Mike Luckovich

By I Report, You Whine

October 11, 2006 06:29 AM | Link to this

Some stalker you are Georgie Girl, so easy to ditch.

Cut!

Today’s cartoon that doesn’t suck!

Cut

The little-understood reality of this election year is that conservatives are being under-polled. If you asked me, for instance, if I am happy with the job that President Bush is doing or that the Republican Congress is doing, I would say “no.” But if you give me a good conservative to vote for, I will go out of my way to vote for him.-AmericanSpectator

Ehhehehehe.

Cut

I argued recently that the Democrats deserve to be defeated in this fall’s elections because they contribute nothing of value to the national debate. Boy, have they proven me right with the Foley scandal. The Republicans were doing well politically when the nation was focused on national security, but their poll numbers and electoral prospects dropped as soon as the Democrats exploited the Foley story. It is a measure of what the two parties have to offer that the one does well when the public focuses on the vital issues of the day—and the other does well when the public ignores vital issues in favor of trivial scandals.-RealClearPolitics

Cut

A Bubba tirade followed, when an answer would have worked fine. As Wallace told The Washington Post’s Howard Kurtz, the surprising thing was that he (Wallace) was the only TV interviewer among many to ask Clinton that question, even though Clinton had been complaining about an ABC miniseries that faulted his handling of bin Laden. It is amazing no one else asked. It goes to show that Fox News keeps American media fair and balanced. –RealClearPolitics

By Filthy Godless Liberals

October 11, 2006 06:30 AM | Link to this

But since when does the Democratic Party, to say nothing of Dr. Dean, advocate U.S. unilateralism when unending multilateral approaches are available? And how does Mr. Nunn’s suggestion that President Bush should have dealt with North Korea first among the axis of evil square with the idea that it was terribly bad form to describe such an “axis” in the first place?-OpinionJournal

Cut

Everything you really need to know about the protesters is contained in this sentence: “Shame on the College Republicans for inviting this fascist thug and provoking such outrage on our campus.” In other words, the act of inviting a controversial speaker is worse than violence against that speaker … oh, and the speaker must be a “fascist thug” because he doesn’t agree with the writer’s left-wing sensibilities which are typical of Columbia students.-OpinionJournal

By Mrs. Godzilla

October 11, 2006 08:05 AM | Link to this

At a debate in 2004, President Bush explained that his policy against bilateral talks with North Korea would be effective in preventing them from becoming a nuclear power.

The president says, “We began a new dialogue with North Korea. One that includes, not only the United States, but now China, and China has a lot of influence over North Korea. Some ways more than we do. As well, we include South Korea, Japan and Russia. Now there are 5 voices speaking to Kim Jong Il, not just one. And so if Kim Jong Il decides again not to honor an agreement, he’s not only doing injustice to America, he’ll be doing injustice to China as well. And I think this will work. It’s not going work if we open up a dialogue with Kim Jong Il.”

In 2002, the United States released $95 million to North Korea as part of an agreement to replace its nuclear program.

“In releasing the funding, President George W Bush waived the Framework’s requirement that North Korea allow inspectors to ensure it has not hidden away any weapons-grade plutonium from the original reactors,” the BBC reported in 2002.

Bush’s Presidential determination said that the decision was “vital to the national security interests of the United States.”

The directive said that the United States was “continuing to make significant progress on eliminating the North Korean ballistic missile threat, including further missile tests and its ballistic missile exports.”

OOOPS, HE DID IT AGAIN!

By Republicans LIE, Troops DIE

October 11, 2006 08:22 AM | Link to this

BAGHDAD, Iraq - For months, soldiers from the 172nd Stryker Brigade fought in riverside towns of western Iraq, trying to clamp off the flow of foreign fighters and suicide bombers that commanders said were terrorizing Baghdad. Now hundreds of these same U.S. soldiers have been sent to deal with what U.S. officials say is an even greater threat — rising attacks between Sunnis and Shiites in the capital itself.

“Seeing the fruits of your labor lost is frustrating,” said Capt. David Ramirez of the 4th Squadron, 14th Cavalry Regiment, who was sent to Baghdad from western Iraq.

The shift from Anbar to Baghdad underscores the problems facing the overstretched, 140,000-strong U.S. military force in Iraq.

To secure Baghdad, the Army had to extend the tours of thousands of soldiers from two brigades, including hundreds from the 172nd who had already returned home only to be shipped back to Iraq.

“We do not have sufficient troop strength to secure the entire country simultaneously,” Andrew Krepinevich, a military analyst, said in an e-mail to The Associated Press. “Trying to be strong everywhere will lead us to being strong nowhere.”

King George and his merry band of Republican troop killers continue to over extend our troops in order to feather their political nests and to line the pockets of their big business/big government war-bucks profiteering owners. Republicans LIE, Troops DIE ! ! !

By N-GA

October 11, 2006 08:24 AM | Link to this

Thank you mrs. Godzilla. At first I felt ambivalent about Mike’s toon. Your post allowed me to better understand his point. I can only imagine what the wingnuts will say…blame Clinton!

By Roger

October 11, 2006 08:28 AM | Link to this

There’s a fool here that goes by the name filthy godless liberals?

I knew these blogs had some really clueless idiots, but that it priceless!

By bon scott

October 11, 2006 08:29 AM | Link to this

Bush looks so good in this ‘toon. He looks like the coyote after a Road Runner attack.

By drunken Andy - October 11, 2006 06:29 AM - Some stalker you are Georgie Girl, so easy to ditch.

Weren’t you whining pathetically here just a little while ago George’s hacking? What you’re doing now?

Your and your pal Foley both approach computers and pederasy the same way.

Do as I say, not as I do. Typical ethics challenged Repugs.

