Thinking Right

By Redneck Convert

January 7, 2008 9:22 AM | Link to this

Well, dang it, I got caught by one of the red light cameras this weekend. I was turning left and this yankee from Vermont was in front of me. I thought I could beat the turn light but he slowed down in the innersection and I was right in the middle when the light turned red. I must of had my picture took about five times. And he give me the finger after he went through. I’m for the Death Penalty for these yankees that hate rednecks.

I got a lot of ideas for change. And it ain’t the kind this Osama guy wants. For starters,

Anyhow, I got a lot more ideas for change. If you want to hear more just drop me a line at Simpsons Trailer Park, PO Box 1553, Cumming GA. Have a good day everybody and vote Republican to save this country from the heathens and backsliders and libruls. We don’t want one of Those People or a Clinton to get in the White House. It could be hard on your pocketbook and our ways down here in the South.

By jbmlaw

January 7, 2008 9:22 AM | Link to this

Good morning all. “Change” is a magic word, and I believe a desire for change in spending practices caused the American electorate to send a statement in the Congressional elections of 2006. President Bush could magically turn the entire presidential and congressional campaigns with a simple executive decision – to refuse to honor earmarks. Most earmarks are not actually voted on by both houses of Congress, but are merely inserted into Congressional committee reports. The President is arguably free to ignore those spending requests. Be executive fiat, the President could direct every government agency to ignore every earmark directive, and to comply with the law compelling full expenditure of Congressionally-approved funds by spending those amounts on his own priorities. A simple executive action could shift the entire discussion of the campaigns, onto the need for reform of Federal spending practices – routinely the most immoral activity of our central government; it would certainly force the question.

Back to topic, as I believe we are obliged to acknowledge our host’s arguments, I broadly agree with Jim Wooten. “More government intrusion into our lives,” the change advocated by our leftist brethren and their candidates, is not a change for the good. It is time for President Bush to act on the “conservative” part of “compassionate conservative,” and put an end to irrational exuberance in the spending habits of our Congressional overlords.

By TW

January 7, 2008 9:36 AM | Link to this

Bush and Cheney are clearly guilty of numerous impeachable offenses. They have repeatedly violated the Constitution. They have transgressed national and international law. They have lied to the American people time after time. Their conduct and their barbaric policies have reduced our beloved country to a historic low in the eyes of people around the world. These are truly “high crimes and misdemeanors,” to use the constitutional standard. - McGovern, who stood clear of calls to imoeach Nixon after the 1972 election.

Only Al Qaeda would truly be happy with the status quo, Jim…

By Woobama

January 7, 2008 9:40 AM | Link to this

Wow, it didn’t take Mr. Wooten long to start using Senator Obama’s full name did it? And he cleverly used it in a quote from someone else!!

Very good Jim. You get an A+ in sleazy campaign tactics!

By jbmlaw

January 7, 2008 9:45 AM | Link to this

It seems to me that there is another change the president could force – senate failure to vote on appointments. While the Constitution undoubtedly grants the senate a right to “advise and consent” on presidential appointments, it is silent on the method required to validate the appointments. Here is the relevant portion of Article 2, section 2, (the second and third paragraphs) in discussing presidential powers of appointment:

“He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

“The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.”

I tried to highlight the second clause. Note that the first clause requires concurrence of two thirds of the Senators; note that the second clause does not particularly require any concurrence. Seemingly the senatorial oversight of presidential appointment power is merely advisory? Perhaps the presidential power of appointment is absolute, and the senate is merely invited to offer an opinion

By jbmlaw

January 7, 2008 9:47 AM | Link to this

Dear TW @ 9:36, I think your offer the moonbat nonsequitur of the day: “Only Al Qaeda would truly be happy with the status quo, Jim…” Thus Al Qaeda would oppose the impeachment of the man who destroyed their organization in Iraq? So bizarre, this leftist posturing.

By Smart Alex

January 7, 2008 9:49 AM | Link to this

Didn’t you mean to write that Giuliani is polling between 9-11 percent?

By Jack

January 7, 2008 9:52 AM | Link to this

The libs should root for McCain. If he gets the nod, the GOP will certainly lose.

By R. Wing

January 7, 2008 9:53 AM | Link to this

Of course, Al Qaeda didn’t have an organization in Iraq until GW opened the door for them to come in.

By jbmlaw

January 7, 2008 9:54 AM | Link to this

The consent of the Senate is required for appointments. My argument is that silence (or failure to exercise a power to deny), in the face of knowledge of a nomination, is “consent.”

By Woobama

January 7, 2008 9:55 AM | Link to this

It is a shame that such a brilliant constitutional scholar as jbmlaw is in Atlanta obsessively posting to the AJC website when he clearly knows more than all of the attorneys working for the President in Washington about how the process of government was intended to work. Let’s all pray that the White House reads Thinking Right so that jbmlaw can be given his rightful place as the foremost legal scholar in the nation.

By Will Jones

January 7, 2008 10:02 AM | Link to this

Our invasion of Iraq had no moral foundation. Had Bush (a homosexual draft-dodger - Who stated at the 2000 Al Smith Dinner in NYC that the Roman Catholic elite in attendence was his “base” - cheated into the White House by only the Roman Catholic Supreme Court Justices’ votes in the patently unconstitutional “Bush v. Gore”) told Saddam one more “scholarshipped” suicide bomber in the State of Israel and America would invade his country, we could have had moral authority upon the occurance of “one more scholarshipped suicide bomber.” Instead he and Cheney chose to commit treason and lie us into a false war. The People must, to ensure a nation of laws under the rule of Truth and Righteousness, try, convict and hang them for their crimes against Our Constitution, against the People, against Our Armed Forces, and against Humanity. Much “good change” will come under Annuit Coeptis as America is returned to the Path of Righteousness so painfully missed under the criminal regime of Rome’s Fifth Column now in power in Washington.

By getalife

January 7, 2008 10:03 AM | Link to this

Yes, this is an election for change.

Why is that?

All the Dems will change w’s policies because they are failed policies.

Some of the gop realize this reality but some will stay the course with w’s failures.

Why are we divided after we were united?

Well, w decided to invade Iraq and cut and run from obl. He surrendered to the one responsible for 9/11. Now we have a major problem in Pakistan.

Then he governed for the wealthy 1%.

Change?

Of course, people.

Think.

Obama still has the big mo drawing in twice as many voters as the gop.

These people are thinking.

Try it some time.

By The Right

January 7, 2008 10:05 AM | Link to this

We have to focus on the GOP debate in New Hampshire. McCain, Romney, Huckabee, et al agree that Al Queda will nuke a US city in five years. (50% chance). They also all agreed that had Bush done his duty as commander in chief in Afghanistan and finished off OBL, that the War on Terror would not be an issue. To a man, the GOP lineup condemned this administration as a bunch of no good, dirty, lyin’, thievin’ yellah traitor-trash.

“Ditto the administration groupies”, they insisted, “especially the blog-wonks”!

The GOP candidates have a real chance in November by aligning themselves with reality and truth like that. We should elect them as a comittee, a comittee of GOP GODS, like apollo and Zeus on mt olympus! WE could come full circle as a species!

By The Way

January 7, 2008 10:05 AM | Link to this

Great stuff, The Right!

By Abomi Nation

January 7, 2008 10:05 AM | Link to this

Lol Woobama, I just got through reading how the tactic of using Obama’s full name was going to be a common sight by Republicans now that he has some momentum.

Good job Jim. Right on cue.

By WTF?

January 7, 2008 10:06 AM | Link to this

Of course, Al Qaeda didn’t have an organization in Iraq until GW opened the door for them to come in I LOVE IT!!!!!!!!!!! Of course, then GW let Osama walk away, free as a bird………….guess he must have taken those mysterious WMD’s (from Iraq) with him! Anything, I repeat, ANYTHING, or should I say, ANYBODY, ANYBODY would be better than this fool we have now……….thanks GW!

