Mike Luckovich

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 14, 2006 07:41 PM | Link to this

A misdemeanor?

I thought Bush didn’t care about the budget?

By getalife

March 14, 2006 07:43 PM | Link to this

LOL, Great cartoon Mike!

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 14, 2006 07:43 PM | Link to this

Democrats Beat Quick Retreat on Call to Censure President

By CARL HULSE Published: March 14, 2006

WASHINGTON, March 13 — Senate Democrats on Monday blocked an immediate vote on a call by one of their own to censure President Bush for his eavesdropping program.

Another public spanking. When will they learn to ignore the crackpots?

By DavidU

March 14, 2006 07:45 PM | Link to this

Finally, an answer to the Deficit

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 14, 2006 07:51 PM | Link to this

So does anyone think that RE will ever answer my question about what he thinks the CIA’s job is? The dude seems to be able to mimic others, to judge their comments without any contributions of his own. He’s playing it just like a liberal, always complaining, a backseat driver.

By getalife

March 14, 2006 07:55 PM | Link to this

The former aide, Claude A. Allen, 45, was President Bush’s top domestic policy adviser

Well, he did learn about returns policy.

By Myth Buster

March 14, 2006 08:12 PM | Link to this

Nothing about this cartoon is factual. The reality may very well be that Claude Allen’s very troubled and often in trouble twin brother (Floyd Allen) is the involved in this case. Also, Mike (We don’t need no stinkin’ facts) Luckovich has no earthly idea what the President’s response to this situation might be.

Hey Mike, we are still waiting on your cartoon featuring Mohamed, you coward.

By DavidU

March 14, 2006 08:12 PM | Link to this

I don’t know if the ol’ switcheroo Allen pulled with Target is going to work with China, but I guess it’s worth a shot. He can’t do any worse with the deficit than Bush has done.

By RW-(the original)

March 14, 2006 08:13 PM | Link to this

I guess ml figured he better rush out another cartoon convicting someone with no trial before the very real possibility of his innocencecame out.

By Napo D

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

Another great cartoon, Mike!

RW, my lips hurt real bad. Will you bring me my chapstick?

By clark

March 14, 2006 08:20 PM | Link to this

Excuses Used by children: “The Dog ate my homework”

Excuses used by Rep: “My twin did it”

By Midori

March 14, 2006 08:28 PM | Link to this

snicker

giggle

guffaw

Great toon, Mike!!!!

Getalife: you’re turning into quite the comedian. :)

By whynot

March 14, 2006 08:29 PM | Link to this

that twin brother stuff is the crap they put on soap operas

Myth Buster, I apologize in Mikes name for not knowing what the president would say maybe you could enlighten us on what he would say seeing as how you know George and all

By RW-(the original)

March 14, 2006 08:31 PM | Link to this

clark,

Do Republicans even get a day in court in your world?

By getalife

March 14, 2006 08:33 PM | Link to this

So Allen did not tell the administration about his “evil twin” and let the President answer the questions to the reporters?

By clark

March 14, 2006 08:38 PM | Link to this

RW; no, not if that’s their defense strategy. Just like “I did not have sexual relations….” did not work, so does “my twin did it” not work.

By DavidU

March 14, 2006 08:40 PM | Link to this

GetaLife- It would not be the first time, Bush & Co do something without getting all the information first (Iraq?) so maybe this twin thing is true.

By RW-(the original)

March 14, 2006 08:42 PM | Link to this

clark,

That isn’t his defense strategy. The New York Times has brought up the possibility.

In any case it is up to prosecutors to find him guilty.

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 14, 2006 08:42 PM | Link to this

Can I ask one question? WTF does Claude Allen have to do with the big picture?

Is this something that you stupid POS liberals can easily understand, this shoplifting? Is it reduced enough to fit into your worldliness?

Morons.

By RW-(the original)

March 14, 2006 08:43 PM | Link to this

I should say to “prove” him guilty.

By getalife

March 14, 2006 08:44 PM | Link to this

So which is the truth. The “evil twin did it,

or

Through his lawyer, Mr. Allen denied the charges, saying there was a mix-up concerning his credit card

By whynot

March 14, 2006 08:49 PM | Link to this

Libs suck an lie,

the big picture is you must be PMS or something ( I thought I’d use an acronym seeing as how you mentioned WTF)

By DavidU

March 14, 2006 08:49 PM | Link to this

GetaLife- I would go with the “evil twin” one. That has ‘Made for TV’ movie all over it. I wonder who would play Bush?

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 14, 2006 08:51 PM | Link to this

Which is more important to the NIVS crowd:

a- A tyrannical dictator who feeds his subjects into shredding machines, feet first for enjoyment.

b- A zany “president” of a terror sponsoring state, that foams at the mouth upon the mere mention on Israel’s name, who’s goal for 06 is an atomic bomb.

c- A penny ante shoplifter.

And they wonder where their credibility went.

By SS&S

March 14, 2006 08:51 PM | Link to this

Maybe they do have a strategy in their silence. Let the Democrats step “in it” or “on it” again and wait to hear their cries of anguish after the facts are revealed.

Just thinking here!!!

By SS&S

March 14, 2006 08:54 PM | Link to this

Oops!!! Must comment on the cartoon…must comment on the cartoon…must comment on the cartoon.

O.K., mildly amusing!

By whynot

March 14, 2006 09:01 PM | Link to this

Libs S and L, Zany is a fun word but Bush isnt against Israel oh wait… you were talking about the Iranian president! you know if it werent for the whole Israel thing I’d get them mixed up all the time

By getalife

March 14, 2006 09:06 PM | Link to this

DavidU,

They compare him to this so I guess it would be the ape in the Clint Eastwood movie.

Clyde

By Objective Observer

March 14, 2006 09:14 PM | Link to this

I wonder if ml knew about the twin? If he did, and didn’t reveal that in some creatively artistic way, then he withheld information pertaining to the case, or situation, as it were.

I’m feeling a little misled here. Maybe he just suffered from scribbler’s block today.

By whynot

March 14, 2006 09:22 PM | Link to this

Objective obserber, um dude hes a political cartoonist not a f*** lawyer get over it.

By RW-(the original)

March 14, 2006 09:33 PM | Link to this

Objective Observer,

I’m going to go out on a limb and say “whynot” has their sarcasm detector turned off. Meet the Allens

By Objective Observer

March 14, 2006 09:35 PM | Link to this

whynot: Maybe you can help me, but it looks like you’ve got your own problem to solve. I’ll look for somebody with a sense of humor for assistance.

By whynot

March 14, 2006 08:29 PM | Link to this

that twin brother stuff is the crap they put on soap operas

Myth Buster, I apologize in Mikes name for not knowing what the president would say maybe you could enlighten us on what he would say seeing as how you know George and all

By whynot

March 14, 2006 08:49 PM | Link to this

Libs suck an lie,

the big picture is you must be PMS or something ( I thought I’d use an acronym seeing as how you mentioned WTF)

By whynot

March 14, 2006 09:01 PM | Link to this

Libs S and L, Zany is a fun word but Bush isnt against Israel oh wait… you were talking about the Iranian president! you know if it werent for the whole Israel thing I’d get them mixed up all the time

By Objective Observer

March 14, 2006 09:40 PM | Link to this

whynot: Your last rant was icing on my cake. Thanks! It was yummy!

By whynot

March 14, 2006 09:22 PM | Link to this

Objective obserber, um dude hes a political cartoonist not a f* lawyer get over it.

By Dusty

March 14, 2006 09:47 PM | Link to this

Objective Observer,

Luckovich suffers from scribbler’s block every day. That’s because he is a mind-blinded liberal Democrat.

Yes, I am angry. Yesterday I read Republicans are not distressed by the deaths of more than 2,300 in Iraq…

That was followed by Republicans are not distressed by the wounded or the widowed, or the orphaned…

This junk was copied and joyously repeated by AMERICAN liberals. Have liberals sunk so low that they really believe such unmitigated lies as this? Would repeat it about fellow Americans? It casts a long dark shadow on all liberals.

I am having trouble stepping away from that shadow. Luckovich has always cast his own sorry shade. Just part of the team, a team that denigrates the human face of America.

By Objective Observer

March 14, 2006 09:48 PM | Link to this

Dammit, some guy’s picture keeps popping up on my screen wanting me to take some kind of poll or something. I’m going in to ask him if he wears boxers or briefs. If he suffers from frequent incontinence and how many trips to the bathroom it requires.

By Mike Parker

March 14, 2006 10:01 PM | Link to this

Good for a laugh but not the best from Mike L.

Needs to tie it in to the Young Republicans, Delay, Rove, and Abramoff.

By Objective Observer

March 14, 2006 10:01 PM | Link to this

Dusty:

I watched a young soldier who had been wounded in Iraq being interviewed last night. He was disfigured from his injuries. He is presently working with an organization who assists veterans and their families.

He said, and I quote…”It is important for those who remain in combat to know that their country supports them in their noble efforts.” “We do not question our Commander in Chief.” “Our job is to defend and protect.”

If that is all he asks of “me,” I am more than happy to do it.

Mike could have at least had Bush holding up two pictures, one of “Gracie” and one of “George.” Would that have been too much to ask. It wouldn’t have revealed too much of the truth.

By seeker

March 14, 2006 10:15 PM | Link to this

LSL is absolutely right.

And since the US cared enough to invade Iraq because Hussein was wood-chipping dissidents, we should also invade every other country where the opposition’s killed.

There’s Burma, N. Korea, most of the ‘stan countries, and half of the rest of Asia. Also most of the countries in Africa.

Golly, so many countries, so little time. Where should we start?

By finch

March 14, 2006 10:31 PM | Link to this

The “evil twin” alibi is intriguing. I’m surprised that the White House, to say nothing of Allen himself hasn’t brought it up. Okay. my mind’s open.

It is a funny cartoon!

By Buy Danish

March 14, 2006 10:38 PM | Link to this

Seeker,

Where do you live?