By Eric

October 11, 2006 08:36 AM | Link to this

First the idiot president announces that North Korea is part of the Axis of Evil. Then he invades Iraq, unprovoked. Next he refuses to talk to North Korea and Iran. It only makes sense that they would seek to develope nuclear weapons. Who wouldn’t? They’re obviously concerned that they’re next on Dubya’s list. That dumb flukker has done more to destabilize the world than anyone since Hitler.

By Republican Gold

October 11, 2006 08:37 AM | Link to this

WASHINGTON - James A. Baker III, the former secretary of state with a long-standing reputation of service to Republican presidents and the Bush family in particular, has joined a list of prominent Republicans raising questions about the administration’s Iraq policy.

Co-chairman of a bipartisan commission studying what to do next in the wartorn country, Baker said his panel is preparing to recommend that President Bush consider options other than his “stay-the-course” strategy in Iraq.

Even die hard Republicans realize what an idiot the Chimperor is, now. If brains were made from gold, King George and his entire administration wouldn’t be able to buy a stick of gum ! ! !

By Political Foreskin

October 11, 2006 08:40 AM | Link to this

Those darn presidents and their cigars, eh?

I bet that’s how Clinton’s cigar looked after he used it as a marital aid on Monica, too.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, but not this time.

Luchovich is going for the funny lately. He’s using classic formulae, and making America laugh out loud, literally.

The old exploding cigar sight gag is one of the oldest, funniest gags ever. On his caricature of W, it could…go….all…the……WAY!

Are there nuclear cigars? Low tar and nicotine H-bombs?

By Political Foreskin

October 11, 2006 08:43 AM | Link to this

Actually, Bush is a good domestic president. It’s the world he cant quite fit in with. If only we didn’t have to worry about foreign policy. Heetler, unt his frauline Teetler was good for Germany until their foreign policy ruined everything. Mussolini, and his wife Pussolini was good for Italy, until their foreign policy spaghettied everything up.

By Buy Danish

October 11, 2006 08:48 AM | Link to this

Sybil Bon Finchie,

“Pederasy?” Would you like to buy a “t” or have a cup of coffee?

Or maybe this will wake you up. Exhibit A for “Democrat Values”. Warning - although this was distributed to Middle School children, and received funding from numerous “mainstream” institutions it is highly offensive. Open at your own risk.

Rushncap,

This is for you too^^^^^. These are Democrat Values - “It takes a village to indoctrinate our children through pornography.”

No wonder these Pages reciprocated in the IM messages. It’s all part of their public school education.

By SPIN!!

October 11, 2006 08:49 AM | Link to this

Perhaps not the most popular of prose And where it will end, no one knows. It just might be best If we left the North Korean Mess In the hands of Chairman Hu Jintao Who may follow the Tibetan Solution of Mao!

By Pretty Please With Sugar on Top

October 11, 2006 08:50 AM | Link to this

WASHINGTON - Hollywood may have to tone down its portrayal of the military’s screaming, in-your-face boot camp drill sergeant. In today’s Army, shouting is out and a calmer approach to molding young minds is in, says the head of Pentagon personnel. The Army says it has reduced by nearly 7 percent the number of recruits who wash out in the first six to 12 months of military life.

In other words, in order to satisfy King George’s thirst for the blood of American troops, he is reducing troop standards. DI’s under enemy fire will now have to very politely ask their units to ‘pretty please with sugar on top’ engage the enemy.

By Buy Danish

October 11, 2006 09:11 AM | Link to this

Democrat Values Voters,

[The GOP has professed to be a party of “family values” - but when it comes to making a choice between protecting their political majority vs. protecting our children, they put our children at risk…] (http://www.democrats.org/a/communities/lgbt_community/)

Oh yeah. Democrats distribute pornography in schools,but Republicans get blamed when the kids earn an “A”.

By Shameless Republicans USE Our Troops

October 11, 2006 09:18 AM | Link to this

WASHINGTON - The Army is reviewing the appearance of a soldier in uniform in a political television ad by Sen. Mike DeWine (R, Ohio).

Defense Department instructions prohibit members of the armed forces from wearing their uniform while participating in partisan political activity, said department spokesman Maj. Stewart Upton.

Republicans continue to USE our troops and ignore DOD rules in order to feather their political nest. Anybody want to bet that the ‘soldier in uniform’ is really just another paid actor shilling for the Republican party ? ? ?

By w00t

October 11, 2006 09:22 AM | Link to this

Ok, wow… that book is pretty sick. I hope that the parents were outraged. Material like that, especially the language doesn’t belong in schools.

By RW-(the original)

October 11, 2006 09:22 AM | Link to this

Only a bunch of brain dead liberals would want to replicate a North Korea policy that was already proven to be a failure during the 1990’s.

As Secretary of State Rice said yesterday, the reason North Korea wants to deal with us bilaterally is that they have no compunction violating an agreement with us, but an agreement with China, Japan, South Korea, and Russia is a whole different ball game.

Liberalism in full flower:

Iraq: “Bush is an idiot going it alone”

North Korea: “Bush is an idiot involving others”

Iran: “We wish Bush would clearly state his policy so that we could take the other side and call him an idiot”

By Another Republican LIAR Bites the Dust

October 11, 2006 09:26 AM | Link to this

WASHINGTON - Rep. Richard Pombo (R, CA) has insisted he was never lobbied by Jack Abramoff. Records show the disgraced lobbyist billed a client for at least two contacts with Pombo a decade ago.

The lobbying records released by the Northern Mariana Islands show that Abramoff billed once for calls to Pombo, chairman of the House Resources Committee, and a second time for a discussion with him, while lobbying in 1996.

Another Republican LIAR exposed ! ! ! This is becoming so common that it would be BORING if it weren’t so TRAGIC for America.

By Jesus

October 11, 2006 09:28 AM | Link to this

IMPEACH BUSH NOW!!!

