Weather

Cloudy

75° F

Pollen 8

| Traffic

Luckovich cartoon changes address!

Mike Luckovich’s cartoon has moved to a new ajc.com address. Click here to view and bookmark.

The new format features a larger version of Mike’s cartoon for the day and allow readers to vote. There are also links to recent Luckovich cartoons and special galleries.

Bloggers who want to comment on issues in the news are invited to blog at any of our four other Opinion blogs:

Thinking Right

Jay Bookman

OpinionTalk

Woman to Woman

Home > Opinion > Mike Luckovich > Archives > 2007 > February > 06 > Entry

Dominoes, anyone?

By Mike Luckovich | Tuesday, February 6, 2007, 06:09 AM

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Do you like today's cartoon?
  No
  Yes


Voter Limit: Once per Hour
View Poll Results

Permalink | Comments (222) | Post your comment | Categories: Editorial Cartoon

Comments

By reebok

February 6, 2007 08:13 AM | Link to this

The saddest thing about this is, Dubya undoubtedly WOULD invade Iran if he hadn’t already decimated our military by creating, and then trying to quell, a civil war in Iraq.

By Brian Curtis

February 6, 2007 08:14 AM | Link to this

Bush still doesn’t understand that he’s not in charge, does he? He’s been given his orders, in the form of the 9/11 Commission report and the Iraq Study Group recommendations. Any deviation from those orders is going to blow up in his face.

He’s too incompetent to be trusted with this kind of power, and he just keeps on proving it.

By @@

February 6, 2007 08:21 AM | Link to this

ml has a “Bee” in his bonnet over “Plan B”?

Plan B has been in the works for awhile now. It’s covert…Shhhhhhhhh!

Maybe ml can elaborate on what he thinks Plan B is.

Or is he too preoccupied with his “mindless doodles” here?

By Jesus

February 6, 2007 08:23 AM | Link to this

IMPEACH BUSH NOW!!!

By mike

February 6, 2007 08:34 AM | Link to this

Plan B. huh ok I am still trying to figure out how that seaman I saw on the local news this morning got shot by a sniper in Iraq. Does that mean any mos requires pounding the sand over there.

By Paul

February 6, 2007 08:37 AM | Link to this

@@

Don’t give out Plan B! That’s Hillary’s secret plan. I mentioned yesterday the parallel between her “If we’re still in Iraq in 2009 when I’m President I’ll finish the war” and Pres Nixon’s election on “I have a secret plan to end the war.” Amazing, isn’t it - they now endorse a campaign gimmick for their standardbearer which was dreamed up by a Republican President they despise.

Predictably, no response, even the typically irrational ones, from the Bush-haters. Saw the most recent polls on Giuliani - “Hillary vs Rudy’ now there’s a debate I’d love to see!

Well, time to get ready for the blasts of “you criticized a Democrat so you love Bush and you love what we’re doing in Iraq and you love killing civilians and… and…” (yawn).

By Paul

February 6, 2007 08:40 AM | Link to this

Mike

Likely a medic. Navy corpsmen regularly serve with Marine units. Air Force enlisted pull a lot of security details.

By Paul

February 6, 2007 08:58 AM | Link to this

G’Morning, Buy Danish

Did your flak jacket get shredded yesterday afternoon? Geesh, read those posts - some of those comments hurled your way must’ve come from the “Happy Hour with Kool-Aid Shooters” group.

A couple days ago we were discussing the failure - not just of the current administration, but Pres Clinton’s - of taking any meaningful action on energy (even when Clinton was trying to arrest those pesky terrorists) - which would go a long way for a meaningful disengagement from the Middle East. It was also pointed out how under Pres Clinton (and Bush) CAFE standards were flat, about half the US fleet was exempt from automobile standards, vehicles got heavier, more powerful, burned lots more gas that necessary (remember the Bush model - people buying Hummers are all Clinton’s fault) and led to oil imports now constituting about two-thirds of our oil use (double from not too many years ago).

Bush has proposed significant CAFE increases - you’d think the UberLibs would be dancing in the streets.

You said you’d rather rely on free markets. My thought, generally, is free markets are fine for an economics class but break down outside of a university. Vehicle buying is an emotional decision - not usually a rational one. It is also one governed by perceived benefits to the buyer - not perceived benefits to the country (Toyota Prius buyers excepted).

Which I why I think CAFE standards should be strengthened. And why this ethanol thing, is, I think, just swapping apples for more apples - energy neutral or deficient, but a great deal for the agriculture industry.

By Mrs. Godzilla

February 6, 2007 09:04 AM | Link to this

Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God.

I sure hope he means daughters too.

By The Peoples for a Nuked Amerika' Century!

February 6, 2007 09:04 AM | Link to this

Singing to the Beach Boys tune “Barbara Ann”:

“Bomb Bomb Bomb - Bomb Bomb Iran”

By rushncap

February 6, 2007 09:17 AM | Link to this

So ok Muffin… we’ll give Shrub’s new “plan” a chance. Once it fails (and it will), do we give his new inane idea a chance, and then a new one etc., or is there a certain point at which you would say “enough is enough”? Or do you not care at all? As long as he keeps proposing anything at all we should all blindly do as he says? Yes or no?

By Lord Help Us

February 6, 2007 09:20 AM | Link to this

Sure, Lucko-Curl,

Lots of smart people saw Iran as much more of a threat than Iraq back in 2003.

You see, a country with egregious ties to terrorist groups, a robust economy, run by Islamists, with nuclear capability would, to rational people, be seen as much more of a threat than a country run be a weak, secular, failing leader, with no nuclear capability and minimal ties to terrorism.

Can you explain why are soldiears are dying to solidify a gov’t in Iraq that is allied with Moqtada al Sadr and one that will have closer ties to Iran than the Hussein gov’t?

Thanks in advance.

By @@

February 6, 2007 09:26 AM | Link to this

Paul:

Okey Dokey, I’ll do my part to assist in the covert operation.

Giulianni has “dimples” deep enough to hide Plan B, and “Mums” the word on Hilary…or is it Pelosi?

Anyway, they’re both “Mums”, and that’s a very “critical point” in politics these days.

“Bullet bras”, do you wear ‘em or burn ‘em? Decisions…decisions!!!!

By FACT CHECK PART 1

February 6, 2007 09:28 AM | Link to this

Last time we heard… By Craig

February 1, 2007 03:04 PM | Link to this

The office of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is pressing the Bush administration for routine access to military aircraft for domestic flights, such as trips back to her San Francisco district, according to sources familiar with the discussions.

The sources, who include those in Congress and in the administration, said the Democrat is seeking regular military flights not only for herself and her staff, but also for relatives and for other members of the California delegation. A knowledgeable source called the request “carte blanche for an aircraft any time.”

Why stop there with just the families of California Congresspeople? Let’s have the military turned into a shuttle service for Democrats everywhere.

By FACT CHECK PART 2

February 6, 2007 09:29 AM | Link to this

Now we hear…

On February 1, the Washington Times published a story titled “Speaker pursues military flights,” which claimed that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) had been “pressing the Bush administration for routine access to military aircraft for domestic flights, such as trips back to her San Francisco district.” Former Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL) also used military aircraft to travel to his district. However, the Times reported, Pelosi is “demanding permanent access to a large military jet for herself, her staff, other Members and supporters.”

The story was disseminated widely through right-wing talk radio and blogs, spurring posts like, “First Class Pelosi,” “Air Force Becomes Pelosi Air,” “Nancy Pelosi is Drunk With Power,” “The Imperial Speakership,” “Pelosi: Fly Me Awayyyyy,” “Pelosi wants military airlift,” and “Nancy Pelosi’s Private Military Plane.”

In fact, the central claims of the Washington Times piece are both false.

1) The House Sergeant at Arms, not Pelosi, initiated inquiries into the use of military aircraft. House Sergeant at Arms Wilson Livingood, who has served in his position since 1995, released a statement today clarifying the facts. He writes, “In December 2006, I advised Speaker Pelosi that the US Air Force had made an airplane available to Speaker Hastert for security and communications purposes following September 11, 2001.” Additionally, Livingood writes, “I offered to call the U.S. Air Force and Department of Defense to seek clarification of the guidelines [which governed Speaker Hastert’s use of a plane].”

2) A larger plane was requested because Hastert’s plane required refueling to travel cross-country. The Washington Times says a larger plane was requested to accomodate Pelosi, “her staff, other Members and supporters.” That’s not true. In fact, the plane used by Speaker Hastert was too small for Pelosi since it “needs to refuel every 2,000 miles and could not make the nonstop haul to California. ‘The Air Force determined that [Pelosi’s] safety would be best ensured by using a plane that has the fuel capacity to go coast-to-coast,’” a Pelosi spokesperson said.

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 09:29 AM | Link to this

Why do you suppose it is that we call rushncap, rushncap and he makes up childlike names for people?

Oh well maybe he’s just a child. So rushncap, what military credentials do you have that make you more qualified than General Petraeus?

By FACT CHECK PART 3 THE LESSON

February 6, 2007 09:30 AM | Link to this

We still can’t trust them to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

By Little Right of Center

February 6, 2007 09:30 AM | Link to this

God just loves you little peaceniks doesn’t he? I guess that is why Jesus said “

[Luke 22:36] Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

Stir up the delusional little lefties and watch them foam at the mouth! HaHaHa

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 09:35 AM | Link to this

Is there anybody here that doesn’t think LHU would be yapping about how we should have invaded Iraq and given us a litany of reasons that he got from Democrat talking points in the late 1990s, if we had invaded Iran first?

I, for one, am certain that Iraq would suddenly be called a menacing danger while the oh so peaceful Iranians had never so much as harmed a goat before the evil Chimperor turned them, and the world of course, against us.

By IN THE NEWS

February 6, 2007 09:36 AM | Link to this

In response to continuing financial strains, U.S. Army Europe has canceled all welcome home celebrations for units returning from deployment through this fiscal year, halting the tradition of free food, rides and other community festivities for returning soldiers and their families.

Way to Go! That’s supporting our troops!

By rushncap

February 6, 2007 09:37 AM | Link to this

Please tell me RW that you’re not seriously looking for me to start posting the names of every general that disagrees with the Shrub. I have a job, homes, don’t have enough time for that.

Also, since every single other thing that the Shrub has tried in Iraq has failed, I admire your child-like faith that this last one, half-assed and disliked by everyone with a brain, won’t.

By Eric

February 6, 2007 09:38 AM | Link to this

LuckoDull? Oh, that’s clever.

By Dusty

February 6, 2007 09:39 AM | Link to this

Plan B???

A report from abc News on Jan. 30 includes this statement: “Bush says invading Iran ‘Not the plan!’”

Maybe Valerie Plame told Luckovich all the “secret plans to be”. Don’t mention my name as that info is confidential and not to be revealed.

By Eric

February 6, 2007 09:39 AM | Link to this

Impeach the son of a b.tch now!

By Eric

February 6, 2007 09:41 AM | Link to this

Little Right of Center? How ‘bout Little Right of Stupid!