By WashingtonState

March 14, 2006 10:50 PM | Link to this

OO,

You ask that liberals extend conservatives the benefit of ascribing good intentions to their actions, but that is a two way street. I don’t see any conservative ascribing any but the basest of emotions to liberals. What has happened to our country when half think the other half does not have the interests of America at heart? That is the biggest reason why I feel the Bush administration has to go. The great uniter has turned out to be the ultimate divider. Left to our own devices, we often can find common ground (with the possible exception of Suck and Midori.) Once Bush and Co. enters the dialogue, all hope for consensus goes out the window. Time for change.

By dubya

March 15, 2006 12:37 AM | Link to this

“Freedom an Democracy r on thee march! Course I’m gonna hafta send a few more troops ta Eye-rack to unplace thee ones I already killed. Mission accomplished! Brang hit on! Now I got my eye on Eye-ran. Bring hit on! God bless Mercuh. God bless me, yore leeder!! Mission complished!”

By Steve

March 15, 2006 03:40 AM | Link to this

Dubya, you’ve about covered the territory that goon-boy has destroyed and decimated so far. No wins, all losses. A democracy that forbids printing the number of wounded. Just what kind of democracy is that? The number is about 25,000 currently. Wonder why Bushboy insists upon lying and covering it up. And the uncleansed masses just follow in lock-step. Pitiful.

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 15, 2006 04:57 AM | Link to this

Save the Medicare benefit TODAY’S EDITORIAL March 15, 2006

Medicare’s market-driven drug benefit has had the fastest start up a federal program in recent memory. More seniors were able to get coverage in three months than were able to obtain it after years under state Medicaid and prescription drug plans. Millions of poor seniors that were spending 30 percent of their income on drugs now pay nothing. As a result, they are in better health and the total cost of their care will go down.

Implementation problems had nothing to do with seniors — numbering in the thousands, not millions — not getting drugs. It was a spat about who was going to foot the bill during the time Medicaid eligible seniors chose a drug plan. The administration had a back up plan for resolving this issue in place and it worked well except in less than one percent of all cases. In no case was someone denied a medicine.

So what are all the pinkos whining about? The same old same old?

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 15, 2006 05:23 AM | Link to this

In other words, everything that Mr. Bush has been accused of during the last five years, no matter how Orwellian or thoroughly refuted, will be trotted out again and used as impeachment fodder. And lest you think this could never happen, Judiciary is the House committee through which any formal impeachment resolution would be introduced and proceed. As the country heads toward 2008 and a Democratic nomination fight, John Kerry and Hillary Rodham Clinton would be hard-pressed to avoid going along with Mr. Feingold, Al Gore, and others feeding the bile of the censure/impeach brigades.

Which brings us back to Mr. Feingold’s public service in floating his “censure” gambit now. He’s doing voters a favor by telling them before November’s election just how Democrats intend to treat a wartime President if they take power.

Not only do they want to block his policies, they also plan to rebuke and embarrass him in front of the world and America’s enemies. And they want to do so not because there is a smidgen of evidence that he’s abused his office or lied under oath, but because they think he’s been too energetic in using his powers to defend America. By all means, let’s have this impeachment debate before the election, so voters can know what’s really at stake.

Yes, indeed.

By AntiRadical

March 15, 2006 05:52 AM | Link to this

Well, let’s be sure to minimize the actions of a THIEF. What was wrong with Allen’s “misdemenaor” was that he was stealing. People who are innocent don’t resign, they answer the charges, so I wouldn’t be putting too many eggs in the “evil twin” or “innocent until proven guilty” baskets; those baskets may very well not have a bottom. It is completely laughable to hear the “way-rights” excuse clearly criminal conduct. Since grand theft (look at the dollar amount) seems to be completely excusable to Reps, it is no wonder that they confuse him with Clinton so much (Clinton did it too, did it first, etc.)

My own “tongue-in-cheek” theory is that Clinton got plastic surgery in a discreet Mexican clinic, installed a look-a-like to live with the Hilldebeast, then ran for and won re-election in 2000 & 2004 as GWB. So far, it looks like we have had 14 years of the “Clinton” administration to hear the Reps tell it. It is definitely time for a change whenever a party loses all distinction between right and wrong! Theft is not excusable, IT IS A CRIME!

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 15, 2006 06:09 AM | Link to this

I wonder how many of these pinkos will be quoting Bob Barr this morning?:

Apparently, in Hollywood’s jaundiced eyes, all the good capable of being attained by human beings has been accomplished, and all that is left for the movie industry to celebrate and hold dear are those crumbs of human degradation that seem the central themes of the genre known as modern movies. The human spirit, in Hollywood’s jaded view, can do no more than strive to reach such goals as trans-genderism, illicit sex, racism and competing to see just how many times screenwriters can cram the F-word into a 90-minute film.

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 15, 2006 06:21 AM | Link to this

AntiR: This may cloud the things that you consider to be politically important but don’t you think, if shoplifting is going to surpass Iranian Nukes in importance, that you pinkos should build more prisons to house those caught up in your little dragnet?

Even more confusing for you, I’m sure, was Mr. Allen working in official governmental capacity while he “shopped” at Target? Since I doubt he was there to negotiate world peace with the store managers, aren’t you liberals once again trampling his civil rights, you know, like privacy and a right to trial, etc.

Or do constitutional rights only matter when we can slam Bush with them?

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 15, 2006 06:34 AM | Link to this

Well, surprise, surprise, it took Queen Pinko to keep the memory of Bill Campbell’s corruption from falling into obscurity. And she does it with such style and candor:

He also liked the high life — glamorous women, private jets, golf courses, swanky casinos, ringside seats at boxing matches. He liked to buy his mistresses expensive gifts. He liked to gamble. Yet, his salary as mayor was $100,000 a year, not enough to support him in the manner to which he wished to become accustomed. If Campbell wanted more money, he should have stayed in his law practice, where he might easily have earned several times a mayor’s salary.

Tom Delay should feel cheated, what’s a puny golf trip in the truly greedy world of bigshot democrats?

While we do appreciate Mother Lib’s efforts to illustrate the hypocrisy of the liberals, we must make note that she could have saved forests full of trees and gallons of ink by simply summing it up: Live by the race card, die by the race card.

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 15, 2006 07:30 AM | Link to this

If the Iraqi generals believed that Iraq had WMD up until they were informed by Saddam Hussein three months before the war started, and the UN was unaware of how and where the weapons of mass destruction had been dispersed or destroyed, it is not surprising that the CIA, with few, if any, agents in Iraq before the war, also believed that Iraq still had WMD.

Will The New York Times editorial board and the radicals on the left like MoveOn and the ACLU, all having for years accused the Bush administration of lying to the American people on Iraqi possession of WMD, now admit error? Will the ACLU run another full-page ad in The Times admitting that it was wrong when it accused the President of lying about Iraqis possessing WMD thereby committing high crimes and misdemeanors worthy of impeachment?

The self-appointed watchmen of our society, including those I mentioned, and the many media commentators and politically active citizens, e.g. Cindy Sheehan, Harry Belafonte, Michael Moore, Times columnist Bob Herbert, and so many others who have made wild charges against the President will undoubtedly continue to do so. They have injured the country in the eyes of the world. I do not expect them to admit error in their wild charges and apologize, no matter what the facts show.

Ed Koch is the former democrat Mayor of New York City.

By DCM

March 15, 2006 07:33 AM | Link to this

Uhm…We don’t torture?

By Liberal Texas Democrat

March 15, 2006 07:48 AM | Link to this

Commenting on the cartoon - Ecellent!

By Liberal Texas Democrat

March 15, 2006 07:56 AM | Link to this

Excellent!

By Souldrift

March 15, 2006 08:05 AM | Link to this

Great cartoon Mike!! And you know he wouldn’t have scammed Wal Mart!

Visit Blog and Tan.

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 08:07 AM | Link to this

Washington State,

Just yesterday, we were treated to this garbage from your side:

March 14, 2006 05:15 PM | Link to this

Kurtlar vadisi: Irak /// Valley of the Wolves: Iraq (2006) Bittorrent Download

Directed by Serdar Akar

They (Our military) kill dozens of innocent people with random machine gun fire, shoot the groom in the head, and drag those left alive to Abu Ghraib prison - where a Jewish doctor cuts out their organs, which he sells to rich people in New York, London and Tel Aviv…

Republicans are not distressed by the deaths of more than 2,300 Americans in Iraq, many of whom ( most of whom) lost their lives needlessly fighting a war that should have been over long ago. Republicans are not distressed by the wounded or the widowed or the orphaned or the merely haunted who will, on account of combat, never get another good night’s sleep.

Those are just some highlights from yesterday.

By N-GA

March 15, 2006 08:07 AM | Link to this

Great cartoon!!! If ML published all his cartoons that lampoon corruption in this administration, the AJC would need to print an additional section.

It shows desperation when wing-nuts try to suggest that the evil twin did it. While not out of the realm of possibilities, all the transactions were credit card purchases/returns, so the evil twin would need to have had access to a card issued to Claude Allen. Also, the investigation ran for weeks, so I suspect that even incompetent investigators would have checked and double-checked before they charged an administration official.

And the criticism that one shouldn’t convict someone until they have their day in court reeks of hypocrisy. You wing-nuts quote Limbaugh, O’Reilly, Hannity, Coulter and others have done the same thing for years.

Chalk this one up to another:

• Bush ex-nominee for the federal courts

• Bush appointee

• born again Christian

• ALL OF THE ABOVE

By Souldrift

March 15, 2006 08:11 AM | Link to this

Don’t send the wrong message to the troops!

By N-GA

March 15, 2006 08:16 AM | Link to this

Support our troops…Impeach Bush!!!!

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 15, 2006 08:39 AM | Link to this

And the criticism that one shouldn’t convict someone until they have their day in court reeks of hypocrisy. You wing-nuts quote Limbaugh, O’Reilly, Hannity, Coulter and others have done the same thing for years.

