Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- gster on Goldman Sachs ‘apology’ hollow
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/24
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/24
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- minutelady on Open thread 11/24
- minutelady on Open thread 11/24
Open thread 8/16
- By Phillip Brownlee
- Posted Aug. 16, 2007 at 1:05 a.m.
- Filed under Open thread
- Permalink
- Comments RSS
- Both comments and trackbacks are closed
261 Comments
I was watching a speech given by Michele Malkin, author, blogger and sometime host and commenter on Fox News. At times she makes O’Reilly and Hannity look like moderate liberals, she is better to look at then Ann Coulter but not one centimeter more insightful or intelligent. I started laughing when she talked about the differences between two bloggers that report from Iraq. One reports only the good things he finds happening there. The other has reported some of the atrocity he has witnesses. U.S. troops making fun of a civilian working in the mess hall that was disfigured by a I.E.D. Soldiers dancing around with the skull of a child they found in a mass grave, etc.
Malkin made the following statement: “Atrocities happen there… I do not deny it, I and fellow bloggers do not deny it! But just because they happen does that mean we can take it as the true?”.
“they happen does that mean we can take it as the truth?”.“they happen does that mean we can take it as the truth?”.
If something happens and you question if it is the truth, there is a word to describe that.Ms. Malkin that is called DENIAL!Oh don’t get me wrong, she is not alone in her blind thought process on the right she is one of the extreme along with Charles Krauthhammer. On the left Michael Moore and Shawn Penn, all in that special group that are so Partisan they think Cancer is caused by the left or the right. All appealing to the less then intelligent side of human nature.
But back to the subject, yes Ms. Malkin if you recognize that something happens then you can accept that it is true! As the saying goes, denial is not just the name of a river in Egypt….
If you don’t hear about it, it never happened! Which is why it is so important that reporters just report the ‘Good News’ in Iraq. This war could be over in a Jiffy if some of the media would just quit reporting what happens everyday in Iraq!
Hurricane Dean is on the way and he is gonna be a big one! Could hit Texas (a red state that gave us Bush so who cares) or could hit Mexico. What bothers me is the fact that people often jump in their cars and flee approaching hurricanes by driving inland. In fact here in Georgia, I-15 is a “hurricane route” and equipped with gates that can convert it to 6 lanes west bound as opposed to 3 each way. But here is my thing about it and that is that REAL men don’t run from the weather. A REAL man stands his ground and faces a threat head on. If you run from Dean, then Dean wins and this will only encourage more hurricanes to come. We have to fight the hurricanes over there before they come over here. We have to hit them when they first start forming and and plotting their evil courses to attack the United States. We have to put other nations on notice- especially west Africa- that if you continue to harbour hurricanes, you will be treated the same as the hurricanes. We have to let them know we simply will not put up with it anymore!
Writerdog
I believe that you completely misunderstood Miss Malkin. I didnt see the speach but based upon the details you gave she was speaking about the Scott Beauchamp scam.
Google it. Understand the context within which she was speaking.
Are the Salina Journal forums phony? I began to suspect so after being kicked off – but who knows why. I violated every possible policy, but then so did a lot of posters. First, since I am working at a different location and carry a lap top, I tried to rejoin under another name, which appeared to be successful, but my account was never activated.
O.K., I thought. They’re smarter than me. Perhaps since my old name was that of a flowering plant, and I simply chose the scientific name for the same flowering plant, I had outsmarted myself. But then I noticed I was listed as a member of the board, and my presence had been added to the total number of board members listed.
Then, just by coincidence, I learned that two people I knew had a similar experience. They joined the board, their nicknames are listed among the members of the board, but their accounts were never activated, so they can not post. I also noticed at least one nickname which appears frequently on this board, but no listing of posts. In fact, the vast majority of the member of board have never posted. Why would anyone join a forum you can read without being a member, I wondered, unless you wanted to post?
O.K., I know it’s nothing. Perhaps there are criteria not listed in the rule book, but if that is so, the Salina Journal is being dishonest – big surprise. And I’ve moved on. My urge to taunt the conservatives on the Salina board is subsiding, and there are like thousands and thousands of other forums. I just wanted to bust their chops a little.
THIS IS VERY, VERY REAL.Please don’t open any “greeting card” e-mails unless you knowwhothey’re from.verified this athttp://www.snopes.com/computer/virus/postcard.asp(last update 1 July 2007)
WORST VIRUS EVER —CNN ANNOUNCEDPLEASE SEND THIS TO EVERYONE ON YOUR CONTACT LIST!!
A new virus has just been discovered that has be en classified byMicrosoft as the most destructive ever. This virus was discoveredyesterday afternoon by McAfee . This virus simply destroys SectorZerofrom the hard disk, where vital information for its functioning arestored.This virus acts in the following manner:It sends itself automatically to all contacts on your list with the title:”A Card for You”.
As soon as thesupposed virtual card is opened the computer freezes sothat the user has to reboot. When the ctrl+alt+ del keys or the resetbutton are pressed, the virus destroys Sector Zero, thuspermanently destroying the hard disk.
Whew sure am glad my social security money is not in the stock market.
Where is your social security money, may I ask?
Well I left the Journal boards, but for another reason. If you’re a legitimate poster, they’ll approve you. Most of the names signed up are spam, which is why they were never approved.
If you went in there just to create havoc, then don’t complain that you didn’t get approved. They actually monitor their forums.
We arent supposed to have ADS for Playboy on here are we??
Another great distraction from the administration. When the economists say we are headed towards the “greatest financial trainwreck in history” the administration is labelling again. Watch as the stock markets continue to fall, and the housing market fail and do nothing. The fact that while the administration was fighting their “war on terror” they were not regulating the housing market. 900,000 foreclosures so far this year and that number is expected to double by years end. Banks are tightening lending requirements, and holding the money injected by the feds. Revolving credit card debt rose 8.4% last month which indicates Americans are living above their means. As these economic indicators continue, watch as the bubble bursts in the stock markets. Its proven that years ending in 07 and 57 have been disasterous financially for our economy. But lets keep talking about whats going on elsewhere shall we?
Heckler, you didnt see the Malkin speech, and yet you can tell writer dog what the context of it is??
That almost sounds like the Peter Pan spin theory to me…
If you get a chance, make sure to watch the Daily Show reruns of last night. For a comedian, Steward sure smacked the pants off of ole Stephen Hayes.
Or see it here.
http://www.indecision2008.com/blog.jhtml?c=vc&videoId=91550
Make sure to click on “even dick don’t know dick”…to see what Steward is referring to in the clip.
Oooops — Link doesnt work, PMom!! Yikes!!
I had hear some details on the “Baghdad Diarist” most from watching Fox news. I just finished reading up on what I can find. The New Republic is standing by the accounts still after interviewing some of the other troops in his unit. They admit that in part the account about the disfigured woman was not in Iraq but Kuwait. TNR other then that is going around the barn to back up the stories. The Army is stating that this Scott Beauchamp has signed a statement say he total had made it all up, but refuses to disclose the statement to settle the matter. Both side of the controversy are not showing direct evidence to refute the other.
In her speech Kalkin was giving an example of how bad news from Iraq is not reliable. But neither was she saying “Good news” is reliable either. That the truth and reality is what ever you choose to believe at the time. She was admitting that atrocities are being committed, that such incident can be happening. But that she CHOOSES to no believe they are happening. I was not commenting on the truthfulness of the accounts that Beauchamp wrote. Since I had not truly been following it, it is a fact that such things can and do occur whether they happened involving Beauchamp or not in a war zone. A soldier see so much death and destruction. Playing with a body part or running over a dog would be almost a normal reaction to the fact that any moment it could be you or a buddy next to you. There are still many of our WWII vets whom will not or can not talk about what they witnessed.
BUT in her statement of it being a choice as to whether something actually happens that has happen. That is pure and simple denial, it is easier that accepting that it happen. and in her case politically expedient.In researching Michele Maklin I found she defends the internment of those that were of Japanese decent during WWII. And several other acts that go against the very fabric of this nation. LOL she and Krauthhammer are cut from the same cloth… God help us if they would ever breed!
http://www.indecision2008.com/blog.jhtml?c=vc&videoId=91550
PMom, THAT is Classic Cheney!! Even Dick dont know Dick!! LOL
Hey, Writer dog… You got a link to that Michelle Malkin speech?? That might make good coffee break watching here soon… :-)
Chas
The disfigured civilian worker, the skull cap, part of Beauchamps scam “diary” in the New Republic.
Bet a case of .45ACP on it. You taking?
KKR has asked for more time on loan repaymetnt to Money Market funds (401k). Max did you know that those guaranteed interest funds are at risk also? And, of course 401 k investments are not FDIC insured. So, do you still think you wish all your SS was at risk in the market?
Phantom, where are your social security funds now?
Backed by the Govt.
Phantom
No, backed by the future earning power of you children.
KEV: Thanks for the laugh. Always good to start the work day with a giggle.
ATTENTION!
ATTENTION!
WARNING TO THOSE WHO LIVE ON THE GULF COAST!
Dean is now a HURRICANE! Yeeeahhhh!!!! Oh my God Look Out! Category 1, 80 mph sustained winds and project to -
GO INTO THE GULF OF MEXICO BY MONDAY 8/20!!!!! AND IT IS PROJECTED TO STRENGTHEN TO A Category 4 or 5 with winds upwards of 140 MPH!!!
ATTN: MAYOR NAGIN AND NEW ORLEANS
Get off your tail and DO something this time! Flappin your lips after the fact doesn’t count!
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/refresh/graphics_at4+shtml/144524.shtml?5day#contents
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/text/refresh/MIATCDAT4+shtml/161450.shtml?
http://www.intellicast.com/Storm/Hurricane/Active.aspx?storm=2&type=track
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/refresh/graphics_at4+shtml/144524.shtml?5day?large#contents
AS THE HURRICANE APPROACHES THENORTHWESTERN CARIBBEAN SEA…MOST OF THE GUIDANCE SUGGESTS THATDEAN WILL REACH THE WESTERN PERIPHERY OF THE SUBTROPICAL RIDGE ANDATTEMPT TO MOVE MORE TO THE WEST-NORTHWEST. GUIDANCE IS IN GOODAGREEMENT ON THIS SCENARIO AS WELL…EXCEPT FOR THE GFDL. IT ISSTALLING A MIDDLE-LEVEL LOW…CURRENTLY OVER THE BAHAMAS…IN THEEASTERN GULF OF MEXICO. THIS SOLUTION ALLOWS THE HURRICANE TO MOVEMORE TO THE NORTHWEST INTO THE CENTRAL GULF OF MEXICO.
This has been a public service annoucement presented by:
Americans Holding Government Accountable to The People
The previous warning was provided on 8/16/07 or 4+ days BEFORE DEAN hits New Orleans.
No excuses now Nagin, you be on notice now.
You may not listen to the National Weather Service, the Hurricane Prediction Center, or to radio or TV, but surely you read the WE Blog!
Notice to Mayor Nagin from the Taxpayers:
WE WILL NOT PAY FOR YOUR STUPIDITY AGAIN!
NO MO TAX MONEY GOING TO YOU TO BAIL YOU OUT OF YOUR OWN INCOMPETENCY!
GET YOUR PEOPLE TO SAFE PLACES NOW!
DON’T KILL YOUR OWN PEOPLE AGAIN!
Watcha blamin’ me for?
This is ALL the fault of the President of the United States of American. That would be the Honorable Mr. Bush.
Don’t go trying to point out the recovery in the states of Mississippi and Bama.
Bush screwed New Orleans. The whole world knows that. He personally was responsible, as part of his daily routine, to ensure New Orleans recovered. He should have known about every one of our local problems. From the hole in the Superdome, to the yellow buses we didn’t use to evacuate. IT IS ALL BUSHY’S FAULT!!!
Friend of yours Mayor? Is this the POTUS fault too?
NEW ORLEANS, Aug. 13 — In a new blow to this city’s ethically troubled politics, the City Council’s senior member, Oliver M. Thomas Jr., pleaded guilty to a federal bribery charge on Monday and immediately resigned, adding to a pervasive feeling that corruption infests public life here.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/14/us/14orleans.html?em&ex=1187236800&en=44b31c1e9e13dcff&ei=5087
WE WILL NOT PAY FOR YOUR STUPIDITY AGAIN!
You know it’s so sad it’s almost funny. We do pay again.
Everytime people rebuild their luxury beach homes along the atlantic and gulf coasts – FEMA bails them out. It’s not just tax dollars either. We pay when the cost of lumber (plywood) escalates after these hurricanes destroy their homes. We pay with higher insurance costs too.
“It’s just brazen down here,” James Bernazzani, the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s special agent in charge, said at a news conference after Mr. Thomas entered his plea.
“In Louisiana they skim the cream, steal the milk, hijack the bottle and look for the cow,”
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,293451,00.html
THIS is the kind of stress that caregivers face- I feel incredibly sorry for this man and woman. But what the hell do you do when you can’t pay for healthcare, and you can’t work because you have to supply the healthcare.
But what the hell do you do when you can’t pay for healthcare, and you can’t work because you have to supply the healthcare.
