Jay Bookman

By AJC/DNC Management

January 24, 2009 9:27 AM | Link to this

{{{{Then President Bush adopted and implemented the policy.}}}}

Really?

{{{{Archive for Saturday, January 14, 2006 Bin Laden’s Top Deputy Targeted in U.S. Strike A U.S. airstrike on a suspected Al Qaeda compound in a remote region of Pakistan targeted Osama bin Laden’s second in command, U.S. officials said Friday, adding that they were investigating the possibility that the Egyptian militant had been killed.}}}}

And if memory serves, the Urinal/Jihad pitched the obligatory Page 3 hissy fit at that time.

Fumbling around for apologies to toss out for your surprise war mongerer, are we?

By Mike

January 24, 2009 9:32 AM | Link to this

So much for all of the yammering about abrogating a nation’s sovereign rights and international law.

Don’t get me wrong. I agree that the strikes should continue. I am simply pointing out the absurd double standards of the media and liberal pundits. The more this double standard manifests itself, the more obvious it will be that so much of the attacks on Bush were rooted in base partisanship instead of any true principles.

By AJC/DNC Management

January 24, 2009 9:51 AM | Link to this

Man, I cannot believe that the President Of The United States Of America whined and moaned about a radio talk show host, do wonders never cease to amaze when dimwitocrats are in charge?

{{{{WASHINGTON — President Obama warned Republicans on Capitol Hill today that they need to quit listening to radio king Rush Limbaugh if they want to get along with Democrats and the new administration.}}}}

Unreal.

He just totally preempted his own parties stealth efforts to silence Conservative talk radio and, on top of that, just gave the El Rushbo a ratings boost of unimaginable proportions.

In a way the guy is right, there are only two real voices of Conservatism left in America, me and Limbaugh, all of the other Repugs have become “moderate” “reach across the aisle” row butts.

And look at what it’s got them, stomped in the last two elections and now having the hopeandchange race mongers lead them around by the nose, and scolded for having ideas not approved by the Politburo.

Shut up and vote yes, eh?

Would anyone like me to go dig up the old lib columns about the “rights of the minority party to be heard” that were written when the dimocrats were out of power?

By JAY BOOKMAN

January 24, 2009 9:52 AM | Link to this

Mike, who criticized Bush’s policy of missile strikes within Pakistan?

Judging from your post, that criticism was widespread, yet somehow I can’t recall any. I certainly never criticized it, nor did the AJC editorial board. I can’t think of major political or media figures condemning it either. I think you’re overcompensating.

And AJC, good catch. I think that prior to last summer the strikes were pretty isolated and only grew in number later, but you are correct.

By Mike

January 24, 2009 10:00 AM | Link to this

Jay -

You are taking a simplistic view of my comment. I didn’t calim that there was widespread condemtation of the missle strikes, although there were plenty coming from the left.

My point is that folks in liberal media have constantly yammered about how the Iraq demonstrated disregard or international law and Iraq’s sovereign rights.

How is the invasion of Iraq a violation of international law, yet unauthorized air strikes in Pakistan are not?

My point is that terms like “international law” and “sovereignty” or trotted out when it is convenient for partisan attacks, yet these same terms are ignored when one of “your guys” is the decision maker. Kind of like how Clinton’s extraordinary renditions never receive criticism, yet Bush’s were held up as a departure from American values.

Thanks for responding to my comment.

By AJC/DNC Management

January 24, 2009 10:13 AM | Link to this

Jay: Come on man, you cannot deny the tone of the news coverage in the AJC concerning missile strikes across the Pakistan border.

The “tone” during the Bush years, that is.

This is not a two news papers in one situation either, Obama stated back in the dem primary debates that he “would invade Pakistan if necessary,” it’s kind of hard for your “centrist” editorial board to harangue the policy after that.

But the news coverage in the AJC had no problems “reporting” the “tensions with Pakistan,” parading around dead “civilians,” and the big one, “turning Pakistan civilians into terrorists against the US.”

None of that is present in today’s reporting, nope, now it is Obama “flexing his muscles.”

There is an editorial “position” of every newspaper in America, that extends into it’s coverage of the news and sometimes even the weather, I’m just curious as to why the sudden change in your newspaper?

By Mike

January 24, 2009 10:18 AM | Link to this

I also wonder why we had to wait to declare a Bush policy “good” until Obama was in office.

The inability to recognize Bush’s successes is as rooted in partisanship as is his incessant demonization.

By getalife

January 24, 2009 10:21 AM | Link to this

At least he is not occupying a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 and perhaps it is the only way to attack al qaeda and disrupt their next plot.

Mike,

I think they do have permission from Pakistan.

welcher,

He should add Hannity to that argument.Those two want Obama and our country to fail.

So does Buy Danish and many at Hot Air but the gop led by McCain does not.

Do you want our country to fail too?

By Taxpayer

January 24, 2009 10:30 AM | Link to this

Some Republicans just need to whine. Rush is one of them. If he doesn’t whine and garner attention, then his ratings fall and his income falls and he’s left with himself. That should be more than enough motivation for the poor man. As for those that would give credence to this man’s blathering, Obama has let you know where he stands — plain and simple — so there can be no misunderstanding. Obama surely knows that there will be some that cannot be satisfied because all they really want to do is whine anyway. As for those who are willing to listen as well as be heard, they are welcome. Good for you, President Obama.

By Mike

January 24, 2009 10:32 AM | Link to this

Getalife -

Gee, you think we have permission. What do you know that the NYT does not? Did you read the article? Or do you just let liberal pundits give you the gist. If you read the article for yourself, you might also learn that, “the attacks have also killed civilians, enraging Pakistanis and making it harder for the country’s shaky government to win support for its own military operations against Taliban guerrillas in the country’s lawless border region.” Remember how the left demonized Bush with just this line of argument, yet somehow don’t really care about it any more.

