Mike Luckovich

By Scooter

January 18, 2006 09:53 PM | Link to this

End the prescription drug entitlement before it strangles the opportunities from my childrens future.

By finch

January 18, 2006 10:21 PM | Link to this

Scooter, humanitarian concerns aside, your proposal would be political suicide.

10s of millions of cranky, clumsy, myopic, stubborn, old-and-in-the-way golden agers have this annoying habit of voting in huge, barely controllable herds in every single election.

It’s one habit they’ve conveniently failed to pass on to younger generations….

By RW-(the original)

January 18, 2006 10:57 PM | Link to this

ml is getting mighty close to violating the International Olympic Committee rules here.

Oh well, so much for ml’s scribbling Ted “the Swimmer” Kennedy may have had some other swimmers working for him.

By finch

January 18, 2006 11:20 PM | Link to this

Hi RW,

Yes, the IOL can get really pushy with people it thinks are sullying their virginal, untarnished image.

Why am I not surprised about the National Enquirer’s story on Ted? Although since this IS the Enquirer,

You have to consider the source.

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 01:05 AM | Link to this

finch,

Was it the NE that first reported Jessie’s love child? Maybe they are better with paternity issues, at least when they stay intra-terrestrial, than other things. (I doubt the Kennedy’s could have kept this a secret, especially since the mother is still alive.)

Having said all that, what is the IOL?

By Washington State

January 19, 2006 02:44 AM | Link to this

Finch, It is all part of the starve the beast strategy. No better way to break medicare than to give the pharmaceutical industry a carte blanche and pay for it with medicare funds. After introducing this wonderful welfare program for the pharmaceutical industry, the feds are refusing to pay for the gigantic mess they have created for those seniors who are truly indigent. Many companies have simply refused to live up to their contractual obligations, leaving seniors high and try without critical medications. States have had step in and pick up the tab to the tune of millions of dollars (remember, no negotiating) and now will have to go after the dozens of different plans to collect from them because the feds have said “It’s your problem now.” Compassionate conservatism at its truest.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 04:58 AM | Link to this

Why we have a cartoon about medicare today:

But Utah Republican Chairman Joe Cannon was unconvinced. “One of the biggest beneficiaries of Jack Abramoff is Harry Reid,” he said. And so it went throughout much of Mr. Reid’s red state trip which served as a warning bell that people outside the Washington Beltway weren’t buying his story this is just a Republican scandal.

“Reid and other members of Congress should expect that when they take their show on the road this election season, they’ll get questions about whether they got money from [Abramoff] or not,” said Massie Ritsch, spokesman for the Center for Responsive Politics.

The scandal that was supposed to throw out the Republican Congress has suddenly turned decidedly bipartisan.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 05:27 AM | Link to this

And the team had no shortage of players from both sides of the aisle. On the national level, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan group that tracks money in politics, Republican campaign groups received $1.24 million from sources linked to Abramoff since 1999, while Democratic groups got $844,000 during the same period.

By Objective Observer

January 19, 2006 05:37 AM | Link to this

Woke up feeling very mischievious! Do I dare? Here it goes….it would appear that older folks and “big O’s” are not mutually exclusive. Good for them. The temptation was too great! Always looking for the brighter side.

By AntiRadical

January 19, 2006 06:17 AM | Link to this

As one of those “cranky, clumsy, myopic, stubborn, old-and-in-the-way golden agers” (see above) who obviously should just die, get of of the way, and give my (GenX) children the rest of what they haven’t already had handed to them on a silver spoon, I would have to say that GenXs are absolutely right. I should have balked and crabbed about supporting my parents (and GenX kids) as well. I would be much wealthier, of course, and the little GenX windbags wouldn’t get any inheritance ‘cause my parents would have been busted long ago. GenXs are the most spoiled generation of human beings to ever visit themselves on the face of the Earth. They never appreciated a darn thing that was ever done for them but I’m quite sure that they will not make the same errors judging from their generations divorce rates, juvenile delinquency, drug use, abandoned latchkey kids and seniors, and their chronic debt loads. This completely self-absorbed generation is already well on the way to “taking care of only its own damnable self”.

By Liberal Texas Democrat

January 19, 2006 06:28 AM | Link to this

I love today’s cartoon.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 06:29 AM | Link to this

AntiR: The “make love not war” baby boomers taught them so well, didn’t they?

By AntiRadical

January 19, 2006 06:32 AM | Link to this

Proof is in the pudding, ANDY!!!!!!!!!!!

By Andy

January 19, 2006 07:07 AM | Link to this

I think it’s unlikely that these veterans believe Senator McCarthy’s public opposition to the war served anyone but the North Vietnamese—an opinion, in fact, shared by the North’s commander, General Nguyen Vo Giap. Seeing that his forces could not beat the United States militarily, Gen. Giap considered negotiating a truce until the antiwar protests (the American Pinko) reached critical mass—soon after Senator McCarthy came out publicly against the war. From then, Giap wrote, he realized that he could lose every battle and still win the war. All he had to do was endure.

Sound familiar?

By AntiRadical

January 19, 2006 07:38 AM | Link to this

Giap philosophy then can be summarized as “the way to beat the Americans is through their pocketbook”. If the effort costs them enough, they will quit because they care more for their money than their principles. Giap was succinctly correct in his assesment. The Cong definitely could not beat US military forces in a stand up fight. They did manage to kick a little butt in the bushes, though (there are 58,166 names on that memorial wall in DC, you know). Unless we are willing to give up most of our earnings to pay the taxes that will be needed to support endless occupations of cultures that are oppositional to us culturally in the first place, we can expect much more of the same old, same old.

By Scooter

January 19, 2006 07:59 AM | Link to this

Golly, when I said we should end the prescription drug entitlement, that doesn’t equate to allowing old folks to die in the streets. That is a good sensationalist reaction that would be expected from someone who is looking for economic security from the government, at the cost of other individuals.

No, old folks aren’t to die in the streets by the hundreds. Little secret; there are thousands of private organizations and we are a compassionate people who would not allow our elders to die in the streets. The dems, vilify the private sector so that they (politicians of both stripes now) can solidify more power in D.C. All I’m saying is it is unwise for free men and women to handover their responsibility/power to the great federal government. The old people have been around the block enough times to know government can screw up a wet dream and should not be trusted with our health. But, old people do like “free� stuff.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 08:00 AM | Link to this

AntiR: Where did you see this financial qualifier at anywhere in Giap’s words? All I see is that he figured out that the hysterical American pinkos had no balls and would argue against the war on his behalf. Isn’t it amazing how timeless his wisdon turned out to be?

By Scooter

January 19, 2006 08:11 AM | Link to this

Andy, if the open minded liberals would read this letter to UBL in its entirety, they may see how they are playing into the hands of the enemy.

The first stage: Expel the Americans from Iraq.

The second stage: Establish an Islamic authority or amirate, then develop it and support it until it achieves the level of a caliphate- over as much territory as you can to spread its power in Iraq, i.e., in Sunni areas, is in order to fill the void stemming from the departure of the Americans, immediately upon their exit and before un-Islamic forces attempt to fill this void, whether those whom the Americans will leave behind them, or those among the un-Islamic forces who will try to jump at taking power. There is no doubt that this amirate will enter into a fierce struggle with the foreign infidel forces, and those supporting them among the local forces, to put it in a state of constant preoccupation with defending itself, to make it impossible for it to establish a stable state which could proclaim a caliphate, and to keep the Jihadist groups in a constant state of war, until these forces find a chance to annihilate them.

The third stage: Extend the jihad wave to the secular countries neighboring Iraq. The fourth stage: It may coincide with what came before: the clash with Israel, because Israel was established only to challenge any new Islamic entity.

By AntiRadical

January 19, 2006 08:14 AM | Link to this

Andy: economic qualifier is well implied. Wars cost money and “responsible” generations pay for them. American war protests centered on the human and economic war costs, not on socialist philosophical commanalities or cowardice. My friend, one day you will learn the timeless truth that “it’s ALL about the money”.

Scooter: You’re living in a dream world if you don’t realize how many seniors are indeed dying each and every hour primarily through lack of adequate health services that other “decent” societies around the world manage to find rooms in their budgets for. Come spend a shift with me in the emergency room and you will learn the degree of your ignorance.

By Scooter

January 19, 2006 08:14 AM | Link to this

I apologize. The letter was to Zarqawi, not UBL.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 08:23 AM | Link to this

AntiR: I was not asking about your lunatic moonbat theories, I was asking when did Giap say anything about money? You can’t answer that because he didn’t. He played on your weakness, which is all too obvious and exploitable.

This war has nothing to do with money and everything to do with our survival. Why you even say things like that shows a definite madness, a lack of the basic ability to distinquish what is important and what is not. This is why democrats can never again be allowed to lead this country.

Scooter: I think Zarqawi and the pinkos want the same thing.

By Scooter

January 19, 2006 08:25 AM | Link to this

Anti, no I’m not living in a dream world. Another secret for you Anti, I will die, you will die, all living organisms will die. Birth is the beginning of death. The cells can only regenerate so many times. Nobody lives forever no matter how much stolen money gubment throws at it, sorry.

By Mrs. Godzilla

January 19, 2006 08:29 AM | Link to this

Mike, our “MiMi” can’t get her walker through the hoop!

By gttim

January 19, 2006 08:42 AM | Link to this

End the prescription drug entitlement before it strangles the opportunities from my childrens future.

The Reagan, Bush and Bush deficits have already done that. Your kids were born with a $70,000+ birth tax thanks to them!

The scandal that was supposed to throw out the Republican Congress has suddenly turned decidedly bipartisan.

Andy, you are lying again, not a good thing for a wingnut who supposedly is from the family values party. Not a single Democrat received a contribution from Abramoff, which is easily verified on campaign contribution websites. This is Republican corruption, nothing more. A few Indian casinos donated money to Democrats, but in much samller amounts than before they became entangle with Abramoff and Ralph Reed. Of course as Abramoff and Reed were extorting lots of money from the tribes, so they probably did not have as much money to donate. Andy you lie, but hey, you are a Republican so you have to. You cannot use facts.

By AntiRadical

January 19, 2006 08:43 AM | Link to this

Yeah, Scooter. You don’t owe anything at all to the generations that came before you and kept this great society you claim to love going before you got here. It’s all about you and the few cents extra you “save” on your pitifully small to begin with tax deductions. I don’t guess you were “stealing” when you were supported with roads, schools, buses, health research, community hospitals, college scholarships/loans, etc., etc., etc. from the tax base, though, were you??? Only those who are old and need medication are the “stealers”.

Yeh Andy, money doesn’t make the world go round, does it??? I was there bud. Most people during ‘Nam were concerned with the COST of the war in terms of LIFE and most importantly, MONEY. You can try to rewrite history to imagine otherwise but you are deluding yourself, as usual.

By Scooter

January 19, 2006 08:50 AM | Link to this

Also Anti, you may want to think I am ignorant of emergency rooms, but I have spent my fair share of time in Atl’s Grady Hospital. It is truly amazing how people act when they know something will be paid for by someone else. I have seen people yelling and screaming, while clogging up the emergency room, because their eyebrows hurt. Oh if it’s “free� give me two of them, you know.

Government doesn’t have to be given that much power; there are private charities and churches who can do a much better job. By giving the gubment power to steal more money from the citizens, you are simply constricting the opportunities that will allow more young Americans to become wealthy and start their own private charity.

For you to quote the status of European nations you must not know of the economic hardships they are encountering. Remember the financial problems California had? How about you dems let this nation stay a republic so you can only bankrupt one state at a time?

