Thinking Right

By Brian Curtis

March 15, 2007 8:53 AM | Link to this

Call it surrender if you like… it won’t change the reality that we’re accomplishing nothing in Iraq, and there’s nothing TO accomplish there.

We should be fighting terrorism instead.

By jbmlaw

March 15, 2007 9:15 AM | Link to this

Good morning all. The surrender-democrats are not cowards - they simply lack the intellectual capacity to see the larger war that will involve us for the next two generations. Any who proclaims “Iraq has nothing to do with terrorists” obviously does not read even the headlines now. The arc, from Lebanon through Syria through Iraq through Iran and ending in Afghanistan, was the heart of the terrorists. The US military has insinuated itself right in the middle of the arc, disrupting their activities world-wide. And now that we have won that essential ground, our leftist visionaries would surrender. I’m certain they truly believe that would make our lives better, but I have disputed their vision on every other way they want to make our lives better, so no reason for me to stop now.

By Mid-South Philosopher

March 15, 2007 9:16 AM | Link to this

Good morning, Jim,

I finally got on!!!

This is just another example of political hypocrisy on the part of the liberal Democrats.

The liberals believe the war to be lost, yet they realize that the preponderance of the American people will not support any action that will place our troops in more danger. Consequently, the Democrats do not have the gonads to cut-off funding for the war.

Hypocrisy is rampant among the liberals. For example, the liberal banner proclaims the freedoms and rights of individuals within the society and against the economic corporatists. They defend the right of choice, which terminates the life of an entity that has never done them harm, yet they would prevent you and I from possessing, bearing, and using a firearm against a thug criminal bent upon our injury or destruction.

However, hypocrisy is not a malady among the liberal only. The conservatives display a generous supply of it as well. Consider, if you will, the hypocrisy of the conservative point of view when it comes to the power of the 50 states with respect to the legalization of the medical use of marijuana. Yesterday’s ruling by a three judge panel of the 9th District Court of Appeals, which held that California’s law legalizing the use of cannabis under the supervision of a medical doctor was trumped by the national drug laws (largely unenforceable because of the Bush administration’s incompetence in securing our borders), has assured all of us that we will be protected from those dangerous individuals with brain cancer, aggressive arthritis and other pain-centered and incapacitating diseases. Wow, we can all sleep better at night!

With respect to the courts and the interpretation of the Constitution, both the conservatives and liberals are blatantly hypocritical. For conservatives, a judge or justice, who rules according to their philosophy, is a Constitutional originalist. Any other interpretation must be a judicial activist. Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh are particularly guilty of this hypocrisy.

On the liberal side, judges or justices, who rule according to the liberal philosophy, are progressive, sensitive, and enlightened. While those who go in some other direction are clearly reactionary.

Ann Coulter has become so erratic that they are considering naming her the poster child for PMS, but, at least, she is honest enough to admit that she wants activist conservative judges and justices. I can, at least, respect her position.

What a joy it is to watch the politicians!

By Corky Cobb

March 15, 2007 9:21 AM | Link to this

Lead the way Republican war lovers. You want to get the job done in Iraq right? You don’t want to surrender, right? And of course the threat is real, right?

Well now is your chance. It may require you to stop blaming the Dems for all your problems, but it can be done!

Lack of sufficient personnel has been a problem. What we need is for all you war loving dodgers to ENLIST. A maasive show of force is needed. That’s right. Its time to cork the wine. Time to drain the jacuzzi. Put the SUV in the garage. Say good-bye to the kids. Its time for the war loving dodgers to put your money where your pampered mouths are. Stop waiting for others to do what you have so far refused.

If you cancel a few of those tax breaks we can probably throw in some armored vehicles and medical care.

It takes sacrifice to win a war. The threat is real, right? The Dems won’t help, so stop crying, get the job done. Prove to the country you are serious about winning this war and…..

ENLIST

By Southern Democrat

March 15, 2007 9:25 AM | Link to this

You have to laugh at columns like this or you’ll cry.

It is downright pathetic that Wooten, Hannity, and others still try to analogize 9/11 and the War Against Terror to the quagmire that is Iraq. The CIA, Army, White House, and everyone except for certain columnists acknowledges that there is no connection between the regime of Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda’s plot to harm America.

The good news, though, is that while thousands of people die in Iraq, we know exactly where al Qaeda is operating, in the uncontrolled, tribal regions of our “ally” Pakistan. You know, that loyal ally that sold nuclear secrets to North Korea and who allows Islamic fundamentalists to operate unfettered in the Peshawanar region? Oh wait, that’s bad news.

Getting our troops out of Iraq isn’t political except for the far right. It’s a matter of national security for those of us who give a darn about actually protecting our country.

You can call me a coward, a surrenderist, a Defeatocrat, whatever makes you feel better. The good news is that I won’t have to call my aunt to explain why my cousin (getting ready to deploy for the third time in May) had to die in a war she doesn’t understand or mourn any of my friends currently deployed.

Do you not realize that the American public is against this war? It’s not just pacifist liberals or whatever you want to call them, it’s people who would bleed for their country at the first opportunity if it meant making it and their families safer.

Quit listening to those who have never served in combat (e.g., Cheney) and think for yourself. Perhaps a walk along the road to Damascus will help; it seemed to work for Saul.

By McRae Chambers

March 15, 2007 9:27 AM | Link to this

This just in from the CDC: Swallowing gnats kills brain cells. Jim Wooten explained. More at noon.

By Redneck Convert

March 15, 2007 9:38 AM | Link to this

Me and my buddy Jim Earl was talking about the war last nite. We agreed that we need about a million more troops over there. Zell’s idea of sending all the aborted babys to help out takes care of part of it, but I say we get the draft going and take in all the libruls. They can go over and be cannon fodder. After the S**ts and Sunnys run out of ammo on killing them we can send in good conservative troops and wipe them out.

And hurry up about it. My grandson little Sonny Zell George is growing up and I want this war to be over before he is old enough to go.

I know them Iraq people would be little George Washingtons if they was just give a chance and not kilt every time they step out of their house. If we kill the 60% of the Iraq people that say they want our troops out of there we can get somewhere.

I’m downright ashamed of Wooten today. Now he’s set Sister Dusty off and she’ll be ranting about cutting and running all day. She’s probly getting out of the house coat and putting on that sweat shirt right now and getting ready to sound off. Might as well wave the red flag before the bull. And bull is what we’ll get from her.

By abc

March 15, 2007 9:39 AM | Link to this

We’re stuck with Iraq. We can never leave. Just as we still have bases in Germany and Japan, we’ll ALWAYS be in Iraq. If we withdraw, Iran will take it over in no time flat. Shall we call it Babylon again?

By Former conservative

March 15, 2007 9:51 AM | Link to this

The mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks is BEHIND BARS in Cuba. He just admitted planning it “A to Z”. What are we doing in Iraq? Fighting a faceless opposition who are willing to blow themselves and others up. How can you “win” against people such as that? We can’t. We won’t. We should be in Afghanistan tracking down Osama Bin Laden.

We have spent 4 billion dollars on restoring electricity to Iraq and it’s only 20% functional and won’t be completely functional until at least 2015. We have spent billions more on equipment, rebuilding, etc in vain.

We need a plan to pull out of Iraq by 2009 and spend our money on our own country taking care of our own. We have let many Americans down while we are spending ungodly amounts of money on people who hate us and don’t even want us there.

C’mon people. Common sense here. We shouldn’t be there.

By time for the truth

March 15, 2007 9:52 AM | Link to this

maxine waters is thicker than ebonics spouting pigsh!t!!! I saw this far left black bigot on FNS and its snivelling moron caught in the studio lights performance was freaking hilarious. Almost as funny as a typical man hating, haggish jargon loaded diatribe from the poisonous feminazi Naomi Woof. At one point this black congressional caucus dolt actually stated that under Soddom the shia and the sunni ‘got on with each other very well’. How such a snivelling, abject braindead moron is in congress is a far greater outrage than the minor incidents at Abu Ghraib. To paraphrase Satan Karville and the corrupt to the core pardon selling Arkansas rapist - “its her race stupid”!!

The only “good” thing about the yellowbellied cut and run demoNcrat scum’s cut and run policy is that now the rest of the usually pretty obtuse, self absorbed politically uninformed great American peasantry is getting to see what Pelsoibitch San Fran Sicko values and trash the military/undermine the military policies are all about. The likes of Turdtha and the cretinous bigot Waters are feverishly and gleefully doing the work of Al Quaeda. The leftist demoNcrats are the true enemy within that all patriotic Americans need to spit on, both literally and metaphorically!!

Watching these cowardly scum run like scurrying cockroaches from having a debate on Fox News in Dingy harry reid’s back yard was the best laugh I’ve had since the lard arsed HiTllary started manically screeching in that execrable phoney southern accent whilst vaingloriously pandering to those black GOP hating people that the racist inbred rednekkk hates so much.

Somebody please deport the unhinged coward getamaggotbrain back to Cuba today!!

And a hefty verbal kick in the bollocks to the should have been aborted anal obsessive paedophile stalker which was back to its old desperate attention seeking sick and twisted ways yesterday afternoon.

By NativeATLien

March 15, 2007 9:55 AM | Link to this

Once again, you stumbling over yourself to point fingers elsewhere from where the real blame lies. And shame on your silly, race-baiting, low brow Sistah Souljah analogy.

By Jack

March 15, 2007 10:04 AM | Link to this

The war cannot be won if you care about killing civilians. In fact you should kill as many as possible so that those that survive will pressure those in charge to give up. How many German/Japanese civilians were killed in WWll? Would we have won had we not? Do you think our enemy gives a damn about killing innocents?

By time for the truth

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

By NativeATLien

March 15, 2007 9:55 AM | Link to this

Once again, you stumbling over yourself to point fingers elsewhere from where the real blame lies. And shame on your silly, race-baiting, low brow Sistah Souljah analogy.

Actually bollock chops … that was the FUNNIEST and most telling point in todays much too restrained missive on the cut and run demoNcrat scum!!

Waters is by far and away the most ignorant/stupid/brainless/witless moron in congress!! If she was white she’d just be another embittered minimum wage toilet cleaner somewhere in Kalifornia!!

By melo

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

So your point Wooten is? We know the liberal view point as much as we know the neocons, so u saying blah blah what?

By NativeATLien

March 15, 2007 10:19 AM | Link to this

To “time for the truth”

First off you don’t know the first thinkg about Sisah Souljah and what she’s up to these day. If you did, you’d probably try to find someone else for your mindless, ad hominem attack.

I swear this place is popoulated by nothing but idiotic, chest beating, “we’re #1” synchophants who have NO idea what the strife over there is about and no hubris or contrition to admit theat the’ve stepped in a BIG piple.