By Lord Help Us

October 11, 2006 09:29 AM | Link to this

RW-(Crispy),

Actually its:

Iraq - Much more dangerous than when Bush came into office…

Iran - Much more dangerous than when Bush came into office…

North Korea - Much more dangerous than when Bush came into office…

CONGRATULATIONS! A TRIfecta on the ol’ Axis of Evil…

By Paul

October 11, 2006 09:29 AM | Link to this

Pretty Please With Sugar on Top at 8:50: Actually those changes in processing recruits and conduct during boot camp took place during the first Clinton Administration. As Bush was not president, it had nothing to do with him.

BTW - there were many “horror” stories in the military-related blogs during that era - substantiated in the mainstream press. One DI removed from duties when a female recruit lodged a sexual harassment complaint because, as she was wandering off from formation the DI told her to “get her a* back in formation.” Another female recruit on the firing range, didn’t safety her weapon, rounds went all over, DI screamed “what the hell are you doing?” Her complaint? “He used abusive language at me.” The DI received disciplinary action.

“Clinton’s fault?” Of course not. But it was indicative of the tenor of the administration and those politically-correct views are adopted by senior officers who want to get ahead. Which is one reason Rumsfeld skipped over the serving Army generals and asked Gen Peter Schoomaker to come out of retirement and serve as Army Chief of Staff.

By Concerned Gay GOPer

October 11, 2006 09:31 AM | Link to this

Will I be outed over this Foley mess? Shouldn’t most of us GOPers be very afraid??

There’s a whole bunch of us in the closet, and even more on the down low…

I shouldn’t worry - maybe my boss is one of us - he has a W sticker on his car…

By RW-(the original)

October 11, 2006 09:36 AM | Link to this

LHU,

They were far more dangerous when we were burying our head in the sand or giving them autographed basketballs. Germany probably looked more dangerous after we started fighting them in WWII, too.

ARLBtD,

Any chance that Abramoff was billing his clients for stuff he didn’t do, or is he suddenly a paragon of virtue?

By Paul

October 11, 2006 09:37 AM | Link to this

Mrs. Godzilla at 8:05: too bad there’s another partisan view of this. Fact is, Clinton Administration’s policies didn’t work. Neither did the Bush Administration’s. “Work” in the sense of preventing acquisition of nuclear weapons.

Bilateral agreements have impact of NK reneging and only US seems impotent. That’s a good point for multilateral agreements - include Japan, China, S Korea etc. the stakes for reneging become higher. But Kim Jong Il is such a psychopath even that would likely not deter him (witness his response to China’s ‘concerns’).

Only real chance of success is for the affected parties to stand in solidarity - which is problematic. As an aside - interesting how people who were in a rage “Bush acted unilaterally and didn’t consult our allies” in Iraq (inaccurate upon examination) are among the same voices calling for unilateral (as in bilateral talks) with NK.

BTW - all the rhetoric we read here of “Bush LET NK get nukes” or “Bush DIDN’T MAKE China do - whatever” is rather silly. Amazing that leaders of the sovereign nations begin their policy meetings with the question “What will Pres Bush let us do today?”

By Republicans Ignore Evangelicals

October 11, 2006 09:38 AM | Link to this

PLANO, Ill. - House Speaker Dennis Hastert met Tuesday with an evangelist who hoped to persuade the Illinois Republican to step down because of the congressional page sex scandal.

Paul told The Associated Press he met alone with Hastert for about 30 minutes and prayed with him. He said he told Hastert that he should resign.

“You need to for the sake of the country and for the sake of your future,” Paul said he told Hastert. “You pray within your heart and you do it.”

The only time Republicans ever give lip service to evangelicals is when they can FOOL and USE them to further GOP big, big, big government agendas ! ! !

By Buy Danish

October 11, 2006 09:38 AM | Link to this

wOOt,

No kidding! This sort of stuff happens all the time.

Did you know that the California legislature approved a bill that removes the words “mom” and “dad” from school text books because the LGBT “community” finds it offensive? Waaaaaaaaaah!

[And if you don’t vote with the LGBT community you get OUTED by gay hit-men like Mike Rogers for not buying into their agenda(http://www.blogactive.com/)

Be sure to read about “The List” on the left column. You can also find out who he has already OUTED through his plan of blackmail and extortion.

I thought that Democrats biggest issue was “the Right to Privacy”.

By RW-(the original)

October 11, 2006 09:46 AM | Link to this

Queen Yahoo has finally found an evangelical Christian she finds worthy.

Ahh the hypocrisy of a belief system based on the convenience of the believer

By Lord Help Us

October 11, 2006 09:48 AM | Link to this

Sure, Crispy…

During the 90’s the plutonium producing sites in NK were shut down and routinely inspected by the IAEA, spent fuel assemblies were secured and routinely inspected by the IAEA.

After 2002, the plutonium sites were restarted, the spent fuel assemblies that had bee secured were harvested for plutonium and the inspectors were kicked out.

No doubt it wasn’t perfect, but I’ll take the engagement (and results) from the 90’s over the complete failure since 2002 ANY day.

WHO has their head in the sand??

By getalife

October 11, 2006 09:49 AM | Link to this

Clinton’s fault.

By getalife

October 11, 2006 09:57 AM | Link to this

Clinton’s fault

By RW-(the original)

October 11, 2006 09:57 AM | Link to this

Sure they were LHU, by the very same people that told you that Iraq was swimming in WMD.

Gullible little donkey aren’t you?

By Seeing is Believing

October 11, 2006 09:57 AM | Link to this

WASHINGTON - Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice says the United States would not attack North Korea, rejecting a suggestion that Pyongyang may feel it needs nuclear weapons to stave off an Iraq-style U.S. invasion.

Rice said that President Bush has told the North Koreans that “there is no intention to invade or attack them. So they have that guarantee. … I don’t know what more they want.”

North Korea HEARS what King George says but they SEE what he does (IRAQ). Seeing is believing ! ! !

