Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Karl, Go Say Something Dumb

    Karl Rove reportedly said the other night, "Al Jazeera now broadcasts to the region the words of Senator Durbin, certainly putting America's men and women in uniform in greater danger. No more needs to be said about the motives of liberals." This comment and more many like it have set off another round of demands for an apology, followed by demands that those who are demanding an apology apologize -- and so on. We live in an apology culture; unless you say something that later will require an apology you won't be heard to begin with. [A personal note: I would like to apologize for comparing Guantanamo Bay to Chesapeake Bay. That was a huge exaggeration.]

    I will give Rove the benefit of the doubt and assume his words had some kind of broader, less ridiculous context. Rove knows as well as anyone that liberals are not firing IEDs at our soldiers. He also is enough of a student of history to know that any attempt to muzzle your political opponents for national security reasons (the comfort-to-the-enemy argument) is the first step toward ... wait, let me think of a moderate term that won't get me in trouble like Durbin...okay, toward Stalinism.

     My guess is that, as part of some double-secret triple-backloop political strategy, Rove realized he needed to cause a distraction. He informed the president that the poll numbers were looking bad, or that Social Security privatization is about as likely as the resurgence of alchemy. The president said, "Karl, go out there and say something really dumb." By now you should know that nothing happens in the White House political shop except for very calculated reasons. Rove is a red herring. Keep your eye on the big fish.

By Joel Achenbach  |  June 24, 2005; 7:48 AM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Ed Klein: Ambitious Hack?
Next: Why is Grass Green?

Comments

I think the more likely possibility is that Republicans have such overwhelming control of the government in such a partisan climate, that their idiocyometers have just stopped working. Karl Rove can rave like a loon, the President and VP can offer up answers to question that have tenuous connections to reality at best, and senators can give their completely uninformed medical opinion on family matters that are none of their business, and all because they know that no matter how ludicrous they act the Democrats don't have a hammer to swing.

For the record, I'm not some crazy left-wing Republican-hater. I'm a moderate who's fed up with the partisan bickering, and I think that the Democrats are just as guilty. Does anyone really think that they've given REAL consideration to Republican judicial nominees, or even the Bolton confirmation, except to find reasons not to confirm? Democrats have been acting as if they refuse to cooperate with Republicans just to be contrary--they'd probably take their ball and go home if they could.

Posted by: jw | June 24, 2005 8:31 AM | Report abuse

As far as the judicial nominees go, I believe that Bush has had over 200 approved and nine blocked, of which two withdrew and four were passed. Not exactly massive obstruction. (These numbers are off the top of my head and may be off, but not by much.)
After 9/11 the Demos in Congress were generally supportive of Bush on security issues, they passed No Child Left Behind, and the Repubs killed them in the midterms in 2002. They've learned that rolling over gets them nowhere, yet they have no leverage and DeLay and his crew change the rules whenever it suits them. I'm curious. What would cooperation look like and how would it benefit them?
When Mr. Rove is looking around for someone to blame for inciting the insurgency, he might want to talk to that guy who made the "Bring it on!" comment a while back. And while I'm ranting, let's take the money spent on flying Air Force One all over to stage these Social Security charades and put it into up-armoring a few Humvees in Iraq, dagnabit!

Posted by: kurosawaguy | June 24, 2005 8:53 AM | Report abuse

I don' think Guantanamo Bay is that far off from Chesapeake Bay. In both places our government is trying to get away with things things that should be illegal.

Posted by: Ryan | June 24, 2005 9:01 AM | Report abuse

Rove reminds me of a guy who beats up another guy and then gets mad at the folks who rat on him, painting himself as the victim.

It doesn't matter whether our military's actions are compared to Hitler's, Stalin's or Charlemagne's, it's not the COMPARING that's the problem here. We should all be apologizing for the actions, not the words. Karl Rove and his cronies should go first.

Posted by: TBG | June 24, 2005 9:05 AM | Report abuse

I like Guantanamo Bay. They have really good jerk chicken and the bowling alley's a lot of fun.

Posted by: jw | June 24, 2005 9:08 AM | Report abuse

I'll start:
I apologize for everything I've ever said, written, or thought. Further, I'd like to preapologize for any speaking, writing, or thinking I may do in the future.

Joel, after reviewing my secret stash of tapes I made of Comedy Central's "That's My Bush" TV series, I agree that Rove may be performing a political Triple Lindy here to prevent bloggers from further comparing this administration to the 1972 Miami Dolphins.

Oh, and I'm waiting for your official apology for this blog.

bc

Posted by: bc | June 24, 2005 9:18 AM | Report abuse

And NO ONE should be apologizing for the military's actions, thank you very much. How condescending is that? You think that some 18 year old kid who's pulling duty in Gitmo and just wants to serve his country enjoys being compared to a Nazi? He's the only person who should be apologized to.

Posted by: jw | June 24, 2005 9:19 AM | Report abuse

Karl Rove is just one very ugly Tom Cruise.

There is a need for both these guys to draw attention to themselves, via over-the-top drama or words, to draw big box office (getting noticed)--and deflect the attention from--in Cruise's case that he's an aging Hollywood almost has-been, and in Rove's case, that the Republican agenda and Bush's poll numbers are in deep doo-doo territory.

It is the theatrics or thespianism of the desperate.

Posted by: Meooowww | June 24, 2005 9:21 AM | Report abuse

I agree that JW is not some left-wing Republican hater. He sounds much more like a right-wing Democrat hater who sees the damage this administration has done and continues to do, but cannot condemn or face it. The real shame here is less that Bush & Co. seem determined to destroy American democracy than that so-called loyal Americans like JW will permit it to hold onto an illusion.

Posted by: Singlegal | June 24, 2005 9:40 AM | Report abuse

This administration lies and gets us into a war that has made us less safe and they have the nerve to accuse Liberals of being unpatriotic!! Rove should apologize - not only to Liberals but to all of America - and not only for those ridiculous comments but for being the archetect of the campaign that put the worst president in US history in office. And, although I am not a Democrat, I take offense by those who say that the Democrats are jsut as guilty. They are not just as guilty as the Republicans. They have made some mistakes, some of them did vote for the resolution authorizing the use of force in Iraq is the most grevious, but down the line they are far less at fault than Republicans. To suggest that they are equally at fault is ridiculous!

Posted by: Mark | June 24, 2005 9:40 AM | Report abuse

Mark: Rove masterminded the Warren G. Harding campaign??

Posted by: Achenbach | June 24, 2005 9:46 AM | Report abuse

Karl Rove conveniently forgets that immediately after 9/11, Congress, the House and Senate, Republicans and Democrats, voted UNANIMOUSLY to go to war in Afghanistan, and to search and destroy Osama Bin Laden and the terrorists who were responsible.

Perhaps Mr. Rove is confused. Could it be that the "indictments and therapy" he claims the Democrats are prescribing are for Republicans, not terrorists?

Posted by: Greg | June 24, 2005 9:51 AM | Report abuse

Agreed, I think the far right is faultering on almost every front, and with the president's poll numbers continuing to decline, I think Rove is trying to launch an all-out last-ditch effort to gain some traction and reverse the Republicans continued decline. Things are going to get a lot worse before they get better. Bush and Co. are like a wounded cornered dog, and instead of admitting guilt (which I think is absolutely inconceivable with this Administration), they're going to go down swinging, destroying or desgracing anything or anyone that tries to hold them accountable. When all is said and done, I seriously doubt this country will ever fully recover from what is about to be unleashed in Bush's second term.

Posted by: Shawn | June 24, 2005 9:52 AM | Report abuse

re: jw's comments, dated 6/24

A large part of the problem with partisan bickering is that bit of equivocation coming at the end of the letter in question. Being contrary is part of what makes a loyal opposition possible. The other part is loyalty to the greater whole. Blaming both sides for the problem may soothe one's conscience, but it sounds more like capitulation than reason.

Posted by: CA | June 24, 2005 9:52 AM | Report abuse

You're right, Joel. The attack of the Republicans on the Democrats who attacked Karl Rove's attack on them (whew!) was just too well-organized to be coincidental. It's deliberate obfuscation.

The question is: what's the real game? What is it they are trying to draw attention away from?

Posted by: Paul | June 24, 2005 9:55 AM | Report abuse

Kurosawaguy -

Rant on! Well said and on point. I cannot understand how anyone can defend the lunatics that are running this country (running it straight into the ground).

Posted by: jlessl | June 24, 2005 9:57 AM | Report abuse

I must say, I really enjoyed Karl Rove's comment about 9/11 being a time for Americans "to brandish steel". I love to see soft, fat little pasty-white guys talk about brandishing steel. I suspect the only steel he's ever brandished is stainless flatware.

Posted by: David | June 24, 2005 9:57 AM | Report abuse

The question is: what's the real game? What is it they are trying to draw attention away from?

It's called "myth making." Rove's words will be repeated ad nauseum by every Limbaugh and Hannity wannabe for the next three months. They are reinforcing the myth that liberals are only obstructionists and are weak on defense and the so-called war on terrorism.

Posted by: Greg | June 24, 2005 9:59 AM | Report abuse

Politics, schmolitics. Yeah, sure the Iraq War is all the fault of the Republicans. So was the VietNam War, the Civil War, that demise of the dinosaurs, and the increase of obese children. I don't expect anything less from a flaming left-wing liberal rag like the Post. They like nothing better than taking snarky pot-shots at Republican Presidents and their staff. You'll please note the Republican in office inherited a mess from a Democrat who couldn't keep his mind on his work.

Now, if I recall there was that guy in the White House who had inappropriate sex with a staffer, lied about it, and it's just a guy thing, really. And JFK, another Democrat with the habits of rabbits. No big deal. When was the last time anyone saw Bill and Hillary in the same room together since he left office? I think they're just staying together for the sake of her running for the Oval Office, God forbid. I'm moving to Canada if she wins.

Now have at it -- hit me with your best shot.

Posted by: WASP | June 24, 2005 10:00 AM | Report abuse

A wordsmithing challenge to the 15:

Take Durbin's central text and re-write it so that it would not "require" an apology, accepting his premis as worth saying.

How the hell did we get through the Mi Li investigation without 1,000s of apologies?

BTW, I apologize to all who watched any of the really bad games during the 1972 NFL season.

Posted by: Dolphin Michael | June 24, 2005 10:01 AM | Report abuse

I've traditionally been a political moderate, but Rove's comments have me unable to get Eminem's song "Puke" from playing in my head. This administration truly makes me so angry I get nauseous. By the way, I'm 46 and Eminem is not usually on my playlist!

Posted by: Tammi | June 24, 2005 10:02 AM | Report abuse

Rove's idiotic comment can't be anything other than an attempt to draw attention away from the fact that W has stepped on his d1ck with hare-brained SS reform scheme that has no chance of passing and doesn't address the solvency problem. Rove is waaaay too smart to start a firestorm like this unintentionally.

Posted by: KJ | June 24, 2005 10:06 AM | Report abuse

Do Rove's comments remind anybody else of Joe McCarthy? Naming names and calling them out for being weak on defending our country? To me, that's the part that's un-American.

Posted by: Matt | June 24, 2005 10:07 AM | Report abuse

But when the Republicans' "decline" is complete, what will we be left with? A Democratic Party that has no cohesive plan that goes beyond defeating the opposing party? One that perpetrates the culture of confrontation and contention while pandering to the left-wing minority? Or one that recognizes that the vast majority of Americans are people who, like me, firmly straddle the line--supporting the war on terror but disagreeing with the handling of the Iraq situation, a person of faith who beleives that exploring all avenues of stem-cell research is crutial, who loves the Red Sox but hates the DH rule?

I'd hope that Democrats would recognize a return to the middle in politics is that route to real power, but their incessent whining in Congress makes me embarassed for my party.

Oh yeah, did I mention I'm a registered Democrat?

Posted by: jw | June 24, 2005 10:07 AM | Report abuse

The Democrats are as much to blame for the Iraq mess, having shown NO profiles in courage as votes came up to go to War.
The Dem Leadership wants it both ways, be a sheep for the vote, then bay like a wolf at the War.
On a side note: The Republikans employ diversionary IED's (Improvised Excitable Demagoguery) about Durbin, Hillary, etc. to get the country to stop fixating on energy, war, environment, housing, etc..Look over there, it's a silly Senator !

Posted by: Jonesy | June 24, 2005 10:07 AM | Report abuse

I don't think the Republicans would squeal as much if they felt more secure. They are aware than half of the nation's voters (and most who know how to read) detest them and Bush's numbers continue to sink (although to put it in perspective, they're about the same as they were last summer). The Dems need to keep the heat on these liars. And, ahem, provide a meaningful alternative to neo-con.

Posted by: Alexandria | June 24, 2005 10:09 AM | Report abuse

Loose lips sink ships.

Posted by: markkens | June 24, 2005 10:09 AM | Report abuse

I agree with David. Karl Rove is once again doing what he does best - re-write history. If he says something, and its repeated often enough by commentators, it must be true.

By Fall 2006, the Democrats will be painted as "those liberals who kept us from waging war on terrorism", "kept us from victory in Iraq" and therefore are responsible for whatever terrorist actions against Americans happen between now and then." That's the agenda for Karl Rove and company.

Posted by: Cate | June 24, 2005 10:11 AM | Report abuse

According to MSNBC, Al Jazeera is NOT broadcasting Durbin's remarks in any overt way. They simply reported the event on the 16th as a straight news story, on both their English and Arabic news site. There are only individual blogs in the Arabic world that are running with the story, but not Al Jazeera.

This is a Rove triple play: lie about the left, lie about the coverage of the left in the mideast and its effects on the war on terror, and by doing so, divert attention away from the real issue---the abuse at Guantanamo Bay and the Downing Street Memos (which was just starting to take off in the mainstream press).

Posted by: Stefani | June 24, 2005 10:11 AM | Report abuse

sorry excuse for a government...

it's interesting that there has been little or no talk of political resistance from within the ranks of the U.S. Military (aside from calls for downing the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy and complaints about mandatory Stop-Loss programs)... My viewpoint on the whole issue is similar to my viewpoint on U.S. citizenry at large... namely that thir political will has been voraciously stifled by excessive beaurocracy and a rampant medieval gung-ho crusade mentality of a semi-conscious and fully hypocritical religious majority. At the risk of being labelled unpatriotic by a country where I've been discriminated against for not being white, rich and hypnotically acquiescent, the real America is dead... the CIA murdered her in the 70s.

Posted by: Alan | June 24, 2005 10:12 AM | Report abuse

I believe Rowe was completely right.
It only requires a review of what Al Jazeera to realize that the Arab Street does not hear the apology, only the Assertion.
Our democratic leadership is doing its best to lose this war, because they believe that this is good for democratic candidates.

Posted by: Leon Rogson | June 24, 2005 10:13 AM | Report abuse

Do any of you have a remotely intellectual response to Rove's statement? Did any of you notice that the author compared Rove to a Nazi. The Nazis and Communists used soldiers, prisons, and executions to control speach. Rove merely stated his opinion and he is compared to a Nazi by the author. Yes, tolerance, love, compassion. Right.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 24, 2005 10:14 AM | Report abuse

Do any of you have a remotely intellectual response to Rove's statement? Did any of you notice that the author compared Rove to a Nazi. The Nazis and Communists used soldiers, prisons, and executions to control speach. Rove merely stated his opinion and he is compared to a Nazi by the author. Yes, tolerance, love, compassion. Right.

Posted by: craig | June 24, 2005 10:14 AM | Report abuse

The problem I have with the whole political spectrum right now is that honest debate has been replaced with personal destruction. No one debates issues and outcomes of decisions. People just say...that is dumb! No explanation, no facts no back-up...nothing. Just destroy him and when we are the only ones left standing...they'll have to do it our way. This goes for both parties!

Posted by: SDS | June 24, 2005 10:14 AM | Report abuse

Of course, the latest line is that Rove wasn't talking about Democrats at all ... How could you possibly think that?! He said liberals, not Democrats! This by the same folks who've spent the better part of the last 40 years attempting to merge the meaning of the two, and demonizing both.

Honestly, to me the most offensive part is not the speach, but the White House quickly and publically going on record defending it. Rove is Dubya's closest adviser and a well-paid government official. That speaks volumes - Our government has defended pitting one half of America against the other. Why do they hate America?

The forest they don't want you to notice is that they are truly tanking - on every front. Rove has generally been smart enough to stay in the shadows in the past. This episode smacks of desparation, and in the end, I suppose we should all be applauding it.

Posted by: Mike | June 24, 2005 10:14 AM | Report abuse

You are right on.

Posted by: JC | June 24, 2005 10:15 AM | Report abuse

Republicans are just turning up the noise to drown out the scandals. In Ohio, we are about to discover that tax money was diverted from the Bureau of Workers Compensation to any number of Republican campaign efforts. The goal of the Administration right now is to take the focus off the graft.

Forget Iraq and 911. The con is in full swing.

Posted by: Buckeye | June 24, 2005 10:16 AM | Report abuse

Why can't you just admit it, Karl Rove handed the democrats their a$$ on on a platter. They fell for the oldest trick in the history of childish behavior. By saying the liberals considered 9/11 an international police issue as opposed to an act of war, he tricked the dems (Clinton, Reed, Shmuker, etal) into admitting they were liberals even though they try to tell us theyt are not. I laughted my a$$ off. :)

Posted by: elinks | June 24, 2005 10:17 AM | Report abuse

I think it's hilarious that people whip out the "but there was unanimous support in Congress for the war in Afghanistan" comment as though that has anything to do with the fact that liberals on the whole (which is what Rove was speaking about) acted like a bunch of wimpy, defeatist surrender-monkeys practically as soon as the first plane struck (exaggeration used there, in case it isn't obvious). See: MoveOn.org petition, peace rallies, and anti-war protests right after 9/11 occurred.

The "red herring" is the faux show of pain and hurt the Democrats have quickly leaped to take upon themselves regarding Rove's comments, so as to bury the truth of his comments under the massive wave of their whining and griping.

Instead of discussing why liberalism is such a vile mentality and why it is destructive to the war effort, we're discussing whether or not Rove should apologize to a bunch of Democrat congressmen&women who jumped into the path of his comment purposely, so as to create this entire debacle and derail any discussion of liberalism versus conservatism, which was the actual point of Rove's comment.

Posted by: Silly People | June 24, 2005 10:17 AM | Report abuse

The military ranks are no place for political resistance. There's a word for that: insubordination, and in the extreme, treason. You want to resist, it's real easy. Get out and run for office. Or become an activist. There's a very good reason the military has regulations against political campaigning beyond having a bumper-sticker on your car. You may disagree, but at the end of the day you better know who the boss is.

Posted by: jw | June 24, 2005 10:18 AM | Report abuse

What's amazing to me is that folks still keep wandering back to clinton as if bush's foul-ups were his fault, six years later. Hillary's just an easy target for rabid right-wingers with nothing else to target.

I miss my bubba......

Posted by: LP | June 24, 2005 10:18 AM | Report abuse

Making comparisons of Guantanamo Bay to all these various historical atrocities is ridiculous, attention-grabbing babble. That's all it is. I don't think they should apologize for saying those things, their words expose their idiocy, and that's punishment enough.
As for Rove, of course it is over the top to say that liberal's motives are to harm Americans. He essentially is using the same tactic that liberals are using to attack Gitmo. All he is doing is slinging the back in their face. It's right there in front of you, but you'll never see it because of your bias.

Posted by: chris | June 24, 2005 10:18 AM | Report abuse

IT IS DOUBTFUL THE COUNTRY WILL BE ABLE TO RECOVER FROM TNE BUSH ERA. HIS WAR, HIS TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH, HIS TOM DELAY, HIS M. BOLTON, HIS NO "CHILD LEFT BEHIND", HIS OIL CRONIES, HIS PARM. CRONIES. HIS POLICIES HAVE CAUSED THE WORLD TO VIEW US LESS FAVORABLELY THAN COMMUNIST CHINA.

Posted by: ROXIE | June 24, 2005 10:19 AM | Report abuse

maybe its just that Karl Rove is an evil person who only cares about his big $ partners and can find no lows too low to stoop to?

Posted by: daltonic | June 24, 2005 10:19 AM | Report abuse

Wasp what was your post about? and could somebody get around to apologizing for Nixon?

Posted by: parithed | June 24, 2005 10:20 AM | Report abuse

To WASP:

So is that the best you got? That Dems are womanizers? This must be another attempt at covering up some of the real problems the current administration has. Dubya can be a great husband and father, yet lie and kill thousands in Iraq....but that's ok. Sheesh.

Posted by: J | June 24, 2005 10:21 AM | Report abuse

We need more partisan bickering. Maybe if these gentlemen (and ladies) start yelling at each other more often, they'll be too busy to pass laws and screw up even further. Personally, I can't wait for CNN to start showing fistfights on the Senate floor. If government can't govern, it should at least be entertaining.

Posted by: Dex | June 24, 2005 10:21 AM | Report abuse

For the sake of a few votes in FL we find ourself in the middle of Iraq searching for madman who is half a world away. And Rowe rants on about the Dems. The evening news is so poor and porus that I search for the BBC for a glimmer of what is happening on the ground in Afganistan and elsewhere. Having fought in Vietnam and studied the logic and rhetoric that the politicians (Dems and Reps) used to support that fiasco, I hear the same "light at the end of the tunnel" logic rolling out of the White House and Pentagon. I hear the same bitter criticism directed at anyone who questions the war or its status.

Rowe or not...we're looking at ten more years in country and billions that could have been used more effectively. Add in another 1,000 or so US dead and the "freeing" of Iraq is simply not worth the price.

Posted by: ursa | June 24, 2005 10:21 AM | Report abuse

oh... did I mention that I'm a veteran?

Posted by: Alan | June 24, 2005 10:21 AM | Report abuse

keep in mind that the republicans spent more money investigating bill clinton than they did investigating 9/11. please someone wake me up from this nightmare!

Posted by: jugger grimrodd | June 24, 2005 10:21 AM | Report abuse

If Karl Rove believes this is true:

"Al Jazeera now broadcasts to the region the words of Senator Durbin, certainly putting America's men and women in uniform in greater danger. No more needs to be said about the motives of liberals."

Then why is the Republican Party running video of Mr. Durbin's comments 24/7 on their web site? Is it their intent to put American men and women in uniform in danger?

Posted by: SpinDentist | June 24, 2005 10:22 AM | Report abuse

Rove's just doing what he has always done for dear old W - divide us into good and bad, conservative and liberal, patriotic and unpatriotic, etc etc etc blah blah blah. He does it 'cause it works. This will slide right off him like slime off a duck.

Posted by: JC | June 24, 2005 10:22 AM | Report abuse

Not that I condone the "rabbit habits" of the Democratic presidents WASP mentions, but...

The president's job is not to be a good spouse (Ideally it would be nice if they were). However, I would much rather have a president with "rabbit habits" than a president who leads the country into a war, threatening thousands of lives, for false reasons.

Funny how WASPs list of accusations against Democrats have nothing to do with running the government/country.

Posted by: anti-WASP | June 24, 2005 10:22 AM | Report abuse

Let's face facts here- neither party's leadership reflects the average American. Two words: Voter TurnOut (or is that three? Turn out) Anyway, I have no doubt that in the days after 9-11 most Americans also wanted to "unleash the might and power" even though Rove characterized that as a purely conservative desire. However, I am quite confident that there was, in fact, a hesitation by most Americans's (myself included) to ponder for a moment what the most appropriate response should be. At the end of the day, the Republicans have moved this country alarmingly close to a Facist State while the Democrats have allowed them do so through the lost of thier backbone. The result is we no longer have a unified fight against terrorism but -yet again- we have committed young patriotic troops to a conflict where they are fighting against an unkown enemy who uses brutality and guerilla like tactics. Additionally, we see on the news everyday that succes is measured in body counts and the government we are trying to support would crumble if we did not continue on. Hmmm huantingly familiar.

Sadly, if Republicans and Democrats had the courage to do what was right for the country and not their policital careers perhaps we wouldn't hear about the daily deaths of our fellow citizens along with pentagon's insurgents killed tally.

Posted by: Chris | June 24, 2005 10:24 AM | Report abuse

OK, WASPY. You're a douche. Way to compare horny presidents to a guy who's getting our troops slaughtered so he can TRY to save a little face. Easily the most offensive comparison of the weak. You're like a little, tiny Karl Rove Jr. What parallel could possibly exist there?

you're just like the clown on the Hill, flashing a shiny object to attempt to distract from the real issue. Your man screwed up royally. Blame Clinton if you want, but the only thing Bill ever did (in the political arena, which is the only arean a politician should be judged by, unless you want to get into DUI's and coke binges by your boy Bush), was not go get Osama. Do I need to remind you nimrod OSAMA IS NOT IN IRAQ.

It's dimwits like you, lemmings that follow whatever bread crumb trail the republicans will leave out for you, that are goingh to doom this country. Why are we there? Besides trying to fix a place we destroyed. WHY?! What is it going to take for you to understand Hussein was just another Castro. Yes, things he did to his countrymen were awful, but if you're going to start policing the world, we're are going to fail. This isn't the Inquisition, we can't purge every culture by ourselves and sidestep the rest of the world when they don't agree with us. Oh yeah, and you know, we didn't even officially go in to liberate a country. Your boy lied about that too. Funny how he can change jhis primary reason for invading a nation and kill thousands of people so quickly!

Posted by: WASPisaDouche | June 24, 2005 10:25 AM | Report abuse

Rove and his circle continue to massage 9/11 as their main weapon of political destruction, they did to win the reelection and they will in the future, no questions about it. As you can see Bush is unable to carry a second term without Irak, 9/11 terror threat alerts (mere psych-ops courtesy of Tom Ridge), by the way, we don't see yellow, orange, blue alerts, wow! we're safe right after November 2004, isn't that great?, only in America.

It is time now for democrats to take a stand and assume a very decisive position, don't make the mistake of attempting to please everybody because like in life, it doesn't work that way, not everybody will agree with you but hey no sweat. Take a side with your core values and stick with it, leave the political correctness BS and fight. Don't provide more ammunitions to your adversaries.

Posted by: Outsider | June 24, 2005 10:26 AM | Report abuse

Agreed, the guys at the wheel are lunatics. But, what are the alternatives? The more that the democrats say "Vote for us because we are not Bush. Bush is evil." the more they alienate people like me who have been solidly democrat in the past. I am looking for solutions to very difficult problems that the country is facing. I might be a latte drinker from Boston, but I shall do my civic duty to vote in a party that ensures economic well being, tolerance of all its citizens, and provides national security. Frankly, the choice has come down to religous nuts on the right and union thugs on the left. The question has come down to this: Do we want to let people like Karl Rove destroy the country's social fabric by voting in the republicans or do you want to let the AFL-CIO destroy the country's economic fabric by voting in the democrats. The culture wars have gone on long enough.

Posted by: thinkforachange | June 24, 2005 10:26 AM | Report abuse

Jesus! Can't we all just get along?

Posted by: Jay Taylor | June 24, 2005 10:27 AM | Report abuse

I hate being called a liberal, but Conservatives got a good thing going. anyone who isn't a warmongering, hateful, greedy, sniping jerk is forced into the other category. I can't stand hippies and the like, but I'd gladly be labeled one of them than be in the same hemisphere as any of the people supporting Karl Rove on this blog.

Posted by: WASPisaDouche | June 24, 2005 10:27 AM | Report abuse

The word is 'speech' not 'speach.' And 9/11 happened only 8 months into the Bush Administration, not 6 years. Clinton ignored earlier terrorist attacks, while he was snogging his staff, and didn't do anything about them.

BTW -- when I worked in law enforcement, police officers' code word for Negroes was 'Democrat.' If they wanted to know the race of a perp, they'd ask 'Is he a Democrat?' meaning 'Is he black?'

Posted by: WASP | June 24, 2005 10:27 AM | Report abuse

the real red herring here is the whole of the iraq debacle - most of the 9/11 terrorists were from saudi arabia, but the bush family's alliance with the house of saud does not allow us to go after them.... it's no coincidence that many of this administration and administrations previous also hold/held board seats, vp positons, etc., in the US's top energy corporations, such as Halliburton, bechtal, et al.

Posted by: LP | June 24, 2005 10:27 AM | Report abuse

Apotheosis of the military is the shibbolethof fascism. The soldiers in Iraq are federal employees who signed up for the pay and benefits package. Earning a living by killing people doesn't mean you love your country any more than earning a living in a day-care center does. Their laundry is done by Bengalis, the latrines are cleaned by Sri Lankans. I'm paying KBR $20 a meal for their cheeseburger and fries.You have a greater chance of being shot in Washington DC than Baghdad.

Posted by: Bill Fishlore | June 24, 2005 10:28 AM | Report abuse

Hi WASP,
Let's agree on what we can about WJC- he is a lying weasel with a zipper problem who wouldn't know a principle if it bit him in the tail. Leave JFK out of things, unless you want to go on with me about Nixon and what a great thing it would have been if Strom Thurmond had been president, etc. As to what Clinton did and did not do, well, he left office with a budget surplus and a country at peace. He did not get after UBL as much as he might have, but since the military hated Slick Willie worse than latrine duty and Congress was in the hands of his opponents, not much could have been done without further provocation. He did not OTOH lead us into war to the tune of 1700 dead (and counting), 13,000 wounded (and counting), who knows how many civilians dead and wounded, and a half trillion dollars (and counting really really fast), based on a series of pretexts which have since all been discredited. Even given all that, and assuming Bush's complete and sincere belief in the faulty intelligence he received, I would still have retained some respect for the man if at the time he had asked for some sort of shared sacrifice on the part of all Americans. My personal proposal would have been to freeze the tax cuts and impose a $.50 /gal gas tax to go to pay for the war. Now THAT would be supporting our troops, instead of a million magnetic yellow ribbons and a bunch of fat no bid contracts for Halliburton.

Posted by: kurosawaguy | June 24, 2005 10:29 AM | Report abuse

Boy, look at all the moonbats posting. And you think the Republicans have never worked a day in their life huh? ha ha If you think that Rove's comments hurt, its because it is true that the liberals were seeking counseling for the terrorists and for themselves. Its a fact Jack...and they have been anti-war, so 'unsupportive' would be a mild word when it comes to protecting us from the beheaders. One must have a low esteem problem, when they don't even wish to protect themselves. Comparing Rove's comments (completely supported by everyone from McKinney to Kennedy), to the dastardly Turban Durbin is unconscionable. The liberals do truly have a mental disease, and now I see it is not 'self diagnosed' very easily, but is surely chronic.

Posted by: dickied | June 24, 2005 10:29 AM | Report abuse

Achenbach:
The president said, "Karl, go out there and say something really dumb."

Let's see, if I were putting out a casting call for a movie about the second-term Bush administration, I think Jim Carrey woiuld be an excellent choice for playing the role of President Bush. Karl Rove could be played by Jeff Daniels. It would be an original movie, but also a sequel: Dumb and Dumber II.

Who should be tapped as the director? Why, the real behind-the-scenes director, Neo-Conservative in Chief, Dick "the insurgency is in its last throes" Cheney!

Posted by: Meeooowww | June 24, 2005 10:29 AM | Report abuse

Joel seems so much more insightful when he writes what I am thinking; he should do it more often. However, I was taken aback by the stunning news that alchemy isn't making a comeback. I immediately tried calling my financial adviser but his phone service was disconnected; so I tried calling A.C.M.E. Alchemy Inc. directly but they seem to have disappeared along with my children's college fund money. See what you've done Joel? You've ruined everything for moi. It's all your fault. Blame is no game. If only you had kept silent. Now I know Karl Rove is right, Michael Moore really is the Wily Wizard of Tragic-Magic. I bet you didn't think that thought did you Joel? I bested your odious stab at elite liberal mind control didn't I? Hah. I may be poor but I'm unaffected.

Posted by: Moi Moi | June 24, 2005 10:29 AM | Report abuse

say what you want about clinton but at least he was INSPIRED and not GROOMED to become the president. bush, rove, cheney, limbaugh, et al where hiding during vietnam but now they have no problem sending young people to do what they were afraid to do themselves. how is that moral? bush is a liar, thief, coward and everything that conservatives claimed clinton was. where is the outrage now??

Posted by: pansy division | June 24, 2005 10:30 AM | Report abuse

Hey and a racial blast. Wow. You prove my point better than I ever could. Thanks for the affirmation.

BTW - Turn off your internal grammar check, douchebag. It's blog, not a Harvard application essay.

Posted by: WASPisaDouche | June 24, 2005 10:30 AM | Report abuse

Let's see 9/11, yup the GOP went right after the villians who took down the Trade Center. Saddam and Iraq? I believe the Wanted Dead or Alive person is still alive and well. So what did Bush & Rove really start? A WAR that was NOT NEEDED. They have Blood on their hands. REMEMBER WMD's? Remember Cheney saying " They (Iraq) will be greeting us with Waving Flags? Why do you think Powell left these looneys? America WAKE UP

Posted by: ckuhn | June 24, 2005 10:30 AM | Report abuse

"the real red herring here is the whole of the iraq debacle - most of the 9/11 terrorists were from saudi arabia, but the bush family's alliance with the house of saud does not allow us to go after them"...

Hey everybody, guess who gets his education from Michael Moore.

Posted by: chris | June 24, 2005 10:31 AM | Report abuse

Well, fair enough. I have to apologize for Michael Moore. Our bad.

But you have to admit, Ann Coulter isn't a bundle of fact either. They both could benefit from early retirement.

Posted by: WASPisaDouche | June 24, 2005 10:32 AM | Report abuse

rebuttal to JW...

the military ranks are exactly the place for political activism. This war goes agains ALL military doctrine and codes of ethics. When illegal orders are followed (gleefully and with intentionally added maliciousness), the indication is that the command climate has not only sanctioned this behavior, it has done so willfully. By the way, consentious objection is not unknown in military culture... Besides, treason, which is punishable by death, is no harsher a sentence than being sentenced to death or dismemberment due to political irresponsibility, cowardice or incompetence... friendly fire or enemy fire leaves soldiers just as dead in the end. And... my point was that the MEANS for political resistance are just as stifled in the civilian sector as in the military.

Posted by: Alan | June 24, 2005 10:32 AM | Report abuse

Bush won............when will the liberals get over it!!!

Posted by: Kelly | June 24, 2005 10:33 AM | Report abuse

@WASP

Moving to Canada if H. Clinton wins?

Um, you do realize that Canada's right wing is far-left of the Democrats?

Posted by: Rich | June 24, 2005 10:35 AM | Report abuse

Oh and Bush was really on top of things when he got a memo warning about possible airplane attacks before 9/11.

Oh, and I can't believe you would actually say that about the whole Democrat/Negroe thing.

Thanks for reinforcing my own stereotypes about police officers.

BTW -- if you are just posting this stuff as way to see how angry "the 15" will get, good job! Otherwise, you're hopeless.

Posted by: anti-WASP | June 24, 2005 10:35 AM | Report abuse

I miss the digressions of the SAOF.

And WASP, was the racial slam really necessary? It just displayed the level of your maturity and mindset.

Posted by: Sara | June 24, 2005 10:35 AM | Report abuse

We all are to blame for buying into this type of politics. We watch shows and elect politicans that use these tactics to sway us or to make us miss the real story going on that no one is reporting.

Look at the assault on PBS (Bill Moyers and Frontline) for actually practicing real journalism. There is little doubt that PBS and NPR do lean slightly left - but there reporting is still the least biased of all the major news outlets. The Right knows this and now needs to send the attack dogs after them.

But we the electorate created this situation and we can still change it if we want to.....

Posted by: Kyle | June 24, 2005 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Questions for all the Rove/Bush Repub Macho Men:

1. If your judgement and leadership on the War on Terror are so on point, Where are the HUGE CACHES of WMD'S Iraq supposedly
possessed?

2. Where is and Why Havent you caught Osama Bin Laden?

3. What Did Iraq have to do with the events of 9-11-01?

Posted by: Cassini | June 24, 2005 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Hey Kelly,

Great one-dimensional thinking. Alright, Saddam's out of power, let's get the hell out of Iraq and let the terrorists run the place.

Hey, Tsunami victims, here's your check. We're outta here.

Bush won, so it's hands off for the next four years? the founding fathers would be so proud you missed every point they ever made about eternal viligance. Go eat a doughnut.

Posted by: HeyKelly | June 24, 2005 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Karl Rowe was throwing red meat to a conservative audience at a fund raiser. His statements are backed up by documented quotes by prominent liberals. Seems to me that the ones who are hollering the loudest is a case of the 'hit dog barks'. Besides, the hollerers are trying to draw attention from their deafening silence on Sen. Durbin's 'Nazi' comparisons.

Posted by: Texan | June 24, 2005 10:37 AM | Report abuse

Will someone give Karl Rove a wife!

This way he can quit screwing the American people

Posted by: dassy | June 24, 2005 10:37 AM | Report abuse

Joel, I agree. Rove is an expert at the sleight-of-hand trick of misdirection. This is a calculated move. Watch his other hand!

Posted by: Necco | June 24, 2005 10:38 AM | Report abuse

WASP- yes, you are exactly correct. Clinton got a little memo on his desk "BTW - bin laden, HW Bush's cronie, has gone awol, and we fear he will be attacking the world trade center with airplanes sometime in the near future..." Oh, wait. Oh, that was BUSH that got that memo, not clinton. And it's Bush's family that tossed all that artillary to bin laden in the eighties - not clinton. get your facts straight. And if I were in the white house, i'd want a blow job, too.

Posted by: LP | June 24, 2005 10:39 AM | Report abuse

Mr WASP seems to be a bit confused. If I remember correctly, Bush inherited budget surpluses, a robust economy and a National Security staff that warned him about Osama. He gave the budget surplus away to his friends like Ken Lay, his voodoo economic policies have led to an anemic economy a best, and rather than heeding warnings about al Qaeda he was reading pre-school childrens books on 9-11 (probably because he couldn't handle grammar school level reading). And if that wasn't enough he lied to the American public to get us into this stupid foray in Iraq. Inherit a mess? No! He created it!

Posted by: Bill | June 24, 2005 10:39 AM | Report abuse

I don't think that Rove is nearly as smart as he thinks he is. His comments are part of his strategy to paint opponents to the war as unpatriotic so as to stop opposition and expand the powers of the executive. Funnily enough, this is also the old strategy.
Do you remember this talking point from 2002? "We need to support our president in time of war"--I think that, as a country with such a powerful military and economic influence in the world, we should encourage debate and descent especially in times of war. It is not as if everyone is just afraid of getting drafted; we know that that option is not politically viable, but it would have been good to slow down the march to war. Maybe we could even have discovered the cracks in our intelligence system before the invasion is debate were welcomed before the war.
How about calling the patriot act the PATRIOT act? If anyone opposes the impingement on civil liberties they are automatically un-patriotic, and the bill passes granting the executive more power.
Now I think that this administration believes that they are doing something good for the world and the country with this war and, honestly, I don't have the necessary clairvoyance to determine whether the net effect will be a positive or negative one, but the clear threat to America that I see, is the consolidation of power with the executive. The attempts to change rules and bully the opposition are irresponsible and, if they continue to succeed, these changes will severely undermine the constitution.

Posted by: Will | June 24, 2005 10:39 AM | Report abuse

Hmm...military doctrine and code of ethics? There's nothing political about refusing to follow an illegal order, but it seems to me you're suggesting soldiers disobey orders because they don't agree with them on a political level. Doctrine is policy, not law, and as such should be left to politicians, or at least the JCS. There's no place on the battlefield for political debate.

Posted by: jw | June 24, 2005 10:40 AM | Report abuse

wow, this is exciting. I can't go into chat rooms at work or i'd get fired, so this is the only intelligent conversation i get to have all day.

I really can't stand hard-line whiners of either spectrum, but can't we all just admit that we take such hard stances because we just like to argue? How 3@#%^ boring would this place be if we were all moderates?

For every Fox News, there's a CNN, for every Washington Post there's a Washington Times. Gotta love it. Media is a market, ans the've created their own demand. It's genius.

Posted by: nedkelly | June 24, 2005 10:41 AM | Report abuse

Words of wisdom to adhere by: OPINIONS ARE LIKE ASSHOLES......EVERYONE'S GOT ONE! It seeems to me that liberal assholes are smellier than others though...lol

Posted by: George | June 24, 2005 10:41 AM | Report abuse

Well....WASPisadouche makes my point.

He disagrees with WASP. So shall we debate the issues? Nah...just call the guy names.

That is not debate. That is not persuasive speech.

More of the same.

Posted by: SDS | June 24, 2005 10:41 AM | Report abuse

That's not michael moore, i can't say I'm a moore fan. That's John Perkins, Confessions of an Economic HitMan, an auto-biography of a gentleman that wroked with all these guys in the seventies and eighties. Oh, wait, that's right, Saddam had all those WMDs....

Posted by: LP | June 24, 2005 10:42 AM | Report abuse

Yawn.

"Conservative" is a poor word choice in describing the violent, lawless reactionary statism that seems to be the hallmark of the Bush administration's foreign policy. The seemingly endless stream of one-liners and one-upsmanship that pours from the lips of Bush's hatchetmen is not even thinly disguised as the adolescent machoism of a fifth-grade bully.

As for the pseudo-oppositional democrats(or whatever they wish to call themselves), the are by and large virtually indistingushable from their tie-wearing pencil pushing counterparts in D.C. None of them appear to give pin's fee about the tens of thousands of dead and hundreds of billions of dollars that have resulted from their purile and completely unthoughout reaction to the events of September 11, 2001.

Heck, any child could've predicated the outcome.

Why not save the dead, their surviving friends and relatives, and the taxpayers here and abroad a lot of trouble, and just cut a check in the name of Al-Quaeda for $250,000,000,000 in exchange for a promise not to ram an airplane into a building for a few years?

Posted by: Connie | June 24, 2005 10:42 AM | Report abuse

There are two issue re-emerging here that I find extremely sad:
First, another instance of "truth by repetition" As was stated before, assertions are being made and repeated, and no presentation of facts or counterarguments will have any effect. Just say the same thing over and over again, and people will believe it after a while. If someone complains their either "whining" or "unpatriotic." Sad times for a democracy...
The other issue is the misuse of the term "liberal." In my book that is someone who is capable of accepting that other people might have a different view of things, someone who tries to understand why there is a different view, someone who is willing and capable of questioning his beliefs and, if he still finds them to be true after examination, will defend them with strong arguments. "Liberal" is a way of dealing with the uncertainties of life and the variety found in mankind. It is not a political party. If Rove critizises Liberals, he condems everyone who is trying to think before they act. And if that is now becoming a bad thing, then it really is time that God bless America. We'll need it.

Posted by: Phoebus | June 24, 2005 10:42 AM | Report abuse

With the words of Durbin and Ted Kennedy still echoing through the hall of the Senate, it would seem that the only recourse for these individuals is to redirect the Public attention away from the broadside of liberal comments. Mr. Rove is correct in his opinion what has the left done for us lately? The answer in clear, noithing. They have given the insurgents the same rights as American to the Judical system, some how the American policy is to place all these insurgents in the Hilton or a Bed and Breakfast Inn. How about the one in Boston Ted? I thought not. Until the Democrats can reel in Mr. Dean, stop Mr. Kerry from making statements that are off track regarding the previous election, it is now the time to form a new party. Yes there is a need for a party that represents the middle of the road democrats and not the Clinton's idea of Socialism.

Posted by: Steven | June 24, 2005 10:43 AM | Report abuse

This is the same old type of juvenile banter my generation is used to hearing from this quickly fading, post WWII egocentrical American generation. I long for the future. when 20 years from now our more sensible, wakened generation takes over. That is, if the former hippies and yuppies don't destory things first.


We look at the Karl Roves of the world as "children". As a matter of fact, a good majority of our republics (anyone know what a repuclic is anymore?) political body are nothing more than children in adult packages, throwing around meaningless comments and poorly worded verbal attacks, only to retract with heartless "apologies" because they can't even understand their own convictions.

To all of you in this generation I'm speaking about, my generation does not feel hatred toward you. We feel pity. We feel the pain handed to us created by your pleasures. We see the insanity festering inside of your minds. And we are not like you. We're over the last few years deciding to do something you decided not to do: grow up. Television shows you the opposite, but keep in mind that's television, not reality. And your tactics are not going to work on us.

Good people of America, things will get worse before they get better, but I'm confident my generation will try as hard as possible for all of our generations. I know there are plenty of "compentent" and intelligent persons of our not so adult generation that see through such BS as presented above, and must say I feel sorry you had to grow up around it. Hopefully by the time my generation inhabits the halls of Congress, we will be on our way for paying for the greed and consumption our fathers created for us, and we will forgive you. Because you never grew up.

Posted by: forkboy | June 24, 2005 10:43 AM | Report abuse

I think Rove is right on. Democrats have consistently referred to fighting terrorists as a law enforcement matter (see John Kerry's entire campaign)- it's NOT - 9/11 was an vicious attack on our soil which demanded and still demands a military response. Now the Dems have their panties in a wad about if someone looked sideways at a Koran or if prisoners didn't get chocolate milk with their honey glazed chicken at Gitmo. How can normal people listen to the Democrats in congress and think that they are really concerned about our men in uniform or preventing another 9/11 when all they whine about is how badly they think the US is treating terrorists at Gitmo?? Every time Democrats open their mouths, it's not to spread the word on what an amazing, free country we are, but how bad the US is. It's depressing.

I'd love to hear a different, useful point of view from the Democrats. I'm sick of the Bush administration and its ineptitudes. I listen and watch the Democrats with hope but instead all I hear is whining and concern for terrorists instead of concrete suggestions on being a strong nation and really winning the WOT.

AS long as the Dems keep hanging around with the likes of Michael Moore, George Soros and MoveOn.org who spew hateful comments all the time, they look like hypocrites demanding apologies and resignations from conservatives who are giving them a taste of their own medicine.

Posted by: Wis | June 24, 2005 10:44 AM | Report abuse

Hey Dassy...maybe we should just get Rove to be a Democrat...then he can screw everyone's wife.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 24, 2005 10:44 AM | Report abuse

Mr WASP seems to be a bit confused. If I remember correctly, Bush inherited budget surpluses, a robust economy and a National Security staff that warned him about Osama. He gave the budget surplus away to his friends like Ken Lay, his voodoo economic policies have led to an anemic economy a best, and rather than heeding warnings about al Qaeda he was reading pre-school childrens books on 9-11 (probably because he couldn't handle grammar school level reading). And if that wasn't enough he lied to the American public to get us into this stupid foray in Iraq. Inherit a mess? No! He created it!

Posted by: Bill | June 24, 2005 10:44 AM | Report abuse

Oh, and Joel buddy, don't forget- this is your blog and you just wade on in here into the swamp any old time you feel like it, ya hear?

Posted by: kurosawaguy | June 24, 2005 10:45 AM | Report abuse

At what point do we, those of us who desire to chart a change in our current course, begin to act together. The overall sentiment is clear here. The "W"rong crew is at the helm. Help us all by galvanizing our efforts to administer a change in leadership. We have seen the progression of a long term effort to seize control of this country away from the middle ground common sense folks and I think, with little argument, the results are devastating for us now and for a while to come. When you can carry on a discussion of favorability ratings that compares the US with a Communist country like China, or expose actions that can clearly be construed like something a Nazi would do, then it's time to take action and reclaim what, for generations with great sacrifices by many, has been the building of a great nation.

Posted by: GlavestonIslander | June 24, 2005 10:45 AM | Report abuse

This discussion itself is what Karl Rove wanted us to get to. If we keep hammering this crap and the talkshows pick it up as they will then for those with short attention spans this will be the subject de jour for at least two weeks maybe more and every other serious issue will be ignored.
This guy is pretty brilliant, won't you say.

Posted by: Hadyn | June 24, 2005 10:45 AM | Report abuse

"The Inquisition's here and it's here to staaaay..."

Posted by: Torquemata | June 24, 2005 10:45 AM | Report abuse

I blame Joel for this. Friday should be a day for posts about whether gas or charcoal is better.

And I can't believe someone actually said "negro".

The TSA15 needs deligated veto power so that only posts that are about chlorophyll and whether any ladies here are available for drinks tonight.

Posted by: jw | June 24, 2005 10:47 AM | Report abuse

As a moderate Democrat (read...former Republican irritated by the new direction the party has taken,) I believe that we have a case of behind covering. Mistakes were made by this administration as well as the previous and not all of these were foreseeable errors. September 11 wreaked havoc and confusion upon our nation and where confusion reigns opportunity exists. Whether it is money or power, people are taken advantage of in this milieu. America wants answers to many important questions and the more quickly we dispose of these issues, the better off we all will be. Machiavellian tactics must cease.

Posted by: Randy | June 24, 2005 10:47 AM | Report abuse

We have also set a record or elapsed time to 100 posts. Scary.

Posted by: jw | June 24, 2005 10:47 AM | Report abuse

Blah blah, so many opinions, so many idiots.

Its always a bit funny reading whats written in response to a blog column... people spout ideas and push notions that are absurd at best. We all believe what we want to believe, we all try to piece our view of the world together in a manner that suits us... lets be realistic, not everybody is right. You can stand there and say that you are right and everyone else is wrong, but lets face it, you're more than likely wrong.

Take for instance Waspisadouche. The guys a fuggin morron, just pushing the political agenda that appeals to him the most like everyone else is. "blah blah, Bush wants soldiers to die, he'd kill themselves personally if it meant saving face.. blah blah.. Osama isn't in Iraq, and since I know this I must know just where he is.. blah blah... republican.. Hussein is Castro!.. Inquisition!.. killing thousands of people sooooo quickly OMG!.. blah blah amd freakin blah.

I mean, everybody these days is trying to spin their own politics like they know what they are talking about and they are the fountain of all thats true and right. Lets be realistic about that... no one here fully understands everything that goes on in politics, what motives are what, and whatever else there may be. We take a (more often than not uneducated) guess at what it is. Should people really defend something so vehemently when its nothing but a guess?

I think we'd all do better to approach things from the middle ground, because this bickering back and forth at two opposite poles helps no one understand anything, and it certainly does not make anyone appear any more intelligent.

My apologies for this posting.

Posted by: TheDude | June 24, 2005 10:47 AM | Report abuse

I find it sad that in this whole argument, people seem to see Social Security privatization as an assumed lost cause and "hare-brained scheme." I am a Ph.D student in Economics, and my nearly professional opinion is that privatization is unquestionably one of the smartest things that the government could do right now to protect future generations of Americans. And this goes way, way beyond politics. I'm going to assume that a large number of people posting here are in the 20-30 age range, and all of you should realize that a privatization plan now would benefit you the most, since you will have the ability to put a large portion of your lifetime earnings in a growing account rather than a stagnant 1% government bill.

I heard a democrat on C-SPAN talking the other day, and argued that current benefits can be paid until 2040-something, and even then the system will still work if we pay 80% benefits for 30 years after that. He claimed that the problem is fictionalized, and there are more important things to talk about. Many of you seem to agree with that point. Those of you that do are being short sighted and stupid. There's a big difference between a plan that maintains benefits for 40 years before cutting them and a plan that makes them grow steadily and indefinitely.

Unfortunately, people seeking political advantage have demonized this type of plan without ever considering it's implications in a real way. They find it easier to gain votes by scaring old people into believing their benefits will be cut (they won't) or simply obstructing the policy because its passage would be a major political victory for the Republicans. I urge all of you to educate yourself about this issue and think about it in a meaningful, non-political way, because Social Security in general will probably have a greater effect on American prosperity over then next 50 years than the War in Iraq, the federal deficit, and the No Child Left Behind Act COMBINED.

This is the only thing I evangelize about. The end. Off soapbox.

Posted by: AC | June 24, 2005 10:48 AM | Report abuse

Joel, in your own understated way, you're 1000% right - Rove is indeed a red herring.

The 'distraction tactic' is the one bait the Dems keep taking, each and every time. It drives me crazy...

Posted by: Vince | June 24, 2005 10:48 AM | Report abuse

Karl Rove was completely accurate in his portrayal of the ideas of the liberal wing of the democratic party as one that is more concerned with the feelings of those who want to kill us than with the protection of the citizens of this country. Liberals do not view the US in a positive light and try at every turn to slander the efforts of US troops everywhere. These liberals compare the treatment of prisoners at Gitmo to those run by Nazis. These prisoners have all gained weight, from eating 3 squares a day, and have received exceptional dental and medical care since their incarceration. Historically speaking, these people have not a clue about what actually took place in prisons in Germany and Russia during WWII. Additionally, these are killers who would love to kill as many Americans as possible. Many of the Gitmo prisoners who were released already were encountered again on the battlefield shooting at our troops. Supporting the promotion of democracy in Iraq and supporting our troops is a lost cause for liberals but championing the rights of terrorists and killers is a much more rewarding experience for them. Karl Rove is absolutely correct is his analysis of the differences between Republicans and liberals.

