Thinking Right

By Mid-South Philosopher

January 15, 2007 08:07 AM | Link to this

Good morning, Jim,

It is clear that Secretary Condoleezza Rice is among the minority of the “competent” of the Bush Administration, and Senator Boxer’s interrogation of her using the “being childless, you can’t understand real loss” theme that she pursued was “tacky.” It would have been “tacky” if the Senator had, had the opportunity to advance the question to “Georgie” Bush, himself, relative to his own children…but, then again, I suppose there is some degree of danger in bars and nightclubs.

Word comes today that Secretary Rice has succeeded in arranging a three-way summit with both Palestinian and Israeli leaders. Likely, it will not result in much but one can always hope, and at least the Secretary isn’t sitting in Washington pontificating on how much the U.S. is unappreciated.

Meanwhile, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, President of Iran is strolling around Latin America, hobnobbing with Hugo “Bozo” Chevez and Daniel “I’ve reinvented myself” Ortega.

“Georgie” Bush doesn’t have a clue, and, thus far the Democratic hopefuls to replace him in 2009 haven’t shown that they are any wiser.

We need a “Scoop” Jackson for sure!

By Brian Curtis

January 15, 2007 08:16 AM | Link to this

Boxer’s blunder simply exposes a popular and illegitimate tactic that’s always used by politicians: dragging in their personal lives to justify their positions.

After all, how many times have we seen public officials making weepy declarations of faith, openly questioning an opponent’s history of divorce, smearing with hints of interracial affairs (gasp! in 2007!), and the like?

It’s always an illegitimate tactic, whether used to build up or tear down. And on the personal level, it’s equally useless for valid argument: “If you support the war, go join the army” is just as silly as “If you never served in the military, you don’t get to comment on what they do.”

By Brian Curtis

January 15, 2007 08:28 AM | Link to this

By the way, Laura Bush has also commented that Rice couldn’t do the job of President precisely because she’s single and childless.

Nice to see that idiocy is bipartisan.

By Jeff

January 15, 2007 08:41 AM | Link to this

Brian Curtis:

I’ll support the First Lasy on this one.

A single, childless 40+yo person is less likely to have anything that depends on them, and therefore they are less likely to feel the true “burden of leadership” that a married person or parent feels. Would you really want a person who has NO ONE to live for with their finger on the nuclear button?

By Happy Birthday MLK!!

January 15, 2007 08:48 AM | Link to this

Catfight!

Rowwf!

Clay Aiken vs Kelly Rippa…..trump vs Rosie….paris vs nicole…..betty davis vs joan crawford…..Boxer vs Rice…..and I still wont go see Rocky 6!

By Happy Birthday MLK!!

January 15, 2007 08:54 AM | Link to this

Grading Wooten. I’ve never seen a bigger mess than Wooten’s opening paragraph. Yesterday, Wooten accomplished goolash with the first few sentences. But today’s is a chernoble.

Hey Wooten, your umlauts are glowing!! I cant believe you get away with this. It’s a violation of the laws of communications. There has to be some sort of bizarro pulitzer prize committe tht hunts down word-devils and prosecutes them. There has to be. If not, literacy is finished.

Other than that your blog was great.

By Producer

January 15, 2007 09:00 AM | Link to this

It’s the same old tired liberal line. Those who advocate an aggressive antiterror policy or who advocate the return to the draft, which by the way should never should have been eliminated anyway, are often asked if they have served the United States themselves. An irrelevant question, really. Just because someone hasn’t doesn’t mean what they are advocating isn’t exactly what is needed. Nice going Ms. Boxer.

By jim d

January 15, 2007 09:10 AM | Link to this

Jeff,

“Would you really want a person who has NO ONE to live for with their finger on the nuclear button?”

NO,——-but then I don’t care for the finger to belong to an alcholic, fundamentalist that believes God is directing him and that he’s doing God’s will, either.

By Happy Birthday MLK!!

January 15, 2007 09:10 AM | Link to this

What is the mission of US troops in Iraq?

By RW-(the original)

January 15, 2007 09:21 AM | Link to this

Brian Curtis,

Would you mind looking through this and telling us where Laura Bush says Dr. Rice couldn’t do the job?

Mrs. Bush: I agree. But it isn’t easy to live here. Dr. (Condoleezza) Rice, who I think would be a really good candidate, is not interested. Probably because she is single, her parents are no longer living, she’s an only child. You need a very supportive family and supportive friends to have this job.

It might help your credibility if you didn’t lie about things that are that easy to verify.

By IC

January 15, 2007 09:24 AM | Link to this

The troops mission in Iraq is to follow the orders of the commander in chief, willingly sacrificing their all for his amusement.

By Curious Observer

January 15, 2007 09:27 AM | Link to this

I have absolutely no interest in the catfight during last week’s Senate hearing. It was showtime, designed to appeal to political bases. Both Boxer and Rice are lightweights in this sparring about the “surge.” Boxer’s influence will always be negligible, while Rice will be replaced by her incoming understudy within another eighteen months.

The real story was the Iranian president’s visit to chat with Chavez. It is almost a certainty that the two reached an agreement whereby Chavez agreed to cut off oil shipments to the United States should Iran decree it. It was Iran’s girding of the loins in the event of military conflict with the United States or Israel.

Yet, this blog will continue to focus on the inconsequential—Jimmy Carter’s latest babbling or a California senator’s point-scoring attempt against a sitting cabinet member. Let’s not focus on anything substantive.

By Mallory

January 15, 2007 09:29 AM | Link to this

J.Wooten, By Boxer’s logic, no judge should be allowed to hand down sentencing after a jury convicts unless a member of their family has been the victim of a violent crime.

It was a stupid statement by a stupid democrat. They just can’t think. They can politic. They can pander, but they can’t engage their brain before shooting off their mouth.

By Happy Birthday MLK!!

January 15, 2007 09:30 AM | Link to this

What are the orders for US troops to follow in Iraq?

By deegee

January 15, 2007 09:45 AM | Link to this

Boxer was rude when she cut Rice off in midsentence while she was making a point. That’s it, just rude. These televised Congressional hearings are all about a show for the dumb masses. If you believe that they are real then you must also believe that WWE Smackdown is real.

By Brian Curtis

January 15, 2007 09:45 AM | Link to this

RW: Where’s the lie? Laura Bush said Condi shouldn’t have the job because she’s single and childless.

That’s a very, very stupid statement.

By Van

January 15, 2007 09:52 AM | Link to this

Jeff and Brian Curtis,

I see no barrier to a single person being president. Grover Cleveland was single when he entered the White House. I would think that being single might give Dr. Rice a chance to set policy without the tug of emotions, from children or others.

However, if Dr. Rice marries someone less than half her age, like President Cleveland did, then the White House might get the attention of the glued to the TV, game system or what they call music these days.

If Trent Lott said the same thing to a high ranking democrat, what would the fall out be? So far, the Barbara Blockhead has been labeled with the all condenming title of “tacky” - Wow, what a punishing label. I would have held out for ill bred, of ill mannered. Now those would have real clout.

By jbmlaw

January 15, 2007 09:53 AM | Link to this

Good morning all. I am impressed by the measured language of our leftist friends so far, seemingly agreeing with Jim on the issue of “Borking” competent opponents (as opposed to questioning with substance.) Perhaps there is hope for civility in DC again, a world without demonization or as one of those practitioners called it, the “politics of personal destruction.”.

By jbmlaw

January 15, 2007 09:57 AM | Link to this

Dear Brian @ 9:45, you need to re-read Laura’s comment - there was no animus. You cannot make such an argument on Boxer’s intent. Had Boxer opened her statement with “Ms. Rice, you would be a great president but…” your equivalence would be sound. You don’t fool me - you know that Boxer was not thinking anything remotely like that.

