Home > Thinking Right > Archives > 2006 > August > 21 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USThe Dixie Chick of Politics
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Once upon a distant time, oh, say, 15 years ago, no figure more noteworthy than a Dixie Chick would dared have stood on foreign soil — or chosen a foreign publication — to criticize a sitting President of the United States. Wouldn’t do it. We disagree amongst ourselves but for an American of standing, it is disloyal and disrespectful to stand on foreign soil and undermine the foreign policy of the United States of America.
That was before Jimmy Carter and the embittered anti-war evolution of his party, the “vast majority” of whom he professes to represent. Having previously spoken in opposition to President Bush abroad, the former president unloaded last week in the German magazine DER SPIEGEL. “There is no doubt that this administration has made a radical and unpressured departure from the basic policies of all previous administrations including those of both Republican and Democratic presidents,” Carter told the magazine. “Under all of its predecessors there was a commitment to peace instead of preemptive war.”
Carter, 81 years old, goes on. And on. On Israel: “I don’t think that Israel has any legal or moral justification for their massive bombing of the entire nation of Lebanon.” On Christian conservatives: “The fundamentalists believe they have a unique relationship with God, and that they and their ideas are God’s ideas and God’s premises on the particular issue. Therefore, by definition since they are speaking for God anyone who disagrees with them is inherently wrong.” And from there it goes downhill. Bad Christians. Bad administration. Evil. They bad, Carter good.
Listening to Carter is about like listening to Andrew Young, 74 years old, as he talks about the Jews, Koreans and Arabs who ran mom-and-pop stores in the ghetto. At some point you just want a respectful press corps to say: “shut off the microphone; they’re sounding really old and bitter.”
In the political rancor of the past 15 years or so, we’ve lost a great deal. In so many instances, it’s not men and women who are from Mars and Venus. It’s liberals and conservatives. At some point, the loyal opposition must reemerge as force that can oppose without becoming completely unhinged, and ex-Presidents, recognizing that they had their shot, will hold their tongue. As a reminder that conservatives and liberals exist in different worlds, in mine ex-Presidents would rather cut off their tongue than use it to criticize the sitting President abroad, especially in time of war. Today’s question about the old guys is this: Is it time to shut up and go away? And I wonder, too, whether we can ever get back to the principle that Americans of standing — entertainers and celebrities excluded — don’t criticize their country or its policies on foreign soil.
Comments
By MClark
August 21, 2006 08:06 AM | Link to this
Good Morning Jim, (Sorry MId-South, I couldn’t resist. I promise not to do that again.)
The very idea that it is the fault of one side or the other, rather than a shared responsibility for the divisions in America is ridiculous. Both parties have been co-opted by their fringes as the vast number of Americans have sat idly and allowed the lunatics on the right to squeal and screech about the fallacy that dissent is unpatriotic, that abortion is the only real issue facing us and the misguided notion that the invasion of Iraq was not only a good thing but is still being conducted efficiently and effectively.
At the same time the lunatic left has devolved into directionless Bush haters connecting all of the ills facing the country to Iraq, who are unable to give the current administration anything other than disdain and who seem to face every problem not with answers, but more criticism.
And nothing gets done.
Rather than a world of conservatives and liberal, I believe there is a third group: A group that will soon spank the extremists on both sides and send them to their room. As for the old guys, if they are spending their days preaching to the choir, repeating the same old nonsense day after day then yes, it is time to shut up and go away.
But it goes far beyond Jimmy Carter. For every Carter there is a Gingrich, for where there is one side there is always the other. It goes for everyone who sees the world as existing of good conservatives and evil liberals or intelligent liberals and ignorant conservatives. It goes for the Wootens and the Tuckers as long as they perpetuate this war between two factions that always want to be seen as speaking for “the American mainstream” but lost touch with most of us long ago.
The extremists’ time is almost up.
By Captain Freedom
August 21, 2006 08:10 AM | Link to this
“Today’s question about the old guys is this: Is it time to shut up and go away?”
Jim, you are much too hard on yourself. Keep up the good fight for Common Sense.
By MClark
August 21, 2006 08:16 AM | Link to this
Want to see an example of what I am refering to above? Just take a look at the waning moments of yesterday’s blog where three on the right took on two on the left and no one said anything. Rather than debate they: whined that no one would debate, made fun of one guys name way past the point of bad taste, while the guy being made fun of was smug to the point of qbnoxious.
We have totally lost the ability to talk to one another. Can we recover or will it take another Civil War to sort this out?
By Think Tank Timmy
August 21, 2006 08:21 AM | Link to this
The last Dixie Chick publicity photo showed them naked and discreetly holding their boobs. Is Mr. Wooten suggesting that a naked Jimmy Carter (holding his tongue) get in there with them?
Jimmy Carter did bring up an interesting point: we will find out whose side God is on soon enough.
Lets all play, “Whose side was God on?”
1). Vietnamese vs USA
2) North vs South (US Civil War)
3) Japan vs China (1930’s)
3) Whiskey Rebellion of 1822
4) Sitting Bull vs Custer
5) Oil/Car Companies vs Planet Earth
By candide
August 21, 2006 08:29 AM | Link to this
How dare an s.o.b like Wooten criticize Carter for taking a moral position. Carter may not have been one of our better presidents but he outclasses George Bush by a mile or two. Wooten is just another embittered reactionary fascist.
By getalife
August 21, 2006 08:34 AM | Link to this
My goodness.
So Jim wants Americans to keep their mouths shut while a corrupt dictatorship regime sale out our country.
I don’t think so Jim. You and your ilk are on record in support of this regime and there will be a reckoning.
I find it absolutely incredible that people like Jim still support the GOP after everything they have done to this country. If Jim were a true patriotic American he would be writing the truth about the GOP but instead he still spins the same old bs.
No thanks Jim. I will stay on my country’s side with the rest of the great American patriots who voice their opinions with the truth against the pathetic GOP.
By Think Tank Timmy
August 21, 2006 08:40 AM | Link to this
Iraqi Exit Strategy on which Republicans and Democrats agree: Iraqi Civil War.
It’s amazing how the only realistic exit strategy involves perception. Who are the umpires or observers in position to make the call about civil war?
The homeland base umpire is too busy surveilling balls (porn wiretaps) and strikes (union busting, hey, doesn’t that explain the immigration policy?).
If the Iraqis call it civil war, who will believe them? “We are fighting a civil war, go away”…..”No you’re not. You’re a lying piece of Sunni scum”….”Yes we are in a civil war, sir, please let us fight without your interference”…..”No, it’s not a civil war, you no good, dirty, yellow thievin’ piece of caliphate trash”
If we do leave, then that’s when a small Kurdish boy will run after US troops yelling, “SHAME…..DONT COME BACK!…SHAME!……DONT COME BACK…..SHAME!…..SHAAAAAME!!!!!”
By Realist
August 21, 2006 08:48 AM | Link to this
I think part of the problem is that “American” just doesnt hold the same clout or repsect it used to. You have a large segment of the population (African Americans, Mexican-Americans, Entertainers, Liberal Extremist) who show disdain for America and the American dream and feel that they are not a part of it. And of course its these clowns who get most of the media attention. If a guy has actually worked hard and is able to drive an expensive car and live in a nice home, its something to be ashamed of. Youre labeled as a fat cat baby seal killer. Lets face it, it has become chic to be anti-American.
By Think Tank Timmy
August 21, 2006 08:52 AM | Link to this
Dixie chic?
By Realist
August 21, 2006 08:52 AM | Link to this
Just to clarify, in my last post, I did not mean to say that ALL African Americans, Mexican-Americans, etc, hold this anti-american view. I was referring to that segment of those groups who do hold that view.
My apologies.
By deegee
August 21, 2006 08:56 AM | Link to this
I love America!! Look at my car, look at my home!!! Sell more Amway and be like me!!!
By @@
August 21, 2006 09:08 AM | Link to this
I think Carter likes to revel in what he views as his enlightened approach to Middle East peace. What exactly did he accomplish? Based on what I’m seeing and hearing, he accomplished very little. The man is an idealist. The world cannot nor will it ever be ideal. My opinion is he needs to shut up and resume his philanthropical efforts at home.
Off topic…As a former liberal, I’m beginning to see where I was wrong in the past.
During my liberal days I felt good about biting into the shiny apple of liberalism, only to find out that the fruit(mankind) was rotten.
Carter failed to see something rotten in the Middle East. To be specific, it was “Islamofacism”.
Think Tank Timmy:
That will be my only post of the day here. I’m trolling off to work in the yard.
By Ed
August 21, 2006 09:11 AM | Link to this
Let’s consider the source. Jimmy Carter does not have anyone listening to him beyond the Georgia borders. When he does get national attention, he abuses it. It was pretty shameful to use Mrs. Kings funeral for his own agenda and bash every Republican known to man. He wasn’t alone on that day but again consider the source. King Bill and Queen Hillary to their credit, took the high road and talked about the things Mrs. King accomplished and said that this is not the time or place to bash. That day should have been about Mrs. King. They don’t need to pursue the national stage because it comes to them. Jimmy Carter, one of our worst Presidents, had America at double digit inflation and didn’t have the guts to free American hostages. I don’t hear other retired Presidents going after him although the facts would be an easy target.
By Interested Observer
August 21, 2006 09:11 AM | Link to this
Imagine that a Democratic president had launched the invasion of Iraq, set up prison camps in Guantanamo Bay and across Iraq and Afghanistan, presided over what happened at Abu Ghraib, created the largest new entitlement spending program since Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society programs, and presided over a foreign nation-building project that is quickly collapsing into a civil war.
And now imagine Republicans like Gingrich, DeLay, Perle, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Cheney, etc., remaining silent in the face of all of that, holding their tongues at a Democratic administration that was pursuing the policies above.
Hard to imagine, isn’t it?
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 09:14 AM | Link to this
I had a friend named Bill Campbell he used to rob steal and gamble
And on the side he’d beg so he mopped up
I told him he shouldn’t do it and Campbell told me he knew it
So he started beggin’ with a bucket instead of a cup
He’s in the jailhouse now (he’s in the jailhouse now)
He’s in the jailhouse now (he’s in the jailhouse now)
Well Campbell fluffed his dove when he wore a tuxedo to the country club
He’s in the jailhouse now (he’s in the jailhouse now)
I met his old gal Sadie she said have you seen Billy lately
I said I don’t believe that he’s about
She went down to the jail she went down to take him his mail
Then she whispered sheriff please don’t let him out
He’s in the jailhouse now (he’s in the jailhouse now)
He’s in the jailhouse now (he’s in the jailhouse now)
While Campbell’s put away Sadie’s with the sheriff everyday
He’s in the jailhouse now (he’s in the jailhouse now)
Well I remember the last election the prohibitionists were in action
They’s tryin’ to elect themselves a president
Bill Canpbell and John Austin walked from New Orleans to Boston
And they’ve got a bottle in every settlement
They’re in the jailhouse now (he’s in the jailhouse now)
They’re in the jailhouse now (he’s in the jailhouse now)
They were down at the railroad track stealin’ a train to haul it back
They’re in the jailhouse now (he’s in the jailhouse now)
By sct
August 21, 2006 09:15 AM | Link to this
Jim, the kind of talk and action by people like Realist are far more of a threat than the Dixie Chicks. Chickenhawks that love to watch wars from the sideline but are too afraid to do the fighting. Take this statement by Realist from last week.
Dear Iraqi Soldier, I am fighting right along side you son. You see, back home, we are fighting a threat just as real as any IED or RPG that you may face. Its a threat to our way of life as we know it. The threat is the undermining of American patriots and servicemen just like you son, and you wont beleive where the threat is coming from! Its coming from the liberal congress that many of us trusted and beleived in when they voted to send troops into Iraq. Thats right, the very ones who voted to send you in are now backing out on you and abandoning you one after another. So my son, we are here fighting for you. Not to mention working hard at our jobs each day and sending our tax dollars to Washington so that you can have the equipment and food and tools you need to win this war. You are doing a great job son, and we appreciate you and your work for this country. Keep doing your part, and we conservatives will keep doing ours on your behalf!!
Warmly, Realist, true american
Of course Realist also said what he planned to do that night, I wonder what the soldiers in Iraq were doing that night?
“…my wife and I will put my son to bed and sit out back on the screened porch with a glass of wine, maybe even sit in the jacuzzi, and listen to the crickets before we go off to bed.”
Yes, you conservatives are soooo patriotic. I guess this is how you FIGHT a modern war, jacuzzi, wine and 6400 sq ft houses.
By PatriotforLife
August 21, 2006 09:16 AM | Link to this
Jim, Thank you again for your common sense comments. Jimmy Carter is a moral man, and was arguably the worse president we ever had. He is starting to rant and ramble like my granddaddy.
By Southern Democrat
August 21, 2006 09:16 AM | Link to this
MClark,
I agree with both of your posts wholeheartedly and hope that the nation will soon cast off the extremists, find the middle, and start moving forward.
Mr. Wooten,
I cannot help but, respectfully, point out the self-contradictory nature of your argument. Why is the conservatives’ (particularly the neo-cons’) mantra to “export democracy,” yet the act of an American exercising free speech outside the territorial boundaries of the U.S. seen as treason? One cannot have it both ways.
I do, also, agree with President Carter regarding the paradigmatic shift in U.S. policy that Iraq represents. While the U.S. was never reticient to use small-scale military action in a pre-emptive manner (Granada, Panama, etc.), the philosophy behind the Iraq conflict is radically different. Similarly, the use of Predator drones to assassinate terrorist leaders and publicly admit to doing so is a radical departure from U.S. foreign policy. I bring these up not to pass value judgments (I’ll keep those to myself), but simply to note that we, as Americans, need to stop and discuss the fact that we are proceeding in a radically different manner than ever before… and are we okay with that?
Last, as I have said before, I have lived in Madrid, London, New York, and D.C. in addition to the Peach State, so I am no stranger to terrorism and its after-effects. I also know that using fear as a justification is a dangerous game and that our foreign policy must reflect a sensible, coherent philosophy that is easily explainable for us to regain our moral legitimacy. I do not think that the leadership of Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld, none of whom has ever seen combat, has been positive for this country.
By Steve
August 21, 2006 09:18 AM | Link to this
Throw a picture of Castro, Clinton or Carter into the Grand Canyon and stand back…all of those types will follow….
Problem solved.
By sct
August 21, 2006 09:23 AM | Link to this
“And now imagine Republicans like Gingrich, DeLay, Perle, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Cheney, etc., remaining silent in the face of all of that,”
Exactly! One month into the Yugoslavia war many of those WERE criticizing the war. They were our leaders, not a couple of entertainers. Why were they allowed to question our “exit strategy?” “another Viet Nam,” and “cost.”
ONE MONTH INTO THAT CONFLICT????????
By Fall Line
August 21, 2006 09:31 AM | Link to this
I’m afraid that the time of the gentlemen’s agreement that “criticism of foreign policy stops at the border” is gone. It was killed by the deep divisions that separate the conservatives and liberals in this country, and I despair that we’ll never have it back again. I’m a conservative and a Christian, but I believe that God has more important things to tend to than politics. I have always found it interesting that Christians who believe that God endowed us with “free will” strive so to take that luxury away from those who choose another path. As for Mr. Carter, I wish there was an activity other than politics which could draw his attention. Too bad he can’t play golf or chase women, then he could be as laid back as our last sitting President. I guess the peanut farm doesn’t need any brush cleared or the Sunday School class doesn’t need new lesson plans. Somehow he thinks that the people who would not listen to him when he was President, will listen to him now that he’s not. Presidents, unlike fine wine, do not improve with age.
By Jackie
August 21, 2006 09:32 AM | Link to this
I find the current crew of “chickenhawks” that expose their patriotic values and zeal for war and death to be a psychotic desire to reach out and hug their mother’s skirt tail for safety. They are neither patriotic or brave; they are just plain cowards who would rather see everything and everyone devasted, as long as they have the ability to maintain their pacificers and security blankets.
By Think Tank Timmy
August 21, 2006 09:40 AM | Link to this
When Geronimo was captured in 1881, he was found riding a horse leading three other riderless horses, with his wife walking behind. When asked why he was riding and his wife was walking, Geronimo answered matter-of-factly, “Cause she aint got no horse.”
This is exactly parallel to us being caught in our WMD lies to the UN. When asked why we invaded Iraq and not Pakistan, (where the 911 conspirators are hiding), Bush answers matter-of-factly, “Cause Iraq aint got no nukes”.
By Amelia
August 21, 2006 09:46 AM | Link to this
Has anyone else here stopped to think that the current administration has done exactly what the lunatic fringe of the republican party said that Hillary would do?
