Mike Luckovich

By Semper Fi

February 9, 2006 07:29 PM | Link to this

Is that Ted K and John K on the front row?

By Semper Fi

February 9, 2006 07:32 PM | Link to this

Where is Andy???? We need Andy back..

By candide

February 9, 2006 07:40 PM | Link to this

Bush 41, like Bush43, is an idiot. I don’t know what Bill Clinton’s problem is.

By scott

February 9, 2006 07:42 PM | Link to this

Candide you calling anyone an idiot is like the pot calling the kettle black!!

By Semper Fi

February 9, 2006 07:47 PM | Link to this

scott, Candide is the new Democratic base. Hopefully everyone sees this and always votes agaisnt it. I really like Candide and Midori.

By Soweto

February 9, 2006 07:48 PM | Link to this

Candide,

As I wrote in my last entry on the “Editor” cartoon, the issue is mud-slinging. I am OK with you thinking the Bushes are stupid, but I sure would be interested in hearing why you think so. Name-calling in juvenile. Let’s argue the issues, not the emotions.

By finch

February 9, 2006 07:50 PM | Link to this

This one’s SO good!

I can’t explain the GHWB-BC friendship, either.

By DavidU

February 9, 2006 07:51 PM | Link to this

very Funny!!

By DavidU

February 9, 2006 07:55 PM | Link to this

I wonder when Hillary runs will BC and GHWB continue their little affair. LOL. What happens if (I said if, everyone relax) she wins will BC invite GHWB to hang at the White House? This relationship of theirs is Weird/Hilarious.

By RW-(the original)

February 9, 2006 08:10 PM | Link to this

Their relationship is a an odd one and I wish George W. Bush wouldn’t have made it so easy for BC to rehabilitate his image.

Why do you think he did? I think it was because he thought they could do good work and pull the political poles a little closer together. Rally the left and the right to a common cause with a very visible example. Some might call that being a uniter. Once again President Bush does what he says he is going to do.

Tell me again how divisive he is. I never get tired of fairy tales from the left.

By DavidU

February 9, 2006 08:17 PM | Link to this

RW- Huh? Sorry, new to this blog, but I’m assuming “the regulars” carry discussions from one blog to another. Let me know so I can get comfortable.

By Soweto

February 9, 2006 08:24 PM | Link to this

It seems as if all the leftists have gone to watch TV for the night. It is too bad that if they get their way, we will not have the channels to choose from. Once they wipe out all the evil industrialists, shoe producing sweatshop owners, cancer causing popcorn poppers, and evil people who got rich by generally producing jobs and services instead of entertainment, there will be no one with enough money to buy commercials and sponsor the inane shows that they have all left to watch. Darn incentives. No wonder they call it the dismal science.

By Court

February 9, 2006 08:35 PM | Link to this

Pretty good: so, when are we gonna see your cartoon of Mohammed and that 7 year old he married in a theater setting?

By RW-(the original)

February 9, 2006 08:54 PM | Link to this

DavidU,

Most of us try not to carry forward a discussion unless there is a relevant point. This cartoon shows Bush 41 and Clinton together joking about how close they are. It was George W. Bush that put them together to work on Tsunami relieve.

It’s my observation that the man that brought them together is always called the divisive one. I think my post is almost completely relevant to this cartoon.

By Scooter

February 9, 2006 08:58 PM | Link to this

Mike L, now that is funny! Do you think they got extra butter?

By RW-(the original)

February 9, 2006 08:58 PM | Link to this

DavidU,

I just noticed another reason you may have asked that. If it was because my post came right after yours, it had nothing to do with your post.

One thing most people do here is address a comment if it is meant for someone or just post unaddressed to make a general statement. (That doesn’t hold true often enough, though)

By DavidU

February 9, 2006 09:01 PM | Link to this

RW - I read your post too quickly and since the cartoon had H.W.Bush in it, I thought that’s who you were talking about (In my head I added an H to the W), and I noticed once I had already posted my question. Thanks for responding though.

By Midori

February 9, 2006 09:01 PM | Link to this

I really like Candide and Midori

I really wish I could return the favor.

you put the “I” in Idiot.

By Midori

February 9, 2006 09:04 PM | Link to this

I wish George W. Bush wouldn’t have made it so easy for BC to rehabilitate his image.

George W. Bush makes Charles Manson look presentable.

By RW-(the original)

February 9, 2006 09:05 PM | Link to this

DavidU,

Half of my posts have missing words and letters that I see in my head, so yours was certainly an easy mistake to make.

By Midori

February 9, 2006 09:07 PM | Link to this

Good Cartoon, Mike.

The more I see of Bush the younger, the more I admire the Father.

And that takes a lot for me to admit.

By Midori

February 9, 2006 09:08 PM | Link to this

What did you guys do with Andy? Put him in a strait jacket, where he belongs?

Jason Vohees doesn’t have anything over him.

By Objective Observer

February 9, 2006 09:10 PM | Link to this

The unlikely friendship, the movie onscreen, the recent bipartisan antics at the CSK funeral…maybe it asks “Why all the fuss?”

By kimberly

February 9, 2006 09:20 PM | Link to this

HAHAHAHA! I’m loving this cartoon, Mike! It’s humor that gets me through the dark times, and I can always count on a Lucko ‘toon to help!

By kimberly

February 9, 2006 09:28 PM | Link to this

Y’all…. Did you ever think that the reason Andy is here at the crack of dawn and still late at night, and consistently through the day, is because something’s WRONG? I mean, beyond the obvious emotional maladjustments… Who would WANT to spew that kind of anger 24/7 unless…. maybe he’s not able to get outside and DO stuff… you know? Most likely he needs our compassion and prayers. Yes, I know, he’ll call me all manner of vile pronouns for suggesting it, but I think he does.

By RW-(the original)

February 9, 2006 09:31 PM | Link to this

DavidU-I am now going to violate my theory of not carrying things over…

OO,

Did you make it to the Sporting goods store?

finch,

Are you laughing as hard as I am right now?

I’m karmas b-itch right now-Earl Hickey

By RW-(the original)

February 9, 2006 09:36 PM | Link to this

kimberly,

The reality is that Andy is seldom here at night, probably because he does get up very early. The question today arises because he wasn’t on the other thread either.

Maybe perception is reality is part of YOUR problem.

By kimberly

February 9, 2006 09:40 PM | Link to this

RW, um…. did you have a point? Yes I noticed him missing today as well. Sometimes I read for amusement but opt not to jump into the fray. But hey, thanks for attempting to change the subject to MY problem. Did you have a point to add to that, or do you just feel superior with your bad self now for telling me I have a problem?

By RW-(the original)

February 9, 2006 09:47 PM | Link to this

kimberly, um…no.

By Dusty

February 9, 2006 09:53 PM | Link to this

Kimberly,

I think it best not make judgements on the lives of others. To do so just shows the cracks in our own.

These blogs get a wee bit boring without Andy. He is smart, witty and very strong in his convictions. You might say he shoots straight from the hip. I hope he will SOON start posting again.

Most likely we ALL need compassion and prayers.

By finch

February 9, 2006 09:56 PM | Link to this

RW,

Yes, yes, YES!! Earl’s the MAN!! Sacrificing the affections of professor woman for…. KARMA!!!

Now… where were we? Oh yes. 41 and 42. Wasn’t it just last month that 43, 41’s son was speculating in so many words about a Hillary White House??

“Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton”

Cue the “Twilight Zone” theme

By RW-(the original)

February 9, 2006 09:58 PM | Link to this

Dusty,

Andy’s contributions are certainly more entertaining than anything we get from “paid professional” kimberly.

Speaking of missing persons, where the hell is BigDaddy?

By RW-(the original)

February 9, 2006 10:01 PM | Link to this

finch,

After Hillary the country would be ready for Jeb, so it’s:

Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton, Bush….and then the kids will be coming of age.

By Dusty

February 9, 2006 10:12 PM | Link to this

RW,

How do you get to be a “paid professional” and which profession is that?

Yes, where is Big Daddy? He said goodbye but I thought he’d be back. I bet it is getting lonesome down at the bridge, cold weather or not.

By Paul

February 9, 2006 10:15 PM | Link to this

BREAKING NEWS!! Bush saved L.A. from a horrid terrorist attack in 2004 - but is only revealing it TODAY. Much to the surprise of LA officials. My God, that man performs one heroic deed after another. Do you suppose he really imagines these things - or is it the alcohol?? And does it take another alcoholic to believe his words?? Stay tuned!

By Ricky

February 9, 2006 10:17 PM | Link to this

This cartoon is actually pretty funny. I am no fan of Lucko’s but I try to call them fairly and this one made me laugh. There is almost a subtle jab at Jimmy Carter in this toon too. One of the better ones I have seen from Lucko

By RW-(the original)

February 9, 2006 10:18 PM | Link to this

Dusty,

In one of his/her fits of superiority “kimberly” started babbling about how she/he was awash in publishing contracts. So I would guess writer, much too mean for hooker.

If BigDaddy is flashing from the bridge in this weather he may have to start going in drag.

By finch

February 9, 2006 10:19 PM | Link to this

RW,

That is so beyond the realm of possibility that it’s… quite possible.

The mind reels.

Chelsea will be old enough to be President in 2016 (DOB 2-27-80) The Bush girls, a year later (DOB 11-25-81).

tickticktickticktick…

By Ricky

February 9, 2006 10:24 PM | Link to this

Paul, the attack was actually in 2002, not 2004. And if Bush had revealed it then, you would have said he was just gloating. So once again either way he can’t win for trying. Me personally, I don’t really need to know the details. I just assume it be kept a secret how we were able to foil the plan if the same technique can be used again.

By RW-(the original)

February 9, 2006 10:24 PM | Link to this

finch,

You have various cousins to be concerned with too. Somewhere deep down a certain family based in a lovely area near Cape Cod has to wonder why they aren’t in that string ‘o names.

By RW-(the original)

February 9, 2006 10:30 PM | Link to this

Objective Observer,

If you still have the link for that lovely screen cleaner would you mind posting it or dropping it off at my site?

By Ricky

February 9, 2006 10:38 PM | Link to this

RW, post the link to your site man. I want to check it out

By RW-(the original)

February 9, 2006 10:42 PM | Link to this

Ricky,

Can I get you to ask that on a daily basis?

By Dusty

February 9, 2006 10:53 PM | Link to this

Presidential candidates ?? Maybe when Chelsea is age 65 or 70 the Democrats might be able to elect a President from their party. But it will probably take a little longer than that.

By Gene

February 9, 2006 11:01 PM | Link to this

Hey, I really enjoyed listening to your comments, opinions, and observations on NPR’s “Talk of The Nation.” I found the show extremely interesting and informative. I wish more readers of AJC could have listened. You were very profesional in your views and how they were expressed. The impact of political cartooning is far greater than most people realize. Thanks.

By RW-(the original)

February 9, 2006 11:09 PM | Link to this

Well thank you Gene!!!, but that wasn’t me. Was it you Dusty? finch? Ricky? kimberly?

Gene,

How do you know how many readers listened to ml’s interview? There is something creepy about the rest of your post.

/jk

By finch

February 9, 2006 11:10 PM | Link to this

Dusty,

Who’da thought in 1980, after Reagan buried Carter, that we’d have Clinton for 8 years?? I wouldn’t rule the Dems out so cavalierly.

RW,

Yep, that’s a big Massechusetts clan.

By the way, is this the screen cleaner you want?

And as long as I’m here, I might as well pimp your blog, too!

By RW-(the original)

February 9, 2006 11:16 PM | Link to this

finch,

That might be the one, but there seems to be more to it now. I am collecting these links for a very serious post, mind you, that I will probably put here!

“getalife” eat your heart out! Blog pimping is reaching a new level tonight!!

By Michael

February 9, 2006 11:17 PM | Link to this

Hey Mike, I was given a lovely mental respite from the drudgery of filing office documents in a freezing storage room via my “walk-man” radio and your co-interview with Ms. Telnaes today. I had a got a much needed chuckle over your comment about the famous (unfortunately) Pat Robertson. I couldn’t agree more! Keep up the good work and continue to find the humor in the political arena. Cheers!

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 12:01 AM | Link to this

Tango. Some things need to be widely shared.

By Andy

February 10, 2006 12:21 AM | Link to this

To all of you who thought you got rid of me: P-iss off. What’s the matter, couldn’t oddball gay finch fill my shoes?

I’d like to share a funny moment I had with a bunch of extreme right wing money grubbing capitalists this evening as we were leaving Hartsfield Jackson. When you come up to the parking lot “pay booths,” you pull up to the window like you’re going to give your money to someone working inside but it turns out no one works there anymore. Now you scan your parking ticket and credit card into a machine and it raises the gate to let you out. Here’s what I said at that time: “Ain’t it funny how the democrats b-itch and moan all day about how we aren’t doing enough for the poor but yet they replace someone’s job with a machine?” This was received with gales of boisterious laughter, as we all were aware of the pathological pinko hypocrisy.

Anyway, I swore off the media the last few days, but from checking Drudge just now, I see that Harry Reid is fulfilling my prophecies and Bush has made the pinko mayor of LA look like an idiot, which ain’t saying much, because he saved them from the “non existent” terrorist threat. Some things never change.

By Andy

February 10, 2006 12:26 AM | Link to this

So what’s up with the gay president’s deal? Did I miss something? I know Bush is just trying to be the adult in this situation, he is trying to be civil amongst all the animosity, why make fun of his outreach? Are we trying to do some advertising for “Humpback Mountain?” Is this like a little pinko fill in between award ceremonies?

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 12:31 AM | Link to this

Andy,

Welcome back!!!!!!

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 12:39 AM | Link to this

Wow, moonbats eating their own. I would excerpt, but ml’s censor wouldn’t stand for it.

I don’t Michael Moore this &$%*

By Andy

February 10, 2006 12:40 AM | Link to this

RW: Thank you.

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 12:47 AM | Link to this

Andy,

The only problem now is these idiots will say “RW you said Andy isn’t around late at night”. The fact that this isn’t normal will be forever lost on them.

By Andy

February 10, 2006 12:53 AM | Link to this

RW: It ain’t the only thing we have surprised the pinkos on….

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 12:57 AM | Link to this

Andy,

That last comment coupled with ml’s scribbling could be very easily misinterpeted…not that there’s anything wrong with that, of course

By RE

February 10, 2006 04:58 AM | Link to this

Just following this cartoon to the next step….Clinton is the top, HW is the b***

By cynic

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

Candy A* and Rectum Wuss-a little “Brokeback” going on between these two?-clandestine late night trysts in the pig pen? We now that Semper Fi often joins in-Marines are taught how to give a treach around first thing in boot camp-they’s so thoughtfull and polite.

It’s well known the right wing likes to “eat their own” but there may be another dimension to that.

By Objective Observer

February 10, 2006 05:22 AM | Link to this

Andy:

Your obelus was missed.

R.W.: Yes I did go shopping. Thanks, but they have side-effects. Warm feet make me sleep. I’ll adjust with time.

Kimberly: Condescension disguiced as compassion is more offensive than condescension alone. It is, however, the philosophy of the liberal left.

Finch: Thanks for filling inin my absence.

By Objective Observer

February 10, 2006 05:52 AM | Link to this

Oops! Make that “disguised”.