Since you adn Wooten are so militaristic and keeping focused on the “big picture of this “war”, how about the Pentagon report QUIETLY released yesterday that FINALLY called the Iraqi conflict a “civil war”?!?!?!?

By NativeATLien

March 15, 2007 10:20 AM | Link to this

To “time for the truth”

First off you don’t know the first thinkg about Sisah Souljah and what she’s up to these day. If you did, you’d probably try to find someone else for your mindless, ad hominem attack.

I swear this place is popoulated by nothing but idiotic, chest beating, “we’re #1” synchophants who have NO idea what the strife over there is about and no hubris or contrition to admit theat the’ve stepped in a BIG pile.

Since you adn Wooten are so militaristic and keeping focused on the “big picture of this “war”, how about the Pentagon report QUIETLY released yesterday that FINALLY called the Iraqi conflict a “civil war”?!?!?!?

By Quick Observation

March 15, 2007 10:20 AM | Link to this

Sister Souljah? Although race has little or nothing to do with Jim’s point on Iraq, he found a way to slip it in. He continues to do his part to keep the Southern Strategy alive. Well done Jim!

By time for the truth

March 15, 2007 10:25 AM | Link to this

poor old thick as pigsh!t waterMELOnhead sure is puking up the leftist intellectual dishonesty this morning!!

Jim’s points are blindingly obvious and irrefutable - albeit much too politely and ‘moderately’ put - you have to be a rabidly dishonest cut and run pinko not to see it!!

By NativeATLien

March 15, 2007 10:26 AM | Link to this

To “time for the truth”

First off you don’t know the first thinkg about Sisah Souljah and what she’s up to these day. If you did, you’d probably try to find someone else for your mindless, ad hominem attack.

I swear this place is popoulated by nothing but idiotic, chest beating, “we’re #1” synchophants who have NO idea what the strife over there is about and no hubris or contrition to admit theat the’ve stepped in a BIG pile.

Since you adn Wooten are so militaristic and keeping focused on the “big picture of this “war”, how about the Pentagon report QUIETLY released yesterday that FINALLY called the Iraqi conflict a “civil war”?!?!?!?

By JP

March 15, 2007 10:35 AM | Link to this

Yes, Mohammed—nothing to see in the Justice department, folks, we have a repeated 9/11 confession! Look away, American Idol is on…….

jbm: “The surrender-democrats are not cowards - they simply lack the intellectual capacity to see the larger war that will involve us for the next two generations.”

No, they recognize that the “war on terror” is misguided and erroneously taking place in Iraq when it should have been more forcefully fought in Afghanistan, and they’re trying to guide it to being fought on the correct fronts.

Trouble is, Republicans will pounce on any attempt to clean up the mess as a sign of “weakness” or “surrender” for purely political reasons, thus trapping us in this colossal joke and preventing any real honest discussion from taking place.

Iraq != the War on Terror, no matter what Dick Cheney upchucks.

Jack, “The war cannot be won if you care about killing civilians.” Woo hoo, let’s carpet-bomb somebody! Wait, didn’t we try Shock and Awe already? Nevermind that, drop more bombs! Exterminate! Yeeeeeeee-haaaaaa!

By deegee

March 15, 2007 10:37 AM | Link to this

Why is the debate in congress concerning a timetable for the redeployment of troops considered a sideshow? In November the American voters considered the issue to be the main event. It still is and it will be for a while.

In my opinion the side show is what is happening in the Attorney General’s office and the revelation that Gonzalez’s top aide was speaking with the White House staff on a plan to use the Patriot Act to fire US Attorneys and replace them sans congressional approval. This is exactly why many people are opposed to this legislation.

By Jeff

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

If Pelosi and the majority of the Dems had been in power in 1941, we’d be speaking German - MAYBE Russian - by now. (Actually, I probably would have grown up learning one of those two languages as my FIRST language, and I’d probably have been second generation as that!)

Dresden? Hiroshima? Nagasaki? Wholesale carpetbombing with dumb gravity bombs? Nope. Too many “innocent” casualties. (Never mind that these “innocents” - like the vast majority of today’s Muslims - never once spoke out about the evil and violence committed by those in power over them.)

Iwo Jima? Normandy? Berlin? Midway? Nope. Too many dead soldiers. (BTW: Each ONE of those battles killed as many as we have lost in Iraq in FAR shorter amounts of time.)

So what exactly DO the Dems want to do? They STILL haven’t shown any initiative other than “We’re not Bush”. YOU’RE IN POWER NOW: SHOW US YOUR PLAN! You can NO LONGER play the “the other Party won’t les us” card! (aka “Do you want some cheese with that whine?”)

By Jeff

March 15, 2007 10:42 AM | Link to this

JP:

The Soviets couldn’t clean up Afganistan, and they didn’t have to worry about the liberal pansies such as Pelosi telling the military that it can’t do its job.

By time for the truth

March 15, 2007 10:43 AM | Link to this

That was utterly pathetic illegal ALIEN … whatever bigotry/racism sistah souljau may or may not be puking up today is utterly irrelevant. It was a most amusing ‘literary analogy’ - indeed a perfect foil (in the context used) to the hateful Pelosibitch!!

So “no one” on here has “NO idea” what the “strife” in Iraq is about??!! LMFAO!! …huge smirk at brain dead lefies

This is NOT a “civil war” … the American Civil War and the English Civil were very very different in intensity and scope. Its still very clearly just the ancient sectarian hatreds which simmered under Soddom and - like in the old Jugoslavia when Tito died - have slowly come to the boil. When the two sides are actively rampaging all over the country with armies/armed units and fighting frequent if not constant actual battles/serious skirmishes then I’ll belive its a civil war!! Right now its still just cowardly, murderous sectarianism!! Which has actually dramatically been reduced in and around Baghdad since the recent troop surge!!

You must also have a watermelon brain like the sad wanker melo … after 25 years or so of watching Soddom’s Iraq and post Soddom Iraq only a gibbering ebonics spouting supremely retarded ape could post such vacuous, mendacious bollocks and not seriously consider suicide by pork rinds as a fitting penance!!

YOU HAVE NO SHAME BUBBATURD!! That’s the hate America left for ya!!!

By time for the truth

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

That was utterly pathetic illegal ALIEN … whatever bigotry/racism sistah souljah may or may not be puking up today is utterly irrelevant. It was a most amusing ‘literary analogy’ - indeed a perfect foil (in the context used) to the hateful Pelosibitch!!

So “no one” on here has “NO idea” what the “strife” in Iraq is about??!! LMFAO!! …huge smirk at brain dead lefies

This is NOT a “civil war” … the American Civil War and the English Civil were very very different in intensity and scope. Its still very clearly just the ancient sectarian hatreds which simmered under Soddom and - like in the old Jugoslavia when Tito died - have slowly come to the boil. When the two sides are actively rampaging all over the country with armies/armed units and fighting frequent if not constant actual battles/serious skirmishes then I’ll belive its a civil war!! Right now its still just cowardly, murderous sectarianism!! Which has actually dramatically been reduced in and around Baghdad since the recent troop surge!!

You must also have a watermelon brain like the sad wanker melo … after 25 years or so of watching Soddom’s Iraq and post Soddom Iraq only a gibbering ebonics spouting supremely retarded ape could post such vacuous, mendacious bollocks and not seriously consider suicide by pork rinds as a fitting penance!!

YOU HAVE NO SHAME BUBBATURD!! That’s the hate America left for ya!!!

By getalife

March 15, 2007 10:46 AM | Link to this

The next Khalid Shaikh Mohammed is in Pakistan planning the next attack while we are fighting a civil war in Iraq.

w is ignoring them again.

The Iraq disaster continues while the money wasted is cutting into basic American programs.

China has us by the balls and the total destruction of a superpower is happening right in front of our eyes.

This is w’s legacy.

By Dennis

March 15, 2007 10:48 AM | Link to this

The next thing you know, Jim Wooten will be blaming the democrats for supplying weapons and giving money to the insurgency. Of such is his twisted logic.

His pathology is exemplary of neoconservatives - never mind the truth, and what’s a little lie if it gets us to the goal we want.

Perhaps he thinks someone his age will be around (and he’s younger than I am) when there truly is an elete with him a member at the top and the rest of us are the “bewildered herd”.

Problem is, that battle has been going on since the beginning of time and the neocons are no closer to achieving that goal than when the race for mastery over all others began.

The war in Iraq is, and always has been, about who will control the middle-east oil and little else. Continuing to deal with Saddam would have been much less costlier in terms of lives and money than the war we’ve had for the past four years.

I suppose when you write a column for a newspaper, tho, you can say what you want - truth be damned.

Today’s article by Mr. Wooten is an excellent example.

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

By BeenThereDoneThat

March 15, 2007 10:54 AM | Link to this

By jbmlaw

March 15, 2007 9:15 AM | Link to this

Good morning all. The surrender-democrats are not cowards - they simply lack the intellectual capacity to see the larger war that will involve us for the next two generations. Any who proclaims “Iraq has nothing to do with terrorists” obviously does not read even the headlines now.

jbmlaw it is you who must lack “the intellectual capacity”. You spin Iraq and make a case for staying the course, as John McCain so ably did yesterday. You totally ignore the fact that WE created this stage for those guys in Iraq. This 2 generation conflict that you predict should have been fought all along in the places and against the people that you feel are the enemy in this conflict. Iraq was a massive blunder and has actually taken resources away from the real threats elsewhere in the world. Furthermore, if alot of you would compare the threat that terrorism poses in relation to the resources being expended to combat it, you might find that the sum total of this threat has been greatly overblown. Compare deaths caused bu terrorism to other causes of death and then try to rationalize the cost in dollars, lives, and resources. There is no ROI jbmlaw. Spin it anyway you wish guys, but be honest enough to admit that invading Iraq was a monumental blunder and has done nothing toward eliminating the “terrorist” threat that scare you chicken littles so badly. It has made the situation drastically worse.

By Dusty

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

Thank you, Jim Wooten,

You have this situation so well in hand. Liberals keep trying to make cut-n-run look good. Southern Democrat listed all the oblique statements liberals make when trying to act brave while running. We are off to a good start today.

RedNeck, you made me laugh even as I gathered all my sound off weapons to thrash you miscreants.(I even have on a chenille sweater for the occasion.) But no bull. You are the overwhelming producer of such as that and I would not infringe on your territory.

So lead on, Jim Wooten. You are in fine shape today.

By Corky Cobb

March 15, 2007 10:59 AM | Link to this

Jeff, you talk about the liberal pansies destroying the war you love.

What about the conservative pansies? What are YOU doing? Why do the war loving conservatives get to dodge this war?