By Andy

January 19, 2006 08:51 AM | Link to this

gttim: Yep, the Justice Department is investigating Reid and Dorgan just because they want to get to know them better, they are enthralled with their pinko geatness and hope some rubs off.

AntiR: So we should have war and national policies written that say we will protect our citizens up to the point of when it becomes too great of a financial burden, right? Is this an article of the Constitution that is awaiting discovery by the pinko Supreme Court?

By AntiRadical

January 19, 2006 09:12 AM | Link to this

No Andy, I’m not campaigning for any written laws/policies. The laws of human nature will trump them every time. People have always voted their pocketbooks and I suspect that they always will. If the Supreme court is “pinko” it would be good to remember that it was mostly appointed by REPUBLICANS. You poor thing, your getting as addle-brained as the President and have forgotten where your grand old party’s appointments have been made. (by the way Scooter, I’m not Dem- I vote for the man, not the party and if you think I voted for Kerry, you’re wrong. I, also, don’t throw my vote away on third party candidates). Certainly the government spends much pork that it shouldn’t but it is, also, true that it doesn’t spend money that it should (health care and education). By the way, most of my patients haven’t made themselves sick just so they can get “free” care. The ridiculousness and lack of common sense presented by NeoCons never ceases to amaze me.

By getalife

January 19, 2006 09:13 AM | Link to this

“When a prescription drug bill puts pharmaceutical companies first, senior citizens pay the price for their prescription drugs,” Pelosi said. “When an energy bill gives tax breaks to oil companies already making historic and obscene profits, Americans pay the price at the pump and with record bills for their home heating oil.”

Well of course, the coc has their hands in the cookie jar. Poor seniors do not stand a chance, but they do vote!

By Calvin Harris

January 19, 2006 09:17 AM | Link to this

First of all - your editorial cartoons are great!

Second, I have an idea that may be of interest. The republican electorate seem to be deaf, “dumb”, and blind to all of the crap generated by this insane administration. So, I can picture a bunch of republicans standing around like six year olds with their fingers in their ears going, “nyah, nyah, nyah I can’t hear you.” While an adult media is standing over them reading a litany of “Jeff Gannon, No WMD, Missing 8 Billion, Torture, Downing Street Memo, Katrina, Valerie Plamegate, Warrantless Wiretaps…..”.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 09:19 AM | Link to this

AntiR: The only people I’ve ever heard saying that we will fight this war until we run out of money and then we will let the terrorist savages slaughter us in our homes is you, goofball. You have formed and implemented your very own national policy, completely independent of any formal US legislation, what will you call your new country?

By getalife

January 19, 2006 09:24 AM | Link to this

Some lawmakers said they thought Congress was overreacting to the lobbying scandal with an excess of new rules and requirements

Well of course, some members of the coc still want business as usual in Washington.

Criminals!

By Ricky

January 19, 2006 09:24 AM | Link to this

After doing some research on the lobbying reform bills that the two parties are trying to beat each other to the press with, there might some good coming out of it. I think one of the good provisions is the “no dead of night” earmarks onto spending bills. That kind of pork has gotten completely out of control and needs to be stopped. So maybe some good will come of this after all.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 09:25 AM | Link to this

WASHINGTON, Jan. 18 - After the longest independent counsel investigation in history, the prosecutor in the case of former Housing Secretary Henry G. Cisneros is finally closing his operation with a scathing report accusing Clinton administration officials of thwarting an inquiry into whether Mr. Cisneros evaded paying income taxes.

His report says Justice Department officials refused to grant him the broad jurisdiction he wanted; for example, Attorney General Janet Reno said he could look at only one tax year. And after Internal Revenue Service officials in Washington took a Cisneros investigation out of the hands of district-level officials in Texas, the agency deemed the evidence too weak to merit a criminal inquiry, a conclusion strongly disputed by one Texas investigator.

This is the COH, or culture of honesty as the pinkos will tell you.

By Scooter

January 19, 2006 09:27 AM | Link to this

Calvin, you forgot the mad cow, the New York Blackout, Enron, Halliburton, trying to kill SS, etc… Sorry, it has been three years of nothing but criticisms and I have lost track. But I do know the ideas that have been presented by the super intelligent eleitist liberals, income redistribution in the style of Europe. They are so smart.

By Scooter

January 19, 2006 09:29 AM | Link to this

Dang Andy, just when they thought we could forget about the Barret Report.

By AntiRadical

January 19, 2006 09:33 AM | Link to this

Poor Andy, now that you’re unable to reason, you’re get mad and insulting. As usual, you try to put words in my mouth that haven’t been said but that is your only method, isn’t it? I didn’t say we would fight Iraq until we were completely broke; instead, I implied that we would stop the effort when the cost is more than we are willing to pay. You obviously feel differently; in time we will see where common sense leads us. By the way since you brought it up, how many American citizens were “slaughtered in their own homes” by the North Vietnamese “terrorist savages” after we abandoned the losing effort in ‘Nam?

By Ricky

January 19, 2006 09:36 AM | Link to this

AntiRadical, are you really comparing the North Vietnamese to Al Qaede? That comparison is nonsensical. The N Vietnemese stated goal was to unify their country under communist rule, not to destroy America like Al Qaeda has declared. And for the record we were winning the war militarily in Vietnam. We lost the war at home in the court of public opinion. If Lyndon Johnson had waged total war and bombed N Vietnam and their supply trials into Cambodia and Laos the war would have turned out much different.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 09:37 AM | Link to this

Everybody and their uncle knows that the EU and the United Nations has taken the lead on the Iranian nuclear negotiations except for Hillary Clinton, Bill’s “wife.” Who do you think she’s blaming for that failure, now that it’s obvious the UN can’t handle it? One guess?

U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton faulted the Bush administration for “downplaying” the threat.

It’s the absolute only thing the democrats know how to do and they do a d-amn good job of it.

By getalife

January 19, 2006 09:37 AM | Link to this

Scooter,

I think the Barret report is good news. It says we can go back and look at the Bush administration after they are out of office. I hope we spend the time and money on the Barret and Star reports on the Bush admin.

By Scooter

January 19, 2006 09:44 AM | Link to this

Getalife, I do too. I also hope the Bush Administration won’t obstruct as much as the great and wonderful Clinton administration did, then maybe it won’t drag out and cost so much.

By Eric

January 19, 2006 09:44 AM | Link to this

On the contrary Mike, I think the repugnicans got exactly what they wanted. It they’d had even a clue that their drug benefit plan would help anyone other than the pharmaceutical companies it never would have passed. I’m sure they’re thrilled that the poor and aged are unable to jump through all those hoops. It’s just another attempt on their part to starve the beast.

By Scooter

January 19, 2006 09:46 AM | Link to this

Eric, government is a beast isn’t it?

By Andy's

January 19, 2006 09:46 AM | Link to this

AntiR:

By the way since you brought it up, how many American citizens were “slaughtered in their own homes� by the North Vietnamese “terrorist savages� after we abandoned the losing effort in ‘Nam?

None, they were too busy killing 3 million Southeast Asians. Would you like to find out how many more than 3000 the terrorists can get in a single day?

I implied that we would stop the effort when the cost is more than we are willing to pay.

I understand what you “implied” that’s why I “implied” that you were a lunatic moonbat, a sentiment I feel even stronger about. You’ve formed your own country. This one, the United States of America, will defend itself to our last drop of blood, I can promise you that. As long as we ignore your pinko hysteria we will never have to find out for sure.

By getalife

January 19, 2006 09:48 AM | Link to this

Scooter,

They will say the reports are unamerican, sending the wrong message then smear the reputations of the people doing the reports.

By Liberal Texas Democrat

January 19, 2006 09:50 AM | Link to this

“hysterical American pinkos had no balls” You know Andy when I was humping the highlands in “the Nam” I used to say to myself I think we could win this thing tomorrow and go back to the world if only Bill Bennett, Frank Gaffney, Newt Gingrich, David Limbaugh, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Reagan, Gary Bauer, Richard “Dick” Cheney, George W. Bush, Saxby Chambliss, Tom Delay, J Danforth Quayle, Trent Lott, Joe Scarborough, or Neel Boortz were here by my side. Didn’t want that Bill Clinton around, though, he’s got no balls. But this was a blog about a cartoon spoofing the results of privatization of Medicare and Medicaid, wasn’t it. So I’ll ignore it for the rest of today as strawman distractions from the issue at hand are just too tedious for words.

By AntiRadical

January 19, 2006 09:51 AM | Link to this

Ricky: You need to read back further. This comparsion was initiated by Andy (see 7:07 post). I would still have to disagree with you about the outcome of ‘Nam, though. The French got their tales kicked before we did, you know. I don’t really know what more we could have done in ‘Nam short of total and complete annihilation of the entire population. Everytime we set up a new puppet government there it proved to be more corrupt than the one before it. Actually, the NV didn’t start out with socialists leanings. Ho Chi Mihn was one of our greatest allies in WW2, you know. After the big one, the allies double-crossed Ho in siding with French imperialist claims to its’ “colony”. It was only then that Ho turned to communist China for support.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 09:59 AM | Link to this

Liberal Texas Democrat: So you “humped all over the Highlands” so that Conservatives back home would just shut up and enslave themselves to every stupid pinko idea?

By Kev

January 19, 2006 10:00 AM | Link to this

Feel free to lob the usual cheapshots but I have a solution. Socialize medicine. Doctors make too much money now off the suffering of the sick. If they were truly in it to help their fellow man they wouldn’t be motivated by greed and deny treatment to those without insurance. It’s a sad state of affairs that the once noble Hypocratic oath has beome the Hypocritic oath.

By Ricky

January 19, 2006 10:03 AM | Link to this

Anti, I agree with you about Minh. As the story goes, he tried to get a meeting with Truman during the peace negotiaions after WW II. Truman blew him off and the rest is history. I disagree with you on the outcome though, because for years LBJ wouldn’t bomb the NV in the north or their supply routes giving them freedom of movement leading to the Tet Offensive, which was a failure for the NVA but broke the back of a lot of public support back here. I am not saying we could have made NV noncommunist but we could have kept the South free. Not to mention the mass killings that took place in Cambodia and Laos after we left.

By AntiRadical

January 19, 2006 10:03 AM | Link to this

Andy: You give away American flags and I’ll give away hundred dollar bills. Then we will really see which is most important to most people (care to place a really, really big wager on which line will be longer?)

By Andy

January 19, 2006 10:03 AM | Link to this

In Vietnam, we killed 1.4 million NVA, Viet Cong and NLF forces, lost no major battles at a cost of 58,000 American lives. To show strength to our brave armed forces and to the world, we selfishly withdrew from the conflict and abandoned our ally at the point that we had it won. The Communists negotiated our surrender. Twist it any way you want, these are the facts.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 10:05 AM | Link to this

AntiR: You give away death or enslavement at the hands of the enemy and I’ll give away American flags. Then we will really see which is most important to most people (care to place a really, really big wager on which line will be longer?)

By Ricky

January 19, 2006 10:06 AM | Link to this

Kev, you want our medical system to look like Canada’s or most of Europes? Where people have to wait for months for routine surgeries. Why do you think America is near the top in medical discovery? Because of the competition of the free market. Socializing medicine will lead to a marked decrease in the quality of the care you and I receive.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 10:09 AM | Link to this

Kev: That’s a real good idea if you want to get euthanized over a hang nail. Your encouraging pinkos to kill hospital patients to lighten their load and save some of the almighty money that has AntiR so hysterical this morning, they might just get you someday. Then you won’t need health care.

By finch

January 19, 2006 10:11 AM | Link to this

For the record: My description of older Americans as “cranky, clumsy, myopic, stubborn, old-and-in-the-way golden agers” was meant to be ironic. As I’ll be eligible for SS in a few years, I’m in that boat too.

