Home > Jay Bookman > Archives > 2008 > December > 22 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USCheney, Bush try to woo history
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Let history note that Dick Cheney smuggled a bit of truth into a very large package of lies last week.
And believe me, history will indeed take note.
As their second term comes to a close, Cheney and President Bush have been doing a series of interviews and public appearances offering their assessments of the past eight years.
In an interview with ABC’s Jonathan Karl, the vice president was asked whether he thought the invasion of Iraq would have been justified even if we had known beforehand that Saddam Hussein didn’t have weapons of mass destruction.
His answer? Yes, of course. We wanted to get rid of Saddam Hussein, and we did. Whether he actually possessed stockpiles of WMD, as the administration claimed at the time, was pretty much beside the point, Cheney explained.
“He had a long reputation and record of having started two wars. Of having brutalized and killed hundreds of thousands of people, some of them with weapons of mass destruction in his own country. He had violated 16 National Security Council resolutions. He had established a relationship as a terror sponsoring state according to the State Department. He was making $25,000 payments to the families of suicide bombers,” Cheney said. “This was a bad actor and the country’s better off, the world’s better off with Saddam gone.”
Of course, that’s not the story we were hearing back in 2002 and 2003. Back then we heard talk of mushroom clouds rising over U.S. cities and unmanned aerial vehicles attacking our shores and huge stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons that had to be eliminated because they posed a direct threat to our security. And the deceptions did not stop there.
The American people were lied to not just about the justification for the war but about its cost, its length and its impact, not just on Iraq but on our standing in the world. Cheney believes those deceptions were justified because in his view, it was all for our own good.
That same chilling arrogance was also apparent in Cheney’s response to a question about torture.
In his trademark deadpan style, the vice president endorsed the use of torture as necessary and productive while dismissing the possibility that any torture had actually occurred.
“On the question of so-called torture, we don’t do torture,” he said. “We never have. It’s not something that this administration subscribes to. Again, we proceeded very cautiously. We checked. We had the Justice Department issue the requisite opinions in order to know where the bright lines were that you could not cross.
“The professionals involved in that program were very, very cautious, very careful —- wouldn’t do anything without making certain it was authorized and that it was legal.”
Accepting that explanation requires accepting the notion that words have no fixed meaning. What Bush and Cheney sanctioned wasn’t torture, they claim, because administration lawyers changed the definition of the word, deciding for example that “torture” required inflicting pain equivalent to death or major organ failure. It also wasn’t torture because they had “the requisite opinions in order” and everything was authorized.
In the months and years to come, the American people will learn that torture had been far more widespread than they have been led to believe.
They will also come to understand that the atrocities at Abu Ghraib —- a tragedy that Bush himself acknowledged has been our most serious setback in the war on terror —- was not some low-level aberration but the inevitable consequence of behavior and examples set at the very highest levels of the U.S. government.
I’m not ready to argue that Bush, Cheney, Don Rumsfeld and others ought to be prosecuted for approving torture and thus committing a felony under U.S. law. That’s the kind of decision that can only be made after a full, honest, unbiased airing of the facts. But I do think it’s time those facts were brought to light.
Services »
Comments
By Eric Olson
December 22, 2008 7:06 AM | Link to this
This chilled me. Is it not true that Bush/Cheney:
Started two wars. Caused the killings of tens of thousands of people (Iraqis and Aghanis), some of them with massive weapons of destruction such as laser guided bombs and cruise missiles. Undermined the United Nations at every turn, thus violating its fundamental premise. Established a relationship with, and supported with billions of dollars, a state that is a de facto sponsor of terror and destabilization, that harbors Al Queda and Taliban leaders (Pakistan). Made direct cash payments in blood money and compensation for support and intelligence to tribal leaders who shifted sides at any opportunity.
And: destroyed our hard-earned world reputation as a moral leader and beacon of hope, squandered a budget surplus, replacing it with a record deficit while winking at, and deregulating, greedy financiers who led us ultimately into the largest financial disaster the nation has suffered since the Great Depression *(and which may eclipse it) and so on.
Indeed, Cheney is a bad actor and the country’s better off and the world is better off, with Cheney gone.
By Taxpayer
December 22, 2008 7:07 AM | Link to this
Cheney, just like Bush and Rumsfeld, could easily summarize his time in office more succinctly with statements such as “Of course I lied whenever needed in order to have my way with you bunch of idiots.” You can especially see the arrogance and the utter disdain for the American people in Cheney’s words and expressions. He surely is the epitome of all that is wrong with America and humankind.
By Mike
December 22, 2008 7:23 AM | Link to this
Stop the presses. Jay Bookman hates Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld. Didn’t see that coming.
If anyone wants to read a liberal pundit who, unlike Bookman, is not a boring and predictable partisan hack who never strays from ideological and cultural dogma, check out the NYT’s brilliant Nick Kristof:
This holiday season is a time to examine who’s been naughty and who’s been nice, but I’m unhappy with my findings. The problem is this: We liberals are personally stingy.
Bookman would never think to criticize any other than those who don’t share his narrow and intolerant views. That’s why he is peers with hacks like Hannity, while Kristof is peers with true thinkers like David Brooks.
By Chad Harris
December 22, 2008 7:24 AM | Link to this
Janet Napolitano already off to a crappy start at old Ibsen “Homeland” (never heard the term since high school Ibsen plays) Security by naming Leiberman’s campaign manager to be press spokesman for DHS, one of the biggest liars of an agency in the history of the US.
It appears that when 2012 rolls around the Pentagon now plans to have about 80,000 troops in Iraq according to statements by the generals and Gates.
By DB, Gwinnettian
December 22, 2008 7:29 AM | Link to this
Mike, here’s the money quote that’s all too often ignored in this nonsense I hear from conservatives:
“According to Google’s figures, if donations to all religious organizations are excluded, liberals give slightly more to charity than conservatives do.”
Consider what kinds of “churches” are favored by conservatives—looking beyond the smaller congregations, and to the gi-normous Bapto-plexes and such—and you realize that a lot of the so-called charitable contributions are really just acts of self-interest, wherein conservatives are merely pumping money into an organization that directly benefits themselves and their families’ interests.
Sorry, Mike—even though it’s all equal in the eyes of the IRS, I don’t put church-tithing on the same level as contributions to (say) Habitat or Heifer.
By Chad Harris
December 22, 2008 7:37 AM | Link to this
Congrats to Bernie Madoff’s son who was seen yesterday tooling around Soho in his BMW SUV with his separated wife shoppin’ their a**s off and uttering “no comment” while their arms were full of bags from Soho stores.
Many Madoff investors who were multimillionaires now face losing their homes right after the holidays—punishment for being so stupid they didn’t pay attention to who was managing or what was happening to their millions.
The fallout is that the secretive hedge funds not related to Madoff are now seeing a pandemic of withdrawal requests and are starting to balk. There is no joy in hedgefundville right now. Comemuppance?
By Mike
December 22, 2008 7:38 AM | Link to this
DB -
Your intellectually dishonest take on the survey is similar to other intellectually dishonest liberals’. The Times board is full of quotes from people like yourself who have all kinds of excuses. Most cite your feeble and ignorant logic that evil conservatives are giving to their evil churches, because in your pathetic world., any who don’t share your narrow and bigoted views must be devoid of compassion. How pathetic and hateful.
Kristof addresses your pathetic and hateful logic here:
“(UPDATE: Several people raise some questions, and let me try to adjust them. Some of the data bases are adjusted for income, and they show conservatives donating more as a percentage of income. “Liberal” and “conservative” are self-identifications. As for donating time rather than money, conservatives also seem to come out on top there, although the data aren’t as good. Some liberals say they are more likely to choose lower-paying professions such as teacher, and that strikes me as likely but I don’t know of data on it. Finally, I think there’s a basic misunderstanding among many readers about the kind of conservative driving the trend. Those behind these figures aren’t Upper East Side zillionaires, but rather Idaho farmers and Alabama factory workers and Kansas insurance salesmen. They aren’t fabulously wealthy, but they tend to be embedded in smaller communities — including churches — where everyone knows everyone else and volunteering and donations are part of the grain of life.)”
Jay Bookman thrives on the mindless hatred of folks like yourself just like Hannity thrives on mindless conservative partisans. If you really believe that only those who share your political views are capable of compassion, then you are just a sucker for partisan pundits. But we knew that already.
By Taxpayer
December 22, 2008 7:43 AM | Link to this
Just remember to stay out of shotgun range when telling Dick that you know that he is scum. I heard that Putin once looked into Dick’s soul when he looked in his eyes — it scared the crap out of him. Later, Putin recalled seeing Dick when he looked in George’s eyes. Dick has weapons and he’s not scared to use them. He even named his trusty shotgun Dubya in honor of his most favored weapon of mass destruction. Dick reminds me of the type of bully I saw when younger that would tie a cat inside a bag with rocks and throw it in a lake.
By DB, Gwinnettian
December 22, 2008 7:49 AM | Link to this
Mike, anyone who sees a column critical of this Administration and cries “hate”, as you did @ 7.23, has no call referring to anyone else as “intellectually dishonest.”
By JJS
December 22, 2008 7:52 AM | Link to this
Thank you Mr. Cheney for helping to keep our country save and prosperous for 6 years. The in 2006 the democrats took over congress, and have proceeded to destroy the country. Thanks, for your service to this country. You are one of the more knowledgeable people that we have had in Washington. thanks, JJS
By Joey
December 22, 2008 8:05 AM | Link to this
Pity the fools who were so naive, so gullible, so stupid that Bush and Cheney were able to sell them a fabricated story of WMDs. Foolish Representatives and Senators so easily lured in, so unable to reason for themselves, that no one was able to see the truth. The truth that was just beyond the Bush/Cheney lies.
OR almost every Senator and Representative in DC had access to the same intelligence data as the Whitehouse They either believed it or were to lazy or unconcerned to read it. They certainly did not contradict the intelligence prior to voting to make the commitment of troops.
Congressman, Senator; if your only defense for doing what you now think was the wrong thing is that Bush and Cheney lied to me, you should resign from you elected position and slink off into the shadows.
Ditto for News Media heros.
By Mike
December 22, 2008 8:07 AM | Link to this
DB, Gwinnettian -
Nice comeback. Not related to anything we were discussing, but nice comeback.
Just remember: anyone who doesn’t share your views is incapable of charity. Keep on bleating!!
By tallestmidget
December 22, 2008 8:07 AM | Link to this
So, Bush, the idiot managed to persuade members of Congress that we should go to war because he and Cheney really wanted to get their oil buddies rich? The members of Congress didn’t read any of the intelligence briefings, they should just listened to the idiot and said, “I’m in”
Bush must be the tallest mental giant in Washington
By DB, Gwinnettian
December 22, 2008 8:11 AM | Link to this
JSS @ 7.52, about this “in 2006 the democrats took over congress, and have proceeded to destroy the country” business: Would you please explain how that works?
How does half of a legislative body (the Senate is, essentially, tied, and can’t go to the bathroom unless Republicans say it’s ok) “destroy” a country in less than two years? What kind of super-secret laws did they manage to pass and get enacted into law by Bush, unbeknownst to the Administration, the Supreme Court, or (apparently) the public at large?
And while you’re at it, perhaps you could explain how allowing the nation to be attacked by hijackers flying planes (and by anthrax, although nobody wants to talk about that one) constituted “keeping us save.”
Thanks!
Oh, and Mike @ 8.07—what’s this “we were discussing” business? You brought up an off-topic column, not anyone else. If, as you claim, “(t)he Times board is full of quotes from people like yourself who have all kinds of excuses” why don’t you go over there and annoy them instead of trying to start an off-topic food-fight over here?
By AJC/DNC Management
December 22, 2008 8:15 AM | Link to this
If what Bush and Cheney did to Islamic terrorists can be classified as torture, then what would you call Janet Reno and Bill KKKlinton burning to death 80 children?
By Dennis
December 22, 2008 8:17 AM | Link to this
If this war had been prosecuted on the battlefront and not in the liberal news, there would be a far different conclusion reached. Jay, sorry sir, but by your own words, you state that the question was asked of Cheney, had their been no WMD’s, would we have taken him down? And Cheney answered the question honestly, yes, if no WMD’s, we would have for the reasons listed. I need to ask where your outrage is agaist Bill Clinton, who had the opportunity to take out Bin Laden, but whiffed? With all due respect, you are far from being an objective journalist. Else, you would take on the number of folks in the Democratic party who voted for the war with the SAME intelligence briefing the President had. And John Kerry’s comment that he didn’t read it, well that’s beyond the pale. Again, this has been a ware of posturing in the liberal press, and not a ware in the Iraq. And sadly, you along with others, have helped work against our troops. As I asked where your moral outrage is, be sure there is moral outrage, not against you, sir, but the lies you spread in the so-called statement of facts and truth. In reality, you are spewig your own viewpoint, rather than looking for the truth. And that is truly not right.
By spankmonkey
December 22, 2008 8:21 AM | Link to this
Wingnut history will place Bushco right up there next to Ronnine Reagan on the podium.
Real Historians will not be so kind.
In the next couple years we will see the wingnuts split off thier own versions of the three R’s republican math (Enron, Madoff, Abramoff will all certainly be enshrined), republican science (the bible, which has all the true answers from the creation of the planet 6000 years ago, to man’s life with the dinosaurs, to the current end of days), and republican history (which we see being written right here, right now).
look for this to happen as further reaction to the “libural bias” in academics.
I love this last post “Thank you Mr. Cheney for helping to keep our country save and prosperous for 6 years. The in 2006 the democrats took over congress, and have proceeded to destroy the country. Thanks, for your service to this country.”
I did not realize we were prosperous up until 2006, and I did not realize that a country could be destroyed by congress alone in 2 years.
SERVICE to our country??? “I had better things to do” immediately comes to mind when you put the words “service” and “Cheney” together.
Wow, here I am typing about the republicans alternative past, and one of the architects of the alternate reality pops up in front of me, the rest of ya’ll will be along shortly…
to be “intellectually dishonest” there must be some sort of intellectual capacity, and there is none in your average everyday “conservative”, that explains thier voting patterns, and the inability to see the truth when smacked in the face with it. Therefore they are simply pathologically deluded.
By Jeff M
December 22, 2008 8:21 AM | Link to this
Another garden variety journalist rewriting history…
“Whether he actually possessed stockpiles of WMD, as the administration claimed at the time”. Yeah, “the administration” believed every credible security source the free world had access to at the time.
“The American people were lied to”. I imagine you have a “Bush Lied, People Died” bumper sticker. Who cares about objectivity when you have the power to create your own reality with the strokes of a keyboard?
Your article only gives me pause to be thankful that you chose journalism as a career and did not committ your talents to protecting our country post 9-11. Otherwise the latest column may be titled, “7th Attack In 7 years On Bookman’s Watch”.
By Shawny
December 22, 2008 8:23 AM | Link to this
Nice piece regarding the myths of the Bush administration.
By DB, Gwinnettian
December 22, 2008 8:26 AM | Link to this
Jeff, why is it always about “protecting our country post 9-11” with you 25 Percenters?
Why doesn’t 9-11 count?
By AmVet
December 22, 2008 8:29 AM | Link to this
Hannity a true thinker???
It’s going to be hard to top that for the comedic line of the week.
I would imagine the Dumbnamic Duo are thankful this holiday season that they weren’t impeached.
How that happened is a miracle rivaling the supposed one in Bethlehem.
A disgraceful pair, but that’s how the reich-wing rolls…
By spankmonkey
December 22, 2008 8:32 AM | Link to this
So Andy, I guess the voice of personal responsibililty, sees none in the actions of Koresh “the Lamb of God”. The man has sex with preeteens, preaches apocolypse and stockpiles illegal weapons, kills federal agents, and defies the law of the land before setting fire to his own compound, killing 80 people in the process, in order to fulfill his own “prophecy”… Not one whit of personal responsibility there huh? David Koresh HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT TRANSPIRED right? He was a good man?
God help you my friend, you’re beyond delusional. Have you had a CAT scan recently?
So, lets debate the issue shall we?
Should David Koresh have been left to his own, in light of the information the ATF had?
By Dennis
December 22, 2008 8:32 AM | Link to this
DB, who are you referring re 25 percenters? Where is your logic and facts, or is yours just saying something and because you say it, it must be believed, because you are the moral authority? I’m (tongue in cheek) waiting for your retort that I’m part of the moral majority wing of the Republican party. Just for kicks, so you know, I spent the first 30 of my 45 years in Massachusetts. I’ve seen the likes of your viewpoint - it’s in the water up there - and I can see right through it. So, if you have facts to support what you say, and are objective in terms of criticism on both sides of the aisle, bring it on. And please, attack ideas and positions, not people, e.g., 25 percenters.