Texan - do you know what quotation marks are for? I never said “blog-simple” or anything of the sort. I also never said Bookman was simple. I said , “You are taking a simplistic view of my comment.” (Notice the correct use of quotes and take notes.)

I guess your view of complexity is calling people names and making fun of disabled people. How progressive of you!

By Bud Wiser

January 24, 2009 10:37 AM | Link to this

Yeah, let’s keep lobbing missiles into Pakistan. Maybe we’ll catch a few of those murdering pigs that boated into Mumbai jus for the thrill of the kill.

Then maybe India will think it is a good idea too, seeing as how they were the terrorist target and all, so nor it will be okay if they join the party and lob a few missiles into Pakistan as well.

Not to be outdone, Pakistan now thinks it needs to protect it’s sovereignty, so it will respond by tossing a few back at India. Now the Indians are really in a p** mood, so in the interest of ending this once and for all, it’s NUKE EM time! A couple should do the trick. Pakistan responds as quickly as they can with their nukes. Ooops, we missed. A nuke or two lands in China. The Chinese aren’t about to take this by simply absorbing the roentgens and moving on, and respond as only they know how …. overwhelmingly.

Oh, by the way, since the US apparently started this whole border infringement thing, the Chinese try to launch a few at us. Ooops, missed again. Never got past Kamchatka Peninsula. Wait a minute, don’t the Rooskies own that? Uh now, now we have a mess, don’t we?

But not to worry, in a few millennia the earth will have cooled, the radiation degraded, plant life will reappear (maybe), the air will be sweet, the water pure, an idyllic paradise once more, just like the Sierra Club has envisioned.

Maybe the cockroaches and field mice will be able to enjoy it because there will be no more DeCon, no more rat traps, or cats to chase and eat them; oh, and no more humanity to worry about either.

By Mike

January 24, 2009 10:37 AM | Link to this

Taxpayer -

“Some Republicans just need to whine?”

Well what are you doing? You aren’t addressing any topic raised here at all. You are just whining that you think that all people who don’t share your narrow views are flawed.

What’s the difference?

By AJC/DNC Management

January 24, 2009 10:40 AM | Link to this

{{{{By getalife January 24, 2009 10:21 AM At least he is not occupying a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 and perhaps it is the only way to attack al qaeda and disrupt their next plot.}}}}

You may want to double check me, al-Gitmo, but I’m pretty sure he is occupying a country that had “nothing to do with 9/11.”

That war monger.

And no, me and the rest of the wingnuts do not want America to fail, that is why we oppose Oblahmi and his health care travesty, socialist policy and race mongering.

It is not I who is alienating the largest majority of people in America, that is your president doing that, Robert Reich did not dream up his ideas all by himself, he was just mimicking the tone of the conversations taking place within the Oblahma administration.

I am very supportive of this Obama strategy, I wish him nothing but success with such an undertaking.

By Mike

January 24, 2009 10:46 AM | Link to this

Notice that the conservatives on this board are not looking for excuses to attack Obama, and in fact state their support for the man.

Want to know why the crowd at the inauguration was so convivial? Maybe it was because conservatives don’t need to wail and protest when they don’t win.

By Taxpayer

January 24, 2009 10:47 AM | Link to this

Good whine there, Mike. Most excellent. Keep up the good work.

By Bud Wiser

January 24, 2009 10:49 AM | Link to this

Taxtaker is one of those left wingnuts who just likes to hear himself let out air, and feel his gums flapping. He may eventually post an item of use, but if history is any guide, I wouldn’t count on it.

The world is full of tools that point fingers in every direction but at themselves, who criticize without offering alternatives, who just rant and rave and just want to watch the world burn.

Taxtaker and his ilk fit that mold quite nicely. Reading his jibberings, you can see that he just wanted to puff up, never once addressing the topic or anything even closely resembling it. Knock yourself out Taxtaker, you expose yourself for what you are every time you post.

A wise man once said (and I paraphrase here); ” Sometimes it is better to smile and remain silent, letting others only guessing how ignorant you are about something, rather than opening your mouth and confirming it for everyone.”

I’d take that advice to heart if I were you.

By Mike

January 24, 2009 10:51 AM | Link to this

Taxpayer -

Please explain why I am “whining” and you are not. Can you? Do you really believe anything that you say?

Can you actually have a discussion without useless ad-hominem attacks? You know, actually address what someone says instead on issuing a blanket condemnation of any who don’t share your ideology?

It would be interesting to see that. I don’t expect it, but I’d like to see it.

By Taxpayer

January 24, 2009 10:55 AM | Link to this

Taxtaker. Who is this Taxtaker that you refer to in your whining, BudWiser? Also, let me just “say” that you also whine most excellently. Bravo.

By AmVet

January 24, 2009 11:07 AM | Link to this

I felt that the original statements by President Bush that any country who harbors our enemies is an enemy and that we reserved the right to strike anywhere, anytime were both correct.

And I supported them. And still do.

Unfortunately the Court Jesters Rummy and Dickie talked King George the Crusader into morphing it all into the highly questionable Bush Doctrine of preemptive (preventative???) wars, unilateral invasions and regime changes.

So now, after getting 4,230 Americans needlessly KIA’d in Iraq most Americans are converts to the Anti-Cheney Doctrine — If there’s a 1% chance that the misguided and inept neo-cons can regain power, we have to treat it as a certainty in terms of our response. It’s not about our analysis … It’s about our response.

Neo-con foreign policy - a deadly oxymoron…

By Mike

January 24, 2009 11:08 AM | Link to this

Texan -

I didn’t misunderstand anything. You must have misspoke when you said, “Mike is calling Jay “blog-simple”. Do you always blame others for your poor choice of words?

The country “started pronouncing words incorrectly and we embraced mentalpath” because of Bush. Wow. That’s a new (and hilarious) one.

I guess it must be Bush’s fault that you don’t know how quotation marks are used too?