By getalife
August 21, 2006 09:48 AM | Link to this
sct,
The facts show the obvious hypocritical mind set of the wingnuts. Jim was probably right there with them in bashing Clinton’s war.
The wingnuts will never admit anything, they write in spite of the facts. To learn from your mistakes, you have to admit your mistakes. The wingnuts will never learn. They are to be ignored in the future to clean up their mess.
By Janine
August 21, 2006 09:49 AM | Link to this
As you point out , Jim, we no longer present a united face to the rest of the world.However,the fact is that we are not united, of one mind This, it seems to me, is the inevitable outcome of real freedom and the diversity that has become America. This dissent is now shared with the world because we have the means to do so that our forefathers did not have….the ubiquitous media. If 60 MINUTES had been around in the 1800’s to interview our slaves, and if they would not have been hung from the old apple tree for speaking out,the world would have heard the voice of dissent much earlier…. [not to mention, if the media had been , shall we say, unleashed,as it is today,we , living right here in the old USA, would have all known of the extra marital activities, of FDR, Eisenhower, and J. Kennedy ]. Dissent is and always has been one of the pillars of our republic/democracy. It was here in the beginning and, hopefully, will remain…and if the world sees it, then so be it!
By Eric
August 21, 2006 09:51 AM | Link to this
Ah yes… the conservatives move more to the right (Zieg Hiel!) and the liberals move more to the left (Da Comrade) and they take their idiot followers with them… while the vast majority of moderate Americans look the our two major parties and can’t decide whether to laugh or cry at the stupidy, greed, lunacy and retardness of the choices we have…
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 09:55 AM | Link to this
Carter is clearly the most despicable living ex-president. Read a copy of The Real Jimmy Carter by Steven Hayward as I have and you’ll soon see why this true. Anyone who slavishly asserts Carter is a moral man is clearly badly bewildered. But this is the type of cretinous fawning Carter just eats up!!
Here’s just a few of the now forgotten examples of vileness of Carter from back in the old days when Carter described himself as a “Russell conservative” - Russell being a virulently segragationist DEMONCRAT GA senator. Yet Carter also at another press conference when asked if he liberal, conservative or moderate refused to answer not wanting to alientae liberal types. Carter has always dodged and weaved when things go against him. Carter in his 1966 GA Gov camp was a vile smear merchant, especially against Carl Sanders, Carter made up lie after lie. Carter even played the race card (see book for full details) with black Hawks players and Sanders ther Hawks owner in a grainy photo in a leaflet which was distributed by senior Carter campaign types. One Carter aide was even spotted passing out these leaflets at a KKK rally!! All this is well documented in the book - read the rest for yourself.
I despise Carter for his vile smugness and his overweening ignorant leftist narcissism. His pandering to anyone who supports his far left politics and his hateful boorish attitude to Bush and others with whom he disagrees. Carter is enevr ever wrong about anything. Including his genius N Korean treaty which was based entirely on lies and worthless promises but great PR for Carter. His overt support for the Venezualean thug after his Mussolini type campiagn that Carter endorsed. His disgusting dishonest attacks on Israel and Bush and many others he opposes. Carters political calumny is as poisonous as it gets. Remember Carter’s outrageous sneering at Bush at a Nobel ceremony - given to Cartr purely on political grounds. The GOP largely if not completely follow the unwritten rule of no attacks by expresidents outside the USA. The leftist dems never do!! Carter is no better or any more trustworthy than the obese tub of treasonous lard Moore.
By Eric
August 21, 2006 09:55 AM | Link to this
Plus, people seem to forget what president actually accomplished something lasting in the Middle East… Peach between two nations… Israel and Egypt… a peace that still holds today…. what did Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II get for us in the Middle East?
War, War, War, $3 a gallon gas, War, Dead Americans, War, War
And so Carter is the idiot….
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight
By MClark
August 21, 2006 09:59 AM | Link to this
Regardless of how Jimmy Carter’s comments are viewed today, it is extremely disingenuous to act as if the man contributed nothing to the world during his term in office. To toss the Camp David Peace Accords onto the trash heap of history because of a disagreement with Mr. Carter’s current position is intellectually dishonest.
The Camp David Accords were extremely influential in breaking the back of the united Arab front when it came to the right for Israel to exist. Egypt, at the time, possessed the strongest military of the Arab countries and conflict between Israel and Egypt was a serious threat hanging over the mid-east. President Carter saw this threat as a reality and turned away from Kissinger’s shuttle diplomacy and began to work on multilateral negotiations. Just four years after the Yom Kippur War this strategy was effective but risky for all involved. (Egypt was tossed out of the Arab League for ten years and just three years after the Accords were signed Anwar Sadat was assassinated.)
The legacy of these accords was the framework for the recognition of Israel’s right to exist by Arab countries and a realization in the Arab world that negotiations with Israel were possible. The situation in the middle east would be much more complicated, confused and dangerous without the work of Menachem Begin, Sadat AND Carter.
So feel free to disagree with President Carter for his current statements. As long as he speaks out then he has no right to object to opposition to his words, and I do think there is validity to the argument that a past President should be very careful and circumspect with speaking about a sitting President. But keep the criticism honest and give the devil his due.
The Camp David Accords deserve their place in history as does President Carter for facilitating them.
By deegee
August 21, 2006 10:01 AM | Link to this
There is a difference between a politician and a statesman. We are entrenched in the 2-party political system and politicians will campaign until they die. If Joe Lieberman can win as an independant in Connecticut then maybe we will start to see the beginning of a self-corrective movement in this country.
By Fall Line
August 21, 2006 10:03 AM | Link to this
mclark… well said.
By Lake Sinclair
August 21, 2006 10:06 AM | Link to this
Jim:
You need to read more history. As close as the 70’s people were criticising the government on foreign soil. As a matter of fact one of the critics grew up to be President. Where does is say that you can’t do this? Send me a copy of your constitution, mine is missing that part.
By sct
August 21, 2006 10:07 AM | Link to this
Jim, Getalife is right isn’t he? You were against the Yugoslavia war, and your columns reflected that. Care to explain?
By Janine
August 21, 2006 10:08 AM | Link to this
You know,Jim,as I think about it, the AJC is quite guilty of perpetuating the GREAT DIVIDE in this country. I read every editorial you write as well as every one your nemisis, Cynthia Tucker, writes. She is so ultra left and you are so ultra right..both coul almost be described as on the fringe, that it’s difficult for us regular folks out here to bond with either of you…!
By julie
August 21, 2006 10:10 AM | Link to this
Jimmy Carter just needs to hush. As a matter of fact, all ya’ll just need to hush.
By Janine
August 21, 2006 10:12 AM | Link to this
Julie,…hush is not the AMerican Way!!!
By getalife
August 21, 2006 10:13 AM | Link to this
sct,
I wish we could ask Mike Luckovich.
He would know. I doubt Jim would admit bashing Clinton during war time.
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 10:14 AM | Link to this
Carter is a bitter hateful utterly incompetent old man who needs to shut the hell up and silently retire amongst his far leftist narcissistic peanuts. His bloody peanuts are just about the only thing in this world that still loves him unconditionally (other than his wife).
Bush and others in office need to publicly round on Carter and tell him to his supremely smug, dictator loving face that he is wrong on every issue he now shrilly and idiotically pontificates on. He should also be told to publicly apologise for being so naive and moronic to take the word of the N Koreans and his disgusting outburst at the King funeral. Remember how Carter preened himself everywhere after that worthless N Korean treaty was signed!!
Carter is as much a man of peace as Neville Chamberlain - the difference being that Chamberlain eventually saw the error of his ways - Carter never ever admits being wrong!!
By Fall Line
August 21, 2006 10:19 AM | Link to this
I think that you seeing Tucker as a nemisis for wooten as symbolic of how far polarized we have become. I don’t see Wooten as far right, and I don’t see Tucker as far left. They each make good and bad points. I will admit that I most often agree with Wooten, but I find that Tucker and I stand side by side on some issues as well. I think some people have co-opted the old right wing saying, “My country - right or wrong,” and changed it to “My party - right or wrong.”
By deegee
August 21, 2006 10:23 AM | Link to this
Here’s a link to the entire interview in Der Spiegel. http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/spiegel/0,1518,431793,00.html
Carter’s comments are not the rantings of a demented old coot. The US is losing its ability to fight a multilateral war against radical Islam because of the ideology of the present administration. Take note that to date there is no multilateral peacekeeping force ready to step in to southern Lebanon. The idea that if we just don’t talk about it then no one will notice is ridiculous. I don’t see much difference between an interview with CNN and and interview with International Der Spiegel magazine.
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 10:30 AM | Link to this
Carter’s comments are not the rantings of a demented old coot.
Absolutely agree … they are actually the rantings of a narcissistic (going) senile far leftist moral fascist!!
By MClark
August 21, 2006 10:35 AM | Link to this
At the risk of spending the rest of the afternoon being called names, would you please expalin for me how President Carter qualifies as a fascist?
By Rawena
August 21, 2006 10:40 AM | Link to this
Leftist Facist? Is that sort of like a Capilalist Socialsit or an Atheist Christian?
Time for Truth, I think it’s time for education for YOU!
By jbmlaw
August 21, 2006 10:42 AM | Link to this
Good morning all. While I agree with Jim’s sentiments, I disagree somewhat on the substance, for a couple of reasons.
First, critique by the personage of President Carter is comparatively meaningless, for all the reasons cited by TTFT and others. He was a totally ineffective president, without regard to his intentions. Today the Democrats (including, evidently, President Carter) have abandoned President Carter’s long professed respect for human rights and freedom for our brothers overseas
Second, I don’t believe criticism of conservative policies has never really stopped at the water’s edge. The moonbats compare the war on terrorism to WW2, but that is a false analogy; the better comparison is to WW3, the war against international communism, which took nearly 50 years to win. The early warriors in the battle –Richard Nixon and Joe McCarthy – were constantly attacked, falsely, by the moonbats of their day; I believe the criticism of the conservative conduct of the war was not limited to stateside.
Excellent essay in WSJ today, anticipating Jim’s topic:
Even though he paid a price for it, Sen. Joe Lieberman was right when he wrote last November in The Wall Street Journal that “it’s time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge he will be the commander in chief for three more critical years. And that in matters of war, we undermine presidential credibility at our nation’s peril.” At the same time, Republicans should remember what Mr. Lieberman wrote immediately afterwards: “It is time for Republicans in the White House and Congress who distrust Democrats to acknowledge that greater Democratic involvement and support in the war in Iraq is critical to rebuilding the support of the American people that is essential to our success in that war.”
By MClark
August 21, 2006 10:43 AM | Link to this
It seems to me if I recall correctly fascism’s origins and characteristics that President Carter would be the exact opposite of a fascist.
This is not a defense of Carter or an endorsement of him, just a recognition that perhaps you are confused as to what the words you are chosing to utilize here mean.
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 10:46 AM | Link to this
If you actually bothered to read/post what I actually said you’d see that it was “moral fascist” A moral fascist is someone who at best is extremely intolerant of anyone who disagrees with them . At the very least Carter is undeniably that!!
Next time mate - at least be honest enough to quote me in full. That Clintonesque trick of a partial quote didn’t work, did it??!!
By jbmlaw
August 21, 2006 10:47 AM | Link to this
“Fascism” merely refers to Italian nationalism, from the “fasces” the bundle of wheat that was the symbol of good fortune for the Romans. President Carter’s newly-found isolationist policies may qualify.
By GodHatesTrash
August 21, 2006 10:48 AM | Link to this
Carter is one of the minority of southrons who gets what the United States is about. YOU FILTHY CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN OF KLANSMEN AND GREAT-GREAT GRANDCHILDREN OF TRAITORS ARE NOT DECENT AMERICANS - YOU ARE TRASH.
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 10:50 AM | Link to this
Rawena … thanks for the moronic dishonest post … nor did I say “leftist fascist” - see my response above to MClark!!
He is a far leftist and a moral fascist - you lefties are clearly not just playing being real dumb today!!
Must be because Campbell’s finally in the Big House!!
By getalife
August 21, 2006 10:51 AM | Link to this
OMG, W is an idiot. I had to change the channel.
Unbelievable, people support this idiot.
Wow.
By jbmlaw
August 21, 2006 10:51 AM | Link to this
Dear Rawena, all fascists and Nazis are/were socialists. They always believe that government should triumph over private choice.
By Van
August 21, 2006 10:51 AM | Link to this
deegee and other left leaning people.
Carter’s comments are outrageous. Saying that Israel has no moral or legal reason to retailiate against the hezbo’s and Lebanon.
Is he nuts?
Israel was invaded by a state sponsored terrorist group. Its soldiers killed and captured.
In the south, Hamas invaded and captured a soldier,
What other reasons are needed for fighting back?
Leboanon has violated 1559 and the current UN resolutions by not living up to their end, disarming the cowardly Hezbo’s.
As to jimmy, he can not find a voice in print in the US, so he goes outside the country to critize the US - I say revoke his passport, he obviously does not like it here.
By Najeh Davenpoop
August 21, 2006 10:55 AM | Link to this
Yeah, Jimmy Carter criticizing the President on foreign soil is so terrible — I mean it’s not like if he came on CNN and criticized Bush the rest of the free world would be able to see it or anything. Looks like there wasn’t anything else to write about today, huh?
By An interesting idea
August 21, 2006 10:55 AM | Link to this
If Carter is the Dixie Chick of politics, how about Wooten as the Trannie Coulter of the AJC?
By MClark
August 21, 2006 10:56 AM | Link to this
Fascism refers to much more than Italian nationalism. Fascism was a political philosophy that began in France and stresses community, and equates individualism and materialism with moral decay. It was critical of Marxism Liberalism AND conservatism, while co-opting ideas from all three.
So take your full quote of moral fascist and realize that there is no such animal as a moral fascist. Someone who is extremely intolerant of anyone who disagrees with them can be called a bigot, narrow-minded and any number of other things, but moral fascism is nothing more than a confusion of terms and a complete misunderstanding of the precepts of fascism.
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 10:58 AM | Link to this
Clark … fascism’s ideological/political origins are utterly irrelevant here . a moral fascist is what Carter is.
stop being a dishonest pedant and wise up - I’ve told you what the usage was - you may disgree with that which is fine!! I am not a moral fascist!!
fascist is now used generically to descibe folks who are virulently opposed to any position - mohammedan fascists or islamic fascists are often discussed in the media and by commentators. clearly they are no more “political” (Mussolini type) fascists than Carter is … but they are still fascists - in the wider usage today.
you’ve failed with your attempt to dig at me, because of your ignorance of contemporay political “discourse”.
agree or disagree about Carter - its of no consequence either way.
By Call'em as I See'em
August 21, 2006 10:59 AM | Link to this
Bush vetos stem cell research on already harvested cells and Carter is the “moral fascist”? That’s a good one.
And Jim will never answer the question of why he didn’t support Clinton during a time of war. He’ll conveniently ignore it - just like Fox news conveniently ignored the 290 wounded/16 dead in iraq yesterday morning. THEY NEVER MENTIONED IT ONCE - while all the other local and national news made it their headline.
Also, notice how Jim never talks about what the current admin is doing wrong or having difficulty with, but always finding some democrat to lash out at? How bout calling to task the people who matter, ie, are in control of the congress, senate and White house - not old presidents who don’t make policy? Well, we all know why that is!
By GodHatesTrash
August 21, 2006 10:59 AM | Link to this
I guess Mr. Wooten thinks Carter inherited the traitor gene.
By Van
August 21, 2006 11:03 AM | Link to this
time for the truth,
In my opinion, fascism, refers today to a viewpoint held by the group and not individules.
The radical islamist hold a view point as a group and not as an individule, lefties, are the same way, a goup viewpoint. The good old group think is alive and well today. Just listen to the lefties all spout the same talking points they were feed today from the AJC.
Live free, think for yourself and foil the plans of the tyrants.
By MClark
August 21, 2006 11:03 AM | Link to this
No one is trying to dig you but your can’t just mish-mash words together and expect to be taken seriously.
There is no such thing as a moral fascist.
By The Truth Hurts
August 21, 2006 11:03 AM | Link to this
Say what you want about Jimmy, he told the truth. So did Andrew Young and so does Bill Cosby on his crusade. The truth negates slander in any court. Because you cons can’t handle it is too bad. Get over yourselves.
