Thinking Right

By Mid-South Philosopher

October 19, 2006 08:11 AM | Link to this

Good morning, Jim,

I’m sorry, Jim, but “Georgie” Bush has “bumbled” this war… about as badly as Lyndon Johnson did the one you and I remember so well…not for invading Iraq and disposing of Saddam, but for listening Donald Rumsfeld. The only thing Rumsfeld got right was the “lean, mean, fighting machine invasion force.” It was tremendously effective in the combat phase of the war. Then came the occupation and Rumsfeld was “lost ball in high grass”…too few troops to do the job, inadequate equipment in the initial phases of the task, and arrogance equaled only to Robert McNamara of another era. As a consequence of our lack of sufficient force, the insurgents were able to organize and become an issue and the Islamist fanatic terrorists from other parts of the region were able to enter Iraq. Now, our troops are paying the price.

Should we cut and run…not a chance, but the time has come to deal with the situation. Since we are too “humane” to destroy the Iraqi population structure that “enables” the insurgents and/or the Islamist terrorists, we must demand that the Iraqi government rise to the occasion. The best way to do this may be a form of “Iraqization,” similar to Nixon’s “Vietnamization”. In other words, we develop a schedule for the Iraqi forces to assume certain tasks. When those times arrive, we turn those tasks over to the Iraqi…ready or not. This “schedule” could be kept close to the vest…put Karl Rove in charge of it’s security…thus not making it a public schedule of departure.

“Georgie” is not going to do this. He has already embraced the Rumsfeld philosophy. That coupled with the fact that he has been the most “liberal” spending President in history (even discounting the war), a member of the “inept” President’s club with respect to protecting our borders, and one of the strongest advocates for “bigger” government and the “infringement” upon individual liberties since the Federalists of the John Adams era, I suspect that his legacy will not be treated kindly.

By Aquagirl

October 19, 2006 08:21 AM | Link to this

Maybe the left and right don’t have much to say to each other because the right took up a head in the sand, disagree with us and your’re with the terrorists position. They excluded such cut-and-run types as Colin Powell, who dared try to differ with the military reasoning of Bush, who spent his war flying over Alabama.

The war in Iraq is unwinnable the way the Republicans have been running it. That doesn’t mean it’s unwinnable, but good luck trying to explain that to the head Republican drones. To them, a traffic accident on Peachtree means the Democrats want to invite Osama over for dinner and elect him President.

A solution? Elect real Republicans, not the closeminded, contentious, fake-religious bunch that’s running the show now. Powell is a real Republican; I’d vote for him as fast as I voted for Ronald Reagan.

By Jim's Missing the Point

October 19, 2006 08:21 AM | Link to this

Morning Jim,

Maybe the GOP needs another document like this one to give the electorate some guidance about what it’s core value system really is…you know, something to set it apart from those nasty Democrats.

Besides, it worked so well previously, why not just repeat that formula? How about something like “Republican Contract with Iraq” instead?

REPUBLICAN CONTRACT WITH AMERICA

As Republican Members of the House of Representatives and as citizens seeking to join that body we propose not just to change its policies, but even more important, to restore the bonds of trust between the people and their elected representatives.

That is why, in this era of official evasion and posturing, we offer instead a detailed agenda for national renewal, a written commitment with no fine print.

This year’s election offers the chance, after four decades of one-party control, to bring to the House a new majority that will transform the way Congress works. That historic change would be the end of government that is too big, too intrusive, and too easy with the public’s money. It can be the beginning of a Congress that respects the values and shares the faith of the American family.

Like Lincoln, our first Republican president, we intend to act “with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right.” To restore accountability to Congress. To end its cycle of scandal and disgrace. To make us all proud again of the way free people govern themselves.

On the first day of the 104th Congress, the new Republican majority will immediately pass the following major reforms, aimed at restoring the faith and trust of the American people in their government:

FIRST, require all laws that apply to the rest of the country also apply equally to the Congress;

SECOND, select a major, independent auditing firm to conduct a comprehensive audit of Congress for waste, fraud or abuse;

THIRD, cut the number of House committees, and cut committee staff by one-third;

FOURTH, limit the terms of all committee chairs;

FIFTH, ban the casting of proxy votes in committee;

SIXTH, require committee meetings to be open to the public;

SEVENTH, require a three-fifths majority vote to pass a tax increase;

EIGHTH, guarantee an honest accounting of our Federal Budget by implementing zero base-line budgeting.

By Jim Wooten

October 19, 2006 08:26 AM | Link to this

Once again, Philosopher, you start our day with reason and substance. I trust the pattern will hold as the day wears on.

By Aquagirl

October 19, 2006 08:32 AM | Link to this

Yep, not even 8:30 and the Republican Contract with America is up here again. Keep it up, JMTP,the Republicans should be force-fed that thing they were so proud of every morning with their Wheaties.

BTW Jim, thanks for a good topic today. The UN thing was so easy it wasn’t attractive, thus forcing me to go over to another board and smack posters about tongue piercing. Ick.

By Van

October 19, 2006 08:41 AM | Link to this

Mid-South Philosopher,

I have to agree with you today about not pursuing the occupation phase with enough vigor.

When will we adopt a get tough attitute toward the local and foreign fighters. We need to change from a posture of peace keeping to combat mode to fight against the terrorists.

We need to show then both the velvet glove and the iron fist in dealing with the Iraqi’s. Help all those that are peaceful and rain down fire and fury upon the trouble makers. Then maybe local militia leaders like Al-Sadr will come around and work toward a peaceful Iraq.

By Curious Observer

October 19, 2006 08:58 AM | Link to this

It is absurd to posit that the Iraqi government can “stand up” and take control of the country if only we will keep troops in the country for a few more years. The situation there is very much as it was in the US post-Civil War period. Only the iron hand wielded by occupying federal troops kept the South in line until several decades passed. And even now, the hatred of the North still exists.

And how long do we take to train troops for combat? A year is regarded as standard, but somehow we’ve been training Iraqi troops for more than three years, and they still can’t hold their own in combat against insurgents.

The problem is that there is a lack of national will among the Iraqi people, and the notion that a people will somehow appreciate the glory of democracy after centuries of autocracy is absurd. The only stability that Iraq will ever know will come as a result of the installation of a theocracy. It will come along with the brutal suppression of the Sunnis.

And we have sacrificed almost 3,000 American troops, not counting the tens of thousands of maimed troops and the hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis, for that?

Only the most terminally stupid will maintain that Iraq will see peace and stability if we will keep troops in the country for a few more years. Wake up and smell the coffee, neocons. Maybe then you will perceive that the inevitable course Iraq will follow is to become the twin of Iran. It will happen regardless of US wishes.

By Ah Break Wind in the Faces of:

October 19, 2006 09:00 AM | Link to this

all neo-scum-zionist-repuke-bigots on this board.

By Bring it On, Neo-Clowns

October 19, 2006 09:03 AM | Link to this

wooten is an idiot, hence the nick name of if-i-only-had-a-brain, imho. His competition at the ajc is so weak, he is able to keep his job as mouth-piece for the right wing bigots. Fear not, revenge is just around the corner. The neo-scum plan to attack Iran on or shortly after October 21, 2006. Iran will take heavy loses, but they will fight back, and the cheap oil uncle stupid has been stealing from the arab peoples will stop flowing. The fake american economy is underpinned by the printing of 1 trillion new dollars per year, and the dollar is underpinned by arab oil. All that changes when the oil stops flowing. The dollar will go to zero on foreign exchange markets, imports will drop to zero, our oil stocks will plung daily, and it will be back to the 19th century for america. The Fat-ASSet repukes will see their jobs disappear and their savings become worthless, just like the Germans of 1923. Adolf Von Bush and his neo-scum pals will take america from democracy to AmeriKa the facist. ‘course, bushie and pals may wear brown shirts, and talk all tough, but underneath, they all wear pink panties, and are chicken-s** cowards

The brutality of the neo-scums is in direct proportion to their under lying cowardlyness. Rummy, Wolfie, Libbie and Chaney would not last five minutes under the kinds of torture they have ordered inflicted on their Arab prisioners. Their pink panties would quickly fill with the brown truth of their own cowardlyness, anf yellow ribbons of surrender would stain the purty pink fronts of their lace covered panties.

Yellow ribbons of surrender stain the purty pink fronts of their lace covered panties - Child molesting neo-sum congressman gets his jollies molesting male children, fellow neo-scum congressmen cover up for years, then want to investigate “who leaked this to the press.” Yellow ribbons of surrender staining the purty pink fronts of their lace covered panties, the neo-scum house leadership calls on the FBI to investigate the leak of this “highly classified information, that could damage our national security.”

X-Neo-Scum-Congressman Folley reveals who molested him as a child, seeks to enter witness protection program! X-FBI director’s pink tutu impounded for DNA testing! Read all about it! J-Edgar-Hoover’s library and freak-show shut down, ringed in yeller police tape of surrender! Read all about it, right here, today!

By DebbieDoRight

October 19, 2006 09:14 AM | Link to this

I honestly don’t feel there can ever be a peaceful solution to Iraq. Check back in the history books during the time before Saddam took over and you’ll find that there was always civil unrest, ethnic/religious strife and Iraq was always near the brink of civil war.

The US help PUT Saddam in power because they felt that he would be a stabilizer in an unstable region, (which he was — with the US’s help[weapons, training] he kept Iran in check and brutally kept his nation in check), and now without a stabilizer we’re left with more chaos in the region than ever before.

Iran, leery of the US and now free from the shadow of Iraq has decided to pursue a nuclear weapons program, as well as help to further tear down Iraq by allowing insurgents to cross their borders into Iraq to further disrupt the Iraqi peace initaitve.

Now we’re left with a big mess that we helped to create. The Iraqi people who once appreciated us, when we took down Saddam, now see us as unwanted and unwelcomed “guests” who should have went home a long time ago. We can not, in reality, leave Iraq in the state that it is in now, nor can we leave our troops in such harm’s way continually. It’s not just the physical harm our troops are suffering, but the emotional harm as well — (have you ever taken the time to sit down and talk to a VietNam veteran who has done more than one tour of VietNam?) I think as the Southern Philosopher states, we have to have people in power who actually KNOW what they’re doing and who LISTENS to their troops/commanders in order to effectively create a better situation for both the US troops and the Iraqi people. It’s not about Right Or Left — but Right And Wrong.

By mijo

October 19, 2006 09:24 AM | Link to this

Aquagirl is a fraud

By Aquagirl

October 19, 2006 09:37 AM | Link to this

babygirl! How nice of you to join us. Please, share your thoughts on the situation in Iraq. I’m sure everyone here will enjoy your insightful commentary that has already been displayed in defense of subjects such as unwed motherhood.

Crank up that Fantasia album and get the party started!

And see if you can get a little more creative in the name calling department. It’ll enhance your standing among the other minimum wage workers. “Yo mama!” is quite the rage in that set.

By MP

October 19, 2006 09:37 AM | Link to this

Well, we should have never started a war in Iraq. They had nothing to do with what happen on 9/11. Iraq was a better country left alone as bad as it may sound. When Saddam ran the country bad things did happen but not as bad as what is happenning now. He kept more order in Iraq then it is now. This country can’t be run like America. We need to give up on that principal and let the Iraq people decide how they want to run their country. Wether they want to run it as a dictatorship,theocracy or devide the country in to sections. We need to step back more and let their people call the shots. Staying the course is not going to solve anything but more dead troops, police, and civilians. You keep hearing who would you trust more to fight the war on terrorism the cut and run Democrats or the Republicains. I can’t see how staying with the Republicains is any better. Things or only seeming to be getting worse. We can only get better with a change in leadership.

By Jim's Missing the Point

October 19, 2006 09:39 AM | Link to this

Hi again Jim,

You know how Rush does those satirical ads from time to time poking fun at politicians? Well this is in the spirit of that…just good clean fun. I hope you and the readers here enjoy it, because it’s dang funny. Pure entertainment. Don’t, like Markus likes to say, “get your panties in a wad”.

REPUBLICAN CONTRACT WITH IRAQ

As Republican Members of the House of Representatives and as citizens seeking to do some nation building on behalf of Exxon and BP, we propose not just to overthrow Iraq’s government, but even more important, to restore the bonds of trust between the White House and the people we made all those promises to.

That is why, in this era of IED’s, low-grade civil war and sectarian violence, we offer instead a detailed agenda for nation-building, a written commitment with no fine print.

This year’s election offers the chance, after four decades of not doing what we say, to bring to the people of Iraq a new majority that WILL do what we say. This historic change would be the end of government that doesn’t do what we say. It can be the beginning of a democracy that respects the values and shares the faith of the American corporate family…and does what we say.

Like Lincoln, our first Republican president, we intend to act “with firmness in the right, as Allah gives us to see the right.” To restore corporate accountability to Iraq. To end its cycle of death and revenge. To make us all proud again of the way Muslims govern themselves.

On the first day of the new Iraqi interim authority will immediately pass the following major reforms, aimed at restoring the faith and trust of the Iraqi people in their government:

FIRST, require all Muslims to be much more Western in general, but preferably Christain;

SECOND, hire Haliburton to do some expensive stuff;

THIRD, cut the number of contractors involved in all this to just one (see #2);

FOURTH, limit the terms of all mullahs;

FIFTH, make pork a good thing; we’re big on pork over here;

SIXTH, require committee meetings;

SEVENTH, require a three-fifths majority vote to pass a tax increase (some things never change);

EIGHTH, guarantee an honest accounting of our New Interim Budget by replacing the previous system of Muslim patronage with a more modern system of Western patronage - actually, a system of lobbyist organized a’la carte legislation.

By deegee

October 19, 2006 09:47 AM | Link to this

Van, the civilian leadership’s vision of the occupation phase in Iraq precluded the use of vigor. The administration ignored the risk statements made by the military and the CIA and proceeded down the path of insanity. The strategy you are describing is the Bush strategy of “staying the course”. It’s like throwing water on a grease fire. It’s not working.

