JG-TC.com > Opinion > Letter: Impeach the head thief and jail him, too

TODAY'S HEADLINES

SPECIAL SECTION

ONLINE POLL

ONLINE EXTRAS

SITE TOOLS

OTHER LINKS

St. Louis Post-Dispatch

Lee Enterprises

Monday, June 18, 2007 12:42 AM CDT
Letter: Impeach the head thief and jail him, too

By GREGORY JENNINGS, Mattoon

Out the crooks and jail them. Impeach their head thief and jail him, too. Enough is enough.

We are being forced to pay for the terrorism of Iraq and Iran just to keep the price of their stolen oil higher than it was back when we had honest(?) businessmen running things. If that isn’t reason for change and impeachment, then we don’t need air or water.

So, Congress and Senate, if you can’t do your job, your time in office is limited, too. Do it, now.

Add your comments

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login? (requires cookies)
	Forgot Your Password?

Not already registered?
Then click Here.

Comment policy:

JG-TC.com encourages readers to engage in civil conversation with their neighbors. Comments that are submitted are not posted to the site immediately. They go into a queue to be moderated and may take several hours to be reviewed. Comments posted on Saturday may not be reviewed until Sunday afternoon.

In order to keep the page a set width, long lines (mostly long links) will be chopped. Try putting spaces in your links or consider using tinyurl.com to make a smaller link that you can include.

We will never edit or alter your comments, but we do reserve the right to remove comments that violate our code of conduct.

No comment may contain:

* Potentially libelous statements; such as accusing somebody of a crime, defamation of character, or statements that can harm somebody's reputation.
* Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
* Personal attacks, insults, threats, harassment or inciting violence.
* Commercial product promotions.

If you have any questions, please contact our moderator.

Duh wrote on Jun 18, 2007 6:18 AM:

" This country needs to pay a heavy price for the atrocities committed against innocent Muslims and it would only be fitting if the number of flag draped coffins increased. Maybe then this country would fully realize how misguided it was to give a power-mad Fundamentalist Christian like George Bush unlimited reins of power. Thanks to him the world has seen that the real holy war is being waged by Christianity and not Islam. "

Early Bird wrote on Jun 18, 2007 7:01 AM:

" Here we go again. And just when you think it's safe to go in the water... "

Duh wrote on Jun 18, 2007 8:18 AM:

" The comment earlier was the ghost poster, not me. "

Well Billie wrote on Jun 18, 2007 8:53 AM:

" Are you still in admiration of Doh after that one? That man has no shame. "

Urban wrote on Jun 18, 2007 9:05 AM:

" The neocons have pulled the strings to make their chimpanzee puppet dance, and now they want to pose as appalled dance critics. Too late, boys. You've already been exposed as liars, incompetents and sociopathic war criminals, just like your plaything Mr. Bush. "

Duh wrote on Jun 18, 2007 9:40 AM:

" The first comment on here was mine. If this keeps up I will just start posting anonymously. "

Urban wrote on Jun 18, 2007 9:56 AM:

" Here's a story from the New Yorker that you Fox News zombies won't be seeing... Abu Ghraib Investigator Details Pentagon Cover-Up: ‘I Thought I Was In The Mafia’ In a New Yorker article today, Seymour Hersh interviews Army Major General Antonio M. Taguba, who led the Pentagon’s investigation into the abuses at Abu Ghraib. This article is the first time that Taguba has publicly spoken out about the scandal, revealing that the Pentagon forced him to retire early because of his aggressive pursuit of the issue. Taguba also reveals that he believed high-level military officials, including Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, knew about the abuses but feigned ignorance, putting all the blame on low-level soldiers. Key highlights: Taguba was threatened by Gen. John Abizaid: A few weeks after his report became public, Taguba, who was still in Kuwait, was in the back seat of a Mercedes sedan with Abizaid. … Abizaid turned to Taguba and issued a quiet warning: “You and your report will be investigated.” The former senior intelligence official said that when the images of Abu Ghraib were published, there were some in the Pentagon and the White House who “didn’t think the photographs were that bad” — in that they put the focus on enlisted soldiers, rather than on secret task-force operations. Referring to the task-force members, he said, “Guys on the inside ask me, ‘What’s the difference between shooting a guy on the street, or in his bed, or in a prison?’” A Pentagon consultant on the war on terror also said that the “basic strategy was ‘prosecute the kids in the photographs but protect the big picture.’” "

Billie Brant wrote on Jun 18, 2007 10:33 AM:

" To Well Billie, Ya know, No ONE has any proof that Doh is the ghostposter. ANYONE could sit back, read all the stuff here and decide to play games with all of us! A scapegoat is needed, and Doh just may fit the bill to many because he's ruffled many a feather. "Ghosts" and "Trolls" have been on here since the beginning of these comment sites. I've had my name hijacked from time to time also along with Early Bird, Answer, Duh, fchipper, Voltaire and yes Doh too just to mention a few. "

Urban wrote on Jun 18, 2007 12:17 PM:

" Another of Bush's warmongering lies dies with a whimper, in the New York Times... UNITED NATIONS, June 16 — The search for Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction appears close to an official conclusion, several years after their absence became a foregone one. The United States and Britain have circulated a new proposal to the members of the United Nations Security Council to “terminate immediately the mandates” of the weapons inspectors. Staff meetings on the latest proposal have already taken place, and officials say that the permanent Council members, each of whom has veto power, seem ready to let the inspection group — the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission — meet its end. "

Speak the Truth wrote on Jun 18, 2007 1:46 PM:

" "Congress and the Senate" Interesting choice of words. You need a civics lesson. Congress is bicameral. The Senate and the House of Representatives compose the Congress. When you say "congress and the senate," it doesn't make sense. You should say the House and the Senate. Also, when you rant you should at least make sense. I can't wait to return to the days of honest businessmen like Skilling and Lay. "

Doh wrote on Jun 18, 2007 3:21 PM:

" Thanks for the faith Billie! I appreciate it more than you know. I don't know what the hell happened in here but apparently my torture debate with Answer Friday caused someone to snap in a major way! I want to state this again for everyone: I DO NOT GHOSTPOST OR STEAL NAMES. And you're right Billie, this crap has been going on long before I made my splash on this site. I was going to stop posting as Doh, but I didn't expect the idiots to sink to the depths that they have. Besides my only other options are to resort to ghostostings (have I mentioned I hate that) or to stop posting. And of course the loons on here would love to drive me away. That's what they've been trying since I came on here. What I don't get is why they go through some much trouble to spread lies, like "I don't answer questions" and "I don't really debate" or plant phony posts that they attribute to me, when it would be a lot less trouble to simply DEBATE ME. Why is that, trolls? And this is exactly the kind of garbage that has allowed the Left to dominate this site. I've watched these little trolls attack people since this site opened. The only solution to this is to get online registrations of usernames. I've been on dozens of other blog sites and they ALL have mandatory logins and they NEVER have a problem with names being stolen. I wonder why this site can't put this in place? Anyway, thanks again for the faith Billie! I've always been a good judge of character and you're the latest proof of that! Now, let's see what the nutjob's pull next. "

Answer wrote on Jun 18, 2007 3:54 PM:

" I don't think Doh is one of the ghostposters on here stealing names. I also agree that it didn't start with Doh. I have to flatly disagree with Doh that he is the first person from the right to frequent this sight, I remember the Crap Detector (who later became CD), VC, and many others who have a very conservative bent. Doh is one of the most outspoken war supporters as many of the conservatives have abandoned this poorly conceived debacle in the desert but he is not alone on here now nor has he ever been. I frankly don't even see a particular slant to the left at all in these blogs. Coles County is strongly Republican and the debates on here have always had input from both sides. Finally Doh, I have to chide you a little, I think part of your in your face name calling style was intended to intimidate those who disagree with your point of view. That is only my opinion. For full disclosure, I sometimes tease or taunt people for the same reasons, especially the terminally moronic, but I'll save that explanation for another time. "

Doh wrote on Jun 18, 2007 4:46 PM:

" I really appreciate that Answer. I know we don't see eye to eye on....well... anything political but I do like your taste in music and scotch. I didn't take our last debate to heart and I felt we were both taunting a little, both I'm okay with that. I took it all in stride. And yes I do get into peoples faces; I'm use to hard-core political debate and I love to break all verbal battles down to logic and reasoning. These principles are an integral part of my career on a daily basis and while the intensity serves me well with clients, it doesn't seem to translate well in here. Maybe I need to ratchet it back a bit, but I have a vested interest in this current war and it's hard not to get fired up. I liked sparring with you Answer and in the future I'll try to not get in your face so much, and if we reach a point that we have to agree to disagree, then so be it. I won't badger you. Thanks again. Good to hear from you Answer! "

VC wrote on Jun 18, 2007 4:51 PM:

" Anyone care to cheap in for ticket?Maybe we should send "Duh" to Iran. It is to bad our boys are defending people like this. "

Duh wrote on Jun 18, 2007 5:09 PM:

" Defending people like what? I am the original Duh, and the person who posted first on this thread under my name is a right winger who is trying to discredit me. He supports Bush's invasion, so I'm sure he would be glad to go to Iraq, by the way. This will be my last post. The lying right-wing creep can have the "Duh" name. "

Urban wrote on Jun 18, 2007 5:26 PM:

" Bush and his bunch are actually fascists, and, to disguise that fact, are engaged in a campaign to destroy the meaning of the word by calling everyone else fascists, including liberals (which is surreal, because liberalism is the direct opposite of fascism).  As Mussolini put it, "fascism is corporatism." And totalitarian crony corporatism is the very shriveled, reptilian soul of George W. Bush. "

Rotty wrote on Jun 18, 2007 8:12 PM:

" I agree that the name stealing & ghost posting have gone on not too long after these comment boards were first put into place. You can tell, if you've spent some time here, that it is not being done from any of the long time regs of here. I'd also like to throw my hat into the ring & say, I believe it isn't Doh stealing names or ghost posting as well, & like Billie said, he is just the needed scapegoat for whomever is playing the childish game. I hope the JG-TC will get the registration for these comment boards up & running sometime soon. Have a great evening everyone. "

Doh wrote on Jun 18, 2007 8:58 PM:

" Thanks Rotty. AND NO! I'M NOT ROTTY! And let me reiterate: This name-stealing crap needs to end. And I don't care what side of the debate you're on. It's pointless, it ruins the entire site and it doesn't advance anybodys position, unless of course- you have no position. And maybe that's why you're doing it- to simply cause havoc. Now go ahead and accuse me of posting as Rotty, or just go ahead and steal our names. You know you want to. "

Dotty wrote on Jun 18, 2007 9:32 PM:

" We are one, but not the same... "

Billie Brant wrote on Jun 18, 2007 9:51 PM:

" IT's still here. Going by Dotty now. "

Doh wrote on Jun 18, 2007 10:54 PM:

" I saw that Billie. I'll probably be blamed for IT. "

Dotty wrote on Jun 18, 2007 11:12 PM:

" Doh. He's the conservative you love to hate. Pull the string and hear him recite Rush. Rotty. He's the shadowy figure nobody really knows. Pull the string and hear him agree with Doh. Combine these two impressive action figures and you get the terrifying Dotty. Dotty, Destroyer of Libtards, Defender of the Executive Branch, and Tormenter of Traitors. Libtards fear the combined power of the Dynamic Duo. "

Urban wrote on Jun 19, 2007 2:40 AM:

" They are coming! Give up all your rights and allow Bush to become Dictator, now! We need the government to spy on everyone. We need cameras everywhere just like in London. We need militarized police. We need all honest citizens ro give up their guns because the military will be right there to protect you. We need an American Dictator to protect us. What good is the Bill of Rights if you are blown up by a suicide bomber? Remember this is all for your safety. Forget freedom, it's just too scary. "

Billie Brant wrote on Jun 19, 2007 9:28 AM:

" Try to ignore Dotty or whatever name IT's going by at any given time. IT won't be going away, but if we don't feed him, maybe he'll back off somewhat. EB has joined Rotty, fchipper, Answer and me in the belief that YOU are not the ghost. Check out EB's post on the Paris Hilton thread. You are IT's main target, but all of us have been hit by the stuff It throws out. We'll just have to be more vigilant and recognize IT for the excrement stirrer IT is! "

Urban wrote on Jun 19, 2007 10:22 AM:

" ... tyrants are active and ardent, and will devote themselves in the name of any number of gods, religious and otherwise, to put shackles upon sleeping men. -- Voltarine de Cleyre "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 19, 2007 11:38 AM:

" Sorry to turn this thread back to the original subject matter, but hey, relax. The country has spoken and the 2006 'landslide' that swept the evil republicans from office and installed the true great leadership that the U.S. needs is complete. Pelosi, Reid, and William "The refrigerator" Jefferson will clean this whole mess up within 100 HOURS of their first term as the majority!!! Ooops. Missed that deadline, but they're sure gonna give Bush and his henchmen a dose of reality. There's a new Sheriff in town - this war will NOT continue to be funded. Most of our troops will be home by the end of 2007, and a strict timetable will be set for the Iraqi government to pull itself together and become independent. A new, tough immigration policy will also be in place before the first session ends. Gasoline prices will be brought under control and the greedy oil barons will face justice. All the democrats need is a majority in the Senate and all will be fine. What? Oil prices are LOWER than a year ago, but gasoline is a dollar HIGHER? A troop INCREASE in Iraq? An immigration bill filled with more pork than Rosie O'Donnell's freezer failed to sail through? They all caved and ran away from their campaign promises? Six months into the 'new' congress and not a single meaningful piece of legislation has passed? The new congress' approval rating is 10 points lower than President Bush's is? Nah... can't be. "

Doh wrote on Jun 19, 2007 3:49 PM:

" DAMN! (ItsJustDave) Looks like we got us another bad-boy on the block! You go Dave! "

fchipper wrote on Jun 19, 2007 4:12 PM:

" Maybe the Democrats rally cry is "The Last 100 Days". It would make more sense since the American voters (all 7 of them) can't seem to remember what happened longer than 6 months ago. "

Urban wrote on Jun 19, 2007 4:59 PM:

" Bush has delivered permanent war, a shredded Constitution, a back-breaking $9 trillion national debt, a flood of illegal cheap labor, outsourcing of middle class jobs and health care that is now unaffordable, all slathered with sticky Jesus syrup. "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 19, 2007 5:45 PM:

" Exactly which bill or law got passed by King Bush without congressional approval? How did such a complete moron accomplish all of those disasters under the watchful eye of the nearly evenly split congress? Thank you for pointing out that illegal immigration, the national debt, Indian customer service representatives, budget - busting emergency room care for welfare recipients and illegals for runny noses, left-wing sanctuary cities for illegals (oops... UNDOCUMENTED AMERICANS) and tax - exempt multimillion dollar Taj-Mahal churches started in 2000. "

Urban wrote on Jun 19, 2007 6:00 PM:

" The Congress was entirely under Bush's thumb until six months ago, and with his "signing statements," the Chimpanzee in Chief has asserted that he doesn't have to obey congressional law anyway. On the plus side, though, Bush has destroyed the Republican Party. "

thanks Urban wrote on Jun 19, 2007 6:18 PM:

" I hadn't looked at it that way. "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 19, 2007 7:28 PM:

" Clinton vetoed 37 bills. Bush has vetoed ONE, the fewest since Abraham Lincoln, if you don't count Garfield, who wasn't in office long enough (6 months) to even talk a chubby intern, too young to buy a beer, into not doing anything with him. "Signing statements" are merely a president's way of saying that he does not personally agree, but will acceed to the congress' , and therefore the people's, wishes. Might wanna look that up. Signing a bill and attaching a signing statement at least lets the bill be passed into law. A straight veto pretty much nullifies the bill, unless it's something off the wall and gets overridden. "

Doh wrote on Jun 19, 2007 8:21 PM:

" ‘Most Ethical Congress Ever’ Running Into Problems (By Bobby Eberle On June 13, 2007) - "When the Democrats took over the House of Representatives, one of first statements out of the mouth of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (and other Democrats) was that this new Congress would be the “most ethical ever.” Now, it seems that they are changing their tune in their zeal to keep their pet pork projects away from the eyes of the American people. As noted in the Washington Times, Democrat leaders in the House are reversing the work of Republicans regarding what is known as “earmark reform.” The 2006 legislation would: -"allow lawmakers to vote on individual earmarks, specific funding requests attached to larger bills that often are called “pork” — A PROCESS DEMOCRATS HAVE SAID THEY WILL NOT USE as Congress considers the 12 annual spending bills."- Despite efforts by the Democrats to keep spending on pork projects hidden from public debate, House Minority Leader John Boehner and other GOP leaders are seeking to actually move Congress in a more ethical direction. Boehner introduced a resolution on Tuesday that would “force the Democratic leadership in the House to restore Republican earmark reforms enacted last year.” "

Doh wrote on Jun 19, 2007 8:51 PM:

" DoD BRACES FOR A FIGHT WITH PELOSI (By Mike Soraghan June 14, 2007) - "Pentagon officials are bracing for a fight with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) over her desire to allow lawmakers’ adult children to tag along on taxpayer-funded travel for free. Pelosi wants them to be able to fill the role of lawmakers’ spouses when the latter are unable to make a trip because of health issues or work commitments. “It has been longstanding policy that, in the absence of a congressional spouse, the adult child of a member of Congress may accompany the member on official U.S. government travel abroad for protocol reasons and without reimbursing the U.S. Treasury,” Pelosi spokesman Nadeam Elshami said. “Speaker Pelosi believes that a modern policy must reflect the professional responsibilities or health realities that might prevent a spouse from participating, and instead permit an adult child to fulfill the protocol needs of the official trip.” Pentagon officials say the policy is that the Treasury must be reimbursed at commercial rates for children who accompany members on such trips, often called codels. Pelosi’s office inquired about such travel on June 1, according to a Department of Defense memo obtained by The Hill. In a June 8 memo, the head of legislative affairs for the Pentagon, Robert L. Wilkie, told Defense Secretary Robert Gates that he sees Pelosi’s question as a first step toward challenging the policy. “We were told that the Speaker would expect that members’ children (of married and unmarried [members of Congress]) would not have to reimburse the Treasury,” Wilkie wrote. “We expect future challenges from the House leadership on this policy.” Pentagon aides did not respond to requests for comment. But taxpayer watchdog groups and ethics advocates said they were surprised Pelosi would seek more perks for members. “One of the things she was praised for when she came in was her sweeping reforms on gifts and travel,” said Craig Holman of Public Citizen. “It is very disheartening if she is, in fact, backsliding on this.” Public Citizen filed a complaint with the IRS last year, saying that family members who receive free travel by accompanying lawmakers should pay taxes on the travel’s value. The complaint focused on privately sponsored travel, but Holman said it should apply to taxpayer-funded travel as well. “I don’t see any difference,” Holman said. In its first week with a Democratic majority this year, the House passed what Pelosi called “the toughest congressional ethics reform in history.” It forbade gifts and travel from lobbyists and banned travel on corporate jets. It did not address publicly funded travel such as codels. Lawmakers’ children currently can travel gratis if they get a waiver, termed an “invitation,” from the secretary of defense, according to Dan Stanley, a former assistant secretary for legislative affairs at the Pentagon. He said it was rare for a lawmaker to travel with his or her children. “Children have always flown as an exception to policy,” Stanley said. “I’m unaware of any substantial policy that would allow children to take the representational role of a spouse.” The president’s family, such as President Bush’s twin daughters, can travel without reimbursement. They cannot fly commercially for security reasons. But most executive-branch officials either do not bring family members on military aircraft or reimburse, Stanley said. Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld would fly with his wife back to Taos, N.M., he said, but was scrupulous about reimbursing. "

Urban wrote on Jun 19, 2007 9:59 PM:

" Look, we liberals have endured seven years of hateful nonsense from you Bush worshippers for the crime of being right about this vicious, incompetent, alcoholic plutocrat from the beginning. Now Bush is wrecking the country clearly enough for just about everyone to see. It didn't take a genius to know that invading and occupying a nation that had never attacked or even threatened the United States was not only a terrible mistake, because it would obviously create an insurgency, but was also evil. To know that, all you had to do was look past the transparent, cowardly corporate news propaganda on Fox News, CNN and the others. No great feat if you're reasonably intelligent and have lived long enough to learn that great numbers of people can be and are fooled regularly, because they want to be. Some of us didn't want to be, and we weren't. That's all. "

Anita wrote on Jun 19, 2007 10:25 PM:

" Oh, Gregory...you ARE an informed soul, aren't you. Stolen oil? Paying for terrorism? I'd debate facts with you, but I cannot duel with an unarmed opponent. "

Anita wrote on Jun 19, 2007 10:51 PM:

" It's amazing to me that the left seems to think that all the problems in the world were created by President Bush. I suppose we lived in a Utopian society world-wide before that? Wow...so if President Bush is so stupid, how has he managed to single-handedly control congress, raise gas prices worldwide, ruin everyones' lives, and start a world-wide Islamic jihad against all western society? ---------------------------------------- Golly, he's been a busy boy. ------------------------------------------- And Duh, Doh, whatever - I'm watching you do exactly what I did several months ago. I don't understand why the paper doesn't get registration instated, but not everyone thinks you are horrible. I can often tell when it's you because we tend to have similar viewpoints...and even when I don't agree with you, I can usually tell because you tend to be conservative. Just don't sweat it. "

Doh wrote on Jun 20, 2007 12:21 AM:

" Urban- Iraq was a nation that had never attacked or even threatened the United States? Now there you go again! That's not what the Clinton Administration said. Clinton said that Iraq had a working relationship with Al Qaeda on the development of WMD's. And after 17 failed resolutions by the U.N.(an organization that Saddam was bribing through the Oil-For-Food scam) Bush simply acted on the policy of Iraqi regime change that Bill Clinton had already enacted. Have you forgotten all of this already? Or would you like me to (once again) lay out all the documented evidence of this? Because if you keep spewing your lies, I can keep documenting the evidence. You see- just because you keep telling those same lies over and over again doesn't make them any more truthful. When are you going to come clean on that propaganda? "

Doh wrote on Jun 20, 2007 12:52 AM:

" And Urban- If you really believe that a Democrat President will pull the troops out of Iraq- then you are in for a serious dose of reality. I've got a newsflash for you; the Jihadists ain't going away. And after your Democrat President gets his or her first intelligence briefing, I guarantee you that those Liberal ideals of simply talking to the enemy and rationalizing with them will fly out the window faster than greased lightning. Because sooner or later, over there or over here, we WILL have to battle Islam. They want war, their God wants war, and they WILL wage war. So what are you Democrats going to do about it? Just what is your magic solution? You Liberals have had it easy these last seven years with your arm-chair quarterbacking. But when it's your time to get into the game- just what do you think your party's really going to do? "

Urban wrote on Jun 20, 2007 7:48 AM:

" "And I said on my program, if -- if -- the Americans go in and overthrow Saddam Hussein and it's clean, he has nothing, I will apologize to the nation, and I will not trust the Bush administration again." - Bill O'Reilly - Good Morning America - 3-18-03 "

Urban wrote on Jun 20, 2007 8:26 AM:

" You didn't have to be prescient to know that the Iraq invasion was going to be a criminal disaster. You only had to be intellectually honest. "

So Urban wrote on Jun 20, 2007 8:32 AM:

" Did Bill O denounce Bush? If he would do that, how long would the fair and balanced folks at the Fake news channel keep him on? "

Urban wrote on Jun 20, 2007 8:50 AM:

" So General Betray-Us thinks the U.S. will be occupying Iraq for the next decade, eh? Hey, that's only another 10,000 dead U.S. troops, maybe another 100,000 maimed ones and another, what, trillion dollars or so in national debt that we can borrow from China, isn't it? Chump change. As the great Republican military genius Donald Rumsfeld said, the troops are "fungible" — easily replaced, right? And to think, it's all for for the noble, lofty goal of preventing a dead guy from having weapons that didn't exist. "

A silly question, I guess... wrote on Jun 20, 2007 8:58 AM:

" What ever happened to going after the real ring leader of 9/11, Osama B L? The Bush apologists and supporters never talk about him anymore, do they? Mostly they just want to spend all of their time justifying the Iraq war. Is he irrelevant too? Could it be that there is an element of truth to the claim that the Bush family has ties to Osama B L's family, both personally as well as economically? I know their argument is that Osama is holed up in the mountains somewhere and is not causing any problems. How do they know that? If he could orchestrate 9/11 why couldn't he be directing the insurgency in Iraq? And why the hell don't we go after him? "

Doh wrote on Jun 20, 2007 9:56 AM:

" Well I'll be darned. I didn't know that O'Reilly was the final and ultimate authority on the looming threat that was Saddam Hussein. And here I was, listening to the Clinton Administration, the ISG, and a variety of long forgotten military and media reports. I guess I should have taken your lead, and tuned in to the egomaniacal Mr. Bill. I didn't know you were one of those FoxNews fanatics. I wonder if (IT) will blast you for that? Tell me Urban- what else should I listen to Mr. Bill about? "

the same thing wrote on Jun 20, 2007 10:18 AM:

" I guess you could say the same thing about your lies. "

Doh wrote on Jun 20, 2007 10:40 AM:

" Anita ("And Duh, Doh, whatever - I'm watching you do exactly what I did several months ago.") You lost me there- Anita. "

Urban wrote on Jun 20, 2007 10:53 AM:

" So Gen. Petraeus thinks the U.S. will be occupying Iraq for the next decade, eh? Hey, that's only another 10,000 dead U.S. troops, maybe another 100,000 maimed ones and another, what, trillion dollars or so in national debt that we can borrow from China, isn't it? Chump change. As the great Republican military genius Donald Rumsfeld said, the troops are "fungible" — easily replaced, right? And to think, it's all for for the noble, lofty goal of preventing a dead guy from having weapons that didn't exist. "

Billie Brant wrote on Jun 20, 2007 12:45 PM:

" Doh, Anita was the target of of a nasty poster quite awhile back as was I (under a different postname then) as well as other's. She really took the brunt of it though. The main reason to my way of thinking she could out think, out debate and out write the poster. She finally got tired of it. I'm glad to see her back! I think she'e referring to you and the rest of us who have been IT'S targets that she knows where we're coming from. "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 20, 2007 1:38 PM:

" Hey, Urban - Looks like you don't like our current president or his policies very much. Now maybe you can 'feel our pain'. We had similar feelings, from the other perspective, from 1992 - 2000. Much less hate - filled and paranoid about the ability of one man to destroy a republic in 8 years, but just as disgusted. I can't imagine the scope of the left's mental meltdown that would occur if Hillary wins in 2008, and Jeb Bush knocks her out in 2012, but that sure would be a hoot to watch. "

Doh wrote on Jun 20, 2007 1:41 PM:

" Thanks for the explanation Billie. I wasn't aware of the history of Anita's name being stolen also. Interesting.... "

Urban wrote on Jun 20, 2007 1:53 PM:

" You parents and grandparents see many things when you look at your eight-year-old children, I'm sure. But I'm guessing that you don't see what General Petraeus sees, which is troops to occupy Iraq. "

Urban wrote on Jun 20, 2007 2:37 PM:

" Too bad it took the Pentagon and the Bush morons only LONGER THAN WORLD WAR II to come with their new "surge" plan for non-victory, isn't it? But we should all have great faith in the military's wisdom by now. This is, after all, the same Pentagon that sent out recruitment letters to troops who had already been killed in Iraq, isn't it? "

Doh wrote on Jun 20, 2007 3:21 PM:

" If you want to criticize the lateness of the surge- Urban, then be my guest. I actually agree with you on that point. The biggest mistakes in this war were the ridiculous rules of engagement coupled with insufficient troop levels. It's about time we started taking the gloves off, and it looks like the surge is doing just that. And let's not forget one key point in this debate: The number of troops killed so far is an unprecedented LOW for a conflict of this size and scope. And that is a direct testament to the professionalism of the men and women of the U.S. Military. These people deserve our never-ending gratitude and praise and they need to hear it often! I for one would like to tell them Thank You! Now who wants to join me in that? "

Hey Dave wrote on Jun 20, 2007 4:33 PM:

" How many kids did Slick Willie get killed in those 8 years? "

Urban wrote on Jun 20, 2007 4:44 PM:

" You didn't have to be prescient to know that the Iraq invasion was going to be a criminal disaster. You only had to be intellectually honest. "

Billie Brant wrote on Jun 20, 2007 4:47 PM:

" Doh(June 20-3:21 P.M.) Yep! "

Jeb in 2012? wrote on Jun 20, 2007 5:07 PM:

" Come on fella, with all the criminal activity (son), drug busts (daughter) and smuggling goods into the country (wife)that poor old Jeb's family has been involved with, do you really think he could over come all of that? Besides all that, by the time this Bush leaves office office, this country will just about have had our fill of that bunch of reprobates. Wait a minute, I guess if old W could get elected, with his miserable track record, maybe there is hope for Jeb after all. How about a quick review of W's record? Bankrupted several companies, arrested for theft, multiple DUI arrests, busted for cocaine, used family influence to jump ahead of over 3000 applicants for the Texas guard, and then lied about it. AWOL from the Texas guard for over a year, reprimanded for refusing to take a drug test in the guard, involved in illegal stock sales scam, invaded a sovereign nation, refusing to go after Osama B L. I guess that's enough for now. Now, which one of these points would you Bush apologists like to dispute? "

W and Dead-Eye Dickie wrote on Jun 20, 2007 5:15 PM:

" Doh, (June 20, 3:21) yep...thanks for all your support, Doh. "

Anita wrote on Jun 20, 2007 7:08 PM:

" Thanks for clearing that up, Billie. ;-) I think I probably felt exactly as Doh is feeling now. ------------------------------------------ So I have a question for the people who say that all this Iraq and Saddam business is Bush's idea. Why was there such a huge debate in congress over what to do with Iraq 15+ years ago? Just the other evening, Hannity & Colmes showed a video clip of a much younger, thinner version of Al Gore making a case for war with Iraq based on intelligence that reported the link between Saddam, wmd's, terrorism, and oppression. I don't understand how it is that people are so forgetful. ------------------------------------------ I know that many people do not believe that Doh is correct about the jihadists...but he is absolutely 100% correct. It's difficult to understand how deeply they hate because our culture and values are so completely opposite of theirs... but they hate us, they have hated us for decades, and they ARE at war with us regardless of how we feel. They're coming for us. We either get them there, or we appear weak, pull back with our tails between our legs, and wait for them to come here and perpetrate another Sept. 11. "

Doh wrote on Jun 20, 2007 8:28 PM:

" The question IS: how many people would now be alive if Clinton had the onions to go after Bin Laden in some sort of meaningful way and to actually enforce his policy of regime change in Iraq at the time, instead of taking the politically popular and irresponsible way out. Now as far a number...I would say that at least 3000 inoccent and unarmed people would probably be alive today if Clinton would have killed Bin Laden when he had the chance to do so. And lets not forget about the USS Cole and The Battle of Mogadishu in Somolia, now that certainly wasn't a waste of life (eyeroll). Yeah. Clinton was great. "

Doh wrote on Jun 20, 2007 8:33 PM:

" It's a pleasure to meet you Anita. I'm proud to be on the same side with you. Stick around my friend, we need to even this site out. "

Billie Brant wrote on Jun 20, 2007 8:37 PM:

" You're right on target Anita! Seems to me I remember you(TPQ) and I(different name then too) going over much the same ground with the same arguements concerning the jihadists over a year ago. As much as I hate to think about it, I'm afraid it's going to take another attack on our home soil to make people realize it. If it does happen, I'm sure many of the "conspiracy from within" bunch will blame it on our own government. "Old Rosie" will most likely be named as The General in command of this outfit. "

Doh wrote on Jun 20, 2007 8:59 PM:

" Billie- if there is any kind of justice under the sun, then the next terrorist attack will occur in that infidel hive known as Hollywood. Preferably in Rosie's neighborhood. "

Doh wrote on Jun 20, 2007 9:49 PM:

" NEW GALLUP DATA SHOW CONFIDENCE IN CONGRESS AT ALL TIME LOW: Just 14% of Americans have a great deal or quite a lot of confidence in Congress. This 14% Congressional confidence rating is the all-time low for this measure, which Gallup initiated in 1973. The previous low point for Congress was 18% at several points in the period of time 1991 to 1994. Congress is now nestled at the bottom of the list of Gallup's annual Confidence in Institutions rankings, along with HMOs. Just 15% of Americans have a great deal or quite a lot of confidence in HMOs. (BY WAY OF CONTRAST, 69% OF AMERICANS HAVE A GREAT DEAL OR QUITE A LOT OF CONFIDENCE IN THE MILITARY, WHICH TOPS THE LIST. More on this at galluppoll.com on Thursday). --- Wow! That's a double shot of bad news for most Liberals in here; Not only has the "Most Ethical Congress Ever" completely lost the confidence of the American people, but the people have rarely had such confidence in our magnificent Arm Forces! Sorry Liberals! I think it would be very wise of the Democrats like Harry Reid to stop questioning the competence of the commanders in the field. On second thought- I think the Dems should continue to bash the military! WooHoo!!! "

Billie Brant wrote on Jun 20, 2007 10:44 PM:

" I hope we don't have to go through another Doh, but I think it's going to happen. Isn't it strange that the conservative's or moderate's in the entertainment industry get very little press coverage , while the Michael Moore's, Rosie O'Donnell's Sean Penn's and the "mother" of all Hollywood Anti- American's Hanoi Jane Fonda get their EXTREME left wing agenda spewed forth so easily in the media? Tom Selleck, James Woods, Gary Sinese, Denzel Washington,Patricia Heaton, just to name a few are hard pressed to get their conservative view's recognized as valid. Many of them work quietly behind the scenes to do good things. Gary Sinese of CSI:NY entertains troops(plays bass guitar) and has helped build schools for Iraqi kids. Once in awhile one of these people will be able to say what they think on a show as James Woods did a few weeks back, but not often enough. The heavy hitter's such as the afore mentioned can get away with it if they are booked on a show or interviewed, but some of the lesser conservative actors and entertainer's need to "stay in the closet" if they want to work. It's much more fun and newsworthy for the extreme lefties( add Oliver Stone to that list) to bash everything about our country in general. Their liberal agenda is the ONLY ONE that's the truth in their minds. There is no middle ground. To be fair, the conservatives have their share of nut cases too, Pat Robertson heads the list as far as I'm concerned. I'm not real nutty about Rush Limbaugh either!.. I can't live every day worried about when we're going to be hit again. I guess I have the mind set the folks on the west coast have concerning earthquakes and the "big one". You know it's going to happen, you just don't know when. The difference is we CAN do something to stop the terrorist's and their attacks IF we take seriously their desire to destroy our way of life and dominate us. "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 21, 2007 5:12 AM:

" We have the Jihadists' time and money concentrated in Iraq Iraq right now. If we hadn't gone in, does anyone (That's not in fantasyland) really believe that there would not have been another terrorist attack on U.S. soil before now? If anyone remembers late September, 2001, it seemed that almost everyone, lefties, righties and don't - cares, was sure we'd get hit again, and soon. Now, we've done quite a bit to make sure that the terrorists (or is that freedom fighters, left-wing?) are busy in the middle east and do not have the time or money to easily organize and carry out plans to attack the U.S. . Once things relax a little in Iraq, and if our new president retreats and leaves a safe haven again, the terror cells will be back with a vengeance. Of course, if and when the next terror attack on the U.S. occurs, even if in 2010, it will be Bush and Cheney's fault, scream the left, because they laid the foundation for it, and the plans must have been in place for years to have been so successful. Funny those same people spouting that nonsense will conveniently forget that in Sept, 2001, Bush / Cheney had been in office for only eight months. "

Early Bird wrote on Jun 21, 2007 7:57 AM:

" I think you crossed the line a little with that last comment, Doh. Wishing death and destruction on anyone is wrong. How would that be justice? How would you react if someone said the same thing should happen to the Bush family home? Like you, I too have people that I hold in total disdain, but I would never wish that upon them. Having a son-in-law who was in the world trade center the morning of the attack, I know the hurt and pain that can come from such a thing. By the way, my son-in-law was out before the collapse, but there was a several hour period in which my daughter had no idea if her husband, and the father of her young children was dead or alive. I hope you seriously don't wish that sort of suffering on another human being or their family. "

Urban wrote on Jun 21, 2007 8:05 AM:

" At least Charles Sullivan recognizes what others are unwilling to admit -- the horror that is Bush's true nature. Note the following quote. "In many ways, George W. Bush is the perfect man for the job, if one understands what his real work entails as an emissary of the ruling class. He possesses all of the qualifications the vocation requires: callousness and indifference to the needs of others, the absence of conscience, truncated mental capacity; the inability to reason and to analyze; the incapacity to admit wrong doing; a penchant for cruelty that includes the enjoyment of inflicting pain and torture on others, as well as a powerful sense of nobility and entitlement that stems from being born into wealth and privilege. He is also a pathological liar." "

Doh wrote on Jun 21, 2007 8:29 AM:

" You are absolutely right Early Bird! I do owe you and everyone here an apology for my desire for Hollywood to be attacked. I am truly sorry for that comment and those sentiments. And I am very thankful that your son-in-law survived that hellish day. Thanks Early Bird for calling me on that! That was definitely below my standards. "

Urban wrote on Jun 21, 2007 8:32 AM:

" Tell me, do you "support the troops" by sending them to occupy a country that never attacked or threatened the U.S. and by keeping them targets in the middle of a civil war? Or by sending them against the people who actually attacked us on 9/11? You do remember Osama bin Laden, don't you, the man George W. Bush has stopped looking for, the man George W. Bush has stated he doesn't even care about? For some weird reason, you right wingers seem to have no problem with that - with Bush letting the man who planned, financed and executed the 9-11 attacks simply get with it. I guess that much-advertised patriotism of yours is all in your mouth. You aren't patriots. You're just obnoxious shills for the corrupt, lying Republican Party. "

Billie Brant wrote on Jun 21, 2007 8:58 AM:

" Wow Early Bird! I'm glad your son-in-law made it out of that building! I can only imagine the gut wrenching horror of having to wait until your family received the word he was ok. It was horrible enough to those of us who watched the scene on TV that didn't have anyone close to them in that inferno. These were our people! That's reason enough to be afraid for them... I don't wish any physical harm done to Rosie, although she sets my teeth on edge with her anti- American comments and 911 conspiracy plots. I have to admit I wouldn't mind seeing her bite her own nasty tongue in two so she would have to quit( at least temporarily) throwing out all the blathering stuff(notice how I cleaned that up Lol) that comes out of her mouth. "

Doh wrote on Jun 21, 2007 9:29 AM:

" You "support the troops" by supporting their mission of regime change and ending the documented threat to our national security as cited by the Clinton Administration. You also go after the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks when the previous Clinton Administration refused to do so in any meaningful way. In short, you support the military mission that was neglected by the former Commander in Chief who was more concerned with political expediency and personal liasons with young interns than he was with National Security. "

Billie Brant wrote on Jun 21, 2007 9:43 AM:

" I DO want bin laden caught Urban, and yes I think we are NOT doing enough to find him! I think YOU went too far though in labeling those of us who support the war effort as NOT being patriots. I was against going to Iraq when we did, but once there I feel we have to see it through. Yes, the Iraqi's need to step up and do more...I am not a blind follower of GWB. Personally, I don't care for him much, never did. However, I do support our military and now that we are there I feel I have to give them all the support I can. I want us out of there too, but not until we can bring some stability to Iraq. If we leave before that is accomplished, we'll be in an even bigger mess. Iran is not only knocking on the door , but has both feet in Iraq. "

come on Urban wrote on Jun 21, 2007 10:39 AM:

" George Bush is probably the best President we have ever had. He is honorable and honest. hee hee (notice that no could dispute the earlier profile of all of his accomplishments either) "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 21, 2007 10:49 AM:

" Charles Sullivan? Are you serious? I suppose the next person you quote will be Ward Churchill or Cindy Sheehan. At least quote someone who has some knowledge of the situation (such as a high ranking member of congress) and has not been certified as insane. "