I’m trying to think of one, one shoplifter that the vast right wing conspiracy has devoted it’s total attention and piled on with comparable glee, in, oh, let’s say, the last 75 years. Recollection of this eludes me.

I’ll tell you what, I’ll open the door to even include serious crimes, instead of just retail theft. So if anybody out there can give me a name (besides any that start with a C, I don’t want to collapse the AJC server) then come on with it.

By N-GA

March 15, 2006 08:44 AM | Link to this

Sorry Andy…..but Hillary and Bill are the first that come to mind. Why would you want to exclude them? Are you a hypocrite?

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 08:46 AM | Link to this

And the criticism that one shouldn’t convict someone until they have their day in court reeks of hypocrisy. You wing-nuts quote Limbaugh, O’Reilly, Hannity, Coulter and others have done the same thing for years

N-GA,

Let’s have some facts please!

When did any of these people “convict” someone before they had their day in court? BTW, O’Reilly is an “independent” so I’ll make your research project easier, and ask that you stick with Hannity, Coulter and Limbaugh.

You are ready to convict Bush, but you know, I’m going to take former Democrat Mayor Ed Koch’s side on this issue, as he is actually sane and informed by facts, not delusions.

And Clueless in Seattle wonders why our country is so divided and then blames it on Bush. Classic!

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 15, 2006 08:52 AM | Link to this

I’m talking about accused criminals that don’t have their very own special justice system, that doesn’t apply to the rest of us.

By Eric

March 15, 2006 08:54 AM | Link to this

It’s easy to ignore crackpots. To me that Andy and that Liberals Suck nut don’t really even exist, they’re just pitiful little cartoon characters. Now watch while I ignore every piece of crap they spew for the rest of the day.

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 15, 2006 09:01 AM | Link to this

By Eric March 15, 2006 08:54 AM

It’s easy to ignore crackpots. To me that Andy and that Liberals Suck nut don’t really even exist, they’re just pitiful little cartoon characters. Now watch while I ignore every piece of crap they spew for the rest of the day.

That’s why Eric wails about me first thing every morning because I have no effect on him and someday he will ignore me. Maybe.

That’s

By Wilma Lamb

March 15, 2006 09:04 AM | Link to this

by sickofsleaze You proved the liberals got under your skin or you wouldn’t be spewing your venom.

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 15, 2006 09:11 AM | Link to this

The Feingold proposal is a disaster on all levels for the Democrats, but it is a boon to the Wisconsin senator, thus capturing the current Democratic political dilemma in microcosm. The left-wing netroots are rallying to Feingold’s proposal, and posting the phone numbers of Democratic senators, so Bush haters everywhere can call to urge them to vote for the Feingold’s censure resolution. These bloggers and their readers are a key part of Feingold’s constituency for a run for the 2008 presidential nomination from the left. Anything Feingold does to please them helps himself, even if it is irrational and harmful to his party’s interests. It often will be, since the netroots can’t distinguish between political strategy and pointless, self-gratifying stunts. This is why they pushed Democrats to compound the disaster of the Alito hearings with a doomed filibuster of the nomination, championed — not coincidentally — by another ‘08 hopeful, John Kerry.

Feingold hopes to blow this all up. Republicans should gladly rise to his challenge. Increasing Feingold’s prominence as a spokesman for the Democrats on the War on Terror only benefits the GOP. He epitomizes the Left’s do-nothing, or at least do-the-absolute-minimum, approach to the war. He voted against the Patriot Act, and its reauthorization. He opposes the NSA program. He was against the Iraq war, and opposes using coercive interrogation against terrorists abroad. He is against almost any measure in the War on Terror that doesn’t fit neatly within the confines of the American law-enforcement system (and against even ones that do — the Patriot Act). It was telling that on the Senate floor Feingold highlighted past statements by President Bush saying that law enforcement needs a court order to get a wiretap, by way of supposedly proving the president’s deceit. But the NSA surveillance is not a law-enforcement program; it is not being used to produce evidence of crimes, but to tip off American intelligence about potential plots and the whereabouts of terrorist agents.

By getalife

March 15, 2006 09:26 AM | Link to this

He said at Kos, he is doing it because W broke the law and he is trying to hold him accountable for the illegal wiretaps on Americans. He said W could have done it legally but chose not to so Feingold is trying to hold him accountable.

He is the only Dem with balls enough to stand up for the laws they are swore in to uphold. I guess the rest do not believe that the laws written apply to them.

By getalife

March 15, 2006 09:29 AM | Link to this

Instead of reading what biased opoinions think about what is happenning, it would be better to read his own words, dontchathink?

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 15, 2006 09:42 AM | Link to this

getalife: I have read his words, I know political grandstanding when I see it and I completely agree with the “biased” opinions.

Anything else I can help you with?

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 09:44 AM | Link to this

Lambikins,

We would ignore you “liberals” except for the fact that you are invasive pests that demand our attention.

So yes, you get under our skin

Kinda makes me want to “spew” my breakfast.

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 15, 2006 09:47 AM | Link to this

Feingold Accuses Democrats of ‘Cowering’

By Like it Really Is

March 15, 2006 09:54 AM | Link to this

Danish- Your post misses the whole point of my “Valley of the Wolves” post. The point is not that any of the claims made in the movie are valid; the point is that this is the prevalent view of the Islamic world as regards their American “liberators”. This is exemplified by the movies’ popularity not only in Turkey but across the rest of Muslim countries as well. If you still think that Iraqis and other Muslim populations are appreciative of American “freedom fighting” and give us anything other than lip-service in return, you should download that torrent and actually watch it. You’re in for a rude awakening!

“If crime fighters fight crime, and fire fighters fight fire, what do freedom fighters fight?”- George Carlin

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 09:56 AM | Link to this

Time to choose teams! Getalife is clearly on Feingold’s team. Anyone else?

By getalife

March 15, 2006 10:07 AM | Link to this

Yes, I will be on Feingold’s team because he has balls:

“Democrats run and hide” when the administration invokes the war on terrorism, Feingold told reporters.

Also, voted no to the invasion of Iraq, no to the Patriot Act and yes to ethics reform. Maybe, instead of grandstanding, he is standing up for what is right or best for his country. We could use more Feingolds and hope the fighting Dems will follow his leadership to clean up W’s mess.

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 10:17 AM | Link to this

Like it Really Is,

I can give you all sorts of Middle Eastern “polls” that support Bin Laden. So what? Farenheit 911 was popular. So what?

All that tells me is that the anti-American/anti-Jewish propaganda is working (thanks to films like Valley of the Wolves), and that there is a tremendous amount of ignorance in the Islamic world.

And as for the Iraqis view of us, please read this letter - something you won’t hear from the MSM (I don’t have a URL for his so I have to post then letter from an email:

From: Mayor of Tall ‘Afar, Ninewa, Iraq

*In the Name of God the Compassionate and Merciful

To the Courageous Men and Women of the 3d Armored Cavalry Regiment, who have changed the city of Tal’ Afar from a ghost town, in which terrorists spread death and destruction, to a secure city flourishing with life.

To the lion-hearts who liberated our city from the grasp of terrorists who were beheading men, women and children in the streets for many months.

To those who spread smiles on the faces of our children, and gave us restored hope, through their personal sacrifice and brave fighting, and gave new life to the city after hopelessness darkened our days and stole our confidence in our ability to reestablish our city.

Our city was the main base of operations for Abu Mousab Al Zarqawi. The city was completely held hostage in the hands of his henchmen. Our schools, governmental services, businesses and offices were closed. Our streets were silent, and no one dared to walk them. Our people were barricaded in their homes out of fear; death awaited them around every corner.

Terrorists occupied and controlled the only hospital in the city. Their savagery reached such a level that they stuffed the corpses of children with explosives and tossed them into the streets in order to kill grieving parents attempting to retrieve the bodies of their young.

This was the situation of our city until God prepared and delivered unto them the courageous soldiers of the 3d Armored Cavalry Regiment, who liberated this city, ridding it of Zarqawi’s followers after harsh fighting, killing many terrorists, and forcing the remaining butchers to flee the city like rats to the surrounding areas, where the bravery of other 3d ACR soldiers in Sinjar, Rabiah, Zumar and Avgani finally destroyed them.

I have met many soldiers of the 3d Armored Cavalry Regiment; they are not only courageous men and women, but avenging angels sent by The God Himself to fight the evil of terrorism.

The leaders of this Regiment; COL McMaster, COL Armstrong, LTC Hickey, LTC Gibson, and LTC Reilly embody courage, strength, vision and wisdom.

Officers and soldiers alike bristle with the confidence and character of knights in a bygone era. The mission they have accomplished, by means of a unique military operation, stands among the finest military feats to date in Operation Iraqi Freedom, and truly deserves to be studied in military science. This military operation was clean, with little collateral damage, despite the ferocity of the enemy. With the skill and precision of surgeons they dealt with the terrorist cancers in the city without causing unnecessary damage.

God bless this brave Regiment; God bless the families who dedicated these brave men and women. From the bottom of our hearts we thank the families. They have given us something we will never forget.

To the families of those who have given their holy blood for our land, we all bow to you in reverence and to the souls of your loved ones. Their sacrifice was not in vain. They are not dead, but alive, and their souls hovering around us every second of every minute. They will never be forgotten for giving their precious lives. They have sacrificed that which is most valuable. We see them in the smile of every child, and in every flower growing in this land. Let America, their families, and the world be proud of their sacrifice for humanity and life.

Finally, no matter how much I write or speak about this brave Regiment, I haven’t the words to describe the courage of its officers and soldiers. I pray to God to grant happiness and health to these legendary heroes and their brave families.*

NAJIM ABDULLAH ABID AL-JIBOURI Mayor of Tall ‘Afar, Ninewa, Iraq

By SS&S

March 15, 2006 10:18 AM | Link to this

So how many out there miss the motive behind this statement:

“I’m amazed at Democrats … cowering with this president’s numbers so low,” Feingold said.

