Thinking Right

By Thor

May 22, 2008 8:20 AM | Link to this

I might! GA is a solid red state and I refuse to vote for the GOP (they should be punished). Obama doesn’t light my fire so I might cast a protest vote for Barr!

By Craig

May 22, 2008 8:29 AM | Link to this

I’m with Thor. McCain has flip flopped on so many issues - tax cuts for rich people, immigration, relationships with the radical Christian Right, on and on.

If nothing else, agree with him or disagree, Barr is consistent. It would be nice, after 16 years of questionable ethics in our presidents, to have someone with some integrity in that office.

By Manny

May 22, 2008 8:32 AM | Link to this

In this election, I will, for the very first time ever, vote for a Democrat for President. I’m voting for Barack Obama instead of McCain or Bob Barr.

I would like to see a refreshing change in our foreign policy. I think we should talk, to the point of chastisement, to Iran and other enemies of the US Government- as long as they are heads of state. And other than the fact that McCain was a POW in Vietnam, I see no policy change between President Bush and McCain.

And President Bush’s foreign policy has failed.

By HIDT

May 22, 2008 8:33 AM | Link to this

As someone who really believes government should do as little as possible beyond, defending the shores, delivering the mail and staying out of citizens’ business, I always give the Libertarian candidate a look.

By Redneck Convert

May 22, 2008 8:36 AM | Link to this

Well, I might could vote for Barr except he’s a librul on some things. Like not wanting the guvmint to open our mail to look for terrists or listen in on our phone calls. If the guvmint don’t have that right then the terrists win. On other things like the budget Barr’s a good conservative that would cut out all this welfare to Those People.

Us rednecks got ourselfs a awful quandry in November. We see a librul at the head of the Republican ticket and a librul at the head of the Democrat ticket and a half librul in Barr and another librul in Nader.

I can’t figure out why this country turned so much against godly Republicans. Even most of our own party won’t vote for a real one. People set around and gripe about no jobs and high gas and a broke budget and they want to blame us for it. Well, you can’t pay for a war without going a little broke and the high gas is the fault of the towel-heads. We don’t get no credit for turning the Supreme Court mostly conservative or for building a couple miles of border fence.

Maybe I should of stayed in the race instead of dropping out. I think right now most of the people on this blog would be tickled to death to see the name Redneck Convert up there on the ballot instead of all these libruls.

Have a good day everybody.

By jbmlaw

May 22, 2008 8:43 AM | Link to this

Good morning all. I respectfully disagree with one of Jim’s significant arguments, but first things first. No, I will not be voting for Bob Barr, even though I voted for him in his race against a more attractive conservative candidate, John Linder. My disaffection arises from Mr. Barr’s repudiation of the Iraq effort; I will not vote for anyone who is wrong on the big issue, and he is wrong. Captain Queeg is right on the big issue, so for now he retains my vote. (Note to all friends who harbor ambivalent feelings about the Republican standard-bearer, you need to see the “McCain 2008” tee-shirt linked from Chairman Ann’s home page. Cannot be described in a family newspaper, but it is truly funny.)

My disagreement with our genial host is in his conditional absolute, that he will not support a third party candidate. I have so voted for a third-party candidate under similar circumstances. In 2000 I voted for the Libertarian candidate – think it was Harry Browne, I’m not sure – but only after I determined that Georgia was likely to support George W. Bush by a wide margin. My Harry Browne vote was to send a note of disapproval – I suspected then that Mr. Bush was a faux-conservative, much as I view Captain Queeg. Regrettably the Libertarian option is not reasonable this year, as both Mr. Barr and Mr. Paul declare themselves indistinguishable from leftists on Iraq; who would ever dream that Hillary would be more faithful to the Iraq effort than Bob Barr? If a true conservative offered himself/herself as an alternative in Georgia, and the state continued to look like safe McCain-territory, I would cast my futile protest vote again. Does not look likely this year.

By Copyleft

May 22, 2008 8:48 AM | Link to this

Nothing outrages entrenched party loyalists like the specter of offering voters an actual CHOICE, does it? (snicker)

I’m no fan of Barr or Libertarianism, but I’m always happy to see more choices offered in our broken electoral process.

By jbmlaw

May 22, 2008 8:49 AM | Link to this

Dear Manny @ 8:32, just curious: what do you think could be accomplished by talking with Iran, best case? The Europeans have been talking for four years, with no results, other than giving Iran cover for further development of nukes. Of course, the problem for the Europeans is that they are trying to get something – nonproliferation – for nothing. What do you think Obama can accomplish that the vaunted Europeans have not, and at what cost? Is Kumbaya enough to satisfy you?

By Copyleft

May 22, 2008 8:53 AM | Link to this

By the way, conservatives: I hope you enjoy being lectured and talked down to if you even DARE to think about voting for someone who actually represents your beliefs!

The partisans will wag their fingers at you, declaring “You’re not ALLOWED to choose! Party loyalty is all that matters—no matter HOW badly our candidate ignores or undermines the issues you care about!”

Liberals got an earful of that back in 2000 when they backed an actual progressive (Nader) instead of the handpicked corporate-party “safety candidate” (Gore). How DARE you vote your beliefs!

Enjoy.

By Manny

May 22, 2008 9:07 AM | Link to this

jbmlaw,

What has not talking to Iran accomplish? The USA isn’t Europe. If not talking accomplishes nothing but emboldening Iran to become the dominant player in the power vacuum that was created with the regime change in Iraq, then talking directly to them might.

Plus, talking isn’t negotiating. With my foes, I like to look them in the eye. I like to show them directly my displeasure, and speak directly as to how this can be resolved.

But to sit back and let Iran become the Middle East ultimate power broker while threatening war and rattling swords is accomplishing nothing but alienating our friends and stirring up hatred with neutral countries.

By WFC

May 22, 2008 9:07 AM | Link to this

“Conservative” was once an honorable term (Barry Goldwater, for example.) However, in today’s world, far too often, “conservative” has simply come to mean: “I’ve got mine and to h*ll with you PLUS you better believe in my version of the Big Invisible Guy in the Sky.”

I’m comfortably retired and hardly a liberal. John McCain is a fine man who I admire although I don’t always agree with him.

By jbmlaw

May 22, 2008 9:08 AM | Link to this

Dear Copyleft @ 8:53, heck, I get “lectured and talked down to” on this blog on a daily basis, and that is by my friend Dusty, not to mention my ideological opposition. I guess I am just a masochist.

By GOPs got to go

May 22, 2008 9:11 AM | Link to this

Smile……

By bartender

May 22, 2008 9:12 AM | Link to this

McCain adviser Charlie Black rebuked for work with dictators. Clients included notorious rulers Savimbi, Marcos, Sese Seko, Siad Barre http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24769387/

McCain is as corrupt as they come he’ll do anything, say anything as long as it suits his purpose. And, half the time his facts are wrong.

Lincoln Chafee said this on Faux News “It’s almost like two people, kow-towing to the Republican base. It’s a different John.”

I’m voting for Obama. He does not have the stink of the career politician hanging around his neck!

By Glenn

May 22, 2008 9:13 AM | Link to this

Though I have most of Mr. Barr’s politics I can’t vote for a person missing any sense of humor. Too creepy.

The Libertarian Party is ridiculous, and should Barr become its nominee his only power will be destructive power. He’s a negative force, and should take a hike.

By ac/dc

May 22, 2008 9:21 AM | Link to this

If anyone had any doubts that Obamanians were Marxist liberals, search no further than right here. http://www.kxmb.com/News/Nation/240392.asp What kind of liberal socialist democrat as-sholes love to play the Soviet national anthem?

Neocommunism under the guise of caring liberalism, or more specifically ‘progressiveness’ will be the death of this nation and your right to privacy, personal freedom of choice (apparently the only “choice” libs care about is with abortion), and the right to keep more of your property, including money for inheritance and retirement. Yes, I know, if I want to keep any of the aforementioned, I am just a greedy, selfish s.o.b. who doesn’t want to put my socialist-wannabe nation under liberalism first. Pi-ss off, libs. Go create your own socialist liberal utopia elsewhere and keep it the HELL out of my private life.

Want to really destroy this nation? Vote Obama ‘08!

Slimebags.

By steve

May 22, 2008 9:24 AM | Link to this

I have voted Libertarian in the past, but will not this time around. I am voting for Obama. He is a democrat that actually talks about personal responsibility and I believe that his presidency will influence Americans to better themselves.

By ghost rider

May 22, 2008 9:28 AM | Link to this

Outside of the deep south I doubt Mr. Barr has any noteworthy name recognition.

Besides he has a few hurdles to obercome such as these.

While pretending to be a champion of “traditional” marriage, Barr has remarried three times and also licked whipped cream off of a beauty pageant’s breasts.

By Manny

May 22, 2008 9:28 AM | Link to this

Also, to further discuss the feasibility of direct talks vs. public threats is this point:

Iraq.

Saddam had no WMDs. Many liberals scream about that they knew all along that he didn’t and what-not, well I didn’t. And evidently the intelligence community didn’t either.

But imagine if someone held constant, hard, straight, and direct talks with Saddam about the ramifications of not being open from the one government that was the main instigator of that threat? What, during that conversation, you realize that Saddam is lying about WMDs and nuclear capabilities to make it look like they are keeping up with Iran? Imagine if you realize that Saddam is just trying to keep Iraq safe, in his weird, maniacal way, from an invasion from Iran?

I don’t know what would have happened during the course of that conversation. Maybe the way could have been averted. Maybe we could have still had the war, but under different auspices. Maybe we couldn’t have found out anything.

But we never tried.

By AmVet

May 22, 2008 9:33 AM | Link to this

Copyleft at 8:48.

Like with you and me, I hope that sentiment is beginning to awaken in many more Americans.

There are two factors in play here.

First, many of the more deliberative voters now FINALLY see AND admit that the differences between the two parties are minuscule. Sure they each blather on endlessly about how the other is the devil incarnate, but the reality is that they are bought and paid for by the same monied masters.

And the reality is that nothing ever fundamentally changes in Washington. And if you really doubt me, I would ask you to ask the average American if they agree with that assertion or not.

So our hijacked government as defined by both political parties is no longer recognizable as a government of the people, by the people and for the people. (Unless General Dynamics, General Electric and General Motors are people).

This LONG overdue indictment of our utterly corrupt political duopoly is the primary reason that Ralph Nader resonates with those of us that recognize and wish to marginalize the monstrous, self-serving corporate wh0res and plutocrats.

Secondly, the parties seem obsessed with gaining and keeping power before the best interests of the nation. And NOTHING of import gets accomplished.

Sorry to be so blunt about this, but Mr. Wooten is an out-dated fool in this regard. And contributes greatly to this hyper-partisan, inept clusterf&ck that is a sham representation of effective governance.

And does one single blogger here actually believe that tripe about there being ANY possibility of him voting for a non-Republican? Under any circumstances?

And how pitifully ironic that the Wooten-led “conservatives” may get a chance to parrot the pathetic Democrats and bemoan and falsely blame someone, Mr. Barr in this instance, for their own obvious failures of leadership and inability to demonstrate that their are willing to clean up their awful act.

It is beyond time to tell both the Democratic and Republican apparatchiks to go to h&ll…

By Glenn

May 22, 2008 9:35 AM | Link to this

“direct talks vs. public threats”

Manny, I don’t think you’re going to get jbm, Esq., to but that loaded counterposition.

By jbmlaw

May 22, 2008 9:36 AM | Link to this

Dear Manny @ 9:07, you ask the relevant question: “What has not talking to Iran accomplish?” US refusal to elevate the Iranians to our diplomatic level, coupled with our eradication of the government of Iraq caused Iran to suspend its nuke program (you recall the politicized CIA report from last fall that noted the 2004 suspension of activity?) Of course since then, the Western-leftist undermining of the war facilitated covert Iranian misbehavior in Iraq, and has cost us an additional 2,000 military lives. Since then we have had only the talk without the sabre-rattling, so the Iranians, reasonably, resumed their nuke production. As I read your note, you propose continuing such talk without sabre-rattling, which is what prompted my inquiry at 8:49. Thus, I assume kumbaya is enough for you, and that your expectations otherwise are justifiably low. Sort of “talk loudly and carry no stick at all.” Wonder how that will work?

