Mike Luckovich

By LuckoDull

April 27, 2007 8:02 AM | Link to this

The AJC’s immature, psychotic, obsessed George Bush stalker harps on the president about “growing up.”

A lib that wants to run screaming fron a bunch of Islamic Chos, leaving 25 million innocent people to the tender mercies of suicide bombers.

How ironic.

A liberal projecting his own faults on an authority figure.

Classic denial.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ®.

Peggy Noonan, caring about the important things:

We are not giving the children of our country a stable platform. We are instead giving them a soul-shaking sense that life is unsafe, incoherent, full of random dread. And we are doing this, I think, for three reasons. One is politics—our political views, our cultural views, so need to be expressed and are, God knows, so much more important than the peace of a child. Another is money—there’s money in the sickness that is sold to us. Everyone who works at a TV network knew ratings would go up when the Cho tapes broke.

Imagine the thoughts of a child when they first realize what partial birth abortion really is.

We think of ourselves and only ourselves in this self centered, uncaring society and our children are the ones paying the price for that.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ®.

{{{OUR OPINIONS: GM invites next gas-guzzling era Rather than waste energy fighting higher fuel efficiency standards, GM’s executives should spend the time figuring how to meet them.- David McNaughton, for the Urinal editorial board.}}}

Advice on how to run a successful business from a “news” paper with a plummeting circulation that consistently cannot deliver it’s product on time.

Gee, thanks.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ®.

By LuckoDull

April 27, 2007 8:02 AM | Link to this

See what I mean:

Noting his reputation as a verbose “gaffe machine,” Williams asked Biden: “Can you reassure voters in this country that you would have the discipline you would need on the world stage, Senator?” Displaying a quick wit worthy of Calvin Coolidge, Biden simply responded, “Yes.” He then remained silent as laughter grew in the audience.

We already knew Biden was a tax and spend dullard, but there’s nothing like a friendly reminder to discredit all of the liberal propaganda about him.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ®.

{{{Take taxes, for example. Hillary says the wealthy once again “aren’t paying their fair share.”}}}

I can see what she means:

{{{Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) counts off shore hedge fund executives as donors and fundraisers for her presidential campaign. Edwards became a consultant for Fortress Investment Group, a New York-based firm known mainly for its off shore hedge funds. They showed that Edwards raised $167,460 in donations from Fortress employees for his 2008 presidential campaign, his largest source of support from a single company.- By John Solomon and Alec MacGillis, Washington Post Staff Writers, Monday, April 23, 2007}}}

Interesting, bitc-h about the rich not paying enough taxes, even though the top 1% pay 40% of all income tax, and then turn right around and shelter your millions from the tax man.

Hahahahahahahahahaha.

And the libs call Bush a “liar.”

WTF?

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ®.

By George

April 27, 2007 8:03 AM | Link to this

No truer words have been said. It will take years to correct the damage done by that little man in the White House.

By Mrs. Godzilla

April 27, 2007 8:05 AM | Link to this

Here’s a realistic date for your time line Mr. President: November 4th, 2008.

By Not Dull

April 27, 2007 8:06 AM | Link to this

Bush’s Non-Argument

President Bush and Vice President Cheney cannot make the case that their Iraq policies have succeeded, so they are doing one thing they do very well: taking a serious argument over the future of American foreign policy and turning it into a petty partisan squabble.

By Goldie

April 27, 2007 8:21 AM | Link to this

Love the ‘toon, ML! And this can be added about 20 years out:

“Bush realizes he was just a comma in American presidential history.”

By Eric

April 27, 2007 8:22 AM | Link to this

Impeach Bush, Cheney, Gonzalez, etc, etc, etc…

By Goldie

April 27, 2007 8:22 AM | Link to this

And maybe this can be added about 30 years out:

“Bush, on his deathbed, is no longer arrogant.”

By JP

April 27, 2007 8:32 AM | Link to this

Luckodull, bush is only an “Authority figure” in his own mind and perhaps yours.

The only timeline that really matters anymore is 1-20-09.

By IN THE NEWS

April 27, 2007 8:33 AM | Link to this

ADD TO TIME LINE 10 YEARS OUT

PAROLE HEARING

By Paul

April 27, 2007 8:40 AM | Link to this

No comments (other than Luckodull’s) on the debate?

By Blackadder

April 27, 2007 8:41 AM | Link to this

It’s getting to be quite a chore scrolling past all of Spamdy’s numerous, brainless posts.

I like this quote from Alaska Senator Mike Gravel last night:

“the only thing worse than soldiers dying in vain are more soldiers dying in vain.”

By Jesus

April 27, 2007 8:43 AM | Link to this

IMPEACH BUSH NOW!!!

By Blackadder

April 27, 2007 8:46 AM | Link to this

John Edwards made a good effort at using the limited time to discuss each of the major policy proposals he has presented, despite the limitations of time in the debate. The most awkward moment was when he was asked who his moral leader was. That prompted several awkward seconds before he came up with a pretty good answer.

Hillary spent about half of the time in lecture mode. The other half of the time she was passionate about the topic she was addressing. This is the Hillary that will appeal to people and establish more of a connection with voters that she badly needs.

Barack Obama came across as a class act. I didn’t hear anything that could have been directed at the African American audience in South Carolina. Perhaps it is a part of his larger political strategy, but I think it could be a mistake. This was an opportunity to send a message to African American voters.

Overall, the debate was a good thing. Though I didn’t see any major defining moments.

By LuckoDull

April 27, 2007 8:47 AM | Link to this

{{{By JP April 27, 2007 8:32 AM Luckodull, bush is only an “Authority figure” in his own mind and perhaps yours.}}}

Bush is manned up against the same people that tore a hole in Manhattan and killed three thousand Americans, cut throat Chos that you pinko®s want to run and hide from.

You have no idea what an “authority” figure is, other then your neighborhood bull dyk-e kicking your little as-s, plus I’m pretty sure I didn’t ask for your lame opinion.

Coward.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ®.

By Goldie

April 27, 2007 8:49 AM | Link to this

Both Senators Obama and Clinton were very succinct and presidential in the debate last night. Even Hillary is now saying that a timeline is needed for withdrawing our troops from Iraq — that timeline being “if I’m elected president.” Any combination of the top 6 Dem contenders sharing a ticket in ‘08 will absolutely blow away any Repug contenders regarding the Iraq quagmire…

By Blackadder

April 27, 2007 8:50 AM | Link to this

Please explain to me why some of you still try and engage Spamdy in an intelligent debate?

It’s like opening a sewer and expecting ice cream.

Ignore the moron.

By @@

April 27, 2007 8:55 AM | Link to this

Oh come on ml. What would you know about growing up?

Bush has admitted to mistakes. You covered your ears.

Bush has listened to outside advice. The ISG and those who are battling Al Qaeda and the insurgents in Iraq. That’s our “home team” ml, but you don’t like it because they don’t want to hand the ball off to you and your liberals.

Bush changed the strategy with Petreaus and the surge. You don’t even want to hear the “game plan” from the bench, do ‘ya ml?

Let’s look at what Congress has offered the Iraqi government with THEIR strategy????

Meet the benchmarks and we’ll get out.

Don’t meet the benchmarks and we’ll get out.

Your anti-war group wants to take their ball and go home leaving the Iraqi government and its people to fall victim to the radical extremists. That’s what selfish liberals would call “a win”. It’s not what our military calls a win though.

You and your anti-war group think you’ll fare better with the “home crowd” advantage, but at what price?

Remember 9/11…it was the enemy that scored big time on “our court”. Were you there?

Naaaahhhhh. You were at the “concession” stand loading up on junk food.

By Mrs. Godzilla

April 27, 2007 8:58 AM | Link to this

Obviously Dull is not the only one who needs to be ignored.

By Blackadder

April 27, 2007 9:00 AM | Link to this

“Remember 9/11…it was the enemy that scored big time on “our court”. Were you there?” -@@

Now if only Bush would go after the country (Saudi Arabia) who’s citizens attacked us on 9/11 or the person (Bin Laden, also a Saudi) who orchestrated it.

By IN THE NEWS

April 27, 2007 9:01 AM | Link to this

Renzi could soon resign U.S. House seat

By Goldie

April 27, 2007 9:01 AM | Link to this

Yeah, the realistic Repugs know that to “win” in Iraq is going to require killing all the terrorists ad infinitum… like that’s ever going to happen. Dream on, losers!

By IN THE NEWS

April 27, 2007 9:03 AM | Link to this

“It’s not worth moving heaven and earth spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person.”

By Blackadder

April 27, 2007 9:04 AM | Link to this

…and now Saudi Arabia is funding the Sunnis whose insurgents are killing our troops.

By IN THE NEWS

April 27, 2007 9:07 AM | Link to this

This ad will start running this weekend in DC in response to Bush’s threatened veto.

By Blackadder

April 27, 2007 9:08 AM | Link to this

..and who are Bush’s bestest buddies? THE SAUDIS.

What hypocrites wingnuts are.

By Crazy Wingbat Alert

April 27, 2007 9:11 AM | Link to this

I just wanted to share this comment from a crazed wingbat on Wooten’s blog. It was just too good to keep to myself:

“Bin Laden did not attack us; the people that hijacked the planes attacked us. Their twisted ideology attacked us.”

By getalife

April 27, 2007 9:12 AM | Link to this

“Bush said (he is) sympathetic to Tillman family. President Bush hopes someone is held responsible for the U.S. military’s mishandling of information about the death of former football star Pat Tillman in Afghanistan, the White House said Wednesday.”

Your the President idiot. Make it happen.

Scum, lower than Dusty.

Geez.

By Buy Danish

April 27, 2007 9:14 AM | Link to this

{{{On another topic, though, I must mock your George Soros refernce (“Time for George Soros to sic Media Matters on Spike Lee and the L.A. Times!”) Do you people seriously believe this tin-foil-hat theory?}}}

JP,

I’m running out the door, but need to address this from last night.

George Soros is funding Media Matters. That is what is known as a “FACT”.

A bunch of loons who get Media Matters’ talking points, like Rosie O’Donnell, believe that Building 7 was brought down by explosives and Bush did it. That is what is known as a “THEORY”.

For the Moveon.org/ 9-11 Truther crowd to claim that connecting the dots between Soros and all the groups he has his hands in a “tin foil hat” theory is quite hilarious.

Cartoon comment:

I am waiting for the Democrat’s plan to fight Islamic terrorism should their plan to surrender to Al Qaeda succeed.

So far we’ve got:

ONE: Surrender

TWO: Rescind much of the Patriot Act

THREE: Bring Gitmo prisoners “home” to the U.S. and give them unfettered access to lawyers and “discovery”.

FOUR: Prosecute Bush and Cheney as “war criminals”.

What else?

Later…

By Blackadder

April 27, 2007 9:14 AM | Link to this

IN THE NEWS - Great ad - I did my part and emailed the White House at comments@whitehouse.gov and asked President Bush to sign the bill and bring our troops home.

By IN THE NEWS

April 27, 2007 9:20 AM | Link to this

DITTO DUDE

By steve-o

April 27, 2007 9:21 AM | Link to this

Well done, Luckovich!

MassenDull,

It’s hilarious to watch you defend a president with an approval rating below 40%. Keep up the good work!

Buy Danish,

George Soros sent a mass email out to all of us libs in order for us to relay the message that he doesn’t like you.

By IN THE NEWS

April 27, 2007 9:21 AM | Link to this

FACT Drudge falsely claimed Soros funds Media Matters

By @@

April 27, 2007 9:22 AM | Link to this

Blackadder:

Yours is a “simple mind” that knows nothing outside the box it inhabits.

I’m not surprised that the concept of an “enemy without borders” escapes you.

Why don’t you wrap it up and deliver it to somebody who will pay C.O.D.

You’re “a package” that any socialist promoting Democrat would love to receive.

Now I’ve got 4 miles to do on the track before work.

Outta here until later.

By steve-o

April 27, 2007 9:24 AM | Link to this

MassenDull,

One more thing…

George W. Bush is STILL a punkass chump.

By LuckoDull

April 27, 2007 9:25 AM | Link to this

{{{By Blackadder April 27, 2007 8:50 AM Please explain to me why some of you still try and engage Spamdy in an intelligent debate? It’s like opening a sewer and expecting ice cream. Ignore the moron.}}}

Waaaaahhhhhhhh!!!!!!

Oh, am I under the troll’s skin, gosh, I’ll have to be nicer from now on.

Stick it up your as-s Polly, when you gonna start calling me a f-ag?

{{{By Blackadder April 27, 2007 9:00 AM Now if only Bush would go after the country (Saudi Arabia) who’s citizens attacked us on 9/11 or the person (Bin Laden, also a Saudi) who orchestrated it.}}}

An Egyptian led it.

Led a group of Middle Eastern males, Muslims all.

That had pledged their allegiance to an Islamic organization founded on it’s dominance over the West, perpetrated by jihad and martyrdom.

Am I going to fast for you simpletons?

Cowards.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ®.

By IN THE GOSSIP

April 27, 2007 9:26 AM | Link to this

OKAY WHILE MUFFIN AND BOOBS ARE OUT OF THE ROOM…..

