Home > Thinking Right > Archives > 2006 > October > 25 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USMore troops for Iraq?
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
The top commander of American forces in Iraq, Gen. George Casey, said Tuesday that he may call for more troops to quell violence in the Baghdad area. He expressed, too, a belief that Iraqi forces would be ready to take over security responsibilities by late next year or early in 2008.
While it is clearly disheartening that Iraqi security forces have not been up to the task in Baghdad, changing a military culture, like changing the culture of any population or institution, occurs slowly. Securing Baghdad is essential and if more troops are required to give the Iraqis more time to professionalize their army, troops most assuredly should be provided. On troop levels, I believe it to be true that the U.S. had sufficient forces to win the war and agree too that in planning for the war, the defense strategy of not thinking in terms of manning an occupation army was the correct one. The message, always, should have been: defeat Saddam, stabilize the country and give an elected government the opportunity to function, and then come home. Don’t plan to stay for the long haul. Having said that, though, overwhelming force is required for specific battles and Casey should have access to troops when they’re required for a short-duration situation. That may involving moving troops within country, holding troops over, or getting reinforcements from elsewhere.
It makes sense, too, to remind Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki that while the U.S. will not abandon Iraq or his government, our stay is not entirely open-ended. No timetables for withdrawal, but the clock is running and it is imperative for Iraqi leaders to resolve their differences so that they can professionalize their security forces to police the militias.
Comments
By Brian Curtis
October 25, 2006 08:07 AM | Link to this
Well, General Casey’s been a font of reliable, objective information so far, so I have NO reason to doubt his findings.
After all, he’s a soldier, so he knows best. Just like Kevin Tillman.
By Mid-South Philosopher
October 25, 2006 08:20 AM | Link to this
Good morning, Jim,
While I agree that Rumsfeld’s strategy for winning the initial conflict, (i.e, defeating the Iraqi Army) was the correct one, the notion that the “occupation” has been anything other than a gross failure is fantasy. We now have troops returning to Iraq for their “third” tour of duty!
It all boils down to the fact that the members of the Bush Administration, who are dealing with this, must have NOT had any world history courses above thoses offered in the 10th grade of high school. Unfortunaltely, I don’t see any other option now, so, likely we will increase our troops and will be there for until the attack from North Korea.
On an entirely different matter, with respect to Rush Limbaugh’s observation that Michael J. Fox’s performance in a political ad favoring embryonic stem cell research was the result of the latter being off his medication or just doing a good job of acting, I only have this to say. While Fox’s politics is not my own, I have had some experience with Parkinson’s disease in my family. It is not pleasant, especially if one cannot afford the high priced medical care to which Fox, no doubt, has access. On the other hand, how can we tell when the pompous hypocrite, Limbaugh, is “off” his medication!
By jbmlaw
October 25, 2006 08:23 AM | Link to this
Good morning, all. Perhaps I am out of sync with reality, but I think the solution to Iraq is not to send signals that we are pulling out as soon as feasible, but rather to suggest we will be there on a scale and time comparable to our post-Nazi presence in Germany. Rather than give some hope to the killers that they may again have free rein in Iraq, we need to make them think this is going to be harder than they think. It would not matter whether we actually station forces there forever (as in Germany – why are we still there?), it is only important that we give the impression that our presence may be nearly permanent.
By Jim's a Distractor
October 25, 2006 08:30 AM | Link to this
Mid-South,
I heard part of that Rush show yesterday while walking to the store, and what I’m interested in is this: what plan or piece of legislation is it that he referred to when saying that the “left” wants to kill old people because they’re inconvenient? I’m not familiar with that.
And per Jim’s topic today, it’s such a shame that Clinton botched all this Iraq stuff up. If only the GOP had been in charge, being that they’re so good with wars and such.
By Jim Wooten
October 25, 2006 08:33 AM | Link to this
Morning all. Later in the week, I get a chance to interview Condoleezza Rice for 30 minutes. If you have any pressing questions, other than whether she’ll be a candidate for president in 2008, which she’s answered repeatedly, let me know. I may pick two or three from the blog, record the answers and report back.
By Brian Curtis
October 25, 2006 08:38 AM | Link to this
Here’s question: How would she describe the difference between being Secretary of War (oops, I mean Defense) and now being Secretary of State?
That’s assuming she’s aware that there IS a difference, of course.
By Mid-South Philosopher
October 25, 2006 08:47 AM | Link to this
Further to my 8:20 A.M. post:
The way to have handled the “occupation” in Iraq would have been to have had a “Allied Proconsul” (perhaps a British or an Australian leader as an American would likely have been perceived as a “dictator”) for a more extended time. The borders could have been secured, the infrastructure could have been rebuilt, and the economic structure could have been repaired. Only now, under that scenario would “elections” ahve been happening. We moved “too” quickly to establish a national Iraqi government. It took Doug MacArthur over five and one-half years to rehabilitate the Japanese.
Americans just do not grasp the intricacies of the Eastern mind.
By Van
October 25, 2006 08:54 AM | Link to this
Brian Curtis,
Condi was National Security Advisor before Secratary of State, she was never Secratary of Defense. Or do all conservative politicans look alike to you?
By GodHatesTrash
October 25, 2006 08:55 AM | Link to this
Stumpbroke redneck trash don’t grasp the intracacies of anything.
By Political Foreskin
October 25, 2006 08:57 AM | Link to this
What can the Iraqi Police/Army do that US troops cant do in Baghdad?
We are looking at a 30 years war here.
I spotted this impending draft three years ago, because I knew that BP Oil would have to secure the pipelines eventually. We’re there. Expect a draft by spring, and expect talk of a draft to hit the round tables within days after the election. Till then, SHHHH! (dont say the D word).
One thing that astonishes me, is in the videos of the assassination of US troops that CNN despicably aired. Did anyone notice what a bustling city Baghdad is? People are driving around living their lives. It’s like the war is just slowing down traffic a bit, but everything else is fine. The “civil war” may just go away, because it’s not getting the attention you think a civil war would get and people just drive by.
A drive-by civil war? We only have drive-by shootings. That’s not fair. I’d like to get me one of them there drive-by civil wars. They must have drive-in ammo dumps. A waitress in a burqa skates out to your parked car with a tray of grenades, AK-47 bullets, and a menu of the different demographic virgins available in the afterlife. The waitress points to the pictures: “What you like today?” (Yes, I’d like blondes with blue eyes, and a box of dum dum shells, please). “You like big noses, black mascara, and lots of facial hair?” (no, I like blonds with blue eyes). “Oh! We got just what you looking for: all kind of types… Big nose, black mascara, and facial hair! See here? Big nose…..facial hair…..black mascara….” (Uh, no, I want blue eyes and blonde hair, thank you). “Ohhh! You tough customer! Look here…we got something special just for you….big nose….facial hair……black mascara…..”