Posted by: political_mom
I’ll tell you what you don’t do. You do not change the entire nations healthcare system for this one person’s circumstances.
That is lunacy.
It’s not one person’s circumstances. Just because it’s not yours, doesn’t mean diddly. There are tons of people out there right now this minute feeling just as desperate.
Awwww PMom, tht is disastrous!! But, I bet he is convicted of murder, and gets heavy sentence… unless they find him mentally deficient
That justifies nothing. he couldn;t pay her bills, so he killed her? Geesh. By the way, it doesn;t say she was denied medical treatment.
Well I left the Journal boards, but for another reason. If you’re a legitimate poster, they’ll approve you. Most of the names signed up are spam, which is why they were never approved.
That might be correct, p.m., but how would the journal know that, and in addition, I know two people who tried to join and weren’t approved.
As a part of my silly mood yesterday, I’m reposting my link to my latest video. Recognizing the WE Blog Staff for providing us a forum to Blog.
Today started off normal then I mentioned Blogging to someone in the store and they thought I said “Clogging.”
One thing led to another and I couldn’t resist the temptation to make a Video Carton.
This video is dedicated to the WE Blog Staff.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Lbmz8jJDw9Q
Cast:
Lou Heldman – FootstoolPhillip Brownlee…GuitarRhonda Holman…PianoRandy Scholfield…Upright Bass FiddleRichard Crowson…”Hmmm, not sure.”Dave Knadler…Hoofer and Step Dancer
And who is that “Double Eagle” Guy?
Sorry, some days one just has to be silly.
Pardon my amateur cartoon and video skills. :)
doh! I left the spelling of cartoon as “carton” again. Hmmm, carton…maybe…er maybe not. :)
Well! I’ve now been kicked of the 67601.com board after posting the above there. No more free rides, was the excuse. I wonder how many people will actually pay to “count off?” 1-2-3.
I’m sure the story had enough room to print everything that was involved in the case. NOT.
You shouldn’t have to live like that to care for the ones you love. It’s hell, not only watching them suffer, but also the stress of caring for them, the bills, it’s everything. Feeling helpless and broke and not able to do a damn thing about it.
We accept suicide as a tragedy, why is it that nobody realizes this is just as much of a tragedy? I don’t think he wanted to kill her, obviously he was already willing to give his life up to prison.
I’ll bet that he asked for help repeatedly- directly and indirectly, but was ignored, or denied, or told by some face behind a desk mindlessly that they didn’t qualify. Probably had a few neocons chastize him on that if they just tried harder, that they needed to stop whining -and get a job.
Or..like when I was in a desperate situation myself- told to me once by one of those fabulous Christian charities…in her snottiest voice, that more help would be available if I joined a church and believed in Christ.
This is why, when I argue for abortion rights for women to decide, unless you have stood there in such angst, you have no idea what it is like. It’s the same for this. I’ve watched it, I’ve lived it.
And what do you wanna bet, her family will be up in arms…and didn’t do a darn thing to help out when she was alive too?
Ummmm there is a possibility that she didnt have any family left, PMom… I have seen that happen before as well…
Writerdog Chas
Beauchamp signed a statement for the military saying he made the whole thing up.
You all reckon Murtha’s going to appologize to the Haditha marines today?
crickets
You shouldn’t have to live like that to care for the ones you love. It’s hell, not only watching them suffer, but also the stress of caring for them, the bills, it’s everything. Feeling helpless and broke and not able to do a damn thing about it.
We accept suicide as a tragedy, why is it that nobody realizes this is just as much of a tragedy? I don’t think he wanted to kill her, obviously he was already willing to give his life up to prison.
I’ll bet that he asked for help repeatedly- directly and indirectly, but was ignored, or denied, or told by some face behind a desk mindlessly that they didn’t qualify. Probably had a few neocons chastize him on that if they just tried harder, that they needed to stop whining -and get a job.
Or..like when I was in a desperate situation myself- told to me once by one of those fabulous Christian charities…in her snottiest voice, that more help would be available if I joined a church and believed in Christ.
This is why, when I argue for abortion rights for women to decide, unless you have stood there in such angst, you have no idea what it is like. It’s the same for this. I’ve watched it, I’ve lived it.
Posted by: political_mom | August 16, 2007 at 11:28 AM
This post is nothing but pure speculaiton on your part, and while valid as opinoin, has nothing to do with fact, Yeah, I’v lived it to. With a better outcome. My son lioved, my finances did not. Nearly 300,000 in debt. Oh my friend lived it too, 1,000,000 in bills. He didn;t throw his kid over the balcony. Instability is instabilty. Nutcase. Plain and simple
You shouldn’t have to live like that to care for the ones you love.
Lived like what? he lived in a fairly pricey neighborhood, didn;t he? I could be wrong here, but I thought all that area was fairly pricey
LJ, based upon the limited information in the story and my general knowledge of the area around the Plaza in Kansas City, it could be that they lived in one of those multi-story apartment buildings a few blocks off the Plaza proper, which were modest in cost, small, and somewhat dated the last time I was around that area.
Vaughn,
You could be right. I made an assumption that I should not have. My bad.
Yes, and I didn’t do anything either to harm. I’m just saying. Who knows what supports you or I had that they did not. I don’t feel it necessary to kill myself for losing a billion dollars simply because I don’t and never will have a billion dollars, but some people do it.I imagine it must be a great loss. I can’t comprehend it.
I CAN comprehend losing nearly everything- feeling suicidal, and wondering what happens to your family when YOU can’t hold it together anymore.
A little something to consider from “The Economist” concerning the financial markets.
http://economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9659733&top_story=1
Beauchamp signed a statement for the military saying he made the whole thing up.
Posted by: Heckler | August 16, 2007 at 11:35 AM
======================
Heckler, I am not sure what Beauchamp has to do with what writer-dog posted earlier about Michele Malkin’s speech… I dont recall seeing anything in WD’s post that said anything about Beauchamp…. Care to make a few clarifications??? hmmm???
And this is a good place where either a belief in God is helpful, or hurtful. If you believe that God doesn’t give you anything more than you can handle…or will always make everything ok…I guess that can offer you a little comfort. But when everything falls apart anyway, and the perception that there is no hope for things to get better, then you can feel that being dead is better than being alive.
It shouldn’t happen. It just shouldn’t happen.
PMom, I suppose somebody with a total lack of compassion, might raise the question: Why didnt he just make it a murder/suicide, and jump off with her???
I know that sounds cruel, but you know how it goes some days on the Blog…
I certainly wouldnt raise that question, but I have seen that done in other cases of similar nature in the past… perhaps not here, but in other places…
Speaking of financial markets, isn’t it about the right time of day for the Fed to inject some additional “temporary reserves”?
Dow industrials plunge 300 points
Forget everything I posted about being a conservative republican.
I will be needing food stamps, WIC, subsidized housing, and free health care (did I leave anything out, please advise soonest).
God Bless Hillary Clinton! Long live the Democratic Party!
(Pass the collection plate)
Political MOm-
A belief in God does help. Not because bad stuff doesn;t happen to good people, no matter how much they “believe” Not that, well, it doesn;t matter. Everything does fall apart sometimes. Sometimes, it is not going to get any better, at least for awhile. Sometimes, you can get that feeling that being dead is better than being alive. Sometimes, it might be true. But for most, it is not. Everything passes. Everything.But he did not kill himself, he killed his wife. Supposedly because”he couldn;t pay the bills”. THat’s a bit narcisstic, isn;t it? I am going to kill you, because you are costing me money I cannot afford? i suspect that it was not the money at all, but the depths of hopelessness in watching his wife waste away, and suffer, no matter what was tried. I have nothing to base that on, except for the experiences of various members of my family
I certainly wouldnt raise that question,
Posted by: Chas. | August 16, 2007 at 12:10 PM
You just did.
L J… ummm NO I didnt raise it… I said somebody might… and I have seen that sort of thing raised in other places… But did not say I would raise the question, and I did NOT raise it…
God doesn’t give you anything more than you can handle…or will always make everything ok…I guess that can offer you a little comfort. Posted by: political_mom
God is not the author of death and disorder. Put your faith in Him, but if you do believe, then you must also believe in Satan.
Here you will find your responsible party.
That could very well be too LJ. I don’t think it’s any one factor. I don’t think she would have thrown her off a building if he could see a way out though.
I do wonder too, why he didn’t take himself. Maybe he planned to.
I have to say though…man, if I’m ever in that situation, and my hubby feels so desperate to take me out…gosh please, don’t throw me off a building! Give me pills, inject me, shoot me. Don’t do that!
Theo, my argument..that I forgot to type thanks….was that if you do believe in God, you may feel that being dead or your loved one(with him in heaven) is more desireable to being alive.
L J… ummm NO I didnt raise it… I said somebody might… and I have seen that sort of thing raised in other places… But did not say I would raise the question, and I did NOT raise it…
Posted by: Chas. | August 16, 2007 at 12:18 PM
Sure you did. You were the only one talking about it. Nobody else. You brought up the issue. Of course, not to really ask the quesiton, but to take a shot at somebody who MIGHT bring it up.You raised the question, and the issue. Just suck it up and admit it. YOU and YOU alone brought up the issue
if you do believe in God, you may feel that being dead or your loved one(with him in heaven) is more desireable to being alive.Posted by: political_mom
PM, that might be true in some religions, but it’s not part of the Christian belief. Maybe for a muslim with a few dozen virgins waiting for him………
PM, that might be true in some religions, but it’s not part of the Christian belief. Maybe for a muslim with a few dozen virgins waiting for him………
Posted by: theologian | August 16, 2007 at 12:38 PM
I guess I have to disagree with you here. There are many christians, that watching their family members, suffer in pain for months while dying, have a certain amount of relief that it is over, and take comfort that the departed is now with God.
I agree with L J Theo…
christians, that watching their family members, suffer in pain for months while dying, have a certain amount of relief that it is over, and take comfort that the departed is now with God. LG
Been there with family member myself and I do feel that way now. But I wanted them to LIVE!!!More than anything else. I would have given my own, had it done any good.
But I would not kill a family member to get there.
Theo, studies have found among suicides, religion seemed to play no part in who was more likely to commit suicide. So yes, it IS a part of Christianity.
I don’t think the spouse tossed over the balcony in today’s Eagle article will be considered suicide or assisted suicide.
My family has always taken care of the elderly and infirmed of our family and those in their Church. My mother, who is 77 still goes to the homes of her ailing friends and sees to their needs (cleaning, taking to medical appoints, etc.)
Part of the Christian attitude to the infirmed is to show mercy and provide compassionate care. This is what I’m familiar with and have dozens of personally known incidents to reference.
It’s not an easy thing to do, unless you do it on your own and without God. Then it becomes an experience with much self-treachery and in the case of the balcony woman, a tragic experience.
I’m not discounting your claim Theo, I do know there are many who no matter what wish their loved ones to live, even if that means a horrible existence. I don’t understand that.
But I have seen it in a few cases. One lady I took care of, her husband was with her day in and day out, he saw how much she suffered, and when her death was imminent, and she writhed in pain (absolute worst death I’ve ever seen) he refused her pain medication because he was afraid she’d die. She died anyway. In what looked to be unbelieveable pain. It was so bad, my superiors had taken steps to override him on the pain medications, but she passed before that happened.
This was a woman who had late alzheimers, couldn’t speak for years, basically just sat there motionless- I cared for her for 5 years….and about a week or so before her death, began thrashing about in bed, turned gray, grinded her teeth, grunting…it was horrible…just horrid.
I know he was grieving, but my goodness, how could he stand it? It made me so furious, I could hardly be in the room to care for her. It still makes me angry to think about it. I never ever want my loved one to live like that. I never ever want my loved one to be in a place that doesn’t care for them or abuses them.
“if you do believe in God, you may feel that being dead or your loved one(with him in heaven) is more desireable to being alive.Posted by: political_mom”
Dear political_mom,
I believe this statement is very true. I was very fortunate to have several hours alone with my mom before she died. She was a Christian and we spent time reading the scriptures together.
I was relieved when she passed, she was ready and it was a blessing. I know she went to heaven and I didn’t dread her funeral.
It’s hard for me to go to funerals when I know the deceased is not a Christian. I have been a pall bearer several times in recent years and some of them have been very painful for me. It’s an honor to be asked by the family an obligation that is hard to decline.
Hank
“Theo, studies have found among suicides, religion seemed to play no part in who was more likely to commit suicide. So yes, it IS a part of Christianity.”
Huh, p_mom? Actually religious belief is a protective factor against people attempting suicide. The rate of suicides amongst catholics is lower than that amongst protestants.
I must not be understanding the point you are trying to make.
What do otherrs think of this alleged “bait and switch” – the Patraeus Report will be written by the White House with ‘input’ from military leaders. Bush has consistently made it sound as though, the objective report of Patraeus would be what determined if the surge was successful or not. Having Patraeus brief congress was supposed to have the effect of circumventing the distrust congress and entire country have regarding anything Bush has to say about “progress” in Iraq. There is talk of having the Secretary of Defense and State make the presentations before congress.
