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 24, 2007
    COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN - JANUARY 24, 2007

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

    Host: Keith Olbermann

    Topics/Guests:

    • RESOLUTION TO OPPOSE THE BUSH WAR PLAN: Jonathan Alter, Newsweek senior editor
    • SCOOTER LIBBY TRIAL: Thomas DeFrank, NY Daily News Washington bureau chief
    • TOM CRUISE AND SCIENTOLOGY: Michael Musto, Village Voice columnist

    As our favorite carnival barker spat out his traditional patter, he touched on all the proper spin points: the "escalation" (DNC spin-term for sending in reinforcements, with the added bonus that it has VietNam resonance), lawmakers opposing the surge, The Great Leak Case, Kerry bows out, Hillary, and--glory be!--Cruise News!

    The infamous, deplorable Keith Olbermann led off with "Mister" Bush and Capitol Hill Republicans: the honeymoon "could be over". Only one Republican supported the anti-surge resolution, and that Republican was rewarded with a lengthy clip. Was he the only one who spoke? Silly rabbit, of course not. All of the rest of the Republicans disagreed with him, but how many of them got clips from Edward R Olbermann? You guessed it: zero. The most biased hour in television news.

    So to balance that out, Oralmann brought in Sen James Webb (D). Another Democrat?!? The List is updated anew. He got Great Thanks before he even said a word! Olby complained about the phrasing on the "nine-binding resolution" because they didn't use the "escalation" spin-term, and insisted that Congress has an "obligation" to stop the reinforcements at any cost. KO asked "is it fair to say" (a giveaway phrase that means another sloppy softball is coming) that this is just an "attention-getter" and more action is to come. Webb of course agreed. That's the reason he's there. Hammering home "escalation" about fifty dozen more times, Fat Ass finally ceased his fawning chatfest

    Olbermoronn then asked The Wolffe Man whose speech had more impact, Bush's or Webb's? There is, of course, one way to gauge this, but somehow "Man on Fan" Olbermann didn't mention it. (See hounds, below.) Wolffie of course said Webb was more effective, Edward R Olbermann referenced "the proverbial [Ding!] sound of one hand clapping", and wondered if the silence "was not deafening enough". (Ace wordsmith Monkeymann leaves no cliche unturned.) Chuck Hagel's words of opposition to the surge "will go down in history". KO claimed "the people" don't want bipartisanship on Iraq, and naturally The Wolffe Man whimpered his agreement. Great thanks.

    MADMAN

    In a classic moment, Keith managed to say that the "Scooter Libbery trial" has brought claims of "destruction of evidence". Oops, could this be Another Olbermann Lie? Looks like. Olby waxed poetic about the importance of The Great Leak Case, because regardless of the "guilt or innocent of" Libby, its priceless gift is its "unprecessedented revelations about how Mister Cheney operaish". Slippery Shuster's rundown of the day's doings was extraordinary, because it was a recitation of prosecution testimony as if it were fact, with nothing about the cross-examination that tattered a high State Department Official. The guy was caught making the exact same error (forgetting what he told people, getting the chronology wrong) that Libby is being charged with doing on purpose! Any knowledgeable trial attorney will tell you that this is a key moment for any witness's credibility, but it should be no surprise that the quintuply-discredited Shuster left it out, while letting Olby's lie about "destruction of evidence" stand. After all, he did doctor that tape for Herr Olbermann.

    After oddball, John Kerry is still not running for President, followed by the rest of Keith's blue-dress interview with Madame Hillary. And another update to The List. (It gets more incriminating with each update.) KO bragged about his ratings, once again using unpublished data in a special demographic about an hour of post-primetime coverage. And people wonder why we post the true ratings numbers every night. Then an attack on a Congresswoman (R) who hugged the President (Blue Blog Source: Crooks and Liars), Britney Spears, K-Fed, Anna Nicole Smith. The #1 story was Cruise News with the creepy Michael Musto, and we apologize to our readers: we could not take another minute of Fat Ass Olbermann, particularly when he's engaged in another painful exercise in mutual onanism with the Village Voice Idiot.

    In the Media Matters Minute, five conservatives and Fox people, including Steve Doocy, were attacked for theorizing that Hillary's announcement video may have been pre-taped because of the green foliage in the background (Blue Blog Source: Media Matters). Juan Williams was cited because he said, on Fox, that the statement was taped in DC, not NY. But what is Mr Merkle not telling us this time? Doocy raised the foliage question to Juan Williams and asked him about it, prompting the explanation. And so he gets made "worst person" because he asked a question which elicited the answer that Keith uses to call him a "worst person"? If you think Pan's Labyrinth is convoluted, just try to make sense out of that gem of OlbyLogic.

    OLBY

    Hushed hounds: Keith wanted to know about the impact of the SotU speech. Funny, the poll-happy propagandist very carefully avoided any mention of this poll. Could it be because he doesn't like the results? Ya think? In other news: The stock market hits another historic high. Hundreds of illegal aliens arrested. North Korea is helping Iran with Nuke tests, and Iran confirms it has received technology from Russia. Another US strike against Al Qaeda in Somalia. None of this is news on OlbyPlanet. We're still waiting for KO to apologize for smearing Simon Cowell, and to explain why he is entitled to report stories from Insight magazine, but when someone at Fox does it they become "worst person". And in the ongoing scrutiny of Naked Right-Wing Propaganda Masquerading as Entertainment, last night's episode of NCIS found the team disrupting a terrorist attack in the DC area, but Oralmann did not devote an entire segment to bashing them. NCIS is not on Fox

    NAME

    Olbermann's book The book that bears Olberman's name slipped further to #4,596 at amazon.com, while "Culture Warrior" is #194. The OlbyTome is #2,464 at Barnes & Noble; O'Reilly's book is #115 there, as well as being one of 2006's top ten best sellers. Tuesday's SotU coverage found Fox creaming A-Mess-NBC, while the Hour of Spin again found Herr Olbermann in third place, though he did eke out a second-place finish in the critical, beloved, all-important, coveted "key demo". Tonight's MisterMeter reading: 2 [LOW]


    Posted by johnny dollar | Permalink | Comments (367) | | View blog reactions

    367 Comments

    Wonder who Olby "had lunch" with today?

    He was probably too busy trailing HRC around serving as her official back rubber, foot massager and ass kisser to have lunch.

    Olberman is making a hugh mistake trying to bring down the Bush administration. He is making alot of enemies with his endless lies, slander and false accusations. I wonder if he looks all around himself when he steps out of his office on to the mean streets?

    Did Olby just accuse a bunch of commentators of being "green"? I guess he hasn't viewed tape of his radioactive NY broadcasts.

    He's actually comparing The Lord with Tom Cruise in an idiotic taped sketch?

    Keif, the Bush Administration is the only one capable of bringing down the Bush Administration.

    I guess all of Fox's "lies, slanders, and false accusations" were Ok with you because after all, they were always in support of the Bush Administration.

    Olberman is making a hugh mistake trying to bring down the Bush administration. He is making alot of enemies with his endless lies, slander and false accusations. I wonder if he looks all around himself when he steps out of his office on to the mean streets?

    Posted by: Keif at January 24, 2007 8:43 PM


    HA!HA! Yeah, all 20% of the country that still thinks Shrub is going to bring about the rapture will be waiting for him... HA!

    Keif,
    Olbermann is dork. He gets limo rides. He wouldn't have the balls to walk the strets. He's straight pussy. Hopefully he'll come to Miami for the Superbowl. We'll catch him and give that dork a beat down!

    Just listen to that liberal, America hating traitor Chuck Hagel going on against Bush's 'surge' plan.

    Can you believe we've got traitors like this guy in the Republican party?

    "all of Fox's "lies, slanders, and false accusations" were Ok with you because after all, they were always in support of the Bush Administration."

    Nah Dumbass it just help balance out the leftwing
    lies,slanders on abc,cbs,nbc,cnn,cnbc,msnbc,nytimes etc.,etc

    Maybe Teheran Keith will have Iranian bodygaurds!

    Yeah, that nasty, nasty 'liberal' media has just ruined eveything hasn't it?

    Oh no, he had that other 'liberal' America hater Jim Webb on there too. This guy's just going too far!

    "Just listen to that liberal, America hating traitor Chuck Hagel going on against Bush's 'surge' plan.

    Can you believe we've got traitors like this guy in the Republican party?"

    At least the Republican party tolerates dissent unlike the Stalinist Dems ask Joe Liberman about
    that.

    I believe Joe Liebermann still calls himself a 'Democrat', even if he is completely wrong regarding the war. I just gave him a call to ask him your question but he was a little too busy to come to the phone.

    Actually Liebermann calls himself an INDEPENDENT..
    dumbass that is what the (I) stands for.....like
    i said Chuck Hagel won't have to leave his party
    to freely express his thoughts.....

    Joe Lieberman ran - and got elected - as an independent.

    That's because the loony left in the Democratic party smeared him so much he had to leave.

    And he supports the surge. That damned neocon fascist.

    He's actually comparing The Lord with Tom Cruise in an idiotic taped sketch?

    Posted by: at January 24, 2007 8:55 PM

    The Lord,, do you believe in the tooth fairy as well ?

    Lieberman was smeared from one end of the liberal/left netroots to the other.

    Anyone care to find a conservative blogger smearing Hagel?

    As the saying goes, the left seeks heretics, the right seeks converts. If you cross the left, it's like crossing the Mafia. Once you're in, you're in it for life.

    Lieberman has to be pretty old,, get him a pretzel.

    You guys keep Lieberman, we'll take Hagel. At least Hagel has some sense. Lieberman needs to be kicked until he's dead. Hagel smacked down Lieberman a few weeks ago on Meet The Press. It was awesome.

    "That's because the loony left in the Democratic party smeared him so much he had to leave."

    Isn't that the definition of the Democratic party
    LOONEY Far Left????

    Guess that explains why a just elected Jim Webb gave
    the rebuttal they didn't have Kerry or Kennedy or
    Schumer or Hillary i.e. the loooonneey left.

    Lieberman is just looking out for his people.

    "Lieberman was smeared from one end of the liberal/left netroots to the other."

    by Ohboy

    Exposing somebody's constant lies is not smearing. Rethugs try to make that claim any time you catch them lying, which is quite often.

    "Huntley Brinkley" is what Matthews said
    More like Laurel and Hardy instead
    Olby and Matthews
    Like wooden statues
    Spew propaganda for the misled

    "Lieberman has to be pretty old,, get him a pretzel."

    Interesting. Lieberman, as young man, risked his life and went to Mississippi in the 1960s to help black Americans achieve justice and a better life. This was at a time when the Klan was killing such people (Cheney, Schwerner and Goodman, for example).

    What did you do, O'leilly, that was 1/100 as courageous as that?

    Oh no, I believe you got it all wrong again. Now listen up, OK!

    Joe Lieberman lost in a Democratic primary. It's called 'Democracy' in action, and at it's finest. Most Democrats disagreed with him, so they didn't vote for him. NO smears here.

    Now, AFTER he registered as an Independant, he won because most Republicans wouldn't even vote for their own candidate. Even so, he could not have won the general election without support from BOTH Democrats and Republicans.

    Lets review now....It's called Democracy.

    And yes, he still calls himself a Democrat, or to be techhnical about it, or as he puts it...an "Independant Democrat".

    He could have just as easily called himself an "Indepedant Republican", but you see, he chose not to do that on his own free will. And yes, his disent is being 'tolerated'.

    Any questions?

    Congrats on going Neil Cavuto Mr. Cox,You'll be
    seen by more people in one night than olbymoron
    gets in a month.

    "Exposing somebody's constant lies is not smearing."

    Showing him in blackface isn't a smear?

    Not to mention racist and ugly.

    Saying he's "like a disease" (as Huffington did on Olbermann's little pretend news show) isn't a smear?

    Hum, I think anon 9:18 & 9:25 might benefit from some anger management classes!

    Saying he's "like a disease" (as Huffington did on Olbermann's little pretend news show) isn't a smear?

    Posted by: Ohboy at January 24, 2007 9:30 PM

    The truth hurts sometimes. Just like all of you Republiscum will learn in 5-10 years how you were all played like a fiddle by Shrub & Co. You have all been like sheep, stupid and easily scared. I imagine that will hurt as well.

    Sorry 9:25, I read the quote as YOUR post. Obviously that wasn't the case.

    Yes Dumbass Mike why did the Dems run Ned the Retard
    Lamont against him?????Because, THE DEMs...
    Your DEMs didn't like his position on the war.Boy
    that is mighty "tolerant" of the Dems.... actually that is the Democratic Party's idea of "Toleration"


    And Dumbass Mike he is an independent say it again in-de-pen-dent that what he calls himself that is
    what he is......

    shaun, get a GED and put a couple of years under your belt, maybe you'll have facial hair by then. Come back, as a grown-up you might have a clue.

    Olbermann is balding and hair going grey. It's gotten worse since his Special Comment/Nervous Breakdowns! The show should be called countdown until the dork goes bald!

    I was "Kurt Kissel'd" by my male baby sitter when I was 4 years old. It affected me deeply.

    No anon 9;45, they DIDN'T like his position on the war. I didn't either. Thats why we have elections. It has nothing whatsoever to do with 'tolerance'. That is WHY we have elections, 'dumbass'.

    Now, lets review, 'dumbass'...its' called D-E-M-O-C-R-A-C-Y....'dumbass'.

    Now 'dumbass', I have personally heard him call himself an "Indepedant Democrat" in a TV interview....and also 'dumbass', that is exactly why the Senate is considered to be under Democratic control. There are two Indepedants and they have both chose to align themselves with the Democrats.

    Any questions....'dumbass'?

    "shaun, get a GED and put a couple of years under your belt, maybe you'll have facial hair by then. Come back, as a grown-up you might have a clue."

    Posted by: Sheep jack bauer

    Awww, looks like I touched a nerve... If you don't like what I write, don't respond Sheep.

    Speaking of Joe Lieberman... This is courtest of www.glenngreenwald.blogspot.com:

    Wednesday, January 24, 2007
    The toxicity of Joe Lieberman's treason accusations

    (updated below - updated again with possible correction - updated again)

    Joe Lieberman has probably become the single most poisonous Beltway voice when it comes to the war in Iraq. The Bush administration's principal rhetorical tactic for the last five years, of course, has been to equate opposition to its policies and criticism of the Leader with love of the Terrorists. But when it comes to the debate over Iraq, Lieberman -- time and again -- has managed to descend even further into the rhetorical sewer than the administration itself.

    Lieberman, of course, spent several years warning Americans not to criticize their Leader with regard to the War. Just two weeks ago, Lieberman went on Meet the Press and prompted an angry outburst from Chuck Hagel after Lieberman sat there smugly accusing Hagel and anyone else who opposes the Glorious Surge of wanting the U.S. to lose in Iraq. In the same appearance, Lieberman also looked straight into the camera and said that the U.S. was "attacked on 9/11 by the same enemy that we’re fighting in Iraq today" -- a claim so transparently false that even the President long ago abandoned it.

    But yesterday, Lieberman reached what might be a new low. During the confirmation hearings of Gen. David Petraeus, Lieberman provoked this truly reprehensible exchange with Gen. Petraeus, as summarized by The Washington Post's Thomas Ricks:


    Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) asked Army Lt. Gen. David H . Petraeus during his confirmation hearing yesterday if Senate resolutions condemning White House Iraq policy "would give the enemy some comfort."

    Petraeus agreed they would, saying, "That's correct, sir."

    Using the terms to" give comfort" and the "enemy" in the same phrase has no conceivable objective other than to invoke accusations of treason. The Constitution's definition of "treason" is exactly that -- giving "Aid and Comfort" to the enemy. For Lieberman to purposely track the Constitution's treason language when describing opponents of the "surge" plan -- and to invite the new Iraq War Commander to agree with his accusation -- reveals so inescapably what Lieberman is. That's just the basest and most despicable smear one can imagine.

    The Post also re-prints the response to this exchange from Sen. John Warner -- who, as a newly announced surge opponent and co-sponsor of one of the enemy-comforting resolutions in question, is now one of the many whom Lieberman is accusing of being "some" type of a traitor. Warner warned Petraeus of how ill-advised it is for Petraeus to associate himself with the toxic sentiments of Joe Lieberman:


    I hope that this colloquy has not entrapped you into some responses that you might later regret. I wonder if you would just give me the assurance that you'll go back and examine the transcript as to what you replied with respect to certain of these questions and review it, because we want you to succeed.

    Warner's response illustrates an interesting point. War opponents have been the target of smears of this type for years, beginning in 2002 when the country became intoxicated with Iraq war fever and every war opponent had their character attacked and motives called into question. Nobody seemed to mind too much back then.

    But now the Washington Establishment has arrogated unto itself the right to oppose the war and criticize the President. As a result, many of the same groups and even same individuals who spent the last three years accusing war opponents of "undermining the Commander-in-Chief in a time of war" and thereby weakening America have themselves become vocal war opponents as the war lay in ruins (though it should be noted, from what I can tell, that Sen. Warner himself never engaged in that sort of smearing rhetoric and even expressly opposed it, one of the very few in his Party who did). What was subversive and unserious in 2002, 2003 and 2004 has now become perfectly acceptable, even noble, among the elite political and journalist classes.

    The Washington Establishment has not only changed its view on the war, but has also -- not coincidentally -- dramatically changed its view on the propriety of opposing the President and his war, i.e. whether it's now allowed to do so. As the superb Jim Webb recently told Robert Gates at a recent Senate hearing:


    There's really nothing that's occurred since the invasion and occupation that was not predictable and in fact, most of it was predicted. It was predicted in many cases by people with long backgrounds in national security...and in many cases there were people who saw their military careers destroyed and who were personally demeaned by people who opposed them on the issues, including members of this administration. And they are people in my judgment, who will be remembered in history as having had a moral conscience.

    To Joe Lieberman, anyone who opposes whatever Iraq plan he happens to be currently favoring is a frivolous, defeat-hungry traitor -- giving "some comfort" to the "enemy." He's really the Senate's modern-day Joe McCarthy, smearing everyone's character and impugning everyone's motives who doesn't march faithfully along behind the President. What makes it all the more deceitful is that he never ceases to piously masquerade around as the Beacon of Civility and Honor, a disguise long propped up by an adoring Beltway media.

    But now, Lieberman's behavior has become so toxic and ignoble that even decorous, restrained Senate Republicans -- no strangers to the art of the political smear -- have begun condemning him in unusually strong terms. What is more pernicious than for a politician, in a Senate hearing with the country's new top General in Iraq, to expressly equate disagreement with their war views with treason? Not much.

    UPDATE: Relating to the last point about the shift in the rules imposed by the Washington Establishment, The Washington Post's Glenn Kessler this morning identifies numerous inconsistencies and incoherent claims in the President's speech last night. In particular, Kessler documents that "President Bush presented an arguably misleading and often flawed description of 'the enemy' that the United States faces overseas, lumping together disparate groups with opposing ideologies to suggest that they have a single-minded focus in attacking the United States."

    Kessler's points are all correct and well-stated, but the article nonetheless provokes mixed feelings. None of the manipulative falsehoods which Kessler criticizes are new. These are the same tactics the administration has been using continuously for the last six years to bludgeon all of its opponents and to render all opposition subversive and pro-terrorist.

    And while it is encouraging, I guess, that the media is beginning to point out these fundamental flaws more expressly, it's hard to avoid the conclusion that this scrutiny is due more to the President's pervasive unpopularity than it is to any re-awakening by national journalists with regard to their responsibilities. Kicking a President with Nixon-level approval ratings is easy. Americans have already figured out that the President is a fraud. The real need for this scrutiny was back when 70% of Americans cheered on the invasion -- and the subsequent occupation -- because they had been led to believe that it was Saddam who helped fly those planes into the buildings along with his good friend, Osama bin Laden.

    UPDATE II: Several people in comments have noted that other media outlets have quoted Lieberman's question to Petraeus differently than it was quoted by Thomas Ricks in The Post -- specifically, some media outlets quote Lieberman as asking whether the resolutions would "give the enemy some encouragement" (and not, as Ricks had it, "comfort" to the enemy). But Sarah Wheaton, on her New York Times blog The Caucus, also quotes Lieberman's question as asking whether the resolutions “would give the enemy some comfort” (though it's possible she was using Ricks' article as her source for that).

    I haven't found anything definitive yet, but I did receive an e-mail from a very reliable source from a well-known political/media group (whom I'll identify once I get permission), and he advises me that he obtained and listened to the video of the hearings and Lieberman used the word "encouragement" and Ricks therefore misquoted Lieberman. If that is so, then Lieberman's smear here is just the standard, garden-variety one used by war advocates to equate war opposition with helping The Terrorists, and not the more extraordinary version that purposely tracks the treason language from the Constitution. Once I have something more definitive one way or the other, I will post it.