Democratic politics as usual, and at the risk of our country’s security. Shameful politics!!!

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 10:19 AM | Link to this

gatalife,

Okey dokey, but I’m on the team that is going to try to clean up Islamofascism’s mess.

I look forward to seeing which AJC regulars will wear Feingold’s colors or take a more “measured” approach.

By kimberly

March 15, 2006 10:22 AM | Link to this

Yep. Me too. Tell ‘crat with courage he doesn’t stand alone.

By SS&S

March 15, 2006 10:26 AM | Link to this

Like it Really Is - I always liked George Carlin and his “in your face” kinda humor. Recently I watched him use a father’s suicide (true story) in a tasteless attempt at humor. Described the man as useless to his family and they were better off without him. Now that it compassion!!!!

He has become rather morbid…..

By candide

March 15, 2006 10:29 AM | Link to this

Bush has picked all his team on the basis of cronyism.

I still think impeachment is in order. But I should prefer a march with pitchforks to the White House to take him out.

By seeker

March 15, 2006 10:33 AM | Link to this

Republicans are not distressed by the deaths of more than 2,300 Americans in Iraq

Richard Cohen is right, and the truth hurts. Republicans cry alligator tears over deaths in Iraq as they tool around with the made in China “Support Our Troops” decals on their SUVs. Meanwhile, they applaud as Bush sends more Americans into the wood-chipper he borrowed from Saddam.

Bush backers decrying this description of them protesteth way, way too much.

By Like it Really Is

March 15, 2006 10:35 AM | Link to this

Danish- Movie makers make movies that will sell (especially ones with $10M budgets like this one). The anti-American sentiment was already there long before “Valley of the Wolves”. The movie only capitalizes on that sentiment. Refer to my earlier post regarding the movies popularity or better yet do a web search. Your letter was nice but I can’t imagine anyone believes that it embodies the hearts and minds of anything more than a small few members of Iraqi society, probably the same ones who have been installed into power by American force like the Mayor of Tall ‘Afar, Ninewa, Iraq who benefits by his “friendly” position. I prefer to believe the millions of people who succinctly “voted” their approval of this movie by purchasing a ticket to see it. Can you show me any evidence of that kind of grand-scale support in favor of American intervention?

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 10:39 AM | Link to this

Like it Really Is,

*One recent opinion poll revealed the depth of the hostility in Turkey toward Americans: 53 percent of Turks who responded to the 2005 Pew Global Attitudes survey associated Americans with the word “rude”; 70 percent with “violent”; 68 percent with “greedy”; and 57 percent with “immoral.” *

I wish the Pew-sters would conduct a poll in the U.S. about Islamofascists. Personally, I love the “rude” question! How about, “Is it rude to behead civilians?” or “Is it rude to hijack American planes and use them to slaughter civilians”? or “Is it rude to request the death penalty for editors who print caroons” or “Is it rude to declare a fatwa”? or “Is it rude to put people in shredders” or “Is it rude for Gary Busey to take a role in an anti-american/anti-semitic propaganda vehicle?”

Of course Hollywood Busey may not realize that it is propaganda, so maybe that’s not a fair question.

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 10:42 AM | Link to this

Seeker,

Is it okay to have a “Support our troops” decal on a sedan?

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 10:45 AM | Link to this

Like You Wish it To Be,

How many “millions” went to see this wonderful movie exactly? Give me the box office numbers.

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 10:50 AM | Link to this

Like it Really Isn’t,

I’m guess the phony Mayor just made up all that stuff about Zarqawi rudely stuffing the bodies of dead children with explosives.

No blood for Islamofascism!

By Scooter

March 15, 2006 10:50 AM | Link to this

Conservatives, Neocons, chickenhawks or whatever you want to label me (don’t call me a republicrat), honor the soldiers who serve to secure a peaceful Middle-East for our children and grandchildren. The “left” cannot seem to grasp that this Iraq war is for the security of our children and grandchildren.

Of course Muslims don’t like us when we are forcefully showing that self rule will end many of the problems the Mullahs and Imams blame Zionists for. They blame the Zionists for all the problems of poverty and such, this blame is explained the poor children as they are indoctrinated into suicide bombers in the local Madras’s. They fail to notice that many of the problems being blamed on the Zionists are in fact born from the dictators who rule through religious favoritism.

Perhaps I should have checked to make sure my “support the troops” sticker was union made in the U.S.A?

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 10:52 AM | Link to this

Wishin’ and a Hopin’

Your letter was nice but I can’t imagine anyone believes that it embodies the hearts and minds of anything more than a small few members of Iraqi society

Yep, nothing but dwarfs and midgets happy to see the shredder in chief deposed.

By fortylife

March 15, 2006 10:53 AM | Link to this

I read post on this board frequently. I understand that we all have different politicial views in one way or another. However, all the mean, name calling post today really saddens me.

By Like it Really Is

March 15, 2006 10:59 AM | Link to this

Danish- Ask and ye shall receive That movie, which reportedly cost a record $10 million, enjoyed the most successful opening of any film ever in Turkey. Pic has totaled more than 3.5 million admissions since its Feb. 3 start and is expected to reach 6 million.

Variety.com 2/26/06

That was on 2/26/06. There are many more millions of viewers that have been added since then. I believe that you have a distorted world view, my dear!

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 11:00 AM | Link to this

Kimberly and Getalife on Feingold’s team. Anyone else? Seeker, what about you?

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 11:01 AM | Link to this

Wishin’ and a Hopin’,

Get back to me when that number reaches 50 million okay?

By getalife

March 15, 2006 11:03 AM | Link to this

So who else is on Feingold’s team to hold W accountable?

Shameless plug.

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 11:07 AM | Link to this

Wishin’ and a Hopin’,

My world view isn’t formed in a cave somewhere in Afghanistan or Pakistan, or in a Hollywood studio.

But go ahead and be proud of yours - you can hardly contain your glee that there is so much anti-American sentiment out there. P.S.

Can Feingold count on you as a team member?

By getalife

March 15, 2006 11:09 AM | Link to this

By candide March 15, 2006 10:29 AM | Link to this Bush has picked all his team on the basis of cronyism. I still think impeachment is in order. But I should prefer a march with pitchforks to the White House to take him out.

Three for Feingold, one for W?

By Like it Really Is

March 15, 2006 11:12 AM | Link to this

Danish- I’m back. The movie has only begun world syndication (including distribution in the states). The figures above were only for Turkey (low population with little disposable income) on its’ initial opening. Want to increase that 50M number a little more so that you won’t embarass yourself again?

By Scooter

March 15, 2006 11:17 AM | Link to this

Mark me up for Feingold!

The dems grandstanding and opportunistic politization of wartime issues has not been well enough displayed. I don’t take shovels from people digging their own grave.

By finch

March 15, 2006 11:21 AM | Link to this

I’m no fan of Bush, but Feingold’s tilting at windmills. This censure ploy will boost his name recognition. That may not be a plus.

Pick your battles.

By RW-(the original)

March 15, 2006 11:22 AM | Link to this

Count me in for the Feingold Express train too. I’ll even chip in for a backhoe.

By Brian Curtis

March 15, 2006 11:30 AM | Link to this

It really is past time for all patriotic Americans to stand together against our common enemy: Bush. Sure, terrorism’s a concern, but Bush is doing WAY more damage than a few plane-jacking zealots.

He’s the best friend terrorists and other anti-American nuts ever had… so why exactly do we put up with his proven crimes and treason? Just because it’s hard to find anyone with the power to impeach him who’s not already in bed with the same interests?

Stand up for America, people. Get rid of Traitor Bush and his criminal cronies. We deserve better.

By kimberly

March 15, 2006 11:38 AM | Link to this

Just curious, Scoot. Did you call it “grandstanding” when Hyde attacked our sitting President over personal P-nis issues? I mean, what a public figure does with his private p-nis is way more important than the Constitution, right? So did you call it grandstanding then, or did you applaud pulling the man away from his duties to protect us all from his wayward p-nis? Just curious.

Heh heh… “back-hoe” heh heh…

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 15, 2006 11:42 AM | Link to this

Finally! Nothing is official, they still have to run some fake polls on it but I think I’ve discovered the democrat party platform:

Workers choice act: If you want the unions in where you work, we will bring them to you and shove them down your employer’s throat. This is a make up for running a trial lawyer as VP instead of a union hack. It is also democratic like terrible timing, seeing how all of the major corporations are folding up because of union obligations. Advantage: Republicans.

Broadband for everybody!: Now that everybody already has broadband, the libs are stepping up and taking the credit for it. I’ll bet suing those telecoms for being “monopolies” sure made them feel generous. Advantage: Even.

Increase the minimum wage!: Shove more regulation down the throat of American business, in turn causing more layoffs. Advantage: Republicans.

Energy Independence!: Since they have released no details of this harebrained, I mean, policy idea, I must as-sume they mean flower power. Advantage: Republicans.

All in all, it’s pretty lame but it is a start. It seems they are targeting the 18 year old part time burger flipper nintendo champion drug abuser sector, or the “I’m not doing a dam-n thing today” crowd. As usual.

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 11:44 AM | Link to this

Like it Really Isn’t,

I don’t mean to be rude, but you know I get the feeling that you don’t really have American’s best interests at heart.

Why do I think that? It’s your presentation! If you noted the success of this vile film and followed that up with something like, “What can we do as Americans to counter this destructive, anti-Semitic, anti-American propaganda which does very real damage to our war on terror and Islamofascism - a war that we cannot afford to lose?” than I’d believe that your motives were pure.

Instead, you use its popularity as evidence that the war on terror cannot be won and say, The entire radical Islamic world is not worth one more drop of American blood.

In other words, retreat and admit defeat.

Rah rah.