Also, spare me the false indignation about social stigmas applied to the disabled. You are the person who sneered about “two-headed short bus rider fighting over the helmet”, yet you have the audacity to accuse me of being callous to the disabled.

Finally, drop the “sir” nonsense. Don’t take on the air of a polite conversationalist in the same paragraph that you compare me to a “two-headed short bus rider”. You are dealing in the lowest form of debate, and the “sir” nonsense doesn’t change that fact.

Your hypocrisy and self delusion is laughable.

By getalife

January 24, 2009 11:08 AM | Link to this

No welcher,

He is withdrawing from a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 and the Marine General wants to go to Afghanistan.

Imagine the wingnut outrage if Obama stopped the attacks on the ones that did 9/11 and we were attacked again.

These drone attacks will continue.

BTW, I read the RW blogs and the majority side with Rush and Hannity and want our country to fail.

Not “real Americans” thinking “country first”.

By Davo

January 24, 2009 11:09 AM | Link to this

So Obama is as much a neocon as Bush it seems. No change in foreign policy here, just a continuation of interventionism in nations we consider ‘unstable’.

Jay and the rest of the liberal cheerleaders only notice that the players have changed but that its the same old game using the same tired playbook.

By DB, Gwinnettian

January 24, 2009 11:10 AM | Link to this

Jay, yeah, this issue of Pakistan’s sovereignty being breeched hasn’t been a big rallying point of the left to date. I’ve heard Maddow grouse about it on her radio show some months back, but that’s been about it.

I’m sure others have complained and if one were to dig one could find cites, but your point is sound—it hasn’t been a club the left saw fit to bludgeon Team Bush/McCain with to any prominent effect.

Truth is, the whole Iraq/Afghan money-sinkhole issue in 2008 seemed to boil down to this:

GOP: The Glorious Surge(R) worked perfectly and you won’t admit it!

DEMS: The war didn’t start with the surge; you lied to us about the war and you guys all suck!

It got a little more nuanced than that at times, but not much.

Later, all.

By Taxpayer

January 24, 2009 11:12 AM | Link to this

[[[By Mike January 24, 2009 10:51 AM | Link to this Taxpayer - Please explain why I am “whining” and you are not. Can you? Do you really believe anything that you say? Can you actually have a discussion without useless ad-hominem attacks? You know, actually address what someone says instead on issuing a blanket condemnation of any who don’t share your ideology? It would be interesting to see that. I don’t expect it, but I’d like to see it.]]]

Well, Mike. May I call you Mike. Good. You initially gave yourself away as a whiner to me when you claimed that “…You aren’t addressing any topic raised here at all…” in your 10:37. If you had taken the time to read through all the previous posts, you would have noticed that there was indeed a post on the topic of the whining Rush Limbaugh. Hence, I did indeed address a topic that had been raised, contrary to your assertion. I do hope that I have satisfactorily answered your question.

By Mike

January 24, 2009 11:19 AM | Link to this

Taxpayer -

Not surprisingly, you didn’t answer my question at all. You just reinforced the fact that you have one standard of behavior for those who share your narrow and intolerant views and another for those who don’t.

Just what I expected.

By Taxpayer

January 24, 2009 11:43 AM | Link to this

Well, Mike, I assumed that the primary question that you sought an answer to was the one regarding why I consider you to be a whiner. I did indeed answer that question in my 11:12 post. Now, if that is not the question that you truly sought an answer to then by all means please elucidate. While you’re at it, please elaborate on your claim that “…the fact that you have one standard of behavior for those who share your narrow and intolerant views and another for those who don’t…” is indeed fact. What supporting evidence do you offer, Mike? Enlighten me.

By mm

January 24, 2009 11:47 AM | Link to this

Wingnuts,

I don’t recall anyone on the left complaining about killing terrorists.

The complaints were about invading Iraq. Still rewriting history, are you?

By Taxpayer

January 24, 2009 11:48 AM | Link to this

Oh well, I’ll have to check back later for that anticipated enlightenment. Time to get outside for a while. Enjoy.

By RW-(the original)

January 24, 2009 11:52 AM | Link to this

{{{{{By Mike January 24, 2009 10:18 AM | Link to this I also wonder why we had to wait to declare a Bush policy “good” until Obama was in office}}}}}

I’m calling that the post of the day and closing the competition, but Mike, you have to learn to recognize and ignore Polly Prepuce who is posing as Texan today.

By Mike

January 24, 2009 11:55 AM | Link to this

“By Taxpayer January 24, 2009 11:43 AM | Link to this Well, Mike, I assumed that the primary question that you sought an answer to was the one regarding why I consider you to be a whiner.”

LOL. You just keep proving my point. I have twice now asked you why I am a whiner, yet you are not. You keep telling me about me, yet refuse to address why the same criticisms do not apply to you. Not surpring, as hyper-partisan rarlety assess their own behaviour when juding others.

What makes you intolerant? How about labelling all Republicans as whiners. Regardless of any of the individuals involved, ypou ascribe this moral flaw to all people who are member of a political party that you despise. This is intolerance.

Here is clue: there are good Republicans and bad Republicans. There are super nice liberals and there are liberals who are crappy people. The only people who think that “those guys” are inherently flawed because they are a member of the other political party are people who can not accept any views other than their own. You are one of those intolerant people.

Get it?

By RB from Gwinnett

January 24, 2009 12:05 PM | Link to this

Gee, getaclue. When exactly was it we were invaded by or attacked by Pakistan? I’m not aware of Pakistani forces engaging with US forces, so why are we firing missles at Pakistan? Your double standard on this issue is disgusting. I told you hacks Obama wasn’t going to change our policies over there because Bush was doing what needed to be done and unless Obama is just plain stupid, he would continue to do what needed to be done. He’s not stupid.

And Jay, how many innocent women and children were killed in those missle attacks? You seem to have left that detail out of the story and having been provided those details for the past 8 years, we’re accustomed to having them. Would you mind doing your job as a journalist and see if you can’t provide that for us?

