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 23, 2007
    COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN - JANUARY 23, 2007

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

    Host: Keith Olbermann

    Topics/Guests:

    • SCOTTER LIBBY TRIAL: Howard Fineman, Newsweek senior Washington correspondent
    • IRAN: Rajiv Chandrasekaran, fmr. Washington Post Baghdad bureau chief and author of "Imperial Life in the Emerald City"

    Keith bellowed in the opening spiel that the SotU speech has been "overshadowed" by The Great Leak Case. Yeah, America can't stop talking about it. Everything is Cheney's fault. Plus Hillary Clinton's "first interview" since launching her committee, and...oh yeah...the State of the Union which maybe this year will have "intentional" jokes. The Hour of Spin lives up to its nickname once again.

    MADMAN

    The lead story was The Great Leak Case. Ah, it's like the good old days once again on OlbyPlanet. Fitzgerald "alleging" that Cheney was somehow involved; Libby's attorneys "attempting to paint" Libby as innocent. And of course, that means Slippery Shuster is on the scene. He gave a detailed rundown of the most salacious portions from Fitzgerald's opening statement, and Krazy Keith suggested that all this being made public the day of the SotU address was "fortuitous". KO noted that "they threw Libby under the bus" [Bingo!]. Great thanks.

    Then we got a repeat of an Olbermann Lie; an oldie, but a goodie:

    Those 16 words in which "Mister" Bush had claimed in 2003's address that Iraq had tried to secure weapon-grade from Niger ultimately proving to be false.

    MADMAN

    For those who tuned in late, "Mister" Bush never mentioned Niger in that SotU, and never claimed anything other than what British intelligence reported. But Olbermann is only a stickler for accuracy when he wants to be, and tonight he didn't want to be. This was a precursor to Herr Olbermann's claim that Iran wasn't really involved in Iraq as the eeevil Bush claims. When Howard Fineman came on, Oralmann amplified his lie, now stating that "Mister" Bush stated that Iraq "had obtained uranium from Niger". Olbermann lies are like a screensaver: they constantly change, but they hide the real truth. The Pundit for All Occasions harped on "credibility" as KO came up with one example after another of Rule #1 (it's bad for Bush): Dick Cheney will be sitting behind him, the Libby trial is going on, he's trying to do a "U-turn" to domestic issues, yada yada yada. Great thanks.

    Next came "Lying in State", the Fat Ass rundown of "lies" from previous Bush SotU speeches (Blue Blog Source: Daily Kos). Since Oralmann lied twice about what Bush said in just the first segment, why should anyone believe any of this propaganda? And when he said that Gen Shinseki asked for more troops and then was "ousted", making this the third Olbermann lie of the night, we quit counting.

    Then the Big Interview with Hillary. It was another hard-hitting, brilliantly incisive job of questioning from "Man on Fan" Olbermann:

    • What, if anything, could the president of the United States say during the State of the Union tonight that would cause you to stand up and applaud and cheer?
    • Do you think he has grasped the actual nature of bipartisanship? To this point is there evidence to that that is the case?
    • You mentioned health care, an issue likely to come up in the speech. The early indications about that are that it would -- whatever would be provided for people would be taken out of hospital budgets -- out of public hospital budgets. That can't sit well with you?
    • If you were president, as opposed to January, 2009, what would you do as we finish this interview about Iraq?
    • Would you reach out immediately to the Syrians and the Iranians even with the tensions between this country and Iraq?
    • Richard Clarke said on this newscast last night that the administration -- current administration has operated without any intelligence for the last few years. I thought it was quite a double entendre on this subject, especially.
    • How would you answer people who've approached this and say, I could not possibly vote for anyone who, no matter how misled they might have been, no matter how misled the country might have been, voted in any way to authorize what has happened in Iraq? How would you answer them?
    • The president was hard-pressed to find in a period of four years anything that he viewed as a mistake in his presidency. Would you apply the word mistake to your vote to authorize the war in Iraq?
    • So how can you, and Senator Obama, and Senator Edwards and Governor Vilsack, and Governor Richardson, and everybody else who is considering, or has considered, or will run for the Democratic nomination, maintain and survive a campaign of that length, to say nothing of the American people? How do we do this?
    • What, if you could pick and could only show to the voters one element of your resume, would you say, "This is it, this why"?
    • But having spent eight years in the White House under the conditions in which you and your husband spent them, that's a reason to want to go back to the White House?
    • What role will the former president play in your campaign between now and January, 2009?
    • Would he be in the administration?
    • Are you sort of setting up on your own using the technology and really trying to get unfiltered even by the people who think they are unfiltered on the net?
    • What, in your opinion, is, as of right now, the State of the Union?
    • Senator, our greatest thanks for your time.

    Oh, that's right, we have to update The List. Done.

    In the Media Matters Minute, John Gibson (who works at--of all places--Fox!) was "worst person" for daring to defend something that Fat Ass himself has done repeatedly: report a story from Insight magazine (Blue Blog Source: TVNewser). After Olbermoronn repeated his Niger lie again, Matthews joined Olby for SotU coverage, and that's when we bowed out. Anything to avoid having to suffer through more of the slovenly political hack, even if he is sharing time with Chrissy.

    NAME

    Since this was SotU night, we'll give the infamous, deplorable one a pass on non-barking dogs. Olbermann's book The book that bears Olberman's name is down to #5,550 at amazon.com, while "Culture Warrior" is #163. The OlbyTome is #2,490 at Barnes & Noble; O'Reilly's book is #562 there, as well as being one of 2006's top ten best sellers. Monday's Hour of Spin, the one that brought us one of Krazy Keith's most outrageous examples of Olbypocrisy, found the discredited sports guy in third place, losing even to Paula Zahn, though he did eke out a second-place finish in the critical, beloved, all-important, coveted "key demo". Tonight's MisterMeter reading: 9 [SEVERE]


    UPDATE: Newsbusters caught Keith in an embarrassing blunder tonight. And they put even more flesh on the bones of the rank Olbypocrisy first reported by Olbermann Watch. Good work, Busters.


    Posted by johnny dollar | Permalink | Comments (352) | | View blog reactions
    user-pic

    352 Comments

    Hey Olby! Where's my apology?

    Olby's whooping it up with all the chicks in D.C. while he's briefly away from his little girl. You know what a player he is. He's too busy trying to score with hot politicas to apologize to you, Al. He owes so many apologies to people, especially women (so we've heard), that you'll just have to take a number.

    So that's why Olby gave Bubba that personal check on air - to secure an interview with Hillary after she became a presidential candidate. That doesn't sound like a conflict of interest, does it?

    Keith would be more interesting if he just sat there for an hour and said."I hate Bush,I Fox News" over and over again,his boring blather and outright jealous hated of Fox News has just gotten WAY too old.His ratings are horrendous and the only reason he has his show is that MSNBC couldn't find anyone else that wanted to go head to head with O'Reilly,and believe me they definately tried.Couldn't make it at ESPN and now hes taking MSNBC's 8pm time slot down the dumper too.Whats next for Keith,Girls Gone Wild ????

    How difficult is it to get the "16 words" from Bush correct?

    Takes 5 seconds. Here's what he said:
    "The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

    Sought, KO, not acquired. Africa, KO, not Niger.

    The allegation was/is true. The British government stands by it this very day.

    But this is a hopeless fight, JD. The lie has gained hold and nothing can be done to un-ring that bell.

    Only in Olbyworld does the opening arguments of the Libby trial take precedence over the SOTU Address.

    Is not Niger in Africa? Or do you need Google Earth? If you Google Hussein and Niger, you'll find that the British report he was referring to said Niger. He didn't say Niger because he didn't know where it was. Obviously neither do you.

    "Is not Niger in Africa? "

    Is Niger the ONLY country in Africa that has uranium?

    Iraq also sought uranium from the Congo.

    If you Google the British report - the Butler Report - it refers to attempts by Iraq to acquire the material from both Niger AND the Congo.

    The British intelligence - the information Bush was referring to in his SOTU - cited attempts by Saddam in both countries.


    Apparently, David Schuster didn't save his worst for "Countdown" tonight, and instead delivered a bogus report on what would be alleged at the start of the Libby trial on MSNBC Tuesday morning, which, according to Steven Spruiell over at NRO, had been, ah, 'redacted' from the MSNBC website by late afternoon when it turned out the memo he said was destroyed still exists.

    http://media.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NTBiMzA0ODMzNGE5ZTA2ZWU0NzkxZmRiZDM3MDBjZmQ=

    Olbermann did not do a worst person in the world when he was interviewing Mr. Clinton ... what is up with that ?!?

    Johnny, I just got done watching Hillary (yes they got that video right up!) over on msnbc.com
    I think I found a goof.

    I could only watch it once. I'll try again in another hour but in the second half I think she calls him Gene.

    "And when he said that Gen Shinseki asked for more troops and then was "ousted", making this the third Olbermann lie of the night, we quit counting."

    You might want to read the article a little deeper - yes, Shinseki was not RETIRED, but the way he was treated (Pentagon officials called it a "castration") he might as well have walked away:

    From the same article:

    "What really happened is that in April 2002, 14 months before the end of Shinseki's term as Army Chief of Staff, Donald Rumsfeld leaked the name of Shinseki's successor to the Washington Post — effectively making Shinseki a lame duck. But while Rumsfeld was probably hoping Shinseki would take the hint and choose to retire early, he didn't force him out — and in fact Shinseki ended up serving out his full term. What's more, Rumsfeld did this nearly a year before Shinseki's congressional testimony about needing "several hundred thousand" troops in Iraq. Rumsfeld disliked Shinseki, but it was mainly because of disagreements over weapons systems and Rumsfeld's view of "transformation," not troop strength for the Iraq war.

    Or so I thought. But I wasn't aware that Shinseki had been privately challenging Rumsfeld's troop estimates for the war as far back as late 2001. Rumsfeld may have had other disputes with Shinseki as well, but the troop strength issue really was one of the reasons that Rumsfeld announced Shinseki's replacement so far ahead of time."

    If anything, Olbermann SOFT-PEDALED it by calling it an "ouster" - would YOU want to be in a job where you were basically impotent for 14 months?

    Bottom line is Olbermann lied that he was "ousted". He wasn't. He served longer than many. IN fact, only two in history have served longer than he did:

    http://www.defenselink.mil/home/dodupdate/For-the-record/docs/2006-11-03a.html

    His term was up, one way or another. Olbermann saying he was "ousted" after speaking out was a lie, and still is a lie.

    Yep! we have a goof on the tape!!!!

    She calls him Gene!

    Wow! she does'nt know the great Edward R. Moron??

    They probably said when she came in "Mrs. Clinton, Keith Olbermann would like to interview you".

    Hillary: Who?

    Hillary Hack: Ah Keith Olbermann, don't worry Mrs. Clinton, he throws softballs so big he makes Larry King look like Sandy Kofax.

    And I saw bottles and a bar in the backround, where did they do this? At a Blarney Stone?

    Ah no! It was Terry McCallif's (sorry Terry I know that last name isn't spelled right.) book party!

    Keith had to do a suck up ambush soft ball interview!!!!

    Yeah, kinda like that 'softball' he threw when he asked her to explain her vote autherizing war!

    >>

    ***AHEM***

    "Johnny Dollar was over at Newshounds and posted at one of the comments section."

    Sorry for being a tattle-tale, $.

    Hey, we're at least talking about health care again. Maybe this election did mean something after all.

    I was eager to log on as the only part of "Countdown" I was able to see over here was the segment on lies and misrepresentations in earlier SOTU addresses on a French language station, out of Belgium I suppose. That was certainly revealing, and Mr. Olbermann is masterful at having that type of segment pieced together. Informative and artful.

    As for the SOTU address itself, a rather dismal CNN International broadcast .... I was struck by how uninspired and flat it all was. Dubya almost seemed to put himself asleep after the admitedly gracious introduction of Speaker Pelosi. Still that frat boy charm when Dubya wants to summon it ...! He should try it more often.

    By contrast, Senator Webb blew me away. I was pleased he won the election, but I never cared that much for him. That changed. What wonderful candor! Even those who might disagree with his comments must surely appreciate his honesty. And, how nice on SOTU night to hear from someone who has a personal stake, who is making a true sacrifice in the war. It gave Senator Webb's remarks power and authenticity. What a great treat that was.

    > "Johnny Dollar was over at Newshounds and posted at one of the comments section."

    Oh, stop the presses! Actually you should stop the presses. Usually when I point out their lies they summarily delete my messages. Someone must have slipped up.

    "Olbermann saying he was "ousted" after speaking out was a lie, and still is a lie."

    So naming a successor 14 months BEFORE his term was up was what...a "congrats on a job well done"?

    He was marginalized and minimized BECAUSE HE DISAGREED with Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. He was an Army Chief of Staff on paper, but in truth he was about as effective as a clip of paper bullets.

    K0 has interviewed all three major Democratic Presidential candidates today, and he had a dialoque with Brokaw, Russart, & Williams as well. All you Olby haters must really be gnashing your teeth tonight!

    "on a French language station, out of Belgium I suppose"

    Great, KO will fit in nicely with the anti-American media in Europe.

    Just what we need. More hate against the US.

    If the Europeans expects us to bail their asses out of trouble one more time, forget about it. You're on you own.

    Ungrateful bunch.

    Hillary sez: "I -- think -- that -- Keith Olbermann -- still -- has -- some --- more -- important -- inter-viewing -- to do -- for -- the -- upcoming -- two-thousand & eight -- presidential -- elections -- of this -- nation."

    No, I don't think the Europeans are worried about that at all. They are probably wondering if they might have to bail us out of trouble this time!

    > K0 has interviewed all three major Democratic Presidential candidates today

    So when will he have the major Republican candidates on Countdown and interview them?

    Ohboy thinks the Europeans, after having advised us NOT to do something so very stupid as to invade Iraq, and then turn out to be right, makes them "anti-American".

    Kind of pathetic really, that some so called Americans actually think like this!

    I don't know Johnny, have they asked to appear on Countdown?

    LMAOOOO..."the good old days on OLBYPLANET!!!!'...oh god..too funny

    By contrast, Senator Webb blew me away. . . What wonderful candor! Even those who might disagree with his comments must surely appreciate his honesty.
    Posted by: Kurt Kissel at January 23, 2007 10:51 PM

    More twaddle from the inflated ego of Kissel. Webb's lame rebuttal to the President's succicint and powerful defense of the state of our economy was laughable. Webb went back to the well for another round of ginning up class warfare. "Look at all the money those CEO's are making" was Webb's message. Yeah, that's a real winner. A couple of times Webb looked like he was trying to keep from giggling. Other times he wore a constant scowl on his face. Is this the best that the Dems can come up with? So lame.

    What is it the Europeans might expect us to bail them out of, I have to ask? I have only been over here for two (2) days, but I haven't seen troops massing at the frontiers. The radio stations haven't been seized. There are no blackout curtains in the Gasthaus. The lines at the market don't seem abnormally long. Europe seems to be a peace and as free from Angst as Northern Europeans can be. I suspect we can safely use the troops we might send to bail Europe put for the ill-advised troop surge in Iraq. That conflict, by the way no longer includes the Dutch and never included the Germans, Belgians, French, Swiss or Austrians.

    So you arn't impressed with Webb? OK, fine..so I will ask you the same queston you asked; is Bush the best the Rebs could come up with? How about Mitch McConnell, Haskert, Frist, Delay, etc....all zeros that impressed absolutely no one except the hard core of your party.

    Hillary Clinton admitted that we have two more years wit George W. Bush and Keith Olbermann just sat there. Olbermann Watch should post that as another reason to why Keith Olbermann's lazy and careless as an anchor person.

    Pucko that was callous and rude to mention the Bugman. The Republicans have cast him aside and moved on. You should never bring up the past. The Republicans never do.

    Damn Johnny Dollar you just got owned by Ensign Expendable. He took your "proof" and once again showed your selective reasoning in the political world. Kinda the same thing you complain Olby does on a nightly basis but here you are caught red handed and your only defense is

    "Bottom line is Olbermann lied that he was "ousted". He wasn't. He served longer than many. IN fact, only two in history have served longer than he did:

    meaningless link that means nothing

    "His term was up, one way or another. Olbermann saying he was "ousted" after speaking out was a lie, and still is a lie."

    Nice to ignore the referneces in there to Rumsfeld taking action to make Gen Shinseki a lame duck. The bottom line it tells the same story. Shinseki believed more troops were needed, Runsfeld didn't agree with him and took the steps necessary to make him a "lame duck" as the article says. It doesn't change anything about the perception that this administration would not listen to anything other than what they wanted to hear which is the overall basis of the story anyways. You are like KO jr in your methods. I love how you post links to right wing sites while complaining that KO gets his information from left leaning sites. It's completely dishonest and misleading to be exactly what you despise.

    There might not be anything we can really do about it, nor should we probably try legislatively, but how can anyone with even the most rudimentary sense of proportion defend CEOs making 400 times what the average worker in their own company makes?

    CEOs are employees too, and no one can convince me that these people are so outstanding that they are actually worth this kind of money

    Has Olbermann detached his lips from Billary's ass long enough to do his un-American hit job on the presidents State of the Union speech. Olbermann wants the United States to lose so that his favorite party can "win". He likes seeing troops die so that he can bash the President. What a coward.
    Mike cried today about how "mean" I was to him. Poor baby. He then defends a coward name "O’Liely" who makes fun of Jews being exterminated. He also then takes issue with people who want to talk about the lies that Olbermann spews. Funny, I thought this was a blog about Olbermann's lies. Here is news flash for Mike and O’Liely, people die in wars. Not every war is a video game like the first Iraq war. You tout the 3000 dead troops as a liberal badge of honor. You don't actually care about the dead troops; you just want to use them to prove your political points.

    Here's a bit of info for you if you're concerned that the president might not be doing all he can be doing to protect our borders from Radical Islam:

    In April 2005, President Bush met with King Abdullah Bin Abdul Aziz of Saudi Arabia at his Crawford, TX ranch. At such time, they made an agreement to encourage more Saudi students to receive their undergraduate educations in the U.S. Presently, there are approximately 5,000 Saudi Arabian students studying in U.S. colleges and universities and 15,000 applications in the pipeline, although confirming the exact figures is one momentous task, if not impossible to find.

    The deal which King Abdullah proposed to President Bush was to allow 5,000 students per year the opportunity to study in the U.S., with all tuition costs footed by the Saudi Arabian government. The scholarship program, which was not publicly announced by either the White house or the Saudi Embassy, was an attempt for the Saudi government to fast-track the student visa program to which the administration has now agreed.

    http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/13086.html

    You think young idealistic Saudi nationals (i.e. UBL back in the day) might be willing to use this program to strike against the Infidels (that's US).

    This one has flown WAY under the radar...

    "Ohboy thinks the Europeans, after having advised us NOT to do something so very stupid as to invade Iraq, and then turn out to be right, makes them "anti-American"."

    Sorry, you're sleepwalking through history. I'm referring to the Europeans who think the US and Israel are more of a danger to world peace than countries like Iran or North Korea.

    And once Bush is gone, they'll still hold on to that view.

    Believe it or not, there are people who hate America. There's a long pedigree of this type of thinking. It predates Bush and will continue once he is long gone.

    You friends on the liberal/left better start recognizing this. At least those of that don't themselves hate the country.

    You friends on the liberal/left better start recognizing this. At least those of that don't themselves hate the country.

    Posted by: Ohboy at January 23, 2007 11:27 PM

    ================================================

    Why is that the liberal/left have to recognize this? It is the conservatives that have all of the power in the executive branch and supposed grass roots movements. Spread the blame.

    Here's a "right-wing" source for you, the nonpartisan factcheck.org:

    http://www.factcheck.org/article275.html

    But the administration didn't force General Shinseki to retire. In fact, The Washington Times reported Shinseki's plans to retire nearly a year before his Feb. 25, 2003 testimony.... We originally quoted in this space an Oct. 9 Washington Post story saying Gen. Shinseki's pending retirement was leaked "in revenge" for his position on troop levels. Based on that, we said there was "some truth" to Kerry's statement. However, the Post withdrew their report in a correction published Oct. 11.

    Olbermann lied.

    Here's another "right-wing" source: CNN

    CNN Fact Check: Kerry implies that Shinseki was forced to retire as a result of his comments about troop levels in Iraq, which is inaccurate. Shinseki served a full four-year term as Army chief of staff, and did not retire early. Since World War II, no Army chief of staff has served longer than four years.

    http://www.themediareport.com/jun2006/gore-abc-shinseki.htm

    Anyone catch how KO got shot down with his ' brilliant ' opening question to three of his first four guests ?

    KO basically asked if they were surprised it took the President 3200 words until he first said Iraq. All replied they saw no problem when he brought it up.

