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 'EDT/-4.0/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 9, 2007
    COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN - JANUARY 9, 2007

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

    Host: Keith Olbermann

    Topics/Guests:

    • PRES. BUSH'S SPEECH TOMORROW: Richard Wolffe, Newsweek chief White House correspondent and MSNBC political analyst; Roger Cressey, MSNBC terrorism analyst
    • NEW WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL: John Dean, fmr. Nixon White House counsel
    • BLAMING LIBERAL MEDIA: Rachel Maddow, Air America Radio host

    The opening spiel found our favorite carnival barker back in form: Ted Kennedy (D) was "eloquent"; the army refuses to protect our troops; Fred Fielding is part of "the watergate crew"; plus Royal Rumours, the Hall of Fame, and more.

    MADMAN

    Of all the people who have made speeches about the "surge", it's Kennedy's that gets to be made the lead story on The Hour of Spin. Gallup says most people don't like the surge, while some Dems "continue to insist they are powerless" to stop the maniacal madman from sending our children to the slaughterhouse. OK, that was paraphrased. Olby cited Steny Hoyer (D): "house majority leader, or house minority, majority, uh, leader". That about covers everything. Hoyer's got it all wrong, according to Monkeymann, in thinking the Commander in Chief actually gets to send troops places. But "Senator Kenny" (lengthy clip--nearly four minutes!) is introducing legislation to make sure "Mister" Bush doesn't usurp the constitutional powers of the true Commander-in-Chief, the Senator from Massachussetts. No clips were run representing any other point of view.

    Olbermoronn asked The Wolffe Man why those rascals Hoyer and Biden are letting the constitution hamstring them from taking over troop deployment decisions. Oh, it's all politics, sez Wolffie. KO naturally adopted the term "escalate"--after all, it is part of the Dems' talking points. How could anyone not expect a Dem talking point to turn up on The Hour of Spin? A regurgitated NBC report on a controversial weapons system followed, with Olby doing a little back and forth with Lisa Myers.

    After another Pulitzer-worthy oddball, it was time to analyze Fred Fielding, the new White House counsel. A prime opportunity for the latest chapter in Olbermann's Left-Wing Criminal Rehabilitation Program, featuring felon John Dean. Watergate, watergate, watergate. Even the disbarred lawyer had to admit Fielding had no watergate taint, despite Monkeymann's obsessive repetition of the word. Then it was on to signing statements, domestic eavesdropping, detainees, Jack Abramoff, and all the familiar notes that sound from Olby's player piano. Special thanks to the felon.

    The news continued with the royal girlfriend (recycled video again), the malibu fire, and Howard Stern. Plus a full segment on the elections to the Baseball Hall of Fame.

    MADMAN

    Herr Olbermann must have been especially intent that tonight's Media Matters Minute would get the worldwide recognition that his every word so richly deserves. After all, he went out of his way yesterday to make public his attacks on Geraldo Rivera: first blasting him on the radio, then tweaking the wording a bit and rerunning his attack during Countdown. But what happened? His acolyte, TVNewser, didn't post on either of his pronouncements. That cannot be allowed to stand on OlbyPlanet, so KO dashed off an email to TVN. Actually, the email was just a rewrite of the "worst person" comments, which in turn were a rewrite of his radio diatribe. But it worked: TVN obediently ran an item claiming that Olby responded to Geraldo "in an email to TVNewser". Mission accomplished, but we're sure Fat Ass would rather not have to take that extra step to get Brian to fulfill his PR duties.

    So tonight Keith "Man on Fan" Olbermann, to get maximum attention, swung for the fences. Steve Jobs got a nomination, but the "worst person" was Tony Snow. KO's claim is that he lied about the "mission accomplished" speech. As soon as Olby tipped earlier in the show that Tony would be "worst" we knew what he would say, because, as usual, Keith lifted his "outrage" from someone else--and not just the target, but even large chunks of the commentary. Olbermann's Blue Blog Source: Think Progress. Bellowed Monkeymann: "Tony, my God, you're just bald-faced lying." There. Did you get that, Brian? Was that statement bold and courageous enough? Or does Keith have to send you another email?

    OLBY

    Silent Schnauzers: One of these is left over from yesterday: Krazy Keith ran a clip from Gordon Smith (R) appearing to oppose the troop surge. But it turns out his position was more nuanced than KO let on, since Monkeymann left out Smith's comments that it would be "dishonorable" to withhold funding for said troops. For all the talk tonight about the "surge", isn't it odd that Olbermoronn took pains not to tell his viewers the position of the Iraqi government? Well, not really. The discredited sports guy will always go out of his way not to report new terror threats. And he has no interest in medical developments that don't comport with OlbySpin. A story that combines illegal immigration with sexual child abuse gives KO two reasons to ignore it. But the biggest dog that didn't bark is still the absence of a retraction and apology for Olbermoronn's Friday night lie about Bill O'Reilly.

    NAME

    Olbermann's book The book that bears Olberman's name is a runaway success at amazon.com: it's now all the way up to #3,105; Mr Bill's "Culture Warrior" is #108. The OlbyTome slipped to #2,747 at Barnes & Noble; O'Reilly's book is #41 there, as well as being one of 2006's top ten best sellers. On Monday's Hour of Spin, Bill O'Reilly beat our favorite discredited sports guy by more than three to one, though Olby did manage a second place finish in total viewers and in the critical, beloved, all-important, coveted "key demo". Tonight's MisterMeter reading: 2 [LOW]


    Posted by johnny dollar | Permalink | Comments (393) | | View blog reactions

    393 Comments

    Man this site needs some new blood. But the main problem is the same tired lack of ability by the moderators to deal with reality.

    I think we're jaded by the same tired dreck from Olby. Same crap, different show.

    First we have Haliburton, profiteering from the deaths of the American troops serving in Iraq, now we have Raytheon Corp. getting someone to protect their profits, by denying the troops equipment that could save their lives.

    I think we need a congressional investigation to find out WHO in the administration and/ or at the pentagon, is acting the lacky for another profiteering company that doesnt give a damn about the troops, just maintaining their status quo.

    I wonder if Bush, Cheney, Rummy, or someone inside this unamerican administration owns stock or has other ties to Raytheon.

    I think we should know. Dont you ?

    BTW, all of you good little Bushies always insist that you support the troops, dont you think there should be an investigation.

    You answer shows whether you REALLY support our troops.

    Trying to divert attention, or ignoring the question, is nothing but an admission that YOU dont give a damn about the troops.

    Indierik,

    I had a horrible nightmare last night. I dreamt that I was walking through a field of broken buckeyes. They bleed as if they were fauna. Then a group of gators crawled through the field, smashing the buckeyes with their tails, and laughing as they did so.

    I woke up screaming "the horror, the horror!"

    Are ALL republican huge pussies that try to talk tough but refuse to serve in the military?

    Or is it just most?

    Just wondering...

    Say Rico,

    Dont you think that there should be an investigation into Why, and Who the scumbags are that are willing to sacrifice the troops, just so Raytheon can protect their profit potential?

    Looking forward to your response.

    Arnold,

    I wouldnt say ALL, that is too broad a generalization.

    I would say that ALL of the republicans that hang around Olbermannwatch.com are. And the neo-cons. And those that support the war but wont serve certainly are. And their kids, and grandkids.

    I dont know, maybe you are right.

    Olby, you are the expert at making stuff up every night. If Tony Snow is a liar, then you are his mentor and hero.

    Hey Anonymous at January 9, 2007 08:50 PM,


    You want to take a stab at answering the "should there be an investigation of Raytheon Corp" question.

    It is a really simple question, and I am wanting to find out WHO REALLY supports our troops.

    I have another question.

    Did you know, that possession of and use of Steroids, is a felony ?

    And what sort of felony, the EXACT SAME CHARGE as possesion of and/or use of HEROINE.

    After all, steroids and heroine are both "controlled substances".

    Yep, illicit drug use is OK with some people, just as long as it is baseball players. After all, they are rich enough so that they dont have to steal anything to get or use their drugs.

    Oh, but they have stolen baseball, and a lot of the records in baseball. They have driven the price of admission up so much that MOST baseball fans cant afford to go,

    To the question.

    How many of you think that our law enforcement and legal authorities should enforce the laws, regardless of WHO is breaking them ?

    If Tony Snow is a liar, then you are his mentor and hero.

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


    No, that would be your hero George W. Bush, or Bill O'Reilly, or Rush Limbaugh .......


    hell, take any right wing pundant and insert name.

    My policy is to not respond to posters who are too lazy to populate the "Name" field.

    Do most of the posters here deal in reality?

    KO has his moments but this place is so far slanted as to be a psycotic homeland.

    Tony Snow is totally full of crap. He would fail miserablly if he had to tell the truth.

    Do most of the posters here deal in reality?

    KO has his moments but this place is so far slanted as to be a psycotic homeland.

    Tony Snow is totally full of crap. He would fail miserablly if he had to tell the truth.

    A few weeks ago, on the Right Wing propaganda show, "Scarborough Country" a discussion about immigrants was raging. when Pat Robertson said something to the effect that "immigrants that come here, become naturalized citizens, and retain the foriegn citizenship, really are not Americans, because they have not renounced citizenship of their home country"

    That is paraphrased, but it is accuarte enough.

    To that end and wondering about how YOU feel about that argument, Do you know this person ?

    http://assets.gigavox.com/showimages/547.jpg


    Apparently, and the situation may have changed, but he is an Irishman, who is a naturalized American, but has not renounced his Irish citizenship.

    Is this man a real American ? Like Pat Robertson asserted, or is he just an interloper here in the US stiring up trouble.

    Anonymous at January 9, 2007 09:03 PM
    -----------------------------------------------------------

    Simple question.

    So you dont support finding out who it is that has intentionaly left the troops in unnecessary danger.

    So you dont support the troops, are care how many die so that someone else (Raytheon and someone in the Bush administration ) can make their profits,

    Dont EVER act like you support the troops, because it is quite apparent that you dont give a damn about them

    Anonymous at January 9, 2007 09:03 PM
    -----------------------------------------------------------

    Simple question.

    So you dont support finding out who it is that has intentionaly left the troops in unnecessary danger.

    So you dont support the troops, are care how many die so that someone else (Raytheon and someone in the Bush administration ) can make their profits,

    Dont EVER act like you support the troops, because it is quite apparent that you dont give a damn about them

    Rico said:

    My policy is to not respond to posters who are too lazy to populate the "Name" field

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

    Hell, I will fill in a name.

    Rico, are you a cuban, maybe you can take a stab at answering the illegal alien, naturaized citizen question.

    You wouldnt answer the other question, maybe you can answer that one.

    I hope that ya'll are watching Scarborough country... Bill o'reilly analyzed by a body language expert! lol

    I hope that ya'll are watching Scarborough country... Bill o'reilly analyzed by a body language expert! lol

    Is this Dan Abrams new strategy? If so, it's beyond lame and totally pathetic but hey, that's what makes them number three (or four) in the ratings. Keep up the good work Danny!

    In an earlier post I related a statement made by Pat Robertson on "Scarborough Country" ..

    To be correct, it was Pat Buchannon, and this clarifies and corrects that post.

    But the fact is that is was another of the right wing idiots.

    If you watched Scarboro, then maybe you caught Pat Buchanon's point that by not cutting funds and refusing to support a surge, we are now on a stay the course path. Hmmm. I think Buchanon's point about naturalized citizens is that there are supposedly a large group of Mexicans who believe that the southwest still belongs to Mexico. I have heard him talk about that before. BTW, what if a poll question were asked would you support a surge in order to start drawing down troops?

    Bill o'reilly analyzed by a body language expert!

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

    Did she analyze him in the shower with his phone, a faloofa, and his phalic instrument for anal probing ?

    That analysis might be interesting.

    "Aragorn"??? Somebody likes kiddy movies.

    No, I am not Cuban. What does that have to do with anything, anyways?

    there "is" supposedly a large group ...

    would you support a surge in order to start drawing down troops?

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


    Yes I would, with one BIG caveat.

    That it were for the EXPLICIT purpose of, and NECESSARY for the purpose, of withdrawing the troops.

    If on the other hand, if that was the way the need for a SURGE were posed by Bush, and if it turned out, much like the war, and everything else Bush has done, if it turned out to be a lie in order to just deploy more troops, Would YOU support impeaching Bush?

    "Aragorn"??? Somebody likes kiddy movies.

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

    I dont know what you are refering to, but I do enjoy the works of JRR Tolkien.

    Why, you have a problem with that ?

    BTW, I still think you are a cuban illegal alien, How is LUCY doing?

    Are is that Rico Suave?

    Do you think you are really cool RICO ? Do you think you are really hot RICO ?

    I wonder if anyone else agrees ?

    Probably just you, and maybe your momma.

    I don't know what his plans behind the surge are but hopefully will learn tomorrow. As much as I disagreed with the Clinton administration and as despicable as his actions were (side note- at the time I was a state employee and 3 people were fired during that time frame for a "love triangle" on the job), it would not have been good for the country. Impeachment and conviction to me, require serious consideration.

    I guess Aragorn died.

    I'm watching Scarborough right now. Has he turned the corner or something? He totally slammed Pat Buchanan.

    There might be hope for the boy yet.

    BTW... what's up with all the Progressives here tonight?

    Welcome friends.

    (get with it, Sharon) it would not have been good for the country to throw him out of office is what I forgot to say.

    hey sharon, did you answer the question, do you support a congressional investigation into why Raytheon has been able to keep our troops from recieving the equipment that could save their lives.?

    Sharon you RE: 'd with

    "I don't know what his plans behind the surge are "

    but you did say very specifically in your question to me

    "would you support a surge in order to start drawing down troops?"

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

    Why would you pose a question with such a caveat builtin, just to say that you dont have any idea what his plans are ?

    I would support a SURGE, only if it were neccesary to start bringing home troops.

    Do you agree with that ?

    "A prime opportunity for the latest chapter in Olbermann's Left-Wing Criminal Rehabilitation Program, featuring felon John Dean."

    Well, Fielding was Deputy White House Counsel under Dean. Who's a better expert on how someone works than his former boss?

    I don't know the background of that. (this is about my only free time of the day) I am for the troops and their safety. I am too old to serve (42) and my children are too young to enlist (7,6, and 2). But I do have friends and know others with loved ones serving. I live in a military town.

    it would not have been good for the country to throw him out of office is what I forgot to say

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


    BTW, Impeach has several meanings.

    Now republicans like to say impeach as in a govermental process by which a president is removed from office.

    but impeach also means to impune someone integrity or to accuse someone of something.

    the later is done by gossipy ol bitties at church on sunday mornings.

    the definition that is most correct is the accusation of wrong doing. See like this, I impeach the president George W Bush of being a lying piece of crap, and all of his little cronies of the same,

    See that is the actual meaning of impeachment that the republicans mean, even though they imply the other.

    the impeachment that they imply, is the act of congress, to REMOVE from office.

    Oh, and let us not forget, that the trial held to determine guilt of the ACCUSATION, found Bill Clinton NOT GUILTY

    I didn't intend to pose a question with a caveat. It is my assumption that Pres. Bush wants to take measures to bring them home. I was alluding to the fact that poll questions are sometimes deceiving. If people voted against the surge, was it because they felt it was to prolong the war indefinitely?

    Yes, I am aware that he was found not guilty. If he would have been found guilty, I don't think it would have done the country much good. (I meant impeach as a governmental process.)

    featuring felon John Dean

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


    Let us make sure the record is clear,

    featuring felon John Dean, who was a REPUBLICAN, working in a Republican White House as a REPUBLICAN lawyer for a REPUBLICAN President that was covering up felonies for REPUBLICAN operatives, that had committed felonies for the REPUBLICANS.

    yep, that clears it up

    Oh, and let us not forget, that the trial held to determine guilt of the ACCUSATION, found Bill Clinton NOT GUILTY

    But a federal court found him guilty of obstuction of justice (specifically intentionally interfering w/ a defendant's pursuit of a civil rights claim against him). The court disbarred Mr. Clinton for this transgression. The Senate did not impeach him because it has a bunch of gutless wonders among its Republican number. (Graham, Lott, McCain, Hagel, etc.)

    Thanks for the history lesson. But he's still a felon.

    "The Senate did not impeach him"

    I should have said, "The Senate did not convict him. . ." in my post above .

    Hey Johhny, you probably already know this but I think Andrea Mitchell is on Hardball tomorrow. Scarboro has really pumped up her appearance on O'Reilly in his newest surge of his own.

    Simple question needing a straight answer.

    How many times has Dobberman done a story on exploited children/missing children/ illegal aliens committing crimes and other REAL issues facing America?

    Answer =

    Yes thats right, never, yet he has all the time and energy to air the same anti-Bush stories over and over again.

    But a federal court found him guilty of obstuction of justice (specifically intentionally interfering w/ a defendant's pursuit of a civil rights claim against him). The court disbarred Mr. Clinton for this transgression. The Senate did not impeach him because it has a bunch of gutless wonders among its Republican number. (Graham, Lott, McCain, Hagel, etc.)

    Posted by: hank at January 9, 2007 10:04 PM
    -----------------------------------------------------------

    some of you make it up as you go along.

    He plead guilty to providing false or misleading statement.

    The court did not suspend his license to practice law, it was the Arkansas Bar that suspended his license for 2 years. And all of that was prearranged.


    And I say that the Senate, did not convict, because the evidence did not support removing Clinton from office.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------
    Thanks for the history lesson. But he's still a felon.


    No he isnt, it wasnt even felonies that he plead to, it was misdomeanors.

    But if you want to talk about CONVICTIONS,

    Bush and Cheney have 4 convictions.

    The first time in AMERICAN HISTORY that someone with a criminal conviction was elected to the office.

    One more note, it wasnt widely adverstised, but when Bush visisted Canada a few years ago, there was a big long process, because Canada will NOT ADMIT a convicted drunk driver. Waivers had to be signed, and George was not allowed to drive while in Canada.

    Wow. I haven't seen this much anger in a while. Can't we all just get along?

    If people voted against the surge, was it because they felt it was to prolong the war indefinitely?

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


    that is the question isnt it.

    > it wasnt even felonies that he plead to, it was misdomeanors.

    I'm not sure what a "misdomeanor" is, but Dean pled guilty to conspiracy to obstruct justice and spent time in federal prison. That happens to be a felony. He is a felon, and lost his law license as a result.

    Please don't make up stuff when it's so much easier to rely on facts.

    "How many times has Dobberman done a story on exploited children/missing children/ illegal aliens committing crimes and other REAL issues facing America?"

    I think Bill O'Reilly, Nancy Grace and Glenn Beck have pretty much cornered the market on that segment of the news.

    (P.S. - Did BillO have an explosion over the fact that most of the statements in the Jessica "Jessica's Law" Lunsford murder case got tossed?)

    And since when is sending soldiers into harm's way NOT a REAL issue?

    If I want true crime stories, I'll turn on Court TV.

    Didn't Obama admit to illegal drug use in his book? Should he be barred from pursuing the presidency (if the drug use is true)? I guess he could still tour Canada since I don't think he was convicted. ALthough he wouldn't get my vote, I am not against his running because of a past mistake.

    Can't we all just get along?

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

    that seems to be all we hear from the republicans today, or they whine and cry about how they arent being treated fairly.

    when we see a vote held open for over 3 hours, or threats about jobs for family members, or middle of the night, last mintute, behind closed doors changing the language of bills AFTER they have been voted on in conference committees, or ......


    you get the point.

    NOW the republicans cry, why cant we all just get along.

    Screw the republicans

    Macjoubert:

    Wow, if I read posts on this site long enough, I guess I'll see anything. You think those kind of stories are the 'real' isues facing America? I don't know what to say about that!

    I kind of disgree. I think a controversial war and a power grabbing president who is not listening to the American People kind of dwarfs those other things you mentioned.

    However, there's always Nancy Grace!

    Ensign,

    One of the most tragic stories for our military this past summer was that of Privates Menchaca and Tucker. (You should know what I am referring to). That BARELY made any mention on Olbermann, except for the false suggestion that they were killed in retaliation for alleged actions of members of the 82 Airborne.

    some of you make it up as you go along.

    He plead guilty to providing false or misleading statement.

    "The court did not suspend his license to practice law, it was the Arkansas Bar that suspended his license for 2 years. And all of that was prearranged."

    Good lord. OK, Mr. Concrete Thinker. Clinton was found guility of making a false or misleading statement WHICH RESULTED IN OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE BY INTENTIONALLY INTERFERING WITH A DEFENDANT'S PURSUIT OF A CIVIL RIGHTS CLAIM AGAINST HIM.

    And the Arkansas Bar disbarred him AS A RESULT OF THE CONVICTION BY THE FEDERAL COURT.


    "And I say that the Senate, did not convict, because the evidence did not support removing Clinton from office."

    And I say you are a Clnton stooge who is in complete denial.


    There is nothing wrong with covering a few stories outside of Iraq. Jessica's Law has made an impact statewide. It is representative of the terrible plight of children and past injustices for lenient sentences. It is newsworthy.

    Rico, you weren't dreaming, the Buckeyes went down harder than Bush's approval rating. Click on my name and order yourself some Gator gear- it would help improve the appearance of a wingnut like yourself. LOL!

    CHOMP! CHOMP!

    IT'S GREAT . . . TO BE . . . A FLORIDA GATOR!

    "That BARELY made any mention on Olbermann, except for the false suggestion that they were killed in retaliation for alleged actions of members of the 82 Airborne."

    Stop telling tales, sharon. Here are some facts:

    FACT - Keith covered this EXTENSIVELY on the June 20th, 2006 edition of Countdown - he devoted as much time to it as Bill O'Reilly did on the same day.

    FACT - it was not "alleged actions by the 82nd Airborne" that was speculated, but rather the terrorism expert Keith had on that night discussed whether this was a "retaliation" for the U.S. taking out Abu Musab al-Zarqawi less than 2 weeks earlier.

    FACT - Even Johnny Dollar's writeup of that day doesn't support your position, and I would think that HE (of all people) would have said something had what you said been accurate.

    Here is an EXAMPLE of right winged propaganda.

    this is the section of posts above, watch how Johnny Dollar spins it, and takes part of it, to meet his own needs, watch the deception.


    This is an exact copy of the post above

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


    Oh, and let us not forget, that the trial held to determine guilt of the ACCUSATION, found Bill Clinton NOT GUILTY

    But a federal court found him guilty of obstuction of justice (specifically intentionally interfering w/ a defendant's pursuit of a civil rights claim against him). The court disbarred Mr. Clinton for this transgression. The Senate did not impeach him because it has a bunch of gutless wonders among its Republican number. (Graham, Lott, McCain, Hagel, etc.)

    Posted by: hank at January 9, 2007 10:04 PM

    Thanks for the history lesson. But he's still a felon.