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 11:04 AM | Link to this
Clark - you are being dishonest and dumb again … there are countless references to arab/islamic/mohammedan fascists in the media today … the left endlessly call Bush a fascist and a nazi …
my usage of moral fascist about Carter was clear and unequivocal - all your pedantic bollox IGNORES the common, wider usage of this term which is no longer strictly limited to 1930’s style brownshirts.
this is one of the more ludicrous usages I found - bet you enjoy it :)
http://www.friesian.com/trek.htm
By Southern Democrat
August 21, 2006 11:05 AM | Link to this
jbmlaw, I always admire the well-crafted nature of your postings, though I tend to disagree with their substance.
Your holding out of Nixon and McCarthy as “attacked, falsely” left me scratching my head, however. If you are trying to say that those two men identified the global threat of communism, then perhaps I agree with you to that extent. If you are holding them out as paragons of virtue and moral leadership, then I am simply baffled. This would seem to me the same argument that some of my fellow Dems tried to use in defense of Clinton’s pecadillos.
Further, while your explanation of fascism is correct to some degree, ignoring the application of the term to Nazi Germany, Franco’s Spain, Salazar’s Portugal, etc., and its discussion amongst political science thinkers (particularly Arendt), is equivalent to confining “democratic republic” to the city-states of Greece.
As such, the colloquial understanding of fascism is much more readily analogized to an administration that consolidates power in the executive through gradual reduction of accepted freedoms and checks on said power than on an ex-executive who disagrees with current policy.
But now I’m just being ticky-tacky… :)
By getalife
August 21, 2006 11:05 AM | Link to this
Thank you “Call’em as I See’em”.
Well said.
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 11:06 AM | Link to this
Carter is a moral fascist!!
By Call'em as I See'em
August 21, 2006 11:06 AM | Link to this
The irony in the last sentence of Van’s last post is so sweet!
By MClark
August 21, 2006 11:07 AM | Link to this
fascist is now used generically to descibe folks who are virulently opposed to any position
That is simply not true and if there is any truth to it then the personusing it is as confused about the term as you. The historical foundation of a political philosophy cannot be tossed aside so that the word may be used as a political slur.
By JoeD
August 21, 2006 11:10 AM | Link to this
If moral fascist is a proper term, and I’m not saying it is, then who better to term moral fascists than the current administration and the neo-cons who think they know more than everyone else? Jim’s opening today is a prime example of that. If you disagree with Dubya, or Cheney, or the Gang that Can’t Shoot Straight at State and Defense, then you are a traitor. No one wants to consider the fact they might be wrong in this administration, so they just attack the messenger and go blythely on the way toward disaster. This administration could use a little constructive criticism, whether it comes from CNN, the AJC or Der Spiegel. But it won’t listen.
By Toad
August 21, 2006 11:11 AM | Link to this
Janine,
Frederick Douglass did go to England and speak out against slavery in the U. S. At the time he was still a slave.
By Janine
August 21, 2006 11:13 AM | Link to this
THanks , Toad…..But was it covered by 27 networks so that every backwoods Bo could analyze and criticize”?
By rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda
August 21, 2006 11:13 AM | Link to this
Greetings today, from Boulder, Colorado. I checked the online paper to see what is going on and I see Mr. Wooten is up to his usual stuff - rousing the redneck rabble.
Cute title Jim - I remember when Dick Williams used to work for the paper - he used to refer President Clinton as William Rodham or William Rodham Clinton, in an attempt to feminize the President, I guess - of course, it you’ve ever seen the effete little bowtied bespectled Mr. Williams, male virility is not your first impression - or last, or any.
So little Jimmy Wooten calls an ex-President of the United States the Dixie Chick of politics. Sort of like Dick “Less” Williams trying to feminize Bill Clinton…
Let’s hope Mrs. Wooten sees something we don’t. Or that she doesn’t care.
Why does the AJC continue to publish this sleaze?
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 11:14 AM | Link to this
you are being deliberately obtuse - in fact you are now being a troll about fascism …
fascist is now a term even homos use about christians becasue of their opposition to buttock bouncing. like it or not fascist is used as term of abuse to demonise one’s opposition or characterise violent terrorists/thugs like arab fascists.
Carter is a moral fascist because he is incredibly intolerant of anyone who opposes him.
more non Mussolini modern type fascism here
http://www.nationalreview.com/kurtz/kurtz200504280758.asp
By MClark
August 21, 2006 11:15 AM | Link to this
I agree that the left accuses President Bush of being a fascist and while I disagree the analogy at least has some connection to the true definition of the word rather than just something made up to make a point.
Look at the characteristics of fascism (they are easy to find) and you’ll see how just about any opposition group can accuse a political opponent of fascism. This is due to the rather schizophrenic nature of the definition of fascism and a misunderstanding and misapplication of the term by many (including you). Further, the application of the term to radical Islamists is dead on in its connection to the traditional use of the word. It is just this sort of amorphous, wide tent definition that leads to its wide use and misuse.
But the fact is that there is no such thing as a moral fascist. It is a contradiction in terms.
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 11:18 AM | Link to this
go look at footage of anti Bush demos and see the Bush is a fascist/nazi placards!!
you are now being a moral fascist!! :)
The historical foundation of a political philosophy cannot be tossed aside so that the word may be used as a political slur.
maybe so - BUT THE FACTS SHOW IT IS … nazi and fascist are bandied about will nilly these days, mostly by the left! you are very naive!!
By Van
August 21, 2006 11:19 AM | Link to this
Call’em as I See’em,
Like so many on the left, you failed to qualify the veto on stem cell research - it was only Federal money that he vetoed - Big business can still invest all they want into stem cell research. Eventhough adult stem cell research has had the only successes, anyone can do research, with any type of stem cells, from any stem cell line, just not with federal dollars.
By Watta Load
August 21, 2006 11:20 AM | Link to this
My, my TFTT,
Looks like someone is giving you your precious debate now…and beating the pants off of you…all you have to give back is your usual insults…Mr. Kettle Black.
You should lick your wounds for awhile…isn’t it about time to go ride your little girly bike?
By MClark
August 21, 2006 11:20 AM | Link to this
Simply because the word is often misused does not mean that the definition has changed.
When my son was young used to mispronounce the names of people on his favorite baseball team and when I’d correct him he’d tell me “well, that’s how I want to say it.” That was fine for a child but it didn’t change the way you said Yastrzemski’s name.
And sorry if you think I am a troll, but I believe that if you are going to use terms such as these you should at least know what they do and do not mean. Else your argument loses its effectiveness.
By Toad
August 21, 2006 11:21 AM | Link to this
Why is the age card being used? This is an attempt to discredit Carter and Young because they are old?
By Wheels
August 21, 2006 11:25 AM | Link to this
TFTT, are you the person who called a disability activist a fascist and told her to go live in a Communist country? This was at a protest at Glenwood.
By deegee
August 21, 2006 11:26 AM | Link to this
Van, while I don’t agree with Jimmy Carter’s asssertion that Israel was immmoral in the bombing of Lebanon, he is not saying anything that is substantially different than what is on the mind of many military and policy experts on the Middle East. The attack following the capture and killing of the IDF troops was considered by many to be an over reaction. Many believe that Israel took the Iranian bait and further empowered the Islamic radicals. Time will tell whether the Israeli action was a good or bad decision. So far, there haven’t been alot of positives to report on the Israeli side.
Here is a link to an interesting discussion that took place last week between the military and Chris Matthews.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036697/
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 11:38 AM | Link to this
now you are being deliberately obtuse!!!
the definition “on the street” is about perception and usage … NOT the purist “dictionary” use - I agree that fascism has a distinct political meaning - but the contemporary usage - by lefties primarily - has changed that.
millions of folks consider the arab terrorists to be fascists or fascist types - I agree with them.
language is organic and you are naively ignoring that!
pedants often make themselves look foolish by not moving with the times.
arab fascists is the most common one I see/hear everyday on certain media. certain arab militias/groups in Iraq and elsewhere are fascist in their make up/attitudes - as were/are serbs and croats.
I note that wattaloadof bollox like a schoolbully groupie sneers from the sidelines.
Clark - we agree on the archetypal definition - but Carter is a moral fascist as I have stated - its an opinion - rooted in his despicable behaviour over decades!!
the troll jibe was but an in forum joke
By Van
August 21, 2006 11:39 AM | Link to this
deegee,
Where we differ is I think Israel did not do enough or go far enough.
Israel has been threatened, attacked and villianized ever since its conception by the hands of the UN.
The hezbo’s and Hamas have fired rockets into Israel on an almost daily basis.
After a while, anyone will strike back, and they did in a restrained manner, too restrained.
This is the trouble we face now, civilian governments managing military campaigns.
General George S. Patton once said -
“Never tell people how to do things. Tell them what to do and they will surprise you with their ingenuity.”
All Israel had to do was tell the IDF, to disarm the Hezbo’s, and back them up -
All Bush had to do was to tell the military commanders what result he wanted and let them do it.
But, in todays world, just like with James Earl Carter, the civilians want to micro-manage the military, not lead it.
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 11:41 AM | Link to this
see even wheels tells us that others use the term as abuse … not sure where Glenwood is mate … not my side of town!!
By MClark
August 21, 2006 11:43 AM | Link to this
TFTT,
I understand that language is organic but clarity is essential in debate. The fact that the word is continually misused doesn’t change the definition.
But enough. I’ll let it go and respect that you believe Carter to be a moral fascist.
I just ask that you respect my opinion that there is no such thing.
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 11:47 AM | Link to this
clark - the micky mouse term homophobia is NOT a real word - it never actually existed before the homosexuals got very uppity … it was made up by homosexuals … it literally means someone who hates their own kind - but its frequent leftist/homo activist media USAGE is now aimed at demonising anti-buttock bouncers. but its now in the bloody dictionary … defined as the homos use it!!
change of emphasis/usage of words happens … get over it :)
By Wheels
August 21, 2006 11:48 AM | Link to this
What made an impression on me, other than the fact that some people don’t believe in equal access for disabled people, was the conjunction of “communist country” and “fascist.”
By Van
August 21, 2006 11:49 AM | Link to this
I do have one question about the ditzy chicks.
If there career has been impacted by the loud mouth ramblings of ones of it members, why don’t they do like the democrats do and “reposition” themselves as more centralists?
Hillary does it, Kerry didn’t and lost. McCain is moving left and Lieberman is moving right. That is what politicians do. Say one thing, but do something else.
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 11:50 AM | Link to this
sorry - cant respect something that’s not simply not true :)
if the homos can “coin” homophobia I can “coin” moral fascist!!
By rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda
August 21, 2006 11:51 AM | Link to this
I found this on the internet - I want to share it with you this morning - my salute to you cons!
I AM A REPUBLICAN (AND PROUD!) I SING PATRIOTIC SONGS REAL LOUD I AM A GOP SHEEP I WRAP MYSELF IN 20 US FLAGS AND I LIKE TO TALK BAD ABOUT F* I LOVE GEORGE BUSH & THE WAR BUT I REALLY DON’T KNOW WHAT FOR I’M A REPUBLICAN & PROUD I’M AN IDIOT WITHOUT A DOUBT I CALL GEORGE BUSH A FEARLESS LEADER EVEN THOUGH I KNOW HE’S AN AWOL CHEERLEADER I’M A REPUBLICAN & PROUD I LIKE DEFICITS UNEMPLOYMENT FAKE MEDIA OIL WARS AND pRESIDENTS I’M A REPUBLICAN AND PROUD WHO CARES ABOUT BUSHS FRIEND BIN LADEN SADDAM WAS A THREAT TO MY BUDDIES OIL CORPORATIONS I’M A REPUBLICAN & PROUD I HATE GAYS LESBOS BLACKS AND PROTESTERS I HATE MEXICANS TOO BUT I LOVE THEIR CHEAP LABOR I’M A REPUBLICAN AND PROUD I GOT AN 80 FT CHINESE MADE US FLAG I ACT REAL TOUGH BUT MY PARTIES FULL OF F* I’M A REPUBLICAN AND PROUD I HATE POOR PEOPLE AND ORGANIZED LABOR IS IT ANY WONDER I LIVE IN A TRAILER I’M A REPUBLICAN AND PROUD
By Grayson
August 21, 2006 11:51 AM | Link to this
Gawd…. there is a reason no one over 30 should be allowed to blog. Old geezers are so totally behind the curve, they’ll never catch-up. The boat done left the dock.
Obviously Wooten, you missed Jon Bon Jovi, Dem-lover extraordinaire, on Larry King recently. Bon Mote Jovi is more noteable than Natalie Maines, Jimmy C. and Ahmadinejad combined. But he’s so cute, he just sells a trillion more records while making nice-nice with Larry.
FYI… Al Gore is the smartest person Bon Mote knows. And last time I checked, Al hadn’t said a damn thing “old and bitter.” Just informative maybe. Unlike this silly blog of yours.
Jon Bon Jovi on Larry King clip here:
http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/larry.king.live/
By More aware now
August 21, 2006 11:54 AM | Link to this
With a couple of exceptions, the lot of you are pendantic, tedious, and generally boorish. [I did, however, truly appreciate the manner and tone of Southern Democrat’s post, and MClark submitted the odd post I felt encouraged by.]
But, in general, the tenor of comments here make me see just how sorrowfully humanity has been blinded. The world is so divided, so violent — if not only in physical behaviour, then at least in rhetoric. Namecalling, or otherwise vitriolic speech designed to take the other party down a peg — what is truly accomplished in the end?
We are all human here. The world over, upwards of six billion of us share the same common ancestry, similar physiological functions, a common space, common desires — irrespective of language, creed, skin colour, etc. Why the need for such hatred and nastiness?
Such was absolutely inscrutable to me for one period of my life, but even though I understand why the world is in such a mess now, that doesn’t mean it saddens me any less.
The only solace I can take in such quarreling is the attention it garners in blogs such as these and in Letters to the Editor. As long as daily newspapers or their e-counterparts continue to stir up the masses who partake, one way or the other, then I’ll still have a paycheque. Jim and Cynthia likely take the most radical spins on their respective topics as possible to generate the most buzz. The economy, after all, ain’t what it used to be, and though still in the black, the Company would surely welcome the same revenue as in years past — if not more. So, let’s spin the most radical webs we can weave, and wait for the vitriolic masses to spew their dissent [or agreement.]
Well, they’ve done a bang-up job, I suppose. And the seemingly mature, urbane adults of the Southeast turn into squabbling kids on these blogs and in letters to the editor. It would be hilarious if it weren’t so disturbing.
But I suppose I need not complain, really — no need to bite the hand that feeds me. The Jims and Cynthias are merely doing their jobs — and quite well, may I add. I may not like the things the masses have to say when they arrive — but at least they show up to the party. For this, at least, my paycheck and I are grateful.
By MClark
August 21, 2006 11:55 AM | Link to this
OK. Thought I might appease you Chamberlain style.
Van, for your answer listen to the Chicks new song. Right or wrong, agree or disagree they are still defiant. And my son, who is a back line engineer for the sound company that handles their audio, tells me that they still do fine in concert in some places. Odd place this America.
By JoeD
August 21, 2006 11:55 AM | Link to this
The Dixie Chicks are not politicians.
By Van
August 21, 2006 11:56 AM | Link to this
Grayson -
Gore? informative? 14 years telling folks we only have 10 years left?
By Spankmonkey
August 21, 2006 11:57 AM | Link to this
Excuse me numnuts, but the “political rancor” of the past 15 years is a Republican offspring, birthed by the Republican revolution of 92 and the long discarded “contract with America” most of whom’s tenets were discarded a soon as the votes were counted and the takeover complete. I find it humorous at best to listen to Republo-Fascists lament the loss of political discourse, when it was you and your ilk that brought about it’s demise, from Ralph “Body Bags” Reed, to Newt “I’m banging my aide” Gingrich’s in-your-face Homer Simpson politics, to Dubya’s “with us or agin us” Big Government Republican party of today.
You did unto others, now you are being done unto, stop whining and be a man.
By Barbara Scruggs
August 21, 2006 12:01 PM | Link to this
Former Presidents should not be critizing sitting Presidents, here or overseas. In 1979, Iran fell when Mr. Carter was in office. Would we be in the mess today if the United States helped Iran? With 24/7 of news many become impatient about war. 9/11 changed the way we fight wars and the left has no idea how one does it-no plan to keep America safe, secure, and free.
By getalife
August 21, 2006 12:02 PM | Link to this
Yes, and the idiot responsible for the contract with America that was thrashed completely is running for President. Oh, the hypocrisy with these winguts is just mind boggling.
