Buy Text-Link-Ads here
Recent Comments

    follow OlbyWatch on Twitter

    In

    John Gibson Welcomes Back the Infamous, Deplorable Keith Olbermann

    tonyome wrote: <a href="http://twitchy.com/2014/07/28/voxs-laughable-praise-of-keith-olber... [more](11)

    In

    Welcome Back, Olby!

    syvyn11 wrote: <a href="http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/keith-olbermann-reviving-worst... [more](9)

    In

    Former Obama Support/Donor Releases Song Supporting Romney/Ryan: "We'll Take It Back Again" by Kyle Tucker

    syvyn11 wrote: @philly I don't see that happening. ESPN has turned hyper left in recent... [more](64)

    In

    Blue-Blog-a-Palooza: Ann Romney Edition!

    djthereplay wrote: By mkdawuss on August 29, 2012 6:17 PM Will John Gibson be having a "Red-B... [more](4)

    In

    No Joy in Kosville...Mighty Olby Has Struck Out

    djwolf76 wrote: "But the FOX-GOP relationship (which is far more distinguished and prevalen... [more](23)

    KO Mini Blog



    What's in the Olbermann Flood Feed?
    Subscribe to Olbermann Flood Feed:
    RSS/XML

    KO Countdown Clock


    Warning: mktime() [function.mktime]: It is not safe to rely on the system's timezone settings. You are *required* to use the date.timezone setting or the date_default_timezone_set() function. In case you used any of those methods and you are still getting this warning, you most likely misspelled the timezone identifier. We selected 'America/New_York' for 'EST/-5.0/no DST' instead in /home/owatch/www/www.olbermannwatch.com/docs/countdown.php on line 5
    KO's new contract with MSNBC ends in...
    0 days 0 hours 0 minutes

    OlbermannWatch.com "My Faves" Set

    OlbermannWatch.com Favorited Photos from other Flickr Users

    Got OlbyPhotos? See some on Flickr? DO NOT email us. Send us a FlickrMail instead. Include a link to the photo. If we like the photo you will see it displayed in the Olby Flickr Flood above.

    New to Flickr? Sign up for a FREE Flickr account!


    Got some OlbyVideo? See some on YouTube? DO NOT email us. Send us a YouTube Messages instead. Include a link to the video. If we like the video you will see it displayed in our favorites list in our YouTube page.

    New to YouTube? Sign up for a FREE YouTube account!

    Red Meat Blog
    Keith Olbermann Quotes
    Countdown Staff Writers

    If they're not on Keith's payroll...

    ...they should be...

    Crooks & Liars
    Daily Kos
    Eschaton
    Huffington Post
    Media Matters for America
    MyDD
    News Corpse
    No Quarter
    Raw Story
    Talking Points Memo
    Think Progress
    TVNewser
    Keith Lovers

    MSNBC's Countdown
    Bloggerman
    MSNBC Transcripts
    MSNBC Group at MSN

    Drinking with Keith Olbermann
    Either Relevant or True
    KeithOlbermann.org
    Keith Olbermann is Evil
    Olbermann Nation
    Olbermann.org
    Thank You, Keith Olbermann

    Don't Be Such A Douche
    Eyes on Fox
    Liberal Talk Radio
    Oliver Willis
    Sweet Jesus I Hate Bill O'Reilly

    Anonymous Rat
    For This Relief Much Thanks
    Watching Olbermann Watch

    Keith Olbermann Fanlisting Site I
    Keith Olbermann Fanlisting Site II
    Keith Olbermann Links
    Olberfans
    Sports Center Altar
    Nothing for Everyone

    Democratic Underground KO Forum
    Television Without Pity KO Forum
    Loony KO Forum (old)
    Loony KO Forum (new)
    Olberfans Forum (old)
    Olberfans Forum (new)
    Keith Watchers

    186k per second
    Ace of Spades HQ
    Cable Gamer
    Dean's World
    Doug Ross@Journal
    Extreme Mortman
    Fire Keith Olbermann
    Hot Air
    Inside Cable News
    Instapundit
    Jawa Report
    Johnny Dollar's Place
    Just One Minute
    Little Green Footballs
    Mark Levin
    Media Research Center
    Moonbattery.com
    Moorelies
    National Review Media Blog
    Narcissistic Views
    Newsbusters
    Pat Campbell Show
    Radio Equalizer
    Rathergate
    Riehl World View
    Sister Toldjah
    Toys in the Attic
    Webloggin
    The Dark Side of Keith Olbermann
    World According to Carl

    Thanks for the blogroll link!

    Age of Treason
    Bane Rants
    The Blue Site
    Cabal of Doom-De Oppresso Libre
    Chuckoblog
    Conservative Blog Therapy
    Conservathink
    Country Store
    Does Anyone Agree?
    The Drunkablog!
    Eclipse Ramblings
    If I were President of USA
    I'll Lay Down My Glasses
    Instrumental Rationality
    JasonPye.com
    Kevin Dayhoff
    Last Train Out Of Hell
    Leaning Straight Up
    Limestone Roof
    Mein BlogoVault
    NostraBlogAss
    Peacerose Journal
    The Politics of CP
    Public Secrets: from the files of the Irishspy
    Rat Chat
    Return of the Conservatives
    The Right Place
    Rhymes with Right
    seanrobins.com
    Six Meat Buffet
    Sports and Stuff
    Stout Republican
    Stuck On Stupid
    Things I H8
    TruthGuys
    Verum Serum
    WildWeasel

    Friends of OlbyWatch

    Aaron Barnhart
    Eric Deggans
    Jason Clarke
    Ron Coleman
    Victria Zdrok
    Keith Resources

    Google News: Keith Olbermann
    Feedster: Keith Olbermann
    Technorati: Keith Olbermann
    Wikipedia: Keith Olbermann
    Wikipedia: Countdown
    Wikiality: Keith Olbermann
    Keith Olbermann Quotes on Jossip
    Keith Olbermann Photos
    NNDB Olbermann Page
    IMDB Olbermann Page
    Countdown Guest Listing & Transcripts
    Olbermann Watch FAQ
    List of Politics on Countdown (by party)
    Mark Levin's Keith Overbite Page
    Keith Olbermann's Diary at Daily Kos
    Olbermann Watch in the News

    Houston Chronicle
    Playboy
    The Journal News
    National Review
    San Antonio Express
    The Hollywood Reporter
    The Journal News
    Los Angeles Times
    American Journalism Review
    Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
    St. Petersburg Times
    Kansas City Star
    New York Post/Page Six
    Washington Post
    Associated Press
    PBS
    New York Daily News
    Online Journalism Review
    The Washingon Post
    Hartford Courant
    WTWP-AM
    The New York Observer
    The Washington Post


    Countdown with Keith Olbermann
    Great Moments in Broadcast Journalism
    Great Thanks Hall of Fame
    Keith Olbermann
    MSM KO Bandwagon
    Olbermann
    Olbermann Watch Channel on You Tube
    Olbermann Watch Debate
    Olbermann Watch Image Gallery
    Olbermann Watch Polling Service
    OlbermannWatch
    OlbyWatch Link Roundup
    TVNewser "Journalism"

    July 2013
    September 2012
    August 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011
    May 2011
    April 2011
    March 2011
    February 2011
    January 2011
    December 2010
    November 2010
    October 2010
    September 2010
    August 2010
    July 2010
    June 2010
    May 2010
    April 2010
    March 2010
    February 2010
    January 2010
    December 2009
    November 2009
    October 2009
    September 2009
    August 2009
    July 2009
    June 2009
    May 2009
    April 2009
    March 2009
    February 2009
    January 2009
    December 2008
    November 2008
    October 2008
    September 2008
    August 2008
    July 2008
    June 2008
    May 2008
    April 2008
    March 2008
    February 2008
    January 2008
    December 2007
    November 2007
    October 2007
    September 2007
    August 2007
    July 2007
    June 2007
    May 2007
    April 2007
    March 2007
    February 2007
    January 2007
    December 2006
    November 2006
    October 2006
    September 2006
    August 2006
    July 2006
    June 2006
    May 2006
    April 2006
    March 2006
    February 2006
    January 2006
    December 2005
    November 2005
    October 2005
    September 2005
    August 2005
    June 2005
    May 2005
    April 2005
    March 2005
    February 2005
    January 2005
    December 2004
    November 2004

    Google

    Olbermann Watch Masthead

    Managing Editor

    Robert Cox
    olby at olbywatch dot com

    Contributors

    Mark Koldys
    Johnny Dollar's Place

    Brandon Coates
    OlbyWatch

    Chris Matthews' Leg
    Chris Matthews' Leg

    Howard Mortman
    Extreme Mortman

    Trajan 75
    Think Progress Watch

    Konservo
    Konservo

    Doug Krile
    The Krile Files

    Teddy Schatz
    OlbyWatch

    David Lunde
    Lundesigns

    Alex Yuriev
    Zubrcom

    Red Meat
    OlbyWatch



    Technorati Links to OlbyWatchLinks to OlbermannWatch.com

    Technorati Links to OlbyWatch Blog posts tagged with "Olbermann"

    Combined Feed
    (OlbyWatch + KO Mini-blog)

    Who Links To Me


    Mailing List RSS Feed
    Google Groups
    Subscribe to Olbermann Watch Mailing List
    Email:
    Visit this group



    XML
    Add to Google
    Add to My Yahoo!
    Subscribe with Bloglines
    Subscribe in NewsGator Online

    Add to My AOL
    Subscribe with Pluck RSS reader
    R|Mail
    Simpify!
    Add to Technorati Favorites!

    Subscribe in myEarthlink
    Feed Button Help


    Olbermann Watch, "persecuting" Keith since 2004


    January 3, 2007
    COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN - JANUARY 3, 2007

    "COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN" (8:00 P.M.-9:00 P.M. ET)

    Host: Keith Olbermann

    Topics/Guests:

    • THE EVE OF THE DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS: Howard Fineman, Newsweek senior Washington correspondent and MSNBC political analyst; John Dean, fmr. Nixon White House counsel and author of "Conservatives without Conscience"
    • MORE SADDAM HANGING VIDEO OUTRAGE: Craig Crawford, Congressional Quarterly columnist and MSNBC political analyst
    • BRITNEY SPEARS NEW YEAR'S EVE FALLOUT: Paul F. Tompkins, VH-1's "Best Week Ever" contributor

    The spin started in the opening spiel: the President is being "partisan" and is telling Dems "agree with him or else". Plus the old "signing statement" bugaboo, the "enduring nightmare" of Saddam's execution, and Britney. An auspicious opening to another stunning edition of The Hour of Spin.

    MADMAN

    It only took moments for Herr Olbermann to call "Mister" Bush "Orwellian" ("Nixonian" had the night off). The excuse was the President's WSJ Op-Ed, which he "rehashed" in the Rose Garden ("regurgitated" also had the night off). After the obligatory press-vs-Snow clippage, in slithered Howard Fineman, Pundit for All Occasions. Howie was obsequious to the max in echoing OlbySpin (Bush is being "partisan"), as Olby made the evening's most absurd observation: Bush has no business being against earmarks because the surge in Iraq is "Bush's own personal earmark". Howie made a half-hearted attempt to clarify that muddled metaphor, while Monkeymann quickly adopted the Cindy Sheehan phrasebook for describing the yet-unannounced Iraq plan ("escalation").

    After great thanksing The Chameleon, the infamous, deplorable Keith Olbermann commenced yet another chapter in his ongoing program to rehabilitate left-wing criminals. Yes, it was convicted felon John Dean and his impartial, nonpartisan analysis. The disbarred lawyer was in rare form: hypocrisy, ruthless Republicans, and the like. Krazy Keith went for the jugular: impeach the cabinet! The criminal loved that idea; if the votes aren't there to get Bush and Cheney, let's get cabinet officers and White House staffers in the dock! The felon tossed in a Nixon comparison (maybe "Nixonian" didn't have the night off after all) and a good time was had by all.

    Just to make sure the propaganda wasn't too subtle, Monkeymann next brought in Barney Frank (D). Another Democrat politico on The Hour of Spin? The List has therefore been updated accordingly. B.F. hit the ground running: there hathn't been a more partithan adminithration, they're inthulting people'th intelligenth, they are conthithtently wrong, Republicanth are very partithan (obviously the spin word of the night is "partithan"...sorry, "partisan"). Lots of talk about cutting off money for the troops in the field, which is the latest bee in Man-on-Fan Olbermann's bonnet. As B.F. spoke, Citizen Keith grunted in approval: "Exactly...Yeah, exactly." We've made another love connection.

    Next on the carnival of thpin spin: the Saddam execution, and how the US is "pretending it had nothing to do with it". Pretending? You mean there were Americans under those hoods? The hanging was a "grotesque, sectarian spectacle", and there to parrot the propaganda was Craig Crawford (aka Olbermann's Brain). OlbyLogic: because Saddam was a threat and we took him out, therefore we are responsible for how the Iraq government executed him. Brain snickered in mindless agreement, calling it "the biggest problem" for the Bush administration. KO: Is this "the beginning of the end for the hope of peace"? Brain: [snigger] something or other [chortle].

    After a Ford internment recap [demoted way back to the #2 slot], it was straight off to O.J. Simpson, Anna Nicole Smith, and Britney Spears. In the Media Matters Minute, Pat Robertson got a nod for talking about how God told him to expect a terrorist attack. We're still waiting for Citizen Keith to give a nod to Ray Nagin for claiming God sent Katrina to punish New Orleans. Olby also ridiculed a global warming skeptic: the guy claimed that hot water will not freeze into ice cubes faster than cold water. Prof Olbermann cackled about several studies about how hot water can freeze faster than cold, thereby neatly avoiding the fact that the guy was specifically talking abut ice cubes. You know, ice cubes, that freeze faster from cold water than from hot water. That's our Keith; he can't even get ice together.

    OLBY

    Muted Mongrels: Rev Olbermann has preached about the eeevil Republicans in the House and how mean they treated the Dems. But now that Nancy Pelosi is about to break a campaign promise and ram through legislation without allowing the minority party any right to have hearings or even propose amendments, Mr Hypocrisy was silent. He also protected his party by avoiding any mention of Hillary dissing Obama, not to mention the latter's drug use. Of course, terrorism news is regularly spiked on The Hour of Spin. At the UN, the new Secretary General has taken an important finance-related position away from the US. No time for that; we need more Britney news!

    NAME

    Olbermann's book The book that bears Olberman's name surged at amazon.com: it's now all the way up to #6,088, while Mr Bill's "Culture Warrior" has risen to #78. The OlbyTome stands at #2,517 at Barnes & Noble, but O'Reilly's book is #296, and is one of the year's top ten best sellers according to Nielsen's BookScan. With no numbers available for Tuesday, we can nonetheless state with confidence that The Hour of Spin lost overwhelmingly to the eeevil O'Reilly both in total viewers and in the critical, beloved, all-important, coveted "key demo". Tonight's MisterMeter reading: 7 [HIGH]



    Posted by johnny dollar | Permalink | Comments (320) | | View blog reactions

    320 Comments

    " Being insulted by the Three Sttoges ".. perfect... the reichwingers reign of error ends tomorrow... Run for the hills righties.. I hope you all get shot.

    It's a shame you have to joke about the killing of those who disagree with you. It's really (really) pathetic.

    Well.. the righties have killed 3,003 and counting.

    I could have sworn it was the insurgants in Iraq who've done the killing.

    Insurgants... in their own country ?

    You really don't listen very well do you O'Lielly. Yes, there have been insurgants from other countries who rushed in to Iraq. My God are you people truly THIS stupid? never mind. I know the answer to that particular question.

    They rushed into Iraq because that is where our soldiers are.. if they are not there.. they are not dead.

    "Insurgants... in their own country ?"

    Pardon me, Professor O'lielly, Al-qaeda's in Iraq. Y'know, the group that perpetrated 9/11 and has declared war on us?

    Iran has also been providing support and has sent agents there.

    If your only source of information and news is Keith Olbermann, I'm not surprised you don't know any of this.

    "They rushed into Iraq because that is where our soldiers are.. if they are not there.. they are not dead"

    Like the people in the Trade Center Towers in New York?

    Or the Pentagon?

    Of airline flights?

    They were all safe too?

    Sorry, O'lielly. I know you need to blame the neocons or Bush or Cheney or Haliburton because you can't or won't face up to the danger.

    It's called displacement. Instead of understanding where the true problem is, a person transfers the danger to something else to make things easier to comprehend and handle.

    It's easier to blame Bush. Because if it's not really Bush, then one has to face a more serious reality.

    And you don't want to face that.

    That would be giving O'Lielly and his kind way too much credit Ohboy. They are ill-informed and it's because of the likes of Olbermann who refuse to provide them with a full picture of the news, and instead, pick and choose what they will and will not cover. The idea that someone could remain woefully ignorant of the insurangt presence in Iraq is stunning but I learned a long time ago that books could be filled with what liberals don't know and refuse to acknowledge or educate themselves about. In their skewered world, dictators are good, Saddam is to be mourned, and they actively cheer against their own countrymen in uniform. I want no part of their world or their gross ignorance.

    Haven't been here in months. It's nice to see O'Lielly is still here causing trouble. Posting on this web blog is practically his second job. I will bet my dollar to anyone's quarter that his first job is anchoring the KO show. Either that or he doesn't have a first job.

    I didn't watch Breakdown tonight. Did he come close to a breakdown tonight?

    J$- I believe you and the wingnuts need to stop worrying about Keith's book and focus your concerns on another author's book- The Audacity of Hope, by Senator Obama. He's poised to make your lives much more miserable than Olbermann could ever do.

    GO GATORS!!!!!!

    O'Leilly,

    You are playing the role of Monica to the Iraqi insurgents Bill. It's heaven for you, no doubt.

    Here's how desperate the Dems have become. they're putting all their hopes on someone who doesn't have a record of any kind and who has the endorsement of Queen Oprah herself. Good luck to you with THAT.

    Bush's press conference today was nothing more than trying to avoid the oncoming bus.

    He knows that the pork barrel spending is over, democrats have said time and again that they will END the wasteful spending. IE. the quarter of a billions dollar "Bridge to nowhere"

    He also knows that the Haliburton war profiteering days are over. Buying gasoline for 25 cents in Kuwait, driving it a few hundred miles and then charging the military, and us, $2.50 a gallon.

    He also knows that the democrats will try to be less partisan than the republicans have been for more than 6 years. He called for more bi-partinship, what a joke. Where was he on this issue for the last 6 years? Wherever it suited him, and his political agenda.

    Hearing all of these right winged idiots CRYING and BELLYACHING, and WHINING about how the democrats are changing the rules. What a friggin laugh fest.


    Yep, the days of changing the rules to suit their needs like, holding votes open for more than 3 hours of armtwisting and threatening members of their own party to get them to change their votes. Or like changing the language of legislation hours and somethimes minutes before the bill is put up for a vote. And letting republicans only in to these "last minute " legislative changes to the bills to be offered.

    Talk about a way to sneak in monies for corrupt buddies and their pet projects, and such things as provisions of the patriot act and the military court thingie, that pretty much did away with habeous corpus.

    Yeah, the days of the corrupt coverups for the child molesting, cover up for their funneling monies to their war profiteering friends, the coverup of the lies told by this administration about the reasons for and the so called evidence for the need to go to war,

    Yep, the bus is coming, do the republicans have the ability to get out of the way,,,,,,


    Oh no, its not a bus, its a friggin train.......

    He knows that the pork barrel spending is over, democrats have said time and again that they will END the wasteful spending.
    **************************************************
    Righttttt..and if you believe that then I got a piece of swamp land to sell you...fact of life:Dems in control=uncontrollable spending.

    "J$- I believe you and the wingnuts need to stop worrying about Keith's book and focus your concerns on another author's book- The Audacity of Hope, by Senator Obama. He's poised to make your lives much more miserable than Olbermann could ever do."

    Is this your endorcement of the self-described BORN AGAIN CHRISTIAN, indierik?

    I'm not worried about Obama....I would like to have Sunday Morning worship with him....Hallelujah!

    Wow, I thought the radical left required a vow to atheism, secular humanism and science....this should be a verrrrry interesting Democratic Primary.

    "Audacity of Hope" was a good read....I highly recommend it...much better than WPITW....

    I especially think the following idiots should read it....

    Sir Loin of Milquetoast
    codas
    Bufallo ______
    Professor Bunsen Honeydew (Bob)

    and any other religious bigot who feels so superior to those who think a guy from Nazareth was The Son of God.

    So when did this become Obamawatch?

    So I guess that means O'Reilly beat Olby again. And again, and again, and again.

    The buzz about Obama is that he is the unknown ship right now. People don't know him. Wait till the Clinton meat grinder gets done with him. He will become JUST ANOTHER VICTIM!!!!!!!!!!

    Did Keith Olbermann cover this story tonight?.......

    "House Democrats tried to unveil their lobbying reform package today, but their press conference was drowned out by chants from anti-war activists who want Congress to stop funding the Iraq war before taking on other issues.

    "Led by Cindy Sheehan, the mother of a slain soldier, the protesters chanted "De-escalate, investigate, troops home now" as Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., began outlining the Democrats' plans to ban lobbyist-funded travel and institute other ethics reforms. The press conference was held in the Cannon House Office Building in an area open to the public.

    "Emanuel finally gave up trying to be heard over the chants, and retreated to a caucus room where Democrats were meeting."

    Oh yeah...the nuts are out now....calling in their investment.....NOW I KNOW WHERE SIR LOIN OF MILQUETOAST SPENT HIS AFTERNOON!

    What will the silly Dems do to feed the beast that is the radical leftist wing?.....Go to the back room and cry like Rahm?

    I'll answer my first question....Keith Olbermann would only run this story on COUNTDOWN if Sheehan had been invited to the podium to make some nutty comment.

    LOL

    Sheehan DID take over the podium when Emanuel gave up trying to be heard. And Olby STILL didn't cover it. I'm giving him another day before making it a dog that did not bark. KO is SO protective of his party. You could fill books with the stuff he doesn't cover. He's too busy getting ice wrong.

    You got that right Puck....the secular left will never run a guy like Obama....Hillary will get rid of him in a New York minute.

    Oh, and by the way, his religious convictions do not bother me....it is his lack of experience that disqualifies him at the present time IMHO.