Another issue crosses my mind, not particularly relevant for Obama w/r/t Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea, or even Syria. Obama’s dad was a Muslim, and that means Obama was Muslim at birth. He later renounced Islam, and professes Christianity. I think I understand that the Koran pronounces a specific punishment for such apostasy. Does that not preclude meetings – for reasons of safety - with theocrats such as those who control Iran? Do we have any intelligent reason to believe they will adhere to Western sensibilities of civilized behavior?

By lolo

May 22, 2008 9:37 AM | Link to this

YES I AM!

By ghost rider

May 22, 2008 9:40 AM | Link to this

By ac/dc

May 22, 2008 9:21 AM | Link to this

Dear ac/dc, did you not note the disclaimer to this article?

“This article is a blog post and does not represent the views or opinions of Reiten Television, KXNet.com, its staff and associates and is wholly owned by the user who posted this content.”

Which means this could have been written by Hannity, Rush, Savage any one of a fistful of rightwing nut jobs!

The “Decemberists” are nothing more than a local PORTLAND band.

Try thinking for yourself..you’ll be a much better person.

By TW

May 22, 2008 9:46 AM | Link to this

The size of the pending liberal tsunami will be proportional to the strength of rightwing’s continued embrace of the ‘w’ regime. Those who call themselves conservatives but do not denounce the ‘w’ admin for the abortion it has been, are nothing short a of a wet dream for moveon.org.

Denounce the infiltration. Save the conservative voice.

By Dutchman

May 22, 2008 9:56 AM | Link to this

To a degree, I do hope BHO gets elected. When that specter hots the American people, it will be 1994 all over again. The Congress will be turned out and a republican majority will be swept in. Followed closely with a conservative Republican President.

On the other hand, McCain does have is good points. I do not expect my taxes to go up nearly as much. HRC and BHO both want me to pay more for less. He seems to understand that rogue nations and crazy dictators and tyrants are to be marginalized.

In this imperfect world, we sometimes get imperfect candidates. I will vote for McCain.

By Lisa

May 22, 2008 9:56 AM | Link to this

I worked for Bob Barr when I was in college as an intern in one of his congressional offices. I found him to be extremely smart, knowledgeable about all of the issues, and committed to his own stances on those issues. He is NOT a politician who tells you what you want to hear in order to get your vote. I admire that honesty about him.

In this election, though, I am so torn. I really want to vote for him because he is the candidate that I most trust and believe in. I just wish he were in John McCain’s place! Because on the other hand, I don’t want to hand the election over to the democrats by voting for a third party candidatte! For that reason, my mind just isn’t made up.

By jungleland

May 22, 2008 10:00 AM | Link to this

Yes, I plan to vote for Barr. Less Government, Lower Taxes, More personal freedom.

If I was 100% sure that McCain would (1)Pay off the deficit (2)Overturn the Patriot Act (3) Lower Taxes

Then I would vote for him instead

By Truthifier

May 22, 2008 10:07 AM | Link to this

Did George Mcgovern break any fundraising records? Did George McGovern ever attract a crowd of 75,000?

As usual, Jimmy Wooten is just trying to stir things up. I’ve actually been a Clinton supporter, but no one, well no one other than Jimmy, would argue that Obama is not running a tight, effective campaign.

Jimmy’s shameless partisan hack routine is getting tiresome.

By getalife

May 22, 2008 10:09 AM | Link to this

“Appeasement goes mainstream — Israel, Syria sit down for talks”

Pakistan made peace with the Taliban.

Palestine next?

w lost, obl won.

Barr lead to impeach President Clinton but not a peep for w breaking the law and destroying our country.

Hell no to Barr.

By Dave

May 22, 2008 10:11 AM | Link to this

There is NOTHING that shows that Barr is for “smaller government” based on his previous record in Washington. He says he’s changed…trust me he has not…. That’s what we need as our leader…with ALL the problems that were facing this country and going on in the world…he became the biggest bully and pitbull in DC to go after Clinton…who cares if some girl got on her knees and “serviced” the president? Who cares that he lied about it. Too bad he did not do the same for ALL GOP members that have lied under oath over and over.

Hey GA….go vote red this election…nobody will even BOTHER with this state…as they don’t care. It matters very little. So vote for McInsane (and get him some depends while you at it), or for Barr….Obama is on a straight path to run this country. Too bad he won’t be able to mend and fix all the Dubya and DICK broke while they played in the whitehouse….

The Truth, (what a name for a propagandist)….sad that yesterday…as I wrote…that you think I was speaking of YOUR daughter…I was not…i was speaking in gneral terms…The WHOLE GOP “values voters” bunch in the state of GAWGA….sorry if you took it the wrong way… or personal… but spin thins as you may…it’s understandable that you do/did…

But I’m STILL waiting for the “censorship” police to show up and knock at my front door…. ;-)

By Manny

May 22, 2008 10:12 AM | Link to this

JBmLaw,

Your interpretations, albeit somewhat valid, has some points in which I would like to clarify.

Instead of sabre-rattling, let’s talk and tell them directly our positions and the ramifications if our positions are not acted upon. That’s not sabre-rattling. That’s direct, hard diplomacy. They may still be threatened, but they aren’t guessing.

Also, to the issue of Obama’s father, Barack never took Shahada, so just because his father was a Muslim doesn’t mean that Barack is an apostate due to his father’s faith.

In Islam, you are Muslim by youth, but then the child matures and have to make a decision concerning his faith. According to Islam, if the child follows his fitrah, or innate nature, he will find his way back to Islam and start his journey within the 5 pillars of faith. And that person becomes a practicing Muslim.

Now Barack Obama never took Shahada, which is the 1st pillar of faith. His life was lived in accordance to his own logic and reason until he accepted Jesus Christ as Lord. And upon his first testimony of faith in Jesus Christ, his baptism, he became a Christian.

So just because your father was a Muslim doesn’t mean that you are an apostate in Islam. You are considered as apostate only when you acknowledge Islam as the true religion and then turn away from it. It’s the same was in which you accept Jesus as Lord in Christianity and then renounce it.

So Obama’s not a Muslim. If he was, when he said during a campaign speech that he acknowledge that Jesus is his savior just killed that.

Oh, and just being President of the United States would provide greater safety concerns than his faith with these theocrats.

By Dave

May 22, 2008 10:14 AM | Link to this

There is NOTHING that shows that Barr is for “smaller government” based on his previous record in Washington. He says he’s changed…trust me he has not…. That’s what we need as our leader…with ALL the problems that were facing this country and going on in the world…he became the biggest bully and pitbull in DC to go after Clinton…who cares if some girl got on her knees and “serviced” the president? Who cares that he lied about it. Too bad he did not do the same for ALL GOP members that have lied under oath over and over.

Hey GA….go vote red this election…nobody will even BOTHER with this state…as they don’t care. It matters very little. So vote for McInsane (and get him some depends while you at it), or for Barr….Obama is on a straight path to run this country. Too bad he won’t be able to mend and fix all the Dubya and DICK broke while they played in the whitehouse….

The Truth, (what a name for a propagandist)….sad that yesterday…as I wrote…that you think I was speaking of YOUR daughter…I was not…i was speaking in general terms…The WHOLE GOP “values voters” bunch in the state of GAWGA….sorry if you took it the wrong way… or personal… but spin thins as you may…it’s understandable that you do/did…

By Dave

May 22, 2008 10:15 AM | Link to this

There is NOTHING that shows that Barr is for “smaller government” based on his previous record in Washington. He says he’s changed…trust me he has not…. That’s what we need as our leader…with ALL the problems that were facing this country and going on in the world…he became the biggest bully and pitbull in DC to go after Clinton…who cares if some girl got on her knees and “serviced” the president? Who cares that he lied about it. Too bad he did not do the same for ALL GOP members that have lied under oath over and over.

Hey GA….go vote red this election…nobody will even BOTHER with this state…as they don’t care. It matters very little. So vote for McInsane (and get him some depends while you at it), or for Barr….Obama is on a straight path to run this country. Too bad he won’t be able to mend and fix all the Dubya and DICK broke while they played in the whitehouse….

The Truth, (what a name for a propagandist)….sad that yesterday…as I wrote…that you think I was speaking of YOUR daughter…I was not…i was speaking in general terms…The WHOLE GOP “values voters” bunch in the state of GAWGA….sorry if you took it the wrong way… or personal… but spin thins as you may…it’s understandable that you do/did…

By Redneck Convert

May 22, 2008 10:15 AM | Link to this

Well, I didn’t know jbmlaw was so multi-talented. Jim Earl’s cousin is a machinist, too.

By Curious Observer

May 22, 2008 10:20 AM | Link to this

At least Lisa and a few others on this blog recognize that voting for Barr in sufficient numbers is the equivalent of handing the election to Obama.

Sadly, that’s more than can be said about many Florida voters in the 2000 election. In voting for Nader, they handed the state and the election to a man who arguably became the worst president in history, getting much worse than Gore.

So go ahead and futilely register your protest against the major parties. By voting for either Nader or Barr, you will be sealing your own doom. You have the right to commit electoral suicide. I suspect that most Republican voters are smarter than that.

By Markus

May 22, 2008 10:26 AM | Link to this

Dave, when you write GAWGA, are you meaning the pronunciation of Georgia that sounds like jawja? Gawga sounds weird when pronounced as you have written it.

You’re welcome. Any time. No, really, I don’t need money. Your thanks is enough.

By Charles

May 22, 2008 10:27 AM | Link to this

I’m a Libertarian but I don’t feel that Bob Barr is committed to the ideals of the Party. I have to look at the big picture. The main priority in the upcoming election is to use all means to keep a Socialist (Obama) out of the White House. McCain will receive more votes than any third party nominee and is the logical way to keep my priorities intact. Sometimes you have to do what’s best for the country - and Obama would be a complete and total disaster if elected.

By Shar

May 22, 2008 10:31 AM | Link to this

Dutchman @ 9:56 - Whomever wins the White House in November, you will definitely be paying “more for less”. The catastrophic borrow and spend philosophy of the Bush Administration turned the record surplus they inheirited into a record deficit and undermined our currency while the economic program has permitted job flight and the current credit crisis. The next President will be forced to deal with the wreckage left by these policies, as well as the damage to our foreign stature, national security, overstressed military and domestic institutions such as education and justice. No matter what the candidates claim and promise between now and November, that is the reality they will face upon taking office in January and the conditions that will define the next presidency. Taxes will go up to pay for this appalling mess, and services will go down.

To that end, I am waiting for the convention hoopla to settle in hopes of discerning the better executive between all of the candidates running. The next four years will demand excellence in management, fiscal sobriety and the ability to prioritize and discipline in order to begin the process of repair, and right now I’m only hearing a lot of unrealistic promises and big ideas from all four candidates. I’ll vote for whomever shows the best ability to direct the nitty gritty, uncharismatic work of fixing what Bush has broken, to attract good subordinates and delegate appropriately while remaining acceptable to me on issues I deem crucial (abortion, Iraq and Supreme Court appointments.) I don’t care what party such a person comes from.

By Lily Toad

May 22, 2008 10:31 AM | Link to this

It is sad that our country is so locked into the two-party system that people don’t feel like they can vote for the candidate who they think is best for the job. If we don’t vote for candidates from other parties how will those parties ever gain strength? I voted for Nader in 2000 because he was running on the Green Party ticket and I wanted the Green Party to get on the ballot nationwide, which would happen if one of their presidential candidate garnered at least 5% of the vote. I’d like to break up the two-party system because the two parties are too much alike.

By GMAN

May 22, 2008 10:36 AM | Link to this

Tisk Tisk Tisk! Decisions Decisions! Should I vote for the old flip-flop fossil with the junky wife or the multi-adulterer. What’s a faithful member of the Retardican Party to do?

By AmVet

May 22, 2008 10:36 AM | Link to this

I don’t think anyone with an IQ over 100 doubt’s Barr’s estimable intellect.

That has never been the issue.

It is his judgment. And hyper(with a capital H)-partisanship. And the observation by most, that like Newt the Nut, he was one of the meanest, most intransigent little neo-con pr!cks to ever come down the pike.