For all you libs who question the media bias, THERE’S YOUR EXAMPLE.

By AJC/DNC Management

January 24, 2009 12:07 PM | Link to this

{{{{By mmoron January 24, 2009 11:47 AM Wingnuts, I don’t recall anyone on the left complaining about killing terrorists. The complaints were about invading Iraq. Still rewriting history, are you?}}}}

Blah, blah, blah-

{{{{Missile strike stokes tensions in Pakistan!!!!- Tuesday, September 09, 2008- Islamabad, Pakistan —- Missiles fired from U.S. drone aircraft!!!! hit a seminary!!!!! and houses associated with a Taliban commander on Monday, killing at least nine people, including both militants and civilians!!!!!, officials and witnesses said.-Urinal/Jihad}}}}

I’m personally going to miss hearing from “officials and witnesses” during the next four years, we hardly got to know ye, hahahaha.

So naive, mmoron.

By AmVet

January 24, 2009 12:13 PM | Link to this

The laughs just keep on coming!

The Republiconned were practically slobbering over themselves vis a vis the impending inauguration of the most liberal human being in the entire earth-centered solar system.

But wait just a cotton-pickin’ minute!

So far, they appear to have widely missed the mark. Again and as usual.

These “faithful” were the sheeple who swallowed hook, line and sinker the tripe that BushCo was conservative. And never understood, or even realized that the RepubliCon train has gone off the rails, into a ravine and ended up upside down, under water.

The darlings of talk radio and the burning bush oracles of the lunatic fringe are still being touted as REAL conservatives with REAL ideas and REAL answers???

Laughable and exceptionally weird, but I think this is actually a very good thing for America.

As long as Headrush, Pretty Boy, O’Lielly and Mann are ever-popular among the dwindling far-right delusionists, it reinforces the clarity and the resolve of most Americans that they have a seat at the table.

The children’s table.

Neo-cons. They’re not just for breakfast anymore…

By getalife

January 24, 2009 12:14 PM | Link to this

Well RB,

You should not spew such ignorance. You are aware aq moved to the ungoverned regions when w cut and ran to occupy Iraq and have Pakistan’s permission.

We are not at war with Pakistan and that is just plain ignorant.

Do not engage me with that bs. Get real.

By John Galt Jr.

January 24, 2009 12:39 PM | Link to this

Let me remind you dimocrats, Pakistan did not attack us, nor did Iraq, it was Al Qaeda holed up in Afghanistan. You are saying now it is OK to attack Pakistan because Obama wants to do it. Personally, I have no problem with attacking Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, or even Iran for that matter, wherever the terrorists live, kill them all, but I am not a hypocrite. On another matter, the terrorist we released from Gitmo is now an Al Qaeda leader in Yemen. Over 50 of the released terrorists went back to terrorism and took up arms against America. I guess asking them to behave, hold hands and sing Koombayah did not work. Closing Gitmo is lunacy. Keep them on an ISLAND! Of course we could move them to Chicago and they would fit right in.

Also, sticking the US taxpayers to pay for killing babies (abortions at OUR expense) in foreign countries? What the hell is the president thinking? Why are we spending US tax dollars for this?

It is a shame people vote for someone JUST BECAUSE OF THEIR COLOR. Hold on to your hats people, the fun is just beginning.

By AJC/DNC Management

January 24, 2009 12:45 PM | Link to this

You know, I do not understand this liberal “they don’t support the president” goony campaign, which is good in a way, because to understand the actions of liberals is just a stone’s throw away from the insane asylum.

58,343,671 people voted against King baraKKK of hopeandchange, the second largest no vote in history, it’s almost as though the left had to create about 4 million votes to get their “man” over the top.

Are all these people “anti American” or whatever it is the harpies are calling us?

What, you don’t remember the last 8 years, featuring the Millions of Maniacal Moonbats from the Fever Swamps?

All we’ve done is called the guy a dunce and laughed at all of the federal investigations/ blatant hypocrisy.

Maybe some day you’ll have a complaint, but now, uh, not.

By JAY BOOKMAN

January 24, 2009 12:47 PM | Link to this

Mike asks “why we had to wait to declare a Bush policy “good” until Obama was in office.”

RW calls Mike’s question “the post of the day” and says he’s “closing the competition.”

But neither will acknowledge that what I said today echoes what I’ve said in the past. For example, back in September I posted the following on this blog:

“In recent weeks the United States has begun to get more aggressive about attacking targets within Pakistan. We have launched missile strikes and even helicopter assaults on suspected terrorist locations. As long as our intelligence is solid and the target important enough, I have no problem whatsoever that approach. When we said that the man behind the attacks on the World Trade Center would find no refuge anywhere in the world, we meant it, or at least we should have.”

By Mike

January 24, 2009 12:57 PM | Link to this

AmVet -

You throw out that pile of name calling and ad hominem attacks and you accuse others of being at the “children’s table”?

Is your behavior that of an adult?

Your hypocrisy is laughable.

By RW-(the original)

January 24, 2009 1:03 PM | Link to this

Jay B.,

Sorry, but I was reading the word “we” as being far broader in scope than your blog. Did you happen to complement the Bush policy in that September posting or was it more of an affirmation of Obama doing all his saber rattling about Pakistan?

By CommunistAJC

January 24, 2009 1:07 PM | Link to this

Obama is now going after Rush Limbaugh. Wow, after 20 years on the radio Rush still is the last man standing. I thought that libs were all for free speech but they have turned into modern day Nazis when it comes to free speech. I miss the old school libs who fought for free speech no matter what side was speaking. No wonder Bookman and many other “journalists” are going to lose their jobs.

“The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.” -James Madison

By Mike

January 24, 2009 1:10 PM | Link to this

JAY -

Fair enough, but there is a big difference between saying ” I have no problem whatsoever that approach” in regards to Bush and calling it a “good policy” onec Obama is in office.