DOES THE SIR SEEM CLEANER?

By RW-(the original)

April 27, 2007 9:26 AM | Link to this

Look at this from yesterday:

{{{{{By Blackadder April 26, 2007 12:24 PM | Link to this Edwards voted against it [the Iraq war] from the get go so he’s more apt to get my primary vote.}}}}}}

Scroll down and check out the roll call vote

Keep in mind when dealing with idiots like Blackadder that you will never see an honest word.

By Paul

April 27, 2007 9:35 AM | Link to this

I thought Brian Williams did a good job moderating – well prepared, a range of questions, a few judicious comments for those who avoided questions.

Gotta give credit to Biden with his one-word response after being told he had a minute to answer. That was classic.

Kucinich was asked if he thought it was possible to oppose the war and vote to continue to fund the war. He replied no, that was inconsistent, you can’t say you oppose it and then vote to fund it, as every new round of funding reauthorizes the war. He said the Democrats have “the power to end the war right now, and that’s what we should do.” I seem to recall a few antiwar people here have taken great exception to that argument.

BlackAdder – good point about Edwards (excuse my not using proper names/titles here – just brevity, no disrespect to them or their office) and the moral compass question. I wondered if he remembered the flack Pres Bush took with his “Jesus” answer. But he didn’t look flummoxed – just thoughtful. There’s a difference in him compared to four years ago.

Dodd, I thought, blew it when he completely ignored the question about from whom he receives campaign funds. He struck me as embodying the worst stereotypes of a career politician. Personal note, completely irrelevant – but Dodd invoked his kids to make a point - what is with these guys who should be grandfathers who are fathers? Is there a story there?

Richardson sounded pretty good to me. A Democratic governor of a western state, making comments that separates him from northern/eastern Democrats is always interesting. He brought in experience – same problems, state level – very well.

Gravel became embarrassing. The initial challenges and heavy criticism to the other candidates was attention-getting, then he seemed to me to be quite strident, extreme. He may have struck some as embodying stereotypes of Democrats that the Party is trying to overcome. He appeared fixated on a theme – even when discussing Iran he segued into another of those “this is why America’s bad” examples – not a good way to win support from the center. Then there was that comment when, after a gap from the spotlight, Williams asked a question and he said “I’m an elder statesman and you’re treating me like a potted plant.” Ego, ego, ego.

Amazing the number of pundits who said Hillary would do well if she kept her voice down and didn’t sound strident (not conservative pundits, either

By RW-(the original)

April 27, 2007 9:35 AM | Link to this

I didn’t get to see the debate, but did any of them talk about what they were doing for the environment? Especially as it has to do with carbon footprints.

By Paul

April 27, 2007 9:36 AM | Link to this

I thought Brian Williams did a good job moderating – well prepared, a range of questions, a few judicious comments for those who avoided questions.

Gotta give credit to Biden with his one-word response after being told he had a minute to answer. That was classic.

Kucinich was asked if he thought it was possible to oppose the war and vote to continue to fund the war. He replied no, that was inconsistent, you can’t say you oppose it and then vote to fund it, as every new round of funding reauthorizes the war. He said the Democrats have “the power to end the war right now, and that’s what we should do.” I seem to recall a few antiwar people here have taken great exception to that argument.

BlackAdder – good point about Edwards (excuse my not using proper names/titles here – just brevity, no disrespect to them or their office) and the moral compass question. I wondered if he remembered the flack Pres Bush took with his “Jesus” answer. But he didn’t look flummoxed – just thoughtful. There’s a difference in him compared to four years ago.

Dodd, I thought, blew it when he completely ignored the question about from whom he receives campaign funds. He struck me as embodying the worst stereotypes of a career politician. Personal note, completely irrelevant – but Dodd invoked his kids to make a point - what is with these guys who should be grandfathers who are fathers? Is there a story there?

(continues)

By Paul

April 27, 2007 9:38 AM | Link to this

(continued from 9:35)

Amazing the number of pundits who said Hillary would do well if she kept her voice down and didn’t sound strident (not conservative pundits, either). She succeeded on those counts. Wasn’t too scripted, either. Two answers surprised me, almost seemed to illustrate what happens when you’re used to stringing together talking points . Regarding VT shootings, said she and Bill went to Colombine (pulls in Bill, had to, at least once) – then said stricter gun control measures, looking at mentally ill, was a goal of their administration. What? She recognized a weakness in the system, set a “goal” (something you strive to achieve) – then we had VT where gun access by mentally ill is recognized (again) as a problem? Not good. The second “what” was when she was listing what Pres Bush hasn’t done, and about the second or third point was “he hasn’t secured our borders.” ?!!? Not that he has – but is the implication she will? And what will she do to “secure” them? Not to deal with those already here, but to secure them. Call out the Guard? Fund the wall? That may get some attention.

Obama looked and sounded the part. Some say he appears hesitant in answers – I look at it as thinking – his answers often go along several tracks with interrelationships, not the single point so many candidates go for. He did show how he differs from Kucinich and Gravel – considers Iran the largest state sponsor of terrorism, dangerous for the US.

A tremendously important question by Williams on a show of hands. “Do you believe there is such a thing as a global war on terror?”

Raised hand (agreed): Richardson, Dodd, Obama, Clinton.

Did not raise hand (disagreed): Biden, Edwards, Kucinich, Gravel.

By RW-(the original)

April 27, 2007 9:47 AM | Link to this

Paul,

That last question you mention should narrow the field by four. Won’t, but should.

By getalife

April 27, 2007 9:48 AM | Link to this

Paul,

Kucinich voted no to the war and the funding .He is consistent with his position. Plus his wife is hot.

When Williams asked for a show of hands that support his cheney impeachment, none did. Very disappointing.

Gravel is a Zell like character with some good one liners like who are you going to nuke Obama? When asked where has he been all these years, he replied under a rock.

At least our next President will have a brain and can talk.

I think Edwards can unite the majority and win.

By Paul

April 27, 2007 9:50 AM | Link to this

In the news

There were a few interesting replies in that link you cited about Soros, this was the second:

“Media Matters is funded by the Democracy Alliance which is funded by George Soros and his brother. You can check MediaSource for this information. If you have a problem with the truth, please disregard this posting.”

I’d go into “pass-through” contributions (similar to money-laundering) and other similar actions campaign finance reform had tried to address, just not sure how much interest there is in it.

BTW - I listened to the O’Reilly kickoff about this and thought “source?” just as he said info was gathered from SEC filings. I thought “okay, that’s source from the organization’s own financial reports.” I then watched Olbermann’s rebuttal. I expected “OR said this, cited these documents, alleged a money trail, we’ve examined SEC filings and this is why I think he’s wrong.” Instead you could diagram his response (which diagram follows for much of his commentary - it seems to rarely vary): quote from person who’s your topic, ridicule what he or see said, ridicule the person for making the comments, make unflattering comments about the person, bring up examples where the person screwed up.

Nothing about the heart of the topic. As I’ve said, from him, I don’t learn much about facts used to form opinions.

By LuckoDull

April 27, 2007 9:51 AM | Link to this

{{{By steve-o April 27, 2007 9:21 AM It’s hilarious to watch you defend a president with an approval rating below 40%. Keep up the good work!}}}

Dullard, is that a fact?:

{{{Congressional Job Approval- Approve 36.8%}}}

Moron.

Coward.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ®.

By liberalextremist

April 27, 2007 9:52 AM | Link to this

Brilliant toon as usual, Mike. Keep up the awesome work!!!!!

By Shawny

April 27, 2007 9:57 AM | Link to this

Goldie, you are a clueless sucker. Of course she sounded presidential. Of course she said “If elected president….” with standard dem talking points. That is what they do. They are applying for a job, duh. Unfortunately, lipstick on a pig…..well, you know.

On another note regarding the timetable crap, and it is crap… This article is excellent. It tells the story of a squadron that helped win the battle of Midway, turning the tide in the Pacific theater during WWII, and if having to fight it the Murtha way, the squadron would have never materialized to begin with.
At the very end of the article, I like the following passage: “If legislators really don’t believe we should continue in Iraq, they need to come clean, shut down the war — and accept the risks, and take responsibility for the consequences. Otherwise, they need to provide U.S. forces the means to carry out their missions.”

Stop the war, or fund the war. Don’t handcuff our soldiers, though.

By Paul

April 27, 2007 10:01 AM | Link to this

getalife

When I watched the post-debate mingling on the stage I thought of you. Kucinich and his wife walked across the stage and I thought “I wonder how many times getalife’s going to hit ‘rewind-play rewind-play’ tonight?

By Blackadder

April 27, 2007 10:12 AM | Link to this

Oops - I erred in stating that Edwards had voted against the war resolution.

I do wish someone with a brain had corrected me instead of an inbred mouth breather like Ricky.

By Al Gore is a Big Fat Fool

April 27, 2007 10:16 AM | Link to this

This is for all of you left-wing nut jobs who will believe anything that the party hierarchy tells you that you must believe and you do it:

Warming Rip-Off?

People who are spending big money trying to cut their contributions to global warming may be getting ripped off. The Financial Times reports corporations and individuals are coughing up millions of dollars on carbon-offset projects that are in some cases worthless, and in others make little if any difference to the environment.

Some companies in the booming carbon offset industry are making millions by selling services of little or questionable value. The U.K.’s biggest bank went carbon neutral two years ago — but its environment adviser says he has found “serious credibility concerns” in the offset market. And the Times reports other companies — such as DuPont Chemical — are actually getting people to pay them to clean up the company’s own pollution.

By Blackadder

April 27, 2007 10:17 AM | Link to this

Moronic quote of the day:

“Tonight, the House of Representatives voted for failure in Iraq,” White House spokeswoman Dana Perino in a statement after the vote.

Funny I thought they did that four years ago when they authorized this fiasco.

By steve-o

April 27, 2007 10:21 AM | Link to this

MassenDull,

You cute little keyboard warrior you! “Moron”…”coward”…it’s that how lead into foreplay sweetums?

Say what you want about Congress, but I’m not the one chastizing people for not feverently supporting them.

But YOU on the other hand, MassenDull, continue to berate people for supporting a guy with an approval rating of less than 40%. You kind of remind me of the nutjob on the corner wearing a sandwich board saying “the end is near.”

Again, I find your naive and misguided prose to be hilarious and entertaining. Keep up the good work!

By getalife

April 27, 2007 10:23 AM | Link to this

“BILL MOYERS: We wanted to talk to some others in the media about their role in the run up to warÂ….Judith Miller, who left the TIMES after becoming embroiled in a White House leak scandal declined our requestÂ…on legal grounds. The TIMES’ liberal hawk Thomas Friedman also said no. So did Bill Safire, who had predicted Iraq would now be leading the Arab world to democracy. President Bush recently awarded him the Medal of Freedom.

THE WASHINGTON POST’s Charles Krauthammer also turned us down…so did Roger Ailes the man in charge of FOX NEWS.. He declined because, an assistant told us, he’s writing a book on how Fox has changed the face of American broadcasting and doesn’t want to scoop himself.

William Kristol led the march to Bagdad behind a battery of Washington microphones. He has not responded to any of our requests for an interviewÂ…but he still shows up on tv as an expert, most often on FOX NEWS.”

This guy is good.

By ABS

April 27, 2007 10:28 AM | Link to this

Unfortunately for you “Al Gore is a Big Fat Fool” most scientists and those with mature and critical thinking skills disagree with you. Who cares if some in the business world don’t believe it…the proof is there…go ahead, don’t believe it, I don’t care. I personally don’t need someone in my party’s hierarchy to tell me what to think…it’s just common sense.

Fortunately for us, most Americans, even some evangelicals (who in the past didn’t think we needed to be concerned about the environment because of the rapture) are starting to wise up to the problem.

By Goldie

April 27, 2007 10:28 AM | Link to this

The Repugs’ frontrunner right now is a big loser of a FLIP-FLOPPER:

In a startling departure from his previously stated position on civil unions, Mayor Giuliani came out to The New York Sun yesterday evening in opposition to the civil union law just passed by the New Hampshire state Senate.

Surprisingly, not “startling” at all.

So, y’all have 2 big loser FLIP-FLOPPERS with Rudy and Miffed, and just one sad warmonger with Double-Talk McCain, so say it with me now:

“DEMS in ‘08!”

By Historian

April 27, 2007 10:31 AM | Link to this

Just a little trivia for everyone - it may hearten some and some will scream in agony (haha) - without exception in every election held on the date of November 4, as the 2008 election will be, has been won by a Republican (and before that one Whig).

By LuckoDull

April 27, 2007 10:32 AM | Link to this

{{{By steve-o April 27, 2007 10:21 AM But YOU on the other hand, MassenDull, continue to berate people for supporting a guy with an approval rating of less than 40%.}}}

Ummm, I’m Andy, you’re Steve, uh, Oh.

Wanna try this again from the top?

You are the one “berating” people that support Bush.

You know what I mean?

Coward.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ®.

By Goldie

April 27, 2007 10:35 AM | Link to this

Certainly we all remember that it’s the right-wing business leaders of the tobacco industry who stood before Congress and PERJURED themselves in saying that nicotine is not addictive… and the 29% cult members still tout their business leaders regarding the climate change challenges facing the world?

