Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Thursday, May 17, 2007
Larry Elder :: Townhall.com Columnist
Democrats to Bush: You Are Evil
by Larry Elder
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


While studying psychology in college, I read about an experiment on the pressure to conform.

Several people sat around a long, rectangular table. The "instructor" and all but one person seated at the table were confederates in the experiment. The instructor held up a sheet of paper with a line drawn exactly six inches long. He then handed the sheet to a seated confederate and said, "Guess the length of this line."

The man, as previously agreed, said, "About two inches." The paper then went clockwise around the table until it reached the only person not in on the experiment. Until then, each person "guessed" anywhere from two to three-and-a-half inches, even though the line was obviously much, much longer.

When the paper was slid to the final person -- the only one not in on the ruse -- he, too, said, "About three inches."

Perhaps this explains a recent poll put out by the "non-partisan" Rasmussen Reports. A mind-blowing 35 percent of Democrats believe the president possessed prior knowledge of the 9/11 terror attacks that killed over 3,000 Americans. Another 26 percent of Democrats said that they are "not sure." Thus 61 percent of Democrats believe or consider themselves uncertain about the assertion that the president knew in advance about the terror attacks of 9/11, yet did nothing to stop them.

Now I've long since accepted that many Democrats flat-out hate the president. Democrats, for example, far more so than Republicans, believe in the idea that government must "level the playing field." So Democrats oppose tax cuts that "help the rich." I strongly disagree, but I get it.

Because Republicans -- more so than Democrats -- believe in limited government, they stand accused of selfishness. This argument, too, I at least understand. Never mind that in the recent book, "Who Really Cares?," Syracuse University Professor Arthur C. Brooks found Republicans gave more to charity -- in both time and money -- than Democrats. It turns out that if one supports smaller government, he or she is more likely to feel the need to step in and help the needy by donating time and money. Also, the more religious the person, found Brooks, the more likely he or she gives to charity. Religious Democrats gave as much as religious Republicans, but Democrats as a whole were less religious than Republicans. Some secular Democrats feel uncomfortable with a religious president, whom they feel "gets his guidance from God." So I can understand the discomfort of the Democrats with the president's religiosity.

On the issue of global warming, many Democrats side with Al Gore, who believes the "debate on global warming is over." They find it obscene that the president objects to a worldwide accord to deal with the "crisis." I believe they're wrong, but this, too, I get. If the scientists all agree, why this leaves only the dissenting global-warming-denying, gas-guzzling, smoke-stack-belching capitalists.

Health care is a "right," so says former presidential candidate John Kerry. Most Democrats nod in agreement. Never mind that of the 46 million people in America who lack health-care insurance, about half go without health care for only a few months, while they are between jobs. About three-quarters go without health care for less than a year. And 10 percent have high-paying jobs, but choose to pocket the money they would spend on insurance premiums. Millions more without health-care insurance came here illegally. But at least I get the Democrats' objection to government "failure" to provide health-care insurance.

As to the war in Iraq, most Democrats oppose it. Most Republicans, however, still support the war, and still think victory possible. Only two House Republicans supported the war-funding-with-troop-withdrawal-deadlines legislation passed, at the end of April, by Congress. In the Senate, two Republicans voted for it.

This complicated war now approaches its fifth year, with nearly daily headlines of setbacks and American military deaths. We awaken nearly every morning to headlines of American military deaths and Iraqi sectarian violence. The current Iraqi government appears confused and ineffective; and the international chorus calling Iraq a "blunder" grows louder and louder. Thus, I get the Democrats' anger towards Bush's "stubbornness" for continuing to prosecute the war despite near worldwide opposition and the dwindling number of allies, including the British.

But do 61 percent of Democrats "honestly" believe the president "allowed" 9/11 to occur, taking no measure whatsoever to stop it? Please tell me this reflects an insincere desire to simply conform rather than a sincere belief that the president willingly allowed over 3,000 Americans to perish. Tell me you say this with your fingers crossed.

Please.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Larry Elder is a syndicated radio talk show host and best-selling author. His latest book, "What's Race Got to Do with It?" is available now.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Larry Elder's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
If Bush wants
full funding and Congressional support for the war, all he has to do is make a statement that he's coming out against the war.


Brian....
...and the Dems will then start preaching "Stay the course". Makes sense to me.

Hate
The hate for GWB makes them think he is the blame for every problem since the beginning of time.

Larry Elder is Mistaken On This Point --
quoth Elder: "... Republicans -- more so than Democrats -- believe in limited government ..."

I think the six years where we had a Republican President, Senate, and House, lays substantial evidence *against* this claim.

Republicans have yet to learn to "walk the walk."

Unca Alby
"I think the six years where we had a Republican President, Senate, and House, lays substantial evidence *against* this claim."

If you think it wouldn't have been worse with socialist democrats you are only fooling yourself.


Why People Hate George Bush
To paraphrase a line I read today, you can't expect people to think you are Winston Churchill if you govern like Grover Norquist.

Bush believes that politics and governance are the same thing. He sees the White House as an instrument of partisanship. He has made it clear that he does not consider himself to be the president of all the people, but only of his political base.

lilly
"Why People Hate George Bush"

Because they never got over the Sore/Loserman2000 debacle when Gore failed to steal the election via the courts. They even blame President Bush for their own hate, it's pathetic.

Right Alaby....
You mean like the guys who burn more electricity in one month than most American in a year, and then turn around and tell the rest of us we need to use less..... There is that Dem thinking that we are all so fond of..

The Dems want to stay the course
The Dems want to "stay the course" with the "ignore it and it will go away" way of dealing with this.
Attack after attack, and they stayed that course.

Now they want to "stay the course" with the Fairness Doctrine

"Stay the course" with raising taxes.

Democrats have to be the most reactionary group in the country.

Democrats
While Democrats are beating up on Bush and his low approval numbers , the media has conveniently
forgotten to highlight the fact that the Democratically controlled Congress has even lower ratings at 26%. Gee I wonder why?

The absurdity of the Demoncrats
is perhaps best explained by this line, originally credited to Clemenceau and later to Churchill:

"if you are not a liberal when you are young, you have no heart; but if you are not a conservative when you grow up, you have no brain."

And therein lies the basic difference between most Demoncrats and most Republicans - Demoncrats "feel" while Republicans "think".

ALERT: Gun Legislation!!

Mr. Elder
" Because Republicans -- more so than Democrats -- believe in limited government, they stand accused of selfishness."

That's the way it USED to be, Mr. Elder. But, conservatives seem to have forgotten that. Most certainly at least 8 of the Presidential candidates have. Only Ron Paul and Tom Tancredo have any regard to true conservatism and after last night, I am wondering about Tancredo. For the most part, I am seeing a whole lot of Republicans agreeing with the federal government increasing it's size and scope at nearly every turn. So much for limited government, or liberty for that matter.

People out to read this book:
"Conservatives Betrayed: How George W. Bush and Other Big Government Republicans Hijacked the Conservative Cause"
by Richard A. Viguerie
http://tinyurl.com/3aesod

typo
out --> ought

State of denial
I suspect a lot of Democrats (and at least a few Republicans, mainly Ron Paul supporters) would tend to believe this, not so much as a result of "groupthink", but because they cannot deal with one very basic fact, on an emotional level.

Namely, that there is a group of human beings, called Islamists, who want to kill or enslave anyone else who is not part of their clique, on the grounds that not being part of that clique makes everyone else on Earth something other than human. Including the aforementioned Democrats and Republicans.

They reject this fact because it does not fit their worldview, in which everybody is nice except people they, personally, hate- for being different from themselves. The fact that there are others with exactly the same aberrational reaction to "the other" is unacceptable to them, because it means that there is someone who does not "recognize" their innate superiority, i.e., the innate superiority they credit themselves with possessing. Add in a long-standing and visceral hatred of Western Civilization (on the grounds that it gives too much power to those they define as inferior to themselves), and you have a nearly-perfect example of an inaccurate assumption leading to an unsupportable conclusion.

And when others of somewhat stronger connection to reality show them evidence that they are mistaken, they go into a mental blackout. It cannot be true- therefore it isn't. Since the facts conflict with their worldview, the facts must be wrong, and anyone who puts them forward is a liar. It is only a short step from that to believing in (a) a vast conspiracy, and (b) that anyone holding a view contrary to their own is part of (a).

Circular reasoning then sets in, and the chain of unreason is complete.

The part that amuses me (the only part) is that in doing so, they are using the same thought-processes that the Catholic Church used to deny the evidence of Giordano Bruno, Galileo Galilei, and Nikola Kopernik (better known as Nicholas Copernicus)re how the Solar System actually was based on scientific evidence, as opposed to the version the Church had "devined" from Scriptural readings. Bruno was burned at the stake, Galileo spent the last years of his life under house arrest, and Copernicus only escaped similar measures by ensuring that his works would only be published after his death.

And I am quite sure that most of those holding the opinions Mr. Elder speaks of are people who (c) have little or no use for organized religion and (d) consider themselves to be "speaking truth to power" as the intellectual heirs of Bruno, Galileo, and Copernicus.

(c) is an opinion that they are entitled to have.

(d) is so inaccurate as to be laughable.

Nevertheless, it does not amuse me, at all.


cheers

eon

Dems to Bush...by Elder
Democrats get a steady diet of the super biased MSM which reflects their wishes. Whatever the MSM writes...it's the TRUTH to the Democrats whether the news is actually backed up with facts or not.

The MSM prints blatant lies over and over until the Democrats blog the lies into the truth...according to them. They all sing the same old lines over and over.

I guarantee you this...if the entitlements that the Democrats use to buy votes (recall the spinach, peanuts etc pork they attached to the war supplemental?) with were to STOP the Democrat party would collapse.

I don't recall exactly how much their next tax hike is but I think it's around a half trillion??

ALL
Check my blog (click on my handle) for what the people in the Gay Area (Red Nanny Pelosi's district) did yesterday to celebrate Falwell's death

AND

How the Dhimmicrats are forcing the CIA to study patterns of global WARMING vice patterns of global terrorism.

Oops.
My burst. Should be Bay Area.

PJ
The quote from Churchill goes:

Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has no heart; and any man who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains.

GunnyG
Depends on what source you read. Some sources credit your quotation to Clemenceau. Whatever. Both have the same idea. Thanks for reading my comment.

PJ
I caught that on another website. I agree, both were dead-on and their quotes are still valid today!

lilly: Stay the Course
“Bush believes that politics and governance are the same thing. He sees the White House as an instrument of partisanship. He has made it clear that he does not consider himself to be the president of all the people, but only of his political base.”

By all means, let the Democrats continue their agenda:

Impose the “Fairness Doctrine” & the neo-Marxist tool of “race” as the key to destroying alternative media like talk radio. Imus was just an experiment, a “litmus test” WRT evaluating tactics. Marxism as an economic model is an abject failure, but is an appalling success as a tool of social engineering.

Continue their Neo-marxist, anti-intellectualism by subscribing to one of the following un-scientific beliefs:
+Global warming caused by anthropomorphically-generated “greenhouse gases” while ignoring fluctuations “solar luminosity” (global warming on Mars & the reduction of its polar ice caps must be caused by evil republicans in SUVs)
+Global warming contributed to the creation of Hurricane Katrina
+Homosexuality has a genetic basis w/o scientific evidence
+“Gender is a social construct” in direct contradiction of scientific evidence
Etc.

Continue to embold our enemies by de-funding our troops in Iraq while ignoring the lingering after affects of the to Clinton administration’s military misadventures? Let’s see: un-necessary wars for the following reasons:
(a) No strategic value other than UN/European popular opinion:
+ Our misadventures in Bosnia (Bombing/killing hundreds if not thousands of innocent women & children in Belgrade)
+Our misadventures in Somalia, where several US Rangers/Delta force soldiers were killed because the Clinton administration wouldn’t authorize the use of armored vehicles (too OFFENSIVE you know)- Clinton’s mishandling of this situation emboldened OBL into conducting the 9/11 attack.
(b) Racial politics: Black congressional caucus playing the race card & invading Haiti IOT put their pet Marxist thug, Aristide, back in power in Haiti.
+We’re still in Bosnia & Haiti- where’s our exit strategy?