By Elbows, Picassos + Iraq

October 19, 2006 09:52 AM | Link to this

Wooten’s premise is wrong. Iraq is not the front lines in the war on terror. Nor is another generation of terrorism dependent on Iraq’s end game…

The British failed to establish a government and an ally in Iraq after a 12 occupation exactly like Bush’s, and with a mission statement worded exactly like Bush’s mission statement, (which he reiterated on ABC World News Tonight last night).

RELEVENT QUESTIONS: What is the mission of US troops in Iraq (that exists on a plane in three dimensions here on planet earth)?

What can the Iraqi Army do to secure Iraq that the British couldn’t do in 12 years, and Bush couldn’t do in four?

Can we save the Iraqis from the Iraqis?

Are we prepared to spend the ONE Trillion dollars that I estimate it will cost to continue this occupation through 2012?

By Aquagirl

October 19, 2006 09:56 AM | Link to this

And what are we staying the course with? Regular military units are being rotated in and out of Iraq like they’re on a merry-go-round. The National Guard and Reserves are getting tapped out. Realistically, we’re running out of people and equipment. Unless we’re willing to start drafting people and spending a whole lot more, we’re not going to be able to “stay the course” much longer.

By Dusty

October 19, 2006 09:59 AM | Link to this

Well, here we go again. Our government is rotten. Bush is rotten. Our congress is rotten. Iraq is rotten. Not one good thing is mentioned.

Everybody is put out because Bagdad doesn’t look like downtown Atlanta or Boston. That there’s no push for stability yet our troops and the Iraqis are out fighting every day for their freedom and ours. We have “no plans” yet our generals give us reports every day and Rumsfeld is on the job. Of course he had a plan. It isn’t working as well as he thought. Can you have a huge upheavel without some set backs? I think not.

As President, George Bush has had almost as many “emergencies” as FDR. And FDR took almost 12 years trying to get things “straight”. 9/11, Katrina, Iraq—and you want to say that George Bush has done NOTHING??? Only the blind and dumb would rightfully say so.

There is not one Democrat I would have wished to take G.W. Bush’s place during these times. Not Kerry. Not Gore. Not Clinton, either one. We needed a strong man with ethics and we had one.

Support your country. Have a little faith. And honor those who have died promoting freedom in this world.

By DebbieDoRight

October 19, 2006 09:59 AM | Link to this

Crank up that Fantasia album and get the party started!

Hey, I have that CD!!!

By Rod

October 19, 2006 10:03 AM | Link to this

Well, here’s an EXCELLENT article in a previous AJC regarding how the Republicans have butchered the Iraq War. And Jim actually wonders why Republicans are losing control:

“It’s over.

American troops are still fighting and dying in Iraq and will be for months to come as we try to extricate ourselves from this mess, but it’s over.

The U.S. Army may be planning ways to keep 140,000 troops in Iraq until at least 2010, but it’s over. It’s just over.

What we’re doing in Iraq cannot be sustained, not militarily and not politically, and after the election a lot of people are going to start saying so. They’ll say so if the Democrats take control of one or both chambers of Congress, and they’ll say so if Republicans remain in control. Because it’s over, and everyone knows it.

In Baghdad, 65 percent of Iraqis now support an immediate pullout of U.S. forces from their country, according to a U.S. government poll. A second poll, conducted by the University of Maryland, found that 71 percent of Iraqis want us gone within a year, and more than 60 percent of Iraqis support attacks on the U.S. troops who are fighting and dying to try to protect them. That number says it’s over.

It is impossible to win a counterinsurgency in which 60 percent of the people you’re supposed to be helping want to see your soldiers dead.

Our allies know it’s over, too. In Britain, Prime Minister Tony Blair is being forced from office largely because of his support for the war. And last week, Britain’s top general publicly advocated withdrawal of British troops from Iraq for redeployment to Afghanistan, where they are badly needed and victory is still possible.

“I am a soldier speaking up for his army,” Gen. Sir Richard Dannatt told the press. “I am just saying, ‘Come on, we can’t be here forever at this level.’ “

Here at home, public support for the war has disappeared as well. In a Gallup poll, 66 percent of Americans disapprove of how President Bush is handling Iraq. In a CNN poll, 62 percent oppose the war.

The most telling numbers, though, come from a poll by the Institute for Southern Studies, based in Durham, N.C. Its survey of 13 Southern states found that 56 percent of Southerners believe that U.S. troops should be partially or completely withdrawn from Iraq, which is about the sentiment of the nation as a whole. Eighty-nine percent of Southerners say they are a little to very saddened about the war; only 12 percent say they are proud of the war.

When you’ve lost even the South, it’s over. Pretending that we can sustain our effort in Iraq for several more years with such meager support here at home is sheer fantasy.

Our best political leaders, Republican and Democratic alike, know that, too. U.S. Sen. John Warner (R-Va.), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, returned recently from Iraq and said that if trends aren’t reversed in two or three months, it will be time to change course, with all options on the table. James Baker, the Republican chairman of a bipartisan commission expected to issue its report on Iraq after the election, says the same.

“I think it’s fair to say our commission believes that there are alternatives between the stated alternatives, the ones that are out there in the political debate, of ‘stay the course’ and ‘cut and run,’ ” Baker said. And of course, the facts on the ground say it’s over as well. U.S. troop levels are at the highest level since the invasion. We’ve scavenged soldiers and Marines from other parts of Iraq to focus on Baghdad, and we now claim hundreds of thousands of Iraqi troops trained and ready to help.

Yet with all that, the number of attacks in Baghdad keeps rising, the number of U.S. deaths continues to increase, the civilian death toll is still soaring and the Iraqi government is incapable of taking action. Last week, Shiite and Kurdish members of Iraq’s Parliament passed legislation creating a process for splitting the nation into pieces. They know it’s over, too. President Bush, of course, continues to bluster.

“When you pull out before the job is done, that’s cut-and-run as far as I’m concerned,” he said last week.

Our president can’t even work up the courage it would take to acknowledge his mistakes. He lacks the guts.

By clinging to the fantasy that this is still workable, he and his dwindling circle of supporters may hope to dump the blame for its collapse on those who force a change of course, but it’s not going to work.

He chose this war. He chose the means by which it was fought. Congress and the American people gave him everything he asked, and it’s over.

Now, men and women better than he is will step in and try to clean up his mess.

• Jay Bookman

By Richard

October 19, 2006 10:04 AM | Link to this

Has anyone else noticed how peaceful and discussion oriented this blog is today - since time for the lies hasn’t gotten out of bed yet?

By Renee

October 19, 2006 10:06 AM | Link to this

Oh Dusty - that brought tears to my eyes!

Laughing that is! What a joke!

By Paul's Stumped

October 19, 2006 10:07 AM | Link to this

Poor Paul McCartney. He wasn’t a very nice man. George Harrison knew. John Lennon knew. He even lost Ringo.

Paul was the chick’s fave of the fab four. Everyone wanted to look and sing like Paul. I learned how to play “Blackbird” on a 12 string guitar, and I swear to you that I got laid many times late at night because of it.

Paul was also a laboratory rat, in a self imposed experiment about the effects of daily THC ingestion over a forty year period. This guy was always stoned. For Forty Years!!

It didn’t kill him, but……..

In 1999 I saw Paul on Oprah. Oprah asked, “Why did the Beatles break up?”.

“Well, you know Oprah, we had come full circle. Full Circle it was. You see, we started out here, and then we went here and down to there, and over to here until we ended back where we started. (Paul describes a circle with his hands as he explains). It was full circle.”

“But Paul, didn’t Yoko have anything to do with it?”

“Well, you know, Oprah, Yoko had come full circle too. You see, she started here, and went there, and ……..”

“Sing, Paul”.

Paul McCartney is the living warning against smoking pot everyday. I have a friend who is a lawyer who has smoked dope everyday since 1971. He got through law school, and has held a corporate job ever since. He’s still saying, “Far out”. He even went to Vietnam in 2003 to try to secure some Thai Sticks. (true)

If you are smoking more than two times a year, once on your birthday, and once on New Years Eve, (or something), then you are a dull, uninteresting person. (guaranteed). You may not realize it, but everyone who has to suffer a conversation with you realizes it.

Dont smoke dope.

By Severed Ties

October 19, 2006 10:11 AM | Link to this

. . WHAT IS THE MISSION OF US TROOPS IN IRAQ?

By Van

October 19, 2006 10:11 AM | Link to this

Dusty ,

Bravo and amen.

By Pitbull

October 19, 2006 10:11 AM | Link to this

I understand that our military forces have everything under control in DaNang.

By Aquagirl

October 19, 2006 10:13 AM | Link to this

DebbieDoRight, Nice that you have Fantasia’s album…and even nicer that unlike her, you’re literate!

I think Jim would really enjoy Fantasia as the theme music for his blog. She’s a great supporter of the present administration, I’m sure.

By Richard

October 19, 2006 10:13 AM | Link to this

Hey Paul’s Stumped - you must be drugged up right now to post this inane commentary in this blog. Go smoke some more weed and pass out with your partner tftt.

By Van

October 19, 2006 10:14 AM | Link to this

DebbieDoRight,

In the first few years after WWII, we felt the same way about Japan and GErmany - both of those worked out - and we still have troops there.

By Severed Ties

October 19, 2006 10:16 AM | Link to this

If Iraq was the front lines in the war on terror, then the recent dirty bomb alert against our football stadiums should have read, “Terror Alert: Iraqi Soccer Stadiums might get dirty bombed on Sunday”

The frontlines on the war on terror is “INTEL” itself. You cant get much intel from an IED, or an RPG other than to learn that the Iraqis are the enemy, the friend, the ally, the conspirator, the bad guys, the good guys, the lawmakers, the lawbreakers….IN IRAQ!!!!

By Severed Ties

October 19, 2006 10:17 AM | Link to this

The Iraqis want us to fight the terrorists over there so THEY dont have to fight the terrorists OVER THERE!!

By getalife

October 19, 2006 10:18 AM | Link to this

Jim finally addresses the elephant in the room.

One question about Iraq, how many times has w changed the reason for invading Iraq?

It is a mistake and they should be held accountable.

The world is waiting for us to do the right thing.

There is your solution Jim.

By DebbieDoRight

October 19, 2006 10:20 AM | Link to this

As President, George Bush has had almost as many “emergencies” as FDR. … 9/11,

The Invasion & Occupation of Iraq happened AFTER 9/11

Katrina,

He said Michael Brown, (disgraced FEMA Director had everything under control. You mean he DIDN’T?)

and you want to say that George Bush has done NOTHING???

yep.

Only the blind and dumb would rightfully say so.

You’re kidding right?

By Severed Ties

October 19, 2006 10:21 AM | Link to this

No civil war, or sectarian violence in Post World War 2 Occupied Countries.

Non Sequitur. Non Sequitur.

Blogger used convoluted logic. Debate point goes to the blog. Commenter penalized two points.

Abort thought process, sir.*

*Roberts Rules of Order, page 37.

By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I

October 19, 2006 10:22 AM | Link to this

The war is a horrible joke, an atrocity. It doesn’t take an accident on Peachtree Street for an intelligent person with a conscience to figure this out.

That breeze you feel, Jim, is Dumbya and his cronies blowing smoke up your butt.

Are we a nation of chickenhawk flagwaving paranoid fundamentalist idiots, or not? That is the question that we will decide in November.

Frankly, I’m not optimistic.

By MELO

October 19, 2006 10:23 AM | Link to this

As President, George Bush has had almost as many “emergencies”

You call the Iraqi war an emergency??!!Holy cow.And Jim chimes in with this nonsense,The Iraqi phase of the war on terrrorism increasingly is an issue

No emegergency when this war was started and no terrorism(not terrrorism) either when we went there then.

For my life i can bet u that even if George BUSH or any other American President were in power for 4 terms, with American troops in Iraq at that level, that guerrilla warfare will not be one!Where in the world has America fought a guerrila war and won it?

I would love for the President to clean up his mess before he goes out of office, but this one will not go down like that and he will leave it for others to solve. Unless he cuts and runs ofcourse. Scary and insightful slogans will not win the war.And i hope that Baker commission, which by its formation, is an admittance of failure. will recommend a pullout and a timetable:in GOP circles, as euphamism for CUT and RUN. Sad LEGACY.

By mijo

October 19, 2006 10:25 AM | Link to this

So Aquagirl is a racist and a snob. What is wrong with Taco Bell, telemarketing and Fantasia. How is it any different than working at the pumping station?

By Severed Ties

October 19, 2006 10:31 AM | Link to this

I now point to Wooten’s last sentence. I had to read it five times, before I understood it. Clumsily worded, Awkwardly constructed, and sytactically unsound. Worse, a landslide for the democrats will not help us solve the Bush Quagmire. It exists independently of our electoral process and the war on terror. He’s opened up Pandoras Box, and no political mandate can solve that.

“If anybody else sees a solution that’s not clear winner/clear loser in November, we’re listening.”

Properly rewritten, Wooten’s sentence should have read: “If homie aint dope with gangbang fixin’, dawg, then get your ears on, blood.”

By Aquagirl

October 19, 2006 10:35 AM | Link to this

Look, here are the two main reasons I’ve heard for the invasion of Iraq:

So, why did we go there? It was a noble cause, but not really thought out well.

By Dusty

October 19, 2006 10:36 AM | Link to this

Oh how nice. We have two born-again liberals dancing to Fantasia. Aqua Girl and DebbieDoRight. In fact, they sound so much alike I can’t tell them apart. And Renee, who is home laughing to herself, sounds a bit like a hearty threesome. But their music and laughter are so familiar. Here’s how it goes.

We”re lost. We failed. We don’t have a plan. Heads in the sand. Illiterate. Alabama. Merry-go-round. Tra la la.