    I caught part of that on c-span cee! Damm I was laughing soo hard I was on the floor! I hope Sheesham camps out there. More kooks on Capital Hill!!!!!!!!!!

    Oh my.....Sheehan got to the podium?...Thanks J$, you made my night.

    PLEEEEESE have Ms. Sheehan in the gallery for the State of the Union Address.....pleeeeeese!

    While we are on Obama let me give Keith a little break here. I read where CNN goofed on his name and he called them up. And they had Wolf Blitzer call him and apologize.

    Did CNN call Dick Cheney and apologize when they put that "X" across his face?

    Cee, I apologize. I caught that on FoxNews. It's on their website right now.

    Cee, I apologize. I caught that on FoxNews. It's on their website right now.

    You wingnuts are so pwned by Olbermann.

    Cee has been crying about "Let's see the Democrats cut off funds for the war"
    Well, Dr Lapdog, It's obvious you don't know how the budget works.We found out that answer tonite on Keith's show.
    Barney Frank said that the GOP already passed the budget for defense.Bush got billions more to continue to botch things in iraq.
    Education,health etc of course those budgets weren't passed, which shows you where THEIR loyalties lie on those issues.
    Barney Frank , btw, is the head of the finance committee so he knows what he's talking about, unlike yourself, Cee.

    Oh I forgot Cee, You didn't see the show tonight, b/c you don't have basic cable.
    Now that's funny.

    Time to spring for the big bucks, doctor !

    A doctor who can't afford basic cable.

    TDF

    Dr Lapdog says he disagrees with Keith 99.5% of the time, yet he's never actually seen his show.

    Hysterical stuff, really.

    So Olby haters,

    Are you really going to make a difference this year to impact Keith's ratings negatively? Or will his audience grow again? Since the birth of this website Olby has gained viewers, so I'm choosing answer "B". That's a sure bet on my part. I guess you can call me "conservative".

    I wish the Daily Show and Colbert weren't replayed at 8 PM. I know Keith is losing some viewers due to this.

    GO GATORS!!!!!!!

    Indierik,

    You said it wrong.

    GO BUCKEYES!!!!!!!

    Rico,
    Did you see olbermann's near nervous breakdown last night? It was funny as hell! It was great TV his face was red, he was shaking and he almost cried. I would of laughed seeing him collapse and taken out on a stretcher! I can't watch that show. Olbermann makes me laugh so hard I pee!

    Rico,
    the above post was me.

    Keith was at DEFCON 1 last night, DEFCON ZERO being when his head explodes.

    "Olbermann makes me laugh so hard I pee!" - Anon

    You must be an O'Reilly fan. Too old to control your bladder.

    Rico- if you're not a Gator, you're Gator bait! OSU's hoops team were supposed to take out my National Champion U of FL team, but were smoked by nearly 30. Chomp! Chomp!

    GO GATORS AND GOOD NIGHT!!!!!!

    Gosh, did you guys watch Bill tonite? What a fewd between Rosy and Donald..it's soooo interesting, especially cuz there's nothing else going on. The donald calls Bill and Fox all the time to tell them what a loser Rosy is! So funny! (Well, she is a homo after all..) Anyway, can't wait until the apprentice comes on!!! Yer fired...love it!

    Indierik,

    Right now, as I type, I am conjuring up the ghost of Woody Hayes. The hex is on, baby! The Buckyes will be making Gator boots for themselves this Monday.

    I haven't followed college hoops lately but the "nearly 30" point deal could not possibly be true. No need for me to even look that one up!

    Olby lovers, check out this. Despite all his b.s. spin, his show isn't even in the top 20.. behind every FOX show and most of CNN's for the entire year.

    http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/01/03/2006-numbers-program-ranker/

    On 23 December 2006

    UF 86 - OSU 60

    Cut, paste, and weep after you read the link below:

    http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/recap?gameId=263570057

    GATOR DONE!

    (Good night for real this time)

    indierik and Rico,
    What're your guys predications for this week's NFL playoff games?
    KC Chiefs vs. Colts
    NY Jets vs. Patriots
    NY Giants vs. Philly
    Dallas vs. Seattle

    Any picks here are mine:
    Colts, Jets, Philly, Dallas.

    RE: Insurgents.

    It’s widely acknowledged that a majority of the fighters are non-Iraqi. The Left uses this fact to argue that it’s evidence that we are “creating” more violence, while the Right says, correctly so, “Good, let’s get ‘em all in one spot.”

    I have a few buddies that have been over there fighting, and they confirm that most of what they went against, the bodies counted and captured that is, were non-Iraqi.

    Any picks here are mine:
    Colts, Jets, Philly, Dallas.

    Well, you're half right.
    The Pats will bring the Jets back down to earth and Dallas sucks....big time.
    Can't wait to see TO drop a few more passes !

    Go Eagles !

    That wa me that posted the Football stuff. You could be right in your picks too. There's no favorite to win this year. Although however wins the AFC will probably win the Superbowl.

    great recap...spot on as usual.

    LF

    Obama admits having used cocaine. Admits drinking and partying. Welcome to the new Democrat " not so white" HOPE.

    "Well.. the righties have killed 3,003 and counting"

    We DIDN'T kill 3,003 people the radical Islam-O-Fascists Terrorists have.

    Why do you people always blame America first? To the radical left (Not all of the left) but to the radical left. "America can do no right, and the rest of the world can do no wrong"

    THE OJ PRESIDENT

    George W. Bush confronts a long and lonely walk down the hallway of history. There will be loyalists and radical ideologues that will remain his confidantes and treat him deferentially, but he is poised to become a man estranged from the country and the people who endured eight years of his deadly inadequacies.
    We will not want to talk or think about President Bush because he will be a symbol of how our democracy went horribly wrong just like O.J. Simpson turned into an icon of the failure of our criminal justice system.

    Mr. Bush has suggested he will be dead before historians trying to understand his legacy "get it right." But he is wrong, again. The president is grasping at the concept that he has set in motion a process in the Middle East that will not be fulfilled until he has become dust. A tiny number of fervent believers like the president are still convinced the U.S. presence in Iraq will lead to democracy and stabilization when every scintilla of evidence indicates only escalating chaos and death. Even though he refuses to admit mistakes, the rest of this country and the wider global community have reached the unavoidable conclusion that America's invasion of Iraq was a monumental blunder. Historians examining that decision and its political and economic impact will have a similar judgment and looking at the facts through the focal length of decades will only amplify the ignorance of this president's choices.

    The president insisted that he was been comforted by the fact that historians are still writing and examining the life of George Washington 231 years after the country was founded. If they are still debating his performance, Mr. Bush suggests, they will be discussing his administration for a long time, too. Oblivious to the context of history, our current president could not be expected to understand what an insult he had delivered to the man whose deeply held principles prompted him to both lead the founding of our nation as well as standing in the way of harm to fight for those beliefs. Mr. Bush has neither the intellect nor the curiosity to divine what our nation needs at this critical hour and because of that more and more of his political contemporaries will begin to shun him while historians during the next 100 years will simply wag their heads in great bafflement at his tenure.

    The first bits of trace evidence regarding the coming isolation of Mr. Bush are already being discerned. Listen to the early GOP presidential contenders. There is not a soul among their number who talks about "continuing the great leadership of President Bush" or who suggests "we have to finish the job" started by this president. What precisely would they finish? Perhaps, they might go back and make an attempt to completely turn over Social Security funds to Wall Street or maybe they would try to rewrite health care laws to give even more money and power to pharmaceutical companies while at the same time surrendering additional national park lands to oil drilling while relaxing air quality standards so that we might all drive our SUVs in the accumulated haze. Fewer and fewer people in government and politics want to be associated with the man who has set these sadnesses rolling and after he is gone from office, Mr. Bush will become almost invisible. His phone won't be ringing and that's because almost everybody won't be calling. The most interesting entertainment of 2008 will be watching how the Republicans try to position Mr. Bush at their presidential nominating convention. He'll have to speak, of course, to say his farewell, as is tradition, but who will stand beside him and dare say "thank you?"

    The ignominy, in fact, is already becoming apparent. As he begins to think about his life after the White House, the president and his increasingly small number of friends and supporters are looking at places to locate his library. Southern Methodist University in Dallas, where his wife Laura graduated, is the top choice. Unfortunately, professors, administrators, and staff at SMU don't like the idea of a Bush library on their campus. The board of regents received a letter from a large group of them who urged board members to refuse the president's request to build the library on campus because they did not want the university to appear as though it were sanctioning the wrongs of Mr. Bush's tenure. SMU has been laboring to shirk its image as an elitist institution that produces future Republicans and the letter written by the professors and others suggested that the greater goal of diversity would be hampered by having the Bush library stand sentinel on the campus.

    Some of the slights being received by this president will be overt and others a tad subtle. The children of President Ford, who stood for hours shaking the hands of citizens come to pay respects to their father, were nowhere to be seen when Mr. Bush arrived for his perfunctory appearance beside the casket. This could hardly be interpreted as protocol. If they would have had any respect for Mr. Bush, the Ford children would have stayed to receive his personal condolences. Instead, they were absent during the entire seven seconds the president deigned to spend beside Mr. Ford's casket.

    There is probably not much chance that Mr. Bush and O.J. Simpson will ever get to play golf together, although there would be much convenience and symmetry to the round. O.J. could continue his quest to find the real killer of his wife and her lover and the former president could look in the rough for weapons of mass destruction. Instead, however, Mr. Bush will spend the last part of his life wielding a chainsaw cutting down cedar trees in one of the box canyons of his ranch along the hardscrabble Balcones Escarpment. He will, of course, still be oblivious to all the wrongs he has done to his country and the global community. Forever, this man's heart and soul will be separated from the harm he has caused and the lives he has ruined and he will continue to sleep the sleep of a child.

    As he fades, though, even George W. Bush is likely to ask himself the glaring question of how he went from being the most influential man on planet Earth to a cedar chopper with a nice house, no friends, and a few government paid guards watching over him in boredom. The answer, of course, should he ever get around to asking, will be "democracy." In spite of all he did to destroy our constitution simply to serve his political ends, our democracy will survive and move past Mr. Bush.

    And he will finally arrive at the ignominy he has so rightly earned.

    Listen I just want to say this right off the bat but I'm only gonna say it once.

    You hardcore leftists NEVER gave Bush a chance. You protested him the moment he was sworn in on 2001.

    HOWEVER...I as a conservative...AM...willing to give the Democrats a shot. Who knows...maybe they can get some work done for once.

    I let the GOP know in person that I was VERY DISAPOINTED in them these past 2 years always taking vacations.

    So...I say seriously and calmly. Alright Nancy and Reid...let's see what you've got. You've been whinning and complaining for 6 years. Now that you've got the drivers seat, let's see what you can do with it. Seriously let's see what happens.

    So far there's only one thing I agree with the Dems on and that is I do want the Minimum wage increased. Oh by the way the last time it was raised in the 1990's THE REPUBLICANS had the house yet Clinton got all the credit for rasing the minium wage in 97'.

    You hardcore leftists NEVER gave Bush a chance. You protested him the moment he was sworn in on 2001.

    I'm only going to say this once so pay attention.
    Bush had the support and good will of most of the world after 9/11. He could have done great things with this overwhelming support of both Democrats and Republicans. He squandered it all with his deadly excursion into Iraq and his reflexive and total incompetence.
    To blame "leftists" or anyone else for the failures of George Bush just shows you haven't been paying attention .

    Bushkill posts a novellette and doesnt attribute it to the blogger over at HUFFPOST where he stole it from. Sad.
    ALSO...Aaron, well said.

    who the f--- cares where the OJ piece came from...it was brilliant .

    Olbermann would be in a mental institute. Bush would visist for charity and Olbermann would be completely deranged!

    The OJ President was written by James Moore.

    James Moore is an Emmy-winning former television news correspondent and the co-author of the bestselling, Bush's Brain: How Karl Rove Made George W. Bush Presidential. He has been writing and reporting from Texas for the past 25 years on the rise of Rove and Bush and has traveled extensively on every presidential campaign since 1976. He is currently writing a book on the long term consequences for America of Bush and Rove policies, which will be published next year.

    Keith Olbermann - "The only American President to have line item veto was Jefferson Davis, serious".

    Really Keith? I guess you forgot that one American President a long time ago named Bill Clinton. You might want to take advantage of "The Google".

    Well done James Moore.
    I especially liked the part where the Ford children snubbed Bush at the funeral and that SMU won't let Bush have his library at their institution.
    His will be a very pathetic legacy.

    Hey Olberdouche! Where's my apology?

    Evangelical broadcaster Pat Robertson said Tuesday that God has told him that a terrorist attack on the United States would cause a "mass killing" late in 2007.

    How come you only hear of the wing nuts claiming God speaks directly to them ?
    and...
    If Robertson's prediction comes to pass will the right wing retire one of their favorite slogans," We're fightin them over there so we don't have to fight them here"
    Boy, these wing nuts sure love their slogans, like Mission Accomplished and Stay the Course Etc.

    johnny Dollar who writes this crap at the top of the page each night is a real class act.
    Mocking Barney's Frank speech impediment is something I'm sure all the Olbyhaters will be proud of !
    You olbygoons talk about Keith's distortions.
    Dollar's nonsense is worse than Newsbusters.org
    Dollar's writings aren't worth a red cent.

    Aaron said: "I let the GOP know in person that I was "VERY DISAPPOINTED in them these last two years for always taking vactions"

    How did they react when you told them that? Did Bush personally apologize, or did he just send in Cheney to apologize to you? What did Dennis Haskert and Bill Frist have to say about it? I know they were probably pretty upset about having disapointed you!

    Aaron's biggest problem with the GOP Congress was taking too many vacations.
    How funny is that !
    They did absolutely nothing in 6 years. How did you know the difference when they were vacationing or not ?

    Giving a pass to the war profiteers wasn't so bad but taking vacation days raised Aaron's ire.

    You just can't invent this stuff !

    Anon, whichever one you are, if you've ever read this site for any length of time you know that we go out of our way to use the tricks and smears Olby himself deals out to others. He has often made fun of the way other people speak. If you think that is classless, you are correct. You should tell Keith Olbermann to stop doing it and apologize. If he does, we will stop too.

    No, no, no Bob; They did something! You forgot that they passed the Bankruptcy bill right after the 2004 election to help their Credit Card Company friends...after conveniently neglecting to talk about their intentions during the campaign.

    johnny Dollar who writes this crap at the top of the page each night is a real class act.
    Mocking Barney's Frank speech impediment is something I'm sure all the Olbyhaters will be proud of !

    Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 01:12 AM

    Ith not the thame as making fun of thumone who wuth born with a dithabilithy, hith "impediment" ith thelf inflicted from thucking hith thumb tho much (or whatever he's thucking on)

    Didn`t , Barbey and Keith look good together.. what a lovely couple

    Didn`t , Barney and Keith look good together.. what a lovely couple

    It all boils down to this ....

    Keith... you really don't matter...

    thats just the way it is

    The silly Professor Honeydew (Bob) claimed:

    "Cee has been crying about 'Let's see the Democrats cut off funds for the war'
    Well, Dr Lapdog, It's obvious you don't know how the budget works. We found out that answer tonite on Keith's show. Barney Frank said that the GOP already passed the budget for defense. Bush got billions more to continue to botch things in iraq. Education,health etc of course those budgets weren't passed, which shows you where THEIR loyalties lie on those issues.
    Barney Frank , btw, is the head of the finance committee so he knows what he's talking about, unlike yourself, Cee."


    Please do more research than watching the hacks on COUNTDOWN, professor....

    Barney Frank i'th already 'thowing h'th political cowardi'th by quickly running away from your radical comrade'th, profe'thor......

    Read Rep. Dennis Kucinich's plan....

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-dennis-kucinich/there-is-only-one-way-to-_b_35299.html

    A small taste:

    "The Campbell case makes it clear that as long as Congress continues to fund the war, it cannot simultaneously argue that its will is being usurped with respect to the war powers. Each appropriations vote gives the President "implied consent" to continue the war. So it is clear that this war is not only the President's. This war belongs to Congress as well, to Democrats and Republicans alike, in the House and in the Senate. And, unless and until Congress decides to force a new direction by cutting off funds, the United States will continue to occupy Iraq and have a destabilizing presence in the Middle East region.

    "Once troops in the field, support for the war within Congress, as measured by support for Iraq war appropriations, increased sharply among Democrats in the House, to the point where only a small number of House Democrats consistently opposed continued funding for the war.

    "Indeed, a little more than one month before the Great Realignment of November 2006, (the most recent vote taken on an Iraq funding bill) on September 30, 2006, only twenty Democrats voted against the conference report which provided another $70 billion for the war. The Senate passed the bill 100 - 0."

    Mmmmm....we'll see what your brave Dems do in May '07 when the appropriations come up again. Also, professor, if you researched history, you would find instances where Congress did other things to cut off war funding.....like:

    Case-Church Amendment...1973

    Mmm...will we see a Kucinich-Conyers Amendment requiring the halt of all military activity in Iraq passed?.....I doubt it because The Democratic Party Majority is MORE concerned about their public image than following the dishonorable course demanded by people like Sheehan, Sir Loin of Milquetoast, and you, profe'thor.

    PS....I will once again take note no leftist has responded to my discussion of the liberal democrat's hand in the fall of Saigon, the liberals' desertion of the millions of South Vietnamese refugees (and the racist attitudes of libs like Jerry Brown, Joe Biden and Robert Byrd), or the REALITY that the behavior of the radical secular left is almost identical to that of the left in the late 60's and 70's....ignoring the human toll of abandonment
    and surrender.

    The party of death needs to respond!

    I'm old - What does "pwned" mean?

    cee goes around for days declaring that the anti-war movement needs to be more visible and active in order to be considered morally consistant; then he ridicules Cindy Sheehan's ceaseless bipartisan agitation. Consistancy is not your long suit.

    You armchair Humvee gunners who have never lost or sacrificed anything make me sick.

    ....also: cee the saintly physician seems particularly fond of ridiculing speech impediments. Jesus preserve me from ever seeing this vulture hovering over my sick-bed.

    "The Democratic Party Majority is MORE concerned about their public image than following the dishonorable course demanded by people like Sheehan, Sir Loin of Milquetoast, and you, profe'thor."

    I regretfully agree with the wispy hypocrite: there are a number of self-serving and corporate serving moles in the Democratic leadership. However, what the coward cee failes to recognize is that the liberal grass roots is not the servile, leader-worshipping mob that the drowning-rat Republican remnant represents. We understand our dominant relationship to our government, and will exercize what pressure is required to get what we want from our representatives. Thanks to strong talk from people like Olbermann, this empowered political perspective is only spreading.

    So good night, fascists - your opportunity is past.

    Please Sir Loin of Milquetoast....the same ridicule you claim shows my insensitivity is used regularly by posters like yourself at powerful Repubs (even discussing their immoral sexual proclivities)....BTW, engaging in such humor is that...harmless humor....I recognize this and suggest you get a life....

    I would never shame someone over a physical foible who does not feel superior to the rabble they rule over....this is the fine man from Mass.
    another arrogant liberal.

    Also, I never claimed to be perfect.


    Oh no, Loin, I want to see more of you radicals in the news because it makes the Dems nervous. "Money where their mouth is," I expect Congress and The President fighting over funding by June '07, with a wavering Democratic party nervously eyeing 2008. Then, if there are fresh terrorist attacks (parrallel to how the VietCong acted after The Watergate Congress was put in and started the surrender), then we'll really see the radical left run for cover and demand total withdrawal....

    Oh I can't wait to see who the McGovern is going to be this time in 2008!

    Were you at the press conference mentioned previously, Sir Loin of Milquetoast?

    Cee:

    I get the impression that you are not that old, so my question from you is; Were you even around during the the Vietnam debacle, or are you getting all your views about this from things you have read?

    I was around (and in the Military) at the time, and your romantic views on this just don't seem to support the realities as I remember them.

    Mike,

    The national policy towards South Vietnam was changing prior to President Ford's term. I rely on his personal, and compassionate view of the situation. With the lack of public support to help the South Vietnamese remain free from the communists, Nixon already was preparing for the end. The Democrats did the deed with regard to allowing Saigon to fall and their refusal to be humane to the millions of refugees who wanted freedom. It is not romantic, it is not naive. It is the truth and liberals just ignore this history.

    I was 5 years old at the time. All I recall is watching a BW TV showing the protests....the people screaming that we were killing innocent Vietnamese and the troops were murderers. Guess what these protesters turned out to be.....

    Liberals.

    I get disgusted even thinking about how your side treated the honorable men and women of both the armed forces and South Vietnam in the 1970's.

    Yesterday cee did an awful lot of hiding behind our troops to protect his cowardly ego. He even invoked an actual veteran (MikeW) to protect him self from the truth.

    cee reposted this from MikeW:

    "Fortunately, none in my family had to go to combat during our previous Commander in Chief's tenure -- thank God for that. Frankly, not many soldiers (including me) had any respect at all for him as a man or as the President - but we would have gone to war, because it was our responsibility and duty to do so (see above about service to the country) (as so many of my fellow soldiers did in Kosovo, Bosnia, etc - and none of those countries had even the potential to be detrimental to our national security). I know of many soldiers who tore up their certificates of retirement from the military simply because it was signed by President Clinton."

    ...and cee then added this, like a schoolyard brat sticking his toungue out from beind his big brother's leg:

    "PS....if Sir Loin of Milquetoast even tries to pull the "chickenhawk" stuff again....I will re-post MikeW's eloquence every time...Thanks Mike, where ever you are. God Bless America."


    Actually, Mike's post supports entirely the position I have promoted all along. When MikeW says "but we would have gone to war, because it was our responsibility and duty to do so", I would add that it is clearly incumbent upon the American electorate to ensure that such fundamental altruism not be misused. Soldiers will and do go headlong into danger when ordered, despite who does the ordering - they have temporarilly set aside their political wills in such situations. Those of us who retain our political wills have the responsibility to consider these issues and act in the interests of our politically powerless heroes.

    But despite the profound sacrifice of our troops, America does not go to war for the honor of individual soldiers or units. We maintain a miitary to protect the interests and constitution of the United States. We have had civilians in charge of our military since our founding for the very reason of maintaining this circumspection, and intrinsic to a soldier's honor is obedience the will of the nation as filtered through his comanders.