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 09:41 AM | Link to this

That fact check routine sounds a lot more like a cover up after a power mad politician got caught with her hands in the perq jar.

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 09:43 AM | Link to this

rushncap,

You said the surge will fail. That’s a definitive statement made by you. So again I ask, what military credentials do you have that make you more qualified than General Petraeus?

By Mrs. Godzilla

February 6, 2007 09:45 AM | Link to this

Little right of center,

Jesus would be so proud of you. Two sentences from our prophet and which do you choose to follow?

Here’s the footnote to that verse… 12 [36] In contrast to the ministry of the Twelve and of the seventy-two during the period of Jesus (Luke 9:3; 10:4), in the future period of the church the missionaries must be prepared for the opposition they will face in a world hostile to their preaching.

I think you are taking it out of context. But that is your right.

Go ahead and kill in Jesus’ name…. We’ll see who ends up in the express lane at the pearly gates and who does not.

Peace be unto you.

By FACT CHECK

February 6, 2007 09:48 AM | Link to this

y RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 09:41 AM | Link to this

That fact check routine sounds a lot more like a cover up after a power mad politician got caught with her hands in the perq jar.

PERHAPS, but the odds are it’s the another attempt at a smear.

By Paul

February 6, 2007 09:52 AM | Link to this

IN THE NEWS 9:36

I’m guessing your source is some anti-Bush web site?

If this was a “tradition,” Army commanders were breaking the law. US citizens do not pay taxes so government employees can have free food and parties. In the past, communities (civilian) have provided the food as a thank-you gesture. Military forces have had a “show up and congratulate the returnees” affair.

Congress allocates some funds for free food and gifts for civilian community PR - and they are explicit about how they are to be used. The amount is quite small.

Gotta get your “facts” from somewhere else. This one isn’t “Bush’s Fault.” The new Congress can change the law any time they want.

By Paul

February 6, 2007 09:57 AM | Link to this

LuckoDull 9:44 -

So are you saying there are some things the UberLeft takes on faith?

:)

By FACT CHECK

February 6, 2007 09:58 AM | Link to this

PAUL _ SHOW ME WHERE I SAID IT WAS BUSH’S FAULT. YOU ARE TELLING A LIE ABOUT THAT AREN’T YOU?

IPSO FACTO - YOU WORD IS NO GOOD HERE>

By Paul

February 6, 2007 10:00 AM | Link to this

John Edwards is being interviewd on NPR’s Diane Rehm show right now. Another chance to hear what a candidate says - not what others think he (she) said.

By AntiRadical

February 6, 2007 10:03 AM | Link to this

Good toon ML but for unintended reasons, I think. I get as tired of hearing Dem scare tactics (they’re going to invade Iran) as I do those from the Rep caucus (cut n run, raise taxes). This sort of politicing has run its’ course at present; someone should tell the pols so that they will stop insulting our intelligence.

David Brooks had a good article in today’s print edition entitled “Post-boomer crowd spells trouble for GOP”. The crux of the article is that post-boomers are primarily moderate in their political leanings but that they have been put-off by the hard line inflexiblity of the current GOP. Reps would do well to peruse this offering. Brooks is a NY Times columnist so he will probably be discounted as such, but I beieve he is dead on target with his observations as they parallel my own interactions with post-adolescents.

Paul- You are right regarding Nixon and the fact that he ran twice on a stop the ‘Nam war platform. He was a demagogue, intent on legacy and power. He shared many traits with the current President. I seriously doubt that Hillary would emulate his mistakes. Whatever else she may be, she is a consumate pol whose reputation is that of someone who can arbitrate and get things done.

We all know of the CAFE standards loopholes and the era of the SUV. I’m glad that GWB has taken a stand but I think most people see this sort of thing as a band-aid measure.

I think that Reps would do well to confront the Dems on their continued intransigence regarding expansion of nuclear power. It is my belief that this is the only truely viable fuel alternative to petroleum and that sooner or later it will have to be developed to its’ fullest potential. Many of America’s (and the world’s) problems would evaporate overnight if we could only break our critical reliance on oil. The party that champions this technology will save America’s bacon and gain the thanks of a grateful nation.

By Brian Curtis

February 6, 2007 10:04 AM | Link to this

BD, Bush has been shown the ONLY way he can proceed with any hope of salvaging his legacy: it’s to follow the Iraq Study Group’s recommendations to the letter.

If he fails at this—his last chance—he’ll be forever remembered as the worst president America has endured. Yes, even worse than Nixon. And given his record of stubborn incompetence, I seriously doubt he’ll wise up now and miraculously do something right, after his track record of repeated failures.

By Little Right of Center

February 6, 2007 10:05 AM | Link to this

More people have been killed in the name of Christianity than in all the World Wars combined. We’re just carrying on the Christian Tradition. Come On TruthMan, where is you Atheist Support??

See the foam, oh the pretty foam, take another toke you delusional old hippies. You’ve undermined our government for over 30 years, why stop now!

By Jump off point

February 6, 2007 10:07 AM | Link to this

The liberal view of America, that justice is job one, is superior to the conservative view, that the rich handful of white fatbellies deserve 90 percent of the world’s resources. We should rid ourselves of these finely dressed leeches now, and banish their fifth column blog-trolls along with them and be cleansed and then we can enjoy justice for all.

By Paul

February 6, 2007 10:08 AM | Link to this

Fact Check

I see that moniker pop up every so often - can’t tell if it’s used exclusively or is one “worn” by one of the types who changes names like otheres change socks. The general tenor of such posts is “Bush is at fault for everything that can be spun as detrimental to the military, social programs, environmental issues, etc.”

So I apologize for inferring to you a position you obviously do not take. It’s good to know you place upon Pres Bush absolutely no responsibility for decisions taken by General McKiernan.

By One

February 6, 2007 10:08 AM | Link to this

That ba$tard Bush has denied the funding for Peachcare!!!!! That slimy, low down, greedy, deceitful, did I say GREEDY ba$tard!!! All this money for an ignorant azz war (weapons of mass destruction, my azz!!!!) and nothing to ensure the healthcare of our kids. I truly, without a doubt, despise him!!!! What an ignorant piece of garbage…………BUSH SUCKS!!!!!!!!!

By Buy Danish

February 6, 2007 10:12 AM | Link to this

rushncap,

We have no choice but to win and in order to win it requires will on our part.

It may require our presence in the Middle East for a very long time - C’est la guerre. The forces of the United States military are located in nearly 130 countries around the world performing a variety of duties from combat operations, to peacekeeping, to training with foreign militaries. Some of these deployments have existed for nearly 50 years, as in Japan, Germany, and South Korea, while other deployments have more recent origins such as the current occupation of Iraq.

Paul,

I’ll have to get back to you later - I’m on my way out.

I need to address Mrs. Godzilla briefly.

{{{Go ahead and kill in Jesus’ name…. We’ll see who ends up in the express lane at the pearly gates and who does not.}}}

Mrs. G,

Who kills in the name of Christ? The only people I know of who routinely kill in the name of any religion are Islamofascists who kill in the name of Mohammed (a very violent prophet if you read your history) and Allah.

Your phony sanctimony is quite frankly nauseating.

By Lord Help Us

February 6, 2007 10:14 AM | Link to this

RW-(the obfuscator) at 9:35,

Trust me when I tell you that answering a post and/or question directly will help you gain some credibility.

Constant obfuscation and obvious avoidance of reasonable questions only illustrates the absence of logic.

I’ll give you another chance:

‘Can you explain why are soldiears are dying to solidify a gov’t in Iraq that is allied with Moqtada al Sadr and one that will have closer ties to Iran than the Hussein gov’t?’

I’m rootin’ fer ya…

By Paul

February 6, 2007 10:15 AM | Link to this

AntiRadical

More good points. I would call CAFE a band-aid if it was taken in isolation - but in concert with other actions can be an important component. Germany’s new Pres has told critics “you don’t like nuclear power? You want to cut down greenhouse gasses? Fine. What are your suggestions?” So far the Green spokesman has said, in effect… not much. I agree with you about our oil gluttony being the source of much of our difficulties - but getting people to change their ways voluntarily isn’t going to be easy. This isn’t something where “tax the rich or someone else” is going to cut it.

My point on Hillary was not so much she’d use the tactic - it’s that voters would buy it. Memories are short - or are dictated by one’s Party affiliation.

By Two & 1/8

February 6, 2007 10:19 AM | Link to this

One- Don’t hold back tell us what you really think. LOL

By Midori

February 6, 2007 10:19 AM | Link to this

Watch the Iraq Reconstruction Hearing Live

By Little Right of Center

February 6, 2007 10:19 AM | Link to this

Calm down ONE, no need to blow a gasket, just take another toke, that’s it take a deep one. Now slowly release it… feel better?

Why don’t you quit whinning about what the government won’t give you and GO AND GET A JOB you d^mn freeloader!

Oh, I’m soooo sorry, but JumpOffPoint (10:07) just got rid of 90% of the people that create jobs. So I guess you will have to depend on the government for everything. Yea Stalin! He’s your kinda leader.

By Shawny

February 6, 2007 10:20 AM | Link to this

oooooh….the ipso facto card…..you got served!

By Paul

February 6, 2007 10:25 AM | Link to this

Midori

Now there’s a recipe for depression. Assemble your 2006 income tax documents while listening to where your money goes in Iraq…

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 10:26 AM | Link to this

LHU,

Assuming you mean “our” and “soldiers” the answer is that they aren’t.

By Mrs. Godzilla

February 6, 2007 10:27 AM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

It is my opinion that any self-proclaimed Christian who stand for this war, or any war kills in the name of Christ. To me this is the ulimate use of the Lord’s name in vain.

Any killing in the name of God is wrong.

As far as your accusation of “phony sanctimony”, it is, at best, a bad guess on your part as to my character. (it’s also the start of the slippery slope to name calling)

By FACT CHECK

February 6, 2007 10:29 AM | Link to this

PAUL

NO PROBLEM DUDE.

FACTS, JUST THE FACTS.

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 10:31 AM | Link to this

FACT CHECK,

If you’re only dealing with “odds are” maybe fact check isn’t the right name.

By Shawny

February 6, 2007 10:33 AM | Link to this

Mrs. G…

“Any War” ?!?!?

None, ever in the history of the world, were worth fighting? Forget this one, we know what you think about it.

By Dusty

February 6, 2007 10:34 AM | Link to this

anti-rad

David Brooks also gave a few thoughts that you barely mentioned. Many of the Duke students he wrote about have “moved lately to the center” of politics. And another thought:”their politics is not between left and right but between idealism and realism.” Brooks also wrote that little or no mention was made of Iraq by students.

Brooks concluded that this was bad news for the GOP. I can’t see that it is good news for Democrats either. The students sound like young Liebermans or Zell Millers. They look for “truth” not parties. And they are optimistic. That is good news for the future.

Footnote: David Brooks is on Lehrer News Hour every Friday more or less discussing the conservative view in debate with liberal commetator Shields.