The DNC needs to put out some new material. Dancing to Fantasia isn’t going to cut it. Democrats have already been dancing to that tune for a long time.

By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I

October 19, 2006 10:37 AM | Link to this

An incomplete list of the 71 AMERICANS that died so far this month in Iraq. TIME FOR YOU BUSH LOVIN’ CHICKENHAWKS TO GROW A PAIR AND SIGN UP

I bet Realisp will buy a new yellow ribbon for his SUV instead.

Chase A. Haag, 22, Army Corporal, Oct 01, 2006 Mario Nelson, 26, Army Sergeant, Oct 01, 2006 Denise A. Lannaman, 46, Army National Guard Sergeant, Oct 01, 2006 Justin D. Peterson, 32, Marine Captain, Oct 01, 2006 Christopher B. Cosgrove III, 23, Marine Reserve Lance Corporal, Oct 01, 2006 Aaron L. Seal, 23, Marine Reserve Corporal, Oct 01, 2006 Raymond S. Armijo, 22, Army Specialist, Oct 02, 2006 James D. Ellis, 25, Army Staff Sergeant, Oct 02, 2006 Satieon V. Greenlee, 24, Army Private 1st Class, Oct 02, 2006 Justin R. Jarrett, 21, Army Specialist, Oct 02, 2006 Joe A. Narvaez, 25, Army Staff Sergeant, Oct 02, 2006 Michael K. Oremus, 21, Army Private 1st Class, Oct 02, 2006 Joseph W. Perry, 23, Army Sergeant, Oct 02, 2006 Kristofer C. Walker, 20, Army Specialist, Oct 02, 2006 Daniel Isshak, 25, Army Staff Sergeant, Oct 03, 2006 Jonathan Rojas, 27, Army Staff Sergeant, Oct 03, 2006 Dean Bright, 32, Army Private 1st Class, Oct 04, 2006 Timothy Burke, 24, Army Specialist, Oct 04, 2006 Christopher O. Moudry, 31, Army Staff Sergeant, Oct 04, 2006 George R. Obourn Jr., 20, Army Specialist, Oct 04, 2006 Edward M. Garvin, 19, Marine Lance Corporal, Oct 04, 2006 Benjamin S. Rosales, 20, Marine Corporal, Oct 04, 2006 Nicholas A. Arvanitis, 22, Army Corporal, Oct 06, 2006 John Edward Hale, 20, Marine Lance Corporal, Oct 06, 2006 Bradford H. Payne, 24, Marine Corporal, Oct 06, 2006 Brandon S. Asbury, 21, Army Sergeant, Oct 07, 2006 Carl W. Johnson II, 21, Army Corporal, Oct 07, 2006 Lawrence Parrish, 36, Army National Guard Sergeant, Oct 07, 2006 John Edward Wood, 37, Army National Guard Specialist, Oct 07, 2006 Shane R. Austin, 19, Army Private 1st Class, Oct 08, 2006 Timothy Fulkerson, 20, Army Specialist, Oct 08, 2006 Stephen F. Johnson, 20, Marine Lance Corporal, Oct 08, 2006 Derek W. Jones, 21, Marine Lance Corporal, Oct 08, 2006 Jeremy Scott Sandvick Monroe, 20, Marine Lance Corporal, Oct 08, 2006 Robert M. Secher, 33, Marine Captain, Oct 08, 2006 Phillip B. Williams, 21, Army Private 1st Class, Oct 09, 2006 Julian M. Arechaga, 23, Marine Sergeant, Oct 09, 2006 Jon Eric Bowman, 21, Marine Lance Corporal, Oct 09, 2006 Shelby J. Feniello, 25, Marine Private 1st Class, Oct 09, 2006 Shane T. Adcock, 27, Army Captain, Oct 11, 2006 Nicholas R. Sowinski, 25, Army Sergeant, Oct 11, 2006 Justin T. Walsh, 24, Marine Sergeant, Oct 11, 2006 Gene A. Hawkins, 24, Army Sergeant, Oct 12, 2006 Johnny K. Craver, 37, Army Lieutenant, Oct 13, 2006 Thomas J. Hewett, 22, Army Private 1st Class, Oct 13, 2006 Kenny F. Stanton Jr., 20, Army Private 1st Class, Oct 13, 2006 Leebenard E. Chavis, 21, Air Force Airman 1st Class, Oct 14, 2006 Joseph M. Kane, 35, Army Staff Sergeant, Oct 14, 2006 Charles M. King, 48, Army 1st Sergeant, Oct 14, 2006 Timothy J. Lauer, 25, Army Specialist, Oct 14, 2006 Keith J. Moore, 28, Army Private 1st Class, Oct 14, 2006 Jonathan J. Simpson, 25, Marine Sergeant, Oct 14, 2006 Jr., Lester Domenico Baroncini, 33, Army Sergeant, Oct 15, 2006 Stephen Bicknell, 19, Army Private, Oct 15, 2006 Joshua Deese, 25, Army 1st Lieutenant, Oct 15, 2006 Jonathan E. Lootens, 25, Army Sergeant, Oct 15, 2006 Mark C. Paine, 32, Army Captain, Oct 15, 2006 Brock A. Babb, 40, Marine Reserve Sergeant, Oct 15, 2006 Joshua M. Hines, 26, Marine Reserve Lance Corporal, Oct 15, 2006 Christopher E. Loudon, 23, Army 2nd Lieutenant, Oct 17, 2006

By Van

October 19, 2006 10:44 AM | Link to this

Severed Ties,

How about the weak spined “american” people wanting us to get out before the job was completed.

By DebbieDoRight

October 19, 2006 10:46 AM | Link to this

DebbieDoRight,In the first few years after WWII, we felt the same way about Japan and GErmany - both of those worked out - and we still have troops there.

Neither Japan nor Germany suffered from in-fighting due to ethnic wars; nor were they during the course of their history on the brink of civil war on more than one occasion. Both countries were beaten, but otherwise stable. The same can not be said of Iraq.

By Aquagirl

October 19, 2006 10:47 AM | Link to this

Hey, Dusty, watch it with the name-calling! I’m a born again Libertarian! Mijo is the liberal. What makes pointing out the strategic errors of a war liberal?

And y’all can thank me, as a Libertarian, for supporting TFTT’s right to being stoned so he’s absent.

By Van

October 19, 2006 10:48 AM | Link to this

Aquagirl,

Close but no cigar -

1) Violation of a number of Security Council resolutions.

2) Refusing to allow free access to the UN inspectors

3) Not waiting until they are a imminent threat.

additional reason, Freeing 25 million from the dictator, Saddam providing aid and support to terrorists and the undeclared WMD’s he did have.

By Dusty

October 19, 2006 10:54 AM | Link to this

RedNecks,

I despise your efforts at using our fallen soldiers as a political tool. They were volunteers who fought for this country and its principles. Many felt that 9/11 was enough to prove to them what our enemies wanted to do. That, of course, is to kill us.

It is heart breaking enough without you making political fodder of their deaths. Go visit Arlington or some other quiet place of the dead. Maybe you can learn something about loyalty and valor.

By JoeD

October 19, 2006 10:56 AM | Link to this

Van Sounds like you just made the case for invading North Korea, too. Are you ready to go?

By DebbieDoRight

October 19, 2006 11:01 AM | Link to this

The DNC needs to put out some new material. Dancing to Fantasia isn’t going to cut it. Democrats have already been dancing to that tune for a long time.

Huh? Haven’t had time to take your meds yet?

By Aquagirl

October 19, 2006 11:01 AM | Link to this

Van Again, Iran and N. Korea meet the “UN, please bite me” critera. And both are pretty darn close to being imminent threats.

And there are plenty of oppressed people living under other dictatorships, we haven’t invaded them.

I fail to see how you’ve answed my questions of why Iraq is so different.

I’m not skipping out on your argument, I just have to go participate in what is called “life”. I’ll be back later. In the meantime, please enjoy Mijo’s (or whatever it’s screen name is at the moment) namecalling. You don’t even have to bother going after me, it will make feeble uneducated attempts on your behalf.

Of course, if you want to make a real response, don’t wait for Mijo. That would be a long wait. You seem capable of organizing thoughts and completing a sentence, while including snarky comments. That’s far more entertaining, yes?

By Chazman

October 19, 2006 11:01 AM | Link to this

Dusty says everybody is put out because Bagdad doesn’t look like downtown Atlanta or Boston. Wrong. Nobody expects Bagdad to look like those cities. But they sure don’t expect us to lose 11 troops in 30 hours 3 years after this war starts.

Rumsfeld is on the job? That’s the problem. “Of course he had a plan. It’s not working as well as he thought.” Really? I have never heard him admit a mistake. The only plan we here is Stay The Course. Yet when Democrats suggest any kind of timetable, they’re labled cut n runners. Funny how some republicans are suggesting that now.

The last part of his post says it all of why there is so much discourse.

Support your country Because Democrats disagree with the way this war has been run, we don’t “support our country.” Because we don’t agree with Bush, we don’t “support our country?”

And honor those who have died promoting freedon around the world. You think those that disagree with this war, that believe we should not have invaded Iraq do not honor those that have died? My 82 year old father served a year as a POW in Germany after his plane was shot down. He weighed 88 pounds when he was liberated. He does not agree with this war, nor with many of Bush’s decisions in this war. Do you think he doesn’t support this country? Do you think he doesn’t honor those troops that have died in Iraq. Apparently you think he does not. If you told him that to his face today, that 82 year old man would whup your a* on the spot.

The Republicans wonder why there is so much discourse, but when you are accussed of not supporting your country or that you don’t honor the dead troops, what do you expect? The Rumsfeld-like arrogance of you-either-support-us-or-your-with-the-terrorist type of mentality cripples this country. And it can also get your a* whipped by an 82 year old war hero who will be buried at Arlington National Cemetary in a short time.

By Severed Ties

October 19, 2006 11:04 AM | Link to this

Dont forget that DIEBOLD will stuff ballots electronically like they did in 2000, 2002, 2004, 2006.

The frontlines in the war on terror is the polling place where Diebold IEDs (Intercepted Electoral Democrats) and RPGs (Republican Polling Guards) will defraud America for the fifth straight election.

By getalife

October 19, 2006 11:05 AM | Link to this

There were many lies to invade Iraq and they are still lying about Iraq. Here are a few of the lies:

(1) Saddam Hussein was partly responsible for the attack against us on September 11th, 2001, so a good way to respond to that attack would be to invade his country and forcibly remove him from power.

(2) Saddam was working closely with Osama Bin Laden and was actively supporting members of the Al Qaeda terrorist group, giving them weapons and money and bases and training, so launching a war against Iraq would be a good way to stop Al Qaeda from attacking us again.

(3) Saddam was about to give the terrorists poison gas and deadly germs that he had made into weapons which they could use to kill millions of Americans. Therefore common sense alone dictated that we should send our military into Iraq in order to protect our loved ones and ourselves against a grave threat.

(4) Saddam was on the verge of building nuclear bombs and giving them to the terrorists. And since the only thing preventing Saddam from acquiring a nuclear arsenal was access to enriched uranium, once our spies found out that he had bought the enrichment technology he needed and was actively trying to buy uranium from Africa, we had very little time left. Therefore it seemed imperative during last Fall’s election campaign to set aside less urgent issues like the economy and instead focus on the congressional resolution approving war against Iraq.

(5) Our GI’s would be welcomed with open arms by cheering Iraqis who would help them quickly establish public safety, free markets and Representative Democracy, so there wouldn’t be that much risk that US soldiers would get bogged down in a guerrilla war.

(6) Even though the rest of the world was mostly opposed to the war, they would quickly fall in line after we won and then contribute lots of money and soldiers to help out, so there wouldn’t be that much risk that US taxpayers would get stuck with a huge bill.

Later, w said Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

Enough with the excuses, w wanted to invade Iraq before 9/11 and he did after 9/11. He made his bed, let him lie in it.

He and his cronies must be held accountable. Period.

By DebbieDoRight

October 19, 2006 11:07 AM | Link to this

Freeing 25 million from the dictator, Saddam providing aid and support to terrorists and the undeclared WMD’s he did have.

Saddam Hussein, the meglamaniac and dictator, allowing terrorists to stay in his country?! Not possible. No self respecting dictator would ever allow a subversive group to thrive and possibly recruit his citizens, stay in his country. He would’ve been kicked out of the Despoted Dictators Club. (See Cuba’s Castro and the Mariel Boatlift)

By Fear Itself

October 19, 2006 11:14 AM | Link to this

A soldier’s grave is a warning to the living, sir.

Why should we take all the planet’s resources? What makes us so superior to the other 5.7 billion human beings in the world?

W proposes a path of conquest under the BP Oil flag that only a lunatic would want. Notice how the frontlines in the war on terror is an oil and gas field??????

Anyone notice?

Misplaced loyalty and valor, (Jingoism, and Nationalism) is what gave the world the Gestapo, Hitler Youth, Maidens schtooping for Heetler, unt der SS, (not to mention the Panzergrenadiers)

“The Panzergrenadiers”?

I told you not to mention that.

By Dusty

October 19, 2006 11:16 AM | Link to this

Well, Aqua Girl,

What name calling? I used words taken from your posts and your sound alike, Debbie.

Oh, you mean “born again liberal” is too harsh? But born again Liberal Libertarian is OK? I really can’t tell the difference. You both dance alike.

When you start mentioning the positive side along with the negative about this country’s policies I may think you have a balanced perspective. Until then…tra la la, Fantasia.

By deegee

October 19, 2006 11:17 AM | Link to this

Sounds like Jim Wootang has acknowledged that there will be a clear winner and a clear loser in November. Polling data suggests that Jim’s party will not be the clear winner. He asks us if we feel more secure with democrats or republicans in power as per the republican talking points.