By Craig also

January 7, 2008 10:07 AM | Link to this

RWing, don’t confuse him with facts - he gets surly when you do that….

By Curious Observer

January 7, 2008 10:09 AM | Link to this

Yes, let’s simply bypass the advise and consent role of the Senate in presidential appointments.

After all, the president has already empowered himself to declare that a bill presented for his signature means exactly the opposite of what it says. He has decided that the president has the power to declare war. Why bother with allowing a Congress to interfere with the absolute power of the presidency in appointments? Perhaps, as a courtesy, he can “advise” Congress of his appointments after those appointments have been made and implemented. And if Congress doesn’t like them, he can always send Dick Cheney to give the old FU to any senator who objects.

By getalife

January 7, 2008 10:12 AM | Link to this

TW,

McGovern, who stood clear of calls to imoeach Nixon after the 1972 election

I agree with McGovern on impeachment but let us think about that statement.

Here is a Presidential candidate that wanted to end the Vietnam war but Nixon stayed the course, then caught red handed breaking the law.

Do you think he would not want impeachment?

Like most real Americans, he did.

By Glenn

January 7, 2008 10:14 AM | Link to this

Redneck he may have been a yankee, but couldn’t have been from Vermont. In Vermont they don’t know how to give someone the finger. It’s all Cherry Garcia up there.

I still say the old folks Army is a good idea. One time I met the C.O. of Marine Corps Air Station El Toro, who happened to tell me that it was he who’d laid out the flight paths for the fighters that drilled there. When I asked why he’d thought to orient the runways so as to launch his fully loaded fighter jets rather dangerously over a planned retirement community, Col. Conroy said, “Buncha fogeys on the dole, who better?” He was, as a fogey himself, a master of Marine Corps humor.

jbm, that’s such a good point, that W could refuse to honor earmarks. Had he done that all along, his reputation with conservatives would be intact if only for that single reason. He could, as you say, do it immediately, but his legacy already is fixed.

Still, do it he should. The only thing he’s got to lose, other than the lives of countless civilians at the hands of our enemies, is his party’s occupancy of the White House. And I can’t see how this blue-penciling could especially affect that; probably the contrary.

Brace yourself, as I’m about to say something good about Jimmy Carter. When he went from paddlewabbit to lame duck, President Carter decided to keep an old campaign pledge to pass a budget that would have the U.S. spending more on education than on defense. (It was the quixotic notion of his mentor-enemy Hyman Rickover, and it sounded like a good slogan at the time.) Carter saw the opportunity in his departure from the presidency to keep a promise he still saw as worthwhile.

Bush should do the same.

By The Boss

January 7, 2008 10:16 AM | Link to this

Barack Hussein Obama. Barack Hussein Obama. It sounds like a variation of the latin mamba dance. Or like a fat swedish couple clearing their sinuses.

But what’s in a name. Would not a Bush by any other name have let OBL slip through his fingers? Would not a Cheney by any other name comitted treason in the Plame affair?

And would not Valerie Plame herself by any other name look as sweet? The problem, dear friends, is not in our nom de plumes, but in naming our plames. (sorry)

By The right

January 7, 2008 10:16 AM | Link to this

Great stuff the boss

By TW

January 7, 2008 10:17 AM | Link to this

jbmlaw@9:47 Thus Al Qaeda would oppose the impeachment of the man who destroyed their organization in Iraq? So bizarre, this leftist posturing.

Al Qaeda applauds the man who set the table for them in Iraq. Rest assured, jbmlaw, in whatever cave bin laden resides, there is a framed portrait of Republican George W Bush atop the mantel.

By Dennis

January 7, 2008 10:25 AM | Link to this

Mr. Wooten writes, “The policies espoused by the Democratic front-runners, especially on Iraq, are not changes for the good.”

Iraq aside for a moment, no one can say (except those who received the lions share of the tax give aways) can show where this country has been blessed by the administration of George W. Bush -

an administration that has been filled with corruption, deceit, lying, and pretty damned near a revolution (without firing a shot) and take over of the country.

And that has involved top members of the FBI, CIA, Homeland Security, the Justice Department and the office of the Secretary of State and some members of Congress.

We’re not talking conspiracy here, we’re talking FACT.

As to Iraq, yes, the country lived under a dictator (whom the U.S. helped to power there), but Bush policies have FAILED.

In the meantime, American soldiers are in the same positions they were under the administrations of Johnson and Nixon/Kissinger - dying more to try and save the political as_es of the Republican party than defending against “smoking bombs” and “chemical warfare” and terrorism that didn’t exist in Iraq until George W. Bush ordered the U.S. militry to attack them.

(Need we discuss the corruption by U.S. corporations and “our” “good ole boys” in Iraq)?

Even a veteran Vietnam neoconservative can’t say that the Republicans are trying to clean up their act.

As ineffective as they may be, the proposed policies of the Democrats are ahead of the Republican “stay the course.”

As bad off as the Democrats are, this country cannot afford another four years of Republicans.

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

By Glenn

January 7, 2008 10:28 AM | Link to this

TW,

Good morning. Al Qaeda has released at least two tapes we know of, one of them featuring that screen star Osama himself, lamenting Al Qaeda’s losses in Iraq. Were the press not also to lament those losses, it would make it clear to the American People that Al Qaeda’s statements are tantamount to an admission of defeat there.

Mr. McGovern’s remarks are sad, and I expect that were he to die in, say, two years and those remarks to be remembered, we would remember them as slightly embarrassing. As the man has an oustanding and spotless record of straight-talking public service, it’s unfortunate that he would soil himself in his dotage as Goldwater and others did. Not one of his accusations would stand up in an impeachment proceeding, much less in the Supreme Court. Any Supreme Court.

By WTF?

January 7, 2008 10:28 AM | Link to this

Al Qaeda applauds the man who set the table for them in Iraq. Rest assured, jbmlaw, in whatever cave bin laden resides, there is a framed portrait of Republican George W Bush atop the mantel. Again, I LOVE IT!!!! Anybody that can’t see the connection there, is either blind, or just dumb as a box of rocks!

By GaVoter

January 7, 2008 10:31 AM | Link to this

There’s good change and there’s bad change and there’s politician’s change.

Good change is a pocketful of Krugerrands.

Bad change is a pocketful of 1943 P Lincoln cents.

Political change: Hmmmm. Hot air? Worthless? Cheap? Depends on what the definition of change is.

By B.P.O.E.

January 7, 2008 10:31 AM | Link to this

(((((In an move that is clearly an effort to prove to the country that he is a good Christian American, Barack Hussein Obama announced today that he is going to change his name ever so slightly in an effort to improve his image. “He wants to be known now simply as “Senator O’Bama.”“)))))

Thats just ridiculous.

By Box of Rocks

January 7, 2008 10:38 AM | Link to this

El Jefe,

Shouldn’t it be “a fat Belgian couple clearing their sinuses”? Isn’t that why they call it Flemish?

[Rudy 08]

By The boss

January 7, 2008 10:45 AM | Link to this

GOod one, BOx of rocks! (carson used swedes in his carnac routine: “What is the sound a fat swedish couple make when making love”)

I had to go with precedence, but your’s is better by a mile!

By The boss

January 7, 2008 10:45 AM | Link to this

To Hillary and her angry eyes I say: “Klatu Mirada Nicktoe”

By anonymous

January 7, 2008 10:53 AM | Link to this

Her “angry eyes”? Give me a break.

By Mr. Magoo

January 7, 2008 10:56 AM | Link to this

To Hillary and her malocchio I say, “My name is Edmund Dantes”.

By Lisa Love

January 7, 2008 10:56 AM | Link to this

It doesn’t matter who the GOP nominates, the Democrats will win back the Whitehouse this year. This country is sick to death of their lies, corruption, deceipt and poor leadership. All the Repub. candidates want to be able to criticize Bush without actually pointing the finger at him. Excepting Paul, they are all pro-Iraq war, so there is no winning for them. Only the stupid, Bible-thumping south will vote Red this time. Tell me, Mr. Wooten, what has Bush done that is so great? Recession, scandal, failing war, terrorist attacks, indictments, failure to get Bin Laden, and pure stupidity. If you are trying to convince anyone that he was a good president then I hope you are talking only to the kool-aid drinkers because they are the only ones who still buy that line of of bull5hit! Face it, your party is in disarray and may be finished!