But, to his credit, he has apparently had some epiphanies. For example, he has revised his one-time support for the moronically misguided War on Drugs. (Which is sure to BIG time p!ss of the Ronnie fans and Harding prohibitionists.) And shows some 21st century sanity and compassion by now supporting medical marijuana.

But he has demonstrated a long and documented history as one of the Kings of Wedge Issues and more and more and more governmental interference in private lives. As evidenced by his taking a lead in the completely unnecessary Defense of Marriage Act. And trying to ban Wiccans from the military. (WTF???)

Isn’t it time to just say no to those who insist on legislating their sometimes questionable morality and shoving their “Ed Meese values” down our throats?

Thanks, but no thanks.

By bill

May 22, 2008 10:40 AM | Link to this

Avocation of the lesser of two evils is how my mother was able to choke down a vote for Nixon in 1968

By Dave

May 22, 2008 10:44 AM | Link to this

jbmlaw, Let me ask of you… why do we deal with Saudi Arabia? The WORST country in the WORLD as far as human rights go. 15 of the 19 hijackers that smashes into the WTC where from there. Women can not vote. There is religious rule and religious laws that make ALL women 2nd rate citizens. They have no freedom to dress they way they want, to even be in public with a member of the opposite sex that is not a family member. Yet we sell them bombs and bullets….fighter planes that can carry those bombs around the world…yet you have a problem with only Iran? Do you NOT think that there is not millions (if not billions) of dollars coming out of Saudi Arabia that is being used AGAINST our troops in IRAQ? (where we never have been in the first place)! The LARGEST flow of money for fighters that fight AGAINST our troops comes NOT from IRAN…it STILL comes from SA. It’s a fact that is known around the world…yet ALL our media (except small inde media) fails to report it.

Time to cut off SA. Or do we NEED them for oil? The empire is dead…and as they go down with it (as ALL curves show oil has peeked and is on it’s way down and the US empire that bulit up b/c of it)…that there are already others in place…that already RUN the show…face it or don’t believe it’s already true…

yet WHERE my friend…are your harsh words for SA and our relationship with them?

or….do you think oil lasts forever…..? ;-)

By ron

May 22, 2008 10:46 AM | Link to this

Good morning all,Mr. Barr has some campaign funds that really haven’t been sorted out to my satisfaction,although I would never be persuaded to vote for the gentleman.

Manny,Do you really believe that in a Muslim country such as Iran that a child has a choice of religions?Or even in a Muslim enclave in the U.S.?

jbmlaw,Interesting article in the London Times this morning on oil pricing.Article by Anatole Kaletsky. Much food for thought there.

By Dennis

May 22, 2008 10:48 AM | Link to this

Mr. Wooten writes, “I’ve previously stated my absolute unwillingness to vote again for any third party candidate.”

What a pity, unless he only means the current offering of “third party” candidates.

Given his wrtings, however, Mr. Wooten means what he says, “I’ve previously stated my absolute unwillingness to vote again for any third party candidate.”

But that’s conservative thinking…don’t take any chances that the world can be a better place for everyone (Jesus loves the little children, all the children of the world, red and yellow, black and white, they are precious in His sight). Stay in the rut that you are familiar with (Get all you can, can all you get) even if it is a rut.

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

By Dave

May 22, 2008 11:00 AM | Link to this

jbmlaw, Let me ask of you… why do we deal with Saudi Arabia? The WORST country in the WORLD as far as human rights go. 15 of the 19 hijackers that smashes into the WTC where from there. Women can not vote. There is religious rule and religious laws that make ALL women 2nd rate citizens. They have no freedom to dress they way they want, to even be in public with a member of the opposite sex that is not a family member. Yet we sell them bombs and bullets….fighter planes that can carry those bombs around the world…yet you have a problem with only Iran? Do you NOT think that there is not millions (if not billions) of dollars coming out of Saudi Arabia that is being used AGAINST our troops in IRAQ? (where we never have been in the first place)! The LARGEST flow of money for fighters that fight AGAINST our troops comes NOT from IRAN…it STILL comes from SA. It’s a fact that is known around the world…yet ALL our media (except small inde media) fails to report it.

Time to cut off SA. Or do we NEED them for oil? The empire is dead…and as they go down with it (as ALL curves show oil has peeked and is on it’s way down and the US empire that bulit up b/c of it)…that there are already others in place…that already RUN the show…face it or don’t believe it’s already true…

yet WHERE my friend…are your harsh words for SA and our relationship with them?

or….do you think oil lasts forever…..? ;-)

By will not vote for Barr

May 22, 2008 11:06 AM | Link to this

Barr is an idiot, even though I have occasionally voted Lib in the past I will never vote for him. If Repubs are serious about winning in Nov., for heaven’s sake even if you’re not crazy about him, just vote for McCain. Your making a statement might be shooting yourself in the foot, people.

By JK

May 22, 2008 11:11 AM | Link to this

Dave, fake lawyer man, Wooten, Crusty, and their kind give the Saudis a free pass when it comes to human rights abuses, totalitarianism, and OH YEAH, the little fact that OBL is a Saudi who remains free and well-funded. You see, Bushie boy holds hands and skips through the bluebonnets with the Saudi royals, and there’s even kissy-face for the cameras! So NO, we are not allowed to talk about the fact that Saudis attacked us on 9-11, or about the enormous financial debt we (the taxpayers and our grandchildren) we have incurred. Why do you hate America?

By Lily Toad

May 22, 2008 11:13 AM | Link to this

Dave, to avoid multiple posts, I recommend shutting down the web page right after hitting “post.” This is the only way I can keep my post from repeating itself and still use my computer.

By Dave

May 22, 2008 11:14 AM | Link to this

AM Vet…great post @10:36am!

By BradF

May 22, 2008 11:29 AM | Link to this

I’d probably vote for Bob Barr, particularly because I’ve already cast my vote in the primary for Ron Paul. I haven’t seen anyone else worth voting for. Regardless of the shape the country is in, or the situations we are in, the bottom line is who can you trust to actually get the job done.

By the way, When I was a kid in the 80s, there was talk about future problems with Social security etc, Has anyone taken a leadership role and fixed that yet? No? Maybe the next generation will be able to figure it out and fend for themselves. Given the situation we face today, they won’t have to worry about it.

By Dutchman

May 22, 2008 11:30 AM | Link to this

Shar,

The only way for this government to control the deficit is to cut spending - that is the only way.

As we have seen in the past, when folks get to keep more of their money, to a point, the tax revenues increase. So we are not talking about an increase in tax revenues. We need to address the spending in Congress. The pork that both parties seem to be in love with.

Someone asks what about the Saudi’s and their human rights record. That one is easy. We need to increase our ability to provide our own oil and refinery capacity. Cut them off where it will hurt the most.

But then again, Congress has forbidden us to use our own resources. No drilling, no refineries, no oil independence.

Regardless of what may be a magical solution, until we can produce more energy than can be recovered from hydrocarbons, we will need oil until then.

After all, what do you think plastic is made from. Petro products are ubiquitous. Oil touches a vast majority of our lives. Until that magic whatever is invented, we will remain dependent on oil, I just wish it was our oil and not some foreign governments.

By jbmlaw

May 22, 2008 11:32 AM | Link to this

Dear Truthifier @ 10:07, I still have my album of Barbra Streisand’s concert for George McGovern. The answer to both of your questions, is “yes.”

Dear Manny @ 10:12, thanks for your good-faith answers, especially for your explanation alleviating my ignorance about the relevance of “birth as a Muslim.” I think I disagree with your view that elevating Iran to our diplomatic “level” would not have adverse consequences in the Middle East. It seems to me that region embraces profound, if often unmerited, respect for the “strongman.” Thus Saddam’s refusal to acknowledge that his WMD program was a Potemkin, although such a simple acknowledgement would have saved his regime and his life. If we suddenly open discussions with Iran as an “equal” we have created the Strongman in the Middle East - not a wise move. But, “being President of the United States would provide greater safety concerns than his faith with these theocrats”? Not likely. These same theocrats kidnapped an entire embassy-full of US diplomats (except for the one military guy, whom they murdered). You implicit argument, that this is a normal bunch of people, is without foundation and contrary to history. Especially if they think “we” are talkers who are not doers – remember, they saw Obama bowl also, and are conscious of the distinction between ability to disseminate pretty words in the English language vs, doing something.

Dear bill @ 10:40, that is how I voted in every election except 1980 and 1984 when I voted for a conservative (the only times since I reached voting age that a major party nominated one – I was too young to vote for AuH2O, and probably would have been too stupid then), and arguably 2000 when I cast a third-party vote. Voting for the least-rotten is a norm in America.

Dear dave @ 10:44, forgive me for being Clintonesque, but what do you mean by “deal?” You surely do not suggest that the government of Saudi Arabia foments terrorism against the US (although the government of Iran obviously does.) Otherwise I agree with most of your observations, so let’s clarify “deal” and perhaps I can offer an argument. If you mean “trade,” you surely already realize I am a free-trade advocate.

Dear Ron @ 10:46, thanks for reference, hope to review this afternoon.

By Dave

May 22, 2008 11:35 AM | Link to this

Thanks Lily Toad! ;-)

JK?…perhaps you think or read wrong in what I posted…. I hate how we have this relationship with the Saudi’s….there is NO WORSE country in the WORLD when it comes to abuse of it’s very citizens….From their very rights, of women….to cutting off heads…hands, etc.

But f******* as it is…why did SO MANY in the US “cherish” the ahging of Saddam? When in truth…Bush and Cheney are the ones that hopefully will have to face those very same gallows one day…in a dark room…while people cheer…

They have caused pain and suffering to MILLIONS!!! We too should have the very right to see them held accountable….

No!!! I DO not believe in hanging, ot the death penalty…but I DO think that Bush, Cheney, Rummy, Condi, and ALL the rest of the neo- cons should be spending life sentences in small small cells… as they deserve that…

They truly do…

Say what you want…but when you think GLOBALLY>… Saddam was a “saint” compared to the torture and suffering they (mentioned above)have brought upon innocent people…

To be honest..though I think he is a good man…Powell deserves the same…he should have “walked away” before he too sold the war that has killed millions of innocent people…

and to ANYONE that signed up for the miltary after we dropped the first bombs on Iraq…you too need to re-examine you life and the choices you made….

I don’t blame you for making a HUGE mistake…but I kinda think you should have had “smarter” parents or guardians that could have kept you away from the death and destuction you became part of….

There were NO “terrorists” in Iraq until we showed up….

The “saddest” thing about it..

Is that Dubya and CO are “the WORLDS TERRORISTS”….yet their buddies (and they themselves) profit from the terror, killing, and injuring of innocent “good” people…

So sad…America…sad of what you became…

Sad that the blood on your hands…

lies on and in the hands of those that voted for Bush/Cheney…TWICE!

By James

May 22, 2008 11:38 AM | Link to this

Yeah, I plan to vote for Barr. I vote for the man, not for the party, and I base my vote on principles. McCain has shown by his voting record and such bills as the McCain-Feingold Act that such things as the Constitution are less important to him than political expediency. One could make the same argument against Barr, but at least he is now saying the right things. Do I trust Barr? No, but I trust McCain less when it comes to his conservative credentials.

Besides, isn’t it high time we had another Georgian in the White House? I hold that a vote against Barr is a vote against Georgia. Take pride in your state! Vote Barr!

By AmVet

May 22, 2008 11:41 AM | Link to this

Dave, only the most rabid right-wingers and religionists still cling to, and desperately try to defend, this demented definition of “conservatism”.

Most of the others, even the once BIG time fans of all things “conservative” ala Bushco/Gingrich/Reagan, politely avoid the subject or offer the deluded defense that the GOP’s gigantic problems are because they weren’t “conservative” enough.

Wake up, Republicans! They weren’t conservative to speak of, at all!

I do not feel sorry for them and this ongoing implosion of theirs though. They have had nearly three decades to come to grips with, and more importantly, alter this “conservative” charade/train wreck first foisted on the nation, via his gullible proxies, by the revered Ronnie Raygun.

What a bunch of non-conservative rubbish.

And now at long last this nonsense is coming home to roost for them.

And the spectacle is most entertaining for an American electorate completely fed up with their hypocrisy, hubris, venality and utter incompetence.