    Posted by: johnny dollar at January 9, 2007 10:04 PM

    ___________________________________________

    hank was responding to my earlier post about Bill Clinton, and the way that republicans try to spin it to mean a lot more than it does.

    Notice Johnnys "Thanks for the history lesson. But he's still a felon."

    Then Johnny takes my statement and uses it COMPLETELY out of context.


    He quotes ME, then inserts his new spin.
    #########################################

    > it wasnt even felonies that he plead to, it was misdomeanors.


    I'm not sure what a "misdomeanor" is, but Dean pled guilty to conspiracy

    ######################################3


    I wasnt even talking about Dean at the time, and ealier when Johnny Dollar inserted his 2 cents, we were talking about Clinton, and the quote of mine Johnny Dollar quoted was specific to Clinton.

    Talk about making ip up as you go along,

    And to you Johnny Dollar, you said "Please don't make up stuff when it's so much easier to rely on facts."

    You are damned right, the facts are you just got busted trying to spin what I said.

    Looks like you are using Cloberts latest new word, "FACTINESS" = facts that you present, that you can not prove, but that I cant disprove.

    But I guess I just did huh ?

    And Hanks said:

    And I say you are a Clnton stooge who is in complete denial.

    ---------------------------------------------------
    A "Factiness" award to you hank,

    when the truth and facts get in the way of your BS, just toss out some inane insult,

    Dont worry about the truth or the facts

    Aragorn,

    It seems to me that the President wants to take some action to quell the violence and stablize Baghdad so that the Iraqis can take over ASAP. You don't believe that objective is attainable. From what I read from the boots on the ground, it is attainable. I know not all of them believe that but it appears, to me, that many of them do. That is the basis of my opinion.

    quick question.

    was anyone else floored when they heard Ethiopia had moved in to help Somolia? I mean, Ethiopia of all places. Not to be sterotypical, but i had no idea Ethiopia was any where near capable of anything like that. Has Ethiopia gotten that much better, or is Somalia just that insanely poor and chaotic.

    It was Strider who was talking about John Dean, and giving us a history lesson. Then I replied to HIM, thanks for the history lesson but he's still a felon.

    Then you replied to ME, as I was talking about John Dean, claiming that "he" was only convicted of "misdomeanors". That of course is incorrect, John Dean is a convicted felon.

    Now if you couldn't figure out I was talking to Strider (he's the one who gave a history lesson), and that I was talking about felon Dean, don't blame me.

    > I wasnt even talking about Dean at the time.

    THen why did you drag my statement into it? I WAS talking about Dean. If you weren't, then quit quoting me while pretending I'm talking to you. I have little desire to do that any more than necessary, so you can include me out.

    Another quick question.

    Apparently Bush wants Iraqis to have control of all provinces by November. Obviously Anbar would be last. Is the plan then to just sort of to build iraq up from the outside in. I mean as they had over provinces, start moving those divisions further in, with eventually having almost all of the forces in anbar alone. Is that the idea?

    Ensign,

    None of the news carried that story very well. If you did actual research on that topic (the JAwa Report was where I first heard the story), you would know that an initial communication about the abduction from the terrorist group (posted on terrorist website) made no mention of that incident with the 82 Airborne. It was after the paper (I think Times) noted the connection that the rape/murder and the capture of the soldiers (both dealt with 82 Airborne) that the claim was made by the terrorist group. Even the Times (I think it was that paper- I can go back and make sure) admitted that. I was so affected by this story that I was appalled at the lack of information and the misinformation. (not just Olbermann). I don't believe Olbermann wanted to talk about it because at that time, he was angry about the alleged torture of Gitmo prisoners. If people knew the details of what happened to the two privates, it would have take some fire out of his arguments.

    Whenever myself or my fellow Marines see Keith Olbermann we laugh and flip him the bird. We hate him and his one-sided bullshit.

    It seems to me that the President wants to take some action to quell the violence and stablize Baghdad so that the Iraqis can take over ASAP.
    --------------------------------------------

    Do you still believe that lying SOB.? I dont, nor does an overwhelming number of americans. Most americans know Bush to be a liar, and a man that has NO Morals, well he does have situational morals, and deals more in fanatasy than reality. The evidence supports that view.

    The only people that still believe him are the coolade drinkers, and they would beleive anything Bush says. They already have.


    --------------------------------------
    From what I read from the boots on the ground, it is attainable. I know not all of them believe that but it appears, to me, that many of them do. That is the basis of my opinion.
    ----------------------------------

    and from what I am told by several of the "boots on the ground", it wouldnt matter how many more troops we sent, we will not end a 1300 year old religious war with american intervention. Now some people may want to keep troops there, and will use ANY excuse, and try to paint any rosey picture, but we have already seen how the rosey scenarios go......

    So do I trust Bush, or his pundits, about what is best for the troops, or this country?

    HELL NO

    Ensign,

    We are talking about two different points (obviously).

    If Hillary or Obama came out tomorrow and said victory in Iraq IS obtainable, all you filthy cowardly surrender-monkeys would jump on the band wagon. Let's face it, you cowardly liberals are spineless shit-bags.

    Have you ever noticed that all governments suck? Dictators wield too much power. Democracies move too slow. Theocracies discriminate. Capitalism exploits. Facism really exploits. Socialism makes things worse. And anarchism is 10x worse than all of them.

    its true what they say. Life sucks and then you die.


    maybe i should buy that sealand.

    Whenever myself or my fellow Marines see Keith Olbermann we laugh and flip him the bird. We hate him and his one-sided bullshit.

    Posted by: LanceCorporal Wm Meyers
    ------------------------------------

    You may be a marine, and then you could be some pimple faced, pampered, priviledged and NEVER GONNA SEE ACTION in the uniform of any military branch.

    But I wil say this, I am from a military family.

    Born in a military hospital, raised on military bases all around the world. enlisted 7 days after my 17th BDay, and right now have 7 members of my family serving.

    So I am not overly impressed by someone claiming to be in the service.


    But I will Pose one question to you LanceCorporal Wm Meyers,


    would you agree that ANYONE that supports this war, should go down and enlist to fight in this war,

    I would like to know your opinion, because I KNOW how people really serving feel about this question.

    looking forward to your response

    Anonymous 11:06,

    Of course I don't know what every service member is thinking and neither do you. What I do hear (and I don't have the statistics) is that people are re-enlisting. I do think it is taking a terrible toll on them to serve so many tours. I respect whatever those who serve say. If servicemen and women are supportive of their mission (I mean mentally), it must be extremely difficult for them to hear how what they have done means nothing and that their comrades have died in vain.

    Roger Ebert

    You're so Gung HO, why dont you enlist and go to Iraq,

    LanceCorporal Wm Meyers,

    If you are legit, please enlighten us some more. Get your buddies to, also. This is the first time that someone who claims to be currently serving has posted when I have been here (which raises suspicion in my mind).

    But I wil say this, I am from a military family.

    Born in a military hospital, raised on military bases all around the world. enlisted 7 days after my 17th BDay, and right now have 7 members of my family serving.

    So I am not overly impressed by someone claiming to be in the service

    Yeah well, I served as a marine in the UNSC and single-handedly stopped an alien race known as the covenant from conquering earth.


    Can we all please stop with this one-uping the others military background?

    a. i dont believe any of you.
    b. i really dont care. As though only people in the military opinions matter.

    hey sharon

    earlier you said you were 42, they just raised the age, I think to 40, isnt that conveniet, when they raise the limit from 40 to 45 will you go then,

    Or maybe the age is already at 42, I will check and if that is the case, will YOU go.

    hey sharon

    earlier you said you were 42, they just raised the age, I think to 40, isnt that conveniet, when they raise the limit from 40 to 45 will you go then,

    Or maybe the age is already at 42, I will check and if that is the case, will YOU go.


    It takes a big man to challange a 42 year old women to go to war............Stephen Colbert? Is that you? Only you have the balls to do something like that.

    b. i really dont care.
    -------------------------

    that is apparent.

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

    As though only people in the military opinions matter.
    -------------------------------------


    No, but it matters a whole lot more than a cowardly supporter of this war, and president, that WONT serve.

    Those are the WORST sort of TRAITOR and COWARD

    And if you resemble my remark, TOUGH

    My age is out of my control (wish it weren't so). I wouldn't go with a 2 year old at home. Women who have children are free to make their own choices about serving but I guess you can call me old fashioned; I want to raise them. My husband is 45. If the limit is upped and he chose to serve, I would support him. If the age limit were dropped to age 7,, I would have a little problem with that.


    It takes a big man to challange a 42 year old women to go to war

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


    I already served

    I dont believe in this war, never did

    And I know why people like you dont want women, and homosexuals in the military,

    Cause they are showing people like you up

    Women and homosexuals are more manly, better americans, and just better people than you.

    "women...are more manly."


    nice.

    Krazy Keith must be at his best
    When felons appear as his guest
    "Law expert" John Dean
    Disbarred and unclean
    Olby's fool that sane folks detest

    I already served


    i served in the revolutionary war....for the British.

    This IS fun.

    Anonymous (11:28),

    I take your word that you served. How did your fellow servicemen feel about women and homosexuals serving? I don't think women should serve in active combat. I agree with the don't ask' don't tell policy regarding homosexuals. It seems to strike a deal between those who don't want homosexuals to serve and those who do. I haven't served so I don't know how having openly gay members serve in the military would affect its efficacy. That is what matters.

    "Ensign,

    We are talking about two different points (obviously)."

    Yeah, I think we are...

    Quick clarification about something that was discussed several days ago regarding the President's "signing statement" on the U.S. Mail. I just talked to my Dad (who has worked for the United States Postal Service for the last 22 years). He told me that the ink was barely dry on the signing statement when the USPS's legal counsel sent an internal memo around saying that this would NOT CHANGE the policies or procedures of how the Post Office or the Postal Inspectors would handle the mail. The ONLY agency that can authorize the opening of U.S. Mail (other than the legal recipient) is the Postal Inspectors - that has not changed one iota.

    Therefore, because I am an honest person, I hereby extend an apology to Grammie (in particular because we've been going round and round on this) and anyone else I may have gone hammer and tongs with. I was right in some respects (the Post Office's autonomy from the Executive), but wrong in others (the mail is still as safe and secure as it ever has been).

    >Yeah well, I served as a marine in the UNSC and single-handedly stopped an alien race known as the covenant from conquering earth.


    That is one of the few times i have ever laughed out loud while reading at this board.

    Conservative Joe Scarborough : "Tommorrow Karl Rove ( & George Bush) in the speech to the nation will try to frame their points to paint the Democrats right into a corner !"

    Sharon, I was in the hospital all of April and May and most of June this year. I found out about Al Zaquari [sic] getting his just reward two weeks after it happened. That snapped me out of my malaise and I started following events again.

    What is the story you were talking about two soldiers and the 82nd airborne. I don't have a clue and don't know when it happened.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    I don't respond to posts signed 'annon'. I've said my piece, and for what it's worth i've been deployed twice to afghanistan. So blow me.

    Ensign,

    I respect what you posted to Grammie about the mail. You could have kept that information to yourself and no one would have been the wiser.

    About the two privates, I could post for a very long time about that. One of the things that really bothered me the most is that after watching both videos released, it is clear that the mutilations were done after they died, likely of injuries. The families will never know that. (The bodies were burned so a medical examiner would never be able to determine the exact cause of death). The burning was shown on the second video released. The only way you could know that they were already dead was to analyze the videos. Those who captured the bodies of the privates didn't do it because of Zarqawi's death. The only difference would have been that Zarqawi would have taken part in the matter. Anyways, Olbermann was on the roll about torture and I couldn't stand listening to it at that time.

    "women...are more manly."


    Than the real he-man macho type republicans

    They TALK real big, like Bush.

    But to say that the women are more manly than some of these republicans, cause they are not real men, they are "GIRLY MEN"

    Aragorn,
    "Rico, are you a cuban"
    What do you care? Are some racist NY Northeast/California Leftists that views us Hispanics as your little serfs?
    Are you Muslim?

    so Sharon,


    your short answer, without all of the reasons or excuses is, you support this war, just as long as someone else fights it.

    BTW, there are PLENTY of women serving that have kids at home, there was a 63 year old woman called up just a few months ago, and there are still homosexual all over the service.

    As a matter of fact, recruiters have quit ASKING at all about sexual preferences.

    But you dont mind sending those people do you

    Thanks Sharon. Thats all I need to know. What a horror for them and their families.

    And thanks for pointing out EE's post to me. I missed it.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    I would define big-talk as running on anti-war, anti-patriot act, and anti-wire tap stances, all the while knowing full well you aren't going to touch those programs.

    Grammie,

    An Iraqi girl was raped and killed (as well as members of her family) last summer. It came out after the two privates (from the 82 Airborne) were found mutilated that the suspects in the rape killing were from the 82 Airborne. I really shouldn't say for sure that it was the Times but a newspaper noted that the suspects and the two captured soldiers were from the 82 Airborne and "wondered" about a possible connection. Suddenly, the terrorist group (can't remember name but Zarqawi's group) posted on the web that the soldiers were killed in retaliation for the murders. Everyone ran with the story. The Jawa Report should have it in its archives (if it maintains history from last summer. The Jawa Report is a cool site.

    BTW since you have mentioned stem cell research in the past, I could send you an interesting article about what has happened in the Ukraine.

    Sorry to go on again Grammie. It takes awhile for the comments to show up.

    LanceCorporal Wm Meyers:

    I noticed that you didnt answer the question

    You did not answer, because people really in the service are sick and tired of all of you people that dont mind sending them to war, but wont enlist and fight yourself,

    If you really were in the marines, you would understand that. and you wouldnt be afraid to say it,

    I say you are lying about even being in the marines,

    I say you are a lying SOB just like your fearless leader,

    What a coward, and even worse , trying to pass yourself off as a marine, what a punk

    I would define big-talk as running on anti-war, anti-patriot act, and anti-wire tap stances, all the while knowing full well you aren't going to touch those programs.

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


    Show all of us what a real american you are, defend her ?

    People like you talk about defending america, protecting her, just as long as it is someone else doing it.

    AGAIN, there are homosexuals, women, and elderly people proving themselves to be better americans than the likes of you

    Anonymous (12:00)

    What is your problem? I had 2 of my kids before this war! I said I would support my husband. I can't help it if we are too old to serve and our kids are too young! How is that an excuse! I said a number of times that I respect the opinions of the men and women serving and because from various accounts (even those against the war) morale is high, I continue to support them in their mission.

    EE, the last post I made left it at we'll just have to agree to disagree.

    It wasn't a total waste, though. I learned a lot about signing statements, B Nussbaum's memoramdum to President Clinton asserting the constitutionality of signing statements and a lot about President Clinton's strong and unprecedented use of executive orders.

    If I ever find out what prompted the Nussbaum memo, I'll let you know.

    Thanks,

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Red Wolf said

    "What do you care? Are some racist NY Northeast/California Leftists that views us Hispanics as your little serfs?
    Are you Muslim?
    ----------------------------------------------

    Am from Texas, not a racist, just cant stand all of the cubans that have come to this country and get citizenship irregardless of anything else,


    It is amazing that you right winged a--holes always bitch and belly-ache about all of the immigrants coming here, but let a wet -back cuban show up, and your kind will give them everything.

    So do I hate cubans, you bet, because they get preferencial treatment when it comes to immigrating.

    Like all of you right wingers say, let em get to the back of the line

    Would-be toughguys posting here named 'annonymous'? HAR! HAR! HAR! HA!

    Sharon, ignore the big brave patriot. An act of congress could not chage him to an officer and a gentleman.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    sharon, so your short answer is, you support the war, and support the troops ( right ) as long as you and yours dont have to go,

    that is real simple, why are you afraid to admit it.

    My problem is that there are WAY TOO MANY of YOU,

    If your child, or husband were there, or about to be sent there, I KNOW that your attitude would have been and would be very different.

    Just admit it

    Proud to be a kool-aid-drinker. Fox News is number 8 in all cable news rankings for 2006. MSLSD? I think they came in #63? Would that put them behind Home Shopping Network?

    It seems you're new found buddy Scarborough has this body language guy on. If we ask Joe about dead bodies turning up in his office will Joe's body language change?

    I don't watch Scarborough, and a glance at his ratings, nobody else does either!

    Wow anon a fallofa. Thats soooo three years ago. But why should we expect wing-nut-sheep to be in the real time. want to bring up stuff when O'Reilly was at WNEP 30 years ago too?

    Oh for the other wing-nut, O'Reilly is a Traditionalist, registered independent. Could you please get your kook fringe friends at Daily Kos to make that correction? I won't hold my breath.

    "Would you support a surge to draw down troops".

    How much crack do I have to smoke before that makes sense? Sharon! Jim Jones is on the Phone.

    Aragon? What is the impeachment charge you are going to bring forth? What you came up with will spend about two seconds in court. But you might be brought up on charges of doing a bad Jackie Mason imatation.

    "Well your honor George Bush did this but he lied about that but he did this and lied about that. The war was a total failure, okay we won in Afghanistan. but we think he should be impeached."

    Next time you have to go to court for a traffic ticket tell me, I could use a night of Comedy.

    Bubba.....progressives? Comon' you have all you're friends here. You can call each other by you're real names? I like that progressive. More like regressive.

    Sharon I don't have a clue what you said at 9:42 Troop surge, love triangle? Well you did say you were a state employee so that explains everything or a lot.

    Sharon I'll explain this. The President is going to come on Wed. night and make his speech. What he says doesn't matter because the wing-nuts on the left and the wing-nuts on the right are going to see what they want to see. What you should do is go to nypost.com click on news then columnist then Steve Dunleavy and read "Bravest Advice". Read about Danny Swift who was there, got blown up, saw his buddies die, saved other people in his group.

    After you read this then ask you're self. Why you won't see Danny Swift on Olby, Hannity, Scarborough,Anderson Cooper, O'Reilly. Even Savage glossed over it. A one minute mention only. If what Danny Swift is saying is true and there is no change. I'm done bring em' home. That said many troops I talk to want to go back.

    If I hear any of the above have Danny Swift on I'll take there name down.

    Whatever moron was saying something about Republicans making a profit off this war. John Kerry owned Halibertin stock, and don't try to give me crap it was in his wife's name. He's married to her. They just dumped it for a while when he was running in 04'. Both sides are grabbing some change off of this along with a boatload of stock holders. Republicans and Dems.

    As much as you wing-nuts would like to see Pres.Bush get impeached right now you don't have a charge. Go back to saying he blew up the towers.

    But of course I would like the impeachment because that would mean a massive selling off Haliburtin and raycroft, and whatever stock by the Dems that I'll suck up. So it will never happen. Dems love Greed too.

    It would be better for you......progressives? LOL! To just keep doing what your doing. The Republican Party will sink themselves. (Jerry Doyle had a great line on that.) You see you can't show you for what you really are. So keep using dopey words like progressives.

    Remember what happen to your buddy Clinton. And if this war turns around and your side is pushing impeachment. You're done!

    Sirius just gave Howard Stern a 83 million Dollar bonus, how come you......progessives...aren't all up in arms about that?

    It's like the c**t that came on here and said Republicans are pussys for not going to Iraq. From behind his key board.

    Was his name Anonymous too?

    Like the other Anonymous that says he's from a Military Family. Then signs Anonymous. So is he from The France Military Family? Oh and you say you know? I get all kinds of talk back on the war from soldiers. But yeah jarhead, tell me why do people enlist. And re-enlist? In this voluteer army? By the way in case you asked. Dad was in the Navy, Grandpa was in the Army. They both made sure I went to college, but after I got a job in Area 51. I can't tell you about that I would have to expose you to the death ray I built.

    Now drop and give me twenty Jackass!!!! And stop picking on Sharon. What a real man. Says he's from the Military, signs his name Anon, Gives a verbal beatdown to a woman. What do you do for an encore, kick you're dog?

    That's okay I'll go talk to Danny Swift.

    Hey Bob! Sure did like Corzine's speech today. "You'll get a property tax cut just as soon as we find a way to pay for it."

    Guess you just got sucked in by another Dem.

    New Jersey, highest taxed state, Highest car insurance rates. But hey! you don't have to pump you're own gas!

    Oh and Bob. We're not from New Jersey. We know Scarborough is a conservative. But some earlier posts had your.....progressive(lol) buddies saying he was coming around to you're side.

    Like I said before I don't watch him and a look at his ratings nobody else does either.

    Punk, Coward, Like I said moron how come people keep enlisting and re-enlisting if as you say if they are all tired and fed up.

    Are you really a hippie student from Columbia University. Are you going to start screaming baby killers next? Because I've never met a Marine that talked like you. I think you should be glad nobody shot your ass up out in the field. And going after another serviceman like that? I've never seen that before. I think your problem is personal.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie,


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


    Your story about being in the hospital was touching. Why arent you in the military,

    Like I said, we just had a 63 year old grandmother called up in the national guard a couple of months ago.

    Oh, but that is right, you are sickly.

    Got kids ? Grand kids ?

    send them

    Posted by: puck
    -------------------

    that should read
    Posted by: punk

    Anonymous /Aragorn

    Wetback Cubans? Well at least they come here clean unlike your ancestors that came in cramped ships full of lice and disease. Hey I know Cubans that're whiter than you. Your just a typical Liberal Racist. Yet In a sick way I respect you.
    At least your honest about your anti-Hispanic attitude. Hey how do you feel about Muslims?
    Last I recall it was 19 Muslims that ram planes in our buildings. I didn't see anything on Cubans or Mexicans.
    How come Muslims don't bother you? Hmmm?

    Would-be toughguys posting here named 'annonymous'? HAR! HAR! HAR! HA!

    Posted by: DavidBrock

    -----------------------------------------------
    and unless your REAL NAME is david brock,

    then you are a lying POS, just like your president

    Whats the difference between anonymous and using a bogus name, ones is a LIAR, the other is not

    Listen Anonymous,

    If I had strong evidence that those who are serving are completely against this war, I would say stop it now. Give up. They don;t seem to be saying that.

    If I had a husband or child there, I would ask them what they feel based upon their experience.

    I was actually kind of surprised when our country did go to war. It was surreal watching events unfold. Once the war began, I wanted to see the U.S. succeed.

    Ya know this Anon creep has to be some hippie from Columbia.

    Any fool knows if you enlist, chances are pretty good you'll go to Iraq. But, people keep enlisting.

    Yes Sharon if you're husband or you're children enlist, I think they are smart enough to know where they will go.

    This phony is just getting his jollys giving a verbal beatdown to a woman. Who's the real punk here? If he is for real his C.O. hated him so much he probibly gave him the sh**iest job on the base. Like cleaning the s**thouse.

    Yet In a sick way I respect you.
    At least your honest about your anti-Hispanic attitude. Hey how do you feel about Muslims?