Continue to ignore Democrat-activist sponsored voter fraud, e.g., Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN)

Continue institutionalized racism, i.e., affirmative action, quotas

Continue institutionalized sexism: i.e., the $ 20B VAWA

Speaking as a minimally-franchised, expendable white heterosexual male taxpayer (majority=MEN) who is part of the top 50% of income earners forced to pay 96% of all income taxes IOT support a grow “Victim-group entitlement industrial complex”, I feel so much safer under the a Democrat regime.

Yes, the Democrats represent the interests of all people, unless you happen to be a minimally-franchised, nominally Christian, white heterosexual male taxpayer.

Disingenuous Manipulation of Numbers
Mr. Elder goes a long way in proving that you can manipulate numbers to give you the results that you want.

Another columnist at Townhall, I can't remember who, wrote essentially the same column using the numbers in the same way. It's too bad that Mr. Elder can't be a little more original.

35 percent believe . . . and 26 percent are not sure. NOT SURE does NOT mean that they think Bush was involved! That is totally disingenuous.

There is approximately 30 percent of Republicans that also will support anything that this administration says.

All those numbers tell me, my bias, is that 30 percent of both parties will support anything that their party says. If their party said that Martians were landing, you'd get 30 percent agreeing.

As for Democrats hating Bush, again my bias, I think it relates more to the difference between authoritarian figures and how Republicans and Democrats view those types of figures. I am not trying to be judgmental here. My feeling is that the personalities of Republicans are such that they are more willing to accept strong authoritarian figures to follow than are Democrats. For that very same reason, Democrats are more rebellious when it comes to these types of figures.

John Cougar Mellencamp, "I fought authority, authority always won." or something like that.

Demosthenes
Your demonstration of your hate is truly amazing.

Disprove global warming in 30 minutes
We were taught in school that water expands when frozen, but contracts when thawed.

Take a clear glass and put a strip of masking tape down the side. Fill it about half full with hot water (to help melt the ice faster and approximate global warming), then mark the level.

Stick in a handful of ice cubes, then mark the level of the water. Some of the ice cubes will stick up out of the water, but so does some of Antarctica.

Go do something for a half hour.

When the ice is completely melted, mark the water level.

Compare to the original, no-ice level. (Brace yourself for a shock if you are uneducated.)

We don't have to worry about rising water levels, but lower water levels. "The tip of the iceberg" takes note of the fact that only about 1/10 of an iceberg is above sea level. The remaining 9/10, below sea level, will contract.

You think a liberal could believe his/her eyes and realize that what we learned in elementary school remains true?

voxoreason
Could you please explain the relevance of your post to the column written?

dogjudge,
your comment to Demosthenes illustrates the real intent and meaning of hate speech laws: anything a liberal doesn't agree with.

Principle trumps power



Does anyone support Gonzales staying as Attorney General? Why would President Bush appoint Gonzales as AG knowing his past ethical problems?

USA TODAY-Three years ago, an attorney general, his deputy, the FBI director and others put their jobs on the line to block a White House wiretapping plan. The story, revealed Tuesday, speaks worlds about the importance of upholding principle under pressure — and about the current attorney general’s failure to do just that.

James Comey: “I thought I just witnessed an effort to take advantage of a very sick man, who did not have the powers of the attorney general,” the former deputy AG says

Watch

http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/principle-trumps-power

James Comey testimony should be seen no matter what party you are in!


Democratics are right
I am Republican in spirit, but will believe Bush is worst President in history and will gleefully vote democratic and vote against most incumbents of either party.

Although I am well read on the topic, I have discovered that most citizens are incapable of believing their government was involved in 9/11. I am true believer and the evidence unequivocally points there. The neocons had expressed their desire for a Pearl Harbor in writing , and the evidence points to Israel's advance knowledge and participation to excaberate the event. This is not the first time in our history when our government has bought the line that Israel cannot survive the disclosure of the truth (even though it deserves the consequences) and not the first time Israel has conducted a false flag (or deception attack) to incite us against others. I have no knowledge that GWB knew (as opposed to those right under him), even though on the night before 9/11 he became the only president in history to have a air to ground missile battery on the grounds of the private mansion he visited in Florida (and that night only before and since). The cumculative circumstantial evidence is too much: shut off of all power (and security cameras) to towers week before for 36 hours; many witnesses to advance explosions; huge puddles of motlen steel eight weeks after event; all indicia of controlled demolition; building 7; five Israeli officers dressed as Palestinians filming 9/11 as it ocurred and high fiving each other; the German intelligence report, the Israeli one; Israeli agents had had all under survelliance in US in advance; the economics of tower, recent cost, cost to remediate environmental problems, and recent purchase of terrorism insurance; the classification of all Israeli contacts to 9/11; our governments refusal to let our 9/11 commission see all evidence (one former senator resigned); the initial film of reactions of Cheney and then GW to reporters demand for full investigation; the physics; the pre-announcement for the collapse of building 7; the physics history of collapsed buildings, v. fire damaged buildings v. controlled demoltion. There are three or four fine documentaries, each of which tends to address different angles. And then there is the little known phenonomom of media's refusal to pick up stories detailed in other papers (and especially so for any article potentially adverse to elite's interest). Evidence is overwhemling, but I know that rest of you have your mind set the other way. Your government is "good". Well, 9/11 Commission, due to politics, expressly refused to look at issue of whether US was "bad" or complicit in fomenting attacks by 40 years of occuption and assassination of leaders of occupied subject and every violation of human rights named in Geneva Convention. And today, leading Harvard Professors cannot get their article critical of Israeli lobby published in USA, but Zionists can get feature articles published critical of their unpublishable one. Just like Israel attack on USS Liberty and murder of our sailors, its involvement with 9/11 was and is "classified" and the most sensitive documents were not even shared with 9/11 commission. Thanks for reading.

philosophocon
Perhaps.

At the same time, if you read the post it is filled with all sorts of pejoratives that don't relate to the actual issues that are being discussed.

Unless someone here REALLY gets me going, I try to refrain from namecalling and talk issues.

There is one person on this list that continually refers to all Democrats as communists. It is apparently being used as a bullying technique.

It happens on both sides of the political spectrum.


Saddam and 9/11
Democrats like to bash Bush for spreading propaganda that Saddam was linked to 9/11.

But the real truth is that immediately after 9/11, polls showed over 50% of America mistakenly attributed 9/11 to Saddam. During the 2004 Presidential campaign that number rose to 66%.

So, Larry Elder, are you going to talk about how stupid Republicans are or are you a hypocrite.

Fact is that Bush's extremely cynical playing on the ignorance of Americans has come back to haunt him and the GWOT.

It's difficult to convince people the importance of the threat of Islamist Extremeism when ignorant people believe it was Saddam who caused 9/11.

The irony that Bush preyed up the ignorant to get reelected and now ignorance is working against him is only just.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.

JR
My compliments on your thoroughness in finding or creating evidence for your delusions. Your post is almost Unabomber-esque in its psychotic rambling.

For everyone else, I disliked Bill Clinton intensely. He was a lying, manipulative, narcissistic pants-load; sort of an Eddie Haskell with a law degree (my apologies to Ken Osmond (sic?), who I know to be a good conservative). While I do believe that he was capable of lobbing a few cruise missiles at brown and black skinned people to take political heat off himself, or to do away with or threaten into taking the fifth people who have the goods on him, I never even entertained the thought that he would INTENTIONALLY shake the foundations of this country for his own purposes. Why do so many democrats want to believe it of Bush?

JR
you need to quit dating rosie and catch your breath. Thew moveon interpretation of the news is not the place to gather information

Gunny-
Read your blog and viewed the photos you linked.
In slide #7, was that person goosestepping on the effigy of Jerry Falwell's grave?

Thighmaster
I agree. On the rare occasions when he did something right, like NAFTA and welfare reform (although I suspect his motives in both instances), I was vocal in my support. If W woke up and proclaimed that the house he is currently living in was painted white, the moonbats would disagree, and accuse him of being the puppet of "Big Paint".

American Ignorance
It has been commented on before that an alarming number of Americans cannot even locate the United States on a map of the world. The notion that President Bush had prior knowledge of 9-11 must rank with this incredible statistic in ignorance.

I will never again be the slightest bit intimidated by that "sixty percent" who disapprove of President Bush's performance. They are out to lunch.


Credibility Part of the Problem?
In his recent meeting with the 11 Republicans about the Iraq war, Representative Kirk essentially told the President that he needed someone from the military to be the spokesperson for the administration on the issue of Iraq. That the President had no credibility.

This is coming from someone within his own party.

I know that very few here would agree, but do you think that might be a PART of the President's problem? Credibility.

Reseach For Yourselves!
Liberty, thanks for the updates above! BTW, Deevy Kidd is a great patriot & NewsWithViews.com is one of the best sites on the web. :)

Folks, we all need to look beyond what we're spoonfed by the Globalist controlled mainstream media. Also, the 9/11 Commission was a total whitewash (as they buried "Able Danger). We also need to research beyond what's provide by the NeoCON propaganda arm of "Faux News"!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WsyEqKQRBY

ThighMaster
I had read this quite a few times before.

I did a search on Townhall for "meeting with Bush" and came up with a reference that linked me to an article from the Washington Post.

From that article -

"Davis, a former chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, also presented Bush dismal polling figures to dramatize just how perilous the party's position is, participants said. Davis would not disclose details, saying the exchange was private. Others warned Bush that his personal credibility on the war is all but gone."

In other articles they took it a different way and added that the Republicans told Bush that Patreus had to present the information because Bush's credibility on the war was zero.

Here's the link to the Washington Post.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/09/AR2007050902461.html?hpid=topnews

Dog
I think the lack of credibility is a creation, to a large degree, of the popular culture. Every day we hear politicians and pundits spew innaccuracy, vitriol, and downright lies about the President, and the MSM doesn't question it.
One hears quite a lot about freedom of the press- what about responsibility of the press? Like most conservatives, I don't wish for the MSM to stop holding the republican's feet to the fire, I just wish they would toast a few toosies on the other side of the aisle.

that's "tootsies"
"tootsies", my apologies.

odddoc
The 9/11 Commission acknowledged that the motivation of the mastermind of 9/11 was injustice of the Israel/Palestine situation, but the Commission failed to even look at the issue of our complicity in the cause for the attack. The 9/11 Commission Report stated in its “What to Do? Chapter (p. 362):

“[Their motivation] is fed by grievances …widely felt throughout the Muslim world -- against the U.S. military presence in the Middle East, policies perceived as anti-Arab and anti-Muslim, and support of Israel. … [T]o them America is the font of “all evil”…. It is not a position with which Americans can bargain or negotiate. With it there is no common ground---not even respect for life—on which to begin a dialogue. It can only be destroyed or utterly isolated.”

The last two sentences closed the door on any inquiry into our role in injustices in the Mid East which was the single most self-reflective and important issue before the Commission.

The 9/11 Commission refused to follow the oft quoted wisdom of former Secretaries of State James Baker, Zbigniew Brzezinski and others to the effect that the proper response is two pronged: 1. attack the enemy that attacked us; and 2. simultaneous movement to ameliorate the unjust conditions that prompted the attack.

Instead of looking for and curing our complicity in evil, we opt for war for eternity, and not from the moral high ground. I encourage you to read Pat Buchanan, Paul Craig Roberts and Lou Dobbs (all great Americans). The WOT is a total fraud designed to extend Israel's agenda and excuse it from accountability.

A notable Israeli false flag attack was in 1954 (as I recall) when Israel fire bombed our cultural centers/libraries in Egypt which was designed to make us think that Muslim Brotherhood was responsible and to trick us into retaliation against muslims. The prior year, 1953, Israel began illegally diverting the waters of the Jordan River which absolutely enraged Ike. These are things our press makes sure we do not remember.