By Mrs. Godzilla
December 22, 2008 8:35 AM | Link to this
Read the words of Lt. Gen. Antonio M. Taguba, who investigated the Abu Ghraib scandal for the Pentagon. “There is no longer any doubt as to whether the current administration has committed war crimes,” he concluded. “The only question that remains to be answered is whether those who ordered the use of torture will be held to account.”
Bush and Cheney can woo all they want….. We will not forget. We will not let our children forget.
By RetiredLTC
December 22, 2008 8:35 AM | Link to this
There is no more deserving an individual of a public perp walk than Dick Cheney. The man is evil incarnate. The man is also a coward. Never met a war he didn’t want to fight as long as a Cheney wasn’t called to serve. Yeah buddy, all 5 deferment Dick is one hell of a chairborn warrior. Tough as nails. Unfortunately the Cheney cowardice extends to his offspring, one of whaich was pulled from a scheduled tour in Iraq with Paul Bremmer because, in Mr. Cheney’s own words, “She would have been in too much danger”. What a maggot. Dick Cheney was George Bush’s first and biggest mistake. Hell has a most special place waiting for Dick Cheney.
By Sam
December 22, 2008 8:46 AM | Link to this
No Dennis. You’re just one of the 25%ers. The ones that just don’t get it and never will. But that’s ok. You have no relevancy anyway. The last election proved it beyond any doubt.
By Dennis
December 22, 2008 8:51 AM | Link to this
Thanks for the facts Sam - not. The last election was a sham, the press never investigated Obama, as they would have had he been a Republican. He ran on nothing, no substance, no record, and in the grand scheme, you’re right. Facts, records, achievements had no place in the last election, so it was irrelevant, just as your comments without mention of those, just rhetoric. Unlike many who write here who did not support the current President, I will support Obama and not attack him - as many have done to Bush.
Thank you Sam for confirming what I wrote.
By Taxpayer
December 22, 2008 8:51 AM | Link to this
spankmonkey at 8:32,
what is it that you are saying to one of David’s disciples!
By Goldie
December 22, 2008 8:56 AM | Link to this
And Bush lamented last week that “I wish the intelligence had been different” about WMDs — what a freakin’ dumbass! Like 75% of America will ever forget what his administration did to “cook the intelligence” they were given!
There was plenty o’ intelligence saying that Saddam Hussein was not an imminent threat to the world’s security and that our invasion of Iraq would be greeted by a insurgency that would last for years to come. He and Cheney chose to disregard that info and thereby showed that they had “no intelligence” themselves.
The disastrous and arrogant Bush administration will be written about for centuries to come… and hopefully our children’s children will learn from their arrogance.
By The Corporal
December 22, 2008 8:58 AM | Link to this
To AJC/DNC
You hit the nail on the head. Under Jay’s rules, let’s try Clinton/Reno for murder. Ridiculous.
President Bush and Vice President Cheney won’t be tried for torture any more than Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee were tried for treason. Why? It’s just not there.
By the way, if the Guantanamo detainees ever get reparations, I want mine for Marine Corps boot camp.
By getalife
December 22, 2008 9:02 AM | Link to this
They will walk with no accountability because the Dems enabled it.
Move on.
By Dan
December 22, 2008 9:02 AM | Link to this
At ease corporal. Everytime I read one of your ignorant posts it becomes perfectly clear why you never rose above the rank of corporal. Isn’t a corporal in the Marines equivalent to a Private First Class in the Army anyway? Now get down and give me 10 maggot. After that go shine your sergeant’s boots.
By The Corporal
December 22, 2008 9:05 AM | Link to this
P.S.
Do you libs quit reading the current thread as soon as Jay posts a new one?
If so, we’re missing a lot of good back and forth. Your choice.
By Sam
December 22, 2008 9:07 AM | Link to this
Wrong again Dennis. It wouldn’t have mattered who the Dems ran. The last election was an indictment of the whole Bush/Cheney debacle and the Republican party’s imbecillic kow towing to you 25%ers. You and those of your ilk are through in this country Dennis. The American people spoke loudly and clearly. You and those like you are done. End of story. Finito. Deal with it dumbazz.
By Dusty
December 22, 2008 9:09 AM | Link to this
Ho hum, just another blow hard finger pointing subject by Bookman still trying to make a big deal problem out of the safety of this country as delivered by Bush and Cheney.
Bush and Cheney kept this country safe after 9/11 when terrorists thought they had delivered a death blow to American democracy.
Bush and Cheney did nothing illegal even though liberals keep blowing evil bubbles in hopes that one will last.
Iraq is well on its way to freedom from tyranny.
Afghanistan is well on its way to freedom from tryranny.
Directors of the behavior at Abu Gharib were punished for breaking the law.
The British agreed with our war plans having seen the information on Iraq. They have helped fight there as have other countries. NATO forces still fight in Afghanistan. The UN has been with us as Iraq broke all UN objectives.
If liberals want to run down Bush and Cheney for keeping us safe, then liberals harm the country, not the President and Vice President. They give terrorists a boost with every lie and negative propaganda they produce.
But, as we see with Bookman, that does not matter. Their goal is to diminish Bush and Cheney, no matter the cost to the safety and spirit of this country.
Liberals are the disgrace of America. Few people who have enjoyed so many national benefits and safety as they have, turn against the country that has given it to them. Our grand children will recognize liberals as the non-patriots of this century.
By DB, Gwinnettian
December 22, 2008 9:14 AM | Link to this
Shorter Dusty: Polishin’ turds is Hard Work!
By Kelly
December 22, 2008 9:14 AM | Link to this
The world is a better place without Sadam. Sometimes the ends do justify the means.
By Mrs. Godzilla
December 22, 2008 9:15 AM | Link to this
Sign petition here for Special Prosecutor for Bush War Crimes
By Taxpayer
December 22, 2008 9:19 AM | Link to this
It was bad enough that Bush and Cheney failed the American people so miserably on 9/11. Then, they had to go and screw up even worse on everything that they touched after that date (the “Dubya touch” — it turns everything to crap) and to top off their despicable performances, they have to brag about how they lied to and cheated the American people. Even their own Republican politicians in Congress are ragging on them. Then again, Republicans do like to eat their own.
By Dennis
December 22, 2008 9:19 AM | Link to this
As I said Sam, thank you for confirming what I wrote earlier. If the debate is on facts and substance, well then, you don’t participate, you just defer to name calling in the end. And again, confirming what I wrote earlier. Not true that the Dems would have won no matter who ran. Not true at all. The liberal slant of the media is evident to the unbiased, else Obama would have received the same scrutiny and likely would not have gotten the nomination, Hillary would have. And the country would not have elected her, despite the fact she is way more qualifed (objectively) than Obama.
So, if you want to resort to name-calling, go back to the second grade playground, where those who do that best, rule. But if facts and debate are your choice, then bring it on. But you won’t because in the end you’ll lose, and the fact you and the other here won’t bring that, demonstrates that.
Thanks again.
By getalife
December 22, 2008 9:20 AM | Link to this
dick never got over the Nixon resignation and decided to break the law to show they are actually above the law like Nixon said.
Speaking of unpatriotic, the new three stooges of talk radio,lazy Fred, 9/11 Rudy and Gomer Pyle are attacking our President before he takes office.
Will crusty the clown speak out for her love of country?
Nope.
By Benjamin Franklin
December 22, 2008 9:20 AM | Link to this
Those who sacrifice their freedom for security deserves neither.
But at least sheep like Dusty and others of her ilk can crawl out from under their beds and run quickly outside without becoming victims of terrorists and feel falsely safe and secure. Krogers is a much safer place because of Bush/Cheney I guess.
By The Corporal
December 22, 2008 9:22 AM | Link to this
To Dan
How about some reasoned debate instead of just name calling ? Surely, you can do that Daniel?
The problem with most of the people on these blogs is that they have never lived in the real world when it comes to these life and death issues. They have only philosophized about it on blogs or in their editorials. Big difference.
By spankmonkey
December 22, 2008 9:28 AM | Link to this
“Yeah, “the administration” believed every credible security source the free world had access to at the time.”
They believed everybody but the CIA.
“He ran on nothing, no substance, no record, and in the grand scheme, you’re right.”
You are right about that. And you still lost. What does that say? Some good investigative journalism would’ve changed the election results? Or, as I see it, less McSame and more fresh ideas would’ve been much better alternative.
But keep on believin’ that a picture of Obama hitting a joint in college would’ve helped you all fulfill the “manifest destiny” you seem to feel you all deserve (for what, god only knows…). Sooner or later you all will realize that Bush/Cheney lost this for you.
Not ACORN, mot the “libural” press, not even Obama’s fresh ideas (I’m being facetious when I say that, all he did was say “I’m not Bush”, that’s all it took…) The numbnuts in the WH who couldn’t get enough wingnuts to come out and support “4 more years”, that’s why you lost. You know it.
Wingnuts: If Bushco are such heroes, and did protect the country, yes even gave us a prosperous 6 years, where were they during the campaign? These are accomplishments that should be trumpeted far and wide, no???
By Dusty
December 22, 2008 9:30 AM | Link to this
Yes, Mrs. Godzilla, put your name on a list.
INFINITE INFAMY by LIBS would make a nice title for your list.
Will you make a copy for Osama or does he already know who you are?
By Dan
December 22, 2008 9:31 AM | Link to this
Just like you, huh “corporal”?
By Shawny
December 22, 2008 9:33 AM | Link to this
Gads, this Bush Derangement Syndrome is sad. Y’all need to let it go…your boy will be in office soon enough.
Of course Saddam needed to be removed. He killed hundreds of thousands of people, many of his own Iraqis.
Had he been taken out like he should have in 1991/2, then there would be no discussion of whether or not it was the right thing. We all would have agreed that it was. He was a tyrant, a harborer of terrorists, a brutal dictator, etc.
By The Corporal
December 22, 2008 9:35 AM | Link to this
To Dan
Brilliant reply son. I tried.
Over and out.
By AJC/DNC Management
December 22, 2008 9:36 AM | Link to this
spankmonkey: Yeah, those kids that died were evil, got it.
So look at this, here we have a pinko arguing like some wingnut to attack, attack! the children cause they, uh, were “bad.”
Five minutes from now, this lib will be whining about some al Qaeda cut throat getting his souffle served cold.
By Dusty
December 22, 2008 9:36 AM | Link to this
Benjamin Franklin, 9:20
You better go back and review your own words.
You help establish freedom from British Monarchy and now you want to lose freedom to terrorism? That is quite a switch and not one I care to make.
By Mike
December 22, 2008 9:38 AM | Link to this
DB -
“Oh, and Mike @ 8.07—what’s this “we were discussing” business? You brought up an off-topic column, not anyone else. If, as you claim, “(t)he Times board is full of quotes from people like yourself who have all kinds of excuses” why don’t you go over there and annoy them instead of trying to start an off-topic food-fight over here?”
OK. I know that mindless partisans have a lot of trouble with logic and short attention spans so let me refresh:
1) I posted a comment pointing out that Bookman is boring and predictable partisan and pointed out Kristof as an alternative.
2) YOU engaged me on the point of Kristof’s article.
3) I responded specifically to the point that you made.
4) Incapable of responding to my point, you go on to make some unrelated and inaccurate claim that I treat any criticism of the current admin as “hate”
5) I pointed out that your “response” was not a response at all to the debate that YOU instigated with me.
So to be clear, when I said “we were discussing”, I meant YOU and I were having a specific conversation that YOU instigated. Don’t know why that is so hard for you to understand, but apparently you are one of the many partisans who just view “the conversation” as being an endless series of random discussions with any who don’t share your views. I on the other hand, view a discussion as a specific conversation between two people.
But hey. Why do you care? As I don’t share your narrow views, I must be evil right? LOL
Keep on bleating that party line!
By Mrs. Godzilla
December 22, 2008 9:38 AM | Link to this
——-PULLED——
Don’t make it personal, please.
Jay
By Taxpayer
December 22, 2008 9:39 AM | Link to this
OH MY GOD. Now we don’t even live in the real world! It was bad enough to be told by Sarah that we are not even real Americans. Where will it all end. Is anything really REAL!
I’ll bet those innocent people in Iraq that got shocked and awed into a pile of bloody little pieces by those big bad preemptively-dropped bombs were wishing all the way up ‘til the end that it wasn’t real. So, just remember this, all you terrorists that would strike this country with a Dick-led administration in power, our military might will be brought down on some other random country that did not claim any of the terrorists as their own. I guess that means that Saudi Arabia and Pakistan will always be safe from a Republican-led bombing of their countries.
By DB, Gwinnettian
December 22, 2008 9:47 AM | Link to this
@ 9.38 (…) So to be clear, when I said “we were discussing”,(…)
FFS, Dennis, are you this tiresomely pedantic in real life? I pity your family this holiday season.
May they find solace in rum balls, hot toddies, and ear plugs.
By Shawny
December 22, 2008 9:47 AM | Link to this
If Bush supports the auto bailout package, then he is wasting money on a failed and badly managed industry.
If Obama and co. support the auto bailout, then he is protecting vital American jobs and working hard for the middle class.
If Bush cuts taxes (which actually increase govt take, created jobs, and helped revive a post-recession economy) and pushes for stimulus packages, then he is needlessly increasing deficit spending in a time of war, which is reckless.
If Obama and co. want more tax cuts and stimulus packages, then the dems are working hard for the middle class.
Bush Derangement Syndrome…. sad.
By The Corporal
December 22, 2008 9:48 AM | Link to this
To Taxpayer
You know exactly what I mean by the real world and it’s life and death situations and decision making scenarios.
It’s very similar to people who moan and groan and throw their popcorn in the air while criticizing the professional quarterback and they have never even played the game at the pee wee level. Sure, we know how they would have handled that third down.
Disgusting !
By Dusty
December 22, 2008 9:50 AM | Link to this
getalife,@9:20
Would you mind telling us exactly how Cheney broke the law? Nobody else can find any law that he has broken. Just YOU!
Obama is not the subject today. He is our President-elect and I shall wait to see how he presides. Why don’t you wait and see instead of listening to the radio and complaining? Radio is a waste of time as far as I am concerned.
By Dennis
December 22, 2008 9:56 AM | Link to this
DB,
Thanks again for confirming that insults are your only weapon. How tirelessly unimaginative.
Dennis
By David Bell
December 22, 2008 9:58 AM | Link to this
Jay said “he is not ready to argue that Bush should be prosecuted for approving torture because that’s the kind of decision that can only be made after a full, honest, unbiased airing of the facts.”
Wow - when has honest, unbiased facts interfered with your garnishing of truth in the past or have you found religion?
By BDAtlanta
December 22, 2008 9:58 AM | Link to this
What people forget is that the “means” of getting rid of this one man named Saddam Hussein is still going on.
They don’t want to think about the fact that we have spent thousands of American lives and billions and billions of taxpayer dollars to get rid of this one guy. One guy.
I would say we won the battle but Saddam won the war. We are out billions and billions of dollars and thousands of American lives for 1 guy!! That is crazy nut job math right there.
That is what all the anti-war (and, as you wingnuts would call us, unpatriotic American) people have been screaming about the past 6 years.
Crazy/dumb/idiot logic
Worst.President.Ever
By spankmonkey
December 22, 2008 9:58 AM | Link to this
Andy Bleats:
“Yeah, those kids that died were evil, got it.”
Obviously, wingnut, the question is not whether or not innocent children were killed, it’s by who’s hand.
You contend Reno and Clinton were in there with a blowtorch and sickle hacking and burning innocent little children to death. Support this please.
I contend David Koresh is the person responsible for the deaths of 80 adults and children. One must responsible for one’s own actions, no?
Nice twist Andy, keep on tilting there…
By spankmonkey
December 22, 2008 10:00 AM | Link to this
Andy Bleats:
“Yeah, those kids that died were evil, got it.”
Obviously, wingnut, the question is not whether or not innocent children were killed, it’s by who’s hand.
You contend Reno and Clinton were in there with a blowtorch and sickle hacking and burning innocent little children to death. Support this please.
I contend David Koresh is the person responsible for the deaths of 80 adults and children. One must responsible for one’s own actions, no?
Nice twist Andy, keep on tilting there…
Dusty, thank god at least one conservative here reserves judgement. At least he’s pitched out a couple bones. The rest of the conservative crowd here already know what all Obama is going to do, and have judged accordingly.