Can you answer the more relevant question I posed to you:

“How is the invasion of Iraq a violation of international law, yet unauthorized air strikes in Pakistan are not?”

You only seem to answer the questions to which you have easy answers.

By CommunistAJC

January 24, 2009 1:11 PM | Link to this

JAY BOOKMAN, What you and every other “objective journalist” fail to understand is that Osama Bin Laden IS NOT THE ONLY TERRORIST IN THE WORLD. Bush said in in 911 speech to Congress that there is an axis of evil. He named off countries as well as terrorist organizations that must be destroyed. I absolutely believe that you and every other journalist have some sort of brain disease. You simply are blinded by Bush derangement syndrome. I absolutely can not wait for the day when newspapers completely go under.

By CommunistAJC

January 24, 2009 1:12 PM | Link to this

Mike, you’re wasting your time because no matter what happens, Bookman will always blame Bush. Every problem in Jays life can be solely blamed on Bush.

By Bosch

January 24, 2009 1:17 PM | Link to this

Commie,

You can’t wait until newspapers go under? Well, then where will we get our information? The internet? Blogs?

Which countries need to be destroyed? Destroyed?

Come on now, lets keep the hyperbole down a bit, it’s Saturday.

By CommunistAJC

January 24, 2009 1:17 PM | Link to this

A Free Pass for Geithner

By Jonah Goldberg

During the hothouse days of the presidential campaign, Joe Wurzelbacher became famous because he got Barack Obama to confess that he likes to spread the wealth around. Better known as Joe the Plumber, the Toledo, Ohio, laborer became the target of bottomless venom and scorn because he seemed like an obstacle to Obama’s coronation.

One of the main talking points, particularly among left-wing bloggers, was that Wurzelbacher was a tax cheat because, it was revealed by ABC News, he had a tax lien of $1,182 for back Ohio state taxes. This fueled the argument that he was a fraud, his opinion didn’t matter. Nothing to see here, folks. Move along.

Fast-forward to today. Timothy Geithner, President Obama’s choice to be the next treasury secretary, quite clearly tried to defraud the government of tens of thousands in payroll taxes while working at the International Monetary Fund. The IMF does not withhold such taxes but does compensate American employees who must pay them out of pocket. Geithner took the compensation — which involves considerable paperwork — but then simply pocketed the money.

The rest can be found here:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/01/afreepassforgeithner.html

By CommunistAJC

January 24, 2009 1:22 PM | Link to this

Bosch, Um, I get my news information from many places OTHER than newspapers. Internet, TV etc…. I got ask you this, you wrote, then where will we get our news information? Hello, it is 2009.

Which countries need to be destroyed? Let me be more specific, I don’t mean land masses being destroyed. I mean, people who run countries like IRAN. The Mullahs. Iran is the NUMBER 1 supporter of terrorism. Saudi Arabia is another. Drill for our own oil here, go to nuclear energy and therefore our money will not flow into these countries again. Bankrupt them.

By CommunistAJC

January 24, 2009 1:25 PM | Link to this

For some odd reason, my copy and paste of that article didn’t work. Anyway, its on realclearpolitics.com

The Collapse of the Left-Wing Media.

by Bill O’Reilly

There is much irony in the fact that while liberals have won power in Washington big time, left-wing media are collapsing all over the place. In the last couple of weeks, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, the Minneapolis Star Tribune and the mother of all liberal publications, The New York Times, each has issued SOS announcements.

The Seattle paper will cease publication in March unless a buyer is found. Even though it can’t pay its bills, the Post-Intelligencer should have been inducted into the left-wing hall of fame after its publisher told the FBI to buzz off when the agency asked for media help in locating two possible terror suspects.

The Minneapolis paper, dubbed the Red Star by some in Minnesota, filed for bankruptcy after its earnings dropped more than 50 percent in one year. That despite the presidential vote and a vicious election between Sen. Norm Coleman and Al Franken.

As for The New York Times: It is Twilight Zone time. The paper was already trying to use equity in its Manhattan office building to pay debts, and now has borrowed $250 million from Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim Helu. And get this: The Times is paying old Carlos an astounding 14 percent interest. What, was Tony Soprano not available? Does the description “loan shark” mean anything to the ideologues running the Times? The prime lending rate in America is 3.25 percent, and these guys are paying Carlos Slim 14 percent. Wow.

On the TV front, the uber-liberal, Bush-hating MSNBC network ranked 31 in total day ratings for the first two weeks of January. I think that’s right behind the “Roller Derby Channel.” General Electric, which owns NBC, has taken a sharp turn to the left in its corporate philosophy and, at the same time, is watching its stock price decline from about $50 a share to around $13. The fact that GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt still has his job ranks up there with the miracle of the U.S. Airways water landing.

Again, the rest is on realclearpolitics.com

By RW-(the original)

January 24, 2009 1:26 PM | Link to this

OFF TOPIC

When does anyone think Maryland’s Gervais Vasquez will run his mouth about Cameron being his house again?

Duke 70

Maryland 29

With 10:32 left.

By CommunistAJC

January 24, 2009 1:30 PM | Link to this

RW-(the original), My team is awesome!

By JAY BOOKMAN

January 24, 2009 1:41 PM | Link to this

Mike, when did I claim that invading Iraq was a violation of international law?

I feel no need to defend statements or arguments I never made.

From the beginning, my argument against invading Iraq was based on the fact that it was stupid, unnecessary and likely to be far more expensive and difficult than the Bush administration claimed. Pragmatic things like that.

By AmVet

January 24, 2009 1:42 PM | Link to this

Mike,

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. Perhaps you should look up the definition.

I have and always will provide much substance — you know, stuff like data, facts and evidence — to back up my assertions that the Bush administration and it’s underlying, fraudulent ideology was and is, a debacle and inept failure.