HARDY-HAR-HAR-HAR!

By Right-wing nut job in full glory

April 27, 2007 10:37 AM | Link to this

Goldie,

Intellectual flexibility is not a bad thing. I mean where would be now if Bush hadn’t changed his mind about the military being used for nation building? As you may recall, during the election of 2000 Bush was very clear that the military ought not be used for the sort of mission that he is asking it to do now. If he hadn’t been intellectually flexible, Saddam would still be in power with all those WMD’s and he would be planning even more 9/11’s.

RWNJIFG

By Right-wing nut job in full glory

April 27, 2007 10:37 AM | Link to this

Goldie,

Intellectual flexibility is not a bad thing. I mean where would be now if Bush hadn’t changed his mind about the military being used for nation building? As you may recall, during the election of 2000 Bush was very clear that the military ought not be used for the sort of mission that he is asking it to do now. If he hadn’t been intellectually flexible, Saddam would still be in power with all those WMD’s and he would be planning even more 9/11’s.

RWNJIFG

By bon scott

April 27, 2007 10:37 AM | Link to this

Yup, there’s more, Andy:

Here’s a better idea, Why not tax the rich and give REAL tax relief (not $450 per annum pocket change) to families that have already seen their “savings” from the present tax “relief” sucked by higher heating and gasoline prices?

I know you’re against unfar wealth distribution, Andy. So why not distribute it more equitably? The super-rich don’t need that extra Maserati, but a few thousand for working class folk who really need that roof replaced and could use a replacement for that 1988 Buick. Why not tax the rich and give REAL tax relief (not $450 per annum pocket change) to families that have already seen their “savings” from the present tax “relief” sucked by highter heating and gasoline prices?

I know you’re against unfair wealth distribution, Andy. So why not distribute it more equitably? The super-rich don’t need that extra Maserati, but a few thousand for working class folk who really need that roof replaced and could use a replacement for that 1988 Buick might come in real handy,

Hahahahahahahahahaha. And the libs call Bush a “liar.” ](http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/shared-blogs/ajc/luckovich/entries/2007/04/26/timetables.html#comment-1194504)

Andy, you may like playing with numbers, but they don’t add up.. To put it another way, the taxes paid by the top 5% are equal to the ENTIRE DOMESTIC PAY of your average worker.

Under the laughable ‘fair tax” proposed by BUSH 41 AND 43, the wealthy are using this extra noney NOT to expand businesses and start new ones. It’s being used to buy Maseratis, imported marble for new mansions, yachts, $20,000 baubles from Harry Winston and other such “necessities, necessites, necessities”. These expenditures create few, if any jobs in the private sector.

The rich won’t miss it. His and her Maseratis are SO tacky. But the extra tax money coud be used to revitalize the nation’s health care system, repair its disintegrating transportation system (roads, trains, air), and reduce the federal deficit that the ill-conceived and badly planned Iraq war has added so much to.

Too much to digest in one sitting? Have a drink or two. Stdies show that the brain actually works better when exposed ro small amounts of booze. Just don’t empty the bottle, Andy. That’s when your posts s

By Buy Danish

April 27, 2007 10:37 AM | Link to this

Getalife,

My 12 year old was watching Brit Hume with me last night and made this unsolicited comment about Charles Krauthammer:

“He’s a very intelligent man, isn’t he, Mom?”

He was right of course, and that answers your question as to why Krauthammer did not choose to participate in Bill Moyer’s target practice.

O’Reilly demonstrated last night how Moyers butchered, err, edited his comments to the point that they completely changed their meaning.

Only a fool would trust Moyers not use the same editing tricks with an interview.

By Blackadder

April 27, 2007 10:38 AM | Link to this

Historian - it’s a good thing we’re going to upset that record in 2008.

By Goldie

April 27, 2007 10:38 AM | Link to this

{{without exception in every election held on the date of November 4}}

Just a little bit superstitious, are you Fake-Historian? Figures. That’s what most of the Repugnant Party faithful can be described as… superstitious and delusional.

By Paul

April 27, 2007 10:39 AM | Link to this

Many here have taken the position members of the Bush administration disregarded advice from military leaders, which led to the current debacle. They’ve referred to a number of former general officers to support the position.

Now comes a serving Army Lt Col, one well thought of with a bright future (currently deputy commander, 3rd Armored Cav Regiment, selected to command a battalion) who says US generals repeated the mistakes of Vietnam, have intellectual and moral failures, slow to grasp the realities and overly optimistic in their assessments. His comments are from an article published today in the Armed Forces Journal at

Link:[Army Officer slams US generals](www.armedforcesjournal.com0

and the news article:

Link:[News summary]*(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/26/AR2007042602230.html?nav=hcmodule)

Earlier he’d stated “the Army fundamentally is not geared to the task of helping the advisory effort.

“The thing the Army institutionally is still struggling to learn is that the most important thing we do in counterinsurgency is building host-nation institutions,” he told the interviewers, “yet all our organizations are designed around the least important line of operations: combat operations.”

So, according to this officer, the generals got it wrong at the outset (even those who’ve been on the talk circuit), got it wrong during subsequent years and many of them still don’t get it.

Rather challenges the earlier thesis that if only Pres Bush and company had listened to the generals we wouldn’t be in this mess. If one accepts his assertions as accurate, it seems the harsh criticisms of Pres Bush by those here will now have to include harsh criticisms of past and current military general officer leadership, doesn’t it?

By getalife

April 27, 2007 10:39 AM | Link to this

“By Dusty

April 27, 2007 10:23 AM | Link to this

getalife@9:14,

I am so glad that brought up Pat Tillman’s name again. LuckoDull wrote such a fine tribute to Tillman on Luckovich’s “Dishonored Memory” blog of April 25 @7:16. I would like to repeat part of that again.

*It takes a special kind of man to forego glamour, stardom and riches so that he can serve on the front lines of the Islamic War against America.

I find it seriously hard to believe that he would have wanted anyone grand standing on his behalf against the country that he laid his life down for.

These are things that you liberals can’t even begin to understand, you couldn’t begin to fathom the depth of honor and sacrifice we are dealing with here.

I am greatly humbled to have served the same nation as Pat Tillman did, it makes me weak to think of what we owe him, of what he gave to us.”

crusty the scum spewed this crap at wooten’s.

I am going say this for the last time. His brother Kevin fought next to this hero and he wants the truth to come out.

Stop bashing the Tillman family you piece of sh-it low life scum.

By RW-(the original)

April 27, 2007 10:39 AM | Link to this

Gosh, I wonder who should have been responsible for correcting Blackadder?

My guess is that when one makes a statement of fact, they themselves should have been responsible for making sure to ascertain the accuracy of that statement of fact. Of course, I’ve never been a lib that thinks they can spew with impunity and all the other good little libs will just nod their heads like a car load of bobble head dolls driving down a gravel road.

Interesting that snake boy came clean about his lie, but didn’t mention shifting his support from Edwards.

By Brian Curtis

April 27, 2007 10:41 AM | Link to this

Building on DullAndy’s so-called “logic,” I note that Bin Laden and all the hijackers were male.

So clearly we need to launch an all-out assault on men everywhere around the globe; after all, THEY attacked us! Don’t bother with the specific individuals who were actually, y’know, involved… it’s much smarter to declare Total War on a large, vague group identity so we can twist the War on Terra(TM) to mean whatever we want it to mean, no matter how disastrous.

Soon, saner (liberal) heads will prevail in Washington. And they may even help resurrect the notion of sane conservatism too, instead of the neocon nightmare we’re enduring now. America is on its way back from the abyss… proudly led, as always, by liberals who are once again proven right.

Suck it, losers!

By Goldie

April 27, 2007 10:41 AM | Link to this

Right-wing Nut Job @ 10:37… I certainly have no problem with intellectual flexibility, as it shows a sign of hard thinking about all sides of an issue and maturity as an adult. However, we all know how the Repugs felt about “flexibility” in the ‘04 election… to them, there is NONE.

By Paul

April 27, 2007 10:43 AM | Link to this

Nuts. One more time with the proper link format.

Link:Army Officer slams US generals

and the news article:

Link:News summary

By rushncap

April 27, 2007 10:45 AM | Link to this

Muffin — I’m glad your 12 year old thinks Krauthammer is “intelligent”. I’m sure he also thinks the Tooth Fairy is real. Grownups are far less impressed with Krauthammer. Most high schoolers are smarter than him.

By Goldie

April 27, 2007 10:45 AM | Link to this

Thank you Brian Curtis @ 10:41 — well-stated!

By steve-o

April 27, 2007 10:45 AM | Link to this

MassenDull,

Unlike you, I’m not perfect. I meant to say that you berate people for NOT supporting a guy with a less-than-40% approval rating, which is exactly why you seem like the nutjob standing on the corner with a sandwich board that says “the end is near.”

By getalife

April 27, 2007 10:47 AM | Link to this

Its a damn shame you lie to your kid BD.

I feel sorry for your kid growing up with all that hatred in your house.

Those war mongering wingnuts had the opportunity to go on his show but the cowards declined.

By Right-wing nut job in full glory

April 27, 2007 10:47 AM | Link to this

Steve-o, you really should give LuckoDull credit for having the courage to support Bush. Many people would be afraid that they would be called a complete moron, an idiot, a buffoon, a retard etc… for taking such a position, but you see me and Luck are brave enough to withstand the taunts.

You also have to be courageous to follow a president and a policy off the cliff. I mean, we have to be honest about the fact that nothing that Bush and his Admin have said about Iraq has turned out to be correct. A lot of cowards would see that and start to question themselves, but if you’ve got BALLS like Luck and I you just see it as an opportunity to show how dedicated to our position we are by ignoring the facts. And we ain’t above making up some facts if it helps.

RWNJIFG

By Paul

April 27, 2007 10:49 AM | Link to this

rushncap 10:45

Most high schoolers are smarter than Krauthammer? Maybe you’d like to select one of his columns

Link:Krauthammer Columns

(I suggest “which is the real war?) and provide a rebuttal?

By Goldie

April 27, 2007 10:49 AM | Link to this

Paul @ 10:39 — the Presidential Medal winner George Tenet doesn’t have a high opinion of what the Neo-Cons did to America and Iraq either:

Ex-C.I.A. Chief, in Book, Assails Cheney on Iraq

By Paul

April 27, 2007 10:55 AM | Link to this

Goldie

This’ll be good to watch. He’s on 60 Minutes on Sunday, OR on Wed, I’m sure a lot more shows where he will face varying levels of questions - from “when you were at CIA you said…” to “tell us how Cheney shafted you” to “you say you were shocked we didn’t find WMDs in Iraq, so were Clinton officials…”

I’ll be watching more to see how, if he knew at the time there was a “we’re going to war” mentality among VP Cheney, Wolfowitz, Feith, Perle, etc how he portrays his agency’s role (and his leadership) in countering that during the political infighting. If he did know then (I do not know he has stated this) then why was he unsuccessful in putting the Agency’s position forward as a powerful counterforce?

By steve-o

April 27, 2007 10:56 AM | Link to this

Paul,

Interesting post at 10:39.

The Bush administration came into office with the intention of going to war with Iraq. I remember hearing Colin Powell’s speech when he was nominated for Secretary of State and he declared that the administration will not focus on Israeli-Palestinian relations as a cornerstone of Mideast policy, but rather instead, focus on Saddam and Iraq.

Although I truly believe that they sincerley grieved with the rest of the country, 9/11 presented an opportunity for them and the first thing Rumsfeld asked was if they could pin the terrorist attacks on Saddam.

Here’s an intersting story about Tenet that just broke today. He stated that the administration was going to war regardless of the advice.

As far as military advisors, past presidents have constantly had to weigh the advice of military advisors and more doveish staff members. JFK ignored the advice of his generals to launch an airstrike against Cuba during the missle crisis and ended up opting for the “blockade” route, thus averting the potential for a nuclear war.

By RW-(the original)

April 27, 2007 10:56 AM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

Wouldn’t you just love to see a debate between Charles Krauthammer and rushncap?

finch,

Neither Bush 41, nor Bush 43 has ever proposed the FairTax. What’s even more laughable is that you then go on to tell us what ill effects the FairTax has ALREADY had, when it’s never been voted on, much less implemented.

The thing that’s even nuttier about your reasons are that if the rich ran out and made all these opulent purchases they would be sending wheel barrow loads of cash to the treasury under the FairTax.

By steve-o

April 27, 2007 11:00 AM | Link to this

{{{By Buy Danish

April 27, 2007 10:37 AM | Link to this

Getalife,

My 12 year old was watching Brit Hume with me last night…}}}

Ouch! Don’t make us call DFCS on you!

By Goldie

April 27, 2007 11:02 AM | Link to this

Paul— Tenet will have to lay in the bed that he’s made for himself in s@cking up to Bush’s backside, but he makes a very true assessment here about Dumbya’s Iraq policies:

{{He also expresses skepticism about whether the increase in troops in Iraq will prove successful. “It may have worked more than three years ago,” he wrote. “My fear is that sectarian violence in Iraq has taken on a life of its own and that U.S. forces are becoming more and more irrelevant to the management of that violence.”}}

By getalife

April 27, 2007 11:05 AM | Link to this

steve-o,

I bet the kid had nightmares involving Frankenstein.

