Where Eagles Dare

It ain't the 1960's folks, there's an anti-anti-war movement afoot in the Nation, primarily being fueled by New Media. I suspect it's done a great deal to bolster the President's message, as well as contining to provide much needed support for the efforts of our troops in Iraq.

Just today, President Bush held a meeting with embeds and Bloggers - Bill Ardolino conferenced in from Iraq.

And Michelle Malkin has the details on a Gathering Of Eagles set for tomorrow September 15.

Check it out.

Comments

[BobInStamford]

I can't wait for these Dodos - er, EAGLES, to gather.

[Other Ed]

Think they'll break 200 people this time? Or will they have to fake National Park Service estimates like they did last time?

[Worst President Ever]

"Gathering of Eagles" - hilarious. Can Chickenhawks attend? Maybe they can send in the choppers to lift Bush's approval ratings out of the dumps.

[MarkJ]

I see BobInStamford's Fan Club--all three of them (including Bob)--has assembled for its regularly scheduled coffee klatch and navel-gazing exercises.

So, guys, how's the weather on Neptune these days?

[Observer]

After the recent damage to the VietNam memorial, I think it will bring out the Eagles and their supports in strength.

[templar knight]

Whether he is guilty of the particular crime you mentioned, Observer, chris/Boob/Worst is the type of guy who sneaks around in the dead of night and desecrates graves and monuments. He needs his little ass kicked. And he should have to do shitter duty at every gathering of veterans for the next 20 years.

[bloodrage bob]

dude! i totally LOVE the eagles! especially glenn frey!

PS - this just in: carter still worst president of all time.

[southdakotaboy]

The left has gotten over confident and has let the mask of "supporting the troops" slip. This time however they will be met by people who are very willing to push back against them.
These guys organize on the internet and pick assembly points, we need to find these rally points and met them there and disrupt their marches before they even begin.

[Worst President Ever]

"These guys organize on the internet and pick assembly points, we need to find these rally points and met them there and disrupt their marches before they even begin"

Yeah, because Free Speech is SOOO Un-American.

As Molly would say, that sounds better in the original German.

[southdakotaboy]

WPR, these people do not think anyone who disagrees with them should have the right of free speach, so I say right back at them. It is one of the old Golden Rules " Treat others like you would like to be treated". They think nothing of trying to shout down and disrupt conservative events and if you try and stop them they say you are preventing their free speach, I'm tired of turning the other cheek with these p.o.s I want our side to give them a taste of their own medicine and see how they like it.

[Worst President Ever]

I'm for ALL Americans, conservative, liberal, whatever, to have the right to express their political views freely. It's kindof the definition of America. Certainly neither side has been perfect. But when you call anti-war Americans unpatriotic - meaning they're really unAmerican and implying that war supporters are the only true Americans, you're setting the bar pretty low for political discourse.

If everyone follows through on what you suggest, you can pretty much kiss American Free Speech goodbye.

[bloodrage bob]

any pompous droning commentary on the enforced leftist political conformity demanded by college marxists, president carter? you know - where the prof bravely flunks anyone who doesn't parrot his dogma back to him perfectly? or the bold burnings of campus conservative papers? or the daring shouting down of dissent?

can we kiss american free speech on campus goodbye, mr. worst-president-of-all-time-carter?

did you happen to notice how the mindless moveon drones - democrats all, BTW - reacted to washington state representative baird (D., Wa.) when he came back from iraq and said "surge working!"? did they try to shut him up? have they threatened his job as punishment for deviating from the approved script? just like they did to senator lieberman (D., Ct.)? why yes, i believe they HAVE. odd, that. i mean for people who SAY they like free speech ....

[Philip McDaniel]

“I'm for ALL Americans, conservative, liberal, whatever, to have the right to express their political views freely.” Nice sentiment, WPE, but not one the leftist in our society seem to believe in or practice.

There are other things they seem to practice with glee however – traveling to the lair of a dictator and spewing venomous comments about our President, his administration, our troops, fellow Americans who are conservatives and proclaiming down right lies as facts.

It is one thing to have opposing political philosophies and debate their relative merits, it is another to denigrate your opponent – as was done so publicly and explicitly by moveon.org in the New York Times and by Senator Hillary Clinton subtly calling General Petraeus a liar. And please, let’s not argue the meaning of Clinton’s comment. We both understand the English language quite well.

[Worst President Ever]

The Moveon ad was stupid, but while you're lecturing about denigration, you might want to consider how conservatives have labeled anyone anti-war a traitor. Now that's real denigration. Senator Hagel, who's about as conservative as you get, suddenly becomes a traitorous RINO because he thinks the war's a mess as says so.

The administration has had problems from Day 1 getting its facts straight. When you repeatedly twist or ignore facts, people are going to call you a liar. It's why Bush's credibility with the US public is in the can. His speech the other night was a litany of distortions. He's simply trying to run the clock out on his administration so he can hand the mess he's made over to someone else to clean up. Now that's a profile in courage.

