Mike Luckovich

By buff

November 17, 2005 08:01 PM | Link to this

Rather, silly, illogical, and poorly drawn. Looney-Tunes-Lucko and the Al Jazeerah Chronicle, AJC, are anti-American, pro-leftist, and poorly written. But, it is the only show in town. Wow, an exploding population and circulation is decreasing. Hmmmm. I wonder what a conservative, or even unbiased, newspaper could do here?

By Andy

November 17, 2005 08:16 PM | Link to this

No, buff, this is great. Woodward a liar? Really? Well, what about Bernstein? What about Nixon? What about Watergate? What about Vietnam? How far does it go, cartoon boy?

By Andy

November 17, 2005 08:32 PM | Link to this

Boy, these pinkos are some real deep far sighted thinkers. I agree 100% with them on this one. Let’s call into question the premise of the movie “All the President’s Men.” For you young uns, that was the pinko lib glorification documentary on how Woodward uncovered Watergate. We are talking about the man behind Watergate. Did I mention if it were not for Woodward we would not have Watergate? After all these years, now Woodward is a liar, probably a religious right wing bigot to boot. How did Bernstein get suckered into Woodward’s web of deceit? Is he a wingnut too? Are they all liars, Republican operatives? Is Nixon innocent? Was he set up by this evil cabal also?

By Andy

November 17, 2005 08:35 PM | Link to this

Did I fail to mention that Woodward is the one who uncovered Watergate?

By Andy

November 17, 2005 08:42 PM | Link to this

I used to think that there were some people that were just off limits to the pinko smear campaign, that they would overlook you based on past doings. For instance, Clinton could get caught checking out Republican chicks, they would have a happy cartoon out by 5 that afternoon. I was wrong. There is no boundary for the liberal savagery. When you interfere with their mindless quest for George W Bush, you are going to get ate up, regardless of past victories. It should tell any of you people thinking of a career with the libs what you can expect.

By Dusty

November 17, 2005 08:57 PM | Link to this

Woodward’s judgment clouded? I don’t know. But Luckovich’s access to AJC has either clouded HIS judgment or his vision. This cartoon can only be described as pitiful and pointless.

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 09:05 PM | Link to this

How strange is it that Bill Clinton is the only person ml draws wearing clothes anymore?

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 09:13 PM | Link to this

I posted these on the Clinton page, I should have known that wasn’t actually going to print.

Speaking of publicity hounds.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Joseph Wilson, the husband of outed CIA operative Valerie Plame, called on Thursday for an inquiry by The Washington Post into the conduct of journalist Bob Woodward, who repeatedly criticized the leak investigation without disclosing his own involvement.

Full Story

Did Andy mention Woodward’s connection to Watergate?

I’ll link the other story in the next post.

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 09:15 PM | Link to this

In case you don’t remember, “Boogie to Baghdad� is the phrase that Richard Clarke, when he was the top White House counterterrorism official during the Clinton administration, used to express his fear that if American forces pushed Osama bin Laden too hard at his hideout in Afghanistan, bin Laden might move to Iraq, where he could stay in the protection of Saddam Hussein.

Clarke’s opinion was based on intelligence indicating a number of contacts between al Qaeda and Iraq, including word that Saddam had offered bin Laden safe haven.

It’s all laid out in the Sept. 11 commission report. “Boogie to Baghdad� is on Page 134.

Byron York’s article

By buff

November 17, 2005 09:17 PM | Link to this

You know, I think you guys are onto something about Looney-Tooney-Lucko and lack of clothes of men. His homo-erotic lusts are coming through quite clearly. One thing, i wish his artwork was better.

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 09:20 PM | Link to this

buff,

Now, now don’t be calling Clinton something less than a man. T72 will think you’re being mean and might even find a pastiche of names you use.

By buff

November 17, 2005 09:53 PM | Link to this

Yes, Bob Woodward, the hero of the left for over 30 years, now, he may help Scooter’s case and he is worthy of ridicule. Query, do these pinkos realize how dumb they are?

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 10:56 PM | Link to this

I guess this big “Murtha story” isn’t quite so new

Oh well, they can always trot Kerry out tomorrow.

By finch

November 17, 2005 10:58 PM | Link to this

Woodward, how the mighty have fallen. You, Bernstein and the Washington Post did a wonderful thing when you unveiled the plot by Richard Nixon’s aptly named campaign organization CREEP (Committee to RE-Elect the President) to sabotage the Democratic Party campaign of George McGovern. It was such an unnecessary, pointless conspiracy, since McGovern lost to Nixon in 1972 by the most lopsided vote margin of the century! And now? Well, Mr. Woodward, you’ve given junkyard dog prosecutor Fitzgerald more nooks and crannys to probe!

Mike’s right. Access to power has clouded the judgement of the Bush White House. Nixon wasn’t done in by Watergate, he was done in by lying about it. Clinton wasn’t done in by Monica. He lied, too. Which heads will roll in Plamegate? Libby’s already has. Will it be Rove? Cheney? Maybe even W himself? This is more fun than “Desperate Housewives”!

By buff

November 17, 2005 11:02 PM | Link to this

finch, I cannot say I disagree w/ any of your comments, but, my points convern the hypocrisy of the leftist media, pols, and rabble. Nixon was a megalomaniac.

By buff

November 17, 2005 11:03 PM | Link to this

I am a conservative, and I celebrated when the pig, Nixon, went down. And, let’s thank him for affirmative action, food stamps and price controls.

By RW-(the original)

November 17, 2005 11:04 PM | Link to this

finch,

I think ultimately it will be “W” himself, Yes Wilson’s head will roll.

By Brett

November 18, 2005 12:17 AM | Link to this

BUFF, ANDY, DUSTY. Shut the —— up! Pathetic little rodents and would-be Nazis (minus the keesters) Leave some room here for some sanity and dignity. Gutter scum like you ruin anything/everything positive in life. You hate yourselves. Get over it. May I suggest suicide for you and your ilk. Time to thin the herd!!

By Andy

November 18, 2005 04:53 AM | Link to this

To fully understand the extent of this pinko murder/ suicide, you have to remember that Robert Redford played Bob Woodward in the movie “All the President’s Men” that basically enshrined Woodward in the democratic party hall of fame. Having Robert Redford play you in a movie is like some pinko high honor reserved for people like Clinton.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 04:59 AM | Link to this

And to take this even further, Brett, I suspect cartoon boy figured that the pinko faithful might just be too stupid to remember that Woodward was once their hero. He probably figured you mouthbreathers would be happy just to have another corpse to drag around in the streets.

They do believe anything you tell them, after all.

Nah, I take that back. It’s mindless rage that’s driving Luckovich.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 05:01 AM | Link to this

Did I fail to mention that Woodward uncovered Watergate?

By candide

November 18, 2005 06:33 AM | Link to this

Woodward suffers from too much success and notoriety.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 06:51 AM | Link to this

And the pinkos were more than willing to help-

“We were not strong enough to drive out a half-million American troops, but that wasn’t our aim. Our intention was to break the will of the American government to continue the war.”—North Vietnamese General Vo Nguyen Giap.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 06:55 AM | Link to this

And the pinko media were more than willing to help-

But there is a larger danger in the Democratic strategy of attempting to make George Bush into the Wizard of Oz, a man whose every statement about threats to American security is fantasy and falsity. Pounding through the media that the prewar intelligence was a conscious lie may incline the American people to believe the whole Iraq enterprise is false, and worse, that the very notion of weapons of mass destruction is also doubtful. The psychology of the big lie can sometimes run out of control.—WSJ 11/18/05

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 07:08 AM | Link to this

This guy might be even sicker than ml

By Voice of Reason

November 18, 2005 07:09 AM | Link to this

I see a handful of people that need lives. Get over it already. Do you sit and wait for Luckovich to finish penning his art so you can run off, ignorantly, at the mouth?

By Andy

November 18, 2005 07:14 AM | Link to this

Now this is low….

As realclearpolitics.com, a source we turn to for aggregating poll data, points out, Mr. Bush’s approval ratings are nine points better than those of congressional Democrats.—NY Sun 11/18/05

By Chuck

November 18, 2005 07:17 AM | Link to this

Kudos to Congressman Murtha for telling it like it is. As a Vietnam veteran and the father of a Marine Corps veteran of “our” war in Iraq, Murtha should be congratulated for telling “chicken hawks” like the Dick Cheneys, Donald Rumsfelds, Sean Hannitys and Rush Limbaughs of the world what a bunch of cowards they are for avoiding their duty to serve this country like the young men and women they so easily send off to war. It’s easy for someone who’s never experienced war to send someone else off to fight in one and to watch friends die. Cheney is in no position to criticize Murtha for expressing his assessment of that quagmire Cheney created. Cheney doesn’t deserve to breathe the same air as a true hero and true warrior that Congressman Murtha is. Kudos to him !

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 07:18 AM | Link to this

Voice of Reason,

Did you know that by using the internet tools, provided on this and other pages, your computer will tell you when something new is available?

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 07:20 AM | Link to this

Chuck,

Are you referring to Congressman Murtha’s statement yesterday or when he said the same thing in May 2004?