I gather you take umbrage at my message of how the neo-con apologists were and still are being duped.

But if the foo sh!ts, wear it.

And thanks for playing.

Commie,

Though it seems obvious to note that Limberger is the poster boy of Republican hyper-partisanship, intransigence and intolerance, Obama is probably making a big mistake. The American people, for the most part, have already rejected the ideas of the far-rightists, as evidenced by the consecutive Republican humiliations of the past two elections, and to give him more ammo seems counter-productive.

I’m a huge First Amendment kind of guy. I say let him rant — he and his diatribes are irrelevant. Even if there are those few elected members of governance that give him an ear…

By AJC/DNC Management

January 24, 2009 1:45 PM | Link to this

{{{{By Bosch January 24, 2009 1:17 PM You can’t wait until newspapers go under? Well, then where will we get our information? The internet? Blogs?}}}}

Bosch: When you say “information,” are you talking about the news or the events of the day twisted all around into living breathing democrat propaganda?

Do clarify, please.

By CommunistAJC

January 24, 2009 1:49 PM | Link to this

AmVet, If Limbaugh was irrelevant he would fall by the wayside of people such as Ted Kople, Dan Rather, Katie Couric, Chris Matthews, Brian Williams, Keith Olberman and the rest of the so-called media types. He averages 30 million listeners/week. I would not call that irrelevant. Besides, as everyone knows, most of the democrat voters are uneducated freeloaders who insist America turn into a giant welfare state. I welcome Obamas war against Limbaugh. It not only will prove just how much the left hates Limbaugh, it will also prove just how inexperienced Obama really is. We already have Gitmo detainees running back to Al Quida, but we also have a president who thinks that nationalizing banks will somehow help the economy. Last time I checked, NO ONE COULD SPEND THEIR WAY OUT OF DEBT.

By RW-(the original)

January 24, 2009 1:49 PM | Link to this

I just went back and perused that September piece. It turns out Jay B made the misleading paragraph he repeated here today as a launching point to tell us what a visionary Obama is and not only was he shown to be wrong about when the strikes were occurring on this thread today he was also shown to be wrong, in both the timing and frequency of the strikes, back in the comment section of that thread.

By CommunistAJC

January 24, 2009 1:51 PM | Link to this

AmVet, You mentioned “hyper-partisanship.” What in the world do you think the democrats are all about?

By CommunistAJC

January 24, 2009 1:55 PM | Link to this

RW-(the original), Watch our RW, Bookman might ban you from his “objective blog” for calling him out like that. Remember, this is the AJC and not some well-formed debate by people who can tolerate healthy debate. OBEY OBEY OBEY!

By AJC/DNC Management

January 24, 2009 1:57 PM | Link to this

Aahhh, yes, Camelot fills up with shrieking and hair pulling, again-

{{{{Gov. Paterson rapped Caroline Kennedy at a private event the night before he tapped Kirsten Gillibrand for the Senate, telling guests Kennedy had been “nasty” to him and shown “disrespect” with how she bowed out, attendees told The Post. As for Paterson on Thursday, a source close to him said Kennedy was never in true contention because of issues over taxes, a nanny and questions about her marriage.-NYPost}}}}

It’s good to see the democrats at each other’s throats, instead of Bushie’s.

By RW-(the original)

January 24, 2009 1:58 PM | Link to this

85-44 Final

CommunistAJC,

Yes they are.

Seen any good JC Day concerts lately? The last one I went to was Mountain, Butterfield Blues Band, and The Beach Boys 30 odd years ago.

By Copyleft

January 24, 2009 2:08 PM | Link to this

Commie, I’ll try to clarify for you.

“What you and every other “objective journalist” fail to understand is that Osama Bin Laden IS NOT THE ONLY TERRORIST IN THE WORLD.”

True, but he’s the one who actually attacked us. That kinda makes a difference.

“Bush said in in 911 speech to Congress that there is an axis of evil. He named off countries as well as terrorist organizations that must be destroyed.”

Yes, and he was wrong. And America has rejected his wrong conclusions and decided to pursue a more sensible strategy. How is this confusing you?

By RW-(the original)

January 24, 2009 2:10 PM | Link to this

CommunistAJC @ 1:55,

I often disagree with some of Jay B’s decisions on what to censor and the hair trigger he shows with certain posters, but I’ve never seen him attempt to shut down a healthy debate when it’s done civilly.

By CommunistAJC

January 24, 2009 2:17 PM | Link to this

Copyleft, You have ZERO evidence that the country rejects destroying terrorism. Obama won on ONE thing alone. The economy and every single exit poll showed just that. IF or when we are attacked again, due to Obamas weakness and inexperience then he and the media can not put the blame on Bush. Why? because he is the one who is shutting down Gitmo. Killing Osama is not going to stop terrorism because terrorism was not invented by Al Quida. Good luck to you on the day that you have to backtrack once we are attacked.

By CommunistAJC

January 24, 2009 2:19 PM | Link to this

RW-(the original), No, but I did see the Killers the other night. When I was in Nashville I saw Ricky Scaggs in concert. I’m sure the left would hate that group because Ricky said the words Jesus Christ. Oh the humanity!

By Taxpayer

January 24, 2009 2:24 PM | Link to this

Mike At 11:55,

You said: [[[LOL. You just keep proving my point. I have twice now asked you why I am a whiner, yet you are not. You keep telling me about me, yet refuse to address why the same criticisms do not apply to you. Not surpring, as hyper-partisan rarlety assess their own behaviour when juding others.]]]

Well, Mike, I was able to identify your whining quite readily and so I highlighted it for you in my 11:12 post. However, when I looked back over my posts, I could not find evidence that I had whined in a similar manner. Further, since you appear to be of the opinion that I would not be able to identify my own whining, why did you not simply identify it for me.