Seriously, the Medicare perscription plan is just more government fat for the for-profit health care industry. Leave it to the neocons in Bush&Co to squeeze every dollar from those who can least afford it.

I see the resident neocon loony is at it again here. 3 million asians dead because of the US withdrawl from Vietnam? Well, most of those deaths (if indeed there were 3 million) occured outside Vietnam. Does Pol Pot and Cambodia ring a bell? The US wasn’t in Cambodia. Just the facts, guy.

And the “unified Muslim threat” is just as much a neocon paranoid fantasy as the unified Commie threat was. Communism didn’t fall because of the US or Reagan. It fell apart, and is still falling apart from within, because its being eaten away by the glorious cancer of free enterprise. The fact that “unified” Communism was divided by language, culture, religion, race, etc. just helped.

The same thing will happen to the “dream” of a unified Islam world empire. Poof! Gone. Just wait.

By Midori

January 19, 2006 10:13 AM | Link to this

It is said only in hushed tones and not by anybody of prominence, but a few brave souls in the Bush administration admit it. President Bush’s Medicare drug benefit that went into effect Jan. 1 looks like a political blunder of far-reaching consequences. Furthermore, these critics assign major responsibility to Karl Rove.

This program looks less like a bump in the road than a major pothole on Rove’s highway to permanent majority status for the Republican Party. As Bush’s principal political adviser, Rove has a brilliant strategic mind and can take credit for crafting the 2000 and 2004 presidential election victories. The drug plan was an audacious effort to co-opt the votes of seniors, reflecting Rove’s grand design of building on the electoral majority by adding constituency groups. By failing to win new supporters while alienating old ones, the drug plan betrays a flaw in Rove’s strategic overview and points to potentially disastrous consequences.

What’s got into Novakula?

By AntiRadical

January 19, 2006 10:17 AM | Link to this

Ricky: I appreciate your comments. Problem in ‘Nam was similar to that in Iraq. The opposition was not a truely organized army but a bonded collection of guerilla units. There was never any concentration of enemy resources for us to bomb. Mass slaughter in the “killing fields” of Cambodia (now Laos) was, of course, the work of Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge not NV. Disseminated nature of the enemy forces made victory by conventional warfare unachievable. I think this scenario is in some respects being repeated in Iraq, today.

By Ricky

January 19, 2006 10:20 AM | Link to this

finch, again your statements are laced with falsehoods. You are right in saying that most of the Asians that died after we withdrew were from Cambodia(hence the movie The Killing Fields). There was widespread murder after the communists took over South Vietnam. And Pol Pot was able to take control only after we left. And don’t you remember the uproar after it was revealed that we were fighting in Cambodia and Laos? It is laughable to say there was no threat from communism. It is probably easy for you to say that now that the threat is gone. And the term neocon wasn’t even really used back in the 1980’s. That is a new term coined by the left to talk about people they disagree with. To say that Communism didn’t suffer from Reagans policy is a joke. He bankrupted their ecomony and drove them to destruction. I know you don’t want to admit a Republican could do something good, but you can’t deny the facts. You really should do some reading on current international relations because you seem sadly misinformed. As for the medicare, I didn’t really agree with the plan to start with. It seems like too much gov’t involvement for me. And sense you seem to know so much about the neocons you like to deride, what is their social policy? It would probably surprise you that they like to put more money into improving social infrastructure and the poor than most standard Republicans. They are considered more socially liberal. But again I don’t expect you to know this since I doubt you have done any research into what a neocon really si

By Midori

January 19, 2006 10:22 AM | Link to this

*By RW-(the original)

January 18, 2006 10:57 PM | Link to this

ml is getting mighty close to violating the International Olympic Committee rules here.

Oh well, so much for ml’s scribbling Ted “the Swimmer� Kennedy may have had some other swimmers working for him.*

RW — Your cheap shots get cheaper and cheaper.

I remember the Enquirer being sent anthrax —right after they ran a picture of one of the Bush girls on the floor drunk out of her mind with her legs wide open.

By AntiRadical

January 19, 2006 10:22 AM | Link to this

Andy: I know your brain wanders a lot and it’s very hard for you to stay on topic but we were talking about patriotism vs economics, not patriotism vs terrorism.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 10:22 AM | Link to this

Well, good morning, hydrogen filled artillery balloon man. Communism didn’t fall because of the US or Reagan

Reagan forcefully confronted the Soviet Union, marking a sharp departure from the détente observed by his predecessors Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, and Jimmy Carter. Under the assumption that the Soviet Union could not then outspend the US government in a renewed arms race, he strove to make the Cold War economically and rhetorically hot. The administration oversaw a massive military build-up that represented a policy called “peace through strength.” The Reagan administration set a new policy toward the Soviet Union with the goal to win the Cold War through a three-pronged strategy outlined in NSDD-32 (National Security Decisions Directive). The directive outlined Reagan’s plan to confront the Soviet Union on three fronts: economic - decrease Soviet access to high technology and diminish their resources, including depressing the value of Soviet commodities on the world market; military - increase American defense expenditures to strengthen the U.S. negotiating position and force the Soviets to devote more of their economic resources to defense; and clandestine - support anti-Soviet factions around the world from Afghani insurgents to Poland’s Solidarity movement. He proposed the Strategic Defense Initiative, dubbed “Star Wars”, a space-based missile shield, widely viewed outside the US as an offensive weapon. In October 1986, Reagan met with Mikhail Gorbachev in Iceland where Gorbachev ardently opposed this defensive/offensive shield. By 1991, the Soviet Union was officially dissolved. Margaret Thatcher said, “Ronald Reagan won the Cold War without firing a shot.”

By getalife

January 19, 2006 10:24 AM | Link to this

I doubt the coc will get the senior vote after this fiasco.

OBL has a new audio tape out saying they are still planning attacks on the US. Lets hope the NSA found his new phone number since dubya said he changed phones due to the leak.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 10:26 AM | Link to this

AntiR: I am disputing your mentally unstable assumption of “patriotism vs economics” by saying that most Americans, correct me if I’m wrong y’all, prefer to have life more than money. Keep banging your head on the wall, kook, it makes a big difference.

By Ricky

January 19, 2006 10:30 AM | Link to this

AntiRadical, you are wrong about concentrated enemy forces. We were fighting two main forces in Vietnam. You had the North Vietnemese Regular Army and the Viet Cong Guerilla Army. The NVA had regular Army bases and supply depots just like we do. We could have bomb those to smitherins. I never said that the NV was responsible for killing all those people under Pol Pot. However, the US leaving enable him to take control of that country and move it back to the stone age through his killing of the majority of the educated and professional workers there

By Andy

January 19, 2006 10:38 AM | Link to this

Ricky is absolutely right. The United States, had it been on the ground in the South or an ally of a victorious South Vietnam, would have never allowed the genocide in Cambodia to take place. As it turns out, the democrats in Congress allowed it to happen by legislating our withdrawl from the war and the region.

By Daniel

January 19, 2006 10:41 AM | Link to this

That war is over. We can’t win the one we’re in.

By Ricky

January 19, 2006 10:42 AM | Link to this

Daniel, we are winning the one we are in.

By AntiRadical

January 19, 2006 10:42 AM | Link to this

Andy: Clean out you ears, guy. We were talking, once again, about patriotism vs economics, not longevity vs economics or patriotism vs terrorism. You implied that Americans were so patriotic they would support war irregardless of cost. I said you were full of hot blueberry muffins. Once more, “You give away American flags and I’ll give away hundred dollar bills. Then we will really see which is the most important to most people.”

By Ricky

January 19, 2006 10:44 AM | Link to this

AntiRadical, that is not a good comparison. To test patriotism, how about you let Andy give away rifles to defend our country with and you give away $100 bills. That would be interesting. On the west coast and in the northeast you would probably win, but I think Andy takes most of the rest of the US

By Daniel

January 19, 2006 10:45 AM | Link to this

Ricky: The government is still incompetent. What is the plan? “Mission Accomplished” proved false. “The insurgency in its last throes” was wrong. What is the measure of victory?

By Andy

January 19, 2006 10:47 AM | Link to this

AntiR: You implied that Americans were so patriotic they would support war irregardless of cost. And nothing has changed. This is exactly why we are in charge and your not. You kook liberals would probably put a environmental impact study, not to mention financial considerations, above the national security of the United States. You’re too goofy to even realize what you are arguing for.

By Ricky

January 19, 2006 10:48 AM | Link to this

Daniel, these questions get asked everyday. “Mission Accomplished” was correct in that Saddam was removed from power. Cheney was wrong about the insurgency. The measure of victory is easy. The Iraqis have a big enough security force to defend themselves and they have a freely elected government. We are well on our way to both. The ISF measure 225,000 right now and the Iraqi’s have already had three elections. Will it be easy? No. Have we made mistakes? Yes. But we are winning and we will prevail.

By AntiRadical

January 19, 2006 10:50 AM | Link to this

Andy: The Democrats are the people who really escalated the Vietnam war. Eisenhower and Kennedy only deployed advisors. ‘Nam was LBJs war of convenience. President Nixon if you will remember ran on a platform of stopping the war in ‘Nam (both campaigns in fact). Nixon’s Secreatry of State (Kissinger) is the one who negotitated the “peace”, not the Democrats in Congress. You really should learn a little something about history prior to embarrasing yourself so much.

By Daniel

January 19, 2006 10:51 AM | Link to this

Why does Bush dishonestly attack the service records of people who disagree with him? He did it to McCain, Kerry and now Murtha. Is this the christian way? Lie about others? The lie is vintage Bush. Perhaps, this is why 40 Iraq war vets are running as democrats this time around. .

By Ricky

January 19, 2006 10:52 AM | Link to this

AntiRadical, just so we get both sides of the story on this blog. The Dems in Congress voted to cut off funding the war in Vietnam under Nixon. He really didn’t have much of a choice. Nixon ran on a platform of turning the war over to the S. Vietnemese, not stopping it.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 10:52 AM | Link to this

Daniel: We have entered the “don’t get your panties in a wad” phase of the Iraqi conflict. The insurgency is winding down due in large part to the Iraqi citizens starting to kill Al Qaeda on their own. They are forming a government of their choice, not one that we have told them to. Our biggest challenge as a country is to control the hysterical silly freaked out pinkos within our own borders. I see victory by the end of the year.

By getalife

January 19, 2006 10:54 AM | Link to this

Yes, they should be voted in because they are not corrupt yet.

By Daniel

January 19, 2006 10:54 AM | Link to this

I wish I could agree with you. We will have to wait and see. What about my question above. Why does Bush lie about vets? Why is he attacking Murtha’s service? How do you feel about this?

By Ricky

January 19, 2006 10:55 AM | Link to this

Daniel, I see who avoided responding to my post answering your questions. Facts suck don’t they. And does it really suprise you that there are Iraqi Veterans running as Dems? Obviously if they really enjoyed being in the service and supported the war, they would have stayed in the service. You can’t really draw too many conclusions from that. And the first Iraqi veteran to run as a Dem lost.

By AntiRadical

January 19, 2006 11:00 AM | Link to this

Ricky: Andy and I had been discussing patriotism vs economics, not defense vs patriotism, etc. Are you guys really that unable to stay on topic or is it that you have to change the topic when you are stymied? Do you not possess the common sense to know that most of the public cares more about their everyday economic prosperity than they do about patriotism? If so, you are much more out of touch with reality than even I ever imagined.

By Daniel

January 19, 2006 11:00 AM | Link to this

The question asks why Bush lies about vets service?

By blogger

January 19, 2006 11:01 AM | Link to this

Andy is an idiot.