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 06:35 AM | Link to this

Judging from the early morning news it will not be a good day for the Bush administration. It appears that all of the chickens are starting to come home to roost.

By Ricky

February 10, 2006 06:40 AM | Link to this

WWJD, there haven’t been many good days for the Bush administration lately. He is in a no-win situation at this point

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 06:41 AM | Link to this

Did Andy’s mom finally get him into Intervention?

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 06:56 AM | Link to this

With only himself to blame.

By Ricky

February 10, 2006 06:58 AM | Link to this

WWJD, it doesn’t matter what Bush does. You will hate him either way

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 06:59 AM | Link to this

I don’t hate him Ricky. What makes you say that? I voted for the guy and over the course of time he has lost my trust just as he has with others.

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 07:01 AM | Link to this

Politicians should learn that the TRUTH will work with the American people. We are not like the movie where where Jack Nicholson screamed, “you can’t handle the truth.”

By Ricky

February 10, 2006 07:07 AM | Link to this

WWJD, I say that because i have never seen you post a positive comment about him. Now that being said, I am no huge fan of Bush myself. He has really disappointed me over the 5 years of his tenure. What I don’t like to see is the blind partisanship from either side. People who won’t admit he does anything wrong or anything right, whichever the case may be. I got that vibe from your post and if I was wrong I apologize

By candide

February 10, 2006 07:24 AM | Link to this

Bush 43 has demonstrated arrogance and ignorance; his handling of the Iraq situation demonstrates this beyond doubt. Bush 41 could never get out a coherent sentence either, talking as he did about a thousand points of light and crap like that. He will be remembered as an amiable fool, married to a real b***, she is responsible for 43’s odd liking for women like Hughes and Rice and Miers.

The Bushes, I have said before, demonstrate genetic degeneration in the WASP elite. Prescott Bush was a distinguished man and business and political leader. Bush 41 left New England for Texas and started eating pork rinds, thus becoming a faux redneck. 43 is a thorough redneck.

Bill Clinton is a real redneck but one who has risen above the trailer park.

By Ricky

February 10, 2006 07:44 AM | Link to this

candide, another one of your rascists and hate-filled rants to start the day. You constantly harp about how the right is close miinded and bigoted and yet you are one of the most rascist people who posts on here

By Jesus

February 10, 2006 08:34 AM | Link to this

IMPEACH BUSH NOW!!!

By Taye Kover

February 10, 2006 08:49 AM | Link to this

Yeah, about as real and genuine as anything gets in a Clinton’s life. The Bush family will eventually go the way of all those who “befriend” Bill and Hillary: trashed and smeared for political and/or personal gained probably, but hopefully not indicted, jailed, or a suicide. You can’t sell your soul to the devil and expect him or her to never collect.

By Andy

February 10, 2006 09:07 AM | Link to this

Do you pinkos ever get serious?

WWJD says: Politicians should learn that the TRUTH will work with the American people.

But, in reality: Abramoff Team and Reid’s Office Had Frequent Contact, Records Show

Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid wrote at least four letters helpful to Indian tribes represented by Jack Abramoff, and Reid’s staff had frequent contact with the disgraced lobbyist’s team about legislation.

The activities — detailed in previously unreported billing records and correspondence — occurred over three years as Reid (D-Nev.) collected nearly $68,000 in political donations from Abramoff’s firm, lobbying partners and clients.

Is this what you’re talking about, WWJD? And getalife, isn’t the next step in this cleansing process supposed to be Reid stepping down from the leadership post? You guys don’t want to be outreformed, do you? Lose the reform proliferation race?

By Andy

February 10, 2006 09:21 AM | Link to this

I thought this clown was investigating the Valerie “Mrs. Don’t Invade My Privacy” Plame leak?

Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald said in documents filed last month that he plans to introduce evidence that I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Cheney’s former chief of staff, disclosed to reporters the contents of a classified National Intelligence Estimate in the summer of 2003.

Looks to me like this bozo is flailing all around trying to find something, anything he can use to pin on Libby. Which means, I guess, that he has nothing.

By Liberal Texas Democrat

February 10, 2006 09:21 AM | Link to this

Finch wrote: This one’s SO good!

I can’t explain the GHWB-BC friendship, either.

Maybe it has something to do with childhood abandonment/daddy syndrome dynamic. That or two consummate politicians who can’t get enough of each others company. i mean really who would understand each other more than two persons who’ve run against each other in a political campaign? All that said, I can’t help but wonder how many times a day one of them hears, “Who’s your daddy?”.

By Liberal Texas Democrat

February 10, 2006 09:30 AM | Link to this

Candide wrote “The Bushes, I have said before, demonstrate genetic degeneration in the WASP elite. Prescott Bush was a distinguished man and business and political leader.”

I beg to differ

By Andy

February 10, 2006 09:33 AM | Link to this

Liberal Texas Democrat: Did you ever consider that the Bush family might just be gracious, respecting, stately and mature in their honoring of a past president and of the office itself? And not bitter, angry, stupid foaming at the mouth conspiracy theorists like you liberals usually are?

Anybody who witnessed the unveiling of the Clinton portraits in the White House can tell you the GWB has elevated himself above the silly partisan antics that the democrats so easily engage in. He spoke well of the Clinton’s, extending the proverbial olive branch, and for his troubles he got bit by a rabid pack of stupid, conniving, rabid little animals that the Clintons are.

It’s an adult thing, which puts it out of your realm of understanding and causes you to ponder such mysteries.

By Ricky

February 10, 2006 09:34 AM | Link to this

LTD, don’t worry candide doesn’t really believe that either. She is just trying to make the current President sound as bad as possible using rascist posts. Would you also agree that Robert Byrd is not a distinguished man due to his memebership in the KKK and filibustering the Civil Rights Act?

By Ricky

February 10, 2006 09:37 AM | Link to this

Past Presidents have an understoond agreement that they won’t critize the sitting President. GHWB stood by this agreement during Clinton’s trouble, so maybe Clinton was thankful for that and they have actually forged a frienship. Its too bad good ole Jimmy Carter couldn’t abide by this agreement at the King funeral

By Andy

February 10, 2006 09:37 AM | Link to this

Did I fail to mention the Clinton’s were rabid?

By Jewish and Proud of It

February 10, 2006 09:38 AM | Link to this

Would you also agree that Robert Byrd is not a distinguished man due to his memebership in the KKK and filibustering the Civil Rights Act

Ricky, I would, while he may have changed his strips since then, any affiliation with that organization, however long ago and however mildly, automatically removes the word distinguished as an adjective you could ever apply to yourself or have others apply to you.

By Liberal Texas Democrat

February 10, 2006 09:38 AM | Link to this

It’s not about Byrd, it’s about Bush.

By Ricky

February 10, 2006 09:42 AM | Link to this

LTD, so its only wrong if its a Bush. Why can’t you call out people that you agree with? Why the double standard?

By Andy

February 10, 2006 09:46 AM | Link to this

Cal Thomas nails the efeect that democrat meddling has on our national security:

The New York Times recalled those “glorious” (for the left) days by reprinting a picture of Church talking to reporters during the 1975 hearings into the misuse of intelligence gathering by the Nixon administration. Though Nixon used government agencies to spy on his domestic political enemies, the Times wants its readers to believe the Bush administration monitoring of phone calls and other communications between terrorist suspects outside the country, and those inside, is similar behavior. What the newspaper fails to acknowledge is that the findings of the Church Committee led to dismantling many useful intelligence-gathering operations, thus limiting our ability to gather precisely the type of intelligence that would have been useful in stopping the terrorist attacks against America of September 11, 2001.

None of this bothers the pinkos, they just keep driving on, even today wrecking our ability to defend ourselves.

They are, after all, our real enemies. If Ted “Drunk and Stupid” Kennedy, the Swimmer, would leave a woman to drown when he could have saved her, thinking only of his own fat a-ss, what do you think he would do to this country if it needed his help?

By finch

February 10, 2006 09:56 AM | Link to this

“I thought this clown (Pat Fitzgerald) was investigating the Valerie “Mrs. Don’t Invade My Privacyâ€? Plame leak?”

Kind of like Ken Starr was investigating the failed Whitewater real estate deal?

Where’s that definition of hypocrisy again?

By Jewish and Proud of It

February 10, 2006 09:57 AM | Link to this

As Stewie from Family Guy would say, Oh boy, here we go again!

By Liberal Texas Democrat

February 10, 2006 10:02 AM | Link to this

Ricky, i don’t need to be fair: in 1987 a bill to place the Fairness Doctrine into federal law passed the House by 3 to 1, and the Senate by nearly 2 to 1, but it was vetoed by President Ronald Reagan. Among those voting for the bill were Rep. Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) and Sen. Jesse Helms (R-N.C.). In 1989 the Fairness Doctrine easily passed the House again, but didn’t proceed further as President George Bush threatened to veto it. In 1991, hearings were again held on the doctrine, but President Bush’s ongoing veto threat stymied passage.

By Andy

February 10, 2006 10:05 AM | Link to this

Nothing like a shot of hot Ann on a cold morning:

But apparently the Quran is like the Constitution: It’s a “living document,” capable of sprouting all-new provisions at will. Muslims ought to start claiming the Quran also prohibits indoor plumbing, to explain their lack of it.

Other interpretations of the Quran forbid images of humans or animals, which makes even a child’s coloring book blasphemous. That’s why the Taliban blew up those priceless Buddhist statues, bless their innocent, peace-loving little hearts.

By candide

February 10, 2006 10:19 AM | Link to this

WWJD? Who the hell cares and what difference would it make?

WWMD? that’s for Mohammed.

WWMoD? Moses.

WWBD? Buddha

By Voice of Reason

February 10, 2006 10:26 AM | Link to this

Ricky - How did Carter bringing up the fact that the King’s were victims of illegal wiretapping become an insult to the sitting president?

By getalife

February 10, 2006 10:29 AM | Link to this

“If President Bush is wiretapping my phone and listening to my calls, I think he actually should pay for half of the phone-sex bill.” —-David Letterman

By getalife

February 10, 2006 10:32 AM | Link to this

Jimmy

and Jimmy again

By kimberly

February 10, 2006 10:34 AM | Link to this

Objective Observer at 5:22 this morning, you said, “”Condescension disguiced as compassion is more offensive than condescension alone.” Do you have some special magic ability to know what’s in the heart of a person you never met?

Who was it that said, “If you only love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even repugnant folks love those who love them. Be kind to those who despise you, hoping and expecting nothing in return.”

I’d like to quote something Dusty said that I truly agree with: “I think it best not make judgements on the lives of others. To do so just shows the cracks in our own.”

Have a blessed day — Y’ALL!

By Eric

February 10, 2006 10:37 AM | Link to this

I’m not sure what to think about this one. Is it supposed to be a slap at Bill and George or is it a compliment? Neither of them are gay, but if they were, would it be a bad thing? Or, like in the movie, it’s only bad in the sense that society destroys their lives. I chuckled at first glance, but now I’m confused. No matter. Mike rules!

By finch

February 10, 2006 10:39 AM | Link to this

Stunning! The AP, hitero considered a lying left wing monkey by right wing zealots, drops the bomb on Harry Reid!

But does it??

The office of virtually every member of Congress got legal money from Abramoff’s firm, but often not from Abramoff himself. The legal money is not the issue. The issue is the money Abracmoff stole from the tribes, laundered, and then funnelled to Republicans.

And Abramoff lackeys billing the tribes for phone calls they made to Reid’s office? I’m scared, man! Really scared!

The Fat Lady hasn’t even warmed up for this performance. Snicker.

By gadem

February 10, 2006 10:40 AM | Link to this

UH ANDY Bush has met with Abramoff as well. No one is denying that Reid met with him, but please by equally vile in your post.

By Dusty

February 10, 2006 10:52 AM | Link to this

Andy,

Glad you are back. We need your fireworks to keep our batteries recharged.

Did you see H. A. Von Spakovsky’s letter to the editor this morning? He said that Cynthia Tucker’s claims (editorial) related to voter registration are false. His letter starts I don’t know whether to laugh or cry at the ridiculous chain of logic to Cynthia Tucker’s column” He continues with valid points to his statement.

Von Spakovsky is commissioner of the Federal Election Commission in Washington.

Von Spakovsky must not read the AJC very much or he would be accustomed to the “ridiculous chain of logic” exhibited by Tucker and Bookman.

By finch

February 10, 2006 11:02 AM | Link to this

Even if BushCo had unlimited surveillance authority, they’d still manage to mess up a picnic.

“(The Bush administration) set a new standard of cynicism when it allowed NASA’s leading authority on global warming to be mugged by a 24-year-old presidential appointee (George Deutsch) who, quite apart from having no training on that issue, had inflated his résumé.”

The Bush administration can’t even vet a person who lied about a college degree on his job application! Of course, this is the same outfit that put Michael (you’re doing a heckuva job!) Brown to head FEMA (how many Arabian horses are in FEMA?), and nominated veterinarian Norris Alderson, a man, to head the FDA’s Office of Women’s Health!

BushCo doesn’t know how to use the fact finding resources it does have. It’s no wonder that, after over 4 years, Osama’s still at large. If they were given a map, updated hourly, locating OBL, they’d be looking in, ohhhhh… Puerto Rico.

Come to think of it, maybe that’s why BushCo hasn’t found any WMD’s in Iraq. If there are any, that is. It couldn’t find it’s as-s with a mirror and a flashlight.

By Monica's Man

February 10, 2006 11:05 AM | Link to this

candide make’s me want to puke. What a sorry pieace of crap person……

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 11:15 AM | Link to this

OK. Libby is rolling over on Cheney. Abramof says that he met with Bush a dozen times or more and was invited to the ranch. The former head of Middle Eastern Intelligence says that intel was cherry picked to suit the case to invade Iraq and that other intel was thrown out or disregarded. It was Cheney’s office that was responsible for the final intel report that went to congress and GWB. IF all of this is true it refutes what has been the story coming out of the administration since day 1. With the exception of the Abramof mess, which impacts on both parties, every stinky mess that the president is dealing with originated in Cheney’s office. If Cheney had any loyalty or concern for his boss, he should resign immediately. If not Bush should grow some cojones and fire his sorry a$#. Bush minus Cheney is probably alot better for America.

By Dusty

February 10, 2006 11:16 AM | Link to this

finch,

If the Democratic portion of Congress doesn’t get its act together, the only surveillance tools our security people will have left is A MIRROR AND A FLASHLIGHT.

By finch

February 10, 2006 11:29 AM | Link to this

Dusty,

Let me get this straight. BushCo doesn’t know how to use resources it legally has. It doesn’t know how to use resources that are arguably illegal, either.

And you want to give it carte blanche to snoop anywhere, with absolutely no oversight??

“Look hon! Our baby is having SO MUCH fun splashing in that pool of gasoline! What say we give him a lighter, too?”

By Dusty

February 10, 2006 11:39 AM | Link to this

finch

I’d say that having no attacks on America since 9/11 is a pretty good record. Did you notice that the lighthouse on Hilton Head has not been bombed by terrorists?

As to snooping anywhere, what misinformation you present. Why don’t you read the Patriot Act? It might give you a little oversight.

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 11:41 AM | Link to this

finch, does it seem to you that even the Bush aplogists here are having some trouble bolstering their case in light of new developments? Their google searches keep them away for much longer periods now.