Minus all your editorial comment, of course.

By Voice of Reason

November 18, 2005 07:21 AM | Link to this

I’m well aware of that RW, but it’s amusing to me that the “handful” have nothing better going on in their lives so they post from the crack of dawn until the beginning of the 11 o’clock news.

Whatever tickles their twinkies, I guess. It’s just amusing.

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 07:26 AM | Link to this

Voice of Reason,

Actually this morning the warmth of the computer feels pretty good on the old twinkies! (At least if that means toes)

By Andy

November 18, 2005 07:27 AM | Link to this

Chuck: If Murtha was a Republican criticizing democratic, let’s say, lack of ideas, there would be all sorts of cartoons showing him as an ape, and every other imaginable smear, in every pinko “news” paper in the country.

I challenge anyone of you to find anything other than respect and discussion of Murtha’s comments in the Conservative news sources.

Just thought I’d point that out….

By Chuck

November 18, 2005 07:29 AM | Link to this

RW -

So, it doesn’t bother you that the “men” who push the buttons of war, and who you support are cowards themselves? I wasn’t editorializing; I was simply pointing out factually accurate historical information about our “leaders.”

By Chuck

November 18, 2005 07:33 AM | Link to this

Andy—

Our VP and the Whitehouse propogandist Scott McClelan have already characterized Murtha’s comments this morning as “a plan of surrender.”

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 07:38 AM | Link to this

Chuck,

By design the Commander in Chief is a civilian position. Obviously because of the age of most politicians (late and post Vietnam era) we are going to have quite a few years ahead with leaders that have less military experience than many in the past.

That doesn’t mean we won’t have to confront threats.

I am only pointing out that Murtha’s position is not new. He did a press conference with Nancy Pelosi in 2004 and said the same thing he said yesterday.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 07:42 AM | Link to this

RW: I’m not talking about government debate of an issue or proposition. I’m talking about the propaganda aspect of the lib media. Woodward came out just recently saying exactly what Conservatives have told everyone about the Plame affair; that it is inconsequential and a waste of government resources. No pinko opened any discussion of these comments and Woodward’s exalted status was no barrier to the blind rage that was unleashed on him.

The White House is right that Murtha is advocating surrender but they don’t need the Con media to tell them that.

By Voice of Reason

November 18, 2005 07:45 AM | Link to this

RW - I guess twinkies can be whatever you want them to be.

It doesn’t matter what side of the isle Murtha is sitting on - he is right. I not totally behind an immediate withdrawal though. The reasons we went to Iraq are questionable, but we are there and we have committed. Now is not the time to be half-a-ssed.

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 07:45 AM | Link to this

Andy,

I think it is Chuck complaining about the White House.

I think this says they are right

By Erik

November 18, 2005 07:52 AM | Link to this

Anybody that says surrender is even the proper verb to use is still laboring under the false premise that this war was ever winable. It was not. No more than the Nazis, no parallel implied, were able to defeat the French resistance. An enemy that fades away and returns even as a different person carrying out the obscene acts done, cannot be defeated by soldiers, I was one, good and true. The GOP marionettes were out in force talking about running and cutting. Well it is not their sons and daughters running for their lives and being cut up for an end that is not even a remote possibility. If the US Army invaded Andy’s home town, how much luck would they have in making him a liberal ?

By Andy

November 18, 2005 07:54 AM | Link to this

Chuck: I’m not talking about government debate of an issue or proposition. I’m talking about the propaganda aspect of the lib media. Woodward came out just recently saying exactly what Conservatives have told everyone about the Plame affair; that it is inconsequential and a waste of government resources. No pinko opened any discussion of these comments and Woodward’s exalted status was no barrier to the blind rage that was unleashed on him.

The White House is right that Murtha is advocating surrender but they don’t need the Con media to tell them that.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 07:57 AM | Link to this

Erik: The enemy in Iraq is trying to outlast the will of wimpy little people like you. I wonder where they get their idea that you might be a spineless little pacifist who is open to the idea of surrender?

By Erik

November 18, 2005 07:59 AM | Link to this

Bravo to Chuck. Hit the nail right on the head. As far as the government’s position is concerned, FDR had it right “Repetition does not transform a lie into a truth”

By Erik

November 18, 2005 08:03 AM | Link to this

The only wimp in this conversation is Andy. Why aren’t you over there putting your money where your mouth obviously is. I spent 20 years as an Army surgeon. I’ve seen what happens. And are you so ignorant to think that we in the space of a few years can undo several hundred years of animosity? As soon as we leave the feces will hit the fan. Given that, what are these good kids dying for? Their deaths in the future with no long term change ( did you see one in Vietnam after 54,000 deaths)will rest on your shoulders. I hope you have the strength.

By Mike181

November 18, 2005 08:07 AM | Link to this

Feeling much the dimwit, but I just dont get it.

By Malachi

November 18, 2005 08:09 AM | Link to this

Andy, do you have a limited vocabulary? In every post, but three, you have used the word “pinko”. Retire the word. Enough is enough. We get the point. All libs are pinkos. Got it. Move on.

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 08:10 AM | Link to this

Well I guess you can cross Cheney off your Fitzmas list.

The vice president did not talk with Woodward on the day in question, did not provide the information that’s been reported in Woodward’s notes and has not had any conversations over the past several weeks about any release for allowing Woodward to testify, said the person, speaking on condition of anonymity. Report by John Solomon

Don’t you just love reporters finding anonymous sources to try to figure out the identity of someone else’s anonymous source.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 08:13 AM | Link to this

Erik: So we should throw away all of our efforts, call the lives of our dead a waste, trash the hopes of the free Iraqi people and abandon the cause of freedom throughout the whole region, just so you pinkos can save the cost of your psychotherapy sessions? I have a clear conscience about what my country is doing; I’ve talked to Iranians who hope we come to them next.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 08:18 AM | Link to this

Did I fail to mention that it was Woodward who uncovered Watergate?

See, no pinko, Malachi.

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 08:21 AM | Link to this

Andy,

See, no pinko, Malachi

You owe me a flat screen!

Hey, I found out candide is really an English professor named John Daly

By BamaBoy

November 18, 2005 08:49 AM | Link to this

After reading this blog, I’ve decided to share some conclusions and thoughts: 1) I’m still amazed how folks blindly follow a president (regardless of party) no matter how poorly he performs or what he says. It’s as if they refuse to admit the person they voted for is imperfect. 2) People believe we’re in Iraq because of 9/11. Last I heard, Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. We’re in Iraq because “W” couldn’t take out his agression on Osama and needed to flex his military muscle so “while we’re in the neighborhood”, he decided to take care of his daddy’s bully. And heaven forbid anyone criticise the war because it might send “the wrong message.” That’s the ultimate example in shunning responsibility. 3) Extremism or fundamentalism of any political or religious slant is dangerous. 4) Andy must be senile because he keeps repeating himself over and over again.

By Rich

November 18, 2005 08:59 AM | Link to this

Bush is Dumb!

By JB

November 18, 2005 09:04 AM | Link to this

Embedded journalist has now taken on a whole new meaning.

By Eric

November 18, 2005 09:06 AM | Link to this

“Silly, illogical and poorly drawn”…do I detect a hint of jealousy from a no talent pseudo intellectual? Another home run Mike. Made me laugh out loud!

By Andy

November 18, 2005 09:06 AM | Link to this

BamaBoy: Seeing how Michael Moore came up with everyone of the comments you offered, I don’t really see how you can say that I repeat anything.

You’re the one blindly following the lib media.

By gttim

November 18, 2005 09:07 AM | Link to this

Woodward sold his soul to the corporate media. The “so-called liberal media” has been dead for years, but the wingnuts keep beating on it, trying to play to the ref. The media is currently owned by corporations who push the GOP talking points and party line. Woodward, who was once a decent journalist who walked into a great story, has completely sold out. If Watergate happened today, it would never make the news. Even worse is happening under Bushco, and the media won’t touch it.

Thanks Mike! You always call it like you see it.

Now, can we get an exterminator to do something about this troll infestation? Why don’t all these wingnuts ever seem to be employed?

By buff

November 18, 2005 09:21 AM | Link to this

Look, if we pull out of Iraq now as Murtha wants the terrorists cam claim victory; that would enable them to recruit vast amounts of newbies, which would result in us not only losing hegemony, but would emboldem them even more. Viet Nam was a bad cause, the war against radical Islam is just. In Iraq, the enemy is radical fascist Islam, and they must be defeated. I think many of you leftists are sincere, but we must stand firm

By sickoftheneocons

November 18, 2005 09:34 AM | Link to this

Buff, come on, the war itself has already become a rallying call by the Islamic jihadists. Now, whether that can be considered an act of desperation on the part of the jihadists, I cannot say. But the facts suggest that terrorists are attemting to infiltrate Iraq from all sides so they can have the opportunity to blow themselves and a few Americans to hell and back. I think RW posted a comment yesterday about America’s Operation Steel Curtain (is that correct RW?) in which we are trying to stop them from getting into the country.

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 09:39 AM | Link to this

sickof…

This is the Centcom press release

By sickoftheneocons

November 18, 2005 09:39 AM | Link to this

Let us say, for the moment, that we do set up a democratic Iraq. What’s to stop their borders from being as completely porous as our own?