Ask yourself, would YOU believe the ‘mission accomplished’, ‘WMD’, ‘insurrgents last throes’, ‘liar in chief’ if YOU were North Korea ? ? ?

By Buy Danish

October 11, 2006 10:00 AM | Link to this

Democrat Values Voters,

The indoctrination continues here

What parents get arrested for in the indoctrination village, err, schools.

How about Abortion 101 for Fourth Graders?

Conservatives who oppose this stuff^^ are routinely labeled sexually repressed, Christo-fascist, Homophobes.

Here’s the link I screwed up to Mike Rogers, Gay Hit Man

By Republican Last Throes

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

BAGHDAD (AFP) - Iraqi militia have fired a mortar round into a US military base in Baghdad, triggering a thunderous series of explosions that destroyed an ammunition dump and rocked the entire city.

The munitions store in Forward Operating Base Falcon was still burning Wednesday, more than 13 hours after the strike set off a blaze that lit up the night sky and spread panic in the already shell-shocked Iraqi capital.

Yup, those insurrgents are still in their ‘last throes’, aren’t they ? ? ?

By Paul

October 11, 2006 10:03 AM | Link to this

Lord Help Us at 9:48 - When examining NK it helps to take a longer view: This cut and paste from the Financial Times: Feb 1993: International Atomic Energy Agency requests inspection of two nuclear waste storage sites, citing evidence that North Korea has been cheating on its nuclear non-proliferation treaty commitments. North Korea refuses.

Mar 1993:: North Korea announces intention to withdraw from the NPT, but later relents.

Jun 1994:: Former US president Jimmy Carter negotiates a deal with North Korea to freeze its nuclear arms programme.

Oct 1994:: US and North Korea sign Agreed Framework, committing Pyongyang to freeze and eventually end weapons development and allow IAEA inspections. In return, North Korea would receive international aid including two light-water reactors and annual heavy fuel oil shipments.

Aug 1998:: North Korea test fires its 2,000 km-range Taepodong-1 missile over Japan. Work continues on the 6,000km-range Taepodong-2 missile capable of reaching the US.

Dec 1999:: An international consortium signs a $4.6bn US contract to build two light water nuclear power plants in North Korea.

Jan 2002:: President Bush describes North Korea as part of an ‘axis of evil’ in State of the Union address.

Oct 2002:: James Kelly, US assistant secretary of state, visits Pyongyang and secures an admission that North Korea has an active programme enriching uranium to weapons grade, contravening the Agreed Framework.

Nov 2002:: United States and 13 states belonging to the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organisation meet in New York and decide to cut off heavy fuel oil shipments to Pyongyang.

Dec 2002:: North Korea says it plans to restart its Yongbyon reactor shut under 1994 deal, disables IAEA surveillance devices at Yongbyon and expels IAEA inspectors.

Jan 2003:: North Korea quits the NPT and from IAEA.org

Dr. Yousry Abushady, IAEA Unit Head responsible for safeguards implementation in the DPRK, was the Agency’s key contact point for its inspectors in Nyongbyon. He recounted what happened when North Korean authorities took steps to reopen a sealed plutonium reprocessing plant, cutting the metal seals and disrupting surveillance equipment.

“The inspectors were asked to leave the country immediately,” he recalled. “But first our inspectors witnessed our surveillance equipment being turned off and our seals removed. The DP

By getalife

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

W to hold press conference to blame Clinton.

By rushncap

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

So in your opinion, RW, is Bush responsible for ANYTHING that happens during his presidency, or is every failure for the past 6 years (and boy is there a boatload) Clinton’s fault?

By Paul

October 11, 2006 10:08 AM | Link to this

My 10:03 dropped the last paragraph - along the lines of

NK “played” both administrations. They received hundreds of millions of dollars in aid, never wavering from their goal of acquiring nuclear weapons. Whoever occupied the White House was irrelevant - it simply meant a change in tactics by NK.

By Lord Help Us

October 11, 2006 10:10 AM | Link to this

Crispy, Man, YOU GOT Nuthin…’

The IAEA did the inspections in the 90’s.

Remember the IAEA, the ones that doubted the existence of WMD in Iraq, determined the infamous Aluminum tubes were NOT appropriate for uranium enrichment, easily determined the Niger documents related to Hussein’s alleged procurement of uranium ore were forged, etc.

These were not the ‘same people that told you Iraq was swimming in WMD.’ THAT was primarily the Bush admin…

You Know, the ones with ZERO credibility!

You are so, so uneducated…

By Midori

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

Getalife: the George W. Bush memorial

:)

By RW-(the original)

October 11, 2006 10:17 AM | Link to this

rushncap,

Yes he is, but he isn’t responsible for creating the problems that he is trying to fix. For what it’s worth Clinton isn’t responsible for creating most of these situations either. His blame is in kicking all the problems down the road instead of risking his precious legacy by trying to confront these festering trouble spots.

We can never again take eight years off and expect to survive as a country.

By Paul

October 11, 2006 10:24 AM | Link to this

Lord Help Us at 10:10: you’re not seriously going to continue with the line the Bush Admin was only one to allege WMD in Iraq? Thought that horse was beat to death. Plenty of references here to Clinton admin and world leaders alleging WMDs, also Hussein’s own generals in debriefs after war - they’d deployed Iraqi troops with gas masks in preparation of use.

But - for the timeline - from NPR.org (not Bush apologists) check the date at the end and ask “who ordered airstrikes to destroy Iraqi WMDs and prevent further production?” Hint: the year was 1998 -

Israel Attacks ::: June 7, 1981 Israeli warplanes make a surprise attack on the French-built Osirak nuclear reactor near Baghdad. Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin says that his country had to act before Iraq could successfully build a nuclear weapon to use against the Jewish state. Saddam Hussein’s Iraqi government says the reactor was not part of a plan to build nuclear weapons.