By Andy

December 26, 2005 04:27 PM | Link to this

blogger: What branch of government does the Attorney General belong to?

By blogger

December 26, 2005 04:32 PM | Link to this

Andy, why don’t you do some research for once if you don’t know?

By Andy

December 26, 2005 04:37 PM | Link to this

The Judiciary. Bush had the Attorney General review his actions. Bill Clinton had Jamie Gorelick, his deputy Attorney General review his wiretapping surveillance. Why do you say that it hasn’t been reviewed for legality by the Judicial Branch if it has been? Are you just going with the impeach Bush line, like some silly sap?

By blogger

December 26, 2005 04:49 PM | Link to this

Andy, gee, I always thought that the Attorney General is a member of the President’s cabinet who serves at the pleasure of the President, and is a member of the Executive Branch of government? Did you just say that the Attorney General is a member of the Judicial Branch of government???????

By Andy

December 26, 2005 05:00 PM | Link to this

It figures, I’m dealing with a lightweight, a hysterical one at that.

The Attorney General compromises the Justice Department, specifically- the Attorney General was to be “learned in the law� with the duty “to prosecute and conduct all suits in the Supreme Court in which the United States shall be concerned, and to give his advice and opinion upon questions of law when required by the President of the United States in other words a member of the Judiciary.

It should have been easy for you when I tipped Bill Clinton’s use of Jamie Gorelick to review the legality of his surveillance activities. You must not be capable of complex reasoning. Do you get all your ideas from Michael Moore? Why am I discussing this with you and not him? Wouldn’t it save time?

By blogger

December 26, 2005 05:10 PM | Link to this

Andy, I can’t believe how completely stupid you are. Take a few minutes to familiarize yourself with the organizational chart of our federal government. You’ll see that under “Executive Branch� is the “Department of Justice,� which the Attorney General heads. Also, if you would happen to read a little further into your own link you would see that the Department of Justice is “an executive department of the government of the United States� with the Attorney General as its head, or in other words, the Executive Branch. You’re a moron, Andy. You are utterly stupid, and a complete waste of time.

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 11:02 AM | Link to this

Daniel,

How about backing up your idiotic claim before demanding an answer?

Here is a story about Murtha’s medals I don’t see the President’s name anywhere.

By Midori

January 19, 2006 11:10 AM | Link to this

It’s more “idiotic” to pretend to believe that those slurs and slime and filth didn’t come from the White House.

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 11:16 AM | Link to this

Midori,

Your paranoia is showing again. This is quite the dichotomy you’ve built for the White House. Would you call it bumbling Machiavellians?

Release the full Barrett report!!!

Come on Dems, didn’t you say just yesterday you were for open and honest Government?

By AntiRadical

January 19, 2006 11:17 AM | Link to this

Ricky: To be even more complete, the Rep Congressmen, also, voted to cut off funding for ‘Nam. Voters were getting ready to string ‘em up, remember? To make the claim that Reps supported ‘Nam and that the Dems were the quitters flies in the face of recorded history. Nixon campaigned to “turn ‘Nam over” (if it makes you feel better) and did exactly that. Current Republican historical revisionism must have Ronald Reagan spinning in his grave. To paraphrase the gipper ‘the Reps have a lot of really smart things to say, too bad most of it isn’t true.’

By finch

January 19, 2006 11:21 AM | Link to this

Cherry-pick Wikipedia quotes all you want. Communism was never a monolith. Oh, Stalin, Krushchev, Mao and the other rabble rousers of the mid-20th Century did a great job of bamboozling the West with that “We Will Bury You” song and dance (much to the delight of the $$ hungry military-industrial complex), but it was rotten from within. To the core. For economic, political and cultural reasons. I’ll give Reagan credit for hastening it’s demise, but it’s demise was inevitable.

So was the fall of South Vietnam. That was an internal civil war in which we propped up a corrupt oligopoly transparently disguised as a pro-Western democracy. It couldn’t, and didn’t, survive when the US left because it had no political home base. Note how many former South Vietnamese leaders ended up in the US running liquor stores, restaurants, and sporting goods chains. They just wanted money, which is just as good, if not better in California than it is in Saigon. Greedy, duplicitous SOBs. Note how many “South” Vietnamese joined the Viet Cong! Talk about (lack of) loyalty! And even as I write this, free market forces are winning in Vietnam, just as they’re winning in China, just as they won in Moscow, Warsaw, Prague, Berlin, etc. Check out the shrimp at Krogers or the clothes at Wal-Mart. Country of origin? Vietnam.

Osama and his small band of zealots face the same fate. Their religious fanaticism will fail as it’s riddled with internal dissent based on differences in culture, language, etc., just like Communism failed (See: Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union). It will also fail (just as Communism failed) as it is unable to stop the relentless advance of liberty and prosperity brought on by a free market. You can’t stop the tide.

I’m not dismissing Osama&Co. as a threat. They’re a small, crazy bunch of nuts who MUST be watched… but they are NOT the leaders of a massive organized movement with any real chance of toppling civilization.

Somtimes I think all the fear mongers who are hysterically warning of this huge surge of zillions of muslim fanatics must own stock in Lockheed, Boeing, Halliburton or Northrup-Grumman. They just want the bucks that wild defense spending, funded by crippling deficits will leave them.

Other times, I think they’re just paranoid. No, stupid and paranoid. That’s it. Either way, you don’t need computerized, hypersonic sledge-hammers to kill fleas.

But I digress. Mike’s cartoon is still great. Bush&Co’s “modernization” of Medicare is just another gravy train for the health care industry, at the expense of millions of Americans who can least afford it. The coc lives.

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 11:23 AM | Link to this

What’s with the sudden love of nukes among the lefties? First “sicko…” and now Chirac.

By getalife

January 19, 2006 11:26 AM | Link to this

There is no shame in this solution, which prevents the wasting of billions of dollars that have gone to those with influence and merchants of war in America.”

By Eatme

January 19, 2006 11:31 AM | Link to this

It’s almost fun watching Republicans flush America down the toilet while the sleeping dragon slowly wakens. America is dead. Long live China.

By chester

January 19, 2006 11:31 AM | Link to this

The Republican spin that this is a bi-partisan outrage won’t wash. Abramoff was a bigshot in the College Republicans 20 yrs ago where me forged his friendship with Ralph Reed and Grover Norquist … every dime given personally by “Dishonest Abe” and his wife went to GOP candidates … and he was a Bush Pioneer. This is a Republican scandal not because they are inherently less honest, but because THEY CONTROL WASHINGTON. they control the White House, the House and the SEnate … they started the K Street Project to ensure that the lobbyists paid tribute to THEM. They want the power but not the accountability. Voters can’t force them to take responsibility for their actions, but they CAN remove them from power.

By Jay not jay

January 19, 2006 11:32 AM | Link to this

Osama (if it is even him) sure knows how to use the media to his advantage, huh?
Sounds familiar.

By Midori

January 19, 2006 11:32 AM | Link to this

RW - I went to your blog last night, and am still laughing my a* off.

No wonder you’re so deluded and misinformed!!!!

You blooming MORON!!!!!

OH NO!!!!! THEY CHEATED!!!!! STRING THIER BUTTS UP!!!!!

By Midori

January 19, 2006 11:37 AM | Link to this

H

By Trent Lott

January 19, 2006 11:39 AM | Link to this

Poor Trent:

“Now we’re going to say you can’t have a meal for more than 20 bucks,” said Senator Trent Lott, Republican of Mississippi. “Where are you going, to McDonald’s?” -in response to question about potential ethics/lobbying reform

Shouldn’t he just pay for his own meals?

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 11:39 AM | Link to this

Midori,

It was hard to see if in the midst of your incessant profanity and name calling, whether you agree that he full Barrett report should be released. You are for open and honest Government, aren’t you?

By Midori

January 19, 2006 11:40 AM | Link to this

RW — Haven’t you guys sniffed in Clinton’s crotch enough?

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 11:42 AM | Link to this

Ah, I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning….smells like victory!!!!

By Jay not jay

January 19, 2006 11:45 AM | Link to this

Why do the Dems have such a problem with raising questions about Democrat ethics if they are so clean? Cleaning up corruption is not about Repub/Dem.

By Midori

January 19, 2006 11:45 AM | Link to this

Screw you.

I asked you nicely about not calling names, and you refused.

So I play the game, and now you have the nerve to point fingers at me????

Hah!!!!

so far as the Barrett report, I’m all for releasing it in it’s entireity. what the hell. go for it. I really, really don’t care.

As I’ve said, you guys need to get your noses out of Clinton’s crotch.

However, let the chips fall where they may!!

Nobody is interested in further prosecution of Henry Cisneros, an exceptional public figure who might well have become the first Hispanic-American governor of Texas and perhaps even president of the United States. Rather, an unredacted Barrett report is an opportunity to observe how the Internal Revenue Service decides when to prosecute, a place where Congress until now has feared to venture.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 11:46 AM | Link to this

RW: Guess what I learned today. When fighting the war on terror if we feel that we are spending too much money we will surrender and allow the terrorists to swarm over the borders and slaughter us. Empty the White House out and give it to Zarqawi. I think we’re supposed to save just enough money to build concentration camps for ourselves. I’m hashing this new pinko idea out, I’ll keep you abreast.

By Midori

January 19, 2006 11:47 AM | Link to this

It’s in Congress’ hands now.

As I’ve said, let the chips fall where they may.

Release the whole damn thing.

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 11:49 AM | Link to this

Touchy,touchy….

Cisneros was pardoned, I wonder who got payed for that? but I digress, the Clinton in question is Hillary not Bill.

Somehow I don’t think a sitting Senator, that compares her peers to slaves on a plantation, is someone we should just “get over”.

By buff

January 19, 2006 11:49 AM | Link to this

If you are preparing to eat, my apologies. This pix of Teddy K is disgusting

http://boortz.com/nuze/index.html

By getalife

January 19, 2006 11:50 AM | Link to this

Yes, then do a Fitzgerald report on the coc.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 11:51 AM | Link to this

finch: You know as weird, odd and incorrect as you might be, I have to give you credit for having more balls than my little f* stalker blogger who only has one thing in life going for him right now; Me. I’m proud I can contribute to his pitiful little existence and give him something to live for. I just hope he doesn’t hurt himself masturbating over me like he does, keeping track of my every move. I don’t want to get sued.

Reagan forcefully confronted the Soviet Union, marking a sharp departure from the détente observed by his predecessors Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, and Jimmy Carter. Under the assumption that the Soviet Union could not then outspend the US government in a renewed arms race, he strove to make the Cold War economically and rhetorically hot. The administration oversaw a massive military build-up that represented a policy called “peace through strength.” The Reagan administration set a new policy toward the Soviet Union with the goal to win the Cold War through a three-pronged strategy outlined in NSDD-32 (National Security Decisions Directive). The directive outlined Reagan’s plan to confront the Soviet Union on three fronts: economic - decrease Soviet access to high technology and diminish their resources, including depressing the value of Soviet commodities on the world market; military - increase American defense expenditures to strengthen the U.S. negotiating position and force the Soviets to devote more of their economic resources to defense; and clandestine - support anti-Soviet factions around the world from Afghani insurgents to Poland’s Solidarity movement. He proposed the Strategic Defense Initiative, dubbed “Star Wars”, a space-based missile shield, widely viewed outside the US as an offensive weapon. In October 1986, Reagan met with Mikhail Gorbachev in Iceland where Gorbachev ardently opposed this defensive/offensive shield. By 1991, the Soviet Union was officially dissolved. Margaret Thatcher said, “Ronald Reagan won the Cold War without firing a shot.”

What don’t you understand?