By time for the truth

January 15, 2007 09:58 AM | Link to this

A few factual and well informed thoughts for MLK Day. The most politically correct Micky Mouse holiday in the US.

Whilst his historical legacy is overall a fine and noble one and worth acknowledging in some way, though a national holiday is not necessarily quite deserved. Having only come about by shrill black and liberal lobbying, and racial pandering, and hardly through a huge national populist groundswell of opinion from sea to shining sea.

Certainly MLK has become the definitive icon of his righteous, just cause, and compared to the arrogant, grasping, snouts in the racial spoils trough family he left behind he almost has a Mother Theresa like image. Naturally there are some blindingly obvious points to make that lefties and blacks often wholly ignore which will help to place today in a more realistic perspective.

So today is when we’re supposed to remember a renowned serial adulterer and a BLATANT academic CHEAT who stole verbatim tracts of other folks’ work for his thesis. Its funny how so many blacks are Micky Mouse preachers with NO real academic weight to their oft little more than self described ‘Reverend’ titles.

Indeed I myself have a Reverend designation/title that I can legally use to marry folks and run a legally established tax exempt church etc. It cost me $25 back in 1990 from a “church” in CA. And NO academic training or written examination(s) in a seminary was required.

Contrast this with the rigorous academic requirements and several years of study involved in being ordained say in the Catholic/papist church or the Church of England.

Sharptongue and Jackasson have NO credible clerical training - they’re just thuggish race hustlers using the meaningless Reverend title for personal and political power/gain/money. MLK was obviously intellectually incapable of actually earning a real doctorate - but at least he tried - unlike so many of the racial spoils hustlers that followed him.

Aside from these two major flaws which literally put him on the same level as Jackasson MLK did play a major role in changing the USA for the better. And his murder was cowardly and utterly unwarranted.

I suppose the worth of this holiday to the nation is reflected in just how few folks actually bother to observe it - beyond the usual postal workers indolence and eagerness to grab any day off from their heavily medicated working lives. Other than imperial federal govt institutions and local councils and schools the so called “holiday” is barely observed nationally.

What is truly bothersome about those that followed MLK is that once what he sought was deservedly achieved and enshrined in law the race hustlers took over and demanded illegal racist quotas and all the other divisive racial spoils often discussed on here. Which have for me indelibly tarnished the great dream he had in which all folks were simply to be treated equally, NOT given racially charged preferrential treatment. Or become haughty snotty arrogant APD chauffered Queens who refused to talk to ordinary folks on aeroplanes etc whilst seeking tens of millions of dollars for documents that actually belong to the nation.

By RW-(the original)

January 15, 2007 10:03 AM | Link to this

Brian Curtis,

First you said that Laura Bush said Dr. Rice couldn’t do the job, which she didn’t. Now you’ve switched to claiming Laura Bush said Dr. Rice shouldn’t have the job, which she also didn’t say.

Is it coming any clearer to you where your lie is?

Curious Observer,

We are one of the very few countries capable of refining Venezuelan oil because of it’s unusually high sulphur content. Now it’s entirely possible that Chavez is crazy enough to bankrupt his country at the whims of Iran but not likely.

By jbmlaw

January 15, 2007 10:12 AM | Link to this

Dear TFTT, well-written, factually sound, well-analyzed. I recall that at the time of his death MLK was widely-perceived - at least in the circles I traveled - as a “has-been” of the movement, one who was surpassed by Stokley Carmichael and others even more radical. I lived in the newly-desegregated South then, and even among my most-bigoted friends there was no celebration of the death of MLK, only a tinge of sadness for the death of a still-young man.

As to the holiday, it is as significant as Presidents’ Day and Columbus Day and Memorial Day - days people celebrate with shopping. Why not? One less day per year the bureaucrats can screw up the country.

By deegee

January 15, 2007 10:17 AM | Link to this

The only prediction that we can make concerning Chavez is that he will continue to make sensational headlines in Latin America and will continue to be a thorn in the side of the US policy makers. Is he crazy enough to bankrupt Venezuela over ideology? Perhaps. He idolizes Fidel Castro. I think that what he is likely to do depends on what best riles the U.S.

By Dennis

January 15, 2007 10:18 AM | Link to this

In his column today, Mr. Wooten tries to make a case against Nancy Palosi and in favor of Condoleeze Rice by wanting us to focus on the statement of Condoleeze Rice’s having “no immediate family” in the Middle-East war.

Some responders, but not all, have bite on his hook, but that is the wrong hook to bite. Rather, the focus should be on the question, “who pays the price” for Rice’s decisions?

That question never gets answered. To which Palosi responds, “Madam Secretary, please. I know you feel terrible about it. That’s not the point. I was making the case as to who pays the price for your decisions.”

Condoleeze Rice should answer the question, “who pays the price”.

But since Ms. Rice will not, perhaps Mr. Wooten would answer that question as he and other right-wing conservatives HAVE YET to make their own case(s) for this COOKED UP war.

You don’t have to be a blind conservataive not to see it, just a ignorant one to deny it.

By jbmlaw

January 15, 2007 10:24 AM | Link to this

Dear Dennis @ 10:18, you are the fool who took the hook. Boxer’s line of questioning was not calculated to lead to any victory over terrorism, but merely an attempt to destroy the credibility of an individual policy-maker - an old, now thin Democrat ploy. Pay attention.

By Van

January 15, 2007 10:27 AM | Link to this

deegee,

I think you may have something there.

Chavez, is going to make another Socialists’ paradise in Venezuela. We will have another dirt poor country with very weathly leadership. Like Cuba, I do not forsee any worthwhile advancements for Venezuela.

By Janine

January 15, 2007 10:30 AM | Link to this

Mr. W…Being that it’s MLK Day, it occurs to me that if the… you can’t understand because you are single and childless.. were replaced with …you can’t possibly understand the struggle of being black because you are not black.. No one would call it tacky!

By Happy Birthday MLK!!

January 15, 2007 10:38 AM | Link to this

Four observed shoplifters, to create a diversion for escape, detonated a chemical bomb in a Wallmart in metro atlanta today. This is a time of war, and I think we’ve got a death penalty case here. no one was injured, but it doesn’t matter, because a child could have wandered into the explosion easy as pie, and I wont rest until those men are executed.

Lets show all terrorists, domestic and foreign, that we are at war.

Hang the Wallmart Four!!! Hang the Wallmart Four!!!

By time for the truth

January 15, 2007 10:38 AM | Link to this

Right on jbm - you (a little more explicitly) picked up where I left off … the often murderous and criminal racist Black Panther types were out killing folks, shooting at cops and robbing banks etc. Like I said once the MLK “language” was enshrined in the Civil Rights Act and he was murdered, the thuggish black radicals took over. Their self appointed leadership was inevitably duly encouraged by the simpering drug crazed leftist hippie types who were just as rabidly anti-establishment, albeit with a somewhat different agenda. This is where the repugnant seeds of so much of the modern racial divisiveness came from. The hateful black power rhetoric and cynical racial spoils came not from MLK and his mostly dignified, pretty moderate circle, but from the younger, poer and money hungry venal acolytes … like Jackasson, Carmichael and (admittedly at something of a tangent) the likes of Calypso Louis Farracrap.

I humbly suggest that MLK Day is much less of a shopping bonanza than other such holidays. My proof of this includes the fact that Timberland DO NOT send me a 15% coupon for their outlet malls - whereas they do for virtually ALL the other holidays. Shopping is good for us though, it helps the thriving Bush economy to keep humming.

Does this make Timberland “racists”? … I think not!!

By Janine

January 15, 2007 10:38 AM | Link to this

LIkewise, it’s hard to understand what war is like on the front lines and the true tragedy of war if you have not been on the front lines or lost someone there.