There is word that Patraeus is relieved that he is not going to have to be the defender of the Iraq war.
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/horsesmouth/2007/08/wapos_fred_hiat.php
If true, it is awful. Horrible.It should be Patraeus testifying, to his own words.
Steven–
Thanks for that.
BushCo. didn’t lie us into never-ending war only to allow cold-eyed appraisals now.
Of course, they are going to write the report–just like they wrote Colin Powell’s UN speech, just like they fired Gen. Odin when he said that we’d need half a million troops, like they fired Gen. Jay Garner when he had the temerity to take BushCo’s promises of democratic elections seriously.
The Bush administration has been nothing but dishonest about the war from day one. Why would this report be anything different?
Notwithstanding the statements of the President shown last night on a variety of medial outlets, the report is being written in the White House. The deputy press secretary in Crawford yesterday said so in response to questions in the afternoon news brief, again as shown over and over last night.
Clarification: past statements of the President (I recall July 31 and August 6 as two of the dates), clips of which were shown, in which he made reference to “General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker” as preparing a report. While he didn’t state flatly that they, in fact, would be writing and presenting it, that sure was a reasonable inference to be drawn from the wording he used.
President Bush is the Commander-in-Chief. Anything about the goings on in Iraq should come through his Commanders in the field through him.
That is, unless the Democrats want to re-write the Constitution where the President is no longer the Commander-in-Chief?
AKA “Word Twister in Chief”
No, Steven, the studies I’ve seen show that Catholics are no more or less likely to commit suicide.
I’ll look it up.
Hank, I’m so sorry that you feel your friends are suffering in eternal hellfire. That’s the nice thing about not being a Christian….I don’t worry about that one bit.
You keep posting Capn A:
BushCo. didn’t lie us into never-ending war only to allow cold-eyed appraisals now.
I’ll keep posting the truth:
If you are going to claim that the Bush administration lied, then there sure are a lot of other people, including quite a few prominent Democrats, who have told the same “lies”. You must admit the truth if we are to learn anything from this and keep it from happening again. Both parties, all politicians played a part in our commitment to war:”If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.”- President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998“He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983.” S- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998.”[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.” — From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998″This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies.” — From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others”Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities” — From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002″There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources — something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.” — John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002″Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.”- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.”- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.”- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weap ons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members .. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.”- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002″We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction.”- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002
Great American Troll–
Those Democrats never believed that we should INVADE Iraq over WMD’s.
Big difference, dumbass.
AbstractWhen compared to suicide rates in the general population, it may be expected that elderly suicide rates would be lower in Catholic and Orthodox societies than in non-Catholic or non-Orthodox countries because of religious affiliations and extended family traditions. National suicide rates in the general population were compared with rates in the sub-population of those aged over 75 years. Proportionately, there are significantly higher suicide rates in elderly men in Catholic and Orthodox countries, compared to rates in other countries, with a trend for similar findings among women. There may be important implications on health and social policy and clinical practice in the efforts to reduce suicide rates among elderly people. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/abstract/73504955/ABSTRACT?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0
It may be interesting to note, in my very brief search, there was continually reference to a study done a century ago on this subject…but it was also noted that in Catholic countries during that time, often coroners were reluctant to list suicide as a reason for death. Because of the stigma.
I’m still looking for a more recent, US based, thorough study.
“[E]verybody Knows This Is A Bad Guy And The Last Thing On Earth We Want Is For Him To Have Weapons Of Mass Destruction And A Delivery System By Which He Could Cause Havoc In His Region And Around The World. Therefore We Do Want To Get Rid Of Him.” (MSNBC’s “Hardball,” 9/11/02
“I Can Support The President, I Can Support An Action Against Saddam Hussein Because I Think It’s In The Long-Term Interests Of Our National Security…” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 9/15/02)
“Do You Believe We Could Have Disarmament Without Regime Change?” Sen. Clinton: “I Doubt It.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 9/15/02)
“That Saddam Hussein Has Worked To Rebuild His Chemical And Biological Weapons Stock, His Missile Delivery Capability, And His Nuclear Program. He Has Also Given Aid, Comfort, And Sanctuary To Terrorists, Including Al Qaeda Members.” (Sen. Hillary Clinton, Congressional Record, 10/10/02 p. S10288) (FOX’s “Special Report,” 11/2/05)
“In The Four Years Since The Inspectors Left, Intelligence Reports Show That Saddam Hussein Has Worked To Rebuild His Chemical And Biological Weapons Stock, His Missle Delivery Capability, And His Nuclear Program. … It Is Clear, However, That If Left Unchecked, Saddam Hussein Will Continue To Increase His Capacity To Wage Biological And Chemical Warfare And Will Keep Trying To Develop Nuclear Weapons.” (Sen. Hillary Clinton, Congressional Record, 10/10/02, p. S10288)
“Saddam Hussein, In Effect, Has Thumbed His Nose At The World Community. And I Think That The President’s Approaching This In The Right Fashion.” (CNN’s “Inside Politics,” 9/18/02)
“We Stopped The Fighting [In 1991] On An Agreement That Iraq Would Take Steps To Assure The World That It Would Not Engage In Further Aggression And That It Would Destroy Its Weapons Of Mass Destruction. It Has Refused To Take Those Steps. That Refusal Constitutes A Breach Of The Armistice Which Renders It Void And Justifies Resumption Of The Armed Conflict.” (Sen. Harry Reid, Congressional Record, 10/9/02, p. S10145)
“We Know He Continues To Attempt To Gain Access To Additional Capability, Including Nuclear Capability.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 8/4/02)
“Constitutionally, The President Has The Right To Act Pre-Emptively Go Strike The Chinese, The Communist Regime? The Answer’s No. And So – But With Saddam, There Is–It’s Much More Tenuous Because He Has Used Weapons Of Mass Destruction Before. He Has Made Assertions About Intentions To Use These Weapons And, Therefore, It Gives More Credence To The President’s Capacity To Be Able To Act Pre-Emptively.” (CBS’ “Face The Nation,” 6/16/02)
“[W]hat Makes Saddam Hussein Different Is He Invaded A Country; He Lost A War; The Terms Of Surrender Were Specific Requirements Made And Commitments Made To The United Nations That He Has Violated.” (CBS’ “Face The Nation,” 9/22/02)
“[I] Think We Clearly Have To Keep The Pressure On Terrorism Globally. This Doesn’t End With Afghanistan By Any Imagination. And I Think The President Has Made That Clear. I Think We Have Made That Clear. Terrorism Is A Global Menace. It’s A Scourge. And It Is Absolutely Vital That We Continue, For Instance, Saddam Hussein.” (CNN’s “Larry King Live,” 12/14/01)
“But It Is Something That We Know–For Instance, Saddam Hussein Has Used Weapons Of Mass Destruction Against His Own People, And There Is Some Evidence Of Their Efforts To Try To Secure These Kinds Of Weapons And Even Test Them.” (CBS “Face The Nation,” 9/23/01)
“According To The CIA’s Report, All U.S. Intelligence Experts Agree That Iraq Is Seeking Nuclear Weapons. There Is Little Question That Saddam Hussein Wants To Develop [Nuclear Weapons].” (Sen. John F. Kerry, Congressional Record, 10/9/02, p. S10172-10173)
“In The Wake Of September 11 … Who Can Say That This Master Of Miscalculation Will Not Develop A Weapon Of Mass Destruction Even Greater – A Nuclear Weapon.” (Sen. John F. Kerry, Congressional Record, 10/9/02, p. S10173)
In President Clintons own words. (Oh yeah, he lied too, or based his understanding on bushes handpicked intelligence)
Transcript: President Clinton explains Iraq strikeCLINTON: Good evening.
Earlier today, I ordered America’s armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq’s nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.
Their purpose is to protect the national interest of the United States, and indeed the interests of people throughout the Middle East and around the world.
Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons.
I want to explain why I have decided, with the unanimous recommendation of my national security team, to use force in Iraq; why we have acted now; and what we aim to accomplish.
Six weeks ago, Saddam Hussein announced that he would no longer cooperate with the United Nations weapons inspectors called UNSCOM. They are highly professional experts from dozens of countries. Their job is to oversee the elimination of Iraq’s capability to retain, create and use weapons of mass destruction, and to verify that Iraq does not attempt to rebuild that capability.
The inspectors undertook this mission first 7.5 years ago at the end of the Gulf War when Iraq agreed to declare and destroy its arsenal as a condition of the ceasefire.
The international community had good reason to set this requirement. Other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles. With Saddam, there is one big difference: He has used them. Not once, but repeatedly. Unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long war. Not only against soldiers, but against civilians, firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran. And not only against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq.
The international community had little doubt then, and I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again.
The United States has patiently worked to preserve UNSCOM as Iraq has sought to avoid its obligation to cooperate with the inspectors. On occasion, we’ve had to threaten military force, and Saddam has backed down.
Faced with Saddam’s latest act of defiance in late October, we built intensive diplomatic pressure on Iraq backed by overwhelming military force in the region. The UN Security Council voted 15 to zero to condemn Saddam’s actions and to demand that he immediately come into compliance.
Eight Arab nations — Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, United Arab Emirates and Oman — warned that Iraq alone would bear responsibility for the consequences of defying the UN.
When Saddam still failed to comply, we prepared to act militarily. It was only then at the last possible moment that Iraq backed down. It pledged to the UN that it had made, and I quote, a clear and unconditional decision to resume cooperation with the weapons inspectors.
I decided then to call off the attack with our airplanes already in the air because Saddam had given in to our demands. I concluded then that the right thing to do was to use restraint and give Saddam one last chance to prove his willingness to cooperate.
I made it very clear at that time what unconditional cooperation meant, based on existing UN resolutions and Iraq’s own commitments. And along with Prime Minister Blair of Great Britain, I made it equally clear that if Saddam failed to cooperate fully, we would be prepared to act without delay, diplomacy or warning.
Now over the past three weeks, the UN weapons inspectors have carried out their plan for testing Iraq’s cooperation. The testing period ended this weekend, and last night, UNSCOM’s chairman, Richard Butler, reported the results to UN Secretary-General Annan.
The conclusions are stark, sobering and profoundly disturbing.
In four out of the five categories set forth, Iraq has failed to cooperate. Indeed, it actually has placed new restrictions on the inspectors. Here are some of the particulars.
Iraq repeatedly blocked UNSCOM from inspecting suspect sites. For example, it shut off access to the headquarters of its ruling party and said it will deny access to the party’s other offices, even though UN resolutions make no exception for them and UNSCOM has inspected them in the past.
Iraq repeatedly restricted UNSCOM’s ability to obtain necessary evidence. For example, Iraq obstructed UNSCOM’s effort to photograph bombs related to its chemical weapons program.
It tried to stop an UNSCOM biological weapons team from videotaping a site and photocopying documents and prevented Iraqi personnel from answering UNSCOM’s questions.
Prior to the inspection of another site, Iraq actually emptied out the building, removing not just documents but even the furniture and the equipment.
Iraq has failed to turn over virtually all the documents requested by the inspectors. Indeed, we know that Iraq ordered the destruction of weapons-related documents in anticipation of an UNSCOM inspection.
So Iraq has abused its final chance.
As the UNSCOM reports concludes, and again I quote, “Iraq’s conduct ensured that no progress was able to be made in the fields of disarmament.
“In light of this experience, and in the absence of full cooperation by Iraq, it must regrettably be recorded again that the commission is not able to conduct the work mandated to it by the Security Council with respect to Iraq’s prohibited weapons program.”
In short, the inspectors are saying that even if they could stay in Iraq, their work would be a sham.
Saddam’s deception has defeated their effectiveness. Instead of the inspectors disarming Saddam, Saddam has disarmed the inspectors.
This situation presents a clear and present danger to the stability of the Persian Gulf and the safety of people everywhere. The international community gave Saddam one last chance to resume cooperation with the weapons inspectors. Saddam has failed to seize the chance.
And so we had to act and act now.
Let me explain why.
First, without a strong inspection system, Iraq would be free to retain and begin to rebuild its chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs in months, not years.
Second, if Saddam can crippled the weapons inspection system and get away with it, he would conclude that the international community — led by the United States — has simply lost its will. He will surmise that he has free rein to rebuild his arsenal of destruction, and someday — make no mistake — he will use it again as he has in the past.
Third, in halting our air strikes in November, I gave Saddam a chance, not a license. If we turn our backs on his defiance, the credibility of U.S. power as a check against Saddam will be destroyed. We will not only have allowed Saddam to shatter the inspection system that controls his weapons of mass destruction program; we also will have fatally undercut the fear of force that stops Saddam from acting to gain domination in the region.
That is why, on the unanimous recommendation of my national security team — including the vice president, the secretary of defense, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, the secretary of state and the national security adviser — I have ordered a strong, sustained series of air strikes against Iraq.
They are designed to degrade Saddam’s capacity to develop and deliver weapons of mass destruction, and to degrade his ability to threaten his neighbors.