Over the course of history there have been threats from our enemies regardless of who presided in congress. Anyone else remember bomb shelters and evacuation drills in elementary school? If you feel that you can win the war of ideology with bullets and grenades, vote republican. If you feel that the middle east will embrace western style democracy and spread it from sea to sea if we kill enough non-believers, vote republican. I know I don’t feel safer with republicans in congress.

By getalife

October 19, 2006 11:18 AM | Link to this

“If you look at the general overall situation, the Iraq war is doing remarkably well.”

Dick Cheney (R-Insane liar)

Peter King (lying R) said diving in Baghdad is like Manhattan.

Just freaking lying.

By DebbieDoRight

October 19, 2006 11:25 AM | Link to this

What name calling? I used words taken from your posts and your sound alike, Debbie. Oh, you mean “born again liberal” is too harsh? But born again Liberal Libertarian is OK? I really can’t tell the difference. You both dance alike.

Dusty,Dusty, I have begged u over & over to please take your meds BEFORE posting to the blogs. Maybe then your posts will make an iota of sense, but, well, perhaps not…….

By DebbieDoRight

October 19, 2006 11:27 AM | Link to this

The Panzergrenadiers

I had to look that one up!! Where did you get such an obscure word from? R U of German descent?

By BP OIL DID IT!!!!!

October 19, 2006 11:27 AM | Link to this

BP OIL was who got Britain into Iraq in the 1920’s.

BP OIL is there now. for the last century, big oil has dictated our foreign policy.

Every thinktank in the world today has proved that with logic, history, direct communication with big oil, and the fact that the mission statement for Britain in Iraq reads exactly word for word like W’s mission statement in Iraq.

Word 4 word.

I’m not going to bother posting it. If the bloggers on this blog refuse to look this up themselves, which would thus convince themeselves that this was all BP OIL’s idea, then no amount of googling can save them.

A bubble government, detatched from the rest of Iraq? When we do leave, they will hang every person in that government live on the internet for free. Iraqis are looking backwards to Mohammed. Who is the rightful successor to Mohammed?

Who is the rightful successor to Mohammed. That’s what we should be debating now. Because that is what the quagmire is all about, sirs.

That is the Iraqi’s mission statement: To fight it out, until Mohammed’s successor is named, THEN and only THEN, will they want political compromise.

naming mohammed’s successor should include the chant, “It’s his cousin, no backs, no vice versas, no changies”.

My source for this is history, human nature, and every breath that every human being who ever lived has ever taken. (not to mention my Funk and Wagnalls).

“Funk and Wagnalls?”

I told you not to mention that.

By Filster

October 19, 2006 11:28 AM | Link to this

As a die-hard conservative Republican, one who has fought, served with honor and bled for his country I’m sure what I will write will shock and amaze many. I think Iraq was the most horrific example of group think ever seen in modern times. While I have seen photos out of Iraq of Russian migs buried in tarps under the sand, and have no doubt that Hussein used chemcial agents on our troops during Desert Storm (which leads to the question of whether he has more and if so, where are they), it has been pretty much established that the “intell” about WMD’s was bogus and over-hyped. And anyone who dissented, such as Gen. Powell, was dismissed out of hand. Can you imagine that? A career civilian defense wonk like Rumsfield brushing aside someone like Powell whose life was spent doing exactly what Rumsfeild wanted to do in Iraq. Our initial strike swift, strike hard strategy explains why we overran iraq so quickly and efficiently, but the strategy has not changed to an occupational one, hence the growing body count. And yes, it doesn’t take too much to see that Al-Queda or whomever is over there killing and blowing things up hopes to effect our elections. A U.S. withdrawl would be perceived as a victory for extremists Muslim radicals, and yes, the jihad would grow and return to American soil. So I don’t think cut and run is an option unless we are asking for it further down the road. But I am just so sick and damn tired of our men and women being killed in a country I no longer see as worth the life of even an American pet. Despite being islamic, Shiites and Sunnis kill each other because they differ in how Mohammed’s successor is. Is that country worth even one American life? No way. let em kiil each other all they want. Just stop sending our troops out into towns were IED’s rule the streets, where people gladly blow themsleves and anyoone else around them up in blaze of religious zealotry. I received a call from the RNC asking to count on my contributions. I told them when Rumsfield is fired I will contribute twice what I gave last year. Haven’t heard back from them yet. While I don’t have the answers (other than nuc’ing the whole freaking country!), Mr. President, you have completely and totally disappointed me by the way you are performing as our president. You refuse to accept alternate strategies, stick will ill-advised advice from moronic advisors, and I will lay the fact that the Republican party will be shellacked in the November re-elections solely upon yours, Cheney’s, and Rumsfeild’s shoulders. I just wish that everyone would take a second to consider that the Pelosi’s and Dean’s and Kerry’s are just as extreme and ill-advised. Be prepared for massive societal upheavals when they take power in November. I am just so sick and tired of all politicians, Republican and Democrat, because I know longer believe that any of them possess some much as a shred of decency anymore, and they are all concerned only with appeasing their respective radical bases and whatever special interest fuels their coffers. Looking at the political positions, they are far to the left and right of most Americans, but the majority cannot find a unifying voice to truly represent the middle. America has been run into the ground by politicians, and I hope that one day they all find themsleves victims of what they’ve created. As for the Foley scandal, attributing child molesting to all Republicans is about as smart as if I think all Democrats stick their cigars into the vaginas of their interns. Damn Congress. Damn the Senate. Damn the White House. Damn all politicians everywhere. You are nothign but whores and perverts who have sat back and been responsible for the lost lives of some extraordinary Americans. Htere isn’t a hell hot enough to punish you for those sins.

By DebbieDoRight

October 19, 2006 11:29 AM | Link to this

Sorry — Despotic Dictators Club.

By mohammed's successor

October 19, 2006 11:33 AM | Link to this

Mohammed did choose a successor. But the one he “passed over” killed him and declared himself the successor. That was 14 centuries ago.

BP OIL has been using that ever since to get us to slaughter arabs.

Gotta give it BP OIL. They know how to start a war.

By mohammed's successor

October 19, 2006 11:34 AM | Link to this

Christ or Martin Luther?

Who do you worship? Do you believe Christ started his own church, and worship there?

Or do you believe Martin Luther started his own church and worship there?

Ditto Islam. Mohammed’s chosen successor, or the one who seized the title via murder of the chosen one??

By mohammed's successor

October 19, 2006 11:36 AM | Link to this

If we dont understand Islam, we will never attain a peace in the middle east.

Why are we in liason with the Muslims here in the USA?

Visit a mosque. Shake some hands.

Have you hugged a mullah today?

By Dusty

October 19, 2006 11:37 AM | Link to this

Chazman,

My family is full of veterans. My father is already in a military cemetery. I do not use his name as political fodder as RedNecks is doing in the current war. That was my objection.

Yes, I want OBVIOUS support for this country. Terrorists don’t know the difference between political objections and hate. They look at ANY objections by Americans as those who believe as they do, that this country should be demolished.

Therefore, please reconsider your objections to the politics of our country. Is it worth giving unintentional support to terrorists or not? Thoughtful dissent is one thing. Hateful accusations are another.

I do not care to lose my freedom for some hate monger to vent his slanted politics.

By mohammed's successor

October 19, 2006 11:38 AM | Link to this

What Islam is demanding from the christians is that we respect them. Do you trust the cowboy bush and the whitebread cheney to show Islam any respect?

That’s how your deliberation about where to cast your vote should proceed.

By Van

October 19, 2006 11:40 AM | Link to this

getalife,

More distortions as usual from the usual suspects. No one in the administration ever said that Saddam had anything to do with 9/11, he did give support to terrorists and did have a working relationship with terrorists cells.

Anyone that believe Saddam did not have any ties with terrorists before the current war on terrorism is just plain blind or ignorant.

By mohammed's successor

October 19, 2006 11:40 AM | Link to this

That is an exit strategy with honor: By ostentatiously revering the choice that arabs have made about how they wish to worship.

By showing respect for Islam itself.

Mandatory first step: get the televangelical right to STFU!!!

By Markus

October 19, 2006 11:46 AM | Link to this

Hey Missing Point, Distractor, et. al.-

Hey JACKASS, I replied to your Contract With America post yesterday and you said nothing. Now quite posting the same CRAP over and over expecting different answers, or one you WANT.

Here’s my reply to you, assclown liberal.

By getalife

October 19, 2006 11:46 AM | Link to this

[Not like Manhattan](http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/10/19/D8KRNM6O2.html

Not going remarkably well

A con admits it is a mistake

Vote Dem to stop this insanity

By Filster

October 19, 2006 11:48 AM | Link to this

MS - you missed my point. I know Mohammed choose a successor and he was kiiled. My point is ya’ll are killing each other in especially brutal ways simply because of arguments over a man. I believe that Christ is the son of the true God, and not just a man or prophet like Mohammed, his successor, or whoever killed whomever. My point was why should we risk one American life for a people who kill each other over such trivia. As a mulsim or jew, you would deny that Christ is the son of God. I guess under the S** and Sunni mindset I ought to mosey on over to your place, burn it down, and murder you and your family. But I don’t, because you have the freedom to belive what you believe and we will all answer one day for those beliefs, right or wrong. But what you don’t have, and what I do not respect in the least, is the right to kill whomever disagrees with your beliefs and that, friend, is the major difference between Islam and most other religions inthe world. Christianity is not a convert or die religion like Islam is. And please spare me the islam is a religionof peace. Other thn a few soundbites, I haven’t seen any cleric or iman or spoeksman come out against the behading of hostages, or condemn Al- Sadr or Bin laden or any other islamic jhadists for their killings and then actually do anything about it. proof is inthe pudding MS, and actions, or rather inactions, speak volumes. here.

By getalife

October 19, 2006 11:50 AM | Link to this

Yes Van,

You are just plain blind or ignorant.

It is the American voters like you who are to blame.

By jamie

October 19, 2006 11:50 AM | Link to this

We are at the point now where a traffic accident on Peachtree Street or a cool breeze in the air is the signal the anti-war left was looking for, the “final straw” bit of evidence, of a need to abandon the cause in Iraq as “unwinnable.”

Wrong (again), Jim. We’re to the point that: — we don’t want to hear “We have a plan, but we’re not going to tell you what it is.” — we don’t want your president taking away our freedoms in the name of saving us from people he says want to take away our freedoms. — we don’t want to continue a war he started under false pretenses (where are those WMDs and Saddam links to al-Qaida, Jim?) and continues to try to explain with lies. — we’re tired of hearing how we don’t appreciate the sacrifices of our military, when what we don’t appreciate is your president sacrificing our military. — we’re tired of parrot-like pundits such as yourself, Limbaugh, Hannity, Boortz, etc. trying to scare us into submission and blind obedience with threats that our football stadiums might be targeted by terrorists.

That’s where we’re at, Jim. Where the hell are you?

By Jim Wooten

October 19, 2006 11:51 AM | Link to this

Interesting comments, Pilster @ 11:28. Having said all that, what course do you choose in November?

By JK

October 19, 2006 11:53 AM | Link to this

“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God.”

There’s another name for those of you who get wood every time you think of war, death, destruction, and random bloodshed in the name of your country, and are always calling out for more. Yes, you know I’m talking to you, old man.

By Dusty

October 19, 2006 11:53 AM | Link to this

Debbie Do Little,

That line about “meds” is so old it should be thrown away as outdated. You can do better than that.

By Markus

October 19, 2006 11:56 AM | Link to this

Van-

You will not find a dirty RAT on this blog that can come up with a direct quote from Bush that Saddam was responsible for 9/11. It’s just more lies from the left told over and over long enough to be percieved as the truth. Gitmolife is the queen at it.

By CJ

October 19, 2006 11:58 AM | Link to this

Jim Wooten “The Iraqi phase of the war on terrorism increasingly is an issue…”

I’m 150 pages into Bob Woodward’s “State of Denial”. This book, so far, looks at the pre-war planning from the perspective of the members of the Department of Defense who were in charge of post-conflict reconstruction efforts. If what I’ve read to date has a grain of truth, then the war in Iraq was doomed before it began.

Secretary Rumsfeld hired former General Jay Garner, a man uniquely qualified to help the Iraqis establish their own government and rebuilding effort, and then undermined him at every turn. In addition, this book shows how Rumsfeld undermined his own Pentagon staff, the Joint Chiefs, and the State Department under Colin Powell. Such undermining was easily accomplished with Bush and Cheney urging Rumsfeld on like a couple of cheerleaders. Rumsfeld’s ego and ideology (he only wanted “loyalists” on his team) prevented him from considering the ideas of people who were supremely more experienced and qualified than he. As a result, our men and women in the military, their families, and innocent Iraqis are suffering or dying.

Regarding Jim’s quote about the “Iraqi phase of the war on terrorism”, this language indicates that Jim is either still in denial or still trying to scam us. Going to Iraq had nothing to do with terrorism. It had everything to do with oil.

The question today isn’t - how do we win? With tens of thousands of dead Iraqis, we’ve already lost. The question today is - how do we mitigate the damage?

By Van

October 19, 2006 11:59 AM | Link to this

mohammed’s successor,

Such ignorance of the Reformation is laughable.

Which came first, Henry VIII or Luther?

Luther wanted to reform the Catholic Church, not start a new religion, therefore the Lutherans of today and the Catholics of today are very close.

A little known fact is that Luther always concidered himslf a Catholic.

Mohammed, on the other hand, was just a dissatisfied little jew boy, and started his own “religion”. Why else would the so-called customs of Islam be so close to those of Judism, food, dress, type s of worship (separating the men from the women).

By Markus

October 19, 2006 12:01 PM | Link to this

JK-

“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God.”

“There’s another name for those of you who get wood every time you think of war, death, destruction, and random bloodshed in the name of your country, and are always calling out for more.”