Posted by: Conrad Bovell | June 24, 2005 10:49 AM | Report abuse

Response to Bill Fishlore

Dear Sir,

Perhaps you should put down the bong and your copy of the city papers for a few short minutes to ponder you comments about soldiers being nothing more than federal employees who signed up for the pay and benefits package. Most enlisted soldiers live below the federal poverty line and receive substandard medical care. While no doubt there are those who join becuase it is a job, you can alos walk down to the local McDonald's and get a similar pay and benefits package and not fear for their lives. The truth of the matter is most soldiers who join do see an opportunity to serve their country and either have and/or develop real sense of patriotism, particularly when dropped into a combat zone where they see their friends die around them. Those bangladeshi and sri lankin contractors you talk about are their as wage earners no different than the illiegal immigrants that take low paying jobs here in the U.S. It doesn't diminish their plight but it certainly doesn't warrant a comparison to American soldiers dying on a battle field. They do a job their country sends them to do and they do it becuase of duty, not a pay check or benefits. Get Real

Posted by: Chris | June 24, 2005 10:49 AM | Report abuse

LIKE I SAID BEFORE.......BUSH WON....GET OVER IT !!! (LIBERALS ARE BAD LOSERS)

Posted by: KELLY | June 24, 2005 10:49 AM | Report abuse

Before liberals jerk their knees after Karl Rove says something, they should stop and think about what he's up to.

After all, it is liberals & Dems who have given Rove the image of being the most Machiavellian politico in U.S. history!

But when Rove called liberals (not Dems) bleeding-heart touchy-feely wimps who "want to give therapy and understanding" to terrorists, the Dems took the bait, hook line and sinker.

Rove's ploy in fact had a lot to do with the flap over Guantanamo. He saw Democrats drifting toward identification with the politics of internet hysteria and the nutty claims of anti-American groups like Amnesty International. He used simple reverse psychology to reignite the fires of patriotism in the Dems -- in the process reminding them they can't straddle two sides on the defense of America.

Citizen

Posted by: Citizen | June 24, 2005 10:50 AM | Report abuse

I have a question for Alan...

"This war goes agains ALL military doctrine and codes of ethics."

Please explain... the late Pope John Paul II condoned it... so it must not be against codes of ethics... and I haven't heard of one thing that the military has done against doctrine.. and don't say Gitmo because those terrorists in their aren't under the Geneva Convention... secondedly, how can you say that this war is against ALL codes of ethics when your fellow democrats are killing thousands of babies a day... you crats amaze me

Posted by: Pete | June 24, 2005 10:50 AM | Report abuse

I have a question for Alan...

"This war goes agains ALL military doctrine and codes of ethics."

Please explain... the late Pope John Paul II condoned it... so it must not be against codes of ethics... and I haven't heard of one thing that the military has done against doctrine.. and don't say Gitmo because those terrorists in their aren't under the Geneva Convention... secondedly, how can you say that this war is against ALL codes of ethics when your fellow democrats are killing thousands of babies a day... you crats amaze me

Posted by: Pete | June 24, 2005 10:50 AM | Report abuse

To WASP on your threat to move to Canada ; I'm certain you wouldn't like it here.

Posted by: Canuck | June 24, 2005 10:51 AM | Report abuse

My party has been hijacked by greedy cynical wackos, and the best the Democrats can do in opposition is whine for apologies. Keep your eyes on the ball- these (pre)felons want to steal or divert the nation's treasure to themselves and their campaign contributors at the cost of our military and fiscal strength, our future, our children's future and our planet. There are reasonable, non-agenda driven, true Americans and patriots in both parties. If they truly love their country, they'll get together and go around these political animals and start taking this country back.

Posted by: Moderate Republican | June 24, 2005 10:52 AM | Report abuse

Pay attention.

It's not just Rove. Typical to the Repugs, they launch their attacks on multiple media fronts.

So, you have Rove's comments, you have O'Reilly calling for the arrest of all Air America employees for treason, you have Congresswoman Pryce of Ohio accusing Dems of conducting "guerilla warfare" on the military.....they create the meme, then they treat it as accepted Truth.

This is so their faithful will not waver, because Rove, et al, has shown them how they are better than us. Because they are loyal and will ignore the escalating death toll and we, who question any of it, are traitors.

This will come in handy when they want to formally attack Iran, everyone here will be so busy pissing on each other that there will be no coherent resistance and little or no notice of the continued plundering of our treasury for their war profiteering.

Posted by: roooth | June 24, 2005 10:53 AM | Report abuse

Over 100 comments already (jw stole my thunder in announcing this, though). This is an Achenblog record, am I right? And there will probably be more by the time I finish typing this.

jw: you just want iowabiologist to come back so you can sweet talk about chlorophyll and the dirty laundry (and massage oils) in your room over martinis.

Posted by: Sara | June 24, 2005 10:53 AM | Report abuse

While you are all complaining about the war and the poll numbers slipping for the president and the war, lets not forget the idiots that voted him back in office. He didn't force himself back in. We put him there!!! We did this to ourselves. Now the question is does the American people still have enough control over our elected government to force him out of office?? Or do we just have to take Bush's crap until 2008. I am a Republican that voted Democrat because I believe that we needed some new ideas in this war and Kerry was the only other option. I have had enough of this administration and would be glad to join the political process that removes them from office. Support our troops and lets bring them home soon!!!!!

Posted by: Walker | June 24, 2005 10:54 AM | Report abuse

This is a red herring. The "real" herrings are Jack Abramoff, Ralph Reed, and the GOP Party's rape of Native Americans. We should not be surprised that our president sees nothing wrong with publicly divisive comments that are lies. It won't be the first time.

Here is the Truth of Rove's comments:
Republicans DID plan a war immediately after 9/11. Unfortunately for America, it was against Saddam Hussein, instead of the guy who actually attacked us on 9/11, Osama Bin Laden. (My proof: We have Saddam Hussein in jail with nary a WMD to be found, yet the guy who actually declared war on the United States has loyalists still killing Americans four years later.)
Don Rumsfield is the best at calling press conferences to distract from bad news. This time it's my opinion that Rove is shifting attention from the testimony of the "CEO" in the case against Delay, Abramoff, Ralph Reed et al. At any rate, they would love for us to waste all day long hyperventilating about an apology. There will be no apology, so use the opportunity at the microphone to shine the light of Truth back on them.

Posted by: bevbb | June 24, 2005 10:55 AM | Report abuse

I don't really have massage oils. I am sooooo not cool enough for that. Although I would like to invite her in for some fine "sham-pain-ya." We are now up to 118. This is a definite speed record.

Posted by: jw | June 24, 2005 10:55 AM | Report abuse

I'm not seeing my comment in these replies - so I'll pipe up: Durbin's initial comments, replayed over and over again on Al Jazeera, do in fact have the effect of placing our military men and women at greater risk because they are motivating to those that would cause them harm, and can be exploited by the leadership of various terror orgs to bring those folks out of the woodwork. Rove's comments, as quoted and criticized in this blog, are actually dead on accurate in my opinion. Doesn't anyone remember the reasons given for beheading Nick Berg? Weren't they citing Abu Gharib? That's what I recall anyway... Our Senators, Repub or Dems (I'm neither), should NOT be giving these guys any reason to be motivated.

Posted by: Roger Herzler | June 24, 2005 10:57 AM | Report abuse

Walker's right... lets get our troops out of Iraq and abandon the Iraqi citizens.. Who cares, they arent Americans... I say why we are at it we have every troop bring home a gallon of oil.. make it two gallons, that way we can selfishly abandon the Iraqi people who so desperately wanted freedom and lower gas prices at the same time!! Good idea Walker

Posted by: Pete | June 24, 2005 10:57 AM | Report abuse

Okay, Wis. I'll bite.

I am a Finish citizen. "What an amazing, free country we are."

There, I said it.

What's your point?

And what grade are you in?

Posted by: Martha | June 24, 2005 10:57 AM | Report abuse

as long as the repug thugs can keep creating distractions like schiavo and flag burning(as they did so successfully in the election campaign)they don't have to deal with real issues like health care, the carnage in iraq and the lousy economy. the dems are saps to get pulled into their role of yapping at repug heels instead of setting the agenda.

Posted by: joannar | June 24, 2005 10:57 AM | Report abuse

Of course this blog hit 100 fast. It was on Google's news page...millions saw the headline. I followed the link. I have never been here before today (and probably won't be back)

Posted by: Anonymous | June 24, 2005 10:57 AM | Report abuse

I'm afraid, very afraid...and every American citizen should also be afraid. It seems as if our beloved America is heading toward being a coountry where everything (the Presidency, the House of Representatives, the Senate, the Supreme Court Judiciary, business, religion, the military, etc. etc.) have been taken over by a radical bunch of "elites" from the richest & most privileged idealogues who seem to be controlling all aspects of American life, just like any other dictatorship. Bush & Co. care nothing for the American public (whose sons and daughters are fighting their wars?...not theirs). They are hypercritical of any word uttered that does not fall under the party line. They are placing far-right-wing zombies (to their cause) in positions that cry; no, scream for a nonpartisan such as in Public Broadcasting. It is OK to have Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Rielly, Sean Hannity, that awful Ann Colture and the entire Fox News Network constantly spout the party line and lies, over-shouting any opposition and cutting their microphones when guests make a valid point that is contrary to Bush & Co's propoganda.

Carl Rove makes me ill as does Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and a host of others. Bush is a spoiled bully who is like a giddy, smug little boy when everything goes his way and a sullen, sniveling, vindictive little brat when he doesn't. Why don't any of the Bush gang ever answer the questions asked by reporters? They constantly revert to talking about what they want to talk about instead of giving an honest answer, then abruptly end the interview, walking away from topics that show what they have been up to. This past week I heard a reporter/journalist ask about the "secret prisions where detainees are held" and this was not denied...instead Rumsfeld talked about Gitmo. A typical bait & switch. It has been happening for six years...ever since the campaign leading up to the 2000 election. We never get a straight and truthful answer about so many things; the Iraq war, the projected cost of the war, Social Security, tax cuts for the rich, rich, rich, the energy policy, the budget deficit, etc., etc. I have never heard anyone express concern over this and it bothers me enormosly.

Posted by: Ellen | June 24, 2005 10:57 AM | Report abuse

If I hear one more request for an apology about anything, I am going to shoot myself. Both parties are behaving like the nineteenth century jacksonian dandies who beat each other with canes and fought duels at the slightest breach of their honor. Could the centrists of the world please unite to talk about ISSUES instead of WORD CHOICES?

Posted by: oliver | June 24, 2005 10:58 AM | Report abuse

To the guy who thought having sex in the oval office was worse than breaking laws and going against most of the nations of the world, let me paint you a picture.

Adultery is not illegal. In fact, you can do it to your hearts content. And the president lied about his affair(s). Now theres a shock. A man who lies. I have yet to meet one that doesn't, particularly about an affair, and particularly when they are with a strong woman (yes Hillary)

Now I really do believe that attacking a country with little to no provication with the exception of the ruler of that country threating your daddy, well yes I do believe that is illegal. I believe we call it "Terrorism".

If my president wants to get his wanker tied in a knot but still manages to keep us mostly out of hot water, then I'll stick with that guy rather than the guy that is trying to line his pockets with an oil pipeline in Iraq. Think I am kidding? Do the research buddy. Cheney used to work for the company that is getting the work contracts in Iraq even though they are not the lowest bidder nor the best for the job. Guess who's making money in that endeavor.

So glad we risked the troops for that nonsense. I say bring them home. I am sick of seeing the body bags.

Posted by: Diane | June 24, 2005 10:58 AM | Report abuse

I thought you had to be cool to be one of the TSA15 or SAOF or whatever we're calling it these days...or were age and financial situation the only stipulations?

Posted by: Sara | June 24, 2005 10:58 AM | Report abuse

For Kelly.....

I suspect the liberals will 'get over it' about the same time the Republicans who believe '...the White House has lost touch with reality' do.

Posted by: Dave | June 24, 2005 10:59 AM | Report abuse

Is there any Democrat out there that possesses and can articulate any positive ideas for the future of this country? I have yet to hear any since Bill Clinton. In the absence of that, this version of the democratic, small d, party will be portrayed, fairly or unfairly, as the weak party who yells and screams a lot but without ever really saying anything. My, how far we have fallen.

Posted by: gtbana | June 24, 2005 10:59 AM | Report abuse

"The Worst President Ever", "Nazis", "Republicans started the illegal war in Iraq" ...
Democrats, liberals, socialists, whatever you like to call them are a joke. One minute they're saying the decisions were solely republican, the next thing they say is the Democrats also voted in favour, so are equally patriotic. Bush started the war? As well as hypocrits, it's clear that Democrats are also suffering memory problems. You left wing people pick and choose what suits your arguments and use decisions that republicans voted for as an example of what isd wrong with republicans and use the same decision that democrats also voted for as what is good about democrats. What hypocrits. Either take the good with the bad, or your opinion is worthless. Accept there are good points about the Bush administration and the republican party instead of seeing nothing but anything and everything negative and you may begin to have an objective opinion, instead of one full of left-wing rhetoric and resentment.

For the record, I am neither a Republican or a Democrat. In fact I'm not an American and don't even live on that continent.

Democrats should accept their share of responsibility for decisions made and even when times are tough, should stick to those decisions and see things through, like Iraq, instead of blaming everyone but themselves and trying to make a bad situation worse, by pulling troops out as a political move in an attempt to harm the Republicans and wash the US' hands of a problem they're heavily involved in, rather than a decision that benefits Iraq.

Posted by: AB | June 24, 2005 10:59 AM | Report abuse

For Kelly.....

I suspect the liberals will 'get over it' about the same time the Republicans who believe '...the White House has lost touch with reality' do.

Posted by: Dave | June 24, 2005 10:59 AM | Report abuse

So amazed to see how "distorted" the reality is becoming. It's become more and more obvious that Republicans maintain their position through lies and more lies and, at the very least, distortions. Heard and repeated enough, it all becomes some sort of reality to many Americans who don't have the time to research the "truth". What I've observed is that, if one truly cares to dig for the truth - which requires more than listening to the occasional Hannity and Colmes. If one really seeks out all opinions, biased and otherwise, then it becomes all too obvious. Our president wants it his way and thus distorts the facts. It happens virtually every day he opens his mouth. (Not 2 days ago he pretended the Patriot Act was responsible for more "Terrorist" aprehensions than the facts show). So was he called a liar by the media? Heavens no! It just depends "how you look at the facts". (BS!) So you have Cheney saying we're in the "last throes" for the upteenth time, but the general who has actually been to Iraq, head of Central Command and top US commander in the Middle East, states, appolgetically, "I'm sure you'll forgive me for criticizing the vice president (after he thorougly disagrees with his political take"). Does Cheney not trust these leaders we have in the field? I'm sure he probably does, but he's not being honest with the American people. I have plenty of beefs with the Democrats or "liberals" as many like to stain them (ever consider the origin of the word liberal?) but most of my complaints lie in the fact that so few have the courage to stand up to all the distortions of the truth and outright lies that flood the airwaves everyday. And, yes, Democrats can lie too. Thing is, most Americans don't need to be lied to about the things Democrats hold dearly. There's no shame in most of those positions. Whereas trying to pretend one is protecting the envirnoment by labeling it "the clear skies initiative" ad nauseum or any of the other "catch-lie" phrases used by the administration to hoist their views on Americans, is downright dishonest, if not disgusting! Funny how things turn out. The Supreme Court decision yesterday that allows municipalities to exercise a form of emminent domain, was decided by the more "liberal" justices. This is a case where I agree with the conservatives justices. As I did with the flag burning decision some 10 years or so ago - which went the way of the conservative memebers of the court. I've said too much, but seek out the truth and that truly will make you free.

Posted by: Americaneedstruth | June 24, 2005 11:00 AM | Report abuse

That there's an underlying plan to Rove's comments is certain, and it's probably all-too-well designed to use cognitive frameworks to mold opinion without reference to facts or truth.

But it's not the methodology that alarms me as much as the restraint-free lust for power exhibited by the Republican leadership and their backers. It's no coincidence that the three Republican administrations we've had since the 1960's have each handed us a terrifying Constitutional crisis.

Nixon sought to subvert an election with the Watergate burglary. Reagan/Bush the Elder deliberately sold weapons to one of our most ardent enemies, Iran, in order to funnel money to a group of right-wing rebels in El Salvador in direct violation of law expressly forbidding such support.

Now Bush the Lesser has deliberately lied about a national security condition to justify starting a horrific and unnecessary war in order to advance a domestic ideological agenda.

Comparing Guantanimo Bay with a Soviet Gulag? No apologies there, but what's really scary is the similarities between the neo-conservative rise to power in the US and the rise of the Social Democrats in Germany during the 1930's.

Posted by: DNT | June 24, 2005 11:00 AM | Report abuse

It's all a big smoke screen to shift focus away from the Downing Street Memo. Karl Rove took one for the team. Don't be distracted!

Posted by: chuck hampton | June 24, 2005 11:00 AM | Report abuse

I'd be more interested in having Rove, Bush and the rogues gallery in the White House apologizing to the nation for being asleep at the wheel in the months leading up to 9/11, for hiding in bunkers during 9/11, and for launching a stupid and phony war in Iraq after 9/11.

But then again, expecting Rove, Bush and Co. to behave like responsible leaders is equal to expecting a jackass to behave like a thoroughbred.

Posted by: Phil | June 24, 2005 11:01 AM | Report abuse

Why would anyone listen to a propagandist? Rove's job to spin, confuse, sell bullshit, and brainwash the masses. Karl Rove is the Republican version of Bagdad Bob (remember him?) and the even more notorius Joseph Goebbels. His job is a lie, promote his lies, write lies for the people he works for, and whipser lies in the ear of the president via a hidden earpeice because the President can't lie for himself. Anyone who willfully allows their brain to get pickled by Rove is a fool.

Posted by: RealityCheck | June 24, 2005 11:01 AM | Report abuse

As far as the judicial nominees go, I believe that Bush has had over 200 approved and nine blocked, of which two withdrew and four were passed. Not exactly massive obstruction. (These numbers are off the top of my head and may be off, but not by much.)

Yes, these numbers are "off the top of your head" and are dead wrong. Bush has had the lowest confirmation rate for appellate court nominees of any president...ever at 69%......Even Clinton, in a Republican-controlled congress had a 74% confirmation rate. Because of the Filibuster it is "minority rules." The dems just don't get it....do they? LOL

Posted by: Mike | June 24, 2005 11:02 AM | Report abuse

RIGHT NOW THE COUNTRY HAS BEEN DIVIDED INTO TWO GROUPS:
ONE IS LIBERALS THAT ARE TOO SPINELESS TO FIGHT AND HAVE EVEN CONVINCED THEMSELVES INTELLECTUALLY THAT FIGHTING IS WRONG.

THE OTHER GROUP, REDNECK CONSERVATIVES THAT DISGUISE RACISM AND XENOPHOBIA IN TERMS LIKE "FAMILY VALUES" THIS GROUP IS READY FOR A FIGHT BUT ARE TOO STUPID TO KNOW WHAT TO FIGHT FOR.

WHILE WE BICKER ABOUT A WAR THAT SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN THE GOVERNMENT IS MAKING A LAND GRAB REMOVING OUR RIGHTS TO PROPERTY OWNERSHIP.
IT'S DEFINITELY A RED HERRING, BUT WHAT ACTION HAS THIS ADMINISTRATION(OR THE PREVIOUS ONE) MADE THAT WASN'T A METHOD OF EXACTING CONTROLL OVER AMERICAN SOCIETY.

WAKE UP AMERICA!

Posted by: Wake Up | June 24, 2005 11:02 AM | Report abuse

"I like Guantanamo Bay. They have really good jerk chicken and the bowling alley's a lot of fun." But the beer there tastes funny ;-)

Posted by: eg | June 24, 2005 11:02 AM | Report abuse

Yeah! Right! Them "Liberals" They need to be tarred and feathered! Throw them in the dungeon!

One question: Does that also apply to ANY "Liberal" that was among the 3,000 that perished in 9/11?

Does that also apply to all the "Liberals" that served, have been serving and, still serve in Afghanistan & Iraq?

Does that also apply to all the "liberals" that died in Afghanistan and, "Operation Enduring Freedom"?

What a perfect way to honor and, remember them. Thanks Mr Rove! Now we know where you stand and, your brand of "conservativism" comes from.

Posted by: Frank | June 24, 2005 11:02 AM | Report abuse

For Kelly.....

I suspect the liberals will 'get over it' about the same time the Republicans who believe '...the White House has lost touch with reality' do.

Posted by: Dave | June 24, 2005 11:02 AM | Report abuse

Wow, I just can't get past this "Negroes...'Democrat'" comment. How was that supposed to be taken anyway?
It's just baffling.

I bet this person voted Democrat without realizing it. Those voting machines can be complicated...

Posted by: Marc | June 24, 2005 11:03 AM | Report abuse

Hey, Karl Rove just told the truth since when do you have to apoligize for telling the truth.

Posted by: Don Crain | June 24, 2005 11:03 AM | Report abuse

He done broke out ALL CAPS... that's against the BLOG code of ethics

Posted by: Pete | June 24, 2005 11:03 AM | Report abuse

AFTER READING YA'LLS COMMENTS IT SEEMS TO ME THAT ROWE WAS CORRECT. US DEMOCRATS ARE SHALLOW INDIVIDUALS WHO ADHERE TO LIBERAL BELIEFS. ITS WRONG FOR US DESCRIMINATE AGAINST HOMOSEXUALS OR MOSLEMS BUT CHRISTIANS....IT'S OK. US DEMOCRATS ARE JUST A BUNCH OF HYPOCRITS. THAT'S WHY I'M CHANGING MY PARTY AFFILIATION TO REPUBLICAN. I WANT TO LEAVE MY BROTHER DEMOCRATS BEHIND. THANKS FOR YALL'S SUPPORT. PS........BUSH IN 2008 !!!

Posted by: BILL CLINTON | June 24, 2005 11:04 AM | Report abuse

I think WakeUp might be trying to say something...he seems vehement in his caps lock style. Roxie, also. Though she was a while ago.

Posted by: Sara | June 24, 2005 11:04 AM | Report abuse

Just age and financial situation. I fit the age bracket, but I don't know about the financial one...I forget what it is, but people who live on Hot Pockets probably aren't in it.

Posted by: jw | June 24, 2005 11:05 AM | Report abuse

This sure looks like a "lets pat each other on the back" session.
Have fun!
(By the way I am laughing at both sides of this.Your two political extremes are equally childish and ridiculous.)

Posted by: Jeff | June 24, 2005 11:05 AM | Report abuse

For Diane: Actually, adultery is illegal in the US military. FYI.

To everyone else that's arguing Republicans vs. Democrats (my party is better than your party - nyah nyah) I say be done with all of them. It's a 3 card Monty game and they are all ripping you off. Is that too cynical? :o)

Posted by: Roger Herzler | June 24, 2005 11:05 AM | Report abuse

OH! BILL CLINTON, too!

Posted by: Sara | June 24, 2005 11:05 AM | Report abuse

to Pete:

Pope John Paul did NOT condone the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Check your facts. He was against it and spoke out about it

and to Kelly, re:"LIKE I SAID BEFORE.......BUSH WON....GET OVER IT !!! (LIBERALS ARE BAD LOSERS)"

You mean like the Repugs got over Gray Davis' re-election in California? Or like they got over the Democrats win in Washington state where they sued for two years because they didn't like the results? Or Jeb Bush reassuring FL Repugs not to worry about an amendment that got passed that they didn't like with a comforting, "Don't worry, I have plans to stop it"?

You guys are a joke. If there's anything worse than a sore looser, it's a meanspirited sore winner that still keeps whining.

When you've won everything, it's kind of stupid to keep posing as a poor-me victum. Waaah, the Democrats are attacking us, waaah.

Your problem is that with total control of all branches of government, you guys are royally screwing everything up in front of the whole world and need someone to blame.

Get over it yourself.

Posted by: roooth | June 24, 2005 11:06 AM | Report abuse

Martha - try being a little more coherent. Might be hard for you though.

Since the proposition seemed to bother you, I'll repeat it: the US is an amazing and free country which the Democrats continually undermine - I could care less if some idiotic socialist European disagrees.

Posted by: Wis | June 24, 2005 11:06 AM | Report abuse

The problem is, that the Dems keep falling for Rove's same sleight-of-hand.
You'd think they'd get it by now.

Yesterday, everyone was dancing because Public TV was *saved.* At the same time, they appointed a former RNC co-chair, as head of the (non-partisan) Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
This is unprecedented... yet the media & the Dems are rejoicing.

I never thought I'd see the day when our Government would remind me 1930s Germany.
They pay journalists to spew their propaganda (see Armstrong Williams et al)... make fake video news releases, to look like real news stories... and now they're taking control of the one unbiased media outlet in our country. Unbiased meaning *fair & balanced.*

Heir Rove has learned well from Heir Goebbels.

Everything I've said is fact, except my conclusion... which is MY conclusion.
I dare anyone to challenge the facts.
I expect the right-wing sheep to do the only thing they know how to do... attack my family, my god, or me.

Posted by: Baz | June 24, 2005 11:08 AM | Report abuse

Oh! BILL CLINTON, too! I think caps constitute yelling and I don't know if that's allowed here. Thought Joel has yet to censor it.

jw: I fit the age, too. But I'm in college so I'm living off of the Taco Bell value menu. I never thought about Hot Pockets. Variety would be nice.

Posted by: Sara | June 24, 2005 11:08 AM | Report abuse

READ. THINK. THEN POST.


CIA: Iraq now a bigger terrorist threat than Afghanistan/binLaden
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050622/pl_nm/security_iraq...

US Figures Show Sharp Global Rise In Terrorism
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...

United States: Losing the War on Terror
http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/terrorwar/analysis/2...

Evidence that the US May Be Losing the Global War on Terror
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1501

US: Three Years On, War on Terrorism Looks Like a Loser
http://ipsnews.net/interna.asp?idnews=25437

Posted by: Hattie | June 24, 2005 11:09 AM | Report abuse

***I think the more likely possibility is that Republicans have such overwhelming control of the government in such a partisan climate, that their idiocyometers have just stopped working***

What, then, is Durbin's excuse? Or Polosi's? Or Kennedy's?

***Karl Rove conveniently forgets that immediately after 9/11, Congress, the House and Senate, Republicans and Democrats, voted UNANIMOUSLY to go to war in Afghanistan, and to search and destroy Osama Bin Laden and the terrorists who were responsible.***

Wrong. See: Dennis Kucinich.

*** I think Rove is trying to launch an all-out last-ditch effort to gain some traction and reverse the Republicans continued decline. Things are going to get a lot worse before they get better. ***

Decline? Is that what you call being in control of all branches of the Federal Government?

***Republicans are just turning up the noise to drown out the scandals***

They must pay Durbin and Dean well for their parts, eh?

***Rove's just doing what he has always done for dear old W - divide us into good and bad, conservative and liberal, patriotic and unpatriotic, etc etc etc blah blah blah. ***

As opposed to dividing us into Pol Pots and Hitlers?

***What is it going to take for you to understand Hussein was just another Castro. Yes, things he did to his countrymen were awful, ***

I don't recall Castro starting 3 wars that left over a million dead. I must've missed that.

***Jim Carrey woiuld be an excellent choice for playing the role of President Bush. Karl Rove could be played by Jeff Daniels. It would be an original movie, but also a sequel: Dumb and Dumber II.***

It must suck to lose continually to "dumb" people.

***Look at the assault on PBS (Bill Moyers and Frontline) for actually practicing real journalism.***

Real journalism is not biased. The word you want is "editorialism".

*** I long for the future. when 20 years from now our more sensible, wakened generation takes over***

Yeeha, can't wait for President Johnny Knoxville.

Posted by: j-damn | June 24, 2005 11:09 AM | Report abuse

Yes, Mike, "appelate court nominees", but not "total judicial nominees". let's be totally truthful in case some out there don't know the whole truth.

Posted by: Americaneedstruth | June 24, 2005 11:09 AM | Report abuse

Who's side will you be on in the coming civil war?

Posted by: red stater | June 24, 2005 11:10 AM | Report abuse

READ. THINK. THEN POST.

Bush War On Terror? More like Bush's War Creates Terror!

The Evidence File

By LynnTheDem

06/23/05 "ICH" - - You've made us all less safe now, while killing tens of thousands of innocent people, including Americans. Read the evidence file.

Rove: Dems Didn't Get 9/11 Consequences

"Liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers," Rove said. "Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 and the attacks and prepared for war."
http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/1-06222005-50614...

Republicans, not being the brightest bulbs, decided to OUT-TERRORIST and OUT-SAVAGE the handful of SAUDI terrorists.

Yeah that sure was smart;

CIA: Iraq now a bigger terrorist threat than Afghanistan/binLaden
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050622/pl_nm/security_iraq...

US Figures Show Sharp Global Rise In Terrorism
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...

United States: Losing the War on Terror
http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/terrorwar/analysis/2...

Evidence that the US May Be Losing the Global War on Terror
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1501

US: Three Years On, War on Terrorism Looks Like a Loser
http://ipsnews.net/interna.asp?idnews=25437

"We have a stronger jihadi presence in Iraq today than in March 2003," noted Roger Cressey, the former director for Transnational Threats in Bush's National Security Council at a briefing at the libertarian Cato Institute earlier this week.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0911-01.htm

The 'War on Terrorism': Winning or Losing? Losing.
http://www.oxfordresearchgroup.org.uk/publications/brie...

Terror threat to US called 'significant' - Apr 27, 2005
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/04/27/terror.report /

Global terror attacks triple in 2004
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0428/dailyUpdate.html

Worldwide terrorism-related deaths on the rise
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5889435%20 /

US Losing the War on Terror in Iraq; The invasion of Iraq has increased, not decreased, the threat of terrorist attack
http://www.intellectualconservative.com/article2629.htm...

Posted by: Hattie | June 24, 2005 11:10 AM | Report abuse

I like Hattie. She seems to have a good head on her shoulders.

Posted by: Sara | June 24, 2005 11:10 AM | Report abuse

***I dare anyone to challenge the facts.
I expect the right-wing sheep to do the only thing they know how to do... attack my family, my god, or me***

Blah blah Bushhitlerhalliburton, blah blah blah, CNN=truth, blah blah blah.

Posted by: j-damn | June 24, 2005 11:10 AM | Report abuse

all this talk about apologies is fun. However, Durbin did not apologize for his comments at all. He apologized for being misunderstood. Rove's general comments about liberals hardly compare to Durbin's specific references to certain attrocities in history. One suggests a group of people have the wrong "ideas", the other suggests crimes against humanity. Which requires a real apology, if it is indeed wrong.

Posted by: nobiasherewhatsoever | June 24, 2005 11:11 AM | Report abuse

And on a slightly different front: my ex-girlfriend's grandmother was in a Solviet gulag for much of her late teens and early 20's (her sister and cousin are actually in a picture in Anne Applebaum's excellent book). Guantanamo Bay is NOTHING like a gulag. Last time I checked none of those prisoners' shoulders are raw to the bone from hauling brush, and they aren't wading through miles of hip-deep snow without proper clothing.

Posted by: jw | June 24, 2005 11:11 AM | Report abuse

READ. THINK. THEN POST.

US Losing the War on Terror in Iraq; The invasion of Iraq has increased, not decreased, the threat of terrorist attack
http://www.intellectualconservative.com/article2629.htm...

Occupation Made World Less Safe, Pro-War Institute Says
http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/terrorwar/analysis/2...

Iraq Invasion Hurt War on Terror
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0719-10.htm

Musharraf: World more dangerous because of Iraq War
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/9/25/03544/7945

Blix Says Iraq War May Have Worsened Terror Threat
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0319-02.htm

Poll: Aussies, Brits, Italians say Iraq war increased terrorism
http://www.startribune.com/stories/1576/5027215.html

Posted by: Hattie | June 24, 2005 11:11 AM | Report abuse

Wow, WASP you are one racist small peckered bastard. Please do this country a favor and move your rancid ass to Canada. The USA would be a happier and better country without the slime of you rotting its core. Your genetic pool needs a heavy chlorine blast to rid all of us of your stupidity and of the foul odor that leaks through your porous skull and into these posts. We all know you are jealous of Clinton and wish you could get booty like that, lol.

Posted by: WASPEATSPOOP | June 24, 2005 11:12 AM | Report abuse

Watch this. The set-up is already under way. The big question which will be posed by the GOP in 2008, while the Iraqi Civil War is in full swing, we're outta there, and Al-Qaeda has set up shop in another failed ungovernable state, is "Who Lost Iraq?". Their prospective answer, of course, which they will repeat ad nauseum, will be that it's the fault of the Democrats/liberals/media for "undermining our troops". You just watch. That will be the only way they can try to distance themselves from the nasty political fallout from this nasty and unnecessary war of Mr. Bush's.

Posted by: jv | June 24, 2005 11:12 AM | Report abuse

I've been praying my wussy little liberal, anti-Christian heart out that the Democrats will take exactly one lesson from this debacle: QUIT EFFING APOLOGIZING. Repeat after me: "I will not apologize; my remarks were simply misconstrued." Durbin and his caving made me sick.

Posted by: grey | June 24, 2005 11:12 AM | Report abuse

j-damn, that last sentence of yours is truly inspiring. So well spoken. I think I'll come to your side.

Posted by: Sara | June 24, 2005 11:12 AM | Report abuse

I don't remember anyone offering therapy to the attackers, but I do remember that the bin Laden family was offered safe passage by Mr. Bush.

Posted by: Michael | June 24, 2005 11:12 AM | Report abuse

READ. THINK. THEN POST.

Iraq intervention increased threat of terrorism
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/archive/scoop/stories/c7/9...

UK Government; Iraq war 'increased terror threat'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3451239.stm

Iraq war has swollen ranks of al Qaeda
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,10...

US State Department Corrects Report to Show Rise in Terrorism
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5264512 /

Iraq has become a terrorist spawning ground, CIA admits
http://www.smh.com.au/news/After-Saddam/Iraq-a-terroris...

Iraq Conflict Feeds International Terror Threat
http://www.skyhen.org/Focus/iraqcoverage/cia_iraq_confl...

In the January CBS News poll, 62 percent thought that the threat of terror would increase if the U.S. takes military action against Iraq.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/02/07/opinion/meyer...

Posted by: Hattie | June 24, 2005 11:12 AM | Report abuse

You cannot have Conservatives without having Liberals. Conversely, you cannot have Liberals without having Conservatives. You cannot have middle of the roaders without having both sides. To view one or the other as inherently evil is childish and ignorant. Liberalism is not a "vile disease" and people who are Conservative do not have a mental condition.

In this case, Karl Rove -- one of the BIGGEST propogators of anti-liberalism (right up there with Ann Coulter) -- just is doing what he is best at: Pissing people off and getting them to stop looking at the big picture.

Liberals are not guilt free, either, but Mr. Rove could learn from Senator Durbin, who was man enough to apologize for his remarks when he realized they offended.

Posted by: ProudlyLiberal | June 24, 2005 11:13 AM | Report abuse

Hey Roooth: Bush won........get over it!!!

Posted by: Kelly | June 24, 2005 11:13 AM | Report abuse

...and just like one other poster mentioned, I miss Bill Clinton too.

What happened to the Republican Party? They weren't always like this...frothing at the mouth ultra-conservatives. It's disturbing, and disheartening.

Rove's not going away anytime soon. With the possibility of a McCain-Bush ticket in '08, it's a certainty that he's already put the "Personal Destruction Machine" in place against Clinton-Obama. He's in for a surprise, I think...

Posted by: Vince | June 24, 2005 11:15 AM | Report abuse

READ. THINK. THEN POST.

In the judgement of the JIC there is no recent evidence of Iraq complicity with international terrorism."
http://memoryhole.freedomunderground.org/downing/ods020...

"US scrambling to establish a link between Iraq and Al Aaida is so far frankly unconvincing."
http://memoryhole.freedomunderground.org/downing/ricket...

Jack Straw; "In addition, there has been no credible evidence to link Iraq with UBL and Al Qaida."
http://memoryhole.freedomunderground.org/downing/straw0...

"To my knowledge, I have not seen any strong, hard evidence that links the two. (al Qaeda & Iraq)"
-Rumsfeld
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,10975887-1702,00.h...

Posted by: Hattie | June 24, 2005 11:15 AM | Report abuse

No, actually, CNN=FOX=MSNBC... blah blah blah.
At least we agree on the facts.

Posted by: Baz | June 24, 2005 11:15 AM | Report abuse

To ProudlyLiberal:

Liberals are not guilt free, either, but Mr. Rove could learn from Senator Durbin, who was man enough to apologize for his remarks when he realized they offended.

One should just about NEVER have to 'apologize' if someone is offended by a comment. That's not an apology anyway. If you come to believe you were WRONG - then you make an apology. To heck with everyone getting their panties in a bunch while being perpertually offended.

Posted by: Roger Herzler | June 24, 2005 11:15 AM | Report abuse

Hey Pete. I don't recall saying lets start bringing them home today. You talk too much. Are you a politician? And get off your oil high horse because I bet you enjoy that resource as much as the rest of us do so be ready because one day you might have to steal a bucket of oil for yourself. If we have the most advanced military machine in the history of mankind, whats the the damn problem here?? The problem is our politicians here have put a leash on our military and turned them into a police force. They are not trained for that. Lets get serious about this war, get something accomplished and get them home. Our politicians do nothing now but talk, have meetings, wine and dine at the end of the day. It seems to me that our troops are sitting ducks over there and they now have 2 governments telling them what they can and can't do.

Posted by: Walker | June 24, 2005 11:16 AM | Report abuse

Hey Pete. I don't recall saying lets start bringing them home today. You talk too much. Are you a politician? And get off your oil high horse because I bet you enjoy that resource as much as the rest of us do so be ready because one day you might have to steal a bucket of oil for yourself. If we have the most advanced military machine in the history of mankind, whats the the damn problem here?? The problem is our politicians here have put a leash on our military and turned them into a police force. They are not trained for that. Lets get serious about this war, get something accomplished and get them home. Our politicians do nothing now but talk, have meetings, wine and dine at the end of the day. It seems to me that our troops are sitting ducks over there and they now have 2 governments telling them what they can and can't do.

Posted by: Walker | June 24, 2005 11:16 AM | Report abuse

"Comparing Guantanimo Bay with a Soviet Gulag? No apologies there, but what's really scary is the similarities between the neo-conservative rise to power in the US and the rise of the Social Democrats in Germany during the 1930's."

I guess the Presidents next move must be to round up the Jews!

Posted by: Amreicaneedsreality | June 24, 2005 11:16 AM | Report abuse

From BAZ - "I never thought I'd see the day when our Government would remind me 1930s Germany.
They pay journalists to spew their propaganda (see Armstrong Williams et al)... make fake video news releases, to look like real news stories... and now they're taking control of the one unbiased media outlet in our country. Unbiased meaning *fair & balanced.*
Heir Rove has learned well from Heir Goebbels."

Yeah, ME TOO! It *totally* reminds me of the Third Reich too!! Except that Jews aren't being loaded on cattle cars to concentration camps by the thousands. Except that my children aren't required to join the Nazi youth party. Except that I'm free to post on this blog. Except I'm not in fear of my life on a daily basis because I'm not Aryan.

Except for those little details, I totally feel like I live in 1930's Germany. Wow, what a GREAT analogy.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 24, 2005 11:16 AM | Report abuse

Such short-sidedness from a bunch of misguided lemmings. Bush may not be perfect but I am sure glad he is in power rather than any other. The proof of his success is that there have been no other terrorist attacks on American soil since 9-11. He has taken the battle to the terrorists and we, meaning those who value freedom, are winning this war. I am proud of our military who put themselves in harms way to protect our freedoms. I honor this president and the young men and women of our armed services. Joel, would you want blood of American soldiers on your hands because you feel you "have a right" to say something that will compromise their safety? Comparing Rove's comments to Stalinism really proves how low the liberal left is willing to stoop to undermine America. Also, for those of you who have forgotten, or choose to ignore, there really is a God.

Posted by: TB | June 24, 2005 11:17 AM | Report abuse

Rove is an intellectual but he lacks class. As the architecht of Bush's presidential campain, he was brilliant. He smeared, lied, and twisted truth better than any politician has ever done. But what does he have to show for it? A presidency and an administration that has not accomplished much except for a few wars which have no rational purpose attributed to them.

The sad part, for me, is that the God that could be discovered through Science or the Humanities is now being killed and again brought back to life in faith rituals prescribed by born-again christian leaders who do not want anyone to question their athority. Who gives a rat's ass about Rove's triple lindy's. God is dead, again.

Posted by: handy1 | June 24, 2005 11:18 AM | Report abuse

Ah, so good to have the WASP remind us that Clinton got impeached for lying about getting head. Lying about oral sex is a far more serious and impeachable offense than lying about why you're sending kids to die in Iraq.

Posted by: JH | June 24, 2005 11:18 AM | Report abuse

1) Don't shoot the messenger, I'm only reporting what I witnessed while working in a law enforcement agency.

2) I'm a baby boomer; born after WWII and my father was a veteran. So were several uncles, cousins and friends who fought in WWII, Korea, VietNam, Gulf War. One cousin stormed the beaches at Normandy. Another is buried in a military cemetery full of American soldiers in France. Their service allowed weenies like you to freely express your opinions, no matter how flakey and misinformed.

3) Civilized people do not discuss the Big Four in public: politics, money, sex or religion.

4) Politicians are on the same level as used car salesmen, lawyers, and carnival barkers. Get over it and get back to work, if you have jobs.

Posted by: WASP | June 24, 2005 11:20 AM | Report abuse

The events of the past few years depress me and make me truly worry about the country my sons will inherit.

Posted by: Sick_of_all_of_it | June 24, 2005 11:22 AM | Report abuse

Politics doesn't matter. Republicans, Democrats, moderates.....what difference does it make. Why worry about unimportant things. The only thing in life you should be concerned with is pleasing God and following my teachings. Death comes to all of us sooner or later, pay more attention to how your living your life now because this is the only one you're given.......amen

Posted by: Jesus Christ | June 24, 2005 11:24 AM | Report abuse

Bush is still lying. Kids are still dying.

Party of morality, my ass.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 24, 2005 11:25 AM | Report abuse

In reference to JW's remarks, the Barrel Club was great as well.

Also, the golf course clubhouse had a great bar.

Posted by: AC | June 24, 2005 11:25 AM | Report abuse

And lastly... the latest Rove strategy...
why, Bin Laden is in Iran.

Watch as the media starts propagating this BS for Rove.
They've already started on FOX.

Here we go again.

Posted by: Baz | June 24, 2005 11:25 AM | Report abuse

I interpret Rove's comments thusly, "liberals/democrats are pussies". I am a 57 year old democrat/liberal. I bet I could kick Rove's ass. I hope I get the opportunity. The same goes for Bush, Cheney (how easy would that be!), Rumsfeld, the blogger asshole WASP, etc., etc.

To hell with words. We need to start swinging. The Civil War is not over. Not by a long shot.

Posted by: Dave from Boston | June 24, 2005 11:26 AM | Report abuse

Oh, what a delightful racist non sequitur, WASP. And "Negroes"? Nice. How very old school.

I suspect you're giving former President Clinton a bit too much credit, actually. Even allowing that he may be an above average fellow, I find it doubtful that all the minutes spent in all the (exhaustively - what is it with some people's dirty l'il minds?) documented incidences of "staff snogging" add up to all that much. Certainly not distraction sufficient to steer him away from governing.

But back to that exhaustive documentation of the aforementioned "snogging" - now that (and the attendant impeachment circus) might have been distracting. Yet, strangely, I neither recall feeling particularly ignored by that president, nor that he ignored the job of being president.

The current president? Oh, I'm afraid I can't say the same of this one. He's quite an activist on certain narrow(-minded) issues, but I can't bring myself to believe he gives a rat's ass about our nation as a whole.

Posted by: Shrike | June 24, 2005 11:26 AM | Report abuse

READ. THINK. THEN POST.

Bush: No evidence Saddam Hussein involved in Nine-Eleven attacks
http://www.kltv.com/Global/story.asp?S=1447698

Rice: U.S. Never Said Saddam Was Behind 9/11
http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/983821/posts

Posted by: Hattie | June 24, 2005 11:26 AM | Report abuse

Hey Kelly - I'm over Bush "winning" It's his continuing criminal incompetence and his war profiteer buddies that I want to bring him down for.

And "Damn", re: "I don't recall Castro starting 3 wars that left over a million dead. I must've missed that."

Maybe if Rumsfeld, Cheney and Reagan had supplied Castro with WMD's, biological weapans and lots of cash to keep him propped up - like they did with Saddam - he could have done more.....

Posted by: roooth | June 24, 2005 11:26 AM | Report abuse

Hey Kelly - I'm over Bush "winning" It's his continuing criminal incompetence and his war profiteer buddies that I want to bring him down for.

And "Damn", re: "I don't recall Castro starting 3 wars that left over a million dead. I must've missed that."

Maybe if Rumsfeld, Cheney and Reagan had supplied Castro with WMD's, biological weapans and lots of cash to keep him propped up - like they did with Saddam - he could have done more.....

Posted by: roooth | June 24, 2005 11:26 AM | Report abuse

12,000 liberals marched against the invasion of Afghanistan in NY City.

Rove is right.

Posted by: bcp | June 24, 2005 11:27 AM | Report abuse

"The problem is, that the Dems keep falling for Rove's same sleight-of-hand. You'd think they'd get it by now."

So true, so true.

Rove is indeed a red-herring. His comments are a mere defelection. Keep your eyes on the ball, people. Think Downing Street Minutes. Think bombing escalation in 2002. Think...

Posted by: Ed | June 24, 2005 11:27 AM | Report abuse

Pete - JPII did not CONDONE the Iraq war, he CONDEMNED it.

"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, just not their own facts".

Posted by: CF | June 24, 2005 11:27 AM | Report abuse

Hey Kelly - I'm over Bush "winning" It's his continuing criminal incompetence and his war profiteer buddies that I want to bring him down for.

And "Damn", re: "I don't recall Castro starting 3 wars that left over a million dead. I must've missed that."

Maybe if Rumsfeld, Cheney and Reagan had supplied Castro with WMD's, biological weapans and lots of cash to keep him propped up - like they did with Saddam - he could have done more.....

Posted by: Anonymous | June 24, 2005 11:27 AM | Report abuse

What saddens me about Karl Rove is that he is so lionized by the Republican Party; many conservative commentators said he should have been Time's Man of the Year, for getting the President re-elected. Yet this is the same man who when running "W"'s campaigns against Senator McCain in the primaries, first tried to spread the rumor than McCain gave "aid and comfort" to the enemy in order to get preferential treatment at the Hanoi Hilton. Well one only has to look at Senator McCain's face to see where his jaw had been broken several times to see what a ludicrous lie that was, so Karl came up with a better one, he fathered several children while in South Vietnam and then dumped and left them there to return to his family in America. This one the people bought, and "W" bested McCain and won. In fact this lie worked so well that he did it again against Senator Kerry, and it worked. So here's the quagmire the Republicans have, their ideal leader, the man who is the lion of the republican party provides wins by lies, and character assassinations, and is morally bankrupted, (so where is the party of family values,, unless of course your idea of family values is lie and do whatever it takes to win) and this is one of the Presidents best friends. Is it any wonder we are finding out now about all the lies that were told to us about Iraq?

Posted by: Barry Dean | June 24, 2005 11:28 AM | Report abuse

How come when John McCain gets his hands tied behind his back and is lifted straight up by those hands, dislocating his shoulder in the process, and injuring him so severely that even today he cannot raise his arms fully we say that the Vietnamese tortured him yet when the same thing is done to fighters the US has captured, it is not tourture? How can this be? Oh, I forgot, someone parsed the wording on tourture.......

Posted by: Just a Guy trying to do the right thing | June 24, 2005 11:28 AM | Report abuse

Can someone please remind me of a time that the present administration has told me the truth about ANYthing?

Posted by: Doug | June 24, 2005 11:30 AM | Report abuse

READ. THINK. THEN POST.

Rumsfeld sees no link between Saddam Hussein, 9/11
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-09-16-rums...

Posted by: Hattie | June 24, 2005 11:30 AM | Report abuse

I have read comment after comment blaming someone for something. Going back and fourth. The truth is that Karl Rove spoke about something he felt and should be able to that. He spoke about a political ideology that he disagree, hardly comparable to Durbin's comments that consistently chastise his own country and the policies of his government. He is the senate, why not keep the comments to the floor. He and his fellow democrats must be suffering the 'post election syndrome' like our friends in Florida and elsewhere. Dean's constant comments continually demonstrate the disillusion of the democratic party and this one sided article demonstrates the biased at it's finest.

Democrats and the liberal types are worried what the world thinks of the US specially worried about European opinion. I believe they should worry about our won country first and not the very countries that are constantly undermining our economic well being.

Karl Rove and friends have merely stated what millions feel, even if they do not want to admit it. It is ridiculous that we have so many people make so many bad comments against their own country and do so very little for it.

Posted by: Jason | June 24, 2005 11:30 AM | Report abuse

READ. THINK. THEN POST.

Richard Kerr, a former deputy CIA director who lead an internal review of the CIA's prewar intelligence;

"the CIA has not found any proof of operational ties between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein's regime."
http://www.thenation.com/capitalgames/index.mhtml?pid=8...

Posted by: Hattie | June 24, 2005 11:32 AM | Report abuse

Bush won...........get over it!!!

Posted by: Kelly | June 24, 2005 11:32 AM | Report abuse

What did Karl do?


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/theblog/archive/kristen-breitweiser/karl-roves-understandin_3103.

Posted by: roooth | June 24, 2005 11:35 AM | Report abuse

READ. THINK. THEN POST.

The White House's own publication, A Decade of Defiance and Deception, makes no mention of Osama bin Laden or al Qaeda.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/iraq/decade/sect5.htm...

The 2002 congressional joint intelligence committee's report on the Sept. 11 attacks revealed that the Bush administration had no evidence to support its claim that Saddam's government was supporting al-Qaeda.
http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20030723-064812-949...

Posted by: Hattie | June 24, 2005 11:36 AM | Report abuse

Just say bahhhhhh little sheep.
Your blind adherence to the Republican or Democratic parties is just pathetic.

Posted by: Farmer John | June 24, 2005 11:36 AM | Report abuse

For Amreicaneedsreality:

Please don't put words in my mouth... what I said is what I said... no mentions of cattle cars, etc... only about the media.
Ya dig.
This is how bad things begin.

Posted by: Baz | June 24, 2005 11:36 AM | Report abuse

Where else, but the Washington Post, will you find such yellow journalism? Perhaps the NY Times and USA Today. Washington Post misses the point again and advances it's own agenda. Bad Paper! Bad Reporter!!

Posted by: Dave | June 24, 2005 11:37 AM | Report abuse

I have always believed the American people could govern themselves. Even after Nixon was re-elected, I held firm with that idea. His resignation affirmed my belief. So what have the American people done by re-electing Bush? Does anyone think the military men and women were happy? I haven't seen a poll on it but comments I've heard say they were not happy.

Democracy allows for mistakes. It also requires they be corrected. Its time for Bush's impeachment for:
Lying to the American People.
Violations of Law wrt prisoner abuse by his military.
Lying to Congress (about the reason to invade Iraq).
Lying to Congress (about the cost of Medicare).
Lying to Congress (about the costs of the occupation).
Lying and Lying and more Lying!

Who will have the courage to confront this guy and his lies? The Dems are pathetic in their ability to confront the obvious vioations of law, lies and trampling of the constitution. The price of freedom is vigilence and right now everyone is looking the other way. Will someone please call a cop!

Posted by: Jim Middleroader | June 24, 2005 11:37 AM | Report abuse

You say of the Democrats, "They've learned that rolling over gets them nowhere, yet they have no leverage and DeLay and his crew change the rules whenever it suits them. I'm curious. What would cooperation look like and how would it benefit them?"

I'm curious. How does the current scene resemble 'cooperation'; and why aren't you asking how it would benefit US ALL?

Posted by: Percival | June 24, 2005 11:37 AM | Report abuse

What the Democrats are doing now is the same BS they were doing when they lost the election and why they'll lose the next one.

They attack the Republicans at any oppertunity.
They blame anything negative on the Republicans.
They use buzzwords like Gulag, referring to camp X-ray to discredit the Republicans.
They claim everything the Bush administration does is spin, conspiracy and cover-up, except where anti-Bush information has leaked from a sieve like government to prove that the government can't keep anything a secret.
They ressurect old debates about Haliburton and Cheyney to lend weight to an argument completely unrelated.

What they eventually do is make people stop listening to what they have to say and vote for someone who doesn't sound like a bitter and twisted hatemonger, like all Democrats singing from the same anti-Bush hymm sheet.

Posted by: SeeTheBigPicture | June 24, 2005 11:39 AM | Report abuse

READ. THINK. THEN KEEP POSTING A BUNCH OF LINKS.

Please think about this: Posting an unending flow of links that bolster your opinion is definetly time well spent. Take a look at the sources of these unending articles. Is there a pattern in them? There is a point at which beliefs like this begin to look un-american. If your disgust with our system, policies, and freedoms is so great, go surround yourself with similar thinkers... perhaps is France or better yet, Iran. Maybe Indonesia? Oh that's right, you would not move to one of those places if your life depended on it.

Posted by: Hattie? | June 24, 2005 11:39 AM | Report abuse

It's so much easier to hate you americans AND know we are right to hate you. When your own leaders admit publicly that your troops are a bunch of murderers. When I learn of your atoricities on Al-Jazerra I know they must be true... after all your own government officials decry them as so.

Posted by: Abdul | June 24, 2005 11:40 AM | Report abuse

Right on Jim Middleroader,
The next step is realizing that you are the cop. There is no one to call. We are all responsible for the government getting out of hand.