At the same time, we are delivering a powerful message to Saddam. If you act recklessly, you will pay a heavy price. We acted today because, in the judgment of my military advisers, a swift response would provide the most surprise and the least opportunity for Saddam to prepare.
If we had delayed for even a matter of days from Chairman Butler’s report, we would have given Saddam more time to disperse his forces and protect his weapons.
Also, the Muslim holy month of Ramadan begins this weekend. For us to initiate military action during Ramadan would be profoundly offensive to the Muslim world and, therefore, would damage our relations with Arab countries and the progress we have made in the Middle East.
That is something we wanted very much to avoid without giving Iraq’s a month’s head start to prepare for potential action against it.
Finally, our allies, including Prime Minister Tony Blair of Great Britain, concurred that now is the time to strike. I hope Saddam will come into cooperation with the inspection system now and comply with the relevant UN Security Council resolutions. But we have to be prepared that he will not, and we must deal with the very real danger he poses.
So we will pursue a long-term strategy to contain Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction and work toward the day when Iraq has a government worthy of its people.
First, we must be prepared to use force again if Saddam takes threatening actions, such as trying to reconstitute his weapons of mass destruction or their delivery systems, threatening his neighbors, challenging allied aircraft over Iraq or moving against his own Kurdish citizens.
The credible threat to use force, and when necessary, the actual use of force, is the surest way to contain Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction program, curtail his aggression and prevent another Gulf War.
Second, so long as Iraq remains out of compliance, we will work with the international community to maintain and enforce economic sanctions. Sanctions have cost Saddam more than $120 billion — resources that would have been used to rebuild his military. The sanctions system allows Iraq to sell oil for food, for medicine, for other humanitarian supplies for the Iraqi people.
We have no quarrel with them. But without the sanctions, we would see the oil-for-food program become oil-for-tanks, resulting in a greater threat to Iraq’s neighbors and less food for its people.
The hard fact is that so long as Saddam remains in power, he threatens the well-being of his people, the peace of his region, the security of the world.
The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi government — a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people. Bringing change in Baghdad will take time and effort. We will strengthen our engagement with the full range of Iraqi opposition forces and work with them effectively and prudently.
The decision to use force is never cost-free. Whenever American forces are placed in harm’s way, we risk the loss of life. And while our strikes are focused on Iraq’s military capabilities, there will be unintended Iraqi casualties.
Indeed, in the past, Saddam has intentionally placed Iraqi civilians in harm’s way in a cynical bid to sway international opinion.
We must be prepared for these realities. At the same time, Saddam should have absolutely no doubt if he lashes out at his neighbors, we will respond forcefully.
Heavy as they are, the costs of action must be weighed against the price of inaction. If Saddam defies the world and we fail to respond, we will face a far greater threat in the future. Saddam will strike again at his neighbors. He will make war on his own people.
And mark my words, he will develop weapons of mass destruction. He will deploy them, and he will use them.
Because we’re acting today, it is less likely that we will face these dangers in the future.
Let me close by addressing one other issue. Saddam Hussein and the other enemies of peace may have thought that the serious debate currently before the House of Representatives would distract Americans or weaken our resolve to face him down.
But once more, the United States has proven that although we are never eager to use force, when we must act in America’s vital interests, we will do so.
In the century we’re leaving, America has often made the difference between chaos and community, fear and hope. Now, in the new century, we’ll have a remarkable opportunity to shape a future more peaceful than the past, but only if we stand strong against the enemies of peace.
Tonight, the United States is doing just that. May God bless and protect the brave men and women who are carrying out this vital mission and their families. And may God bless America.QUICK VOTEWas Saddam Hussein trying to take advantage of the political turmoil in the U.S.?YesNo
View Results
VIDEOClinton says attack on Iraq averted potential Iraqi aggression (12-17-98) Real: 28K | 56K, Windows Media: 28K | 56K
For Clinton, a long day of political juggling (12-17-98) Real: 28K | 56K, Windows Media: 28K | 56K
Larry King Live highlight: Vice President Al Gore on the military air strike on Iraq (12-17-98) Real: 28K | 56K, Windows Media: 28K | 56K
Clinton statement on attack against Iraq (12-16-98) Windows Media: 28K | 56K
TRANSCRIPTSClinton defends U.S. attack on Iraq (12-17-98)
President Clinton explains Iraq strike (12-16-98)
POLLU.S. public endorses Clinton’s actions on Iraq (12-17-98)
RELATED STORIESBlasts over Baghdad during second night of attack (12-17-98)
U.S. boosts Gulf strength (12-17-98)
World reaction mixed; Russia, China harshly criticize U.S. (12-17-98)
House passes resolution in support of U.S. troops (12-17-98)
Impeachment and Iraq fill the president’s time (12-17-98)
In-depth: Strike on Iraq
MESSAGE BOARDYour opinion: Iraq vs. the U.N.
——————————————————————————–
MORE STORIES:Wednesday, December 16, 1998• Republicans skeptical of Iraq attack on eve of impeachment vote• Clinton: Iraq has abused its final chance• Transcript: President Clinton explains Iraq strike• Impeachment debate delayed• How to contact undecided House members• Thousands say good-bye to Chiles• Presiding Rep. LaHood mum on his vote• Length of impeachment debate depends partly on Democrats• U.S. Rep. Shays holds town meeting on impeachment
ARCHIVES
——————————————————————————–
© 1998 Cable News Network, Inc. All Rights Reserved.Terms under which this service is provided to you.Read our privacy guidelines.Who”
“The Weapons They [Iraq] Have Are A Threat To The World. And Mister President, The World Must Respond.” (Sen. Barbara Boxer, Congressional Record, 10/10/02, p. S10252)
“To Me, The Issue Of Iraq Should Be Approached In The Following Way. Iraq Must Be Held To Its Word That It Will Submit To Thorough Inspections And Dismantlement Of Weapons Of Mass Destruction. Let Me Repeat That: Iraq Must Be Held To Its Word That It Will Submit To Thorough Inspections And Dismantlement Of Weapons Of Mass Destruction.” (Sen. Barbara Boxer, Congressional Record, 10/10/02, p. S10252)
“With Regard To Iraq, I Agree, Iraq Presents A Genuine Threat, Especially In The Form Of Weapons Of Mass Destruction, Chemical, Biological, And Potentially Nuclear Weapons. I Agree That Saddam Hussein Is Exceptionally Dangerous And Brutal, If Not Uniquely So, As The President Argues.” (Sen. Russell Feingold [D-WI], Congressional Record, 10/9/02, p. S10147)
And I still opposed the Invasion of Iraq. Then, and now. The only thing to do is define success, and slowly begin to detach ourselves from this mess.
“Saddam Hussein Has Shown Himself To Be An Implacable Foe Of The United States. It Is Essential That We Confront The Threat That He Represents.” (Sen. Thomas Carper, Congressional Record, 10/10/02, p. S10311)
“This Is Not The First Time That I Have Faced The Question Of How We Ought To Deal With Saddam Hussein’s Intransigence In The Facet Of International Law. As A Member Of The House Of Representatives, I Voted In 1991, Along With Many Members Of This Body, To Authorize President George Herbert Walker Bush To Use Military Force To Expel The Armed Forces Of Iraq From Kuwait.” (Sen. Thomas Carper, Congressional Record, 10/10/02, p. S10312)
“I Am Proud Of That Vote, And I Am Prouder Still Of The American And Allied Forces That Went On To Liberate Kuwait.” (Sen. Thomas Carper, Congressional Record, 10/10/02, p. S10312)
“Having Engaged In That Debate, And Witnessed Saddam Hussein’s Refusal To Yield Except When Confronted With The Threat Of Force, I Have No Illusions About The Danger He Poses To Regional Stability And International Security Today. I Am Concerned That Iraq Remains In Violation Of More Than A Dozen Security Council Resolutions.” (Sen. Thomas Carper, Congressional Record, 10/10/02, p. S10312)
“I Am Alarmed That The Regime Of Saddam Hussein Continues To Develop Weapons Of Mass Destruction In Violation Of The International Agreements It Promised To Comply With At The End Of The Gulf War. Above All, I Feel Strongly That We Must Not Allow Saddam Hussein To Develop The Capacity To Acquire Or Deploy Nuclear Weapons.” (Sen. Thomas Carper, Congressional Record, 10/10/02, p. S10312)
Nathan–
A lot of countries pose threats to us. A lot of them have terrible weapons. A lot of them want more of those weapons.
The question is should we INVADE them or not?
I don’t think you can find many Democrats — or Republicans for that matter — going on record as saying invasion and occupation are a good idea.
Certainly, Feingold has never said it.
Sen. Levin: “The War Against Terrorism Will Not Be Finished As Long As [Saddam Hussein] Is In Power.” (CNN’s “Late Edition,” 12/16/01)
Sen. Levin: “[Saddam] Has Ignored The Mandates Of The United Nations, Is Building Weapons Of Mass Destruction And The Means Of Delivering Them.” (Committee On Armed Services, U.S. Senate, Hearing, 9/19/02)
Sen. Levin: “The Use Of Military Force May Not Result In That Desired Result But It Will Serve To Degrade Saddam Hussein’s Ability To Develop Weapons Of Mass Destruction And To Threaten International Peace And Security. Although Not As Useful As Inspection And Destruction, It Is Still A Worthy Goal.” (Senator Carl Levin, Congressional Record, 2/26/03, p. S715)
Sen. Levin: “We Begin With The Common Belief That Saddam Hussein Is A Tyrant And A Threat To The Peace And Stability Of The Region.” (Committee On Armed Services, U.S. Senate, Hearing, 9/19/02)
Aren’t hackers WONDERFUL?????
http://sunbeltblog.blogspot.com/2007/08/new-ransomware.html
Sen. Feingold: “With Regard To Iraq, I Agree, Iraq Presents A Genuine Threat, Especially In The Form Of Weapons Of Mass Destruction, Chemical, Biological, And Potentially Nuclear Weapons. I Agree That Saddam Hussein Is Exceptionally Dangerous And Brutal, If Not Uniquely So, As The President Argues.” (Sen. Russell Feingold, Congressional Record, 10/9/02, p. S10147)
LJ–
An air strike is way different from invasion and occupation for four and a half years, isn’t it?
Correct answer–yes, it is.
DNC Chairman Howard Dean: “There’s No Question That Saddam Hussein Is A Threat To The United States And To Our Allies. …[I]f Saddam Persists In Thumbing His Nose At The Inspectors, Then We’re Clearly Going To Have To Do Something About It.” (CBS’ “Face The Nation,” 9/29/02)
DNC Chairman Howard Dean: “I Believe That Iraq Does Have Chemical And Biological Weapons, And They Are A Threat To Many Nations In The Region, But Not To The United States.” (PBS’ “Newshour,” 2/25/03)
DNC Chairman Howard Dean: “Everything The President Says About Saddam Hussein Is True. He’s Evil. He’s A Liar. He Gases His Own People.” (ABC’s “This Week,” 12/22/02)
DNC Chairman Howard Dean: “I Would Be Surprised If [Hussein] Didn’t Have’ Chemical And Biological Weapons.” (Mort Kondracke, “Is Howard Dean For Real? Well, Not Entirely,” Roll Call, 1/27/03)
Sen. Bayh: “The Question Is, Do You Want Saddam Hussein Having Chemical Weapons, Having Biological Weapons, Possibly One Day Having A Nuclear Weapon? Do You Want To Have To Deal With That? And If The Answer Is No, Then What Do You Do About It And When Do You Do Something About It?” (CNN’s “Live Event/Special,” 12/1/01)
Sen. Bayh: “Bill, I Support The President’s Efforts To Disarm Saddam Hussein. I Think He Was Right On In His Speech Tonight. The Lessons We Learned Following September 11 Were That We Can’t Wait To Be Attacked Again, Particularly When It Involves Weapons Of Mass Destruction. So Regrettably, Saddam Has Not Done The Right Thing, Which Is To Disarm, And We’re Left With No Alternative But To Take Action.” (Fox News’ “The O’Reilly Factor,” 3/17/03)
Sen. Bayh: “I Think, Once We’ve Exhausted Every Other Alternative, Diplomatic, Economic And Covert, If There Is Simply No Other Way To Prevent Him From Attaining A Nuclear Weapon In Addition To The Biological And Chemical Ones That He Already Has, I Think, In The Long Run, That Is Unacceptable To Our Country.” (CNN’s “Connie Chung Tonight,” 9/10/02)
Sen. Bayh: “In My Opinion – And I Do, As You Know, I’m Fairly Hawkish On Iraq. I’m Inclined To Support Going In There And Dealing With Saddam. But I Think That Case Needs To Be Made On A Separate Basis – His Possession Of Biological And Chemical Weapons, His Desire To Get Nuclear Weapons, His Proven Track Record Of Attacking His Neighbors And Others.” (CNN’s “Late Edition,” 8/4/02)
Sen. Bayh: “God Forbid (Saddam Hussein) Get Hold Of Nuclear Weapons. It’s Going To Be A Lot Harder Than Afghanistan.” (Louie Meizlish and Shannon Pettypiece, “Bayh, McCain Push To Increase Volunteerism, Visit U. Michigan,” Michigan Daily via University Wire, 4/9/02)
-Umm. In practicality, yes. In theory, it is still an attack on a soverieng nation, so no it is not.