The Republican-lite Barr is but another poser, albeit perhaps slightly less distatesful, in this regards…

By JK

May 22, 2008 11:42 AM | Link to this

Sorry Dave!!! My sentence structure appeared to be lumping you in with them, when I meant to address you first, and then begin my rant about them. I enjoy and agree with your posts! The Bush enablers are responsible for what America has become because they put party before country, and refuse to ever admit they were wrong. They’d rather die being wrong claiming to be right than to actually BE right. I totally agree: SO SAD.

By Daniel

May 22, 2008 11:44 AM | Link to this

I would definitely vote for Bob Barr over either Insane McCain or Hussein Obama. McCain is a warmongering neo-con and Barak is as socialist as they come - might as well rename the USA the USSA if Barak becomes President.

Bob Barr in 2008 !

By Tom

May 22, 2008 11:45 AM | Link to this

I’m not crazy about Bob Barr, but I’ll give him one thing…..

At least he hasn’t forgotten the actual purpose of a constitution like so many of the GOP members I used to support unflinchingly.

By Jeff

May 22, 2008 11:46 AM | Link to this

I’ve said it before:

I will NEVER again vote for ANYONE with a D or an R beside their name.

I will sooner write in my dad for President than vote for either McCain or Obama, at least I could trust him with the job!

Now that Mr. Barr is in the running, he has my vote.

Republicans (or Democrats for that matter): Want my vote again? It aint that hard to get. Simply stand for minimal government intervention and maximal personal responsibility. In other words, FREEDOM as the Founding Fathers intended.

By Dave

May 22, 2008 11:47 AM | Link to this

Love how this Blog of Jims moves more to “the left” every single day….

Is it only ME that sees the HATE that is in the very “core” of those on the right? So much hate…and to be honest…it’s sad…very.

By getalife

May 22, 2008 11:51 AM | Link to this

Stand up and sign the petition for Florida, Michigan and Democracy by helping to make their votes count

By Copyleft

May 22, 2008 11:52 AM | Link to this

Charles & Daniel: The SOCIALIST candidate for president is Brian Moore of Florida.

Obama is the DEMOCRATIC candidate. You guys really need to learn your terminology.

By JK

May 22, 2008 11:56 AM | Link to this

Dave, They hate us for our freedom. That’s why they’re okay playing footsie and doing business with the Saudis — no freedom there for women, gays, or those who think for themselves. The American “righties” and religio-fundies admire that so much, they’ll make any and every excuse they can think of to enable it.

By Dutchman

May 22, 2008 11:57 AM | Link to this

Shar,

The only way for this government to control the deficit is to cut spending - that is the only way.

As we have seen in the past, when folks get to keep more of their money, to a point, the tax revenues increase. So we are not talking about an increase in tax revenues. We need to address the spending in Congress. The pork that both parties seem to be in love with.

Someone asks what about the Saudi’s and their human rights record. That one is easy. We need to increase our ability to provide our own oil and refinery capacity. Cut them off where it will hurt the most.

But then again, Congress has forbidden us to use our own resources. No drilling, no refineries, no oil independence.

Regardless of what may be a magical solution, until we can produce more energy than can be recovered from hydrocarbons, we will need oil until then.

After all, what do you think plastic is made from. Petro products are ubiquitous. Oil touches a vast majority of our lives. Until that magic whatever is invented, we will remain dependent on oil, I just wish it was our oil and not some foreign governments.

By will

May 22, 2008 11:58 AM | Link to this

I absolutely intend on voting for Barr. I’m also a born and raised liberal who voted for the first time in 2004 for John Kerry. If you actually think Bob Barr is going to hurt John McCain in a vastly more serious manor than he’d hurt Barak Obama you are just blindly following the typical and lazy anti-3rd party propaganda. While Bob Barr might siphon some voters from the libertarian wing of the party, those people most likely wouldn’t be McCain voters anyway. Every single Poll I’ve seen so far looks about like this. Barr gets about 7% of the republican vote, 5% of the democrat vote, and 12% of the independent vote. So the propaganda simply doesn’t match the facts. From talking to people in the field (politics goes so good with beer) I find Obama supports much more interested in hearing about Barr than McCain people. This is because McCain people are more-or-less one issue voters (pro-Iraq war) while a lot of people are attracted to the change image of Obama for a plethora of reasons many of which aren’t really reflected in Obama’s policies. When I present to them a real alternative change candidate like Barr and explain how issues like the nat. dept, sound money, and state’s rights are far more crucial than anything Obama is going to address it is amazing how quickly Obama seems artificial to them in comparison. If that doesn’t work then I’m offering a six-pack for anyone I know that votes for Barr and so far it looks like I’m going to have quite a party on election day.

By Jeff

May 22, 2008 12:06 PM | Link to this

Will:

I like the six pack approach! Beer is always a good thing!

By BS Aplenty

May 22, 2008 12:06 PM | Link to this

I like Bob Barr, in general, but won’t vote for a third party candidate. McCain ‘08

AuH20 + OU812 => Ted Nugent

By Dutchman

May 22, 2008 12:09 PM | Link to this

By Dave May 22, 2008 11:35 AM

I can’t tell if you are just plain unamerican, or ignorant.

While we may not agree with an administration, we do support our county. There are some of us that understand the difference and some that it get clouded in their little pea size brain.

Just remember, it was Congress that authorized the war, not Bush and Cheney. It is Congress that funds the war, not Bush and Cheney. Bush and Cheney have no authority to send troops into battle without the funding provided by Congress. How do you think the VietNam war was ended, Congress surrendered and stopped funding it.

You on the other hand - I just do not know.

By svf

May 22, 2008 12:23 PM | Link to this

Are you really voting for Barr?

Yes.

By George Washington

May 22, 2008 12:25 PM | Link to this

What is it about dirty stinking lawyers that makes them think they should be President? Lawyers are scum, please treat them as such….

By getalife

May 22, 2008 12:31 PM | Link to this

The Senate passed the Webb GI bill with veto proof majority.

McCain cut and ran on the vote.

Suk on that gop.

By Dave

May 22, 2008 12:46 PM | Link to this

Dutchman…yeah…I AM “unamerican”…as just as I belive that if one is born in Jordan to muslim parents and think that “their” beliefs are the “right ones…i was only born on american ground to american parents. Do you TRULY think the the USA is the “free” country…the best? That we have have more liberty and freedon than say…hmmm…Holland, Norway, etc? Do you think our tax dollars..thosw which we earn are put to the best use?

If you were born…in Iraq…and saw you father dragged out of his/our home…by an american soilder….killed in front of your eyes…for now reason…and read online that “we” americans “accept” the term ” collateral damage”….do you think you would just “let it go”..?

American is NOT the free country it once was…nor is it the “bravest”…it’s become a sad sad shell of what it was once…

The military/industrial complex runs our nation…not our leaders…

our dollar…the one that ALL oil is based off of…is nearly worthless…

if you voted for Bush/Cheney…you or any that did…deserve to pay and pay and pay for your vote. IN high gas prices, no raises (if you still have a job that is), more for food, and bigger profits for the Carlyle Group and Haliburton…no bid contracts….

You pay…they profit…

people die…REAL PEOPLE ACTUALLY STOP BREATHING!!! Do you NOT care? Is it because they don’t believe in you fictional bible? How do you NOT rise up against ALL that is wrong?

I hope you sleep well…see…it ALL comes back…every time you pump gas…every dollar you spend sir…comes back..

yet there is a child in IrAQ WITH NO FATHER….WHY? eVEN JUST ONE LIFE COUNTS!! Is that NOT what you taqlibangelicals preach? Or do ONLY the “unborn” count?

What about those living?

Do THEY count?

Does the term “collateral damage” fy with you? Is it acceptable? Or…is it only MUSLIM lifes that are “collateral”….and US “unborn” lives that need to be “saved”?

As always…the “right’s” logic…is FAULTY at best…

By AmVet

May 22, 2008 12:49 PM | Link to this

As anyone who visits here knows, I continue to hammer on the almost innumerable failures of this administration, their enablers and the awful aspects of the Republican “base”.

And IMHO, they have worked exceptionally hard to earn this derision and exposure.

BUT…I am also no fan of the Democratic Party, especially as fronted by this Pelosi/Reid “leadership”, which has proven to be a line from an old Who song. “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss”.

That they are marginally better than the abomination that has become the GOP is not exactly comforting.

Yet, liberals have always been a vibrant and relevant force in American society and politics. And I believe they always will be. That said, clearly they need some moderation and rational, reasonable restraint from across the aisle i.e. not these non-conservative conservatives.

And the liberals/moderates/progressives ability to reinvent themselves from time to time is, unlike the neo-cons, at least plausible.

So a new generation of young Democrats, ALL veterans and all but one with service in Iraq/Afghanistan, are running for office here in Georgia.

I have not studied their positions, etc in detail but they all deserve a look:

GA-01: Bill Gillespie

GA-06: Bill Jones

(This 1976 USAF Academy grad looks very impressive and may be an excellent alternative to my current Rep - Tom Price)

GA-07: Doug Heckman

GA-10: Bobby Saxon

GA-11: Bud Gammon

getalife, that is the best news I’ve heard in quite some time.

Thanks for the heads up!

By a real conservative

May 22, 2008 12:49 PM | Link to this

Yes, I could vote for Barr. It will either be him or Chuck Baldwin (Constitution Party). The reason for my thinking…We need a politician who talks about, promotes, and protects Liberty and the Constitution as the Founders did back in early America.

By bill

May 22, 2008 12:56 PM | Link to this

I am not much for Rap lingo; but the Saudi’s know our secret energy policy makes US their b***, and we know how they treat women…

By MEK

May 22, 2008 12:56 PM | Link to this

Jim,

I knew you wouldn’t blog about McCain’s ties to his “spiritual advisor” this morning. I also knew you wouldn’t bring up Charlie Black, one of McCain’s campaign advisors who has ties to NOTORIOUS dictators. You are so full of crap. I guess the crunch is outta the cookie…Republican’s *$(#! stinks too!

By George Washington

May 22, 2008 1:03 PM | Link to this

Dave is right, a little too much like me in his language, but that is A-OK in George’s big book of bad words….

By GetReal

May 22, 2008 1:13 PM | Link to this

I would vote for a monkey before I would vote for a damn lawyer!!!

By Polk Salad Annie

May 22, 2008 1:14 PM | Link to this

Wooten missed the more obvious Obama link to McGovern: “I stand behind my VP pick 1000%” Then he throws him under the bus.

Ditto Obama’s Pastor.

I saw that connection as it occured, but I wanted to see if Wooten would see it, and he didn’t. The McGovern connection he makes is a great example of why the conservatives are in dissarray. Their spin is harmless.

Oooo, I dont think Obama’s campaign can survive the Mcgovern parallels.

There’s another elephant in the room that’s so obvious that nobody sees it yet. There is a greater overall truth that’s emerging in the democratic race. Once again, I refuse to give it away, because I want Wooten to find it, and if he does, it could help the conservatives in November.

But you know what? Bush will tie up Iraq in a nice bow for McCain. Now, it would not take much to spin a victory over there in Iraq. Nothing really ever happens, have you noticed? Even in the worst of it, there was a anti-climactical tone to the war.

If the oil bubble pops, and Barr stays in, and Iraq stays Iraq, then McCain can put up better numbers in November.

Then, add a near 100% certainty of other shoes dropping on Hillary and Obama, you could still see McCain geting in the 40’s against the democrat’s best polls a week before election day.

Best case scenario, is McCain, 47%, Obama 52%, Barr 1%.

Then, just throw in the usual election day chicanery and voila, the GOP eeks out a victory, and McCain is our president, and I dont think the world will end either.

So what if he set fire to an entire aircraft carrier and has never apologized or taken responsibility. SO what if we’ve all seen more vigor in a bowl of soup. So what if his wife is so hot, there’s certain to be college girls gone wild video of her somewhere.

McCain 08: He’ll do, but get a load of Cindy!!!

By GeorgiaLegislatorsAreCriminals

May 22, 2008 1:28 PM | Link to this

I will vote for Bob Barr. Bob Barr spoke out against Georgia’s anti-American, immoral, idiotic, counter-productive, and anti-factual “sex offender” laws. In direct contrast to Georgia’s lying politicians, Barr’s position demonstrated his superior intelligence, basic common sense, and the fact that he thinks with his brain and not his emotions. In this state and country these days, we need someone who believes we should not have a nanny government and that people should take some personal responsibility.