    UPDATE III: Whether Lieberman accused "surge" opponents of giving "comfort" to the enemy or merely "encouraging" them (and it looks increasingly like it was "encouragmenet," though still nothing truly definitive), Chuck Hagel's impassioned response applies just as potently -- not only to Lieberman, but to all of those war supporters who think that what is one of our country's greatest strengths -- the fact that we debate important issues, rather than meekly submit to the Leader's will -- is something we should suppress because the Terrorists are emboldened by our disagreements.

    posted by Glenn Greenwald

    "posted by Glenn Greenwald"

    Oy, just post the link and summarize what you think are the key points.

    Olbermann is a pathetic excuse of a human being! I can think of more deserving people who deserve better than what he has. He's a living Max Hedrum!

    Does "dumbass" Mike EVER leave his parents house? (I prefer assclown). Every night when I check in with OlberWatch to see what news the host slanted in his direction, I see Mike in the comments section belittling other posters and pontificating his beliefs without any capacity to listen to the ideas of others.

    I personally believe that the country is in great shape. Unemployment at historic lows, productivity the highest of any industrialized country, no attacks on our country in six years, and the stock market setting record after record each day. Iraq will only become more stable with a surge of troops to Baghdad and Anwar, and to leave will only create a power vacumn that will end with attacks within the continental U.S.

    I know it's not en vogue to be positive in this country these days, but we need to look at the whole picture (unlike Olbermann), and by doing so, we have much to be proud of.

    RedState,
    As long as Bush is president America sucks to the Left. You'll see if Hillary is in power and the economy stays good in 2009, you'll hear about how great America is!

    Right on Red Wolf...you got KO all figured out...he's an Islamist...he makes nasty faces at young girls...and boys too...he's a facist too...his mother wears Army boots...he hates America...and he hates Florida too...and he hates Apple Pie real bad...I hear he makes his girlfriend wear a burka...he hardy ever mows his yard...they say and he can't get it up half the time...He lies abou Iran...he goes to church in Mosques...he kicks puppies...he hates Chevrolets...he's a Commie...he loves Castro too...he peeps on his neighbors...yada...yada...yada...yada...blah...blah...................................................................................................

    I turn on the television and what do I see? Keith Olbermann comparing Tom Cruise to Jesus !!!!!!!!!!

    No name,
    Olber is a bitch ass dork. He's a phoney hack. He takes his talking points from Hillary. He loves the death of every American soldier as it furthers his far Left political agenda!

    Redstate:

    Tell me, how can you look at the "whole picture' when you only have half a brain?

    And exactly what is this wierd little obsession you have with me anyway?

    I would expect a selfish wretch like yourself to be so 'positive', when you or no one you care about is actually in danger themselves.

    It takes a conscience to actually care...something you wouldn't know anything about.

    I agree with the Worst Person in the World segment placing Conservatives at worst of the list. Saying tha HIlary Clinton did not tape her announcement in real time was just way too petty. Not to mention the fact that Newsbusters.org updated the article with an answer.

    Keith Olbermann is a slime ball who's a one dimensional person. He can't even admit he's a Leftist!

    Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.)

    What is that after Lieberman's name ...is that an
    "I" for INDEPENDENT ....DUMBASS mike????????

    And Redstate:

    I see you made some very insightfull Right Wing talking point predictions about what is now going to happen in Iraq with the 'surge'. You know what will happen if we leave and you know what will happen if we don't. It must be so wonderfull to know so much!

    I bet you were also were one of those psychics making making baseless predictions back in 2002 about how we would find WMD, how easy it was going to be, how Democracy was going to flower, etc. etc. etc.

    You people can be wrong a hundred times in a row...yet you would still insist on how right you are are THIS time.

    Anon 11:17: Now go back and review my post on Liebermann one more time, or do you need yet another civics lesson....'dumbass'.

    Or is it that you are calling Liebermann himself a liar when he calls himself an "Independant Democrat"?


    One thing IS clear, You definitely need anger management therapy.

    Olbermann is a low life scumbag. It's real sad he has followers!

    I came in to tonight's episode of Countdown and I saw a gigantic fish. What was that about, people ?!?

    Are people of this website actually "waiting" for an appology for "smearing" Simon Cowell? Don't you all know that Simon Cowell and American Idol are the two greatest bobbleheads out there? It is not that hard! American Idol is making a mockery out of the music industry, and I long await that the irrelevancy of that program runs out soon. In fact ... I may want American Idol to do bad in the ratings long before I want to see Bill O' Reilly canned.

    now I get what MSNBC stands for...Must Smear Nonstop Bush Conservatives....duh,wheres my head been at all this time

    .....American Idol is making a mockery out of the music industry, and I long await that the irrelevancy of that program runs out soon. ...
    ************
    bicker, I've read that sentence three times and can only conclude that you await a long relevant run of "Idol".

    Keef has done dozens of segments on " American Idol". Obviously it's relavant to him.

    B.D.; Please explain why you think Bush is a 'conservative'?

    Keith was relating a story to a friend. It seems he was walking down a neighborhood sidewalk and happened to see several families hunkered around the television. He noticed it was "American Idol". One family in particular ranged from very young children to adults, and probably grandparents. They seemed to be truly enjoying the program, all having favorites they rooted for, probably each week. Keith went on to say it "sickened" him. He laughed to himself. These dimwits probably go to church. Red State fools!
    Then he was on to a literary event honoring Robert Mapelthorpe.

    Keith goes on and on and on about the Scooter Libby trial like it was another Watergate.....hmmmm,was there ever ANY mention on his nightly bashfest about Billy Clintons little mole stealing papers from the National Archives to cover Bill's butt about his lack of going after terrorists while he was in office,talk about "destuction of evidence"....must me Keithy never got THAT memo

    Olby interviewing Hillary. Yikes. I noticed he wasn't quite as awe-struck as when he obliged her hubby. He didn't hand her a check. Is it true that after the Bubba interview, he offered to perform 'analingus' on him? After all, Monica said Bubba schooled her in that art, cuz it was his favorite sex act. Really. Someone check Olby's tongue for DNA. HAR!

    I'm a Conservative Republican, but after coming to this site and reading the posts from today, I realize that no party has a monopoly on stupidity. Ebert, Red Wolf, Red State, Jack, QQ...you guys embarass me. I'm assuming you guys are all in your twenties (at most) so I'm guessing you don't embarass yourselves, yet.

    But, Come on, you're not doing yourselves any favors with the 3rd grade antics. Okay, you don't like Olbermann, that doesn't mean you should act like school children who are jealous of him.

    Roger Ebert:

    TWO THUMBS DOWN to a little cynical bastard who IS NOT FUNNY in the slightest.

    Quit slandering a GOOD MAN's name and get the hell out of here, you poser.

    And by good man, I mean Roger Ebert. Getting you to stop slandering Keith Olbermann would be like trying to stop the Earth from rotating.

    Shaun....You are dumber then Professor Honeydew (Bob).....

    You claimed, "Lieberman also looked straight into the camera and said that the U.S. was 'attacked on 9/11 by the same enemy that we’re fighting in Iraq today' -- a claim so transparently false that even the President long ago abandoned it."

    WRONGO!

    Lieberman is 100% correct....In 2007, who is part of the opposing forces using terrorism on innocent civilians/our troops to the destabalize the new, democratically elected Iragi government?.....Al Queda in Iraq.

    In 2001....Who sponsored, planned and took responsibility for the 9/11 terrorist attacks on our great country?.....Al Queda.

    Mmmm....Al Queda....Also, who just taunted The President of The United States to send 100,000 more troops to Iraq so they would be killed by the jihadists?.....

    Al Queda's #2: Ayman Al-Zawahri....

    Mmmm....so Senator Lieberman (I) is correct to say the enemy in Iraq IS THE SAME...both literally AND symbolically....Terrorism, as a tactic is the symbolic connection that bolsters the argument even more.

    I guess that is part of the problem in this debate....Some people believe that George Bush is the enemy and Al Queda is not! How strange.

    I loved how CLEAR Petraeus was in what he said in regards to the NONBINDING, SYMBOLIC resolution....oh, and by the way....IF he was wrong....the committee SHOULD NOT HAVE APPROVED HIM TO LEAD THE SURGE!.....

    "Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) asked Army Lt. Gen. David H . Petraeus during his confirmation hearing yesterday if Senate resolutions condemning White House Iraq policy 'would give the enemy some comfort.'

    "Petraeus agreed they would, saying, 'That's correct, sir.'"

    Facts are facts....The leading commander of the surge has the opinion that The Senate of The United States of America will be giving the enemy COMFORT with their TOOTHLESS resolution....Can this become even more absurd?

    You guys on the left are pathetic....especially the likes of Shaun & the professor! Go and become better prepared to defend your horrid position.

    cee
    "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

    Action!

    Tell Congress: Use Your Power to Bring the Troops Home Now

    We call on you, as our elected representatives in the U.S. Congress, to use your power and take action to end the war in Iraq and bring all the troops home.

    We call on you to:

    Vote for the immediate withdrawal of all U.S. forces from Iraq;

    Vote for full funding of veterans benefits;

    Vote against any funds for military action of any kind in Iraq, except for the safe withdrawal of all our armed forces;

    Vote for aid to reconstruct Iraq under Iraqi control;

    Vote to redirect our tax dollars for social programs at home.

    http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/organizationsORG/ufpj/petition.jsp?petition_KEY=447


    ###
    Come on guys...If you believe this war must stop, go to DC this weekend!.......

    Assemble on the National Mall,
    between 3rd and 7th Streets, at 11 am.
    Rally 11am-1pm.


    I want to see huge numbers!....1969 numbers!....You all tell me 80% of the American people are against the war....are YOU going to march of Washington?.....

    professor (Bob)?
    Shaun?
    bystander (Donora Pa)?
    Bushkill?
    Mike?
    EE?
    The many liberal anons?

    Well?...What are you doing Saturday?

    cee
    "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

    Exposing somebody's constant lies is not smearing. Rethugs try to make that claim any time you catch them lying, which is quite often.
    ====================================================
    I thought that was "swiftboating". At least, that's what democrats cry every time that's done to them.

    Question......Do you personally want the Iraq plan President Bush announced last week to
    succeed?

    DEMOCRATS "YES, I personally want the plan to succeed."...........51% NO 34%

    Independents....Yes 63%, No 19%
    Repbublicans....Yes 79%, No 11%

    http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/011807_foxnewspoll.pdf

    I think the blue bloggers on this post are in that Democratic 34% who want defeat!...nice world-view...

    cee
    "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


    Kurt.....

    You leave out THE most complex of Republicans....

    Senator John McCain....

    Why?

    cee
    "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

    Posted by: Mike at January 24, 2007 9:28 PM
    -----


    Mike,

    How could it be democracy in action? I keep reading on here that George W. Bush is a facist, dictator, monarch. How could we have had democratic elections if such was the case? For that matter, why are all these Democrats coming out declaring they are running for president? Do they think that King George will abdicate or something?

    Fred:

    Interesting that I just happened to look at this board for the first time today...and there was your 'question'....right at the bottom.

    Obviously, your 'question' is a rhetorical one, so obviously there is nothing I could say to 'answer' it anyway.

    You never heard ME call GWB any of those things except to state my belief that he has abused the power he was given while he has it.

    I would love to watch Al Qaeda come here and take some liberals like olberman. We would stand by and laugh. Al Qaeda can have as many as them as they want. That's what is is going to take to get these traitorous bastards democrats to put their country ahead of partisan politics.

    Wow! You neocons never fail to amaze me. Duncan Hunter??? For President??? Perhaps he should've waited until his tax fraud was worked out or his relationship with Duke Cunningham's financial schemes...

    He's the worst one yet and Guliani is running...

    I wonder when Bob is going to show up to talk about Libby's trial today. Ah well, I'll try and paste some clarifications for him...

    "First and foremost, based on information in Wilson’s book, among other places, it became abundantly clear that Valerie Plame was not a covert agent, but an official based in Langley whose identity was well-known around town. She was living openly under her own name, and was identified as Wilson’s wife in a Who’s Who entry. In other words,. Plame was not a covert agent, and she had not served overseas for at least five years. As a result, the IIPA was never even an issue."

    "Needless to say, nobody has ever been charged with an IIPA violation in connection with the Robert Novak story. Indeed, it has since been revealed that Libby was not one of Novak’s sources. Novak had, in fact, been told of Plame’s status by Secretary of State Colin Powell’s deputy, Richard Armitage — who has been described as a notorious Washington gossip. Moreover, since both Armitage and Powell are well-known Iraq-war skeptics, to argue that his disclosure to Novak could have been a part of any campaign to punish Joe Wilson or defend the administration’s justification is inherently implausible. Significantly, all of these facts were known to the Justice Department long before Fitzgerald got either of his mandates."

    "In a story already rich with irony, here is another ironic twist — we now know, from none other than Bob Woodward of Watergate fame, that Woodward learned of Valerie Plame’s identity in June of 2003 from a government official other than Libby, and that he (Woodward) may have mentioned her identity to Libby. In other words, Libby — who talked with numerous reporters daily about Iraq — may well have misremembered who first told him about Plame, confusing a prominent middle-aged television journalist for a prominent middle-aged newspaperman."

    "Unlike Watergate, there was simply no crime to cover-up. And still, Fitzgerald did not call it quits. Now justice will be up to the jury."

    But of course, this is all just signs of Bush's rampant crime etc etc...
    Actually I am curious to know how Bob spins this crime that's not a crime. Heck, when all this is over, I'm so very curious to know how Olbermann will handle it. I'm offering options on:
    1) Spins it into an administration coverup. (2 to 1 for)
    2) Offers corrections (1 to 50 against)
    3) Doesn't mention it at all. (3 to 1 for)
    4) Stupid right-winger, Libby's going to jail like all evil 'rethuglicans' should. (1 to 10 against)

    Place your bets people.

    Chuck Hagel was right in demanding that the Congress know exactly the implications of sending more troops.
    There seems no end in sight and more troops just to satisfy Bush and Cheney's vanity is stupid.A new report confirms that more troops CANNOT solve the Iraq conundrum so why send more against conventional wisdom?

    Our lappity Lapdog for Bush( Cee) is all excited that a paid employee of the government has a position that Cee agrees with..and he thinks that makes him right !
    Nice logic, Cee.
    When the Congress OFFICIALLY votes against this escalation, it will be the first time the Congress took a stand against this war.
    Funny how it took a Democratic led Congress to get this ball rolling.( the cowardly GOP Congress didn't have the balls to even touch this war nor even investigate any of its impropieties)
    Although the resolution will not be binding , it is a necessary first step for the Congress to speak loudly and clearly how they feel about this war to the American people.
    If the president continues to stand alone against the COngress and the American people,...as Sen Webb said," We will show him the way. "

    BTW, Sen Webb was outstanding in the DEM. message rebutting Bush's short on substance, long on theatrics State of the Union Message.


    "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 !

    Cee is going to give himself a myocardial infarction with the frenzy he's whipping himself into. Here's hoping.... Although his crazy rantings are semi amusing...

    Cee hearts Joe LIEberman for whatever reason. You mess with LIEberman and you mess with Cee. I know that must be very scary for folks. The hard ons that Shrub & LIEberman have for each other is rubbing off on Cee.

    The Grim Challenger thinks he has the high road on this trial.
    How funny is that !
    It's already great fun watching the rats of this administration throw each other under the bus.
    So much more information to come out during this trial.
    Glad to see that the lying that brought us to war is already starting to surface.
    Stay tuned for more fun watching the republicans stab each other in the backs.

    Mike "Obviously, your 'question' is a rhetorical one, so obviously there is nothing I could say to 'answer' it anyway.

    You never heard ME call GWB any of those things except to state my belief that he has abused the power he was given while he has it."


    Well, Keith Olbermann does label Bush all these things and you've characterized him as being the lone voice on cable television for people who share your views.

    This trial has already been so much fun. It is only going to get better. Republicans are in disarray, jumping ship and pointing fingers. It's been great!

    Posted by: Mike at January 25, 2007 10:23 AM
    ---

    Yeah...it was just for fun...I wanted to see some of the others come out of the woodwork and hear what they had to say, but no takers...

    Ah Bob's response. So predictable I could have written it for him and saved him the trouble. I wonder his reply to this thought:

    "And, finally, there is the palpable tragedy of a man forced from his post in the Vice President’s office, and being dragged through years and years of personal and professional hell, because he could not recall who first told him that Joe Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA. The injustice to Libby is particularly noteworthy when compared with the lenient treatment accorded to President Clinton’s former national-security adviser, Sandy Berger. Berger stole highly classified documents from the National Archives, evidently in an effort to mislead the 9/11 Commission investigation regarding the Clinton Administration’s failure to confront al Qaeda. He was not the subject of a special-counsel extravaganza, and ultimately plead to a slap on the wrist — a $50,000 fine and community service. He may well return in the next Clinton Administration, if there is one. For anyone who does not see injustice here, we offer a quote from Dr. Johnson: “if he does really think that there is no distinction between virtue and vice, why, sire, when he leaves our houses let us count our spoons” — and documents."

    Grim,

    You didn't cite any sources. Observe:

    "But within the C.I.A., the exposure of Ms. Plame is now considered an even greater instance of treachery. Ms. Plame, a specialist in non-conventional weapons who worked overseas, had "nonofficial cover", and was what in C.I.A. parlance is called a NOC, the most difficult kind of false identity for the agency to create. While most undercover agency officers disguise their real profession by pretending to be American embassy diplomats or other United States government employees, Ms. Plame passed herself off as a private energy expert. Intelligence experts said that NOCs have especially dangerous jobs." New York Times 5 Oct 2003

    "...Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer. In July 2003, the fact that Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer was classified. Not only was it classified, but it was not widely known outside the intelligence community..."

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/28/AR2005102801340.html

    This trial has already been so much fun. It is only going to get better. Republicans are in disarray, jumping ship and pointing fingers. It's been great!
    ===================================================

    Are Shaun and others willing to bet with me whether this turns into another "Fitzmas" or not? Same bar we'll all meet at when the world ends because of global warming.

    "So much more information to come out during this trial.
    Glad to see that the lying that brought us to war is already starting to surface.
    Stay tuned for more fun watching the republicans stab each other in the backs."


    Some of the information that has come out in trial is that during cross-examination, a prosecution witness contradicted his own testimony about who talked to whom about what due to mistakes in memory.

    This, in a trial where the defendant's defense against pejury is that he made just such a mistake.

    As for throwing someone under a bus--- can you please give me more details about this.

    Good substantive responses gentlemen (I am assuming the gender)....

    None of my questions were answered....

    What is the brave professor and brilliant Shaun doing this Saturday?.....

    Why did General Petraeus get approved IF he is wrong in his opinions and strategies?.....The Senators could have voted his confirmation DOWN and place The President in the position of looking for another lapdog (your accusation) to execute his flawed policy.

    You see, I deal in reality.....

    In reality, these toothless resolutions are not the first step to anything....they are political CYA in place of real action.

    In reality, The Senate could begin applying real legislative pressure through confirmations and appropriations....They could be debating Kennedy's Bill as we speak....In reality they are not.

    In reality, IF this country was so strongly opposed to this war, we would see hundreds of thousands at the march on Saturday....Let's talk after this weekend and see if they get a fraction of the number.

    You guys are rich....Cone on and save those kids who are dying for nothing (your assertion) as soon as possible!*

    *(For those who choose not to realize it, the last sentence was sarcasm)

    cee
    "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

    Oh, right, I did forget links. The above quotes were from:
    http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OGI5NzI4MzVhMTE4YWM5ZWZhYzkzNTM4NTVlZWY3OTg=

    But there was also from the washington post:
    "Dana Priest: It was reported before that she worked on proliferation issues for the CIA. The leap in this new round of information is that her outing significantly impacted our current intel on Iran. I don't buy it. First, no one person who quit clandestine work four years ago is going to make that big of a dent in current knowledge. But also, nothing like this came up at the time of her outing and I believe it would have. Think we need some actual details. At present it just doesn't smell right."
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/04/28/DI2006042801011.html

    Cee:

    Your analysis of that poll you just cited at 10:01 AM was a little limited. It's but another example of how your side just loves to label complicated situations like this in such simplistic terms.

    You 'question' in the poll, just as you put it was a loaded question for several important reasons. It is also a rhetorical question because any citizen who actually cares about their country would naturally never want it to 'lose'.

    To begin with, the purpose of the 'surge' is to quell the recent sectarian violence in Baghdad, not 'win' the war proper. If they succeed it bringing down that violence to a dull roar, we will STILL be only back to the point we were before that sectarian conflict began. We will not have 'won' the war.

    While I would not have been one of the 34% who would answer 'no' to such a simplistic question, I don't think it really calls into question the patriotism of anyone who did either.