And did you read the lies why PRESIDENT CLINTAON called and airstrike? Oh, hmmm. something about WMDs. Why, he must have been lying? Right?
Wrong.
What we’re talking about is not whether Iraq was perceived as a threat.
It was.
What we’re talking about is how should that threat be dealt with.
Here’s Cheney’s view:
Well, just as it’s important, I think, for a president to know when to commit U.S. forces to combat, it’s also important to know when not to commit U.S. forces to combat. I think for us to get American military personnel involved in a civil war inside Iraq would literally be a quagmire. Once we got to Baghdad, what would we do? Who would we put in power? What kind of government would we have? Would it be a Sunni government, a Shi’a government, a Kurdish government? Would it be secular, along the lines of the Ba’ath Party? Would be fundamentalist Islamic? I do not think the United States wants to have U.S. military forces accept casualties and accept the responsibility of trying to govern Iraq. I think it makes no sense at all.
See the video at http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/12/cheney-quagmire/
Nathan what the dems on this blog fail to recognize it that the prez is in the unique position of going to war. He has to have the backing of congress and you have made that point quiet clear. However being the weak kneed sheeple that they are – they fail to understand that you can’t just one day change your mind and say OPPS!! shouldn’t have invaded Iraq. Bring our men and women home. They (the dems) have turned this war into a political battle with the lifes of our military men and women at stake. The main stream media is playing all the right songs for them and we are seeing the carnage this is producing.
The truth simply is, that Clinton, like Bush, Like all the rest above, were wrong about WMD.THey didn’t lie, they didn;t cherrypick intel, they were simply …….wrong. I am tired of the BUsh lied, people died mantra.Of course, You could say all the rest, Including PRESIDENT Clinton, lied also.
Here’s a speech in ‘94 in which Cheney again justified not taking out Saddam in Gulf War I.
He again used the term “quagmire.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BEsZMvrq-I
The point is, we are in Iraq and ALL should support the troops and the action there.
Wishing it didn’t happen is not a viable approach and is not a solution to anything.
LJ–
He lied about the need for an invasion.
He lied when he saw Saddam as a threat.
He wanted the oil, and he got it.
CapnAmerica-
Years later, here’s what PRESIDENT Clinton sais
“The hard fact is that so long as Saddam remains in power, he threatens the well-being of his people, the peace of his region, the security of the world.
The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi government — a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people. Bringing change in Baghdad will take time and effort. We will strengthen our engagement with the full range of Iraqi opposition forces and work with them effectively and prudently.”
Great American,
Who was presenting those reports that the above used to make their conclusions?
Cap where or where is all this oil you talk about continually?
We’ve had four and one-half years to test the CON’s theory of transforming Iraq with guns and tanks, and you people still can’t admit you were wrong.
Sad.
LJ–
He lied about the need for an invasion.
He lied when he saw Saddam as a threat.
He wanted the oil, and he got it.
Posted by: CapnAmerica | August 16, 2007 at 03:12 PM
Yeah, right.
http://clinton.senate.gov/speeches/iraq_101002.html
“… My vote is not, however, a vote for any new doctrine of pre-emption, or for uni-lateralism, or for the arrogance of American power or purpose — all of which carry grave dangers for our nation, for the rule of international law and for the peace and security of people throughout the world.”Sen. Hillary Clinton, Oct 10, 2002
Grm–
It’s being controlled by US interests. It’s being kept out of the world production so that price of oil goes up.
And go up it has!
Historically high prices for a barrel of oil.
President CLinton:
In short, the inspectors are saying that even if they could stay in Iraq, their work would be a sham.
Saddam’s deception has defeated their effectiveness. Instead of the inspectors disarming Saddam, Saddam has disarmed the inspectors.
This situation presents a clear and present danger to the stability of the Persian Gulf and the safety of people everywhere. The international community gave Saddam one last chance to resume cooperation with the weapons inspectors. Saddam has failed to seize the chance.
And so we had to act and act now.
French Intelligence Supports Parts Of Secretary Powell’s Address To The UN Security Council. “Powell presented the Security Council with satellite images, intercepted phone conversations and other evidence which he said supported Washington’s claim that Baghdad was hiding mass destruction weapons. French Defense Ministry spokesman Jean-Francois Bureau said Thursday that French intelligence backed up parts of Powell’s presentation. ‘There are a certain number of questions evoked by Mr. Powell that we had information on.’” (Christine Ollivier, “Chirac Says U.S. Evidence On Iraq Does Not Change French Position,” The Associated Press, 2/6/03)
In February 2003, The German Ambassador To The U.S. Said Iraq Had Weapons Of Mass Destruction. Ambassador Wolfgang Ishinger: “I think all of our governments believe that Iraq has produced weapons of mass destruction and that we have to assume that they still have – that they continue to have weapons of mass destruction.” (NBC’s “Today,” 2/26/03)
German Intelligence Services Predicted That Iraq Would Have Nuclear Bomb Capabilities Within Three Years. “A report prepared by the German intelligence services in December 2000, based on defectors’ reports, satellite imagery, and aerial surveillance, predicted that Iraq will have three nuclear bombs by 2005. But that may be too optimistic. Before the Gulf War no one had a clue how far advanced Saddam’s nuclear weapons program was.” (Robert Kagan And William Kristol, “What To Do About Iraq,” The Weekly Standard, 1/21/02)
“However being the weak kneed sheeple that they are – they fail to understand that you can’t just one day change your mind and say OPPS!! shouldn’t have invaded Iraq.”
ksgrm, are you referring to the dems on this blog in the above statement? If so, count me out. From the beginning of Bush’s ultimatums and speeches, I felt he was wrong. I didn’t flip-flop, I didn’t change my mind.
Maybe you assume to much?
Russian Intelligence Reports That Iraq Was Planning Terrorist Attacks Against The United States. “President Vladimir V. Putin said … that Russia gave intelligence reports to the Bush administration suggesting that Saddam Hussein’s government was preparing terrorist attacks in the United States or against American targets overseas. … Mr. Putin said Russia’s intelligence services received and passed along the information after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and before the American-led invasion of Iraq began in March 2003. He did not give details of the nature of the intelligence or the type of attacks reportedly being prepared. … Mr. Putin said Russian ’special services’ had received information about plans for terrorist attacks ‘more than once.’” (Steven Lee Myers, “Putin Says U.S. Was Alerted To Possible Attacks By Iraq,” The New York Times, 6/19/04)
Great Britain’s Prime Minister Tony Blair: “[W]hat we know from what has been going on there for a long period of time is not just the chemical, biological weapons capability, but we know that they were trying to develop nuclear weapons capability.” (Prime Minister Tony Blair, President Bush, Prime Minister Blair Discuss Keeping The Peace, Camp David, MD, 9/7/02)
Blair: “[I] was just reading coming over here the catalog of attempts by Iraq to conceal its weapons of mass destruction, not to tell the truth about it over — not just over a period of months, but over a period of years. Now, that’s why the issue is important.” (Prime Minister Tony Blair, President Bush, Prime Minister Blair Discuss Keeping The Peace, Camp David, MD, 9/7/02)
Blair: “There isn’t any doubt that Iraq has had weapons of mass destruction … That is not in dispute, not by anybody.” (Jane Wardell, “Blair: No Doubt Saddam Had Banned Weapons,” The Associated Press, 4/28/03)
to=too
Unfortunately for BushCo, their deal to give a majority share of Iraqi oil to big multinational oil companies seems to be hitting a snag in the Iraqi Parliment, but give it time . . . we’ve got the guns and tanks, remember?
Italy’s Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi: “I believe that the moment has arrived to find out where all the weapons of mass destruction that Saddam Hussein said he had, where they ended up.” (Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, President Bush Meets With Italian Prime Minister Berlusconi, Washington, DC, 1/30/03)
Berlusconi: “[Iraq has] to avail themselves of the biological, chemical weapons that we know were available as Saddam Hussein. Therefore, on the basis of the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441, Saddam Hussein has to reveal and account for the weapons that we know he has. So the decision on face rests in his hands.” (Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, President Bush Meets With Italian Prime Minister Berlusconi, Washington, DC, 1/30/03)
Where is all this oil Capn? How much has gone into the Bush family account?
How many oil tankers are heading to the U.S. alone from Iraq?
let’s get a barrel count on all this Iraqi oil.
How about some numbers Capn?
Let’s see some sources are all this gathered oil from Iraq.
Australia’s Prime Minister John Howard: “Australia’s position concerning Iraq is very clear. We believe a world in which weapons of mass destruction are in the hands of rogue states, with the potential threat of them falling into the hands of terrorists, is not a world that Australia — if we can possibly avoid it — wants to be part of.” (Prime Minister John Howard, President Bush Meets With Prime Minister Howard Of Australia, 2/10/03)
Howard: “And that is the fundamental reason why Australia has taken the position she has. And it’s the fundamental reason why we believe the goals that the United States set of disarming Iraq are proper goals and they are goals that the entire world should pursue.” (The White House, President Bush Meets With Prime Minister Howard Of Australia, 2/10/03)
“The Committee Did Not Find Any Evidence That Administration Officials Attempted To Coerce, Influence Or Pressure Analysts To Change Their Judgments Related To Iraq’s Weapons Of Mass Destruction Capabilities.” (“The Report On The U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Intelligence Assessments On Iraq”, Select Committee On Intelligence, U.S. Senate, 7/7/04)
“The Committee Found No Evidence That The IC’s [Intelligence Community] Mischaracterization Or Exaggeration Of The Intelligence On Iraq’s Weapons Of Mass Destruction (WMD) Capabilities Was The Result Of Political Pressure.” (“The Report On The U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Intelligence Assessments On Iraq”, Select Committee On Intelligence, U.S. Senate, 7/7/04)
The Commission On The Intelligence Capabilities Of The United States Regarding Weapons Of Mass Destruction Stated They Found “No Evidence Of ‘Politicization.’” “Many observers of the Intelligence Community have expressed concern that Intelligence Community judgments concerning Iraq’s purported WMD programs may have been warped by inappropriate political pressure. … The Commission has found no evidence of ‘politicization’ of the Intelligence Community’s assessments concerning Iraq’s reported WMD programs.” (The Commission On The Intelligence Capabilities Of The United States Regarding Weapons Of Mass Destruction, “Report To The President,” 3/31/05)
PRESIDENT Clinton said:
Saddam defies the world and we fail to respond, we will face a far greater threat in the future. Saddam will strike again at his neighbors. He will make war on his own people.
And mark my words, he will develop weapons of mass destruction. He will deploy them, and he will use them.
Because we’re acting today, it is less likely that we will face these dangers in the future. “
DON’T FORGET ABOUT HURRICANE DEAN!
Kay: “Based On The Intelligence That Existed, I Think It Was Reasonable To Reach The Conclusion That Iraq Posed An Imminent Threat.” (NPR’s “Weekend Edition,” 1/25/04)
Kay: “[A]ll I Can Say Is If You Read The Total Body Of Intelligence In The Last 12 To 15 Years That Flowed On Iraq, I Quite Frankly Think It Would Be Hard To Come To A Conclusion Other Than Iraq Was A Gathering, Serious Threat To The World With Regard To WMD.” (David Kay, Committee On The Armed Services, U.S. Senate, 1/28/04)
Nathan, please explain the last of Blair’s quotes (4/28/03). I believe “has had” is past tense, not present.
I can post all day long CapnAmerica and the rest of you Bush lied Democrats who choose to bury your heads in the sand and pretend like no one else was involved.
Friendly Reminder,
I guess you aren’t a Christian?
The 2002 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) On Iraq Stated Iraq Had WMD:
The 2002 National Intelligence Estimate On Iraq: “Baghdad Has Chemical And Biological Weapons As Well As Missiles With Ranges In Excess Of UN Restrictions; If Left Unchecked, It Probably Will Have A Nuclear Weapon During This Decade.” (National Intelligence Council Website, “Iraq’s Continuing Program For Weapons Of Mass Destruction,” http://www.cia.gov, Accessed 9/27/05)
The 2002 National Intelligence Estimate On Iraq: “Iraq Has Largely Rebuilt Missile And Biological Weapons Facilities Damaged During Operation Desert Fox And Has Expanded Its Chemical And Biological Infrastructure Under The Cover Of Civilian Production.” (National Intelligence Council Website, “Iraq’s Continuing Program For Weapons Of Mass Destruction,” http://www.cia.gov, Accessed 9/27/05)
Four and a half years later and all Nathan can do is dig up old clippings from Google.
Where’s the transformation, Nathan? Where’re the WMD’s we died and killed for? Where’s the threat when it is now obvious that Iraq couldn’t fight its way out of a paper bag?
Sad.
You’ll still be arguing you were right when Iraq becomes a failed state . . . oops, too late, it already is.
And check out the Christians in Iraq. They have the choice to leave or get massacred.
Nice.