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 11:52 AM | Link to this

Andy,

I was trying to follow that crazed moonbat theory, I guess they want to take OBL up on his latest offer to save a few bucks. Maybe we can get free hotel rooms for the grandchildren of Katrina victims with the savings.

By Midori

January 19, 2006 11:54 AM | Link to this

I’m not touchy at all.

There you go again.

You come at me like, “A HA”. I go along.

You look like a fool, and try to put the onus on me.

Must be a right wing thang, huh?

I REPEAT: Go for it.

As for the “plantation” remark, you need to get over that, too. Like you did when so many conservatives used the term to describe the democratic controlled congress.

your hypocrisy and ignorance sickens me.

By Midori

January 19, 2006 11:58 AM | Link to this

Maybe we can get free hotel rooms for the grandchildren of Katrina victims with the savings.

Like those people were sitting around hoping for their lives to be disrupted and all of their belongings lost just so they could get “free” hotel rooms.

You sicken me.

I’ve bitten my tongue too many times when i saw remarks like that, but no more.

Scum.

I pray to God that you aren’t affected by a monumental tragedy and will need assistance.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 11:59 AM | Link to this

finch: Wow, defeating the Soviet Union was a Reagan National Policy Directive. Go figure. Conservatives actually do the things they say they are going to do, not like all of the democratic backstabbing abandonment all through history, like you pinkos want to do in Iraq.

Reagan’s plan to defeat communism

By GWB

January 19, 2006 12:03 PM | Link to this

“So I don’t know where he is. You know, I just don’t spend that much time on him. Again, I don’t know where he is. I’ll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him.�. Bush on bin laden.

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 12:04 PM | Link to this

Midori,

How many years of a free ride do you think people should get? Maybe if people learned self reliance instead of cradle to grave Government dependence they would be much better off right now.

While you sit around and feel compassionate with other peoples money, all you are doing is robbing people of the greatness that is within them.

The soft bigotry of low expectations is more than a slogan.

By blogger

January 19, 2006 12:05 PM | Link to this

Andy, can you please explain to me again what the Attorney General does?

By Andy

January 19, 2006 12:06 PM | Link to this

I don’t want to contradict all of you pinko historians but:

Summary: During Richard Nixon’s first term, when I served as secretary of defense, we withdrew most U.S. forces from Vietnam while building up the South’s ability to defend itself. The result was a success — until Congress snatched defeat from the jaws of victory by cutting off funding for our ally in 1975. Washington should follow a similar strategy now, but this time finish the job properly.

MELVIN R. LAIRD was Secretary of Defense from 1969 to 1973, Counselor to the President for Domestic Affairs from 1973 to 1974, and a member of the House of Representatives from 1952 to 1969. He currently serves as Senior Counselor for National and International Affairs at the Reader’s Digest Association.

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 12:06 PM | Link to this

blogger,

The first couple of hundred times you were mildly amusing, can’t you at least find a different point to harp on?

By Andy

January 19, 2006 12:16 PM | Link to this

finch: Not very many Republicans voted against it:

June 19, 1973 - The U.S. Congress passes the Case-Church Amendment which forbids any further U.S. military involvement in Southeast Asia, effective August 15, 1973. The veto-proof vote is 278-124 in the House and 64-26 in the Senate.

If anybody can find this particular vote roll call, your assistance would be appreciated.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 12:19 PM | Link to this

“In June 1973, he voted to cut off all funding to the South Vietnamese government, practically ensuring a communist takeover by the North Vietnamese, the ramifications of which were the killing fields of Cambodia and a bruised and shaken USA. Kennedy’s answer then is not too different from his answer today, which is to abandon our mission in Iraq and send our troops home, denying our soldiers the chance to see those objectives to fruition.”

If nothing else, this blog is quite entertaining: Ted Kennedy’s Bad Habit Of Leaving People… For Dead

By Andy

January 19, 2006 12:21 PM | Link to this

RW: Don’t encourage the little loser, he’ll attach himself to your leg, like some queer dog.

By Pink Salmon

January 19, 2006 12:24 PM | Link to this

A Salmon Song for Lunch: I’m slippery and slimy so don’t try to find me, I’m the incredible, indelible, Pink Salmon. Midori is angry and liberally lazy, she don’t have a clue, so she only can spew. And blogger is so boring he’s hardly annoying- he’s a kook, smells of poop and surely will be duped. I’m the great all knowing Pink Salmon!

Bow to the Salmon. Kerplunk

By getalife

January 19, 2006 12:31 PM | Link to this

Murtha was right!

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 12:32 PM | Link to this

Salmon for lunch does sound good.

Now where is that lemon pepper?

By getalife

January 19, 2006 12:35 PM | Link to this

A little local flavor

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 12:40 PM | Link to this

getalife,

Have you seen what comes up if you click the McCain ads link on your blog?

By Daniel

January 19, 2006 12:43 PM | Link to this

Bush lied about McCain in S.C. after McCain beqat him in N.H. When the rat Bush is cornered he sets up bogus outfits like SBVT to lie about his opponent. He did this to Kerry in the last campaign. Now he’s doing it to Murtha. This is vintage Bush. Question: Why are the Republicans and Bush lying about Murtha? Why do these people lie about our vets service?

By getalife

January 19, 2006 12:53 PM | Link to this

RW,

Please click on all of them so I will have med money. The coc screwed me on that deal.

How did you get your counter at the bottom of the page?

By Andy

January 19, 2006 12:57 PM | Link to this

Hey Pink: Watch out for that bear!

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 12:59 PM | Link to this

getalife,

I don’t know for sure. My counter was moving down the page whenever I posted and when I moved the script that makes the Gaggle cartoon automatically appear to the bottom of the page the counter went with it.

Your counter doesn’t seem to move. Try moving the counter script to below the archives in the template and see if that does it.

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 01:08 PM | Link to this

I wonder what it would take for the AP to lable someone a terrorist instead of “exiled dissident”?

By Ricky

January 19, 2006 01:39 PM | Link to this

Daniel, what is your proof that Bush set up SBVT? Why do you discount what a large group of people had to say about Kerry? How is he lying about Murtha?

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 01:58 PM | Link to this

Andy,

So far I’ve had no luck with the roll call votes, but I am learning a few things about June 19, 1973:

. Pete Rose got his 2,000th hit

. ZZ Top rocked the Omni in Atlanta

. The Rocky Horror Picture show opened

. Dave Winfield made his major league debut

. The 747 made it’s first flight

By Dr R

January 19, 2006 02:01 PM | Link to this

Back to the Medicare thing: If there is one reason I no longer support Bush and the GOP, this is it. The party that was supposed to be about limiting government spending and entitlements created a $700 billion boondoggle so that our children and their children will be buying medicine for rich seniors. Why? So the GOP could win Florida and Arizona in the 2004 election. It’s the most cynical political ploy I’ve seen in a long time, and Lord knows, there are plenty to choose from. Basically, the GOP did what it has accused Democrats of doing (and they have) for decades: Spending taxpayer money to buy votes.

By Ricky

January 19, 2006 02:06 PM | Link to this

Dr R, I agree with you. The GOP screwed the pooch on the medicare bill. They tried to appeal to too many people and got away from the core beliefs.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 02:19 PM | Link to this

I’m surprised the pinkos haven’t come back with their counter offer yet- Bin Laden offers Americans truce

This is a pretty big compliment for the George W Bush war on terror, going from Bin Laden’s promise to kill 4 million of us to him pleading for us to quit kicking their a-ss.

By Dr R

January 19, 2006 02:23 PM | Link to this

Someone tell me what the definition of “conservative” now is. It used to mean the belief that the federal government should be smaller, less powerful and spend less, ceding more power to individuals and local government. That’s why many of us joined the bandwagon. Now it means something quite different; those who call themselves “conservative” seem to believe in a powerful federal government that sees fit to control various aspects of our lives and spend every bit as much money as their “liberal” foes, only to pay off a different set of voting whores.

By RE

January 19, 2006 02:24 PM | Link to this

For the open minded folks here who used to think the GOP represented thier values, an excerpt from a column by Pat Buchannan:

“Every great cause, said longshoreman-philosopher Eric Hoffer, begins as a movement, degenerates into a business and ends up as a racket. So it went with the labor and civil-rights movements. And so it goes with the conservative movement and the Republican “revolution,” for which Jack Abramoff is mirror and metaphor.”

The GOP is no longer interested in a smaller or less powerful government, instead they are using public funds to make business constiuents and themselves wealthy.

By Dr R

January 19, 2006 02:26 PM | Link to this

Dude, bin Laden’s probably dead. I think his followers are piecing together old audio or faking the whole thing to make us think otherwise. How is it he has continued to call for attacks on the U.S. but none have happened? He’s either powerless to order such or rotting in a cave somewhere in Pashtun. Either way, he’s not the threat he once was.

By Ricky

January 19, 2006 02:28 PM | Link to this

RE, while I agree with you the GOP has gotten away from some of its core beliefs, your analysis that they are doing it for businesses and themselves is the same tired Democratic talking point.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 02:29 PM | Link to this

Aaawwww, she’s been talking to Jimmuh Cawter- Sen. Clinton Wants Sanctions Against Iran- Keek em out da Olympics!!

One thing, though, didn’t Michael Moore tell her about the UNDERGROUND PIPELINE! that runs to the White House?

By Dr R

January 19, 2006 02:31 PM | Link to this

Politicians of both parties are motivated by two things: Getting re-elected and getting the money to get re-elected. If any of them had the stones to do the people’s business before their own, they wouldn’t let our deficit run out of control, they wouldn’t ignore the Social Security train wreck headed toward us, any number of other issues that require a little political courage. They’re all cowards worried about the next election, not solving problems.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 02:39 PM | Link to this

Dr R: If you can remember after the 2000 elections when the pinkos went all in on “Bush Was Selected!” to quite their hysterical antics down, Bush had to consult them on every move he made in his first term. The Swimmer wrote the biggest education spending increase in history, this medicare monster was a bipartisan creation. Are you also saying we should hold back money from Nawlins?

It’s the fault of both parties that spending has gotten out of hand, I think there are some serious reforms in the works.

By Dr R

January 19, 2006 02:43 PM | Link to this

No, the Medicare bill was a GOP production. The Democrats proposed their own big-money plan that kept private insurance out of the mix. It would have been no cheaper, no better, and just as motivated to lure senior voters. In fact, they opposed Bush’s bill for the simple reason that they didn’t want to give the GOP credit, and Florida, going into the ‘04 election. We’re never going to get significant reform on any issue until we term-limit the b—tards and make them put in a little honest work before they jet off to their fundraisers. (PS: The only guy in D.C. willing to take on Social Security of late was GWB, who did so after his last inauguration. He has nothing else to run for, thus nothing else to lose, and is willing to deal. Alas, there is no one to deal with who has the guts to join him at the table. That’s why nothing of value can get done as long as there is another election to pay for).

By RE

January 19, 2006 02:47 PM | Link to this

I may have missed something here, and by no means are the democrats blameless prior to 2000, but since that time haven’t the house, senate, and presidency belonged to the GOP. It seems every bill in the last 5 years had been a republican bill. The GOP has full authority over every aspect of new legistlation. The party in charge has to take the blame if you are unhappy with the current spending

By Dr R

January 19, 2006 02:48 PM | Link to this

Andy, remember back in ‘94 when Gingrich and his guys took over Congress? They actually took on some big issues for awhile, and even forced Clinton to negotiate a balanced budget (for which he took full credit, of course). That was when the GOP still stood for something. But after 12 years in power, we see that whoever is in the majority starts acting the same and spending our money like it’s pouring from a faucet. This bunch — Frist, DeLay, et al — are arrogant, big-government spendthrifts who want to bleed our wallets dry for their agenda as they tell us how to live our lives. It’s even hard to say anymore that they are the lesser of two evils.