By Midori

February 6, 2007 10:39 AM | Link to this

BAGHDAD (CNN) — A man sentenced to death in Kuwait for the 1983 bombings of the U.S. and French embassies now sits in Iraq’s parliament as a member of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki’s ruling coalition, according to U.S. military intelligence.

Jamal Jafaar Mohammed’s seat in parliament gives him immunity from prosecution, but Washington now says he supports Shiite insurgents and acts as an Iranian agent in Iraq.

Repeated efforts to reach Jamal Jafaar Mohammed for comment through the parliament, through the ruling Shiite Muslim coalition and the Badr Organization — the Iranian-backed paramilitary organization he once led — have been unsuccessful.

A Kuwaiti court sentenced Jamal Jafaar Mohammed to death in 1984 in the car bombings of the U.S. and French embassies the previous December, which killed five people and wounded 86. He had fled the country by then, but Western intelligence agencies also accuse him of involvement in the hijacking of a Kuwaiti airliner in 1984 and the attempted assassination of a Kuwaiti prince.

By LMAO

February 6, 2007 10:40 AM | Link to this

Bush’s State of the Union bump? Isn’t that usually the case, a bump right?

Not with this dumbazz president.

New Gallup poll has him at an embarrassing 32% approval. Down from 36%.

LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

By getalife

February 6, 2007 10:57 AM | Link to this

“George W. Bush is again guiding the nation toward a preemptive war - this time with Iran - without allowing anything like a full debate of the underlying facts, probable consequences of the conflict or peaceful alternatives.

Bush is following the same course he chose in the run-up to war in Iraq: he insists that war is “a last resort” yet puts in motion the engines of war; he times the release of alarming intelligence reports for maximum political effect; he brushes aside doubts and warnings; he then presents war as unavoidable or a fait accompli.

Despite the painful lessons from the Iraq War disaster - including more than 3,000 U.S. soldiers dead and Iraq torn apart by sectarian civil war – the key institutions of Washington, particularly the Congress and the press, are playing similar roles, too.

The capital again is possessed of an air of unreality as the clock ticks down to a likely military showdown with Iran.

Though the documentary record is now clear that Bush set his sights on war in Iraq a year or so before the actual invasion, the President is still believed when he insists now that he wants a diplomatic solution with Iran.”

Of course, he will attack Iran to blame them for his disaster. He will never man up and admit his disaster, he is a coward.

Check out the new budget and it is clear he does not give a dam-n about the people. He is trying to devalue the dollar to create a new North American Union.

And the wingnuts say yea w, destroy our country until it is history.

Freaking pathetic.

By Mrs. Godzilla

February 6, 2007 10:58 AM | Link to this

Shawny,

I know this is tough, it’s tough for me too. But yes, I interpret Christ’s teachings as do not make war.

Doesn’t mean I don’t want to sometimes. Heck, there are times I’d like to nuke my next door neighbor.

I’m not alone in this…I respect and admire the Amish and the Quakers. Ghandi is a personal hero.

I have been called a lot worse than “Peace-nik”.

By Lord Help Us

February 6, 2007 11:06 AM | Link to this

Yup, got me on a typo RW.

Remember, ‘let he who is without sin…’

Now, we are making ‘some’ progress.

Iraq’s current gov’t includes a large block of Sadr’s followers and he exercises respective influence. So, I am unsure about why you would so readily reject the obvious.

Also, the current gov’t in Iraq is already significantly influenced by Iran. Hopefully, you consider the latest NIE credible. You should read it if you do not think the gov’t in Iraq is already influenced substantially by Iran.

Care to set me straight?

By LMAO

February 6, 2007 11:10 AM | Link to this

Yes, Jesus was all for war.

Thats why the all powerful One wiped his enemies off the planet in a shock and awe display that saved him from the cross.

By The Peoples for a Nuked Amerika' Century!

February 6, 2007 11:13 AM | Link to this

[Could Bush be thinking?]

Dubya’s “Axis of Evil” checklist

Iraq - Sunni Muslim Heathens (Conquered) Iran - Shiite Muslim Heathens (Next) North Korea - Godless Commies (soon)

USA troops will be used to take em’ down. Then my “God’s Work” private security firm “Blackwater” along with my good buddies at “Haliburton” will control and run these countries. And you taxpayers will pay for it through the nose!

Call Erik Prince! We have God’s work to do!

Praise God and Guns!

By This Justin

February 6, 2007 11:24 AM | Link to this

Are you people just plain CRAZY?????

Have you ever heard of “THOU SHALT NOT KILL????? Did you war freaks get a special waiver from GOD????

God hates abortion doctors. God hates soldiers. THERE ARE NO WAIVERS you stupid idiots. Helllooooo, ever hear of “love thy neighbor”, what part do you not understand?????

God has a nice hot place reserved in Hell for all you soldiers and abortion doctors. STOP KILLING BABIES!!!!!!!! STOP.

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 11:26 AM | Link to this

LHU,

I answered your freaking question and I didn’t cast any stone at your typo. Why don’t you grow up just a little.

At least provide a link to the entire text of the latest NIE. What surprises is me is why YOU would find the latest NIE credible. Remember WMDs?

By The Peoples for a Nuked Amerika' Century!

February 6, 2007 11:28 AM | Link to this

Someone Set us Up the Bomb

http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view.php?id=92904

By Little Right of Center

February 6, 2007 11:28 AM | Link to this

LMAO, let’s see, there was Jericho and the parting of the Red Sea where God destroyed his enemies. I’m sure there are more instances but why confuse everyone with the details.

By Little Right of Center

February 6, 2007 11:34 AM | Link to this

This Justin, Please share with us uneducated where God claims to hates abortion doctors! I think it was something like love the sinner but not the sin. Where does the Bible claim that God hates ANYONE? More made up “facts” to make your case. You’re such an idiot, bless your heart.

By LMAO

February 6, 2007 11:37 AM | Link to this

Answer the question, CHRISTIAN. Why didn’t Jesus wipe out his enemies?

He had the ability, answer the question.

Why no shock and awe from Jesus, the son of God?

You really think Jesus is up in heaven cheering on this war?

By AntiRadical

February 6, 2007 11:38 AM | Link to this

Hi Dusty- Thanks for posting more of the good points from the Brooks article.

I don’t see this as especially good news for the Dems either, at least the older Dem platform. Thankfully, the conservative revolution is, also, changing the way Dems do politics. The new breed of blue dogs like Tester are appealing to the new pragmatists that are entering the voter rolls. The Dems are “evolving”. I think the Reps would do well to pay attention to this current social trending.

I’m especially glad that you didn’t discount Brooks simply because he writes for the NY Times. If we all focused on that which we believe to be right, regardless of political/social affiliation, we might find much more common ground to build upon.

By Mrs. Godzilla

February 6, 2007 11:43 AM | Link to this

Little Right of Center

Old Testament (The Torah) vs. New Testament.

Words of the Moses, Abraham etc vs. the words of J.C.

They are at times diametrically opposed. Do you side with Moses or Jesus?

By Brad

February 6, 2007 11:49 AM | Link to this

Wow! ML, I was so concerned, we have had no BUSH BASHING toons for two days. The media’s job is to bash Bush 24/7, you are letting the libs down dude.

By Truthman

February 6, 2007 12:03 PM | Link to this

Isn’t it amazing that Ted Haggard, The Mega-church molester, completely “cured” of his homosexuality?

And it only took a few months! Gee, why don’t they bottle it and sell it!!

What a bunch of pseudo-christian crap. Molesters are not homosexuals. Molesters are usually hetero males with families.

Cured of homosexuality…what a load of horse dung!!

By The Peoples for a Nuked Amerika' Century!

February 6, 2007 12:04 PM | Link to this

Gee

Bush was Right! God did tell him to attack Iraq!

“Go up, my warriors, against the land of Merathaim and against the people of Pekod. Yes, march against Babylon, the land of rebels, a land that I will judge! Pursue, kill, and completely destroy them, as I have commanded you,” says the LORD. “Let the battle cry be heard in the land, a shout of great destruction”. (Jeremiah 50:21-22 NLT)

By LMAO

February 6, 2007 12:05 PM | Link to this

The two-faced calf has died. I say we stuff it and use it as the Zell Miller statue! LMAO!!!

By Midori

February 6, 2007 12:11 PM | Link to this

Brad,

maybe he wouldn’t be “bashed” (as you call it) so much if he wasn’t a weak, incompetent oaf, who is bleeding this country dry monetarily, spiritually and physically.

Ya think?

By Dusty

February 6, 2007 12:12 PM | Link to this

anti-rad

The new approach by the blue dogs is interesting. Wonder if Leiberman will return to join them? Of course, the Republicans also have their Tuesday Group which seems to be heading more to the center.

Makes me proud when I see Americans beginning to work out their political problems. A light at the end of the tunnel maybe. The extremes on both sides are just TOO much.

By New Life Church

February 6, 2007 12:18 PM | Link to this

We structured Rev Haggard’s therapy after the James Dobson gay conversion method for boys. Here’s how.

The man’s pastor has to do his part. He needs to mirror and affirm the gay man’s maleness. He can play rough-and-tumble games with the man, in ways that are decidedly different from the games he would play with other men. He can help the man learn to throw and catch a ball. He can teach him to pound a nail into a board.

He can even take the man with him into the shower, where the man cannot help but notice that Pastor Bob has a pennis, just like his, only bigger.

By Cal

February 6, 2007 12:23 PM | Link to this

It’s the mellow mushroom for the lucko posse. Ride ‘em cowboys.

Yeeehaaawwwwwww

By Goldie

February 6, 2007 12:23 PM | Link to this

LMAO— don’t you remember learning about Jesus’ sermon on the mount, wherein he not only stated that “war is good”, but he also declared that “God hates f@gs!”… I’m pretty sure I learned about this in Sunday school…

By Scooter

February 6, 2007 12:24 PM | Link to this

Good one ml, when Bush doesn’t give you direct fodder for funnies you can just make up stuff and make fun of that. Lord knows you wouldn’t want to perform your life’s work (drawing) to portray Hillary Clinton’s desire to confiscate private sector profits for the purpose of chasing a “solution” to today’s hysteria. Never mind that solution will transfer huge amounts of power to the government and government never relinquishes power back to the people. Hey, isn’t fascism some type of marriage between corporations and government for the purpose of pursuing government objectives? Or, is fascism holding private meetings with corporations, presumably to see how government can get out of the way of the private sector? Probably depends on who you talk to.

By Brad

February 6, 2007 12:26 PM | Link to this

Midori - he is THE president of the USA, our president! He was reelected even after going into Iraq!

By Lord Help Us

February 6, 2007 12:46 PM | Link to this

Well RW, you’re right back to RW-(the obfuscator)…

I said that the current Iraq gov’t is aligned with Moqtada al Sadr and is influenced significantly by Iran.

You said, ‘They aren’t (period).’

Here are some facts to back up my position:

From the Iraq Study Group, Page 11: ‘The Badr Brigade is affiliated with the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, which is led by Abdul Aziz al-Hakim. The Badr Brigade has long-standing ties with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. Many Badr members have become integrated into the Iraqi police, and others play policing roles in southern Iraqi cities. While wearing the uniform of the security services, Badr fighters have targeted Sunni Arab civilians.