    Your citing that poll in such terms implies that you view those in that 34% category as somehow unpatriotic or un - American.

    - Is someone who doesn't want to see another 3000 American killed for what they see as a dubious and unsustainable goal 'unpatriotic'?
    - Are they 'un - American if they fear any limited 'success' will only encourage this militaristic administration to enter into still more such potentially disastrous military adventures?
    - Does not accepting the mantra that failure in Iraq will make us less safe at home call their patriotism into question?
    - Does simply not believing the talking point that 'saving' Iraq is 'vital' to our own best interest make someone less American?
    - Does not believing that it is our place to control the world make one 'unpatriotic'?

    This whole question is so much more complex than the simplistic terms that so many of your side keep trying to package it in....and therein lies the problem.

    When O'Reilly, Hannitty, and others like them keep framing the argument in simple little terms like "do you want us to win in Iraq, or not", they have missed the point entirely. It is also clear that the 'question' is intended to do nothing more than to trap anyone against the war into a corner framed with false patriotism....and that is why so many of us can only smile every time that 'question' is posed...rhetorically of course!

    End of an Affair
    It turns out that the person who exposed CIA agent Valerie Plame was not out to punish her husband.

    Friday, September 1, 2006; A20

    WE'RE RELUCTANT to return to the subject of former CIA employee Valerie Plame because of our oft-stated belief that far too much attention and debate in Washington has been devoted to her story and that of her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, over the past three years. But all those who have opined on this affair ought to take note of the not-so-surprising disclosure that the primary source of the newspaper column in which Ms. Plame's cover as an agent was purportedly blown in 2003 was former deputy secretary of state Richard L. Armitage.

    Mr. Armitage was one of the Bush administration officials who supported the invasion of Iraq only reluctantly. He was a political rival of the White House and Pentagon officials who championed the war and whom Mr. Wilson accused of twisting intelligence about Iraq and then plotting to destroy him. Unaware that Ms. Plame's identity was classified information, Mr. Armitage reportedly passed it along to columnist Robert D. Novak "in an offhand manner, virtually as gossip," according to a story this week by the Post's R. Jeffrey

    Smith, who quoted a former colleague of Mr. Armitage.

    It follows that one of the most sensational charges leveled against the Bush White House -- that it orchestrated the leak of Ms. Plame's identity to ruin her career and thus punish Mr. Wilson -- is untrue. The partisan clamor that followed the raising of that allegation by Mr. Wilson in the summer of 2003 led to the appointment of a special prosecutor, a costly and prolonged investigation, and the indictment of Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, on charges of perjury. All of that might have been avoided had Mr. Armitage's identity been known three years ago.

    That's not to say that Mr. Libby and other White House officials are blameless. As prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald has reported, when Mr. Wilson charged that intelligence about Iraq had been twisted to make a case for war, Mr. Libby and Mr. Cheney reacted by inquiring about Ms. Plame's role in recommending Mr. Wilson for a CIA-sponsored trip to Niger, where he investigated reports that Iraq had sought to purchase uranium. Mr. Libby then allegedly disclosed Ms. Plame's identity to journalists and lied to a grand jury when he said he had learned of her identity from one of those reporters. Mr. Libby and his boss, Mr. Cheney, were trying to discredit Mr. Wilson; if Mr. Fitzgerald's account is correct, they were careless about handling information that was classified.

    Nevertheless, it now appears that the person most responsible for the end of Ms. Plame's CIA career is Mr. Wilson. Mr. Wilson chose to go public with an explosive charge, claiming -- falsely, as it turned out -- that he had debunked reports of Iraqi uranium-shopping in Niger and that his report had circulated to senior administration officials. He ought to have expected that both those officials and journalists such as Mr. Novak would ask why a retired ambassador would have been sent on such a mission and that the answer would point to his wife. He diverted responsibility from himself and his false charges by claiming that President Bush's closest aides had engaged in an illegal conspiracy. It's unfortunate that so many people took him seriously.

    © 2006 The Washington Post Company

    Ranting, ranting, ranting... Blah blah blah...

    Cee, there is no point in arguing with you. You like to go around in circles as I've discovered in the past. You are no better than Red Wolf.

    You are just acting out a bit, flailing all about, a bit lost, just like your party. It's understandable. We'll cut you some slack.

    Grim,

    I hate to disparage your sources, but I think that testimony before a special counsel trumps a conservative rag and an editorial...

    As for throwing someone under a bus--- can you please give me more details about this.
    ===================================================
    Cecelia, the accusation was made BY the defense in the trial's opening statements.

    (from: http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MGUwMTlmYzVlOTc5YzJiMzUzODk4Yzc0MGMwYTBiNzk=)
    Wells went on to quote a vow from Libby: “I will not be sacrificed so Karl Rove can be protected.”

    Why did General Petraeus get approved IF he is wrong in his opinions and strategies?.

    Because he gave Bush the opinions he wanted to hear.
    Cee ignores all the other generals and former Sec of defense that have been totally wrong in their views and have failed in their strategies in Iraq.
    It's not the generals fault, it's the imposible position Bush had put them in,..and continue to put them in.

    BTW...I'll be in Washington this weekend Lapdog,matching with Sgt Madden. Will you?
    Or will you be watching from the comfy of your recliner?
    Gotta run.

    "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 !


    "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 is a sad excuse for a person. Ican think of many unfortunent people that deserve better than that dork!

    I hate to disparage your sources, but I think that testimony before a special counsel trumps a conservative rag and an editorial...
    ====================================================
    The testimony was a year and a half ago. Since that time no more has been made about Valerie's supposed "covert" status. Why is Libby being charged with perjury and not violating the Intelligence Identities Protection Act if Valerie really was covert.

    Grim,

    Why weren't the people who forged federal documents and gave them to Dan Rather prosecuted? Answer: We have a corrupt executive...

    BTW, the duplicate quote was unintended.
    Potent words,though,n'estpas ?

    And clearing up the misspelling:
    I'll be MARCHING with Sgt Madden.
    I'll tell him you said hello, cee, and also that you're using his words even though he probably thinks you're a right wing coward.
    We'll both be laughing at you.

    "Cecelia, the accusation was made BY the defense in the trial's opening statements."

    Yes, I know, Grim, but Libby's attorney referenced Bush's statement that the leaker would be dealt with. The "bus" is President Bush and the claim is that staffers --- Rove's staff is the implication--- where trying to make Libby the scapegoat to protect Rove from being "dealt with".


    It's the cover-up stupid.

    Bob writes "We'll both be laughing at you."


    Frankly Madden's focus of ire is the Democrat leadership in congress, not someone who has also pointed their inconsistencies, war-proponent or not.

    Why weren't the people who forged federal documents and gave them to Dan Rather prosecuted? Answer: We have a corrupt executive...
    ===================================================
    ??????
    Now I am curious. What motive would the executive have in NOT prosecuting someone that made false allegations and attempted to slander the president? The administration is so corrupt they do NOT go after their enemies? WTD?

    "at" NO ONE is on trial for violating Valerie Plame's cover.

    If Fitzgerald had grounds for THAT, he would be prosecuting it.

    Cecelia, I think generic is either behind the times, or doesn't want to admit that in the year and a half that Fitz made the claim he posted new info has come to light which has invalidated much of his prior claims.

    Grim,

    Why weren't the people who forged federal documents and gave them to Dan Rather prosecuted? Answer: We have a corrupt executive...

    Posted by: at January 25, 2007 11:13 AM

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

    Well, I suppose Repubicans could have demanded an investigation that ended with Rather and Mapes and who knows what other journalist, producer, or executive at CBS, being put into jail for not revealing their sources, but I guess they just left that tactic to others...

    Grim writes "Cecelia, I think generic is either behind the times, or doesn't want to admit that in the year and a half that Fitz made the claim he posted new info has come to light which has invalidated much of his prior claims."

    Well, it does take a certain steadfastness of mind to stand behind a piece from 2003.

    Redstate: This post is really for your sniping eyes only:

    To your chagrin, here I am on here 'again', and there is nothing you can do about that, so don't bother to post another one of your obligitory mean spirited little snipes aimed at me, that you love to post while essentially butting into converstions I am actually having with others.

    I don't have a clue what your obsession is with me or why you keep aiming your vicious little snipe attacks at me personally, but be assured that they don't bother me at all. You have already clearly shown yourself to be nothing more than a bridge troll, with no ideas of her own other than to parrot talking points and statistics taken from Fox 'news' channel or similar sources.

    You might also check out an earlier 2:11 AM post from another 'conservative', no less, who identified you as one of several say nothing posters that 'embarass' them.

    I asked the brilliant professor, "Why did General Petraeus get approved IF he is wrong in his opinions and strategies?."

    If he had bothered to read the post....the approval was from The Senate Commitee which also approved the nonbinding "anti-surge" resolution...I was simply pointing out the contradicitons in condemning a policy but enabling it at the same time.

    And Shaun, avoiding my specific questions by claiming I am nearing a catastrophic event seems slightly pathetic....Do you have anything of substance to add to the conversation?

    cee
    "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

    Grim,

    You are being insincere. The forged documents were a scam intended to use against democratic candidates. When none of them took the bait, Rather took it. It is a crime and it was not investigated...

    You haven't replied to my question in any real way...

    Cee (and to anyone who might care) there is an entry about some GOOD new from Iraq today. It is VERY long though.

    http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YzRhMzI1ODExYWNhYThmNzRkY2UzYWJhMzQwYzFjNjM=

    Very relevant parts:
    "Based on his experiences in Iraq, events there are not as bad as the news media make it seem, an Army medic from Adrian said.

    Cpl. Ignacio Garza, a medic in the 1st Armored Division home on leave after serving in Iraq for six months, said the troops don’t watch television news for war updates because they think none of the networks show an accurate depiction of what’s happening. He said they ignore large parts of the country, including the Kurd-dominated north, that are stable."

    and

    "If it were any other country, the reconstruction of Iraq would be a huge story. As of December 31, 2006, there are 658 projects underway at a cost of $2.67 billion, 3,026 projects have been completed at a cost of $7.11 billion, and 94 more projects are planned.

    A $43 million upgrade to the Al Basrah oil terminal is expected to be completed by April. The upgrade includes an emergency shutdown system, control valves, metering system, and fire protection. The upgraded terminal will meet all international safety and metering standards.

    Twenty hospitals throughout Iraq are currently undergoing $103 million in renovations.

    A small water project was completed in Dahuk Province. The new water storage tank and pipeline serves more than 1,000 residents of Dahuk.

    An $8.6 million renovation to the Samawah Railroad Maintenance Center has been completed. The Samawah site is one of two railway maintenance centers in Iraq, and employs more than 250 Iraqis."

    Grim,

    The Kurd-dominated north was stable before we invaded...

    Grim,

    You are being insincere. The forged documents were a scam intended to use against democratic candidates. When none of them took the bait, Rather took it. It is a crime and it was not investigated...

    You haven't replied to my question in any real way...
    ====================================================
    I hadn't replied because I was trying to understand your question in the first place.

    So let me get this straight... the documents were intended to get democrat canidates to.. go to jail? How would this work and under what charge would they have suffered? Oh, and what exactly is any evidence you have of this?

    The Kurd-dominated north was stable before we invaded...
    ==================================================
    Sure, if you count being randomly slaughtered by Saddam "stable".

    "Later, in the nineteen-eighties during the Iran/Iraq War, the Kurds were again caught up in the struggle between nations. And again the world stood by as Saddam destroyed over four thousand Kurdish villages, unleashing poisonous gas assaults against not only the people, but the forests and the wildlife as part of his ‘Anfal’ campaign to obliterate the Kurds and their way of life."
    http://theotheriraq.com/relationship.html

    Yeah, and Nazi Germany was pretty darn stable before we invaded there too. Your point?

    A general question: Why do so many of you here seem to have this pathalogical desire to downplay/dismiss/discount/etc ANY good news from Iraq? Please answer me: WHY do you have such a vendetta against ANY good news coming from there?

    Grim,

    >>So let me get this straight... the documents were intended to get democrat canidates to.. go to jail? How would this work and under what charge would they have suffered? Oh, and what exactly is any evidence you have of this?

    Playing dumb is sophmoric and ineffective. Obviously the effect desired was exactly what happened to Rather: Lack of credibility.

    >>Sure, if you count being randomly slaughtered by Saddam "stable".

    Saddam did not venture into the North after the "no-fly zone" was established. No mass graves date from that period.

    As for your general question, there has been no good news out of Iraq, except for Saddam's execution...I haven't seen anyone discounted the fact that he was executed...

    Playing dumb is sophmoric and ineffective. Obviously the effect desired was exactly what happened to Rather: Lack of credibility.
    ===================================================
    Besides the fact that that is an awfully weak claim, Rather didn't HAVE to run the story. He could have done the journalistically responsible thing and investigated the source etc. Again: where is your evidence that the administration was behind the documents?

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Saddam did not venture into the North after the "no-fly zone" was established. No mass graves date from that period.
    ==================================================
    So all the mass graves from before that point don't count?

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    As for your general question, there has been no good news out of Iraq, except for Saddam's execution...I haven't seen anyone discounted the fact that he was executed...
    ==================================================
    Wow, I think you need medication. You could look at that link I posted which lists several good things from Iraq. Yeah there's bad too, but there's good news as well. Or are you going to try and claim this is "fake"?

    " Two years ago, the same streets were fraught with roadside bombs and snipers, and sellers and buyers stayed away. The area was considered too dangerous even for a quick tour by a U.S. general in his armored Humvee.

    The Al Qaim region routinely was described as an out-of-control "wild west" where the Marines were fighting, with only limited success, to control the smuggling of insurgent fighters and weapons from Syria.

    Today, Marines walk the downtown beat, chatting with residents, fielding their complaints, encouraging them to contact the Iraqi police if they suspect insurgent activity.

    In a country studded with areas where the United States either has failed or had only limited progress toward stabilization, Husaybah and the surrounding Al Qaim region stand out as a success, officials said."

    Let's see how O'Really's ratings do if he goes head to head with sweaty, oiled up, fake-tanned men with mullets. Then his Red Neck audience would be forced to choose:

    Wrestling in Top Spot in Cable Nielsens
    By The Associated Press

    Wed Jan 24, 1:22 PM

    Rankings for the top 15 programs on cable networks as compiled by Nielsen Media Research for the week of Jan. 15-21. Day and start time (EST) are in parentheses.

    1. "WWE Raw" (Monday, 10 p.m.), USA, 3.91 million homes, 5.99 million viewers.

    2. "Monk" (Friday, 9 p.m.), USA, 3.556 million homes, 5.16 million viewers.

    3. "WWE Raw" (Monday, 9 p.m.), USA, 3.354 million homes, 5.36 million viewers.

    4. "SpongeBob SquarePants" (Saturday, 9:30 a.m.), Nickelodeon, 3.33 million homes, 4.32 million viewers.

    5. "Fairly Odd Parents" (Saturday, 10 a.m.), Nickelodeon, 3.17 million homes, 4.21 million viewers.

    "If he had bothered to read the post....the approval was from The Senate Commitee which also approved the nonbinding "anti-surge" resolution..."

    Sorry, that's incorrect. Approval of the resolution was in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Approval of General Petraeus came from the Senate Armed Services Committee.

    And this is not an inherently contradictory position. General Petraeus was approved to ensure that the transion of command is smooth. The fact that he supports the surge is interesting, but ultimately irrelevant. If he doesn't get the funding or the troops for an escalation, it won't change his strategy for fighting the war as it is.

    "Please answer me: WHY do you have such a vendetta against ANY good news coming from there?"

    by Challenger Grim

    Because it's like finding out before setting sail on the Titanic, that it is 'unsinkable'. It may be comforting when you hear it, but it doesn't change anything or make it so.

    Iraq is a disaster. The biggest disaster in our history. Unlike Vietnam, we have opened Pandora's Box in the Middle East and our children's children will still be dealing with consequences due to Shrub & Co.

    Because it's like finding out before setting sail on the Titanic, that it is 'unsinkable'. It may be comforting when you hear it, but it doesn't change anything or make it so.
    =====================================================
    No Shaun, it's more like after the Titanic is already sinking and, while sitting out in the ocean in your lifeboat, you refuse to be told that there are any other survivors in any other lifeboats.

    This goes way beyond any sort of pessemism or even cynism.

    Grim,

    If you want to go back sixteen years in Iraq, fine! But, the invasion did not improve the stability of the Kurdish north. It was already stable (he repeated)...

    As for the other "improvements", since violence is getting worse in Iraq, it is difficult to state that it is good news that there are still areas where people aren't killed immediately...

    Funny how you claim that Rather didn't have to run the story about Bush's pathetic service, but, the fact is that a forgery was given to a newsman. Forgery of federal documents is illegal. Leave it to you neocons to coddle the criminal...

    Funny how you claim that Rather didn't have to run the story about Bush's pathetic service, but, the fact is that a forgery was given to a newsman. Forgery of federal documents is illegal. Leave it to you neocons to coddle the criminal...
    ====================================================
    Ok, so who forged the documents? Let's go get them.

    Grim:

    This "good news' argument is but another red herring in the Iraq debate.

    I personally listen to any and all news coming out of Iraq, good and bad, and then weigh and balance it accordingly.

    At some point, most of us have already made up our minds as to whether or not continuation of this disastrous endeavor is in our best interest or not. You are clearly on one side of that argument, and I am on the other. For most of us, this is no longer a "fence sitter" argument in which any new piece of information is likely to sway our opinion significantly.

    The question about "good news" vs "bad news" is another complex one that cannot be simplified. I don't want either one...I want the truth!

    At some point however, those of us who have made up our minds wonder if any additional pieces of "good news" will do anything but place doubt in the minds of some as what the ultimate outcome will be, and therefore, possibly prolong the war, causing many more US deaths in the process.

    Also, on the other side of your "good news" arguments are the really "bad news" stories we are NOT being allowed to see. These include the denial of media access to returning caskets and the wounded.

    We should not be afraid of the truth....ALL of the truth!

    Let's see how O'Really's ratings do if he goes head to head with sweaty, oiled up, fake-tanned men with mullets. Then his Red Neck audience would be forced to choose:

    Why not judge Keith's rating in the same way?? Did you forget this is Olbermann watch? Let's all have a good laugh because sweaty rednecks and a cartoon can beat Olbermann.

    The question about "good news" vs "bad news" is another complex one that cannot be simplified. I don't want either one...I want the truth!

    At some point however, those of us who have made up our minds wonder if any additional pieces of "good news" will do anything but place doubt in the minds of some as what the ultimate outcome will be, and therefore, possibly prolong the war, causing many more US deaths in the process.

    Also, on the other side of your "good news" arguments are the really "bad news" stories we are NOT being allowed to see. These include the denial of media access to returning caskets and the wounded.

    We should not be afraid of the truth....ALL of the truth!
    ==================================================
    Mike I generally agree with you that the entire picture should be painted and my general question really wasn't directed toward you (since I haven't really seen you deny good news like some people here). But can you honestly admit that the news we get from there is overwhelmingly the bad with almost no reporting on any progress or good incidents?

    Grim:

    I can't really argue with that but I can point out that the overwhelming volumn of news that we get from anywhere is basically bad. That is simply what the press does and has always done.

    Mike and Shaun and their ilk were against the Iraq Mission from day one, hence their veiws of the state of the war cannot be taken seriously. Mike in particular believes Iraq was a virtual "Garden of Eden" before Bush ruined paradise.

    Why not judge Keith's rating in the same way?? Did you forget this is Olbermann watch? Let's all have a good laugh because sweaty rednecks and a cartoon can beat Olbermann.

    Posted by: at January 25, 2007 12:21 PM

    Because you guys like to talk about O'Really's ratings. I thought since ratings are so important, you'd like to see who the real 'king of cable' is...WWF. Makes sense, since that's the type of fan base that makes O'Really so popular!

    Mike "We should not be afraid of the truth....ALL of the truth!"

    Grim isn't this your point?...

    "Mike and Shaun and their ilk were against the Iraq Mission from day one, hence their veiws of the state of the war cannot be taken seriously. Mike in particular believes Iraq was a virtual "Garden of Eden" before Bush ruined paradise."

    by QQ

    HA! Yes, Republiscum have SOOOO much credibility on the war... HA! HA! HA! HA!

    From the lies to take us there, to the horrific planning, to the criminal execution of it, the blunders that have been made would be laughable if it weren't for the fact that 150,000 Americans are over there putting their lives on the line. QQ, shut your mouth and be thankful that the grown ups are back in charge. I know I am.

    Grim has no point, Cecelia. I've had to remind him that the Kurds were safe before the invasion, that Plame was undercover and other things on other days.

    Problem is, when you are very interested in holding a particular opinion, you may begin to jettison conflicting data if you are wrong...