    The third person he asked this to was Hillary rephrasing it to ' Well over 3200 words ' and she responded " NO " giving her reasons, and after KO looked confused, as if he was sure she would rally on his childish question to berate the President. What answer did he expect " Yes, Ko you math genius he should have brought it up by word 1742 at least ". I have not heard that question since.


    Funny thing "Factor", I don't recall 'crying' at all, not from anything someone as intellectually challenged as you came up with anyway.

    No, your the same Neandethal that actually quotes "The Factor" to defend his third grade level arguments, and then calls anyone who disgrees with you a 'Socialist".

    You really think YOU have anything to tell me about wars, and how people die. I actually AM a veteran...are you?

    You have such an incredibly simplistic view of America, and the world that it is actually painfull to read your pathetic comments. Believe me, you arn't helping your side at all!

    Trust me, you deluded O'Reilly fan, you are totally incapable of making me 'cry'. Laugh is more like it!

    Tha Factor...

    You say "You don't actually care about the dead troops; you just want to use them to prove your political points."

    So lets look at the liberal point of view. Basically it is bring then home or as you may see it, cut and run.

    You accuse of Mike of using the soldiers for political points but it is really you that are doing it. Asking them to stay there and die, wanting to send more troops over so they can be in harms way all so you may score political points. So hopefully at the end you can say you were right. I agree with you that people die in wars which is exactly why the people that send then to war should do so with repect, a solid plan, a valid reason, and most importantly as a last resort. The Iraq war is a war of choice, not a war of necessity. You want to ask people to die for your politics, then go ahead but don't accuse people that want to pull them out as rooting for their deaths so they can bash the president. It is the exact opposite.

    Mike: Admit it... you wine.

    Webb stated at the end of his rebuttal that if the President doesn't move to act (troop withdrawal), they will. Yet earlier in his address, he said he did not want immediate withdrawal. What exactly is his position?

    Below are portions of the President's speech on January 10.

    -I've made it clear to the Prime Minister and Iraq's other leaders that America's commitment is not open-ended.


    -To establish its authority, the Iraqi government plans to take responsibility for security in all of Iraq's provinces by November.

    -So America will hold the Iraqi government to the benchmarks it has announced.

    The terrorists and insurgents in Iraq are without conscience, and they will make the year ahead bloody and violent.

    I read his comments as stating that the Iraqis have until November or its over.

    Ok Johnny. You found a lie that a lot of the press has said over the years. Does that change the popular perception from that lie that Rumsfeld ousted him because he disagreed with him? Is the context of the story any different with or without the lie? Doesn't it really just say the same thing?

    Oh I found THAT lie. And I found the one where Olbermann misquoted the PResident's 16 words. And then I found the one where he misquoted and CHANGED THE MEANING even further of the President's words. As I said, at three I stopped counting. Lies become "popular perception" because slovenly political hacks like Oralmann keep repeating them. These are far from his worst lies; nothing tonight that compares with the Top Ten Lies of 2006, so memorably documented at this site. But it's his lies--the small ones and the whoppers--that are part of the reason he won't bring people on who are anywhere to the right of Al Franken. They'll expose him for what he is, a slovenly political hack.

    JD (KOjr),

    Isn't that all you really are too, "a slovenly political hack."? You just got busted misleading the people here on this site and you have the nerve to call KO out for being dishonest. You are a hypocrite.

    Olby also kept trying to overstate Bush's position on Iran. Russert didn't seem to be buying it.

    The way that I see this ... if it is catchy ... it is definately likely to be a lie. "16 words" "16 words" 16 words" !!! Too catchy .

    > You just got busted misleading the people here on this site

    What in the Wide World of Sports are you talking about? I never mislead. Who do you think I am, anyhow, Krazy Keith?

    No you are KO jr.

    Does that make R. Cox Chris Matthews' junior ?

    Sorry, Dave--the host dug up the reference, and proved you wrong. It's not so bad to admit it. We've all been wrong at one time or another. Those of us who supported the Iraq invasion are now constantly hectored to admit our wrongness; like most democratic members of Congress,who are now falling all over themselves to admit they were wrong. Of course, they were only wrong because they were misled, and if they'd only known every single fact with mathematical certainty and known that it was correctly sourced in the intelligence community, dating back to 1993, when Clinton started to declare the same thing,then they'd have done otherwise. And, of course, they'd also do a better job of running the war, because after all,they've done it, and we've all done it, and who could do worse, anyway? Is LBJ still alive? So go ahead and admit it- you were wrong about Shinseki. It's ok. It won't hurt.

    Is Robert Cox blonde like Chris?

    Dave,

    Wouldn't it have been just as easy for Olby to relate what happened to Shinseki as you did in your comment? He used the term ousted because he wanted to convey something more than what you have stated.

    Chris Matthews hates to sit next to Olbermann. Matthews couldn't follow fat ass's metaphors. Keith was harping on the red clothing in the chamber and the irony of that fact. Matthews looked stupified. Keith explained to Matthews that most of the 'red' was voted out in November. Matthews tried to continue. Ouch.

    No, but I think that Chris Matthews means 2 things:

    1) Syrupy sucking up

    &

    2) Trying to be all gruff all of the time.


    I like R Cox better than this $ guy. Unfortunately ... we are stuck with Johnny more.

    In all fairness QQ, I think that particular incident reflected worse on Mathews than it did KO. I was kind of surprised he didn't get the 'red' quip right away.

    > I like R Cox better than this $ guy. Unfortunately ... we are stuck with Johnny more.

    I agree with you. Maybe you could start a petition drive.

    Gene, Hillary called him Gene.

    Maybe she got him confused with the wrestling announcer from the 80's Gene Olbermann

    Yeah thats it!

    One of Olby's biggest highlights of his career and she calls him Gene.

    And she didn't go to him, He had to go to a bar to see her.

    You know a Krazy Komment is coming Wed. night!!

    Maybe after Gene Olbermann loses this job his next stop can be the W.W.E.!

    She called him Gene!

    This is priceless!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Word is that Tom Brokaw demanded to do remote commentary, as he also can't stand fat ass political hack Olbermann

    > Hillary called him Gene

    She probably confused his eyebrows with Gene Shalit's mustache.

    Maybe R. Cox was promoted somewhere. Maybe he was locked in a storage room 1 day so that dollar can have this website all to himself. Where is he ? Banished somewhere.

    Puck: "Hillary called him Gene"...

    I'm sure that you would have preferred that she call him "fat Ass"!

    "So go ahead and admit it- you were wrong about Shinseki. It's ok. It won't hurt."

    He was NEUTRALIZED as Army Chief of Staff - virtually IGNORED by the Administration for the last year he was in the post because they had already named his replacement.

    The fact that he didn't retire is plain Army mule stubbornness. But Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz did EVERYTHING they could to make sure Shinseki's input was nil. It had the EFFECT of an "ouster" without the mess of explaining why a four-star General was being given the bum's rush.

    Why didn't Keith Olbermann have a "conversation" with Mr.s Clinton? He just sat there...

    Yes, I noticed that he didn't get up and dance on the table.

    Mike, I call people a socialist who claim that our military is a sinister complex of corrupt companies trying to make a buck. The companies who build our weapons, planes, and armor make us the most powerful nation in the world. They allowed us to defeat Japan in WWII. They allowed us to defeat the Soviet Union. They allowed us to save our enemies lives in the first Iraq war. Our capitalist military has protected the US and Europe.
    You have such an incredibly simplistic view of Iraq. You actually believe that Sadam would not take an opportunity to work with terrorist? You believe Sadam would no allow terrorist to train in his country? You believe Sadam would not give them money? You believe that Iran is no afraid of a US military presence in Iraq? You must believe this because you want the United States to hide under our blanket and hope a terrorist plot will not be hatched by our enemies.

    I noticed that he just zoned out. He did not even correct her when Hillary Clinton stated that Bush was going to be in the white house another couple years !!!

    Breaking news:

    Gene, Hillary called him Gene.

    Maybe she got him confused with the wrestling announcer from the 80's Gene Olbermann
    Puck and Dollar you're brilliant,

    You can bet these two geniuses will be pointing out every time George Bush slaughters the English language let alone miss state a name.

    Right?

    'Factor' I don't really give a tinker's damn why you "call people a Socialist".

    You are obviously a simpleton, and every one of your posts proves it.

    arthurize,

    Wrong about what? That JD misleads people here. That he quotes from right wing sources and then criticizes KO for quoting left wing sources. I'm not saying JD is wrong every time. I'm just pointing out he brings a bias to his commentary and therefore sees everything in a way to support his bias. I'm nto saying he shouldn't but he often comes acorss as a hypocite to me.

    And did you also notice how very perceptive Hillary was to note that Bush "is going to be in the White House for another coupla years"

    WHAAAAAT!!!!!.........No impeachment?

    > Where is he ? Banished somewhere.

    He's been working hard on the Libby trial. As head of the Media Bloggers Association he got bloggers accredited as press for the trial and he's been coordinating that each day. It's been taking up a lot of his time.

    When is he coming back from vacation?

    Sharon,


    Yeah he could of. Does it come off as stronger using the word "ousted"? I don't think so but I can see what you are saying but since it does not effect the whole context of the story, I think it makes no difference. The article mentions that pentagon officials equated what Rumsfeld did to the general amounted to "castration". Actually that sounds a lot worse than "ousted".

    G'night. Vote Obama.

    Hold the phone!!!!!

    I'm sorry but I might have jumped the gun.

    I asked ICN to watch it and they came back and said it might not be a slip. That she was talking about a responsibility gene.

    So I could have been wrong and I don't want to be accused of taking anything out of context. Especially with all the people on here that are oh so perfect.

    But there's still more interview for tommorow night.

    I'd watch it again but I'm tired and if I fall asleep on the couch watching Hillary and Olby I might end up having a nightmare.

    Gene Olbermann!!! Damm that would have been good!!!!!!

    Puck: Would your nightmare about Hillary and Olby be X rated?

    Funny no hawks picked that up?

    I know, I know, It hard for anybody to sit through an Olby/Hillary interview.

    Damm torture if you ask me.

    Somebody posted, that Olby interviewed three Dem candidates today.

    Then someone posted did he interview any Republican candidates.

    To which the poster replied, they didn't ask.

    So Olby the independent will run to interview Dem candidates, but Republican candidates have to ask?

    Let me watch that tape one more time, maybe she did say Gene.

    Ya know Mike if I do, I'm going to go tell Bill and say it was real.

    Nah! I don't want Olby to end up in Fort Marcy Park.

    The Factor,

    Where should I start. First please look up the definition of a Socialist. You got that wrong. Second you are naive to think that these companies you so love that build our military hardware care about anything other than making a buck. You can look anywhere to see a history of these "patriotic" companies purposely overcharging and producing faulty equipment(Bradley tank for example). Who are they screwing? Us(I'm assuming you pay taxes.) I'm not saying they haven't created powerful weapons but make no mistake, the dollar comes first.

    You accuse of Mike having a simplistic view of Iraq when you hold an extremly paranoid view.

    " You actually believe that Sadam would not take an opportunity to work with terrorist?" Well terrorism has been around for quite a while and Saddam has had ample opportunity to work with terrorists and didn't. Maybe you are one if the ignorant people that never knew there were terrorsts till 9/11.

    "You believe Sadam would no allow terrorist to train in his country? You believe Sadam would not give them money?"

    You are a being more real here. If they were Sunni terrorists, then maybe he would allow them to train in Iraq although the links between terror organizations and Saddam have never been very strong. You have to remember that saddam was a secular leader and while paying lip service to Islam, he personally despided fundalmentalists cause they were a threat to his power.. If you are talking about Hamas, Al Quaeda, or Hezbollah, no he didn't. Saddam did give money to the familes of suicide bombers in Palestine.

    "You believe that Iran is no afraid of a US military presence in Iraq? I'm assuming that the "no" is a "not" so forgive me if I am misunderstanding your point.

    I wouldn't say they are scared. I think they know that we do not have the military manpower to invade them with what we are experienceing in Iraq. I would say they are more alarmed by our presence so close to their borders. I don't think Mike in any way has supported us hiding under a blanket. On the other hand I don't think he believes we should be invading another country right now when we are having trouble controlling the two countries we have invaded in the past 5 years.

    "Republican candidates have to ask?"

    Well. Dems ARE the hot tickets in town right now!

    Dave:

    I'm a little surprised to see you taking 'Factor' seriously. He'll like that!

    However, you might have to wait until morning, because they might just have a curfew in that group home he lives in.

    good point.

    Everyone should remember Sgt. Liam Madden. Cee has been (he thinks) taunting Democrats by using this quote at the end of each of his posts:
    "I'd tell you that the Democrats are talking a good game, but they're not even doing that. Everybody in Congress has to understand something: If they continue to fund this war, it's not just the President who owns it. They own it, too." Sgt. Liam Madden

    Wouldn't Cee just shit if he thought he was posting a quote from a Sgt that is totally the opposite of what Cee's views are.

    Well, funny thing, they are !

    The event where Lapdog got that quote was when Sgt Madden was part of a small group of out-of-uniform active-duty service members, supported by veterans and academics, gathering inside a Norfolk, Va., church on Martin Luther King Jr. Day to hold a rally calling for the immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.

    Let me repeat that last point. "The immediate withdrawal of US troops from Iraq" !

    "It is time for U.S. troops to come home," said Marine Corps Sgt. Liam Madden, speaking to a crowd of about 80 - not including reporters - gathered in the sanctuary of the Unitarian-Universalist Church in downtown Norfolk. He said active-duty troops have the right to speak out, and he said his opposition to the war is not driven by politics.

    "It's not political when people heed the call of their conscience," said Madden, 22, who is stationed at Quantico Marine Corps Base and who served in Iraq with Okinawa's 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit as a communications specialist. "Not one more of my brothers should die for a lie. This is my generation's call to conscience." The remarks drew cheers and a standing ovation.

    Ain't that just the ultimate irony!

    Other active duty servicemen invoked King's message of nonviolent resistance, along with his eventual opposition to the Vietnam War, as an example worth following during a war many at the rally said echoes that controversial conflict of an earlier generation - and is a war that should end now.

    "We're not anti-war," said Navy Mass Communications Specialist 3rd Class Jonathan Hutto, 29, who enlisted in 2004 and is assigned to the Norfolk-based carrier Theodore Roosevelt, which deployed to the Persian Gulf in 2005-06. "We're not pacifists. We're anti-Iraq war."

    And if you think it's just a few military personnel that feel this way,think again.
    And they're not just talking about it.They did something about it !

    Madden, Hutto and the other active-duty members who came to Monday's rally are signatories to an online petition to Congress sponsored by Appeal for Redress, a group for active-duty, Reserve and Guard personnel started last fall by Hutto and Madden that calls for an end to the war and the "prompt" withdrawal of all American military forces and bases from Iraq.

    Hutto said they've gathered about 1,000 signatures, mostly from enlisted service members and nearly half from the Army, in ranks ranging from E-1 to O-6.
    Members of the group presented the petition to Congress on two weeks ago on the steps of the U.S. Capitol's Cannon House Office Building. On hand to accept the petition, group members say, was Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, who opposes the Bush administration's planned troop surge and favors cutting off funding for the war in an effort to halt that surge.

    So the next time you see Cee post that quote from Sgt. Madden, remember how he feels:
    "Not one more of my brothers should die for a lie. This is my generation's call to conscience. We're not antiwar.We're not pacifists. We're anti-Iraq war."

    die for a lie? sounds like insipid partisanship to me. cee's quote is more genuine. Its truth.
    I'd tell you that the Democrats are talking a good game, but they're not even doing that. Everybody in Congress has to understand something: If they continue to fund this war, it's not just the President who owns it. They own it, too." Sgt. Liam Madden.

    die for a lie? sounds like insipid partisanship to me. cee's quote is more genuine. Its truth.


    Talk about being delusional. QQ dismisses that Sgt Madden actually said that.
    Fuuunnnnnyyyy!

    And QQ must have missed that he and his fellow servicemen want the US out of Iraq immediately.

    "die for a lie? sounds like insipid partisanship to me. cee's quote is more genuine. Its truth."

    Cee's quote is more genuine! As if it came from a different person.

    These neo-nuts are a frigging hoot !

    "Not one more of my brothers should die for a lie. This is my generation's call to conscience. We're not antiwar.We're not pacifists. We're anti-Iraq war."

    Sgt. Liam Madden and a host of servicemen vehemently opposing this war !

    "sounds like insipid partisanship to me."

    Maybe Sgt Madden doesn't support the troops.

    QQ is DOA.

    I though you were going to leave "bellow," "opening," and "spiel" out of the re-cap for a few days? Are you a real person, or is a bot writing these things?

    I'd like to leave Olberamnn out of the recap, but he keeps showing up. As long as he keeps using "proverbial" and "throw under the bus" and the rest of his Olbyisms, I don't feel bad reviving "bellow" and "spiel".

    Just remember Grim and the braindead brigade think that the military isn't against this war.

    "Tonight, I have a high privilege and distinct honor of my own as the first president to begin the State of the Union message with these words: 'Madam Speaker,'


    Hail Nancy !

    Good to see the president speak of "Democratic" issues, such as energy conservation,education and the man actually acknowledged "global warming".

    Will there now be a paradigm shift for Grammie, Ceals and the Grim Challenger?

    TDF

    MISSING FROM BUSH'S ADDRESS:
    the words "middle class" and "New Orleans."

    No one needs to ask why.

    Bush also mentioned in his last state of the union,about becoming less dependent on foreign oil.

    He's still not done a damn thing on that issue up to this point.

    Talk is cheap.

    "...the most powerful nation in the world."

    Can't do shit about an IED.

    Johnny dollar wrote:
    > K0 has interviewed all three major Democratic Presidential candidates today

    So when will he have the major Republican candidates on Countdown and interview them?

    So, it bothers your crybaby nature when other people play the good old boy game and shut you out? Mind you, that was rhetorical. You're silly pettiness is hillarious... and sad.

    but then, the only thing you'll notice is the typo, because when someone points out the hypocritical nature of your party's ethics or lack-there-of — you get all affirmative-actiony, even though you stand against affirmative action. But, it's easier to nitpick petty stuff than to look in a mirror.

    Bush is a coward, he doesn't have the guts to pull out of Iraq and tarnish his image as a war time president (not one who accepted defeat) so he sends more troops a piss piddle 20,000.
    At the turn of the century it took Britain a million men to hold Mesopotamia after the collapse of the Ottoman empire and you think a mere 100~120k will suffice!

    Any Wagers that douchebag will have a mumbling, rambling, ranting Special Comment tonight?

    BTW.My local Barnes and Noble was selling JerkMeats book for $5.99,....how's that for success?

    Webb's forhead will be a hinderence!

    Thank God we got to hear about a lot of terrorist plots that Bush foiled (actually it was either other nations or there was little or no evidence of a plot). And good thing Bush wants to get rid of the deficit that he created...what a trooper! My favorite pre-SOTU announcement from Bush has to be when he stated that he wanted health care for everyone but not universal health care...

    Here's an idea, neocons: Next time, put a baboon in a suit and run him for president. He'll probably be a better public speaker and he'll certainly have more guts than the current coward-in-chief...

    I recall that "baboon in a suit" whooped back-to-back democrats. SCOREBOARD!

    Benson,

    Actually, Gore won the 2000 election. A statewide recount of Florida proved that. And, that is after kicking ten thousand blacks off of the rolls erroneously.

    As for 2004, Kerry was a stupid choice; however, you make a good point. The American people were pretty stupid during both elections. I think that we are both glad that everyone has wised up, eh?

    You still believe that loser florida recount bullshit!! SCOREBOARD!

    My guess is you voted for Kerry!

    CUT and PASTE "blue Blog"
    repeat!

    Only Democrats think votes are retractable.
    War Vote- shouldn't have!
    Kerry Vote- shouldn't have!
    Bush Vote- shouldn't have!
    Sheesh

    Benson,

    Are you stupid? I said that if ALL the Florida votes were counted, Gore won. It is a fact. Now, I could post proof, but you'd run like a little girl or do the "if they'd counted like Gore wanted" dance...both pretty cowardly.

    Repeat, if ALL Florida votes were counted, Gore won...

    Aren't all the votes the way to elect a candidate?

    Your problem is you throw out insults all too often.
    As I recall- thats why you are now the Chicken Blogger.
    You got sick of people throwing "stupid" and "dumb"
    you way. Learn!

    As reported by PBS- Hardly OReilley Slanted

    (PBS) April 3, 2001
    In the first full study of Florida's ballots since the election ended, The Miami Herald and USA Today reported George W. Bush would have widened his 537-vote victory to a 1,665-vote margin if the recount ordered by the Florida Supreme Court would have been allowed to continue, using standards that would have allowed even faintly dimpled "undervotes" -- ballots the voter has noticeably indented but had not punched all the way through -- to be counted.