By Lisa Love

January 7, 2008 10:58 AM | Link to this

It doesn’t matter who the GOP nominates, the Democrats will win back the Whitehouse this year. This country is sick to death of their lies, corruption, deceipt and poor leadership. All the Repub. candidates want to be able to criticize Bush without actually pointing the finger at him. Excepting Paul, they are all pro-Iraq war, so there is no winning for them. Only the stupid, Bible-thumping south will vote Red this time. Tell me, Mr. Wooten, what has Bush done that is so great? Recession, scandal, failing war, terrorist attacks, indictments, failure to get Bin Laden, and pure stupidity. If you are trying to convince anyone that he was a good president then I hope you are talking only to the kool-aid drinkers because they are the only ones who still buy that line of of bull5hit! Face it, your party is in disarray and may be finished!

By JK

January 7, 2008 11:02 AM | Link to this

Here’s an idea, Mr. Wooten:

Instead of lazily “reporting” on an election, months ahead of time, as you would call a horserace (Barack Funny Name is pulling two links ahead of Hillary Pillary rounding the second turn!) — a lame and pointless approach to journalism that offers no real insight to your readers, why not try reporting on the issues that affect us, and tell us what our government is actually doing with our money in our name? Why not put forth objective, verified facts alongside pertinent issues, and let the PEOPLE decide for whom to vote, based on enlightened knowledge instead of groupthink and peer pressure. The gravity of this election merits more honest reporting and less popularity-based gossip, don’t you think? Just a thought.

By Boswell Scaggs

January 7, 2008 11:05 AM | Link to this

I.

Some change comes down for the better

You feel it move

Then some comes down like the weather

You take that in too

II.

But like some change in your pocket

Sometimes it seems to be too little too late

I guess it’s time to break out a few pesos

Cause I’m getting to where I like the view

So if you’re feeling lucky and you ain’t just passing through

You might change some too

III.

There was a time I was lowdown for action

Red hot as a rule

Certified guaranteed satisfaction

One happening fool

But now I know I was missing the boat

Now I know I was missing it by a country mile

So like Noah said — You’d better wake up

You don’t want to get stuck in this zoo

Cause when he leaves the dock he ain’t waiting round for you

Be prepared to change some too

[Rudy 08]

By The Right

January 7, 2008 11:13 AM | Link to this

Barack Hussein Obama! Yes, it sounds like Osama bin Laden, but what is in a name? Would not a Bush by any other name have to be shaved for a playboy shoot? Would not a Cheney, by any other name have outed that CIA agent, (the dirty rat).

The problem, dear friends, is not in our nom de plumes, but in naming our Plames.

By Dusty

January 7, 2008 11:13 AM | Link to this

Oh my goodness, liberals on the loose this morning. I mean, TW even knows that a picture of our President is hanging on the wall of Osama’s cave. I suspect that TW has a picture of Osama hanging on his wall.

And Dennis thinks that Bush’s policy in Iraq (our troops) are only slightly better than Sadaam’s and Iraq is a total failure. The Boss(PoFo) thinks that Cheney should be impeached and Ms. Plame is Miss USA Loyalty. (There must be a full moon because loonies are lively.)

Now, all we need is Camus to tell us that hating the President, the country and betraying our troops is the way to be patriotic. And RedNeck is getting to be a monotonous termagant. The puerile parade of libs goes on.

But..thanks to jbmlaw and Glenn we have some voices of reason this morning. Thank you, gentlemen. Wooten has some good thought to consider. I hope you continue. I’ll be back later to see.

By The Boss

January 7, 2008 11:13 AM | Link to this

Yes!

By Glenn

January 7, 2008 11:17 AM | Link to this

Well, I do take one pearl from this column, and that’s a certain candidate’s blunt dispelling of what jbm rightly calls the “magic” word change. Electorates sometimes fall under spells, and even a mere monosyllable can do it. Voters can be superficial or they can go deep. I agree with JK that we need ‘em to go deep this time. Let’s start by debunking brainless codewords.

By Lisa Love

January 7, 2008 11:18 AM | Link to this

If you want to make fun of candidates names then lets all pray the Republicans nominate Huckabee. F***, BigDumFuckabee. He’s hilarious and his name is even better.

By Charles

January 7, 2008 11:25 AM | Link to this

Ahhhhh …. here comes the first of many Clinton leaks to the press:

[http://www.drudgereport.com/flashhn.htm]

For someone who was supposedly breaking records in financial support (legal AND illegal) it seems odd she’s running out of money. I’m not sure what the “Hill-Billy” campaign is up to, but I’m sure its another manuever to stop the Obama Express.

By The Right

January 7, 2008 11:28 AM | Link to this

Barack Hussein Obama. Hide the children, Osama’s plant has taken over our country!!!!!

Fear not, my fellow americans, the problem is not in our nom de plumes, but in naming our Plames.

By Captain Freedom

January 7, 2008 11:31 AM | Link to this

THE Captain agrees with Jim that the prospect of change is anathema to the True Belief crowd. Things are just fine for THE Captain, yessiree, and He sees no reason to accept a change in The Way Things Have Always Been just for the sake of a few minority whiners, irrational war haters, the collapsing middle class, and other dead enders that despise America and all She stands for.

THE Captain knows that the flaming trolls of Islamunistoliberalfascism will set forth numerous “examples” like the collapsing housing market; the sharp downturn in employment numbers while the costs of petroleum and any product that relies on petroleum (i.e., everything we buy) skyrockets; the endless War on Terror while Osama bin Laden continues to run free; the evisceration of our Constitution; and various other so-called assertions of “fact” by the bedwetting liberal pansies who love French surrender monkeys more than Our Leader and His Scintillating Codpiece. These are subversive comsymp agitations designed to shake Our Faith that America is THE GREATEST NATION EVER IN THE UNIVERSE AND ALL UNIVERSES YET TO BE DISCOVERED. Well, a few facts will not dissuade Common Sense leaders like THE Captain, Jim, jbmlaw, and RW from clinging to Our Dream.

THE Captain scoffs at those cut’n’runners who think that prosperity should be shared, that the Rule of Law should be respected, that dark-skinned people (aka, terrorists) should not be subjected to simulated drowning. Things are going just fine, and the only change that we should countenance would be to CHANGE BACK to the good old days when men were men, women were housewives, darkies were subservient, and homoliberatheist deviants were beaten savagely at the merest hint of their sodomitic perversion. THAT is the America THE Captain and Jim and Dusty know and love, and we beseech you all to join us in Our Righteous Crusade to turn the clock back to happier days.

Turn back the clock!!! It is the Right Thing to do.

By Lisa Love

January 7, 2008 11:33 AM | Link to this

The Republicans tried their best to pawn Hillary off on us. They have been dying for us to nominate her. Well, we aren’t going to do and they are hopping mad as a result. Obama ‘08. and, oh yeah, GOMIKEFUCKABEE!!

By Heywood Jablome

January 7, 2008 11:37 AM | Link to this

BigDumFuckabee

BigDumFuckabee

BigDumFuckabee

BigDumFuckabee

BigDumFuckabee

BigDumFuckabee

Hey this is fun!

By GaVoter

January 7, 2008 11:39 AM | Link to this

I LM that JK at 11:02

By ron

January 7, 2008 11:40 AM | Link to this

Please keep in mind that the old fogeys that you want to put in the army have already served.In our day,serving your country was not voluntary.Some of us volunteered but many were simply chosen.We at least wouldn’t be completely lost if we had to serve again.Unlike a lot of you whiners.