    Because you guys like to talk about O'Really's ratings. I thought since ratings are so important, you'd like to see who the real 'king of cable' is...WWF. Makes sense, since that's the type of fan base that makes O'Really so popular!

    Posted by: at January 25, 2007 12:43 PM

    I'll address these serious charges here...

    WWF is most popular among the 16- 35 year old demographic. In fact, MTV has its own specials devoted to WWF personalities.

    Aren't we told that Olbermann beats O'Reilly among these viewers... therefore the majority of Keith's fans are likely to watch WWF too.

    I'd suggest that Sponge Bob has a young demographic as well...

    QQ said: "Mike and Shaun and their ilk were against the Iraq mission from day one, hence their views on the state of the war cannot be taken seriously"

    An interesting but very convoluted point. I would think having been against the invasion from day one would show INCREASED credibility, rather than do the opposite, especially when you consider the disastrous state we are in now, something NOBODY really denies.

    QQ ALSO lied that "Mike in particular believes that Iraq was a 'Garden of Eden" before Bush ruined the paradise.

    OK liar, I challenge you to go back and find where I said anything close to what you just accused me of saying!

    Stating it was more staple before we invaded, and not in our national interest to do so was HARDLY a statement that Iraq was "a garden of Eden", or a 'paradise'.

    Mike, sorry, that most aggregious allegation was supposed to be leveled at shaun, he of the 'kurds had it great' before Bush invaded. I agree, you are the less of the transgressors.

    Shaun, 99 out of 100 servicemen and women in Iraq would slap you silly for your statements. I know I would. You don't have a precious clue.

    EE,

    You are right, thank you for correcting my error...The only common D in both committees is Webb and he did vote to approve Petraeus.

    The Democrat approval of General Petraeus is yet another step that allows the increase in troops under The President's plan. The argument that The Congress should not disrupt a smooth transition is disengenuous because of the emotional language from the opponents of the actual policy.....Biden sounded like Bush was about to shoot someone in the head in his emotional pleading to pass the nonbinding resolution!...."Please stop the surge! PLEASE!"

    Hagel describes what he is doing as hard?....Hard is placing your political neck out and committing to a plan of action that thwarts the action of The President some are so quick to say is wrong.

    This is all cynical political posturing and to interpret it away or excuse it is also a very cynical political strategy.

    cee
    "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


    "Mike, sorry, that most aggregious allegation was supposed to be leveled at shaun, he of the 'kurds had it great' before Bush invaded."

    by QQ

    QQ, try again, I never said anything about the Kurds. Find it and show me.

    "Shaun, 99 out of 100 servicemen and women in Iraq would slap you silly for your statements. I know I would. You don't have a precious clue."

    by "LanceCorporal" Wm Meyers

    HA! This site is more fun than usual today. We have tons of delusional Shrub apologists here today. Still living in an alternate reality where Republiscum are still in charge and still have an ounce of respect.

    "LanceCorporal", I don't doubt that you could find 100 servicement, and that 99 of them might disagree with what I say. Now, 99 out of every 100 servicement, and I'd say you need to lay off the sauce.

    "Hard is placing your political neck out and committing to a plan of action that thwarts the action of The President some are so quick to say is wrong."

    Again, we can't act like a blunderbuss - as some have clearly pointed out a reckless exit strategy is A BAD IDEA.

    Hagel is at least making the point that we have to have the debate. He was rebuking his fellow Republicans for refusing to even DISCUSS the matter before the full Senate.

    With this Administration, cee, it seems you have to rant and rave before someone will pay attention to you.

    When the US comes out with evidence of Iran's involevement in Iraq, I wonder what defence Olbermann will use to defend his allies?

    Grim has no point, Cecelia. I've had to remind him that the Kurds were safe before the invasion, that Plame was undercover and other things on other days.
    ====================================================
    No, Cecelia was right.

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Problem is, when you are very interested in holding a particular opinion, you may begin to jettison conflicting data if you are wrong...
    ====================================================
    Hmmm.... like data that Plame was NOT undercover? Like data that maybe, just maybe there are a lot of Iraqis that are VERY glad Saddam is gone? Pot, meet kettle.

    Hey Mike,

    Feel free to explain how hard numbers like the ones I posted last night are talking points from the FOX News Channel, as you charge.

    Here's what I said on this board last night:
    "I personally believe that the country is in great shape. Unemployment at historic lows, productivity the highest of any industrialized country, no attacks on our country in six years, and the stock market setting record after record each day."

    Those are facts, you misogynist pig, not opinion or talking points. Calling me "little Miss Red State" or prefacing posts with "for your little eyes only" shows why you spend your lonely nights on this board instead of with someone.

    If Mr. Cox took down this site down tomorrow, what would you do with yourself (wait, don't answer that).

    Although I do not approve of RedState's presentation (it's called TACT), I do think that's a great appendum to my first general question. In that, why do so many seem blinded to all the good things going for the country? It's like... when a dem is president... suddenly they only see the good things and ignore all the bad...

    EE:

    Debate what?......Whether Bush is right or wrong?.....

    The issue should not be whether you agree or disagree with the specifics of the policy. One can do that in the press....Constitutionally, the executive has the duty to command the armed forces as he/she determines whilst the legislature approves the funds and has, in the past, passed legislation curtailing increased force numbers and duration of intervention.

    So, Senator Hagel and the rest of those opposed to the policy (Debating them is useless because their minds are made up!) should be pursuing what the founders thought of....a check.....ACTION that stops the executive.

    Please stop trying to couch the nonbinding resolution as some great accomplishment....it is not...As General Petraeus stated, it only accomplishes giving comfort to those his troops will be fighting in Iraq.

    The political statement by a certain number Senators will only be used by two groups....

    1 The militant islamists as a positive sign their persistent terrorism has and will erode public support.

    2 The Political Pontius Pilots who are essentially and cynically trying to wash their hands of a NATIONAL policy they are really supporting by funding it and not trying to stop it legislatively (? a word).

    Their behavior is a national shame.

    cee
    "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

    Nazi Germany declared war on the US before we declared war on it. True. Makes a huge difference, doesn't it?

    Posted by: Kurt Kissel at January 25, 2007 1:13 PM

    Some historians may see this as a blunder, waiting for Germany to declare war on the USA.

    Redstate:

    Believe it or not, little Miss snipe, I couldn't care less if this site went away tomorrow, or whether I was banned from it tomorrow.

    If you want to characterize being able to stay at home with my wife of 21 years as having "lonely night", your free to do that, but I doubt if many others would understand your ridiculously convoluted 'point'.

    As for my supposed hatred of women, I'm pretty sure my wife will also take issue with that one.

    You have YET to explain your strange little obsession with me, and why you seem can't communicate with or about me without throwing in some ignorant insult similar to "you misogynist pig", as you just did?

    For anyone else reading this and wondering what this is all about, this is the same intolerate poster who recently ordered me to "leave the country" recently just because she didn't approve of my views.




    Grim,

    All you had was the opinion of a reporter, as far as Plame was concerned. I had the special counsel and the words of other CIA folks; moreover, outing Plame was also outing her cover organization which was responsible for finding loose nukes.

    You can't really spin this your way...so why try?

    All you had was the opinion of a reporter, as far as Plame was concerned. I had the special counsel and the words of other CIA folks; moreover, outing Plame was also outing her cover organization which was responsible for finding loose nukes.

    You can't really spin this your way...so why try?
    =====================================================
    Ok, ignoring for a moment that you're going by the words of the special counsel from a year and a half ago.. please explain to me then WHY Libby is being prosecuted for perjury and NOT violating the IIPA. Please explain.

    "...productivity the highest of any industrialized country..."

    ...yet health care coverage is among the worst.

    So tell me, who is this productivity helping?

    The Executives, that's who.

    Actually, let me rephrase my quesiton to generic. Fitz said that the crime was outsting Plame. So why then is he not PROSECUTING for that specific crime? Explain why the special counsel is going back on his word.

    Must be a rousing marriage since you're on here all the time.

    Mike's wife: "Honey, can we go out to dinner or see a show? We haven't gone out in months."

    Mike: "Quiet, little Miss Mike! I need full concentration when complaining about everything in the world on Olbermann watch. Now go in the kitchen and make me a pie!"

    I asked you to leave the country because you said Islamic extremists are less threatening than the Bush Administration. If you want to stand by that, be my guest.

    Challenger Grim,
    Your just a hater. Olbermann is an intellectual giant without any rivals. He's the greatest man alive! He single handidly won Congress for the Democrats! He's now going to prevent the agression against Iran and their peace loving leader Ahamdinejad. Another great man! Olbermann is good role model for Kids! Stophating and listen to what the Aristotle of our times is saying!

    All the people here who agree with me are absolutely right!

    Challenger Grim,
    Your just a hater. Olbermann is an intellectual giant without any rivals. He's the greatest man alive! He single handidly won Congress for the Democrats! He's now going to prevent the agression against Iran and their peace loving leader Ahamdinejad. Another great man! Olbermann is good role model for Kids! Stophating and listen to what the Aristotle of our times is saying!

    Posted by: Alf at January 25, 2007 2:27 PM


    Hmmmm, Ole Aflie spelled several English words wrong, but spelled the name of Iran's leader correctly. Perhaps (S)he's a member of a sleeper cell. Perhaps (s)he's just a member.

    All the people here who agree with me are absolutely right!
    ====================================================
    Wow, how mature. Look I can do it too:

    "We're all going to die! Not from terrorists but global warming and Bush's policies as our freedoms are stripped away from us. Any who don't see the coming apocolypse are morons."
    -Bob, generic liberal, Shaun, etc

    Grim,

    All you had was the opinion of a reporter, as far as Plame was concerned. I had the special counsel and the words of other CIA folks; moreover, outing Plame was also outing her cover organization which was responsible for finding loose nukes.

    You can't really spin this your way...so why try?

    Posted by: at January 25, 2007 2:10 PM

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

    What spin? The Special Counsel is not prosecuting anyone for blowing Valerie Plame's cover.

    Either he doesn't feel he can prove Plame met the criteria of such a status or he can't prove that anyone premediatedly subverted a covert agent.

    Redstate:

    Actually if your going to quote me, I suggest you use the entire quote, and in it's proper context, and I will stand by it 100%. As I've already told you twice, you can't hold a candle to my patriotism, OR my record of actual service to my country.

    As for your characterizations of my personal life, which you know absolutely NOTHING about, keep right on....I'm sure you sound pretty damned ridiculous to the rest of the folks who post here.

    And finally to address your other ridiculous little 'point', that I'm "on here all time", once again, thats nothing but an outright lie. Sure, I'm on here a lot, but so are many others who are on here every bit as much as I am, and more....and I wouldn't do it if I didn't enjoy it.

    Now once again; Exactly what is this really STRANGE personal little obsession that you have with me? I'm sure that by now, others would like to know that as well.

    Mike,
    Isn't Olbermann the greatest man alive. He's a hero to millions of us oppressed Americans. He's standing up to the evil Bush and his Fascist minions. He risks his life everyday for us!

    Grim,

    My guess, and pretty much everyone else's, is that Fitz doesn't think that Libby is the one who originally leaked the information, and that prosecuting him for lying about his involvement might end in information about who did...

    ""We're all going to die! Not from terrorists but global warming and Bush's policies as our freedoms are stripped away from us. Any who don't see the coming apocolypse are morons."
    -Bob, generic liberal, Shaun, etc" by Challenger Grim

    Oh me too, me too:

    "We are all going to die cuz the big bad terrorists are coming to get us. We want our idiot pwesident to keep us safe from all those brown people. We are all pussies who are afraid of our own shadows. Those defeat-o-crats are gonna be sorry!" - Challenger Grim, Cecelia, QQ, RedState, RedWolf, etc.

    I know I have a "personal obsession" with you Mike, because you manage to argue all sides of an issue at once.

    Too, you also term it "sniping" when you have your words played backed to you after you've contradicted yourself later. You whine about what is essentially this fair tactic, while being the king of jumping in and asking "how come you don't go ape over Bush's iies and failings" when ANY ONE criticise any Democrat, anywhere, especially Keith Olbermann.

    No Alf: Olbermann is simply one of a group of small group of media pundits, who unlike most of the media, is trying to point out that there actually IS another valid side of the issues....a side other than the official line constantly presented to us by the administration and Fox News....and that NOBODY has an exclusive handle on the 'TRUTH".

    As for "risking his life"? No, not really, but on the other hand, so many of you people seem to hate him so much, that....well, maybe he is!

    Grim,

    My guess, and pretty much everyone else's, is that Fitz doesn't think that Libby is the one who originally leaked the information, and that prosecuting him for lying about his involvement might end in information about who did...
    ====================================================
    Wow, how far behind the news are you? It has since been determined that Novak's source was *drum roll* Richard Armitage.

    So please tell me... why isn't Armitage being prosecuted for violating the IIPA.

    As for "risking his life"? No, not really, but on the other hand, so many of you people seem to hate him so much, that....well, maybe he is!
    ====================================================
    Mike, you reminded me a classic quote from King of the Hill:

    "The vandalism on my house can only be described as a hate crime.
    ...
    Somebody hates me."
    -Dale Gribble

    "My guess, and pretty much everyone else's, is that Fitz doesn't think that Libby is the one who originally leaked the information, and that prosecuting him for lying about his involvement might end in information about who did..."


    That you don't know much about the case is evident, but you didn't even read the Washington's Post editorial (NOT op-ed-- the Post's official positioin on the matter). It said:

    "But all those who have opined on this affair ought to take note of the not-so-surprising disclosure that the primary source of the newspaper column in which Ms. Plame's cover as an agent was purportedly blown in 2003 was former deputy secretary of state Richard L. Armitage."


    I'm confused Cecelia....why are you injecting yourself into this (when you really don't know the history of this little dispute), and why are you claiming that you too, have an 'obsession with me, something I haven't claimed at all.

    I'm sorry you think I have been so contradictory to you. All that means is that you don't understand my positions at all.

    And contrary to your claims, I have criticized Olbermann MANY times myself....just look at the archives. But Cecelia, I have news for you; NO ONE is perfect...not me, you, KO, or especially Redstate!

    That sums it up nicely, Cecelia. And I'm sure if Mr. Cox rolled out the numbers, we'd see that Mike posts on here more than anyone else, proving that he's miserable in his reality existance.

    I don't have any obsession with you, Mike. I do, however, loathe people like you that only see the negative side of everything and do nothing to try to solve the problem or at least offer what you see as a solution. Complain, attack, complain is probably a bumper sticker you own.

    Interesting Time poll released today:

    Sen. Hillary Clinton leads fellow Democratic Party Sen. Barack Obama by 19 points in a Time magazine poll of likely presidential candidates in the 2008 race.


    The same poll shows Sen. John McCain edging former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani by a four-point margin among GOP hopefuls.


    Clinton, New York's junior senator, was the choice among 40 percent of the random sampling of 1,064 registered voters who responded to the telephone poll. Obama, in his first term as Illinois junior senator, polled 19 percent for second place, with former North Carolina senator and vice presidential candidate John Edwards placing third with 11 percent.


    Among Republicans, Arizona Sen. McCain holds a narrow 30 percent to 26 percent lead over Giuliani for the GOP nomination. Both men have formed exploratory committees, but neither has officially entered the 2008 race for the White House.


    SO MANY RESOLUTIONS SO LITTLE TIME: McCAIN TO INTRODUCE THIRD IRAQ RESOLUTION

    -- Representative Republic Struggles To Reign In Blundering Chief Executive --

    WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Senator John McCain, R-Arizona, said Wednesday he will introduce his own Senate resolution on Iraq that calls for a series of benchmarks and intensified congressional oversight. McCain's resolution will be the third Senate resolution that deals with the president's call for a troop increase in Iraq. McCain would not speculate to reporters on how many Democrats might support the resolution.


    Mike "And contrary to your claims, I have criticized Olbermann MANY times myself....just look at the archives. But Cecelia, I have news for you; NO ONE is perfect...not me, you, KO, or especially Redstate!"


    Well, who is arguing otherwise. That's just one more example of your brand of speciousness, as is your statement about criticising Olbermann (though you have termed him the lone voice for you position).

    I'm pretty sure when YOU criticise Olbermann you don't then turn around and ask yourself why you aren't criticisng O'Reilly or Fox or Bush for being worse, like you do everyone else.

    See what I mean about your having it all ways.

    If you want to call engaging you over crap like that a "personal obsession", well I have one about you too.

    Cecelia:

    One other point little point about what RedState has been doing is injecting herself into the middle or the end of an argument, and then playing back a few of my words totally out of context.

    It's a lot like in a basketball game when one player takes a cheap shot at another one but doesn't get caught doing it. When the player who was the victim of that heap shot retaliates, HE is the one that gets caught and called for the fowl. That is a good analogy to most of the snipe attacks that Redstate has leveled at me.

    Like when somebody calls me a 'dumbass' in three separate posts, as happened yesterday, I finally call that poster a 'dumbass' back, mostly only in mockery of the insult he made to me....and THEN, and only then is when little Miss Redstate chooses to jump in and and try to tag me for using the word 'dunbass'.

    As for as my "interjecting" myself into a discussion-- this is a public blog board. Anything written here is open for comment from anyone.

    Shaun,
    "We want our idiot pwesident to keep us safe from all those brown people."

    I'm Hispanic who lives in Miami you stupid fool.
    Also Muslims aren't just brown, they can be White or Asian also. Either way it's violent cult that must be dealt with. I can't understand the Radical Left's obsession with defending a regressive culture. Please explain?

    "As for throwing someone under a bus--- can you please give me more details about this.

    What's the matter Ceals,your browser broken and can't find any news web sites?
    I know it's all a mystery to you.

    Karl Rove's criminal exposure in the leak of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson was so extensive that the White House feared it could cost Republicans the presidential election in 2004. So administration officials sacrificed one of their senior cabinet members and set him up to be the fall guy for the leak in order to protect Rove, "the lifeblood of the Republican party" and the White House's senior political adviser.

    That was how defense attorney Theodore Wells characterized the dramatic turn of events inside the White House in the days and months following the Plame leak, and it is the primary reason, he claims, that his client, Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff, was indicted for perjury, obstruction of justice and lying to the FBI about how he discovered Plame was employed by the CIA and whether he shared that information with reporters.

    Wells's two-hour presentation to jurors on the first day of Libby's trial was stunning, to say the least. What had once been thought of as an administration so loyal to one another was nothing more than a facade. Behind the scenes, the most powerful political operatives in the country guarded their personal interests at all costs.

    Still, the intriguing stories of fierce infighting between officials in President Bush's office, Vice President Cheney's office, the CIA, and the State Department over pre-war intelligence, all of which is aimed at confusing the jury, will likely unravel, said Elizabeth de la Vega, a former federal prosecutor and author of the New York Times bestselling book United States v. George W. Bush et al.

    Fitzgerald described in startling detail the lengths to which Libby and other White House officials went in order to attack a single critic of the Iraq war, Plame's husband, former ambassador Joseph Wilson, whose stinging rebukes of the administration's use of pre-war Iraq intelligence enraged Cheney and set in motion a chain of events that led Libby, and many other senior cabinet members, to leak Wilson's wife's identity to some of the most well-known reporters in Washington, DC, in an attempt to silence him.

    I'm sure, Ceals will think everyone is innocent and it's all a liberal media plot !

    Redstate, I think "loathing" Mike DOES count as a personal obsession.

    I'll back off enough to say that I like him over all. And I don't care how much time anyone spends here, that's their business.

    Cecelia:

    YOU used the word "personal obsession" as referenced to me and I was just asking why you did that?

    I don't know what there is to turn around about my position on Olbermann. I LIKE what he is saying and doing....for the most part! While I fully understand that he is biased, just as are those on the right that you mentioned are as well.

    Being 'biased' it not all bad. Hell, we're ALL biased to some degree.

    So, no, I don't see what you mean at all, nor do I really understand why you chose to inject yourself in this really nasty and unfortunate little personal spat that I have tried to end several times. It's just that Redstate won't be satisfied until I quit posting here, another reason to keep on doing it.

    Shaun,
    "We want our idiot pwesident to keep us safe from all those brown people."
    ====================================================
    Ok Shaun, I know this will be a shock for you, but you know what? Not everything is racially motivated! And before you ask, yes I'd be just as ready to fight the enemy if they were white (i.e. NAZIS). Heck what about communists? Don't people of your inclination like to make fun of all the "anti-communist craziness" of the right? Yet last I checked, for a good part of history, most communists were white.

    Bob,

    I"m glad your browser finally found you something to cut and paste. Mind linking it.