    To Chicken Blogger (10:00 a.m.),

    That wasn't a statewide recount. The full statewide recount wasn't completed until September of the same year.

    Sorry, child...

    KK- The Electoral College System still helps keep candidiates from concentrating their campaigns in just the larger states.

    >>KK- The Electoral College System still helps keep candidiates from concentrating their campaigns in just the larger states.

    Why is that an issue? Our country is composed of people. Why should dirt get the right to vote?

    Since someone else brought up Kerry, I'll throw my two cents worth in:

    No, while John Kerry was not the bes America could offer, he was ALL we had as an alternative to Bush. I am proud to say that I voted for Kerry and I hope everyone that knows me understands that I did.

    I still have a Kerry bumper sticker on my car, and it is there for a reason. While some may think I am just to lazy to scrape it off, the real reason it remains there is that I want everyone who sees it to reflect on the MONUMENTAL mistake that was made on that November day, and know that I did not personally help make it.

    I firmly believe that if Kerry had been elected, we would have already reached some kind of political compromise in Iraq, and we would be in the process of moving on. The healing process would have already begun.

    No, it would not exactly have been the elusive 'victory' all the right wingers keep opining for, but the possibility of achieving their concept of 'victory' had probably already come and gone by early 2004.

    Are you stupid? I said that if ALL the Florida votes were counted, Gore won. It is a fact. Now, I could post proof, but you'd run like a little girl or do the "if they'd counted like Gore wanted" dance...both pretty cowardly.

    Repeat, if ALL Florida votes were counted, Gore won...

    Aren't all the votes the way to elect a candidate?
    ==================================================
    Ummm..... not exactly.
    http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4155/is_20011112/ai_n13928076
    "Since the legal wrangling focused on how votes were defined, the media-sponsored review did, too, calculating results under different standards--for example, whether to count as votes "hanging chads" on punch-card ballots or ballots marked with an "X" instead of the required filled-in oval on optical scan ballots.

    Under any standard that tabulated all disputed votes statewide, Gore erased Bush's advantage and emerged with a tiny lead that ranged from 42 to 171 votes.

    Completing two partial recounts that Gore unsuccessfully pursued in court showed Bush maintaining a lead ranging between 225 and 493 votes.

    Strikingly, all these outcomes were closer than even the narrow 537 votes of Bush's official victory. With numbers that tiny, experts said it would be impossible to interpret the survey results as definitive."

    Keep in mind that last sentence there. Because as another study determined, if there was a statewide recount, there were FOUR possible methods of recount. 2 which would have gone to Bush, 2 to Gore:
    http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4196/is_20010404/ai_n10687069
    " Here's what the review found in all Florida counties, including those that were not part of the court-ordered recount:

    -- Standard: Every dimple, pinprick or hanging chad on a punch- card ballot is considered a valid vote, the most inclusive standard.

    Result: Gore would have won by 393 votes.

    -- Standard: Dimples were counted as presidential votes only on ballots that had dimples in other races, suggesting a fault with either the machine or the voter's ability to use it.

    Result: Gore would have won by 299 votes.

    -- Standard: A vote was counted only when a punch-card chad was detached by at least two corners, perhaps the most common standard applied nationally.

    Result: Bush would have won by 352 votes.

    -- Standard: A vote was counted only when a hole was cleanly punched, the most restrictive standard.

    Result: Bush would have won by 416 votes."

    So actually... if they recounted ALL of florida, there was a 50/50 chance of Gore winning, and THAT is a FACT.

    "There have been two polls in 2 years, and they overwhelming stated that they want the US out of their country.

    Maybe Fox news didn't report that.
    I wonder why."

    "Of course Sharon and Benson are going to poo poo the poll. It doesn't fit into their mindset."

    -Bob

    The introduction to the survey indicated a sample of 1,150 Iraqis, with an oversampling of Arab Sunnis. It very importantly stated that "little is known of how the mass of Iraqis view al Qaeda and whether opponents of the U.S. presence are also al Qaeda supporters."

    I would hardly call this poo poo'ing the poll.
    Put the survey into some context. Is that not a reasonable request? We can then draw our own conclusions.

    The tactic of quoting questionable (at best) polls is in the same vein as claiming evidence of WMD was cherry picked. When will the impeachment issue on that one begin? According to Hillary, Bush is going to be around for 2 more years. Maybe Sandy Berger accidentally stole those elusive reports showing the cherry picked evidence.

    I stated that Michelle Malkin posted an interview with an Iraqi who commented positively on the presence of the U.S. I also noted an interview with an police officer from Fallujah and previously gave the link. This information is available and has not been reported a farce as of yet. This is the kind of evidence I look to, not my mindset. If the majority of Iraqis clearly want an immediate withdrawal and refuse to cooperate, then it is obvious what the course should be. I don't see that kind of proof yet.

    Mike- Kerry was seen by the dems as the "most electable of the candidiates" and that is why he received your mandate. On the contrary- you have Hillary. Many dems now consider her "unelectable" in 2008. (Something like 65% "of the Dems that don't like Hillary" - don't like her because they think she is unelectable) Should be fun to watch.

    Best part is- you won't have Bush to run against. By 2008 I think both sides will try to be as far away from him as possible.

    Why is that an issue? Our country is composed of people. Why should dirt get the right to vote?
    ====================================================
    Ah, so only those people that live in LA, Chicago, New York, Miami and Houstan should count then. How very progressive of you. Let an elite determine the fate of all. Thanks but no thanks, as the saying goes: "I don't want to trade 1 tyrant 2,000 miles away for 2,000 tyrants 1 mile away." Pure democracy can be (and often is) even more oppresive than a lot of dictators.

    And for those who are about to argue for pure democracy, let me ask: are you willing to ditch the bill of rights? It is a very undemocratic document.

    Sharon, if your looking for 'proof' of anything, your not going to get it from someone like Michelle Malkin.

    Oops, that post up there on the florida recount, that was me.

    Chickenblogger with the insults!
    Two of your posts back-to-back

    "Are you stupid? I said that if ALL the Florida votes were counted, Gore won."

    "There was a 50/50 chance of Gore winning, and THAT is a FACT"

    See the hypocrisy of your slander and lack of candor?

    Oops- wish I could retract the 10:26
    Sorry Chicken blogger- Grim was the second- my bad.

    Since he had HRC on (had Obama on back in Oct before he actually announced), does that mean he will now have on many/any of the Republicans that want to run for preaz in '08?

    "...But the study also found that whether dimples are counted or amore restrictive standard is used, a statewide tally favored Gore by 60 to 171 votes.

    Gore's narrow margin in the statewide count was the result of a windfall in overvotes. Those ballots -- on which a voter may have marked a candidate's name and also written it in -- were rejected by machines as a double vote on Election Day and most also would not have been included in either of the limited recounts..."

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A12623-2001Nov11.html

    Benson:

    While you were having 'fun' in 2004 laughing at our failure to elect an atmittedly less than perfect alternative to Bush, some of us already understood what a national disaster re-electing Bush was even then.

    I live in a very 'red' state with a lot of non-political country people. I got into a little debate with one country gentleman just after that disastrous election about the outcome. He assurred me that I was completely wrong and that everything was going to be alright.

    About three months ago, that same country gentleman approached me because he wanted to tell me that he understood that he had in fact been very wrong and, that it "just had taken him more time to realize it".

    While you may still be proud of your vote for Bush, I can assure you that there are millions of people out there who now realize what a mistake they made.

    Elections have consequences, and the choice should never be made on the basis of personality. Unfortunately, it usually is.

    " You actually believe that Sadam would not take an opportunity to work with terrorist?" Well terrorism has been around for quite a while and Saddam has had ample opportunity to work with terrorists and didn't. Maybe you are one if the ignorant people that never knew there were terrorsts till 9/11.
    ==================================================
    Ummm... yes he did.
    http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_22_53/ai_79665380
    "Laurie Mylroie's book, Study of Revenge: Saddam Hussein's Unfinished War Against America, reports persuasively that Saddam Hussein was the sponsor of the 1993 attempt on the World Trade Center. That was a huge effort, unsuccessful by the standards of September 11, but although the building did not collapse, six people were killed, and a 100-foot-wide crater opened up."

    Plus you mention RIGHT below that he gave funding to terrorists and their families. So even you admit that he had connections.

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    "You believe Sadam would no allow terrorist to train in his country? You believe Sadam would not give them money?"

    You are a being more real here. If they were Sunni terrorists, then maybe he would allow them to train in Iraq although the links between terror organizations and Saddam have never been very strong. You have to remember that saddam was a secular leader and while paying lip service to Islam, he personally despided fundalmentalists cause they were a threat to his power.. If you are talking about Hamas, Al Quaeda, or Hezbollah, no he didn't. Saddam did give money to the familes of suicide bombers in Palestine.
    ==================================================
    I find it so funny that many like to accuse some on this board of "ignorance" then proceed to have no knowledge of what they just talked about. Here's a tally of Saddam's connections.
    http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_13_56/ai_n13651096
    "Its roots date back to 1990, shortly after the Islamist coup that converted Sudan into a terrorist haven to which bin Laden would move his fledgling al-Qaeda. Saddam had invaded Kuwait, and found himself under siege by a U.S.-led coalition--which in turn provoked Sudanese Islamist leader Hassan al-Turabi, bin Laden, and others to begin calling for worldwide jihad. Turabi embraced Saddam and brokered an uneasy accommodation between Iraq and the militants--inducing the secular Baathist to incorporate elements of Islamic sharia into Iraqi law, while convincing wary militants that aligning with Saddam was a necessary evil.

    It worked. Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) records recovered last year reveal that, by 1992, bin Laden was already regarded as an IIS asset, while Saddam was hosting Ayman al-Zawahiri of Egyptian Islamic Jihad--who would later become bin Laden's second-in-command. By 1994, the two sides came to an understanding: Al-Qaeda would not work against Iraq, but would cooperate with it on some projects, including weapons development. IIS provided al-Qaeda with phony passports; Iraq also set up secret training camps for terrorists, where the IIS special-operations division provided schooling in assassination and hijacking."

    This is also pretty interesting:
    http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0RMQ/is_41_10/ai_n15622078

    But do a google or findarticle search on Iraq Al-Qeada connections. There are a lot of them.

    LIBBY: BUSH TRIED TO SAVE ROVE

    Rememeber when George Bush said,"If there was anybody in my administration who was responsible for outting a CIA agent, I'd like to know about it.And If I find out WHO THAT IS , THEY WILL BE DEALT WITH."

    Well, chalk that up to just another lie from this lying president.
    In today's AP story:
    White House Officals tried to sacrifice vice presidential aide I.Lewis Libby to protect strategist Karl Rove from blame for leaking a CIA operative's identity during a political storm over the Iraq War, Libby's lawyer said Tuesday.
    The new details of behind-the-scenes conflict at top levels of the Bush White House, along with some previously unseen blunt language from Cheney,were the high points of a dramatic day in which the prosecutor and defense dueled in multimedia statements to the jury.
    When the White House press secretary publicly absolved Rove in the leak but later refused to clear Libby, Libby sought Cheney's help in defending himself.
    "They're trying to set me up. They want to make me the sacrificial lamb.I WILL NOT BE SACRIFICED SO KARL ROVE CAN BE PROTECTED"

    So how come Bush didn't keep his promise about "dealing" with the person responsible for all of this?
    So when anyone who doubts whether Bush is a liar, or "a man of honor" as Cee laughable puts it,just listen to the people in Bush's own White House speak of the lack of veracity and moral turpitude of our commander in chief and vice president.

    Hey neo-nuts: Still believe that Bush isn't capable of lying to our country to bring us to war ?


    "Not one more of my brothers should die for a lie. This is my generation's call to conscience. We're not antiwar.We're not pacifists. We're anti-Iraq war."

    Sgt. Liam Madden and a host of servicemen vehemently opposing this war !



    WASHINGTON, DC -- White House sources say that President Bush is planning to hire Jack Bauer, the main character in the popular TV series "24", to help in the ongoing war against terrorism. Anonymous officials admit that the President has yet to realize that the character is fictional.

    The plan first developed after Bush watched the season premiere of "24" last week and thought it was a documentary. He immediately insisted on meeting Mr. Bauer and compelling him to go fight in Iraq. Actor Kiefer Sutherland, who portrays Bauer on the show, reportedly visited the White House over the weekend. Even he, however, was unable to convince the President that Jack isn't real. "What do you mean," a confused Bush responded, "You're here talking to me and you look just like you did in that documentary."

    Bush plans to unveil his plan during tomorrow's State of the Union address. Dismayed by the unfavorable reception his latest "surge" strategy for Iraq received, he plans to appease critics by focusing more on the "terrorist hunting" aspect of the war. "Instead of sending 21000 new troops to Iraq, we'll send just one," says one line of the speech. After Bauer brings peace to Iraq, Bush plans to send him to Afghanistan to "finally find that Osama Bin Laden fellow. But that's really kind of low priority."

    Bush's speechwriters refused to cooperate with the outrageous Bauer plan, but sources say that the President was so adamant about going forward with it that he fired them and finally learned to write himself. "It's quite astounding," admitted Chief of Staff Josh Bolten, "just 6 years ago he learned to read, and now George has finally grasped the basics of English prose. We're all so proud of him." It's unclear, however, when the President will grasp the basics of reality.

    Aides still have hope that before tomorrow's speech the President will realize the folly of his new plan. The creators of "24", as well as representatives of the Fox network and the show's cast will be on hand at the White House Monday night when a new episode airs; they will once again attempt to explain to Mr. Bush that the show is purely fictional.

    (yes, i couldn't resist having some fun this morning with everyone's tendency to post news articles)

    Kissel the bloviator is back again with his pompous prose that is surely the cure for insomnia. Kissel advises us what a wonderful orator the scowling Senator Webb is. Why the Europeans are just batty over him!

    Then Krazy Kurt gives us this gem:

    "I have to say MSNBC did an outstanding job of putting together a fairly diverse group of commentators."

    Yes such diversity. Let's see former Tip O'Neill errand boy Chris matthews; Frothing left wing cheeleader Olbermann; Plagerizer in chief and hard core lefty Barnicle Bill; and clueless Juan Williams clone Eugene "The Machine" Robinson. Yes, it was quite impressive the way Abrams brought in a range of views from the poltiical spectrum as one would expect from a top flight "news" network. But we all know that MSLSD is a third rate disaster that places liberal agenda driven propaganda over balance and fairness Kissel you have been hitting the Merlot too hard or whatever fancy ass adult beverage you've been consuming as you hob nob with the Euro-elitist pussies.

    The single hardest thing for me to understand about die hard Bush supporters, after all that has happened is.....how in the hell can they still look at this man, and still see him "as a man of honor"?

    Mike-
    Laughing and proud are hardly the words I would use to describe how I feel about either of your points. But I digress.

    My point is simply that the Dems want the white house back more than anything and Hillary is a slippery candidate for you. Take her out of the mix and I think your path is far easier and less bumpy. She definitely muddies the waters, and as a Hillary hater, I like watching the show.

    Mike,

    You are missing the point about Michelle Malkin. She is on VIDEO. It is not her OPINION. You can judge for yourself the credibility of the Iraqi woman (who was obviously speaking through a translator; unless you think the translator is on her payroll.)

    And to think the Grim Challenger has always leapt to Bush's defense when anyone called him a liar.

    So Grim: You still in the defending mode after what has transpired in court yesterday ?

    Benson:

    We actually agree. In my opinion, every known viable alternative to Hillary would be more electable than her.

    I sincerely hope she is not the nominee. But like most states in this ridiculous nomination process, mine will not play much of a part in determining the oucome.

    The single hardest thing for me to understand about die hard Bush supporters, after all that has happened is.....how in the hell can they still look at this man, and still see him "as a man of honor"?
    ==================================================
    Is this the same Mike we used to know and love or a different one? I, for one sir, thought you'd be able to understand it. After all, there are more than a few liberals who I believe do plenty to mess up the country (as I assume you're addressing when talking about Bush), or who's ideas would, but I still consider them honorable. Honor is defined by a personal code. No matter how mistaken that code may be, one can still be 'honorable' by following it.

    The single hardest thing for me to understand about die hard Bush supporters, after all that has happened is.....how in the hell can they still look at this man, and still see him "as a man of honor"?

    Posted by: Mike at January 24, 2007 10:45 AM

    Mike : At this stage of the game, these cowards find it so much easier to attack KO than to defend our lying president.
    Yes, it has come to this.

    If it makes you feel any better... my vote for Bush hasn't mattered either as my state has Never and will NEVER go red.

    But you can see our votes tally in the popular vote counts!

    Sharon:

    Actually I didn't miss the point at all about Malkin. I have no doubt that she managed to find an Iraqi woman who would say what she wanted to hear.

    After all, even in America, a solid 25 - 35% apparently STILL has faith in George Bush, for reasons that totally escape me.

    I don't suppose it would be too difficult for her to locate one of those 25 - 35% if she tried either.

    After all, there are more than a few liberals who I believe do plenty to mess up the country (as I assume you're addressing when talking about Bush), or who's ideas would, but I still consider them honorable.

    The Grim Challenger: Whoops there it is, Whoops there it is !

    Even when his president has proven to be a liar, Grim still thinks he's honorable !
    You heard it here, on today's version of Grimm's Fairy Tales !


    "Not one more of my brothers should die for a lie. This is my generation's call to conscience. We're not antiwar.We're not pacifists. We're anti-Iraq war."

    Sgt. Liam Madden and a host of servicemen vehemently opposing this war !

    We actually agree. In my opinion, every known viable alternative to Hillary would be more electable than her.

    I sincerely hope she is not the nominee. But like most states in this ridiculous nomination process, mine will not play much of a part in determining the oucome.
    ==================================================
    I'm with you there too Mike. Even I would feel a lot more comfortable with Omba [sp?] being elected prez far more than Hiliary.

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    And to think the Grim Challenger has always leapt to Bush's defense when anyone called him a liar.

    So Grim: You still in the defending mode after what has transpired in court yesterday ?
    ==================================================
    ? Defending what? Let's look a moment at something you said earlier:
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Hey neo-nuts: Still believe that Bush isn't capable of lying to our country to bring us to war ?
    ==================================================
    Capable? I dunno, aren't you the one always claiming he's dumber than a rock? (or is that someone else?) Again, a lie has to consist of two things: 1) a falsehood and 2) a person's knowledge that it IS a falsehood. So let me ask you this: you really believe (or have evidence) that Bush knew absolutely that Iraq [blah blah, insert stuff here] beforehand and took us to war anyway? Heck I still want to know, if this was all some cooked up scheme, why the heck didn't Bush then PLANT WMDs in Iraq after invasion? Not only that, but what would be the motivation? It's not that I'm defending Bush, Bob, it's that your logic is too flimsy.

    Mike,

    You are still not getting my larger point. Bob quoted a poll to "prove" Iraqis want the U.S. to leave. He left out pertinent information about that poll. I pointed out that information. I gave a very small example of support for the U.S. presence, to be sure, from Michelle Malkin. I also gave a link to an interview with a police officer who felt that the U.S. presence was needed for awhile longer. It was not on camera but the credentials of the journalist have not been questioned to my knowledge. Maybe an accurate poll would reflect only 25% support. Maybe not. The intelligence that our troops receive has to come from somewhere.

    No Grim:

    An honorable Bush would have fired a staff member after vowing he would in the Plame affair. I can list many, many, more individual examples of Bush proving to me that 'honor' is not one of his guiding principals.

    I know that you are probably going to want to quibble about the Plame situation, and about others, but lets don't! All of these arguments have been made and remade hundreds of times, and you either believe he has 'lead' with honor, or you don't!

    "After all, there are more than a few liberals who I believe do plenty to mess up the country ".

    The Challenger Grim is only one of the first at this site who will be trying to deflect attention away from Bush's lying, THOSE BAD LIBERALS theme.

    Let the spin begin !

    The Grim Challenger: Whoops there it is, Whoops there it is !

    Even when his president has proven to be a liar, Grim still thinks he's honorable !
    You heard it here, on today's version of Grimm's Fairy Tales !
    ====================================================
    It's things like this which make me seriously doubt Bob is a college professor. Really, I would expect such Childishness from middle school students. Maybe Bob's just a 'professor' in his head and his 'students' are the orderlies.

    And you just made a serious point, Mr. Kissel?

    Sorry but- "Miss Shrill Malki" is no worse than Shuster.

    I watched his 'false" report twice yesterday on the destroyed memo. He hyped this as a banner moment in the prosecution's statement"

    Ends up the document was never destroyed AND imagine this, MSNBC never retracted this report. It ran TWICE during the day. He is a hack.