By Taxpayer
December 22, 2008 10:01 AM | Link to this
So, now you are comparing peewee football to blowing innocent people into piles of bloody pieceparts, Corporal. Then again, some of you Republicans really do take your games to disgustingly new levels. I have an idea. Let’s start broadcasting war real time. Now that’s reality TV at its finest. Just to be fair though, I say put the be-headings, massacres, and everything else on TV. What do you say, Corporal. That’s reality that we can all share in. It’s precisely what you said that we were missing. And by the way, it is disgusting. War is Hell though and what better way to convert sinners than to give them a little taste of Hell on earth.
By Dusty
December 22, 2008 10:02 AM | Link to this
Mrs. Godzie @9:38
Now, now, not nice to talk like a guttersnipe.
You better get back to cookie recipes, etc. You are better at cooking than at being a crank.
By spankmonkey
December 22, 2008 10:06 AM | Link to this
“It’s very similar to people who moan and groan and throw their popcorn in the air while criticizing the professional quarterback and they have never even played the game at the pee wee level. Sure, we know how they would have handled that third down.”
Er, ahhh, Corporal that’s much like the neocon chickenhawks with no military experience prosecuting a war of choice. The results were predictable, and they were nothing like the predicted results…
“MISSION ACCOMPLISHED”
By BDAtlanta
December 22, 2008 10:08 AM | Link to this
Getting rid of Saddam was never the real reason for invading. If they wanted to get rid of him they could easily have sent assassins.
Cheney is an ex-defense contractor so Bush and Cheney needed a war.
Oil men and defense contractors knew the minute Bush won in 2000 that it would be raining money for them for at least 4 years (of course the wingnuts gave em 8 years to pad their pockets.)
The Bush administration was looking for an excuse to go to war even before 9/11. 9/11 just gave em a perfect excuse.
If we have spent billions of dollars on this war, where do you think that money went? The majority to defense contractors.
By Paul
December 22, 2008 10:12 AM | Link to this
Wow, Jay
Another column denouncing ‘torture’ but you’ve never, as I recalled, specified what, exactly, has your dander up. I know, it’s convenient to make general comments and launch on specific attacks of lies, but really.
What administration-sanctions do you find fit in the realm? Loud music? Repeated questions? Making the detainee feel uncomfortable? I cite these as they constitute violations of the Army Manual for Interrogations, which the Congress and Administration stated is the standard after all the hearings and attempts at legislation.
Getting specific just might cut short the discussion - which blogmasters generally don’t like to do. But if, for instance, a person said “that person is ugly” and the other person said “is not” and they repeated that, they’d get nowhere. But if one person said “ugly is a person who is taller than 5 feet, doesn’t weigh at least 280 and who doesn’t have facial tattoos” they there’d be a basis for discussion.
But again, you’ve never been specific, never distinguished interrogation from torture and never stated what you think is okay (let alone discussed the real-world implications of your position, other than “America’s stature in the world”).
C’mon - it’s Christmas. Please share.
By jjs
December 22, 2008 10:18 AM | Link to this
Once again, Thanks to Cheney for your service to our country. When I hear you speak, I get the feeling that the country is safe. I think that you and Bush have done a wonderful job. Surely history will remember this administration as the one that had the courage to make tough decisions that were in the best interest of the country. With respect to the economy, we could name many democrats that should be in jail. The democrats won in 2006. The decline began in 2006. You figure it out. Looking forward to SARAH PALIN 2012 JJS
By Bosch
December 22, 2008 10:21 AM | Link to this
It’s really not a question of what Bush and Cheney did in lying to the American people about Iraq, it’s whether or not those who have the authority will have the balls to take it to the next step (prosecution).
By Mrs. Godzilla
December 22, 2008 10:21 AM | Link to this
—— PULLED ——
as a personal attack. Mrs. G, address issues not personalities please.
— Jay
By caz1158
December 22, 2008 10:22 AM | Link to this
In regards to Mr Bookmans childlike article on VP Cheney’s interview,did he write that he was distorting historical truths or Cheney? It was hard to find any actual facts other than the usual hate spew that we have come to identify with Bookman! But is the case with with Bookman,don’t let facts get in the way of a good story. History will hopefully tell us the true story.But it won’t come from anything written by Bookman,that much you bet on. Happy Holidays to all-even Bookman!
By Bosch
December 22, 2008 10:23 AM | Link to this
jjs, and all other “our country is safe” people,
Really? Our country is safe?
By Dusty
December 22, 2008 10:23 AM | Link to this
Ok BDAtlanta @9:58
I believe WWII got rid of Hitler. Was that wrong?
I can understand your desire to stop any loss of life, whether good or evil. But to say that it is OK to let evil thrive and kill is poor logic to me. Your reasoning is that we sacrificed young lives for nothing.
Our military sacrificed their lives in Iraq not just to rid the world of one person, they did it to save the lives of millions of Americans in line for killing by terrorists. That is the spoken goal of terrorists and one step in that goal was to fight in Iraq.
You can ignore that if you wish but I do not agree with you. I believe in good will but do not wish to sit back when it allows millions of innocent people to be killed. Do I need to mention over and over THE HOLOCAUST?
I’ll be back later maybe.
By DaninMacon
December 22, 2008 10:24 AM | Link to this
Liberals hate America. Whenever anything goes wrong on this planet, there is a group in this country, on the left, that immediately blames America. There is no doubt about it. As sure as the sun rises in the east, and as sure as IL is filled with corrupt Democrat lawmakers, there will always be a group that cannot help but let their disdain for this great nation to shine through at every opportunity.
By basementfrog
December 22, 2008 10:29 AM | Link to this
These two animals need to be imprisoned, if not executed.
More than an imbarrassment, a complete disgrace not only to america, but the human race.
How can we recreate little Hilters and then reelect them and not punish them?
What a world.
By Bosch
December 22, 2008 10:30 AM | Link to this
The other night as I was watching the news and laughing at Bush’s shoe incident, the other Bosch asked me “Honestly, how can you laugh at that? If al-Malaki had been in here and one of our reporters had done that to him, something would have been bombed.”
Dammit, I hate it when the other Bosch does that, because it’s true.
By Dusty
December 22, 2008 10:31 AM | Link to this
OH oh I believe BD said something about “sending assassins” instead of our military. Wow! How about Superman of spider man or Shawn Connery?
Somebody has been watching too many movies.
Mrs. Godzie, send cookies! Not clunkers!!
bye…
By @@
December 22, 2008 10:31 AM | Link to this
That’s my guy, Cheney! Standing firm on his decisions.
So what came first, jay…..the Iraq invasion or the Oil for Food Scandal? Who and what countries were involved in the scandal? How much money did Saddam stash away from the scam? On what did he intend to spend those billions in profit?
Did the use of the word “imminent” carry any weight when Bush forewarned Barney Frank and Chris Dodd of the economic impact of Fannie & Freddie’s lending practices?
In his address to congress, Bush saw Saddam as an “imminent” threat.
Can you, YOUR EMINENCE, say with all certainty, that Saddam DID NOT pose an imminent threat?
By Paul
December 22, 2008 10:33 AM | Link to this
Jay
VP Cheney validated part of what you’ve written in the past (the Administration would have gone to war without the WMD rationale – something I agree with), yet you call him a liar? Wouldn’t he have been a liar if he said we would not have gone to war if we knew there were no WMDs?
Eric Olson 7:06
[[Started two wars… massive weapons of destruction such as laser guided bombs and cruise missiles]]
Pres-elect Obama supports the Afghan war, so it’s not different from Bush. As far as the US WMD’s, must be nice to make up your own definitions. Most people would say weapons that are much more highly accurate than those they replace, and therefore limit collateral damage, are let’s see, there’s a word they use… oh yes, “precise.”
AmVet 8:29
[[Hannity a true thinker???]]
Couldn’t you have left out the word ‘true’ and had the same effect?
RetiredLTC 8:35
The post sounds more like something from a ‘makebelieveLTC.’
DB 9:14
Your comment to Dusty – are you going to say the same thing about Pres Obama when he ‘stays the course’ in Afghanistan and leaves American troops in Iraq until the end of his term?
Taxpayer 9:19
[[It was bad enough that Bush and Cheney failed the American people so miserably on 9/11]]
Are you really making the case the prior Administration did not fail the American people regarding al Qaeda, that the new Administration radically changed the policies regarding AQ and that it was some new bureaucracy that dialed back how we view and respond to AQ, thus allowing 9-11?
Hi Mrs. Godzilla Hi Dusty. Hi Midori. Hi getalife. Hi Bosch.
Merry Christmas!
By Lee
December 22, 2008 10:33 AM | Link to this
I will believe a lot of things before I believe that Republicans would sacrifice American blood, and even more importnat, American treasure, in order to save some foreign people from a tyrant like Saddam.
Give me a break! Cheney lied than, and he’s lying now. It just makes the comparison between Clinton’s presidency and the Bush presidency so much more stark- when Clinton lied, nobody died. And remember when people said it wasn’t the sex, it was the lies they hated? No, it was the sex. No one is impeaching Cheney for lies. They should.
4,000 dead American soldiers in Iraq say the same thing.
By Copyleft
December 22, 2008 10:35 AM | Link to this
Conservatives hate America; there’s no doubt about it. After all, they show nothing but contempt for the Constitution, American ideals and principles, and even our former allies in their bloodthirsty, flag-waving campaign for empire, wealth, and power. No matter what American principle stands in the way of their conquest—they’ll find a way around it, sneering all the while. Conservatives are scum.
So, how’s it feel, Dan? Was that an intelligent, productive contribution to the blog? Has the debate been elevated with such idiocy?
Too bad the Christmas spirit seems to have passed you by….
By Paul
December 22, 2008 10:36 AM | Link to this
And “hi” and “Merry Christmas” to AmVet, DB, Taxpayer, CopyLeft, @@ and anyone else I neglected to mention earlier!
By Bosch
December 22, 2008 10:37 AM | Link to this
@@,
And Bush was WRONG.
If Saddam Hussein had WMD, how can we say for certain that he did pose an imminent threat? What about all the other countries that have WMD, do they too pose an imminent threat? Did we have information that he was planning on using these phantom weapons?
Should we next bomb India or Pakistan? That argument is moot not to mention lame.
By mm
December 22, 2008 10:39 AM | Link to this
Yes, indeed. Bush, Cheney, and their supporters want to rewrite history. Who wants to be responsible for the biggest disaster this country has ever seen?
History will not be kind to Bush, Cheney, and the idiots that voted for them and still defend them.
You wingnuts can blame it all on the Dems, the liberal media, etc. But America now knows better.
By Shawny
December 22, 2008 10:39 AM | Link to this
No, Lee. It was the lies. Lying to a grand jury is a criminal offense. I feel bad that slick willie had to go to that homely Monica to get what he wasn’t getting from his screeching wife, but that is his personal business.
You speculate that the current administration lies, but have no proof.
By The Corporal
December 22, 2008 10:43 AM | Link to this
Taxpayer
You really have trouble carrying on a logical, serious debate.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion but you know full well I wasn’t comparing football to war; but only the monday morning quarterbacking mindset that those who have never experienced certain things seem to revel in.
By the way, I have carried brothers in arms from the field of battle and have seen those bloody pieceparts as you call them - how about you?
Yes, war is ugly ……..
War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks nothing worth a war, is worse. A man who has nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety is a miserable creature who has no chance at being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.
John Stuart Mill
By Midori
December 22, 2008 10:46 AM | Link to this
Everything I read written by Corporal, Andy and Dusty translates into: HULK SMASH
By Taxpayer
December 22, 2008 10:51 AM | Link to this
My case, Paul, is just as valid as anything that I’ve seen posted by anyone else. Of course, we recognize that we can agree to disagree in an agreeable manner and avoid the bout of “OSUR” and “ONOURNOT”.
By Mrs. Godzilla
December 22, 2008 10:53 AM | Link to this
Have ya’ll seen the story about Micheal Connell?
GOP consultant killed in plane crash was warned of sabotage: report
By Paul
December 22, 2008 10:57 AM | Link to this
Jay
[[Accepting that explanation requires accepting the notion that words have no fixed meaning. What Bush and Cheney sanctioned wasn’t torture, they claim, because administration lawyers changed the definition of the word, deciding for example that “torture” required inflicting pain equivalent to death or major organ failure. It also wasn’t torture because they had “the requisite opinions in order” and everything was authorized.]]
I’m wondering - after the three cases of waterboarding, when Sens Pelosi and Rockefeller, among others, were given the grand tour of what had happened, what we knew, what we didn’t know, what we thought might happen next and what we were doing to prevent it (waterboarding the top guys) and the only question this group had was “are you sure it’s enough? Can you do anything else?” - I’m wondering - was their response to what they’d seen and heard based upon a legal briefing or upon their own moral compass? And just why did they change their opinion a short time later?
By The Corporal
December 22, 2008 10:58 AM | Link to this
Midori
Of course Dusty, Andy and I could repeat your 10:46 diabtibe and just reverse everything but that would be infantile.
As always, debate or call names.
Your choice.
By The Corporal
December 22, 2008 11:00 AM | Link to this
Excuse me …. diatribe.
By Paul
December 22, 2008 11:02 AM | Link to this
Taxpayer
I sure hope so. I’ve just viewed the policy in how the gov’t and bureaucracy viewed OBL and AQ and how they responded to those within the bureaucracy (the Richard Clarkes) as little different between Clinton and Bush. If Clinton could have run for a third term 9-11 would’ve happened anyway.
By Taxpayer
December 22, 2008 11:02 AM | Link to this
So, now we are moving on to the Monday morning quarterback aka the armchair warrior. Yes indeed, it is so easy for Cheney and company to send the children of others off to kill the children of others — except for his own child, that is. Get serious, “The Corporal”. You are no match for my debating skills. I just enjoy toying with you from time to time.
By the finger
December 22, 2008 11:10 AM | Link to this
By AJC/DNC Management December 22, 2008 8:15 AM | Link to this If what Bush and Cheney did to Islamic terrorists can be classified as torture, then what would you call Janet Reno and Bill KKKlinton burning to death 80 children?
AJC/DNC Management, thanks again for more irrelevant and idiotic KKKomments. you are a worthless douchebag
By Phil Weathington
December 22, 2008 11:12 AM | Link to this
Mr Bookman, I’m not sure what the purpose was of the Cheney piece this morning. If the purpose was to swing conservatives to your side of thinking, I think you missed the target. What you don’t understand is that most conservatives don’t have a problem with the war, and most don’t have any problem with torture when it is needed to protect the United States. I can see that your one of these people who actually believes that bad people do not exist in our world. Saddam was the definition of bad and he murdered more people than you can shake a stick at, not to mention how he has treated the women of Iraq. Yet, you’re worried about some people getting water poured in their faces which does not seem like torture in the first place to me. I would bet if you lived in Iraq with Hussein you would be the first one in line looking for Cheney to save your a*!! Just like typical liberal looking for a hand out,,,, Do us all a favor and go back on the other side of the Mason Dixon line.
By The Corporal
December 22, 2008 11:14 AM | Link to this
Global Warming
Beijing’s coldest December day in 57 years …
‘All parts of Canada’ may see first white Christmas since ‘71 …
Bitter cold, high winds chill Midwest …
RealFeel: -30 in Chicago …
NYC -10 …
By RealityKing
December 22, 2008 11:17 AM | Link to this
I see that the progressive kool-aid is still running freely on the AJC. But that’s OK this Christmas.., because so is the 57 million newly freed people of Cheney’s wars..
By VultureTX
December 22, 2008 11:20 AM | Link to this
Wow so the US Admin told you ALL of their reasons and you focused on the ones that were US centric and turned out no to be right. But all the other reasons for War in Iraq that were true, you ignored for years until Cheney reminds you. What a selective memory and your indignation of being reminded of it. Whenever you disagree with justice (stopping those who reward the killing of american civilians), you give up your right to claim you support America. Yeah it’s that simple, or did the rule of law stopped meaning anything to you unlike you claim in Bush/Cheney’s admin violating/suppressing it.
As for torture having a variable meaning, by treaty is does. If one was to use the widest definition of torture most jails on earth would end being called torture chambers. Yep US, Japan, Austria ,India all torture if you let the most liberal definition be the rule. But please blame Cheney and Bush again after all it all you are good for.
/”interfered with the UN in Iraq”? wtf? since it was so busy taking bribes and bypassing sanctions, is it interference to stop illegal activity. If not will you make the UN standard on business the rule of law. That would be the left’s quickest way to destroy Western Civilization and go post apocalyptic Green.