By Andy

February 10, 2006 11:49 AM | Link to this

gadem: You are absolutely right, it just goes to show you that with hard work and diligence even you can contribute to the discussion, be it ever so rarely, but yes Bush did meet Abramoff as well as 10 million other visitors to the White House and other functions.

Heck, I met Bill Campbell one time, does that make me a crook? Can I tell everybody that I slept with Marion Brooks now?

That is why I posted 9:07 is to show that Harry Reid not only met Abramoff, he also took “legal” money from his clients in exchange for favorable legislation and/ or official acts. Bush didn’t, as matter of fact, he can’t, he is not a Congressman.

They have a “legal” term for this, if I may define that word using oddball gay finche’s boundaries, it is called Scot Free for GWB.

By getalife

February 10, 2006 12:02 PM | Link to this

This government could use some scott free.

It stinks like New Orleans after Katrina.

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 12:05 PM | Link to this

WWJD,

Leaving aside your insinuations about Cheney, how is President Bush supposed to fire his sorry a-ss?

Are you that ignorant of our electoral process?

finch,

One big difference between Ken Starr and Fitzgerald is that as each new skeleton came out of the Clinton closet Starr went back to Janet Reno for instruction and authorization on how to proceed. Fitz is just throwing cow patties at a wall to see if any of them stick.

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 12:09 PM | Link to this

I guess what is more proper would be to say, Bush should convince him to resign.

RW, are you aware how Ken Starr became Special Prosecutor?

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 12:11 PM | Link to this

WWJD,

I’ll say no, so that you can give me your kook conspiracy theory. Type away, I’ll get the popcorn started.

By Andy

February 10, 2006 12:16 PM | Link to this

Bob Tyrell understands the situation:

And there are sociologists who perceive a deeper cause, the ancient patriarchy of these countries. In places such as Syria, which is mostly Arab, and Iran, which is not, old men rule their families and their clans. They keep women and girls in the background. They keep young men in inferior status, despite the young men’s talents and energies. The consequence is a lot of angry, frustrated young men. Such young men are available for riot at the drop of a… well, at the drop of a cartoon. Whether the economists are right or the neocons or the sociologists, or any other gogues that might offer up an analysis, one thing is eminently clear: The peoples in such a rage over Danish cartoonists are a deeply troubled people. They are incapable of reason or even of governing themselves. They are the enemy of civilization, whether it be Western civilization or some civilized order that might emerge in the Middle East.

By candide

February 10, 2006 12:17 PM | Link to this

You did a great job, Brownie!

What does Bush think of his committee testimony?

You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time, but you can fool Republicans always — just promise a tax cut and a strong military and they go ape.

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 12:19 PM | Link to this

Just exactly where did I say “conspiracy theory” RW? I will be glad to give you a sequence of events that led to Starr being appointed after Wild Bill signed a new Independent Counsel Statute. But Starr going back to Janet Reno on anything is abjectly false.

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 12:22 PM | Link to this

WWJD,

It is absolutely not false. Go ahead and give me your sequence if you really want, but I’m not the least bit interested.

By Old school parent

February 10, 2006 12:26 PM | Link to this

WWJD - I’m curious - Is your nom de blog short for “world wide juvenile delinquents”? While you’re busy Googling and reading the Daily Kos, why don’t you take a trip back in time to some of the fundraising activities at the Clinton White House. See Dan Burton’s Congressional hearings and all the Johnnie Chung types who fled the country. Why do you think they did that JD? And why did Jamie Gorelick put up a wall between the FBI and the CIA? And how about a little refresher on Hilary and the FBI files. How about the hiring of Private Dick Pellicano to dig up dirt on the ops? Where was all your paranoia then? Weren’t you concerned about what you libdems term “illegal domestic surveillance” pre 9/11? Maybe you were still in Kindergarten or the dog ate your newspaper so you don’t remember?

Dusty - Actually we do have one more weapon that should really cower the enemy: SPITBALLS.

By Scooter

February 10, 2006 12:34 PM | Link to this

WWJD in regards to your cherry picking intel and Cheney resigning;

Granted I am young and haven’t lived through any wars, outside of Grenada and the Central American conflicts of Reagan, but if a President wanted to militarily enforce a UN Resolution, that had been mocked for twelve years, why would he emphasize all of the reasons not to do it? What war president in the past has done such a thing? It just doesn’t seem a reasonable course to achieve the ends, you know?

Do you realize that if Bush had not done such a thing Saddam would still be buying his way out from under sanctions (Oil For Food Corruption) and be ready to reconstitute his WMD programs (both Kay and Duelfer Reports state such).

So let me try to imagine how things would be had we taken the Dems old course of “Whacking Moles” (to use Clinton’s phrase); we would have invaded Afghanistan and focused more troops into mountain combat, which many would not have been trained for. They would have been focused on Finding UBL. If we did catch him, or kill him, I don’t think turning him into a martyr would help our effort too much, but that’s my opinion.

Maybe we would have UBL and that would cause whatever, but Saddam would still be making a mockery of UN Resolutions, thereby making that world body appear even more inept than it already does to some. What good is an ally if they are inept? In addition, it is possible that Saddam would be winning elections by 99 percent by now and the elections could be endorsed by Jimmy Carter.

WWJD, I understand war is hell, but I also thought all was fair on the battle field. But, the left taught me that our Soldiers must approach wounded terrorist and just hope they don’t self detonate.

Dr. R asked for someone to paint him a picture the other day. He wanted a picture of what the situation would currently be, had we followed the dems course, in regard to enforcing UN Resolution 687, adopted after Desert Storm. WWJD, keep in mind that the inspectors were only alowed back in because Bush pushed the UN, after approximately five years of being removed from Iraq. The pushing of the UN took some six months and we had little account of what Saddam was doing during that time.

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 12:37 PM | Link to this

I realize that RW. But you made an uninformed statement and held it up as fact. Everything that I am about to say can be verified if you really want to look.

Janet Reno originally appointed Robert Fiske, a Republican as Independent Counsel/Special Prosecutor, what ever you want to call it. When Clinton signed the new Independent Counsel statute, the task of appointing Independent Counsels fell to a special division created under the new law. Chief Justice Rehnquist was responsible for hiring the head of this division, who in turn would appoint the independent counsel. Rehnquist appointed Judge David Sentelle for that position. Judge Sentelle was an ultr-conservative protégé of Sen. Jesse Helms. Sentelle fired Fiske and appointed Starr, who had been a court of appeals judge and solicitor general in the 1st Bush administration. Starr had actually been an outspoken advocate of Paula Jones and actually offered to write a friend of the court brief on her behalf. The New York Times also reported that prior to firing Fiske that Sentelle had had lunch with Fiske’s biggest critic, LauchFaircloth and Jesse Helms. The 3 said they were discussing prostate problems.

Anyway RW, Starr reporting back to Janet Reno in no way form or fashion. He reported to Judge Sentelle. So actually Starr had closer ties to Clinton’s political enemies than he did to the Justice Department.

By Midori

February 10, 2006 12:38 PM | Link to this

Old School Parent —

an “old school” way of cooking pasta is to throw it against the wall to see if it sticks.

this was how you tested to see if its done.

Much like your post.

You put everything in there but the kitchen sink.

and that “spitball” comment.

sheesh.

Are you Zell Miller’s alter ego?

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 12:38 PM | Link to this

Old School Parent = Buy Danish. Used different internet browser and didn’t notice outdated blog name. Mea Culpa.

By Ronnie

February 10, 2006 12:40 PM | Link to this

Bush lied again, I’m am crushed.

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 12:43 PM | Link to this

Midori - The point is that Zell Miller was right. Please tell us what your plans are for the defense of this nation. Many of us would really like to hear some actual suggestions from the Left for a change instead of childish and boorish ad hominems.

And the kitchen sink is filled with dirty dishes.

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 12:44 PM | Link to this

Hi Midori. I think it is getting harder and harder for the administration apologists to defend their positions. I think the sh&% is really about to hit the fan, and I really wouldn’t be surprised to see some IC action on some of these guys. Judging from some of the post Iran-Contra convictions, some of these guys have to be worried.

I am also watching Brown (FEMA) testify today. VERY interesting.

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 12:46 PM | Link to this

Buy-Danish. The defense of this country is not one dimensional. The Iraqi war and the war on terrorism are not the whole equation.

By Scooter

February 10, 2006 12:48 PM | Link to this

Look here, it seems DailyKos is trying to get their “group think” pool of info together.

Dkosopedia.com, nice!

By finch

February 10, 2006 12:49 PM | Link to this

” …(if) *a President wanted to militarily enforce a UN Resolution, that had been mocked for twelve years, why would he emphasize all of the reasons not to do it?”

Scooter, you raise a very important point.

Question: What right does a US President have to enforce a UN resolution?

Answer: None, unless the UN authorizes it.

Question: Did the UN authorize the 2003 invasion of Iraq by the US?

Answer: No.

Conclusion: The US invasion of Iraq was a unilateral military action that was neither endorsed, accepted nor even condoned by the United Nations.

And that’s that.

By kimberly

February 10, 2006 12:52 PM | Link to this

WWJD, thanks for clarifying the Ken Starr stuff. Am I correct in my recollectins that he actually wanted to quit when he kept coming up empty, and move on with his life, and take a job at Pepperdine U.? As I recall, his bosses wouldn’t hear of it, and demanded he continue, regardless of timeframe or expense to the taxpayer, until he found something — anything, with which to “nail” the President. (For which he could only find sex — not illegal — or lying to be discreet — illegal when you’re forced to go under oath to testify to the whereabouts of your willy.) Do you remember it this way as well?

By Scooter

February 10, 2006 12:53 PM | Link to this

finch, I guess that is what you interpret “serious consequences” to mean.

You avoided addressing how the UN would be working to enforce Resolution 687, had Bush simply focused on UBL and continued to trust the UN to disarm a man we provided with WMD’s.

By gadem

February 10, 2006 12:56 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish = The Grinch AKA The Token…

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 01:00 PM | Link to this

WWJD,

This is from one of your kook sites and would appear to back your claims, with a tiny little exception.

Only in January 1998, after Starr pushed his way into the Monica Lewinsky case — which arose from the Paula Jones suit — were questions asked about Starr’s potential conflicts of interest. Those questions sharpened in October with release of more Lewinsky evidence.

In mid-October, National Public Radio brought attention to Starr’s larger role in the Paula Jones case in 1994. NPR reported that Starr met the Jones lawyers half a dozen times.

But Starr did not disclose these contacts when he approached Reno in 1988. “It just did not occur that it was relevant,” said Starr spokesman Charles G. Bakaly III. [WP, Oct. 17, 1998]

It certainly sounds like Starr had to go to Janet Reno to get Lewinsky included in the scope of his investigation. (1988 is obviously a typo).

Maybe he was just asking her to go dancing.

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 01:00 PM | Link to this

WWJD - Iran Contra? You’re kidding! You want to open up that can of worms? Let’s talk about Ollie North and his testimony about Abu Nidal. Unlike you and your partisan soul mates like Midori, Colonel North actually understood the threat of Islamic extremists to our nation. And got criticized for protecting his family.

Now you can make all the predictions that you want, but so far all your scandals have fallen flat. It just might have something to do with the integrity of the Bush Administration. You can disagree with him, but your side’s attempts to demonize him aren’t working.

Waiting for the next big story? I say it has something to do with leaking classified information to the New York Times. That’s the one I’m waiting for. Let’s just hope we all live to hear it since your side has so cavalierly comprimised our national security.

Gotta go make some spitballs.

By Pinko Supremo

February 10, 2006 01:06 PM | Link to this

Pinko…

Another Pinko….

[PINKO!!!] (http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/59867.htm)

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 01:20 PM | Link to this

By WWJD “The defense of this country is not one dimensional. The Iraqi war and the war on terrorism are not the whole equation.” Agreed. So what’s your point?

Gadem - OOOOHHHH. You just slay me with your wit.

By Mike

February 10, 2006 01:23 PM | Link to this

Looks like the garbage pile for the trash talking Republicans.

Libby rolled.

Abramoff rolled.

Two thirds of the country thinks Fox News is an unreliable source for truth.

The Evangelicals believe in Global Warming.

If you see a white male with his head stuck up his b—-, Don’t worry.

It’s just another Republican kissing his a* good bye.

By Scooter

February 10, 2006 01:28 PM | Link to this

Mike, it is good to know that democrats are so pure?

Trash talking republicrats? Someone calls another a Pinko and that is trash talk or hte speech, but calling people fascist etc… is patriotic dissent. Life is good when you make your own rules, huh?

By Dusty

February 10, 2006 01:31 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

Only spitballs? Have you forgotten secret messages written with lemon juice on white paper? Maybe I should remind NSA that this is a permissable way to communicate without impugning anybody’s honor and freedom. But shhhhh…don’t tell the Democrats about the secret process, i.e. heating the paper over an electric light bulb. They will ban lemons.

Oh well….hmmmm

By Voice of Reason

February 10, 2006 01:32 PM | Link to this

Looks like Brownie doesn’t want to play scapegoat anymore … I say, you’re doin a heckova job Brownie! Show em the emails!

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 01:32 PM | Link to this

Mike - Web Hubbell rolled too, remember? I wouldn’t bet all my casino dollars on Abramoff. Yawn. But thanks for elevating the level of discourse out of the trash and into the outhouse with such eloquence.

By candide

February 10, 2006 01:34 PM | Link to this

Laura Bush, in Rome, has told the Pope that the secret wiretapping program uncovered a plot to blow up the Vatican in 2003. Benedict XVI thanked her but did not say that he would start Dubya’s canonization process quite yet.

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 01:36 PM | Link to this

Dusty - LOL! Let’s come up with a list of the top ten methods to fight Al Qaeda that might meet their approval. Back later…

By Scooter

February 10, 2006 01:40 PM | Link to this

Well, I guess finch is really mulling my question over.

finch, I anxiously await your scenario thet would have resulted had we followed the brave and noble democrat’s Iraq policies. No revisionint history please. I’ll check back

By Pinko Supremo

February 10, 2006 01:41 PM | Link to this

Trash Talking?

You keep forgeting…Pinko is now a BADGE OF HONOR…

I have nothing but respect for these people for accepting or disseminating the truth.

If people like Senator Joseph McCarthy call people who disagree with him a Pinko….then that is a badge of honor.

If disagreeing with George W. Bush makes you a liberal, then liberal is a badge of honor.

If thinking that the Iraq was is a waste of time makes you a traitor for not ‘supporting our troops’ then traitor is a badge of honor.

The rules are rather consist to me…..the only rule that those in the Cabal (now see…THAT’S trash talking…) care about is that they’re the only ones that get to make the rules, that they are not accountable to the rules, and if you are not with us you’re against us.

By Pinko Supremo

February 10, 2006 01:42 PM | Link to this

No revisionist history?

No Revisionist history?

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAAH! Snort snort BAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHA!

HAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAAA!

Ok….we won’t use any revisionist history here at all.

HeeeeeeeeAAAAAAAAhahaha!

By G. Orwell

February 10, 2006 01:46 PM | Link to this

If the Party could thrust its hand into the past and say this or that even, it never happened—that, surely, was more terrifying than mere torture and death.”

“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed—if all records told the same tale—then the lie passed into history and became truth. ‘Who controls the past’ ran the Party slogan, ‘controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.’”