    On the evolutionary scale:

    squirrels

    rats

    leeches

    Michele Malkin

    decaying road kill

    Dick Cheney

    Rock bottom !

    An honorable Bush would have fired a staff member after vowing he would in the Plame affair. I can list many, many, more individual examples of Bush proving to me that 'honor' is not one of his guiding principals.

    I know that you are probably going to want to quibble about the Plame situation, and about others, but lets don't! All of these arguments have been made and remade hundreds of times, and you either believe he has 'lead' with honor, or you don't!
    ==================================================

    At this point I am not very pleased with Bush over the whole CIA affair that I've been reading. But the trial is not over yet and hopefully we'll all have a clearer picture when it's concluded (I mean, I thought "innocent until proven guilty" was the rule).

    Yeah, it was disappointing to read Byron York's account of the Libby trial this morning. (http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MGUwMTlmYzVlOTc5YzJiMzUzODk4Yzc0MGMwYTBiNzk=) but wasn't the entire lesson of Clinton's presidency that one lie in one area didn't affect the entirety of a man? (or did I misunderstand the lesson of it)

    Note: I'm not trying to deflect attention, I'm first trying to filter out any double-standards. Those were equally outraged at Clinton's actions can continue this discussion over Bush. Those who were not, please leave the classroom, there's no room for you.

    It's times like this Grim, that we KNOW you don't have a conscience when you can't stand up and speak out against the president of the US and his lies and deceptions.

    ( Yess I do have a playful side that I have to keep hidden in my line of work.)

    That's why I come to this Olby haters site and laugh my ass off and show them/you what hypocrites you are.

    Fret not Grim- "not very pleased with Bush over the whole CIA affair that I've been reading".

    Always when a prosecution lays out their case it is one sided. Let the dust settle.

    Krazy Kurt sez

    "We simply can't have a serious discussion if people keep interjecting Miss Shrill Malkin."

    He wants a serious discussion and then gives us this:

    "I have to say MSNBC did an outstanding job of putting together a fairly diverse group of commentators."

    Tells you everything you need to know about Kissel's credibility.

    See my post above an the "diversity" of MSLSD's post SOTU address coverage.

    Fret not Grim- "not very pleased with Bush over the whole CIA affair that I've been reading".

    Always when a prosecution lays out their case it is one sided. Let the dust settle.
    ====================================================
    Actually benson, read Byron's article. What I was "fretting" about (and I use that term so very loosely) was the argument made by the DEFENSE.

    Challenger Grim : I'm not trying to deflect attention, I'm first trying to filter out any double-standards.


    Let's see:

    Clinton: lied about sex

    Bush: lied about bringing a country to war,Yellow cake in Niger,bringing to justice anyone in his administration who would out a spy, etc etc etc etc.

    Get a grip Grim, ON REALITY.

    Either the new majority (with exceptions) doesn't believe that Pres. Bush lied or they don't care. They are not going to institute impeachment proceedings. That seems pretty clear right now.

    Let us not forget that the folks that gave Dan Rather FORGED FEDERAL DOCUMENTS were never charged or even investigated...

    Hank- KK still thinks MSNBC is not biased which is the root of his analysis. So anybody that agrees with their pundits must be balanced too.

    Word in MSNBC is contemplating running a crawl that repeats; Bush lied. Bush is Bad. Cheney is the devil. Repeat"

    I saw for a bit last night MSNBC coverage of the Stae of the Union speech. Olbermann was worried that Bush mention Hizballah and Iran. He went on a rant defendinf the Ayatolllahs. I just flipped the channel. His pro-Iran bias shows more and more. His name should be Teheran Keith. I'm starting to belive the rumors Teheran Keith has Persian blood.

    Let's see:

    Clinton: lied about sex

    Bush: bringing to justice anyone in his administration who would out a spy

    Get a grip Grim, ON REALITY.
    ====================================================
    Sure, that's the only thing that's been confirmed at the same time. Oh, and I should point out that Libby is being charged with the same crime that Clinton (and Nixon) was.

    I bet ch.Grim, Hank and benson remained loyal to that crook Nixon in his final days too.

    They are so very predictable.

    They will go down with this crook too.

    Teheran Keith defending Iran yet again. Why does the Left always defend Islamo-Fascists like Iran, Hizabaalh and Al-Qaeda. I just don't understand?

    It's times like this Grim, that we KNOW you don't have a conscience when you can't stand up and speak out against the president of the US and his lies and deceptions.
    ====================================================
    HEY LOOK EVERYONE! It's the same logic the reds and others used to declare that Keith supports Iran. I thought that was bipartisanly condemned the other day. Either Bob was trying to be the most clever satirist of all time (unlikely) or he just joined the company of some of the hardest right-wingers on this site.

    Either the new majority (with exceptions) doesn't believe that Pres. Bush lied or they don't care. They are not going to institute impeachment proceedings. That seems pretty clear right now.

    Posted by: sharon at January 24, 2007 11:17 AM

    Neither, Sharon.They know they can't get the necessary overall votes for impeachment, so they won't try something that probably won't be possible.

    If there ever was a president who deserves impeachment, it surely is this one.

    "Not one more of my brothers should die for a lie. This is my generation's call to conscience. We're not antiwar.We're not pacifists. We're anti-Iraq war."

    Sgt. Liam Madden and a host of servicemen vehemently opposing this war !


    Bob has yet to concede that he presented a poll sampling 1,150 Iraqis with an oversampling of Sunnis, and with the caveat that it is unknown whether the opponents of the U.S. presence are al Qaeda members or supporters. There could probably never be an accurate poll. What you have to look to is evidence of cooperation (intelligence, for example).

    I bet ch.Grim, Hank and benson remained loyal to that crook Nixon in his final days too.
    ====================================================
    Oh yeah, especially since I wasn't even ALIVE at the time. Oh wait, of course you've all figured out by now that I'm the incarnation of Death and of course favor any person that gives me work. (though you should have seen the paperwork I had to do on Saddam)

    Ok, again I just couldn't resist the joke.

    Just to get into your dour mindset
    "What grounds would you want him impeached for?"

    Bob,
    Doesn't it botjher you that Olbermann was yet again defending the Ayatollahs? What's wrong with Teheran Keith? I though the Left was against Fascism. I hope you don't defend the Iranaians and Hizballah.

    Sharon:"Bob has yet to concede that he presented a poll sampling 1,150 Iraqis with an oversampling of Sunnis."

    Bob hasn't conceded about that poll b/c there it been proven that there was an "oversampling of Sunnis".

    Got any proof ?

    sorry for the improper grammar, I'm trying to do 3 things at once.

    There were not enough voted to convict Clinton but he was impeached. Let me add a third option to they don't believe he lied or they don't care: they don't have any proof.

    Bob,

    I am taking information from the introduction to the report you posted!

    "I bet ch.Grim, Hank and benson remained loyal to that crook Nixon in his final days too.
    They are so very predictable.
    They will go down with this crook too."

    I was too young to really follow what was happening in Nixon's final days.

    Simply because I point out the journalistic ineptitude of MSLSD and the leftist propaganda that is featured on Meltdown on a nightly basis (while falsely claiming to be unbiased) is no indication of what I think about Nixon. Bad journalism is bad journalism and I'm telling it like it is.

    Really, Bob,

    I can't cut and paste because it is in a format that doesn't allow for it. Go back and read the introduction. That is where the oversampling came from.

    they don't care: they don't have any proof.

    Posted by: sharon at January 24, 2007 11:32 AM

    The Libby trial is providing proof as we speak.
    Bush knew about the whole sordid Plame affair, and then came out and said, "He'd take care of anyone" who outed a spy in his administration.

    I guess you're not following the trial.


    "Not one more of my brothers should die for a lie. This is my generation's call to conscience. We're not antiwar.We're not pacifists. We're anti-Iraq war."

    Sgt. Liam Madden and a host of servicemen vehemently opposing this war !


    Way off base. MSNBC is not my sole or even primary source. I read the NYT, WP, WSJ and Austin American-Statesman when in the country and when time allows; I read the IHT when out of the country; I try to read the Times of London, Figaro and Suddeutsche Zeitung, when possible; I watch BBC World Report, Deutschewelt and the News Hour, virtually every day; I listen to NPR, daily. I supplement all this with a bit of CNN and MSNBC. When I want to find out why the lemmings are hurling themselves off the cliffs, I tune into FIX.
    ==================================================
    Someone explain some reasoning for me. If 'fox (faux, fix, etc)' is so biased it is "not to be trusted" then why do you (kurt in particular) watch these other sources that are just as (if not more so) biased as fox is? Does bias ipso facto discredit a source or does it not?

    The Libby trial is providing proof as we speak.
    Bush knew about the whole sordid Plame affair, and then came out and said, "He'd take care of anyone" who outed a spy in his administration.

    I guess you're not following the trial.
    ====================================================

    Ok Bob, so what of that is grounds for impeachment?

    Grim only worries about bias when he/she thinks it leans to the right. Apparently Olbermann's bias doesn't bother them in the slightest.

    Imus and crew said this morning that Olbermann did everything but give Hillary a back rub during his kiss-ass interview of her last night on Countdown.

    Agreed Hank...

    I am here too because Olbermann is an abomination to the 'news' as an industry. I love to expose his hypocrisy and lies. If I wanted to debate politics- I would hang at a political blog.

    Unfortunately blue bloggers Bob, Mike, No Name, and KK come here and hijack the debate back to bush bashing and cheney chucking. But I like the banter anyways.

    KK,

    When the Clinton impeachment proceedings were going on, I was angry that he wasn't convicted. I flip-flopped because I, too, now feel that it would have been too divisive. Others have pointed put that the lie of Clinton is of a much more insignificant nature than the alleged lie of Bush. I agree. If those in control really believe that Bush lied only to take our country to war for his own purposes, they have an obligation to the servicemen and their families to pursue impeachment. Otherwise, no president should ever be impeached.

    Grim only worries about bias when he/she thinks it leans to the right. Apparently Olbermann's bias doesn't bother them in the slightest.

    Imus and crew said this morning that Olbermann did everything but give Hillary a back rub during his kiss-ass interview of her last night on Countdown.
    ====================================================
    ? I think there's a typo there somewhere. Anyway, I myself know that bias does not make something true or false. If that was true, we'd have to fire every math teacher since they obviously have a bias towards euclidian geometry. [sp?] Not to mention human cause global warming supporters would have to be thrown out with the skeptics. Bias just means we have to watch a little more closely and figure out if there's anything missing from the info we're recieving, but left... right... doesn't matter,
    BIAS != FALSEHOOD

    Bob,

    Please concede that you did not read the report that you cited. Regarding impeachment, I was referring to the alleged lie to take us into war.

    My intent is to stick to the Olby subject but it is just too tempting to keep mum. I have been ignoring the kids. I'll politely wait for your concession Bob.

    "I'd like to leave Olberamnn out of the recap, but he keeps showing up. As long as he keeps using "proverbial" and 'throw under the bus" and the rest of his Olbyisms, I don't feel bad reviving "bellow" and "spiel'."

    So, because you think Olbermann's writing is bad you feel the need to compound the error? Check it out: www.thesaurus.com. It will open new worlds for you.

    Brandon,
    Notice the Blue Bloggers get ballistic when I point out Teheran Keith's defence of Iran. They're whole existence is to defend Keith and bash Bush. I can imagine how lonely their lives will be when Bush is gone. Who will they Bash?

    Unfortunately blue bloggers Bob, Mike, No Name, and KK come here and hijack the debate back to bush bashing and cheney chucking. But I like the banter anyways.

    Posted by: Benson at January 24, 2007 11:41 AM

    Bush bashing ! Hysterical !!!

    No, the "blue bloggers" come here and report factual information that you Bush apologists overlook , and to prove what hypocrites you all are.
    If you cared a whit about your country, you would also be appalled over Bush's lies and the ways he's mismanaged this war and our country.

    OK carry on, back to your KO bashing.

    I couldn't resist sharing these internet 'cheat codes' with the other posters at this site. Enjoy all! =D


    * Type "Google.com," then type "kiddie porn" to send a squad of police to your door.
    * By buying your own domain, and posting information that is not true, it will BECOME true, using the "everything on the internet is true except on Wikipedia" clause.
    * Upon entering Google, type in "miserable failure" and click "I'm feeling lucky" to read up about miserable failures.
    * Go to Google.com and type "French Military Victories" into the search browser, then click the 'I'm Feeling Lucky' to find Google asking you if you meant "French Military Defeats". Google is a great spell checker!
    * TYPE IN ALL CAPS TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY
    * tYpE iN aLtErNaTiNg CaPs To Be ReSpEcKeDeD
    * If you pretend numbers are letters, everybody will love you.
    * Compare an opponent in an argument to Hitler and you automatically win said argument.
    * To login to the Internets, use the password qweasd.
    * Before submitting a long post, press Alt+F4 to automatically make it awesomer.

    "Notice the Blue Bloggers get ballistic when I point out Teheran Keith's defence of Iran."

    You got some proof there, champ, or are you just spraying Cheez Whiz into the wind?

    Or is this one of those "he defends because he doesn't attack" routines where we're supposed to read the "subtext" of Keith's words?

    So no one on this blog cares that we have authorized 'field trips' to the US for thousands of Saudi Nationals? You guys would rather bicker with each other about who said what when?

    C'mon Med Wolf, you're usually frothing at the mouth about 'National Security' and 'Islamofacism.' Apparently as long as it's something a Neocon is doing, it's somehow OK. What if a Democratic president was opening the floodgates at our safety's expense? You'd be barking at the moon right about now.

    Tells me all I need to know about this site....

    Here's a bit of info for you if you're concerned that the president might not be doing all he can be doing to protect our borders from Radical Islam:

    In April 2005, President Bush met with King Abdullah Bin Abdul Aziz of Saudi Arabia at his Crawford, TX ranch. At such time, they made an agreement to encourage more Saudi students to receive their undergraduate educations in the U.S. Presently, there are approximately 5,000 Saudi Arabian students studying in U.S. colleges and universities and 15,000 applications in the pipeline, although confirming the exact figures is one momentous task, if not impossible to find.

    The deal which King Abdullah proposed to President Bush was to allow 5,000 students per year the opportunity to study in the U.S., with all tuition costs footed by the Saudi Arabian government. The scholarship program, which was not publicly announced by either the White house or the Saudi Embassy, was an attempt for the Saudi government to fast-track the student visa program to which the administration has now agreed.

    http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/13086.html

    You think young idealistic Saudi nationals (i.e. UBL back in the day) might be willing to use this program to strike against the Infidels (that's US).

    This one has flown WAY under the radar...

    The problem with trying to reason with Red Wolf is that he's just an idiot. He proves it over, and over, and over again. A perfect example of someone who will let facts go in one ear and right back out the other, as if nothing had been said at all, and turns right around and parrots the same stupid stuff back out again, and again, and again, and again,.........

    KK-
    Throw in a little Washington Post on top of your left leaning rags. It will give you some perspective. I watch and read both sides and am able debate both sides. You only seem to "enjoy" news that agrees with your point-of-view.

    The New York Times and BBC have countless documented instances of manipulating the facts to fit their agenda.

    Rummy shaking hands with his good buddy Saddam Hussein. He was still an evil dictator back then, wasn't he?

    http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/

    But he's dead now- isn't he?

    You think young idealistic Saudi nationals (i.e. UBL back in the day) might be willing to use this program to strike against the Infidels (that's US).

    This one has flown WAY under the radar...
    ===================================================
    Hey generic, just meant to say, I too am uncomfortable with what you posted. But then again, I'm one of those that has not been thrilled with Bush's immigration plans from day one and certainly don't see how this is going to be of any help.

    Bob,

    Please concede that you did not read the report that you cited.Sharon.

    Are you speaking of this report ?

    BAGHDAD, Sept. 26 -- A strong majority of Iraqis want U.S.-led military forces to immediately withdraw from the country, saying their swift departure would make Iraq more secure and decrease sectarian violence, according to new polls by the State Department and independent researchers.

    In Baghdad, for example, nearly three-quarters of residents polled said they would feel safer if U.S. and other foreign forces left Iraq, with 65 percent of those asked favoring an immediate pullout, according to State Department polling results obtained by The Washington Post.

    "Majorities in all regions except Kurdish areas state that the Multi-National Force-Iraq (MNF-I) should withdraw immediately, adding that the MNF-I's departure would make them feel safer and decrease violence," concludes the 20-page State Department report, titled "Iraq Civil War Fears Remain High in Sunni and Mixed Areas." The report was based on 1,870 face-to-face interviews conducted from late June to early July.

    The PIPA poll, which has a margin of error of 3 percent, was carried out by Iraqis in all 18 provinces who conducted interviews with more than 1,000 randomly selected Iraqis in their homes.

    Using complex sampling methods based on data from Iraq's Planning Ministry, the pollsters selected streets on which to conduct interviews. They then contacted every third house on the left side of the road. When they selected a home, the interviewers then collected the names and birth dates of everyone who lived there and polled the person with the most recent birthday.

    Matthew Warshaw, a senior research manager at D3 Systems, which helped conduct the poll, said he didn't think Iraqis were any less likely to share their true opinions with pollsters than Americans. "It's a concern you run up against in Iowa or in Iraq," he said. "But for the most part we're asking questions that people want to give answers to. People want to have their voice heard."

    Am I supposed to concede that I didn't read this report ?
    (:

    "The New York Times and BBC have countless documented instances of manipulating the facts to fit their agenda"

    Uh Huh...just like when the NYT helped the administration to manipulate facts in their favor during the run up to the war.

    Everyone knows that Saudi Oil is thicker than American's Blood!

    "This one has flown WAY under the radar..."

    And your post flew way over Red Wolf's head !

    But he's dead now- isn't he?

    Posted by: Benson at January 24, 2007 12:05 PM

    yes he is,(saddam) and Iraq has never been the same since the US deposed him.
    Many feel Iraq needs a dictator to hold the warring factions together.
    Now we just have chaos and a civil war ( and sending more of our troops to die in the crossfire)

    BTW, how Bush's pledge to get Osama Bin Laden "dead or alive" going ?

    Bob,

    Now you can truthfully say that you read (at least in part) the report. You asked me where my proof was that the Sunnis were oversampled. Just go into ignore mode. I got it from the report you cited.

    THE REPORT ITSELF, NOT ME states "little is known of how the mass of Iraqis view al Qaeda and whether opponents of the U.S. presence are also al Qaeda supporters."

    I suggested that you include it as relevant information so that otehrs could make their own judgment. I made mine. You can agree or disagree.

    I bet you breathed a sigh of relief when you found what you quoted above.

    Scariest Part of Bush's Speech

    It wasn't his stubborn reliance on committing additional troops to Iraq.

    It wasn't the spectacle of watching an unpopular president pay lip service to bipartisanship and political compromise.

    It wasn't seeing Cheney sitting behind the President like a mad inventor wondering how much longer his Frankenstein experiment will last before it reaches complete self-destruction.

    It wasn't the annoying and incessant applause, coming mainly from Republicans. (One wonders if there had been a green applause light in the House chambers. Correction, make that studio light a red one.)

    It wasn't the tense smiles and clenched jaws of many of the Democrats who simply dislike the president and everything he and his administration represents.

    It wasn't the nearly universal cheering and standing ovations greeting lines like "We must balance the federal budget." (D'oh!)

    It wasn't the President's avoidance of real solutions to real problems, ranging from global warming to the mounting trade deficit.

    It was something else completely.

    The scariest part of Bush's speech was marked by who wasn't there to hear his address: U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

    The Constitution says that one member of the president's cabinet must not be in attendance during the State of the Union address in the likelihood that something horrible happens and the entire government is decapitated by an enemy attack. One cabinet member is thus kept off site at an undisclosed location in order to ensure the government's continuity.

    Yes, that was the scariest part of last night's speech by the president. That he had placed his faith in Mr. Torture to be his potential go-to guy as commander-in-chief.

    The flickering, nightmarish idea of this particular Attorney General as U.S. President makes one's blood turn cold. Gitmo here we come.

    Hey Sharon, Are you breathing "a sigh of relief" knowing now that the Bush Administration threw Libby under the bus to save Karl Rove?..AND TRIED TO COVER IT UP !!!!

    Are you breathing a sigh of relief that Bush knew all along about this...as Harry Truman called it, This "treasonous" act of outing a spy ?

    How long is it going to take for you to see the light about your "boys" ?

    Sharon is like her other partners in denial( Cee, Janet, Cecilia, Grim, Benson)

    No information is damning enough for them to give up their membership in the BLIND PATRIOTS UNION.

    Congressman John Dingell (D): “I don’t take sides for or against Hezbollah or for or against Israel”
    WDIV-TV July 30, 2006

    Sorry , Hank for excluding you in the Blind Patriots UNion.
    I'm sure you're a charter member.