Some of the tricks True American, Nathan and others use to justify an invasion…
http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/wmdquotes.asp“Origins: All of the quotes listed above are substantially correct reproductions of statements made by various Democratic leaders regarding Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein’s acquisition or possession of weapons of mass destruction.
However, some of the quotes are truncated, and context is provided for none of them — several of these quotes were offered in the course of statements that clearly indicated the speaker was decidedly against unilateral military intervention in Iraq by the U.S.
Moreover, several of the quotes offered antedate the four nights of airstrikes unleashed against Iraq by U.S. and British forces during Operation Desert Fox in December 1998, after which Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen and Gen. Henry H. Shelton (chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) announced the action had been successful in “degrad[ing] Saddam Hussein’s ability to deliver chemical, biological and nuclear weapons.” “
Why did Bush pull the inspectors from Iraq? After all, if he had let them stay, they might have proved he was right. Right? Then there would be no need for the argument of whether there were or were not WMDs.
Where’s that Oil Report Capn?
I want to see verification about your claims on the Oil in Iraq.
Nathan–
I don’t believe that Bush only lied about Iraq.
I believe that Bush lies about absolutely everything.
You can go through the State of the Union addresses and not one verifiable statement the man makes–including “Good evening”–is true.
Rox, the Weapons Inspectors were sponsored by the U.N., not the U.S.
They left Iraq, because they were advised to do so by the U.S.
Nathan you can’t be reading those as fast as you’re posting them. Stop it.
Yes every Democrat thought Saddam was a bad guy. Democrats were RELUCTANT to go to FULL OUT WAR over it though. You can even find places where I have said I support..if you snip out the rest of what I have said. I remember very CLEARLY Clinton saying after we went into Iraq that he certainly wouldn’t have done it the way Bush had. So you can stop right there. We all had to go by the intel that Bush was tweaking too.
Where’s that Oil Report Capn?
We are all waiting to hear about the great Oil Conspiracy.
NathanWe can all post all day long! What is the point when you are so sold on this war and our “Worst President Ever”!
Talk about having your head in the sand- and up your #&&!
So because the Democrats voted to authorize the war, that means they didn’t want to go to full out war?
Hmmm…..
Just a political vote they didn’t mean, I guess.
But then again PMom, the First Lady Hillary Clinton asked the Military in the White House not to wear their uniforms and often used them as waiters.
The Clintons didn’t think much of the Military at all and their attitude towards them was little more than servants.
Rox didn’t realize you were a US Congressperson. They were the ones with a vote – not me and I assumed not you.
Political Mom,
What tweaking? At every turn all you can do is make up things and lie about Bush.
you might think things are a mistake or we should never have done this, but you can’t deny the FACT that every major intelligence agency backed what Bush was saying and so did the Democrats.
King George sets record: Most vacation days taken by any president……424! Thats right folks, a sitting war time president has taken more than a whole year off. Of the 6.5 yrs in office he has taken more than a year off. I want to know what company if any in the private sector gives this kind of vacation time?
Be happy that Bush is on vacation. Let us hope that while he is away he won’t be doing any thing that will hurt us!
“I can’t believe that Morrison is so completely lacking in reading comprehension skills as to believe the law actually allows for abortions for women simply because they don’t want to miss a rock concert. That’s not what ’substantial and irreversible impairment’ means. Post-viability abortions for trivial reasons or for birth control are total violations of this law. Someone with a fourth grade reading level could understand that.”. . . Operation Rescue President Troy Newman, on the reading ability of Kansas Attorney General Paul Morrison. . .Meanwhile, Baby Killer Tiller (BKT) may very well never open his Wichita abortion mill again, lacking a second quack for signing off and any more profits from the illegal contract killings of viable babies.And the new petition is gearing up another grand jury for more charges from the abortion mill crimes of 2004-2007.Keep a good thought.
Back that up Mike. Was there ever a single day he was not in contact with the ‘office’? Do you consider that vacation time? How about his days at Camp David? Were those vacation days also. Don’t get me started about the most traveled prez ever. We footed the Bill for all of his travel. Did you complain about that?
Show me the proof.
“So because the Democrats voted to authorize the war, that means they didn’t want to go to full out war?”
Posted by: Max | August 16, 2007 at 03:27 PM
Are you unable to understand that the vote added a strong diplomatic “leverage”?
A “full out war” should’ve been the last resort, if inspections had not been allowed. The preemptive attack forced the inspectors to leave.
ParkayGive us all a break would you? Don’t you see that you are being used by the reich wing to get your vote? They don’t really care about abortions. If they did they had control of Congress, the White House, and the Supreme Court and did nothing. So save your whining. Abortion will always be legal, if it wasn’t the reich wing couldn’t count on your vote. And the dems are a “do nothing” Congress. Please!
KSGMhttp://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=George_W._Bush:_The_War_President_is_Missing_in_Action
I wouldn’t call clearing brush in Hazard Co. working from home. Where was your president when Katrina struck? Vacation. Where was your president when the intelligence report came out on Bin Laden pre 9-11? Vacation.
Lets not split old gray hairs here. I know you want to.
An very inconvenient truth for the human-caused GW deniers,
‘Green Myth-Busting: Global Average Temperature’http://greenoptions.com/2007/08/15/green_myth_busting_global_average_temperature“In order to truly call global warming into question, one would also have to prove satellite data, borehole analysis, glacial melt, sea ice melt, sea level rise, proxy data, and rising ocean temperature to be flawed.”
Didn’t Clinton have like over 300 trips in his last year alone – most of them overseas? I recall reading that somewhere.
Maybe if Bush hadn’t been on vacation and instead read his intell reports “bin laden determined to attack the US” then we’ve still have 3000 Americans still alive and avoided to wars that that’s taken another 3000+ lives. Wasn’t Bush on vacation while Katrina was tearing up the south
Mike you have to know that the link you gave was a leftwing attack publication, not even cleverly disguised as a news article. If you didn’t – well that doesn’t say much for your intellect.
In August when you said that Bush was on vacation, he indeed was in Texas on his ranch at that time. Look at who told this little fact about Bush being out of contact. That would be George Tenet, who actually was on vacation at that time.
NOW if you believe that someone in Tenet’s position was unable to contact the prez, Texas is still in the USofA afterall, I have some ocean front property in Arizona. It was called CYA.
Read the 911 Commission Reports Tom Paine to determine what happened before, during and post 911. That is, if you can stand to hear the truth.
Katrina would have happened even if Bush was staying as Mayor Nagin’s guest in New Orleans.
So are you blaming natural disasters on Bush now?
How about that recent earthquake? Was that Bush’s doing as well?
Tom do you live in a world where you have to be in YOUR office behind YOUR desk in order to be notified when something important needs to get to you? WOW I didn’t realize anyone was that far behind the times. In this case I would blame the message carriers – oh yeah that was what happened and Tenet in trying to deflect the fault from him directed it to the prez where it only stuck with dems who were salivating over one more supposed lack from the Prez.
That is kinda of like the poster that suggested that Bush should have been in New Orleans when Katrina hit and not on his ranch in Texas.
“Meanwhile, Baby Killer Tiller (BKT) may very well never open his Wichita abortion mill again, lacking a second quack for signing off and any more profits from the illegal contract killings of viable babies.”
Yup, this is exactly why that law is unconstitutional. To limit a woman’s right to an abortion, by regulating it to the point of undue hardship, is unconstitutional.
Yeah Tom, information moves slowly these days. Sometimes it takes 4 or 5 days for the president to get the smoke signal that the Gulf Coast has been devastated by a hurricane. Didn’t you know that? It wasn’t the top story on Fox Noise. How can you expect the president to know? Isn’t it funny how now its Tenets fault? Condie was out buying shoes. Cheney was on vacation(i am sure he was getting a fresh virgin baby blood tranfusion) and Old George was down in Hazard Co. with the misses, clearing some brush.
Nobody is suggesting that Bush can control the weather. Thank God. But just like the 7 minutes he sat on his a** after he had been told the United States is under attack, he is too stupid to move. Ever heard the phrase, “paralyzed with fear?”
Pmom where in the constitution are we given the right to an abortion? I have always wondered this. Even the court ruling doesn’t state this. It was a matter of privacy. Just wondering?
Again Mike, you are someone who has not read the 911 Commission report.
Quit stating generalities as facts and read the 911 Commission report.
That is, if you can stand to read the truth.
P_mom:
“Usually, religion tends to protect people from suicide…predominantly Catholic or Muslim countries tend to have low suicide rates (e.g., Egypt, the Phillipines, Iran, Mexico, Ireland)(p.469-470).”
The above is confounded with culture in addition to religious traditions in countries.
“Nonfatal suicde attempters and suicide completers were less likely than natural deaths or a nonsuicidal national sample to attend church every week. To sum up: Suicide completers and attempters are generally less involved in their religious communities and activities than is the general nonsuicidal population (p.472)”
Maris, R.W., Berman, A.L., & Silverman, M.M. (2000). _Comprehensive Textbook on Suicidology_. New York: Guilford Press.
Mike when you can’t argue logically then revert to irrelevance.
I remember bush during 9/11 he took 20minutes to read a children’s book and then hid in a hole in the ground in Neb. you keep mentioning the 9/11 commission how many of the recriminations that they proposed has Bush enacted? And while disasters cant be blamed on a person are you going sit here and tell me that the governments handling of Katrina was good? Walmart did a better job getting supplies to the area than government including the military.
KansasI have not referred to the 9-11 Commission report. Nor have I been bored enough to read it. I do know that your president read it and then used it for toilet paper. Much like the report given to him earlier in the year on Iraq.
KSGRMWhat part of my post was not logical? Did the president rush to the Gulf to see what could be done? I don’t think so. Was Condie buying shoes? Yes she was….there are pics to prove it. The statement regarding Cheney was slightly sarcastic. But he isn’t part of the Executive Branch anyway, right?
The Katrina Incident
-Failure by Local Government and its Citizens to adequately prepare.-Failure by State Government to adequately repair-Failure by Federal Government to adequately repair.
It was the first large scale test of modern day government to respond to a disaster that covered many states, not just New Orleans.
There were failures from the lowest levels to the highest levels, plenty of blame to go around.
Katrina would have happened no matter who was President.
Let’s not be trivial and put blinders on what happened as the result of Katrina. It was an eye opener what happens when huge disasters hit the U.S.
Prove your point about Walmart.
I don’t recall seeing Walmart there directly after the storm cleared. I do recall seeing Louisiana National Guard vehicles there.
Let’s see the article on when Walmart rolled into New Orleans?
What about Biloxi? Gulfport? Alabama? Like I said, New Orleans wasn’t the only place struck by Katrina.
“But then again PMom, the First Lady Hillary Clinton asked the Military in the White House not to wear their uniforms and often used them as waiters.
The Clintons didn’t think much of the Military at all and their attitude towards them was little more than servants.”
What is your reference for this? Rush Limbaugh does not count. I believe it is one of those urban myths —- snopes.com also refutes the myth of Marines not rendering the proper salute and protocol to Clinton …….
“But then again PMom, the First Lady Hillary Clinton asked the Military in the White House not to wear their uniforms and often used them as waiters.
“The Clintons didn’t think much of the Military at all and their attitude towards them was little more than servants.”
Posted by: Kansas | August 16, 2007 at 03:27 PM
This absurd story has been debunked many times.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200708100002?f=h_topic
Really Steven Davis? How was the story debunked and by whom?
This quote from your link:
“MATTHEWS: How did you get that insight on her working — were you her military attaché or her husband’s military attaché?
PATTERSON: Yes, I was President Bill Clinton’s Air Force aide from 1996 to 1998.
PATTERSON: Well, the fact that she wanted to outlaw uniforms, military uniforms in the White House when I first arrived in 1996, I think, is a perfect example.”
http://www.workerscompinsider.com/archives/000358.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/05/AR2005090501598.html
Mike asks: What part of my post was not logical? Did the president rush to the Gulf to see what could be done?
Mike what world do you live in? The prez should go to the middle of a disaster area to do what?? He/she should never be a first responder. Things could have gone better but what was really the problem?
Haley Barber (R) gov of Mississippi was out in the trenches on day one. Where was Blanco (D)? All the other states were able to start helping themselves. Why wasn’t NO? Did Nagin (D) do a poor job of preparing his constituents for the disaster? Many question with only one answer. Bush did it!!!
Oh and I forgot that Condi had an unscheduled shopping trip because she needed some shoes. How dare she not coordinate her schedule with you.
I also would like to see that info about Walmart. They had a huge financial stake in this area and indeed did arrive quickly but not as quickly as you would infer.
Second, as Lt. Col. Buzz Patterson, a former White House military aide, explained to us here at The Tank, Hillary has never had a place in her heart for the military.