You ungodly ignorant fools on the terrorist appeasement left love to use Christian phrases when it suits your cause, don’t you? I’ll bet your pathetic self doesn’t know the bible references taking up arms against the enemy of God.

Yeah man, France tried the “peace” route and so did Poland in 1939. Look how that “peace” mentality turned out for six years. Idiots.

By harold

October 19, 2006 12:01 PM | Link to this

harold wonders since bushie and friends has all admitted they lied their arses off to start their fight with huseein, why would anybody believe what bushie and friends has tome say about iraq today? once a liar always a liar. foo harold once, shame on you, foo harold twice, harold be a foo’

the longer them reepublicans stay in power the longer this war will last. they say they aint got an exit stratergy, but that is a lie. their exit stratergy is to lose the elections and put the pullout on the demobrats

that is why all these child molester and bribery things are “coincidentally” coming up right now. the reepublains WANT to lose this election and congress so their exit stratergy is implemented: blame the demercrats for whatever happens to iraq! they pulled out!

well if the reepbulians stay in power, they will plod around for 2 more years until bushie is out and a democrat president takes the blame for the “cut and run” the republcians planned for and are counting on

FOOs

By time for the truth

October 19, 2006 12:03 PM | Link to this

If you strip analysis of Iraq down to a REAL football match - not the crash helmets/shoulder pads NFL type NEVER played with the feet, but REAL football - its clear that stark changes have to be made. The manager and the team on the pitch are being hampered by a stubborn Iraqi director of football that is holding back the strikers from the final third of the pitch whilst the opposition midfield is being largely overwhelmed in most of the pitch, their defence is mostly on the backfoot and their keeper is constantly getting medical attention.

Our rested Champions League standard strikers on the bench need to warm up properly before substituting the current nippy centre forward and target man. But its the new owner of the team that is the biggest problem, he wont sanction sustained, effective use of the whole first team squad, things are fine in training but not working out in actual games. Thus the defence is still a bit leaky as the experienced slightly stale centre backs dont yet have a complete understanding with the constantly changing locally born yoof team fullbacks who have seemingly stepped up a bit too early. And our midfield is playing too much of a holding game.

All football games are ultimately won and lost in midfield though. But the crowd has a major impact and clearly some of the crowd is for appeasment and cut and run which ALWAYS communicates itself to the players and affects the performance. Thus the manager and the first team coach get edgy - always concerned with the immediate scoreline and so naturally somewhat lose their focus on the medium and long term as the defeatist elements in the crowd always makes more noise than the loyal supporters do, thus giving a false impression as to what the entire stadium wants.

To turn it around the team needs to use both wings, get men behind the defence down to the byline, nutmeg their fullbacks and then put plenty of low searching balls (calm down rednekkks NAMBLA, stupid DICK, pimpHO rod et al) in the box. This will ensure an easy clean sheet victory in most games.

By Chazman

October 19, 2006 12:06 PM | Link to this

Jim, you state Meanwhile, in Iraq, Ramadan and the run-up to U.S. elections contribute to an escalation in violence, with 70 U.S. servicemen killed this month, second highest since the siege of Falluah nearly two years ago.

What evidence do you have that the run-up to U.S. elections have contributed to an escalation in violemce? Is this just an opinion? An excuse? Do you think the insurgents are saying, “Since the election is getting closer, lets escalate the violence.” Just wondering where you got that.

By Van

October 19, 2006 12:11 PM | Link to this

JK,

You will notice, it says Peacemakers, not Peacekeepers.

A Peacemaker is an enforcer of peace, not a patsy.

By harold

October 19, 2006 12:16 PM | Link to this

the USA surrendered before the upsurgency ever even started. bush and friends dont care what happens to iraq as long as hussen is out of power and the nation is destabilized and weakened.

they are treading water now (losing dozens to hundreds of american lives daily plus countless iraqis our news dont care to mention) until they can blame the failure on somebody else: democrats.

Rs are throwing this election by claiming to be gay child molesteringers who are on the take. Please! No good Republican is really a child moletersters. They are taking one for the team. they are making up reasons to lose.

Bush and friends are the ultimate treasonists. They put this country in danger and destroyed iraq on personal business and didnt care about the outcome.

They are just waiting to blame the outcome on sombody else. Harold says that is TREASON.

Harold thinks they should all be arrested and face the music before some of them actervist judges.

By Markus

October 19, 2006 12:16 PM | Link to this

Where’s that old dried up liberal bat Pelosi? How come we haven’t heard much from her lately? Where have her anti-Bush, anti-Republican tirades gone? Usually as an election gets closer, the liberal BS rhetoric meter starts jumping off the scale. But suddenly, the witch and her sisters are silent.

No liberal bloodcurdling screams about impeachment proceedings, no screams about castrating the evil rich via taxes, no screams about Gestapo-like tactics on small businesses on jackbooting the minimum wage to a “living” wage, no screams about pulling out of Iraq, no screams about retreating from the war on islamofascist terrorism, no screams about ruining the healthcare system that is perfectly good for 84% of the population so the other 16% can have their “free” healthcare too, no screams about making it harder [as in taxes] to send your child to a private school (because it’s not “fair”), no screams about what they intend to do about socialist security, no screams about what they intend to do in Iraq, no screams about what they’ll do about illegal immigration, and no screams about how they’ll fix the trade deficit.

Nothing. Not a damn thing. Deafening silence right now. What’s the matter liberal ladies? Afraid people might actually discover your horseass “plan” isn’t what they want? Idiots.

By getalife

October 19, 2006 12:18 PM | Link to this

73 US troops killed so far this month. They are sitting ducks in the middle of a civil war.

This war will create more terrorism for future generations. We are hated for this war worldwide.

It has ignited a nuclear arms race and an attempted military coup on Pakistan.

It has stretched our military to the breaking point with them the only ones sacrificing for this war over and over again.

We have borrowed billions from a communist country to fund this war.

By time for the truth

October 19, 2006 12:18 PM | Link to this

I remember back when, not too long ago, most Republicans and true patriots fully supported the war on terror and the liberation of Iraq. Its the unremitting lies and leftist cut and run defeatism of the leftist media that has undermined that, along with the changing enemy - its now Iranian backed shiite killers and their bitter sunni foes that are responsible for the most deaths in Iraq, not the ‘original’ towel head terrorists who are for the most part largely being defeated or at least cornered in smallish areas. Nothing in Iraq has changed that much, its just a different phase of the war and the leftist hate America press has very cleverly, with unremitting often quite dishonest criticism and shameless tactics has managed to undermine Bush to the point he’s now being much more defensive than he needs to be.

The endless pussyfooting around with the killers has to stop and unless and until it does then this murderous mohammedan fascist stalemate will continue.

By JK

October 19, 2006 12:22 PM | Link to this

Count the war wood on the page, people. Crushing the skulls of, and blasting the flesh off other human beings to prove your manhood, (or trembling with desire at the thought) is grotesque. But that’s just my opinion. I hope you good “Christian” warmongers will forgive me if I forego the violence in the old testament, and focus on the actual words of my Lord instead. No, I don’t guess you will forgive me, will you? You can explain that to someone else when the day comes; I don’t need to hear it.

By Van

October 19, 2006 12:25 PM | Link to this

Chazman,

Take a second look at the terror attacks in Spain before their elections - it worked there, but will not work here.

BTW, when was the last time there was a run up in violences in Iraq?

By Filster

October 19, 2006 12:26 PM | Link to this

Jim - unfortunately, right now I honestly do not know. The idea of Pelosi measuring the drapes in the Speaker’s chamber makes me want to hurl, but I just honestly disguste with the way iraq has been handled, or mishandled. I would like to see Bush fire Rumsfield, and I wouldn’t shed a tear if Cheney went as well. We just really need some new leadership at the top and for the first time, I will consider looking at democrats as a viable alternative. Man, that hurt! Ok, I did vote for Carter back in the 70’s but I was young and stupid then. Maybe still am. Whichever way I vote, or you vote, or our country votes, I just pray it’s right.

By Markus

October 19, 2006 12:27 PM | Link to this

Don’t let the liberal LIES about the economy go unchecked.

By getalife

October 19, 2006 12:30 PM | Link to this

The truth about Iraq

Remarkably well?

They lie to you and you still believe them and trust them.

Who are the idiots macaca?

By Markus

October 19, 2006 12:30 PM | Link to this

That’s ok JK-

I knew you wouldn’t be able to respond to either Van or myself on war and God.

By Chazman

October 19, 2006 12:32 PM | Link to this

Dusty, you say They look at ANY objections by Americans as those who believe as they do, that this country should be demolished. Does that mean there should be NO objections then? You must by capitalizing ANY.

What do you mean by OBVIOUS support? No critisizing the president or his war policy? Do you want us to all march to show our support to the president and the war? What is OBVIOUS?

And please reconsider my objections to the politics of our country? What the hell does that mean? Reconsider and start supporting Bush? If I don’t support Bush I’m giving support to the terrorists? Why don’t you reconsider and start supporting a change in the Iraq policy of Stay The Course. Didn’t think so.

And finally, Thoughtful dissent is one thing. Hateful accusations are another. When you accuse other Americans, or an entire party, that they are not “supporting our country”, or worse yet, not “honoring those who have died promoting freedom around the world”, that is about as hateful as it gets. I can think of nothing more hateful than accusing another American of not supporting their county or not honoring those that have died in a war.

By harodl

October 19, 2006 12:33 PM | Link to this

the leftists aint had nuthin to do with the war, t-foo-tt. rumby and friends dont listen to nobody, especially not NPR or the washington post, but the rightists is planning on the leftists to pull out next year. the democrats ARE the exit strategy, foo!

By harold

October 19, 2006 12:36 PM | Link to this

what lies about the economy? the economy is doing ok. it’s just that the big corporations have got all the money right now. they will implode soon enough like the republicans are doing. harold knows you knows what they say about absolute power.

By harold

October 19, 2006 12:39 PM | Link to this

“Stay the Course” has been officially re-named to “Tread the Water”

By Markus

October 19, 2006 12:39 PM | Link to this

Gitmolife-

Listen up you backyard laundry thief liberal, because I’m only going to say this one time and one time only: THERE IS MORE GOING ON IN THE WORLD AND IN THIS NATION THAN THE IRAQI WAR YOU DERANGED LIBERAL

By time for the truth

October 19, 2006 12:40 PM | Link to this

you’re a sad lying leftist harold!!

By MELO

October 19, 2006 12:40 PM | Link to this

“We are working very closely with the government of Iraq to determine how best to refocus our efforts.”- said the U.S. military spokesman, Maj. Gen. William Caldwell. CNN

CNN’s Barbara Starr called the announcement of a change in plans a “huge admission.” of FAILURE

STAY THE COURSE BUSH-IT

By Van

October 19, 2006 12:42 PM | Link to this

getabrain,

Two can play that game - try this link

Either you lied again, or I lied, take you pick pinko

By harold

October 19, 2006 12:45 PM | Link to this

STEP 1: ATTACK IRAQ

STEP 2: ?

STEP 3: BLAME THE DEMOCRATS

Rummy and friends are gonna sheet their underpants if the Rs dont lose congress because that is their Iraq exit plan.

By Redneck Convert

October 19, 2006 12:45 PM | Link to this

I guess my hero TFTT done hurt hisself bad in sellabrating gay pride week last night, so I’ll speak up for him—minus the cuss words, of course.

If the Sonnys and S** would act like good Christians, we wouldn’t be having all these problems in Iraq. Maybe we need to send the Revrend James Dobson over there to straiten them out. And if Dobson can’t do it, then Falwell’s my man. Or maybe Jimmy Swaggert. In no time, he’d have those people saying “I have sinned against thee, my Lord,” with real big tears and all.

Anyway, I sure hope the Republicans win next month. The missus has laid in about three months worth of food and says if the Dems win on Nov. 7 she’s going to commit suicide by eating. She’s still not over fuming about Mark Taylor, and a Dem win for Congress next month would do her in. I would need a crane to get her body out of the trailer.

Tell Markus, Realist and Van I’m sure TFTT will be back soon. He twisted hisself up so bad last night that he probly looks like a pretzel. Anyway, they can hold their own till he’s back.

By Van

October 19, 2006 12:48 PM | Link to this

JK,

That sounds like a challenge, shall we take up our christian swords and defent the faith again - we can you know.

And that is the difference, we can defend our faith with the sword while they try to expand their faith by the sword.

The question you need to think about, if they were in charge here where would you be? Praying 5 times a day or holding your breath forever?

Over here, we allow all to build churches, temples or mosques. Over there, you can’t. Even atheists are prosecuted.

By Filster

October 19, 2006 12:50 PM | Link to this

MS: I tried to hug a mullah but that damn explosive vest under his robes got in the way…

By getalife

October 19, 2006 12:56 PM | Link to this

Figures you would link to the NRO Murdoch, commie lover.

It is as credible as Cheney.

By harold

October 19, 2006 12:58 PM | Link to this

dang, troof. usually you got more than “you’re a danged liar.” usually you got a lot more. here you got nothin’ more because you know harold is right. you been tricked!

By harold

October 19, 2006 01:03 PM | Link to this

c’mon, y’all. this thing is titled ‘thinkin’ right’ so let’s get thinkin’!

why aint they committed more troops? why aint they making progress? why they just treading water in iraq? why it seems like they just dont care? why so many republican scandals coming out right now? why why why?

because the only Iraq exit strategy bush and rummy have is “lose congress and then blame the democrats.”

america has been betrayed. we have been stabbed in the back and knifed in the gut. rummy has beheaded Lady Liberty. we have all been taken advantage of by the ruthless selfishness of a group of people hellbent on destabilizing iraq for whatever reasons, be they personal and/or economic.

stand up and vote and keep the Rs in congress. make them lie in this bed they have created. do not fall for their plan to blame the democrats! vote republican!