There are many, many other credible sources that attest to the influence of Iran and I will have a number waiting if, as I predict, you obfuscate again.

Now, regarding al Sadr and his influence in the current Iraqi gov’t, please note the following:

Al-Sadr has significant political clout in the Iraqi government. His party holds at least 30 seats in the 275-seat parliament, forming one of its largest voting blocs. Al-Sadr’s movement also controls several government ministries.

There, now I would LOVE to see anything you have that illustrates your point (‘they aren’t’) - that al Sadr IS NOT significantly influential in the current Iraqi gov’t AND Iran is not influential in Iraq.

Thanks in advance…

By Buy Danish

February 6, 2007 12:57 PM | Link to this

MidoriLIZ,

Thanks for the link to the convicted terrorist sitting in Iraq’s parliament. It shouldn’t be too difficult to take care of this problem, now should it?

Mrs. Godzilla,

I don’t doubt that you would object to taking care of this depraved terrorist^^^^ as it is against your peculiar interpretation of Christianity.

Fortunately we do not rely on your unwise and pseudo-Saintly counsel, and I trust that justice will be served despite your wrongheaded entreaties to lie down like a doormat while IslamoFascism marches on.

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 01:03 PM | Link to this

LHU,

Here is your question in your own words:

{{{{{‘Can you explain why are soldiears are dying to solidify a gov’t in Iraq that is allied with Moqtada al Sadr and one that will have closer ties to Iran than the Hussein gov’t?’}}}}}

In the answer “they aren’t” “they” refers to “are soldiears” which I interpret to mean our soldiers. Your question doesn’t in any way, shape, manner, or form ask about the ever changing alliances in the Iraqi government structure.

By Midori

February 6, 2007 01:09 PM | Link to this

I fail to see your point, Brad, if there is one.

Perhaps you should take your case to the 70% of Americans of whom Bush is “the president” who don’t agree with his lunatic policies.

Maybe you should explain to those people why they have no right to voice that displeasure as well.

By Mrs. Godzilla

February 6, 2007 01:11 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

Do you mean KILL when you say take care of? If so, why not say it?

I assume, maybe incorrectly, that by peculiar you don’t mean:

uncommon; unusual. distinctive in nature or character from others.

That’s ok, it is your right.

I don’t think your view of Christianity is peculiar. I think it’s wrong. I think it puts your immortal soul at risk. But that’s ok too. It’s my right to think that.

You call me unwise, I hope to be as unwise as Ghandi. I pray for the strength to be as unwise as JC…giving up my life rather than to take one. Hey, it’s hard to follow the Prince of Peace. It’s a whole lot easier to follow Pat Robertson, et al.

I know better to offer you counsel of any kind.

s

By Midori

February 6, 2007 01:12 PM | Link to this

you’re very welcome, B-a-a-a-a-a-h Danish - tho I don’t know what my email ID has to do with anything.

back to the link, yep, ain’t Democracy great?

The Iraqis seem to like to elect thuggish murderers just like us.

Aren’t we special?

By Lord Help Us

February 6, 2007 01:15 PM | Link to this

So, RW-(the obfuscator),

Allow me to simplify:

Is the current gov’t in Iraq aligned with Moqtada al Sadr and significantly influenced by Iran?

Because, THAT is the gov’t our soldiers are dying to help solidify.

By The Peoples for a Nuked Amerika' Century!

February 6, 2007 01:22 PM | Link to this

Dubya’ continues to allienate our friends around the world. This time it will cost us our one and only air base in South America.

http://www.ajc.com/news/content/shared-gen/ap/LatinAmericaAndCaribbean/EcuadorUS_Base.html

By Midori

February 6, 2007 01:27 PM | Link to this

Mrs. Godzilla,

If it’s any consolation, I consider you very wise. And sane.

Rather than return grenades, you just diffuse them.

By Mrs. Godzilla

February 6, 2007 01:31 PM | Link to this

Midori

Thank you.

I have admired your words as well.

Grenades are just too damn messy!

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 01:33 PM | Link to this

LHU,

Some of it probably is, did you expect instant Democracy? We have been working on that for 230 years without perfection. Guess what? Some things take time, this isn’t an episode of Family Guy or wherever you get your world view.

You do realize Iraq has a Constitution and they have elections don’t you? There has been a push over the last few days aimed right at the heart of the Mahdi Army and the surge hasn’t even begun.

Our military has been authorized to deal swiftly and decisively with interference from Iran and Syria. We have also placed the Iraqi government on notice that they will have to hold up their end of the bargain this time.

All these things are good signs that maybe we are going to fight to win finally.

Here’s some great reading for you to ignore.

By Buy Danish

February 6, 2007 01:35 PM | Link to this

C’mon, Buy Danish - can’t you tell when someone’s not serious and is just funnin’ with ya?

People who discuss this topic seriously make the distinction between Old and New Testament theology (which was done initially). Then they usually recognize errors in translation, recognize that some words, no matter what word was used in the “original copy” gets translated into one or two English words (“kill” or “murder”) - heck, ever looked at how many words or concepts get rendered as “Hell”? (place of departed spirits, the garbage dump outside the Jerusalem wall) - Occasionally they’ll even introduce some scholarly writings on when war (or killing) is justified. It’s the same kind of situational argument that sank Dukakis.

Not to say it’s proper to say “Christianity” advocates military action based upon its principles. Then again, isn’t that one of the nice things about Christianity - you can pretty much believe what you want and still fall under the umbrella? Only on forums like this (or in Islamic schools) will someone who doesn’t believe in live and let live assail you for your interpretation.

By Goldie

February 6, 2007 01:37 PM | Link to this

{{and I trust that justice will be served despite your wrongheaded entreaties to lie down like a doormat while IslamoFascism marches on.}}

Kill, Kill, Kill! There’s only one way to defeat “IslamoFascism”, right Donut? And that’s to be even more fascist like you, apparently…

By Buy Danish

February 6, 2007 01:43 PM | Link to this

Sorry ‘bout that, Buy - at 1:35 - I just came back online, was thinking about writing and zoned out when I was filling out the login sections. I’m sure others recognize you’re not one of the posters who talk to themselves!

Paul

By Scooter

February 6, 2007 01:43 PM | Link to this

Where would the world be if all the good and righteous men of history sat idly by saying WWJD (What Would Jesus Do), while the world’s evil rulers conquered and ruled more and more people? Would that make Jesus proud of his fathers humans? How about What Would Jules Do?

By Paul

February 6, 2007 01:45 PM | Link to this

Buy D at 1:35

Sorry ‘bout that - wasn’t a namejack or nitjack or whatever they call it. I was just signing on, thinking about your comments, so rather zoned out while I was logging in.

Paul

By Mrs. Godzilla

February 6, 2007 01:46 PM | Link to this

Some one please help me!

It seems I can’t stop assailing…..

Pish Posh

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 01:48 PM | Link to this

I ought to repost one of Midori’s kind and gentle posts from my blog and let Mrs. G see how many words the AJC censor would let through.

By the way, those posts come into my blog completely unsolicited so they are nothing but grenades.

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 01:53 PM | Link to this

Paul,

Stop digging!

By Mrs. Godzilla

February 6, 2007 01:56 PM | Link to this

RW - I liked Harry Truman’s words too….he had a colorful way with words don’t you think?

By Thomas

February 6, 2007 01:57 PM | Link to this

-=-

RW?

Democracy at Gunpoint?

If our intended goal for this invasion was to install (Our form) of Democracy in the government of Iraq, then we have directly violated international Treatys and Law by invading a sovereign country, killing it’s leader, overthrowing the current government, and installing our own government there. And now we are “Hostile Occupiers” to boot!

In otherwords we are no better than the Nazi’s were in THEIR “Empire Building” campaign.

I certainly hope that is not what the “War in Iraq” was all about. If it is, - Then we have done grevious and permanent harm to our reputation as a Free, Just, and Democratic society.

Democracy at Gunpoint is not a true Democracy. Democracy can only be achieved when a country’s people embrace Democracy and it’s ideals themselves.

I fear that this will never happen seeing as the people of the “Middle East” have had thousands of years of traditional rule by Theocracy and Monarchy. To change thousands of years of traditions and tribal communities into a single democratic entity would indeed be a miracle. But to do so at Gunpoint would be a Heinious Injustice to the people of that country. And in the long run, such a government would eventually fail as it is a propped up government by a foreign occupier.

We Got Saddam, It’s over!

It’s now their country and we should leave and let them set their own future whatever that future may be. We can aid them in re-building their country, but let them decide how that country should be shaped, not us!

Unless of course you want “The United States of America” to become “The Empire of the United States”

Thomas

-=-

By Paul

February 6, 2007 01:59 PM | Link to this

RW - I corrected once, hit “send” (all right, ‘Enter’) and I got a screen “AJC.com - unknown” so, thinking there was an error, I logged back in and sent again. Didn’t want BD to think someone was being UnChristian in *jacking her name.

BTW - “grenades” on your blog?!? That’s doesn’t sound very Christian, either. Shouldn’t they be rose petals or palm fronds or something?

By Lord Help Us

February 6, 2007 02:05 PM | Link to this

Great, RW-(the obfuscator),

You say ‘In the last few days,’ we have made a ‘push’ at the Mahdi army…

So, I guess, ‘in the last few days,’ ‘our military has been authorized to deal swiftly and decisively with interference from Iran and Syria…’

And, I guess ‘in the last few days,’ ‘we have also placed the Iraqi government on notice that they will have to hold up their end of the bargain THIS (my emphasis on THIS) time…’

Beautiful rationalization for 4 YEARS of incompetence.

And of course, as usual, you didn’t (couldn’t) answer a simple question…

By getalife

February 6, 2007 02:09 PM | Link to this

“When I hear Bush and Cheney keep talking about “getting the job done” in Iraq, the thing that most amazes me is that they don’t know they are laughingstocks in the region. It isn’t just that they are widely hated, or distrusted, or viewed as failures. It is that people are laughing at them. No surge can fix that.” — Juan Cole

Geez.

By Lord Help Us

February 6, 2007 02:10 PM | Link to this

RW-at 1:53,

It hurts…but I gotta throw kudos your way on that one…

By Buy Danish

February 6, 2007 02:12 PM | Link to this

Paul,

It appears that Goldie and Mrs. Godzilla are firmly in the doormat group. Of course these women also stand up for a woman’s right to partial birth abortion, so I guess we’re meant to sweep that parodox under that doormat they’re lying on so valiantly.

They are convinced of their moral superiority but despite their delusions to the contrary, they do not represent the majority.

Considering their unwillingness to dirty their hands in the defense of freedom, it seems to me that Hitler would have been lucky to have them on his team, and Midori might still be picking cotton on some plantation somewhere if not for some “killers who secured the blessings of liberty for others.

By Lord Help Us

February 6, 2007 02:24 PM | Link to this

BuyPauler,

I don’t know if it’s just me, but your last post was off base even for you.

Mrs. G does not strike me as someone I would ever associate in anyway with Hitler.