One more thing. If this war does end in peace and the rival factions sit down and peacefully share the country and it’s oil, I promise that I will eat the stillborn cheeklint from the rear end of a gay suma wrestler. (live on Utube) That’s a guarantee. You may sue me in civil court if I welch on this one.
By Jim's a Distractor
October 25, 2006 08:57 AM | Link to this
Hi Jim,
This is fun!
Ask her if she’s comfortable with the US being involved in nation-building to the extent that we currently are. And if so, take the Sudan…could we reshape it in our image if we wanted to?
Or…
Ask her if the current administration ever really expected to be able to manage the myriad of social, religious and violent variables that present themselves when taking over a fundamentalist state used to being ruled by a dictatorship. Is there a handbook on that, and if so did we read it?
By Mid-South Philosopher
October 25, 2006 09:04 AM | Link to this
Jim,
When you interview Secretary Rice you will be dealing with one of the more intellectually gifted members of the Bush Administration. She is dreadfully loyal to “Georgie,” so you will not get anything critical about him out of her. That being said, I would like for you to explore the notion of “post” Bush diplomacy. Does she have any innovative ideas about how to combat the ideology of Islamist Fanaticism”? Is there a danger that in combating Islamist Fanaticism, we may instill in our children and grandchildren a “Western” fanaticism (Christian or otherwise)? What does she see for the long term for improving our perception by Latin American nations? Can we develop a 21st Century “good neighbor” policy and image?
She is too smart to be President, but she can be a mover and shaker for years to come.
By Political Foreskin
October 25, 2006 09:11 AM | Link to this
Ask her if our media (TV. Movies. Cartoons), stereotyped Muslims (Ali Baba and the 40 Thieves, Aladin)) as unfairly as they stereotyped blacks in this country.
By Van
October 25, 2006 09:13 AM | Link to this
Mid-South Philosopher,
I agree, with you on this. We have become use to solving things too quickly and not taking the tried and true approach.
On the other hand, Japan was a destroyed country, beaten and surrendered to the US.
Iraq has not been beatened down to next to nothing. They have not been literally destroyed.
It might take the Iraqi’s a little longer to grasp what is happening.
By DebbieDoRight
October 25, 2006 09:13 AM | Link to this
jbmlaw: We’re still in Germany because of the treaty we signed to end the war. Since Germany was the aggressor in two world wars back to back, they, according to our treaty will always be “occipied”.
Jim Wooten: A question for Condoleeza? How about why the flip flop on Iraq before 9/11? Before 9/11 all the GOP upper echeleon stated continuously and emphatically, (on television no less), that the sanctions against Saddam were working as well as the vigorous chemical inspection policies in place by NATO and that he was unable to wage war with anyone because of those reasons; he was in effect, null and void. Then after 9/11 viola! Everything changed — now he’s not only an instigating force behind terrorism, (although 95% of the hijackers were of Suadi descent), he also had WMD’s! With the advent of television and real time reporting, how did they, Presidential Cabinet, think they were going to get away with that sort of hat trick? (Since I know you’ll NEVER ask her that question, too much REAL journalism for you, here’s another one).
Question for Condeleeza: Who does her hair?
By CJ
October 25, 2006 09:19 AM | Link to this
Jim,
Will you ask Secretary Rice how much longer it’ll take President Bush to figure out that the six party talks aren’t working with North Korea?
Will you ask her if she realizes that the sanctions just passed by the U.N. aren’t going to work with N. Korea? These sanctions were an important step and an important statement, but by themselves, they won’t work.
Will you ask her when the Bush administration is going to swallow their pride and realize that she and the President are in over their heads on North Korea? (as they are on Iraq and the Palestinian issue).
Will you ask her to bring in some outside professionals on the Korean issue? I’m thinking of James Baker, Bill Richardson, Dick Perry, Jimmy Carter, President Clinton, Madeline Albright and Bush 41 as possibilities. Not ideologues. Pragmatists.
Will you ask her when the national security team is going to realize that Henry Kissinger and Newt Gingrich don’t know what the hell they’re talking about and stop listening to their advice?
By Political Foreskin
October 25, 2006 09:20 AM | Link to this
Ask her what she thinks of the terrorist groups like the KKK and the White Aryan Supremacists that live openly right here in the good ole USA.
Ask her if maybe Uncle Sam should bring justice to it’s own damn country before it spreads the beneficient wealth of democracy to the desert sands of Iraq?
Ask her if she knows anyone in her own family who was called the N word? or discriminated against for a job promotion. Or forced to leave a restaurant because some YAHOOS were in there stinking the place up?
Ask her what she thinks of white bread neo-cons and their theo-political shenanigans?
Ask her if she thinks that you, Jim Wooten, are a cracker.
Lets get real here. We are in the midst of a catastrophe that is cascading through our entire political spectrum and redefining the boundaries between what is domestic policy and what is foreign policy. As Secretary of State, how much allegience to domestic matters can she pledge when her attention is so focused on the world and their problems and their needs.
Or ask her if she watches Oprah…your call.
By Voice of Reason
October 25, 2006 09:21 AM | Link to this
I don’t know who this DebbieDoRight chick is, but I dig her style.
By Political Foreskin
October 25, 2006 09:22 AM | Link to this
Boxers or Briefs?
By Southern Democrat
October 25, 2006 09:28 AM | Link to this
Jim,
Congrats on landing the interview! I would love to ask Secretary Rice if she thinks there is any linkage between a perceived reduction in U.S. soft power after the Iraq invasion and the recent rash actions of both Kim Jong Il and President Putin of Russia? Also, what is our current policy stance towards Russian accession to the WTO?
Finally, does she think that increasing free trade with Latin America will help our interests there and isolate dictators like Chavez and Morales or is more required to help stabilize the region?
By Brian Curtis
October 25, 2006 09:34 AM | Link to this
Van: I never said she was. I asked if she knew there was a difference.
By Southern Democrat
October 25, 2006 09:38 AM | Link to this
Jbmlaw,
I think that your 1945 Germany + Marshall Plan analogy is an apt one, but for Afghanistan and not Iraq. The resurgence of the Taliban in Afghanistan is a very serious problem (in addition to the staggering amount of opiates being produced) and is potentially undoing the progress we made from 2001 onward. We need to (along with NATO) recommit ourselves to stabilizing Afghanistan (which was, incidentally, the largest training ground for terrorists).
