Thinking Right

By jbmlaw

August 26, 2007 9:13 AM | Link to this

Bravo. Well-argued.

By TW

August 26, 2007 9:28 AM | Link to this

We all as Americans should be ashamed of ourselves for not giving our Military a commander in chief worthy of their sacrifice. It is our duty to see that these brave men and women who VOLUNTEER to defend us are led by an individual whose discretion is sound. We have failed as a nation to do this and the results are devastating. May God forgive the United States of America.

By Duh stands for Democrat

August 26, 2007 9:29 AM | Link to this

Wooten gets it:

{{{{The plain fact is that Americans don’t want to lose and know instinctively that any premature abandonment, however couched, will be hell to pay for a generation to come. Projecting weakness and a lack of resolve is national suicide. The veterans to whom Bush spoke Wednesday know that and affirmed it by their enthusiastic response…… No matter how many Republicans bolt, nor how many commentators and Google-trained experts second-guess, Bush should heed the lessons of last century’s wars, all of which could have been declared lost before they were won. Democrats have invested in defeat.}}}}

His boss doesn’t:

{{{{As a young man of draft age during the Vietnam years, Bush avoided combat by signing up for the Texas Air National Guard. And there is a persuasive body of evidence indicating that he couldn’t even be bothered to fulfill those obligations.-Sinthia Tucker, Urinal}}}}

Yes, “a persuasive body of evidence” that no one can seem to find, well, except for the forged Dan Rather documents.

So after this bald faced lie, Queen Pinko moves on to accuse Bush of being a liar:

{{{{Similarly, President Bush and his band of chicken hawks (how serious can you take an editorialist that uses school yard name calling?) built support for the invasion of Iraq on a foundation of half-truths, misstatements and outright lies —- including the fabrication of strong ties between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden.}}}}

Yawn:

U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 107th Congress, A joint resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq. Clinton (D-NY), Yea Kerry (D-MA), Yea Reid (D-NV), Yea Edwards (D-NC), Yea Cleland (D-GA), Yea

Clinton, yea for war, member of the armed services committee, with the responsibility of intelligence oversight, lied to herself?

{{{{At least the architects of the Vietnam fiasco have mostly owned up to their failures.}}}}

Funny, I don’t remember the democrats admitting that they abandoned South Vietnam, dishonoring the Paris Accords and instigating the most shameful and tawdry chapter in United States history, when they cut off funding to the South.

By Tim McKevitt

August 26, 2007 9:37 AM | Link to this

I am embarrassed to say that for four plus years I’ve considered the Iraq disaster (it is not a war) to be far and away the worst foreign policy decision in my lifetime; probably the worst foreign policy decision in our nation’s history. But I think I will change my mind based on your column today. It prints a quote from a recent speech: “Iraq is one of several fronts in the war on terror — but it’s the central front,” said Bush. “It’s the central front for the enemy that attacked us and wants to attack us again. And it’s the central front for the United States and to withdraw without getting the job done would be devastating.” The quote didn’t convince me or most readers against this disaster that we have been incorrect in our thinking. It was the comment you made next that convinced me. “The veterans’ applause underscored agreement.” I would have never imagined that that a hand picked audience of Pavlov’s dogs would have roared in approval. Here is some advice. Since my guess is that the majority of people that read the editorial page are not idiots, the opinions you express and arguments you make should be aimed at people with a higher intellect. The above sentence in bold appears to be more of a cheerleading quote and an attempt to convince yourself, rather than an attempt to convince the readers.

In a related note, if you do not read the sports section, Roger Goodall told seven NFL middle linebackers whose next contract was contingent upon keeping Michael Vick out of the end zone that Vick has been suspended from the league. The linebackers’ applause underscored their agreement with the suspension.”

By Mid-South Philosopher

August 26, 2007 9:43 AM | Link to this

Good morning, Jim,

An initial supporter of the war, I embraced the President’s rationale (Saddam Hussein’s possession and potential use of WMDs) for the conflict. Even when it was proven that the intelligence, upon which the President appeared to have acted, was terribly flawed, I accepted the President’s secondary reason (Saddam Hussein was an evil tyrant, who needed desperately to be removed) as a reasonable motive for the fight.

I continue to be disappointed and to have some question as to why not one…NOT ONE… agent or member of the American intelligence community has lost their job because of this misfeasance or malfeasance!

The initial effort by Donald Rumsfeld’s lean, mean, fighting maching was brilliant. The combat phase of the war was quickly won. But as I watched the prosecution of the occupation under the tutelage of the On the Cheap policy, it became clear to me that Donnie Rumsfeld and Georgie Bush were, at best, rank amateurs. The very Surge, in which we are at this moment engaged, is a testimony to the incompetence of the Bush-Rumsfeld occupation strategy.

Come September, we will hear from General Petraeus. Unless I am badly fooled, again, he will provide an honest and forthright appraisal of the situation. At that point, if he says…stay, I will shut my mouth and not criticize another military act of this President for the rest of his term. If, however, Petraeus’s report is not positive, I will expect you Bushites to NOT refer to the General as a cut and runner!

Any of you want to accept my challenge?!?

By Carbon Footprint

August 26, 2007 9:49 AM | Link to this

Cynthia Tucker and Jim Wooten published a “He said, She Said” point/counterpoint today. Both used red-herring non sequiturs to stir emotions of readers. Tucker referred to the last soldier who dies for a mistake. Wooten planted the Iwo Jima flag.

Wooten’s Right: Iraq is one front of the many fronts in the war on terror.

Cynthia Tucker’s Right: The war on terror is one front of the many fronts of the war in Iraq.

Mr. Wooten, define the “enemy” in Iraq.

Ms. Tucker: Should our Commander-in-Chief be a civilian?

Wooten’s argument is a superb example of circular logic: that there exist parallels with previous wars because there are parallels with previous wars. Jingoism without Judgement is not pretty.

Tucker labels our president a chicken hawk when it’s clear no coward could be president. Why tear down the institution further?

You want historical references to predict the outcome scenarios of the Iraq War? How about the alliances that forced Europe into World War One. Those were newly-established and untested, just like the recent alliances that now exist in the ethno-sectarian soup boiling over in the middle east.

