If Keith doesn't cover the stuff in Lebanon, you guys complain that his priorites are screwed up. If he does, you complain that he's ignoring other stories because they contradict his previous positions.

Are you ever happy?

so you don't think KO should've covered Voinovich's change of mind after having made such a big deal about it before - when it hurt bush?

do you not understand such a simple argument?

so you don't think KO should've covered Voinovich's change of mind after having made such a big deal about it before - when it hurt bush?

When it first came up it was a story because Bolton had only been nominated and the idea of a "recess appointment" had not even been considered.

Now, the matter may be moot. If there is actually time for confirmation hearings before the new Congressional Session, then Keith should cover it. Considering there are only 34 days left in the Senate before they adjourn for the year, it is unlikely that a full confirmation process can be conducted before a new Senate is elected.

do you not understand such a simple argument?

Skip the patronizing. You're not very good at it.

The NeoCon and OlbyWatch Crazies

Today we call them neoconservatives, but when the first George Bush was president, those who believed that America could remake the world to its liking with a series of splendid little wars -- people like Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld -- were known within the administration as "the crazies." Grown-ups in both parties rejected their vision as a dangerous fantasy. The second President Bush obviously confuses swagger with strength, and prefers tough talkers like the crazies to people who actually think things through. He got the chance to implement the crazies' vision after 9/11, and the result is the bloody mess we're now in.

Few if any of the crazies have the moral courage to admit that they were wrong. Vice President Cheney continues to insist that his two most famous pronouncements about Iraq -- his declaration before the invasion that we would be "greeted as liberators" and his assertion a year ago that the insurgency was in its "last throes" -- were basically accurate.

But if the premise of the Bush doctrine was right, why are things going so badly? The crazies respond by retreating even further into their fantasies of omnipotence. The only problem, they assert, is a lack of will. Thus William Kristol, the editor of The Weekly Standard, has called for a military strike -- an airstrike, since we don't have any spare ground troops -- against Iran. For years the self-proclaimed "war president" basked in the adulation of the crazies. Now they're accusing him of being a wimp. "We have been too weak," writes Mr. Kristol, "and have allowed ourselves to be perceived as weak." Does Mr. Bush have the maturity to stand up to this kind of pressure? Probably not.

Anonymous asked:

"Are you ever happy?"

No.

Anonymous (4:28 p.m. post),

In case you don't know any better,your insert is definitely blasphemous. And you libs wonder why you can't get the Christian vote?

I like this comment - "The NeoCon and OlbyWatch Crazies".

Anon 5:34 makes some good, relatively well-articulated points. It's about the closest thing I've seen on this site from the left that has some measure of coherence. There is no doubt that Bush is a polarizing figure and that his view of the world has troubled some allies and caused our enemies to step up their efforts. And Non 5:34 is right if one evaluates Bush foreign policy by taking a snap shot today and projecting every key issue on the most negative trajectory.

I don't think it is crazy to believe that 9/11 was a subtle hint that we could not afford the status quo ante. And when you decide to confront your enemies directly while pushing forward a vision of participatory government you are going to alienate people.

There is no doubt that Bush is a polarizing figure and that his view of the world has troubled

Sure, as we know reading history, any figure that disrupts the status quo and challenges the accepted practices and thinking will engender animosity and dislike.

For about a quarter century, we basically embraced realpolitik or realism with our dealings in the Middle East. This was especially true during the Cold War when both the US and the USSR wanted to keep things from getting hot. So they restrained things to prevent a direct Soviet/American confrontation.

Bush is directly challenging that. And so the isolationists on the Right and Left and the internationalists, chiefly on the liberal side, are angry at his policies. And the anti-Americans in Europe and the rest of the world are especially angry at the thought of American power being used (for any purpose).

Whether those policies are right or wrong, whether he is pushing too far too fast, remains to be seen.

But whatever the case, someone who challenges the existing policy will risk a backlash.

SMG

President Bush doesn't often engage his critics. He does what he thinks is right and takes the heat. The left screwed up big by not picking there battles and critizing EVERY single thing thats happened since his ELECTION. Hes been free to do as he pleases because he gets critisized either way. The left only has critisism, as observed daily here and elsewhere. And lacks any credibility on all issues and is in steep decline.

Some of the US's "splendid little wars":
War for Indepedence.YEE HAW.
Civil War.Republican's "splendid" effort to end slavery.SUCCESS
World War II. This "splendid" war re-shaped the world for the better.VICTORY
War on Terror:Begining of long struggle at home and abroad.MISSION BEGUN.