By deegee

October 19, 2006 01:04 PM | Link to this

Van, did you really say this or was it a poser?

“Mohammed, on the other hand, was just a dissatisfied little jew boy, and started his own “religion”. Why else would the so-called customs of Islam be so close to those of Judism, food, dress, type s of worship (separating the men from the women).”

By mijo

October 19, 2006 01:13 PM | Link to this

You are all a bunch of testosterone deprived, cross dressing, bed wetters.

By DebbieDoRight

October 19, 2006 01:14 PM | Link to this

No one in the administration ever said that Saddam had anything to do with 9/11, he did give support to terrorists and did have a working relationship with terrorists cells.

MR. RUSSERT: We could establish a direct link between the hijackers of September 11 and Saudi Arabia.

VICE PRES. CHENEY: We know that many of the attackers were Saudi. There was also an Egyptian in the bunch. It doesn’t mean those governments had anything to do with that attack. That’s a different proposition than saying the Iraqi government and the Iraqi intelligent service has a relationship with al-Qaeda that developed throughout the decade of the ’90s. That was clearly official policy.

MR. RUSSERT: There are reports that the investigation Congress did does show a link between the Saudi government and the hijackers but that it will not be released to the public.

VICE PRES. CHENEY: I don’t know want to speculate on that, Tim, partly because I was involved in reviewing those pages.

Meet THe Press 3/16/03

By DebbieDoRight

October 19, 2006 01:15 PM | Link to this

“The regime of Saddam Hussein cultivated ties to terror while it built weapons of mass destruction. It used those weapons in acts of mass murder, and refused to account for them when confronted by the world.”

Bush’s UN Address Sep ‘03

” Interviewer: But, still, those countries who didn’t support the Iraqi Freedom operation use the same argument, weapons of mass destruction haven’t been found. So what argument will you use now to justify this war?

THE PRESIDENT: We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories. You remember when Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said, Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons. They’re illegal. They’re against the United Nations resolutions, and we’ve so far discovered two. And we’ll find more weapons as time goes on. But for those who say we haven’t found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they’re wrong, we found them.”

Interview with the Bush by the TVP Poland

“Our nation enters this conflict reluctantly — yet, our purpose is sure. The people of the United States and our friends and allies will not live at the mercy of an outlaw regime that threatens the peace with weapons of mass murder.”

Pres. Bush’s Addresses the Nation From the Oval Office — Operation Iraqi Freedom 3.19.03

By Cletus Snow

October 19, 2006 01:25 PM | Link to this

Well I see that the Saviours of civilazation are at it again this AM. I feel safer already knowing that this much brain power is alerted to save us this morning. If we could just get the powers that be to listen to these geniuses they could solve all our problems in 10 minutes,then we could all get back to scratching our gonads and winding our watches.

By DebbieDoRight

October 19, 2006 01:26 PM | Link to this

Anyone that believe Saddam did not have any ties with terrorists before the current war on terrorism is just plain blind or ignorant.

OK but what about the SAUDIS ties to terrorists? Why aren’t we invading them?

“The Administration continues its close ties with the Saudis. But the LA Times reported on 8/2/03 that the bipartisan commission investigating 9/11 found the Saudi government not only provided significant money and aid to the suicide hijackers but also allowed potentially hundreds of millions of dollars to flow to Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups through suspect charities and other fronts.”

All governments that support terror are complicit in a war against civilization.

Bush, Speech to UN 9/23/03

By Dusty

October 19, 2006 01:27 PM | Link to this

Chazman,

If you could cool off enough to think, you might realize what my opinion is about.

I believe that terrorists are encouraged or discouraged by what they hear about America by Americans. Therefore I would like Americans to think clearly about their criticisms of our country before they “shoot off their mouths”. That does not banish criticisms. I suggest PRUDENT criticism.

Obvious support means NOT having almost every newspaper and almost all Democratic output in the country citing every bad move and never mentioning the good ones. Making this country look like bumbling idiots at every setback and not presenting our true mission is exactly what encourages the enemy. Seeing this country as one massive force against terrorism is my view of supporting the country. Whether you like Bush or not, you should be American enough to do what is best for the nation.

You are one misguided fool if you think I am not honoring those who died fighting for the USA.. Every generation of my family has fought for this country. I objected to listing the dead for political purposes, as Rednecks was doing. I will continue to fight for every right in this country because I don’t want to lose a one.

Get yours facts straight, Chazman. I like Bush but I love my country more. I will promote it’s greatness at evey chance.

By mijo

October 19, 2006 01:39 PM | Link to this

We interrupt these important proceedings with an important message: Psychosis IS treatable.

By getalife

October 19, 2006 01:40 PM | Link to this

Cheering on the failed cheerleader is NOT loving your country crusty.

You choose your failed party over your country which is unpatriotic.

You can lie to yourself about supporting the country but your words speak volumes of your true blind faith of our failed leadership.

How is that for PRUDENT criticism CRUSTY THE CLOWN?

By getalife

October 19, 2006 01:58 PM | Link to this

The solution for Iraq is not stay the course.

Honest, competent leadership is a step in the right direction.

If you truly love your country, you would want the same.

Crusty does not want what is best for our country. She is a failed American and will continue to vote gop no matter what happens to our country.

Real patriotic Americans will vote for a change in the failed leadership and direction.

By deegee

October 19, 2006 02:01 PM | Link to this

For all of the stay the course folks, here is little explanation for why you don’t throw water on a grease fire. See if you can draw a parallel to what is happening in Iraq.

Remember, combustion requires exactly 3 ingredients: fuel, oxygen and heat. Without any one of them, a fire stops. The corollary is that if you provide two of those ingredients in abundance, but not the third, no combustion.

So, you’ve provided wax for fuel and added lots of heat, but the only place the wax mixes with oxygen is at the wax/air interface. You get surface burning, but that’s all.

Then you added water. The water turned instantly to vapour, expanding and expelling itself and lots of wax in a cloud of very small droplets (this would probably be called aerosolization). Now you have lots of super-heated wax, rapidly interfacing with lots of oxygen over a huge surface area (the wax envelope around every tiny steam bubble) - suddenly, you have all three ingredients for combustion in ample supply.

BOOM!

By harold

October 19, 2006 02:02 PM | Link to this

harold says, if psychosis IS treatable we need a major lithium drop on the white house

By mijo

October 19, 2006 02:04 PM | Link to this

Okay, so you all talk and no one listens. Got it now. Goin back to Metico

By Dusty

October 19, 2006 02:06 PM | Link to this

Getalife,

I guess that you are talking to me.

I don’t have a white flag, Getalife, so I’m not “politcally correct” enough for you. Thank goodness.

By CC

October 19, 2006 02:07 PM | Link to this

Yesterday, Congressman Terry Everett, Vice Chairman of the House Intel Subcommittee on Technical and Tactical Intelligence admitted in an interview that he did not know the difference between a Sunni and a Shiite. And you want us to trust the Republicans to protect us Jim? How can they when they refuse to educate themselves about something so neccessary. It would be laughable if it weren’t so sad. The Republicans may talk a good game, but at the end of the day, the have no idea what they are doing.

By Draft all the children of Jews

October 19, 2006 02:08 PM | Link to this

To serve as shock troops in the zionist war of extermination of the Arab peoples of the World. They orchestrated this war, now let them suffer the consequences. Allah Akbar, Y’all. Leave us Atheists along, and we will leave you along, you Judo-Christian Bigot Scum.

By UGA Grads are Stupid

October 19, 2006 02:10 PM | Link to this

Right you are deedee, you must be an engineer or a chemist. This is so unfair, you really shouldn’t beat up on the weak minded liberal arts major Neo-Scum bags, they just can’t keep up.

By Cheerleaders for the Chickenhawk Cheerleader

October 19, 2006 02:20 PM | Link to this

We are filthy craven chickenhawk flagwaving trash, and we cheer cheer cheer for Dumbya!

By time for the truth

October 19, 2006 02:22 PM | Link to this

harold your absurd paranoid lies and distortions about your conservative superiors are simply NOT WORTH any more than that.

watching pathetic traitors like maggot brain and other lefties melt down on here in their desperate feverish rush to pre-ejaculatory declarations of victory is too freaking funny. the pinko polls are deeply suspect once again as the leftist vermin seek to try and undermine the GOP and Bush. sampling more demoNcrats than GOP voters will always give a higher support figure for the demoNcrats. you’re a complete dummy harold if you believe the leftist media lies - but we’ll see what happens next month. if the leftist maggots continue to overplay their hand they’ll end up seriously inflaming the GOP base and end up with very few gains. in part that’s why that b*** Pelosi has all but slithered from public view. and why the dingy corrupt weasel Reid is belatedly, after being caught, changing his deliberately misleading FALSE senate declarations.

I just wanted to thank all the knuckle dragging vapid pinko wankers on here for continuing to peddle their envious, witless abuse aimed at yours truly even when I’m not posting - its highly amusing to see that I still have the desired effect on such snivelling nonentities as infest this bit of cyber space.

By time for the truth's a brown shirted pink pantied child moleter coward

October 19, 2006 02:35 PM | Link to this

But that doen’t mean you cannot lead the G0P, ya fit right in, chicken-sshhiitt coward screw up.

By Kick a neo-con in the balls a day

October 19, 2006 02:41 PM | Link to this

NO MORE ARAB OIL FOR AMERIKA THE FACSIST!

NO MORE RUSSIAN OIL FOR IZRAEL THE MASS MURDERER!

CUT EM OFF, CUT EM OFF, CUT EM ALL OFF

By harold

October 19, 2006 02:43 PM | Link to this

victory? there is no victory.

the USA has lost no matter the outcome.

troof, your conservative electees have bent you over and stuck it up your read. they have proven again and again that they dont care about conservative values or saving tax money or protecting the constitution. they dont care about the mess in iraq. it was intentional. they have used you and yours and now abandon the country to whatever happens next. they dont care anymore because they got theirs. harold can’t say they gave up, though. they got what they wanted and now they are done. that is why iraq fell apart. nobody in power gives a sheet about it!

By Chazman

October 19, 2006 02:44 PM | Link to this

Dusty, check out these quotes:

“You can support the troops but not the president.” –Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

“Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?” –Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99

“[The] President … is once again releasing American military might on a foreign country with an ill-defined objective and no exit strategy. He has yet to tell the Congress how much this operation will cost. And he has not informed our nation’s armed forces about how long they will be away from home. These strikes do not make for a sound foreign policy.” –Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA)

“If we are going to commit American troops, we must be certain they have a clear mission, an achievable goal and an exit strategy.” –Karen Hughes, speaking on behalf of George W Bush

“I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our over-extended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today” –Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

“Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is.” –Governor George W. Bush (R-TX)

Do you think this criticism of Clinton by republicans during an act of war was bad? I bet not at the time. Look at the first quote. Do you think you can support the troops but not the president like Trent Lott said? Or was he wrong? Do you think Sean Hannity encouraged the enemy with his comment? And what about all those exit strategy comments!! Hmmmmm.

Therefore I would like Americans to think clearly about their criticisms of our country before they “shoot off their mouths”. If I am critisizing Bush’s war policy or reasons for invading Iraq, am I critisizing the country, like you said? No, I never said anything about our country, just the reasons and policy of our policy. There is a hell of a difference, as Trent Lott said above. And Sean Hannity. And Rick Santorium. And George Bush. Do you consider Trent Lott’s statement “prudent” enough for you?

So almost every newspaper is not presenting our “true mission?” Just what is our true mission, because the president has given us many.

Whether you like Bush or not, you should be American enough to do what is best for the nation. And just what would that be? Giving unconditional support to Bush, whether you agree or not? Do you think republicans did “what was best for America” during Clinton’s impeachment?

You are one misguided fool if you think I am not honoring those who died fighting for the USA. Never did I say you did not honor those who died. But rather, YOU did.

By julie

October 19, 2006 02:46 PM | Link to this

What’s a repuke?

By deegee

October 19, 2006 02:48 PM | Link to this

Fair and balanced fans here is what you may have missed. I perused the morning news channels at the 7:00am hour today. The Today show was reporting on Iraq, CNN was reporting on Iraq and Fox and Friends was reporting on the lawsuit brought by the parents of the girl that was mistakenly declared deceased after a wreck. Just trying to help.

By Van

October 19, 2006 02:53 PM | Link to this

deegee

And what provided the spark in the 70’s with the Iranian hostage situation?

We were provding comfort(hospital care) the the ex-shah. Such a wonderful religion of Peace.

By Aquagirl

October 19, 2006 02:57 PM | Link to this

Well, looks like I didn’t miss much. It seems like the argument hasn’t really moved too much. On one side, the GodFearingRightiousAmericans like Dusty continue to say that any dissent about our government (not our country, our government, mind you) is unpatriotic and means that you are buying tickets for terrorists to move right on in.

In the other corner we have the LeftistPinkoCommieLonghairs like me, who somehow think that maybe George Bush, Rumsfeld, et.al. don’t have a pipeline on the absolute truth, and are taking the un-American step of being concerned about dead servicemembers, dead Iraqis, and a war that increasingly looks like it can’t be won.

Jim has a good point in his column, that there isn’t a middle ground. But that’s a symptom of an administration that doesn’t see a middle ground on anything. Colin Powell—-out. Donald Rumsfeld—-In. Disagree? You want the terrorists to win! Bush has had several years of fairly broad support, a majority in congress, and the finest military in the world at his disposal. Blaming Democrats when things suck is just—-Bushit.

Oh, and sorry Van and Dusty, the name-calling I was referring to was coming from mijo. She tottered over here, following me from one of the other boards, but I think the words of more than two syllables scared her off.

But I have no doubt y’all will have some names for me now. Lock and load!