We are so close to doomsday, that they had to go digital to measure how close to midnight the clock says it is. (diebold makes the doomsday clock, BTW)

By tim

August 26, 2007 9:51 AM | Link to this

Iraq is the “central front on terror” because we made it so by using false and misleading information to invade a place that WASN’T a harbor for those responsible for 9-11. Afganistan was and should have always been the central push. Korea was invaded by the northern communists, and we came to their aid. That’s a very different scenario that Iraq…WE caused this quagmire, and are trying to impose democracy on a part of the world that has little success or cultural affinity for it.Bush’s simplton philosophy about oversees policies was his weakness when we elected him, and it is destroying our credibility around the world and has caused many of us here to lose faith in our government.

By Corky Cobb

August 26, 2007 9:54 AM | Link to this

No matter how you spin it Jim this war is all Bush’s.

I didn’t know that 66% of the American people are Democrats. That is the number from the most recent Gallup poll that want us out by April.

The fact of the matter is not many Republicans support Bush either. Oh sure many of them shout down the Democrats for not “supporting” the war. But how many of them are putting their own butts in the line of fire. Republicans support the war like a cheerleader supports a football game. On the sidelines.

Instead of whining about the Dems ruining your war, how about for once call out your own.

Get off the blogs and into Iraq.

This great threat and everyone is on the sidelines. Maybe people would take this “threat” more seriously if the “supporters” started to ask their own to fight in this war.

Careers and school are way more important to 95% of the American public right now.

Where are the young Republican war lovers, and why have they abandoned their President?

The threat is real, right?

ENLIST

By michael hinkle

August 26, 2007 9:58 AM | Link to this

“loss of will”? wooten should think about “loss of lives”. I served during viet nam and it was the worst stain on this country because of the deceit and perpetual lies of our leaders.

By Disappointed

August 26, 2007 10:02 AM | Link to this

Jim,

The closing paragraph in today’s column is priceless. “Democrats have invested in defeat. But that’s not what the American people want — and they’ll never knowingly embrace a party that offers it.” As evidence to prove your point, young Americans are flocking to recruitment offices to sign up for the military; specifically the military age children of bush and republican congressman. Jimbo, if you want to find out how much the “hawks” (including you), support the war….. reinstate the draft.

By bschem

August 26, 2007 10:06 AM | Link to this

Once again flat-Earth conservatism ignores the elephant in all our living rooms. For one thing, the Iraqi people are “living under a brutal and oppressive regime” right now, with mass murder and ethnic warfare being carried out right under the noses of the US Army that we are told is winning this war. This ugly fact is waved away with a morally repugnant “better them than us” argument by Bush supporters. So much for conservative, traditional Christian principles.

But that’s only the tail of this particular Republican pachyderm. The rest of the beast that Mr. Wooten & his ilk are attempting to hide is that this war never had anything to do with American principles of democracy. If it did, we would have invaded Lybia and deposed Khadaffi. This war never had anything to do with preventing genocide, as suggested with reference to Cambodia. If it did, we would have intervened in Rwanda. No, this war was about OIL. Period. Bush doesn’t give a rat’s rectum about the Iraqi people, and it shows in the complete lack of interest in planning for securing Iraq after the invasion.

So get off your high horse, conservatives. This was blood for oil from the beginning, or we would have secured Afganistan as our response to 9/11 and dug in our heels there. No, this war is a failed attempt by Bush to take by brute force what Republicans - stuck in the nineteenth century - feel we are entitled to by Manifest Destiny, with predictably disasterous results.

By Carbon Footprint

August 26, 2007 10:07 AM | Link to this

Warner on meet the press now.

must see tv

By Duh stands for Democrat

August 26, 2007 10:27 AM | Link to this

Aren’t we lucky the Angry Left is not in charge of national security?:

{{{{ By Corny Cobb August 26, 2007 9:54 AM Get off the blogs and into Iraq. ENLIST}}}}

Just imagine the 101st Wheelchair and Walker Brigade, straight from the nursing home and Intensive Care, right into the maw of the enemy, bravely wheeling their way to glorious, er, victory.

Either that or you can STFU.

What a wonderful message of inclusion, the full spectrum of liberal “diversity,” let’s not make the disadvantage part of the American dream, no let’s muzzle them if we don’t like what they are saying. Let’s stuff them in the closet, lest their words upset our tender sensibilities.

It isn’t enough for the POS left that these people don’t cheer on Al Qaeda’s every atrocity and act of genocide, they don’t disclose national security secrets to the whole wide world, the don’t falsely accuse our brave soldiers of all manner of war crimes, like the pinkos do.

By Carbon Footprint

August 26, 2007 10:29 AM | Link to this

Meet the Press. Dont miss this. Now.

You need to hear this information and discussion.

Dont get left behind in today’s blogging.

Meet the Press now.

By bschem

August 26, 2007 10:30 AM | Link to this

By the way, Mr. Bush. You are NOT Commander-in-Chief of the United States. Constitutionally, you are Commander-in-Chief of the ARMED FORCES ONLY. Or have you dictatorial ambitions as well?

By Martin

August 26, 2007 10:37 AM | Link to this

Well, after reading all the ho-hum babble from the left on this blog, one would think we really are at doomsday. It’s interesting how The Hill has to shriek about a new terrorist attack would be a Republican power builder. Of course, we all know the conspiracy nut androgynous liberals would say Bush attacked his own country to gain political clout for Republicans. Yawn. The military surge led by General Petraeus is clearly succeeding in lowering the violence level in Iraq [but not competely eliminating it], yet the liberal media cheerleader squads for defeat at the AJC editorial board and blogs like this are scrambling for a new strategy to convince Americans that Iraq is a disaster. To top that, we have deranged liberals that post things like at 9:54am who think that 2/3 of America is Democrat[ic]. It truly doesn’t get any better than that.

Never, EVER trust a liberal.

By jm

August 26, 2007 10:42 AM | Link to this

If Iraq means so much to W the incompetent, why isn’t he locked up in a room somewhere with the leaders in Iraq trying to handle the diplomacy part of the surge (remember, there were two parts to the surge). Instead, he is giving speeches to the VFW while the Iraqi parliament is on vacation. Also, it is nice to see the republicans trying to swiftboat al-Maliki.

By SOCOM

August 26, 2007 10:47 AM | Link to this

By the way, Mr. Bush. You are NOT Commander-in-Chief of the United States. Constitutionally, you are Commander-in-Chief of the ARMED FORCES ONLY. Or have you dictatorial ambitions as well?