Your analogy is not as apt for Iraq, in my opinion. Of course our initial military strategy was correct, the facts demonstrate that. What the facts also demonstrate, however, is a lack of hard intelligence and prescient strategy outlining exactly how Iraq would transition from an autocracy ruling over warring ethnic factions to a functioning representative democracy. It is the combination of these failures on the policy level that, in my opinion, are inexcusable and have cost hundreds of thousands of lives (American and Iraqi).
One other point to consider, too, for my conservative colleagues who extoll the virtue of bringing democracy to Afghanistan and Iraq: read their constitutions / foundation documents. They are both explicitly grounded in Islam and it is still against the law in Afghanistan to convert to Christianity. Freedom?
Let’s hand over control to the Iraqis and renew our commitment to Afghanistan.
By Van
October 25, 2006 09:38 AM | Link to this
CJ,
Just a question for you.
Would North Koreas listen better to its neighbors who have a vested interest or someone on the other side of the world?
Would North Korea listen to China, Japan, South Korea, Russia and the US or just the US by itself?
By Jim's a Distractor
October 25, 2006 09:42 AM | Link to this
Foreskin,
Ha!
How about “Thongs or Bloomers?”
By JK
October 25, 2006 09:50 AM | Link to this
Mr. Wooten, please remind Sec. Rice that Wolfowitz said the oil pumping capacity of Iraq is 2 million barrels a day. Then ask her who EXACTLY is operating and monitoring the pumps and pipelines, and where the pipes go, and who gets the oil on the other end, and where do they send it, and what kind of money they’re making off it, and why isn’t that money being used to reimburse the American taxpayers like we were told, and why are our troops making meager pay to stand guard over highly-paid contractors who also benefit receive our tax dollars, but who cannot produce audit trails or receipts for the money they suck from our treasury, and by the way, WHO EXACTLY IS PUMPING, PIPING, SELLING, AND MONITORING THE OIL FLOW, and where does all that money go? Thanks!
By ed lorenzo
October 25, 2006 09:52 AM | Link to this
INTERVIEW WITH MADAME SECRETAIRE
“Good morning Madame Secretary General! You look tres chic!”
Wrapped in a Carolina Herrera cape with a Hermé scarf and a printed silk Modelaire sheath she looked stunning. Clearly in a sunny disposition, she smiled and said:
“Bon jour, journaliste avec la conviction de l’esprit n’entraine pas toujours celle Coeur!”
I immediately regretted the French word I used in greeting her. Her French is impeccable while mine remains at the “carte du jour” level. I was impressed by her new look; it was a marked contrast with her Security Council wardrobe of recent times.
“I am not going to ask you what you have been doing. You have replaced the movie and jet set stars in the news. All for the collective good, I trust”
“Absolutely, darling. These days you have to be on your toes not to miss any one of those fabulous shows in Montenapoleone, rue Saint Honoré, Paseo de Gracia, the Banhoffstrasse or Regent Street. Besides, the new designers are a heavenly lot and are coming out with great new leather creations, silk combinations that even the Italians envy and the cutest hats!”
It was nice to hear Condi with a new script. Her previous ones were tiring pronouncements probably penned by old Karl. Except that this time little mention was made of the major international concerns she was supposed to be involved in. I said so.
“Darling” she said in her best Lauren Bacall imitation “I was telling dear Claire of the Dior gang, you know, at the cocktail party given by Prince Abensperg von Traun in the Saint Moritz Chalet of the Iron Greek Panayiotis that the only way to solve the world’ s problems is if there are more charity galas, balls, fashion shows, polo tournaments and safaris to the Matto Grosso. So much money could be collected that half the poor countries would start their own events!”
“How about Iraq? North Korea? The other countries in the latest axis of evil?
“Rummie just told me that Dick said that the insurgents are in their last throes. So, in a couple of months we will organize the Baghdad Film Festival, a Fashion Show and a great Camel Barbecue. John Bolton at the UN will take care of the other evil ones. And as far as natural disasters like hurricanes is concerned, Michael Chertoff is now drawing plans to help the poor at the next hurricane which, according to the CIA will take place in 25 years!”
Somehow, I liked the old Condie much better.
By Van
October 25, 2006 09:53 AM | Link to this
Brian Curtis,
Then you question was faulty -
“…the difference between being Secretary of War (oops, I mean Defense) and now being Secretary of State?”
I thought you were smarter than to make that obvious an error.
By time for the truth
October 25, 2006 09:56 AM | Link to this
If the General didn’t opine somewhat positively about Iraqis assuming FULL responsibility for their own security in a year or so the leftist cut and runners would be screeching that he has NO idea when this might/will occur. The truth is NO ONE actually knows for sure - thus for purely cynical political reasons the leftist scum are trying (still somewhat preemptively) to precipitate a withdrawal without much regard for actual conditions on the ground. Its clearly a sensitive (and therefore way beyond liberals) balancing act between ensuring the Iraqis dont drag this out and merely dupe the US and the UK et al into absorbing casualties unnecessarily whilst ensuring the Iraqis are actually ready to do this and are not overrun by mohammedan fascists and murderous mohammedan militias.
It also requires that the Iraqis grow a collective pair and actually DIRECTLY confront the killers - most of whom are well known to their govt. I saw a US colonel on the telly last night saying that he’d been ordered not to locally militarily confront a certain militia - whatever they do. This kind of mohammedan political interferemce is pathetic and only prolongs the mohammedan fascist murdering.
Until the pussyfooting around for cultural and political reasons ceases Iraq will not change.
Most Iraqis at least (locally) are happy enough with the allied presence - it still means and certainly has meant reconstruction projects, improved localised emergency medical care for folks and all the other unreported (by pinko cut and runners) benefits that liberating forces bring with them.
The pathetic ignorant comments about Senor Limbaugh are beneath contempt. Fox states in his book that before making important speches or ads he deliberately goes off his meds to ensure he cuts as pathetic and sympathy inducing a figure as possible … which is the typical liberal way of doing things … the utterly dishonest way. Rush actually read out this Fox quote before he made his astute observations about Fox’s penchant for the moveon.org style of campaigning. Still the pinko scum ignore that fact and twist what what was said!!