By candide

November 18, 2005 09:41 AM | Link to this

Bush is kaputt! It won’t be long before he needs to leave the white house, or we will arrest him and Cheney for war crimes.

And yes, our troops need to shoot their officers before returning from Iraq.

By Dusty

November 18, 2005 09:41 AM | Link to this

Wingnuts and Trolls? I’d rather be that than these anti-war protestors who claim they support the troops with their split personalities. Then they drag their little white flags around and talk about their patriotism. Forget it. You have given up patriotism for party favoritism. Anything that sounds like mud on the administration is right up your alley. Surremder. oh yeah. You already have. You threw love of country right out the window and went bowing and scraping to people who want to kill us. I have no use for you. Cowards!

By Andy

November 18, 2005 09:43 AM | Link to this

sickoftheneocons: Steel Curtain’s objective is to kill the foreign jihadists as they enter the country. I believe this is better than having to crush them with our large buildings in New York. Just an opinion!

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 09:46 AM | Link to this

Wow, they had a 2.5 earthquake in Boston last night. I wonder if The Swimmer fell off a barstool.

By sickoftheneocons

November 18, 2005 09:48 AM | Link to this

Andy, you miss my point. My point was that as long as the war continues, there will be extremist Islamic nutjobs that will be willing to blow themselves up in the name of Allah and take a bunch of us with them. I know how just and righteous you believe this war to be. Don’t you understand that the terrorists on the other side feel doubly as passionately as you do about how just and right it is to give their lives to fight us?

By sickoftheneocons

November 18, 2005 09:51 AM | Link to this

I think (I don’t know for sure) that you view this war not only as an outlet of revenge for the 9/11 bombings but also as a way to defend our country (please correct me if I’m wrong). The terrorists view our war there as an invasion, an occupation, of their lands. You would be willing to fight tooth and nail against an invader of this country would you not? They feel the same way. I’m not condoning it, I’m just saying that I think that is what they believe.

By Clay from Columbus

November 18, 2005 09:54 AM | Link to this

Luckovich, for an immigrant to this country you are the most ungrateful anal orifice to come down the pike. Do you ever see anything you like about any administration? Obviously, you have never seen a republican administration you could tolerate. Of course, with the yellow stripes down the backs of the AJC management you probably fit right in with their editorial staff. Welcome to America. You probably couldn’t get a job at a paper in your native country.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 09:56 AM | Link to this

sickoftheneocons: So you would choose to have 3000 die in one day versus 2000 die in 4 years? With your choice the terrorists would have killed 4,272,000 of us by now, which is pretty close to their stated goal of 4 million. Say, are you a terrorist?

By Steve

November 18, 2005 10:01 AM | Link to this

Clay from Columbus -

Unless you are a Native American Indian, you don’t want to be waving that “immigrant” thing around. You are an immigrant to this country, too. I rather doubt that your family was here with either Christopher Columbus or the Pilgrims got here.

Oh, and didn’t your mommy teach you that if you didn’t have anything nice to say, to keep your mouth shut? If you don’t like the AJC, read another paper.

By sickoftheneocons

November 18, 2005 10:02 AM | Link to this

No Andy, are you? If I had a choice, I would not choose for anyone to die as a result of extremism. You also said in your post that with my choice we would have 4mm deaths? Your telling me that if we hadn’t invaded Iraq, then 4mm Americans would have died between then and now? Please tell me which fortune teller you go to to get your information. That prediction is patently ridiculous. Did you happen to read that little blurb a few years back that said you are more likely to get struck by lightning TWICE than you are to be killed by a terrorist?

By getalife

November 18, 2005 10:02 AM | Link to this

Wow, the best show on TV was the battle for budget cuts on C-SPAN last night. Alot of name calling, yelling, screaming and shame. At the end the GOP won and got it’s tax cuts for the people who make one million or more a year. Check out the pinkos who said no (must not be able to sleep at night).

Name just one religion in the world that preaches the value of asking the most of those who have the least and asking nothing of those who have the most,” said Chet Edwards, D-Texas. “Sadly, that is what this budget does.”

Republicans who voted “no” included Jim Ramstad of Minnesota, Tim Johnson of Illinois and Nancy Johnson, Christopher Shays and Rob Simmons of Connecticut.

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 10:03 AM | Link to this

sickof…,

There’s a flaw in your position on invasion/occupation. With foreign terrorists making up most of the insurgency and native Iraqis flocking to the polls and joining security services in large numbers, then your comparison would be that if we were invaded we would be basically fine with it, but Mexicans and Canadians would be streaming through our borders to fight.

By gadem

November 18, 2005 10:05 AM | Link to this

Sick, I think that you are correct in your assesment. Iraq is viewed as their Holy Land. Osama set the trap, and Bush feel for it. By the Troops being in their “Holy Land” that is in itself adding fuel to the fire, and giving life to their cause.

Now if some of the supporters of Bush can clearly explain to me why are we in Iraq? The war in Afghanistan can be justified as a form of bringing those to justice for the acts of 9/11, but Iraq played no part in it rather than the media showing celebrations that occured there when 9/11 happened.

Also as someone pointed out yesterday, Saudi Arabia is a dictatorship, and the White House has always been very cordial with them, so I do not buy the fact that they are out to spread democracy throughout the world….H-E-L-L how can you spread something that has not yet been perfected here in America.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 10:15 AM | Link to this

sickoftheneocons: Are you denying that Osama Bin Laidentorest did not state, in a religious fatwa, no less, that 4 million Americans and Jews were to die to “even the score” with Muslims? Or has the lib media not told you this yet? If I said I was going to kill you, would you take steps to protect yourself or would you start singing folk songs?

By hewhoasks

November 18, 2005 10:16 AM | Link to this

Buff (first comment)

When I started reading Luckovich daily there was a conservative newspaper in Atlanta. There was the Atlanta Journal and the Atlanta Constitution. The two were folded into the AJC.

By sickoftheneocons

November 18, 2005 10:19 AM | Link to this

Andy, I do not deny that bin laden made the statement. I emphatically deny that it would have taken place between now and then as you stated. I could say that within the next three years, I will be able to fly using only my supernatural ability to do so. That does not make it possible.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 10:22 AM | Link to this

sickoftheneocons: The U.S. Army standing in their faces is what has made it impossible.

By C

November 18, 2005 10:22 AM | Link to this

Andy, by your reasoning we should now invade the 700 Club. Right?!?! Or are you denying that Pat Robertson, in his religious preachings, no less, stated that we should be carrying out assassinations of those whose policies may make our lives a little less comfortable?

By gadem

November 18, 2005 10:25 AM | Link to this

Andy you are delusional if you think that threat is actually achievable…but whatever allows you to keep your fire burning.

By sickoftheneocons

November 18, 2005 10:26 AM | Link to this

To take it a step further Andy, Bush did a lot of saber-rattling before we actually invaded Iraq. So what did the terrorists do? They took steps to defend themselves and did not start singing folk songs like you seem to think I would do in the event someone threatened me.

By M.S.

November 18, 2005 10:29 AM | Link to this

I see it’s already started. Bob Woodword is going to be thrown under the bus just like Judith Miller was for daring to shed some light on one of these mindless made up media “scandels”. Anyone who goes against the template is vunerable.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 10:30 AM | Link to this

sickoftheneocons: If all it takes is a little coaxing to get these people to want to kill Americans, would you rather have them getting slaughtered by the hundreds in Iraq or would you like to see them each strap on their own little bomb and go wading into their own little crowd of innocents? If an average of 20 people die in each terrorist attack, then you can safely say that the U.S. Army has prevented the deaths of over 800,000 innocent civilians.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 10:31 AM | Link to this

gadem: If they kill 2 of us it is unacceptable to me, pinko. But thanks for arguing their side!

By gadem

November 18, 2005 10:32 AM | Link to this

M.S that sounds alot like what the Bush Administration does, or what Fox News does to people that speak out against this Administration….imagine that.

By gadem

November 18, 2005 10:36 AM | Link to this

Andy I am not arguing their side…you are the one that is being irrational. You support the war, but you don’t expect any soldiers to die?

By sickoftheneocons

November 18, 2005 10:39 AM | Link to this

So what your telling me Andy is that because of our actions in Iraq, we have successfully prevented the deaths of 800,000 Americans in the last 4 years? Something that no terrorist group in the history of the world has been able to accomplish? When was the last time any terrorist organization managed to kill 200,000 Americans in any given year?

By sickoftheneocons

November 18, 2005 10:41 AM | Link to this

Have you no faith in the American military establishment Andy? Do you honestly believe that they could not prevent 200,000 Americans from being killed last year, even if we hadn’t invaded Iraq? How un-American.You have no faith in our military Andy. Wow!

By gadem

November 18, 2005 10:46 AM | Link to this

Sick, Andy is delusional no point in trying to rationalize with him. I am guessing that Andy is stocked up on duct tape and plastic, with a bomb shelter.

By gadem

November 18, 2005 10:49 AM | Link to this

I think Andy is senile like NeoReo…don’t they have some type of medicine to slow the process?