But forget the national election - let’s get rid of Georgia’s criminal legislators this year. They are not decent people.

By JK

May 22, 2008 1:29 PM | Link to this

AmVet at 12:49:

Thanks for your service and your honesty, and as a Democrat, I cannot disagree. Unlike the Repuglies, I do not put party loyalty first, and am deeply disappointed by the failure of the Pelosi/Reid leadership to rectify the wrongs of recent years. To be fair, without a veto-proof majority, they ARE limited in the legislation they can pass. But they have not demonstrated the moral and vocal leadership I had hoped. This “nice guy, let’s work together” stuff is of little value if nothing gets resolved. They seem to punish the few that emerge with a working pair, and shush them into the background. (I think this explains why some people are inspired by a fighter who stands up against the odds and says, “Heck NO, I won’t quit!” Like her or not, it’s a refreshing change.)

Nevertheless, nothing the Dems have or have not done excuses the abuses of power demonstrated by the Republicans in the past 12 years. They need to go, and if we must then turn on their replacements for being slack, so be it.

PS: I will be volunteering for the Bill Jones campaign!!

By Wow

May 22, 2008 1:31 PM | Link to this

jbmlaw:

“Of course since then, the Western-leftist undermining of the war facilitated covert Iranian misbehavior in Iraq, and has cost us an additional 2,000 military lives.”

You are unbelievable. Do you conservatives take responsibility for anything? To make that kind of statement that the failures in Iraq are anything but the responsibility of the Bush administration shows a clear lack of reasoning and common sense. You remind me of the little kid who misbehaves and then looks at the other guy and says, “He did it”. Bush broke Iraq, not the “left”.

By ron

May 22, 2008 1:32 PM | Link to this

Four years and six months for being involved in the travesty that caused the death of Kathryn Johnson.Not much,is it?

By GeorgiaLegislatorsAreCriminals

May 22, 2008 1:35 PM | Link to this

I will vote for Bob Barr. Bob Barr spoke out against Georgia’s anti-American, immoral, idiotic, counter-productive, and anti-factual “sex offender” laws. In direct contrast to Georgia’s lying politicians, Barr’s position demonstrated his superior intelligence, basic common sense, and the fact that he thinks with his brain and not his emotions. In this state and country these days, we need someone who believes we should not have a nanny government and that people should take some personal responsibility.

But forget the national election - let’s get rid of Georgia’s criminal legislators this year. They are not decent people.

By union goonie

May 22, 2008 1:37 PM | Link to this

Don’t look now, but libs and dems are getting their wish. High gas prices are killing off SUV and truck production. You see, for quite a while now since this nation and the left has been brainwashed into global warming accelerated by man’s activity, the wish has been to let gas shoot up to $5/gallon solely to kill off SUV ownership. Yeah, like $5 gas will only hurt SUV owners. Nothing like sinking one’s own ship to punish a few SUV owners, eh? Typical liberalism at its finest moment. Those idiots are reactionaries only and do not think things through long term. So, how many of those fascist econazi libs who don’t want people driving what they want to are going to help find these people jobs and contribute to their unemployment compensation when (not if, WHEN) they get canned? Yeah that’s right, you and I, Mr. & Mrs. Taxpayer, will be paying for that, just like we pay for so many other lib “causes”.

By AmVet

May 22, 2008 1:42 PM | Link to this

JK, thank you and well said.

That’s great news about volunteering for Jones. I may as well…

Gotta run, duty calls. Someone has got to help pay for the occupation!

By chuck

May 22, 2008 1:49 PM | Link to this

Clinton campaign’s new strategy … vote for Chelsea in 2016

This is really becoming comical. This Clintoons just do not know when to quit, do they? Since Hillarity has been a massive failure on all fronts - and you Democrats had damn well better pray that she and her henchmen do not steal the nomination from Obama [never underestimate the korruption of a klinton] - their fixation is now on Chelsea for 2016. Too bad the apple rarely falls far from the tree.

By dan stryker

May 22, 2008 1:52 PM | Link to this

Voting for Barr if he is indeed the nominee of that party. I want a third party to receive 5% of the national vote so that they are qualified for matching funds for the next presidental cycle.

By Dave

May 22, 2008 1:56 PM | Link to this

Er…union…sorry to say…but it is YOUR wishes…and THOSE you voted into office that give us the very things you complain about…hey let me remind you as well…the Saudi’s….it was THEY they caused 9-11, and it is THEY that now “strangle” our economy by holding oil so high and PROFITABLE!!! Drilling in Alaska will not make us safe…nor will it bring down the price of oil…

Someone needs to REALLY step up the the SAUDI’s…worst human right’s violators in the WORLD…ever!

Second worse..is Bush/Cheney…not here at home…but around the globe….you know…the thing that spins around the sun…that is BILLIONS of years old…not like what the bible says…

ARREST BUSH! ARREST CHENEY! ARREST RUMSFELD! ARREST RICE! and sad…(but he went along for the ride to SELL the war)…ARREST POWELL!!!

By Dan

May 22, 2008 2:05 PM | Link to this

(1) A vote for Bob Barr (if he receives the LP nomination, which is far from a sure thing) will not be shifted to Obama. A vote for Barr would be, well, a vote for Barr.

(2) Timid conservatives are to the GOP what many African-Americans are to the Democrats — sadly tied to one political home, often an abusive one.

(3) Since the GOP “revolution” of 1994, the GOP proved beyond doubt that, as an institutional party, it is not the least bit serious about containing, much less reducing, the size, scope, and power of the Federal government.

(4) Thank goodness the GOP fought so incredibly hard the 15 years to increase oil drilling in Alaska and in the Gulf, so that we’re all able to now enjoy $1 gasoline and decreased reliance on the likes of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the UAE, and Venezuela. Okay, wake up now.

(5) But hey, at least the dollar is strong relative to other currencies, thanks to all the spending restraint exhibited by the GOP for non-defense-related matters, and the lack of government-issued debt. Oh, wait; never mind.

(6) At least the GOP robustly protects the spirit and text of the First Amendment with the likes of McCain-Feingold. Not.

(7) While the Democrats certainly are the Big Government Party, the GOP — in practice, if not always in rhetoric — has shown itself to be the Slightly Less But Still Really Big Government Party. Actions speak louder than words. When allegedly conservative voters quit rewarding the GOP ticket with votes and money, then and only then will GOP officeholders feel any compunction to take seriously a desire to limit government and increase individual freedom and responsibility.

(8) It was none other than “Mr. Republican” Robert Taft who warned America repeatedly of the dangers of an interventionist foreign policy, and it was Dwight Eisenhower who warned of the dangers of the military-industrial complex. More than a few conservatives need to (re)acquaint themselves with those concerns.

By What?

May 22, 2008 2:07 PM | Link to this

union goonie:

World market forces are killing off the SUV, not the left. There is a whole big world out there beyond the US and its legions of leftist conspirators as you imagine it. You can still have your precious SUV, you’ll just have to pay dearly to drive it. If you want to give your money away to big oil and countries that hate us that is your choice. In your eyes that makes you a conservative and a patriot. As for me, I like to keep my money and give big oil and those countries that hate the US the finger.

By jasper

May 22, 2008 2:18 PM | Link to this

Dave, lay off the coffee, get out of the basement, and go buy yourself a new keyboard. You’re going to implode down there and deprive us the continued enjoyment of deciphering your nuggets of wisdom. I for one am thoroughly entertained.

By reebok

May 22, 2008 2:23 PM | Link to this

Is the Libertarian candidate guaranteed to get on the ballot in every state?

By Phil Dolan

May 22, 2008 2:29 PM | Link to this

Polk Salad Annie, are you saying that Obama’s support of his pastor and then subsequent flip compares with the grand mal faux pas McGovern made with his mentally unstable vice presidential pick, Sgt. Shriver? The fact that McGovern picked a guy who could never pass the scrutiny of a campaign was all Americans had to know about McGovern. His campaign was toast from the second the news came out.

Obama seems to slip through every and all stop gaps, flip flops, and malaprop gaffs. He’s simply unassailable and maybe a good question is why? Has campaign rhetoric become such a science that we see it’s perfection in Obama 08? Has all the mistakes been made that can be made to the point where it’s the aftermath of a gaff, not the gaff that sinks a campaign? In the past, it’s the coverup that gets the politician. When all the dust settles after a big scandal, there’s always the insight that if the politician had just come clean on day one, he’d have weathered the storm.

Obama looks like our next prez. I dont know what he stands for, except change. I do know that if he did make his position on the bellweather issues, that he would not be elected.

Campaign Rhetoric 101: Mondale’s “He wont tell you, I just did”, about raising taxes, is probably the first class any candidate should take. Never be so clear about your position that you haven’t straddled both sides and the middle and any and all exceptions. You can only do that by saying nothing. NOTHING!

Who is Obama? I googled him. He has a facebook and a myspace page. I’m actually going out with him on Friday night.

Who is Obama, really.

By Dave

May 22, 2008 2:31 PM | Link to this

Hey Jim….Let’s go with your first sentence today “If Barack Obama is the 2008 version of George McGovern, it looks like former Georgia Congressman could be this year’s version of Ross Perot”…

Actually…you wrote it wrong…Barack Obama…is the NEW JOHN KENNEDY…and it KILLS you…does it not?>

One who wants to do things “different”..? One who will NOT just pull the trigger and be a “sissy cowboy” if another cuban missle crisis happens?

It really does get under you skins does it not? That someone FINALLY is standing up to the HORRIBLE people you voted for?

No..he’s not jesus…nah…that guy was GAY! (oh…and BTW…there was NO “virgin” Mary…)… it’s like A 16 year old these days saying…i don’t KNOW HOW I got pregnant…

gee. “ya all”…maybe she DID have sex!!! ;-) trust me…it was NOT “god” that knocked her up…it was “the boy next door….haha

By TW

May 22, 2008 2:35 PM | Link to this

Congratulations to the Republican Party on today’s court ruling in Texas. Perhaps Romney would be a good choice for VP?

By jasper

May 22, 2008 2:38 PM | Link to this

No doubt the republicans abandoned core conservative values, i.e., least expansive, expensive, and intrusive government. And so we debate sending a message to them by diverting our votes to Bob Barr, (hard to type his name with a straight face.)

In the meantime the most liberal socialist minded Democrat gets elected with a majority congress. Taxes go through the ceiling and all of a sudden 51% of the voting public either work for the government or are dependent on its handouts.

Dudes, it won’t matter then how rejuvenated you are. You just gouged out your eyes to improve your sense of smell. And Bob Barr will be living the good life with Soros’ millions.

By ron

May 22, 2008 2:44 PM | Link to this

Dave,my partally good man,Barak Obama will never be John Kennedy.He does not have the kind of substance that made Kennedy what he was.

By 19114me

May 22, 2008 2:53 PM | Link to this

I would have voted for Fred Thompson had he been serious about running and making a good run at the nomination.

I cannot vote for The Manchurian Candidate. Even if he’s the most electable Republican among swing voters.

Barr will get my vote over McCain.

By Dave

May 22, 2008 3:00 PM | Link to this

Actually Ron…you’re right…he’s NOT JFK…he might just be…a “better man” than he…

We’ll all find out…as there is nothing that will stop him from being our next president…

GOP can try and figure out all they want…as it is THEY,,,,those that voted them into office…that pay dearly…your votes cost you more for gas, less jobs, les job security, more for food, less NATIONAL secutity, the twin towers falling to the ground…your votes caused that…too much to mention…

By Dave

May 22, 2008 3:00 PM | Link to this

Actually Ron…you’re right…he’s NOT JFK…he might just be…a “better man” than he…

We’ll all find out…as there is nothing that will stop him from being our next president…

GOP can try and figure out all they want…as it is THEY,,,,those that voted them into office…that pay dearly…your votes cost you more for gas, less jobs, less job security, more for food, less NATIONAL secutity, the twin towers falling to the ground…your votes caused that…too much to mention…

By Dusty

May 22, 2008 3:02 PM | Link to this

Oh, oh, how the middle of the roaders are swarming here today. Oh yes, they say…..I’m gonna vote for Barr, Nader, and any other doesn’t-count-vote for nothing that can be found. Yes, that’ll really show ‘em!! You bet. Our enemies appreciate these shows of dissolutionment..