Not once have I seen a Wooten column asking his readers for sacrifice. Tax cuts yes, sacrifice hardly.

If we fought WWII the way we have fought the Iraq war we would all be speaking German or Russian. NOBODY seems to be willing to fight this war.

Its time Jeff. The threat is real right? It’s time for YOU to….

ENLIST

By Brad

March 15, 2007 10:59 AM | Link to this

Please allow me to make a prediction before Rush gets on the air and before Sean Hannity gets on the air. I know all you leftie wingnuts think every conservative can’t live a day without listening to Rush. I know all you leftie wingnuts can’t get a word in on this blog without mentioning conservatives can’t think without Rush first. Therefore, I would like to say up front that somehow the leftie wingnuts are going to dismiss the confession of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. The wingnuts are going to deny that he was the architect of 9-11 and 31 other terrorist attacks on Western interests around the globe since 1993. The wingnuts are going to say that at Guantanamo Resort & Club, Khalid was waterboarded, electrocuted, fed pork, and stacked naked which combined got him to say anything those evil, hateful US soldier Nazis wanted him to.

After all, if the wingnuts can no longer whine about Osama’s whereabouts because he wasn’t the true architect of the terrorism we witnessed, as well as W taking his eye off the ball in Iraq, then it would be one less screed for the world to hear from the wingnuts about how W is wrong. Finally, there can be no more of an absurd comment to make than to say that supporters of the war in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other hotspots of radical Islamic terrorism around the globe should all go sign up and join the war. Such 6th grade juvenile arguments are not unexpected however coming from wingnuts who can’t reason without emoticons getting in the way.

By Southern Democrat

March 15, 2007 11:01 AM | Link to this

There’s a brutal dictator in the Middle East presiding over a nation that is deeply factionalized. He uses authoritarian methods to attempt to bring them into line, but has thrown up his hands regarding a whole region of his country. He has received large amounts of aid from the U.S., but he is losing his grip on power and terrorists are taking a foothold in his country. He has weapons of mass destruction and has outwardly threatened an American ally. His name is not Hussein, but Musharraf.

Why haven’t we invaded?

There’s another leader in the Middle East. Though his power is vastly overstated by most who are ignorant of the political system, he is the figurehead secular leader of a theocracy. He has vowed to wipe Israel off the map. He has sent arms to Hizbollah. He has supported attacks against U.S. military forces. His name? Ahmadinejad.

WHY HAVEN’T WE ATTACKED???

COWARDS! REPUBLICAN’TS!!!

As I said a few months back, the Neo-Con Amateur Hour approach to foreign policy is over. It’s time for some real leadership. You know, from people who have actually been in combat and understand both military and soft power.

By liberalextremist

March 15, 2007 11:04 AM | Link to this

Mr. Wooten,

Congratulations on taking this conversation to a new low. Sir you have proven that you don’t want the facts and you are nothing but a race-baiter. Shame on you!!!!

By deegee

March 15, 2007 11:12 AM | Link to this

What dismays me the most about the entire debate in the US over the situation in Iraq is this crankiness on the part of the American people over what we perceive to be a lack of urgency on the part of the Iraqis to reform. We invaded their country, we toppled their government, we disbanded their army and police, and we naively told them that they needed to implement a representative form of government that had to include Sunnis, Shia and Kurds. Now we are PO’d because they aren’t acting fast enough, et al, conforming to our election cycles.

Conditions in Iraq are desperate. People with means are leaving in droves creating a refugee crisis in neighboring states. The US cannot leave Iraq right now. We have to clean up our mess before we leave and we have to use our heads in order to stop the killing. Talking with Iran and Syria is a good start.

By Dennis

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

Brad@ 10:59. “Such 6th grade juvenile arguments are not unexpected however coming from wingnuts who can’t reason without emoticons getting in the way.”

First, Brad, your comments are well written - with the same “emotiocon” that you accuse those with viewpoints opposite to yours.

Your patriotism is unquestioned at this point. But has it ever occured to you that you that those of us who don’t share your views may be just as intelligent and better informed than you are?

Additionally, every reason that the Bush administration gave for attacking Iraq has been shot down. NOT ONE HAS WITHSTOOD THE TEST OF TIME.

And now, including the Bush administrations lies and current attempts at circumventing the courts and the constitution over attorney general appointments.

That ought to raise the questions of just how much and how many more lies are there.

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

By Jake

March 15, 2007 11:21 AM | Link to this

Jack, Jeff, Dusty, Brad, …

Call your Congressmen and Senators and ask them to raise your taxes to fund the war. Enlist if they’ll take you. Hell, I’d be willing to bet that none of you have taken even a single step to save energy specifically to avoid funding our enemies with our addiction to oil.

You chicken$hit warmongers compare Iraq to WWII, but unlike the greatest generation, you’re unwilling to make even the smallest of sacrifices.

You keyboard warriors are the greatest pu$$ies. Congratulations.

By Captain Freedom

March 15, 2007 11:28 AM | Link to this

Bravo Brad,

You are so right. Bush has won. Khalid has admitted that he was the mastermind, so we really have no reason to worry about bin Laden. We did not “abandon” the search for Osama, we just realized he was not the evildoer everyone said.

After all, most of the bin Laden family are good friends with the Bush family; that’s why they were all allowed to leave the country in the days following 9/11 (even as airspace was closed to all other air traffic). Bush knew that the crazy liberals would try to blame bin Laden for the attack, just to embarass his Daddy and brothers for their business dealings. But now, he has proved that bin Laden was just a fall guy, and this Khalid guy was the real bad guy. And we got him, and attached electrodes to his balls just like he deserved.

But I am concerned about Osama…where does he go to get his reputation back? Perhaps Alberto Gonzales can coach him before his next press conference so he can play for maximum sypathy. “Mistakes were made by al Quaeda, but hey, it’s a big organization, and I can’t be expected to know everything that goes on. I’m just a poor Arab boy that pulled himself up by his bootstraps.” etc etc

So shut up you pantywaist liberal bedwetters. We’re winning!!

By DebbieDoRight

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

Silly Jim: Since you believe in this war so much, how many of YOUR family members have enlisted to serve? How many of Cheney’s, Bush’s, Limbaugh’s, Coulter’s? How many of the current Republican Senators/Congressman’s? Has the family of Alberto Gonzalez signed up yet? How many of your REAL believers in this misbeggoten war have sacrificed ANYTHING in the name of “winning”?

Until any of you have sacrificed at least ONE family member to this “War On Terror” you should all be silent — your typing out ridiculous statements on a typewriter doesn’t count; sitting on your yellowing shirt tail is not sacrosanct, neither is putting down the people who are trying to affect REAL change upon this disastrous war.

Your ideaology is one of stubborn hubris which is emboldened by a sad, sick man drunk on his own power, (or Jim Beam), and your trajectory course of action for this war is heading straight down the crapper.

By MarkP

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

Mr. Wooten, you are right: President Bush has managed to convert Iraq from a dictatorship to a front in the war on terror. The far right seems to find the quagmire itself to be an actual ‘success’ merely because they can say “there are terrorists there. We can’t leave, that would make them happy.” That being the case, why not strive for even more success over the next two years. Surely it would be a very easy matter to convert various other nations to fronts in the War on Terror. How about Iran, Syria? Tunisia or Kenya? Admit it: either Iraq is now another Somalia unable to function as a sovereign (as the far-right now seems to assert) or it has the basic ingredients for a democratic structure (as was claimed immediately before and following the invasion, again by the far right.) If it’s the latter, then a timetable (to withdraw most of the troops doing the legwork on the ground) will give the would be fledgling democracy a lot more incentive to step up their effors at security and control, and maybe even some constitutional order.

By time for the truth

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

@ demented bollock chops jake … cheers for the hugely amusing, deranged cut and run like yellowbellied RAT turds hissy fit you anal wart infested queer marxist scumbucket!!

I trust the above suitably terse factual description of your worthless putrid dumbrarse doesn’t embarass you too much at your next Rentboys Anonymous meeting in San Fran Sicko or the limp wristed pinko fa ggot part of Atlanta you slovenly infest!!

By Jack

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

Hey Jake, you don’t know sh-t. I’ve been there done that back in 1970. Go play with your dolls.

By HAROLD

March 15, 2007 11:37 AM | Link to this

CRAZY OLD MAN! THE REPUBLICANS HAVE BEEN BEGGING THE DEMOCRAPS FOR A WITHDRAWAL TIMETABLE.

THE BUSH WITHDRAWAL STRATEGY IS “BLAME THE DEMOCRATS”

DUBYA HAD NO PLAN, NO STRATEGY FOR WINNING OR WITHDRAWING. HIS PLAN WAS TO DESTABILIZE THE AREA TO REDUCE ECONOMIC/POWER COMPETITION FOR THE USA AND THEN BLAME IT ON THE DEMOCRATS THAT THE USA DID NOT “WIN”

BLAME THE DEMOCRATS! BLAME THE DEMOCRATS!

IF YOU DRIVE YOUR CAR INTO A RIVER LIKE KENNEDY DO YOU BLAME THE TOW TRUCK DRIVER THAT YOUR CAR IS DESTROYED AFTER HE PULLS IT OUT? HAROLD THINKS NOT.

By TW

March 15, 2007 11:38 AM | Link to this

Republican criticism of a ‘liberal’ attempt to manage the war is about the same as the kid who craps in his pants telling on the one who picks his nose.

By time for the truth

March 15, 2007 11:38 AM | Link to this

so … was it rednekkks NAMBLA, getamaggotbrain or inbred rednekkk that got caught choking on an organic hotdog in the mens toilets with the Chairqueer of MARTA?

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/11256844/detail.html

By Dennis

March 15, 2007 11:39 AM | Link to this

By MarkP March 15, 2007 11:30 AM

“Mr. Wooten, you are right: President Bush has managed to convert Iraq from a dictatorship to a front in the war on terror. The far right seems to find the quagmire itself to be an actual ‘success’ merely because they can say “there are terrorists there.”

Well said, Mark. It doesn’t seem to have occured to Mr. Wooten that Iraq didn’t go to the terrorists.

Rather, the current terrorists came to Iraq - AFTER the invasion of GWB.

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

By Jake

March 15, 2007 11:44 AM | Link to this

Jack,

Been where? Done what? All done now?

This ain’t Vietnam…it’s World War III. So what do you have give? A son? A daughter? Higher taxes? A more fuel efficient car? An employee who can work from home one day a week? What about replacing a light bulb with a compact florescent?

Anything? Anything at all?

By harold

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

harold wonders sometimes if criminal advisor Rove and criminal vice president cheney did not tell bush “hey, you can never defeat them and keep us safe. the best thing you can do is create a distraction” and he listened and now we have iraq. he has thrown hudnreds of thousands of iraqis under the bus thinking it will save americans. newsflash buddy. it wont.