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

    I am not anti-hispanic, I am not ant-cuban

    I am however anti-priveledged class, whether it is cubans or anyone else that gets to skirt the laws

    I also hate most baseball players, and their fans, because they dont have to face the consequences of their actions

    I also HATE all of the people that support this war, and this president, but WONT SERVE

    because they dont have to face the consequences either

    and worst, are those that are that way, but will not admit it, like yourself,

    but then again, I understand why you wont admit it,

    Puck, if he ever served I bet the guys in his unit were knocking each other out of the way to take his back.

    On second thought, maybe not. He is probably a fawning pussy cat face to face with real men.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Hey when Anon gets up tomorrow he's going to blow off class at Columbia and go protest against the war and hope he bags some hippie chick.

    damn, it's fun to play with 'annonymous' and make that kid squeal like the cowardly piglett he/she/it is HAR!HAR!HAR!HAR!HAR!HAR!HAR!HAR!

    This guy is starting to make some of our regular self proclaimed heros and whiners seem almost lame.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    what a bunch of typical republicans we have here, all of you support this war.

    Dont tell me you support the troops, cause you dont give a shit.

    you know what, you all remind me of Osama Bin Laden in one way.

    he sent others, to do what he would not do.

    a bunch of cowards, and family members of cowards,

    David Brock do you mean Anon was from that movie Deliverance?

    Well at least he knows how to play the banjo.

    Anonymous,
    Your a typical Racist Democrat. you're also a Al-Qaeda\Hizballah\Iran supporter!

    puck,

    If Afghanistan went oh so well, explain this please...

    http://www.boston.com/news/world/asia/articles/2007/01/08/commanders_seek_more_forces_in_afghanistan/

    "Taliban forces, shattered and ejected from Afghanistan by the US military five years ago, are poised for a major offensive against US troops and undermanned NATO forces. This has prompted US commanders here to issue an urgent appeal for a new US Marine Corps battalion to reinforce the American positions...

    President Bush is expected to announce this week the dispatch of thousands of additional troops to Iraq as a stopgap measure. Such an order, Pentagon officials say, would strain the Army and Marine Corps as they man both wars.

    A US Army battalion fighting in a critical area of eastern Afghanistan is due to be withdrawn within weeks to deploy to Iraq...

    Despite the presence of about 30,000 NATO troops -- roughly 10 percent short of what its member nations had pledged to provide -- Taliban attacks on US, allied, and Afghan forces more than tripled in the past year, from 1,632 in 2005 to 5,388 in 2006, US officials say.

    Suicide bomb attacks increased from 18 in 2005 to 116 in 2006. Direct-fire attacks also more than tripled, from three per day in 2005 to more than 10 per day in 2006.

    With NATO unable or unwilling to stem the rising violence, the Taliban are pressing their advantage."

    Wrong oh! sport oh! I've been regestered independent since 92'.

    We support the troops

    You and your kind use the troops!!!!!!!!

    Puck quoted:

    "you'll get a property tax cut just as soon as we find a way to pay for it"

    What a novel concept....actually PAYING for a tax cut!

    Puck,

    I know I worked for the state at one time and that makes me an idiot, but the point of the question I posed awhile ago (not very artfully phrased) was that poll questions can be misleading. On Scarboro, he discussed the polling question "Do you support the surge" to which 12% responded yes. My point (not artfully made) was that if peolpe understood the surge to be temporary and for the purpose of stabilization in order to bring the troops home, the responses may have been more positive. (Someobody previously commented about watching Scarboro and would have known about the poll discussion). Maybe the results would have been the same. My point about the love triangle at work was that the average state worker gets fired for misconduct.

    This guy is starting to make some of our regular self proclaimed heros and whiners seem almost lame.

    Janet Hawkins
    -----------------------------------------------------------

    several of you have tried to lay the liberal tag on me, but I am a real republican.

    A real republican in the sense that I dont think that we should be medling in other countries crap, unless we really have to,

    I also believe in smaller government, But when I say "smaller" I mean the government staying the hell out of my business.

    What you current day republicans mean is a smaller number of people, telling us exactly how to live our lives.

    I will say this though

    After I saw all of YOU republicans head us off into a war, based on lies, and an unwillingness to even discuss what should be done and what evidence there was to support the war,.


    All of you cowardly, Right Wing idiots are not real republicans, you are more like nazis or communist.

    And I will never again vote for a republican, you people have made a dirty word out of republican

    Anon, you seem a tad upset. I hope it wasn't something we said.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Grammie,
    ------------------------


    Not upset, I know it must seem that way, since I am nailing all of you right winged idiots for the liars that you are,

    And like I said, you are JUST LIKE OSAMA BIN LADEN

    You and your ilk sent troops to fight a war you would not, you wont even send your kids,


    and if that is not the case, then Why is the military being stretched so thin, Why are my family members doing 3rd, 4th, and on 3even his 5th tour,

    and BTW, some one earlier pointed out that people are re-enlisting. Yeah, because they are loyal, and with a sense of loyalty and honor, they will not leave their friends and brothers-in-arms to fend for themselves.

    but that also does not explain why the "involuntary retention" part of the patriot act has been used more than 50 thousand times in the last 2 years.

    so quit acting as though you care about the troops, cause people like you dont give a shit,


    you are just like OSAMA BIN LADEN

    "And I will never again vote for a republican, you people have made a dirty word out of republican


    Posted by: Anonymous at January 10, 2007 12:46 AM"

    And don't forget giving people who are Christ-like a bad name also. These pin heads who come here to huddle with their own kind (racist fake Christian who hate democracy)always try to play either the patriotism thing or the christian thing as a crutch to lean on as they spew pro death and destruction foreign policy to quell their panic of being attacked by brown people.


    Will,
    that was John Corzine the governor, not me.

    He said the same thing almost last year. Yep he was going to raise taxes to give the people the property tax cut. And then didn't do it. I didn't understand it. Thats why I moved out of that state.

    Will,
    every election in Jersey Dems say they are going to give a property tax cut, they get voted in then they don't do it.

    Corzine, McGrevey,Whitman(R),Florio, as far back as I remember, they all said it.

    Now I live in Pennsylvania. Where Fast Eddie Rendell raises taxes, then gives checks to Buisnesses. Wow! I remember when we use to call that "Corporate Welfare".

    Quick, turn off the lights. They're crawling ou of woodwork now.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    My kids are 7, 6 and 2, I highly doubt that I could command them to serve. Does a paraplegic have a right to support the war?

    ms PUNK said

    "If he is for real his C.O. hated him so much he probibly gave him the sh**iest job on the base. Like cleaning the s**thouse.

    Posted by: puck at January 10, 2007 12:31 AM

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


    ooh, using terms like" C.O. " and "sh**iest job on the base"

    but this one is a little wierd "Like cleaning the s**thouse "

    One of these things is not like the other.

    What branch of the military uses the term s**thouse ?

    The Army and I guess the AirForce call it a latrine. The navy and marines call it the head. I would assume that the cost guard would use that terminology as well.

    Oh, ok, that term is what the cub scouts uses. is that the branch of the service PUNK is in.

    BTW, Ted Haggerty wasnt your scout leader was he? Or that Mark Foley guy ?

    The Buffalo
    "racist fake Christian who hate democracy)"

    Just like the racist Islamic supporting Leftist like yourself!

    " quell their panic of being attacked by brown people. "
    Yeah like Racist Democrats from NY and Boston. It's funny the most racist people I've met have been Democrat. But like all Lefty loons you deny your own racism!

    Anonymous,
    I was in the Military and term SH!*house was used.

    racist fake Christian who hate democracy)always try to play either the patriotism thing or the christian thing as a crutch

    Posted by: The Buffalo at January 10, 2007 12:55 AM

    Exactly. They do hate democracy and other than the part about being saved despise Christianity, though they would never admit it. Love thy neighbor, unless he is not one of "us". Do unto others, before they do unto to you. Give us this day our daily bread, unless you are poor and lazy, then you deserve your fate. Give to all who ask of you, unless you mean my tax money, it's all mine and you can't have it you lazy worthless bastards. Turn the other cheek, unless you mean cut and run you coward. The love of money is the root of all evil, but not as evil as you socialist lennin loving pigs. Thou shalt not kill, except if it is in defense of Israel and W.A.S.P's. who say I should. Etc etc etc......

    Donora Pa,
    Democrats are racist too. They view Hispanics as little serfs that need the Anglos to help them. Why do you guys ride on your high horses. The most racist people are you Democrats!

    The emblem of the Democratic party should be the hammer and sickle entertwined with the swatsiga!

    red wolf

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


    Now that is a real macho handle.

    Just how manly are you.

    manly enought to enlist and go fight in Iraq.

    Oh no, you have more important things to do, or you are disabled, or you have kids, or you ........(INSERT ANY LIE OR EXCUSE) ......

    now see, I am a veteran, and i will tell you this,

    I have more RESPECT for the peacenicks, that opposed this war, and did not want to send the troops, and therefore will not serve in the services,

    than some republican a--hole that

    wants this war to be fought, supports the war, supports the president and his war mongering friends, but does not have the guts to go down and enlist and serve his country.

    I know that is why SO MANY right wingers here just hate me, cause I point out your lies, your cowardice, your unpatriotic attitude, and the fact that

    YOU ARE JUST LIKE OSAMA BIN LADEN, you are willing to send others to fight and die, when you yourself are unwilling to,

    and I just thought of something, I HATE THEM, but to show you all just how far down on the rung of shit all of you RWs are in my mind, the terrorist that atttacked us on 9-11 had more guts and more patriotism to their cause than you.

    I cant stand their guts and would not hesitate to shoot one of them if I had the chance. Their deaths were what they deserved,

    But you spineless RightWinged bastards here and anywhere in america are not even good enough to lick sweat from the terroroist balls.

    That is how pathetic and low you are.

    Sharon

    I don't know what to tell ya. I don't watch Scarborough, I consider him a "Cocktail Conservative", or a "Company Republican". If I come home between 3-6 E.S.T. I'll put on Jerry Doyle (www.knew910.com) He's fairly new, but he's catching on. He calls himself an independent conservative. At night I'll flip between O'Reilly and Olby. (Olby for a laugh.) Everybody else is pretty much encamped with one brand or another.

    I give O'Reilly respect because when some lowlife rapes a little kid and the judge gives the guy probation. O'Reilly is on that Judge like white on Rice.

    I do make bets at night with Woman because Savage follows Jerry doyle on K.N.E.W. as how Mike will start his show. As Mr. Passive or Mr. Lunatic.

    I lost tonight Mike came on playing The Doors and being Mr. Mellow.

    Say REDWOLF,

    It should be pink kitten, you pussy,


    Did you see my post to you ?

    I am glad that you talked your shit, cause now I have a better line to piss off you RW idiots.,

    I HATE the 9-11 hijacker terrorist. But I hate the RW idiots mroe.

    Why ? Because the 9-11 hijackers were willing to sacrifice themselves for a cause. I stilll hate them.

    But you RW idiots dont even have that much guts. You are willling to send others to do what you will not, much like Osama Bin Laden,

    But I have more respect for the 9-11 hijackers than I have for you. And that is none at all

    doesnt it just warm the cockels of your heart to know that you are lower than the terrorist

    "Donora Pa,
    Democrats are racist too. They view Hispanics as little serfs that need the Anglos to help them. Why do you guys ride on your high horses. The most racist people are you Democrats!

    Posted by: Red Wolf at January 10, 2007 01:11 AM"

    Hey RedWolf why don't you stop lying about this total fabrication of yours. You made this shit up to justify your racist garbage you spew here.

    I challenge you to copy and paste with date and time one single post by anyone Republican or Democrat who said anything that would resemble your lies pasted above. You are full of shit with you claims of being attacked for being "Latin", you are no more Latin than I am and I will say to you now as said before you can shove your claims of being Hispanic up your ass. You have been accused of being a racist here many times and it was only after you posted this (see below) ignorant garbage that you started pushing your Latin claim into now being Hispanic. You are f---ing liar!

    This sound like the words of a "hispanic" man sensitive to being made fun of for his race?

    See below what kind of low life piece of shit this scum ball called RedWolf is:

    Rico,
    These jokes will get the Left mad. Hey they can crack Christian jokes right!

    (Q): A deadly snake and a Muslim are both approaching you rapidly, you are a dead shot, you have a gun, but only one bullet, which one do you shoot ?
    (A): The MUSLIM of course !! The snake only bites when provoke. We know the Muslim’s intention.

    I don’t personally have anything against Muslims.
    In fact, I think everyone should own one or two !!

    Q: What do female Muslims use for birth control?
    A: Their faces.

    Q: What’s the difference between a Muslim and a dead horse?
    A. It’s no fun beating a dead horse.

    Q. What’s the difference between an American BBQ and an Islamic BBQ?
    A. In America, Humans roast animals over a fire. In Islam, it’s the other way around.

    Q. What do you say to a Muslim with his arm all the way up a camel’s rump?
    A. “Having car trouble?”

    Q. What’s the difference between Cindy Sheehan and a terrorist enemy?
    A. I don’t know either.

    Q. What’s the difference between Michael Moore and a one ton CARE package?
    A. Michael Moore, if sliced real thin, can feed a larger Afghan village.

    Q: What’s the definition of a virgin in the Middle East?
    A: Any camel that can run faster than an Muslim.

    "Posted by: Red Wolf at January 6, 2007 02:48 AM"

    Anonymous,
    You racist phoney Veteran. I served in he 90's you jerk. My 2 cousins are in Iraq.
    Your just a raving madman like your Chairman Olbermann. Now go shine that picture of Stalin and Pol Pot you commie!

    Redwolf

    I think I made my point, this Anon dude has to be from Columbia University.

    He has respect for the jerks that flew the planes into W.T.C.?

    Your Honor I rest my case, Take over Red Wolf I'm going to bed.

    The Buffalo,
    Just like how you don't like Hispanics, I don't like Muslims. I stand by those jokes and have gotten a great laugh at many bars. Why are you so sensitive to Muslim jokes? Are you a Camel lover?

    boy, that little jolt of truth got em stirred up

    With all of the comments to keep track of, sometimes you may get the wrong view of a person. Ditto on O'Reilly. I've only seen Savage when he is a guest on other shows. I watch Scarboro when Pat Buchanon is on but not always. He has been leaning left but the last part of his show is about Hollyweird crap about which I couldn't care less.

    Uh oh, the lunatics have taken over the asylum again!

    To get Mr Camel lover mad, I will print the jokes myself?

    (Q): A deadly snake and a Muslim are both approaching you rapidly, you are a dead shot, you have a gun, but only one bullet, which one do you shoot ?
    (A): The MUSLIM of course !! The snake only bites when provoke. We know the Muslim’s intention.

    I don’t personally have anything against Muslims.
    In fact, I think everyone should own one or two !!

    Q: What do female Muslims use for birth control?
    A: Their faces.

    Q: What’s the difference between a Muslim and a dead horse?
    A. It’s no fun beating a dead horse.

    Q. What’s the difference between an American BBQ and an Islamic BBQ?
    A. In America, Humans roast animals over a fire. In Islam, it’s the other way around.

    Q. What do you say to a Muslim with his arm all the way up a camel’s rump?
    A. “Having car trouble?”

    Q. What’s the difference between Cindy Sheehan and a terrorist enemy?
    A. I don’t know either.

    Q. What’s the difference between Michael Moore and a one ton CARE package?
    A. Michael Moore, if sliced real thin, can feed a larger Afghan village.

    Q: What’s the definition of a virgin in the Middle East?
    A: Any camel that can run faster than an Muslim.

    Here's a new one!

    Q: Why do Muslims blow themselves up?
    A: In the hopes of recieving 72 Virgins since the women they have while alive are ugly! That's what Burkas are for!

    Take that Lefties!

    SO PUNK and PINK KITTY


    You RESEMBLED my remarks huh ?

    I nailed you dead on ?

    and pink kitty ( pussy ) I dont think ANYONE in your family EVER served.

    Yep, the terrorist are just above pink kitty and Punk on the evolutionary rung.

    But dont dispair, you are right down there with Osama Bin Laden with all of the other RW ers here

    "Anonymous,
    You racist phoney Veteran. I served in he 90's you jerk. My 2 cousins are in Iraq.
    Your just a raving madman like your Chairman Olbermann. Now go shine that picture of Stalin and Pol Pot you commie!

    Posted by: Red Wolf at January 10, 2007 01:21 AM"

    RedWolf is lying again. When I first started posting here a guy was here who quizzed Redwolf about his claims to being in the military and as far as I and others were concerned he proved RedWolf was a lying sack of shit.

    Read what RedWolf wrote (see below) to see what kind of a person he is. This guy just this week started claiming to be Hispanic as way out of this post. I began my campaign against his shit the same time he posted this hate filled racist garbage. Garbage you will not see Puck or "grannie" or Cee or many of the others on the right here condemn.

    You want to know why this nation has a bad name these days read below to see who brings hate on our nation:
    ---------------------------------------------------------

    "Posted by: Red Wolf at January 6, 2007 02:48 AM"

    Rico,
    These jokes will get the Left mad. Hey they can crack Christian jokes right!

    (Q): A deadly snake and a Muslim are both approaching you rapidly, you are a dead shot, you have a gun, but only one bullet, which one do you shoot ?
    (A): The MUSLIM of course !! The snake only bites when provoke. We know the Muslim’s intention.

    I don’t personally have anything against Muslims.
    In fact, I think everyone should own one or two !!

    Q: What do female Muslims use for birth control?
    A: Their faces.

    Q: What’s the difference between a Muslim and a dead horse?
    A. It’s no fun beating a dead horse.

    Q. What’s the difference between an American BBQ and an Islamic BBQ?
    A. In America, Humans roast animals over a fire. In Islam, it’s the other way around.

    Q. What do you say to a Muslim with his arm all the way up a camel’s rump?
    A. “Having car trouble?”

    Q. What’s the difference between Cindy Sheehan and a terrorist enemy?
    A. I don’t know either.

    Q. What’s the difference between Michael Moore and a one ton CARE package?
    A. Michael Moore, if sliced real thin, can feed a larger Afghan village.

    Q: What’s the definition of a virgin in the Middle East?
    A: Any camel that can run faster than an Muslim.

    "Posted by: Red Wolf at January 6, 2007 02:48 AM"


    OH NO PUNK

    You said "He has respect for the jerks that flew the planes into W.T.C.? " refering to my comment earlier.,


    I know that it must be difficult for you to keep up with, but I will simplify for you,

    I think that they are better than YOU.

    The respect that I have for them is NONE AT ALL,

    But you have even LESS respect.

    You are on the same rung as Osama.

    Do you not understand now ?

    I dont have ANY respect for the terrorist, but you and your kind are even worse.

    Anonymous,
    Yeah your a veteran right? Of what Pol Pot's genocide campaign!

    Mr Bison I was never question about my Military Service. Even if I was, I don't anser about it. The people that know me know I served. I don't have to prove it to bunch of Muslim loving Communists!

    Buffalo,
    Here's a new Muslim joke!

    Why do Muslim men blow themselves up?
    Their women are so ugly they deperately need those 72 Virgins!

    Buffalo,
    Here's a new Muslim joke!

    Why do Muslim men blow themselves up?
    Their women are so ugly they deperately need those 72 Virgins!

    Janet:

    Did somebody just say you are just like Osama Bin Laden?

    Well, I sure do hope you at least have a better since of humor than that Bin laden guy, and why do you people always have to keep that damned gun by your side?

    Sharon,

    Savage has become persona nongratta on all shows liberal and conservative.

    Give Jerry Doyle a try if near you're computer between 3-6 E.S.T.

    For Anon thats 15:00-18:00

    www.knew910.com

    goodnight!

    Buffalo here another Muslism joke for you!

    Q: What does retro mean in Islamic lands?
    A: Dressing like it's the 7th Century again!

    Q: Why do Muslims hate dogs?
    A: The Dogs run away from their foul odor!

    Ha Ha!

    I thought the full moon was over but I see Red Wolf is still out!

    "Buffalo,
    Here's a new Muslim joke!

    Why do Muslim men blow themselves up?
    Their women are so ugly they desperately need those 72 Virgins!

    Posted by: Red Wolf at January 10, 2007 01:36 AM"

    RedWolf? Maybe not anything like a real wolf that is for sure but you are showing your true colors, and all the idiots here who side with you are really squirming in their seat reading your hate filled garbage.

    The term is "Islamists" not Muslims you dumb hillbilly low life. Maybe if your "uncle Jim" who made you call him daddy while violated your virginity at 12 yo had not kept you home from school so much you might not be so f---ing stupid.

    Muslims are spread from one corner of this earth to the other. More than a billion of them. 99% of them hate Islamists radicals who terrorize them far more than your coward ass.

    You are so f---ing stupid you don't know how to properly define your racists garbage.

    You suck you coward pussy and I am not talking about what your uncle Jim made you do to him in the back of the trailer!

    The Islamic/Leftist/NeoNazi alliance. A match made in hell. Stalin, Hitler and Mohamed must be holding hands together singing Cumbaya!

    Okay Anon I get it you think I'm lower than the terrorists that took down the W.T.C..

    I think you're lower than the turd I just left in the toliet.

    The difference? The turd at the bottom of the toliet didn't take out 3000 people.

    BUT IT DID SMELL!

    pink kitty and punk and any other RW idiot that cant understand what I said earlier, here is a visual aid.

    The evolutionary ladder.

    l l
    l l
    l l
    l l
    l l
    l l
    lllllllll Jesus Christ llllllllllllllll
    l l
    l l
    l l
    l l
    l l
    l l
    lllllll Saints and Heroes lllllllllll
    l l
    l l
    l l
    l l
    l l
    l l
    lllllll Normal People lllllllllllllll
    l l
    l l
    l l
    l l
    l l
    l l
    lllllllllll Criminals llllllllllllllll
    l l
    l l
    l l
    l l
    l l
    l l
    lllllll Varmits and Horseshit llllllllll
    l l
    l l
    l l
    l l
    l l
    l l
    lllllllllllll 9-11Hijackers lllllllll
    l l
    l l
    l l
    l l
    l l
    l l
    llllll Osama Bin Laden lllllllllll
    l l
    l l
    l l
    l l
    l l
    l l
    llll RWers that wont fight this war llll
    l l
    l l
    l l
    l l
    l l
    l l
    lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll


    Sorry guys, you did not even rate with osama

    Puck: It sounds like you're not eating enough veggies if it smells that bad.

    Mr Bison burger,

    "you dumb hillbilly low life"
    I guess your ignorant Stalinist brain can't be deprogrammed to realize, I'm not anglo.
    Let me repeat I'm Spaniard/Dominican/Sicilain/Puerto Rican.
    Now leave your Marxist indoctrination and realize Spanish people hate Muslims! You idiot. In fact so do Most Americans.
    For that here's another Muslim joke:

    Q: Why is insurance low on Muslim truck drivers?
    A: They don't live long enough to collect the money!