By TW

January 15, 2007 10:38 AM | Link to this

Perhaps Dr. Rice should get a Purple Heart for surviving that brutal attack? That the White House would have its feelings hurt by such a trivial comment screams volumes about the Freeper’s inability to fight a war. 3000+ dead, but let’s all rush to get Condi a tissue :(

By Happy Birthday MLK!!

January 15, 2007 10:44 AM | Link to this

JBM, you are the one leading with your chin. Boxer clearly knocked two neo-pallookas (you and rice) out with one punch. Rice has been our sec of state long enough to have proved she’s the worst sec of state, and most inneffective sec. of state, and biggest patoot kissing sec of state in our state’s history.

I would still vote for her for president, but only because she is a black woman, and the fact of her administration would be a quantum leap for justice so enormous that it would set this country back to the future of it’s great society potential.

By Happy Birthday MLK!!

January 15, 2007 10:49 AM | Link to this

Jbm at 9:57: R U suggesting, sir, that Rice’s legacy is not only unused rocket tubes, but unused philopian tubes?

How dare you. HOW DARE YOU!!!

By time for the truth

January 15, 2007 10:51 AM | Link to this

TW

If Sec. Rice got a purple heart for that it would be on a par with ALL of Kerry’s purple hearts. Rice was scratched at by the BoxerBitch and Kerry both scratched himself for at least one PH and got scratched by a stray dog or whatever when he was filming others doing some fighting in the distance for his cynically PLANNED campaign commercials a few years after his despicable, treasonous LYING outbursts about Vietnam.

By getalife

January 15, 2007 10:51 AM | Link to this

Lets see, Barney and Laura are the only ones supporting w’s escalation and he is trying to get Iran to engage but they will not take the bait.

Jim whines about a comment made to another failure, Condi.

It just gets more and more pathetic from the idiots on the right.

The voters need to put pressure on the gop to get w and cheney to resign like Nixon.

Do it for your country and stop whining like babies.

It is just so freaking pathetic.

By JK

January 15, 2007 10:55 AM | Link to this

Today’s lame topic is a good example of subjective interpretation. You can take anything anyone says and assign whatever meaning you want, using your prejudices or your underlying agenda, and use it to screech and howl over the offense and injustice.

Here’s how I interpreted that exchange: “This war isn’t killing MY kids because they’re the wrong age, and it isn’t kiling YOUR kids because you don’t have any, but we should nonetheless consider those families who ARE affected by this war.”

Time to screech? Only if you have no actual meaningful points to make about SACRIFICING OTHER PEOPLE’S LOVED ONES to the Decider’s disastrous ego.

PS: Happy Birthday, Dr. King!

By William Fielder

January 15, 2007 10:56 AM | Link to this

Boxer is an empty skirt. Her line of questioning for Scty Rice would have been ridiculed without end if it were a Republican questioning a Democrat. But we all know this. What may escape us is that these liberal fools are advocating a policy in Iraq that would be a disaster—and open the flood gates for attacks on the US. We must not go wobbly. whf.

By Dennis

January 15, 2007 10:56 AM | Link to this

jbmlaw, it is not my intention to argue on this site. I will post my opinions and you can agree or disagree.

However, this once, I will break my rule; if there is anyone on here who verbosity is not limited to exaggertion, you get the blue ribbon.

You don’t have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.

By Redneck Convert

January 15, 2007 10:57 AM | Link to this

Ain’t nothing as good as reading about a couple hangings to start the day. Us rednecks love Law and Order and executions, but the libruls have spoilt the fun a lot lately. I reckon they don’t have much truck in Iraq. I see that one of them’s head come plumb off when the rope snapped tight.

Far as I’m concerned, that old pinhead history guy ought to been hung for jaywalking. He musta been a bad one for it to take 12 Atlanta cops to hold him down on the sidewalk. We need to keep the English people out of this country. And that goes for TFTT and his bad spelling and writing and name calling. He’s going to snap one day, and it will take more than 12 cops to take him out. Just mark my words. The guy’s a powder keg looking for a match.

I bet that senator nor Rice could bake a decent pie. It was like watching a pair of banty hens go at it. They need to be like Sister Dusty, setting on the sidelines and baking cookies and lobbing bombs at each other and pointing to their kids and their military service. Women got no place in politics. They can’t even fight a decent war against theirselfs, much less get a good one started overseas.

Well, I got a big load of beer to drop off today. The Baptists was real thirsty this weekend. I guess they need to get oiled up real good before they go to church and listen to preachers rail against the evils of booze. I’m pertending this MLK holiday don’t exist. He was nothing but a trouble maker, and us people up in Forsyth County knowed how to deal with him and Hosea and the like back then. Now that the libruls have moved in and ruined everything, we are going to the hot place in a handbasket. If we had elected ol Strom, we would be better off now.

By TW

January 15, 2007 11:03 AM | Link to this

tftt - And if she had hid underneath her daddy’s bed with a case of beer to avoid Vietnam, she might be president. What’s your point? I’m saying war is a tough guy sport, and spinning our wheels over hurt feelings ain’t cutting it. Couldn’t care less about John Kerry.

By Happy Birthday MLK!!

January 15, 2007 11:05 AM | Link to this

What is the mission, then, of the surge? Has it been defined?

Counterinsurgency techniques require a clear and hold strategy. That in itself implies a room to room hand to hand stalingrad struggle of titanic proportions.

Dont forget about all the secret underground passages in Sadr City.

The surge will be wildy succesful….in the limited areas that it will be focused.

The overall effect of the surge on the ground in baghdad will be minimal, and one year from now, we’ll be all under the same impeach-bush umbrella, because there wont be one person left in America who doesn’t understand that we are forever trapped in Iraq for no reason other than Bush’s vendetta against saddam hussein. (Saddam tried to kill his dad because his dad was CIA director when Saddam’s regime was backed by the US. But then 41 abandoned Saddam after desert storm, and the betrayal stuck in Saddam’s craw.)

W has invented a perpetual motion machine making a giant sucking sound while it operates as an tectonic open money pit in the quicksand of Iraq.

Impeach Bush now, avoid the ‘08 rush.

George Bush is a bigfooted, silverbacked silverfoot(inmouth), jingoistic godzilla.

By Happy Birthday MLK!!

January 15, 2007 11:09 AM | Link to this

William Fielder - what is the mission of US troops in Iraq, sir?

By Dennis

January 15, 2007 11:14 AM | Link to this

My apologies to those who caught my mispelling above, @10:56. The correct spelling should be “exaggeration”, not exaggertion. I should have proof read a little more carefully.

However, if jbmlaw is as half as good as he thinks he is, he will still get the message (maybe).

You don’t have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.

By getalife

January 15, 2007 11:15 AM | Link to this

“Let’s get this straight:

President Bush lied again just five days ago when he told the American public the troop escalation was devised to help secure a chaotic country and protect its civilians. Of course, many observers suspected as much. And military families will have the comfort of knowing their loved ones in service are in the line of fire, not for an achievable strategic goal but for show – or to provoke a military confrontation over a problem that the Iraq Study Group and most sane Middle East watchers advised should be solved diplomatically.”

Pay attention, your hero is trying to start another war. This one will involve China and Russia protecting their oil. Quit whining like wussies and read about your insane hero.

By time for the truth

January 15, 2007 11:24 AM | Link to this

We need to keep the English people out of this country

Hugely proud English smirk

Its now mighty too late for that Inbred Dickweed.

I guess the almost universal American use English langauge (albeit decidedly modified); the continuing use of English common law; countless English/British place names and ‘English’ names of states (like Georgia, N York, N Hampshire, Washington, etc; many millions of folks with English/British ancestry and so on must have passed your inbred leftist dumbarse by …

By Happy Birthday MLK!!

January 15, 2007 11:26 AM | Link to this

But Dennis, maybe you dont have to be a blind conservative not 2C it, (just an ignorant one 2deny it), but my question here is what if you were a tailess, deaf christian neo-newt who was ambivalent about his own amphibianity, but stood mute on moot questions about mutinous generals in Iraq?