By getalife

March 15, 2006 11:45 AM | Link to this

Y’all can’t get over the grandstanding.

It’s about accountability for breaking the law.

Remember, they write the laws and yes, it does apply to them even though W does not think so.

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 11:47 AM | Link to this

Kimberly,

Clinton’s law license was revoked over “personal p-nis issues”?

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 11:49 AM | Link to this

Pardon my typos in my last and final post to Like it Really Isn’t aka Wishin’ and a Hopin’ - That’s “America’s” and “then”…

I’m off to prove the theory of trickle down economics.

By getalife

March 15, 2006 11:52 AM | Link to this

Don’t forget to buy Danish.

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 15, 2006 11:56 AM | Link to this

Reading back: I see that Turkey is mad at us for killing their suicide hijackers and bombers before they have a chance to kill innocent Americans. Why, gosh, I feel awful about this. We must stop killing the terrorists and let them slaughter women and children indiscriminately until they achieve their objective of enslaving us under Islamic Law. I can’t bare the thought of someone being mad at me just because I want to live and be free. We must let them kill us! We can’t have all of this unhappiness! Let it stop! STOP THE UNHAPPINESS!

By kimberly

March 15, 2006 11:58 AM | Link to this

Thanks for the helpful comment, BD, but my question was to Scooter, as to whether he considered that “grandstanding” as well. The President has an important job, and I do not think he should be dragged away from his duties to have his pee pee smacked over something TRIVIAL, regardless of party affiliation. Scooter thinks Feingold is grandstanding; I just wondered if he thought so back in the 90’s as well.

By Brian Curtis

March 15, 2006 11:59 AM | Link to this

BD, you’ll have to enlighten us on how we can “win the war on terror” by making more enemies.

That IS your claim, isn’t it?

By Like it Really Is

March 15, 2006 12:00 PM | Link to this

Danish- You are rude all the time as evidenced by your continued perversion of my (and other) monikers while I afford you the dignity of posting yours as is. Why change, now?

When you can’t face up to facts “like they really are” then you fall back on the old “anti-American” diatribe. It is not unAmerican to point out truthful fact.

We all wish that Iraq could have a happy ending and that there could be “free bread and circuses” for all, but that is NOT “Like it Really Is”. It is sad that you choose to defend the indefensable and claim that Muslims just love Americans because we now occupy them. It simply isn’t true and anyone with common sense knows better.

A lynch pin in the support for the war in Iraq is the supposed support of Muslim populations for American intervention. “Valley of the Wolves” and its’ reception by the Islamic world indicates that this is a “distorted world view”.

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 15, 2006 12:00 PM | Link to this

getalife: Don’t get weepy, man. There were no laws broken, it’s called presidential powers, haven’t you been watching 24 (joking!)? Seriously, read this.

By Objective Observer

March 15, 2006 12:20 PM | Link to this

Kimmie: I know you were looking for a response from Scooter, but since I knew him when…he would have to confess to his own wayward p*** with the ladies, so I’m pretty sure he saw it as grandstanding.

Sorry Scooter. I still adore you!

By getalife

March 15, 2006 12:33 PM | Link to this

John Woo

Torture and freedom fighter.

What a great American, not.

South Korean.

Lets take a closer look at the people involved in this decision, shall we.

Thompson was briefly the subject of controversy when it emerged last year that he was a director of a credit card company that paid more than $400 million to settle charges of consumer and securities fraud, according to The Washington Post. The company, Providian Financial Corp., was also the subject of a class-action suit by its employees, alleging Enron-like actions.

Who listens to these people?

W does.

By getalife

March 15, 2006 12:42 PM | Link to this

Consistent with the Yoo Doctrine, Yoo acknowledged during a December 2005 debate at Notre Dame University with professor Doug Cassel that no treaty prevents the President from authorizing the torture of a detainee’s child — including by “crushing the testicles” of the child. When asked whether any law prevents it, Yoo replied that it would depend on why the President was authorizing it.

Yoo think?

By finch

March 15, 2006 12:43 PM | Link to this

I’m less inclined now to consider the “evil twin” alibi in the Claude Allen case.

ROCKVILLE, Md. — A former top White House aide to President Bush who was arrested for theft admitted to a Target Corp. investigator that he fraudulently returned merchandise that he didn’t buy at one of the company’s stores, according to charging documents.

I am not gloating over this. It’s sad, really.

By finch

March 15, 2006 12:51 PM | Link to this

getalife,

It is all about accountability, and there’s been no final decision on the legality of the wiretapping, the National Review notwithstanding.

Feingold’s censure call is a demand for punishment before there’s been a verdict. I’d prefer that he weren’t so premature.

By SS&S

March 15, 2006 12:51 PM | Link to this

finch - So I guess you’re saying that Fox News is fair and balanced. Good for you!!

By getalife

March 15, 2006 12:53 PM | Link to this

I would continue but it only gets sicker.

The “Buy Danish” vote only had one for W and the rest supporting accountabilty.

Thanks for taking the time to participate in the vote. I am so happy, I am weeping.

getalife: Don’t get weepy, man

By RW-(the original)

March 15, 2006 12:56 PM | Link to this

finch,

Are you going to jump on the “lock him up now” bandwagon or are you at least going to let the guy have a trial? You did notice the according to charging documents didn’t you?

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 15, 2006 12:58 PM | Link to this

getalife: What are trying to get at with your 12:33? Even SEE BS has nothing fake to report about Bush in your link, this is like a once in a lifetime thing for them praising Bush. Are you grasping for straws?

By finch

March 15, 2006 01:07 PM | Link to this

RW,

I’m definitely not in the lock-em-up camp. I really hope his twin did it. Remember, I did write “less inclined”.

SS&S,

I posted a link from Fox because it’s more credible to certain partisans here than a link from the Washington Post.

It’s all in the presentation.

By getalife

March 15, 2006 01:08 PM | Link to this

Okay, I will praise Bush for this

Happy?

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 15, 2006 01:09 PM | Link to this

JESSICA SIMPSON SET FOR REPUBLICAN DINNER Wed Mar 15 2006 10:16:35 ET

The National Republican Congressional Committee has snagged the wholesome, blonde and buxom Jessica Simpson to attend its fundraising gala on Thursday. House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) is the lucky guy who gets to sit next to the “Dukes of Hazzard” star.

Republicans Happier Than Democrats, Independents

By seeker

March 15, 2006 01:09 PM | Link to this

What a great response to bible-thumping political hacks—-

“People place their hand on the Bible and swear to uphold the Constitution; they don’t put their hand on the Constitution and swear to uphold the Bible,”

By candide

March 15, 2006 01:11 PM | Link to this

Saw a great bumper sticker today: “Had enough? Vote Democratic.”

By seeker

March 15, 2006 01:14 PM | Link to this

How to keep the peace in Afghanistan.

LASHKARGAH, Afghanistan - Afghanistan will encourage its powerful drug lords to invest their illegally earned profits in the war-shattered country, according to the governor of the nation’s top opium-growing region.

So where’s the money going now?

Most of their money is stashed in banks in the United Arab Emirates

With friends like these…

By kimberly

March 15, 2006 01:17 PM | Link to this

ObjObs, thanks for the response. I guess if we were ALL going to be objective, we should determine what does and does not constitute an abuse of executive power, and apply it consistently over time. Likewise, if the Executive branch is forced to testify under oath in one administration, that should apply in the next as well — something we have not seen lately, due to “special powers” and privileges. I think it’s the clear double standard we’re seeing that makes people distrustful and less willing to “support” this leader.

By rushncap

March 15, 2006 01:17 PM | Link to this

Thanks for the link, candide. Finally, a picture where Bush may be the more intelligent party. It only took 5+ years.

By N-GA

March 15, 2006 01:27 PM | Link to this

Here is the entire story:

“It’s so rare, given the basic tenor of most arguments in politics today, but every once in a while someone says something so remarkable that’s it’s worth noting, without any comment at all.

Such a situation took place on March 1st in Annapolis, Maryland, where a hearing on a proposed constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage was taking place.

The far right wing was doing its usual best to frighten, anger, and intimidate the witnesses who dared disagree with them.

Then Jamie Raskin, professor of law at American University, testified as to why the amendment should not be passed.

At the end of his testimony, one of Maryland’s most insane ultra-far-rightwingers, republican Senator Nancy Jacobs, stood up and shouted: “Mr. Raskin, my Bible says marriage is only between a man and a woman. What do you have to say about that?”

To which Mr. Raskin replied: “Senator, when you took your oath of office, you placed your hand on the Bible and swore to uphold the Constitution. You did not place your hand on the Constitution and swear to uphold the Bible.”“

By finch

March 15, 2006 01:36 PM | Link to this

I don’t think I’ve ever seen the words “wholesome” and “Jessica Simpson” in the same sentence before. Remember how long her marriage lasted? And those “Victoria’s Secret” ads?

Debbie Gibson is wholesome.

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 15, 2006 01:39 PM | Link to this

Yep, and the Constitution will soon limit marriage to that between a man and a woman, with an amendment that will be upheld.

I have faith in that.

By N-GA

March 15, 2006 01:39 PM | Link to this

CBS conducted a new poll to determine support for GWB. This poll included 358 Reps, 366 Dems, and 412 Indies. The result….identical!!!! Only 34% of Americans think JWB is doing a good job!

Faux News sure has been quiet since polls by AP, Zogby, Harris, and CNN also confirm GWB’s plummet in the ratings.

So now I would like to know what all the ditto-head bloggers who jumped all over CBS’ initial poll have to say. Let me help you: “It is the liberal media!”

Maybe the RNC will help you ditto-heads pay for swimming lessons.

By Objective Observer

March 15, 2006 01:42 PM | Link to this

Sorry Kim. I’m afraid you misread.

Scooter concerns himself with the important issues. Political posturing on the part of Congress to secure votes at the risk of our country’s security is something that I know he would not support. But he obviously does support Feingold’s right to step on his dick.