As for the remainder of your post, you claim to label me as “intolerant” due to my labeling all Republicans as whiners when in fact what I said in my original post, at 10:30, that you commented on was “Some Republicans just need to whine.” So, once again, it appears that you are whining given that your preface for your remaining “argument” is in fact, false. By the way, thank you for that most enlightening exchange and have a good day.

By Taxpayer

January 24, 2009 10:30 AM | Link to this

Some Republicans just need to whine. Rush is one of them. If he doesn’t whine and garner attention, then his ratings fall and his income falls and he’s left with himself. That should be more than enough motivation for the poor man. As for those that would give credence to this man’s blathering, Obama has let you know where he stands — plain and simple — so there can be no misunderstanding. Obama surely knows that there will be some that cannot be satisfied because all they really want to do is whine anyway. As for those who are willing to listen as well as be heard, they are welcome. Good for you, President Obama.

By Mike

January 24, 2009 2:28 PM | Link to this

JAY -

My mistake. The vast majority of liberal pundits have made thae claim that the invasion of Iraq was an violation of international law. Regardless, it is unfair of me to assume that you made the same claim. My mistake.

AmVet -

Yes, You have studied the “facts” which indisputably prove that anyone who doesn’t share your narrow views is inherently wrong and a bad person..

You think any of Rush’s dittoheads are any less certain of their facts and their intolerant ideology?

By getalife

January 24, 2009 2:38 PM | Link to this

So far, the only problem I see is the defense lobbyist exception.

President Obama should fire him.

By Taxpayer

January 24, 2009 2:44 PM | Link to this

I saw something about that defense lobbyist getting past Obama’s rule. What’s the deal there.

By RW-(the original)

January 24, 2009 2:58 PM | Link to this

Polly,

Writer’s block again?

By getalife

January 24, 2009 3:12 PM | Link to this

I don’t know Taxpayer.

“Lynn was not, prior to this week, a widely known political figure. But his background, outside of Raytheon, is extensive and impressive. He served for four years as the Under Secretary of Defense, was the director of program analysis in the Office of the Secretary of Defense and was awarded three DoD medals for distinguished public service. In addition, he has extensive history on Capitol Hill, having served for six years under Sen. Ted Kennedy.

On Thursday, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs called him a “uniquely qualified” individual who shouldn’t be precluded from serving “the public interest in these critical times.” On Friday, Gibbs added that the waivers like the one granted to Lynn to serve in the Obama White House would be “limited” in their number.”

By Andy the Welcher

January 24, 2009 3:17 PM | Link to this

Sigh…

Why do “conservatives” hate America so much?

ew

By Andy the Welcher

January 24, 2009 3:20 PM | Link to this

President Obama is the best president ever!

Zero, count em, zero terror attacks on his watch, best ever!!!

By Taxpayer

January 24, 2009 3:21 PM | Link to this

Well getalife,

It is somewhat of an embarrassment for Obama to make such a rule and then break it. I think that there should be some extra hoops to jump through for such exceptions though. Perhaps, full disclosure of past lobbyist efforts and approval by a larger number of Republicans and a promise from Rush not to pick on the poor guy or even a public blessing from Rush. That should do it.

By RW-(the original)

January 24, 2009 3:30 PM | Link to this

Taxpayer,

Bill Lynn didn’t just have some obscure past connections to lobbying. He’s coming straight from being a top defense lobbyist for Raytheon to be the number 2 man in the Pentagon.

Call me a cynic, but if that’s an acceptable exception then the whole EO with respect to lobbyists isn’t worth the paper it’s written on.

I fully expect Jay B to do a scathing expose. /sarc

By Anonymous

January 24, 2009 3:31 PM | Link to this

Testing

By getalife

January 24, 2009 3:32 PM | Link to this

Hell, rush would do lib radio if there were a huge contract involved.

Amazing how many dittoheads take that oxyhead seriously.

By getalife

January 24, 2009 3:37 PM | Link to this

RW,

Could be karma for cheney and Haliburton or a favor paid back to Ted Kennedy.

Doesn’t look good.

By AJC/DNC Management

January 24, 2009 3:59 PM | Link to this

{{{{By Andy the Welcher January 24, 2009 3:17 PM}}}}

Who is this turd blossom?

I really don’t want to unload on the wrong pinko, that wouldn’t be nice.

By Chad Harris

January 24, 2009 4:05 PM | Link to this

U.S. Approves First Stem Cell Study for Spinal Injury

[The newest fear-mongering campaign from the Right and the media}(http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/)

Bush wasn’t near doing “what needed to be done” in Pakistan. Bush was hemorrhaging billions of dollars for next to no return. It sure doesn’t seem like what needed to be done to the people whose family members were blown up by Pakistani Lashkar-e-Taiba in Mumbai.

The Taliban has never been stronger and has recruited thousands of loyalists under Bush their head recruiter. They have grown rich and prospered under Dimwit Bush who has functioned as their de-facto head of recruiting.

That’s sure a dumb definition of “what needed to be done.” Pakistani relations under Condi were a clusterf*cking mess as was everything she touched at Foggy Bottom. Clinton will be no better. Clinton is a horrible choice and it provides her the free publicity she needs to get defeated in the Democratic Primary in 2012 when Obama will crush the losers Jindal and Romney once again.

By Chad Harris

January 24, 2009 4:10 PM | Link to this

The newest fear-mongering campaign from the Right and the media

By Pogo

January 24, 2009 4:25 PM | Link to this

So yesterday Obama makes the statement in a meeting with Senate Democrats that if they don’t pass the stimulus plan by February 16, Democrats could lose seats in congress and his re-election could be in jeopardy. So what he is really saying is, “throw the money at this thing, no matter if it is good for the people or not, because it is “politically” appealing. Don’t take time to scrub it”. It’s not like $500 per family is going to pull this country out of its funk. I have a feeling before this thing is over with that Obama is going to make George.W.Bush look like Stephen Hawkin. Obama looks more and more over his head with every news conference he has. Obama has revealed himself to be a purely political automaton quicker than most do who are entering office. America, brace yourself for some REAL idiocy. The real treat is the glee with which Pelosi displays at the aspect of having four years of pulling Obama’s puppet strings. She knows she has a winner in Obama who can only make her look more and more powerful because he must do her bidding.