Poor kid, she probably tells him it is the liberals fault when he gets in trouble.

The morals on this kid are corrupted.

By Buy Danish

April 27, 2007 11:10 AM | Link to this

{{{By rushncap

April 27, 2007 10:45 AM | Link to this

Muffin — I’m glad your 12 year old thinks Krauthammer is “intelligent”. I’m sure he also thinks the Tooth Fairy is real. Grownups are far less impressed with Krauthammer. Most high schoolers are smarter than him.}}}

rushncap,

Shall we compare Krauthammer’s prose with yours?

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Getalife,

Do you know what the word “unsolicited” means?

RW,

I can think of few things more entertaining than a Krauthammer/rushncap debate.

By Blackadder

April 27, 2007 11:12 AM | Link to this

BD’s example of a highly intelligent person is someone who spews BS like this:

“The only people who think this wasn’t a victory are upper west side liberals, and a few people here in Washington” -Charles Krauthammer 4/19/03

He was proclaiming that the Iraq occupation was already won. It’s now four years later and this looks nothing like victory to me. But in Wingnutland the Iraqi people are laying roses at the feet of our troops.

By Buy Danish

April 27, 2007 11:22 AM | Link to this

{{{By Blackadder

April 27, 2007 9:08 AM | Link to this

..and who are Bush’s bestest buddies? THE SAUDIS.}}}

Snake,

May I commend you for the exquisite timing of that^^^remark?

/SARC.

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia — Police have arrested 172 militants who were plotting to attack Saudi Arabia’s oil fields, storm its prisons to free the inmates and use aircraft in their attacks, the Interior Ministry said in a statement Friday.//The militants planned to carry out suicide attacks against “public figures, oil facilities, refineries … and military zones.” The statement said some of the military targets were outside the kingdom, but it did not elaborate.

By steve-o

April 27, 2007 11:22 AM | Link to this

Right-wing nut job,

It’s either big balls or small brain…I think that it’s a combo of small balls and a small brain.

getalife,

I know that if I was 12 and had to watch an ugly man saying ugly things, I would be traumatized for the rest of my life.

By bon scott

April 27, 2007 11:24 AM | Link to this

RW - I ever said that te Bushies offered the so called “Fair Tax” as outlined by Boortz zombies. Personally, I think their “Fair Tax” plan is smoke and mirrors.

I was referring to the arguments that the Bushies, Reagan (and the Reagan economic “guru” Dave Stockman) pushed; insisting that a lower tax on the wealthy would fuel investment in new and existing businesses.

As hindsight as proven, the greedy rich (with few exceptions) were more interested in McMansions, fancy cars for them AND their kids, and the ability to take a 3 week break in Italy without worrying about money,

Your attempt to misinterpet my words shows either a willful atempt to warp my position,or a serious lapse in brain function. I prefer the former explanation, since while you are arrogant and self centered, you are not dumb.

By Get a clue

April 27, 2007 11:30 AM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

Glad you are back and I hope you are ready to deal with somne unfinished business from yesterday. As you will recall you ran away like a wee little girl from some direct and pertinent questions yesterday that I hope, today you have woken up with the guts to answer.

The first is:

How could anybody, except a moron, believe that invading Iraq would do anything but strengthen the position of the Iranians?

The second is:

Under what circumstances could we be certain that Iranians will not influence the internal politics in Iraq without being committed to staying in Iraq as long as the Ayatollahs are in power in Iran?

These are questions that you should have thought about before the invasion and you damn sure ought to have an answer to when you send kids off to Iraq to die. Now step up to the plate and show the people on this blog that you aren’t an intellectual coward.

(I know, too late, but its worth the try.)

By LuckoDull

April 27, 2007 11:31 AM | Link to this

{{{By steve-o April 27, 2007 10:45 AM MassenDull, Unlike you, I’m not perfect. I meant to say that you berate people for NOT supporting a guy with a less-than-40% approval rating, which is exactly why you seem like the nutjob standing on the corner with a sandwich board that says “the end is near.”}}}

Maybe if you spent a little bit more time thinking, instead of riding that wave of feminine emotions, maybe that could be the problem, no?

I fully understand where you’re coming from Steve Oh, I find liberalism hard to keep track of myself.

It seems like all of your candidates blow endlessly about “global warming” but then spew massive amounts of jet fuel whenever their royal as-ses get transported around the country.

It’s like it would kill them to travel with you common folk.

Only thing they want to do with you is dictate how you get to live your life.

But if that sh-it makes you happy, who am I to complain?

Coward.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ®.

By rushncap

April 27, 2007 11:36 AM | Link to this

Muffin, please don’t insult me by comparing what I write to Krauthammer’s. This uncivil.

By Truthman

April 27, 2007 11:39 AM | Link to this

Ha, Ha, Ha!!!

Poor neo-conmen and women. They know their neo-christian zombie brigade boat is sinking faster than Alec Baldwin’s visitation rights.

Ain’t it grand!!!

I feel happy and gay!!

OK, homophobes, attack me!!

By steve-o

April 27, 2007 11:39 AM | Link to this

MassenDull,

You sassy little keyboard warrior…gosh…”coward” again…stop it…really…you’re making me blush!

I do support a platform that will decrease energy consumption. Why not? It would be nice to have cars with higher CAFE standards and homes built to minimize energy expenses.

See—this is where the “small brain” thing comes in on your part. You have no vision for improving things for the future. The “no balls” part applies to the fact that you are too scared of change and sacrifice.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

By LuckoDull

April 27, 2007 11:43 AM | Link to this

{{{By bon scott April 27, 2007 10:37 AM}}}

Is it just me or does these comments^^ seem like they were posted by a psycho who was out on the street peddling drugs and almost got ran over by a, uh, Maserati?

{{{By bon scott April 27, 2007 10:37 AM The super-rich don’t need that extra Maserati}}}

{{{The super-rich don’t need that extra Maserati}}}

{{{noney NOT to expand businesses and start new ones. It’s being used to buy Maseratis}}}

{{{His and her Maseratis are SO tacky.}}}

Go back and reread this post carefully, check out the mangled sentence structure, the grade school spelling, the duplicate paragraph, the utter babbling insanity, the incomplete formatting, and tell me, go ahead and be honest, I can take it, which one of us do you reckon has a drinking problem?

Insane, oddball, gay liberals projecting their faults on people that they know are better than they are.

It’s the only way a sicko knows how to make himself look better.

Weird, man.

(As for the rambling idiotic argument about successful people buying things that they enjoy and should instead give their money to the nearest crackhead, people earn a living building and selling that “stuff,” so yes, lunatic, let’s put them out of business.)

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ®.

By Buy Danish

April 27, 2007 11:59 AM | Link to this

{{{By steve-o

April 27, 2007 11:22 AM | Link to this

getalife,

I know that if I was 12 and had to watch an ugly man saying ugly things, I would be traumatized for the rest of my life.}}}

Steve-o,

I don’t doubt that it would take very little to “traumatize” you. This sort of easily cowed and unhinged behavior is exactly why Democrats cannot and must not be in the White House.

BTW, I thought you were opposed to “hate speech” and objected to the lack of civility on this board.

Isn’t calling people “ugly” hateful, especially in view of the fact that Krauthammer is a confined to a wheel chair since he became paralyzed in an auto accident?

You’re also lying your cowardly a* off, since Krauthammer is always an elegant, eloquent and measured speaker and NEVER says “ugly things”.

Clueless Punk,

GET A HINT! I do not CHOOSE to debate people who habitually change their identity.

May I suggest that you pursue Bon Scott? He would be happy to fulfill your desire for attention as he is well-practiced in the multiple i.d. game.

By Dubya

April 27, 2007 12:04 PM | Link to this

Another week of Bushieness nearly completed. More revelations of the conduct of these low-lives at every level. A stench in the nostrils of the very word “decency.” God bless Murcuh.

By LuckoDull

April 27, 2007 12:05 PM | Link to this

{{{By steve-o April 27, 2007 11:39 AM See—this is where the “small brain” thing comes in on your part. You have no vision for improving things for the future. The “no balls” part applies to the fact that you are too scared of change and sacrifice.}}}

Dullard: What a great, brave, courageous green warrior you are, Steve Oh, riding your horsey of self righteousness against your contrived enemy, what a wonderful battle plan, choke the United States economy to death because the Sun is getting hotter.

Didn’t your mommy ever tell you “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it?”

We need help from you liberals like 8 month old babies in the womb need their mother’s rights exercised.

Meanwhile, back on Earth, real people, all of them innocent, get killed everyday by a real enemy, Islamofascism, and you Coward liberals want to run and hide from it.

Chickensh-it liberals, in search of a “fight” where there is no enemy.

Cowards.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ®.

By Cindy

April 27, 2007 12:06 PM | Link to this

Krauthammer may not say ugly things, but he does distort the truth eloquently. But hey, that’s what he gets paid for.

By Dusty

April 27, 2007 12:07 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

Congratulations on raising an observing and intelligent son. Sounds like he has some excellent parents from which to learn.

By rushncap

April 27, 2007 12:08 PM | Link to this

I guess Muffin does not consider lies “ugly” if the person writing those lies does so eloquently.

By steve-o

April 27, 2007 12:14 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

I’m only familiar with Krauthammer from his columns and seeing his still picture. I didn’t know that he was paralyzed…my apologies.

I didn’t lie about Krauthammer saying ugly things…I was telling you my opinion. If I were to lie, I would say that I agree with his views.

MassenDull,

You said “if it aint broke, don’t fix it?” You are insane!! Green technology is the next boom industry, but yet your candyass wants us to sit on our azzes and do nothing. It’s not self-righteousness, it’s wanting to improve the air quality as well as wanting to save money on energy costs.

Also, what is exactly Islamofacism? Are you talking about sectarian violence?

Also, it was the neoCON child-king who chose to ignore the REAL ENEMY OSAMA BIN LADEN and go after a marginalized Saddam Hussein.

Since you love to call people cowards, what have you done to confront this “Islamofacist” threat?

By RW-(the original)

April 27, 2007 12:15 PM | Link to this

Hmmm…I’ve scrolled back up the blog twice and I don’t see a single example of rushncap showing us examples of lies from Krauthammer, nor do I see where he took Paul’s challenge.

I guess the AJC server must have scrubbed them, because surely Dmitry wouldn’t pass up a chance to dazzle us with his sheer genius.

By Convinced

April 27, 2007 12:16 PM | Link to this

Now I’m totally convinced that Dusty and Buy Danish are the same person (and maybe @@)

By MC

April 27, 2007 12:19 PM | Link to this

If you do that, PLEASE do Cheney first! The guy is totally devoid of any kind of ethical or moral compass. He is evil incarnate.

By Get a clue

April 27, 2007 12:20 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

I won’t take a hint. I’ll follow you to the end of time. And as long as you are posting, I will point out to the people here that you are a gutless coward who supports sending other people’s kids off to die in a war that you are unable or unwilling to justify.

This blog is supposed to be a debate and you run from that debate like Cheney ran from serving his country..over and over and over. You may wish me to go away, but I will be here until you grow a pair of balls or crawl under a rock, I don’t care which.

By LuckoDull

April 27, 2007 12:22 PM | Link to this

{{{By steve-o April 27, 2007 12:14 PM MassenDull,}}}

Yaaaawwwwwnnnnnnn.

{{{You said “if it aint broke, don’t fix it?” You are insane!! Green technology is the next boom industry, but yet your candyass wants us to sit on our azzes and do nothing. It’s not self-righteousness, it’s wanting to improve the air quality as well as wanting to save money on energy costs.}}}

You think I’m insane, how are you going to put out the Sun?

Freaking idiot, awash in feminine feelings.

By the way, it is said that a single degree temperature rise will save 200,000 lives in the United States from cold deaths OVER what will die from heat.

Is that why you libs want to “stop” “global warming?”

{{{Also, what is exactly Islamofacism? Are you talking about sectarian violence?}}}

See the big hole in the middle of Manhattan?

{{{Also, it was the neoCON child-king who chose to ignore the REAL ENEMY OSAMA BIN LADEN and go after a marginalized Saddam Hussein.}}}

See, no more big holes in Manhattan.

{{{Since you love to call people cowards, what have you done to confront this “Islamofacist” threat?}}}

Supported the people that are killing 30,000 Al Qaeda operatives in Iraq.

Any other stupid questions?

Coward.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ®.

By steve-o

April 27, 2007 12:30 PM | Link to this

MassenDull,

Can you tell me the difference between Wahabiists and extreme Shia groups like Hezbollah? What about the difference between AlQaeda and the Medhi Army? Is there a difference between the religious government in Iran and the one in Saudi Arabia? Seriously, what is Islamofacism?

As far as attacks, since 9/11 there have been attacks in Madrid, London, Istanbul, and Bali.

Oh yeah, and the mere fact that you “support the troops” doesn’t make you a coward. How do you get up every morning with the threat of the liberal media looking to snuff you out?

Also, what the hell does rolling back energy consumption have to do with putting out the sun? Really, what are you talking about?