"Grown up's" victories: Rwanda and all African genocide's. Hitler's un challenged rise. Communist holocausts in Russia, China,Cambodia,Vietnam.
The war on poverty. The war on fetuses(baby's).
Support for Terrorist thru insane 9/11 theories.
And opposition to the struggle to change the Middle East.

Cease fires never end the reason for war.Short term fix of cowards and "grown up's".LOL

President Bush doesn't often engage his critics

That's because he can't. He's clearly the worst public extemporaneous speaker the country has had since the advent of the television age. He repeats the same cliches about "democracy" without fleshing out exactly what that means for the people of the Middle East and for the US.

One of his major problems is showing how events abroad - in Iraq and elsewhere - directly affect the lives of Americans. And how a defeat in Iraq will inevitably affect us here.

This is not Vietnam where the US could retreat and do nothing while millions of people were slaughtered by the communists. A slaughter of the people of Iraq - which will come if the Baathists and/or Islamists win - will have repercussions throughout the Middle East and here.

But he is unable to show the people how that will happen.

And so the critics can say, "Leave, it's up to the Iraqi people". That's an appealing policy to a people that don't see or can't see what the long-term effects of a precipitous withdrawal will mean (Remember Tocqueville's description of the "democratic man" and conflict in Democracy in America?).

SMG

President Bush doesn't often engage his critics

... He should just bite his lip and tell 'em he feels their pain. Then there would be peace on earth.

PEACE THROUGH SUPERIOR FIREPOWER

Cease fires never end the reason for war.

Maybe not, but they at least allow the people caught in the cross-fire to get the hell out of the way.

In the Mid East often times the ones caught in the cross fire are the ones CNN shows celebrating ex: 9/11 or London subway. And road side candy stands. I am never shocked when there's trouble in the Mid East. These people know the way there countrymen are and choose to live there anyway.

It is hard for civilians to stay out of a war when they hide missiles in their houses. The Hexbullah heroes like human shields, you see! I just hope Olby doesn't report that -- it would be improper.

These people know the way there countrymen are and choose to live there anyway.

How about the 80,000 or so foreigners (mostly European Union and American citizens)? Surely they should be given a chance to get out before the tanks go rolling in. Or do they deserve what they get because they "chose" to live there?

Yes they did chose. Who in there right mind visits Lebanon? And if you choose to you assume a certain risk. Are you saying the 80000 foreigners were forced to live in Lebanon? We may have a news scoop here.
You dumbass. You think real wars wait for people to evacuate. In your Sesame Street world view maybe.What a TOOL.

THAT'S IT! I'M TIRED OF BEING CALLED A DUMBASS BY THE LIKES OF YOU. SAY IT TO MY FACE, WHY DON'T YOU, YOU SMALL-MINDED a--hole! I'LL GLADLY MOP THE FLOOR WITH YOU ANYTIME AND ANYWHERE.

Yes dumbass give me your real name and address. Maybe it could be arranged.
Way to respond to my comments.
You pretty handy with a mop? I bet you are.Change your nick to Janitor.DUMBASS.

What did anonymous say after losing his virginity?
Get off me dad your messing my hair up!!

There's a list of people you can't take seriously on this site. Scooter and KfK are at the top, just look at their history and the insane points they try to make in their posts. It's better to ignore them and let them rant to themselves.

SCOOTER! IT WASN'T FUNNY THE FIRST TIME, YOU FUCKIN' a--hole! AND IF YOU THINK I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU MY REAL NAME AND REAL ADDRESS ACROSS A PUBLIC WEBSITE, THEN YOU ARE AN EVEN DUMBER a--hole THAN I GAVE CREDIT FOR!

COX I WANT THIS PERSON'S IP ADDRESS NOW! AS THE ADMINISTRATOR OF THIS WEBSITE YOU ARE LIABLE FOR THE CONDUCT OF THE POSTERS ON THIS BOARD AND I WILL FIND A WAY TO SUE YOU AND HAVE THIS SITE SHUT DOWN IF THE HARRASSMENT DOES NOT STOP IMMEDIATELY!

Want cheese with your whine. Squeal little piggy squeal. You threw down the gauntlet now put up or shut the fuck up.What a TOOL.DUMBASS.

Non you couldn't ignore me if you tried. You can't resist ad hominem attacks in place of discourse.And hey roll over, wake James up, and tell him i said so.

Oh anonymous i wasnt talking to you i was talking to anonymous. Now sue that.What a TOOL.DUMBASS.