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 02:53 PM | Link to this

RE,

Tom Daschle might be surprised to learn that he wasn’t majority leader from May 2001 until January 2003.

By Dr R

January 19, 2006 02:59 PM | Link to this

He was for about 18 months after Jeffords went Indy, and before the ‘02 vote. But the House controls the budget and did nothing to tamp down spending. Frankly this whole, “Well, the Democrats are no better” argument is pretty weak. OK, they’re no better, meaning both parties suck. I wish we could empty the whole joint and start over from scratch, with not one Senator or House member eligible to run again. Whole brand dang new Congress, with the old guys not able to run again until the next go-round. That way if the new bunch sucks, too, we can go back to the devils we know. But I don’t think we’d want to.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 03:00 PM | Link to this

Bush spurs on negotiators working on compromise Medicare bill

While formal negotiations plod, Frist and several other top GOP senators meet regularly with Democratic Sens. Max Baucus of Montana and John Breaux of Louisiana. Thus far, they have focused on possible ground rules for a new era of competition between managed care plans and traditional Medicare.

In the end, nine Republicans voted against the entitlement, saying it costs way too much — $395 billion over 10 years — while 11 Democrats and Independent Jim Jeffords of Vermont voted for the measure, saying seniors need immediate assistance and shortcomings in the bill can be worked out later.

You are absolutely right that the democrats were posturing for the vote on this but I guarantee, pardon the language, they all had hard ons and would have voted yes if it wasn’t a chance to smear Bush. We’re talking about entitlement spending and democrats, right?

By Dr R

January 19, 2006 03:05 PM | Link to this

Meaning nine Republicans are true fiscal conservatives and the rest are shameless vote pimps, led by Dr. Bill. I’m not excusing the Dems at all, pal; I’m just saying the other guys are just as bad, when we thought we were getting something different. Might as well have Tip O’Neill and his bunch back in charge. At least he could drink Scotch with Reagan …

By Andy

January 19, 2006 03:07 PM | Link to this

As a matter of fact, the only reason that any democrat voted against the measure is because they were concerned it would “ruin” traditional medicare. Said Sen. Ted “Swimmer” Kennedy, D-Mass., one of the staunchest foes of the measure. “I am absolutely convinced that at the end of the day we will preserve the Medicare system, which is threatened, threatened seriously by this proposal. The GOP senators are the only ones concerned about spending.

By getalife

January 19, 2006 03:16 PM | Link to this

Corruption reform, now is the time!

By Midori

January 19, 2006 03:17 PM | Link to this

And does it really suprise you that there are Iraqi Veterans running as Dems? Obviously if they really enjoyed being in the service and supported the war, they would have stayed in the service. You can’t really draw too many conclusions from that. And the first Iraqi veteran to run as a Dem lost.

poor clueless, follower Ricky

It appears that Democrats aren’t the only ones hanging around to fight this “noble” war.

By Dr R

January 19, 2006 03:24 PM | Link to this

Ted wants socialized medicine and will stop at nothing short of that. Frankly, I’m not sure he won’t get it eventually, as bad an idea as I think it is. I question whether our GOP majority feels strongly enough to resist it. The Medicare drug thing is just one more incremental move in the direction of having the health care industry managed and financed by the federal government. Faced with that prospect, I suspect many lawmakers from either party, if given sodium pentathol, would say “Yeah, that’s fine with me as long as my party is controlling it.”

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 03:27 PM | Link to this

And he lost to this fine woman

By Dr R

January 19, 2006 03:29 PM | Link to this

I’m not sure the kind of form letter offered by the Common Cause site is going to have much effect. Lots of e-mail servers will just kick those things into the junk mail basket. We need a more personalized, direct reaction to let our slimebag lawmakers know we’re on their con jobs. Kicking them out of their cushy posts would be a good start.

By Daniel

January 19, 2006 03:39 PM | Link to this

You’re just an awkward pathetic guy who sits in front of a computer all day pretending.

By Scooter

January 19, 2006 03:46 PM | Link to this

getalife and Dr, R., as getalife is my man I check out his links and the Common Cause site looked appealing till I found this in their list of objectives;

“Make certain that our government is held accountable for the costs, in lives and money, for the invasion of Iraq.�(http://www.commoncause.org/site/pp.asp?c=dkLNK1MQIwG&b=190064).

Sneaky internet liberals.

By Daniel

January 19, 2006 03:46 PM | Link to this

Bush runs a prussian operation. Does the name: Lee Atwater, mean anyting to you. When Bush is cornered he lies. He organizes a fake grouop to lie about his target. Bush set up SBVT. He was behind the attacks on McCain. Where are these sewer rats today? Perhaps, Bush was hoping the SBVT would rescue New Orleans. Bush is behind the attacks on Murtha. Perhaps if he would let us tap his phones we could get bettr evedence. Watch the coming elections. The ayyacks against the Iraq vets will be vicious, dishonest and frequent.

By getalife

January 19, 2006 03:54 PM | Link to this

Scooter,

Dang liberal media bias. I got that link from my blog’s Google ad.

I need the money to afford my meds now that the coc got their greedy hands on my med money.

By Scooter

January 19, 2006 04:05 PM | Link to this

Getalife, you will be alright. You just need to learn where to look for help. When I had my brain injury and went to the Sheperd Center here in Atlanta I was fresh out of college and in deep in student loan debt, still am for that matter. Anyway, I looked and found this nasty free market lovers program that helped people. That nasty free market supporter was Bernie Marcus and his Bridge Program](http://www.shepherd.org/shepherdhomepage.nsf/933b0df00b8fa08985256942006e7ddb/ee16a6777e01d51b852569a4006e8162!OpenDocument).

It helps to love the free market and be willing to work within it rather than give the responsibility/power to government. You just seem to meet better and more accomplished people that way. Bashing the system that made those people wealthy like many of the dems in this blogdo will not help youmeet the right people.

Stay well brother.

By Scooter

January 19, 2006 04:07 PM | Link to this

Dangit those links. Maybe I got some polluted stream water in my mouth and it has encumbered my limking abilities, dangit!

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 04:07 PM | Link to this

Daniel,

Scroll over the picture John Kerry used in his ads to see who is playing fast ans loose with the facts.

By Donn

January 19, 2006 04:08 PM | Link to this

After glancing at this blog for a couple of days it’s easy to see how Bush and his worms slithered into the White House. My God, talk about the “dumbing down of America” and “The Worst Generations”! How many different outlets and orifaces do you Nazi clowns have for your hatred?

By getalife

January 19, 2006 04:21 PM | Link to this

Scooter,

Very nice, thanks for the link.

By BigDaddy

January 19, 2006 04:23 PM | Link to this

Donn, after glancing at your post, it’s easy to see why the Democrats are in danger of never winning another national office ever again. Calling people hate-filled Nazi clowns a way to guarantee that you won’t get their votes. I recommend a gentler approach.

And if you’re going to complain about the “dumbing of America” you might want to make sure that your post is grammatically correct with correct spelling - “the Worst Generations”! (sic) and “orifaces” (sic) betray you as a product of your own complaint…

By RE

January 19, 2006 04:32 PM | Link to this

Just thinking about history here, in 5 years since this administration took control, we have spread democracy to a few other countries. But it seems like those democracies are electing more anti-american leaders. Communism used to be a dead idea, with only Castro clinging to it fully, China is more of a fascist state than a communist society, they certainly have open markets. Since then he have Chavez in Venezula and Morales in Bolivia, with elections set next year in many countries including Mexico that are all trending anti-US and communist. Oh, and anyone remember that other democratic middle east country…Iran. Khatami was a step in the right direction when he took over in the 90s, the ruling mullahs were losing power and the country was become more modern and secular. Now he lost to that nut aminijad or whatever his name is. Our reputation does effect the rest of the world. And we do have consequences from other foriegn leaders.

By getalife

January 19, 2006 04:36 PM | Link to this

You mean the coc reputation of lying, cheating, stealing and killing. Our children will gow up to be just like them unless we stop setting this example for them.

By Ricky

January 19, 2006 04:40 PM | Link to this

RE, so according to your post, the US is responsible for the election of all the bad leaders of foreign countries. What you don’t mention is that newly Democratic countries often go through a period where they reject the new openess and revert back to a more authortarian state, hence the elections of communists in Venezula and Bolivia. You mention Cuba as the only communist country left, what about Vietnam? Or North Korea? You are completely wrong about Iran also. The hope was that Khatami could lead to some changes, but it never did. Most of the everyday people in Iran don’t like their government and are actually not anti-US. The mullahs never lost any power in Iran. What about Germany elected a more pro-American leader?

By Scooter

January 19, 2006 04:48 PM | Link to this

Elected a Pro American leader. Now they are not allies of the left. Only the America haters are allies.

By RE

January 19, 2006 04:49 PM | Link to this

Not sure on Vietnam, I do not have much knowledge of that, I would consider North Korea as a fascist/isolationist state more than a communist one.

Khatami was making great progress, of course the mullahs did not want to give up their power. I would say that the current leadership in Iran is a direct result of US action. Khatami’s reforms died the day of the axis of evil speach. The mullahs were losing power and the people of Iran wanted to be free of their control, but after that speach, basically putting them on notice that they may be attacked…the people reverted back to a nationalist ideology and away from reform.

By Midori

January 19, 2006 04:50 PM | Link to this

it’s easy to see why the Democrats are in danger of never winning another national office ever again

Do you all take a special course to learn how to say that?

You all say it.

Whenever you can’t think of anything of substance, that’s your “get out of jail free” card.

By RE

January 19, 2006 04:55 PM | Link to this

Democrats can win power back by finding as many deaf mutes as possible and running them. So long as a democratic candidate does not speak, they will be ok. Think of it as a supreme court confirmation hearing, just try not to say anything.

By Ricky

January 19, 2006 04:56 PM | Link to this

RE, N. Korea is a communist country. I know you want to blame Bush for everything, but it doesn’t always work out that way. Midori, I know the election results the last couple of years have probably been disappointing for you, seeing Dems lose again and again. So when people make comments about Dems not winning elections they are just stating the fact. Whats your get out of jail free card, calling people fascists or calling Bush a liar or saying all Republicans are dumb.

By Scooter

January 19, 2006 04:58 PM | Link to this

I haven’t been compared to Joseph Goebbels lately. I loved it when the overly intelligent liberals compared me to Goebbels.

By BigDaddy

January 19, 2006 04:59 PM | Link to this

Midori, calm down, I was just pointing out to newby Donn that flinging rhetoric like a chimp flings feces is not a way to win people over to your line of thought. I’d like to have some responsible Democrats provide some balance to the hegemony of the Republican party, particularly as we’ve seen that the Republican holding of the White House, Congress and the Senate has been a very expensive boondoggle (to wit - the source of today’s cartoon).

My point is that unbridled hatred with no alternative policy offerings is not a selling point. Let’s say you were shopping for a new car - you went to a Toyota dealership and a Honda dealership. The Toyota dealer spends his entire spiel bad-mouthing the Honda, while at the same time showing nothing positive about the Toyota. Are you more or less likely to buy a Toyota at that point?

I guess you thought that Donn had something of substance to which I could respond…

By getalife

January 19, 2006 04:59 PM | Link to this

From OBL There is no defect in this solution other than preventing the flow of hundreds of billions to the influential people and war merchants in America, who supported Bush’s election campaign with billions of dollars.

It amazes me that people from the coc think they know how to change the world today, when our own government is so corrupt, the enemy used this statement today.