    "The difference? The turd at the bottom of the toliet didn't take out 3000 people.

    BUT IT DID SMELL!

    Posted by: puck at January 10, 2007 01:45 AM"

    Last I heard the count was 3000 dead Americans in Iraq, a nation that never attacked us and never threatened to attack our nation.

    Some how you seem to think 3000 dead Wall Street elite are more significant than 3000 dead American Soldiers.

    B.S. wrote

    You suck you coward pussy and I'm not talking about what you're Uncle Jim made you do to him in the back of the trailer.

    Hate speech? What hate speech?

    Goodnight and I mean it!

    Bison Burger,
    So tell me do you have a T-Shirt with a picture of Stalin and Mao or do you have a shrine to your beloved Chairmen?

    Bison Burger,
    So tell me do you have a T-Shirt with a picture of Stalin and Mao or do you have a shrine to your beloved Chairmen?

    Buffalo Stomp...Buffalo S**t....It's all B.S. TO ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! GOODNIGHT!!!!!!!!

    Red Wolf Jokes:

    "Q-Why is insurance low on Muslem truck driver?"
    "A-They don't live long enough to collect the money!"

    HA HA HA HA HA HE HE HE HE HE HE HE HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HE HE HE HE HA HE HA HE HA HE HA HE HA............

    Wow, Red Wolf sure is a riot!

    Buffalo, you give them the number of dead in Iraq, the only problem is, they dont give a shit,

    I started at the very top of this thing, 2nd post, asking whether anyone here would support a congressional investigation into why our troops were denied anti-RPG equipment that could save maybe hundreds of lives, so that Raytheon Corp could maintain their profit potential.

    NOT ONE republican responded in the affirmative,

    Our troops are in needless danger, hell they have been since the start of this fiasco, and the only thing that the RW ers want to do is send more of someone elses sons and daughters.

    Not their kids, someone elses.

    Punk, you said you were leaving, so pack up your bag of lies, and take all your bullshit, and GO

    Redwolf is so stupid he makes excuses for his racist garbage by claiming he is a "Spaniard" and that all Spaniards hate Muslims for what they did to them.

    Did when? Back in the stone age? Was like back in the 7th century that Redwolf jokes about Muslims living in in his post above?

    The guy is so f---ing stupid he simultaneously makes fun of Muslims for living in the "7th century" and then claims he has a justification for his hate for something that happened more than a thousand years ago. This KKK thinking at it's best.

    The guy is one uneducated white trash hillbilly with a flare for bullshit.

    "Not their kids, someone elses.
    Posted by: Anonymous at January 10, 2007 01:59 AM"

    Most of the vermin who post anti-American anti-democratic propaganda here probably don't have children and if they did they most likely don't know what jail they are in to know if they would ever be able to get out in time to enlist. But I bet some of them would like to see their kids go so they could hang on their coat tails here like RedWolfs delusions about having family in Iraq.

    They hate America and they hate democracy even more. All they care about is having some group somewhere they can fit into. This is the curse of having a heart full of hate!

    Say Buffalo,

    I agree, about Red Wolf aka pink kitty and PUNK, but the rest of the right wing idiots around here arent any better.

    hell, even the guy that runs this place is a RWer to the extreme. That is why he has links to O'Lieghlies book at amazon all over his website.

    I am an irishman myself, well half Irish and half native american. But between O'Reilly and Cox, and that right winger Irish Catholic, whats his name Donohue, I am almost ashamed to claim my Irish sir name.

    I guess I shouldnt be surprised though. They have the same sort of Right Wing idiots in Ireland. They are called the IRA.

    "I am almost ashamed to claim my Irish sir name."

    Anon,

    Almost?

    "I am almost ashamed to claim my Irish sir name."

    Anon,

    Almost?
    -----------------------------------


    Oh, I get it,,,,,,,


    I run Linux, havent been on the internet in more than 9 years in windows,

    Anyway, my computer accepts cookies and then re-directs them to /dev/nell

    So clicking on remember me doesnt work, and I am too impatient to type a name in everytime.

    besides, no one around here uses their actual name, is your real name buffalo, so I just dont bother

    Anon,

    Cox has a link to Keith Olbermann's book as well as polls that consistently show Keith to be liked by the vast majority of people who visit this page.

    Cox may have his views but he is not anywhere near being like the low lifes like RedWolf in his beliefs or his rhetoric

    Oh, I get it,,,,,,,

    Uhhh.... no you don't

    dev/nell or dev/null

    maybe he has had a change of heart, but I have seen some pretty belcose stuff in the internet by him over the years,

    And to be perfectly honest, I used to be a republican, but these people calling themselves republican today dont even remotely resemble what republican used to mean.

    ESPECIALLY the ones that support this war, and dont even have the guts to admit that they are afraid to go fight in it. I dont and didnt mind fighting someone elses battles, but I will be damned if I am going to let them pick a fight, without really taking a hard look at the cost before hand.

    I opposed this war, because I never saw the evidence, and anyone that tried to raise a voice of decent was shouted down. That was the first clue to me that someone was lying, and now we see that some of those people and their questions were spot on right,

    Even the Michael Moores were more accurate than this bunch of yahoos

    I am not go into a long explanation for you but the short of it is,

    /dev/null

    /dev is the device folder
    /null is a device, that is nothing.

    so if you symlink to /dev/null the cookie disappears into the nothingness that it belongs

    I guess after several years of Red Wolf being thaught by his uncle to suck not bite using his mother douche as a deminstation tool. The vinegar affected his developing brain negatively.

    I wonder if it was the vinegar are the anal probing that got to him.

    naw on second thought, he would have enjoyed the latter

    It's tough to tell, but it had to be something drastic to become so idiot.

    idiotic

    I guess we just ran em off, either that or they are sitting there patiently waiting for one or both of us to leave.

    They arent much on the confrontational side, specially when they start getting their asses kicked and their heads stoved in

    Ya, people like it are weak, scared, war supporting chickenhawks.

    They can't even respond about a subject that they would seem to support by the way that they talk. Like the antiRPG equipment that you asked them to respond on. I even noticed that J$ glossed over it, because it would even give these Right Wingers something that they could agree with Keith on. Don't ever Watch on OlbermannWatch something that even makes sense in their brainwashed minds.

    I get home from work,check out this site to see what lies and fact manipulation KO has perpetrated and I find again you left wing nuts changing the subject and spewing hate speach. First let me say I am not a republican,joined the Navy at 17 (My father had to sign for me) just after Viet Nam,and would support a hearing on the anti-RPG equip. I would not enlist to fight in this war just as I will not join the Police or Fire Depts. because I would'nt make it physically and their are people who really want to much more than I. Does that mean I cant have an opinion?Apparently in your eyes YES! In your warped mind if a situation arises where Police or Firemen are needed to go into a situation where they could be killed and my opinion is they should go, you would tell me to join first or keep my coward mouth shut.The reason no one is answering you is because no matter what they say you will just call them liars. And of course they could lie but the main reason is WHO THE HELL ARE YOU? Your not looking for an honest debate you just want to attack. And these are people you have no idea of who they are.You just lump everyone in as RW Cowards.There are two lines I want to comment on. This from buffalo " Some how you seem to think 3000 dead Wall Street elite are more significant than 3000 dead American Soldiers." First let me say that it sounds like you give more weight to the soldiers where as I think they are equal. An american is an american.Soldier or "Wall street elite"

    I would also point out that many Firemen gave their lives for these Elite and they had no idea in hell what was coming. At least the soldiers know what can happen. And this from Anonymous at 01:20 AM "But I have more respect for the 9-11 hijackers than I have for you. And that is none at all

    doesnt it just warm the cockels of your heart to know that you are lower than the terrorist "So you have more respect for maniacs who kill innocent people,torture,and use people as shields to fight .If these real cowards were as brave as you seem to think they are they would get out in the open and attack like men instead of hiding behind others.Oh they hate us no doubt but do you really believe these brave men would be so great in numbers if it was'nt for the fact that they believe they will go right to heaven and put an end their miserable existence?Yeah we know what their about but you have more respect for them than your fellow americans who you know nothing of what is in their heart ,except that they have a different opinion than you. I will not stoop to your level and namecall.There is no need.What you post says it all.

    From the NYT today:

    "In both chambers, Democrats made clear that the resolutions — which would do nothing in practical terms to block Mr. Bush’s intention to increase the United States military presence in Iraq — would be the minimum steps they would pursue. They did not rule out eventually considering more muscular responses, like seeking to cap the number of troops being deployed to Iraq or limiting financing for the war — steps that could provoke a Constitutional and political showdown over the president’s power to wage war.

    "The resolutions would represent the most significant reconsideration of Congressional support for the war since it began, and mark the first big clash between the White House and Congress since the November election, which put the Senate and House under the control of the Democrats. The decision to pursue a confrontation with the White House was a turning point for Democrats, who have struggled with how to take on Mr. Bush’s war policy without being perceived as undermining the military or risking criticism as defeatists.

    "'If you really want to change the situation on the ground, demonstrate to the president he’s on his own,' said Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. 'That will spark real change.'"

    So....Let me get this straight....The Democrats said, prior to attaining power, the Iraq war was wrong, the troops should come home and every additional death is a waste.....

    And now they are doing the MINIMAL to stop the war.

    Senator Biden's quote says it all.....THIS IS POLITICAL to them right now....Shame on them.

    I will bet my next paycheck President Bush will not change his policy one bit despite Biden's analysis. The only way to stop President Bush from doing the surge and continuing the push towards victory over the next 2 years is to stop finacially supporting him....PERIOD!

    The Democrats just want their opportunity to vote over some nonbinding resolution that they can point to during their primaries and re-elections in 2008....This will not affect the troops on the ground one bit! Those that are there will stay there and there will be more to come.

    This is the leadership America has chosen.... SYMBOLISM! Give me a break....and the "progressives" above call Republicans cowards....what about these Democrats....being anti-war is only a political stand...they are practically speaking...stay the course!

    I want resolution of this "issue," called the Iraq War....Either the troop increase or the troop decrease ("phased" or whatever)...take a stand liberals, you have historic precident! (allow me to repost from kos)....

    December 1970. P.L. 91-652 — Supplemental Foreign Assistance Law. The Church-Cooper amendment prohibited the use of any funds for the introduction of U.S. troops to Cambodia or provide military advisors to Cambodian forces.

    December 1974. P.L. 93-559 — Foreign Assistance Act of 1974. The Congress established a personnel ceiling of 4000 Americans in Vietnam within six months of enactment and 3000 Americans within one year.

    June 1983. P.L. 98-43 — The Lebanon Emergency Assistance Act of 1983. The Congress required the president to return to seek statutory authorization if he sought to expand the size of the U.S. contingent of the Multinational Force in Lebanon.

    June 1984. P.L. 98-525 — The Defense Authorization Act. The Congress capped the end strength level of United States forces assigned to permanent duty in European NATO countries at 324,400.

    November 1993. P.L. 103-139. The Congress limited the use of funding in Somalia for operations of U.S. military personnel only until March 31, 1994, permitting expenditure of funds for the mission thereafter only if the president sought and Congress provided specific authorization.

    Well put Karris56... but relax. They spout the kinda of hate that doesn't even need to be responded to. Especially the anonymous monikers! They are pussies!

    Cee:

    I suppose what you're complaining about is that the Democrats are not opposing you, and Mr. Bush strongly enough?

    I agree, I have the same complaint.

    Why does that bother YOU, and Why are you taunting US about it?

    Like I said, I don't like the situation at all, but I would rather have a 'weak' leadership pulling in the right direction than a 'strong' leader pushing in the wrong direction. Mostly, I'd like to see a president listen to the American people, who I believe he is supposed to be working for.

    You seem to be rooting for an all out Constitutional crisis that could effectively destroy or cripple our two party system.

    I've read a lot of you're posts in which you keep referring to abstract concepts like 'victory' and 'defeat', but I sure would like to see you detail what 'victory'? would actually look like?

    - What level of damped down violence would acceptable enough to constitute 'victory'?
    - How long would any stability that we do attain have to hold before we can call ourselves ultimately 'victorious'?
    - Are we still talking about "democracy", or just stabilization?
    - Will we be 'victorious' if we leave a 'stable' Iraq, but with Sadr essentially in control?
    - And, if we were to take out Sadr, do you think we can control the resulting angry Shiite majority?
    - Who are we fighting and who are we supporting?
    - How many more homes in Baghdad have to be destroyed by our own troops? How many more doors being kicked in is acceptable?
    - Do you really believe we can 'win' a war in which the VAST majority of the people hate us? Remember, the key to 'victory' was supposed to be "winning the hearts and minds of the people"! Thats certainly what I believed from the beginning anyway. I'm sure we will continue build on that good will....with every new door that we kick in.
    - Do you see no role whatsoever for diplomacy in all of this?
    - Last, but far from least, just how long can we expect an army stretched this thin both in equipment, and personel, to continue to carry ALL of the load for us?

    You know what Cee, our military did their job admirably over 3 years ago. They were 'victorious' over another army. What you and Bush keep asking them to do now is something an army should never be asked to do.

    Yes, the Democratic response is too 'weak', as you keep pointing out over and over again, but I don't think it is 'weakness' so much as it is too many differing opinions....along with an unwillingness to march in lockstep the way the Republicans have been doing the last six years to get us into this mess in the first place.

    Mike:

    I am TIRED of this political football...A war should not be a political issue.

    The left (as outlined by Olbermann) claims Bush is only acting out of concern of his legacy....a pure political calculation.

    The right claims The Democratic Leadership is only acting out of concern for their White House ambitions/cementing dominance in The Congress in '08.....a pure political calculation.

    This is war....people's (the troops' and the Iraqis') lives are in the balance....The politics can now stop because BOTH sides (right and left) have the power to institute their policy.

    I want it over....either we do as Bush has planned or he is stopped by whatever legal (Constitutional) means can be mustered.

    Symbolism does NOTHING except give the other side (the ONLY true enemy, IMHO) in IRAQ more motivation to continue their war of attrition. CLEAR signals should be sent with regard to our Iraq policy.....

    1. We are there militarily for the long term (2 years) to advance the political solution.

    OR

    2. We have lost militarily and will stand down over the next 12 months in hopes of a decent political resolution.

    I have no intention of "taunting." I just want HONEST debate....not this sham of insults thrown around by the likes of Olbermann, Comic Book Store Guy (Buffalo), Proud, Professor Honeydew (Bob), the myriad or liberal anons and of course....my fave (who has been gone as of late)...Sir Loin of Milquetoast.

    The problem with the Iraq war is that we know that we have lost it. You cannot walk into a country that doesn't want you there and take it over...the Russians discovered that in Afghanistan. Fortunately for Haliburton, we ended up with a president stupid enough to ignore recent history.

    Will congress pull funding? If they do, Bush will try to make political milage by blaming soldiers deaths on lack of money or lack of troops. Will this convince the ignorant right? Only the base, I'm afraid. Because the rest of the country is onto the right.

    I said, over a decade ago, if you want to get the right wing out of office, just let them implement their agenda. Worked great!

    My input (Asifyoucare) is that the Democrats advertised an anti-war stance and pledge a pullout to win the elction. Only now they realize the repercussions of a pullout. It would tarnish their 3 day legacy. Therefore they continue to play the- you broke it you fix it card. So far they have shown very little on this issue that they won the election on. They are truly painted in the corner and most pundits realize the 2008 elections will be swayed on this issue. Note: Hillary's cricket chorus.

    Anon its not that simple... but you think it is. Where is the Democrats if it is so cut-and-dry?

    are the democrats? sorry

    Another anon with a 100% POLITICAL and cynical retort....man I am sick or this...

    Ok Anon....I call your bluff....You said, "Will congress pull funding? If they do, Bush will try to make political milage by blaming soldiers deaths on lack of money or lack of troops. Will this convince the ignorant right? Only the base, I'm afraid. Because the rest of the country is onto the right." Then the congressional leadership does this, right?...easy call?

    Choose a REAL posting name and continue to return to this page over the next 4 weeks and we will see if The Democrats actually follow-through with your solution and then let's discuss how Bush responds.

    Idea- (taken from last night) If a person can't even make up a moniker for the 'name' slot... they do not merit a response.

    Wow! Who to respond to? Benson, who is ignoring the fact that the dems are already taking a stance on the war...or Cee, who has more of a wait and see attitude? Neither responded to the fact that we are in a lost war (smart). Neither really has much to say (smart). Both are too simple to conceive that Bush has put this country into a hole and it will take more than three days to get us out...

    Do you here someting?

    Let me rephrase, when everyone else operates and reports international stories on Bush, WOT, War in Iraq, Iran in rotation, Dobberman restricts himself to different shades and coats of Bush bashing...period.
    Forget about any internal story that might jeopardize his leftist stance... e.g. reporting on Illegal immigrants committing criminal acts and so forth.
    80% of Dobberman's stories revolves around Bush and Bush and more Bush.
    Even BOR posits that Bush is a failure in Iraq,but at least he focuses and reports on domestic issues as well.

    Sorry anon...

    It has suddenly occurred to me why you don't bother to use a posting name.

    My mistake.

    Benson,

    Can you spell something?

    MacJoubert-
    Theie new call letters and tag!
    MSNBC-
    Must Shine Negatively on Bush Constantly

    or 'hear'- my bad

    BTW I agree on holding Bush accountable for everything gone awry in Iraq to the dot.
    But alas we were talking about Dobberman's overall journalistic worth not Bush's.

    Again agreed-
    If the War is Bush's legacy, then the cards are being played. But we are here to debate KO.

    I love all of this neocon blabber about the democrats' "three day legacy", as if any failure to pass one of the six bills is a failure for the entire term. Republicans had six years to secure our ports and they almost gave that job to the UAE. Republicans had six years to raise minimum wage...and would only consider it if more tax cuts for the wealthy were involved. Republicans have had six years to stabilize Iraq...but, since they are spineless sheep, they've let themselves be led around by a complete imbecile.

    Sad, really...

    But I have more respect for the 9-11 hijackers than I have for you. And that is none at all

    doesnt it just warm the cockels of your heart to know that you are lower than the terrorist


    Posted by: Anonymous at January 10, 2007 01:20 AM

    Somebody needs to loosen the fan belt on their head diaper.

    Did they run their election campaign on the promise to raise minimum wage? I think not. So THAT is why the Dems passive stance on the Iraq war is a joke. Hope you enjoy the extra $10 in your check next month.

    Benson,

    The average american cannot even pay rent on minimum wage. The democrats did campaign on the subject and tried to introduce bills into congress on same. It's pathetic that we are in such a state. Bush has made us a third world nation...

    Puck:"That's why I moved out of that state"(NJ)

    That and the 5 bench warrants for his arrest.

    What campaign were you watching? The election was ALL about the war. I don't have a problem with raising the min wage, but lets not salute that softball legislation. The elephant in the room is the war and so far there is only bravado from our newly elected members.

    I suppose the Dems could insist strongly that the Baker Commission's recommendations are enacted, but there isn't even consensus on that. Where's your girl Hillary? Hiding, because its not as simple as they said it would be. Leadership means taking calculated risks. The democrats have shown very little. Minimum wage bump- not risky. Ethics legislation- passed with one nay. Show me something.

    "Aragorn"??? Somebody likes kiddy movies.
    ==================================================
    HEY RICO! I like the LOTR movies too and they are DEFINITELY NOT kiddy movies. Even I'm offended there.

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Hell, I will fill in a name.
    ==================================================
    Just wanted to point out to this poster... (hey i'm a big LOTR fan too), but you do know that Aragorn is pretty much Bush right? (ESPECIALLY in the movies) Actually, it'd be more accurate to say it's the other way around I guess.

    Benson,

    The average american cannot even pay rent on minimum wage. The democrats did campaign on the subject and tried to introduce bills into congress on same. It's pathetic that we are in such a state. Bush has made us a third world nation...
    ==================================================
    Wow, where to begin...
    1) a LOT of states (if not most) already offer a minimum wage higher than the federal one.
    2) Few people stay at minimum wage for very long
    3) MOST minimum wage earners are teens or some other member of a household so the 'rent' is rarely an issue.

    I think I'll finish up with a quote:
    Milton Friedman taught that "the substitution of contract arrangements for status arrangements was the first step toward the freeing of the serfs in the Middle Ages." He cautioned against set prices. "The high rate of unemployment among teenagers, and especially black teenagers, is both a scandal and a serious source of social unrest. Yet it is largely a result of minimum-wage laws." Those laws are "one of the most, if not the most, anti-black laws on the statute books."

    Kurt,

    You say, "In this entire bungled, hideous matter, Dubya has never trusted the American people. Why should we trust Dubya, now? We should not."

    The problem is he is legally allowed to continue instituting the foreign policy he wants for the next 2 years.

    If you feel he is wrong....what recourse to you have to stop him?

    Removal from office.
    Pulling the funding that SUPPORTS his policies.

    You and the radical left are really becoming broken records and a broken record cannot continue for the next 2 years....action is needed.

    The election empowered the anti-war left.....the power is nothing to the troops and our country unless it is used.

    Oh, and by the way....according to the public opinion polls and the posters on this site....your following statement is ALREADY true.

    "Our anger and rage ought to be focused upon Dubya and his Administration and not upon some silly sidebars."

    OUGHT? Any dim bulb can see it already is....Keith Olbermann's last Special Comment was filled with anger and knashing of teeth!

    So if Bush will not change from your rhetorical activity, Olbermann's screeds, and the rest of the droning that comes out of my TV every night....What can be done next to stop him?

    Grim,

    I would appreciate it if you could back up items two and three.

    Thanks...

    Dr Lapdog admits:"I will bet my next paycheck President Bush will not change his policy one bit despite Biden's analysis."

    And how well has the Bush policy worked in Iraq so far , doctor ?
    Since Bush has not been correct about ANYTHING in Iraq so far, why should anyone have the least bit of confidence in any NEW plan he has ?
    IraqIII. The sequel of the sequel.

    This escalation of the war is disingenous at the very best.
    Troop levels in Iraq have risen and fallen more than the 20,000 troops being requested by Chimpy during the past 3 years.
    How well did it work the other times troop levels increased?
    The problem still remains that no matter how well or how long our troops secure a city or zone, as soon as they leave,the insurgents take back that area in a flash.
    20,000 troops will not change that same scenario that has led to the horrendous conditions now prevalent in that country.
    Not to mention , that Bush is the ultimate flip flopper.
    Bush talks frequently of his disdain for micromanaging the war effort and for second-guessing his commanders. "It's important to trust the judgment of the military when they're making military plans," he told The Washington Post in an interview last month. "I'm a strict adherer to the command structure."
    But over the past two months, as the security situation in Iraq has deteriorated and U.S. public support for the war has dropped, Bush has pushed back against his top military advisers and the commanders in Iraq.
    He says he'll listen to his commanders, and then take their advice even though the Joint Chiefs have long opposed an escalation of the war and an increase in troops.
    FLIP FLOP !
    THIS IS A GREAT PRESIDENT ?
    Give me a frigging break !