Now we have been conned into practicing torture and leasing fleets of planes to fly suspects to torture chambers around the world; and we have evidence of secret charges and secret trials as Christian Science Monitor broke one story. The big story on the five Israel officers dressed as Palestinians was a leading Scottish paper, The Sunday Herald, as I recall (although Washington Post had cryptic summary that verified same). I am not going to continue this dialogue. It is high handed of you to call my post "delusional", as I cryptically refer to facts and a significant percentage of Americans see the same. However, many leading physics professors and scientists support the truth for 9/11 movement. Thanks for reading this last post.

Same Old Song and Dance
Lunacy from Lunatics, Who Woulda Think it!

P.S.
Gunny - Yeah, Right! OOPS - Gay Area - LOL!

olddoc
Credibility?

That's one of those things that's impossible to measure. You can poll it, but then you get into the argument about polls and validity.

For Clinton or Bush, you have people who believe in them no matter what they say.

That being said, when moderate members of the President's party are quoted as saying that the President has a credibility problem, I do think there is some validity to the point.

My biggest gripe with the MSM these days is their lack of substantiation into articles, or investigation. I think they are more concerned with being the first one to report an issue than with getting the issue right. Judith Miller and the NYT is a prime example for me.

Democrats Lunatic Fringe
It's important to understand that the Democratic candidates are seeking to appeal to the lunatic fringe that believes Bush responsible for 9/11.

I did disagree with Jerry Falwell from time to time -- don't tell Ann Coulter I said that. Jerry recognized that we live in an imperfect world, and he tried to make it not perfect, but better. Religious belief is about bringing our hearts, minds, and souls closer to the one Being who was & is Perfect. Politics is about making things better. We can't improve on our Creator & Savior. We can improve our society, mainly through our own behavior but also through the concerted action we call politics. I think most people of faith can make the distinction. If you'd like to share your thoughts on faith, politics, or anything else, please visit my site (click on name above). God bless the Falwell family and all those who loved him.

steve maloney
ambridge, pa

Why Democrats Have a Problem with George
I give Mr. Elder credit for at least trying to understand to understand the Democrat's worldview. So often in discussions of this type---on the right or the left---what we see are stereotypes of the other side that suggest that the writer had never really tried to delve into the opposition's way of thinking.

Let me suggest a couple of reasons, not addressed by Mr. Elder, why liberals and Democrats are so exasperated with---and yes, sometimes downright hateful toward---this President:

1.) THE BUBBLE BOY SYNDROME. Bush likes to think he is resolute and committed to principal. But evidence suggests that he is a basically ignorant and shallow man who surrounds himself with people who do not seriously question his judgment. The result is, he doesn't have very good judgment----and historians are already liining up to label him one of the worst.

2.) DISRESPECT FOR THE RULE OF LAW. Perhaps the most egregious examples are wiretaps conducted without the warrants clearly required by law, and the signing statements that basically say, "I'm not obligated to follow the law just passed by the law-making branch of government." Although I "get" that Bush---a non-lawyer---has surrounded himself with people (notably) Cheney who believe that the executive branch should be more powerful, Bush is allowing them to push our country in an authoritarian direction that would make the founding fathers roll over in their graves. And to their shame, most---but by no means all---conservatives have stood by meekly and let him do it.

Reno is absolutely correct
Those that believe 9/11 was a gov't conspiracy are somewhat lacking in the intelligence department. Those that aren't sure, are uninformed and uninterested. They simply don't care enough to do the research in order to form a conclusions. Both are different forms of ignorance.

libs and jihadists
I hope I don't sound twisted but it seems their is a similiarity between the two. The jihadists tend to be tribal and hate everyone outside their group. It seems with libs they are similar in that everything related to conservs and the rightends them to apoplexy. One would think that as Americans we could all unite behind the crisis facing us: the deathcult from the middle east. Yet these dimwits on the left see our president as the number one enemy. I have serious doubts about our mission in Iraq. These people don't seem to want to save themselves escape thr tyranny of killers in their midst and wassting our young people seems counter-productive. Better to launch attacks against the killers than tyry to settle tribal disputes. Yet those on the left seem to think all we need do is have a sitdown, talk about whatever nonsense comes to mind, hold hands and hug and all the troubles will go away. I think at times those on the left are too stupid to even save themselves and would rather assume the prison shower position than defend themselves. Oh course I could be wrong

Thighmaster
Sorry Thighmaster, anyone who blindly buys into the NeoCON propaganda of the "terrorist boogeyman" (pushed in order to justify an Orwellian police state & an intentional quagmire in Iraq under the guise of "Nation Building") will make an excellent slave/zombie for the Globalist Elite's planned dystopia (**See - North American Union, Amero's replacement of the U.S. dollar, the National RFID/ID card coming next year, The Military Commissions Act, forced vaccinations (like Merck's Gardasil,etc.).

http://www.amazon.com/Debunking-11-Mechanics-Defenders-Conspiracy/dp/156656686X

http://www.jonesreport.com/


What will the Demoflats do?
What will they do and who will they blame when Bush is no longer in the White House and Karl Rove is no longer around?


JohninOregon
You need to stop drinking the water in Oregon. The Prozac, Benadryl, and caffeine in it is affecting your thinking.

9/11
Maybe all those Democrats watch Rosie.

john in oregon
I know you guys are the west coast massachusetts but please explain how we protect ourselves from the deathcult ME. They are promising to kill us or is that just bluster on their part and only meant for their own local consumption

a conservative myth
this whole idea that liberals and dems hate bush is simply a myth.
first of all there are extremists on both sides who spew hate.
being a liberal on townhall, i get hateful comments every day, i mean really hate filled screeds from posters like gunnyg or lolo or lynne.
i had a guy named southerner, supported by another poster tell me he wanted to "hunt down and silence liberals".

liberals and dems don't hate bush, in fact at this point he has become a pretty pitiful character.
now again there are some who do but there are a small minority.

when talking about the war, elder tries to portray the dems as the ones out of touch.
but the fact is by a large majority the american people have had enough of this war and the november election and all subsequent polls bear that out.
now don't start about polls because it is a poll that is the basis of this article.

as far as democrats believing bush knew about 9/11 the biased conservative press always leaves out the rest of the poll results which are that close to 20% of independents and 10% of republicans think the same way.

it is my personal belief that they are reacting to the pdb which stated that osama had plans to fly planes into buildings.
in an attempt to be the anti_clinton after he took office, bush pushed aside any advice or direction left behind by any of the clinton advisors.

it was simply a stupid thing to do but over the years we have all witnessed bush stubborness and inability to reach out for opposing ideas.

we do not hate bush just his policies.
i sincerely think he probably a good person, but has been a disaster as a president.

my last point is i have seen just as many harsh comments by conservatives on this website than anywhere else.
how many times has anyone reading these posts seen bush described as the most hated word in the conservative world ----liberal.

Thighmaster
You are so right. Just let the libs keep drinking the koolade their leaders keep pouring them..I really feel sorry for them, and pray they don't have to learn the hard way.

wildwest
we had nuclear missles pointed at us for 50 years and we never succumbed to such hysteria.

look i have no doubt that some of these stone age clerics want to kill us but so did the soviets.
did we beat them militarily, no, we beat them with patience ideaology and capitalism.
we are doing the same with china.

as every general has said, the answer is not military might.

religiouslib
"in an attempt to be the anti_clinton after he took office, bush pushed aside any advice or direction left behind by any of the clinton advisors."

What was that advice? Watch out for this guy, he's up to something... We (the Clinton admin) didn't feel the need to do anything about him, but we are warning you (the Bush admin) that you should. This is the ridiculous "logic" of the left. Bush knew because the Clinton admin warned him. If they (Clinton admin) "knew" then why didn't they take any actions prior to the Bush Administration taking office?

Religious lib
I would maintain there was a certain amount of collusion between the soviet military and ours. They both wanted their military toys and it's resulting power. Both sides knew they would never use the weapons but did like to have them sitting on the shelf. Do the mad mullahs fully understand the consequences of a nuclear strike and the retaliation or do they think only their brain washed followers will suffer the consequences and those leaders will walk away unscratched. If our leaders have given the mad mullahs a complete picture of nuclear adventurism on their part on the resulting consequences have they comprehended an event they have never witnessed or is the lure of paradise more than they can overcome

Pot calling kettle black.
The first,immediate action,of any human being accused,or caught,commiting an act of evil,is to deny,or excuse to legitamize the action. The element of evil,that legitimizes terrorist actions,seeking to destroy America,is the same element accusing President Bush. A different face of the evil element taking actions to legitimize,and further,its goals. The selfish goals of a body to secure,maintain,and govern its force,and direction. Whether a singular body,or a body of many,all are subject to promoting,or denying,this element of evil. A singular body can promote it to fulfill self-love,selfishness.Or a singular body can deny it to promote truth for the whole body. With that in mind answer; with what goals in mind do the Democrats seek to label President Bush as the evil that destroyed American life? What body secures,maintains,and governs its force,in a direction for the whole? With what truths, theoretical, or proven? I pray the body of America fights all the elements of evil that threatens this nation.

J.R.
I knew it was the Jews! If it wasnt for them Islam would truly be a religion of peace! Well except for the jews and all other non- muslums. And oh yes the gays. ....feminists too i guess, women in general for that matter. Maybe if we could get all the islamo boys in one or two big towers the Jews could knock them off too.

Thighmaster
i left off part of my message to the ME when addressing rel.lib. We should provide a target specific list wsith the mad mullahs at the top followed by mecca, medina and any other site their hold precious. Until they fully understand the consequences they will continue to saber rattle. The danger becomes when the mindless sheep they control takes matters into their own hands. That these cult followers can't wait to get to paradise is a more serious threat

Thighmaster: A few questions
you stated:

"The enemy we face now is far more willing to kill us than the Soviets."

I assume youre talking about the so-called
"Islamofacsists Movement"

therefore my question is:

Do you honestly believe that the "Islamofacist"
are capable of conquering the worlds only "superpower" the United States, and if so exactly how do you think they would accomplish this feat?

Bush and 9/11
Yes, and the same 35% who think Bush knew about the attack on 9/11 are the same group that believes the Holocaust never happened. Get your heads back on your shoulders and out of your - - -.

Tons of Evidence
Rob, if NeoCON Bushbots like yourself bothered to read Griffin's book, you'd find tons of evidence. Also, JonesReport is most certainly NOT leftist, but paelo-Conservative (ie - REAL conservatism) and pro-Constitution. You NeoCONs need to stop buying into the phony left/right paradigm perpetuated by the Globalist Elite who control the GOP & DNC "leadership". For the record, here's just a few tidbits of info for your education...

-What about NORAD standing down?
-What about WTC 7 obviously being imploded & WTC Leaseholder Larry Silverstein's admission on PBC that they gave the orders to "pull it"?
-What about other admitted false flags like the Gulf of Tonkin, Operation Northwoods, etc?
-What about all the scientific proof from scholars like Dr.Steven Jones? http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/may2007/150507JonesWTC911SciMethod.pdf
- What about the many WTC workers & firemen who alluded to hearing loud explosions & seeing molten steel running down the WTC channel rails?
- What about BBC repoting WTC7 had collapsed as the reporting is standing in a building with WTC7 clearly in the background??
http://www.jonesreport.com/articles/140507_new_bbc_wtc7.html

There's tons of evidence out there for those who care to look!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WsyEqKQRBY

http://www.infowars.com/martial_law_911.htm





Yada yada and yada
Democrats believe the president possessed prior knowledge of the 9/11 terror attacks that killed over 3,000 Americans. Another 26 percent of Democrats said that they are "not sure." Thus 61 percent of Democrats believe or consider themselves uncertain about the assertion that the president knew in advance about the terror attacks of 9/11, yet did nothing to stop them.
======================================

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/10/august6.memo/

I don’t suppose the fact that the CIA informed them prior to 9-11 has anything to do with why so many believe that they knew?

Just a thought….

Get this: About 13% of republicans ...
... believe this too!

Poll doesn't say what percent of republicans say they don't know.

A difference of 35% to 13% on any issue between republicans and democrats should not surprise anyone.

Slacker's rule of thumb is that 50% of the people don't know what they are talking about anyway.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/22_believe_bush_knew_about_9_11_attacks_in_advance

Ben
"I don’t suppose the fact that the CIA informed them prior to 9-11 has anything to do with why so many believe that they knew?"