By The Corporal
December 22, 2008 11:22 AM | Link to this
To Taxpayer
You failed to answer:
1) my question to you …
2) my point regarding the mindset of “monday morning quarterbacking” …
3) Nor did you address the issues of the ugliness of war that I presented in the quote I submitted …
If those are your debating skills then so be it.
Bring it on.
By spankmonkey
December 22, 2008 11:22 AM | Link to this
The problem with justifying torture to protect the United States is that it puts our troops in danger of the same.
I know we’re fighting a foe who isn’t bound by the usual conventions of war, but why make it worse. Torture rarely yields helpful results sooner or later trhe tortured will simply tell you what you want to hear. Wasn’t McCain tortured? I’m pretty sure his opinion on the subject should be relevant here, sincew he’s one of the few who have spoke up on the issue who has ACTUALLY BEEN TORTURED .
I love this: “not to mention how he has treated the women of Iraq.”
Can we get examples please? Can we compare them to what women experience in Iraq now please?
So we’re simply spraying some water on someone’s face, Abu Gahrab was just some fraternity pranks, and women got it good in Iraq now, especially compared to how they had it under Saddam. Got it.
That’s how it is in Bizarro world, how about some reality???
By Taxpayer
December 22, 2008 11:24 AM | Link to this
You are speculating, Paul. For even that great all-seeing mind of yours cannot know what bin Laden’s next move would have been under different circumstances. Likewise, you cannot predict with any degree of certainty what a different administration and President would have done with just a little bit of intel that forewarned of a likely terrorist attack involving planes. It’s the nature of us individually unpredictable humans. Now, if you want to talk about the collective, that’s a whole ‘nother ball of wax. For example, just put a bunch of rednecks with a predisposition for violence together in front of someone willin’ to chant something like “…Pallin around with terrorists…” and see what kind of trouble you can stir up. Just throw in a rope with a large loop contained by 13 little wraps and you got the makin’s of a good old fashioned lynchin’. Yessiree! We can however see with our own two eyes what has happened, when it happened, etc., and each draw our own conclusions given the information that we have at our disposal.
By Paul
December 22, 2008 11:25 AM | Link to this
Corporal
“Climate Change.” Not “Global Warming.”’ Mr. Gore changed it, remember?
I wonder if he had to change the prospectus for the investors in his $700 million fund to profit from the technology to combat global warming?
:-)
By Dennis
December 22, 2008 11:27 AM | Link to this
Nothing biased about Bookman - ha! You get his drift in this piece from his opening statement “….that Dick Cheney smuggled a bit of truth into a very large package of lies last week.”
Personally, I am in agreement with and indebted to Bush - and/or Cheney for keeping the U.S. free from any post 9-11 terrorist attacks and do agree with them about the need to remove Saddam from his perch to do just that. I understand that Cheney’s reluctance to agree that it was a mistake because the weapons of mass destruction was not true. And I understand that Cheney’s demeanor and presentation style is not warm and fuzzy - like that of a Clinton or Obama who also tend to mold their answers to the audience and moment at hand. What tickles me is the media’s frustration at Cheney’s tendency to stick to his guns in his seemingly unyielding style, and especially his failure to apologize and gravel in response to public opinion - opinion molded by the constant reporting of those opposite views by our liberal news media.
I hope Obama has those in his administration that have similar backbones.
By bh
December 22, 2008 11:27 AM | Link to this
Shawny:
“Ed Gillespie is the Counselor to President George W. Bush.”
A unbiased source if ever there was one. Just how stupid ARE YOU!!!
By DB, Gwinnettian
December 22, 2008 11:30 AM | Link to this
“Whenever you disagree with justice (stopping those who reward the killing of american civilians)”
Actually, Cheney was referring to the sponsoring of Palestinian suiciders. Something, by the way, our pals the Saudis did (and probably still do) as well.
Your confusion is, I’m sure, exactly what Cheney intended.
By RealityKing
December 22, 2008 11:31 AM | Link to this
Bush borrowed 1 trillion to protect America by freeing 57 million people in Iraq and Afghanistan
Obama is going to borrow 1.3 trillion for short term road projects and morbidly obese state budgets.
Yep, no doubt about it. History is definitely going to need more wooing..
By Wyld Byll
December 22, 2008 11:33 AM | Link to this
Today, more than ever, I am proud to stand with President Bush.
He inherited a terrible intelligence mess from the Clintons and was faced by an enemy unprecedented in the scope of its treacherousness and pure evil - and then, in addition to Pelosi and Reid, he also had to deal qith the Islamic Jihad.
I read the anti-Bush rhetoric and would love to know what you people do for a living. Certainly, you’ve never had siginifcant leadership roles, and can’t understand the nature of holding the responsibility for others and making decisions on the best available information. The best comment is that Bush lied about the “length” of the war. A war is not like a movie, where one can say it lasts 93 minutes. Wars, by nature, are indefinite in term, because one can never tell what the enemy might do and if any of its tactics will be successful.
President Bush acurately recognized the threat that our nation faced and kept us safe. Hold that thought, in case, G-d forbid, PEOTUS is not nearly so successful. G-d bless President Bush and Vice President Cheney.
By The Corporal
December 22, 2008 11:35 AM | Link to this
To Paul
Ah, yes ….. sorry.
O.K. Even the corporal has to go out in this Climate Change to do some last minute shopping. I’ll be back later to catch up.
By Major Woodie
December 22, 2008 11:41 AM | Link to this
By The Corporal December 22, 2008 11:14 AM
that you, corporal, sir, for your brilliant insight on reporting one day’s temperatures around the world and showing how global warming is obviously wrong.**
please share some of your brilliant scientific mind regarding the silliness behind evolution
anyone who reads tge bible and the constitution knows that evolution is pure fantasy.
By VultureTX
December 22, 2008 11:51 AM | Link to this
@DB, Gwinnettian
Nope the extra bonus Saddam himself (as seen of arab tV thanks to the clueless palistinians camera crew) gave was for a bombing at a Israeli university where an american girl was killed. Also Saddam specifically harbored terrorists involved in the deaths of US citizens abroad. So please go spin in the corner.
BTW the Saudis changed their payment system after pressure from the US and Israel. And they opened up all Saudi financial transactions to allow US scrutiny for terror funding thanks to Bush/Cheney’s efforts. So funding is traced, one of the best tools in the WoT.
By AJC/DNC Management
December 22, 2008 11:55 AM | Link to this
Yeah boy, “global warming” is sure kicking it off today, I think I’ll sell my SUV and buy a matchbox with a sail on it, sure will.
By Wyld Byll
December 22, 2008 11:57 AM | Link to this
To meddle, for a moment, in the discussion between Major Woodie and The Corporal December, would an evolution supporter answer one question for me?
It seems that evolution is pretty straightforward and built upon the foundation that elements combined in the primordial ooze to form life and that life begat new forms of life.
Please explain from whence the matter that formed the elements and primordial ooze came? As it appears to me that without a theory on that the theory of evolution has no basis on which to stand.
By jewcowboy
December 22, 2008 11:59 AM | Link to this
why do the anthrax attacks in mid-late september of 2001 not count as terrosist attacks? is it because they were domestic in origin, or because it does not fit into the “there hasn’t been a terrorist attack on the US homeland since 9/11” mantra put out by the right? If memory served the first was on 9/18/01 and they continued into november.
By Paul
December 22, 2008 11:59 AM | Link to this
Taxpayer 11:24
I think it’s a valid assumption. According to the 9-11 commission, the plan had been underway for years. Years. There was no “we’ll do this if a Republican wins but not if a Democrat wins.” The first few months of the Bush Administration were AQ’s final few months of preparation and action.
My point wasn’t what a ‘different’ administration would have done. My point was that the actions of the Bush Administration in this regard were little different from the Clinton Administration’s actions. It’s not surprising, given the Bush Administration inherited the same basic bureaucracy with the same hundreds of thousands of State, DoD and intel bureaucrats.
And whatever differences one may care to point out, the fact remains that a Gore Administration would have been even more congruent with the Clinton Administration’s policies – which would not have lessened the likelihood of 9-11.
Dennis 11:27
[[I am in agreement with and indebted to Bush - and/or Cheney for keeping the U.S. free from any post 9-11 terrorist attacks]]
So if the US is attacked on Pres Obama’s watch, any ideas what ‘failures’ of Pres Obama’s would have ‘let’ the attack happen?
Not a serious question. As Bosch so rightly pointed out - nothing of the sort would be said. Politics, you see -
By mm
December 22, 2008 12:02 PM | Link to this
There’s a new one. We now have Wyld Byll blaming Clintol for the intel failures of Bush. How nice.
By spankmonkey
December 22, 2008 12:12 PM | Link to this
Bushco’s initial reaction, well besides reading “My Pet Goat” and going into hiding, was exactly right. The Taliban housed Osama, and wouldn’t give him up or ask him to leave, so we went to Afghanistan started bustin skulls.
Where they went wrong is they weaved IRAQ into this, and lied about it the whole time.
By cliff
December 22, 2008 12:12 PM | Link to this
Hey, It’s clear now why Clinton didn’t take Bin Laden when he had the chance, look at all the Millions he got from Middle East. Zman
By mm
December 22, 2008 12:14 PM | Link to this
Hey Management. It’s over 100 degrees in Australia. There are 2 hemispheres, but your feeble brain can only see the US, unless of course it concerns war.
By Taxpayer
December 22, 2008 12:21 PM | Link to this
And yet, Paul, what one person does with a little piece of intel can be entirely different from what another does with it. Further, speculation is still speculation — regardless of how valid we think it is. I could just as easily promise to bomb Iran (assuming I had that capability) if they ever sent a terrorist to commit his crime in the US. It would still be speculation. However, I can tell you with absolute certainty that, using a base 10 number system and our accepted definitions for numerals and addition, 2+2=4. No speculation. Yet, so many people wish to think that an “If, then” construct applies where it does not. Why. Do they simply yearn for such simplicity or do they refuse to accept life’s complexities. I for one was very pleased to hear Obama state that sometimes we need to agreeably agree to disagree. Too bad that war mongers such as Mr. Preemptive Dick and his sidekick, Dubya, (aka, D&D or Dumb and Dumber to many) could not see things that way.
By The Ghetto Prophet
December 22, 2008 12:27 PM | Link to this
Gay Bookman is a con artist! He is good @ word twisting and BS ideas. I’m not a Bush fan but can anybody explain why Brother Billy Clinton admits to “Dropping the ball” when he was in office? I seen a youtube interview Billy Clinton did where he said, He dropped the ball BUT @ least he tried. In reference to Bin Laden. Its a four part interview. Go to Youtube keyword clinton post 911 attack.
By AJC/DNC Management
December 22, 2008 12:32 PM | Link to this
By mm December 22, 2008 12:14 PM Hey Management. It’s over 100 degrees in Australia.
That’s nice, mmoron, but I don’t live in Australia.
Where I live it’s freaking cold, almost like al-Gore is in town.
If so, could somebody tell him to please go away?
By Midori
December 22, 2008 12:34 PM | Link to this
Keith Olbermann summed it up quite nicely about Bush claiming that “everyone” had the same intelligence: “That’s like blaming your bad grade on the guy that you cheated from who also got a bad grade”.
Doesn’t inspire much confidence, does it?
What happened to “the buck stops here”?
By sunshine and thunder
December 22, 2008 12:36 PM | Link to this
A few bullet points for those of you who are blind:
Bush didn’t lie us or rush us into a war. He assessed the intelligence, used 16 UN resolutions and a congressional one for removing Saddam, spent six months of valuable time trying to get the UN to help enforce some of those resolutions and had the support of congress.
Bush created a worldwide coalition of more than 90 nations to combat terrorism. He also acted to remove Saddam with a multiple coalition of international partners. To ignore this fact is not only to distoryt history but to insult the sacrafices of the brave men and women of our allies.
How is it that, over the recent past, pro American leaders have been elected in Germany, France and Italy?
Iraq and Afghanistan are two fronts of the SAME WAR. Listening to democrats you would think the only legal war was the one with Afghanistan. In reality the Iraqi war has much more of a UN mandate.
By @@
December 22, 2008 12:41 PM | Link to this
Bosch:
If Saddam Hussein had WMD, how can we say for certain that he did pose an imminent threat? What about all the other countries that have WMD, do they too pose an imminent threat? Did we have information that he was planning on using these phantom weapons?
Not to be harsh Bosch, but I quit reading your posts a long time ago. Your objective in life appears to be to sit on one thumb using the other to hit the space bar while blogging. Not real impressive.
What is it you always say when backed into a corner in an online debate?
“But that’s just my opinion.”
Bomb Pakistan? I do believe Obama has said he’d do just that if Pakistan doesn’t cooperate.
I was going to break down your questions responding to them one by one but you’re here for the socialization and I won’t be providing what’s lacking in your life.
Off to the grocery store.
Paul:
Merry Christmas to you and yours.
By DB, Gwinnettian
December 22, 2008 12:41 PM | Link to this
Paul, Merry Christmas back atcha. As for your earlier question, if I’m caught polishing any historical turds for Obama come Dec. 2016 I expect to be called out on it.
By Truthman
December 22, 2008 12:44 PM | Link to this
CHENEY MUST BE PROSECUTED!!! HE HAS BEEN THE MOST EVIL MAN ON THE WORLD STAGE IN THE PAST 20 YEARS (He gave Saddam Hussein matching pearl-handled pistols back in 1986 for Iraq’s fighting Iran in their war). A “PERSON” OF HIS ILK MUST NEVER BE ALLOWED INTO A POSITION OF POWER IN AMERICA EVER AGAIN.
CHENEY IS CONCENTRATED EVIL…HE IS HUMAN PARAQUAT!!
By DCT
December 22, 2008 12:46 PM | Link to this
By AJC/DNC Management
December 22, 2008 11:55 AM | Link to this
Yeah boy, “global warming” is sure kicking it off today, I think I’ll sell my SUV and buy a matchbox with a sail on it, sure will
Since when does a baby stroller being pushed by your mother qualify as an SUV Andy?
By AJC/DNC Management
December 22, 2008 12:46 PM | Link to this
A key figure in Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s alleged scheme to sell a U.S. Senate seat has sought immunity from federal authorities in return for his cooperation in their ongoing probe, the Tribune has learned.
Raghuveer P. Nayak, an Oak Brook businessman and political fundraiser, is the unnamed “Individual D” who prosecutors say was being squeezed by the governor for campaign cash in return for appointing U.S. Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. to the Senate seat vacated by President-elect Barack Obama, sources said.
ew
So will he get immunity or will the Oblahma hit squad give him the old dirt nap?
By Midori
December 22, 2008 12:46 PM | Link to this
Reading through this thread, I thank GOD that the American people woke up and saw you conservatives for what you truly are: crazy as loons, disengenious, hypocritical, greedy, completely out of touch (and reality), and master (so you think) manipulators of the truth.
I’d be surprised if America (minus the original slave holding states) trusts your brand enough to elect them as dog catcher.
By What
December 22, 2008 12:47 PM | Link to this
“That same chilling arrogance was also apparent in Cheney’s response to a question about torture.”
UNBELIEVABLE!!! Jay’s hindsight analysis and total disregard for our national security is amazing. Our national and global security is paramount, regardless of the cost and methods used!!!
By Copyleft
December 22, 2008 12:50 PM | Link to this
most conservatives don’t have a problem with the war, and most don’t have any problem with torture when it is needed to protect the United States
Phil: Thanks for explaining why conservatives just lost the elections and have been booted from power. The REAL America doesn’t do that s**t, and we’re sick of fascists pretending they’re patriots.
By DaninMacon
December 22, 2008 12:50 PM | Link to this
I remember Tom “Puffy” Daschel demanding a second vote on the Iraq war resolution in 2002. He wanted to make sure that every Democrat could be on the record supporting the war. Then, when things got tough, the democrats started with the Bush lied garbage. You libs rewrite history all the time. Most democrat lawmakers, including most of the members of Obama’s new White house crew, supported the war. The selective memory of libs allows them to stab the country in the back.