    And to further beat you down with your own truthstick Dr, Lapdog, you were so proudly yesterday listing all that you read and watch to show everyone how well rounded you are.( chuckle, chuckle)
    You said "I read the NYT, watch MSNBC..."
    What?
    Considering which appendage that truthstick has been resting on your person,it's not going to be a pretty scent hitting yourself with it.
    You have stated on more than one occasion that you don't get basic cable, so you can't watch Keith's show.
    Well, correct me if I'm wrong,but Keith's show is on MSNBC.
    Yet you said yesterday that you watch MSNBC.
    Which lie are you going with today ?

    Oh by the way, why everyone is concerned about this new escalation of the war, Bush slipped in this doozy.
    He lifted the drilling ban Tuesday for Alaska's Bristol Bay, clearing the way for the Interior Department to open the fish-rich waters to oil and natural gas development.
    The environmental president strikes again, when everyone's attention is elsewhere.

    Yup, this surely is a great president! Maybe in an alternate universe, the one Dr. Lapdog must live in, where lies are truth and war is peace and good environmental policy is raping our last pristine wildlife area in the USA.

    This would be hilarious if it weren't so tragic !

    Bob- are you aware that Alaska's Bristol Bay is overwhelmingly wanted and financially needed by the local Alaskan people. Who cares? The moose gotten live! We'll just subsidize their minimum wages.

    "Our anger and rage ought to be focused upon Dubya and his Administration . . .Mr. Olbermann and Bill-o are not that important"

    If that's how you feel, why are you here? This website has a clearly stated objective-- to point out the gross journalistic malpractice and other foilbles of Meltdown host Krazy Keith. If you think this effort is not worth the time spent to address it, there are plenty of other sites to register your displeasure over the prosecution of the war.

    Federal minimum wage is a joke. The new minimum wage will do nothing to help pay for an apartment in New York.

    I would appreciate it if you could back up items two and three.
    ==================================================
    No problem. All of the following is taken from http://www.bls.gov/cps/minwage2004.htm

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    "2) Few people stay at minimum wage for very long"

    The proportion of hourly-paid workers earning the prevailing Federal minimum wage or less has trended downward since 1979, when data first began to be collected on a regular basis. (See table 10.)

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    "3) MOST minimum wage earners are teens or some other member of a household so the 'rent' is rarely an issue."

    Minimum wage workers tend to be young. About half of all hourly-paid workers earning $5.15 or less were under age 25, and about one-fourth were age 16-19. Among teenagers, about 9 percent earned $5.15 or less. About 2 percent of workers age 25 and over earned the minimum wage or less. Among those age 65 and over, the proportion was 4 percent. (See table 1 and table 7.)

    Part-time workers (persons who usually work less than 35 hours per week) were much more likely than their full-time counterparts to be paid $5.15 or less (about 7 percent versus 1 percent). (See table 1 and table 9.)
    (this last one I post because part time workers are more likely to be a part of a household with one member already working full time)

    You can also check out http://www.epionline.org/mw_statistics.cfm
    which points out:
    "Virtually all minimum wage employees will see their incomes rise as they increase their value to employers by gaining skills through experience. Analysis of US Census Bureau data shows the median raise these employees receive is six times higher than that of employees earning above the minimum wage.

    This traditional growth out of entry-level employment explains why less than 1% of employees above the age of 25 are working at the minimum wage."

    It has a link to research at http://www.epionline.org/mw_publications.cfm.

    On minimum wages- you can't complain about minimum wage being so low AND complain about jobs be exported to Mexico. Its called a waffle which the Dems are poster children of. One or the other...

    Buffalo Stomp says:

    "Muslims are spread from one corner of this earth to the other. More than a billion of them. 99% of them hate Islamists radicals"

    Yes, the voices of the "99%" denouncing the terrorism carried out by the Islamist radicals is deafening.

    "Bob- are you aware that Alaska's Bristol Bay is overwhelmingly wanted and financially needed by the local Alaskan people."

    Yes the bay is needed... for their livelihood !Do you think oil and gas exploration will be beneficial to the fishing waters?

    Do you think at all ?

    and...and....The Gulf waters acted upon by this president is a small part of a much larger 8.2 million acres that were approved for oil and gas development by Congress last month in one of its last acts before adjournment.

    So when the "do nothing" Congress actually does something, in it's last act, they permit the Gulf waters to be spoiled.

    Is it any wonder why Republicans with conscience are abandoning their leadership!

    Not to me it isn't !

    From the NYT:
    In both chambers, Democrats made clear that the resolutions — which would do nothing in practical terms to block Mr. Bush’s intention to increase the United States military presence in Iraq — would be the minimum steps they would pursue. They did not rule out eventually considering more muscular responses, like seeking to cap the number of troops being deployed to Iraq or limiting financing for the war — steps that could provoke a Constitutional and political showdown over the president’s power to wage war.

    The resolutions would represent the most significant reconsideration of Congressional support for the war since it began, and mark the first big clash between the White House and Congress since the November election, which put the Senate and House under the control of the Democrats. The decision to pursue a confrontation with the White House was a turning point for Democrats, who have struggled with how to take on Mr. Bush’s war policy without being perceived as undermining the military or risking criticism as defeatists.

    I think "do nothing in practical terms" describes democrats well.

    On minimum wages- you can't complain about minimum wage being so low AND complain about jobs be exported to Mexico. Its called a waffle which the Dems are poster children of. One or the other...
    ==================================================
    Benson, did you ever hear the case of a McDonald's in one state outsourcing it's drive-thru intercom position to another state where the minimum wage was lower? Some local people were annoyed that that particular job was being "robbed" from them.

    At any rate, hopefully a little local parable will help some "lefties" realize how minimum wage can induce outsourcing.

    Bob- so caustic with your linear thinking!

    "Do you think oil and gas exploration will be beneficial to the fishing waters?"

    That has been weighed by the locals- and they have decided they can do both. Unless you live in Alaska- you anger is misguided.

    I know it is hard for you, professor, but do TRY to stay on point....

    The post you referred to is pasted for your review....

    "And dear, deluded codas, I see EVERYTHING....I read newspapers, especially the rag NYT, I see the same polls cited above. I read liberal and conservative blogs. I watch Keith Olbermann at the MSNBC site and read his blog.....I enjoy political debate over important issues....So spare me your arrogant judgement that I see only what I want to see....I do not live in an echo chamber.

    "The tangents Professor Honeydew and the rest of the left posting today want to take simply results in ignoring the most pressing issue....will we increase troops in Iraq or not.

    "Go to the morning posts and see I TRIED to constructively engage in a debate on the two options before us: Bush's plan or
    The evolving Democratic Congressional Leadership Plan that is starting to finally mention the best way to force US withdrawal: war fund cutting."

    "Instead I either get a rehash of polls, hate speech about corporatists, rednecks and evangelicals or (my favorite topic), Grammie's icy veins. Why? Because finally, power has been achieved and requires a responsible action....and I think some are getting cold feet!

    "Codas...what about this?...You want us out of Iraq based on moral arguments you have posted....Do you agree with Kennedy, perhaps even Kucinich? No trap here...I want an honest discussion.

    "I will guarentee you Bush will not relent on his pursuit of a stable government in Iraq through military and political means....The left, who has clearly stated "NO" to continued military action, has no choice but to begin the process of either cutting the funding or removal of Bush and Cheney from office.

    "I agree with The President's policy in Iraq and I have not wavered from my support despite the insults both to my intelligence and spirituality.

    "So, it's up to you fine Americans to continue to work to change American foreign policy over the objections of the current executive.

    "Stop the name calling, you have power now....it is silly to continue an political campaign when there are two years to reverse what you call a humanitarian disaster."

    Posted by: cee at January 9, 2007 02:09 PM


    So other than showing you are a total dingbat and can't read that I clearly stated I only watch Olbermann from internet access (site verses a channel), I would like you to respond to the rest of the more cogent issues raised, professor.

    My goodness....what a flake.

    " "A prime opportunity for the latest chapter in Olbermann's Left-Wing Criminal Rehabilitation Program, featuring felon John Dean."

    Well, Fielding was Deputy White House Counsel under Dean. Who's a better expert on how someone works than his former boss?"

    Posted by: Ensign Expendable at January 9, 2007 09:56 PM


    Stoop it, ensign!! You KNOW that Johnny FRAUD & his analysis are beyond a plebe like you'res criticisms!!

    If he says that John Dean, (The Chief White House Council of President RICHARD NIXON, A RUPUBLI/FACIST) is a 'Left WIng Schill,' then it must be so!! No questions are allowed to be asked!

    Bob- the average American APPROVES of drilling in Alaska. SO maybe when the polls are not in your favor they are useless.

    You deluded a--holes and your lying, deluded war criminal president are SOOOOO f---ed.
    Never before has a presidential address been so anticipated.
    Everyone knows Bush is a liar.
    72% of the people already disagree with whatever he`s going to say tonight.
    It`s going to be great fun watching that worthless piece of shit stammer through another pitiful charade.

    Grim,

    Your citation didn't prove your second contention well and table one disproves your third contention entirely.

    Yet another intelligent observation from a liberal anon....

    "It`s going to be great fun watching that worthless piece of shit stammer through another pitiful charade."

    Yep, and it is going to be tragic when 20,000 more troops go to Iraq, sent by President Bush over the SYMBOLIC objections of your representatives in The Congress...impotent as they are ACTING currently.


    SECTARIAN REGRESSIVE HUKSTER HONES NEXT SHELL GAME SPEECH

    -- With 72% Disapproval Rating, Bumbling Decider Practices Delivering Old Lies With New Inflections --

    WASHINGTON -- President Bush has set Wednesday night for the unveiling of his new Iraq war plan which is certain to touch off a bruising battle with Congress over his expected proposal to dispatch more U.S. troops to Iraq. Democrats on Monday reiterated their pledge not to cut off money to ground troops, but were considering a range of other ideas to counter the Bush plan, including cutting off funding for private contractors who profit from reconstruction efforts. Democrats now have two factors working in their favor: majorities in the House of Representatives and Senate, and more Republicans who would be willing to support a phased withdrawal. Recent polls have shown that 72 percent of Americans disapprove of the way Bush has handled Iraq.

    Bush has also lifted a drilling moratorium in an area of the central Gulf of Mexico known as Lease Area 181, making that area available to drilling.

    Instead of pushing for development of alternative sources of energy like many other industrial countries, the Bush Administration continues to give the oil companies carte blanche to spoil our waters and air.
    We should be phasing down our committment to fossil fuels, not expanding them.
    This is a backward president that continues to champion a short-term pollution-based prosperity, which enriches his political contributors and corporate cronies by lowering the quality of life for everyone else....including yourself...but what the hell..he's your guy.... so let him do whatever he chooses...even at your own expense !

    `Yep, and it is going to be tragic when 20,000 more troops go to Iraq, sent by President Bush over the SYMBOLIC objections of your representatives in The Congress...impotent as they are ACTING currently.`

    -------

    oh yeah, a--hole -- and the tragedy will be the Dems fault. Ha! what a moron you are.

    so now you blame the dems for not oppposing what your war criminal president proposes? you really are a loser.

    Bob- the average American APPROVES of drilling in Alaska. SO maybe when the polls are not in your favor they are useless.

    oh really?..or should I say OReilly!
    Where did you hear that, on Fox news ?
    Yup the American people want the last remaining vestige of a pure wildlife area plundered by our oil companies !
    And they also support Bush's Iraq policy too, right ?

    Very constructive....Liberal Anon...insults and profanity will really get you far.

    Cursing the darkness (which for you is The President's war policy) seems foolish. Lighting the candle (which for you is bringing the troops home, and could be forced by your congressional leadership) seems like the right thing to do.

    Grim,

    Your citation didn't prove your second contention well and table one disproves your third contention entirely
    ==================================================
    What? How? Here's what I said:

    "3) MOST minimum wage earners are teens or some other member of a household so the 'rent' is rarely an issue."

    Table 1 does NOT give any idea on households, just a general breakdown of individuals so it it would be kind of hard for it to disprove the 2nd part of my contention, but for the first part...

    Look at the third column of Table 1)
    "Percent of workers paid hourly rates" Every high number there is on the 16-24 range, and even more concentrated in the 16-19 range. The first sentence of the bullet points even says (and I quote)
    "Minimum wage workers tend to be young. About half of all hourly-paid workers earning $5.15 or less were under age 25, and about one-fourth were age 16-19."

    And I posted a second link since I was afraid that an inflection from the first (hmmm.... let's see, number of people earning the minimum wage has decreased over a period time... what can we conclude from this?). But here it is again in case you're blind:
    "Analysis of US Census Bureau data shows the median raise these employees receive is six times higher than that of employees earning above the minimum wage."

    I mean really, I don't mind debate, but I do ask my opponents to try and think a bit or at least grasp what argument I'm making.

    Bob- read it and weep. All the left propoganda about dead wildlife and yet...

    "I enjoy political debate....I would like you to respond to the rest of the more cogent issues raised, professor."

    Dr. Lapdog carefully avoided my main points of what a flip flopper Bush is and why should we trust his judgement when his judgement with Iraq has turned out horribly wrong.

    So the fact that Bush said he'd listen to his commanders and generals and when they told him the opposite of what he wanted to hear, he either fired them or ignored them...is a cogent point ?

    Nice.

    I can see why you avoided these points.
    The reality of this situation conflicts with your continuing support of a president who has been consistently WRONG about everything he does.

    And you call me the flake!
    That's a good one, Dr Fraud !

    Bob- read it and weep. All the left propoganda about dead wildlife and yet...

    http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=539

    For the link deficient-
    The results showed 53 percent of the American people supported allowing companies the ability to drill for oil in certain areas such as the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR).

    Yup the American people want the last remaining vestige of a pure wildlife area plundered by our oil companies !
    ==================================================
    By the people living there? Quite a bit actually.
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/oil/anwar.html
    "A fair bit. Polls suggest that 75 per cent of Alaskans support developing the region. The Inupiat were initially opposed to opening up the region for oil exploration. But they've changed their minds in recent years. They see oil and the jobs that come with it as the best way to improve their lives. There are few jobs in their village and they've been left behind economically while the rest of Alaska is doing quite well."

    I have been curious about that as far as liberals are concerned so perhaps Bob can answer my question. When helping the poor "damages" the environment (or "helping" the environment hurts the poor, however you want to phrase it), which do you do?

    Dr. Lapdog carefully avoided my main points of what a flip flopper Bush is and why should we trust his judgement when his judgement with Iraq has turned out horribly wrong.

    So the fact that Bush said he'd listen to his commanders and generals and when they told him the opposite of what he wanted to hear, he either fired them or ignored them...is a cogent point ?

    Nice.

    I can see why you avoided these points.
    The reality of this situation conflicts with your continuing support of a president who has been consistently WRONG about everything he does.
    ==================================================
    Wait Bob...
    So Bush is a flip flopper when he does something different from what he said awhile back, but then you critisize him for "sticking to the same course" against all evidence to the contrary?

    So are you upset that he's a "flip flopper" or upset that he doesn't "flip flop" enough? Or are you just upset when it suits your purpose?

    Let's put this on a level that even Cee can understand.Cee says he wants a debate.

    OK..on one side is Cee and Bush.

    On the other side is the vast majority of the American people, military commanders and generals in iraq and the Joint Chiefs of Staff and a majority of the republicans in Congress.( that flaming liberal,Robert Novak predicted that Bush won't get 12 of 49 republicans in Congress to support him)

    Earth to Lapdog !
    Earth to Lapdog !

    Well, here's something that promises to be more interesting than "Countdown" next Thursday night:

    NEW YORK -- (BUSINESS WIRE) -- A colossal media event a year-and-a-half in the making will unfold when Stephen Colbert ventures into the "No Spin Zone" to make his debut guest appearance on FOX News Channel's (FNC) The O'Reilly Factor on Thursday, January 18th at 8:00 PM. Later that evening Bill O'Reilly will grab his American passport and head over to "Colbert Nation" for his debut appearance on COMEDY CENTRAL's The Colbert Report airing at 11:30 PM.

    Colbert commented, "I look forward to the evening. It is an honor to speak face-to-face with a broadcasting legend, and I feel the same way about Mr. O'Reilly."

    O'Reilly added, "I'm really looking forward to speaking to a man who owes his entire career to me!"

    http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/070109/20070109005987.html?.v=1

    ***

    I doubt this means we're any closer to ever seeing Keith show up on Hannity & Colmes, but it no doubt will give him some soundbites to use on January 19.


    how flattering that Keith gets all this attention from people who can't understand reality.

    I don't need to address the point, professor, because Bush's plan has had military input....please see my NYT article post yesterday morning, and the policy is ready to go.

    All it needs is congressional funding.

    The point YOU are avoiding is the fact that Bush may get this funding to increase the troop numbers DESPITE an election that (according to you) signaled the end on the war. The Congressional Democrats have to act in order to stop Bush from increasing the troops.

    So please, Professor, your continued insults of The President and me do nothing but show you are using the war as a political tool.

    Unless Bush is forced....either through funding cuts or removal from office...IMHO, he will do the right thing in helping the Iraqi people achieve security and a political resolution to the problems theny face as a people.

    You disagree....how do you prevail, professor? Your leaders in the congress have to do more than talk and pass symbolic legislation...don't they?

    Man John, i need to find a cable TV so I can watch that!

    I will admit, BillO comes off a little too snarky at times for my tastes and I do wish he had a bit more of a sense of a humor. Still, that could be an interesting night.

    Grim,

    No need to be nasty. If you look at Table one it shows TWICE the number of people ABOVE the age of twenty-five working for minimum wage compared to those below twenty five.

    If you must act superior, don't jump the gun...

    I'll even quote today's NYT regarding the lack of action by The Democrats in Congress...

    "Lawmakers said Senate Democrats appeared broadly united in opposition to Mr. Bush’s approach during their private luncheon on Tuesday. While there were a few senators who favored cutting off money for any troop increase, a handful of others expressed uncertainty about challenging the president on a potential war-powers issue.

    "'We have to be very careful about blocking funding for any troops because we don’t want to leave our troops short-changed,' said Senator Mary L. Landrieu, Democrat of Louisiana.

    "Yet a large share of the House Democratic caucus supports a stronger stance against the plan. It remained unclear whether a resolution would satisfy constituents."


    ###
    Why does Ms. Landrieu believe this, professor?
    The resolutions can be very specific regarding where the money goes and can even require Bush not to exceed certain troop levels....Again, let me quote kos on the legal precident:

    December 1970. P.L. 91-652 — Supplemental Foreign Assistance Law. The Church-Cooper amendment prohibited the use of any funds for the introduction of U.S. troops to Cambodia or provide military advisors to Cambodian forces.

    December 1974. P.L. 93-559 — Foreign Assistance Act of 1974. The Congress established a personnel ceiling of 4000 Americans in Vietnam within six months of enactment and 3000 Americans within one year.

    June 1983. P.L. 98-43 — The Lebanon Emergency Assistance Act of 1983. The Congress required the president to return to seek statutory authorization if he sought to expand the size of the U.S. contingent of the Multinational Force in Lebanon.

    June 1984. P.L. 98-525 — The Defense Authorization Act. The Congress capped the end strength level of United States forces assigned to permanent duty in European NATO countries at 324,400.

    November 1993. P.L. 103-139. The Congress limited the use of funding in Somalia for operations of U.S. military personnel only until March 31, 1994, permitting expenditure of funds for the mission thereafter only if the president sought and Congress provided specific authorization.

    Hello? Honeydew (Bob)?

    The Grim Challenger says:"So Bush is a flip flopper when he does something different from what he said awhile back, but then you critisize him for "sticking to the same course" against all evidence to the contrary?

    So are you upset that he's a "flip flopper" or upset that he doesn't "flip flop" enough? Or are you just upset when it suits your purpose?"

    I'm upset when he lies and more troops die b/c of them.
    "We're definitely winning the war in Iraq!"
    4 weeks later,"We're not winning , we're not losing "
    It's a full time job correcting the Bush supporters trying to defend their indefensible points of view.

    Stay the Course has been rejected by everyone.
    Agreed?
    Even though it was YOUR policy for years !
    Tough to be reminded of that fact, isn't it ?

    The change of course that has been spoken loud and clear by the American people IS NOT an escalation of the war.
    IS NOT!

    Bush said he'd listen to his generals and then didn't..or fired them.

    And none of these examples register as folly in your little brain?

    I know being a Bush supporter is really hard work and a full time (thankless) job....but how you can continue to support a man who has been wrong about everything in Iraq, lies about us winning the war, and doesn't listen to his generals after he said he would?

    Lucy, you have some espplaining to do !

    "Unless Bush is forced....either through funding cuts or removal from office...IMHO, he will do the right thing in helping the Iraqi people achieve security and a political resolution to the problems theny face as a people."

    It's only the "right thing" if the Iraqis want it - WE cannot want success there MORE than they do. Otherwise we'll be there forever.

    "You disagree....how do you prevail, professor? Your leaders in the congress have to do more than talk and pass symbolic legislation...don't they?"

    Yes, but let's say Congress does pass a troop cap or funding cut. Bush vetoes it. Congress manages to override the veto (it's possible given the current political climate). Bush ignores them and sends the troops anyway.

    BANG - Constitutional crisis.

    The professor seems incapable of holding anyone else accountable regarding Iraq.

    Senator Kennedy has taken it upon himself to show some spine to end the war, professor....why do others in his caucus seem hesitant? You are SILENT about this....

    You are from NJ.....What is Menendez and Lautenburg saying about cutting funding? How about your Huse rep....is he or she willing to stand up and stop Bush?

    Grim,

    No need to be nasty. If you look at Table one it shows TWICE the number of people ABOVE the age of twenty-five working for minimum wage compared to those below twenty five.

    If you must act superior, don't jump the gun...
    ==================================================
    My apologies, some of the very rude morons here have a tendency to callous one.

    But I'm looking at the graph and it says:
    "At 5.15 an hour" for 25 and over: 249
    for 16-24: 272

    for "below 5.15 an hour"
    25+: 733
    16-24: 750

    What's the TOTAL working at or below 5.15 an hour? It says:
    25+: 982
    16-24: 1,022

    So umm..... what table are you looking at? I'm looking at http://www.bls.gov/cps/minwage2004tbls.htm#1

    Dr Lapdog continues to furiously cut and paste but absolutely refuses to touch my questions.

    Do I need ask them again?

    How dense are you?

    How can you support a president who lies ?
    He said he'll listen to his commanders and generals..and then doesn't...or fires them.

    and

    How can we trust and believe a president who has a new plan when every other plan hasn't worked?