Yes, When was that..... Oh right 1998!!! It's amazing that the Bush admin did nothing with almost 3 years advance warning... What's that? The Bush admin didn't exist then? That's still no excuse, they were warned!!!

Nation under therapy
You have heard of the book "Nation Under Therapy"? Quite frankly I think we are a nation in need of therapy. Look at the lunatics that believe this stupidity without any evidence. Look at the stupid, simpleton, of not sound mind comments on this forum everyday. Lack of education, combined with narcissism is making for a society in sore need of help. Liberalism is lazy intellectualism that alwyas equates to grand conspiracy theories that somehow morph into fact. Tell a lie long enough people will believe it.

thighmaster
"we have nothing to fear but fear itself"

krushchef said he would bury us and tried to put missles in cuba.

i am in some agreement with wildwest that we should let it be known that if america is attacked again mecca will be in ashes.

as far as pre 9/11 mentality that is simply a lame talking point.
its like the "they will follow us home" rhetoric which means nothing.

if they wanted to get here they are not waiting for us to leave iraq they would come regardless.

the israelis have faced this same menace for 50 years and they don't act as scared as some americans do. i wonder why that is?

The Statistics
I opened up this column because of its title:
Democrats to Bush: You are Evil.

This should have been a primary reason for not
opening up the column. After recently learning
that tv executives are writing requirements into
contracts that their employees MUST be inflamatory (Imus and Cross Fire and Scarborough come to mind)it is definitely my assumption that at the very least, if a columnist wants to be placed on the Town Hall list, he or she must gets lots of readership. And anyone who has spent more than one day on Town Hall knows what kind of crowd we have here. If not, think: Lions and the Christians. They are out for blood. Level-headed debate be damned.

My immediate response to the title was first of
all - Democrats to Bush: You are irrelavant, at
this point. I can say this because I do not have
a son or daughter fighting the war. My apologies
to those who do.

My second response was: Falwell to everyone who
isn't a fundamentalist Christian - you are evil.
But it is not good or charitable to speak ill of
someone who is so recently deceased.

So I would instead like to ask a couple of questions about your statistics. I have read
them several times on Town Hall. As a group, they must be applying for Sainthood. This is the first time I have seen anyone put a
name and a book behind the statistics.

I had never heard of the good Professor Brooks so
I looked the book up on Amazon. The Publishers
Description clearly indicates the bias of the
professor, even if he was stunned by the results.
Such blatant bias always makes the findings a bit
suspicious.

But that is neither here nor there. Where did he
get these figures and how does he know who is a
conservative or a liberal in connection with the
figures?

I am also curious about a couple of other things.
I have always seen the conservative party as
a hodge podge of three distinct groups with some
overlap. The rich or I'm going to be rich any
day now group, the I don't want to pay taxes and I do want to shoot my pickup-full of guns crowd,
and the fundamentalist Christians.

Certainly with the first group they have more
disposable income and should be giving more.
With the second group, they cheat on their taxes.
(Ok that is an outrageous statement, but I have
known 5 people in my lifetime who TOLD me how they did it and in every case they were from 2nd group with one overlap into group 1. The most recent one was a matter of a contribution to a charity which he then changed from $50 to $250.00. He shouldn't even have taken the $50.00
because he actually purchased an article and was
given a slip of paper with the organization's
name on it listing the amount he paid. He then
put a 2 in front of the 50.00)

The third group is the fundamentalist church
members. About five years ago I read a group
of statistics from a study done that was published
in (I believe) Christian Heritage. It concluded
that church groups that did not allow women in
positions of governance (fundamentalists) had
far less in their church budgets for outside
charities than those churches who did have women
in positions of governance. In other words,
fundamentalists' budgets went to pay the church
bills, their share of the national organization's
budget (if it is connected to a national organization) and then usually some missionary
work.

My curiosity is - does this also extend to the
charitable giving among the members of fundamentalist churches. When my children were
in Scouts, I did a lot of "charitable" giving
to the scouts, when in reality I was simply
paying for some services my children were using.
It still counted on the tax form, but it wasn't
charity in my mind. In other words, giving your
tithe to the church is certainly a charitable
tax deduction, but isn't it really just paying
for services it provides you and your family, if
the money doesn't go beyond the four walls of the church.

Sorry for quibbling. In the end, I am going to
presume that too much congratulations is being
given to oneself through these particular statistics and that sainthood will need
some backup evidence.

On a personal note, I guess I am somewhat like the French.
They are also mentioned often on Town Hall as
creeps for giving almost nothing to charity.
But they pay a great deal more in taxes than we
do and within that framework they assume that the
government is looking after the needs of the
people. Their attitude is that if something should be done, it should not be left willy nilly
to people who may not know anything about it or
how to handle it.

So, I target 10% of my budget (after taxes) to
charities, though since my kids no longer
require my finances and my finances are somewhat
larger it usually turns out to be 14% to 16%.
And it is also my presumption that my taxes are
also going to at least 10% charitable work, to be decided and performed by the experts.

By the way, if you have worked for volunteer
organizations as I have you must know how inefficient they can be. They are often wonderful people but not necessarily the best to get something done. In that instance at least, the French know what they are talking about.

ProudAmericanNationalist
Thankyou for proving my point with your ignorant post. Why did you leave out the conspiracy theory about LBJ and the CIA assasinating Kennedy? Throw that one in there too!

JohnInOregon
Like most liberals, you are quick to assume that those who disagree with you are your intellectual inferiors. For years we listened to libs rant about the "stupidity" of Reagan. Now we're treated to the absurd spectacle of high school dropouts in Hollywood, whose sole intellectual accomplishment is defined by a pair of plastic breasts, comment on the "stupidity" of Yale grad and Harvard MBA Bush. I strongly suspect that his academic accomplishments are far superior to your own.

You are also wrong about wiretaps of Al Qaeda agents calling into the US. Much as Democrats would like to create a "terrorist bill of rights," our enemies do not as yet enjoy the full benefits and rights of US citizens. They are not protected by the 4th amendment. Further, the President has weakened the power of the Executive branch by agreeing to allow FISA courts to oversee intelligence gathering. FISA laws are blatantly unconstitutional.

ReligiousLib - I respectfully beg to differ on the subject of Bush hatred. I agree that there will always be a fringe of impassioned radicals on both sides, but the mouth-foaming hatred of Bush encompasses the vast majority of the Left, far in excess of the Clinton hatred that made the cover of Time Magazine.

thighmaster
I might agree if I was convinced there were other than two groups in the ME. If there are others than the killers and their cheerleaders and enablers i might think there was a chance. We are told their cult tells them they will rule the world. How do you overcome that ideology

virrudh
What does your post have to do with the price of rice? If you don't know what your getting on this website then ignoramus does not even begin to describe you.

left angle
Have you read Londonistan? they (Islamo boys) are doing a good job taking over U.K. Mostly through intimidation ( your racist if you say anything mildly bad about islam) and the complete and willing blindness of a lot of thier politions. After they blew up the trains many pol's and the media went out of their way to say this had nothing to do with Muslums/Islam.

JohninOregon
If you don't want to continually fight wars or reopen Manzanara then you had better get behind wiretaps. Ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

left angle
should be politicians

Thightmaster: There is a threat..
a truly dangerous one to the U.S. as there always have been and will continue to be.

As far as "Islamofascism" is concerned I believe that there is a threat within the ranks of Islam that hates the U.S. however, I believe that smearing everyone that practices Islam with that
pronouncement is not only far fetched it is patentedly wrong.

I think the right wing in this country led by Prez Bush, V.P. Cheney, Karl Rove and Sec. Rice have greatly exagerated and exploited the so-called threat of "Islamofascism" for political gain thru "fearmongering".

The very thought of "Islamofacist" conquering the worlds only superpower, the U.S. is patently absurd and anyone that buys into that nonsense needs tos have their noggin examined.

left angle
I don't think the ME wackos could ever defeat america but I don't want to see horrific damage done either. If they nuke a city or two and kill many thousands and we turn their countries into glass, we win but why pay that price for victory. I maintain these wack job mullahs haven't a clue as to what nuclear destruction can be. Until they fully understand it's power they will probably consider using it

Lolo
Why don't you just shut up for awhile and help
make Town Hall a better place to be.

Many, many people have pegged as among the worst
of the worst on this site, and I would agree.

thighmaster
when your greatest fear is the freedom of women you are not ready to leave the barbaric times you live in. With reports of 60% to 90% illiteracy depending on the country there is no way to deliver a message they understand other than force. The problem isn't so much they reside in the dark ages, it is they want to export their ignorance and intolerance everywhere they go. They are so convinced our lives are so corrupt and there is a pureness to their religion they will be doing us a favor to end our existence if we don't convert. The west attained civilization greatness with the full integration of women into society. When that simple concept evades those killerseverything else remains beyond their comprehension

Lolo....Wake Up!
Whatever Lolo...just go on buying into the Big Government = good mindset (like your sheeple breathren). Meanwhile, your NeoCON "gods" in DC are pushing mass amnesty for illegal invaders, the North American Union (SPP is easily documentable), pushing further infrigements to privacy & the Constitution. The U.S. dollar is being rapidly devalued to bring in the "Amero" (modeled after the EU's "Euro"). Oil prices are being artificially increased to rack up profits for big oil and their pals in crooked OPEC. Meanwhile Americans are paying $3+ per gallon at the pumps! Oh, let's not forget the wonders of "Free Trade" (NAFTA, CAFTA & the FTAA) your NeoCON masters laud...all which have lead to American jobs and industry being outsourced overseas by the thousands! All this proof....and so many Sheeple still support the Neoconservative platform! Talk about ignorant....NeoCON locksteppers take the cake!

http://www.jbs.org/freedom

ThighMaster
ThighMaster writes: Thursday, May, 17, 2007 1:53 PM
Ben
That article is full of holes bro. they cite no specific sources, there isn't a single word in there about the towers being the targets or when it would happen. What did you want Bush to do? Shut down air travel forever?

I just don't understand how anyone can honestly say that the POTUS let islamic fascists kill 3000 Americans with a straight face.
=================================================

Because it is obvious that they are the most incompetent administration we have ever had. That is how.

Four insiders have now said that they were planning the Iraq war prior to 9-11. They were obsessed with Iraq and ignored the real threat of terrorism.

They didn’t have to know exact plans to prevent. They did NOTHING. They ignored it. The didn’t notify the FAA or alert the FBI or anything..

They went on planning their agenda to invade Iraq.

They had blinders on. And they didn’t take the threat seriously. And, if you like it or not, they are responsible for letting our guard down and not protecting America.

Dislike Bush, YOU BET
Here's one of the reasons that I dislike the President.

So for all of you who are avid supporters of President Bush. You go on and on about the President supporting the troops.

So for all of his "wonderful" support we get things such as Walter Reed, etc.

Now comes a new one.

Please read the link, it's not from one of your foaming at the mouth liberal publications, it's from the Army Times.

Your wonderful supporter of the troops next priority? Fighting a 3.5 percent pay increase for the troops as unnecessary.

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/05/military_payhike_whitehouse_070516/

thighmaster
obviously bush and company have done a good job of protecting the homeland, and most americans would agree, but their political use of fear and smear to anyone who questioned them has made the country less safe.

why?

because they are so afraid of alternative ideas that they don't take good ideas when they come along because it might be called "caveing" by the right wing.

Left Angle
Hooray

FDR: "We have nothing to fear but fear itself"

TH Conservatives: We have nothing to fear but
not enough fear"

I wish I could give myself credit for that quote,
but I heard it somewhere on TV - maybe the Documentary Channel. If anyone knows, please let
me know. I plan to use it again. I am sure I
will have the opportunity.

dogjudge
dogjudge writes: Thursday, May, 17, 2007 2:30 PM
Dislike Bush, YOU BET
Here's one of the reasons that I dislike the President.

So for all of you who are avid supporters of President Bush. You go on and on about the President supporting the troops.

So for all of his "wonderful" support we get things such as Walter Reed, etc.

Now comes a new one.