By rushncap

April 27, 2007 12:35 PM | Link to this

I didn’t know Paul had a challenge. I don’t have time to read every post on here. So I’d suggest you stick it where the sun don’t shine, RW, but for you that wouldn’t be specific enough.

By Shawny

April 27, 2007 12:51 PM | Link to this

Pay attention to this jack-a$$ as it evolves over time.

By Blackadder

April 27, 2007 12:57 PM | Link to this

Clarke hits a homer. No summary of mine is going to improve upon his biting deconstruction, so here are a few excerpts:

””=Clarke’s words

“Does the President think terrorists are puppy dogs? He keeps saying that terrorists will “follow us home” like lost dogs. This will only happen, however, he says, if we “lose” in Iraq.

The puppy dog theory is the corollary to earlier sloganeering that proved the President had never studied logic: “We are fighting terrorists in Iraq so that we will not have to face them and fight them in the streets of our own cities.” …

How is this odd terrorist puppy dog behavior supposed to work? The President must believe that terrorists are playing by some odd rules of chivalry. Would this be the “only one slaughter ground at a time” rule of terrorism?

Of course, nothing about our being “over there” in any way prevents terrorists from coming here. Quite the opposite, the evidence is overwhelming that our presence provides motivation for people throughout the Arab world to become anti-American terrorists.”

Meanwhile we’ve created the George Bush School of Terrorism

“In the real world, by choosing unnecessarily to go into Iraq, Bush not only diverted efforts from delivering a death blow to Al Qaeda, he gave that movement both a second chance and the best recruiting tool possible.”

I wonder how many more experts need to make this point before everyone understands and believes it.

By Buy Danish

April 27, 2007 1:08 PM | Link to this

To whom it may concern:

Will someone please advise the idiot stalker of many names (Get a Clue and Right Wing Nut Job being the most recent incarnations) that if he wants to know my opinions on the Iraq War and Islamofascism that there are archives he is free to go through?

Also, please tell the clueless idiot that I have no intention of “growing balls”.

{{{I didn’t lie about Krauthammer saying ugly things…I was telling you my opinion. If I were to lie, I would say that I agree with his views.}}}

Steve-o,

If you disagree with someone’s views that means they say “ugly things”?

By Shawny

April 27, 2007 1:08 PM | Link to this

Proud of our boys, Chambliss and Isakson. Only 22 Senators had the guts to vote for the ammendment “to prohibit the congressional earmarks of funds appropriated pursuant to authorizations in the bill. Feingold and McCaskill were the ONLY two democrats to vote for it. While I expect the democrats to want to keep their pork provision, more than 20 Republicans should have stepped up.

By steve-o

April 27, 2007 1:14 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

You’re running this into the ground. I’ve read Krauthammers columns many times and I’ve found them to be ill-informed, misguided, and obtuse. I don’t agree with most of the things he says. I could use a different adjective to express my negative opinions about his column if you want.

By mk

April 27, 2007 1:21 PM | Link to this

Fascism

One entry found for fascism. Main Entry: fas•cism Pronunciation: ‘fa-“shi-z&m also ‘fa-“si- Function: noun Etymology: Italian fascismo, from fascio bundle, fasces, group, from Latin fascis bundle & fasces fasces 1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition 2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control

Hahahaha, BUSHOFASCISM!

The bushies are much more bent on world domination than the worldwide members of the Islamic religion…or do you wish to make some kind of accusation here?

By RW-(the original)

April 27, 2007 1:23 PM | Link to this

Blackkadder,

Which Clarke was that?

By Dusty

April 27, 2007 1:28 PM | Link to this

Convinced @ 12:16,

I’m not convinced that there are more than two liberal posters writing here. You know. One female and one male. Or maybe just one. They all have the same opinion.

By Blackadder

April 27, 2007 1:31 PM | Link to this

Sorry - I should have specified that it was Richard Clarke.

By RW-(the original)

April 27, 2007 1:39 PM | Link to this

Thanks, Blackadder,

I figured it was Richard. He’s the one that originally linked Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein in his Boogie to Baghdad memo. Of course he wrote it to Sandy Berger so it’s probably been stolen and destroyed.

By Blackadder

April 27, 2007 1:40 PM | Link to this

Here is the link to the entire Richard Clarke article for anyone who is interested.

By mk

April 27, 2007 1:42 PM | Link to this

Dusty,

Reality clearly never influences your beliefs, now does it?

And, unlike the libs obviously, you and dull have very different opinions, you hate and he, well,…he has more hate…oh, and anger

fwiw, I haven’t posted here for months.

By LuckoDull

April 27, 2007 1:43 PM | Link to this

{{{By steve-o April 27, 2007 12:30 PM MassenDull,Can you tell me the difference between Wahabiists and extreme Shia groups like Hezbollah? What about the difference between AlQaeda and the Medhi Army? Is there a difference between the religious government in Iran and the one in Saudi Arabia? Seriously, what is Islamofacism?}}}

Why would you want to seperate them??

They’re all trying to kill us, you dullard.

Coward.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ®.

By Buy Danish

April 27, 2007 1:46 PM | Link to this

Another day, another campus shout down, err, protest, this time at Harvard against FBI Director Mueller.

Great news for the Moonbats! There seems to be something new to protest!:

“Stop the unconstitutional repression of the environment”

There must be a very aggressive affirmative action admissions program at Harvard. How else to explain how these dunces ended up there?

steve-o,

I found your use of the word “ugly” to describe Krauthammer to be silly and makes you look like a congenital wimp who is so hyper-sensitive you think that every disagreement qualifies as a form of bullying.

By Dusty

April 27, 2007 2:11 PM | Link to this

Thanks RW @ 1:23,

Blackadder gets a little addled at times so I wasn’t sure which “Clark”.

Maybe Mark Clark. Nawww he was too smart to talk about puppy dogs.

Wesley Clark, general and failed politician. Maybe..

Ahh CLARK Howard a man of good sense but too practical to be a liberal.

Sooooo it was Richard Clarke, released government official who changed his story to promote his new book. Oh that one! Oh well. So much for puppy dogs and other seeing eye dogs for liberals.

So “mk” @1:42 replied to my post to “Convinced” @ 12:16 to say that she had not posted in months. Tell us all your favorite IDs. Then we won’t suggest that you use a variety. Do try and vary the “opinion” just a tad. It gets so predictable.

By georgia 74

April 27, 2007 2:17 PM | Link to this

Krauthammer is not a journalists in any form or fashion. He is a shill for the state of Israel, not that there’s anything wrong with it, but thats what he is. I can’t understand why he doesn’t admit it, he should be proud of his cause.

By Blackadder

April 27, 2007 2:23 PM | Link to this

Dusty,

Richard Clarke served 3 Republican presidents and one Democratic president. And served them very well. Not many people get to serve under multiple administrations and in both parties. He must have been doing something right for all those years.

He sees what 70% of the American people see and comes to his senses about the Iraq occupation and so now he’s the enemy, right?

Typical

By steve-o

April 27, 2007 2:24 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

Can we please drop the subject, woman???!!! How can you call me “sensitive” when over the past three hours, you are the one who can’t drop the fact that I referred to Krauthammer’s comments as “ugly”? Seriously, I’m tired of Krauthammer! I’m sorry that I said anything about Krauthammer! Lord Jesus if I wouldn’t have said anything about Krauthammer then this crazed right-wing pastry-named woman would leave me alone!

MassenDull,

How can you engage in a war without understanding the enemy?

{{{They’re all trying to kill us, you dullard.}}}

You sound like a little girl (in nasal feminine voice) “they’re trying to kill us!”

You can’t hide the fact that you didn’t know a damn thing about Iraq before the war and sure as hell don’t know a damn thing about Iraq now.

By Observer

April 27, 2007 2:30 PM | Link to this

It doesn’t take a great genius to see the difference between Clarke and Clark. However, it does take a little bit of talent in reading and understanding the language.

By mk

April 27, 2007 2:32 PM | Link to this

Dusty,

You are right, just as you always are.

Another charming attribute of the Bushofascist mind.

By mk

April 27, 2007 2:41 PM | Link to this

He doesn’t know anything about Iraq because he doesn’t want to know. He, no doubt, believes just as a unfortunate acquaintance of mine said as I tried to explain my position on the war “Hey, you’re talking to the wrong guy. I say open the Bombay doors and let ‘em fall where they may.”

Hate is a broad brush and truly sad.

By steve-o

April 27, 2007 2:44 PM | Link to this

mk,

It’s truly sad indeed.

By ABS

April 27, 2007 2:44 PM | Link to this

Blackadder - response to your post at 12:57… I sat in on a lecture recently that touched on some of what you were saying. In the lecture (it was actually a debate) but one side was arguing that the mere geography of the United States would make it impossible for a LARGE scale invasion of any terrorist group and others argued along those same lines that if the military were to concentrate on border security, airport security, port security, immigration, etc. it would make small terrorist cells more difficult to enter the country. There is not organized army in the world that could invade us simply based on where where we are in the world and if they got here, they couldn’t sustain that army. So, my point is, if the military would concentrate on the things I mentioned above and we had more intelligence measures to concentrate on any terrorist groups already in the country (by legal means of course) wouldn’t that be a better solution to our war on terror? I know that some of you will argue that is going on the “defense” and not on the “offense” and we can’t win if we are in the “defense” mode, but it really appears that our “offense” mode isn’t working.

I’ve mentioned that on other blogs before and have never had a response of opinion from anyone…I guess it was too late when most were already gone, but I would like to know some opinions about that theory…especially those who have been in the military, just a thought…

By Dusty

April 27, 2007 2:49 PM | Link to this

Blackadder @ 2:23

I did not call Richard Clarke the “enemy”. Those were your words.

I knew you were addled. But misquoting someone as you have done is not anything but..well…lying.

Try to be a little more ethical in your posts.

mk @2:32 or Convinced or whomever,

“Bushofascist mind”? Hey, I believe that is a new one. But I will take it instead of the “Osamaliberal mind”. Now that WOULD be an insult.

By Get a Clue

April 27, 2007 2:51 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

Nice dodge. I could review every post you typed or in fact every thought that your brain could conjure and there is no way that you have addressed the question. The reason for that and the reason that you dodge is that you know that there is no good answer that supports your position.

So again, for everybody blogging here:

Buy Danish is an intellectual coward who will not defend his or the Bush Admin. failure to realize that invading Iraq played into Iran’s hands. Further he is happy to see Americans continue to die in Iraq without any solution to the Iranian problem. So Buy Danish by avoiding, continuously, the topic not only shows himself or herself to be, not only an intellectual coward, but also a person who is indifferent to the unecessary suffering of our soldiers.

Congrats.

By Blackadder

April 27, 2007 2:58 PM | Link to this

Talk about addled. I wasn’t quoting you. So therefore I couldn’t have misquoted you.

I made the assumption that you considered Clarke your enemy because of your snide remarks about him. Or is that how you refer to people you admire. Just wondering.

By Convinced

April 27, 2007 2:59 PM | Link to this

Isn’t Buy Danish a woman? I may have to rethink my analysis of Buy Danish and Dusty being the same person (along with @@).

But, yes, Dusty, back to you. You’re brilliant deduction that myself and mk are the same person, well, it’s simply not true, and I don’t want you to embarrass yourself anymore.

How you came to that conclusion I will never understand, but then again, how you come to most of your conclusions, I will never understand as well.

By Blackadder

April 27, 2007 3:01 PM | Link to this

..besides it was a question to you. How could you construe that as a quote> I asked: “…so that makes him the enemy, right?”

Learn to read so we won’t have to keep explaining simple terms to you.

By Blackadder

April 27, 2007 3:07 PM | Link to this

Dusty, You couldn’t possibly prefer fascist over liberal, can you?

Famous fascists include Hitler, Mussolini, etc.

Famous liberals include Jesus Christ, Kennedy, etc.

And I mean liberal as in ideology, not politics.

By Gregg

April 27, 2007 3:12 PM | Link to this

You’ve got that right, Dubya. Plus cowardly Bush and his goon neocon followers have bastardized for the foreseeable future words like “patriot” and a host more.

By True Stories in the Life of Dubya

April 27, 2007 3:13 PM | Link to this

George Bush is sat in the oval office one morning, reviewing the Iraq situation with his generals. The door opens, an aide walks in….”Bad news Im afraid ,Mr President…we have just had word that 3 Brazilian soldiers have been killed in Iraq”

President Bush drops to his knees and puts his face in his hands…and starts sobbing with grief….absolutely inconsolable…the President seems to have taken the news incredibly badly……All the assembled generals can hear from the president is a mumbled “oh my god …oh my god….”

Eventually, Bush looks up to Dick Cheney through teary eyes from where he is kneeling and asks…..”Exactly how many is a brazillion,Dick?”

By True Stories in the Life of Dubya

April 27, 2007 3:15 PM | Link to this

George Bush is sat in the oval office one morning, reviewing the Iraq situation with his generals. The door opens, an aide walks in….”Bad news Im afraid ,Mr President…we have just had word that 3 Brazilian soldiers have been killed in Iraq”

President Bush drops to his knees and puts his face in his hands…and starts sobbing with grief….absolutely inconsolable…the President seems to have taken the news incredibly badly……All the assembled generals can hear from the president is a mumbled “oh my god …oh my god….”