Chemical Attacks on Iran ::: 1983 Media reports describe Iraqi use of chemical weapons against Iranian forces. Mustard gas is the first weapon used. In 1984 reports say Iraq uses the nerve agent Tabun.

Gassing the Kurds ::: March 1988 Iraq uses chemical weapons against its own population during an attack on the rebellious Kurdish city of Halabja.

Invading Kuwait ::: Aug. 2, 1990 Iraq invades Kuwait, easily overwhelming its tiny neighbor.

Resolution 687 Bans Iraq WMD ::: April 3, 1991 Shortly after Iraq is ejected from Kuwait by an international military coalition, the United Nations Security Council passes its first resolution addressing Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) in Iraq. Resolution 687 states that Iraq must destroy its presumed stockpile of WMD, and the means to produce them. It also limits the country’s ballistic missile capability. The U.N. Special Commission (UNSCOM) is established to oversee the inspection, destruction and monitoring of chemical and biological weapons. The International Atomic Energy Agency is asked to document and destroy Iraqi efforts to develop nuclear weapons. Iraq accepts the resolution three days later, agreeing to disclose the extent of its WMD program to inspectors.

Unilateral Destruction ::: Summer 1991 Iraq unilaterally destroys WMD equipment and documentation in an effort at concealment of pre-war work.

Resolution 715 Demands Compliance ::: Oct. 11, 1991 Responding to I

By rushncap

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

Oh yes, RW, Bush has done a bang-up job confronting problem situations. He has done so much to diffuse the North Korea situation. I mean, just a few years ago he included them in his “Axis of Evul”! If that does not solve the problem, I don’t know what could. And that terrible threat of Saddam’s WMD arsenal? He solved it so thoroughly we can’t even find a trace of them any more. Now THAT’s what I call action. And don’t get me started on that threat of global Islamic terrorism. Why, they all love us now!

And RW, this country is pretty resilient. We’ve weathered 6 years of Bush actively trying to dismantle much of it, and are still doing OK. I’m quite impressed how much abuse America has been able to take over the past 6 years without completely folding.

By Paul

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

too long, cut off, here’s the citation: ‘Defensive’ Biological Weapons ::: May 1992 Iraq officially admits to having had a “defensive” biological weapons program. Weeks later, UNSCOM begins the destruction of Iraq’s chemical weapons program. Progress is halted in July when Iraq refuses an inspection team access to the Ministry of Agriculture.

Denial and Acceptance ::: 1993 Inspections are again held up when Iraq attempts to deny UNSCOM and the IAEA the use of their own aircraft in Iraq. In late 1993 Iraq accepts resolution 715.

Nuclear, Chemical Weapons Programs Destroyed ::: 1994 UNSCOM completes the destruction of Iraq’s known chemical weapons and production equipment. IAEA teams largely complete their mandate to neutralize Iraq’s nuclear program, including the destruction of facilities Iraq had not even declared to inspectors.

Defection and Revelation ::: Aug. 8, 1995 Hussein Kamel, the former director of Iraq’s Military Industrialization Corporation, responsible for all WMD programs, defects to Jordan. As a result, Iraq admits to a far more developed biological weapons programs than it had previously disclosed. Saddam Hussein’s government also hands over documents related to its nuclear weapons program and admits to the attempted recovery of highly-enriched uranium.

Al-Hakam Destroyed ::: May 1996 Iraq’s main facility for the production of biological weapons, Al-Hakam, is destroyed through explosive demolition supervised by UNSCOM inspectors.

The Fight Against Proliferation ::: 1997 The Additional Protocol is added to the global Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), giving IAEA inspectors more authority to investigate programs in member states. The protocol is in response to the realization that Iraq — a NPT signatory — had been able to move swiftly and covertly toward the construction of a nuclear weapon in the late 1980s under the treaty’s previous safeguards. Inspections in the 1990s revealed that Iraq was much closer to building a nuclear weapon in the 1980s than had been suspected by IAEA officials.

Resolution 1115 ::: June 1997 In another effort to end Iraq’s interference with inspection teams, the U.N. Security Council passes Resolution 1115. The resolution again calls for Iraq to comply with all previous resolutions regarding WMD. By the end of 1997, a diplomatic stalemate forces UNSCOM to withdraw

By Paul

October 11, 2006 10:33 AM | Link to this

Finally for the missing paragraph. Long, I know, but let’s stop the nonsense that only Bush Admin thought Iraq had WMDs.

Memorandum of Understanding ::: Feb. 20-23, 1998 U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan visits Iraq in an effort secure inspections of what Iraq terms “presidential sites.” The U.N. and Iraq agree to support the terms of the newly drafted “Memorandum of Understanding.” The Memorandum secures UNSCOM access to eight previously off-limits presidential sites.

Operation Desert Fox ::: 1998 Cooperation ends between Iraq and inspectors when the country demands the lifting of the U.N. oil embargo. UNSCOM and the IAEA pull their staffs out of Iraq in anticipation of a US-led air raid on Iraqi military targets. The four-day military offensive known as Operation Desert Fox begins on December 16, 1998. According to a U.S. military Web site, the mission of Desert Fox was “to strike military and security targets in Iraq that contribute to Iraq’s ability to produce, store, maintain and deliver weapons of mass destruction.” The operation is considered a success, largely finishing off what was left of Iraq’ s WMD infrastructure.

By RW-(the original)

October 11, 2006 10:44 AM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

A sure sign that you have kicked rushncap’s a-ss with your link this morning is his petty sniping at me.

Good job!

Paul,

You’re providing good information, but can’t you please just leave a link.

By rushncap

October 11, 2006 10:46 AM | Link to this

Paul, notice how while people thought that Saddam may have some WMD programs, no one decided to invade. If you suspect that maybe, possibly, your neighbor had a hand in an armed robbery, you wait and gather evidence until you’re sure. You don’t bust into his house and shoot him in the face. Want to explain to us why we don’t invade every country that violates a U.N. resolution at some point? And want to explain to us when you actually started caring about what the U.N. says anyways?