By Curious Observer

January 7, 2008 11:45 AM | Link to this

Well, well, Hillary’s national lead is down to 2 points over Obama. It’s beginning to look as though the knuckle-draggers won’t have the Demon Hillary to use as a scare tactic in this election.

Yes, it appears that we are a year or so away from some of the “rogering” that THE Captain writes about. I suggest that Wooten, jbmlaw, Dusty, and other supporters of the status quo make heavy investments in Vaseline and K-Y jelly.

By WTF?

January 7, 2008 11:46 AM | Link to this

The Republicans tried their best to pawn Hillary off on us. They have been dying for us to nominate her. Well, we aren’t going to do and they are hopping mad as a result. Obama ‘08. and, oh yeah, GOMIKEFUCKABEE!! VERY PERCEPTIVE!!!! AND VERY FUNNY!!!

BigDumFuckabee HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ohhh, my stomach!!!!

On a more serious note, let’s just look at how desperate the Rethuglicons are. After realizing that we were not going to jump on the Hiliary train, now they’ve started a rumor. They really want us to vote for Obama in the primaries, so in the end it will come down to a white man (Rethuglicon) vs. a black man, and no white person will vote for a black man over a white man for President, so the Rethuglicons will win again. WTF????????? That may have a slither of merit, but we ain’t biting. OBAMA in ‘08!!!!!!

By GaVoter

January 7, 2008 11:46 AM | Link to this

Well they almost got me ron at 11:40. I was 1A No.25 when I found out the draft was no more.

By The Boss

January 7, 2008 11:51 AM | Link to this

See, Mr. Wooten? You cant have a blog without children writing naughty words on it. This is how the left can lose. Can you uber-pudwits tone it down? You’re so clever to “General Betrayus” Huckabee’s name. Gee, nobody sees the funny sounding name possibilities, you all are geniuses in your own RIGHT.

You just dont have any sense of how to fight a campaign, and thats’ why people like me shine. Now, I want all you left-leaning towers of sleaza’ to STFU.

You have no idea the damage you cause to our cause. Getawipe is the worst one, and it’s probably him doing the too clever for my shirt huckabee faux pas, but whoever it is, Shut…TF….UP!

By The Boss

January 7, 2008 11:51 AM | Link to this

See, Mr. Wooten? You cant have a blog without children writing naughty words on it. This is how the left can lose. Can you uber-pudwits tone it down? You’re so clever to “General Betrayus” Huckabee’s name. Gee, nobody sees the funny sounding name possibilities, you all are geniuses in your own RIGHT.

You just dont have any sense of how to fight a campaign, and thats’ why people like me shine. Now, I want all you left-leaning towers of sleaza’ to STFU.

You have no idea the damage you cause to our cause. Getawipe is the worst one, and it’s probably him doing the too clever for my shirt huckabee faux pas, but whoever it is, Shut…TF….UP!

By Dusty

January 7, 2008 11:51 AM | Link to this

Quick quick!

Get the butterfly nets.

The Captain has come to join PoFo.

Is there no cure for Multiple Personality Disorder and Undercover Obnoxious Ovations by Extroverts?

Maybe Dr. Phil or Mr. Goodwrench could help.

By anonymous

January 7, 2008 12:01 PM | Link to this

All this talk about Huckablee. I find it ironic that the Republicans had the chance to nominate and possibly elect John McCain in 2000 but let dirty politics win and selected Mr. Bush instead. Now that it looks like Senator McCain may have another shot at the presidency his chances of winning are slim because of the mess created by Bush? McCain is a fair and honest man who could have gone down in history as a great president, but the Republicans will forever have their record besmirched by their choice of GWB.

By getalife

January 7, 2008 12:06 PM | Link to this

There is an Obama wave washing accross this country.

w and cheney have screwed up this country so bad, we may get our first African American President.

Talk about change.

By Glenn

January 7, 2008 12:06 PM | Link to this

Yeah, that’s a start: stopping the irresistable toying with Huckabee’s name. And why don’t we MoveOn to “neocon” while we’re at it? Getalife yesterday posted a list of “Neocons” associated with McCain’ campaign. At least half of them (of the ones whose names I recognized) were conservatives pre-dating the invention of neoconservatism. Kos is run by youthful idiots.

By The Boss

January 7, 2008 12:09 PM | Link to this

I take no joy in chiding the right. The pendulum swings without me or anyone else. We may have lucked out with a Bush War in that no funds are now available for some liberal entitlement that may ruin us. We have troops in the desert manning checkpoints and securing order in obscure regions of the middle east. We have six full years of recovery from 911. If we get nuked, then our whole system will change. Will we care that it’s the GOP’s fault? What does it matter? If OBL wants to nuke us, then he’s free to nuke us at will. If he can, he will. We had our chance to get him. He got away. It’s as if the Japs managed to sneak away at Midway because Roosevelt’s navy admirals wouldn’t attack because the airforce spotted the enemy carriers. That’s actually exactly why Rumsfeld didn’t finish Osama off when he was ordered to. The CIA found OBL. Rumsfeld would not share the victory. True. Fact. Believe it.

SO who’s fault is that? If we see Atlanta burn again, then we may as well appeal against the thunder! War is hell, and the fog of war hath blinded us again, and we must now suffer the counsel of fools.

By getalife

January 7, 2008 12:21 PM | Link to this

Glenn,

They are not all neocons, some went to rudy’s campaign.

Of course, the first name on McInsane’s list is the one who admitted outing a CIA agent, Armitage.

I have question McInsane’s character and sanity. He has been tortured, you know.

By Dennis

January 7, 2008 12:23 PM | Link to this

By Dusty January 7, 2008 11:13 AM “And Dennis thinks that Bush’s policy in Iraq (our troops) are only slightly better than Sadaam’s and Iraq is a total failure.”

If things go well, I may have a little time to play on here today.

So, Dusty, other than bringing down the statue of Saddam and being certain he was hanged before he could tell all he knew about the Bush oil business in the Middle East, why don’t you tell us that all of the Iraqis have all of the electricity, water, sanitation, adequate hospitalization, gasoline that they need and had before the fall of Saddam and that they are free of the terrorism that was reserved for Saddam only prior to GWB’s military excursion into Iraq?

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

By Dusty

January 7, 2008 12:27 PM | Link to this

Anonymous @12:01

How you wish. President Bush will always look like a jewel, especially following that clunk of coal, Clinton.

President Bush has fought our enemies and brought safety to America after terrorists attacked us. How soon you forget.

But most Americans do not forget and history will not either. I am sorry that you are a laissez-faire lib who cannot appreciate your own safety. That safety was brought about by our President, our troops, and those who see the dangers and have done something about them.

Democrats overpowered Congress and it has been running backwards ever since. I suspect that is what will happen if we elect more inexperienced, socialistic and tax increasing government officials. That describes the present Democratic nominee crowd. Heaven help us if that is the kind of “change” we get.

By GaVoter

January 7, 2008 12:32 PM | Link to this

Iraq is and will continue to be the re-make of the good , the bad, and the ugly. Iraqis in general are surely good people just wanting to live a good life, Saddam and others were or are the bad, Saddam showed us his ugly side, as did many terrorists and even us. We are there and we will be there for many years to come. Let’s get someone in office that will push for foreign policy that engages others to work with us. We may even have to eat a little crow in order to do that — ya think.

By anonymous

January 7, 2008 12:36 PM | Link to this

Dusty: “How you wish. President Bush will always look like a jewel, especially following that clunk of coal, Clinton.”

Dusty, please provide us with the current approval ratings for Presidents Bush and Clinton.

By Dusty

January 7, 2008 12:37 PM | Link to this

getalife,12:21

John McCain’s character and sanity are just fine. Torture only made him stronger.

What excuse would you give for YOUR loss of character and sanity?

Dennis @12;23

Many people in Texas are in the oil business. That does not make them traitors as you are suggesting.

Iraqis may be short on some material things but their freedom is prevalent. They no longer have a killer dictator. Do you not put any value on freedom?