Posted by: TJ | June 24, 2005 11:41 AM | Report abuse

READ. THINK. THEN POST.

No proof links Iraq, al-Qaida, Powell says:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/ID/3909150

According to a "top secret British document", quoted by the BBC "there is nothing but enmity between Iraq and Al Qaeda." The BBC said the leak came from intelligence officials upset that their work was being used to justify war." (quoted in Daily News, New York, 6 February 2003).

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO303D.html

Iraq-al Qaeda links weak, say former Bush officials:

Three former Bush administration officials who worked on intelligence and national security issues have told National Journal that the prewar evidence tying al Qaeda to Iraq was tenuous, exaggerated, and often at odds with the conclusions of key intelligence agencies.

http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0803/080803nj2.htm

Posted by: Hattie | June 24, 2005 11:41 AM | Report abuse

Let's face it. Karl Rove is a political genius. He's successfully made an issue about virtually everything that the Dems have said or done recently. What's sad about this issue is that the Dems have no 'central authority' to vet discussions or events and comment on them either en masse or with equal political genius. When will the liberals in this country gather together and create their equal and opposite think tanks so they can outsmart the Republicans? Until they do the Republicans will continue to win each and every public argument until the Dems are ALL sent whimpering in the corner.

Hey Dems it's called 'framing the argument'. Learn how to and you'll win a few!!

Posted by: M. Smith | June 24, 2005 11:41 AM | Report abuse

over 200...wow.

Posted by: jw | June 24, 2005 11:41 AM | Report abuse

READ. THINK. VERIFY LINKS. THINK AGAIN. SPARE US. SHUT OFF COMPUTER.

Use google: http://www.google.com to verify info. And links.

Posted by: Dave | June 24, 2005 11:42 AM | Report abuse

Who's Karl Rove?

Posted by: PSK | June 24, 2005 11:42 AM | Report abuse

Karl Rove takes the heat for reminding us in a none too suttle way that the left is suspect on National Security. Most Americans believe that, as exemplified by a 53% vote for Bush. If the Democratic party refuses to move to the center, it will lose again and again. In a three party system, the winners cover the center and leave the left and right wing loonies in the political wilderness. How about a party of the center with a McCain Lieberman ticket that would represent the silent majority. It would win hands down.

Posted by: John Kerr | June 24, 2005 11:42 AM | Report abuse

Jason,

Why don't YOU do "something for our country" and learn to construct an intelligible sentence. My four year-old can write better than that!

If you are on the side of us God-fearing American-loving freedom fighters, who believe in 9-11 and the President, then please do us all a favor and shut the ____ up and learn how to communicate effectively.

Please stop trying to help us.

Posted by: Walter | June 24, 2005 11:42 AM | Report abuse

We should start extending the terms of office. Bush in 2008 and 2012 would be great.............Bush is the gratest president in American history. He has fixed the problems Clinton and his fellow Nazi hillbillies brought to the whitehouse in the 90's. He has brought respect to the presidency once again...... Damned, I'm proud to be an American... God Bless America and God Bless George W. Bush !!!!

Posted by: Kerry Johns | June 24, 2005 11:43 AM | Report abuse

I think I have decided to be radical. My question here is "How can we impeach not just this President, but this ENTIRE administration?

Because that is what it would take to return any realm of sanity to our government. Just impeaching Bush would leave us with even more unpleasant (is that possible?) alternatives.

God help us all to get through the next 3 years until something can change. Hopefully, and I do believe this, for the better.

Posted by: Patricia Witherspoon | June 24, 2005 11:44 AM | Report abuse

Thank you, Dave. I couldn't have said it better myself.

Posted by: Sara | June 24, 2005 11:44 AM | Report abuse

READ. THINK. THEN POST.

Nearly a year after U.S. and British troops invaded Iraq, no evidence has turned up to verify allegations of Saddam's links with al Qaeda, and several key parts of the administration's case have either proved false or seem increasingly doubtful.
http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/2004/03/04/news/na...

Iraq and al Qaeda: What Evidence?
http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF...

bush's own hand-picked Republican weapons hunter ISG, Dr. David Kay;

David Kay was on the ground for months investigating the activities of Hussein's regime. He concluded "But we simply did not find any evidence of extensive links with Al Qaeda, or for that matter any real links at all."

He called a speech where Cheney made the claim there was a link, as being "evidence free."
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2...

Posted by: Hattie | June 24, 2005 11:45 AM | Report abuse

READ. THINK. THEN POST.

Israeli intelligence (the Moussad)

"According to Israeli intelligence, Palestinians are still not connected to the global terror network, and neither is Iraq."
http://www.haaretz.com /

bush's second and final hand-picked Republican weapons hunter ISG, Dr. Charles Dueffler;

Report: No WMD stockpiles in Iraq, no capability since 1991, no evidence of ties to al Qaeda, no serious threat;
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/10/06/1096949583...

OFFICIAL VERDICT: WHITE HOUSE MISLED WORLD OVER SADDAM-AL QAEDA TIES
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0617-03.htm

No evidence of Iraq-Al Qaeda ties: 9/11 commission
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/07/06/cheney.911

"CIA Review Finds No Evidence Saddam Had Ties to Islamic Terrorists"
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1005-01.htm

Posted by: Hattie | June 24, 2005 11:46 AM | Report abuse

Wait, I was referring to Dave's post about Hattie. Not Dave's post about the Post and Joel. Have to clarify that because I'm personally a fan of the Post and this blog.

Posted by: Sara | June 24, 2005 11:46 AM | Report abuse

To Wake up, the land grab has been going on for decades, the Supreme court just made it official.
Iraq is the wrong war, but we're in it now and it has to be finished. Pres. Bush made a huge mistake and seems to have problems admitting it. The conservatives are pushing for destroying the mideast and the liberals are hell bent on us "understanding" the radical Muslim's dislike of us. And no matter who is in office, Dem or Rep we will bow to the Saudi oil wells

Posted by: mike | June 24, 2005 11:46 AM | Report abuse

I agree with Shrike. Republican politics are as disenfranchising and polemical to those not deemed worthy of the "party line" that they resemble the jock fraternity in Revenge of the Nerds than a representative institution... or worse, they ARE acting as avery astute representative institution and that many people in America really believe that they can determine definitively who really matters in America and who can supressed and leeched off of as so many mindless sheep and vagrants. The ideal republican picture of the nation seems to be remarkably similar to what western Europe looked like in the Middle Ages. Let me know when the middle class looks less like serfs trapped in a corporate feudalism.
This all reminds me of a Teddy Roosevelt response to Congress over the Panama Canal fiasco... (paraphrasing)"I stole the Panama Canal fair and square... Let Congress debate about it."

Posted by: Alan | June 24, 2005 11:47 AM | Report abuse

Karl Rove said what Bush would like to Everyone knows that.

If Gore had been elected,invaded Iraq,came up empty,and had the callousness to say "Bring it on",he would have been impeached and removed from office by now.

Culture of life,nonsense. He trots that out when it suits his pandering.

The Feds spent $40M on the wrong investigation. Apparently, it's far worse to lie about a blow job, than to plan the worst crime in modern history.

The Republicans are the hypocrites.

Posted by: mgottlieb | June 24, 2005 11:47 AM | Report abuse

Dead On

Posted by: Tony Burns | June 24, 2005 11:47 AM | Report abuse

If a lunatic on the street begins shouting illogical crazy talk, does it make sense to engage him? No, the right thing is either to ignore him, or if warranted, to quietly notify the police.

Do not fall for Karl Rove's game. Do not get mad about his comments: better to blithely dismiss him as the desperate lunatic that he is.

Controversy and anger will only keep this idiot in the spotlight and feed his ego.

Posted by: Joel C | June 24, 2005 11:49 AM | Report abuse

It's going to take a long time for this country to get over Bush and his gang, who are bankrupting the treasury and wrecking the military. They are watching their poll numbers go down the toilet and can't even begin to wonder why, because this is a group of people that can't believe it could be wrong about anything. After 9/11, this country would have responded to a dramatic call for sacrifice. Bush told us to keep shopping, then proceeded to mislead us into a cesspool. I'm sure he believed in his heart that Iraq would be quick and inexpensive. It has turned out to be neither, but try telling him that. With Bush, belief is alway more important that any inconvenient or uncomfortable fact. He is as divorced from reality as Hitler was over Stalingrad. The tragedy for America is that we probably have to endure three-and-a-half more years of him.

Posted by: rboid | June 24, 2005 11:51 AM | Report abuse

Rove was right, when the World Trade Center was bombed in 1993 Clinton and Company arrested some terrorists in America and never went after Bin Laden who planned the 1993.

How many times did the #1 Terrorist inthe world (during the 90s) eat dinner in the White House during the Clinton regime? I lost track, but I am sure someone knows how often Yassir Arafat was a guest of President Clinton.

Rove spoke the truth about Liberals, not Democrats, he said liberals and all Democrats took offense to it. I guess all Democrats are liberals. Finally the truth is out there.

Posted by: Mike | June 24, 2005 11:51 AM | Report abuse

Help, Joel, stop me before I post again! Too late. Whew, boy this thread went off the road, into the ditch and deep, deep into the weeds in a hurry. Anyway, to Mike, I just wanted to acknowledge that I blew the numbers on the judge thing and you were right to call me on it. And thanks go to the person explaining about how libs and Dems are "shortsided". I guess that explains the uneven shoe wear and the problem with getting the cuffs hemmed to match...

Posted by: kurosawaguy | June 24, 2005 11:51 AM | Report abuse

Ohhh wasp, don't shoot the messenger right?, don't want to discuss the Big Four?, you started it now take it like a man, don't cry now.

You know what really revolts me?, people bringing the WWII veteran tale, the uncle, the father,the grandfather, etc. in a futile attempt to take credit of what you haven't done, they and not you fought that war, they protected freedom, not you, you divide, and still none of them are bragging in everybody's faces and demanding to be thanked all the time for the opportunity of having freedom of speech, like other paper tigers or chicken-hawks you are just trying to cash the reputation the greatest generation ever, acquired. Come on man, you want to be another G. Gordon Liddy?, you've got the t-shirt?, another gung-ho?, a pistol wagging tough guy?, and you were in law-enforcement?, glad to hear you retired, we need professional grade, responsible people not tough talking wannabes.

"DIVIDE AND YOU WILL CONQUER", that's the mantra of this administration, that's how the game is played, United States of American never was so divided like today, that's how most of republicans try to prevail, keeping the president within a cocoon of silence, misinformation and utter ignorance, with ridiculous farses called "town hall meetings", with pseudo-journalists planted in the White House, with peddlers like De Lay and Co. Divide and conquer, that's the law of Karl Rove and his henchmen, manouvering in the dark where they belong. This is our country at its worst, God please help us.

Posted by: Outsider | June 24, 2005 11:51 AM | Report abuse

Introducing ... Operation Yellow Elephant!!

http://patriotboy.blogspot.com/2005_06_12_patriotboy_archive.html#111890999305868369

C'mon, if you're a big supporter of Bush and his war, what are you doing on this blog. Recruitment is at an all time.

If this war is really necessary to protect your country, why aren't you serving?

Your country needs you in Iraq, get to a recruiter:http://www.usarmy.com

Or are you just a little yellow elephant?

http://www.wonkette.com/politics/enlist-young-republicans-have-other-priorities-109325.php


BTW, save your breath asking me, just about everyone in my family has served, and my 18 yr old just joined the Marines.

HooYa

Posted by: roooth | June 24, 2005 11:51 AM | Report abuse

hey Kerry Johns your right. BUSh is grate man and loves Jesus to! The lieberlals are evil (remember Terri!!!!!) and dont want US to be a ntion in CHRIST as GOD intended!!
GOD belss ROVE for he spoke the truth We were ATTACKED and when your AATTACKED you KILL the pople who ATTACKED you thats why were in IRAQ killing TERRORITST whith the help of JESUS!

Posted by: johnmark | June 24, 2005 11:51 AM | Report abuse

Bush for eight years is the GOP's gift to the Dems for giving us Bill Clinton for eight years.

Posted by: nottamember | June 24, 2005 11:53 AM | Report abuse

Attention Kelly...
Shut up.

You're obviously not in the majority over here so quit your complaining.

Posted by: Josh | June 24, 2005 11:53 AM | Report abuse

GET A HINT:.........BUSH WON, GET OVER IT !!!

Posted by: Kelly | June 24, 2005 11:54 AM | Report abuse

Sorry, I meant Sara's post about Dave's reference to the Hattie post about not posting. My pre-post post about not posting was in regard to the post Dave tendered about not posting unless you've read all the posts and verified your information before posting.

p.s. Sorry about this post.

Posted by: Dot | June 24, 2005 11:54 AM | Report abuse

In our war against cancer, we make every attempt to determine the cause. Who can argue with that strategy.

Terrorism is a cancer, and it will kill the civilized world as we know it. And we DO know what causes it. The problem with both parties as well as the majority of our population is that we are NOT willing to address those causes.

hint: killing 100 thousand innocents is NOT the answer.

#1 cause = greed, yours and mine and especially, politicians'

Posted by: Dave | June 24, 2005 11:55 AM | Report abuse

HATTIE

Would you like a list of links to prove alien existence?

A list of links proves one thing; other websites exist. Apart from that, they are nothing more than these blogs; biased opinion and rhetoric.

I could search Google to prove JF Kennedy is still alive and would find as many links as you're spamming this site with to support my argument, but it wouldn't make it true.

You're a fool and anyone who bases their opinion on other peoples opinions is a fool too. Try to think for yourself, not through the information presented you by people whose agenda may not be to present the truth.

That's how suicide bombers become so. They're indoctrinated by other peoples information, whose agenda is to persuade these people to blow themselves up and to do that, they must convince the bomber that killing other people is right and they'll be rewarded in heaven for it.

That is how powerful imposing your opinion on others can be, so to form your own opinion, you should use your own judgement to filter out what you believe to be fact, not hop onto a bandwagon, then absorb every opinion you can find that agrees with it.

Maybe you should post a few links opposing your argument? Perhaps then, you'll read them and realise that 2 people can see the same thing in 2 different ways and what matters is not what they're looking at, but why they were looking!

Posted by: Anonymous | June 24, 2005 11:56 AM | Report abuse

Karl Rove is a political hack. Rove's like that wimpy little kid in elementary school that tried to tell the bully who to beat up on, but would never get his own hands dirty. The bottomline? Karl Rove is chickensh*t. Not only does he lack any type of professional skill, the man holds a "teaching" position in a Texas University... although never actually bothering with schooling post-high school himself. The man (if I can truly call him that) is a coward who enjoys using the strength of the greatest nation in the world to oppress and kill people that look and think differently than he does. At least Adolf Hitler had the fortitude to stand behind his actions in the Holocaust (horrific as they were, in his sick mind he believe in his decisions). The same cannot be said for this weasel Rove who hides behind the most ignorant and gullible (not dumb, however) man-child to ever step foot in the White House (for any position, just sadly enough... he is the President). For any of you hoping for change from this administration, don't hold your breath... just keep your fingers crossed and hope that Rove and Bush and all of the religious fanatics that elected them are right about the "afterlife"... because if they are, I'm sure there's a nice little concentration camp just like the one they've set up at Gitmo prepared for Rove's arrival. One final piece to Karl Rove, in the words of Hunter S. Thompson, "Go to hell you dumb pigf*cker!"

Posted by: True Patriot | June 24, 2005 11:57 AM | Report abuse

Dot, where's your first post?

Posted by: Sara | June 24, 2005 11:57 AM | Report abuse

To Baz/DNT

Funneling money to Iranian rebels was an attempt to bring the Shah, a friend of the U.S., back into power without putting our boys into a war with radical Islamists. Illegal?, perhaps, but none of our troops died. Had it gone on longer, Iran might be a democratic, stable society today.

Posted by: Americaneedsreality | June 24, 2005 11:58 AM | Report abuse

To Josh:

You stupid retard; The conservatives are the majority whether you want to believe it or not. We have the majority in Senate, in the House of Representatives, We have the majority of American voters as proven by the last election..... And thank God we will also have the majority in the Supreme Court. So Josh, I am a conservative and I AM THE MAJORITY.......you're a loser. Also remember, BUSH WON.........GET OVER IT!!!

Posted by: Kelly | June 24, 2005 11:58 AM | Report abuse

Hey Josh,

RE: the response to Kelly, Glad to see you believe in inclusion for everyone, as long as they think like you.

Posted by: mike | June 24, 2005 11:58 AM | Report abuse

Baz - if you're not talking about concentration camps or other lovely aspects of 1930's Germany, then why don't you try to make more accurate analogies than US=Nazi Germany and Bush=Hitler? Please. These extreme analogies get to be such a bore to listen to.

C'mon, think a little before you spout off stupid comparisions that aren't logical. It's just so...Michael Moore...or Dick Durbin.

Posted by: Wis | June 24, 2005 11:59 AM | Report abuse

Get over it Liberals. GO Bush

Posted by: Grandma | June 24, 2005 11:59 AM | Report abuse

I argree with JOhnmark. It is because of the evil of the terrorists that Jesus would have wanted us to attack evil with evil. In the Bible it says that we are God's children. Everyone nose that children must be taught hard lessons, and that sometimes it hurts to be disciplened but it is an important part of growing up. Therefore, we must teach eveil that it does not benefirt God or us if you are not loving of Jesus and others. Attacking someone is not always bad. It depends on why.

Thank you. God Bless America and God Bless Jesus.

Posted by: Dave B | June 24, 2005 11:59 AM | Report abuse

DNT

"what's really scary is the similarities between the neo-conservative rise to power in the US and the rise of the Social Democrats in Germany during the 1930's."

DNT... you are profoundly astute.

Posted by: Randy | June 24, 2005 11:59 AM | Report abuse

The Democratic Party has become more of a threat to the United States than the nineteen hijackers on September 11th, or the terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan. The outrageous rhetoric from senators Kennedy and Durbin, among others, is now being added to the training sessions of new terrorists, and fueling anti American attitudes around the world.

The Democratic Party is actively subverting U.S. foreign policy with Clinton breaking with traditions and speaking against Gitmo to foreign press. Clinton was outraged with Carter "negotiated" a failed deal with North Korea, that cost Americans millions in aid and money, yet he engages in exactly the same behavior that caused his outrage.

Have you all forgetten? Has the memory of the WTC crashing to earth and the Pentagon burning left you all?

Are you all so hateful that you would rather see the United States fail in Iraq than see a chance for democracy succeed in the Middle East?

I can see three decades of our failing public school system has taken it's toll, breading a generation of self serving, spoiled brats. The Greatest Generation must be ashamed of this new generation, except of course, those brave, and proud mem and woman that continue to defend your right to spew your anti American rhetoric.

Posted by: Outraged Democrat | June 24, 2005 12:00 PM | Report abuse

Get over it Liberals. GO Bush

Posted by: Grandma | June 24, 2005 12:00 PM | Report abuse

Get over it Liberals. GO Bush

Posted by: Grandma | June 24, 2005 12:00 PM | Report abuse

Rove and Cruise? Well, they both have BMI over 31, by my estimate.

Not much else I see in common.

Posted by: Gary | June 24, 2005 12:02 PM | Report abuse

Rove and Cruise? Well, they both have BMI over 31, by my estimate.

Not much else I see in common.

Posted by: Gary | June 24, 2005 12:02 PM | Report abuse

Get over it Liberals. GO Bush

Posted by: Grandma | June 24, 2005 12:02 PM | Report abuse

I know I'm the cop. I voted for Kerry, not because I thought he was the best but because I thought he was the least of the worst. Too many times Americans are given this sad choice. No wonder we only show up 50% of the time to vote.

I've been pondering the history of American democracy. Political parties were an after-the-fact invention to consolidate power. The "rules" in Congress were made up as they went along. The "rules" are not in the Constitution and as long as they don't violate the Constitution they are ok. I think its time for someone to begin the discussion of whether a 2-party system is way better than a 1-party system and whether the current way Congress runs itself is in conformance with the constitution. Its time to take stock and figure out if we're still on the right road.

Posted by: Jim Middleroader | June 24, 2005 12:02 PM | Report abuse

Say what you will about Karl Rove, but the man is a political genius.

He must have God on his side to have been able to get George Bush into the White House for two terms!

Posted by: Jack O'Hara | June 24, 2005 12:02 PM | Report abuse

The anti-abortion issue becomes a little more clear to me now; those babies are needed for cannon fodder in places like Iraq where they can be wasted as "heros". What is happening to us? How did we get here? Where are we going? Why?

Posted by: Dick Johnson | June 24, 2005 12:02 PM | Report abuse

It is the President's job to lead us to a solution. Does Gitmo have problems? By most accounts, yes. Have this administration identified some of the problems and produced a plan to resolve those problems? If so, he has not communicated them. Are there problems in Iraq? I watch them daily. Is there a plan? None have been communicated. Do we Americans know what the plan is in Afganistan? I've watched for it but still don't know what it is. Is there a problem with Social Security? I think the problem is solvency in the future. Is there a plan? If there is a plan, it hasn't been communicated.

Do we have a leader? I think we better have a plan the next time we vote!

Posted by: eric | June 24, 2005 12:02 PM | Report abuse

Rove and Cruise? Well, they both have BMI over 31, by my estimate.

Not much else I see in common.

Posted by: Gary | June 24, 2005 12:02 PM | Report abuse

Sure the Dems lost Congress, The White House, and slowly the judiciary and they whine alot but what they whine about is true. W and the Repubs won, so where is my safer more inclusive America?

Is it even possible to kill all the terrorist so that there will never be another attack? These guys are in charge no doubt about it but is this country a better place?

It will be in a few days when Karl makes the ultimate sacrifice to save W and quits...stay tuned!!!

Posted by: klonzo | June 24, 2005 12:02 PM | Report abuse

"I'm a uniter,not a divider."

When a man tells you how honest he is,you better hang on to your wallet.

This is the same game as the Cold War,just the names of the players have changed.

Posted by: mgottlieb | June 24, 2005 12:03 PM | Report abuse

I agree with Kelly. If you are in a race and you win, then the looser must accept that. Even though Hitler won the election in Germany in the early 1930s, we have to respect him as their chosen leader. Anybudy against him was just being a crybaby and a poor loser. That's not the American way.

Posted by: Alice | June 24, 2005 12:03 PM | Report abuse

All of you read the comments blogged here in the past couple of hours?

Didn't think so, me neither.

Sounds like a lot of complaining, and for good reason. There is a reason there are two or more political parties. Because every Joe Schmo thinks he can make the lives of the Billions of people on earth better.

Get a clue people, there is no single or group of people that can accomplish this. WE'RE HUMAN.

Take a cue from Gandi (sp?). He said if everyone were to live by the standards of the bible, that the world would be a better place. The bible advocates getting out of anything to do with politics, yes really, go actually read and study it for a change instead of listening to some clergy member grinding his own axe and supporting some govt. official.

Posted by: out of it | June 24, 2005 12:04 PM | Report abuse

If we were to poll the guys and gals on the ground in Iraq, I think that we would be surprised at how many are Democrats{ or as Rove puts it, liberals}, who would you want defending you? These democrats or that little whimp Rove? If we had to depend on him and the rest of those CHICKEN HAWKS who hid under the bed while the real men were fighting in Vietnam we would really be in trouble. It is real easy to talk tough when someone else is doing the dying. These people were a disgrace to their country then and they are a disgrace now.

Posted by: Donna | June 24, 2005 12:04 PM | Report abuse

Do you know WHY we were attacked on 911?

Do you even care?

It wasn't the 100 thousand innocents we've killed so far.

I'm not talking about enemy combatants, I'm talking about civilians.

Posted by: Dave | June 24, 2005 12:04 PM | Report abuse

Kelly,

Re: Your 3rd posting of, "GET A HINT:.........BUSH WON, GET OVER IT !!!"

This time I'll speak veeeerrrry slowly for you, cause you are, after all, a Repug:

I'm over Bush winning. I want him brought down because he is criminally incompetent and surrounds himself with war profiteers who have caused death, destruction, and torture for their personal profit.

Posted by: roooth | June 24, 2005 12:05 PM | Report abuse

I hope Rove realizes how comments about
evil liberals look from abroad, where "liberal" still has the meaning of "associated with ideals of individual especially economic freedom, greater individual participation in government, and constitutional, political, and administrative reforms designed to secure these objectives" (according to Merriam-Webster online).

Right-wing theocray America ahoy!

And to the jokers who think that the pope acquiesced to Irak II? Try this:

http://www.cjd.org/paper/jp2war.html

Guess that makes the pope a liberal surrender-monkey, then. Suck it up!

Posted by: El Tonno | June 24, 2005 12:05 PM | Report abuse

As a soldier in Iraq for my second tour, I can only hope that this great debate will lead to some worthwhile and far-reaching discussion of our foreign policy strategy. In our fair land of 99% reactionary thinkers, I am amazed that there have been 3 hours and 18 minutes of posts towards this topic. Isn't there a sale at Walmart right now? Don't you all need to get to Starbucks for your Triple Decaf Latte with cinnamon? The truth is that King George the Second learned (and is still under the tutilage of) well from George the First the art of media control. Of course the Downing Street Memo is accurate; the government lied about thier intentions concerning Iraq. Of course Dick Chaney is not thoroughly divorced from Haliburton. Of course the Patriot Act is an attempt by the powers that be to limit the free will of the people. I can't blame them for getting away with it though. If Ted Kennedy can get away with Chappaquidick, why shouldn't the Bushes get away with taking over a soverign nation without justifiable reason. Voltaire said it best: something about you shutting up with all that talk I donna like or I smasha you face...?!?!?!

Posted by: Tom | June 24, 2005 12:05 PM | Report abuse

How's this for rhetoric from the Right Wing? I think they should apologize.

Here's what anti-choice activist Karen Brauer, president of Pharmacists for Life, has to say about your right to doctor-prescribed birth-control:

On the fight against "radical feminazis" -- that is, women trying to get birth control: Pharmacists for Life helps: "Pharmacists of Conscience who find themselves under attack by legal and judicial mechanisms, employers, fellow employees, the left, and radical feminazis..."

On the helpful lecture she offers women asking for a birth control prescription. "I'd work on them every month. I'd say, 'Hey, when are you going to get off the pill?' "

On her apparent pleasure in dispensing Viagra. "I helped a whole lot of old married men get lucky!"

And last, but certainly not least:

On Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich's recent order requiring pharmacists to fill birth control prescriptions (and his Serbian heritage). "Governor 'Slobodan' Blagojevich refuses to back down... Hiz Honor continues to show a despotic disrespect for the law and freedom of religion and conscience, as did his "namesake" who is up for war crimes following ethnic cleansing in Bosnia-Heczegovina. The Guv would love to cleanse IL of any pharmacists who still have a conscience, or so it seems!"

Posted by: Chooser | June 24, 2005 12:07 PM | Report abuse

True Patriot, take a deep breath, go get some more Kool Aid, take lots of little sips, go lie down. The men in white coats will be coming for you soon, so just rest.

Only a True Moonbat would write "At least Adolf Hitler had the fortitude to stand behind his actions in the Holocaust." What a sick person.

Posted by: Wis | June 24, 2005 12:07 PM | Report abuse

I nominate Karl Rove to star in "Robot Chicken".

It's not even worth the time to "dissemble" (uh...that means to take it apart, I think?) his remark.

HAHAHAHAHAHA.
Go ahead - make my day!

Posted by: Yogi-one | June 24, 2005 12:07 PM | Report abuse

Get a hint: BUSH WON.......GET OVER IT... stop whining and being like a typical liberal.... The only way to change your political party is to change the way you think. stop whining and blaming everyone else for your own mistakes. Clinton could have stopped the terorists when he was in office but he didn't... We had to wait till George W.Bush came into office to get the job done right... Thanks George for a job well done !!! GOD BLESS AMERICA and GEORGE W. BUSH.

Posted by: kelly | June 24, 2005 12:08 PM | Report abuse

Right on to whoever told Hattie what-for. You'll never develop an independent mind and learn to think for yourself if you read stuff on the internet. True knowledge comes from within. Only by freeing oneself from barrage of facts and stuff is it possible to be truly free in how you see the world and think.

Posted by: Drifter | June 24, 2005 12:08 PM | Report abuse

The 18 year old kid pulling a tour of duty in GITMO who is trying to defend his country by committing the acts of torture described in the FBI Report that Durbin read should not be surprised at being compared to a Nazi or Gulag guard, both had institutional approval to commit torture. And while we are at it, Let's hold a Nuremburg tribunal for the leaders who authorized the torture, Bush, Cheney, Gonzalez, Rumsfeld, Rice, Wolfowitz. The Nazi leaders who authorized the torture. Perhaps a long vacation in Leavenworth federal prison would be satisfactory for our leaders who authorized the torture.

Posted by: jdcolv | June 24, 2005 12:08 PM | Report abuse

"I'm a uniter,not a divider."

When a man tells you how honest he is,you better hang on to your wallet.

Rove,Limbaugh,Falwell and the rest of their coterie are third rate rabble rousers.

Posted by: mgottlieb | June 24, 2005 12:10 PM | Report abuse

Sara:

I don't think "cool" is the best adjective for the SAOF. There does seem to be a common thread of intelligence, and a tendency to be interested in every subject that Joel cares to write about. And we are witty, or at least we find ourselves amusing.

There is a tendency towards elitism, which I share but am embarrassed to own up to. I was about to suggest that we call the outsiders "GOOGLERS" from now on, but then I felt ashamed and want to say that the blog is open to everybody and that we are all enriched by the opportunity to learn from others with diverse viewpoints. Even the ones who are obviously insane or stupid. [I'm sorry. I apologize.]

You're okay, Sara, come on in. jw needs his fantasy of the week. Bring your own massage oil.

Posted by: kbertocci | June 24, 2005 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Guys-its simple. Its our team versus your team. Obscure the substance, change the subject, set the bait, - makes the dems overeact. This scenario keeps playing and the rubes don't catch on.

Why do you think we have another flag burning amendment --this is just fodder for 2006.
The dem line should be: "It's unfortunate that a man of Mr. Rove's calibre has been reduced to making such slanderous and erroneous statements about a period (post 9/11)in which both liberals and conservatives largely agreed. I'm sorry and disappointed that he would impune the patriotism of so many Americans.

Posted by: CEL | June 24, 2005 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Oh, and Hitler *NEVER* won any election

The Nazis were *always* a minority party.

However, he played his hands well and
got the license to kill from parliament
afraid of red unrest. End of story.

Posted by: El Tonno | June 24, 2005 12:13 PM | Report abuse

Karl Rove should be president in 2008, I'd definitely vote for him and so would the majority of Americans. At least he isn't a lier like Clinton. Remember the comment he made: "I NEVER HAD SEX WITH THAT WOMAN"..of course he later admitted that he lied and was impeached for it..

Posted by: Karl Rove | June 24, 2005 12:13 PM | Report abuse

"Outraged Democrat" wrote:
Have you all forgetten? Has the memory of the WTC crashing to earth and the Pentagon burning left you all?

I haven't forgotten but Bush has. I guess when Bush said he wanted Osama "dead or alive" he was ok with "alive". Osama continues to threaten America and its interests while Bush points the American spear at Iraq. Bush is not defending the nation as he swore to do and has stated the he is "not concerned" about Osama. Well, damn it, I'm concerned. I'd like to see $500B and 250K American troops smother the hills of the Afgan/Pak border area and find him and kill him dead, dead, dead. But Bush is not concerned ... Its the guy that tried to kill his Daddy that we should all be focused on. History will judge the last election harshly. How could American have left such an idiot in charge?

Posted by: Jim Middleroader | June 24, 2005 12:13 PM | Report abuse

Funny, I was "tortured" more in bootcamp than the report out of GITMO says the "detainees" were tortured. And all my times in the desert I believe I lived in unairconditioned tents eating C Rats or MREs for most my meals. During bootcamp I was mentally harassed, forced to stand at attention for hours, not allowed to talk, call my family, marched in the rain and cold and subjected to many other "atrocities"

Posted by: mike | June 24, 2005 12:14 PM | Report abuse

Karl Rove is saying what many conservative republicans believe. They truly think that liberals are soft "tree huggers" who want to sing in a circle and hold hands.

He is appealing to his base. The flaw in his logic is that he really believes that no matter how far right the republican party goes, they can shift the moderates with them by using some well calculated "wedge" issues such as gay marriage as well as the general fear of terrorism.

It's a sad commentary that Karl and the republican leadership truly believe that the American public does not have the ability to think beyond 1-2 issues. I think they will get a wake up call in the mid-term elections. I guess they forgot the lessons learned form Newt and company.

Posted by: Patrick | June 24, 2005 12:14 PM | Report abuse

The auther describes Rove as a Stalinist, but really what we have here is Plutocracy, a government controlled by money and the interests of money. Keep your hands off my stash while I try to pocket yours seems to be the rule of law here.

Posted by: Lamar Crawford | June 24, 2005 12:14 PM | Report abuse

Dear Washington Post

CONGRESS NEEDS CASH ON DEPOSIT

The ongoing Odepus Cain and Abel Battle between political parties is damaging American Business:

Our Troops are tired and could use free plane tickets for a military vacation back home with their families and atleast a cryonic preservation option if something bad happens to them in Iraq

I mailed the US Treasury Two Trillion $2,000,000,000,000.00 Deposit Dollars to help

an Act of Congress is needed, and political
unity so people can have a happy and fun future


God Bless You All

Br Izzo

cut and pasted blog below
------------------------------------------

The $1000 Billion Deposit Dollar US Tax Trust



The $1000 Billion Deposit Dollar US Tax Trust


The $1000 Billion Deposit Dollar US Tax Trust of 2004
NOTICE: AN ACT OF CONGRESS IS NEED
TO AUTHORIZE CERTAIN NOTES AND COIN
AS LEGAL TENDER FOR DEPOSIT

(1) $1,000,000,000,000.00 IN MILLIONARE BANK USA NOTES

(2) $1,000,000,000,000.00 IN WASHINGTON MINT 2003
TRILLION DOLLAR SILVER PROOF COIN
REGISTRATION NUMBER 7398

TOTAL OF $2 TRILLION DEPOSIT DOLLARS
IN TAX TRUST FOR THE 2004 TAX YEAR

Dear Members of Congress:

An Act of Congress is needed to authorize the deposit of certain United States, money notes and coins as Legal tender so the US Treasurer can issue Treasury checks secured by them.
Money, is man made like
there is nothing natural about civilizations or MONEY

" It Was New Money Created by The Bank "
Treasury Secretary Anderson 1959
This email is not a joke at all,
Congress has an extra $1,000 Billion Deposit Dollars AVAILABLE if Congress needs it,
a Capital Gain tax of $1,000 Billion Dollars of a like Kinded Exchange of
Currency for Currency for Deposit into the US Treasury was claimed in 2004

Money, like Civilization is man made

there is nothing natural about civilizations or MONEY
-----------------------------------------------------------
" It Was New Money Created by The Bank "
Treasury Secretary Anderson 1959

-----------------------------------------------------------
This email is not a joke at all,

Congress has an extra $1,000 Billion Deposit Dollars AVAILABLE if Congress needs it,

a Capital Gain tax of $1,000 Billion Dollars of a like Kinded Exchange of

Currency for Currency for Deposit into the US Treasury was claimed in 2004 Taxes


DOES THE UNITED STATES HOLD $$$$TRILLIONS IN CREATED GOLD COIN METAL ????

It is Up to Congress to accept the Deposit and then circulate or issue Treasury checks of said

$1,000 Billion Dollars Millionare Bank USA notes,

Capital Gain Tax of a like Kinded Exchange

Our Company made a Huge Capital Gain from a Like Kinded Exchange in Currency

only $60 BIllion Dollars in Millionare Bank USA notes where mailed

We did not realize a DEPOSIT LOOPHOLE EXISTED until a week ago 4/12/2005

OUR Private COMPANY IS VERY HAPPY TO FORWARD THE REMAINING $940 BILLION


DOLLARS IN MILLIONARE BANK USA NOTES

FOR DEPOSIT INTO THE UNITED STATES TREASURY

I PRAY THE IRS WILL ACCEPT AND DEPOSIT THE CURRENCY FOR THE UNITED STATES

AGAIN WE STILL OWE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT $940 BILLION IN MILLIONARE

BANK USA CURRENCY it is up to Congress to place a VALUE ON MONEY, including Paper Money

Taxes due The United States, FROM A CAPITAL GAIN OF A LIKE KINDED EXCHANGE OF

CURRENCY

WE ONLY REALIZED THIS CAPITAL GAIN, DEPOSIT LOOPHOLE, DAYS AGO

IT IS UP TO THE UNITED STATES TREASURY TO ACCEPT AND CIRCULATE ANY OF

THESE BANK NOTE CURRENCY, as authorized by Law VIA TREASURY CHECK FOR

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PURPOSES

WE PLAN ON MAILING THE ADDITIONAL $940 BILLION DOLLARS IN MILLIONARE BANK

USA CURRENCY NEXT MONTH ( re file in June 2005 ) IF ACCEPTABLE TO THE US TREASURY

GOD BLESS YOU AND AMERICA


Cryonic Life Insurance Company
Dept of General Resurrection
Br Daniel Izzo
512 Onondaga Ave
Syraucse, NY 13207

MONEY ENDS SUFFERING

ANOTHER IDEA IS FOR THE UNITED STATES MINT TO MAKE $20 CREATED GOLD COINS
CREATED GOLD IS NOT THE STANDARD WEIGHT AS GOLD, BUT IT IS FINE LIKE GOLD
The British Pieces made of bronze created gold should look finer

RELATED LAW TEXT BELOW:


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
US CODE TITLE 31 SEC 5103 LEGAL TENDER

TITLE 31 > SUBTITLE IV > CHAPTER 51 > SUBCHAPTER I > ? 5103
Prev Next
US CODE TITLE 31 SEC ? 5103. Legal tender
Release date: 2003-05-15
United States coins and currency (including Federal reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal reserve banks and national banks) are legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes, and dues. Foreign gold or silver coins are not legal tender for debts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

US CODE TITLE 12 SEC 412 APPLICATION FOR NOTES, COLLATERAL REQUIRED
TITLE 12 > CHAPTER 3 > SUBCHAPTER XII > ? 412
Prev Next
? 412. Application for notes; collateral required
Release date: 2004-03-18
Any Federal Reserve bank may make application to the local Federal Reserve agent for such amount of the Federal Reserve notes hereinbefore provided for as it may require. Such application shall be accompanied with a tender to the local Federal Reserve agent of collateral in amount equal to the sum of the Federal Reserve notes thus applied for and issued pursuant to such application. The collateral security thus offered shall be notes, drafts, bills of exchange, or acceptances acquired under section 92, 342 to 348, 349 to 352, 361, 372, or 373 of this title, or bills of exchange endorsed by a member bank of any Federal Reserve district and purchased under the provisions of sections 348a and 353 to 359 of this title, or bankers? acceptances purchased under the provisions of said sections 348a and 353 to 359 of this title, or gold certificates, or Special Drawing Right certificates, or any obligations which are direct obligations of, or are fully guaranteed as to principal and interest by, the United States or any agency thereof, or assets that Federal Reserve banks may purchase or hold under sections 348a and 353 to 359 of this title. In no event shall such collateral security be less than the amount of Federal Reserve notes applied for. The Federal Reserve agent shall each day notify the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System of all issues and withdrawals of Federal Reserve notes to and by the Federal Reserve bank to which he is accredited. The said Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System may at any time call upon a Federal Reserve bank for additional security to protect the Federal Reserve notes issued to it. Collateral shall not be required for Federal Reserve notes which are held in the vaults of Federal Reserve banks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

US CODE TITLE 12 SEC 342 DEPOSITS AND EXCHANGE

TITLE 12 > CHAPTER 3 > SUBCHAPTER IX > ? 342
Prev Next
US CODE TITLE 12 SEC ? 342. Deposits; exchange and collection; member and nonmember banks or other depository institutions; charges
Release date: 2004-03-18
Any Federal Reserve bank may receive from any of its member banks, or other depository institutions, and from the Unites States, deposits of current funds in lawful money, national-bank notes, Federal reserve notes, or checks, and drafts, payable upon presentation or other items, and also, for collection, maturing notes and bills; or, solely for purposes of exchange or of collection may receive from other Federal reserve banks deposits of current funds in lawful money, national-bank notes, or checks upon other Federal reserve banks, and checks and drafts, payable upon presentation within its district or other items, and maturing notes and bills payable within its district; or, solely for the purposes of exchange or of collection, may receive from any nonmember bank or trust company or other depository institution deposits of current funds in lawful money, national-bank notes, Federal reserve notes, checks and drafts payable upon presentation or other items, or maturing notes and bills: Provided, Such nonmember bank or trust company or other depository institution maintains with the Federal Reserve bank of its district a balance in such amount as the Board determines taking into account items in transit, services provided by the Federal Reserve bank, and other factors as the Board may deem appropriate: Provided further, That nothing in this or any other section of this chapter shall be construed as prohibiting a member or nonmember bank or other depository institution from making reasonable charges, to be determined and regulated by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, but in no case to exceed 10 cents per $100 or fraction thereof, based on the total of checks and drafts presented at any one time, for collection or payment of checks and drafts and remission therefor by exchange or otherwise; but no such charges shall be made against the Federal reserve banks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

US CODE TITLE 31 SEC 5111

TREASURER'S AUTHORITY TO ISSUE SPECIAL COINS

LIKE SPECIAL NATIONAL TRILLION DOLLAR COINS TO SECURE THE NATIONAL DEBT

US CODE TITLE 31 SEC 5111 see PART 2 AND 3

TITLE 31 > SUBTITLE IV > CHAPTER 51 > SUBCHAPTER II > ? 5111
Prev Next
? 5111. Minting and issuing coins, medals, and numismatic items
Release date: 2003-05-15
(a) The Secretary of the Treasury?
(1) shall mint and issue coins described in section 5112 of this title in amounts the Secretary decides are necessary to meet the needs of the United States;
(2) may prepare national medal dies and strike national and other medals if it does not interfere with regular minting operations but may not prepare private medal dies;
(3) may prepare and distribute numismatic items; and
(4) may mint coins for a foreign country if the minting does not interfere with regular minting operations, and shall prescribe a charge for minting the foreign coins equal to the cost of the minting (including labor, materials, and the use of machinery).
(b) The Department of the Treasury has a coinage metal fund and a coinage profit fund. The Secretary may use the coinage metal fund to buy metal to mint coins. The Secretary shall credit the coinage profit fund with the amount by which the nominal value of the coins minted from the metal exceeds the cost of the metal. The Secretary shall charge the coinage profit fund with waste incurred in minting coins and the cost of distributing the coins, including the cost of coin bags and pallets. The Secretary shall deposit in the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts excess amounts in the coinage profit fund.
(c) Procurements Relating to Coin Production.?
(1) In general.? The Secretary may make contracts, on conditions the Secretary decides are appropriate and are in the public interest, to acquire articles, materials, supplies, and services (including equipment, manufacturing facilities, patents, patent rights, technical knowledge, and assistance) necessary to produce the coins referred to in this title.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
US CODE TITLE 31 SEC 3302 CUSTODIANS OF MONEY

TITLE 31 > SUBTITLE III > CHAPTER 33 > SUBCHAPTER I > ? 3302
Prev Next
? 3302. Custodians of money
Release date: 2003-05-15
(a) Except as provided by another law, an official or agent of the United States Government having custody or possession of public money shall keep the money safe without?
(1) lending the money;
(2) using the money;
(3) depositing the money in a bank; and
(4) exchanging the money for other amounts.
(b) Except as provided in section 3718 (b) [1] of this title, an official or agent of the Government receiving money for the Government from any source shall deposit the money in the Treasury as soon as practicable without deduction for any charge or claim.
(c)
(1) A person having custody or possession of public money, including a disbursing official having public money not for current expenditure, shall deposit the money without delay in the Treasury or with a depositary designated by the Secretary of the Treasury under law. Except as provided in paragraph (2), money required to be deposited pursuant to this subsection shall be deposited not later than the third day after the custodian receives the money. The Secretary or a depositary receiving a deposit shall issue duplicate receipts for the money deposited. The original receipt is for the Secretary and the duplicate is for the custodian.
(2) The Secretary of the Treasury may by regulation prescribe that a person having custody or possession of money required by this subsection to be deposited shall deposit such money during a period of time that is greater or lesser than the period of time specified by the second sentence of paragraph (1).
(d) An official or agent not complying with subsection (b) of this section may be removed from office. The official or agent may be required to forfeit to the Government any part of the money held by the official or agent and to which the official or agent may be entitled.
(e) An official or agent of the Government having custody or possession of public money shall keep an accurate entry of each amount of public money received, transferred, and paid.
(f) When authorized by the Secretary, an official or agent of the Government having custody or possession of public money, or performing other fiscal agent services, may be allowed necessary expenses to collect, keep, transfer, and pay out public money and to perform those services. However, money appropriated for those expenses may not be used to employ or pay officers and employees of the Government.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
US CODE TITLE 31 SEC 5154 STATE TAXATION

TITLE 31 > SUBTITLE IV > CHAPTER 51 > SUBCHAPTER V > ? 5154
Prev Next
? 5154. State taxation
Release date: 2003-05-15
A State or a territory or possession of the United States may tax United States coins and currency (including Federal reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal reserve banks and national banks) as money on hand or on deposit in the same way and at the same rate that the State, territory, or possession taxes other forms of money. This section does not affect a law taxing national banks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TITLE 31 > SUBTITLE IV > CHAPTER 51 > SUBCHAPTER V > ? 5153
Prev Next
? 5153. Counterfeit currency
Release date: 2003-05-15
Disbursing officials of the United States Government and officers of national banks shall stamp or mark the word ?counterfeit?, ?altered?, or ?worthless? on counterfeit notes intended to circulate as currency that are presented to them. An official or officer wrongfully stamping or marking an item of genuine United States currency (including a Federal reserve note or a circulating note of Federal reserve banks and national banks) shall redeem the currency at face value when presented.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

posted by Brother-Dan-Izzo @ 4:27 AM 0 comments


2003 TRILLION DOLLAR SILVER PROOF THE WASHINTON MINT REGISTRATION NO. 7398

My Favorite Links:

Got Full Blown AIDs ? blog

90% Cancer Cure Diet with EFAs food oil and sulphur in cheese

Cryonic Life Insurance Company

The $1000 Billion Deposit Dollar US Tax Trust

My Info:

Name: Br Dan Izzo

Email: revdanielizzo@yahoo.com

Posted by: Br Dan izzo | June 24, 2005 12:14 PM | Report abuse

why should rove apologize? i'm sure he's expressed his views accurately. i'm sure he feels just that way about liberals and it's breath of fresh air to hear anyone at that level of government speak frankly. shouldn't the people most "harmed" by what he said be thankful for the insight?

everyone gripes about lack of candor in government. a big thanks to plainspoken karl fer tellin' it as he sees it. after all there are differences between libs and cons.

Posted by: mike | June 24, 2005 12:16 PM | Report abuse

All you Democrats and Liberals must know that you cannot be saved if you do not love Jesus. Jesus did not love terrorists, he wanted to have them converted through God's love. That is in plain English in the Bible.

Liberal whinners who attach our President should learn that there is more to leading a great country than critizing torture (which we do not endorse, by the way!!!).

Democrats and liberals need to calm down and to learn to appreciate that our leaders know more than most of us do about the world, and therefore they must be trsuted to make the right decisions. Anything less is a betrayal of our trust in them. You do not doubt God, do you? The place you trust in our Surpreme Commander in Chief.

Posted by: Father Tom | June 24, 2005 12:16 PM | Report abuse

why should rove apologize? i'm sure he's expressed his views accurately. i'm sure he feels just that way about liberals and it's breath of fresh air to hear anyone at that level of government speak frankly. shouldn't the people most "harmed" by what he said be thankful for the insight?

everyone gripes about lack of candor in government. a big thanks to plainspoken karl fer tellin' it as he sees it. after all there are differences between libs and cons.

Posted by: mike | June 24, 2005 12:16 PM | Report abuse

I served in Viet Nam, consider myself a Liberal, have a small consulting firm, live in a nice home, have a good wife, have some money for retirement - basically living the American middle-class life. I have never been so dissappointed in our government (even tragic, pathetic Nixon was on target at times, and was certainly more capable than our current leader). President Bush is an embarrassment and makes you wonder how does a small-minded, silly person get that far? What does that say about our culture, that he is where he is? With limbaugh, hannity, orielly, and others of their ilk spewing distortions all day, every day, it seems difficult for average folks to get a bearing on the truth. Still, how is it that our fellow countrymen are so fooled by such frauds, and for this long? Our culture is in trouble.

Posted by: shoot me now | June 24, 2005 12:17 PM | Report abuse

Kelly, HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

Bush got the job done right???????????

Which job, making sure he ignored warning after warning about an impending attack?

Making sure his butt was out of town when they expected the attack?

Making sure he stood on an aircraft carrier in his play uniform so he could look like a CIC?

He's as big a coward as all you big mouth Repugs who love the war but won't put your life on the line?

If this war is really necessary to protect your country, why aren't you serving?

Your country needs you in Iraq, get to a recruiter:http://www.usarmy.com

Or are you just a little yellow elephant?
http://www.wonkette.com/politics/enlist-young-republicans-have-other-priorities-109325.php

Posted by: Anonymous | June 24, 2005 12:17 PM | Report abuse

Stalin killed almost 43 million people using his gulags, etc.... Much more than the Nazis and their death camps. Yet somehow you believe comparing the Bush administration to Stalin is less offensive that comparing them to Nazi Germany? I have no love for the current administration, but I dearly wish for a time machine so you and Rove and Durbin could be sent back to a Soviet Gulag, or perhaps Buchenwald, to see what it was really like. Then maybe such ignorant comparisons between those horrible places and the USA would not so oft and easily spill from your lips. You not only malign America, you marginalize the men, women and children who died in those hell holes.

Posted by: Mac | June 24, 2005 12:19 PM | Report abuse

Yes. Durbin and the liberals aren't firing missiles at our troops. But the Bush gang would LOVE to find another Jane Fonda type of figure who they could use as a tool to say that the "enemy" is holding their own by inspiration supplied by American disloyalty. The Jane Fonda myth galvanized a generation of conservatives until (wait... it still does.)

Sadly the liberals can't get mean enough to do the same and show any number of public spokesmen are flushing our standing down the drain in the world community AND doing more to rally the "enemy" troops than anything that Durbin might have said.

Posted by: Dennis from Cape Cod | June 24, 2005 12:19 PM | Report abuse

I'm a wee bit confused. Much of this incessant and mindless banter (specifically the variants of "GOD BLESS AMERICA AND GO BUSH") seem like what I encountered during my (wonderful) secondary school education. *sigh* If you do not like what you're reading, then stop reading it. It's as simple as that. Unless you can provide relevant commentary or analysis, sans proclamations of your lust for our...beloved leader...keep out.

Posted by: freshman | June 24, 2005 12:19 PM | Report abuse

Do you people realise that the ideology of Al Qaeda is to create a planet, yes, an entire planet into an islamic state, like that created by the Taliban?

If you did, then you may begin to realize that it isn't a war against people who want the US out of Iraq or from interferring in the middle east affairs. It is a war against your way of life, by people who believe your religion, your freedom of choice, your lifestyle and even your heritage should be denied you and controlled by shiah law. Your complete compliance with their rules of existence is absolute and failure to comply to anything they decide is gods will, warrants your death.

These are people that won't surrender, ever. They won't worry about things not going to plan every time, or decisions making them accountable. They aren't concerned with who said what. They gain strength from the weaknesses of democracy, as seen in Spain. They prey on fear and know that any action they take will eventually be blamed on the government of the country they attacked too. It's win, win for them and they'll never stop, because they KNOW that you as a person living in a western democracy, WILL give up, because history proves that time is on their side. When the going gets tough, democracies start finger pointing and casting blame, until their policy changes. At that point, Al Qaeda is incentivised to go to the next level, with the eventual aim of destablising and causing chaos, when they can move in and build a nation of islam.
Why do you think Al Qaeda terrorists are leaving Europe and the U.S. to be suicide bombers in Iraq, instead of where they are? Because Iraq is an oppertunity for them to create a base for their Islamic state. It is a battle between Islamic extremism and Democracy and should they win, they'll be stronger than ever and be able to be more adventurous by expanding their islamic world.

Be fully aware of what the stakes are and that it is a war that will never end. You should not be infighting but showing solidarity and ensuring that no matter what, Iraq will not be abandoned to terrorists, no matter how many soldiers and civilians they terrorists murder, or whether the reason for the Iraq invasion was right or not.

Posted by: Pragmatist | June 24, 2005 12:20 PM | Report abuse

If I have to choose between a President who lies about a blow job and leaves a budget surplus or one who lies about the reasons to kill thousands, piss away billions and creates the biggest deficit in history, I'll take the BJ guy.

Regardless, democracy does not exitst in this country. It is plutocratic oligarchy, plain and simple. (Please, do us all a favor and grab a dictionary if necessary.) That is the primary crime all our elected snakes are trying to distract us from figuring out and doing something about. Wake up now or stay the sleepy sheep you are!

Posted by: Irma Brown | June 24, 2005 12:20 PM | Report abuse

If I have to choose between a President who lies about a blow job and leaves a budget surplus or one who lies about the reasons to kill thousands, piss away billions and creates the biggest deficit in history, I'll take the BJ guy.