“Day by day and almost minute by minute the past was brought up to date. In this way every prediction made by the Party could be shown by documentary evidence to have been correct; nor was any item of news, or any expression of opinion, which conflicted with the needs of the moment, ever allowed to remain on record. All history was a palimpsest, scraped clean and reinscribed exactly as often as was necessary”

By Pinko Supremo

February 10, 2006 01:47 PM | Link to this

Operative word there being ‘THE party’ friend….

Washington warned us….and we didn’t listen.

By Andy

February 10, 2006 01:52 PM | Link to this

Pinko Weirdo: So are you accusing the democrats of changing history? It’s kind of hard to tell from your posts.

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 01:55 PM | Link to this

Buy-Danish. Did I say one word about Ollie North? Or did your telepathic mind read what I was thinking. Since your knowledge of history needs a little kick start, if anything I was refering to Caspar Weinberger being convicted and later pardoned by President Bush.

As for the one dimensional defense issue comment. It seems that like all one trick ponies, certain people on this blog can only keep going back to the Iraq war or terrorism. No one wants to discuss other aspects of defense. There is the economic security (huge deficits) of this country. International drug cartels threaten our security, and yes, natural disasters directly impact the security of this country. This administration is so obsessed (along with alot of folks on this blog) with terror mania and Iraq that they can’t see the forest for the trees. Be it terrorism or a natural disaster, dead is dead, and the economic impact in both cases is quantifiable.

By Monica's Man

February 10, 2006 01:57 PM | Link to this

Bunch of Liberal losers on this board…I bet they live with their parents and never been laid.

By Pinko Supremo

February 10, 2006 01:57 PM | Link to this

I’m accusing YOU of changing history Andy.

I’m accusing YOU and all those like you of sticking their head in the sand and ignoring the world as it falls apart around you.

I’m accusing you of accepting cheap firecrackers for the real REAL American Patriotism.

I’m accusing the Democrats of being idiots and the Republicans (as they currently stand) of being bigger idiots.

I’m accusing you of H-Y-PO-CR-ACY, rhymes with PHA-RI-SEEE, STU-PID-TY, and lack of D-I-PLO-MACY.

I’m accusing anyone who ignores the warnings of being complicit in the destruction of light, honor and goodness in our society.

And I’m accusing you for the future generations that will look back when the truth is revealed, as it always will be revealed, of standing by and letting evil run dark and rampant.

For seven weeks I have been commenting on this list, and with a very few exceptions, I have convinced very few of very little. To those who have listened, I salute you. To those I have listened to, I adore you. May the power of rational independent thinking beyond that of any party or memelocked idiology prevail.

My time here is done. I have other things to move on to, but I wish you well.

Shadowmarch/Pinko Supremo

By Monica's Man

February 10, 2006 02:05 PM | Link to this

Pinko Supremo, the only thing you have convinced me of is that you are an Idiot. Good luck in your pathetic life.

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 02:05 PM | Link to this

Kimberly,yes I do. And RW, the kook site that you alledged that I got my Ken Starr info from was a book written by a rather well known politician. And guess which party he belongs to.

You guys are to the point now that all you can do is try to sully other people and “shout them down” with insinuations and your clairvoyance. Of course we all know that Rushrant, Hannityhorsesh&$, and O’Reillyregurgitate are good sources.

By Scooter

February 10, 2006 02:05 PM | Link to this

Not bowing down to terrorist is a pretty big thing in life. I only really only enter to try and show the importance of the invading Iraq and supporting a capitaist economy. I leave the other stuff alone for the most part. When I see someone babling the halftruths that the democrat party have disseminated in an effort to politicize a conflict, I try to call them on it. I was not the first to bring it up and I realize you did not say I was.

Some could say thet when cornered with facts about Iraq’s history, many on the left will choose to divert attention to other issues. Could it not?

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 02:07 PM | Link to this

Want some nifty revisionist history, {check out the first post](http://rw-theoriginal.blogspot.com/). When did the AP quit even pretending to be journalists?

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 02:08 PM | Link to this

Memo to NSA: Legal tools to fight terrorism

A few more: Force terrorists at Gitmo to eat Hot Cross buns; Take a tip from Michael Jackson and hire monkeys to clean their cells; Utilize accepted torture technique and blast “Havanagila� over ghettoblasters 24/7…

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 02:08 PM | Link to this

Want some nifty revisionist history, check out the first post. When did the AP quit even pretending to be journalists?

By Voice of Reason

February 10, 2006 02:12 PM | Link to this

Okay Scooter — why was Iraq more important than say … ummm Syria, Iran or North Korea. Iran and N. Korea were a much bigger threats to our country than Iraq. And (it’s a two parter) why was Iraq more important than catching Osama?

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 02:12 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

The liberals would never go for 5,7,8, or 10 because they would insensitive. #9 would probably have to change to add a cameraman.

By kimberly

February 10, 2006 02:14 PM | Link to this

Breaking news: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060210/apongoprwh/bush;ylt=ArbcUWn6hATiP4amN6m5jOyFz4D;_ylu=X3oDMTA5aHJvMDdwBHNlYwN5bmNhdA

Reporters then were ushered out — “I support the free press, let’s just get them out of the room,” Bush said — so the president could speak privately to his fellow Republicans.

“I want to share some thoughts with you before I answer your questions,” said Bush, unaware that microphones were still on and were transmitting his comments back to the White House press room. “First of all, I expect this conversation we’re about to have to stay in the room. I know that’s impossible in Washington.”

By Dusty

February 10, 2006 02:14 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

If you can compile a list of ten “approved” methods, I will send you my Wheaties Code Ring in appreciation. But these methods must not crush the Constitution, terminate Thomas Jefferson, or meddle with Madison. Hey, I’m legal!!!

Speaking of Pinkos or was I ?…… I do believe that Pinko Supremo is Midori. You know. Same old hysterical outbursts.

By Andy

February 10, 2006 02:18 PM | Link to this

I never would have thought ME was the one revising history!

Clinton was an economic genius and brought about the go go 90’s, never mind the peace dividend from Republicans winning the cold war and the speculation and capital burns of the dot.com boom, which collapsed just in time to blame Bush for it.

Jimmy Carter winning the cold war and defeating the Soviet Union by covering them up with treaties.

McCarthy ruining the lives of every pinko that ever visited Hollywood even though the libs can’t come up with one name.

Now, if you don’t mind, could you tell me what we have been revising?

By kimberly

February 10, 2006 02:18 PM | Link to this

Dusty says: (2-9-06, 9:53 PM) “I think it best not make judgements on the lives of others. To do so just shows the cracks in our own.”

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 02:19 PM | Link to this

I don’t know RW. Tell us when the quit pretending to be reporters. Was it when the Limbaughs, Hannitys, and O’Reillys started calling themselves “entertainers”? Maybe the real reporters decided to level the playing field. After all, there is less accountability for your stuff when you are an “entertainer.”

By finch

February 10, 2006 02:21 PM | Link to this

Scooter,

Show me where the UN authorized a ground invasion by the US (or anyone) against Iraq at anytime between 1991 (the end of the Gulf War) and 2003 (the beginning of the Iraq War).

You can’t.

Or as Wikipedia puts it:

“The attempt of the United Kingdom and the United States to obtain a further Resolution authorizing force failed. Thus, the U.S.-led invasion (in 2003) *began without the express approval of the United Nations Security Council, and most legal authorities regard it as a violation of the UN Charter.”

In other words, the US had no authority to invade Iraq to enforce any UN resolution involving any agreement ending the 1991 Gulf War. Any argument that the US was enforcing the will of the UN is piffle.

Case closed.

By Dusty

February 10, 2006 02:22 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

My Wheaties code ring is in the mail. Great list. I would quibble about giving Kerry a rifle. He might shoot himself in the foot and you know what that means—-another Purple Heart.

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 02:24 PM | Link to this

WWJD - Iran Contra and Oliver North are inextricably linked, so my knowledge of recent history is quite on target.

What’s your logic? Since “natural disasters” present as large a threat as Bin Laden or Saddam Hussein, and we’re all going to die anyway, we should just lie down and accept our burkhas and turbans peacefully? And I’m just fascinated with the Left’s obsession with deficits on the one hand and endless requests for funding pet projects on the other. And I guess mortgages are a right wing thing. BTW, I can’t tell you how many times I had to rack up extra debt on my credit card to pay the government even more taxes than my already substantial contribution, so on a personal level higher taxes equal personal deficits.

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 02:25 PM | Link to this

WWJD,

If you went and looked at my link about what Toni Locy, a paid reporter for the Associated Press not somebody with a talk show or an editorial column, wrote and didn’t come away somewhat ashamed by the state of journalism then you may be beyond help.

The job of a journalist is to report facts, not level some mythical playing field.

By Geraldo

February 10, 2006 02:27 PM | Link to this

Actually Rush is rather bright. How did an overweight, doctor shopping ner-do-well figure out that hot air blown up the posteriors of feeble minded people would turn into what it has today. And how did he know that the above mentioned feeble minded people would expell said hot air from said posteriors as gospel. I guess you could say that he is a pioneer. He singlehandedly started the shift from reporting to entertaining.

By RE

February 10, 2006 02:29 PM | Link to this

New Word:

Ignarrogance: To be knowingly completely devoid of knowledge about a subject, yet be stubbornly confident in your opinion as if it were fact

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 02:33 PM | Link to this

“First of all, I expect this conversation we’re about to have to stay in the room. I know that’s impossible in Washington.�

Your point Kimberly??

RW - Yep, you’re right, so that leaves us with even fewer options.

Dusty - The Wheaties Code Ring is brilliant! You deserve a medal from the NSA for that one. That reminds me - I’ll have to get my old comic book x-ray glasses out of the attic to use in the defense of freedom. And you’re probably right about Kerry. Maybe Kennedy could take over that role.

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 02:36 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

If you make that switch you’re gonna need a bigger boat.

/my apologies to Jaws

By Scooter

February 10, 2006 02:37 PM | Link to this

VOR, do you remember the 80’s when Iraq was invading Iran and that was, at the time, a good strategic move. Or how about the early 90’s when Iraq invaded Kuwait. Or, the gassing of the Kurds after Bush 41 sold them out? Then we have the twelve years of obstruction of inspectors and ultimate expulsion from the country?

I don’t remember those other countries doing stuff like that, but I had a brain injury. Perhaps you can change make the case for invading one of those countries? Don’t forget Saudi Arabia had kicked UBL out and UBL was made at them for allowing US bases in the heart of Muslim country.

finch, glad to see you made it back. I kind of like the position we took in the UN Security Council;

The representative of the United States noted that, while primary responsibility rested with the Council for the disarmament of Iraq, nothing in the resolution constrained any Member State from acting to defend itself against the threat posed by that country, or to enforce United Nations resolutions protecting world peace and security.…

“Recalling that its resolution 678 (1990) authorized Member States to use all necessary means to uphold and implement its resolution 660 (1990) of 2 August 1990 and all relevant resolutions subsequent to resolution 660 (1990) and to restore international peace and security in the area,”

If you want to make the argument we must seek the UN to help negotiate cease fire agreements (like after Desert Storm, 687) and then say the UN can prevent those agreements from being met, have at it?

Case being reviewed.

By Dusty

February 10, 2006 02:38 PM | Link to this

Ah Kimberly,

Glad you like my posts. You do see the difference between hysterical outbursts on a blog and comments on the personal life of a blogger? Public versus private?

Maybe I can think of a good quote here. How about “I never promised you a rose garden.” Not too good but I will try to do better next time.

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 02:47 PM | Link to this

WWJD - “WAAAAAAHHH! We need a “Fairness Doctrine” so Al Gore, Al Franken, and Michael Moore can have equal time. It isn’t fair - our entertainers aren’t entertaining! We need to force people to listen to us! End Big Radio Now!!”

By kimberly

February 10, 2006 02:47 PM | Link to this

Sweetroll, I was just offering some breaking news that Bush tossed the reporters out of the room but left the microphone on. Heh We all know he doesn’t want the press to know, quote, or report anything that wasn’t pre-scripted from Karl. From a more personal standpoint, I feel somewhat slighted that he will comment openly to “the republicans in the room” but not the rest of America, when afterall, he is paid to be President to us all. But I’ll try to get past it.

Dusty, you’re so right and I apologize to anyone I offended. We shouldn’t presume to KNOW things about people we don’t know, including what’s in their hearts. Thank you.

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 02:52 PM | Link to this

Oh well. I see there is no cure for terror mania. Even though the odds are greater than winning powerball that any one of us here will encounter even one terrorist in our lifetimes, let’s just focus on that and let everything else take a back seat.

By gadem

February 10, 2006 02:52 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish AKA The Token, don’t forget let Dubya do his “flight training” and give Cheney a gun while you were at it. We all know that he has no heart, so he can not be killed.

By Dusty

February 10, 2006 02:55 PM | Link to this

Aww gee whiz and all that,

Kimberly likes my quotes and Buy Danish thinks NSA should give me a medal (for my code ring, sir). It doesn’t get any better than that.

Hate to leave the fun and it has been. See you later.

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 02:56 PM | Link to this

Isn’t it ironic that the biggest chicken hawk in the administration is the biggest draft dodger. (5 deferment Dick) He has absolutely no problem sending folks out to die as long as it isn’t him or his. What a “patriot”.

By Scooter

February 10, 2006 02:59 PM | Link to this

Well, we now know WWJD is not to concerned with a nuclear bomb being detonated in some US city. WWJD, I know that you do but that sounds bad.

By Scooter

February 10, 2006 03:02 PM | Link to this

WWJD, some people are meant to fight and some are not. That should not be a prerequisite to serve as a civilian commander of the US Military, especially ater Clinton.

By kimberly

February 10, 2006 03:05 PM | Link to this

Scooter, please forgive me, but I’m having trouble following your logic. You just attributed a statement to WWJD that he did not make, and then said you know he didn’t mean it, and then admonished him because it sounds bad. Was there a POINT or a piece of information in there somewhere, or should we just all go back to work now?

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 03:07 PM | Link to this

Kimberly - Maybe Bush isn’t as dumb as you think and he actually figured out that you can’t trust the Democrats with secrets???

And do share with us when the last time Hilary Clinton held an unscripted press conference or “town meeting”. Please, we want to know so we can vote for her.

Or better yet, just tell us anything of substance about anything! Give us some positive ideas! A plan for anything! Take your pick: Social Security, National Security, Deficits…

But there is one rule to Big Danish’s game: You can’t call Bush any of the following epithets: Hitler, cowboy, idiot, stupid, drunk, moron, facist, or @#$# anything. Nor may you mention any of the following: Halliburton, Big Oil, Big Pharma, Big WalMart, Big Tobacky, Big Cotton, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Scalia, Roberts, or Alito. Can you do it?? I’ll give up my Wheaties Secret Code Ring for one practical and coherent idea.

Oh - I just remembered something about Democrats and censorship!! Listen up Pinko and pals: Before the last election Sinclair Television stations were going to run the documentary, “Stolen Honor” about that guy who served in Vietnam. But the Dems organized and threatened to boycott all the advertisers in the little towns that sustain these tv stations with their local advertisers. Threatened with going out of business, they caved and the documentary didn’t run. So in one fell swoop, they used strong arm tactics to silence Sinclair, AND they were willing to put little guys out of business in the process.