Freedom to choose belongs to the individual with Scooter. Consequences of their choice belongs to the individual as well.

Talk about distracting the President from important issues??? Tell me, what was Bill doing that was so important at the time. Obviously not addressing Islamofacism which was threatening even then.

Well, the kids are back, so I’ll quit talking on Scooter’s behalf.

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 15, 2006 01:48 PM | Link to this

From the website of The Nation:

For the moment, however, let us celebrate the man. The club will try to shove him in a closet and forget his little unpleasantness ever happened. I hope they fail and other Dems are properly embarrassed. Amid scandals in high places, Senator Feingold is fresh air. The country should rise up and sing!

(Chorus)

Get The Nation at home (and online!) for 75 cents a week!

If you like this article, consider making a donation to The Nation!

For reprint rights to this article, e-mail nation@agenceglobal.com!

(Refrain)

Get The Nation at home (and online!) for 75 cents a week!

If you like this article, consider making a donation to The Nation!

For reprint rights to this article, e-mail nation@agenceglobal.com!

By N-GA

March 15, 2006 01:54 PM | Link to this

Some of you actually believe this administration when it says that censuring the president undermines national security?

If you weren’t such pathetic sheeple, willing to believe anything they tell you, then I would find it laughable.

Few in the world today view this administration seriously. There is absolutely nothing that we can do to make this administration look more ridiculous. They do enough all by themselves without outside help.

What hypocrites. Let me say it again. WHAT HYPOCRITES you are.

I just wish I had created the line:

“Stupid is as stupid does”. There is no hope for you, but there is still hope for America when we return it to the people.

By kimberly

March 15, 2006 01:57 PM | Link to this

ObOb, Sorry, but you’re all over the map on this. Are you saying “the kids are back” so you have to start kicking sand at me before they accuse you of being objective???

My point was that, based on MY objective observations, the standards of whether to smack a President for his actions seem to be applied unevenly from one administration to the next. Are YOU trying to say that the business of running this country was LESS important in the 90’s than it is now? If yes, then why get mad if Bill took a “breather” (Haha!), and if NO, then how do you justify his smackdown and not one for our current “laws-are-for-other-folks” President? Do you think that it’s wrong to expect a consistent standard?

By RW-(the original)

March 15, 2006 02:04 PM | Link to this

N-GA,

If you would pay attention once in a while you would notice most of us are all for letting Feingold’s censure measure come to a vote. Bill Frist tried to bring it to a floor vote and Harry Reid used procedural tactics to block it.

Why don’t you address your next rant to this guy?

By getalife

March 15, 2006 02:06 PM | Link to this

A closing argument :

FEINGOLD: Well, because I think this is thefirst step. I think what we’ve done for three months is I’m on both on the Intelligence Committee and the Judiciary Committee. We’ve listened and listened. We’ve not heard any persuasive argument at all that the president had legal authority to do that

In other words, it is the first step in the impeachment process just like they did for Clinton.

By N-GA

March 15, 2006 02:11 PM | Link to this

RW,

My post wasn’t addressed to you, so it is curious that you found the need to respond. It wasn’t addressed to anyone specifically. If you would PAY ATTENTION, my post came right after OO’s 1:42 post.

Focus, RW.

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 15, 2006 02:18 PM | Link to this

From RW’s link, at the bottom:

Paid for by Friends For Harry Reid 422 C St. NE Washington, DC 20002 - Privacy Policy and Terms of Use

Hhhhmmmm:

Welcome to Friends for Harry Reid

Check out the picture of the…. Indian Reservation! How timely. Are democrats simply that stupid? He’s freaking smiling like he’s got a load in the bank.

If the libs won the White House, would they fly the flag of Al Qaeda over it?

Click here to learn more about Senator Reid.

Two years later, Reid was elected the youngest Lieutenant Governor in Nevada history, and in 1977, he was appointed Chairman of the Nevada Gaming Commission where, for five years, he made headlines for his legendary and relentless pursuit to clean up Nevada’s gaming industry.

Let’s see, Casino= Indian Reservations. Casinos= Mafia.

Harry Reid. Delivering Results.

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 15, 2006 02:27 PM | Link to this

Harry Reid is spying on us!

Information Collected About You We collect a variety of Personal Information about those who register on our site, make contributions through our site or use other functions or features on the site. “Personal Information” is information that can be directly associated with a specific person or entity such as a name, address, telephone number, credit card information, bank account information, e-mail address, or information about activities that is directly linked to that person.

Censure! Censure him!

By RW-(the original)

March 15, 2006 02:31 PM | Link to this

N-GA,

The fact that your post was not addressed to anyone in particular seems to leave it open for response from anyone. (Even if that sort of etiquette was observed here)

If you prefer to babble to yourself please let us know.

By getalife

March 15, 2006 02:34 PM | Link to this

Andy: Don’t get weepy, man

Have a nice day :)

By dee

March 15, 2006 02:38 PM | Link to this

Goodness!!! There are so many hostile, errant, and arrogant people on this board!!! Whatever happened to “Debating an issue” with civility?

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 02:56 PM | Link to this

Wishin & Hopin’,

We all wish that Iraq could have a happy ending and that there could be “free bread and circuses” for all, but that is NOT “Like it Really Is”. It is sad that you choose to defend the indefensable and claim that Muslims just love Americans because we now occupy them. It simply isn’t true and anyone with common sense knows better.

Show me where I ever said any of the above.

I know that relying on a Pew poll, or the popularity of a vile film that is filled with more lies than even Michael Moore can dream of is not how we should conduct foreign policy. On the contrary, it is our duty to countermand this propaganda and not to encourage it through appeasement or cowardice.

I said that your “presentation” gave the strong impression that your motives are suspect, and although I handed you an opportunity to correct that perception, you have failed to do so.

By getalife

March 15, 2006 02:58 PM | Link to this

I guess “dee” voted to hold him accountable.

By getalife

March 15, 2006 03:03 PM | Link to this

RW,

You are turning me into a vicious lib like Clooney.

Another shameless plug

By RW-(the original)

March 15, 2006 03:03 PM | Link to this

getalife,

I think “dee”, like “fortylife” earlier, is voting to hold you accountable.

I guess niether one of them has been reading for the last few days. I thought the place was pretty civil today.

By RW-(the original)

March 15, 2006 03:07 PM | Link to this

getalife,

Clooney and Huffpo seem to be having a little trouble.

By N-GA

March 15, 2006 03:08 PM | Link to this

RW….there is only one “babbler” in this dialog…Me thinks thou protest too much. So far as I can tell, you’ve contributed nothing in terms of issues today. I guess you want everyone to go to your blog so that you can “earn” your 30 pieces of silver.

By getalife

March 15, 2006 03:08 PM | Link to this

RW,

Me too. I am accountable for my rhetoric but ended with :

Have a nice day :)

By N-GA

March 15, 2006 03:11 PM | Link to this

With the GOP controlling Congress, our only hope of holding GWB accountable is post-presidency. He will screw up and travel to a country that has an outstanding warrant for war crimes.

Unfortunately that will not bring back the thousands of dead Americans and Iraqis.

By RW-(the original)

March 15, 2006 03:14 PM | Link to this

N-GA,

My blog, which I have not promoted once today, is an ad free and tip jar free place.

Have you got some extra special problem today that you would like to share with us?

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 03:16 PM | Link to this

N-GA,

Earlier in the day you made a sweeping statement about Rush/Hannity/Coulter being liars, and apparently you consider that to be a magnificent contribution.

Still waiting for the facts to support your claim. Opinions that you disagree with don’t count - I want specific “lies” that they told.

By N-GA

March 15, 2006 03:18 PM | Link to this

Nothing that will turn your head RW, or fill it for that matter. Like I said earlier, you’ve chosen not to contribute today relative to the issues, but only to post smarmy comments that add nothing to the debate.

Try harder, please.

By Scooter

March 15, 2006 03:21 PM | Link to this

Kimberly, sorry for the delay.

At the time yes I saw the attacks on Bill’s personal life as grandstanding. However, when the President stood before the world and lied (cause he knew for certain what he did with his Pee Pee) it offended me, because; my little sister was in her early teens at the time. My little sister was at an impressionable age and to hear the President of the United States of America stand there and redefine what sexual relations were threatened her judgment on what sex was.

As to your “objective” observation about different standards being applied to different parties, I don’t think so. I don’t expect nor will I condone any president lying or breaking the law. If Bush was wire tapping calls between two callers and both were in the US then hang him high. I don’t know enough of the program to make that call right now. I do however know that foreign agents presently seek to kill as many American civilians as possible and they probably have sleeper cells in this country that they will probably communicate with.

So, we have one president doing something to protect his own hide and the other doing something presumably to protect my life. I don’t have as big a problem with the later.

As to privacy issues, the IRS invades our privacy yearly to enforce this complicated and burdensome “progressive” tax code. Do you worry about that? I personally have always figured the government knew things about me and my actions. However, knowing and using that knowledge, so that government can take away a citizens right to life, liberty or the pursuit of happiness, are two entirely different things.

By getalife

March 15, 2006 03:24 PM | Link to this

Arrianna, I am shocked. This was bad. You compiled some interview answers and passed it off as Clooney writing the blog? No disclosure of that fact. You just lost a reader.

The comments seem to favor Cooney’s argument.

By N-GA

March 15, 2006 03:24 PM | Link to this

BD,

Anointed one….I NEVER said they are liars (I should have). I said they are quick to judge people before they have had their day in court. That was in response to someone saying that ML was too quick to attack Mr. Allen for defrauding department stores.

You should read my post BEFORE you make stupid accusations, BD.

By kimberly

March 15, 2006 03:26 PM | Link to this

OH! OH! Let me! Bill O’Reilly claimed that he does not “do personal attacks” on the February 23 edition of The O’Reilly Factor, during a discussion with Mike Farrell about gay marriage and the death penalty. I’m pretty sure that’s a lie. {:->

By finch

March 15, 2006 03:29 PM | Link to this

getalife,

I noticed that torture-policy-enabler John Yoo’s son in law is Peter Arnett.