    Fitzgerald described in startling detail the lengths to which Libby and other White House officials went in order to attack a single critic of the Iraq war, Plame's husband, former ambassador Joseph Wilson, whose stinging rebukes of the administration's use of pre-war Iraq intelligence enraged Cheney and set in motion a chain of events that led Libby, and many other senior cabinet members, to leak Wilson's wife's identity to some of the most well-known reporters in Washington, DC, in an attempt to silence him.
    ==================================================
    I'm so curious, can someone explain to me how "leaking" Plame's status (which, btw, has been determined to be NOT a secret and well known at the time) was supposed to silence Joe? As the phrase goes "who profits"? And by that I mean also, how do they profit?

    Mike, writes "YOU used the word "personal obsession" as referenced to me and I was just asking why you did that?"

    Because it was a word YOU used to describe someone who called you on stuff.

    The statement you make about Olbermann is just another example of the way you argue both sides. He's biased but there's nothing wrong with being biased. I criticise Olbermann too (for what? being biased?....), but I'm going to slam opponents when they make the same criticisms...

    Something good happening in Iraq just obscures the real story of how terrible it is there. The media rarely report anthing but bad news....

    Frankly Madden's focus of ire is the Democrat leadership in congress, not someone who has also pointed their inconsistencies, war-proponent or not.

    Posted by: Cecelia at January 25, 2007 11:16 AM

    Cecilia continues to live in her red colored dream world.
    Yes Madden wants funds to be cut, but only you can possibly think that his wrath isn't directed at Bush for continuing sending our troops to their deaths and anyone like Cee and yourself who supports this travesty.

    It's obvious that you are incapable of getting inside the mind of an antiwar soldier or citizen.

    Mike,
    Olbermann is the truth. He speaks up and cares for us. He's willing to trade his life to make sure we have freedom. He will forever be ensgrined as a true hero. Keith has brought the evil Bush to his knees. I hope he continues to expose this evil regime and that he keeps defending the innocent peace loving Muslims who like us have become victims!

    I'm so curious, can someone explain to me how "leaking" Plame's status was supposed to silence Joe? As the phrase goes "who profits"?

    --------

    payback to wilson.
    deterrent to other iraq war critics.
    the profit is self-explanatory.

    "Karl Rove's criminal exposure in the leak of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson was so extensive that the White House feared it could cost Republicans the presidential election in 2004. So administration officials sacrificed one of their senior cabinet members and set him up to be the fall guy for the leak in order to protect Rove, "the lifeblood of the Republican party" and the White House's senior political adviser."

    So Wells described a man who was the focus of the Plame thing, and who has not been charged, and who Fitzgerald says he has no plans to charge as having had "criminal exposure" in a case where we now know Rove wasn't even close to being the first guy who talked about Plame?

    Why do I think there's been a bit of poetic license taking with Bob's cut-n-paste?

    payback to wilson.
    deterrent to other iraq war critics.
    the profit is self-explanatory.
    ====================================================
    *sigh* Ok, let me explain this again: HOW does it 'payback' wilson? Keep in mind Plame's agent status was NOT covert at the time, and in fact she was generally known as a CIA employee.

    In that, why do so many seem blinded to all the good things going for the country? It's like... when a dem is president... suddenly they only see the good things and ignore all the bad...

    Posted by: Challenger Grim at January 25, 2007 1:58 PM
    -------------------

    Grim,

    Great point....my favorite example of this was that during the presidencies of Reagan and Bush I, we always heard about the millions of homeless across the country and their dire situation...then from 1992-2000, we never heard much about any homelessness...then after W came into office, all of the sudden we had reports that there was a terrible homelessness problem again...did they all find homes during the Clinton administration that they were promptly kicked out of? There are other examples too, but that one stood out to me

    "Ok Shaun, I know this will be a shock for you, but you know what? Not everything is racially motivated! And before you ask, yes I'd be just as ready to fight the enemy if they were white (i.e. NAZIS). Heck what about communists? Don't people of your inclination like to make fun of all the "anti-communist craziness" of the right? Yet last I checked, for a good part of history, most communists were white." by Grim

    Typical Republican response. Pull out one sentence and dispute it, disregard the overall message. Perhaps I should have stated 'muslim people' as opposed to 'brown people' seeing as how sensitive you all are to that. (It's funny thinking that Republicans are sensitive to ANY race matter unless it relates to their hatred of quotas) My point is that all Republicans are acting like pussies screaming at the top of their lungs that the terrorists are going to come and get us. The simple fact of the matter is that the chances of being a victim of a terrorist attack are roughly equal to being struck by lightning. In the world we live in, yes, it is more of a risk and we are only making it 10X worse with the Iraq debacle your party has gotten us into. Nevertheless, to cower and whine and proceed to want to give up everything our Constitution guarantees every American, is distinctly un-American. Once again, you guys are pussies.

    As Ben Franklin said best: "Any people that would give up liberty for a little temporary safety deserves neither liberty nor safety."

    Shaun,
    There are plent of Hispanics like me that hate Muslims. Funny, like a typical Left wing Anglo you know nothing of Spanish history or Culture.

    And if anyone ever questioned the Grim Challenger's credibility before, he left all doubters convinced with his comments still questioning the existence of global warming.

    I asked this question the other day, but those I directed it to were too shy to answer.I'll try again.
    Now that their hero Bush has finally admitted the existence of global warming ( in an indirect way , of course,)and the need to do something about it(last industrial country to come to its senses)
    will Grammie, Cee, Ceals,Grim have a paradigm shift in their beliefs on the subject ?

    Typical Republican response. Pull out one sentence and dispute it, disregard the overall message.
    ====================================================
    Typical??? You should check out:
    http://www.olbermannwatch.com/archives/2007/01/countdown_with_200.php\
    Toward the bottom you'll see where i posted an old, LONG article. I even prefaced it with:
    "I know this article is a little old, but funny how much of it still applies."
    Then I get the following reply:
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    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?

    Posted by: at January 24, 2007 6:42 PM
    ==================================================
    So Shaun (the pot) go check that out and then get back to me (the kettle).

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    As Ben Franklin said best: "Any people that would give up liberty for a little temporary safety deserves neither liberty nor safety."
    ==================================================
    hmmm.... And yet I think of this whenever I see someone claim that the Iraqis were better off Saddam because it was more 'safe' even though it was less free. Have you not made a claim or something that amounts to: "So what if the Iraqis have freedom now? They're not safe."

    I hope nobody's head explodes from this.

    "Shaun,
    There are plent of Hispanics like me that hate Muslims" by Red Wolf

    I am so glad you guys claim Red Wolf as one of yours. He is so eloquent and speaks such truth. Jesus christ.

    Hey Shaun,
    Come on anser me. what about Hispanics that hate Muslims. Explain that?

    I'm a lilly white overfed liberal and goddam it, when i say i know what's best for the " brown people" , I MEAN IT!

    Why do I think there's been a bit of poetic license taking with Bob's cut-n-paste?

    because you're an idiot?
    and refuse to even believe that the nose on your face exists unless you hear Rush confirm it ?

    Just a guess, though.

    I agree with Bob. Bush looks ridiculous worshiping at the alter of the faux religion called global warming. You can't get the socialists to like you because you pander to their faith Mr. President.

    Bob,

    Link the piece you site and we'll see.

    *sigh* Ok, let me explain this again: HOW does it 'payback' wilson?

    -----------

    *sigh*
    "Plame and Wilson say that, after Wilson accused Bush of twisting intelligence about Iraq's pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, Cheney, Rove and Libby conspired to `discredit, punish and seek revenge against the plaintiffs that included, among other things, disclosing to members of the press Plaintiff Valerie Plame Wilson's classified CIA employment.`"
    *duh*

    "I hope nobody's head explodes from this." by ??

    I have to admit, mine came close. :) Not for the reasons you assume, but because I am not sure how many different posts are contained in this one. I'm assuming this is Grim?

    Cecelia:

    Once again, Redstate doesn't just "call me on stuff". She makes ridiculous personal attacks related to my fictional lifestyle, whether I own my own home, or live with my parents, how lonely I am, and caps it off by accusing me of being an unpatriotic woman hater. Of course, ALL of that is a total lie and is irrelevant to any real issues.

    As far as excusing Olbermann for being biased, and liking him too, you seem to find that contradictory...I don't. I listen and read a lot of news and opinions on both side, and some I consider as unbiased as is reasonably possible to be. There is a time and a place for all of them.

    Olbermann is filling a void that people such as Glenn Beck, and others, are filling on the 'other' side, and there is nothing wrong with that. They all need to be taken with a certain amount of skepticism.

    Bush looks ridiculous worshiping at the alter of the faux religion called global warming.

    --------

    Bush looks ridiculous, period.
    Global Warming deniers have begun recanting because they were informed by legal counsel that they could later be held accountable for the misrepresentation and falsification of discernible scientific facts for their own financial benefit. Just as the tobacco companies were for held accountable for misrepresenting the known scientific facts surrounding the dangers of nicotine.

    payback to wilson.
    deterrent to other iraq war critics.
    the profit is self-explanatory.

    Posted by: at January 25, 2007 3:23 PM

    Too there was the little matter of Joe saying he was sent by Cheney's office when his wife pushed for him to be sent.

    The Senate Subcommittee has documented Wilson's lies. Here's a link to the report:

    http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/library/congress/2004_rpt/iraq-wmd-intell_chapter2-b.htm

    Has Olbermann ever told the truth in the last three years?

    I asked this question the other day, but those I directed it to were too shy to answer.I'll try again.
    Now that their hero Bush has finally admitted the existence of global warming ( in an indirect way , of course,)and the need to do something about it(last industrial country to come to its senses)
    will Grammie, Cee, Ceals,Grim have a paradigm shift in their beliefs on the subject ?
    ====================================================
    I didn't see your comment Bob but no, I still think human-cause GW is still a bunch of crap. Why? because the UN IPCC even SAID SO. Last page of the '94 report:
    "There is no scientific data conclusively proving man is responsible for this warming."

    Oh, and since you love to bring up scientific consensus, how do you reply to the 15,000 scientists that signed a petition refuting the IPCC's claims? Isn't that almost as much as the ones you claim supported it?

    shaun,
    We Hispanics here in Florida don't need help from you Leftists Anglos. We have economic and political power down here without your help. We aren't your little vassals down here and we regularly tell you Northern Leftists go back to NY where your brainwashing of Hispanics into victims has worked. As for the Brown peple color, Hispanics can be White, Brown, Native American, Black or even asian. Once gain you show your typical ignorance. Your the slimey Racists White liberals I used to beat up growing up in NY. I'm glad I left that place. f--- NY! I hope it gets Nuked!

    "As far as excusing Olbermann for being biased, and liking him too, you seem to find that contradictory...I don't. I listen and read a lot of news and opinions on both side, and some I consider as unbiased as is reasonably possible to be. There is a time and a place for all of them."


    What I find contradictory is your saying you find things to criticise Olbermann about, but then illogically asking people why they aren't criticising Bush, or Fox News, when they ALSO find things to criticise Olbermann about.

    I have to admit, mine came close. :) Not for the reasons you assume, but because I am not sure how many different posts are contained in this one. I'm assuming this is Grim?
    ====================================================
    My bad shaun, that was supposed to be me

    It's funny why some of the doubters on global warming or even the causes of it stride lockstep with the far right wing on this issue.
    "Hey, if Rush says it's a hoax, then so be it !"

    Doubters always point to some renegade scientist or some right wing site, totally dismissing the bulk of the scientific community.

    I think this article illuminates why some people still get confused on the issue:


    EXXONMOBIL AND GLOBAL WARMING
    Monday, January 08, 2007 - FreeMarketNews.com

    Are the major oil dealers engaged in a plot to discredit concerns about global warming?

    There's a report from the Union of Concerned Scientists which claims that ExxonMobil has "adopted the tobacco industry's disinformation tactics" in an attempt to, "cloud the scientific understanding of climate change and delay action on the issue." The report states during the period between 1998 and 2005, that global energy corporation funded nearly 50 advocacy organizations, to the tune of almost $16 million, designed to "confuse the public on global warming science."

    Alden Meyer, UCS Director of Strategy & Policy, states, "ExxonMobil has manufactured uncertainty about the human causes of global warming just as tobacco companies denied their product caused lung cancer. A modest but effective investment has allowed the oil giant to fuel doubt about global warming to delay government action - just as Big Tobacco did for over 40 years.

    The RW'ers probably thought the tobacco industry had their best interests at heart too.

    TDF

    Bob,

    We both know you didn't write that synopsis of the Libby trial or you used some source that you quoted copiously....

    Link it please.

    ...disclosing to members of the press Plaintiff Valerie Plame Wilson's classified CIA employment.
    =================================================
    But there's one small problem: Plame's employment was NOT classified at the time.

    "I'm glad I left that place. f--- NY! I hope it gets Nuked!"

    Red Wolf, I thought we discussed this a couple weeks ago. I don't care how much you loathe it, joking about an American city being destroyed by a nuclear blast IS NOT f---ING FUNNY!

    Knock it off!

    Shuan,
    You know nothing of my culture or heritage you scum. I hate when you Lefties claim you speak to Hispanics. Come down to South Florida and see Hispanics who weren't made you vassals!

    OMG!

    Mr/Mrs/Ms ______!

    Please! Put down the Kool Aid and step away from the bottle!

    from Rather-gate to Plame-gate to apparently global-warming-heretic-gate...you seriously need to renew that ADD prescription...

    Global Warming deniers have begun recanting because they were informed by legal counsel that they could later be held accountable for the misrepresentation and falsification of discernible scientific facts for their own financial benefit. Just as the tobacco companies were for held accountable for misrepresenting the known scientific facts surrounding the dangers of nicotine.
    ===================================================
    Riiiiight. Because it's not like global warming hypers have anything to gain from it.
    " Let's jump to the 'Why' of this issue. What's in it for who? As in 'who benefits?' if we all believe global warming is indeed a crisis. Well, when a 'crisis' is announced, just like a state of emergency, all sorts of extra money becomes available. Gobs and gobs of it.

    If the crisis can be sustained, why, then we need to study it. It doesn't take a genius to realize that the flow of money is dependent on the perceived problem getting worse. Heck, Jesse Jackson figured that out years ago. "
    (from: http://rightbias.com/Articles/011707.aspx)
    It's just a rule of thumb among science. You don't get research money to find out that "everything's alright".
    But of course, only deniers are dirty for accepting money right?

    This is rich! Even the Liberal bloggers at HuffingtonPost are tired of Keith. On todays page: It's not that I'm mad at Keith Olbermann, I'm just disappointed.

    I first heard of him when someone sent me a bit torrent of his special comment on the anniversary of September 11th. Before that, I didn't think MSNBC even had shows; I thought it was just a blank screen with pretend stock quotes and Prince lyrics running on the bottom scrawl.

    Besides a kooky detour involving a reference to a Twilight Zone episode, his commentary voiced the pain and anger that I'd only heard around melancholy dinner tables and in disgruntled cafes here in Manhattan. He seemed honest, eager, and real. His indignation was forceful but tempered by the seriousness of the occasion. His anger didn't make him a cartoon character. What I listened to before the State of the Union might as well have ended with "That's All Folks!" rather than Olbermann's preferred sign off, "Good night, and good luck."

    It may well be that people nowadays are so desperate to hear anyone speak in complete sentences, that when someone with intelligence, wit, and the barest whiff of gravitas comes along, we have the self control of a sorority girl offered a plastic bead necklace. (Perhaps this draught of intellectualism explains the Obama love fest.) When someone gets on television who actually does have these qualities, it's not enough to just let them coast along; they must meet their own standards. Keith Olbermann is not meeting his own standards.

    Tuesday night there was a barrage of snarky one-liners that seemed to be winking asides to those in the know. It's those obnoxious asides that turned me off "Studio 60" and I certainly don't want them on 60 Minutes, or any other news program. When he's not playing disappointing cop / mind-numbing cop with Chris Matthews, his program still seems shoddy and increasingly shallow. Is it so much to ask for a quality news program where aggressive, ruthlessly honest reporting doesn't need to be balanced with the inane "zaniness" of segments like, "The Worst Person Ever?" Leading questions and sympathetic talking heads make Countdown come off as sophomoric, while editorializing that should remain in Olbermann's Special Comments segment borders on the cringe-worthy.

    From hawking his book, The Worst Person in the World to ranting while a list of bullet points that frequently can't keep up with him appear on screen, Olbermann is becoming an equal opposite to Bill O'Reilly. Television news will always be nauseating to me, at least while the coverage of the State of the Union is one news anchor asking another anchor what they think before cutting to a talking head who brings in another news anchor from a corporate affiliate.

    (During the Surge speech, I think it was about the time Chris Matthews and Olbermann brought in Tim Russert and Tom Brokaw to all talk about what they all thought Bush would talk about, that I nearly tossed my cookies. I haven't heard that sort of orgiastic spasm of male intellectual masturbation since my sophomore Joyce class.)

    What I like about the show is how much Olbermann clearly cares about what's going on. Even when he sets aside the grandstanding of his special comments, he has a passion for discovering the truth, which all good journalists have. But he's too comfortable. He's begun to coast along, thanks to an all too agreeable audience and iff he doesn't stop pandering, he' going to end up more Howard Beale than Edward R. Murrow. I don't want a "Mad Prophet of the Airwaves." I want newsman.

    (Of course, unless Christian Amanpour starts a nightly news show, because if she does ... Forget Olbermann, I'm going with her.)

    "As Ben Franklin said best: "Any people that would give up liberty for a little temporary safety deserves neither liberty nor safety."
    ==================================================
    hmmm.... And yet I think of this whenever I see someone claim that the Iraqis were better off Saddam because it was more 'safe' even though it was less free. Have you not made a claim or something that amounts to: "So what if the Iraqis have freedom now? They're not safe." by Grim (I assume)

    Your little game of what you think is GOTCHA! uses an extremely flawed analogy. First off, what Franklin said in regards to security and liberty applies to America and American values. Don't make the mistake of thinking every person in the world wants what we want and what we have. It's just not true. Iraq is a different culture and they don't share our values and belief in democracy. Sure, some do, but it's obvious the majority despise us. So, no, Benjamin Franklin's statement does not make sense when applied to Iraq, nor should it. And it doesn't justify the Iraq debacle either. It has only displayed American ignorance and arrogance thinking we could re-shape a part of the world in our image that is thousands of years older than our society. You know, the way Shrub didn't have any idea that there were Sunni & Shia before we invaded. This is the man virtually every Republican has defended (prior to the '06 elections anyway) for the past six years while he has done irrepairable damage to the country and it's image abroad.

    As I said before, you all are going to feel awfully stupid when the truth trickles out during the next 2-10 years. You are all going to feel like sheep: stupid and easily scared. You're going to see that everything that Shrub & Co did wasn't what it was sold as and that he used certain constituencies (evangelicals come to mind) by making empty gestures to them, promising everything and then delivering nothing. You all fell for it, hook, line and sinker. You let them scare you into submission.

    Challenger Grim,
    Global warming is true. Keith Olbermann has said so! Did you see how warm it was this year! Stop denying the truth and see the Al Gore film. Olbermann nvere lies so Global warming is happening!

    Global Warming deniers have begun recanting because they were informed by legal counsel that they could later be held accountable for the misrepresentation and falsification of discernible scientific facts for their own financial benefit. Just as the tobacco companies were for held accountable for misrepresenting the known scientific facts surrounding the dangers of nicotine.
    ==================================================

    Because we're the Global Warming Inquisition...


    LANDMARK UN STUDY BACKS CLIMATE THEORY: HUMAN ACTIVITY CAUSES GLOBAL WARMING

    -- With Rising Seas, Severe Weather, GW Deniers To Have Much Less Sand To Bury Their Heads In --

    PARIS (AFP) -- A political time bomb is set to detonate next week, and the men and women priming the device prefer to wear sensible brown shoes or ties that look like socks -- and they rarely raise their voices above a reasoned murmur. They are members of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the UN`s paramount scientific authority on the causes and effects of global warming. Its third and last report, in 2001, delivered the most emphatic warning yet, saying human activities caused most of the warming of the previous 50 years. In one of his first acts in office, President Bush abandoned the Kyoto Protocol, defending this decision in part by saying he doubted there was a scientific consensus about global warming.


    Grim posts a comment from 1994 about global warming and expects to be taken seriously.
    How funny is that!

    Hint: there has been a small amount of data and research done since then.

    To my dear Ceals:My link of the trial came from Jason Leopold from Truthout.org
    and one of the comments came from Elizabeth de la Vega, a former federal prosecutor and author of the book United States v. George W. Bush et al., as noted.

    Now maybe you can answer if you're having a paradigm shift on global warming.

    "I didn't see your comment Bob but no, I still think human-cause GW is still a bunch of crap. Why? because the UN IPCC even SAID SO. Last page of the '94 report:
    "There is no scientific data conclusively proving man is responsible for this warming." by Grim

    I can't believe that you would cite a 1994 report as basis for not believing in GW. That is truly ignorant. So many comprehensive studies have been done since then. This is another example of how stupid you people have been. Just told what to believe by your leaders. You believe it as long as they show you some "facts" provided by ANTI-GW think tanks. I can show you "facts" that Hitler provided to his people about the Jews before they fired the gas chambers up too.