By RE

October 11, 2006 10:47 AM | Link to this

I love the RW philosophy…Every problem the US get into under the Bush administration is actually Clinton’s fault, not because we had a problem during the Clinton years, but because Clinton kicked the problem down the road.

War with Iraq….Clinton ignored the problem, Bush did something about it.

N Korea Nukes…..Clinton ignored the problem, Bush did somthing about it…Still not sure how having them test a nuke is a victory for the US, but somehow, Bush showed strength in…ok, I cannot even make anything up here. But it is Clintons fault that Bush didn’t do anything right.

Iran….Clinton ignored the problem, with expanding dialogue and peaceful moves toward opening up Iran. Luckilly Bush called them evil, which really helped….well it didn’t help anything really. It actually drove them further into isolation.

You know, I cannot think of one place on Earth safer today than it was before Bush took office.

By Lord Help Us

October 11, 2006 10:48 AM | Link to this

Paul,

I DO appreciate the factual posts.

There were others in the ‘Iraq has WMD’ camp, no doubt. However, when I see the presentation Powell did in front of the UN Security council and, years later, find out how much exculpatory intelligence was ignored…I can’t help but conclude that the intelligence that got ignored was because it did not fit the agenda.

In other words, the war was ‘sold.’

Instead of acquiescing to Saddam’s intransigence, a continuation/escalation of inspections (Clinton’s approach) would have confirmed this fact. These further inspections could have been backed with tactical military operations.

In other words Clinton’s approach, in hindsight, WORKED!

By Truthman

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

Hey Sonny!

I’m so glad things are going so well in our state that the only problem you think Georgians have is that doggone AJC and it’s obvious bias against your beloved Bulldogs.

Look, dummy! I went to UGA. We did get “put in our place!”

Why don’t you worry more about the environment and alternative modes of transportation in the metro area?

Why don’t you worry more about the families of Soldiers sent off to conduct an illegal war by your buddy, Dubya?

Why don’t you raise the minimum wage statewide and sell your ill-gotten property near Disneyworld?

Georgia has a lot more problems than a headline that you didn’t like!!

Signed, - The Big Guy

By Paul

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

Excellent suggestion, RW. Didn’t seem that long when I read the article - sure did in these narrow columns.

By Joel

October 11, 2006 10:51 AM | Link to this

WARNING: Andy’s link could have viruses!!!

I feel an obligation to warn bloggers NOT to click on any commenter’s links because I did once and my computer shut down and froze and some weird screen saver appeared.

Not funny, Andy. I just spent $1500 upgrading.

DO NOT CLICK ON ANDY’S LINKS.

ANDY IS THE GUY WHO WRITES, “CUT” between his manifesto style uniblogging rants of incoherent blither blah poodle poo.

Not funny, Andy, and I might subpoena the AJC to provide your name and address so that my lawyer can make you understand how free speech liabilities work in civil court.

By RW unplugged........ew

October 11, 2006 10:54 AM | Link to this

Dont read RW’s posts, they are provided by a sleeper cell friendly traitor who should be behind bars.

He uses phrases that appear on CIA word screens and divert attention from real sleeper cells. He does this because he hates American freedom more than AL Queda does.

RW hates liberty. Lib is short for liberty.

By I Don't Have A Brain So I Blame EVERYTHING FROM YAHOO On Bush

October 11, 2006 10:58 AM | Link to this

SINGAPORE - Singapore’s government said it plans to cover most of the island with public wireless Internet access by next year and offer nearly 10,000 subsidized computers to low-income students to offer digital opportunities to all its citizens.

Because King George won’t empty the United States treasury out to poor people, Singapore has to BUY it’s own people computer’s! ! ! If a pinko democrat was in office the whole world would have it’s own computer! ! !

By RW-(the original)

October 11, 2006 10:58 AM | Link to this

RE,

How about the United States? Last time I checked a lot less planes are being flown into our skyscrapers.

Paul,

That’s the problem, a simple paragraph in an article you’re reading looks like a manifesto in this setup.

By I Don't Have A Brain So I Blame EVERYTHING FROM YAHOO On Bush

October 11, 2006 11:00 AM | Link to this

SPRING LAKE, N.C. - They winced while their blood was drawn and fidgeted as the blood pressure cuff tightened. But the sixth-graders were excited about becoming test subjects in a nationwide diabetes study, if only to score the $50 gift card being offered.

King George stabbing schoolchildren in the arm and stealing their blood! ! ! They’ll never be the same again! ! ! And the scar, oh, the scar! ! !

By The AJC Is A Filthy Virus

October 11, 2006 11:02 AM | Link to this

By Joel October 11, 2006 10:51 AM Not funny, Andy, and I might subpoena the AJC to provide your name and address so that my lawyer can make you understand how free speech liabilities work in civil court.

Take your new computer and stick it up your as-s.

You should probably lube it up first.

Just because you are too stupid to install a virus software program, does not a court case make.

By RE

October 11, 2006 11:04 AM | Link to this

Actually, the only time planes were flown into buildings was when he was president

By getalife

October 11, 2006 11:07 AM | Link to this

Way to go Andy.

Virus spreader.

By Paul

October 11, 2006 11:09 AM | Link to this

rushncap at 10:46 Lord Help Us at 10:48

LHU - another important point is, if a hostile, expansionsist government portrays itself as having a capability and blocks international agencies, the Law of Unintended Consequences might just kick in.