Honestly, you can’t make this stuff up.

By RW-(the original)

March 15, 2006 03:31 PM | Link to this

N-GA,

Which debate would you like to participate in? The one that says “Bush sucks”, the one that “Bush really sucks”, or the one that says “Shoplifters should face summary execution”?

I guess you might not have noticed, but there really isn’t much of a debate going on here today.

finch,

Didn’t your wholesome Debbie Gibson do a nude layout for Playboy?

By kimberly

March 15, 2006 03:36 PM | Link to this

As to your “objective” observation about different standards being applied to different parties, I don’t think so. Really? I mean, you know, REALLY? Do you think the same fairness has been applied to the secret pacts between the Bush administration and the secret energy commissions and the no-bid contracts to oil buddies, and Port deals to foreign nations that were applied to the scrutinization of Bill Clinton’s p-nile wanderings? REALLY? Umm… okay, if you say so.

I don’t expect nor will I condone any president lying or breaking the law. So YOU don’t think that circumventing the 72-our retroactive warrant provision for wiretapping is breaking the law? Because Feingold is there in Washington, on the committees that look at this sort of thing, and he disagrees with you. What information do YOU have that Senator Feingold doesn’t? Can you share, or will you have to kill us all if you do?

By Scooter

March 15, 2006 03:37 PM | Link to this

So Kimberly, did my response satisfy you?

By getalife

March 15, 2006 03:41 PM | Link to this

finch,

I saw that too.

I started looking at the people involved in telling W that it is legal:

In early September 2002, just before the first anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks, a group of lawyers gathered in a heavily protected, windowless room in the Department of Justice building in Washington. There were three federal appeals-court judges, Laurence Silberman, Edward Leavy, and Ralph Guy. There was Theodore Olson, the U.S. solicitor general. There was Larry Thompson, the deputy attorney general. And there was John Yoo, the Justice official who had closely studied questions of war powers and presidential authority. Rounding out the group were a few other department staffers, one official from the FBI, and David Addington, Vice President Cheney’s top lawyer.

They come up with this :

In re: Sealed Case, has become one of the key documents in the hottest argument in Washington today

By RW-(the original)

March 15, 2006 03:44 PM | Link to this

These people have some inside info too.

“I haven’t read it,” demurred Barack Obama (Ill.).

“I just don’t have enough information,” protested Ben Nelson (Neb.). “I really can’t right now,” John Kerry (Mass.) said as he hurried past a knot of reporters—an excuse that fell apart when Kerry was forced into an awkward wait as Capitol Police stopped an aide at the magnetometer.

Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) brushed past the press pack, shaking her head and waving her hand over her shoulder. When an errant food cart blocked her entrance to the meeting room, she tried to hide from reporters behind the 4-foot-11 Barbara Mikulski (Md.).

“Ask her after lunch,” offered Clinton’s spokesman, Philippe Reines. But Clinton, with most of her colleagues, fled the lunch out a back door as if escaping a fire… .

So nonplused were Democrats that even Sen. Charles Schumer (N.Y.), known for his near-daily news conferences, made history by declaring, “I’m not going to comment.” Would he have a comment later? “I dunno,” the suddenly shy senator said.

The rest

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 03:48 PM | Link to this

Kimberly,

O’Reilly is an “Independent”. We “wingnuts” don’t pay much attention to him.

NGA,

Sorry, you’re right. Other bloggers call them liars - almost daily. It’s part of the talking points.

As for rushing to judgement, I’ll admit it: I thought OJ was guilty before the jurors actually deliberated. Still do. Something about that DNA evidence.

By getalife

March 15, 2006 03:49 PM | Link to this

Are you a lawyer?

By kimberly

March 15, 2006 03:57 PM | Link to this

I want specific “lies” that they told. Um, specifically, Bill O’Reilly said he doesn’t do personal attacks. We could debate whether he was lying when he called Hillary Clinton a “left-wing nut,” Ralph Nader a “loon,” and Moyers a “secular, far-left fanatic,” Jimmy Carter “cluless” and “a fool,” John Kerry a “sissy,” or Dallas Morning News columnist Macarena Hernandez “incompetent,” and a “Latina ideologue.” But I think it’s conclusive that these are, indeed, “personal attacks.”

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 04:11 PM | Link to this

[Here’s that Democrat Agenda that we’ve been waiting for!}(http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=\Politics\archive\200603\POL20060315b.html)

Oh goody! I may get to pay for someone else to get “affordable” broadband access.

Meanwhile, they’re still going after WalMart, and hugging unions.

By Jewish and Proud of It

March 15, 2006 04:13 PM | Link to this

Did anyone read the article from yesterday’s edition of the USA Today that hypothesized that liberal or left-leaning couples are having fewer children than conservative or right-leaning couples and that, as a result, the nation will, over time, become more “conservative?” The author says that this is already beginning to happen and will become more pronounced as time goes on. He went on to say that while there will certainly be those that rebel on both sides of the fence but that on the whole the “conservative values” will be passed on to more children than “liberal values” and that will lead to a more conservative country. I wish I had a link but I do not so I’m kinda paraphrasing here. Any thoughts?

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 15, 2006 04:15 PM | Link to this

getalife: So, dude, could you clarify something for me. This doesn’t seem to pass your legal smell test, even though all applicable procedures and regulations were followed and thoroughly vetted. That’s fine, you ignored the law all through the Clinton years, obvious stuff at that, I didn’t expect you to turn to the judiciary now anyway.

What I would like to ask, you don’t see the common sense logic that if someone in the United States is talking to a known aqent of Al Qaeda, our sworn legal enemy, that we shouldn’t be interested in what’s being said? Wouldn’t Bush be negligent if he didn’t wiretap?

I already no the big overriding concern in all of this, the true pinko motivating factor at work behind the scenes, so you can probably spare me the answer I’m looking for. If you were to speak honestly, you would say to hell with national security, get Bush!

Right?

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 04:19 PM | Link to this

Kimberly,

I hate to disappoint you, but O’Reilly is not who we get our wingnut orders from.

I will point out that calling someone like Bill Moyers “a secular far-left fanatic” doesn’t really qualify in the “personal attack” department, unless you’d like to include everytime the Dems call us “extremists” or “members of the extreme right wing of the party”. He has also levied the same charge against George Soros, which I have no argument with.

And what about every time that you and the MSM refer to George Bush as a stupid, ignorant, war-mongering, dunce? Doesn’t that count?

Come to think of it, I don’t really think that any of the examples you mention qualify as personal attacks. To me a personal attack would have to attack something other than someone’s ideas or political positions.

Like John Kerry referring to Cheney’s gay daughter…

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 04:22 PM | Link to this

Let me try that link again. I have a new keyboard whose revolutionary ergonomic design takes more than a little getting used to.

Here’s that Democrat Agenda that we’ve been waiting for!

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 15, 2006 04:23 PM | Link to this

Like I said, Liberals Suck:

Speaking of Allen, the Los Angeles Times carries a rather jaw-dropping column on his case from Erin Aubry Kaplan:

I don’t support conservatism in its current iteration, and I support black conservatives even less, but we cannot ignore the racial implications of this latest Republican fall from grace. Here is a decidedly white-collar black man getting clipped for a blue-collar crime associated with economic necessity, one that practically guarantees prison time for most black men in this country. (Even if he’s ultimately convicted, it’s doubtful that Allen will end up behind bars.)

What does the man’s color have to do with anything?

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 15, 2006 04:27 PM | Link to this

kimberly: Please don’t flame me but the question was framed as to finding someone guilty before they’ve had their right to trial. I’m surprised you don’t know of the constitutional right to a trial by your peers and presumed innocence until guilt is proven.

While Jimmy Carter may deserve to be put on trial…..

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 04:28 PM | Link to this

JAPOI,

This is hardly news - USA Today must have been having a slow news day.

For one thing, the majority of women in the Dem party are single which cuts down a bit on the child thing (not entirely of course, but a little).

Secondly there is this little thing that James Taranto calls “The Roe Effect” - if you use your imagination, you can guess what that is.

Third, I don’t think that ‘conservative’ women are as hell bent on having a career and delaying marriage and childbirth.

Fourth, ‘conservative’ women don’t believe that having a lot of children “destroys the environment.”

I could go on if you’d like, but I think you get the idea…

By kimberly

March 15, 2006 04:31 PM | Link to this

Danish, chill Chickie-Pie! I was only responding to YOUR request for a specific example. I mean, if you WANT to rant & rave about how much you despise other people, go ahead, but please don’t claim it’s on my account. ‘kay? Oh, and have a lovely evening! (That might be possible if you step outside, Dear. The sunshine is delightful.)

By Scooter

March 15, 2006 04:35 PM | Link to this

Kimberly, are you having fun?

Secret Energy Commissions: the secret part is the kicker. I don’t know what went on in those meetings. If it was something that was going to favor public entities with tax incentives or something, it wouldn’t matter if I had my way and we instituted the FairTax. Nobody could lobby for preferential treatment under a national retail sales tax.

No bid contracts to oil buddies: the old tried and foggy accusation of people like you. You see Kimberly, I understand that there is this thing called LOGCAP. If you are going to type that you are the objective one here, I will assume that you railed against Clinton awarding no bid/LOGCAP Kosovo projects to Halliburton? I seriously doubt you did as I have not seen you ever criticize democrats.

Furthermore, I also understand there are not many companies that can handle the expansive duties that Iraq entails. There is a foreign country, Dyncorps I think, that could potentially handle it, but I wouldn’t want to send my tax dollars to a foreign country where they cannot be partially recaptured by American taxation. Do you?

The port deal was a double edged sword. On one hand you don’t want to further enflame Muslim resentment of the US, but you also don’t want to be caught with your guard down. If you will remember, I stayed out of that one while you and the rest of the country ran off half cocked and even less informed. Sure info eventually came out, but you know good and well that the “left” knew everything instantly.