By getalife

January 7, 2008 12:38 PM | Link to this

Ah, the fake patriot crusty shows up after being exposed as a liar and a loser yesterday. Nothing but a gop loyalist, not an American patriot.

Tell us again how you supported President Clinton’s war like you did yesterday.

Fraud.

By Jackie

January 7, 2008 12:39 PM | Link to this

Dubya, Cheyney and the other criminals in this regime have robbed, cheated and stolen from all of us. Sen. George McGovern called for the impeachment of the President and Vice President. Not only have Dems called for his impeachment, Repubs like Bruce Fein, an acknowledge constitutional law expert and a member of the Reagan and Nixon administrations have called this regime lawless and need to have impeachment charges brought. John Dean, counsel to Nixon during the Watergate scandal has called for the impeachment of Bush and has said the crimes of this regime are far worse than those of Nixon. Today, the Pentagon has reported “Iranian ships are harassing US Navy ships in the Gulf.” Must this regime be so callous as to sacrifice more life to try and rewrite his legacy? Does the timing seem suspect wherein the video of the American al-Qaeda is released days before Dubya is to depart to his Mideast confrence? By the way, in his 8 years in office, this is his first visit to Israel, our proclaimed strategic ally in the Mideast. More games, more politics, more lost lives and an impending recession laid at the feet of Dubya.

By The Boss

January 7, 2008 12:39 PM | Link to this

It really got to me in New Hampshire, when the GOP debaters agreed about our chances of emerging unscathed in this nuclear war on terror. (30-50%). It will happen. It will. That means we cant predict how low our civilization will go. We’ve already lost any civility, and the hatespeakers here on the right and left seem ready for another civil war. Words have power, fools. You sling them at each other as if blogging were a video game, and Wooten was Donkey Kong or something. Your carelessness could cost us all. Aaron Burr was going to let it go until Alexander Hamilton had to fire off one more letter of contempt for him. That was it. Letters are blogs. Look at how RW’s comments read like a sociopath’s. He’s beguiled himself into believing his own bile bytes. He truly hates the left. He drips poison. He’s the biggest fool I’ve ever read, and the worst troll of any I’ve slain in my ten years of patrolling 4 trolls. There’s no room 4 haters, RW, so get lost. Take a short walk off a long pier, turn from a butterfly into a cocoon, you’re not wanted, you’re not needed, so just go.

By Dusty dear....

January 7, 2008 12:49 PM | Link to this

Dusty there was an attack on the World Trade Center during the presidency of Bill Clinton but no more attacks occured on his watch. Did/do you appreciate the efforts Mr. Clinton took to ensure that such an attack did not occur again? Or do you reserve your patriotism for Republican presidents only? The next attack, as we all know, occured under Mr. Bush’s presidency. Was he to blame? Of course not. However, your blind and vociferous loyalty to Mr. Bush doesn’t indicate that you give any truly thoughtful consideration to the issues. Mr. Bush has done what he felt was necessary to secure the nation and let’s pray it is working. But realistically you know there could be another attack any day or there could never be another attack — no matter who is president.

Some non-partisan reflection would do you good.

By Dusty

January 7, 2008 12:53 PM | Link to this

getalife,12:38

You can’t even spell D-u-s-t-y much less think straight.

Try to refrain from posting your hallucigenic victories. It is truly pathetic.

By getalife

January 7, 2008 12:53 PM | Link to this

This is how the fake, phoney, fraud patriot supported President Clinton’s victory:

By Dusty January 6, 2008 2:01 PM | Link to this getalife, What Clinton victory? The election? The Chinese embasssy in Yugoslavia? The empty training camp or the pharmaceutical plant in Sudan? The withdrawal from Somalia? Those sound like “victories” you libs would celebrate, not to mention women. Oh well. You brought up Pres.Clinton but don’t want anybody else to do that. Run, baby, run. You libs really know how to do it.

It has no character or patriotism, just a gop hack.

By getalife

January 7, 2008 12:59 PM | Link to this

And this is President Clinton declaring victory:

”Tonight for the first time in 79 days, the skies over Yugoslavia are silent,” Mr. Clinton said. ”The demands of an outraged and united international community have been met. I can report to the American people that we have achieved a victory for a safer world, for our democratic values and for a stronger America.”

You are a fraud dusty.

Cut and run like you did yesterday.

By Dennis

January 7, 2008 1:03 PM | Link to this

By Dusty January 7, 2008 12:37 PM Dennis @12;23 “Many people in Texas are in the oil business. That does not make them traitors as you are suggesting.”

I only mentioned GWB, not all of Texas. For that matter, Texas is not the only state in the oil business. I stand by that Saddam was hanged before he could expose Bush, et. al., for crooked oil deals as well as for the U.S. taking his side against Iran - which we already knew/know.

“Iraqis may be short on some material things but their freedom is prevalent.”

If their freedom was prevalent, we wouldn’t still be there. And although Saddam ran the country and the people feared and trembled, they weren’t getting blown up everyday as they now are. Nor can you deny with any proof that the dictator Saddam didn’t run the country for many, many years with the support of the U.S. just as long as we were getting Iraqi oil.

Had Saddam not invaded Kuwait, he probably would still be running Iraq - with U.S. support.

(And the people would still have all of the amenities of electricity, water, etc. that they were used to having prior to the Bush invasion).

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

By The Boss

January 7, 2008 1:04 PM | Link to this

Barack Hussein Obama. Yes, it’s a scary sounding name. But what’s in a name? Would not a Cheney, by any other name have outed a CIA agent? The problem my dear, dear, dear friends and countrymen, who have lent me your ears and eyes on so many previous occasions too numerous to mention, the problem is not in our nom de plumes, but in naming our Plames.

Freinds, Romans, Countrymen, lend me your earmarks!

By GaVoter

January 7, 2008 1:06 PM | Link to this

As for Clinton and Edwards, I’ve learned enough about them over the years to know that they are not the candidate for me. Obama — I just don’t know enough about yet to make a call.

Now Romney and Huckabee concern me because I worry about getting too much religion into the presidential slot. I’m concerned that they may not be able to keep a respectable distance between their religious beliefs and the beliefs that others in the world are equally entitled to. At the same time, I want a strong president that knows when to stand his (or her) ground with the likes of Putin and others while also understanding that the world works better with a little give and take. Is McCain the man? Rudy? I still have doubts. And, I still have to factor in my thoughts on their capabilities right here within our borders.

By @@

January 7, 2008 1:12 PM | Link to this

Love the ….or whatever. conclusion Jim. Dems don’t need specifics just promises.

I watched the debates last night. Alot of the candidates volunteering the word change. Lame attempts to recycle talking points in my opinion. Isn’t it bad enough when the dems do it?

When Chris Wallace specifically asked each candidate to weigh in on how they would meet the call for change, Fred Thompson said it best…

“Politicians need to tell the American people the truth even if it’s difficult to hear. Change is possible but it will take time. Alternative fuels are not around the corner. Success in Iraq is not around the corner. Social Security is bankrupt and will be painful to fix it, but fix it we must. All of this change will require personal sacrifice by the American people.”

I can live with that. Heck, just tell me the truth. If it’s the hard truth then I know they’re not lying to me. If it’s the sunnyside of hope, chances are a solar eclipse is in the making and they’re just moonin’ me.

What was it Rudy said? “There’s change for the good and change for the bad. We have to decide which kind of change we want.”

Whatever doesn’t cut it for someone with a brain.

Michael Ramirez had a funny cartoon

Can it be more obvious that we’re dealing with the “Loose Change” democrats here? For them, political promises hold value—reality is a conspiracy.

It’s hilariously funny and pathetic on the farside of the left’s moon. I shall never vote Democrat again after witnessing what I have on these blogs.

By Dusty

January 7, 2008 1:13 PM | Link to this

Dear fake Dusty dear who cannot use it’s own ID,

President Clinton did something about the World Trade Center attack? Like what?

President Bush had been in office about 9 months when we were attacked and 3000 Americans died.