By time for the truth

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

Its blindingly obvious that the cut and run hate America keyboard warrior jake has already generously given what passes for its brain to the Emory Primate Centre for medical research into snivelling leftist cowardice!!

By Jackie

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

Does it strike you as strange to hear the necons speak of “supporting the troops” and “cut-and-run?” They say the are conservative and the question I have is; there are social, religious, fiscal and constitutional categories that would define their conservatism.
I ask the so-called conservatives, which category or blended category do they fall in? Secondly, they can tell us what needs to be done and how to do it when it comes to other peoples lives; when do they “support our troops” with something other than sloagneering? It appears to me they are all chicken-hawks.

By harold

March 15, 2007 11:52 AM | Link to this

harold wonders sometimes if criminal advisor Rove and criminal vice president cheney did not tell bush “hey, you can never defeat them and keep us safe. the best thing you can do is create a distraction” and he listened and now we have iraq. he has thrown hudnreds of thousands of iraqis under the bus thinking it will save americans. newsflash buddy. it wont.

By Dusty

March 15, 2007 11:55 AM | Link to this

Oh, I wish I had time for all the fun and games. Right now, liberals are definitely winning in “Who’s the biggest idiot?” Let’s see.

SouDem, great peace lover, wants to declare war on Iran.

deegee wants to give out enemies a timetable so they can get their schedule straight.

Curtis says we are not fighting terrorism!!

Dennis throws in the old attorney general appointments thing forgeting that Clinton docked 90+ while Bush dropped 8.

Then Capn Freedom with his pseudo simperings tries to say that Bush and Osama are big buddies.

Yep, liberals are way ahead on the fool’s folly parade. They are so talented.

See ya later. Gone for the day.

By Bud

March 15, 2007 11:56 AM | Link to this

Jake nailed it. Anybody arguing that we should stay in Iraq indefinitely or arguing that we’re in the gestational stage of WWIII should also be calling for higher taxes, a broad-based draft and energy restrictions on the American people to avoid funding our enemies. Otherwise, they’re just a bunch of welfare queens who sit on their fat azzes while seeking to benefit from the hard work and sacrifices of others.

By Chip

March 15, 2007 11:57 AM | Link to this

“Conservatives are divided on the Iraq war, but there is a growing feeling it was a mistake,” says longtime conservative activist and fund-raiser Richard Viguerie. “It’s not a Ronald Reagan�type of idea to ride on our white horse around the world trying to save it militarily. Ronald Reagan won the cold war by bankrupting the Soviet Union. No planes flew. No tanks rolled. No armies marched.”

By Brad

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

Well thank you for your kind words Dennis.

But has it ever occured to you that you that those of us who don’t share your views may be just as intelligent and better informed than you are?

Better informed? That’s a matter of opinion, don’t you think?

Additionally, every reason that the Bush administration gave for attacking Iraq has been shot down

Does that include violating 15 or more United Nations resolutions for over a decade?

And now, including the Bush administrations lies and current attempts at circumventing the courts and the constitution over attorney general appointments. And that is different than Bill Clinton firing all of his when the White Water investigation started ramping up because*???

Captain Freedom.

most of the bin Laden family are good friends with the Bush family; that’s why they were all allowed to leave the country in the days following 9/11

Did it ever occur to you that the Bin Laden family disavowed Osama years ago when he went radical and Saudi Arabia threw him out? I’ve heard all the wingnut conspiracy theories, so save your fingers.

Jake.

Hell, I’d be willing to bet that none of you have taken even a single step to save energy specifically to avoid funding our enemies with our addiction to oil.

You know nothing of those who post on this blog. You don’t know where they live, what they drive, and what they do in their personal lives to decrease energy consumption. However, we do know what hypocrites like Al Gore and John Edwards are doing about it. So don’t even pretend to talk about something you know nothing about.

As for the rest of you wingnuts on Iraq, I’ll make you a deal. I’ll support an increase in my taxes and yours can stay the same for Iraq. In return, I’ll expect you to support an increase in your taxes while mine stay the same to fund your free universal healthcare for all proposition that I don’t support. One good turn deserves another. I’m out.

By Jackie

March 15, 2007 12:06 PM | Link to this

There are broad categories of conservatism that I have been able to identify; social, fiscal, religious, constitutional. Could the conservatives please tell us what category(s) they fall in and what this does to help our country? Secondly, could they help me understand what they have done to “support our troops” beside speak about it? Those of us who have walked the walk would like to understand where you get all this bluster and flatulation?

By melo

March 15, 2007 12:06 PM | Link to this

I think you need to regudgitate this coloumn evey two weeks Mr. Wooten. That way we can arouse the base and hopefully win the 2008 elections and keep the war on Islam and Arabs( i mean terror, my bad) going!!

Thats why u lost the Novemeber elections, so thats fine, the Bush ratings will go up. The American people are fools and can be easily manipulated by Crawl ChenRowBushDUMB Religious Fornicators Right?!

By steve-o

March 15, 2007 12:12 PM | Link to this

It’s is so damn funny that Maxine Waters, a good congresswoman who has made a career out of representing the disadvantaged, has really roused the ire of the neoCON wingnuts today! So Maxine Waters supports a withdrawal from Iraq…is this really news? Are you all really that shocked and enraged?

The comparison to Sista Souljah is far-fetched—with the only thing that the two women have in common is that they’re black. What’s next Wooten…you’re going to compare Condi Rice to good ol’loyal Aunt Jemima? Both comparisons would be far-reaching.

The war was a stupid, ill-informed mistake that I never supported in the first place. It has nothing to do with 9/11, despite Wooten’s mention of Khalid Sheik Muhammad at the end of his unhinged rant. The troops have no mission right now. We’re not winning. Iraq is worse off now than it was after the fall of Saddam. If some of you believe that it isn’t, then book a vacation to Iraq and see the wonderous ancient sites and relics that it has to offer. Here’s another hint…high ranking State Dept. officials shouldn’t have to make “secret” visits to a country where we were victorious.

If you neoCON wingnuts want to blow off some steam then look at your child-king and his “yes-men” who led this country into one of the greatest ill-fated and quixotic calamities in our history.

By time for the truth

March 15, 2007 12:14 PM | Link to this

YET MORE NAUSEATING HYPOCRISY FROM THE far left ECO-WHACKO GLOBAL WHINING LIARS!!

Eco-warrior Trudie prefers helicopter to an 80-mile train ride 15.03.07

Trudie Styler: One rule for her, and another for the rest of us It’s one rule for them, and another for the rest of us.

Trudie Styler, wife of Sting and self-styled eco-warrior, recently took a helicopter to travel 80 miles from Wiltshire to Devon, a journey that would have taken less than two hours by train.

The actress and film producer is forever harping on about saving the environment, having set up the Rainforest Campaign in the late 1980s with her pop star husband.

The Stings are known for eating only organic food, supposedly grown on their land, although one member of staff recently admitted to serving up nonorganic salad from the supermarket.

So what was Styler thinking as she clambered into her gas-guzzling chopper, off to stay with friend and fellow greenie Zac Goldsmith on his organic farm in Devon?

Her own home, Lake House, a Jacobean manor in the Avon Valley, is conveniently located just six miles out of Salisbury, from where frequent trains run to the West Country.

On Monday David Cameron announced plans to crackdown on domestic flights by slapping a green tax on them, so perhaps Styler is enjoying the luxury of a private helicopter while she can get away with it.

But this isn’t the first time the Stings have been caught out. In 2000 the couple threatened the Ministry of Defence with legal action if a nearby airfield were to be expanded.

It later emerged Sting had twice used the airfield in question from which to roar off in his private jet.

Styler’s personal assistant declined to comment on her boss’s travel arrangements when I called.

By Captain Freedom

March 15, 2007 12:16 PM | Link to this

Look, fellow True Believers, I’m just pointing out that with Khalid’s confession, we no longer need concern ourselves with bin Laden. This would be true whether the family was tight with the Bushes or not. No conspiracy, just the facts. Khalid confessed to it all, ergo bin Laden must be off the hook. That’s why we pulled all but a handful of troops out of Afghanistan…they were no longer needed there. The ones that remain behind are strictly humanitarian nation-builders who re-build schools and hand out candy bars to grateful youngsters.

Don’t be such a sore winner, Brad. Khalid’s confession (which I’m sure is somehow updated and more comprehensive than his previous confessions) is all we need to prove that i) torture works and ii) we are winning.

And to all those Islamoliberfascists who complain that this confession is old news, that it’s been published at least twice previously, that it is really only a distraction from the Libbyesque persecution of Alberto Gonzales, well, you are a bunch of whiners and pathetic stupid dum dum liberals. Who are traitors and hate America.

By steve-o

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

Oh…and Wooten, I noticed your little disingenuous IDs for Pelosi and Waters, (D-San Francisco) and (D-Los Angeles).

Here some ideas for you:

Newt Gingrich (R-OTP) Orin Hatch (R-Big Love) Mark Foley (R-Limbaugh’s neighborhood) Strom Thurmond (R-Dem ol’ cotton fields)

By Morris

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

We are not fighting terrorists. We are not dealing with a criminal element. We are in a war with Islam.

They declared the war and re-declare it daily. It is not empty rhetoric. They don’t care where they fight us. They don’t care how we got into Iraq. We can pull out of Iraq and the fighting will simply move somewhere else. It will never stop till one side is crushed.

The Left in this country thinks that, as with the Communists they coddled so much, they can reach out and find common ground with Islamists. They will eventually find that the only commonality we share is the six feet of soil over us and under Islamist’s feet. Ted Kennedy’s liver will have failed by that point so he won’t be here to care. We better start caring now.

By Dennis

March 15, 2007 12:19 PM | Link to this

By Dusty March 15, 2007 11:55 AM. “Dennis throws in the old attorney general appointments thing forgeting that Clinton docked 90+ while Bush dropped 8.”

Well, here you go, Dusty, trying the old “cherry Pick” which won’t work in this instant. All AGs work at the pleasure of the president, a fact in your limp, wimppy, neocon way, that you would like us to forget. And every president usually does this at the beginning of his presidency.

Clinton didn’t sack his AGs in the middle of his tenure and he didn’t sack any by sneaking through the back door for investigating his cronies.

At this point in the game, even intelligent neocons know that they have backed a loser.

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

By jm

March 15, 2007 12:22 PM | Link to this

Maybe instead of trying to establish democracy in the middle east, we should try and establish here in the US. What Mr. Wooten seems to overlook is that the democrats are doing what the voters (you know, the ones that President Bush claims to represent) elected them to do and that is get out of Iraq. While I know some people on this blog might have trouble believing this but you are in the minority in wanting this fiasco to continue.