That is perhaps the most ludicrous thing I’ve read from a castrated liberal yet. bschem, did you say that same thing when Bill Clinton was “in charge” of America? Didn’t think so. Of course, I’ll bet that pud puller made fun of Cheney when Cheney said he technically wasn’t a part of the Executive Branch which is Constitutionally factual. It is clear the loon left is becoming more deranged and detached every day. Rather entertaining to watch I must say.

By time to baseball bat cut and run appeasing demoNcrat scum

August 26, 2007 10:52 AM | Link to this

The spineless flaccid appeasing yellowbellied snivelling defeatism of the treasonous hate America cut and run pinko liberal scum is a national and international outrage. These weak willed craven latter day Chamberlains are gleefully lining up like a pack of spastic Pavlov’s dogs to run away from a fight/conflict a thousand times more important than Vietnam - which countless smelly hippie commie dogturds equally gleefully undermined with their dissembling psychotic treachery and despicable cowardice.

So the Pelosibitch, the corrupt to the core Turdtha, the far left lying socialist maggot Feingold and their fellow bleating energiser abject appeasers are joyously aiding the towel head terrorist enemy. Sending daily Tokyo Rosie tuboflesbianhatepiglard O’Donnell like surrender now signals to folks who would kill us all in the twisted sick name of some child molesting illiterate demented seventh century racist arab toyboy halfwit whose word was as duplicitous and self serving as any perjuring lying Arkansas rapist, page boy molesting Assachussets queer or DUI killer Kennedy.

Liberalism is undeniably the most evil, worthless, corrosive and venal vicious mental ‘ideological’ disease the west has endured since the bad old days of the genocidal papist inquisition and the sullenly stupid, backward superstitious murderous religious nutters lost their immense power to control freak - with bonfires and dungeons - the cowed clerically controlled peasantry.

The massed yellow streaked rodents that constitute the verminous liberal enemy within are so obsessed with “winning” at Bush’s expense that their Bush Derangement Syndrome has - like a new instantly addicktive form of crack - blinded them like a cowardly depraved pardon selling Arkansas rapist in a Little Rock hotel room to what is right and what is wrong.

The future of the still globally envied and resented American freedoms have never been more at risk. Clear thinking patriotic Americans must reject the bleating and incessant, snivelling demands for cut and running from the perfidious plague of craven selfish leftist cockroaches and allow commonsense to prevail and avoid the demoNcrat imposed debacle of Vietnam.

By Corky Cobb

August 26, 2007 10:58 AM | Link to this

Where did I say that 66% of the American public are Democrat? Jim did.

“Democrats have invested in defeat. But that’s not what the American people want — and they’ll never knowingly embrace a party that offers it.”

He said DEMOCRATS are invested in defeat. 66% of the American public want out by April so by Jim’s math they are Democrats.

And how about you Martin? What is your excuse for not “fighting them THERE, so we don’t have to fight them here?”

Does every single war supporting blogger here have an excuse?

Where are the neo-patriots? Why are they at home during this horrible threat to our security? Lead the way!

ENLIST

By deegee

August 26, 2007 11:08 AM | Link to this

Assuming that Afghanistan is one of the many fronts we are fighting in the war on terror, here’s another example of the whac-a-mole strategy of the Pentagon. Clamp down on the North and then watch the South go Taliban. Either get it right or get out. The US military is simply not large enough to fight the war on all fronts. Reinstate the draft and give the military what they need or get out.

“ASHKAR GAH, Afghanistan: Afghanistan is expected to produce record levels of opium in 2007 for the second straight year, led by a 45 percent increase in the Taliban stronghold of Helmand Province.”

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/08/26/asia/afghan.php

By Lee

August 26, 2007 11:13 AM | Link to this

Many years from now, when historians ponder the demise of the American empire, they will point to three main events:

• The War of Northern Agression, which essentially replaced our Constitutional Republic form of government with a centralized, federalistic government.

• The uncontrolled invasion by tens of millions of illegal aliens, which undermined the sovereignty and social fabric of our nation.

• An imperialistic foreign policy, which drained this country of trillions of dollars from our treasury and millions of lives of our citizen patriots.

The question we should ask is not about troop pullout or troop surge, no, the question we should be asking is why we allow our addle-brained politicians to embroil us in foreign conflicts that do not concern us.

Our Founding Fathers warned us against entangling foreign alliances. Sadly, we forgot that history lesson…

By jbmlaw

August 26, 2007 11:13 AM | Link to this

Dear Duh @ 10:28, good response. Your pointed note makes me realize that while the mindless left is not in charge of our anti-terrorism efforts, it does play the role of a screaming chimpanzee bouncing on the shoulders of the serious people attempting to free us of the threat.

By Corky Cobb

August 26, 2007 11:16 AM | Link to this

I mean really.

Those that think of Iraq as being this big bad threat are staying on the sidelines.

What kind of war strategy is that?

What examples of history are we using here? What wars throughout history were won by name calling?

What wars were won when the supporters wouldn’t fight? What wars were won when careers were more important? How are your words winning the war on terrorism?

By jbmlaw

August 26, 2007 11:16 AM | Link to this

Dear TFTT @ 10:52, I’ll second your argument, too.

By zeke

August 26, 2007 11:17 AM | Link to this

A big 10-4 Jim! Vietnam is held forth by peacenicks, liberals and socialists as a lost war! Bull crap! We were decimating the viet cong, the north vietnamese army and thier chinese backers, who by the way were fighting with the cong against our forces! Even the so called disaster of the TET offensive is misrepresented as a loss. Truth is we had decimated thier forces, and, all we had to do was mop up the swine! But, the peace groups, liberals and anti US crowd pushed and pushed for us to leave because they said we were not winning! Westmoreland made a mistake of telling the truth that if our troops were allowed to fight as they were trained we would be in Hanoi within 6 months and the war would be won, then we could decide about the chinese dogs! That truth got him fired just as MacArthur was fired in Korea when he wanted to pacify the chinese dogs! So look what we have now because of the short sighted decisions made for pure political reasons by Truman and Eisenhour! Thank God W. has the intelligence, wisdom and courage to do what is right regardless of the liberals, socialists, media and the anti US peace activists (anarcists)!

By zeke

August 26, 2007 11:21 AM | Link to this

TW is a liberal idiot! W. is the best leader we could have now! Thank God Gore, Kerry or Clinton were not in office on September 11, 2001!