Please read the link, it's not from one of your foaming at the mouth liberal publications, it's from the Army Times.

Your wonderful supporter of the troops next priority? Fighting a 3.5 percent pay increase for the troops as unnecessary.

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/05/military_payhike_whitehouse_070516/
=============================================

You should go to the senate web site and look up how many amendments to properly fund VA healthcare got shot down by party line votes- the republicans always voting against the troops. Back in 2003, our Senator Landrieu put in an amendment to fund the care of troops coming back from Iraq based on how many were coming back- I.e. automatic funding of their care- rather than keep having congress wait until critical mass before taking on the problems. Party line votes- all republicans and Democrat Miller voted against our troops.

This is nothing new. Bush tried to reduce combat pay at the beginning of this war.

Supporting troops is only something that comes up with Bush and company when they wish to silence debate.


Thighmaster & wildwest..
thighmaster:

9-11-01 was no fluke but in comparison to the U.S. "carpetbombing" of Iraq (shock and awe), which did the most physical damage or killed the most people?

the proof in my theory is that President Bush was re-elected to office by overhyping the "threat" of Islamofacist to launch further attacks against the U.S. and portraying democrats as "weak on national security", which both exagerations.

problem is it worked for them then, but by midterms the effects of the over-hype was gone as americans by the majority gave control of congress to the dems with the intent on ending
this needless war in Iraq.

wild west:

I think the mullahs are fully aware of what nuclear weapons can do. Do you really think
those people are that ignorant? I just think
they would be crazy to attempt to use such a weapon against the U.S. if they were able to
obtain one. it would be the end of THEIR civilization on earth. In the end though the
U.S. has more of every type of weapon on the face of the earth. Who are we to dictate to smaller countries what weapons they can and cannot have?

john galt
vast majority of dems "hate bush"

and i could counter with a vast majority of conservatives hate bush.

bush is irrelevant and pitiful, not even worthy of hate.
now cheney is another matter imho.

i participate on a liberal political board at slate.com and you don't see the hate you are talking about.

there is no more hate towards bush by liberals and dems than there is hate by conservatives and republicans towards liberals.

neither is justified in my opinion.

virrudh
What's a matter? Touch a sore tooth? Is that the best you got?

ProudAmericanNationalist
No I am not a proponent of big government, nor do I hate neocons. Reagan was a neocon by definition by the way. I, however, am not a proponent of growing government by a gigantic amount just to turn it into a police state. I will concede your point however that this bill falls far short of what can and should be done. Is that a little clearer for you?

Left angle
I don't know how you draw the conclusion the wacko mullahs understand the power of a nuclear bomb. And yes, those people are that ignorant. I have seen films of a nuclear bomb going off, I am a college graduate but am still in amazement what I saw and its destructive power. Other than memorizing the koran I don't know these mullahs as a group have much in the way of an education and if that is the case they have no way to gage what it is capabler of. Reports have come from Iran that the goal of their getting a nuclear bomb was to level Israel knowing that Israel would still have time to level all the cities in Iran. The report claims that is acceptable to the mullahs as removing Israel would guarantee them all a trip to paradise and the favor of allah. Maybe this is totally false I don't know That some might think this way is scary. You might think the mullahs fully understand the consequences should they use nuclear weapons. I don't share that trust. Their actions indicate a complete lack of concern for life ifg it furthewrs their ambition. Perhaps you have seen a different message

religious lib
I would not say the vast majority of conservatives hate Bush. I think Bush is like most presidents...average. Has done some good , and some not so good. However, I don't think he gets a fair shake either. He constantly gets accused of partianship when he has done nothing but compromise on most things. Thus he has Dems hating him and politicizing everything with the help of the MSM, and the conservativies ticked off for compromising too much and the total unfairness of the entire situation in general. I would also submit that a much more objective picture would be viewed if so much pettiness were not involved to promote political gain. That's why I think primaries are more important. Political office seems to become an addiciton on both sides of the aisle.

wildwest
The book "Living in Hell" among others supports your point of view. I think they know exactly how much damage a nuke would do and that is exactly why they want one. Remember it is the caliphate above all else! Alot of people still are not comprehending the end goal of Islamofascism. What amazes me is the left not seeing it above all else since they purport to hate religious fanaticism most of all. Instead they condemn all religion and tar everyone with the same brush, but lack the courage to do anything about it. That goes back to a lack of education and critical thinking skills. Wonder how many threw out the baby with the bathwater?

Consumate hypocrisy
I'm surprised this hasn't been brought up yet.

The hypocrisy of this issue of Democrats calling Bush evil is amazing to me.

Conservatives - Clinton.

Enough said.

ThighMaster
"Again, what did you want Bush to do? What did you think the FAA was going to do about a non-specific threat that might occur sometime in some place?? "

He wanted him to resign for not knowing that 9/11 would be the first time, ever, terrorists used a hijacked commercial plane as a weapon instead of as a bargaining chip. Conspiracy theorists are easy to dismiss, their delusions come crashing down and they make up more crap to try to justify the insane ideas they project.


"Plenty of blame can be distributed between the 2 administrations for letting our guard down, but nowhere do I see you blaming the muslim nutbags that actually did it."

That's the problem with Ron "cut and run" Paul. He tried to blame America, like other anti-American scumbags have. Rudy slapped him around like a redheaded stepchild. He's doomed.

P.S. ProudAmericanNationalist
There is a big difference between big government and strong government. Big does not necessarily make you strong, and strong does not necessarily make you big. Learn the difference.

dogjudge
Your making assumptions again. I do not hate Clinton. He broke my heart. He failed to live up to his potential by a long shot. He had the potential to be one of the greatest presidents ever and got wrapped up in his own narcissism. I did not vote for him ever, because I suspected this about him . For me the 60 Minutes interview did him in. However, I was not devestated when he was elected...twice. I knew the world would not stop spinning on it's axis. Clinton knows the skinny of what should be and should not be, but trips himself up. He also knows the skinny when it comes to the WOT and Bush. The reason he gets so much anger, other than the lying over Monica, is because the left tries to pee on my leg and tell me it's raining when comes to Clinton. Democrats are just not being honest about him. At least publicly. I know quite a few privately however, three of whom worked for Clinton, and they are very honest...in private. And even more brutally honest about Hillary to the point that it is painful. Quite frankly a part of me pities Mr. Clinton.

thighmaster
Dang it! Don't get me started on the fallacies of Ron Psaul and the blame America first crowd!

ThighMaster
ThighMaster writes: Thursday, May, 17, 2007 2:47 PM
Left Angle
Hold it, hold it, hold it....

"9-11-01 was no fluke but in comparison to the U.S. "carpetbombing" of Iraq (shock and awe), which did the most physical damage or killed the most people?"

Are you seriously comparing the war in Iraq to the murder of innocent people on 9/11??

You need help my friend, serious help....
================================

I will.

The evidence is coming out in droves. There were no ties between Iraq and the terrorist. It was known before hand there were not WMD in Iraq. The intelligence was twisted and cherry picked to support false claims. Professionals were dismissed, generals ignored, security experts destroyed, and anyone not bowing to the official line was destroyed.

And we now have at least four insiders saying the Iraq war was being planned prior to 9-11.

The Iraq war is immoral in all concepts. It was an agenda of the neo-conservative movement and they used the horror of 9-11 to push if forward. All the while allowing the real terrorist escape to attack us another day.

The CIA has also stated the Iraq war is helping the terrorist recruit and train. It emboldened Iran and N. Korea.

We have gained nothing by invading Iraq. The Terrorist gain everything.

And Bush’s “shock and awe” in Iraq was no different than the terrorist attacking New York. Pure aggression for no reason.

ThighMaster
ThighMaster writes: Thursday, May, 17, 2007 2:42 PM
ben
Again, what did you want Bush to do? What did you think the FAA was going to do about a non-specific threat that might occur sometime in some place??

Also, why aren't you addressing Clinton's role in letting OBL go before Bush was even in office? Had Clinton not been obsessed with getting his pipes cleaned in the oval office maybe 9/11 wouldn't have happened. Now we'll never know because liberals all give Clinton a pass.

Plenty of blame can be distributed between the 2 administrations for letting our guard down, but nowhere do I see you blaming the muslim nutbags that actually did it.


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

I would expected him at the very least to put them on alert. I would expect that the Saudi’s the FBI were watching would have continued to be watched.

At the height of the impeachment, Clinton had 70% approval ratings. The country wanted to end that witch hunt, but the republicans were the ones obsessed. They wouldn’t let it go, even after no real matter besides a consensual affair was uncovered. If the republicans were interested in national security at that time, they would have been helping Clinton rather than moving forward with that waste of time.

Clinton was going after Bin Laden. The republican leadership in the house was getting the same intelligence reports Clinton did- they used it for politics. They used it for the pathetic little impeachment games.

If they had put country before party- we could have done more- that is a fact. But they didn’t.



Left Angel:
I agree with you on the over hyping of the threat. But, I think someone like Bin laden would use a nuclear bomb against us in a heart beat.

That is why I am so flabbergasted by the Iraq war. We left the real problem behind and are continuing to ignore it under this admin.

The Iraq war is weakening us. Our Military has never been this unprepared or below readiness levels. The Iraq war is draining our resources and increasing the terrorist threat.

We are less safe under this Administration. Everything they have done insured this.

Lolo
Lolo, it is very much enabling & enpowering (the Government to Orwellian levels) with the passage of Constitutional-flawed legislations such as the(so-called) "Patriot" Act, Military Commissions Act & the John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007. Along with the National ID Card, these horrendous bills are indeed fostering a police state.

BTW, I don't hate NeoCONs/Bush. I was an avid supporter of the GOP for 14 years & campaigned hard for Bush in 2000 & 2004. I also was a "super-hawk" during that time. However, I've studied Globalism and looked beyond "mainstream" knowledge these past 3 years. I know consider myself an Independent, paleo-Conservative, Nationalist/Constitutionalist (not a Libertarian).

Patriot, "RINO" Rudy is a total liberal who paralayed the 9/11 tragedy into millions of dollars for himself (**think "who stands to gain the most"). Dr.Ron Paul a proven Consitutionalist who is founding father material...unlike Globalist shills like "RINO" Rudy, "Flip" Romney, "McKennedy" & even "NeoCON" Newt...

http://www.infowars.com/articles/us/paul_ron_giuliani_and_realities.htm

Ben...
What I was trying to tell thighmaster is that
in terms of "collateral damage" bush's "shock and awe" attack on Iraq made bin ladens 9-11-01 attack on the U.S. look like a cheap amatuerish
small potatoes operation, which it was indeed.

I'm just trying to get where right wingers like him get the idea that the U.S. hasnt committed disatrous/negative acts during it's existence. they really need go back and restudy U.S. history.

PS....Ron Paul 2008!!!
Only Tom Tancredo & Duncan Hunter come (somewhat) close to Dr.Paul...a true conservative and Founding Father material indeed! Look at the man's record and platform instead of listening to NeoCON propaganda from mouthpieces like Pawn Vanity & Faux News...

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/html/Issues_fx.html




Lolo
I have NO desire to start a conversation with
you.

However, since you asked: I do make an attempt
to be as polite as I can whenever I can, so the
answer to your question is - yes, it is my best
shot, considering self-imposed limitation.

ThighMaster
ThighMaster writes: Thursday, May, 17, 2007 3:46 PM


What evidence do you have that everyone knew there were no WMDs in Iraq before the war? NONE. In fact, there is evidence to argue that Saddam had enough time to move his WMD to Syria, there's even an ex0Syrian colonel or general, I forget his rank, that states Saddam's WMD is indeed in Syria. But we never get to hear about that from the MSM.

==============================================
Rice said on the Sunday talk shows over a year or two ago, there was no evidence that any WMD went to Syria.

But yet, here you are still hyping it.