By sickoftheneocons

November 18, 2005 10:50 AM | Link to this

gadem, I don’t think he’s delusional, just blinded by hatred. I think he honestly believes that if we hadn’t have done what we did then we’d be up to our elbows in terrorists.

By Wild Sects

November 18, 2005 10:58 AM | Link to this

Good one Mike! Woodward was a hero during Watergate but seems to have lost his way with his access to the dark side.

By gadem

November 18, 2005 10:59 AM | Link to this

Yeah sick it is quite sad…Andy you are officially on my prayer list.

By sickoftheneocons

November 18, 2005 11:01 AM | Link to this

You know what happens to people blinded by hatred. They are tempted by the darkside. Andy was not strong enough to resist the temptation.

By Dusty

November 18, 2005 11:14 AM | Link to this

Sickgadam, I don’t know whether Andy has a bomb shelter with duct tape, etc. But I do know one thing he DOESN’T have. That is all those nice little white flags you carry around talking about surrender and soldiers being killed. Do you like Candide? That is the next step in this “anti” propaganda/ opinion production. Don’t fool yourself. Your own extremism is only slightly less objectionable than Candide’s.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 11:21 AM | Link to this

Fess up: How many of you pinkos got out of bed this morning, saw cartoon boy’s murder/ suicide and thought- “Gosh, it was Woodward who inspired me to go to school, commit myself to becoming a Washington Post reporter so that I could be the hero of the next Watergate. But after seeing Luckovich stabbing him in the back, I sure am glad I flunked out of the 5th grade.”

By sickoftheneocons

November 18, 2005 11:21 AM | Link to this

Sorry Dusty, I don’t think I ever said anything about surrender or anything resembling that. All I did was point out a glaring fallacy by Andy. He stated, not insinuated, but stated that if we hadn’t have invaded Iraq, terrorists would have killed an estimated 800,000 Americans by now. Come on!

By Andy

November 18, 2005 11:26 AM | Link to this

sickoftheneocons: Answer to 10:39 question. 1941- 1945.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 11:32 AM | Link to this

sickoftheneocons: There were 3 terrorist organizations, one of them was a little weakling like gadem. I know you would probably describe them as our friends, since they killed so many Jews. We lost 200,000 Americans alone in France, one of our “allies.”

By sickoftheneocons

November 18, 2005 11:33 AM | Link to this

Ahh! Now Nazis were terrorists and I believe that the total American death count of that war was more like 300,000, not 800,000.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 11:34 AM | Link to this

sickoftheneocons: Oh, and surprise, that war started because a couple of pacifists wouldn’t fight until after they lost their countries.

By M.S.

November 18, 2005 11:37 AM | Link to this

gadem,you don’t adress the fact that Woodward is right.Half of Washington knew that MS.Plame worked at the CIA.Goole up the “friend of the court”brief that all of the big media submitted last year and in the Miller case.They only changed there minds when they saw A chance to “get” someone at the White House.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 11:37 AM | Link to this

sickoftheneocons: Actually 40,000,000 people died in World War II. So, you think the Nazis weren’t terrorists? Gosh, would any of you other pinkos like to weigh in on that?

By sickoftheneocons

November 18, 2005 11:38 AM | Link to this

I take that back, we lost 405,000 in all of WWII according to the History News Network. Here’s another statistic: Total American combat deaths from the American Revolution through today: 1,541,042 with over 700,000 of those coming during the Civil War when we were fighting each other.

By Ricky

November 18, 2005 11:38 AM | Link to this

What is funny is that liberals hailed Woodward as a hero for Watergate, but now that he might have helped the Bush administration, he is a bad guy. Laugh out loud funny

By sickoftheneocons

November 18, 2005 11:40 AM | Link to this

Andy, 40,000,000 people WORLDWIDE were killed in WWII, not 40,000,000 Americans. You have been talked about AMERICAN deaths all morning, not total deaths.

By sickoftheneocons

November 18, 2005 11:41 AM | Link to this

oops, talking, not talked, sorry

By Scooter

November 18, 2005 11:42 AM | Link to this

Woodward is my hero!

By M.S.

November 18, 2005 11:42 AM | Link to this

I ment Google

By Andy

November 18, 2005 11:42 AM | Link to this

sickoftheneocons: Thank you for sharing that with us. The number 2000 shrinks in comparison, doesn’t it?

By sickoftheneocons

November 18, 2005 11:43 AM | Link to this

and besides, of the 40,000,000 people that died in WWII, about 18,000,000 were Soviet, pinko Commies. Aren’t you happy about that?

By sickoftheneocons

November 18, 2005 11:45 AM | Link to this

No Andy, the number 2000 sits very heavily on my mind. Of course, we’ve lost 2000 to a non-existent military where as in WWII, we were facing an entirely different animal.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 11:48 AM | Link to this

sickoftheneocons: You’re awfully selfish for being a pinko. I thought y’all were in favor of a one world government or whatever that nonsense was I heard. Besides which I also talked about 4 million earlier, it just goes to show you, if 40,000,000 can die in 6 years, who are we to say the terrorists can’t?

By Andy

November 18, 2005 11:52 AM | Link to this

sickoftheneocons: So you advocate waiting for Al Qaeda to turn into “an entirely different animal” that you talk of? So we can lose another 40,000,000 people?

By Andy

November 18, 2005 11:54 AM | Link to this

An audiotape purportedly from the head of al-Qaida in Iraq says the group did not intend to bomb a wedding party at an Amman hotel last week…

The suicide belt went off by accident! All 4, er, 3 of them at the same time! I thought there wasn’t any Al Qeada in Iraq!

By sickoftheneocons

November 18, 2005 11:56 AM | Link to this

Jeez Andy, your awfully childish for being an adult. I haven’t resorted to name calling. Why have you? The last time I checked there were no Nazis calling for the death of 4 million Americans, Islamic jihadists are the ones doing that. Please tell me how many Americans ISLAMIC JIHADISTS have killed in the last, say, 229 years? (not including the 2000+ lives they have taken so far in Iraq).

By Dusty

November 18, 2005 12:02 PM | Link to this

Sick of, you must be trying to fool yourself. By your very name you are saying you are sick of conservatives which has to include our president, our administration, a majority of our citizens and a large part of congress. Then you bad-mouth everything that is done by our country. We shouldn’t have invaded Iraq. You support everything that works against us. You have lost the American spirit and don’t even know it. That is the exact purpose of this anti-American brain-washing.

By gadem

November 18, 2005 12:02 PM | Link to this

So M.S it is a conspiracy against the defenseless conservative right….Woodward may have gotten this information from someone in the Executive branch, but that does not recuse Scooter from perjury. I ask you why lie? In my opinion, the only reason that people lie is to cover up things that they have done wrong.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 12:05 PM | Link to this

sickoftheneocons: You are what you preach, pinko. I’m a neocon, right, name caller?

3,500 approximately not counting the soldiers in Iraq. Is this a trick question or do you just not know?

By Malachi

November 18, 2005 12:05 PM | Link to this

I hope you rightwing nuts realize that not all of the terrorists come from the Middle East. Some of them are homegrown. Shall we mention Eric Rudolph and Timothy McVeigh? I’m sure there are more out there itching to do harm to Americans just like the Islamic terrorists. How many did Timothy McVeigh kill in that one day?

By Andy

November 18, 2005 12:11 PM | Link to this

Malachi: There were a bunch of young children killed by Bill Clinton and Janet Reno, remember Waco? What is your point?

By sickoftheneocons

November 18, 2005 12:14 PM | Link to this

Dusty, I did not say we should not have invaded Iraq. I’ll boil down every post I’ve made this morning and tie it up into a nice little package just for you Dusty. The invasion of Iraq has done more to recruit terrorists than it has to deter them. We have lost the lives of American citizens through the acts of Islamic fundamentalist terrorists. ON THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS, the loss of life due to those terrorist acts is miniscule. Again, IN THE GRAND SCHEME of things. More people die due to auto accidents in one year in this country than have been killed by all the terrorists acts in history.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 12:17 PM | Link to this

sickoftheneocons: Now I understand where you are going, John Kerry, Jr. You think that terrorism is a law enforcment issue and that 3000 deaths are acceptable risks we have to take.

By sickoftheneocons

November 18, 2005 12:27 PM | Link to this

Andy do you see the lopsidedness of this? We have spent BILLIONS of dollars, tens of thousands of lives and the security of our country on an enemy which has, HISTORICALLY, caused us no more irritation than a bee sting. Andy, you are letting your EMOTIONS dictate your decision making. I thought only us pinko libs were supposed to do that. YOUR AFRAID! Your mad as h-e-l-l at the TOWELHEADS who killed innocent Americans. A tragedy yes but what will it cost us in the long run? I’m done arguing about this. Nothing I say is going to get through to you and you certainly haven’t presented a coherent argument to me. So, agree to disagree and let’s move on.

By M.S.