Hillary did try to ban military uniforms in the White House and we objected for national security reasons [It was important that the Secret Service and staff be able to immediately identify the military aide.]. She relented only on the one point of those who were responsible for carrying the nuclear football [the super-secret black briefcase containing the nuclear launch codes]..Other than that, military uniforms were not worn in the White House per Hillary’s directive issued down through the staff. In fact, the only military personnel who were permitted to wear uniforms at the White House were the Marine Guards (who were positioned outside of the White House) and the social aids — mostly captains and majors, who were there infrequently and only during social events, assisting guests, showing people where the bathrooms were, that kind of thing. http://tank.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MGJmN2YzZDg4NmU4OWQxOGI3ZTcwNjQ3NWU0ZmVjZTM=&CFID=277365&CFTOKEN=7886a6637f679284-709F70B8-FF33-87D1-F7EF273CDEC645F0
So the people that were Military Aides in the White House from 1993-2001 were just using their imagination when their uniforms were not worn while on duty?
I remember the story distinctly and several National TV news reported on it.
Anyone interested in the truth, please read the entire article I link to. Do you enjoy being a liar? We hear from you that you don’t like being called a liar, but does that change your behavior? Apparently not.
As the article points out, this Patterson has changed various and important details in his story several times. Read the whole article is my suggestion to those who are not afraid of the truth.
It depends on which study, which age group, which culture, and even if divorce or not married involved. I read one report that said the biggest factor in suicide, is whether or not one had family.
Steven Davis you are a very confused person. The military told this story and I know an Air Force Chaplin who was at the Clinton white house. He was over the Chaplin Corp of the Oklahoma guard. He was on duty for two straight week when the Murrah building was bombed. During this time he met some active military personel who were on guard duty at the White House.
They invited him to tour the white house when he mentioned that he was going to be in DC in the near future.
When he showed up in full uniform they told him it was a good thing the Clintons were out of town because they didn’t allow military uniforms inside.
He did take them on a tour of the white house and they even have a picture taken with Socks, the cat, in the Rose Garden.
I know this to be true. But you believe those articles written with ‘no’ bias.
I did read the whole article Steven Davis.
Patterson was the only interviewed on the Matthews program that was actually there.
If you want to call someone a liar, call Patterson a liar.
I interpret the stories as I read them and it is a known fact that first duty Presidential Aides did not wear uniforms in the Clinton White House unless they were guards or carried the “football.”
Revisionists…
“it is a known fact”
It is no such thing. Here is an article outlining the history of the rumor that Republican wants to believe so badly because it matches so well with his self-deluded worldview.
http://www.slate.com/id/2162672/
Those Clintons really get people like you to wet your pants, don’t they?
You obviously do not understand historical revisionism and are repeating the nonsense of Limbaugh, who also doesn’t understand the study of history.
Okay Steven Davis,
Here is the Video where SLANT dot COM got that source.
http://www.nohillaryclinton.com/2007/08/09/is-hillary-clinton-a-dove-or-a-hawk/
Here is the statement directly from Patterson with out Slate’s spin on it.
Was Slate there? No.
Was the statement made on the Chris Matthews Show by Patterson from a former Clinton White House Presidential Aide? YES
So who is spinning who Steven Davis?
Please note Steven Davis, I did not lower my self of calling people liars.
There is proof in the video.
Spin it all you want. Lt Col. Patterson was in the White House when the Uniform ban was in force.
Go watch it on video Steven Davis.
http://www.nohillaryclinton.com/2007/08/09/is-hillary-clinton-a-dove-or-a-hawk/
Oh, in case you don’t want to visit that Website Steven Davis, here is the YouTube link.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmMqhZY7wtY
The comment by Patterson is a little less than halfway through the video.
Friendly lil storm reminder to the idiots in New Orleans who are not paying attention!
HEY NAGIN! WAKE UP!
Dean is now a Category 2 Hurricane with 100 MPH winds.
Now entering the Gulf of Mexico on Tuesday 8/21 not Monday. So y’all have an extra day to get outta town!
Forecast to be a Cat 4 storm with winds upwards of 140 MPH.
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/refresh/graphics_at4+shtml/203525.shtml?5day?large
http://www.intellicast.com/Storm/Hurricane/Active.aspx?storm=1&type=track
Just my opinion, but I see the cold front from the Midwest US clearing eastward before Dean enters the Gulf. Stalled High Pressure behind the front may ridge southward into Texas, which would steer Dean NORTH after it enters the Gulf of Mexico.
In other words, NORTH toward New Orleans!
Look out!
Remember, you heard it here first, on the WE Blog.
This has been a public service annoucement presented by:
Americans Holding Government Accountable to The People
Kansas, aka Troll, seems to be calling DeLay a LIAR.
http://www.slate.com/id/2162672“But I digress. Here is DeLay’s accusation, on Pages 108 and 109:
“Fortunately, someone talked the Clintons out of this treachery [banning all military uniforms from White House grounds], …”
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/930315/archive_014806_2.htm“Among other poisonous rumors is the tale that the Clintonites are preparing to order military personnel to wear civilian clothes, not their uniforms, whenever they enter the White House. Another rumor is that Clinton advisers have forbidden the military aide who carries “the football”–a suitcase containing nuclear launch codes–to dress in uniform. The White House denies both allegations.”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10313850/site/newsweek/“(There are still soldiers who swear by the myth that she banned uniforms at the White House.) It was rumored that some officers were planning to walk out of the award ceremony. As it turned out, the audience did stand up, but not to leave. When Clinton’s name was announced, she received a standing ovation. “If you’d asked me three years ago, I would have been surprised,” says Lt. Col. Lou Leto, the group’s spokesman. “[But] she’s one of our strongest advocates.”
So who are you going to believe, some News Reporters and Spin by people who were not in the White House?
Or
The Military Presidential Aide to Bill Clinton who was there for two years?
I believe the Military Aide who was actually there in the White House and have seen on video where the former Presidential Aide spoke the words.
Or, you can believe the spin masters of the press.
Pickin flycrap outta peppa again.
Who gives a rip about Hillary and whether she likes uniforms or not.
She has more serious problems we should be worried about.
As President:
1. How will she ensure there is a strong Defense for America?
2. How will she solve the social security fiscal crisis?
3. How will her free health care plan be paid for, especially during the fiscal crisis created by social security?
4. How will she make America energy independent?
5. How will Americans keep from going deaf when Hillary is Shrilling at us all the time?
You Tube video where former Presidential Aide speaks about the no uniform policy during the Clinton White House.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmMqhZY7wtY
The comment by Patterson is a little less than halfway through the video.
See Hillary Clinton’s voting record and quotes.
http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Hillary_Clinton.htm
Ummm… Nathan?? You need some Charmin to clean up your mess on the Thread earlier??? My goodness!! Too many beef/bean burritos??? ROFL!!
“They left Iraq, because they were advised to do so by the U.S.”
No kidding? LOL Your point just made my point. Thank you!
No Rox, advise and order have two different meanings.
Looks like Kansas, aka troll, believe that Tom DeLay(R) LIED in his memoir, when he said there was NO ban of military uniforms from WH grounds.
‘DeLay’s Hillary SmearThe Hammer revives an urban myth.’http://www.slate.com/id/2162672
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,22163551-5005961,00.html
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article2132569.ece
This is the law that the Iraqis haven’t passed yet:
Future of Iraq: The spoils of warHow the West will make a killing on Iraqi oil richesBy Danny Fortson, Andrew Murray-Watson and Tim WebbPublished: 07 January 2007Iraq’s massive oil reserves, the third-largest in the world, are about to be thrown open for large-scale exploitation by Western oil companies under a controversial law which is expected to come before the Iraqi parliament within days.
The US government has been involved in drawing up the law, a draft of which has been seen by The Independent on Sunday. It would give big oil companies such as BP, Shell and Exxon 30-year contracts to extract Iraqi crude and allow the first large-scale operation of foreign oil interests in the country since the industry was nationalised in 1972.
The huge potential prizes for Western firms will give ammunition to critics who say the Iraq war was fought for oil. They point to statements such as one from Vice-President Dick Cheney, who said in 1999, while he was still chief executive of the oil services company Halliburton, that the world would need an additional 50 million barrels of oil a day by 2010. “So where is the oil going to come from?… The Middle East, with two-thirds of the world’s oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies,” he said.
Oil industry executives and analysts say the law, which would permit Western companies to pocket up to three-quarters of profits in the early years, is the only way to get Iraq’s oil industry back on its feet after years of sanctions, war and loss of expertise. But it will operate through “production-sharing agreements” (or PSAs) which are highly unusual in the Middle East, where the oil industry in Saudi Arabia and Iran, the world’s two largest producers, is state controlled.
Opponents say Iraq, where oil accounts for 95 per cent of the economy, is being forced to surrender an unacceptable degree of sovereignty.
Proposing the parliamentary motion for war in 2003, Tony Blair denied the “false claim” that “we want to seize” Iraq’s oil revenues. He said the money should be put into a trust fund, run by the UN, for the Iraqis, but the idea came to nothing. The same year Colin Powell, then Secretary of State, said: “It cost a great deal of money to prosecute this war. But the oil of the Iraqi people belongs to the Iraqi people; it is their wealth, it will be used for their benefit. So we did not do it for oil.”
Supporters say the provision allowing oil companies to take up to 75 per cent of the profits will last until they have recouped initial drilling costs. After that, they would collect about 20 per cent of all profits, according to industry sources in Iraq. But that is twice the industry average for such deals.
Greg Muttitt, a researcher for Platform, a human rights and environmental group which monitors the oil industry, said Iraq was being asked to pay an enormous price over the next 30 years for its present instability. “They would lose out massively,” he said, “because they don’t have the capacity at the moment to strike a good deal.”
James Paul, executive director at the Global Policy Forum, the international government watchdog, said: “It is not an exaggeration to say that the overwhelming majority of the population would be opposed to this. To do it anyway, with minimal discussion within the [Iraqi] parliament is really just pouring more oil on the fire.”
Looks like cosmos is denying theYou Tube video where former Presidential Aide speaks about the no uniform policy during the Clinton White House.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmMqhZY7wtY
The comment by Patterson is a little less than halfway through the video.
Kansas, you got your finger stuck on that Paste Key for that link???
And besides, what bearing does something that happened 10+ years ago have on NOW??? Thats what all you right wingers say all the time… This is POST 9/11, ya know… That makes it all different now, according to the Right spin meisters!! ROFL!!!
So Capn, that’s well known news about the PROPOSED oil usage in Iraq.
Who has the last say about the use of Iraq’s oil?
I’ll let you guess Capn.
(pssst…Capn is not looking here, but the use of Iraq’s Oil will be determined by the Iraqi Parliament. The broke for Vacation with out voting on the U.S. measure. But don’t tell Capn that the Iraqi Parliament has the last say on the use of Iraqi Oil! I want him to research it!)
:)
Iraq’s oil production has plummeted from a peak of 3.7 million barrels per day to 1.8 million bpd in spite of a $1.7bn rehabilitation programme overseen by the US Army Corps of Engineers.
http://www.ameinfo.com/125744.html
And let’s see, what happens when supply drops? Demand for remaining stocks goes . . . what did they tell me in MacroEconomics class again . . . oh, yeah now I remember . . . SUPPLY GOES DOWN, PRICE GOES UP.
http://www.wtrg.com/prices.htm
From a low in 1998 of $14 dollars (constant dollars) a barrel, the price of oil skyrocketed after the invasion of Iraq to $31 dollars and just keeps going up, doubling again to over 60 dollars a barrel in 2006.
Right now, the price is over 70 dollars a barrel.
Oil companies last year made the biggest profits of any companies in the world.
Mission accomplished.
The reich-wing refuses to acknowledge that oil companies make money on Iraqi oil by NOT SELLING IT as well as selling it.
They make money either way . . .
Chas, did you view the video?
How can you say it is spin when the former Presidential Aide for Clinton uses words spoken right for your ears to hear without any spin?
Is everyone a liar Chas?
By the way, Lt. Colonel Patterson on the video was a Democrat during his time as Bill Clinton’s Presidential Aide.
So Capn,
Tell me, who has the FINAL say on the use of Iraqi oil? :)
Irrelevant.
But ultimately it’ll be the people with the guns and the tanks who have the final say.
That’s why we have the say right now.
Ah!
Capn says the Iraqi Parliament is irrelevant on who gets to use Iraqi oil!
Then why were the Oil Companies so upset when the Iraqi Parliament , who took their vacation without passing the proposal where those Oil companies you listed get exclusive use of Iraqi oil?
That “irrelevant” Iraqi Parliament appears to be a bit of a sticky wicket in your oil conspiracy story there Capn.
‘Looks like cosmos is denying the You Tube video where former Presidential Aide speaks about the no uniform policy during the Clinton White House.’
Posted by: Kansas, aka troll
No, DeLay, and two credible news links deny it.
Kansas, I will make the direct assertion that the Col. on the Video is LYING big time… Most likely paid for by some Reich Wing nut who was trying to bring down Clinton way back then…. DeLay said it never happened… You calling DeLay a liar too???
I would venture a guess that even Snopes says it was a LIE Kansas…
Well what do you know. Bush’s filthy white trash daughter found some neo con to marry her. Funny thing is that he is only 29 and hasn’t seen a day in a military uniform to fight and maybe die for Bush.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,293507,00.html
Question Chas:
Was Delay in the White House more than 12 hours per day?
Was Delay wearing a military uniform back then?
Was Lt. Col Patterson President Clinton’s military Aide?