Then what?

By time for the truth

January 15, 2007 11:29 AM | Link to this

TW … perhaps you’d be good enough to remind me of just how many military hatin’ wimmin like the feminazi Boxerbitch actually served in Vietnam… the chances of her actually being drafted were then about as good as Klinton now HONESTLY admitting he’s a cowardly corrupt perjuring pardon selling rapist!!

I am clearly not IN ANY WAY denigrating any ladies (or lesbians)who did serve in Nam (or anywhere else).

By Buy Danish (The one and only)

January 15, 2007 11:30 AM | Link to this

This argument of “who pays the price” really points out the egoism of Leftists (read Democrats) who frame everything from a perspective of how they are personally affected, not by how policies affect our nation as a whole.

It’s completely self-centered, where all that matters is “me, me, me” and what do I get out of it. That’s what enables someone like Boxer to ask Rice that sort of mean-spirited and irrelevant question.

Dr. Rice is not forming foreign policy based on what she can personally get out of it; she is acting in the best interests of the nation.

If we are to follow Boxer’s “me! me! me!” thinking to its logical and ludicrous extension, then only Seniors can form Social Security policy, only parents can work in education, ad nauseum.

By Happy Birthday MLK!!

January 15, 2007 11:31 AM | Link to this

Takemywife: there’s zero chance of a war with Iran. We have no available army.

Getalife, will U stfu? You’re ruining a perfect blog day, and you’re destroying the left’s credibility.

Go to the Woman to woman blog and dazzle them there, they’ll love you, man, you’re perfect for them.

By Rob Smith

January 15, 2007 11:34 AM | Link to this

Read about Michael Tabb’s (100 Black Men of Atlanta); Red Rock Global Real Estate Services and The Real Chow Baby Restaurant. Do you really want this firm advising Atlanta Public Schools? Read how they ripped off the poor in Miami FL! Is this right…

Click on this Link: http://www.redrockglobal.blogspot.com/ Internet Website Link.

Red Rock Global Real Estate Services…

Thank you…

By Happy Birthday MLK!!

January 15, 2007 11:35 AM | Link to this

Here’s another scary thing: Not one person saw that I mispelled Fallopian tubes vs Rice’s unused rocket tubes for enriching uranium.

Some ignorance dont deserve no comment no how.

Rocket tubes to enrich uranium. How did I fall for that one? I did, though. I let it go right past me. Unbelievable.

Now, with the surge, Rice is doing it again, she’s saying, “Lets wait and see if it works”.

Wait and see. Hey Rice, I got your rocket tube, RIGHT HERE!!!

By getalife

January 15, 2007 11:40 AM | Link to this

PF,

I thought I was at the woman to woman blog with all this pathetic whining about what Boxer said.

Geez.

By Dennis

January 15, 2007 11:40 AM | Link to this

By Happy Birthday MLK!!

But Dennis, maybe you dont have to be a blind conservative not 2C it, (just an ignorant one 2deny it), but my question here is what if you were a tailess, deaf christian neo-newt who was ambivalent about his own amphibianity, but stood mute on moot questions about mutinous generals in Iraq?

Then what?

Well, I think one would have to be in the mind of GWB to answer that, if he was in his mind.

You don’t have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.

By Dusty

January 15, 2007 11:45 AM | Link to this

Well,

Poor ol’ liberals. They don’t want to fight for their country so they fight Condi Rice. Barbara Boxer leads the liberal surge!! Nancy Pelosi is going “tut tut” ‘cause she has five children and gobs of grand children and not one in Iraq that anyone has mentioned. (By the way, it is only FAIR to mention the children of Republicans.)

So “tally ho” go the liberals as they charge bravely against Dr. Rice. All this while the rest of the country fights terrorism.

Oh well, you gotta do what you gotta do. Liberals find it easier to fight our leaders and children of our leaders like the Bush twins. Figures!

By Dennis

January 15, 2007 11:49 AM | Link to this

Just read this on another site.

“He wouldn’t say it directly, but this week FBI Director Robert Mueller in effect told Congress the bureau has 8,000 people under investigation for terrorism.”

As Bugs Rabbit used to say, “That’s all folks!” Have a good day.

You don’t have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.

By TW

January 15, 2007 11:53 AM | Link to this

tftt- perhaps you’d be good enough to remind me why you and Wooten have chosen to explore your infatuation with feminism rather than support the troops…just committed another 2150 and you guys are worried about Condi’s feelings getting hurt? Compassionate Freeper Conservatism, perhaps?

By Buy Danish (The one and only)

January 15, 2007 11:53 AM | Link to this

Getapair,

How ironic that you act dishonestly and don’t provide links to your quotes, but accuse Bush of lying. But I digress.

If you want to proceed with that “argument” then don’t ever ask that we go to Darfur, Kosovo or other places that need to be “secured” before peace can be attained.

By Happy Birthday MLK!!

January 15, 2007 12:01 PM | Link to this

Yes, Dennis, it’s true that I’ve already conceded to you that, indeed, you do not have to be a blind conservative not 2C it, just an ignorant 1 2deny it, and I dont think there’s one right honorable friend here today who would call that codicil a crock.

That’s 4sure, that’s 4dang sure.

By DebbieDoRight

January 15, 2007 12:02 PM | Link to this

I would also like to see a Malcolm X Day.

Some quotes:

On Martin Luther King, Jr…

“He got the peace prize, we got the problem…. If I’m following a general, and he’s leading me into a battle, and the enemy tends to give him rewards, or awards, I get suspicious of him. Especially if he gets a peace award before the war is over.”

“I’ll say nothing against him. At one time the whites in the United States called him a racialist, and extremist, and a Communist. Then the Black Muslims came along and the whites thanked the Lord for Martin Luther King.”

By JK

January 15, 2007 12:02 PM | Link to this

Only a blind AND ignorant “conservative” would interpret caring about the lives of other people’s children (& spouses, fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters and friends) as an act of “me me me” selfishness. Vanna, please give this woman all the vowels you have, ‘cause she doesn’t have a CLUE.

By DebbieDoRight

January 15, 2007 12:03 PM | Link to this

I would also like to see a Malcolm X Day.

Some quotes:

On Martin Luther King, Jr…

“He got the peace prize, we got the problem…. If I’m following a general, and he’s leading me into a battle, and the enemy tends to give him rewards, or awards, I get suspicious of him. Especially if he gets a peace award before the war is over.”

“I’ll say nothing against him. At one time the whites in the United States called him a racialist, and extremist, and a Communist. Then the Black Muslims came along and the whites thanked the Lord for Martin Luther King.”

By DebbieDoRight

January 15, 2007 12:04 PM | Link to this

I would also like to see a Malcolm X Day.

Some quotes:

On Martin Luther King, Jr…

“He got the peace prize, we got the problem…. If I’m following a general, and he’s leading me into a battle, and the enemy tends to give him rewards, or awards, I get suspicious of him. Especially if he gets a peace award before the war is over.”

“I’ll say nothing against him. At one time the whites in the United States called him a racialist, and extremist, and a Communist. Then the Black Muslims came along and the whites thanked the Lord for Martin Luther King.”

By Huge

January 15, 2007 12:11 PM | Link to this

They just can’t think. They can politic. They can pander, but they can’t engage their brain before shooting off their mouth.

Truly ironic, considering this:

By Mallory

January 14, 2007 06:12 PM

Huge, I was talking about Danish’s frontal assault on your cherished Hillary dumbass.

Hillary Clinton?!! She has no more credibility than GWB. Both pretend to be non-extremists but are in reality, at the far edges of their respective political parties.