Please ask Ms Rice why she always allows the liberal and black racebaiting about the purely incidental fact of her being black to go unanswered. Contrast this with the pathetic, unremitting liberal/black shrill hypocrisy when occasionally a GOP type makes a remark that liberals/blacks always noisily deem “racist” even when its just legitimate criticism.
Also ask her why she doesn’t speak out against the smug idiocoy of leftist morons in the senate (too many to list here) who keep witlessly parotting the need to “talk” to everyone … there was years of “talking” about Iraq at the UN and nothing came of it except the biggest ever corruption/fraud scandal in the world.
The klinton/karter combo “talked” to N Korea and look how eefective they were back then. Nations, especially rogue nations do whatever they want to, or are allowed to - until somebody STOPS THEM!! And stopping them is invariably not achieved by weak appeasing lefties “talking” to them. The lefties after all this time are still gutlessly hiding behind the UN - which is anti-American, worthless and useless. Ask Ms Rice about that please!!
By brother devildog
October 25, 2006 09:57 AM | Link to this
I was in the marine corp for 6 years and went to the first gulf war. I think we should pull out of iraq. I do believe that we will never turn iraq around or establish a successful iraq army and government. My fellow service members are being killed and permanetly disabled over politics. I still never will understand why we didnt go after osama bin ladin first. Oh thats right bush jr. had a personnal mission for his father bush sr. Ask condolizza rice this: Why do service members recieve such low pay and wages? Dont they and their families deserve a higher pay? After all they are dying daily and getting disabled every day. They deserve alot better of a pay plan if the United States wants to continue to be the big bad war loving country. Also get some real chaplains on the battle field, god and jesus need to be a general in this war and the service members need a personnal relationship with the almighty jesus christ so when they do get blown up, their family will know that they have gone to a better place. We need a revival on the battle field.
By Simply Reasonable
October 25, 2006 10:06 AM | Link to this
What has invading Iraq accomplished? Saddom is out of power, but he killed fewer Iraqi people per day than are currently being killed in Iraq; American troops are on the ground in an Arab country, giving us a foothold, but we are now averaging four dead americans per day; Iraq is still exporting oil, but they are producing less oil now than prior to the invasion; There are fewer if any suicide bombing in israel than when saddom was paying 20,000 dollars to the families of successful bombers, but there are many more suicide bombing in Iraq; the arab world hated america and its policies prior to the invasion, now they hate and dispise america and are trying to kill our troops everywhere. So now the question: Will more american troops improve the situation in Iraq? In my opinion, none of the above will improve, but many will get worse with more american targets on the ground, and more opportunity for atrocities by our troops. So who is the winner is this invasion: Not America, Not Iraq, the only possible winner is Israel with fewer Saddom paid suicide bombers. Fewer Israeli’s are being killed, but far more americans and Iraqi’s are dying.
By getalife
October 25, 2006 10:07 AM | Link to this
Iraq was lost when Iraq allied with Iran. The rest is a waste of lives and money. We should have never invaded Iraq, stayed and finished the job in Afghanistan to get the ones responsible for 9/11.
We should be talking about accountability for Iraq and get rid of these people in government and the military. When you fail miserably at your job you get fired.
By JK
October 25, 2006 10:17 AM | Link to this
What has invading Iraq accomplished?
If we had the answers to my questions at 9:50, we might have the answer to your question, not only “what” but “for whom.” Nothing goes on for 3 and a half years with no end in sight unless there’s a nice profit in it for somebody. Doesn’t happen.
By Dusty
October 25, 2006 10:29 AM | Link to this
Jim,
Could you ask Sec. Rice about our current status with Venezuela? Are we going to use the Cuba policy of disconnection? How are American oil companies going to continue to deal with an apparently communistic government and keep the oil flowing?
By Talon News
October 25, 2006 10:41 AM | Link to this
Jim, congrats on your Condi interview, you will really like her. One word of advice, don’t mention the leather outfit, she’s embarrassed about it. She normally doesn’t wear such things. She did it for me, Condi was my guest at a private social event.
Anyway, keep giving those Libby Libs Hell!
BTW, if I were asking the questions I’d ask, “What is an in-law? – you’ve said you are going to reach out to these people, – how are you going to work with people who seem to have divorced themselves from reality?”
Say hi to Con for me.
Jeff…O~O
By Realist
October 25, 2006 10:41 AM | Link to this
Jim, To elaborate on JK’s conspiratorial questions of Rice, Id also ask has she actually seen the alien bodies and space ships that the government hides in gaurded warehouses, and if she has seen the “real” Kennedy assasination report implicating the CIA as the true killers. Oh, and the crop circles thing.
Thanks.
By getalife
October 25, 2006 10:42 AM | Link to this
Jim,
Please ask the same question Wallace asked Clinton to prove Clinton wrong.
CLINTON: But at least I tried. That’s the difference in me and some, including all the right-wingers who are attacking me now. They ridiculed me for trying. They had eight months to try. They did not try. I tried.
So I tried and failed. When I failed, I left a comprehensive anti-terror strategy and the best guy in the country, Dick Clarke, who got demoted.
So you did Fox’s bidding on this show. You did your nice little conservative hit job on me. What I want to know is…
WALLACE: Well, wait a minute, sir.
CLINTON: No, wait. No, no…
WALLACE: I want to ask a question. You don’t think that’s a legitimate question?
CLINTON: It was a perfectly legitimate question, but I want to know how many people in the Bush administration you asked this question of.
I want to know how many people in the Bush administration you asked, Why didn’t you do anything about the Cole?
I want to know how many you asked, Why did you fire Dick Clarke?
I want to know how many people you asked…
WALLACE: We asked — we asked…
CLINTON: I don’t…
WALLACE: Do you ever watch Fox News Sunday, sir?
CLINTON: I don’t believe you asked them that.
WALLACE: We ask plenty of questions of…
CLINTON: You didn’t ask that, did you? Tell the truth, Chris.
WALLACE: About the USS Cole?
CLINTON: Tell the truth, Chris.
WALLACE: With Iraq and Afghanistan, there’s plenty of stuff to ask.
CLINTON: Did you ever ask that?
Ask her why they did nothing to stop 9/11 Jim.
By getalife
October 25, 2006 10:44 AM | Link to this
Ask her the big question Jim.
Why did we invade Iraq?
By getalife
October 25, 2006 10:48 AM | Link to this
Ask her why we continue to stay in Iraq after they allied with Iran?
Ask her when will there be accountability for Iraq?
Ask her where the missing billions went in Iraq?
Ask her if it is worth the losses in Iraq?
Ask her to tell the truth because we are sick of the lies.