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 05:02 PM | Link to this

BigDaddy,

I’m guessing Midori would buy the Toyota, they like that kind of stuff.

By BigDaddy

January 19, 2006 05:04 PM | Link to this

Democrats can win power back by finding as many deaf mutes as possible and running them - RE

RE, you’re probably right, though if the Alito hearings are any indication, bloviation is a common trait of “progressives”…

At any rate, as much gerrymandering as we’ve seen in the past decade and with the McCain-Feingold bill acting as an incumbent-protection act, I’d be surprised to see much change in the make-up of Congress in the mid-term elections. Too bad, really, because the Republicans deserve to be punished for their fiscal indiscretions.

By BigDaddy

January 19, 2006 05:07 PM | Link to this

RW, BigDaddy drives over Toyotas. Or around them very quickly. Depends if BigDaddy is in the Denali or on the Fat Boy…

Toyotas are for patchouli-scented vegans with PETA memberships…

By RE

January 19, 2006 05:09 PM | Link to this

Actually BD, that is a great metaphore for modern elections. Come sept and oct, that is all you will be hearing.

I still love the pack of wolves ad from the last election…fear sells

By Scooter

January 19, 2006 05:09 PM | Link to this

I’ll bet Midori would buy whatever Tex tried to sell her, but I don’t know?

By BigDaddy

January 19, 2006 05:12 PM | Link to this

RE, that’s why BigDaddy doesn’t drive a Honda or Toyota. They both suck (and using them as metaphors for the Dems and Reps only puts them in a worse light).

BigDaddy is all for an alternative…

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 05:17 PM | Link to this

getalife,

Another story for you.

Culture of Corruption

“Pelosi Weds in Prison”—headline, Newsday (Long Island, N.Y.), Jan. 19

By RE

January 19, 2006 05:19 PM | Link to this

I love my Chevy Truck, but when gas was about $3/gal…well, those little civics looked a whole lot nicer

By A Libertarian

January 19, 2006 05:21 PM | Link to this

LOL, more far right-wing Republican rhetoric from “libertarian” Big Daddy.

By BigDaddy

January 19, 2006 05:22 PM | Link to this

RE, that’s what motorcycles are for - better gas mileage than a Civic, and you get to keep your testicles! It’s a win/win!

By getalife

January 19, 2006 05:23 PM | Link to this

RW,

Please do not spell it out, use my word.

By BigDaddy

January 19, 2006 05:24 PM | Link to this

Yay, A Libertarian, the little troll has resurfaced! Can you point to anything that I’ve written (just today - I don’t want you to strain yourself) that would indicate BigDaddy being a “far right-wing Republican”. Don’t hurt yourself scrolling back and actually reading anything.

By physicsDawg

January 19, 2006 05:25 PM | Link to this

Hey, something else on June 19th, 1973: I was 5 days old!

By BigDaddy

January 19, 2006 05:28 PM | Link to this

physicsDawg, happy belated birthday! I hope you get a talented new quarterback for your birthday…

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 05:30 PM | Link to this

getalife,

That was lifted from Best of the Web so I thought I should use his format, of course I should have also acknowledged where it came from.

Did moving the script for the counter just move it over to the sidebar?

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 05:37 PM | Link to this

physicsDawg,

For the 5 day celebration of your birth your parents could have taken you to see Pink Floyd at the Civic Arena in Pittsburgh. I hope they at least noted in your babybook that on June 13, 1973, Bear Butte was entered into the Register of Historical Places. (Although I bet they were pretty tired of bare butts about then.)

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 05:39 PM | Link to this

That should, of course, say 19

By getalife

January 19, 2006 05:40 PM | Link to this

RW,

He should have mentioned me for butchering the language.

HTML sheese. I put

on top of the counter and moved it over there. Once I add links (like yours) it should go to the bottom.

By getalife

January 19, 2006 05:42 PM | Link to this

arrow left ul arrow right, ml’s computer does not like HTML.

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 05:43 PM | Link to this

getalife,

Send James your word, he loves things like that.

By getalife

January 19, 2006 05:51 PM | Link to this

RW,

I did.

By Daniel

January 19, 2006 05:52 PM | Link to this

GaL: Where do you get that stuff? Abramoff-Delay-Bush scandal should keep you busy.

By getalife

January 19, 2006 05:57 PM | Link to this

Daniel,

Yes, but the OBL quote said it all. Had to put it at the top.

Hastert’s plan is a joke but the Dems want to bring down K street.

McCain said it just goes to show you that if you stay in Washington long enough, anything can happen. He has been wanting to reform his party and shows backbone like Murtha.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 06:00 PM | Link to this

From 1991-2000, Reid Received No Contributions From The Following Non-Nevada Tribes, But While The Tribes Were Clients Of Abramoff, Reid Received Over $50,000 From Them:

Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians (California) contributed $19,500 to Reid between 2001 and 2004

Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana (Louisiana) contributed $5,000 to Reid 2001 between 2001 and 2004

Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians (Mississippi) contributed $7,000 to Reid between 2001 and 2004

Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe of Michigan (Michigan) contributed 19,000 to Reid between 2001 and 2004

(Campaign Finance Analysis Project Website, www.campaignfinanceanalysisproject.com, Accessed January 12, 2006)

And the pinkos say:

He didn’t do it, he didn’t do it, he didn’t DO IT!

By RE

January 19, 2006 06:04 PM | Link to this

[The other shoe for Frist….] (http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Democratswantethicscommitteetoprobe0119.html)

By Daniel

January 19, 2006 06:04 PM | Link to this

GaL: I agree. It is little solace that the Republicans are the ones doing the lying and stealing, borowing and spending. Keep hitting them. There are good people in the Republican party; they just aren’t leading the country right now. The Democrats need to find their voice. I am confident we will get this right.

By getalife

January 19, 2006 06:08 PM | Link to this

Daniel,

The thing I don’t get is how the coc are pushing religion when they lie, steal, cheat and kill. Sets a very bad example for others to live by.

Where is This Justin when you need him?

By Andy

January 19, 2006 06:08 PM | Link to this

RE: You want to try again:

error 404: File not found

The document you requested is not found

This might be the handiwork of the vast right wing conspiracy, no?

By RE

January 19, 2006 06:11 PM | Link to this

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Democratswantethicscommitteetoprobe0119.html

no, poor cutting and pasting

By RE

January 19, 2006 06:14 PM | Link to this

[this] (http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Democratswantethicscommitteetoprobe0119.html)

By Andy

January 19, 2006 06:15 PM | Link to this

RE: Now I’m forbidden and authorization will do me no good. Perhaps they sense the vast right wing conspiracy, you reckon?

By RE

January 19, 2006 06:16 PM | Link to this

I apparently cannot include a web address with an underscore. it changes the text to italics.

After a comment by Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY) on Air America’s Majority Report Wednesday evening, RAW STORY has learned that House Democrats are pushing the ethics committee to investigate allegations of congressional offices providing privleged information to Wall Street investors.

By getalife

January 19, 2006 06:16 PM | Link to this

Since the FBI is going after google for porn again, it seems like they should be investigating corruption. Not our privacy on the Internet.

Sheese. I am in trouble now.

By Tex

January 19, 2006 06:18 PM | Link to this

DONN lad. No, there is no end to the possibilities of their hatred. Realize that they belong to the largest single hate group on the face of the earth. These are very sick, weak, needy people. They know they will never be anything more than that, thus the organized hatred, bitterness, self-loathing, self-failures, et al. A quick little study in the darkness of human behavior. Waste not much time here - these mouthy misfits are basic insects. No more, no less. All of the great historians wrote of such people. Beautiful.

By Scooter

January 19, 2006 06:18 PM | Link to this

getalife, the only thing that will kill K-Street is the … you know what it is.

By getalife

January 19, 2006 06:21 PM | Link to this

The coc?

By Scooter

January 19, 2006 06:21 PM | Link to this

There is Tex, describing all of those small business owners again. Everyday is hate your boss day for Tex and he sounds so compassionate.

By Scooter

January 19, 2006 06:26 PM | Link to this

No, a tax system that doesn’t divide and foster animosity. A tax code that ecourages reuse of goods and the consumers will pay the taxes. The drug dealer, illegal immigrants, tourists, current tax evaders, all of those people would pay their taxes. You said you bookmarked it.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 06:26 PM | Link to this

Oh no, if it was on Air America, Frist may as well pack his bags.

By finch

January 19, 2006 06:33 PM | Link to this

Andy, if you want to give credit where credit is due for the fall of Communism, guve it to Lech Walesa, the strikers at the Gdansk shipyard in 1980, and that young, conservative-radical Pope John Paul II. They succeeded where the anti-Communists in Hungary in 1956 and the Prague Spring optimists in 1968 failed. They stood up to the Communists, and STAYED up. The domino theory in reverse. 9 years later the Wall came down.

Reagan’s timing was great, but he was little more than a very observant and rather clever opportunist, and all for a good cause.

As for Vietnam, a lost cause (in time, money, and blood) is a lost cause. It took less than 2 years for “South” Vietnam collapsed after the US belatedly cut off it’s feeding tube after 20 years supporting those farking, evil parasites. Good riddance. Should have been done years before. The “South” Vietnamese were as loyal as snakes.

RE, LOVED that Eric Hoffer quote. So true, so true. The GOP “party of reform” is a racket now. More accurately a coc criminal enterprise.

And I’ve also noticed the swing to the left in Latin America. Venezuela, Bolivia, Chile.. who’s next? Free markets are good, but unfettered capitalism that lets a handful of wealthy snots stomp all over the workers is a recipe for backlash. Especially when those workers can vote, and DO vote. Thanks to some decent politicians (usually, but not always Democrats), and labor unions (go unions!) in the US, the vast canyon between the rich few and everybody else is just a gully here. Although thanks to the GOP-COC cabal, that gully’s growing bigger.

How ABOUT that Osama tape? That psycho’s on the run now! Notice how the mess in Iraq hardly generated a peep out of him? But lose a couple of henchmen to some US missles in Pakistan, and THERE HE IS! Truce? Kiss this, Osama! Hunt him down and kill him. Launch more surgical strike missles against Pakistan or even Saudi Arabia, or wherever the REAL terrorists are.

But get the heck out of Iraq, the sooner the better. The really dangerous Osama groupies aren’t there. It’s just Zarqawi, with a bunch of disenfranchised Batthists, formerly upper class Sunnis, and a handful of foreign zealots trying to spark a civil war. No international terrorists there! Fight them where they REALLY are (not Iraq!) so we don’t have to fight them here.

The GOP Medicare plan sucks. The “Deficit Reduction Act” isn’t. In fact, the only GOOD thing you can say about the neocon GOP coc is that they are VERY CLEVER with names. The “Clear Skies Act” doesn’t. The “Healthy Forests Initiative” isn’t.

Other than that, it’s great to be an American!

By getalife

January 19, 2006 06:34 PM | Link to this

Scooter,

Are you the guy who wrote this book?

By Scooter

January 19, 2006 06:44 PM | Link to this

getalife, no. I assure you that guy is doing more imortant things than blogging.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 06:45 PM | Link to this

finch: Reagan did exactly what he said he was going to do and that isn’t good enough for a pinko like you, I wonder why?

North Vietnam had no Soviet or Chinese support, none, nope, they fashioned those SAM 7 missiles out of bamboo, right?

Yeah, Latin America, fearsome enemy of the United States, at any minute they could launch a barrage of bananas.

If we leave Iraq immediately, like you war losers would like us to do, where would we station all of our troops to fight the war on terror. New York? Trenton? Why not stay in Iraq and let the terrorists come to us? Not enough dead American civilians for you “patriots?”