On top of that, the junior senator from NY’s vote authorizing the aforementioned you know who, to do you what, is pretty much a deal breaker for me. Knowing what she must have about this administration ater they’d been in power for over a year and a half and still giving them the OK to invade Iraq is disconcerting to say the least.

F* the verbage garbage.

Ahhh. Here’s where Mallory’s debating “skills” truly show themselves!

The always uber-angry Danish made a silly and sophomoric miscue by chastising me for using the word summit as a verb. (As usual, she could find nothing else to counter-argue in the relevant post so she thought she’d be witty and fall back on one of her more adept skills - nit picking.)

And your response when I post the irrefutable evidence that summit is, of course, a verb was the above erudite comment - F* the verbage garbage.

You and your buddies demonstrate a complete disregard for, and an utter inability, to be precise with words. And that demonstrates an inability to be precise with your ideas and positions. And that ultimately undermines your ability to make cogent, credible arguments.

Maybe that’s why you still speak as if you are playing with toy soldiers, or perhaps enjoying a captivating game of Stratego, and rely on terms like “frontal assault” and “defensive strategy”. Maybe you can “soften up the enemy” and “use some ground pounders” next!

And certainly Danish will feel compelled to chastise your ironic and incorrect use of the adjective politic as a verb. But then given your shared ideologies, probably not. Demagoguery trumps intellect. Partisanship trumps accuracy. Shallowness trumps disputation.

You don’t know a damn thing about defensive strategy which is why no democrat should ever be in charge of national security.

Forget, for a moment, the sheer childish incoherence of that “hypothesis”. Democrat? Me? Here’s a little hint for you; I voted against Kerry and Gore. I voted for Ronald Reagan.

I can assume that you have no military experience then?

Yet even more brilliance from Mr. Assumer, all in one short post!

Here’s another hint, Mr. Make an A$$ Out of Yourself: Throw a little pop quiz to the assorted chickenhawks, neo-cons and other boys and girls out here about military service in the early 70’s and let’s compare some notes.

In summary, so few words from the esteemed Mallory, and so very many mistakes and problems.

Poorly spoken, poorly written and grasping at half-baked ideas should be painfully embarrassing. As should be making inane assumptions about somebody you know absolutely nothing about. But then there’s always that thing called blissful ignorance. At any rate his “musings” are, truth be told, quite entertaining…

By DebbieDoRight

January 15, 2007 12:17 PM | Link to this

Sorry!! Did not mean to post that 3 times. :(

By Buy Danish (The one and only)

January 15, 2007 12:35 PM | Link to this

JK,

How did Barbara Boxer demonstrate that she “cares” about the lives of “other people’s children” or anyone on the planet, other than herself and her own family, by making an uncaring, demeaning, insulting and completely irrelevant ad hominem remark to Dr. Rice?

That statement reveals a basic character flaw in Madame Boxer, and there is no way to defend it, unless of course you’re a despicable liberal who will justify any behavior as long as it serves your own selfish, machiavellian ends.

By Dusty

January 15, 2007 12:36 PM | Link to this

Huge,

Your lenthy literati could be condensed to five lines.

You don’t like Mallory but you are not too keen on Hillary yourself.

You think you can add “ing” to any noun or adjective and make it into a verb. Your example is “summiting”.

Well, maybe you are right. We could say “Huge is ‘stupiding’ us every day.”

By Buy Danish (The one and only)

January 15, 2007 12:39 PM | Link to this

You and your buddies demonstrate a complete disregard for, and an utter inability, to be precise with words

Says Huge Blowhard^^^ who takes 2500 words to say nothing!

This is so entertaining.

By Brian Curtis

January 15, 2007 12:43 PM | Link to this

There’s no need to attack Condi’s personal life and family status… her poor record is more than enough reason to condemn her without stooping to Republican tactics like that.

Keep swinging, RW, we know how much you love distortion of the “lie” word.

By Sonny Perdue

January 15, 2007 12:44 PM | Link to this

My fellow Georgians, I am mostly proud to announce that Condi and I have a love child who is deployed to Baghdad right now. I am totally proud of our son, proud that I bagged that total babe Condi, but terribly ashamed that this is the first Mary has heard of it. Sorry, dear, it’s a shame.

By DebbieDoRight

January 15, 2007 12:53 PM | Link to this

I guess Condi was on his “Sonny Do” list!

By time for the truth

January 15, 2007 12:54 PM | Link to this

I see the loathsome black bigot crackpipe is slavishly racebaiting away again today … how utterly unsurprising that is!! Macolm X was a racist black thug whose much vaunted putative ‘recanting’ was at the least highly questionable.

To balance Crackpipe’s Malcom X day and other such bollocks I demand a White History Month … thus ensuring that ALL races have their poxy little annual pandering session, replete with smug pandering PSA’s on the vile bollocks calling itself WSBTV. The only slightly good thing about the pointless and stupid black history month is that its in Feb and thus is mercifully a couple of days shorter than it could’ve been. Given there is also an equally pathetic asian history month and mexican type history month etc … we should surely ban all such moronic racial pandering.

I recall reading somewhere that black history week was once considered sufficient at one point … clearly given the paucity of suitable material to justify arrogantly and cretinously expanding it to a month makes the whole unsavoury pandering shiite nauseatingly ludicrous.

By DebbieDoRight

January 15, 2007 01:02 PM | Link to this

Women In VietNam

What is truly unconscionable in the annals of American military history is the fact that little or no data exists on the women who served and, yes, were injured or killed, in Southeast Asia during the Viet Nam era.

Accurate records on how many women were there, what decorations they earned, where they served - and most important - what after effects they have suffered - and continue to suffer - are nonexistent.

However from anecdotal reports, letters, from books by those who were there, from research papers by military historians, and from the excellent text “Women in the Military - An Unfinished Revolution”, by Major General Jeanne Holm, USAF (Ret), we can glean the following overview.

Over five hundred WACs were stationed in Vietnam.

Women Marines were in Vietnam.

Over six hundred Women in the Air Force were there.

Army, Navy and Air Force Nurses and Medical Specialists numbered over six thousand.

Untold numbers of Red Cross, Special Services, Civil Service and countless other women were there.

By DebbieDoRight

January 15, 2007 01:04 PM | Link to this

“You’re not to be so blind with patriotism that you can’t face reality. Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it or says it.” — Malcolm X

“Be peaceful, be courteous, obey the law, respect everyone; but if someone puts his hand on you, send him to the cemetery.” — Malcolm X

By DebbieDoRight

January 15, 2007 01:13 PM | Link to this

They Gave Their Lives…..Women in Combat

http://userpages.aug.com/captbarb/lives.html

By time for the truth

January 15, 2007 01:14 PM | Link to this

crackpipe debbie perpetually panders her piddle of race baiting nonsense by the black thug leader Malcolm X. the two-bit hustler wontonly exploited the liberties awarded him by his country only to commit treason by courting MOHAMMEDANS in AfiKa. crackpipe debbie glibly proffers this extremist islamic rhetoric whilst i wank myself slowly and thoroughly…

twist…pull…twist…pull…alomst there…pull…pull…ahhhhh!!! SMIRK

By Dennis

January 15, 2007 01:18 PM | Link to this

“That’s 4sure, that’s 4dang sure.”

“Dang straight”, “mighty right”.

You don’t have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it. :)

By Dusty

January 15, 2007 01:19 PM | Link to this

DebbieDoRight

I am pretty sure that most people are aware that women were very active in the Viet Nam War. It is no surprise that there were women in the military besides Red Cross workers and others. People are not blind until they see statistics.

If you want to lead a great charge for feminism, why not jump in for Condi Rice? While not in the military, she has certainly done a good and difficult job during war time. Will feminist support the great job by women in this war or will they forget Conservative women? Do YOU support Condi Rice as a leader in our country? Do you let politics affect your feminism?