[bloodrage bob]

jeebus, president carter, do you even READ the stuff you type in? or is it all just a blur of words they pay you $6 an hour to type in for them? you just described - in word-for-word perfection - the operating motto of clintonian foreign policy. naturally, you being the profoundly stupid (possibly brain-damaged) worst president of all time, i don't expect you to understand this, mr. carter. can i call you "jimmuh"?

still, it's magnificent irony, even for *you*.

[Philip McDaniel]

“The Moveon ad was stupid,…” Stupid? Oh I think it was much more than that, WPE.

And you say “you might want to consider how conservatives have labeled anyone anti-war a traitor”. I have considered it. I think a number of people both in government and in the entertainment industry have come very close to committing treason if they haven’t already crossed the line. As a matter of fact, had they done the same things during World War II they would have had their movements severely restricted at the very least.

“The administration has had problems from Day 1 getting its facts straight.” Really? Let’s look at the record: From the first, Al Gore and his minions tried to steal an election from Bush in Florida. You may disagree, but the facts are there for anyone who cares to look at them. And being in Florida, in the very midst of the so called Republican fraud and seeing the actual Democrat attempt at fraud almost succeed, I can tell you it was a sobering event.

Then it started. Calling the President stupid; calling him a liar; producing fake papers supposedly showing he did not complete his tour of duty in the military; distorting intelligence reports on Saddam’s attempt to buy yellowcake then declaring that it was Bush and his inner circle that was cooking the books. Amazing. I could go on and on. All true and provable, but why bother? I find it all quite disgusting. The real liars, charlatans and mountebanks are leftist.

You know, I used to be a Democrat…that was back in the days of Truman and John Kennedy. Something died with the death of Kennedy. The Party changed, not, unfortunately, for the better. Ironically, the only true Democrat left it would seem is the one who is now an Independent…

I remember a comment made to me years ago by a person whose country and people were royally screwed by a leftist congress of ours. Freely translated it goes like this: “These are not people like you and I, they are really dressed up animals.” Think about that for a moment. It speaks volumes.

[southdakotaboy]

The left uses the playbook straight out of 1984. Double speak and New speak. In the leftist world view Good is Evil and Evil is Good. How else can you explain their support of the extremist muslim agenda regarding Israel? Their hatred of anything that disagrees with them and religion.
We have been talking about free speach and someone brought up what is going on on the campuses. When was the last time you heard about a Lefty speaker getting hit in the face with a pie or having their property stolen and destroyed.
We on the right have been turning the cheek way to much we need to start answering back tit for tat until they get the message that this isn't going to fly anymore. I am tired of all those on the right who say that this just shows that we are better, bs all it shows is that we won't stand up for ourselves against bullies. Bullies cave in like little babies when confronted with a good hard punch to the nose.

[Worst President Ever]

No, it's called Free Speech. And until southdakotaboy and his jackboots rule, any American can engage in it. Conservatives certainly poured out just as venomous stuff against Clinton. But I'm sure that speech you were OK with.

You might want to be quiet about voter fraud, becuase there's a bunch of evidence from Florida and Ohio that Republicans engaged in it. Search on Florida Voter Rolls Purge. You'll get plenty of interesting info. And letting Katherine Harris, the Secretary of State, also serve as the c0-chair of the Bush Campaign seems the definition of conflict of interest.

Bush's term in office has been one incompetent act after another. Iraq - no cakewalk, no WMDs, no oil to pay for it, no nuclear weapons, just blood and unending war. Katrina - Bus says, I think I'll stay on vacation. Medicare bill - let's lie to Congress about how much it will cost so we can get it passed. Budget - lets balloon the deficit bigger than anyone ever has. Taxes - yeah we got a war on and a huge deficit, but lets cut 'em anyway. Fiscal Conservative? Please. Immigration Reform - write your own description. Check the exchange rate of the dollar since Bush came to office. It's down, down, down. The Canadian dollar is now worth more than the US dollar.

Now he's telling us the surge is working. But on his visit to Iraq, he skipped going to Baghdad. Gee, I wonder why. Course the political situation in Iraq, which is what the Surge was supposed to help fix, is just as bad as before.

Republicans should be just as pissed at the guy. His incompetence may take years for the Republican Party to recover from. He's done more to hurt the party than any Democrat could ever dream of.

[southdakotaboy]

First off WPE if you want to stand up in front of a group of people and talk your trash go ahead . You want to come to a speach and try and shout down the speaker or attack him because you don't like what he has to say, then I say you need a good thumping. For years you on the left have gotten away with being abusive to those you disagree with and then when people call you on it you call them names. Well guess what, I don't care if you call me names and say I wear jackboots. Jackboots look good and you won't break your toes when you kick something.

[rwilymz]

"Conservatives certainly poured out just as venomous stuff against Clinton."

So therefore let's be just as self-defeating in return. Izzat it? Boy, you're going to show those Republicans how to support a divisive president, aincha? What the Rpublicans did to Clinton was dumb, stupid and largely invented, so, boy, we'll show them how to be dumb, stupid and inventive!!