    Is you're union motto still :PARTY OVER COUNTRY?

    Whatsamatter BF Pa, don't like it when I criticize your boy Dingell?

    "The Constitution says that one member of the president's cabinet must not be in attendance during the State of the Union address in the likelihood that something horrible happens and the entire government is decapitated by an enemy attack."

    Correction - The Constitution doesn't mandate it. The "designated survivor" rule came about during the Cold War.

    In addition, since 9/11 there have also been 2 House Representatives and 2 Senators (1 from each party) absent so that there would be someone to rise to the positions of Speaker of the House and Senate President Pro Tempore.

    Why don't you look at what happened to Privates Menchaca and Tucker on the two videos released? Viewing them makes it extremely difficult for one to care about Gitmo detainees. Where were Menchaca and Tucker's lawyers? Have you seen your fellow Americans beheaded? But yet, I tell myself to let human decency reign.

    Bushkill,

    You just make blind statements without reading what I post. I stated that if there is evidence that Bush lied to take our country to war, impeachment proceedings should begin. Because there apparently will be ni proceedings, the majority:

    1) doesn't believe Bush lied;

    2) doesn't care Bush lied; or

    3) lacks proof that Bush lied.

    If impeachment proceedings are not instituted when there is proof of this alleged criminal misconduct, then on what grounds would impeachment ever occur?

    Bob,

    I prefer to withhold judgment until the trial is over. It's one of those rights that Olby claims he wants to protect.

    Did you notice in last night's speech that Bush wants to end "junk lawsuits" (that got the standing ovation of the night from Republicans) and an expansion of health savings accounts, a favorite of upper-income households looking for a tax break?

    Also notice that two words were not spoken in his address:
    Middle Class and New Orleans.


    Funny how the "Blind Patriot's Union" as Bushkill calls it,loves their president and favors his policies that will only hurt them in the end.
    Bush's policies have done nothing for the lower and middle class, yet I'm pretty certain that the Blind Patriot's posters come from either of these two classes.
    This is a classic example of "cutting your nose to spite your face" syndrome.


    "Not one more of my brothers should die for a lie. This is my generation's call to conscience. We're not antiwar.We're not pacifists. We're anti-Iraq war."

    Sgt. Liam Madden and a host of servicemen vehemently opposing this war !

    "The Factor" thinks bin laden was idealistic? odd characterization. i guess hitler was once a peace maker, too

    I reiterate my position for voting Bush in 2000. Gore abandoned his pro-life position for higher political aspirations. (Just war is not the taking of innocent life- I am not going to debate that now). Bush has never been my ideal candidate. As I have stated before in similar terms, you have to be alive to be middle class.

    My generation will be the first to suffer from the bankrupt Social Security system. There are not enough workers to pay into the system as it currently operates. We went from large families to 2.5 kids. Look at what is happening in Europe.
    No one wants to fix it.

    I meant fix the social security system.

    EE "He was NEUTRALIZED as Army Chief of Staff - virtually IGNORED by the Administration for the last year he was in the post because they had already named his replacement."

    The only thing I see that Rumsfeld did wrong was to discount the opinion of someone who was right in the end. Rumsfeld was wrong. He was not pernicious.

    CNN reports that Army Chief of Staff Shinseki served four years and that no former Chief of Staff has served longer than this.

    One can speculate that Shinseki was ignored and marginalized for not agreeing with Rumsfeld about several key issues--- troop levels in Iraq, post-Cold War military systems--- but I'm wondering how Rumsfeld mentioning the name of the next candidate in line for Shinseki's job (after his four year service is complete) PROVES that Shinseki was a "lame duck" while serving out the standard tenure?

    I differ with your argument that Shinseki being "ignored" (and I'm accepting that he was as a "given" for the sake of argument) by Pentagon leadership was effectively an outster. With that logic any boss or CEO who puts less stock in one employee because of policy disputes, would have effectively fired or forced that person to resign. That's nonsense. Anyone on the planet who disagrees with the persons running the place stands of a change of being "marginalized" in the sense of being left out of the loop. We all are aware of this before we makes the waves we think we need to make. To equate this with being forced out entirely, is making routine workplace politics into something far more pernicious.

    Bob,

    I prefer to withhold judgment until the trial is over. It's one of those rights that Olby claims he wants to protect.

    Posted by: sharon at January 24, 2007 12:43 PM

    it's not so much the outcome that interests me, it's watching the spectacle of the rats of the Bush Administrtion turning on each other and the INSIDE information we are finding out that your "boys" have TRIED to keep hidden for the past 6 years.

    It's so sweet that you couldn't believe that Bush lied to send us to war !
    You really don't have much of a handle who these people in the White House really are, do you ?

    "Not one more of my brothers should die for a lie. This is my generation's call to conscience. We're not antiwar.We're not pacifists. We're anti-Iraq war."

    Sgt. Liam Madden and a host of servicemen vehemently opposing this war !

    "If impeachment proceedings are not instituted when there is proof of this alleged criminal misconduct, then on what grounds would impeachment ever occur?"

    Maybe these-

    http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/downloads/nm.pdf

    Remember, according to the rules of the House of Representatives, all it takes is for one state legislature to pass a measure like this and one Representative to sponsor it and the process starts.

    Sharon: Our government is ALREADY bankrupt because of this war, decreased taxes for the wealthy, and huge new spending programs from the very people who were supposed to be most opposed to such things.

    When the budget as a whole becomes balanced, and we begin paying down the debt in a sustained manner...only then will it make much any sense to try to 'fix' Social Security.

    "Did you notice in last night's speech that Bush wants to end "junk lawsuits" (that got the standing ovation of the night from Republicans)"

    No the issue that go the standing O of the night was the President's call for an up or down vote on his judicial nominees while Nancy sat on her hands . So much for bipartisanship!

    Bob writes "So the next time you see Cee post that quote from Sgt. Madden, remember how he feels:
    "Not one more of my brothers should die for a lie. This is my generation's call to conscience. We're not antiwar.We're not pacifists. We're anti-Iraq war."

    Bob are you so dense that you don't understand that Cee posts that quote SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE this guy is a war opponent who won't back off his own rhetoric (as most anti-war folks have done on this board...) and let the Dems off for not trying to get troops out of Iraq ASAP?

    No the issue that go the standing O of the night was the President's call for an up or down vote on his judicial nominees while Nancy sat on her hands . So much for bipartisanship!

    Posted by: hank at January 24, 2007 1:03 PM

    The country ( and Nancy) has seen just what far right wing judges Bush has nominated.That may have something to do with not applauding.

    By the way, I didn't notice Harriet Miers sitting with the other members of the Supreme Court last night.

    THERE was another doozy of a choice of Bush's for the Supreme Court.
    My God !

    Bob,

    I am all about proof. I would rather give the majority the benefit of the doubt that they are not letting the President get away with an egregious crime. As far as the Libby trial, Libby doesn't want to go to jail. The trial is just underway. I prefer to give the justice system a chance to work. I hop you don't teach any subject on the criminal justice system!

    Mike,

    The problem with Social Security is not new. It needed addressed long before Iraq.

    So Sharon, how successful has Bush been in reforming Social Security?

    So Sharon, how successful has Bush been in creating a sound energy policy?

    or affordable healthcare in this country?


    or combating the war profiteering in iraq ?

    or winning the war in Iraq?

    or helping New Orleans to get back on their feet.

    or combat the unbelievable corruption in the monies allocated to the reconstruction companies for New Orleans?


    or......

    Sorry, not enough time to point out ALL of this president's failures.

    Sharon: Our government is ALREADY bankrupt because of this war, decreased taxes for the wealthy, and huge new spending programs from the very people who were supposed to be most opposed to such things.

    When the budget as a whole becomes balanced, and we begin paying down the debt in a sustained manner...only then will it make much any sense to try to 'fix' Social Security.
    ===================================================
    Mike, did you see what I wrote yesterday? here it is again:
    http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20070123/oppose23.art.htm
    "Deficit halved 2 years early
    Three years ago, skeptics scoffed. Now they're eating crow.

    Three years ago, President Bush established the goal of cutting the federal budget deficit by half in five years, without raising taxes. At the time, many — including USA TODAY— expressed skepticism. But it was achieved last year, three years ahead of schedule. Now is the time to build on that success and work with Congress to balance the budget in the next five years.

    On Feb. 5, the president will propose the customary five-year budget, showing declining deficits every year and a surplus in 2012.

    Getting to balance requires both keeping the economy strong and keeping federal spending under control.

    Key to the first is continuing pro-growth policies — including tax relief — that have helped fuel our robust economy. Since the president's tax relief became fully effective in 2003, we've seen a dramatic increase in business investment, more thanseven million new jobs created and higher wages for American workers. This stronger economy has also generated record revenues over the past two years, cutting our deficit by more than$150 billion. This is why it is so important to balance the budget without raising taxes and not put our economy at risk.

    Key to the second condition is setting budget priorities and stopping unnecessary orwasteful spending. Fiscal restraint while investing in our national security is equally important to a balanced budget.

    The president's budget will demonstrate how balance can be achieved by using cautious economic and revenue projections in line with forecasts by outside experts. On spending, the president will propose realistic restraint, while increasing funding for the global war on terror, including all costs of Iraq and Afghanistan over the next two years.

    In demonstrating how we can balance the budget in the next five years, the president will continue to call for bipartisan solutions to the longer term challenges posed by unsustainable growth in important entitlement programs. In fact, a key reason to pursue a balanced budget now is to position us better for that future challenge.

    A balanced budget is good for the American taxpayer and for our economy. There's plenty of work to be done, but I am optimistic we can do it — across party lines — as the American people expect and deserve.

    Rob Portman is Office of Management and Budget director."

    The debt has been reduced AHEAD of schedule the last few years. Higher taxes are NOT the answer. Heck there's even been recent evidence that a flat tax helps raise revenues. Now decreased spending, we can all agree on but good night Mike, Bob, it's not the end of the world. Even the most hard-lined right-wingers were willing to admit to good news and results from Clinton.

    Oh, and since I KNOW someone's going to ask about the flat tax...
    http://newsbusters.org/node/10179
    Clip from Time magazine:
    "Since regaining independence in 1991 with the collapse of the U.S.S.R., Estonia (pop. 1.35 million) was the first former Soviet republic to introduce its own currency and adopt a flat-tax system, now widely copied in the rest of Eastern Europe. It has also become one of the most technologically advanced places on the planet. You can use your mobile phone to pay for parking, buy bus tickets or check your children's school schedule. Wi-fi hot spots are ubiquitous, and the nation's most famous start-up is Skype, the Internet phone titan, which eBay acquired for $2.6 billion. That's slightly more than the annual output of the entire Estonian economy 15 years ago.

    The economy is now one of Europe's most dynamic, racing along at an 11.3% growth clip. Estonia is the only new European Union member to have a budget surplus, and its national debt is shrinking rapidly. Naturally, there are growing pains: the unemployment rate has fallen so sharply, from 14% in 2000 to about 4% today, that businesses are scrambling to find workers. "This is the best time in our history," says Sten Tamkivi, Skype's Estonian operations manager....

    Most Estonians, enjoying a boost in living standards, are hoping the boom can continue. But there's at least one caveat: Estonia needs to resolve its labor shortage. "We are running out of people," says Craig Rawlings, president of the American Chamber of Commerce in Tallinn. Still, Estonia has shown that it can improvise. "We're a very small country," says Skype's Tamkivi. "That means we just have to be efficient." So far, they've managed."

    Mr. Angry,

    All of those efforts require bipartisanship; there has been none. Both sides are guilty. Look, I am not a millionaire. I am actually angry that I obtained a student loan in the 80's at a high interest rate. I received a higher education degree, incurred more debt and had to consolidate at the highest interest rate of my loans. I am stuck with it. More helpful legislation for student borrowers does not include me. Yes, I have my beefs too, but that pales in comparison to what others must face, so I suck it up.

    So Sharon, how successful has Bush been in creating a sound energy policy?
    ==================================================
    See: well practically anything on the free market.


    or affordable healthcare in this country?
    ==================================================
    Not too bad. So far every survey talks about how seriors are loving the latest drug plan. Of course again, the more it's privatized, the cheaper it'll get.


    or combating the war profiteering in iraq ?
    ==================================================
    I'd like to see these numbers broken down. Besides, wasn't there a brief period where war supply companies were actually losing money?


    or winning the war in Iraq?
    ==================================================
    The war WAS won. It's the rebuilding/aftermath that's a b****. Learn the difference (even bush said rebuilding was going to be a pain)

    or helping New Orleans to get back on their feet.
    ==================================================
    Wait a sec... wasn't more than New Orleans hit by the hurricanes? Where's all the problems Mississippi has been having getting on their feet? All those other cities besides New O have the same federal government... so are they have the same problems?????

    or combat the unbelievable corruption in the monies allocated to the reconstruction companies for New Orleans?
    ==================================================
    ???? What does president Bush have to do with this? I thought all of that was a local effort? (just like the previous funding for the leevees that were stolen by LOCAL efforts) Is bush supposed to be president or demigod?

    http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/


    JohnnyD,

    Tom Maquire at Justoneminute.com is doing a jam-up job of reporting the lies and distortions of Olbermann and David Shuster on the Libby trial.

    There are links there too of several 'anything but rightwing' bloggers-- The Daily Howler for one, expressing amazement at Shuster's reporting.

    I know you're such a fan of Shuster, so I thought you might want to check it out. it's breath-taking! Skip down on the page to "Shuster Follies".

    Anyone who wants to follow the ends and outs of the Libby trial will appeciate this blog.

    Sharon: All of those efforts require bipartisanship; there has been none. Both sides are guilty.

    How do you figure.
    For the past 6 years, we've had a GOP congress and a GOP president. Having both together is the ultimate working relationship to get legislation passed.

    We have seen the lack of legislation and the poor performance by the GOP Congress and the lack of leadership by your GOP president on every domestic problem facing this country.

    No , Sharon, both sides ARE NOT guilty.
    Your GOP Congress and president have been completely in charge for the last 6 years.
    Put the blame where the blame belongs.

    Grimn just made a total fool of himself with his last post.


    LAME SCHMUCK PHONES IN STATE OF UNION ADDRESS

    -- War President Barely Mentions War; Bush Fed Up With Iraq; U.S. Fed Up With Bush --

    WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Faced with a widely unpopular war in Iraq and a Democratic Congress, President Bush in his State of the Union address urged lawmakers to work with him to "achieve big things for the American people." In his 50-minute address, the president appealed for patience with his recently announced plan to increase troop levels in Iraq, despite opposition from many Democrats and some members of his own party. Polls taken before the speech indicate he faces a political headwind as voters 2-to-1 are dissatisfied with his leadership. In the Democratic response, freshman Sen. James Webb of Virginia -- an early and outspoken opponent of the 2003 invasion -- said Bush "took us into this war recklessly" and ignored warnings from many experts about the consequences.


    Grimn just made a total fool of himself with his last post.
    ===================================================

    This, from the foundation of "because we said it, it must be true!" For once I guess uncyclopedia was right:
    "By buying your own domain, and posting information that is not true, it will BECOME true, using the "everything on the internet is true except on Wikipedia" clause."

    Social security is a political football. It's a subsidiary of politicians used as a scare tactic to stir up trouble with voters towards anyone who wants to revamp for a new era. I don't think it's possible to touch it.

    I'm hoping that somehow...someway...the tax credit for health care insurance premiums paid by individuls will get passed with the new leadership.

    That deduction is the same one that businesses get for providing insurance coverage to employees and paying a portion of the premiums.

    As it stands now, employers own our health care insurance and companies cater to them, instead of the actual consumer-- the individual.

    Hopefully, we'll see a change where the tax cuts make it possible for individuals to own their own policies, so that the industry can be more consumer driven.

    We need to shore up Medicare and Medicaid and continue the tax write-offs for businesses who supply insurance benefits to employees. That way the indigent, the disabled, the elderly, and those working people with medical problems that might be turned away from insurance companies or priced out of the market-- despite a tax write-of-- would have coverage.

    I haven't got my hopes very high. It's in the interest of politicians to want to control all aspects of our lives.

    I don't know if anyone has responded to just one more lying statement by Bobo.

    Right, Bono, Cee didn't have a clue about Sgt Liam's petition that he objects to the war.

    Below is the first time this appeared here and BY CEE:

    "WASHINGTON, Jan. 16 — Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, an outspoken Republican critic of the administration’s Iraq policy, will join two leading Democrats in introducing a resolution opposing President Bush’s buildup of troops in Iraq, putting a bipartisan stamp on the looming Congressional showdown over the war.

    Talk, talk, talk, talk.....NO ACTION....CUT THE FUNDING NOW!.....

    Talk today about Sgt. Liam Madden, a kid from Vermont who joined the Marines after high school and ended up in Anbar Province, who says that you can be a good Marine and a good American and still want our war in Iraq to stop. Talk proudly about Madden of the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit, who took a petition, signed by more than 1,000 just like him, to Congress yesterday, who just by walking up the steps of the Cannon House Office Building did more than big Democrats such as Sens. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.) are doing these days

    "I'd tell you that the Democrats are talking a good game, but they're not even doing that," Madden says. "Everybody in Congress has to understand something: If they continue to fund this war, it's not just the President who owns it. They own it, too."

    The Appeal for Redress, as yesterday's document is officially called, was signed by active military members and National Guardsmen and reservists. There were 1,034 names on it yesterday when Madden and the others took it up the steps to the Cannon Terrace. And this was not partisan dissent that came from the President's political opponents. This came from soldiers brave enough to speak out, even at the possible cost of their careers, and makes them braver than the people who represent them

    Their Appeal for Redress ended this way: "The timing of the beginning of the war was a choice, and the timing of the ending will be a choice. If President Bush does not choose to end the war, then Congress must by cutting off funds."


    Madden joined the Marines at 18 because, he says, he needed purpose in his life. He thought that in the last four years of his contract, he could get himself a college education. Now he is not so sure, even though he was told on his way into service for his country that he would be called back from inactive duty only for a "national emergency."

    "They keep changing the rules," he says

    So he puts his name on the Appeal for Redress. And then listens to Cheney, who goes on television Sunday and says that if we withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq, we "revalidate the strategy that Osama Bin Laden has been following from day one, that if you kill enough Americans, you can force them to quit,that we don't have the stomach for the fight."

    "It's the same old stuff," Madden says. "If we're not blind in our loyalty to their beliefs, then Osama wins. But that doesn't work anymore, and the election should have told everybody that. The American people aren't idiots."

    Just treated that way by this administration. On one hand, the President calls this the most important ideological battle of our time. Then, practically in the next breath, he says that this country's commitment in Iraq is not "open-ended." So even with the most important ideological battle of our time, he has the meter running.

    Some soldiers, ones who have put themselves on the line in Iraq, spoke out against this lunacy yesterday. It is the best they can do for now. It is their elected officials who have to do better, starting with the Democratic front-runners, Clinton and Barack. They can start by saying they will vote against further funding of this war the first chance they get. You fund this war, you own it.

    That's right.....YOU FUND IT, YOU OWN IT!


    Posted by: cee at January 17, 2007 2:59 PM"

    Come on Bobo, tell us again how Cee is too stupid to know who and what Sgt Liam is.

    That was the ENTIRE point that Cee made.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    I'll back you up on a lot of that Cacelia. Very few people realize how declining birth rates are going to crash a lot of current welfare systems if they aren't adjusted.

    Grim:

    First, 'halving' a deficit we shouldn't have incurred in the first place is not the same as paying as you go, and not the same as paying down the National Debt, as we should be doing.

    Second. I almost missed your reference to me because many of your posts are so very lloonngg! By the time I read the entire post, I forgot what the first part was about.

    Cecelia-
    Awesome post... great reading on the lies at MSNBC
    in a single day. I watched it live and was shocked by
    Shuster's assertions. After review they were almost
    all bunk!

    http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/

    "Come on Bobo, tell us again how Cee is too stupid to know who and what Sgt Liam is.

    That was the ENTIRE point that Cee made.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie"


    Can you believe it...

    Chucks is even more dense than WE ascertained.

    Benson,

    I highly recommend the blog, no matter what subject is being covered.

    "That's right.....YOU FUND IT, YOU OWN IT!"

    Any rational person who doesn't have a political bone to pick wouldn't necessarily agree with that statement. If Bush puts troops in harms way and is unwilling to bring them home, making sure they have funding to keep them safe and 'do their job' isn't exactly 'owning' the war. It's making the best of a bad situation that wasn't of their making.

    I think Powell's quote regarding Iraq makes a lot more sense, "You Break It, You Own It."

    Unfortunately since it's Our President, Our Country, and Our Troops, we ALL own the war to some degree.