Eventually, Bush looks up to Dick Cheney through teary eyes from where he is kneeling and asks…..”Exactly how many is a brazillion,Dick?”

By True Stories in the Life of Dubya

April 27, 2007 3:16 PM | Link to this

George Bush is sat in the oval office one morning, reviewing the Iraq situation with his generals. The door opens, an aide walks in….”Bad news Im afraid ,Mr President…we have just had word that 3 Brazilian soldiers have been killed in Iraq”

President Bush drops to his knees and puts his face in his hands…and starts sobbing with grief….absolutely inconsolable…the President seems to have taken the news incredibly badly……All the assembled generals can hear from the president is a mumbled “oh my god …oh my god….”

Eventually, Bush looks up to Dick Cheney through teary eyes from where he is kneeling and asks…..”Exactly how many is a brazillion,Dick?”

By Cindy

April 27, 2007 3:17 PM | Link to this

ABS

One of the biggest reasons that we have not been attacked on a scale like 9/11 is because many of our agencies took greater heed of warnings, “shared notes”, and became more diligent. They became better trained and equiped. I don’t like the idea of the miltary policing the country. However, I do believe that this could be accomplished by better funding responsible federal agencies. Shortly after 9/11 and the afghanistan invasion the US entered the Philipines by invitation and assisted their military with destroying radical terrorist groups. I (incorrectly as it turns out) thought that was how we were going to implement the war on terror and thought it seemed a sound plan. I don’t see why we can’t get back on that footing. This would take some diplomacy at which we are currently failing, so I don’t think it is something bush could initiate. As we cleared out friendly nations, the terrorists would have to retreat to other nations where they would be contained. Some of those countries don’t want a bunch of killers runnning around, so they would take their own internal measures. The ones that embraced the terrorists would be dealt with through pressure.

By Brian Curtis

April 27, 2007 3:18 PM | Link to this

Dusty: That’s just silly. Everyone knows Osama is an arch-conservative.

In fact, he’s just a bearded version of many of the Bush supporters here in the good ol’ U.S.A.

By True Stories in the Life of Dubya

April 27, 2007 3:18 PM | Link to this

George Bush is sat in the oval office one morning, reviewing the Iraq situation with his generals. The door opens, an aide walks in….”Bad news Im afraid ,Mr President…we have just had word that 3 Brazilian soldiers have been killed in Iraq”

President Bush drops to his knees and puts his face in his hands…and starts sobbing with grief….absolutely inconsolable…the President seems to have taken the news incredibly badly……All the assembled generals can hear from the president is a mumbled “oh my god …oh my god….”

Eventually, Bush looks up to Dick Cheney through teary eyes from where he is kneeling and asks…..”Exactly how many is a brazillion,Dick?”

By True Stories in the Life of Dubya

April 27, 2007 3:19 PM | Link to this

George Bush is sat in the oval office one morning, reviewing the Iraq situation with his generals. The door opens, an aide walks in….”Bad news Im afraid ,Mr President…we have just had word that 3 Brazilian soldiers have been killed in Iraq”

President Bush drops to his knees and puts his face in his hands…and starts sobbing with grief….absolutely inconsolable…the President seems to have taken the news incredibly badly……All the assembled generals can hear from the president is a mumbled “oh my god …oh my god….”

Eventually, Bush looks up to Dick Cheney through teary eyes from where he is kneeling and asks…..”Exactly how many is a brazillion,Dick?”

By mk

April 27, 2007 3:20 PM | Link to this

How about George Bush’s own Osamawho mind? You clearly fall into that category.

Fear is an awful thing its just so hard for bushofascists to recognize.

I do have fears though. I fear that the Rupert Murdochs, Dick Cheneys, George Bushs, Bill O’Reillys, Bill Crystals and all of their ilk will continue to chip away at what you and I hold so dear. Our country. They have caused more division and done more damage to America than all the terrorist acts combined. And you can jump all over that one, but I believe it to be true. And they do it with such deft that you are willing to hate anyone that dares speak contrary to their agenda.

Sooner or later, if we fail to speak out, they will consolidate the power so well that we will not be able to resist. It’s already happening. It is our duty to question and remove republicans OR democrats who fail us. At this time it just happens to be the republicans.

By True Stories in the Life of Dubya

April 27, 2007 3:23 PM | Link to this

George Bush is sat in the oval office one morning, reviewing the Iraq situation with his generals. The door opens, an aide walks in….”Bad news Im afraid ,Mr President…we have just had word that 3 Brazilian soldiers have been killed in Iraq”

President Bush drops to his knees and puts his face in his hands…and starts sobbing with grief….absolutely inconsolable…the President seems to have taken the news incredibly badly……All the assembled generals can hear from the president is a mumbled “oh my god …oh my god….”

Eventually, Bush looks up to Dick Cheney through teary eyes from where he is kneeling and asks…..”Exactly how many is a brazillion,Dick?”

By Blackadder

April 27, 2007 3:26 PM | Link to this

mk - I hate to correct you but Bill(y) Crystal is a funny comedian. You were refering to ultra-right wing, Bush apologist Bill Kristol.

By True Stories in the Life of Dubya

April 27, 2007 3:26 PM | Link to this

George Bush is sat in the oval office one morning, reviewing the Iraq situation with his generals. The door opens, an aide walks in….”Bad news Im afraid ,Mr President…we have just had word that 3 Brazilian soldiers have been killed in Iraq”

President Bush drops to his knees and puts his face in his hands…and starts sobbing with grief….absolutely inconsolable…the President seems to have taken the news incredibly badly……All the assembled generals can hear from the president is a mumbled “oh my god …oh my god….”

Eventually, Bush looks up to Dick Cheney through teary eyes from where he is kneeling and asks…..”Exactly how many is a brazillion,Dick?”

By True American Hero

April 27, 2007 3:35 PM | Link to this

[[Washington Post April 27, 2007 Pg. 4

Army Officer Accuses Generals Of ‘Intellectual And Moral Failures’

By Thomas E. Ricks, Washington Post Staff Writer

An active-duty Army officer is publishing a blistering attack on U.S. generals, saying they have botched the war in Iraq and misled Congress about the situation there.

“America’s generals have repeated the mistakes of Vietnam in Iraq,” charges Lt. Col. Paul Yingling, an Iraq veteran who is deputy commander of the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment. “The intellectual and moral failures … constitute a crisis in American generals.”

Yingling’s comments are especially striking because his unit’s performance in securing the northwestern Iraqi city of Tall Afar was cited by President Bush in a March 2006 speech and provided the model for the new security plan underway in Baghdad.]]

By Buy Danish

April 27, 2007 3:37 PM | Link to this

Since he seems to be struggling, will someone please tell a dullard who goes by the name “Get a Clue” that I gave a huge, err, clue about my sex today when I said this:

{{{By Buy Danish

April 27, 2007 10:37 AM | Link to this

Getalife,

My 12 year old was watching Brit Hume with me last night and made this unsolicited comment about Charles Krauthammer:

“He’s a very intelligent man, isn’t he, Mom?”}}}

By mk

April 27, 2007 3:46 PM | Link to this

/me blushes No offense taken blackadder, just failed to proof read.

By Blackadder

April 27, 2007 3:48 PM | Link to this

mk - I wouldjust hate to see a decent person who gives so much of himself to charities, etc. mistaken for a mindless Bushbot :-)

By Buy Danish

April 27, 2007 3:49 PM | Link to this

I’m actually a hermaphrodite. During the weekdays I’m a female, but on weekends I’m a male. My 12 year old calls me Dad on Saturdays and Sundays.

By Paul

April 27, 2007 4:01 PM | Link to this

ABS 2:44

The functions you described are not the missions the missions the military is charged with (no cute Coast Guard remarks, pls). They are functions of civilian agencies, many with a law enforcement background. The military is specifically prohibited by law from engaging in law-enforcement type duties within the US.

“Geographical Separation” has been cited for decades as a security factor for the US and aided immeasurably in our development. The “invasion” scenario described is relevant only in the context of traditional warfare. In context of today’s environment (nonstate entities, nontraditional (no uniforms, no adherence to law of armed conflict) enemies, ability of small numbers to inflict large casualties through nonstandard weapons, goals of the enemy (ideological as opposed to military defeat) the entire line of debate missed the mark by a wide margin.

If that was a security symposium I’d advise disregarding any by the sponsor. If that was a university setting - frankly, the guidance and knowledge implied by the faculty is sadly lacking and the foundational understanding of the debate teams did not permit them to knowledgably discusss the topic, nor were any “conclusions” formed by the audience valid.

By ABS

April 27, 2007 4:06 PM | Link to this

Cindy, I’m with you, I certainly don’t want the military policing the country, but if they are here, couldn’t they do more to protect the country or be here to respond in case of a terrorist attack (or other disaster such as Katrina)? I’m agree with you on that, I’m just thinking out loud for a minute. I also agree with what you said about if we fund the federal agencies that are responsible for our safety. Instead of pouring billions of dollars towards a war with no end, can’t we better spend that money here for our protection? To provide internal measures for security and protection? To build better security infrastructure?

You example of the Phillipines is the kind of thing that I think our military should be doing. Taking out small terrorist groups on a smaller scale….and pouring money into better intelligence to identify groups and cells of terrorist who are in countries that wouldn’t necessarily “invite” us to come in.

Thanks for you comments Cindy! That’s really been on my mind lately and it’s good to hear another opinion!

By ABS

April 27, 2007 4:19 PM | Link to this

Paul, I’m certainly aware that no traditional warfare scenario will happen in the U.S. anytime soon, but on the other hand, isn’t that what we are doing in Iraq? Aren’t we fighting an idea with no tangible border? Isn’t fighting Al Qaida like (and seriously, excuse this expression) like herding cats? It’s impossible to control an ideological force with military presence on a large scale.

I didn’t know that about the military though…thank you for informing me of that…but couldn’t that be modified a little in times of this so-called war? Couldn’t the military be used to inspect ports, patrol airports, etc.? I mean, I see what you said about their not being able to because of “law”, but maybe I’m being a little idealistic here, couldn’t that be changed? I don’t know…just a thought.

I’m not a military expert, and really don’t claim to be, but I would like to think that the military could do something useful here at home instead of being deployed in Iraq where a majority of the people who live there do not want us there. Again, I’m being idealistic. It’s Friday after all.

What I respectfully disagree with you about Paul, is that the debate didn’t miss the mark…I think the conclusions that I came up with are certainly valid - I don’t know what the others in the audience concluded to be honest. I think we need fresh and radical new ideas to deal with an ever changing enemy.

By LuckoDull

April 27, 2007 4:20 PM | Link to this

{{{By Blackadder April 27, 2007 3:07 PM Famous liberals include Jesus Christ}}}

It tells you how weak the faith these liberals have for their own beliefs, when they have to validate their own sorry as-s life choices by saying that Christ was a liberal.

Yeah, I’m real sure Jesus was all for abortion and homosexuality, yep, there you go.

Liberalism is a perversion of humanity, a desecration of God’s creation, a lifestyle full of depravity, nothing but an excuse for being a sinner and feeling good about, cause you don’t “discriminate” even though you do call Conservatives that you don’t like “fa-gs” and “hermaphrodites.”

Yeah, you son of a bitc-hes are the top of the line, that’s for sure.

Scumbags.

Cowards.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ®.

By ABS

April 27, 2007 4:22 PM | Link to this

Paul, I meant to tell you thank you too. It’s good to hear both sides and I wanted to hear from some military people. I’ve talked to my friend who is in the Air Force about this and although he said pretty much the same thing, I still think it’s worth talking about.

By Buy Danish

April 27, 2007 4:24 PM | Link to this

{{{…and pouring money into better intelligence to identify groups and cells of terrorist who are in countries that wouldn’t necessarily “invite” us to come in.}}}

ABS,

Does this fit your grand plan?

(Senior AQ commander) Abd al-Hadi al-Iraqi was captured by the CIA as he was attempting to travel back to his native country, Iraq. He was going to Iraq, officials say, to “manage” al Qaeda’s operations, including plots on Western interests outside of Iraq.

By Paul

April 27, 2007 4:31 PM | Link to this

ABS

Disaster response eg Katrina is a standard mission of National Guard units (under state control, can be Federalized and assigned to augment the regular military). National Guard units conduct search and rescue, rescue victims, provide food, shelter and medical support and in many ways assist their neighbors throughout their states.

Your other concerns were referenced yesterday in the Democratic “Real Security” plan (available at their web site). It addressed many of the issues you raised. Unfortunately, progress in implementing the plan since January has been all but nonexistent. Their “pay as you go” policy makes funding difficult and the series of investigations with political appointee firings, intelligence procedures before the Iraq war (despite past hearings and reports), are frankly much more important than say, port security.

As a side note - the cooperation you desired between our government and others in tracking down and capturing or killing terrorists has been going on for years, albeit quietly. There is still a debate on the proper procedures (law enforcement, court appointed lawyers, reading of rights; or more “military” procedures) that should be applied. That was the an element of candidate Giuliani’s widely misrepresented remarks (he used “fighting words” but “How dare you!” is not an adequate response).