By Mallory

January 15, 2007 01:30 PM | Link to this

Huge, Whoa nellie! What does your 12:11 have to do with J.Wooten’s topic?

You came on to accomplish a mission? Impact me with your perfunctory prose. Hate to tell you dipwad, but you failed to make any point worth reading.

No wonder Buy Danish calls you Blowhard. I suggest you bend over when you do it.

Cogent enough for you?

By getalife

January 15, 2007 01:34 PM | Link to this

“It’s uh (sigh), you know I, uh (looking to sky), uh, it’s hard to, uh, for the family members to recount, uh, or relive their love in front of the President (shrug). Yet, you know once we get beyond the initial (pause), kind of meeting, it’s amazing how strong the folks are and umm, they want to just let ‘em, let me know a lot of things. They want me to let me know what their son or husband was like.

…Umm, (sigh) you know, you know a lot of them say, you know, Mr. President, don’t, don’t let my son die in vain.”

They died for big oil contracts and you know it.

“On the floor of the House of Representatives, January 11, 2007

Mr. McDERMOTT: Mr. Speaker, the American people have not received very much information about a major issue in and around the Iraq war, and the oil industry would like to keep it just that way.”

By time for the truth

January 15, 2007 01:34 PM | Link to this

I see the desperately lonely, hopelesly inadequate, virtually asexual spotty harelipped mommie’s boy is back to gleefully anally stalking its intellectual conservative betters… I’m jolly glad to be of some service in finally giving you something to fulfil your worthless existence with bollockchopwankpig!

damn shame that aborted foreskin won’t imbibe that jug of crystal meth flavoured liquid oxygen!!

By Huge

January 15, 2007 01:35 PM | Link to this

Is it ADD? Or is it a tragic symptom of our modern “dumbed-down” culture. Use only small words and consider only small ideas. And be sure to not lose the little darlings by using too many words, no matter the subject matter or complexity. Using them correctly is optional. Expand upon and analyze nothing. Use a demented Cliff notes approach in lieu of discourse.

It reminds me of the scene in Amadeus where the Duke tells Mozart that there are two many notes in his opera and to remove a few! Which few didn’t even matter!

Keep it stuntingly simple and pretend you’ve said something worthwhile.

For example: You think you can add “ing” to any noun or adjective and make it into a verb. Your example is “summiting”.

Close, but the word was summit. (Oh, that attention to detail that Dusty is famous for!)

Is this her way of saying that is an equivalent for, “Yes, it is perfectly and grammatically correct to do so”!

Or this?

“You don’t like Mallory but you are not too keen on Hillary yourself.”

I just love it when someone so far off the mark tries to put words in other people’s mouths!

I didn’t say I don’t like Mallory. (For godsakes woman, I don’t even know him!) I just said he is an atrocious debater and so far has used little but ad hominem insults and asinine assumptions as a substitute for positing believable positions. But let’s face it,he is certainly not alone in that regard here. You, all too well, can relate.

So Dusty, better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth, or in this case, touch the keyboard, and remove all doubt.

2500 words?! You actually counted them? Danish? Bueller? Anyone?

I know that you have proudly demonstrated countless times, the amazing god-given ability to take any topic and turn it into a sound bite. It is your substitute for valid content. It is one of your favorite alternatives and it explains your aversion to modern science, as well as a deep distrust for reliance upon logic and reason.

Off to go make money. But I’ll be back to check up on the elucidating repsonses that are sure to follow.

By Happy Birthday MLK!!

January 15, 2007 01:40 PM | Link to this

Time4daTurd is the John Wayne Bobbit of bloggers. (He’s always going off half cocked.)

bwatard

By jbmlaw

January 15, 2007 01:40 PM | Link to this

Dear Mallory @ 1:39, Huge and Deminimis don’t publish substance, they occupy that other side of the blog. Don’t waste your time with them.

By DebbieDoRight

January 15, 2007 01:42 PM | Link to this

If you want to lead a great charge for feminism, why not jump in for Condi Rice?

Im still up in the air about her — my husband, a couple of brothers, and a few friends (both republicans and democrats) are all gaga over her. I’m still waiting on the verdict.

Will feminist support the great job by women in this war or will they forget Conservative women? Do YOU support Condi Rice as a leader in our country? Do you let politics affect your feminism?

I don’t consider myself a “feminist” although, being a child of the 80s I do have LOTS of feminist leanings. However, I believe in the male taking the lead role in the marriage, (whenever possible), and the female allowing him to lead, (whenever possible). But I also believe in equal pay for equal work, blah, blah blah. As for Ms. Rice; I have read her authorized biography and I am a little perplexed by her way of thinking. She was friends with one of the Birmingham 4, (the four little girls who got blown up in a Birmingham Church); but she espouses the rationale of a “colorless society”; which, even in Sweden, is dang near impossible. While working as the National Security Advisor, she allowed herself to be bullied and pushed aside by Rumsfeld and Cheney instead of standing up for what she KNEW was right. When she received the information about Al Quaida (sp); she took it to Rumsfeld instead of taking the lead role and doing HER JOB. When Colin Powell left because of his misgivings about the Bush Administration’s Iraq Policy, instead of publicly defending his decision she allowed herself to be caught up in a quagmire of Powelitis that the Bush Administration was drumming up.

Could I support her? I really don’t know. She would have to prove to me that she can LEAD and not follow. The job of President is not for the weak at heart and although I would expect her to depend on her advisors; the ultimate “buck” would stop with her.

By Dusty

January 15, 2007 01:50 PM | Link to this

Oh cut it short, Huge.

I don’t count your words any more than I count the grains on an ear of corn. The corn is more interesting by the way when served hot and buttery.

If you want to pontificate, go write a book. Better cut out the trite expressions though. They get kinda dull.

By time for the truth

January 15, 2007 02:00 PM | Link to this

I see our beloved leftist afterbirth scum foreskin aka Happy Birthday Serial Adulterer has once again shamelessly and DESPERATELY has turn his sights on yours truly. It is utterly imbecilic and pathetic how this miniscule piece of marxist bile afterbirth perpetually proffers complete bollocks in the face of his CONSERVATIVE SUPERIORS! Let’s wish this desparate pisant a glorious journey back to the bucket of biomedical waste that he calls home. However on the way home, may he stop by my home and take lessons from my vainglorious wanking technique…twist…pull…twist…pull…are you observing foreskin?…twist…pull…almost there…ahhh!

huge I just showed aborted foreskin how to wank better SMIRK!

By time for the truth

January 15, 2007 02:11 PM | Link to this

see how pathetically easy you are to hysterically wind up aborted foreskin!!

By Blind Homer

January 15, 2007 02:11 PM | Link to this

Condi’s competent, wonderful and doing a great job? How’s that exactly, what has she done? I see someone who was ideally suited to fill the vacuum Colin Powell created when he refused to be the tool and front person for this horrendous Administration. She’s been a good little girl, always spewing the party line, I’ll give her that much; just like her boss, bag boy for the oil and defense industries.

By Dusty

January 15, 2007 02:12 PM | Link to this

DebbieDoRight,

I think you are misinterpreting the term “colorless” by Condi Rice. Did not MLK say we should not judge people only by the color of their skin? I think that is what Dr. Rice meant when she said colorless.

As to her politics, she travels all over the world talking to leaders without any prompters. And maybe she began to disagree with Colin Powell as he began to differ with President Bush. I would not say that her politics are not successful. Nobody’s decisions seem totally right these days. But she seems to be one of the most intelligent and diplomatic people in our government. (Not to mention best mannered which is totally lacking in women like Boxer.)

By time for the truth

January 15, 2007 02:21 PM | Link to this

TW

your moronic, sadly seemingly not deliberately optuse simpering still witlessly avoids the nub of the issue. Its NOT at all about Rice’s feelings being/getting hurt … its the arrogant despicable hypocrisy unerringly reflected in the party of hate leftist media which allows feminazis like the Boxerbitch to get away with appalling sexist/personal abuse, which - if it had been say a white republican similarly personally abusing a leftist black demoNcrat the incident would have been screeched about until the next hatepig Dean the scream meltdown.