November 18, 2005 12:31 PM | Link to this

So after A two year investigation “scooter” is in trouble for what? Forgeting A sequence of events. Now that Woodward has blown A hole in that theory we are back to my origial point.A big media invented scandle.Go pour another glass of media cool-aid goderd.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 12:46 PM | Link to this

*sickoftheneocons: Now I understand where you are going, John Kerry, Jr. You think that terrorism is a law enforcment issue and that 3000 deaths are acceptable risks we have to take.

By gadem

November 18, 2005 12:52 PM | Link to this

Oh so when scooter “lies” he forgets a series of events, and that is a ok….when someone else does it, lets say that they are a flip-flopper…man it is convenient to ridicule someone when they don’t agree with your point of view. I am beginning to think that most bush supporters are hypocrites.

By gadem

November 18, 2005 12:57 PM | Link to this

M.S the investigation is to see who divulged this information. I pray to GOD that it was Bush or Rove. And if it were you all would say…oh well Bush has executive priveledge or God told Bush to leak her name to reporters…

By Pinko Liberal

November 18, 2005 01:01 PM | Link to this

By your very name you are saying you are sick of conservatives which has to include our president, our administration, a majority of our citizens and a large part of congress.

You hit the nail on the head - we’re sick of this administration and their lapdogs destroying everything in their paths for tax cuts and oil. BTW - I wouldn’t say that the majority of Americans are conservative. Dubya was selected the first time and won by a slim margin the second (if you can believe Diebold’s Ohio count). So if his approval rating is 34% the what percentage of conservatives have come to their senses?

By Malachi

November 18, 2005 01:07 PM | Link to this

My point is: we should go to war with extremist, religious white conservative males, too. They kill just as many as the Islamic terrorists, and they are American, too. How tragic.

By M.S.

November 18, 2005 01:09 PM | Link to this

gadem,you still have not adressed the main point.A lot of people includind Andrea Mitchel and Woodward have said publicly that this CIA thing was no secret.Why would the White House come up with A plan to “out” A person who was already “outed”? Again I refer you to the “friend of the court” brief submitted by many big news outlets including the owners of this newspaper where they argue the same point. Why did they change their minds?

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 01:18 PM | Link to this

gadem,

More important than the inaccuracies is that, if the CIA truly, truly, truly had wanted Ms. Plame’s identity to be secret, it never would have permitted her spouse to write the op-ed. Did no one at Langley think that her identity could be compromised if her spouse wrote a piece discussing a foreign mission about a volatile political issue that focused on her expertise? The obvious question a sophisticated journalist such as Mr. Novak asked after “Why did the CIA send Wilson?” was “Who is Wilson?” After being told by a still-unnamed administration source that Mr. Wilson’s “wife” suggested him for the assignment, Mr. Novak went to Who’s Who, which reveals “Valerie Plame” as Mr. Wilson’s spouse.

Full Article,nice picture too

I thought we had been over this, Valerie Pflame was outed by Joe Wilson.

By gadem

November 18, 2005 01:21 PM | Link to this

Well apparently they are investigating other charges as well. The initial investigation stated with who divulged this information. Other things maybe uncovered in the process. If there are no charges to be filed, I am sure the Grand Jury will not bring any indictments. But I know that you think everyone is out to get Bush because he is spreading the gospel of good news.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 01:22 PM | Link to this

Malachi: Your point is awfully lame. We had a president that gassed and burned 80 some children over a weapons violation and it didn’t bother you pinkos one bit. Let’s stick to the task at hand: killing Islamist terrorists.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 01:25 PM | Link to this

Did I fail to mention that Woodward is the man who uncovered Watergate?

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 01:25 PM | Link to this

gadem,

Here’s more:

Corn has assured us several times that Wilson refused to answer questions about his wife, refused to confirm or deny that she worked for the CIA, refused to “acknowledge whether she is a deep-cover CIA employee.� But he is willing to say on the record that “naming her this way� was an act of treachery? That’s not talking about his wife? That’s not providing confirmation? There is only one way to interpret this: Wilson did indeed talk about his wife, her work as a secret agent, and other matters to Corn (and perhaps others?) on a confidential basis

You do know that David Corn was the first writer to “out” Pflame’s status. Don’t you?

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 01:27 PM | Link to this

Andy,

I’m trying to research Robert Redford, do you know any interesting roles he had?

By M.S.

November 18, 2005 01:27 PM | Link to this

Wow gadem that was weak. Isn’t it amazing how most liberal arguments fall to shreds when comfronted whith the smallest bit of truth.I know you guys were hartbroken that you didn’t get Rove. Better luck next time. NOT

By Andy's best post

November 18, 2005 01:32 PM | Link to this

I disagree with last nite’s imposter, I think this is one of my better ones-

By Andy

November 17, 2005 08:42 PM | Link to this

I used to think that there were some people that were just off limits to the pinko smear campaign, that they would overlook you based on past doings. For instance, Clinton could get caught checking out Republican chicks, they would have a happy cartoon out by 5 that afternoon. I was wrong. There is no boundary for the liberal savagery. When you interfere with their mindless quest for George W Bush, you are going to get ate up, regardless of past victories. It should tell any of you people thinking of a career with the libs what you can expect.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 01:36 PM | Link to this

RW: He did Barbra Streisand in one movie, that took courage.

By gadem

November 18, 2005 01:36 PM | Link to this

So RW, your rationale is that he should have known better to write the piece because his wife was a “covert” CIA agent. Therefore he was fair game, along with his family…man RW that is some pretty mobster like tactics that you resort to…so what about his grandma or daughter did they ever smoke mary jane?

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 01:37 PM | Link to this

The media case of Murtha suddenly having a change of heart is falling apart faster than Fitzmas.

Rep. Murtha first voiced his displeasure with how things were going in Iraq on September 16, 2003, when he called for the immediate firing of President Bush’s defense leadership team. The network news organizations this evening chose not to inform their viewers of this, and, instead, implied that Rep. Murtha was a “hawk” that has always supported this war, and that his statements today were recent revelations

He supported the war for almost six months

There is rock solid support the troops can rally behind.

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 01:41 PM | Link to this

gadem,

Did you happen to read the article? Victoria Toensing wrote the IIP act.

One of my points is that actual covert CIA agents shouldn’t be married to publicity whores.

By Andy's best post

November 18, 2005 01:44 PM | Link to this

I was trying to show your soft side Andy. RW(Research World?) Keep the links coming. Those sites are very informative.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 01:48 PM | Link to this

I was wrong about political cartoonists having enough dignity not to use Congressman Murtha’a comments to attack the opposition party, my bad…

swift boat vets?

By gadem

November 18, 2005 01:49 PM | Link to this

RW could you please tell me why your President is threatening to veto a bill that raises taxes on his oil company buddies?

By Andy

November 18, 2005 01:53 PM | Link to this

The search result page won’t come up. Go to the politicalcartoon site link and type in “murtha.”

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 01:53 PM | Link to this

gadem,

I wish he would veto anything that digs into my pockets and even yours, too.

Funny, with a nic like ga(georgia)dem(Democrat) I thought you were a citizen.

By gadem

November 18, 2005 01:55 PM | Link to this

If he raises taxes on oil companies that made record profits last year, that is really digging into your pockets and theirs huh? I really feel sorry for them….and you too. How will they afford to stay in business if taxes are raised?

By Andy's best post

November 18, 2005 01:57 PM | Link to this

Now that’s funny.

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 01:59 PM | Link to this

gadem,

Oh, I forgot you were a socialist. Sorry.

In our country businesses operate, at least somewhat, freely. So when you place an artificial cost on them they pass it on to us. So your oil tax is an evil scheme to harm the poor, who we all know can least afford it.

What country are you from, so we can look into your President?

By Andy

November 18, 2005 02:00 PM | Link to this

RW: I wonder if the pinkos will use the “access to power has clouded my judgement” about Fitzgerald’s latest news conference?

By C

November 18, 2005 02:04 PM | Link to this

Andy, it’s quite obvious that you are completely obsessed with the color pink. Apparently you haven’t yet figured out that color truly has no relevance to politics, religion or any of the other real issue on the face of the earth outside of the subjects of fashion, Barbie dolls, cotton candy and Pepto Bismal. I know no men outside of the gay community who are so obsessed with this color, so I can’t help but think this is the reason you are so angry. Come on out of the closet. It’s perfectly okay. You’ll feel much better - the rage will go away and you’ll be a much happier person when you’ve accepted your true self. Then, maybe you can learn how to be a productive person rather than spending your life ranting non-sequitors completely devoid of fact or reason.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 02:09 PM | Link to this

C: If all that were true I would call myself a pinko, wouldn’t I? Thanks for asking!

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 02:10 PM | Link to this

Andy,

Here’s another link to the Murtha caroons

That should go to the page with the three small cartoons. It didn’t take long for him to become the lefts hero.

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 02:14 PM | Link to this

C,

You’re not from South Park, are you? They had the darndest time trying to get Tom Cruise, John Travolta, and R. Kelly out of the closet this week.

By gadem

November 18, 2005 02:19 PM | Link to this

SO RW you are ok if companies overcharge you for something? Interesting concept…Seeing as it is their God given right to do so.

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 02:20 PM | Link to this

More interesting reading for the “tax the evil oil companies” crowd

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 02:23 PM | Link to this

gadem,

Interesting how you always seem to answer a question with a new question.