Oh and Mr. Wooten, nice try in once again trying to link Iraq to 9/11 but that tired lie needs to be put to bed. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and W the incompetent made it possible for Osama Bin Laden (you know, the head of Al Queda, who the republicans mention only during elections to scare people from voting for democrats) to escape from Tora Bora.

By getalife

March 15, 2007 12:22 PM | Link to this

Keep an eye on Pakistan to see where the next attack will come from.

The chief justice has been arrested by the President and the lawyers are rioting (geez.)

They have the nukes OBL will use against us.

By Jake

March 15, 2007 12:24 PM | Link to this

Brad at 12:04,

Where are you off to, keyboard warrior?

Your silly attempt to change the subject with “Let’s Make a Deal” indicates that I was right about you — no sacrifice whatsoever for the cause you fight so gallantly for from behind your monitor.

When are you gonna step up Brad? What’s your sacrifice going to be so we can defeat our enemies?

Taker.

By melo

March 15, 2007 12:24 PM | Link to this

Time for the Truth, pinko,CAN I PLEASE BORROW YOUR DICTIONARY??

Thanks, Putrid, dumbrarse,BOLLOCK,PINKO…..

By Dennis

March 15, 2007 12:30 PM | Link to this

By Morris March 15, 2007 12:17 PM “We are not fighting terrorists. We are not dealing with a criminal element. We are in a war with Islam.”

Wrong. Islam is not a terrorist organization. Islam is a religion that grew out of Judaism just like Christianity grew out of Judaism.

That there are terrorist and peace loving people in all three religions is correct.

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

By Jack

March 15, 2007 12:37 PM | Link to this

After we cut and run per the dem’s wishes, there will be massive killing in Iraq that will make the genocide in the Sudan look like kid’s play. If you don’t believe that your head is in the sand.

By Friend in True Belief

March 15, 2007 12:42 PM | Link to this

We heard you the first time Captain. While Dusty and Brad share our common hatred of our fellow non-Christian man, woman and child, their reading comprehension is sometimes lacking. I’m not concerned though. What they lack in intellect they make up for with passion — bless their hearts.

Lead on, sir.

By getalife

March 15, 2007 12:45 PM | Link to this

Jack,

Read up on Iraqi history. They have been killing each other for over 1000 years, Saddam kept the lid on and now it is off.

The Iraq disaster is an admitted mistake by the Dems who voted for it. The hate party will never aqdmit it.

The threat is now in Pakistan. Pay attention, this is where the next attack will come from probably with nukes.

By Morris

March 15, 2007 12:51 PM | Link to this

Dennis - Watch who you are calling ignorant, you stupid, freaking, dumb a*. The origins of Islam are irrelevant. Modern day followers of Judaism and Christianity are not publicly calling for the world-wide extermination of non-believers. Everyone in Germany was not a member of the Nazi party either, but the rest went along when push came to shove. These are people who are still fighting the Crusades. The focus on an Iraq withdrawal and fighting terrorism like it’s the Mafia is short sighted. You are also a pinhead.

By Jack

March 15, 2007 12:55 PM | Link to this

getalife. Just because they have been fighting for so long doesn’t change what will happen if we cut and run. The dem’s can have all that blood on them and feel good about abandoning the good people of Iraq.

By Kelly

March 15, 2007 12:56 PM | Link to this

Jake inspired me. I’m changing my position on Iraq. I’ll support it if we institute a draft without exemptions for college students, promise to drop a minimum of 500,000 troops into Baghdad and raise my taxes to pay for it. In addition, strict restrictions must be placed on energy consumption by both business and consumers.

What about it Jack? Are you with me?

By Jack

March 15, 2007 1:01 PM | Link to this

Yeah. Go for it.

By Captain Freedom

March 15, 2007 1:01 PM | Link to this

Kudos, Morris!! You put that Islamosympfascist Dennis right in his place. Dennis’ so-called “fact-based” post is no match for your superior wit and intimidating invective. The closing shot calling him a pinhead was surely the cuop de grace. Strong and stirring words sir, and no doubt backed by a fine example of Patriotic masculinity.

Clearly sir, your talents are wasted on the bedwetters on this board. Your local armed forces recruiting office needs your kind, sir, manly men who are not afraid to inflict pain where pain is due.

Be sure to ask for a forward infantry assignment. I understand all the vacancies for school re-building and candy bar distribution are filled.

By chipper

March 15, 2007 1:03 PM | Link to this

What the hell you are belly aching about Jake? Brad made an excellent point. You pay for your causes with taxes, others should pay for their causes with taxes. Your kind brought up the taxes and war support issue here. Besides, your kind takes the word of an Islamic terrorist over those of our troops. Your kind takes the word of the proven liar media over the word of our troops. Your kind hates the troops. What the $hit do you care whether someone signs up or not?

By Jack Has a Split Personality

March 15, 2007 1:05 PM | Link to this

Jack,

At 10:04 you were advocating that we should kill as many civilians as possible. At 12:37, you’re expressing concern about the massive killing that would take place if we leave.

Make up your mind dude. Are you for sectarian genocide or not?

By Captain Freedom

March 15, 2007 1:06 PM | Link to this

The Captain apologizes for mis-spelling “coup de grace”.

Further, the Captain deeply apologizes for using the debased French language on this board of Patriotic True Belief. Such SurrenderSpeak is out of place and sends an unintended signal of support to the terrorists. As our friend TFTT will no doubt agree, the Frogs have proved themselves pu$$ies as far back as Agincourt. (again, apologies for the language, but the place name is French

By Captain Freedom

March 15, 2007 1:09 PM | Link to this

Of course my good friend Jack is not in facor of “sectarian genocide”. That would be un-Christian.

But a little collateral damage? Well, you can’t make an omelet unless you break a few eggs, you mindless comsympislamolib.

(damn! I think omelet may be a French word. a sure sign of Terror in the ascendant!)

By LMAO

March 15, 2007 1:12 PM | Link to this

Jim you mention Maxine Waters and her meeting with Pelosi but you didn’t mention other Dems she has met with and considers leaders on Iraq.

Like Tim Walz, Joe Sestak, Chris Carney, Phil Hare and Patrick Murphy.

I wonder why? Maybe because it doesn’t rally the base and create a hysterical exaggerated sideshow.

Maybe its because they are all veterans, and now congressmen, some who have actually served in Iraq. They all support a troop withdrawal.

Can’t very well call them sistah’s now can you.

By Dennis

March 15, 2007 1:16 PM | Link to this

By Morris March 15, 2007 12:51 PM Dennis - Watch who you are calling ignorant, you stupid, freaking, dumb a*.”

My, My, My. Gotta puff yourself up to a sixth grade level.

“The origins of Islam are irrelevant.”

Only to someone who doesn’t know any religious history or theology. Those origins are just as relevant as the origins of Christianity and Judaism.

“Modern day followers of Judaism and Christianity are not publicly calling for the world-wide extermination of non-believers.”

Modern day Islamics are not all calling for the extermination of Jews and Christians, either. Just the Islamic terrorists fundamentalists.

“Everyone in Germany was not a member of the Nazi party either, but the rest went along when push came to shove.”

Everyone in the U.S. isn’t a neocon either, but the rest go along.

“These are people who are still fighting the Crusades.”

For example, like James Dobson and Jerry Falwell and the recent Christian fundamentalist who was exposed for using drugs (illegal) and homosexuality (his business) while condeming others for doing the same.

“The focus on an Iraq withdrawal and fighting terrorism like it’s the Mafia is short sighted.”

If GWB hadn’t lied and gone into Iraq in the first place, we wouldn’t have this withdrawal problem and getting our military killed in a war we can’t win.

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

You are also a pinhead.

By Jake

March 15, 2007 1:17 PM | Link to this

Sorry “chipper”, but you can’t pick and choose the government programs you pay for. If that were possible, you’d be a bigger welfare queen than you already are. Tis better to receive — right buddy?

Let me know when you and “your kind” have a serious point to make beyond parroting your favorite Rush Limbaugh talking points.

By Jack

March 15, 2007 1:19 PM | Link to this

That’s right. I talk to myself all the time, and answer too. I made my points. If you don’t agree fine. Wait and see. Hope you know how to hunt, fish, and grow veggies.

By Lord Doom

March 15, 2007 1:21 PM | Link to this

Who’s the pi$$ant responsible for ratting out my glory hole partner at Hartsfield? The parties responsible will incur the wrath of Doom!

Doom just hopes that his glory hole partner at Piedmont and the one at Hartsfield aren’t one in the same.

By Dennis

March 15, 2007 1:23 PM | Link to this

By Captain Freedom March 15, 2007 1:01 PM “Kudos, Morris!! You put that Islamosympfascist Dennis right in his place. Dennis’ so-called “fact-based” post is no match for your superior wit and intimidating invective. The closing shot calling him a pinhead was surely the cuop de grace.”

Oops! In re-reading my reply to Morris, I forgot to delete his pinhead remark which now seems like I was putting myself on his level.”

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

By Lauren

March 15, 2007 1:27 PM | Link to this

Wooten again trying to blame the failures in Iraq on the Dems. Yawn! Everything about this war and this administration is a failure and it is all Bush/Cheney’s fault. Nothing they have told us about Iraq and this war has been right! All wrong! Why should we listen to them now? We will be greeted as liberators…Wrong! They are trying to make a nuclear bomb to use against us…Wrong! Mission Accomplished…Wrong! I am sick of listening to these idiots and to the idiots like Wooten who defend them and still, despite monumental failures and loss of life, still believe in them. Wooten can tote Bush’s water all he wants, but that’s what he is, a water-carrier for a bunch of lying failures. Bravo!

By Cletus Snow

March 15, 2007 1:28 PM | Link to this

Wow, the sharpest knife in the kitchen is not in this drawer. Do any of you morons read what you write before you hit the post button?

By Lauren

March 15, 2007 1:28 PM | Link to this

Wooten again trying to blame the failures in Iraq on the Dems. Yawn! Everything about this war and this administration is a failure and it is all Bush/Cheney’s fault. Nothing they have told us about Iraq and this war has been right! All wrong! Why should we listen to them now? We will be greeted as liberators…Wrong! They are trying to make a nuclear bomb to use against us…Wrong! Mission Accomplished…Wrong! I am sick of listening to these idiots and to the idiots like Wooten who defend them and still, despite monumental failures and loss of life, still believe in them. Wooten can tote Bush’s water all he wants, but that’s what he is, a water-carrier for a bunch of lying failures. Bravo!