By Really
December 22, 2008 12:53 PM | Link to this
By The Ghetto Prophet
December 22, 2008 12:27 PM | Link to this
Gay Bookman is a con artist! He is good @ word twisting and BS ideas. I’m not a Bush fan but can anybody explain why Brother Billy Clinton admits to “Dropping the ball” when he was in office? I seen a youtube interview Billy Clinton did where he said, He dropped the ball BUT @ least he tried. In reference to Bin Laden. Its a four part interview. Go to Youtube keyword clinton post 911 attack
Funny that you you mention bin Laden. He’s still out there. One more Bush/Cheney failure. The get tough on terror zoo crew can’t even track down and kill the main perp. Maybe if they hadn’t been so busy performing oral sex on their good buddy and despot Musharaf they would have really gotten tough on terror sponsoring and harboring states such as Pakistan and gone in and got bin Laden. Tough on terror my azz.
By Copyleft
December 22, 2008 12:57 PM | Link to this
Dan: Bush DID lie. There’s no need to rewrite history—the facts are pretty much clear and indisputable. And nothing that Congressional Democrats did or didn’t do will change that sad fact.
“Stabbing the country in the back” is exactly what the Bush regime has been doing for the past eight years. And now we’ve put a stop to it. Why are you so upset by that?
By Truthman
December 22, 2008 12:58 PM | Link to this
Midori and Copyleft…WORD!!!
Their despicable arses have been kicked from office and their lies and mania are only supported in the old confederacy and Utah.
Good riddance, neo-conmen and women!!!
GOOD RIDDANCE!!!
By Paul
December 22, 2008 1:00 PM | Link to this
DB 12:41
I’ve a feeling there are a few here who will do just that when we pour tens of thousands more troops into Afg with no ‘victory metrics’ like those expected of Pres Bush in Iraq and when Pres Obama announces a ‘residual’ force of some tens of thousands to remain in Iraq indefinitely!
The more things change…
Truthman 12:44
[[HE IS HUMAN PARAQUAT!!]]
I believe that’s a biological impossibility. Did you have the same Intelligent Design teacher as Mr. Olberman?
By Mrs. Godzilla
December 22, 2008 1:03 PM | Link to this
Truthman, Midori, Copyleft…
These last few Bush and Cheney apologists are very nearly too tedious to bear!
I used to enjoy the blog….but now all the sour grapes give me heartburn.
By Paul
December 22, 2008 1:04 PM | Link to this
Truthman 12:58
Utah?!!?
By George
December 22, 2008 1:05 PM | Link to this
Well stated Really. That about sums up the Bush/Cheney war on terror. The only war they’ve waged since 9/11 is a war on the American people and the 4th Amendment.
By GhettObama
December 22, 2008 1:07 PM | Link to this
Hey Jay,
Let me tell you and your shemale pals at the AJC one small thing — the United States, under the stewardship of Bush and Cheney, fought Islamic terrorism tooth and nail and took all steps necessary to keep Islamofascists under check. They took the battle to those b&stards, invaded Iraq (where every Democrat, French, Russian, Brit, Aussie, etc beleived the existence of WMDs for years!!!), fought in Afghanistan and eliminated many leaders of these groups. Your hatred for Bush & Cheney is so great that it has cluded your judgement on their successes. Oh, by the way, where were you when unemployment was around 4% for most of Bush’s presidency? How come we have stopped seeing Iraq-related headlines, now that successes there are being achieved? You and Cynthia Tucker and rest of the intolerant, leftist nuts are such bloody hypocrites. Be glad that this country has not been attacked — look at what happened in India when a lackluster policy response to Islamic extremism there resulted in hundreds of people being killed. Where the hell were you liberal poopers then?!! Where was your sense of outrage? Or were you too busy eating organic tofu in East Atlanta with your fellow pansies?
By mm
December 22, 2008 1:16 PM | Link to this
I’m SO glad I left GA 15 years ago. GA tolerates the Christian equivalent of the Taliban in Afghanistan.
By Paul
December 22, 2008 1:17 PM | Link to this
Midori 12:34
I believe Olberman’s remark would have been more on point if he’d have said “that’s like blaming your bad grade on the science SAT on the science teacher who taught intelligent design and nothing about evolution.” There were agencies charged with developing intel sources and analyzing it. They blew it. And if they saw those to whom they were providing their assessments proclaiming something with no basis in fact, they had a duty to the people to call them on it, regardless of the hit to their careers.
Truthman - this was dropped ahead of my 1:00 quip back atcha - trust the Olberman comment makes more sense now -
By Truthman
December 22, 2008 1:18 PM | Link to this
GhettoBush,
WHATEVER!! Go crawl back under your Cheney/Bush/Rummy/Wolfowitz apologist rock. You and your ilk’s time has passed…FOREVER!!!
I know two Soldiers who were with your chicken-hawk Wolfowitz in Iraq during a mortar attack. They say they found him hidden under a desk crying!!
SO MUCH FOR BEING A BIG HE-MAN!!
Why don’t you enlist…you’re so proud of your draft-dodging neo-cons (Bush, Cheney, Chambliss, Gingrich, Romney)…maybe you should put an M4 where your mouth is!!
P.S. I’ve worked for the DoD for more than 24 years, so don’t ask why I don’t enlist!
By jewcowboy
December 22, 2008 1:24 PM | Link to this
This myth that Bush has kept us from being attacked on U.S. soil is pure unadulterated crap, meant to salvage any credibility the administration has left. Of course it does not matter if it is true or not.
I seem to remember John Allen Muhammad killing 16 people in 2002 in the beltway sniper attacks in dc, saying he was waging a jihad against the U.S. This left more dead than the 1993 trade center bombing, but why is this not considered a terrorist attack against the U.S.? Is it simply due to the fact the person behind it was an American.
The administration has had a few positive accomplishments, such as tripling the amount of humaniatrian aid to AIDS victims in Africa. Unfortunately, those accomplishments are grossly over shadowed by thier dismal failures.
By SwedeAtlanta
December 22, 2008 1:31 PM | Link to this
Reference Joey @ 8:05 a.m.
Joey, I completely agree that members of Congress must accept their role in authorizing the use of force in Iraq.
But it must be pointed out that
(1) Members of Congress did NOT have access to the same intelligence as the White House
(2) The Republican Leadership had access to more intelligence than their Democratic counterparts
(3) The Congress didn’t go around making up stories to promote the war whereas the Executive Branch did even at a time when the White House had access to more intelligence information than Congress
Yes, leaders of Congress that voted for this war of choice need to accept their responsibility for this but their culpability is mitigated by the fact they had access to less intelligence and were sold the war by a profiteering and highly ideological Executive branch.
By Sam
December 22, 2008 1:36 PM | Link to this
Dec. 22 (Bloomberg) — The FBI has engaged in “triage,” taking agents off terror and other crimes to respond to a cascade of financial frauds such as the alleged Bernard Madoff Ponzi scheme, the head of the bureau’s New York criminal division said.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation was forced to reallocate its manpower in New York to deal with recent frauds involving subprime mortgages, auction-rate securities and Madoff, who prosecutors said confessed this month to bilking investors out of $50 billion, FBI official David Cardona said in an interview.
“We have to work those cases which we think pose the greatest threat,” he said. “In this case, it’s a threat to the financial system and Wall Street.”
It’s about damn time.
By Wyld Byll
December 22, 2008 1:38 PM | Link to this
jewcowboy 1:24 PM
It is hard (and unpleasant) to take the measure of one so small that he: 1) would take that which, in Oklahoma, is considered to be an anti-semitic term as his screen name; and b) ignore reality in his BDS addled dementia just to deny giving President Bush credit for that which he has done. Shame on you, you anti-semitic, racist hatemonger.
By Wackolibhack
December 22, 2008 1:38 PM | Link to this
It is Bush’s fault that there is war. It is Bush’s fault that there is terrorism. There was never any conflict with the muslims until Bush. It is Bush’s fault that we, the uppity USA have not been attacked since 9/11, even thought we deserve it. It is Bush’s fault that most Democrats supported the war until it was unpopular. It is Bush’s fault that Liberals now have to say to anyone that supports the war that they should go enlist. Although, most of those on the left have never served or harbor disdain for the armed forces. It is Bush’s fault that Sen. Harry “The Body” Reid (D- Stoplight, NV) has been saying the “war is lost” while the surge is working. It is Bush’s fault that Obama will not pull troops out of Iraq on Jan 22nd. It is Bush’s fault that he is going to escalate the hostilities in Afgani-Pakistan areas. It is Bush’s fault that there are idiot congressmen and congressgals that simply refuse to see that the war on terror is a war worth fighting. I hate Bush!!!
By Villa Rica DAWG
December 22, 2008 1:42 PM | Link to this
Hmmm… Just because this is an opinion column doesn’t give you the right to state your speculation as facts, Bookman.
I won’t pretend that I am satisfied with Bush, but it isn’t because of Iraq or the War on Terror. It has more to do with his domestic policies as far as the middle class, jobs, and the economy in general is concerned.
What’s that he said, “Normally, we would let a failing business fail.” Hmmm, what about the millions of Americans losing their homes, cars, and jobs due to the rates of inflation seen on gasoline, groceries, and operating costs at home and at work????
That said, Bookman is an extremist and I don’t care for extremists on the left side either.
By John J
December 22, 2008 1:44 PM | Link to this
I read Jay’s usual predictable drivel in the paper this morning. I then put it exactly where it belongs, directly under my bird
By jb
December 22, 2008 1:44 PM | Link to this
With all due respect sir, how can you honestly say that had we not gone into Iraq and done away with Sadaam and his forces, the world would be safer today? How do you know FOR SURE that some of the things predicted by VP Cheney would not have come to fruition if we had not taken the war (and it is war) to them on their own turf? It is a given that these terrorists hate the US and everything it stands for and have a mindset that makes them want to kill every one of us (me and you included). With that in mind, had you rather they send their non-uniformed soldiers (aka terrorists) into our country and do in our cities what they are doing in their own cities. I do not agree with everything that Pres. Bush and VP Cheney have done, but I am sure glad they had the courage to stand up to these thugs and fight them to the death. It is sad that we have lost many of our finest young men and women (my son is in Iraq) but I think it would have been much worse if we had stood by and let the war come to us. Something had to be done. Did they lie to us? Yes. Does it really matter now? No. Would it have been better if they had told us “Don’t worry. This is just a one-time incident and the terrorists won’t do it again”. By the way, let’s assume you are the President on Sept 11. What would you have done?
By Wackolibhack
December 22, 2008 1:48 PM | Link to this
You know what else is Bush’s fault? It is Bush’s fault that Gay Bookman is a cheese eating, wine swilling, hybrid driving, democrat lackey. I hate Bush!!!!!
By williebkind
December 22, 2008 1:49 PM | Link to this
I get it!! Jay is just keeping the Atlanta liberals ignorant! Mrs G is legendary at locating liberal website opinions.
Jay are you going to post about Bush during the fourth and final year of OBAMA?—unless we are a third world country by then with no 1st ammendment rights.
By jewcowboy
December 22, 2008 1:53 PM | Link to this
Wyld Byll,
It’s a bit hard to be anti-semitic when you’re jewish, and I’m not in Oklahoma.
It’s a bit sad and pathetic that there are those that will not face reality such as yourself. Do you remember Richard Reid (aka the Shoe Bomber), who in Dec. 2001 was arrested after trying to blow an American Airlines flight from Paris?
It was not Bush or air marshals or domestic wiretapping that foiled that, simply 2 female flight attendants.
But please, don’t let the facts get in the way of re-writing Bush’s legacy.
By spankmonkey
December 22, 2008 1:56 PM | Link to this
The wingnuts are worked up today… they probably stopped by Wasilla and picked up some crystal meth from Bristol Palin’s future mother in law.
By Benjamin Franklin
December 22, 2008 1:58 PM | Link to this
By williebkind
December 22, 2008 1:49 PM | Link to this
I get it!! Jay is just keeping the Atlanta liberals ignorant! Mrs G is legendary at locating liberal website opinions.
Jay are you going to post about Bush during the fourth and final year of OBAMA?—unless we are a third world country by then with no 1st ammendment rights.
So what moron! Thanks to Bush/Cheney we’ve already lost our 4th Amendment rights. Those two launched the grandest assault on the U.S. Constitution in the history of this nation.
By jb
December 22, 2008 1:59 PM | Link to this
With all due respect sir, how can you honestly say that had we not gone into Iraq and done away with Sadaam and his forces, the world would be safer today? How do you know FOR SURE that some of the things predicted by VP Cheney would not have come to fruition if we had not taken the war (and it is war) to them on their own turf? It is a given that these terrorists hate the US and everything it stands for and have a mindset that makes them want to kill every one of us (me and you included). With that in mind, had you rather they send their non-uniformed soldiers (aka terrorists) into our country and do in our cities what they are doing in their own cities. I do not agree with everything that Pres. Bush and VP Cheney have done, but I am sure glad they had the courage to stand up to these thugs and fight them to the death. It is sad that we have lost many of our finest young men and women (my son is in Iraq) but I think it would have been much worse if we had stood by and let the war come to us. Something had to be done. Did they lie to us? Yes. Does it really matter now? No. Would it have been better if they had told us “Don’t worry. This is just a one-time incident and the terrorists won’t do it again”.
And to the folks who keep saying that Mr. Obama won the election in a landslide or was given a huge mandate, you need to remember that although he (Obama) won 67% of the Electoral College Votes, he only won the Popular Vote * by *6 percentage points. According to the previous election (Bush vs Gore), the Democrats stated that the popular vote was much more indicative of the nation’s wishes. If that is indeed true, then there wasn’t such a landslide or mandate for Mr. Obama after all.
By Mrs. Godzilla
December 22, 2008 2:03 PM | Link to this
jb
‘member Bush’s 2nd term mandate?
compare the numbers dude.
By Sam
December 22, 2008 2:08 PM | Link to this
jb you have a greater chance of winning the Powerball Lottery than you do being killed by terrorists. Grow a set eunuch. Keep drinking the koolaid.
By Jethro
December 22, 2008 2:13 PM | Link to this
Jay:”Of course, that’s not the story we were hearing back in 2002 and 2003. Back then we heard talk of mushroom clouds rising over U.S. cities and unmanned aerial vehicles attacking our shores and huge stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons that had to be eliminated because they posed a direct threat to our security.”
Not to be rude, but please site your source on this, if you would. I don’t recall any of the ‘mushroom cloud’ and ‘unmanned arial vehicle’ talk you attribute to them. Much less Iraq attack us here at home. Thanks
By RCH
December 22, 2008 2:17 PM | Link to this
Cheney `clearly would love’ to get bin Laden now WASHINGTON — Vice President Dick Cheney says he’s guessing that al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden is still alive.
Bin Laden has escaped capture since the Sept. 11 attacks. Cheney says capturing him is something the Bush administration “clearly would love to do” in the last few weeks in office.
Then what’s stopping you Deferment Dick. Are your lips still stuck to Musharaf’s azz. Dick Cheney is not only a pathological liar, but a sociopath as well. Not to mention a coward of the 1st magnitude. Want to know how to get a deferment. Ask Dick. What a POS. May his soul rot in hell. Right along with Saddam and all the others of Cheney’s ilk.
By Jethro
December 22, 2008 2:21 PM | Link to this
One last thing to some of my fellow posters…..name calling is nothing but a profound form of ignorance, and it appears we have a “profound” number of posters here today expressing their “profound” lack of manners. Merry Christmas, all.
By jb
December 22, 2008 2:24 PM | Link to this
So Sam, What would you do if a group of terrorists sponsored by some ruler in another part of the world flew a plane into the Sears Tower? Now make your decision in light of what you have been told is true (they have WMDs) by your group of specialists. And you only have a few minutes to make that decision because another plane is on the way towards the Bank of America Plaza in Dallas. And there may be a couple of stray planes out there headed toward other major population centers. And after those hit, your intelligence communities are telling you that there is good reason to believe another wave of attacks are imminent. And I have a set. I served my time in Vietnam and my son is serving his time in Iraq. What have you done? Let me guess - you have swallowed the Democrats/Obama line that they are going to set things right. Well, the Democrats have controlled the Senate and House for the past few years and so far, they haven’t done too well. And based on the latest headlines, they are backpeddling on what they are going to do in the next few years. Hey, I am willing to give them a chance. I don’t “tow the party line”. I am neither a Democrat or a Republican. I have enough sense to make my own decisions and not let some group of overpaid politicians make those for me.
I suspect my chances of getting killed by a terrorist is much smaller now because of what our Armed Forces have done. I may be wrong but I’ll take my chances.
And Mrs. Godzilla, I agree completely with you dudette on Pres. Bush’s 2nd term. He didn’t win a mandate and should never have stated that he had. He was wrong.