Somebody on this board warned of people like you, hmm… was it Andy?

Capitalism works every time it’s tried, my friend!

If we knew more about your President this conversation would make more sense.

By gadem

November 18, 2005 02:27 PM | Link to this

Why is it wrong for someone to change their position. I know, they are flip flopping if they do that, Lord forbid someone gets new information, or sees that the initial course of action was incorrect and wants to reevaluate their position. I know RW staying the course is your motto, seeing as you have it imprinted on your butt cheeks.

But to me a good leader can adapt to a changing situation, and not continue to steer the ship into the storm because they don’t want to be seen as indicisive.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 02:27 PM | Link to this

RW: My link is working now, their server must have sensed a Con at the site and shut down until it could hide the evidence.

By Ava

November 18, 2005 02:27 PM | Link to this

Wow! Ya’ll are STILL at it! Well, incase no one has seen this website or heard about it yet:

www.anysoldier.com

It has a list of soldiers in Iraq (and surrounding areas) that would like care packages and help to keep morale up. I’ve sent 5 packages so far since someone told me about it. So everyone one, forget your differences and send these brave men and women a package. Some just want Q-tips, baby wipes, deoderant and things like that….Show them that you really care and not just buying a yellow magnet for the back of your bumper!

By gadem

November 18, 2005 02:32 PM | Link to this

Andy you play the victim really well.

By gadem

November 18, 2005 02:33 PM | Link to this

Thanks AVA will do..

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 02:34 PM | Link to this

Andy,

I’ll have to send you the secret patch that masks the political leanings of your computer!

Would you mind reading gadem’s last few posts and see if you can make any sense out of going from oil taxes to profits without discussing margins to what I pay for goods to my butt cheeks without ever answering a question?

By Andy

November 18, 2005 02:37 PM | Link to this

RW: I noticed that we have reduced gadem to a babbling mass of liberalism. He doesn’t do so good by himself.

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 02:47 PM | Link to this

Andy,

Maybe his tag team partner can come help him out.

This is another site that does great work for our troops

Cell phones for Soldiers was started by a young brother and sister and this is another good way to help our troops stay in touch with loved ones.

By Dave From Woodstock

November 18, 2005 02:54 PM | Link to this

Angry Andy:

Crickets chirping.

Do you work?

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 02:54 PM | Link to this

France takes on Hollywood

Maybe they want to do something with all the car fire footage they’ve collected.

By Dave From Woodstock

November 18, 2005 02:56 PM | Link to this

Cell phones for Soldiers was started by a young brother and sister and this is another good way to help our troops stay in touch with loved ones.

That’s real swell RW.

Now maybe we can call our troops and ask what armor they need this week.

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 02:58 PM | Link to this

Dave,

If all you want to do is mock our troops don’t go to the link.

Thannks

By Joe

November 18, 2005 03:00 PM | Link to this

Oooh, a three-some…..kinky! Wonder who’s really getting screwed.

By gadem

November 18, 2005 03:01 PM | Link to this

Oh cynical and paranoid Andy. The sky is falling, stock up on duct tape and plastic. you know what is the terror alert these days? By the look of things, Bush and his staff will call for a Red Terror alert. But I digress, I know that Bush himself will be standing at the Gates of Heaven turning me away if I continue to question his authority.

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 03:08 PM | Link to this

Zarqawi Lied, People Died

Meanwhile,

French Wine Riots

By buff

November 18, 2005 03:13 PM | Link to this

gadem, the pols are just pandering to the public about taxes on oil companies. It is stupid because theywill just pass it on to us. Remember, simple economics: if you want less of something, tax ti; if you want more of something, subsidize it.

By gadem

November 18, 2005 03:33 PM | Link to this

Buff, Do you mean like this administration was using fear to scare the public into supporting this lie filled war in Iraq….buff I know what you mean.

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 03:43 PM | Link to this

buff, How about this one?

“The Democrats philosophy is if it moves regulate it, if it keeps moving tax it, if it stops moving subsidize it”. Ronald Reagan

By Kanye

November 18, 2005 04:13 PM | Link to this

George Bush doesn’t care about Congressman Murtha.

By Kanye

November 18, 2005 04:16 PM | Link to this

George Bush doesn’t care about Bob Woodward.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 04:20 PM | Link to this

They have found another audio tape from Zaqarwi of Al Qaeda in Iraq, here is the transcript:

“Lions of God, have any of you seen my wife? She is wearing a burqa that may seem excessively bulky and could have wires hanging out of it. God willing, please tell her that the glorious hour of paradise has long since past; is she having problems? Tell her to push the red button. If you have any problems with her call me at the cave.

I would also like to pass my sincerest love to brother gadem among the infidels of the great satan. I have been following your progress on cartoon boy’s blog, be strong great lion of God.”

By Andy

November 18, 2005 04:24 PM | Link to this

Any of you pinkos want to hang yourselves in public, be on the floor of Congress at 6:45 this evening. The Cons are calling you out.

By Dave From Woodstock

November 18, 2005 04:31 PM | Link to this

If all you want to do is mock our troops don’t go to the link.

You mean you’re a soldier?

LOL!

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 04:35 PM | Link to this

DFW,

A U.S. citizen

Thaks

(I gave you an extra “n” last time)

So why are you so pleasant today?

By Andy

November 18, 2005 04:54 PM | Link to this

Alright.

I’ve had it with all you g******* pinko bastards. You are all going to hell, you are all evil, you are all turd-burgling toe-dancers that need a good round of slap and tickle.

Call me. Please. I need it bad.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 04:55 PM | Link to this

OOOOOOORRRRRAAAAAAHHHHHH!!!!!

Though the American media is slow to report it, U.S. forces are relentlessly destroying Zarqawi’s senior leadership. A November 2 air strike killed two senior al Qaeda operatives in Iraq: Abu Zahra, the so-called Emir of Husaybah, ran all insurgent operations in that Iraqi city, and Asadallah, Zarqawi’s key recruiter. U.S. forces have now confirmed the identities of both dead terrorists.— Richard Miniter, WSJ, 11/18/05

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 05:04 PM | Link to this

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi had no immediate reaction to the planned vote.

I guess San Fran Nan has to take a quick poll

I sure am glad the libs have principals. Or at least quick pollsters.

By getalife

November 18, 2005 05:12 PM | Link to this

It is getting ugly on C-Span.

By buff

November 18, 2005 05:12 PM | Link to this

gaden, I did not mention Iraq, I was discussing tax policy and its effects. RW, yeah, regualte, regulate, regulate. Darn, I miss Reagan

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 05:16 PM | Link to this

getalife,

You’re not kidding. C-SPAN is must see TV this afternoon!!!

By buff

November 18, 2005 05:19 PM | Link to this

Whether one supported the invasion of Iraq or not it would be a terrible blunder to withdraw at this time. I wish we could, but, the message that would send world-wide, and especially to those evil terrorists, is the exact wong thing to do They would become more emboldened and the recruitment of new murderers would increase exponentially. Al Zarqawi would become a hero and our country would become more dangerous. When one reads their goals and ambitions it is bone-chilling. We have to realzie that we will be in a war with radical Islamo-fascists for decades. We have to win; defeat is not an option.

By getalife

November 18, 2005 05:24 PM | Link to this

Man, they muted the audio.

By Dave From Woodstock

November 18, 2005 05:31 PM | Link to this

R.W.

So you really are a U.S. citizen?!

Did you say the pledge of allegiance this morning?

Sing the National Anthem before dinner?

I’m sooooo proud of …you…you’re tugging at ….sniff….my…sniff…my heart!

WHY, YOU IS AN AMERICAN!!!

btw: When are all you “patriots” signing up for George’s War in Iraq? C’mon, C’mon, no dawdling, get to it!

What? You’re too old?

Got kids?

Nephews?

Nieces?

What’s stopping you?

By Joe Roman

November 18, 2005 05:31 PM | Link to this

That lard butt Dennis Hastert, who never came within a mile of putting on the uniform calling John Murtha questioning John Murtha’s courage and patriotism on the House floor is the last straw. I call on every veteran to ask men they know if they support the war. If they say yes, ask them if they served in the military. If they say yes again, thank them for their opinion. If they say no they did not serve, punch their lights out. All you right wing cowards out there who think war is grand thing-as long as somebody else fights it-are beneath contempt……….and before you can get it out of your mouth wingnuts, people who oppose war and refuse to fight are morally honest and ethically consistent. That’s OK with me.

By Joe Roman

November 18, 2005 05:38 PM | Link to this

I’d love to see this Andy punk say what he says here to John Murtha’s in person. After a a few seconds, little Andy’s panties would be even wetter that his bloody face. Typical morally, intellectually and ethically bankrupt right wing coward.

By buff

November 18, 2005 05:39 PM | Link to this

Oe Roman, if Hastert did that, it was despicable. I understadn thso eopposed to the war. I was opposed to the invasion of Iraq, but, I think it would be a disaster to withdraw at this time. Oh yes, my son graduated form Ga. Tech in December 2001, joined teh Marines, went to OCS, served 19 months in Iraq, and is now stationed at Parris Island. And, yeah, I was frafted in ‘69, did my tour in the hellhole some call Viet Nam, where I was anything but a hero. I was terrified my firs ttwo months in the jungle, and I mean terrified. Anyone who has been incombat has a much different perspective than those who don’t. So, if you disagree with what we are doing, I respect that, just disagree.