Urban wrote on Jun 21, 2007 11:12 AM:

" The poor gutter-trash Republican. He believes the people he supports are "good" and "nice" because they wear American Legion hats and carry around Bibles. He thinks he's a victim of those awful "liberals" he hears so much about on Fox News — the people who fought slavery and child labor and poorhouses for the elderly and then somehow became, oddly enough, servants of evil. In fact he is the victim, as his "good" heroes drain his Social Security account with national debt and carefully prepare his grandchildren to invade the next resource-rich country that catches Dick Cheney's reptilian eye. Insisting that the U.S. can do no wrong (except when a Democrat is president), he therefore lets it get away with murder - literally. "

Bush is the BEST wrote on Jun 21, 2007 11:36 AM:

" Look at all of what W has done for the rich? He has been the greatest president EVER! The war in Iraq helps thin out the poor and has been GREAT for the stock market. Gas prices don't hurt those of us making 100,000 plus so the roads are not so croweded with you poor folks and my gosh the imigration plolicy cut my payroll by 3/4ths! Now if we could end homosexuality, womens right to work and abolish birth controle the country would be darn near perfect... I'll bet if we elect JEB BUSH (go JEB) we can get all of the above done withing 8 years! "

Doh wrote on Jun 21, 2007 11:53 AM:

" Wow it looks like Urban (formerly known as Duh) is lobbying hard to get one of his poetic proses featured in the daily "Your Post" section of the JG-TC. More power to ya bud! Go Urban Go! "

Doh wrote on Jun 21, 2007 11:56 AM:

" Golly (Bush is the BEST)! I thought your "Most Ethical Congress Ever" was supposed to fix all that? What happened to those Dumbocrats? "

Urban wrote on Jun 21, 2007 12:29 PM:

" Robert Parry wrote,"Possibly the most troubling case was revealed in mid-June by The New Yorker’s investigative reporter Seymour M. Hersh, the case of Army Maj. Gen. Antonio M. Taguba, who investigated the abuses of detainees at Abu Ghraib prison and issued a tough report that prevented the scandal from being swept entirely under the rug. Rather than thank Taguba for upholding the honor of the U.S. military, the Bush administration singled out this hard-working, low-key general for ridicule, retribution and forced retirement in early 2007. In an interview with Hersh, Taguba described a chilling conversation he had with Gen. John Abizaid, head of Central Command, a few weeks after Taguba’s report became public in 2004. Sitting in the back of Abizaid’s Mercedes sedan in Kuwait, Abizaid quietly told Taguba, “You and your report will be investigated.” “I’d been in the Army 32 years by then,” Taguba told Hersh, “and it was the first time that I thought I was in the Mafia.” ...Hersh wrote that the sensitivity over Taguba’s report went beyond its graphic account of physical and sexual abuse of Iraqis detained at Abu Ghraib; it also brought unwanted attention to a wider pattern of criminal acts committed with the approval of President Bush and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld." "

Doh wrote on Jun 21, 2007 12:30 PM:

" From MSNBC.COM: REPORTERS GIVE DEMOCRATS MORE MONEY OVER REPUBLICANS 9-1 !!! Yeah. There's no mainstream media bias. It's all in our heads. (eyeroll) http://tinyurl.com/2nkgfu "

Answer wrote on Jun 21, 2007 12:41 PM:

" Doh, you're going over the line now. What Clinton said in 1998 has little or nothing to do with why we went to war in 2003, and you well know it. Now please, lets have an honest debate about the situation we are in and the hubris that caused it. Also, the Republican congress and the republican leadership were virtually all opposed to the military actions the Clinton administration did take, and there was certainly no support of any kind for going to war with Iraq or Osama Bin Laden during the Clinton presidency. Now, please, lets talk about facts and not twisted history. "

Answer wrote on Jun 21, 2007 12:46 PM:

" To ItsJustDave, attacking the messenger and ignoring the message is a time-honored tradition for you Repugs now isn't it? Maybe instead of casting aspersions on the person (it's called an Ad Hominen attack, a fallacy of logic) you would care to fairly and honestly discuss the content. My guess is you will not since for most on your side the ability to be intellectually honest disappeared years ago. "

Answer wrote on Jun 21, 2007 12:48 PM:

" And the corporate owners of the media give overwhelmingly to the Rethuglican party, so what's your point. Lies, damn lies, and statistics, which are often the biggest lie of all. "

Urban wrote on Jun 21, 2007 1:03 PM:

" I don't have to lobby, Doh. But thanks for your compliment about my poetic prose. "

Billie Brant wrote on Jun 21, 2007 1:23 PM:

" A quote from Urban " Look we liberals have endured seven years of hateful nonsense from you Bush worshipper's for the crime of being right about this vicious, imcompetent, alcoholic, plutocrat from the beginning" I don't think we on the "right" have the market cornered on hatefulness as you said. Read your own posts Urban, there's plenty of hate in them, "gutter-trash" "obnoxious shills' and so forth. Doh has been trying to present his strong posts with more decorum than he has in the past. Shoot! He's even apologized a few times for going over the line, and Early Bird and I as well as other's have also. No one here minds a "shot" or two, I take aim at Rosie and some of her crowd, but you are dangerously close to going over the line with some of your decriptions of the ones who oppose your way of thinking. Keep your thoughts out there Urban, you have the right to do so, but couldn't you try to scale back the nastiness just a little? I'm not calling you a traitor or unpatriotic just because I disagree with you! Keep your strong posts Doh and thanks for trying to "ratchet" them back a little. It's obvious to those with open minds you are trying to do just that without sacrificing your stance. We'll all backslide now and then, but we can at least try to do better. "

Doh wrote on Jun 21, 2007 2:14 PM:

" How ya doing Answer. Good to hear from you. I'm going to have to disagree with you; What Clinton said in 1998 had everything to do with why we went to war in 2003. Namely, Saddams relationship with Al Qaeda to develop WMD. After the events of 9/11 and 17 failed U.N. resolutions we could no longer tolerate this looming threat. And Bush did what had to be done. And Clinton did pass up several chances to take out Bin Laden. Like it or not, these are facts. "

Doh wrote on Jun 21, 2007 2:18 PM:

" Answer- I didn't know that corporate owners of the media give overwhelmingly to the RNC. Do those owners also determine the daily template of the news on an Editorial basis? "

Anita wrote on Jun 21, 2007 2:19 PM:

" Thanks, Doh. I'll probably hang around now...There is a better balance now between left, right, and center. ---------------------------------- Urban, Urban, Urban. *shakes head* Where to start? Goodness, you sound like Michael Moore. Honest debate means you have to use ALL the facts. President Bush is not the only person who thought that Saddam had wmd's. Personally, I believe that Saddam probably DID have wmd's at one time. I believe that he disposed of them by either destroying them or sending them to another country before we got there. That's neither here nor there, though. Many many people believed that Saddam had wmd's, including both Clintons, Al Gore, and several other Congress members whose names I cannot recall off the top of my head. (I'd have to look that up). --------------------------- On top of that, several foreign countries also believed he had wmd's. The debate about handling Saddam's terror connections and Hitler-like behavior has been going on for the last twenty to twenty five years now. ---------------------------------------- As for Bin Laden, yes, I am still angry that we pulled back and shifted focus. We had him cornered like a rat in a hole in an area in Afghanistan. I'm not clear as to why we didn't push on and pull him out of his rat hole. I have to assume that this was hashed and rehashed by people way smarter than I before they chose to back off. -------------------------------------------- As for Bush being such a horrible, awful person, I really have to disagree. I believe that he has more strength of character than most of us. He is up against extreme opposition, however, he continues to do what he thinks is right. --------------------------------------- One such example is the embryonic stem cell bill. His reason for the veto is, "Destroying human life to try to save life is not ethical." You have to fertilize a human embryo and then destroy that embryo to do this research. ------------------------------------------- And as for Abu Ghraib... why are you beating a dead horse? First and foremost, the poor little terrorists behead us on video and then post it on the internet for the world to see... a small handful of guards EMBARRASSED these poor guys. Yes, THAT makes us horrible. Above and beyond that, we prosecuted those responsible and punished them. Of course someone tried to sweep it under the rug...that's what people do when they do something they could get in trouble for...they try to hide it. --------------------------------------- For myself, I think that embarrassing the terrorists is a TINY thing, especially compared to what they do to the world. They kill everyone who doesn't agree with them, including moderate Muslims. They subjugate their women, treat them like dogs, and kill them for imagined offenses. They even kill a woman who has been raped because by becoming a rape victim, she has dishonored her family. ---------------------------------------- So how does Abu Ghraib compare? Yes, it was wrong, but it wasn't so awful that the perpetrators should have been jailed...merely reprimanded. -------------------------------------- WOW...I had a lot to say this time! LOL "

Voltaire wrote on Jun 21, 2007 2:22 PM:

" You know, Billie, every one of your posts ends up saying the same thing. "

Urban wrote on Jun 21, 2007 2:30 PM:

" I wonder if Bush ran across this bit while eagerly pouring over those "three Shakespeares" he laughably claims to have read — "That one may smile, and smile and be a villain." "

dik wrote on Jun 21, 2007 2:32 PM:

" Go Gettem George and if any Muslim (extreme or not) gets in the way, blast them to. "

Voltaire wrote on Jun 21, 2007 2:55 PM:

" "I believe that he (G.W. Bush) has more strength of character than most of us." LOL. I don't need to say anything else... "

Answer wrote on Jun 21, 2007 2:58 PM:

" Doh, I will assume your "I didn't know the corporate owners gave overwhelmingly to the Repubs" comment is tongue in cheek, because I assume you are a well informed individual. If you are not aware of the overwhelming republican slant to corporate America you may want to broaden your choices when doing research. I also assume you are just baiting when you try to say we went to war in 2003 because Bill Clinton said something 5 years earlier. Now, I suppose you have the documented evidence of exactly how Iraq abbrogated each and every one of the "17 failed UN resolutions". Honestly Doh, you're a smart guy, you should be able to debate without spewing talking points that have no real meaning. I would expect that sort of inane behavior from Sean Hannity but up until now I have given you more credit that that. Please don't let me down. "

Billie Brant wrote on Jun 21, 2007 3:00 PM:

" Be prepared Anita! You'll be labeled as a torturer too! ...Don't read my posts Voltaire if you think I'm redundant! OR are you Voltaire? "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 21, 2007 3:11 PM:

" ANSWER: Repug? Rethuglican? And you're getting on ME about name-calling? By the way, the phrase is ad HOMINEM. If you're gonna try to make yourself out to be an intellectually superior left wing professor-type, you might want to learn to spell, as well as proper usage and grammar. Between you and "Urban", there are more unfounded name - calling tirades than any six others on here combined. As far as 'attacking the messenger', when 'Urban' stops quoting left-wing reporters and professors, I'll be glad to respond. That's equivalent to someone on the other side of the issue quoting Pat Buchanan or Bill O'Reilly to back up a point. Oh, yeah. I forgot. You two quote those guys, as well. "

Anita wrote on Jun 21, 2007 3:24 PM:

" Yeah, I know, Billie. LOL That's ok. Everyone has a right to his or her opinion... ... ... however misguided it may be. LOL "

Answer wrote on Jun 21, 2007 3:28 PM:

" Once again, itsjustannoying, you failed to debate the point and instead attacked the messenger, this time me. Yes I know how to spell Ad Hominem, and I am not a professor, just well read and intelligent, things which used to be admired in America before the ridiculous right wing attacks on education, intelligence and reason took hold. Now, I'll give you one more chance to stop making a huge a$$ of yourself. Would you like to debate the message or continue to attack the messenger? "

Answer wrote on Jun 21, 2007 3:46 PM:

" Billie, although I disagree with your stance about abortion I certainly never called you a torturer nor anyone else on this site. I don't remember that post, were you actually called a torturer? "

Answer wrote on Jun 21, 2007 3:49 PM:

" **Correction** I inadvertantly substituted the word abortion for torture in my previous post. It shoudl have read as follows - Billie, although I disagree with your stance about torture (coercive interrogation to use the euphemism) I certainly never called you a torturer nor anyone else on this site. I don't remember that post, were you actually called a torturer? "

Doh wrote on Jun 21, 2007 3:54 PM:

" Okay....everybody take a deeeep breath. "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 21, 2007 5:02 PM:

" Aw, C'mon, Doh - this is kinda fun. Watching a meltdown right before our very eyes. As for Answer: My first, second and third posts in this thread were all relevant and addressed the matter at hand. I did indeed engage in a debate with a poster with another viewpoint. I haven't seen anything in this thread from you that should induce a reasonable response, so I haven't provided one. What, I'm supposed to debate a quote by Charles Sullivan or a story by a reporter for the New Yorker? Please. As for you 'giving me one more chance', I don't think you run the show here, so your thinking that you can give me anything is rather silly. "

Urban wrote on Jun 21, 2007 5:09 PM:

" As I recall, the first time I heard the name "Osama bin Laden" it was from President Clinton on TV, identifying bin Laden as the greatest threat the western world faced. I also recall that when Clinton tried to kill bin Laden, Republicans shrieked that he was only trying to distract us from the all-important matter of Clinton's sex life. By contrast, Bush ignored a report saying that bin Laden was determined to strike in the U.S., not wanting to let it cast a shadow on one of his lengthy vacations. Thus is history rewritten by lying right-wing hacks and their corporate media lackeys. "

Voltaire wrote on Jun 21, 2007 5:38 PM:

" Dick and Jane were told to go dig a hole because we needed to make a new well. After a few feet, Dick and Jane found they had run into a layer of limestone. They started to chip away at the rock when they were told that we didn't really need another well. BUT DICK AND JANE NEED TO KEEP DIGGING THAT HOLE BECAUSE THEY STARTED DIGGING A HOLE. IF WE STOP DIGGING THE HOLE, THE NEIGHBORS MIGHT THINK WE'RE WEAK. No, the neighbors are just going to think we're stupid for trying to dig through limestone for a well we don't really need. If you want that well dug so bad, get down in the and start digging -- otherwise, shut up. "

Answer wrote on Jun 21, 2007 5:43 PM:

" I'm sorry, ItsJustInane, I was just giving you a chance to say something relevant or intelligent. Your lack of ability to carry on a reasonable debate does not surprise. It is impossible to defend the illogical right wing positions you stake out on every issue. I have read your illogical and fallacious rants for months now, it is high time someone held you accountable for your unsupportable opinions and outright falsehoods. Now, ItsJustInane, carry on with your personal attacks and unsubstantiated drivel, the adults in the forum will continue to attempt to debate the issues of the day. Issues like why General Taguba is the latest in a long line of military leaders forced out by this administration. "

Wow! wrote on Jun 21, 2007 6:09 PM:

" Was there a full moon last night? "

Anita wrote on Jun 21, 2007 10:43 PM:

" I am absolutely amazed. Rather than discuss the points raised, there is name calling or orders to just shut up. Amazing. Way to discuss, there, kids, way to discuss. I'm so impressed. "

Billie Brant wrote on Jun 21, 2007 11:23 PM:

" No Answer, you have not called me a torturer. In fact no one has said "Billie you are a torturer", but it was inferred (not only to me but other's also), because I don't have a problem with using some forceful means(excluding water boarding, that I don't like at all) to make these head- loping jihadisit's loosen their tongues so many of our people and Iraqi's can be saved. I'm not the only one this stuff has been thrown at. Duh in his post 6-14-07 3:11 A.M. states "Bush and the right winger's want to torture people because they like the idea" That's just the first sentence of that post... He goes further on 6-15-07 8:10 A.M, " So you right winger's like the sound of the phrase U.S Torture Chamber do you? That tells us all we need to know about you gutter trash". So you see some of us have been labled as torturer's as well as gutter trash. That's just two examples... I was just issuing a bit of advice to Anita that since she holds with some of our views, to be on the lookout. I know full well Answer you would never call me such a thing even though we disagree. I've known all of that wonderful family of yours too long for any of them including you,to think that of me.... "

Voltaire wrote on Jun 21, 2007 11:56 PM:

" Shock, shock, another dead-ender crying about civility on the forum. Look around, you'll see most of the name calling flows in one direction. Sorry, I won't debate with people who made up their minds long ago and keep recycling the same "we must dig because we are digging" mantra. "

Anita wrote on Jun 22, 2007 6:57 AM:

" No Voltaire, I originally thought the same thing you do...and then I started researching. YOU are the one who made up your mind a long time ago...and YOUR side is the one that has been doing all the name calling. I began researching with an open mind, open to the information and other points of view. Occasionally, I even agree with certain liberal points of view. ---------------------------------------- I haven't seen you use civility and respect in your comments...you've used sarcasm and anger. You label anyone with a more conservative view point as 'right wingers', and then you tell us to shut up. Well, guess what? We have the right to speak just as much as you do. ------------------------------------------ Why do you get so angry? I suspect it's because the facts don't back you up when you have the entire story. You can take any situation and use just the facts you want to use, and you can make a convincing argument. That's what extremists do...they use SOME of the facts, add their own spin, and voila! If you really disect the entire picture, analyze ALL the facts, consider human nature, and then compare it to history...the picture changes dramatically. ---------------------------------------------- You also seem to forget that there are all ranges of both liberals and conservatives. There are extremes on both sides, but the majority of Americans are fairly moderate. ---------------------------------------- You're right...you DO refuse to debate or discuss, but do NOT try to blame anyone but yourself for that. I'd be willing to listen to your points as would several other 'right-wingers' if you did not fill your diatribes with name calling. ----------------------------------------- When I read a post, and it starts out with insults or name calling, I quit reading and move on to the next. I read your entire digging post, and I was prepared to discuss it with you until you told everyone who didn't agree with you to shut up. "

Does it matter? wrote on Jun 22, 2007 9:37 AM:

" Ever been tortured because your fat, wear glasses, or for your lunch money. C'mon, everyone has been tortured at some point (and to varying degrees) in their lives. Hell, sometimes I even torture myself over stupid little decisions and my own actions. All of you that think you have the answer to getting the answers, please respond. If your answer is to sit back and let the bully, bully, then what kind of answer is that? Just another question--like when will we be bombed again? when should we step in? what's worth more an innocent life or that of a terrorist? "

To Urban wrote on Jun 22, 2007 10:47 AM:

" The first time you SHOULD have heard of Bin Laden was when Reagan funded his group back in the 80's to oust the USSR. Hmmmm.. Is that Clintons fault? You gota love people who sit around all day listening to Rush blame Clinton for everything. Clinton is GONE! Who is in power TODAY? We can what if any situation to death an blame someone 100 years ago for not pulling the plug on middle east terrorisim and what does that get us? Not a darn thing. What we should be doing is holding the feet of the people IN OFFICE to the fire to get results and not placing the blame on a guy who left DC 6 years ago. "

Urban wrote on Jun 22, 2007 10:55 AM:

" Does it matter if the U.S. government kidnaps and tortures people and imprisons them forever without legal rights, in violation of the Constitution? Only if you're a civilized human being. If you're a fascist thug, no, it doesn't matter in the least. "

Hud wrote on Jun 22, 2007 11:02 AM:

" I do find it amusing that the people who favor U.S. torture practices like waterboarding, in which victims are repeatedly brought to the point of drowning, get their little baby feelings hurt because someone has insulted them. You want to have people tortured and murdered by the U.S. government, but you can't stand being called a mean name? Awfully thin-skinned for such tough guys, aren't you? Or is it only other people's agony that you can so bravely bear? "

Chris wrote on Jun 22, 2007 11:49 AM:

" I have never seen so many people on the side of the terrorist. If we wanted their oil, then why aren't we taking it? Why are our gas prices so high? Iraq is using oil revenues to pay for their rebuilding. Pay attention and get educated or don't post nonsense on the web. "

Urban wrote on Jun 22, 2007 11:55 AM:

" If you will read my post more carefully, To Urban, you'll see that I was complimenting Clinton and condemning Bush. "

Voltaire wrote on Jun 22, 2007 12:50 PM:

" Whatever Anita. "

Voltaire wrote on Jun 22, 2007 12:52 PM:

" You need to sink those screws INTO the floor. Stupid helper. "

Whatever? wrote on Jun 22, 2007 1:56 PM:

" Good one. Very succinct and well thought out. "

Urban wrote on Jun 22, 2007 2:38 PM:

" By the way, those who are "on the side of the terrorists" are the people who endorse torture and the secret, permanent imprisonment of people without legal rights. Those are terrorist, totalitarian principles, not U.S. constitutional principles. "

Answer wrote on Jun 22, 2007 2:50 PM:

" Anita wrote on Jun 22, 2007 6:57 AM: "...and YOUR side is the one that has been doing all the name calling." Please Anita, that statement is ridiculous on it's face. There has been plenty of name calling (Libtard, dumbocrat, traitor, terrorist) from "YOUR" side. Now quit whining and post your point of view. No one except the terminally brain dead or the obviously illiterate buys that only the left resorts to name calling. "

Urban wrote on Jun 22, 2007 4:33 PM:

" (Washington, DC) -- Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, today released new documents from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) related to the “expeditious departure” of Saudi nationals, including members of the bin Laden family, from the United States following the 9/11 attacks. According to one of the formerly confidential documents, dated 9/21/2001, terrorist Osama bin Laden may have chartered one of the Saudi flights. The document states: “ON 9/19/01, A 727 PLANE LEFT LAX, RYAN FLT #441 TO ORLANDO, FL W/ETA (estimated time of arrival) OF 4-5PM. THE PLANE WAS CHARTERED EITHER BY THE SAUDI ARABIAN ROYAL FAMILY OR OSAMA BIN LADEN…THE LA FBI SEARCHED THE PLANE [REDACTED] LUGGAGE, OF WHICH NOTHING UNUSUAL WAS FOUND.” The plane was allowed to depart the United States after making four stops to pick up passengers, ultimately landing in Paris where all passengers disembarked on 9/20/01, according to the document. “Eight days after the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history, Osama bin Laden possibly charters a flight to whisk his family out of the country, and it’s not worth more than a luggage search and a few brief interviews?” asked Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Clearly these documents prove the FBI conducted a slapdash investigation of these Saudi flights. We’ll never know how many investigative leads were lost due to the FBI’s lack of diligence.” U.S. District Court Judge Richard W. Roberts ordered the FBI to resubmit “proper disclosures” to the Court and Judicial Watch, having previously criticized the adequacy of redaction descriptions, the validity of exemption claims, and other errors in the FBI’s disclosures. Incredibly, the FBI had previously redacted Osama bin Laden’s name from the records in order “to protect privacy interests.” "

Urban wrote on Jun 22, 2007 5:07 PM:

" I think Fox News needs to be derided for not reporting all that "good news" from Iraq they have always assured us is being repressed by those liberal-biased reporters at other news organizations. I'd very much like to see every reporter and pundit at Fox News out walking the streets of Baghdad, reporting all that good news from those grateful, candy-throwing Iraqis. "

Here's why wrote on Jun 22, 2007 7:10 PM:

" The fake news channel and the right wing radical radio wackos have to preach that line to keep all of their little lemmings, who can't think for themselves in line. Good point Urban, if it's going so well why doesn't Fake (Fox) news prove it, instead of whining about how the so called liberal biased mainstream news outlets are ignoring all the wonderful news coming out of Iraq. Personally, I thing the Fake (Fox) news channel is to news, as to what professional wrestling is to sports. Both are big jokes. "

Urban wrote on Jun 22, 2007 7:15 PM:

" The AP reports that an Army officer with a key role in the U.S. military hearings at Guantanamo Bay says they relied on vague and incomplete intelligence and were pressured to declare detainees "enemy combatants," often without any specific evidence. His affidavit is the first criticism by a member of the military panels that determine whether detainees will continue to be held. Lt. Col. Stephen Abraham, a 26-year veteran of military intelligence who is an Army reserve officer and a California lawyer, said military prosecutors were provided with only "generic" material that didn't hold up to the most basic legal challenges. In other words, the administration doesn't have any evidence against these people it has held in prison for years. "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 22, 2007 7:28 PM:

" Hey Dave' wrote on Jun 20, 2007 4:33 PM: " How many kids did Slick Willie get killed in those 8 years? " I have the answer - you SURE that you want it? OK, here goes: The answer is : 7,625! Official breakdown is as follows: 1993: (1245) 1994: (1109) 1995: (1055) 1996: (1008) That's 4,417 deaths in four years of peacetime but, of course, who's counting? Shall we continue? 1997: (817) 1998: (827) 1999: (796) 2000: (758) Total military dead in the Iraq / Afghanistan wars between 2003 and this month stands at about 3,545 (21 Jun). This is tragic, as are all deaths due to war, and we are facing a cowardly enemy unlike any other in our past that hides behind innocent citizens. Each death is blazoned in the headlines of newspapers and Internet sites. Clinton was no more or less responsible for deaths durig his terms as Bush is now. And lets not forget the 40k+ people who die on the highways every single year. If we just pull out from the American highways we could save far more lives than pulling out of Iraq. I know that you don't want to see the American murder rates for those same periods - but I'll give ya a hint: add 50% to 2001 and you get the 1993 number. What's that got to with anything? Nothing, really, just like any statistic - it can be twisted to suit your needs, but the numbers are accurate. "

Anita wrote on Jun 22, 2007 7:36 PM:

" Urban, it's true...we DID let the bin Laden family leave the country... but you know, if we had forced them to stay, then that would have been the wrong move, too. Someone would have started screaming that we were keeping them here illegally. ------------------------------------------- And answer, I haven't seen the 'dumbocrat' one...the Libtard thing was over virtual identity theft...as for the terrorist thing, the only thing I've seen is a comment that some of you appear to take the terrorist's side over that of our country (which would then justify the traitor comment, although I haven't noticed that, either). And as for whining --- if I start whining, you'll know. I have done nothing BUT respectfully post my point of view. Maybe I SHOULD rephrase, however...your side is the one that has done the MAJORITY of the name calling. ------------------------------------------- And voltaire - Awesome response, bud! "

Anita wrote on Jun 22, 2007 7:49 PM:

" Dave - wow. I had never looked up that total, and I'm not sure that I've heard anything about Clinton's numbers. That's a very interesting piece of information. Pesky little facts, huh. LOL "

Voltaire wrote on Jun 22, 2007 8:28 PM:

" Gotta love this "us" and "them" mentality of the right. No Anita, you don't have a clue about the recent name calling and ghost posting that has been happening. Gee, all I did was tell (the generic) you (who hold a particular view on digging a hole) to shup up. Now I'll do one better; Anita, shut up and go resereach who has said what. "

Voltaire wrote on Jun 22, 2007 8:54 PM:

" Harping about Clinton, good; defending the current administration's policies, bad. Note, we don't want to list the figures for 2000-present, do we? No, those wouldn't fit well into our little fantasy world. I'd jump on the Clinton-bashing bandwagon too, but hey, there's more important things happening today for me to go back and worry about 1996. "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 22, 2007 9:24 PM:

" I was neither 'harping' about Clinton nor defending the current adminstration's policies. I answered the question posed to me with facts, not pitching a little hissy fit and telling anyone to shut up. I know that's a foreign concept to you. I wasn't asked about 2001 - 2002. Here are the numbers. 2001: (891) 2002: (999). Oh, yeah... you don't worry about 1996, and I don't worry about 2003. Fair enough? Happy now? Pre-Law 101: Don't ask a question you that don't know the answer to - it could kill your case. "

Doh wrote on Jun 22, 2007 9:30 PM:

" HEAVY FIGHTING AS U.S. TROOPS SQUEEZE INSURGENTS IN IRAQ CITY: -THE NEW YORK TIMES (June 21, 2007) By MICHAEL GORDON and ALISSA J. RUBIN: - "BAQUBA, Iraq, June 20 — Fighting was heavy in parts of Baquba on Wednesday as American troops continued to squeeze a large section of the city in an effort to rid it of insurgents believed to be part of Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia. Soldiers moved block by block through the city, the capital of Diyala Province, clearing houses and removing roadside bombs. As they pressed in, American troops discovered a medical aid station for insurgents — another sign that the Qaeda fighters had prepared for an intense fight. The hospital, uncovered by troops from the Fifth Battalion, 20th Infantry, was equipped with oxygen tanks, defibrillators, generators and surgical equipment, as well as pieces of insurgent propaganda. The American effort got off to a slow start in the morning when blowing sand precluded reconnaissance and medevac flights. But as the weather cleared, the soldiers advanced into the western section of the city. Soldiers said they had received useful tips from some residents on the location of buried bombs and booby-trapped houses. In the Mufrek neighborhood, several residents said they had been terrorized for months by Qaeda fighters, who commandeered houses to use as positions to shoot at American forces. The insurgents have imposed a strict Islamic creed, and some have even banned smoking, one resident told Capt. Jeff Noll, the commander of Company B of the First Battalion, 23rd Infantry, during his patrol through the neighborhood. While the soldiers searched the houses, loud explosions rumbled through the city. Americans were using satellite-guided bombs and rockets where underground bombs were believed to have been buried. The American troops have found 25 improvised explosive devices and have destroyed five homes that were rigged with explosives, the military said in a statement. Not all the buried bombs were found in time. At least three have exploded, in one case overturning a Bradley Fighting Vehicle and in another damaging a heavily armored Buffalo mine-clearing vehicle. One American soldier has been killed and 12 wounded in those attacks. In a statement, the American military said it had killed 41 Qaeda operatives. Some wounded insurgents were reported to have escaped when they were taken into a nearby home by a group of woman and children, and American troops held their fire. The Americans said they had not found any indication that insurgent fighters had fled Baquba. Elsewhere in Diyala Province, attacks continued on checkpoints and civilians. At least six civilians were killed, two of them by fire from allied troops, according to an Interior Ministry official in the province. Three soldiers also died when militants attacked their checkpoint, and the checkpoint building was mostly destroyed by a bomb. In the northern city of Mosul, eight Christian students and their professor were kidnapped by armed men who surrounded the minibus they were riding in. In Baghdad, the toll from Tuesday’s bombing at a busy square rose to 87 as more bodies were recovered and some of the wounded died. South of Baghdad, in Shiite-dominated areas, violence appeared to be on the rise. In Hilla, three Sunni Arab mosques were bombed. Nasiriya, the capital of Dhi Qar Province, about 225 miles south of Baghdad, was mostly quiet on Wednesday after American forces intervened in recent days in a battle between the police and Mahdi Army militiamen loyal to the cleric Moktada al-Sadr, according to a statement from the American military and from the Sadr office in Nasiriya. Several Nasiriya police officers were badly wounded in fighting on Monday and Tuesday, and Iraqi Army forces tried to rescue them. The soldiers came under heavy fire from the Sadr militiamen, who were positioned on rooftops, the American military said. Iraqi soldiers were unable to drive off the gunmen. Later, the American troops called in an airstrike against the militiamen, according to the American military’s statement. A spokesman for Mr. Sadr in Nasiriya, Hussein al-Araji, said that by the time the American strike came, the militiamen were trying to retreat after receiving orders from Mr. Sadr. Over the past three days, three Sadr gunmen were killed and 45 wounded, according to an American military statement. The Americans said Iraqi security forces had taken 30 casualties, but it was not clear whether any of those were deaths. The American military in Baghdad announced that it had rescued 24 severely malnourished and maltreated orphan boys, some of whom appeared to be mentally disabled. The soldiers discovered the orphanage on June 10; the discovery was first reported by CBS News on Monday. The children, ranging in age from 3 to 15, were found naked and emaciated in a darkened room, some of them in pools of their own excrement. Some were tied to their beds. The Iraqi Army and the local neighborhood council helped rescue the children, and American medics gave them initial care." - http://tinyurl.com/26v4jc - "

Doh wrote on Jun 22, 2007 9:37 PM:

" SURRENDER OR DIE: On the scene of Arrowhead Ripper June 22, 2007, 1:30 a.m. (By Michael Yon): "First a quick media round-up. (This is not all inclusive.) Alexandra Zavis from Los Angeles Times is down in the heat of the battle bringing home information. Michael Gordon from New York Times is still slugging it out, and his portions are accurate in the co-authored story, “Heavy Fighting as US Troops Squeeze Insurgents in Iraqi City.” (Long title.) CNN has joined the fight. AP came but will stay only a few days. Joe Klein from Time was here on the 21st and his story posted the same day and was accurate. We rode together in a Stryker. Like magic, Joe’s story was out before I got back to base. Joe took a helicopter out and filed from elsewhere. I’m having communications problems here, which is greatly slowing the flow. My Thuraya satellite phone and RBGAN satellite dish are not working for hours each day. The AP reporter is having the same problems. The signal degradation is caused by a special sort of RF interference. Moving our antennas around won’t work. We simply get cut off for long periods. I am with 3-2 Stryker Brigade Combat Team. I’ve run a few missions with them in Baghdad, and they have fought all over Iraq. This Brigade has much recent combat experience, and is expertly commanded. A person does not need to even meet the commanders (though I do each day) to know they are running a tight ship. The professionalism of 3-2 is particularly high, and they are very competent fighters who are maximizing their assets, including the incredible Stryker vehicles. While the name “Stryker” is on the table, apparently controversy is brewing back home whether Strykers should be in our arsenal. The answer is YES: we need all we can get. The Stryker might be the finest all-around combat vehicle in Iraq. But that is a matter for another day, and for professional soldiers to answer. The combat in Baqubah should soon reach a peak. Al Qaeda seems to have been effectively isolated. The initial attack on 19 June achieved enough surprise that al Qaeda was caught off guard and trapped. They have been beaten back mostly into pockets and are surrounded and will be dealt with. Part of this is actually due to the capability of Strykers. We were able to “attack from the march.” In other words, a huge force drove in from places like Baghdad and quickly locked down Baqubah. LTG Ray Odierno visited Baqubah on the 21st. Odierno clarified that this battle is to be final: we are not going to do this again. Odierno stressed to our commanders that they need to be thinking of an end-state that results in Iraqis taking charge, but that Iraqi commanders should not be given the reigns until they are ready, so that the result is we set them up for success. Odierno’s timing was remarkable: even before he arrived, the commanders here were talking about end-state daily and, on a more sour note, our commanders have their hands full with the local Iraqi commanders who seem less competent (to be kind) than those I have seen elsewhere, such as in Mosul. Our guys are winning. Al Qaeda is about to be strangled and pummeled to death in this town, but the local Iraqi leadership is severely wanting. This was most obviously noted in one area in particular, where there were some slight indicators of a possible humanitarian need. “Crisis” certainly is not the correct word, but there are displaced persons numbering at least in the hundreds. LTC Fred Johnson actually took me out there. (The access even to “bad” news is amazing with this Brigade.) I have been with LTC Fred Johnson for several days. LTC Johnson seems to recharge on sunlight or moonlight and can run a man into the ground. After seeing the humanitarian need building with no action to abate it underway, Johnson was very unhappy. He immediately started jerking choke chains on the people who are supposed to be handling humanitarian need, trying to avert having it build into a crisis. This is where the inept local Iraqi commanders come in. I’ve seen them in meeting after meeting, over the past few days, finding ways to be underachievers. The Iraqi commanders have dozens of large trucks and have only to drive to our base to collect the supplies and distribute those supplies to the people displaced in the battle. Our troops are fully engaged in combat, yet the Iraqi leaders were not able to carry that load without LTC Johnson supplying the initiative. The Kurds would have had this fixed yesterday. The Iraqi commanders in Mosul would have fixed this. The local Iraqi command climate is disappointing by comparison. Later I spoke with Major Jerry Gardner who is in charge of humanitarian needs. Gardner said he has 70,000 kilos each of flour and rice (bought from Iraq), and enough bottled water to keep 5,000 people going for 15 days. He can get three times that amount with a phone call. He’s got about 30,000 MREs, and also a complete “W.H.O. kit” that he says can feed 30,000 people for a month. Gardner said he can get four more kits like that if needed. The need is not at the level of a crisis, but the need for those few hundred is becoming more serious. They have small children. Our soldiers took me out there and let me talk with the people as long as I wanted to. The kids wanted their photos taken and were happy, but the moms looked worried. All males between ages 15-55 are being screened before being allowed to pass through the cordon. People are trying to escape the fighting, but we made this mistake in places like Tal Afar and Fallujah where our people attacked and left huge escape routes. This time, the number one priority is to trap and destroy al Qaeda." — Michael Yon is an independent writer, photographer, and former Green Beret who was embedded in Iraq for nine months in 2005. He has returned to Iraq for 2007 to continue reporting on the war. He is entirely reader supported and publishes his work at www.michaelyon-online.com "

Doh wrote on Jun 22, 2007 9:57 PM:

" BE NOT AFRAID: In a place where everything that is not already desert is tinder, sparks tend to catch fire. (By Michael Yon June 19, 2007, 6:30 a.m.) "---You shall cross the barren desert, but you shall not die of thirst. You shall wander far in safety though you do not know the way. You shall speak your words in foreign lands and all will understand. You shall see the face of God and live. Be not afraid. I go before you always; Come follow me, and I will give you rest.--- [From a prayer card I found on a base in Anbar Province, Iraq.]Thoughts flow on the eve of a great battle. By the time these words are released, we will be in combat. Few ears have heard even rumors of this battle, and fewer still are the eyes that will see its full scope. Even now — the battle has already begun for some — practically no news about it is flowing home. I’ve known of the secret plans for about a month, but have remained silent. This campaign is actually a series of carefully orchestrated battalion- and brigade-sized battles. Collectively, it is probably the largest battle since “major hostilities” ended more than four years ago. Even the media here on the ground do not seem to have sensed its scale. Al Qaeda and associates had little or no presence in Iraq before the current war. But we made huge mistakes early on and are pumping blood and gold into the region to pay for those blunders. When we failed to secure the streets and to restore the stability needed to get Iraq on its feet, we sowed doubt and mistrust. When we disbanded the government and the army, and tolerated corruption and ineptitude in reconstruction, we created a vacuum and filled the ranks of an insurgency-hydra with mostly local talent. But when we flattened parts of Fallujah not once, but twice, primarily in response to the murders of four of our people, we helped create a spectacle of injustice and chaos, the very conditions in which al Qaeda thrives. There is no particular spark, no single bolt of lightning, errant campfire, or careless cigarette flicked out a window that caused this conflagration. We walked into a dry, cracked land, where the two arteries of Mesopotamia have long pulsed water and blood through scorched lands into the sea. In a place where everything that is not already desert is tinder, sparks tend to catch fire. When we eviscerated Fallujah, al Qaeda, who had not been here before, swarmed in and grew like a tumor. There were many insurgent groups already infecting Iraq with many conflicting ideologies and goals, and just as many opportunistic thugs, and some that only needed the band aids and aspirin of open markets and electricity and a feeling of normality. But al Qaeda has been trying to start a civil war here for several years; chaos speeds the decay they feed on. During about the first three months of 2005, when I was in Diyala Province, I first wrote that Iraq was in Civil War. I felt the backlash from that throughout 2005-2006, and worse, we all watched the sad unfolding of greater and greater lies until now, in 2007, when the civil war is systemically toxic. Today al Qaeda (AQ) is strong, but their welcome is tenuous in some regions as many Iraqis grow weary enough of the violence that trails them to forcibly evict AQ from some areas they’d begun to feel at home in. Meanwhile, our military, having adapted from eager fire-starting to more measured firefighting, after coming in so ham-fisted early on, has found agility in the new face of this war. Not lost on the locals was the fact that the Coalition wasn't alone in failing to keep the faith of its promises to Iraqis. Whereas we failed with the restoration of services and government, AQ has raped too many women and boys in Anbar Province, and cut off too many heads everywhere else for anyone here to believe their claims of moral superiority. And they don’t even try to get the power going or keep the markets open or build schools, playgrounds and clinics for the children. In addition to destroying all of these resources, and murdering the Iraqis who work at or patronize them, AQ attacks people in mosques and churches, too. Thus, to those listening into the wind, an otherwise imperceptible tang in the atmosphere signals the time for change is at hand. We can dissect our Civil War, or World War II or Vietnam, but there is no way to dissect the current war. Only the residue of those prior wars remains with us today — the scars and headstones, memorial statues, history books, and national boundaries. We only dissect that which is dead. Pathologists who autopsy those wars can no longer affect the outcomes. There is little left to the corpse of a war, but the sculptors of history take the clay and give it shape and substance. But even the most masterful among the artisans — Michelangelo himself — chipping and slicing at marble from Carrara, could not breathe life into the statue of David. Twice I stood in Florence, staring up at David, clad only in his slingshot, the rock with which he would change history cupped in his hand. But as I write these words, the explosions — cannon fire reverberating day and night, rockets exploding on base, the rumbling and crumpling sounds of car bombs — are the very pulse of this war. This war cannot yet be dissected because it still lives— wounded, angry, thrashing on the table, but alive. We can only hack into it, diagnose it, treat it, knowing each attempt at a cure affects the pulse. Doing nothing causes tachycardia. Much of what afflicts Iraq was here before America was born. But when we elected to perform surgery on this sick land, we used hacksaws and sledgehammers, and took an already sick patient and hacked off some parts while pulverizing others. Meanwhile, there are stadiums full of people shouting at the doctors, threatening to fire them or revoke their licenses, or at the very least to cut off the lights mid-surgery. In the din of the mob, few seem to notice that the patient, screaming to be healed, is much more alive than dead. The patient roils in agony with every new cut, slashing at doctors and self. Some say we’ve done enough and it’s time for the patient to heal itself. Others are saying we should put it out of our misery, but surely this thing will live, and drag its mutilated self out of the hospital and follow us home, no longer seeking a cure but intent on revenge. For far too long our media and government have failed to fully inform us — even to the point of lying — about Iraq. I came to this ill-begotten war searching for people who knew the truth and would tell it. After those early embeds in places such as Diyala Province, back when I first began a five month embed in Mosul, I attempted to trace what had gone right and wrong with Nineveh Province during 2003, 2004, and 2005. Nineveh is a reasonable microcosm of an ethnically, religiously and culturally divergent Iraq — clearly affected by the whole, and affecting the whole — and I got in with one of America’s best fighting battalions, the 1-24th Infantry Regiment. They were at war. Out of the battalion of about 700, the soldiers were awarded about 181 purple hearts. And they were winning, clearly winning, in their tough battle space. I traveled around to many units in different provinces, but nowhere was the pulse of this war as palpable as it was with the 1-24th, also called the “Deuce Four.” Importantly, even perhaps presciently, feeling that pulse with my own fingers in 2005 led me to a specific person: David Petraeus, the first Coalition military leader in Nineveh, a general who’s many successes in Iraq were at that time already behind him. I finally reached General Petraeus after following the Deuce Four back home. He was stationed in Kansas, though why he was in Kansas was beyond me. Having just spent most of 2005 in Iraq, I thought he should be back in Iraq where he was needed. During a phone call to his home early in 2006 we must have talked for about two-hours. He was honest, almost blunt and always cogent, and the conversation added to my growing belief that Petraeus was the doctor who might be able to save this place..." ----Michael Yon is an independent writer, photographer, and former Green Beret who was embedded in Iraq for nine months in 2005. He has returned to Iraq for 2007 to continue reporting on the war. He is entirely reader supported and publishes his work at www.michaelyon-online.com.---- "