"You might want to be quiet about voter fraud, becuase there's a bunch of evidence from Florida and Ohio that Republicans engaged in it"

No, actually, there isn't. The reality is that no election is going to have all legal votes cast be counted, and all votERS properly casting their votes. The purpose of election law is to maximize the counting of legal votes and to minimize the illegal votes. Vote FRAUD is when deliberate actions are taken that seeks to reduce legally cast votes, or to increase ILlegally cast votes. And there was none of that in either of the wet-panty *cause de-boob* of today's modern conspiracy theorists. Those actions and items that are pointed at and called "fraud" was election law working the way it was designed to work. You don't like the way it was working? change the law. But calling it "fraud" is conspiracy theory and it makes you incorrect.

"And letting Katherine Harris, the Secretary of State, also serve as the c0-chair of the Bush Campaign seems the definition of conflict of interest."

Case in point.

"Bush's term in office has been one incompetent act after another"

"Incompetence" is where you seek to do something and do not do it. A large portion of what you're griping about is where Bush sought to do something that you didn't like and he succeeded in doing that something that you didn't like. That's not incompetence; that's doing things you don't like.

"Iraq - no cakewalk, no WMDs, no oil to pay for it, no nuclear weapons, just blood and unending war."

The war was over in seven weeks -- which is as close to a cakewalk as you'll find in any history book. The 6,500 chemical weapons that the UN left there in '98 were gone in '02 when they went back. It's not our oil; it's theirs and they keep blowing up the pipelines. nThe blood is almost exclusively their own; and before you deign to define what "war" is perhaps you ought to learn something about military doctrine.

"Katrina - Bus says, I think I'll stay on vacation."

What's he supposed to do? Does the Prez have the power to stop a Cat4 'cane by putting up his hands and commanding it to stop? For someone you claim is "incompetent" you sure are saddling him with mystical powers.

"Medicare bill - let's lie to Congress about how much it will cost so we can get it passed."

Are you serious? ALL legislation costs more than it is estimated.

"Budget - lets balloon the deficit bigger than anyone ever has"

The current deficit is significantly smaller as a share of GDP than the celebrated 50-year deficit that ran from FDR until Clinton.

"Taxes - yeah we got a war on and a huge deficit, but lets cut 'em anyway. Fiscal Conservative? Please."

Straight out of Econ 101. Capitalism makes money by passing dollar bills around, the more often they're passed from one person to another, the more often that dollar can be taxed. You lower the **rate** of taxation, you increase the number of times each dollar is passed, and you increase the amount of taxes you get. You INCREASE the rate of taxation, you DECREASE the number of times each dollar is passed around, and you LOWER the total amount of taxes you get.

The guvmint is getting significantly more in tax revenue now than it was before the tax cut.

"Immigration Reform - write your own description."

It's been pathetic all the way around, and the Democrat's approach has been largely nonexistant. It's pretty much the same deal with No Child. For over 40 years the eentire country [sans the NEA and certain Democratic lapdogs to it] have understood that US public education was abyssmal. And Each prez from Carter through Clinton, including Reagan and Bush the Elder for what it's worth, made a campaign claim to being "the education president". Yet no one did a goddammed thing about US public education. Not one of them. Just whistled past the graveyard.

You don't like No Child? Stand in line; you're behind me. W_A_Y behind. You don't learn anything by memorizing test answers. But at least this is doing **something**, rather than the president fiddling for 40 years while Johnny got dumber than a box of mismatched doorknobs.

"The Canadian dollar is now worth more than the US dollar."

BZZZZZT!

"Now he's telling us the surge is working"

It's not? How would you know, General Patton, sir?

"But on his visit to Iraq, he skipped going to Baghdad."

He's the US President, not a Super Hero X-Man. Jesus christ and a half. Are you seriously advertising yourself to be an idiot? You want him to go stand in the middle of a Cat4 like Moses and part the clouds, and then you want him to go stand in between Sunni Ba'athists and Shi'a Shitheads and let bullets bounce off his chest.

Do you retards actually listen to yourselves?

"Course the political situation in Iraq, which is what the Surge was supposed to help fix, is just as bad as before."

When you lay in a supply of Instant Peace 'n Stability you let us know, y'hear? I've heard you can pop it in the microwave, nuke it for 45 seconds and out comes world peace and brotherhood.

"He's done more to hurt the party than any Democrat could ever dream of."

The same can be said of Harry Ried, Nancy Pelosi and the whole "we'll change everything by leaving it exactly as it was" **voter revolution**.

Don't you get it yet? The Democrats are just as into Iraq as the Republicans; there are trivial details they'd change, but nothing substantial. They just want to be the ones in charge of it, and in order to GET themselves in charge of it, they're telling the boob on the street [this is where you come in, boob] exactly what the boob wants to hear so that the boob will vote for the Democrats. But when the Democrats get in office they don't do anything they promised to do.

And instead of being mad at the Democrats for not doing what they said they would, you're doubly mad at the guy who IS doing what he said he would, and doing it fairly well, actually, and you're redefining "doing what he says" as "lies" and "incompetence".

Nosir. It is not lies and incompetence which has your panties all steaming wet. It is fairly candid success **that you don't like** which has you pouting like a school girl.