By Barbara Scruggs
August 21, 2006 12:03 PM | Link to this
Former Presidents should not be critizing sitting Presidents, here or overseas. In 1979, Iran fell when Mr. Carter was in office. Would we be in the mess today if the United States helped Iran? With 24/7 of news many become impatient about war. 9/11 changed the way we fight wars and the left has no idea how one does it-no plan to keep America safe, secure, and free.
By Markus
August 21, 2006 12:06 PM | Link to this
As a general rule, the liberal left has never cared about the US military or anything else regarding America’s defense capabilities since the mid-60s when those cool free-thinking drugs became popular. The left in general sees America as the problem, hence, their snide comments about the “military industrial complex.“ A lot of those on the loony left saw our 9/11 attack by islamofascist terrorists as our fault, or in Ward Churchill’s case, “chickens coming home to roost.” There are local left-wing politicians in California, especially the Bay area, who feel we don’t even need to HAVE a military. They feel that the UN or some other global police force is all that’s needed to secure America and keep threats away. Jimmy Carter, like most other Democrat politicians, is one of those who has always loved the UN first. Yes, that same UN that couldn’t stop Saddam from violating 17 resolutions in 12 years; yes, that same UN that couldn’t enforce 1559 in Lebanon calling for the “immediate disarming and disbandment of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias.” Yes, that same UN that can’t even keep people fed in Africa. Yes, that same UN involved in Iraqi oil for food corruption.
If you look back into our history on wars and Hollywood/entertainers, WWII and Korea saw very little public resentment, and Hollywood and the musical entertainers were out in full force of support thanks to the USO. There were a lot of folks not happy with the North Korea situation, but by and large they kept it to themselves knowing that what they said publicly in a negative light could damage the mission (these were the same people that fought WWII, so they knew about enemy propaganda). Not long after JFK’s death, the Vietnam issue was born. A lot of people arguably say that was what started that wonderful “I’m more enlightened and smarter than you” hippy generation, where radical liberalism was born. That was also the first war to have large protests staged both domestically and internationally.
Then we had Gulf War I, but most of those protesters were the indigenous kook fringe “no blood for oil” peacenik libs. You know the ones, those 18-24 years old “activists” who think they are the smartest people in the world. Hollywood even as recently as then for the most part supported our effort, right up to the end where Madonna said “I love you Schwarzkopf baby!” at the 1991 Grammys.
Fast forward to today, and we have entertainment groups like the Dixie Chicks who have to go to nations like Canada to sell more concert tickets. Then there’s Barbara Streisand, and actors like Alec Baldwin, Martin Sheen, Susan Sarandon, and the other usual kook fringe loonbat left that loves to get up on their soapbox and preach anti-Bush rhetoric that can be heard all the way to Osama’s cave.
The enemy is listening, of which the ultimate proof can be heard from Osama talking about Bush’s popularity to Mahamoud’s Democrat talking point comments about Bush including poll numbers. But the loon left doesn’t care. All they know in their twisted dementia world is that Bush needs to be removed from power, and they will stop at nothing to accomplish that, including poor-mouthing every single policy he has pushed through, even those that came from the left. That mentality is nothing new of course, it’s been going on for almost six years.
Finally, one of the most telling examples of the mindset of these holier than thou “I’m smart, you’re not” liberals is that they feel they can get out there and say negative, hate-filled rhetoric against this nation and it’s administration totally FREE from any retaliation. How many times have you heard these bedwetters whine when someone fires back at them, and they just say “You are calling me un-American.” Or in the case of some politicians, “You are attacking my patriotism.” Just like this forum, liberals think they can go out there and spout off their mantra unchallenged. No, they aren’t above anybody else who happens to not be a candyassed, bedwetting, terrorist appeasing liberal.
By Barbara Scruggs
August 21, 2006 12:08 PM | Link to this
Former Presidents should not be critizing sitting Presidents, here or overseas. In 1979, Iran fell when Mr. Carter was in office. Would we be in the mess today if the United States helped Iran? With 24/7 of news many become impatient about war. 9/11 changed the way we fight wars and the left has no idea how one does it-no plan to keep America safe, secure, and free.
By Grayson
August 21, 2006 12:08 PM | Link to this
Gosh darn it. There goes another 10! Last I heard, we had at least 20.
By JoeD
August 21, 2006 12:08 PM | Link to this
And the Republican plan to keep us safe, secure and free involves starting wars with countries that are not a threat, overextending the military, fighting without a plan to win the peace and get home, ignoring the true major threat to this country, (Bin Laden), and taking away our freedoms at home. And yet the right blindly follows along, singing the praises of the Emperor Bush. Good plan.
By JoeD
August 21, 2006 12:10 PM | Link to this
Oops, almost forgot the most important part of the plan: “Stay the course.”
By Grayson
August 21, 2006 12:14 PM | Link to this
Hey Marcus… wanna go out back and burn one? Seems like you need to lose some of that “old bitterness.” We can talk over the good days, Jane Fonda on that tank and stuff. It’ll do you a world a good.
By Van
August 21, 2006 12:17 PM | Link to this
JoeD,
I trust the military to keep us safe, it is politians I distrust. Keep the two separated. President is Commander-in Chief and the Congress controls the budget. It is called checks and balances.
By Van
August 21, 2006 12:19 PM | Link to this
Grayson,
She was smiling and playing on an anit-aircraft gun mount.
By Adolphus
August 21, 2006 12:21 PM | Link to this
Hey! Let’s not forget about our dear defeated Congresswoman, Cynthia! What a dope!
By Toad
August 21, 2006 12:21 PM | Link to this
Why is no one attacking the ageist comments on here? Old people can’t blog? Young and Carter are bitter old men?
By harold
August 21, 2006 12:22 PM | Link to this
the dixie chicks shouldnt critize bush,
but wooten should critize carter
got it
By deegee
August 21, 2006 12:22 PM | Link to this
The problem Israel had in the recent war was that the civilian leadership bought the military’s pitch on effort to disarm, estimated time to completion, etc. The IDF took casualties due to the military’s disjointed and inconsistent orders from their commanders. The US has had problems in Iraq for the opposite reason. The military is doing a good job with the paucity of resources that have been provided to them by the civilian leadership.
By getalife
August 21, 2006 12:22 PM | Link to this
Lets, China and Russia said to STFU. Iran and North Korea said check out my new nukes.
And now for the Mexican invasion
Is there any country that is not messing with us right now?
I will say it again. It is very dangerous to have a President with no credibility and no accountability.
Wake up America!
By War Eagle
August 21, 2006 12:22 PM | Link to this
Time for the Truth is RIGHT! Jimmy was pathetic-acting in a “Christian” like way destroyed America and made us weak. As for those that say we attacked a country that posed no threat-Remember Nazi Germany? Get it through your thick heads-the ISLAMIC countries are trying to take over the world. UNDERSTAND this: According to the Muslim faith-CHRISTIANS must convert to Islam or be killed. DO YOU UNDERTAND THAT? You want to reason with a killer organization?-WGST had a former PLO terrorist talking about how they train the suicide bombers-he says the Muslims today are ALL TERRORISTS because they are brainwashed from age 5 in their Muslim schools. He called them Terrorist Schools. They are taught to hate all that are not Muslims and that the end result for the Koran is a Muslim world. Someone call the Martians, for it seems that Europe has it’s head in the sand or up it’s butt. Let’s send Jimmy and Cynthia to Iran, strapped in grenades-perhaps that is the answer. Remember men-there is NO FOOTBALL in the Muslim world, no bikinis and women have to wear a sack over their bodies. How 10th century can you get?
By Jim's a Cherry Picker
August 21, 2006 12:26 PM | Link to this
MClark,
Nice posts, but you’re swimming up stream. If the people you’re trying to reason with here don’t understand the difference between a political opportunist and someone who lives their life according to real Christian principals, then a blog isn’t the place they’ll come to that understanding.
Keep up the good work though.
By sct
August 21, 2006 12:26 PM | Link to this
Yes Hollywood’s influence on America is great.
Ronald Reagan, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Fred Thompson, Sonny Bono.
Non-elected- Mel Gibson, Charton Heston, John Wayne.
Hollywood has destroyed America!!! LOL.
By Markus
August 21, 2006 12:29 PM | Link to this
Hey Graybeard..
No, I’d rather talk about the “good old days” of the Carter administration where O
I’d like to talk about Carter never meeting a dictator he didn’t like, including doing assinine things like negotiating with the militia in Haiti even though international human rights groups condemned them. I’d like to talk about the naiveness of Jimmy taking North Korea up for holding it’s word on a nuclear program.
When Carter left office, the USSR was in the middle of Afghanistan, Iranian “students” had been holding US State Department personnel and US Marines hostage for over a year, OPEC went unchallenged in strongarming itself into the position to control oil prices, 8% unemployment, and inflation in double digits and interest rates over 20% where it was impossible for average Americans to finance anything like cars and homes.
Yeah dude, the GOOD old days.
By Grayson
August 21, 2006 12:29 PM | Link to this
Yeah Van, and her hair was perfect.
By J Tom
August 21, 2006 12:30 PM | Link to this
Toad, No age card is being played. Both Carter and Young have had their chances to bring about their visions, and both have failed. Their ideas are old, have been mostly proven as failures, yet they still cling to them, unwilling to accept that they are wrong. Therefore, by definition since they are speaking TRUTH and WISDOM, anyone who disagrees with them is inherently wrong.
What we were doing up until Bush was not working. Not for us, not for Israel, not for peace. Carter screwed up with Korea, the ME and Haiti. Carter-Clinton formed a Middle East policy (which Bush, Sr. felt restrained by) that has given us a plethora of terrorist groups and radicals who control wealthy countries.
The world was made less safe under the policies of the last several administrations (Reagan screwed up on the ME, too, but at least he got the Cold War right). The present administration may also be screwing up, but at least it’s a new approach and certainly can’t do any worse than our old failed policies.
Carter should recognize that if HE hadn’t allowed radicals to take over Iran, we might not be in the ME today. According to Wikipedia, “The Shah enforced a strict dictatorship, imprisoning hundreds of political activists, and enforcing censorship laws. At the same time, however, living conditions for the people improved significantly, and many basic human and democratic rights were established (e.g. extending suffrage to women).” Supporting a dictatorship may seem wrong, but, MG, look at what they have now. It wouldn’t have taken a war to transition the Shah’s Iran to some semblance of a free country. By not supporting the Shah, Carter broke Iran and never tried to fix it.
Carter naively believes that all people are honorable, will compromise for the greater good, and are men of their word. The Camp David Accords only worked because that was true for both Egypt and Israel. But such characteristics have always been a rare thing in the world.
By Toad
August 21, 2006 12:31 PM | Link to this
President is Commander-in Chief and the Congress controls the budget. It is called checks and balances.
Only Congress can declare war! Its responsiblities are much more than controlling the budget.
By Markus
August 21, 2006 12:32 PM | Link to this
Yeah Harold, Carter isn’t the president right now in charge of a two-front war. Not that Carter would have ever done a damn thing about threats to this nation anyway.
He’s becoming a bitter senile old man. He’s like the useless old horse that just needs to be put out to pasture.
By sct
August 21, 2006 12:40 PM | Link to this
Was senile-old-Hollywood-actor- President Reagan wrong when he pulled his famous cut-and-run in Beruit?
By getalife
August 21, 2006 12:41 PM | Link to this
Oops ,I may have changed the channel and missed this bomb:
Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11. George Bush just said so. Expressly. For the first time.
By Markus
August 21, 2006 12:45 PM | Link to this
Reagan chose fighting USSR communism over Beruit. Every president makes tough decisions (except Carter of course). That to me is hardly “cutting and running.” I’ll bet that loonbat Softball’s Chris Matthews forgot to bring that up.
By Markus
August 21, 2006 12:46 PM | Link to this
What politician said Iraq DID specifically have anything to do with 9/11 except you candyasses on the left making that part up to use against us?
By getalife
August 21, 2006 12:49 PM | Link to this
Markus,
You never answered my question.
Why is there no oil coming out of Iraq?
By Markus
August 21, 2006 12:52 PM | Link to this
getalife:
I ran out of time last night. Why no oil out of Iraq? What the hell difference did Iraq make on the international oil market BEFORE we invaded? You think it was a $1 then vs. $3 now difference? I’ll let you look that up and give you all afternoon.
By getalife
August 21, 2006 12:54 PM | Link to this
Answer the question dumb-a-ss.
By Grayson
August 21, 2006 12:55 PM | Link to this
Hey Markus. I think you’ve mistaken me for a (male) boomer! I totally feel yo pain though… I’d love to get back to the days, my days, when all we had to worry about was the Prez. getting a Lewinski. I had money in the bank and a health insurance plan then. Heck, the way things are going under this dude W, I may have to get into some of that mercenary line of work, or the “security detail” we call the War On Terror just to pay the mortgage.
By sct
August 21, 2006 12:56 PM | Link to this
Was senile-old-Hollywood-actor- President Reagan wrong when he sold weapons to our enemy Iran?
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 12:58 PM | Link to this
not as wrong as the senile narcissist Carter was when he completely swallowed the N Korean lies on behalf the corrupt Arkansas sexual predator!!
By Redneck Convert
August 21, 2006 12:59 PM | Link to this
Everybody knows that you give up your rights as an American when you go overseas, specially if you are a liberal. And when you stop being president, you have to have your tongue cut out, unless you are a Republican criticizing a Democrat.
When you go overseas and somebody asks you what you think of your president’s policies, you have to say “Everything he does is wonderful”—unless, of course, he was a Democrat. And if you have left office as the president, you have to play “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil.” That is the Amerika Al Queda way.
Now I have to go take my monthly bath here at the trailer. The doctor says I have to keep this pile-on cyst clean. I have given it the nickname Wooten, but I thought about naming it Realist, Markus, or TFTT, because all of them are pimples on the a** of American politics. And they have about the same moral vision as my pile-on cyst.
By getalife
August 21, 2006 12:59 PM | Link to this
Grayson,
Yes, we will look back at the Clinton years as the good ole days.
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 12:59 PM | Link to this
would Carter now admit he was wrong not to put sand filters in the rescue choppers? HA HA HA HA HA
By getalife
August 21, 2006 01:01 PM | Link to this
lies,
At least they tried talking to them instead of outsourcing diplomacy.
By Van
August 21, 2006 01:03 PM | Link to this
Grayson ,
Yeah, perfect hair on an empty head.
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 01:04 PM | Link to this
YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWN!!
yet another deranged bitter hissy fit from rednekkks vermin!!!
you must have PTBD rednekkks …
Post Traumatic Blog Disorder!!
By getalife
August 21, 2006 01:04 PM | Link to this
lies,
And your puppy Blair has finally woke up.
When are you going to wake up lies?
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 01:08 PM | Link to this
I see maggot brain is still drooling about NOTHING!!
the glib oily liar Tony Blurrrrrr has only been sound on one issue — dealing harshly with arab fascists!!
By Van
August 21, 2006 01:08 PM | Link to this
time for the truth,
Are you refering to his plan for using sea borne helicopters instead of helicopters set up for desert use? Or how about making sure that all radios were able to talk to each other. Bad coordination between the Army, Air Force, USMC and Navy.
By Grayson
August 21, 2006 01:09 PM | Link to this
Jeez Redneck, that sounds terrible! Kinda like the time the lab threatened to blow and I got that nasty burn where my halter top shoud’ve been. Ouch!
I gotta say though, last time I went to Europe was under the Carter Admin, and man, only thing I gave up was having to pay my bar tab. Those frogmenz were literally, and liberally, lining-up to buy a genuine ‘Merican gal her Pernot. Nowadays, they’d run my as* outta town for being Merican. Sad, n’est pas?
‘Course I got a few more miles under my jeans nowadays… Ahhhh the good ole days…
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 01:14 PM | Link to this
Van … the former … the fact that they then had to abandon the choppers in the Iranian sand and Carter looked even more foolish and weak when the chaps should have been able to at least engage the young (now promoted to) Iranian Hitler US hostage taker that the cowardly liberals appeasers nowadays wont confront either!!
By Oil Anyone?
August 21, 2006 01:17 PM | Link to this
Buying into a worthy cause.
By sct
August 21, 2006 01:20 PM | Link to this
“Iranian Hitler US hostage taker that the cowardly liberals appeasers nowadays wont confront either!!
Thank god Reagan is out of the picture, he’d probably sell them the nuclear missles they want in exchange for those 2 Israeli hostages.
By rarringt
August 21, 2006 01:25 PM | Link to this
Afternoon all,
Markus said:
Reagan chose fighting USSR communism over Beruit. Every president makes tough decisions (except Carter of course).