    Man..It's so obvious that Grim hasn't a clue on ANY of these issues:

    So Sharon, how successful has Bush been in creating a sound energy policy?
    ==================================================
    See: well practically anything on the free market.

    HOW MUCH PROGRESS HAVE WE MADE ON GETTING OURSELVES LESS DEPENDENT ON FOSSIL FUELS?
    PLEASE SUBMIT BUSH'S GRAND ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SUCCESSES.

    or affordable healthcare in this country?
    ==================================================
    Not too bad. So far every survey talks about how seriors are loving the latest drug plan. Of course again, the more it's privatized, the cheaper it'll get.

    HA!
    Since the new Medicare prescription drug benefit program went into effect Jan. 1,2006, tens of thousands of seniors have encountered problems, including higher costs, red tape, and in some cases, no coverage at all.

    and affordable healthcare doesn't only have to do with seniors. Many hard working Americans are getting their healthcare cut or eliminated by employers all over the country.
    ( If they ever have it )It's taking more of a chunk out of their salaries where some people have the choice of healthcare or groceries.

    or combating the war profiteering in iraq ?
    ==================================================
    I'd like to see these numbers broken down. Besides, wasn't there a brief period where war supply companies were actually losing money?

    How about these numbers, Grim?
    $8 billion of our tax money MISSING in Iraq.
    Tens of Billions have been made by Halliburton , Bechtal etc.
    Many times these companies make 10 times the amount, doing the same jobs as many of our troops, and the troops have stated how unfair this seesm to them.
    Also educate yourself and see the film IRAQ FOR SALE: THE WAR PROFITEERS.


    or winning the war in Iraq?
    ==================================================
    The war WAS won. It's the rebuilding/aftermath that's a b****. Learn the difference (even bush said rebuilding was going to be a pain)

    or helping New Orleans to get back on their feet.

    The war was won eh?
    Mission Accomplished, right ?
    Tell that to the 27 American soldiers that lost their life in one day this weekend.
    The war was won ! Spoken like a charter member of the Blind Patriots union.

    The rebuilding of New Orleans is a disgrace. If the hurricane hit Newport, RI, do you think it would still look like New Orleans ?
    Fool!

    or combat the unbelievable corruption in the monies allocated to the reconstruction companies for New Orleans?
    ==================================================
    ???? What does president Bush have to do with this?

    This money that is being stolen is our tax money and it comes from the federal government. I believe George Bush is still in charge of the federal government, the last time I checked(or has he been impeached yet )

    Typical blind right wing Bush apologist!
    What does Bush have to do with it?
    What does Bush have to do with anything?
    (your case)

    Harry Truman took on the war profitters and was successful.

    George Bush is just supposed to sit on his throne, waging war and not helping the people of this country.

    I get your point !

    I just loved Hillary's statement that if "she had known then what she knows now",she wouldn't have voted for the war in Iraq.Thats like saying that if I had known my sushi was bad then I wouldn't have eaten it.Sounds JUST a little like John Kerry voting for the war before he voted he voted against it.Hillary also stated that she was against the troop surge and in the very next sentence she said our troops we "undermanned",and of course Keith never questioned her on that point.KO's face looked liked a giddy college frat pledge questioning Paris Hilton.I was waiting for him to ask Sen Clinton to autograph his chest

    Grim,

    We'll just have to wait and see.

    First, 'halving' a deficit we shouldn't have incurred in the first place is not the same as paying as you go, and not the same as paying down the National Debt, as we should be doing.
    ==================================================
    1) So just because we shouldn't have done it in the first place, you're against (or have a problem with) us fixing/cleaning the mess?
    2) Isn't the national debt as a percentage of GNP the lowest it's ever been?

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Second. I almost missed your reference to me because many of your posts are so very lloonngg! By the time I read the entire post, I forgot what the first part was about.
    ==================================================
    Sometimes a post isn't meant specifically to you, just this time I meant that what you said, I had talked about yesterday. And I don't mean to be long, but with so many on this site (I'm sure you know who i'm talking about) if you try to be brief you get accused of ignorance/omissions, etc etc so I just try to be through.

    HANK! HANK! HANK! HANK! HANK! HANK!

    Highly recommended for truth finders in news!

    http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/

    "I just loved Hillary's statement that if "she had known then what she knows now",she wouldn't have voted for the war in Iraq."

    If you have a problem with that notion, then you have a problem with the sentiment of a VAST MAJORITY of Americans.

    Yeah, hindsight is 20/20. Is admitting that surprising, inaccurate, or disengenuous?

    No, it's only human.

    BD writes "I just loved Hillary's statement that if "she had known then what she knows now",she wouldn't have voted for the war in Iraq."


    Well, you know BD...she was merely married to the guy who until 8 months before 9/11, had complete access to ALL intelligence on Iraq for 8 years...


    The worst person in the world is olberman's mammy for shitting out this fat lying little turd.

    Al Jazeera @ 30 Rock.

    Bob says:

    "The country ( and Nancy) has seen just what far right wing judges Bush has nominated.That may have something to do with not applauding."

    Oh you mean the judges that have been endorsed, almost without exception, by that bastion of right wing conservatism, the American Bar Association-- the endorsement that left winger Schumer has called the "gold standard"?

    Pelosi sat on her hands during the President's call for an up and down vote because she was reflecting her party's ongoing response to up and down votes-- a cowardly refusal to schedule a vote. Now that they are in power and control both Houses, let's see if they really want to play ball when they talk their bullshit about "bipartisanship". If the Dems really believe (like Bob does)that the judges that the Preseident has nominated are unqualified, then just give them a vote and vote them down. The Dems can't hide behind their minority status anymore as a reason not to schedules the votes.

    No name/Chicken Blogger
    "So no one on this blog cares that we have authorized 'field trips' to the US for thousands of Saudi Nationals? You guys would rather bicker with each other about who said what when?"

    I've attacked Bush's ass kissing of the Saudi's. I don't like this. The visa for Saudi Students could be used to for Hispanics.
    Funny, yoiur idol Teheran Keith hasn't condemned this. This is more evidence of Olbermann's sympathy for Muslims. You just re-enforced my point. Why doesn't Olbermann condemn this program? Because he favors it!

    I just love the spin job Cecilia and Grammie make for Cee.
    ( and how they both show up at the same time to support their points)
    Their twisted logic ( and excuses) for what Lapdog is trying to say is hilarious.

    Yeah, let just cut the funds while the extra troops are arriving or already arrived in iraq.
    Yeah, Bush's war is now the Democrats war( after 3 weeks in power)

    "Hurray up, Dems, do something"
    While the three have given the GOP congress a free pass the past 6 years.

    All three ignore that they are in the smallest of minorities in this country about how people feel about the war....which includes Sgt Madden, ,generals, ex-generals and division commanders and the bulk of the American people.

    So big of you to support more death of our troops !You obviously have no conscience.

    "Not one more of my brothers should die for a lie. This is my generation's call to conscience. We're not antiwar.We're not pacifists. We're anti-Iraq war."

    Sgt. Liam Madden and a host of servicemen vehemently opposing this war !

    Bob- my guess is the Dems want the war to be there in '08. Just a guess.

    Teheran Keith is auditioning for Hillary's press secreatry. He kisses up to her and his show should be considered as part of the Hillary for president campaign. He's a hack for the Clintons and The Ayatollahs!

    Olbermann should put a disclaimer on the bottom of the tv. Bought and paid for by Hillary '08!

    "Any rational person who doesn't have a political bone to pick wouldn't necessarily agree with that statement. If Bush puts troops in harms way and is unwilling to bring them home, making sure they have funding to keep them safe and 'do their job' isn't exactly 'owning' the war. It's making the best of a bad situation that wasn't of their making.

    I think Powell's quote regarding Iraq makes a lot more sense, "You Break It, You Own It."

    Unfortunately since it's Our President, Our Country, and Our Troops, we ALL own the war to some degree.

    Posted by: Home of the Brave at January 24, 2007 2:07 PM"

    Your dispute is with Sgt Liam and the 1'100+ active duty military who signed the petition. It is their view that THEY expect the Dems to follow through with their rhetoric and if they don't they are as culpable as GWB

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    To B.D. and everybody else who keep saying KO was 'gushing' over Hillary:

    Exactly who was it that asked her to explain her vote for the war last night? I don't believe it was Shaun Hannity.

    So big of you to support more death of our troops !You obviously have no conscience.


    "Not one more of my brothers should die for a lie. This is my generation's call to conscience. We're not antiwar.We're not pacifists. We're anti-Iraq war."

    Sgt. Liam Madden and a host of servicemen vehemently opposing this war !

    Posted by: Bob at January 24, 2007 2:27 PM

    Eh....Chuckie...Madden wants the troops out NOW and so does Dennis Kucinich...

    Instead of harping on Janet, me, and PREPOSTEROUSLY Cee!--for making the point with Madden's quote that your words belied your pre-election anti-war rhetoric.... Why don't you blast Madden and Kucinich for having the courage to be consistent.

    Janet:

    I actually generally agree with your premise, although I would have to question whether the Dems who don't act to stop it share EQUAL culpability.

    The problem here is how to get ALL of the Dems to take the most extreme stand? Thats what it would take.

    HOW MUCH PROGRESS HAVE WE MADE ON GETTING OURSELVES LESS DEPENDENT ON FOSSIL FUELS?
    PLEASE SUBMIT BUSH'S GRAND ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SUCCESSES.
    ==================================================
    Boy, be nice if we were drilling in Anwar right about now isn't it? Hasn't Bush tried for that? What about nuclear power plants? That's a good solution too. Oh, and btw, for all your talk about me being "ignorant" you certainly seem ignorant about how tech and economy work. Alternate energy solutions are not just going to spring up over night and even if they did, changes would have to be made to accomadate them. Government micromanaging almost never leads to advancements as fast as free competition.
    http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ODg5MjgyNTBmNmNlMDA3NjEzZGEzZDc4OGRjY2Q3Yzk=

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    HA!
    Since the new Medicare prescription drug benefit program went into effect Jan. 1,2006, tens of thousands of seniors have encountered problems, including higher costs, red tape, and in some cases, no coverage at all.

    and affordable healthcare doesn't only have to do with seniors. Many hard working Americans are getting their healthcare cut or eliminated by employers all over the country.
    ( If they ever have it )It's taking more of a chunk out of their salaries where some people have the choice of healthcare or groceries.
    ==================================================
    http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZWRkNGM3Nzg5ODYzMjhiNzQ4NjE3MGZkNDg1OTRkN2Q=
    ^You just need to read that, but I'll try to spell out a simple concept for you: Ok, I'll try to type slow.
    When government gets involved, one of two things happen (if not both): prices go UP and supplies go DOWN. Let's use an example: You're one of several candy retailers that sells candy to children in the neighborhood. Now you know that kids have to get some small jobs to earn money, and the going rate for them (i.e. newspaper delivery) is about a quarter a day. So how much are you going to charge for candy? Well definitely not more than a quarter a basic bar are you? Now suppose you hear that all the parents in the neighborhood are giving every kid an allowance of $20 a week. Now what are you going to charge for candy? At least a dollar per basic bar no? It's happened with both college and healthcare: when government gets involved, prices go UP. Here's some perspective:
    "The United States Department of Veterans Affairs — touted by Democrats as an ideal example of government negotiations — has just such a formulary. If the latest drug isn’t on the VA list — well, there are always old drugs. Columbia University professor Frank Lichtenberg reports that “only 38 percent of drugs approved in the 1990s and 19 percent of the drugs approved by the FDA since 2000 are on the VA National Formulary.” Robert Goldberg of the Center for Medicine in the Public Interest points out that Azilect, the latest drug to treat Parkinson’s disease, is covered by every private Medicare Part D plan, but not by the VA."

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    How about these numbers, Grim?
    $8 billion of our tax money MISSING in Iraq.
    Tens of Billions have been made by Halliburton , Bechtal etc.
    Many times these companies make 10 times the amount, doing the same jobs as many of our troops, and the troops have stated how unfair this seesm to them.
    Also educate yourself and see the film IRAQ FOR SALE: THE WAR PROFITEERS.
    ==================================================
    hmmm..... you make a good point. I say we prosecute everyone involved. Let's say... George Soros.
    "And then there is George Soros, who is widely rumored to have been selling
    the dollar short in the run-up to the war, hoping for a fat profit if the
    dollar dropped. If this is right, and Soros's "view" was the correct one,
    then Moveon.org and the rest of Soros's political ventures are financed in
    part from "war profiteering." Is anyone protesting about this? My guess
    would be: No."

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    The war was won eh?
    Mission Accomplished, right ?
    Tell that to the 27 American soldiers that lost their life in one day this weekend.
    The war was won ! Spoken like a charter member of the Blind Patriots union.
    ==================================================
    *sigh* Ok, what part of the following of Bush's speech did you NOT understand?
    "We are helping to rebuild Iraq, where the dictator built palaces for himself instead of hospitals and schools for the people. The transition from dictatorship to democracy will take time, but it is worth every effort."
    Really, I thought 'you people' were all about nuance.

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    The rebuilding of New Orleans is a disgrace. If the hurricane hit Newport, RI, do you think it would still look like New Orleans ?
    Fool!
    ==================================================
    *sigh* ok, let me say this again. OTHER CITIES/TOWNS WERE HIT BY HURRICANE KATRINA. Which of those are going through the same trouble as New Orleans? Why or why not?

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    This money that is being stolen is our tax money and it comes from the federal government. I believe George Bush is still in charge of the federal government, the last time I checked(or has he been impeached yet )
    ==================================================
    So Bush is in charge of the federal government (what happened to Congress and the Court?) and not only does he hand out federal money, but he also oversees how it is distributed locally? Wow, and all this time I thought it was local governments that were in charge of most money distribution.

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Typical blind right wing Bush apologist!
    What does Bush have to do with it?
    What does Bush have to do with anything?
    (your case)

    Harry Truman took on the war profitters and was successful.

    George Bush is just supposed to sit on his throne, waging war and not helping the people of this country.

    I get your point !
    ==================================================
    No... no... you really don't. Your hatred has so blinded you, you argue with a chariciture instead of my actual points. Tell me what it's like to live in a world where Bush is demigod and master over all that happens in America.

    Bobo, you lied when you so condesendingly stated that Cee stupidly didn't realise that the petition signers were anti-war.

    If you are so confident in your rightiousness why do you stoop to such pathetic lies that are so obviously lies and easily demonstrated to be a lie.

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Instead of harping on Janet, me, and PREPOSTEROUSLY Cee!--for making the point with Madden's quote that your words belied your pre-election anti-war rhetoric.... Why don't you blast Madden and Kucinich for having the courage to be consistent.

    Ceals loves that word "rhetoric"
    TDF.

    Ceals wants me to blast Madden and Kucinich for wanting the same thing as I do. Our troops out of Iraq immediately !

    She HAS to be off her rocker( that she must have stole from Grammie)

    The irony of my point is totally lost on Ceals and her sidekick.
    Cee used a quote from this military man who is 100% in opposition to his views on the war.
    The three stooges ( Cee, Grammie and Ceals) want this war to continue endlessly no matter how many deaths of our troops it takes.
    Sgt Madden and the other courageous servicemen and myself want the opposite.

    And in case you missed what they believe in, I'll gladly repeat it for you.

    "Not one more of my brothers should die for a lie. This is my generation's call to conscience. We're not antiwar.We're not pacifists. We're anti-Iraq war."

    Sgt. Liam Madden and a host of servicemen vehemently opposing this war !


    Olbermann will soon start attacking Obama to please his leader Haillary! He's a hack and he's been exposed for it. It looks like a big duffy nerd. I'm sure he used to get his ass kicked in HS. We used to jump jerks like him. He needs a good beat down. He's such a dork!

    To B.D. and everybody else who keep saying KO was 'gushing' over Hillary:

    Exactly who was it that asked her to explain her vote for the war last night? I don't believe it was Shaun Hannity.

    Posted by: MIke at January 24, 2007 2:38 PM


    So Olbermann gave H. Clinton a forum to say that she wouldn't have voted for the war had she known what she knows now. He doesn't win a Profile In Courage Award for asking the obvious...and before YOU argue something silly...YES,that still means that he would and should be criticised had he NOT asked the obvious question.

    As it stands, he let her superficially answer the question on the key issue of her viability as a Dem presidential candidate.

    Any proper follow-up would have been:

    "what do you know now about intelligence on Iraq that was witheld to you then?"

    "Did you discuss Iraq and intelligence on Iraq with your husband who had access for 8 years?"

    "If he gave you no specifics on intelligence, did he voice any caution in your voting the way you voted?"

    "What information do you feel was witheld or skewered?"

    I got a few hundred more...

    > the lies and distortions of Olbermann and David Shuster on the Libby trial.

    Good thing he's handling Slippery Shuster. I don't have time to do a Shuster Watch. Keeping track of Olbermann lies is nearly a full-time job. Many thanks for the tip. It will make a good link the next time Oralmann brings out the quintuply-discredited Slippery Shuster.

    T3eheran Keith's hair is getting greyer and greyer! I think those special comments/Near nervous breakdowns are getting to him! Pretty soon he'll give one of his special comments and he's ll shake and have a breakdown on TV. He'll be taken out on stretcher! That would be funny! The man is a paranoid nut!

    Jon Stewart said it best, the fact that news channels have resorted to fighting amongst themselves for portraying the "truth", has resulted in droves flocking to Comedy Centrals news programming, wherein you know the sketches are based on real news which they prefer and also know to be "truer".

    Grammie: "you lie...lie..lie...lie...lie.."

    Calm down, Grammie, you're going to have a coronary.

    Funny how you are so astute at finding..LIES...yet can't find any from your president.

    Selective vision?

    Did I LIE , Grammie,?

    Read my above post. I certainly did not.

    Take your medication, sit down, put your feet up and watch Fox News. You'll be in the "zone" before you know it.

    I say we set up Countdown to Olbermann's Nervous Breakdown!

    Bobo, maybe the third time will be the charm

    Why did you lie about Cee?

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    But Cecelia- those question would have been off script... and furthermore KeithO may have been accused of doing "a nice little conservative hit job on her"

    Bob wrote:

    "Yeah, let just cut the funds while the extra troops are arriving or already arrived in iraq."

    That's just what Madden and Kucinich want to do numbskull. Why aren't you chiding THEM for what you obviously feel is a bad move?

    Cee's point in posting that quote was that Madden was consistent! YOu can't be that way in two posts five minutes a part!

    Benson,
    Olbermann is a Hillary hack. The questions are written by the hillary campaign and he like a true dork, recites them. He's a Dorky looking propaganda artist!

    > He's a Dorky looking propaganda artist!

    I am sorry but you are incorrect. He is no artist.

    Funny how Cecilia feels this great need to stick up for Lapdog (Cee).

    The Blind Patriots Union has a loyalty that is admirable....misguided to put it kindly...but cute.

    So ceals, how do you feel about the Bush Administration throwing Libby under the bus to save Rove's ass ?

    Also, How do you feel about Bush promising to get to the bottom of the Plame affair, when he already knew about it ?

    Your "boys" are in deep do do .
    You're going to have to work overtime in making excuses for these criminals...

    or better yet, do what you do best. Sit on the sidelines and wait to nitpick what people with real opinions say.

    Here's a lie for you....
    Seems your girl Hillary is qualified

    "Hillary Clinton gave "factually false" testimony about firing the White House travel staff, but not enough to warrant indictment, independent counsel Robert Ray has concluded."

    Hillary Lied-People Got Fired!

    Bob- check on the trial reports OUTSIDE of MSNBC and the Shuster reports. Its not such a slam dunk as you keep repeating.

    Johnny Dollar,
    I apologize. That was an insult to artists. He's a propaganda hack!

    The swiftboating of Hilary has begun.

    How predictable are these idiots !

    "I am sorry but you are incorrect. He is no artist."


    I beg to differ, Johnny.

    Olbermann is the Picasso of flim-fam artists.

    We'll have to agree to disagree. A true flim-flam artist would never be as obvious, blatant, and easily exposed as the infamous, deplorable Keith Olbermann.

    "Also, How do you feel about Bush promising to get to the bottom of the Plame affair, when he already knew about it ?"


    I don't blame you for trying to change the subject, Bob.

    What did Bush know about the Plame affair prior to his statement you mention above?

    The same people who haven't been able to report or even notice the lies of Bushco, now all of a sudden have this keen investigating prowess for Hilary.

    It's 1992 all over again.

    GET CLINTON !

    Swiftboating? Just showing you the facts.
    Her resume is pretty ugly! Truth hurts huh?

    Bob,

    Too, please explain why ...my boy... (I'm assuming you mean Bush) is in trouble?

    cecilia is really after the truth in the Plame affair.
    Just listen to her.


    ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha h ah ah ah ah ah

    Olbermann is auch a duffy looking dork. How can anyone be interviewed by him and crack up laughing. He so dorky looking. Was he in Revenge of the Nerds?

    If you haven't heard
    Mr. Cox on Fox News at 4pm today

    "cecilia is really after the truth in the Plame affair.
    Just listen to her."


    Are you insinuating that if I want the truth, I'm asking the wrong person questions?...

    That's no way to talk about Bob...

    "It's 1992 all over again.

    GET CLINTON !"


    Yes, it's a campaign season...

    Imagine Olbermann with a turban on a minaret, leading a call to prayer?

    Cecelia,
    Of course it's campaign season. That's why Olbermann has made his show an extension of the Hillary 2008 team. He's going to be their Kommisar of propaganda!

    "Just another vast right wing conspiracy"

    "My husband barely know the woman"

    "Imagine Olbermann with a turban on a minaret, leading a call to prayer?"

    Red Wolf, why must you persist in being a buffoon. I OFFERED you a chance to PROVE your ludicrous assertions - yet you persist in sounding like a Class-A lunatic.

    Maybe you need a change of scenery. There's a lovely little place on Tantalus V that will take care of you. A little Neural Neutralization and you'll be all better...

    So Ceals, Are you saying that while Cheney and Rove were scampering around trying to cover their asses and throwing Libby under the bus, that Bush didn't know about any of this ?

    Are you going to use the Ronald Reagan defense, that he was "out of the loop"?
    Too busy clearing brush, maybe?
    Taking his famous naps ?

    Sorry but I have work to do, and can't wait to hear your ..I'm sure.... enlightening excuse machinations for the criminal team of Bush/Cheney/Rove.

    EE, I'm reposting something I wrote earlier.

    I'm having difficulty with your reasoning and I'd be interested in hearing more on this.

    From earlier:

    EE "He was NEUTRALIZED as Army Chief of Staff - virtually IGNORED by the Administration for the last year he was in the post because they had already named his replacement."

    The only thing I see that Rumsfeld did wrong was to discount the opinion of someone who was right in the end. Rumsfeld was wrong. He was not pernicious.

    CNN reports that Army Chief of Staff Shinseki served four years and that no former Chief of Staff has served longer than this.

    One can speculate that Shinseki was ignored and marginalized for not agreeing with Rumsfeld about several key issues--- troop levels in Iraq, post-Cold War military systems--- but I'm wondering how Rumsfeld mentioning the name of the next candidate in line for Shinseki's job (after his four year service is complete) PROVES that Shinseki was a "lame duck" while serving out the standard tenure?

    I differ with your argument that Shinseki being "ignored" (and I'm accepting that he was as a "given" for the sake of argument) by Pentagon leadership was effectively an outster. With that logic any boss or CEO who puts less stock in one employee because of policy disputes, would have effectively fired or forced that person to resign. That's nonsense. Anyone on the planet who disagrees with the persons running the place stands of a change of being "marginalized" in the sense of being left out of the loop. We all are aware of this before we makes the waves we think we need to make. To equate this with being forced out entirely, is making routine workplace politics into something far more pernicious.

    "Sorry but I have work to do, and can't wait to hear your ..I'm sure.... enlightening excuse machinations for the criminal team of Bush/Cheney/Rove."

    I can't answer anything when I don't know what the basis of your claims are.

    What has come out in trial that makes you state that Bush knew someething that he wasn't telling?

    Ensign Expendable,
    Last night I tuned in for a little bit after the state of the union speech. Olbermann was defending Iran and Hizballah and condemned Bush for mentioning them as enemies. I guess 300 dead Marines don't count!I just couldn't believe his pro-Iran bias. I changed the channel. I don't even tune into this Iranian loving clown anymore. Why do you insist on defending him. Matthews is a Leftists and yet he reasons better than Teheran Keith. Notice I don't attack Matthews.

    Listen to cecilia's faulty reasoning for the firing of Shinseki.

    This girl just bleeds right wing red.

    "Listen to cecilia's faulty reasoning for the firing of Shinseki.

    This girl just bleeds right wing red."

    "At", why don't you explain to me why you think my reasoning is flawed.


    Good reporting professor Olbermann. Iran is not arming Sunni insurgents. Maybe that is because Iran is a Shia country and does not want other Shia killed. The key to pushing propaganda is to at least get some facts straight.

    Patient preseents today in severe distress. Says his career is in "ruins" because a famous politican he interviewed misidentified him as "Gene". Attempted to explain that such mistakes are no reflection on his abilities, but pt. cannot be consoled. Explains that it is of paramount importance to have name recognition with famous people, particularly Hollywood stars and liberal politicians.

    It is my professional opinion that pt. suffers from extreme insecurity and self doubt and derives sense of self worth from attachments to famous persons. At other times, pt. gratuitously insults famous people in an attempt to elevate himself above them, particularly in cases where the famous person in question is a more suceesful competitior to whom he bears animosity and jealousy. This again relates to pt's underdeveloped sense of value and worth.

    Explained my diagnosis to pt. and need for intensive therapy. Pt. reacted in anger and stormed out of office in a rage expressing need for a long soak in his bathtub.

    Ensign:

    In just reading this blog, but I have noticed that Every now and then, someone will actually stoop down to Red Wolf's level, and actually try to REASON with him. It can't be done!

    I've noticed that you just tried it again, and boy, does he love the attention!

    You can't argue with a wall, and you can't argue with Red Wolf. You can't reason with an eggplant, neither can you reason with Red Wolf.

    It can't be done!

    To "Keith's Psychiatrist":

    I trust that you are aware that as Keith's psychiatrist, it is an ethics violation of the first order to publicly disclose your diagnosis of your 'patient'?

    In fact, you are very much in danger of loosing your licence to practice over this.

    Better run to keith and beg him not to pursue this!

    "Olbermann was defending Iran and Hizballah and condemned Bush for mentioning them as enemies."

    BULLSHIT!

    Olbermann: "And in particular, Andrea, I mean, to whatever benefit might have been achieved by identifying, say, al Qaeda and its followers are Sunni extremists, two minutes later references are made to the Iranians and the Shia extremists, and then Hezbollah is brought in there.

    There‘s—I mean, not that you want to go and please any one of these organizations, but all of them, in this extraordinary balance in the Middle East, what benefit is derived or what interpretation would be reached in the Middle East of having all of these organizations and religious entities equated in the State of the Union Address?"

    He was asking what the White House gains by equating SUNNI extremists (al-Qaeda) with SHIA extremists (the iranian hard-liners and Hezbollah) even though they have different goals.

    That is not a DEFENSE of them - it's asking how it is POSSIBLE to say these people have different goals and different strategies, yet they are the same? It would be like saying the German Navy and the Japanese Navy in WWII were exactly the same because they're both navies.

    If critique is condemnation, then there must be a HELL of a lot of Iran lovers in Washington.

    > it is an ethics violation of the first order to publicly disclose your diagnosis of your 'patient'?

    Oh no, Olby will call in The Perfessor, and he'll explain that the shrink is not violating the law, he's simply a "whistle blower".


    COALITION FORCES OCCUPYING BAGHDAD VOW TO RETAKE BAGHDAD

    -- Generation of Displaced Iraqis Eager To Repay U.S. For Selfless Gift Of Imposed Democracy --

    BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Iraqi and U.S. troops battling militants along Baghdad's volatile Haifa Street on Wednesday killed at least 30 insurgents and detained 35. The battle on Haifa Street went on for eight hours, as U.S. and Iraqi forces fought to regain control of the mainly Sunni area. Normally busy streets were empty as the militaries closed bridges to isolate the battles. Families fled from their homes, clutching their belongings during a lull in the fighting. U.S. fighter jets streaked overhead and Apache helicopters circled Baghdad for hours as plumes of black smoke drifted across the sky.



    "but I'm wondering how Rumsfeld mentioning the name of the next candidate in line for Shinseki's job (after his four year service is complete) PROVES that Shinseki was a "lame duck" while serving out the standard tenure?"

    Because it was done with a YEAR of service left in Shinseki's tenure. It is not customary to indicate a change with so much time left in the current CoS' tenure because it undermines their authority - after all, they're on their way out and the new guy will want it done differently. That's why Pentagon officials in the article Johnny Dollar sourced called it a "castration".

    "With that logic any boss or CEO who puts less stock in one employee because of policy disputes, would have effectively fired or forced that person to resign."

    When we're talking about Donald Rumsfeld, the logic makes perfect sense. This was a man who was famous for "wire brushing" (publicly dressing down) his senior officers whenever they disagreed with his decisions.

    It just so happened that Shinseki and Rumsfeld's careers intersected. IF it had been any other SecDef, I doubt it would have gone this way.

    EE,
    "He was asking what the White House gains by equating SUNNI extremists (al-Qaeda) with SHIA extremists (the iranian hard-liners and Hezbollah) even though they have different goals."
    Hizballah and Al-Qaeda have the same goal. To establish a Caliphate. They also have in the past coorperated, have the same sources of funding and Hizballah celles ahave helped al-Qaeda cells. Khobar Towers was a combined Hizballah/Al-Qaeda operation. Iran is protectiung major Al-Qeada leaders such as Saad Bin Laden. The Iranians don't deny this.

    "It would be like saying the German Navy and the Japanese Navy in WWII were exactly the same because they're both navies."
    Germany and Japan were allies! Ha so you made my point! Bush was describing the 2 faces of the same enemy. Hizballah and Al-Qaeda are the same! They both must be crushed!

    "then there must be a HELL of a lot of Iran lovers in Washington."
    There are. There's plenty of Iranian money in Washington. No body condemned Iran's Holocaust denial conference.
    Olbermann was condemning Bush for mentioning Iran and Hizballah. He always defend the 2. That means he supports them. That's the only reason. I guess he forgot Beirut 193 or vatrious kidnappings done by Hizballah. In g=fact in the 90's Hizballah trainers were in Afghanistan traing Al-Qaeda. Olbermann supports Iran.

    To add to KK's comment, regardless of our party affiliation, arn't we ALL just a little sick of the Bush's AND the Clinton's?

    Why do Americans REALLY want to support "royal families" with presidential entitlements? I don't get that at all.

    The idea is kind of sickening to me.

    There are good and honorable Republicans in our nation, just none in Dubya's administration. They are ready for a more civil political environment. I am sure they will work with us to rid their party and our nation of these hot-headed, dirty-handed mud-slingers.
    ====================================================
    I'm curious Kurt. Is every honorable republican you're thinking of left-leaning or can you name some conservative ones? Not only that, but do you really think mud-slingers are ONLY on the right? Have you ever been to places like Daily Kos or DemocraticUnderground? Where they regularly talk about "rethuglicans" and that's one of the most minor insults.

    To add to KK's comment, regardless of our party affiliation, arn't we ALL just a little sick of the Bush's AND the Clinton's?

    Why do Americans REALLY want to support "royal families" with presidential entitlements? I don't get that at all.

    The idea is kind of sickening to me.
    ====================================================
    I'm with you Mike. Notice how smart Jeb is to not even try running this coming election.

    EE,

    Your disagreements with the decision by President Bush to fight in Iraq has been detailed at length in this blog. Just wondering what your opinion is of his predecessor:

    President Clinton’s reputation for having problems with the military is well known, and predictably, not a highly appreciated feature of his position by the military. His early days in office are full of examples of his disdain for the uniformed services. Among the early gaffes were the famous "left-handed salutes." His staff, within hours of his inauguration, informed senior military officers that they were to refrain from official visits to the White House "in uniform." The Clintons hosted several official social functions where uniformed military officers were required to tend bar and serve food. (This would be a violation of The Geneva Convention if those officers were prisoners of war!) His staff took to using marine helicopters for golf carts, with dress uniformed soldiers toting the clubs. The total lack of respect and appreciation for the institution and people in the military (along with their mission) would probably explain the none too subtle "lack of enthusiastic support" of him from many military people whose political leanings might otherwise be classified as "other than conservative." http://www.spectacle.org/198/wilson.html

    Dubya has harmed the military a helluva lot more than Bill.

    Last night the orange moron gave new meaning to the term “lap dog”. His “interview” –insert vomit noises here , and here, and here, was perhaps the most revolting , most toady like performance since, well since the Orange moron displayed his man love for all to see during hi suck up session with Bill Clinton. All that was missing from last nights disgusting fiasco was the Orange moron handing over a check to Hillary for her campaign. Oh, wait, the orange car wreck has a TV show where he totes the far lefty Democratic Party line night after lowly rated night, so I’m sure we will see more odes to Olbytard’s Clinton boy love over the next two years.
    Yup. Used to be when a democrat hack wanted to do a softball interview, they went to Larry King. However, since the Olbytard has yelled his man crush for Bill Clinton to the ages, Bill’s old lady waddled her gigantic thighs over to AMESS-NBC for the on air toe sucking that Olbytard calls an “interview”. Wow, just when I thought I could not possibly despise that orange retard any more, he manages to out whore even his orangey tinged self. Now that‘s a whore! I guess we can dispense with all doubts about the far left tilt that NBC has taken in the last year—the Orange retard is the poster boy for NBC ‘s true tilt-----way , way , way left each and every second of the day, oh and hate Bush all the time.
    Back to the toe sucking by the orange monkey Olbytan. How did this moron ever get on TV? Olbytan is a dope—plain and simple he’s a simpleton. Olbytan should be working nights at a seedy Radio Shack----he’s just that type of guy.
    BTW—did anyone see Hillary during the SOTU? Add a top hat and monocle and she ‘s the image if Charlie McCarthy ( even then McCarthy is more life like that that tree limb Hillary).

    "Any rational person who doesn't have a political bone to pick wouldn't necessarily agree with that statement. If Bush puts troops in harms way and is unwilling to bring them home, making sure they have funding to keep them safe and 'do their job' isn't exactly 'owning' the war. It's making the best of a bad situation that wasn't of their making.

    I think Powell's quote regarding Iraq makes a lot more sense, "You Break It, You Own It."

    Unfortunately since it's Our President, Our Country, and Our Troops, we ALL own the war to some degree.

    Posted by: Home of the Brave at January 24, 2007 2:07 PM"

    Your dispute is with Sgt Liam and the 1'100+ active duty military who signed the petition. It is their view that THEY expect the Dems to follow through with their rhetoric and if they don't they are as culpable as GWB

    Janet Hawkins
    AKA Grammie

    Posted by: Janet Hawkins at January 24, 2007 2:38 PM

    My dispute is with ANYONE and EVERYONE who thinks if the Democrats help fund the war they 'own' the war in the same way Bush OWNS the war. Since SGT Liam is unlikely to see my post, it makes sense that my dispute is with the Neocons on this site that would like nothing more than to try to deflect as much blame from the president as possible.

    Did you disagree with my assertion, Grammie, or are you just trying to guide my words towards who YOU think they should be aimed at?

    The fact that Active Duty Military are hoping the Dems will follow through on their rhetoric should tell you everything you need to know about support for Bush's war.

    "Olbermann was condemning Bush for mentioning Iran and Hizballah. He always defend the 2. That means he supports them. That's the only reason."

    Your "assertions" are WORTHLESS - the RAVINGS of a DELUDED PSYCHOPATH who equates silence with open support and critique with condemnation. But in your little world, he should have just shut up and let Bush's assertion go unchallenged. That's NOT supporting them - it's asking WHY we should accept the interpretation given. You know, rational discussion? (Wait, I forgot who I was talking to.)

    Just go the hell away, you little moron.

    "Funny, yoiur idol Teheran Keith hasn't condemned this."

    I know this might come as a surprise to you Med Wolf, but it is possible for someone to not like Olbermann AND think you are an Idiot.

    Olbermann is part of the George Soros Leftists smear machine. Both side smaer. Teheran Keith is a Leftwing smear merchant!

    Olbermann is part of the George Soros Leftists smear machine. Both side smaer. Teheran Keith is a Leftwing smear merchant!

    Posted by: Red Wolf at January 24, 2007 4:55 PM

    ....And you're still an Idiot

    "President Clinton’s reputation for having problems with the military is well known, and predictably, not a highly appreciated feature of his position by the military."

    I never said Clinton was a BETTER President with respect to his relationship with the military. There were PLENTY of mistakes the Clinton made. But with little exception, most Presidents post-WWII have not had what we would call "stellar" relationships with the men and women in uniform.

    Truman was reviled for integrating the military by Executive Order, for firing General Douglas MacArthur and for sending a still-rearming military into Korea (which ended in stalemate).

    Eisenhower and Carter, despite being military men themselves, were criticized for slashing defense spending (Eisenhower particularly because his decisions came when the Cold War was periously close to become a hot war).

    Johnson and Nixon have the albatross that is Vietnam around their necks - they were criticzed heavily for trying to "run" the war from Washington rather than giving more liberty to their commanders in theater.

    So military disdain for the commander-in-chief is not unique to Clinton - it was just more pronounced.

    Since everyone here likes proof, here's some proof to illustrate the fact that Med Wolf is an Idiot. Just copy and paste the following link to your browser's window and then click on any one of the day's archives:

    http://www.olbermannwatch.com/

    Kurt Kissel is a pedophile

    That charge was expunged from the record, damn it!

    Krazy Kurt says:

    "the Republicans always have a Segretti, Attwater (despite his deathbed recantation and coversion), Rove/Hughes ready to viciously attack any formidable Democrat. These hideous people are already prepared to tear Senator Clinton from limb to limb. . I am sure they will work with us to rid their party and our nation of these hot-headed, dirty-handed mud-slingers. Let's just not hand them a task half accomplished."

    Awww, cry me a river. Your memory seems a bit selective, Krazy Kurt. Or have you forgotten the slimy Begala/Carville/Stephanopoulous days? Let me give you just a taste of these scumbags:

    Clinton Administration hench men including Paul Begala, George Stephanopoulos, Terry Lenzner, and James Carville engaged in blackmail, intimidation, and smear tactics against perceived Clinton adversaries, in part through the use of FBI files..

    On February 8, George Stephanopoulos, a top adviser to President Clinton during his first term, told a national television audience on ABC's This Week with Sam Donaldson and Cokie Roberts that there is an "Ellen Rometsch strategy" by "White House allies" to "bring down" perceived adversaries of the Clinton Administration - which may include everyone from reporters to attorney investigators to members of Congress. Stephanopoulos confirmed, under oath, the existence of this "deterrent strategy." Historically, the "Ellen Rometsch strategy" refers to late FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover 's successful efforts to use FBI files to blackmail members of Congress to prevent an investigation into President John Kennedy's affair with East German spy Ellen Rometsch.

    In a deposition of Stephanopoulos on March 9, he professed "lapses of memory" about his activities and meetings in the White House. And, rather than divulge who exactly the "White House allies" are, Stephanopoulos refused to provide the information, citing an alleged "journalist privilege." When asked if Terry Lenzner, the President and Mrs. Clinton's private investigator, could be construed generally as a "White House ally," Stephanopoulos said, "Sure." Stephanopoulos also confirmed that James Carville, who has threatened to break the kneecaps of and wage war on Ken Starr, could be construed as a "White House ally."

    Paul Begala, a senior adviser to President Clinton, was deposed on March 3. Angry and fearful that he would be linked to Stephanopoulos's statement about the "Ellen Rometsch strategy," Begala called Stephanopoulos on the phone to demand an explanation. Begala said that he was relieved when Stephanopoulos told him he was referring only to "White House allies." Begala said that he never found out from Stephanopoulos or anyone else who these "White House allies" were. Is it because Begala already knew?

    Another "White House ally," James Carville, was deposed on March 16. Carville said he called Stephanopoulos almost immediately after the "Ellen Rometsch strategy" was discussed.. Carville admitted to discussing this deterrent strategy with other key White House staffers, including Begala, Rahm Emmanuel, and Sidney Blumenthal.

    Terry Lenzner, a private investigator whose international firm IGI is working for the Clintons, was deposed on March 13. Lenzner refused to divulge who and what exactly he was investigating on the Clintons' behalf, but conceded he was hired by the Clintons' lawyers. Nor would he say why he went to the White House in 1996 to meet with Harold Ickes, who was then the president's top political operative at the White House.


    A pedophile will not stop on his own, and will not turn himself in, because he
    does not take responsibility for his behavior and denies that he's doing anything harmful. He will abuse until he's caught.

    EE
    "Just go the hell away, you little moron."
    Like all Stalinists you don't want to hear dissenting opinions. You get really upset that your hero Teheran Keith gets exposed as the Clinton and Pro-Iran hack that he is. He's mad that Bush mentioned that Hizballah and Iran are enemies also. They are. Where have you been? It's well known they're anti American. Just yesterday Tehran Keith's ally Ahmadinejad said the US and Israel will be destroyed. Why no condemnation on part the Left at a leader calling for the destruction of America? Why the silence.
    You couldn't make me go away anyway! Ha ha! You can't do nothing! Your helpless against me. I will continue to post bashing Olbermann and pissing the Left by attacking their spokesman!