By Blog Warriors

August 26, 2007 11:22 AM | Link to this

Come on guys and gals - there are millions of us blog warriors.

Yes, we didn’t serve during Nam, or like Wooten joined the Air Force or the Navy to duck the areas where they were actually shooting bullets, and most of us are pretty old and obese.

But heckfire - any fat slob can drive a truck or humvee around the desert, or hide in the Green Zone waiting for a mortar attack. Remember, if we give them enough targets over they won’t come over here!

And if you think shooting a squirrel or the neighbor’s cat is fun, you get to play with guns in Iraq too. Someone ain’t stoppin’ fast enough for you - someone stoppin’ too fast - someone don’t look right - someone looks too right - blow them away! It’s called “collateral damage” - let Allah sort ‘em out, those heathen mothers.

And let’s face it - Armageddon’s comin’ ladies - better get yourself killed fast, ‘fore Jeezus puts the “No More Vacancies” sign up! Get blowed up in a humvee - seems like The Rapture, I bet.

So why don’t a few million of you True Americans hustle on over to Iraq. I’ll join up just as soon as I find me some damn toilet paper!

Ted Nugent, Pro-War Pro-Killin’ Pro-Death Pro-American!

By Corky Cobb

August 26, 2007 11:25 AM | Link to this

“it does play the role of a screaming chimpanzee bouncing on the shoulders of the serious people attempting to free us of the threat.”

Where are these “serious” people you talk of? Those trying to free us of the “threat”

It seems they have issued themselves waivers for doing the one thing that is necessary for victory, fighting. Why are these people not enlisting? Sounds rather unpatriotic to me.

By Carbon Footprint

August 26, 2007 11:34 AM | Link to this

The crux of the Right’s argument is that if we leave Iraq, Al Queda will take over the failed state, from which they will launch attacks on America.

It is the one constant across the splintered spectrum of the Conservative base of support for the President.

It also is the weakest point one can make about a post-USA Iraq. Al QUeda will get swallowed up in the chaos of a USA free iraq.

If anything, our presence in Iraq is provided cover for Al Queda to operate because we have established no mans lands and fire free zones and a structure from which any guerilla insurgency thrives.

I cant believe the ignorance of the interviewers who allow these unsubstantiated points to be made during round table discussions.

Why didn’t the host press the pundits who predict that al queda would use a failed state from which to launch attacks?

Please. The idea stinks worse than Mission Accomplished, which stinks worse than Cheney’s Saddam-911 links.

I honestly dont believe that Bush knew what he had wrought when he invaded Iraq in 2003.

I dont think he understands what his options are now either: our options are a field of one - We can never ever leave. Ever.

We are trapped there, against our will, and will suffer the fate of the French who bankrupted themselves in bankrolling our own insurgency. (Thanx to Benjamin Franklin’s legerdemain)

What we are learning from Iraq is how to conduct militia-based political caucusing. We are in grave danger of becoming Iraq, becoming that which we most despise.

We made the cardinal mistake of allowing ourselves to hate. Never hate. We only hate in others what we see in them of ourselves. We ultimately become that which we most despise.

The hate was born from the fear of 911, weilded by our leaders, and transformed into vigilante mob-think, and now the situation is quite hopeless, and the only endgame is that the USA stays in Iraq 4ever, staving off the regional and thus global spread of the chaos.

By Tony

August 26, 2007 11:36 AM | Link to this

A few things,Bush did avoid going to Vietnam so did Cheney.In Cheney’s words he had better things to do.These guy’s see you rah rah people as fools they can manipulate.Also this if we leave we lost news flash we lost this one already but its easy to say keep fighting when you have no skin in the game. I wish they would start a draft tomorrow oh the song would change when they are sending your son or daughter off to iraq.

By Woohooten

August 26, 2007 11:54 AM | Link to this

Well another beautiful weekend and here we have the same old tired lazy liberals wasting their wasted lives a way on a blog as if it will change the planet. Fortunately, it’s going to only be 90 degrees instead of 101, and I’ve got a new motorcycle to ride to the mountains in a short short.

Corky Cobb is using the same old tired worn out trite phrase of “join up if you support the war” BS. Yawn. Bite me, Corky. You probably never stood up for a single thing in your sad miserable pathetic useless liberal life. Oh wait, we already went through that last week: “I’m against this, I didn’t vote for Clinton, I don’t support that, I don’t agree with..” Meh, nobody gives a flying cockroach what you think, Corky. Come back when you can actually say something grown up like “I am for..” without saying you are for losing a war. We could have won Vietnam by the way ignoramus, as zeke said.

Moving forward, US and Iraqi forces are preparing for an onslaught of violence and bloodshed during Ramadan after the report on Iraq progress is released. You can rest assured that people like Cynthia Tucker, Christiane Amanpour (sp?), Wolf Blitzer, and the libs that blog here will be rooting for the enemy and US defeat. After all it’s just “Bush’s War.” Sickening.

Speaking of Amanpour, how about that Christian/Judaism/Islam religion slam with that multiple Communist News Network episodes? Christians were insinuated as being totalitarians whereas Muslims were touted as being “warriors.” No, I’m not making this up. As if anyone should be shocked at this barrel scraping garbage fest from CNN.

By Woohooten

August 26, 2007 12:08 PM | Link to this

Only a Canadian media outlet has the courage to say “the Liberal leader..”. Here in the States, you can always hear or read about “conservative leader” or “right wing leader” or whatever, but RARELY do you here or read the words “liberal leader” or “left wing leader.” Isn’t that interesting?

Anyway, Canadian opposition leaders delivered an ultimatum to Prime Minister Stephen Harper on Thursday, demanding he reverse course on his climate change policies and Canada’s combat mission in Afghanistan or risk a fall election. Huh. You do realize that this is tyranny at work, no? The attitude of “we believe man-made global warming is an imminent threat to humanity and not radical globalized Islamic terrorism.” Sounds like the left in this nation.

Don’t think for one second that Democrats here in the states wouldn’t do this if they knew they could get away with it. To think they call Bush a tyrant or dictator. Laughable. From the man who in his first six years never vetoed one bill drawn up by Democrats (then of course liberals and Democrats b-itched about “his” spending). They’re all mad, and I’m not talking about anger.

By getalife

August 26, 2007 12:09 PM | Link to this

And now for the truth.

There is no Iraq government.

So, I propose to send all failed Iraq occupation supporters to Iraq to serve in their government.