[Worst President Ever]

Conservatives certainly poured out just as venomous stuff against Clinton."

So therefore let's be just as self-defeating in return. Izzat it? Boy, you're going to show those Republicans how to support a divisive president, aincha? What the Rpublicans did to Clinton was dumb, stupid and largely invented, so, boy, we'll show them how to be dumb, stupid and inventive!!

** I said previously that it was stupid but southdakotaboy seems to think it's only Dems that engage in attack tacktics.

"You might want to be quiet about voter fraud, becuase there's a bunch of evidence from Florida and Ohio that Republicans engaged in it"

No, actually, there isn't. The reality is that no election is going to have all legal votes cast be counted, and all votERS properly casting their votes. The purpose of election law is to maximize the counting of legal votes and to minimize the illegal votes. Vote FRAUD is when deliberate actions are taken that seeks to reduce legally cast votes, or to increase ILlegally cast votes. And there was none of that in either of the wet-panty *cause de-boob* of today's modern conspiracy theorists. Those actions and items that are pointed at and called "fraud" was election law working the way it was designed to work. You don't like the way it was working? change the law. But calling it "fraud" is conspiracy theory and it makes you incorrect.

**Yes. Read Greg Palast's work.

"And letting Katherine Harris, the Secretary of State, also serve as the c0-chair of the Bush Campaign seems the definition of conflict of interest."

Case in point.

** By Harris' decree, ChoicePoint — a private firm — was hired prior to the election to identify and remove thousands of names from the state voters list on the condition that these people were convicted felons. Many of these would-be voters were turned away at the polls or even prior to reaching the polling places. It would later be discovered that approximately 97% of the people removed from the list — and thus denied the right to vote in the election — were not felons at all. The majority of these voters were African-American, and as African-Americans predominantly vote Democratic, the situation suggested foul play.[13] In any case, the thousands of votes affected by Choicepoint's error were far in excess of the number of votes (537) by which George W. Bush won the state. Whether or not there was deliberate action to prevent likely Gore supporters from voting is subject to intense debate, as is Harris' role in the process.

"Bush's term in office has been one incompetent act after another"

"Incompetence" is where you seek to do something and do not do it. A large portion of what you're griping about is where Bush sought to do something that you didn't like and he succeeded in doing that something that you didn't like. That's not incompetence; that's doing things you don't like.

** Bush is incompetent. He promised a cakewalk in Iraq - we didn't get it, and that's the signature issue of his presidency. And Iraq has been one incompetent decision after another. Even Republican leaders admit that. I don't how you can define Katrina away as anything but incompetence. On another signature issue, immigration, he hasn't been able to do anything. Part D of the Medicare bill.

"Iraq - no cakewalk, no WMDs, no oil to pay for it, no nuclear weapons, just blood and unending war."

The war was over in seven weeks -- which is as close to a cakewalk as you'll find in any history book. The 6,500 chemical weapons that the UN left there in '98 were gone in '02 when they went back. It's not our oil; it's theirs and they keep blowing up the pipelines. nThe blood is almost exclusively their own; and before you deign to define what "war" is perhaps you ought to learn something about military doctrine.

** Utter nonsense. Tell the families of the dead that the war was over years ago and many more Iraqis are dying than Americans. I'm sure they'll be comforted. If the WMDs were gone, what the hell did we attack Iraq for? Wolfowitz said the oil would pay for the war, it's him you'll have to debate about oil ownership. And a number of Repbulicans have admitted the war really was about oil after all. It ain't peace, soldiers are dying, we just did a surge. What do you call it? I'm sure those fighting in Iraq will be happy to hear it's not a war. They'll sleep better at night, I'm sure.

"Katrina - Bus says, I think I'll stay on vacation."

What's he supposed to do? Does the Prez have the power to stop a Cat4 'cane by putting up his hands and commanding it to stop? For someone you claim is "incompetent" you sure are saddling him with mystical powers.

** Show a little leadership. But I guess the the flyover met your presidential standards. "Good job, Brownie".

Are you serious? ALL legislation costs more than it is estimated.

**Are you willfully ignorant? Or just uninformed:

"Medicare bill - let's lie to Congress about how much it will cost so we can get it passed."

** WASHINGTON - The nation's top Medicare cost analyst confirmed yesterday that his former boss had ordered him to withhold from lawmakers unfavorable cost estimates about the Medicare prescription-drug bill. He said the estimates exceeded what Congress seemed willing to accept by more than $100 billion.

Richard Foster, chief actuary at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, said that in early June he received a written note from Thomas Scully, then the centers' administrator, ordering him to ignore information requests from members of Congress who were drafting the drug bill.

"Budget - lets balloon the deficit bigger than anyone ever has"

The current deficit is significantly smaller as a share of GDP than the celebrated 50-year deficit that ran from FDR until Clinton.

** No, Most of that debt accumulated under Reagan. Clinton left Bush a surplus.

The percentage of debt to GDP continued to grow until 1996, when Mr. Clinton began to get government spending under control. The US debt peaked at 67.3% of GDP under his administration. By the end of the Clinton administration this percentage had dropped to 57.6%. Debt as a percent of GDP dropped almost 10% in four years under Clinton.