By Cindy

April 27, 2007 4:33 PM | Link to this

ABS,

The current administration is a perfect example of why we never want the military policing our country. If he had his way bush would declare all liberals as enemies and order the Army to kill us. This is in direct conflict with the US constitution. It was bad years ago when the Ohio National Guard shot and killed American students; nobody wants to get close to that again. The laws could be changed to allow Army policing, but that is a very terrible idea and far from our constitutional idealogy. It is one step closer to a military dictatorship. The better choice would be to increase border patrol guards and custom officials.
However, you have to realize that because of all the money going to the Iraqis, we haven’t enough for protection of our own country. When one agency gets the goods, all others have to tighten up and scale down. That is how it will be as long as we have large numbers of troops protecting Iraqis. Wars are very expensive; inflicting death, pain and injuries on our soldiers and denying other needs within our own country. This war has made me a fan of “pork” (temporarily I hope): I love seeing money spent on this country and its citizens.

By Paul

April 27, 2007 4:42 PM | Link to this

ABS

You’re welcome. Careful about the conclusions (“military”), though. I simply related the state of law, American history, and some polysci thoughts. Someone can give advice about running a company without ever having done so (a few econ professors, I recall).

You’re right, “the law” (posse comitatus) can be changed - it has a civil war background - but given our country’s strong civilian control over the military and the availability of civilian forces I doubt it’ll happen. Use of National Guard/Reserve forces in an inspection/border guard does not violate that law, however. Gets problematic, though.

I did not mean to imply your conclusions formed after the conference weren’t accurate (especially as you’ve obviously given this serious thought) - only that conclusions based solely on misinformation are not formed through a valid process, even though they may be true.

By Paul

April 27, 2007 4:47 PM | Link to this

Cindy

“If he had his way bush would declare all liberals as enemies and order the Army to kill us”

A bit over the top? Or does that represent a serious conclusion in some quarters?

” because of all the money going to the Iraqis, we haven’t enough for protection of our own country. “

The Federal government does not operate like a private company or household. There’s plenty of funds available for whatever priorities the people, Congress and the President deem appropriate.

By IN THE NEWS

April 27, 2007 4:49 PM | Link to this

SO MUCH FOR THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE

Bush to Democrats: do not ‘test my will’ on Iraq

By IN THE NEWS

April 27, 2007 4:53 PM | Link to this

I WILL REPEAT

ITS NOT THE ONES WHO GOT FIRED ITS THE ONES WHO STAYED

Unpurged Prosecutor Lets Frist Off the Hook

By getalife

April 27, 2007 4:54 PM | Link to this

That is a hell of a bait there Andy.

Should get a bite out that one.

Domestic terorism, like the bomb in Austin, belongs to the radical Christian extremists.

They belong in Gitmo, tortured, without a lawyer and held forever. These wingnuts are dangerous and do not know right from from wrong.

By Buy Danish

April 27, 2007 4:57 PM | Link to this

{{{As a side note - the cooperation you desired between our government and others in tracking down and capturing or killing terrorists has been going on for years, albeit quietly.}}}

Paul,

Duh.

I just love these Moonbats who show up here and think they have brilliant strategic ideas than surpass anything that all the minds of the intelligence agencies and the Pentagon combined have heretofore come up with.

Listening to Cindy is like taking advice on the war on terrorism from Rosie O’Donnell and just as grating.

By LuckoDull

April 27, 2007 5:03 PM | Link to this

{{{By getalife April 27, 2007 4:54 PM Domestic terorism, like the bomb in Austin, belongs to the radical Christian extremists.}}}

Oh, O.K. gitmo, what other history would you like to change around, while we’re making Eric Rudolph and Tim McVeigh into “religious” extremists.

Does this revision of the truth somehow make you feel better about yourself and all of the murders that you personally approved of and voted for the killers?

We Christians sleep good at night.

Sorry to hear about your issues.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ®.

By Paul

April 27, 2007 5:05 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish

The comment was in response to ABS, who appeared to be a university student trying to sift through so much of what he/she has heard. It’s an especially difficult task in today’s environment.

There are a lot of interesting views here. I appreciate it when you and others respond, when asked, with sources or experience. I don’t always agree, of course, but it is still good to go through. What gets me is the idea that any web site (seems to be the preferred source) is valid - used to be, there were mainline newspapers. Then there were the “rags” you’d find in boxes on street corners put out by anything from the John Birch Society to the New Left Utopian Society. But if it’s on the web, hey, just post a link, quote it and move on.

By LuckoDull

April 27, 2007 5:10 PM | Link to this

{{{GREENVILLE, S.C. (AP) - Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Rodham Clinton said Friday she sees her sometimes Southern accent as a virtue. “I think America is ready for a multilingual president,” Clinton said during a campaign stop at a charter school in Greenville, S.C.}}}

If there was ever any doubt about what these libs think about you twangy people, this pretty much clears it up.

This idiot bull dyk-e “woman” thinks just cause she can speaks like you dolts does, means she knows another language, you reckon?

What an as-swipe.

John “gimme one dem liesends” Kerry wasn’t even this f’ed up.

She doesn’t even go out into the hinterlands, don’t venture beyond the New York city limits, out into Hicksville, does she?

I’ll bet she thinks you savages still wear lion clothes.

Hey, if that sh-it makes you happy.

Have at it.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ®.

By getalife

April 27, 2007 5:10 PM | Link to this

Looks like your cult leader is in trouble again

Bwhahahahaha.

Blame the Tillman family and the liberals scumbags.

By Paul

April 27, 2007 5:16 PM | Link to this

LuckoDull

I thought you were kidding, baiting Democrats with that accent she puts on (who in their right mind calls that a “southern” accent? Someone from the northeast?. And that part about the accent shows America is ready for a multilingual president?

Just when you think you’ve heard it all - I checked - you referenced it accurately. I told you I wasn’t impressed with her advisors.

Too bad she didn’t demonstrate it during the debate. Maybe on the next one.

By Dusty

April 27, 2007 5:17 PM | Link to this

Ho hum,

I’ve been gone awhile and there are so many backoffs and hodgepog answers here now.

I am not any kind of fascist (even facetiously) and there is no such thing as a Bushfascist or other meanderings of the liberal mind. So I guess I am just plain ol’ American.

You folks carry on the great battle of the blog. It is too close to my dinner time for me to deal with all the liberal foolishness. “Dumping” on our country does not appeal to me. So I leave you for more appetizing fare.

See you later!!

By RW-(the original)

April 27, 2007 5:21 PM | Link to this

Paul,

Just about anytime Buy Danish posts a link to a web site, that site in turn links to all it’s source material. I’ve noticed most center/right blogs do this, while most leftist blogs take you to an endless string of other blogs that simply say the same thing.

I would much rather read a post on a web site that takes me to multiple sources of information that were used to develop their post than a newspaper article that tells you that you can trust them because of all the various unnamed sources that they used.

By ABS

April 27, 2007 5:22 PM | Link to this

Paul and Cindy — It wasn’t a conference I attended, just a simple debate in an academic setting, but there was debate with good points from both sides - with good information from both points of view. Considering it was an academic setting, the sources were a little more reliable than some of the sources used here on this blog (like the Internet and People Magazine). I think you are right though, it would be tough to change current laws, and us “moonbats” wouldn’t like the idea of military policing…especially like Cindy said, with the current administration, there is no way I’d want the National Guard policing the streets, but again, they are in Iraq now, so we wouldn’t have to worry about that too much. I think Cindy was just trying to drive home a point what you thought over the top, but it is a valid point. After all, Hitler rounded up the leftists and see what happened to them - BUT I seriously don’t think that would happen here.

But like Cindy said, since we are spending all our resources on in Iraq, we don’t have the funds to spend on additional security measures at home.
However, the federal government does have money to spend via different federal agencies and would certainly have a lot more if not for Iraq. Many projects and programs that are funded are directly influenced by the air in Washington. For example, NIH funds many projects that are directly connected to security, i.e. biohazards, etc. That’s a broad example, but I think you get my point.

Like someone said earlier, there are certain people on this blog that aren’t worth the time to think about, I have learned to simply scroll past their incoherent rants and manifestos.

By getalife

April 27, 2007 5:24 PM | Link to this

Good riddance,

Slither back under your rock crusty.

God bless the Tillman family.

By @@

April 27, 2007 5:24 PM | Link to this

Blackadder:

Just for you…an Iraqi born citizen affiliated with Osama Bin Laden before 9/11.

He was born in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul in 1961 and served in the Iraqi military before going to Afghanistan where he spent 15 years, it said.

I guess he escaped the Saudi’s box or was it your “boxed lunch” he avoided?

Whatever!!!

By Paul

April 27, 2007 5:30 PM | Link to this

RW-(the original)

That’s a good observation. It’s apparent from that link I cited earlier “O Reilly says Soros funds far Left websites that have an agenda” - I thought maybe I’d find copies of the SEC filings, the web sites’ financials, donor lists - it was just another guy saying “can you believe this charge? He’s nuts! What and idiot! He’s a bozo!” Lots of opinions and indignation, light on the supporting facts - like an Olbermann commentary.

The newspaper articles that say “multiple sources/wire services” are usually done by a staff writer. I saw one not too long ago - screaming headline on global warming - but not one single sentence in the multicolumn article supported the headline. Rather like the Guiliani headlines regarding a Democratic win in ‘08. Shouldn’t be that difficult for a Democratic candidate to say “this is how he’s wrong, this is why we won’t go back to defense.” Unless…..

By RW-(the original)

April 27, 2007 5:33 PM | Link to this

ABS,

What do you think about Franklin Roosevelt as a President?

By Bill

April 27, 2007 5:34 PM | Link to this

One has but to glance at the products here of LuckoDrone, BD, RW, Dustee, other inferiors. Every minute of every day filled with hatred, jealousy, bitterness, personal failure, et al. They are living proof that in life there are, indeed, worse things than…death.

By ABS

April 27, 2007 5:36 PM | Link to this

Paul, Oh by the way, I’m not a university student…I used to be one…for a long time actually, but I choose to actually think of solutions, like some wingnuts here have demanded we do, instead of just throwing out nasty names, which speaks worlds to their mindset! Federal research and funding is something I do know something about.

By RW-(the original)

April 27, 2007 5:38 PM | Link to this

Paul,

There is a certain political persuasion, well represented here, that thrives on headlines regardless of the data found under it. Why do you think we are constantly treated to the title of the August 6, 2001 PDB, but those that bring it up will never discuss it’s substance.

By ABS

April 27, 2007 5:41 PM | Link to this

RW - to be honest I don’t know much about him…enlighten me. It’s obvious you are chomping at the opportunity. Like I said, I’m not a military strategist. I don’t claim to know everything which is why I welcome actual debate instead of simple name calling…I leave that to children.

By @@

April 27, 2007 5:44 PM | Link to this

Blackadder:

Try again on the link.

Find the Iraqi here.

(((It said that at one point he was Zawahiri’s caretaker and that he interacted with top Al-Qaeda planners and decision makers such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, Abu Faraj al-Libi, Hamza Rabi’a and Abd al-Rahman al Mujair.)))

By Paul

April 27, 2007 5:47 PM | Link to this

ABS

Thanks for the followup. I’m not much on hyperbole to make a point - especially in written forums - which is different than speaking so while at a party downing a few cold ones. I’m plenty big on using a bit of sarcastic humor (some would dispute anything as humor or appropriate) like the “too many important hearings to tend to port security” - but hey, gotta have a bit of fun and humor!

Well, off to get the car tended to. Good evening and weekend, all -

By getalife

April 27, 2007 5:48 PM | Link to this

Well ABS,

Here is a sample of RW’s civil discourse:

“You low life freaking imbecile. It was the people you glorify by calling them insurgents that they were fighting in Haditha. You know, the Al Qaeda wing of the Democrat Party. F’k you! I’m sick and tired of you slandering our military and lying through your tooth about their undertaking just for your punka-ss political party.”

If you do not want name calling , you are responding to the wrong person.

By RW-(the original)

April 27, 2007 5:48 PM | Link to this

ABS,

I’m not champing to enlighten you in the least.

You said that Hitler rounded up leftists and to you it made perfect sense to think President Bush would do that as well.

That premise is completewly absurd so I wasn’t entertaining it, but I brought up Roosevelt since he was in roughly the same time frame as Hitler and he did round up Japanese-Americans and threw them in interment camps during WWII.

I guess I wondered if you thought it was a worse offense to actually round up people and imprison them in mass or to have your political opponents go around spouting nonsense about how you would imprison or kill political opponents in mass if you got the chance.

By RW-(the original)

April 27, 2007 5:53 PM | Link to this

getalife,

As you well know I have never once started a fight with someone on this blog. Any poster that comes here and remains civil, I deal with in a civil manner. Daniel makes wild claims that our military is comprised of nothing but murderers and rapists that revel in watching a child’s brain splatter against the wall. I don’t put up with that kind of slander being leveled at the very men and women that protest his freedom to drag them through the mud like that.