Following that logic, it stands to reason that Bush chose fighting Iraqi totalitarianism and evildoerism over hunting down and punishing those who perpetrated 9/11.
After all, every president makes tough decisions.
TFTT, caught the discussion this morning on the meaning of fascism vs “moral fascism.” Looks like you stepped on the same mine as most of the other far-right conservatives in trying to construct an argument (or in your case, an insult) based on a definition that exists solely in your mind.
It never ceases to amaze me how many people on hear throw terms like “fascist” and “leftist” around, but don’t seem to truly grasp their meaning.
Ironically enough, last Wednesday, I asked for a legitimate definition (from conservatives) of conservatism. Only Realist and TFTT attempted to respond. Of those two, only Realist’s response was an honest, non-cynical effort.
For the next 6-1/2 hours, everyone else seemed perplexed at how to define what it meant to be a conservative, and address the deeper question of what it meant to be a conservative in light of what is happening as a result of the conservative administration.
I would argue that’s because most of you have no idea what conservatism is, other than a bunch of catchphrases you heard on some talk show. It certainly isn’t anything Bill Buckley or George Will would recognize as limited government conservatism.
How does limited government conservatism match up with the current administration? It doesn’t, of course. Yet, so many on this blog who jump on the ideological bandwagon marching on Washington if half of the things happening these days were done under a democratic administration.
Consider: runaway deficit spending, “supporting” troops without providing a tangible mission, government intrusion on privacy, tacit support of rampant corporatism, ducking important issues with the Iranians and North Koreans, etc.
So, back to my question. If you agree with actions that would have been anathema to GOPers under a demo president, then what do you stand for? Please, no “support the troops,” “america,” “patriotism” or other platitudes. We all do.
Define conservatism.
If you can.
If you know.
Note to TFTT and others: although you’ll call me names and dismiss my comment as “obtuse quasi-intellectualism”, regarding changing your terms: to do so is to concede your definition was flawed in the first place.
A flawed definition is the poisonous tree from which little good fruit can come. There is no such thing as the “street definition, which means anything you want at that particular moment, in legitimate debate. In other words, garbage in, garbage out.
Admittedly, outside of a ban of expletives there seems to be few rules on this blog. Fine, but those who come looking for good debate should hold themselves to certain standards. Knowing who you are and what you stand for, and not relying on definitional relativism to get you out of a spot when you’ve been pushed into a corner should be one of them. That goes for everyone, but especially the far right.
After all, it shouldn’t matter what your definition of “is” is, right?
By Redneck Convert
August 21, 2006 01:30 PM | Link to this
Thank god Reagan is out of the picture, he’d probably sell them the nuclear missles they want in exchange for those 2 Israeli hostages.
Now you done stepped in the cow-pile, sct. You’ve attacked St. Reagan, the demented father of tax cuts for the wealthy and Iran-contra. Better get yourself a fortified bunker to live in for the next few years. Everybody has free speech rights except you and a few other centrists and liberals on this blog.
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 01:32 PM | Link to this
thank Allah the sexual predator sick Willie is out of the picture - now the red chinese cant illegally buy elections, the N Koreans cant lie any more about nukes and ugly fat, did I say ugly, interns are safe from sexual harassment!!
By rarringt
August 21, 2006 01:35 PM | Link to this
Sorry if my request means you have to turn down Rush for a minute and actually come up with an original response.
Then again, since my last request, you’ve had 6 days to think it over….
By Conservatism Done Right
August 21, 2006 01:38 PM | Link to this
To strictly construe the Constitution is to recognize that it is not a “living document” to be amended by interpretation, but rather is a contract between the states and the federal government.
Philosophical and moral issues are to be decided by the legislatures of the states, not by federal courts
No state or federal judge should have a say in the matter, and Congress likewise has no authority to intervene one way or the other.
A conservative Christian recognizes that he is commanded to feed the hungry, clothe the naked and comfort the sick and dying. He is not commanded to shift this responsibility to government.
As for traditional values, they are little observed. America is a decadent country, especially its cultural elite. One would have to be deaf, blind and living in a monastery not to recognize this.
Nowhere in the Constitution is the federal government authorized to provide welfare, health care, housing or education. Nowhere in the Constitution does it mention abortion or gay marriage.
I’m am conservative because the left is anything but….
By Mony
August 21, 2006 01:39 PM | Link to this
Something you all should listen to.
Here is a powerful and amazing statement on Al Jazeera television. The woman is Wafa Sultan, an Arab-American psychologist from Los Angeles. I would suggest watching it ASAP because I don’t know how long the link will be active. This film clip should be shown around the world repeatedly!!! Put the following in your browser window and click Go.
http://switch3.castup.net/cunet/gm.asp?ai=214&ar=1050wmv&ak=nul
By rarringt
August 21, 2006 01:45 PM | Link to this
Ok, it’s been 20 minutes, and only a passing defintion from someone not confident enough to use their regular blog name.
No, you can’t ditto someone else’s definition, so stop cutting and pasting from Wikipedia. >:^)
Tick, tock….
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 01:50 PM | Link to this
smirk snigger smirk …. looks like I’ve EFFORTLESSLY anchored the simpering art of ‘innoculation’ from legitimate conservative barbs on ALL THE SODDING LEFTIES ON HERE!!
Naturally I object to your continued cynical “trolling” on the subject of moral fascism rarrington. Said all I needed to earlier. Common usage etc is perfectly fair to cite. fascist has all too frequently become the insult of the left.
the poofs coined homophobic - I coined moral fascist!! the poofs corrupted and twisted the use of “gay” - I coined moral fascist.
My comments on a conservative America I’d like to see very soon were perfectly fine. my attitude to liberals was I felt more than conciliatory and if anything a little too respectful!!
You need to go back to studying for your GED retake rarrington - not skiving off on here!!
By getalife
August 21, 2006 01:50 PM | Link to this
Mony,
A very brave woman. Yes, they must promote peace and not violence. We must do the same.
How many people have you seen say the same thing on our networks?
It is all hatred and violence.
By rarringt
August 21, 2006 01:57 PM | Link to this
Once again, a smug non-comment from TFTT, who confuses “insult” with “intellect.” Another example of you being definitionally challenged, gov?
For those of you who need more time, here’s the definition of “moderate I put together in 10 minutes last week.
*Moderate:
Fiscally conservative, with a belief in focusing money on strong social safety nets (retirement, medicare, medicaid, health care, etc.) vs. entitlement programs (corporate welfare)
Socially progressive in the areas of equitable education and agressive-but-socially-conscious business development (ANWR, OK; no strip mining the rockies for shale oil).
Strong belief that oil is an issue of national security, and that the reduction of dependence through alternative research is the key to long term stability.
Tolerant of all forms of do-no-harm religion. I am a pentecost, and get along famously with those who aren’t.
Belief in a strongly equipped and very carefully used military.
Near zealotry for ensuring fair and impartial elections and judiciary (which should be primarily comprised of moderates).*
Ok, it’s now been 30 minutes. How come so many of you are able to make countless posts insulting people and making unsubstantiated attacks with no facts to back them up, but the room gets really quiet when you’re asked to explain what you do believe in?
Sheesh. It’s no fun at all in the sandbox when no one has the courage to play….
By H. T.
August 21, 2006 01:59 PM | Link to this
Short and sweet: 1. Better to be thought a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt. Carter revels in the removal of doubt apparently. 2. Carter knows he was an awful President and the only way he can become relevant is to be controversial. Evenhis own party shunned him. 3. Old men say the mind is the second thing to go, but Jimmy’s (mind) is unfortunately located in the first thing to go - and Viagra ain’t an option!
By Toad
August 21, 2006 02:02 PM | Link to this
Jimmy Carter’s the best ex-president we’ve ever had!
By James
August 21, 2006 02:02 PM | Link to this
H.T.,
Insert Zell Miller in your post just as easily.
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 02:05 PM | Link to this
rarrington … I told you last week conservatism is essentially about the preservation of the status quo (assuming its a conservative one) or what are deemded the best parts of that status quo. Harold MacMillan was a one nation conservative - a Tory wet if you like. Happily Baroness Thatcher (PBUH) was a little more to the right.
Lisitng the bits of conservatism one supports wiol always be personal - every one has a different world view.
I beleive all US liberals should be forcibly deported to Gaza, Syria, Iran etc and stripped of all their assets. Then when the US military eventually comes calling their media will have a head start in the Bush/GOP type hate!!
I naturally assume you are trolling for a response so you can sneer/argue about the responses.
By rarringt
August 21, 2006 02:05 PM | Link to this
Ok,
It’s been about 40 minutes. Recess is over. I apologize for asking such hard questions, and guess we can return to meaningless name calling, droning on about UGA coeds, contemplating the “new” black middle-class and how they don’t fit into stereotypes, and letting TFTT make 80 posts a day (including saturdays) accusing others of being obnoxious trolls….
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 02:08 PM | Link to this
and guess we can return to meaningless name calling, droning on about UGA coeds, contemplating the “new” black middle-class and how they don’t fit into stereotypes, and letting TFTT make at least 580 posts a day (including saturdays) accusing others of being obnoxious trolls
YEAH - RIGHT ON BUBBA!!!! everyffing U jus seddd!!
By tftt??
August 21, 2006 02:17 PM | Link to this
Flatullation, flagelallation, masturbation, mindless remonstration, constipation.
Retardation.
By tftt??
August 21, 2006 02:21 PM | Link to this
tftt - the fat ‘toopid troll
tftt - the fairy ‘tard tory
tftt - time for the thorazine
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 02:22 PM | Link to this
rarrington - do let us know when the next 40 mins is up - OK!!
By Grayson
August 21, 2006 02:28 PM | Link to this
Dang it all… where did Redneck go? He was a hoot.
By Realist
August 21, 2006 02:37 PM | Link to this
rarringt,
Good afternoon !! I see you are playing that game again. I guess its fun considering the lack of responses you are getting from the right. Although I must say, I think the game you play could be played with equal results if reversed and the question asked of liberals, libertarians, etc.
I do think its sad that there are no fellow conservatives in here to step up and speak about thier beleifs. But if you read the daily posts here, its no wonder why. This blog is over run with radical leftist moveone.org speech “cut and pasters” who would test the temperment of even Ghandi. Perhaps all the conservatives are away on some liberal blog site fighting the good fight there? I know that it gives me great comfort to be able to click X and close the screen thereby effectively removing from my life the likes os redneck vermin, getalife, mark the lib, sct, et.al. Its really ashamed the direction this thing takes everyday. And its always the radical left, same posters day in, day out, who drag this thing down the drain. I think the conservatives have better things to do than be party to this garbage.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 02:38 PM | Link to this
There must be a reaon that Conservatism and common sense both begin with a C, and liberalism and lunatic begins with an L. Just an observation!
A special hello to all my liberal “fans” today. How y’all is?
TFTT: You & Markus and some of the boys didn’t fumigate the blog today apparently. Boy, the loonies are out today!
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 02:40 PM | Link to this
Actually Zell Miller is one of the very few visionary Dems left. A truly great Georgian. His speech to the GOP convention, other than Bush’s easy victory over the gigolo Kerry and Daschle’s glorious humiliation was the highlight of that political year.
Carter needs to go count his peanuts and write yet another boring tedious moronic self absorbed book about his monotonous years as an ugly plain child in Plains never speaking out against segregation.
By rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda
August 21, 2006 02:43 PM | Link to this
Lunchtime in the Rockies - Boulder CO, a shout out to my gals in the ATL - TFTT, ugotta, Markus, etc. Wazzup home girls??
Oh come on dudes, I’m just funnin’ ya - everybody knows what big he-men y’all are - hehehehe men anyway. Tranny Annie Wooten’s column today got me into the funnin’ and jokin’ spirit.
Hey - anybody ever seen Anne Coulter and Wooten together - hey wait a minute!
Just kidding - well - maybe not!
By James
August 21, 2006 02:45 PM | Link to this
Yeah, good ole Zell. Whichever the way the wind blows, goes Zell. Segregation? Zell was cool with that. Being a democrat to get elected in Georgia? Zell was cool with that. Being a “I used to be a liberal” spokesperson? Zell is cool with that
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 02:46 PM | Link to this
Damn, mention lunatics and guess who appears…ole Wednecks-Amewica’s Athwipe!
What are you doin’ in Boulder? Waitin’ for your old lover, John Karr? wink, wink!
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 02:46 PM | Link to this
alright kidding … I’ve been toying with some of the resident moral fascists today and they’ve been saying beastly horrid things about Sir Ronald Reagan (PBUH).
Rarrington is absolutely right about the far left though!! He’s not as stupid as he looks in cyber space!! :)
By rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda
August 21, 2006 02:48 PM | Link to this
Oh - I see my beotch Realist is here today too - ‘zup girl?
Lots of ink in the Colorado papers today about your homeboy Alabama John Karr.
You know, you can’t trust an Arkansan with your adult daughter - and you can’t trust an Alabaman with little kids…
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 02:48 PM | Link to this
I see James is just throwing more hateful “spitballs”!!
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 02:50 PM | Link to this
Kidding … credit JonBenet’s sick obsessed stalker with some taste - even this animal would turn down rednekkks!!
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 02:51 PM | Link to this
TFTT: You know as well as I that the left doesn’t like any President that has a little fight in him like Reagon and Bush. They prefer sissy boys like “Goober” Carter and “BJ” Clinton. ooooooooooooo!
James: Yeah, ole Zell really kicked y’alls a*s in that speech, didn’t he? I taped it so I can watch it at least once a week just for fun! Duh-huh!
By Realist
August 21, 2006 02:51 PM | Link to this
Yeah, Karr was another black eye the fine old state and good citizens of Alabama didnt need. But to correct you, I beleive he was a Georgian.
By getalife
August 21, 2006 02:51 PM | Link to this
Hey rednecks,
Do not forget to send Jim a post card.
Chimps on the toilet.
Classic. LOL.
By Realist
August 21, 2006 02:53 PM | Link to this
you can’t trust an Alabaman with little kids…
yeah, we might turn them into God fearing Christians or something
By jbmlaw
August 21, 2006 02:56 PM | Link to this
Dear Southern Democrat @ 11:05, thank you for the kind words. You correctly interpret the limitations of my “attacked, falsely” phrase - there is no politician whom I will magnify as a paragon of virtue. Your other comments on Fascists and Nazis confuse me some - not that this is an unusual state for me - but all I intended to do was remind the reader that all Fascists and all Nazis were also socialists, tyrants who magnify the state above the individual. I understand your observations about the “colloquial” application of the terms, and would merely note that the same definition would also describe either “dictator” or “leader of an Islamic republic.”
Rarringt @ 1:25, somewhere around 20 minutes into your thesis you requested a definition of “conservative.” Like “truth” and “beauty,” those would normally be in the eye of the beholder. I always liked Buckley’s definition: one who stands athwart history and yells, “Stop!”
May not be able to pop back in, have a great day all.
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 02:56 PM | Link to this
funny how Jim never mentioned getting any more postcards from snigger … the UK … or was that the town next to Ty Ty or where ever it was.
By Redneck Convert
August 21, 2006 02:56 PM | Link to this
Conservative means back in the old days. It means, instead of having the government provide for vaccination and electricity, let ‘em die of polio or measles and read by kerosene lanterns. It means poll taxes and literacy tests for voting. It means that if the original Constitution acknowledged slavery, then we should return to slavery. It means letting people starve if they have not exercised Personal Responsibility by saving their money. It means tugging on your forelock to acknowledge your betters—those with more money than you. Of course, if you’re bald, well, you ain’t got no forelock to tug on, so you’ll have to bow. It means executions in public squares and prison for bankrupts who have failed to exercise Personal Responsibility. It means, let’s return to the late 1700s and not change a thing. Conservatism means returning to the law of the jungle. If it’s good enough for the animals, it ought to be good enough for us. It means letting the state legislatures decide what the law is and not letting the activist courts tell them that what they pass is against the US Constitution. The Constitution shouldn’t get in the way of passing tough laws. And it means that people like Wooten would still be in a mountain cabin, instead of going to college and getting a job as a columnist.
I had an awful time with school before I had to drop out in the fifth grade, but at least I know what conservative means. Now, if you’ll pardon me, I really do have to take that monthly bath. My pile-on cyst is beginning to act up again. Besides, the water I spent so much time heating on the stove is beginning to get cold.
By rarringt
August 21, 2006 02:57 PM | Link to this
How goes it, Realist? Hope you and yours had a good weekend.
I reposted my question because, with the exception of you, really, no one else hazarded a serious response.