Mr. Bush II inherited a shrinking government and debt in 2001. With his first budget he managed to increase the debt to GDP ratio to 60.0%, by cutting taxes but not spending. By 2004 this ratio had risen to 63.7%, as a result of additional tax cuts but no significant corresponding cuts in spending. Government estimations (which are notoriously low) predict that the debt to GDP ratio will grow to 69.3% by 2008, two percent higher than the previous peak in 1996. Mr. Bush will completely wipe out the gains we made under a fiscally responsible Democratic President.

"Taxes - yeah we got a war on and a huge deficit, but lets cut 'em anyway. Fiscal Conservative? Please."

Straight out of Econ 101. Capitalism makes money by passing dollar bills around, the more often they're passed from one person to another, the more often that dollar can be taxed. You lower the **rate** of taxation, you increase the number of times each dollar is passed, and you increase the amount of taxes you get. You INCREASE the rate of taxation, you DECREASE the number of times each dollar is passed around, and you LOWER the total amount of taxes you get.

The guvmint is getting significantly more in tax revenue now than it was before the tax cut.

** Of course it's getting more in tax revenue. The economy grows, and no matter how much you cut taxes, eventually you'll get more revenue than before the cuts. But it took four years for Bush tax revenues to surpass those of Clinton's last year in office.

"Immigration Reform - write your own description."

It's been pathetic all the way around, and the Democrat's approach has been largely nonexistant. It's pretty much the same deal with No Child. For over 40 years the eentire country [sans the NEA and certain Democratic lapdogs to it] have understood that US public education was abyssmal. And Each prez from Carter through Clinton, including Reagan and Bush the Elder for what it's worth, made a campaign claim to being "the education president". Yet no one did a goddammed thing about US public education. Not one of them. Just whistled past the graveyard.

You don't like No Child? Stand in line; you're behind me. W_A_Y behind. You don't learn anything by memorizing test answers. But at least this is doing **something**, rather than the president fiddling for 40 years while Johnny got dumber than a box of mismatched doorknobs.

"The Canadian dollar is now worth more than the US dollar."

BZZZZZT!

**If the US currency falls from favor, and other countries decide to stop financing our debt, you'll wake up fast.

"Now he's telling us the surge is working"

It's not? How would you know, General Patton, sir?

** Uh, reading the numbers, watching the Iraqi legislators go on a months vacation, etc.

"But on his visit to Iraq, he skipped going to Baghdad."

He's the US President, not a Super Hero X-Man. Jesus christ and a half. Are you seriously advertising yourself to be an idiot? You want him to go stand in the middle of a Cat4 like Moses and part the clouds, and then you want him to go stand in between Sunni Ba'athists and Shi'a Shitheads and let bullets bounce off his chest.

Do you retards actually listen to yourselves?

** Name-calling - so juvenile. But you're letting your ignorance show. If you're going to have a surge, then visit the country right before giving a national speech claiming it's a success, you might want to visit the city the surge was aimed at pacifying: Baghdad. But reading your description of Baghdad, you apparently don't believe it's been pacified either.

"Course the political situation in Iraq, which is what the Surge was supposed to help fix, is just as bad as before."

When you lay in a supply of Instant Peace 'n Stability you let us know, y'hear? I've heard you can pop it in the microwave, nuke it for 45 seconds and out comes world peace and brotherhood.

** It's Bush and supporters that have been claiming things are getting better, Remember, the damn Liberal Media hasn't been reporting the good news. Conservatives have claimed Baghdad is safer than Detroit. Senator McCain claimed Baghdad was safe enough to take evening strolls. Sen. Lindsey Graham and Reps. Mike Pence and Rick Renzi said similar.

"He's done more to hurt the party than any Democrat could ever dream of."

The same can be said of Harry Ried, Nancy Pelosi and the whole "we'll change everything by leaving it exactly as it was" **voter revolution**.

** Read any polls lately? http://pollingreport.com/cong2008.htm

Don't you get it yet? The Democrats are just as into Iraq as the Republicans; there are trivial details they'd change, but nothing substantial. They just want to be the ones in charge of it, and in order to GET themselves in charge of it, they're telling the boob on the street [this is where you come in, boob] exactly what the boob wants to hear so that the boob will vote for the Democrats. But when the Democrats get in office they don't do anything they promised to do.

And instead of being mad at the Democrats for not doing what they said they would, you're doubly mad at the guy who IS doing what he said he would, and doing it fairly well, actually, and you're redefining "doing what he says" as "lies" and "incompetence".

Nosir. It is not lies and incompetence which has your panties all steaming wet. It is fairly candid success **that you don't like** which has you pouting like a school girl.

** And I have no clue what "It is fairly candid success" is.

It's Bush's War, end of story. He made the case for it, it's his and the Republicans legacy. The American Public is sick of it and wants it over.

And when a Democrat becomes president in 2009, we'll be out of Iraq. You can count on it.