    ..and cee, you ARE a chickenhawk. I could understand that MikeW would not want to serve beside someone like you, but even he cannot stand in the way of your moral integrity - only you can thwart that.

    Ah yes, the brave Sir Loin of Milquetoast once again tries to impugn with his arrogant chickenhawk line....again I will quote MikeW....

    "We all felt that it was our duty as citizens of this great country. So quit being so snarky and self serving with your commentary about this issue, especially if you personally haven't served in our military in a wartime setting."

    CITIZENS....although he became a soldier....he still maintained his intellect, his will and his rational thought as an American citizen...you ignorant fool, Loin. MikeW and his family were not robots ready to do as programmed by their, "civilian bosses."

    You are so elitist it sends chills down my spine!

    I have never attacked another's commitment to defending this great country under our great commander-in-chief....you have Loin. So your arrogant stance that you know better than MikeW, (because you are an infomred civilian!!!!) and judge his service as not altruistic is simply ridiculous.

    I think MikeW and his family did a great thing for our country in Iraq and Afghanistan. You do not. So stop spinning.

    BTW, again, you do not know all about me Loin...and it is just as well because you continue to post ignorance despite being shown to be an absolute hypocrite.

    Mike,

    As a Vetnam-era serviceman do you recall the vitriolic spitting and allegations of "baby-killers" that cee and others on the right continually invoke to discredit the anti-war movement?

    I was eight in 1970, and for a number of years to either side of that point my parents essentially raised me on the protest line. I was present at countless rally's and events; we camped at numerous weekend-long demonstrations; and I was in the masses at a number of marches in WashingtonDC. I NEVER heard or witnessed any behavior of this sort on the part of any fellow anti-war activist. Quite to the contrary, the same respect and concern that characterizes anti-war attitudes toward the troops today was ubiquitous in those conexts that I experienced then.

    The Church Commission found clear documentary evidence that the FBI under LBJ and Nixon directly instigated many instance of "face-spitting" etc. in order to discredit the anti-war movement - so obviously some of our soldiers experienced this sort of vile treatment.

    What are your experiences/views on this subject?

    There was such wide-spread maliciousness towards the troops returning from Vietnam that only a whacko would claim it was a conspiracy by the administration. The anti-war campaigners had severe disdain for troops who "killed innocents" in Vietnam. That is what fueled their anti-troop hatred.. and now you try to rewrite history and say spitting at troops wasn't true. Its why you like KO. The truth hurts. Admit your 60s actions were reprehensible. Liberals are embarrassed by their anti-war actions back then and WILL be embarrassed again unless they tone down their antitroop rhetoric now.

    "he still maintained his intellect, his will and his rational thought as an American citizen"

    ...If he maintained his will he was committing mutiny. He himself declares emphatically that he abdicated his will;$ why else would he claim to be willing to march of under the orders of a president he personally hated (Clinton)?

    Can you imagine an army in which every soldier maintains his or her will? Perhaps you don't have to imagine it - we've created it in Iraq. It appears that the soldiers in the Iraqi army consider it more important to be loyal to their ethnic enclaves that to the will of their commanders. Is this how you see the American military?

    Anonymous,

    I do not have the evidence to deny that such things happened - I was merely stating that in my extensive and relevant experience (albeit as a minor) I did not witness it. That's why I asked Mike, who was older and in the military at the time - for his views.

    What do you say about the documented cynical use of such abuse by the executive branch in order to discredit the antiwar movement?

    Its just as embarrassing

    Cee:

    As I suspected, you were not really 'around' at the time, at least not in a way in which you were capable of judging the realities as they existed at the time. You are parroting other's one sided views about what happened, and more importantly, why.

    There simply was not this partisan "liberal vs Conservative" thing you seem to want to believe their was near the end of that war. Most of that division had already played itself out in the late 60s to very early 70s. Just about EVERYBODY was weary of the war, and the same thing was going to happen regardless of who was in charge of Congress at the, although the Republican probably would have delayed the inevitable just a little longer.

    You just referred to me as "your side". There was almost no such thing as "your side" in public opinion. I still naively believed the war was 'right' at the time, so I don't know where your getting the "your side" form. It turned out I was very wrong.

    First.....America was incredibly war weary! The overall mood of demoralization of that time far exceeded that of today. We simply did not have the National will to continue, or more aptly....re-deploy and restart our end of the war once the NVA made their final devastating invasion AFTER we had almost completely pulled out.

    There was a thing called 'Vietnamization'. A Nixonian policy of training and deploying South Vietnamese regulars to replace American troops as a solution for getting us out of there. This 'Vietnamized' Army proved no match for the NVA and Viet Cong when the final push came. There were reports of entire brigades throwing down their weapons and running. This 'Vietnamization' sounds remarkably similar to todays "stand up the Iraqi Army so we can stand down". The reported performance of the Iraqi "stand ups" sound remarkably to that of the South Vietnamese Army.

    Our Military was demoralized to a point unthinkable by today's standards. We simply could NOT have mustered the National Will to go back in there and do it all over again. No Chi Minh's NVA was extremely motivated and very well supplied by both the Chinese and the Soviet Union.

    There was this thing called the draft that hung over the head of every young man in America if they were coming of age in the mid to late 60s. I remember looking at my life in stages as a high school student....IF I got past Vietnam, I could continue the rest of my life....but that seemed like a big IF at the time. I was not alone.

    Drug use, outright disrespect for authority, and personal survival were the prevailing thought of most infantry soldiers. They just wanted to get through that year alive or in one piece so they could actually have a "rest of their life". There were even many 'fragging' incidents, in which enlisted memebers would attack their superior officers or NCO's.

    The continuation of that fight was simply not possible for America by 1975, regardless of what you may choose to believe through the one sided lens of Right Wing writers.

    Iraq and Vietnam are very different, yet there are so many eerie parallels as well. Our all volunteer Military is apparently not yet even close to being demoralized like it was back then, but the more we keep them in an unwinnable situation, the more it will take it's toll on moral. This is the major lesson that many of us think is having to be 'learned' all over again by those in power.

    I don't think there is much debate that, without a return to the draft, it would be impossible to build and maintain the 500,000 man fighting Army that we had in Vietnam at it's zenith, yet that is exactly what a prominent General testified it was going to take to stabilize Iraq BEFORE the invasion. As I'm sure you know, he was fired for stating what we now know to be the truth.

    Yes Cee....unfortunately we have, and are, making the same mistake twice in Iraq....with a twist or two thrown in the mix.

    The idea that "the left" isn't willing to show the will to "stick it out" is a myth. In order to accept that myth, you must ignor the realities of human nature and History.

    We have to pick our fights wisely....and we failed to do that....both in Vietnan, and in Iraq!


    There are sepcific historical activities of liberal democrats that show the left's disregard for basic human rights....and Sir Loin of Milquetoast retreats back to YOU'RE A CHICKENHAWK or IT WAS A FBI/CIA CONSPIRISY! I am sick and tired of the subject changes.

    Nixon is dead and buried. Ford is gone. J. Edgar is long gone. Joe Biden still lives. Edward Kennedy still lives. Robert Byrd still lives. Hillary Rodham still lives. John Kerry still lives. These leaders in your party made policy, took stands....documented and clear, with regard to The US treatment of civilians in South Vietnam. Where are the questions? Where are the cries to, "learn from history?"

    I have a theory Loin....perhaps you got too much second hand hash smoke and it affected your memory of those love-ins, peace-ins, whatever. Also, LSD use can affect memory.

    And Mike chooses to ignore facts and my posts.....

    I was clear to say that troop withdrawal had already started and was unstoppable by the time Nixon started his second term.....I referred to FUNDING and logistically supporting The South Vietnamese Government. Read President Ford's recollections of the Watergate Congress' actions between 1974 and 1975 and it is clear....the liberal democrats killed democracy in South Vietnam. The "will" of the American people had nothing to do with supporting the south....we have been doing it with South Korea since the 50's.

    No, Mike, the behavior before and after the fall of Saigon was not honorable and WRONG. Reality in your own little world is all well and good, but the representatives who were elected decided to surrender and desert millions of people looking for our support. Now these same leftist retreads want to do the same thing to the civlians in Iraq.

    Please go visit the Ford Presidential Library to get a different perspective on that horrible time in our nation's history.

    Sir Loin:

    I went to Thailand (right next to Vietnam) in 1970 and returned in 1971. I would travel in full uniform around the US because the Airlines offered big discounts if you traveled that way. I NEVER was personally harassed or dis-respected by anyone, nor did I personally witness such behavior, even though I saw many references to it in the news. I think this was probably a little overblown, and this kind of behavior was mostly undertaken by the radical fringe, but it was a partial indicator of the mood at the time. I didn't have any information about these incidents being 'instigated' by the right or anything like that, but anything seemed possible.

    At the same time, nobody ever appoached me and "thanked me for my service" either, like they do today, which is a positive lesson that apparently WAS learned from the Vietnam experience.

    This is just what I personally experienced. A lot of things were going on at the time.

    Cee:

    It was a bit classless of you to refer to "my little world"....for some reason, I expected better of you than that. But why should I have expected that? Pretty much all of your posts show a continual denial of reality, and anything that gets in the way of that worldview is a threat to you.

    The Ford museum is just a little bit out of my way, but I have a pretty good recollection of the Ford years, as well as the Vietnam years, and, I've done my share of reading History over the years as well, so don't be so arrogant as to imply you're world is so much 'bigger' than mine. I've read a whole lot of your posts, and you're world sounds pretty small to me.

    You're continued obsession with 'leftists' as a source of all evil is another example of your own "State of Denial".

    So we'll just have to agree to disagree, but.....you are simply WRONG, and I believe you will know that yourself some day....when you are a little older, and wiser.

    Cee:

    I also think you are really naive to believe that additional US "funding and logistical support" without the active Military presence could have staved off the inevitable (In Vietnam).

    I guess the naivete is for both me and Gerald Ford, Mike.

    Oh and the point of "little world" was a rebuttal to your ploy to make your personal experience that much more believable than those who have spoken about it as well, but have a much different point of view.

    You still never addressed the blind rush to extracate the US TOTALLY from South Vietnam by The Watergate Congress as either moral or immoral....or the reaction of the left to the refugees from same. Again...ignore it and it will go away.

    BTW, it is now ALWAYS liberal and conservative...don't show your naivete, Mike. The entire post-Kennedy US history is polarization, wedge issues and secularization....progress according to the leftist......

    Good bye good ole USA to the conservative.

    "Obama admits having used cocaine. Admits drinking and partying. Welcome to the new Democrat " not so white" HOPE."

    Posted by: DavidBrock at January 4, 2007 12:09 AM

    No, David, welcome to America in the twenty-first century: where we ALREADY have a President who admits to drinking, partying, & using cocaine.

    Al of you right wingers are hypocrites. You are all 'in-the-closet' about the very things you demonize! I mean, between the classless actions of the 'owner' of this blog towards Representative Barney Frank, (no offense intended to the real owner, Mr. O'Reilly,) & your President Cokehead Tumbleweed, you guys set yourselves up for Mark Foley really nicely...

    Oh, & the comment welcoming us to the new Democratic 'NOT SO WHITE' hope? Yes, I can see the campaign commercials now.... With a Don King impersonator, a Marian Barry impersonator, & a look alike of Senator Obama sitting in a room, talking about how much they are going to like 'taking away white peoples jobs' or 'marrying all of those white women...' & I see you guys winning too, because desperation (many times) gets the results that you want. But mark my words... We will all pay for it!

    David, your behavior is indeed absolutely despicable. Very fitting for your party, though...

    Did olbermann get his BIG pay raise?

    Dr. Lapdog takes the incomprehensible point that US militarism and imperialism is justified but actually leaving ( for whatever reason) is unjustified.
    "We abandoned the South Vietnamese"...
    We'll abandon the Iraqis"...
    Cee,,,you're just a simple run of the mill war monger.
    Never met a situation where the US shouldn't jump into other country's affair's ( unless Clinton did it)and thus we need to stay there...forever.
    You feign concern for the "slaughters" when the US finally realizes their errors and pulls out with their tail between their legs....but have no problem how many young American women and men lose their lives in the wars that you gleefully support.
    You flinch and spit and hollar when Sir Loin or I call you a chicken hawk and I can see why.
    You are the prototypical definition of the word !

    You also never learn from the lessons of the past.
    You didn't learn a single thing about Vietnam,thus you're inane points keep surfacing with Iraq.
    Since you love to dismiss anything I say especially when I'm 100% correct like in the Barney Frank point, which I will get to in a sec,instead of me telling you the lessons of Vietnam( especially since I include it in a course I teach) let me use the words of Major Clarence Mariney,USMC in teaching you.
    "The U.S. civilian and military leadership failed to
    heed the lessons of the past during the Vietnam war. They
    underestimated the enemy and the nature of the war. The collective U.S. leadership failed to consider
    the historical context or the Vietnam war. Adequate
    consideration was not given to the previous conflicts in
    Vietnam. Over the centuries, the Chinese, the Japanese, and
    the French have attempted to exert control over Indochina
    unsuccessfully. Out of this experience, the Vietnamese have
    forged a strong collective identity. Its leadership has
    demostrated a strong national resolve and resistance to
    foreign domination as was evidenced by the defeat of the
    French at Dien Bien Phu. The conflict with the U.S. was
    seen as just a continuation of 2000 years of foreign
    oppression. The North Vietnamese were prepared to accept
    limitless causalties in its conflict with the United States.
    In formulating a strategy to defeat the North Vietnamese,
    the U.S. military leaders did not completely understand the
    nature of the war. The U.S. civilian leadership fail to
    invoke the national will with a declaration of war. This
    produced a strategic vulnerability that our enemy was able
    to exploit. In this regard, the lessons from the Korean war
    were overlooked.
    Conclusion. In retrospect, one can only wonder if the U.S.
    civilian and military leadership had understood the
    historical context and will of the enemy, would a different
    strategy have been employed more successfully? We did not
    take the time to examine the lessons learned from the French
    involvement in Indochina. We failed to understand that the
    enemy's goals were as political as they were military. In
    the future our leaders should be aware of and take advantage
    of past experience. They must also carefully consider,
    define, and communicate to the American people what are U.S.
    vital interests and which interests are we willing to die
    for."

    Take particular attention to the point about underestimating the enemy and the nature of the war.
    Does a little bell go off in your little brain ?
    It should!
    That's exactly what happened in Iraq when George W. Bush marched into Iraq without even knowing about ( or studying )the regional differences that have been in place for hundreds of years.
    Ignorance ( and greed)is what led us into Iraq and it's the reason it's been unsuccessful with no one predicting success in the future.

    You continue to shout about the same old bullshit about the Democrats cutting funds for the war.
    THEY CANNOT when the budget is already passed.The money has already been promised .
    Barney Frank ( where you mock his speech impediment..and you call yourself a doctor ?)
    made that very clear..except to you of course with your jackboot negative response to anything or anyone on the other side of the aisle.

    You didn't learn the lessons of Vietnam which Major Mainey spoke about, thus you continue your ignorance in discussing the Iraq war.

    George Santanya said,""Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to
    repeat it." and it's obvious you haven't learned a single thing.

    "Keith Olbermann - "The only American President to have line item veto was Jefferson Davis, serious".

    Really Keith? I guess you forgot that one American President a long time ago named Bill Clinton. You might want to take advantage of "The Google"."

    Posted by James at January 4, 2007 12:50 AM

    Yes, Really, James. Clinton never got the line-item veto... Because our Congress would NEVER give him or any President that power, (despite the fact that at least every President since World War II has asked for it...) It's considered too much power in the hands of one individual...

    Jefferson Davis, however, did have the power of the line-item veto because the constitution of the confederacy, (which was written 73 years after the Federal Constitution we currently operate under,) featured this along with three or four other 'small' modifications that actually gave the Executive branch more power... (ie, six year Presidential Terms, cabinet members having seats & voting rights in the Confederate Senate, etc.)

    Just thought you'd like to know!

    Our freedom just took another hit and the reach of the executive branch continues to expand...right into your own homes and your own mail.

    DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU

    President Bush added a "signing statement" in recently passed postal reform bill that may give him new powers to pry into your mail - without a warrant.
    WASHINGTON - President Bush has quietly claimed sweeping new powers to open Americans' mail without a judge's warrant, the Daily News has learned.

    The President asserted his new authority when he signed a postal reform bill into law on Dec. 20. Bush then issued a "signing statement" that declared his right to open people's mail under emergency conditions.

    That claim is contrary to existing law and contradicted the bill he had just signed, say experts who have reviewed it.

    "They hate us for our freedoms" is one of the braindead rallying cries of Bush and the right.
    Well...they might not be able to hate us much longer for that reason.

    This new development is unconscionable and I'm going to love to hear the right wingers try to defend Bush opening up their mail without a warrant.
    Let the excuses begin:


    REPUBLICAN MINORITY PLEADS FOR RIGHTS THEY REFUSED DEMOCRATS

    -- GOP Hypocrites Whine All The Way To House Chamber --

    WASHINGTON -- Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.) walked into the House TV gallery yesterday to demand that the new Democratic majority give the new Republican minority all the rights that Republicans had denied Democrats for years. "The bill we offer today, the minority bill of rights, is crafted based on the exact text that then-Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi submitted in 2004 to then-Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert," declared McHenry, with 10 Republican colleagues arrayed around him. Omitted from McHenry's plea for fairness was the fact that the GOP had ignored Pelosi's 2004 request -- while routinely engaging in the procedural maneuvers that her plan would have corrected.


    Notice the date of Bush singing the postal reform bill: Dec 20.
    As I have posted before, Bush loves to sign bills that will threaten our environment, our freedom,or our pocketbook the day before a holiday or late on a Friday afternoon, hoping the American people are too preoccupied to notice.

    Just to show how pathetic it is to compare Olbermann to right wing pundits like Rush or Oreilley. Limbaugh spent a whole show yesterday ripping on the Republicans for whining about the democrats locking them out of the process. I have NEVER heard Olbermann shine a dim light on the Democrats which only shows his shallowness and hypocrisy. His one sided 'news' show is a crock of shit and anyone who doesn't see his hate- needs to be escorted to the padded room... in my opinion.

    Name a president who hasn't. Really you people spend entirely too much time demonizing Bush for things other presidents have done as well. Is your memory that short?

    John Mccain will probably be the GOP 2008 presidential nominee. He appears to be following the grand tradition ..perfected by Bush ..of thumbing their nose at the American people.

    Listen to McCain's most recent quote :"
    "I Want To Keep Health-Care Costs Down Until I Get Sick, And Then I Don't Give A Goddamn"...

    Sound like a Republican to you ?
    What do you think about his "straight talk" ?
    Still proud to be a Republican ?

    Bob- it sure is nice and warm up here in the northeast. Gotta love the tan I am working on in January. Keep up the good work. No more sleet and snow!

    I hear ya Anon.....global warming is a myth !
    Ha !

    Professor Honeydew.....

    I will once again direct your attention to your comrade, Representative Kucinich.....

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-dennis-kucinich/there-is-only-one-way-to-_b_35299.html

    "In 2004 Congress created a mechanism at the request of the Defense Department, a bridge fund, to avoid cash flow method of funding for the troops, until the next Supplemental Bill is passed. Under Title 9 of the Appropriations Bill, Congress appropriated $25 billion in FY2005, $50 billion in FY2006, and $70 billion in bridge funds for the Iraq War. Since the war is costs about $7.5 million a month, this latest amount will last until approximately the end of June, 2007. There is no immediate cash flow problem. That money bridge can be used to fund troops in the field. It can also be used to bring the troops home.

    "This is where the debate will center among Democrats. It will begin soon and it will be in earnest and it will determine whether or not Democrats maintain public support. Do we close ranks as a party and move quickly to bring the troops home? Or do we ignore voters' intent and keep the money pouring into Iraq. Congressional approval of appropriations bills since the enactment of the war authorization has enabled the Bush administration to continue the war with hundreds of billions at his disposal.

    "Democrats have a real chance to use the power of the people to take a new direction, to offer a new plan, to end the occupation by ending the funding of the war. We can rescue our troops and our nation from Iraq. We can rescue whatever vestiges of good reputation the US has in the world. We can claim our constitutional obligation to provide a check and balance to the abuse of Administrative power. History is calling us to a high accounting."

    Why are you not supporting his endeavor in the first 100 hours if starting the withdraw from Iraq is such an important issue?

    And again.....the professor ignores my post about Vietnam.....just like Loin and Mike.....because it shows how pathetic liberals act. Your ilk turned their backs of millions of South Vietnamese.

    BTW, I 100% supported Clinton's use of force in Kosovo and BTW the US is still in Kosovo.....

    like we are still on the Korean peninsula....

    Good, honorable missions.....

    like Vietnam....

    like Iraq....

    like Afghanistan.

    Brandon:Name a president who hasn't. Really you people spend entirely too much time demonizing Bush for things other presidents have done as well. Is your memory that short?

    Well the excuses are starting to stream in...
    Brandon must think it's fine and dandy that his mail can be opened w/o a warrant.

    Now..let's see if Dr. Lapdog will chime in on this one.
    What excuse will he give for this slap in the face of our freedoms?

    Maybe he'll ignore it b/c even he is appalled.

    I wonder if there are any right wingers out there who finally have the courage to say to Bush: ENOUGH IS ENOUGH !

    If you do...let me hear it !

    Oh...and Dr. Alpdog just proved my point about not learning from the lessons of Vietnam.

    I reluctantly have to agree that Keith was wrong on the line-item veto issue. The Republican Congress did give Clinton line-item veto power in 1998, but the United States Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional as it violated separation of powers (effectively giving the executive the power to make law).

    As for Obama, why is "past sin" a handicap for Democrats but a strength for Republicans (because it shows they can overcome hardship)?

    It is amazing to me that right-wingers continue to think we could have "won" the Vietnam War, just as they think we can "win" in Iraq.

    In both, cases, we were fighting not a foreign invader, but people of the same countries we were ostensibly fighting!

    We are siding with one group of Iraqis against other groups. Not only that, a number of major leaders on "our side" are radical Shia clerics who want Iraq to ally with Iran.