Doh wrote on Jun 22, 2007 10:17 PM:

" THE SURGE IS MASSIVE AND INTENSE:--http://tinyurl.com/yqd22u-- "The good news is the Iraqi-US forces have established themselves in configurations which are surrounding the al-Qaeda (and sympathizing groups’) strongholds so that there is no place for the Islamo Fascists to go. The fighting is most intense in Baquoba, the capitol city of Diyala Province and the second declared capitol city of al Qaeda’s moder caliphate (Ramadi in Anbar was their original claimed capitol - which they lost a few months back when Anbar turned on al-Qaeda"......"I predicted a few months back that al-Qaeda’s brutality would be its undoing and apparently I was right. al-Qaeda cannot exist of the local population is so angry it celebrates their destruction and is willing to take up arms against them. We have gone from what could have been a US surrender to al-Qaeda through a Congressional collapse of spine (nothing more) a few months back to a campaign were the Arab/Muslim street is now rising up against al-Qaeda and showing why the Democrats (or Surrendercrats as I call them) were incredibly wrong on Iraq. Al-Qaeda could have become the beacon of the Muslim world if we had left Iraq, but now they are being destroyed, in large part, by a backlash in the Muslim world." "

Doh wrote on Jun 22, 2007 10:33 PM:

" TURNING ON AL-QAEDA IN BAQUBA (FROM TIME ONLINE) Thursday, Jun. 21, 2007 By Joe Klein: "I helicoptered today into Baquba, the centerpiece of the current U.S. offensive in Iraq, with Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno —and then drove via Stryker brigade into the center of the fight for a briefing. It was midday, and the sun was so hot that both sides in the battle seemed to be taking a siesta. Only a few small explosions could be heard in the distance; there was no small arms fire. Odierno—a supertanker of a man with a shaved head who looks like ancient turtle—met with a group of battalion commanders in the ruins of a medical center that had been blasted, by someone, several years earlier. Situation maps were leaned against a white ceramic tile wall; the officers sat in campaign chairs, hunched in a tight semi-circle; bottles of cold water were passed around. The news from the battle was good. That was no surprise: in a guerrilla war like Iraq, every engagement that can be described as a "battle" is inevitably won by the superior force, which is part of the frustration. Baquba, the capital of Diyala province just northeast of Baghdad, had been infiltrated by al-Qaeda over the past year—between 400 and 500 al-Qaeda fighters were estimated to be in the city when the U.S. forces attacked on Monday, and now those who remain are surrounded, in a slowly tightening cordon. These sorts of operations have taken place multiple times in multiple cities during this war, to little effect—usually the terrorists slip away, as they did in Falluja in 2004, only to turn up elsewhere. That may well happen again this time. But there is one promising development in Baquba. A lieutenant colonel named Bruce Antonia told Odierno about preparing to attack the Buhritz neighborhood a few nights earlier when he was approached by local Sunni inusurgents—members, they said, of the 1920 Revolutionary Brigades—who were streaming out of the neighborhood. "They said they'd been fighting al-Qaeda but had run out of ammunition and asked us to supply them. We told them, 'Show us where AQ is and we'll fight them.'" The insurgents did and the neighborhood was cleared. A second lieutenant colonel named Avanulis Smiley picked up the story from there, "Sir, they've also showed us seven buried IED sites. They gave us specific information—description of the houses, gate color, tree trunks." After the briefing I asked Colonel Antonia if he'd asked the Sunnis why they had turned against al-Qaeda. "They said it was religious stuff," he said. "AQI demanded that the women wear abayas, no smoking and they preached an extreme version of Islam in the mosque. They'd also spent the winter without food and fuel because of the violence al-Qaeda was causing. One guy said to me, 'We fought against you because you invaded our country and you're infidels. But you treat us with more dignity than al-Qaeda,' and he said they'd continue to work with us. I've been involved in many operations here and this is a first—usually everybody's shooting at us. This is the first time we've had any of them on our side." (In web postings, the 1920 Revolutionary Brigade has denied it is cooperating with the Americans.) Odierno later told me similar anti-al-Qaeda rebellions were happening throughout the country, including some neighborhoods of Baghdad. "Iraqis notice things. They noticed what happened when we began to support the Sunni tribes against al-Qaeda in al-Anbar. And al-Qaeda seems to have overplayed its hand." At a second briefing, at a bunkered, joint U.S.-Iraqi command post in the middle of Baquba, the news was less optimistic. An Iraqi General said that he was pretty certain that the al-Qaeda leadership had slipped away, north to Tikrit and Samarra, and that many of the fighters were burying their equipment before they left town, hoping to return—as always—when the Americans left. "Well, it's up to you to make sure they don't come back," Odierno said. But the Iraqi Army and local police have been pretty unreliable in Diyala—riddled with Shi'ite militia elements, incompetence and corruption. "They replaced the commander of the 5th Iraqi Army," Odierno told me. "He had a pretty clear Shi'ite agenda. The new guy says the right things, but we just don't know yet what he's going to be like." -- http://tinyurl.com/2axw8m "

Doh wrote on Jun 22, 2007 11:32 PM:

" MARINES VOLUNTEER TO RETURN TO IRAQ (In one battalion, 200 members opt to extend their enlistments, for no bonus money. 'I'm here to teach the younger guys,' says one.) LATIMES.COM By Tony Perry Times Staff Writer: (May 22, 2007) - "RAMADI, IRAQ — Marine Cpl. Saul Mellado could be back in California, finishing the final months of his enlistment in a safe billet at Camp Pendleton. Instead, the 23-year-old naturalized U.S. citizen from Mexico is patrolling these war-torn streets only recently wrested from insurgent control — and bracing for an expected counteroffensive. Mellado, a machine-gunner, knows these streets: the adults who eye the Marines with suspicion and the children who beg for candy and water. He was first dispatched to Ramadi in late 2004, a deployment during which 15 Marines in his unit — the 2nd Battalion, 5th Regiment — died and more than 200 were wounded. Under Marine Corps rules about "short-timers," Mellado could have skipped this return to Ramadi six weeks ago. But like 200 other members of the battalion — a quarter of its number — he asked to have his enlistment extended. Unlike a reenlistment, the move earns the Marines no bonus money, no promotion and no promise of a job shift or posting to a favored duty station. "For a lot of the guys, this is their first tour," Mellado said as his Humvee moved slowly through the rubble-strewn streets. "If anything happened to them, and I could have helped them, I couldn't stand that." Mellado's wife, Kirsten, is pregnant with their first child, a boy. Mellado has no plans to take leave to see the birth, and it is unclear whether a webcam will be available so he can see the infant. "I'm here so our sons don't have to come here and fight someday," he said. In a teasing, sing-song voice, Lance Cpl. Abraham Saenz, 21, said: "He came out here to be with us. He just couldn't stand to leave his boys behind." Officials say extensions are not uncommon among the Marine Corps' 24 battalions, even as some return to Iraq for their third combat tour. In fact, they say, few records are kept because they are so common. But Marine generals who review the manpower of all infantry battalions say the 200 from the Two-Five, the most decorated battalion in the Corps, make up the biggest group. It can be traced to a meeting in Okinawa, Japan, several months ago when the battalion was finishing a phase of its pre-deployment training. Lt. Col. Craig Kozeniesky, the battalion commander, and Sgt. Maj. William Jordan, the senior enlisted man, assembled Marines whose enlistments were running short. Marines who were there don't remember that Kozeniesky or Jordan spent much time speaking of the complexities of U.S. foreign policy in the 21st century. Instead, the two asked the Marines to help the battalion's younger members. "I just told them: 'We've been together this long. We need you — the young Marines need you,' " Jordan said. In an infantry battalion, a sergeant major serves as the embodiment of institutional values to younger "grunts." At 44, Jordan has been in the Marine Corps for 27 years. "Finally I just told them, 'Everybody who is with us, move to the right side of the room,' " Jordan said. Only a handful stayed put. About 175 moved immediately to the right side. "I was blown away," Jordan said. "In all my years in the Marine Corps, I never saw anything like it." A decision to extend an enlistment meant putting plans on hold and finding an explanation for spouses and parents who would prefer that their Marines not return to Iraq. Sgt. Brian Kasher, 22, of Illinois plans to attend college, but he figures that can wait. "I'm here to teach the younger guys," he said. "My wife doesn't like it, but she understands it." Once the battalion returned to Camp Pendleton, 25 more Marines, many of whom had not attended the Okinawa meeting, also agreed to extend their enlistments by several months to be part of the deployment. For Mellado, the decision is connected to his status as an immigrant. "I came to America with 10 bucks in my pocket," he said as he walked through a marketplace. "This is my way of paying back my country for all the good things it has done for me." The Two-Five, whose motto, "Retreat, Hell," stems from the World War I battle at Belleau Wood, has drawn one of the tougher assignments in what remains the toughest city in sprawling Al Anbar province. Phone service is spotty, sewage runs in many streets, and any sign of local government is minimal. But Marines say that residents, encouraged by tribal sheiks and imams, have turned against the extremists and, among other things, are pointing out the location of hidden roadside bombs. "The last time, it was like the people didn't want to do anything to help their neighborhoods," Mellado said. "Now it's a big change. I want to be here to help with that, to help my Marines." - http://tinyurl.com/2ht99x "

Doh wrote on Jun 22, 2007 11:40 PM:

" One word sums up the left when it comes to Iraq: Denial. Everything is just a variation on a theme. The basic denial finds expression in the axiom that George Bush can’t do anything right. The corollary denial resides in their unshakable, desperate faith that they can never be wrong about Bush always being wrong. The first denial sets up the anathematization that can be summed up as, “If George Bush is for it, then I’m against it; if George Bush said it, then it must be a lie!” So - if George Bush wants victory in Iraq, then any suggestion, claim or proffered evidence supporting victory must be categorically denied. The second denial is even more poisonous, for it enables leftists to dissociate themselves at will from the real world. This is how they can go on parroting long-debunked canards, or deny plainly evident facts that don’t fit their narrative, or wallow in all manner of paranoid, bizarre conspiracy delusions. To be a leftist is to live a lie. Everything is deception: - You have to lie about yourself to yourself, because the truth that would be revealed by honest self-examination would be too awful to contemplate, let alone confront. - You have to lie to those like you, because you’re part of a community built upon a foundation of lies about itself and the outside world; if you don’t share in the collective dishonesty, then they’ll ostracize you to protect their whole world from collapsing. - And you have to lie to everyone else about what you believe and what you want, because you know that if they ever find out what your beliefs and desires really are they’d shun you. But every now and then, when they let their inner ugliness get the better of their self-control, they let the mask slip and prove that lo, you really *can* “question their patriotism.” Like Murtha looking for ways to “undermine” the administration on the war effort, or someone who “can’t wait” to see Iraq categorized as a Vietnam-style defeat, or when Harry Reid declares the fight to be “lost,” or the utterly cynical and dishonest utterances about “supporting the troops, but not their mission.” Cato the Elder used to close every speech he gave before the Roman Senate with the reminder, “Carthage must be destroyed.” A modern-day person who understands leftists like Cato understood the Carthaginians could be excused for concluding every post with, “Liberalism is a mental disorder. "

Voltaire wrote on Jun 23, 2007 12:33 AM:

" Indeed Dave, these are facts twisted to suit your needs. First, we have no clue where Dave’s figures are coming from, but even worse, he doesn’t state what these magical numbers are derived from, or give any context to them. Yeah, it is the “official breakdown” as declared by our very own Dave; what, was Clinton out there stabbing these children? I don’t doubt these facts, as it is possible, I just want to know how Dave got them so we can compare them to the similar numbers for the Bush administration. I am assuming, those are the figures just for children, since that is what Dave is supposedly replying to. However, he’s also suggesting we might want to include “40,000+ people” killed in automobile accidents annually and also all the murdered people from 1992-2000. I guess Clinton is responsible a million deaths or more. We all know the auto fatality rate and the murder rate were so much greater, what 1500%, than now, due to Bush’s superior domestic agenda and policies. Then Dave suggests that we should compare apples to rubber tires by taking these “facts” and only compare them to the 3,545 military deaths of American soldiers in Iraq, forgetting that similar number of domestic deaths have occurred since 2000, and totally disregarding any of the Iraqi civilian causalities in his comparison of numbers. Wow! You are right, Clinton killed a lot more people when we only use those numbers in that manner. I really doubt the president has any affect on the number of car wrecks that happen on the highway or the murder rate. Stick to the subject of discussion, okay? Ah, but he also says, “Clinton was no more or less responsible for deaths during his terms as Bush is now.” Again, those on the right continue to deny any responsibility for the actions of the Bush administration. You know, like how Clinton had the same information as Bush on Iraq, so Bush therefore wasn’t at fault for anything. That is just another denial of reality. The reality is this: using the same information, Bush sent ground troops into Iraq and Clinton did not. Stop hiding behind Clinton’s faults; we all agree he was a first-rate scumbag. Here’s my prediction, when a Democrat takes office in 2008, the moment someone chides Bush, you bet these folks who bash Clinton 6 years after he left office will be out there whining “stop talking about Bush”, that is so 2 days ago. While both Clinton and Bush had the same “evidence”, only one thought the case warranted an invasion and subsequent occupation. What if Clinton decided to launch nukes against Russia based on poor information that Bush senior thought was true, but later turned out false? Oh, well, I guess he wouldn’t bear any responsibility for Armageddon since “Clinton was no more or less responsible for deaths during his terms as Bush is now.” Dave doesn’t cite anything, doesn’t compare similar figures, digs up arguments about an administration out of office for nearly seven years, and totally denies all reality about the culpability of the Bush administration. I don’t know which is more laughable, Dave’s original post or the person who buys into those “pesky little facts” without using a discerning mind to separate fact from fantasy. "

Early Bird wrote on Jun 23, 2007 6:52 AM:

" Now just how did those seven thousand plus kids did, Dave. For some reason you failed in include that information, but I'm sure that was an oversight on your part. Did those seven thousand kids die in an uncalled war, such as the one in Iraq? Heck Dave, you might as well throw in the numbers on abortions and blame that on Clinton too. By the way, glad to see you back. "

Early Bird wrote on Jun 23, 2007 7:28 AM:

" Sorry for the typo, that should read die not did. For Anita: your kudos on Daves "facts" confused me a little bit, please explain. Thanks.... "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 23, 2007 8:17 AM:

" Those are official Department of Defense military deaths reported for the years cited. I did not get a breakdown on the cause and manner of death for each, not an oversight, wasn't asked about that. I imagine all deaths include combat, training, accident, homicide, suicide, bee stings, heart attacks, strokes and anything else. All ages were included - I doubt that I have access to information like age of each soldier at time of death. If I do, it's difficult to find. As for Iraqi civillian deaths - didn't look up that number. Could absolutely not care less. Kids and women used as homicide bombers, or to lure soldiers into traps. Our troops need to put their safety first. Kill whatever and whoever is considered to be a threat. Man, woman, child, donkey, cat, goldfish or houseplant. Whether or not I agree with government or military policies, and what I think of the war, our troops are there fighting for us, and dying for us, and they should have the ability to protect themselves in as many ways as is possible. I answered the question as it was posed to me. If, through your own research, you find official casualty numbers that differ from mine, by all means post them. Voltaire wrote: "I don’t doubt these facts, as it is possible, I just want to know how Dave got them so we can compare them to the similar numbers for the Bush administration. I am assuming, those are the figures just for children, since that is what Dave is supposedly replying to. However, he’s also suggesting we might want to include “40,000+ people” killed in automobile accidents annually and also all the murdered people from 1992-2000." I absolutely did NOT say anything about the years 1992-2000 regarding murders or highway deaths. Clinton did not stab any children that I know of, and no proof has been offered to show that Bush has, either. I don't even think Cheney has shot a kid in the face with a shotgun during this administration. I didn't blame Clinton for anything, just pointed out that the culpability of the two commanders - in - chief should be equal. Neither is personally responsible. If abortion numbers or anything else had been cited, they would have included numbers for both administrations. I did not pick and choose numbers or years to suit myself, simply answered a question that was asked of me. Jeez, first people get hammered for not answering questions, then they get attacked when they do answer, and the subject suddenly gets changed into something else. On one hand, someone tells another poster to "shut up and do some research" , but then that same person seems incapable of doing research of his own. Seems like a defense mechanism has been activated. As for Voltaire deeming my first post laughable: which part of it is untrue? Are you seriously going to deny that all of those things were promised and none were delivered? Thanks for the welcome, Early Bird. I watched from the sidelines for a while, but just had to jump back in for this. It's kinda frustrating and time consuming to feel the need to dot every i and cross every t regarding my statements and sources, while others can cite no source at all and not be called on it. It's also kinda sad that the personal attacks on other posters has escalated. I never did like the name-calling thing. Public figures are one thing, but even the most outrageous of posters should be either ignored (In the case of those who do not use a consistent name, or no name at all) or disagreed with civilly. My posts are often laced with dry humor and/or sarcasm, but some get so riled up that they miss it. A few sharp jabs in someone's direction to make a point is fine. Calling someone an idiot simply because he or she holds views that differ from your own, and not using any objective facts of your own to refute those views seems childish. It'd be just as easy to state the truth - that you have no legitimate counterpoint and are frustrated about that, or tuck your tail and admit defeat. "

Doh wrote on Jun 23, 2007 8:17 AM:

" Hey- I keep hearing these crazy stories about the troop surge kicking-a55 and taking names. I'm hearing it's the biggest offensive since the beginning of the war. Heck I'm even hearing these wild claims that the Sunni tribes that were originally resisting the American occupation, are now JOINING THE AMERICAN FORCES TO DRIVE OUT AL QAEDA! And I even heard that the Iraqis are revealing Al Qaeda's roadside bomb locations to the American troops! Can you believe these ridiculous stories folks? I mean raelly! We all know that this surge is a failure....right? Right??? I mean...this has got to be more FauxNews propaganda! Right??? Although....I've been hearing that these stories have been coming from real news sources like The New York Times, The AP, Time, The LA Times, and CNN even the BBC!!! This has GOT to be a bunch of bull!!??? Right? I mean-come on! We all know that NO posistive news comes out of Iraq! Am I right??!! NAH!!! I'll choose to believe the "The Most Ethical Congress Ever"! Because if Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Jack Murtha say that Iraq is a lost cause- then that's good enough for me! After all, what do those stupid commanders in the field know!! PPFFFFTT!!!! I mean really!!! Bush lied.(eyeroll) (sarcasm off) "

Curious wrote on Jun 23, 2007 8:31 AM:

" Tell me Anita, does your research involve watching Fox News, reading right wing blogs and web sites or what? Based on your positions, that is what it sounds like what you are probably doing. Seriously, how do you go about conducting your research? One thing you are going to have to learn, is that if you are going to come on here and make statements, such as the one you made yesterday about researching things, you had better be prepared to back them up or else you will get called out. One more thing, if you think most of the nastiness comes from the left side on here, you better get your glassed checked out. I would say that the nastiness is just about even. And just so you know, the Libtard slur started long before the name stealing started. You can always go back into the archives to check these things out. Sometimes we view things through rose colored glasses, don't we? "

Doh wrote on Jun 23, 2007 8:52 AM:

" REACTIONARY AMNESIA -The good ole’ days in the Middle East- (By Victor Davis Hanson June 22, 2007) "“Mess,” “fiasco,” “disaster,” “blunder,” and “catastrophe.” Fill in the blanks with almost any stock noun of gloom these days when speaking about Iraq. For finger-in-the-wind politicians, writing off Iraq is mere throat-clearing before moving on to any discussion of immigration reform or taxes. For ahead-of-the-curve pundits, starting out with “The failure in Iraq” is like opening their browser before daily pontificating. No need of explanation or empiricism, one just gets things out of the way at the very beginning with our new postmodern ritual. Usually the more vehemently one used to clamor for the idea of removing Saddam Hussein — such as a Sen. Harry Reid or an Andrew Sullivan — the more now they are likely to use superlatives in damning the enterprise. THAT THERE ARE 160, 000 AMERICANS — AT THE MOMENT IN AN ENORMOUS OFFENSIVE AGAINST AL QAEDA — FIGHTING TO SAVE IRAQI DEMOCRACY MEANS LITTLE, as evocation of pullouts, withdrawals, and timetables is mixed in with the language of defeat, despair, and finger-pointing. THAT THE WAR HAS MORPHED ONCE AGAIN INTO ONE LARGELY AGAINST AL QAEDA AND ISLAMIC TERRORISTS IS LOST ON CRITICS. All the old bogeymen — Ashcroft, Bremmer, Feith, Libby, Pearl, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz — are gone. But the media and opposition searches for new ones to blame for a policy they largely once endorsed. Witness the new slurring of the Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Pace as incompetent and Gen. Petraeus — our most innovative commander in a generation — as less than candid and not in touch with operations under his command. But then few have offered any consistent policy of what we are to do after Iraq. Once again generalities — best mouthed by John Edwards — about multilateralism, restoring American popularity abroad, working with allies — are thrown out, as if the world will be safer and more harmonious once we return to some mythical Democratic past. By default that could only mean something akin to the foreign policy of our last two such presidents, Messrs. Carter and Clinton. Have we gone mad in our amnesia about that awful past? The epithet “the Great Satan” was coined out of hatred for the diplomatic efforts of Jimmy Carter. Do we want Andrew Young back praising the humanitarianism of Khomeini? Bin Laden started out his 1996 promise to slaughter Americans with the warning to a sober and judicious Secretary of Defense Perry “I say to you William…” — in furor over the basing of American troops in Saudi Arabia. Al Gore weighed in on the aftermath of the Gulf War by damning the senior Bush — but for doing too little, allowing Saddam to stay in power, and proceed to acquire nuclear technology and weapons of mass destruction. Just as journalists, generals, and politicians rush to get into print another tell-all, I-know-the-answers book about the “disaster” in Iraq, so too in the 1990s the mini-Middle East publishing industry used to be devoted to equally furious attacks on realism, neo-isolation, and cynicism of Republicans and conservatives for an array of sins — sacrificing the Kurds and Shiites, not supporting Democratic reformers abroad, leaving Saddam in power, failing to prod Gulf sheikdoms to liberalize, cynically prodding on the Iran-Iraq war, etc. WHAT IS LOST, THEN, IN THE PRESENT PRE-ELECTION HYSTERIA AND THE REPOSITIONING ON IRAQ, IS THAT THERE WERE NEVER ANY GOOD AMERICAN CHOICES IN THE MIDDLE EAST. The present ones in Iraq and Afghanistan came about only from 9/11 and a general consensus that the failures of the past had led to that mass murder — and thus a new course of action was needed to replace both the liberal appeasement and conservative realism that had worked in the interest of bin Ladenism......OUR PRESENT POLICY, HOWEVER POORLY MANAGED IN POSTBELLUM IRAQ, AROSE AS A REACTION BOTH TO THE DO-NOTHINGISM OF PAST ADMINISTRATIONS, WHICH, BY GENERAL CONSENSUS, HAD EMBOLDENED AL QAEDA TO UP ITS ANTE ON 9/11, AND THE DECADES OF AMORAL REALISM THAT PROPPED UP THUGS AND DICTATORS WHO RUINED THEIR SOCIETIES BUT BLAMED THE ENSUING MESS ON AMERICANS AND JEWS. After 9/11, we did not, as alleged, invade countries serially, but removed only two fascistic governments, the worst in the Middle East — both with a record of supporting enemies of the United States, and both of whom we had bombed or sent missiles against in the very recent past. We did not leave after such punitive measures because we felt that the last time we did that, whether in Afghanistan in the 1980s, or Iraq in 1991, or Lebanon, or Somalia, things only got worse — and after 9/11 they might well get much worse. And unlike the bombing of 1998 in the Balkans, both operations in Afghanistan and Iraq were sanctioned by the U.S. Congress, discussed at the U.N., and widely supported by the American people. Removing the Taliban and Saddam, and promoting constitutional governments in their places, were not the only options after 9/11, but they were good choices — if the desire was to address comprehensively a quarter-century of terrorism that was insidiously escalating both in frequency and vehemence. If both governments can be stabilized even at this late date, the landscape in the Middle East from Lebanon to the West Bank will be much improved; if not, much worse. For those who wish to give up the struggle in Iraq, go home, and stay clear of the Middle East, a final question: What would Mr. Assad in Syria, al Qaeda in Iraq, President Ahmadinejad in Iran, or Hamas and Hezbollah wish us to do — and why? And what in turn would Mr. Karzai, Mr. Maliki, the women educators of Iraq, the Lebanese democrats, the Syrian exiles, and the Iranian dissidents prefer? And which group should we in turn enlist as friends and which accept are our enemies? It would be nice to go back to our pre-9/11 past, just as in a bloody 1944 the calm of 1937 looked to many of the starry-eyed far preferable, just as in the midst of the nuclear stand-off of 1962 we lamented the loss of the old “friendly” Russia and China of 1945. But while our ancestors engaged in the same despair, the same blame-gaming that we so enjoy, they at least were not stupid enough to lose those far more deadly and dangerous wars. We can win like they did as well, but only if we face the future with confidence, and not pine for the return of a mythical past that never was." "

Urban wrote on Jun 23, 2007 8:58 AM:

" The U.S. has imprisoned and tortured hundreds of Muslims for years, based on no evidence, and affording them no legal rights. But for some reason, the U.S. refused to detain the members of bin Laden's family, even though they may well have had operational and financial knowledge about the 9-11 attacks. Why? Because the bin Laden family has been a long-time business partner of the Bush family. Mustn't threaten the Bush family millions, no matter how many Americans get killed. In a family in which Grandpa Bush served as a banker for Hitler, what else would you expect? "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 23, 2007 9:07 AM:

" EarlyBird: I was as surprised at the military death numbers as you apparently are. When I started looking for those numbers, on a goof, I was truly, honestly expecting that the 1990's military deaths would be maybe 30% of today's number. I would have been OK to make my point with those numbers, after all, we're talking about wartime versus peacetime. Of course you'd expect many more deaths during a war. Doesn't work out that way, though. I can't explain the figures, and those for the 1980's are even higher (double, in some cases) than the 1990's. UN peacekeeping missions? Better training? More focused? Dunno. In interest of full disclosure, since you asked, the number 3,545 represents only deaths in Iraq since the start of the war in March 2003 (since that was the question) and does not reflect total military fatalities during Bush's first term. According to the Department of Defense, total military deaths during Bush's first term (Feb 2001 - Dec 2004) totaled 5,187, compared with 4,302 under Clinton's first term. The Iraq war began in March 2003, so 2001 and 2002 are not included in Iraq war totals. The first three weeks of 1993 were not under Clinton, thus accounting for the 4417/4302 discrepancy. So the grand total is 7,625 under Clinton, and 6,926 under Bush as of Jan., 2007. Still, pretty astounding numbers considering the war. "

Urban wrote on Jun 23, 2007 9:08 AM:

" Three months into the new U.S. military strategy that has sent tens of thousands of additional troops into Iraq, overall levels of violence in the country have not decreased, as attacks have shifted away from Baghdad and Anbar, where American forces are concentrated, only to rise in most other provinces, according to a Pentagon report. Just another failure to add to Bush's endless string of failures. Tell us again, right wingers, how this vicious ape is the greatest thing since Abraham Lincoln. I could use a good laugh. "

Thanks Voltaire wrote on Jun 23, 2007 9:15 AM:

" Apples to rubber tires, now that was a good one. That about sums up most of the logic and Bush and Clinton comparisons being put on here by those trying to justify Bush and his actions. One would think that if Bush was so right all of the time, they could support that without having to resort to dragging Clinton into the fray, as they seem to have to do. Reading most of the pro Bush stuff on here is like listening to the radio nut cases who, for every good thing they have to say about Bush the have 2 bad things to say about one of the Clinton's. By the way Doh, do you really thing your rather lengthy cut and pastes jobs really have any effect on anyones thinking, besides Anita of course. I suspect most are simply ignoring them anyway, but I'm sure you are rather proud of them, so by all means, if that's the best you can come up with, keep it coming. "

Paranoia on my part? wrote on Jun 23, 2007 9:39 AM:

" The removal of certain threads on this site seem a bit suspicious at times. I realize that all have to go eventually, but it seems like some subjects, sometimes a little aggressive in their comments towards certain people, seem to up and disappear all of a sudden. Would that be a form of censorship? Just a thought. I realize this has nothing to do with the subject at hand, but had to place it somewhere, and this seemed like as good as place as any. "

One word for Dave wrote on Jun 23, 2007 9:52 AM:

" Ouch! "

The biggest lie... wrote on Jun 23, 2007 10:05 AM:

" .....being put forth on this site is, that if you are against this war, you are for the terrorists. I suspect even those using that line know that's not true, but some how they think it makes their case stronger. "

Urban wrote on Jun 23, 2007 10:40 AM:

" Gee, if things are going so swimmingly in Iraq, we must be mistaken about the world's most expensive military being stymied by insurgents for longer than World War II, eh? Let me guess. Maybe the U.S. really won four years ago, about the time that chimpanzee you right wingers worship got dressed up in his G.I. Joe flyboy playsuit and went prancing around on the deck of an aircraft carrier in front of a big "Mission Accomplished" sign. You right wingers are certainly not much for victory or successful governmental operations, but you're great at Village People impressions. "

Urban wrote on Jun 23, 2007 11:39 AM:

" "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." — Sinclair Lewis "

Doh wrote on Jun 23, 2007 12:58 PM:

" HELLO DEMOCRATS, RINOs, AND THE SOCIALIST PROGRESSIVE LIBERAL ANTI-WAR LEFT: - ****SERIOUS TROOP SURGING HAS BEGUN**** - MUCH TO YOUR CHAGRIN AND THAT OF THE LIBERAL MEDIA. - And now for the 70% of clear and open-minded Americans who have "very high confidence" in our amazing Arm Forces, check out the photos from the the current operations (taking place as we speak). Here they are: http://tinyurl.com/2jm4xr "

Hud wrote on Jun 23, 2007 1:20 PM:

" You know, you right wingers disappoint me. For years, you lectured us about how, despite all the evidence to the contrary, your Chimpanzee in Chief was as smart as Lincoln and as brave as Batman, and meant what he said and said what he meant. You assured us that, just as Bush claimed, the voice of God spoke through him, and gave him those infallible gut instincts and whims that he used to govern so wisely. And yet, for a long time now, you have been terribly quiet. I haven't heard you right wingers review your simian savior's great qualities in a long, long time. I'm afraid they are starting to fade in my mind. List them again for me, please. I'd love to hear them. "

Hud wrote on Jun 23, 2007 4:42 PM:

" Still no takers on my invitation to list the wonderful qualities of George W. Bush? This concerns me. After all, our great leader has assured us that God speaks through him. According to the Intelligencer Journal and the Lancaster New Era newspapers, a group of about 60 local Amish people heard Bush report this momentous fact at the Lapp Electric Service plant in Smoketown, Pennsylvania, on July 16, 2004. “I trust God speaks through me,” Bush told them. “Without that, I couldn’t do my job.’’ Have you right wingers turned your backs on God? Speak, right wingers! Defend the Lord Bush thy God! "

Doh wrote on Jun 23, 2007 4:56 PM:

" What's wrong Urban? Aren't you happy that the surge is starting to produce these positive results so early? Aren't you encouraged that the Sunni insurgents are actually turning AGAINST Al Qaeda? Aren't you thankful that our troops rescued a city whose females and young boys were literally being raped by Al Qaeda? Aren't you thankful that our troops rescued two dozen mentally disabled children who were lying in their own excrement? Aren't you encouraged that the Sunni insurgent groups view us as more respectful and humane than Al Qaeda? Doesn't it make you hopeful when you hear that the citizens of Iraq have thoroughly had enough of Al Qaeda? Doesn't any of this strike you as good news? Or are you actually BITTER AND ANGRY about this news? What's wrong Urban- does all this good news just pi55 you off? Do you find yourself cheering for the "other" team? With all your soapbox diatribes on the utter failure of Iraq, why aren't you happy about this latest news? After all- it's coming from THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA, NOT FOXNEWS. So is this news false, Urban? You owe everyone in here an explanation. Let's see if that never-ending mouth of yours can cough up these answers- or will it just spew out some more mindless far-left anti-American psycho-babble from the Daily Kos site. Let's see! "

Doh wrote on Jun 23, 2007 5:05 PM:

" Fascism has already come to America. And far from being wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross, it is instead burning the flag and legislating the cross out of existence. Only now, it uses political correctness instead of book-burnings as it shrouds it's identity in the sheep’s clothing of "Liberalism". "

Anita wrote on Jun 23, 2007 5:10 PM:

" To whoever thinks he/she/it needs to teach me how to research, you are absolutely 100% wrong. I do not have to learn anything about how to post here... you can ask anyone who remembers me from before. I used to cite nearly every source. The thing I learned was that it didn't matter. No one bothered to check them out, anyway. No, I do not read blogs of any kind, and I do not get all my information from right-wing shows. I do not listen to talk radio. I DO watch Fox because they give both points of view. I think Sean Hannity is too far right...I think O'Reilly, though far right in many ways, is much closer to center than is Hannity, and I often wonder if Alan doesn't spend most of his time wearing rose colored glasses. --------------------------------------------- No, there are a lot of things I do not do well, but research is not one of them. I have to be good at research...I'm a grad student. ---------------------------------------------------- In answer to the question about kudos to Dave's stats, I simply found it interesting. I wouldn't have thought that there would have been nearly as many military deaths during the Clinton years because we were not really at war then. I mean, yes, we had little skirmishes and conflicts, but it wasn't like any major, long time wars such as Vietnam, WW I or II, Korea, etc. So I just found it interesting. I had not looked up that information. -------------------------------------------- And Voltaire, I will NOT 'shut up'. And thanks to Doh and Dave, I don't have to do any research because they've already provided you with excellent sources. "

Doh wrote on Jun 23, 2007 5:47 PM:

" The biggest truth being revealed on this site is that if you are against holding Jihadists accountable for their actions and instead assign blame to the United States for the Islamo-Fascists actions; you are probably a terrorist-sympathizing, American-hating, Jihadist-enabling, Far-Left-Progressive, Closed-minded, Revisionist-spewing-Liberal. "

Doh wrote on Jun 23, 2007 6:04 PM:

" You know, some of you Left Wingers fail to disappoint me. Because you never miss a chance to view this country in the absolute worse light possible. Even to the extent of rationalizing truly barbaric behavior by truly fanatical zealots by pointing to imaginary and incomparable conspiracies of this nation as it restrains its military might while it struggles to free a country of the very zealots that some on The Left view as more "victim" than terrorist. You fail to disappoint- because nothing less was ever expected of you. Thank you. "

Doh wrote on Jun 23, 2007 7:04 PM:

" The fact remains that this country went to war with Iraq based on the claims and policies that were already cited and enacted by the Clinton Administration. That is one of many inconvenient facts that the Left-wing Revisionists have never come to terms with. And it is the main reason they work as hard as they do to never stop repeating the lie "Bush lied, people died" in hopes that it will become "the new truth" in the psyche of the politically-deluded and the historically-illiterate. Goebbels would be proud! "

Actually wrote on Jun 23, 2007 7:22 PM:

" The number of military deaths under Reagan was twice that of Clinton. "

Doh wrote on Jun 23, 2007 7:38 PM:

" ("The reality is this: using the same information, Bush sent ground troops into Iraq and Clinton did not.")---- ummm...Voltaire? Did you happen to hear about that whole 9/11 "thingy"? Ya didn't? Okay. Well, here it is. You see this bad guy call Osama Bin-Laden heads this group called Al Qaeda. Now Bin Laden had his twisted little minion's hijack some airplane "thingys" and fly them into these building "thingys". And 3,000 Americans ended up dying! No kidding! Well it turns out (don't cha know) that just a few years before that, Old Billy-of-the-open-fly actually stated (in an official capacity) that old Bin Laden had a working relationship with (now wait for it...) none other than....TAHDAH!!! Mr. Saddam (Home of Dr.VX nerve gas) Hussein!!! And President Bush decided (along with a whole bunch of very patriotic Democrats) that after that whole 9/11 "thingy", old Saddam (inventor of the wood shredder torture) Hussein could no longer be tolerated. And had to be de-throned, as per Bill (I passed the chance to kill Bin Laden) Clinton's policy of regime change. Now does that clear up that whole revisionist and illogical statement that you made? I thought so. You're welcome! "

Well.. uh..... er ....uh.... wrote on Jun 23, 2007 7:40 PM:

" .....oh yeah, he was arrested for theft one time...and uh, I think he had a couple of DUI's...and maybe a coke bust a long time ago..and don't forget about his fantastic military career and his pristine attendance record in the guard.. and he did have an illustrious business career, except for all of those bankruptcies. Sounds like a great set of qualifications for a President to me. All hail the Commander (Monkey boy) in Chief. "