We know they will not fight so it is time to put up or shut up and serve in their government.

Pundits like Jim could report in Iraq or retire.

I think Jim would retire.

By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I

August 26, 2007 12:18 PM | Link to this

Woohooten, you’re relatively new here. We Your Pope welcome you to the losers of the Woo-ten Klan. On the weekends, Luckovich’s losers also post here, too, making this blog one of the finest representations of chickenhawk kkkonservative mindlessness on the web.

Anyhow, The Order of the Yellow Stripe - the Pro-War kkkowards and kkklowns that regularly post here - will be recruiting you soon - your mindless juvenile bloviating for your Emperor will probably earn you one of their Medal of Freedoms.

Lord, We Your Pope pray for deliverance from these filthy jackals, hyenas, butt pirates and scavengers that support the moron in the White House. Send us a sign - increase their IQs tenfold - once they are halfwits they will be easier to reason with. Amen

By getalife

August 26, 2007 12:20 PM | Link to this

There is a ton of work to to serve in Iraq.

Cowards will not have to fight, they could go work on the water, the electricity, the hospitals, the media to spew their propaganda, the laws to steal their oil (the gop would be great for this)and rebuilding the bombed out buildings.

So enough w being right. Prove it and go serve in their government. The troops can’t win without an Iraq government. Help the troops win and be the Iraq government or STFU.

Geez.

By Corky Cobb

August 26, 2007 12:21 PM | Link to this

We couldn’t even win Viet Nam with the draft Woohooten. How are we going to win Iraq without one? Our “warriors” have decided to sit this one out.

Our war supporters have given comfort and aid to the enemy. The terrorists have access to the internet and know that our ‘Warriors’ have decided their careers are more important than the war on terror.

I’m sure they are scared to death of the bloggers.

At least you war dodgers don’t have to move to Canada. You get to blog from the comfort of home.

By Woohooten

August 26, 2007 12:24 PM | Link to this

Inflated foreclosure numbers by the media? Say it ain’t so, Joe. Now, nobody in their Right mind would argue that house foreclosures have shot through the roof so to speak, but to inflate something already painful? What’s the agenda behind that? One knife wound into “Bush’s economy” isn’t enough? Oh wait, it can’t be Bush’s economy because as one brilliant liberall pointed out this morning, Bush is only Chief of the military. Don’t you love hysterics in liberal mentality?

Oops, I’m going off on a Nuget tangent (hilarious watching the pansies on the left go grape ape nuts over that video and I knew they would..hey libs, you can thank Drudge for that..Drudge that you nuts hate so much).

Anyway, when you loan out money to sub-prime candidates you take a risk. When you as a consumer buy a home that you can only afford on a month to month basis with no room for unforeseen consequences like milk prices and other groceries skyrocketing due to brilliant liberal corn fuel alternatives, you have asked for it. It would be interesting to know the political ideology of those who had to give up their homes because they bit off more than they could chew. That’d be a hell of a poll, don’t you think?

By Carbon Footprint

August 26, 2007 12:29 PM | Link to this

Wooten does not define, “premature abandonment”.

Just when is that? What’s the criteria?

See how you are a useless debater? You back up nothing with even less nothing to support it.

We are in real trouble, and Wooten doesn’t even know it.

That means he’s afraid.

The round table discussions included both right and left, Fox and Abc, and they all are pointing toward one deduction: we aint nevah gonna git outta Iraq.

I’m the only one who knew this in the whole world? Who am I?

Now I’m frightened.

By Woohooten

August 26, 2007 12:30 PM | Link to this

Anyhow, The Order of the Yellow Stripe - the Pro-War kkkowards and kkklowns that regularly post here - will be recruiting you soon -

Well thank you, Pope. Although I must say that unlike a current sitting West Virginia Senator, I don’t plan on joining the klan or having the klan as a part of my life in the past. My beloved African-American boss who I would do anything for would surely fire me.

By Woohooten

August 26, 2007 12:34 PM | Link to this

“We couldn’t even win Viet Nam with the draft Woohooten.”

Corky, you do realize that the B-52 bombing escalation in Vietnam towards the end actually brought the NVA to the table for talks, do you not? Defeatism is what you liberals know best.

BTW, stop repeating yourself man. You are starting to sound insane.

By getalife

August 26, 2007 12:38 PM | Link to this

British move out of Basra police center, Shiite militia moves it

By Woohooten

August 26, 2007 12:41 PM | Link to this

“The round table discussions included both right and left, Fox and Abc, and they all are pointing toward one deduction: we aint nevah gonna git outta Iraq.”

Brilliant observation, Carbon Bigfoot. We ain’t nevah gettin’ out of South Korea, Germany, the UK, or Japan either. How many years ago were those wars? For the record, our USAF military presence in Saudi Arabia was one of the leading reasons why Osama turned radical and against the West. So everything is relative, I suppose.

By getalife

August 26, 2007 12:43 PM | Link to this

You have to read the British media to find the truth in Iraq.

Corporate wh-ore media does not report the truth. Hoot is an idiot.

Funny how the world saw w’s speech as a pathetic lame duck attempt to pass on this disaster to Hillary but Jim never mentions the truth.

By Duh stands for Democrat

August 26, 2007 12:47 PM | Link to this

{{{{By getalife August 26, 2007 12:09 PM There is no Iraq government. So, I propose to send all failed Iraq occupation supporters to Iraq to serve in their government.}}}}

al-Gitmo: Hey, since we don’t have a Congress in our government anymore now that the democrats are in charge, can I volunteer to take, let’s say, Harry Reid’s seat?

He’s not using it.

And as far as helping the Iraqi government, how about if we first try to not act like we are going to abandon them to the foreign Al Qaeda killers, like you abandon South Vietnam?

I can see how the Iraqis lack any motivation, with all of you hysterical perverts calling for us to cut and run, I’ll bet they are just longing to cooperate with the Americans and it’s depraved band of flip floppers and sissy coward liberals.

Hell, we are the safest and most secure country in the world and we can’t get Pelosi to look after our affairs, what makes you expect the Iraqis to stick their necks out for us?

Let’s summarize: The Angry Left thinks it is o.k. to publish Taliban propaganda, spit on soldiers returning from war, falsely accuse soldiers of atrocity, threaten to cut off the funding to the troops, abandon an ally to the communist killers after we won the peace, encourage the Al Qaeda killers to slaughter innocent women and children so that you kowards can ape the killing as the fault of America, and after all that and more you want everyone to join the Armed Forces that you are working so hard to defeat?