Who came first, the liberal losers or the libertarians? The anti-war protestors or the I-hate-Bushers? The Democratic-led Congress or The Mickey Mouse Club?

Listen to liberals here: JK, when she isn’t hugging a tree in the mountains, tells Dave that conservatives hate freedom. She hates Bush to show her loving nature.

AmVet, who always claims he supports the military, calls the war in which they are fighting, an “occupation”. He calls that “support” even as his son serves in the military.

I commend Dutchman for clearly stating how our government operates. Who has the power, who decides, and who votes. It is always good to hear a sensible accurate voice.

We have but two major political parties and candidates. The rest are mavericks with a motive. I want the President of the USA to be ethical, smart and reasonable, patriotic and strong. Therefore I cam voting for McCain because he is the only nominee that meets those standards.

By getalife

May 22, 2008 3:19 PM | Link to this

Rove has been supeonaed finally.

“HRC: How Long Will A Responsible Withdrawal Take?

By Spencer Ackerman 05/22/2008 12:23PM

Sen. Clinton just hit it out of the park with a question that couldn’t have been easy for her to ask. How long will a responsible withdrawal from Iraq take, if the next president asks?

“It’s a very difficult question,” Odierno responded, “and the reason is, there are a number of assumptions and factors I’d want to understand first… what is the [desired] endstate. … I don’t think i can give you an answer now… but if asked, I would undertake careful planning… and we’d lay out a timeline.” That’s a lot further than Petraeus went last month, when he all but said he wasn’t interested in planning for withdrawal.

A great question. A somewhat-enlightening answer. And, incidentally, also the last exchange of the hearing. So that’s a wrap. Both generals will undoubtedly be confirmed. But good for Clinton that she asked such an important — and stunningly overlooked — question.”

Leadership.

By jbmlaw

May 22, 2008 3:22 PM | Link to this

Dear Wow @ 1:31, most of the noble Americans who died in Iraq died, not at the hands of George Bush nor of Dick Cheney, but at the hands of Islamists, the same people who leveled the World Trade Center, and who sponsored so many attacks against US interests throughout the 1990s. Not that you care. Our military is doing good work, killing the bad guys. Not that you care. Approximately half of those were killed, not by Iraqis, but by others temporarily in the country. If our military had enjoyed bipartisan support for the effort, we could have eliminated many of those needless deaths with surgical actions against the provocateurs, who mostly were not in Iraq. Not that you care. I regret that the Republican leadership lacked the fortitude to act appropriately in the absence of Democrat support. Even now your side is unable to acknowledge the Iranian role in the deaths of so many of our noble military. Not that you care. I do not have that problem.

“Do you conservatives take responsibility for anything?” We take responsibility for coming up with a plan to wipe out those who have attacked us repeatedly for the past 20 years. What has any leftist done to that end? Threaten them with an occasional criminal trial. Surely suicide bombers quake in their boots at the thought of going to trial. The only effective plan is to kill them all, until they give up the fight. Until you leftists reach that plane of thought, you will be able to do nothing more effective than wring your hands and whine. Or maybe sing Kumbaya.

Dear Dave @ 1:56, “Drilling in Alaska will not make us safe…nor will it bring down the price of oil…” Don’t tell me the democrats repealed the laws of supply and demand! I did not think they even knew the laws of economics existed.

Dear Reebok @ 2:22, probably, I’d guess 45 out of 57.

Dear Phil @ 2:29, I partially disagree with your well-written argument. “Campaign Rhetoric 101: Mondale’s “He wont tell you, I just did”, about raising taxes, is probably the first class any candidate should take. Never be so clear about your position that you haven’t straddled both sides and the middle and any and all exceptions. You can only do that by saying nothing. NOTHING!” In fact, the rule is to “only say conservative things.” That is the litmus test for electibility for democrats (Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton) or republicans (both presidents Bush, candidates McCain and Hillary Clinton.) You don’t have to BE it, you just have to sound like it. Thus Obama is constrained; he cannot say anything since he cannot speak as a conservative. I suspect he will cloak some intentions within conservative language, to make himself tolerable to the American public.

Well argued, Jasper @ 2:38 and Dusty @ 3:02.

By AmVet

May 22, 2008 3:29 PM | Link to this

Dustbomb, PLEASE do NOT ever mention my son again. It makes me puke to think that you even refer to him.

After five plus years, untold billions of dollars, 30,000 casualties and 4,079 flag draped coffins, you still deny it is a de facto occupation.

Pathetic…

Any word lately on the emerging basic competency of the “Iraqi government” to, you know, actually govern?

Any word lately on political reconciliation?

Any word lately on the booming economy/infrastructure there?

Any word on when their military/police are going to actually stand up?

I didn’t think so.

The more things change there, the more that clusterf&ck stays the same.

And our allies just shake their heads and laugh at our government…

By Glenn

May 22, 2008 3:45 PM | Link to this

Had Bob Barr the grit, traction and juice to run for the nomination of the party he’s now spurned, he’d have flamed out shortly after Tom Tancredo and just before Duncan Hunter. But Barr didn’t do that; didn’t, because he’s a weasel.

And rather obviously a megalomaniac as well. We really need another of those in presidential politics!

Those of you who are considering peeling from the GOP and going with Barr, so long. You obviously never got it in the first place. The Republican and Democratic parties are venerable institutions that welcome everyone with a vote (and, in the latter case, Hugo Chavez too.) They ask that you get involved in the Party’s decision-making, and to do that you have to show up on time having made decisions of your own. During esidential cycles, “on time” means during the primaries.

Being a coy voter right into Election Day itself is both dilletantish and debutantish—-definitely not the sort of behavior acceptible to the suffragists and Freedom Marchers and soldiers who bought and paid for your idiot fickleness. Sh!t or get off the pot.

By getalife

May 22, 2008 3:50 PM | Link to this

McCain just rejected the endorsement of his kook McGee.

He released his medical records so they need to look at his brain scan.

His positions are all over the place.

By Copyleft

May 22, 2008 3:54 PM | Link to this

The fact that Dusty is so terrified at the prospect of a Barr candidacy shows what a good idea it is.

More choice, more freedom! All the things that Dusty hates. (snicker)

By Phil Dolan

May 22, 2008 3:55 PM | Link to this

JBMLAW: US casualties in Iraq have come from Islamists, Islamics, Insurgence, weekend warriors and hobbyists, Bathists, clerics, etc …..in fact, there has been an evolving enemy that has nothing to do with radical islam but everything to do with our shifting strategy which itself is evolving as we learn the reality on the ground. I understand you’re spinning for the right, but you’re only fooling yourself now, I think the country has caught on to the Rushannity spin technique.. Here’s the catch for spending your credibility for the last two years JBM, in November: (you lose).

Also, “Say something conservative”? you mean like no new taxes?

You take on much more than you are suitable 4 when you respond to a variety of comments all at once. It’s okay to have an opinion, but just tackle one guy at a time, and I think you’ll have your hands full.

There’s a pathology about blogging where someone yields to self aggrandizing views of their own blogging ability. Your friend Glenn is the emblematic stereotypical poster child of that malfunction.

It would be a shame if you were to emulate him.

Maybe you could become some sort of uberpudwit 2

By Dusty

May 22, 2008 3:59 PM | Link to this

AmVet@3:29

I have great respect for your son but very little for you. I will speak of him any time I feel like it. I will ALSO speak of you any time I feel like it, unpleasant as it is.

I don’t know where you got your bully complex but it doesn’t work here.

As I’ve said before, you really should find the cause of all your bitterness. It is not the country, the war or Republicans. It is YOU.

By bc

May 22, 2008 4:02 PM | Link to this

I have never voted for a major party candidate for president and this started with John Anderson. If this were a close vote in Georgia, I might vote for McClain but as it is I see my vote as one against both Republican and Democratic policies. Give me the Libertarian candidate. I can live with corruption, I can live with “daliances”, I can live with incomptance just stay out of my pocketbook and personal life.

By Glenn

May 22, 2008 4:06 PM | Link to this

Philo Doxan,

“Blogging ability?” What in hell is that?

Are you talking about the kind of “pathology” that would have to obtain were one so self-aggrandizing as to coach others on how to blog and how not to blog?

What’s Barack, a*******hole? What is he?

You don’t have the brass to answer.

By Gandalf, the Grey

May 22, 2008 4:11 PM | Link to this

A vote for Barr is not a protest vote, it’s a wasted vote. Only an idiot would vote for someone who has no chance to win. Stay home if you aren’t voting for Hillary or McCain.

By Gandalf, the Grey

May 22, 2008 4:14 PM | Link to this

A vote for Barr is not a protest vote, it’s a wasted vote. Only an idiot would vote for someone who has no chance to win. Stay home if you aren’t voting for Hillary or McCain.

By Glenn

May 22, 2008 4:16 PM | Link to this

Poorly stated, Gandalf.

By Analchord

May 22, 2008 4:17 PM | Link to this

That was easy.

By fairy god mother

May 22, 2008 4:17 PM | Link to this

Now, Now Children;

Why can’t we all just get along?

We’ve got dust-bomb and AmVet going at it!

We’ve got Glenn calling Phil nasty names!

We’ve got jbm law preaching to anyone who will listen!

TSK..TSK..TSK

Shame on all of you.

By Dave

May 22, 2008 4:18 PM | Link to this

Aww…AmVet, Don’t you know that Dusty, Jbm, Jim Woot and the rest of the talibangelicals think that it’s OK that our own press is censored from showing bodies of dead rotting american corpses coming homw from Iraq? That they only mention how many americans have been killed and care less for innocent Iraqi’s… that they think only american christians are “human” and deserve respect and dignity… That they truly think that “those over there” are “collateral damage” and that the very term thought up by our gov. that started this war is acceptable…

Freedom of the press? Yeah…if that’s the case…show me the dead bodies…of ALL “humans”..

see me? I live on “planet earth”…one that should have no borders nor any religion…

sad you can’t want the same…

if you did…there would BE no war…

Saddam was a friggin’ SAINT compared to this administration….many more have died because of them…in a much much shorter amount of time..

what ever happen to “all life is sacred”??? For the mass of cells called an abortion? What about those living, breathing Iraqis??? You can’t give a cr$p about them can you?

Time to show the coffins and pictures of ALL those that die over there….in real time…

Stop the CENSORSHIP!!! how DARE our media keep the “truth” away from the “people”…all in the name of “respect”..!!!! RESPECT is SHOWING the dead…TELLING THE TRUTH>..

The US is a sad sad story…time to tell the truth…save what we have left of our dignity. We owe a HUGE APOLOGY to the world.

Sad that YOU DUSTY, jbmlaw, Jim Woot and co. don’t see it that way….

I’m not kidding…it’s sad. It’s un-human to not “care”….

By Gandalf, the Grey

May 22, 2008 4:20 PM | Link to this

Dave, your the f*!

By Gandalf, the Grey

May 22, 2008 4:23 PM | Link to this

Dave, your the f*!

By Charles

May 22, 2008 4:27 PM | Link to this

Copyleft,

Obama and Hillary may be in the Democrap Party - but both believe in Socialism. They were both indoctinated by Liberal professors while in school with the ideals of Karl Marx and never grew up.

By Dusty

May 22, 2008 4:28 PM | Link to this

Copyleft @3:54

ME terrified? No indeed, I’m not a liberal. Don’t pass your white flag to me. I don’t want it.

By AmVet

May 22, 2008 4:30 PM | Link to this

Puke away Dustbomb.

Frankly, my cow, I could give a damn…

You have respect for him, you miserable hag?

What a f&cking joke you are!

Unless and until you learn that he, like me, stands proudly against all of the cr@p you promote.

Then I’m sure your fake respect will vanish like a Young Republican from UGA at the recruiter’s office.

I doubt virtually anyone believes a word you write, you inveterate liar.

And I have NO doubts that he too would be repulsed by you. And fortunately like most in the US military, understands he serves the United States of America.

Not George W. Bush. Not any single man. And certainly not your warped Nazi-like ideology.