By Captain Freedom

March 15, 2007 1:32 PM | Link to this

By LMAO Like Tim Walz, Joe Sestak, Chris Carney, Phil Hare and Patrick Murphy. Can’t very well call them sistah’s now can you.

Correct. These are Democrat tax and spend girlie men.

By Disgusted

March 15, 2007 1:37 PM | Link to this

I see the liberal weenies are out to smear Republicans again. Well, we took a lot of actions to promote democracy in Iraq.

We were told there were weapons of mass destruction there. Well, we didn’t find any, but whose fault is that? At least we got Uday and Qusay, and we turned Saddam over to the Shia so that he could be hanged. That has to count for something.

We were told that Saddam was killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. Well, we went over there and exercised the Republican principle of Outsourcing. Now, we don’t even need a government to oversee the killing of hundreds of thousands. The warring factions do it themselves.

We were told that a minority (the Sunnis)were oppressing the majority (the Shia.) Well, we went over there and used some good old US of A principles. Now, the majority is oppressing the minority, and that’s the way it should be. If the majority runs into a little trouble, we send our troops to wipe out the minority. Majority rules, you know.

We firmly believed that the Iraqi people would embrace democracy. So we went over there and helped install a new government. It has the support of all Shia. Sure, the Sunnis are a little upset, and 60% of the total population wants our troops out, but the majority’s desires don’t count for anything in our country, so why should we pay any attention to what the majority wants over there?

Meantime, North Korea and Iran are building nuclear bombs. Are we supposed to deal with things like that when we have a war to fight and some terrorists to waterboard?

I wish these pantywaist liberals would wake up to reality.

By Kelly

March 15, 2007 1:38 PM | Link to this

Jack at 1:01,

I sense a lack of enthusiasm from you. I’m very disappointed.

By steve-o

March 15, 2007 1:41 PM | Link to this

Wooten’s unhinged rant today, as well as the emotional outbursts by his minions today, shows that the far-right neoCONs and their agenda is crumbling. What a wonderful day!

By Jack

March 15, 2007 1:43 PM | Link to this

Hi Sweet Thing.:) Hope you are doin ok. Sure is a lot of venom on this blog. Fun stirring the pudding though.

By Lauren

March 15, 2007 1:48 PM | Link to this

Disgusted, your post is ridiculous! The Sunnis are “a little upset”. Talk about not accepting reality! Even you can’t spin it in your favor. If you believe what you are saying you are an idiot, if you don’t believe it but are saying it anyway because you can’t admit when you and your party have been wrong then you are a coward. Either way, you are irrelevant! If you think what the majority of voters in this country wants does not mattern then you weren’t paying attention in the last election. Perhaps another butt whipping in the next election will convince you.

By LMAO

March 15, 2007 1:50 PM | Link to this

Wow, Captain Freedom you are on a roll lately. Lmao!

By steve-o

March 15, 2007 1:51 PM | Link to this

Lauren…honey…

Although I admire your passion, Disgusted was only joking with his post.

By Filster

March 15, 2007 1:54 PM | Link to this

Whew! Some vitriol being dished up this day. couple of questions for all of you on one side or the other of Iraq. First, how many of you have ever served in the U.S. military during combat? Didn’t think so. Since none of you have the experience, please spare us your uninformed insight. Here are problems in Iraq - Rummies’ “go fast: theory worked well in beginning but after several months the heavy armor should have come in and we switch from liberator to occupier. But, couldn’t do that because of Rummie/Cheney/Libs/Arabs. If no one has consider the potential poltical and economic fallout over ticking off the group of folks who control the world’s energy supply, grab a pad of paper, take a pencil and a couple extra rolls of TP and go think about that. So we try and maintain the minimal amount of force that has the barest chance of success so we don’t tick off the Arab world, and that causes unnecessary casualties. Bush’s plan is to secure the country through numbers, which we should have done all along. In fact, we need more in Afghanistan and Iraq to get the job done and the he!! with Pakistan’s President’s approval. Gointo those mountains, find bin Laden and drag his a$$ out into the open. Of, for those of youconsidering a brillant retort, I served through Desert Storm and have the scars to prove it. Guess that makes me a teensy bit more qualified to discuss military matters than you civilian soldiers like Rummie (that’s Rumsfeld y’all) and all my fellow bloggers. My position on it all? Either go in with sufficient numbers and resources to get the job done ASAP, or get out, let the ba$tard$ kill each other off and then go back in and turn Iraq into a territory. Hey, free oil!

By Lauren

March 15, 2007 1:56 PM | Link to this

It can be very difficult to tell the joke defenses of the GOP from the real ones. They are equally laughable and unbelievable.

By Jack

March 15, 2007 1:56 PM | Link to this

Lions and tigers and bears. Oh my!! Lions and tigers and bears. Oh my!! Lions and tigers and bears. Oh my!!

By Lauren

March 15, 2007 2:00 PM | Link to this

Filster, if not having served combat missions excludes one from having an opinion about Iraq then I guess Bush & Cheney can both be disqualified!

By steve-o

March 15, 2007 2:01 PM | Link to this

Lauren,

I completely understand. The worst thing about Bush leaving in 2008 is that it will be one of the greatest losses of political satire.

By Jack

March 15, 2007 2:03 PM | Link to this

Filster. Amen.

By Filster

March 15, 2007 2:07 PM | Link to this

Lauren - if my comment was clear enough, it most definitel includes Rumsfeld and Cheney. I despire Rumsfield and think he should be prosecuted for his bungling arrogance re Iraq. As for Dick, well, he’s a capable politician but I for one amd tired of politicians of any ilk who prostitute themselves to special interests, which I guess menas I hate ALL politicians on both sides of the fence. And in case anyone is wondering, I am a Republican, support the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan because I truly believe we are in a religious war with Islam, but I really hate the way we are being forced to fight it. How we’re fighting is what’s getting our guys killed needlessly.

By Lauren

March 15, 2007 2:12 PM | Link to this

Filster, I don’t think the way to fight religious nuttery is with more religious nuttery. The only people who aren’t sick to death of the right wing Christian agenda are the right wing Christianists. You all are just as irrational, crazy, misguided and blinded by religion as the Islamic jihadists. I am afraid of you equally.

By JoeD

March 15, 2007 2:13 PM | Link to this

Uninformed insight, and total lack of foresight. The catch words of the Bush administration.

By jbmlaw

March 15, 2007 2:16 PM | Link to this

Dear JP @ 10:35 and BTDT @ 10:54, I think you and I have a profound disagreement over strategy. Like the great French generals of 1938, you would be fighting yesterday’s battle, in Afghanistan, while the real action is 500 miles west of there. (Not that I dispute the need to keep troops both east and west of Iran, i.e., the present configuration, Afghanistan and Iraq, respectively.) I credit President Bush with thinking a little ahead. I cannot credit the surrender democrats with thinking beyond September 10, 2001 – they have yet to connect the dots, and do not understand the war against the US, which started in the 1980s, goes on with or without our military participation.

I would prefer our battles be fought in the middle east arc, and by our noble military. We tried doing it with lawyers and American courts during the Clinton years, and I think we suffered a terrorist strike every year in the decade. Let’s fight intelligently, toward a victory. We saw the same method in the war against the communists, where for 35 years we merely sought to contain the reds; when we switched our strategy to one designed to win, we triumphed in less than a decade.

While the principle is the same as in the war against communists, the strategy must be different, because we fight a different mentality. We did not have to physically kill all of the communists, all we had to do was irrevocably disprove their ideology, for us to win. That would be a futile strategy against the Islamists; we will have to physically kill enough of them to persuade the rest that there is a better way for them. Thus my argument that we must actually kill all of the America haters – for this argument only I exclude Democrats from that definition!

And BTDT, I will modify my first post for you exclusively – you are a chicken.

Dear Corky @ 10:59 and Jake @ 11:21 and Kelly @ 12:56, I propose that we sacrifice the Departments of Agriculture, Urban Affairs, and Labor, and perhaps we can do without EEOC, just to fulfill your desire for sacrifice. Somehow we will muddle through without those essential services.

Dear Southern @ 11:01, you surely are not suggesting that there is even one elected democrat with sufficient political courage to declare war on Iran! (I sincerely believe you have such courage, and I will contribute to your campaign if you ever run.) Or perhaps you argue that talking, with no intention of backing up the talk (aka singing Kum-Ba-Yah) will cause the Islamists to cease their campaigns of terror. I think it fair to acknowledge that this is why we do not routinely look to democrats for leadership on foreign issues, but merely anticipate leftist carping when a man of action takes meaningful steps to cure a problem.

Dear Deegee @ 11:12, is it possible that the Iraqi “People with means are leaving in droves” due to a perception that the American leftists will abandon them (i.e., cut and run?) I think that is exactly the case. You correctly identify the problem, but miss the causation.

Dear Debbie @ 11:30, you err strategically – the idea is not to “sacrifice” our guys, but to kill all of the bad guys. I know losing is deeply ingrained as a virtue on the left, but that is no way to fight a war. You should leave war to those of us with a clue about how to win.

Dear TW @ 11:38, you are not allowed on this blog until you are 12 years old.

Dear Mark P @ 11:30 and Dennis @ 11:38, you guys are severely behind the curve. On September 11, 2001, we faced a diverse world-wide enemy. A Harvard business school MBA conceived a way to draw that diverse enemy into a narrowly-focused area, where they would be much less destructive to the rest of the world, and much easier for us to destroy, and you think that was a mistake? You don’t have to be ignorant to be a leftist, but it helps.

Dear Morris @ 12:17, well-written, focused argument. My compliments.

Dear Dennis @ 12:17, your argument is substantially false. The fired US Attorneys, in large measure, appear to be democrat hacks who would not investigate pretty-obvious cases of voter fraud. They should have been fired for partisanship, but incompetence is a fully sufficient reason. http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009784

By steve-o

March 15, 2007 2:26 PM | Link to this

Dear Deegee @ 11:12, is it possible that the Iraqi “People with means are leaving in droves” due to a perception that the American leftists will abandon them (i.e., cut and run?) I think that is exactly the case. You correctly identify the problem, but miss the causation.

jbm,

Are you really serious? I mean really? What the hell do “leftists” have to do with a war that Republicans got us into?

Iraqis are leaving in droves and it isn’t because of “lefitsts”. Try sectarian strife or civil war or lack of security.

I can’t believe this…leftists??…geez!