Although a few on the left did respond, the point was to get people to ask themselves who they were and what they stood for, regardless of their supposed ideological position.
The two hardest questions to truly and fully answer are “who am I” and “what do I want?” But that’s more suitable for discussions on existentialism.
In terms of our political (or politicized) blog, it means not rushing to condemn positions based on stereotypes, especially if you don’t understand what your position is or why you believe in it.
So many in here on both sides are in love with positions that have been laid out for them that only exist in a vacuum. I’m drawn to this website for the (increasingly diminished) discussions on real world views and solutions for problems. I also like fencing with the likes of you and others in the purely abstract sense, but that’s only fun when both sides play by the rules. A sense of self is rule no. 1. One’s arguments, like a foil, should be flexible when parrying yet strong and true when striking.
Enough of the fancy talk. Just stand for whatever you believe in, and believe in whatever you stand for.
By rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda
August 21, 2006 02:58 PM | Link to this
Yeah, Karr was another black eye the fine old state and good citizens of Alabama didnt need
Alabama has more black eyes than a Birmingham battered wives shelter after ‘bama loses another big one.
Alabama - The sphincter of the Universe.
Until ugotta and TFTT came along.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 02:59 PM | Link to this
The lunatic Athwipe is back again at 2:56. God, you’re so much a moron!
By jbmlaw
August 21, 2006 02:59 PM | Link to this
While I’m still around, my other definitions:
Leftist - one who wishes to tell others how to live their lives, and how to spend their money
Moderate - one with no real beliefs, a truly wishy-washy soul who would sing Kumbaya with Islamic terrorists.
By James
August 21, 2006 03:01 PM | Link to this
TFTT and UGOTTA,
I never spew hateful spitballs..lol..I can care less about angry old men whether its Carter or Miller or Young. I just see the full spectrum. I’m an engineer and conservative by nature through my designs and planning. Yet, I fail to get caught up in the word “conservative”. As an innovator, I must remain “progressive”.
By Dana
August 21, 2006 03:02 PM | Link to this
What was today’s question? Oh yes - should American’s give their opinions on our government when on foreign soil, (especially during war) and whether or not it is time for Jimmy to hush his mouth and stay home.
I may surprise some of you with this. I strongly support free speech. That said, I think I have more respect for the country than to spout off publicly in the manner in which Mr. Carter chose to do. As it happens, I don’t actually agree with much of what he said, however, I don’t think that is the point. That said, I am greatly anticipating changes after the next election, at which time I hope and pray we have someone to vote for, a moderate candidate who can pronounce “nuclear” and who may actually have a plan to successfully bring us to the next decade in a better position than we entered this one.
By five o'clock somewhere
August 21, 2006 03:03 PM | Link to this
From the left: Why can’t you conservatives describe what it means to be a conservative to you?
From the right: Why can’t you liberals just read a simple blog and figure out what it means to be a conservative?
From the left part Duex: Why can’t you conservatives take responsibility for your actions?
From the right part Duex: Why can’t you liberals own up to helping aid and abeit the enemy with your lavish hate speech on W?
From all over the map: Why do liberals ask the same questions continuously expecting a different answer as if they will one day get the one they want to hear?
By rarringt
August 21, 2006 03:03 PM | Link to this
jbmlaw said,
you requested a definition of “conservative.” Like “truth” and “beauty,” those would normally be in the eye of the beholder. I always liked Buckley’s definition: one who stands athwart history and yells, “Stop!”
You know, I could have a field day with that one…. :^)
By Lola
August 21, 2006 03:04 PM | Link to this
Carter needs to just shut up and build houses.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 03:05 PM | Link to this
You are right-on with that answer jbmlaw. Might I add: Conservative - one who has an abundance of common sense, superior in intelligence, totally moral, trustworthy, and damn good-looking!
By Dana
August 21, 2006 03:08 PM | Link to this
JBM -
Happy to see that you are exercising your freedom of speech, however I take exception with your views.
Moderate individuals are QUITE aware of where they stand, we have very strong beliefs, there is NOTHING wishy washy about THIS moderate and I would be far more likely to use a terrorist for target practice than sing anything with him!
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 03:09 PM | Link to this
James, I have you know that TFTT and I ARE NOT angry OLD men…we’re just angry men! LOL
By rarringt
August 21, 2006 03:09 PM | Link to this
From the middle:
Question: Why can’t Five O’Clock simply answer the question, and instead try and deflect back to an assault on liberals?
Answer: Because he has no answer for who and what he is. All that exists is hate and contempt, focused on “liberals,” as the main problem confronting the country.
Ladies and gentlemen, please say hello to the Angry (and increasingly irrelevant) Right.
By Katie
August 21, 2006 03:10 PM | Link to this
I definitely think its time for Carter to shut up and go away!
By @@
August 21, 2006 03:15 PM | Link to this
Think Tank Timmy called me a “neo-con troll” here yesterday. I’ve also been called a “neo-con fascist troll” at ml’s.
I’ve always wondered where I might fit into the conservative mix. I took a test.
I fell dead center on the lower level of the graph. I voted for George Bush and would again. According to jbmlaw I’m wishy washy with no real beliefs, but I’ll tell you one thing…in no uncertain terms would I ever sing anything with a bunch of terrorists unless it was “Row Your Boat Offshore Ahmed-Hoooooaaah”.
By rarringt
August 21, 2006 03:17 PM | Link to this
Lola/Katie (and whoever else is posting under multiple IDs)
I agree. Carter oughta stick his Nobel Peace Prize and dozen acclaimed (yet liberal) books right in his mouth so he can’t talk anymore.
After all, he’s just a PhD and former President. Clearly, all we need is to listen to Sean Hannity and read a Coulter book or two, and BOOM, we’re just as knowledgeable as he is on the subject for foreign affairs.
Besides, the current administration is handling things over “there” (wherever “there” may be) so well, even while on extended vacation.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 03:17 PM | Link to this
Lola and Katie: You beautiful Conservative ladies! Ole “Goober” knows he’s just a footnote and is just trying to get a little attention. Pitiful isn’t it?
TFTT: I know now why Athwipe’s in Boulder seeing his lover John Karr. They busted his home in Buford and found his $50 million in meth. That’s what financed his trips to Ty Ty and beyond…
By five o'clock somewhere
August 21, 2006 03:21 PM | Link to this
From the right:
Limited taxation policies.
Strong military.
Limited intrusion of government in personal finances.
Not being afraid to look at a cross on public land.
Having the backbone to not take offense at anyone who may attempt to offend us, and not attempting to make laws and rules against those that do.
Accepting that your fate and the decisions you make are your choices, and the government has nothing to do with either your success or failure.
Accepting the fact that there are those out there who disagree with us, yet we don’t try to shut them up, shut them down, or out shout them.
Knowing that success is based on what choices you make in lifea and how you choose to live it, not how you were born and what cards you were dealt with. Even nature itself isn’t equal for all.
Knowing that man-made global warming is for the large part an anti-capitalist bunch of hooey stirred up to hinder America’s economic powerhouse. How many hurricanes have we had this year Al Gore? This was supposed to have been a big season.
Knowing that the Katrina victims were victims of federal government dependence, not federal government response, which is the 3rd tier response after local and state agencies, which failed in Louisiana and New Orleans.
I’ll think up of some more later, but that’s just off the top of my head for starts.
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 03:21 PM | Link to this
say hello to rarrington - the increasingly snotty and patronising old liberal blowhard!!
I’m only angry when Rooney gets sent off for no reason against the sodding cheating Portugese!!
one other crucial strand of conservativism is the compassion we centre right folks usually show to liberals … not shooting or horse whipping them where ever they stand strikes me as extreme restraint. Likewise allowing them to pollute the minds of innocent kids in school with their filthy notions of diversity, their depraved dogma of multiculturalism …
damn!! looks like some nasty liberal has hacked my id again!!
By getalife
August 21, 2006 03:22 PM | Link to this
You can tell how bad and sick these people are when they bash an ex President who has done more to help people than they would ever dream of.
Clinton too.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 03:22 PM | Link to this
rarrington: I’ve got a better place for ole “Goober” to stick it. And yep, he demonstrated how knowledgeable he was on “foreign affairs”, among other things like the economy and hostage situations WHILE HE WAS PRESIDENT.
My God, y’all just don’t get it, but I still like you though!!!
By tftt??
August 21, 2006 03:24 PM | Link to this
tftt - the flatullating tinyminded troll
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 03:26 PM | Link to this
rarrington: I think that five o’clock somewhere and TFTT pretty well just summarized conservatism for you.
By Mark
August 21, 2006 03:27 PM | Link to this
time for the truth… you’re a retard. So getting a blw jb in the White House is unforgivable (Bill and Hilary kept their marriage together BTW… not like that pig Gingrich who’s cheated on all his wives and been married how many times now?) but lying to the American public, sacrificing 2,500 (and counting) American soldiers, refusing to admit ANY mistakes four years into a war that was supposed to be over in a few weeks, etc., etc. is some how honorable and worthy of praise. Spare me. If you like the war so much, go enlist. The Republicans will lose control of both houses of congress in the next election and impeachment proceedings against Bush and Cheney can begin soon after that. Oh… and speaking of “loyal opposition”… what was the “loyal (Republican) opposition” doing throughout the entire Clinton presidency… critisicing everything he did and engaging in an endless which hunt to destroy him… even while our troops were engaged in conflicts (oh… and fiscal conservatives… Clinton brought about welfare reform, presided over a roaring stock market and left a budget surplus… thanks Bush for undoing all that). Republicans just don’t seem to like it when their game plan is used against them. Guess what neo-cons… you made the new rules… so suck it up and deal with it as we turn them back on you pigs.
By Van
August 21, 2006 03:28 PM | Link to this
getalife ,
Who, Jimmy? When the Embassy in Iran was attacked, he did what? He apologized, he wimpered.
When Clinton allowed the Somalia campaign to be withdrawn, he basiclly wimpered out of that one too.
Reagan did not do us any favors when he retreated from Lebanon, at least both Bush’s don’t mind using force once in a while.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 03:30 PM | Link to this
Mark: I believe you have to be at least 14 to post blogs here. Isn’t that right Jim? You might want to check his “picture ID”!
By rarringt
August 21, 2006 03:30 PM | Link to this
Five O’clock,
Good job (and it only took you two hours). Most of the rest on here are at 6 days and counting.
Regardless, your post is illuminating of your thought process. Thanks for stepping up.
TFTT, stick and stones…but words do seem to hurt you. Seems like the best thing I can do is to let you drone on. After all, I can never hope to do as thorough a job of discrediting you as you do to yourself every day.
(heh, heh)
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 03:31 PM | Link to this
**ladies, gentlemen and unhinged liberals
meltdownmark easily winds HISSY FIT OF THE DAY!!**
that was pure magic mark!!! and so — heartfelt too … huge smirk
By Cletus Snow
August 21, 2006 03:31 PM | Link to this
I think that Jimmy Carter has realized that he wasted his trip to the white house,I wish he would stop his lunatic ranting and sit down under a nice shade tree and enjoy a glass of tea. As for the Dixie Chicks,no class whatsoever,reminds me of a dog we had, beutiful dog but would not housebreak, had to let her go.
By Van
August 21, 2006 03:32 PM | Link to this
jbmlaw,
I thought a liberal was one
Who knows exactly where God went wrong.
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 03:33 PM | Link to this
ladies, gentlemen and unhinged liberals
meltdownmark easily wins HISSY FIT OF THE DAY!!
that was pure magic mark!!! and so — heartfelt too …thank you so much bubbaturd — huge smirk
By getalife
August 21, 2006 03:33 PM | Link to this
Tell me Van,
When Clinton went to war, did you cry like DeLay and Newt?
Are you a hypocrite too?
BTW, I was talking about the good things they have done throughout the world for people.
What have you done Van?
By Van
August 21, 2006 03:37 PM | Link to this
rarringt,
To put in words that folks in mid-town can understand,
Liberals put their trust in the Federal Government.
Conservatives put their trust in the American people.
A moderate, hasn’t a clue where to put their trust.
By Realist
August 21, 2006 03:40 PM | Link to this
Mark, Please tell us all more about this welfare reform Clinton was the mastermind behind? Im not familiar with it.
By rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda
August 21, 2006 03:40 PM | Link to this
Just looking at the papers here - Karr’s daddy - Atlanta’s Wexford Karr - is a minister - anybody know where he preachifies?
That’s gotta be a fun church and a great place to experience Christ - or not! LOL.
Realist - you’re right - Karr was born in Conyers. Moved to ‘bama at 12, went to high school there. Married a 14 year old there.
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 03:40 PM | Link to this
cheers rarrington - your utterly unexpected fatuous pompous drivel magically cheered me up no end - and indeed I always at least fleetingly try to (figuratively) bow and scrape in sublime deference to your serendipitous albeit happily tardy abuse.
By getalife
August 21, 2006 03:42 PM | Link to this
Well said Mark.
These folks are in denial and do not want to see the reality of what W has done.
There is no honest debate when the facts keep getting in the way.
By Van
August 21, 2006 03:42 PM | Link to this
getalife,
I actually thought the mission to the former Yugosolvia was worthy, but we are still there, time to leave.
I thought the original mission to Somalia was worthy, but the execution was terrible.
BTW, getalife, when you get out of school and get a job, you will become a conservative - I have seen it happen too many times. When a person get a real job, and not a name tag job, they start thinking about where all their tax money goes.
By sct
August 21, 2006 03:43 PM | Link to this
Conservative:
Stole the word Christian
Builds bridges to nowhere, oink oink
Creator of deficits
Nation builders ( with empty ideology)
Corrupt
Outs our spies
Ruined our military
Ignores Osama
Flip flopped on term limits
Ignores constitution
Against states rights
Incompetent
Can’t compete in Conn Senate race
By MClark
August 21, 2006 03:43 PM | Link to this
Five O’Clock
Pretty good list. Some I agree with, some I don’t. I’m one of the horrible moderates that jbmlaw ignorantly said was “one with no real beliefs, a truly wishy-washy soul who would sing Kumbaya with Islamic terrorists.” (And I thought he was smarter than that and above that sort of nonsense but who knows what lurks in the hearts of man.)
But I want to ask for clarification on one thing.
At 3:03 you said “Why can’t you liberals own up to helping aid and abeit the enemy with your lavish hate speech on W?”
But at 3:21you said that conservatives are known for “Accepting the fact that there are those out there who disagree with us, yet we don’t try to shut them up, shut them down, or out shout them.”
These two seem incompatible. I am on record here, in this blog (I think even today) of saying that the extreme lefts vilification of the President is irresponsible and wrong. I think that if they can respect nothing else, they should respect the office. At the same time I do not think it is wrong to criticize any President’s policies, competency or decisions. It is that freedom that hallmarks America.
To conflate dissent with aiding and abetting the enemy is to attempt to negate the dissenters’ position to a much more extreme degree than simply trying to “shut them up, shut them down, or out shout them.” It is far worse and to me an un-American thing to do.
Am I misunderstanding what you were saying?
(Oh and BTW. If your name is a Buffett reference, remember he is a rather liberal guy himself.)
By Mark
August 21, 2006 03:43 PM | Link to this
Whatever, Time. Just put the blinders on and your ear plugs in and repeat the mantra …. “Bush is king… you’re with us or against us… stay the course…” That’s really doing a lot of good in the world.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 03:44 PM | Link to this
Hey Athwipe, that’s what I would expect from an A*******wipe like you. Leave Karr’s father out of this, I’m sure he’s as innocent in all of this as you and I. Of course I realize your ONLY reason for mentioning that was to point out the fact that his father is a Minister. You’re not only an A*******wipe, you’re a POS!!!
By Van
August 21, 2006 03:44 PM | Link to this
Got a question for the lefties.
Why has France or someother limp spined country called for a cease fire in Iraq? If they are so concerned about Lebanon, why not Iraq?
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 03:45 PM | Link to this
looks like sct had the wrong kind of mushrooms on that lunchtime pizza!!
By five o'clock somewhere
August 21, 2006 03:46 PM | Link to this
You are welcome rrngt. Some of us do have more important things to tend to than spend seven days a week and ten hours a day on blogs. I’m just glad I saw your post. I didn’t see your others out there looming in the queue of unanswered questions.
By rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda
August 21, 2006 03:48 PM | Link to this
Oops - I’ve upset one of the girls!
Don’t cry ugotta, it’ll be OK.
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 03:49 PM | Link to this
and the perfidious, gutless, snail munching, cheese eating Gallic surrender monkeys are now unsurprisingly backing out of leading the Lebanese peace keeping force they DEMANDED and PUSHED FOR!!