Regardless, democracy does not exitst in this country. It is plutocratic oligarchy, plain and simple. (Please, do us all a favor and grab a dictionary if necessary.) That is the primary crime all our elected snakes are trying to distract us from figuring out and doing something about. Wake up now or stay the sleepy sheep you are!

Posted by: Irma Brown | June 24, 2005 12:20 PM | Report abuse

I apologize to the American people for not telling the truth about the American Left before just now. Let me once again clarify what I said... Liberal scum in the past have demoralized our nation. I stand by this wholeheartedly and truely believe this. Its time to move on to a new horizon. KARL ROVE in 2008.....

Posted by: Karl Rove | June 24, 2005 12:20 PM | Report abuse

Thank you Hattie,
Hard to swallow the criticisms of her postings. Do they support one view? Well, the subjects are varied, but many of them just point to the fact that the administration itself - or other supposed "respected" organizations have come to the same conclusions based on the facts. The fact that Hattie reads is no reason to condemn her. Is she just responding to others' opinions? Well, in most cases she is pointing out how the "facts" differ from what many are saying on this blog. One needs to read or learn before forming rational opinions. Seems one blogger believes she should form her own opinions in a vacuum?? Hmmm, have any of you actually called up many of the articles she's posted? Certainly we should all read opposing views as well as those supporting our own views. Many of the sources are quite credible to both conservatives and liberals alike and are just stating what the facts really are. The fact that members of this administration, when pointedly asked, have agreed there is no real substative link between Iraq and Bin Laden, tells us all something....I would check out some of Hattie's postings, as well as other "opposing" views if someone would post something as credible as many of those.

Posted by: Americansfortruth | June 24, 2005 12:22 PM | Report abuse

>>Democrats and liberals need to calm down >>and to learn to appreciate that our >>leaders know more than most of us do >>about the world, and therefore they must >>be trsuted to make the right decisions. >>Anything less is a betrayal of our trust >>in them. You do not doubt God, do you? >>The place you trust in our Surpreme >>Commander in Chief.

Would you like to buy some swamp land in Florida?

Posted by: ed | June 24, 2005 12:22 PM | Report abuse

The anti-abortion issue becomes a little more clear to me now; those babies are needed for cannon fodder in places like Iraq where they can be wasted as "heros". What is happening to us? How did we get here? Where are we going? Why?

Posted by: Dick Johnson | June 24, 2005 12:22 PM | Report abuse

The anti-abortion issue becomes a little more clear to me now; those babies are needed for cannon fodder in places like Iraq where they can be wasted as "heros". What is happening to us? How did we get here? Where are we going? Why?

Posted by: Dick Johnson | June 24, 2005 12:23 PM | Report abuse

Rove's despicable description regarding the liberal vs. conservative responses to 9/11 was actually the exact opposite of the truth.
I recall my associates and I saying in our e-mails on 9/11 that this was an act of war and that Bush's response--bringing these criminals to justice--was ridiculous.
It was Bush who saw this as simply a crime to be punished. I remember saying in one e-mail that this should be War and Peace, not Crime and Punishment.
I remember saying we needed an FDR, not a GWB. In fact, I was so angry that I was saying we should use tactical nuclear weapons. It wasn't until his neo-conservative puppetmasters had a chance to reprogram his primitive brain functions several days too late, that Bush started talking in terms of a war instead of a crime. And then it took him what--a month or more to actually act militarily in Afghanistan! Gee, I'm sure that sent a great message of decisiveness. We should have started bombing them the same day or even the same hour! On his own, Bush had no ability to respond intelligently or appropriately to the situation.
It seems that poor Durbin is falling all over himself trying to make amends for doing nothing more than calling a spade a spade. The only person who needs to apologize is the head Nazi himself--Bush!
People apparently have decided that unless you go goose-stepping by in an SS uniform on your way to guard duty at the local death camp, you're not a Nazi. Bush and his cohorts are very much the moral equivalent of the Nazis. Who cares if you exterminate the innocent in death camps or just blow them to bits with bombs!
Who cares which ethnic/religious group you torture, murder, and persecute? It's all the same kind of fascism. Bush's right-wing religious plutocracy is horrifyingly similar to that of Hitler. Different time, different country, different flag. Same evil. People never see clearly through the fog of their own times. I think we live in very dark times, but few of us are ready to wake up to it--least of all the media.

Posted by: BillyD51 | June 24, 2005 12:23 PM | Report abuse

It is shameful that Americans were involved in torture. Criticising them is not an act of unpatriotism. The individual soldiers wer NOT responsible, the leaders are. Remember, this is a democracy where EVERYONE has a right to speak up about what goes wrong. The majority of US troops are decent, good persons.
Bush claims to support democracybut is this democracy?

Posted by: Patriot | June 24, 2005 12:23 PM | Report abuse

Is this "Kelly" person the best that the Neocons have to offer on this blog? Is it really his argument that "Bush Won" and therefore has the right to lie, distract, and then lie some more and those of us who don't like it had just better shut our cake holes and take it, because "Bush Won"?

A better question might be, where were all these people who now disapprove of Bush's performance in office when we really needed them -- Election Day?

You made your bed, America. Sleep well!

Posted by: The Anti-Kelly | June 24, 2005 12:23 PM | Report abuse

I roflmao at the republicans who bring up Clinton as if their is some kind of connection with sex with an intern and a president who is guilty of HIGH CRIMES and Misdemeaners for lying to the Americans to go to war and then runs the most incompetent war in the history of the US because of him there are 1730 dead Americans. How many Americans died while Clinton was having sex? I think that we should begin to start a movement to impeach Bush and all of his cronies. Anyone want to sign a petition??

Posted by: donna | June 24, 2005 12:24 PM | Report abuse

Father Tom: I'd like to "attach" the president -- preferably to a hot-air balloon (which no doubt could be filled to capacity by mouth by Mr. Rove) to be floated over Iraq, so that he could be greeted warmly by the Iraqi people like the liberator he is...

Come back when you've acquired a spell-checker...

Posted by: zippy the other pinhead | June 24, 2005 12:25 PM | Report abuse

Donna writes: "How many Americans died while Clinton was having sex?"

The answer, unless you count all those little Clinton wigglies that died on Monica's blue dress -- None!

Of course, now that this fact has been made public, DeLay et al will probably seek to indict Clinton for manslaugther for letting his sperm die without resulting in a conception.

Posted by: The Anti-Kelly | June 24, 2005 12:26 PM | Report abuse

kbertocci: I'd have to bring my own massage oil. jw admits that he doesn't really own any. i think he may still be a little hung up on iowabiologist, though.

Posted by: Sara | June 24, 2005 12:27 PM | Report abuse

Hey Kelly

I got over bush winning did you get over the clap?

Posted by: KellyisEZ | June 24, 2005 12:29 PM | Report abuse

Mike has it right. Think Mr. Klein have a son, daughter, cousin, niece, nephew serving in Iraq (of course neither does Mr Rove)? If he (they) did they might be much more sensitve about Durbin's words and others (i.e. Kennedy, etc) and their impact on the troops and usefulness with Al Jazera, Al Queda etc.

Posted by: ggsamj | June 24, 2005 12:30 PM | Report abuse

Please allow me to clarify. I put my faith in God and Jesus's love. I t is just that I also believe that our leaders are also worthy of our respect too. It is the Democrats and Liberals who wisht to tear down the society of goodness that America is. And for that, I must stand up and say that you do not help terrorism by critizing the President in his war against evil. God said it best in the Bible when he wrote: "I am the light of this World." (And, yes, I believe that the Buible is God's word, and that he wrote every page of it.)

Sorry for the confusion.

Posted by: Father Tom | June 24, 2005 12:30 PM | Report abuse

Why would anyone get too worked up about Rove's statements this far into his career? He has been an outrageous liar ever since he wrangled his way into Texas politics. It's no secret that he is an example of why we need checks and balances. He holds an unelected office (and an amazingly powerful one too I might add), and can, and clearly does, virtually do what he pleases. I mean come on, this is a guy who, with no concern for decency or morality, bugged his bosses office so that his opponent in the Texas Gubernatorial election would come out, on the eve of the election, smelling like a snake. He's clever, because it worked. Unfortunately, he's also an immoral, devious liar.
As for all the goofiness about Democrats who are or aren't liberals. WTF? Is it just me or is that just silly? Rove made his comments because he can, because he believes them, and he knows that his power is total, and that he is untouchable. It's macho bullying. Durbin was right. Gitmo is a disaster, and it show how little we care for humanity. Bad people need to be stopped. They don't need to be huddled on the ground, perpetually bound and gagged while defecating on themselves. Last I checked, that didn't do anyone any good. That's just plain nasty. Amnesty International was dead on in their report, and look what the goons in Washington had to say about that. They tried to say it proved that Amnesty had no credit to speak of. Amnesty International? Morally bankrupt? Are we really that stupid in this country? They are comitted to the freedoms of all people, not just guys like Karl Rove. What's next? Arm bands?

Posted by: Blicero | June 24, 2005 12:31 PM | Report abuse

So glad to see that Bush as brought "civility" back to government. Karl Rove's stupidity had taken our minds off of the kind of Doritos that Saddam Hussein likes to munch.

Posted by: Bob Davidson | June 24, 2005 12:32 PM | Report abuse

To Anti-Kelly:

Up yours...

and remember, BUSH WON......GET OVER IT!!

Posted by: kelly | June 24, 2005 12:32 PM | Report abuse

Let me see if I understand your point, Father Tom. If we criticize the President, we are helping evil? Might I suggest actually READING the Bill of Rights instead of wiping your hiney with it? And what sort of pen did God use when he wrote the Buible? A really BIG one?

Posted by: The Anti-Kelly | June 24, 2005 12:32 PM | Report abuse

"I'm frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in A, B, C, and D. Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me?"

Barry Goldwater 1964

Posted by: Matthew Bell | June 24, 2005 12:33 PM | Report abuse

Dick Johnson says:

> What is happening to us? How did we get here? Where are we going? Why?

Beats me. Probably something to do with the frog that doesn't notice it is being boiled alive if you heat the water slowly enough.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 24, 2005 12:34 PM | Report abuse

Yes, Kelly, that's the argument. It was the same thing the Nazi's said as they marched the Jews to the camps. Hitler won. Get over it.

My God, but you are a moron!!!

Posted by: The Anti-Kelly | June 24, 2005 12:35 PM | Report abuse


Enough already - It's time to fire all of them and start over.

Power to the people - jail time to those opposed.

Posted by: Commonsense | June 24, 2005 12:35 PM | Report abuse

Here's the s I left off up above. I hate misspellings.

Posted by: Blicero | June 24, 2005 12:35 PM | Report abuse

To Zipper the Other Pinhead.

I did not mean to upset you. But you must understand that a world of peace sometimes takes sacrifice. That is gained by supporintg the President -- not by attacking him. The idea you have about a balloon is not funny. A person who was floating high up could be seriously injured if they fell, not to mention if someone was under them. Some things are not funny.

Posted by: Father Tom | June 24, 2005 12:36 PM | Report abuse

Being a Democrat or a Republican used to mean something entirely different. Now these two parties seem to be defined by their lunatic fringe. Sadly, our two party system seems to have a broken wheel.

Posted by: Mac | June 24, 2005 12:36 PM | Report abuse

Karl was absoulutely right, liberals did want to "understand the enemy" because it was immediately apparent to those of us with a semblance of an education that this was a terrorist act which would inevitably be followed by futile military action against nations who were not to blame, in order to save face/gain oil access. Now we are feeling the sting of having been lied into a war with Iraq, and there could be no better time in history to question why someone would want to "understand their enemy" before they cripple and kill soldiers on both sides, as well as throw the U.S. economy into the toilet for years to come, if not forever. Wake up folks, smart does NOT equal wimpy. The greatest generals and armies in history were the ones that had foresight, political and intellectual capacity. We did not even begin to solve the problem that was made evident on 9/11, instead we have made it decidedly worse, and unfortunately, that means it will happen again. We can only hope that it happens after 2008. How can anyone seriously be proud of electing this president and his Rove of Death? You want to hear liberal elitist ranting? I think it's about hateful uneducated people voting for whom they see as the person most similar to themselves. Period.

Posted by: karlsMom | June 24, 2005 12:37 PM | Report abuse

'You go to war with the Army you have,not the one you want.'

That is callous-look how many have been killed or maimed.

Digusting! Where's the outrage?

This is nothing more than an oil war.Who is the beneficiary of this war? The defense contractors.Civilian contractors like truck drivers,are paid $100K,which comes from tax dollars paid by the middle class.Those tax cuts only benefit those making more than $200K a year...you can look it up.

Leave it to Republicans to figure out how to privatize a war!

The troops are left with broken lives.

Posted by: mgottlieb | June 24, 2005 12:37 PM | Report abuse

Can god bless other countries or just america? it seems like we want to have the monopoly on him. Never understood that.

Posted by: parithed | June 24, 2005 12:37 PM | Report abuse

After reading Rove's complete interview, please explain, using the whole and not the excerpts, what he said that was fallacious.

Anyone?

Posted by: blackdude | June 24, 2005 12:37 PM | Report abuse

Father Tom -- let me just throw this out there. How much of the Bill of Rights are you willing to toss into the trash just so President Bush can continue his little misadventure?

Posted by: The Anti-Kelly | June 24, 2005 12:38 PM | Report abuse

Typical Rove move. When you are out of answers, villify your opponent.

Easier than defending your own position when you have no defense.

It works for Rush Limbaugh, and it captivates the uninformed.

The White House must feel desperate. They are on the ropes.

Posted by: Eileen | June 24, 2005 12:39 PM | Report abuse

Stalinists got one thing right ... the Purge! If the Dems ever get back into office, sending a few million idiots ... er, Republicans ... to "Siberia" might prevent them from driving the ship of state into a leeward shore AGAIN...

Posted by: Old Joe | June 24, 2005 12:40 PM | Report abuse

Blackdude-- if you read the entire speech and do not know why people are outraged, then no one here will be able to explain it to your satisfaction.

But just in case -- he said (paraphrasing) that Conservatives want to "kill" evil while Liberals want to sing folk songs.

Posted by: The Anti-Kelly | June 24, 2005 12:41 PM | Report abuse

This is getting ridiculous. You're all attacking each other over things like spell check. In a perfect world there would be no typos and no bi-partisan politics, but this isn't a perfect world so make the best of what you've got and stop hating each other for typing "attach" instead of "attack." Grow up.

Posted by: Sara | June 24, 2005 12:41 PM | Report abuse

To the Anit-Kelly.

God wrote the Bible is clear. I don't know if he used a pen or what, but it doesn't matter because his word is there. He probably did use a pen or some sort of writing instrument. I think you are rude about the Bill of rights which I would never use to wipe anything. I only use sanitary objects not that is any of your business.

Posted by: Father Tom | June 24, 2005 12:41 PM | Report abuse

BUSH WON, SO ONCE AND FOR ALL......GET OVER IT, OK????


GEEEEEZ.....CAN YOU MORONIC LIBERALS GET A HINT?

Posted by: kelly | June 24, 2005 12:42 PM | Report abuse

Father Tom is a bit confused. Democracy and dicourse go hand-in-hand. It's not tearing down America - it's asking for a better America! Is that not possible or a righteous goal?? Good / Evil; Black/White; Moral/ Amoral??? Nothing is that simple. Many Anmericans could do well visiting much of the world they purport to be experts on. How many of you have even been to the Middle East??? Any clue about their multiple cultures? There is as much difference between Saudi and Iraqi citizens as there is between Americans and Mexicans. Not a good analogy, but this world is a very diverse place. Do you really want democracy in Saudi today??? Well then be prepared for a very fundamentalist society - way more than now. And why do you think Bush isn't giving Pakistan a hard time, which, up until a few years ago did practice democracy? Even had a woman in charge. Now we have a military dictator in charge who....oh wait, who supports Bush and his agenda. Nothing in this world is as simple as Father Tom believes it is.

Posted by: americansfor truth | June 24, 2005 12:42 PM | Report abuse

speak out now, and vote when it's your time.

a freely elected administration is just a reflection of the people that put it there. it's tough love--and we're ALL as guilty as we are innocent.

Posted by: nunatak | June 24, 2005 12:42 PM | Report abuse

Ever notice that every time Bush/Chaney mention that the Iraqi insurgency is in its last throes or that we're winning the war the number of US soldiers killed in Iraq goes up. What a hypocrite!!

Posted by: Kevin | June 24, 2005 12:42 PM | Report abuse

Ã…nd to all those who claim to be Christian while supporting this immoral administration:

Who would Jesus kill? Would he abandon the poor? Would he abandon every principal to gain more power?

Not all Christians support this power-hungry administration whose behavior represents everything Christ condemned.

Posted by: Eileen | June 24, 2005 12:42 PM | Report abuse

Anyone pulling guard duty in Gitmo who abuses people should be compared to as SOMETHING bad, because its wrong. I can say that as someone who has worked in a max sec prison -I never once abused an inmate-even though God knows they test a persons patience. BIG DIFFERENCE was the inmates I guarded had actually been TRIED AND CONVICTED. The Gimto detainees had NOTHING-no way to even prove factual innocence. Is THIS the American way? If so, I'll pass. I'll take the Constitution over this kind of "rule of law" any day. I say that as someone coming from a military family. Shame on you for condoning this, America.
People are waking up-the Republicans know one party rule forever really might not be good for America. Duh. Get the facts-
http://prissypatriot.blogspot.com

Posted by: Prissy | June 24, 2005 12:42 PM | Report abuse

Six more U.S. troops dead.

Those of you who think this is a good thing, go to Iraq and volunteer for the front line.

The rest of you: stop bickering about who's to blame for what and put your superior minds together and figure out how to end this thing.

Please.

Posted by: jeff | June 24, 2005 12:43 PM | Report abuse

Every time Kelly posts "BW-GOI" another brain cell dies.

And Father Tom is putting us on. Please, God, let him be putting us on!

Posted by: The Anti-Kelly | June 24, 2005 12:44 PM | Report abuse

25,000 dead at Iwo Jima. Where was the outrage then??

Posted by: redstater | June 24, 2005 12:44 PM | Report abuse

Rove & Co. Taking over.

The more people the 'Cons' piss off, the bigger a backlash they'll be facing in the future. I've had some friends tell me about being scared of Pax-Republicana. People saying that the Democrats controlled government with an Iron fist in the Post WWII era, and now it's the Republicans turn.

Republican slanted, yes. Republican Dominated no. Democrats did not control both houses of congress and the presidency for over 50 years. Something about (Ike), Nixon, Reagan, and Bush Senior seems to kill that idea. The Republicans had to change their methods, style, and message many times before becoming 'Conservatives'. Democrats may need to change their message to battle a 'Neo-Conservative' America. In the end, these new alliances will stop the wholesale rollback of liberties estabished by our Mothers & Fathers. The best place to start is inside their playbook.

Don't get mad.........get even.

Posted by: Backspan | June 24, 2005 12:44 PM | Report abuse

Every time public opinion goes against Bush, we get another little announcement about terrorism that scares people.

Watch for it.

He got elected on fear, and fear is all he has on his side.

Bush is the real enemy.

Posted by: Eileen | June 24, 2005 12:44 PM | Report abuse

Jeff -- How to end this thing?

BRING OUR TROOPS HOME!!! RIGHT NOW!!! THIS INSTANT!!!

Was that simple enough?

Posted by: The Anti-Kelly | June 24, 2005 12:45 PM | Report abuse

Hey Father Tom what about "blessed are the peacemakers"? Where does that fit into bush's war plan?

Posted by: parithed | June 24, 2005 12:46 PM | Report abuse

Every time a liberal speaks, God kills a kitten.

Posted by: xiangdao | June 24, 2005 12:46 PM | Report abuse

Father Tom, you remind me of an old Fugs song...."Kill for Peace"....

Posted by: americans for truth | June 24, 2005 12:46 PM | Report abuse

TO ANTIKELLY:

HITLER BELONGED TO THE NATIONAL-SOCIALIST PARTY (SEE THE CONNECTION BETWEEN LIBERALS AND SOCIALISM THERE). GET A LIFE, BECOME A REPUBLICAN AND JOIN THE MILLIONS OF HAPPY AMERICANS (THE MAJORITY) WHO LIKEWISE DO..

Posted by: KELLY | June 24, 2005 12:47 PM | Report abuse

I see a lot of comments out there about Democrats weakening America by coddling terrorists and condemning torture and inhuman practices at institutions like Gitmo. In response I would say that torturing and abusing detainees, though they may be and probably are the lowest form of human existence, should be denounced loudly and strongly so that we can preserve the greatest weapon that we have against terrorism and tyranny...our stature in the world as the leader of human rights and freedom. The Bush admininstration likes to say "Freedom is on the march". That is all well and good but will countries really follow us as the leader in that parade if they see us as abusers of human rights and freedom? By the way, it is not just Democrats who are speaking out against Gitmo and Abu Ghraib. Republicans are also (correctly) calling for change. And despite attempts by the administration to discredit Amnesty International, the world does hold that organization in high regard and is hearing loudly its reports on our abuses.

Posted by: ThinkAboutIt | June 24, 2005 12:47 PM | Report abuse

I 100% agree...what's disappointing is that the Democrats took the bait. The old adage is "Fool me once, shame on me..."...but it seems that the minority party is content to be fooled into a meaningless media war dozens of times. While they fight Rove for communications legitimacy (a fight they will surely never win, and be lucky to draw), the GOP will outflank them on policy.

Posted by: Patrick | June 24, 2005 12:47 PM | Report abuse

Death has a tendency to encourage a depressing view of war.
~Donald Rumsfeld

Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president or any other public official...
~Theodore Roosevelt

We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. When the loyal opposition dies, I think the soul of America dies with it.
~Edward R. Murrow

Posted by: canuck | June 24, 2005 12:47 PM | Report abuse

It's pretty clear that the left is trying everything it can to undermine the war for political gain.

Gitmo is nothing like the nazi death camps, the soviet gulag, etc. to compare them is ridiculous. And I'm glad someone from the right is actually speaking out against the left and calling them out for who they really are.

By the way, Howard Dean is the greatest. I wish he'd say more because every time he opens his mouth more and more average Americans begin to understand how out of touch with reality the left in this country is.

Posted by: JoeAmerican | June 24, 2005 12:47 PM | Report abuse

What I'm really confused about is why all the energy expressed in all these comments isn't directed at actively, in whatever way, changing what is going on in America today? The comments sound frustrated, angry, and helpless.

Almost everyone says how bad it is, or is going to get; or talks about the 1700+ dead, the 20,000+ wounded, and the more than 100,000 "collateral damage" civilians; about apologies/no apologies; candour/no candour; republicans and/or democrats --- who really gives a heck if all these talkers aren't ACTIVELY talking ABOUT doing something specific or actually doing something to change this? Like Bush and Rove, talk is usefully distracting and it's cheap.

The truth is that almost all of your elected or not reps aren't doing a thing (Rep. Conyers aside, for example). They aren't, from the comments, even representing your views, let alone listening to you and your arguments. Your gripes don't change a thing - you elected these folks, special interests (corporate) own almost all of them, and mostly (in this column) you only talk ??!! Maybe that's why the Insane Clown Posse (Bush, Cheney, Rumsey, Wolfowitz, Rice, et al) ride as they will and desire.

From an overseas observer (and great admirer of Americans but not of American government).

Posted by: Kyle Manjaro | June 24, 2005 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Father Tom,

It seems you support Bush blindly simply because he was elected (ya know, Hitler was also elected...).

To help open you eyes please understand that you are supporting the following:

-A war against a country that did not threaten or attack the USA.

-The suppression of information about the costs of Bush's medicare plan from the Congress that needed to considered it.

-The shifting of wealth from the poor to the rich through Bush's tax policies.

-The supression of information needed by Congress to consider a UN ambassador's approval to serve.

-The administration's retaliation against a CIA operative whose husband happened to have proof discounting the lie Bush was saying about Iraq's attempt to acquire uranium.

Father Tom, I believe its ok to blindly believe in God, or Jesus, or Ala, or Krishna, or whatever diety you like, but blind faith in any person who has been given the power of the president of the USA is unAmerican.

Posted by: Jim Middleroader | June 24, 2005 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Anti-Kelly, I would not call the President an adventurer. Or the Buill of Rights something to throw in the trash. (I beklieve in reccycling too,because it is good for God's earth.) An adventure is something you do on a journey. The President lives in Washington D.C. and has to take car of a large home as well as lead the free world. That takes a LOT of work. And he needs ourt support -- not attaching him.'

Kelly, thank you for making sense about how spelling is not as important as winning a race to be the President. I agree. The important thing to remember is that if you believe in American and God's word then it doesn't matter about the Bill of Rights and stuff so much. Freedom and Jesus's love are what's important. Thank you for standing up in what you believe is the Truth.

Posted by: Father Tom | June 24, 2005 12:49 PM | Report abuse

Karl Rove's comments highlight the anti-capitalist policies of the national socialist Bush White House.

Posted by: Neil | June 24, 2005 12:49 PM | Report abuse

To all of you who continue to bitch, moan and complain about "the politicians", SHUT UP! Did you vote? We, the people, elected these polititians. If you don't like what they say or do, vote for someone new. Don't like Rep. or Dem. choices, vote independant, ask for a write in ballot. Put your own name down, ask your friends to vote for you, etc.
As to "apologies", they should cease! Don't apologize for anyhting you say. If you beleive it and other people are offended by it, well that's just the right to be free. You gotta listen to other people as well as they do you.
As far as troops being in Iraq, I don't think they should be there. I still support my brothers and sisters who are there. We should bring them home! The "freedom fighters" are killing more of their own people than we ever have or will. Bring our troops home, or just take over the whole damn country!
I have a unique theory about why the Mid-east people hate Americans so much. Because if we want something, like a loaf of bread, we can drive our SUV down to Wal-mart and pay 59 cents for a loaf of white, wheat, rye, etc. In the Mid-East they have to go stand in line for 3 days and spend a weeks salary to do the same thing. It is pure and simple jealousy. I see a simple solution, bomb Iraq, pave the whole country and build the biggest Super Center Wal-Mart the world has ever seen.
God bless America! If you don't like it, LEAVE!

Posted by: TN Dave | June 24, 2005 12:49 PM | Report abuse

Arguing with Kelly is like mud wrestling with a pig. You can't win, and the pig likes it.

But just in case he still has a working brain cell -- there was nothing even remotely liberal about Hitler's policies. He called his party National Socialist because it sounded good to the disaffected German citizenry of the time. It had nothing to do with socialism. In fact, Hitler hated the Communists with nearly the same passion as he hated Jews.

Join the majority? Seems the "majority" thinks your president is doing a crappy job. So I'm already IN the majority.

Posted by: The Anti-Kelly | June 24, 2005 12:50 PM | Report abuse

To both sides of this discussion. Resorting to personal attacks and name calling means you have no real argument. Stick to the point.

Posted by: notpersonal | June 24, 2005 12:50 PM | Report abuse

"Every time a liberal speaks, God kills a kitten." Come on, try and be original. We all got the email which you plagiarized this from.

Posted by: Xiangdao be original | June 24, 2005 12:50 PM | Report abuse

great post kyle.

Posted by: parithed | June 24, 2005 12:51 PM | Report abuse

Kelly is a very good student of the Repu-thugs current strategy. Repeat something stupid enough times and it will stick. Jeez, do you have anything else to say but 'we won...you lost' pathetic twat.

Posted by: kellyisatwat | June 24, 2005 12:52 PM | Report abuse

http://www.counterbias.com/181.html

Posted by: me myself and your wife | June 24, 2005 12:53 PM | Report abuse

Hey Kelly, saying Bush "won" is pretty dubious. He shouldn't have been in the office at all if you really want to split hairs. His first go round was stolen beyond argument. The 04 election may well have been stolen in Ohio as well.
But really, either way, if we don't agree with the way the president is running the country we get to say so, and you don't have to like it. How does one get over the unceremonial plundering of our liberties? Do the families of those who have died in Iraq need to get over it too? Hmmm...Blog forums are the home of verbal sparring, perhaps you may want to get over that and enjoy your day.

Posted by: Blicero | June 24, 2005 12:55 PM | Report abuse

>>>Do you people realise that the ideology of Al Qaeda is to create a planet, yes, an entire planet into an Islamic state<<

Posted by: Faith | June 24, 2005 12:56 PM | Report abuse

Gor, you people are morons.

Posted by: Scott | June 24, 2005 12:56 PM | Report abuse

Prissy, POWs don't get trials. You are applying civil rules to military operations.

Ask American servicemen who were POWS in WWII or Korea, or Vietnam if they think the POWs at Gitmo are being mistreated. Then compare and contrast their experiences.

Unrelated: Nunatak made a good point. "We the People", means just that. We are all responsible for our government because WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT. People from foreign lands who say "We love the American people but hate your government" do not understand the founding principals of this country. We may not like our current presidential administration either, but we have to accept responsibility for it.

Posted by: Mac | June 24, 2005 12:57 PM | Report abuse

you are judged by those with whom you choose to associate. Let's see: Karl Rove, Donald Rumsfeld, Jack Abramoff, Dick Cheney, Tom DeLay, etc. these people are evil, lying, bastards. A big thank you should go out to the 51% of those who voted for GWB. Way to go. little side not on rush limbaugh for all you ignorant right wingers; he is a drug using hypocrite. when he wants your opinion he'll give it to you. why do you think he never has guests?

Posted by: notafanofbush | June 24, 2005 12:57 PM | Report abuse

"The important thing to remember is that if you believe in American and God's word then it doesn't matter about the Bill of Rights and stuff so much. Freedom and Jesus's love are what's important. Thank you for standing up in what you believe is the Truth."

So apparently Father Tom does not include those Americans of us who are Hindu,
Budist, atheist, or many of the other religions and sects who don't believe that the only truth is the way you interpret it. And not need the Bill of Rights??? Do you realize how amazing America is for separating religion from the government??? Have you ever lived in a country like Saudi Arabia where they would take your bible away from you when you enter the country??? (I have) I am not a religious sort, but I would totally protect anyone's right to believe as they wish - just as long as they don't believe I SHOULD HAVE TO FOLLOOW IN HIS FOOTSTEPS! That IS the American way.

Posted by: americansfor truth | June 24, 2005 12:58 PM | Report abuse

As usual, you liberals are all the same. All you can do is either have all of your favorite liberal congress people say something stupid or dumb and you will wholeheartedly support them. But let one, and mean only one, conservative tell it like it is and we are in Chicken Little land.

Posted by: Jim Ball | June 24, 2005 12:59 PM | Report abuse

JESUS WEILDS A BRIGHT AND FALMING SWORD
AND WHEN HE IS DONE WITH THE TERRORSISTS
HE WILL COME FORTHE LIEBERALS
FOR THEY ARE NOT RIGHTEOUS
YEA VERILY
SURE HE SAID THAT THING ABOUT THE OETHER CHEEK
BUT THEIR COMES ATIME FOR ACTION
AND IT IS NOW

Posted by: johnamrk | June 24, 2005 12:59 PM | Report abuse

Mac -- if the argument is that our torture isn't as bad as their torture, we've already lost. They win. They dragged us down to their level. It's over.

Posted by: The Anti-Kelly | June 24, 2005 12:59 PM | Report abuse

democrat - republican

two sphincters on the same old dog

Posted by: chaos | June 24, 2005 1:00 PM | Report abuse

Sombedody said something like I was joking. I am not. Let me be clear.

The Bill of Rights is a great book that will always be remebered as one of the most important things man has created.

But it is not the same as the Bible, which is different.

I know the world has many beliefes and systems but that means that man has fallen far from the Tree of KNowledge (the way than an apple can sometimes fall on the ground and roll a far way away from the tree).

Our Presidnet loves Jesus. That much is clear. Gogin against him is like going aginst Jesus. This is provable through simple logic. Therefore, if you help the terrorists you are not on Jesus's side.

Which side do you want to be on?

Posted by: Father Tom | June 24, 2005 1:01 PM | Report abuse

Lib'-er-al: One who does not accept as Absolute Truth each and every word uttered by Rush (or W, Dick, Rummy, Paul, Tom, etc., etc., etc.)

Posted by: Joe | June 24, 2005 1:01 PM | Report abuse

Odd. I see the occasional "Jesus" in the causalty lists from Iraq... but none of them has the last name "Christ."

A time for action? In Iraq? Why?

Posted by: The Anti-Kelly | June 24, 2005 1:01 PM | Report abuse

Xiangdao be original: how 'bout this one?

All your base are belong to us.

Posted by: xiangdao | June 24, 2005 1:02 PM | Report abuse


Father Tom,

Get your head out of your ass, learn to think for yourself and please, do try not to choke on your rhetoric; it's bound to get messy.

As a Republican I find your position uneducated, corrosive, and so incredibly sodden with the fear, as to be physically offensive.

A last comment:

It is our duty as American citizens to question those in power. The Constitution of the United States ensures our voice and our ability to tear down the existing government if that is our collective wish. But we have these tools only if we as a people ensure those founding rules, found within both the Constitution and Bill of Rights are protected, supported and not destroyed by limiting provisions added (like the Patriot Act) in times of fear and explotive circumstances.

Fight for what is in the best interests of all, fight for your voice, fight for your right to pursue Liberty, Truth and the pursuit of Happiness. Fight for your future, fight for yourself, fight for the greater good, fight for the baby in the arms of the woman on the bus, fight for the America we have always believed in, dreamt of and have seen glimpses of through the smoke.

Peace Up.

Posted by: Commonsense | June 24, 2005 1:02 PM | Report abuse

Karl is trying another "Swift Boat" and most people are falling for it. You know. that's why the fat guy get paid the bug bucks. But, use your head: this bait and switch has happened so many times!
One way to get a guy to not talk is to mess with his religion's book. One way to lose a war is attack the symptoms and leave the root cause in place. Terrorists or insurgents or whatever you want to call them are financed and trained in Saudi, Syria and Pakistan. Pull out our troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan. For every rock they throw at our installations, go after Pakistan, Saudi and Syria in earnest. You will have insurgency in it's last throes soon after.
Alas, we are led by idiots (Karl, Chaney and Bush, in that order). Why bother reasoning with them? Their kids are not in the line of fire, ours are. They gain from keeping America divided and on edge. We lose.

Posted by: SaneGuy | June 24, 2005 1:02 PM | Report abuse

>>>Gor, you people are morons.

Posted by: Scott<<<

I guess this includes you.

Posted by: Faith | June 24, 2005 1:03 PM | Report abuse

The National Socialist Party had nothing to do with Socialism.He did that to appeal to the unemployed.Hitler was a capitalist and a fascist.The commandants of the death camps sold what was left of the victims to other German private industries.

Karl Koch,Commandant of Buchenwald was shot for prison graft.

Iwo Jima? That was a war to preserve Western Civilization,not preserve Halliburton. The WMDs story was made from whole cloth,and Americans are being killed and maimed because of it.

BTW,MacArthur's crossing the Yangtze cost 10K American casualties.It was the Chinese soldiers who inflicted those horrific losses. Truman severely punished MacArthur for disobeying the Commander-In-Chief.

Posted by: mgottlieb | June 24, 2005 1:03 PM | Report abuse

Sorry everyone... I am a freaking idiot

To be honest I am actually embarrassed at the Republican Party.

(God, my meds. I have to stop forgetting to take them)

Posted by: KELLY | June 24, 2005 1:03 PM | Report abuse


Father Tom,

Get your head out of your ass, learn to think for yourself and please, do try not to choke on your rhetoric; it's bound to get messy.

As a Republican I find your position uneducated, corrosive, and so incredibly sodden with the fear, as to be physically offensive.

To Kelly: best to simply keep your mouth shut if you can't express yourself without shouting.

A last comment:

It is our duty as American citizens to question those in power. The Constitution of the United States ensures our voice and our ability to tear down the existing government if that is our collective wish. But we have these tools only if we as a people ensure those founding rules, found within both the Constitution and Bill of Rights are protected, supported and not destroyed by limiting provisions added (like the Patriot Act) in times of fear and under explotive circumstances.

Fight for what is in the best interests of all, fight for your voice, fight for your right to pursue Liberty, Truth and the pursuit of Happiness. Fight for your future, fight for yourself, fight for the greater good, fight for the baby in the arms of the woman on the bus, fight for the America we have always believed in, dreamt of and have seen glimpses of through the smoke.

Peace Up.

Posted by: Commonsense | June 24, 2005 1:03 PM | Report abuse

Middleroader:

Father Tom, I believe its ok to blindly believe in God, or Jesus, or Ala, or Krishna, or whatever diety you like, but blind faith in any person who has been given the power of the president of the USA is unAmerican.

No it is not ok to blindly believe in something. This just gives you Taliban with the bible instead of the Koran. Or people sitting in front of abortion clinics waiting to cap a doctor 'to save life'. The Evil.

As to Father Toms' "God wrote the bible"... *polite cough - Gnosticism - cough*.

Posted by: El Tonno | June 24, 2005 1:04 PM | Report abuse

Cheney and Rummy said that the insurgency is despirate and in it's final days. Me thinks that sliding poll numbers, a sliding victory in Iraq, a sliding economy and a sliding health care system (just to mention a few of the many issues that are sliding down hill in this country) makes this lame duck White House despirate, and they will continue to slide until their final days. Rove can bark all he wants! The truth will come out about this administration. America, the truth hurts, and there is only so long that one can hide the truth.

Posted by: Marco | June 24, 2005 1:04 PM | Report abuse

WASP-Maybe I can help you move to Canada earlier. You along with the rest of the right wing lug nuts that are destroying our life, liberty and pursuits of happiness. Let's make sure we get you a one way ticket.

Posted by: MDubya | June 24, 2005 1:04 PM | Report abuse

Father Tom -- you are kidding, right? Please say you are kidding and that you don't mean "Going against Bush means going against Jesus." Please? Please???

You're making me want to cry!

Posted by: The Anti-Kelly | June 24, 2005 1:04 PM | Report abuse

when will wasp, jw, and father tom enlist?

i'm waiting...

Posted by: dave | June 24, 2005 1:04 PM | Report abuse

Well said TN Dave. Thats the best one I have heard. I love it!!! And to all of you getting into religious discussions, get the hell off the web and go bow to your God you idiots?? I love this country and its freedoms because I can say that God is dead and I don't have to be beheaded for that. Enjoy your freedom of speech and the english you are using. Oh, and don't forget to thank the troops that are out keeping things this way for you.

Posted by: JP | June 24, 2005 1:05 PM | Report abuse

Regarding the "outrage" expressed by the likes of "Hillary" and "Schumer" I remind them that it was one of their own, Harry Truman, who said "I didn't give them hell, I just told the truth and they thought it was hell".
I will give the lefties credit. The only way they can even exist today is because thirty years of left wing deterioration in education in the USA has dumbed down the general populace to the point where their lunacy does not immediately appear.
I am still waiting for the likes of Durbin, and Dean and Pelosi (not to mention the Michael Moore cadre) to "tone it down." At least the Republicans are not saying things that Al Jazeera can hype to those who practice the "religion of peace".

Posted by: BGC from a RED state (NY) | June 24, 2005 1:05 PM | Report abuse

This bickering needs to end, the real problem with the US right now is our economy are you aware that China is about to purchase our 3rd Largest Oil Company? Hostile Take-over? Our stock market has been stagnent for 5 years, let's focus our attention off the "He Said She Said" and stand up to really matters in the USA and that is a Strong Economy.

Does the Bush Administration have any agenda to the state of our economy?

Posted by: I wish somebody would stand up to our BRUTAL economy | June 24, 2005 1:06 PM | Report abuse

Speak softly and wield a "falming sword". Hey Father Tom, put me on whatever side you aren't on. Geez.

Posted by: blicero | June 24, 2005 1:06 PM | Report abuse

Regarding the "outrage" expressed by the likes of "Hillary" and "Schumer" I remind them that it was one of their own, Harry Truman, who said "I didn't give them hell, I just told the truth and they thought it was hell".
I will give the lefties credit. The only way they can even exist today is because thirty years of left wing deterioration in education in the USA has dumbed down the general populace to the point where their lunacy does not immediately appear.
I am still waiting for the likes of Durbin, and Dean and Pelosi (not to mention the Michael Moore cadre) to "tone it down." At least the Republicans are not saying things that Al Jazeera can hype to those who practice the "religion of peace".

Posted by: BGC from a RED state (NY) | June 24, 2005 1:06 PM | Report abuse

hahah I just stumbled upon this while looking through google news and it's keeping me enterntained at work

great discussion guys

i find it funny though that the best response alot of right-wingers can come up with is name-calling, i.e. "surrender monkeys"

Posted by: Denis | June 24, 2005 1:06 PM | Report abuse

>>Mac -- if the argument is that our torture isn't as bad as their torture, we've already lost. They win. They dragged us down to their level. It's over.<<

The Geneva Convention did a fair job of describing how POWs should be treated. We are not in violation as far I know. If I'm wrong, then I'll re-evaluate my position. However, the violations will have to be substantiated by more than simple wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Posted by: Mac | June 24, 2005 1:06 PM | Report abuse

I'm done. Father Tom is a flake and a symptom of what is wrong with the religious right. "I am right and the rest of the whole world (or americans who dissagree with me) are wrong!" "I have the only true Religion" Well guess what, the Bible has been cannonized and edited and voted on and revised to the nth degree. Not even religious scholars dissagree with that. If you believe it is
truly God's only word than you have been duped as much as much as those who use Bush, God and Jesus in the same sentence. Ooops! That was you!!! Oh and don't forget when you celebrate Easter you are celebrating an old Pagan holiday related to the rising of the sun god (or some other similar foolishness). Look it up!

Posted by: americansfortruth | June 24, 2005 1:07 PM | Report abuse

Apology?!?! Dick "the turban" Durbin didn't apologize. He said he was sorry that his words hurt someone... Ok.. I'll run you over with my car and I'll get out of it by saying, "I'm sorry the tire of my car crushed your head" geez... don't be such a bunch of pansies!!! Interrogation is a tough job... if a detainee at gitmo is subjected to loud music and cold rooms (as the FBI has reported) saves 1 life, it's well worth it. All the accusations have come from a stance of ignorance because NO ONE but the individuals at Gitmo knows what's going on at Gitmo. Until we know what's happening there, comments comparing the guards at Gitmo to Natzies and are way out of line. As too some of the comments coming from the Right... It seems to me that both sizes are talking out of their rectums. The left has gone too far left & the right has gone too far right.
But if you want to see a place that is completely controlled by democrats, go live in Massachusetts for a few years... What a friggin nightmare!

Posted by: Bill in NH | June 24, 2005 1:07 PM | Report abuse

AMAZING! Rove mentions LIBERALS and "Moveon.org" by name, and all you machine democrats get up in arms. How typical. Read your own posts here, it realy sounds like you're hoping for a terrorist victory n Iraq if it hurts Bush.

WHAT, many of you are saying that. So what is your problem with Rove's statments, they seem to refelct most of you here on the left.

Posted by: Don McD | June 24, 2005 1:08 PM | Report abuse

Rove only spoke the truth. Ted Kennedy, Chucky Schummer, Boxer, Durbin are triators!!!!!!!

Posted by: Jasinacus | June 24, 2005 1:08 PM | Report abuse

Bravo to Rove for telling it like it is. Howard Dean, Richard Durbin, Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi and the others have undermined the President at a time of war and made themselves look like horses behinds. Then again, this is common for the left.

Posted by: Conservative | June 24, 2005 1:08 PM | Report abuse


Don't Cry - Laugh at the poor bastard.

And go get some icecream - its Friday -you deserve it.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 24, 2005 1:09 PM | Report abuse

A family therapist once told us that the conservatives were the first ones in line at the abortion clinic when their daughters are pregnant. He should know, they are his clients and this is a frequent topic. While I'm asking, how many of you people truly do what jesus would do? How many of you have adopted a child of color or a child with a disability? How many of you have tried in vitro fertilization where many fertilized eggs(a life by your standards) are rejected by the uterine wall. those viable lives are going down the toilet. every fertilized egg that doesn't take is grounds for murder by your standards. I am a moderate and I believe in individual rights above all things. Do not impose your values on others and judge not, lest ye be judged.

Posted by: notafanofbush | June 24, 2005 1:09 PM | Report abuse

Americans should not question the President because he is leading the fight on War on Terror. He is trying the best he can!

Posted by: CodBlessAmerica | June 24, 2005 1:10 PM | Report abuse

I agree with whoever said that the were defending their ideoliogy and freedom to live the life that they wanted to live in a free America. That person (God Bless Him) has a good point. We believe in a free soceity where people can think and live as they like. Othret society's are not as free. For example, I know for a fact that if you are dirving a car in France, there are places where you have give the right of way to walkers. Not true in this Country (except in some places).

The point is that Our soldiers have a right to attack terrorists who wish to take away our freedom, even if that means defending our right to not stop for a walker. (There are consequences, however, if you hurt someone! Don't forget the Ten Commandments.)

American is a place where I can be free to choose how I wish to live. Are you going to lose that to terrorists? The Democrats can't seem to decide. The Republicans know which side they are on and want to preserve their freedoms, whether that means how to drive, or other choices we all make.

God gave us the freedom to choose. A terrorist cannot take it away. I believe in my heart that the President is truly commited to fight against the terrorists. Are you?

Posted by: Father Tom | June 24, 2005 1:10 PM | Report abuse

Good for you, "Commonsense". I do believe in the America I love. I want it back whether in Republican or Democratic hands. I don't really care which as long as "America's" Constitutional values are upheld.

Posted by: americansfortruth | June 24, 2005 1:11 PM | Report abuse

I believe your family therapist just as much as I believe John Kerry really had a plan.

Your comments about adoption and invitro are just plane stupid.

Posted by: Conservative | June 24, 2005 1:12 PM | Report abuse

The remarks by Karl Rove are typical of the members of the administration who never put on a uniform (or when they did it was to fly obsolete planes for a weekend a month). I'm sure that like Dick Cheney, they had better things to do with their time. As a retired Army Ranger, I'm deeply offended by these people and their despicable ideology. This the same nonsense that was force fed to the public during the Vietnam War. It is time for the American public to show how patriotic they truly are and stage a new revolution to restore the United States to the ideals that we are obliged to uphold.

Oh and Karl, you do not received the Order of the Purple Heart for sticking your foot in your mouth. SHUT UP!!!!! (For the record, I have 2 Purple Hearts which I'm proud of). The same goes for Hannity, Limbaugh, Coulter and those other right wing spoiled brat mouthpieces who have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

D.R.
RANGERS LEAD THE WAY!

Posted by: AngryVietVet | June 24, 2005 1:12 PM | Report abuse

So, let me get this straight...no Democrats or liberals are fighting in Afghanistan or Iraq? You mean, there aren't any Democrats or liberals in the US Military? Or that no Democrats or Liberals died in the attacks of September 11? Karl Rove...puhlease...

1. Downing Street Memo
2. Bush's poll numbers at their lowest.
3. Only 27% of Americans support his Social Security privatization plan.
4. More than half of Americans now think that going to Iraq was a mistake.
5. The VA announced that they're short $1 billion.

Those of you have proudly stick a "Support the troops bumper sticker" on your car, do you know how many troops have come back amputated, severely disfigured, or with permanent health problems? What have you done to "support the troops"? Lets not forget that every single Republican in the Senate, except for Arlen Spector, voted against the Murray Amendment which would have increased funding to the VA by over $1 billion. Republicans supporting the troops? Prove it.

If I recall, Rove never fought for this country or risked his life fighting for our freedoms. In fact, more Democrats in Congress have served in the military than Republicans.

This is just getting absolutely ridiculous. What good has this administration done for America?

Posted by: I'm an American! | June 24, 2005 1:13 PM | Report abuse

Dear Conservative,

When has Rove EVER told it"like it" is?

I mean from a reality perspective your as funny as Rev Tom

Posted by: Anonymous | June 24, 2005 1:14 PM | Report abuse

>>I do believe in the America I love. I want it back whether in Republican or Democratic hands. I don't really care which as long as "America's" Constitutional values are upheld.<<

Good luck with that. We've given up so much since 911 we may never get it back. Now our homes can be taken away by Wal-Mart.

Posted by: Mac | June 24, 2005 1:14 PM | Report abuse

I have more bad news for Republicans and their blind faith: 9/11 happened because we stuck our nose in Kuwait. That was an oil war,and so is this one.

Saddam Hussein is a thug - Idi Amin was FAR worse. We didn't "liberate" Uganda because they don't sit on trillions of gallons of crude.

I will keep saying this: Iraq is an oil war,and the troops are paying for it in advance,with blood.

NO BLOOD FOR OIL!!

Posted by: mgottlieb | June 24, 2005 1:14 PM | Report abuse

If Bush believes so strongly that the war in Iraq is important to all Americans why aren't his nieces and nephews over there fighting it? I see Billy Bush on Entertainment tonight feeding the at the Hollywood trough. He's fighting age. This war is being fought by reservists and people with no options. Ask the military recruiters how many kids they sign up from St. Albans or Philips Exeter.

Posted by: notafanofbush | June 24, 2005 1:15 PM | Report abuse

"when will wasp, jw, and father tom enlist?"

Exactly. And don't forget to add kelly to the list. I'd love to see these war mongers all enlist and help the cause. Recruitement is way down you know, enlist NOW...

Posted by: kellyisatwat | June 24, 2005 1:16 PM | Report abuse

Here is a reality check for you. Can you name a republican congressman or senator who is being used to headline Al Jazeera?

Most Libs do feel exactly the way Karl described. It is a shame.

Posted by: Conservative | June 24, 2005 1:16 PM | Report abuse

To Xiangdao:

I see Dead Kittens!!!...............There's another one!!

Posted by: Cynic | June 24, 2005 1:17 PM | Report abuse

Let's take a poll--how many think Father Tom was putting us on, and how many think he's for real?

Posted by: cabinjohn | June 24, 2005 1:17 PM | Report abuse

Hmmmm, can't decide if "Codblessamerica" is a joke or another typo??

Posted by: americansfortruth | June 24, 2005 1:17 PM | Report abuse

notafanofbush-Why are you here BSing the this site on not over there on the frontlines??

Stupidity!!!

Posted by: JP | June 24, 2005 1:17 PM | Report abuse

All rights rest on the most basic right which seldom gets mentioned - to understand what is really going on, read George Orwell. Our press has lost its integrity. That decays all freedoms, which originate with the freedom to think independently based on objective information.

Posted by: harlock | June 24, 2005 1:18 PM | Report abuse

Hey dave...

"when will wasp, jw, and father tom enlist?
i'm waiting..."

Hmm...that'll happen about, say, 6 years ago. Dumb ass.

Not sure how I get grouped with those two though.

Posted by: jw | June 24, 2005 1:18 PM | Report abuse

If I recall, didn't Al Jeezera constantly play Bush's incredulous remarks "Bring Em On!!!!!!".... yeah, that's not inciting terrorists..

Posted by: I'm an American! | June 24, 2005 1:18 PM | Report abuse

Carl Rove is keeping true to his title: Strategist Extraordinaire! Ah, the good old department of dirty tricks lives on, thanks to Rove! The Democrats have no idea how to behave like the Republicans, for they lack that grip-on-the-throttle approach for control.

Posted by: JES | June 24, 2005 1:19 PM | Report abuse


AVV,
Right on man! You've got it nailed - th enew revolution - it's coming - just REALLY slow picking up steam - it will happen - its a complacency issue, sort of a couch potatoe syndrome for social obligation.

It will happen. The pendulum has already started it's return swing.

Posted by: Commonsense | June 24, 2005 1:19 PM | Report abuse

We stuck our nose in Kuwait? Please.

You are a typical Liberal. Blame America for everything. I guess those poor Kuwati's who were killed, raped, kidnapped or dismembered did not deserve Liberation.

What a dolt.

Posted by: Conservative | June 24, 2005 1:19 PM | Report abuse

Carl Rove is keeping true to his title: Strategist Extraordinaire! Ah, the good old department of dirty tricks lives on, thanks to Rove! The Democrats have no idea how to behave like the Republicans, for they lack that grip-on-the-throttle approach for control.

Posted by: JES | June 24, 2005 1:20 PM | Report abuse

The Democrats have been tripping over themselves this year to shed the liberal label and paint themselves as moderates for the next election.

You have gotta love it, he got all these Democrats to agree together (all at once) that they are all personally offended as the aforementioned liberals. ...Played them like a fiddle if you ask me.

A smarter, honest and moderate minded Dem would have said, "who is Karl talking about, certainly not me?!"

Brilliant!

Posted by: Richeyrich | June 24, 2005 1:22 PM | Report abuse

plane stupid? hmmm... obviously a fan of bush.

Go ask the Italian goverment about their policy on in-vitro. http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2002/jun/02061201.html You moronic conservatives can put another plank in the campaign platform for 2008.

Posted by: notafanofbush | June 24, 2005 1:22 PM | Report abuse

To whoever said that I think I know the truth. You are wrong.

I said that The truth lies in Jesus's word (or the Word of God -- you're pick!). Just because the Billof Rights is a great book does not mean that it is the truth. That is up to God.

I think the problem here is that people are blinding themselve to the real issue which is whether The President should be criticized for doing God's work. Now, don't get me wrong. God is against killing, of that I am sure. But, he does say that if someone takes your eye, then that person must give you his eye to replace it. To me that seems only fair, which is obvious because God is the Great Judge, and therefore must be fair.