By Woohooten

August 26, 2007 12:54 PM | Link to this

“You have to read the British media to find the truth in Iraq.”

That idiot Getalife has the gall to say that while the BBC has reported lies and Reuters has doctored photographs of war.

Getalife would have made a great nazi propogandist. So easily brainwashed.

By KZ_Guy

August 26, 2007 1:00 PM | Link to this

I too believe Bush’s speech to the VFW should be required reading. That speech should solidify his position on the bottom rung of the historical presidential ladder. I never thought I would live to see a president as bad as Richard Nixon again. Bush is nothing more than a speech reader. Only an idiot would try to favorably compare VietNam to anything.

By Woohooten

August 26, 2007 1:02 PM | Link to this

“Hell, we are the safest and most secure country in the world and we can’t get Pelosi to look after our affairs, what makes you expect the Iraqis to stick their necks out for us?”

EXCELLENT point Democrat Duh. What, praytell, has Nancy OR Reid been doing lately other than being a policial ambulance chaser? I guess that explains their 15-28% approval rating in congress. Laughably sad. Sadder for the idiots who voted for those loudmouthed clowns thinking change would happen.

By Corky Cobb

August 26, 2007 1:04 PM | Link to this

“Let’s summarize: The Angry Left thinks it is o.k. to publish Taliban propaganda, spit on soldiers returning from war, falsely accuse soldiers of atrocity, threaten to cut off the funding to the troops, abandon an ally to the communist killers after we won the peace, encourage the Al Qaeda killers to slaughter innocent women and children so that you kowards can ape the killing as the fault of America, and after all that and more you want everyone to join the Armed Forces that you are working so hard to defeat?”…………..

So, with all that going on, the war loving bloggers have decided to just sit this one out and not do anything about terrorism?

WHAT ARE YOU PEOPLE WAITING FOR???

Go show us how its done. Lead. Sitting around waiting for the others and doing nothing but name calling is not going to get the job done. Stop whining about it. Stop pouting. Al Quada killers are massacuring children and you people sit around and do nothing???????????? What does that say about YOUR side?

HEADLINE: AMERICAN WARRIORS SURRENDER! DEFEATED BY LIBERAL PROTESTERS!

ENLIST

By Woohooten

August 26, 2007 1:07 PM | Link to this

“Only an idiot would try to favorably compare VietNam to anything.”

KZ_Guy, Bush was referring to the CONSEQUENCES of cutting and running. He was Right. Millions died after we ran from Vietnam, and millions more will die if we abandon Iraq. Only an idiot would try to deny that.

By Redneck Convert

August 26, 2007 1:18 PM | Link to this

Well, I see we got the same old bunch of librul cowards on here today. I say fight and fight some more. Good Southren people never give up in a good fight. That trader Robert E. Lee surrendered us or else we would still be fighting the War of Northren Aggression.

What people on here don’t understand is there is more of us than there is of them. So say we lose a few hundred thousand troops in the next ten years or so. I figure Iraq will run out of people before we do. Because we got more people. It won’t be long till there ain’t nothing but Americans in Iraq. All the Iraq people will be dead. Then we’ll have their oil and plenty of cheap gas and they won’t be able to follow us home because they will be dead. Long as it ends before my grandson little Sonny Zell George grows up and has to join the army I’m all for the war.

The libruls on here want us to cut and run and when we do a bunch of towel heads will be over here trying to break into my trailer and take my 42 inch HD TV. Then I will have to listen on bad radio for my beloved Dawgs and the Falcons and major league baseball might not even be on. The towel heads like soccer. Which is a sissy sport.

Anyway, I just thought I would light into the libruls while Sister Dusty is trying to sober up. She can take over pretty soon. Mixing whiskey and beer on a Saturday night can really do a number on you. She had a big battle with that librul JK yesterday and needed something to comfort herself.

By Woohooten

August 26, 2007 1:19 PM | Link to this

“Go show us how its done. Lead.”

The hell do you think Bush & Co. is TRYING to do? Hell he’s got TWO enemies to deal with; one in Iraq that crosses borders, and one at home here in the States. Yeah. That means the likes of YOU Corky.

“Sitting around waiting for the others and doing nothing but name calling is not going to get the job done.”

LMAO. Corky has gone off the deep end again. It was bound to happen. Liberal Iraq War Derangement Syndrome is dangerous.

By Dumbya's History Lessons

August 26, 2007 1:27 PM | Link to this

Napoleon enters Moscow - “Mission Accomplished”

Hitler and Vichy France - “Coalition of the willing.”

French at Agincourt - “We got ‘em on the run!”

Hitler at Stalingrad - “It will fall in days!”

The French at Dien Bien Phu - “We got ‘em surrounded!”

Westmoreland just before Tet - “We’re almost through here, Mr. President.”

Custer at Little Big Horn - “We’re Americans, they’re savages!”

The Light Brigade and of course, Pickett at Gettysburg - “Charge!!!!”

By Woohooten

August 26, 2007 1:28 PM | Link to this

What a shame. Bush disses Vermont for a visit and the Communist News Network jumps all over him for it and spins it into an Iraq issue:

REGINA GILBERT: He [President Bush] asked something that surprised me. ‘Does it ever get easier?’ And I just looked at him, and I looked at my husband, and I said absolutely not. I said this is a hole in my heart and it’s always going to be there.

KING: Regina Gilbert traveled to Fort Bragg, North Carolina to meet the president. Her only child, Kyle, was killed in Iraq four years ago. Vermont has lost 18 soldiers in Iraq. 41 states have lost more, but because it is so tiny, Vermont has the highest per capita death toll. More than reason enough, Regina Gilbert says, for the President to visit.

GILBERT: Hopefully we’re making strides. But I want to hear something good about it, so my son can look down and say, ‘See, Mom, I told you.’ But I’m still waiting for that day. So, I hope he does come, to our little state, ‘cause I think that we’ve — like I said, we’ve stepped up. And I’m hoping he will reflect and step up as well.

Hmm. Isn’t Vermont that nutter state that allows nudes to roam around freely and supports agnostic haters like Howard Dean?

For the record, nobody in the media raised hell when Clinton dissed the Red State Nebraska for eight years.

By getalife

August 26, 2007 1:29 PM | Link to this

duh,

We have a government but not much of one. The coc runs Washington and you know it.