Unlike you, he gets that this is a nation of laws, not men.

It is ironic that he serves, so traitors like you can vomit up lies about honorable veterans and decent American citizens everyday.

GFY, Dustrag.

By Analchord

May 22, 2008 4:34 PM | Link to this

Bush: The hearts and minds of the Iraqi people……the saudi king…..cheney’s chicanery….

Obama: the hearts and minds of the american people.

Obama 08: A Man. An American. A President.

By Dave

May 22, 2008 4:36 PM | Link to this

Why is THIS not shown nor reported in our mainstream press every single day?

Where is FAUX news? Fair and balanced they say?

Here’s what happens when WE start a war: http://mindprod.com/politics/iraqwarpix.html

Show these on the evening news…show this to your children…

Show them what happens when you hijack 9-11 to start a war that kills hundreds of thousands of innocent victims…

show the american people this every day!

The rest of the world does…

Why the censorship?

What happened to our first ammendment? Did it too die with this administration?

By Jerry

May 22, 2008 4:44 PM | Link to this

Kudos Amvet! Well said! Unfortunately the sheeple believe the drivel of the Republicrat and Demopublican parties. I’d vote for Mickey Mouse before either of the 2 monopolies.

By Jeff

May 22, 2008 4:44 PM | Link to this

Did you hear? There is actually a 2nd Republican running for president…but of course none of the media will cover him because he’ll make good on his promises to change the government…his name?

Ron Paul.

By Dusty

May 22, 2008 4:44 PM | Link to this

Fairy God Mother,@4:17

You really are Mother Goose of the goosey lib flock, aren’t you? Uh huh..

But..since you are playing Nanny of the Day, how about speaking to Dave? He’s not being a nice boy and I have run out of air-spray. It takes a lot when he’s around.

Thank you, Mother Goose, but don’t come too often. I have to watch where I walk after you’ve been here.

By Jerry

May 22, 2008 4:46 PM | Link to this

Kudos Amvet! Well said! Unfortunately the sheeple believe the drivel of the Republicrat and Demopublican parties. I’d vote for Mickey Mouse before either of the 2 monopolies.

If the death march of the last 20 years hasn’t taught them anything prepare for the NWO!

By Dusty

May 22, 2008 4:52 PM | Link to this

AmVet@4:30

You are pitiful. I hope you get help soon. The need is obvious.

By Dave

May 22, 2008 4:53 PM | Link to this

Awww Dusty, Go look at all the lovely pictures of the dead Iraqi’s and dead american solders. It won’t kill you. It only killed them by your support of this war from the beginning.

Tell me more about a fetus. Stop caring about the unborn mass of cells…and start caring about HUMANS!

By Glenn

May 22, 2008 4:56 PM | Link to this

Dave,

Do you have any vague notion of what “censorship” is or means, in the context of the First Amendment? If your answer is an honest one, then I suggest you go to your nearest bookstore and look under the section marked “Educational Aids”, and buy one of those one-page laminated cheat-sheets, the one marked “Constitutional Law”. When you get home, read the little balloon about censorship and the First Amendment. And then, before dinner, shove the thing up your alimentary canal.

By Sue Bee

May 22, 2008 5:06 PM | Link to this

I will vote for whomever the GOP runs for President. Barak Obama doesn’t even know how many states there are. Sue Bee

By Dusty

May 22, 2008 5:08 PM | Link to this

Awww Dave @4:53

I am too busy looking at the terrible pictures of the floating dead in Burma and the crushed and wounded dead in China. I bet you haven’t given them a thought or how fortunate YOU are to be in this country.

You are still griping because we honor our dead with privacy and concern after they have given their lives for this country.

The only thing rotting here is your mind. Don’t keep making us aware of your condition.

By Dave

May 22, 2008 5:08 PM | Link to this

Glenn… what’s your problem with showing dead people on/in the news? Would it keep young stupid idiots from enlisting? Would it cause people to take to the streets? It is clearly “censorship” in every sense of the very word by not allowing the press to show the “truth”…

it does NOT dishonor those that died. Nor does it tarnish their lives. It tells the truth. That is what our press is for. To tell the truth, not sugar coat things.

Perhaps if YOUR family members were killed because of this war we started, you’d be screaming in the streets exactly the words I write. Be they muslim Iraqi family members, or our youth here in this country. A human is a human. Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9-11. We are over there because of reasons that had NOTHING to do with 9-11. The people, the once living breathing HUMANS, have a right to have their voices heard. Show them in death. Show the caskets coming home. Show the families grieving, both here and over there.

it’s the TRUTH! It’s HONEST. Hiding it from the general public…all in the name of “patriotism” is a crime. Those that believe anything but…makes it clear and understandable as to how Hitler was able to get his own support for his “empire”…but like the german empire and ALL empires that have come before…ours is over.

tell the truth in the press. Show the pictures…stop hiding behind the friggin’ Lapel pin!

By GayGrayGeek

May 22, 2008 5:10 PM | Link to this

Dusty: You. AFEES. NOW.

Time for you to put up, since you won’t shut up. Quit being a KeyboardKommando and actually go SUPPORT your country. You know, the one you claim that everyone else should support.

WHY DO YOU HATE AMERICA, DUSTY?

By Dave

May 22, 2008 5:15 PM | Link to this

Dusty, what about the dead innocent Iraqi’s…so easy for you to not mention THEIR rights or HONOR!!! It shows that you care NOT ONE SINGLE BIT for them, their families, or their lost lives. To be honest…it is THEY they we should honor!!!

By jasper

May 22, 2008 5:15 PM | Link to this

Ok, you libs win, and you’re absolutely right. Votes for Barr will help elect Obama. So remember this when November comes, focus with me - Tell all of your college, journalist, and soup-line buddies to vote for Barr. I know it sounds crazy, but it will work. That means you to Dave and AmVet - vote for Barr.

By Wow

May 22, 2008 5:18 PM | Link to this

jbmlaw,

You may be qualified at many things, like being a neocon, but you are not qualified to tell me what I care about. Argue on fact and not your emotions. I guess then you would not have anything to write about, which would be just as well.

By Analchord

May 22, 2008 5:29 PM | Link to this

Ted Kennedy. I dont know how I feel about him. He’s a shadow of his brothers. His priveledges were abused and he came too quickly to the aide of his nephew who raped that girl on the beeyayatch. He’s been a scandalous scoundrel. His catholicism embarrasses me. It makes you wonder what Bobby could have accomplished. or jack. or Jackie O, or

JACKO! Jacko is back in Vegas!!!!!

Billy Jean’s at mah doh, she the girl who said that I am the one, deedee daa how does it go? I’ve forgotten that song.

darn.

By jasper

May 22, 2008 5:31 PM | Link to this

Dave - if they’re dead, how do we know they were innocent. How do you know our military doesn’t have secret weaponry that can determine a person’s guilt or innoncence, past, present, or future. I know Bush was personally working on such a device to help with replacing federal judges. The news just won’t report the good stuff about him. It’s like you got to invent the internet to get any coverage.

By Dave

May 22, 2008 5:32 PM | Link to this

Jasper…why are you not over in Iraq comminting murder as we speak? Don’t you feel that urge and NEED to kill muslims? I know you do…you can admit it. We all know how you and those like you feel. Once a racist, always a racist. Your SUCH a dick cheney! go ahead and kill some muslims…you KNOW you really want to. We understand. We do.

By Big Poppa

May 22, 2008 5:34 PM | Link to this

Bob Barr is a political joke. Other than trying to impeach Bill Clinton he was and remains a useless politician. I’ve known Bob for 16 yrs. and he’s still the same old tell ‘em what they want to hear guy that ran for office back in the early 90’s. Folks don’t throw your vote away on a lost party and a ‘has-been’ of a politician. What has Bob Barr ever really, and I mean really, done for Georgia?? Wake up people…this is all about pulling votes from John McCain not about winning as a Libertarian…

By jasper

May 22, 2008 5:35 PM | Link to this

Yeah, poor Teddy, its all that guilt stuck in his brain about Mary Jo Kopecki. But the dude could drink some Scotch, world class. I really thought the liver would go first.

anyway it continues ; but the kid is not my son. I’ll vote for Jacko for Teddy’s replacement, even sum game.

By Dusty

May 22, 2008 5:36 PM | Link to this

Dave@5:14

We honor the Iraqis by giving them freedom. We do not leave them for another dictator to take over.

You can’t understand that because you don’t appreciate your own freedom. Well, I do and the likes of you are reprehensible.

This blog will close soon and I am leaving. Pleasant dreams. You should have something happy in your life.

GGG@5:10

Your repetition is soooo boring. Good night..

By Glenn

May 22, 2008 5:39 PM | Link to this

Come on Dave. You obviously haven’t got that Constitutional hitch in yer giddyup yet, ‘cause you dare to pretend at 5:08 that “showing dead people on/in the news” is what I’d objected to in your demand at 4:18 that “our own press” not be “censored from showing bodies of dead rotting american corpses coming homw from Iraq”. Think, compatriots, Dave. Think, loved ones. Constitutional protection? My arse.

Look, all blogsport aside, you’re passionate about the Iraq conflict and that is a seriously stand-up way to be, but when you get so passionate about it that your heart has you making necessarily pseudo-rational arguments, count to 10 or something. A considerable minority of (esp. Democratic) voters has just one electoral issue: ending what you all still call “The War”. Fine. But the emotiveness is ill-advised. The mass of American voters will turn away from the emotive “anti-war” activists.

And the last time that happened, look who gained the Oval Office.

By Dave

May 22, 2008 5:41 PM | Link to this

Freedom?! Is that what youy think the Iraqi’s have? How sad and clueless you are Dusty. Truly sad. I guess it’s OK that you’re so clueless. Nice to live in that little bubble of yours. Enjoy it.

By jasper

May 22, 2008 5:43 PM | Link to this

Dave, nicely put about once a racist, always a racist. I guess that philosophy also applies to Trinity United Church.

By fairy god mother

May 22, 2008 5:45 PM | Link to this

By Dusty

May 22, 2008 4:44 PM | Link to this

Fairy God Mother,@4:17

“You really are Mother Goose of the goosey lib flock.”

Dear Dusty…Oh, sweet one. From your posts it sounds like you need a real good GOOSE!

By GayGrayGeek

May 22, 2008 5:46 PM | Link to this

Dusty - If you’ve got the time to blog, you’ve got the time to serve your country.

WHY DO YOU REFUSE TO SUPPORT YOUR COUNTRY, DUSTY? WHY DO YOU HATE AMERICA, DUSTY?

By jbmlaw

May 22, 2008 5:51 PM | Link to this

Dear WOW @ 5:18, I have previously learned that extraordinarily few leftists care anything about truth or facts or logic. So in addition to those conservative virtues, I often inject some emotion, the only mental activity that sways leftists.

By donald

May 22, 2008 5:51 PM | Link to this

About the only office Barr should be running for is the office of head toilet bowl cleaner. Is this the best you scumbag neo(con) libber dolts can do is to try and prop up yet another idiot. This clown had his 10 seconds of pseudo claim long ago. Wooten, do us all a favor and turn in your editorial credentials because you been snorting way too much angel dust!!

By Glenn

May 22, 2008 5:53 PM | Link to this

jasper @ 5:31,

You said: “our military doesn’t have secret weaponry that can determine a person’s guilt or innoncence, past, present, or future”. How do you know they haven’t got? Wasn’t that the wonder of Carter’s Wonder:

“You ever hear of the neutron bomb? Destroys people - leaves buildings standing. Fits in a suitcase. It’s so small, no one knows it’s there until - BLAMMO. Eyes melt, skin explodes, everybody dead. So immoral, working on the thing can drive you mad. That’s what happened to this friend of mine. So he had a lobotomy. Now he’s well again.”

—from the film “Repo Man”

By Dave

May 22, 2008 5:53 PM | Link to this

And Jasper…same goes for the former “leader” of the talibangelicals…Ted Haggard…who has many “private” prayer sessions with Dubya at the white house..once gay…ALWAYS gay! It’s the METH part I so love as well! ;-)

Know what I love as well…it’s where he got his cash to PAY for his big stud gay escort and his meth…from OTHER talibangelicals…you just can’t make that stuff up…PRICELESS! :)

By jasper

May 22, 2008 5:54 PM | Link to this

Later Dave, its been fun. I feel like I should send you a quarter for the entertainment value. Tell you what, there’s a Marta token in your name at the College Park Station. Don’t mention it. Peace

By Glenn

May 22, 2008 5:55 PM | Link to this

jbm,

Do you think you’re a neocon?