By getalife
August 21, 2006 03:51 PM | Link to this
Van,
Are you serious?
You do not know about France and Iraq?
By Van
August 21, 2006 03:54 PM | Link to this
getalife,
Answer me, why has no one gone to the UN and call for a cease fire?
Of course, the UN can say all the magic words they want, but are so corrupt, that their words are as empty as your head.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 03:58 PM | Link to this
Hey, I’m not crying A*******wipe. You don’t bother me at all bubba! Just remember to mock “Gawd” when you’re on your death bed one of these days. It’s amazing how many Atheists suddenly “find God” on their death beds! Let’s see how brave you really are then A*******wipe!!!
By deegee
August 21, 2006 03:59 PM | Link to this
George Washington Carver made a statement that I believe hints at the moderate view.
“How far you go in life depends on your being tender with the young, compassionate with the aged, sympathetic with the striving and tolerant of the weak and strong. Because someday in your life you will have been all of these.”
A moderate understands that circumstances dictate actions. Today’s liberal could be yesterday’s conservative depending on their circumstances.
By Redneck Convert
August 21, 2006 04:00 PM | Link to this
Hey, Ugotta, there are two Rednecks on this blog. Of course, we both hold you in contempt, but at least read before you spew and try not to splatter saliva all over the windows, monitor, and windshield.
By laf
August 21, 2006 04:01 PM | Link to this
The truth needs to be told about George Bush and the Republican Party. The truth doesn't change just because you are in a foreign country. People in foreign countries are not fools.By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 04:03 PM | Link to this
rednekkks is getting uppity again … the crystal meth moonpies must be wearing off!!
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 04:04 PM | Link to this
Dang, Redneck Convert, I really wish you hadn’t said that you hold me in contempt. Damn, just when I was beginning to like you both. Now I might not sleep tonight. I’m soooooo hurt! Duh-huh!
By Dana
August 21, 2006 04:05 PM | Link to this
Hey deegee, great quote! I see a great deal of merit in those words, thank you for sharing them.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 04:07 PM | Link to this
Athwipe’s not merely posting under different IDs, It’s his multiple personality disorder and the whole damn bunch is posting!
By J Tom
August 21, 2006 04:07 PM | Link to this
MClark-
Nice going, you changed “lavish hate speech” to “dissent” to make your invalid point.
You can voice dissent without being rude, obnoxious or hateful, without disrespecting the office of the President along with more than half the country. You give dissent by saying, “Mr. President, I can not support your policies,” you give fuel to the enemy by saying “Bush is a murderer. He is guilty of war crimes.”
By five o'clock somewhere
August 21, 2006 04:08 PM | Link to this
Hello MClark. I do not recall ever saying that those who speak out against W should be shut up. What I did say was that they should at least acknowledge that what they are saying out loud in public is detrimental to this war effort on all fronts, not just Iraq. Liberals want conservatives to own up to things so to speak, so why can’t conservatives demand the same of liberals?
Regarding Buffet, I don’t recall him ever speaking out in public or on foreign soil against our government, do you?
By Realist
August 21, 2006 04:09 PM | Link to this
deegee, He also tried to play a phonograph with a peanut, while John R. Skippy and Richard L. Jiff sneaked in and stole his peanut butter recipe, going on to untold millions in sales, while alas, the peanut phonograph never took off. thats just sad and unfair.
By getalife
August 21, 2006 04:10 PM | Link to this
laf,
Yes, the world sees the images of Iraq everyday.
They are waiting for us to do the right thing with W and Cheney.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 04:13 PM | Link to this
Did you see today’s score?
Israel 2 — Hezbollah 0
By MELO
August 21, 2006 04:14 PM | Link to this
MISSION ACCOMPLISHED. !!!! Who the heck is talking about war?
By rarringt
August 21, 2006 04:18 PM | Link to this
laf,
The sad thing is, the truth keeps getting told on a near-daily basis. Many, including some in here, simply don’t care, can’t tell the difference between truth and propaganda or - and this is truly bad - are aware of the lies but look the other way because it comports with their world view or short term goals.
5 p.m. (and others),
The lifeblood of democracy is dissent. If everyone agreed all the time, why would you need a democratic system? Civics 101, y’all….
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 04:18 PM | Link to this
Rednekkks clone - please say you hold me in real meaningful contempt too … its just not fair you saying that to UGK and not me. In fact I NOW DEMAND to be held in much more contempt than UGK. If you’re handing out contempt on this forum then be a good deranged contemptuous liberal and SHARE your precious contempt EVENLY!!
your contemptible chum TFFT, contemptuously awaiting your contempt!!
By Van
August 21, 2006 04:20 PM | Link to this
Hey, get a brain, I mean getalife
Are you going to answer or are you going to shift your empty headedness to another topic.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 04:23 PM | Link to this
Hey TFTT: Na na na na na! I’m held in contempt!
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 04:27 PM | Link to this
WHOAAAAAAA! CNN just reported that Bush’s poll numbers are back up to 42%! Donna Brazile (algore’s ex-campaign manager) is one of their guests so I KNOW we’re gonna get the troof!!!
By rarringt
August 21, 2006 04:29 PM | Link to this
Realist,
You are quite the joker today! Not a bad idea, as we could use a bit more wit in here.
By getalife
August 21, 2006 04:30 PM | Link to this
Ignorant question Van.
Most countries did but the US held out.
Now w says he is giving them money to rebuild knowing they will not accept it because they get money from Iran.
Iran won that war too.
By sct
August 21, 2006 04:32 PM | Link to this
OMG 42%!!!! Not Clinton numbers but hey, it is Bush.
61%- Against the war——35 approve of the war. Why are so many here out of touch with America?
By getalife
August 21, 2006 04:35 PM | Link to this
Ug,
Yes, you have more people like yourself supporting this idiot.
Something to be proud of I guess.
By MClark
August 21, 2006 04:36 PM | Link to this
J Tom I was asking Five O’clock for clarification, not trying to make a point. There are people who ask questions and wait to hear the other person out rather than just trying to score points with every post. But I have read a number of your posts and know that such subtlety of debate is lost on you.
And keep in mind that one man’s dissent is another’s hate speech. That is why I asked the question in the first place.
Five O’Clock,
Thanks for the clarification. I’m not sure I agree that dissent is detrimental to the war effort, but I see the point you are making. I agree that both sides should be asked to support their positions and made to own up to what they say. It is the ignorant speech on all sides of the spectrum that is making a mess of things. (For every Franken there is a Hannity, for every Dixie Chick there is a Toby Keith, for every Randi Rhodes there is a Coulter.)
And thankfully, you are correct about Jimmy. But I recall when he campaigned for the democrats in Florida in the eighties he caught all kinds of crap for it. I was not trying to make any connection or defense of the Chicks by mentioning Jimmy, just recalling trivia.
Thanks for the clarification.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 04:37 PM | Link to this
Boy, it must be really reassuring to our troops to know that the liberal DemoNcraPs are so solidly “behind them”. Like they were Joe Lieberman (as if he was the only DemoNcraP that voted FOR the war)!!!
Well, at least you’re not spitting on our troops like some of these older lunatics that were around in the 60s did to our troops coming home from Vietnam. So much so that our troops were told NOT to wear their uniforms home.
I was just reminded when getaclue said that “Iran won that war too.” (I guess speaking of the Israeli-Hezbollah war or recent days)
By Van
August 21, 2006 04:41 PM | Link to this
getalife,
Wake up, no toking during blogging hours.
The question that you seem to ignore, is why has no one come to the UN and proposed a cease fire in Iraq?
They acted quickly when the Hezbo’s were getting their arses(trying to get around the AJC censors) kicked. When Israel seemed to be making headway - boom France wants a cease fire. Why should Iraq be left out?
If you want to be taken seriously and not as a pest, try answering once in a while.
By getalife
August 21, 2006 04:41 PM | Link to this
Yes, w said he invaded Iraq, killed thousands for no good reason and Americans still support him.
Right or wrong does not mean anything in this country anymore.
Our country has lost her soul.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 04:42 PM | Link to this
BTW TFFT: They hold Joe Lieberman in contempt also! AIN’T I SPECIAL???
By sct
August 21, 2006 04:42 PM | Link to this
I didn’t know 61% of the American population were liberals Ugotta. When did this happen?
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 04:47 PM | Link to this
It’s 61% that are not approving of Bush’s handling of things SCT, NOT JUST IRAQ? I never said 61% were liberals.
NOT ALL of those 61% are wanting to CUT AND RUN! ONLY THE ONES THAT ARE DEMONCRAPS!!!
By getalife
August 21, 2006 04:47 PM | Link to this
Van,
Wow, you are ignorant.
They did, google it.
w invaded anyway.
Do you read or just spew.
By sct
August 21, 2006 04:53 PM | Link to this
It looks like Israeli soldiers and citizens are demanding some serious answers on why their latest conflict went so bad.
Does this mean Israeli’s love Hezzbolah? Do the soldiers hate Israel?
I just hope no Israeli pop singer comes over here and gives aid to the enemy by being critical of their government. Israel would fall for sure. I mean a pop singer, my god!
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 04:53 PM | Link to this
I think they’re just pretending not to hold me in contempt out of contemptible spite!!
By Atlantajan
August 21, 2006 04:53 PM | Link to this
Say what you mean. You don’t just think it’s wrong to criticize a sitting president during war time on foreign soil; you think it’s wrong all the time under any circumstances.
Bush and his minions created this war, he ran it into the ground, and, by God, it’s not just my right to say he screwed it up. It’s my duty. Anywhere.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 04:58 PM | Link to this
sct: I think the key words in your last post are: Israeli soldiers AND citizens! Israeli soldiers are demanding some serious answers on why their latest conflict went so bad.
When you show me where American troops are “demanding some serious answers on why their latest conflict went so bad”, I’ll have to agree with you.
By Van
August 21, 2006 05:00 PM | Link to this
getabrain,
3 April 2003 – United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan has said he does not see any immediate prospect for a ceasefire in the war in Iraq.
There, I googled it, nothing, Even Kofi, sees no prospects. Back in 2003, no one was calling for a cease fire.
Where is your proof - oh I know, you don’t have any.
As I thought, getalife is just an empty drum.
By JoeD
August 21, 2006 05:06 PM | Link to this
Van, what is the point of your question about a cease fire in Iraq? I’m not taking a shot, I’m just trying to find out why you think it’s significant. And TFTT, if no one else will say it, there’s plenty of contempt here for you. And yes, I know, you’ll wear it as a badge of honor. All the sadder for you.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 05:08 PM | Link to this
AtlantaJan: I think the point Jim was making was that before 2001 when Bush took office, it was protocol and professional courtesy and respect for the office by former presidents to NOT criticize a sitting American President or his policies while abroad. It was okay to do it here, but they DID NOT do it while out of the country. BUT that was before the new WIN AT ALL COSTS that the DemoNcraPs are engaged in. Anything goes to drive his approval numbers down and hinder his policies.
By Jackie
August 21, 2006 05:10 PM | Link to this
All those couch-patriots that have not voluntered for military service should not speak a word about cut-and-run because you are all cowards. Jimmy Carter was a professional military man who served his country. The question is, “what have you done to serve your country?” Speak now, or forever hold your tongue because you all have diahhreha(sic) of the lip
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 05:12 PM | Link to this
cor … at long last one of dem nasty libs fesses up!!!
please say you’re not just saying that Joe just to make me feel better - your contempt is real??!!
WOW … my life is now complete - one lefty liberal twonk has real contempt for me!!
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 05:13 PM | Link to this
So JACKIE, let me see now…If I’ve never had an abortion, WHO THE HELL AM I to speak out against abortions??? Duh-huh! Great argument!!!
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 05:15 PM | Link to this
run along now Jackie … its your turn for soda fountain at Chuckee Cheese!!
By JoeD
August 21, 2006 05:17 PM | Link to this
Actually, I did say just to make you feel better. I really couldn’t care less about you.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 05:19 PM | Link to this
JoeD: That wasn’t nice. And we thought you liberals only believed in looooooove and peeeeeaace and dem sorts of things! We don’t like ugly!!! Do we TFTT?
By Jackie
August 21, 2006 05:19 PM | Link to this
You did not have an abortion, but, you thought process is limited and without foundation. You speak of abortions as if that is the pancea of everything that affects our everyday life, yet, you would deny those who have their children the opportunity to raise those children in a manner that would be helpful to the child, therefore society. Guess you have a problem with a living wage? I think you argument is specious and has not merit, consequently you can not address the topic at hand because your thought process is being framed by the facisits leanings that you think will continue to rule politically. Your time is running out and you can go back to your cave.
By sct
August 21, 2006 05:19 PM | Link to this
Jackie the Chickenhawks answered your question last fri.
They are blog warriors, fighting the liberals here at home so others can fight the terrorists there. Safe and cozy.
One even bragged that he was going home to his 6400 sq ft house, a glass of wine and a dip in the jacuzzi, blogging to keep us safe. Yep that was his part.
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 05:20 PM | Link to this
Jacki - you brainless leftist bimbo - I came to this country way too old to serve in the military - the cutoff point for registering for the selective service system is 26 and I was well past that!!
By Van
August 21, 2006 05:20 PM | Link to this
Jackie,
Four years USMC, 1967 through 1971. Server with VMFA 333 and VMFA 235.
Where were you back in ‘67? Going ga-ga over Hanoi Jane? Dancing naked at a love fest? Doing your part to support us in our endevour?
By Jackie
August 21, 2006 05:21 PM | Link to this
@time for the truth:
Your sheet is showing and it appears that it has a stain in the rear.
You are another of the clowns in the circus of the facisits
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 05:21 PM | Link to this
Anyone that speaks “lunacy” please translate what Jackie just said at 5:19. Pleeeeeease!
By Jackie
August 21, 2006 05:24 PM | Link to this
@Van
Were you in the Marine Expiditionary Force bottled up in the Ashau Valley when the “First Team” had to come and get your hip?
1st Cav Div, ‘68 - ‘69. Remember??????
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 05:24 PM | Link to this
Hey sct, you qualify. Translate that for me please. Y’all are attempting to carry on a conversation so you must speak some “lunacy”.
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 05:24 PM | Link to this
Joe I am CRUSHED!!! You mean you dont have contempt for me??
YOU NASTY SPITEFUL LIBERAL LIAR!!!
They toy with you and then dump on you - kind of like sick willie the sexual predator did with Juanita and Jennifer and Paula and all the others!!
By Jackie
August 21, 2006 05:27 PM | Link to this
@Ugotta B Kidding
Seems that the cat has your tongue.
It appears to me that you have gone from diarrhea to contstapation!!!!!!!!!
If have spoken clearly and directly without your being able to respond to the challenge before you. Have you volunterred yet?
By Van
August 21, 2006 05:27 PM | Link to this
JoeD,
France and other countries can to the aid of the hezbo baby killers when they we starting to get the arses beat. You did notice, no one can to the aid of the killers in the Gaza strip.
If a cease fire was so important to Lebanon, then why not Iraq? If it was so easy for France to open its mouth, but put up next to nothing to help, then why not the poor suffereing terrorists in Iraq?
Why was it important to rein in Israel, but not to try it with the US? We are fighting the same type of low lifes as the Israelis.
By sct
August 21, 2006 05:27 PM | Link to this
Oh and Jackie have you not heard of the bird flu? It seems to be affecting mostly young white conservative males. Many thousands of military deferrments have been given because of it. I believe doctors have named it CS, or Chickenhawk Syndrome.
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 05:28 PM | Link to this
Jackie — is that … pant pant pant … contempt??? … say it is lovey?
How much do you usually charge to say you have contempt for a true right wing Kerry/Clinton hating conservative???
Joe smugly retracts his contempt - but he’s just spiteful and cruel!!
By getalife
August 21, 2006 05:29 PM | Link to this
Van,
Read this and you might learn that there was no call for a cease fire because w said screw the UN
By Markus
August 21, 2006 05:32 PM | Link to this
@getalife-
Ok, now that I have more time, do you want to tell me now about Iraq not producing and exporting any oil right now? Do you want to compare how much oil Iraq produced for the international market before 2003 and now?
Maybe I’m wrong, but you come across as wanting to blame Bush solely for high oil prices and therefore he is “manipulating” them. Please clarify further where you are coming from.
I’m ready to engage…
By Jackie
August 21, 2006 05:33 PM | Link to this
@sct
You da’ man!!!!!!!!!!!
It seems dem’ conservatives loose their voices when it comes to the fact that someone speaks the truth and not engage in a diatribe that has not meaning.