    Mr. No name/Chicken Blogger,
    "you are an Idiot."
    Your a nobody. Obvious I hit a nerve attacking Olbermann. So my attacks will get harsher!

    Olbermann's hair is greying badly and he's balding on his Left side. If he has a few more of those Special Comments/Nervous breakdowns, maybe he'll go bald, live on TV! That will be funny!


    Dubya? Jebbers? FIX news?
    Am I back in 8th grade? Kurt, grow up and speak like an adult. It's not AWSOME to talk like a pre-pube.

    A man eloquently states his opinion and gets branded a pedophile for it...

    Welcome to Olbermannwatch.com

    Where people who claim the High Ground are merely High...

    "Like all Stalinists you don't want to hear dissenting opinions."

    No, I don't mind dissenting opinions. Provided that they have SOME grounding in REALITY. All you do is spew invective and bile. At this point, you could tell me the sky is blue and I would outside to make sure. THAT'S how low your "credibility" is, sir.

    At 4:44 PM, 'Billy' made a relatively short post that included ALL of the following, some repeated several times.

    "Tree Limb Hillary, ...Olbytan, ...Orange monkey Olbytan, ...toe sucking, ...Oranges retard, ...whore, ...orangy tinged self, ...AMESS-NBC, on the air toe sucking, ...Bill's old lady waddled her gigantic thighs, ...Olbytard has yelled his man crush for Bill Clinton, ...Clinton boy love, ...Orange car wreck, ...orange moron, ...hi suck up session, ...toady like, ...insert vomit noises here, ... & lap dog.

    NO KIDDING!

    Is this guy related to Jimmy Carter? Wait no, Billy died, didn't he?

    I'm kinda glad this guy is on YOUR side. He definitely makes everyone on my side look like Einsteins by comparison!

    Mr. No name/Chicken Blogger,
    "you are an Idiot."
    Your a nobody. Obvious I hit a nerve attacking Olbermann. So my attacks will get harsher!

    Yeah, take another 'hit' Med Wolf...

    EE writes

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

    If four years is THE longest tenure, then everyone at the Pentagon knew Shinseki would be retiring and that his replacement would likely be more to Rumsfeld's liking.

    I appreciate your reasoning, EE, and I see your point to a certain extent, in that Shinseki's replacement was designated and that this was Rumsfeld dissing Shinseki.

    Please don't misinterpret me as saying that Rumsfeld is the sort of boss who is incapable of dissing those who disagree with them. I think you make a good point in that it was a "public" dissing and Rumsfeld is known for taking it public.

    Aside, for being dissed by your boss, I don't know how it did it any more harm to Shinseki. His was the age-old problem of being at odds with the guy in charge in the first place.


    Cecelia said: "I don't know how it did it any more harm to Shinseki"...

    Who cares what it did to Shinseki? I care what it did to my COUNTRY!

    Watched Bob on Neil Cavuto!

    He did a great job and very articulately sounded a warning to Republicans that I think is uniquely his message.

    He did this while managing to appear on the same show as the Hooter's Calendar girls too.

    That's our Mr. C.!

    Cecelia:

    Yea, I caught Bob on Cavuto as well. I had to hold my nose a while through the other part of the show until they got to him.

    Bob actually IS somewhat fair and balanced, unlike Fox or Cavuto. I'm surprised he is a Republican, or is it just a bad assumption on my part that he is a Republican?

    Dosen't matter whether Cox is a Republican or not-- he understands the deception and fraud spewed forth on a nightly basis by Orange Boy and keeps this site going to address it. That's good enough for me.

    Cecelia said: "I don't know how it did it any more harm to Shinseki"...

    Who cares what it did to Shinseki? I care what it did to my COUNTRY!"

    Posted by: Mike at January 24, 2007 5:32 PM

    Where's the contradiction? I had already stated that Rumsfeld was wrong and Shinseki was right in his analysis in the first place, in my first post.

    I don't know if you need some sort of quote of that sort put at the bottom of a post, ala Cee or if you just love seeing yourself on a high horse.

    Posted by: Ensign Expendable at January 24, 2007 5:21 PM

    At 4:44 PM, 'Billy' made a relatively short post that included ALL of the following, some repeated several times.
    -------------------------------------------------
    Is there a rule on the brevity of, or lack of on posts?My only qustion for you is--who did you get to read my post to you?
    Yea, I know----but why not--it will be fun to start a war with this putz.Olbytards are nothing if not dolts , so why not.

    Yea, I caught Bob on Cavuto as well. I had to hold my nose a while through the other part of the show until they got to him.

    Bob actually IS somewhat fair and balanced, unlike Fox or Cavuto. I'm surprised he is a Republican, or is it just a bad assumption on my part that he is a Republican?

    Posted by: Mike at January 24, 2007 5:38 PM

    I never watch Fox (just Olbermann, and I watch Hardball occasionally is the only tv I see) but I was wondering what the heck the beef about Fox is through the whole show.

    Cavuto went up against Bush administration policy very heavily the immigration thing. He had a balanced panel on Hillary dissing the current economy and ended by letting both Hillary proponents from Forbes have the last say.

    In the entire history of Countdown there hasnt been two incidences like that, let alone in the same program.

    Posted by: Ensign Expendable at January 24, 2007 4:07 PM

    "While I admire and respect Senator Clinton, and I am convinced she would be a formidable president and even more revered and popular than her husband "
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Proof positive , this guy is Daily Kos cool aid drinking putz.The left really are missing a gene or two.

    Posted by: Ensign Expendable at January 24, 2007 4:07 PM

    "While I admire and respect Senator Clinton, and I am convinced she would be a formidable president and even more revered and popular than her husband "
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Proof positive , this guy is Daily Kos cool aid drinking putz.The left really are missing a gene or two.


    CHENEY FURTHER ERODES CREDIBILITY BY DENYING LOSS OF CREDIBILITY

    -- BushCO`s Boss Hog Calls Insinuation `Hogwash`; Lauds Illegal Regime Change; Blames Saddam For Everything --

    WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Vice President Dick Cheney on Wednesday dismissed as `hogwash` the suggestion that blunders may have hurt the administration's credibility on Iraq and led members of Congress on both sides of the aisle to question President Bush's plan to send more troops to Baghdad. In an interview with CNN`s Wolf Blitzer, the vice president was told that some Republicans in Congress `are now seriously questioning your credibility, because of the blunders and the failures.` When asked to describe the biggest mistake made by U.S. war planners, Cheney said: `I think we underestimated the extent to which 30 years of Saddam`s rule had really hammered the population, especially the Shia population, into submissiveness. It`s very hard for them to stand up and take responsibility, in part because anybody who`s done that in the past have had their heads chopped off.`


    Since the news posting has started up again... I know this article is a little old, but funny how much of it still applies.

    The Politics of American Wars
    Islamists have proved adept at winning liberal exemption from criticism.

    By Victor Davis Hanson

    F or all the talk of imperial America, and our frequent "police actions," we are hardly militarists. Protected by two oceans, and founded on the principles of non-interference in Europe's bloody internecine wars, the United States has always been rightly circumspect about going to war abroad. The American people are highly individualistic, skeptical of war's utility, and traditionally distrustful of government—and wary of the need of their sacrifice for supposed global agendas.

    So we go to war reluctantly. And being human, our support for war hinges on its being short and economical, and waged for professed idealistic principles. Wars that drag on past three years—from the Civil War to Vietnam—can often lead to demonstrations and popular disdain.

    By the same token, some politics are more compatible with the American perception of the need to fight.

    It was not only Lincoln's gifted rhetoric that got the Union through Cold Harbor and the Wilderness, but after the war's initial months of hard fighting, his reinvention of the North's very aims, from a utilitarian struggle to restore the United States to a moral crusade to end slavery and the power of the plantationists for good. In that effort, he was willing to suspend habeas corpus, sidestep the Congress, and govern large chunks of the border states through martial law.

    Woodrow Wilson intervened liberally in Central America. He led us to war against right-wing Prussian militarism. His "too proud to fight" slogan in was no time scrapped for the Fourteen Points, a utopian blueprint for the nations of the world, handed down by a former professor from his high and moralistic Olympus.

    Few worried that Franklin Delano Roosevelt not only waged a savage global struggle against Italian, German, and Japanese fascism, but in the process did some pretty unsavory and markedly illiberal things at home. It was no right-wing nut who locked up Japanese Americans without regard for habeas corpus or ordered German agents to be shot as terrorists.

    To end the dictatorial and genocidal plans of Slobodan Milosevic, liberal Bill Clinton was willing to bomb downtown Belgrade, commit American forces to a major campaign without U.S. Senate approval, and bypass the United Nations altogether. Few accused him of fighting an illegal war, contravening U.N. protocols, or cowardly dropping bombs on civilians. In all these cases, public opposition was pretty much muted, despite the horrendous casualties involved in some of the conflicts.

    Some general principles, then, can guide us in determining American reactions to war, and they transcend even the notion of comparative sacrifice and cost. Progressives such as Wilson and Clinton, who, we are assured, hate war, can intervene far more easily, and are more likely to receive a pass from a hypercritical elite media.

    In the end, they always seem forced to fight by circumstances, since their very liberal natures are supposed to abhor optional conflicts. FDR's wartime criminal-justice apparatus trumped anything that John Ashcroft could imagine, but it has remained relatively unexamined even to this day: Liberals must have had very good reasons to put non-white people in camps, so contrary to their innate notions of social justice.

    Second, the United States seems to be more united against right-wing fascism than left-wing totalitarianism, perhaps because our elites in academia, journalism, and politics feel authoritarian dictators from the right lack the veneer of egalitarian empathy for the poor. In any case, we are more prone even today to assume the 6-8 million Hitler slaughtered puts him in a category far worse than Stalin or Mao, despite the fact that the two combined did away with ten times Hitler's tally.

    During World War II, here at home we experienced nothing like the Rosenbergs or Alger Hiss working for the Axis, even though Soviet-inspired global Communism would end up liquidating 80 million in Russia and China alone. Fighting North Korea or North Vietnam—or even waging the Cold War—was a far more difficult enterprise than opposing the Kaiser, Hitler, Mussolini, or Tojo. Our successes were often due to the efforts of strong anti-Communist democrats such as Harry Truman, who could assure our influential universities, media, politicians, writers, actors, and foundations of the real danger, and the fact that the president had little choice but to go to war.

    In this context, many had some apprehensions about the present so-called war on terror. Ostensibly, the Islamists who had pulled off September 11 largely fit past definitions of fascism and so should have galvanized universal traditional American furor.

    The tribal followers of bin Laden advocated a return to a mythical age of ideological purity uncorrupted by modernism, democracy, or pluralism. Islamism certainly held no tolerance for other religions, much less any who were not extreme Muslims. Sexism and racism—remember bin Laden's taunts about Africans, ongoing slavery in the Sudan, and the genocide in Darfur—were an integral part of radical Islamist doctrine. Al-Qaeda was not so much chauvinistic as misogynistic. Substitute bin Laden's evocation of "believer" for the old "Volk," and the crackpot rants about world domination, purity, and the anti-Semitic slurs of "apes and pigs" fall into the old fascist slots.

    It is no accident that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and Mein Kampf are still popular sellers among zealots in some capitals of the Arab world. Was our war on terror, then, going to be morally clear to even the most progressive utopian, since our enemies lacked liberal pretensions and the charisma of a Stalin, Ho, Che, or Fidel that so often duped the gullible?

    Hardly.

    Two factors explain the current growing hysteria over Iraq, and they transcend the complex nature of the war and even the depressing media reports from the battlefield. First is the strange doctrine of multiculturalism that has become one of our most dominant boutique ideologies of the last few decades, as the United States experienced unleveled prosperity, leisure—and guilt.

    All cultures are of equal merit; failure and poverty abroad are never due to indigenous pathology but rather Western colonialism, racism, Christianity, and gender bias. The Other is never to be judged by our own "biased" standards of jurisprudence and "constructed" bourgeois notions of humanity; those poorer, darker, non-Christian, and non-English-speaking are to be collectively grouped as victims, deserving condescension, moral latitude, and some sort of reparations or downright cash grants. Senator Patti Murray gave us the soccer-mom version of this pathology when she once talked of the need to rival bin Laden's supposed humanitarian projects in Afghanistan, while Senator Durbin assures us from a private e-mail that poor suspects in Cuba (no longer terrorists who plot to butcher more thousands) suffer the similar fate of Hitler's victims.

    As September 11 faded in our collective memory, Muslim extremists were insidiously but systematically reinvented in our elite presentations as near underprivileged victims, and themselves often adept critics of purported rapacious Western consumerism, oil profiteering, heavy-handed militarism, and spiritual desolation.

    Extremists who would otherwise be properly seen in the fascistic mold were instead given a weird pass for their quite public and abhorrent hatred of non-believers and homosexuals, and their Neanderthal views of women. Beheadings, the murder of Christians, suicide bombings carried out by children, systematic torture—all this and more paled in comparison to hot and cold temperatures in American jails on Cuba. Suddenly despite our enemies' long record of murder and carnage, we were in a war not with fascism of the old stamp, but with those who were historical victims of the United States. Thus problems arose of marshalling American public opinion against the supposedly weaker that posited legitimate grievances against Western hegemons. It was no surprise that Sen. Durbin's infantile rantings would be showcased on al-Jazeera.

    When Western liberals today talk of a mythical period in the days after 9/11 of "unity" and "European solidarity" what they really remember is a Golden Age of Victimhood, or about four weeks before the strikes against the Taliban commenced. Then for a precious moment at last the United States was a real victim, apparently weak and vulnerable, and suffering cosmic justice from a suddenly empowered other. Oh, to return to the days before Iraq and Afghanistan, when we were hurt, introspective, and pitied, and had not yet "lashed out."

    If one examines the infomercials of a bin Laden or Zawahiri, or the terrorist communiqués sent to the Westernized media, they are almost all rehashes of the Michael Moore Left, from "Bush lied" to "Halliburton" to "genocide" and "Gulag." This now famous "Unholy Alliance" of radical anti-Americans and reactionary jihadists is really a two-way street: Islamists mimic the old leftist critique of the United States, and the Western Left hopes that they in turn can at least tone down their rhetoric about knocking walls over gays or sending all women into burka seclusion—at least long enough to pose as something like disposed Palestinians minus the Hamas bombs laced with feces, rat poison, and nails.

    The second problem was that not only were we no longer clearly fighting a right-wing extremist ideology, but Texan, twangy, and conservative President Bush was hard to repackage into the reluctant liberal warrior in the image of Woodrow Wilson, FDR, Harry Truman, or Bill Clinton.

    So there was never much room for error in this war. We are not talking in this postmodern era in terms of a past Democratic president invading Latin America, interring citizens in high-plains camps, hanging terrorist suspects, nuking cities, or bombing pharmaceutical factories in Africa, but, at least from the weird present hysteria, something apparently far worse—like supposedly flushing a Koran at Guantanamo.

    In a leisured and liberal society, it is very difficult in general for a conservative to wage war, because the natural suspicion arises—as a result of the conservative's tragic view of human nature and his belief in the occasional utility of force—that he enjoys the enterprise far more than a lip-biting progressive, who may in fact order more destruction. George H. W. Bush barely pulled off freeing Kuwait, but only because he fought on the ground for only four days, used the aegis of the U.N., pulled back on televised images of the so-called "Highway of Death," and was able to avoid going to Baghdad and dealing with a murdering despot still in power.

    In contrast, once the metamorphosis of the Islamists from fascists to victimized critics of the West was underway, and once a suspect conservative like George Bush eschewed the old League of Nations utopianism, the fireside chat, and the "I feel your pain" persona of traditional Democratic war leaders, I feared we would have real trouble finishing this war.

    Contrary to all recent popular wisdom, the war in Iraq is not a disaster, but nearing success. It has been costly and at times tragic, but a democracy is in place, accords are being hammered out with Sunni rejectionists, and the democratic reformist mindset is pulsating into Lebanon, Egypt, and the Gulf. This has only been possible because of the courage and efficacy of a much maligned military that, for the lapses of a small minority at Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib, has been compared to Stalin and Hitler.

    If President Bush were a liberal Democrat; if he were bombing a white Christian, politically clumsy fascist in the heart of Europe; if al Qaeda and its Islamist adherents were properly seen as eighth-century tormenters of humanists, women, homosexuals, non-Arabs, and non-Wahhabi believers; and if Iraq had become completely somnolent with the toppling of Saddam's statue, then the American people would have remained behind the effort to dismantle Islamic fundamentalism and create the foundations to ensure its permanent demise.

    But once the suicide murdering and bombing from Iraq began to dominate the news, then this administration, for historical reasons largely beyond its own control, had a very small reservoir of good will. The Islamists proved to be more adept in the public relations of winning liberal exemption from criticism than did the administration itself, as one nude Iraqi on film or a crumpled Koran was always deemed far worse than daily beheadings and executions. Indeed, the terrorists were able to morph into downtrodden victims of a bullying, imperialistic America faster than George W. Bush was able to appear a reluctant progressive at war with the Dark Age values of our enemies.

    And once that transformation was established, we were into a dangerous cycle of a conservative, tough-talking president intervening abroad to thwart the poorer of the third world—something that has never been an easy thing in recent American history, but now in our own age has become a propagandist's dream come true.

    " Hey Sharon, Are you breathing "a sigh of relief" knowing now that the Bush Administration threw Libby under the bus to save Karl Rove?..AND TRIED TO COVER IT UP !!!!

    Are you breathing a sigh of relief that Bush knew all along about this...as Harry Truman called it, This "treasonous" act of outing a spy ?

    How long is it going to take for you to see the light about your "boys" ?

    Posted by: Bob at January 24, 2007 12:27 PM

    Where did anyone even in the Lib media suggest Bush knew any of this ? Do you even know who got Fitzgerald on this case ? They were so sure Rove was behind it all . Now it's Cheney. Nothing proven yet. The only thing that has been proven is Joe Wilson is a liar. Yet that fact is never reported.

    Long Live Bush!

    Long Live Neocons!

    Long Live America!

    (...God Willing)

    "Proof positive , this guy is Daily Kos cool aid drinking putz.The left really are missing a gene or two."

    billy, you do realize that the poster's name appears BELOW their post - not ABOVE it - and that YOU have attributed quotes to me that I DID NOT SAY?

    "Proof positive , this guy is Daily Kos cool aid drinking putz.The left really are missing a gene or two."

    billy, you do realize that the poster's name appears BELOW their post - not ABOVE it - and that YOU have attributed quotes to me that I DID NOT SAY?

    Posted by: Ensign Expendable at January 24, 2007 6:28 PM

    Is that important? ;)

    Contrary to all recent popular wisdom, the war in Iraq is not a disaster, but nearing success. It has been costly and at times tragic, but a democracy is in place, accords are being hammered out with Sunni rejectionists, and the democratic reformist mindset is pulsating into Lebanon, Egypt, and the Gulf.


    What evidence to you have to back up these insane claims?

    speaking as a lifelong resident of New Orleans, I could give a $%#@! that the city was not mentioned in the SOTU. Doesn't mean anything. The bills have been passed or are there to be passed. You think any intelligent person (a rare breed apparently, here and on this site) thinks that Bush can speed up handing out the checks? The money is there to be drawn on.The governor of our Gret Stet (who let the contract to disburse the money, and all of like 87 people have gotten theirs) is on her way down and this is a transparent attempt to score a few points. Does the Congress need Bush to remind them? If they think another bill is needed, pass the goddamned bill.That's what this great new Congress is for, right? He will sign it. One last point on Shinseki- he was neutered, I see.Oh my. Ensign, I could draw you up a list of about 86 Army chiefs of staff who were used as everything from chauffeurs to procurers.All of these tough guys were gelded by a 74 year-old man, or whatever Rumsfeld was? Then they should have resigned.

    "All of these tough guys were gelded by a 74 year-old man, or whatever Rumsfeld was? Then they should have resigned."

    Because, even in his marginalized capacity, Shinseki probably would have felt that abandoning his men would have been rank cowardice. Military mindset is that even when you get the "shit duty", you do it because it has to be done.

    EE,
    Like Teheran Keith, you have 0 credibility. You come and defend Olbermann's defense of Iran and Hizballah. Why is your hero silent on Ahmadinejad's call to destroy America? Hmm?
    Don't you think it's weird that everytime Iran comes up in conversation, he defends that Fascist regime? I know you admire Olbermann, but face it he's an Iranian loving dork!

    Guess the great leak trial and Tom Cruise are more important than Iran.