By CJ
October 25, 2006 10:50 AM | Link to this
Southern Democrat @9:28 - A minor correction, if you please. Chavez and Morales were both elected in free and fair elections. Whether or not we like their policies, they’re not dictators.
Van @9:38 - The answer to your first question is someone on the other side of the world. The answer to your second question is the U.S. by itself.
Direct talks between North Korea and the U.S. are unavoidable; it will happen. The longer we put it off, the more dangerous North Korea becomes.
The six-party talks, on the other hand, are actually a ruse to make us think that the Bush Administration is actually doing something. You fell for it. These talks haven’t worked, they’re not going to work, and they were never expected to work.
By JK
October 25, 2006 10:53 AM | Link to this
Mister Realist, I’ve missed you. How nice that you return and put me in my place. {;->
By DebbieDoRight
October 25, 2006 10:55 AM | Link to this
Time For Truth:Please ask Ms Rice why she always allows the liberal and black racebaiting about the purely incidental fact of her being black to go unanswered. Contrast this with the pathetic, unremitting liberal/black shrill hypocrisy when occasionally a GOP type makes a remark that liberals/blacks always noisily deem “racist” even when its just legitimate criticism.
Huh? Dang Truth, do you like ANYBODY??
Dusty:How are American oil companies going to continue to deal with an apparently communistic government and keep the oil flowing?
Judging by history, Business men can make a deal with the devil if they have to. As long as they get a profit out of it.
By getalife
October 25, 2006 11:02 AM | Link to this
Ask her what will we do when the Taliban get Pakistan’s nukes?
Ask her what we will do to stop the Taliban comeback since they have a safe haven in Pakistan?
Ask her when we will talk directly to North Korea and Iran about their nukes?
Ask her if the “axis of evil” threats have given Iran and North Korea a reason to have nukes?
My guess is you will ask Jeff Gannon type questions and lob a few softball questions to Condi.
By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I
October 25, 2006 11:04 AM | Link to this
Greetings, rednecks and decent folk, it is I, the Pope. Back from my adventures in AZ, Vegas, and upstate NY for a funeral and a family reunion, alas, I am back in Georgia, where the goobernatorial contest is between the Big Guy and a pig of a grown man named Sonny.
Greetings and salutations to the Order of the Yellow Stripe, the cowardly chickenhawks too scared to fight for their primitive beliefs, to the filthy stumpbroke violent drunken incestuous mother and father-rapers, sister and brother-rapers and child molesters that make up the vast majority of the “modern” GOP voters.
You people sicken me with your mantras of hate and fear. Animals.
Lord, deliver from this plague of stupidity and fear, from the hatemongers, the fearmongers, the whoremongers and child molesters that infest our country’s leadership, the followers of the Devil Dumbya. Send him and them to Hell where they belong, in Jesus’s Holy Name we pray. Amen.
By JW
October 25, 2006 11:06 AM | Link to this
In light of your blind support for an utterly incompetent administration, the notion that you would ask her a “tough” question is laughable. You are not a journalist. Why waste your breath with a Hannity-esque a* kissing “interview”?
By getalife
October 25, 2006 11:10 AM | Link to this
Dusty,
China is a communist country. We are in major debt and buy billions of their goods. The gop loves China so your question is hypocritical.
By Richard
October 25, 2006 11:13 AM | Link to this
Did any of you see the news report last night?
Jim Wooten was given a DWHA by the cops.
If you don’t know what a DWHA is, it’s Driving While your Head’s up your @ss.
By War Whore for Bush
October 25, 2006 11:13 AM | Link to this
Please, Mr. Wooten, tell Ms. Rice to keep up the good fight - my Halliburton stock is doing very well. I just wash the blood off my money and it spends the same as always.
Can’t wait for the October surprise - what will Dubya let them blow up next?
By getalife
October 25, 2006 11:15 AM | Link to this
Jim,
Ask Condi if the invasion of Iraq and Lebanon has emboldened the enemy and increased recruits for terrorism?
By Dusty
October 25, 2006 11:16 AM | Link to this
Well, Debbie,
You may be right but I don’t see us dealing with Cuba. And I see some of the local “devils” going to jail, such as Skilling and others.
Business that doesn’t make a profit isn’t around very long. Maybe Sec. Rice can give us some ideas about keeping the oil flowing from Venezuela without making deals with the devilish one.
I don’t know “how”. That’s why I would ask Sec. Rice.
By Chazman
October 25, 2006 11:19 AM | Link to this
Dusty,
OK…Let’s try this one more time.
I mistakenly attributed the quote “You can support the troops without supporting the President” to Trent Lott. It was actually Tom Delay.
Now the question is, do you agree with Tom Delay or not? Was he wrong when he said this? It’s a simple yes or no answer.
Your response yesterday:
Chazman,
Did you ask me a question? I just read that you asked me a question about supporting what Trent Lott stated.
Trent Lott is no longer in politics and has no bearing on what I think. Now if your father has discontent with the Iraq War that’s his business. I just hope he isn’t running around Crawford,TX carrying protest signs and telling the world the USA is one big hunk of trouble. Then go to communist Chavez in Venezuela and give him a big kiss for smearing the USA. Yes, Chazman, I do not consider that *Support for the Troops. Do you?
First of all, Trent Lott is still in politics. He is a current Senator from Mississippi. I noticed how you dodged the answer by stating since he is no longer in politics, he has no bearing on what you think. That wasn’t the question. The question was do you agree with what Delay said when Bill Clinton was in office. Do You?
And talk about classic spin. You go from me stating my father, a former POW, disagreeing with Iraq policy, to this: I just hope he isn’t running around Crawford,TX carrying protest signs and telling the world the USA is one big hunk of trouble. Then go to communist Chavez in Venezuela and give him a big kiss for smearing the USA.
That’s pathetic. Let me just say, no, my father is not carrying signs in Crawford, Texas. Not everyone who disagrees with the administration with being in Iraq, or the many reasons we were given for being there, goes around carrying signes in Crawford.
Just answer the question Dusty. Do you agree with the Delay statement “You can support the troops without supporting the president.” Yes or No. It’s not that hard. If you don’t agree with what Tom Delay said during Clinton’s presidency, just say so. Still waiting on the answer…….
By Rod
October 25, 2006 11:20 AM | Link to this
Hold on - HOld on
Does anyone in here honestly believe that Jim’s going to ask Secretary Rice a real question? One with bite? One that matters?
I’ve seen his notes, these are the questions he’s planning:
1) What’s that lovely perfume you’re wearing?