You need to temporarly replace the Iraq government because they have none.

Lets say about thirty years.

How did you win Iraq without an Iraq government?

By getalife

August 26, 2007 1:34 PM | Link to this

Bill went all the States and they love him.

w can’t go to any of them without the wingnuts.

They hate him.

Clinton 08 for the love.

By Dusty

August 26, 2007 1:43 PM | Link to this

Oh, well done, Jim Wooten. I am glad you are speaking more strongly against the liberal element undermining our country.

The President’s last speech shows he is doing the same. He’s a strong President and looks stronger by the day. More Americans are realizing that we are fortunate to have a leader who can perservere during tough times. As ‘tis said, “You can’t keep a good man down.” You can’t keep a good country down either when there is a leader who recognizes the value of freedom and will fight for it.

By GodHatesTrash

August 26, 2007 1:45 PM | Link to this

Vermont has lost 18 soldiers in Iraq. 41 states have lost more, but because it is so tiny, Vermont has the highest per capita death toll.

Way higher than the Woo-ten Klanners.

Cowardly chickenhawk trash.

By Woohooten

August 26, 2007 1:47 PM | Link to this

“Bill went all the States and they love him.”

Once again that stupid liberal tool Getalife doesn’t address the POINT -> Clinton disses a con state, it’s cool. Bush disses a lib state, it’s evil.

Every exit is an entry somewhere else - Tom Stoppard.

For Iraq, that’s failure and millions of lives.

By papicek

August 26, 2007 1:48 PM | Link to this

When all is said and done, I think we’ll find that Israel may be the big winner here. In destroying the largest standing army to the east of Israel, they can reallocate resources elsewhere, which they have, in fact, done. However, anyone who says that this war makes America safer is being less than candid. Nobody knows what lies ahead. Anyone who says that this war and occupation is an effective way to combat terrorism is forgetting that the terrorist movement is transnational, and that the terrorists, like the insurgents in Iraq responding to the surge, have simply picked up and started elsewhere. This has been the bloodiest August since the actual fighting ended, and those who point out that Anbar province shows gains from the surge, should remember that we’re seeing that in as little as 48 hours after our troops have redeployed from any particular location, the insurgents have returned.

How did we get into this mess? James Dobbins, writing in Foreign Affairs*, puts our failures neatly, “Americans should insist on leaders who will foster debate and welcome disciplined dissent.” And that’s what has been missing here all along. Instead, we’ve had uncritical reporting from the press, many of whom have since acknowledged it, taking the Bush administration’s assertions as though they were graved in stone. We now know to what extent we’ve been led by amateur intelligence analysts (Rumsfeld’s ad hoc pentagon group investigating Saddam’s ties to Al-Qaeda) and officials who have no stomach for dissent and too much regard for their own opinions. Colin Powell was right all along, and he knew it. Because people’s lives depended on the outcome of Bush’s decision, I would have been happier had he held his ground. We might have still gone in, however, we all would have benefitted from a frank and honest airing of the goals and probable outcomes.

And everyone knew beforehand that invading Iraq would be, in Cheney’s now-famous words, “a quagmire.” I knew it, before the first bomb dropped—Israel has been at this for almost 60 years and they’re still at square one. There’s grown a culture that wants to take up what we call terrorism, and we all know that it enjoys broad support. So in retrospect, everyone was asleep at the wheel here; the White House, in entering upon a policy without internal debate, the republicans who are more intent on building a lasting majority in Congress and on corporate handouts than on the state of the nation, the democrats whose job was to make dissenting viewpoints heard, and the American people who let themselves be led like sheep. Our people in uniform and their families are now paying the price.

Iran now stands before us and now is the time for discussion. And I don’t mean the mudslinging of lefty crazies or rightie wingnuts. I mean what the founding fathers intended: a free people engaged in mature debate to decide their course.

We’ve failed our foundering fathers. We’ve all failed them. Let’s not compound the problem by calling for a Christian jihad. I can promise you that it’s never going to happen. The six sergeants who sent that letter to the NY Times made a brave choice. In that letter, they specifically mentioned reason they wrote was that the debate on the course of the war and occupation had more to do with domestic political concerns than with the realities on the ground there. We can insist on all the “benchmarks” we like, yet the fact remains that those benchmarks have everything to do with domestic political concerns and nothing to do with Iraqi realities. They are worse than useless in light of the fact that we in the United States haven’t realized that we cannot rebuild Iraq; that only the Iraqis can.

Those who serve there deserve better than slogans, they deserve better than childish name calling, they deserve better than an unexamined policy that profoundly affects their lives. They deserve our very best.

*”Who Lost Iraq?”, James Dobbins, Foreign Affairs, September/October 2007, Council on Foreign Relations.

By getalife

August 26, 2007 1:51 PM | Link to this

He is a lame duck.

A desperate soul of a sniveling coward.

The worst leader this country has ever seen.

w and cheney should think about their country for once in life and resign in disgrace.

Reid was right but w and cheney will never admit it.

This is an act of cowardice. If you support these failures prove it by going to Iraq and helping their government. There is much work for you to do.

Of course, you will type your support but do absolutely nothing.

By AmVet

August 26, 2007 1:53 PM | Link to this

Notwithstanding Mr. Wooten’s sycophantic cheer leading, here is:

The Recipe for Success in The War on Terror in Iraq

Beginning in 2000, continue to develop strategies to oust Hussein/Baathists and eventually work feverishly to make any connections, no matter how dubious, with the Taliban, Al Queda, “terrorists”, foreign/non-Iraqi jihadists, whoever.

(Nice bonus benefit - get to finally clear the legacy of daddy, along with Donald Rumsfeld himself, who “didn’t finish the job”. As they originally feared a “quagmire”).

Totally disregard credible notice and take no actions whatsoever, that the enemy had plans to use US airplanes as weapons. Instead use finite resources to grab at every straw available (very large quantities of WMDs, uranium from Niger, supposed clandestine meetings between the Baathist and Al Queda, aluminum tubes, etc…) to support the “plan”.

After the Sept. 11 attacks, futher develop strategies (in the world of business this is known as cooking the books) to ensure overthrow of Hussein is the primary focus after routing Taliban in Afghanistan.

Created a bloated turf-protecting and inefficient bureaucracy called The Dept. of Homeland Security that is SUPPOSED to better coordinate intelligence gathering from the countless other turf-protecting bureaucracies.