How does this MSM thing work?
The favorite boogeyman on the right is the MSM (when of course it isn't Bill or Hillary Clinton). How do they get their marching orders? Why aren't the people who are supposedly forced against their will to report phoney news that supports the liberal agenda speaking out? Except for Bernard Goldberg, formerly of CBS, who seems a little unhinged sometimes when I view him on TV, where are the rest of these people who have been brainwashed? Or is thier a litmus test when you apply for a job with the MSM that ask if you are a progressive? All of this secrecy and conspiracy would put the Kennedy assasination to shame, and yet, everybody keeps their mouth shut andgoes on doing the job of promoting the extreme progressive slant on the news while at the same time denying a voice of truth from the glorious and virtius right.

left angle
please provides examples to support your claims of negative/disasterous acts. I am truly interested

Thigh Master: Over the Top?
Slavery, the american Indian and Dropping the
Atomic Bomb on Japan, you call that over the top?

I dont blame 9-11-01 on America. Bin Laden DID.

and while i dont agree with him, I can understand where he's coming from. A lot of that
has to do with american imperialism..and i suppose you think thats made sh*t too?

how many people were killed and building destroyed in bush's shock an awe?

we should have let it go? what exactly did iraq
& hussien have to do with 9-11-01? tell me that.

dude you are so naive..lol

Thighmaster
Actually it was Falwell that blamed Americans for 9/11.
"I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way, all of them who have tried to secularize America. I point the finger in their face and say 'you helped this happen.'"

Ron "cut and run" Paul beatdown by Rudy
http://www.nypost.com/seven/05162007/news/nationalnews/rudy_in_rage_at_9_11_diss_nationalnews_carl_campanile.htm

"May 16, 2007 -- COLUMBIA, S.C. - An irate Rudy Giuliani blasted a fellow Republican candidate at last night's GOP debate for trying to blame the United States for 9/11.

Giuliani unloaded both barrels at Texas Rep. Ron Paul, a fringe Republican White House hopeful with little support, who said, "Have you ever read about the reason they attacked us? They attacked us because we've been over there."

"We've been bombing Iraq for 10 years," Paul went on. "I'm suggesting that we listen to the people who attacked us."

Giuliani suddenly turned the polite debate on its head when he jumped out of turn to respond to Paul's shocking comments.

The former mayor tore into him for blaming Americans for 9/11.

"That was an extraordinary statement, as someone who has lived through the attacks of Sept. 11th, that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq," an indignant Giuliani responded.

"I don't think I've ever heard that before, and I've heard some pretty absurd explanations for Sept. 11th.

"I'd ask the congressman to withdraw the statement and say he wasn't serious," Giuliani added to rousing applause - the loudest of the night - at the debate sponsored by Fox News and the South Carolina Republican Party."

Then there's this:
http://www.mlive.com/newsflash/michigan/index.ssf?/base/news-44/117935695635230.xml&storylist=newsmichigan

"Michigan GOP leader wants Paul barred from future debates

COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — The chairman of the Michigan Republican Party said Wednesday that he will try to bar Ron Paul from future GOP presidential debates because of remarks the Texas congressman made that suggested the Sept. 11 attacks were the fault of U.S. foreign policy.

Michigan party chairman Saul Anuzis said he will circulate a petition among Republican National Committee members to ban Paul from more debates. At a GOP candidates' debate Tuesday night, Paul drew attacks from all sides, most forcefully from former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, when he linked the terror attacks to U.S. bombings.

"Have you ever read about the reasons they attacked us? They attack us because we've been over there. We've been bombing Iraq for 10 years," Paul said.

Anuzis called the comments "off the wall and out of whack.""

Ron "cut and run" Paul is a joke, like his supporters, he's doomed because he's out of touch with reality and the war on terror.

Left Angle
Left Angle writes: Thursday, May, 17, 2007 3:55 PM
Ben...
What I was trying to tell thighmaster is that
in terms of "collateral damage" bush's "shock and awe" attack on Iraq made bin ladens 9-11-01 attack on the U.S. look like a cheap amatuerish
small potatoes operation, which it was indeed.

I'm just trying to get where right wingers like him get the idea that the U.S. hasnt committed disatrous/negative acts during it's existence. they really need go back and restudy U.S. history.
====================================

I agree... We have over a hundred year history with the Middle East, some good, some bad, But nothing as bad as the last few years.

Left angle
which slavery are you addressing. The slavery of the egyptians over the hebrews, muslim slavery which still exists, slavery practice by tribes throughout the world throughout history when conquered enemies were kept to do the tribal work, american indians and blacks who also kept slaves or is it mearly white americans who committed the sin. The conflict with native peoples, again happening world wide was more a conflict of an industrial society coming in conflict with a primitive hunter/ gatherer peoples. The primitives couldn't compete, they lost. As for the A bomb and Japan, projections for US casualties if stopping the war involved a land invasion were put at I,ooo,ooo soldiers deaths. Didn't Japan start the war not only with us but also others Asian countries. After the first bomb, Japan was given the offer to surrender and they refused. Examining historical events is always a good exercise examining them with todays values and prejudices are disingenuous. Throughout history there have been many conflicts, humans can be horrible people, but that is all of humanity, not just Americans. In todays world looking at any conflict where muslims are inflicting their will and power of others show us to be rank novices if barbarity is your touchstone

ThighMaster
ThighMaster writes: Thursday, May, 17, 2007 3:46 PM
Ben
I don't know where to start picking apart your drivel, but here goes....

What evidence is coming our in droves? you've provided exactly one article that doesn't say a thing.

What evidence do you have that everyone knew there were no WMDs in Iraq before the war? NONE. In fact, there is evidence to argue that Saddam had enough time to move his WMD to Syria, there's even an ex0Syrian colonel or general, I forget his rank, that states Saddam's WMD is indeed in Syria. But we never get to hear about that from the MSM.

What neocon movement could possibly be acheived by invading Iraq?? You're getting hysterical now, or at the very least completely misguided.

This one's my favorite:
"And Bush’s “shock and awe” in Iraq was no different than the terrorist attacking New York. Pure aggression for no reason."

Saddam violated all 17 UN sanctions, he was murdering Khurds and his own people. He was shooting at coalition planes in the no-fly zone. There is evidence he was pursuing yellowcake in Africa, and actually posessed yellowcake in quantity. He ordered centrifuges buried in scientist's backyards and ordered them to keep quiet until the inspectors left.

Comparing America's invasion of this maniac's land to 9/11 is down right stupid. I suggest you pack your belongings and move out of the country because you have no evidence of anything, no love for your country, and absolutely no intelligence. This is my last response to you as you have no valid points.
===================================

You are unhinged. Everything you said above is false.

In February of 2001, Powell gave a speech before the UN saying there was no evidence of WMD in Iraq and that sanctions were working.

As far as yellowcake and scientist with centrifuges buried in their back yards- you call me unhinged????????????????????? Really…


Here listen to this:
Maj Gen John Batiste (Ret.), former commanding general of the first infantry division in Iraq.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/050907A.shtml

Or, is he unhinged too?

AS fare as the neo-conservative movement goes, are you joking? There whole agenda for the last 15-20 years has been to invade Iraq and “democratize” the Middle East.

Here, read this- http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm
A letter sent to Clinton begging him to invade Iraq and signed by Rumsfeld and Wolfy too.

All there writing between 1997-2000:
http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqmiddleeast2000-1997.htm

In here you will find the justification for “pre-emptive” strikes. All the hysteria of a growing Iraq threat- that the Neo’s helped make worse by Iran Contra-

Or, are we not to recognize that US policy. Because I don’t know about you, but arming both sides of a war seems to be a very good reason the people of the Middle East hate us.

But, I could be wrong and arming both sides of a war could have been their fault we did that--- what!!!! Starting to sound like you now…. Aren’t I….

Ron
falwell later apologized for his remarks. I don't know the man's heart but many of us are guilty of saying things in the heat of the moment that we later regret. basic humanity should allow us to accept apologies for mis-statements

Ben
"We have over a hundred year history with the Middle East, some good, some bad, But nothing as bad as the last few years."

None of our history justifies alqueda's attack. That worthless scum try to blame America for alqueda's crimes, say more about those idiots than America.

The fact is, we can't "cut and run," surrender is not an option. We can't hand over Iraq to terrorists, despite the goal of anti-American scum.

ThighMaster
http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/powell-no-wmd.htm



Click the link to the video and watch both Powell and Rice, prior to 9-11, say the Iraq had no WMD.

Then the neo’s took over.

And made everything worse through their complete incompetence.



wildwest
wildwest writes: Thursday, May, 17, 2007 4:33 PM
Ron
falwell later apologized for his remarks. I don't know the man's heart but many of us are guilty of saying things in the heat of the moment that we later regret. basic humanity should allow us to accept apologies for mis-statements
============================================

Clinton apologized.

Where was the humanity then?

Had to get their guy, didn't they.

If you're not angry, you're not thinking
I know that this isn't the type of place many conservatives visit, but they are bringing up an absolutely horrible position that the Bush administration is taking.

Despite a veto proof vote, the administration is threatening to veto a pay raise for the troops and increased benefits to widows.

Part of the article was also on the Army Times website.

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/05/17/bush-military-veto/#comment-3809369

wildwest
You make it sound like it was a lone, isolated incident. It was not. Falwell has a rap sheet of ignorance and utterance that is very long, I hesitate to post them all. Besides, he never apologized to Tinky Winky.

Thighmaster
You have got to be kidding.

wildworld: were talking about america
and that's specifically what I was talking about...you can put it any context you want to but specifically speaking, the u.s. has committed its share of atrocities historically. to pretend otherwise is intellectual,disengenous dishonesty as the u.s. is portrayed by the right wing.

ben
which event did clinton apologize for. Not defending this country, for using the oval office like a pick-up bar, for using an impressionable and naive women for his personal gratification, for lying to the american people anbd getting others in his administration to lie for him, committing perjury, selling access to the licoln bedroom for his personal profit and all those pardons on his way out of the office. There is a difference between the nonsense spoken by a private citizen and the failure of a president to live up to his oath of office. Too many on the left refuse to see that

Ron
please tell me how you apologize to a stuffed toy

Patriot
Patriot writes: Thursday, May, 17, 2007 4:35 PM
Ben
"We have over a hundred year history with the Middle East, some good, some bad, But nothing as bad as the last few years."

None of our history justifies alqueda's attack. That worthless scum try to blame America for alqueda's crimes, say more about those idiots than America.

The fact is, we can't "cut and run," surrender is not an option. We can't hand over Iraq to terrorists, despite the goal of anti-American scum.
===========================================


I never said it did.

We are not fighting Al Quada in Iraq, we are fighting Iraqi’s in Iraq. Al Quada is in Afghanistan for the most part, and drifting more and more outward.

Do you really believe the terrorist with the dirty bomb is going to show in Iraq for tea before coming here? Or anywhere else with it? Think, will you.

And, the people of the Middle East do have reason’s to hate us. I mentioned Iran Contra before. We armed both sides of the Iraq/Iran war. While Reagan was trying to work with Iraq- the Neo’s undermined him. And is it any wonder that most of them are on this Admin.

Here, a military analysis of Reagan’s Iraq Policy. It could have worked. It should have worked. But Iran Contra undermined him and us.

But hey, they hate us for our Freedoms- Right?

And for all of you who wish to turn all Arabs or Muslims into terrorist. The Terrorist are a very small group. But, don’t listen to me, here is West Point’s Terrorism Unit explaining it.
http://www.ctc.usma.edu/atlas/Atlas-ExecutiveReport.pdf


Oh, and by the way, no one is saying cut and run. We are saying pull back and out. You are right- we cannot just leave. Bush as completely screwed up and destabilized the entire Middle East. It will be our biggest obstacle for the next few Decades, but neither can we sustain a war so completely and incompetently run.

Do any of you know the concept behind “scarcity of resources?”


thigh master...
I named THREE above.

wildwest
You are naive if you don't think Bush (Highest of high standards) will hand out pardons on the way out the door, just like his father.

Thighmaster
Your link to the WMD. I am glad someone has them. BTW, how come we haven't invaded Syria to get them, they are even a smaller country than Iraq?

ThighMaster
ThighMaster writes: Thursday, May, 17, 2007 4:47 PM
Ben
I will concede this to you, I would not have invaded Iraq, not then anyway. Since most of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi, they would've been my target.