[southdakotaboy]

WPE you seem to think calling me names was just fine, but it is juvenile when done to you. Typical lib you sure can dish it out but turn into a little cry baby when somebody dishes it back. Another lib trait is changing the subject when you can't answer. I asked you earlier if you could name a lefty speaker who had been attacked while giving a speach on campus or lib groups that had their newspapers stolen and burned. Needless to say you changed the subject. Today the "progressives" are intolerent, bigots. Yes, I called you guys bigots. To justify that just ask any black conservative how they are treated by white progressives. You could also ask Asians how they like the whole affermative action thing on college campuses.

[rwilymz]

"Yes. Read Greg Palast's work"

You want to deny you're a conspiracy theorist by refering me to a conspiracy theorist?

"By Harris' decree, ChoicePoint — a private firm — was hired prior to the election..."

She was the Atty Genl, and by law has authority over the running of the election. Many, if not most, government functions are handled by contract workers. Are you trying to complain that the guvmint hired contract workers?

"...to identify and remove thousands of names from the state voters list on the condition that these people were convicted felons..."

...per law. But that's not the only reason allowed by law to remove people from voter roles.

"It would later be discovered that approximately 97% of the people removed from the list — and thus denied the right to vote in the election — were not felons at all."

Not quite. But that's the way it goes. In order to demonstrate a conpiracy to commit fraud, you need to prove deliberation. Coincidence doesn't cut it.

C'mon. Attach your brain, here.

"The majority of these voters were African-American..."

African-Americans or, in order to avoid being a mincing mealy-mouth, *blacks*, are disproportionately "administered" by the judicial system. They are also disporportionately poor, move around a lot, and have multiple addresses -- another indicator of voter fraud. Hence their removal.

The bottom line, skeezix, if you're going to consider yourself as a worthy analyst you simply cannot throw away information that does not conform to your preset bias. Analysts use ALL data, and draw their conclusions from the picture that ALL the data makes.

What you are doing is called conspiracy theorizing: throw away data that you don't like, use the little that's left and fill in the blanks with innuendo.

"Bush is incompetent. He promised a cakewalk in Iraq - we didn't get it"

Yes. We did. Name another time in the history of EVER in which a nation of 25 million was conquered by a military force 1% that size, in 7 weeks, with as little loss of life, military and civilian, friend and foe, as the conquest of Iraq.

Issuing a convenient fantasy makes you wrong, and repeating it simply makes you wrong repeatedly. The answer is not going to change. If you wish to discuss military tactics and doctrine with me then I'd advise you to learn a little more about the subject than you can pick up from Hogan's Heros reruns.

"Iraq has been one incompetent decision after another."

Name one, General.

"Even Republican leaders admit that"

Politicians are going to say what the voters want to hear them say. If you listen to a politician and give it more than minimal credence, you are a boob.

... you are a boob.

"If the WMDs were gone, what the hell did we attack Iraq for?"

They violated the cease fire; we were obliged to babysit them ad infinitum; we no longer had the capacity to do so.

"I don't how you can define Katrina away as anything but incompetence."

Because I don't expect the US guvmint to be a wizard with a magic wand. Maybe you do.

One of us, it seems, will be perpetually disappointed.

"Utter nonsense. Tell the families of the dead that the war was over years ago"

I work with them, buckwheat. The "families of the dead" that **you** hear about are the slim minority who want to whine and carry on.

"It ain't peace, soldiers are dying, we just did a surge. What do you call it?"

Look, sparky, just because you saw Saving Private Ryan does not mean you know jack shit about the military or how wars are conducted. Just because people are walking around with guns and shoots them off every once in a while does not mean it is called "war". This, in fact, is called "occupation". The rules of engagement are almost completely different.

In short, squirt, learn what the hell you're talking about before talking.

"Are you willfully ignorant? Or just uninformed"

I'm not naive. You are. The *>snffff<* smoking gun you threw down as your trump card is de rigeuer DC politics.

Stop being a boob.

"No, Most of that debt accumulated under Reagan. Clinton left Bush a surplus."

What is this, gainsay hour? The DEBT was paid off. The DEBT was accumulated over 60 years of deficit spending from FDR through Clinton, with a one-year surplus under Nixon. Bush simply started the deficit spending and debt accumulation again.

"it took four years for Bush tax revenues to surpass those of Clinton's last year in office."

Yeah? And? Are you wanting microwave economics now?

"If the US currency falls from favor, and other countries decide to stop financing our debt, you'll wake up fast."

Wah, wah, wah. The rest of the world cannot do without the US. We can do without the rest of the world a lot easier.

"Uh, reading the numbers, watching the Iraqi legislators go on a months vacation, etc"

Ahhhh. Right. So, if you are asked if your furnace is working, are you going to open the window and see if it's cold outside to find the answer?

"Name-calling - so juvenile."

I'm not above name-calling, squire. I don't care if you call me names either. But the bottom line is: if you don't want me calling you a retard, don't sound like one. Don't talk like one. Don't write like one. It's veryveryvery simple.

Kinda like you.

"But reading your description of Baghdad, you apparently don't believe it's been pacified either."