Lesson: if a terrorist attacks one of our buildings, then he has to give us one of his buildings. This thing has gotten totally out of control, however. Too many buildings have been lost. That is not the President's fault, however. He has many important things to worry about. Someone should count the buildings and then we can decide.

God Bless America and our President.

Posted by: Father Tom | June 24, 2005 1:23 PM | Report abuse

Once again, Libs look to the norms of another country to set the standard for their own.

Posted by: Conservative | June 24, 2005 1:24 PM | Report abuse

If this type of government bashing and military bashing were to have taken place during WWII, all of us would be speaking German right now. The fanatical wack jobs being held at Guantanamo Bay would cut your heads off in a second. You call what we're doing to the people being held in Guantanamo Bay as abuse. I guess putting panties on someone's head is the equivalant of chopping someone's head off. We need someone like Karl Rove to shut up these lunatic Senators who constantly condemn the military and are basically supporting our enemy.

Posted by: NotAfanOfLiberals | June 24, 2005 1:24 PM | Report abuse

WASP:

In fact, Clinton tried to go after bin Laden and the Republican controlled congress would not let him follow the money and wanted to protect "off-shore tax haven's" becuase in Phil Gramm's opinion the American people deserve to get the lowest possible tax rate wherever they can. Not for nothing but, I don't know any poor or middle class people who have enough money to hide it offshore to avoid paying taxes. In fact, Clinton's hands were tied by the VAST RIGHT WING CONSPIRACY that spent $70 million dollars of taxpayer money to expose that this man had an extramarital affair. Nice work. When the Repugs accused Clinton of trying to distract the American people from his troubles when he wanted to go in after Osama, intelligence officials when the the Hill to discuss the growing problem of Osama bin Laden. The Repugs wanted none of it and said there was no reason they couldn't move forward with the impeachment hearings. It was not Clinton who was not paying attention, it was the Repugs who could not be destracted from trying to distroy a man merely because they despised him. Apparently Repugs make no mistakes and are never wrong...even when they are wrong.

Posted by: bichn | June 24, 2005 1:24 PM | Report abuse

Hmmm....

Didn't the polls indicate last year over and over that most Americans thought Conservative Bush would be tougher on terrorism than Liberal Kerry?

Posted by: trex | June 24, 2005 1:24 PM | Report abuse

Is this Father Tom character for real? Or is he a 3rd grade student? That is exactly what he sounds like-can't think his way out of a wet paper sack.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 24, 2005 1:24 PM | Report abuse

Leave Durbin Alone

Posted by: Rama Patel | June 24, 2005 1:27 PM | Report abuse

Hey Father Tom, I defend your right to not use spell check, but that doesn't make it a good idea.
Here's how it is.
No one, including Republicans folks, gets to get away with saying that people who disagree with them are with the terrorists. I have met all kinds of people with all kinds of ideas about God, Govt, and the "War on Terror", and none of them, not a single one (and this includes straight up Birkenstock wearing, no armpit shaving Liberals), has ever sided with the terrorists or sympathized with them. The Al Queda creeps may have a legitimate beef with our foreign policy, but ultimately they are totally out of their gourds. Saying the US has done deplorable things to move itself through history is unfortunately true. However, it doesn't mean I love terrorism for saying that. I loved it when Chomsky got into the argument with the French guy who couldn't understand the idea of free speech. It means you can speak freely about damn near anything without fear of the man coming down on you. No one has to agree with what you say, but you still have the right to say it. And believe me Father Tom, that right is a good one, and it's also worth fighting for. Rove is free to say whatever he likes too, and so is everyone else in here. That's how it goes. Freedom is ugly business, but it beats the alternative. Let's not find ourselves in it.

Posted by: Blicero | June 24, 2005 1:27 PM | Report abuse

I think its clear that we are all united against terrorism in the strongest terms-
then everything else IS debatable
FYI the Durbin apology quickly followed on the heels of another Democrat from his state, one Richard Daley called him out for using senatese silly/inappropriate hyperbole.
After all Daley's son enlisted a few months back.

Posted by: Lory | June 24, 2005 1:28 PM | Report abuse

I guess only conservatives serve in the U.S. Military? There have been over 50,000 U.S. Medical Evacuations from Iraq, which had nothing to do with 9/11. I guess they were all conservatives. Do our troops take an oath to protect George Bush or an oath to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution from enemies foreign and DOMESTIC? I am neither left or right, a conservative or a liberal. I'm a citizen of the United States In America, which used to be the greatest Nation in the history of the world. Welcome To The 4th Reich, onward to Iran Christian Zionist Soldiers.

Posted by: crusader bunnypants | June 24, 2005 1:28 PM | Report abuse

How come nobody told me that we became Italians?? When the hell did that happen?? Guess that doesn't matter because they are at war in Iraq too......

Posted by: JP | June 24, 2005 1:28 PM | Report abuse

Mac:

> Good luck with that. We've given up so much since 911 we may never get it back. Now our homes can be taken away by Wal-Mart.

Hmm...yeah. And here it's being blamed on liberalism:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/23/AR2005062301420.html

Duh? WUH???

Oh, I have just strayed 20 lightyears from the Rove silliness. No matter..

Posted by: El Tonno | June 24, 2005 1:28 PM | Report abuse

I would like to see all of the summer interns at the Heritage Foundation,sign up for the military.

They talk a good game,but they really are in basic training as drug company lobbyists.

How many are going to die,be maimed or come back psyco cases before we say "enough'? There weren't any weapons - end of discussion.

Posted by: mgottlieb | June 24, 2005 1:28 PM | Report abuse

One correction. I think that when we count buildings, we should not lump houses into the same category as office buildings, which are obviously bigger.

Posted by: Father Tom | June 24, 2005 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Father Tom,
I lived /worked in Saudi Arabia for 25 years. Your statments and diatribes read EXACTLY like those of Islamic Fundamentalists. You may "think" you are right - and that God chose Bush, but there are many in the world who believe the exact opposite - that Bush is the devil. I don't believe either but have learned that those with your blinded beliefs are what is threatening our freedoms, not protecting them! Go ahead and delude yourself, it's obvious that no facts would ever sway you - anymore than for those Islamic fundamentalists.

Posted by: americansfortruth | June 24, 2005 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Hey Greg...eights years of peace and prosperity too much for you?!

Posted by: RC | June 24, 2005 1:32 PM | Report abuse

>>>The Geneva Convention did a fair job of describing how POWs should be treated. We are not in violation as far I know. If I'm wrong, then I'll re-evaluate my position. However, the violations will have to be substantiated by more than simple wailing and gnashing of teeth. - Posted by: Mac | June 24, 2005 01:06 PM <<<<

Mac, read or go and listen to Seymour Hersh (New Yorker Magazine). Hersh broke the Abu Ghraib story (in the States). Remember the day Senators were allowed to take a peek at some of the DVDs and photographs from Abu Ghraib that haven't been made public yet? A number of them came out white, green, and visibly shaken. Now why was that? I have no idea, but Seymour does. He's written and spoken about what's to come (and come out).

I wouldn't worry about anything as staid as the Geneva Convention if I were you, or about the UN or the Red Cross "bitching" about 'torture', or, as you so gently put it, "We are not in violation as far I know." I suggest you get your head out of that dark place it's so into it thinks that's sunshine coming down its way, and practise some wailing and gnashing of teeth because, despite the Pentagon's "heroic" defensive efforts, information is a lot like life, it just wants to be free, and what Seymour and others have written and spoken about, and what some of the senators reputedly saw and heard was us (as in U.S. us) soldiers raping some Iraqi women and children in Abu Ghraib. What creeped them out were not the visuals, but the nerve-scraping whines and the screams. When the DVD gets out or is outed I guess you'll "re-evaluate" your position and, perhaps, even wait for the trials (if any) before you figure it out: what's happening there is happening in our name, in YOUR name, in my name, etc, regardless of how much "evaluation" 'we' have to do.

Posted by: Re-Evaluate | June 24, 2005 1:33 PM | Report abuse

God did not put Bush in the White House. He is there to represent the people of this country (no matter what their religion or political party). If he wants to do God's work he should resign and become a minister. And as far as the eye-for-an-eye comment, OSAMA BIN LADEN IS NOT IN IRAQ!!!!!!!

You will never make me believe that God would want the rich to get richer while the poor get poorer. I will also never believe that he would approve of any kind of discrimination for any reason.

If God had actually put Bush in the White House, he would have been FIRED long ago!!!!

Posted by: bichn | June 24, 2005 1:33 PM | Report abuse

i enjoy each day seeing the liberal left digging themselves into deeper and deeper holes by their actions and words. not only have the dem party been taken over by leftist whackjobs, the dem party has also
lost touch with the vast majority of american people. the dems have no plans of their own, just lame criticism and personal attacks. its no wonder republicans hold the majority now.

Posted by: Paul | June 24, 2005 1:33 PM | Report abuse

I think he was correct. Democrats run around screaming about stuff that puts our own troops in danger. They should keep their mouths shut so that the stupidity of their remarks stops burdening all of our ears, and killing American soldiers.

Posted by: elementskater | June 24, 2005 1:33 PM | Report abuse

if there is only one thing manifestly clear to republicans, democrats and independents alike, it is this simple truth: the political process in the united states is not perfect. however, we all enjoy the freedoms provided by the sacrifice of generations of men and women before us, including the right to express our opinions without fear of government reprisals. people fought and died so we could all have a say in how our government is run. it is sad that most political debate is no longer concerned with finding common ground to serve as a starting point for resolving important issues. we have certainly lost our way from the path envisioned by our founding fathers.

Posted by: Michael | June 24, 2005 1:33 PM | Report abuse

Why does every discussion have to digress into Jesus and abortion? Frankly, those are two subjects at the bottom of my urgency list. This has nothing to do with that. Who cares?

Regarding Rove, yes, his comments were divisive, as were Sen. Reid's comments when he called the president an "idiot." It's tit-for-tat nonsense. But read what Rove said. He said "liberals," not necessarily "Democrats." It's funny that so many Democrats who go through great pains to paint themselves as "moderates" get so offended when someone calls out "liberals."

Plus, Rove's comments were made at a gathering of the New York Conservative Party. Go to any such partisan gathering, on the right or the left, and you'll find enough red meat to make a vegetarian vomit.

Compare this to Sen. Durbin's comments, which were made on the floor of the Senate, and you can see why this "outrage" is a little suspect. Pot, meet kettle.

I'm sorry, but I think this all is a lot of hot air about nothing. Ooh, Rove said something offensive about liberals and Democrats are offended...in other news, the sky's blue and water's wet. Perspective, people. Perspective.

Posted by: PG | June 24, 2005 1:34 PM | Report abuse

If you voted for Bush and support his war, put your "life" where your mouth is: enlist yourself, your kids or your grandkids. What better cannon fodder than young republicans?

Posted by: Bicycle Commuter | June 24, 2005 1:34 PM | Report abuse

Buckeye has completely lost his mind, forget 911 and iraq, oh and the workers comp scandal is some sort of brand new problem those programs have been scammed and abused since the beginning get a grip.ill pass you heart warming thoughts to my family fighting for your worthless existence. please relocate to california or NY thank you.

Posted by: Ohio Matt | June 24, 2005 1:34 PM | Report abuse

I'm MORE than happy to hear someone state what I've been thinking for years. Fact is, I realize that civil war is probally inevitable in the US in coming years. See all you left nuts on the battlefield!

Posted by: Liberals Are Losers | June 24, 2005 1:34 PM | Report abuse

the Italian soldiers I met were there reluctantly at best. as far as my not going to fight, I lost a leg to an IED in 04. you got both of yours?

Posted by: notafanofbush | June 24, 2005 1:35 PM | Report abuse

Durbin alleges that the US is like Hitler's Germany.

We are not Nazi's. This assertion is crystal clear.

Stop depending Durbin. He made a mistake and he has not apologized for saying it.

We are in the midst of stupid intellectuals.

Posted by: Conservative | June 24, 2005 1:37 PM | Report abuse

It is obvious that Father Tom is a committed member of the cwc, christians without christ, and as such cannot be constrained by Jesus' message to mankind. Remember the beautiful verse "Suffer the little children..."? It was the faithful core of the cwc that twisted that message into "Bugger the little children..." Forget Brotherly Love, the Sermon on The Mount and the Ten Commandments. The cwc has replaced them with their own moral concerns: abortion, gay marriage, stem cell research and other social issues.Christ's message for those christians has now become a "yes,but" response to the teachings of the Bible and now, with GWB as their leader, they think that they have the power to act. This is where Father Tom and many other "Christians" seem to be: abortion is wrong but war is OK. Never mind the paradox. Trust me; somewhere in the Bible it says so.

Posted by: Dick Johnson | June 24, 2005 1:38 PM | Report abuse

Please don't this one vote.

"Americans should not question the President because he is leading the fight on War on Terror. He is trying the best he can!
Posted by: CodBlessAmerica | June 24, 2005 01:10 PM"

Posted by: GalvestonIslander | June 24, 2005 1:40 PM | Report abuse

Father Tom and your coterie,like Rove:

Dr.Johnson defined patriotism as "The last refuge of a scoundrel."

Posted by: mgottlieb | June 24, 2005 1:40 PM | Report abuse

BRAVO!! 'I'm an American!' for telling it like it is!!!

Conservatives................

Patriotic words back empty promises.

Why should the Republicans be scared of spending an
extra $1 Billion Dollars to support our troops at home ??

They spend that much money for dental floss in Afghanistan!!!

Oh, right, I forgot. The Rich Americans who got tax cuts can't stand to see our government wih a budget deficit!!!

Now it all makes sense!!!

Posted by: I Love Greenday! | June 24, 2005 1:41 PM | Report abuse

To the person who said that everyone was against the terrorists. I agree. But now people are against The President too. How ccan that be? Example: if I have open my umbrella while the wind is blowing south, I must point it north or the umbrella will fold inside out. Both cannot be going in the same direction or disaster!

Same thing here. Supporting the President and the repbublicns is like holding firmly to your umbrella when it is windy outside. Make sure you point toward the wind, though, or else! Seems to me that the Democrats and liberals want to turn away from the wind! This doesnt make sense. for one you will get very wet from the rain.

Lesson: Two things that are going against each other means that one thing must win out. I believe that if we support our President, then we will win.

Posted by: Father Tom | June 24, 2005 1:41 PM | Report abuse

Please don't let this one vote.

"Americans should not question the President because he is leading the fight on War on Terror. He is trying the best he can!
Posted by: CodBlessAmerica | June 24, 2005 01:10 PM"

Posted by: GalvestonIslander | June 24, 2005 1:42 PM | Report abuse

Good Lord. I just read every single post made to this thread, and I can't believe how far we've all gone off the rails as a country. What the hell happened? George W. Bush capitalized on a horrifying tragedy in order to accomplish things the far right has dreamed of for decades. The entire ship of state is off course. He's dying to dismantle our extremely paltry social safety net, and with such a stranglehold on things, he'll probably get his way again. Has anyone ever told him "no" in his life?

But what's dominating the news? Name-calling silliness. George W. Bush and his ideological cronies are destroying the country. Look at yourselves in the mirror and ask honestly, are you really better off now than you were in 2000? I'm not. My friends and I, the college class of 2002, were the first class of new graduates to have to contend with the George W. Bush war economy. It's not pretty. Lots of us still live with our parents because we can't find work that pays enough for us to get our own places. We did everything right. We went to school, got our degrees, helped our neighbors, and our reward is all of this. It's so demoralizing. It's enough to make you want to throw yourself off a bridge, and that's not exaggeration.

God help this country and its citizens. Somehow, we'll get through this, but who knows what we'll have when it's over? All you neo-cons out there, who wouldn't know patriotism if it bit you on the nose, wake up. You're destroying your own futures. 2008 can't come soon enough, unless they change the Constitution to keep Bush in office forever. These days, nothing surprises me.

Posted by: tired and sad | June 24, 2005 1:42 PM | Report abuse

LOL...
Clinton tried to go after Bin Ladin?? Clinton pi$$ed down his leg at the thought of stirring that pot, even after it was confirmed that OBL was involved in the twin towers attack of '93! Oh, and BTW, YES, I am a conservative, and YES, I am a retired Gulf War Veteran, and YES, I think we should have kicked Saddam's A$$ the first time we were there and then none of this would be an issue.

The U.N. sucks, and we need to kick them out of NY and send them to Paris for there new home. Then the corruption can at least be accomplished without running up such a big long distance bill.

Posted by: Amer-I-Can | June 24, 2005 1:42 PM | Report abuse

I stand corrected notafanofbush. My apologies. I have the upmost respect for this country's soldiers. Yes I have both legs. But I have had 4 knee surgeries and an an ankle surgery since I got ran over by a left lib after an argument at the bar. I have talked to military personnel and now that my leg cannot be relied on and I have been genetically blessed with blindness, I can't go fight other than sitting in an office. But I am sorry and I thank you.

Posted by: JP | June 24, 2005 1:42 PM | Report abuse

I find it absolutely amazing that everyone is so focused on how Durbin's comments are supposedly hurting our men and women in uniform -- as if the acts of torture and homicide (yes, the Pentagon estimates either 26 or 27 detainees have died in custody as the result of homicide) are somehow lost on the rest of the world. They're not. In trying to keep tabs on my brother in Iraq -- because our flipping media can't be bothered to actually cover the war worth a damn -- I've come across any number of moderate to raving lunatic Arab and Islamist Web sites. Believe me, nothing Durbin says could matter in the least to them. They knew about Abu Ghraib long before we did, and they abound with conspiracy theories that leave no doubt as to the degree to which they hate Americans.

But the thing is, it didn't have to be this way. Had we managed the occupation intelligently we could have truly convinced the world that our intention really was to rid the world of a tyrant, whatever the real reasons were. But what does the world see? They see an Iraq where the Prime Minister is the head of a former Islamist terrorist organization and the Oil Minister is the alleged pro_Iranian spy Chalabi. They see us defending torture and even homicide in Gitmo, and recall that we released 80% of the Abu Ghraib detainees because we tacitly agreed with the Red Cross in their estimate that by far the majority of Abu Ghraib detainees were probably innocent. They recall that the same people who executed this war were the ones that supported Saddam at his worst. And they see us unable to reconstruct Iraq while spending $2 billion on a new embassy and untold billions on "enduring" military bases.

And Durbin is our PR problem? I don't think so. In fact, I doubt anyone outside the US media bubble COULD think so.

Posted by: Rover | June 24, 2005 1:44 PM | Report abuse

Osama Bin Laden and weapons of mass destruction. Both never existed. Why? Because we can't find either one.

Knowing for sure they are not in an easily deployable location in Iraq is useful to strategic planners. Everyone has hindsight and thinks they are a brilliant international strategist. Discussion not over...

Posted by: Richard | June 24, 2005 1:44 PM | Report abuse

To whoever said that The President is the Devil. You are wrong. Everyone know that the devil is red and has horns and enjoys hot places. The President goes running in Washington, D.C. That's true. But he does not have horns or even goat bumps. Therefore, your argument is wrong.

Shouldn't we be focusing on the main issue here which is counting the buildings?

God Bless American, Freedom, and So on.

Posted by: Father Tom | June 24, 2005 1:45 PM | Report abuse

> If this type of government bashing and
> military bashing were to have taken place
> during WWII, all of us would be speaking
> German right now.

Improbable. Do not forget that Japan
attacked (while the US spooks messed
up *bigtime*) and that Hitler declared
war (silly ass).

You probably would need a Soviet Visa
to go to Paris and the US would have
good trade relations with the Greater
Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere. China cannot
be found on a map.

Sphere.

Posted by: El Tonno | June 24, 2005 1:45 PM | Report abuse

Osama Bin Laden and weapons of mass destruction. Both never existed. Why? Because we can't find either one.

Knowing for sure they are not in an easily deployable location in Iraq is useful to strategic planners. Everyone has hindsight and thinks they are a brilliant international strategist. Discussion not over...

Posted by: Richard | June 24, 2005 1:45 PM | Report abuse

Carl Rove apologize for pointing out Al-Jeezera prints what idiotic Senators say that adds fuel to an enemies fire? The appearence of an un-United States. Huh, they might be right. Oh well, tough camel dung..from another arrogant ugly American.

Posted by: Joeschmo | June 24, 2005 1:46 PM | Report abuse

Bush is a great man. He stuck it to Saddam because (well im not exaclty sure why) but he did stick it to him. Iraq was mocking us every second so why shouldn't we start a war.

And come on if these democrat/liberals would just stop talking then the enemy would defiantly stop killing our boys and girls. I dont see why everyone cant see that.

Posted by: ilovebush | June 24, 2005 1:46 PM | Report abuse

Change Rove's comments about "liberals" (which assumes "all liberals") to "most liberals", and then tell me how what he said is wrong. There has been a lack of support from the Democrats in the war on terror and an even greater lack of ideas.

The Democrats role in the war on terror so far has been to criticize the Republicans handling of the war on terror.

Posted by: Keith | June 24, 2005 1:46 PM | Report abuse

>>Hmm...yeah. And here it's being blamed on liberalism: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/23/AR2005062301420.html

Duh? WUH???<<

Yeah I read that too. I looked up the results:

Rehnquist (Nixon/Reagan)- AGAINST

Stevens (Ford) - FOR.

O'Connor (Reagan) - AGAINST.

Scalia (Reagan) - AGAINST

Kennedy (Reagan) - FOR.

Souter (Bush) - FOR.

Thomas (Bush) - AGAINST.

Ginsburg (Clinton) - FOR.

Breyer (Clinton) - FOR.

It can be interpreted any way you like. All the Democrat appointees voted to allow cities to grab any land they please, and re-sell it to the highest bidder. Some republicans voted for it and some against it - a balanced split.

I choose to believe that for the most part these justices voted based on their beliefs - not blind loyalty to some political party. I also believe those who voted FOR it have done the American people a grave injustice - regardless of the party of the politician who nominated them.

Posted by: Mac | June 24, 2005 1:47 PM | Report abuse

>>Hmm...yeah. And here it's being blamed on liberalism: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/23/AR2005062301420.html

Duh? WUH???<<

Yeah I read that too. I looked up the results:

Rehnquist (Nixon/Reagan)- AGAINST

Stevens (Ford) - FOR.

O'Connor (Reagan) - AGAINST.

Scalia (Reagan) - AGAINST

Kennedy (Reagan) - FOR.

Souter (Bush) - FOR.

Thomas (Bush) - AGAINST.

Ginsburg (Clinton) - FOR.

Breyer (Clinton) - FOR.

It can be interpreted any way you like. All the Democrat appointees voted to allow cities to grab any land they please, and re-sell it to the highest bidder. Some republicans voted for it and some against it - a balanced split.

I choose to believe that for the most part these justices voted based on their beliefs - not blind loyalty to some political party. I also believe those who voted FOR it have done the American people a grave injustice - regardless of the party of the politician who nominated them.

Posted by: Mac | June 24, 2005 1:47 PM | Report abuse

ilovebush...
Thanks for the stir.....

Posted by: Amer-I-Can | June 24, 2005 1:49 PM | Report abuse

liberals to the 9/11 attacks would be funny, if it so many innocent people were not dying because of a grudge Bush has against Hussain. His remarks are telling me he believes republicans are in the last throes of losing the 2006 midterm elections. That means he looks like a guy who's desperate. The president had full support of Americans, and most of the world, after 9/11. It is his misguided invasion of Iraq that divided Americans, and has turned most of the world against us. We now know from a recent poll many foreigner's have a more favorable view of the Chinese government then our own! Conservative's policies have done little to diminish the number of people who hate America; rather their policies have bread greater numbers of terrorists. These sorts of facts are what are causing American's to rethink the wisdom of conservative's policies. It's really that simple. For political reasons republican's want to make it complicated. Karl's comments illustrate why Osama remains alive and now the CIA tells us Bush has created more terrorists. I don't anticipate an apology , I anticipate falling poll number for our Dear Leader.

Posted by: Alba | June 24, 2005 1:50 PM | Report abuse

Father Tom-
If you'll refer to your Bible, I believe you'll find the "eye for an eye" bit in the Old Testament. Seems like Jesus overturned that by emphasizing forgiveness and "turning the other cheek." Better brush up on your scripture there a bit, padre.

Posted by: whonose | June 24, 2005 1:51 PM | Report abuse

in defense of the GENEVA convention--no one has yet confirmed that AMERICA has violated it's terms.

be-that-as-it-may, the evidence is mounting and it's incumbent upon the conventions enforcers to investigate and take action lest they are accused of being complacent themselves.

either we'll abide by one set of laws--or we will abide by none.

Posted by: nunatak | June 24, 2005 1:52 PM | Report abuse

To AmerIcan

>LOL...
>Clinton tried to go after Bin Ladin?? >Clinton pi$$ed down his leg at the thought >of stirring that pot, even after it was >confirmed that OBL was involved in the >twin towers attack of '93!

BZZZT.. Wrong.

Dear Sir, may I direct you here:

www.gpoaccess.gov/911/pdf/sec4.pdf

> YES, I think we should have kicked
> Saddam's A$$ the first time we were there

Agreed. Cheaper that way too.

> and then none of this would be an issue.

Most probably wrong.

Posted by: El Tonno | June 24, 2005 1:52 PM | Report abuse

Hmm. Karl Rove did not accuse Democrats of anything. He attacked liberals. I find it interesting that Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton and Harry Reid and other leading Democrats are complaining, because they often style themselves as centrists and moderates (and I used to believe them!) But if they're getting upset about Karl Rove personally attacking far-Left liberals, then it doesn't seem unreasonable to conclude the people getting offended are far-Left liberals. That would mean thT Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton and Harry Reid are all far-Left liberals. I really thought they were moderates.

Now I don't trust them anymore.

Posted by: Moderate Independent | June 24, 2005 1:52 PM | Report abuse

In WASP's diatribe, he missed the two flings by George HW Bush. Two in his four years while Bill only had one in his eight years. I'm only trying to help WASP and save him from rewriting history.

Posted by: Larry Elden | June 24, 2005 1:52 PM | Report abuse

Hmm. Karl Rove did not accuse Democrats of anything. He attacked liberals. I find it interesting that Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton and Harry Reid and other leading Democrats are complaining, because they often style themselves as centrists and moderates (and I used to believe them!) But if they're getting upset about Karl Rove personally attacking far-Left liberals, then it doesn't seem unreasonable to conclude the people getting offended are far-Left liberals. That would mean thT Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton and Harry Reid are all far-Left liberals. I really thought they were moderates.

Now I don't trust them anymore.

Posted by: Moderate Independent | June 24, 2005 1:53 PM | Report abuse

I cornered Rove the other day. You read it here first!

Karl Rove: You want answers?
Monkey:I think I'm entitled to them.
Rove: You want answers?
Monkey: I want the truth!
Rove: You can't handle the truth! Son, we live in a world that has walls. And those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinberg? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago (I'm assuming one of those Muslim names) and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives...You don't want the truth. Because deep down, in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall. You need me on that wall.
We use words like honor, code, loyalty...we use these words as the backbone to a life spent defending something. You use 'em as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it! I'd rather you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you're entitled to!

The monkey has struck!

Posted by: alternativemonkeystrikesback | June 24, 2005 1:53 PM | Report abuse

Father Tom,

I am not very religious; however, I think that ALL religions have their pro's and con's. I also believe that Jesus would want individuals to think for themselves. The president is just another citizen. There are plenty of citizens who love Jesus. Why should we follow one of the many who love Jesus?

The world is not just black and white. I think Jesus would appreciate it if you started thinking for yourself rather than blindly following another human.

Posted by: gringobonk | June 24, 2005 1:53 PM | Report abuse

Osama Bin Laden and weapons of mass destruction. Both never existed. Why? Because we can't find either one.

Knowing for sure they are not in an easily deployable location in Iraq is useful to strategic planners. Everyone has hindsight and thinks they are a brilliant international strategist. Discussion not over...

Posted by: Richard | June 24, 2005 1:53 PM | Report abuse

It's been 1,376 days since GWB said he'd catch UBL 'Dead or Alive!'

Usama bin Laden died of kidney failure in December [2001] and was buried in the mountains of southeast Afghanistan!

"Evidence linking these Israelis to 9/11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It's classified information."
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/spyring
-- US official quoted in Carl Cameron's Fox News report on the Israeli spy ring and its connections to 9-11.

0 WMDS in IRAQ
1,730? U.S. Troops Killed "in" Iraq
50,000 Medical Evacuations
112,000 Iraqis Killed By "smart" bombs
$300,000,000,000.00+

The US Goverenment and its corporate state media lied to start an illegal war of conquest. USA! USA! USA!

Long live the 4th Reich, I give it a few months.

Posted by: Maldoror | June 24, 2005 1:54 PM | Report abuse

I've been reading everyone's posts and these posts seems to suggest that we have some kind of power to change what is happening in this country. Unfortunately I think the US of today is not the country we once were or will ever be again, and I don't think there is much that can be done about it. The level of lies and dishonesty at the highest levels of government in this bush administration, as well as the degree of pandering to the wealthiest few has changed US into a country mad with greed and power. In my lifetime both Kennedy's were assasinated, by who??? That magic bullet theory, lone assassin theory (JFK) is ridiculous, then we get Nixon whose idea of a "dirty trick" is to burglarize the DNC, and now fast forward to bush. I think it's over for democracy in the US. Besides the horror of the 2000 election we now have voting computers that can be rigged. All it takes, on the national level is to rig a few voting districts in a couple of state. I believe the power and greed at the top of the republican party knows no boundry. I don't think we will ever have another honest election and the US is disintegrating. One does not have to look too far into the history of nations to see that the power-mad and greedy at the top of governments have destoyed countries for generations. I think we are at the tipping point now. The dishonesty rampant in this administration has turned the US upside down. I believe there are plenty of honest republicans but I also believe few of them have the time to really think about what is happening. Karl Rove will do his best to make sure of that. Bush thinks God is guiding his decisions, Cheney is banking millions from Halliburton, Rumsfeld thinks if he clicks his heels together and says "I do believe" then things in Iraq will go well.
The list goes on and on.

Posted by: wish it weren't so | June 24, 2005 1:54 PM | Report abuse

>>Hmm...yeah. And here it's being blamed on liberalism: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/23/AR2005062301420.html

Duh? WUH???<<

Yeah I read that too. I looked up the results:

Rehnquist (Nixon/Reagan)- AGAINST

Stevens (Ford) - FOR.

O'Connor (Reagan) - AGAINST.

Scalia (Reagan) - AGAINST

Kennedy (Reagan) - FOR.

Souter (Bush) - FOR.

Thomas (Bush) - AGAINST.

Ginsburg (Clinton) - FOR.

Breyer (Clinton) - FOR.

It can be interpreted any way you like. All the Democrat appointees voted to allow cities to grab any land they please, and re-sell it to the highest bidder. Some republicans voted for it and some against it - a balanced split.

I choose to believe that for the most part these justices voted based on their beliefs - not blind loyalty to some political party. I also believe those who voted FOR it have done the American people a grave injustice - regardless of the party of the politician who nominated them.

Posted by: Mac | June 24, 2005 1:54 PM | Report abuse

I cornered Rove the other day. You read it here first!

Karl Rove: You want answers?
Monkey:I think I'm entitled to them.
Rove: You want answers?
Monkey: I want the truth!
Rove: You can't handle the truth! Son, we live in a world that has walls. And those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinberg? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago (I'm assuming one of those Muslim names) and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives...You don't want the truth. Because deep down, in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall. You need me on that wall.
We use words like honor, code, loyalty...we use these words as the backbone to a life spent defending something. You use 'em as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it! I'd rather you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you're entitled to!

The monkey has struck!

Posted by: alternativemonkeystrikesback | June 24, 2005 1:55 PM | Report abuse

I've been reading everyone's posts and these posts seems to suggest that we have some kind of power to change what is happening in this country. Unfortunately I think the US of today is not the country we once were or will ever be again, and I don't think there is much that can be done about it. The level of lies and dishonesty at the highest levels of government in this bush administration, as well as the degree of pandering to the wealthiest few has changed US into a country mad with greed and power. In my lifetime both Kennedy's were assasinated, by who??? That magic bullet theory, lone assassin theory (JFK) is ridiculous, then we get Nixon whose idea of a "dirty trick" is to burglarize the DNC, and now fast forward to bush. I think it's over for democracy in the US. Besides the horror of the 2000 election we now have voting computers that can be rigged. All it takes, on the national level is to rig a few voting districts in a couple of state. I believe the power and greed at the top of the republican party knows no boundry. I don't think we will ever have another honest election and the US is disintegrating. One does not have to look too far into the history of nations to see that the power-mad and greedy at the top of governments have destoyed countries for generations. I think we are at the tipping point now. The dishonesty rampant in this administration has turned the US upside down. I believe there are plenty of honest republicans but I also believe few of them have the time to really think about what is happening. Karl Rove will do his best to make sure of that. Bush thinks God is guiding his decisions, Cheney is banking millions from Halliburton, Rumsfeld thinks if he clicks his heels together and says "I do believe" then things in Iraq will go well.
The list goes on and on.

Posted by: wish it weren't so | June 24, 2005 1:55 PM | Report abuse

I've been reading everyone's posts and these posts seems to suggest that we have some kind of power to change what is happening in this country. Unfortunately I think the US of today is not the country we once were or will ever be again, and I don't think there is much that can be done about it. The level of lies and dishonesty at the highest levels of government in this bush administration, as well as the degree of pandering to the wealthiest few has changed US into a country mad with greed and power. In my lifetime both Kennedy's were assasinated, by who??? That magic bullet theory, lone assassin theory (JFK) is ridiculous, then we get Nixon whose idea of a "dirty trick" is to burglarize the DNC, and now fast forward to bush. I think it's over for democracy in the US. Besides the horror of the 2000 election we now have voting computers that can be rigged. All it takes, on the national level is to rig a few voting districts in a couple of state. I believe the power and greed at the top of the republican party knows no boundry. I don't think we will ever have another honest election and the US is disintegrating. One does not have to look too far into the history of nations to see that the power-mad and greedy at the top of governments have destoyed countries for generations. I think we are at the tipping point now. The dishonesty rampant in this administration has turned the US upside down. I believe there are plenty of honest republicans but I also believe few of them have the time to really think about what is happening. Karl Rove will do his best to make sure of that. Bush thinks God is guiding his decisions, Cheney is banking millions from Halliburton, Rumsfeld thinks if he clicks his heels together and says "I do believe" then things in Iraq will go well.
The list goes on and on.

Posted by: wish it weren't so | June 24, 2005 1:55 PM | Report abuse

I've been reading everyone's posts and these posts seems to suggest that we have some kind of power to change what is happening in this country. Unfortunately I think the US of today is not the country we once were or will ever be again, and I don't think there is much that can be done about it. The level of lies and dishonesty at the highest levels of government in this bush administration, as well as the degree of pandering to the wealthiest few has changed US into a country mad with greed and power. In my lifetime both Kennedy's were assasinated, by who??? That magic bullet theory, lone assassin theory (JFK) is ridiculous, then we get Nixon whose idea of a "dirty trick" is to burglarize the DNC, and now fast forward to bush. I think it's over for democracy in the US. Besides the horror of the 2000 election we now have voting computers that can be rigged. All it takes, on the national level is to rig a few voting districts in a couple of state. I believe the power and greed at the top of the republican party knows no boundry. I don't think we will ever have another honest election and the US is disintegrating. One does not have to look too far into the history of nations to see that the power-mad and greedy at the top of governments have destoyed countries for generations. I think we are at the tipping point now. The dishonesty rampant in this administration has turned the US upside down. I believe there are plenty of honest republicans but I also believe few of them have the time to really think about what is happening. Karl Rove will do his best to make sure of that. Bush thinks God is guiding his decisions, Cheney is banking millions from Halliburton, Rumsfeld thinks if he clicks his heels together and says "I do believe" then things in Iraq will go well.
The list goes on and on.

Posted by: wish it weren't so | June 24, 2005 1:55 PM | Report abuse

Change Rove's comments about "liberals" (which assumes "all liberals") to "most liberals", and then tell me how what he said is wrong. There has been a lack of support from the Democrats in the war on terror and an even greater lack of ideas.

The Democrats role in the war on terror so far has been to criticize the Republicans handling of the war on terror.

Posted by: Keith | June 24, 2005 1:55 PM | Report abuse

Hey Alba,
I find it interesting that the only real push back that we have received has been from nations with dictators, or the major players in the corrupt oil for food scandal. Hmmmmm.... I guess the 36 countries that support us, still to this day, don't really count since they seem to be disregarded so regularly.

Posted by: Amer-I-Can | June 24, 2005 1:56 PM | Report abuse

The problem isn't so much the "look over here" antics of Rove, but the whole "My Sandbox" mentality of the Administration, and the majorities in both chambers. Occupying 1600 Pennsylvania isn't free reign, isn't carte blanc, and it isn't like having your parents gone for the weekend so you can invite all your friends over to raid the liquor cabinet. It's a responsibility. And there will be criticism, sniping, and obstrunctionism in good faith (and bad). To get bent out of shape about it, to smirk and ignore, to demonize your adversary and push on no matter what is the height of arrogance.

For years, nay decades, the Republicans have lamented entitlement programs. My advice, stop treating your offices and positions as an entitlement.

Posted by: WDR | June 24, 2005 1:56 PM | Report abuse

Joel Achenbach,
You're a nobody hack mock journalist.
Did you really need to use that title? Of course, otherwise no one would read this.

Posted by: Where did all the Journalists GO? | June 24, 2005 1:57 PM | Report abuse

Is it of scientific interest? That the Republican spokesmen are usually pink and pudgey with WEAL tough words to impart? Is we scared or what? Not unrelated to the
president who loves war and loves being awarpresident. WEALLY TOUGH. My God, it's dangerous. Especially now when things are beginning to unravel. What will they do to keep their big images of themselves? BE SCSRED.

Posted by: Pudgy | June 24, 2005 1:57 PM | Report abuse

Just a side question.

Why did the planes that crashed into the WTC pass over a nuclear power plant that if crashed into would have caused massive death and devestation. WHO BENIFITED THE MOST FROM A WTC HIT THAT POLARIZED AMERICA INTO A WAR MACHINE.

Posted by: R.BLOCKER | June 24, 2005 1:58 PM | Report abuse

Hey, is this blog trying to supplant DU or dKos? Looking at the tilt to port, it sure seems that way.

Posted by: idgit | June 24, 2005 1:58 PM | Report abuse

Conservative - tending to conserve; preserve established institutions etc; opposed to change; cautious; takes no chances

Liberal - tolerant, receptive, non-conformist; broadminded; favoring reform or progress; impartial; rational, distached, dispassionate; unconventional; individualist

These are the definitions for conservative and for liberal.

Sorry folks -- we ain't got a lot of them folks about no more. They be far and few. And from this blogosphere I happened upon, many of you don't know how to be conservative or liberal either. Screaming "I'm right, I'm right, I'm right" don't make it so. Everyone has a right to their opinion, but you need to back it up with some real facts if you want the other person to see your point of view.

Currently, we are inundated with righties and lefties who are more alike than un-alike.

Just my opinion -- and your blogs prove my point.

E

Posted by: ET | June 24, 2005 1:58 PM | Report abuse

The point is that, in fact, Al Jazeera broadcast Durbin's original statement, but not his retraction. It did/does encourage the enemy; the implication for troops in the field is real. No, Rove did not call for silencing Durbin; he merely pointed out that acts have consequences, as Durbin should have considered.

Posted by: Martin | June 24, 2005 1:59 PM | Report abuse

>>For years, nay decades, the Republicans have lamented entitlement programs. My advice, stop treating your offices and positions as an entitlement.<<

Actually, not only Republicans treat their offices as entitlement programs. The federal government is rife with this mentality.

Term limits for EVERY POLITICIAN!

Posted by: Mac | June 24, 2005 2:00 PM | Report abuse

Someone said that the Bible provides two choices when someone takes your eye. True, God wrote that we should turn the other cheek. But that is only if someone slaps your first cheek. He said nothing about the eye. Besides, if someone takes my eye then I offer him the other one, how can I read the Bible?

So you see, your interpretation is wrong.

The point is that when the terrorists attached the one large building, we didn't even have a chance to offer them the other one. I call that being selfish.

A polite terrorist would have at least waited for permission to attack the other building. Therefore, we must take their eyes or their buildings. Not sure which.

Hope this helps.

God Bless American and our Great President

Posted by: Father Tom | June 24, 2005 2:00 PM | Report abuse

Has "Father Tom" ever been told that Jesus was at least a liberal and probably a socialist. He should be more familiar with the spiritual leader of a great number of people.

Posted by: Larry Elden | June 24, 2005 2:00 PM | Report abuse

Durbin's a knucklehead. If you're going to use "gulag", "killing fields", etc. in a statement, be prepared for a shite-sturm. And have the 'nads to stand-up to the criticism and explain yourself.
I wonder why anyone would look at the US Congress and say that it's a model of a modern democracy.

Posted by: clamflat | June 24, 2005 2:00 PM | Report abuse

Hey Keith,

http://www.bayoubuzz.com/articles.aspx?aid=4293

Great article!

Posted by: Amer-I-Can | June 24, 2005 2:01 PM | Report abuse

What does Iraq have to do with the war on terror? Osama is in Pakistan, the head of the CIA says he knows exactly where he is but we can't get him because it would ruffle feathers.

Huhhhhhhh????? We can spend $300 billion and kill over 100,000 civilians and over 1700 US soldiers and piss off pretty much the entire world (and set a dangerous precedent for China to follow whenever it feels like it -- what are we gonna do? -- by starting an unprovoked war) invading secular Iraq but we can't go after the man who killed 2700 of our people who is holing up in the nation that is selling nukes to every creep in the world?

Meanwhile, we can't afford $2 billion to protect our ports?

In what way is this treasury-busting war a war on terrorists? If anything it seems that terrorists are less afraid of the US military because Iraq has shown once again the limitations of conventional American military power. Which is, we can destroy but we can't hold territory occupied by a determined enemy.

Posted by: Rover | June 24, 2005 2:01 PM | Report abuse

To read all this (which is pretty close to how the media pundits collectively opine) would have one believe that we've become a nation of extremes and intolerance. Maybe we have, but I'd rather not believe that this is so. But it's hard not to.

We used to be the one nation of tolerance; a plural society in which we had a fundamental respect for others' views, others' ways and manners and mores. Instead, 'We' spend more time talking about 'them' and their wrongness as if in pointing out their wrongness 'we' will automatically become 'right'. Debate is no longer about ideas; it's about who's louder. At best debate these days is pro forma. And disrespectful. Did I mention 'intolerance'?

I sometimes fear for our republic. Until recently, we were a nation that kept to the high road. Sometimes, as I look at all the perspectives I've read in the posts above mine, I get the feeling that the low road is the highest we'll manage. Extremism or intolerance of any flavor sees to it. And we're OK with that?

I once read (from a 'Murphy's Law' desk calendar some years back) that 'The world is divided into the righteous and the unrighteous, and it is the righteous who do the dividing.'

I'll say.

Insofar as I haven't espoused my own political views here, my expectation is that my opinion here will be collectively trashed. If nothing else I got folks to generally agree on THAT.

Posted by: jjg | June 24, 2005 2:02 PM | Report abuse

Is it of scientific interest? That the Republican spokesmen are usually pink and pudgey with WEAL tough words to impart? Is we scared or what? Not unrelated to the
president who loves war and loves being awarpresident. WEALLY TOUGH. My God, it's dangerous. Especially now when things are beginning to unravel. What will they do to keep their big images of themselves? BE scared.

Posted by: Pudgy | June 24, 2005 2:02 PM | Report abuse

"Is Father Tom for real or just putting us on?"

Unfortunately 51% of America is just like Father Tom. Deluded, self righteous, and religious enough to put their religion before their patriotism.

The Bible never speaks of democracy or human rights. It does speak of the Roman government as ligitimate. The bible does not talk of individual freedom or free speech. Read the Constitution and you'll see the evil in the Bush administration. Read the Bible and all you will hear is that Bush is "pro life" or "against gay marriage". Remember, Germany was a capitalist christian democracy in 1933. The republicans have already:
-threatened the American Judiciary with the impeachment of judges who disagree with them.
-invaded a country that did not threatened us.
-demonized their political enemies.
-created a propaganda machine in the form of conservative talk radio & TV, which spouts so many lies we have become accoustomed to them and sadly are ignoring them.
-outed a CIA agent, an illegal act, as vengence for showing what a fool Bush was to say Iraq was seeking uranium in Africa.

Read your history America. The Father Toms are everywhere. The chanting Germans in 1933, the chanting Russians in 1917, the chanting Japanese who raped China and Korea, the chanting KKK who lynched innocent blacks in the American South, the chanting Chinese who lead the cultural revolution, the chanting Cambodians who followed Pol Pot. All thought they were in the right and had the blassings of the devine. Now we have the republicans building a one-party state out of what was a pluralistic democracy. As has been pointed out, it will be up to the American people, who have revolted in the past, to stand up and be counted, and throw these unAmerican bastards out of office. 2006 - Bring It On!

Posted by: Anonymous | June 24, 2005 2:02 PM | Report abuse

"Is Father Tom for real or just putting us on?"

Unfortunately 51% of America is just like Father Tom. Deluded, self righteous, and religious enough to put their religion before their patriotism.

The Bible never speaks of democracy or human rights. It does speak of the Roman government as ligitimate. The bible does not talk of individual freedom or free speech. Read the Constitution and you'll see the evil in the Bush administration. Read the Bible and all you will hear is that Bush is "pro life" or "against gay marriage". Remember, Germany was a capitalist christian democracy in 1933. The republicans have already:
-threatened the American Judiciary with the impeachment of judges who disagree with them.
-invaded a country that did not threatened us.
-demonized their political enemies.
-created a propaganda machine in the form of conservative talk radio & TV, which spouts so many lies we have become accoustomed to them and sadly are ignoring them.
-outed a CIA agent, an illegal act, as vengence for showing what a fool Bush was to say Iraq was seeking uranium in Africa.

Read your history America. The Father Toms are everywhere. The chanting Germans in 1933, the chanting Russians in 1917, the chanting Japanese who raped China and Korea, the chanting KKK who lynched innocent blacks in the American South, the chanting Chinese who lead the cultural revolution, the chanting Cambodians who followed Pol Pot. All thought they were in the right and had the blassings of the devine. Now we have the republicans building a one-party state out of what was a pluralistic democracy. As has been pointed out, it will be up to the American people, who have revolted in the past, to stand up and be counted, and throw these unAmerican bastards out of office. 2006 - Bring It On!

Posted by: Jim Middleroader | June 24, 2005 2:03 PM | Report abuse

To read all this (which is pretty close to how the media pundits collectively opine) would have one believe that we've become a nation of extremes and intolerance. Maybe we have, but I'd rather not believe that this is so. But it's hard not to.

We used to be the one nation of tolerance; a plural society in which we had a fundamental respect for others' views, others' ways and manners and mores. Instead, 'We' spend more time talking about 'them' and their wrongness as if in pointing out their wrongness 'we' will automatically become 'right'. Debate is no longer about ideas; it's about who's louder. At best debate these days is pro forma. And disrespectful. Did I mention 'intolerance'?

I sometimes fear for our republic. Until recently, we were a nation that kept to the high road. Sometimes, as I look at all the perspectives I've read in the posts above mine, I get the feeling that the low road is the highest we'll manage. Extremism or intolerance of any flavor sees to it. And we're OK with that?

I once read (from a 'Murphy's Law' desk calendar some years back) that 'The world is divided into the righteous and the unrighteous, and it is the righteous who do the dividing.'

I'll say.

Insofar as I haven't espoused my own political views here, my expectation is that my opinion here will be collectively trashed. If nothing else I got folks to generally agree on THAT.

Posted by: jjg | June 24, 2005 2:03 PM | Report abuse

The point is that, in fact, Al Jazeera broadcast Durbin's original statement, but not his retraction. It did/does encourage the enemy; the implication for troops in the field is real. No, Rove did not call for silencing Durbin; he merely pointed out that acts have consequences, as Durbin should have considered.

Posted by: Martin | June 24, 2005 2:03 PM | Report abuse

The FBI agent Durbin cited said detainees at Guantanamo had been found huddled on the floor, covered in their own excrement, having torn their own hair out over the night, shivering uncontrollably in frigid air-conditioning.

Some of these detainees may have been Taliban soldiers who fought against US forces in Afghanistan. Some may have been Al Qaeda terrorists. Some may have been innocent people caught in the wrong place at the wrong time. Because none of them have ever been able to make their case in a court of law, we don't know who they were.

Do you patriots support this manner of treating detainees? You think anyone who US forces catch must have been guilty of something, so it's their own damn fault if they wind up shivering on the floor, covered in their own filth, tearing their hair out? You think such treatment is becoming of the United States of America?

Posted by: An FBI agent's testimony | June 24, 2005 2:04 PM | Report abuse

polarized? sorry, i have to post fast, im at work. grouped would be more appropriate

Posted by: R.BLOCKER | June 24, 2005 2:04 PM | Report abuse

Wow, that was entertaining watching WASP out himself and watching his ass get handed to him.

Posted by: flockshock | June 24, 2005 2:05 PM | Report abuse

You don't fire IED's.

Posted by: uuilly | June 24, 2005 2:05 PM | Report abuse

Some people here are hysterical. "Bush is a benevolent genious who has everyone fooled and will soon unveil his great plan that will lead us to victory!" "No, Bush is an evil genius who is so brilliant that he's capitalized on a tragedy with the end goal of ruling the world!"

Come on, people. This is the guy who can't even make it through a news conference without practically pissing himself. Funny that the same people who make fun of his stupidity also seem to think that he's the mastermind of some grand evil scheme.

Democrat supporters rightfully made fun of Republican supporters for all of the conspiracy theories during the Clinton years, but now they're guilty of the same thing. Here's a hint, if you're hearing it all from Rush/Michael Moore, News Max/MoveOn, and it's conspicuously absent from mainstream news because of some vast media conspiracy to "cover it up," chances are it's not true.

Bush is what he is. He's a sub-par president (in my opinion), who is equal to, or maybe slightly better/worse than what we would have gotten with the equally horrific Kerry. He's made some good decisions which he has tried to spin into great decisions, and some poor decisions which he has tried to spin into good decisions...which makes him about the same as the two presidents that preceded him.

Sorry to burst your bubble...he's no savior, and he's no evil genius. Just another president, whose term is up in three years. Maybe this time we'll actually get two halfway decent candidates to choose from instead of the garbage that the two parties have tried to shove down our throats the past five elections.

Posted by: PG | June 24, 2005 2:05 PM | Report abuse

Yawn.
Joel, didn't you used to write something useful, like a tech column?

Posted by: Xixi | June 24, 2005 2:06 PM | Report abuse

Sorry to burst your bubble,but the hypocrites are in the Republican camp:

Gingrich has been married 3 times;he committed adultery twice.Limbaugh has a fondness for OxyContin,and buys it behind a convience store,and has divorced three times.Dan Burton has a child out of wedlock. Neil Bush divorced because he committed adultery with call girls in Hong Kong and Thailand.And don't forget Siverado. Henry Hyde had an affair with a married woman,when he was 40.

And don't forget all the moral lectures from the Catholic Church...seems their clergy has a fondness for boys.

Posted by: mgottlieb | June 24, 2005 2:06 PM | Report abuse

Pondiferous. Or should I use a real word to explain my exasperation? Carl Rove states a fact (Durbins words are being strewn accross a sympatheric network) and we want an apology? We say what he said was dumb and act like he is up to something? How about this. What he said hurts because it is true. Just because your intention is not to foster energy toward the terrorist movement, doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Just like the idiots report of the Quran down the toilet, the liberal media has no objective standard in which to guide its actions. This constitutes people doing what they want without thinking of the complications. It's like the other idiot who asked Cheney about Poll's shifting on the Iraq situation. How many times do Poll's need to be wrong before we realize, they are just methods of distraction? The reason you hear the liberals louder then ever, is because they are losing, and they have no idea why.

John Stewart pressed Dean for a concise answer to any one of their defamations of the Bush policy. He echoed the mantra of the Democrats. "We will do it better". Wow, real concise. Maybe if Democrats and liberals realized that the lack of objective points of view suffocate intellectual reasoning, then maybe they would have a platform to stand on. Keep screaming though, I am sure the people want a whiner as their next leader.

Oh wait, no they don't.

Posted by: Eatmeimadanish | June 24, 2005 2:06 PM | Report abuse

Sorry kids, the Bush administration did not inherit a roubust economy in 2001, but one where the stock market had declined over 1000 points during the year 2000, beginning last quarter 1999. The reason its called the Clinton/Gore recession is becuase the 1993 economy was on the rise when the 1994 administration took over. The economy was in the midst of the dot com burst of 2000, and then 9/11 happened - two huge blows to our economy and yet for most segments the economy is now better than it has ever been. You can blame efficiency and productivity via technology for the loss of jobs in certain sections of the economy. You can blame 1994 - 2000 for the huge exodus of business to foreign countries as Bubba signed the master bill for those tax breaks. Also thanks, Bill, for closing a 25 year technology gap with the Chinese in exchange for large contributions to the Dem. Natl. Committee...that is what impeachment should've been for, not for doing interns and then lying about it...also gutting the justice department and the military from 15 divisions to 10...BUT to be fair, I feel Iraq has been badly mismanaged - a week after toppling that statue we should've been out of there, and I'd rather we went to Syria after Afghanistan...Saudi Arabia next...Gitmo must stay..enemy combatants dont apply to any Geneva Convention articles, and there has been no torture of any kind - sorry the underwear on the head doesnt compare to being put in a 2 foot tall bamboo box while still standing. If they have info that might save American lives get it, period. Oh yes I want $$$ to go to solar and wind power, not "nuclr" as George puts it...someday a real third party must again emerge, Nader aint it though...