    We have met the enemy and it is us!

    It is amazing to me that right-wingers continue to think we could have "won" the Vietnam War, just as they think we can "win" in Iraq.

    In both, cases, we were fighting not a foreign invader, but people of the same countries we were ostensibly fighting!

    We are siding with one group of Iraqis against other groups. Not only that, a number of major leaders on "our side" are radical Shia clerics who want Iraq to ally with Iran.

    We have met the enemy and it is us!

    `Good, honorable missions ... like Vietnam ... like Iraq ...`

    - - - - -

    Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha!

    have ya`ll noticed that as their demonstrably failed policies become more and more evident on the ground, that Repugnicants are now forced to back off on at least some of their self-deceptions ... notice how the GOP talking points for Iraq have now changed from the delusional `Victory` to the rationalized `Honorable Mission`.

    quite reminiscent of Nixon`s `Peace with Honor` Vietnam rationalizations. (after all, a pigheaded conservative is someone who learns little from experience and continues making the same mistakes over and over -- all the while denying the entire regression).

    way too fun to watch. these next two years are really gonna be a blast.

    Clinton smoked but didn't inhale- JOKE!
    Bush accused of cocaine use- never proven- SLANDER
    Obama admitted pot and cocaine use- CERTAIN LOSING ISSUE

    Thank heavens we have someone like Keith Olbermann who is not afraid to "speak truth to power."

    Bush is become more and more isolated, moreso perhaps than even Nixon was in his last days. He has contempt for Congress, the courts, the American people and our Constitution.

    Our 200+ experiment in constitution republican goverment has never been in so much peril since the civil war. The powers that Bush has claimed would have shaken the founders to their core.

    Now he claims the power to open our mail without warrant! What next? I do not favor impeachment at this time, but I'm beginning to wonder if we have a choice.

    All who love freedom should be recoiling in horror at a man who thinks he is king. I'm beginning to think he is mentally unbalanced.

    Thank heavens we have someone like Keith Olbermann who is not afraid to "speak truth to power."

    Bush is become more and more isolated, moreso perhaps than even Nixon was in his last days. He has contempt for Congress, the courts, the American people and our Constitution.

    Our 200+ experiment in constitution republican goverment has never been in so much peril since the civil war. The powers that Bush has claimed would have shaken the founders to their core.

    Now he claims the power to open our mail without warrant! What next? I do not favor impeachment at this time, but I'm beginning to wonder if we have a choice.

    All who love freedom should be recoiling in horror at a man who thinks he is king. I'm beginning to think he is mentally unbalanced.

    Oh...and Dr. Alpdog just proved my point about not learning from the lessons of Vietnam.

    Like not abandoning millions of South Vietnamese to the re-education and murderous rage of like-minded ideologues of the United States left...The NVA.

    Like allowing refugees to settle in our country after we surrendered Saigon...instead Biden and your ilk passed laws to retrict the immigration.

    Oh yeah....keep ignoring the facts radicals....you just enjoy changing the subject so that you don't deal with the reality of your ideology. (I know the professor is so worried about Bush finding those bad little magazines he's been getting in those plain brown wrappers!)....Don't worry professor....I am sure KO will spend lots of time on the signing statement tonight...probably with Turley...so we'll get to it tomorrow.

    Back to Vietnam....Professor Honeydew knows history like Keith Olbermann knows fashion sense. Please understand my posts....Vietnam was lost militarily during Johnson's administration. A peace accord was brokered by Nixon and the NVA reversed course.....betting on the help of liberals in the US to give the South to them on a silver platter.....that's what happened.

    Paul- be thankful you haven't been attacked, maimed or killes by a Muslim Extremist and shut up you ingrate. You owe your simple life to that great man.

    So we have to become a police state ruled by a king because there is terrorism in the world?

    There have always been terrorists and there always will be. Of course we need to take reasonable measures to protect ourselves, but if we trash our constitution to do, the terrorists won't need to attack us again, because they already will have won.

    Bob, glad to see you back. How did things go at the Recruiting Office?

    Any word on how long before you are deployed. Just think how many new friends you'll make. All those hate America and GWB Iraqis to commiserate with.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Cee. How long have you been a brainwashed, self righteous, religious warmonging, deluded ding dong?

    It pains me to see these frightened conservatives cowering under their beds crying "the terrorists are coming, the terrorists are coming! Give up our rights, give up our liberties, we are under attack!"

    We liberals are made of sterner stuff. We aren't afraid. We know the threat and want to take reasonable steps to lessen it.

    But making infirm old ladies in wheelchairs take off their shoes at airports (which I just witnessed last month) and other such silliness
    isn't making us safer. Nor is letting our President decide, without court order, whose mail he can open and read.


    Cee. I'll bet you hit your head a lot when you were a child.

    "Obama admitted pot and cocaine use"

    Yes, THIRTY YEARS AGO Obama did these things - which he has ADMITTED to doing and regrets doing.

    But isn't that what teenage years are about - being young and stupid?

    "They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security."

    ---Ben Franklin

    Back to Vietnam....Professor Honeydew knows history like Keith Olbermann knows fashion sense. Please understand my posts....Vietnam was lost militarily during Johnson's administration. A peace accord was brokered by Nixon and the NVA reversed course.....betting on the help of liberals in the US to give the South to them on a silver platter.....that's what happened.

    How would you know about Keith's fashion sense since you've admitted you don't even have basic cable to watch him? You're such a joke,,
    and....

    yeah...that's what happened...Nixon was a hero and Johnson the goat.
    Your inability to see the truth never fails to amaze me....and your penchance for having every situation turn out poorly for the "liberals" and to the victory goes the Republicans .It doesn't matter how much you have to revise history to always come to that very point.
    I guess the Major I quoted didn't know what he was talking about either.
    His lessons in Vietnam was part of a master thesis of his.
    Your inability to learn ANYTHING propulses your laughable comments at this site.
    (See other posters points about your hilarious commments)

    and your comment "(I know the professor is so worried about Bush finding those bad little magazines he's been getting in those plain brown wrappers!) speaks volumes of your inability to condemn Bush in even his most heinous acts.

    That implies that you approve of the government opening your mail w/o a warrant?
    A true conservative would be appalled...one who is for less government....but once again you've proved to be a lapdog for a president who continues to attempt to erode the freedoms this country was founded.

    You are a disgrace to your country and all freedom loving Americans everywhere.

    CLOSE UP THIS SITE! Kudos from all over the world for Keith and his comments re
    SACRIFICE.

    How in the world can anyone be anti- the TRUTH

    As the close the fan site for Britney Spears add this site to those that have outlived their own lies.

    Keith is growing in stature and this comment has received a positive rating from every major newspaper and many websites. IT IS THE TRUTH.

    "Paul- be thankful you haven't been attacked, maimed or killes by a Muslim Extremist and shut up you ingrate. You owe your simple life to that great man."

    Posted by Anonymous at January 4, 2007 11:56 AM

    He owes his simple life to President Cokehead Tumbleweed??? I have heard the same said about my father... OK... good point... I have heard of such things being said with a good amount of accuracy in Stalinistic & fascist regimes threoughout the world. But I have never heard that being said about a President of The United States of America! I mean is Big Brother really that indescreet to you, that you must expose it?

    Shhhh... Don't tell anyone... The Plebes might be listening!

    Bob, glad to see you back. How did things go at the Recruiting Office?

    Grammie you're back...and as usual...making no sense whatsoever.

    (Grammie is another one who will be quiet as a churchmouse about Bush's recent attempt to usurp our freedoms)

    How does it feel to know that we have your number ?

    So...Did he ever get his raise??????

    It is a wonderful day in American history. The repelicans are now the minority party, thanks to the American people rejecting their partisan and self serving agenda of hatred and war. I doubt they will ever agin be the majority.

    So...Did he ever get his raise??????


    `Vietnam was lost militarily during Johnson`s administration. A peace accord was brokered by Nixon and the NVA reversed course.....betting on the help of liberals in the US to give the South to them on a silver platter.....that`s what happened.`

    * * * * *

    Vietnam was `winnable` but was lost because of a lack of American will.
    revisionist history at it`s very finest.
    better get used to it kiddies.
    especially after the George W. Goebbels Presidential Library is constructed.
    Iraq was `winnable` but was lost because of a lack of American will.
    this is the Bushit the deplorable right will be regurgitating for years.


    The right wing( and Olbyhaters) are taking a beating these days, and justifiably so.
    They continue to defend the indefensible and look like fools doing it.

    Bob, I gather things didn't go too well for you yesterday. Don't tell me you were 4-Fed. Was it is physical or mental?

    Well, I did my best to meet your daily demand that right wing nuts volunteer a member of their family. No hope for anyone else I could offer up. As I said I nominated you because you are the strongest smartest relative I ever had.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    The right wing( and Olbyhaters) are taking a beating these days, and justifiably so.
    They continue to defend the indefensible and look like fools doing it.

    Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 12:27 PM

    They are doing more than looking like fools when they blame Americans first for losing Vietnam and now Iraq. They can't deal with democracy. They can't deal with someone having another opinion than theirs.

    "especially after the George W. Goebbels Presidential Library is constructed."

    Mr Goebbels is having a lot of trouble finding a place to put his ...ahem....library.
    If there ever was an oxymoron..that's one !

    George and Laura want it at her alma mater, SMU, but have been repudiated for having the tarnish of the Bush stink forever at their school.

    (The Ford children also snubbed Bush at the funeral)

    Better get used to your karma, George, it's just beginning.

    It speaks volumes that no one wants to be associated with this disgraced president.

    Grammie has become just another insignificant voice in the wilderness that used to be the Republican majority.

    Her fantasy posts prove she has nothing left to say.

    Janet. What about a straight %10 off of everyones paycheck to pay for the wars? I am for it, are you? Or will the republicans suddenly get a conscience and decide to be diplomats?

    Wow! This site is still up? Still trying to attack Olbermann for being right? Still comparing Amazon sales?

    Yikes!

    I'll ask cee again: his rationales for the war have all started to ultimately point to the American left - so why atack Iraq? Why Vietnam?

    If we lefties are truly the evil behind these wars waged on unoffending and innocent populations - why don't you idiots start a civil war right here with the actual sources you percieve to whatever problem? Is it because you and your like are cowards, and don't relish the thought of righteously victorious liberals sweeping through your neighborhoods and finally bringing your deluded side to heel?

    I'll ask cee again: his rationales for the war have all started to ultimately point to the American left - so why atack Iraq? Why Vietnam?

    If we lefties are truly the evil behind these wars waged on unoffending and innocent populations - why don't you idiots start a civil war right here with the actual sources you percieve to whatever problem? Is it because you and your like are cowards, and don't relish the thought of righteously victorious liberals sweeping through your neighborhoods and finally bringing your deluded side to heel?

    the thought of righteously victorious liberals sweeping through your neighborhoods and finally bringing your deluded side to heel?

    Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef at January 4, 2007 12:47 PM

    Sounds like a nice idea.

    I'd pay 10% tax for the war but the tax and spend dems would earmark a good chunk for champagne at Pelosi's partys

    I'd pay 10% tax for the war but the tax and spend dems would earmark a good chunk for champagne at Pelosi's partys

    Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 12:59 PM

    Sorry, but it's the republicans who are the ones who can't balance a budget. Or win a war.

    funny dumbora

    Well, Donora, why be so paltry. As a selfish right winger all the paychecks could be confiscated. I've paid my dues and am a lifetime retired and disabled member of our rotten society. No more paychecks to tax.

    Ridiculous and absurd proposal and RESPONSE by me. I believe the fastest route to bankrupting our country would be a punitive tax system that sent us spiraling into serious recession, if not a depression.

    So, whatever the larger point you were trying to make is just lay it out.

    I am always reasonable with people who are reasonable with me.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    I am always reasonable with people who are reasonable with me.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    So has Bush gone too far with his most recent attempt to pry into our mail w/o a warrant, or are you still the lead drum majorette in the Bush parade ?

    I thought this site was about Olbyloon-

    I am sure KO will spend lots of time on the signing statement tonight...probably with Turley...so we'll get to it tomorrow.

    Dr. Lapdog doesn't have the guts to condemn Bush for his latest attempt at curtailing our freedoms, so he'll wait until KO speaks about it...and then blast KO.

    Who's the coward Cee ?

    It's obvious to all of us !

    Ridiculous and absurd proposal and RESPONSE by me. I believe the fastest route to bankrupting our country would be a punitive tax system that sent us spiraling into serious recession, if not a depression.

    So, whatever the larger point you were trying to make is just lay it out.

    I am always reasonable with people who are reasonable with me.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Posted by: Janet Hawkins at January 4, 2007 01:03 PM

    The point is why should this war be on a charge card so to speak, with a tax increase on the next generation to pay for it? If the people who support the war had to pay for it, I will bet half of them will find other causes to fight for. It's so easy when you can have your cake and eat it to. War and tax cuts. Who is bankrupting who?

    Bob, I said reasonable people. Having read and at times tried to engage you in serious debate for quite a while now, you don't qualify.

    I also have experience with your so called facts. When I learn myself what the signing statement was I'm sure I will have an opinion.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Thankfully taxes aren't done that way DP... If I could pick and choose how my taxes were used- I'd pull every dollar of mine spent on welfare and throw it at Iraq.

    I also have experience with your so called facts. When I learn myself what the signing statement was I'm sure I will have an opinion.

    I'll make it easy for you.

    DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU

    President Bush added a "signing statement" in recently passed postal reform bill that may give him new powers to pry into your mail - without a warrant.
    WASHINGTON - President Bush has quietly claimed sweeping new powers to open Americans' mail without a judge's warrant, the Daily News has learned.

    The President asserted his new authority when he signed a postal reform bill into law on Dec. 20. Bush then issued a "signing statement" that declared his right to open people's mail under emergency conditions.

    That claim is contrary to existing law and contradicted the bill he had just signed, say experts who have reviewed it.

    Let me guess...you'll find someway to wiggle out of condemning this blatant act of Bush's.

    Thankfully taxes aren't done that way DP... If I could pick and choose how my taxes were used- I'd pull every dollar of mine spent on welfare and throw it at Iraq.

    Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 01:14 PM

    You don't want your money going to welfare for Americans but you do want it for Iraq. What is it now up to, half a trillion dollars over there? Lets have a telathon. Who would be the host?

    Sure, anonymous, all you right-wingers want to do is "throw money at problems."

    Bob- you and olby may finally have a legitmate gripe. I disagree with this sweeping change by Bush, so you loons can have at it... Thats why we republicans are silent. Tonight's countdown will be OVERTHETOP, so criticism of KeithO will be easy. He is probably now asking for a second hour to spew twice as many lies.

    Welfare for americans that COULD get jobs and earn it themselves!

    "The hanging was a "grotesque, sectarian spectacle",..."

    doesn't he mean partisan?

    So, Donora, the fact that the recent tax cuts have increased tax revenues to the feds to an alltime absolute and relavent high is immaterial to you? And, deficit spending in relation to GNP is extremely low.

    And, how do you propose to tax (punish?) only those who support our foreign policy.

    Would you be willing to extend your rationale to every controversial area of spending. Welfare, education, EPA etc. Only tax those who think the policy is right and being implemented correctly.

    What you are arguing is that those who disagree with you have no moral basis and would fold at the first adversity.

    I disagree.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Paulie- Dems act like there aren't problems... like KeithO says "alleged terrorist threat"

    Welfare for americans that COULD get jobs and earn it themselves!

    Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 01:26 PM

    Lets be honest. Some of them could no doubt work for their money. Couldn't the same logic be used to say that Iraqis could fight their own war now? Why do you show more empathy to them than your fellow countryman?

    Good point- I'll give you that

    Would you be willing to extend your rationale to every controversial area of spending. Welfare, education, EPA etc. Only tax those who think the policy is right and being implemented correctly.

    What you are arguing is that those who disagree with you have no moral basis and would fold at the first adversity.

    I disagree.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Posted by: Janet Hawkins at January 4, 2007 01:28 PM

    How do you think this war is being paid for?

    I guess Grammie is done researching Bush's signing statement.
    How do I know?
    She won't comment on it ! (:

    Here's Grammie research :
    1. www.rushlimbaugh.com
    2. www.seanhannity.com
    3. www.drudgereport.com
    4. www.newsbusters.org
    5. www.whitehouse.gov
    6. www.anncoulter.com

    "shit...I may have to find a legitimate news source:
    7.www.foxnews.com

    "nope...nothing...OK I guess I'm forced to lower my standards."
    8.www.abcnews.com

    "Ohhhhhhhhhhhhh

    Damn...did he really do that?
    I guess I'll have to talk about something else back at home (OW)"

    damn liberal media. Always messing with my beliefs !

    Grammie- that Bob appears to be pretty lame yet caustic

    I see the estremists on the right are busy getting their excuses ready for the aftermath of the Iraq war. It will be something like "we could have won that war if only those damned liberals had not caused us to lose our will".

    And Cee, since you keep invoking President Ford's name into the Vietnam issue, how do you explain HIS opposition to this invasion and subsequent occupation? It sounds to me like HE personally learned the right lessons from the Vietnam debacle.

    By the way, did Ford's own children shun Bush at Ford's national wake, as was reported yesterday? I hope for honor's sake that the report is true.

    As for your left/right bend on the Vietnam refugee issue, I didn't comment on that because I don't really know enough about the political side of that issue to make an effective comment. That certainly doesn't mean I will accept your slant on that particular side issue, nor would it change the overall reality of the Vietnam war, and the overall stupidity of the undertaking, from start to finish....kind of like Iraq!

    Cee, just an observation; You are loosing badly in your long running debate with Bob on the war issue. Yes, he is in fact 'left of center', but he has a far better grasp of the issues than you do and his posts sound far more coherent than yours.

    Welcome Paul...just keep in mind that this site routinely produces some kind of error message that makes you think your post didn't take the first time when it actually did.

    Tonight's countdown will be OVERTHETOP, so criticism of KeithO will be easy. He is probably now asking for a second hour to spew twice as many lies.

    When the evidence doesn't match the expectations, just call it lies.

    "Yeah...let's diss KO for getting mad over Bush taking away our freedoms...yeah...that's the ticket !

    "KO...madman !"

    Pelosi is officially in power... i suddenly feel unsafe!

    "By the way, did Ford's own children shun Bush at Ford's national wake, as was reported yesterday? I hope for honor's sake that the report is true."

    Just a little more propaganda and another lie that you like to spread to make your simple lives seem better. What blogs is spreading that BS?

    Pelosi is officially in power... i suddenly feel unsafe!

    Would you feel safer if the US invaded another country that didn't attack us ?

    How about Finland?
    Italy ?

    Sure- Iran

    Just a little more propaganda and another lie that you like to spread to make your simple lives seem better. What blogs is spreading that BS?


    Someone who was at the funeral and observed it.
    Of course, pretend it didn't happen. it's easier that way !

    Bob, from your quote from the Daily News note the use of the word 'may'.

    President Bush added a "signing statement" in recently passed postal reform bill that MAY give him new powers to pry into your mail - without a warrant.

    Now, copied directly from the signing statement:

    "The executive branch shall construe subsection 404(c) of title 39, as enacted by subsection 1010(e) of the Act, which provides for opening of an item of a class of mail otherwise sealed against inspection, in a manner consistent, to the maximum extent permissible, with the need to conduct searches in exigent circumstances, such as to protect human life and safety against hazardous materials, and the need for physical searches specifically authorized by law for foreign intelligence collection."

    KO may actually love this approach. If those soap suds had been intercepted he would not have had to spend the night in the emergency room.

    From your mind to your keyboard is a slippery slope.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    "Someone saw it"- nice news source. You work in KeithO's war room compiling those facts?

    You did this great job here!
    http://psci121a.utep.edu/images/5369 - mol/_reqdis/0000069c.htm?mess_id=cheap-viagra
    [url=http://psci121a.utep.edu/images/5369 - mol/_reqdis/0000069c.htm?mess_id=cheap-viagra]cheap viagra[/url]
    cheap viagra
    http://virtual.yosemite.cc.ca.us/cmpgr262_tw/_searchtheweb/00000084.htm?mess_id=viagra
    [url=http://virtual.yosemite.cc.ca.us/cmpgr262_tw/_searchtheweb/00000084.htm?mess_id=viagra]viagra[/url]
    viagra
    http://www.chartercollege.edu/king/_cmp400/00000089.htm?mess_id=order-viagra
    [url=http://www.chartercollege.edu/king/_cmp400/00000089.htm?mess_id=order-viagra]order viagra[/url]
    order viagra
    http://www.sbs.utexas.edu/delia/bio212/_reqdis/00000946.htm?mess_id=phentermine
    [url=http://www.sbs.utexas.edu/delia/bio212/_reqdis/00000946.htm?mess_id=phentermine]phentermine[/url]
    phentermine
    http://www.ses.wsu.edu/Discussions/_101_Section2/00000029.htm?mess_id=viagra-sale
    [url=http://www.ses.wsu.edu/Discussions/_101_Section2/00000029.htm?mess_id=viagra-sale]viagra sale[/url]
    viagra sale
    http://www.taftcollege.edu/TCplan/_TCplan/0000120e.htm?mess_id=generic-viagra
    [url=http://www.taftcollege.edu/TCplan/_TCplan/0000120e.htm?mess_id=generic-viagra]generic viagra[/url]
    generic viagra
    http://www.chsbs.cmich.edu/iopa/_disc1/00000179.htm
    [url=http://www.chsbs.cmich.edu/iopa/_disc1/00000179.htm]buy viagra[/url]
    buy viagra


    BUSH TO CALL FOR MORE U.S. FODDER UPON MISBEGOTTEN ALTAR OF IRAQ

    -- Latest Political Bait & Switch: From Vainglorious Victory to Senseless Sacrifice --

    WASHINGTON -- Informed speculation among White House insiders and outside advisers has it that President Bush`s speech on the way forward in Iraq may come sooner than later. The White House is getting anxious that the Bush plan, not yet announced, is already being picked apart by the media and members of Congress -- especially on the matter of a surge of troops. `The 800-pound gorilla in the room is the war,` says a senior Bush adviser, `President Bush has put all his chips in the middle of the table on Iraq. Either he gets it right this time, or we lose the next election.`


    You did this great job here!
    http://psci121a.utep.edu/images/5369 - mol/_reqdis/0000069c.htm?mess_id=cheap-viagra
    [url=http://psci121a.utep.edu/images/5369 - mol/_reqdis/0000069c.htm?mess_id=cheap-viagra]cheap viagra[/url]
    cheap viagra
    http://virtual.yosemite.cc.ca.us/cmpgr262_tw/_searchtheweb/00000084.htm?mess_id=viagra
    [url=http://virtual.yosemite.cc.ca.us/cmpgr262_tw/_searchtheweb/00000084.htm?mess_id=viagra]viagra[/url]
    viagra
    http://www.chartercollege.edu/king/_cmp400/00000089.htm?mess_id=order-viagra
    [url=http://www.chartercollege.edu/king/_cmp400/00000089.htm?mess_id=order-viagra]order viagra[/url]
    order viagra
    http://www.sbs.utexas.edu/delia/bio212/_reqdis/00000946.htm?mess_id=phentermine
    [url=http://www.sbs.utexas.edu/delia/bio212/_reqdis/00000946.htm?mess_id=phentermine]phentermine[/url]
    phentermine
    http://www.ses.wsu.edu/Discussions/_101_Section2/00000029.htm?mess_id=viagra-sale
    [url=http://www.ses.wsu.edu/Discussions/_101_Section2/00000029.htm?mess_id=viagra-sale]viagra sale[/url]
    viagra sale
    http://www.taftcollege.edu/TCplan/_TCplan/0000120e.htm?mess_id=generic-viagra
    [url=http://www.taftcollege.edu/TCplan/_TCplan/0000120e.htm?mess_id=generic-viagra]generic viagra[/url]
    generic viagra
    http://www.chsbs.cmich.edu/iopa/_disc1/00000179.htm
    [url=http://www.chsbs.cmich.edu/iopa/_disc1/00000179.htm]buy viagra[/url]
    buy viagra

    On a side note... who the heck are these Viagara Spammers a--holes? I know JohnnyDollar would be able to filter the word 'viagara' if KeithO wasn't impotent and a frequent user.