    I know these are real hard questions for you, but by avoiding them just makes you look like the fraud we all prove you are on a daily basis.

    The professor seems incapable of holding anyone else accountable regarding Iraq.

    And you have held Bush accountable for the failures in Iraq?

    Touche...big time.

    And my representative Rob Andrews just came out today and said he WILL NOT support an escalation of the war.

    "BANG - Constitutional crisis"....this is better than two more years of a domestic political spat that does nothing but make The United States look foolish, divided and impotent.

    I say go for it....right is right and if the anti-war left is so confident of their position and we need to be out of Iraq over the next 12-18 months....they should start the process.

    I'm upset when he lies and more troops die b/c of them.
    "We're definitely winning the war in Iraq!"
    4 weeks later,"We're not winning , we're not losing "
    It's a full time job correcting the Bush supporters trying to defend their indefensible points of view.
    ==================================================
    What? You've never heard of (or thought it possible) for a war's course to change within four weeks? I'm not justifying it, I'm just saying I don't see a problem with it because war's are static, things change and adjust faster than weather.

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Stay the Course has been rejected by everyone.
    Agreed?
    Even though it was YOUR policy for years !
    Tough to be reminded of that fact, isn't it ?

    The change of course that has been spoken loud and clear by the American people IS NOT an escalation of the war.
    IS NOT!

    Bush said he'd listen to his generals and then didn't..or fired them.

    And none of these examples register as folly in your little brain?
    ==================================================
    MY policy? OOOOO do I finally get my wish and am in charge now?

    But seriously, no they don't really register as "folly" to me. Do I think they are wise moves, eh maybe not what I would have done, but then I can understand Bush's motivations. (and no, it's not for oil)

    Professor Honeydew.....

    I will not debate you as you change the subject everytime I pose a specific question. You know my answers to the following questions you asked in response to my questions......

    "How can you support a president who lies?"
    I have answered this question several times, the same way, by saying your premise is false: Bush has not lied.

    "How can we trust and believe a president who has a new plan when every other plan hasn't worked?"

    This is a totally silly question because I am not asking you to trust Bush....I realize you hate him and are against his policies in Iraq so I ask you what you are going to do about it.

    Lastly,
    Will Rob Andrews vote to stop funding Bush's requests if they include dramatic troop increases?

    Grim,

    First table, third and fourth lines.

    "We're definitely winning the war in Iraq!"
    4 weeks later,"We're not winning , we're not losing "
    It's a full time job correcting the Bush supporters trying to defend their indefensible points of view.
    ==================================================
    What? You've never heard of (or thought it possible) for a war's course to change within four weeks? I'm not justifying it, I'm just saying I don't see a problem with it because war's are static, things change and adjust faster than weather.

    Grim believes that the course of the Iraq War has changed in a few weeks !
    So we were winning in November, but not winning in December, even though the evidence has shown we haven't been winning for years.

    This Bush Apologists Syndrome is starting to rot out the brains of the right...it already got Grim's.

    Hey Grim, wasn't it a clue that the official news gathering agency Of the White House hasn't been in Iraq for a long time now...B/C IT'S TOO UNSAFE FOR THEM TO BE THERE ?

    Sherlock Holmes you ain't.

    "How can you support a president who lies?"
    Cee hysterically says:I have answered this question several times, the same way, by saying your premise is false: Bush has not lied.

    Even though the evidence proves otherwise.
    I'm not surprised you wouldn't touch the proof Bush lied when he said he'd listen to his generals...and then didn't..or worse...fired them.

    The facts are like Kryptonite to the (not so good )doctor...and he proved it again.


    One final attempt.....

    (All of Professor Honeydew's (Bob) posts are ancillary to the topic at hand. He will not commit to a plan that will take The United States on a different course from President Bush's plan.)

    Professor,

    Insulting me, Grim, Grammie, Cecelia or any other person on this site only shows you as a provocteur. A provocateur who has no ideas for constructive progress with regards to the war in Iraq.

    If there is such a small amount of public support for The President and he is such an unintelligent nimrod...it should be rather clear what the next course of action should be.....

    Strong Congressional legislation that does what was done in 1970....laws that place limits on Bush's ability to prosecute the war.

    DO YOU UNDERSTAND ME, PROFESSOR?

    What evidence? Show me facts...not your opinion for once!

    The military commanders have given Bush many options, professor. Even today, in the Washington post, shows agreement over the troop surge by Bush's military advisors:

    "The Joint Chiefs came to accept Bush's wishes, especially after new Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates traveled to Iraq last month with the Joint Chiefs chairman, Gen. Peter Pace, said a U.S. official familiar with the trip. Gates met with Maliki, who laid out more details about the Iraqi plan for Baghdad.

    "That gave them enough to define a mission and its objectives," the official said. "They came back satisfied."

    In the end, the White House favored the idea of more troops as one visible and dramatic step the administration could take. One senior White House official said this week the president concluded that more troops are not the only ingredient of a successful plan -- but they are a precondition to providing the security the Iraqi government needs for political reconciliation and other reforms.

    Tonight, this source said, the president will explain "that we have to go up before we go down."

    ###
    You see professor, you lie about the lies! You are a foolish man who runs away from real debate by changing the subject. No more, professor....I will not respond anymore to a silly, pathetic whiner who is so impotent that he is unable to engage in a logical debate.

    cee,

    You left out part of the article -

    "Pentagon insiders say members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have long opposed the increase in troops and are only grudgingly going along with the plan because they have been promised that the military escalation will be matched by renewed political and economic efforts in Iraq."

    Yes, they are going along with the plan...BUT ONLY because they were promised that the military option would not be the sole operating factor.

    Lapdog is starting to lose it...I understand Cee.

    Bush did lie when he wouldn't listen to his commanders and generals in the field..and you know it...
    Which is why you're off on your next adventure....

    (All of Professor Honeydew's (Bob) posts are ancillary to the topic at hand.

    It's YOUR topic, Cee.You wouldn't address mine.

    And if or when and how the Democrats restrict funding or just try to stop the war profiteering remains to be seen and will be dealt with...in a timely but sensible manner...and I hope they make the correct choice.

    Your party had 4 years to right this travesty of a war. Now you're demanding action by the Democrats, immediately.
    What a phony !

    But refusing to address Bush not listening to his generals in the field .. is totally revealing and says a lot about you and the "truthstick " you like to whip out.
    This additionally proves exactly who you are,Cee: a Bush lapdog who is blind to the horrors this president is responsible for, and continues to make excuses for him even when the obvious proof that he is a liar is staring at you in the face.

    These are just the facts !

    and you say I'm a provocateur, eh?
    Thank you, I'll drink to that.( diet coke )

    cee,

    You left out part of the article -
    Ensign

    Of course he did. Lapdog has tunnel vision of everything the Bush Administration does and says.

    It's not like we don't have your number, Cee.

    TDF.

    WAPO-Wednesday, January 10, 2007;

    Senate Republicans, dreading President Bush's prime-time address tonight calling for more U.S. troops in Iraq, emerged from their weekly party luncheon yesterday displaying more dance steps than the Joffrey Ballet.

    Cee is signing up with some of them for the latest installment of Dancing with the Stars !

    Even to this day seeing the bumbling,incompetent George W Bush making decisions that will affect the lives of so many is really, really hard to fathom.

    GOP senators in disarray:

    Sen. Lott: "I Want To See What He's Proposing Before I Make Dramatic Statements"Sen. Voinovich: "We Need More Information, Okay?". Sen. Sununu "It Wouldn't Be Wise For Me To Suggest That I Do Or Don't Know Whether Their Conditions Are Appropriate"Sen. Snowe: "I Have Deep Skepticism About It"


    and this is OTHER side, the Bush supporters !

    The OLbyhaters got nothing !

    The more we see, the more it appears that militarily and strategically, the surge/escalation/whatever it is just does not amount to much - i.e., it is not fundamentally different from what we've seen before.

    The single selling point for this is that it is, indeed, different, a "new way forward." But the one thing that really is new - Bush overruling the generals - isn't exactly reassuring.
    Now it's all in the president's hands. Yikes.

    Meanwhile, there are three clear echoes of past mistakes, George W. Bush's familiar cul de sacs.

    One: in the overall scheme of things, 20,000 troops aren't all that many. There aren't more available. At least, not without some big and inadvisable strategic changes in our deployments that no one wants make. If the president really wanted to "double down" on Iraq, he'd do this. But he's not. He's just trying to squeeze more juice out of the rind.

    Two: The generals were apparently convinced to come on board not because of the compelling military logic of the White House's arguments, but because of a commitment for more nonmilitary money and programs:

    Pentagon insiders say members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have long opposed the increase in troops and are only grudgingly going along with the plan because they have been promised that the military escalation will be matched by renewed political and economic efforts in Iraq.

    "Political and economic efforts"? Nation building? Now? It was never the Pentagon's strong suit, and all those schools they built (and, it must be noted, the even more stuff that they failed to build due to contracting snafus) haven't made much difference in Iraq's slide into civil war.

    Three: This appears innocuous, but the president spent a lot of time teleconferencing with Maliki on their joint plans, and apparently became convinced of his commitment and ability to deliver:

    The president and prime minister spoke by secure video conference, with the second half of the conversation involving only the two leaders and their translators, Snow said.

    Whenever Bush personally bonds with a foreign leader, it's a red flag. Putin's soul and so on. As we've seen many times, the president's sincere belief that someone's a "good man" has nothing to do with what that man will actually do.

    Blair is a good man... Putin is a necessary ally.

    "Pentagon insiders say members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have long opposed the increase in troops and are only grudgingly going along with the plan because they have been promised that the military escalation will be matched by renewed political and economic efforts in Iraq."

    Who and when were these promises made.....go to my quote from the same article....

    EE....Your quote is consistent with my quote because The Joints Chiefs, "were satisfied," after meeting with Maliki....Selecting specific quotes from the article to make it seem like Bush is ALL by himself in the troop surge (along with me, according to Professor Honeydew), is disengenuous. Also, if Bush is such a bungler and idiot...why would these professional men EVER indulge in public support for the troop increase?

    My point remains: Those who MATTER (those who have power) are 180 degrees apart.....The Democratic Leadership want the troop level decreased....Bush wants more troops....who will prevail AND WHY?

    EE, you seem to be a little more reasonable than the dear professor who only has insults and emotion for responses (it almost feels like he is manic). One final question....

    I anticipate a very clear plan to be presented tonight by The President. If the plan calls for more troops in Iraq, what will the proper Democratic Congressional leadership ACTION be, in your opinion?

    The dear, demented professor may choose to answer as well, if he can manage to stay on point....

    Grim,

    First table, third and fourth lines.
    ===============================================
    Ok, on those lines you have
    25+: 982
    16-19: 497

    Which umm... leaves out a six year span there. Using the total 16-25 (1022) minus the 16-19 comes out to 525. Which means several things
    1) If you want to pick and choose segments, then you can prove almost anything. Heck, I'm sure fewer 16 year olds make the minimum wage than workers 17 and older.
    2) Percentages are also important here. Look at the TOTALS of wage earners.
    25+: 57,765
    16-24: 16,174
    Now, subtract the number making the minimum wage or less and we get how many are making MORE than the minimum wage.
    25+: 56,783
    16-24: 15,152
    Which means while double 25+ might be making minimum wage compared to 16-19 range, more than TRIPLE 25+ are making HIGHER than minimum wage compared to 16-24.
    Narrow it down to 16-19: 4936
    and then you get MORE THAN TEN TIMES the number of 25+ workers earning OVER the minimum wage compared to teens.

    So again, what was your point?

    ... Putin is a necessary ally.

    Posted by: Benson at January 10, 2007 01:35 PM

    Saddam used to be one, as was Bin Laden actualy.

    Anonymous, Bob, et al,

    If you believe what you argue vehemently here, you should be completely angry at the Democratic party for allowing first, Bush to get re-elected. Talk about a spineless nimrod- Kerry fits the bill! He didn't fight back, couldn't relate to the average Joe (people who voted for him voted against Bush), and had so much obvious baggage! Wesley Clark seems to be your man. Then, the Democrats allowed this war to happen; they allowed it because they didn't want to appear anti-military; people were still pretty emotional about 9/11 and they didn't want to speak out. They stayed silent over the issue of nation building, the potential for disaster by imposing democratic rule on a Muslim nation. You should be angry at the Democratic party for everything they have allowed to happen. Mike continually makes convoluted defenses for them (in a respectful way) as if they are mentally challenged and couldn't think for themselves. And they are the majority now?

    BTW, there are so many anon's that I don't know which anon said early this morning that no Republican would support an investigation into Raytheon Corp. Karris56' comment reminded about that issue (I saw that story exposed and was angry about it) and there should be an investigation. Are there any democrats taking the lead and pushing it forward?

    Grim believes that the course of the Iraq War has changed in a few weeks !
    So we were winning in November, but not winning in December, even though the evidence has shown we haven't been winning for years.
    ==================================================
    Wow Bob, what is it like to live in such a simplistic world view?

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    This Bush Apologists Syndrome is starting to rot out the brains of the right...it already got Grim's.

    Hey Grim, wasn't it a clue that the official news gathering agency Of the White House hasn't been in Iraq for a long time now...B/C IT'S TOO UNSAFE FOR THEM TO BE THERE ?

    Sherlock Holmes you ain't.
    ==================================================
    No, I get my clues from a family member that's over there and actually works with getting press releases out etc. (I'd post some things but 1) don't want to reveal my identity to crazies - not because i'm afraid, but because I don't want to go through a trial explaining why your bodies are on my lawn and 2) I obviously don't want to reveal his identity without his permission) In fact, have you ever seen www.theotheriraq.com? Go check it out and get back to me k?

    Bob, this is the third time I'm posting this.

    Bob, you have gleefully stated dozens of times that the Dems won on an antiwar platform and had a mandate from the American people, 85% to be exact, to get us the hell out of Iraq. For the moment we'll leave aside your other claimed mandates.

    You campaigned and won on the antiwar mandate. Now you are testy because you won and those evil repubs are asking you how are you going to accomplish it, when and what you expect the outcome to be. And that corner you claim to occupy was forced on you in a Karl Rovian dirty trick.

    Bob, you and 85% of the American public are at the plate. So, what are you going to do? Get called out on strikes; bunt; pray for a walk; or if you don't get a hit or a homerun at least go down swinging.

    Chickenhawks indeed.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Posted by: Janet Hawkins at January 9, 2007 11:02 AM

    And as an added bonus I get to use my name a few more times.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Saddam neutralized Iran for almost 20 years.
    Bin Laden did the same to russia.

    What's your point....?
    Time changes things, like your positions.
    You may notice america previously supported
    the war AND now they don't.

    Grim,

    I read the Jawa Report now and then and I did see something from The oTher Iraq. It was a positive story and before realizing that Olby is totally off his rocker, I e-mailed it to him.

    BTW, there are so many anon's that I don't know which anon said early this morning that no Republican would support an investigation into Raytheon Corp. Karris56' comment reminded about that issue (I saw that story exposed and was angry about it) and there should be an investigation. Are there any democrats taking the lead and pushing it forward?
    ==================================================
    I 2nd that. Despite the projectionist assumptions of SOME around here, I don't really have tolerance for corruption by anyone (hence why I always favor as little government as possible, less for corruption to damage). Of course, there have been so many "alarms" here lately (fitzmas anyone?) that you shouldn't mistake caution for reluctance. Investigations? Sure! Let's do it! But I'm not going to presume someone guilty until proven innocent.

    "Also, if Bush is such a bungler and idiot...why would these professional men EVER indulge in public support for the troop increase?"

    Because he is the Commander-in-Chief, they are officers, and they can be court-martialed under Article 88 of the UCMJ for "contempt towards officials". They can criticize in private, but PUBLIC opposition to the President is risky for them.

    "If the plan calls for more troops in Iraq, what will the proper Democratic Congressional leadership ACTION be, in your opinion?"

    I support Kennedy's legislation in theory, because at least then we'll have a debate over WHAT the mission is and an up-or-down vote on it rather than the rhetoric. I may have quibbles with the wording.

    I would suggest that Congress look at using their authority to cut funding FOR THE PURPOSES OF ESCALATION ONLY. It seems moderates are willing to come along with that while not alienating the majority of Americans. With that leverage, the Congress might be able to at least get the President to either pursue more diplomatic options or set hard-and-fast guidelines for the Iraqis so that they aren't relying on us to be the "policeman".

    Grim,

    Percentages don't mean anything when they are applied to groups, only to the whole. You misrepresented the data, probably unintentionally.

    My original purpose was to discuss the effect of minimum wage hikes upon those earning slightly above minimum wage; however, I was sidetracked after checking your data.

    Grammie....it seems pointless....

    The professor only wants an issue for the next 2 years so that someone he agrees with ideologically has a better chance to occupy The White House.

    I hope his type is the minority in his cadre.... because if this IS all about politics for a large section of the left's ruling class, Vietnam and its aftermath will seem like Camelot compared to what will occur in The Middle East.

    I just feel bad for the troops and the Iraqis who have to wait for help in a very destabalized, terror filled environment for the American ruling class, "to get their political ducks in a row."

    Grammie,

    You are like a broken record of an imbecile chanting a nursery rhyme that he doesn't entirely know. Bush is still commander in chief. He still controls what the military does. The democrats only control the purse-strings. Learn about how our nation works before engaging in political debate, eh?...

    John McQuaid, are you saying, or implying, that the highest military leaders in the country have the right to dispute its civilian leadership. I quote you:

    "Two: The generals were apparently convinced to come on board not because of the compelling military logic of the White House's arguments, but because of a commitment for more nonmilitary money and programs:

    Pentagon insiders say members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have long opposed the increase in troops and are only grudgingly going along with the plan because they have been promised that the military escalation will be matched by renewed political and economic efforts in Iraq."

    Convinced to come on board? Only grudgingly going along?

    When did this momumental change take place and our military became independent of civilian control?

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    And anon 1:59, you are a moron....Congress could stop the increase EASILY with passage of Kennedy's bill.....Why don't you get informed about current events?

    I agree with you EE with regards to the congressional action....It would make for an honest process. Thank you.

    I disagree with you regarding The Joints Chiefs....I can be sure that newspaper reports would not have them actually MAKING a plan for increased troops they felt was militarily foolish, chain of command or not. In addition, with a new defense secretary in the mix, there is no way a troop increase would occur if there was unanimous dissent for any change in direction. In any event, Bush is NOT alone in his opinion that more troops would benefit Iraq's security situation.

    Anon, thank you for acknowledging what some seem to have a difficulty with. Bush can listen, or not, to the military. If the military can not in good conscience follow the CIC, they can resign and speak to their heart's content.

    I don't put much credence in these reports, one way or the other, about the interplay between GWB and the military leaders.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    anon(2:09),

    The president can deploy all he wants and wait for the money to run out, then whine that he doesn't have the money to support the troops. If you must discuss politics on an American board, learn about our government.

    Thanks.

    Bob, you and 85% of the American public are at the plate. So, what are you going to do?

    Was this from Janet Hawkins?
    Grammie?
    Can't be sure.
    Maybe if you wrote your name just a few more times we'll know for sure.

    I haven't answered b/c of how stupid the question is.

    The vast majority of Americans who want out of Iraq DON'T make public policy.

    Guess what? I don't either !
    You didn't know that?
    Or were you just being glib and snide as you always are ?

    What do I expect the outcome to be?
    I haven't a clue.I can't predict the future.
    I have stated numerous times that if it were up to me, the troops would already be on ships coming home and the enabling of the Iraqi army would cease and they would defend their own country.
    I hope the Democrats cut off funding and permit just enough to get our troops out of the country safely.
    I know you think all Democrats think alike....and are going to hold me personally responsible for whatever the Dems do.
    Just like you have taken responsibility for all the failures of administration policy the past 6 years? (in all areas)

    You're funny.

    Get called out on strikes; bunt; pray for a walk; or if you don't get a hit or a homerun at least go down swinging.

    It's the bottom on the ninth, the home team is behind 245-3, and you're looking for the other team (dems) to commit an error or two so you can laugh at their mistakes and claim a moral victory.
    Such good sportsmanship !
    and so....YOU.

    Anon at 2:09 PM was me....sorry to increase the confusion.

    Grammie....John McQuaid is quoting from the same WaPo article I referenced....."Insiders" who won't be quoted by name are like the Anons on this site.....annoying. It is ridiculous that the press and many of the public make judgements based on anonymous sources.

    I do not believe the generals were 100% opposed to a troop increase and then talked into making a plan for The President to pursue actually calling for increases. Contigencies are always at the ready in organizations depending on the reality on the ground AND the goals. The military likely had preconditions that the political people had to meet before they agreed to have a plan involving the surge. That is why the end of the article is so important regarding the generals meeting with Gates and Maliki.

    Grammie....John McQuaid is quoting from the same WaPo article I referenced....."Insiders" who won't be quoted by name are like the Anons on this site.....annoying. It is ridiculous that the press and many of the public make judgements based on anonymous sources.

    Cee, John McQuaid wrote the article, you dimbulb,

    You said you referenced it, but you don't know who wrote it.
    Idiot.

    Grim,

    Percentages don't mean anything when they are applied to groups, only to the whole. You misrepresented the data, probably unintentionally.
    ==================================================
    ? I... guess as soon as I figure out what you're meaning is. But table 7 gives the details by ages.
    Highest group? 20-24: 523.
    2nd highest? 16-19: 497
    3rd highest? 25-34: 384

    Lowest group total? (tie) 60-64 & 65-69: 41

    Also table 8 has martial status data. Very interesting...
    Never Married? 1,244 (16-24: 940, 25+: 303)
    Married Spouse Present? 481 (16-24: 65, 25+: 416)
    Other Martial Status? 278 (16-24: 16, 25+:263)

    So let's run all these numbers together...
    Grand total of people making minimum wage or less?
    2,003
    Number less than 20? 497
    Number between 20 and 24? 523
    Number married and over 25? 416
    Total? 1436

    The total of the first two? 1020
    Number of the first two married? 65

    Considering the recent data showing that children are wait to move out till they are almost 30, it would again seem to support my statement that most making minimum wage, are part of a larger household and they don't have to worry about "rent" as much.

    Hey Olby haters and Bush apologists :turn on MSNBC, all day today they are discussing Iraq and Nixon's, excuse me, Bush's escalation of the war.

    Maybe you can go over someone's house , Cee.

    Anon...you are a fool...If the Congress passes a bill like:

    June 1984. P.L. 98-525 — The Defense Authorization Act. The Congress capped the end strength level of United States forces assigned to permanent duty in European NATO countries at 324,400.

    And Bush's expected veto is overturned.....he has to comply.

    Also, specific funds can be restricted as part of the supplement that will be debated in February.