My view - basis of which would take far too long to discuss here - is that current administration was committed to changing the governmental setup in the Middle East - variety of reasons - dilute base of jihadists (who also - read bin Laden’s writings or transcripts of interviews) who wanted to topple the regimes - provide long-term stability which would serve America’s long-term strategic interests. Vehicle to get this started was change gov’t in Iraq - obviously didn’t work as hoped. WMD provided rationale - not saying administration didn’t believe they weren’t there - I think they did - but it did provide a rationale.

rushncap - the reason we “don’t invade every country” is not every country represents a US strategic interest. Would we care if Paraguay invaded Bolivia? No. Would we intervene if Equatiorial Guinea invaded Gabon? Hardly. Do I care what the UN says? Only if it serves US interests. US could do a better job of pointing out shortcomings, as Ambassador Bolton has done. Just look at the makeup of the countries - the type of governments, dictatorships and monarchies they are - then look at how countries put their economic self interest first (France, Russia selling arms to Iran during the embargo - Capitalism before Conscience, Profits before Principle) and you get an idea of what to expect.

By I See That Finch/ bon scott Is Here

October 11, 2006 11:12 AM | Link to this

By RW unplugged……..ew October 11, 2006 10:54 AM Dont read RW’s posts, they are provided by a sleeper cell friendly traitor who should be behind bars

Henceforth known as the Name Jacker Off.

By Midori

October 11, 2006 11:12 AM | Link to this

FWIW: Bush is on tv, lying again.

By RW-(the original)

October 11, 2006 11:13 AM | Link to this

RE,

And since then we have taken action and become a much safer place. Oh there have been setbacks along the way, like when Harry Reid announced breathlessly to a cheering throng of moonbats that he had killed the Patriot Act, but sanity prevailed and Republicans shot down his little terrorist appeasing wet dream.

By Buy Danish

October 11, 2006 11:14 AM | Link to this

RW,

Thanks! I have more!

Awww, isn’t this cute! It’s an ad that is linked to the Gay HitMan’s home page, providing him a revenue source for his witch hunt. Isn’t it clever the way the Left erect candy mountains to make unpalatable ideas sound enticing.

Note the “glbt” at the end of the URL. Presumably Rosie knows where her foundation’s ad dollars are going, or maybe it is the fault of one of her interns.

More to come for Democrat Values Voters…

By rushncap

October 11, 2006 11:16 AM | Link to this

Good point, Paul. Let’s f%$k over the rest of the world if we can make a quick buck within the next couple of weeks. No, there are absolutely no drawbacks to that brilliant strategy.

By RW-(the original)

October 11, 2006 11:20 AM | Link to this

Andy,

As lame as that was it’s more creative than Sybil bon finchie is capable of.

By w00t

October 11, 2006 11:22 AM | Link to this

Paul, ok, so long as it’s a “strategic interest” ie: oil, then its ok to go and blow them to hell and back. Well that does make a lot of since, as Iraq is said to have the world’s second largest oil reserve in the world.

Oh, by the way, we sold weapons and dual use technology to both Iran and Iraq during their war. We decided later to sell to Iraq because we didn’t want the fundamentalist in Iran from spreading. So, the US is no better than your list of countries.

Like I’ve said before, we knew Iraq had WMD’s because we had the receipts to prove it.

By RW-(the original)

October 11, 2006 11:26 AM | Link to this

Paul,

As you can probably see from that brilliant response at 11:16, you have to pare down your posts even further when discussing things with rushncap. His reading comprehension skills barely go beyond “See Spot run” so there is no way he can figure out that you were talking about France and his beloved mother land going for the quick buck.

By Paul

October 11, 2006 11:30 AM | Link to this

rushncap: your questions were “Want to explain to us why we don’t invade every country that violates a U.N. resolution at some point? And want to explain to us when you actually started caring about what the U.N. says anyways?”

I thought I answered that. I do not understand your response. Is Iraq a debacle? Sure. Do we have vital national interests in the Middle East? Yes (thanks to administrations going back to Carter - and Congresses - not developing alternate energy policies). I am not persuaded by the “lets deploy military forces to make profits for US corporations” crowd. That is different than the military-Congressional-industrial grouping, though - which is a major reason why we haven’t the weapons and supplies appropriate for the job.

By Ummm, ummm, good Guest Workers

October 11, 2006 11:31 AM | Link to this

WASHINGTON - California lettuce recalled over E. coli fears tested negative for a sometimes deadly strain of the bacteria, company officials said Tuesday.

Looks like King George’s ‘guest workers’ have switched brands of toilet paper. So what is their new favorite brand….strawberry, orange, kale, corn, cabbage? I hear that the cucumber and carrot workers wipe INside as well as OUT ! ! !

By Bob Barr

October 11, 2006 11:31 AM | Link to this

Watching the gop leadership scramble around last week was not just painful. It was excruciating and embarrassing.

…a leadership so utterly devoid of, well, keadership reminded me just how far this majority had sunk…

The gop’s slide…has been neither sudden nor pretty.

The gop leadership moved quietly, even comfortably, from a holding pattern to one of subservience; leaving it to the new repub pres and his team to set the congressional agenda.

Unfortunately with the morass in Iraq…the gop leadership went completely adrift as the White House became fixated on Iraq.

It is perhaps a realization that after 12 years in power, but lacking any vision, the gop has itself become the status quo. Such a realization cannot help but make one feel depressed.

By rushncap

October 11, 2006 11:32 AM | Link to this

RW, Paul and I are having an adult discussion (so far). This is way over your head. Go play in the sandbox with li’l andy. That’s a little more your level.

By I See That Finch/ bon scott Is Here

October 11, 2006 11:36 AM | Link to this

By RW-(the original) October 11, 2006 11:20 AM Andy, As lame as that was it’s more creative than Sybil bon finchie is capable of.

He was worn out from typing in his trademark threat upon my person at 10:51.

It won’t be long before he totally flips out and starts menacing every one’s family.

I’m afraid for the blog, how much more can they restrict it because of him?

The good news is that I figure 3 or 4 weeks and he’ll be institutionalized again, so it’ll get him out of our lives for a few peaceful months.