2) Do you regret not trying to get the NFL Commish’s job?
3) Do you have any additional boasting lies about Bush’s job performance you’d like me to expound on in my column?
By @@
October 25, 2006 11:21 AM | Link to this
Jim: I’d love for you to ask Secretary Rice why she doesn’t address the public more often on the Transformational Diplomacy that Colin Powell initiated, and that she and President Bush are carrying forward.
It certainly speaks to the global issues facing us in the 21st century.
There’s no place to hide anymore, it’s a small world on a global scale.
By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I
October 25, 2006 11:21 AM | Link to this
Mr. Wooten is one of the last holdovers from the Atlanta Urinal, the afternoon “conservative” paper that merged with the Constitution. He’s a longtime bloviator for redneck and kkkonservative causes. Of course, when Massuh Jim started for the Urinal, it was just after the good old days when a nice white man like hisself would not have sat down with a colored woman like Condie, lessen it was for some miscegenation and horizontal integration…
Not holding my breath for anything of substance from this interview…
By Th
October 25, 2006 11:28 AM | Link to this
The idea that Maliki will disarm the militias is divorced from reality. He serves at the pleasure of the leaders of the two main Shiite militias, Sadr and Hakim, and the leaders of the Kurdish armies, Talabani and Barzani. The Iraqi army is made up of these militias. Talabani and Barzani have made their peace with each other for now, but Sadr and Hakim are in a death struggle to see who gets to run Iraq. Staying in Iraq is only putting off the inevitable. Five years after we leave, the situation will be the same whether we stay one more year or ten more years. Yugoslavia is the best example I can think of for what comes next. The insurgents are not so much fighting us as trying to get us out of their way.
Do not be fooled by street scenes in Iraq. I had a physics prof in college who grew up in Dresden during WWII. He showed us a photo of his friends and himself playing soccer in a dirt lot while firemen were putting out the fires in the buildings in the background that were bombed the night before. His stories of life then were clear; life goes on.
By Brian Curtis
October 25, 2006 11:30 AM | Link to this
Chazman: Dusty ducked a very similar question from me yesterday: “Is it the responsibility of Americans to do nothing when the government sends troops on a foolish, illegal, and unnecessary mission?”
Dusty replied by insisting that Iraq didn’t qualify… but you’ll note that she didn’t actually answer the question.
I’m doubtful that she can, but then she’s left with the assumption that NO war, NO military intervention, under ANY circumstances, is EVER illegitimate. And I don’t think anyone will buy that.
By getalife
October 25, 2006 11:30 AM | Link to this
Ask her if Barney still wants to stay the course.
By Wag the Mutt's Tail
October 25, 2006 11:36 AM | Link to this
Ask Condi if Bush plans to attack Iran just prior to the election, hoping for a wave of patriotic fervor to retain the house. Ask Condi if a sneak attack on an american ship will be staged to justify an american politically motivated attack on a soverign government.
By Kathy Bates
October 25, 2006 11:37 AM | Link to this
Please Ms Rice how it feels to be a political whore for the GOP.
By Th
October 25, 2006 11:37 AM | Link to this
Don’t be fooled into thinking that the Bush administration is seriously considering altering course in Iraq. They know people have lost all faith in their conduct of the war and all this carrying on is just a smoke screen that allows the people who should know better to pretend that Bush has a handle on the situation and will make the right changes. This is all about the elections and then no changes will be made. It’s still, “stay the course.”
By Cletus Snow
October 25, 2006 11:38 AM | Link to this
Yes we need a lot more troops and a lot more force to bring this problem to a cobclusion asap
By getalife
October 25, 2006 11:42 AM | Link to this
Ask her if there is a civil war in Iraq and what does stay the course mean.
By Draft all the Wooten Males
October 25, 2006 11:44 AM | Link to this
and send them to Iraq, where they will fight until they are dead, dead, dead.
By Akbar
October 25, 2006 11:49 AM | Link to this
The American Empire will be forever broken in the deserts of the Middle East, and in the sea’s off Iran. Allah Akbar!!
By dave
October 25, 2006 11:50 AM | Link to this
Besides the elections, what progress has been made in the security situation in Iraq in the last two years?
By Markus
October 25, 2006 11:50 AM | Link to this
Personally, I don’t give a damn what the jackass left thinks about Iraq or North Korea or Iran. The left b!tches when there “aren’t enough troops” in Iraq out of one side and then b!tches about wanting an immediate pullout from the other side of their two-faced selves. The left b!tches when we Bush uses a 6-nation round table when attempting to deal with North Korea, then b!itches out the other side when Bush “hints” (that the media made up) that he might bomb North Korea. The left b!tches when Bush calls Iran an “Axis of Evil” and says he’s “sabre rattling” out of one side, then says he’s not doing enough to thwart Iran’s nuclear ambitions out of the other side.
No, the way the horseass left has been reacting to everything Bush does/doesn’t do in world affairs, I couldn’t give a damn less what they think about what’s going on in the world right now.
By Buy Danish
October 25, 2006 11:53 AM | Link to this
Jim Wooten,
When you interview Condi - When Ambassador Bremer was in charge of the Provisional Coalition Authority,I would like to know why we didn’t arrest Al Sadr who had been charged with the murder of a Sunni Cleric. Does the White House regret the decision to let him roam free with his Mahdi Army?
The other question that nags at me is why the State Department is still filled with Cold War era Leftists who actively work and conspire in opposition to Bush Administration foreign policy, and among other bad acts, leak secrets to their wives who just happen to be individuals like Dana Priest of the Washington Post - with apparent impunity.
By Pat Clark
October 25, 2006 11:54 AM | Link to this
The proposed Persian Gulf Resolution: An unprovoked attack on an American war ship in the Persian Gulf by Iranian forces has forced America to declare a state of war now exists between Iran and the United States of America. All out warfare has been underway since October 31, 2006, the date of the attack. ~Is this the planned press release by the neocons just prior to the November election?
By Dusty
October 25, 2006 11:57 AM | Link to this
Chazman and Brian,
I’ll answer questions when you stop asking silly ones.
Trent Lott is out of politics because he resigned as Senate Republican Majority leader some time ago and does not plan to run again for office. In other words, he is “out” of political influence.
Trent Lott never did influence my politics one way or the other. Is Nancy Pelosi your guiding light in politics? Be sure you answer now.
Chazman, I said your father’s opinions were his own business. I don’t know why you are making such a big deal over your father’s politics. Don’t you have an opinion of your own?