Why don’t they join the military and have some target practice with the targets having the ability to shoot back.
Don’t you just luv’ ‘em, CHICKENHAWS ALL!!!!!!!!!!!!
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 05:33 PM | Link to this
Jackie: That stupid question has been asked everyday by other liberals before you. It’s one of the only 2 questions y’all know how to ask about the military. Please find something new! And get help with the OCD!!!
SCT: Did you give up on googling an answer to MY question. I’ve asked IT only ONCE! That’s just common sense conservatism.
By getalife
August 21, 2006 05:34 PM | Link to this
The huge mistake w was talking about today was his mistake with his failed neo con plan.
He says to support their government when their government supports Iran.
Can you hear me now?
By Van
August 21, 2006 05:37 PM | Link to this
Jackie,
The Air Wing was above all that. VMFA - Fixed wing Marine Fighter Attack. F4-J Phantoms, one of the best planes at that time.
BTW, VMFA-333 had the sole all Marine MIG kill, oddly enought, it was Sept. 11, 1972, yep 9/11.
By getalife
August 21, 2006 05:38 PM | Link to this
Markus,
I am saying there are 130,000 troops in Iraq and they can’t protect the oil supply.
You can spew all the numbers you want, but the fact is there is no oil coming out of Iraq.
Why?
By Markus
August 21, 2006 05:38 PM | Link to this
IDF wasted some Hellbollah ‘gorillas’ today. Boy, I sure am glad that wonderful lovechild of the loonbat left known as the UN is doing it’s job over there!
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/08/21/mideast.main/index.html
By Jackie
August 21, 2006 05:39 PM | Link to this
@U Gotta Be Kidding
It is not the only question that is asked on those of you with the “Syndrome.” The question I would ask of you, why do you folks lie so much in pretending that you are patriots. You must have cognitie dissonance, seeing something before your very eyes and denying that it exists. Either your glasses don’t work, or, the exam that you had was not good. Must have been spouting about how much you love this country!
By Van
August 21, 2006 05:40 PM | Link to this
getalife,
You mean the UN was cowered by W? I thought you lefties said he was dumb as a brick.
So if he could back down the UN, he must have had something.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 05:42 PM | Link to this
Jackie: What is it that we’re supposed to be denying? And what am I “lying” about? Please clue me in since you seem to have a special insight.
By Markus
August 21, 2006 05:43 PM | Link to this
Getalife:
Iraq has been producing over one million barrels a month for some time now. Now tell me again there is no oil coming out of Iraq.
http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Story.aspx?dist=newsfinder&siteid=mktw&guid=%7B2395CFE1-F843-41E2-8336-6293779F7D63%7D&
Go ahead, tell me where in your world Iraq is not pumping and transporting oil. I cannot believe what I’m reading, even from your ilk.
State your purpose of “why no oil out of Iraq” or I’m moving on. You have the facts right in front of you.
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 05:45 PM | Link to this
GOT IT —-only liberal vermin like Jackie are TRUE PATRIOTS!! Conservatives cant be patriots because they lie so much!!
any chance of just a smidgeon of contempt coming my way for that bubbakins??!!
By Jackie
August 21, 2006 05:45 PM | Link to this
@Van
As a member of the military in a combat situation, you and I both know that what we went through was not picnic and many of the folks here talk the talk, yet they have not walked the walk. One thing to shoot at something, another thing when something shoots back. Where are the volunteers needed for the Army in Iraq because the Army is broken because of the frequency of the rotation. How are you going to suppres a population of 25 million folks with a force of 130,000 soldiers. It’s like your going to destroy a fire ant mound and accidently step on a mound that you did not see. Been there before.
By sct
August 21, 2006 05:46 PM | Link to this
Ugotta,
Israeli soldiers and citizens are speaking out against their war! Imagine how much that emboldens the enemy!! They are doomed. Right???
Here it is only 61% of the population along with leaders of BOTH parties and plenty of ex-military officers.
Does the soldiers and citizens speaking out in Israel embolden the enemy? Because that conflict sure ain’t over.
By getalife
August 21, 2006 05:46 PM | Link to this
Van,
He just ignored them and now he needs them. Notice anybody going to Lebanon?
Very stupid.
By Markus
August 21, 2006 05:47 PM | Link to this
British give details, make charges against islamofascist suspects. Weapons, DVDs, movies of martyrism saying their farewells, and on and on and on.
Well, let’s see how long before the loonbat freak fringe terrorist-loving wacko left will say this is just a part of Bush’s propoganda machine to “scare” people.
Funny, I couldn’t find this story on CNN’s website or the Washington ComPost. Wonder why?
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,209612,00.html
Go ahead kooks, call this story “Feaux” news. I dare you.
By time for the truth
August 21, 2006 05:49 PM | Link to this
YOU BRAINLESS MORON JACKIE!!!
There is NO attempt, need or desire to “suppress 25 million people”!! YOu liberals are so twisted you cant even debate with any honesty!!
NOW WHERE’S MY DAMN CONTEMPT??!!
By getalife
August 21, 2006 05:49 PM | Link to this
Why? Tough question huh?
Cut and run Markus.
By Markus
August 21, 2006 05:50 PM | Link to this
Correction.. that’s over one million barrels of oil a DAY in Iraq.
By Pheromonal Fantasy
August 21, 2006 05:50 PM | Link to this
There is no military solution possible for Iraq. The think tank end-game scenarios all end in stalemate or worse.
Bush needs to resign. Ditto Cheney.
Phasers on stun. Wide field. On my mark…two..one.. FIRE!!!!
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 05:51 PM | Link to this
And SCT it doesn’t need to be over. As long as Hezbollah is armed they will be a danger to Israel.
But that has nothing to do with U.S. troops “complaining about their latest conflict in Iraq”.
By Van
August 21, 2006 05:51 PM | Link to this
getalife,
France was not involved with Lebanon, and are not going in the numbers they first stated. Now the glorious UN is sending Muslims to protect Muslims from the dreaded JEWS.
Talk about the Fox guarding the hen house. It looks like the Hezbo’s will be rearmed in no time.
By Pheromonal Fantasy
August 21, 2006 05:52 PM | Link to this
BTW: what is the mission of US troops in Iraq?
By Markus
August 21, 2006 05:53 PM | Link to this
Getalife-
I just showed you where Iraq is producing and transporting oil to Turkey via a pipeline that has been sabatoged on many occasions.
Now if you don’t want to back up what you said,or at the VERY least validate your statements, stop wasting my time. Methinks you jackholes got enough of that yesterday.
By Jackie
August 21, 2006 05:54 PM | Link to this
@sct
Did you notice how quiet our conservative friends get when the facts that face them can not be manipulated with name-calling, i.e., abortion, stay-the-course, liberals, etc, etc.. These folks would jump off the cliff if they thought it would advance their lie. Wait, they are cowards and the cliff, even though a small hill, would present a challenge to the fortitude!!!!!!!!! Conservatives who are full of noise-pollution, stand in line and raise your hand to be sworn in to help protect this country from the islamofacisits!!!!!
By Markus
August 21, 2006 05:55 PM | Link to this
HAHAHAHAHA!!!!
*By Pheromonal Fantasy August 21, 2006 05:52 PM | Link to this
BTW: what is the mission of US troops in Iraq?*
Oh where have I heard THAT question before? Yep, liberalism is definitely a sickness.
By J Tom
August 21, 2006 05:57 PM | Link to this
MClark- As I pointed out in my post, there are ways of dissenting without being boorish, but you obviously missed the point. If you really feel that one man’s dissent is another’s hate speech, then I can understand your inability to comprehend that one can disagree without being disagreeable.
By Markus
August 21, 2006 05:58 PM | Link to this
Jackie, I haven’t seen a damn thing to reflect “fact” from you candyassed terrorist loving liberals out there. Right now “getalife” can’t answer my challenge to her challenge about Iraq and not in oil production/flowing/exporting.
Please, all you jackasses waste more time than you neosocialist buttpirate wallet thiefs are worth.
By Dave
August 21, 2006 05:58 PM | Link to this
Jim I am an old coot and I do not plan to shut my mouth until I am dead. However, I am not an ex-President nor a member of a world wide touring singing group. In other words, I agree that those little UNinformed chicks and the INformed Carter are both terribly guilty of near treason. I can tolerate Carter and his religious rightousness here in Georgia, but I can’t tolerate his big political mouth being opened wide to the likes of Der Spiegil. He is not worthy of being noticed. Therefore from this point forward I will not acknowledge that he even exists on my planet.
Now for Mr Andrew Young. I do NOT agree with him politically, but I sure believe he had the right to tell the truth about the rip off store owners in his neighborhood. It is beyond my belief that in small neighborhoods, and samll towns, our neighbors rip us off on the price of food, gasoline and other necessities of life. Just does not make sense but it happening as I write. Mr. Young’s only mistake, in my opinon, was naming the offenders. That was politically incorrect, and of ALL politicians in this country HE should have known that telling the truth would mean trouble. When you offend the offenders you end up eating crow. No pun intended.
By Van
August 21, 2006 05:59 PM | Link to this
Jackie, Jackie, Jackie, where do you come up with this drivel.
August 10, 2006 U.S. Military exceeds recruitment goals for 14th consecutive month
The Department of Defense has released the military recruiting numbers for July, and for the 14th consecutive month the active duty branches all exceeded their recruiting goals (also see this pdf file with complete stats from June 2005 to June 2006).
Look here
The Marines exceeded their goal by 112%. I guess it proves what a broken down bunch of Jar Heads they are.
By Pheromonal Fantasy
August 21, 2006 05:59 PM | Link to this
Forget about Lebanon, the Hezbollah will chose war. Does anyone doubt that?
Forget about Hamas. They will choose war. Does anyone doubt that.
No, it’s the end game in Iraq. How will this play out? This is what concerns all Americans the most. Will we have to redraw the maps? A new Shia Superstate in Iraq/Iran. Kurdistan. Sunni/Syria?
If so, what does THAT mean for peace in the middle east?
The think tanks dont like this end game, but they all agree it’s the most likely.
Get to know a think tank. Google the Heritage Foundation. Read their bloggers. Real mensa types thinkin’ deep thoughts all day long. And you get to blog back at them. But watch yourself. They’re sharp as tacks.
Phasers on dope. Narrow beam. On my mark….three..two..one..FIRE!!!
By sct
August 21, 2006 05:59 PM | Link to this
Ugotta, you never answered the question. Does the Israeli criticism of their conflict embolden the enemy? Is Israel doomed because of it?
By Markus
August 21, 2006 06:00 PM | Link to this
I’m WAITING getabrain… cowardly chump.
By Jackie
August 21, 2006 06:00 PM | Link to this
From my reading about the Iraq invasion, Turkey has said clearly, that if the country breaks up, they will invade and keep the Kurds from causing them grief by using the oil money they will have. A few days ago, there was a terrorist attack in Turkey , reportedly by Kurd sepratist and they Turks made it known that they were poised to cause major heartburn for the Kurds in Iraq.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
August 21, 2006 06:04 PM | Link to this
Jackie: When you’ve got something intelligent to say, get back to me. Like I said once before - I’ll recognize it when you begin it with, “Ugotta once told me…” Obviously that’ll be the only thing you’ve said that has any obvious signs of intelligence to it. All I’ve heard today was the same ole worn-out liberal BS. So get a new line of questions before you visit us again. Y’all have worn these out!!!
By Markus
August 21, 2006 06:08 PM | Link to this
Hey getalife:
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again… don’t start something you can’t finish, ya mental midget brainwashed liberal.
Get some new material or go away. We conservative suburban adults have more important things to deal with like careers, recreation, and actually enjoying life because we don’t obssess day in and day out over any blogs that might actually host people who mgiht actually say something negative about our ideologies.
CHECKMATE.
By sct
August 21, 2006 06:17 PM | Link to this
“We conservative suburban adults have more important things to deal with like careers, recreation, and actually enjoying life “
Chickenhawk markus, get your chickenbutt to Iraq. Stop with the FAKE support of the troops and earn your cushy life. Stop sponging off the sacrifice of others and do your share. Put down the wine and turn off the jaccuzi, then put your money where your mouth is.
By Blog Dawg
August 21, 2006 08:11 PM | Link to this
Hey, SCT, I’ll tell you what was funny. Yesterday, this blogger named Think Tank Timmy listed all the traits that define a troll, and then all the trolls (tftt, realist, @@, ugotta, markus) spent the rest of the day playing out every single symptom that he listed. It was like life imitating art imitating morons. Funniest thing. This guy is some sort of genius, to have set up a play like that, and then have every single troll on the board cough it up made to order, set piece, with no excuses. Imagine falling for an old gag like that in this day and age. Unreal.
You know what they say about “turds of a featherbrain” blogging together.
The trolls on this board are some of the funnest trolls I’ve ever seen. They riff well, and they are great mimics. You dont have to hit them over the head with stuff, they copy it right away…
And best of all: the trolls still dont know they fell for it!!!! Okay, they do now.
By Middle America
August 22, 2006 08:44 AM | Link to this
I think Wooten is upset because there are no conservative ex-Presidents that can weigh in on the current situation. But even if any of them from the last 40 years were able to speak, only one would have any credibility. Richard Nixon, now deceased, was a criminal, who used illegal wiretaps as a sitting president. Gerald Ford, near dead, pardoned Nixon, which in my mind makes him complicit in Nixon’s crimes. Ronald Reagan, now deceased, for all his positives was afflicted with the beginnings of alzheimer’s while still in office. He also sold (or his administration) arms to the very country that is our #1 enemy, Iran. And it is from his term as president that other current conflicts find their origins, Lebanon, Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden. George Herbert Walker Bush, probably the most credible to speak on the subject, is not at liberty to talk because he can’t discredit his own son. Many of the successes and policies that Bush I had in 1990, were completely ignored by his son. And one of the architects of those successes, Colin Powell, was first, discredited by being sent to do the dirty work at the UN with false information, and then marginalized by the administration, and finally forced to leave because he no longer had any influence with W. Was Jimmy Carter a successful president? Probably not by a lot of measures, but he never committed any crimes. There is absolutely nothing wrong with despising war. To me anyone who tries to mock people who love peace, there is something terribly wrong with your mind. Are all situations resolvable by peaceful means? No. But completely ignoring peaceful means before leaping into war is wrong, and it should be pointed out that it is wrong, even if you are criticizing the president. And it does not matter WHERE the criticism takes place. Bush should know, if you are not willing to take the criticism, then you probably shouldn’t be doing what you are doing. All we ever hear from him is how “this is hard work” or it’s “difficult”. No sh*t sherlock. We don’t want a play by play on how hard this is, we want to know WHAT YOU ARE GOING TO DO TO MAKE THIS RIGHT.
By Michelle
August 22, 2006 09:48 AM | Link to this
One thing I’ve noticed about Conservatives is the only time they cry foul is when the President on the receiving end is a Republican. If someone said something nasty about President Clinton, here or overseas, do you think this Wooten guy would be criticizing them or calling them Un-American? Don’t give me that crap about how different rules apply during times of War, either. I seem to remember various Conservative types wanting to crucify President Clinton while our troops were overseas in Bosnia.
By KZGuy
August 22, 2006 10:36 AM | Link to this
Once again Wooten is all wrong. Why should an ex President not speak out about the current President? Especially one that has made MAJOR mistakes like Bush. Bush has single handly united all of our enemies and divided our few allies. 2008 Are we there yet? History will be kind to Jimmy Carter. History will rank Bush right along side his only equal - Richard Nixon.
By Mony
August 22, 2006 10:37 AM | Link to this
While we are arguing the pros and cons of Liberals vs Conservatives we have our young dying on foreign soils. We should be united in our support for them. They don’t care about this as they fight to protect us. We sit here shooting shxx, for damn hours (days). Shame on us. They need our support!
http://www.bentbay.dk/Indian_war.htm
By Markus
August 22, 2006 11:41 AM | Link to this
I see sct likes to play childish games and wait out the last message before sending a response on a window still open. You pathetic liberal coward. You’re ilk here couldn’t even support your the argument about no oil flowing from Iraq.
Oh, and hey jackass, why don’t YOU go build a habitat for humanity if you believe in the causes so much. Why don’t YOU go volunteer to shelter the homeless and feed them since you have such passion for those causes. Otherwise, sit down and SHUT THE HELL UP already about supporting Iraq and not serving. Scumbag liberal hypocrite.
By Michelle
August 22, 2006 12:04 PM | Link to this
The troops don’t need our support, they need to be withdrawn out of that toilet and brought home to their families. There is absolutely no reason for them to be over there.