By kimberly

February 10, 2006 03:14 PM | Link to this

Sweetroll, you misunderstand me. I come here to LEARN from enlightened gentlemen like you. My earlier post came straight from today’s news, followed by my perception of it. If I’m wrong, (as so many here presume to know what others believe), then surely YOU can shed some true light, and provide verifiable sources to counter. OR, you can ramble on rabidly like a man whose blood-sugar is out of control.

By gadem

February 10, 2006 03:14 PM | Link to this

Hey WWJD, what is even funnier is that Evil Dick’s daughter has bigger balls than him.

By Scooter

February 10, 2006 03:15 PM | Link to this

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 02:52 PM

“Oh well. I see there is no cure for terror mania. Even though the odds are greater than winning powerball that any one of us here will encounter even one terrorist in our lifetimes, let’s just focus on that and let everything else take a back seat.”

Kimberly, it is not hard to expand from the statement above and interpret that to mean, to WWJD it is not a big deal or much of a threat.

When another one goes off, which it will sooner or later, I think WWJD will be singing a different toon. I’ll bet WWJD was singing a different song about the importance of prevention after 9/11. These are simply assumptions on my part, but I see it in so many of my liberal friends.

I’m not sweatin you honey, roll on.

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 03:17 PM | Link to this

WWJD - This comment of yours: “Even though the odds are greater than winning powerball that any one of us here will encounter even one terrorist in our lifetimes, let’s just focus on that and let everything else take a back seat.” proves that YOU are more dangerous than WMDs. I better buy a lottery ticket because I actually knew 3 people who died on 9/11. What’s the odds of that?

But here are some bumper sticker for you and yours to use next to your rainbow and legalize pot stickers: DEFICITS KILL! STOP RACISM NOW - END HURRICANES! BIN LADEN IS YOUR BUDDY! TERRORISM DOESN’T STRIKE TWICE!

By finch

February 10, 2006 03:17 PM | Link to this

Scooter,

What the US thinks it should do about a UN resolution is irrelevant, unless the UN agrees. If the UN refuses to endorse a US military action to supposedly “enforce” UN resolutions, that action is indefensible.

You can’t say you’re waging war on behalf of an organization when that organization doesn’t want you to fight that war. The UN Security Council can, and did refuse to approve the 2003 Iraq invasion.

To put it another way, if someone breaks my window, and you offer to burn the rock throwers house down, and I say, “NO! I want to negotiate with rock man!”, you definitely do NOT have the right to burn his house down anyway, and then say you did it for me.

Case closed.

RW,

You get 2 points for a “gotcha” on the AP’s Tony Loci. Applause! Really! That was sloppy writing/reporting.

But if Bush claimed Saddam was shopping for uranium in Africa, exactly where was Saddam allegedly shopping?

It sure wasn’t Niger.

I think you won your points on a technicality.

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 03:24 PM | Link to this

Kimberly - Pussycat, you neglected to mention that your perception of what Bush said was that he is everyones’ president, not just Republicans, so how dare he exclude the Democrats. Right? So you pick a quote out of the news. So what? I mean, isn’t there supposed to be a POINT to it?

gadem - I nominate you for the Pulitzer Prize of pornography. Its a new category sponsored by that nice Larry Flynt at Hustler Mag. You’re just so articulate - you really wow me.

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 03:26 PM | Link to this

There you go again Scooter. Making assumptions. I am not a “liberal”. Voted for Bush (unfortunately). To me terrorism is not the only thing going on in this world that requires attention. Why are you so obsessed with something that has such long odds? How many people on this earth die of non-terror related issues and how many die from terrorism each year? Terrorism as an issue is way overblown and sucks up resources that just might be used to prevent the type of deaths that are as certain as well..death.

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 03:26 PM | Link to this

finch - Did you vote for Koffi Annan as Commander in Chief and President of the United States? Its funny, because I don’t recall seeing his name on the ballot.

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 03:27 PM | Link to this

finch,

I would say it’s more than a technicality when a reporter says that the President said Iraq had already bought the uranium and Saddam was currently putting his bomb together as a justification for war. If I really wanted to expand my comment I would note you have joined with Toni in leaving out a very important part of the sixteen words. (Hint: the first five)

kimberly,

I’d love to discuss your story, maybe you could provide a link that works or some hint as to how to find your story. I’ve looked all around Yahoo news where it appears, from the partial URL you dropped, it came from.

By gadem

February 10, 2006 03:29 PM | Link to this

Well Token, you give me so much to work with….but whatever you say.

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 03:31 PM | Link to this

Still can’t see the forest for the trees can you Buy-Danish? I know 3 people who were on KAL-007. But I’m not obsessed nor consumed by it.

By kimberly

February 10, 2006 03:32 PM | Link to this

Sweetroll, here’s my point: I’m not feelin’ the love… or the honesty… or the integrity.. or the “protection” or the “uniter not a divider” thing. In fact, I’ve never felt so divided - EVER. Some people tell me that’s the fault of me and my “kind” or my “side” or throw me in with a group and then assign derrogatory labels (and then say “don’t judge people” HAHAHA!) So, sweetroll, either we can discuss facts and issues and enlighten each other, or continue to hammer that wedge deeper and deeper. From what I can see HERE, “my side” isn’t the one driving it in.

By gadem

February 10, 2006 03:36 PM | Link to this

Token, I am sure that your ancestors would be ashamed of what you have become.

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 03:36 PM | Link to this

WWJD - I almost forgot another bumper sticker. CIGARETTES KILL TOO! And lets not forget GLOBAL WARMING IS A MENACE!

Listen, do me a favor, and do a little research on recent Fatwas over the weekend. Read “The Connections” by Stephen Hayes or any of the countless books out there that might connect the dots for you. Then come back here and tell all of us how there is no threat.

I’m starting to think that you’re a plant for the Muslim Brotherhood, just trying to get us all to be really complacent and put our money where it really belongs and open more daycare centers. Because its hard to believe that anyone could really be that naive.

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 03:45 PM | Link to this

Lil Kim - Pussycat, I’m not really interested in your “feelings”, I’m interested in what you THINK. If you want to talk about “feelings” you need to go to Oprah or Dr. Phil.

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 03:48 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish, I spent 21 years “connecting the dots” as you say. And sometime they just won’t connect. And that seems to be the case with this administration. Anyway Buy-Danish. Sit back, scratch your belly, belch real loud one good time, crack open another Budweiser and feel good about the fact that you are just the kind of guy that guys like Bush and Cheney depend on.

By Scooter

February 10, 2006 03:55 PM | Link to this

Finch you and the Dem party keep running from the question below, that’s fine, we’ll see how it works out. You see the thing is if the UN resolutions are so solid they can prevent us from acting why are they not as imposing on people like Saddam. Have you accepted that the UN Oil for Food Program was corrupt and further starving an already impoverished people so that Saddam could buy favor within the UN Security Council?

Dr. R asked for someone to paint him a picture the other day. He wanted a picture of what the situation would currently be, had we followed the dems course, in regard to enforcing UN Resolution 687, adopted after Desert Storm. WWJD, keep in mind that the inspectors were only allowed back in because Bush pushed the UN, after approximately five years of being removed from Iraq. The pushing of the UN took some six months and we had little account of what Saddam was doing during that time.](http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/shared-blogs/ajc/luckovich/entries/2006/02/09/buddies_forever.html#comment-299504)

WWJD, stick with me doll I said my liberal friends. The way they demand the August 6th PDB should have prevented 9/11 without infringing on any precious civil liberties, and then say after 4.4 years +/- that there isn’t much of a threat. I know for certain that my friends will be demanding commissions and wanting to place political blame at the feet of a republicrat.

When another one goes off, which it will sooner or later, I think WWJD will be singing a different toon. I’ll bet WWJD was singing a different song about the importance of prevention after 9/11. These are simply assumptions on my part, but I see it in so many of my liberal friends.

Don’t anyone tell my ratter but she must get a bath and then my wife and I are off for a weekend with some of my male “funny� fiends.

By RE

February 10, 2006 03:58 PM | Link to this

Anyone remember when laws were rules to be followed instead of “tools”. Don’t you think an attorney General would know that, or am I one of those who is stuck on original intent?

By Scooter

February 10, 2006 03:59 PM | Link to this

Modification:

Blah, blah, blah…years of being removed from Iraq. The pushing of the UN took some six months and we had little account of what Saddam was doing during that time.

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 04:01 PM | Link to this

You’re right Scooter. Civil liberties are precious. They are the cornerstone of our freedom. And yes…the threat is overblown.

By AntiRadical

February 10, 2006 04:05 PM | Link to this

Abramoff e-mail to the editor of the Washingtonian states that the fallen lobbyist:

Had brief conversations with President Bush almost a dozen times and the president knew him well enough to make joking references to Abramoff’s family. Bush “joked with me about a bunch of things, including details of my kids,” Abramoff recalled of his contacts with the president. The president has, of course, said he doesn’t recall ever meeting the lobbyist.

Bush “has one of the best memories of any politician I have ever met.” The e-mail said that Bush’s ability to recall is one of his “trademarks, though of course he can’t recall that he has a great memory!”

The e-mail adds, “Perhaps he has forgotten everything. Who knows.”

Sounds like if Abramhoff cuts a deal to testify, he may not be very “friendly” with the President anymore, doesn’t it?

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 04:07 PM | Link to this

This administration has done a fine job creating a bunker mentality among some folks. I will say that for them. The Straussian manifesto they work from has served them well.

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 04:12 PM | Link to this

WWJD - When exactly did you vote for Bush? Because I’m having just a wee bit of trouble believing you. Your comments are just not convincing me.

And if you spent 21 years connecting the dots, you’ve been busy my friend, but you seem to have flunked puzzle-solving.

I have this overwhelming desire to slap your face - the way that EMTs do when they need to wake people up in an emergency. Meanwhile, enjoy your snooze. Maybe you’ll get lucky and die of deficits or global warming before you get struck by the intifada. Can you give us the address of your safehouse? I think you should be a true American and share it with the rest of us.

By Scooter

February 10, 2006 04:12 PM | Link to this

WWJD, I agree that threats to civil liberties are overblown also, well with sunset clauses and all.

What were Romans saying when Hannibal was crossing the Mountains?

Now I’m a bathing the dog, finch can keep telling us all how we should turn American defense over to the UN, without my responses.

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 04:18 PM | Link to this

Anti-Radical - This is what most people think of “The Abramoff Scandal”: Abramoff who? Its not on the radar zone, even with the Harry Reid connection, so you better find something else other than “the culture of corruption” to hang your hopes on.

By Andy

February 10, 2006 04:24 PM | Link to this

I like this one from WWJD, it helps to reinforce some of my more deeply held beliefs: Terrorism as an issue is way overblown and sucks up resources that just might be used to prevent the type of deaths that are as certain as well..death. It’s like we can afford to have one, maybe two 9/11’s every year, it’s really no big deal, 3000 people getting burned alive, trillions of dollars lost, less crowded skylines in our major cities.

Makes you want to just hand the keys to the Pentagon right over to these pinkos, don’t it?

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 04:24 PM | Link to this

Well Scooter. You have the right to your opinions. Seeing as how alot of chickens are coming home to roost for the administration today, it will be interesting to see how you spin the Michael Brown testimony, how you spin Libby rolling over on Dick, and as we speak, Paul Pillar, the CIA’s head of Middle Eastern Intel, telling it like it is on Wolf Blitzer regarding the intel in the runup to the war. I realize that it will probably not faze you in the least seeing as how you are willing to follow Bush right over the edge of the cliff because he says “trust me.”

By DawgBite

February 10, 2006 04:31 PM | Link to this

The little diaper wetter is out from under his bed I see. Intervention didn’t work huh Andy? What is your address? Bin Laden would like to send you a lifetime supply of depends.

By AntiRadical

February 10, 2006 04:34 PM | Link to this

Danish: I think most “informed” people are cringing to see if Abramhoff cuts a deal or not. Then we get to try and figure out if that is the truth, what he needed to say to get out of trouble, or if he might be trying to set-up a sweet-heart book deal, etc. One of those public-confidence builders that the president has left for us. Can’t imagine why his poll numbers continue to slide into oblivion (along with conservative hopes); can you?

On a lighter note: The Brazilian government will distribute 25 million free condoms to promote safe sex during the country’s Carnival holidays, the Health Ministry said Monday. Don’t know about anybody else but next year I’m going to Brazil.

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 04:38 PM | Link to this

The deal I’m waiting to see is the one Libby cuts.

By candide

February 10, 2006 04:38 PM | Link to this

Overheard in Cheney’s office: You’re doing one hell ov a job, Dubya!

By gadem

February 10, 2006 04:45 PM | Link to this

ANDY, how many terrorist attacks on US soil have we had. I am sure that the reason for that is Dubya and his strong defense policies….his policies consist of no planning, under man, and under equip the soldiers.

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 04:46 PM | Link to this

WWJD,

Libby isn’t charged with giving out any classified information, so what difference does your story make?

By Andy

February 10, 2006 04:46 PM | Link to this

This really is a pinko talking point:

[Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton on Wednesday accused Republicans of “playing the fear card” of terrorism to win elections and said Democrats cannot keep quiet if they want to win in November.](

By Objective Observer

February 10, 2006 04:49 PM | Link to this

Kimberly:

Went back up ^^^ reviewed your post and mine. Let me give you an example of sincere concern for someone who irritates you.

“Andy, you are an a*, but none of us look good without one. Hurry back, we miss you! Hope all is O.K.”

Now that is, in my opinion, a sincere expression of concern without condescension.

Last post for the day! I am overwhelmed with concern for one of my students. Please keep him in your thoughts!!

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 04:51 PM | Link to this

Yep, WWJD voted for Bush alright. It appears that some people can’t even anonymously blog without lying. I mean, I can understand opposition to the Iraq War, but Scooter Libby and Plamegate? Why such schadenfreude over that?

By Andy

February 10, 2006 04:53 PM | Link to this

This really is a pinko talking point:

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton on Wednesday accused Republicans of “playing the fear card” of terrorism to win elections and said Democrats cannot keep quiet if they want to win in November.

If this wasn’t so bizarre it would be funny. Can these simpleton liberals, and I’m not referring to blogger/ dawgbite’s obvious lack of maturity, really not put two and two together? It’s like, you reckon the reason terrorism is not that big a threat is maybe because we are fighting the war on terror, you know, killing terrorists and all that? And gee, I wonder what will happen if we stop fighting the war on terror?

Are you pinkos bipolar, or what?

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 04:55 PM | Link to this

anti-radical - Sweetheart book deal? You mean like Hilary and Bill Clinton’s? Did the publishers actually make a dime on those deals?

By RE

February 10, 2006 04:57 PM | Link to this

Andy,

Can you tell me again when the last time we had a terrorist attack on US soil was. I think it was 1993 at the WTC, february actually about 4 weeks after clinton was inaugarated. We had been fighting the war on terrorism for a very long time, and very effectively until the current administration changed policy in early 2001.

By RE

February 10, 2006 05:03 PM | Link to this

qualifier, prior to 9-11

By Andy

February 10, 2006 05:07 PM | Link to this

RE: Did you get wasted already this evening? There was a huge attack in 2001, on September 11th, you may want to look it up.