By Middle America

October 19, 2006 03:00 PM | Link to this

I think that the only way America “wins” is if Mr. Republican turns to his left and Mr. Democrat turns to his right and gets reacquainted with the other half of America that they’ve each been ignoring for so long. We need to take back Washington from the left and right and put it back where it belongs, in the middle. We’re in dangerous times. We have a president willing to ignore the Constitution, signing into law a measure that would allow him to declare U.S. citizens as enemy combatants, with no right to due process. And the Congress rubber stamped it like they have everything else. And the minority Democrats only gave passing lip service to how terrible it was. I’m sorry GOP supporters, but any law that takes away a U.S. citizens right to due process is not Constitutional no matter what purpose it is meant to serve, including the guise of protecting Americans from terrorists. If you need a process to deal with foreign terrorists, fine. But any American found to be aiding terrorists has a process already in place to see justice done. If Bush’s administration doesn’t think that will suffice, then they should step aside and let someone else call the shots because they are incompetent. We are a nation of laws borne out of the Constitution. Any moves by our government to weaken the Constitution is worse than a terrorist attack.

By Kick a neo-ccuunntt in the balls

October 19, 2006 03:00 PM | Link to this

Make that 2000, not 98 - a little too much jack daniels, in honor the tennessee’s butt kickin’ of the mutts of dishonor. Yo, if-only-i-had-a-brain, didn’t you graduate from that pieces of sshhiitt school in what, 1 day? Drove thru Athens with the back window down, didn’t ya! So Jimmy, how do ya explain Vandy’s butt kickin’ of the mutts?

By Van

October 19, 2006 03:01 PM | Link to this

deegee,

Yes, I said it. He was. They will not admit it, but what else explains his problems.

By Mrs. RepubLady

October 19, 2006 03:18 PM | Link to this

The Republicans will win in November, no matter what you think of the war in Iraq. You can just get over it, stop whining and start supporting America!

By time for the truth

October 19, 2006 03:21 PM | Link to this

it sure does seem that rednekkks NAMBLA has finally allowed the end stages of syphilis to get the better of the last vestiges of what’s left of its ability to be very slughtly rational … thus its deranged rantings are even more lunatic than normal which is very pleasing. when the liberal maggots lose yet again in November this board will be a rare treat to behold … I for one am expecting that the crypto marxist SCUM will then cut and run for a while and there will actually be a few days of relative normality on here. A leftist defeat will be all the more sweet because this time the pondscum are expecting victory and when it doesn’t happen they will literally go beserk!! Hopefully more than a few will literally follow McCain’s recent witty quip about committing suicide.

By Van

October 19, 2006 03:27 PM | Link to this

Middle America,

Under existing law, any American caught in armed conflict with a foriegn force against Americans or its allies, can be striped of his/her US citizenship. This is plainly stated on the US passport.

Ergo, they are not citizens and are not eligible for US rights.

By deegee

October 19, 2006 03:28 PM | Link to this

Van, don’t you have a spreadsheet or something that needs updating?

By Van

October 19, 2006 03:35 PM | Link to this

deegee ,

It is called multi tasking. This is the easy part, work takes time to think about, you guys are not that big a challenge.

By smarty

October 19, 2006 03:50 PM | Link to this

How about you just get your head out of your a* Wooten? Is that a good solution?

By time for the truth

October 19, 2006 03:50 PM | Link to this

Van

every single day you patiently, logically, factually and even (relatively politely) explain to the leftist scum on here patently obvious factual material which they glibly and dishonestly completely ignore when it undermines their irrational BUsh hate etc. Allowing for ‘genuine’ political differences which will always divide “us” and “them”, is there any point to being so continuously reasonable? - they dont take a blind bit of notice of you, or anyone else who factually enagages them. A good example being the treatment of non-combatants and the left’s lies/distortions/dissembling etc on this essentially very black and white topic.

No one on here seems to change anyone else’s mind, - that doesn’t really matter of course. And its almost never the case that someone admits that facts marshalled in defence of Bush/the GOP etc actually answer any point)s) made. The game by the left on here is simply to TRY and undermine us GOP types and to post pretty hateful, virulently abusive hate speech about the GOP/Bush.

Ultimately there is little if any real debate on here, which is why I stopped even trying to debate anyone. NO one from the left concedes a “good point”. Some of the more moronic lefties simply deny, or completely ignore any points one makes to them or they simply refuse to debate factual irrefutable points. What there is is endless repetition - from both sides - of the respective positions.

Its become a farce which is why I dont post as much as i used to. even abusing afterbirth like NAMBLA is no fun any more - there’s only so many times once can repeat the same kind of insults. and the left’s pathological obsession with homosexuality is unbelievable.

By deegee

October 19, 2006 03:56 PM | Link to this

Van, you are a legend in your own mind.

By Aunt Bea

October 19, 2006 03:56 PM | Link to this

Oh, he’s going to spread something, but it’s not his sheet.

By DebbieDoRight

October 19, 2006 04:00 PM | Link to this

I’m sorry GOP supporters, but any law that takes away a U.S. citizens right to due process is not Constitutional no matter what purpose it is meant to serve, including the guise of protecting Americans from terrorists.

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both. Benjamin Franklin

Experience is a dear teacher, but fools will learn at no other. Benjamin Franklin

By DebbieDoRight

October 19, 2006 04:03 PM | Link to this

Middle America was talking about people like Jose Padilla. Who hasn’t been caught doing anything other than looking on the internet on how to make smart bombs. I guess if he was trying to find out how to make good ole american McVeigh bombs, he would be free right now.

By Dusty

October 19, 2006 04:10 PM | Link to this

Chazman,

Would you try and get something straight in your mind? Are you getalife’s brother? Oh, nevermind.

My politics are not based on what this one said or that one said. I even try to think for myself, something you should try.

We are in a war. I support our country and the military who represent and fight for us in that war.

I do what I can to help us win. Everything is not perfect but whatever corrections we need I don’t blast off for the public or the enemy. Writing and emailing is better.

I will vote for the people I think are most capable of running this country. At the moment, Democrats have no one I would want leading this country in war, before, now or after. I have no desire to cut’n’run which is the only real suggestion given by Democrats.

Please don’t misquote me or misinterpret me anymore, Chazman. I will not answer.

By Dusty

October 19, 2006 04:19 PM | Link to this

Debbie DoLittle,

Where have you been besides California? That first Benjamin Franklin quote has been beat to death on this blog. Maybe you should speak to the terrorists about taking away liberties. But they don’t want to take away our liberties. Just our heads.

By DD

October 19, 2006 04:27 PM | Link to this

Bush needs to be tried for lying to Congress about WMD.

By Aquagirl

October 19, 2006 04:31 PM | Link to this

So, Dusty, were all the people Chazman quoted being unpatriotic? Why is this such a thing for the Bushthinkers to accuse anyone who raises a perfectly good question of aiding and abetting the enemy? It’s not a coincidence that the White House loved and recommended Woodward’s last book, and touted him as a smart guy. But when he writes a book critical of the administration…look, what a misguided reporter!

you can’t even argue that Bush fan=Republican anymore, there seem to be a lot of angry Republicans out there who aren’t happy with the current state of the GOP.

By Dusty

October 19, 2006 04:38 PM | Link to this

AquaGirl,

I assume you are tryin to say that Conservatives like me are not concerned over war casualties. Oh yes!! I have one son who has already served in the military and three more sons younger. So I’m not concerned about the war in Iraq ‘cause I don’t care??? You know so little about which you speak.

Run with your own white flag which has Democrat written all over it. Your political party couldn’t run a “tea party” much less a war or a country. We tried it fairly recently. We know.

Giving comfort to the enemy IN ANY WAY is not how I do things. Therefore I support the war efforts and this country because I like living in freedom.

By DebbieDoRight

October 19, 2006 04:45 PM | Link to this

Debbie DoLittle, Where have you been besides California? That first Benjamin Franklin quote has been beat to death on this blog.

A good relevant quote can never be “beat to death”.

Maybe you should speak to the terrorists about taking away liberties. But they don’t want to take away our liberties. Just our heads.

Im speaking to Americans who are letting fear malign their common sense. Fear is the weapon that Hitler used to start a war. Fear is what McCarthy used to keep himself powerful during the Red “Scare”.

Here’s another quote for you. Maybe you’ll like this one better…..

He that won’t be counseled can’t be helped.

Benjamin Franklin

By Dusty

October 19, 2006 04:48 PM | Link to this

AquaGirl,

Woodward wrote three books. Two of them were big buddy-buddy-to-Bush books. Then the wind changed a bit and so did Woodward. Some people he quoted have already challenged him on his accuracy. Which two do you prefer?

But hang in there, Water Baby. Libs are desperately looking for something to hang their hats on. Why don’t you investigate Chazman? He is more your type.

By DebbieDoRight

October 19, 2006 04:51 PM | Link to this

Giving comfort to the enemy IN ANY WAY is not how I do things. Therefore I support the war efforts and this country because I like living in freedom.

Quick question, what does the war in Iraq have to do with American Freedom?

By Aquagirl

October 19, 2006 04:57 PM | Link to this

I like living in freedom too. That’s why I don’t like the current administration.

And no, I don’t think you’re unconcerned about war casualties. On the other hand, you posture like everyone else doesn’t, because they aren’t like you. Such egotism.

Funny how Chickenhawks like to go on and on about how they’re the only ones “supporting the troops”. Like they belong to you? They belong to everyone in this country, and I’m damn sick and tired of neocons acting like they have a lock on goodness and decency and love of this country. From the FDA to stem cell research to foreign policy to immigration, the GOP is determined to pursue their course, and surpress any dissent, even when it makes sense.

Only fools head off of a cliff. If you want to go along with the lemmings, go for it.

By Van

October 19, 2006 04:59 PM | Link to this

Hey, DD

Maybe sense you are so hateful of America, try this foreign press about Saddam and his WMD’s

By Aquaman

October 19, 2006 05:01 PM | Link to this

Dusty,

Exactly how was anything that was going on in Iraq a threat to the freedom you like living in?

And exactly how do you eplain away all those quotes questioning Clinton when we were in a state of war in Kosovo? Were all of those people, your hero GWB and his shill Karen “Talk About Hillary’s Cankles” Hughes somehow loving America less then because they were asking the exact same questions regarding mission and exit strategy as the opposition is asking current administration?

I’d love to see you try and explain this one away! Maybe you can get one of your friends to help.

By Aquagirl

October 19, 2006 05:03 PM | Link to this

Funny, nobody in the White House thought Woodward was inaccurate when he was “buddy-buddy”. But that’s how they work there. You agree? You’re right. You disagree? You’re wrong, even if all evidence points to the contrary. We’ll just ignore that.

And the people who are challenging him are covering their, uh, words. Condi said she was never briefed about a serious terrorist threat, then brushed it off when evidence was produced to the contrary. That’s just plain sad.

By Van

October 19, 2006 05:08 PM | Link to this

Aquagirl,

One of the things that gets me angry is when someone says they support the troops but not the war.

It is not possible to support the troops and not the war, if you support the troops, you by default support the job they are doing, if you support the job, you are supporting the war and by extention, their commanders - including the Commander-in-chief.

Only a liar, ignorant person or just a plain old fashion back stabbing, america hating, pinko scum would try to cover their a*s and try to straddle the difference.

By Aunt Bea

October 19, 2006 05:10 PM | Link to this

Foley even lied about his supposed molestation by a priest.

Bush lies. Cheney lies, then he lies about lying.

Latest from Cheney: “I never said that Saddam met with Al Queda Operative. I never said that he had WMDs or that rocket tubes were being used to enrich uranium. I never said we would be welcomed by the Iraqis with open arms. I never said that the insurgency was in it’s last throes, or that the war was going well.”

“What I said was, that the democrats are flip floppers. I still maintain that fact.”

Cheney: stfu.

By @@

October 19, 2006 05:10 PM | Link to this

Jim: My patience has worn thin. Not with the war in Iraq, not with our military efforts there, but with the Liberals who offer no solutions of their own.

Amongst the oldest terrorist organizations, you’ve got Hammas in Palestine.

They’re shocked?

Patience. Terrorists can and will be defeated over time. But not by a left-wing effort. They know nothing but withdrawal from the face of the enemy.

Republicans and strong-willed Democrats will offer national security for our America.

Whineeeeee liberals need to move aside.

By Aunt Bea

October 19, 2006 05:14 PM | Link to this

I just heard a news report that N. Korea has threatened to put a hole through another rare Picasso Painting if the UN sanctions are enforced.

By Aquaman

October 19, 2006 05:15 PM | Link to this

If what you are saying is true Van then I’ll gladly tatto “liar, ignorant person AND just a plain old fashion back stabbing, america hating, pinko scum” on my damn forehead because I most definitely support the troops and not the war.

My son is one of the troops assshhoolllleee and I am so opposed to this nonesense in Iraq I can’t see straight.

So wise up jackass and realize that the world is made up of more than two colors.

By getalife

October 19, 2006 05:17 PM | Link to this

Van,

I support the troops and think our leadership has failed the troops and should resign.

Does that make you angry commie lover, fascist, pos?

By peter evans

October 19, 2006 05:18 PM | Link to this

The fundamental Iraq question that’s not being asked is ‘how many more young american servicemen are you willing to sacrifice on a failed policy. With a death toll in excess of 600 a year, a stay the course policy till Mr Bush leaves office will insure that over 1200 more soldiers and marines are destined to die. Will their sacrifice make us safer?

By Aquagirl

October 19, 2006 05:19 PM | Link to this

Van, thanks for proving my point about current neocon thinking. Ever heard of circular reasoning? Guess not. Only an idiot would equate supporting the troops with supporting a political structure.

And we had troops overseas when Clinton was prez, where was all your conservative undying support for the Commander-In-Chief then? Or did you miss the quotes posted above? Plenty of your conservative bedbuddies felt free to ask questions then. Oh, but questioning now, that’s wrong.

By BackWords

October 19, 2006 05:19 PM | Link to this

One of the things that gets me angry is when someone says you cant support the troops if you don’t support the war.