You really believe your own bullshit don't you. Let's go back to that furnace of yours. Because you checked to see if your furnace was working by opening all your windows, it's now cold in your house. Well, somebody with actual brains in his head -- say, for example, me -- came in, whacked you upside the head and shut all your windows and turned on the furnace. Instead of being 55 degrees inside, it's now 62.

Is it warm? Is it hot?

Or is it simply warmER?

"Conservatives have claimed Baghdad is safer than Detroit."

It quite likely is -- in parts.

"Read any polls lately?"

Actually, no. I have to work in the bottom edge of political shinola and try to avoid it as much as I can.

But I'm aware that the new modern savior of the Democratic Congress polls worse than Satan Incarnate president.

"And I have no clue what "It is fairly candid success" is."

Of course you don't.

Your whole whinewhinemewl response was a testament to what you don't know.

"The American Public is sick of it and wants it over."

Ahh. Now, there you have a legitimately supportible argument. We are, indeed, a democratic republic, and if the majority of the public is tired of something, they tend to get what they want. Eventually. We can very easily declare the war a loss, and come home with our flag between our legts and weep and wail the obligatory self-recrimination theat manymanymany want us to weep and wail. Oh, big bad **us**.

Or ...

The 99.95% of the Americans who know bupkus about war and how to run them and how to judge whether they are won or lost can sit down, shut up, and let those who know what the fuck they're doing simply do it.

"when a Democrat becomes president in 2009, we'll be out of Iraq. You can count on it."

I'd bet you on that, but I wouldn't want to take your last shred of dignity. I work in the war planning/executing/supplying area, and I know better than to make such a foolish, foolish, **foolish** statement as you just did. Clinton signed the US up for more military actions in his 8 years than Bush the Younger has in the first 6-1/2 of his. By far. More. But smaller.

Bush, far fewer, but bigger in scope.

Are we going to be uninvolved in foreign intrigue in Iraq under a completely Democratic guvmint? hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. Don't be a dope. The Democrats are, in fact, agitating for a "moral" war in Sudan. Oh, those poor, poor Fur tribe revolutionary slave-traders. They started a revolution and lost, and they should not have to lose just because they're poor revolutionaries. Awwww, let them go back to being slave-traders! Right?

Cuz that'd be **moral**.

Just like the pre-emptive war for regime change against Serbia was "moral". Let's save another batch of failed revolutionaries. Hey. I don't personally care. I'm employed either way. And I haven't had to worry about my job since Carter.

But if you sincerely think that Democrats are all about peace and group hugs, then you are a grade-A idiot.

And if you think that anything will be remarkably different if/when the Democrats sweep the Republicans into the dustbin, then you are not only a grade-A idiot, but you are standing on the street corner, naked, shouting your idiocy.

[Worst President Ever]

For someone who seems to have such a high opinon of himself, you sure have a problem with facts and history.

Palast is an investigative reporter, not a conspiracy theorist. He digs up facts rather than creating them out of thin air. Conspiracy theorists would be the people that try to link Iraq to 9/11 with absolutely no evidence.

"She was the Atty Genl,"

No, she was Secretary of State.

"The war was over in seven weeks"

No, the battle with Saddam's army was over in seven weeks, the war goes on. We had enough soldiers to win the battles, but not enough to control the country and make a lasting peace. There's more to war than blowing things up.

"They violated the cease fire; we were obliged to babysit them ad infinitum; we no longer had the capacity to do so."

And you call me a retard - you either can't admit or don't understand the justifications used for the war. The principal arguments for invading Iraq were WMDs, a connection to Al Qaeda, and Ms. Rice's wonderful mushroom cloud imagery. All those proved false. No WMDS, no Al Qaeda connection, no nuclear program.

"Iraq has been one incompetent decision after another."

Name one, General.

Oh man, you really are either clueless or intentionally ignorant.

1. Not understanding what it would take to control and rebuild Iraq. General Shineski told Bush it would take hundreds of thousands of soldiers to police Iraq. He got fired.
2. Disbanding the Iraqi army
3. Putting inexperienced political neophytes in charge of crucial projects.

Wolfowitz Concedes Iraq Errors: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37468-2003Jul23.html
Bremer: 'I made some mistakes' in Iraq
http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/01/13/iraq.main/

Here's George Will's list of mistakes - attack him if you want:

10. Refusing to fire Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld when his incompetence and maliciousness became apparent in the growing guerrilla war and the Abu Ghraib torture scandal.

9. Declining to intervene in the collapsed economy or help put Iraqi state industries back on a good footing, on the grounds that the "market" would magically produce prosperity effortlessly.

8. Invading and destroying the Sunni Arab city of Fallujah in November, 2004, thus pushing the Sunni Arabs into the arms of the insurgency in protest and ensuring that they would boycott the January, 2005, parliamentary elections, a boycott that excluded them from power and from a significant voice in crafting the new constitution, which they then rejected.

7. Suddenly announcing that the US would "kill or capture" young nationalist Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr in spring, 2004, throwing the country into massive turmoil for months.