    You'll find out soon enough that the reason GW was dismissed is because the Shrub admin. is ONLY worried about keeping big corporate donors happy, that's it! Whether they believe (they do) in GW or not is irrelevant to them. They are just disgustingly greedy and completely without any morals.

    The UN? LOL..the folks who brought you Rwanda now bring you the gospel of global warming. Spare us. What facts are there on global warming and please don't site Algore's laughable home movie.

    Posted by: Shaun at January 25, 2007 3:52 PM
    ----

    OK...America/American Values

    FDR/Japanese-Americans/Manzanar/WWII
    (bbbbbbbbut FDR was a democrat)

    Because we're the Global Warming Inquisition...

    "Oh I didn't expect the global warming inquisition."

    The UN? LOL..the folks who brought you Rwanda now bring you the gospel of global warming. Spare us. What facts are there on global warming and please don't site Algore's laughable home movie.

    ---------

    don't like the UN?
    no problem.
    just type "Global Warming" into your browser.

    the severe weather extremes
    the world has been experiencing of late,
    five feet of snow in Denver in as many weeks,
    72 degrees and sunny in NYC for new year's,
    glaciers melting,
    heat waves where it's normally cool and wet,
    cold and snowy where it's normally hot and dry,
    (snow in Malibu the other week, same thing in FLA)
    it would be difficult to deny that SOMETHING is going on
    (except for a ditto head, of course)

    if you want to argue that's it au natural,
    and not caused by human activity,
    then fine,
    argue that all you want.
    but if you don't think the planet is changing,
    what with all the data
    and empirical evidence before your very eyes of late,
    then there is little hope for you.
    go ahead and be a blithering idiot.
    nobody cares.

    Grim,

    I think we're going to have to wait and see if Bob takes a lawyer's defense as seriously when Wells talks about the Wilsons. :D

    Since the early '80s, scientists have been predicting that global temperatures would rise substantially, and they've done so. According to NASA, the six warmest years on record have been, in order, 1998, 2002, 2003, 2004,2005 and 2006.

    Scientists have also been predicting that climate change would lead to storms that were both more powerful and more numerous, and as the folks on the Florida Coast can attest, that has happened as well. Here in Georgia, they've predicted more precipitation extremes, with long dry spells alternating with periods of intense rainfall and flooding, and that's what seems to be happening.

    Of course, none of that proves for a fact that the scientists are right. It's certainly possible for all those things to be occurring for natural reasons.

    But when somebody tells you that he can flip a quarter and make it come up heads 10 times in a row, and then proceeds to do so, you have a choice. You can dismiss it as just luck, because that's one possible explanation. It is, after all, mathematically possible to get 10 heads in a row.

    But personally, I'd think that guy was onto something. And I sure wouldn't want to bet the well-being of my children and grandchildren that he wasn't.

    Grim obviously doesn't care about his children and grandchildren. Rush Limbaugh will protect them.

    Five feet of snow in Denver in January is extreme! I'm convinced, we're doomed.

    The world is getting warmer. In fact we're going to die! If we stop this war against peace loving Muslims, global warming will stop!

    Ceals too shy to discuss global warming, or have you recanted your embarrassing posts from 6 months ago on the topic?

    "But when somebody tells you that he can flip a quarter and make it come up heads 10 times in a row, and then proceeds to do so, you have a choice. You can dismiss it as just luck, because that's one possible explanation. It is, after all, mathematically possible to get 10 heads in a row.

    But personally, I'd think that guy was onto something. And I sure wouldn't want to bet the well-being of my children and grandchildren that he wasn't." by georgia peach

    Very well put.

    Shaun, Bob, etc, let me put it another way. We were warned about global warming BEFORE, back in the 1950s. Oh, then it was global cooling AGAIN (after it had been reported in 1920) and now it's warming again. These people have a hard enough time predicting the weather for next WEEK and I'm supposed to believe all this global warming stuff? Hey check out what the UN said LAST MONTH:
    "It also says that the overall human effect on global warming since the industrial revolution is less than had been thought, due to the unexpected levels of cooling caused by aerosol sprays, which reflect heat from the sun."
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/12/10/nclimate10.xml

    Wow, wonder how many corrections will be out tomorrow (with the 'tomorrow' being the metaphorical meaning).

    Now maybe you can answer if you're having a paradigm shift on global warming.

    Posted by: Bob at January 25, 2007 3:58 PM

    -----------

    No...because by global warming you really mean man induced global warming and while the UN may have come out with another study proffering the evils of America/capitalistic societies, that doesn't mean they are to be believed as to what will happen as they STILL cannot match up their computer models to come up with today's conditions, much less divine tomorrow's (see claim that 2006 will be the worst ever hurricane season)

    Also, one of the most interesting points in all this is that if someone comes out with a viewpoint that goes against the GloboWarmingOlogy religion, they are decried as a heretic. Their scientific study is discounted saying that they got their money from a bad company or are trying to get money from a bad company...however, the actual points of a study that contradicts gloal warming tend to not get addressed at all...why is that?

    It's funny how the same people at this site who told us for years that the Iraq war has been a success are the same people who make jokes about global warming.

    Being totally wrong never stops them from continuing to be wrong.

    Okay, as suggested I typed in under religion in Google the words "global warming". This is what came back, amazing.

    Daily Policy Digest: MARS IS WARMING

    National Center for Policy Analysis ^ | January 10, 2006 | National Center for Policy Analysis

    Patrick sounds like one major moron.Glad he continues to post to prove it.

    Because we're the Global Warming Inquisition...


    "Oh I didn't expect the global warming inquisition."

    Posted by: Challenger Grim at January 25, 2007 4:05 PM

    ----
    NOBODY EXPECTS THE GLOBAL WARMING INQUISITION!

    cold and snowy where it's normally hot and dry,
    ==================================================
    So global WARMING can cause cold weather...

    "Gee Mr. Wizard, is there anything global warming CAN'T do?"


    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Scientists have also been predicting that climate change would lead to storms that were both more powerful and more numerous, and as the folks on the Florida Coast can attest, that has happened as well.
    ==================================================
    Hey Bob, like last year? oh wait... nothing happened last year. In fact, the hurricane season UNDERperformed last year. So as you put it about the man flipping the quarter, apparently if he says he can do it 10 times in a row, but the sixth times comes up tails (all the other 9 times are heads) what does that prove?

    "Being totally wrong never stops them from continuing to be wrong."

    Ask Bill Kristol, Rush LimpBalls, FauxNews, etc. Being wrong has only improved their standing with these people. It's truly amazing.

    NOBODY EXPECTS THE GLOBAL WARMING INQUISITION!
    ===================================================

    Nooooo!!!! Please don't put me in... THE COMFY CHAIR!

    "Now maybe you can answer if you're having a paradigm shift on global warming."

    Well, that's for noting the synopsis came from a leftwing site.

    As for global warming, no, afraid not. I've always believed that global warming is a natural and not man-made phenomenon. So there's not much paradigm for me to shift...

    However, I have NEVER thought or espoused the notion that it is undebatable and therefore the tantamount to saying that the earth is square if one does not accept it--- your 1600 scientists nonwithstanding....and I've argued vehemently against those who arrogantly say this.

    I think that this stand is what you interpret as a wholesell rejection of global warming. But frankly, I don't think you much care about global warming either, Chucks. You merely like to grasp at the next thing you can find to fuel anger at those who don't think as you, going from tract to tract within minutes and within the same thread.

    I think they're also the same people that predicted a GOP victory in Nov.

    Ensign Expendable,
    Try growing up Spanish in NY and you'll understand my anger. You grew up in a happy happy white suburb. You don't know the pain of being insulted because of your ethicity. So I say again I hope NY gets Nuked!

    "cold and snowy where it's normally hot and dry,
    ==================================================
    So global WARMING can cause cold weather..." by Grim

    This proves that you have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to global warming. As has been said many times, GW makes all weather extreme, may it be cold or hot weather. Droughts become drier, storms become stronger, etc. Do some reading, then come back and see us.

    "So global WARMING can cause cold weather...

    "Gee Mr. Wizard, is there anything global warming CAN'T do?""

    I turn your attention here:
    http://news.com.com/Global+warming+to+bring+heavier+rains,+snow/2100-11395_3-5895784.html

    "Rising temperatures in the world's atmosphere and oceans will lead to more intense storms as the century progresses, according to a new report from the National Center for Atmospheric Research.

    Evaporation increases when the surface temperature of the ocean rises and warmer air can hold more moisture. When this soggier-than-normal air moves over land, it results in storms wetter and more intense than those experienced in the past.

    The greatest changes will occur over land in the tropics, according to the study, which was released Thursday. Heavier rain or snow, however, will also fall in northwestern and northeastern North America, northern Europe, northern and eastern Asia, southwestern Australia, and parts of South America during the current century....

    The Mediterranean and the southwestern U.S., meanwhile, will experience a different pattern. Storms will likely become wetter, particularly in the fall and winter, but dry spells may stretch for longer in the warmer months. A picture of how this pattern might develop was seen in Europe this year: While Germany endured unprecedented floods, Spain and Portugal imposed water rationing because of a lengthy drought."

    What is really sad about this latest leftist "religion" is how they are trying to use global warming to do what socialism/communism failed to do, enslave people.

    your 1600 scientists nonwithstanding
    ============================================
    It was 1600 Cecelia? I wonder how he deals then with the 15,000 (yeah, that's almost ten times as many) scientists that disagreed.

    Alf is my Leftwing alias! ha ha!

    Ceals too shy to discuss global warming, or have you recanted your embarrassing posts from 6 months ago on the topic?

    Posted by: Bob at January 25, 2007 4:11 PM

    By all means, Bob. Show me the post where I said there is no such thing a global warming instead of saying that evidence of global warminng is not inarguable that it makes those who don't believe it, the same as saying the earth is flat, as you're insults indicated.

    Okay, as suggested I typed in under religion in Google the words "global warming". This is what came back, amazing.

    Daily Policy Digest: MARS IS WARMING

    National Center for Policy Analysis ^ | January 10, 2006 | National Center for Policy Analysis


    Posted by: Patrick1 at January 25, 2007 4:14 PM

    Patrick sounds like one major moron.Glad he continues to post to prove it.

    Posted by: at January 25, 2007 4:15 PM

    ------

    Actually, Patrick1 is correct.

    Studies have shown that Mars is warming based on the shrinking of the polar caps...check it out if you do not beilieve it.

    But I am sure Bob will blame it on man continually landing items on the Martian surface (like the rover) causing pollution and greenhouse gases to melt the poles!

    Bob says:

    "To my dear Ceals:My link of the trial came from Jason Leopold from Truthout.org"

    Oh, that Jason Leopold? You mean the guy that was the subject of this May 6 write-up by Howie Kurtz of the ultra right wing WaPo:

    I reported yesterday (and if you missed it, start paying attention!) that the liberal Web site Truthout.org was standing by its claim that Karl Rove had been secretly indicted in the CIA leak case, despite strong denials by the White House aide's lawyer and spokesman.
    Why the Rove team would lie about information that, if true, was certain to come out soon was never quite clear. More than three dozen mainstream journalists checked on the Truthout report but could not confirm a word of it.
    Now Truthout has backed off, at least partially, from the story by reporter Jason Leopold, who has had some credibility problems in the past (as he acknowledges in a new book) but has also worked for such news outlets as the L.A. Times and Dow Jones.
    Marc Ash , the site's founder, writes:
    "On Saturday afternoon, May 13, 2006, TruthOut ran a story titled, 'Karl Rove Indicted on Charges of Perjury, Lying to Investigators.' The story stated in part that top Bush aide Karl Rove had earlier that day been indicted on the charges set forth in the story's title.
    "The time has now come, however, to issue a partial apology to our readership for this story. While we paid very careful attention to the sourcing on this story, we erred in getting too far out in front of the news-cycle. In moving as quickly as we did, we caused more confusion than clarity. And that was a disservice to our readership and we regret it."
    Um, what exactly does that mean? That the story was wrong? That they're not sure whether it was wrong? That it was right but published too soon?
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2006/05/23/BL2006052300414_pf.html

    Of course, we now know not a word of this was true, but truthout never issued a full apology. So, we once again have half baked sources w/ zero credibility from Professor Bob. Tell me Bob, do any of your students submit research papers citing truthout as one of their sources, and if they do, do they get bonus points for doing that? Ha, Ha, you fraud.

    P.S. "Nonpartisans" Olbermann and Slippery Schuster hyped this story for days, even while it was falling apart. Another example of Olbermann of why Meltdown gets such low ratings.

    I'm pretty sure everyone has figured out that Alf is actually Red Wolf.

    "Try growing up Spanish in NY and you'll understand my anger. You grew up in a happy happy white suburb. You don't know the pain of being insulted because of your ethicity. So I say again I hope NY gets Nuked!

    Posted by: Alf at January 25, 2007 4:19 PM"

    AHA! Red Wolf, you little punk...should've known it was you posting. Now CRAM IT - you don't know a DAMN thing about where I grew up or what my life was like. And I don't care how bad you had it - NOTHING justifies what you said.

    "Posted by: at January 25, 2007 4:24 PM"

    That was me.

    Patrick1 argument is like saying I have a rock that protects me from tigers. I know this because a tiger has never attacked me. Scientists also predicted a new ice age until the late 70's. Scientists also predicted last year would be the worst hurricane season yet. Man made CO2 has little to no effect on global climate change. The earth’s position around the sun and water vapor has a much greater impact on the earth's climate. Many "Scientists" use an idea that the earth is warming and try to predict it with a flawed computer model and flawed data. Just because many scientists believe that there is some form of global warming does not make it fact. Many scientists believed the earth was flat and that the planet and the sun revolved around the earth. Socialist promote the theroy of global warming because it promtes goverment regulation.

    This proves that you have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to global warming. As has been said many times, GW makes all weather extreme, may it be cold or hot weather. Droughts become drier, storms become stronger, etc. Do some reading, then come back and see us.
    ===================================================
    Once again Shaun, you missed my point. So apparently you're saying that global warming can actually cause ANYTHING.

    Know what that would be called? An unfalsifiable hypothesis. So now instead of "god in the gaps" we have "global warming in the gaps". I'm more disheartened that apparently so few even think about this a moment. But then again, just like religion, they hate for the dogma to be questioned. Tell me something, if the entire globe started to get cooler, would that also be due to global warming????

    Oh and EE (good to see you BTW), what does your paste about greater rains etc have to do with cooling?

    Thanks , Ceals, for embarrassing yourself again saying global warming isn't man made.

    So the billions of tons of co2 that man spews into our atmosphere has nothing to do with changing our climate.
    Got ya !

    You are consistent.

    Consistently wrong and you'll never let facts or reason change your mind.

    Just remember people like Grim, Hank, and your other good buddies have always claimed the Iraq War is also going swimmingly.

    Oh, and EE, I have to agree with you on RW. Wolf, that was TOTALLY uncalled for.

    This proves that you have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to global warming. As has been said many times, GW makes all weather extreme, may it be cold or hot weather. Droughts become drier, storms become stronger, etc. Do some reading, then come back and see us.

    Posted by: Shaun at January 25, 2007 4:21 PM

    ------
    YEAH GRIM!

    Didn't you see about 5-7 years ago when the global warming people couldn't explain the other extreme weather phenomena, the retreated into themselves and cam back out with Global CLIMATE Change Theory of Global Warming....Thus, ANY natural dissaster can now be explained by global warming!

    YES ITS THE COMFY CHAIR
    -signed those of at The Global Warming Inquisition!

    PS: So Long, and thanks for all the fish

    Whether their deluded, self-serving, and moronic denials are about global warming, Iraq, torture, the Constitution, or Terri Schiavo's shriveled brain ... it's nice to see that a national trend is developing ... whereby clear-thinkers are finally calling the Irrational Right Reality Deniers exactly what they are: DELUSIONAL. dangerously delusional. most folks are finally starting to figure it out. i.e., the midterms. bushy's disapproval rating. disapproval of the war. etc, etc, etc.


    Durbin calls Cheney comments "delusional"

    WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin, D-Illinois, Thursday sharply rebuked Vice President Dick Cheney's claim of several accomplishments in Iraq, calling comments he made to CNN the day before "delusional." "To have Vice President Cheney suggest that we have had a series of enormous success in Iraq is delusional," Durbin told reporters. "I don't understand how he can continue to say those things when the president calls them a slow failure."

    Like any man made religion it must be shown to be all powerful. So GW must make everyhing cold in the winter, everything warm in the summer, hurricanes and droughts on and on. No facts can get in the way of this gospel.

    By the way, what day did Algore land on Mars?

    Oh, and Ceals, let me know when it's permissible to change topics.

    That seems to really annoy you.

    Funny.

    So the billions of tons of co2 that man spews into our atmosphere has nothing to do with changing our climate.
    Got ya !
    ====================================================
    Compare to..... HOW much is produced naturally? Go ahead Bob, tell me what the numbers are for CO2 that is produced naturally if not a car existed.

    It's Dick Turbin.

    is this patrick character actually serious?

    Ignorance seems to be his forte.

    PS: So Long, and thanks for all the fish
    =================================================
    oooo..... you can't out geek me man! (though you're welcome to try ;-)

    Oh, and I've now done 6 impossible things before noon, so you know where I'll meet you.

    is this patrick character actually serious?
    =================================================
    What do you mean? His claim that GW is now 'all powerful' is backed up by Shaun at 4:21 PM. Go see what he posted.

    Of course I didn't say that Herr Olbermann.

    Ensign Expendable,
    Listen you little bitch cracker, I was aLatin King you pussy. I used to go after corny Libs like you. You ain't seen what I've seen. Mommy and Daddy fed you with a silver spoon! I had to get mine and I did. I learned your either predator or prey. I'd rather be a predator, than a prey like you. You're just a cornball that grew up in the rich lilly white sticks. I've seen things that would make you shit!
    As for the nuke NY comment. It would be the best thing that happened to this country. It would wake us up to the Islamic threat and it would cripple the Leftists media and leadership, besides taking out a few anti-Hispanic a--holes!
    When it happens America will be unleashed, the Left discredited and Islam will suffer!

    "I'd rather be a predator, than a prey like you." by RedWolf

    HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!

    That's why you're a Republican huh? Cowering in the corner scared of the 'terrorists'! Take my liberty please, just keep me safe!

    HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!

    "Oh and EE (good to see you BTW), what does your paste about greater rains etc have to do with cooling?"

    That the warming may be minimal in terms of what we feel (55 degrees feels about the same as 50), but that warming increases the amount of moisture in the air, which creats heavier and stronger storms (such as the massive ice storm that paralyzed most of the country a couple weeks ago, or the massive floods that hit parts of Pennsylvania and New Jersey last year).

    Olbermann just by opening his mouth cause glaobal warming!

    That's why you're a Republican huh? Cowering in the corner scared of the 'terrorists'! Take my liberty please, just keep me safe!
    ===================================================
    Oh, something I meant to answer earlier Shaun. I practice my 2nd amendment rights VERY often. (and I don't just limit myself to guns) So I'm actually not very scared of terrorists. Heck if every single one of them want to come to my house and take me out, they are so very welcomed to try.

    I'm just concerned that they'll take out an American brother like you who is (maybe) not armed. Unlike RW, I don't want to see NY nuked. I think even 1 american life lost to a terrorist is too much.

    Hey EE, I get what your point is. But increased moisture in the air doesn't always equal cooling. There's a big difference between rain and snow and that difference is temperature.

    Shaun,
    You stupid andlo Commie, I'm not a Republican. They're a bunch of racists jerks like the Democrats. Screw them too. I don't vote. Both parties are are too scared to deal with the Islamic threat.
    Hey what freedoms have been taken away? I still have the same freedoms I had before Bush. So stop with your little Pro-Islamic Marxist propaganda.
    Name me the freedoms that have been taken away?

    "Hispanics can be White, Brown, Native American, Black or even asian."

    Posted by: inbRed Wolf at January 25, 2007 4:22 PM


    ...And that's why I come to Olbermannwatch. The cutting edge news stories that don't appear anywhere else.

    The freedom to fly a jetliner into a skyscraper.

    "Oh, something I meant to answer earlier Shaun. I practice my 2nd amendment rights VERY often. (and I don't just limit myself to guns) So I'm actually not very scared of terrorists. Heck if every single one of them want to come to my house and take me out, they are so very welcomed to try." by Grim

    Ahhh, the second amendment.. Now there's a discussion for another time...

    But as your Supreme Leader tells you, these terrorists are ruthless and they want to kill your family. They want to get a hold of "nukular" bombs (or whatever other scary weapon Shrub & Co can think of to scare you further into submission) and blow us up. How are your second amendment rights going to help you then?