By LuckoDull

April 27, 2007 5:54 PM | Link to this

Just an observation, I usually leave these pompous a-ss blowhards to revel in their own “brilliance” but I can sense that I’m being baited:

{{{By ABS April 27, 2007 5:41 PM I don’t claim to know everything which is why I welcome actual debate instead of simple name calling}}}

{{{By ABS April 27, 2007 5:36 PM but I choose to actually think of solutions, like some wingnuts here have demanded we do}}}

{{{By ABS April 27, 2007 5:41 PM…I leave that to children.}}}

Typical lib, whine and bitc-h about something you do even as he does the same exact thing.

Or worse.

Looking for somebody to scold.

Coward.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ®.

By @@

April 27, 2007 5:55 PM | Link to this

Good grief Getalife.

Has your doctor recently altered your meds again?

Are you back on the script he had you on before, or are your “drugs of choice” interracting with your prescribed meds?

You bitter old fart.

By RW-(the original)

April 27, 2007 5:56 PM | Link to this

protest=protect in my 5:53

sheesh, that wasn’t the best place for a typo.

By ABS

April 27, 2007 5:59 PM | Link to this

RW - no I do not think it was right of Roosevelt to round up Japanese-Americans during WWII. If you would have read my entire comment earlier, instead of cherry picking you will notice that I said that I didn’t think that would happen here now. If you actually read the entire comments between Cindy, Paul and I you would be able to take my comments in context.

However, since you broght it up…we do have Gitmo…I wonder how history will remember that? Roosevelt was wrong then, just like Bush is wrong now. But, Bush certainly does have the current behavior and precedence to warrant such remarks.

By getalife

April 27, 2007 6:00 PM | Link to this

RW,

And yet you fall in line to blame the Tillman family for wanting the truth.

I gave you an opputunity to show some decency.

You did not.

Daniel is informed on the Haditha case. If you want to debate the facts. Debate them and stop with the pathetic strawman bs.

By @@

April 27, 2007 6:04 PM | Link to this

I guess RW’s typo could be compared to one of my many.

“Iowa Jima”. I even laughed at myself when one of the liberals pointed that one out to me.

The more familiar immediately flies off the fingers.

A whole lotta “protest” going on here.

By getalife

April 27, 2007 6:06 PM | Link to this

@@,

Blaming the Tillman was disgusting and the attacks on the posters will be countered.

If you can’t take the heat…………….

By Cindy

April 27, 2007 6:08 PM | Link to this

I have little doubt if the error had not been made by Franklin, the bush administration would have tried it. Since they put leftists in their terrorist database and fired some lefist fed employees and threaten others I have no doubt they would carry it further given the rein. Thank God the American people respect freedom more than this administration. And no, Paul, the American coffers aren’t unlimited. Other agencies have seen their budgets downsized considerably to fund this war. However, when something happens, like with the food poison events there are suddenly more funds for like the FDA. If you look at past budgets, you will see the reductions.

By LuckoDull

April 27, 2007 6:09 PM | Link to this

{{{By ABS April 27, 2007 5:59 PM Roosevelt was wrong then, just like Bush is wrong now.}}}

Let’s see here, gitmo holds terror suspects caught on the battlefield while Roosevelt rounded up innocent men and women based on skin color, so yes, let’s compare the two.

Bozo.

Coward.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ®.

By getalife

April 27, 2007 6:11 PM | Link to this

@@,

Your thoughts on Andy’s posts?

By RW-(the original)

April 27, 2007 6:14 PM | Link to this

getalife,

You simply misrepresented Dusty and then you’ve been squawking about it all week. You should really read the comment from LuckoDull at the end of that day. How anyone could read that and still not understand the point doesn’t want to understand it.

THe problem with the Haditha hysteria is that we DON’T know all the facts yet, but Daniel and John Murtha want to string these Marines up and hang them without even hearing the facts.

ABS,

Roosevelt rounded up Japanese-Americans and locked them away just for being of Japanese descent. That’s a far cry from locking up enemy combatants, which did include one US citizen. That’s been something of a tragedy and has wound it’s way through the courts that will hopefully end up giving us better guidelines on dealing with an American plotting with a foreign enemy that isn’t in allegiance with a country. President Bush’s actions pale in comparison to Roosevelt, much less Hitler’s, yet you chose to say you never know what Bush would do and your basis was that if Hitler did it Bush might.

That’s absurd, but I get the feeling you don’t really care.

By ABS

April 27, 2007 6:15 PM | Link to this

Okay, I’m off to enjoy the weekend…I suggest you all do the same!

By @@

April 27, 2007 6:16 PM | Link to this

Getalife:

I haven’t had time to read today’s posts.

Do you have a particular post of Andy’s in mind?

Would you like to direct me to its’ place on today’s blog agenda Chairman B.O. Fart?

By Buy Danish

April 27, 2007 6:22 PM | Link to this

Paul,

I know it was in response to ABS. Unfortunately his ideas are incredibly silly, and no one is talking about the biggest and easiest “invasion” which only requires an abundance of Islamist immigration where in a very short time the population demographics can shift to people who think Sharia Law is the way to go.

Add Cindy to the mix and it is unbearable to “listen” to.

{{{Considering it was an academic setting, the sources were a little more reliable than some of the sources used here on this blog (like the Internet and People Magazine)}}}

ABS,

Bwahahahahahahahahahaha.

Just this week I’ve cited a story from Yale where they banned props like guns and swords from being used in plays because of what happened at Virginia Tech. Today I cited a bunch of morons from the Harvard Crimson, who in addition to be a bunch of rude loudmouths, are yammering on about the “unconstitutional repession of the environment” among other idiocies.

Thanks to the Left’s stranglehold on education, “academia” is a freaking joke.

By LuckoDull

April 27, 2007 6:25 PM | Link to this

What a total waste college tuition is nowadays, you know it?

I dread the thought of forking over 70G so that someone can teach my kid how to hate the country that they live in.

What a bunch of diseased perverts.

Where do they think we’re going to live after they do in the United States?

Any of you gasbags given that any thought?

I swear, common sense and the basic comprehension of the world around you is not something many of us dwell on.

How sad.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ®.

By RE

April 27, 2007 6:27 PM | Link to this

Forget about “fitzmas”

how about “abramannukah”

WASHINGTON - A senior Justice Department official has resigned after coming under scrutiny in the Department’s expanding investigation of convicted super-lobbyist Jack Abramoff, according to a Justice Department official with knowledge of the case. Making the situation more awkward for the embattled Department, the official, Robert E. Coughlin II, was deputy chief of staff for the criminal division, which is overseeing the Department’s probe of Abramoff.

get it? Abramoff is jewish, hence hannukah. You get gifts on 7 nights so it stretches out longer.

Someone needs to get a scorecard together, I cannot keep track anymore. You have the abramoff scandal, then there is Duke cunningham, and now the attorney purge, as well as the plame investigation.

The headlines are so repetitive, just fill in the blanks.

Republican ” A ” has stepped down from office due to the ” B ” investigation.

Pick one from column A:

Congressman, senator, political appointee, senior staffer.

and one from column B:

Abramoff, Cunningham, Attorney purge, Plame,

Feel free to ammend if I have missed any.

By Buy Danish

April 27, 2007 6:30 PM | Link to this

{{{By ABS

April 27, 2007 6:15 PM | Link to this

Okay, I’m off to enjoy the weekend…I suggest you all do the same!}}}

ABS,

Thanks for the tip. “Have a nice weekend” would have worked just fine.

The last thing we need is snotty advice from arrogant liberals like you as to how to best to spend one’s free time.

By getalife

April 27, 2007 6:32 PM | Link to this

@@,

I know, you are hypocrite.Its okay if Andy does it.

RW,

You are okay with cover ups?

Why do you love to be lied to man?

By RE

April 27, 2007 6:33 PM | Link to this

Wow BD, a little defensive don’t you think?

By RW-(the original)

April 27, 2007 6:38 PM | Link to this

getalife,

Have a Crown and a Cohiba and see if your version of reality returns.

RE,

There really should be some investigation of the Plame investigation. No crime, the prosecutor knew the leaker before it started, and one guy gets convicted (subject to appeal) for lying about the order of meetings while the star witness against him forgot entire TV appearances.

Lock up Fitz! Let’s get to bottom of the grand waste of time and money.

By Buy Danish

April 27, 2007 6:40 PM | Link to this

RE,

Thanks for the botched joke.

Pathetic.

By RE

April 27, 2007 6:44 PM | Link to this

I’ll admit, it doesn’t roll off the toungue like Fitzmas, but I don’t think abramannakah is pathetic.

A little harsh.

By getalife

April 27, 2007 6:46 PM | Link to this

RW,

I am drunker than Andy.

I guess my questions could not be answered honestly .

Nobody likes to be lied to unless they are paid huh?

By @@

April 27, 2007 6:49 PM | Link to this

Getalife:

I’ve looked back and I think I see where you’ve misunderstood the comments on Tillman.

I’ll speak for myself here as I don’t want to misrepresent anyone else’s thoughts on Kevin Tillman.

I would have a greater appreciation for Kevin’s cause if he had not allowed himself to be the frontman for the anti-war crowd.

I could appreciate him more (I do appreciate his service) if he had told TruthOut and the anti-war crowd that it was a personal matter on behalf of his brother, Pat. That he wanted answers from the government they both served, but that he would not allow the anti-war leftists to ride his coattails while he pursued answers to his questions.

That’s the way I see it.

My opinion on Andy’s posts?

Andy’s baaadddddd.

The kinda “bad” I like in a guy.

By LuckoDull

April 27, 2007 6:52 PM | Link to this

{{{By getalife April 27, 2007 6:46 PM I am drunker than Andy.}}}

gitmo: You’re just as convincing as finch was, wigging out over a Maserati while calling me a “drunk.”

You libs focus on the weirdest things.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ®.

By Tool

April 27, 2007 6:53 PM | Link to this

getalife must of been sooo highh!

By getalife

April 27, 2007 6:55 PM | Link to this

@@,

I will ask you the same questions RW dodged:

You are okay with cover ups?

Why do you love to be lied to ?

By getalife

April 27, 2007 6:57 PM | Link to this

Tool,

Who are you to wave your finger?

By RW-(the original)

April 27, 2007 6:59 PM | Link to this

I think Maserati Meltdown may have to work it’s way into the ricktionary, except somebody would have to define it and that would mean wading back through that post. Has finchie come back to blame it on the Apple yet?

By Buy Danish

April 27, 2007 7:01 PM | Link to this

RE,

A little anti-semitic perhaps?

LuckoDull,

I JUST heard on Brit Hume that the Georgia legislature is trying to pass some sort of legislation promoting academic freedom.

Off to check on the details…

By @@

April 27, 2007 7:02 PM | Link to this

Getalife:

I’m all about waiting for justice to prevail.

I do not, however, support the “vigilante style justice” exhibited by you leftists.

I find it repulsive and destructive.

It all goes to motive for me.

By getalife

April 27, 2007 7:04 PM | Link to this

Mmmm, crickets.

Let me ask RE,

Are you okay with cover ups?

By bon scott

April 27, 2007 7:05 PM | Link to this

Andy, you give me a case of constant giggles! Blatant, stupid hypocrisy does that to me.

{{By LuckoDull - April 27, 2007 4:20 PM - Liiberalism is a perversion of humanity, a desecration of God’s creation, a lifestyle full of depravity, nothing but an excuse for being a sinner and feeling good about, cause you don’t “discriminate” even though you do call Conservatives that you don’t like “fa-gs” and “hermaphrodites.”}}

And yet minutes later you call Hillary a “homo”. That, after calling other reasonable Americans “f*”, “hermaprodites”, menstruating hags”, “meteoerosexuals”, and other insults too numerous to mention.

Why don’t you practice what you preach? Your version of Christianity reminds me more of David Koresh and Jim Jones than Robert Schuller and Billy Graham.

Come to think of it, you aren’t Christian at all.

By Buy Danish

April 27, 2007 7:08 PM | Link to this

RW,

This was one of my favorite parts of the Maserati Meltdown:

{{{Stdies show that the brain actually works better when exposed ro small amounts of booze.}}

By LuckoDull

April 27, 2007 7:12 PM | Link to this

{{{By bonnie scott April 27, 2007 7:05 PM And yet minutes later you call Hillary a “homo”.}}}

Excuse me, oddball gay finch, but when did I say that I was democrat and didn’t discriminate against homosexuality?

That would be you and yours, you know the trolls that call me a fa-g even though they say there is nothing “wrong” with “that.”

Is this too much for you to grasp?

Or are you wasted again?

Watch out for that Maserati!

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ®.

By RW-(the original)

April 27, 2007 7:32 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

The double paragraph thing was interesting too since the first paragraph concluded, but when it started over it trailed off. Too bad the character counter got him. We might have found out that his boss just came to his house and after finding him toasted once again, fired him and drove away in a……Maserati!

I wish Apple would find out that he blames their computer for his addictions.

By LuckoDull

April 27, 2007 7:46 PM | Link to this

RW: I can see blaming Apple on a syntax error but what we witnessed earlier today was just plain psychotic.

I’d hate to have that loon catch me riding in a…..Maserati!!

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ®.