Posted by: Bill | June 24, 2005 2:06 PM | Report abuse

"Americans should not question the President because he is leading the fight on War on Terror. He is trying the best he can!"
Posted by: CodBlessAmerica |

Fitting malaprop Mr. "CodBlessAmerica". American certainly reeks of a fish smell, and the rotten head can be found on a biped wearing a Swastika shirt in Washington. Of course, the Swastika has been altered so that the symbol now looks like a +. Propaganda, fear, failure to stand for human right, etc., etc., only it's being done under the guise of a "good Christian man..."

Posted by: Bayoureality | June 24, 2005 2:06 PM | Report abuse

Martin, Al Jazeera is a news network. It's no more biased than FOX. So what if it broadcast Durbin's statement? This causes the hearts of our brave troops to wither and pale?

Posted by: brooksfoe | June 24, 2005 2:08 PM | Report abuse

To ilovebush: Bush is a great man. How/ That statement strains credulity.

Iraq was mocking us every second so why shouldn't we start a war? What kind of a ridiculous notion is that? Other countries have been mocking us for years and we haven't started wars with them. You do not start wars because your feelings get hurt. People die in war. This includes the innocent. And when I say the innocent that includes our soldiers who had nothing to do with these petty trivialities.

And if these democrat/liberals would just stop talking then the enemy would defiantly stop killing our boys and girls. I don't see why everyone can't see that. Where did you grow up? Did you just come out of some right wing cocoon? Did you receive an education? Do you bother to educate yourself or do you get your news from Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter?

You have obviously never fought in a war, never knew anybody who fought in a war and are not willing to fight in a war. Talking does not get "our boys and girls" killed. It's weaponry held by those who want us out of there. They don't care what we say. They want us dead.

Now you know why everyone can't see that. Stop thinking like an ideologue and get an education. And if you want to find out what it's all about, then head down to your local Army recruiter.

I spent 20 years in the Army in the Rangers. I have fought for this country and probably understand more about this than the collective minds of this administration and your right wing flunkies, none of whom by the way ever put on a uniform in defense of this country. They would be the first to run in the face of combat but that's typical of the cowards that these people truly are.

RANGERS LEAD THE WAY!!!!

Posted by: AngryVietVet | June 24, 2005 2:08 PM | Report abuse

Joe,
Nobody "fires" IED's at us in Iraq. Perhaps you are confusing them with RPG's;which are airborne. IED's are a ground placed, ambush type weapon. As it happens, the ingredients for these IED's mainly come from old munitions stocks that we did not adequately secure in the aftermath of the invasion or are brought in thru the porous borders that we still haven't secured. Had our military commitment been of adequate size for the job or had we waited until we had the support of other nations we could have prevented both of these situations from being the advantage they have become to the enemy.

Posted by: Clint Mensa | June 24, 2005 2:09 PM | Report abuse

Woah! You right-wingers make me laugh! You get so worked up over NOTHING. Maybe they should focus on things that are important like, oh say, 45 million Americans not haveing access to helthcare.

Posted by: Chris | June 24, 2005 2:09 PM | Report abuse

So, the question remains: What is happening that Rove is trying to obscure?

Osama's stated goal has been to kill Americans and bankrupt the US via an extended war in Iraq. What is W's goal?
To kill Americans and bankrupt the US through an extended war in Iraq. Osama hasn't been found because W is Osama...Rove has discovered W's terrible secret! I didn't vote for W in 2000 because his tax cuts sounded like an effort to revitalize the national debt. I didn't vote for W in 2004 because it was clear he was a sociopath (or is that psychopath...a little help here...I apologize).

Posted by: wixie | June 24, 2005 2:10 PM | Report abuse

"Remember, Germany was a capitalist christian democracy in 1933."

Wow...Godwin was right. Every Internet discussion does end with a Nazi comparison, regardless of the topic.

People should be really careful about "Hitler, Hitler, Hitler, Nazis, Nazis, Nazis." When you say it so much, it loses its meaning.

Posted by: PG | June 24, 2005 2:10 PM | Report abuse

Father Tom, I was thinking. Maybe we could build some buildings in Afghanistan, or Pakistan, or Crawford, or wherever BinLaden is hiding so that we can then exact our architectural revenge on those artless terrorists. It appears your beef with BinLaden is an aesthetic one. In other words you are implying they came here to wreck our buildings alone. The people? collateral damage. Well, let's build some big 'ol buildings over there, bomb them back into paste, and then declare the war on terror over. Eight buildings should do it. Seven for the entire World Trade Center, and one for the Pentagon. No wait, make that nine, then we will have one on them! Will we have crushed their hate for our buildings then?

Posted by: Blicero | June 24, 2005 2:10 PM | Report abuse

Well said, Joel. I have been in this country for almost 20 years, and I view it as a sign of my patriotism when I privately, of course, compare Bush to Stalin in more than one way.

Posted by: SNS | June 24, 2005 2:10 PM | Report abuse

War sucks. I acknowlege that. But I do support the War on Terror, and I think it was neccessary to protect our nation and show those that wish to hurt us that we won't "go quietly into the night." But it seems to me like most of the american public that doesn't support the Iraq War doesn't support it for the wrong reasons. Alot of people are always saying "Osama isn't in Iraq, so why are we fighting there?" Granted, this isn't one of the main objections, I realise that, there are some other legitimate concerns, I just think the No Osama In Iraq line is a poor excuse.

I supporte the war on terror, and I supported going into Iraq, not as a part of the war on terror, but as a way to dispose of an evil tyrant that kills his own people outright (don't try to compare Bush to this, that is just the bad comparison making people are crying about in this whole discussion). Saddam was an evil man, who we (the american government) has been trying to get rid of for decades. DemoCrappy president, RepubliCant president, it doesn't matter, they all tried it in some way, none so blatant as Bush's action though. GWB was the only one who had the balls to say "Thats enough Mr. Hussein, I'm tired of your crap, I'm coming in to get you!" And that is what I totally support. I do not believe how so many of you can look at Iraq and say "There is nothing wrong there, why should we intervene?" and then decry our soldiers dying to protect others. You have to be completely blind to what was going on in Iraq to think that way.

It is inherently american to only think about ourselves. We see our own people dying and we bitch and moan and ask for something to be done, but when we see people from another country being slaughtered we turn our heads and refuse to acknowledge it. It happened in Rwanda, it happened in Iraq for many years, and it happens everyday all over the world in places we never hear about why? because the AMERICAN PUBLIC DOESN'T WANT TO KNOW ABOUT IT so 'they' don't tell us. As I said, I don't like war, but I think as one of the most powerful nations in the world we have a DUTY to defend the weak and protect the innocent, in our country and all over the world. It's a big step, and I realise it may also be almost impossible, but someone has to do it because the UN Peacekeepers can't do it.

All that being said, I don't like how the war in Iraq ended up going and I blame that on poor management, but I still support the decission and the resolve Bush showed in the matter.

Posted by: fencesitter | June 24, 2005 2:11 PM | Report abuse

Anyone remember the 2000 election?

"Bush has no mandate"

"Bush can't get anything done with such a closely divided congress"

"Even with a (liberal darling) Yale Undergrad and a (liberal darling) Harvard MBA, he's stoopid"

Anyone remember the 2004 elections?

"Bush is out of touch with America"

"Bush is un-presidential compared to Kerry"

"Bush will lose in a close race"

Bustamanti anyone? (ahead of Ah'nold by double digits...)

Kerry Anyone? (Pulling ahead at the last minute... yet lost by the largest margin since Mondale.)

Seems some folks just can't see what they don't want to see.

ya know what a Liberal is? Someone who's heart is bigger than their brain. Uh oh, the Sensitivity Police will be after me now!

Posted by: The Hammer | June 24, 2005 2:11 PM | Report abuse

hey dick since you feel so badly for the towel head torture victims in gitmo listening to that awful rap music why dont you adopt them all and take them home with you? you can all read the kuran together and trust me after the next election you will have plenty of time to do that.

Posted by: dick durban is a dick | June 24, 2005 2:11 PM | Report abuse

Martin, Al Jazeera is a news network. It's no more biased than FOX. So what if it broadcast Durbin's statement? This causes the hearts of our brave troops to wither and pale?

Posted by: brooksfoe | June 24, 2005 2:11 PM | Report abuse

A clarification. I stated that a polite terrorist would wait for someone to offer the other cheek. That does not mean I agree with the terrorist! Just that I think terrorists sometimes have a short temper, probably from the pressure of fighting against things.

Lesson: if you meet a terrorist, try to calm him down first. As Jesus said, patience is a vuirtue. Then when he has calmed down, offer him the other cheek. If he is a good terrorist, he will not strike. If he is a bad terrorist he may strike your cheek. Only then do you have God's permission to take his eye. That is in the Bible.

God Bless America, The Bible and and Presidnet Bush

Posted by: Father Tom | June 24, 2005 2:12 PM | Report abuse

father tom is just plain nutty.

Posted by: gringobonk | June 24, 2005 2:12 PM | Report abuse

I believe as President Bush has stated many times there is a turd in the white house. It is starting to smell and it is time to flush it out of there.

Posted by: Gary | June 24, 2005 2:12 PM | Report abuse

I believe as President Bush has stated many times there is a turd in the white house. It is starting to smell and it is time to flush it out of there.

Posted by: Gary | June 24, 2005 2:12 PM | Report abuse

I believe as President Bush has stated many times there is a turd in the white house. It is starting to smell and it is time to flush it out of there.

Posted by: Gary | June 24, 2005 2:12 PM | Report abuse

Wow PG, there was a whole lot of logic in that statement.... Stop it, you're scaring me!!

Thanks

Posted by: Amer-I-Can | June 24, 2005 2:13 PM | Report abuse

I believe as President Bush has stated many times there is a turd in the white house. It is starting to smell and it is time to flush it out of there.

Posted by: Gary | June 24, 2005 2:13 PM | Report abuse

What I am disturbed about is the fact that the Pentagon is keeping records that includes social security numbers, GPAs and courses of study for "recruitment" purposes by a private company. Wow, hackers could seriously have a field day with this one! There goes the Republican adminstration collecting data as a "distraction" from the fact thatit might be absolutely necessary for a draft to be in place to fulfill all of our commitments around the world. They can collect all the data they want to, double the enlistment bonus and pay off families to fight THEIR war but cannot provide benfits for the veterans that they have over here. When will people wake up and see the real danger theses folks are to our constitution,free speech and basic quality of life...

Posted by: kuuks | June 24, 2005 2:13 PM | Report abuse

I just like this board, but I gotta go now and get me a beer (with p=100%) and some sexual healing (with p=0.5%). Take care USA.

More punditry:

http://www.economist.com/printedition/displaystory.cfm?Story_ID=4105189

Posted by: El Tonno | June 24, 2005 2:13 PM | Report abuse

I believe as President Bush has stated many times there is a turd in the white house. It is starting to smell and it is time to flush it out of there.

Posted by: Gary | June 24, 2005 2:14 PM | Report abuse

Why are you giving Karl Rove the benefit of the doubt? Isn't that a part of the problem? That the press keeps giving these guys the benefit of the doubt instead of asking the hard questions that need to be asked and holding people accountable? Come on, you guys, do your jobs!

Posted by: Pam LaPier | June 24, 2005 2:14 PM | Report abuse

>>Do you patriots support this manner of treating detainees?<<

They are POWs and have been treated in accordance with the Geneva Convention. If they choose to pull out their own hair or crap themselves to get attention, so be it. It is not 'treatment' if they do it to themselves.

I also find it hard to believe that anyone would legitimately complain about having air conditioning in Gitmo. It's not exactly a cool place in June. I'll bet they'll be crying about not enough cable channels before too much longer.

Posted by: Mac | June 24, 2005 2:14 PM | Report abuse

"Father Tom" is pretty clearly amusing himself -- I say he's a put-on.

The scary part is, it's pretty damn hard to tell the difference, as evidenced by all the people taking him as being for real.

You really have to work to outdo the self-parody of the real Father Toms. And there are plenty of them out there.

Posted by: jmb3 | June 24, 2005 2:15 PM | Report abuse

If you make incorrect inflammatory comments, then you will incorrectly inflame the enemy. So Carl is correct.

Posted by: Jeff | June 24, 2005 2:15 PM | Report abuse

>>Do you patriots support this manner of treating detainees?<<

They are POWs and have been treated in accordance with the Geneva Convention. If they choose to pull out their own hair or crap themselves to get attention, so be it. It is not 'treatment' if they do it to themselves.

I also find it hard to believe that anyone would legitimately complain about having air conditioning in Gitmo. It's not exactly a cool place in June. I'll bet they'll be crying about not enough cable channels before too much longer.

Posted by: Mac | June 24, 2005 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Lets all try and be honest. Was ANYONE walking around thinking we needed a war with Iraq before this crew got control of the government. NO. "Support our troops" should mean not thinking so little of their lives as to send them into a politically driven war we started. These ideologues talk a tough game when they are sending others to do their fighting. When it was their turn to "Brandish Steel" they were AWOL. How people can fall in line with their patriotic spin to support their neocon agenda is shocking. Where is the critical thinking? Don't let them re-define what patriotism is. Perhaps we are the United States of Lemmings?

Posted by: Doug | June 24, 2005 2:16 PM | Report abuse

Has everyon noticed that the republicans all same the same thing...?

Its amazing how Rush Limbaugh does the thinking for all of them. Unfortunately he gets his script from Rove.

Think for yourselves for a change.

Posted by: GoDonkeys | June 24, 2005 2:16 PM | Report abuse

The time karl speaks of, after 911 is actually the only time during the Bush administration that we all acted like united americans, we we're all united, we voted 98 to 0 in the senate and 420 to 1 in the house to authorize necessary force against terror. for karl to say it went any other way is rediculous.
The problem is that after that, Bush went after the wrong guy, and invented WMDs and all kinds of crazy things, that is what has divided us. We would still be united today if the administration had gone after the right enemy, and not abused it's support.
I don't get Karl, he's trying to say we were divided when we were most united.

Posted by: bruno | June 24, 2005 2:17 PM | Report abuse

from Posted by: WASP | June 24, 2005 10:00 AM...The usual "Clinton got a free BJ and I didn't!" argument used once again to absolve all of Bush's sins...

What is it about these BAFERWCCs (Born Again Fundamentalist Evangelical Right Wing Conservative Christians) and sex?

Posted by: Bob Anderson | June 24, 2005 2:17 PM | Report abuse

I believe Gary in an unemployed welfare recipient who cannot figure out how to post. The only turd here is the one that came out of your fat cow mom and she named it Gary.

Posted by: Gary is a moron | June 24, 2005 2:17 PM | Report abuse

How quickly you people forget:

"It's outrageous that the same Democrats who stood by Dick Durbin's libeling of our military are now expressing faux outrage over Karl Rove's statement of historical fact. George Soros, Michael Moore, MoveOn and the hard left were wrong after 9/11, just as it was wrong for Democrat leaders to stand by and remain silent after Dick Durbin made his deplorable comments."
- RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman

Liberal Third Party Groups Urged Restraint, Blamed America:

Immediately After 9/11, MoveOn.Org Petition Urged "Moderation And Restraint" And Use Of "International Judicial Institutions."

* "We, The Undersigned, Citizens And Residents Of The United States Of America ... Appeal To The President Of The United States, George W. Bush ... And To All Leaders Internationally To Use Moderation And Restraint In Responding To The Recent Terrorist Attacks Against The United States." (MoveOn.Org Website, "MoveOn Peace," http://web.archive.org/web/20021127190638/peace.moveon.org/petition.php3, Posted 9/13/01, Accessed 6/23/05)

* "We Implore The Powers That Be To Use, Wherever Possible, International Judicial Institutions And International Human Rights Law To Bring To Justice Those Responsible For The Attacks, Rather Than The Instruments Of War, Violence Or Destruction." (MoveOn.Org Website, "MoveOn Peace," http://web.archive.org/web/20021127190638/peace.moveon.org/petition.php3, Posted 9/13/01, Accessed 6/23/05)

* "[W]e Demand That There Be No Recourse To Nuclear, Chemical Or Biological Weapons, Or Any Weapons Of Indiscriminate Destruction, And Feel That It Is Our Inalienable Human Right To Live In A World Free Of Such Arms." (MoveOn.Org Website, "MoveOn Peace," http://web.archive.org/web/20021127190638/peace.moveon.org/petition.php3, Posted 9/13/01, Accessed 6/23/05)

Just After 9/11, Liberal Filmmaker Michael Moore Derided "Terror And Bloodshed" Committed By Americans. (David Brooks, Op-Ed, "All Hail Moore," The New York Times, 6/26/04)

* Just After 9/11, Moore Blamed America's "Taxpayer-Funded Terrorism" And Bush Administration For Terrorist Attacks. "We abhor terrorism - unless we're the ones doing the terrorizing. We paid and trained and armed a group of terrorists in Nicaragua in the 1980s who killed over 30,000 civilians. That was OUR work. You and me....Let's mourn, let's grieve, and when it's appropriate let's examine our contribution to the unsafe world we live in." (Michael Moore Website Archive, "Death, Downtown," Posted 9/12/01, www.michaelmoore.com , Accessed 7/27/04)

* Michael Moore Said U.S. Should Not Have Removed Taliban After 9/11. Moore: "Likewise, to bomb Afghanistan - I mean, I've never understood this, Tim." (CNBC's "Tim Russert," 10/19/02)

Liberal Donor George Soros Claimed America Should Have Treated 9/11 Attacks As Crime, Responded With Police Work. "War is a false and misleading metaphor in the context of combating terrorism. Treating the attacks of September 11 as crimes against humanity would have been more appropriate. Crimes require police work, not military action. To protect against terrorism, you need precautionary measures, awareness, and intelligence gathering - all of which ultimately depend on the support of the populations among which terrorists operate. Imagine for a moment that September 11 had been treated as a crime. We would have pursued Bin Laden in Afghanistan, but we would not have invaded Iraq. Nor would we have our military struggling to perform police work in full combat gear and getting killed in the process." (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 18)

* Soros Said The Execution Of 9/11 Attacks "Could Not Have Been More Spectacular." "Admittedly, the terrorist attack was a historic event in its own right. Hijacking fully loaded airplanes and using them as suicide bombs was an audacious idea, and the execution could not have been more spectacular." (George Soros, The Bubble Of American Supremacy, 2004, p. 2)

* Soros Said War On Terror Had Claimed More Innocent Victims Than 9/11 Attack Itself. "This is a very tough thing to say, but the fact is, that the war on terror as conducted by this administration, has claimed more innocent victims that the original attack itself." (George Soros, Remarks At Take Back America Conference, Washington, DC, 6/3/04)

Liberal Democrats Urged Restraint, Blamed America:

Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH): "'The Time For Peace Is Now,' [Kucinich] Declared Optimistically July 11, Two Months To The Day Before Terrorists Hit The Pentagon And The World Trade Center. ... Sitting In His Capitol Hill Office Last Week, Near A Window Where He Could See The Smoke Rising From The Pentagon On Sept. 11, Kucinich Insisted He Is More Optimistic Than Ever That People Worldwide Are Ready To Embrace The Cause Of Nonviolence." (Elizabeth Auster, "Offer The Hand Of Peace," [Cleveland, OH] Plain Dealer, 9/30/01)

* Kucinich: "Afghanistan May Be An Incubator Of Terrorism But It Doesn't Follow That We Bomb Afghanistan ..." (Elizabeth Auster, "Offer The Hand Of Peace," [Cleveland, OH] Plain Dealer, 9/30/01)

Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D-HI): "Only Now Are We Trying To Figure Out What Is Islam. Maybe If There Was A Department Of Peace, They Would Be Able To Say, 'Uh-Oh, We've Got Some Problems With These People,' ... I Truly Believe That If We Had A Department Of Peace, We Would Have Seen [9/11] Coming." (Ethan Wallison, "War A Challenge For Peace Caucus," Roll Call, 10/1/01)

Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA): "I Am Convinced That Military Action Will Not Prevent Further Acts Of International Terrorism Against The United States." (Eddy Ramirez, "Calif. Congresswoman Alone In Vote Against War Powers Resolution," [University Of California-Berkeley] Daily Californian , 9/17/01)

Al Sharpton (D-NY) Said That The Attacks On The World Trade Center Are Evidence That "America Is Beginning To Reap What It Has Sown." (Adam Nagourney, "Say It Loud," The New York Times, 12/1/02)

Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-OH) Claimed Osama Bin Laden Could Be Compared To "Revolutionaries That Helped To Cast Off The British Crown." "'One could say that Osama bin Laden and these non-nation-state fighters with religious purpose are very similar to those kind of atypical revolutionaries that helped to cast off the British crown,' Kaptur told an Ohio newspaper, The (Toledo) Blade." (Malie Rulon, "Lawmaker Compares Osama, U.S. Patriots," The Associated Press, 3/6/03)

Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) Said The United States Would "Pay Every Single Hour, Ever Single Day" That Bombs Were Dropped In Afghanistan. "'How much longer does the bombing campaign continue?' Biden asked during an Oct. 22 speech at the Council on Foreign Relations. 'We're going to pay every single hour, every single day it continues.'" (Miles A. Pomper, "Building Anti-Terrorism Coalition Vaults Ahead Of Other Priorities," Congressional Quarterly Weekly , 10/26/01)

"The Bombing Campaign, [Biden] Said, Reinforced Existing Stereotypes Of The United States As A 'High-Tech Bully ...'" (Miles A. Pomper, "Building Anti-Terrorism Coalition Vaults Ahead Of Other Priorities," Congressional Quarterly Weekly, 10/26/01)

Gov. Howard Dean (D-VT) Said Osama Bin Laden Not Guilty. Dean: "I Still Have This Old-Fashioned Notion That Even With People Like Osama, Who Is Very Likely To Be Found Guilty, We Should Do Our Best Not To, In Positions Of Executive Power, Not To Prejudge Jury Trials." ("Dean Not Ready To Pronounce Osama Bin Laden Guilty," The Associated Press, 12/26/03)

Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) To High School Students: "How Would [Muslims] Look At Us Today If We Had Been There Helping Them With Some Of That Rather Than Just Being The People Who Are Going To Bomb In Iraq And Go To Afghanistan? ... War Is Expensive Too ... Your Generation Ought To Be Thinking About Whether We Should Be Better Neighbors Out In Other Countries So That They Have A Different Vision Of Us." (Gregg Herrington, "Senator Asks Students To Ponder," The [Vancouver, WA] Columbian, 12/19/02)

Sen. John Kerry (D-MA): "[W]ar On Terror Is Far Less Of A Military Operation And Far More Of An Intelligence-Gathering, Law-Enforcement Operation." (The Iowa Brown & Black Coalition Presidential Forum, Des Moines, IA, 1/11/04)

* Kerry: "[W]hat We've Learned Is That The War On Terror Is Much More Of An Intelligence Operation And A Law Enforcement Operation." (NPR's "All Things Considered," 3/19/03)

Posted by: New Jersey Moderate | June 24, 2005 2:18 PM | Report abuse

Its all Hyperbole, Talk is cheap, hyperbole is a journalist's JOB!!!

Posted by: Rmulvan | June 24, 2005 2:18 PM | Report abuse

A former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury under President Reagan stepped back into the political spotlight this week, expressing doubt about the official 9/11 story and claiming "if they lied to us about Ruby Ridge, Waco and weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, why should we believe them now."
http://virtualmatter.blogspot.com/2005/06/former-asst-sec-of-treasury-under.html

Posted by: JJ | June 24, 2005 2:19 PM | Report abuse

Blicero, I think your proposal is a good one. But I am not sure if it would stop the hate for our buildings. This is something I admit I do not understand, why someone would be angry at a buidling (unless it was blocking the view from their porch). The New York buildings are very tall and blocked a lot of light. Still that does not make it right for someone to be angry at it so much that they would become a terrorist.

I'm stumped. Again, this is one of those things that makes me believe that the Presiodent needs advisors for.

Can anyone out there help us out on this oen?

Posted by: Father Tom | June 24, 2005 2:20 PM | Report abuse

Turds? fat mothers? what is this 5th grade?

Can you say, Downing Street Memo? Impeachment? High Crime? a bit more serious than a thong in the oval office.

Posted by: playnice | June 24, 2005 2:21 PM | Report abuse

Ah yes...those lowly Democrats talking badly about the war on terrorism.

Far better to lie to the American people and start a war against a country not related to the terrorists who struck America and ignore two countries with far more terrorist ties and weapons capability, Iran and North Korea.

I feel safe.

Posted by: GoDonkeys | June 24, 2005 2:22 PM | Report abuse

Father Tom, you give intelligent and thoughtful Christians a bad name. Go away.

Posted by: flockshock | June 24, 2005 2:22 PM | Report abuse

A further clarification. I was educated in a cardboard box until time I was eleven years old. Father worked fifteen years at Dairy Queen never complained about no dental care. I have volunteered for service U.S. Marine Corps 1979 but was rejected on account of inaccurate medical diagnosiss.

Posted by: Father Tom | June 24, 2005 2:23 PM | Report abuse

"More Democrats served in the military than the Republicans." I'd like to see the actual numbers to back that up. I served in the Marines from 92 - 96, under Slick Willie as the commander in chief. I received no pay raises the entire time I was in. Not even a cost of living raise. These are the reasons military people are primarily Republicans. Because the Republicans do more to support the military than the Dem's do. Every time a helicopter crashed in the last 5 years because of black market parts being installed on them, I thought "Thanks Bill!" Why? Because of Clinton's cut backs to the military. The truth hurts sometimes. But it's still the truth.

P.S. Hey Father Tom, where is the original version of the bible? Has anyone ever seen or found it? Has anyone ever gone looking for it? Maybe it's just a tall tale, like Paul Bunyon and Babe the big blue ox?
Food for thouhgt!?

Posted by: TN Dave | June 24, 2005 2:23 PM | Report abuse

Personally, I didn't think Durbin had anything to apologize for. I think if the administration and the military don't want to have their acts of torture brought into the light, perhaps they should stop committing them.

Of course most members of the military or the administration were not involved in these things, but by the same token when Karl Rove or Donald Rumsfeld defends those actions against all criticism, they are giving strong implicit sanction to the torturers. A defense of "We didn't do it, it was only a few bad apples, and it's those damn liberals' fault anyway" does not make everything all right.

Whether or not "enemy combatants" can be held indefinitely, it is absolutely inexcusable to treat them as subhuman. This is exactly the kind of behavior that is losing the War on Terror for the U.S. As a patriotic U.S. citizen, the whole thing makes me sick.

Posted by: kf | June 24, 2005 2:24 PM | Report abuse

Rove may be correct - So if you're a young Republican I'd suggest you prove us Liberals wrong, enlist in the Army, go fight Dear Leaders war - PUT UP OR SHUT UP.

Posted by: Liberal | June 24, 2005 2:25 PM | Report abuse

Bush is still lying. The kids are still dying.

Bush should be impeached and imprisoned for murdering our nation's children with his lies.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 24, 2005 2:25 PM | Report abuse

Joel, your Rove Herring Theory sounds promising. How do you account for Rep Hostetler (R-Ind.) and his truly half-hearted attempt to criticize the liberal assault on Christianity earlier this week? He apologized instantly! We could have been treated "Democrats Swear They're Not Anti-Christian" headlines all week. Rove and Company missed a great opportunity to really slam the Dems against the wall.

Posted by: AckAck | June 24, 2005 2:26 PM | Report abuse

Joel, your Rove Herring Theory sounds promising. How do you account for Rep Hostetler (R-Ind.) and his truly half-hearted attempt to criticize the liberal assault on Christianity earlier this week? He apologized instantly! We could have been treated to "Democrats Swear They're Not Anti-Christian" headlines all week. Rove and Company missed a great opportunity to really slam the loyal opposition against the wall.

Posted by: AckAck | June 24, 2005 2:27 PM | Report abuse

The President is wrong. Supporting the wrong path, regardless of facts or consequences, does not make you a winner. There is more then one way to deal with terrorists. Perpetuating a failed war to liberate Iraqi's from themselves will not end terrorism.

I am a registered Republican. I was a soldier deployed to SWA last year in support of OIF. I served honorably and was recognized by my command for my service. I say this with a heavy heart. The current leadership of the republican party is evil. I know they believe they are doing the right thing but belief that you are doing good does not excuse evil.

I was taught that too torture and kill people was evil. I was taught that Americans are supposed to be good. But we torture and kill people. Our President sanctions the torture and murdering of people. He may believe he is good, but his actions are evil.

Father Tom, hold tight to your umbrella. The storm is raging. Keep you umbrella pointed toward the wind. You believe you won't get wet, but when your determination blinds you you will not see the error of your ways.

I am willing to get wet if it means doing the right thing.

Posted by: Jason | June 24, 2005 2:27 PM | Report abuse

Here is a reality check for you. Can you name a republican congressman or senator who is being used to headline Al Jazeera?

Conservative

Hey, how about ........ Chuck Hagel???

I guess, by reporting what Hagel said, NewsMax and CNN and MSNBC are bad boys as well?

Reality Check, that is such a cute way to put it. Here is a reponding question: Do you want to listen to what Rummie says about the progress of the occupation or ... how about the US Ambassador to Iraq who happened to go there and saw for himself?

The hardest thing to deal with is the truth. How do you seek out the truth, or do you just think that you know what is true?

The whole Durbin quote was about the truth. When he read the truth about the treatment in GITMO, he was shocked. Durbin uneliquently said that he would not expect that treatment from his own countrymen but of those from tyrannical regimes (of which he listed many).

The truth is that such treatment is happening and happening on purpose. Second, it is happening off shore for a reason. This was all planned and carried out to skirt the laws that we used to respect. This is a fact. The JAGs have complained and been to leave the site. We know that.

Come on now, let's get real and stop thinking that liberals want to kill American soldiers or that we can call use code words like Democrats to refer to Blacks. The truth is what we are after.

What has really changed here? It is the way that we have gone about starting the war in Iraq; the way we have occupied Iraq; and the shape that Iraq is in now and the shape that the US is in right now.

For all you youngin's who think that we need to spend another 5 years sorting out Iraq, remember what happened in VietNam, when it is all said and done, we, as a nation, "can move the Goal Line" and say enough.

Maybe, enough is enough. You so-called conservatives need to take a deep breath and look at the facts. Don't look at what you claim are dishonest motives or my favorite in attacking Michael Moore, sure it is 100% true, but presented in a way to mislead...

You guys are tripping over the truth. You are getting spun to death. Take care of the poor in this country first, before you go off to other parts of the world to solve their problems with military might and billions of borrowed dollars.

God Bless.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 24, 2005 2:27 PM | Report abuse

"I received no pay raises the entire time I was in. Not even a cost of living raise. These are the reasons military people are primarily Republicans."

Well, TN Dave, it's nice to know you always thought about what was best for the country, rather than about your own salary, in making these decisions.

Posted by: brooksfoe | June 24, 2005 2:27 PM | Report abuse

Is it just me, or does it seem like Father Tom is channeling Amelia Bedilia? Come on guys, he's putting you on!

Posted by: Brother Bob | June 24, 2005 2:28 PM | Report abuse

>>Wow...Godwin was right. Every Internet discussion does end with a Nazi comparison, regardless of the topic.

I actually agree, the comparison is overused, but it is a legitimate comparison to the Bush experience.

I guess what is more comparable is not what each government did, but how the people blindly followed each, cheering, no matter what the government did, because any suggestion that the government was wrong was met with that terrible label "your unpatriotic" and antiGerman/antiAmerican. The latest example comes from Carl Rove: "Al Jazeera now broadcasts to the region the words of Senator Durbin, certainly putting America's men and women in uniform in greater danger. No more needs to be said about the motives of liberals." Rove fails to mention that what Durban said was a description of the treatment of detaines at Gitmo as described by American FBI Agents! Of course, he wants to believe that it is untrue, so, to him, it is...

The propaganda machine is in full throttle. The other branches of government are under attack and you only have to ask Micheal Schaivo or Valarie Plame what happens when you anger anyone in this administration. Oh, but that can't happen here...

Posted by: Jim Middleroader | June 24, 2005 2:28 PM | Report abuse

The President is wrong. Supporting the wrong path, regardless of facts or consequences, does not make you a winner. There is more then one way to deal with terrorists. Perpetuating a failed war to liberate Iraqi's from themselves will not end terrorism.

I am a registered Republican. I was a soldier deployed to SWA last year in support of OIF. I served honorably and was recognized by my command for my service. I say this with a heavy heart. The current leadership of the republican party is evil. I know they believe they are doing the right thing but belief that you are doing good does not excuse evil.

I was taught that too torture and kill people was evil. I was taught that Americans are supposed to be good. But we torture and kill people. Our President sanctions the torture and murdering of people. He may believe he is good, but his actions are evil.

Father Tom, hold tight to your umbrella. The storm is raging. Keep you umbrella pointed toward the wind. You believe you won't get wet, but when your determination blinds you you will not see the error of your ways.

I am willing to get wet if it means doing the right thing.

Posted by: Jason | June 24, 2005 2:28 PM | Report abuse

"I received no pay raises the entire time I was in. Not even a cost of living raise. These are the reasons military people are primarily Republicans."

Well, TN Dave, it's nice to know you always thought about what was best for the country, rather than about your own salary, in making these decisions.

Posted by: brooksfoe | June 24, 2005 2:28 PM | Report abuse

Gary is a welfare recipient because his job was shipped overseas after his employers CEOs spent 3 years of projected earnings to Abramhoff. Thankfully, Abramhoff was able to come through for the CEOs, but not until all non-execs, like Gary, had lost their jobs to 15 cents/day workers in China. But Gary, you're in luck, 'cause the army is in need of those who can no longer live in this country but are ready to die in another. And yes, poor Gary's mother was obese. But after years of having worked in a chemical processing plant, Gary's mom lost 125 lbs. when malignant tumor was removed from her abdomen. The only bms the poor lady now has is via a colostomy bag - which should be properly disposed of on George W. Bush.

Posted by: Bayoureality | June 24, 2005 2:28 PM | Report abuse

Why don't you people just admit that this country has become a dictatorship and get to the real problem, Bush and Cheney and the oil concerns that put them into power. For oil, by oil, until the oil is all gone. Then the middle east will be a forgotten corner of the world once again. Maybe Bush will refuse to vacate the Presidency when his term is up based on some trumped up threat. Don't act surprised when it happens.

Posted by: gilbertgosane | June 24, 2005 2:29 PM | Report abuse

Is it just me, or does it seem like Father Tom is channeling Amelia Bedelia? Come on guys, he's putting you on!

Posted by: Brother Bob | June 24, 2005 2:29 PM | Report abuse

To JJ: You prove a good point, which is that sometimes a liberal approach will help our enemies. Terrorists don't care if you turn a cheeck. They want to attack buildings! Everybody knows buildings are bigger then cheeks and can't turn on their own anyway (except for fancy building that is built on ball bearings or something).

Liberals fail to see that each person only has two cheeks. If you add up all the people in the U.S., that makes for about 600 million cheeks. But there are way more buildings in America! Therefore, once all the cheeks are turned, the buildings will be attacked.

This is the simple thing that Liberals don't understand!

Our President and His Team do understand, and that is why they are committed to protecting all the cheeks, eyes and buildings in a free American.

God Bless Republicans, God, The White House, and so on.

Posted by: Father Tom | June 24, 2005 2:30 PM | Report abuse

This administration has cut $100 million in medical benefits for those NYFD heroes Bush stood with on sept 12, 2001.

More than one plan has been floated by this administration to cut benefits for those soldiers returning from Gitmo, Iraq, and Afghanistan.

There is strong evidence that there is a traitor in the white house who leaked the name of a CIA agent in the field.

There is strong evidence that this administration placed our sons and daughters in harm's way, and is killing Iraqis, both innocent and otherwise, at best without checking his facts, at worst lying to the American public.

There is strong evidence that Iraqi is safer for terrorists now than it was before the war.

This administration has taken away freedoms (Patriot Act) AND failed to provide any real security or protection. A remarkable feat.

If you think these are not slippery slopes that CAN POTENTIALLY (that is what the article said) lead to fascist laws, then you're only kidding yourself.

I'm as liberal as they come, and I'm as patriotic as they come, and I feel I have a right to pretty pi$$ed off at right-wing ideologues who think they know something about liberals.

I have a right to be pi$$ed off that Bush says he supports troops and then takes away their benefits.

I have a right to be pi$$ed off that however committed our president is to fighting terror, he is not competent to the task, nor qualified for any job that I know of.

I have a right to be pi$$ed off when right-wing ideologues try to tell me what I think.

I have a right to be pi$$ed off when cable TV pundits get their facts wrong, and no one questions him because he's Bill-O-F@cking-Liely.

That's all any liberal wants, no more no less, and when Republicans try to take that away, or tell me I'm a traitor, or tell me I'm soft on terror, I will step up and say "bring it on" 'cause I will go toe-to-toe on any topic with any of you right-wing frauds and win.

I've met plenty of conservatives, and it's a rare one that measures up to their talk.

I am absolutely sick and disgusted with all of the crap conservatives are fabricating about liberals. It's fiction, just like a Bush press conference.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 24, 2005 2:31 PM | Report abuse

Hey how bout that the left and the right are insane!

Posted by: Joe Normal | June 24, 2005 2:32 PM | Report abuse

This is ground control to Father Tom...

Posted by: brooksfoe | June 24, 2005 2:32 PM | Report abuse

Why does anyone who's against Bush's policies automatically get lumped in with Michael Moore and Moveon.org? I've never seen a single damn one of his movies or looked at that website. I know propaganda when I smell it, which is why I don't believe White House press statements.

Posted by: grey | June 24, 2005 2:33 PM | Report abuse

This administration has cut $100 million in medical benefits for those NYFD heroes Bush stood with on sept 12, 2001.

More than one plan has been floated by this administration to cut benefits for those soldiers returning from Gitmo, Iraq, and Afghanistan.

There is strong evidence that there is a traitor in the white house who leaked the name of a CIA agent in the field.

There is strong evidence that this administration placed our sons and daughters in harm's way, and is killing Iraqis, both innocent and otherwise, at best without checking his facts, at worst lying to the American public.

There is strong evidence that Iraqi is safer for terrorists now than it was before the war.

This administration has taken away freedoms (Patriot Act) AND failed to provide any real security or protection. A remarkable feat.

If you think these are not slippery slopes that CAN POTENTIALLY (that is what the article said) lead to fascist laws, then you're only kidding yourself.

I'm as liberal as they come, and I'm as patriotic as they come, and I feel I have a right to pretty pi$$ed off at right-wing ideologues who think they know something about liberals.

I have a right to be pi$$ed off that Bush says he supports troops and then takes away their benefits.

I have a right to be pi$$ed off that however committed our president is to fighting terror, he is not competent to the task, nor qualified for any job that I know of.

I have a right to be pi$$ed off that America claims to want to fight a war, but rejected a certified war hero and leader, and now wonders why we're losing.

I have a right to be pi$$ed off when right-wing ideologues try to tell me what I think.

I have a right to be pi$$ed off when cable TV pundits get their facts wrong, and no one questions him because he's Bill-O-F@cking-Liely.

That's all any liberal wants, no more no less, and when Republicans try to take that away, or tell me I'm a traitor, or tell me I'm soft on terror, I will step up and say "bring it on" 'cause I will go toe-to-toe on any topic with any of you right-wing frauds and win.

I've met plenty of conservatives, and it's a rare one that measures up to their talk.

I am absolutely sick and disgusted with all of the crap conservatives are fabricating about liberals. It's fiction, just like a Bush press conference.

Posted by: True Blue Liberal | June 24, 2005 2:34 PM | Report abuse

Over 1700 lives, billions of dollars, a dramatic loss of staure in the world, a war that has given terroism a call-to-arms, and countless domestic problems ignored.

Oh no the hypnosis is wearing off.... MUST REMEMBER... support the flag....Freedom....War on Terror...Code Orange...liberators of the middle east...hard work...freedom fries. Ah - free from reality - I feel numb and right again!

Posted by: Doug | June 24, 2005 2:34 PM | Report abuse

He pi$$ed off...I'm with you.

Unless the neo-cons have the bullet points in hand from O'liely, or druggy Limbaugh they have nothing to say.

Posted by: GoDonkeys | June 24, 2005 2:35 PM | Report abuse

>>Was ANYONE walking around thinking we needed a war with Iraq before this crew got control of the government. NO. <<

Agreed, when taken in the context of the stated reason we went to war. However, I did think Saddam needed to be deposed as dictator. Just as I thought Idi Amin should have been deposed as dictator. Stalin should have been deposed. Dictatorial regimes are unavoidably vicious and should be stamped out. I've waited my whole life for the UN to do their job and I keep getting disappointed.

I stand amazed at those who think we should embrace a live-and-let-live policy with criminals against humanity. These isolationists are the same people who would watch from their front yard while their neighbor was raped in hers - and not get involved. At some point you really have to say "enough is enough" to retain your humanity. History has shown (again and again) that waiting too long is by far the worst course of action. Call the police (read: the UN)? Yeah, that works - NOT.

Do I think the war in Iraq was fought for the right reason (according to dubya)? No, I do not. I do not think Iraq was a threat to the US. I never expected them to find any WMD. He was, however, a threat to humanity that needed to be removed. I can think of others without too much trouble. Will we go there? Maybe, if we move out of this Politically Correct quagmire that pervades our poor country; but probably not.

Do I think Saddam's removal could have been accomplished more easily? Maybe, or maybe not. Kennedy said that "we do not do these things because they are easy, we do them because they are hard". This quote applies across the board in my opinion. I have fought. I have buried friends. I have also seen enemies vanquished - horrible men who were a blight on humanity.

Posted by: Mac | June 24, 2005 2:36 PM | Report abuse

I think we may have the beginning of a promising Father Tom Initiative to resolve a lot of the world's polarization here.

The keys are cheeks, and buildings.

Cheeks are infinitely fungible: they can be turned, and turned, and turned again, ad infinitum.

Buildings, on the other hand, are discrete and must be exchanged carefully on a one-for-one basis.

More broadly, it's about love (cheeks) and trust (buildings).

Not sure about concrete proposals to put this into play. How about a national forum of some kind? Anyone?

Posted by: brooksfoe | June 24, 2005 2:36 PM | Report abuse

Some have stated that Rove's statements smack of desperation.

It could also be the opposite. Maybe he is taunting the Democrats - showing everyone how impotent they are.

"Apology - yeah right that will be the day." - thinks Rove and the adminstration mouthpieces immediately back him up 100%. .

These guys don't do apologies. They see it as a sign of weakness (the irony being that almost all of them are certified chickenhawks).

Maybe it is time to find a strategy that hits them where it hurts:

http://www.counterpunch.org/neumann06242005.html

Posted by: Bohdan | June 24, 2005 2:37 PM | Report abuse

You're right -- I didn't understand a thing that Father Tom just said, but somehow I don't think it has anything to do with being liberal.

Posted by: True Blue Liberal | June 24, 2005 2:38 PM | Report abuse

The "terror" we're at "war" with in Iraq is Rove's and Cheney's, et.al. True SH had a nasty hand there, but in the long run, history might judge W's nation-building aftermath as even more heinous--for Iraquis now headed for a very long, nasty civil war; for the world, for our creating a nourishing ground for insurgents; and for us for risking our political capital and squandering our resources. And WASP, When Clinton Lied, No One Died. The only people totally wrapped up in the sex lives of others are generally sexually supressed or impotent themselves. The problem for Democrats is trying to end run scrimmage against a very long term plan by Rove...

Posted by: j | June 24, 2005 2:38 PM | Report abuse

Interesting how Rove wins again. He cemented the concept that all media should focus on the analogy that Durbin used, thereby diverting the media from the central issue: we are behaving as badly as the despots we claim to be battling. Many pundits in effect said, "well, it's OK that Durbin was upset at the report, but he should have used a less radical analogy". Jesus Murphy, give me a break! What would have been an acceptable analogy? Please give me one that on the one hand uses torture practices, but doesn't reach the Hitler/PolPot level. Does one overanalogy make that crap OK? To the dim bulb that says something to the effect that "do you think that an 18 year old fighting for his country likes to be compared to----", use your head for a change. Durbin approx. said, "if I didn't know better, I would think that I was looking at a report from ....", and did not say who was guilty, much less did he say your noble, innocent 18 year old did it. Only you are suggesting that, and you further go on to suggest that virtually all the troops act badly! Did you ever consider that there might be a few bad apples in the basket and that they might just be in the administration? What is clear is that someone pulled this Gitmo crap, and it is to them and their superiors that Durbin's remarks are directed, no others. The silly remarks of these Rove supporters need to go into the same category as those from the dittoheads that say if you don't think this war was a good idea, you are not patriotic and you don't support our troops. To me, supporting our troops means: 1. Pay them well, 2.Equip them well, and above all 3. Use them well. A clear exhibition of disregard for our troops is to put them in an impossible situation, poorly planned (if at all) just to gain brownie points with the radical bible thumping right.

Trawlerman

Posted by: Trawlerman | June 24, 2005 2:38 PM | Report abuse

"Why does anyone who's against Bush's policies automatically get lumped in with Michael Moore and Moveon.org?"

Why does Michael Moore get lumped in with MoveOn.org? MoveOn.org is a serious, responsible political organization; claims to the contrary are pure Republican crap-flinging.

Posted by: brooksfoe | June 24, 2005 2:38 PM | Report abuse

Uncle Tom, that's the biggest load of sh*t I've ever read.

Our fearless monkey leader and his team have killed more Americans (and their cheeks and eyes, one would think) than the terrorists ever hoped for in their wildest dreams.

Children (with cheeks and eyes!) have been sent ill-equipped and under-trained to die for Bush's lies. Our allies (and their cheeks and eyes and buildings!) have been bombed, abducted, tortured and killed for Bush's lies.

Americans (and their cheeks and eyes) are being captured, totured and beheaded on camera, all for Bush's war of lies.

Yeah, I'm glad that hero is cowering safely in his office and egging on the terrorists from behind his Secret Service agents for my sake.

Jackass.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 24, 2005 2:39 PM | Report abuse

Man the truth hurts so you have to cry about it? Rove speaks the painful truth about the current state of liberals. NOT DEMOCRATS as a party, but the real liberal nuts like Dean, Durbin, Hillary, Pelosi. Unfortunately, they are the main components of the Democratic party at the moment. I suggest you try to take your party back from the brink of Implosion.

Posted by: Haha | June 24, 2005 2:39 PM | Report abuse

This war was not started for a humanitarian reason. There are so many other areas of the world where we could invest money and troops with a better outcome and in turn setting a strong moral example. This was not planned for the people of Iraq.

Posted by: Doug | June 24, 2005 2:40 PM | Report abuse

If all the young Republican's enlisted in the Army instead of spending their time trashing liberals maybe we'd have a chance of getting out of Iraq before 2020.- PUT UP OR SHUT UP.

Posted by: Liberal | June 24, 2005 2:41 PM | Report abuse

Hey, just figured this out:

Father Tom is Osama bin Laden!

Posted by: Jim Middleroader | June 24, 2005 2:42 PM | Report abuse

Why don't you people just admit that this country has become a dictatorship and get to the real problem, Bush and Cheney and the oil concerns that put them into power. For oil, by oil, until the oil is all gone. Then the middle east will be a forgotten corner of the world once again. Maybe Bush will refuse to vacate the Presidency when his term is up based on some trumped up threat. Don't act surprised when it happens. I'm still waiting for an entire group of people to say, no I won't go fight your war, go yourself. THEN I will be impressed by mankind. Say what you will about that, your so called cowards are the only intelligent life on this planet. Next time your government gives a war, RSVP no thanks!

Posted by: gilbertgosane | June 24, 2005 2:42 PM | Report abuse

New Jersey "Moderate" - Well, Bush has clearly proven them right, eh? I mean obviously starting a war with a 3rd world dictatorship in the middle east is clearly not the way to address terrorism. You need to hunt down the individuals one by one. You'll notice that the U.S. Military has barely captured only a small handful of terrorist leaders. Most were captured by Pakistani Police.

I can't help but notice that the Repubs on this board are usually the ones to drag out the name calling and whatnot.

No matter. Truth always comes out. It just does. The right wing should be very fearful. Joe McCarthy did the right wing in for a decade. History repeats itself.

Posted by: Me | June 24, 2005 2:43 PM | Report abuse

Father Tom's theology is as skewed as his politics.
"As Jesus said, patience is a vuirtue." Jesus didn't say that. Geoffrey Chaucer did. It's from The Canterbury Tales: "Pacience is an heigh vertu, certyn."

"If he is a bad terrorist he may strike your cheek. Only then do you have God's permission to take his eye. That is in the Bible."
Perhaps Father Tom is reading the "King George Version" of the Bible. The "King James" puts it this way:
"Resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also." Matthew 5:39
"Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you and persecute you." Matthew 5:4

That's what Jesus really said. Exactly the sort of "wimpy" sentiments Karl Rove was attacking. Indeed, purported "Christians" like Father Tom (and Karl Rove and George W. Bush) who claim God favors shooting first and asking questions later may have a bit of a surprise in store when "the roll is called up yonder."

Posted by: Patriot 1 | June 24, 2005 2:44 PM | Report abuse

Cheers, Liberal!
If Republicans want this war so much, they can get in those un-armored humvees with no body armor.
PUT UP OR SHUT UP.

Posted by: True Blue Liberal | June 24, 2005 2:46 PM | Report abuse

To the person who said that I was calling Christains bad names, you obviously did not read what I wrote. All Christians are Gold's Children. If you read the Bible then you must have some intelligence.

My point is that there is nothing wrong with believing in Jesus or in wanting a land of the free thta is safe for all good Christians, and where builidngs and people do not have to be afriad of terrorists.

I have presented arguments that support this belief. And I stand by my word that the President is committed to freedom and to winning. The fact that the Liberals are against him proves that they are also against the buildings.

Posted by: Father Tom | June 24, 2005 2:46 PM | Report abuse

Durbin can call his country's government and armed forces Bullies, Stalinists and Nazi's, and Rove can call Durbin and his ilk on these and their countless other stupid comments.

The Demoncrats' gnashing of teeth and cries for apologies (a therapeutic remedy, by the way) serve only to reinforce Rove's point, and to remind us that among the things Demoncrats like to control is SPEECH.

Here are the two "couldn't be different" reactions to the demands for apologies:

--"His voice quaking and tears welling in his eyes, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate also apologized ..."

--"Of course not," McClellan said when asked by reporters whether President Bush will ask Rove to apologize.

So who do you really want running the war on terror?

Posted by: georgie-porgie | June 24, 2005 2:48 PM | Report abuse

Regarding the war..

Rummy says "When you go to war, you go with the army that you have and not with the army that you want". If we did go to war for the humanitarian reason of removing Saddam and liberating the Iraqi people, why couldn't we wait and do it with the army that wanted, or at least made sure all of the humvees were properly armored?

Posted by: GoDonkeys | June 24, 2005 2:51 PM | Report abuse

father tom(Whatever happened to call no man father for you have one father, your lord in heaven, Mt 23:9), you are a liar. That is not the bible, that is a complete corruption of the gospel. that is not even close to what Matt. 5:38, 39 teachs.

matt. 5:43, 44.
43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.

44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

you and your so called 'christian' president should maybe read what you qoute.

Gal 1:6-9
6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:

7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.

8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

9 As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

revelation 22:15
For without [are] dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a LIE.

Posted by: the bible | June 24, 2005 2:51 PM | Report abuse

Mac: "Do I think the war in Iraq was fought for the right reason (according to dubya)? No, I do not. I do not think Iraq was a threat to the US. I never expected them to find any WMD. He was, however, a threat to humanity that needed to be removed."

EXACTLY what I said earlier, and exactly what I believe. You and I should do lunch.

Posted by: fencesitter | June 24, 2005 2:52 PM | Report abuse

"I am absolutely sick and disgusted with all of the crap conservatives are fabricating about liberals. It's fiction, just like a Bush press conference."
Posted by: | June 24, 2005 02:31 PM

How about a name? At least give us SOMETHING to shoot at. You know us Conservatives, we just want to lie and shoot stuff. I know we ain't as good or honest as yoos Liberals, but "By God", we sure know how to tear stuff up.

Much like Slick Willy tore up my Medical Retirement after DS, and took a crap on me leaving me with NO medical coverage, and ineligible for insurance... But that's OK, he needed to do it for the good of the government, even though he claimed that he wouldn't touch the military. No Lies in press conferences there!! MY A$$

Posted by: Amer-I-Can | June 24, 2005 2:52 PM | Report abuse

"So who do you really want running the war on terror?"

Hmm...and who, exactly, is running it now, GP? Scott McClellan, Jeff Gannon's great and good friend? Or Dick "Come to Gitmo, America's Island Paradise" Cheney?