We are fighting and killing Al Qaeda in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, are we not? Could this possibly be the reason, just on an offhand chance, that they haven’t slaughtered anymore of us? Why are you goofy pinkos willing to find out otherwise? That’s the real question. Would it give you some sweet air time against Bush, maybe a backdrop of Seattle in flames, while you libs natter on about how this could have been prevented? Maybe some Senate hearings with the fata-ss Swimmer bellowing at Rumsfeld? Wouldn’t that be just so cool?

By AntiRadical

February 10, 2006 05:07 PM | Link to this

Danish: Surely you’re not so “baked” (sorry, I couldn’t resist) that you can’t recognize the economic rewards of “fame”.

By DawgBite

February 10, 2006 05:08 PM | Link to this

Buy-Danish you sure are a brave little punk. Kind of like Dick Cheney I bet.

By Jewish and Proud of It

February 10, 2006 05:09 PM | Link to this

What about the tens of thousands of terrorists and their training grounds in Southeast Asia, what’s preventing them from striking the U.S.?

By gadem

February 10, 2006 05:10 PM | Link to this

RE you know that ANDY can do no such thing…so I will answer for him. Stupid PINKO, go sleep with Osama. He loves Pinkos almost as much as France. Pinko this, pinko that….pinko pinko pinko.

By Andy

February 10, 2006 05:12 PM | Link to this

James Taranto:

That Was Easy

“Cocky rap star Kanye West is calling for a revised edition of the Bible, because he thinks he should be a character in it.”—ContactMusic.com, Feb. 9

“And he found a new jawbone of an a* …”—Judges 15:15

By Andy

February 10, 2006 05:14 PM | Link to this

gadem: Pi-ss off, you little pinko.

By gadem

February 10, 2006 05:15 PM | Link to this

Andy wears pink panties, that match his pink nails.

By RE

February 10, 2006 05:19 PM | Link to this

Rantings from Andy, that is about par for the course. Say I do remember the 9-11 attack. Do you remember the bio attacks afterward, all those little envelopes with antrax in them….that was after 9-11. Bush fails again.

By DawgBite

February 10, 2006 05:21 PM | Link to this

And he pees himself too.

By Midori

February 10, 2006 05:22 PM | Link to this

Heh

We have to fight the t-shirts over there, so we won’t have to fight them over here. :)

By kimberly

February 10, 2006 05:28 PM | Link to this

DANISH, you said: I’m not really interested in your “feelingsâ€?, I’m interested in what you THINK. I think you’re an colossal p-ckerhead. Wasn’t going to say it, but you asked. Reciprocate if you wish, but I’m not asking. Thanks.

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 05:28 PM | Link to this

All I have to say is Scooter Libby, Michael Brown, Jack Abramof. And they haven’t even gotten around to Tom DeLay yet. A guy of his low character is sure to roll on everybody. Can new indictments be on the horizon?

By DawgBite

February 10, 2006 05:34 PM | Link to this

Danish has taken on some very recognizable Andy characteristics.

By Mike

February 10, 2006 05:38 PM | Link to this

I just saw Bush say, “I don’t even know the guy.” Then a dozens pictures of him and Jack popup on the screen and now there are emails. Why does this administration lie when the truth will do?

By kimberly

February 10, 2006 05:39 PM | Link to this

Regarding the Luckovich CARTOON, I’d like to make another comment. What it illustrates to me is what most of us already know: That Bill Clinton can make ANYONE he wants be his b-tch. Hahahaha! They can deny it all they want, but Pappy Bush LOVES him! Hahahaha!

By psychoanalyst

February 10, 2006 05:51 PM | Link to this

After observing this blog for 3 days I have grave concerns for 4 very disturbed bloggers. RW,Andy,Buy-Danish, and Scooter have the same psychlogical makeup that was prevalent in the group that drank Jim Jone’s Kool-aid. They are born to follow and are easily influenced.

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 05:54 PM | Link to this

psycho,

Aw shucks…I bet you say that to all the conservatives!

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 05:58 PM | Link to this

RE - What about Oklahoma City? The first and second times were under B.C., unless you want to go back to Pearl Harbor. So, that’s two for Bill and one for Bush.

Lil Kim - How did a sweet gal like you end up on a blog like this? Name calling and more name calling. That’s appears to be all you know how to do - you learned it on the playground and have’t managed to get off the playground. The plantation was easy, its the other stuff that seems to stymie you folks. Like IDEAS!

My Buy Danish challenge still stands: Just the facts Madam.

WWJD - Nailed you bigtime on your “Bush vote”. Do yourself a favor and don’t apply for any undercover spy work. You’ll get caught in 2.5 seconds.

DawgBite - Just another blogster with nothing to say. Speak! I’m waiting for a blip of intelligent commentary.

Here’s an idea to shake your brain cells: How about writing a short essay on EXACTLY why you all hate Bush. Abortion? Gay marriage? Iraq War? Tax cuts? Record unemployment? It would help your side focus if you could put it into words - actually describe issues that you disagree with instead of just hurling lame insults. Your pollsters are counting on YOU to frame the message. Extra bonus points for framing actual solutions.

Meanwhile, I close with the strongest warning of the day with thanks to WWJD: Deficits Kill!

By psychoanalyst

February 10, 2006 05:59 PM | Link to this

Only the wingnits RW..only the wingnuts.

By Andy

February 10, 2006 06:01 PM | Link to this

RE: Why don’t you go back and look at your post, numbnut? You’re the one asking the goofball pinko question, what am I supposed to do, ignore your stupidity? Clown.

How do you know Al Qaeda was behind the “antrax” attacks? You withholding inormation from your government? Do we need to phone tap you?

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 06:06 PM | Link to this

Forgot to mention one more thing to the paranoids: You have far more to fear from Google, Yahoo, data thieves, and other assorted non-governmental entities that actually DO collect data on all of you than you do from our Commander in Chief. Be afraid. Be very afraid.

By kimberly

February 10, 2006 06:07 PM | Link to this

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11277462/

Reporters then were ushered out — “I support the free press, let’s just get them out of the room,� Bush said — so the president could speak privately to his fellow Republicans.

“I want to share some thoughts with you before I answer your questions,� said Bush, unaware that microphones were still on and were allowing those back in the White House press room to eavesdrop on his eavesdropping defense.

By jg

February 10, 2006 06:07 PM | Link to this

You rightwingers are piece of work. Y’all are now flooding the net with caricatures of Mohammad the bomber t-shirts even after seeing the trouble it has caused worldwide. You say you are doing it for free speech. We all know you do not believe in free speech to begin with. The real reason you are doing it is to spark trouble in this country you quit caring about years ago.

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 06:08 PM | Link to this

Actually Buy-Danish I voted for Bush in 2000 but not in 04. Nor did I vote for Kerrey. If the guy leading the polls at this time for 08 (John McCain) gets the nomination I will vote for him. He IS a conservative.

By Andy

February 10, 2006 06:14 PM | Link to this

jg: Are you a dhimmi? Are you beholden to do and act how religious extremists tell you to act? Do you think women should wear Burqas so they don’t arouse Muslim males?

By psychoanalyst

February 10, 2006 06:17 PM | Link to this

jg, they suffer from the bully syndrome. And when you combine that character flaw with anonymity they are what you get. These individuals have probably never been the Alpha male in any group and live out their fantasies and delusions with that type of behavior. They are the type that would never actually wear that garment in public either out of fear that someone would rip it off of them and shove it down their throats. They are cowards by nature.

By JimG

February 10, 2006 06:18 PM | Link to this

You guys really bring it to the discussion from both sides. It’s intimidating for a first timer to jump in, but its very interesting to read the view points from both sides

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 06:20 PM | Link to this

wwjd - It was KERRY not KERREY who ran against Bush. KERREY was the fatuous a* on the 9/11 Commission. KERRY is the fatuous a* who served in Vietnam.

Was DeLay in the Bush Administration? Your vitriol seems to extend way beyond W. Here’s a special assignment just for you: “Why I voted for Bush in 2000, but not the second time around”.

I voted for Clinton the first time around, but not the second, but that’s actually easy to explain. Your vote/no vote is curious. Was your vote a Pro-Kerry vote, or an anti-Bush vote? I’m trying to understand what your principles are.

By jg

February 10, 2006 06:20 PM | Link to this

Andy I’m not like you blaming 9/11 on god punishing us because of gays. I don’t pickett funerals of soldiers killed in Iraq like you do because you feel god punished them because of gays. How can a SOB like you and your rightwing friends protest soldiers’ funerals. You are a sick bunch.

By DawgBite

February 10, 2006 06:21 PM | Link to this

No Andy, women should not wear burkhas, but you definately need to keep wearing Depends.Otherwise when you pee yourself everytime someone says terrorist it makes a really big mess for your mother to clean up.

By Andy

February 10, 2006 06:22 PM | Link to this

pyscho: I could have swore that political correctness, the lifeblood of liberalism, was like the biggest wussy cop out in the history of mankind. By design, it’s purpose is to get the strong to cave into the weak. So that makes your last post a form of liberal mental masturbation, an attempt to make yourself feel better. Enjoy it!

By Midori

February 10, 2006 06:22 PM | Link to this

Hi, JimG

welcome aboard :)

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 06:26 PM | Link to this

Bush lost my trust. Kerry wasn’t the answer and I just wasn’t going to let myself be forced to choose between the lesser of two evils. And my vitriol extends to all politicians that betray the very people that gave them their jobs when they sell out to the highest bidder. Dem or Repub..a crook is a crook. Those are my principles.

By DavidU

February 10, 2006 06:27 PM | Link to this

A dhimmi reference, now I have officially seen it all. And they say all that reading I do at Borders is useless.

By JimG

February 10, 2006 06:28 PM | Link to this

Thanx Midori.

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 06:29 PM | Link to this

kimberly,

No wonder that story was so hard to find, even the writer noticed there was nothing to it.

That was not to be — and it was telling that the president chose the controversial NSA program as the first topic to raise out of reporters’ earshot. Even so, there was no substantive difference between those statements and the series of public speeches he has given recently on the program.

This was also a retreat of elected Republicans in Congress. Do the Democrats open their retreats to any and all?

Here’s the direct link to the non-story that “kimberly’s” panties in a wad.

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 06:31 PM | Link to this

To be a great nation means more than being mighty militarily or an economic giant. Truly great nations have big hearts as well.

By Andy

February 10, 2006 06:34 PM | Link to this

By jg

February 10, 2006 06:20 PM | Link to this

Andy I’m not like you blaming 9/11 on god punishing us because of gays. I don’t pickett funerals of soldiers killed in Iraq like you do because you feel god punished them because of gays. How can a SOB like you and your rightwing friends protest soldiers’ funerals. You are a sick bunch.

Whoa!

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 06:34 PM | Link to this

Psycho: “Bully syndrome”?? Is that in reference to TR’s administration or is this a legit term coined by professionals like you? Is the bully or the bullied the person with the syndrome?

jg - I’m going to hold you personally responsible for every idiotic statement that every libdem ever made. I’m just playing by your rules.

Jim Jones: 911 deaths. Al Qaeda: Still counting. Stupid comparisons: Priceless.

By Brett

February 10, 2006 06:34 PM | Link to this

A good one, ML. But bound to upset the deeply closeted CHICKENHAWKS here. RW, Andy, Buffy, Sempie, the rest of the “Castrated Crew.”

By don

February 10, 2006 06:35 PM | Link to this

The thing about Andy going to protest at soldiers funerals because he hates gays is that Andy is gay. It is sick of you to protest at sead soldiers funerals like that Andy, face it.

By psychoanalyst

February 10, 2006 06:35 PM | Link to this

Masturbation is something that you know alot about isn’t it Andy?

By psychoanalyst

February 10, 2006 06:39 PM | Link to this

Seems that my “analysis” struck a nerve with the same old likely suspects. That’s an indicator that they truly are insecure in their own manhood. Very interesting.

By Andy

February 10, 2006 06:40 PM | Link to this

psycho: Not with your mother handy……

By DavidU

February 10, 2006 06:40 PM | Link to this

WWJD - Its a combinations of the two….”Speak Softly and Carry a Big Stick” That’s should be the mantra for a great nation. The Left and Right just pick one of the things and forget about the importance of the other.

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 06:41 PM | Link to this

WWJD - HOW did he/they break your trust? Specificity please. And how do we not “have a heart”? Sounds awfully Wizard of Ozish, but I’d like to hear some examples from the first 4 years of the Bush administration. Something disturbed you. What was it??

By psychoanalyst

February 10, 2006 06:41 PM | Link to this

Andy,do you masturbate to fantasies of the sexual domination of “pinkos”?

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 06:42 PM | Link to this

jg,

Your dhimmitude is really not helping the left’s latest talking point. Remember this week you’re supposed to say anybody that says there is a threat of terrorism is cowering in fear of the perfectly peaceful Muslims.

Here’s some shopping tips for you. Try not to get anything colorful.

By Andy

February 10, 2006 06:44 PM | Link to this

pyscho: Nope, I let your mom beat me off, thanks for asking.

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 06:46 PM | Link to this

Psycho - sorry to disappoint, but if you actually were up on your polling data, you’d know that conservatives have better sex lives than liberals. Maybe it has something to do with the women shaving their legs…

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 06:47 PM | Link to this

psycho,

Everyone you named responded differently to your snarky little post. One by not responding at all so far.

Yet that still makes you right. Say hello to the Mad Hatter.

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 06:47 PM | Link to this

Actually, Buy-Danish, the Cheney factor is the biggest reason I didn’t vote for Bush the 2nd time around. And the indications that this was a neo-con administration as opposed to a conservative one factored in. I was remiss in forgetting what Dick Cheney is all about in 2000.

By Semper Fi

February 10, 2006 06:50 PM | Link to this

Well I read some of the moonbats say terroist attacks are so unlikely we should stop gunning for terroist. With that logic, if your house hasn’t burned down in the last 4 years, cancel your HO policy. Heck, if you haven’t died in the last 4 years cancel all your life insurance. Look at all the money you save. You can, I’ll keep mine and fight terrorism.

By psychoanalyst

February 10, 2006 06:50 PM | Link to this

I didn’t say I was right RW. Just my observations. Have you had the habit of jumping to conclusions and making assumptions for very long RW? You do it alot on this blog.

By Andy

February 10, 2006 06:51 PM | Link to this

Look at who WWJD just admitted to voting for.

By JimG

February 10, 2006 06:52 PM | Link to this

16% did not like this cartoon? How? It even makes fun of both parties equally. Its just plain funny.

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 06:53 PM | Link to this

psycho,

Determining that you are nothing but an idiotarian moonbat is really pretty easy.

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 06:54 PM | Link to this

RW-(the original) - You and Dusty made my day! Thanks for some humor. What a bunch of sourpusses we have to deal with. Our plates are full: Islamofacists and ill-humored sods.

WWJD - Still not convinced dude. Define neo-con as opposed to conservative. Is it the “jew” factor of neo-cons that you don’t like?

By WWJD

February 10, 2006 06:54 PM | Link to this

Is that Bush in drag Andy? Or is that you in your head to toe Depends MOPP5 masturbation suit.

By Semper Fi

February 10, 2006 06:56 PM | Link to this

JimG, most folks don’t seem to vote on the toon. I don’t think I ever have but I may have once. It was funny though.

By Andy

February 10, 2006 06:58 PM | Link to this

WWJD: No, that’s your choice for president, nimrod. Heck, I’d be embarrased to. Do you pinkos ever think before you leap?