    Stop making excuses for the very powerful Democratic Majority....they could force Bush's hand.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sen-edward-m-kennedy-/escalation-its-not-his-_b_38216.html

    Cee :Bush is NOT alone in his opinion that more troops would benefit Iraq's security situation.

    Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

    this man is delusional.

    Technically he's not alone, honestly he's on an island and a tsumami is on the way.

    Well Cee, I think I got a bigger non answer and more pitying self righteous whining from Bob than you did.

    Bob never once gloated that he and his won a mandate and were going to impeach and hang Bush right after getting the troops out of Iraq, which would immediately bring peace and light to the world.

    What a putz.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    I feel a bit frisky today. I'll celebrate by doing my signature signature again. Oh, Cee my signature signature is Janet Hawkins, AKA Grammie.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    For some reason it perturbs some here who also don't like my icy veins.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Big deal anon....I should have typed John McQuaid is quotED.....excuse me for making a mistake....

    As usual, a schlemiel (who uses Anon) can't defend their pathetic position instead parces a poster's grammar or spelling.

    BTW, I am working and post when I can.....I'm not sitting on my butt at home spilling Twinkee crumbs on my chest as I watch TV.

    Grim,

    The fact that a lot of the people in the minimum wage group are young and unmarried is very disturbing considering the extrodinary number of unwed mothers in our country today.

    Let me get this straight.

    Bringing 20,000 more troops is going to secure Iraq, even though we've had MORE than 20,000 troops in Iraq at various times with the same disastrous results.

    Right Cee?

    So it's going to be different this time, I see, Cee.

    Because George said it would !
    And we have seen HIS batting average in iraq.
    0-4 years !

    Technically he's not alone, honestly he's on an island and a tsumami is on the way.

    Posted by: Bushkill Falls, Pa at January 10, 2007 02:29 PM

    Actually he is far removed other than politicaly from the tsunami. It is the troops he is sending in that will have to face it.

    If you are really so sure it will fail and hundreds, if not thousands of more people will needlessly die....then the congress should cut Bush's funding, Bushkill......it would be stopped as easily as that and Congress could do it by the end of February.

    Will they?

    I hope you and your ilk are still posting come February!

    Glad you're so giddy about our so-called failure in Iraq. We and Iraqi forces had a major engagement on Hiafa Street versus Sunni insurgents yesterday. Since you're so into scorecards, here's how that battle ended up:

    US/Iraqi force casualties: 0
    Militants killed: 50

    I know this disappoints you, but our military in addition to 20,000 extra troops will destroy this insurgency once and for all, sending a message to the world that we don't quit, which is exactly what people like you, Mike and Bob want us to do.

    "It is the troops he is sending in that will have to face it."

    No more troops have to go if Senator Kennedy gets his bill passed.

    Grammie looks to cee for comfort and support.
    TDF
    There's safety in numbers for Grammie, especially when they're on the wrong side of the issues.
    Misery loves company.

    and she calls my honest response a non-answer and for not gloating about"he and his won a mandate and were going to impeach and hang Bush right after getting the troops out of Iraq, which would immediately bring peace and light to the world.

    Huh ?

    and then the kindly grandmother adds,

    "What a putz."

    Grammie,to say you have ice water in your veins would be admitting that you at least have a pulse.
    I made a mistake.

    Let's recapitulate.
    You support the most disgraced president in American history, he has almost completely lost the support of the American people,made the worst foreign policy decision probably ...ever...and is laughed at by anyone within the sound of his voice.

    And I'm the putz.

    Yessiree, more clear-headed analysis by the queen of the laundrmat.

    Grim,

    The fact that a lot of the people in the minimum wage group are young and unmarried is very disturbing considering the extrodinary number of unwed mothers in our country today.
    ==================================================
    Well, I agree there. So what should be done? Try to discourage out of wedlock and teen births or raise the minimum wage? Since study after study shows that raising that wage just TAKES jobs from those who need it most (and encourages outsourcing as well), I'm voting more for the former.

    Delusional Red State:I know this disappoints you, but our military in addition to 20,000 extra troops will destroy this insurgency once and for all, sending a message to the world that we don't quit, which is exactly what people like you, Mike and Bob want us to do.

    Then explain why we didn't destroy the insurgency when we DID have 20,000 and more troops before.

    I'll await your response.

    but our military in addition to 20,000 extra troops will destroy this insurgency once and for all, sending a message to the world that we don't quit,

    Please, tell me one public official( other than the ones on this site who live in Neverland) who has gone on record and predicted this outcome.

    Cee, I don't understand why the dems are holding back on their promises. I know, because Bob told me so dozens of times a day, that they ran on an antiwar get out of Iraq platform, won in a landside and have a mandate.

    Now all we get is political stalling moves in Kennedy's bill, whining about Karl Rovian dirty tricks and the same-o, same-o ultimate crying jag foot stomping you made the mistake you can't blame me if I can't fix it.

    Can you see their signs at a war protest. Billboard size because it will have to say we really really want to get out of Iraq right now but Bush and Rove won't let us because than they will tell the American people we don't support the troops and if we lose the next election we'll never get out of Iraq but if you support us we'll do it when it won't be a political risk.

    If I believed what they claim to believe I would be holding the Dems feet to the fire in every way I could. And I would not defend them. If you don't do that you are saying that more deaths in Iraq are AOK IF they die to keep the Dems in power.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Grim's against raising the minimum wage, that hasn't been raised in 10 years.

    Where do these people come from ?

    Cee, I don't understand why the dems are holding back on their promises. I know, because Bob told me so dozens of times a day, that they ran on an antiwar get out of Iraq platform, won in a landside and have a mandate.

    Now all we get is political stalling moves in Kennedy's bill, whining about Karl Rovian dirty tricks and the same-o, same-o ultimate crying jag foot stomping you made the mistake you can't blame me if I can't fix it.

    Can you see their signs at a war protest. Billboard size because it will have to say we really really want to get out of Iraq right now but Bush and Rove won't let us because than they will tell the American people we don't support the troops and if we lose the next election we'll never get out of Iraq but if you support us we'll do it when it won't be a political risk.

    If I believed what they claim to believe I would be holding the Dems feet to the fire in every way I could. And I would not defend them. If you don't do that you are saying that more deaths in Iraq are AOK IF they die to keep the Dems in power.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Let's recapitulate.
    You support the most disgraced president in American history, he has almost completely lost the support of the American people,made the worst foreign policy decision probably ...ever...and is laughed at by anyone within the sound of his voice.

    And I'm the putz.

    Posted by: Bob at January 10, 2007 02:52 PM


    That's the way they see things Bob. More realisicly, what they really believe in is being against what they consider liberal or left wing view points, even if it costs lives of servicemen. They must have read a book or had a teacher in school that pointed them in the direction of being a stuborn bull headed anti anything not of the right. There is no integrity in being that way. They just amuse themseves by pissing people with brains off. Sad and pathetic.

    Well, now we have a new wrinkle...according to the AP, the first brigade (of 5 expected to deploy) will be on the ground in just five days.

    So even if Congress voted not to fund it, President Bush could actually let it sit on his desk long enough for the troops to actually get there, then veto it. That puts Congress in a bind because now the troops are there and have to be supported.

    Now the Iraqis have promised three brigades - one by February 1st and the others by Feb. 15th. Let's see if they meet this benchmark. I'm not holding my breath, however.

    Sorry for the double post. I have problems when I get a blank white screen. Anyone able to help me out and not double post.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    I think Janet has had a brain aneurysm. Her logic keeps getting more convoluted each day.

    PS Kennedy's bill is not a political stalling bill.

    (This coming from a wench that gave the do nothing GOP Congress a free ride for 6 years)

    Senator Kennedy showed that it is possible to express Democratic thoughts with equal clarity if you know what you believe and are willing to say it.

    He's for engaging in the political process, unlike what's we've seen the past 6 years.

    No wonder it's all an anathema to Janet Hawkins A.K.A. Grammie, the imposter.

    Now all we get is political stalling moves in Kennedy's bill, whining about Karl Rovian dirty tricks and the same-o, same-o ultimate crying jag foot stomping you made the mistake you can't blame me if I can't fix it.

    Posted by: Janet Hawkins at January 10, 2007 03:04 PM

    Love the way you feel like it's now time to hold congress accountable, ignoring the fact that you couldn't care less what they do as long as you agree with them. Like the way they sucked this administrations ass for the last 6 years while you cheered them on. No integrity. No real plan for anything other than being against Democrats. While you accuse them of doing nothing you supported a bunch of losers. The end is near for your appointed leader of dumbness.

    "So even if Congress voted not to fund it, President Bush could actually let it sit on his desk long enough for the troops to actually get there, then veto it. That puts Congress in a bind because now the troops are there and have to be supported."

    Oops, that makes mincemeat of all of Grammie and Lapdog's points.
    Damn reality!

    Sorry for the double post. I have problems when I get a blank white screen. Anyone able to help me out and not double post.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Posted by: Janet Hawkins at January 10, 2007 03:07 PM

    After you hit the post button sometimes it goes to a white screen. Hit the back button and then refresh.

    Grim's against raising the minimum wage, that hasn't been raised in 10 years.

    Where do these people come from ?
    ==================================================
    BK, What was even your point? You came in tail end of a conversation another poster (who is a good deal more coherent and intelligent than you) and I were having over the minimum wage.

    Really, can we get SOME coherence among the "leftist" around here? (not consistency, I'd settle for coherence!) Except for Mike, he's alright. I'd like to order a dozen more Mike's please. (well, so far Donora seems ok, but I haven't gotten to read much of her stuff)


    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Sorry for the double post. I have problems when I get a blank white screen. Anyone able to help me out and not double post.
    =================================================
    Janet, best thing to do is right before you post, select all in the comment box (ctrl+A) and then copy it (ctrl+C). Then if you get the white screen, go immediately back to the main site and check the board for whatever you were posting to to see if your message was put up. (if it hasn't, you can paste your comment into the comment box and try again with ctrl+V)

    "So even if Congress voted not to fund it, President Bush could actually let it sit on his desk long enough for the troops to actually get there, then veto it. That puts Congress in a bind because now the troops are there and have to be supported."

    Um, no....do I have to post it a sixth time?:

    December 1970. P.L. 91-652 — Supplemental Foreign Assistance Law. The Church-Cooper amendment prohibited the use of any funds for the introduction of U.S. troops to Cambodia or provide military advisors to Cambodian forces.

    December 1974. P.L. 93-559 — Foreign Assistance Act of 1974. The Congress established a personnel ceiling of 4000 Americans in Vietnam within six months of enactment and 3000 Americans within one year.

    November 1993. P.L. 103-139. The Congress limited the use of funding in Somalia for operations of U.S. military personnel only until March 31, 1994, permitting expenditure of funds for the mission thereafter only if the president sought and Congress provided specific authorization.

    ###
    The Somalia bill is particularly applicable to The Iraq War. And again, EE, if Bush tries to keep troops in Iraq without proper funding, the political support he does have would evaporate...mine included (surprised professor?)...Do not be so cynical and assume President Bush is as diabolical as the radical left has him. The oversite The Constitution gave Congress is not up for political manipulation.

    And before I hear the old song again about how The Republican Congress did not properly supervise Bush, the election solved this problem....I did not agree with it, but unlike the radical left who still cannot accept the 2000 and 2004 Presidential election results, I respect the results and say...."Have at it, Democrats....let's see your policies!"

    So stop the whining Donora, Pa......The Democrats should not use Iraq as a political issue....they should stick to their expressed convictions and get these troops home by the end of Bush's term.


    Antiwar protests, holding the Dems feet to the fire, yada yada yada

    Janet Aka Grammie, since I gave you an honest answer to your question, what don't you answer the question about the 10 ton elephant in the room.

    Which is, how come you are frothing at the mouth for the Democrats to do something in Congress, yesterday, but haven't held the GOP Congress and president accountable in 6 years ?
    You want action NOW, from Democrats, but la-de-daing the past 6 years with your side in power.

    Do you consider yourself a fair individual?
    If so, explain this enigma to all on the board.

    well, so far Donora seems ok, but I haven't gotten to read much of her stuff)

    Hey Grim: Donora, PA is a city in Pennsylvania, thus the PA. And she's a he !

    I just read a story on tvnewser.com that Keith and Geraldo are exchanging barbs. LOL. What a couple of blowhards.

    Keith is hanging his out of shape 6'4" frame against Geraldo's shorter stature. Geraldo may be shorter and older, but he's somewhat of an athlete, sailed solo on a big adventure, and a street kid in his younger days. I might pick Keith if it was a sports trivia contest, but a fight. Ummm ... Keith, sit down before you get hurt.

    Got MSNBC on and the meetings between Bush and the house leaders have ended. So the first 3 interviews fair and balanced MSNBC lined up? A democrat against the plan, a republican against the plan and a mother of a fallen soldier against the plan... Hmmmmmmm... no bias there. (Oh and save your canned responses, MSNBC has just reported the majority of the Republicans and top generals are now on board with the plan, so yes an alternate opinion is within a hundred feet of them.)

    Oh and save your canned responses, MSNBC has just reported the majority of the Republicans and top generals are now on board with the plan,

    Flip Flop.

    Uh, can the professor possibly show more stupidity than he has already?

    Grammie is pointing out that The Democrats the professor so frantically praised as "winners" in November, are not stepping up to bring the troops home as briskly as the demogogues have claimed they would if they attained power.

    Grammie is right to point out that many liberals, when they have the power, pull back from their convictions simply because of the political risk.

    I would venture to say that if funds are not held to stop Bush, it was because of the political risk involved in doing so....and that is a poor excuse for not acting the way you said you would act....especially with regards to war!

    Like I said to the silly liberal anon.....

    "Cursing the darkness (which for you is The President's war policy) seems foolish. Lighting the candle (which for you is bringing the troops home, and could be forced by your congressional leadership) seems like the right thing to do."

    You ever seen the size of Olbermann's ass? He could crush Geraldo by sitting on him. But if we're talking about man to man, well Geraldo's right: Olby's a pussy and would cry if he so much as broke a fingernail.

    Actually Bob- the plan was not finalized until a couple days ago so this wave of Republican backlash against the surge that you have been trumpeting for days seems to have been made up- hmmm imagine... (and I am embarassed to have not called you out on it sooner, as I just found out)

    Hey Grim: Donora, PA is a city in Pennsylvania, thus the PA. And she's a he !
    ==================================================
    Well if DP took offense, then I do apologize (hence I mean what I said when I hadn't gotten a chance to read much, I missed where the person's sex was clarified).

    Of course, I'm not sure what was your point with butting in, except that you seem to recieve some extremely strange edification in correcting people (sure you're not an english teacher?). I figured the PA meant he was from there, but as you'll see on the internet, it's not uncommon for people to list their alias and then their home state.
    Example:
    Joe, VA
    So I was unsure whether that was supposed to be an alias or a city. (kind of like BK, I mean is there really a "bushkills Falls" town? Not as nifty as "deer lick, KY" but still an interesting name)

    Geez 'professor' do you have ANY friends or at least people able to put up with your pompous company?

    Um, no....do I have to post it a sixth time?:

    You can post it 100 times but it doesn't change the fact that Bush can have those troops in Iraq within a few days and if Congress voted not to fund it, he could actually let it sit on his desk long enough for the troops to actually get there, then veto it. That puts Congress in a bind because now the troops are there and have to be supported.

    "Have at it, Democrats....let's see your policies!"

    And how many times are you going to say that too?
    You sound like a patient in severe pain waiting in one of those insufferable doctor's waiting rooms for hours.

    And let me pose to you the same question I posed Grammie, which is "how come you are frothing at the mouth for the Democrats to do something in Congress, yesterday, but haven't held the GOP Congress and president accountable in 6 years ?

    Grammie/Cee..the two headed monster of delusion.

    He feels he has to answer for her now.

    Since you dodged my question before, Mr Truthstick, maybe you can answer my above question.

    You must have been great at Dodgeball in HS.

    You, I and everyone on here know you're a phony.

    "how come you are frothing at the mouth for the Democrats to do something in Congress, yesterday, but haven't held the GOP Congress and president accountable in 6 years ?

    Because I support our acheiving success in Iraq and feel The President should get whatever he requests from the Congress...you idiot! I did not want The Democrats to attain the majority... and, as you frequently scoff at....I am a consistent supporter of George Bush and his policies...just as the last Congress was.

    This is not about me or you, professor.....it is about the country. The ruling class of your political affiliation said they would do all they could to get the troops out of Iraq...are they pursuing those goals.

    My President is taking the politcial risks to fulfill his promises. Your leaders seem to be somewhat hesitant about this urgent and important issue.

    Its coming to a head and the democrats can't say a word.... The militia have been told to disarm or they will be dealt with. Sounds like the governor has been taken off and the US troops can finally take out the people attacking them.

    "My President is taking the politcial risks to fulfill his promises. Your leaders seem to be somewhat hesitant about this urgent and important issue."

    WHAT risks? Once his Presidency ends, that is the end of George W. Bush's political career. He'll go back to his farm (you have to have cattle to have a "ranch") in Crawford and that'll be that. I mean, short of actually impeaching and convicting him, what political risk does he take?

    And as for the Democratic leaders - well, I have to say that at least they are TRYING to come up with a plan in just a few days. Contrast that with the president, who took THREE MONTHS to come up with this plan, despite the "urgency" of the issue. So tell me again who is dragging their feet on this?

    BTW

    I would NEVER presume to speak for my hero.....

    Grammie

    EE....

    The political attacks that will come out regarding Bush's new plan will be enormous...he has to govern while basically doing something only about 30% of the population say they support. For his party, failure of this policy will potentially keep them a minority party for at least the next 15 years and perhaps even effect the next presidential election.

    If Bush did as Johnson did and flee into history...perhaps even resigning after the last election, and the troops were then brought home under a different administration....he would have been risking nothing politically.

    But Bush is bigger then that....he believes in a secure and free Iraq and will continue to do what he thinks will achieve it.

    Bushkill, let me know if I materially misstate your position.

    1. You fervently believe that the Iraq war is illegal, immoral and counter productive for the American people.

    2. You also believe that at worst GWB et al were deliberately criminal in leading the congress and us into that war or at best is a bumbling incompetent idiot and he was tricked and controlled by the cabal of neocons, Cheney, Rove and Rumsfeld.

    3. The only moral recourse is to stop this war and get out of Iraq as fast as possible to stop the loss of innocent life, which emcompasses all violent deaths in Iraq. You want to stop the destruction of their country and begin asap with what it takes to rebuild what we destroyed.

    4. You voted and worked to get the Repubs out of power and the Dems in. You did that because the Repubs are solely responsible for all the wrongs you are so repulsed by and you want and expect the Dems to stop the carnage immediately because it is the only RIGHT AND MORAL thing to do.

    All the one-up-manship aside, I and many others have been accused of every moral and intellectual perversity known to man. Because not only do we disagree with you about the reasons we went to war but we also believe it is necessary and worth doing for us and future generations.

    The idea that we are callous and selfish because we don't care who dies is prevalent on your side. The question what are you going to say to the family of the last man killed because of your war or the Iraqi mothers is a consistent refrain. If I believed as you do that would not be out of bounds. BUT I don't believe what you do so the question is meaningless to me as far as my implied guilt.

    But, if your beliefs are what you all say they are, a similar question to you is valid.

    Why are you condoning the Dems protecting their political futures on the deaths of so many innocent Americans and Iraqis? Why are you not putting every pressure possible for them to use the power they gained on an antiwar platform to rein in the imperial designs and unjust war og GWB et al.

    They have the power of the purse and that is a pretty big damn stick to force an early conclusion to this war.

    Yet you all are going on just as before. The Repub sheep are evil and murderous. They caused the problem. Let them fix it. Smiles and high fives all around because you are so superior and you sure put that old battleax in her place.

    You seem more interested in vanquishing me than in implementing your political will.

    I am here. Tell me why it is OK for your politicians to play poliical games with so many innocent lives.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    I mean is there really a "bushkills Falls" town.

    Bushkill Falls is a resort area in PA,(not as in ma and pa)
    A series of small to large waterfalls.

    Once again....it's better stated in one post compared to my flagellations (nonsexual of course) in the last 20 posts, Grammie....

    Thanks.

    I mean is there really a "bushkills Falls" town.

    Bushkill Falls is a resort area in PA,(not as in ma and pa)
    A series of small to large waterfalls.
    ====================================================
    Heh, cool, learn something new every day. Does your state have some of those joke maps where they highlight every town with a VERY strange name? (I've seen one for KY... VERY hard to keep a straight face while reading it)

    Grammie and Cee both still can't/won't reveal why they are so gung ho for the Democrats DOING something and yet gave the GOP a free pass in making Iraq was it is today.

    We know why you want the Democrats to clean up your mess, you already said that.
    But again, why are YOU stalling with an answer to the question , why have you given the GOP a wink and a nod with all of failures to date?

    You want action NOW, by the Democrats, but for 6 years were quiet as a churchmouse .

    Please explain this contradictory behavior.

    Bob, you say you are a college professor. At some point in your 16 years of education no one ever introduced you the the concept IF....THAN.

    I realise this is tricky that not all sentence structures are declarative statements of fact by the speaker. Once you get the hang of it, though, you'll find that you can sometimes follow conversations that are beyond the scope of 'See Spot run..

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    "But Bush is bigger then that....he believes in a secure and free Iraq and will continue to do what he thinks will achieve it."

    It's easy to be a gambler when there's no consequence TO YOU if you lose. So it may keep the Republicans in the minority - Bush has already said that he doesn't care what people think about him in the short term, or even just after he leaves office. He's looking at the view 50-60 years down the road.

    The President can hope and pray and wish all he wants. But if the Iraqis don't want to step up and DO THEIR PART, then we could send 10 times what the President wants and it wouldn't make a lick of difference. We can't continue to be the driving force here, cee. The Iraqis have got to want it for themselves and (so far) they seem more interested in settling old scores than anything else.

    Hey Benson,since you appear to be so enthusied about Bush escalating the war, and causing many more US deaths,and thinking it will be a great success, answer me this question.

    The military numbers have fluctuated in Iraq thruout the pst 4 years.There have been 20,000 more troops in the region a few times w/o any success resulting from those surges.
    Why would this infusion of 20,000 troops make all the difference when it didn't before ?

    Grim, dittos about Mike. But I also nominate Ensign Expendable.

    They both seem to be good guys if you overlook their political views. :)

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Since it's obvious you're still waffling and now playing semantics, I'll ask my very simple question again.
    This time slower and shorter.
    How ...come.... you've... given.... ...GOP and.. ..president.. a pass... during the past.. 6 years?

    (and don't have the same interminable patience with the other party, that's been in office a week.)