It sure as heck isn't GWB, who stopped worrying about Osama bin Laden the day the first bomb fell on Baghdad.

Posted by: Patriot 1 | June 24, 2005 2:54 PM | Report abuse

>> You and I should do lunch.

Look me up if you ever make it down South; but only if you like steak. ;)

Posted by: Mac | June 24, 2005 2:54 PM | Report abuse

NJ Mod:

Interesting how you changed the subject so deftly. From what Rove said about what 'liberals' said and di, to what Melman said about what Rove said about what 'liberals' said, and then some evidence to prove Melman's remarks.

Nice contribution to the fog.

Posted by: Judy | June 24, 2005 2:55 PM | Report abuse

I thought the Iraq war was started because Saddam wouldn't comply with some UN mandate. Didn't the UN ask us to go in and clear out that mare's nest?

Posted by: CodBlessAmerica | June 24, 2005 2:55 PM | Report abuse

re slick willy and your coverage. how about some facts. the congress makes the laws that determine military benefits. the last time I checked the Newties took over Congress in 1994 and haven't relenquished it since. Republicans cut your benefits.

Posted by: playnice | June 24, 2005 2:58 PM | Report abuse

"Didn't the UN ask us to go in and clear out that mare's nest?"

Most assuredly not. Indeed, the UN weapons inspectors were the first to expose Bush's lies about Iraq's weapons. There was no UN mandate...or even a fig leaf...for the overthrow of the Iraqi regime.

Posted by: Patriot 1 | June 24, 2005 2:58 PM | Report abuse

"Much like Slick Willy tore up my Medical Retirement after DS, and took a crap on me leaving me with NO medical coverage, and ineligible for insurance... But that's OK, he needed to do it for the good of the government, even though he claimed that he wouldn't touch the military. No Lies in press conferences there!! MY A$$"
Posted by: Amer-I-Can | June 24, 2005 02:52 PM

I've always said that Bill Clinton was the best Republican president this country has ever seen.

Posted by: True Blue Liberal | June 24, 2005 2:59 PM | Report abuse

put up or move into a sand cave in Iraq you pissants.

Posted by: 911 | June 24, 2005 2:59 PM | Report abuse

"Didn't the UN ask us to go in and clear out that mare's nest?"

Most assuredly not. Indeed, the UN weapons inspectors were the first to expose Bush's lies about Iraq's weapons. There was no UN mandate...or even a fig leaf...for the overthrow of the Iraqi regime.

Posted by: Patriot 1 | June 24, 2005 2:59 PM | Report abuse

"So who do you really want running the war on terror?"

I'll take the guys who are strong enough to admit a mistake and move on. You know the ones who live in REALITY. Not the ones who ignore facts and stick stubbornly to their plan even when it is clear they are wrong.

Posted by: Doug | June 24, 2005 3:00 PM | Report abuse

Now the UN asked us to go in?

I must be waking up from a long nightmare and now see the light. If you are referring to resolution 1441 from the UN I suggest you read it before repeating Rush or Hannity's nonsense on the matter.

If you fancy a good read, the Downing Street memos are highly enlightening; although common sense and logic are sufficient to infer all that is contained in those documents.

Posted by: GoDonkeys | June 24, 2005 3:00 PM | Report abuse

Goodbye everyone (Adios muchachos, for those pesky Californians). Nice to see that not much has changed for all of our posturing. Hopefully some sort of centrist party that really cares about this country will materialize and save us from the lunatic fringe before it's too late.

Posted by: Mac | June 24, 2005 3:00 PM | Report abuse

"So who do you really want running the war on terror?"

I'll take the guys who are strong enough to admit a mistake and move on. You know the ones who live in REALITY. Not the ones who ignore facts and stick stubbornly to their plan even when it is clear they are wrong.

Posted by: Doug | June 24, 2005 3:01 PM | Report abuse

First of all, it is wrong for someone out there to say that I am Osama Bin Laden. That is name-calling, something I believe is not a nice thiung to do. Besides Osama Bin Laden lives far from my house. Thererfore, we cannot be the same person. So much for that point.

Second, someone said something about shutting up or about cheeks and buildings. If we are to make progress as a nation we must remain open to knew thoughts and ideas. That can only happend if we are allowed to talk on the internet. So it is unAmerican to stop someone from talking no matter what they say.

Third, to the person who "corrected" my quotes from Jesus. Yes, I know about Chaucer and King George. What you don't realize is that God is the original creator. And everything we do is a result of his greatness, except for terrorism, which comes from evil, the Deveil, and Eve's apple. There is no shame in admitting that our greatest thoughts come from God no matter if you are Chuacer or Harry Potter.

God Bless you for reading, and for believing that America is a Great Land With Many Great Buildings and People.

Posted by: Father Tom | June 24, 2005 3:02 PM | Report abuse

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said of Rove's remark that he "has decided to move to center stage in the theater of the absurd."

Beautifully put, and I agree completely, BUT: this is a "your mother wears combat boots" situation, only worse.

How DARE this man insult my mother? How DARE he impugn my patriotism? How DARE he assume that only Repug's are patriotic? HOW DARE HE??

the Rove-Cheney-Rumsfeld triumvirate answers only to corporate America, anyway. That's the only "nation" they know. And we voting citizens, who care so deeply about our beloved country that we WOULD -- I'm speaking as a liberal here -- give our life for our country if asked (for a reasonable, reasoned, defensive and defensible protection of our homeland, not the half-cocked Iraq-Vietnam-Fog-of-War situation that those bastards got us into and now cannot get us out of).

This country is in the worst trouble, the worst divisiveness, than it has been in since 1776, it seems to me. Abraham Lincoln was quite right about the divided house, and the triumvirate seems to be doing everything it can to divide us more.

We elected [well, not me, but they did win] a truly text-book fascist government that, one by tiny one, is removing our civil liberties through all sorts of legal/legislative sleights of hand.

I believe that Karl Rove is not only arrogant, he's dangerous. Democrats have never thought they've owned America; they've always thought the people own America.

But the current administration? They evidently believe that THEY, and only they -- along with the companies they own stock or have other interests in -- own this country.

How DARE that man impugn MY patriotism?? He doesn't even know me!

BTW, is Ken Lay really going to stand trial? Are Bernie Ebbers and Dennis Kozlowski the corporate Breaker Morants of our time? [I'm not defending them; I am suggesting that this administration, with all its corporate ties, is even more conspiratorial than we know about.]

Posted by: leslie | June 24, 2005 3:02 PM | Report abuse

You have apparently not noticed that the war is being waged "over there" and not "over here". Let's just agree that whoever it is has done a reasonably good job of keeping it off of our shores, even if you're not crazy about everything that goes on there.

I've never seen Gitmo, but compared to the $hitholes that Iraqis call "cities", I've got to believe that Paradise is close to the right term. 3 squares a day, air conditioning and you don't have to strap on a bomb vest at the whim of some a$$hole with a turban and a gun. You can't even argue that they gave up freedom to be locked up in Cuba.

Finally, it's probably one of the nicer places on the Island.

Posted by: Patriot 1 | June 24, 2005 3:03 PM | Report abuse

I wonder?? Were the German citizens in the 1930s, that questioned the emergence of the NAZI party, unpatriotic for not declaring undying support to Hitler and the government in power? Or were they the true patriots. Or were the true patriots the unthinking masses swept up in the mass hysteria of the righteous sounding rhetoric of the lunatics in charge?
If GWB and Karl Rove et al question my patriotism for questioning their rhetoric and policies, I feel no compunction whatsoever in saying they are a bigger threat to our democracy than any outside force currently on the face of the planet.
When our democracy falls, as someday it inevitably will, the cause of the fall will come from within, not from outside.
Bringing down the twin towers did not make me fear for the future of our democracy. Gitmo and the Patriot Act (among other things) do.

Posted by: phineoust | June 24, 2005 3:04 PM | Report abuse

Now the UN asked us to go in?

I must be waking up from a long nightmare and now see the light. If you are referring to resolution 1441 from the UN I suggest you read it before repeating Rush or Hannity's nonsense on the matter.

If you fancy a good read, the Downing Street memos are highly enlightening; although common sense and logic are sufficient to infer all that is contained in those documents.

Posted by: GoDonkeys | June 24, 2005 3:05 PM | Report abuse

Michael Moore and MoveOn.org and the ACLU should all pack up and move their Liberal asses to Iraq where their heads can be used as lamp posts.

Posted by: Soory4U | June 24, 2005 3:05 PM | Report abuse

>>"I guess what is more comparable is not what each government did, but how the people blindly followed each, cheering, no matter what the government did, because any suggestion that the government was wrong was met with that terrible label "your unpatriotic" and antiGerman/antiAmerican."<<

51% - 49%...I wouldn't call that "blindly following." This message board alone proves that not everyone is cheering. This country is as it has always been: a place of passionate people with very different ideas. Hitler in Germany was...do I really have to give the history lesson?

There's not even anywhere near the amount of people in Gitmo and Abu Ghraib combined as there was number of people killed by either Hitler or Stalin. If you put it all in proportions, the comparison is still ludicrous.

Look, there are certain types of intelligence gathering that, imo, are necessary, and others that I think are well beyond the pale. This government has used both. No, I'm not particularly proud of all of the tactics used. No, I don't agree with a lot of the decisions this administration has made. But Hitler? Come on. I wish Hitler had been like Bush. He would have got stuck in the Rhineland for years on end and World War II would never have happened.

I agree that Bush and his people throw around this "un-American, unpatriotic" rhetoric a bit too much, but Durbin making those asinine statements, on the floor of the Senate, no less, is at least equally inexcusable. It's just a flat out ridiculous statement.

Personally, I don't care if Durbin apologizes or not. If he truly believes that, fine. In those words, he has told me all I need to know about him.

This is why a lot of Democrats' legitimate criticisms of the Bush administration fall on deaf ears. Because they try and make an impact with statements like this. Not only that, but they stand shoulder to shoulder with the fringe elements of their base, such as MoveOn and Michael Moore, who make equally over-the-top statements on a daily basis. Going on about Hitler and Stalin does nothing to persuade people or represent your side. It only further entrenches those with hardcore beliefs on both sides.

In fact, both parties have selfishly used every aspect of this war to polarize this nation and paint people with different political persuasions as "anti-American, unpatriotic wacky liberals" or "fanatical religious, knuckle-dragging neo-cons." Unfortunately, a growing number of people are buying into this garbage to the point where you can't even have a political discussion without everyone hurling the latest insults that they heard on the Rush Limbaugh or Al Franken shows.

Posted by: P | June 24, 2005 3:05 PM | Report abuse

Sorry, that last post was by me, and NOT Patriot 1...

That conversion would have been too easy.

My apologies.

Posted by: Georgie-Porgie | June 24, 2005 3:06 PM | Report abuse

This is a copy of an E-Mail that I sent Bush today ,

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a democratic grandmother of 4 military age young people ,I would lie down in the street in front of the bus taking them to camp if any one of them decided to join YOUR military!! I am a patriot, wife of an x military and daughter and grand daughter of Democratic men that served their country well. I look at you and all of the people around you and I do not see more then one or two that has served their country, and that sure wasn't that pasty faced little coward Rove. I think that you should bring all of those cowardly democratic kids home now, after all who wants liberal abettors in the military. Then we will be left with all the republican heros , but it sure won't be the kids of anyone you know. And it sure won't be a very big military.
Shame on you and shame on Rove for denigating probably 2/3 of the enlisted people in the military and their families that have paid dearly for your blunder!!
---------------------------------------- I think it is everyone's duty to let Bush know what they think, wtite to him at...
president@whitehouse.gov

Posted by: donna | June 24, 2005 3:06 PM | Report abuse

>>"I guess what is more comparable is not what each government did, but how the people blindly followed each, cheering, no matter what the government did, because any suggestion that the government was wrong was met with that terrible label "your unpatriotic" and antiGerman/antiAmerican."<<

51% - 49%...I wouldn't call that "blindly following." This message board alone proves that not everyone is cheering. This country is as it has always been: a place of passionate people with very different ideas. Hitler in Germany was...do I really have to give the history lesson?

There's not even anywhere near the amount of people in Gitmo and Abu Ghraib combined as there was number of people killed by either Hitler or Stalin. If you put it all in proportions, the comparison is still ludicrous.

Look, there are certain types of intelligence gathering that, imo, are necessary, and others that I think are well beyond the pale. This government has used both. No, I'm not particularly proud of all of the tactics used. No, I don't agree with a lot of the decisions this administration has made. But Hitler? Come on. I wish Hitler had been like Bush. He would have got stuck in the Rhineland for years on end and World War II would never have happened.

I agree that Bush and his people throw around this "un-American, unpatriotic" rhetoric a bit too much, but Durbin making those asinine statements, on the floor of the Senate, no less, is at least equally inexcusable. It's just a flat out ridiculous statement.

Personally, I don't care if Durbin apologizes or not. If he truly believes that, fine. In those words, he has told me all I need to know about him.

This is why a lot of Democrats' legitimate criticisms of the Bush administration fall on deaf ears. Because they try and make an impact with statements like this. Not only that, but they stand shoulder to shoulder with the fringe elements of their base, such as MoveOn and Michael Moore, who make equally over-the-top statements on a daily basis. Going on about Hitler and Stalin does nothing to persuade people or represent your side. It only further entrenches those with hardcore beliefs on both sides.

In fact, both parties are guilty of this type of rhetoric. Both have selfishly used every aspect of this war to polarize this nation and paint people with different political persuasions as "anti-American, unpatriotic wacky liberals" or "fanatical religious, knuckle-dragging neo-cons." Unfortunately, a growing number of people are buying into this garbage to the point where you can't even have a political discussion without everyone hurling the latest insults that they heard on the Rush Limbaugh or Al Franken shows.

Posted by: PG | June 24, 2005 3:07 PM | Report abuse

OUCH True Blue.... but it was a nice stick

Posted by: Amer-I-Can | June 24, 2005 3:07 PM | Report abuse

Hey,

Did you see that? Doug must be one of those people who almost stole the first election!

Or maybe he's from Chicago.

Posted by: I only vote once | June 24, 2005 3:08 PM | Report abuse

Hey WASP --

Why is it that no Republican can have a conversation about politics without bringing up Clinton. Three words: GET OVER IT.

Besides, what's worse: lying about a war (or Iran Contra or a break-in of your opponents' office) or lying about a blow job?

Posted by: Fatbaldwhiteguy | June 24, 2005 3:08 PM | Report abuse

I wonder?? Were the German citizens in the 1930s, that questioned the emergence of the NAZI party, unpatriotic for not declaring undying support to Hitler and the government in power? Or were they the true patriots. Or were the true patriots the unthinking masses swept up in the mass hysteria of the righteous sounding rhetoric of the lunatics in charge?
If GWB and Karl Rove et al question my patriotism for questioning their rhetoric and policies, I feel no compunction whatsoever in saying they are a bigger threat to our democracy than any outside force currently on the face of the planet.
When our democracy falls, as someday it inevitably will, the cause of the fall will come from within, not from outside.
Bringing down the twin towers did not make me fear for the future of our democracy. Gitmo and the Patriot Act (among other things) do.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 24, 2005 3:09 PM | Report abuse

Sorry for the double post! First one was unedited and I acidentally hit send...ouch, they're long, too...

Posted by: PG | June 24, 2005 3:10 PM | Report abuse

I wonder?? Were the German citizens in the 1930s, that questioned the emergence of the NAZI party, unpatriotic for not declaring undying support to Hitler and the government in power? Or were they the true patriots. Or were the true patriots the unthinking masses swept up in the mass hysteria of the righteous sounding rhetoric of the lunatics in charge?
If GWB and Karl Rove et al question my patriotism for questioning their rhetoric and policies, I feel no compunction whatsoever in saying they are a bigger threat to our democracy than any outside force currently on the face of the planet.
When our democracy falls, as someday it inevitably will, the cause of the fall will come from within, not from outside.
Bringing down the twin towers did not make me fear for the future of our democracy. Gitmo and the Patriot Act (among other things) do.

Posted by: phineoust | June 24, 2005 3:10 PM | Report abuse

"There was no UN mandate...or even a fig leaf...for the overthrow of the Iraqi regime."

Which I say is exactly the problem with the UN "Peacekeepers". They looked at Saddam, saw his crimes, and said/did nothing.

I know this discussion has gotten way off topic but I have to know something. Straight up, I want to know how many of you really believe without a doubt that Saddam Hussein was NOT a threat to Humanity and should NOT have been overthrown. How many of you have no regard for human suffering?

Posted by: fencesitter | June 24, 2005 3:11 PM | Report abuse

The War on Terror is just another political creation in the great tradition of unwinnable "wars" that politicians use to get elected and divert us from the real reason they are in office, to help the corporations by streamlining the free market enterprise. The War on Poverty...the War on Drugs...The War on Terror. Where are we with "winning" these? We spent a ton of money so far, thats about all I can see.

Can anyone, liberal or conservative, envision a day when we "win" the war on terror? Was anyone decided what will constitute a "win"?

Why do grown, learned men discuss winning this war like it is something that can actually be acheived?

The idea that Conservatives are fighting this "war" harder than the liberals, then to have the liberals insist they are fighting just as hard in this unachievable endeavor, would be comical if it were not so sad.

Posted by: FollowTheMoney | June 24, 2005 3:11 PM | Report abuse

Sorry for my double post too. Just gettin the hang of this bloggin' stuff.

Posted by: phineoust | June 24, 2005 3:12 PM | Report abuse

Lets face it, all administrations are defined by one act. Reagan-Fall of USSR, Bush 1--Desert Shield and Not finising off Saddamm, Clinton-Monica, Bush 2 - 9/11. So as much as we want to think the public will be fed up with Bush and his cronies by 2006, they won't be because we will be in a 6-9 month period awash in how he was in place for the countries healing post attack. We need to focus on 2006. Sorry but Hillary will never get even close to elected and the sooner we get away from her and to a Moderate (VA Gov Warner?)the better chance we have of not having a Pres McCain.

Posted by: Joe Kazanu | June 24, 2005 3:15 PM | Report abuse

Trawlerman, THANK YOU.

Brooksfoe, interesting food for thought.

Posted by: grey | June 24, 2005 3:15 PM | Report abuse

Hey,

Look at that! The conservative crowd apologizes without needing to be asked.

The liberal crowd rants and demands.

At the end of the day, I'm going to tally up the insults, and post them on this log. Tune in tomorrow.

Posted by: I only vote once | June 24, 2005 3:15 PM | Report abuse

One more thing...I try to be as open as possible, but it really ticks me off that people like this idiotically ignorant DICK who is saying incredibly stupid things about human beings that bleed just like you and me...You don't know a thing about rap music, a thing about the Koran, or thing about history or you would know why this war is really going on. Maybe he should volunteer his services to the armed forces if he feels that those people should not have a decent place to stay in. America should hold itself to a better standard than that. People in this country should EXPECT better than that. I am sick of these ignorant extremists spreading all of their ignorant fear and cloaking it with Religion and calling it good. Jesus never sanctioned retalitaing after truning the other cheek or God would have struck the Jews and the Roman people down after they had tortured him on the cross. For your information, I am a liberal who beilives in opportunity and EQUALITY for everyone, and I also happen to believe that Guantanomo should not be shut down...My heart is not bigger than my brain...there are perfectly logical reasons to think the GOP is a detriment to this country: for instance, unemployment and outsourcing..I am sure you will have a job DICK after the Republicans stay in office for a while..., education levels are PITIFUL, your children's education is going down the tiolet for nuclear bombs but the GOP does not care because they have the money to send their kids to private schools and they claim to be inclusive, give me a dag gone break! Affirative Action is being attacked, our social security is being attacked, and our armed forces are losing recruitment at an alarming rate. You think LIBERALS did all of that? In the five years that the GOP has been in power they have managed to destroy whatever progress this country achieved while Bill Clinton was in power.
There are people in this country who actually believe all of the lies that were FED to them by the Grand Old Party..LIES LIES and IGNORANCE that is what the GOP has brought to our country. That and Hipocritical politics..gotta love that.

Hey dick you are a real ignorant buttwhole who wouldn't know the difference between what a blatant lie is and complete BSing if it hit him in the face! RAP IS GREAT...my IQ is quite high (142) and my heart is even bigger and I am not afriad to BRAG about that. Take that!
By the way what Rap music have you heard??? I do not complain about country music is music..honestly what does that have to do with Gipmo anyway???? Who is 'them' you racist SOB! GOP stirkes again racism prevails because of the comfortable claok of religion.
BEAUTIFUL!
I apologize people I appreciate solid constructive debate rather than ignorant rantings

Posted by: kuuks | June 24, 2005 3:17 PM | Report abuse

I'm extremely offended that some of you cretins posting today think I'm a "he," a born again right wing fundamentalist, repressed, impotent, whatever. I'm none of those. I'm offended and demand an apology. If you're offended by my remarks, then I'm offended that you're offended. People -- get a life.

Let's get the record straight -- I'm a 59-year-old woman, pro-choice, haven't been inside a church in 40 years except for weddings and funerals, which are pretty much the same thing IMHO. I drive a foreign-made car, worked two jobs to put myself through college, maintain my own house, work full time to support myself, have never been on welfare, psychiatric leave or drugs. I belong to AAA and the Lions Club. I think some of these posts are made up by nut cases to 'stir the pot' and if these are representative of educated Americans, then I will move to Canada or Ireland or Nova Scotia. Been there before and the natives are quite friendly and they speak English.

Stop trying to get me to enlist -- I have arthritis and my eyesight is 20/400.

Posted by: WASP | June 24, 2005 3:17 PM | Report abuse

>Can anyone, liberal or conservative, >envision a day when we "win" the war on >terror? Was anyone decided what will >constitute a "win"?

Oh yeah! A win is when these savages turn on themselves in Iraq, and we're no longer there.

Posted by: WinDefiner | June 24, 2005 3:18 PM | Report abuse

I can't believe I just spent 20 minutes scrolling through the most toxic and pointless discussion thread I have every read. I feel the need to go shower.

Posted by: Fool | June 24, 2005 3:18 PM | Report abuse

"Let's just agree that whoever it is has done a reasonably good job of keeping it off of our shores, even if you're not crazy about everything that goes on there."

Fine -- I'll give GWB credit for keeping the U.S. safe from international terrorists for the past 4 years... right after you give Bill Clinton credit for keeping the U.S. safe from terrorism between 1993 and 2001. But wait -- if you do that, who can you blame for 9/11?

As for waging the "war on terrorism" in someplace "over there", I assure you it isn't being fought in Iraq. What is happening in Iraq today is NOT the war againt terrorism GWB promised in the aftermath of 9/11. The current violence in Iraq is a RESULT of the war, not a cause of it.

And despite Porter Goss's most recent gaseous emissions, the U.S. is no closer to catching Osama bin Laden today than it was when Tower 2 collapsed.

As for Gitmo -- if you have to endure being hung upside-down by your manacled wrists over a filthy overflowing toilet in order to get "3 squares a day" and "air conditioning"... you can have it.

Posted by: Patriot 1 | June 24, 2005 3:20 PM | Report abuse

WASP-

Hurry! Please pack your bags and go. You can't be tolerant of political speech and un/informed opinion?

You must go.

Go.

Today.

Go.

Posted by: Travel Agent | June 24, 2005 3:21 PM | Report abuse

It is sad that all the Liberals are trying to complicate the situation by writing long posts with various facts. This confuses the issue which makes it hard to know what to do. But Jesus said to trust in the Lord and you can then go to heaven when your done. To me that's a good deal.

Therefore, Liberals who complicate things with facts are just trying to keep Christians from going to heaven.

I don't think they do this on purpose. They are trying hard to be good patriots but they do not understand theat it is important to trust in your country and in God.

As for Rush Libmbaugh (who somebody said was not a nice man) I don't know how you can say that unless you were at his house. To me he has interesting viewpoints and is not any of the things people say about him. Plus, I think his drug problems are his own busioness. The Liberal media want to bring him dsown by focusing attention on his private life instead of his controversial viewpoints.

This is another sign of how the Liberal media are dangerous to freedom, and our President. In times of war, it may be neceeary to stop the Liberal media even if that means using force. I think that's in the Constitution somewhere. Any help?

Posted by: Father Tom | June 24, 2005 3:21 PM | Report abuse

Oh yeah! A win is when these savages turn on themselves in Iraq, and we're no longer there.
Posted by: WinDefiner | June 24, 2005 03:18 PM

Where does timothy McViegh fit in this definition of a "win?"

Posted by: FollowTheMoney | June 24, 2005 3:23 PM | Report abuse

>> Where does timothy McViegh fit in this definition of a "win?"

He's in the DEAD CRIMINAL column.

Posted by: JusticeNow | June 24, 2005 3:25 PM | Report abuse

To those who charge that calls for understanding the enemy are a sign of weakness: perhaps you should read Michael Shermer's books (e.g. Imperial Hubris). Shermer's a Reagan-loving Christian ex-CIA guy -- who says we have *got* to understand what motivates this enemy to fight, if we ever hope to either (1) negotiate peace, (2) neutralize them by undermining their public support or (3) destroy them with force. Blind, blundering flag-waving ignorance won't help us do it. Hint: a fair resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would mvoe us immeasurably towards (2).

Regarding Durbin: his point was that someone reading the *FBI e-mails* by an *eyewitness* to Gitmo, would think they were reading about a prisoner camp run by a repressive, totalitarian regime -- if they didn't know beforehand that it was run by the USA. This point is obviously *so* important that Rove et al. are pulling out all the stops to divert attention from it.

Rather than 'apologize', Durbin should simply keep hammering that point home:
What kind of country do we want to be?

Posted by: krabapple | June 24, 2005 3:26 PM | Report abuse


. In times of war, it may be neceeary to stop the Liberal media even if that means using force. I think that's in the Constitution somewhere. Any help?

Father Tom:

Yeah, its specifically states in the First Amendent that it is UNCONSTITIONAL to do that.

Why does it seem like Xians skip the first ammendment on there way to vociferously defending the 2nd?

Posted by: FollowTheMoney | June 24, 2005 3:27 PM | Report abuse

Who's fault is it that so many young Republican's can't summon the patriotism to enlist in the ARMY.

Young Republicans - Calling all young Republican's enlist in the army today!!

SUPPORT DEAR LEADER'S WAR IN IRAQ

Posted by: Liberal | June 24, 2005 3:27 PM | Report abuse

. In times of war, it may be neceeary to stop the Liberal media even if that means using force. I think that's in the Constitution somewhere. Any help?

Father Tom:

Yeah, its specifically states in the First Amendent that it is UNCONSTITUTIONAL to do that.

Why does it seem like poeople skip the first ammendment on there way to vociferously defending the 2nd?

Posted by: FollowTheMoney | June 24, 2005 3:28 PM | Report abuse

I am sorry about arthritis and bad eyes. Bear in mind that even a bad eye can be taken by a terrorist who believes in an eye for an eye. Plus I don't think that a terrorist cares if it is a good one or a bad one.

Bear in mnd that chruches are buioldings too. Terrorists don't like them, which should be obvious now.

For the record I am not an old man and cannot drive a foreign car at all.

Posted by: Father Tom | June 24, 2005 3:29 PM | Report abuse

"Liberals who complicate things with facts are just trying to keep Christians from going to heaven."

The Bush Doctrine has never been more eloquently stated. Here's the GOP slogan for '06 -- "Down with facts, Up with Christians!"

Posted by: Patriot 1 | June 24, 2005 3:29 PM | Report abuse

Patriot1 -

I'll blame OBL for 9/11, not any American. I take it you have a different view.

I'll give Clinton credit for keeping the terrorist acts on American soil under super-catastrophic levels (the WTC, the Embassies in Africa, the Cole)...he didn't have the benefit of a 9/11 to make him step up. I'm pretty sure he would have.

I even liked how he bombed the Aspirin factory, although I thought it was a bit weak. But again, that was before 9/11.

as for "endure being hung upside-down by your manacled wrists over a filthy overflowing toilet", you've probably described most of terrorist-controlled Iraq, except that the water's probably been flushed more recently.

Posted by: georgie-porgie | June 24, 2005 3:30 PM | Report abuse

Father Tom makes my point for me, better than I ever could. The danger to democracy comes from within.

Posted by: phineoust | June 24, 2005 3:31 PM | Report abuse

">Can anyone, liberal or conservative, >envision a day when we "win" the war on >terror? Was anyone decided what will >constitute a "win"?
Oh yeah! A win is when these savages turn on themselves in Iraq, and we're no longer there."

I believe the War on Terror can be won without us actually maintaining a large presence in another country (Afghanastan) much like what we do for the wars on drugs, poverty, etc listed before. War in Iraq is a different story however, being as it is a differt war than the war on terror (or at least it SHOULD be).

Posted by: fencesitter | June 24, 2005 3:34 PM | Report abuse

>>Who's fault is it that so many young Republican's can't summon the patriotism to enlist in the ARMY.<<

Says who? This is quite possibly the most uninformed post I've read so far. I'm sure you read a lot of news and read a lot of papers, and probably belive everything Hollywood vomits toward you.

Try getting out and meeting some soldiers once in a while, preferably those who have been over there.

Posted by: JusticeNow | June 24, 2005 3:35 PM | Report abuse

One final thought.

Seems to me that if we truly are committed toa freedom loving America of the red white and blue, then we must agree to allow our chosen leader to get the job done no matter what. hard to say when it will end but I'm glas that Im over here and noth over there!

Still it is wasteful to Goad's earth if we simply allow all the bad things from this war go to waste. I say that we need to continue to fight to keep their memory alive.

So support our troops and people and buildings, cheeks, eyes, arthritis and the like by asking your congressman to allow the President to run again in 2008. I know it's illegal but we can probably vote for an exception just this once.

God Bless The War Against The Terrorists, The White House, The President, Jesus and the Rest.

Posted by: Father Tom | June 24, 2005 3:38 PM | Report abuse

The question was, I think, what is Karl Rove REALLY doing with his fatwah on "liberals"?

I offer a tentative answer: He is preparing the way for 2006, when the GOP...still unable to produce the corpus delicti of the man who actually attacked the U.S on 9/11... blames the Democrats for its failures.

It's sheer, Machiavelian genius. Rove will accuse those terrorist-friendly liberals of tying the hands of Real American Patriots (Republicans) who were ready to turn all of Iraq into a parking lot in their quest to kill Osama bin Laden... but couldn't because of those lilly livers in the Congressional minority.

(And let us always remember what Father Tom has taught us today -- facts keep Christians out of heaven, so we won't be having any of them here!)

Posted by: Patriot 1 | June 24, 2005 3:39 PM | Report abuse

re:Posted by: Father Tom | June 24, 2005 03:21 PM. Focusing on Rush Limbaugh's private life is wrong. WOW!! Now that is the pot calling the kettle black.

In the 90's the right screamed where is the outrage. I guess outrage is only allowed if you're a moral man like William Bennett. He's in the hypocrite camp with Rush. The party of traditional values. Too Funny.

Posted by: playnice | June 24, 2005 3:39 PM | Report abuse

TN Dave, I just read that the VA has a $1 billion shortfall. Will you blame that one on Clinton as well? This administration rushed us into Iraq with too few troops, with insufficent armor, and in some cases, insufficient training for the duties they were assigned, because they knew they would lose support for going into Iraq once people realized they were lying about the connection between Iraq and 9/11.

Nice try though...

Posted by: bichn | June 24, 2005 3:41 PM | Report abuse

Sorry I wasted a reply to one of Father Tom's posts. I thought he was serious. I didn't realize that he's just a complete idiot.

Posted by: phineoust | June 24, 2005 3:42 PM | Report abuse

Someone earlier had said that all Conservative posters merely echo Rush. This is undeniably true. However, count how many times you hear "no blood for oil," "how come YOU don't enlist," "Bush is Hitler," "Repugs," "religious right," etc. Now, I know 30 people didn't spontaneously come up with those...so who's giving the other side their talking points?

Let's just have a rule...if you heard it on talk radio, don't bring it to the dicussion.

Posted by: PG | June 24, 2005 3:44 PM | Report abuse

Okay, well I've finally made it to the end of the posts. Whew.

Many points I agree with, many I don't. What is fact and what is fiction, hard to tell.

I definitely support having your own opinion, but I, as I'm sure most of us, have only the opinions and biased information that is available to us from the internet, public tv, radio, etc. to give us even the slightest idea of what is going on in our government or the world.

I find it continually disturbing that anyone can atest to knowing anything. That being said, you can't just sit there and wait for the magic truth-giver to come down and sort it out for us. We have to make decisions based on, at best, compromised information.

Did I support the war, no. Did I support taking a little time to make a rational decision, yes. Do I support pulling us out of Iraq immediately and leaving a hole there to be filled by anyone, no.

I support some common sense. I support checking authority at every level. Why, because corruption occurs at every level. I support ignoring statistics. That's the first thing you learn about statistics is that you can make them say anything you want.

I do believe that everyone, Reps.,Dems, Independents, non-USers, and terrorist all believe they are doing the right an honorable thing. So whose definition of right and honorable do we use to decide whose the bad guy and whose the good guy? It appears we use the definition that is closest to our own, which in its way makes some sense.

In the end, it seems that there will always be terrorist as long as we don't know why they are resisting what is going on, whatever that may be. Is it opression, is it racism, hatred, who knows. We like to think of it as simply "Evil" because that makes our choices easier, but life isn't easy. Things are not black and white.

I appreciate all the views given in this post, and will try to take some insight from all of them, but in the end I will come to my own decision and move forward in life. As I do with everything. But know that your input has had some effect, be it positive or negative.

So when you go to sleep tonight know that you've had an effect on the world at large. Know that someone actually thought about your opinion and contemplated it vs. just objecting and fighting the thought.

Know that you have power, and you have chosen to use it a certain way. Whether that is an acceptable way is purely in your judgement, and will make little difference to me on the whole.

Discussion is a wonderful thing, contemplation is even better.

Whew, that was a bit long winded, but hey, it's the only one you'll see from me today, so I had to roll it all up into one.

Good day to all of you, and keep you mind moving.

Posted by: Jaegernaut | June 24, 2005 3:45 PM | Report abuse

Dem, Gopper, Indie, who knows what I am. So far my voting record is Reagan, Reagan, Bush, Perot, Clinton, Gore, Kerry. Reagan did a good job of scaring me into believing the USSR would soon take over. Plus recessions are bad news. Then Reagan again, even though by then I was watching warily. But Mondale? Please. Then Bush, Sr. Maybe my biggest voting mistake (he really was one of the least effective ever), but like Mondale, I just couldn't vote for Dukakis. Perot was a protest vote. By then I realized that Reaganomics and Bush Sr. had been a disaster for most of America, as in the part I was part of, and Slick Willy was just too slick for me. The Clinton re-election vote was obvious. Everything that everyone (Dems, Goppers, Indies too) looks to for grading a presidency and country was looking up. Voting for Dole just made it obvious that you'd vote for RinTinTin if he were the GOP's candidate. Gore? Well, he wasn't exciting, but like Mondale and Dukakis, I just couldn't vote for Dubya. Where they were too wimpy, Dubya was simply just too stupid. It was as obvious to me then as it is to everyone on the planet now.

How do Goppers live with defending a Prez that most of them are smarter than? Anyway, take a stupid Gopper, give him the Presidency, and what do you get? An over-powerful VP for starters; an administration and party that consistently blames the last guy for all the country's faults (as we all know, pointing fingers is a primary indicator of poor leadership); a return to easy-to-implement economic policies (tax break for you!) that provide short term fixes, easily fooling the minions, while the rest of us realize the long term effects; 9/11, which might been averted had the last guy's terrorist team been listened to, instead they were laughed at, and of course then blamed; lying about Iraq's WMD and then of course, taking America to War, not because Iraq attacked us, or because they were linked to 9/11, but because they had WMDs...um, because they actually were linked to 9/11?...um, OK, because Saddam is a baaaad man. Yeah, that's it!

May I repeat something? War.

That's pretty much the prime indicator of how stupid this President and administration really is. We should be scouring the planet for OBL and Al Q. Instead, we War with a country that wasn't even involved in 9/11. (I won't get into how the original and glorious War predictions from Dick and Rummy now sound like assessments from, you got it, stupid men). And now, instead of getting OBL and Al Q, we got Saddam, and we have this country that we demolished and now have to fix, at the cost of $billions per month, as well as an average of 540 U.S. casualties a month (60 dead and 480 injured), and in the process we create a cesspool where our real enemies are breeding in order to wreak havoc on us for generations.

Brilliant, eh?

Posted by: TheTruth | June 24, 2005 3:45 PM | Report abuse

"Let's just have a rule...if you heard it on talk radio, don't bring it to the dicussion."

I can live by that rule, since I don't listen to talk radio. Besides, I call it the "Repo Party". Seems more appropriate.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 24, 2005 3:46 PM | Report abuse

I started reading this blog and its comments this afternoon, and hey! has it wandered around some! Still, very interesting. Two thoughts have struck me from amongst all the comments today:

(i) If, as murmurings indicate, term limits are modified and an amendment to let a President serve more than two sittings passes (as GWB and co. might hope), won't Clinton have to "have an accident", otherwise (q) he'll run, and (b) he'll win by a landslide! ?

(ii) There are more months to the end of GWB's term than there are months behind us to the start of the Iraq war. At the present and quickening pace, does that mean there'll be mored dead Americans in Iraq than dead Americans that died on 9/11 by the time GWB leaves office? (I know there's absolutely no connection between Saddam and 9/11).

Posted by: Just Thinking | June 24, 2005 3:48 PM | Report abuse

Father Tom

Sitting back and allowing a really bad president do real damage to working families all over the country (not just the military families) is unconscionable. Jesus said that which you do to the list of you, you do to me. We will all be judged on how we treat the least of us.

You are no christian.

Posted by: bichn | June 24, 2005 3:48 PM | Report abuse

We don't really have a war on terror, only a war of terror. Bush and Bin Laden are two of a kind. Each thinks his God is telling him to send his fighters to the other side of the planet to slaughter innocent civilians by the thousands. And of course each has convinced himself that he is somehow fully justified in this insane, immoral course of action. I'm not really a believer, myself, but if I though God were telling me to do this sort of thing, I'd be wise enough to know it was time to find a new God.

Posted by: Bill-Man | June 24, 2005 3:48 PM | Report abuse

>>"So support our troops and people and buildings, cheeks, eyes, arthritis and the like by asking your congressman to allow the President to run again in 2008."

Hehe...Father Tom, from the name, right down to comments like this, you've got to be one of the most successful trolls I've seen on a forum in a long time. I tip my hat.

Posted by: PG | June 24, 2005 3:49 PM | Report abuse

Last time I checked there wasn't much in the way of liberal talk radio. Talking points, however, are absolute necessities for the conservatives because anything else would be too deep for your herd to understand and defend. We moderates balance our own news. tyvm

Posted by: playnice | June 24, 2005 3:51 PM | Report abuse

So, from several comments and based on only one example, it's unpatriotic to point out that America was mistreating prisoners but it's not unpatriotic to actually mistreat the prisoners, regardless of the prisoner's rights under the Geneva Conventions. There would not have been any reason for any negative comments about Abu Ghraib or Gitmo if nothing negative had occurred there.

Also, it was my understanding that winning an election did not mean that you were entitled to get your way in all things. If so, then Newt Gingrich and all the "Contract with America" people were upatriotic traitors who should have been exiled from the country. I didn't believe that then, I don't believe that now and I think that if you can't support an argument without calling someone who disagrees with you unpatriotic then you need a refresher course on American values.

After 9/11, everybody wanted to get the people who did this and thus the War in Afghanistan against the Taliban. This war was widely and correctly supported. And then instead of finishing the job we took a left turn into Iraq, which had, at best, a spurious to connection to 9-11. Reasonable people can disagree about something this momentus and stifling the voices of people who disagree with you is the most unAmerican thing I can think of.

Posted by: mm | June 24, 2005 3:53 PM | Report abuse

Regarding Durbin: his point was that someone reading the *FBI e-mails* by an *eyewitness* to Gitmo, would think they were reading about a prisoner camp run by a repressive, totalitarian regime -- if they didn't know beforehand that it was run by the USA. This point is obviously *so* important that Rove et al. are pulling out all the stops to divert attention from it.
Rather than 'apologize', Durbin should simply keep hammering that point home:
What kind of country do we want to be?"
Posted by: krabapple | June 24, 2005 03:26 PM

Thank you! A little context! Suddenly, Durbin's comments make more sense, and frankly, it's disappointing that no has pointed this out until now.

If we do not follow the Geneva conventions and respect international law at Gitmo, why should Saddam Hussein respect international law? Why should Kim Jong Il respect international law? If we do not obey these laws, what kind of country do we become?

Posted by: True Blue Liberal | June 24, 2005 3:54 PM | Report abuse

Rove controls the presidency, both houses of congress, and FOX news, the polls keep tanking, so he blame the liberals.

INSTEAD OF BLAMING LIBERAL'S DEAR LEADER SHOULD HAVE ARMY RECRUITERS TAG ALONE TO ALL HIS FUND RAISERS.

Posted by: Liberal | June 24, 2005 3:55 PM | Report abuse

What a laugh. All the Clinton was great Bush sucks comments show just how shortsighted most of you are and how much your "medicine" has afftected your memories.

Rove states that the liberals would prefer to prosecute terrorists rather than kill them. Wonder where he got that idea?

The Balkans?
Sudan?
The 2 African Embassy bombings?
Yemen?

Each and every time the Clinton Administration was faced with an attack they looked to the UN, set up courts and war crime tribunals, gave it enough attention to make it through the short span of public interest and demand for action, then left with nothing accomplished.

Bush summed it up just after 9/11 when he stated our response would be studied and involve the full force of our military. He then stated he wasn't going to shoot a multi million dollar missle into some tents and camels and claim victory -- like Clinton did -- in response to the attack.

They have made some mistakes, most wars include them -- even FDR screwed up a couple of times during WW2, but in all his tenacity and focus has made us safer. When this is over the Middle East will look a hell of a lot better than the Balkans or Central Africa do after the great Prosecution by the Clinton Administrations.

Posted by: Hawk | June 24, 2005 3:56 PM | Report abuse

what blather, bomb the fu.. out of the towel heads and send the boys home!! no f.cki...apologies here!!!!

Posted by: 911again | June 24, 2005 3:56 PM | Report abuse

One more thing. As for terrorists on airplanes, that could be easily solved if we armed all the passengers. This is legal under the Constitution. It would be cheaper than hiring all the extra airport security. And the airlines could operate faster and more efficiently. Just pass out the pistols when getting on board and collect them when done -- just like headphones.

this idea has a couple of flaws but is theoretically a start.

Posted by: Father Tom | June 24, 2005 3:57 PM | Report abuse

>>"I definitely support having your own opinion, but I, as I'm sure most of us, have only the opinions and biased information that is available to us from the internet, public tv, radio, etc. to give us even the slightest idea of what is going on in our government or the world."

Might I make a suggestion? For every story that you are interested in, use a site like Google News to link to the same story from multiple sources. Then you'll get every perspective. Something happens in Israel? You can link to an American paper, a European paper, an Israeli paper, an Arab paper, etc. If nothing else, you're at least not indoctrinating yourself with the same rhetoric from the same news source.

That's how I found this story...after I had already read five other similar ones, both from admittedly biased sources on both sides, and from "objective" sources.

Posted by: PG | June 24, 2005 3:57 PM | Report abuse

I think that ANY administration that perpetuates an US and THEM mentality deserves what ever black eye it gets. The Carl Rove comments are a red herring, a sort of "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain" trick. Everyone seems to forget that this nation of ours was built, brick by brick, by compromise and reason. Yes there have been many times, such as the current times, when extremism was strong. The Alien and Sedition acts for one, or the period just after the Civil War another period of time that comes to mind is the Nixon Administration. One of the great US and THEM periods of time.

No matter. What matters is the simple fact that our employees ( remember they work for us) are not doing the work of the people. Neither side is. Both are simply looking for leverage against the other. Rather than doing the tough work that needs to be done.
The list is long and daunting.
Healthcare - for all Americans
Education - The BEST investment in the future of this great country
Energy ( No - Bush has it all wrong Oil is a finite resource)
Infrastructure ( both real and virtual)
Science - We're falling behind here so fast it's not even funny.
Corporate Reform - These guys are robbing us blind


Oh and one more thing - just to stir the pot - The Jewish God is The Christian God is the Islamic God. And guess what people, other than different methods of worship, illuminated by MAN. The basic precepts of each are the same. Treat each other with repsect. Or as you would like to be treated. That's what it boils down to. All the rest is just window dressing.

Oh and one more thing God did not choose George, God has got a lot on his plate, wouldn't you think? You really think God paying close attention? Give me a break. God might give him a dope slap at some point...

Posted by: Phoebus | June 24, 2005 3:59 PM | Report abuse

Clinton was a great President...Amen...even today, people are still talking about him. How many years has Bush been in the office? Yet, people can't seem to find anything nice to say about the guy. Don't be mad because you can't find somebody to give him a BJ. Getting a BJ is better than sending somebody child to die. Clinton--What?

Posted by: What? | June 24, 2005 3:59 PM | Report abuse

I have a better idea, Father Tom -- let's just kill all airline passengers before they board the plane! Then no one could possibly hijack a jetliner! And if they are good Christians, they will go straight to heaven unsullied by facts.

Over and out.

Posted by: Patriot 1 | June 24, 2005 4:02 PM | Report abuse

In response to the person who wants to bomb everyone in Iraq, I think that Jesus said that you should do unto toerhs as they do unto you. Personally, if someone bombed me, I would want them to apologize if I got hurt.

Therefore, I think thatit would Christain and American if we apologized after we bombed everyone. This is especially true when it comes to children because they don't understand that we are trying to help them be free.

Sounds old fashioned, I know. But sometimes a little courtesty is all the world needs.

God Bless America, again.

Posted by: Father Tom | June 24, 2005 4:03 PM | Report abuse

to mm
war is war and there is no such thing as mistreating prisoners. Did you watch any of the beheadings? couldn't say what you said if you had the guts to watch....these are butchers who would as soon slit your wife & kids throats to promote their beliefs...got to draw the line somewhere.

Posted by: 911 | June 24, 2005 4:05 PM | Report abuse

Re: Hawk

You must be able to see into the future to state things will look better....etc. Myself I can not see into the future, however I can view history. Lie upon Lie upon Lie. Whether a person, a country or some other entity "deserves" something in ones eye, there must be truth and probable cause. You can not have "hurt feelings" or want "revenge", decide to give a reason, change your reasoning many times over. I DO SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, I DO NOT SUPPORT OUR PRESIDENT OR HIS ADMINISTRATION.

The Republicans have always said "no big government", and look what they've done.... This administration is so very messed up, I truly believe if the truth came up and bit them in the nose, leaving a welt seeable by anyone looking at them, they would deny it to the end.

It is a sad sad state our Nation and it's Political figures are in.

Thank you for your time

Posted by: Lynn | June 24, 2005 4:06 PM | Report abuse

re PG 3:57 -- factcheck.org is good for this as well. Media sources have historically let us down. Read the actual spoken and written words for the real truth. It's your mind, exercise it.

as far as Father Tom and the 911 terrorists. He must have missed the VIDEO showing the 911 hijackers getting taken out of line at Logan (Boston). We've had the measures in place to prevent hijacking. This administration believes it is necessary for my mother to remove her shoes before being allowed to board a plane. I hope she never gets any prosthetic limbs. She'll never get to visit her grandchildren.

Posted by: playnice | June 24, 2005 4:06 PM | Report abuse

God Bless America, and Nobody else...LOL

Posted by: what? | June 24, 2005 4:06 PM | Report abuse

>>"Last time I checked there wasn't much in the way of liberal talk radio. Talking points, however, are absolute necessities for the conservatives because anything else would be too deep for your herd to understand and defend. We moderates balance our own news. tyvm"

BUSHED? AIR AMERICA RADIO...c'mon, you've seen the billboards. And calling conservatives "my herd" shows me that you really haven't been reading my posts. Sorry, I call BS where I see BS. Ten people using the same line shows me that it must have come from somewhere and is not original. I get into many discussions on many forums, and you start to notice patterns with both the hardcore conservatives and hardcore liberals. If you're not guilty of that, bravo, then my post was not directed towards you.

Posted by: PG | June 24, 2005 4:07 PM | Report abuse

Why doesn't Karl Rove invite Army recruiters to join him at his speaking engagements? What better way to show his patriotism.

Posted by: Liberal | June 24, 2005 4:07 PM | Report abuse

To ther person who wants to kill people on airplanes, you sound like a terrorist. For your information, terrorists are UnAmerican! That should be obvious.

Second, killing people would not solve the problem because then you are doing something that the terrorists want. They don't care if they die, right? So seems to me that you're approach won't help the situation.

Posted by: Father Tom | June 24, 2005 4:09 PM | Report abuse

re: playnice

I think I broke my neck from shaking my head so much during the election campaigns as Factcheck.org repeatedly put both Bush and Kerry, and their mouthpieces, to shame by doing nothing more than simply pointing out facts and showing the raw text of whatever document/speech/vote happened to be in question at the time.

Posted by: PG | June 24, 2005 4:11 PM | Report abuse

"Which I say is exactly the problem with the UN 'Peacekeepers'. They looked at Saddam, saw his crimes, and said/did nothing."
Posted by: fencesitter

Though it's off-topic, it's worth noting (given all the talk of UN failures these days) that the UN is a SUPRANATIONAL organization. It does not have an army.

UN Peacekeepers are troops "donated" by member countries, of which there are 191. In Rwanda, the bulk of the peacekeeping forces came from Bangladesh and Ghana. The Belgians - the best-equipped, best-trained soldiers that UNAMIR had on the ground - pulled out after sustaining ten casualties.

Lt. General Roméo Dallaire, commander of the peacekeeping mission, first asked, then demanded, then BEGGED for more help from the international community. America was at the forefront in denying requests for more aid in terms of troops, equipment, and even transportation.

Oft-maligned peacekeeping forces have done much more than most realize to prevent or at least mitigate conflict and suffering; most of their failures stem from GOVERNMENTAL failures, including on the part of our own government. One-hundred-ninety countries can favor action, but the Security Council has five permanent members with veto power, and all it takes is one veto to condemn innocent civilians to further suffering.

UN Peacekeepers did not "look at Saddam, see his crimes, and say or do nothing": the international community did. If you want to prevent suffering and preserve legitimacy, urge your Representative, Senators, and the Executive branch to work WITH the UN, to take a stand, and to CONTRIBUTE, financially, logistically, and with troops.

If the US were to put forth a resolution in the Security Council stating that the genocide/crimes against humanity in Darfur were unacceptable and proposing a Chapter VI (peace-keeping)or Chapter VI (peace-enforcing) mission to the Sudan, the crises would be resolved within a relatively short amount of time. Instead, Congress, the President, and former Sec. State Colin Powell declared a finding of genocide and then did little to stop it.

Maybe if we weren't engaged in an illegal war in Iraq, we'd have some troops available to help the people of Darfur...

Bush Sr. was able, as a result of Hussein's aggression, to secure UN approval and 43 nations took part in Desert Shield/Storm. LEGITIMACY is the key. Bush had none then, and has none today. We're on, what, reason number four for the invasion of Iraq? Our "Coalition of the Willing" is made up of countries that are so dependent on US aid that they can't afford not to join. At least one (Costa Rica) doesn't even have a military. Bush did not present a very compelling case for war, but in his defense, there was no case to be made...

Posted by: DangerousChe | June 24, 2005 4:11 PM | Report abuse

war is war and there is no such thing as mistreating prisoners. Did you watch any of the beheadings? couldn't say what you said if you had the guts to watch....these are butchers who would as soon slit your wife & kids throats to promote their beliefs...got to draw the line somewhere.
Posted by: 911 | June 24, 2005 04:05 PM

Wait a minute, how does this compare to bombing cities of civilians to promote our beliefs? (e.g., democracy) Explain to me the difference, because they seem pretty similar. And where exactly is it we've drawn the line? I don't actually see one.

Both sides claim God on their side, somehow I don't think God's involved.

Posted by: True Blue Liberal | June 24, 2005 4:11 PM | Report abuse

liberalism is a mental disorder

Posted by: liberal | June 24, 2005 4:12 PM | Report abuse

The conservatives are bad losers. That's why they hated Clinton - he was a Democrat who presided during an economic boom, a budget surplus, and continued to develop the international level of respect the BUSH SR. started (W has pretty well wiped that out). He took over the center from the GOP and there was nothing substantial they could plaster him with so they dug up the morals stuff. So now the GOP has made that supposed character stuff so important that you could have an IQ of 37 but if you go to church and were a virgin on your wedding day - ok, if you PREACH abstinence - you could get elected.

Liberals are mad because America was built on liberal ideals - from the Declaration to emancipation to the GI bill to votes for women and minorities to the fed reserve to the national park system - fought every step of the way by conservatives. If we'd listened to conservatives the Bald Eagle would have been extinct a generation ago. And then the next generation of conservatives decides that it's good we got rid of slavery after all, but they're against whatever it is that those evil liberals are up to this time. Most of those working class Christians who voted for Bush would be working 60(+)-hour weeks and spending their retirements in the poorhouses if not for 20th century American Liberals, and that's what's really really sad. They think they won but we're all losing.