She may be my new hero(ine)…

By Scooter

February 6, 2007 02:26 PM | Link to this

OH MY GOD! “In otherwords we are no better than the Nazi’s were in THEIR “Empire Building” campaign.”

Maybe I’m wrong, but did Hitler cross the Rhine conquer france and then allow the french to nominate and vote on their own representatives who would in turn draft the country’s constitution. Realy, OH MY GOD!

By Paul

February 6, 2007 02:32 PM | Link to this

LHU

I said what (italics, exclamation points) about Hitler?

That’s an example I rarely cite - nor do I care for “jack-boot thugs” and other such terms. Tends too much to minimize and gloss over the extreme evil done by the Third Reich.

By Mrs. Godzilla

February 6, 2007 02:33 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

I most certainly am not convinced of my moral superiority. I only believe in what I believe in and do so strongly. I am proudly above average, superior? - Mr. G would get a chuckle out of that.

You so very cavalierly assume to know what I stand for, rather than make the effort to ask and get a direct answer. When you put words in other peoples mouths it is tantamount to telling a lie.

Is killing the only method to defend freedom? That seems rather limited.

Do you know about Ghandi or MLK? Sometimes people who practice passive resistance die in their fight for freedom too. Are they any less brave because they choose an alternative method to enjoin the fight?

I believe violence begets violence. It appears we disagree.

But still I wish you peace.

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 02:35 PM | Link to this

LHU,

You really should stop confusing not liking the answer with not getting an answer.

Thomas the ever boring Talk Engine,

Where did you get that I said we were forcing Democracy on them at the point of a gun? Do you moonbats just make up whatever you want to respond to regardless of what was said? Kind of like the scribbler and this toon today.

By Buy Danish

February 6, 2007 02:36 PM | Link to this

LHU,

Mrs. Godzilla, the self-annointed saint, is unwilling to fight ANY war.

You tell me, where does that leave us?

By Shawny

February 6, 2007 02:37 PM | Link to this

http://www.townhall.com/funnies/cartoonist/BobGorrell/2007/02/1

Works both ways…

One thing I find interesting about the senate non-binding waste of time bill on Iraq, is that the senate majority leader was the only democrate that voted against it. Why was that?

By Buy Danish

February 6, 2007 02:40 PM | Link to this

Paul,

LHU very uncleverly called me “By Pauly”, hence your confusion.

Mrs. Godzilla,

When you come here are preach to the rest of about the true interpretation of Christianity, which according to you opposes ANY war, then I’d say that you are very convinced of your moral superiority.

By Lord Help Us

February 6, 2007 02:41 PM | Link to this

BuyPauler,

As Gregory Hynes said in ‘The History of the World’ - ‘The jig is up…’

By Paul

February 6, 2007 02:44 PM | Link to this

Mrs. Godzilla

I once attended a dinner (large - I was in the audience) where one of the main guests was a religious/Christian/in the hierarchy person. He made a comment to the effect they would like to see more people of their denomination (percentage) in the military than are represented in the general population. Reason was to the effect war is a brutal, horrible, (can’t remember all the adjectives he used) affair but the concept was they wanted people with moral convictions present to temper what could happen. Rather like the helo driver at My Lai who evacuated a number of children and told the door gunner to provide cover if he was interfered with.

By Buy Danish

February 6, 2007 02:47 PM | Link to this

(((If our intended goal for this invasion was to install (Our form) of Democracy in the government of Iraq, blah blah blah}}}

Thomas the totally ignorant talk engine,

If I might add to Scooter’s comments, you need a little modern history lesson.

Regime change in Iraq became a stated goal of United States foreign policy when Public Law 105-338 (the “Iraq Liberation Act”) was signed into law by U.S. President Bill Clinton. The act directed that: “It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime.”

Since you’re a tycoon and can afford it, I really should start charging for my tutoring services.

By Mrs. Godzilla

February 6, 2007 02:49 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish.

It’s not nice to talk about people behind there posts! Get a “slam book”.

It is braver to engage.

Again you use your words - “true” interpretation. Never said it. Never would.

By your logic, what are the folks who come here and preach war? Are they also convinced of their own moral superiority? Are you?

Still, I wish you peace.

By Buy Danish

February 6, 2007 02:52 PM | Link to this

Paul,

If I’d been present at that dinner I would have been sorely tempted to ask the gentleman what made him think that our soldiers lack “moral conviction”.

The argument should be that we need people to secure our nation, not to act presumptiously as moral guides.

By RE

February 6, 2007 02:53 PM | Link to this

Scooter,

Let me start by saying that I am not trying to equate the war in Iraq with the Nazi occupation of france, but take a read about Vichy France

The Vichy government was voted on by the eleceted representitives of france, the first action after that was to give the prime minister of france near dictatorial power, but it was voted on.

By Paul

February 6, 2007 03:02 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish 2:52

We didn’t always have an all-volunteer force who are highly educated and are serving because it is a cause in which they believe -

By GAP

February 6, 2007 03:02 PM | Link to this

The Navy has about 8,000 Sailors deployed with Army and Marine units performing duties as Individual Augmentees. They are in support of the GWOT and serve as corpeman, convoy escorts, supply specialists, communications specialist, provosional support teams, construction (SeaBees).

By Buy Danish

February 6, 2007 03:11 PM | Link to this

{{{I don’t think your view of Christianity is peculiar. I think it’s wrong. I think it puts your immortal soul at risk.}}}

And

{{{giving up my life rather than to take one. Hey, it’s hard to follow the Prince of Peace. It’s a whole lot easier to follow Pat Robertson, et al.}}}

AND

{{{I know better to offer you counsel of any kind.}}}

Mrs. Godzilla,

Could you be any more unctuous, preachy and phony?

Nobody is “preaching war”. Stop lying, or if you prefer a euphemism, stop “making stuff up”.

Look, I’ll make this very simple for you:

I am not foolish enough to pretend that wishing for peace is the same thing as securing it.

I am secure in the knowledge that this wise observation will not endanger my “immortal soul”.

By Lord Help Us

February 6, 2007 03:16 PM | Link to this

RW-(the obfuscator),

I like any answer that is logical and/or supported by facts.

Which, you STILL have not provided:

Is the current gov’t in Iraq aligned with Moqtada al Sadr and significantly influenced by Iran?

‘Some of it is…’ followed by excuses for 4 years of disastrous results is not simply, ‘an answer I don’t like.’

It is simply not an answer…at all.

Your threshold for an ‘answer’ appears very low…

By Buy Danish

February 6, 2007 03:18 PM | Link to this

Paul,

Good point, although I bet most of them were Christians anyway - just because the majority of Americans are.

In that case, the guidance should not be to watch over the morality of the other soldiers as much as to provide comfort and aid.

By Paul

February 6, 2007 03:19 PM | Link to this

Mrs. Godzilla

So how does that view affect how to decide who you’ll vote for in ‘08?

By Scooter

February 6, 2007 03:19 PM | Link to this

RE, thanks, I have learned something today. Heavens, talk about voting for the lesser of two evils. I guess that’s all you get in defeat.

Unfortunately, the people of Germany do not have any excuses for voting in a “leader” who promised government could ease the burdens placed on Germany by WWI and the Treaty of Versailles. When will people learn that government is generally the problem and rarely the solution? Will we continue to believe the social and financial promises of politicians? If so, we will likely repeat the mistakes of our ancestors.

By Mrs. Godzilla

February 6, 2007 03:25 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish

Sorry you had to slide…. But still I wish you peace.

Paul,

Really, I don’t know yet. It’s going to be fun to watch though.

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 03:34 PM | Link to this

LHU,

I guess we’ll find out once the surge begins won’t we?

By Buy Danish

February 6, 2007 03:34 PM | Link to this

Mrs. G,

Slide?Say what?

Let me try this another way. I think it is hypocritical of you to want to keep partial-birth abortions legal, yet call those of us who support the War on Teror “killers”.

That being said, I would not have the gall to tell you that your immortal soul was in danger.

That is what makes you sanctimonious and unctuous.

By Paul

February 6, 2007 03:37 PM | Link to this

Mrs. G

My experience is rarely does one find a candidate whose promises or past aligns with one’s convictions. Then we find some who get to Washington and it seems as if much of their past performance goes out the window.

I guess we could vote for Biden. He could talk our enemies to death - that’s kinda nonviolent!

By Mrs. Godzilla

February 6, 2007 03:37 PM | Link to this

SLIDE….

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 03:42 PM | Link to this

Mrs. G,

Do you see any reason/s for the US military? If so what would the reason/s be?

By Blackadder

February 6, 2007 03:46 PM | Link to this

I love spicy Asian food, the hotter the better. Today I happily sweated my way through a nice curry and then turned to my fortune cookie which read “We need to attract people who create more light than heat”.

Kind of an odd little fortune, a drastic departure from the “you will meet a tall, dark stranger” variety, but I liked it. Since they’ve decided we have to slog through 2 years of yammering from potential presidential wannabes before we can slip in the booth and silence them, I think I’m going to keep this little slip of a fortune taped onto my monitor and use it as a benchmark for hyperbole. What is truthful, even if it’s painful, is light. The petty, the petulant, the mean and the self-serving, is the heat.

LIGHT: “The bottom line is we’re asking everybody to share in the responsibility of making health care work in this country. Employers, those who are in the medical insurance business, employees, the American people — everyone will have to contribute in order to make this work.” — John Edwards

HEAT: “I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.” — Joe Biden

LIGHT: “I think all 100 Senators ought to be on the line on this. What do you believe? What are you willing to support? What do you think? Why were you elected? If you wanted a safe job, go sell shoes.” – Sen. Chuck Hagel

HEAT: “The president has said this is going to be left to his successor. He has said that on more than one occasion. And I think it’s the height of irresponsibility, and I really resent it.” — Sen. Hillary Clinton

LIGHT: “And we can’t stand idly by and tell ourselves that it’s the president’s job to fix the mess he made. It’s our job to fix the mess, too, and if we don’t do so we are abdicating our responsibilities.” — Sen. Russ Feingold

I’ve got the cookie wisdom taped up, and ready to rock. Sure, it’s just a cookie, but that make about as much sense as starting a presidential campaign two years early. I’d much rather see those congress critters doing their jobs, diligently, for a year, and then hitting the campaign trail but that’s futile. So, I’m sticking with the cookie. I may have to listen, but if it doesn’t pass the cookie muster, I’m calling it out for the heat it is.

By Paul

February 6, 2007 03:48 PM | Link to this

Gosh, RW, I thought you’d ask about a police force. Same philosophical difficulties -

By Lord Help Us

February 6, 2007 03:55 PM | Link to this

No, RW-(the obfuscator), No, No, No, No…and, one more…NO!

The surge will not affect the FACT that the current Iraqi gov’t is aligned with al Sadr and significantly influenced by Iran.

In fact, if successful, the surge will help solidify the current gov’t!!!!

You are a misguided soul…

By RE

February 6, 2007 03:59 PM | Link to this

Scooter,

There needs to be a balance of government to make a country run effectively. Government is a stabilizing force, however if it grows to large it can be a stifling force as well. The hard part is finding the balance.