By Algonquin J. Calhoun
December 22, 2008 2:28 PM | Link to this
Well, I see the wilderness is coming to greet me. So, even in his lies, Cheney allows a bit of truth to come to the light. I’m surprised by that but it’s obvious he’s preparing the way for the flood of truth that will wash over this nation as he leaves Washington and his papers behind. He was in a dither to shred everything, claiming the papers were his. When the courts ruled otherwise he turned to talking as a means to mitigate their impact. He has now, tacitly, acknowledged the justification for the war of brutality against Iraq was fabricated. He’s acknowledged pre-meditation. This means that our troops were sent to fight a war for purposes other than those stated. Every man and woman who served there, was wounded there, that died there did so in furtherance of a lie manufactured, uttered and reinforced by the Bush administration. The Bush administration mandated a systematic torture of individuals held captive and took this nation from the upper echelon of nations to the bottom of the terror sponsor barrel. I call for this criminality to be investigated. If there is credible evidence prosecute. If found guilty, execute!
By jb
December 22, 2008 2:29 PM | Link to this
So Sam, What would you do if a group of terrorists sponsored by some ruler in another part of the world flew a plane into the Sears Tower? Now make your decision in light of what you have been told is true (they have WMDs) by your group of specialists. And you only have a few minutes to make that decision because another plane is on the way towards the Bank of America Plaza in Dallas. And there may be a couple of stray planes out there headed toward other major population centers. And after those hit, your intelligence communities are telling you that there is good reason to believe another wave of attacks are imminent. And I have a set. I served my time in Vietnam and my son is serving his time in Iraq. What have you done? Let me guess - you have swallowed the Democrats/Obama line that they are going to set things right. Well, the Democrats have controlled the Senate and House for the past few years and so far, they haven’t done too well. And based on the latest headlines, they are backpeddling on what they are going to do in the next few years. Hey, I am willing to give them a chance. I don’t “tow the party line”. I am neither a Democrat or a Republican. I have enough sense to make my own decisions and not let some group of overpaid politicians make those for me.
I suspect my chances of getting killed by a terrorist are much smaller now because of what our Armed Forces have done. I may be wrong but I’ll take my chances.
And Mrs. Godzilla, I agree completely with you dudette on Pres. Bush’s 2nd term. He didn’t win a mandate and should never have stated that he had. He was wrong.
By jb
December 22, 2008 2:33 PM | Link to this
So Sam, What would you do if a group of terrorists sponsored by some ruler in another part of the world flew a plane into the Sears Tower? Now make your decision in light of what you have been told is true (they have WMDs) by your group of specialists. And you only have a few minutes to make that decision because another plane is on the way towards the Bank of America Plaza in Dallas. And there may be a couple of stray planes out there headed toward other major population centers. And after those hit, your intelligence communities are telling you that there is good reason to believe another wave of attacks are imminent. And I have a set. I served my time in Vietnam and my son is serving his time in Iraq. What have you done? Let me guess - you have swallowed the Democrats/Obama line that they are going to set things right. Well, the Democrats have controlled the Senate and House for the past few years and so far, they haven’t done too well. And based on the latest headlines, they are backpeddling on what they are going to do in the next few years. Hey, I am willing to give them a chance. I don’t “tow the party line”. I am neither a Democrat or a Republican. I have enough sense to make my own decisions and not let some group of overpaid politicians make those for me.
I suspect my chances of getting killed by a terrorist are much smaller now because of what our Armed Forces have done. I may be wrong but I’ll take my chances.
And Mrs. Godzilla, I agree completely with you dudette on Pres. Bush’s 2nd term. He didn’t win a mandate and should never have stated that he had. He was wrong.
By GaLiberal
December 22, 2008 2:35 PM | Link to this
Mike@December 22, 2008 said: If anyone wants to read a liberal pundit who, unlike Bookman, is not a boring and predictable partisan hack who never strays from ideological and cultural dogma, check out the NYT’s brilliant Nick Kristof:
This holiday season is a time to examine who’s been naughty and who’s been nice, but I’m unhappy with my findings. The problem is this: We liberals are personally stingy.
Hey, Mike, get a clue. This is about elected politicians deliberately lying to the American people to justify a war. It has nothing to do with how much one gives to charity. Why do you mix these two disparate things together? It is because you can’t get a moral high road out of lying to people? Or the fact the Iraq war has killed as many if not more civilians than Saddam did during his rule? Or the fact that the US invasion left a huge power vacuum that was filled with religious conservatives who then fought to have the US military ejected from the country? Or how about the specious tax cuts that greatly benefited the uberrich the Rethuglicons rely on for campaign funding? You and your Rethuglicon boot licking buddies have no moral high ground so you bring in this stupid and unrelated issue of donations to charities. How low can you go? (It’s a rhetorical question.)
When you vote Rethuglicon, you vote against your own best interests. And Mike is living proof.
By Zeke
December 22, 2008 2:41 PM | Link to this
Listed below is your source Jethro. Appropriate name by the way. Are you a double naught spy?
On NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Vice President Dick Cheney accused Saddam of moving aggressively to develop nuclear weapons over the past 14 months to add to his stockpile of chemical and biological arms.
“Increasingly, we believe that the United States may well become the target of those activities,” Cheney said.
“And what we’ve seen recently that has raised our level of concern to the current state of unrest … is that he now is trying, through his illicit procurement network, to acquire the equipment he needs to be able to enrich uranium — specifically, aluminum tubes,” Cheney said, referring to one of the elements for making nuclear weapons.
Citing Bush administration officials, The New York Times reported Sunday that Iraq tried to buy thousands of high-strength aluminum tubes.
The tubes, Rice said, “are only really suited for nuclear weapons programs, centrifuge programs.”
Centrifuges are one way to separate weapons-grade uranium from natural uranium.
White House sources also tell CNN that Saddam has in recent months met several times with Iraq’s top nuclear scientists and encouraged them to continue their work.
Sources say Iraqi defectors who used to work for Iraq’s nuclear weapons “industry” tell administration officials Iraq’s top priority is acquiring nuclear arms.
Rice acknowledged that “there will always be some uncertainty” in determining how close Iraq may be to obtaining a nuclear weapon but said, “We don’t want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.”
By The Corporal
December 22, 2008 2:41 PM | Link to this
To Major Woodie
Sir:
1) The are many imminent scientists who also think the global warming thing is poppycock. Take it up with them.
2) Do you mean micro-evolution or macro-evolution?
3) At a time when the greatest scientific minds on the planet thought the world was on the back of a turtle or held up by Atlas the Bible says in Job:
He hangeth the earth upon nothing.
Interesting ………
By jb
December 22, 2008 2:45 PM | Link to this
The “mushroom cloud” statement was made by Condoleeza Rice in response to a question on CNN Late Edition on 9/8/02. I don’t believe that VP Cheney was the originator of that term. Even if he didn’t say it, is there anyone in their right mind who would think that these terrorists would not use nuclear weapons inside the US i f they could get them into the country. I don’t think everyone understands that these people hate us and their sole goal in life is to kill as many “infidels” as they can. Do not believe for a second that they would spare your life if they had a choice to kill you or not. This may not be a “declared war” but it darn sure is a war.
By jb
December 22, 2008 2:46 PM | Link to this
The “mushroom cloud” statement was made by Condoleeza Rice in response to a question on CNN Late Edition on 9/8/02. I don’t believe that VP Cheney was the originator of that term. Even if he didn’t say it, is there anyone in their right mind who would think that these terrorists would not use nuclear weapons inside the US if they could get them into the country. I don’t think everyone understands that these people hate us and their sole goal in life is to kill as many “infidels” as they can. Do not believe for a second that they would spare your life if they had a choice to kill you or not. This may not be a “declared war” but it darn sure is a war.
By sunshine and thunder
December 22, 2008 2:46 PM | Link to this
JAY AND ASSORTED LEFT NUTS
Please take a few moments to enumerate Bush’s lies and why they were lies and how he sold them to a gullible congress and country.
We’d all like to know.
For those of you who need it:
eNUMerate (verb): to mention separately as if in counting; to name one by one.
By The Corporal
December 22, 2008 2:49 PM | Link to this
Wyld Byll
It’s like the guy who said, I can take dirt like God did and make life.
And God said, fine, but get your own dirt.
To Jethro
Thank you sir for bring the name calling responses to our attention. There is very little civility or reasoned debate on these blogs.
By JAY BOOKMAN
December 22, 2008 2:52 PM | Link to this
To Jethro:
In an important speech in Cincinnati in October 2002 outlining the dangers posed to the United States by Saddam, Bush warned that “We’ve also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical and biological weapons across broad areas. We are concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using UAVs for missions targeting the United States.”
In that same speech, Bush also warned that “Knowing these realities, America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof — the smoking gun — that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud,” a phrase also used by others in his administration, including Condi Rice.
And, of course, sophisticated delivery systems are not required for a chemical or biological attack — all that might be required are a small container and one terrorist or Iraqi intelligence operative to deliver it.
By Sam
December 22, 2008 2:57 PM | Link to this
Wow jb. Such brilliance. What if what if what if. The Bush apologists anthem. But I guess the logical thing to do would be to adopt the Cheney model, appoint myself de facto national security czar, run all intel on the matter through my office and cherry pick the parts that suited my preconcieved agenda and make sure I micromanaged every thing going to the boss so that nobody else could get to him first and give him contrary information that might stymie my own personal agenda. That is what I would do.
By Mrs. Godzilla
December 22, 2008 3:09 PM | Link to this
sunshine and thunder
Please forgive us for not just jumping on top of your rather forward and ungracious command.
You see, we’d ask you to go back and read the blog postings here and at the old Luckovich site for the last 2 or three years.
We Libs (elevction winners) have been posting that infomation here and there since before you changed your name to susnshine and thunder.
You inability to read and remember or comprehend does not translate directly into a responsibility for us to beat our heads against a brick wall providing data that no amount of wishing will make you accept.
So now you can go ahead with your tired and tedious and predictable response - “you libs can’t prove anything” - while the rest of us chuckle and simply step over you.
You and you ever decreasing minority are no longer worth the effort of educating.
May you find some peace, somewhere, sometime.
By ET
December 22, 2008 3:12 PM | Link to this
jb you watch too much damn TV. I bet your favorite show is 24. I agree with the poster above. Grow a set chicken little. You stand a better chance of being mauled by that bear sighted at Johnson Ferry and Roswell Rd. than ever encountering those boogedy boo terrorists that have you wetting your pants. You and others like you are nothing more than sheep.
By jb
December 22, 2008 3:13 PM | Link to this
Sam, I thought this was supposed to be a forum where people could present questions and comments and not a place for personal attacks. It always seems to be that the “liberals” sure can give out the negative points about someone else’s opinion, but when the non-liberals try to do that to the liberals. the libs always go to personal attacks. Now I don’t know you and you don’t know me. I choose to ask what I think are appropriate questions and I make statements that are, to the best of my knowledge, supported by facts. You, however, have chosen to “get personal”. You should follow the example set by you great Commissar Obama and actually pretend to listen graciously to the opinions of others. It’s obvious that you are so much smarter that the rest of us. So please indulge us misinformed as we blissfully go through life in lock-step with our leaders.
By Midori
December 22, 2008 3:17 PM | Link to this
Mrs. G: SNAP
LOL - You and you ever decreasing minority are no longer worth the effort of educating.
I couldn’t have said it better :)
By RetiredLTC
December 22, 2008 3:22 PM | Link to this
Brig. General Spyder Marks, my West Point classmate was the officer in charge of finding the WMDs in Iraq in the direct aftermath of the invasion. He was given a list of over 400 sites where WMDs alledgedly could be found. After going from dry hole to dry hole it became obvious even to him that he was chasing his tail. He likened it it to the sham POW rescue attempts during the Vietnam conflict when all the “solid intel” ever produced were dry holes.
By Mrs. Godzilla
December 22, 2008 3:23 PM | Link to this
Midori
I just get so tired of the same BS over and over and over. Tired reruns of stuff and nonsense, ritual dead horse beating and nearly daily crap-a-roni.
It makes me sad for them to be sure, but my patience is finite!
By jb
December 22, 2008 3:28 PM | Link to this
So many comments and so little time… If you are going to berate those who disagree with your opinions, at least proofread your submission before you post it with so many errors: “We Libs (elevction winners)”, susnshine and thunder.. I guess those with no “set” are jealous of those of us who have kept ours since the first thing out of your mouth is to question someone else’s “set”. And I do watch TV and 24 is one of my favorite shows. But at least I have enough sense to know that everything you see on TV is most likely made up (kinda like the Democratic/Obama plan to “make things better”). Finally, people who have no idea about the things of which they speak always try to throw off their lack of knowledge by making fun of people who ask you to prove something. If it’s so darn easy to prove your stated “fact”, they why don’t you do it?
By Ahomo
December 22, 2008 3:29 PM | Link to this
Jay you are a person who likes to take his tool and put it in another man’s behind.
By Ahomo
December 22, 2008 3:30 PM | Link to this
Jay you are a person who likes to take his tool and put it in another man’s behind.
By Cindy
December 22, 2008 3:33 PM | Link to this
jb, you haven’t stated one supportable fact here all day. Maybe I missed something, but if so would you care to fill me in on just what those facts are? You sir are the individual marching in lockstep with your beloved leaders. Failed ones at that.
By The Corporal
December 22, 2008 3:34 PM | Link to this
To Ahomo
You are just the person we don’t need or want posting on these blogs.
Please go away.
By Fred S.
December 22, 2008 3:37 PM | Link to this
What are you complaining about jb? Sam said he would do exactly what your idol Cheney did do.
By Dennis
December 22, 2008 3:37 PM | Link to this
Reply to Paul 11:58 - didn’t mean to ignore your question “So if the US is attacked on Pres Obama’s watch, any ideas what ‘failures’ of Pres Obama’s would have ‘let’ the attack happen?” But had to step out for a moment.
I don’t think Obama would “let”, as you put it, an attack happen - but I do fear that the testing of Obama early in his term, as described by his vice-president choice Joe Biden, might be just such a terrorist attack. I hope I’m wrong. I pray I’m wrong. And I’d be happy to admit that taking a “dialogue” stance works with potential terrorists groups, verses the Bush-Cheney more military-type stance, No - no way would I ever accuse Obama of purposely “letting” anything harmful to American life or property happen. And I thank you in the future for no longer putting your word(s) (such as “let”) into the context or train of thought of others’ writings.
By jewcowboy
December 22, 2008 3:38 PM | Link to this
Ahomo, The lady doth protest too much, methinks.
By David Sims
December 22, 2008 3:41 PM | Link to this
By jb
December 22, 2008 3:28 PM
Finally, people who have no idea about the things of which they speak always try to throw off their lack of knowledge by making fun of people who ask you to prove something. If it’s so darn easy to prove your stated “fact”, they why don’t you do it?
What are your facts jb? I’m listening. So far you have presented absolutely nothing. Set the example jb.
By Cindy
December 22, 2008 3:52 PM | Link to this
jb I’m waiting for your facts so as to be better informed on these matters.Or am I to think that your “facts” are nothing more than the same old tired talking points that right wing talking heads so love to puke up. Are you just another snake oil salesmen trying to baffle us with BS? Several people here have expressed an interest in hearing your facts but have as of yet gotten nothing. Are we wasting our time jb?
By Ree
December 22, 2008 3:52 PM | Link to this
Liberal blah blah blah
By jb
December 22, 2008 3:53 PM | Link to this
Cindy, I did not pretend to state facts (except for the one about it not being Cheney who uttered the quote about mushroom clouds”). I simply asked hypothetical questions that I had hoped would be answered by those of you who pretend to know all the answers. Forgive the assumption I had made. I do grow weary of people who do nothing but complain about how someone else handled a situation but when you ask them how they would have done it, they can’t seem to answer. Fred S., Sorry if I sounded like I was complaining. I guess I at least had enough sense to realize that Sam’s response was sarcastic. He probably wouldn’t do anything, but I don’t know him so I can’t really say. And please tell me how I am marching lock-step with Bush and Cheney. I don’t think I have said anything that stated that I agreed with everything they said or did. I do agree with how they handled the decision to go after the terrorists. I do not agree with how they handled the Afghanistan situation and I don’t agree with how they allowed torture to go on (if it really did). And I sure as heck don’t agree with how they screwed up the economy.
By Jethro
December 22, 2008 4:02 PM | Link to this
Thanks for the info Zeke. That was just to far back for my recollections. Yes, I AM a double-naught spy…but only on the weekends :-) Have a great holiday!