Kimberly, Kimberly, Kimberly, are you so rabid that you begin arguing in your head before you read my post? Now, look at what I said and what you asked and really think about it.

Excerpt of my post: * If Bush was wire tapping calls between two callers and both were in the US then hang him high. I don’t know enough of the program to make that call right now.*

Now from you the “objective” one: What information do YOU have that Senator Feingold doesn’t? Can you share, or will you have to kill us all if you do?

And you are the one with all the answers?

By kimberly

March 15, 2006 04:35 PM | Link to this

Andy, Honey, I won’t flame you. It’s okay. Just breathe. There, there.

By kimberly

March 15, 2006 04:45 PM | Link to this

Thanks, Scooter, for the personal attention. You know I just come here to learn; that’s why most of my posts are questions. If YOU think that we are witnessing equality and fairness across parties and administrations, then CERTAINLY, I will consider that to be a valid possibility.

But um, for the record, I haven’t “run off half-cocked” in WEEKS! {;->

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 04:47 PM | Link to this

Kimberly,

I guess you failed to see what I thought was very obvious irony in my post! i.e., when I said, O’Reilly is not who we get our wingnut orders from. It was a joke girl.

I was not “ranting” or “raving” about anything…

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 04:51 PM | Link to this

LS&L,

That snarky LA Times piece wasn’t about being black, it was about being a black conservative.

Maybe it’s just me, but I found the piece to be, how shall I put this…… “racist”.

By Liberals Suck And Lie

March 15, 2006 04:55 PM | Link to this

The second part of their grand election strategy is to censure President Bush for preventing terrorist attacks by conducting wiretaps on suspected terrorist without notifying Muhammad ahead of time. A bill introduced by Sen. Russ Feingold (D.-Wis.) would censure the president for keeping us safe and “breaking the law,” which has been done by every president since Carter, who enacted FISA. One must question whether Feingold is really standing on principle or trying to stick it to Bush. The Democrats myopic obsession with bringing down the President is indicative of the latter. Democrats are simply angry that they don’t have the national security record Bush does.

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 04:55 PM | Link to this

By kimberly

March 15, 2006 04:31 PM | Link to this

Danish, chill Chickie-Pie! I was only responding to YOUR request for a specific example. I mean, if you WANT to rant & rave about how much you despise other people, go ahead, but please don’t claim it’s on my account.

If you are more than “half-cocked” what does that make you? Completely “unglued”?

By kimberly

March 15, 2006 05:04 PM | Link to this

Haha! Good one BD. {:-D It’s good when we can remind each other not to take ourselves too seriously. Yes, unglued is not a good place to be. Hahaha! You don’t really despise anyone, do you? I knew it. Just a good-hearted woman underneath. Isn’t Springtime just the BEST?

By Scooter

March 15, 2006 05:21 PM | Link to this

Kimberly, no I don’ think we are seeing fairness, by the media, across parties. For example, Bush goes to Iraq on Thanksgiving to boost the spirits of soldiers spending time away from their families and the media criticizes the fake turkey. On the other hand, Clinton goes to the largely rockless beeches of Normandy, mysteriously finds a pile of rocks large enough to form a cross in the sand and the media talks of his honor.

President Bush uses his daddy’s influence and lands a reserve job and the media can’t criticize it enough. Clinton runs off to Canada to avoid the draft and the media hardly mentions it.

Unemployment reported as already low at 5.2 percent while Clinton is in office and the same percentage is a record high for the last three years when Bush is in office. Or, they are all low paying jobs.

So, if anything I am trying to counter the SOP of the media that favors your side.

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 05:32 PM | Link to this

I’m just having a bit of difficulty seeing where “I raved about how I despise other people” - on “your account”.

I joked about O’Reilly not being a wingnut, and gave my concept of what qualifies as a “personal attack”.

Yes, it is a glorious day and I have been out numerous times to walk my dog, do yard work, et cetera. Time for a nice cocktail out on my deck…

By Daniel

March 15, 2006 05:37 PM | Link to this

Clinton didn’t go to Canada. He got deferments. Then, when the lottery arrived he got a high number. The rest is whining.

By kimberly

March 15, 2006 05:41 PM | Link to this

Scooter, if you’re trying to say that the media is a JOKE, and that they haven’t been doing the job of reporting the actual news for a very long time now, I’m in total agreement with you!! The crap they pass off as NEWS, while failing to inform us of what our government is really doing in OUR name with OUR money…. it’s a disgrace, that’s what it is.

Still, A FAKE TURKEY? No way, man!! You’re SH—-IN’ me, right? That’s just WRONG man. A FAKE Turkey? I am SO writing to somebody about THAT!

BTW, my Daddy was actually IN the Alabama Air National Guard in ‘72 & ‘73, flying the actual airplanes, after many years of full-time active duty. Let’s not go there today, huh? Toodles!

By kimberly

March 15, 2006 05:46 PM | Link to this

Oh yes, and FYI: Oxford, the prestigious university to which Clinton received a scholarship WITHOUT his [deceased] Daddy’s help, is in England. Um… in case anybody here wants to help their kids apply. England: where our ancestors lived before they came here, killed the natives, and celebrated by eating FAKE turkey. Hahaha!

By RW-(the original)

March 15, 2006 05:59 PM | Link to this

They have finally found the Civil War every one on the left has been so desperate for.

By whynot

March 15, 2006 06:09 PM | Link to this

Kimberly, your dad was in the National Guard? must have been into killing innnocent college [kids](http://talkleft.com/kent043000.jpg

By whynot

March 15, 2006 06:10 PM | Link to this

here

By Objective Observer

March 15, 2006 06:24 PM | Link to this

I am not going to blog from work anymore. I miss way too much.

When I first came in today, I thought that maybe this “Kimberly” was not the “Esteemed Author” Kimberly. Now that I have had time to catch up, I see that she is the one who “speaks from on-high.”

And to think, I was going to apologize!! My apologies to Scooter though. Look up, can you see her Scooter? She’s obscured by the clouds………

By Scooter

March 15, 2006 06:32 PM | Link to this

Daniel, not that it matters but facts are facts. Check them out;

“In mid-1968 Clinton, who maintained that although he was not opposed to the military or war in general, he was morally opposed to the Vietnam War, began to seek ways of avoiding the draft. His first opportunity was provided through the political and social connections of his uncle, Raymond Clinton, and Henry Britt, a Hot Springs lawyer and former judge, who made arrangements with the commanding officer of the local Naval Reserve unit, Trice Ellis, to secure a billet for Clinton in the naval reserve”

“The “other way” that had “taken care” of Clinton was a favor Henry Britt worked out with William S. Armstrong, chairman of the Garland County draft board, a favor that would provide Clinton with only temporary protection from the draft but would allow him to at least start his first year at Oxford without committing him to military service”

The rest is Daniel making things up.

By Scooter

March 15, 2006 06:36 PM | Link to this

Daniel, I do concede and have learned that Clinton did not go to Canada.

By Daniel

March 15, 2006 06:45 PM | Link to this

So what? Who cares? After he went to Oxford he got a high lottery number and never served. What’s your point?

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 06:51 PM | Link to this

RW,

This particular Civil War sounds like a comedy of errors. I’m trying to mentally cast the movie and particularly the director. Mel Brooks?

I hope that they manage to hold things together until November. Feingold needs them and I want Feingold to have every one of them.

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 06:59 PM | Link to this

Clinton’s first efforts to question what the meaning of “is” is

By Scooter

March 15, 2006 07:00 PM | Link to this

Daniel, like I said it doesn’t matter. I don’t criticize Cheney’s deferements nor do I criticize Clinton’s draft avoidance. I have found it intereesting how some will rail Cheney as the deferment guy but defend Clinton, not saying you do that but many do.

By Brian Curtis

March 15, 2006 08:11 PM | Link to this

There’s nothing shameful about ducking out of Vietnam. It’s not as heroic as protesting it, like Kerry did, but only suckers actually volunteered for that insanity.

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 08:44 PM | Link to this

Scooter & Brian,

Okay, so both Cheney and Clinton got out of Vietnam, just like thousands of others would have done if they could have. I don’t have a problem with them avoiding the war for philosophical reasons. But Bush, on the other hand, was in the military. There were men who depended on him being there and having their backs. He had no philosophical qualms about the war; he just thought that he shouldn’t have to go, I guess because he was a wealthy Harvard boy and his dad was a powerful politician. I do have a problem with that, especially now that he believes he should have the authority to send others’ kids to be killed. Of course, all those other 2,000+ kids weren’t as priviledged as GW. He’s a deserter and in my mind a traitor. The worst of the worst— he wouldn’t fight himself, not because he thought it was wrong, but because he was too good, too important to do the same thing as the common man, and now he’s so good he can send the middle class boys to die, since he doesn’t care about them. Impeach him; there’s no shortage of offenses he’s guilty of.

By Scooter

March 15, 2006 08:53 PM | Link to this

At least Bush has the cohones to live under his own name.

By Buy Danish

March 15, 2006 09:04 PM | Link to this

Scooter,

No, I think the point is that he has no cojones what-so-ever.

By Scooter

March 15, 2006 09:07 PM | Link to this

have fun jack-off!

By Bush Sucks More than Monica

March 15, 2006 10:12 PM | Link to this

Great Bush to Hitler Morphing gif if anyone needs an avatar for display!

Let’s be friends- I’ll hug your elephant if you kiss my a-s-s!

By Buy Danish

March 16, 2006 07:57 AM | Link to this

Fake Danish at 8:44,

Nice job of slandering the Guard.

By Brian Curtis

March 16, 2006 02:47 PM | Link to this

BD: That’s quite a stretch—from pointing out that a rich kid used his connections to avoid combat… all the way to “slandering the Guard.”

I admire your flexibility, if not your honesty.