Absolutes are rarely the best option. Somalia for example has no government to speak of, not a good place to be. Some european countries have very large governments with complex and intrusive laws, but remain stable if not at the forefront economically. Then some governments with dictitorial power can have either stunted growth (myanmar) or explosive growth (china)

I think there needs enough government to insure security, though an army and police, Justice through a court system, and economic stability through a central bank to insure deposits and loans. This would be the most minimal government, I think most folks would also like some protections for consumers through agencies like the FDA and USDA. Also I am sure you would like to have roads to drive on, buildings that are properly constructed, Power and energy usage that is standardized and consistant…. etc etc.

Government is not the root of all evils.

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 04:03 PM | Link to this

Paul,

I think the military is more relevant to Mrs’ G’s argument. (Mrs. G, that is an example of how your name can show up in a post not directed to you and yet the person still isn’t talking “behind your post” as you put it. The same as when Buy Danish used your name in a post to someone else wasn’t going around you either)

By Buy Danish

February 6, 2007 04:04 PM | Link to this

LHU,

I heard a New York Times reporter on the radio this morning (didn’t catch his name - was in my car) who had been stationed in Iraq for years before the war.

He spoke of the palpable terror that was there when Hussein was in power. He said that he and other journalists did not properly comprehend how dysfunctional Iraq’s society was, and thus could not predict the violence.

He said that if anything, it was America’s instincts to do good that has hurt us - by wanting to install a democracy too quickly, et cetera.

I agree with that assessment, and I would imagine that Bush received some counsel not to proceed with haste from some sides.

However if we had moved slowly toward Democracy, people like you would have been screaming from the roof tops about the American “occupation”.

What I find unbearable and inexcusable about your point of view is the assumption of evil intentions on our country’s part, and on the part of the administration.

You and others have taken a deplorable stance in this regard, and any reasonable discourse about the merits of the war are lost when you begin by wanting us to lose.

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 04:07 PM | Link to this

LHU,

I respectfully disagree. When the surge is successful there will be no al Sadr.

I also think you are cherry picking your facts and ascribing what parts you cherry pick to the whole of the government.

By @@

February 6, 2007 04:08 PM | Link to this

Oh boy! John Edwards is going to support tort reform. No more frivilous medical malpractice.

Lightening the load in the wallets of all his lawyer buddies.

By You Know It's True!

February 6, 2007 04:11 PM | Link to this

We did it to them, not the other way around. Anything but the truth is a lie.

By Goldie

February 6, 2007 04:16 PM | Link to this

I agree with Mrs. G that war is not the answer to every problem. War is necessary in those cases where our country (or at times an ally of America) is under attack by invading war-mongerers. Afghanistan is considered guilty of this war crime due to its support and harboring of Osama bin Laden, but NOT IRAQ…

You rightwing loonies posting here have yet to explain why we’ve wasted American LIVES and BILLIONS OF DOLLARS while policing a sectarion war in Iraq, which WE in fact caused by invading and occupying that country! What has IRAQ got to do with “defeating the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11”, and if you can’t answer that, then you’re guilty of being a “doormat” in the war on terror, Danish-Donut!

You loonies may hate “liberals” as you keep posting, but at least we know where the war on terror is supposed to be taking place, and it’s not in IRAQ!

By Buy Danish

February 6, 2007 04:18 PM | Link to this

{{{You are a misguided soul…}}}

LHU,

You and Mrs. Godzilla really have it going on. There is so much presumptious talk about other people’s souls going on today, I’m wondering if I haven’t wandered into some Left wing religious blog by mistake.

The Atheists might object to turning this blog into a pulpit, but the concept of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” might come into play here, so it just might work out for you all.

I won’t be joining the congregation.

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 04:19 PM | Link to this

Blackadder,

I would submit to you that the person trying to raise a family as a shoe salesman has it a heckuva lot tougher than Chuck Hagel and is most certainly not in a “safe” job. Whether he meant safe as easy or if he meant it as job you wouldn’t stand to lose, he’d be wrong in either.

By rushncap

February 6, 2007 04:21 PM | Link to this

RW — are you suggesting that we’re going to kill al Sadr? And are you suggest this will ~solve~ some problems?

By N-GA

February 6, 2007 04:26 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

When Hussein was in power, Iraq was a terrifying place to be? Now then, how many countries in the world at the time had similar conditions? Should we invade them all? How many regimes that had brutal governments has the US supported? How many of those had citizens dying every day? How many did we invade?

How many neighborhoods in L.A., New York, Los Angeles, East St. Louis, Chicago, Detroit, Atlanta, Washington D.C., Miami, and Houston are dangerous to walk through much less live in every day?

Shouldn’t we try to make the USA safe (and Democratic) first, then allow others to choose to do the same (or not)?

By You Know It's True!

February 6, 2007 04:28 PM | Link to this

Goldie, Here’s a trillion reasons why. You see, all that missing money went somewhere, into somebody’s pocket. And if that somebody is your friend, or the friend who stashes your cash, then you can see why war can be such a good idea!

A study by the Defense Department’s inspector general found that the Pentagon couldn’t properly account for more than a trillion dollars in monies spent. A GAO report found Defense inventory systems so lax that the U.S. Army lost track of 56 airplanes, 32 tanks, and 36 Javelin missile command launch-units. And before the Iraq war, when military leaders were scrambling to find enough chemical and biological warfare suits to protect U.S. troops, the department was caught selling these suits as surplus on the Internet “for pennies on the dollar,” a GAO official said. Given these glaring gaps in the management of a Pentagon budget that is approaching $400 billion, the coming debate is shaping up as a bid to gain the high ground in the battle against waste, fraud and abuse.

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 04:29 PM | Link to this

rushncap,

What military credentials do you have that make you more qualified than General Petraeus?

Once you get that one out of the way we can move on to your reading comprehension problem.

By Shawny

February 6, 2007 04:37 PM | Link to this

Bingo!!!!!

Invade LA, NY, SF, NO, etc.

There’s an epiphany!

By rushncap

February 6, 2007 04:39 PM | Link to this

Damn you’re an idiot, RW. Show me where I claimed to have those supposed credentials.

By You Know It's True!

February 6, 2007 04:40 PM | Link to this

When did we get the news that Osama Bin Laden was NOT behind the 9/11 attacks on US soil? Was it right before our forces were told to stand down at Tora Bora so he could escape, or right after they pulled down the statue of Saddam, in “Mission Accomplished” Land?

By Tutors 'R' Us

February 6, 2007 04:42 PM | Link to this

Please contact RW or Buy Danish for your “reading comprehension problems.” They are all over the blogs of America, every day, helping people face this problem. They care, and their fees are reasonable.

By rushncap

February 6, 2007 04:44 PM | Link to this

Speaking of funny conservatives: apparently all it takes is 3 weeks of “intensive counseling” to get the gay out. Mr. Ted “I massage gay hookers and buy meth for fun not use” Haggard is now completely cured of his gays. $10 says he will now find work at Exodus International telling poor gay Christians that it’s possible to change their biology if they pray enough. Well played indeed…

By Lord Help Us

February 6, 2007 04:44 PM | Link to this

Mrs. G,

According to BuyPauler…

You and Mrs. Godzilla really have it going on

Hope Mr. G has a sense of humor…

BTW: Mrs. LHU is ‘the queen of my double wide trailer’ (with apologies to Sammy Kershaw).

By Scooter

February 6, 2007 04:49 PM | Link to this

RE, agreed. You can certainly read the anarchist leanings I held when I was young dumb and full of… I have grown to realize government is necessary to regulate societies of people. I like the government just like the Constitution intended it, most government coming from the local level. All men (people) created equal and provided equal protection under the law, even tax law. It is easier to keep our eyes on dirty politicians in our community, ya know?

In my ideal country every individual strives for personal achievement in exchange for monetary wealth. If you are down on your luck the government will give you a hand up, but: you loose the right to vote for (fill in number) years. However, we continue to solidify power in DC where we have very little control over it. We as a society continue to hand over more personal responsibility (aka power) to the government and then act surprised when that power corrupts the politicians we imagine are leaders. These are all reasons why I support the FairTax, it rids those below the poverty line of any payroll taxes (FICA, SS) it takes away politicians ability to manipulate the tax code to benefit one group over another and ends corporations’ ability to lobby for those tax favors. It would be totally transparent to the citizenry and limit the favoritism displayed by politicians everyday in Washington, whether that favoritism be for corporations, lawyers, unions, etc… Not to mention it would greatly expand the tax base and bring back those companies who have headquartered of shore to avoid our overly complex and burdensome tax system. Many argue for a flat tax, but do we really think politicians would leave that alone for more than one election cycle, shuuuuh?

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 04:49 PM | Link to this

rushncap,

9:17 today. The surge plan is General Petraeus’ plan and you said it WILL FAIL. That is rushncap claiming to have a better handle on what will and won’t work, so I simply asked what credentials you have that make you more qualified than General Petraeus.

Now quit acting like a spoiled two year old and answer the question.

By Buy Danish

February 6, 2007 04:50 PM | Link to this

N-GA,

Saddam was a terrorist in a terrorist state. That has nothing to do with what the reporter I cited spoke about. He was talking about the effect of that terror on the populace. If you weren’t such an angry old goat you might have been able to figure that out.

I have no interest in carrying on a conversation with anyone who begins and ends with ludicrous and false premises.

Try someone else.

By LuckoDull

February 6, 2007 04:50 PM | Link to this

Remember, she said it, not me:

By Goldie February 6, 2007 04:16 PM You loonies may hate “liberals” as you keep posting, but at least we know where the war on terror is supposed to be taking place, and it’s not in IRAQ!

Goldilocks: Let me guess, you think the war on terror should be fought in New York, right?

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.

By Buy Danish

February 6, 2007 04:52 PM | Link to this

LHU,

I thought you’d like that. Maybe you all could have a nice “peaceful” foursome or just smoke a “peace” pipe together, while you take turns saying “Bush sucks!” of course.

By rushncap

February 6, 2007 04:55 PM | Link to this

No, RW, let me explain to you how this blog thing works.

On a “blog” people voice their opinions. These opinions may be right, wrong, or somewhere in-between. But they are opinions of those who post them. With me so far?

So, at 9:17 today I posted an opinion that Bush’s “surge plan” (it’s not Petraeus’, it’s the Shrub’s, get off it) will fail. I do not claim credentials when I make that statement, nor do I claim to actually be prescient. It is an opinion. It’s how blogs work.

Let me know which part is not clear, I’ll try to slow it down for you.

By Buy Danish

February 6, 2007 04:58 PM | Link to this

RW,

It’s too bad that rushncap isn’t as pessimistic about Global Warming models. I would love to hear him say they WILL FAIL.

By Mrs. Godzilla

February 6, 2007 05:01 PM | Link to this

LHU

Of course Mr. G has a sense of humor…. poor man has to live with me.

It’s all about the gravy.