But stop comparing 9/11 to Iraq, it's pure hysterical nonsense.
===========================

Why?

Blowing up S.h.i.t. is Blowing up S.h.i.t.

You think the Iraq's that died that day said; thank God it is America killing me?

Bush and Company lied us into Iraq. They were planning it prior to 9-11. They have been writing about it for 15-20 years.

When we left Afghanistan and went to Iraq, it stopped being out National Security and became an agenda.

Killing people based on lies and an unnecessary war is no better than killing people for fanatical reasons.

Destruction is destruction. Dead is dead. Bush’s Shock and Awe was the start of helping the terrorist recruit. And they have been doing it ever since.

left angle
I din't excuse the past but I can't blame people long dead for acting on the mores at the time. Blame america if you chose but also remember our acts of humanity towards the world. No one is either all bad or all good but of course the blame america first crowd always forgets that

ThighMaster
ThighMaster writes: Thursday, May, 17, 2007 4:50 PM
Ben 2
Did you even read the link I sent you? I at least gave your drivel a chance. And had you not been so over the top inyour accusations we might have had a good discussion.

But it's clear that you're not interested in discussion or a different point of view. You think you know weverything which basically means you know nothing.

Go on and keep your hatred of Bush, prove this column right.
========================================
I have not been rude or called names as you have.
I have supported my positions. Your link was to a not very reliable source.

I used West Point, video of Powell and Rice, Military analysis of Reagan's policy towards Iraq.

I don't know what that link you sent was from or who wrote it... sorry...

But, what you state above is PURE projection...(in case you don’t know what that means, you are speaking about yourself but directing it towards me.)




Good night all

one last thing

I don't hate Bush; I fear him and his ignorance.

I fear he will do much more damage to our Country than any terrorist.

Bush ignores our System of Government, our Constitution, and our Laws. There is no room for that in this country.

The fraud and corruption of this administration, that has been oozing out lately, should be enough to turn all good Americans from even speaking their names.

War profiteers are a disgusting bunch, and it looks like that is all this Administration has done right.

ron
to speculate on bushes future acts is a fantasy exercise. If he grants pardons on his way out the door, then history should also view this act in the same nagative light they view clintons

wildwest
isn't it the point of pardons to forgive crimes and indescretions?

Ben
"We are not fighting Al Quada in Iraq, we are fighting Iraqi’s in Iraq."

You are deluded if you think there's no alqueda in Iraq or if you think the war on terror is limited to alqueda.


"Do you really believe the terrorist with the dirty bomb is going to show in Iraq for tea before coming here?"

They've tried chlorine bombs in Iraq before here.



"And, the people of the Middle East do have reason’s to hate us."

There goes the "blame America" crap again.



"And for all of you who wish to turn all Arabs or Muslims into terrorist."

Another canard. Of course they're not all terrorists, but they do exist and they are a danger. You still have a pre-9/11 mindset.



"Oh, and by the way, no one is saying cut and run. We are saying pull back and out."

Jebus, the "cut and run" crowd are all idiots. SAME THING! That's surrender, that's cut and run and worse, that hands Iraq over to the terrorists and we'll just have to go back in within a few years. That's idiotic.

Patriot
Is this the mess we want to be in?

"New report by the British think tank Chatham House concludes, “There is not ‘one’ civil war, nor ‘one’ insurgency, but several civil wars and insurgencies between different communities in today’s Iraq. … It is now possible to argue that Iraq is on the verge of being a failed state which faces the distinct possibility of collapse and fragmentation.”

Link to above http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6663935.stm

Ben - No Half-Truths Please
Ben offers, "In February of 2001, Powell gave a speech before the UN saying there was no evidence of WMD in Iraq and that sanctions were working."

Ben, he was not speaking to the UN. This was not a formal address to the UN, but a kind of sun-shine report to Reporters, not Diplomats. He was speaking to the Press and posturing to demonstrate success. Months later, the evidence changed and so did his opinion.

In a more serious Report to the UN, in 2003, he offered just the opposite, claiming there is, indeed, WMD in Iraq. Although, now, he thinks that his evidence given at this UN address was gravely faulted and regrests his part in that impression. But, he did believe the evidence when he presented it.

Do you really expect to be taken seriously if you only speak in out-of-context half-truths? I expect that the rest of your comments are in the same tradition.

Ron
"the British think tank"

What's the anti-war Iranian think tank say? Who cares?

Additionally, you avoided what else they said.

"Should a U.S. withdrawal herald the beginning of a full-scale Sunni-Shi'ite civil war in Iraq, Saudi Arabia "might not stand by," the paper said, "with the possibility of Iran and Saudi Arabia fighting each other through proxies in Iraq.""

We have to stay and keep training Iraqis until Iraq can defend itself, it's that simple.

If we "cut and run," we hand Iraq over to the terrorists and we'll just have to go back in within a few years.


Ben, what system is he ignoring!
The government of the people, or the government of the poll results taken from a fraction of the people?

Patriot
"We have to stay and keep training Iraqis until Iraq can defend itself, it's that simple."

If it was that simple, why, four years later is it still a debacle or worse? I thought we have been training these Iraqi troops all of these years that the wat has been going on. We got American kids 19 years old, with less training than they've been getting, getting killed.

ron
i thought pardons were for percieved mis-carriages of justice. It's the marc rich pardon that did bill in. You don't pardon a fugitive whose ex-wife passed on thousands of dollars to grease the skids

5 Iran Contra guys
got pardons, they only defiled the constitution.

Ron
"If it was that simple, why, four years later is it still a debacle or worse?"

It's not a debacle, we're making progress. It's taking time and even President Bush said it would be a long war.



"I thought we have been training these Iraqi troops all of these years that the wat has been going on."

They are taking over more parts of their own country, it takes time.



"We got American kids 19 years old, with less training than they've been getting, getting killed."

I'm a disabled vet, myself, these patriots signed up, they weren't drafted. They support the mission, they don't want to "cut and run." Don't pretend that "cut and run" blame America crap is pro-military.

It really is that simple. When we finish training the Iraqis and they can defend themselves, we can go and move on to the next front in the war on terror. The President of Iraq recently said that'd take 1-2 more years. I'd rather stay 1-2 more years than to have to go back in 2-3 years to get rid of strengthened terrorists, fed by Iraqi oil money. It's just insane to cut and run.

Patriot
The troops over there want to come home.

Feb 2006
An overwhelming majority of 72% of American troops serving in Iraq think the U.S. should exit the country within the next year, and more than one in four say the troops should leave immediately, a new Le Moyne College/Zogby International survey shows.

Patriot, You were saying.

Ben - Says Bush Ignores The Law??
Ben offers, "Bush ignores our System of Government, our Constitution, and our Laws. There is no room for that in this country."

Actually, President Bush follows the laws of the land quite well. He was elected, twice, due to his ability to perform as the Public has expected. Additionally, in three elections in a row, his party gained seats in the Congress. Although, in this last election, his party did get quite a spanking by losing the majority in both Houses. My guess is that it was due to not winning the Peace in Iraq.

As evidence of his lawful behavior, a decidedly mean spirited opposition party of Liberals have not been able to musted enough proof to even mount a simple impeachment. Not even on a little white lie over using your employees for sex rides.

You may not like Bush, but he is lawful and his Country put him in office. So, get used to it and quit crying.


Patriot, serious question
were you injured in Iraq?

Ron
"The troops over there want to come home."

Now you're being intentionally obtuse or you're just a mental midget. Of course they want to come home but they want to finish the job. What kind of retard thinks they want to stay in Iraq, forever?



"Patriot, serious question
were you injured in Iraq?"

That's none of YOUR business. You don't deserve to hear my stories.


Patriot
You dishonor the name.

Ron - Constitution Abuse?
Ron says, "5 Iran Contra guys got pardons, they only defiled the constitution."

There is a specific law regarding "defiling the Constitution"? Wow. Luckily Imus did not know about that one.

Patriot
thank you for your service to our country. People such as yourself allow all of us, even libs to post on this site. We are a better nation because others like you have defended our freedom

Ron
"You dishonor the name."

Says the "cut and run" coward.




wildwest
I don't mention my service for accolades but thanks, I'm just one of many, lets all try to remember them too. Many have sacrificed so much more than I.


Mac Moore
I figured you were struggling with the word defile, I know, its 2 syllable so anyway I am posting the definition just for you.

. To make filthy or dirty; pollute: defile a river with sewage.
2. To debase the pureness or excellence of; corrupt: a country landscape that was defiled by urban sprawl.
3. To profane or sully (a reputation, for example).
4. To make unclean or unfit for ceremonial use; desecrate: defile a temple.
5. To violate the chastity of.

ahh the ole cut and run
sure pal.

Patriot
I make it a point to thank all military for their devotion to our country.

Ron - Exemplifies Larry's Article
Ron offers, "An overwhelming majority of 72% of American troops serving in Iraq think the U.S. should exit the country within the next year, and more than one in four say the troops should leave immediately, a new Le Moyne College/Zogby International survey shows."

Larry Elder would be proud of you. You have just proven his point. People tend to respond, in kind, to questions asked of them. We do not know what the Polled troops were thinking. We only know their response. For all we know, they could have responded as a confirmation of how long they think it will take to get the job done.

Most people are job-oriented. The troops are no different. My guess is that when asked when they should leave, they simply calculated when they think they will be done.

Iraq "terrorist Disneyland" if U.S. goes
Once again, in case the mental midgets think surrendering in Iraq with a retarded "cut and run" candidate will appease the terrorists:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070515/ts_nm/iraq_alqaeda_dc

"LONDON (Reuters) - A U.S. troop pullout from
Iraq would leave the country as a potent launchpad for international terrorism and Washington would be forced to go back in within a couple of years, a leading al Qaeda expert said on Tuesday.

Rohan Gunaratna told a security conference at Lloyd's of London insurance market that Iraq, like Afghanistan in the 1990s, would become a "terrorist Disneyland" where al Qaeda could build up its strength unchallenged.

If U.S., British and other coalition troops withdrew from Iraq in the next year, he said, "certainly the scale of attacks that would be mounted inside Iraq, and using Iraq as a launching pad to strike other Western countries -- countries in Europe, North America - would become such that after two or three years, the U.S. forces will have to go back to Iraq.""


Hope that helps...but I doubt it.

Ron
From that same Zogby poll

"Asked why they think some Americans favor rapid U.S. troop withdrawal from Iraq, 37% of troops serving there said those Americans are unpatriotic. while 15% said they do not believe those Americans understand the need for the U.S. troops in Iraq."

Kind of contradicts the assertion you were trying to make. 52% believe those Americans who favor rapid U.S withdrawal are either unpatriotic or ignorant.

Ron - Lost in Translation
Ron offers, "I figured you were struggling with the word defile, I know, its 2 syllable so anyway I am posting the definition just for you."

You earlier offered, "5 Iran Contra guys got pardons, they only defiled the constitution."

I have no problem with the words, but can not find any statute covering this evil deed. So, my guess is that the 5 Iran Contra guys were probably indicted for something else.


drolmorg
"God, how I loathe you dimscum. You don't deserve our protection."

We might protect them all but we don't have to respect them all. ;)


ThighMaster
"I still can't get past blaming the USA for 9/11. Not only would it be insane, but it would be a logistical impossibility.

Or even the argument that some "past atrocity committed by America" meant we deserved 9/11. "

They call "cut and run" "pull back and out" but wouldn't that put us in the same places we were before 9/11? We have to finish the job of training Iraqis until they can defend tehmselves, it's that simple.


drolmorg
You need to quit holding back. Tell us how you really feel :)

drolmorg
never forget this about the dims: you can explain it to them, you cannot comprehend it for them

drolmorg
Ha, I call those "extenuating circumstances". Sounds like you've got your priorities straight!!

ThighMaster
They can HAVE the hp...

drolmorg
"They DO comprehend it. They KNOW what they are doing. They don't care.

Selfish worthless motherless bastards WANT America to suffer. Why else would they believe bin laden over our President? Why do dimscum ALWAYS choose the side of the enemy? Every stinkin time?

Naw, man. They know EXACTLY what they do.

Why...is another question."