By Dave From Woodstock

November 18, 2005 05:41 PM | Link to this

Whether one supported the invasion of Iraq or not it would be a terrible blunder to withdraw at this time. I wish we could, but, the message that would send world-wide, and especially to those evil terrorists, is the exact wong thing to do They would become more emboldened and the recruitment of new murderers would increase exponentially.

Earth to Buff, come in Buff…

What the hell do you think created more terrorism in Iraq???

Was it the food drops?

No.

Was it the nice the U.S. helped them remove Sadam?

No.

Was it the warm milk and cookies we brought to the Iraqi children?

no.

Quiz yourself Buff. If you think leaving Iraq will send the wrong message, you haven’t been paying attention.

What do you think hunting down and killing Osama bin Laden will do?

Who’s he?

You’ve forgotten already?

What a shame.

By buff

November 18, 2005 05:45 PM | Link to this

Dave, name a few times in history when apeasing tyranny worked, and we are fighting Islamo-fascist tyranny. We are in a world war that will last decades. And, if you want to play the insult game, there are others on this blog who will acommodate you; I am not one of them. Have a nice evening

By Connie Sue

November 18, 2005 05:49 PM | Link to this

I was just wondering if Andy and R.W. are secret lovers. PS I don’t mind if you call me pinko liberal because I will defend my personal liberties. Will you two come out of the closet or do you already share an apartment. I won’t be offended if you reply by calling me a pinko liberal.

By Joe Roman

November 18, 2005 05:53 PM | Link to this

If we leave Iraq tomorrow, or if we leave in twenty years makes no difference whatsoever in the larger scheme of things. Once we are out, Iraq will split into three separate entities. However, the sooner we leave, the fewer American troops will die for nothing. Once we came to our senses and left Vietnam, the aftermath was no different than it would have been if we’d left in 1970. If Ho Chi Minh had still been alive before we left, Vietnam would not have experienced the level of misery it had to endure. In short, LEAVE IRAQ NOW!

By Andy

November 18, 2005 05:56 PM | Link to this

What I’d like to know is why the hiding behind the keyboard hard a-s-s-e-s, Joe Roman comes to mind, are the first ones to call on us to run screaming from Iraq. I didn’t think this was hard to understand, you are a p-u-s-s-y if you run, especially from a group of losers like Al Qaeda. Maybe you are Al Qaeda, Joe, and you are tired of seeing your fellow punk a-s-s-e-s getting blown off the face of the Earth.

I will continue supporting our brave troops, if you pinkos don’t mind.

By Ricky

November 18, 2005 05:57 PM | Link to this

Joe Roman, do you remember who got us out of Vietnam? It was Nixon, a Republican. If he had continued to bomb the North and prosecute the war his way, we would have won. It was when the Democratic Congress refused to fund the war, that we left. And now we have a communist country where people starve to death and are killed for no good reason. That worked out great

By Andy

November 18, 2005 05:59 PM | Link to this

Connie: You sound jealous. Aren’t the pinko men pleasing you? You do have a sweet name. What are you wearing?

By Joe Roman

November 18, 2005 06:00 PM | Link to this

Please folks. Proofread your comments before you post them. Otherwise, you come off like an idiot, no matter what your opinion. e.g. Buff: What on earth are you trying to say?

By Andy

November 18, 2005 06:12 PM | Link to this

Ricky: What do you think the pinkos want? Slavery and starvation allow them to extort wealthy nations with their faux concerns. It gives them huge multi billion dollar budgets so they can do absolutely nothing like at the UN. Dying children give them the opportunity to wring their hands at the elite cocktail parties, along with the chance to impress their neighbors wife with statistics.

George Bush, common cowboy, is taking all of their little fiefdoms and setting them free. Showing them freedom and prosperity like the liberals could only promise them. Why do you think they hate him so much?

By Andy

November 18, 2005 06:14 PM | Link to this

Ricky: What do you think the pinkos want? Slavery and starvation allow them to extort wealthy nations with their faux concerns. It gives them huge multi billion dollar budgets so they can do absolutely nothing like at the UN. Dying children give them the opportunity to wring their hands at the elite c-o-c-k-t-a-i-l parties, along with the chance to impress their neighbors wife with statistics.

George Bush, common cowboy, is taking all of their little fiefdoms and setting them free. Showing them freedom and prosperity like the liberals could only promise them. Why do you think they hate him so much?

By Dave From Woodstock

November 18, 2005 06:18 PM | Link to this

Dave, name a few times in history when apeasing tyranny worked, and we are fighting Islamo-fascist tyranny. We are in a world war that will last decades. And, if you want to play the insult game, there are others on this blog who will acommodate you; I am not one of them. Have a nice evening

Buff, we’re appeasing tyranny by letting bin Laden off the hook. This whole “War on Terror” thing was started on 9-11 by bin Laden. Have wingnuts forgotten this?

Apparently so, since Iraq was the logical choice to attack and since so many uninformed Americans think Sadam Hussein was responsible for 9-11.

Attacking Sadam Hussein is akin to beating up the class weakling after the class bully raped your sister and gunned down your brother.

Oh look at the U.S. what a model of decency we are! And look at how braaaave they are!

You know that thing people do when they think someone is crazy? You know, they twirl their index finger in a circular motion near their head indicating to others, “He’s a freaking nut!”

Well, that’s what the rest of the world is doing to the U.S. right now and ever since we invaded Iraq.

But the wingnuts want you to believe us “pinkos” are “unpatriotic”, because we’re against the war in Iraq. They like to play that game here and everywhere else cuz it makes them feel better about themselves and the dumb choices they’ve made

It’s like a guy with big pick-up truck…we all know he’s compensatin’ for something. By selling his big truck he’d be admitting his d**k is tiny.

Wingnuts have been exposed for the weak hypocrites that they are and they’re in panic mode, attack mode.

It kills me to watch them squirm.

But what would be better is seeing bin Laden in U.S custody.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 06:19 PM | Link to this

This is the geat part about living in pinko Atlanta. We don’t have to go to Iraq to find the enemies of our country; there are plenty of them right here. I must admit, these pacifists are a tougher nut to crack than any Al Qaeda loony. And they do more damage. Just think about this: As we win the war in Iraq, the pinkos are screaming for us to leave in defeat. Are we fighting the wrong enemy?

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 06:19 PM | Link to this

Connie Sue,

You flirt, you. :-)

By Andy

November 18, 2005 06:22 PM | Link to this

Dave from Woodstock: Have you seen Bin Ladentorest lately?

“Though the American media is slow to report it, U.S. forces are relentlessly destroying Zarqawi’s senior leadership. A November 2 air strike killed two senior al Qaeda operatives in Iraq: Abu Zahra, the so-called Emir of Husaybah, ran all insurgent operations in that Iraqi city, and Asadallah, Zarqawi’s key recruiter. U.S. forces have now confirmed the identities of both dead terrorists.”— Richard Miniter, WSJ, 11/18/05

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 06:42 PM | Link to this

Drudge Report in Red Alert for Tonights Iraq vote

Fireworks should start back up a little after 7:00 on C-SPAN.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 06:43 PM | Link to this

Victor Davis Hanson quotes fron the Senate Resolution authorizing the War in Iraq:

So read the senators’ October 2002 resolution. It is a model of sobriety and judiciousness in authorizing a war. There are facts cited such as the violation of agreements; moral considerations such as genocide; real worries about al Qaeda’s ties to Saddam (e.g., “…whereas members of al-Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq”); fears of terrorism (” …whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of American citizens.”

This is the same Senate where slightly less than half of the members are trying to punk out.

By Caligula

November 18, 2005 06:49 PM | Link to this

Andy, aren’t you the pop off who got challenged to go to Iraq in some capacity to “kill some camel jockeys” and came up with every excuse in the book why you couldn’t go? You Andy are the keyboard warrior. I remember that you got punked really bad the other day on just this topic. Give him hell Joe Roman. He’s typical of all the rest of the wannabe chicken hawks. Give it up Andy. You are the stereotypical “chairborn ranger.”

By Andy

November 18, 2005 06:54 PM | Link to this

So Caligula, we should stay in Iraq and fight or should we run in defeat like a bunch of p-u-s-s-y-s?

By Dr R

November 18, 2005 06:55 PM | Link to this

Osama and al-Qaida are just one head of the hydra when it comes to terrorism. To go after him and skip governments that support terror is like taking on organized crime by getting one mob boss. You get them all or someone will jump in and take his place. Saddam was sending cash bonuses to suicide bombers in Palestine and supporting terror groups there. He may not have had Osama on his speed dial, but he was supporting terror. If we want to kill the whole beast, we can’t stop after a few cruise missiles. That’s what we did for years and it didn’t rid the world of this scourge.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 07:00 PM | Link to this

By Rep. Steve King Posted Nov 18, 2005

The repeated calls from a group of supposed leaders of this country to cut and run are costing American lives. We are looking at the security of America’s future right now. And if we heed to the demands of those in this body that make declarations simply to gain air time for themselves, we are looking at the dangerous possibility of becoming a country that lives in fear on our own soil.