Who would you go to as a primary source for information of what happened in the White House?
The Military Aide who worked for President Clinton or Tom Delay?
Oh, Kansas, by the way, what years were you flying in those air planes back when you served in the militry?? I cant remember which years you have said…
I would stand by my assertion that the Col. was/is LYING!!!
Kansas, just because you WANT to believe it, and just because RUSH has said it, does NOT make it TRUE… Pull your head out!!
Gotta go make dinner now… Roasted Chicken Thighs, and mushroom sauce with rice…. Yummy!!!
They’re irrelevant for the simple reason that eventually the people with the tanks and the guns will get what they want.
ksgrm,
You started out about the dems on this blog, then moved to the dems in Congress. I commented on the first. And not all dems in Congress voted to use force.
IOW, make up your mind who you’re talking about.
Chas–
The reich-wing hates Clinton so much, they can’t stop b*tching about him, even though he’s been gone for 6 and a half years.
They’re like somebody’s bitter ex-wife, the hate is all they’ve got left . . .
“Wishing it didn’t happen is not a viable approach and is not a solution to anything.”
Obviously neither is staying the course aka repeating the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
“French Intelligence Supports Parts Of Secretary Powell’s Address To The UN Security Council.”
The FRENCH??!! I thought Republicans hated the French. But as long as they concur with “parts”, then they’re okay?
Sheesh.
OT:
“Giuliani wants to give families a $15,000 tax credit to buy insurance privately rather than through employers, and he proposes that any money left from the credit be kept in tax-free health savings accounts.”
What I want to know is if I have to buy the insurance first, then get to claim the tax credit, which isn’t necessarily going to put that money back in my pocket. It might help the haves have more, though.
First, one has to have the money to pay the premiums, so this “tax credit” isn’t going to do those who can’t afford insurance a bit of good.
Will the tax-free heath savings accounts be mandatory?
“No Rox, advise and order have two different meanings.”
Tell the U.N. that.
Oh, Kansas, by the way, what years were you flying in those air planes back when you served in the militry?? I cant remember which years you have said…
Posted by: Chas. | August 16, 2007 at 06:21 PM
This is not about me Chas, can’t you stick with the issues being discussed? I know you want to get in an insult slinging attack on me, I’m not going there.
That sounds terribly paranoid, Kansas… most paranoid!!
Kansas, aka troll,
Why would DeLay LIE???
BOTH DeLay and Patterson make the (false) claim that the Clintons wanted to ban military uniforms from the WH.
But DeLay then wisely says that the Clintons were talked out of the ban — because in fact, there was no ban.
Patterson was/is greedy, and (falsely) claimed the ban actually occured.
I lready told you I am standing by my assertion that the white house aide Col. Whats his name, is LYING through his teeth… Better money for lying, than from military pay, I am sure…
When the Dems on this Blog have been proven wrong by giving them the direct source of the quote being discussed, they go for ad hominem.
Okay, if you want to know who Lt. Col Patterson is, you can visit his Website at buzzpatterson.com
There are some very interesting videos on that Website (you’ll need realplayer to view it.)
I didn’t recall that Bill Clinton lost the codes to the nuclear football, but evidently he did according to Colonel Patterson. Clinton didn’t own up to it right away, but when asked by the Colonel, Clinton admitted he didn’t know where they were. The key codes were never found.
Back to the kitchen now…. Later!!
“But DeLay then wisely says that the Clintons were talked out of the ban…”
A glaring admission on just how anti-military there Clinton’s are.
I am just about DONE with even paying any attention to WingNut LIES, Kansas… I dont care what source you quote… Patterson has been debunked more than enough for most people to let it go…. But YOU continue to persist in the LIE…. Which doesnt say much for Republican integrity, but why should I expect that???
Kansas… Yoo hooo…. OVER HERE… THERE WAS NO BAN!!! DIDNT HAPPEN…. NADA… NADA… WHAT IS THERE ABOUT THAT YOU ARE FAILING TO UNDERSTAND??? IT WAS A LIE BY PATTERSON….
Debunked by who Chas?
Some newspapers? Newspaper reporters never lie right?
Colonel Patterson carried the “football” the nuclear coded package that required keycodes to activate.
Colonel Patterson’s integrity and clearance is at the highest level. Colonel Patterson attended National Security meetings as he was to be close by the President at all times.
“I don’t care what source you quote…” Posted by: Chas. | August 16, 2007 at 06:54 PM
Sounds very Sandy Berger to me Chas.
Ohhh myyyy are you on your knees bowing to this man??? Salivating at the mouth for his starring role??? NOT!!!
Oh fer heaven’s sake, Buzz Patterson was SOB that wrote the all-smear, all-the-time book “Dereliction of Duty.”
He has since written a new book, book “War Crimes: The Left’s Campaign to Destroy Our Military and Lose the War on Terror” (Crown Forum, June 2007).
Okay, whoring for dollars.
Yup. Got it.
Wait, there’s more:
He’s currently the chief operating officer for the David Horowitz Freedom Center. David Horowitz is the guy who pays money bounties for students who turn in “leftist” professors.
the White House was reported as early as April 1, 1993, in a Washington Post article that referred to “[a] whole series of apocryphal anecdotes [that] have made the rounds and fed military disaffection.” With regard to “the one about Hillary Rodham Clinton’s ban on uniforms in the White House,” the Post reported that it “[a]lso didn’t happen.” In a March 15, 1993, article, U.S. News & World Report noted,” Among other poisonous rumors is the tale that the Clintonites are preparing to order military personnel to wear civilian clothes, not their uniforms, whenever they enter the White House.” U.S. News added that the White House denied the story.
Buzz Lightyear claims that none of this happened until 1996. So even three years after the rumors started and were refuted, he claims they were still “banning uniforms.”
Doesn’t even make good nonsense.
Next . . .
Kev you must have misunderstood. Someone said you had a daughter that was white trash. In Georgia that must be pretty low.
Judge not that you be judged.
Uh, Baldy-Troll.
In case you didn’t notice, Kev hasn’t post on this thread.
Sheesh . . .
Sheesh Cap are you deluded or what?
Posted by Kev:
Well what do you know. Bush’s filthy white trash daughter found some neo con to marry her. Funny thing is that he is only 29 and hasn’t seen a day in a military uniform to fight and maybe die for Bush.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,293507,00.html
Posted by: Kev | August 16, 2007 at 06:19 PM
“Kev you must have misunderstood. Someone said you had a daughter that was white trash. In Georgia that must be pretty low.
Judge not that you be judged.”
Who said my daughter is white? At least she doesn’t dress like a whore and stumble around bars drunk like Jenna and that other dumb ass Bush daughter. You never saw or see Chelsea Clinton acting like that do you? Yet she is from Arkansas which is the white trash capital of the USA.
Today I did something rather funny and out “art” on the back window of our car. I bought a “W The President” sticker- you know the black one- and put it there and I also put the “little man pissing” sticker there so the little man is pissing on the W sticker. It is getting good reviews thus far!
“Oh, in case you don’t want to visit that Website Steven Davis, here is the YouTube link.
“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmMqhZY7wtY
“The comment by Patterson is a little less than halfway through the video.”
Now that was edifying – listening to those two numb skulls yell at each other so you could not understand what either were saying. People who make absolute fools of themselves on national TV can’t be too credible if you ask me.
Did anyone read about the things Jenna had been doing? Working for Unicef, teaching poor kids in Central America…
She’s made a few mistakes and has a jerk for a daddy. She doesn’t seem like a bad kid.
Kev–
Bush’s daughters aren’t white trash–they’re worse, according to the CON’s.
They’re elitist Yalies . . . well, one of them is.
I loved how Bush worried in the State of the Union address a few years ago about Social Security “being there” for his daughters.
Because, yeah, that check will just about cover shoes and manicures for the twins when they retire.
Sh*t, the Bush family has big money wealth going back five generations and George is worried about his daughters’ Social Security.
The man lies and doesn’t lie well . . .
P-Mom–
That’s the luxury rich kids have: volunteer work.
Everybody else’s kids are piecing together three part-time jobs . . .
The fiance worked for f***ing KKKarl Rove.
So, it’s a match made in heaven.
Writerdog ChasBeauchamp signed a statement for the military saying he made the whole thing up
You all reckon Murtha’s going to apologize to the Haditha marines today?
>Yes I read that, Beauchamp had already admit to have misrepresenting where the incident how making fun of the disfigured woman happened. And using what it called “literary license” in his accounts, to me these things are far to important to the future of this country to be stretching the point to make a point.
I would hope that Murtha would apologize to them, the R.O.E. ( Rules Of Engagement) are possibility the hardest thing about war and its planning. Often it is like what is said about law enforcement, “Better to be judged by 12 then carried by six”. Where justification end and atrocity begins is such a fine line, it is hoped that for the good of the Corp and the honor of the country justice is done either way.
I didn’t realize her fiance worked for Rove. Carry on.
Good gosh!
Poor girl is getting evaluated on:Who she is going to marry.Who her father is.Where she (or her sister) is going to schoolWhat she is doing these days.
How about something meaningful like, what brand of beer does she drink?
Yup, it sure is good to know that hillary and osama obama have their priorities straight.
This from CNN”Cozy With ‘La Raza’Election 2008: If a GOP candidate sought votes from a white group calling itself the “National Council of the Race,” he’d rightly be shunned as a racist. But let Democrats do the same and they’re called “progressive.”The difference, of course, is that in the latter case both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were appearing before the National Council of La Raza (”The Race”), a radical Latino group.Trolling for votes, Obama pandered to La Raza’s convention in Miami over the weekend, selling himself as one who marched alongside Latinos at last May 1’s illegal immigrant amnesty rallies.Clinton, by contrast, insisted she was “at home” among the La Raza crowd, having hired a top La Raza official, Raul Yzaguirre, as her national co-chair. She then whipped out a mariachi band in his honor to celebrate his birthday.Obama challenged Clinton’s flashy mariachi tactics by saying he’d “walked the walk” for amnesty and would revive the sunken immigration bill that went down in flames in the Senate this month.“We will make this a priority and get it done,” he said.But rather than either of these campaign tacks being political gaffes, both got favorable media coverage because the Latino community supposedly has been “galvanized” over the loss of the Senate immigration bill. It signaled that Obama, like Clinton, buys into the idea that the bill’s end was brought on by what La Raza calls a “wave of hate” and that other American voters won’t notice.The irony is that La Raza is no ordinary organization. The name, in English, literally “the race,” is something its embattled apologists now claim means “every race” or “community”— both absurd, since they both mean just the opposite of the actual word.The organization has been around since the 1960s, with many name changes. If it really means “community,” the Spanish language provides at least two completely serviceable words for that —“pueblo” and “comunidad.” It’s called La Raza because its leaders want to be called that.La Raza is not only the loudest proponent of illegal immigration in the U.S. It fosters ethnic separatism in schools. It runs Hugo Chavez-type handouts for indigents and has ties it refuses to renounce to fringe groups like MEChA, whose own slogan is derived from the rhetoric of Cuban dictator Fidel Castro:“Through the race, everything; outside the race, nothing.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20070816bcchinaaids_attn_national_foreign_editors_ytop
We need to just stop doing any business with China. Don’t the Chinese realize that it’s not their GROUPS that make them look bad…its’ their reaction to the people who live there that makes them look bad.
I wouldn’t go to the Olympics in China for nothing. Why the hell would they choose there in the first place.
Jonas Outram shows himself to be a despicable liar by attributing something to CNN that actually came from a radical John Birch style foam-at-the-mouth website “No World System.”
http://noworldsystem.com/tag/la-raza/
As wacked out as it sounds . . .
And since you call Obama “Osama,” Jonas, I’m going to start called our President George Herbert Hoover Bush.
BTW, Jonas Outram is a neo-Nazi Secretary of State who takes over the US in a “novel” called “Serpent’s Walk.”
It’s published by the same press that put out “The Turner Diaries” about armed rebellion against the US government.
This message brought to you by the Socialist Liberal Party of America.
Future clarifications and commentary from the LEFTISTS point of view will be provided as a propaganda service to all readers, free of charge.
It figures that Jonas Outram would naturally be an evil Troll…
“It’s published by the same press that put out “The Turner Diaries” about armed rebellion against the US government.”
And we ALL know who was the biggest fan of “The Turner Diaries”?
Tim McVeigh. Figures. Kansas militia? Posse Comitatus anyone?
Hehehehe. When I first moved back here, my pals in Texas wondered if I would get a job cooking for the militia? I considered it, but backed off when I found out… wait for it… THEY HATE QUEERS TOO!
Dear Farm Girl,
I use to belong to a little organization in western Sedgwick County.
We weren’t a ‘militia’ butto join you had to be willing to fight for and defend the country. Our meetings were private and we opened them with the Pledge of Allegiance and a prayer. We also ran our meetings in military style, I was the commander and we had a Master at Arms, Vice Commander, Chaplain, Etc.
YOu could have cooked for us anytime, we had nothing against queers.
Hank
Everyone should own one!
They taste quite splendid with a nice Port.
Hank, that almost sounds like the VFW.