I don’t think you’re a neocon…

By Frederick Douglass

May 22, 2008 5:59 PM | Link to this

This just in over the CNN news wire,Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama has pulled his name from his party’s ticket. Citing increased pressure from the white community, and battling rumors that Jeremiah Wright would be his likely VP runningmate, Obama decided to call it quits. Hillary Clinton was quoted as saying “that this is a red letter date in America’s history, and besides Obama’s swarthy butt should not have been running anyway” end quote. Photos and reaction from the tribesmen at 11.

By jbmlaw

May 22, 2008 6:04 PM | Link to this

Thanks, Glenn @ 5:56, of course you are correct. Only anti-semites even use the term.

By Dave

May 22, 2008 6:06 PM | Link to this

Jbm…ahhh yes..the “truth”…like WMD’s being in Iraq, and no bid contracts for halliburton or KBR… truths and facts just like that us “liberals” like to dance around. Dead bodies coming home. Dead children. No electricity or clean running water outside of the green zone (just like it was before we arrived..hmmm…i can smell the flowers blooming there from here)…

Too bad you don’t live in Saudi Arabia jbm… you could make ALL the money you want…import little girls for sex from thailand…and smack the hell out of your wife whenever you get the urge to do so…

tell me more about liberal leanings…

Face it these days…republican and GOP is head hanging in shame…liberal=badge of honor and head held high…as it was we that ALWAYS spoke the truth….

By Analchord

May 22, 2008 6:11 PM | Link to this

Ted Kennedy. Barney Frank. Harry Reid. How are the Conservatives losing to these guys?

Bush trumps all I guess. How did Bush really get elected? Really. Lets finally, as a nation face what happened. Gore is too much of a patriot to tell the truth. So it’s up to us to accept the responsibility to at least acknowledge the horrible facts.

There was a coup. It’s hard to imagine what a coup is. In some countries, you cant get the popular respect unless you attain power through a coup. There as common as greedy congressmen.

A coup.

By Manny

May 23, 2008 8:43 AM | Link to this

JBMLaw,

I’m sorry that I cannot reply so quickly to your response. I’ve been really busy.

But I do think that you are making my point. Obama’s religious heritage, and his decision to forgo that heritage to embrace Christianity is not as big of a hinderance to discussions as his being an American and President of the United States. You are correct: they are not a “normal bunch of people.” So his religius affiliations would not have that great of an impact or leverage on his political affairs in the region.

Also, you are correct in the “Strongman” doctrine that is propagated throughout that region. But not taking that into account is the reason why we are in Iraq in the first place. Saddam had no WMDs, even when he bragged about it to others. And he was very defiant, all the way to the end. Why? Because his bragging was a national security move. His defiance was a national security move.

But if you talked directly to him, Saddam may have told you that, in so many words. Or you may have reasoned that his WMD claims were false. And he would have tried to do it while trying to keep strong appearances to their allies and enemies.

But, once again, we didn’t even try. And thousands are dead in this false hunt.

By Glenn

May 23, 2008 9:19 AM | Link to this

No, Gandalf. When I wrote that your 4:14 was “poorly stated” I was struggling in my inarticulate way to convey that your post was somehow poorly stated. Nothing in it was true, and nor did it summarize anything I’d said. It was yet another of your incessant attempts to fit others and their diverse opinions into the cubbies in your own personal Fisher-Price Busy Box.

It’s a fundamentally slovenly, petty effort, and these blogs are much the worse for it.

By Yorsh

May 23, 2008 9:51 AM | Link to this

How can you guys not understand why some of us TRUE conservatives want out of Iraq? You don’t understand we’re about to hit the 10 trillion dollar mark on our national debt(no, not the deficit). We don’t have money for this war or entitlements or any of that stuff. If we had money to spare then that’s ok. You don’t seem to understand the country is going to go broke. There’s very little chance and the dollar is going under. If there is any chance, Barr, or someone else, is going to have to get us out of Iraq, get our military out of all those other countries we’re in, stop giving free money to lazy people here in the U.S. that could work instead, free money to illegal aliens by way of free medical care, etc, etc, etc. The Iraq war was good to get rid of the idiot Hussein and friends. Now we need to get out and just bomb terrorists here and there when they try to use the country as a terrorist base. We can’t afford it—understand that! We borrow every cent to fight that war. We also borrow every cent to do every other last thing we do like build a highway. WE NO LONGER HAVE ANY MONEY! ANY, ANY MONEY! It’s all borrowed. It’s like making a $2000 a month paycheck and owing $5 million on a credit card. Then, when a new expense arises, you charge that too. There will come a day you can no longer pay the minimums and the creditors come a calling. That’s the day the dollar crashes and you won’t be able to afford to buy a bannana.

By z

May 23, 2008 1:17 PM | Link to this

I plan to vote for Bob Barr b/c I don’t vote out of fear, but principle. It’s that simple.

John Quincy Adams stated it quite nicely:

“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.”

A vote for McCain or anyone who doesn’t represent the Republican Party and conservative principles is a false vote of confidence that sends the message that he is acceptable when he CLEARLY is not.

By Dan from LibertyManiacs.com

May 23, 2008 1:29 PM | Link to this

This is the perfect time to vote libertarian. I’ll be voting for Bob Barr. John McCain will not only lose, but he will only cement the GOPs fate as the recipient of a landslide defeat. Voting for McCain is almost irrelevant. In fact we joke that, “A vote for McCain is a vote for Dole!”

What isn’t irrelevant is signaling to the GOP—through the vote—that they must follow their platform to be of any use to America. Mr. Wooten’s false dichotomy that a vote for anyone but McCain is a vote for Obama is shortsighted and has brought us the type of failed leadership so epitomized by the Bush administration.

As a delegate in the GOP, it is obvious that John McCain is essentially destroying the party. I see it like never before. Activists that carry the water are bailing everywhere. Anyone who has spent two seconds in political campaigns understands that it’s already over.

By z

May 23, 2008 2:39 PM | Link to this

I plan to vote for Bob Barr b/c I don’t vote out of fear, but principle. It’s that simple.

John Quincy Adams stated it quite nicely:

“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.”

A vote for McCain or anyone who doesn’t represent the Republican Party and conservative principles is a false vote of confidence that sends the message that he is acceptable when he CLEARLY is not.

By Glenn

May 23, 2008 2:48 PM | Link to this

Well isn’t that quaint, feeble one. zzzzzzzzzzzz. But LOOK: you missed the train!

And by God so did Bob Barr do.

(You think that mighta been intentional-like?)

By Augustus LaFayette Culpepper

May 23, 2008 2:53 PM | Link to this

I will vote for Bob Barr hoping he will deny John Mccain the presidency and as long as Republicans misrepresent themselves as conservatives when they are not, I will continue to do so in every election until the party rejects big government consrevative pretenders and rediscovers th principles of limited government, fiscal responsibility and costitutional compliance that defines conservatism.

Bob Barr is far closer to the ideals of Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater than the current president or John McCain will ever be and I will proudly cast this conservative vote for a real conservative, not for a pretender, with the full expectation and hope it will cost John McCain the presidency.

By Glenn

May 23, 2008 3:30 PM | Link to this

And as long as weasels like Bob Barr keep representing themselves as Republicans only to prove later that they’re not, I’ll keep hunting weasels.

By Carol

May 24, 2008 12:39 PM | Link to this

I intend to vote for Barr — or for whomever the Libertarian candidate is. Why…? Because I can no longer determine which party is the lesser of evils.

Because to vote for either of the major parties is to give my solid stamp of approval on what they do — and to give my consent for more of it.

Because the Republican party does not own my vote; it is something they must earn. I am not stealing their property if I my vote elsewhere.

Because I recognize every American has this choice. They CAN choose to vote for good instead of evil. If the majority are two weak in the knees to do so, that is their affair, but to vote otherwise, on the assumption that most Americans will persist in voting for increasing levels of government aggression against them is presumptuous and uncharitable.

Because if I do not say “no” to government tyranny now, just when do I intend to do so…?

By Carol

May 24, 2008 12:42 PM | Link to this

I intend to vote for Barr — or for whomever the Libertarian candidate is. Why…? Because I can no longer determine which party is the lesser of evils.

Because to vote for either of the major parties is to give my solid stamp of approval on what they do — and to give my consent for more of it.

Because the Republican party does not own my vote; it is something they must earn. I am not stealing their property if I my vote elsewhere.

Because I recognize every American has this choice. They CAN choose to vote for good instead of evil. If the majority are two weak in the knees to do so, that is their affair, but to vote otherwise, on the assumption that most Americans will persist in voting for increasing levels of government aggression against them is presumptuous and uncharitable.

Because if I do not say “no” to government tyranny now, just when do I intend to do so…?

By Carol

May 24, 2008 12:42 PM | Link to this

I intend to vote for Barr — or for whomever the Libertarian candidate is. Why…? Because I can no longer determine which party is the lesser of evils.

Because to vote for either of the major parties is to give my solid stamp of approval on what they do — and to give my consent for more of it.

Because the Republican party does not own my vote; it is something they must earn. I am not stealing their property if I my vote elsewhere.

Because I recognize every American has this choice. They CAN choose to vote for good instead of evil. If the majority are two weak in the knees to do so, that is their affair, but to vote otherwise, on the assumption that most Americans will persist in voting for increasing levels of government aggression against them is presumptuous and uncharitable.

Because if I do not say “no” to government tyranny now, just when do I intend to do so…?

By Carol

May 24, 2008 3:39 PM | Link to this

I don’t know how my post got printed 3 times. Maybe my message just needed repeating. The typos make me cringe :-)

I see some confusion in people’s posts here. First, it is odd to complain that Barr is not a conservative since he does not claim to be a conservative. He claims to be a libertarian, and libertarians ARE in line with liberals on SOME social issues. (But not on others, such as when the government mandates certain social activities that are out of their rightful jurisdiction).

Now Barr WAS a conservative, but his views have evolved in a libertarian direction, which I am glad to see. He definitely has committed past sins against libertarian principles, but he has spent several years connecting his libertarian dots and working in libertarian trenches.

Since I would like to see more people changing their minds about the level of government they want intruding in their lives, I am glad to welcome him.

The choices offered by the two major parties are false choices. The choice they offer is pretty much: Do you want us to cut off your right hand or your left hand? It’s a big battle to then determine which option is the lesser of the evils.

The Libertarians, however, are saying the government should not be cutting off any of its citizens hands, and exercising the use of force only in the self-defense of our nation or individuals.

If you think my analogy is “extreme” you need to realize that every law, every government regulation, has the point of a gun at the end of it. In other words, you WILL comply with the regulation OR the government will fine or imprison you. If you still do not comply they will harm you.

Laws and regulations are basically aggression. Republicans promote the same amount of aggression as liberals — just in different areas. Liberals start military actions just as do Republicans, just in different countries.

It’s a false choice. The first question you need to be asking yourself about EVERY issue is this: Is this a rightful role of government…?

By TheRight2Kno

May 24, 2008 5:01 PM | Link to this

McCain is a Democrat in Republican clothing. He is in bed with them…It was the McCain-Kennedy Bill that offered illegal-aliens amnesty. And it was the McCain-Feingold Bill that took away the freedom of speech. I CAN NOT name buy an advertisement 60 Days before a general election and use a canidates name (PRO or CON). I can’t advertise McCain’s name and reveal to the public why McCain is such a poor choice, nor why Barr would be a good choice. VOTE BOB BARR!

By admsfbp ofbsgd

March 31, 2009 1:39 AM | Link to this

qico gkln vcbzr ubcshdji ciegdqw tfzemvup odtglbsh

By admsfbp ofbsgd

March 31, 2009 1:40 AM | Link to this

qico gkln vcbzr ubcshdji ciegdqw tfzemvup odtglbsh

By admsfbp ofbsgd

March 31, 2009 1:41 AM | Link to this

qico gkln vcbzr ubcshdji ciegdqw tfzemvup odtglbsh