We must not surrender to terrorists and we must fight and prevail now, where they are, and not on our own soil later. I refuse to believe Americans want to live where guards must protect every school, synagogue and hospital. I refuse to allow our children and grandchildren to live in fear every day of backpack and truck bombers. That is not freedom. That is not freedom as our founders envisioned, nor is it freedom that the United States symbolizes for the entire world.

I urge my colleagues to remember that we did not start this war. We were in fact very late to acknowledge we were at war—Osama bin Laden declared war on us in Afghanistan almost ten years ago.

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 07:12 PM | Link to this

ABC “news” just had a report on the evil U.S.A and our approved torture methods.

Apparently we play Eminem all night, but it gets worse, we have six steps that ABC “news” calls torture:

1)Attention grab

2)Face slap

3)stomach slap

4)sleep depravation

5)cold

6)water boarding

Wow, we’re awful. The other guys just put you in a 4’ by 4’ cage for a couple of weeks and then saw your head off.

By M.S.

November 18, 2005 07:13 PM | Link to this

I had to leave for A while. As A Knucle-draging neoconservitive I have A real job.I see that the conversation has gone all over the place.Do any of you left wing big media cool-aid drinkers need me to show you where to find out how your democratic polititions are all liers about the Iraq war as well as the Plame CIA thing.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 07:18 PM | Link to this

Look at this picture of the Alaskan Pipeline and think of all the things the pinkos told you about ANWR, my goodness, these people are a trip:

pristine

By Andy

November 18, 2005 07:20 PM | Link to this

Scroll to the top of the page, sigh….

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 07:20 PM | Link to this

M.S.,

If you want any of the really crazy libs to read anything, start with,”Look what I just found on Michael Moore’s web site.”

There are a few you can talk rationally to, but starting that way is a safe bet.

By Dr R

November 18, 2005 07:25 PM | Link to this

I endure some of those “torture” methods just coming to work every day.

How about this compromise: We cut back on torture, to satisfy those among us without the stomach for it, but we don’t advertise the fact to our enemies. I’d rather the latest terror thug to think he might get battery cables on his b*s if he’s captured than a suite at the Marriott. It just perpetuates the notion the Islamo-facists have that we are easily cowed lightweights who won’t fight to win.

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 07:26 PM | Link to this

Hey, Andy’s right

Where are all the lush meadows, flowing streams, and snowcapped mountains we always see on any MSM outlet.

Oh, they’re lying. Never mind.

By Dr R

November 18, 2005 07:32 PM | Link to this

I don’t know about you guys, but my car doesn’t run on caribou poop. Likewise, the native Inuits up there can’t eat pretty scenery; they want the jobs. If we could, we should move all of our oil rigs up there where no one will ever see them.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 07:40 PM | Link to this

Alright, see if this link takes you straight there, this is the funniest picture I’ve seen in awhile. It’s the damage done to Alaska by the oil pipeline, that the media warns will happen to ANWR, gasp….

are all the caribou

By Andy

November 18, 2005 07:42 PM | Link to this

I give up. Here’s the link, RW.

http://www.radioblogger.com/#001173

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 07:45 PM | Link to this

Courtesy of Andy

By Andy

November 18, 2005 07:45 PM | Link to this

Dr R: Check out the picture, I think everyone will be fine. You have to wonder why the Republicans in the House wimped out like they did.

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 07:50 PM | Link to this

Andy,

Did you want the radioblogger story? I only posted the picture.

Dr. R.,

The area we want to drill already has oil seeping up from the ground and no pretty scenery for miles.

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 07:54 PM | Link to this

Dr. R,

Maybe we could just have a no torture with this cavaet, no Democrats saw anything wrong with this:

They told stories that at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Ghengis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 07:55 PM | Link to this

A picture is worth a thousand words. I don’t know if the pinkos would get into Hugh Hewitt and Mark Steyn.

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 08:02 PM | Link to this

I wonder my anti-virus program launches every time I look up a John Kerry quote.

Any ideas?

By M.S.

November 18, 2005 08:04 PM | Link to this

Always remember,liberalism depends on your ignorence of somthing.Conservitism depends on your knowledge of it.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 08:04 PM | Link to this

Dr R: Saw nothing wrong? Heck, John Kerry was a party to all of that in Vietnam and these pinkos nearly elected him President.

RW: Jonah Goldberg actually went to ANWR a few years back and his story is hilarious. It’s a desolate, barren landscape, pockmarked with little pools of water from the ice melts. He said the misquitos are the size of Blue Jays and whole herds of caribou will suddenly go insane because of the incessant stinging.

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 08:10 PM | Link to this

Andy,

Even that uber-lib Nicholas Kristoff from the New York Times went there and talked about how desolate it was. It was his story where I got the part about oil seeping out of the ground.

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 08:15 PM | Link to this

The House debate is back on, the Democrats sound just like “gadem” trying to figure out how to get out this one.

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 08:32 PM | Link to this

Candice Miller (R-Mi) has a question for the Democrats.

“If you believe President Bush lied to you about the intelligence, why didn’t he just plant WMD?”

Anyone here want to take a crack at that?

By NeoReo

November 18, 2005 08:40 PM | Link to this

Gawd, what a bunch of pablum-puking, panty wearing, fowl-dunged f* who write on this site. You pinko, left-wing anti-American cowards deserve the government you advocate: appeasers, high tax, high unemployment, anti-military, anti-freedom, pro baby-killer, pro-homo, pro-dope…..Why don’t you just go to Amsterdam and let the God-loving/fearing decent people of this great nation kill terrorists, save the world, and live a life of decency.

By Andy

November 18, 2005 08:41 PM | Link to this

Did anyone else notice that Joe Roman must have adopted a resolution calling for his complete and total withdrawl from this blog. Terms of his surrender will be worked out after we figure out what bed he is hiding under.

By NeoReo

November 18, 2005 08:49 PM | Link to this

Joe Roman = appeaser, f*, coward, freedom-hater, wife-abuser, welfare deadbeat, litterbug, p*** head. He is probalby really upset because it is past the halway mark of the month and he has spent all of his welfare money on lottery tickets, beer, cigarettes, and paying neighbors to bugger him

By RW-(the original)

November 18, 2005 08:50 PM | Link to this

Andy,

Joe Roman couldn’t take the lack of proofreading. He probably considered it a form of torture.

By NeoReo

November 18, 2005 09:04 PM | Link to this

Dam, I hate these liberals. If Al Zaraqawi is going to butcher someone………….

By NeoReo

November 18, 2005 09:28 PM | Link to this

Joe Roman is Jimmy Carter. Rosalyn probably has a giant……stuffed up his ……right now. dam, I hate cowardly appeasers

By NeoReo

November 18, 2005 09:32 PM | Link to this

I am not saying y’all should be Republicans, but, listen to Nancy Pelosi and/or Barbara Boxer and/or Ted Kennedy and rationally say why you want to support them.

By amazed

November 18, 2005 10:41 PM | Link to this

NeoReo, you are a complete psychotic sociopath but the best part is you brag about it. It is hard to believe however in these days of political correctness that someone would admit to being consumed with hatred for his fellow Americans.

It is laughable that a complete whimp such as yourself, hiding behind your keyboard would call Jimmy Carter a coward. He’s what, 5, 7,10 times the man you will ever be.

The best is how you will actually say that you hate anyone who does not believe in war and anyone who would try to bring peace in the middle east is a freedom hater.

NeoReo it must be total anguish for you however having the tiniest little needle dick in North Georgia and not even being able to see it because of your fat blubber belly. Keep sending that paycheck of yours to Pat Robertson and every week so he will pray for you and sooner or later he may be able to cure you or at least lighten your bank account.

See ya loser.

By Steve SC

November 21, 2005 09:46 AM | Link to this

Response to Andy: The U. S. death toll in WWII was 405,000, most of them in 1944 & 1945. If they’d killed more than 200,000 Americans in both those years, that would leave nothing for 1941, 1942, or 1943. Facts are inconvenient things.

By cutandrun

November 21, 2005 11:13 AM | Link to this

November 20, 2005 04:44 PM | Link to this Wooten’s editorial: It will, as was the case with the 200,000 rebellious Shiites that Saddam Hussein slaughtered in the aftermath of Desert Storm, leave Iraq exposed to the vengeful brutality of unchecked evil. Bush’s daddy cut and ran in the Gulf war and left Saddam in power!

By Douglas Wood

November 29, 2005 02:41 PM | Link to this

Well, of course Mike is going to hounded by these right-wing extremist nuts who call themselves “Republicans.” The last time I checked, The Republican Party was one that believed in fiscal conservatism and social moderation. The “Republicans” in power now and the mindless ones who write on this blog, are no where close to that ideology. The “Republicans” of today believe in deficit spending and they also believe that the government should dictate what happens in the personal lives of Americans. These people cannot think for themselves, so therefore, they can’t understand the brilliance of Mike’s cartoons. Wake Up!!!