By Filster

March 15, 2007 2:27 PM | Link to this

Lauren:

You missed the boat. The religious war is based on the fact that one of the tenets of Islam is to convert non-believers at the point of a sword if need be and if they won’t convert, kil them as infidels. It has nothing to do with Christianity. You are dealing with a foe, minority or not, who believes that blowing up womena nd children will gain them entrance into heaven. If that’s in the Bible I must’ve missed those pages. The entire purpose of Christianity is to try and become Christ-like, and if you read Scripture and read how Christ behaved you’d see that’s not a bad thing. Unfortunately, there are a lot of so-called “Christians” who thump the Bible and their chests, talk about sin, make judgments, etc. Funny thing, though. Never could make the connection between “Go, and sin no more” and “so-and-so’s going to he!! for that one!” But I digress. Sadly, you don’t have Iraq in the proper context, probably because you get all your info from the talking heads on TV and the papers. Want the real scoop? Next time you se one of our folks in uniform heading over or coming back, pull them aisde and buy them a drink. And talk with them. You’ll hear a side of the whole thing you’ve never heard from the media.

By Peter North

March 15, 2007 2:27 PM | Link to this

Sounds like a well-documented case against the MARTA guy. In his picture, he appears the type. His current outraged posture is both funny and sad. Upstanding man caught red-handed in deviant behavior. Before long, he will disappear, never to be seen again. Just like the former WSB weatherman.

By JK

March 15, 2007 2:27 PM | Link to this

Hi, Jack…

BTW, since we’re all such close friends here, I’m going to tell you this in confidence: I have indeed, under confinement and torture, confessed to things that were not true. Please be discreet with this information, lest I be re-captured and forced to once again promise I’ll be good.

By Dennis

March 15, 2007 2:29 PM | Link to this

By jbmlaw March 15, 2007 2:16 PM “Dear Dennis @ 12:17, your argument is substantially false. The fired US Attorneys, in large measure, appear to be democrat hacks who would not investigate pretty-obvious cases of voter fraud. They should have been fired for partisanship, but incompetence is a fully sufficient reason.”

Tell us, do you check the factuality of your client’s case before going to court, or do you just take the case on the client’s word and then just blow and blow and blow in court in hopes of winning your case?

That certainly seems to be your proceedure here.

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

By jbm is a condescending...

March 15, 2007 2:31 PM | Link to this

JBM for god, emperor, president, governor, senator, mayor, dog catcher, religious scholar, Pope, imam, emir and councilman. He knows it all.

By Jason

March 15, 2007 2:37 PM | Link to this

Wow, Democrats haved really messed up this war. Democrats planned this war, carried out this war, and failed to fund it. Wait a minute, Democrats haven’t had any impact on the war be it financially or strategic. Even if Democrats cut funds today Bush would have enought to fight the war until January. How can you blame Democrats for what’s going on now or in the near future? Jim, I am sure Iraq has gone exactly as you thought it would. Since you have been so right about the war from the beginning your predictions and criticism of Democrats are both righteous and noble. You’re the man Jim! Stick it to the liberals because this whole mess is their fault!

By Realist

March 15, 2007 2:41 PM | Link to this

Khalid Shaikh Mohammed understands what Harry S. Truman did. That the language of war indeed is victims. In my opinion, it is the USA’s current soft stance on this ideology that makes the winning of wars, at least for the USA, an almost impossible task.

The fact of that matter is, as childish and simplistic as it sounds, if I can kill more of yours than you can of mine, I win. Truman understood that, but those days are gone. We are getting exactly what our soft liberal humanitarian society has asked for. A soft war effort with no chance of winning because we are more concerned with keeping the liberal interests appeased rather than allowing our soldiers to kill and win at all costs. Women, children and infrastrucure included, just like at Hiro and Nagasaki.

By Thurbert

March 15, 2007 2:42 PM | Link to this

What you must keep in mind on this forum is the level of b.S. JBMlaw is not a lawyer, though she pretends to be on this forum everyday.

By steve-o

March 15, 2007 2:45 PM | Link to this

I must say that I don’t know if it’s sad or brave that the neoCON wingnuts here keep up their stay the course/cut ‘n run banter here. I mean talk about a captain going down with his ship!

They have nobody else to blame but themselves for this war. Nobody else. A Republican president with a Republican-controlled Congress (yes, I know that some idiot Dems voted for the war) started, funded, and directed this war for almost 4 years—longer then it took for us to beat Germany in WWII and almost the same amount of time it took for us to beat Japan.

There is not one finger that the GOP can point…not one! Thus the result are unhinged and baseless rants by Wooten and other wingnuts on this board. Go on kids…keep flailing your arms in the wind!

By Yanker

March 15, 2007 2:53 PM | Link to this

Steve-O, I think you should stick to stunts like sticking your penis in an electrical socket rather than attempting political commentary. Your weak attempt to minimalize the Democrats role in deciding to start this war was weak and transparent. Its not that easy ‘round here Pal.

By Captain Freedom

March 15, 2007 2:53 PM | Link to this

Realist, welcome back!! Your clarity has been sorely missed.

It is true, of course. If only we had been able to kill more Vietnamese than we lost US soldiers, we would have won that war. We lost so many people we had to build a memorial wall. The Vietnamese…they know nothing of true sacrfice and suffering. No wall over there. Why, other than that guy who got shot in the head on TV and the little girl drenched in napalm in that propaganda photo, who really got hurt over there? And please libs, no mention of My Lai. That was just a liberal media fabrication to undermine our troops.

Same thing in Iraq…If we could kill more Iraqis than they kill US troops, the Iraqis would soon greet us with flowers in the street as the righteous liberators we truly are. Instead of infiltrating our units and setting off suicider bombs. Why, I bet they’ve killed more of themselves than we have. But do you ever read that on the Commie News Network? Huh? Huh?

The only reason those ingrate sand fleas don’t appreciate all we have done for them — the re-built schools and the state of the art power distribution system that is now working at least 3 hours EACH AND EVERY DAY — is that we have lost 3000+ troops over there, while our military, handcuffed by the sob sisters in the Pentagon who have refused to allow them to unleash the Holy Hell of our Superior Firepower, have been barely able to kill a few dozen evildoers at most.

By Canada

March 15, 2007 2:54 PM | Link to this

The reason jbmlaw thinks he is a lawyer is because he sees one every time he looks in the mirror. Janet Reno’s doppelganger don’t ya know.

By Jack

March 15, 2007 2:57 PM | Link to this

Mum’s the word JK.

By Jack

March 15, 2007 3:09 PM | Link to this

Is he a he or is she a she?

By Corky Cobb

March 15, 2007 3:14 PM | Link to this

A soft war Realist? You mean the type of war where you don’t have to actually do any of the fighting?

How many Iraqi’s have you killed Realist? What have you done to fight for our “freedom.” If I remember correctly you said the other day you have a young son. Are you war age? What gives you the right to stay home with your son while advocating massive loss of human life? Thats what is called soft. How are you any different than a liberal? If you war lovers want to kill Iraqi’s so bad do it. What kind of coward would advocate the killing of women and children as long as he wasn’t the one doing the killing?

It sounds like Harry S. Truman would want you to get your chickenhawk butt to war and get some killing done. Stop dodging the killing you love….

ENLIST

By Canada

March 15, 2007 3:15 PM | Link to this

With a Janet Reno doppelganger it’s best to alternate the two references, just to be sure.

By steve-o

March 15, 2007 3:17 PM | Link to this

Yanker—Your name is quite fitting. Ask yourself who authorized the war. Then ask yourself who has directed this war.

By Realist

March 15, 2007 3:19 PM | Link to this

Ah, Captain Freedom. I see your life still lends itself to your constant presence in the blogsphere. What would this country be without your substantial contribution. I shudder to think of it.

As much as I know it hurts your soft little liberal soul, the solution to the crisis in Iraq, is not more ground troops, it is not isolation techniques, and it certainly is not simply giving up. The answer the systematic withdrawl of all US interests followed quite immediately by tactical strikes using any and all ordiance nessecary to turn Iraq into the new Ground Zero.

Then, and only then, should we go back in, assured that our troops are safe, and begin collecting the bodies where possible, and start a rebuilding process much like we have done here at home with the Twin Towers.

So to sum up, pull out, bomb until there is nothing and no one left, then go in and deal with the grim task of clean up and recovery.

I beleive this tactic would send Iran to the bargaining table rather quickly and put the US back on the list of countries not to be f*** with.

By KeepOnKeepinOn

March 15, 2007 3:22 PM | Link to this

By jbmlaw And BTDT, I will modify my first post for you exclusively – you are a chicken.

Being a non-regular here I would say to you jbmlaw that you are one of those people that others laugh about that in their efforts to impress with their intellect they only succeed in sounding stupid. You fit that bill jbmlaw.

By Realist

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

I would have hoped that in the months since I last visited (Corky Pig I think you have me mistaken with someone else, I was no where around “the other day”) that you limp wristers and VW drivers could have come up with something better than “why don’t you serve”. You ignore the obvious which is that by the mere fact that you are here blogging that you arent serving either, but I suppose that escapes you as important.

One need not serve to be patriotic or have an opinion. I will for now simply pray to our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, that if there were to be a draft, that none of you f*** limp wristed panty wastes are anywhere near covering my 6.

By getalife

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

The John Belushi look alike confessed to every terror attack.

Over 30 of them.

Come on wingnuts, this guy is insane like Saddam.

Geez, gullible.

By time for the truth

March 15, 2007 3:28 PM | Link to this

oh, realist, your plan excites me, you know, in the same way the remains of j. edgar hoover do. perhaps you, me and that hottie martawanker could spend some quality time together tonight. oooooooh!! JERKS, ER, RATHER, SMIRKS AT THE THOUGHT OF IT

By Sam

March 15, 2007 3:28 PM | Link to this

I read BTDT’s post jbmlaw and you are making no sense here. If anyone is chicken it is you. You are so scared as to let what is at best a miniscule threat to you and others that it clouds your judgement and rationale beyond any kind of reason. You have a greater chance of being struck by lightning than to encounter a terrorist. You are the type of coward that terrorists laugh at. You are the type of coward that gives them satisfaction. You are the type of coward that lends currency to their endeavor. Your fear is their victory. You are not the brightest bulb in thepack by any measure jbmlaw.

By Realist

March 15, 2007 3:37 PM | Link to this

Im glad I could come by and spread a few rays of sunshine on you little flowers. Maybe soon I can come by and water you too, if you know what I mean.

peace and love man

By jbm is a condescending...

March 15, 2007 3:40 PM | Link to this

Please don’t challenge jbm on the facts. He knows all and suffers no fool lightly who does not agree with him. “So it is written, so it shall be done” according to Ramses, Yul Brynner and jbm.

By wtf

March 15, 2007 3:55 PM | Link to this

First the AJC reports on the corrupt buffoon Sonny Pervdoo’s fleecing of the populace. Now you’re licking his … by playing raquetball with him and touting his NCAA picks? Hey Sonny, gambling’s illegal. Whose your press agent? Oh yeah, Satan.