Some know, some are morons and some are just myrmidons.

The do it because America isn't socialist enough for them.


drolmorg
they may think they know. They fail to see the consequences. This rush to the big kumbaya festival is nothing more than a fool's errand. If some of the dimwits are looking for love and friendship they need to heed Harry Truman and get a dog. This notion that the world hates us and they will fix that by engaging the killers is stupidly dangerous. we will win when the iraqis stand up and defend their own country and muslims see they can control their own destiny. Those who think they can sit out the coming election because they see no perfect candidate will only enable Red Nancy and her ilk to further erode our freedoms. We must all keep our eye of the goal of protecting this country not only from the ME but those socialists who want to make us into another europe

The Politicians Know
The Dimocritter politicians know what they are doing, and don't care. I don't think the majority of their supporters have a clue though. I had one idiot the other day try to tell me that more Americans died in March of this year than died on 9/11. I will never underestimate the stupidity of the liberal masses.

wildwest
"Those who think they can sit out the coming election because they see no perfect candidate will only enable Red Nancy and her ilk to further erode our freedoms. We must all keep our eye of the goal of protecting this country not only from the ME but those socialists who want to make us into another europe"

Exactly why I never vote for democrats.

Will
Okay, They all hate us and there's nothing we can do about it. Sooooo, are the Dems hoping the people of the middle east will reward our cowardess and begin to like us? You think they would like us more if we invaded Sudan? Since we failed to plan properly previously, what's the plan now after we run away?

muslims
muslim ministers recently met and claimed that the west linking the van gogh murder in holland to muslim extremists was done to stir up hatred towards muslims. Van gogh was killed in a vicious manner by a muslim who accused van gogh of critisizing islamic practices. How do you reason with crazies who blame others because of the acts of their own crazies. I guess the killing was an act of love performed by a caring muslim mearing showing compassion for a fellow human being. These are the people that the dims think they can reason with and will suddenly act civilized if we only sit down and talk with them and show we respect their way of life

drolmorg
He doesn't care, all he cares about is the liberal agenda. He most likely didn't even read the link I posted earlier explaining what happened if we "cut and run" but liberals like him only care about hurting America because it's not socialist enough for them.

Of course there's progress being made, but that doesn't help his agenda.

Senate
Yesterday's vote for immediate pullout of Iraq 67 no, 27 yes. Libs know what a pull out will cause. If they can blame the results on the Repubs, they would have voted us out two months ago. It's all talk and politics with American lives.

Iraq makes progress on...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070515/wl_nm/iraq_constitution_dc_3;_ylt=AidjkC_jKCoHOQet5vvlIuUb.3QA

"Iraq makes progress on crucial constitution plan

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - An Iraqi committee agreed on Tuesday to send to parliament a plan to reform the constitution, an important step towards implementing national reconciliation laws that Washington says are critical to ending violence.

Once-dominant Sunni Arabs, who make up the backbone of the insurgency, have long demanded changes to a constitution they say concedes too much power to majority Shi'ites and ethnic Kurds, who were persecuted under Saddam Hussein.

U.S. President George W. Bush, under pressure to show tangible progress in the four-year-old war, has piled pressure on Iraqi leaders to agree power-sharing legislation.

Such laws, which include sharing Iraq's vast oil wealth and ending a ban on former members of Saddam's party from public office, are particularly aimed at assuaging Sunnis Arabs and bringing them firmly into the U.S.-backed political process.

Saleem al-Jubouri, from the Sunni Accordance Front, said the constitutional reform committee had agreed to pass its draft to parliament next Tuesday -- albeit with some passages unresolved.

He said this would allow it technically to meet a May 15 deadline set by the constitution."



Oh well, so much for the deluded hate-America anti-war retards.

Iraqi president: U.S. troops should stay
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070511/ap_on_re_eu/britain_iraq_talabani

"Iraqi president: U.S. troops should stay

Fri May 11, 3:51 PM ET

CAMBRIDGE, England -
Iraq's president, worried about growing opposition in Congress to funding for the war, said Friday he believes U.S. and British troops will need to stay in Iraq for one or two more years to help stem the bloodshed.

Jalal Talabani told students at the University of Cambridge that all of Iraq was safer because of
Saddam Hussein's ouster and that many people were living "normal" lives.

"I think within one or two years, we will be able to recruit our forces and prepare our armed forces and tell goodbye to our friends," he said."


When we're finished training the Iraqis, so they can defend themselves, then we can move on to the next front in the war on terror.


a general comment
this conversation has wandered way off track which i have no problem with but for anyone with a fair mind i suggest you review the entire thread as i just did.
this post was about hating bush but imho i see many more posts that talk of hate towards liberals than hate on bush.



religious lib
if you want to see hatred check some of the lib sites. We are filled with love and compassion by comparison. I don't see similar calls wishing horrible deaths towards conservs that have come over the lib sites. It was on the news one night the death threats the people who released the information about algores energy use recieved. For libs to lecture us about hatred I would suggest you clean up your own house first

will
You must be a fortune teller.
My point is- Dems have been saying the war is lost, They won't put there money where there mouth is. Talk is cheap. If you want us out have thew balls to vote for it.

jessica lange
where are you getting your information. You have new chargers I haven't heard before. By the way you were lousy in King Kong

Why even try to reason with such idiocy?
"Bush WAS complicit in 9/11"

Why bother?

BS BS BS BS BS BS BS
BS BS BS BS BS BS

Polls and the wording can be made such that no conclusion can be made. I doubt the findings.

If the question was:

Did Bush plan the 9/11 attack or wanted it to happen.

The result would be low.

Wording of a poll question has a lot to do with it. "Do you think Bush knew something about 9/11 before it happened?"

Well YES ofcourse there where signs before the attack, he could have seen if he was not on vacation so much.

Like the report Condi Rice sat on "Bin Laden Determined to attack in side United States"

Like the 20th hijacker flagged by a female FBI against in Minnesota at North Wests Flight Training Center who wanted Boeing 757 and 767 simulator training who said, "I don't want to learn how to take off or land just fly". He sat in jail for months with no interrogation.

CIA knew several Al Qaeda operatives where in the USA.

The list is going on and on. No I don't Blame Bush or Clinton for 9/11. We as a nation where asleep at the switch and they GOT LUCKY. They are not brilliant or powerful, they GOT lucky with box cutters.

Patriot
Patriot, there is a difference between patriotism and nationalism. I hope you realize that.
----------------------------------------

Ben-before:"We are not fighting Al Quada in Iraq, we are fighting Iraqi’s in Iraq."

Patriot:You are deluded if you think there's no alqueda in Iraq or if you think the war on terror is limited to alqueda.
-------------------------------------

Ben now: [Apparently you are deluded. The primary insurgents are Iraq’s. Yes the terrorist are their recruiting and training- that was stated above, but the primary people we fight in Iraq are Iraqi’s. ]
===============================================

B-before:"Do you really believe the terrorist with the dirty bomb is going to show in Iraq for tea before coming here?"

Patriot: They've tried chlorine bombs in Iraq before here.

Ben now: [You did miss the point- didn’t you. The point is we are draining our resources in a country that posed us not immediate threat and that this admin lied this nation to war with. The terrorist are all over- but BushCo ignores that for a stale vision of stay the course in Iraq while denying all the best advice from experts saying get the hell out.]

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

B before:"And, the people of the Middle East do have reason’s to hate us."

Patriot:There goes the "blame America" crap again.

Ben Now: [Now, your just an idiot. But, really good of you to ignore my point. Arming both sides of a war is not good and that is what IRAN/CONTRA was all about. And, I didn’t blame America for it- I blamed the Neo conservative movement. --- but, I know when you have no answer- attack the messenger….it shows your intellect.]

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

Ben before:"And for all of you who wish to turn all Arabs or Muslims into terrorist."

Patriot: Another canard. Of course they're not all terrorists, but they do exist and they are a danger. You still have a pre-9/11 mindset.

Ben now: [The canard that is brought on by the TH regulars that wish to turn all Arabs and Muslims into one big bunch of terrorist.]

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

Ben Before:"Oh, and by the way, no one is saying cut and run. We are saying pull back and out."

Craziness: Jebus, the "cut and run" crowd are all idiots. SAME THING! That's surrender, that's cut and run and worse, that hands Iraq over to the terrorists and we'll just have to go back in within a few years. That's idiotic.

Ben now: [You are worse than an idiot. You stopped thinking all together. Yell it louder and it still wont be true.]

Patriot
Patriot writes: Thursday, May, 17, 2007 7:58 PM
wildwest
"Those who think they can sit out the coming election because they see no perfect candidate will only enable Red Nancy and her ilk to further erode our freedoms. We must all keep our eye of the goal of protecting this country not only from the ME but those socialists who want to make us into another europe"

Exactly why I never vote for democrats.
============================================

Wow, you truly are a nut case. Such hyperbole. Such ignorance.

After all the laws Bush has broken. After all the disdain this administration has shown towards our Constitution. And you fear Nancy Pelosis?

That is funny…

Ben
"Apparently you are deluded. The primary insurgents are Iraq’s. Yes the terrorist are their recruiting and training- that was stated above, but the primary people we fight in Iraq are Iraqi’s."

Apparently, you're an idiot. That there are *more* Iraqis means what to an inbred moron like you? The fact is you claimed we're not fighting alqueda and we are, you lied.



"The point is we are draining our resources in a country that posed us not immediate threat and that this admin lied this nation to war with."

No, your point was about dirty bombs not eminence nor bad intelligence. You're not very good at this, even for a liar.


"And, I didn’t blame America for it- I blamed the Neo conservative movement. "

Oh, we've never heard that delusion from inbred liberals before...


" [The canard that is brought on by the TH regulars that wish to turn all Arabs and Muslims into one big bunch of terrorist.]"

You not only lie, but you're an myrmidon too. I just said that they're not all terrorists but because that doesn't fit your delusion, you have to make up more crap. Terrorists do exist, I know that doesn't help your retarded agenda but too bad, that's reality. You're pathetic.


"Wow, you truly are a nut case."

Pot/kettle/black... See your delusions above.


wildwest
there are extremists on both sides.
but you can go to slate. com and salon.com and you find much more civility than here.

moveon.org is like savage.com ---a bunch of crazies on both sides.

most liberals do not hate conservatives, they hate policies and ideas conservatives have but do not condemn millions of thier fellow americans simply because they are conservative.

conservatives see their fellow americans who are liberal as enemies. that is a far cry from policies differences or personal insults.

look at the post above of patriot for a good example.

retardedlib
"conservatives see their fellow americans who are liberal as enemies."

That's because liberals want the same things as our enemies. Your goals are the same. Blame Bush, blame America, get out of Iraq, get out of (insert place here), more socialism, etc. Birds of a feather...


Murtha to GOP: "That's the way I do it."
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0507/4068.html

"Murtha accused of rules violation

Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) threatened to deny any further spending projects to a Republican who challenged him over an earmark last week, the GOP is charging — a potential violation of House rules that could cause a spike in partisan tensions.

Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.), who questioned money that Murtha inserted into an intelligence bill last week, turned the tables Thursday night by saying he would call for Murtha to be reprimanded for violating House rules.

Rogers plans to insert a transcript of their exchange in the Congressional Record to document the potential violation. His resolution will also require a House vote to reprimand Murtha for his comments, according to a draft received by The Politico. Rogers is expected to file it on Monday.

It does not call for an investigation by the Ethics Committee.

'The way I do it'

According to the draft resolution, Murtha shouted at and chastised Rogers on the House floor Thursday for offering a motion last week to challenge $23 million Murtha requested in an intelligence bill.

Murtha had requested the money to prevent the administration from shuttering the National Drug Intelligence Center in Johnstown, Pa., which is part of Murtha’s district.

“I hope you don’t have any earmarks in the defense appropriations bills because they are gone, and you will not get any earmarks now and forever,” Murtha told Rogers, according to the draft transcript given to The Politico.

“This is not the way we do things here — and is that supposed to make me afraid of you?” Rogers replied.

“That’s the way I do it,” Murtha said."


Of course the democrats don't mind *that* so much...
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.