By Semper Fi

February 10, 2006 07:00 PM | Link to this

Why do all the liberals keep bring up masturbation? What’s a Depends MOPP5 masturbation suit? Must be a liberal thing from Hollyweird.

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 07:05 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

Your contributions have made my day the last few. Thank you!

Skipping around a few news shows it’s amazing to see what a hero of the left Michael Brown has suddenly become. I wonder if they still haven’t figured out we can look up their old statements?

By Semper Fi

February 10, 2006 07:06 PM | Link to this

DITTO Buy Danish

By Andy

February 10, 2006 07:13 PM | Link to this

RW: Why would we need statements when we have pictures?

By jg

February 10, 2006 07:15 PM | Link to this

You rednecks’ idea of buying Danish is a dozen box from Krispy Kreme. Is there a rule that you can’t join the rightwing if you have over five years of education? Most of your comments are less than a sixth grader’s would be.

By Andy

February 10, 2006 07:16 PM | Link to this

Third, the bogus notion of multiculturalism has blinded us to a simple truth: we in the West can live according to our own values and should not allow those radicals who embrace or condone polygamy, gender apartheid, religious intolerance, political autocracy, homosexual persecution, honor killings, female circumcision, and a host of other unmentionables to threaten our citizens within our own countries.

By Andy

February 10, 2006 07:20 PM | Link to this

jagoff says: Most of your comments are less than a sixth grader’s would be.

And

I don’t pickett funerals of soldiers killed in Iraq like you do because you feel god punished them because of gays.

And

Andy I’m not like you blaming 9/11 on god punishing us because of gays.

And

We all know you do not believe in free speech to begin with.

And that was just 3 posts…

By DavidU

February 10, 2006 07:21 PM | Link to this

I agree with Buy Danish, that no one really cares about the Jack Abramoff fiasco, regular people hear the words ‘campaign finance’ and they roll their eyes and change the channel, it just doesn’t capture peoples interest, that is unless there’s some kind of drug/sex angle coming, then people will care (And Rove knows this, that’s why he’s so good at his job). On the other hand FEMA and Michael Brown does capture peoples attention, because they saw and still remember the scenes from N.O. I’m interested in seeing the fall out from the hearings (and how Rove positions the president).

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 07:24 PM | Link to this

Andy,

Those will do, but I’m talking about all the statements about how Michael Brown couldn’t do or say anything right. He was an incompetent liar, a failed horse show something or other, a miserable excuse for a human being, and suddenly he is a paragon of virtue.

By jg

February 10, 2006 07:25 PM | Link to this

“(and how Rove positions the president)”

We all know how Rove postions the president every single night.

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 07:25 PM | Link to this

RW - Re Brownie - I know! It’s amazing. From zero to hero in such a short time, with special thanks to Frank Lautenberg.

Jg - I’m a Nor’ester and don’t have a redneck bone in my body, so try again. Can you be funny this time tho? I get so weary of the pre-K jokes.

Here’s a new assignment: Listen to Richard Pryor and Lenny Bruce. They actually knew how to mix profanity and humor at the same time.

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 07:26 PM | Link to this

That was “Nor’Easter”…

By DavidU

February 10, 2006 07:32 PM | Link to this

jg - LOL…actually he positions him to make the Dem party look stupid, and that’s the problem. Rove is now advising the Rep. Challenger to Hillary in New York. Rove knows they are not going to win but you bet that he’s going to do everything he can to make Hillary do and say something that will come back to hurt her in the Presidential election. The Dem Party needs to pay close attention or they will lose the “Clinton” spotlight in the ‘08 elections before it even begins.

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 07:35 PM | Link to this

DavidU,

People do care about the Katrina story, but not with the political implications the left is hoping for. Most rational people know that if the people had been evacuated in the first place they would have a decent chance of being alive. I’m pretty sure they don’t think that the Federal Government can stock up every possible evacuation site in the path of a hurricane with a full complement of supplies in advance.

By Semper Fi

February 10, 2006 07:38 PM | Link to this

Especially when the devastated area is the size of Great Britian.

By Andy

February 10, 2006 07:40 PM | Link to this

RW: I haven’t been watching the hearings, so I have no idea of the specifics, but it seems to me like the investigation is focused on the wrong subject. The Saturday before landfall, Bush could not have made it anymore clearer to the residents and mayor of New Orleans; evacuate. This was conveyed by a personal phone call. I know how the goofball pinkos can say that Bush didn’t take the storm seriously enough but how can a normal, sane Senator not see a personal phone call from the President of The United States as a serious matter?

Especially considering that the Mayor and Governor told Bush to mind his own business in a round about way. Even the news media contributed to the disaster by blaring that New Orleans had been spared the brunt of the storm after landfall.

Why are they even talking to Mike Brown?

By DavidU

February 10, 2006 07:45 PM | Link to this

Andy- Come on he was in charge of the emergency efforts they have to talk to him. Lets not be completely blind, just because he made the administration look bad today.

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 07:46 PM | Link to this

WWJD - Forgot to ask, those friends of yours who died on 9/11 - were they the hijackers? Because these comments really clinched it for me: “Or is that you in your head to toe Depends MOPP5 masturbation suit.” You definitely, positively never voted for Bush.

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 07:47 PM | Link to this

Andy,

I don’t really know why they have him there again. I’ve only caught bits and pieces, but I thought Lautenburg was going to adopt him. At least they didn’t have the “isms is going to get us” lady back in.

One thing for sure, neither the Republicans nor the Democrats will figure out that part of the problem was too much Government. Hang on to your wallet!

By Andy

February 10, 2006 07:49 PM | Link to this

DavidU: Seeing how 51% of Americans wouldn’t vote for Hillary anyway, Rove doesn’t have much of a challenge.

If he is in New York orchestrating anything, it is so he can bury that B-itch.

Go Karl!

By DavidU

February 10, 2006 07:52 PM | Link to this

The whole evacuation, rescue, and aftermath was completely handled wrong by both the local gov’t and the federal gov’t. But the fact still remains that it hurts more Bush and by association the Rep. Party than it does some local mayor, or Governor. That’s why I think out of Abramoff or Brown; Brown is the one that will probably worry the Republicans more.

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 07:57 PM | Link to this

DavidU,

That is either extreme naivety or wishful thinking on your part. If we ever got to the bottom of the levee commissions shenanigans heads really might roll, but the true scandal of this whole thing is this moronic idea that there is really a good way to handle all phases of a natural disaster of this scope and size.

By DavidU

February 10, 2006 08:02 PM | Link to this

Andy - That’s basically down party lines, with 48% for her, without even getting anywhere near to the primaries is actually very good. No Rep candidate would get that right now (but then again there is no, one candidate for the Republicans). That’s why I see the fact Rove is in New York as a very important issue for both parties.

By Andy

February 10, 2006 08:02 PM | Link to this

DavidU: O.K. let’s be serious. The President of the United States called the Mayor of New Orleans and told him point blank to evacuate, that this storm would destroy the city. Why wasn’t it evacuated? Why did Nagin make excuses about transportation after the storm passed?

What do you silly libs expect from FEMA? That they are going to fly in to every potential disaster area and take charge of the local government? Their role is to assist the relief efforts, with the governor and mayor in charge of coordinating them. Do you think FEMA knows the particulars of local government services in Orleans Parrish? Where to get gas, who to call in an emergency, what door to open to find something that was needed?

I could just imagine what would be going on right now if Bush had called Nagin the night before landfall and told him to shut up, that FEMA was taking over New Orleans.

By Andy

February 10, 2006 08:06 PM | Link to this

Bottom line, if Nagin capitulates responsibility for this disaster off on the federal government, then the federal government should at that moment assume control of the daily functions of the City of New Orleans. They should make Nagin into a bellhop.

By DavidU

February 10, 2006 08:13 PM | Link to this

but the true scandal of this whole thing is this moronic idea that there is really a good way to handle all phases of a natural disaster of this scope and size.

RW- I totally agree, once that type of destruction happens , you cannot fix it over night (like some wanted). But what I was saying is that the Republicans have more to lose in the Brown Hearings. Why? Because its the Bush administration vs. Local Mayor and Gov. Who has more to lose? Bush. People expect the Federal Gov’t to handle things of this magnitude. People in Kansas want to know that if a week of tornadoes happens that FEMA will get in and out and fix their lives again, so that’s why I think the administration has more to lose here, than some Dem Mayor.

By Andy

February 10, 2006 08:15 PM | Link to this

The more I think about this the more it amazes me. What exactly is Nagin’s job? When something goes wrong in New Orleans all he has to do is blame it on Bush and off goes the pinko media, after Bush. Seriously, why even vote for mayor if you don’t have a mayor? This jacka-ss took the opportunity of his City being destroyed to move into a mansion in a state 900 miles away. None of you libs even ask any questions about that bull——.

The office of mayor is nothing but a royalhead so you can go out and party, screw the finest women. But the President of the United States has to be able to turn hurricanes around and send them back out into the ocean. Unreal.

By DavidU

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

Andy - I don’t absolve Nagin of any of the blame, and as a Dem (Yeah I know, I have a third eye or something to you now) I think that his comments are extremely stupid, and every time I hear them, I just imagine Rove sitting back and saying “thank you god, for that one (and counting the days until he can use the comments come election time)” and I feel like looking for my bottle of whiskey.

By Danielle

February 10, 2006 08:21 PM | Link to this

Hi everyone! Just thought Id drop by for a few mins! Hows everyone this friday?

By Andy

February 10, 2006 08:22 PM | Link to this

That’s all liberalism is, shedding responsibility. Sit around all day whining about this and that, when you should be planning for every contingency. When something goes wrong in your life, find the nearest responsible person to blame your problems on. It sure makes the next guy want to be responsible, don’t it? Pretty soon we will all be sitting around whining and blaming, er, well I guess there won’t be anybody left to blame for your problems.

By JimG

February 10, 2006 08:22 PM | Link to this

Hey! You guys stopped talking about masturbation. about time.

By Andy

February 10, 2006 08:26 PM | Link to this

Hey, Danielle, when you going to give us another cartoon to argue over for days on end? :-)

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 08:28 PM | Link to this

DavidU,

I know this will shock you, but I disagree. There isn’t really a comparison between Nagin and Bush, however there is a comparison between letting incompetents run your city or not.

There is an old adage that all politics are local and when people start to think about who they want running their city or state they are going to look more closely at who does the proper thing at the local level.

I don’t believe people will say “the Bush Administration doesn’t do the best job of disaster relief so let’s elect a bunch of bumbling fools locally.”

By Andy

February 10, 2006 08:29 PM | Link to this

JimG: Yeah, apparently DawgBite’s mom put him in his highchair where he can’t reach his keyboard. Maybe she’ll catch him someday and ground him…

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 08:34 PM | Link to this

Danielle,

I was hoping we could catch you when you stopped by the other night. Most of the really rude posters had left, already.

How are you doing?

By Semper Fi

February 10, 2006 08:35 PM | Link to this

Hi Danielle, Good to hear from you. Hope all is going well at school.

By Objective Observer

February 10, 2006 08:38 PM | Link to this

I know I said I wasn’t going to post again, but I owe Danielle an apology. JayNot and I were the rude posters.

Sorry Danielle, we were adults behaving badly. A little late night fun. Next time, give us a 10 minute warning so we can get it out of our system. And no peeking within that 10 minutes.

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 08:39 PM | Link to this

JimG,

It’s not really helpful to bring up something when it’s a good thing it had stopped.

I saw where you said you were new here. Welcome! (watch out for Midori though, she bites)

By Andy

February 10, 2006 08:39 PM | Link to this

My goodness, speaking of which:

What’s cooking in New Orleans? “Nothing,” celebrity chef Emeril Lagasse recently told the New York Post’s Cindy Adams. “The mayor’s a clunk. The governor is also a clunk. They don’t know their [derrieres] from a hole in the ground. All my three restaurants got hit. I’ve reopened Emeril’s, but only a few locals come. There’re no tourists. No visitors. No spenders. No money. No future. No people. It’s lost. It’ll never come back.”

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 08:44 PM | Link to this

OO,

You can take it over to my place when you get the ten minute warning. It posts faster over there anyway. Well at least when the site is up.

I thought Danielle was talking about the earlier stuff, though.

By Danielle

February 10, 2006 08:46 PM | Link to this

Okay warning Im back. lol. yes well school is going alright i suppose. I think I may be back on ML’s blog soon though. But not with a cartoon but with a story.

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 08:49 PM | Link to this

Andy - gotta disagree with your “office of the mayor” comments. Guiliani comes to mind very quickly.

RW - “Most rational people know that if the people had been evacuated in the first place they would have a decent chance of being alive.”. How many cars were left behind that could have been used to get out of Dodge? I recall over 100,000, but could be mistaken. Guess they didn’t get the oft-repeated message about “Mother Nature”.

I saw a National Geographic story at least a year before Katrina hit about what could happen to NOLA if a Cat 4 hit that included the scenario of levees breaking. If I knew, and I don’t live in or near NOLA, why didn’t Nagin and Blanco know enough to have what is commonly called “an evacuation plan? My guess? Squabble, squabble, squabble.

Re: Rove and the anti-Hilary, I also think it has something to do with Rove wanting her to have to spend a ton of money to defend her seat. A decent opponent can really suck up those campaign contributions. And get an unscripted moment. Maybe we should pose as stealth constituents ask her to spell, “potato”.

By DavidU

February 10, 2006 08:50 PM | Link to this

RW - I don’t particularly care who someone else elects locally, I’m was interested in the national implications. I’m assuming (prob shouldn’t) that when people elect local officials they don’t do it based on federal/national implications. But the reality is that when “big” things happen: 9/11, earthquakes, hurricanes, insider trading, even steroids in sports occur people expect the federal gov’t to be prepared to fix the problem. And when a problem deteriorates like it did in N.O. the blame falls on the federal gov’t regardless of if there is a Rep or Dem president there. Nagin and the rest of the Louisiana politicians deserve the blame just as much as FEMA does, but IMO when it comes to Senate, House or Presidential election, the Brown hearing hurt more the ‘right’ than the ‘left’. But I was just agreeing that no one cares about Abramoff, if people are going to care its going to be about the FEMA response, and not about ‘campaign finance”.

By Objective Observer

February 10, 2006 08:51 PM | Link to this

R.W.:

I was feeling guilty. I just assumed she was catching the tail end which is what I do most of the time. I edit for favorites (moderate democrats and all conservatives). I get lost in the links to articles and disappear.

Still blog pimping I see, but where was the link?

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 08:54 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

I bombarded news organizations with letters and e-mails about those cars, but day in and day out we would see video of the devastation with cars everywhere and the talking heads telling us these people had no way to leave. It was hard enough to get them to show a picture of the bus commanders parking lot.

I think you may have missed a little something in Andy’s post, btw.

By Objective Observer

February 10, 2006 08:54 PM | Link to this

Danielle:

That’s great! How did your civil disobedience (tape over the mouth) go? I’m assuming the prom hasn’t happened yet, or has it?

By Danielle

February 10, 2006 08:57 PM | Link to this

OO sadly I only missed one game this entire season and that was that night, the flu passed itself around my school over 75% of the students got it, and sadly I was one. And no prom has not happened yet. Thats close to the end of our school year.

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 08:58 PM | Link to this

OO,

It’s only blog pimping if I do leave a link.