6. Replying to Baathist guerrilla provocations with harsh search and destroy missions that humiliated and angered ever more Sunni Arab clans, driving them to support or join the budding guerrilla movement.

5. Putting vengeful Shiites in charge of a Debaathification Commission that fired tens of thousands of mostly Sunni Arab state employees simply for having belonged to the Baath Party, leaving large numbers of Sunnis penniless and without hope of employment.

4. Dissolving the Iraqi Army in May, 2003, and sending 400,000 men home, unemployed, resentful and heavily armed.

3. Allowing widespread looting after the fall of Saddam Hussein on April 9, 2003, on the grounds that "stuff happens," "democracy is messy," and "how many vases can they have?"-- and thus signalling that there would be no serious attempt to provide law and order in American Iraq.

2. Plotting to install corrupt financier, notorious liar, and shady operator Ahmad Chalabi as the soft dictator of Iraq, and refusing to plan for a post-war administration of the country because that might forestall Chalabi's coronation.

1. Invading Iraq.

*********
On the one hand you argue Bush couldn't go to Baghdad because it's too dangerous. Then you argue it's safer than Detroit. That's nonsensical.

You start a war on false premises and it doesn't go as advertised, you're going to lose your support.

If you want the war to go on endlessly, you're going to have to support a draft. Because we don't have the men to keep troop levels where they are for much longer.

I'll take that bet.

[bloodrage bob]

golly! all those mistakes, and bush is *STILL*, by several orders of magnitude, a better president than carter ever was. (hint: as opposed to the profoundly stupid carter, bush made his mistakes after the completion of a hugely successful military operation involving **destroying** arabs, rather than being **humiliated by them** - as carter was.) i guess that's why everyone unanimously agrees that carter is "worst president ever", no?

PS - in late "free speech" news, the marxists/leftists at U cal davis have denied former harvard president larry summers his chance to address them. it seems davis had invited summers to address them, but the hardcore marxist faculty wasn't going to stand for *that*! no way, comrade! preferring instead to employ the time-honored left-wing stance of "silencing all speech not sanctioned by the party". ah, well. at least they didn't just take summers out and execute him, as leftist icons stalin & mao did so often.

[rwilymz]

"Palast is an investigative reporter, not a conspiracy theorist"

...or a conspiracy theorist.

"No, the battle with Saddam's army was over in seven weeks"

I.e., "the war". If you're going to talk military doctrine, then know what you're talking about.

"There's more to war than blowing things up"

Not really. But, then, if you're going to talk military doctrine, then know what you're talking about.

"And you call me a retard "

You write like one, I will every time, yes.

"you either can't admit or don't understand the justifications used for the war."

The "justifications used" is pure unadulterated politics. If you listen to politicians, talking politics -- and believe them -- then you are the retard that you write like.

"The principal arguments for invading Iraq were WMDs, a connection to Al Qaeda"

I'm aware.

And Iraq was suppsoed to have had 6,500 chemical weapons in warehouses that the UN stored between '92 and '98. They were gone in '02.

Iraq was a state-sponsor of pan-islamist "terrorists", and had an al Qaida-lite operating -- such as it was -- out of Iraq. Now I'm real sorry, but them's facts. Trivialize them all you want, but you're not going to get around them.

"All those proved false."

Nat quite.

No matter how you try to rationalize, Iraq had 6,500 chemical weapons that disappeared. No matter how you try to dissemble, Iraq sponsored "terrorists" and had groups squatting on their territory.

Sorry.

You are wrong.

You'd better get used to it.

"Oh man, you really are either clueless or intentionally ignorant."

Talking to yourself? Should I bow out?

"Not understanding what it would take to control and rebuild Iraq"

There are lots of divergent positions on policy. None of them are "fight" and none of them are "wrong".

"Disbanding the Iraqi army"

That was a state Department requirement. I would agree.

"Putting inexperienced political neophytes in charge of crucial projects"

Vague. You need to do better.

The only neophyte I know of locally is you.

"Here's George Will's list of mistakes - attack him if you want"

You're kidding, right?

Are you seriously going to justify your conspiracy theory by selecting the convenient criticisms that match your vagrant opinions?

That's the mark of a [get ready] conspiracy theorist.

"On the one hand you argue Bush couldn't go to Baghdad because it's too dangerous. Then you argue it's safer than Detroit. "

No. I didn't.

But you're free to quote me. I know what I said, and if you're going to equivocate, then you can simply advertise yourself here and now as a dishinest liar.

"You start a war on false premises..."

False to whom?

To those who know what they're talking about? ...which necessarily excludes you? Or to the 99.95% dimbulbs who know nothing about the conjunction of military/diplomacy and operate off what they've picked up from Hogans Heros?

If you listen to the policitians... and believe what they tell you ... then you are an idiot. Or a retard. As you prefer.

"...and it doesn't go as advertised, you're going to lose your support."

In this day and age, if the dust doesn't settle in two months and gets wipes clean by Endust, then you're going to "lose support". That's just the way it works when you play to polls.

"I'll take that bet"

What bet is that? That the majority is a collective dupe? And you right along with them?

Point shaving, arya?