By JohnHolmes
December 22, 2008 4:02 PM | Link to this
Remember. Chaney always was and will be a Dick.. three inches to be precise
By Cindy
December 22, 2008 4:05 PM | Link to this
Hypotheticals have absolutely no basis in fact jb. There is a hypothetical that can fit any imiginable scenario. The probability is what is key. And unfortunately your odds are much higher of being mauled by that bear than any of us ever encountering a terrorist. Also, unless I am mistaken the guy above did tell you how he would handle your hypothetical. The Cheney model. He would do exactly as Cheney did. So what is your issue with that?
By Jethro
December 22, 2008 4:06 PM | Link to this
JAY and Zeke, Thanks for the info. I knew it was said, but as to the what, where, and when, I wasn’t sure. I’m doing good if I can remember what I had for breakfast :-)
Thanks guys, and have a great holiday and safe New Year!
By jb
December 22, 2008 4:16 PM | Link to this
But since you asked:
By jb
December 22, 2008 4:30 PM | Link to this
You can’t argue with drunks and crazy people and it seems as if you can’t have a friendly discussion between people of opposing views of Bush/Cheney.
I agree that some hypotheticals have no basis in fact, but they do make for an interesting discussion.
It is obvious that Sam’s proposal to follow Cheney’s method was tongue-in-cheek (unless he actually DOES agree with Cheney).
Please understand that all I wanted was a healthy discussion of opposing views. I thought it was still OK in this country to do that. And I really don’t like debating with people who stoop to childish name-calling and personal attacks. I have my views and you have your views. Sometimes we disagree. To me, that’s OK. And you are right about that bear attack. But at least I have some control over that - I stay away from places where bears rule. Unfortunately, it’s not quite that easy to stay away from where terrorists WANT to attack. They want to attack us in our homeland. It sure would be nice if we could adopt the philosophy of that great American, Rodney King - and just all get along. Tha’s the great think about the US. Although we have our disagreements (even over religions), we don’t go around blowing each other apart because we don’t see eye-to-eye. Merry Christmas (even to those who may disagree with me).
By Pogo
December 22, 2008 4:30 PM | Link to this
The one thing that is going to be amusing to watch is to see the stark contrast between the way the very intelligent Cheney operated and the way that blundering dolt Biden will operate. In the Obama administration there isn’t going to be much more than a re-hash of all that the Democrats thought was good in their party in the last 16 years. Another words, Clinton-Clinton-Clinton. This would be fun to watch if it wasn’t the future of ourselves and our children that Obama, Pelosi and Reed are going to sell out. There is no money left for trillion dollar stimulus plans. Obama and his dullard Vice President certainly seem to think so and don’t at all seem to be bothered when they talk about spending “Trillions” of us tax payers dollars. The fact that they don’t seem to be bothered is what should be bothering all of us. And by the way, can Obama speak six consecutive english words without saying, “Uh”?
By Wyld Byll
December 22, 2008 4:31 PM | Link to this
To my fellow American patriots - you know who you are - these liberals blog participants are having their long awaited, but to be shortlived day in the son. Hang in there, continue to try to educate even the worse among them, and one fine day we will return this country to all of its greatness. In conclusion, forgive the liberal sheeple for they know not what they have have said or done. And certainly, they know not that of which they speak.
By Paul
December 22, 2008 4:33 PM | Link to this
Dennis 3:37
I, too, had to step out for a moment.
The ‘let’ as in “Obama would let it happen’ was in quotes for a reason - it was a little back atcha to the antiBush types who for years on this blog have written about Bush “letting” 9-11 happen. So it was just a little lighthearted case of flipping the argument. Nothing intended about putting words in your mouth.
BTW - I don’t hold much hope for ‘dialogue’ with religious fanatics who think it’s their God-given duty to kill those who don’t believe as they do. I also don’t have any hope that if we were out of the ME completely they’d cease hostilities. Just look at OBLs past words about if we were to get out of Saudi Arabia. We did. He continued operations. But I’d still rather we were out completely - more than many Bushcritics do, evidently, given their collective policy and purchasing actions which keep us in continued dependence on them.
By Bill
December 22, 2008 4:36 PM | Link to this
You should thank the GOD you pray to, that we were safe from terrorist attacks after 9/11 under their adminstration.
Let’s hope the lying retard coming into office has the backbone after his cocaine and heroine induced hallucinations to protect us as diligently.
Jay … you are a Liberal Democrat whacko.
And, you’re a pathetic journalist/writer.
Bill
By Jim
December 22, 2008 4:47 PM | Link to this
Bookman, you are just plain crazy. Cheney said the absolute truth. Iraq, the region, the US, and even you, are better off without Saddam Hussein around anymore. I guess you failed to remember that US troops did find WMD’s buried in the sand over there along with Russian fighter jets. It looks to me like you are one of those trying to rewrite history to support your disdain for Bush and Cheney. I am glad for what they did and have accomplished, even if it did not always go the way planned or wanted. As for torture, Cheney said they did what was considered legal, whatever that may be. And I approve of that because it had a role in keeping all of us safe from futher horrible attacks at the hands of these idiot terrorits who are hell bent on killing all of us, even you. Are you willing to give the terrorists a better opportunity of killing you in favor of your idealistic viewpoints on everyone getting along? Get real, the terrorists want to kill us and destroy the US. Where exactly do you draw the line on defending us, and you, and the US? What exactly would you have done differently if you were the pres? Thankfully for all of us, you have not been in power to make any decisions. Bush and Cheney have not been perfect, nor has any pres (even your beloved Bill Clinton), but they have protected us and that is one of the basic tenets of our government. Quit criticizing and start considering and writing about solutions. But it is too easy to criticize isn’t it?
By Jean
December 22, 2008 4:49 PM | Link to this
Obama had a gay sex affair with a limo driver while coked to the gills in Chicago in 1999. The Obama camp has not refuted one snigle word this guy, Sinclair, has said. On that night Obama reportedly told his lover that he had to keep his gayness n the DL, because hs muslim faith did not permit it. The gay community knows taht Obama is gay and that is why they are so upset over the Warren pick for the prayer.
By Bullzeye
December 22, 2008 4:52 PM | Link to this
Sunshine. Here is your coalition.http://theboard.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/25/president-bushs-coalition-of-the-willing-or-orwell-comes-to-iraq/
By Eileen
December 22, 2008 4:53 PM | Link to this
The United States of America has been good to Dick Cheney. He made a fortune when he graduated from being SecDef to becoming CEO of defense contractor Halliburton to suck up DOD contracts for his new employer. He grabbed unprecedented power after nominating himself for VP. He holds himself accountable to no one. Yes, America has been mighty good for Dick Cheney. So why does he hate this country so much?
By Eileen
December 22, 2008 4:56 PM | Link to this
The United States of America has been good to Dick Cheney. He made a fortune when he graduated from being SecDef to becoming CEO of defense contractor Halliburton to suck up DOD contracts for his new employer. He grabbed unprecedented power after nominating himself for VP. He got away with high treason yet will never be held accountable. Yes, America has been mighty good for Dick Cheney. So why does he hate this country so much?
By Jim
December 22, 2008 5:05 PM | Link to this
Eileen- How do you come to the conclusion that Cheney’s hates the US?! He probably hates terrorists, but not the US. He helped protect you too. You were very successful in commiting libel by stating that Cheney “got away with high treason”. Thankfully for you, you don’t really know what treason means so you probably won’t get sued, but if you do, it might make for a fun reality show.
By Robby
December 22, 2008 5:07 PM | Link to this
Dick Cheney should have pushed as hard as he could to secure the world from those whose vision includes only themselves at the top…
one question mr. bookman…why are u asking these questions now…the only failure i see in your world view is the lack of any kind of check on mr. cheneys power when it mattered…
if u could not ask these questions then they lose any credibilty now…
shut the f*ck up mr. bookman…u have apparetnly failed your profession and us with all this mon morning qb political wrangling in your own bid for power
By Charles Hill
December 22, 2008 5:12 PM | Link to this
Is this article a news story and editorial or that messy blend that leads to so much slanted journalism?
By jwads
December 22, 2008 5:28 PM | Link to this
The people who reside safely in this country and try to minimize the importance of keeping it safe are living in a dream world. Torturing a person who knows something about future terroristic plans in order to save American lives, or any lives inside the borders of the USA American or otherwise, is not a crime in my book nor I imagine the books of most realistic and rational Americans. Who knows how many lives have been saved from terror attacks that never occurred because of these “controversial” tactics. How soon we forget burning Americans jumping to their deaths out of burning buildings right here in our own country on September 11th. How many people do you think would have had problems with torture then. Wake up people and realize that war is ugly. If we could talk our way out of these situations without firing a shot then we would do it; thats just not the case. Next time a terrorist attack happens on American soil will there be another report on how we didnt weed out terrorism when we had the chance like the Clinton years taught us. I doubt it and you can chalk that up to the Bush/Cheney “torturous years” in office if thats what you want to call them. For me I will just say thank you to those guys for making the decisions that noone wanted to make.
By jwads
December 22, 2008 5:30 PM | Link to this
The people who reside safely in this country and try to minimize the importance of keeping it safe are living in a dream world. Torturing a person who knows something about future terroristic plans in order to save American lives, or any lives inside the borders of the USA American or otherwise, is not a crime in my book nor I imagine the books of most realistic and rational Americans. Who knows how many lives have been saved from terror attacks that never occurred because of these “controversial” tactics. How soon we forget burning Americans jumping to their deaths out of burning buildings right here in our own country on September 11th. How many people do you think would have had problems with torture then. Wake up people and realize that war is ugly. If we could talk our way out of these situations without firing a shot then we would do it; thats just not the case. Next time a terrorist attack happens on American soil will there be another report on how we didnt weed out terrorism when we had the chance like the Clinton years taught us. I doubt it and you can chalk that up to the Bush/Cheney “torturous years” in office if thats what you want to call them. For me I will just say thank you to those guys for making the decisions that noone wanted to make.
By jwads
December 22, 2008 5:31 PM | Link to this
The people who reside safely in this country and try to minimize the importance of keeping it safe are living in a dream world. Torturing a person who knows something about future terroristic plans in order to save American lives, or any lives inside the borders of the USA American or otherwise, is not a crime in my book nor I imagine the books of most realistic and rational Americans. Who knows how many lives have been saved from terror attacks that never occurred because of these “controversial” tactics. How soon we forget burning Americans jumping to their deaths out of burning buildings right here in our own country on September 11th. How many people do you think would have had problems with torture then. Wake up people and realize that war is ugly. If we could talk our way out of these situations without firing a shot then we would do it; thats just not the case. Next time a terrorist attack happens on American soil will there be another report on how we didnt weed out terrorism when we had the chance like the Clinton years taught us. I doubt it and you can chalk that up to the Bush/Cheney “torturous years” in office if thats what you want to call them. For me I will just say thank you to those guys for making the decisions that noone wanted to make.
By jwads
December 22, 2008 5:32 PM | Link to this
The people who reside safely in this country and try to minimize the importance of keeping it safe are living in a dream world. Torturing a person who knows something about future terroristic plans in order to save American lives, or any lives inside the borders of the USA American or otherwise, is not a crime in my book nor I imagine the books of most realistic and rational Americans. Who knows how many lives have been saved from terror attacks that never occurred because of these “controversial” tactics. How soon we forget burning Americans jumping to their deaths out of burning buildings right here in our own country on September 11th. How many people do you think would have had problems with torture then. Wake up people and realize that war is ugly. If we could talk our way out of these situations without firing a shot then we would do it; thats just not the case. Next time a terrorist attack happens on American soil will there be another report on how we didnt weed out terrorism when we had the chance like the Clinton years taught us. I doubt it and you can chalk that up to the Bush/Cheney “torturous years” in office if thats what you want to call them. For me I will just say thank you to those guys for making the decisions that noone wanted to make.
By Royce
December 22, 2008 5:33 PM | Link to this
2008 was the year Journalism DIED…!!! What I don’t understand is why the AJC even calls Mr. Bookman journalist. Once these people actually reported the news. This guy is so shaded he might as well be writing for a LIBERAL BLOG… (well I guess, with the AJC, that IS what he is doing). Here are the facts: Either the UN is a JOKE (O.K… most agree that is a given), or we had the RIGHT and RESPONSIBILITY to follow through on the 16 demands that Saddam stop killing his own people and threatening peace in the whole world. THIS President (and VP) and the moral courage to stand up to the bully…! I know Liberals don’t understand the necessity of sometimes being a MAN standing up for what is RIGHT. Thanks to God for this great President! There are areas where I also don’t agree with him, but NOT about the NECESSITY to remove Saddam. And, while we suffer from the loss of 4000 brave men and women, we probably saved a few HUNDRED THOUSAND Iraqi lives, and gave the rest a chance for a TRUE life. As normal, blind, Kool-Aid drinking Liberals are so myopic they cannot see simple truths. Maybe, Mr. Bookman, you should go back to school and learn how to REPORT the news without your opinion overwhelming your efforts… otherwise you make JOURNALISM into a JOKE…!!!
By jwads
December 22, 2008 5:33 PM | Link to this
The people who reside safely in this country and try to minimize the importance of keeping it safe are living in a dream world. Torturing a person who knows something about future terroristic plans in order to save American lives, or any lives inside the borders of the USA American or otherwise, is not a crime in my book nor I imagine the books of most realistic and rational Americans. Who knows how many lives have been saved from terror attacks that never occurred because of these “controversial” tactics. How soon we forget burning Americans jumping to their deaths out of burning buildings right here in our own country on September 11th. How many people do you think would have had problems with torture then. Wake up people and realize that war is ugly. If we could talk our way out of these situations without firing a shot then we would do it; thats just not the case. Next time a terrorist attack happens on American soil will there be another report on how we didnt weed out terrorism when we had the chance like the Clinton years taught us. I doubt it and you can chalk that up to the Bush/Cheney “torturous years” in office if thats what you want to call them. For me I will just say thank you to those guys for making the decisions that noone wanted to make.
By jwads
December 22, 2008 5:35 PM | Link to this
The people who reside safely in this country and try to minimize the importance of keeping it safe are living in a dream world. Torturing a person who knows something about future terroristic plans in order to save American lives, or any lives inside the borders of the USA American or otherwise, is not a crime in my book nor I imagine the books of most realistic and rational Americans. Who knows how many lives have been saved from terror attacks that never occurred because of these “controversial” tactics. How soon we forget burning Americans jumping to their deaths out of burning buildings right here in our own country on September 11th. How many people do you think would have had problems with torture then. Wake up people and realize that war is ugly. If we could talk our way out of these situations without firing a shot then we would do it; thats just not the case. Next time a terrorist attack happens on American soil will there be another report on how we didnt weed out terrorism when we had the chance like the Clinton years taught us. I doubt it and you can chalk that up to the Bush/Cheney “torturous years” in office if thats what you want to call them. For me I will just say thank you to those guys for making the decisions that noone wanted to make.
By Greg
December 22, 2008 5:52 PM | Link to this
Yada yada yada - another reason not to actually pay for the AJC
By chico
December 22, 2008 6:21 PM | Link to this
Bleeding liberals are a good thing.
If Jay had his way we would all be saying prayers to allah right now simply to justify the U.S.A. not being mean to those who are sworn to kill us all. Again, I say …. Bleeding a liberal is a good thing.
Chico
By stingray
December 22, 2008 6:26 PM | Link to this
Sam for some reason makes it seem like it’s a bad thing to throw cats in a bag with rocks…
By Sandra
December 22, 2008 6:32 PM | Link to this
I totally agree with your assessment of Cheney. He is never one to let the truth get in the way of his story. It continues to amaze me that people in Georgia don’t even look to more that one or two sources for their information. You only have to listen to the words coming out of Cheney’s mouth at different times to understand the depth of his deception. However, it’s all in the name of increasing executive power and doing what he and the neo-cons have been wanting to do for years.
By Coffee Creamer
December 22, 2008 6:44 PM | Link to this
Atlanta and Georgia would be better off without you and CT polarizing our citizens. Any fool can see that both of you are far left liberals spitting out as much vitrial at the Party of Lincoln as you can. You guys need to be in Phili or Detroit or Cleveland or Chicago etc etc etc.
By cjackson
December 22, 2008 6:56 PM | Link to this
Are you hiding under C.Tucker’s skirt???
By WTF
December 22, 2008 7:26 PM | Link to this
The majority of Americans have turned into a bunch of cowards. How do all you moronic liberals think the United States came to be the greatest country in the world? I can tell you it was not by standing around holding our peckers while others planned our demise. I applaud Bush / Cheney for being proactive rather than reactive (9/11). Jay let me ask you a question. What if a terrorist attacked a local elementary school or hospital? Would you still disagree with the “torture” methods used to get information from those involved?