    You did this great job here!
    http://psci121a.utep.edu/images/5369 - mol/_reqdis/0000069c.htm?mess_id=cheap-viagra
    [url=http://psci121a.utep.edu/images/5369 - mol/_reqdis/0000069c.htm?mess_id=cheap-viagra]cheap viagra[/url]
    cheap viagra
    http://virtual.yosemite.cc.ca.us/cmpgr262_tw/_searchtheweb/00000084.htm?mess_id=viagra
    [url=http://virtual.yosemite.cc.ca.us/cmpgr262_tw/_searchtheweb/00000084.htm?mess_id=viagra]viagra[/url]
    viagra
    http://www.chartercollege.edu/king/_cmp400/00000089.htm?mess_id=order-viagra
    [url=http://www.chartercollege.edu/king/_cmp400/00000089.htm?mess_id=order-viagra]order viagra[/url]
    order viagra
    http://www.sbs.utexas.edu/delia/bio212/_reqdis/00000946.htm?mess_id=phentermine
    [url=http://www.sbs.utexas.edu/delia/bio212/_reqdis/00000946.htm?mess_id=phentermine]phentermine[/url]
    phentermine
    http://www.ses.wsu.edu/Discussions/_101_Section2/00000029.htm?mess_id=viagra-sale
    [url=http://www.ses.wsu.edu/Discussions/_101_Section2/00000029.htm?mess_id=viagra-sale]viagra sale[/url]
    viagra sale
    http://www.taftcollege.edu/TCplan/_TCplan/0000120e.htm?mess_id=generic-viagra
    [url=http://www.taftcollege.edu/TCplan/_TCplan/0000120e.htm?mess_id=generic-viagra]generic viagra[/url]
    generic viagra
    http://www.chsbs.cmich.edu/iopa/_disc1/00000179.htm
    [url=http://www.chsbs.cmich.edu/iopa/_disc1/00000179.htm]buy viagra[/url]
    buy viagra

    Ah yes, I keep poking the caged mind of the liberal with the stick of truth and they lash out.....

    brainwashed,
    a disgrace,
    a joke,
    self righteous,
    a religious warmonging deluded ding dong...

    Wow, I am approaching Grammie in the hate mail. An honor!

    For my first act of truth....I will indulge Professor Bunsen Honeydew (Bob) with the following presidential signing statement:

    "The executive branch shall construe subsection 404(c) of title 39, as enacted by subsection 1010(e) of the Act, which provides for opening of an item of a class of mail otherwise sealed against inspection, in a manner consistent, to the maximum extent permissible, with the need to conduct searches in exigent circumstances, such as to protect human life and safety against hazardous materials, and the need for physical searches specifically authorized by law for foreign intelligence collection."

    "Existent circumstances and foreign intelligence collection"

    Mmmm....I have no problem with this.....hazardous material like mailed Anthrax....Please be my guest....Mr. Bush can open it, especially if it is coming from the professor.

    And guess what....The Department of Justice vetted this signing statement AND there is no new power taken here! The professor has his panties in a bind for no good reason....I am sure Keith Olbermann will as well.

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/12/20061220-6.html


    Next, for my next act of truth.....the ever entertaining Sir Loin of Milquetoast's history lesson....

    He queried:
    "I'll ask cee again: his rationales for the war have all started to ultimately point to the American left - so why atack Iraq? Why Vietnam?"

    My summation FOR VIETNAM was the "ideology" or world-view of the enemy was that of the leftist....

    NVA....Secularist/Communism....the world-view of the radical left as represented by oh.....Loin.

    Now Iraq is like Vietnam in only how the liberals in this country are willing to treat a people we have sworn allegience to and vowed to protect.....

    The South Vietnamese....
    The Iraqi People.

    None of the silly little liberals here have yet to face the music of the refugee crisis following the fall of Saigon.....

    crickets chirping.......

    Shall I get my truth stick out again?


    BUSH TO CALL FOR MORE FODDER UPON MISBEGOTTEN ALTAR

    -- Latest Iraq Bait & Switch: From Vainglorious Victory to Senseless Sacrifice –

    WASHINGTON -- Informed speculation among White House insiders and outside advisers has it that President Bush\'s speech on the way forward in Iraq may come sooner than later. The White House is getting anxious that the Bush plan, not yet announced, is already being picked apart by the media and members of Congress–especially on the matter of a surge of troops. `The 800-pound gorilla in the room is the war,` says a senior Bush adviser, `President Bush has put all his chips in the middle of the table on Iraq. Either he gets it right this time, or we lose the next election.`

    Bob, enough said by me.

    While I was taking the time to google and read the signing statement you were being your charming, lovable self.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    That Pelosi chick has some sweet chicklets

    Did I call it or what?

    Grammie didn't have the moral integrity to blast an attempt by the federal gov( Bush) to open our mail w/o a warrant.

    The KO soapsuds comment is almost identical to Cee's response.
    Trying to make light of a Consitutional crisis caused again by your president!

    You Olby haters, Bush apologists do think alike.

    At least we know where you stand, Grammie.

    Anything this president can possibly get away with is fine with you....even no matter much it hurts this country.

    You are a sad,disturbed old woman.


    Just a little more info about the constituionality of signing statements, that began with President James Monroe:

    "Q: Is this a liberal-conservative issue? Are there any liberals that side with Bush?

    A: An important legal statement in support of the use of signing statements was developed by Bernard Nussbaum, Counsel to President Clinton in 1993 (i.e. while the Democrats still had Congressional majorities). Nussbaum stated that the Department of Justice had advised three prior presidents that the Constitution provided authority to decline to enforce a clearly unconstitutional law. The entire 1993 memo may be found here: http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/signing.htm
    In an essay published in the Boston Globe on August 9, 2006, liberal scholar Lawrence Tribe wrote that signing statements are “informative and constitutionally unobjectionable.” Tribe writes that what is objectionable is “the president’s failure to face the political music by issuing a veto and subjecting that veto to the possibility of an override in Congress.” An eventual challenge to a president should come not to the statement, but to the fact that a president failed to enforce a law or that his actions resulted in harm to others. In the latter case, Tribe has in mind Presidential directives about how to treat “unlawful combatants.” Tribe’s essay can be found here: http://www.boston.com/

    The source for both quotes by me are from:


    The American Presidency Project (americanpresidency.org), was established in 1999 as a collaboration between John Woolley and Gerhard Peters at the University of California, Santa Barbara.

    Our archives contain 69,114 documents related to the study of the Presidency.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Mmmm....I have no problem with this.....hazardous material like mailed Anthrax....Please be my guest....Mr. Bush can open it

    Is anyone surprised ?

    Cee won't admit that the federal gov will be able to open your mail if they suspect anything...which is another nail in the coffin of the Consitition..

    But Dr. Lapdog is fine with it.

    Your truth stick is nothing but a bommerang that 's going to come back and nail your ass.

    Another Bush threat to our Consitution.
    Another thumbs up by Cee.

    Our founding fathers are not only rolling in their graves , they may bust out at any minute and go after you Cee.

    Bob, I report, you decide.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    He knows that the pork barrel spending is over, democrats have said time and again that they will END the wasteful spending. IE. the quarter of a billions dollar "Bridge to nowhere"
    ==================================================
    THAT is by far the funniest thing i've read all day (and I doubt I'll be able to find anything funnier). Did you see Paul Krugman's column recently? (summed up at:
    http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDZjMDQ1OTc0NzBmZDJmNzI1NzczZTUzZTI2NmVlZjA=)
    "By spending money well, Democrats can both improve Americans’ lives and, more broadly, offer a demonstration of the benefits of good government. Deficit reduction, on the other hand, might just end up playing into the hands of the next irresponsible president."
    Of course, ignoring that the debt/deficit REALLY ISN'T THAT BAD (which a lot of leftists like to do), I will buy you lunch if the democrats hold to this promise. (I have so saved Nacy's 'promises' on the first 100 hours and will eagerly keep track of how many are broken in two years, forget the first 100 hrs)

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    I'm old - What does "pwned" mean?
    ==================================================
    It's a computer gaming term that means "owned", a "severe and total beating" or "a complete and humiliating defeat". It's also expanded into a slang insult at people.

    We should begin a countdown to see how many days it is into the new Congress before KO can bring himself to question the action of a single Dem or criticize one. My prediction: it will never, ever happen. Brave, fearless "truthteller" that Olbermann is and all. Ha!

    With Grammie's 2:09 post she is still desperately trying to find some rationale for Bush's most recent attempt to squash the Constitution.

    Gotta give the old gal some credit for trying...but it's so obvious to anyone with a brain what she's attempting to do !

    Continue to lead the Bush apologist parade at the expense of the best interests of our country.

    We voted your ideas out of office on Nov 7, Grammie.
    Can't wait until the shit hits the fan with our new Congress on this latest travesty by Bush.

    Yes Mike....Professor Honeydew would seem reasonable to someone who simply cannot accept that his conclusions about the actions of his fellow countrymen resulted in the shunning, cruelty and death of millions of people we had honor bound committed to protect. It's fine, I know the truth.

    President Ford was a quiet and honorable man who was PREVENTED by the liberal Democratic Congress from at least helping the South Vietnamese escape tyranny and persecution. It has all been white-washed now by the liberal media and liberal academic indoctrinators. The professor would be advised to read primary sources, like Ford's 2002 letter to The Marines of Saigon, to truly feel the pain the man had at seeing us turn our backs on real people.

    My arguments today have NOT been about WINNING the war in Vietnam....it has been about the treatment of human beings relying on our promises. Millions of good and descent Iraqis are also now relying on our commitment to keep them safe from ancient enemies.

    You may choose to cry all you want about the decisions made in 2003, and Ford also looked back in regret.....BUT WHAT ABOUT 2007? That is what a true leader would be trying to solve.

    So Mike, you can keep your compliments and your reviews....From reading your posts, all I see is someone who hates George Bush and conservatives more than he loves his country.

    "Grammie- that Bob appears to be pretty lame yet caustic

    Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 01:42 PM"

    Anon, you really shouldn't judge Bob by his actions, but rather by his own opinion of himself.

    What great man isn't justified in anything when confronted with the evil stupidity as the like of some of us at this site. :)

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Just got your back Gram... this Bob seems more hateful than KeithO, if that is possible. He crams his opinions down everyone's throats, and calls you stupid when you spit them out. Someone should put salt-peter in his fruitloops!

    Shall I get my truth stick out again?

    Posted by: cee at January 4, 2007 01:58 PM

    cee, seriously, you are a deluded human. You should get help.

    Lookie.. Lookie,, More paranoid rightwingers.. Look who is number one... they fear Keith.


    http://www.rightwingnews.com/special/20mo2006.php

    Janet.

    I asked you how this war is being funded. I need to know. Is it taxpayers? If so, why not start with a 10 percent wage tax. Don't you think the war is worth it? Support the troops. They have been there a long time and deserve to be compensated. I think if you have faced enemy fire you should live tax free when you come home. We should pay for our freedom, don't you think? They are paying with their lives and limbs and families of loved ones lost there are paying an imeasurable price. I will give my tax dollors to a war my country supports. Will you? If there is a better way, tell me what that way is.

    Wow BillO- KeithO beat Cindy Sheehan. Quite a feat! Quite a loser list of heros on that website! Just a great link to see all the people on the wrong side of this country!

    Grim, thanks for the link. And what else is new about the Dems.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Wow BillO- KeithO beat Cindy Sheehan. Quite a feat! Quite a loser list of heros on that website! Just a great link to see all the people on the wrong side of this country!

    Lookie.. Lookie,, More paranoid rightwingers.. Look who is number one... they fear Keith.

    Posted by: Bill O'lielly at January 4, 2007 02:34 PM

    They should fear Keith and they do as witnessed by this site. He articulates better than most how rotten and underhanded our leaders have been throughout this administration. He upsets them to the point of them having to insult him for the size of his asss, his girlfriend, his past jobs and everything they can think of. Anything to take their mind off the fact that they have been supporting war crimes.

    MSNBC Slant Update:
    Norah Odonnel- all giddy on this Christmas for Democrats pretending to be impartial

    Norah Od: Your thoughts on Pelosi
    Tony Coello: ...Democrats take back control. Its a great day!
    Norah Od: Yeah it is

    No slant there!

    Cee:

    There's where you are wong again. I VOTED for Bush in 2000 because I was fool enough to believe his campaign promises that he WASN'T an interventionist, and I also believed his rhetoric that he was a "uniter". Trouble is, he turned into both an interventionist AND a divider! You claim I'm just a Bush hater, but I must have liked him then! My problem is I just don't like Polititians who lie about themselves to get elected...what a novel concept...integrity in politics...but I keep hoping!

    No, I love America FAR more than I do party of ideology. In fact, I could care less what party is in power as long as they do the right thing, AND use there brains.

    You, on the other hand, place party and Lib/Con ideology over country every time. I know you're going to disagree with that, but it screams out ever so loudly loudly in every post you make.

    You appear to think just like your hero. Yesterday he called for 'bi-partanship' anew. Well, how convenient....now that his party is in the minority, he's calling for everybody to work together and be non-partanship. But gosh, Cee...his definition of bi-partanship seems to be for his opposition to go along with what he wants....or else. What a great, great man!...You should be proud of this monster that we've hatched.

    It's just fascinating to check every new day and see waht he has said and done now! It's more intriquing than a soap opera, only the consequences are just too grave to laugh about it.

    Yes, you think just like him....It's the 'libs' fault because they just won't keep quiet go along with what you believe. No, we are not supposed to think for ourselves about what is best for America. Do you know how many times right wing commentators and politicians have implied people like myself were 'traitors' over the last 4 years because we just won't keep our damned mouths shut? That kind of crap tends to turn you into a 'hater' of all those that who utter this kind of nonsense over time.

    Keep on clinging to all that is wrong and ignoring reality, but you WILL lose in the end. In fact, you already have, you just won't see it yet.

    Great list! Thanks O'lielly....The lock only came because of Olbermann's representation of the left's ever-present anti-Semitism.

    "But, the real kicker was when the Anti-Defamation League had to chide Keith Olbermann,

    "We are deeply dismayed by your ongoing use of the Nazi 'Sieg Heil' salute, both on your program and in public appearances -- including the recent Television Critics Association press tour -- while holding up a mask of Fox News commentator Bill O'Reilly.

    "While we understand that your aim is to entertain your audience by taking pot shots at Mr. O'Reilly, your repeated use of the Nazi salute has resulted in many complaints from our constituents, including Holocaust survivors and their families who find the use of this gesture offensive and repugnant in any context."

    Also, do not forget calling Wallace a, "monkey." More anti-Semetic dehumanizing that fits the tactics of the secular left.

    Yes friends, the radical left in this country are consistently anti-Semetic. The subject is yet another one that drives the self described tolerant liberal nuts....

    Truth stick, truth stick, truth stick.

    Yes friends, the radical left in this country are consistently anti-Semetic. The subject is yet another one that drives the self described tolerant liberal nuts....

    Truth stick, truth stick, truth stick.

    Posted by: cee at January 4, 2007 02:51 PM

    Don't let the fact that you believe the Jews must repent or go straight to hell when the rapture comes distract anyone from thinking you are antisemetic cee. You deluded ding dong you.

    hi all, interesting conversation so far and i just want to shotgun my 2 cents worth...
    what exactly do you hope to achieve by constantly calling bush names? do you really think this promotes your pov? i mean, "king george", you cant possibly believe this. if you do, it shows an incredible, almost appalling stupidity of our system of government. you and i both know, in two years gearge bush will get on marine 1 after shaking hands with his successor, and retire... no coups, no "will of the people", no abdication. to keep saying this shows you really have nothing to add to any meaningful dialog. i think the war and the ME situation is too serious for this kind of name-calling.
    i dont know about the rest of the posters here, but i usually disregard (read skip) anyone whose only response to a discussion of the war is to call the president a doo doo head. you're not worth the time...
    now, that being said, legitimate, well- thoughtout debate is, and always will be, a fundamental right in america (at least, til sharia law kicks in). dont abuse the privilege.

    The KO soapsuds comment is almost identical to Cee's response.
    Trying to make light of a Consitutional crisis caused again by your president!
    ====================================================
    Bob, intrigued by this I did some research to try and find detail on this.
    The president's signing: (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/12/20061220-6.html)
    "The executive branch shall construe subsection 404(c) of title 39, as enacted by subsection 1010(e) of the Act, which provides for opening of an item of a class of mail otherwise sealed against inspection, in a manner consistent, to the maximum extent permissible, with the need to conduct searches in exigent circumstances, such as to protect human life and safety against hazardous materials, and the need for physical searches specifically authorized by law for foreign intelligence collection."
    Here's the actual text of HR6407:
    (http://www.marketingsherpa.com/cs/pae/PostalAccountabilityAndEnhancementAct.pdf)
    ‘‘(c) The Postal Service shall maintain one or more
    14 classes of mail for the transmission of letters sealed
    15 against inspection. The rate for each such class shall be
    16 uniform throughout the United States, its territories, and
    17 possessions. One such class shall provide for the most ex18
    peditious handling and transportation afforded mail mat19
    ter by the Postal Service. No letter of such a class of do20
    mestic origin shall be opened except under authority of
    21 a search warrant authorized by law, or by an officer or
    22 employee of the Postal Service for the sole purpose of de23
    termining an address at which the letter can be delivered,
    24 or pursuant to the authorization of the addressee.’’.

    Oh, and I did a text search of the constitution and you know what I found? NO reference at all about the postal service OR mail. Unless I didn't use the proper spelling (which is a possibility, you know how they might have spelled those things back then?), there appears to be NOTHING in the constitution that tell us ANYTHING about our mail service.

    So ummm...... how does the president trample on the constitution if there's NOTHING in there about the particular subject?

    Hey me, what if I think someone is a doo doo head? Can I not say so? I thought about it a lot. He is a doo doo head. Debate it if you can. He speaks for himself and it comes out doo doo.

    DP, of course the war, and everything else, is paid for by the taxes that we all pay. My objection to your original comment was two fold.

    First, the assertion that if only those who support something had to pay for it and that would shut them up PDQ is so sophomoric. We all pay taxes that are used for programs that we are in violent disagreement with. Our recourse, yours and mine, are to work to change the policies.

    Second, you have yet to explain what tax policy you support and what result you anticipate that policy producing.

    I pointed out my very broad opinion on the subject. What is yours.

    Do you want to raise taxes and cut spending in what way? Or, do you want to raise taxes and increase spending? Or maintain the current level of spending or shift it around?

    Whatever you want to do with taxes upon what do you base your opinion?

    I support the lowest overall tax rates possible taking into account that government must be funded to provide for defense, infrastucture, orderly regulation of life and to provide for those genuinely unable to provide for themselves.

    Just one historical fact about high taxes resulting in more revenue. In the 1980's a so called luxury tax was imposed on higher end boats. This tax led to the loss of thousands of jobs and negative receipts to the feds and more demand by the unemployed for aid from the government.

    The tax increased the price beyond what those who could afford such boats were WILLING to pay, not what they could afford to pay.

    And I do agree that we, as both a people and individuals, should do more for combat veterans and their families.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    "Don't let the fact that you believe the Jews must repent or go straight to hell when the rapture comes distract anyone from thinking you are antisemetic cee. You deluded ding dong you."

    What?

    I do not believe this? I believe Jehovah will judge all according to the Torah and New Testament. As a Christian I believe Christ will represent me and be my atonement as he promises in scripture, but what occurs other than that is left up to Jehovah. BTW, I am from a family of both Jewish and Catholic traditions and no more have an anti-Semetic bone in my body then have one hateful feeling towards the most intolerant secular humanist.....like you, Donora Pa.

    haven't you been saying that for the last 6 years? nothing more constructive to add?
    we get it, you hate him (and the people who support him).
    since you (on the left) are sooooo much more clever than him, lets hear a reasoned plan for how you would handle the war here and abroad...

    `So ummm...... how does the president trample on the constitution if there`s NOTHING in there about the particular subject?`

    * * * * *

    there`s nothing in the constitution about horseless carriages either, moron. but cars and homes and mail constitute one`s personal possessions -- and the constitution amply guarantees against the unlawful/warrantless search and seizure of same.
    god, you people are idiots. no wonder iraq is such a mess.