Voltaire wrote on Jun 24, 2007 4:57 AM:

" Dave is correct (more or less) with his numbers quoted early in this thread. You can look at the 1,293 deaths in 1993 and the 1,410 deaths in 2003 and really get the impression that the numbers are not really all that different – that’s a mere 100 more deaths, and to boot, we were fighting a war on two fronts in 2003. Yet, without the full context, Dave’s numbers are meaningless. In 1993 the military was 10% larger than in 2003. For rational analysis, let us compare the ratio of the total number of military deaths to the total number of military personnel serving during each year. Starting with 1993, 1 in every 1,524 personnel died; 1994, 1 in 1,624; 1995, 1 in 1,598; 1996, 1 in 1,656; 1997, 1 in 1,926; 1998, 1 in 1,857; 1999, 1 in 1,911; 2000, 1 in 1,968. With a few nominal spikes, we have a linear decrease in the annual deaths to personnel ratio. Now let us examine the early Bush years (I was unable to obtain figures for 2005 or 2006.) In 2001, 1 in every 1,727 personnel died; 2002, 1 in 1,553; 2003, 1 in 1,228; 2004, 1 in 907. Immediately starting in 2001, the death to personnel ratio increases. These are not abstract whole numbers pulled out of thin air. These are the facts, viewed in their full context – a context some simply refuse to acknowledge because it does not fit nicely into their political point of view. The cold, hard, ugly truth is, in 2004 you were more than twice as likely to die than in 1998, 1999, or 2000 if you were in uniform. That is a very different picture than the lackadaisical comparison Dave put forth earlier, where he suggested the numbers are more or less comparable or even that the deaths were more common during the Clinton administration. Dave readily admits the he “can’t explain the figures (being so high in the 1980s)”, but the answer is simple: most deaths in the military come from accidents, illnesses, and suicides. Thus, the larger the size of the military the more accidents, illnesses, and suicides will happen. In the 1980s the military was approximately 2.3 million strong. In 1992 this number declined to 1.9 million, and by 1997 the military strength had leveled off at 1.5 million. It remained at roughly 1.5 million until 2003 when it increased to 1.7 million. In all fairness, the number of accidents, illnesses, and suicides is not really any different in 1994 or 2004 when the military numbered 1.7 million in both years. If these factors are remaining relatively constant, it’s not that hard to figure out where the increase in deaths to personnel ratio is coming from (1:1,624 and 1:907), is it? This analysis bears out exactly what common sense tells us it should: the death to personnel ratio is higher during periods of war. Imagine that? Numbers can be twisted to serve any agenda; facts cannot. This is how you compare “apples to apples.” "

Urban wrote on Jun 24, 2007 6:29 AM:

" The conservatives of the American Freedom Agenda call for a campaign of restoration of American liberty that should enjoy support from liberals who still have spines - a rare breed on Capitol Hill these days, writes Ed Tant. Showing what conservative icon Barry Goldwater called "The Conscience of a Conservative," the AFA calls for the restoration of the "Great Writ" of habeas corpus that is the underpinning of our legal system. The group also takes a firm stand against government spying on Americans "on the President's say-so in violation of federal law." It issues a strong challenge against "signing statements" that allow the White House to ignore duly-passed laws, and aims to prohibit the Bush administration "from kidnapping, detaining and torturing persons abroad in collaboration with foreign governments." The American Freedom Agenda is led by such conservatives as Bruce Fein, who served in the Reagan Justice Department; David Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union; Richard Viguerie, the direct-mail king of grassroots right-wingers, and former Georgia Congressman Bob Barr, the gimlet-eyed enforcer of the Bill Clinton impeachment drive. "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 24, 2007 7:42 AM:

" So, you're basically saying that it doesn't matter whether we're at war or not, the number of military deaths will remain fairly constant, while the ratio inreases in wartime. The full context? Howzabout this? The 1.2 million guard and reserve personnel makes today's military total about 2.6 million. Many of these units have been deployed, so they must be added to the totals to get an accurate picture of the ratio of deaths/personnel. More reserve and guard units are activated during wartime, meaning there are more personnel on active duty than in peacetime, and when these are added in, the ratios are back to the same, or even lower, levels than before. 100 more deaths, with 800,000 more personnel. That actually brings the casualty rate DOWN... WAY down. Nice use of twisted statistics and twisted logic, though. And, there are actually some facts mixed in with the jabberwocky. I'm semi-impressed. Comparing apples to horse-apples is an improvement over yelling "shut up". Nice. "

Urban wrote on Jun 24, 2007 8:03 AM:

" You know what's fun? That the Democratic candidate for president will be running against a candidate from the Party of Bush, who represents the True Spirit of Bush, the man who actually invaded a non-threatening nation by lying to the American people and who created a gigantic, bloody, failed mess there. The man who shredded the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The man whose puppet master vice president declares himself to be above all branches of U.S. government and all mere mortal law. We have thousands of video clips of every major Republican verbally licking the boots of their masters Bush and Cheney, and those will look wonderful repeatedly endlessly in television ads. Failure, deceit, greed and treason, thy name is Bush. Thy name is the Republican Party. Republicans — Always and forever the party of Bush, Bush, Bush. Ahhh. It's morning in America, as Ronnie liked to say. "

Well, Voltaire? wrote on Jun 24, 2007 10:09 AM:

" The property you have lived on your whole life has a well that was built by your strong grandfather. This well has supplied you with more water than you’ve ever needed. You use the well to fill your pool and water your garden every year. Now your neighbor, who beats his wife and children, comes over to use your well without invitation. You see him doing this and don’t say anything, but you do build a fence to keep him out. This same fence also helps prevent you from seeing your neighbor’s abuse to his family. You even hear from other neighbors that the abusive neighbor has stolen vegetables from their garden and flowers from their landscaping. Keeping a peaceful neighborhood and not wanting to impose your non-violence or Christian beliefs on him are the reasons that you haven’t said anything to him for stealing your water and haven’t tried to interrupt the misery that he inflicts on his wife and children. You have called the police a time or two to report a neighborhood disturbance, but the abuse has continued. Well, even after erecting a fence, your abusive neighbor has continued to use your well without invitation and on September 11th he steals 5,000+ precious gallons. Your well (back in 1932): $10; your fence (now): $3,000; Having someone that you can berate for making decisions that keep you, your family, and your friends safe: PRICELESS. "

Doh wrote on Jun 24, 2007 11:23 AM:

" The deaths of 3000 American citizens, the Afghanistan War, the Iraq War, and The USS Cole, ALL COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED IF BILL CLINTON WOULD HAVE TAKEN CARE OF BIN LADEN WHEN HE HAD THE NUMEROUS CHANCES TO DO SO! (From the New York Times August 17, 2005) STATE DEPT. SAYS IT WARNED ABOUT BIN LADEN IN 1996: -- "Critics of the Clinton administration have accused it of ignoring the threat posed by Mr. bin Laden in the mid-1990's while he was still in Sudan, and they point to **CLAIMS BY SOME SUDANESE OFFICIALS THAT THEY OFFERED TO TURN HIM OVER TO THE AMERICANS** before ultimately expelling him in 1996 under international pressure. **BUT CLINTON ADMINISTRATION DIPLOMATS HAVE ADAMANTLY DENIED THAT THEY RECEIVED SUCH AN OFFER**, and the Sept. 11 commission concluded in one of its staff reports that it had "not found any reliable evidence to support the Sudanese claim." ----- Now check out this audio of Bill Clinton at The Long Island Association Annual Luncheon Feb. 15, 2002: (Clinton: "They released him. At the time, 1996, he had committed no crime against America so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America. So I pleaded with the Saudis to take him, 'cause they could have. But they thought it was a hot potato and they didn't and that's how he wound up in Afghanistan.") (Listen to the tape here: http://tinyurl.com/47hol) *Note* The audio of Bill admitting that the Sudanese offered Bin Laden to him is immediately followed by audio of Hillary DENYING THAT BIN LADEN WAS EVER OFFERED TO THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION. Now what was that about Bush lying??? "

Urban wrote on Jun 24, 2007 12:40 PM:

" Republicans should not just give up. Remember, you are, and always will be, the Party of Bush, and embody the true spirit of Bush. As Bush has revealed unto you, God speaks through him. Do not betray God, Republicans! Stand up for Bush! Tie yourselves to Him! Where Bush goes, you go!!! "

Actually I agree with this letter wrote on Jun 24, 2007 1:17 PM:

" Bush should be impeached for what he has done to the English language. "

Doh wrote on Jun 24, 2007 2:13 PM:

" What's wrong Urban? Aren't you happy that the surge is starting to produce these positive results so early? Aren't you encouraged that the Sunni insurgents are actually turning AGAINST Al Qaeda? Aren't you thankful that our troops rescued a city whose females and young boys were literally being raped by Al Qaeda? Aren't you thankful that our troops rescued two dozen mentally disabled children who were lying in their own excrement? Aren't you encouraged that the Sunni insurgent groups view us as more respectful and humane than Al Qaeda? Doesn't it make you hopeful when you hear that the citizens of Iraq have thoroughly had enough of Al Qaeda? Doesn't any of this strike you as good news? Or are you actually BITTER AND ANGRY about this news? What's wrong Urban- does all this good news just pi55 you off? Do you find yourself cheering for the "other" team? With all your soapbox diatribes on the utter failure of Iraq, why aren't you happy about this latest news? After all- it's coming from THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA, NOT FOXNEWS. So is this news false, Urban? You owe everyone in here an explanation. Let's see if that never-ending mouth of yours can cough up these answers- or will it just spew out some more mindless far-left anti-American Noam Chomsky Communist psycho-babble talking points from the The SmirkingChimp.com site. Whats wrong Urban- are you not smart enough to use your own words? Let's see! "

Urban wrote on Jun 24, 2007 2:56 PM:

" In his “When Religion Becomes Evil: Five Warning Signs,” religion professor Charles Kimball told us to watch out for these ominous signals in religious groups – 1) claiming absolute truth; 2) seizing upon an “ideal time;” citing imminent disaster or looming “end times;” 3) demanding blind obedience; 4) using ends to justify means, as in cheerful acceptance of “collateral damage” and 5) waging “holy war.” You will note that American fundamentalists have long since hurtled past all five signposts of danger, shouting their hosannas all the way. "

LOL wrote on Jun 24, 2007 2:58 PM:

" "I'm a grad student... I don't have to do any research because they've already provided you with excellent sources... I wouldn't have thought that there would have been nearly as many military deaths during the Clinton years because we were not really at war then." Personally, I'd take Voltaire's advice rather than embarassing your professors with additional comments. "

Hud wrote on Jun 24, 2007 3:21 PM:

" According to the Associated Press, the U.S. commander of a new offensive north of Baghdad said Sunday his Iraqi partners may be too weak to hold onto the gains of terrority. The Iraqi military does not even have enough ammunition, said Brig. Gen. Mick Bednarek: "They're not quite up to the job yet." His counterpart south of Baghdad seemed to agree, saying U.S. troops are too few to garrison the districts newly rid of insurgents. "It can't be coalition (U.S.) forces. We have what we have. There's got to be more Iraqi security forces," said Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch. The two commanders spoke after a deadly day for the U.S. military in Iraq. At least 11 soldiers were killed on Saturday from roadside bombings and other causes, leaving at least 31 dead for the week. "

Urban wrote on Jun 24, 2007 3:56 PM:

" As one veteran observed, everyone we fight in Iraq is now "al-Qaida" It's a curious thing that, over the past 10 - 12 days, the news from Iraq refers to the combatants there as "al-Qaida" fighters. When did that happen? Until a few days ago, the combatants in Iraq were "insurgents" or they were referred to as "Sunni" or "Shia'a" fighters in the Iraq Civil War. Suddenly, without evidence, without proof, without any semblance of fact, the U.S. military command is referring to these combatants as "al-Qaida". Welcome to the latest in Iraq propaganda. "

Bille Brant wrote on Jun 24, 2007 4:52 PM:

" To Well, Voltaire? Your excellent analogy will be lost on many of the ultra liberals here. It was much too simple and made too much sense.... Good job! "

Voltiare wrote on Jun 24, 2007 4:58 PM:

" My figures stand and include active duty military, national guard, and the reserves. My numbers are from the Congressional Research Office as prepared for the Republican Congress (July 2005.) Your assertion that there was a greater fatality rate under Clinton than Bush has been debunked. You, and not me, are the one throwing out twisted facts and making unsubstantiated claims. You are semi-impressed? Try owned. http://tinyurl.com/yv53q8 "

Voltaire wrote on Jun 24, 2007 5:10 PM:

" Furthermore, I have absolutely no problem telling people who cannot grasp logic (ie. "why there were more deaths in the 1980s", "I don't need to research that because someone else did it for me") to shut up. People who execute poor logic, refuse to look at the situtation objectively, and are wholly bent on partisan aims deserve no place at the adult discussion table. Rather, they only deserve the most base treatment in the most simple terms that can easily be understood by the smallests of minds. "

Voltaire wrote on Jun 24, 2007 5:32 PM:

" Billie, that analogy has no bearing on my recent post that debunked Dave's proposterous claim. I am not suprised that the people who heralded those figures as "the truth" can't handle how the facts really stack up. The debunking of Dave's hypothesis only shows what common sense tells us should be the case, and it says nothing on the war to which this analogy applies. Unable to defend their previous misuse of facts and poor execution of logic, unable to accept reality, some people would like very much to refocus the debate on another topic of their choice. To debate the war in general with such an uneducated, unobjective gathering of peons (left and right) is pointless -- hence my general avoidance of the subject. Moreover, in addition to being pointless, the same people say the same thing over and over and over -- it's boring! However, the blatant abuse of facts by some warranted my gentle foray into this tempest-swirl of ignorance. Good try on switching the subject, but I'm simply not biting. "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 24, 2007 5:49 PM:

" Here's a prime example of where factual numbers turn into absurd statistics: Arthur, Illinois, is a town with a population of approximately 2,200. Let's say some wacko pulls into town and shoots two people to death. Those will be the only fatalities for the year. Using the deaths/population ratio, Arthur has just surpassed Chicago, New York and every other major U.S. city in murder rate statistics, with a 91 per thousand rate versus 15.6 per thousand in Chicago and 6.6 per thousand in New York City (2006 figures). So now Arthur is nearly six times more dangerous than Chicago and almost 14 times more dangerous than New York! Washington, DC, Los Angeles, Detroit and Miami also are statistically safer than Arthur. Which place would you rather have your wife, mother or daughter to have car trouble on a Saturday night? A Douglas County deputy was recently shot, and using deputies shot compared to deputies on the force, being a Douglas County deputy is now more dangerous than being a street cop in any major city in the country! Hard numbers do not lie, extrapolating them into ratios does. So, all we have to do is conscript 3 million more troops into the Armed Forces, and if the death count doubles next year, we can say that the death rate decreased by half. Absurd. "

Doh wrote on Jun 24, 2007 5:55 PM:

" You truly are ignorant of any real “facts” pertaining to this war, aren’t you Urban. The Sunni insurgents are referring to Al Qaeda as "Al Qaeda". As a matter of fact the Sunni's were fighting Al Qaeda when the surge arrived in Baquba last week. They even asked the U.S. forces for more ammunition so they could continue to drive Al Qaeda out of the city. And incidentally every mainstream media source has confirmed that the main resistance IS in fact Al Qaeda. Of course the Clinton Administration claimed there was an Al Qaeda connection with Iraq back in 1998. The question is- when did Al Qaeda ever leave! But of course all you read are Far-Left Wacky-Sites so I don't blame you for being ill-informed. "

Doh wrote on Jun 24, 2007 6:00 PM:

" Well Voltaire- if want to debate this war with someone who is educated, objective, and well informed; here I am. And if you want snotty- I can play that too. Come and get me. "

Anita wrote on Jun 24, 2007 6:05 PM:

" LOL - Way to take comments out of context and then take part of the quote out so that it says something completely different than it did originally. I'm impressed. "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 24, 2007 6:11 PM:

" The above should have said per HUNDRED thousand, not per thousand. Everything else is accurate. "

Bille Brant wrote on Jun 24, 2007 6:16 PM:

" Voltaire- I was responding to Well, Voltaire? and his anaology, not you. It doesn't matter which post he was referring to it was still well done. Ya know, some of us here don't feel the need to overwhelm one another constantly with examples of "superior intellect " as some are prone to do. Sometimes a good dose of good old common sense and straight talk will suffice.... The admonition to "shut up" from... (who was that ?)several times to poster's really shows what a "big boy" a certain poster is! As far as you being bored, who cares? You are not the only poster EVERYONE responds to here. My sleep patterns won't be interupted because of it! Sweet Dreams zzzzzzzzzzz! "

Doh wrote on Jun 24, 2007 6:20 PM:

" 11 soldiers killed out of a surge operation that included 10,000 plus troops is a VERY SUCCESSFUL OPERATION. And let me explain to you "Hud", that the point to this operation is to buy time for the Iraqi Government to work out the terms with the Sunni faction of the new government. That's the main problem with the Iraqi army- the Sunni/Shiite tribalism. Will the new Iraqi government reach an effective level of operation? Time will tell. The good news is that the Iraqi citizens have had enough of Al Qaeda and more and more of the communities are siding with the U.S. forces. That is a HUGE development! "

Yeah, I noticed that too wrote on Jun 24, 2007 6:31 PM:

" The Fake News Channel started calling them all Al-Qaeda first, and now it seems to have gotten into the main stream reporting. Funny how the rebels and insurgents are now all Al-Qaeda. I noticed that Doh picked up on that one quite early too. I wonder if that idea originated in the White House, as it sounds like a Cheney-ism to me. Actually I think this White House and it's number two henchman would put even Joseph Goebbels to shame. "

Bille Brant wrote on Jun 24, 2007 6:36 PM:

" Oops!!! I mispelled "analogy" in my last post( had it correct the first time). I fat fingered the keys on my keyboard. I had better correct it or Voltaire will inform this peon of her sub-standard and uneducated mind. "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 24, 2007 6:48 PM:

" I'm OWNED? What, are you 19? Now I see how you hold your views. Once you move out of mommy and daddy's basement and have to fend for yourself in the real world, i.e.:, mortgage, taxes, etc., your views will evolve. "

Doh wrote on Jun 24, 2007 7:04 PM:

" NEWSWEEK (April 11 2007) TERROR BROKER (BIN LADEN NEEDED A ROLE IN THE IRAQI INSURGENCY, AND ZARQAWI NEEDED OUTSIDE SUPPORT. HOW A DEADLY DEAL WAS MADE): - "Al-Iraqi needed all the poise and charm he could muster for his mission to the insurgents. By the time he reached Iraq, in late 2003, Zarqawi had built a fearsome team of resistance fighters. The Jordanian considered himself to be the obvious choice for Al Qaeda's top man in Iraq. He was livid at the news that bin Laden had chosen al-Iraqi for the job. "I'm already here!" Zarqawi told al-Iraqi. "So why is the sheik sending someone else?"...........Bin Laden had already made his wishes known to Zarqawi via al-Iraqi. "My greatest wish is for you to keep the resistance alive and growing, to increase the number of local insurgents and give the Iraqis more decision-making powers," Zarqawi was told. "Make it as much of an Iraqi organization as possible." Bin Laden also urged his prince to widen the war against America: "We have to expand our attacks on the enemy outside Iraq." - READ THE ENTIRE STORE HERE - http://tinyurl.com/4k3os "

Doh wrote on Jun 24, 2007 7:11 PM:

" ("I noticed that Doh picked up on that one quite early too.") See! You people on the Left need to read my posts a little closer. I'm willing to educate you people for free, and you get the added benefit of my charm. Stick with me oh-ill-informed-ones-of-the-Michael-Moore-talking-points. The School of Doh is IN SESSION! "

Doh wrote on Jun 24, 2007 7:17 PM:

" Oh and Left-Wing Wacko's- Please notice that in that last Newsweek "Terror Broker" story: Zarqawi WAS ALREADY IN IRAQ IN 2003!!! Now how could that be? I didn't think there WERE any terrorists in Saddams Iraq??? Hmmmmmm...Now that IS a pickle! "

Anita wrote on Jun 24, 2007 7:27 PM:

" Voltaire - YOU are the person who didn't want to hear repetative information. Earlier, you complained that the same information kept being posted. So which is it...you want me to repeat the information that Dave and Doh have posted, or do you not? "

Voltaire wrote on Jun 24, 2007 7:38 PM:

" Notice that all our regular right-wing posters have now had the chance to review the real facts about military deaths from 1993 to 2005. I guess they don't want to talk about that anymore, now do they? I wonder why... "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 24, 2007 8:00 PM:

" Yeah, we reviewed them. The numbers remain the same. I have posted my opinion of ratios and other such nonsense. Others have taken all information presented and formed independent views. I think the topic thus far has been discussed. The numbers haven't changed. Unless you have additional information, there's really no benefit to rehashing it endlessly. What's next? The ratio of pet owning military personnel compared to children of twice divorced transvestites? "

Anita wrote on Jun 24, 2007 8:27 PM:

" Here is a site that shows links between Saddam and terrorism. It clearly shows pictures of actual bank drafts from Saddam to the families of suicide bombers: ----------------------------------------- http://www.husseinandterror.com/ ----------------------------------------- It is written in simple, concise language so that even the most feable-minded person should be able to understand it. "

Anita wrote on Jun 24, 2007 8:33 PM:

" Here is another source for the link between Saddam and terrorism...along with statements that say Clinton knew about these links. ----------------------------------------- http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewSpecialReports.asp?Page=%5CSpecialReports%5Carchive%5C200410%5CSPE20041004a.html "

Clinton? wrote on Jun 24, 2007 8:45 PM:

" You right wingers just can't keep from talking about Clinton, can you? Gee, I knew he was a lot more popular, especially with the women, than Monkey boy could ever be, but this is ridiculous. "

Doh wrote on Jun 24, 2007 8:50 PM:

" Way to go Anita!! Great sites! Especially this one: http://www.husseinandterror.com I hadn't even seen THAT one! Now are you trying to show-up old Doh? I have to tell you Anita- I've debated a lot of people on this site, and this is the first time anyone has presented information that I haven't already seen. I'm going to have to keep an eye on you. Glad your back Anita! "

Anita wrote on Jun 24, 2007 8:52 PM:

" This is the Report of the Select Committee on Intelligence on Postwar findings about Iraq's wmd programs and links to terrorism and how they compare with prewar assessments. This report was presented before the 109th Congress, 2nd session. Within the first ten pages, on at least two separate occasions, it clearly states that not all prewar intelligence had been examined, so they cannot make a definitive conclusion on the 'faulty intelligence' that the Bush lied crowd is always screaming about. ----------------------------------------- http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2006_rpt/srpt109-331.pdf "

Voltaire wrote on Jun 24, 2007 8:59 PM:

" Sorry Dave, but I am not letting you off the hook just yet. First, you are comparing two different items in both instances (different urban settings and different police forces), where as I am comparing a single item (the US military.) There are many variables that exist in Arthur that simply don’t exist in New York, and there are also variables that exist in the former and not the latter. There are many potiental flaws that can be found in comparing a small town to a large city that are consquently not found in comparing the statistics of one large city over the course of a decade. Our men and women in uniform have a constant in training, stress, and risks faced each year, save in times of war. I agree, it is not valid comparing Arthur to New York City, but comparing the military in 1993 to the military in 1995 to the military in 1997 to the military in 2003 is undeniably valid. You know, the whole apple thing. Due to the specificity of my study on deaths in the military, the number of potential variables in your “comparable” analogies are not present in mine. Secondly, one of the most important things in reviewing statistics is to look for trends. Because a single Douglas County deputy was recently shot, it does not mean it is more dangerous to work in Douglas County than in an urban setting. The shooting in Douglas County was simply an anomaly. If a deputy was shot every year, for the last ten years, that could indicate there is a problem. There is no quantifiable trends to show evidence (and nobody in their right mind would assume, based off of this one instance) that Douglas County is more dangerous than Detroit. I clearly indicated the trends in both the Clinton and Bush administration with regards to the military death rate over an eight-year and four-year period of time. Unfortunately, your “hard numbers” do lie because they used unethically and are denied the full context of their value. Rather than focusing on validating your numbers or the matter at hand, you opt to challenge mine with an abstract analogy -- fine. Would you agree with Ted Kennedy if he quoted the total unemployment numbers for 2007, ignoring the percentage of the population, and then claimed that Bush presided over the worst economic period in American history simply because X is greater than Y when our current US population is the largest in history? I wouldn’t agree with him; I would laugh at him for being ignorant. You can make all the assumptions about me, but if you used these “hard numbers” in a report to your boss, you would be fired for incompetence. "

Doh wrote on Jun 24, 2007 9:00 PM:

" I'll stop talking about Bill(I did everything I could to not kill Bin Laden)Clinton as soon as you historically-illiterate Left-wingers stop saying Bush lied about claims that were originally made by Clinton. I.e. the Saddam/Al Qaeda connection. Now then- just what was Bin Laden's good buddy Zarqawi doing in Iraq when the war broke out? Maybe Urban can help us with that one? What ya say Urban? Anything on the SmirkingChimp web site on that one? How about the DailyKos? "

Voltaire wrote on Jun 24, 2007 9:08 PM:

" I'm still having fun playing with Dave, but rest assured Doh, if you say something as moronic as your friend, I will definately come play with you. "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 24, 2007 9:08 PM:

" Just so happens that there was a president before the current one, so to compare the two administrations seems reasonable. Now, if someone had brought up the previous dem president, Jimmy Carter, or say, I dunno, George H.W. Bush, Ronald Reagan or even Prescott Bush, (as I'm sure nobody would be so imbecilic to do) that would be different. "

Anita wrote on Jun 24, 2007 9:10 PM:

" Billie - your comments to Voltaire were right on! I have to tell you, though, you come across as an intelligent and educated human being (even if you DO fat finger those keys rofl) "

Doh wrote on Jun 24, 2007 9:13 PM:

" I have to borrow this from your site Anita: As Saddam Hussein put it on Iraqi TV on March 4, 2002: "We are glad of the Istishhadiyyah [suicide] and heroic spirit of the Palestinian people. By Allah, what the Palestinian people does is beyond my expectations…” WELL WELL WELL! That old Saddam was one helluva secularist! My word! He just sited Allah to justify suicide bombers! "

Snot Nose Tommy wrote on Jun 24, 2007 9:22 PM:

" Yo Anita! Your long URL slipped through the gator pit, try usin tinyurl.com, hun. ;) "

Urban wrote on Jun 24, 2007 9:30 PM:

" I don't blubber over dead U.S. troops. I did my mourning just before Bush's immoral invasion. I was almost overwhelmed by grief, but then I reconciled myself to the fact that you right wingers were determined to get thousands of U.S. troops killed and maimed, and hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis slain, injured and otherwise destroyed. All for the invasion and occupation of a nation that never attacked or threatened the U.S. All for nothing. I no longer grieve. All that remains is a cold, hard determination to make you right wingers pay for the evil you have done. "

Doh wrote on Jun 24, 2007 9:33 PM:

" Hey Snot Nose Tommy- where's Larry Lujack? "

Anita wrote on Jun 24, 2007 9:37 PM:

" Why thank you, Doh! =) ----------------------------------------- Snot Nosed Tommy - Thank you, as well...that's a neat little site you suggested. That should show everyone that I'm not a blogger since I didn't know about that site, eh? lol "

Doh wrote on Jun 24, 2007 9:44 PM:

" ("I'm still having fun playing with Dave, but rest assured Doh, if you say something as moronic as your friend, I will definately come play with you.") Uhmm...Voltaire...you misspelled "definately". It should be "definitely" with two i's. It doesn't bother me because I misspell all the time, but since you're a member of MENSA I really thought you should know. Don't worry about it. It will be our little secret. *wink* "

Urban wrote on Jun 24, 2007 9:45 PM:

" That the Bush administration, and specifically its military commanders, decided to begin using the term "Al Qaeda" to designate "anyone and everyeone [sic] we fight against or kill in Iraq" is obvious, Salon notes. All of a sudden, every time one of the top military commanders describes our latest operations or quantifies how many we killed, the enemy is referred to, almost exclusively now, as "Al Qaeda." But what is even more notable is that the establishment press has followed right along. "

Snot Nose Tommy wrote on Jun 24, 2007 9:49 PM:

" lol - He's out riding around in the big pink semi-truck, with you know who. lol "

Bille Brant wrote on Jun 24, 2007 9:53 PM:

" Anita, I can't say that I have a lot of formal education but this "poor ol dumb hick country girl" tries to keep up! lol! Fatfingering keys with misspelled words will probably continue since I employ the "two finger" style of typing( grin).You and Doh are fighting the good fight here! Keep it up!.. Not all the "guys" on the other side have their superior noses in the air as if sniffing something disagreeable. Answer and Early Bird are formidable opponents on some issues( mostly political) but have always treated me with respect even though we have disagreed. Glad you're here girl! "

Doh wrote on Jun 24, 2007 9:53 PM:

" Thanks for establishing once and for all and in no uncertain terms just exactly whose side you're on, Urban- Al Qaeda's. It looks like it is officially okay now to call you a traitor. Thanks for coming clean in front of everyone here. So how does it feel to know that our Arm Forces just sent a bunch of your cockroach Jihadists to their 72 virgins? "

Doh wrote on Jun 24, 2007 9:57 PM:

" Here it is again- just for Urban. NEWSWEEK (April 11 2007) TERROR BROKER (BIN LADEN NEEDED A ROLE IN THE IRAQI INSURGENCY, AND ZARQAWI NEEDED OUTSIDE SUPPORT. HOW A DEADLY DEAL WAS MADE): - "Al-Iraqi needed all the poise and charm he could muster for his mission to the insurgents. By the time he reached Iraq, in late 2003, Zarqawi had built a fearsome team of resistance fighters. The Jordanian considered himself to be the obvious choice for Al Qaeda's top man in Iraq. He was livid at the news that bin Laden had chosen al-Iraqi for the job. "I'm already here!" Zarqawi told al-Iraqi. "So why is the sheik sending someone else?"...........Bin Laden had already made his wishes known to Zarqawi via al-Iraqi. "My greatest wish is for you to keep the resistance alive and growing, to increase the number of local insurgents and give the Iraqis more decision-making powers," Zarqawi was told. "Make it as much of an Iraqi organization as possible." Bin Laden also urged his prince to widen the war against America: "We have to expand our attacks on the enemy outside Iraq." - READ THE ENTIRE STORE HERE - http://tinyurl.com/4k3os "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 24, 2007 10:04 PM:

" Ya don't think Arthur and New York have just as much in common as a domestic U.S. military base and Fallujah or Baghdad? C'mon, you can do better than that. "

Doh wrote on Jun 24, 2007 10:06 PM:

" I miss you and Uncle Larry doing "Animal Stories" Little snot nose Tommy! Ah the days of AM radio. "

Doh wrote on Jun 24, 2007 10:11 PM:

" Billie- I grew up in a world of "poor ol dumb hick country folks" and when my highly educated college boy attitude got the better of me- they always managed to bring me back down to earth. And it usually involved a shovel. "

Doh wrote on Jun 24, 2007 10:12 PM:

" I type like old people spit- sloppy! "

Bille Brant wrote on Jun 24, 2007 10:19 PM:

" Referring to Urban's (or Duh or whatever he's calling himself these days)post-June 24,9:30 P.M.-- He has the nerve to call us gutter trash after THAT post? "

Doh wrote on Jun 24, 2007 10:54 PM:

" Don't worry Billie- I've already saved Urbans little Al Qaeda-sympathizing-manifesto. And every time I call him the Al Qaeda-loving-Jihadist-enabling traitor that he is, I will post that jewel of a statement of his to prove it. I'm going to use that little bite like a hammer! Thanks again Urban for proving me right about you. And to think; people gave ME crap when I first labeled him as a traitor. Remember that folks? "

Bille Brant wrote on Jun 24, 2007 11:08 PM:

" Doh, I wonder how grateful Al-Quaeda will be to Urban IF they ever get a foothold here? Will they commend him for sticking up for the poor innocent,misunderstood jihadists? I'm sure they will express their gratitude just before they lop off his head and those of his family. "

Doh wrote on Jun 24, 2007 11:16 PM:

Early Bird wrote on Jun 25, 2007 6:05 AM:

" I don't think we are accomplishing a lot here, as far as anyone changing their mind as to whether this war is right or wrong. No one has made a dent in my determination that going into Iraq was wrong, and I don't think I, or anyone else for that matter, have changed any minds about it not being the correct thing to do. I have appreciated the links, relating to all of this, being posted. I read them all for the most part, but take most of them with a grain of salt, because of the obvious bias. This bias usually stands out, regardless of which side of the issue the writer comes from. Billie, thanks for the nice comment. I have tried to remain civil, but willingly admit the occasional lapse in civility has occurred. Having said all of that, I have really enjoyed reading everything that has been posted, from both sides. As to the comment from Anita, about the meanness coming mostly from one side, I respectfully disagree with that assessment. Both sides have been guilty of trash talk. Hopefully, that is water under the bridge, and I am happy that, for the most part, it is much better now. "

Anita wrote on Jun 25, 2007 7:17 AM:

" Early Bird - I'm not saying that the war was right or wrong...I DO believe that we weren't 'lied into it' as so many people believe. ------------------------------------------- I had never seen or heard anything about (for instance) Al Gore making a case for war years ago until I saw the video clip of him making the connection between Saddam and all manner of atrocities, many of which have turned out to be factual. Just over the last few days, the Iraqis sentenced another man to hang for war crimes committed there under Saddam. -------------------------------------------- I think the thing that irks me the most is the utter lack of respect for our CiC and country as well as the eagerness for so many to always blame America and sympathize with the terrorists. -------------------------------------------- Bush was elected by a majority vote, and regardless of whether or not people dispute the validity of that vote, regardless of how people feel about him and his policies, he IS our president and thus deserves the respect that goes with the office. -------------------------------------------- Maybe this war wasn't 'right'...but it was justified, and, unfortunately, probably necessary...and furthermore, when you talk to most Iraq vets and most current soldiers, they DO feel as if they are doing something positive and necessary. -------------------------------------------- Those of us here who do not know what it's like over there should respect that. Yes, we are free to have opinions, but how can we judge something like this unless we've lived it? And just because we live in a society that allows us to express our opinions does not mean that we have the right to do so in such a way that it brings such shame to ourselves. ------------------------------------------ We look to the rest of the world as parents who do not provide a united front look to their children...unworthy of respect and always wrong. If WE don't support and respect ourselves, our troops, and our government, then how can we expect anyone else to? "

Doh wrote on Jun 25, 2007 7:50 AM:

" If the Jihadists whom Urban so stridently defend, ever get up-close-and-personal with him; I'm afraid the last words he will ever hear in his head before it is separated from his body will be, "Allah Aqbar! Allah Aqbar!" "

Bille Brant wrote on Jun 25, 2007 8:26 AM:

" You Early Bird have NEVER displayed the obvious anti-American, American's are evil, Americn's are warmonger's, etc. ad nauseam opinion's that Urban has. I can't imagine YOU ever saying "I don't blubber over dead U.S. troops" as he did! Although you don't support this war I can't imagine you wanting to see more flag drapped coffins coming home. This statement from Urban concerning our troops is absolutely sickening! I have the distinct feeling he would not support any kind of U.S. military action anywhere, any time for any reason. I feel you would like to see an end to it(as would I), but also would like to see it come to a successful conclusion for us and the Iraqi's. I don't see you or Answer for that matter (and a few other's) seething with the obvious hate Urban has for those of us on the "other side". As time goes on he gets more and more filled with hate and his posts reflect this . I'll admit there's no "love lost" as far as I'm concerned with the terrorist's that are trying to destroy us and the rest of the western world. We are fighting for our very exsistence. Urban on the other hand seems all too willing to give them all the benefit of the doubt and is quick to condemn as evil ANYTHING WE are trying to do to fight what is truly evil, the jihadists. I am saddened by the site of innocent Iraqi's blown up and murdered by these evildoer's as well. No Early Bird, you don't fit into this hate filled anti-American catagory. I'm sure you still shed tears at the site of American flag drapped coffins as I do. "

Bille Brant wrote on Jun 25, 2007 8:39 AM:

" Doh- Spade or scoop shovel? Lol! "

Looks like wrote on Jun 25, 2007 8:49 AM:

" The Urban character is hanging in there while most of the other anti-war people have given up trying to post their reasons for their opposition to this war. I guess after a while it's like beating a dead horse. I guess maybe you pro-Iraq war folks just haven't realised the horse is dead yet. While you might not agree with most of his comments, you have to give him an A plus for tenacity. And no, this was not posted by Urban. I'm someone who rarely posts anything, and just reads some of this silliness that both sides post on here on a regular basis. PS, some of you people need to get out more. There is a lot more to life than sitting in front of your computer for hours. "

Thanks Bille wrote on Jun 25, 2007 9:17 AM:

" The Well Voltaire? analogy was made by a female, and I enjoy your postings. V-Man (mind if I call you that?), I truly apologize for trying to dumb down my argument-apparently some of you don't respond well to common sense. And Urban--what exactly was that rambling on Bush? You were right about one thing-and that was that I'm a Christian. Props to the BIG MAN! Let me apologize in advance to all my fellow Republicans...but what the hell is that immigration bill...Yowza!...I suppose Bush is doing that one for the Dems. Speaking of Dems, could the one that is running our state make it any less worthwhile to go to work? "

Doh wrote on Jun 25, 2007 9:34 AM:

" Billie- definitely a scoop! It's hard to pontificate about high ideals when you're ankle deep in "reality". Ah yes- the most effective teacher in the world is "pain". It's a good thing! "

Urban wrote on Jun 25, 2007 9:47 AM:

" The first rule is to keep an untroubled spirit. The second is to look things in the face and know them for what they are. — Marcus Aurelius "

Doh wrote on Jun 25, 2007 11:25 AM:

" ("The first rule is to keep an untroubled spirit. The second is to look things in the face and know them for what they are.") You know Urban- You would look a Jihadist right in his indiscriminate-suicide-bombing eyes- and still not know him for the evil fanatic that he is. And that SHOULD trouble your spirit. "

Answer wrote on Jun 25, 2007 12:05 PM:

" Doh, you are forever repeating the ridiculous notion that Bush went to war with Iraq because Clinton said in 1998 that there was a working relationship between Al Quaeda and Iraq. Unfortunately, the CIA, the State Department, and every other credible source says that there were no high level and few if any contacts between Saddam and Al Quaeda, in fact Saddam had spurned any attempt at cooperation and Al Quaeda was not a factor in Iraq. Please, quit telling this tale and confusing the fact that we went to war with Iraq because that's what PNAC and Cheney wanted to do. This administration twisted the truth, ignored any intelligence that didn't suit their predisposition to attack and committed our American blood and treasure on a folly. Those my freind are the "facts", now please quit your attempts to confuse the simpleminded with the "were in Iraq because of Clinton" spiel. "

Answer wrote on Jun 25, 2007 12:08 PM:

" Doh, I didn't know that jihaddists had a certain "look" in their eyes. Have you looked at the evil in your super secret power mad wannabe Dicktator Cheney's eyes? Believe me Doh, Cheney is way more dangerous to the future of our democracy than any one terrorist, including Osama himself. "

Answer wrote on Jun 25, 2007 12:23 PM:

" Doh, Zarquawi reached Iraq in "late 2003", and the war started in early 2003, so Zarquawi was not there collaborating with Saddam before the US attacked. Great job George, you helped spread Al Quaeda in the middle east. Well, we said we wanted to remake the middle east... "

Urban wrote on Jun 25, 2007 12:26 PM:

" Our right-wing Iraq invader pals here are well described by John Dean as authoritarian followers: "The followers have a great desire to submit to established authority. They're also highly conventional, and they have a lot of aggression in them, which studies show comes primarily from being fearful. One of the classic reactions to fear is to fight, and the followers will attack when their authorities tell them to. They love to feel part of a "great movement" in solidarity with others on the move. They are very zealous. They usually are also highly religious, in a fundamentalist sense at least, and studies show they lead the league in self-righteousness. As we have discussed in the past, while there may be such people on the left, they are pretty rare compared with the number we find on the right. "Authoritarian followers have basically copied the ideas of the authorities in their lives. They haven't thought about things to any great degree and then decided what they believe in. To maintain their beliefs in a world of challenging discoveries and conflicting beliefs, they associate as much as possible with others who agree with them. They travel in small circles, getting booster shots of faith from one another. They rely upon social support, rather than evidence or logic, to keep on believing what in many cases they've simply memorized. But this makes them quite vulnerable to manipulators who tell them what they want to hear." "

Urban wrote on Jun 25, 2007 12:32 PM:

" Wait a few years, after the generals retire on their lavish pensions, and they will write memoirs in which they will claim they always knew Bush was a dangerous imbecile and that they were really against the escalation of the Iraq invasion and occupation all along. Like McNamara, they will tell us that they are oh so sad about the hundreds of thousands of deaths they helped cause, for nothing. What they won't say in their self-serving autobiographies is that, like Colin Powell, they were sellouts who sacrificed their much-advertised devotion to "duty and honor" for a cushy job and a platinum parachute. The Pentagon is a sick joke. "

Good point Urban wrote on Jun 25, 2007 1:10 PM:

" Hitler knew this very well, and so do Bush's handlers, especially Rove and Cheney. "

Bille Brant wrote on Jun 25, 2007 1:51 PM:

" I hate to " bust your bubble" Urban(June 26, 12:26 PM) but I WAS a Democrat for most of my adult life UNTIL the far left slowly squeezed out the moderates. So for you to quote John Dean and imply that we on the right are like sheep blindly following authority is so much sheep doo doo! I have ALWAYS made up my own mind, much to the chagrin of my parents when I was a kid and still do to the present day. Not many zealots( not in a religious context of course) on the left? You have got to be kidding! You lefties jump on the "authority wagon" with such guru's as Michael Moore and the rest of the "First Church of America is Evil" congregation and rail away on a daily basis. No Urban we on the right can't claim zealot status exclusively!.. Aggression? You bet when someone tries to hurt me and mine on a personal level, but I call it defense! The same applies to "My Country Tis of Thee"!! I've "put up my dukes" on more than one occasion literally and figuratively and would do so again if the situation warrants it... You go on to quote John Dean "To maintain their beliefs in a world of challenging discoveries and conflicting beliefs, they associate as much as possible with other's who agree with them. They travel in small circles. getting booster shots of faith from one another. They rely upon social support, rather than evidence or logic, to keep on believing what in many cases they've simply memorized. But this makes them quite vulerable to manipulators who tell them what they want to hear". Are you telling us that these words only apply to the right? Pa-leee-ze!... By the way Thanks Billie, you didn't dumb anything down in your post, simple doesn't always mean dumb. Sometimes it means the unadorned truth. Go girl!! If you are going to continue to post I hope you come up with a post name so we can readily identify you. If not, that's your choice at least until(and if) the JG-TC implements their registration policy. "

Urban wrote on Jun 25, 2007 2:26 PM:

" Here’s an update for you on America’s chief warmonger and war profiteer. An analysis released by a Democratic senator found that Vice President Dick Cheney's Halliburton stock options have risen 3,281 percent in the last year. Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) asserts that Cheney's options -- worth $241,498 a year ago -- are now valued at more than $8 million. The former CEO of the oil and gas services juggernaut, Cheney has “pledged to give proceeds to charity.” Cheney told "Meet the Press" in 2003 that he didn't have ANY financial ties to the firm. “Since I left Halliburton to become George Bush's vice president, I've severed all my ties with the company, gotten rid of all my financial interest," Cheney said. "I have no financial interest in Halliburton of any kind and haven't had, now, for over three years.” In fact, Cheney was of course lying, as usual. Cheney continues to receive a deferred salary from the company. According to financial disclosure forms, he was paid $205,298 in 2001; $262,392 in 2002; $278,437 in 2003; and $294,852 in 2004. "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 25, 2007 3:32 PM:

" Stock options and deferred salary from previous years are NOT financial ties to a company. (Well, the stock options could be, but in this case they aren't) They are something earned or given YEARS ago that are now due and payable. Legally, Halliburton can't increase or reduce the amount of the deferred compensation no matter what Cheney does as vice president. So Cheney's deferred payments from Halliburton wouldn't increase no matter how much money the company makes, or how many government contracts it receives. No one in their right mind would refuse to accept salary due from a past employer, that's just idiotic. Stock option proceeds are pledged to charitable causes, and there is a legally binding contract that proves this at the following site. http://tinyurl.com/azxo6 . If Cheney had wanted to profit from Halliburton, he would never have left. He made a helluva lot more there in one year than he has in six years as V.P.. Oh, and quoting an absolutely irrelevant person like John Dean is not helpful to your cause. Who next, Barry Goldwater? Oh, yeah. Ya already used him. 1970's political figures - nice sources for information on 2007 political topics. "

J. Jay wrote on Jun 25, 2007 3:48 PM:

" No comments from the right are necessary, just reading the comments from the moonbats that agree with the original letter is enough. "

Doh wrote on Jun 25, 2007 3:57 PM:

" Tell me- Answer, when exactly did the assertions by the Clinton Admin. about the Saddam/Al Qaeda relationship become false? When exactly did that relationship end? Did that intelligence mysteriously change right before the war? Or was Clinton lying about those claims? "

Doh wrote on Jun 25, 2007 4:08 PM:

" ("Believe me Doh, Cheney is way more dangerous to the future of our democracy than any one terrorist, including Osama himself.") - Thanks for clearing that up Answer. Tell us, when are you going to start posting exclusively as Urban? "

Doh wrote on Jun 25, 2007 4:18 PM:

" REPORT: JORDANIAN RADICAL SEEDED BAGHDAD WITH SLEEPER CELLS (July 15 2004) ANKARA, Turkey (AP) — British intelligence received reports ahead of the Iraq war saying Jordanian militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi seeded Baghdad with "sleeper cells" to attack U.S.-led forces, and that he may have received chemical and biological weapons from northern Iraq. The information, released as part of a review of British intelligence, comes as the Iraqi government said Thursday that it sees signs of increasing coordination in the insurgency between al-Qaeda-linked terrorist groups and the remains of Saddam Hussein's Baathist regime. The report, released Wednesday and based on intelligence available just before the war, raises the question of why U.S.-led forces were not better prepared for a growing insurgency that has used tactics mentioned in the report, such as car bombs, to devastating effect.....The report quotes British intelligence as saying that information from February 2003 — just before the war — "suggests that senior al-Qaeda associate Abu Musab al-Zarqawi has established sleeper cells in Baghdad, to be activated during a U.S. occupation of the city."......Dozens, perhaps hundreds, of pro-Taliban fighters possibly linked to al-Qaeda fled the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan after Sept. 11 and made their way to northern Iraq, where they linked up with Ansar al-Islam, a local group that controlled a small enclave on the Iranian-Iraqi border, according to intelligence reports and analysts. Al-Zarqawi is believed to have been part of that group and to have had a role in the running of Ansar al-Islam in northern Iraq during 2002. --- Read it here ---- http://tinyurl.com/3cjmjv "

D Cheney wrote on Jun 25, 2007 4:19 PM:

" Thanks Dave. As everyone knows my stock options are pledged to charity. Of course I put in the pledge that those I have promised can't sue me if I don't come through. In case your wondering why I don't go ahead a give the profits away now, well, I have a prefectly good answer. I'm waiting till I leave office and the attention is off me, so I can do what I damn well please, and, as all of you know a binding trust can never be broken. (wink wink) "

Lynn Cheney wrote on Jun 25, 2007 5:25 PM:

" I would like to say a few things in defense of my husband, Dick. For most of his career he has been a low paid government worker. One thing he would never do is take advantage of his government position to land a big paying job with a government contractor. Uh... wait a minute...never mind, have a nice day. "

Urban wrote on Jun 25, 2007 5:55 PM:

" Cheney isn't above the law? You could have fooled me. He appointed himself vice president, seized control of the government during 9-11, had people tortured and imprisoned forever without legal rights, lied constantly to the American people, invaded and occupied a nation that never attacked or threatened the U.S., profiteered off the war he started, nullified all constitutional checks and balances and, just for fun, knocked back a few drinks and shot a guy in the face, then told the police to go to blazes. And yet, instead of being impeached and convicted and sent to prison, where he belongs, he continues to smile his reptilian smile at us, plotting more treachery until the day arrives when he can retire to Halliburton's new HQ in Dubai and be presented with a few more billions for "services rendered," watching the impending collapse of America from a nice, safe distance. We'll have the ringside seats. No, I'd say Cheney is the very definition of "above the law." Hitler would envy him. "

Urban wrote on Jun 25, 2007 6:00 PM:

" • Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, to U.S. troops in Aviano, Italy: "It is unknowable how long that conflict will last. It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months." • Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, in a speech to the Veterans of Foreign Wars: "The Iraqi people understand what this crisis is about. Like the people of France in the 1940s, they view us as their hoped-for liberator." • Vice President Cheney, on NBC's Meet the Press: "I think things have gotten so bad inside Iraq, from the standpoint of the Iraqi people, my belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators. ... I think it will go relatively quickly, ... (in) weeks rather than months." Now that those particular Republican lies have long since been exposed, tell me, right-wing war worshippers, how long you expect "victory" to take in Iraq? We're in our fifth year of "good progress" there, according to your Monkey King. When do you think we'll see you glorious "victory?" Thirty years? Fifty years? Or is it just that the "the next six months are crucial" -- as every six month-period has been since 2003, according to Republican liars? "

Anita wrote on Jun 25, 2007 7:13 PM:

" Well, that explains Urban's whole point of view. NBC. They're so far left they're almost standing on their heads. "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 25, 2007 7:19 PM:

" Maybe you oughtta just come clean and change your screename to (T)Urban. "

Urban wrote on Jun 25, 2007 7:33 PM:

" President Bush was presented with a letter Monday signed by 50 high school seniors in the Presidential Scholars program urging a halt to "violations of the human rights" of terror suspects held by the United States. The White House said Bush had not expected the letter. The handwritten letter said the students "believe we have a responsibility to voice our convictions." "We do not want America to represent torture. We urge you to do all in your power to stop violations of the human rights of detainees, to cease illegal renditions, and to apply the Geneva Convention to all detainees, including those designated enemy combatants," the letter said. "

T(Urban) ? wrote on Jun 25, 2007 7:51 PM:

" Sounds like Dave is buying into the Cheney Mantra that says if you're against this war then you're for the terrorist's. I thought you were above that sort of thing, Dave. Oh well, Doh needs all the help he can get. "

Anita wrote on Jun 25, 2007 8:01 PM:

" Dave - (T)Urban............ ROFL ........... That's funny! Very clever! LOLOL -------------------------------------------- Yo, Urban, what does that letter prove other than a bunch of kids who only know what their teachers and parents have fed them wrote a letter parroting the views of their teachers? It's pretty easy to get a group of high school kids on a particular side of any given issue by leading them to the conclusion you want them to have. ------------------------------------------ Telling them to worry so much about the rights of a terrorist is a disservice to those children because said terrorist is just waiting to get out so he can come blow them up. Besides, once you have committed the types of atrocities that terrorists perpetrate, you do not deserve ANY rights... "

for Anita wrote on Jun 25, 2007 8:04 PM:

" Let me explain this to you. He was citing what Cheney said on NBC. But I suppose you somehow think that that screaming, left wing and radical NBC put those words in Cheneys mouth, right? Your going to have to step up the pace a little, Anita. "

Dotty wrote on Jun 25, 2007 8:04 PM:

" "Well, that explains Urban's whole point of view. NBC. They're so far left they're almost standing on their heads. " and " Maybe you oughtta just come clean and change your screename to (T)Urban." Oh so very intelligent; oh so very insightful. Typical garbage from those on the right. You people make me sick. "

Rotty wrote on Jun 25, 2007 8:05 PM:

" Well said, Dave! T-urban the true traitor. I'd say ole T-urban needs wrung out, & hung out to dry - preferably in 120 degree heat. Go home Gump, I mean T-urban, I mean traitor. You are a poor excuse of an American, exemplified. Thank goodness the other folks on the left (atleast the regs here) have decent heads on their shoulders, instead of being so filled with the extreme hate that you are filled with, for the U.S.. You need some serious help, T-urban! (Btw.... Hello & Welcome back Anita - Go Get'em Gal!) "

Doh wrote on Jun 25, 2007 8:07 PM:

" LOL- T(Urban)! I love it Dave! LOL!!!! "

Doh wrote on Jun 25, 2007 8:11 PM:

" T(URBIN)'S TERRORIST SYMPATHIZING MANIFESTO: --- Urban wrote on Jun 24, 2007 9:30 PM: " I don't blubber over dead U.S. troops. I did my mourning just before Bush's immoral invasion. I was almost overwhelmed by grief, but then I reconciled myself to the fact that you right wingers were determined to get thousands of U.S. troops killed and maimed, and hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis slain, injured and otherwise destroyed. All for the invasion and occupation of a nation that never attacked or threatened the U.S. All for nothing. I no longer grieve. All that remains is a cold, hard determination to make you right wingers pay for the evil you have done." --- T(URBIN) IS MAKING OSAMA BIN LADEN VERY PROUD!!! "

Doh wrote on Jun 25, 2007 8:15 PM:

" Hey T(Urbin)- how come you never call for an end to all of the "human rights" violations perpetrated by the Jihadists? "

Rotty wrote on Jun 25, 2007 8:15 PM:

" By the way, T-urban, I'm not buying into any of the mantra, as you so put it. I believe both parties have their good & bad points. I've also voted for Democrats, many times. I do not blindly follow, & I do not listen to Rush. If you want to talk blind - you would have to be blind if you can't see the plain hate you have for this country, in your posts. And, my earlier post stands - you need some serious help, T-urban! "

Bille Brant wrote on Jun 25, 2007 8:27 PM:

" Dave, I thought your (T)Urban moniker fit him quite well especially after his June 24,2007 9:30PM post of "I don't blubber over dead U.S. troops". I do not believe as (T)Urban(?)suggests that we who support the war effort believe that everyone who doesn't, supports the terrorists. Urban however HAS shown his true colors, and they aren't RED WHITE and BLUE! "

Bille Brant wrote on Jun 25, 2007 8:56 PM:

" Duh wrote on Jun 18, 2007 6:18 AM: " This country needs to pay a heavy price for the atrocities committed against innocent Muslims and it would only be fitting if the number of flag draped coffins increased. Maybe then this country would fully realize how misguided it was to give a power-mad Fundamentalist Christian like George Bush unlimited reins of power. Thanks to him the world has seen that the real holy war is being waged by Christianity and not Islam. ".....Is this Duh or Urban, I mean(T)Urban? Duh later posts at 9:05 on June 18 "The comment earlier was the ghostposter, not me" Perhaps it wasn't Duh but it sure sounds like Duh/ Urban hissing his anti- American hate speech with "I don't blubber over dead U.S. troops" Since I'm not clairevoyant I can't be sure. The comparison's are striking though in their similarities. "

Doh wrote on Jun 25, 2007 9:00 PM:

" Hey folks- you gotta take it easy on old T(Urbin). He's had a loaded diaper ever since the 3-2 Stryker unit got up close and personal with his Al Qaeda brothers in Barquba last week. Cheer up there little T(Urbin) dude! At least your buddies are with their 72 virgins. Even if you can't get anyone to cohabitate with you- you should at least be happy for your cockroach pals! "

Amused wrote on Jun 25, 2007 9:02 PM:

" Why is it that when you right wingers can't keep up you always resort to name calling? Happens every time, and I wondered how long you could go before you resorted to that old game. I guess when you can't answer the questions put to you, the next best thing is to start name calling. Shame on you Doh, you were one of those who yelled the loudest when people were calling you names, remember that? "

Doh wrote on Jun 25, 2007 9:03 PM:

" LOL...T(Urbin)....That's still kickin my a55!!! hehehehehehe....Oh Dave!!! I do believe that names is going to STICK! God knows I'll be using it from now on! LOL! "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 25, 2007 9:07 PM:

" I was tolerant and accepting of TUrban's views, and felt he had every right to express them without being villified UNTIL the post regarding his unsympathetic feelings toward the men and women in our armed forces and the sacrifices that they are making to insure that he has the right to express those views without fear of government interference. To make such a statement is unconscionable. These young Americans are doing their duty - most of them willingly, some reluctantly - and should be held in the highest esteem regardless of political views about this administration. I do not dispute that, in hindsight, there were terrible miscalculations made about this war. If the same peole who made the decision to enter Baghdad knew then what we know now, I really can't imagine that they would have chosen the same course. Fact is, the decision WAS made, and we have a responsibility to do whatever we can to make it right. Pulling out and leaving Iraq in the hands of radicals is not an option. We made that terrible mistake in both Vietnam, and, to a lesser extent, in Korea. I know several Vietnamese refugees, and their stories are heartbreaking - one guy who works for me actually blew three fingers off of his right hand with a shotgun to avoid being forced into fighting with Khmer Rouge (No trigger finger, can't fight, he reasoned). Another escaped Vietnam in a rickety boat, only to spend years in Phillipine refugee centers before making his way to Hawaii. These guys and their families hold no grudge against the U.S., they're grateful to be here. Iraq is a mess. There's no easy solution, but to feel a cold indifference toward our men and women who serve there is disgusting. "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 25, 2007 9:18 PM:

" As for name-calling, I have avoided it before now, and kinda sorta deep down feel bad about it, but as I recall, I have been called (ItsJustAnnoying) and (ItsJustInane) in this thread alone, so it's definitely not one-sided. "

Now come on Anita wrote on Jun 25, 2007 9:21 PM:

" Have you sat down and talked to any High School kids lately. Believe it or not, some actually think for themselves and don't always parrot what their teachers and parents say. Is that so hard for you to believe? Do you have children? Do they parrot everything you say? If they do, you need to do some thinking about what you are teaching them. It's been my experience that today's youngsters are far more mature and into the world around them than than we were at that age. Your response to the point made was an insult to all young people. I think you need to reflect upon what you said, and ask yourself if you really think so little of today's young people. So what if it goes against your beliefs? Ever heard of the old saying about attacking the messenger? That seems to be right out of todays conservative speak mode. "

Doh wrote on Jun 25, 2007 9:23 PM:

" Oh look- T-Urbin's now using the name Amused! Sorry pal. You earned it. Now wear it. "

Hey Doh wrote on Jun 25, 2007 9:34 PM:

" If your going to insist on using that handle for Urban perhaps we need to come up with a manme for you. Any suggestions out there? Personally I like Dodo, you know because it's extinct, like most of your thinking. Any other suggetions for Doh's new name? "

Hey Doh wrote on Jun 25, 2007 9:37 PM:

" If your going to insist on using that handle for Urban perhaps we need to come up with a name for you. Any suggestions out there? Personally I like Dodo, you know because it's extinct, like most of your thinking. Any other suggetions for Doh's new name? And by the way, Doh, I resent you giving Urban credit for my post under the name of Amused. As I have told you in the past, I prefer to not stick with the same name, especially since it seems to irritate you so much. "

Doh wrote on Jun 25, 2007 9:37 PM:

" Dave- calling this clown T-Urbin doesn't even compare with the festering bilge that he's been spewing in here. Especially considering the fact that our troops are in harms way so people like him can have the freedom to spit back in their faces! He's been needing a smack-down for a long time. Hell- if you want- I'll take the credit for the T-Urbin label! "

Doh wrote on Jun 25, 2007 9:42 PM:

" You Left-Wing wackos can call me whatever you like, because it's music to my ears! I don't whine about names, (Oh-Nameless-Coward). I enjoy being a target. It makes me feel all wanted and special! "

Doh wrote on Jun 25, 2007 9:46 PM:

" Dear Amused- What's in a name? A nameless twit by any other, is just as inane. "

Wahnita wrote on Jun 25, 2007 9:52 PM:

" I'm tired of seeing all you (liberals) calling people names. Grow up! "

Bille Brant wrote on Jun 25, 2007 9:54 PM:

" Amused- Check out the posts from the left and you will find plenty of name calling to those of us on the opposite side. Names like "gutter trash","obnoxious shills", "facist thugs", references to the president as "Chimpanzee in Chief" "vicious ape , "monkey boy", shall I go on?...Yep the left has been guilty of it too, but we don't hold exclusives rights to the game as you suggest....I can put up with (T)Urbans, (oops) and Duh calling us gutter trash(their(?)) favorite name or facist thugs or any of the other ones he loves so much, BUT I draw the line when he hatefully states "I don't blubber over DEAD U.S.troops"!!!!! What an insult to our troops, their families, their friends and our country!!! I hope he never has to bury a beloved family member that has made the supreme sacrifice.... OR watch a loved one live with the awful physical disablities that often comes as the result of being in combat. Been there, done that! Often times some of those wounds and scars can't be seen but they are there just the same! These warriors are laying their lives on the line to help protect his sorry a$$ whether he wants to believe it or not! These Soldier's,Marines, Sailor's, Airmen aren't doing this so we will give them our undying gratitude, although most of us do, they do it because they CHOSE to serve the U.S.A., because THEY feel a sense of duty to serve their country!... But he would rather place his sympathy's with our enemies, and shed tears for them rather than his own countrymen! He is beyond pathetic! "

Doh wrote on Jun 25, 2007 10:04 PM:

" I have no mercy for the merciless. "

Bille Brant wrote on Jun 25, 2007 10:08 PM:

" Dave, Don't feel bad about it. He had it coming!! Actually it's rather benign compared to some of the names that have been used here. I'm with Doh! (T)Urban is gonna stick like glue! Doggone it Doh! Don't you wish you had thought of it! Lol! "

Doh wrote on Jun 25, 2007 10:33 PM:

" Yes Billie- I DO wish that I had thought of it! Damn-it! I can't believe I missed that. It was soooooo obvious. I must be slipping. "

OK so I guess it's Dodo wrote on Jun 25, 2007 11:00 PM:

" But now I have to decide on what to call our little name caller Billie. I hadn't planned on that, but since Billie wants to join the name calling game, I shall have to come with a name for her too. All of those phony posts from Billie in the past, calling for civility, didn't mean a thing did they. Billie you are no better than the rest of the name callers on here, including myself. Your long winded blather about what a good person you are makes me want to throw up at times, and especially now that you have shown your true colors. What a hypocrite and a phony you have proven yourself to be. If Anita wants to play, I have her name all picked out too. I think she will recall it from the not so distant past. too. I have a real doozie picked out for Billie, but I don't think I can get it by the monitor. And as for Dave, I think JustInane suits him well. Have a nice night you all, even you name calling right wing wackos. "

Billie Brant wrote on Jun 25, 2007 11:04 PM:

" CORRECTION!!! On my post June 25 at 9:54 PM I meant to write " Yep the RIGHT has been guilty of it too, but we don't own excusive rights to the game as you suggest. I inadvertantly wrote LEFT. I was still very angry with (T)Urban when I wrote this., As a matter of fact I'm still pi$$ed off at his anti-American, terrorist loving crap! Won't blubber over dead U.S. troops indeed! BS! "

Voltaire wrote on Jun 25, 2007 11:21 PM:

" ...and the discussion devolves into trash. Good job all (left and right.) Since you people can't handle an adult conversation, feel free to carry on with the name calling and shouting matches. Can someone give me a cool name too, please? How about "hotair"? Doltaire? While rarely good for a civil debate, you are good for laughs -- I'll give you that much. "

Early Bird wrote on Jun 26, 2007 6:14 AM:

" Well, I see we're back to name calling again. I thought it was too good to last. The one person I had faith in, and thought would not stoop to that type of thing is Billie. I have to tell you Billie, that you and I are in total disagreement over this. I understand your frustrations, especially over the heartless comments made about our troops, but can't help but be reminded of the old saying that two wrongs don't make a right. Doh's almost glee full jubilation over this new found name for his main opposition doesn't surprise me, but your latching onto it, with such vigor, does. I'm not going to harp on this issue, but just wanted to make a point and express my feelings about this whole issue of name calling. This post does not endorse everything that has been said by the Urban poster. Admittedly, I have to agree with some of what he has said, but then I also agree with some of what his opposition has said also. And yes, Billie, I am emotionally effected by seeing our young people come home in coffins. It is very painful to read stories about these lost lives. It might not be so painful if I was in agreement as to why they were giving up their lives, but as I have stated numerous times, I don't see this Iraq thing as part of the war on terror. I am not trying to change anyone's mind on this, but am merely expressing my beliefs. I plan to drop my calls for civility because it seems we always wind up back in the same place over this issue. Lastly, I was very disappointed when reading what was posted last night. Hopefully things will be a little better today. "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 26, 2007 7:25 AM:

" Voltaire - you're a real piece of work. YOU call names, insult people, attempt to silence opinions, bully people, and generally try to act like you are more intelligent than everyone else, try to avoid discussion and debate by coming up with outrageous statistics, stomp your feet and hold your breath like a two year old when no one accedes to your demands, then try to come across as the only adult in the room by making observations about the deevolution of the discussion. Kinda reminds me of the ING financial services commercial - the one with the two monacle wearing cats sitting in the park saying "indeed", "indeed" to each other, with British accents. "

Doh wrote on Jun 26, 2007 7:49 AM:

" Early Bird - Calling an obvious communist who has nothing but irrational blind hatred and rage for this country and its Arm Forces and who is exclusively MUTE about the barbaric actions of the Jihadists- (T-Urban), is incredibly MILD. It never ceases to amaze me that people think they should get a pass when they refer to Bush (in the context of this war) by such nice little things as "The Smirking Chimp", "The King Monkey", and "warmonger" and not receive any retaliation from the people who do support this war. Why are the Left-Wingers with the biggest mouths, also the biggest crybaby's? I've always understood that if I throw out names, then I can expect some in return. It's called taking it as well as dishing it out. I'd say TUrban's been getting off easy around here! "

Billie Brant wrote on Jun 26, 2007 8:37 AM:

" You give me way too much credit Early Bird. I've tried very hard not to resort to name calling, but Urban or (T)Urban as he is now being called has crossed the line so far that my anger has spilled over and I find it VERY difficult to be civil toward someone who obviously hates our men and women serving in our military. His "dead troops" statement had me seething with not only anger but disgust. While "two wrongs don't make a right" is very true, I'm not going to beat myself up because I joined in with those who called him on the carpet for his totally nasty, filthy comments toward our people! His statements and the name Itsjustdave gave him seem to go hand in hand. As much as he HATES our military for honoring the committment when they signed up to help protect even his sorry behind and his mouth, I hold them in the highest regard. As I would not stand for anyone saying these things to my face, neither will I put up with it here. ....As far as the war on terror in Iraq goes, whether or not terrorist cells were there before the war or not, the fact is they ARE there now and we have to deal with it. I won't try and change your mind on that issue either EB. Sorry to disappoint you, but I do "fly off the handle" sometimes. "

Anita Psychiatrist wrote on Jun 26, 2007 9:29 AM:

" You can’t believe anything that you see on the far, far left network NBC. You, know, NBC is owned by those commies at the General Electric, the same radical lefty bunch that paid and trained that radical leftist subversive Ronald Reagan for his far, far, far leftist political career. That’s why, when you see Dick Cheney talking on “Meet the Press,” it’s not really Dick Cheney talking. It’s a robot built by those lefties at GE for the radical leftists at NBC. RoboCheney is designed to undermine the confidence of America’s war-licking patriots by spouting obvious lies all the time. Far, far left. Far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far left. Woo woo! Woo woo! My name is Anita Psychiatrist and I really, really do. "

The Question wrote on Jun 26, 2007 9:37 AM:

" All this name calling by both sides of this “debate” is really childish — especially from the right wingers. But I’m not going to call you right-wingers names. I’m just going to ask you some questions. On May Day in 2003, Bush said, “Major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed.” My question to you is, do you think your hero Bush was lying, or do you think he’s really just that stupid? "

The Question wrote on Jun 26, 2007 10:10 AM:

" Here’s Dick Cheney in the vice presidential debate on Oct. 5, 2004, “I have not suggested there’s a connection between Iraq and 9/11.” And here’s Dick Cheney on “Meet the Press” one year earlier, on Sept. 9, 2003: “If we’re successful in Iraq, if we can stand up a good representative government in Iraq, that secures the region so that it never again becomes a threat to its neighbors or to the United States, so it’s not pursuing weapons of mass destruction, so that it’s not a safe haven for terrorists, now we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11.” My question for the right-wingers here, is, in which statement was Dick Cheney lying? I’ll give you a little hint. The correct answer is, “Both.” "

AnitaS wrote on Jun 26, 2007 10:44 AM:

" Ok, my posts keep getting eaten. I've responded to a couple of points, and they haven't shown up. SO, in response to the thing about kids, yes, I have three children, and two of them ARE teens. We have lively debates, and they are quite capable of thinking for themselves...HOWEVER, they are still too young to have accumulated enough life experience and personal knowledge of history to be able to make some of these judgements. ----------------------------------------- Furthermore, the human brain does not finish maturing & developing until around age 25, give or take a few years depending on the person. The frontal lobe where cognitive functions are processed develops last. ------------------------------------------------What this means is that thinking processes are more difficult/laborious for teens. They reason and process things differently than adults do, and it is purely physiological. It has nothing to do with what I think of teens. Another point is that teens are at the peak of hormonal instability, so their emotions/passions/convictions are even more easily stirred than those of an adult. Add to this the lack of experience & the mistaken idea that the world can be ideal, utopian even, and you have a fertile mind open to ideology and influence. -----------------------------------------So say what you like about my opinion about kids, but it is based on personal observation AND scientific fact.------------------------------http://www.news-medical.net/?id=6031----------------------------------------http://parentingteens.about.com/cs/health/a/TEEN_BRAIN.htm "

AnitaS wrote on Jun 26, 2007 10:46 AM:

" Rotty - well thank you very much! =D "

AnitaS wrote on Jun 26, 2007 10:49 AM:

" Voltaire.....I like the names you came up with for yourself! LOL Hot-Aire was clever. ;) "

Anita Psychiatrist wrote on Jun 26, 2007 10:53 AM:

" You know, I always heard that American high school students were just a bunch of far, far, far, far, far left subversives, trained to stab America’s war-licking patriots right in the back. Just look what those awful lefty high school boys did to that fine Republican Congressman Mark Foley. I wasn’t sure about those teen traitors, because of course I never got to go to high school. I had to drop out in the sixth grade to work on my uncle’s bat farm in Humboldt, shoveling bat guano from dawn till dusk. That’s how I got to be so good at it! Far, far left. Far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far left. Woo woo! Woo woo! My name is Anita Psychiatrist and I really, really do. "

Doh wrote on Jun 26, 2007 11:01 AM:

" All right! Registered usernames! Bad news for the leftwing ghostposter. Looks like no more name stealing. "

Doh wrote on Jun 26, 2007 11:14 AM:

" To - (The Question) What is false about those two statements of Cheney's? The Bush Admin never said there was a connection between Saddam and 9/11 specifically. Bush only reiterated Clintons claims that Saddam had a working relationship with Al Qaeda- not 9/11. So what's your point? "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 26, 2007 11:30 AM:

" Asking questions, then answering them yourself. Brilliant way to show your open mindedness on the matter. Got a feeling that alot of our anonymous (like their posts are not so transparent as to give them away)friends will no longer appear now that must register. "

The Question wrote on Jun 26, 2007 11:40 AM:

" On July 27, 2003, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz said, “Something else to keep in mind ultimately, the resources of Iraq will pay for its own reconstruction.” Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel Prize-winning economist, now puts the final cost of the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq to U.S. taxpayers at $1 trillion to $2 trillion, including $500 billion for the war and occupation and up to $300 billion in future health care costs for wounded troops. Additional costs include a negative impact from the rising cost of oil and added interest on the national debt. So the question for you right-wingers is, if you were George W. Bush and you had a top official whose cost estimates for a project were off by, say, a trillion bucks, who you say to yourself, “You know, the best place for him would be running the World Bank. A-Yup!” "

Billie Brant wrote on Jun 26, 2007 11:43 AM:

" To Ok I guess it's Dodo- I have never said I was a perfect person,far from it! I have certain ideals I like to strive for, but fall short ALL THE TIME!! Yes, I have joined other's at times when civility was getting out of hand and called for a return to it. AND I HAVE fallen off the civility wagon myself even afterwards. Does this make me a hypocrite? No! It shows that I can lapse also. Feel better now? I'll admit to having a "potty mouth" at times and anyone who knows me personally can attest to that! I am a "what you see is what you get" kind of gal. Some may like her, some may not... As I told EB, I'm not going to beat myself up for joining in with the new name for Urban, which he deserves as far as I'm concerned. I get ticked off like everyone else and I am "over the top" with anger at a person who so obviously hates our men and women in the military, I reacted in a forceful manner. Do I think I'm a good person? Yes I do. Do I think I'm a perfect one? Absolutely NOT! So, come up with a little pet name for me. Go for it! Use the second letter of the alphabet for it! I've been called worse,( I did retaliate BTW)by people I've loved and admired in the heat of anger. WE got over it! "

Doh wrote on Jun 26, 2007 12:47 PM:

" You know (The Question)- I'm still going to call you TUrban, don't you? You didn't really think you could slide out of that title by just switching posternames did you? "

Anita Psychiatrist wrote on Jun 26, 2007 1:08 PM:

" As you may know, I married the late Mr. Psychiatrist late in life. I was 98. But I had kept myself pure for him, just like it says to do in the Good Book. I believe it says to do that in the Good Book. I've never actually read the Good Book. I think it best that truly pious peple, such as myself, not read it. There's a lot of weird stuff in there, from what I hear. And I mean a "Lot" of weird stuff, if you follow my meaning. Still, Mr. Psychiatrist and I had 38 glorious of marriage before he passed away in that unfortunate porcine incident two years ago. Mr. Psychiatrist's great hero, you know, was John Ashcroft. Just like the former attorney general, he'd want to be anointed with oil every time he got a promotion. That was sure messy. I'd say, "Now Mr. Psychiatrist, I don't think the Good Lord meant for you to get greased up every time they raise the credit limit on your Sears card or you get a coupon for a free car wash." But nothing doing. He'd be in one of those "Silence, Harlot!" moods of his, and I'd have to drag out the Crisco and give him a big white dollap right on his bald spot. "

Answer wrote on Jun 26, 2007 1:14 PM:

" "if I'm going to say anything about John Edwards in the future, I'll just wish he had been killed in a terrorist assassination plot." - Ann Coulter. Anyone on the right care to call Ann Coulter a traitor for wanting terrorists to kill a Presidential candidate? Those kind of comments get you investigated by the secret service if they're made against our fearless leader, yet many of you on the right love Ann, and will not even condemn this kind of speech as long as the subject is a Democrat. "

Anita Psychiatrist wrote on Jun 26, 2007 1:33 PM:

" I know President Bush is always right (May the Good Lord bless and keep him, and send him on one of his two-month vacations in Texas again real soon! The poor dear deserves it! He works so HARD!) The reason I know he's always right is because that handsome Sean Hannity tells me so every night on his program on that wonderful Fox News channel. I hate that far, far, far, far, far, far lefty commie Colmes they have on there. Not very "fair and balanced," if you ask me, to let people talk who are always wrong llike that. I just stick my fingers right in my ears whenever that awful Colmes talks. They should only have Sean talk, because he's always Right (te he!) Luckily, that Colmes mostly keeps his lefty-far left mouth shut, so he knows what's good for him! You can always tell a good, true, Christian American man, because he has a square jaw, not like that squirrelly Colmes. No, a real man has a big, square jaw, just like Sean Hannity. Why, his head is so square, it looks just like a cement block! "

The Question wrote on Jun 26, 2007 2:41 PM:

" Why did Sen. Richard Lugar say Monday that Bush's Iraq strategy was not working and that the U.S. should downsize the military's role? "In my judgment, the costs and risks of continuing down the current path outweigh the potential benefits that might be achieved," Lugar, R-Ind., said in a Senate floor speech. "Persisting indefinitely with the surge strategy will delay policy adjustments that have a better chance of protecting our vital interests over the long term." Why did Lugar say that, after all that great, Muslim-slaughtering progress that you right-wingers say is being made in Iraq? Is Lugar another one of those far, far leftists? Boy, they're all over the place, aren't they? "

Billie Brant wrote on Jun 26, 2007 3:37 PM:

" Answer, I personally DO NOT like Ann Coulter. The statement you are referring to is awful! I'm not a John Edwards fan, but I don't wish him dead! She's made other totally insensitive remarks that I find just as offensive as the left's Rosie! It's to the point when I see her on TV, I usually leave the room to get a cold beer! This statement is coming from a woman whom you know Answer, is not afraid to speak her mind, but Ann Coulter does not "do it" for me! Does that satisfy some of you on the left who seem to think we on the right give our rubber stamp approval to everyone on this side? I can't speak for other's, but I sure don't care for everyone, and that includes Ol' Rush! I can't say I disagree totally all the time with them, but most of the time they set my teeth on edge ! "

Dodo wrote on Jun 26, 2007 3:47 PM:

" How do you like my name, Doh? Sorry, but I just couldn't resist it. "

Doh wrote on Jun 26, 2007 3:48 PM:

" Golly Answer- I'm guessing Ann was practicing a little political parody. You know- kind of like Air America or The Daily Show or most of Hollywood. "

Doh wrote on Jun 26, 2007 3:52 PM:

" Dodo- I love it! Now I can call you by name and insult you at the same time! Thank you so very much! First name registration now this! What a great day! "

Dodo wrote on Jun 26, 2007 3:56 PM:

" Ann Coulter represents the thoughts of most right wingers, and I am more than a little suspicious about her man like Adams apple. I have often wondered what her/his birth certificate says. "

Doh wrote on Jun 26, 2007 3:58 PM:

" I just want to say thank you to the JG-TC for installing the username registration. It is much appreciated! And thank you for providing this forum! "

Answer wrote on Jun 26, 2007 4:12 PM:

" Hardly a realistic comparison when Ann is on "hard" news channels and shows spewing her filth. The Daily Show (which you obviously don't watch or you would not compare John Stewart to Ann) is clearly political satire. "

Doh wrote on Jun 26, 2007 4:13 PM:

" (Ann Coulters Adam apple)- So Dodo- you're the ghostposter! And to think, I don't believe in ghosts and now I see one. "

Anita Psychiatrist wrote on Jun 26, 2007 4:57 PM:

" Anita Psychiatrist is my married name, of course. I was married to the late Mr. Psychiatrist for 38 years, as I mentioned, until he was trampled to death in a tragic pig stampede at the county fair. He was always talking about suing someone, and I’m afraid the pigs thought he was saying, “Soo wee soo wee.” Frankly, the late Mr. Psychiatrist was always a little strange, if you want my honest opinion. A little bit of a lefty, really, what with him being such a suer. I often said to him, I said, "Mr. Psychiatrist, you have a mind like a suer." He wasn't far, far left, mind you. Just far left, kind of like that old 1940s union president guy, Ronald Reagan. Anyway, some of you may remember me from before my marriage. My maiden name was Anita Swastika (of the big Clay County Swastika Klan, er, clan). Far, far left. Far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far left. Woo woo! Woo woo! My name is Anita Psychiatrist and I really, really do. "

Doh wrote on Jun 26, 2007 5:05 PM:

" So Ann can't do "satire" on hard news channels? Where's that law written? After all, CBS News was lead by a clown (Dan Rather)! And most Liberals actually think The Daily Show IS hard news! And did you ever hear Air America? Well of course you haven't. No one has! LOL "

AnitaS wrote on Jun 26, 2007 5:12 PM:

" It certainly doesn't take me long to pick up devoted fans, does it? LOL "

The Question wrote on Jun 26, 2007 5:14 PM:

" My next question for you right-wingers concerns the fact that, in 2003, Lt. Gen. William G. ‘Jerry’ Boykin, while speaking about a Muslim warlord, told an audience, “I knew my God was bigger than his.” My question is, how much bigger? Is the right-wing War God a 900-foot tall nuclear fire breather like Godzilla, while the Muslim God is a little guy like Herve Villachaise or something? And if their God is so tiny, why he has checkmated Gen. Boykin’s War God for four years now? Is He that much smarter than Gen. Boykin’s War God? Boykin also said of President Bush, “He’s in the White House because God put him there.” So who put Clinton and Carter in the White House? Do God and Satan take turns appointing presidents? Would that mean it’s Satan’s turn next time? And why should anybody bother to vote, since Boykin says we don’t have a democratic republic but a literal theocracy? Does it bother you right-wingers at all that we have these whack jobs playing at being generals in the Pentagon? "

AnitaS wrote on Jun 26, 2007 5:14 PM:

" Doh - Air America? You mean that liberal talk radio station that went belly up because no one would listen to the hate and discontent they favored? THAT Air America? rofl "

The Question wrote on Jun 26, 2007 5:19 PM:

" Why did the Ohio Republican Sen. George Voinovich just say that it is important to find out if the administration is listening to differing views on Iraq, adding that “If they’re not, I think that many of us are going to look at legislation that will limit the number of troops.” Is he another one of those commie-lefty Muslim appeasers who doesn’t even want to use good, old-fashioned American torture on people? "

Doh wrote on Jun 26, 2007 6:03 PM:

" ("Is he another one of those commie-lefty Muslim appeasers who doesn’t even want to use good, old-fashioned American torture on people?") ---- He's worst than that, TUrban- He's a commie-lefty Muslim appeaser in Rhino's clothing. That's the worst kind! "

Doh wrote on Jun 26, 2007 6:06 PM:

" (The Question) is TUrban. And (The Question) was Duh. And that's the answer! But is it the (Answer)? Or is TUrban just a (Dodo)? "

Doh wrote on Jun 26, 2007 6:10 PM:

" Yeah Anita- that Air America! Why is it that no one wants to listen to whiny anti-American terrorist sympathizing Liberals? Why is that TUrbin- AKA(The Question)? Why is that? "

AnitaS wrote on Jun 26, 2007 6:51 PM:

" I can't imagine, Doh. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 26, 2007 7:21 PM:

" How's this one, Doh? Looks like you really wound up tonight. By the way my new post name is in honor of you and your hero. Have a nice time with it. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 26, 2007 7:36 PM:

" For really good entertainment, go to You-Tube and key in Ann Coulter, it's a riot watching that idiot make an a$$ of herself. Of course people like Doh probably don't see it that way, after all anyone who thinks we're making progress in Iraq would probably think Ann's the one outperforming everyone else on there. "

Doh wrote on Jun 26, 2007 8:00 PM:

" Check it out- The ghostposting l!btard is completely lost without the ability to steal my name! He's already registered under a couple of email accounts. I'm flattered (Dodo now Dohbaugh and let's not forget Anita Psychiatrist)! Even though I'm flattered - I think you need to get over this man-crush you have on me. I don't swing that way Mr Gump. "

Rotty wrote on Jun 26, 2007 8:05 PM:

" Excuse me? I must be missing something. I seem to remember Ann Coulter was a tree hugger, who sided with you lefties - someone who wanted all of our troops out, right here, right now, & someone who hated this administration for all it was worth, etc.. Atleast that's how she started out - now she's just an equal opportunity hater because nobody would see things her way. So, that debunks your Ann Coulter/right-wing manure babbling, right, Duh-TUrban? "

Doh wrote on Jun 26, 2007 8:09 PM:

" Hey Dohbaugh- If you really want a laugh, see if you can tune in Air America on the dial! pppfffftttt LOL!!! Boy o' boy that Al Frakenberry sure is(was) funny. But then again- he always was a joke. Just like all of Liberal talk radio. And how many Lib talk shows are there? ppppfffttttt LOL!!! "

Doh wrote on Jun 26, 2007 8:30 PM:

" CABLE NEWS RATINGS JUNE 25, 2007 [VIEWERS] (FOXNEWS O'REILLY 2,748,000) (FNC HANNITY/COLMES 1,741,000) (FNC GRETA 1,738,000) (FNC SHEP SMITH 1,580,000) (FNC BRIT HUME 1,298,000) (CNN LARRY KING 1,100,000) (FNC CAVUTO 1,023,000) (CNNHN NANCY GRACE 1,000,000) (CNN DOBBS 764,000) (CNN COOPER 755,000) (CNN ZAHN 683,000) (MSNBC OLBERMANN 624,000) (CNNHN GLENN BECK 511,000) (MSNBC HARDBALL 397,000) "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 26, 2007 8:41 PM:

" For someone who doesn't go that way you sure seem to bring it up a lot. What's with your obsession on that topic. Actually I think it's pretty obvious to even the casual eye. Maybe it's time for you to come out of the closet right here. After all we have no idea of who you are and it might make you feel better about yourself. It must be awfully difficult carrying that secret around. Is that why you keep throwing out little hints about it? By the way, nice try on defusing the Ann Coulter issue. She's a right wing whack job and all of you right wing loonies know it. You guys can keep her, we don't want that nut job on our side. Also, you guys may own talk radio, but the left side owns about all of TV. How many right wing TV shows have you seen lately? Hmmm... I wonder what the ratio of TV watchers vs radio listeners is. Remember when the accused felon and drug addict Limbaugh tried to make it on TV, what a laugh, and the best part was when he tried to say there was a conspiracy to keep him off the TV airways. That was about as believable some of the nonsense you right wing extremists, like Doh, keeps trying to put out. "

Doh wrote on Jun 26, 2007 8:46 PM:

" March 2005 From the HBO show "Real Time With Bill Maher," Maher and his guests, including Democratic Rep. Barney Frank and former Republican Rep. Joe Scarborough, debated the removal of comments from the HuffingtonPost Web log praising the idea of Cheney being assassinated. Frank earned applause when he quoted bloggers saying the bomb was wasted when it missed Cheney. Maher asked the panelists whether it was wrong for blog host Arianna Huffington to remove the comments. Quoting the blog, Maher said, "I have zero doubt that if Dick Cheney was not in power, people wouldn’t be dying needlessly tomorrow." Asked by Frank if Maher believed that sentiment, the host replied, "I’m just saying if he did die, other people, more people would live. That’s a fact." "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 26, 2007 8:50 PM:

" As a matter of fact, I think everyone should start paying more attention to You-Tube. After all, some of the stuff on there makes more sense that what you see on here. All kinds of good stuff about Monkey boy and Dead-eye Dickie too. I think most of you would really enjoy seeing old Limbaugh getting deflated on a regular basis. It's all right there on You-Tube. Check it out, and watch old Monkey boy butcher the English language, as only he can do. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 26, 2007 8:56 PM:

" One more time. Sorry if I'm sounding as repetitious as Doh, but you gotta check this one out. Go to YouTube and key in Dick Cheney and Halliburton. Then scroll down to Cheney flashes stockholders. You gotta love it, even you Cheney fans. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 26, 2007 9:08 PM:

" Now we know why Bush isn't going after Osama. It's right there for all to see on YouTube, of course. Again go to Dick Cheney and Halliburton and scroll down to Iraqi war Halliburton profits music DRI DRI, and you too, will plainly see why Bush isn't going after Osama. We should have suspected something like this. Here's a hint, Doh, it's right up your alley. Be sure to let me know what you think Doh, that is if you are not afraid to check it out. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 26, 2007 9:20 PM:

" Bill Maher has Bush's number, and you know it. He's even better than Jon Stewart. If you right wingers can tear yourself away from the Fake News channel for a while, you could check both of them out. By the way, that was a fact, now, wasn't it? "

Doh wrote on Jun 26, 2007 9:35 PM:

" Oh it's a fact that Maher sounds just like Al Qaeda, Dohbaugh. As a matter of fact, he really admires Osama Bin Laden and his "brave" hijackers. On Sept 17 2001 just 6 days after 9/11 Maher said: "We have been the cowards lobbing cruise missiles from 2,000 miles away. That's cowardly. Staying in the airplane when it hits the building, say what you want about it, it's not cowardly. Stupid maybe, but not cowardly." I guess if you admire Maher then you also admire Al Qaeda huh, Dohbaugh. What was that about Ann who? "

Doh wrote on Jun 26, 2007 9:43 PM:

" In 1997, during filming of an episode of the game show Pictionary, Erik Estrada accidentally punched Bill Maher in the face in a moment of exuberance, briefly knocking him out cold. BWWWAAAAHHHHAAA!!!!!!!! "

Doh wrote on Jun 26, 2007 9:50 PM:

" On May 3, 2005, while appearing as a guest on Craig Ferguson's Late Late Show (CBS), Maher seemed to excuse Michael Jackson's alleged child molestation behavior. He spoke about the need for perspective when thinking about crimes and criminals. He implied that the alleged behavior wasn't so bad because it was only alleged that Michael Jackson "serviced" the children and not the other way around. After a response from Ferguson, Maher said that getting beaten up by schoolyard bullies was worse than "being gently masturbated by a pop star." Maher brought up the comparison without any prodding or provocation from Ferguson. Immediately after Maher's statement, Ferguson ended the interview.--- OH THAT EXPLAINS EVERYTHING!!! No wonder you "like" Maher- Dohbaugh! He's your your kinda "guy"-huh! Geeezzzz! "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 26, 2007 9:55 PM:

" Now come on Doh, you know you checked out that Osama bit, didn't you? You can admit it, I won't tell anyone. You have to admit it was pretty funny, now wasn't it. I supposed you think it was a doctored photo too. Looked like the real thing to me. "

AnitaS wrote on Jun 26, 2007 10:35 PM:

" Well, I was gonna respond...but...I got nothin'...just nuthin. I'm totally lost as to the point of this whole Ann Coulter/Bill Maher conversation. Is it just a chance to take more cheap shots, or am I completely missing the point? "

Doh wrote on Jun 26, 2007 10:48 PM:

" No Anita- it's all about the cheap shots. No one else would play with the former ghostposting libtard so I thought I would get down to his subterranean level. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 27, 2007 3:40 AM:

" Let me help you out, Anita. It's all about getting under Dohnut's skin. Looks like it's working too. He is so easy. By the way, did you check out those YouTubes sites? I know that Dohnut did too, and that's got to drive him up a wall. I wasn't surprised at his Michael Jackson comment, because that's a topic he seems to like to talk about. He always seems to bring that sort of thing into the conversation. There is professional help for those types of fixations. Just so you know, I will continue to post juicy YouTube spots about things that I know will delight old Dohnut. He won't admit it, but I know he won't be able to resist looking at them. And that's that whole point. I hope this clarification help, Anita. "

Early Bird wrote on Jun 27, 2007 7:01 AM:

" Wow! The registration policy may have slowed down the ghost posting and name stealing, but it certainly didn't help with the civility on here. Maybe the newspaper could start an on line site for adults only. If only that were possible, just think, they could let Doh and Dohbaugh go at it on the children's site. Oops, I promised not to harp on this issue. I did check out those YouTube sites that Dohbaugh recommended, and have to say that, even though some are a little crude, they are actually quite funny. I'm not recommending them, but as I have said before, I usually check out things recommended by both sides. Lastly, I found it quite humorous that some on the right side are trying to disassociate Ann Coulter with the conservatives. Give me a break, she even wrote a book defending Joseph McCarthy. How much more right wing can you get. I know she is an embarrassment to legitimate conservatives, but no rational thinking person would try to associate her with modern day liberalism. I don't now, or have never considered myself a liberal, in spite of Doh's insistence pinning that label on me, but if I were, I would say, you guys on the right can keep her with our compliments. Lastly, Billie, I appreciate your recognition of the fact that not all of us who oppose this war are unpatriot and a bunch of limp wrist-ed wienies, as some would have you believe. "

The Question wrote on Jun 27, 2007 7:37 AM:

" Tell me right-wingers, why did Marine Lt. General Gregory Newbold, retired director of operations at the Pentagon’s military joint staff, write this about Iraq? “Commitment of our forces to this fight was done with the casualness and swagger that are the special province of those who have never had to execute these missions — or bury the results.” Is he another of those commie terrorist lovers you see everywhere, and hear under your bed at night? "

Billie Brant wrote on Jun 27, 2007 7:54 AM:

" Early Bird, I never have believed that everyone on the left was unpatriotic. Most , even if they don't go along with the war per se' many at least support the efforts of our military and respects their devotion to their committment to our country. It's a "hate the war, but don't take it out on the warrior" type of thing. However there are those who have shown themselves to be hateful towards these men and women who have chosen to serve their country. You know who I'm refering to. I do have a big problem with this type.... We have an all volunteer military now and I hope it stays that way. I would not like to see the draft brought back. These men and women of today choose to serve....I'll be gone for awhile folks, a close family member is critically ill. See y'all later. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 27, 2007 8:25 AM:

" Hey Dohnut, did you read this morning's paper? Interesting article on page A6. Another Republican Senator is calling for troop withdrawal. As the numbers start to grow, will you continue to label your fellow Republicans as traitors too? Is Senator Lugar now a terrorist supporter? Bush's support for this increasingly unpopular war is crumbling, isn't it? Keep watching the news, because there will be more and more Republicans joining the Democrats on this one. Wanna bet? Senator Lugar is one of the most respected Senators in Washington, and I suspect the closer we get to election time, the more Republicans you will see deserting this sinking ship. Your boy is going down, right before our eyes, Dohnut. Even that bunch of sleazeballs on the Republican side, wanting to be President, will be changing their tune, especially if they think it will get them elected. If you think Romney has been flip flopping now, just wait a few months. It's going to be a lot of fun to watch the Republican party meltdown. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 27, 2007 8:33 AM:

" More YouTube for all of you Bush fans. Key in George Bush Bloopers. And to think this clown is our leader.... "

Doh wrote on Jun 27, 2007 9:51 AM:

" Sorry - The comments by Sen Lugar don't rattle me in the least bit, for several reasons. First- The surge hasn't had a chance to work. The troop buildup was just completed this month and the strategy only started being fully implemented last week. And General Petraeus won't report on the progress of the new strategy until sometime in September. So how can Sen. Lugar possibly know with any degree of certainty that this new (never before tried) strategy will fail? What does he know that the commanders on the ground don't? Second- Lugar insisted that his new approach would help achieve America's "four primary objectives" in Iraq. These are: preventing the creation of a terrorist haven, curbing sectarian violence, preventing Iranian dominance of the region, and "limiting the loss of U.S. credibility in the region." But how in the world would pulling out now achieve ANY of those goals? Sen Lugar doesn't tell us. Third- Sen Lugar theorizes that, "A diplomatic offensive is likely to be easier in the context of a tactical drawdown of U.S. troops in Iraq,"...."A drawdown would increase the chances of stimulating greater economic and diplomatic assistance for Iraq from multilateral organizations and European allies, who have sought to limit their association with an unpopular war." Come again Senator? Pulling out the troops and letting the chaos take it's own course would be appealing to who? Who are these organizations and allies who would jump into the middle of that? Senator Lugar doesn't say. "

Doh wrote on Jun 27, 2007 10:13 AM:

" It is also worth noting that leaks of a potential troop draw down in the spring of the 2008 election year appeared in the media last week. Could it be that Senator Lugar is simply positioning himself as "leading" that possible result, and in effect appearing to be the cause of the reduction as opposed to speaking later and simply following the crowd? He is after all a politician. Which is why I take all politicians with a grain of salt- regardless of their party affiliation. Unlike the majority of anti-war people in here- I'm NOT a blind partisan lackey. I'm an American who wants a viable solution to the global threat of terrorism. And I have ALWAYS realized that any solution was going to take time. Possibly decades. But it has to be done, because in the end- the terrorist won't simply go way on their own. We have to confront them. WE HAVE NO CHOICE! "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 27, 2007 10:53 AM:

" Well gee, Dohnut, which is it? Is Lugar just plain dumb, as you deemed him to be, or is it that he is just a typical political hack, posturing himself for some sort of credit? Your flip flopping reminds me of the Bush supporters ever changing justification for this war. By the way, how did you like the YouTube clips. I know you watched them, now didn't you? My favorite one was the intimate picture of George and Osama. I would have never have guessed they were that close. I knew that Osama's brother invested a lot of money in George's failed oil business, but didn't realize that he was that close to Osama himself. Are you trying to steal Georges thunder by continuing to give Slick Willie credit for this war? "

The Question wrote on Jun 27, 2007 10:54 AM:

" Why does the new report from the special inspector general for Iraq point another accusing finger directly at Halliburton’s recently severed subsidiary KBR, and its work in Baghdad’s Green Zone? “The corrupt reconstruction project has left a wasteland of failed energy, water, educational and political reform plans. As report after report details, garbage is not collected, hospitals are not staffed, schools close soon after they are opened and factories sit idle in shocking refutation of the vaunted efficiency of the United States’ political economic model,” columnist Robert Scheer noted. And how much have American taxpayers shelled out to the vice president’s pet company — the one that he’s still financially tied to — for such awful service? That figure is a cool $22 billion so far. Why would the federal government pays billions in no-bid contract money to a company with a track record of such stunningly arrogant incompetence? Can you think of any reason? I’ll give you a hint. The initials of the source of the corruption here are “DC,” and I don’t mean District of Columbia. "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 27, 2007 10:55 AM:

" Even I admit that Ann Coulter is a little off the charts on a lot of things. I usually enjoy her columns, mainly because of their sarcastic, biting tone. She's a little more intense than O'Reilly, even, and a helluva lot funnier. Both of them need to be taken in small doses over an extended period of time. Too much all at once and it's just an annoyance. g8fh1That said, I would never paint her a serious figure in the politcal world. She is a cartoon character, like Rush Limbaugh. I don't believe that either of them really believe but about half of what they say, and they can use their razor wits to cut without serious injury. Kinda like Rosie O'Donnell, Bill Maher or Al Franken, but smarter and funnier. Glad we didn't run you completely away, Early Bird. Looks like only a few posters have enough stones to stick with their previous screennames. Doesn't surprise me in the least. "

The Question wrote on Jun 27, 2007 11:04 AM:

" Why it is that the Pentagon “cannot report in detail how many of the 346,500 Iraqi military and police personnel that the coalition trained are operational today,” according to the new 250-page report from the oversight panel of the House Armed Services Committee? “This report details the complete lack of understanding of who we have trained and what happens to them after we train them,” said Congressman Martin T. Meehan (D-Mass). “Many of the forces we have trained are unaccounted for, and others are on the rolls but haven't been vetted.” He said they “could actually be fighting against us.” Why have U.S. taxpayers invested $19 billion to train and equip 350,000 Iraqi “soldiers and police,” and gotten exactly NOTHING WHATSOEVER for their money? "

Doh wrote on Jun 27, 2007 11:25 AM:

" ("Is Lugar just plain dumb, as you deemed him to be, or is it that he is just a typical political hack, posturing himself for some sort of credit?") It's quite telling (Former Ghostposter) that those are the only two interpretations of Lugars posistion that you can wrap your head around. Where did I say that he was "just plain dumb"? If anything- he is just plain spineless and disingenuous. In other words- he is just a politician. But of course, if you think that Senator Lugars theories will work, then please, by all means, explain to all of us just exactly HOW they will be successful. And then explain to us how Senator Lugar is more informed than General Petraeus. See if you can find those answers in those hard-hitting news sources of yours. You know: Comedy Central, HBO, YouTube and The View. And here I thought you WEREN'T well-informed! What was I thinking!(eyeroll) "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 27, 2007 12:14 PM:

" You're right on some of my choices of entertainment, Dohnut. I even watch the Faux news channel too, and I put them in the entertainment category too. Unlike you, I recognise the difference in entertainment and news. I don't know about the View, that must be one of yours. And hey, how much longer are you going to ignore my recommendations on YouTube? I guess I should have expected as much , knowing your penchant for refusing to answer questions put to you, when the answer might prove embarrassing or you're just to dumb to know the answer. I just hope Senator Lugar doesnt find out about you knowing so much more about foreign relations than he does. He might get a complex or something if he finds out that a little right winger from Podunk-ville knows more than he does. Hey, it just dawned on me, you must be suffering from short man's syndrome, or as some call it, a Napoleon complex. I'll bet that's it, isn't it? How tall are you anyway. If you say one inch over 5 foot 5, I'll not believe you. I would really hate to give calling you Dohnut, but little man might be more appropriate under the circumstances. Hey, I'm a fair person, I'll even leave it up to you. So which it, Dohnut or little man? Come on now, you're not going to ignore this question too, are you? Go ahead and show everyone what a coward you really are. "

The Question wrote on Jun 27, 2007 1:04 PM:

" Why is Dick Cheney's office abandoning the justification for keeping his secret papers out of the hands of the National Archives? Officials working for Cheney claimed he is above the executive branch, but they said they will no longer pursue that defense. The decision follows a threat by Rep. Rahm Emanuel, the No. 3 House Democrat, to try to cut off the office’s $4.8 million in executive-branch funding. Why did Cheney cave to those powerless, weakling Democrats you right-wingers are always sneering at, and why this is situation just so darn funny? "

Urban wrote on Jun 27, 2007 1:12 PM:

" Bush has admitted that Iraq possessed no weapons of mass destruction, but Doh claims to know better than Bush. Now, almost everyone on the planet knows almost everything better than Bush does, but not, sadly, in this one case. "

Doh wrote on Jun 27, 2007 1:27 PM:

" Well, well, well! Just as I thought. You can't answer ANY real questions- can you Former Ghostposter. What's wrong coward? You're just afraid to give any justification for your ridiculous statements because you know you lack the intellect to respond in any serious manner. So you still can't tell us how you and Senator Lugar are more informed about the Iraq War than General Petraeus- can you. And given your previous tactics of projecting your "short-comings" on to others; it now looks like you have a complex with your height! So let's recap- Short, uninformed (thinks Comedy Central, HBO, YouTube and The View are real news), obsessed with same-sex relationships, and lacking in any real common sense or logic. And oh yeah! You also like to pretend that you are a war veteran sometimes. So once again- tell us- why you are taking the word of a politician over the word of General Petraeus? Now you can keep evading that question as long as you want, because the more you do, the more you prove me right about you. "

The Question wrote on Jun 27, 2007 1:31 PM:

" Why did documentary filmmaker Charles Ferguson say this about the Iraq invasion and occupation? “When I started doing serious research, I was simply stunned. Nothing had prepared me for the black comedy of stupidity, arrogance, incompetence, and dishonesty that I uncovered. And so I learned, for example, that when the Organization for Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance (ORHA) was established to run postwar Iraq -- only 50 days before the war -- it was given offices that had no computers. When ORHA entered Baghdad a week after the war ended, it had no armored vehicles, only a dozen people who spoke Arabic, and no email, Internet access, or telephones. Baghdad was devastated by unchecked looting; Ahmed Chalabi's private militia went around committing carjackings, one of them literally in front of the administrator of Baghdad and the general in charge of U.S. ground forces.” And why doesn't this surprise anyone, in a George W. Bush operation? "

Doh wrote on Jun 27, 2007 3:02 PM:

" IRAQ HAD A NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM AND WAS PLOTTING TO BUILD AN ATOMIC BOMB. At least that's what the NEW YORK TIMES said just 8 months ago on November 3 2006:---("Among the dozens of documents in English were Iraqi reports written in the 1990s and in 2002 for United Nations inspectors in charge of making sure Iraq had abandoned its unconventional arms programs after the Persian Gulf war. Experts say that at the time, Mr. Hussein’s scientists were on the verge of building an atom bomb, as little as a year away.") The story actually backs up the WMD justification for the invasion! It says that Iraq had everything they needed to make a bomb except the fissile material. You know--yellowcake. Remember that Iraqi envoy to Niger? But hey. Don't take my word for it, go to the New York Times and read it for yourself TUrban! --- http://tinyurl.com/yylenc "

Doh wrote on Jun 27, 2007 3:11 PM:

" THE NEW YORK TIMES (November 3 2006) U.S. WEB ARCHIVE IS SAID TO REVEAL A NUCLEAR PRIMER By WILLIAM J. BROAD: "Last March, the federal government set up a Web site to make public a vast archive of Iraqi documents captured during the war. The Bush administration did so under pressure from Congressional Republicans who had said they hoped to “leverage the Internet” to find new evidence of the prewar dangers posed by Saddam Hussein.....Among the dozens of documents in English were Iraqi reports written in the 1990s and in 2002 for United Nations inspectors in charge of making sure Iraq had abandoned its unconventional arms programs after the Persian Gulf war. Experts say that at the time, Mr. Hussein’s scientists were on the verge of building an atom bomb, as little as a year away.....On Sept. 20, the site posted a much larger document, “Summary of technical achievements of Iraq’s former nuclear program.” It runs to 51 pages, 18 focusing on the development of Iraq’s bomb design. Topics included physical theory, the atomic core and high-explosive experiments. By early October, diplomats and officials said, United Nations arms inspectors in New York and their counterparts in Vienna were alarmed and discussing what to do." "

Doh wrote on Jun 27, 2007 3:17 PM:

" Documentary filmmaker Charles Ferguson- are you serious? Charles Ferguson who is a member of the Left-Wing "think-tank" The Brookings Institution? Well hell! Why stop there? Why don't you just quote Michael (Are you gonna eat that) Moore? "

AnitaS wrote on Jun 27, 2007 3:39 PM:

" Ok. Thanks Doh and Dohbaugh. That clears it up for me. I was confused and thought I was missing something, but it really IS all about the cheap shots. ROFL ------------------------------------------------ I haven't checked the you-tube stuff, but I actually DO like Ann Coulter. She's hysterical...the sarcastic humor and biting wit, even when I don't agree with her, cracks me up. Nearly everything she says is meant to get a reaction, and I seriously doubt that she is quite as extreme as she lets on...but she makes an awful lot of money with her books and speeches. To tell the truth, she's probably smarter than most of us...I figure she's probably smarter than me, anyway. LOL "

AnitaS wrote on Jun 27, 2007 3:46 PM:

" Quote by Doh - "Michael (Are you gonna eat that) Moore? " - - - - OMG, WAY too funny! That's great! I can't STAND Michael Moore. What a misguided soul. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 27, 2007 3:54 PM:

" Well little Dohnut, let's take a look at your questions. First of all I have never claimed, unlike you, to be an expert of the Mideast and this war. I would think that Senator Lugar, being the top ranking Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee might have a little bit of knowledge about what's going on over there. But, knowing your habit of putting down any one who doesn't subscribe to your views, I'm sure he is an idiot as well as a traitor too. And speaking of General Petraeus, why is he the General you like to quote so much? Could it be that his views coincide with yours? How about the other generals views, you seem to ignore anyone who dares to not go along with how you see things. Now let's see, what was it Colin Powell said about this whole mess? Could it be that he is an idiot too? Perhaps you didn't get my explanation of differentiation of entertainment TV and real news. I would explain it again, but with your closed mind and biased thinking processes, you wouldn't get it anyway. As for the height, I'm a little over 6 feet and one half inches tall. Sorry to disappoint you on that one too, shorty. As for the Veteran status, yup, your right, I am a veteran. Honorably discharged on August 27th, 1964, after having served 36 months in the US Army, (sorry no war experience). More later. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 27, 2007 4:10 PM:

" Anita, you gotta check out the stuff on YouTube. You can see a lot of Ann Coulter stuff on there too. Even though little Dohnut refuses to talk about it, as is his usual habit, I'll bet even he has looked it up too. You also have to love how little Dohnut ignores questions right an left but Demands responses to his questions. If you don't respond he calls you a coward, what would that make him when he refuses to respond, a coward? Hilarious. This little fella keeps me in stitches. One more thing little Dohnut, it was you who first started in with the same-sex barbs. Remember your comment to one of your opponents accusing him of having a thing for Rush Limbaugh? It would seem to me and anyone with half a brain, that you are the one obsessed about same-sex relationships. Your habit of doing this kind of thing, makes me wonder about your insecurity in your own manhood. I could be wrong, be you seem to bring that topic up a lot. Put yourself in my shoes, what other explanation could there be for it? I'm going to start in making a note of how many times you keep bring that topic up. I will periodically let you know the count. "

Doh wrote on Jun 27, 2007 4:18 PM:

" Well Former Ghostposter- congratulations on your height! That changes everything......no wait....no it doesn't. Now then, can you reveal something really relevant- like your shoe size? "

Doh wrote on Jun 27, 2007 4:36 PM:

" Well now- Former Ghostposter - when did I ever claim to be an "expert" on the "Mideast and this war"? And you think because Senator Lugar is the top ranking Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee that he knows more than the General who is in charge of the Iraq War? Tell me- Ghostposter- were you agreeing with Senator Lugar when he WAS supporting the war, or is this some "new found" confidence that you have discovered for him? And why do I refer to General Petraeus as opposed to Powell? Uhm...because Petraeus is the General in charge of operations in Iraq and Powell isn't. Now tell me again- who is more qualified on this topic than General Petraeus? And as far as your veteran status; gee that's convincing! I mean- it's not like you could just pull that kind of information out of your "thin air"! And it would also put you in your mid 60's, and you sound more like a twenty-something punk than you do a sixty-something vet. Sorry Ghosposter- I ain't buying it. "

Doh wrote on Jun 27, 2007 4:41 PM:

" Please Ghostposter- no one wants to hear about your same sex obsession! You need to get some help with that "problem"! Whatever it is. "

Doh wrote on Jun 27, 2007 4:59 PM:

" Hey Anita! I like Ann too- I also realize that a big part of her schtik is to reveal absurdity by being absurd. She does a great job of pointing out how the Liberals use spokesmodels who are "absolute moral authorities" like Cindy Sheehan and John Kerry. She's a very intelligent lady and I can tell when she's simply jabbing "tongue and cheek". But the fact that not every person on the right in here likes her, clearly demonstrates that we're not just a bunch of mindless neo-con drones. We leave that act to the people on the radical anti-war side. "

The Question wrote on Jun 27, 2007 5:01 PM:

" Why did right-wing pundit Ann Coulter say she wished Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards would be "killed in a terrorist assassination plot," three months after calling Edwards a “faggot?” How have both remarks helped Edwards to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars for his campaign? "

The Question wrote on Jun 27, 2007 5:13 PM:

" Why, in July 2003, did President Bush challenge attackers to target U.S. troops in Iraq? “There are some who feel like that the conditions are such that they can attack us there. My answer is bring them on,” Bush said. Why did Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., say, “When I served in the Army in Europe during World War II, I never heard any military commander — let alone the commander in chief — invite enemies to attack U.S. troops?" Why did Rep. Dick Gephardt, D-Mo., say, "I have a message for the president: enough of the phony, macho rhetoric?" So why did Bush say it? Is Bush that ruthless, that callous, that stupid — or is he all three? "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 27, 2007 5:22 PM:

" As promised, little Dohnut. That's number one. By the way that little man syndrome comment really seemed to get you going, with the over the top insults, must have struck a nerve there. Hmmmmm.... By the way, not mid sixties but getting there, just 63. Just out of curiosity what's your military status, shorty? I'll bet we all know the answer to that one, don't we? Another question for you to refuse to answer, coward. If you had been in the service, you would have been been ideal candidate for a GI party. Check with a veteran friend, if you have one, to find out what that is. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 27, 2007 5:31 PM:

" Why are the right-wingers like little Dohnut, trying to put distance between themselves and Ann Coulter, could it be that she nuts? She doesn't sound any nuttier that little Dohnut to me. "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 27, 2007 5:44 PM:

" See "The Question", Ann Coulter really does have some good qualities! You can argue her views, but ya gotta love the delivery. Question: Can "The Question" get any more annoying, banal or repetitive? "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 27, 2007 5:49 PM:

" I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm glad they put in the name registration deal, and little Dohnut can't ghost-post and steal name anymore. I am glad that little punk has to follow the rules now. "

Doh wrote on Jun 27, 2007 6:31 PM:

" My military status- ghostposter? Same as yours- I've never served. And unlike you- I'm honest about it. And a....you tried that same old "GI party" line last fall when you were calling war supporters "chickenhawks". You also made fun of a poster for saying that the troops were precious to him. That's when we all knew you were completely full of it! Not to mention your little habit of name-stealing. By the way- if anyone wants to know the credibility of this clown just check out his June 26 posts. He registers under the names Anita Psychiatrist, Dodo, and then Dohbaugh. How's that for credibility. And to top it ALL off- he's asking other men how tall they are! I think you are seriously "confused" pal. I think you're on the wrong web site. And you still can't answer the relevant questions- can you coward. Looks like you’re nothing but six feet of pure cowardly lies from Podunk-ville. Now tell us again how you're a U of I graduate. LOL!!! Now THAT was my favorite of ALL your whoppers! LOL!!! "

Doh wrote on Jun 27, 2007 7:12 PM:

" Another political commentator who I like more and more is Dennis Miller. If you haven't heard his new radio show- check it out online. You can listen to archive clips to get a feel for his show. He's quick, he's brilliant, and he's eloquently sharp and cutting. He's very good! And he comes at it as a former Liberal who now leans more Libertarian. The Left-wingers hate him! "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 27, 2007 8:09 PM:

" That was number two for your obsession, you just can't let that issue go, can you?. I'm seriously beginning to think you are confusing me with someone else. First of all I never said I was a combat veteran, the only GI's in Vietnam during my service time were so called advisers. I was released from active duty before any combat troops were committed to Vietnam. Secondly, what's this about the U of I? I did have two sisters who graduated from the U of I, but not me, and I never claimed to have either. I actually attended College (LLC and EIU) on the GI bill. At that time they had a pretty good deal for returning vets, and in addition, the State of Illinois had a GI bill which I also took advantage of. THe federal money allowed me to live, while the state money coverd most of my books, fees and tuition. Today's GI bill is more like a 401 K, that is the troops have to contribute to it, I didn't have to do that. Guess I got all that out of some book too, huh? It might surprise you, but I was active in the veterans club while attending LLC. You're right about that bit about the GI party bit being used on here before, in fact it has been used a couple of times. Let me assure you it wasn't by me. I'm certainly not the only one on here that likes to bust your chops, now am I? Not having served in the military, I'm sure you don't know what a GI party is, so I will tell you. It's when you get a laggard or a smart$$ in your outfit, that won't listen to reason, so you throw a blanket over him in the middle of the night and everyone beats the hell out of him through the blanket. Believe me, it's a very effective tool in changing smart$$ attitudes. Now I suppose your going to say I saw that in some Oliver Stone movie, right? To the best of my knowledge I have never denegraded anything said about the military or anyone's feelings towards the service people them self. I rather take offense at your comments to that effect. I lost friends and classmates in Vietnam and resent the hell out of your insinuations that I am a phony vet and have less that total respect for any veteran. My issue is with the politicians, and fools that support them and not the troops. The way I see it, insulting anyone about their service in uniform, is insulting to everyone who ever served. Here's another question for you to refuse to answer. If you're so gung ho about this war, then why don't you join up? PS, I guess I must be a pretty poor left winger too, because I also like Dennis Miller. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 27, 2007 8:40 PM:

" So what's the deal with little Dohnut? Now he thinks people are registering under multiple names. That must come from his times as ghost posting and stealing names on here. You know what the say about liars and thief's, that is, they think everyone else is a liar and a thief. Little Dohnut, you are so predictable. People set you up, and you walk right in and don't even know when you've been had. I think I will toy with you a little while longer, but you are starting to bore me a little. That word limitation policy sort of cut into your cut and paste routine, didn't it? "

Doh wrote on Jun 27, 2007 9:09 PM:

" Sorry Ghostposter but I ain't buying your story. I think you just told the story of your Daddy- not you. And if there was even a modicum of truth in your service story- it was that YOU were the one receiving the "GI party". It took you a while to get that phoney story all lined out for posting, didn't it Ghostposter. Now isn't it interesting that you brought up the Oliver Stone reference. Because I remember you making derogatory remarks about Vietnam vets to Billie and that's when I accused you of getting your information from an Oliver Stone movie. Gee maybe we should look at that little post of yours! "

Doh wrote on Jun 27, 2007 9:15 PM:

" WELL LOOKY HERE! From the thread: (Who will dismantle this 'death machine'?) The Cowardly and dishonest Ghostposter wrote: (Come on Bille wrote on Jun 13, 2007 6:33 PM: " Most of the troops spend their time getting high while serving in Vietnam. I know you like to put those particular vets on a pedestal, but I was there and you weren't. Smoking dope was not just limited to free time either. A lot of guys went on recon with a buzz on. I know you feel better if you can blame it on the pols, but the troops weren't exactly going all out to win that thing either. The officers were more concerned with body count inflation and giving each other medals than actually winning, the troops picked up on all that and didn't give a damn one way or the other. The medal situation was so funny that real troops laughed so hard they had to start giving themselves medals in the privacy of the officers club. It was a joke. Most of your observations about Nam are second hand and told to you through filtered glasses. No disrespect meant to your late husband, but most of those serving there didn't care one way or the other. I'm happy to say, it is my understanding, that the troops serving in Iraq don't suffer from that don't give a damn attitude that most of the troops serving in Vietnam had.") "

Doh wrote on Jun 27, 2007 9:29 PM:

" LOL!!! You are sooooo busted ghostposter!! Not only are you a compulsive liar- you're not even very good at it! Oh! but don't tell me- let me guess! That wasn't YOUR phony post pretending to be a Vietnam vet- no no! That was some OTHER ghostposter. LOL!!!!! "

Doh wrote on Jun 27, 2007 9:31 PM:

" LOL!!! Hey ghostposter! Your Daddy's gonna be pi55ed when he finds out you've been telling tall tales about his service record! How pathetic. "

The Question wrote on Jun 27, 2007 11:49 PM:

" Why did legendary conservative fundraiser Richard A. Viguerie write this about George W. Bush? "Conservatives feel betrayed. After the "Bridge to Nowhere" transportation bill, the Harriet Miers Supreme Court nomination and the Dubai Ports World deal, the immigration crisis was the tipping point for us. ... It is largely the defection of conservatives that is driving the president's poll numbers to new lows." "

The Question wrote on Jun 28, 2007 12:34 AM:

" Why did President Eisenhower say this in 1961, during his farewell address to the nation? "In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. "We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted." Was he warning us about about the U.S. military budget, which now runs to HALF A TRILLION DOLLARS annually and is SEVEN TIMES LARGER than the military budget of the next-largest national military spender, which is China. Do you think it's a great idea that the United States borrows all that money — much of it FROM China? "

The Question wrote on Jun 28, 2007 8:10 AM:

" On MSNBC on Feb. 2, 1997, Ann Coulter said, "My libertarian friends are probably getting a little upset now but I think that's because they never appreciate the benefits of local fascism." Do all you Republicans support fascism, just like your famous spokeswoman Ms. Coulter? "

Early Bird wrote on Jun 28, 2007 8:13 AM:

" My goodness, it looks like someone figured out a way to get to our friend. He's so flustered he has gotten away from his pro-war drivel in this attack on his new fan. That sort of tells me who has the monopoly in the brain department with that little ongoing battle. A little paranoia? Perhaps I should not have stepped into the middle here because this will probably cause him to claim that I'm really Dohbaugh. After all he has accused me of being a ghost poster, Voltaire, Duh, Answer and many others. I guess I might as well be Dohbaugh, Anita Psychiatrist, Dodo too. Yeah buddy, if it makes you feel better, you can call me all of the above mentioned. And for Billie: I'm sorry that he felt it necessary to drag your late husbands name into his hateful rant. I have no idea if that particular post was from a real Vietnam vet or not, and the truth is he doesn't know either. I wish he had not found it necessary to include your family in his ravings. It's too bad that he doesn't have the maturity to ignore his antagonist, but it's pretty obvious that his new buddy has found the right buttons to push. I just hope we aren't witnessing a complete meltdown on Doh's part. I would really miss his "interesting" posts. "