Brian Curtis, your question is based on a false premise and does not deserve an answer. Our war in Iraq is not a done, lost deal and I support the troops there. If you want an answer to please your anti-war inclinations, ask a liberal. Don’t ask me. I am for the country at this time with no “if’s and buts” and insults about our leaders.
Why don’t you two take up knitting instead of wasting time here?
By getalife
October 25, 2006 12:01 PM | Link to this
BiNazi,
Those are not good little fascist softball questions.
You may be labeled an enemy combatant and end up in Gitmo being tortured.
Good for you.
By Chazman
October 25, 2006 12:05 PM | Link to this
Dusty,
I’m Still waiting on your answer.
By Markus
October 25, 2006 12:05 PM | Link to this
Jackass media panties in wad over Rush’s comments on Michael J. Fox’s ad for the Missouri RAT candidate. Let me get this straight: Rush is on three or four hours a day five days a week, 12 months a year. After all that on-air hot air, the only thing the media can nitpick out is his comment about Fox’s ad as a nice acting job.
Maybe Rush could have used different words, but he has a point: everything about the left is about using a group or cause to get votes. Anyone remember the last time they saw Fox on TV shaking like an old man with Parkinson’s? Me neither.
The RAT party used Fox for the LIE that the Republican incumbent in Missouri would “kill” people by cancelling stem cell research.
Now exactly how in the hell is that any different than the LIE the RAT party used in 2000 that “Black churches would burn” if Bush was elected, or the insinuation that Black people would be dragged behind pickup trucks if Bush was elected?
Now exactly how is that any different than saying old people would be left to die on the streets if Bush were elected?
How exactly is that any different than saying “children will go to bed hungry at night” if Bush were elected? (While they amazingly keep gaining wait every consecutive year)
Perhaps Rush went over the top in his comments, but I don’t think that’s any worse than the RAT party going over the top in their comments… and using a GROUP or CAUSE to project them all.
By getalife
October 25, 2006 12:05 PM | Link to this
Told ya she is ignorant.
By Markus
October 25, 2006 12:08 PM | Link to this
@Akbar-
“The American Empire will be forever broken in the deserts of the Middle East, and in the sea’s off Iran. Allah Akbar!!”
Well may if you pathetic coward islamogoons would fight us man to man instead of hiding behind innocent women and children or blowing yourselves up, you’d have a point.
The problem is you barbaric 6th-Century animals aren’t fighting us. Therefore, you can’t claim any victory, coward.
By CJ
October 25, 2006 12:11 PM | Link to this
Dusty,
You seem to be an expert on the dissention vs. sedition. If I may, I’d like to take advantage of your expertise and ask you a couple of hypothetical questions:
Hypothetically speaking, is it possible to support the troops without supporting the president?
Hypothetically speaking, is it the responsibility of Americans to do nothing when the government sends troops on a foolish, illegal, and unnecessary mission?
I wait patiently for you to enlighten me while continuing with my knitting.
By Realist
October 25, 2006 12:13 PM | Link to this
I think most of you better come up with new questions for Condi. About ten minutes ago the President answered most of your questions, and it came from the horses mouth so to speak.
If Bush pointing at his chest and saying that it all started with HIM, and he was accountable, then I dont know what else will. Getalife, there is your accountability, now stfu about it. He stood up to it like a man instead of trying to cower like demoncrat.
If Bush has done wrong, time and congressional hearings will tell all. In the mean time, the dems should put up a presidnetial candidate who will lead us better than Bush. Cant wait to see who it is, and I almost hope they win. I think Bush will be viewed in history as a strong, successful and forward thinking President in about twenty years from now. We are in uncharted terriroty here. You cant come in with principles and lessoned learned in WWII and Vietnam and apply them to todays war on terror. It wont work. Im eager to see the next guy (or gal) give the oval office a shot. Should be fun to watch.
By Akbar
October 25, 2006 12:15 PM | Link to this
I will fight you man to man anytime Markus, just give me your location.
By Brian Curtis
October 25, 2006 12:18 PM | Link to this
So Dusty… you actually CAN’T answer the question, can you?
Forget Iraq: Invent a totally fictional president and a totally fictional war. Assume THAT war is illegal, foolish, and doomed.
Now, answer (if you can)… what should Americans do about it? Cheer and support it blindly? Shut up and ignore the wasted lives and needless deaths?
Or do you think that no such situation could ever, ever occur, under ANY administration? Because if it can, you need to figure out whether it’s “patriotic” to pretend otherwise.
By Brian Curtis
October 25, 2006 12:19 PM | Link to this
Realist: That’s funny, Bush seems more than eager to apply WW2 and Vietnam-era solutions to the problem of terrorism (i.e., fighting it like a ground war, with soldiers, as if there was a uniformed enemy to shoot at).
And we know THAT doesn’t work.
By Markus
October 25, 2006 12:21 PM | Link to this
“Stomp, stomp, stomp, stomp, stomp, stomp, stomp…”
Here comes the Gestapo Environazis! Last year when Katrina hit, they and their Eichmann lawyers planned on suing US companies for causing the hurricane (via global warming). NOw it appears they are going through with thier plans this year. Gee, I wonder what their excuse is this year since we didn’t have ONE FREAKING HURRICANE hit the shores? I wonder if they have factored in the international no-emmissions control stinkbomb nations like India and China? Nah, probably not.
Liberalism - emotionalizing the way to Utopia
By getalife
October 25, 2006 12:29 PM | Link to this
You are correct Realfake.
W did say he is accountable because he knows he is not on the ballot.
The gop are and people should use the absentee ballots for the paper trail and to hold them accountable.
The house will hold hearings to hold w and the rest accountable.
The world is waiting and I will not STFU until it happens.
By Brian Curtis
October 25, 2006 12:41 PM | Link to this
If liberals are so ‘emotional,’ why is it the Bush administration that hates & fears science so much?
Reality has a liberal bias.
By Blog Dawg
October 25, 2006 12:52 PM | Link to this
Ask Rice: “Boxers or Briefs”?
Ask Rice: “Does W have a credibility GAP?”
Ask Rice: “Have you ever traced your roots, toots?”
Here’s a surprise for Jim Wooten: If Rice were to run for prez, I would vote for her. Not because I think she can do any better than Obama, but because it would advance justice in this great society of ours a thousand light years.
I want justice more than anything in this world for ALL AMERICANS.
By Dusty
October 25, 2006 12:58 PM | Link to this
CJ
I am glad you have taken up knitting. PLease show Curtis and Chazman how to do it. And take your hypothetical copy-cat questions with you.