    "Hispanics can be White, Brown, Native American, Black or even asian."

    Posted by: inbRed Wolf at January 25, 2007 4:22 PM


    And why didn't you capitalize Asian inbRed Wolf? Too many SE Asian Muslims for your liking?

    Bob wites "Got ya !

    You are consistent."


    Bob, the day I have to declare myself the winner of every debate and to say things like "got ya!", and cut-n-paste something without attribution, I'll take you seriously. Until then, you're such a putz, Chucks.

    Shaun,
    The Iranians and al-Qaeda are peace loving souls.
    They're just misuderstood.

    "There's a big difference between rain and snow and that difference is temperature."

    Yes, I know. But the EFFECT of warming is more dramatic on bodies of water than on ordinary land. A five degree rise in teperature on land is not dramatic. A five degree increase in water temperature, however, can result in massive shifts in meterological patterns.

    Just because it snows in Denver or no hurricanes hit the U.S. in 2006 doesn't DENY the existence of global warming - just as it snowing ONCE in southern Texas doesn't PROVE it. You have to look at worldwide precipitation and temperature effects to see a pattern.

    "I can't believe that you would cite a 1994 report as basis for not believing in GW. That is truly ignorant."

    1994 was a long time ago and scientists are much smarter now. We have better computers models now. Suppose quoting Einstein is also truly ignorant.

    "Just because it snows in Denver or no hurricanes hit the U.S. in 2006 doesn't DENY the existence of global warming - just as it snowing ONCE in southern Texas doesn't PROVE it. You have to look at worldwide precipitation and temperature effects to see a pattern." by EE

    You are making entirely too much sense for these people.

    Ahhh, the second amendment.. Now there's a discussion for another time...

    But as your Supreme Leader tells you, these terrorists are ruthless and they want to kill your family. They want to get a hold of "nukular" bombs (or whatever other scary weapon Shrub & Co can think of to scare you further into submission) and blow us up. How are your second amendment rights going to help you then?
    ====================================================
    Ok, 2 things to both you and Kurt. First of all, nukes have to be delivered somewhere to have an effect. Which means unless terrorists get ICBM tech, it's still just going to be a guy walking the streets. Chance to take him out. Same with car bombs (http://www.iava.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1946&Itemid=159).

    Besides that I have to know: What exactly is your suggestion for defense? I love how liberals always like to critisize "self-defense measures" but they never like to offer a better idea.

    The NeoCommunist's Burden,
    Your just an ignoramous. There aren't any SE Asian Hispanics you jerk. By Asians I meant Japanese, Chinese and Koreans that live in Hispanic countries. But your a typical ignorant Leftard!

    Nuke Iran, that'll solve the terrorist issue.

    Just because it snows in Denver or no hurricanes hit the U.S. in 2006 doesn't DENY the existence of global warming - just as it snowing ONCE in southern Texas doesn't PROVE it. You have to look at worldwide precipitation and temperature effects to see a pattern.
    ===================================================
    EE, that's not the issue. The issue was that it was PREDICTED that was going to be worldWIDE records of hurricanes in 2006 and the reality was at least HALF in every way of the prediction. I have no doubt the world is warming, because the thermometer goes only in two directions... so if it was going down in the 70s, at some point it has to go up. What I take issue with is 1) it's all our fault as civilized humans and 2) that it's going to be the doom of us all. Here's a thought: how exactly will global cooling improve our lot? Won't that cause world-wide faminie? (that's what we were warned about then)

    Terrorists don't scare me. Liberal men who wear thong underware in front of children scares me. Yikes! HAR! Hey shaun, if the thong fits.. HAR!

    Name me the freedoms that have been taken away?

    ----------

    The right not to have your mail read without a warrant.
    The right not to have your phone tapped without a warrant (recently restored).
    The right not to be tortured by a Geneva Convention signatory.

    Grim is right...

    it's not like youe your going to maintain the planet on a status quo...everything changes

    "Terrorists don't scare me. Liberal men who wear thong underware in front of children scares me. Yikes! HAR! Hey shaun, if the thong fits.. HAR!" by QQ.

    You mean, like Mark Foley? He was quite the liberal wasn't he?

    Name me the freedoms that have been taken away?

    ----------

    The right not to have your mail read without a warrant.
    The right not to have your phone tapped without a warrant (recently restored).
    The right not to be tortured by a Geneva Convention signatory.

    Posted by: at January 25, 2007 5:09 PM

    ------
    oh, so you have been declared a terroist threat

    All those rights still exist.

    The right not to be tortured by a Geneva Convention signatory.
    ===================================================
    Just for clarification: that only applied if you were not a citizen. Besides, should it also be pointed out that the terrorists are not exactly signatories of the Geneva Convention at ALL?

    You are such an idiot, Grim, it is too tiresome to waste time explaining elementary concepts to you.

    Oh, and I just had to post a GREAT quote by Alexis de Tocqueville:
    "“It must not be forgotten that it is especially dangerous to enslave men in the minor details of life. For my own part, I should be inclined to think freedom less necessary in great things than in little ones. ...
    Subjection in minor affairs breaks out every day and is felt by the whole community indiscriminately. It does not drive men to resistance, but it crosses them at every turn, till they are led to surrender the exercise of their own will."

    As Jonah (http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YzgzNDY3ZTg0YTc1OTAyZjdjNTkyODY2YTY2ODE0YTk=) put it:
    "Free speech is most restricted where it is most important — in political contests near Election Day — while it is maximized to an absurd level at the fringes of culture and decency. Banning “hate speech” from everybody’s lips is a progressive priority, but electronic eavesdropping on a few terrorists is an impermissible leap down the slippery slope to the police state."

    Dems are in power and we are bogged down in non-binding resolutions. Grow some balls, goddamit.

    You are such an idiot, Grim, it is too tiresome to waste time explaining elementary concepts to you.
    ===================================================
    I'm sorry I can't make the insane leaps of logic required nowadays by most and must instead subscribe to the old-fashioned method of reasoning and proof.

    John Ashcroft, another NEO-Scum with no morals, took away my favorite right. The right to download kiddie porn. I'm pissed.

    "I'm sorry I can't make the insane leaps of logic required nowadays by most and must instead subscribe to the old-fashioned method of reasoning and proof." by Grim

    As long as that 'proof'(like a 1994 global warming report) supports your view.

    As long as that 'proof'(like a 1994 global warming report) supports your view.
    ===================================================
    Shaun, did you even see my post about what the UN said LAST MONTH? Go find it, I'll wait. (maybe you should stop living in the past too)

    Whenever I visit this lovely blog, I usually run into someone - a "leftist," if you will - who finds pleasure in things that make our country or the President look bad. I suppose I could say these angry types are no better than cheerleaders for terrorism. After all, both entities - the left and terrorists - seem to share the same desire: to put the US, humiliatingly, in its place.


    But I would be wrong to say such things. Very wrong. Of course, "dissent is patriotic," and the left is only critical of America because it simply loves our country much more than I do.

    That's why calling them terrorists would be intolerant and pretty shameful.

    But what about "patriotic terrorists?"

    That's kinda neat.

    What is a patriotic terrorist?

    It is an American who claims to love his or her country while enjoying the enemy's success against said country. It is a person who gets deeply offended if you question their patriotism, while also appearing to share the same ideals of the more spirited folk who like to blow up innocent people.

    Patriotic terrorists love America with so much intensity that it appears to the untrained eye that they hate it. But it's actually the most powerful form of "tough love" known to man, woman and Rosie O'Donnell. Patriotic terrorists love America so much that they realize it needs an intervention - and real terror is the only way to enable that intervention. In fact, to keep a mammoth, arrogant superpower like America in check, terrorism is the only thing we've got. Noam Chomsky knew this from the start, making him a patriotic terrorist of the highest order.

    This is why he gets the chicks.

    Hey, I bet you've probably wondered why Al Qaeda hasn't struck in the US since 9/11. They don't have to. It has its own offshoot franchise here at work already. Patriotic Terrorists.

    Think about how much both groups have in common!

    -Both patriotic terrorists and Al Qaeda want the US to abandon Iraq, for that reveals Bush and America to be monstrous, laughable failures. It does not matter to either group that the withdrawal from Iraq will make post-Vietnam look like an afternoon at Ikea shopping for a Hoggbo innerspring mattress.

    -For patriotic terrorists and real terrorists, car bombs going off is music to their ears. It proves that you can't offer democracy to troubled countries, as long as you've got terrorists standing in your way. And that's great news for everyone who believes in checks and balances between the haves and the have nots! (Note: "haves" means the US. "Have nots" means those who hate the US)

    -Patriotic terrorists and the more committed terrorists both believe that infractions at Guantanamo Bay are far worse than anything a genocidal dictator could muster, and such horrors possess far more PR potential in denigrating the US than anything involving Ed Begley Jr.

    -Both patriotic terrorists and Al Qaeda terrorists believe the US desires to control the Middle East, empower evil Israel and expand it's power base at the expense of innocent Arab lives. But both groups also realize that the US is too stupid to achieve these goals - and that makes being a patriotic terrorist loads of fun!

    Are you a patriotic terrorist?

    If you are intensely critical of the US, while tolerating homicidal enemies who condemn everything you previously claimed you are for - human rights, voting rights, gay rights, women's rights, porn - then you're a patriotic terrorist.

    If you talk about tolerance constantly - and hilariously tolerate genocide and suicide bombers because those actions undermine your more intimate opposition, the American right - then you're a patriotic terrorist.

    The only difference between a patriotic terrorist and a real one? Real terrorists are simply patriotic terrorists who've taken the extra step - choosing to actually die for their beliefs - rather than simply talking about them at Spago. If Tim Robbins, Sean Penn, Michael Moore, and their ilk had real cojones, they'd all be wearing cute black vests - but stuffed with more than dog-eared copies of Deterring Democracy.

    Thanks Greg

    Trying to say there is no debate on GW is completely disingenuous. There are still plenty of climate scientist that are skeptical like Robert Livezey chief of the Climate Services Division, Office of Climate, Water and Weather Services for the National Weather Service:


    A leading climate-change researcher expressed doubt that growing public fears over the link between extreme weather events and global warming have any basis in science.

    Robert Livezey, chief of the Climate Services Division, Office of Climate, Water and Weather Services for the National Weather Service, spoke Wednesday at the 14th annual Operation Sierra Storm meteorological conference in Mammoth Lakes. He voiced concern that the ramifications of global warming on the numbers and severity of hurricanes, tornadoes, heat waves, damaging winds, floods and droughts had been exaggerated beyond their proven bounds.

    There are "no convincing links" between trends in greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere and trends in severe weather events, according to the scientist.

    He went on to dispel many current myths about the presently understood effects of global warming.

    Livezey said that, although there has been a recent shift toward more hurricane activity in the past decade, similar shifts are not unprecedented in human history.

    Widespread fears about drought in the southwestern U.S. from atmospheric warming come at a time when the area has actually experienced a trend of higher average precipitation rates in recent years, according to Livezey.

    North America has an overall trend of higher numbers of heavy precipitation events, but this tendency has not created significant increases in catastrophic flooding, in Livezey's estimation.

    He also said that there is "No detectable trend in heat waves, yet" due to global warming, although the average global temperature is undoubtedly on the rise.

    Livezey said the only effect of climate change that is completely certain is a rise in sea level, but even the rate of this rise is still under debate.

    "There are uncertainties about how climate will change, but it will change," Livezey said.

    "Here's a thought: how exactly will global cooling improve our lot?"

    It won't - the best solution is to find a way to keep the global temperature constant (or at least prevent it from rising too much).

    I'm not in the "it's all our fault" camp, but I think human activity has EXACERBATED the situation.

    By Greg Gutfield

    Oh where to start, where to start....

    First off, thank goodness this shit stopped working effective November 7, 2006.

    Equating people who ACTUALLY love this country (that would be the left/Democrats) with the 'terrorists' is a tried and true method of smearing us. Guess what? It doesn't work anymore.

    You bring up all the usual left boogeymen, Michael Moore, Sean Penn, Tim Robbins, everyone that Hannity and Limbaugh have programmed you into hating. Those people get under your leader's skin because they have taken action to expose what the far right of this country is: greedy, America-hating pussies. Using fear to wield the country into submission worked for a while too.

    You people couldn't think for yourselves if your life depended on it. Your continued attempts to use the arguments (in one form or another)that worked in '02 & '04 are laughable. You'd think that you guys would be embarrassed by these things, but you don't have that much sense.

    Keep deluding yourselves PLEASE! It will make sure that the grownups stay in charge for the next few generations.

    It won't - the best solution is to find a way to keep the global temperature constant (or at least prevent it from rising too much).
    ==================================================

    ....

    EE, read that sentence again.

    Repeat.

    One more time.

    Now, think: How exactly (if possible) do you think we're going to be able to keep global temperature constant? Hell, was it even constant before humans? (hint: dinosaurs vs ice age) In other words, in a moment of unintended honesty, you've basically summed up the goal of all this: "We should be concerned until Humans are God and able to dictate the actions of the Earth."

    Not a reply to Shaun, but I wanted to use his statement for a point:
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    You people couldn't think for yourselves if your life depended on it.
    ==================================================

    of course, no one try and point out the irony how if you're not accepting the GW dogma (and are instead thinking for yourself) you're a fool and a moron.

    Sometimes I think it's less about "think for yourself" and more "think like me/us".

    "In other words, in a moment of unintended honesty, you've basically summed up the goal of all this: "We should be concerned until Humans are God and able to dictate the actions of the Earth.""

    A bit hyperbolic there Grim. More like - "We should work to prevent the natural balance of the Earth from being upset by dramatic non-natural actions." Now NATURAL actions (such as volcanoes) are out of our control, but ARTIFICIAL ones are. If we can control the artifical actions, then the natural forces will even themsleves out.

    "The right not to be tortured by a Geneva Convention signatory."
    For the socialist who said this statement of foolishness, what does the Geneva Convention define as torture? When did terrorists become a recognized country? When did terrorists start wearing uniforms? When did terrorists sign the Geneva Convention? When did terrorists start abiding by the Geneva Convention? When have Iran, Iraq, and Syria abided by the Geneva Convention? Is torture making someone uncomfortable in an interrogation or is it cutting someone's head off on TV? When did the Clinton administration stop tapping phone calls to the US from terrorists’ countries? Is it better for a building in LA to be blown up, the Brooklyn Bridge to be blown up, or a phone call from Iran not to be tapped?

    A bit hyperbolic there Grim. More like - "We should work to prevent the natural balance of the Earth from being upset by dramatic non-natural actions." Now NATURAL actions (such as volcanoes) are out of our control, but ARTIFICIAL ones are. If we can control the artifical actions, then the natural forces will even themsleves out.
    ===================================================
    Yes I suppose a bit hyperbolic there EE, but I'm more curious how you define "natural balance" and so forth. I mean, it's been theorized that antartica was once a rainforest. The world was probably a good deal warmer in the age of the dinosaurs (and certainly MUCH warmer in the time life began) than today and then the ice age happens. I'm saying that the earth's temperatures seem to have consisted of a WIDE variety over the world's entirity. Humanity itself occupies only a small fragment of that timeline. So what exactly do you consider the "natural" balance?

    Here's a laugh for all the conservatives on this board (heck some liberals might even chuckle):

    Here are my ideas for her presidential campaign slogans: (from http://www.imao.us/archives/007191.html/)

    Hillary '08: Your soul is mine!

    Hillary '08: No power in the 'verse can stop me!

    Hillary '08: Naked ambition given human form.

    Hillary '08: It's time for a woman president whether you want it or not.

    Hillary '08: Don't vote for that black guy!

    Hillary '08: America has existed long enough.

    Hillary '08: Comedy gold!

    Hillary '08: Satan compels you.

    Hillary '08: The survivors will envy the dead.

    Hillary '08: You'll get a 10,000% return on your investment.

    Hillary '08: If I scare you this much, think of what's it will be like for America's enemies.

    Hillary '08: With me as president, the Mexicans will stop trying to get in here.

    Hillary '08: Because God hates you.

    The UN should give the people of Darfur the report that human activity is causing global warming. Then Darfur could say they were just getting serious about the cause for global warming.

    "of course, no one try and point out the irony how if you're not accepting the GW dogma (and are instead thinking for yourself) you're a fool and a moron." by Grim

    That is why I depend on people who do know. The most respected scientists in the world agree that the debate is over. Your 15,000 scientists from 10 years ago notwithstanding... lol

    Again, you're depending on what you've been told to believe by your leaders. You fell in line like most Republicans do when they receive their marching orders (oh yeah, except those to actually serve in the armed forces, but then that directive has never been given by Shrub & Cheney as it would look a bit hypocritical, wouldn't it?,).

    If you bothered to fully research the issue, you would see how wrong you and your party are, and how foolish you have been.

    Me? I am going to take the word of scientists who are respected and do not have a political agenda. Global warming is not politica, but it has been made into a political football like so many other things by Shrub.

    Republicans cannot be trusted on anything related to science. For crying out loud, they want us to believe Adam & Eve rode dinosaurs on to Noah's Ark while the Great Flood created the Grand Canyon. HA!

    Effective defense begins with respect. Respect yourself. Respect others. Respect your nation. Respect other nations. Live your life and conduct your affairs in such a manner that others respect you, that other nations respect your nation. Those most respected are those who are most humble. Dubya talked this talk once. I never thought he believed it, but he proclaimed it. We were attacked by people who did not respect themselves and did not respect anyone else. If Dubya had stood up and demanded respect at that moment by going after those who actually planned and financed the attack, the Saudis and others, instead of cutting and running all over the country, and descending into a hole, what might have happened? I suppose we'll never know. Instead, Dubya climbed out of that hole as the bully he had always been. In unbelievably short order he squandered all the good will, all the respect we had earned, and he turned us into a bully nation. The terrorists are bad, hideously bad. Far, far worse than we in our darkest moments come ever hope to be. But, in the eyes of the world, it became a fight between two bullies. Not many people care who wins that fight. Imagine the fight between Ralphie and the bully in the "Christmas Story." Would we still be watching the movie if it were a fight between two (2) bullies? Of course not. Character, not force is what counts.

    Get over yourself, Greg. Liberals aren't fighting America, and America is not fighting liberals. You are allowing yourself to be distracted much as Dubya distracted us by the faux fight in Iraq. What people like you and Dubya seem to believe is it is enough to scream we're good and we're right. We are good, and we are right, but we are so because we cling to principles and not ideologies. Those principles are founded upon a tremendous, powerful, tranforming anthropology, one that respects all mankind. By all appearance, at the moment, no one respects us and we do not respect ourselves.

    "Humanity itself occupies only a small fragment of that timeline. So what exactly do you consider the "natural" balance?"

    So long as we stay within the range of temperatures seen over the last 8,000 or so years (which would date to the earliest known human-influenced effects on the Earth's climate), I think we'll be good.

    Republicans cannot be trusted on anything related to science. For crying out loud, they want us to believe Adam & Eve rode dinosaurs on to Noah's Ark while the Great Flood created the Grand Canyon. HA! Oh yeah, and all of this happened 6,000 years ago. That's when god created the Earth you know? Hilarious.

    If you bothered to fully research the issue, you would see how wrong you and your party are, and how foolish you have been.

    Me? I am going to take the word of scientists who are respected and do not have a political agenda. Global warming is not politica, but it has been made into a political football like so many other things by Shrub.
    ==================================================
    Right Shaun, no political agenda. And the fact that if they find nothing wrong, they lose all their grant money... that means absolutely nothing right? Look, it's a rule of law, scientists have a LOT to gain (forget politics, just in general) by being right, and oh so much to lose if their research proves nothing. And you really think they are all so infaliable as to not be affected by this? (oh wait, they're only affected if the money is from eeeeeevil coporations) Geez, have you done any research or just knowledge searches on scientists? (oh, and before you ask, yes I have, I majored in genetics first 2 years of college before switching to computers)


    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Republicans cannot be trusted on anything related to science. For crying out loud, they want us to believe Adam & Eve rode dinosaurs on to Noah's Ark while the Great Flood created the Grand Canyon. HA! Oh yeah, and all of this happened 6,000 years ago. That's when god created the Earth you know? Hilarious.
    ==================================================
    I'm curious Shaun, how many republicans have you actually heard this from? Certainly not from me since I've never said I believed any of that. (and a lot of republicans know their bibles well enough to know that A&E and Noah were MANY decades apart)

    "they want us to believe Adam & Eve rode dinosaurs on to Noah's Ark"

    You're wrong, Shaun. A wingnut I know believes dinosaur remains were planted by "satan" to mislead the followers of JJJJEEEEZZZZUUUUSSSS. Don't believe your eyes when you enter a museum, those bones are just a tool of the devil.