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 05:08 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

WILL FAIL doesn’t really sound like just an uninformed opinion either.

rushncap,

How many times have you asked me for what degrees I hold when I give my opinion on a topic? Let me explain how a blog about real world events works. This isn’t one of the blogs where you tell the girls why you “use” porn like that TrueU blog you post on.

When we are discussing an actual event or eventuality and you make a definitive statement that something HAS happened or WILL happen be prepared to back it up.

By Paul

February 6, 2007 05:13 PM | Link to this

Scooter

I’ve read a bit about flat tax - and your observation it would take away politicians’ ability to manipulate one group over another is probably the salient reason it’ll never happen.

Scott Burns - financial columnist - recently did a column in which he stated we already have a flat tax, as (get this, you folks here who are into income redistribution) most everyone already pays nearly 40 percent in taxes.

Link:http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/bus/scottburns/columns/2007/stories/DN-burns_28bus.ART.State.Edition1.1cbab70.html

By RE

February 6, 2007 05:13 PM | Link to this

Ahh, the fair tax. I know it is your favorite, I still think a flat tax is best. Set a cap at 20 or 25% as a tax rate, no breakdown into fico taxes. No deductions for home. Maybe a personal exemption at the povertyline, the first 17k or so goes untaxed. No differentitation for the types of income, it would not matter if it was w-2 or 1099 or dividend income or profit from sale or assets. All income is the same.

It would set the clock back a little, but yeah I am sure that politicians would tweak it. Same goes for the fair tax though. How about a tax incentive for US made goods, maybe a 25% sales tax instead of 28%. Or medicine. Or food. Or services such as legal… there will always be a way to bribe a politician for a tax break, it would just look a little different.

Your idea on losing the right to vote if you accept govt. aid I agree with on principle, but in practice I think that if politicians knew they could get rid of voters by subsidizing them would lead to greater government programs. It would be a great way to keep people in power indefinately.

By rushncap

February 6, 2007 05:13 PM | Link to this

Since no one has a degree in fortunetelling, my qualifications for predictions on the future are as good as anyone’s. I can trot out dozens of generals that agree with my opinion. So, again, it’s either an opinion or I can provide the assessments of many many generals that agree with me. Which is it?

P.S. I find it endearing that both you and Muffin are trying to stalk me. Shows what a low-life (or is it no-life) little waste of bacterial cultures you both are. Keep it up.

By Condescenders 'R' Us

February 6, 2007 05:15 PM | Link to this

Please contact RW and Buy Danish when you need someone to condescend to you, talk down, call you silly, stupid, pathetic, or dense, or explain to you, with love and thoughtful care, why stating your opinion makes you a idiot, and why they, though they have nothing else to do all day but opine and consdescend, are almost too brilliant for words. “Almost” because they do in fact have words for how brilliant they are. Their rates are affordable, and they care.

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 05:19 PM | Link to this

rushncap,

If responding to you makes you think I’m stalking you quit asking me questions.

Wouldn’t “I think it will fail” be a better way of saying it?

By Condescenders 'R' Us

February 6, 2007 05:21 PM | Link to this

P.S.: RW charges more, but Buy Danish uses more tongue.

By Paul

February 6, 2007 05:23 PM | Link to this

RE

Nice observations earlier on gov’t. Amazing how many people view gov’t as some separate entity that prints money as it needs it and the trick in life is to find some way to tap into it. No concept it’s comprised of our fellow citizens who are supposed to work on our behalf.

Add to that the slant of media (headline today to the effect rescinding the tax cuts would cost the gov’t n dollars) - would “cost” them? That’s great -

But too many decry size of gov’t - then scream when FDA doesn’t have enough meat inspectors. As is true with most programs, they become institutionalized and cost billions.

I still think a progressive tax has merit - graduated rates for those with more disposable income - but with most everything, politicians (particularly Democrats, here) use it as an “us against them life isn’t fair let us give you more” issue. With capped rates, still encouraging and rewarding initiative, hard work and dumb good luck it would be doable. But that’s whistlin’ in the wind, isn’t it?

By rushncap

February 6, 2007 05:26 PM | Link to this

No, RW, scouring the internet for any other blogs where I might have posted is stalking me. Do you want me to draw you a picture, will that be easier?

Prefacing every single sentence with “I think” (since all blogs are opinion) is redundant. I thought you’ve spent enough of your life on here to understand the fact that blogs operate on an opinion basis. Not only that, but Gen. Petraeus would also have to preface everything he says with “I think”, unless you think his agreement with Bush gives him clairvoyancy.

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 05:28 PM | Link to this

As unbelievable as it might seem, rushcap is even wrong about nobody having fortune telling degrees

rushncap,

Have you ever been right about anything? It’s quite an impressive streak you’ve got going.

By RE

February 6, 2007 05:28 PM | Link to this

AHAH!!

RW finds the information to disprove global warming….. an online petition.

Excellent research sir, well done!

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 05:34 PM | Link to this

RE,

Look at the signatures on that petition. It’s over 15,000 degreed scientists and climatologists and they don’t say there isn’t global warming, they say MAN MADE global warming.

You can see the signatories by clicking on them alphabetically or sort it by state.

By rushncap

February 6, 2007 05:35 PM | Link to this

I think I have claimed on numerous occasions that you’re a moron, RW. At the very least I’m right about that.

I notice you’ve slunk off in shame away from you stalking me topic. Smooth move.

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 05:43 PM | Link to this

rushncap,

I stand by everything I’ve said to you today and unlike you I can back it up.

Now since you admit that you’ve never been right about anything except calling me a moron, what possible basis do you have for believing you’re right about that?

By Lord Help Us

February 6, 2007 05:49 PM | Link to this

I’m always right and I agree with rushncap, RW is a moron.

Case closed…

By RE

February 6, 2007 05:51 PM | Link to this

Paul,

I think there are a lot of unintended consequences with the tax code. There are geniunely good ideas out there that get special tax breaks. But then there are a lot of pork that gets the tax breaks as well. I would go with the flat tax, but not give loopholes to get out of it. I would like the entire personal tax code to fit on one sheet of paper, that would make it at least understandable. I do not like the progressive tax, or a regressive tax like fico.

By Lord Help Us

February 6, 2007 05:55 PM | Link to this

Rushncap, can we agree that Lucko-(whiny) is a moron too?

I vote yes!

By rushncap

February 6, 2007 06:04 PM | Link to this

Where did I “admit that never been right about anything”? Since you seem to be under the impression that you can back everything up, you’ll have no problem backing this up, will ya Stalker?

By Buy Danish

February 6, 2007 06:08 PM | Link to this

LHU,

Wow - that’s some scientific “reality based” method of proof you’re using.

By rushncap

February 6, 2007 06:10 PM | Link to this

LHU — I’ve ignored li’l andy for the past few months. He’s so demented he’s actually past the stage of being interesting. It’s the difference between watching someone getting hit in the face with a pie or with a baseball bat. The first is kinda funny, the second is just cringinly painful and sad.

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 06:10 PM | Link to this

POINT OF ORDER ON THE BLOG:

If someone asks you to provide information, but calls you a stalker if you do, what is the proper response?

rushncap,

Your 5:35 leaves open the possibility that you admit not being right about anything else. Note the words “at the very least.” Your words not mine. Did you study anything but porn and test tube washing at State U?

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 06:15 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

The LHU method is one of the strange dichotomies of liberalism. Everyone in their bubble agrees with them so they claim to be right about whatever they say and claim anyone that disagrees lives in a bubble.

By rushncap

February 6, 2007 06:16 PM | Link to this

Muffin, Stalker, etc: give it up. You lost. The scientific establishment now accepts the reality of global warming. Will you find someone here and there who disagrees? Sure. But the fact remains: based on the best available evidence the best possible conclusion is that global warming is occurring and it’s due in part to human activity. Thus the vast majority (not everyone, just the vast majority) of the scientists who deal with this matter are in agreement as to this basic idea. Do you people have stock in Exxon Mobil or something?

By rushncap

February 6, 2007 06:19 PM | Link to this

Nice backtrack, Stalker. I guess admitting “sorry, rushncap, I was wrong” is far too big for you, but, at least, you don’t keep pushing the lie until (you hope) someone will start to believe it. This is a welcome departure from your usual MO.

P.S. I don’t believe I ever asked you to search other blogs for my posts, Stalker. No, you did this one all by your desperate self.

By Buy Danish

February 6, 2007 06:22 PM | Link to this

rushncap,

You’re walking on very thin ice calling someone else “demented”.

Utilizing your best scientific research method, Please point to ONE “demented” post from Andy.

I’ll even help you with your research tools - think of one post that you think illustrates your theory that he is “demented” and then use Google to find it.

By danny

February 6, 2007 06:31 PM | Link to this

hey mike how about a cartoon from the iranian point of view. after all the british empire arranged the political situation in iran before wwII. The CIA had one of it greatest coup d’tats when we arranged to install the shah.( on behalf of british and american oil interests) Now we are unhappy with the gov in iran and are plotting to make a new change of gov’t. Perhaps they don’t want us to meddle. Perhaps they are afraid we are going to install a new shah, so they are annoying us to defend themselves from us.

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 06:34 PM | Link to this

rushncap,

I searched rushncap+porn to find the thread where you posted the porn link here. Unfortunately you spend a lot of time discussing your porn habits so the search was wider than I would have imagined.

The fact that you are too stupid to use a different name when you go trolling around women’s religious sites regaling then with tales of how you “use” porn is not stalking. It’s the freaking internet science boy. I use google to find comments all the time around here.

Now if you don’t want to converse with me quit butting into my conversations. I haven’t addressed you first on a thread in months.

By Scooter

February 6, 2007 06:34 PM | Link to this

Paul, certainly you are not saying political pressure from educated voters cannot force politicians to relinquish power back to the electorate. I know politicians are disheartening but I still believe the electorate can force change if enough push a single idea and promote it amongst their fellow citizens.

RE, I do not have the faith that politicians will not manipulate a flat tax, as you admit. Didn’t this nation essentially get a flat tax in ‘86 and how is that working? The FairTax requires the 16th Amendment be nullified and special sales tax rates would be much more transparent to the public than some tax break for XYZ Corp. tucked in at the end of bill before congress.

We will have to agree to disagree on the best tax policy for this country.

And Paul, just because you don’t think it will ever happen is no excuse not to promote it if you find it to be economically viable. That is the same reason my father gives for not supporting it. I know my father has given up on politicians but with his simplistic dismissal of the FairTax it seems he has given up on the country as a whole. Shame on him… I will continue to fight for liberty.

By Buy Danish

February 6, 2007 06:37 PM | Link to this

{{{But the fact remains: based on the best available evidence the best POSSIBLE conclusion is that global warming is occurring and it’s due IN PART to human activity. Thus the vast majority (not everyone, just the vast majority) of the scientists who deal with this matter are in agreement as to this BASIC IDEA.)))

(emphasis mine thanks to the idiotic AJC’s posting rules).

rushncap,

How many billions of dollars do you want to spend on your kinda sorta not really sure but maybe “idea”?