I am not running the $64,000 Question Program for you liberals looking for an excuse to bash the country and the government and call it support for the troops.
Because I support the war and the programs of this country with plain old out-spoken patriotism, shouldn’t upset you. But it does, doesn’t it? I am not politically correct in liberal ways.
If you have a guilty conscience about your attitude towards the country and the troops, don’t look to me to absolve it for you. Do it on your own. I’m not your mother. Thank goodness.
By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I
October 25, 2006 01:03 PM | Link to this
I see the usual cast of chickenhawk cowards is here. Realisp, Markanus, tftt/tommy, Bi Danish - welcome once again to the Woo-ten Klan chickenhawk members of the Order of the Yellow Stripe.
What a bunch of worthless punks.
By Brian Curtis
October 25, 2006 01:07 PM | Link to this
Dusty: I accept your surrender. You can’t answer the question; you can only insist that 1) there’s no such thing as a bad war, and 2) even if there was, it wouldn’t be “patriotic” to do anything to stop it.
You’re a good, obedient little neocon tool. (pats your head) Good girl! Save the thinking for the Big Important People; your job is just to obey and wave flags.
By DebbieDoRight
October 25, 2006 01:22 PM | Link to this
The other question that nags at me is why the State Department is still filled with Cold War era Leftists who actively work and conspire in opposition to Bush Administration foreign policy, and among other bad acts, leak secrets to their wives who just happen to be individuals like Dana Priest of the Washington Post - with apparent impunity.
Leaking secrets? Like when the Karl Rove and “Scooter” Libby outed Valerie Plame?
By time for the truth
October 25, 2006 01:25 PM | Link to this
@ Debbiedummy
I noted your now trademark pathetically dishonest question with suitably mildly amused sniggering. Clearly you completely and deliberately missed the point of my post. WISE UP MATEY!!
Obviously ALL conservatives naturally enough have a least a little bit of contempt for the far left and leftist racebaiters. Surely you are NOT denying that some lefties and blacks have been racially hateful towards Sec. Rice?
By DebbieDoRight
October 25, 2006 01:27 PM | Link to this
If Bush has done wrong, time and congressional hearings will tell all. In the mean time, the dems should put up a presidnetial candidate who will lead us better than Bush.
Mr. Ed, (the talking horse), could do a better job of leading us then Bush. Barney, the purple dinosaur can do a better job than bush. Big Bird can do a better job than bush. And last but not least, The Ilvya Von Stropper (a mythical character I just made up), could do a beter job of leading us than Bush.
By Chazman
October 25, 2006 01:27 PM | Link to this
I figured you would not answer the question. So anyone that does not plan to run for office again is no longer in politics? What a cheezy way of wiggling your way out of admitting you made a mistake, not to mention dodging the question. But actually, you are wrong Dusty.
This from the AP January 2006:
PASCAGOULA, Miss. - Sen. Trent Lott announced Tuesday he is running for a fourth term this year, a decision that ends months of speculation.
The 64-year-old Republican told a hometown crowd that he wants to continue working on federal issues related to Mississippi’s recovery from Hurricane Katrina. He lost his own beachside house to Katrina on Aug. 29.
The former Senate majority leader also has hinted that he might seek another leadership position in Washington. He lost his leadership position in December 2002 after saying at Sen. Strom Thurmond’s 100th birthday party that Mississippi had proudly voted for Thurmond when the South Carolinian ran for president as a segregationist in 1948.
The Democratic candidate in the general election in November will be Mississippi state representative Erik Fleming. Four Democrats participated in the June 6, 2006 primary. Fleming placed first but did not receive 50% of the vote. He and Bill Bowlin qualified for a runoff marked by low turnout on June 27, 2006, which Fleming won by 65-35%.
Doesn’t sound like somebody “out” of political influence.
And I didn’t suggest that Trent Lott or Tom Delay influences your politics. I just asked do you agree with the statement he made. You asked is Nancy Pelosi my guiding light. My answer is no. I support her because she is a democrat, but I do not agree with everything she says. Example: When the Foley deal unfolded a few weeks ago, she was shown on TV over and over stating the republicans covered this up for a long time. I cringed. Although I believe evidence will eventually prove this to be correct, I thought she should not be saying that because there is no proof of that. I thought it was a mistake for her to be saying it.
So you think my question is “silly”? You state anyone who disagrees with the president is not supporting the troops. Tom Delay says you can support the troops without supporting the president. Do you agree with him? Yes or No. I disagreed with Nancy Pelosi. Do you disagree with Tom Delay?
By DebbieDoRight
October 25, 2006 01:32 PM | Link to this
Blog Dawg: At one time Ms. Rice was an avowed Democrat. Having watched the devastation that unequal justice and racism can conjure, (she was a friend of one of the 3 girls in Birmingham who got blown up), she worked dilligently and tirelessly for the Democratic Party.
Then she met Dubya, and fell in love. Afterwards, she became a RepublicTron for life!!!
By DebbieDoRight
October 25, 2006 01:36 PM | Link to this
Clearly you completely and deliberately missed the point of my post.
There was a POINT to all that pontificating?
Surely you are NOT denying that some lefties and blacks have been racially hateful towards Sec. Rice?
How can black people be racially hateful towards Ms. Rice? We LOVE Ms. Rice!! Why she is just like us!!! I watch her show, or tape it, every day and talk about it on blogs to all my friends…….Oh wait, wait, wait….That’s Oprah.
By Dusty
October 25, 2006 01:43 PM | Link to this
Poor old Curtis,
So used to waving white flags he thinks my comments are some kind of surrender. Is he making a citizens arrest of a fellow American?
Poor baby! Will somebody tell him that we are fighting terrorists, NOT Americans? He hasn’t quite gotten the whole picture yet.
By getalife
October 25, 2006 01:48 PM | Link to this
Will somebody tell him that we are fighting terrorists, NOT Americans?
Yes, tell that to W, Cheney and the gop.
By CJ
October 25, 2006 01:49 PM | Link to this
Chazman’s and Curtis’ questions would be relevant if Dusty actually cared about our country, our government, or our troops as she claims. She doesn’t.
Her “stop bashing our country…support the troops” propaganda is a front to disguise her never-say-die support for those who promise the biggest tax cuts (Republicans). She’s not going to concede that Bush failed in Iraq, because she doesn’t care what happens in Iraq. Like the rest of these hypocrites, she only cares about her wallet — regardless of the cost to others including innocent Iraqis, our troops, our government, our security, our future and our morals.