    Cee, thank you kind sir. With all the vein and aneurysm problems I have this old girl needs a kind word sometimes.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    To Grammie :Since it's obvious you're still waffling and now playing semantics, I'll ask my very simple question again.
    This time slower and shorter.
    How ...come.... you've... given.... ...GOP and.. ..president.. a pass... during the past.. 6 years?

    (and don't have the same interminable patience with the other party, that's been in office a week.)

    I actually would be a neocon by your defintion, as I believe when in war, you beat your opposition into submission. We have had our foot on the throat of people like Sadar and been called off. Hopefully we can remove people like him who have been attacking our troops. I am not a backer of more troops unless they are allowed to move to protect themselves.

    My position clear? (not if you agree) but is it clear. The Iraqi PM has declared today that Sadar's militia must disband or his troops with heavy support from the US would disarm them. This is the approach we should have used a year ago.

    I blame pacifists for allowing us to soften before the war is over. The US is taking a hit from the Saddam hanging. There is no soft-shoeing with them.

    I am sure this is why the generals are on board. They are done pussyfooting around. One hard surge to weaken the opposition to the point where the Iraqis can manage them.

    Grammie has a 4 question interrogation for Bushkill but won't answer any herself.

    You're good Grammie.

    Because....I....voted....for....them....to....do...exactly....what....they....did.

    Why...do...you....give....your...guys...a...pass...when...they...are....not....doing...
    what...you...voted...for...them...to...do?

    My...derision is...directed...at...YOU.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    "Grim's against raising the minimum wage, that hasn't been raised in 10 years.

    Where do these people come from ?" Your post seems to imply that Grim and others like him are eeeevil if they are not for a hike. The first thing I thought of when I heard this was yeah, it will help a few teens,part time workers,and immigrants but at what cost?This is like most of the Dem's plans.Sure it sounds good but while it will help some it will also hurt many.First do you think Grim or the Republicans care because it will cost them something?No.It will only cost buisness owners.Not the government or big corporations.Are they just bad people that dont want to see anyone get ahead?Of course not.Again I am not a Republican but lean their way on many issues just for having common sense.Most of these people are factory workers,drivers,waittresses,and fast food workers.And a lot of these people make tips which is where they make most of their money .I watched Glen Beck yesterday and he had it right. He said 4 point something % is unemployed. Which means anyone who wants to work is working. But lets take a family owned bakery which his family owned.They have 5 workers making minumum wage. Now when they raise it the owners are going to have to pay more money.Using common sense what are their options. Raise their price on donuts to $2 fron $1 .I dont think that will help buisness. And it's not like these owners are rich like the Dems think and they can afford it. Some are comfortable and others just get by. Even a company that does do well like Macdonalds. Lets say they have 50 workers and now have to raise salary on over 50% of them .What will they do? It's obvious people are going to be fired and no more new jobs. So yeah it will help many but hurt a lot also. And the people it will hurt may really need their job. So the Republicans ask for tax relief for these buisnesses because they know whats coming and want to really help people so they wont be let go, but look like bad guys cause they are always helping big buisness and the Dems are such swell guys looking out for the little guy. Yes I would love the hike if no one got hurt but I see it otherwise. Anyone disagree?

    Cee, how funny. Bobco accuses us of being a sniper team. Since Bobco always comes to the defense (if only he could that for his country) of his lockstep buddies, who are the REAL sniper teams.

    Methinks Bobco took Coward too much to heart.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Grim, dittos about Mike. But I also nominate Ensign Expendable.

    They both seem to be good guys if you overlook their political views. :)
    ==================================================
    Of COURSE! How could I forget fellow trekkie EE. (well, I guess I figured he was already dead by now lol ;-). Yes, I too vote for the good ensign to be "promoted" to "decent chap."

    But then again, unlike some people (referencing Bob, not you Grammie because i think i can tell a bit of sarcasm there), I can see someone disagreeing with me as a good person and not a spawn of the devil. (well, ok in my case it might be true... lol)

    Because....I....voted....for....them....to....do...exactly....what....they....did

    So you approve of them attacking a country that didn't attack us,have a Congress shierk their responsibilities, give giant tax breaks to oil companies while cutting funds for college loans,weaken clean air laws etc. etc. etc.

    I see.You really do support this inhumanity.

    Thanks for sharing.You're a hell of an American !

    Grammie now is talking to Cee wherever out in cyberspace he may be...How funny is that !
    Are you really that lonely and desperate and need approval that badly ?

    If I had your inhumane views on the world I'd be looking for help too.


    Grammie now is talking to Cee wherever out in cyberspace he may be...How funny is that !
    Are you really that lonely and desperate and need approval that badly ?

    If I had your inhumane views on the world I'd be looking for help too.


    "Of COURSE! How could I forget fellow trekkie EE. (well, I guess I figured he was already dead by now lol ;-)."

    Oh, I know better than to stand anywhere near Captain Kirk while wearing my red shirt.

    Personally, I wish guys like Joe Biden and Steny Hoyer didn't go and say Congress can't do anything. cee has already shown us they CAN if they chose to push back hard. Now is the time for a "roll of the dice" - not at some point down the road when it seems less politically hazardous.

    You can't always stay on the safe ground. I applaud the efforts but non-binding resolutions and stern letters are only the beginning...

    Bobco, it is not seemly for a high school grad only to have to instruct a college professor.

    I posited four distillations of my understanding of the reasons others have to lay the foundation for the the question.

    Not a four paragraph interrogation.

    Since retention seems to be as big a stumbling block for you as comprehension I will repeat the question again:

    "But, if your beliefs are what you all say they are, a similar question to you is valid.

    Why are you condoning the Dems protecting their political futures on the deaths of so many innocent Americans and Iraqis? Why are you not putting every pressure possible for them to use the power they gained on an antiwar platform to rein in the imperial designs and unjust war og GWB et al."

    If you dispute any of my posits, do so. Answer the question if you desire. If not, please hide that dull gleam of yours under a bushel.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Why...do...you....give....your...guys...a...pass...when...they...are....not....doing...
    what...you...voted...for...them...to...do?

    in a week?

    You can't be that partisan, Janet?
    Can you ?

    "Of COURSE! How could I forget fellow trekkie EE. (well, I guess I figured he was already dead by now lol ;-)."

    Oh, I know better than to stand anywhere near Captain Kirk while wearing my red shirt.
    ====================================================
    True, that's only safe if you're at least a 'C' cup.

    So you approve of them attacking a country that didn't attack us,have a Congress shierk their responsibilities, give giant tax breaks to oil companies while cutting funds for college loans,weaken clean air laws etc. etc. etc.

    I see.You really do support this inhumanity.

    Thanks for sharing.You're a hell of an American !
    ==================================================

    Once again, Bob posts his view that if you're not a liberal, you're a completely immoral, if not outright evil human being.

    Janet:

    At the risk of walking into something, I have to ask you this:

    You say you voted for them to "do exactly what they did". Really? Are you referring to the Bush team? .... in the year 2000?

    I voted for Bush myself in 2000, but I took him at his word to be the fiscal conservative and non - interventionist he claimed to be at that time.

    How did you have the clairvoyance in November of 2000 to know exactly what he was going to do?

    OK, that is settled. Grim, Mike, EE and I are good guys.

    I have to also nominate Cee and Cecelia. Any other nominations or dissents?

    Be thinking of a good name and/or acronym for us. We may have stumbled onto the path to World Peace.:)

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Why...do...you....give....your...guys...a...pass...when...they...are....not....doing...
    what...you...voted...for...them...to...do?

    in a week?

    You can't be that partisan, Janet?
    Can you ?

    You don't know our grammie.
    She makes Spiro Agnew look like Thomas Jefferson.
    She's a legend in her own mind.
    A mind that is closed like a steel drum to the problems and mistakes her party is responsible for.

    I voted for Bush myself in 2000, but I took him at his word to be the fiscal conservative and non - interventionist he claimed to be at that time.
    ==================================================
    Mike, you reminded me of something that Jonah Goldberg once said:

    "Indeed, some readers complaining about BSG suddenly injecting itself into real-world politics remind me of conservatives who are shocked that Bush is a big-government guy. He’s been one from the beginning and BSG has been weighing in on political themes from the get-go."
    (source: http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MTc5ZTFlMTE2ZmM5ZWI4NDIxYzIwMTYxMWMzZjE1NmE= )

    I don't believe I'm saying this, but it appears that Kansas Senator Rubber-Stamp Republican and general right-wing nutjob Sam Brownback AGREES with the idea that troop increases are not the answer at the moment.

    Someone please tell me I didn't fall into the Mirror Universe...

    Someone please tell me I didn't fall into the Mirror Universe...
    ===================================================
    You have, you can tell because I'm wearing a goatee here.

    OK, that is settled. Grim, Mike, EE and I are good guys.

    I have to also nominate Cee and Cecelia. Any other nominations or dissents?

    Be thinking of a good name and/or acronym for us. We may have stumbled onto the path to World Peace.:)
    ===================================================
    I object! I did NOT drink the blood of those children and puppies to be considered "good". blegh =P


    (lol ok, I'm just in a silly mood today, probably because of the rogue/druid respecs and the soon to be release of TBC)

    Mike, I condensed years of a belief system and voting into the frame and format set by that expansive thinker Bob. Let me flesh it out a bit.

    In 2000 I was as unaware of what lay ahead as everyone else was. At that time I voted 50/50 for Bush and 100% against Igore. I based that on my general positions re defense and domestic policies. GWB was a little too liberal in some things for my taste and was somewhat of an unknown. But I will take a moderate Repub over a Lib Dem seven days a week and twice on Sunday.

    By 2004 I approved of GWB and judged him to be a man who acted on principals. And I voted against Kerry a 1,000%. It may be hard for you to believe that some who agree with the concept is not stupid, but I agree completely with the policy of Preemptive Strikes. I reached that conclusion when the second plane hit the WTC.

    Do I approve and endorse each and every step taken along the way either foreign or domestic policy. Of course not. Where I have my disagreements they are with strategy and tactics, not the overall goal.

    When we first encountered each other I think I told you that my disagreement is with the implementation of the policy. I favor an approach more akin to the tactics of WWII. Just think Dreden, Hiroshima and the monastery at Casino Pass was it. Brutal murderous enemies must be fought in a brutal murderous way.

    Don't mistake me for the 'tactics' one must employ in what appears to be a vain effort to engage those who are what they accuse their opponents of being. Simplistic, emotional brain dead parrots who argue for you and then defeat you with their self proclaimed brillance.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Anon @ 5:28. to answer your question. Aweek has been plenty long enough to implement other things. A week has been plenty long enough for Kennedy to offer a bill that is a complete copout and protects their nether regions.

    I am arguing this from the perspective of months of gleeful gloating that the Dems ran on an antiwar platform, kicked ass (Repub ass, to be sure) on an antiwar platform and when they took the reins they were going to bring those boys home and then impeach GWB et al and move directly to a hanging.

    Whaa happened?

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Hey Great site I just got turned on to it Monday. It prompted me to start my own site at www.msnbcwatch.com

    It is dedicated to watching the other maniacs on MSNBC Carlson, Mathews, and Scarborough. I could not do a better job with Herr Olbermann than this site so I link to you on my site. I just put up my first post on Matthews. In think you will enjoy it.

    Check it out

    I am arguing this from the perspective of months of gleeful gloating that the Dems ran on an antiwar platform, kicked ass (Repub ass, to be sure) on an antiwar platform and when they took the reins they were going to bring those boys home and then impeach GWB et al and move directly to a hanging.

    Whaa happened?

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Posted by: Janet Hawkins at January 10, 2007 06:06 PM

    It wasn't just an anti-war platform that won it for the democrats. It was that people are sick and tired of deluded promises and fake morality of the republicans. And the condecending attitude towards anyone with another opinion. Make no mistake. Republicans did it to themselves. They can't lead, only talk shit. Like yourself. And stop acting like you care about innocent lives. You let go of your concience long ago.

    Janet:

    Believe me, The last label I would ever place on you is 'simplistic'.

    As I'm sure you've gathered, I have always had a problem with Mr. Bush appearing to metamorphize into something opposite of what he originally represented himself to be, which originally fit my worldview like a glove, regarding foreign policy anyway.

    I have heard many times that "911 changed everything", but I have to admit it just didn't occur to me at the time that, to many people, it really did mean 'everything'!

    It's going to be difficult for me to do, but I am going to try to listen to his speech tonight with an open mind.

    To change the subject, the thing you and Grim were discussing earlier about civility among posters was interesting. I have been amazed at the venom from some of these people. I can't imagine that these people would have the nerve talk to anyone in person the way they do on this board. At first, it seemed to me to be coming mostly from the right, often seemingly directed at me....but lately there seems to have been a lot of truely bombastic posts from the left. I just can't see what any of that accomplishes?

    Why am I not surprised?

    "President Bush's speech may be scheduled for tonight, but the troop surge in Iraq is already under way.

    ABC News has learned that the "surge" Bush is expected to announce in a prime time speech tonight has already begun. Ninety advance troops from the 82nd Airborne Division arrived in Baghdad today.

    An additional battalion of roughly 800 troops from the same division are expected to arrive in Baghdad Thursday."

    No wonder Congressional Democrats felt today's "consultation" with the President was pointless...

    Terrific Sophosrex:

    Lets see, you started out your new website by accusing Criss Mathews of having "Multiple Personality Disorder, Touretts's Syndrome, Attention Deficit / Hyperactivity Disorder, Schizoid Personality, & Paranoid Personality", all in an attempt to get him fired.

    Wow....that sure is a mouthfull! Couldn't you think of a few others to throw in the mix?

    You sound like the nutcase to me!

    Some of you nutjobs forgot that the President is the Comander and Chief! Doesn't have to listen to the congress to deploy new troops. Bus bad. Bush Bad!

    Benson:

    Tell that to Cee. He keeps telling us that the Dems CAN stop the surge, but I believe he's wrong, especially since it's apparently already in motion.

    I very much agree with you on your last point.....Bush bad!

    I just want to see him go explain to all the families of the the new soldiers killed in the 'surge'. I think he should have to personally explain to each and every one of them individually why he thought this was a good idea, when almost ALL the experts, and almost ALL the generals said it wasn't. Most importantly, he should have to explain why he did this against the overwhelming wishes of his bosses...the American people!

    EXCELLENT ATTEMPT AT SPIN KARRIS56
    but your twisting of my words, and attempt to change the meaning of what I said, is just more decietful right wing lies.

    Since apparently you WONT understand what I said, let me reiterate, for those that are reading this thread, and may be confused by your lies about what I said,

    -------------------------------------------------------------
    "So you have more respect for maniacs who kill innocent people,torture,and use people as shields to fight .If these real cowards were as brave as you seem to think they are they would get out in the open and attack like men instead of hiding behind others.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

    What is the difference between the 9-11 hijackers and the right wing republicans that HIDE behind out troops, sending them to fight a war that the right wingers say needs to be fought.

    None,

    Further, I did not say that the 9-11 terrorist were brave, nor did I provide ANY compliments to them. I hate their guts and am glad that they are dead.

    But at the same time, I say that the RWers that support this war, but wont fight it, are bigger COWARDS than the 9-11 hijackers.

    As far as my attributed RESPECT. I have NO RESPECT for the 9-11 hijackers, NONE, nada, zero, it doesnt exist,

    But at the same time, I have LESS RESPECT for those here, that would send our troops to go and fight a war, that they themselves would not. Talk about HIDING behind others, using others as a SHIELD, a "willingness to kill INNOCENTS" . That is EXACTLY what the RWers here are doing. Including yourself,

    On a personal note, I dont believe that you ever served in the Armed Forces. Because someone that had served, would understand the current attitude of a lot of the soldiers, marines, and sailors, that cant stand the civilians back here, that DONT CARE that the war was started on lies. That they (the military personel ) are being sacrificed by the RWers here, and they are tired of hearing the rhetiric of "we support the troops" when it has become quite apparent, that the RWers dont give a DAMN about the troops.

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    but you have more respect for them than your fellow americans who you know nothing of what is in their heart ,except that they have a different opinion than you

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

    One parting shot, and trying to spin what I said, you really are a decietful little punk,

    And I dont care to call you or anyone like you my fellow americans. Hell, Timothy McVeigh was an american, but a scumbag and a terrorist. And there are MANY more examples I could give.

    I consider "so called americans " like yourself, to be the worst sorts of cowards and traitors to america. You are not willing to take a stand, you are not willing to fight your own fights, and you are perfectly willing to HIDE behind, and use our troops as a shield.

    If you support this war, and are willing to send out troops to fight it,when you yourself WILL NOT fight, then you arent even as good as the 9-11 terrorist, you are more like Osama Bin Laden.

    He wanted to use others to fight, but was unwilling to do any fighting himself. So on the evolutionary ladder, you are not even as high on the ladder as the 9-11 terrorist, you are down there with Osama, and just a tiny notch above child molesters,

    From a nutroot at kos:

    "What are the odds that, having scheduled and voted on Biden's resolution, Senate Democrats will consider themselves on record, and their job done? What are the odds that, seeing Bush's determination to move forward within weeks, the Senate will actually schedule a second vote, abandoning their "symbolic" stance in favor of more concrete action, before those troops depart? And if they do, who gets the "up arrow" in the Conventional Wisdom Watch? The scrambling Senate Democrats? Or the White House, which managed to turn an electoral stomping into complete control of the agenda, leaving the Democrats to sweep up after him, in 100% reactionary mode?

    "By scheduling the symbolic vote first -- something I would understand as methodical and calculating under almost any other circumstances -- the substance of the issue is changed. It's no longer a "confrontation" with the White House over Iraq. It's a shadowing. And I think we owe everyone a bit more than that.

    "Opposition to the escalation is going to have to get a little more concrete now. $6.8 billion more concrete, it turns out.

    "With a separate price tag, there's gonna be a substantive vote on the escalation, anyway."


    ###
    So for those who doubt Congressional Democrats are not expected to try EVERYTHING to stop The President's surge....think again. Those who believe they handed The Congress to The Dems expect results and REAL legislation.....not SYMBOLIC stuff.

    This is going to be a battle royale....I just hope Grammie is up for it!

    BTW...it looks like Professor Bunsen Honeydew's (Bob's) lithium kicked in around 5:30pm tonight....thank God! Especially when he lost it and was....starting....to....slowly.....speak.....in.....his.....posts....so....everyone....could....understand......him.

    I hope his wife has a good support network!

    EE, I just have to respond to this:

    "So even if Congress voted not to fund it, President Bush could actually let it sit on his desk long enough for the troops to actually get there, then veto it. That puts Congress in a bind because now the troops are there and have to be supported."

    No, that puts the decision making process re military and foreign policy in the exact place and with the same tension that our Founding Father's intended.

    And the reason that the Presidency has a stronger platform to enact his agenda versus the Congress is because 635 can only reach consensus on hotly debated issues with time and compromises.

    The system may not have given you or me exactly what we want but it is working precisely as planned by our founders.

    The Dems who have been singing to the heavens that they have a mandate to end the war NOW and a new day has dawned in America are suddenly grinning like jackasses eating cactus because they got Ethical Reform. Nothing wrong with that but that is not what is front and center right now. It will take much longer to effect a change re the War and foreign policy by the Congress then it would be for the Executive. And so far all they are doing is playing house and trying to come up with a plan that won't hurt them.

    As far as I am concerned Madame Pelosi can give cooking and child rearing lessons at every session. If she did, I'd be more confident that she will have less time to screw things up from MY perspective.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    As far as I am concerned Madame Pelosi can give cooking and child rearing lessons at every session. If she did, I'd be more confident that she will have less time to screw things up from MY perspective.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Posted by: Janet Hawkins at January 10, 2007 9:54 PM

    Your hypocrisy has never been clearer for anyone to see than it has been recently.

    Can't we all just get along?

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

    that seems to be all we hear from the republicans today, or they whine and cry about how they arent being treated fairly.

    when we see a vote held open for over 3 hours, or threats about jobs for family members, or middle of the night, last mintute, behind closed doors changing the language of bills AFTER they have been voted on in conference committees, or ......


    you get the point.

    NOW the republicans cry, why cant we all just get along.

    Screw the republicans

    ********

    You have proved my point in spades, sir.

    And I'm not a Republican, you assuming tool.

    Hypocracy? Sarcastic or snide yes. But hypocrasy?

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    "As far as I am concerned Madame Pelosi can give cooking and child rearing lessons at every session. If she did, I'd be more confident that she will have less time to screw things up from MY perspective.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie"

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

    First it was Hilary Clinton now it's Nancy Pelosi. Nothing an uneducated hillbilly house wife hates more than a woman who goes out in the world and kicks ass on men who never give the time of day to someone like them. It's called envy and jealousy

    The venom in which they should Hilary was exemplified to the tune of $70 million dollars of our tax money chasing the Clinton's White Water deals ending up with zero indictments achieved. Nada, zilch, a total waste of time and money.

    This is the antics of the Barney Fifes that come out of the evangelical backed politics of Wash DC.

    The first woman ever to be Speaker of the House - a Democrat, and best yet - A CATHOLIC - that is something any blue blooded Klansmen despises!

    The venom these people SHOWED Hilary was exemplified to the tune of $70 million dollars of our tax money chasing the Clinton's White Water deals ending up with zero indictments achieved...

    From not my real name" EXCELLENT ATTEMPT AT SPIN KARRIS56
    but your twisting of my words, and attempt to change the meaning of what I said, is just more decietful right wing lies." I said I was not a Republican. I was born in Chicago,lived 2 blocks from Mayor Richard M .Daley,the area was called Bridgeport in the 11 th ward. All my friends had city jobs. I lived there for 37 years and I am a Democrat. Anyone who knows anything about Chicago knows you have to be a Democrat to live in that neighborhood . I know. I'm a liar. I wrote no one would answer you because you would just call them a liar and you did'nt let me down. Form not my real name"On a personal note, I dont believe that you ever served in the Armed Forces" I wrote I joined at 17 with my father with me because he had to sign at that age. I joined the Navy and went to Orlando for boot camp even tho Great Lakes was closer because I wanted sunshine since it was winter.My father was also in the Navy and was torpedoed twice and believes in this war. Let me read your mind . I am still lying and a coward and my father is too. He is 83 but should still join or maybe he was never in the Navy. You pick. You also responded with this From not my real name "Further, I did not say that the 9-11 terrorist were brave, nor did I provide ANY compliments to them. I hate their guts and am glad that they are dead." So what does this infer From not my real name "the terrorist that atttacked us on 9-11 had more guts and more patriotism to their cause than you" More guts? That sounds like brave to me. And you changed your name from anon to not my real name. Real brave of you. And you also posted this, From not my real name "One parting shot, and trying to spin what I said, you really are a decietful little punk" Who's the decietful little punk? You only accuse people of lying without knowing anything about them. But your own words show who the liar is. Guts? What does that word mean to you. Please lie or spin it for us please. Just go away.