    Gee, "cee" if "the left" is so anti-Semectic, why do 3 out 4 Jews vote Democrat?

    Do you know something they don't? Or vice-versa?

    Grim,

    Don't try to use logic to show that no one is in danger of having their mail opened by the brownshirts.....

    It did not work with the claim about habeus corpus.....

    and it won't work now.

    Fear is a weapon of these cowards. The use it to try to either scare people into supporting their radical agenda or make someone with the truth get frustrated and give-up.

    Well, ain't gonna happen....

    Truth stick 'em.

    3 out 4 Jews vote Democrat?

    Source please.....

    there`s nothing in the constitution about horseless carriages either, moron. but cars and homes and mail constitute one`s personal possessions -- and the constitution amply guarantees against the unlawful/warrantless search and seizure of same.
    god, you people are idiots. no wonder iraq is such a mess.
    ==================================================
    I agree with you on the personal possession part... so why let the government put their hands on it at ALL? Why not turn it over to private carriers more? I'm sure the ones who implemented highly confidential systems would enjoy an enormous profit margin. I mean, wouldn't you send your mail by that company?

    Oh, and once again, way to answer one small fragment of my entire post (a very insignificant one btw) and ignore the larger meat of it.

    "Oh, and I did a text search of the constitution and you know what I found? NO reference at all about the postal service OR mail. Unless I didn't use the proper spelling (which is a possibility, you know how they might have spelled those things back then?), there appears to be NOTHING in the constitution that tell us ANYTHING about our mail service.

    So ummm...... how does the president trample on the constitution if there's NOTHING in there about the particular subject?"

    Look harder, CG.

    Article I, Section 8 - "The Congress shall have power...To establish post offices and post roads;"

    Second, it has been traditionally understood that the "papers" described in the Fourth Amendment applies to the mail.

    Janet,

    I never meant that only those who support the war effort should be taxed for it. I think it should be everyone. Maybe then we would be very careful about who we put in office to decide such things as if we go to war or not. There is no doubt in my mind, even though I am against the war in general that the soldiers fighting it should be the most well armed and have the best equipment at their disposal. They should also be compensated for their efforts when they return in some way other than a pat on the back. Like I said about having your cake and eating it to, it shouldn't be that way. I wasn't around for WWII but I think there was an effort on the part of the whole country to help anyway they could. If this country won't support a war economically than we shouldn't be there. We are just passing the bill to another generation who I am sure will have their own issues to deal with.

    DP- Its the way of the govt. Spend and pass the debt. Thats why I am currently paying for Grammies Social Security... but won't have any SS for myself.

    Any enumerated right in The Constitution can be held if it is in the deemed reasonable for the public safety.......

    Anthrax in my mail from the professor would kill me. I have no problem with the government intervening....and waiting for some fat judge to say "ok" could be a problem.

    Yelling fire in a crowded movie theater is not protected by my free speech right.

    And child pornography in the mail and on the internet is also not protected (yet....give the liberals more time to swing that one around to the way they like it....)

    And give me a break liberals.....you have no problem with government taking my private property for tax purposes (land use).....for the greater good.....why the problem with emergencies and foreign intelligence policy applying to the mail?....If it saves someone from terrorism....Thank God!

    Again professor, Bush does not care about your montly issue of JUGS.

    "I agree with you on the personal possession part... so why let the government put their hands on it at ALL? Why not turn it over to private carriers more?"

    Short answer - U.S. Law prohibits it.

    Long answer - The United States Postal Service holds a statutory monopoly on non-urgent First Class Mail, outbound U.S. international letters as well the exclusive right to put mail in private mailboxes, as described in the Private Express Statutes. According to a report from the General Accounting Office, "The monopoly was created by Congress as a revenue protection measure for the Postal Service’s predecessor to enable it to fulfill its mission. It is to prevent private competitors from engaging in an activity known as “cream-skimming,” i.e., offering service on low-cost routes at prices below those of the Postal Service while leaving the Service with high-cost routes."

    \"Oh, and once again, way to answer one small fragment of my entire post (a very insignificant one btw) and ignore the larger meat of it.\"

    ---------

    what larger meat?

    Grim, you and I have to bone up on the meanings of words. Applying the already existing authority to exigent circumstances and foreign itelligence gathering really mean

    BUSH IS GOING TO OPEN AND READ EVERYONE'S MAIL

    In a nutshell, if you agree with the SURVEILLANCE of phone calls and e-mails originating from known or suspected terrorists than you will have no problem with this. I do agree with both.

    If not, King DooDoo Head has brought us to the precipeice of rule under the US KGB.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Article I, Section 8 - "The Congress shall have power...To establish post offices and post roads;"

    Second, it has been traditionally understood that the "papers" described in the Fourth Amendment applies to the mail.
    ==================================================
    Ah, thanks EE, I thought there might be something in there about the post office, and I had typed in the wrong search term.

    So I will correct and amend what I said earlier, but I still don't see the dire concerns posted by Bob. I mean it says in Bush's statement:
    "...specifically authorized by law for foreign intelligence collection."
    I will note that I hate government speak (hence why I majored in hard sciences and not political ones - so much simpler and clearer) and may be misreading it, but it seems to me that Bush is merely using laws that are already in place. Some of these armegeddion claims about him might carry more weight if they were given direct textual quotes and references to the government documents.

    "In a nutshell, if you agree with the SURVEILLANCE of phone calls and e-mails originating from known or suspected terrorists than you will have no problem with this."

    My problem with this, Grammie, is that the power the President has taken for himself ALREADY EXISTED under U.S. Law. The Postal Service had the power to seize and hold "suspicious mail", and there were provisions to allow for searches of targeted mail under "exigent circumstances".

    It's another example of the Executive Branch over-reaching and grabbing authority for itself.

    Short answer - U.S. Law prohibits it.

    Long answer - The United States Postal Service holds a statutory monopoly on non-urgent First Class Mail, outbound U.S. international letters as well the exclusive right to put mail in private mailboxes, as described in the Private Express Statutes. According to a report from the General Accounting Office, "The monopoly was created by Congress as a revenue protection measure for the Postal Service’s predecessor to enable it to fulfill its mission. It is to prevent private competitors from engaging in an activity known as “cream-skimming,” i.e., offering service on low-cost routes at prices below those of the Postal Service while leaving the Service with high-cost routes."
    ==================================================
    Very true EE, though HR 6407 seemed to open up some more avenues for private carriers AND allow private citizen recourse against the Post Office (translation: seems we can sue them).

    Although I still don't get what you mean by "cream-skimming." Could you give me a real-life or concrete example?

    And just a personal question (though if you don't want to answer it, i understand): do you wish uncle sam would get his hands off our mail or do you think it's a good idea?

    I like Norah- she is a hottie... but she is married to an extremely liberal dude!

    "what exactly do you hope to achieve by constantly calling bush names? do you really think this promotes your pov? i mean, "king george", you cant possibly believe this. if you do, it shows an incredible, almost appalling stupidity of our system of government.

    --------

    deplorable level of unintelligence in this room.
    no, we do not live in a monarchy.
    and those who say "king george" do not think so.
    that moniker is meant to imply that GWB actively promotes unconstitutionality.
    sheesh, ya gotta speak very slowly around here.

    one ... need ... not ... cook ... jews ... to ... be ... fascist.
    it ... is ... sufficient ... to ... promote ... fascist ... ideals ... to ... be ... fascist.
    fascist ... ideals ... such ... as ... rendition ... torture ... and ... warrantless ... spying.

    Cee:"Don't try to use logic to show that no one is in danger of having their mail opened by the brownshirts.....

    It did not work with the claim about habeus corpus.....

    and it won't work now."

    Denial is a strong factor in one who has no moral courage in championing the rights of our Constitution.
    Cee and Grammie both are moral cowards because they wouldn't EVER dare condemn anything that Bush does even with this crucial issue of right to privacy.

    They have demonstrated that time and time again.
    We see it. Anyone who reads their posts see it.
    If you can't get worked up over this issue, can you honestly call yourself a good patriotic American ?

    Bush's support is down to 15% of the American people.After this current fiasco becomes known to the public , I wouldn't be surprised that his support doesn't fall to single digits.

    This is the company that the Olby haters find themselves.

    The lame and the truly lame !


    "And just a personal question (though if you don't want to answer it, i understand): do you wish uncle sam would get his hands off our mail or do you think it's a good idea?"

    I can honestly think of no world power that doesn't have a centralized postal system. The whole point is to make the mail system uniform. A letter costs 39 cents to mail whether you live in New York City or in Toad Lick, Arkansas. If we allowed private competition, companies would be free to charge more to deliver to areas with fewer people because their costs would be higher.

    This is the "cream-skimming" - the private companies could undercut by charging, say, 33 cents to mail a letter to New York or Los Angeles (since more letters go to those places), while it would still cost 39 cents to mail to more rural areas.

    Well, anon, I'm glad to see that you don't like it any more than I did and still don't. If I had my way we would have long ago privatised the bulk of our SSI taxes to inure to the retiree and/or their heirs. The small balance left to be administered would be the equivalent to private disability and/or life insurance. If general revenues were needed to offset any shortfall, I would consider it a just function of government.

    SSI is a welfare plan the way it is structured. I am for reform. Are you?

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    my point was that you offer NOTHING to the discussion by constantly refering to him so. you become just so much noise. hence irrelevent. get it? now if you can clearly argue strategy or policy, you will be worth listening to. however, if you want to resort to just name calling, you're one of the ugly americans you keep bitching about (5% world population, 30% world resources). quit using up some poor 3rd world country's bandwidth...

    Was livid that the Dems and AARP opposed the Bush plan to reinvest the moneys. It was obviously the only solution to saving the plan. Thankfully- more americans are saving on their own. (Imagine that- personal responsibility for ones well being.... how republican) My problem is that if the Dems have their way, I bet in twenty years they will create a stipend to pay out to those who did not save for the past 20 years.

    my point was that you offer NOTHING to the discussion by constantly refering to him so. you become just so much noise. hence irrelevent.

    --------

    your point is poorly taken.
    one man's noise is another man's music.
    calling a would-be despot "king" is hardly irrelevant.
    if you don't like it, then don't do it.
    otherwise, shut the f--- up.
    else you become irrelevant.

    SSI is a welfare plan the way it is structured. I am for reform. Are you?

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Posted by: Janet Hawkins at January 4, 2007 04:03 PM

    SSI has worked well for years just the way it is. If rich corporate executives who get retirement funds from companies in the hundred million dollar range would pay there share of taxes, and the companies payed a decent wage to their workers instead of the CEO getting it all, we would have enough tax dollors to support SSI. Not to mention that if we had a health care system that wasn't so fudged up in favor of health care companies there would be less of a problem with medical bills. Companies shouldn't have to pay for health coverage, we should have it already. Then we might make a decent wage and there is more tax money comming in.

    How bout those Dems returning the freedoms that have been taken from Americans by Bush? Not even worth tackling in the first 100 hours. What good is increased minimun wage when anybody can be held and tortured without a trial? Could it be that no rights were taken from US citizens?

    thanks for illustrating my point...
    civility and discourse loses again.

    dunora- you sound like a communist... no wonder you like Keith's bullshit

    Why do I try with the demagogue, Professor Honeydew......

    "crucial issue of right to privacy"

    The government can (and does) constitutionally over-ride a right.....it is called a pressing need....the government's interest in keeping me alive with expertise I do not have.....HAZMAT, foreign agencies with covert knowledge of terrorism....can be applied UNDER EXISTING LAW to examine a potential threat to my life.

    Now I know you hate me, professor, but please realize that hate only destroys the hater.....pleeeeeese don't send me any white powder!

    dunora- you sound like a communist... no wonder you like Keith's bullshit

    Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 04:17 PM

    How do you justify giving half a trillion dollars to Iraq over the past few years and not providing health coverage to your own fellow Americans, which would take the load off of small buisness owners and corporations which should lead to higher wages and more capitalism, not communism?

    "The government can (and does) constitutionally over-ride a right.....it is called a pressing need....the government's interest in keeping me alive with expertise I do not have.....HAZMAT, foreign agencies with covert knowledge of terrorism....can be applied UNDER EXISTING LAW to examine a potential threat to my life."

    It's the "under existing law" that is the pivot point, cee.

    Under existing law, there were remedies for when the government overreached, policies and guidelines for how these exceptions were to be used. In other words, checks and balances.

    But when the President takes the power for himself, where are those remedies? Where are the checks?

    I mean, the signing statement allows for the President to exercise this power in times of "longstanding national emergency". Well, how is that defined? Who defines it? Does that mean that Bush can declare the GWOT a "longstanding national emergency" and exercise this power RIGHT NOW?

    One of the most important points that our founding fathers ever made is that we SHOULDN'T trust our government.Thomas Jefferson understood that we shouldn't put our trust in any politician. He said we should bind them down from mischief "by the chains of the Constitution."
    And a truly honest man wouldn't even ask you to trust him.

    George Bush is asking us to trust him.

    Does that register at all with anyone here ?

    "When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny" is another quote of Thomas Jefferson's.

    This issue of opening our mail without a warrant is a slam dunk case.

    It's time to listen to people like Thomas Jefferson, not George Bush..or his lapdogs by proxy, Grammie and Cee.


    One of the most important points that our founding fathers ever made is that we SHOULDN'T trust our government.Thomas Jefferson understood that we shouldn't put our trust in any politician. He said we should bind them down from mischief "by the chains of the Constitution."
    And a truly honest man wouldn't even ask you to trust him.

    George Bush is asking us to trust him.

    Does that register at all with anyone here ?

    "When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny" is another quote of Thomas Jefferson's.

    This issue of opening our mail without a warrant is a slam dunk case.

    It's time to listen to people like Thomas Jefferson, not George Bush..or his lapdogs by proxy, Grammie and Cee.


    Just look how fast the Dems are restoring the right Bush took away. In just 100 hours I will be free from being held without a trial and free from torture. Actually my student loan interest rate may go down.

    Ratings are out for Tuesday, which was a special, "Speshul Komment" edition of Countdown. So...after a nearly two-week layoff and his loving fans like Mike and Bob salivating for 60 minutes of KO (without the leash that somehow is present when doing anything outside of OlbyPlanet), Countdown was beaten by the eeeevil O'Reilly 3-to-1 and by a repeat of a game show on CNBC by 200,000 viewers! Are the fact and reality-challenged comments already getting as flat as a two-week open bottle of Pepsi?

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

    Sorry- I'll qualify it better so you can't go off on one of your Cindy Sheehan sounding rants. You sound like a communist because... you insist on putting drastic controls on OUR free market system to direct money where you want it to go. CEOs make more money because, for the most part. they are more educated and create industries that employ and pay wages to the rest of our population.

    EE, I thought I had mentioned that the statement itself relies on existing authority that the president has.

    I don't see how it is overreaching to reiterate what power every president has. That paragraph I copied clearly states it that way.

    What I do find disturbing is the absurd mischaracterization of the signing statement coupled with the assertation that GWB is still shredding the constitution and stripping our freedoms away.

    It is the same old Habeas Corpus uproar. The constitution specifically provides for presidential power to completely suspend Habeus Corpus. After listening to months of hysterical and inflamatory exaggerations the next one becomes so much easier to inflame people over nothing.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    I can honestly think of no world power that doesn't have a centralized postal system. The whole point is to make the mail system uniform. A letter costs 39 cents to mail whether you live in New York City or in Toad Lick, Arkansas. If we allowed private competition, companies would be free to charge more to deliver to areas with fewer people because their costs would be higher.

    This is the "cream-skimming" - the private companies could undercut by charging, say, 33 cents to mail a letter to New York or Los Angeles (since more letters go to those places), while it would still cost 39 cents to mail to more rural areas.
    ==================================================
    hmmm.... thanks for clearing that up EE. I guess I will have to agree with you on that, that a federal postal service might be needed. However, I still fail to see the threat Bush's signing statement poses to us. (and before bob or someone tries to bring it up, yes I'm even thinking of it from a perspective if a democrat had signed it - still can't see any real problems if prez Carter was the one)

    Sorry Redstate, and I know you won't believe this, but O'Reilly lovers and Olby haters are the only ones who really care about that.....really! Rush Limbaughm has a huge audience too, but that doesn't make him honorable!

    One of the most important points that our founding fathers ever made is that we SHOULDN'T trust our government.Thomas Jefferson understood that we shouldn't put our trust in any politician. He said we should bind them down from mischief "by the chains of the Constitution."
    And a truly honest man wouldn't even ask you to trust him.

    Posted by: Bob at January 4, 2007 04:28 PM

    You have to understand Bob that the Republicans used to be front and center in the "I don't trust the Government" line. Then they got power and decided that to not trust the Government is to be in line with the terrorists. It is a reflection of a warped sense of purpose that they feel they have. It's the paranoia thing, like Archie Bunker said, "I'm not paranoid. Why are you all against me?". Thankfully most of the country has now seen the true nature of Republican leadership and has voted for change.

    Amen Donora...good post!

    Having William Jefferson as a committee chairman is a great way to show the Republicans an ethical way to run the govt. You guys are blinded by your own ignorance.

    Countdown was beaten by the eeeevil O'Reilly 3-to-1 and by a repeat of a game show on CNBC by 200,000 viewers! Are the fact and reality-challenged comments already getting as flat as a two-week open bottle of Pepsi?

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

    Posted by: RedState at January 4, 2007 04:28 PM

    Keith spoke the truth to you all once again and his ratings are not the point. It might make you feel better to think no one is hearing him, but someone is. The downfall of this administration is the same stubborness against the truth that you Olbyhaters exhibit everyday here. The true ratings race was won in the election of Democrats to office.


    FORCED BY FAILURES TO TRY DIPLOMACY: BUSH NOMINATES MUSLIM AS NEW U.S. AMBASSADOR TO UN

    -- GOP's Christian Right, Republican Rep. Virgil Goode, Try Hard To Control Gag Reflex --

    WASHINGTON -- The White House will nominate the current Ambassador to Iraq to replace John R. Bolton, the controversial critic of the United Nations who failed to win the Senate's confirmation during the 109th Congress. Zalmay Khalilzad has served as President George W. Bush's Ambassador to both Iraq and Afghanistan. In contrast to John Bolton and his controversial statements about the United Nations, Khalilzad has sounded more conciliatory remarks about the UN. Khalilzad is of Afghan dissent and a practicing Muslim.


    Again, if the government wants to take my private property, or my hard earned money, the radical left trusts them.

    But to serve the most important function the federal government has....protecting the physical, acute safety of my family.....the liberal wants three layers of government to make sure my rights are not violated.

    The powers of the federal executive are there, plain as day....In two years you will exercise the check on the federal executive just like we all did in 2004 and 2006....hey it works!

    "EE, I thought I had mentioned that the statement itself relies on existing authority that the president has."

    Grammie, that's not what I said. Yes, it existed under current law, but NOT as part of the President's authority. That's why I said he has "taken power for himself".

    He didn't have this power before and now he does.

    Anon said "you guys are blinded by your own ignorance".

    - Bell Frist....Senate Majority Leader: Who can forget his "Terry Shiavo" moment. What a mouse of a man!
    - Dennis Haskert....Speaker of the House: Who can forget the way he stood up and did the right thing during the Foley scandel. You can be really, really proud of that guy's ethics!
    - Tom Delay....House Majority Leader: Need I say more. This guy set bi-partisan politics back 100 years.

    Yep, but it's the Dems who are unethical and 'ignorant'!

    "Having William Jefferson as a committee chairman is a great way to show the Republicans an ethical way to run the govt. You guys are blinded by your own ignorance."

    Source please? As far as I can tell, Speaker Pelosi has stated that Rep. Jefferson will not hold any positions of relevance so long as he is under investigation.

    DP, I'm not being personal, but how old are you?

    SSI is a ponzi scheme. And a very costly one to our nation.

    If the feds CONFICATED every dollar earned by CEO's last year it would be irrelavent.

    And the rate is so high that it discourages and makes it virtually impossible for many to invest in private funds.

    You don't see any problems with the actuarial problem that SSI faces. At its inception it took about eight employees to pay each recipient. That number is now approaching about two, I think. And the baby boomers haven't started retiring yet.

    To say nothing about the rate constantly increasing.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Is this Bushwatch? I mean how does he affect any of your lives personally?
    He doesn't affect my life. I don't care about him one way or another!

    How do you justify giving half a trillion dollars to Iraq over the past few years and not providing health coverage to your own fellow Americans, which would take the load off of small buisness owners and corporations which should lead to higher wages and more capitalism, not communism?
    ==================================================
    I see Donora hasn't heard of some of the basic econ lessons that getting the government involved is a sure way to INCREASE costs. You should read ALL of the following article, but as a primer, I'll post one part of it.
    http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ODdmZDJmM2E5Zjk1ZDM4MzJhYTIzZTQ3ZGVjNGM3Yjc=
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Medicare: Passed in 1965, the health-care program for the elderly covers most hospital and outpatient services, and imposes few cost constraints on recipients. Since that time, health-care spending in the U.S. has risen dramatically. Is there a connection? Early research suggested that there was no link between the introduction of Medicare and rise in health-care spending. But an innovative new paper by MIT economist Amy Finkelstein noted that different regions of the country had different levels of health insurance among the elderly (and, hence, different levels of health-care spending) prior to the introduction of Medicare. By taking those difference into account, Finkelstein found a strong link between the introduction of Medicare and the rise in health-care spending, particularly the rise in hospital expenses. According to Finkelstein, it is possible that the spread of health insurance from 1950-1990, of which Medicare was a big part, accounted for “half of the increase in real per-capita health care spending.”

    "Is this Bushwatch? I mean how does he affect any of your lives personally?
    He doesn't affect my life. I don't care about him one way or another!"

    ---------

    Beware.
    Red Wolf is merely a posing provocateur.
    And should be avoided accordingly.

    "SSI is a ponzi scheme".

    We've always suspected the far right believes this. Thanks for putting it into words!

    An unofficial definition of a ponzi scheme:
    A Ponzi scheme usually offers abnormally high short-term returns in order to entice new investors. The high returns that a Ponzi scheme advertises (and pays) require an ever-increasing flow of money from investors in order to keep the scheme going.