    Though I do have to say one thing about fundamentalists that gets on my nerves. Guess what: THERE IS NO EVIDENCE IN THE BIBLE THAT THE WORLD IS 6,000 YEARS OLD.

    Well, unless you want to count the book of 2 'pinions.

    First not all Republicans are Christians. It is widely known that believing in God is a matter of FAITH. It always amazes me to see people talk about evolution from a single cell organism (actually a primordial soup) into a human being and the Universe starting from a Big Bang as not being a great leap of the imagination. Believing in God, evolution or the Big Bang theory all take a great leap in imagination or faith.

    "The only difference between a patriotic terrorist and a real one? Real terrorists are simply patriotic terrorists who've taken the extra step - choosing to actually die for their beliefs - rather than simply talking about them at Spago. If Tim Robbins, Sean Penn, Michael Moore, and their ilk had real cojones, they'd all be wearing cute black vests - but stuffed with more than dog-eared copies of Deterring Democracy."

    Posted by: Greg Gutfield at January 25, 2007 5:33 PM


    Greg-you'll need an enema pretty soon if you walk around too long with all that junk in your trunk.

    "I'm curious Shaun, how many republicans have you actually heard this from? Certainly not from me since I've never said I believed any of that. (and a lot of republicans know their bibles well enough to know that A&E and Noah were MANY decades apart)" by Grim

    MANY decades apart huh? LOL! You make my point for me, but I was exaggerating quite a bit for comedic purposes.

    As for doing my research and scientists wanting to perpetrate a 'hoax' on the American public as your boy James Inhofe (and he is a crazed, fanatical Christianist, quite crazy) believes, let's just look at this logically. Somthing you usually don't do, I know, but everything deserves one try. Why in the world would the most respected scientists in the world put their well-earned reputations at stake to create a scare that most people don't understand and probably wouldn't be understood in their lifetimes? To be ridiculed? To be dismissed as kooks? You'd think after the reaction they received early on would have scared them away from the issue, right? Instead, more and more scientists are subscribing to it and realizing how important it is to do something about it ASAP.

    Why do you think that is Grim? Dazzle us all with your vast knowledge. Please.

    they want us to believe Adam & Eve rode dinosaurs on to Noah's Ark"

    You're wrong, Shaun. A wingnut I know believes dinosaur remains were planted by "satan" to mislead the followers of JJJJEEEEZZZZUUUUSSSS. Don't believe your eyes when you enter a museum, those bones are just a tool of the devil.

    Posted by: indierik at January 25, 2007 6:14 PM

    I'd venture that most believers know that dinosaurs were on earth long before man.

    The book of Genesis says that the earth was without form and void-- rather like a lump of clay. Believers, I know don't see anything incompatible with that scripture and the notion that something was here before man came around.

    The Bible also mentions that Satan was tossed out of heaven down to earth after he rebelled, long before man was made.

    It would certainly be nice if the critics of Christian theology managed to acquaint themselves with it, before they stated these silly topics.

    And to add to point above: These scientists would do this to secure funding? The opposite has happened under Shrub. His administration has even censored NASA reports to ensure that too many facts didn't get out there about the subject. It's laughable, when all the evidence is looked at, that you fools can still deny, deny, deny.

    Olbermannwatch.com

    Ideologues VS Idiots

    I'll let you guess who's who...

    Kissel says:

    "Respect yourself. Respect others. Respect your nation. Respect other nations."

    So in the world of Kissel, respect is the highest value on the hierarchy of values. This is the kind of blather that we hear from the multiculturalist ninnies of the liberal left. Tolerance. Seeking understanding. Tailor your behavior to win the approval of others. All cultures are equally worthy so we must respect all cultures equally.

    Wrong. Some nations/cultures should not be respected because they mean us harm. They mean harm to our way of life. And most importantly, they mean harm to the REAL highest priority value, freedom.

    Kissel must be some Carter era Defense Department retread. Jimmy is losing advisors at the Carter Center right and left after the recent publication of his recent abominable terrorist supporting volume. I bet they would welcome you with open arms Kissel

    Kissel is so warped he cannot grasp that

    "It would certainly be nice if the critics of Christian theology managed to acquaint themselves with it, before they stated these silly topics." by Cecilia

    Before you go off getting all high and mighty Cecilia, you might want to check this out: http://www.s8int.com/creationmuseum.html. It is a museum created for fundamental Christians to teach children the bible and show how Adam & Eve walked the Earth at the same time as dinosaurs.

    Now you can shove it.

    "Wrong. Some nations/cultures should not be respected because they mean us harm. They mean harm to our way of life. And most importantly, they mean harm to the REAL highest priority value, freedom."

    If they don't want Freedom, we need to kill them!

    Before you go off getting all high and mighty Cecilia, you might want to check this out: http://www.s8int.com/creationmuseum.html. It is a museum created for fundamental Christians to teach children the bible and show how Adam & Eve walked the Earth at the same time as dinosaurs.

    Now you can shove it.

    Posted by: Shaun at January 25, 2007 6:35 PM

    No wonder you place a premium on adults, kids like you NEED them!

    If you'll read above, you'll find that I say "most". That you can find an exception is not in the least surprising.

    Now go do your homework and be sure to wash behind your ears.

    I like how the Racist Neocons like to use Radical Islamic Terrorism to reveal how they really feel about all other cultures besides 'American' culture. Not to mention how they really feel about some elements of 'American' culture.

    All those years of having to swallow Multi-Culturalism during the Clinton era has finally taken it's toll.

    (Some) America Good, the Rest of the World Bad!

    And to add to point above: These scientists would do this to secure funding? The opposite has happened under Shrub. His administration has even censored NASA reports to ensure that too many facts didn't get out there about the subject. It's laughable, when all the evidence is looked at, that you fools can still deny, deny, deny.
    ===================================================
    Ummm.... Shaun, not only did you answer your question (funding) but you also have to remember, there's more funding for science in the world than just the united states. If you don't mind, give me a run down of where some of the purponents (let's say... 5-10?) of man-centered GW get their grants from.

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Why in the world would the most respected scientists in the world put their well-earned reputations at stake to create a scare that most people don't understand and probably wouldn't be understood in their lifetimes?
    ===================================================
    Well let me ask you the same. Why would the deniers put their reputations at stake blah blah blah? Especially here lately where they've been compared to holocost deniers. What they've gone through so far seems to be worse than what any proponents have endured. So why would they do all that?

    Here's a hint: If you answer my question, then you'll have an answer to yours.

    Ah yes, saved by the disclaimer "most". That's very tricky of you Cecilia. I suppose "most" does not include the states of Kansas, Alabama, Miss. etc that tried to remove evolution from their school's curriculum or demand that 'intelligent design' be taught along side it. I assume that all of those people would also not fit into that "most" huh?

    These are all very isolated things right? Not representative of the Fundamentalists as a whole right? HA!

    Before you go off getting all high and mighty Cecilia, you might want to check this out: http://www.s8int.com/creationmuseum.html. It is a museum created for fundamental Christians to teach children the bible and show how Adam & Eve walked the Earth at the same time as dinosaurs.
    ====================================================
    So out of the sum total of the funadmental population Shaun, how many go and visit it? 100%?

    These are all very isolated things right? Not representative of the Fundamentalists as a whole right? HA!
    ====================================================
    So Shaun, does this mean we conservatives can start making wide generalizations of liberals? I mean, I was against Red Wolf doing so but hey, if you say it's fair...

    "I like how the Racist Neocons like to use Radical Islamic Terrorism to reveal how they really feel about all other cultures besides 'American' culture. Not to mention how they really feel about some elements of 'American' culture. All those years of having to swallow Multi-Culturalism during the Clinton era has finally taken it's toll.

    "(Some) America Good, the Rest of the World Bad!"

    You are a fool. The excesses of multiculturalism produce an attitude that ALL cultures are to be equally respected. My point is that SOME cultures (not all) should not be accorded such respect because they condone priciples that are antithetical to the highest value-- freedom. But, you are too dense to get the point, so you engage in a idiotic distortion of what I said above.

    "Why would the deniers put their reputations at stake blah blah blah? Especially here lately where they've been compared to holocost deniers." by Grim

    Seriously, you're asking this question? Let's look at the oil & coal industries. They have spent literally bilions of dollars (a drop in the bucket when you're pulling in 8-10 billion dollars EVERY THREE MONTHS) muddying the waters with their misinformation campaigns and think tanks. They don't need to disprove it (cuz they can't), they just need to keep people like you confused enough so that it's not 100% clear.

    This is some of what the "museum" offers:

    "Other exhibits in the museum will blame homosexuals for Aids"
    "More controversial exhibits deal with diseases and famine, which are portrayed not as random disasters, but as the result of mankind's sin"
    "Mr Ham's Answers in Genesis movement blames the 1999 massacre at Columbine High School on evolutionist teaching"
    "animated figures will be used to recreate the Garden of Eden, while in another room, visitors will see a tyrannosaurus rex pursuing Adam and Eve"
    "The museum's opening will reinforce the burgeoning creationist movement and evangelical Christianity in the US, which gained further strength with the re-election of President Bush in November."

    These folks are the base of your party. Embrace them!

    Shaun,

    Yes, Shaun "most" is definitely a very tricky word. I have all my posts screened by attorneys before I post them.

    That many evangelicals don't believe in evolution has nothing to do with the fact that a great many of them believe something was on earth before man and that it included dinosaurs.... Some of them believe it that even included Neanderthals....

    Now go study Christian beliefs with the same respect you'd doubtlessly do other doctrines of other religions.

    1) Shaun, you'll notice I don't rely upon a lot of research backed by industries. I just point out common sense

    2) How much money do you suppose goes into PRO global warming research? if it was several billions, would that mean proponents are equally discredited as deniers?

    Ugh, you do make a good point indierik. But considering some of the wackos seen on places like DU and huff, etc 'your' party base is just about as unnerving.

    These folks are the base of your party. Embrace them!


    Posted by: indierik at January 25, 2007 6:53 PM

    I haven't problem One with them, other than knowing that they do not reflect evangelical belief. Glad to have them in the party. Let anyone of any religion be welcomed.

    1) Shaun, you'll notice I don't rely upon a lot of research backed by industries. I just point out common sense

    HA! Your definition of common sense chooses to ignore the studies by the most well respected and most knowledgeable scientists on the subject. THAT is common sense? Okey-dokey.

    2) How much money do you suppose goes into PRO global warming research? if it was several billions, would that mean proponents are equally discredited as deniers?

    I imagine/hope that it would be close to being equal. The truth ends up getting through eventually. We'll see if it happens too late.

    That's the thing with this issue, one of us is wrong. I truly, truly hope it's me. If it's not me, we're all f*cked if something isn't done rather quickly.

    Grim, I go to Huffpo infrequently and DU never. I have seen some, what I consider irresponsibly posts on Kos. But I've never read/seen anything as off the wall as this on the lefty sites. If you have an equivalent you can present I encourage you to post the link.

    HA! Your definition of common sense chooses to ignore the studies by the most well respected and most knowledgeable scientists on the subject. THAT is common sense? Okey-dokey.
    ===================================================
    And if a bunch of health scientists suddenly said it was best to walk on your hands everywhere, would you do it? As Mark Twain once said: "Don't live your life based upon medical reports. You might die of a typo."


    I imagine/hope that it would be close to being equal.
    ==================================================
    Don't imagine Shaun, go find me the numbers.

    "And if a bunch of health scientists suddenly said it was best to walk on your hands everywhere, would you do it?"

    Now you're being childish.

    "Don't imagine Shaun, go find me the numbers."

    You go find them. You're the one that wants them.

    Cecelia,

    Would you have any reservations about sending your children on a field trip to this "museum"?

    Grim, I go to Huffpo infrequently and DU never. I have seen some, what I consider irresponsibly posts on Kos. But I've never read/seen anything as off the wall as this on the lefty sites. If you have an equivalent you can present I encourage you to post the link.
    ===================================================
    Well this is equivalent in my view...

    http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x19232

    http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x3124555

    http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x3023187

    That last one was about Ford DURING the man's funeral. Need I go on?

    I'm out b*tches! It's been hilarious!

    "Don't imagine Shaun, go find me the numbers."

    You go find them. You're the one that wants them.
    ====================================================
    I guess Shaun's scared to find his heroes as corrupt as their enemies.

    "And if a bunch of health scientists suddenly said it was best to walk on your hands everywhere, would you do it? As Mark Twain once said: 'Don't live your life based upon medical reports. You might die of a typo.'"

    Let me get this straight your not disputing that scientist say global warming is real. You are saying don't listen to them 'cause it might be uncomfortable?

    And to answer your question if the majority of scientist were saying I was gonna die if i didn't walk on my hands, I sure as hell WOULD listen to them.

    Cecelia,

    Would you have any reservations about sending your children on a field trip to this "museum"?

    Posted by: indierik at January 25, 2007 7:11 PM

    None. I was never afraid of my daughter encountering any idea or belief system. However I did try to shield her from portrayals of violence, and from vile scatological oriented stuff.

    "I was never afraid of my daughter encountering any idea or belief system."

    Cool. Then maybe you can encourage your daughter to attend the Yearly Kos convention in Chicago this year? She's probably heard your side of the political story a time or two, so meeting some left wing kooks might help her gain some perspective from the other side.

    I'm with you on the "scat stuff". What is with those folks??? Unfortunately, violence is impossible to shield. Whether you accept it or not, it is within us all. Even in a high school football game the specators will witness several legal acts of violence.

    "I was never afraid of my daughter encountering any idea or belief system."

    Cool. Then maybe you can encourage your daughter to attend the Yearly Kos convention in Chicago this year? She's probably heard your side of the political story a time or two, so meeting some left wing kooks might help her gain some perspective from the other side.

    I'm with you on the "scat stuff". What is with those folks??? Unfortunately, violence is impossible to shield. Whether you accept it or not, it is within us all. Even in a high school football game the specators will witness several legal acts of violence.

    Posted by: indierik at January 25, 2007 7:41 PM

    You paying? If so I'll encourage her to the hilt to attend and I'll attend with her.

    We'll meet you there and we'll pick up the tab for breakfast while you wax eloquent on the wonders of Kos.

    Deal?

    Otherwise, if she wants to spend her money to go hear Kos, she can have at it.

    "I'm with you on the "scat stuff". What is with those folks??? Unfortunately, violence is impossible to shield. Whether you accept it or not, it is within us all. Even in a high school football game the specators will witness several legal acts of violence."

    Unfortunately so is bathroom humor. Watch any movie marketed to adolescents in the last ten years.

    Pay for both of you? Sure my Visa # is 666 0069 5555 1234 and it expires on the day Bush leaves office.

    Cecelia, I'm not a Kos fan myself. I know a lot of folks here like to believe us "Olbyloons" worship Kos, but it's just not the truth. So I will not be attending either. The main reason I frequent this site is because I cannot stand where the president has been leading our country and Olby seems to be the only person who challenges him.

    Doh! I forgot to turn on Countdown. Gotta go.

    Pay for both of you? Sure my Visa # is 666 0069 5555 1234 and it expires on the day Bush leaves office.

    Cecelia, I'm not a Kos fan myself. I know a lot of folks here like to believe us "Olbyloons" worship Kos, but it's just not the truth. So I will not be attending either. The main reason I frequent this site is because I cannot stand where the president has been leading our country and Olby seems to be the only person who challenges him.

    Doh! I forgot to turn on Countdown. Gotta go.

    Posted by: indierik at January 25, 2007 8:06 PM

    Figures.

    All that blather about exposing my daughter to alternative views and now this when I'm not... peeing in my pants at the thought.

    You idiots think you're sooooo cutting edge... I'm not surprised you got your credit from a advertisment on the back of a book of matches either.

    Shut up, putz We'll take mine. Watch out, Kos. You won't know what hit you.

    Road trip! (You're buying breakfast)

    It would certainly be nice if the critics of Christian theology managed to acquaint themselves with it, before they stated these silly topics.

    Posted by: Cecelia at January 25, 2007 6:30 PM

    Cecelia, it would be even nicer if the advocates of Christian theology acquainted themselves with the idea that scripture tells a story. A story I and a lot of people believe has a spiritual truth to it. Evolution is a fact. We evolved from an embryo to an infant to a growing child to an adult and here we are. Why would we think the universe would be any different? Do people realy believe God zapped us into existance with a blink of his eye, like Barbara Eden in Jenie? We don't understand evolution, and we don't understand God. Anyone who thinks they got it all figured out is deluded.

    Donora PA writes: "Evolution is a fact. We evolved from an embryo to an infant to a growing child to an adult and here we are. Why would we think the universe would be any different?Why would we think the universe would be any different? Do people realy believe God zapped us into existance with a blink of his eye, like Barbara Eden in Jenie? We don't understand evolution, and we don't understand God."

    then says:

    "Anyone who thinks they got it all figured out is deluded."

    Posted by: Donora, PA. at January 26, 2007 12:05 AM

    Yep...

    And to answer your question if the majority of scientist were saying I was gonna die if i didn't walk on my hands, I sure as hell WOULD listen to them.
    ===================================================
    And you would never EVER think about the logic of such a statement? Ever wonder what exactly would cause you to die if you didn't? So I guess Shaun's mantra to "think for yourself" doesn't apply if 1) it's from your preferred authority and 2) you're threatened. Good to know.


    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    We evolved from an embryo to an infant to a growing child to an adult and here we are.
    ==================================================
    Donora, just wanted to point out a flaw in your logic: Yeah, we grow from an embryo, that's FROM ANOTHER ADULT. So as you say, "why can't the universe work like that?" that's what the believers are saying. Embryos have to come from a parent, etc etc


    In other words, we're all back to where we started.

    Bystander (Donora Pa) shows ignorance of both scriptural revelation AND the naturalistic theory of evolution.

    Since I know bystander hates it when I discuss scripture...I'll discuss the theory of Natural Selection instead....

    The embryology of the human species, or any species for that matter, is not an example of evolution. Evolution is the process by which a population's inherited traits become more common under the influence of Natural Selection.

    Bystander's contention, "We evolved from an embryo to an infant to a growing child to an adult and here we are," is wrong. I, according to current theory, evolved from catarrhine, or old world monkeys, the first being Kamoyapithecus, which existed 60 million years ago. As an "embryo," I was fully evolved from my distant ancestors as I am as an adult...the species Homo sapien. Through development I changed from a zygote, to an embryo, to a fetus, to an infant, and so forth.

    Please learn some more evolutionary theory before you pontificate, bystander.

    According to Darwinists, evolution from a single cell organism that could replicate its DNA into every single living entity of the face of the Earth...(from the blade of grass with frost this morning to the Homo sapien driving the car in front of me), only occurred under the influence of Natural Selection...The process by which genetic mutations that result in positive traits for survival change species and differentiate new species over millions of years. It's logical, and fits observations we can make today about the world around us....BUT the theory assumes many, many, many things.

    Feel free to read the assumptions made by Darwinists in the posts I made at the end of 1/15/07....The secularists debating me then never responded to my observations....Will you respond, bystander?

    Science assuming things seems to be acceptable to people like bystander (Donora Pa)...but faith in biblical revelation as another explaination for our origins are easily dismissed (sometimes scoffed at/made fun of/ridiculed). This is the great difference between the secularist (no diety needed for existence) and me....I see the same process of assumption (faith) by the Darwinist as I do the Evangelical.....bystander just hates it when I am right.

    cee
    "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

    If anyone is bored enough to argue against this nonsense go here:

    http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/2437/

    Great site debunking so-called "creation science"


    Since I know bystander hates it when I discuss scripture...I'll discuss the theory of Natural Selection instead....

    The embryology of the human species, or any species for that matter, is not an example of evolution. Evolution is the process by which a population's inherited traits become more common under the influence of Natural Selection.

    Bystander's contention, "We evolved from an embryo to an infant to a growing child to an adult and here we are," is wrong. I, according to current theory, evolved from catarrhine, or old world monkeys, the first being Kamoyapithecus, which existed 60 million years ago. As an "embryo," I was fully evolved from my distant ancestors as I am as an adult...the species Homo sapien. Through development I changed from a zygote, to an embryo, to a fetus, to an infant, and so forth.

    http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/2437/

    Anon at 8:28....your point was?

    Please mention one item I had in my post that was incorrect with regards to embryology being confused with Darwinian evolution.....It is a very common mistake made by both sides of the issue and bystander showed a lack of knowledge about the subject.

    Are you suggesting mammalian embryology is an example of Darwinian evolution? If you are then I think you have to do some more study that goes a little deeper than the silly site you posted.

    cee
    "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


    I love your show However when it comes to "low life " like Tom delay , how come nothing is said about is involvement with young girls in the South "Guam and other places" , sex and forcing abortion.....of course he has written a book and has found "Jesus" PLEASE, lets get those scum bag out .

    cee, 8:28 is just an olbyloon doing what they do best, divert.