Bush acquired a depleted military from Clinton who had cut it to the bone. Bush acquired a CIA which was found at a later time to produce erroneous info. Bush also had to gain respect over the world’s laughter at the sexist behavior of President Clinton. Now tell me that is the kind of behavior you libs want in a President, the kind that cannot even practice law anymore because of his actions.

I did support Clinton as President of the United States but not his behavior and lies and neither did the courts. I could never acquire any respect for him.

By Sally Benson

January 7, 2008 1:18 PM | Link to this

So, gavoter, you’re saying that you dont have any idea how to deliberate or form the language to fill in the holes of your own uncaulked caucus? Political expediency is not pretty. Dont just patch together a platform. Be an american.

By TW

January 7, 2008 1:21 PM | Link to this

Glenn – citing Al Qaeda losses in Iraq is like touting a troop draw down of 30,000 after you just surged it 30,000…it’s like smiling about gas prices dropping to a couple of dimes after you let ‘em escalate a buck…c’mon, Glenn, be a right-winger, but not part of their snake-oil sales force.

Dusty - talk to me about knee-pads the way you did yesterday…turns me on…makes you worth my time ;)

By Dusty dear....

January 7, 2008 1:22 PM | Link to this

Dusty dont be dense. “Dusty dear” is my “name” here. We all make up our names for the site. Get it? Do you think there is a “jbmlaw” listed in the phone directory?

So, you’re saying that Bush was in on-the-job training for at least the first 9 months of his administration so the attacks of 9/11 are to be excused because he wasn’t prepared to run the government from day one? That’s a sad assessment.

You think the world was laughing at Bill Clinton’s sexual behavior? Dusty, do you have a passport? Have you ever been outside the United States? People were not laughing at his behavior. They were laughing at the hysterical reaction of people like you.

By AtAt is a genius!

January 7, 2008 1:26 PM | Link to this

Dems don’t need specifics just promises.

Good point, AtAt at 1:12! Succinctly and skillfully put. Those stupid Dems. Why don’t they just shut up and go home? Traitors. Dummies.

By the way… What specifics to YOU need? You know, like about what specifically is the mission of US troops in Iraq? How, specifically, will we know when it’s time for our soldiers to stop dying over there? Or how, specifically, will we balance the budget and pay down the national debt while making tax cuts to the super rich permanent? Or how, specifically, will Americans compete in the global market when decent jobs keep going overseas and families have to choose between the cost of health care and education? Just curious.

Did I mention today that you’re a genius? You are.

By getalife

January 7, 2008 1:28 PM | Link to this

And there the fraud goes again.

President Clinton did something about the World Trade Center attack? Like what?

They are locked up stupid.

Where the hell is obl?

w ignored the problem then cut and ran, surrendered, like you should do loser.

By getalife

January 7, 2008 1:33 PM | Link to this

I love that Barack Obama.

Sure love to lick his pork chops.

Hmm,Hmm, good.

By Dusty dear....

January 7, 2008 1:34 PM | Link to this

Yes, good point getalife (about the perpetrators of the WTC bombing being in prison). Certainly a better record than on OBL. I can’t wait to hear how Dusty spins that so that Clinton was a failure. You’ve gotta give the old girl credit. She’s predictable.

By getalife

January 7, 2008 1:41 PM | Link to this

Dusty dear…

what about my point concerning the pork chops?

By getalife

January 7, 2008 1:51 PM | Link to this

Yes, I predict she will remain ignorant to the facts and be a gop hack not a patriot.

Go ahead pf with the ganking.

Relieve your frustration no matter how bizarre it is.

Have you talked to a shrink about your problems?

I think that would be better than ganking.

Geez.

By getalife

January 7, 2008 2:01 PM | Link to this

pf,

You need to see my shrink.

He helps me when I go through post-Obama withdrawal.

When Obama isn’t on TV, my shrink holds up a poster of him.

By Dusty

January 7, 2008 2:01 PM | Link to this

getalife,12:53

You excel in black print and finger paint.

Yes, that was quite a conflict in Yugoslvia and we still maintain a presence there. But it was not WAR. Congress did not declare WAR as it did with Iraq when Republicans AND Democrats voted for it. There was also a conflict in Somalia but it was not war. You cannot make Clinton a wartime president or a hero.

I do not cut and run. I am NOT a liberal.

Now, go play with Dennis who thinks the Iraqis hung Sadaam because Bush is in the oil business and freedom is unimportant! Oowhee!! Liberals!!

By GaVoter

January 7, 2008 2:03 PM | Link to this

Sally Benson,

Kindly remove foot from keyboard when speaking.

By Dusty dear....

January 7, 2008 2:11 PM | Link to this

Oh Dusty, will you ever get your facts right before you spout off? Congress DID NOT declare war against Iraq. Congress has not declared war since World War II.

By getalife

January 7, 2008 2:19 PM | Link to this

Told ya.

Bwa.

By GaVoter

January 7, 2008 2:20 PM | Link to this

Sally B,

In case I was unclear:

1) No one told me the vote was tomorrow regarding your political expediency comment,

2) The last time I checked I wasn’t standing on a platform but if I were it would not be on that patched diving platform of yours,

3) The language of politics requires careful study. For example, the words “Trust Me” can mean many things to different people,

4) I prefer to plug the holes. That way I may know more about the whole.

By Lisa Love

January 7, 2008 2:34 PM | Link to this

I never claimed that dropping the f-bomb in Huckabee’s name was clever. I never even came close to thinking that I was the first one to think of it. However, I am talking to southern Republicans so it helps if I am not too clever or too astute because that would just confuse them. Also, they love to use baseless insults instead of intelligent criticism so I am just playing their own game. Sorry if your own attitudes sound stupid when reflected back to you. Go Baby Jesus!! GOMIKEFUCKLEBERRY!!!

By Captain Freedom

January 7, 2008 2:36 PM | Link to this

THE Captain yields to no man in his contempt for the subtance-free vacuity of Godly Sister Dusty. However, she is indeed one of the True Believers, and as such THE Captain has always held her in warm regard. It is just that He could never work up much respect for her.

However, the attacks on Sister D over the past several days and her pitiable and feeble response truly alarms THE Captain. Proving His thesis that most True Believers will crumble like a paper doll in the rain when faced with stern rebuke, Dusty has been reduced to sucking the alcohol from her can of Final Net hairspray ahead of her noontime carafe of sherry and evening can of sterno. The blatant drunkeness and clear evidence of alcohol poisoning dementia is clear in her posts, which are both a cry for help and an embarassment to authentic Conservatives and sincere patriots.

THE Captain implores the crowd here to leave this poor wretch of a woman in pieces, I mean in peace, and further beseeches Sister Dusty to get help, immediately.

As for the Islamoliberesbians who accuse Dusty of false patriotism, you are cads, sirs, simply cads. Dusty cannot help her mental illness any more than she can control her incontinence. For shame.

By @@

January 7, 2008 2:43 PM | Link to this

Good point, AtAt at 1:12! Succinctly and skillfully put. Those stupid Dems. Why don’t they just shut up and go home?

I don’t want dems to shut up—just use some common sense. Unless you’re posting from somewhere outside the U.S., you are home. Would you like to call somewhere else home? I could send you there if you’d prefer.

As it turns out, the mission of our troops in Iraq is to isolate the radical extremists—to allow the Middle East to feel the pain of their existence and to take measures to discourage, if not destroy their ideaology. For the first time, they’re feeling the pain we’ve felt at the hands of radical extremists. It appears to have opened their eyes to the beast within their borders.

You can’t balance the budget without revenue. You can’t balance the budget by punishing the wealthy who stimulate the greatest portion of our economy. Placing all sorts of government restrictions on the free market capitalists will force their investment in other countries.

Maybe you can tell me what motivates the John Kerry’s and Ted Kennedy’s to invest their fortunes in offshore accounts. Is it their committment to America’s poor? Their committment to America’s middle class? Their committment to America’s disenfranchised?