By Paul

October 11, 2006 11:36 AM | Link to this

w00t: never said it’s okay. Merely said US gets involved where it has an interest. The effectiveness of that involvement varies from situation to situation. What I implies, what I thought was obvious, was that we did not strike Saudi Arabia, Iran, because they are major oil suppliers - Iraq was not.

Of course we sold them weapons. Alliances are made and change all the time. Interests change. The US has the largest foreign military sales program - also check Russia, China, France, Germany.

I do disagree with your point “the US is no better than… (other) countries” - but that strikes me as a bit of sloganeering. Always amazed me how governments that criticize the US as “no better than or worse” have a citizenry clamoring to get here.

By Lord Help Us

October 11, 2006 11:38 AM | Link to this

Paul,

History now shows that the threat posed by Hussein was emasculated during the Clinton Administration. Even if he was ‘hostile and expansionist’ he would not have been able to be of any threat to his neighbors while the inspections were in place and the no-fly zone was enforced. Try again…

History also shows that NK and Iran have both become much more dangerous since Bush took office. Do you call that a success?

Unfortunately, it is Bush who (as the Crispy one says) will be ‘kicking some MAJOR problems down the road.’

It’s The Competence, STUPID!!

By rushncap

October 11, 2006 11:39 AM | Link to this

Paul, I apologize. You were stating a fact (foreign policy motivated by very narrow-minded and short-sighted economic self-interest), rather than stating an opinion on whether that is the right approach. I agree, that is basically the way it works. What I’m saying is that it sucks that it works that way, because it hurts America in the long run, and hurts the rest of the world as well.

By I Don't Have A Brain So I Blame EVERYTHING FROM YAHOO On Bush

October 11, 2006 11:41 AM | Link to this

TORONTO (Reuters) - An animal rights group called Tuesday for a North American theme park operator to cancel a competition in which people will try to break the world cockroach-eating record.

Bush making people eat cockroach’s because he won’t give them food! ! ! And making the cockroaches suffer too! ! ! I thought hunger was in it’s last throes! ! !

By King George Caves In To North Korea

October 11, 2006 11:45 AM | Link to this

WASHINGTON - President Bush called Wednesday for stiff sanctions on North Korea for its reported nuclear test and asserted that the United States has “no intentions of attacking” the reclusive regime.

In other words, King George stuck his dick in Iraq and can’t pull it out for years and years so he can’t do jack about the real nuclear threat in North Korea now. Republicans sold-out the TRUE safety of America in order to line their pockets with a fortune in war-bucks for themselves and their fat cat buddies in the big business/big government sectors ! ! !

By Playing In The SandBox

October 11, 2006 11:49 AM | Link to this

They should contrast their treatment of Foley — who left after it became clear he had been sending sexual messages to pages — with the Democrats’ tolerance of former congressman Gerry Studds (who had sex with a 17-year-old male page), current congressman Barney Frank (who had a relationship with a male prostitute who ran a prostitution ring out of his apartment), and Bill Clinton (who had oral sex with an intern in the Oval Office). {{{{{{Which party holds its members to the higher standard of personal conduct? The Democrats, who still have Rep. William Jefferson of $90,000-in-the-freezer fame in their caucus}}}}}}, or the Republicans, who never would have tolerated Foley’s presence after the revelations?

I know most of you don’t read rushncrap’s childish inanity but you have to reference his 11:23 to understand the new nick^^.

Sorry to make you have to read his post.

By Buy Danish

October 11, 2006 11:49 AM | Link to this

Democrat Values Voters,

Here’s a great book for teens that is not about sex which should be dedicated to He Who Cannot Be Named. “The Rainbow Party”. Hat Tip: RW.

Here’s the review from Publishers Weekly -scroll down -

Promiscuous sophomore Gin is throwing a “Rainbow Party,” at which girls “put on a different color lipstick, and the guys all drop their pants.” In theory, after the girls perform oral sex on the boys, they would be left with rainbows around their penises, et cetera, et cetera.

More to come - movies for kids that are not about sex…

By Paul

October 11, 2006 11:51 AM | Link to this

Lord Help Us: Did you hear me justify the invasion or give my interpretation why the administration selected Iran?

Re: NK and Iran becoming more dangerous since Bush took office: are you asserting that as causative (Bush made them more dangerous) negligent (Bush didn’t “do” anything) or merely associative (NK Iran would have become more dangerous regardless of who occupied the White House)?

Every President leaves problems for their successor.

rushncap: You have a very good point. But theory aside and political reality in the fore: look at Bush’s poll numbers during the gasoline price rises (not to mention the “Bush caused it talk”). Imagine the political fallout that would occur to a politician who proposed policies that would, long-term, greatly reduce America’s need for Middle East oil if he also stated that, short-term, it would cost more for every American (no cost shifting to three percent of households). I think it would be political suicide. So that’s why it sucks.

By Playing In The SandBox

October 11, 2006 11:51 AM | Link to this

Republicans should show their anger that during the final weeks of a campaign waged in the midst of a war on terror, with shooting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and rogue states staging or attempting to stage nuclear tests, Democrats and the media want to focus on the sick transgressions of one disgraced former congressman. They should say that the public deserves better, and that at this point — after more than a week of wall-to-wall coverage — the continued Foley overkill tells us more about the frivolity and bizarre obsessions of the media and the Democrats than it does about the Republicans. It is they who should be ashamed.

By RW-(the original)

October 11, 2006 11:51 AM | Link to this

At least I got you back on track rushncap, I’ll just accept your 11:39 comment as a thank you.

LHU,

Does this history book you’re reading include the part about NK’s missile test dropping into the water after barely getting off the ground or their fizzled “nuclear” test? Seems to me like Lil’ Kim shows how much less dangerous he is every time he pulls one of these stunts.

The only real danger he poses is to Seoul and that hasn’t changed one iota.

By rushncap

October 11, 2006 11:53 AM |