Posted by: chas | June 24, 2005 4:12 PM | Report abuse

touche' I think the liberal talk radio goes overboard. I've listened once and have no idea where to find it on the dial. Fortunately or unfortunately it is not really mainstream. Nothing like it on TV. There is no libeeral media version of Hannity & Patsie. or the O'Really factor or these other outlets with no true discourse.

Posted by: playnice | June 24, 2005 4:13 PM | Report abuse

When I see Pfc. Karl Rove walking through the streets of Tikrit with a gun defending Iraqis, then I will listen to him talking about partriotism. Same for Bush and Cheney. The dems ought to be saying this. Wake up and find Bin Laden.

Posted by: c m mastersen | June 24, 2005 4:13 PM | Report abuse

To ther person who believes the media is conservative, FYI the media is run by people who are against American values. Example: PBS. If you look you see shows with other cultures on all the time. Not that that is bad, but what about showing American cultuer? On PBS you see cooking shows from Frnace, and boat trips in Germany, and Masterpiece theater from England and all the shows on world business news; and what about all the shows that teach children about pro-environment stuff? Makes you think. All of this stuff is pro-Liberal -- not pro-Christian. Thereofre, it is liberal.

We therefore need more balance. Pro-America equals a pro-Republican and conservative point of view which is not what we Americans are getting!

I rest myu case.

Posted by: Father Tom | June 24, 2005 4:16 PM | Report abuse

true blue lib.....the war on Iraq was right but done wrong....we should have bombed the fu..k out of them, never used ground troups. So there we agree Bush did right and wrong..... and liberalis is a Mental Disorder!!!

Posted by: 911 | June 24, 2005 4:17 PM | Report abuse

I'm no believer, but I wish there were an after-life if only so Bush and Bin Laden could both wake up there together to find they hadn't made it to heaven, and that it takes a lot better justification to slaughter thousands of civilians than some lunatic beliefs and a bunch of lies.

Posted by: Bill-Man | June 24, 2005 4:18 PM | Report abuse

I'm no believer, but I wish there were an after-life if only so Bush and Bin Laden could both wake up there together to find they hadn't made it to heaven, and that it takes a lot better justification to slaughter thousands of civilians than some lunatic beliefs and a bunch of lies.

thanks ms clinton

Posted by: 91 | June 24, 2005 4:20 PM | Report abuse

Tn Dave, you're full of it - as are your heroes.

When I saw your statement that "I served in the Marines from 92 - 96, under Slick Willie as the commander in chief. I received no pay raises the entire time I was in. Not even a cost of living raise," I knew you were full of crap. You see, I too was in the military - for 23 years (including those few you mention, rookie) You got a pay raise every one of those years, bucko. Don't tell such obvious lies, 'k? 'Cause this isn't Rush or O'Reilly, where the truth shall not be heard. For what it's worth, during those years an E3 under 2's base pay went up each year (as did everyone else's)- starting at $913 in '92, and ending at $1019 in '96.

Then, after saying "I'd like to see the actual numbers to back that up," when someone stated that more Dems than Pubs served in the armed forces, you turn right around and have the gall to say "These are the reasons military people are primarily Republicans." You are simply full of it - you don't know whether you're comin' or goin'.

You further prove your inability do basic research when you state "Every time a helicopter crashed in the last 5 years because of black market parts being installed on them, I thought "Thanks Bill!" Why? Because of Clinton's cut backs to the military." You see, The cuts were mostly made under George the 1st (After all, the Cold War ended) and the real dollar budgets were actually slightly more generous under Clinton. Plus, don't forget, it's the Congress which has the final say on budgets. I also seem to recall the Congress was taken over in '92 by those Republicans you so love. And by the way, black market parts come from traitorous defense contractors pocketing the money that was allocated for good parts, not from the president. You know, companies like Halliburton, MZM, et al. Hey, remember the $500 toilet seats scandal... under Reagan? I do. Remember when Reagan put together the "Grace Commission" to try to justify shutting down military commissaries? I do.

Get a clue, and not a set of talking points from Hannity or Rush if you want to enter public discourse.

Posted by: Mike | June 24, 2005 4:23 PM | Report abuse

The Conservatives are NOT bad losers; we are as good at losing as anybody else. We don't go around feeling sorry for ourselves when someone can't spend enough money to get the meassage out. That's not our fault! It's the fault of the Liberal media who are prejudiced against covering conservative candidates. It is the liberals who are complaining all the time, even when they have a liberal president like Jimmy Carter (who, by the way, lost to a GREAT MAN, Ronald Reagan, who also believe in God so that proves my point).

Lesson? Repbulicans don't whine as much as Liberals because they are more in power and don't have to worry about not being able to pull the strings that makes America Great.

God Bless The President and The Non-Liberal Media

Posted by: Father Tom | June 24, 2005 4:24 PM | Report abuse

As a card carrying democrat for over 50 years I am disappointed, though not surprised by the reaction of the Dems ... they've been doing this for years ... north and south ... In the south, in the days of one partyism, their primaries could get vicious ... but come general election time they were all lovey dovey ...
One thing you have to give them ... they hang together ... the Republicans could learn from that, instead of "eating their own." In summation, the view here is that the dems have just never gotten over losing in 2000. It's way past time to move on and stop acting like whiners ...

Posted by: BULLDOG | June 24, 2005 4:27 PM | Report abuse

Rove was stating fact. Nothing to apologise for.

Posted by: rtd | June 24, 2005 4:34 PM | Report abuse

"Most assuredly not. Indeed, the UN weapons inspectors were the first to expose Bush's lies about Iraq's weapons."

Man you are ignorant. Everybody thought he had WMD and you know darn well he did because he USED THEM on HIS OWN PEOPLE. The difference is one side wanted to go in NOW and the other wanted to wait. Spoonfed liberal lies you have been.

Posted by: wow | June 24, 2005 4:34 PM | Report abuse

Father Tom, it was funny for a while, but now it's a bit annoying:

From Wikipedia: Internet Troll

In the context of the Internet, a troll is a person who makes inflammatory or hostile comments, which by effect or design cause disruptions in discourse, or a post made by such a person. Trolling can be described as a breaching experiment, which, because of the use of an alternate persona, allows for normal social boundaries and rules of etiquette to be tested or otherwise broken, without serious consequences.

Troll food refers to replies to the original controversial troll posts, that the trolls subsequently use as feedback to throw more fuel to the fire of their posts.

Common types of troll messages or activities:...intentionally naïve or politically contentious messages -- "I think George W. Bush is the best/worst President ever."

Father Tom...I think you used the above quote word for word.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 24, 2005 4:36 PM | Report abuse

It never ceases to astonish me that conservatives still think the media are liberal. I am very liberal and I am so outraged at the media's silence, support, and complicity regarding Bush and his policies, that I haven't been able to stomach listening to the mainstream news media for the past 4 years or so. They refuse to investigate or report on any of Bush's lies or wrongdoing. The media hounded Clinton continously over even the most minor of alleged offenses, yet Bush can do almost anything without a word from the now mute media. How could this possibly bother any of you who call yourselves conservatives? I really don't understand it. As a liberal I detest the mainstream new media.

Posted by: Bill-Man | June 24, 2005 4:39 PM | Report abuse

To whoever said I was a troll. I am not. I do not use the internet often but was hoping today for a stimulating conversation. I was wrong. You should not assume the wrong things about someone based on what you don't know. I am sorry if my insites are not to your liking.

And by the way, not everyone who is writing things today is really me. Other people are using my name!

God Bless American and The Presidnet, of Course

Posted by: Father Tom | June 24, 2005 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Bill-Man,

You can always tell a paper's slant by the headlines, and especially by the pictures they use of political figures on both sides. Every news source that I've seen slants one way or the other. IMO, it all evens out. Just know that you're outraged as a liberal, but many conservatives are equally outraged and can point to just as many "uncovered stories." I think that shows that the media may slant, but overall is more or less down the middle. If you're in power, you're going to get picked on.

Posted by: PG | June 24, 2005 4:46 PM | Report abuse

UN Peacekeepers did not "look at Saddam, see his crimes, and say or do nothing": the international community did.

DangerousChe: You are right, that is the point I was trying to make and I misspoke. I do not blame the actual Peacekeepers. I blame the international community. But I disagree with you on one thing, the war in Iraq, while technically illegal, was neccessary and I am glade Bush acted. In a way I see it as the start of righting what the international community did wrong in Rwanda, Darfur, et al.

Posted by: fencesitter | June 24, 2005 4:46 PM | Report abuse

The only reason that he USED THEM on HIS OWN PEOPLE is because during the 80's America used Irag against Iran. We gave him the WMD that he used on his own people.

Posted by: wow that was stupid | June 24, 2005 4:52 PM | Report abuse

Iraq: Bush Myths vs. Reality
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,160556,00.html

Posted by: fox news | June 24, 2005 4:54 PM | Report abuse

Libreals don't have a support our troops magnet on there cars cause they r dumb. President Bush is just like Jesus!

Posted by: True Believer | June 24, 2005 4:55 PM | Report abuse

I hate it when "patriots" claim we are at war...we are not at war, we started a war. When you add in the fact that we have such superior fire-power, this is not a war at all. I'd like to see our soft "soldiers" go toe to toe with someone of equal fire-power - we'd probably get our ass kicked more than we already are.

Posted by: Alberto | June 24, 2005 4:56 PM | Report abuse

Patriotism has to do with love of country,not leaders. There is no doubt that the Bush administration has led us down a path of war which at least they have not been candid about or at worst they lied to the people. Lots of circumstantial evidence is available to support this. Most of the people now understand this. The question is how long will the will of the people continue to support this war, how long will the volunteer army be able to sustain this war, Will it backfire? Publish an exit date, maybe not but he who believes that the people will continue to support a war which currently puts plenty of US soldiers in the cross hairs of terrorists is not living in reality. Why would a terrorist want to come to America to kill Americans? There are plenty in Iraq with easy access from Syria or Iran and they blend in better. They fought the Russians for many years in Afganistan and they'll fight the US military for many years in Iraq, even after the Iraqi miltary takes over of most of the operations. This current exit strategy still means many soldiers will die and the terrorists will not be banished. Anyone who doesn't see this is not unpatriotic, just blind.

Posted by: Reuben | June 24, 2005 4:58 PM | Report abuse

Rove was stating fact. Nothing to apologise for.
Posted by: rtd | June 24, 2005 04:34 PM

Actually, the only fact in Rove's statement was that Al Jazeera broadcasts news. The other parts are actually conjecture, a guess, a type of fiction. I know cable news passes conjecture off as fact, but they can't be more different.

As I said earlier, I have a right to be pi$$ed off when folks like Rove talk about what I believe as a liberal, because I can't imagine someone being less informed on the subject. Which means that Karl Rove is talking out of his a$$, which means that he is lying, which means that he owes me an apology. Read my earlier posts.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 24, 2005 4:59 PM | Report abuse

You really nailed it Reuben. Couldn't agree more.

Posted by: Doug | June 24, 2005 5:00 PM | Report abuse

Well now Alberto, obviously, you have never seen any of our "softies" in action. We consistently go toe-to-toe with ambushes in both Afghanistan and Iraq, and for every loss we take, we dish out several to the bad guys - yes, bad guys - who declared war on the US way back before 11 Sep 01.

Posted by: D | June 24, 2005 5:01 PM | Report abuse

Rove/Bush will go down as the most successful buddy-team since Martin & Lewis - just not as funny.

Think: Got rid of Saddam/Rather
Tax cuts for the rich
Gas prices hitting $3 per
Oil drilling everywhere
KBR making a killing

He is accomplishing everything the Supreme Court et al expected when they put him there. And the hits keep coming.

Posted by: Ensane | June 24, 2005 5:03 PM | Report abuse

I think that ANY administration that perpetuates an US and THEM mentality deserves what ever black eye it gets. The Carl Rove comments are a red herring, a sort of "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain" trick. Everyone seems to forget that this nation of ours was built, brick by brick, by compromise and reason. Yes there have been many times, such as the current times, when extremism was strong. The Alien and Sedition acts for one, or the period just after the Civil War another period of time that comes to mind is the Nixon Administration. One of the great US and THEM periods of time.

No matter. What matters is the simple fact that our employees ( remember they work for us) are not doing the work of the people. Neither side is. Both are simply looking for leverage against the other. Rather than doing the tough work that needs to be done.
The list is long and daunting.
Healthcare - for all Americans
Education - The BEST investment in the future of this great country
Energy ( No - Bush has it all wrong Oil is a finite resource)
Infrastructure ( both real and virtual)
Science - We're falling behind here so fast it's not even funny.
Corporate Reform - These guys are robbing us blind


Oh and one more thing - just to stir the pot - The Jewish God is The Christian God is the Islamic God. And guess what people, other than different methods of worship, illuminated by MAN. The basic precepts of each are the same. Treat each other with repsect. Or as you would like to be treated. That's what it boils down to. All the rest is just window dressing.

Oh and one more thing God did not choose George, God has got a lot on his plate, wouldn't you think? You really think God paying close attention? Give me a break. God might give him a dope slap at some point...

Posted by: Phoebus | June 24, 2005 5:06 PM | Report abuse

****God said it best in the Bible when he wrote: "I am the light of this World." (And, yes, I believe that the Buible is God's word, and that he wrote every page of it.)****

Which one of the numerous edits to the bible are you referring to?

****JESUS WEILDS A BRIGHT AND FALMING SWORD****

Welds a falming sword? I thought he was a carpenter?

****AND WHEN HE IS DONE WITH THE TERRORSISTS***

I'm assthuming the extra Sths' are sthimply for emphasisth.

****HE WILL COME FORTHE LIEBERALS
FOR THEY ARE NOT RIGHTEOUS****

Does Joe Lieberman know about this? It might come as a bit of shock if some welder shows up waving about a falming sword.

****YEA VERILY****

I think that just goes without saying.

****SURE HE SAID THAT THING ABOUT THE OETHER CHEEK****

Did I just walk into a Monty Python skit?

****BUT THEIR COMES ATIME FOR ACTION
AND IT IS NOW****

I'm betting Joe is on the horn right now with 911 before that maniac in a welding mask gets the whole neighborhood in an uproar! What will the Kennedys think?!?

Posted by: me, myself and some biologist from Iowa slathered in corn oil | June 24, 2005 5:07 PM | Report abuse

Democrats stick together? I'll avoid the obvious icky pun in response to that. Their only togetherness is entirely accidental -- as when they're tripping over each other to distance themselves from the handful with spine enough to criticize the other party.

As for the Republicans, well I think of this administration as Warren G. Harding, plus nukes, minus flappers, minus gin. Unless Jeff Gannon qualifies as a flapper. And if teapot dome could have started a World War.

Posted by: sinuous | June 24, 2005 5:08 PM | Report abuse

You are not welcome in canada

Posted by: Reply to Wasp | June 24, 2005 5:19 PM | Report abuse

"All your base are belong to us." Nice post. Spoken like a true American.

學會講英國蠢貨

Posted by: Xiangdao be original | June 24, 2005 5:19 PM | Report abuse

WASP is an idiot.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 24, 2005 5:22 PM | Report abuse

****One more thing. As for terrorists on airplanes, that could be easily solved if we armed all the passengers. This is legal under the Constitution. It would be cheaper than hiring all the extra airport security. And the airlines could operate faster and more efficiently. Just pass out the pistols when getting on board and collect them when done -- just like headphones.

this idea has a couple of flaws but is theoretically a start.****

That could get a little dicey flying into Florida airspace. You feel threatened by the steward cutting you off at 6 Harvey Wallbangers and we've got Dodge City at 30,000 feet!

Not that you wouldn't be justified after your buzz is being threatened, but I hear that bullets are kind of pesky when it comes to that whole "cabin pressure" thing.

Posted by: me, myself and Father Tom slathered gun grease *WOO HOO* | June 24, 2005 5:24 PM | Report abuse

"To survive a war, you have to become a war....." -Jesus (or Rambo, I forget)

God bless America, and no one else, eh?.

And what is Alberto V05 hotoil going on about here? Our "soft" soldiers? Have you met a real soldier(I'm not talking national guard, two weeks a year, one weekend a month guys) ever?
Those guys are crazy. They do a job you can't fathom, and have to live with it when it's done.

In perspective: my friend is a Marine, a damn good one, at 22(though young, even younger than I am). He wants to go back into full active duty he's so good. He has killed and seen people killed, and he wakes up from combat fatigue many a night. These guys are not soft, j-hole. I'd like to see you say that sentence to his face first, then we'll find this imaginary military you speak of do dearly to wage war with the next day. There's a lot more going on in the world than these sensational skirmshes you see on TV. Most of our battles go on without us knowing every fricking detail, without play by play from John Madden and Wolf Blitzer(so has to be a stage name). Just keep in mind, someone has to do it, someone chose to do it, and don't piss on them for their choice to do something. And on this note, stop pissing on what they do. They're in combat. Most soldiers don't like hearing, "I support you, but I don't support 'the war'(ie. 'what you're doing for a living')"

We humped up before, and now we're trying to make ammends for it by giving ourselves so that an different culture can attept to thrive. It won't be 2 years, it might not be 10. It's going to take generations for things to get better in Iraq. We're not playing RISK here. It's going to be a long process to help the people of Iraq to get on their own feet. We could pull out now, yeah, and watch everything fall again. Or, we couldhelp lay a foundation that will stand. Their beliefs won't change today, but over time, and new generations growing up with hope and a chance, those beliefs will adapt and become what is best for them(I'm not saying they'll become USA: the sequel, just what will work will work. It takes death for some beliefs to change The older you are, the tougher it is to change your ways.

oh, and in closing, you're right, we are not at war. We're garrisoned, and keeping a semblance of peace. Not perfect, but it's getting better.

ouch, my head hurts thinking of how many smart people there are in America, and yet how dumb and separated we are by little words like "liberal", and "conserative", and "south beach diet". Can't everyone see that both "sides" of our democracy want the same thing: separation. Oh, we talk about togetherness, and coming together, and it takes a village, blah blah...but honestly, no one wants to see everyone getting along, it's not us. We strive to cause strife amongst ourselves. Look at the news. We don't care about a man who raises funds for children as much as we care about who splashed water on Tim Cruise. It is a small inference, but it's odd that Brad Pitt tries to help a country, he gets a week of press, and because he's not boning Angelina Jolie, we don't give a dump. But, because Cruise is marrying his daughter, we're all about it. And what's with the name smashes? It's like 4th grade in the media!!!!
Bennifer( I will dub this the origin, until proven wrong)
Brangelina(the worst one ever, doesn't exactly "roll off the tongue" Whoever made it up, should hang their head in shame)
TomKat(e)?! Lame.

Seriously, if you cannot say Tom and Kate, if it's too much exertion, you must turn in your pen, notepad, Notebook, IMac, Treo, and brain.

Speaking of crazy, anyone know anything about Sceintology that makes sense as a belief system(ps. most of their "message of goodness" is found in every religion, but oh, this isn't a religion, it's scientology.). And why is it Church of Scientology? Shouldn't it be, in all fairness, be the Institute of Scientology? Ok, I'm done. I can't believe I used an actor to prove a point. Ok, not done....
who thinks actors think too much of themselves? anyone? anyone think that their words speak louder than their actions? What makes them more important, their money? I'll be impressed when 1/2 of Tom Cruise's paycheck goes to a better cause than the "Make me look like a good guy" fund. Do something withut a camera Atually, I don't even want to hear about it, just do it.

Posted by: Howling Mad Murphy | June 24, 2005 5:31 PM | Report abuse

****One more thing. As for terrorists on airplanes, that could be easily solved if we armed all the passengers.****

We have, in a way. Pre-911 it was accepted procedure to allow hijackers to maintain control of the plane and do nothing after a takeover. Passengers had it beat into their heads that hijackers were political opportunists - only looking for a way to have their cause heard and to get from point A to point B, after which everyone would be let go unharmed. And this really was the case, with a few notable exceptions here and there.

I am fairly certain that that mentality has changed 180 degrees. How many of you would sit idly by during a hijacking now? Regardless of the exact number of affirmative respondants, I'm betting it's a lot higher than it would have been had I asked the same question on 9-10-01.

Posted by: Kill a Terrorist, Save a child | June 24, 2005 5:33 PM | Report abuse

Rove is worse than a Nazi, and so is bush and his whole gange of war criminals.

At least when we look at the hitler Nazis we KNOW they were evil. bush and his minions purport to be God-fearing christians, who are noble and good. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Posted by: Mark Hamblett (come and get me FBI) | June 24, 2005 5:34 PM | Report abuse

Joel may find it surprising that Alchemy has already made a resurgence!Check any good metaphysical bookstore on the topic and you'll find loads of material!
There is Western (European) and Eastern (Asian) Alchemy. Taoist yoga begins with chi gong and ends with internal alchemy. Carl Jung did much to resurrect alchemy. The focus is on psychological or spiritual transformation, as well as physical health, NOT on transforming lead into gold!
Expect Madonna to soon do for Alchemy what she's done for Kabbalah! (there's some overlap already: Some kabbalistic-alchemical books were written some hundreds of years back).
I realize I'm completely off topic!

Posted by: Bobb999 | June 24, 2005 5:35 PM | Report abuse

Don Crane is an IDIOT.

Posted by: Republicans hate me | June 24, 2005 5:36 PM | Report abuse

****Can't everyone see that both "sides" of our democracy want the same thing: separation. Oh, we talk about togetherness, and coming together, and it takes a village, blah blah...but honestly, no one wants to see everyone getting along, it's not us.****

I'm really more of a obfuscation followed by subjugation type of fella but I'm open to new ideas.

If we go the militarist/survival of the fittest approach, I'm cappin' your arse first. Pay no attention to the man in the bushes!

Posted by: me, myself and hot pants murphy battered, deep fried and served with a side of freedom fries | June 24, 2005 5:49 PM | Report abuse

****Joel may find it surprising that Alchemy has already made a resurgence!Check any good metaphysical bookstore on the topic and you'll find loads of material!
There is Western (European) and Eastern (Asian) Alchemy. Taoist yoga begins with chi gong and ends with internal alchemy. Carl Jung did much to resurrect alchemy. The focus is on psychological or spiritual transformation, as well as physical health, NOT on transforming lead into gold!
Expect Madonna to soon do for Alchemy what she's done for Kabbalah! (there's some overlap already: Some kabbalistic-alchemical books were written some hundreds of years back).
I realize I'm completely off topic!****

Sure, but can you make gold? Well, who the hell cares then?!

I'm still tallying all those angels doing the hoedown on the head of a pin.

Posted by: me, myself and bobb999 lab testing synthetic Chi on rabbits made up like brazen street hussies | June 24, 2005 6:04 PM | Report abuse

Until Rove and the conservatives show me the head of Osama bin Laden, they don't get to talk about who is in league with the enemy.

Posted by: AFIKME | June 24, 2005 6:07 PM | Report abuse

... and if the Democrats were running things, and OBL had been at large for nearly 4 years, I'd be saying the same thing.

Put up or shut up, jackasses.

Posted by: AFIKME | June 24, 2005 6:08 PM | Report abuse

Interesting reading, but so many wrong facts. Don't any of you get your news first hadn, and check your sources? Also, may I suggest you check your dictionary for the meaning of liberal/conservative, and revaluate what you would rather be if you had to label yourself.
Liberal - not narrow in in opinion or judgment, open to change; Conservative - opposed to changem disposed to maintaining existing views, conditions. (Webster's)
Are we t/b in the 21st century, or remain stuck in time (like certain ME cultures)?
And if the cockpit doors had been locked, as security experts had suggested, but airlines resisted, perhaps the towers would not have fallen, and we wouldn't have to go through the 'security' charade at airports that currently exist. Does anyone know the alert color of today? Or care?

Posted by: reader | June 24, 2005 6:14 PM | Report abuse

Joel,

In the history books, George W. Bush will make Warren Harding look like Abraham Lincoln.

Posted by: shep | June 24, 2005 6:14 PM | Report abuse

The alert colors only matter before elections. You know that, reader.

Posted by: AFIKME | June 24, 2005 6:15 PM | Report abuse

I don't think the rhetorical argument is working in your favor. That's just me though.

Posted by: AFIKME, DARRYL and his other brother DARRYL | June 24, 2005 6:17 PM | Report abuse

SHUT UP! You don't know what you're talking about! Looney.

Posted by: DARRYL, AFIKME and his other brother AFIKME | June 24, 2005 6:21 PM | Report abuse

Oh man, this is truly gross. Name callers! Rebugs! Crats! Clinton's bj! Hurt feelings! Nazis! OMG! Really? NAZIs!!! We are in the process of proving that we are not worthy of democracy. We don't even have the brains to carry on intelligent debates...ever..

Best post so far = forkboy

My son, who was voting in his first presidential election last time, resisted the brow beating his mother and i gave him that he should register Democratic. He rebuffed us with "I don't vote for parties. I don't care what side wins. I only care that they are smart. If they are smart, they will make it work." Enough said. No, he wouldn't register as Green like his dad either.

We do need to grow up. Thank you forkboy. And thank you for not hating me when you take control. (But, ya know, fb, we said almost exactly the same thing when we were young - keep yourself thinking straight and perhaps you will do better than we did.) Good luck!

Posted by: old liberal in calif | June 24, 2005 6:25 PM | Report abuse

Rhetorical? My argument is direct. The current leaders of this country have failed in their mission to bring to justice those who are responsible. They have failed to make the country more secure, financially or militarily. They have engaged in meaningless rhetoric, like Karl Rove's recent statements. They have manipulated the moods of the public with things like the alert colors, for pure political gain.

Those statements are merely a diversion from what occurred at the Senate Armed Forces Committee Meeting where it was discussed how our services are hemorrhaging 18,000 troops a month (IIRC), not due to action, but to a failure to recruit and retain. This is an utter propagandic ploy, because they are on the defensive because of the facts on the ground. If we sit here bickering about "he said she said, and my feelings are hurt" they don't have to answer any hard questions, like WHERE THE HELL IS THE HEAD OF OSAMA, AND WHY ARE YOU MISMANAGING THE RESOURCES OF THE US TO FIGHT A LOSING WAR.

If anyone's motives are clear, it is the motives of the current majority, the Republicans, who have systematically attempted to weaken this country through incompetence or malice. I don't know which anymore.

Posted by: AFIKME | June 24, 2005 6:26 PM | Report abuse

Father Tom, go back to school man!, I put in doubt your intellect, and please stop using God's name for every single !@#$!#@ political statment you make, like a modern time pharisee you pretend to be holier than everybody else pointing fingers at your discretion, labeling others as sinners/un-americans, how about you?,. Yeah right, conservatives you called yourselves, conservatives like Jeff Ganon for example? (male prostitute?).

Posted by: Outsider | June 24, 2005 6:28 PM | Report abuse

... and before all this, I was not a partisan. I have been made so by the likes of Karl Rove, because I am not in his camp, I must be with the opposition.

Posted by: AFIKME | June 24, 2005 6:28 PM | Report abuse

Nothing but an attempt to create a buzz and fill the media with ANYTHING to distract the public from the fact that OIL HIT $60 a barrel and MORE MARINE DIED in Iraq.

When you cannot defend your own position, you attack your opponent. That's what Rove, Bush and some four-year-olds (who haven't been taught any better) do.

Too bad the Democrats are playing into his hands by getting upset about it. It is just typical Rove nasty/divisive/immoral/cheap B.S.

Posted by: who cares about Rove's stupid comments? | June 24, 2005 6:37 PM | Report abuse

How would you like to have to defend a loser like George W. Bush?

It's far easier to sling mud at finer people and try to bring them down.

The American public is beginning to wake up. Polls are down and Mr. "I don't watch the polls" is worried. Rove nastiness will achieve a 2-point bounce for about 2 days, then popular opinion will resume its downward slide.

I cannot believe we have 3.5 more years of these dunces running things. Bush's approval ratings will be in the single digits - if he makes it to the end without getting impeached.

Posted by: POOR KARL | June 24, 2005 6:41 PM | Report abuse

The Republican machine is immoral enough when they are winning in the polls. I shudder to think how much more evil they will get as they continue the looooong slide in public opinion.

I live in Kansas and Senator Brownback (R-KS) wrote me a letter - in response to an email I wrote - in which he STILL MAINTAINS SADDAM HAD WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION.

These guys just lie, and lie, and lie. The uninformed just swallow it.

Posted by: no fan of Brownback | June 24, 2005 6:46 PM | Report abuse

The Republican machine is immoral enough when they are winning in the polls. I shudder to think how much more evil they will get as they continue the looooong slide in public opinion.

I live in Kansas and Senator Brownback (R-KS) wrote me a letter - in response to an email I wrote - in which he STILL MAINTAINS SADDAM HAD WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION.

Bush & his supporters just lie, and lie, and lie. All they have to offer is more lies and attacks on people who see through their lies.

Hey Karl - tell us why we should keep listening to Bush. We don't care what you think of Democrats/liberals/moderates.

If I were a Republican I would be so ashamed to have the likes of Rove for a spokesman.

Posted by: no fan of Brownback | June 24, 2005 6:47 PM | Report abuse

Rove is getting desperate. His man is sliding in the polls.

Time for the same old two tactics:

1. Sling mud at the opposition

2. (any minute now...) Make an announcement about terrorism that will scare everybody.

Americans are getting smarter. Fewer and fewer are swallowing nonsense from the White House, which is why Bush is plummeting in the polls.

Posted by: kikibird | June 24, 2005 6:50 PM | Report abuse

How many deaths will it take till they know...

That too many people have died?

Apparently it's around 1700. Finally people are getting sick of the sacrifice for this administration's folly.

Posted by: support your soldiers | June 24, 2005 6:52 PM | Report abuse

Hi,

I agree it's an ~attempt~ at a distraction.

The White House knows the Downing Street Memo is the catalyst for defections from the RNC -- Their own want to know the truth. [ More: http://tinyurl.com/bbfa5 ]

Both the RNC and DNC can unite under the constution.

The issue is simply: Do you want a Constitution or a tyrant?

Choose wisely. The Constitutional shall previal.

Posted by: Constant | June 24, 2005 6:53 PM | Report abuse

6 MARINES DIED TODAY

You won't hear Karl dignify that news with a comment.

Posted by: support your soldiers | June 24, 2005 7:27 PM | Report abuse

So Joel, it doesn't bother you that a government official paid by our tax dollars just called more than one half of the United States citizenry traitors.

While 20% of Americans label themselves "liberal," poll after poll show that a majority of Americans have liberal values. And now more than one-half believe Iraq was a mistake.

A government official just called them all traitors. Your response? Yet another EZ-PASS for the Bush White House. Why? Because he said these stupid things as a political smokescreen strategy. What are we supposed to say? "Oh, in that case, no problem, Karl"--which is basically your position?

But I'll take your bait for a second. Let's say it was a political strategy. Let's say it was to create a smokescreen for sagging poll numbers, like the terror alerts leading up to the 2004 election (this government has no policy, only political strategy, it seems).

If this is true, then WHY AREN'T YOU WONDERING WHY OUR GOVERNMENT IS DIVIDING THE COUNTRY FOR SHORT-TERM CHEAP POLITICAL BENEFIT? Don't you think it's a bad idea for government officials to be using divisive, McCarthyesque and slanderous comments to simply distract attention from the fact that most people are finally realizing how badly the Republicans are screwing the country?

Now we get to see just how "liberal" the mainstream media is. If they all react like your wimpish excuse-making instead of being offended at being called a traitor by an official of the government, then we'll know once and for all what we're already suspected for a decade--that the corporate media is hardly liberal at all--that it is, in fact, pro-Republican.

Posted by: disgusted yet again with this newspaper | June 24, 2005 7:42 PM | Report abuse

It started in the mid 80's... the military used to say... it's easier to apologize than to ask for permission in the first place. Author unknown. Karl, and I love him, is brilliant. We are gonna kik butt in the next election if Dr. Scream is up against Karl.

Posted by: umlot | June 24, 2005 7:43 PM | Report abuse

Rove & Dabya know about as much about being real GOP'ers as I know about being a bleeding-heart liberal (I campaigned for Barry in '64; people called me an extresist then -- these days I'm lucky if I get called a moderate.), but Herr Karl's political instincts are good. He didn't get a lack of raw material this far by being a simpleton. He knows Bush is on the ropes & is vulnerable as hell. He also knows this will blow over in about as long as it takes people to forget whether Terri Schiavo's parents spell their last name with a "c" or without.


Dubya values loyalty & dazzle over any kind of substance -- that has been well-documented for years. We don't really think Karl's job is in any real danger, now, do we? Of course not. Karl is writing checks he knows he won't have to cash, & they're rubber anyway. He's savvy enough to know that since by the time they *do* bounce, nobody will remember or give a particular damn -- this is a no-lose proposition for both him *&* the shrub. The way to counter this tactic is not by reacting to it -- that's exactly what it was calculated to engender. The way to nullify it is by making fun of it & ignoring him after that. Give it to Al Franken, let him puncture the buffoon, & take on another topic.

The additive effect of doing that enough is that sooner or later the middle majority will wake up & say, "Damn, these boys really *are* idiots! LOOK at all this crap. Damn if I'M going to vote for them again -- I thought they were smarter than this." That's how you beat a weasel like Karl. }:)

Posted by: old-line (i.e., real) conservative | June 24, 2005 7:44 PM | Report abuse

Joel Achenbach is the only person who actually understands what's going on today and can write about it with facility and ease. Thanks to the Washington Post for letting this luminary speak in a casual format.

Posted by: AHH | June 24, 2005 7:47 PM | Report abuse

Perhaps Rove will be indicted in the matter of Valerie Plame next week and knows it? Might as well get a shot in before he's forced to resign. (May it be so.)

Posted by: webdems | June 24, 2005 7:51 PM | Report abuse

It's just part of the ongoing effort of the administration to deflect blame away from how poorly things are going in Iraq, the onslaught of evidence that were were mislead into war, and unprepared for the full cost of this adventure.

Rather than accept responsibility for the current situation, and how this administration contributed to it, Rove prefers to fire up the faithful with partisan polemics. All he can do I guess is move as far away from policy and outcome, and use sophmoric snarls based on nothing more than ideological red meat.

Posted by: Dick Tuck | June 24, 2005 7:59 PM | Report abuse

It's the Downing Street Memo that needs distracting from. At long last it's started to get traction in the amrican press.

Posted by: r1chard3 | June 24, 2005 8:02 PM | Report abuse

It seems the nation's capitol is engaged in a game of chicken. Apology Chicken. Each side seeks out some spoken offense of the other side and then demands an apology. They go on talk shows and radio and spread the "outrage" until the offender is forced to respond.

The most recent example is the flack received by Sen. Dick Durbin after drawing comparisons to the torture at the hand of American forces to the torture done in the past at the hand of some foreign forces. What Durbin said was that if you were to read the description of what was done by American troops it would be hard to distinguish it from things done by Nazi or Soviet troops.

Republicans came out of the woodwork demanding an apology.

Sen. Durbin held fast.

The Republicans kept up their demands and continued to feign outrage at this attack on "our men and women in uniform".

Durbin flinched. And apologized.

Democrats demand apologies too. As they did this week when Karl Rove insulted them by saying that Democrats were soft on terrorists. (Actually, the more telling thing that Rove said was that in the wake of 9/11, Republicans prepared for war. Which, we have seen, they did indeed.)

What the Republicans do brilliantly is take offense on someone else's behalf.

Democrats make the mistake of demanding an apology for some affront to Democrats.

They forget: that's the Republicans' job - to insult Democrats.

I'm not sure what they think. The Bush team has not and will never apologize for lying to the American people, sending more than 1700 American forces to their deaths, over 10,000 to lives as handicapped persons, and easily more than 100,000 Iraqi men, women, and children to their own horrific deaths. Does anyone think they would say they are sorry for making some Democrat feel bad?

If it were up to me, I wouldn't call on Sen. Durbin to apologize. I would call on him to resign. For apologizing. Along with any other spineless Democrat who can't say something and stand by it.

Posted by: ironwood | June 24, 2005 8:14 PM | Report abuse

Umm... what was that old saw about the relationship between great power and great responsibility?

Right. That was merely Spiderman. And Rove... he's Peter Porker.

Posted by: Jim | June 24, 2005 8:19 PM | Report abuse

Congress and the people should be focusing on real crises: the Iraq quagmire, the mounting deficit, greenhouse gases and fossil fuel consumption, the absence of universal affordable health care, our failing education system, the crippling polarization of our legislatures. Instead we are given the Social Security "crisis", the Schiavo case, an amendment to sanctify the flag. Karl Rove's outrageous pronouncements are merely the latest addition to the administration's arsenal of WEAPONS OF MASS DISTRACTION.

Posted by: imk | June 24, 2005 8:47 PM | Report abuse

To WASP

Better a president with Rabbit habits than a president with Rabbit brains.

Posted by: imm | June 24, 2005 9:33 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Achenbach is correct, and here's why he's trying to distract us:

US acknowledges torture at Guantanamo and Iraq, Afghanistan: UN source Fri Jun 24, 9:23 AM ET


Washington has for the first time acknowledged to the United Nations that prisoners have been tortured at US detention centres in Guantanamo Bay, as well as Afghanistan and Iraq, a UN source said.

The acknowledgement was made in a report submitted to the UN Committee against Torture, said a member of the ten-person panel, speaking on on condition of anonymity.

"They are no longer trying to duck this, and have respected their obligation to inform the UN," the Committee member told AFP.

"They they will have to explain themselves (to the Committee). Nothing should be kept in the dark."

UN sources said it was the first time the world body has received such a frank statement on torture from US authorities.

The Committee, which monitors respect for the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, is gathering information from the US ahead of hearings in May 2006.

Signatories of the convention are expected to submit to scrutiny of their implementation of the 1984 convention and to provide information to the Committee.

The document from Washington will not be formally made public until the hearings.

"They haven't avoided anything in their answers, whether concerning prisoners in Iraq, in Afghanistan or Guantanamo, and other accusations of mistreatment and of torture," the Committee member said.

"They said it was a question of isolated cases, that there was nothing systematic and that the guilty were in the process of being punished."

The US report said that those involved were low-ranking members of the military and that their acts were not approved by their superiors, the member added.

The US has faced criticism from UN human rights experts and international groups for mistreatment of detainees -- some of whom died in custody -- in Afghanistan and Iraq, particularly during last year's prisoner abuse scandal surrounding the Abu Ghraib facility there.

Scores of US military personnel have been investigated, and several tried and convicted, for abuse of people detained during the US-led campaign against Islamic terrorist groups.

At the Guantanamo Bay naval base, a US toehold in Cuba where around 520 suspects of some 40 nationalities are held, allegations of torture have combined with other claims of human rights breaches.

The US has faced widespread criticism for keeping the Guantanamo detainees in a "legal black hole," notably for its refusal to grant them prisoner of war status and allegedly sluggish moves to charge or try them.

Washington's report to the Committee reaffirms the US position that the Guantanamo detainees are classed as "enemy combatants," and therefore do not benefit from the POW status set out in the Geneva Conventions, the Committee member said.

Four UN human rights experts on Thursday slammed the United States for stalling on a request to allow visits to terrorism suspects held at the Guantanamo Bay naval base, and said they planned to carry out an indirect probe of conditions there.

Posted by: lb | June 24, 2005 10:01 PM | Report abuse

rabbit brains? comparing Bush to Bugs Bunny is insulting to wabbits evwyware.

Posted by: playnice | June 24, 2005 10:10 PM | Report abuse

Assuming what Rove said about the liberals only wanting to be wimps in their ideals in going after the terrorists who attacked THe World Trade Center is true, then why doesn't the present administration release all non Conservatives in our military to let only the Conservative and Republican members of our military fight the Bush War. Some how the statement Rove made does aid and comfort the enemy.

Posted by: Dwight | June 24, 2005 10:44 PM | Report abuse

Be vewwy quiet -- I'm hunting neocons! hehehehehehheh

Posted by: old-line (i.e., real) conservative | June 24, 2005 10:47 PM | Report abuse

Bush and co. will be held accountable by God for: lying to go to war in Iraq, approving torture, loving Mammon more than stewardship of the planet, fighting for the rich over the poor, completely distorting God's message (the Bible is all about "freedom"; huh?; what about care for the poor, the sick, those in prison?), acting like modern-day Pharisees with their religious legalisms, trying to impose their religious dictates on people who don't share their interpretations or beliefs, religious hypocrisy (um, having sex out of marriage or having sex after divorce are adultery, but you conveniently skip over that in order to try to regulate the sexual behavior of others and oppress other, peaceful people), seeking to divide people rather than unite them, ... golly, the list just keeps going. Keep smilin' Bush fans. You're in deep s__t with the Big Guy. Jesus is knocking at the door, but you're not answering. You should take God's message seriously, repent, and change your ways. It's ok to be conservative, but all of the above are heinous in God's sight, and I'm afraid those are Bush's top priorities; every single one.

Posted by: Messenger | June 24, 2005 10:49 PM | Report abuse

There is a lot of truth coming through this long series of opinions and observations. Too bad it probably won't get to the right people. But, even if it did there is a good chance that it wouldn't be understood.

George W. Bush aka The Shrub. It fits; hope it catches on.

Has anyone given serious thought to the possibility that many Islamic people might look on Bin Laden as a freedom fighter? Wasn't this how that "tyrant" Ho Chi Mihn was regarded by the North Vietnamese? To them, Ho was a patriot and a hero. Isn't it possible that more people than we realise might see Osama in that same way.

Forget Iraq and Saddam. That whole fiasco is a red herring. We are there only because The Schrub really wants to be a "war president" and he knows (or thought he knew" that Iraq was beatable and would provide the best setting for his fantasy. Not that it wouldn't get sticky at times but even that would be manageable if he threw a few scraps when needed to assure the cwc (christians without christ)that he was not neglecting them.

Bin Laden was different. The Shrub could see the futility of chasing Bin Laden and decided early that he would have much better control fighting a sitting duck rather than a running fox. The Shrub is maybe not the brightest boy in the Bush greenhouse but he does know what he wants and how to get it.

Insurgents or freedom fighters? Terrorists or patriots? We have been fooled before. Viet Nam was the lesson that we may have yet to learn. For beginners, we totally mis-judged the people's will to be free under a system of goverment that they, not us, wanted. Perhaps the Islamic people have the same desire: to be free under their choice of government, not ours.

Posted by: Dick Johnson | June 24, 2005 11:56 PM | Report abuse

Rove is not as smart as he thinks he is. He should brush up on his Abraham Lincoln. Truth be told, the curtain is starting to come down on this administration and the Republicans will fight like hell not to lose their place in power. Their only problem is that they control everything and John Q. Public is finally starting to pay attention. They have no one to blame so you get a statement like Rove's. People are realizing that this War was started under a false premise and now we are stuck in a morass that is hard to leave and even harder to win. For all those that are so sure that the war in Iraq was right and just, then sign up or have your kids sign up, because boots on the ground is what we need. Our President, who was stupid enough to wage this war when he thought it politically expedient, now does not have the politcal will, courage and wit to do what it will take to win it.

I'm sorry but you are lying to yourself and the facts if you don't think this is Rove Inc and the Republican's fault. The reason the public is turning against this kabal is because they realize that now we are going to have to do something very painful to clean up this Iraq wonderlust. It's one thing to have a mediocre economy, it's another thing to start two wars that have yet to register any where near a reasonable standard of accomplishment. What a mess! It's like we have Richard Nixon and Jimmy Carter's bad luck all in one.

And don't get me started on the Democrats. They voted for this war and went along lockstep with these masters of war. They were too weak to call this administration out and put their foot down....and look what is got them. It's time for some good ole' fashinon prgramatic politics in this country. Every issue in this country shouldn't be decided on the votes of Fundamentalist Christians and the Gay Community. This is not that hard people.

The real problem we have is that our politicians care more about enriching themselves at the expense of our well being. They are to be public servants, our servants, not corporate or special interest servants. The power and greed that drive our country will be what causes it to be undone.

Posted by: Dan | June 25, 2005 12:30 AM | Report abuse

Rove is only trying to fill the airwaves and newspapers with something other than:

6 Marines dead, 14 wounded - males and females

oil shot over $60 a barrel

stock market tanking over oil prices

Shooting off his mouth will buy him about 2 days. The White House is on the ropes and Rove is desperate. This administration is built on lies and owned by big business. It's a house of cards and it's falling down.

Posted by: just me | June 25, 2005 12:41 AM | Report abuse

It makes me sick to see Rove, Bush, Cheney and Rumsfield smiling while people are dying. Half a dozen more marines died today and you don't hear the White House honoring them. Can you imagine Abraham Lincoln, who had the decency to be grave and serious, laughing and smirking like a drunken frat boy while people died on his watch? America has reached a new low with these clowns in charge.

The "optimistic" comments are insulting to those who are suffering and dying while they are smirking.

Posted by: nobody | June 25, 2005 12:45 AM | Report abuse

Bush is down for the count.

Not even Rove tactics can save him now.

Posted by: Bush watcher | June 25, 2005 12:57 AM | Report abuse

According to Arianna Huffington's blog tonight, Cheney was checked in to the cardiac care unit in Vail with angina. Arianna was on the scene and got the scoop while the AP reported that he had gone to see an orthopedist for an old knee injury.

Mm-hmm.

Posted by: webdems | June 25, 2005 2:05 AM | Report abuse

You want to know what Rove was trying to distract people from? The court has ruled that the Pentagon has until the end of this month (only a few days off now) to release the next set of photos and videos of prisoner abuse in Abu Ghraib.

Those who have seen this stuff say it is stomach-turning. Sy Hersh says what you will never forget is the screaming of the children in it. I don't think there's any way they can spin this to look good for them. There will, of course, be those who defend this administration no matter what but the tide is turning, as shown by all the recent polls; this new Abu Ghraib stuff isn't going to reverse that trend.

They desperately need all the distractions they can find. Expect 24/7 coverage of missing white girls.

Posted by: Cranky Media Guy | June 25, 2005 5:41 AM | Report abuse

Thoughts on the RNC strategy sessions to protect Bush: [ http://tinyurl.com/7o7b3 ]

Posted by: Constant | June 25, 2005 4:35 PM | Report abuse

wow. i'm almost brought to tears at the realization that it took america 2.5 years after the fact to figure out that this war was pure zionist deception.

so when are we going to start hearing the hard questions about 9/11 being asked? truth shouldn't have to wait another 50 or so to get out there, like that of pearl harbor.

Posted by: whatreallyhappened.com | June 26, 2005 4:01 AM | Report abuse

Or he may be the answer to Howard Dean. No matter, both parties know how to get press coverage and air time.

Posted by: Hjones | June 26, 2005 6:09 AM | Report abuse

The Bush adminstration is not just a lame duck - it's a dead duck.

The smart Republicans will separate themselves from Bush & Co. It's the only way they will survive the Bush administration.

I think we'll see more and more defections from Bush's own party.

Posted by: kikibird | June 26, 2005 12:33 PM | Report abuse

I just reread article 2 (the presidential one) of the US constitution, from what I can tell the President of the United States, as well as the rest of the executive branch as a whole since it is commanded by the President, is supposed to be very much like a soldier in the manner in which he serves the country. The constitution never mentions anything about laws or policies being proposed by the president. The president's job is to do what the Congress has said America needs to do. It seems that it is up to the President how to go about accomplishing what Congress might want done, if it isn't already spelled out, however I believe the Framers of the Constitution did not want the president to be making decisions about what the country will or won't do with it's power. It is the jo of Congress to set the policy. This being said, I feel that the office of the president has grown far too much in the last few generations. Why does the president need to be proposing a social security plan? Why does the president need to ask congress to do anything? That's not his/or her job (leave me alone Hillary haters, i'm just being open-minded)... The Prez is supposed to be the arm of the country, and when was the last time any of your arms decided to up and tell you what you should do. Now the solution to this problem would be a congress with enough unity to overturn stupid vetoes from the executive, so that the executive wouldn't think that it's veto power is the same as a say in congress.

It's the political party system that has given itself authority in both the executive and legislative branches. You take a group with ideals, a 'party' if you will, that wants to make the rules in this country so it seeks legislative authority, obviously this 'party' will want those rules enforced, so it will want to have the executive branch under control as well. I ask what's the point of checks and balances if two of the three branchs ever answer to the same 'party'.

And now the foolish axe truly falls
Regardless of the ideaology, if any entity exists that can command the loyalty of both the executive and legislative members of our government, is that entity not in and of itself a threat to the idea of freedom and self-government in the same way as religion or foreign oppression is? Parties are entities whose goal is oppressing the people as a whole by imposing their will on those who are not represented in their constituancy. If anyone in a position of authority in the government is answering to the members of a political party before answering to the citizens of these United States then he or she is commiting treason against this country. No political party represents all american citizens and it is these, all of these, that our elected officials ought answer to. When you go to the polls as an Independent, how can you trust that the candidates you see on the ballot with Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, or Religious Fundamentalist next to their name really care about your opinion as much as that of one of the members of their own party, a party that most likely financed and provided the requisite siqnitures needed for their candidacy.

Posted by: FoolishRevolutionary | June 27, 2005 9:43 PM | Report abuse

This is too funny. Maybe he didn't get the memo.

President's Statement on United Nations International Day in Support of Victims of Torture

On United Nations International Day in Support of Victims of Torture, the United States reaffirms its commitment to the worldwide elimination of torture. Freedom from torture is an inalienable human right, and we are committed to building a world where human rights are respected and protected by the rule of law.

The United States is continuing to work to expand freedom and democracy throughout the world. We will seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, and we will help others find their own voice, attain their own freedom, and make their own way. Throughout the world, there are many who have been seeking to have their voices heard, to stand up for their right to freedom, and to break the chains of tyranny. Too many of those courageous women and men are paying a terrible price for their brave acts of dissent. Many have been detained, arrested, thrown in prison, and subjected to torture by regimes that fail to understand that their habits of control will not serve them well in the long-term. America will not pretend that jailed dissidents prefer their chains, or that women welcome humiliation and servitude, or that any human being aspires to live at the mercy of bullies. All who live in tyranny and hopelessness can know: The United States will not ignore your oppression or excuse your oppressors. When you stand for your liberty, we will stand with you.

Posted by: playnice | June 28, 2005 2:28 PM | Report abuse

This is too funny. Maybe he didn't get the memo.

President's Statement on United Nations International Day in Support of Victims of Torture

On United Nations International Day in Support of Victims of Torture, the United States reaffirms its commitment to the worldwide elimination of torture. Freedom from torture is an inalienable human right, and we are committed to building a world where human rights are respected and protected by the rule of law.

The United States is continuing to work to expand freedom and democracy throughout the world. We will seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, and we will help others find their own voice, attain their own freedom, and make their own way. Throughout the world, there are many who have been seeking to have their voices heard, to stand up for their right to freedom, and to break the chains of tyranny. Too many of those courageous women and men are paying a terrible price for their brave acts of dissent. Many have been detained, arrested, thrown in prison, and subjected to torture by regimes that fail to understand that their habits of control will not serve them well in the long-term. America will not pretend that jailed dissidents prefer their chains, or that women welcome humiliation and servitude, or that any human being aspires to live at the mercy of bullies. All who live in tyranny and hopelessness can know: The United States will not ignore your oppression or excuse your oppressors. When you stand for your liberty, we will stand with you.

Posted by: playnice | June 28, 2005 2:29 PM | Report abuse

Okay, so after reading the first 120 or so postings my eyes started to cross....so maybe something along these lines has been stated ad nauseaum.... and maybe no one will care at this point.

People have asked for a Dem to state some solutions... and personally I am sick of them saying nothing. Here are some...
1) America needs to focus on sex education and prevention of unwanted pregnancies (Some pictures of those diseases can give a person pause, even a teen full of hormones) and stop the argument over choice....working to eliminate the "choice" choice. 2) Let's work to get more tax breaks and incentives for fuel efficent cars and energy effecient choices, and eliminate the need for ANWAR drilling and the middle east oil crusade. 3) Let's get Iraq up and running and get out, until then support the troops and get them the armor and protection they need... and as a side note on Gitmo, we lambast (insert country/ historical group/etc.) for their acts against human decency and call ourselves better.... as a country we should stand together for human right violations and hold our own country accountable if we fall short. 4) Let's find a way to shore up social security...if it is private accounts to relieve the pressure, then is there a way to have a government insurance policy in case the market tanks taking part of peple's retirement? And let's not take the money from China.... Our budget is so bloated we can find it ourselves, raising the cap from $90,000 is a suggestion, (rather the chaining ourselves to the financial whims of another country)or tax companies that set up home base in the islands but are an "American" company 5) Raise the minimum wage to a living wage to release the pressures on the need for welfare programs. 6) Fight terrorism on the foreign front and on the home front, neo-nazi groups etc.

Yes, I know this sounds a bit warm and fuzzy...so laugh if you want. But I am tired of the two faced arguements.....

Posted by: Anonymous | June 28, 2005 3:57 PM | Report abuse

As one of those cry-baby liberals who need to "get over" the fact that Bush won the election, I would like to say that I'd give him the f-ing benefit of the doubt if I saw any action on his part that I felt was remotely intelligent or based on fact and/or logic. Unfortunately, he has yet to show me anything I can have even a modicum of respect for, so . . . I don't.

As someone who has spent a great deal of her life in Missouri, I refer to our state motto: "Show me."

Posted by: Anne Olivia | June 29, 2005 1:33 PM | Report abuse

shut the fuck up

Posted by: GOD | January 27, 2006 7:23 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company