    SSI appears to be a very close cousin at the very least. Especially the need for ever increasing flow of money to keep the program/scheme going.

    EE, as I understand it the executive branch administers the post office that was originally formed under the legislature's constitutional authority. I am not an expert on all the different acts re the post office by congress, but is it your contention that the executive has no right to suspend the privacy granted to the users of the service under certain circumstances.

    Could you be a bit more specific? In light of the terms exigent and national intelligience service what do you think has been the overweening power grab here? Or do you believe that we are not in a national threat situation.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Mike, so how would you characterize its structure.

    You might note, that this characterization has been an open one for many years. I didn't realize I was letting the cat out the bag.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    DP, I'm not being personal, but how old are you?

    Posted by: Janet Hawkins at January 4, 2007 04:53 PM

    45, and i cashed in my 41k when I got laid off last year so I am in trouble when it comes to retirement. I won't say SSI doesn't need looking at but I sure don't trust Bush or anyone he appoints to touch it in anyway. What has he touched that hasn't gotten screwed up?

    "It is a reflection of a warped sense of purpose that they feel they have."

    flawed values. failed policies. fiasco results.

    ..........

    It's the paranoia thing, like Archie Bunker said, "I'm not paranoid. Why are you all against me?".

    fear-based living.
    systemic to religiosity.
    counteracted (unsuccessfully) by certitude.
    counteracted (unsuccessfully) by control.
    vulnerable to authoritarianism.
    vulnerable to demagoguery.

    ..........

    "Thankfully most of the country has now seen the true nature of Republican leadership and has voted for change."

    amen to that.
    fortunately, BushCo and RepCongress set the GOP back 20 years.
    that's the silver lining.
    americans have seen through the bullshit.
    and have responded accordingly at the ballot box.

    "is it your contention that the executive has no right to suspend the privacy granted to the users of the service under certain circumstances."

    I'm saying that there were already agents OTHER THAN THE PRESIDENT who had that right already - the Postal Service can hold delivery on mail it deems "suspicious".

    In fact, the bill that the President attached this signing statement to reinforced the protections we have from people snooping in our mail.

    My problem is that the President took a power that was given to other people BY LAW and gave it to himself.

    DP, you're still young enough to recover financially and I wish you the best overcoming your reverses.

    So you really aren't opposed to reform, you just don't trust GWB to do it. I wish you had said that up front so that I needn't have bothered responding to you.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    I see Donora hasn't heard of some of the basic econ lessons that getting the government involved is a sure way to INCREASE costs. You should read ALL of the following article, but as a primer, I'll post one part of it.
    http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ODdmZDJmM2E5Zjk1ZDM4MzJhYTIzZTQ3ZGVjNGM3Yjc=

    Posted by: Challenger Grim at January 4, 2007 05:00 PM

    I read article and at least it states that Republicans are guilty of causing health care costs to rise also. I don't really know the answer but I know that as a health care worker I get a very poor excuse for coverage at my job. If a Republican would come along with a good plan that would save companies money and cover the people who can't afford or are not offered insurance I would applaud them whole heartedly. I have also worked for companies that covered me well and when you have a good coverage plan, as many do it doesn't seem like the issue it is when you don't have it. I don't underatand why there isn't a giant uproar in this country over health insurance. There should be.

    Janet,

    I don't trust GWB to walk across the street without starting a fight or getting someone killed or hurting himself.

    EE, the post office is not administered by the executive? That can't be what you mean, can it? What agents do you mean if not agents of the executive branch.

    The gereric 'people' snooping in our mail doesn't strike me as equivalent to the government under certain circumstances having the right to inspect things that could be a danger to individuals or the safety of the nation.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    "It is the same old Habeas Corpus uproar. The constitution specifically provides for presidential power to completely suspend Habeus Corpus. After listening to months of hysterical and inflamatory exaggerations the next one becomes so much easier to inflame people over nothing."

    ........

    nonsense.
    The Constitution explicitly states that the writ of habeas corpus may be suspended ONLY in cases of invasion or rebellion.

    "EE, the post office is not administered by the executive? That can't be what you mean, can it? What agents do you mean if not agents of the executive branch."

    The U.S. Postal Service is a quasi-independent agency (actually, it is a government-owned corporation). It has its own law enforcement agency (Postal Inspectors) and own Inspector General that handles matters of legality regarding the mails.

    The President doesn't even appoint the Postmaster General anymore. Instead, the President appoints a nine-member "board of governors", who then in turn select a Postmaster General.

    nonsense.
    The Constitution explicitly states that the writ of habeas corpus may be suspended ONLY in cases of invasion or rebellion.

    Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 05:47 PM

    Why isn't restoring Habeas Corpus on the to do list in the first 100 hours for Dems?

    Because you can't restore something that isn't missing.

    Johnny Dollar: Are the documents of the Grand Canyon's age missing?

    Johnny Dollar,
    Can you and Robert Cox set up Bushwatch. That's all That's discuss on this board now. I thought this board is about Olbermann and his antics.
    I guess the Lefties are upset that Olbermann akmost had a nervous breakdown!

    "nonsense.
    The Constitution explicitly states that the writ of habeas corpus may be suspended ONLY in cases of invasion or rebellion.

    Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 05:47 PM"

    Thought you might enjoy reading about some Supreme Court decisions about the suspension of Habeus Corpus and freedom of speech under certain circumstances short of an army invading us or an army of rebellion.

    I cut and pasted them from the following source:
    http://www.uscourts.gov/outreach/topics/habeascorpus_landmark.htm
    Understanding Terrorism Cases
    The Role of Federal Courts in Balancing Liberties and Safety

    Landmark Cases
    The following are landmark cases in which the courts have had to weigh the competing interests of individual liberty with public safety during times of national emergency.

    The Prize Cases, 67 U.S. 635 (1862)
    On April 12, 1861, Confederate forces fired on Fort Sumter. In response to this action, President Lincoln ordered the blockade of Southern ports and the seizure of several ships in Southern harbors. The owners of some of the ships argued that this action was illegal since the United States had not officially declared war on South Carolina or any other Southern state. The Supreme Court ruled that the firing on Fort Sumter constituted an act of war and that the President did not have to wait until Congress officially declared war to take appropriate defensive measures, such as seizing the ships. Since the federal government viewed the Civil War as a rebellion, Congress never officially declared war on the South.

    Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919)
    Charles Schenck printed pamphlets during World War I that urged young Americans to evade the draft. He was prosecuted under the Espionage Act but argued that his actions were protected by the "Free Speech" clause of the First Amendment. The Supreme Court disagreed, saying that, although his actions may be permissible during peacetime, during wartime, they constitute a "clear and present danger" to the United States and, as such, could be restricted.

    Ex Parte Quirin, 317 U.S. 1 (1942)
    Habeas corpus
    During World War II, eight Nazi saboteurs in civilian clothing landed via submarine on the Eastern Shore of Maryland and were apprehended by military forces shortly thereafter. The saboteurs were accused of being spies and were tried before a military tribunal. All eight were convicted and six were sentenced to death. The saboteurs filed for a writ of habeas corpus arguing that, as civilians, they were entitled to a trial before a civilian court, and not a military court. The Supreme Court rejected their arguments, stating that the crime of spying was governed by the rules and customs of war, and thus, the procedures established by the military tribunal afforded them adequate due process.

    Hirabayashi v. United States, 320 U.S. 81 (1943)
    During World War II, President Roosevelt signed a presidential order that, among other things, established a curfew for persons of Japanese ancestry living near military zones on the West Coast. This action was undertaken because the government was afraid that Japanese-Americans might engage in espionage or sabotage. Gordon Hirabayashi, a person of Japanese ancestry, violated this curfew, which he argued was unconstitutionally discriminatory. The U.S. Supreme Court disagreed and said that the President's actions were justified by the necessities of war.

    Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214 (1944)
    During World War II, President Roosevelt signed Presidential Order 9066, which authorized the removal of persons of Japanese ancestry from military zones on the West Coast. This action was undertaken because the government was afraid that Japanese-Americans might engage in espionage or sabotage. Korematsu was tried for violating this order when he refused to relocate. He defended his action by arguing that the order was unconstitutionally discriminatory. The U.S. Supreme Court disagreed and said that the President's actions were justified by the necessities of war.

    In Re Yamashita, 327 U.S. 1 (1946)
    Habeas corpus
    During World War II, General Yamashita was a commander of Japanese forces. After the war, Yamashita was tried for war crimes by a U.S. Military Commission established by General Douglas MacArthur. During the trial, Yamashita unsuccessfully argued that he never ordered his troops to commit these atrocities and should not be held responsible for their unofficial actions. The Commission found Yamashita guilty and sentenced him to death, holding that he was responsible for controlling the actions of his troops. Yamashita asked the U.S. Supreme Court for a writ of habeas corpus, stating that the U.S. Military Commission did not follow the procedural protections of the U.S. Constitution. In a 7-2 decision, the Court denied his petition, holding that an enemy from another country who is accused of war crimes is not entitled to the procedural protections of the Constitution.

    Johnson v. Eisentrager, 339 U.S. 763 (1950)
    Habeas corpus
    Twenty-one German nationals living in China at the end of World War II were tried and convicted of war crimes by a U.S. military tribunal and sent to Germany to serve their sentences. In prison, Eisentrager (no first name given), one of the nationals, and others filed for a writ of habeas corpus, arguing that their procedural due process rights as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution were violated by the U.S. military tribunal. The Supreme Court disagreed and stated that (1) foreign nationals (2) who never lived in the United States, (3) who are captured and (4) tried for war crimes (5) that were committed abroad, and (6) who are serving their sentences abroad were not entitled to habeas relief in U.S. courts.

    There are several other cases that I didn't copy.

    GWB is doing no more, and actually less, than what other presidents have done in similar circumstances with approval by the Supreme Court.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    EE, thanks. In fact I think this change took place in my lifetime.

    Since you seem so much more knowledgible than I do about this I would appreciate your fleshing out your viewpoint at least enough that I can understand the basis of our disagreement.

    If not, any pointers in the right direction to do a little research on my own.

    Thanks,

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Johnny you should have a post dedicated to Olbermann's near nervous breakdown. I saw it again today and could stop laughing at his shaking, red face, and shortness of breath!

    Janet Hawkins should have her own attorney @ law detectives agency & research center.

    Olbermann Watch [Us Bicker],
    What do you think of Olbermann's near nervous breakdown? It was funny!

    Maybe Keith Olbermann was refused his four million dollar extension ?

    Red Wolf,

    Do we really have to go through this again? You find it funny. I find your comments highly offensive and inappropriate. If all you have are sophomoric insults, shut up. There are people who are trying to have serious discussions here and you are adding nothing but drivel.

    Grammie,

    Here's the problem: under the law, the authority to inspect the mails and search them rested with the Postal Inspectors. They can hold mail they consider "suspicious" and even open mail if they need to (in order to determine where the mail is supposed to go).

    This seems to take the authority AWAY from the Postal Inspectors and give it to the President. It also seems to expand the circumstances by which the President (and only the President) can exercise it. (What exactly is a "longstanding national emergency"?)

    Ensign Expendable,
    Serious discussion? All your complaining about are thing that don't affect your life! How does what your discussing affect you? It doesn't. All your doing is distracting people from Olbermann's antics!

    "There are people trying to have serious discussions here and you are adding nothing but drivel."

    -------------------------------------------------

    I think you have that backwards:

    There are people trying to have drivel here and you are adding nothing but serious discussions.

    EE, I see the point you are trying to make but disagree with the scope and implications of it.

    To view it that way would be to accept the Post Office as a fourth and independent branch of government. The Board, the Postmaster General and Inspectors certainly don't have the right to override the executive branch and deny cooperation to the FBI or the NSA because they challenge the authority of the president, any president, regarding the existence or lack thereof of a longstanding national emergency.

    The tension between the three branches is adequate to maintain a proper balance overall without adding another card to the deck. And a card that would be truly non responsive to the electorate.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    10 Minutes until Countdown to Breakdown! I'll come back around 10 to see what Johnny's take on Al-Jazeera USA's broadcat tonight. I'm gonna watch History channel's special on Cults!

    Let me know if that History channel program does a segment on OlbyLoons.

    Is this Red Wolf guy for real? He sounds truly insane.

    Hey Red Wolf:

    So how does Olbermann's "antics' effect YOUR life?

    I'm gonna watch History channel's special on Cults!

    Posted by: Red Wolf at January 4, 2007 07:52 PM

    That's a good idea. Maybe you will see yourself there, probably standing next to cee.

    cee, according to the exit polls from the 2006 election, 87% of Jews voted Democrat. The figure from 2004 was about 75%.

    "My summation FOR VIETNAM was the "ideology" or world-view of the enemy was that of the leftist....

    NVA....Secularist/Communism....the world-view of the radical left...

    Shall I get my truth stick out again?"

    Posted by: cee at January 4, 2007 01:58 PM

    No, that's OK, cee... Leave it at home, & sit back & listen for a minute...

    I really love your 'worldview, Cee.' You are absolutely right... If only America had supported all of these right wing regimes over history, then our world would be perfect. I mean, why should we have even stood up to George III? He is, afterall, the EXISTING government in 1770's America, isn't he? & a wish to preserve that which exists is to conserve, where the word that so represents the 'right-wing' party in this country, CONSERVATIVE, is based, no?

    & the German Right Wing during the First & Second World War... Those were great RIGHT wing governments, also, no?

    Why should things ever change... We had it great in the '50's... Why should we make PROGRESS, & 'free' our minds (or LIBERATE them [from the core latin word LIBRA, or free), as the case may be) as people when we could be CONSERVING our positions? To quote Archie Bunker, "Baby, we could use a man like Herbert Hoover again!"

    Because it's all about all things being to the left being wrong.... Right Cee? Right Grannie? Right Big Re(i)d?

    The three of you guys must be the biggest losers in the world... I mean, you actually BELIEVE the Bullshit that they are feeding you in their Fox News talking points... Your blind devotion to the administration of one man, to one master absolutely belies me. One man is your G-d... His name isn't Jesus, though... It's George W. Bush!

    Closely followed in your worldview ONLY by his apostoles, from cheney to Rummy, to Tony Snow to Condogina Rice...

    Admit it... You are so disingenuous that you would rather continue taking the country down the fiery pit of Iraq than admit that he was wrong to take us into this war... That is sad... What is truly pitiful is that you make up approximately 25% of the general public...

    All of you are hypocrites... They all say that they would fight a war, but wouldn't lift a fist if you punched their eldest daughter in the jaw... It really is pitiful, but funny at the same time.

    Oh yeah, & Cee, Please don't take that LEFT turn on your way home tonight... Your gonna crash with that poor peripheral vision of yours...

    Yes, anon, unfortunatelly he claims to be real... I dunno if I'd ever call him sane... He only watches Olbermann during his special comments because he thinks he's going to explode.... Or so he claims....

    One man is your G-d... His name isn't Jesus, though... It's George W. Bush!
    Posted by: PROUD to be a LIBERAL at January 4, 2007 08:35 PM

    If Jesus walked the earth today cee and his friends would have him water tortured and feel good about doing it. The fact that Christ was tortured to death in this world doesn't leave any impression on some people other than their own salvation being attained by it. Anything Christ may have said or taught is meaningless to them. There are atheists who have more respect for his teaching than the born again cultish bush followers.

    Someone please, quick, play with Red State before he breaks into tears.

    Hey Proud to be a liberal, I read your post at 8:35 PM, since the 3 stooges won't touch your points, let me speak for them.
    "ouch !"

    cee, according to the exit polls from the 2006 election, 87% of Jews voted Democrat. The figure from 2004 was about 75%.

    It appears that the Jews saw something in George Bush from 04-06 for so many to change their vote:75%-87%.
    I wonder what it could have been !!

    Hmmmmmmmmm

    Maybe Cee could tell us.

    And we ended yesterday with religious bigotry....

    Some clarfications of falsehoods (it's not your fault people....your teachers indoctrinated you...try to have an open mind)

    Proud believes....Nazi Germamy was "conservative."

    Dead......Wrong.

    Nazism and the core beliefs held by the leaders sprang from 17th and 18th century SECULAR philosophies. The SUPERMAN, etc....the great lie is that the Nazis used religious symbolism to make their truly secular goals more appealing to the masses. Man as the END of all things in evolution as well as MAN being capable of formulating morality, government, etc. IS SECULAR....the polar opposite to Judeo-Christian philosphy. These same secular philosophies lead to the development of socialism and Communism. Secular world-views that remove God as authority and the source of rule always lead to tyranny. My world-view embraces Jehovah as the authority. Applied to Nazi Germany, the true reaction of anyone who believes God alone is the source of right and wrong would have opposed Mr. Hitler....which was the case BTW.....Trying to stop his evil ended up being THE WESTERN ALLIES, not communist USSR, until he attacked them. Who were the allies....God fearing nations based on Judeo-Christian philospophy.

    "Secular liberals" had no role in the eradication of Nazism....in point of fact, appeasement was their preferable course...containment and diplomacy....see how well it worked? I know this fact surprises you, but the indoctrination by liberal secularists in The US education system has destroyed truth in history and other disciplines since the middle of the 20th Century. I am sorry you have been dupped into accepting the party propaganda. Go to primary sources...read the works of Nietzhe and other secular philosophers that lead to the poison ideologies we are still dealing with today...Nazism, Socialism, Secular Humanism... it's quite shocking.

    I had a LOOOOONG debate with many secular humanists back in October regarding the ture nature of Nazism, the truth about the US Constitution being based on Judeo-Christian ideals, NOT simply a result of 17th Century Enlightenment thought and who really took on ending slavery in the US, Evangelical Christians....look it up. I won those debates handily and I am sure Robert and J$ would like their comment board to deal with other subjects OTHER THAN THOSE DEFENDING FAITH FROM BIGOTED SECULARISTS!

    Lastly, do not try to say Christ would judge anyone a certain way....I have never spoken for Jehovah or Yeshuah....it is wrong to do so. Acting on ALL of God's commands is the goal of the Christian and humbly remembering it is impossible to do so on one's own. Holiness in all things....helping my fellow, money, relationships, sex are all discussed by Christ (Yeshuah) and I (remember it is my opinion, I am not speaking for ANYONE else) would venture most of the secularists who just wrote their hate ignore the more difficult parts Christ claims as TRUTH. An example:

    "[Jesus said] No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other left. Two women will be grinding with a hand mill; one will be taken and the other left."

    Many liberals laugh at the Christian belief about Noah, and also scoff at the ideas discussed about a return of Christ. Many claim Christ never said he would come back or that he never discussed Noah, Adam and Eve and other "myths." Well he did....does this change your opinion about Jesus Christ? It would seem to quote a guy who believed in Noah would be a strange thing to do.

    Some more (Robert...this will be it, I promise)..

    "Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,' and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'? So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."

    "Why then," they asked, "did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?" Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery."

    Yes, Christ specifies what is holy and what man did with what God deemed right....One man/one woman....And before you post it...I believe divorce and adultery is as abominable as any other sexual sin outlined in the law. But for liberals to claim Christ did not discuss sexual sins like adultery, fornication and homosexuality is a lie.

    The wonderful thing about all this is that once recognized and layed at his feet, ANY sin is forgiven through His grace and FREEDOM in Christ is given through grace alone.

    So secularists....please stop cherry-picking pleasing and happy parts of Christ's teachings...it makes you look silly.

    Either Christ was the Son of God as He says or He was a crazed, deluded madman who should be ignored and scoffed at.....Only the intellectually dishonest person tries to say he was neither.

    I have NO god other than Jehovah. My political opinions develop from my seeking His will on what is right and wrong.

    Look at my posts on 1/4....I want to be loyal and help the Iraqi people not become victims like the millions of Vietnamese forgotten in the 1970's. Still, no one from the liberal side has addressed that consequence of our actions....WHY?.... because it is clear that will happen again.

    So stop retreating back to the religious hatred posts and address my specific points regarding the history of Vietnam....Changing the subject is NOT a valid debating tool. It only shows your weakness.

    The truth stick continues....next post

    "It appears that the Jews...." wow....getting close to that anti-Semetic language again, professor.

    The truth about "The Jews" (interesting rhetoric from the left...sounds rather demeaning):

    My rebuttal to your using polls again is nicely stated here:

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2006/11/the_exit_polls_and_the_jewish.html

    I can assure you that if liberal Democrats were honest about their ideology regarding the state of Israel, the numbers would be very different.

    It's like Social Security.....a third rail....and the secular humanists that comprise the radical left would love to have that rail gone!

    I research anti-Semetism and anti-Christian attitudes on blogs.....Guess where I see it the most?.....Daily Kos and HuffPo....the bastions of the radical left. So please, although polls state "Jewish voters" (not THE JEWS as you secularists like to call them...just like Hitler), are historically supportive of Democrats, the numbers voting Republican have NOT declined and perhaps, when proper statistical sample sizes are taken, increasing.

    This issue still does not address Keith Olbermann's flagrant anti-Semetism....and we all know where his political affiliations lie.....again, the left is changing the subject..it is a weakness!

    Truth stick....open your mind dudes!

    Everyone now, gather 'round, let's watch how rapidly Cee's mind closes.

    The British CONSERVATIVE party and the RIGHT-WING parties in France appeased the Nazi regime in the mid- and late-1930s, even though they had begun to criticise its totalitarianism and in Britain especially, Nazi Germany's policies towards the Jews. However, Britain (from 1931 onwards under an overwhelmingly CONSERVATIVE government) had appeased pre-Nazi Germany

    Many influential businessmen and landlords became alarmed at the spectre of a Bolshevik Revolution in Germany. The CONSERVATIVE Nationalists decided that their cause could be served by supporting Hitler.

    Historians universally accept that Nazism's mass acceptance depended upon nationalistic appeals and fear against "unnormal people" (which also could include xenophobia and anti-Semitism) and a patriotic flattery toward the wounded collective pride of defeated World War I veterans. Early support for the Nazis, displayed in various parades, came from the old CONSERVATIVE order that was the military.

    Everyone now, gather 'round, let's watch how rapidly Cee's mind closes.