How many people would you like to impoverish in the process while you wreck our economy for no reason except to make you and people like like Mrs. Godzilla feel better as claim the moral high ground for no reason that withstands the slightest scrutiny?

And what happens if the Earth is actually getting colder and you just make it worse?

By rushncap

February 6, 2007 06:40 PM | Link to this

Muffin — 90% of li’l andy’s posts are demented. That’s all, I’m not spending any more time on him.

RW — so I was right. Again. You do go trolling around the internet looking for my posts. Congratulations. That’s your life. Enjoy. And thank FDR for Social Security.

By rushncap

February 6, 2007 06:45 PM | Link to this

Muffin — that’s not how science works. Sorry. Read a book.

I’d rather risk spending a few billion dollars than risking having a few million people dying. Unlike you.

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 06:49 PM | Link to this

Dusty,

If you are reading this get in touch with me by email or an alternate blog of mine when you get a chance. One of the idiots around here is anonymously posting trash on a Reagan tribute at my main blog and between that and the dozens of spambot comments, I’ve shut off commenting except to users with a google or blogger account.

By Midori

February 6, 2007 06:55 PM | Link to this

[better late than never, I guess](http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/16622706.htm}

Former House Majority Leader Dick Armey unbuttons his mind, dumps on DeLay, says Bush is a failure By Dave Montgomery McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON _ When he was the GOP leader in a Republican-controlled House of Representatives, Dick Armey was never known to be a shrinking violet. But now that he’s out of politics, Armey is indisputably even more plainspoken as the leader of a conservative grassroots network known informally as “Armey’s army.”

snip//

Q. Did Tom DeLay become a liability to the party?

A. Oh yeah. I’m amazed at the number of people who tell me this. I have my own understandings and feelings about Tom DeLay… . I don’t believe he’s a good person and I don’t believe he is a person who should have been in public office.

Q. Why don’t you like him?

A. I don’t like sneaky, conniving people. I don’t like people who get behind closed doors and contrive against other people. (He) has had — what’s the word I want? — an aggressive tendency to create the opportunity to do back-door, behind-the-door, closed-door, dark-room contrivances against people. I just consider that unacceptable.

snip//

Q. Is George W. Bush a failed president?

A. I’ve said over the years that every president either ends up a pleasant surprise or a bitter disappointment. And we haven’t had a pleasant surprise since Ronald Reagan. I don’t see how anybody can look at the Bush presidency and say this was a success in public policy terms.

By Buy Danish

February 6, 2007 06:57 PM | Link to this

{{{By rushncap

February 6, 2007 06:40 PM | Link to this

Muffin — 90% of li’l andy’s posts are demented. That’s all, I’m not spending any more time on him.}}}

rushncap,

You are a fraud.

btw, if using Google to find one of your prior posts constitutes “stalking” what word do you use to describe a male atheist who hangs out at women’s religious forums?

By Huge

February 6, 2007 07:00 PM | Link to this

Hey RW,

A Reagan tribute?

Wow, count me in!

I’d love to discuss and recognize the man who never met a dictator he couldn’t support. A man who thought apartheid was alright. And a man who started that ultra-successful war on drugs.

Yep, Ronnie was my kinda guy.

By Midori

February 6, 2007 07:01 PM | Link to this

dag nabbit!!

correct link here

By Buy Danish

February 6, 2007 07:02 PM | Link to this

{{{I’d rather risk spending a few billion dollars than risking having a few million people dying. Unlike you.}}}

rushcap,

I missed this sanctimonious trash^^^.

Do you have any idea how many billions we’re talking about to do nothing but wreck our economy and thus the worlds’ and potentially impoverish millions?

You have heard of people dying of starvation and disease, haven’t you? It kinda goes along with poverty.

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 07:08 PM | Link to this

rushncap,

FDR should be posthumously derided for putting this country on the road to ruination domestically with things like the ponzi scheme known as Social Security, but even he was a Democrat that knew you had to stand up and fight your enemies until they were defeated no matter the sacrifice.

By rushncap

February 6, 2007 07:10 PM | Link to this

Muffin, darling, trying to gather as much info on me as you possibly can without my consent IS stalking. Look it up. And between you and RW you’re doing very well. Glad to give meaning to your pathetic lives.

Of course, as usual, you’re lying. I don’t “hang out” there, and you know it because not even you are stupid enough not to read time stamps. But, again, for you lying is like breathing.

And yes, I’ve heard of people dying of starvation. Also, of environmental disasters. I’m not sure how many hungry people in the 3rd world Exxon is currently feeding. And no one is suggesting “wrecking the economy”. Intelligent people are suggesting that we accept reality and then figure out how to deal with it. Your solution: “Ignore reality because it might wreck the economy if we don’t.”

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 07:15 PM | Link to this

GFY Huge! And that could possibly mean Good For You.

Somehow I think you are still parading around in your Che’ collection though.

You guys never will forgive Reagan for not allowing Soviet Communism to take over the world. I guess it’s what causes your BDS. If you couldn’t have worldwide communism you feel like you should at least be part of a worldwide caliphate, as long as Bush gets blamed for it and if he stops it you’ll just lie about him like you do about Reagan for the rest of your whiny worthless life.

So now do you think there’s still a chance of GFY standing for Good For You?

By Scooter

February 6, 2007 07:16 PM | Link to this

Oh yeah RE, I don’t follow your argument against my proposal for limiting the vote of those who temporarily depend on government. You say politicians could use that to remove people from the voter rolls and secure and endless tenure. No politician can force me to not better myself. However, politicians can institute policies that reward bad behaviors, while providing no consequences for those same bad behaviors. And hence the slippery slope of government dependence and the handover of power to the political class.

During the early 90’s (’94 I believe) I was working a minimum of 70 hours a week for a non union freight company (teamsters were striking) and was enrolled in at least 9 quarter hours at a local college. I don’t think the politicians would have prohibited me from doing that, nor do I see how they could’ve. Politicians could’ve offered me a handout that would’ve reduced my incentive to attend school, but I would’ve had the personal liberty to accept or decline their offer. Now, if you are saying people will often take the easiest course and politicians could use their laziness against them I will have to agree with you. But, it would’ve been the consequence of their liberty to be removed from the voter rolls.

If I get government grants to research global warming, is it in my best interest to provide evidece countering the human causes of it? If I am a politician who wants more money to pursue goals should I scare the dumb masses end to allowing me to confiscate the profits of certain segments of the economy? Wow, if I was a politician who wanted to confiscate private sector profits, to further the goals of government, would that make me a fascist?

I still love how there are sooooooo many variables contributing to the warming of the atmosphere but some can claim to know for a fact man is causing it, even though the surface of Mars has been warming as well.

The honest source says: says mars data is incorrect because it hasn’t been taken long enough

NASA’s Mars Global Surveyor, which this month began its ninth year in orbit around Mars.

The “flat earthers” say global temperatures haven’t been recorded long enough, but they are stupid “flat earthers”. Now, why would somebody want to squa

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 07:26 PM | Link to this

rushncap,

I bet you could search every dictionary on the planet and you would never find that definition of stalking and you damn sure won’t find it in a law dictionary. I swear I don’t see how you ever got out of third grade. They must have taken social promotion to a whole new level in your school.

Here’s a head start for you dumbass

By bon scott

February 6, 2007 07:28 PM | Link to this

By Luckodull February 6, 2007 04:50 PM | Link to this Remember, she said it, not me:](http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/shared-blogs/ajc/luckovich/entries/2007/02/06/dominoes_anyone.html#comment-984912)

By Goldie February 6, 2007 04:16 PM You loonies may hate “liberals” as you keep posting, but at least we know where the war on terror is supposed to be taking place, and it’s not in IRAQ!

Goldilocks: Let me guess, you think the war on terror should be fought in New York, right?

Andy, youre dumb as a box of rocks. The copious group of “terrorists”, divided by family, clan and religion (among other things) will be far too busy disemboweling eachother halfway around the worls than worrying about us. You are SUCH a doofus.

PS - do your ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZs mean you’re taking too much of your meds, or not enough?

By rushncap

February 6, 2007 07:41 PM | Link to this

Don’t poop your diaper, Stalker. I’m not going to call the cops on you. You may continue searching for anything and everything I’ve ever written. Again, who am I to deprive your life of meaning? You’re not dangerous, just pathetic.

Scoot — so you’re basically accusing the scientific establishments in just about every country on this globe of perpetrating a massive, overarching coverup and scientific fraud. Is that about the size of it?

By LuckoDull

February 6, 2007 07:53 PM | Link to this

By oddball gay finch February 6, 2007 07:28 PM By Luckodull February 6, 2007 04:50 PM | Link to this Remember, she said it, not me:youre dumb as a box of rocks. The copious group of “terrorists”, divided by family, clan and religion (among other things) will be far too busy disemboweling eachother halfway around the worls than worrying about us. PS - do your ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZs mean you’re taking too much of your meds, or not enough?](http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/shared-blogs/ajc/luckovich/entries/2007/02/06/dominoes_anyone.html#comment-985293)

Damn.

finchie: Speaking of copious, how much have you ingested today?

You may want to get some ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ’s.

By RW-(the original)

February 6, 2007 07:57 PM | Link to this

Sure pervert, you troll around women’s religious sites to talk about your porn fetish and I’m the pathetic one.

Ever hear of the psychological term projection?

By the way, moron, every day you jump into the middle of a conversation of mine and I respond to you. If you weren’t obsessed with me I wouldn’t have any reason to ever talk to you or go back to search for something you said when you lie about having said it later. Are you starting to sense a pattern here??

finch,

Speaking of obsessions, are you ever going to get over your obsession with Andy? At least your post is the first thing you’ve written in two months where you look partially sober. Let’s hope you’re making progress.

By Buy Danish

February 6, 2007 09:04 PM | Link to this

rushncap,

Regarding your juvenile 7:41 with the silly poopy talk -

You’d look pretty darn foolish calling the cops to report that someone did a Google search of “rushncap” without your permission.

Heck, I almost wish you’d do it. The cops might even fine you for filing a false report. (There goes that ski money).

By Scooter is a Crook

February 7, 2007 08:17 AM | Link to this

I see the cry babies from the wooten blog have come here to cause trouble. Didn’t you sissies get your butts kicked enough by Silver and his pals? RW and Buy Danish are the same person, that was discovered on the wooten blog.

By Buy Danish

February 7, 2007 08:34 AM | Link to this

SIAC,

You go right ahead and cheer for Silver’s team.

Go Dems!

btw, I hope your “evidence” that RW and I are “the same person” is stronger than the evidence that humans are responsible for “global warming”.

Commenting is open from 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. M-F

Post a comment



Remember me?

You may use the following formatting:
Bold: **this text will be bolded** = this text will be bolded
Italic: *this text will be italic* = this text will be italic
Link: [text to be linked](http://www.ajc.com) = text to be linked



There will be a delay of up to 5 minutes before your comment appears.


*HTML not allowed in comments. Your e-mail address is required.

 

Take a break

Do Good Locally » Find nonprofit causes near you

Find more causes » List your nonprofit

Kudzu Services » Find the right people for the job