I think they’re invested in coconuts—carribean and domestic. That’s what I think.

Now here’s a question for you… Have you wondered why Al Qaeda’s “Azzam the American” didn’t use the recent video to claim victories in Pakistan? They’re more active there than anywhere else in the ME. They’re pretty much calling for retaliation in areas where they’ve already been defeated. If they wanted to boost their image wouldn’t they want us to focus on their present stronghold? Afterall, weakening of government control in Pakistan and inviting the U.S. military to enter into conflict with them are conditions in which al Qaeda thrives.

From al Qaeda’s point of view, the Afghanistan-Pakistan theater is perhaps the only area of opportunity left for the jihadists to exploit, and the area where the final battle of the U.S. jihadist war will be fought. Now that our attention is focused on Pakistan they don’t send an invitation? They want us to go anywhere but there?

I suspect they’re too weak to lick the envelope.

Thank you for the compliment. Not a genius, just grounded in common sense without the usual hysterics of the left.

By Dusty

January 7, 2008 2:43 PM | Link to this

Dusty dear who is afraid to use it’s usual ID @2:11

Ah, dear familiar one, you are correct. Congress granted President Bush the right to decide when to go to war and he decided to do so. Those are the facts, mam. (Thank you, Sgt. Friday.)

ALL of Congress decided to give the power to declare war to the President. Thus, today, Afghanistan and Iraq are free. Not perfect but free. And you libs who think that is nothing, go play with getalife who thinks that the first World Trade Center Attack which killed SIX people was equal to the 9/11 attack that killed THREE THOUSAND. OOOwheee!! Liberals!!

By Lisa Love

January 7, 2008 2:45 PM | Link to this

Change and the desire for change are not empty slogans or empty promises. All the “change” you are hearing about reflects the overwhelming desire to have something different. Different from Bush; different than typical Republican leadership and different from the usual Washington insiders. Get ready you right-wingnuts because you all are about to experience resounding rejection on a nationwide level. And I think what ticks you all off most is you can see it coming. Plus you know all the candidates you have to offer are all just terrible. Well, face it, your party sold its soul to the religious right and now you have to live with it. No Republican worth his salt would want to run after the debacle that is George W. Bush. So you are stuck with losers like Huckabee, flipfloppers like Romney, immoral jerks like Giuliani and well, a man even your own party hates, McCain. Just desserts, I say. GOMIKEFUCKATREE!!

By Glenn

January 7, 2008 2:46 PM | Link to this

getalife @ 12:21,

You can say a lot of things about the people on that list, get. There are some pretty fabled folks on that list, some famous, some infamous. What you can’t say about them, or about anyone else, is that they’re “neocons”; you can’t do so — though you did do so yesterday — because you still don’t know what a neoconservative is and is not, and you’re never going to learn from the childsplay lib sites you read daily because they’re produced by clueless young poseurs.

Ever notice that David Letterman has a perfect tin ear for politics? The man can’t say an intelligent thing on the subject. The difference between Letterman and the sarcastic young things who produce Kos and MoveOn and the DNC sites official and unofficial, is that Letterman has better things to do than to learn the first thing about politics.

By Dusty dear....

January 7, 2008 2:48 PM | Link to this

My usual ID? Who do you think I am Dusty? Are you a conspiracy theorist? If so, perhaps I am part of the vast left-wing conspiracy to discredit you?

By Dusty

January 7, 2008 3:03 PM | Link to this

Ah, dear Captain, your concern is greatly appreciated from the bottom of my heart. What thoughtfulness!! What unabridged indulgences of the unfettered(crazy) mind. But several things I must correct or request.

1-I prefer Manichevitz served with fruitcake (not your kind) but the cake baked by gentle monks at Conyers.

2-I am unfamiliar with psychiatrists so please name those you use in case I have to keep reading your posts.

3-My “pieces” are quite well put together or so I am told. So don’t send your wheelchair. I would not deprive you of that convenience and it might be hard to jog with one.

3-Should that time ever come, will you also recommend the brand of “Depends” that you have found most waterproof. You have already tested eldercare to the utmost. I respect your opinion (on this subject).

Ah, but it is time for your three o’clock meds. Do not let me keep you from your sedatives. Now be a GOOD boy and thanks again, sweet thing!!

By AtAt is a genius!

January 7, 2008 3:13 PM | Link to this

the mission of our troops in Iraq is to isolate the radical extremists—to allow the Middle East to feel the pain of their existence and to take measures to discourage, if not destroy their ideaology. For the first time, they’re feeling the pain we’ve felt at the hands of radical extremists. …..Where, specifically, is this mission stated, and why did it change so many times before reaching this evolved state?

It appears to have opened their eyes to the beast within their borders. …. Upon what specific events do you base this speculative rambling?

You can’t balance the budget without revenue. ….. Brilliant!

You can’t balance the budget by punishing the wealthy who stimulate the greatest portion of our economy. ….Dang! Tell that to the old Republican Congress who had no choice but to approve Clinton’s budgets out of common sense. Time for a Do-Over! Woo-hooo!

What motivates the John Kerry’s and Ted Kennedy’s to invest their fortunes in offshore accounts. …. Good one! Do they have Halliburton stock as well? Their HQ is in Dubai now to avoid US taxes and audits.

I think they’re invested in coconuts—carribean and domestic. That’s what I think. …. Brilliant! Nice way to produce specifics to make your point.

By Dusty

January 7, 2008 3:17 PM | Link to this

Dusty dear who is afraid to use it’s own ID and asked:

who do you think I am, Dusty?

I think you are a liberal loon who couldn’t concoct a conspiracy to steal cookies from the kitchen. Any more questions?

By Glenn

January 7, 2008 3:20 PM | Link to this

TW @ 1:21,

Whoever cited Iraqi casualty lists wasn’t I. Was in done under my name? I’ve got no problem opining candidly on the subject, but I don’t remember when exactly I last did so.

Also, I personally don’t see any point in selling a product already discontinued. Keeping the historical record straight, I suppose, but that’s really a matter of fidelity different from the kind you decry; it’s not fidelity to W, but to the record: the glory, the ignominy, the banality, the accomplishments, the sins of omission and commission alike. Wherever the chips may fall. And so…

Dennis,

Hi. Your 10:25 post has been stuck in my craw since mid-morning. Jackie at 12:39 makes your first assertion also. You seem to make three broad points:

• That the Bush Administration has been corrupt, deceptive and criminal;

• That the Democratic candidates needn’t propose ways to improve our Iraq footing because the Republican Party has been bad for the country; and

• That history has been repeating itself in the form of our Iraq policy.

I just don’t buy any of it, Dennis. Especially not the historical references. I’ve got some serious beefs with the Administration, but criminal? And in what way did we almost have a revolution in the past seven years? Lot’s of countries have experienced near-revolutions — Hungary in the Fall of 1956, Czechoslovakia in Spring of 1968, France and Mexico that Summer, China in Spring of 1989 —- and you could say that the U.S. skirted one in the Fall of 1969 (the first Moratorium Day). But I don’t see that anything like any of these events has occurred here lately.

By Dusty dear....

January 7, 2008 3:26 PM | Link to this

Dusty, did you know that a loon is a water fowl that resembles a duck? I’m not sure how liberal they are.

I don’t care for cookies anyway.

By @@

January 7, 2008 3:37 PM | Link to this

Good point, AtAt at 1:12! Succinctly and skillfully put. Those stupid Dems. Why don’t they just shut up and go home?

I don’t want dems to shut up, just use common sense…and unless you’re posting from somewhere outside the U.S., you are home. Do you call somewhere else home? I could send you there if you’d prefer.

As it turns out, the mission of our troops in Iraq is to isolate the radical extremists—to allow the Middle East to feel the pain of their existence so that they’ll take the necessary measures to discourage, if not destoy the ideaology. For the first time, they’re feeling the pain we’ve felt at the hands of radical extremists. It appears to have opened their eyes to the beast within.