By Buy Danish (The one and only)

January 15, 2007 02:25 PM | Link to this

Keep it stuntingly (sic) simple and pretend you’ve said something worthwhile

Huge Pretentious Blowhard,

Like that^^??

Mallory,

I may be going out on a limb here, but I assume that your are using the name “Mallory” as a first name, not a surname.

Unfortunately, that would not allow Huge Gasbag to reveal his vast knowledge of Mt. Everest’s history and his familiarity with George Mallory.

Mallory’s life is completely irrelevant to any discussion, but that does not stop Huge Blowhard! Nope, not only did it allow him to compare you to a dead mountain climber for no freaking reason (does anyone get the “point” of that??) he was able to use the word summit as a verb, which while technically correct, sounds incredibly pretentious in this forum.

By getalife

January 15, 2007 02:43 PM | Link to this

“For those who haven’t seen it yet, the best part of the interview was this about half-way through:

“You know better than I do that many Americans feel that your administration has not been straight with the country, has not been honest. To those people you say what?” Pelley asks.

“On what issue?” the president replies. “Like the weapons of mass destruction?”

“No weapons of mass destruction,” Pelley says.

“Yeah,” Bush says.

“No credible connection between 9/11 and Iraq,” Pelley says.

“Yeah,” the president replies.

“The Office of Management and Budget said this war would cost somewhere between $50 billion and $60 billion and now we’re over 400,” Pelley says.

“I gotcha. I gotcha. I gotcha,” Bush replies.

This man is insane and the wingnuts still got his back.

Unfreakingbelievable.

By jm

January 15, 2007 02:51 PM | Link to this

Paying the price for anything has never been a concern of this administration. It does not excuse Senator Boxer for making rude remarks but Secretary Rice and other members of the Bush Administration seem to spend too much time dealing with abstract issues and not enough dealing with reality. I would like to hear an honest accounting of what President Bush’s policies are costing and how he expects to pay for it.

By DebbieDoRight

January 15, 2007 03:06 PM | Link to this

And maybe she began to disagree with Colin Powell as he began to differ with President Bush. I would not say that her politics are not successful. Nobody’s decisions seem totally right these days

I don’t know. Like I said, I’m still up in the air about her. I can’t get a feel on where she stands on issues that are dividing this nation; and how, if possible, she would try to mend the rift. To mend the big gulf that separates the right from the left and center; we’d need someone who can understand both points of view and then begin to heal our nation. I don’t think that this nation, divided against itself, can stand much more of this bickering and baiting.

By TW

January 15, 2007 03:09 PM | Link to this

tftt- I can only assume that the feminism issue touches your Foley Freeper nerve in a manner that leaves you unable to think ‘right’. One last time - Why does a trivial comment from a senator supercede the issue of supporting our troops?

By Captain Freedom

January 15, 2007 03:20 PM | Link to this

The Captain arrives with sad news today. The once proud and stiff-backed Peggy Noonan, footmaiden to St. Ronald and erstwhile conversant with dolphins, has become a dead-ending America-hater.

In her WSJ column on Friday, the terrorist-loving Nooners declared her solidarity with the Islamocomufascists with comments such as:

“What a dreadful mistake the president made..”

“There was something unnerving about the speech, from the jumpy beginning to the stumbles to the sound glitches. A jittery affair…Nothing in it really worked.”

“He looked like he was over his head.”

“What is paramount is a hard, cold-eyed and even brutal look at America’s interests. We have them. I’m not sure they’ve been given sufficient attention the past few years. In fact, I am sorry to say I believe they have not.”

In 1967, LBJ famously said, “If I’ve lost Conkrite, I’ve lost America.” I don’t believe that the Nooners carries that kind of heft (being a not-man person, after all, like the Bitter Boxer; the plasticene Senators Pelosi, Dole, and Hutchinson; and the Spinster Rice — we need not take them TOO seriously). But where does this treasonous turn against Our Leader end?

Consider yourself warned, Mr Wooten. Should you waver even a scintilla, Markus, Realist, and I will personally visit the AJC office and wave our pudgy fingers in your face. A man has to take a stand, pilondial cyst be damned!

By JK

January 15, 2007 03:33 PM | Link to this

Among the responsibilities of the United States Senate is OVERSIGHT of the Executive Branch. Senator Boxer has demonstrated a willingness to actually conduct oversight, unlike many of her peers who nodded and rubber-stamped us into a $9 trillion debt with almost as many unanswered questions. The Bush cheerleaders often squawk about Democrats lacking the cajones to protect us from foreign enemies, or to enforce laws here at home. Senator Boxer HAS the cajones (sadly perhaps the largest among her peers) to actually DO her job, ask the tough questions, and EARN her paycheck, and you squawk that she’s “rude.” Wah! Wah! Wah! Did you also squawk how “rude” Vice President Cheney was for telling Senator Leahy to go bleep himself? If no, then STFU, whiners.

One last time - Why does a trivial comment from a senator supercede the issue of supporting our troops? Yes, let’s hear the cheerleaders answer.

By Dusty

January 15, 2007 03:34 PM | Link to this

DebbieDoRight.

I think Dr. Rice is one of best people to close the gap in America. She sees both sides and has simply gone with the side she thinks is the best. She shows no hate at any time.

But, because she is a woman, some, even you, are saying that she cannot decide on her own what is best. Colin Powell changed his mind. Rice did not.

It is true that Rice is not a Margaret Thatcher or a Madelin Albright. I thought highly of these women but Rice is at the tops in another way. She is the “classic” in demeanor, brains, loyalty and ethics.

I doubt that she will be President in the near future. America still has some lingering unfortunate feelings on women and race. But they are fading as women like Rice show us how to excel with dignity.

By Captain Freedom

January 15, 2007 03:42 PM | Link to this

Dusty, my good friend with the parched hoo-hah, writes that “I think Dr. Rice is one of best people to close the gap in America.”

While I am second to none in my admiration of how Dr Rice has overcome her racial obstacles to become an intimate adviser to Our Leader, the idea that she could close any kind of gap is preposterous. Just take a look at her teeth, for heaven’s sake. Small wonder she has not been able to catch a man to fulfill her God-ordained breeding obligation.

By getalife

January 15, 2007 03:43 PM | Link to this

Oh please crusty,

If she goes against w, she will be fired.

Get real loser.

The gop is in big trouble. They are scared and they should do what they did after Watergate. Get this failed leadership to resign in disgrace.

If not, they will lose elections for a very long time.

By DebbieDoRight

January 15, 2007 03:57 PM | Link to this

But, because she is a woman, some, even you, are saying that she cannot decide on her own what is best.

I didn’t say that because she’s a woman. Her sex was immaterial to the comment, I said it because of her actions, in my eyes, thus far. 9/11 could have been prevented at the NSA level — Rice had the information, instead of doing the job her position demanded, she went to Cheney and Rumsfeld with the info; this after Rumsfeld deliberately chose to ignore her status as NSA and purposely didn’t include her in any of the security meetings he was having with the Chiefs Of Staff, National Security Agency, (which SHE was in charge of), CIA, etc. I think she thought she was doing the right thing by first going to him with the information, but I have to ask myself if she were someone like a Margaret Thatcher, (I liked her too), or a Ghandi, (Female PM of India who was assasinated in the 80’s by the sikkhs), etc. would they have gone to an equal or handled the job themselves by going directly to the President with the information?