In the end, nine Republicans voted against the entitlement, saying it costs way too much — $395 billion over 10 years — while 11 Democrats and Independent Jim Jeffords of Vermont voted for the measure, saying seniors need immediate assistance and shortcomings in the bill can be worked out later.

I’ll tell you what, you’re a persistent little liar.

By RE

January 19, 2006 07:08 PM | Link to this

I admit, I would put Air America and Rush Limbough on par with each other so far as credibility goes, but all stories start somewhere…remember the Dan Rather forgery was pointed out on a web log.

That quote from hoffer was lifted from a Par Buchannon column. When you read his writings, it is amazing how much sense a real conservative makes on foriegn policy, ethics, and budget matters. But then it has been a long time since there has been real conservatives around, now all we have are followers of a party or a man. The principals at the core of conservative belief have been discarded in exchange for the ability to maintain power.

Vietnam and Iraq, you kinda knew those two would wind up together sooner or later. How about this idea, you cannot win someone else’s civil war.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 07:08 PM | Link to this

The idea that Senator Reid would attack other senators for taking Abramoff-related donations is laughable. He’s among the top recipients of these funds in Congress, and still refuses to return or donate the money. And now he is using his taxpayer funded office to put out what amounts to campaign attacks. Senator Reid should clean up his own act before lecturing the rest of Congress on ethics. (He didn’t DO IT!)

Democrats look like a bunch of rodeo clowns creating distractions. They are hoping that Americans don’t notice their lack of ideas or solutions for today’s challenges. It’s been months since they promised to unveil a real legislative agenda, yet we still have heard nothing.

by Sen. Jim DeMint- Posted Jan 19, 2006

Couldn’t have said it better myself.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 07:12 PM | Link to this

RE: Let me guess, this hoffer dude said “let’s surrender to Osama” and “I feel like some man lovin.” This is how he got to be such an acclaimed “conservative” in your book? Right?

By Scooter

January 19, 2006 07:17 PM | Link to this

This is priceless!”>http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/newyork/ny-bc-ny—toughtalkingclint0119jan19,0,4686609.story?coll=ny-region-apnewyork)!

By: Hillary Clinton; “But she was critical of the administration for letting European nations take the lead in negotiations over the last several years.�

Wow, Bush ostracized them when he was enforcing her own husbands 1998 Act.

Now he is outsourcing. Didn’t we hear that when Bush teamed Special Forces teams up with anti UBL warlords in Tora Bora? Is that some sort of hypnotic word to make people forget?

UBL offered a truce? I hope Bush tells UBL that we Americans are just frozen in fear. Why is he offering a truce? Is he calling uncle? I thought we were loosing and creating tons of new terrorist to fill his army? If we take him alive how many terrorist attacks will that cause.

NO TRUCE, Biat*h

Hey, the cats home so I’m out.

By RE

January 19, 2006 07:18 PM | Link to this

No I was speaking of Pat Buchanan. I really do not know who hoffer is, I understand he is a union leader, so probably not a conservative. Are you questioning Pat Buchanan’s conservative credentials?

By RE

January 19, 2006 07:20 PM | Link to this

Scooter….nice

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 07:22 PM | Link to this

I’m going out on a limb and saying RE’s 7:20 was a reference to Scooter’s fourth link.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 07:31 PM | Link to this

RE: Pat Buchanan has gotten hysterical more than once but most of the time he is pretty solid.

By getalife

January 19, 2006 07:32 PM | Link to this

Very nice.

Get to know the enemy

He is comparing the war on terrorism to the Afganistan Russian war.

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 07:37 PM | Link to this

getalife,

Are you sure that was OBL and not something Durbin said?

As for torturing men, they have used burning chemical acids and drills on their joints. And when they give up on (interrogating) them, they sometimes use the drills on their heads until they die. Read, if you will, the reports of the horrors in Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo prisons.

By Daniel

January 19, 2006 07:40 PM | Link to this

RE: Eric Hoffer was a homespun philosopher of the early 70’s. Jimmy Hoffa was a thug who was persued by RFK as US Attorney General, among others, in the 60’s. Hoffa was head of the Teamsters. He was killed and his body has never been found. He is reputed to have been the recipient of “cement slippers” by some unsavory types.

By Midori

January 19, 2006 08:07 PM | Link to this

guess who wrote this book? hint: it wasn’t hillary clinton

By Midori

January 19, 2006 08:10 PM | Link to this

Hey, RW - at least the can pay for their own hotel rooms, eh?

By finch

January 19, 2006 08:12 PM | Link to this

Sure Hanoi had China and Soviet material support. But not a peak of hundreds of thousands of troops over more than a decade. Which is what the US gave “South” Vietnam. It takes more than guns to win wars, it takes troops and WILL, neither of which Saigon had. Face it, con… the “South” Vietnamese deserved to lose. Bunch of greedy, petty, selfish cowards.

Every President since Truman has promised to contain Communism. So did Reagan. B. F. D. He hopped on the train as it was riding out of the station and pretended he was the engineer. Feh.

I guess those “banana” weapons in Latin America are why Reagan was so worried about Nicaragua. And Grenada. And why the US still refuses to recognize Cuba. And why BushCo stops just short of saying the “accidental death” of Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez might really not be bad. If Latin America is sooo inconsequential, why doesn’t the US just leave it alone?

So there.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 08:13 PM | Link to this

Hey Midori: I promise I’ll read your book just as soon as I get done with mine.

By Midori

January 19, 2006 08:14 PM | Link to this

beating back a Hillary smear

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 08:22 PM | Link to this

Midori,

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

[Maybe they were pointing out just who is keeping Dr. Kings words from becoming reality[(http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/Ihaveadream.htm)

The soft bigotry of low expectations is not just a slogan, you know.

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 08:25 PM | Link to this

Drat!!

Maybe they were pointing out just who is keeping Dr. Kings words from becoming reality

By Andy

January 19, 2006 08:31 PM | Link to this

Face it, con… the “Southâ€? Vietnamese deserved to lose. You taught them a lesson, didn’t you, those greedy, nasty people, they’re better off dead, aren’t they?

I know every President promised to contain communism, that’s my point, Reagan was the only one who actually did it. He was a legend. He even places third among the all time great presidents in a pinko poll.

Reagan fought communism in Latin America, part of his overall strategy to collapse the Soviet Union. What we have there now pretty much amounts to a tosspot two bit kook (which makes him a lefty favorite, they just adore moonbats) who wouldn’t even warrant an invasion, all we would need to do is have the Air Force do an unarmed fly over, their economy would cave in and the government would flee in terror.

Does anybody else ever wonder why finch never, never includes any evidence in the form of a link to back up his kook statements? Is it maybe because he can’t produce any evidence?

By Andy

January 19, 2006 08:34 PM | Link to this

Ooops: pinko poll ^^^^ is a link, click it for the Zogby poll.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 08:42 PM | Link to this

Oh, this is good:

The Washington Post shut down one of its blogs Thursday after the newspaper’s ombudsman raised the ire of readers by writing that lobbyist Jack Abramoff gave money to the Democrats as well as to Republicans.

In her Sunday column, ombudsman Deborah Howell wrote that Abramoff “had made substantial campaign contributions to both major parties,” prompting a wave of nasty reader postings on post.blog.

There were so many personal attacks that the newspaper’s staff could not “keep the board clean, there was some pretty filthy stuff,” and so the Post shut down comments on the blog, or Web log, said Jim Brady, executive editor of washingtonpost.com.

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 08:42 PM | Link to this

Andy,

I don’t know if Midori is regurgitating the Newt Gingrich quote for me or for you, but his 1994 quote doesn’t appear to have been made in a black church, on MLK day, with the insidious “and you know what I’m talking about” qualifier.

Have fun with your “finch” debate, it’s usually like reading one chapter of a book then reading two more entire books before reading the second chapter of the first book with the pace the debate develops, though.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 08:45 PM | Link to this

Study: Most College Students Lack Skills

Yeah, but they can spot a wingnut and, some of the time, hit them with a pie.

By Andy

January 19, 2006 08:49 PM | Link to this

RW: It’s true Slew of Republicans refer to Democratic party as “plantation” - when are they apologizing? but if we beat her over the head with it during the Presidential campaign, if she says “well, Newt said it” she’s finished, unless Newt gets the GOP nomination.

By AntiRadical

January 19, 2006 08:50 PM | Link to this

Sorry ML, this toon BLOWS! GWB does something unquestionably humanitarian, even braving the wrath of the “off-centers” in his own party, and what do you do? Ya’ just had to take the cheap shot and criticize the guy. I filled some scripts for my Dad a couple of weeks back and found the new program to be wonderful!!! While I realize that others may have had different experiences, I think it is important to note that there are those of us who appreciate the guts of the President in forcing this initiative. After the “Battle of the Cedar Tree” he hit my personal shmuck list but with this grandest of gestures, maybe I can still hope that there is a centrist conservative hidden in there somewhere. Low blow, ML! Low blow!

By Objective Observer

January 19, 2006 08:50 PM | Link to this

Well Andy, obviously the elite media now speaks to them in a language that they CAN understand. What do they call that………

By Andy

January 19, 2006 08:55 PM | Link to this

Are there 2 different AntiRadicals on this blog?

By AntiRadical

January 19, 2006 08:59 PM | Link to this

No Andy, it’s still me. You might be surprised at how much we can agree (me too, sometimes). That’s a good thing!

By AntiRadical

January 19, 2006 09:11 PM | Link to this

Dems should hang their heads in utter shame. A REPUBLICAN president gives the elderly and infirmed a just social benefit that the Dems in two successive “prosperity” administrations could/would/did not do. And the Dems call themselves the party with the “social” conscience???

By finch

January 19, 2006 09:32 PM | Link to this

Anti, its the Gip-O-P that should be hanging its head in shame. I live near a huge middle class retirement community. Lots of snowbirds with decent but far from extravagant incomes. You would be shocked, shocked at the folks there who think this plan sucks.

By Objective Observer

January 19, 2006 09:41 PM | Link to this

AntiR: For me, at least, reading your posts early in the day, and relating it to ml’s cartoon led me to believe that you were opposed to the prescription drug plan. Then to see your last post regarding the same, seemed like a complete turnaround. But, after additional review, I think I, may have misinterpreted.

By finch

January 19, 2006 09:44 PM | Link to this

Last time I checked, Andy, the US never did any serious dancing in Cambodia. Maybe you think this country should take responsibility for the “killing fields”. I don’t. Where was the US when North Korea offed a million people? Nothing over here… not here, either. Nope, I guess in your book a Korean just isn’t worth as much as a Cambodian, right?

It’s true, though, that true conservatives (like Pat Buchanan) don’t believe in nation building. Are you a true conservative? Or just a neocon lapdog?

Why don’t YOU provide some serious links, Andy-pie? Not just to Coulter, or Malkin, or American Spectator or the Moonie Times? And no, cherry picking Wikipedia doesn’t count.

By RW-(the original)

January 19, 2006 09:55 PM | Link to this

finch,

Andy-pie?!?!?!

Were you one of CBS’s writers for The Reagans? “I’d follow you halfway across the country, Nancy-pants.”

By finch

January 19, 2006 10:01 PM | Link to this

RW,

Hmmm. Andy-pants? Nahhhh… Andy-pie? Yeah, a little awkward. But if the tinfoil hat fits….

By J-M in Maine

January 23, 2006 01:09 PM | Link to this

As a government employee who is involved in this mess, I have compiled quite a collection of editorial comics on this topic. THIS - is my favorite. I’ve looked at it a dozen times this morning and just notice the teeth on the ground! LOL! Wonderful. Thanks for the laugh.