You can’t balance the budget without revenue. You can’t balance the budget by punishing the wealthy who contribute the greatest portion of our economy. Placing all sorts of government restrictions on the free market capitalists will force their investment in other countries.

Maybe you can tell me what motivates the John Kerry’s and Ted Kennedy’s to invest their fortunes in offshore accounts. Is it their commitment to America’s poor? Their commitment to America’s middle class? Their commitment to America’s disenfranchised?

I think they’re invested in coconuts—both caribbean and domestic. That’s what I think.

Now here’s a question for you… Have you wondered why Al Qaeda’s “Azzam the American” didn’t use the recent video to claim victories in Pakistan? They’re more active there than anywhere else in the ME. They’re pretty much calling for retaliation in areas where they’ve already been defeated. If they wanted to boost their image wouldn’t they want us to focus on their present stronghold? After all, weakening of government control in Pakistan and inviting the U.S. military to enter into conflict with them are conditions in which al Qaeda thrives.

From al Qaeda’s point of view, the Afghanistan-Pakistan theater is perhaps the only area of opportunity left for the jihadists to exploit, and the area where the final battle of the U.S. jihadist war will be fought. Now that our attention is focused on Pakistan they don’t send an invitation?

I suspect they’re too weak to lick the envelope.

By Redneck Convert

January 7, 2008 3:45 PM | Link to this

Well, I just checked in after a late lunch of chicken weenies and its a shame how so many people are going after Sister Dusty so hard. A good redneck woman can’t even say what she wants to say without being called a bed wetter and crazy and a Bush butt licker.

This Captain guy ought to be ashamed of hisself. I thought he was a good conservative, what with the dreams of what we should do to the libruls and all after we fool them into thinking we are friends. But no, he had to go tell folks about her drinking the booze part of hairspray and just about every secret she had. With friends like him we don’t need no enemas.

Anyhow, I got a big kick out of seeing the picture of that Hillary woman about to cry. I don’t want her to go yet. I want her and that worthless husband of hers to stick around so we can keep saying Clinton done it first. Without a Clinton us GA rednecks won’t have nobody to point to and say its their fault.

By Dusty

January 7, 2008 3:48 PM | Link to this

Does anybody else have time to play with “dusty dear”? He likes paper dolls, tiddlywinks and playdoh.

Bye now. See ya later….maybe.

By Dusty dear....

January 7, 2008 4:00 PM | Link to this

Thanks Dusty! But I don’t know what tiddlywinks is/are. Is that a euphemism for Republican sex?

Hey Dusty, you have a good night ya hear? You’re a hoot and I’ve had a blast wih you today. Later sweet mama!

By Sally Benson

January 7, 2008 4:10 PM | Link to this

Barack Hussein Obama is a very scary name. SCARY! But what is really in a name? Would not a Cheney by any other name have outed that CIA agent? The problem dear friends is not in our nom de plumes, but in naming de Plames! DE PLAMES! (Tatoo)

Gadzooks that’s good!

By @@

January 7, 2008 4:25 PM | Link to this

Where, specifically, is this mission stated, and why did it change so many times before reaching this evolved state?

Life evolves—isn’t that what leftists believe? Conflict and war is and always will be a part of life. It evolves too.

Upon what specific events do you base this speculative rambling?

I would say that Sunnis and Shia working together to oust al Qaeda from Iraq is a specific event. I would say that the more aggressive approach being used by other Arab countries against radicals are specific enough.

Brilliant!

I know. The wealthy, based on their income are contributing far more than me. I wanna keep it that way. I don’t envy their wealth. I don’t want their wealth. I just wanna keep what little wealth I’ve accumulated over many years of hard work. I don’t want to give it to the dems so they can purchase more votes on empty promises. Talk about a bad investment…

Look…Dick Cheney is entitled to deferred compensation from his previous relationship with Halliburton. I’m guessing you would have him donate all future income to charity over and above the $36,000,000 he’s already donated. Do you keep tabs on his annual contributions to charity?

What is it with you leftists? What gives you the right to tell other people what they should do with their money? Little Financial Fidels are ‘ya?

Brilliant! Nice way to produce specifics to make your point.

Thanks! You know what they say…”Coconuts don’t fall far from the tree.” You were sitting under it when that one knocked you into conciousness weren’t you?

Always happy to help with specifics Bonzo.

By Lisa Love

January 7, 2008 4:44 PM | Link to this

I thought Bush & Dick were great names for making fun but Huckabee is providing me with much amusement. Here are some more to finish the day—- DumbCluckabee Whowouldwanttofuckabee MikeFuckedUpabee Hickabee Redneckabee

He’s right up there with Dick Army. Republicans just have the best names!! However, I also like Mitt Romney for the simple reason that I can call him S**. Very satifying. One thing I won’t ever be calling any of theese yahoos, however, is “President”. GoodDay! Obama ‘08!!

By Jackie

January 7, 2008 4:59 PM | Link to this

@Glenn

You post at 3:20 indicates that you do not believe the Bush administration is criminal. Do you consider spying on American citizens to be criminal? This is just one example of the criminality exhibited by this Administration. As for the corruption, where is the $12 Billion dollars that is unaccounted for in Iraq? Did they drop a few dollars off at your place?

By Smart Alex

January 7, 2008 4:59 PM | Link to this

If Hillary wants her poll numbers back up, here’s the solution: Shorter skirts and a plunging neckline, showing a lot of cleavage. Yum.

By I Love

January 7, 2008 5:00 PM | Link to this

I love each and every one of you.

By Sally Benson

January 7, 2008 5:17 PM | Link to this

Cynthia Tucker wrote a piece today about how Obama is a candidate who happens to be black. Like Tiger Woods, blackness is simply not part of what makes the whole. There is a compartment in our souls that explains this. Mohammed Ali was the first black man who happened to be black. Did we see a personality or a black man? Next was Michael Jordan, my personal hero. I never once thought of his blackness, never, I swear. He was simply the best of us and came as close to a god as man has ever come. That explains how america doesn’t see a black candidate, but a candidate who happens to be black in Barack Obama.

By jbmlaw

January 7, 2008 5:28 PM | Link to this

Dear Sally @ 5:17, well said. Please understand that some of us, when we see Obama, simply see another leftist, one who would magnify government at the expense of freedom. We do not oppose him because of the color of his skin, nor for his funny name, nor for even the party identification - it is the ideology only. Change is not always good.

If we ceased to hunt down those who would kill innocents Americans, simply because they are Americans, that would be a change. If we starved the military again, without regard to the threats in the world, that would be a change. If we suddenly raise taxes, to feed Leviathan, that theft would be a change. If our government ceased monitoring telephone calls between foreigners just because the calls are routed through US switches, that would be a change. If we ceased harsh questioning of terrorists captured on battlefields, despite the likelihood that they hold information that could save American lives, that would be a change. Change is not always good.

By jbmlaw

January 7, 2008 5:33 PM | Link to this

(7/26/2007) Barack Obama’s latest pronouncement on Iraq should have shocked the conscience. In an interview with the Associated Press last week, the freshman Illinois senator and Democratic presidential candidate opined that even preventing genocide is not a sufficient reason to keep American troops in Iraq. http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110010382

Change is not always a good idea.

By GaVoter

January 7, 2008 5:56 PM | Link to this

We don’t have the resources to baby sit the world. We do have to at least try to finish what we start. Perhaps we could be a little smarter before we start something else.

By AtAt is a genius

January 7, 2008 6:05 PM | Link to this

Resources, shmeesources! AtAt says that letting the wealthy keep what they earn (or inherit or swindle or the dividends their daddy’s money gleans whilst they sit upon their well-fed, behinds) is MORE IMPORTANT to our economic well-being (well, maybe not “our” collective well-being, but for those that matter anyway) than balancing the budget or actually paying for the war in Iraq.

Borrow away!!! We don’t need no stinkin’ audits! To heck with solvency! Weren’t you listening to AtAt? She’s a geeeeenius!