By Realist and Logic = Oil and Water

March 15, 2007 4:01 PM | Link to this

Stupidest Post of the Day:

“I would have hoped that in the months since I last visited that you limp wristers and VW drivers could have come up with something better than “why don’t you serve”. You ignore the obvious which is that by the mere fact that you are here blogging that you arent serving either, but I suppose that escapes you as important.”

Classic.

By Filster

March 15, 2007 4:05 PM | Link to this

Realist - if Corky got drafted I’d bet big bucks he’d violate the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy in less time than it takes to say it. As to Khalid’s confessions, if he was not in custody at the time of these acts (such as behading Pearl), then whose to say he’s not being truthful. Regardless, what’s a little waterboarding, sleep deprivation,and psychotrophic substances between friends

By steve-o

March 15, 2007 4:05 PM | Link to this

It seems that a GA Senate panel OK’d a bill establishing Confederate History Month.

I can’t think of a better way to stand united against the terrorist threat and promote freedom than to celebrate an era of division, enslavement, and sedition.

By jbmlaw

March 15, 2007 4:06 PM | Link to this

Dear Steveo @ 2:26, contrary to what you apparently believe about the “Iraqi People with means,” they can read newspapers, even the New York Times. I know you leftists are trying to keep your cut and run strategy a secret, but the Iraqi People with means have heard and read, and they intelligently fear the future possibility of leftists triumphing in American domestic elections. The Congressional Democrats have done little to assuage that fear. You know, I tried to compile a list of everything the leftists have done to facilitate victory in the war, and I cannot come up with even a single entry. I suspect Iraqi People with means may have gone through the same exercise.

Dear Dennis @ 2:29, I provided you my documentation. Do you have any rational documentation undercutting those arguments, anything to establish that these half dozen democrat prosecutors were even modestly competent? You don’t have to be ignorant to be a leftist, but it helps.

Dear jbmiac @ 2:31, I respectfully note that you left out Nobel economics laureate and American Idol.

Dear Thurbert @ 2:42 and Canada @ 2:54 and Koko @ 3:22, you are not allowed on this blog until you are 12 years old.

Dear Sam @ 3:28, the families of 2,973 victims on September 11 will be delighted to hear that they suffer a greater “chance of being struck by lightning than to encounter a terrorist.” That makes us all proud, especially if we are leftists.

By jbmlaw

March 15, 2007 4:15 PM | Link to this

Dear Sam @ 3:28, pop quiz: who said all of the following under oath?

By steve-o

March 15, 2007 4:18 PM | Link to this

jbm,

Have you not read that there has been a refugee crisis in the ME for some time now due to the Iraq War? Don’t you think that an Iraqi man would be more concerned with protecting his family from fighting between warring factions within his own neighborhood than some elections thousands of miles away? Show me an interview with an Iraqi that says, “I’m getting the hell out of here because the Dems took control of Congress!”

The “leftists” have nothing to do with this war! They held no positions of power within the Federal government. The facilitation and operation of this war has been by Republicans! Ask yourself what have Republicans done to facilitate a “victory”.

I really can’t believe that you’re passing the buck to liberals and Democrats!

By Canada

March 15, 2007 4:21 PM | Link to this

Ms. Reno, I mean, jbm (the bm part I get) I’m 13. Uh-oh. Guess I shouldn’t have mentioned that to someone of your, um, proclivities.

By Brian

March 15, 2007 4:22 PM | Link to this

It would be nice if some people on here could make a statement without name calling. Is their point so devoid of facts that liberals have to scream… “NAZI”

By JoeD

March 15, 2007 4:32 PM | Link to this

jbmlaw, you need to check your facts. Khalid’s statement was not made under oath. He refused to take an oath, saying it was not allowed under Islamic law.

By getalife

March 15, 2007 4:33 PM | Link to this

fakelaw,

Wow, the enemy is only one man and we got him.

War over.

Geez.

Come on fake law.

Did you believe curveball too?

This guy is knuckleball.

Geez, gullible.

By time for the truth

March 15, 2007 4:38 PM | Link to this

whilst crouching here in the corner drooling and trying to count the flies attracted to the stench emanating from my putrid dressing gown, i contemplated getting a lobotomy. but then i realised the first one has been so effective, i shouldn’t mess with a good thing.

By JoeD

March 15, 2007 4:41 PM | Link to this

jbmlaw, you need to check your facts. Khalid’s statement was not made under oath. He refused to take an oath, saying it was not allowed under Islamic law.

By Captain Freedom

March 15, 2007 4:49 PM | Link to this

Wow. Khalid also confessed to planning to assasinate anti-war do-gooders like the Pope and Jimmy Carter. This is getting very confusing.

To those who question the legitimacy of the confession…come on you bedwetters, its not like he confessed to the Lindbergh kidnapping or anything unbelievable.

By Captain Freedom

March 15, 2007 4:55 PM | Link to this

Wow, and hooray. A Confederate History Month!!! At last, a full month set aside to examine the most notorious example of treason and treachery in the history of our Union. When the Northern aggressors unConstitutionally stole our right to decide local matters like enslaving ‘those people’ (in conditions that were better than any they have had before or since), they may as well have spit on the graves of our Founding Fathers, all of whom owned and bedded slaves themselves.

That ba$tard Lincoln had it coming to him. Hey, maybe Khalid was behind that crime, too?

By Barbara

March 15, 2007 5:01 PM | Link to this

jbmlaw @4:06, Dear jbmiac @ 2:31, I respectfully note that you left out Nobel economics laureate and American Idol.. Now that’s funny!

By steve-o

March 15, 2007 5:02 PM | Link to this

Captain Freedom,

I don’t know if Khalid had something to do with that fateful night at the Ford Theater.

But yes, Lincoln had it coming to him. I mean, he was tall and bearded just like bin Laden.

By Babs is a brown noser

March 15, 2007 5:20 PM | Link to this

That’s all. Babs is a brown noser. With jbm. How sad.

By JM

March 15, 2007 5:23 PM | Link to this

Test

By dingbat

March 15, 2007 5:27 PM | Link to this

After reading today’s posts, I have come up for a solution for dingbat libbies and logic -

By not serving in combat and therefore one should not have a say in a war, then by the same premise one who has never been poor should have no say in what the poor receive or don’t receive. Likewise, one who has never been homeless should have no say in what to do about them or not do about them. Similarly, one who has never paid capital gains taxes or estate taxes or property taxes should have no say in tax cuts. Even more, people who have never had to pay for their medical care, all 46 million of them, should have no say in what would be free lifetime health care for all at the expense of those 254 million who do have a health care plan. Finally, one who has never had an abortion should have no say in supporting or opposing it.

By dingbat and logic = oil and water

March 15, 2007 5:35 PM | Link to this

dingbat,

Congratulations. Yours is the dumbest post of the day. Realist is now the runner-up. Way to go!

By Dusty

March 15, 2007 5:53 PM | Link to this

Dear jbmlaw,

Ah indeed, you have slain them with facts. Most effectively. I commend your weaponry and your skill. Always a pleasure to read.

By jm

March 15, 2007 5:53 PM | Link to this

off topic: for those of you considering supporting newt gingrinch for president, Robert Novak (the dark prince) strikes

By steve-o

March 15, 2007 5:56 PM | Link to this

Dusty,

What facts are you talking about? jbm didn’t present any facts. Opinions—yes, but not facts.

By Jake

March 15, 2007 6:05 PM | Link to this

Well, Jim is about to close up shop for the day, but not one “Right Thinker” has told us what they have done or are willing to do to win the war against “IslamoFascism”. This is WWIII (or so they say), but we got nothin’.

No driving fewer miles or carpooling or switching to a smaller car so we don’t fund the enemy with our disproportionate levels of energy consumption. Nothing as simple as turning the thermostat down a couple of ticks in the winter or replacing standard light bulbs with compact fluorescents to help the cause is considered. Certainly no additional taxes or enlistments or calls for re-instituting the draft.

No, these “Right Thinkers” are worse than any welfare mamas – they’re the biggest takers of all. The greatest generation was willing to sacrifice. On the other hand, the Pu$$y Generation is willing to shop while requiring others to risk their lives and future generations to foot the bill for the protection and security they demand.

Disgraceful.

By Will

March 16, 2007 9:56 AM | Link to this

My main problem with Iraq is that Bush & Company lied to the American people about the threat. They “hyped” the war and Bush was so interested in looking macho that he was willing to do anything - including getting American troops killed and maimed. These people have no shame.

By JP

March 16, 2007 10:15 AM | Link to this

jeff at 10:42, the Soviets didn’t give up after 4 months when they became distracted by Saddam Hussein. We took our eye off Osama, and guess what: he’s still out there, “dead or alive.” Well, alive.

jbm, I believe we do have a profound strategic disagreement. This has been said before, but I don’t think most Democrats would argue that terrorism needs to be defeated. I think they would argue, however, that the way to do so (at least circa 2003) was NOT by invading Iraq.

So, to be brief, the action WAS in Afghanistan for four months. Al Qaeda wasn’t a strong presence in Iraq until we removed Saddam and the hollow—but real—security force that existed there. Civil War didn’t break out until we made room for it.

I’m not convinced that there is any percentage or raw number at which “killing enough” of the terrorists will procure our security. I think that’s flawed logic, because you could kill 95% and the child of one of the ones killed grows up with resentment and pulls off a 9/11 in the future.

By continuing to poke the open sore, and not put energy into the Middle East peace process, we only ensure that we will need to remain there even longer.

Though I haven’t made any decision re: my 2008 vote, Barack Obama has stated, and I firmly agree: “I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars.” This is one.

By JP

March 16, 2007 10:21 AM | Link to this

Realist.. “I beleive this tactic would send Iran to the bargaining table rather quickly and put the US back on the list of countries not to be f* with.”

So - that would also allow us to continue rearranging the borders of Middle Eastern states to suit our liking, and make sure no-one gets upset about it—or at least, follows up on their rage?

Typical solution from someone unwilling to consider that American foreign policy has played any part in creating this monster.

By chuck

March 16, 2007 11:42 AM | Link to this

Liberals have NO IDEA what it means to “Support the Troops”. After all, they have never done it before, so it is new to them. The basic liberal solution for EVERY conflict and problem is to talk about it. They don’t want to THINK about it , just TALK sbout it. They think that by demanding that the troops be brought home, that they are supporting the troops. In actuality, if we did what they advocate, we would be condemning them to another Viet Nam like loss.

What these luke-warm little pansy politicians need to dois stay out of the way and let the troops finish this thing. Change the rules of engagement to allow them freedom to do what needs to be done. Get the “journalists” out of the field and brief them back in the green zone. Give them whatever they need in the way of time and resources to get the job done THEN bring them home.