Colin Powell changed his mind. Rice did not

There is no sin and no shame in changing your mind. If you know you’re travelling the wrong way would you keep going or stop, go to a gas station, ask for directions, turn around then go the right way? Why travel down a path which you KNOW is wrong. Colin Powell was an ex-Army general who had SEEN combat and had successfully commanded military excusions before. Once he SAW that what he told the American people was not correct, not the truth, that he was missing VITAL pieces of information and the equation just didn’t add up; he, being a soldier, a parent, a religious man, an American had a moral OBLIGATION to change his mind, object and speak the truth as he now knew it.

I have no idea WHAT Rice knew and when, (concerning WMD’s; etc.), but I think being the intelligent woman that she is; she could’ve looked at the facts for herself, (she had access to them), and came up with a logical conclusion just like Powell did.

By DebbieDoRight

January 15, 2007 03:59 PM | Link to this

the idea that she could close any kind of gap is preposterous. Just take a look at her teeth, for heaven’s sake. Small wonder she has not been able to catch a man to fulfill her God-ordained breeding obligation

You are soooo bad!!!

By DebbieDoRight

January 15, 2007 04:01 PM | Link to this

I doubt that she will be President in the near future. America still has some lingering unfortunate feelings on women and race. But they are fading as women like Rice show us how to excel with dignity

That is true — I still can’t understand how a country like Pakistan, (which is testosterone dominated), could have a female Prime Minster before America even had a female Vice President.

By holdingAJCaccountable

January 15, 2007 04:02 PM | Link to this

I was just waiting for the Senator to ask Secretary “Since this is a military operation, are you willing to go ‘commando’ a la’ Britney Spears in your efforts to support the troops?” and then justify it by saying she wasn’t being “personal” but rather “merely concerned that, like the Secretary’s choice not to have children, her choice to spend time shopping for undergarments might very well distract from time spent seeking a solution to Iraq, and that her choice in taking the time to chose undergarments is causing our soldiers to ‘pay the price’ “

Talk about undercutting your message with a line of questioning…

By Happy Birthday MLK!!

January 15, 2007 04:08 PM | Link to this

Will someone please show Mr. Peabody to the library…?

By Dusty

January 15, 2007 04:29 PM | Link to this

Aw DebbieDoRight,

You have let being a woman get in your way. You don’t believe Rice could decide about WMD on her own. She should have listened to Colin Powell and changed her mind because HE did. You are overlooking the fact that she did look and came to a decision made by herself.

Also, Dr. Rice knew she was NOT president. She conferred with THE president. She is Sec. of State and is not the elected president. Why should she act like it?

By DebbieDoRight

January 15, 2007 04:51 PM | Link to this

Also, Dr. Rice knew she was NOT president. She conferred with THE president. She is Sec. of State and is not the elected president. Why should she act like it

According to a Truth About Issues Article on the events leading up to 9/11; Dr. Rice had been forewarned by the outgoing administration about the dangers of Al Queada, (sp). http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/37/8946

There are more articles, etc., that claim the same thing, but I won’t bore you with all of them, http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/03/25/1537217

http://www.9-11commission.gov/archive/hearing9/9-11CommissionHearing2004-04-08.htm

http://mediamatters.org/items/200411180004

however if you feel like reading them, above are some links.

I did not say that Dr. Rice was trying to act like the president, what I was trying to convey was that she was not doing her job effectively by immediately going to the president with any new information that she had that was of import to National Security.

By Huge

January 15, 2007 05:13 PM | Link to this

Danish aka (sic),

It brings me no joy, but I’ll say it again. You are an illiterate twit.

The word is stuntingly. I did not misspell stunningly. Nuance is not one of your fortes, is it? Go back and read the passage and see if you can understand the choice I used in terms of context.

And still more from the same post!

“…which while technically correct, sounds incredibly pretentious in this forum.”

Danish makes a point.

Unfortunately, the point again embarrassingly illustrates her sophistry.

Please, please, please quit humiliating yourself; get off of the topic of grammar and try another subject that you can miserably nit-pick at - perhaps science?

By Dusty

January 15, 2007 05:31 PM | Link to this

DebbieDoRight,

I don’t know what Pakistan has to do with our elections or numerous other countries who did or did not have women executives. Maybe someone else can figure who gets what and when.

I guess we just have to disagree. The one person I think Dr. Rice should turn information over to is the President. I imagine her opinion went with it. What good would it do if she got information and kept it to herself?

By Markus

January 15, 2007 05:32 PM | Link to this

Rangel: Saddam was “lynched.” Isn’t that special. Only the demoncats can get away with saying something like that on MLK day. But, why am I not surprised. The same types of sewer RATs right here on this blog use gay epithets to hurl insults at Conservatives while b!tching about no rights for gay marriage out of the other side of their filthy sewers. Oh yeah, and calling us “homophobes.” Yep, these jackals can say anything and get away with it. It’s beyond pathetic.

Saddam was tried in a court of Iraqis and executed by Iraqis. Saddam was a mass murderer who who violated 17 UN resolutions between 1991 and 2002. But according to Rangel, Saddam was lynched. Can these JACKASSES get any more pathetic in showing us why they are so pathetic? Hey RATs, what’s Shrillary’s stance on Iraq since Bush’s speech, hummmmmmm???

Every time Rangel opens his trap I have less and less respect for him… but that goes for most demoncats as well, not that I had a high bar for them anyway.

http://hotair.com/archives/2007/01/15/video-rangel-rues-saddams-lynching-on-mlk-day/

By Dennis

January 15, 2007 05:37 PM | Link to this

By Hugh said; “It reminds me of the scene in Amadeus where the Duke tells Mozart that there are two many notes in his opera and to remove a few! Which few didn’t even matter!

“Keep it stuntingly simple and pretend you’ve said something worthwhile.”

That is a marvelous comment!!!

Now, if we could just get certain ones of the right-wing conservative news media to understand what you are talking about….

You don’t have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.

By Dear Wooten Bloggers:

January 15, 2007 05:41 PM | Link to this

“Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and consciencious stupidity.” -Martin Luther King, Jr.-

By Happy Birthday MLK!!

January 15, 2007 05:55 PM | Link to this

If you say that one more time……

By Markus Stupidius

January 15, 2007 06:01 PM | Link to this

Every time I open my trap people have less and less respect for me. but that goes for most republiscum as well, not that anybody has a high bar for me anyway.

By Markus

January 15, 2007 06:03 PM | Link to this

“A good plan, violently executed now, is better than a perfect plan executed next week that will fail.” -General Patton

Trivia question:

What Republican president signed MLK Day into a federal holiday?

(Clue: he spanked Jimmy “Mr. 444 Days” Carter’s butt).

By Markus

January 15, 2007 06:08 PM | Link to this

“Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and consciencious stupidity.” -Martin Luther King, Jr.-

I completely agree. That ‘splains the Katrina “victims” stuck on stupid and government (they so go handin-n-hand) and they couldn’t make their own decisions and get the hell out of the way of a dangerous hurricane (unlike those dumb rednecks in south Mississippi).

By Happy Birthday MLK!!

January 15, 2007 06:15 PM | Link to this

Show Mr. Peabody into the library, please….

By hewhoasks

January 16, 2007 09:41 AM | Link to this

Boxer didn’t use the words “childless” and “single.” The Republicans change what she said to include those and then chastise her for their change of wording.

Boxer’s very clear point was that both she and Rice had no family affected by the war in Iraq in the way that the families of the troops are affected. There was no hint of deprecating Rice for being childless nor for being single.

On a related topic Rush L. brought race into the discussion by saying Boxer had dissed a black woman just before ML King’s birthday. Go look at Rush’s caricature of Obama on his own website.

By Atlantajan

January 19, 2007 01:50 PM | Link to this

Excuse me? Republicans have controlled Congress for 12 years without even attempting to pass meaningful ethics legislation; the Democrats pass such legislation within 50 hours of taking back the Congress; and, somehow, two Republicans get the credit?

Get real.