Early Bird wrote on Jun 28, 2007 8:21 AM:

" For the question: Whenever I think of Ike's farewell address, I can't help but think of Halliburton. "

The Question wrote on Jun 28, 2007 8:29 AM:

" Just before taking the nation into Iraq, President Bush sat down to discuss the impending invasion with televangelist Pat Robertson. When Robertson suggested that the President shouldprepare the nation for the prospect of American casualties, Bush replied: "Oh, no, we're not going to have any casualties." Do you Republicans think that's true? Do you think U.S. troops are not going to suffer any casualties in the Iraq invasion and occupation? Is that an example of that great "gut-instinct wisdom" of Bush's that you Republicans are always telling us about? Is that the kind of "wisdom" that you Republicans like to see running this country? "

AllYouNeedIsLove wrote on Jun 28, 2007 9:42 AM:

" The government has failed us in the case of the Bush Administration. They have pulled numerous dirty tricks left and right, all around the globe. Most of all, the joke was played on the American people, who supported Goerge W. Bush in the beginning and even let him be president when he lost the popular vote to Al Gore, who is 10 x the man George W. Bush is. George W. Bush wasn't even meant to be the president a second time around! It was suposed to be Al Gore, one of the world's leading humanitarians, who likes to encourage all the counties to work together. As bad as things are right now, they could have been the opposite, if people had used their brains and demanded Gore be president. But they didn't. It is something that maybe was a long time coming, especially since Cheney, Rumsfield and others, have been involved in American politics under several different presidents, for numerous years. They know exactly what they are doing, and are very tricky and cunning. Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumsfield, Bush, and Bush, Sr. planned the whole war. They are some of the greediest people on the earth, and they are the ones we elected. How can we expect greedy people to help us? We elected them and they are taking us down with them. Whether we like it or not, we will always be associated with them. A CIA report that just came out reinstated the idea that the government has a secretive agenda, and has done wrongdoing towards anti-war protesters, as well as drug experiments. They fooled the people back then, they will fool them again. I am tired of not being able to trust my president. I just want someone who cares and who is down to the level of an ordinary person. Bush's head is so blown up, I'm surprised he's still on the ground. It is now up to us. Do we care enough to try to change the government or not? We need to start separating wrong from right, what laws are most important. Maybe we can't agree on everything, but there should be some common ground- the common ground is that everyone is created equal and deserves fair rights. Or are both parties too arrogant to compromise with each other? Ann Coulter remarked yesterday that she wished John Roberts would have been killed by terrorists. Elizabeth Edwards responded by saying that it was inappropiate to make such personal attacks on candidates in front of kids and teens, and that if Ann is criticizing him, let it be for an issue. Besides, isn't it just wrong to say you want someone to die because you don't like him or her? Not only that, it is pro-terrorist. Yes, I know Ann Coulter is a shock jock, just like Howard Stern, but where does the line get drawn? Are we at the point that Republicans are wishing the Democratic candidential candidates are dead, just because they don't like them? That is ridiculous. When will the American people say enough is enough and take back their country? "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 28, 2007 10:32 AM:

" In November, 2008. "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 28, 2007 10:52 AM:

" First of all, the Ann Coulter thing is way overblown and has been taken out of context. In answereing criticism of a speech when she called Edwards a derogatory term for homosexual men, Coulter referred to comedian/wannabe political pundit Bill Maher's suggestion that "people wouldn't be dying needlessly" if Vice President Cheney had been killed as he visited Afghanistan. She contends Maher - whose comment drew little attention - wasn't joking. "So I've learned my lesson," she said on Good Morning America. "If I'm going to say anything about John Edwards in the future, I'll just wish he had been killed in a terrorist assassination plot." Did you get that? It was in English! If...then… it’s a type of argument. She didn’t say she wished John Edwards would die. She parodied Bill Maher, saying in essence (pay attention now,) if I want to stay out of trouble the way Bill Maher does, I’ll maybe I’ll only wish death on Edwards, the way Maher did with Cheney! Does anyone here remember Lynne Cheney whining to the AP that mean ol' Bill Maher said bad things about her poor widdle husband? Anyone? Anyone at all? Didn't think so. "tired of not being able to trust" your president? Like the way the previous one was so trustworthy? Yeah. I wish Algore had become president, too. Double digit unemployment, inflation and mortgage interest rates would have been awesome! Remember those great times in the late 1970's? Those were the days! Lines for gasoline, and all the extra taxes I could have been paying these past seven years. "

father bob wrote on Jun 28, 2007 12:23 PM:

" god bless bill maher. he has the guts to say what we americans are afraid to say. if you recall, there once was a thing called freedom of speech that allowed us to say what we felt about certain controversial topics. now we have to think twice about saying what we feel, due to the bush administration's threats to civil liberties. sad thing is, they want you to feel paranoid about voicing your opinions. in today's america, you are threatened with illegal wiretaps, habeas corpus laws, being a threat to national security...etc., etc., etc.... it all smacks of mccarthyism at it's finest. "

Doh wrote on Jun 28, 2007 12:33 PM:

" Sorry Early Bird- The ghostposter (Dohbaugh) isn't rattling me in the least bit. As a matter of fact I MORE than demonstrated that he is officially "full-of-it". And as further proof of that- notice how your ghostposting buddy said -("The way I see it, insulting anyone about their service in uniform, is insulting to everyone who ever served.") Yet at the same time he stays strangely silent when TUrbin said -("I don't blubber over dead U.S. troops.") Still trying to put a wedge between Billie and me- huh Early Bird? Tsk tsk tsk. Now why would you feel the need to do that? Oh and- just why DID you insert yourself into the middle of this? What dog do you have in this fight? I'm beginning to think that you don't like me for some reason, Early Bird. Is that it? Fair questions- no? "

DohBaugh wrote on Jun 28, 2007 2:10 PM:

" Glad to see you are back little Dohnut ( aka the clam man). I was afraid after the beating you took yesterday, from several sides, you might run away with your tail between your legs. My oh My, that Napoleon complex comment really found it's mark, didn't it? Are you going to ignore my question about your not enlisting? Or are you just going to do your usual clam job, and change the subject by going into attack mode? I don't feel bad, because I have noticed you hardly answer any questions put to you. Rather cowardly, if you ask me. That clam up and attack style of yours is getting pretty predictable. Congratulations for making it through a complete post without bringing up a certain subject that seems to obsess your thoughts. I have to agree with EB, that it's repugnant that you find it necessary to drag Billie and her family into you ravings. I have no problem with your maniacal rantings toward me, even if you are about 180 degrees off, but do wish you would leave her out of it. You have no shame, do you? I'll be waiting patiently for an answer to the enlisting question, ha ha. You have a nice day now, little one. "

DohBaugh wrote on Jun 28, 2007 2:18 PM:

" Hey little guy, just how did you officially prove anything? Calling someone a liar does not constitute proof. Well, maybe in your delusional world it does. So you keep on thinking I'm full of it and I will keep on calling you out on your cowardliness. I sure hope the VA, doesn't read any of this, because if they do they might come and take my house away that I financed through them. Same goes for EIU and LLC. Oh, but I must have got those ideas from a Oliver Stone movie too, right? Or am I possibly just mixed up and thinking of daddy again. "

DohBaugh wrote on Jun 28, 2007 2:26 PM:

" One more thing, sorry little guy, but this one is directed to the Early Bird. Yes I agree with little Dohnut on this one, stay the heck out of this debate. What do you think this is, an open forum or something? I guess if you want to be involved you need to get little Dohnut's approval. "

AnitaS wrote on Jun 28, 2007 2:30 PM:

" Ok, time for medication. AllYouNeedIsLove and father bob get the first doses...really really BIG doses. LOL "

DohBaugh wrote on Jun 28, 2007 3:07 PM:

" So what you're saying, Anita, is that if someone posts something that disagrees with your way of thinking, they need medication? Wow! Do you think this medication would turn them into right wing, Bush loving little Republicans? In fact, if you take the percentage of folks now wanting us out of Iraq, the majority of this country must need some medication. I guess that would be good for the drug companies. What about little Dohnut? You seem to agree with his maniacal rantings and he definitely is in need of some serious medication, or at least some shoe lifts. PS, did you check out the stuff on YouTube yet? "

father bob wrote on Jun 28, 2007 3:25 PM:

" anitas....typical republican response. if you don't agree, attack, berate, debase. neocon GOP hate-mongering. "

father bob wrote on Jun 28, 2007 3:29 PM:

" Nazi leader Herman Goering once remarked that it was easy to lead people into war, regardless of whether they resided within “a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, a parliament, or a communist dictatorship.” All that was required, Goering argued, is for their government to “tell them they are being attacked, and [then] denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to greater danger.” "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 28, 2007 4:22 PM:

" Thanks, father bob. Now we know where Dick Cheney got that line about patriotism. Wow, the things you learn on here. What do you think about that little guy? Or are you going to accuse me of being father bob too? By the way, father bob, glad to see you on here, most of my fellow lefties got tired of little Dohnut and his stupidity and gave up in disgust. PS, don't try asking him questions, because he won't answer them. He's all talk, and has a yellow streak about a mile wide running down his scrawny little back. Kind of reminds you of George Bush strutting across that ship deck, you know when he said mission accomplished, you know about 3000 plus deaths ago. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 28, 2007 4:36 PM:

" Speaking of Dick Cheney, what do you think Ike would have thought about him? When Ike warned of the looming Military Industrial Complex, do you think he even dreamed it would be a VP cashing in on it? I'll bet the old General would have busted Cheney down to buck private..... No, wait a minute, he couldn't do that because Cheney was a draft dodger, and never served in the military. How many deferments did that coward apply for and get during the Vietnam war, oh yeah, it was 5. Draft dodging was quite a thing with this White House bunch. At least Bush did sort of serve, even though he was AWOL for over a year and was reprimanded for refusing to take a drug test. "

Doh wrote on Jun 28, 2007 4:38 PM:

" My goodness! It looks like DohBaugh (aka former ghostposter) is really starting to unravel! Whats the matter there little guy- getting a little nervous now that your phony veteran cover has been blown? Now where was that outrage of yours at TUrbans statement - ("I don't blubber over dead U.S. troops.")? Did I miss that? And I noticed you stopped using your other registered names Dodo and Anita Psychiatrist and you started using AllYouNeedIsLove and father bob- that's a bit too obvious, don't you think coward? LOL! You're really having a melt-down since you can't ghostpost anymore - aren't you! The bats are definitely loose in your attic LOL! Keep talking little ghosposter, I'm enjoying the show! hehehehehe! "

Doh wrote on Jun 28, 2007 4:43 PM:

" Hey Dohbaugh, Three-west just called the JG and said they were looking for you. Something about your meds...and delusions...and you climbing a water tower....and...anyway they said they need you back asap! "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 28, 2007 5:26 PM:

" Ike? Ike? Wasn't that over 65 years ago? What do ya think Millard Fillmore would have thought? Jeez. "

father bob wrote on Jun 28, 2007 5:37 PM:

" thanks dohbaugh.....looks like the neocon/moral majority-religious right/GOP arrogance has reared it's ugly head throughout this blog. too bad. even an ann coulter wannabe has escaped from the asylum. you really can't change arrogant ignorance, just forgive them and go on down the road. they've had 6 years of training in how to talk out of both sides of their mouth and never say anything of any redeeming social value. "

father bob wrote on Jun 28, 2007 5:49 PM:

" i live in the southwest after moving from the area. i like to read the JG-TC online to keep up with "news from home". i happened upon the blog the other day, and became so amused at the rightwing neocons still singing the same old tune. bias, hate, fascism....the lifeblood of the conservatives these days. it's hard to be open minded and realistic when the wheels are falling off your little red wagon. the only thing that really bothers me is the type of hatred they have for their fellow countrymen may very well start another civil war here at home. our country is becoming just that divided. they're the type that will resort to violence for the sake of some sort of misguided patriotic flag waiving. "

Anita Psychiatrist wrote on Jun 28, 2007 5:52 PM:

" Everyone needs medication but me. Isn't that funny? Far, far left. Far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far left. Woo woo! Woo woo! My name is Anita Psychiatrist and I really, really do. "

Anita Psychiatrist wrote on Jun 28, 2007 6:03 PM:

" You're right, friend Dave. Well, actually you're wrong. Ike's speech was 46 years ago, not 65. But it's all old stuff now, and anyway that Ike was kind of a commie lib, if you ask me. The speech is almost as outdated as that rotten old liberal rag the Constitution. Why, pocketing as much moola as you can by ripping off American taxpayers is as American as peach pie. Them liberals will just waste the tax money anyhow. And if the vice president does it, it must be patriotic! That's what I always hear that handsome Sean Hannity a-sayin, and he must be right, because he's got that nice square head. Far, far left. Far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far left. Woo woo! Woo woo! My name is Anita Psychiatrist and I really, really do. "

Doh wrote on Jun 28, 2007 6:22 PM:

" And riiiiight on cue there's Dohbaugh as Anita Psychiatrist! Thanks ghostposter. Now then- can you do the angry phony-veteran again? He's my favorite! Only this time try to ratchet up the scariness a bit. I'm just not intimidated yet. Now don't let me down screwy. I know you can do it! Oh and- don't forget to use your Dodo name again. It's hard work keeping your multiple names alive isn't it- little coward. Thanks General Patton! "

Doh wrote on Jun 28, 2007 6:26 PM:

" Oh and ghostposter- we're still waiting for your phony outrage over TUrban's disrespectful comments towards our troops. Now don't let us down screwy! "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 28, 2007 6:32 PM:

" You're right, AP, I apologize. Let's go back to 1961... Them darkies need to be segregated, and women need to stay in the kitchen. What was the top marginal income tax rate? 91%? Great. For every dollar you earn, 91 cents goes to the government. Super incentive to grow a business and hire new workers. Hell, even the unions don't steal that much. "

Answer wrote on Jun 28, 2007 7:18 PM:

" Doh, AnitaS, ItsJustDave, are any of you going to add anything to the debate? I just got home from a business trip to Chicago, and all I see is a lot of silly finger pointing and talk of meds and other such nonsense. Doh, I had more respect for your intellect, and although I thought Dave mostly a windbag, I at least had some respect for his intelligence, at least until today. This is about what I expect from AnitaS (or whatever she's calling herself now) as her posts have always been less than logical and kind of pointless, but now she is rubbing off on the two of you. I have never agreed with your silly neocon notions about the world but I used to enjoy reading your posts, however far from the real truth they may have been. Please gentlemen, your accusations of ghostposting and silly insults are becoming more than tiresome. I have frequented these blogs since the first day they started and I enjoy the chance to share opinions. Couldn't we get back to that sort of debate? We all wanted registration, now we have it, let's stop the pointless unproveable accusations. There are many on the pro-peace side who share the same opinions, so in all likelihood these are different people. I used to post with my first name but eventually I settled on Answer since I have a common name (Jim) that others used form time to time. So to avoid any confusion I used Answer. Thre is no more name stealing, there may be some posting under multiple name but I honestly doubt it. What it really seems like is you all need to believe that not many oppose your point of view. Well, all the polls say it ain't so. More than 70% of the American public now opposes the war. Is it any wonder there are several posters that oppose the war on these blogs? Please all, lets quit the silliness and actually discuss the issues of the day. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 28, 2007 7:47 PM:

" You're starting to worry me little Dohnut. I wonder if paranoia is effecting you. Gee, I guess I will need a scorecard to remember who all I am today. What's with all of that? Do you think everyone jumps around changing name all the time. I think you have confused me with at least 4 or 5 other people. I have been watching this site for a while and have a pretty good memory about what has been posted. It seems like you want to give me credit for a lot of things. Let's see now, fake veteran, fake U of I grad, fake Vietnam combat vet and I'm sure there are more. As far as names go, now I'm Anita Psychiatrist, father bob, Dodo and I'm sure that any other person who comes along and you disagree with, I'll be them too. Your claims to having debunked my military service are what really lets me know that you may have finally flipped. Seriously little man, I'm starting to get concerned about your well being, and I would really feel bad if I was responsible for this obvious meltdown your going through. Just out of curiosity, how old are you? "

Answer wrote on Jun 28, 2007 7:50 PM:

" So Dave, what year is the cut off for intelligent comments from the past. Since any thoughts from 1961 are out then surely it's time to ditch the Constitution, quit teaching the Gettysburg address and anything else prior to what year did you say? That was maybe the most illogical argument against an opposing view I've ever heard on this site, and that's saying something...not something good I'm afraid, but somethng. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 28, 2007 8:12 PM:

" For Answer: Yes, you are right, it is quite obvious that there are several people posting on this site that are opposed to this war. Some people can't handle that, and resort to calling other liars, phonys etc. and seem to be obsessed that it's mostly one person posting under various names. As far as the debate goes, I think that's water over the damn now. I never saw it as a debate, to me it was just the citing of various web sites by both sides and each side calling the others sites bogus. Some refused to answer questions put to them, and then had the audacity to get upset when their question's weren't answered. "

Answer wrote on Jun 28, 2007 8:53 PM:

" Dohbaugh, I'm not exactly sure how old Doh is but I think he is about my age, early 40's. We had some previous discussions and he said he grew up about the same time I did. "

AnitaS wrote on Jun 28, 2007 8:54 PM:

" father bob - get a life, lighten up, and look who's calling the kettle black. You shouldn't be such a jerk. It's not attractive. ----------------------------------------- Dohbaugh - well of COURSE everyone who doesn't agree with me should be medicated...and so should several who DO agree with me. *cheesy grin* I DO think you're confused on my position, though. I never said that I WANT to stay in Iraq...it has nothing to do with wanting to because I hate that we're still fighting this. No, I believe that if we leave, we'll be giving the nutballs that have invaded the country room to regroup...and if they regroup, they WILL come after us here. ------------------------------------ The extremists are so far out there...I mean, they blow their own children up. If they can do those things to their children and neighbors, what do you think they'd do to us? Do you remember when the torture manual came out just recently? The pictures and directions in their manual were chilling. I'd love to bring everyone home...I'm just afraid that we'll be very sorry if we do... ------------------------------------------ No, I haven't had a chance to check out You Tube yet, but I promise I will. ----------------------------------------- And Answer, if you read, you will see that I HAVE contributed to this discussion more than once AND provided informative links. ----------------------------------------- Some of you people are amazing...a joke about medicating people, in other words CALM DOWN, and SOME of you have to make a big deal about right wing republican blah blah blah whatever it is crap. ---------------------------------------- The labels are kind of stupid, especially since those slinging the terms have no idea... I have just as many liberal views as I do conservative views. I am neither Republican NOR Democrat. I consider myself INDEPENDANT. I vote and decide not based on party lines but on issues and people. ---------------------------------------- I used to be a Dem...and then a friend of mine suggested I sign up for MoveOn's newsletter. Their extreme left wing agenda and their Bush Derangement Syndrome (Thanks Dennis Miller! lol) turned me off...and as the Democratic party leaned further and further to the left extreme, I pulled further and further away from them. The more I learned about the new Democratic ultra-left ultra-liberal leanings, the less impressed I was. ---------------------------------------- Yes, overall, I DO support our president. There are several reasons for this, and most of them have been posted in this thread already. One, he IS president, so he DOES deserve the respect that the office brings regardless of what you think of him or his policies. ------- However, it IS an American past-time --> hating the current president. It made me angry that Clinton was impeached over an affair with an intern - geez, pick something legit. It aggravates me that people make an issue of Bill's infidelities with other women in Hillary's run for the presidency. That part of her personal life should not be an issue in her candidacy. Do I want her to be president? Not really...I want Rudy. ------ Do I agree with everything Bush thinks? NO. A prime example of that is that HORRIBLE immigration bill he tried to get passed. Thank goodness THAT didn't pass! ------- I DO support Bush with the war on terror. I think he sees and understands the threat we're facing more than most Americans. Where I believe the mistake was made is that we underestimated the enemy and didn't send enough troops in initially. We cleaned out the rat holes and then didn't board them up. As soon as we left, the rats came back. So now we have to clean that mess back up. ---------------------------------------- Lastly, I believe that our current president IS trying to do what he thinks is right...and doing the right thing is often the hardest thing with the most opposition. "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 28, 2007 9:24 PM:

" Well, Answer - Since any mention of Bill Clinton brings up cries of "ancient history" from you clowns, I figured anything prior to 2001 was off limits. After all, 2001 is when the apocalypse that is George W. Bush began. Anything before that is just irrelevant, apparently. "

Doh wrote on Jun 28, 2007 9:58 PM:

" I'm sorry Answer- you wanted me to add to the debate like- say, Dohbaugh the (little phony-veteran- ghostposter)? Is that what you want? Or perhaps you would like me to add some biting commentary like (Anita Psychiatrist) or maybe Dodo? Would you like me to follow their lead or did you have something else in mind? "

AnitaS wrote on Jun 29, 2007 12:01 AM:

" One last point, Answer -- at least I'm not being completely one-sided and insulting. Why is it that the only people you felt the need to ask if they were going to contribute are those you deem as right wingers? You in your little glass house should not throw stones because many of your buddies have contributed the same sort of posts that you are yapping about. ---------------------- I could really care less what you think of my contributions or intellect. At least I'm not afraid to use my name, and at least I can post without being rude or condescending... you ARE using an umbrella with all this rain so that you don't drown, right? ------------------- If you are so superior and so smart, then why don't you tell us who you are so we can really judge for ourselves? "

Early Bird wrote on Jun 29, 2007 6:03 AM:

" No, I don't dislike you, Doh. I just happen to think you are an malcontent-ed reprobate. Sorry, but that's the way I see it. You can interpret that as name calling if you wish, but I prefer to think of it as assigning a label. I don't think I am alone with this assessment. You have to be the most immature poster on here. Regardless of your age, you act like a spoiled little brat who has to have his way. Anyone who disagrees with you usually is on the receiving end of your blathering tirades. And no, I am not trying to drive a wedge between you and Billie, I simply see no reason for you to feel a need to include her in your tirades. She has certainly given a hell of a lot more to the military cause than you ever have or ever will. That was one of the lowest things you have ever done or said, and you certainly have said a lot of inappropriate things on here. Having served in the military, I picked up certain things from the Dohbaugh person's posts that only a true vet would pick up on, and I think it's unconsciousnable that you, never having served, continue to belittle an obvious veteran of our military. I have to agree with Dohbaugh in questioning your claim of having proven his military service was a fabrication, again just how did you do that? Your jumping up and down and throwing tantrums don't really prove a thing, does it? It's not your verbosity, and never ending bragging about yourself, that bothers me, it's your reaction to others, and what others have to say. I also have no problem with your support of the President and this war, I just wish you had the ability, and maturity, to show your support in a more adult like manner. You say you want a debate, and I say you have no idea of what a debate really is. I think at least one of your detractors has the right idea, and that is to give it right back to you, in the same silly and immature manner. I realize that pointing all of this is like pouring water on a duck's back, but thought I would give it one last try. Perhaps you haven't noticed, but more and more people are leaving, and I really think it's because of you and your childish antics. Now go ahead and rip into me with your childish style and tell me what an idiot I am. Fair answer? "

Doh wrote on Jun 29, 2007 8:14 AM:

" Gosh Early Bird- tell us how you REALLY feel! I can only imagine what you would say if you actually "disliked" me. And the fact that you're trying to portray me as being disrespectful to Billie or Toby is not only ridiculous- but it is definitely the lowest that YOU have ever sunk on these pages. I have nothing but the utmost respect for both of them and have said so numerous times. I didn't see YOU defending Vietnam Vets when the phony-veteran-ghostposter made those comments degrading their service as nothing more than a bunch of drugged out flunkies going through the motions. And I sure as the hell didn't see you or the phony-veteran-ghostposter utter one single syllable in defense of our troops when TUrban stated -("I don't blubber over dead U.S. troops."). Where was the righteous indignation from you two when those words were spoken? And you picked up certain things from the Dohbaugh person's posts that only a true vet would pick up on? Really? Like what specially? Because I lived all my life with an older brother who spent a little over two years in Vietnam, in heavy combat I might add, and I have never recognized anything in the phony-veteran-ghostposters posts that resemble any 60 something year old vet that I have ever met. And I've met lots of them. So just what do you see in his posts that make him legitimate? The truth is you don't know- do you. But on the other hand- when someone blatantly insults our troops like TUrban did (and no further proof other than his own words are needed) you are suspiciously muted. And you are NEVER at a loss for words. Thank you Early Bird. Thanks for showing us (yet again) what you are truly all about. Thanks for stepping over a chance to defend our troops actively in combat while at the same time providing cover for some young punk who will sink to any level to keep things stirred up in here. Nice move Early Bird! Really fantastic judgment there! Way to show your true colors my friend. I honestly thought that YOU, of all people in here, would have been smarter than that. But I guess your personal disdain for me got the better of your commonsense. I really thought you would have been better than that. Oh- but how wrong I was. "

father bob wrote on Jun 29, 2007 10:32 AM:

" this is laughable....get 'em in a corner and they always resort to Bill's BJ. i used to dislike Clinton for the way he lied about having an extramarital fling with monica. i also used to be a card carrying republican committeeman, but that was until "Boy George" had run for office. the famous quote of his..."the duty of the military is to fight and win wars" told me this guy was going to war if he ever was elected. he was elected, and his lies that have cost us half a TRILLION dollars (yes thats 500 BILLION so far) and a couple hundred thousand lives....and you know, a BJ doesn't seem quite the big deal it once was. "

AnitaS wrote on Jun 29, 2007 12:23 PM:

" father bob - go back and re-read... you'll find something very different than you assumed from just skimming. "

AnitaS wrote on Jun 29, 2007 12:44 PM:

" Doh - you and Dohbaugh have BOTH made both good points and childish points... however, that's what happens in disagreements like this when emotions become involved. Others getting involved is probably the wrong move, but once it's gone on for awhile, they get tired of reading it, too, and can't help themselves. -------------------------------------- Personally, I like both of you based on some of the commentary... although I would really love to know what name or names Dohbaugh went by BEFORE he took on this name. ----------------------------------------- Doh - just ignore and don't give them any more ammo. "

Answer wrote on Jun 29, 2007 12:49 PM:

" Hey Dave, so now I'm a "clown", oh well, at least that means when I say something funny it's intentional, what's your excuse? I only object when Clinton is blamed for the Iraq war or some other folly that is clearly not related. I would love to discuss the Clinton administration (if we could only go back), relative peace, much more prosperity, budget surpluses, paying down the national debt, no warantless wiretapping, open government, etc., etc. "

Anita Psychiatrist wrote on Jun 29, 2007 12:55 PM:

" You know, just as soon as we leave Iraq, them nutball armies from there, the shys and the sundogs and the whey or whatever the heck they call themselves, why they'll regroup and they WILL come after us here! They'll stow away on banana boats with all them bombs strapped to 'em, and they'll pretend they've got a banana delivery to Nieman Marcus, and they'll try to blow up Barbara Bush while she's shopping there for her plus-size housecoats. I just KNOW they will. I just KNOW IT. Those extremists are SO FAR OUT THERE. That's why they call them "extremists." I mean, they blow their own children up. What I can't quite figure is, with them blowing their own kids up all the time, how come their population is almost 28 million, with 40 percent of them under age 15? I guess they just aren't blowing up enough of their own kids. By the way, I'm starting to suspect that this "other Anita" who posts here is trying to mock me. She sounds kinda suspect to me. Kinda soft on them libby lefties, if you ask my opinion. Far, far left. Far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far left. Woo woo! Woo woo! My name is Anita Psychiatrist and I really, really do. " "

Doh wrote on Jun 29, 2007 1:15 PM:

" You're right AnitaS- this has gone on too long. My apologies to everyone here for giving the phony ghostposter far more attention than he ever deserved. Good to hear from you Anita! I like your style! "

Doh wrote on Jun 29, 2007 1:30 PM:

" ("I would love to discuss the Clinton administration (if we could only go back), relative peace, much more prosperity, budget surpluses, paying down the national debt, no warantless wiretapping, open government, etc., etc.") Are you kidding me- Answer? Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaede grew into the global terror giant that they are during the Clinton Administration. And 3000 Americans would be alive today had Clinton took out Bin Laden on the numerous occassions that he had to do so! Yeah- Clinton was real effective at protecting this country- wasn't he. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 29, 2007 1:39 PM:

" Looks like EB really ruffled little Doughnuts feathers this morning, and to top it all off, the little guy did just what EB predicted he would do. I'm glad to see that somone else has little Dohnuts number too. So now this little yellow-bellied piece of crud, d is claiming to have a brother who went to Nam. What a crock, and an insult to every veteran who ever served, especially those who went to Vietnam. Does it make you feel like a big man to CLAIM your brother served, in Vietnam, no less? And in heavy combat too. You are getting more ridiculous by the day, little man. Continue on with your pro-war rants, but please spare us the phony veteran brother crap. That one didn't pass the smell test, Junior. Or is that little tale a way to ingratiate yourself with a certain poster on here. If so, it's a pretty transparent act on your part. You need to stick to your original stuff and leave the military stories to the real vets there, little fella. PS, the closest thing you and your brother ever got to serving in a uniform was probably the Boy Scouts. "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 29, 2007 1:45 PM:

" FYI folks: Answer = AnitaPsychiatrist. Go back through this thread. They always post within a few minutes of each other - rather clear to see. Of course, now that he has been busted, he'll try to change up the pattern. I dare you to deny that one, Answer. If you do, I'll really have to bust your chops from now on. I suspect that "The Question" is also this same poster, but the evidence isn't quite as clear. Funny how "Answer" and "AnitaPsychiatrist" disappeared for a while, and "The Question" appeared, then "Answer" and "AnitaPsychiatrist" reappeared, and "The Question" was suddenly gone. "

Doh wrote on Jun 29, 2007 3:26 PM:

" I know exactly what you're saying (ItsJustDave). I think we can ALL recognize a couple of people on the Left who are multiposting. They've been pulling this little stunt since the first day this blog came on site. At least now they're forced to use SOME consistent names, and that just makes it all the easier to spot the patterns. It's typical of the Far-Left though; use ever changing names while multiposting, then steal other peoples names, while at the same time deflecting the blame by accusing the other side of being the perpetrators. And we're suppossed to believe they're all different people! LOL!!!! "

Doh wrote on Jun 29, 2007 3:32 PM:

" Thanks for spitting on my brothers uniform (little-phony-veteran-coward). I still haven't seen your condemnation yet of TUrbans ("I don't blubber over dead U.S. troops."). We're all still waiting for that junior. I hope your Daddy doesn't find out what you've been up to! Tsk tsk tsk. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 29, 2007 3:39 PM:

" ****Newsflash**** Litttle Dohnut was seen leaving the Video store with an armload of Vietnam war movies. He must be going to prepare some war stories to tell about his brother. You know the Vietnam war vet, who saw heavy combat. (wink wink) "

Doh wrote on Jun 29, 2007 3:56 PM:

" Why stop there (little-phony-veteran-coward)? My brother also suffered several shrapnel wounds- see if you can work that into your degradation of his service. "

Anita Psychiatrist wrote on Jun 29, 2007 3:58 PM:

" You know, doh, I bet it's those Muslim terrorists that come here and use ever-changing names, while at the same time deflecting the blame by accusing the other side of being the perpetrators! The dirty terrorist multiposters! Those Muslims post nasty messages about us under different names, and then they strap those bombs on themselves and go ka-boom! I just know they do. I JUST KNOW IT! I mean those extremists are so extreme, they're just extreme! Either that, or it's the Masons. "

Anita Psychiatrist wrote on Jun 29, 2007 4:04 PM:

" "Good to hear from you Anita! I like your style!" *** Why, thanks doh hon! I like your style, too. I bet you're a real American Christian he-man, with a nice square head like Sean Hannity. Come on over to the doublewide sometime. I'll save back some Everclear and Gatorade for you, and we'll mix us up a pitcher of Blackout Juice. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 29, 2007 4:05 PM:

" Hey Dave, haven't you been listening to little Dohnut? All of those people are me, according to the little guy. Now come on Dave, don't try to steal my thunder. And for AnitaS: Never had a name before this, as little Dohnut says I was a ghost poster. When I first came on here several months ago, I was going to take a name, but when I saw how much it irritated the runt, little Dohnut, I decided to continue with it and continue giving him the needle, just as he has done to so many others. And how about that fake veteran brother? Pretty good timing for that announcement, huh? "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 29, 2007 4:10 PM:

" Sorry, little Dohnut. If I had know about your fake veteran brother I would have brought him into the act a long time ago. Sorry it took so long. Got any more war hero's in the family? How about your Mom, wasn't she in the WAC's or something? "

Doh wrote on Jun 29, 2007 4:12 PM:

" Sorry to disappoint you (little-phony-veteran-coward). My brother didn't exactly talk a whole lot about his Vietnam experience. As a matter of fact my folks always told us kids not to mention it to him. It was only some 15 years later that I ever heard him talk about it- and the stories weren't heroic. Not unless you consider loss of bodily functions "heroic". There- I've given you plenty of ammunition to work with. Now see if you can work that into some more deriding ridicule of his life. Go ahead. You're on a roll junior. "

The Question wrote on Jun 29, 2007 4:12 PM:

" Why did Bush's former Secretary of State Colin Powell just say this on TV? "The reason I am feeling so strongly about Guantanamo is that while we’re arguing these legal issues, we are getting killed in terms of our international reputation because of the place. And we are losing around the world. And what makes it even more difficult is some of the biggest thugs in the world and people that you want to press on moral issues and human rights issues hide behind Guantanamo and say don’t lecture us when you have Guantanamo." "

Vic Sage wrote on Jun 29, 2007 4:24 PM:

" Here's what david Micheal Green had to say: "If a government can plunge a country into penury in order to enrich an elite economic class, if it can propagate an immense campaign of deceit in order to launch a prodigiously violent war, if it can usurp the powers of government at every turn - if it can do all these things, what difference does it make if it is foreign or domestic? If we feel any better being exploited by the Kennebunkport mafia than, say, the Kremlin mafia, it is only because we've been well trained in nationalist bunk to go along with our civics bunk." "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 29, 2007 5:12 PM:

" It just gets thicker and thicker, doesn't it. Would someone hand me a tissue? "

Anita Psychiatrist wrote on Jun 29, 2007 5:16 PM:

" You're so right, doh! Yeah, Clinton was real effective at protecting this country, wasn't he, you libbies! If Clinton had done his job, we wouldn't have all these Muslim terrorists a-coming over here today! Why, just three days ago, one of them Muslim terrorists came RIGHT INTO the doublewide and stole mykeys, the brazen thing! I just KNEW it was a terrorist. I JUST KNEW IT. I don't know if he was wearing a towel on his head or not, because I was having a brief nap on the sofa. A body gets so tired, you know, what with all these lefty-life liberals and chipmunks and whatnot they let run around loose. Anyway, two days later, that terrorist sneaked BACK into the doublewide andstuffed my keys down under the sofa cushions. That's how sneaky those terrorists can be!!! They creep around sometimes at night. I can hear emoutside the doublewide, talking that gibberish they talk. So before I go to bed, I pile all the shoes I've got next to the door. Then, sure enough, five minutes after I've gone to bed, I sit up and I say "Hark! Ihear one of them Muslim terrorists out there." So I grab one of the shoes and I open the front door andwhip it right out at him, there in the dark, and I yell, "Go back to your old Iraq, Mr. Muslim Terrorist, where Our Boys will take care of you." That fixes em. Some night I throw all the shoes, some nights only a couple of pair. "

Answer wrote on Jun 29, 2007 5:22 PM:

" The paranoid delusions of the right wing continue. Now registration requiring an email and first and last name are not enough. The terminally moronic are never satisified. My name is Jim, AnitaS, you can ask Billie if that's my real name, she can clarify as she knows exactly who I am, and has known me for over 30 years. "

Doh wrote on Jun 29, 2007 5:37 PM:

" ("Got any more war hero's in the family?") No hero's Dohbaugh, just ordinary veterans. My Father is a Navy Veteran and is currently in a VA home. Would you like to make fun of him too? Go ahead- he's in his 90's and he's suffering from dementia and is barely alive- maybe you can work up some real hilarious jabs at him too. Go ahead. Show us what you're really made of. "

Doh wrote on Jun 29, 2007 5:52 PM:

" I hate to break this to you Dohbaugh- but this isn't the first time I've mentioned my brothers service. I've mentioned it several times in the past. The last time I brought it up was over on the -"Who will dismantle this 'death machine'?"- thread. Go to it here: -- http://tinyurl.com/29u39l --- (Doh wrote on Jun 13, 2007 10:02 PM: " To- (Come on Bille) - Why does your recollection of Vietnam sound like a re-telling of the movie "Platoon"? Now, while I was too young to have served in Vietnam, my older brother *was* over there for about two and a half years. Some years later I watched "Platoon" with him and asked him how accurate the movie was. His response: "That's a bunch of Hollywood Bullsh!t.") "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 29, 2007 6:22 PM:

" It's getting so deep in bull on here that I'm gong to have to put my boots on just to keep reading little Dohnut's posts about his phony vet brother's so called war history. That shrapnel was a good touch too. How about throwing in a little agent orange damage too?. Probably at least a Silver star or two. For sure at least 2 or 3 purple hearts. Give me a break, Bozo. "

Doh wrote on Jun 29, 2007 6:25 PM:

" ("How about your Mom, wasn't she in the WAC's or something?") Sorry Dohbaugh- mom was never in the service. She was State side while dad was in the Pacific. She passed away from pancreatic cancer back in '98- maybe you can work that into something funny. Or maybe you can call me a liar about that too. "

Anita Psychiatrist wrote on Jun 29, 2007 7:09 PM:

" All you war-licking right-wing patriots here, who do such a noble job of supporting Our Boys in Iraq by talking a lot, have made me feel a little guilty, what with all your fuming about all them far, far leftists who don't post here under the names God gave em. I have to admit, I have not been using my right name here. Makes me feel a little ashamed to say that. Almost like a (shudder) libby. So from now on, I'm posting here under my real name. It's Anita Shrink. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 29, 2007 7:10 PM:

" Since you asked. Wow, between the war hero brother, who saw heavy combat, (wink wink) and all and the old man, I'll bet you guys buy Depends by the truck load. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 29, 2007 7:22 PM:

" I like your style: translation= I like the way you fawn all over everything I say, and I don't understand why no one else does. "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 29, 2007 7:29 PM:

" Anita Psychiatrist wrote on Jun 29, 2007 3:58 PM: Anita Psychiatrist wrote on Jun 29, 2007 4:04 PM: Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 29, 2007 4:05 PM: Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 29, 2007 4:10 PM: The Question wrote on Jun 29, 2007 4:12 PM: Took a few minutes off to create an account under his 'alternative lifestyles' name, Vic Sage, then: Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 29, 2007 5:12 PM: Anita Psychiatrist wrote on Jun 29, 2007 5:16 PM: Answer wrote on Jun 29, 2007 5:22 PM: "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 29, 2007 7:45 PM:

" Would my military service have been anymore believable if had thrown in some crap about shrapnel. My almost two years in Texas seems pretty tame, perhaps if I had borrowed your style of exaggeration, it would be believable to you?. Let me tell you the real story. As most GI's stationed at Fort Bliss do, I was crossing the border into Juarez on night when I was attacked by some Russian spies, but I fought valiantly and got away. Unfortunately one of the shot me three times in the back and right leg. I still carry that bullet in my lower back and set off the detectors at airports. I am forced to carry my medical records with me at all times. I didn't talk about this for 15 years, not wanting the world to know what a hero I was and all. For my troubles, I was awarded the Navy Cross. The Army had run out of medals and were forced to borrow one from the Navy. Hey, little guy, if you can make up stuff, why can't I? "

Stephen Haas (JG-TC) wrote on Jun 29, 2007 7:49 PM:

" If you want to discuss this letter, feel free... no more bickering back and forth about each other. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 29, 2007 7:53 PM:

" Ouch! can you spell Censorship? "

Doh wrote on Jun 29, 2007 8:30 PM:

" You're right Stephen. My apologies to all. "

Anita Shrink wrote on Jun 29, 2007 9:08 PM:

" You’re so right, Dave! When two or three of these far, far lefty liberals post at the same time, that PROVES they’re the same person. And when they don’t post at the same time, that PROVES that they’re trying to hide the fact that they’re the same person. I think all the lefty-left liberals are the same person. To tell you the truth, sometimes I think EVERYBODY around here is a terrorist-loving, Muslim-appeasing far, far, far lefty. Everybody except me. Even you. Especially you. "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jun 30, 2007 5:46 AM:

" Mr. Haas is right - we've all made our points, now we're just being foolish. "

Early Bird wrote on Jun 30, 2007 6:50 AM:

" If the rules are going to change, one would think that would be outlined in the comment policy. An open forum works best when censorship is at it's least. I wonder if the monitor was just having a bad day. Is this a JG-TC shift in policy or strictly the results of frustration on the part of the monitor. Kind of reminds of the old saying about not changing the rules in the middle of the ball game. I have also noticed that the number of posters has dramatically decreased since the registration process was put into place. I would speculate that taking a position, such as was taken last night by Mr Haas, would possibly cause further decreases in the number of people posting on this site. I have always felt that if something offends someone on a site, such as this, they can do the same thing as when watching a movie or a TV show that's offensive to them, and that's to turn it off. I don't think anyone has ever forced anyone to read one single thing on this site. I don't really expect this message to be allowed, but just in case it is, I have a question for the monitor, and that is: Where does it explain your comment about not bickering back and forth in the comment policy? Am I alone in my thinking about this issue? "

Vic Sage wrote on Jun 30, 2007 8:33 AM:

" We do not and we should not teach rubbish and superstition alongside science. "Intelligent design" is not even a theory. It is more like a mentality. It admits of no verification or falsity and does not deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as a series of hypotheses and experiments that have served us well in analyzing the fossil record, the record of molecular biology, and — through the unraveling of the DNA strings — our kinship with other species. And this is to say nothing of the possibility of medical advances that may astonish us in our own lifetimes. To put astrology on the same blackboard as the Hubble telescope would be an approximate analogy. - Christopher Hitchens, "MSN Slate" "

Vic Sage wrote on Jun 30, 2007 8:39 AM:

" I'm always amazed at how childishly frightened these right wingers claim to be. Some Saudi Arabians took over planes armed with box cutters six years ago, and the right wingers continue to shriek that we're all going to be destroyed unless we burn the Constitution while groveling abjectly before the flag. We sit here on our own continent armed with the biggest nuclear arsenal imaginable, and still the right wingers shiver in fear. Are you Republicans really all such cowards, or are you simply fascists who are trying to fan the flames of terror? "

The Question wrote on Jun 30, 2007 12:53 PM:

" Why have newspaper editors around the country observed a scarcity of letters to the editor praising George W. Bush? The Asheville Citizen-Times reports that, "Noticed few letters supportive of President Bush in the AC-T recently? They’ve been scarce in my inbox, and I am not the only letters editor to notice a drop-off. "Sacramento Bee letters editor Bill Moore gets about 60 submissions a day, and up to 200 when controversy is a-brewing. Trying to keep things balanced on his page, he searches out letters supportive of President Bush, a rarity these days. "Moore reports that last August and September, there was a “sea change” in the number of letters supporting the president. Like the AC-T, the Bee continues to receive and print letters from conservatives and Republicans, but most are on issues, and few sing President Bush’s praises, perhaps mirroring his poll numbers. “We have as many politically savvy readers here as anyplace in the country,” Moore said. “We have lots of Republicans in our circulation area. They are our readers ... but no one seems to have a kind word for Bush these days.” Where are all those Republicans who used to gush with praise for their great hero, the man "who says what he means and means what he says?" "

AnitaS wrote on Jun 30, 2007 1:36 PM:

" Well, THAT was inane, Dohbaugh. Sorry that I said I like you AS WELL. My mistake. I wouldn't want to be fawning over since I made the same statement about BOTH you and Doh. Forgive me. -------------------------------------- Dave - I believe you're right about one of my fans (Anita Psychiatrist) being Answer & The Question. I guess it was silly of me to think that registration would halt this type of stupidity. ----------------------------------------- Doh - thanks. :) ---------------------------------------- I'll be gone for a day or two unless the repair guy gets to the house today... but Dave & Doh - keep up the great work! It's obvious that someone has his or her knickers in a twist because there's an awful lot of obnoxiousness from that side all the sudden...so I guess we're doing our jobs well. *rolls eyes* I notice that none of my posts addressing the issues have been answered...I guess it's much easier to ridicule them than it is to discuss. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 30, 2007 2:30 PM:

" Hey Vic, welcome aboard, although I'm sure you're really me, or I'm you, or your answer or something along those lines. Anyway, I'm going to attempt to answer the question, because I will assure you none of the right wingers will. I don't think they are cowards or fascists. What they are, are very insecure people who need to be told how to think and that everything will be OK, if they just listen to the President. Bush represents their security blanket. These are the same types that Fox news and the right wing radio talkers depend on for their existence. As you know, Fox constantly pushes anything positive about this administration while glossing over anything negative. If all you ever watched on TV was Fox, imagine what sort of a distorted view of reality you would have. And the same thing goes for those listen to right wing radio. Most conservatives will not watch anything but Fox and will tell you that the main stream media is just to liberal for them. Of course that is how they feel, after hours on end of hearing about the left wing slant of the main stream news media, of course they would see it that way. Fox news is very good at brainwashing and appealing to people who are too lazy to think for them self. For those who like to point out the popularity of Fox, I would remind them that Fox is the only conservative news station and it only stands to reason that they would be popular. There are a lot of mainstream news outlets on cable and they are all competing with each other, unlike Fox who has a monopoly for reporting the news with a biased right wing slant. The excuse from the Fox fans about it's just the commentaries that are slanted to the right and the hard news is fair and balanced is a laugh. I don't know if they really believe that or not, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that their news is so far slanted to the right that even a 10 year old kid could figure that out. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 30, 2007 2:39 PM:

" Speaking of George Bush. I knew his poll numbers were in the toilet, but now I see it's spread all over the globe, and he is less trusted than the Russian leader, Putin. You Republicans should really be proud of him. In Great Britain, when the leader has lost the confidence of the people, he steps downs. Obviously, this is not Great Britain, but wouldn't it be nice if he would step down? It's amazing what this man has done to this country, and to think Clinton was impeached over lying about a hummer in the Oval office. "

Answer wrote on Jun 30, 2007 4:31 PM:

" Goodbye AnitaS, have a nice trip. -from Answer, or am I... Thanks for the thoughts Mr. Haas. I don't think that it will happen. I think AnitaS and Dave have a crush on me and they don't know how to show their real feelings so they lash out. Please don't censor them, it's so entertaining...remember, more than 4 years since "Mission Accomplished." "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jun 30, 2007 6:24 PM:

" AnitaS, it was a joke, tongue in cheek comment. Talk about getting your knickers in a bunch. Anyway, have a nice trip, and I look forward to hearing from you again. By the way don't get upset because no one answered you questions, no one does that any more on either side. Seems like all we do anymore is slam each other. By the way, don't tell Doh, but I got a solicitaion for membership letter from the VFW today. I guess they don't know I'm a fake vet. Again, enjoy your trip. "

Early Bird wrote on Jul 1, 2007 8:48 AM:

" Looks like the registration process was a flop. People are insulting each other just as much as before and it looks like the numbers of posters has dwindled down to a mere hand full. As far as I can tell, the only change is that people can't post under someone Else's name. Perhaps it will take time to build up again. Personally, I think the problem is that a lot of people don't want to go on line and give out their E-mail address, just a thought. It will be interesting to see how this thing plays out. "

AnitaS wrote on Jul 1, 2007 1:43 PM:

" Sorry Dohbaugh. I misunderstood. "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jul 2, 2007 10:38 AM:

" I think anyone who refuses to provide basic information, such as that required to post, has no business doing so. I do not think that there are fewer posters, just those who previously used 15 screennames now only use 3 or 4. This thread may have disenchanted some, but if there ever comes another topic worth discussing, people will respond. Six posters using 55 different names was really not better than the situation we have now. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jul 2, 2007 12:45 PM:

" So Dave, are you really accusing those left wingers, like myself, of using multiple names? Or could it only be those righties, who are in a minority, here because we all know the majority of the people in this country are against this war and are not supporting this president. So I guess if you look at it logically, it must be the right wingers such as yourself and Doh would are posting under multiple names. "

father bob wrote on Jul 2, 2007 2:28 PM:

" In “Fascism Anyone?” Laurence Britt, identifies 14 characteristics common in fascist regimes. His comparisons of Hitler, Mussolini, Suharto, Pinochet, and Franco yielded these 14 common traits. 1) Powerful and continuing nationalism Fascist regimes tend to make use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere as are patriotic symbols on clothing, public displays, and cars. 2) Disdain for the recognition of human rights Because of the fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights and civil liberties can be ignored in certain cases because of “need”. The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, long incarcerations of prisoners without trial, etc. 3) Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived a common threat or foe: ethnic or religious minorities, liberals, communists, terrorists, etc. 4) Supremacy of the military Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. 5) Rampant sexism The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high as is homophobia, and anti-gay legislation as national policy. 6) Controlled mass media Sometimes the media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is common. 7) Obsession with national security Fear is used as a motivational tool over the masses. 8) Religion and government are intertwined Governments in fascist regimes tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government’s policies and actions. 9) Corporate power is protected The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship for the power elite. 10) Labor power is suppressed Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government. Labor unions are either eliminated entirely or are severely suppressed 11) Disdain for intellectuals and the arts Fascist regimes tend to promote and tolerate hostility to higher education and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts. 12) Obsession with crime and punishment Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations. 13) Rampant cronyism and corruption Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures, to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders. 14) Fraudulent elections Sometimes elections in fascist regimes are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and the manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also tend to use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections. "

Answer wrote on Jul 2, 2007 3:22 PM:

" An appellate court ruled unamiously that there is no reason to delay the incarceration of ol' Scooter. Looks like the "Decider" will be whipping out the old pardon pen anytime now. Can't have the former Chief of Staff for the most corrupt VP in American history in jail. Cheney is so bad he makes Agnew look like a choir boy... "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jul 2, 2007 3:42 PM:

" It almost sounds like the you're describing this administration. We're not quite there, but if Bush/Cheney had more time we might get there. One can certainly see elements of everyone of those 14 characteristics of a fascists state currently taking place, at this very moment. What scares the hell out of me, is that this outfit might try to suspend elections under the guise of national security. Fortunantly, even the stanchest Bush supporters would balk at this, but there are those who would go along. From what I have seen posted on this site, some of them might reside in this area, too. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jul 2, 2007 3:47 PM:

" For: It's just Dave. Dave, I hope you're right and I'm wrong, about the number of people posting, that is. I still think it's the reluctance of some to register, only time will tell, if I'm right. "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jul 2, 2007 7:11 PM:

" Dohbaugh: In my opinion, it's not really a question of 'Left Wing' v. 'Right Wing'. Sure, there are extremists on both sides, i.e. Rosie O'Donnell, Michael Moore and Bill Maher on the left fringe, and Bill O'Reilly, Pat Buchanan and Sean Hannity on the right. I feel the vast majority of peole fall somewhere in between. Most left leaning people do not want America to become an Islamic state, and most right leaning people do not wish to wipe out all of the middle east. The thing that I have noticed (and it's only my opinion, I don't claim that mine is the only correct view), is that some on the left are filled with negativity and a sense of impending doom, while many on the right just see absurdity with those views. The far left is filled with hatred, the far right see the opposition as a source of amusement. Some on the left threatened to flee the country if Bush were elected, and there are documented instances of mental health professionals reporting a huge spike in post-election depression and anxiety related ilnesses in the winter of 2000. Michael Morre reportedly took three days to get out of bed after Bush was elected (It usually only only takes him two days to get up). * See, HUMOR, not hate*. I don't forsee the same reaction if Hillary, Obama or another dem wins in 2008. We'll be disappointed, but our lives will not be over. Optimism that the U.S.A. is stronger than a few government leaders will prevail. Sure, we'll have a field day with every misstep, as was the case with the Clintons and Al Gore, but hate and depression? Nah, more like watching a comedy show - an expensive one, to be sure - but amusing nonetheless. "

Early Bird wrote on Jul 3, 2007 5:26 AM:

" For: It's just Dave. I realize your post was not directed to me, however I feel I must respond. While I agree with much of your analysis, there are parts I would like to take issue with. I have noticed that, like most people who tend to lean to the right, you seem to have a bit of amnesia, when in comes to the Clinton's. I seem to recall that the hatred was just as visceral from the far right towards Clinton as is currently in play with the hatred for Bush. I remember some of the wacky stuff the far right was coming up with, that was so far off the wall that it wasn't even funny. Remember that story about the Clinton's having the White House Christmas tree loaded with pagan and phallic symbols. While it's true that Clinton himself ultimately gave the far right the issue they wanted, it's equally true that a heck of a lot of stuff was pure fabrication. This is in no way a defense of Clinton's immoral behaviors. I am merely pointing out that the hatred for Clinton was just as strong as it is for Bush. I seem to recall that while Clinton was being chastised for his immoral actions, it came out that Newt G. was doing the same thing, and I don't recall much of an outcry from his party. I realize he wasn't President, but he certainly was recognized as a leader behind the impeachment movement. Sometime, I find myself getting caught up in the, it's just getting worse school of thought on political campaigns, but when I remember such things as the opposition's campaign against Andrew Jackson, I realize that's it's just the same old game. Do you remember that slogan? It went something like this: "we don't want a who#@ in the White House", referring to Jackson's wife, whose divorce was in question at the time. In summation, while the hatred for Bush seems to be from more than from the far right and has moved into the center, the hatred for Clinton was just as strong or perhaps even stronger from the extreme right wing. I think your comment about some wanting to the leave the country if Bush was elected was a bit of overkill, don't you think? "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jul 3, 2007 8:06 AM:

" Yanno... maybe I do suffer from selective amnesia, but I really don't remember much 'hate' regarding Clinton. Most people just thought that he was an unqualified pathological liar - someone to be ridiculed, not feared. That's no more hate than how one feels toward Rosie O'Donnell or Al Franken - they're not hated, just viewed as fools. As for the leaving the country comment, there were literally dozens of Hollywood personalities saying exactly that. Eddie Vedder told USA Today, "I'm moving to a different country if little Damien II gets elected." This statement was followed by director Robert Altman's announcement on Sept. 6: "If George Bush is elected president, I'm leaving for France." Then, on Sept. 18, the New York Daily News ran an interview from German magazine Focus in which Kim Basinger announced that her husband, Alec Baldwin, "might leave the country if Bush is elected president," adding, "and then I'd probably have to go too." The Washington Post quoted Kennedy White House press secretary and former ABC News correspondent Pierre Salinger as saying, "I don't want any more Bush presidents. If Bush wins, I'm going to leave the country and spend the rest of my life in France." The intention to decamp for parts un-Bushed had been ascribed to no fewer than a dozen actors, directors, rock musicians and other recognizable persons, among them Martin Sheen, Rosie O'Donnell, Michael Moore, Matt Damon, Whoopi Goldberg, Ed Asner, Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon. No big deal, we don't care, they wouldn't be missed. It just shows the doomsday mentality of a few who have attained great wealth and fame without working for it, and the guilt they feel as a result. Personally, I wouldn't leave the country if Al Sharpton, or even worse, Hillary Clinton were elected president. I'll just sit back and enjoy the show. "

Vic Sage wrote on Jul 3, 2007 8:57 AM:

" And now the head thief schemes to let his criminal henchman, Scooter Libby, escape justice — thereby avoiding the possibility that Libby might ever tell Patrick Fitzgerald the truth. Look, the right wing and the Republican Party are simply composed of bald-faced, ruthless liars who will accuse their political opponents of doing everything they themselves are secretly doing and then tell any lie possible, however absurd, when one of their own is caught in a felony. Remember how the right-wing defenders of Mark Foley suddenly decided that having a congressman chase teenage pages for sex was perfectly fine? Remember how America's moralist Sean Hannity praised the superb reporting of Jeff Gannon, the male prostitute who posed as a journalist with the help of his White House conspirators? Remember how Bill Clinton's blow job inspired the instantaneous moral decline of western civlization? Remember how, every other week, the WMDs "have been found," although even the Chimpanzee in Chief admits they haven't? Remember how the right wingers suddenly decided that it's perfectly fine to tell the investigating sheriff's deputies to go to hell after you get drunk and shoot some guy in the face? They find our concern for the truth amusing and useful, making us vulnerable to their lies. I think they are a little surprised we keep falling for anything they say. We've had plenty of proof that they are nothing but liars, and I specifically mean you right-wingers who post here. What a laugh on us you must have as you talk ad nauseum about your supposed "morality." You know what you really are. As Emerson said, "The more he talked of his honor, the faster we counted the spoons." The idea of telling the truth about anything has never even crossed Dick Cheney's mind. To him words are merely sounds you manipulate to get people to feed your bottomless, reptilian appetites. They have no significance beyond that, nor does anything else. "

AnitaS wrote on Jul 3, 2007 10:43 AM:

" Vic - go crawl back under your rock until you can be nice...and SANE. "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jul 3, 2007 10:56 AM:

" There. "Vic", or whichever name he is using today, just made my point. Pure hatred. If I were that miserable, I'd probably take enough time to crawl out of my parents' basement and jump in front of a train. "

Answer wrote on Jul 3, 2007 2:03 PM:

" I don't think all of you right wingers are "nothing but liars" but I do see a lot of "hatred" in your replies. "

Vic Sage wrote on Jul 3, 2007 2:16 PM:

" Despite whatever verbal snake oil they may be peddling today, the Bush Republicans stand revealed as people whose single motive is clearly for their gang to acquire and keep and exercise as much power as it can, up to and including all of it, if possible, and by any means necessary. They would laugh openly at all this blather about rules of law and constitutions, mere pious fictions to them, if it weren’t for the fact that some of their political opponents are so foolishly idealistic as to actually believe in such nonsense. Laws and constitutions therefore serve them well, much the way a planned distraction serves the pickpocket. While their political opponents are putting up their dukes to fight by the Marquis of Queensbury rules, the Republican gang members are left free to stab straight at the jugular. "

Vic Sage wrote on Jul 3, 2007 2:37 PM:

" By the way, thank you, father bob, for the list of characteristics of fascism. Very illuminating about who these people really are, and what they are really up to. "

AllYouNeedIsLove wrote on Jul 3, 2007 4:26 PM:

" The truth is that while there are some important issues, (abortion, immigration, etc.),that we are debating right now, there are major things going on overseas. Terrorism is real and is one of the worst and scariest new realities, (something that I never dreamed of when I was young...the world hasn't been the same since 9/11) originally bad, but now heightened due to the Bush Administration's wrong method of combating the enemy. Now, terrorists are at America's throats. They see Britains, Israelis, and Americans as a symbol for George Bush. Well, I didn't elect him and I didn't agree with him and I most definitely have never supported him (knowingly) in all his money-making endeavors. What about those Americans, like me, that supports and loves America, democracy, love, humanity, truth and justice, but does not support George Bush? The terrorists do not see this. They are misguided and full of hatred. The Bush Administration is right about that fact about many of the terrorists. However, the Bush Administration has failed miserably to do what we have asked them to do: take care of our country, help us and help others. Ths Bush Administration has done the wrong thing in almost every instance. They have spread their ugly greediness around the world. Are we doomed due to George Bush's foreign policies gone awry? There are a lot of people worldwide who want to kill us, which has only gotten larger and more brutal with every year of occupation and war. Why hasn't the Bush Administration stopped this? What is George Bush thinking this weekend while he twiddles his thumbs and watches fireworks this Fourth of July? Is he thinking of the thousands of people killed, (many young, some not old enough to drink), because of this war? "

Early Bird wrote on Jul 4, 2007 7:45 AM:

" Dave, please enlighten us as to George Bush's qualifications to be President. Tell me Dave, was Clinton less qualified to be President than Bush? I also find it rather amusing that you think most people think Clinton was a pathological liar, perhaps that would explain his popularity. How would you explain Bush's low approval numbers? Is it just the war? It seems to me that one of the big issues with the Bush detractors is his propensity to lie and any and everything. I'm not saying that is necessarily true, but that seems to be the perception of many. By the way, in case you think this is all about supporting Clinton, it's not, and I personally he disgraced the office of President and should have resigned the office. I guess we all perceive things differently, but I really find it hard to swallow that you don't remember the hatred for Clinton, particularly from the extreme right wingers. I got a kick out of your comments about watching for missteps from a Democrat, do you really think any one, Democrat or Republican could have more missteps than Bush has? I don't care who the next President will be, or from which party. I just hope that thousands of our young people won't be killed because of his or her missteps. I can't set back and be amused about that. "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jul 4, 2007 11:53 AM:

" Umm.. he was 35 years old, a natural born U.S. citizen, and had lived in the U.S. for at least 14 years. That's the law. Age and Citizenship requirements - US Constitution, Article II, Section 1 No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States. Term limit amendment - US Constitution, Amendment XXII, Section 1 – ratified February 27, 1951 No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. Was a former state governor, which is all Clinton or Carter had done. Clinton had never even held a job outside the government or owned a home. Sure Bush has faults, and I disagree with him on many issues such as stem cell research, immigration, faith-based B.S., etc., but he's certainly no worse than his two democratic predecessors. We'll never agree on these issues, you won't change my views and I won't change yours. Let's just agree to disagree. See, guys, Bush can't run again, so it's over. problem solved. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jul 4, 2007 12:01 PM:

" Why do the right wingers always attack the messenger? Could it be that they really can't defend this reprobate, Bush? Give 'em hell Vic, let 'em keep coming with their personal attacks, it's the best some of them can do. Anyone else notice that the main big mouth sort of dropped out of the picture, guess he could put out, but couldn't take it. Typical right winger, all mouth an no backbone. This sort of cowardice reminds me of the hawks in this administration, who hid behind deferments and the Texas guard when we were at war in Vietnam. And I can't forget the biggest radio hawk of them all, old accused felon, and drug addict, Rush Limbaugh, who got out of service because of a boil on his butt. "

Doh wrote on Jul 4, 2007 12:49 PM:

" Really Early Bird? ("I just hope that thousands of our young people won't be killed because of his or her missteps. I can't set back and be amused about that.") - Then you must really be less than amused about the 3,000 innocent civilians who were murdered on 9/11 because Clinton refused to do anything about Bin Laden. Would you like to debate that? Would you like me to document the occasions where Clinton had the chance to kill Bin Laden, and didn't? Would you like me to cite the time Clinton was offered Bin Laden by the Sudanese- and refused to take him? And then lied about it? Are you outraged at Clinton for letting Bin Laden take up refuge in Afghanistan after Clintons own State Department warned him of the impending danger that Bin Laden presented? Would you like to talk about the highly classified documents pertaining to Clintons handling (or lack thereof) of Al Qaeda, that Sandy Berger stuffed down his pants and socks and hid in a dumpster? Would we even be in Afghanistan or Iraq had Clinton been more concerned about Al Qaeda than he was about his poll numbers? Do you think terrorism started after Bush was in office? Do you even have a clue? "

Doh wrote on Jul 4, 2007 12:52 PM:

" Tell me Early Bird- do you really think any one, Democrat or Republican could have more "missteps" than Clintons did? "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jul 4, 2007 1:06 PM:

" Make no mistake about it, the pardon will happen (another misstep, Dave). This was just a ploy to keep long time political hack Libby from going to jail, and to keep his mouth shut. Bush will wait until the very end of his term to institute the full pardon. A full two thirds of the people, polled on this issue, think Scooter should go to jail, but Bush, with his usual arrogance, deems otherwise. The right wing Republicans were all over the place when this ruse was announced with all sort of spin justifying it. I love the fact that they simply cannot let the case stand on it's own and have to keep dragging the Democrats into it. I would remind them, that it was a jury of Libby's peers who said he was guilty, not the Democrats. This whole thing has Cheney's greasy fingerprints all over it too. And people wonder why so many hold our politicians in such disdain. Bush and Cheney are the poster-boys for political sleaze, and before anyone says it, Clinton belongs right alongside these two slugs. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jul 4, 2007 5:23 PM:

" Hey Doh, go back and read father bob's Fascists characteristics, especially number 7, and see if that one looks familiar. Let me know what you think of that one, OK? Now that you're back, are you going to continue to duck uncomfortable questions? "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jul 4, 2007 7:53 PM:

" Here you go Dave. You've been reading Doh's comments about Clinton on here for a while now, and can you honestly say that Doh is not one of those scarce Clinton haters, you know, the ones you can't remember. It must really tear you up that Clinton was so popular and most people hold Bush in utter contempt. Chew on this for a while, Dave. Clinton, being a pathological liar, fornicating weasel and in your words, unqualified, and with all of that baggage, he was still more respected and trusted than your hero, Bush. Why is that? I'll ask you Dave, because Doh usually refuses to answer questions, even though he loves to ask them. Lastly Dave, I would love to hear your spin on the Libby commutation. And please, try to leave the Clinton administration out of it. "

Doh wrote on Jul 4, 2007 7:56 PM:

" Hey little Dohbaugh, how ya doing shorty. Who were you saying dropped out of the picture? Was it Voltaire? I'll bet it was Voltaire. Am I right? What's wrong little fella, are those questions I put to Early Bird too hard for you? Do you agree with me or are you just ducking them? "

Doh wrote on Jul 4, 2007 8:19 PM:

" Oh and little Dohbaugh fella- you forgot the biggest Vietnam draft dodger of them all- Bill(Rhodes Scholar)Clinton. You remember him don't ya shorty? You know- the hillbilly chickenhawk who bombed an aspirin factory and who launched a disastrous military campaign into Somalia. The very same chickenhawk who put U.S. troops into Bosnia- troops that are still there, by the way. I know you just forgot about ole Bubba, didn't ya little fella? I guess you're just not "up" on your History- huh. Oh and didn't ole Bill refuse to take Bin Laden when the Sudanese offered him to us? I believe ole Bubba even lied about that too! "

Doh wrote on Jul 4, 2007 8:26 PM:

" Hey little Dohbaugh- when can we expect the Democrats (The Most Ethical Congress Ever) to begin their investigations and hearings over Sandy Bergers blatant theft of highly classified documents pertaining to Clintons dereliction of duty towards Bin Laden and Al Qaeda? "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jul 4, 2007 8:32 PM:

" There you go again, asking questions while ignoring those asked to you. My official position is that I will not answer any of your questions until you start acting like a man and answering a question or two. I thought after I gave you hard time about that phony war veteran brother story you were trying to push, you might have run off and hid. That was a good one, and I'm still laughing over that one. The VA hospital line was quite a finishing touch too. I still think you should have at least thrown in a Bronze or Silver Star for effect. Now don't get all pouty again. "

Doh wrote on Jul 4, 2007 8:33 PM:

" Let me correct you little Dohbaugh; I'm a Clinton critic- not a Clinton hater. I know with you Left-Wingers "critic" and "hater" are synonymous- but that's because most of you people are unhinged with Bush Derangement Syndrom. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jul 4, 2007 8:37 PM:

" Doh, you must have missed it somewhere along the line, but I hold Clinton in even more contempt than I do Bush. You're spitting in the wind throwing all that Clinton stuff at me. You're wasting some pretty good ammunition on someones who even has less respect for Clinton than you probably do. You need to save that for the Clinton supporters. I agree with you, just like most of that Bush staff, Clinton was a yellow bellied chicken too. Clinton should have been impeached. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jul 4, 2007 8:41 PM:

" Looks like old Doh, the vertically challenged right winger, is through pouting, over getting called out for his fake brother story, and is back for more question evasions. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jul 4, 2007 8:45 PM:

" Hmmmm...let me see if I have this straight, if you criticize Clinton you are a Clinton critic, and if you criticize Bush, you are a Bush hater. Hmmm...sounds like typical right wing logic to me. "

Doh wrote on Jul 4, 2007 9:06 PM:

" Back up there little Dohbaugh fella- I want you to tell everyone here how you made fun of and derided, not only my brothers Vietnam service, but also my fathers WWII service in the Navy. Two people who are not here to defend themselves. And tell everyone why you did it. "

Doh wrote on Jul 4, 2007 9:12 PM:

" Hey little Dohbaugh- glad to see you think Clinton is a chickenhawk too. So why did you leave him out of your last "chickenhawk" comments about all the people on the Right? Was that just a mistake little guy? Or are you just not very bright? "

Doh wrote on Jul 4, 2007 9:47 PM:

" How a Dohbaugh mind works: ("Hmmmm...let me see if I have this straight, if you criticize Clinton you are a Clinton critic, and if you criticize Bush, you are a Bush hater. Hmmm...sounds like typical right wing logic to me.") Is *that* what I said little Dohbaugh guy? Really? That's what you heard? Now I know why you're incapable of any sort of serious debate! "

Doh wrote on Jul 4, 2007 10:06 PM:

" ("There you go again, asking questions while ignoring those asked to you. My official position is that I will not answer any of your questions until you start acting like a man and answering a question or two.")- Awwwwww little Dohbaugh! Are you trying to wimp out and run away from a serious debate with ole Doh? Okay little fella I'll answer the question THAT WAS ORIGINALLY ASKED BY SOMEONE ELSE! Are you not smart enough to formulate your own questions OR are you really father bob? Which is it? And here's my answer- I disagree. See that? I just answered your....er I mean... SOMEONE ELSE'S question. "

Doh wrote on Jul 4, 2007 10:20 PM:

" Oh and Early Bird- (Mr. Two-Wrongs-Don't-Make-A-Right) you dodged giving your support to Dohbaughs insulting mockery of my brothers Vietnam service and my fathers WWII service. So now I'm giving you a second chance to officially hitch your wagon to little Dohbaughs disrespectful and low-down comments toward two of my family members (two real veterans) who are not here to defend themselves. Go ahead Early Bird- defend his comments. "

Silence wrote on Jul 4, 2007 11:45 PM:

" I would no sooner hold a conversation with a monkey than this throwback we have among us. Just ignore the little nutcase and he will go away. Until then, I will continue to be silent for as long as Doh posts to these forums. I have plenty of better things to do with my time than play with children. Doh wins JG/TC forums! "

Early Bird wrote on Jul 5, 2007 6:32 AM:

" I think the cartoon on today's editorial says it all. "

Doh wrote on Jul 5, 2007 7:00 AM:

" Silence- *yawn* "

Doh wrote on Jul 5, 2007 8:05 AM:

" Nice dodge- Early Bird. Oh wait! I thought I was the one who didn't answer the tough questions. hmmmmmmm "

Doh wrote on Jul 5, 2007 8:31 AM:

" The New York Times- BILL CLINTON CRITICIZES BUSH ON LIBBY MOVE - "DAVENPORT, Iowa, July 3 — Former President Bill Clinton criticized President Bush on Tuesday for commuting the prison sentence of I. Lewis Libby Jr. and tried to draw a distinction from his own controversial pardons." --- Yes, that’s right. The perjurer who sold pardons for fun and profit is criticizing Bush for commuting Libby’s sentence. My friends, that kind of chutzpah ought to be bottled up and sold on the market, so pure and potent is it. --- "“It’s wrong to out that C.I.A. agent and wrong to try to cover it up,” Mr. Clinton added. “And no one was ever fired from the White House for doing it.” --- Well, that’s because Richard Armitage did it,(who was appointed by the Clinton Admin) and he didn’t work in the White House at the time. But it’s a useful lie, so Bill Clinton is the surest man on earth to wield it. --- "Mr. Clinton pardoned 140 people in the final hours of his presidency, including Marc Rich, the fugitive broker who had been charged with evading tens of millions of dollars in taxes, and who was the former husband of a top donor to Democrats and Mrs. Clinton’s first Senate campaign. Rather than tread lightly on the Libby commutation, the Clintons have chosen to confront it; Clinton advisers said there was no real alternative, because the news media would bring up the Rich pardon anyway." --- They’ve chosen to confront it they way they choose to confront everything– by lying, dissembling, and then going on the offensive. Just let the record show that Mr. Clinton is a perjurer who had his license to practice before the Supreme Court taken away. Let the record show that he sold pardons to his rich friends. Let the record show that he’s still a brazen liar. And let the record show that it was his pal Sandy Berger who stole sensitive documents from the National Archives, hid them under a trailer, then took them home and destroyed them to cover up something that the Clintonistas didn’t want going public, and remember that Berger’s actions made the 9-11 Commission’s work incomplete, and we’ll never know what he covered up. And let the country remember the missing Rose law firm billing records that mysteriously turned up in the Clintons’ White House residence, and all the rest of that sordid mess that the Clintons drag around with them like a trailer park full of skeletons wherever they go. --- From HotAir.com - Read it here - http://tinyurl.com/yow5ln "

Rick wrote on Jul 5, 2007 10:17 AM:

" Consider the facts,oil prices in mid-2006 were considerably higher than a year earlier, they were still roughly $14 from exceeding the inflation-adjusted peak of the 1980 shock, when prices exceeded what would be equivalent to $90 a barrel as reported in wikepedia's online encyclopedia. Think gas is high? soft drinks $2.85 a gallon, beer $9.75 a gallon, Visine for eyes $895.00 a gallon.Considering gas is imported as crude oil from the other side of the world, refined, distributed, & taxed abundantly it may be a bargain. "

Answer wrote on Jul 5, 2007 11:12 AM:

" The sad part is (sigh), that you actually believe all that "hot air" Doh... "

Doh wrote on Jul 5, 2007 11:59 AM:

" The truly sad part- Answer (eyeroll), is that you can't refute anything in that HotAir.com article. "

The Question wrote on Jul 5, 2007 4:20 PM:

" Why did Sen. Pete Domenici or New Mexico, a 36-year Republican veteran of the Senate, abandon Bush's Iraq war policy by publicly endorsing legislation designed to withdraw nearly all U.S. troops from Iraq by March 2008? Why is he the fourth senior Senate Republican to attack Bush's war strategy in the past two weeks? "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jul 5, 2007 5:39 PM:

" Well, don't you get it? He must support the terrorists too. Anyone who doesn't fall lockstep with the Bush/Cheney regime, are for terrorism. I guess that goes for Republicans too. Lets get off this war, and let's hear more about little Dohnut's brother, the war hero. You all know, the one who saw heavy combat. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jul 5, 2007 5:43 PM:

" Anyone else notice that the right wing nuts can not talk about Libby with bringing up the Clinton White House? They just can't do it, can they? On the positive side, if the Dems take over the White House they will be able to blame everything on Bush. Hey why not? The Bush people set the precedent for that sort of thing. I can't wait. "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jul 5, 2007 6:22 PM:

" Dohbaugh; Never once (before now) have the words 'fornicating weasel' eminated from my keyboard. And to ask me to address the commutation of Libby's sentence without mentioning Clinton is akin to me asking you to expound on the Iraq war without referring to George W. Bush. "

Doh wrote on Jul 5, 2007 6:23 PM:

" By all means little Dohbaugh- If you're not finished mocking my brother’s service in Vietnam- then go ahead. Show everyone how much of a scumball you are. Show everyone how you (A 63 YEAR OLD VETERAN) love to make fun of other veterans who are not here to defend themselves. And don't forget to throw in some more pot-shots at my father- the 91 year old WWII veteran who’s in a VA home. Go ahead. Show us all how bada55 you are to other veterans. But first- explain to everyone WHY you're doing it. Go ahead justify it little guy. "

Doh wrote on Jul 5, 2007 6:40 PM:

" Anyone else notice that little Dohbaugh hates it when anyone picks on his favorite hillbilly chickenhawk- Bill(Draft Dodger)Clinton? He just can't stand it can he! He just can't wait till Mrs. Hillbilly Chickenhawk takes over the White House. I hope she never sends any troops in to battle like she did when she was in the Senate! Because I know how little Dohbaugh gets his panties in a bunch when non-veterans send troops to war! "

Doh wrote on Jul 5, 2007 7:07 PM:

" You know little Dohbaugh fella- your whole chickenhawk concept presents a real problem for you- doesn't it. Because if anyone in the White House or Congress who is NOT a veteran and who has the power to send troops into harms way is a potential chickenhawk! Therefore- to avoid being chickenhawks- ALL Presidents and members of Congress HAVE to be veterans. So just WHO are you going to vote for- little (slow-one-of-the-brain)? "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jul 5, 2007 7:13 PM:

" Thanks for making my point Dave. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jul 5, 2007 7:19 PM:

" I want to hear some war stories about the little guy's war hero brother, you know the one who saw heavy combat. (wink wink) "

AnitaS wrote on Jul 5, 2007 7:27 PM:

" My answer as to why politicians are pulling away from the war strategy is politics. They are politicians, not war strategists. They are politicians sitting in cushy offices in DC or playing golf in tacky golf pants. They are not commanders or soldiers on the ground doing the job and seeing first hand what is going on. They are politicians listening to the media and a largely ill informed public. They are not the Commander in Chief listening to his military commanders who are on the ground doing the job and seeing first hand what is going on. They are politicians trying to be popular. They are not a Commander in Chief who cannot get elected again who is just trying to do the right thing even though it makes him the most unpopular person on the planet. They are politicians. "

AnitaS wrote on Jul 5, 2007 7:28 PM:

" Doh and Dohbaugh, I'm going to send both of you to your rooms if you don't behave! LOL "

Doh wrote on Jul 5, 2007 7:33 PM:

" What's wrong little Dohbaugh- running away from my tough questions? You seem scared little guy. Now tell me- does your definition of a non-chickenhawk just pertain to people like my brother who was actually in combat- or does it also include people who never saw any action- like you and George Bush? "

Doh wrote on Jul 5, 2007 7:35 PM:

" Sorry you have to see this AnitaS. But I'm not done spanking this idiot yet. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jul 5, 2007 7:58 PM:

" Come on Anita. Isn't there a slight chance that they might think the continuation of this war is wrong. Several of them have been to Iraq, a heck of a lot more times than Bush and Cheney have too, I might add. They also get briefings on a regular basis too. So you think it's all about politics and the news media, huh? I have to say that I am a little disappointed in your response, because I think you know better. I normally don't see you as a close minded fool, as I see some others on here, but really think you reached on that one. Following the arguments of some on have made, the Republicans who are abandoning Bush, are now siding with the terrorists. Now doesn't make their statements to that effect, in the past, look kind of stupid? "

Dohbaugh wrote on Jul 5, 2007 8:15 PM:

" Notice that the more the runt gets beat up on, the more he talks about how his is kicking butt. Hilarious. I should feel guilty, but it's just too much fun watching his reactions and inane responses. I guess he's not going to regale us with any more of the fake veteran brother stories. In case you haven't noticed ,I am giving him a dose of his own medicine by refusing to answer his stupid questions. That's a page I borrowed out of his playbook, and as you can see, it's driving the pint sized weasel up a tree. I really think more and more people should treat this little lying reprobate in the same manner. I know he won't go away, but it would irritate the hell out of him. "

ItsJustDave wrote on Jul 5, 2007 8:18 PM:

" Making your point? A poster appropriating a perverted version of another poster's name, then trying to eliminate a legitimate debating point to suit your own agenda? You are indeed a sad example of pitifulness. "

Doh wrote on Jul 5, 2007 8:44 PM:

" Well well well! Look at the little Dohbaugh coward run from my questions! Tell us all little guy- why are you claiming my brother never served in Vietnam? Just what exactly are you basing that on? And why on earth would you risk degrading the service record of another veteran (who actually saw combat)? And you have NEVER told any of us about YOUR time in the service. Now why is that? You slam Bush all the time for not being in combat. And you throw around the chickenhawk title towards anyone who supports the troops in this war? Were YOU ever in combat? And why in the hell would you take the word of some chickenhawk politicians over the word of the commanders in the field? Why would you listen to spineless politicians over your fellow veterans? Is it ALL about politics with you? Is that why you are