By DontSeeTheEmpsClothes
December 22, 2008 7:26 PM | Link to this
Comrade Bookman, you’re nothing but a zealous, partisan, idealogue pushing YOUR views and INTERPRETATIONS. Like most liberal hacks, it’s all based on vapor. You’re a worst liar than anyone you ever try to smear and misrepresent with your hateful, intolerant, unfair, and hypocritical bull**.
Too bad you didn’t work in the USSR when Tass was operationg. Your ridiculous propoganda would have been even better suited there, although it finds a nice place in the Urinal Constitution, now in the top five of leftist propogandistic organizations trying (lamely) to present themselves as news organizations.
The biggest threat to this country is intolerant, close-minded, pinheads like you spinning your propoganda out to people that vote, based on the lies and non-truths you slimebags get away with regurgitating day after day, and call it news.
Do you believe in hell?
By Benjamin
December 22, 2008 7:28 PM | Link to this
Cheney, Bush, Rice, Rumsfeld, Gonzalez, et al are each guilty not just of crimes of torture, but all manner of war crimes punishable by execution!
The SOBs need to be brought to account. Those who ignore it just heap further scorn upon the U.S. and show the chasm of hypocracy that exists in America. For the good of our children, trials need to be started.
Unfortunately, there are too many cowards and hypocrites for this to occur. May God punish each of you for your lack of moral courage!
By Sandra
December 22, 2008 7:29 PM | Link to this
Of course Cheney is ingorant- always has been always will be….does not mean he is wrong all the time. The world is better off with Huessin gone.
But now we’re getting another one- Barack Huessin Obama.
By John Stowell
December 22, 2008 7:29 PM | Link to this
I fully agree with the assessment that the Bush, Cheney administration likely misconstrued at best (fabricated at worst) the intelligence to rationalize the invasion of Iraq. Afghanistan was invaded for a different set of reasons that I believe history will largely support (long term terrorist base and clearer linkages to 9/11 terrorists).
However, what is missing from the debate is that the “forward action” stance of the administration has possibly prevented another 9/11 type of attack on the US.
Our leaders have a total obligation to present a clear and truthful case before we go to war. And editorialists should look at the full picture and at least pose the question of “Did the ends at least partially justify the means?” instead of attacking on largely ideological grounds. I don’t think the means did justify the ends, and it least it should be framed as such so that the Iraq invasion can be seen in the context of total US defense.
As an aside, these rants that US is a horrible country due to the way our military has implemented its missions, or the way we have run our interrogations, are baseless. We have been and are the most benevolent “invader” in the history of mankind. Please, study a few other major powers intrusions in to other countries over the past 100 years before assailing our actions.
By Cruikshank
December 22, 2008 7:31 PM | Link to this
Bush / Cheney and company are a gang of international thieves.
The media was their, greatest scam on earth.
The American public,their fatuous cootie.
By Bookman, J
December 22, 2008 7:38 PM | Link to this
Gay Bookman is a liberal weenie.
By ed simmons
December 22, 2008 7:43 PM | Link to this
A terrorist could not say it any better. they need more like you to destroy us.
By Wackolibhack
December 22, 2008 8:11 PM | Link to this
It is Bush’s fault that Gay Bookman is a liberal weenie. I hate Bush!!!!!
By Kyle
December 22, 2008 8:12 PM | Link to this
I love the elitist double standard. We care so much what the world thinks about us(boys marrying boys is swell) but overseas when women are forced into burkas and beaten to death for the crime of going to school, we need endless justifications to act. At some point you have to admit, you are merely ascribing noble cause to your cowardice. The Camelot you long for sought “Might for Right”, what former state of affairs in Iraq do you long for?
By fred
December 22, 2008 8:28 PM | Link to this
And anyone wonders why the AUC is going out of business????
Answer: Sensational left wing journalism
By Algonquin J. Calhoun
December 22, 2008 8:53 PM | Link to this
Maggots, Saddam attacked Kuwait after being provoked and after consultation with George Herbert Walker Hitler’s ambassador. Transcript follows:
On July 25, 1990, eight days before the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, a quiet, largely unreported meeting took place between Saddam Hussein and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq April Glaspie at the Presidential Palace in Baghdad, which has since been destroyed by the war. The transcript of this meeting is as follows:
U.S. Ambassador Glaspie:
“I have direct instructions from President Bush to improve our relations with Iraq. We have considerable sympathy for your quest for higher oil prices, the immediate cause of your confrontation with Kuwait. (pause) As you know, I have lived here for years and admire your extraordinary efforts to rebuild your country. We know you need funds. We understand that, and our opinion is that you should have the opportunity to rebuild your country. (pause) We can see that you have deployed massive numbers of troops in the south. Normally that would be none of our business, but when this happens in the context of your other threats against Kuwait, then it would be reasonable for us to be concerned. For this reason, I have received an instruction to ask you, in the spirit of friendship - not confrontation - regarding your intentions: Why are your troops massed so very close to Kuwait’s borders?”
Saddam Hussein:
“As you know, for years now I have made every effort to reach a settlement on our dispute with Kuwait. There is to be a meeting in two days; I am prepared to give negotiations only this one more brief chance. (pause) When we meet and we see there is hope, then nothing will happen. But if we are unable to find a solution, then it will be natural that Iraq will not accept death.”
U.S. Ambassador Glaspie:
“What solutions would be acceptable?”
Saddam Hussein:
“If we could keep the whole of the Shatt al Arab - our strategic goal in our war with Iran - we will make concessions (to the Kuwaitis). But, if we are forced to choose between keeping half of the Shatt and the whole of Iraq (which, in Saddam’s view, includes Kuwait) then we will give up all of the Shatt to defend our claims on Kuwait to keep the whole of Iraq in the shape we wish it to be. (pause) What is the United States’ opinion on this?”
(Pause, then Ambassador Glaspie speaks carefully)
U.S. Ambassador Glaspie:
“We have no opinion on your Arab-Arab conflicts, such as your dispute with Kuwait. Secretary (of State James) Baker has directed me to emphasize the instruction, first given to Iraq in the 1960’s that the Kuwait issue is not associated with America.”
George W, Hitler completed the illegal, immoral bludgeoning begun by his dear old daddy. you maggots get used to this: your time is up!
By Intown Conservative
December 22, 2008 9:05 PM | Link to this
Jay have you lowered your expectations for Obama too?
You libs will blame Bush for everything from here to eternity. Where does Cox land in the trillion dollar bailout? After all you are Obama’s waterboy.
By b webb
December 22, 2008 9:17 PM | Link to this
The article by Jay Bookman citing comments made by Dick Cheney is an example of just how wrong and hateful Jay Bookman is about the Bush/Cheney administration. Lest everybody has had their heads in the sand, weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq, just not in the quantity that EVERYONE thought. I capitalize the word EVERYONE because everyone from all parties, all nations, etc. believed that weapons were in Iraq. I went to Vietnam because my country said to go. It’s just too bad that people like Jay Bookman don’t support the President the way people supported the President when people were send to World War I and II. I’m thankful that I and my children are not speaking German. If Mr. Bookman had been alive in the 1940’s rhen we all might be speaking German.
By VultureTX
December 22, 2008 9:31 PM | Link to this
@Algonquin J. Calhoun - please seek mental couseling ASAP. your does not prove what you think and it hints at a delusional nature.
I might also point out that Cheney’s points in the interview for going to War with Iraq are also found in Bush’s original statement on invading Iraq (his speech to congress). So please don’t claim that this is a change, it is already documented. Note not all charges have to be true to instigate military action. History has shown this time and time again even for “just” wars.
BTW if you want to go after someone for a False Declaration of War , why are you not calling for Mcnamara’s indictment? We know LBJ fabricated that casus belli and that McNamara was in on it.
/but seriously - get some counseling
By Frederick Douglass
December 22, 2008 9:47 PM | Link to this
As an electorate, we got what we deserved for allowing that idiot eight years to gum up the works. Any one that compares Obama’s obvious intelligence to Bush’s lunacy is a jealous sore loser. Obama is the personification of what many in this country feared when blacks were allowed to be educated on an equal basis. Obama’s been handed the reins at a time when the country’s in its worst shape in history, the next four years will be the true comparison.
By Algonquin J. Calhoun
December 22, 2008 10:02 PM | Link to this
Hey Buzzard Breath, carrion maggot. George W’ Hitler manufactured the “evidence” and lied to Congress and the American people in order to launch the brutal, immoral, unjustified and despicable attack upon Iraq. He’ guilty of murder, torture and fraud. he should be, and I hope will be, brought to trial and, if found guilty, executed!
By DaninMacon
December 22, 2008 10:15 PM | Link to this
Bush did not lie. The libs just changed their little minds.
By Hell has Frozen
December 22, 2008 10:16 PM | Link to this
May all of you that do not believe in military action to protect the freedoms of this great country lose yours or your families lives for your foolish beliefs in the event of any future attacks on the U.S. I certainly hope that is the case rather than the lives of those who are willing to fight and support the actions necessary to prevent attacks on U.S. citizens and the citizens of our allies. The U.S.A. is the only country that follows any rules in the world. So conservative, liberal, gay, straight, or whatever you are, if you can not support freedom brought through and protected by military action leave the country. You are not what our Founding Fathers wanted as citizens. Try having a gay rights parade in China, or better yet starting a business there. Everything does not matter if we lose our freedom to attacks by those who despise freedom. Please be prepared for more attacks to come as Barack, Pelosi, Reed, and the many others incapable of doing their elected duty are about to have us all vulnerable to further attacks, remember the Clinton years?
Clinton Years Equaled:
bombing as criminal act not a terrorist act.
Clinton=Obama, minus the cigarettes.
Bush years equaled no further attacks
History will tell as it always does. I believe the AJC and COX are about to be history financially like all the other biased rags out there! I wonder what happens to the so called journalists then?
By Dillweed
December 22, 2008 10:24 PM | Link to this
Jay, this is why the AJC is declinig in circulation. You and Ted Turner need to get a room together…
By Carl Kirkconnell
December 22, 2008 10:33 PM | Link to this
Lefties (including Bookman), There is plenty to be disappointed in when it comes to Bush-Cheney. However, your sound crticisms lose their sting when you start ranting about war crimes, treason, etc. You expose yourselves as fools not to be taken seriously.
By algonquin J. Calhoun
December 22, 2008 10:39 PM | Link to this
Please be prepared for more attacks to come as Barack, Pelosi, Reed, and the many others incapable of doing their elected duty are about to have us all vulnerable to further attacks, remember the Clinton years?
I remember the Clinton years. The money had value and the country had a real leader. It was after he left, and George W. Hitler took over, that the terrorists launched their attacks upon New York and Washington. bush had been in office nine months and had been warned by Richard Clarke that an attack was imminent. He did nothing! Even when told of the attacks, he continued to read the story of the Little goat to the school children. As for being an American the founding fathers could embrace, I am. I’ve served this nation in the USMC, in a war, and you’ve served nothing but lunches to truckers. Only morons continue to support the idiot who has bankrupted this nation in every way a nation can be flat broke. As far a journalists are concerned, the one I amire the most is the one who fogged the shoes at a moron behind a podium!
By mh
December 22, 2008 10:51 PM | Link to this
Bookman is a sad fellow, blinded to the truth and obviosly more interested in taking good care of the terrorist than the United States of America. I only wish that he could know what Obama now knows already as it relates to the threat matrix that the President sees daily and that you could decide which threat you would allow to take us out first as you obviously have always had ever other country’s interest ahead of the USA. When the issue of just war came up you seemed to ignore the fact that when there are enemies that have their stated intention to destroy you that you must respond to that threat. Even though war is never neat and innocent civilians will be killed, the Judeo-Christian tradition is realistic in recognizing human self-centeredness and sinfulness which may necessitate force to keep evil from spreading its tentacles further, to ultimately restrain violence. C.S. Lewis, writing during WWII, said that “war is very disagreeable.” Be that as it may, evil and aggression are a reality, and we may be doing more harm by ignoring or not stopping evil. He said that a society of pacifists won’t remain pacifistic long! Only liberal societies tolerate Pacifists. In the liberal society, the number of Pacifists will either be large enough to cripple the state as a belligerent, or not. If not, you have done nothing. If it is large enough, then you have handed over the state which does tolerate Pacifists to its totalitarian neighbor who does not. Pacifism of this kind is taking the straight road to a world in which there will be no Pacifists.
By Algonquin J. Calhoun
December 22, 2008 10:56 PM | Link to this
Stopping evil, like charity, should begin at home. George W. Hitler is leaving office and, hopefully, will be brought to trial for his many crimes against humanity!
By greypoopon
December 22, 2008 11:12 PM | Link to this
Saddam had a whole year to dispose of his weapons. Oil wells are very deep holes. Why do you think he set them on fire? To block our sensors? Reduce visibility? Yes, and yes. Also to hide and disperse the WMD’s. It seems to me, that if you have oil in war time, that is good. Not something that you would burn to spite your enemy. Perhaps to hide a great misdeed. And turn the political opinion table aeound.
By tim
December 22, 2008 11:33 PM | Link to this
bookman’s a loser communist. He belongs behind bars at Guantanomo Bay. What this country needs is four more years of true leadership. Not the BS coming from Chicago.
By anne
December 22, 2008 11:34 PM | Link to this
I feel really sad for the US and what we have become. Just evil liars who are so evil that we fail to see we are the terrorist and murders. It appears that many innocent people may have been killed because of lies and deception upon our behalf. I am afraid eventually we will find out the truth behind the destruction of the twin towers because after all Cheney said it really didn’t matter about the lies that was told to destroy Saddam Hussien. It makes you wonder if this man think he’s God and should be able to decide who lives or die. What is his real motive? Is it just evilness or what? This is really scary. I feel really sorry for any human who would uphold anyone so evil. The lies that was told by this administration if unforgiveable. I am praying for our country and hope this new administration make some drastic changes. And for the blind idiot who speak against change, you need mental health. Our country is in a mess fool because of those idoits. Pray, Pray. You reap what you so. Don’t blame no one but yourself.
By steve
December 22, 2008 11:52 PM | Link to this
You suck. Your pity should be redirected toward yourself. You’ve got a third grade education and should consider that before posting anything else. And quit being so scared. You’re acting like a third grader during a tornado drill. Grow up and grow a pair.
By Algonquin J. Calhoun
December 23, 2008 3:11 AM | Link to this
Anne, you spoke of the evil that has made this a terrorist nation and, right after you posted, lo and behold, here it is talking about how evil we are for acknowledging the truth of it. These Republinazi pond scum don’t have a problem with torture, murder or ruthless occupation of another country. What they have a real problem with is the truth. They don’t mind incarcerating their fellow American for expressing a divergent point of view. They continue to be willing to exchange liberties, mainly those belonging to others, for imagined safety. That is far more frightening than anything Osama could come up with. Keep your stinking rede neck hands off my rights, I’ll protect mine b***!
By MatterOfFact
December 23, 2008 7:48 AM | Link to this
Almost all of the 9-11 hijackers were Saudis financed by Saudis, were they not? Isn’t Saudi Arabia the leading financier of terrorism in the entire world? If that Cheney maggot were as tough on terrorism as he falsely tries to appear, why are the real perpetrators of 9-11 still standing?
By Dave in Northridge
December 23, 2008 9:31 AM | Link to this
And no a comment from left of you, Jay. Which facts do you need to see reviewed before Cheney et al. are indicted as war criminals? Or will you be happy when the whole gang is pardoned the morning of January 20?
By VultureTX
December 23, 2008 11:02 AM | Link to this
GWB manufactured Iraq war Fact? So he faked the hijacking of the Achille Lauro? So he faked the bombing of an Israeli college where an american girl died in a suicide bombing. so he faked the deaths of all those Kurds and mass graves of the Shias? Hell he must be good to fake Arab news and footage of Saddam giving Martyr bonus money to the family of those who killed american citizens. There were valid documented reasons to topple Saddam, the WMDs were just the fears of the world’s INTEL communities, but GWB did not make up those foreign allegations, he just used them.
@algonquin - congrats you are a tin foil hat troll that thinks mostly everyone else is wrong and has a false world view. Must suck to wake up to the reality every day. get counseling before you kill yourself.
/for the record no one senior is going to be indicted in the GWB admin for war crimes. But please bet (repeatedly) otherwise with all your assets. It helps the odds and increases our winnings.