Make many of the American voters extremely nervous and suspicious by implementing “war time emergency measures”, like dancing on the legal line of providing habeus corpus or freedom from unreasonable search and seizures.

Demonstrate no success at all in utilizing these measures.

Use relentless hyperbole and every single chance possible to invoke the date of 9/11 and use numerous other scare tactics and propaganda (“we can’t wait for a mushroom cloud as the smoking gun”, “fight them over there so we don’t have to fight them here” ad infinitum).

Sell the concept of regime change and the ensuing benefits as infinitely easier than it is in reality - “We’ll be greeted as liberators with flowers and candy”, “the insurgency is in its last throes” (in 2005), “the surge is working” (in 2007).

Sell the idea of regime change in Iraq as germane to finding and killing the real culprits, regardless of where they are, Saudi Arabia, etc. And play this off as being as equally effective as finding any and all of the others who were heavily involved or directly responsible for the attacks on the United States.

Strong arm, swift boat, lie about, whatever, any and all political opposition to force support of the endeavor, thus reducing the eventual blame. In other words use American politics as the single biggest instrument of policy.

Put far too few troops in country to effectively prosecute the original “plan”. Play this blunder off as “going to war with the army you have”.

From the very first days of the occupation, make a withering series of strategic blunders and allow the pillaging and rape of the country and the ever increasing slaughtering of its citizens to begin in earnest virtually unabated years later.

“See” the “plan” as being so fluid that the goals are always mysterious and “success” is never easily identifiable. Cloak everything in slogans like “we’ll stand down when they stand up”. Attempt to convince the least knowledgeable of the American people that the goal there is not geo-political in nature nor has anything to do with our petro-chemical interests in the region, but rather as a humanitarian effort to export democracy to the very country where the Reagan administration helped empower the dictator in the first place as a failed answer to the Iran problem.

Convince the American people that a complete dearth of military experience does not matter in war time decision making and actually sell them on the concept that those who have demonstrated valor of the highest order in combat and who oppose you are irresolute or as the senior senator from Georgia called it “lacking courage”.

Disregard every lesson from history regarding land wars in Asia and the incredible and obvious chances for lack of lasting political success in this region.

Push all of your potential allies away by discounting their opinions (unless their intelligence supports ours, like in the case of the cowardly, useless France and Russia), and calling the United Nations irrelevant (UNecessary), thus forging a “coalition” of basically us and few bit players.

Sell this concept as American pride and determination at its best rather than as a rogue half-cocked cowboy foolishly going it alone.

Use almost Goebbels like oratory and tactics to portray any and all opposed to this effort as cowards and unpatriotic. (PACIFISTS are PARASITES on FREEDOM).

All the while take virtually all of your energies and focus off of the larger reasons for the strife - Israel and her neighbors, and thus the worldwide fanatical elements of Islamic terrorism in response.

Expect Americans to never question your credibility, competence or trustworthiness in these matters regardless of just how many mistakes and misjudgments you make and no matter how much intransigence you display, nor no matter how much of a debacle you make of it.

Lather, rinse and repeat as needed.

By We Blog For War!!

August 26, 2007 1:55 PM | Link to this

It’s the least we can do.

By Woohooten

August 26, 2007 2:05 PM | Link to this

Another shocker. The Seattle FBI and the Washington Joint Analytical Center (WAJAC) is requesting the ID of two men pictured on a ferry who are suspected terrorists.

CAIR comes to the rescue and says those photos are “resented.” But remember, Bush didn’t “do enough” to stop 9/11 from happening at the hands of radical Islam - for those that actually believe the Jews and Bush weren’t behind it anyway.

By getalife

August 26, 2007 2:11 PM | Link to this

Take it to the lgf coward.

Geez.

By Dusty

August 26, 2007 2:12 PM | Link to this

God Hates Trash @1:45

Maybe those soldiers from Vermont know that NOBODY in their state is supporting them. Makes it pretty tough to fight when your homefolks are crying and b*** like cowards.

On the other hand, real Southerners know how to fight and also know that people at home are supporting them 100%. Makes a big difference in morale.

(By the way, redneck convert is a half-wit phony Southerner, not to be believed on any account except for one. I do believe he drives a beer truck when he’s not delivering pizzas.)

By Woohooten

August 26, 2007 2:16 PM | Link to this

Dusty: redneck convert = GHT = ?

By getalife

August 26, 2007 2:18 PM | Link to this

Call at National Guard conference for U.S. withdrawal from Iraq greeted with standing ovation

Enough with the bs.

Get out now!

Men with honor resign when they fail.

We told this was a disaster and you cheered on the wasted lives.

Shame!

By satch

August 26, 2007 2:21 PM | Link to this

what is sad the gop and their followers don,t give a damn about the iraqi children and women getting whacked everyday.not one iota of concern for them.iraqis will hate the us forver.you cannot kill folks today and tomorrow say let,s be freinds and everything is ok.let tell you about a secret.those soldiers hate being in iraq and they are counting days until they go home.how do i know?i just spent 3 years in iraq working over there and knew scores of them.the officers will make rank the enlisted won,t get jack.

By Woohooten

August 26, 2007 2:22 PM | Link to this

Nope. I’m not going to ride today. That damned SUV-caused global warming is causing too many thunderstorms to pop up this afternoon.

Hey, how many liberals knew that George Wallace was a democrat like Byrd? You sure wouldn’t know it from the media. Surely if Wallace were a Republican that would have been mentioned here. Oh but we know, we know libs: current Republicans are former southern redneck KKK members. Like Byrd is a Republican. Funny old world, isn’t it?

By getalife

August 26, 2007 2:22 PM | Link to this

They build monuments for the fallen wasted lives in Vermont you freaking loser.

They have the highest mortality rate in Iraq per population.

Apologize now!

By Exposing hypocrisy

August 26, 2007 2:28 PM | Link to this

Dusty: redneck convert = GHT = ?

Andy = Woohooten = Duh stands for Democrat = WootenDull = LuckoDull = ??? = countless others.

By Dusty

August 26, 2007 2:28 PM | Link to this

Woohooten @ 2:16

I am not sure about that combination of redneck and GHT. The seemingly benign Dr. Jekyll and the vicious Mr. Hyde? May be. They both post big lies.

By Woohooten

August 26, 2007 2:31 PM | Link to this

(That 2:22 post should get the libs going, har har).

Anyway,