    The British CONSERVATIVE party and the RIGHT-WING parties in France appeased the Nazi regime in the mid- and late-1930s, even though they had begun to criticise its totalitarianism and in Britain especially, Nazi Germany's policies towards the Jews. However, Britain (from 1931 onwards under an overwhelmingly CONSERVATIVE government) had appeased pre-Nazi Germany

    Many influential businessmen and landlords became alarmed at the spectre of a Bolshevik Revolution in Germany. The CONSERVATIVE Nationalists decided that their cause could be served by supporting Hitler.

    Historians universally accept that Nazism's mass acceptance depended upon nationalistic appeals and fear against "unnormal people" (which also could include xenophobia and anti-Semitism) and a patriotic flattery toward the wounded collective pride of defeated World War I veterans. Early support for the Nazis, displayed in various parades, came from the old CONSERVATIVE order that was the military.

    Painful truth spouts the conventional wisdom.

    That's ok though....because I know you cannot help it. The indoctrination has been strong.

    Everyone now, gather 'round, let's watch how angrily Painful's caged mind reacts to the truth stick!

    Now help me with this one.....what party was Neville Chamberlain a member of when he was Prime Minister?......

    Oh yeah....

    The Labour Party

    Who's peace plan basically said, "Hey, the Czechs don't matter....go for it Adolf...."?

    Oh yeah.....

    The liberal appeaser, Neville Chamberlain.

    What happened after this?.....WWII

    Who took over from the liberal and won WWII on his own, essentially?.......

    The CONSERVATIVE Wintson Churchill.

    Please, when I refer to secular liberals, I mean people like Chamberlain and you, Painful.... these types were SILENT all during the 1920's and 1930's regarding the radical secular philosophies spreading all over Europe in the form of Nazism and Communism. Nazism was simply more nuanced and dressed up....but it still did what ALL secular forms of government do.....it relied on man as the source of all truth....

    Not The Creator.

    Do I need to post The Declaration of Independence? This is a good truth sitck that liberal forget is part of our founding documents.....in addition to The "godless" US Constitution.

    PTBAL, what in hell are you talking about that makes a bit of sense to anyone but you? George III and Kaiser Wilhem. You need to get out more.

    You and so many others on your side of the aisle keep reminding everyone with a pulse that you are right, you've always been right, 85% of the world agrees with your every word and thought. And the truth comes from KO's mouth to your ear.

    And, as an added fillip, you have the self satisfying article of faith that you are so good, kind, and morally superior and intellectually superior.

    If I had what you guys CLAIM to have, I wouldn't worry about three dolts (stooges) who disagree and lay out their reasons why.

    I know, as an acolyte to KO you have the duty to proselytize to the unwashed, unread, Fox Repugnant atheist.

    In spite of the overwhelming brilliance I have been bludgeoned with by so many of you, no sale. I still disagree with you and your kind I've met here at OW.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    How incredibly amusing you are CEE. and oh so wrong. Do a google admit you are wrong and stop letting them Indoctrinate you!
    It's not to late to become educated
    From TIME MAGAZINE:

    That speech was sufficiently historic. The obscure happening 22 months ago was Mr. Chamberlain's discreet success in getting himself appointed chairman of the Conservative Party by bumbling Party Leader Stanley Baldwin.

    From Wikipedia:

    Chamberlain remained one of the leading Conservative figures, but he faced a significant challenge in the 1924 general election from Oswald Mosley, head of the Labour Party in Birmingham. After a tense series of recounts, Chamberlain was elected by a mere 77 votes; in subsequent elections he stood in a safer seat. The Conservatives formed a new government, but Chamberlain declined a second term as Chancellor of the Exchequer, choosing to become Minister of Health again.

    From Wikipedia:
    In 1930 Chamberlain became Chairman of the Conservative Party for a year and was widely seen as the next leader


    Chamberlain and Baldwin had a strong political partnership throughout their fourteen years at the height of politics together, but Chamberlain was frustrated by Baldwin's sense of detachment and disinterest in the detail of policy, while Baldwin found Chamberlain's low opinion of the Labour Party disappointing.


    This is what hapens Cee when your sources are mystical invisible fathers who govern the universe.

    How incredibly amusing you are CEE. and oh so wrong. Do a google admit you are wrong and stop letting them Indoctrinate you!
    It's not to late to become educated
    From TIME MAGAZINE:

    That speech was sufficiently historic. The obscure happening 22 months ago was Mr. Chamberlain's discreet success in getting himself appointed chairman of the Conservative Party by bumbling Party Leader Stanley Baldwin.

    From Wikipedia:

    Chamberlain remained one of the leading Conservative figures, but he faced a significant challenge in the 1924 general election from Oswald Mosley, head of the Labour Party in Birmingham. After a tense series of recounts, Chamberlain was elected by a mere 77 votes; in subsequent elections he stood in a safer seat. The Conservatives formed a new government, but Chamberlain declined a second term as Chancellor of the Exchequer, choosing to become Minister of Health again.

    From Wikipedia:
    In 1930 Chamberlain became Chairman of the Conservative Party for a year and was widely seen as the next leader


    Chamberlain and Baldwin had a strong political partnership throughout their fourteen years at the height of politics together, but Chamberlain was frustrated by Baldwin's sense of detachment and disinterest in the detail of policy, while Baldwin found Chamberlain's low opinion of the Labour Party disappointing.


    This is what hapens Cee when your sources are mystical invisible fathers who govern the universe.

    How incredibly amusing you are CEE. and oh so wrong. Do a google admit you are wrong and stop letting them Indoctrinate you!
    It's not to late to become educated
    From TIME MAGAZINE:

    That speech was sufficiently historic. The obscure happening 22 months ago was Mr. Chamberlain's discreet success in getting himself appointed chairman of the Conservative Party by bumbling Party Leader Stanley Baldwin.

    From Wikipedia:

    Chamberlain remained one of the leading Conservative figures, but he faced a significant challenge in the 1924 general election from Oswald Mosley, head of the Labour Party in Birmingham. After a tense series of recounts, Chamberlain was elected by a mere 77 votes; in subsequent elections he stood in a safer seat. The Conservatives formed a new government, but Chamberlain declined a second term as Chancellor of the Exchequer, choosing to become Minister of Health again.

    From Wikipedia:
    In 1930 Chamberlain became Chairman of the Conservative Party for a year and was widely seen as the next leader


    Chamberlain and Baldwin had a strong political partnership throughout their fourteen years at the height of politics together, but Chamberlain was frustrated by Baldwin's sense of detachment and disinterest in the detail of policy, while Baldwin found Chamberlain's low opinion of the Labour Party disappointing.


    This is what hapens Cee when your sources are mystical invisible fathers who govern the universe.

    I apologize, Painful....I misread my source....

    None the less, Chamberlain was a liberal....

    "Some historians have claimed that Chamberlain was not even a Conservative at all, arguing that his technocratic approach to government, commitment to social reform through state interventionism, and disdain for benign paternalism place him beyond even that strand of radical Conservatism associated with Disraeli. In many areas, his outlook was similar to that of the Fabians. Chamberlain himself never liked to use the term "Conservative", preferring the term "Unionist", which had been more commonplace when he first entered politics and which recalled the Liberal Unionist Party of his father."

    http://www.answers.com/topic/neville-chamberlain

    ###
    I equated The Liberal Unionist Party to Labour....sorry and I hope this clarifies my point.

    None the less, Chamberlain was a liberal....

    I'm sorry Cee but you are in error. He was a conservative. A member of the conservative party. Just like margaret Thatcher was a member of the conservative party. Chamberlin's father not Chamberlin was a member of the liberal union party. not that it matters because he led the split from the labor party that joined the conservative party. Now Churchill on the other hand was a liberal

    From TIME:

    In 1904, Churchill's dissatisfaction with the Conservatives and the appeal of the Liberals had grown so strong that, on returning from the Whitsun recess, he crossed the floor to sit as a member of the Liberal Party.

    in addition to this after "Peace in our time" the labor party was so disgusted with the conservatives that they switched to the pro-war camp.

    "The Labour Party, which until relatively recently had been condemning the Tories for their bellicosity, now attacked the appeasers as the "Men of Munich" and switched firmly into the pro-war camp."

    Of course it is not as though the Labor party can't be wrong. Labor leader Tony Blair was certainly wrong about the disaster that is iraq.

    The Liberal Unionis were a British political party which split away from the Liberals in 1886, and had effectively merged with the Conservatives by the turn of the century, the formal merger being completed in 1912. Their principal leaders were Lord Hartington (later the Duke of Devonshire) and Joseph Chamberlain.


    Chamberlain and Baldwin had a strong political partnership throughout their fourteen years at the height of politics together, but Chamberlain was frustrated by Baldwin's sense of detachment and disinterest in the detail of policy, while Baldwin found Chamberlain's low opinion of the Labour Party disappointing.

    None the less, Chamberlain was a liberal....

    I'm sorry Cee but you are in error. He was a conservative. A member of the conservative party. Just like margaret Thatcher was a member of the conservative party. Chamberlin's father not Chamberlin was a member of the liberal union party. not that it matters because he led the split from the labor party that joined the conservative party. Now Churchill on the other hand was a liberal

    From TIME:

    In 1904, Churchill's dissatisfaction with the Conservatives and the appeal of the Liberals had grown so strong that, on returning from the Whitsun recess, he crossed the floor to sit as a member of the Liberal Party.

    in addition to this after "Peace in our time" the labor party was so disgusted with the conservatives that they switched to the pro-war camp.

    "The Labour Party, which until relatively recently had been condemning the Tories for their bellicosity, now attacked the appeasers as the "Men of Munich" and switched firmly into the pro-war camp."

    Of course it is not as though the Labor party can't be wrong. Labor leader Tony Blair was certainly wrong about the disaster that is iraq.

    The Liberal Unionis were a British political party which split away from the Liberals in 1886, and had effectively merged with the Conservatives by the turn of the century, the formal merger being completed in 1912. Their principal leaders were Lord Hartington (later the Duke of Devonshire) and Joseph Chamberlain.


    Chamberlain and Baldwin had a strong political partnership throughout their fourteen years at the height of politics together, but Chamberlain was frustrated by Baldwin's sense of detachment and disinterest in the detail of policy, while Baldwin found Chamberlain's low opinion of the Labour Party disappointing.

    Cee, I also planned on pointing out to you that Chamberlain and Churchill were both members of the Conservative Party.

    The Labour Party was formed in the early 1900's and till Tony Blair was elected as a centrist the Labour Party was a socialist party.

    More to the point of your post re Chamberlain the socialist Labour Party was an appesement party also. They advocated depending on the League of Nations and were completely opposed to British rearmament because that would drain money from domestic spending, surprise surprise.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Cee, one other thing I wanted to point out. Chamberlain, politicians from ALL parties, the Brits themselves and virtually every publication, drum roll if you please:

    EIGHTYFIVE PERCENT LOVED CHAMBERLAIN AND DESPISED CHURCHILL

    I also heard that they had something called Groups of Sixteen Hundred. Very similar to what we have today. Sixteen hundred scientists, sixteen hundred politicians, sixteen hundred ex generals.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    In the early hours of that morning German divisions smash their way into the Netherlands and Belgium. In this new crisis Chamberlain realizes that an all-party government is essential. But the Labour party refuses to serve under a man associated so strongly with appeasement.

    ogp


    Of course the only reason that Churchill came to power at all was because when Chamberlin tried to form an all goverment coalition to deal with the beginning of World War II. The labour part refused to have a leader so tied to appeasment as the conservative leader was.

    Thus paving the way for churchill


    Oh and the labour part opposed rearmament until the rise of Hitler. After that they became anti-appeasement. A full 4 years faster than the conservative party

    "However, after the rise of Adolf Hitler Attlee and most of the Labour Party would come to oppose appeasement, especially after the pacifist Lansbury's resignation in 1935"

    EIGHTYFIVE PERCENT LOVED CHAMBERLAIN AND DESPISED CHURCHILL

    Kinda like how 80 percent loved Dubya then realized they were wrong.

    `The DENIAL of global warming is nothing more than an extension of evolution DENIAL. It is the rejection of science itself. Evangelicals will tell you that the bible says the earth must be destroyed before Jesus returns. This is why they are so alienated from PROGRESSIVE values. This is why they shun real science and why they stand behind Bush. This is not sprituallity, it is cult mentality that says `f--- stewardship all I care about is never not dying`.


    denial.
    you hit the nail right on the head.
    the essence of religion is denial.
    denial of death.
    poor little babies, can`t handle being dead forever.
    so let`s make up a fairy tale to avoid it.

    once you take that tragic first step of denying
    just so you can embrace a fairy tale
    just so you can avoid death
    you`re f---ed.

    because it leads to the denial of many other realities
    in favor of fantasy-based (faith-based) beliefs.

    denied realities such as
    evolution
    science
    homosexuality
    inalienably equal rights for women
    inalienably equal rights for non-whites
    inalienably equal rights for gays.
    all sorts of things
    which have been denied
    by fear-of-death based religious morons for ages.

    denied realities such as
    global warming
    and denied realities such as
    the facts on the ground
    in places like iraq and new orleans
    and in terry schiavo's shriveled brain

    and that is called being REGRESSIVE
    instead of being progressive
    (progress ... get it?)
    (evolving ... get it?)
    (learning from experience ... get it?)
    which is why the radical right
    is so loathsome of progressives.
    because progressives are a threat
    to the radical right's regressive belief system
    which they desperately cling to
    to avoid death.
    poor little babies,
    walking around with a child's deluded misunderstanding
    of the way reality really works.

    and now you can clearly see
    just how f---ed up things can get
    when you let someone with a child's misunderstanding
    and a child's sense of denial
    run the most powerful country in the world.

    Cee,
    Your debate had you run away when it was proven the Bible accepts slavery. You were whipped so badly you claimed God doesn't care about the Ten Commandments. You admitted the Constitution wasn't a Christian document but the people were. I hope people check the argument. They'll see how thoroughly beaten you were.

    What? Have you been away doing drugs, Colbert....I easily, point by point refutted every quote you claimed endorsed slavery (slavery is holy)

    Also, you ran away when I easily showed you that the slavery in The US was ended by Evangelical Christians....not secular humanists.

    Colbert, do not try to change facts. The world according to secularists is a dark world indeed....filled with want and death. Christ promises light and hope....freedom from true oppresion of hubris and self-deluded living. You're blindness of your own need for redemption will be the stumbling block that will thwart any growth.

    I just got home from work....the liberal "see-no-evil" attitude of pre-WWII Europe will have to wait...bye.

    Congresswoman Sherri Davis, R-CA, Launches Two New “Internet- Only” Talk Shows in 2007

    “Talking on Tuesdays” to debut on Tuesdays; “Talking on Thursdays” will broadcast each Thursday. Says Davis: “Expect Some Controversy!”

    New York, NY (PRINSIDE) January 5, 2007 -- California Congresswoman Sherri Davis, R-CA, known as the "Ann Coulter of Anaheim" for her fierce opposition to flag-burners and illegal immigrants and her unyielding support for the American family, issued a statement today announcing the debut of two new Internet-only talk shows, “Talking on Tuesdays” and “Talking on Thursdays,” to be hosted by herself.


    “Talking on Thursdays,” which will be broadcast on the Internet each Thursday, will focus on the top political issues of the day. Davis’ second show, “Talking on Tuesdays,” will be broadcast each Tuesday and will focus on “the lighter side of life”: fashion, film, self-improvement -– and tips to viewers on how to acquire the essential “people skills” that are the keys to success in today’s service-oriented society.

    The two new shows will be produced by cable television’s Myron Kempelstein. Davis will moderate both shows, and surprise celebrity guests can be expected. Selections from the shows can be seen at these links. http://youtube.com/watch?v=px3NY_V3M44 http://youtube.com/watch?v=EiW9rueA2IE

    Typical topics for Davis’ “Talking on Thursdays” show will include inside legislative looks at some of Davis’ signature legislation -- dubbed “Sherri’s War of Ideas” by her friends in the American media. “‘Sherri’s War of Ideas’ is a pure war of ideas that seeks to portray Democratic proposals as “pro-spending, pro-tax – or just plain unworkable,” notes Davis.

    In her premiere edition of “Talking on Thursdays,” Davis says she plans to go on the attack against the Democratic War in Iraq -- and offer some sensible solutions. “Nancy (Pelosi) and I have been engaging in a number of think-tank-style discussions on the issue of the Democratic War in Iraq – and I think you’ll be surprised at the solution we’ve come up with,” says Davis. “Most likely the solution we will propose in my premiere show will take the form of some kind of a ‘Grand Bargain’ – but you’ll just have to tune in to see what our solution to the war really is!”

    Davis also promises her fans that a “special edition” of “Talking on Thursdays” will pay tribute to the many legislative contributions of fellow Californian Bill Thomas, former chair of the House Ways and Means Committee. “Around the House, Bill was known as ‘Compassion With a Calculator,’” says Davis. “And there is even talk of legislatively renaming the famous Donner Pass after Bill –- and calling it ‘Bill Thomas Way.’ Because the story of the Donner Pass is really a story about people helping people, people helping people, and that’s what Bill was all about as well.”

    With her second show, “Talking on Tuesdays,” Davis steps into the television shoes vacated by the recent cancellation of the “Megan Mullally Show.” “It’s a much lighter show than my ‘Talking on Thursdays’ show,” says Davis. “In one sense, it’s almost frivolous.”

    Among the treats in store for viewers of “Talking on Tuesdays” are dramatic readings by Davis herself from Jack Welch’s best-selling book, “Winning,” and fashion tips on how to attain the “Nancy Pelosi look” on a shoestring. “Not to give too much away, but instead of wearing an 18-inch strand of Tahitian pearls like Nancy does,” advises Davis, “you can wear a 16-inch strand –- and slouch.” Davis will also review Mel Gibson’s new film, “Apocalypto.”

    Davis – who heads the House Entertainment Committee – has become known as the “Voice of Hollywood” in the House, and recently proposed increased trade subsidies to promote America’s D-List celebrities to the world market. “Early market research shows a substantial demand for Wilmer Valderamma in nations such as Pakistan and Bolivia,” notes Davis. “And Kathy Griffin would do very well in Palestine and some of the bordering states, if only we had a way to market her there. And just imagine where Carrot Top could go.” It is “small baby steps” such as these that will help America solve its ever-growing and increasingly menacing foreign trade deficit, says Davis.

    Despite the fame and notoriety that typically accompanies the launch of any new broadcast venture, Davis promises not to allow the spotlights to distract her from her legislative mission this year, noting that she has already introduced five Constitutional amendments so far this year. “And there are more to come!” says Davis with her trademark grin.

    Congresswoman Davis, a rising star of the Republican Party, has been gaining traction in political popularity polls recently through a series of think-tank-style town hall meetings. Most recently, Davis told a cheering crowd in rural New Hampshire about her proposed "Bible Repatriation Act," (BRA), which she intends to push through in the coming legislative sessions in order to bring control of the Bible back into the hands of America by requiring that all Bibles be printed in this country.

    "Just yesterday, a constituent sent me a copy of a Bible he had acquired that was printed in a foreign country -– and I can’t tell you which country because of National Security reasons,” says Davis. “While reading this particular Bible, he discovered that in Kings and then again in Deuteronomy, the sections of the Bible that talk about ‘approved entrances’ to the human body had been altered somehow during the printing process to include new, unapproved entrances to the human body that the Lord in his wisdom never intended to open up for use. And it is safe to say that this is obviously the work of America’s foreign enemies – enemies who are not only anti-American, but also anti-family. Hence my support of BRA. Bring our Bibles home. Bring them home."

    As she presses for swift Congressional passage of BRA, Davis continues her work on the rest of her "signature" legislative packages, including the Mandatory Portion Control Act (MPCA), aimed at curbing America's growing obesity problem and "Project SATYR" (Scrapboooking Accelerates Terrific Youth Reading), a program designed to capitalize on the recent "scrapbooking craze" to increase youth reading levels through individual vouchers and major tax-breaks to the American scrapbooking industry.

    "One of my favorite new singers, Kelis, sings about how her 'milkshakes' bring all the boys to her yard, and it is this exact same proposition we seeing in regards to scrapbooking and teen literacy," says Davis. "We view teen scrapbooks as the 'milkshakes of teen literacy' that will bring underperforming teen readers to the 'yard' of teen literacy. Let's face it -- if teens won't read about themselves, in their own scrapbooks, then what will they read about? What's wrong with capitalizing on our youth culture's own narcissism to 'trick' underperforming teens right into literacy!"

    Davis continues to push for swift passage of her Yoga Mat Cleanliness Act (YMCA) through taped appearances with New York-based actress Sarah Jessica Parker. “As Chad Lavigne recently pointed out, Sarah has a remarkable nose. Get her within four feet of an unclean yoga mat, and she can sniff out those tinea cruris germs in a twinkling – and that has been useful on more than one occasion!” Davis also continues to work with the Congressional Black Caucus to force the racial integration of television's highly popular "The Daily Show;" and is making plans for her Valentine’s Day introduction of a new legislative package to create “Sexy Fridays” nationwide.

    Prior to responding to the call of democracy, Congresswoman Davis was a star of stage and screen, appearing with show business luminaries such as Helen Hunt, Amy Sedaris, Nathan Lane, Bette Midler, Leslie Kritzer, Woody Allen, Kristin Chenoweth, Paul Dinello, Matthew Broderick, Martin Short and Susan Sarandon. Davis, known widely as the “face behind the Pashmina” for her role in successfully launching that foreign garment into closets of middle America, skyrocketed to fame in the 1990's with her lively rock-anthem "Baby Dance," which reached No. 4 on the Billboard pop charts. Davis was appointed to her Congressional seat late last year after the tragic death of her husband and was re-elected this November by a "slim but substantial majority." Prior to leaving show business to represent her Congressional district, Davis also played the role of Penny Pingleton in numerous regional performances of "Hairspray."

    We of advanced age have to be dismayed at what has happened to democracy since we first learned about it. We are becoming more socialistic every day. But it is in a large part our fault, as long as we have a few dollars in our pockets and the ability to buy THINGS and pay our bills we may complain, but really close our eyes to what Government does. Remember " Of the people, by the People, and for the People".
    In the late seventies Paul Harvey said it best, on his daily radio program he stated, " The only time this county is truly great, is when it stays home and minds it's own business.