By @@

January 24, 2009 4:30 PM | Link to this

So what, jay………..you’re now giving us permission to cheer Bush’s policies in Pakistan, but only because Obama has emerged from his bullpen?

It’s no wonder there are so few lefties in the major leagues.

By South Paw

January 24, 2009 4:49 PM | Link to this

There are few lefties in the major leagues due to the simple fact that there are fewer lefties than righties.

By AJC/DNC Management

January 24, 2009 4:52 PM | Link to this

Aahhh, it couldn’t last forever, this love we had together-

{{{{The Gallup Poll on Saturday released the first job-approval rating for President Obama, based on interviews during his first three full days in office: 68 percent.

Now that he’s in office, Obama’s approval ratings are starting to normalize/plummet, as partisan back-and-forth picks up. Just a week ago, Gallup found an astonishing 83 percent approval of how he has handled his transition, showing he had even won over most Republicans.}}}}

A twenty point drop in three days?

Next week, he’ll be down there with Congress.

By Cuban Figurehead

January 24, 2009 4:52 PM | Link to this

I did not know that.

By Chad Harris

January 24, 2009 4:57 PM | Link to this

Ah tells ya. You thugs that have done analyzed Obama failing more by the nanosecond after 4 f*cking days in office are just an honor to read. The nuance is quintissential genius.

And after all, it was Sasha and Malia who were the architects of this clusterf*ck anyway. And if money is spent on a new puppy, that will be the ultimate credit default swap doom.

Local Hint: Suntrust is going to be bought after it sinks into total ruin. It’s already taken about $5 billion out of your pocket.

If all I had were Jindal and Romney and those other dead white fooks walking, and I had voted for a clown like Palin, I guess I’d have nothing better to do on a weekend that conclude Obama is a failure after 86 mof*cking hours in office. LOL

By GodHatesTrash

January 24, 2009 5:11 PM | Link to this

Lush Rimblahh, a drug abusing pasty, bloated, not-very-well-closeted pig of a man connects well with many GOPers because he is just like them.

Whiny weaselly wingnut whackjob wascally wiagra-poppers (with cysts in their bum-cracks) love whiny weaselly wingnut whackjob wascally wiagara-poppers (with cysts in their bum-cracks).

Of course, Bookman’s RightWingnuts can’t get enough of him.

By Ray

January 24, 2009 5:51 PM | Link to this

Trash,

And you get upset when I call your wonder boy Buckwheat? You are quite a trip. We have just begun to demonize Mr. Wonderful. And he deserves it. So do you.

By Chad Harris

January 24, 2009 5:52 PM | Link to this

The good Rushky Limp-ballsky news is that he’s gaining weight like crazy these days. He’s a walking poster boy for metabolic syndrome. I guess that $200 million dollar contract don’t throw no money at any exercise equipment and he don’t get off that assky and exercise.

By GodHatesTrash

January 24, 2009 6:05 PM | Link to this

I’m not all upset when one or a bunch of Bookman’s RightWingnuts spew racist crap on this blog.

I expect trash from trash.

Dog bites man. No news there.

By Frederick Douglass

January 24, 2009 6:19 PM | Link to this

Oh y’all have “just begun to demonize Mr. Wonderful”. The truth is, that man was demonized the moment he threw his hat in the ring. Some people on this blog are too kind to outright racists, personally I believe in calling a racist a racist. Hopefully the utter stupidity of race will be chipped away under Mr. Obama. After eight years of pure incompetence, it chafes my A$$ to read the comments of some of you brain dead toadies.

By david wayne osedach, san diego/ U.S.A.

January 24, 2009 6:37 PM | Link to this

Would the United States make the same strikes in Mexico? The answer is no. Pakistan is a soveriegn country. Leave it alone!

By Midori

January 24, 2009 6:52 PM | Link to this

speaking of trash, the American people took it out 11/4/2008

By AJC/DNC Management

January 24, 2009 7:08 PM | Link to this

Incestuous government agencies beget incestuous government agencies-

{{{{National Snow and Ice Data Center- NSIDC scientists provide Arctic Sea Ice News & Analysis, with partial support from NASA.}}}}

NASA is a shell of it’s former self, and I guess since safe space flight is out of the question, these perverts are off lying about ice sheets, whatever the hell that’s got to do with Aeronautics and Space.

Mismanagement of Federal Tax Dollars, crimes committed with the full knowing support of government, give me the lies that I need to expand the government’s control over people’s lives, I’ll give you a fat government grant.

Sick.

Stupid, mouth breathing America, 27th in educational standings right behind Zimbabwe.

By GodHatesTrash

January 24, 2009 9:34 PM | Link to this

Great link, Midori.

Still laughing.

By GodHatesTrash

January 24, 2009 10:45 PM | Link to this

Many - if not most - of the Bookman RightWingnuts are no different from jackals and hyenas, Mr. Douglass.

They are dumber than a bag of hammers, lily-livered cowards, all of them.

By catlady

January 25, 2009 1:13 PM | Link to this

General rule: the party out of power whines; the party in power states facts.

General rule: those who do not support an expenditure call it pork, those who do support it call it “necessary.”

General rule: Those who accept the money for their support of a bill say they have been given objective facts by knowledgeable, concerned citizens; those who don’t say the people giving out the money are vote-buying lobbyists.

General rule: Those profiting say their money is earned; those who pay the fees are “held hostage.”

General rule: When black and Latino teenagers have babies out of wedlock, they are welfare scum; when white middle class teens have babies out of wedlock, they show “family values.”

It’s all a matter of perspective. What you think depends on where you sit.