It is possible to support the troops and not the war. If you support the troops, you by default support the job they are doing, their hard work, and the sacrifices they make for us. But if you don’t have the brains to realize that the troops only follow orders, and make no decisions about the war, and support the worst Commander in Chief in the history of this country under the flimsy excuse of supporting the troops, you are an idiot.

Only a liar, ignorant person or just a plain old fashion back stabbing, America hating, neo-fascist scum would try to cover their a-s and try to say they support the troops by asking more of them to die for no good go—amn reason.

By Dusty

October 19, 2006 05:21 PM | Link to this

Aqua Girl.

At 2:57 you described yourself as a leftist pinko who took the unAmerican step of being concerned about dead service members. You listed this description to show that you were not like Conservatives.

So all Americans don’t care about our lost soldiers. Only leftist pinkos care. What an absolute distortion of the truth. And you call me an egotist? Oh well. Why not. Anything goes with “leftist pinkos”.

Keep pouring out the “leftist pinko”(your own description before you forget) propaganda. And talk to Lil Debbie. She doesn’t even know what the war in Iraq has to do with American freedom. I hope she doesn’t find out the hard way.

By Markus

October 19, 2006 05:24 PM | Link to this

Democrit hypocrisy 101: use the phrase “slavery” when referencing a black man (as a Republican) while claiming that the Republicans are racists.

Democrit hypocrisy 201: re-electing an old fart ex-Klansman from West Virginnie whie claming that the Republicans are racists.

Democrit hypocrisy 301: re-electing a drunkard who killed an intern and ran from the responsibility while making a BIG SCREAMING DEAL over Bush’s DUI (nobody died) in an October surprise.

Democrit hypocrisy 401: stashing $90,000 in a freezer, stealing classified 9/11 documents from the National Archives and destroying them, and having a shady land deal in Las Vegas while not notifying Congress, yet hanging every Republican for everything from saying “The Good Old Days” to shady business deals.

Democrit hypocrisy 501: making a HUGE fuss over Foley and demanding he resign while never having done a thing about Studds and in fact re-electing him.

Yup, the party of the Jackass, the Democrits, have two sets of rules: one set for themselves and another for everyone else. I imagine that’s how they’ll treat Americans as well. No thanks.

By Aunt Bea

October 19, 2006 05:25 PM | Link to this

This just in: The 300 millionth Terrorist was born today in East Baghdad at 3:45 EST. The baby took three hostages and demanded the release of several premie-sunni babies being kept in intensive care in a Shia hospital. He also beheaded a cabage patch doll as a warning for US troops to get out of Iraq.

By Woodward is a back-stabing-jew who uses goim, then betrays, and moves on

October 19, 2006 05:28 PM | Link to this

Don’t ya get it yet? Goim are mere animals, to be cheated in anyway necessary for the greater good of zionist Izrael. We goim don’t count. Spell it any way you want Goyim, Goim, Goomin, its all the same Yiddish crap. Izrael takes our money every year (lots more than gets reported), makes the arab world hate us, gets us to send our stupid animal jesus-freak christian soldiers to die helping to exterminate the Arabs, and still betrays us at every opportunity. There is no gratitude. Look up Frank Pollard, and see why we have sent him to prision for life. I will summarize, since most of you are too stupid to do the work of looking it up and actually reading it. Frankie-the-jew was an analyst at DOD, where he snuck around and obtained a list of American spies inside the former Soviet Union (this was the early 80’s). Being a good little zionist traitor spy for izrael, Frankie-the-jew gave the list to his masters in the Mossad. The Mossad scum then traded the list to Russia for the release of a few hundred Russian jews to immigrate to Izrael. The Russians arrested the entire network of american spies listed by Frankie-the-jew and their entire families. They were tortured and ultimately executed. For that Frankie-the-jew will spend the rest of his life in an American prision, unless the Butt-Boy-of-Yale pardons him, per the wishes of wolfie, libbie and all the other jew-bastard-traitor spies currently calling themselves neo-conservatives.

By Aquaman

October 19, 2006 05:29 PM | Link to this

@@

For the billionth time….

No matter how badly you may want to try and conflate the mess in Iraq tot he levvel of National Security, it is a mess and HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH OUR NATIONAL SECURITY!

If there is any connection at all it is that it has made us LESS SAFE than we were prior to the invasion. This is not an opinion, it is a fact, known to our intelligence agencies, known to leaders of other countries, known to everyone it appears but this current President and those who would believe him if he said the sky was falling.

I’m not whining, I’m p**. America and its best and brightest, my youngest son one of them, have been sent off to fight and die for God knows what and I want it to stop. So how’s this for a plan.

GET THE HELL OUT OF IRAQ.

Let them kill each other, I could care less.

Worried about how the rest of the terrorist will view us. Don’t be. They aren’t afraid of us any more and won’t be no matter what we do. They see us as a toothless tiger, stretched too thin by the mess in Iraq to deal with real threats. Don’t believe it, look at N. Korea.

We have failed! This President, who I voted for in 2000 has failed. The war in Iraq is a failure and no amount of punditry or spin is going to change that.

The Iraq war is a failure.

By getalife

October 19, 2006 05:29 PM | Link to this

Lets see, we are losing troops in Iraq for no good reason.

We have a politician who pleaded guilty and will not resign.

We have politicians who covered up a pervert and will not resign.

We have a government who will not admit failures.

See a trend here?

They are cowards who will not take responsibilty for their actions.

By Aquagirl

October 19, 2006 05:30 PM | Link to this

Aquaman, honey, when did our kid enlist? This is what happens when I’m too busy being a backstabbing-america-hating-pinko-scum to look after the children. Mercy me.

And grab a quart of milk on the way home, okay?

By Aunt Bea

October 19, 2006 05:32 PM | Link to this

1920’s: Winston Churchill wanted Iraq to be a “friendly government” forever more in the middle east.

2006: Bush wants Iraq to be a friendly ally forever more in the war on terror in the middle east.

Was Koolaid even invented in the 1920s?

By BackWords

October 19, 2006 05:33 PM | Link to this

Repubelican hypocrisy: Having two ex-wives and a mistress while claiming to represent family values, while accusing others of not having family values.

Repubelican hypocrisy: Claiming to be for smaller government while making the biggest government in history. Calling Democrats big spenders while spending more money than any government in history.

Repubelican hypocrisy: Saying we ought to get out of the UN because it’s a pointless organization, then defying the UN to attack another country for violating UN restrictions.

Repubelican hypocrisy: Women should not be allowed to make decisions about their own bodies, but multi-national corporations should make any decision they like, completely unregulated and with no accountability, regardless of how many lives or environments are affected, and hide their money in foreign shelters to avoid taxes, and that’s okay.

By Aunt Bea

October 19, 2006 05:35 PM | Link to this

Cartoon Idea: Show W as “Scarface” but instead of AL Pacino, imagine an evil Desi Arnez. The big line: “Say hello to my little friend, Fred Mertz”!!!

By Pinko Scum

October 19, 2006 05:39 PM | Link to this

Van @5:08 “It is not possible to support the troops and not the war…”

You’re wrong LBJ. It’s not possible to support the troops AND the war (in Iraq). We failed. It’s all for pride now.

As you know, pride is one of the seven deadly. Time to swallow yours.

By Markus

October 19, 2006 05:39 PM | Link to this

We interrupt this regularly scheduled blog to inform you we have been infilterated by muslim fanatical liberals. Keep a low profile, and stay well armed. You may want to practice cyber-headshots:

“*By Kick a neo-con in the balls a day

October 19, 2006 02:41 PM | Link to this

NO MORE ARAB OIL FOR AMERIKA THE FACSIST!

NO MORE RUSSIAN OIL FOR IZRAEL THE MASS MURDERER!

CUT EM OFF, CUT EM OFF, CUT EM ALL OFF*”

That’s cute. “Kick a neocon in the balls day.”

This is the nice, peaceful, tolerant, open-minded radical liberalism shining through.

By Aquaman

October 19, 2006 05:42 PM | Link to this

Aquagirl

must’ve been when I was getting my forehead tattoed with “liar, ignorant person AND just a plain old fashion back stabbing, america hating, pinko scum.”

And while I was waiting for Dusty to answer my question.

Seriously, my boy has been in since 1997 and saw the military as a career until this mess began. To say he is disallusioned in to make the understatement of the century.

Pray for him.

By deegee

October 19, 2006 05:44 PM | Link to this

Last night I saw on TV a serviceman in Iraq being interviewed by the press. He said that he didn’t know why he and his buddies were there getting shot at and killed because they happened to get caught standing between Sunnis and Shiites. While he certainly doesn’t speak for all troops I’ll bet he speaks for alot of them.

By Aquagirl

October 19, 2006 05:46 PM | Link to this

“Kick a neocon in the balls day”

Oh, please. This blog is home to TFTT and all sorts of rants. Your offendedness is breaking my heart, Markus.

By Once more with feeling

October 19, 2006 05:50 PM | Link to this

Only a liar, ignorant person or just a plain old fashion back stabbing, America hating, neo-fascist scum would try to cover their a-s and try to say they support the troops by asking more of them to die for no good go—amn reason.

If you care about the troops, pray for their swift, safe return, and then vote for the Congressional candidate that is willing to stand up for the TROOPS, not the liar in chief.

By Markus

October 19, 2006 05:52 PM | Link to this

It’s that time again for the ignoranus liberal pigs out there with short memories on Iraq and Saddam:

“Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime … He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation … And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction … So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real…” - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

http://web.archive.org/web/20040204225854/www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc20030123.html

“I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.” - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

http://web.archive.org/web/20040206224935/johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc20021009.html

“If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.” - President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/02/18/iraq.political.analysis/

“We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction.” - Madeline Albright, Feb 1, 1998

http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9802/01/iraq/

“Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.” - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/transcripts/gore_text092302.html

More to come later as needed…

By Dusty

October 19, 2006 05:52 PM | Link to this

Van,

Liberals are running on very thin ice here. They don’t support the political structure that is running the government (GOP) so they can say anything they want about the people who are running things whether it is harmful or not in wartime.

Democrats and Republicans VOTED for this war in the manner prescribed by the government of the USA. BUT LIBERALS FEEL NO OBLIGATION TO SUPPORT THE WAR. They seem to forget that our troops are fighting the war. There is no way to separate the two. Circular thinking indeed. It is cut’n’run thinking by Democrats.

I am sure the terrorists think this is really funny. Troops not connected to the government of the country that sent them. Whooopeee!! That’s a good one. Only it isn’t funny.

By Aquagirl

October 19, 2006 05:53 PM | Link to this

Sorry, Aquaman, I am forbidden by Dusty and others for praying for your son. They have a lock on what’s good and proper for him, ahead of his father or anyone else. Family values, anyone?

Really, I feel for your son. And everyone else stuck in this conflict, I have a terrible feeling they’ll end up hearing the same truth about this war as we heard about Viet Nam…In the end, everyone knew it was over, but they kept troops in there to save face, or whatever.

There’s a special warm place in the afterlife for those who are charged with commanding soldiers, and sacrifice them for nothing but politics.

Oh, and the hour grows late…Dusty, anyone want to answer the point about all the conservatives questioning conflicts before this one? Anyone? Anyone?

Bueller?

By Markus

October 19, 2006 05:54 PM | Link to this

Aquanut-

“Your offendedness is breaking my heart, Markus.”

I think you misunderstood what I was insinuating. I wasn’t offended at all. I just consider an attitude like that the absolute green light to defend myself, that’s all, and lethally if necessary.

By Aunt Bea

October 19, 2006 05:56 PM | Link to this

The 300 millionth baby born in the USA was actually estimated electronically by DIEBOLD CORP., who reported this: “The 300 millionth Republican was born on Nov. 17, 2006 at 7:45 am EST”.

I dont see a problem this November do you?

By Markus

October 19, 2006 05:59 PM | Link to this

Ok all ignoramus Americans (that means you, liberals), raise your hands if you believe the Jackass Party will be able to support all of their Stalinist social programs and wealth wealth redistribution by just punishing the top 10% of federal income tax payers…

By Aunt Bea

October 19, 2006 05:59 PM | Link to this

THis just in: The 300 millionth naturalist to be eaten by alligators, bears, lions, or hyenas was just devoured today at 5:02 EST.

By Dusty

October 19, 2006 06:00 PM | Link to this

Aquaman,

What is the question? I thought that was just a liberal rant. It wasn’t?

By Aquagirl

October 19, 2006 06:01 PM | Link to this

Gee, Markus, you’re afraid of some cut-and-run radical liberals? I thought we were all wussies who couldn’t whip cream, and wouldn’t know how to fight if Osama carjacked us at the QT.

And please, wait to clean the guns until after the board closes. We don’t need any accidents.

By Aquaman

October 19, 2006 06:02 PM | Link to this

Dusty,

Why not stop talking altogether until you answer the damn question.

Your silence makes you look ignorant.

By Markus

October 19, 2006 06:21 PM | Link to this

Aquanut-

No, don’t flatter yourselves. Kicking someone in the groin is about all you are capable of. Doing so would render me on the ground. If being a con is my only offense to you warranting that, then I’ll protect my “package” and my ideology with all means necessary. I don’t start fights, but I’ll damn well end them.

By Jackie

October 24, 2006 02:57 PM | Link to this

Chatty Abramoff Gets an FBI Desk Jack Abramoff, the lobbying scandal figure, has become such a chatty rat that probe insiders say he’s been given a desk to work at in the FBI. We’re told he spends up to four hours a day detailing his shady business to agents eager to nail more congressmen in the scandal. And when cooperative witnesses spend that much time inside, they get a desk. As a result of his help in the ever expanding investigation, we hear that the Feds hope to keep him in a nearby prison after he’s sentenced on his conspiracy admission. Many more R’s expected to fall!