By getalife

February 10, 2006 09:04 PM | Link to this

But not with a cartoon but with a story.

Whats the sory about Danielle?

By Andy

February 10, 2006 09:04 PM | Link to this

Danish: I guess I don’t follow on the Guiliani comment. He came straight out and blamed the terrorists for his disaster, not the American people or the President.

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 09:06 PM | Link to this

David U, I agree, except it’s a bit early to determine the Katrina fallout. The levee board is going to be very interesting. I mean, one can blame Brownie or Bush all one wants, but who are they going to blame? I built a marina and private airstrip instead of securing the levees because, uh, uh, I take the Fifth.
I think that story has a lot more legs than Abramoff.

I also have a theory about the Indian tribes - I don’t think that they were robbed, I think they were getting kickbacks for allowing all this money to flow through them. Weren’t they one of the exception to “campaign finance reform” rules? Think about it - why are all these congressmen so interested in Indian tribes? Sure, there’s a ton of casino money there, but it doesn’t make sense that they commanded so much interest. Just my theory - haven’t actually heard or seen this anywhere.

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 09:08 PM | Link to this

DavidU,

I guess you just refuse to see the forest for the trees. When people see other areas with competent local Government working well with the same Federal Government that their own incompetent local folks blame everything on they will change the local folks.

You do have a point that too many people look straight to the Federal Government to cure all ills. A difference is I think that is a horrible thing and you seem fine with it.

We’ll know in about 270 days which of us is on the right track here.

By Objective Observer

February 10, 2006 09:09 PM | Link to this

Danielle:

Your life will be full of opportunities. Take full advantage because you will only pass through this life one time.

It has been awhile since my prom. I thought they were towards the end of the year.

By Danielle

February 10, 2006 09:10 PM | Link to this

getalife last year I was involved in a wreck and I sent Mike a email telln him the story (with a cartoon I drew that NO is so not going to be published, I still have to go to court agian) and Mike agreed it was crazy and so he asked if me and my folks thought it would be okay to post the story on here. And we all agree, so yall will probly see it some time soon.

By DavidU

February 10, 2006 09:13 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish - I think if that’s what comes out regarding the Indian tribes, THEN people will pay attention, It makes the story juicier. But if it just involves politicians taking money from one lobbyist or the other….Its like “yeah we know they do that, Is American Idol on yet?” for the majority of people

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 09:13 PM | Link to this

Andy - “The office of mayor is nothing but a royalhead so you can go out and party, screw the finest women.”. That’s what I was referring to when I said I referred to Guiliani. I meant that mayors do matter.

R.W. What was the number of cars left behind, 150,000 or something, right?

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 09:14 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

We’ve talked about some of the things concerning the sudden Indian tribe interest here. One thing that strikes me as bizarre is how many new Indian tribes were recognized during the Clinton years. Maybe they were legitimate tribes that had somehow avoided detection, but I think this another follow-the-money scandal.

By Andy

February 10, 2006 09:14 PM | Link to this

DavidU: If you owned a house and you put a fire extinguisher in it and a fire broke out, would you expect someone from the outside to come to your house, know where that fire extinguisher is at and put out the fire for you? That is New Orleans in a nutshell. They had the plan in place and didn’t follow it.

Buy Danish: The Indian Tribes kicked money back to certain Congressman in exchange for legislation that allowed them to build casinos on their “reservations.” The legislation basically proclaimed land to be a “reservation” and that skirted gambling laws. The Casinos are the prize, we’re talking mucho dinero.

By getalife

February 10, 2006 09:18 PM | Link to this

Danielle,

Sorry to hear that and hope it works out in court for you. I will look forward to reading your story.

By Andy

February 10, 2006 09:21 PM | Link to this

Danish: We are on the same page, my comment about the office of mayor was to try and point out what the liberals were trying to reduce Nagin’s job to. They expect the president to be able to stop a hurricane but the mayor is basically a helpless little babe in the woods.

By Danielle

February 10, 2006 09:22 PM | Link to this

Thanks Getalife, should be intersting to see how this all turns out.

By DavidU

February 10, 2006 09:22 PM | Link to this

If we are discussing just N.O. I would say that everything leading up to Katrina Hitting falls on the Local Gov’t, but after it hits then it falls on the Federal Gov’t……. You guys disagree with this?

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 09:24 PM | Link to this

Andy - Then who are these people saying that they tribes got ripped off? I think that the amount that they kicked back to congressmen prior to McCain Feingold is going to pale in comparison to what was kicked back to the tribes by the lobbyists. Clinton was pre “reform”. I do recall Bruce Babbidge testifying, but don’t remember exactly what it was about now. Hmmm - refresh my memory.

By Objective Observer

February 10, 2006 09:27 PM | Link to this

R.W.:

Its been about a week now. Time to earn my pay. A blast from your past…

“The hardest thing for a bartender is figuring out who is drunk and who is just stupid.” By: Richard Braunstein

By Andy

February 10, 2006 09:28 PM | Link to this

DavidU: Not at all, there was not enough coordination on the ground to sort fact from fiction during the first few days. This was everybody’s fault. And then they overcompensated and gave aid money to people that didn’t deserve it. They still can’t provide what is needed and nothing more. I agree the feds need to do more on this end but it is a unique situation, they deserve some slack.

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 09:31 PM | Link to this

DavidU,

Yes I disagree with that. For one thing you had Blanco not letting the Feds take over and saying that getting to the Superdome with supplies and equipment would make people want to stay, while the Mayor was yelling for people to get there.

There are dozens of examples of this kind of thing. In spite of what you may want the Federal Government has no jurisdiction without the consent of the state.

You also had local officials spouting off rumors of widespread murder and mayhem, which meant you couldn’t just send relief workers in without armed backup. Is it FEMA’s fault that most of that was made up?

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 09:36 PM | Link to this

OO,

That was some short week, wasn’t “the interface” only about three days ago? Whatever I’m paying you it isn’t enough, I tell you!

By Andy

February 10, 2006 09:40 PM | Link to this

Danish: There is no doubt at all that Abramoff ripped off the tribes. He promised them services in exchange of money, money which he lavished on Congressman that never did anything favorable for the Indians. Plus he kept a bunch of the money he took from them, calling them idiots and such in emails to his cohorts. Abramoff is a true crook, a power junkie, he couldn’t have cared less whether the Indians benefited or not, he just wanted access to the politicians.

And as bizarre as it may seem, none of that is a crime for the Congressmen unless they authored some official act or legislation that benefited the Indians. Taking money is not a crime in itself, it is what you do for the money that gets you in trouble.

By Objective Observer

February 10, 2006 09:40 PM | Link to this

R.W.:

Hold onto it or use it now. You’re the boss! I do love philosophy, ancient & modern!

My feet are warm and I am sleepy. Night!

By Danielle

February 10, 2006 09:41 PM | Link to this

Night OO Sleep Well and GOD Bless!

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 09:43 PM | Link to this

OO,

One day I’ll pimp the blog page where I store those quotes and you can put them there.

What I really want to do is figure out how to make a different quote come up whenever you access the page.

Goodnight!

By Jay not jay

February 10, 2006 09:44 PM | Link to this

Bush’s fault?

By DavidU

February 10, 2006 09:45 PM | Link to this

Andy - I agree, once the whole thing was thrown out there by the media, FEMA was basically forced to over compensate, they were already looking totally inept that they basically said yes to anything and anyone. Even though those dang Trailer homes are still parked out in Oklahoma (actually I don’t remember where), wasting space and money. But I don’t really care if its a democrats or republicans fault that they have not been delivered, I just care that they haven’t and that the red tape that doesn’t allow them to be moved to where they are needed be removed, for the next time (That’s was a little off topic, sorry).

RW - I give you the fact that Blanco was a roadblock for rapid response by FEMA, but I was just saying that once the Hurricane hit, the responsibility then shifted to the Federal Gov’t and you can’t agree with that?

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 09:49 PM | Link to this

DavidU,

I researched my Constitution and I can’t find the part that deals with hurricane damage and recovery being the sole province of the Federal Government. Maybe you can link me to the new and improved U.S. Constitution.

By Andy

February 10, 2006 09:50 PM | Link to this

DavidU: No, that was totally “on topic,” you are right about the Fed’s response after the storm hit. I still can’t believe they were passing out those $2000 “credit cards,” they lost a bunch of dollars in that deal. It could have been run better, there’s no doubt.

By Buy Danish

February 10, 2006 10:21 PM | Link to this

David U to RW -“once the Hurricane hit, the responsibility then shifted to the Federal Gov’t and you can’t agree with that?” RW’s right - the state had to agree to turn the power over to the Feds. Blanco wouldn’t do it because she didn’t want W taking credit from her moment in the sun. So she fiddled and dithered while Rome burned.

Was this Fed handover how Jeb Bush handled it in FLA thru how many hurricanes? Or what about Mississippi? Just handed everything over to The Feds as soon as there was landfall? Don’t think so.

By DavidU

February 10, 2006 10:23 PM | Link to this

RW - I didn’t say it was the Federals Gov’t sole responsibility, just like before Katrina hit it wasn’t the locals government sole responsibility to manage the state without Federal intervention (The Levees for example). I do contend that once the Natural disaster hits, the Federal gov’t should take the primary role. And According to the Congressional Act of 1803 that’s why an organization like FEMA was created. “Portsmouth, New Hampshire, community and state resources were overwhelmed by the response and recovery effort. Congress responded with the first legislative action making federal resources available to assist state and local governments. This Congressional Act of 1803 is commonly regarded as the first piece of national disaster legislation.”

FEMA is tasked with responding to, planning for, recovering from and mitigating against disasters. FEMA can trace its beginnings to the Congressional Act of 1803. This act, generally considered the first piece of disaster legislation, provided assistance to a New Hampshire town following an extensive fire. In the century that followed, ad hoc legislation was passed more than 100 times in response to hurricanes, earthquakes, floods and other natural disasters……In 1934, the Bureau of Public Roads was given authority to provide funding for highways and bridges damaged by natural disasters. The Flood Control Act, which gave the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers greater authority to implement flood control projects, was also passed……President Carter’s 1979 executive order merged many of the separate disaster-related responsibilities into a new Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). ……The agency coordinated its activities with the newly formed Office of Homeland Security, and FEMA’s Office of National Preparedness was given responsibility for helping to ensure that the nation’s first responders were trained and equipped to deal with weapons of mass destruction.

By the way if it had been an attack with WMD’s would a Governor been able to tell FEMA or the Military, no you can’t go there it would cause too much trouble?

By DavidU

February 10, 2006 10:25 PM | Link to this

Here is where I got that Info

Hope that actually comes out right

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 10:35 PM | Link to this

DavidU,

If the country was attacked a Governor would not be able to say it’s too much trouble as far as the fighting off of any enemy that happened to be there went. Although it’s a little silly to think we are going to be attacked by an Army on our soil, but they could still tell FEMA to stick it if they wanted.

By Danielle

February 10, 2006 10:36 PM | Link to this

Good Night Everyone Have a Great weekend and GOD Bless

By DavidU

February 10, 2006 10:38 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish - Actually the only Hurricane that compares to Katrina that has hit Florida recently is Andrews and Gov Lawton Chiles was in charge then. And the same thing happened Hurricane hit on the 24th destroyed everything, by the 27th the Federal response was nowhere to be seen so the Director of Emergency Management in Dade got on TV and Demanded Federal Help, then the President activated a division (can’t remember which one) of troops and Navy ships to assist in Miami. So basically the same thing just that Miami was not under water like N.O.

By DavidU

February 10, 2006 10:40 PM | Link to this

RW - From 9/11 we know that it’s not going to be an Army, just 2 guys in a car with a WMD in the trunk, thats what’s the scary part

By Jay not jay

February 10, 2006 10:40 PM | Link to this

Sorry DavidU, this was the worst of all:

“I was just saying that once the Hurricane hit, the responsibility then shifted to the Federal Gov’t and you can’t agree with that?”

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 10:41 PM | Link to this

Daniellee,

Goodnight!

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 10:48 PM | Link to this

DavidU,

Now you are living up to the “U” in your nic and talking in circles. Obviously the military isn’t going to invade Topeka after a car bomb goes off. The Kansas Governor would still maintain control of the recovery effort though.

(Kansas— it’s just an example)

C’mon what is your real argument here? Attacks or natural disasters? Or just the fact that you don’t like our system of Government?

By DavidU

February 10, 2006 10:48 PM | Link to this

JnJ - Yes, that’s what FEMA is for to lead the effort to prepare the nation for all hazards and effectively manage federal response and recovery efforts following any national incident. If it’s not supposed to do that then what’s the point of having it just to eat up the national budget? Again I did not mean that once a hurricane hits the Federal Gov’t just takes over while the local gov’t goes to Puerto Rico to work on their tans, I meant that they are the ones now who have the responsibility to get things under control in an event of a disaster like that in N.O.

By DavidU

February 10, 2006 10:50 PM | Link to this

Guys I’m off to figure out what kind of trouble I can get into Downtown.

It was my second day on the blog, and I really appreciate the exchange of opinions. By the way People said Andy was crazy, I don’t see it, at least when he was discussing with me, he seemed ok to me. RW, great talking to you again. Later

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 10:53 PM | Link to this

DavidU,

See you again soon, enjoyed the joust.

By RW-(the original)

February 10, 2006 11:09 PM | Link to this

Lameness alert! ml has up the Sunday Fishwrap toon.

By Buy Danish

February 11, 2006 09:15 AM | Link to this

David U - Actually the only really apt comparison of Katrina is to a tsunami. It was the levee breach that caused the disaster in New Orleans.

By DavidU

February 11, 2006 10:43 AM | Link to this

Buy Danish - I was responding to your post:

Was this Fed handover how Jeb Bush handled it in FLA thru how many hurricanes?Or what about Mississippi?

That the Hurricane in Florida that compares with the devastation in N.O. is Andrews, and that the same botched up response between Local and Federal occurred there too. Just because places like Biloxi are not getting the coverage that N.O. is, it does not mean that it was not a total catastrophe there too.

By Buy Danish

February 11, 2006 01:51 PM | Link to this

DavidU - The other difference is that the Mississippians and Floridians had no human role in the hurricane itself, while in NOLA there were levees that could have been maintained if they weren’t under the purview of a corrupt bunch of local yahoos. And how many Mississippians and Floridians had the smarts to take their cars and get out of town, unlike their counterparts in NOLA? I love NOLA and want to see it rebuilt, but I’ll be damned if I’m going to allow myself to feel guilty about it. I’m tired of being slapped in the face and called a racist after donating cold hard cash and heartfelt good wishes to help these people.

By Conservatives Suck!

February 11, 2006 02:43 PM | Link to this

And here is why!

Man dies because Insurance Companies Refuse Treatment

By Vicki Harper

February 13, 2006 10:04 AM | Link to this

Please please do a cartoon about Elmer Fudd shooting his friend while duck hunting…..

By Buy Danish

February 13, 2006 05:46 PM | Link to this

V.H. - I read the story and its very sad, but what does it have to do with “Conservatives”? This particular insurance company, which I’ve never heard of, is at fault, not “conservatives”. Do you think that a federal health insurance program would do a better job? Not!

By Buy Danish

February 13, 2006 05:47 PM | Link to this

Sorry V.H. I meant to direct that to C.S.!