When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
DisagreeAgree
Connect with
I allow to create an account
When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
Perhaps our “enemies” are such, not because of some inherent “evil,” but because we insist on violating their state sovereignty. Have you ever asked yourself that question?
Taking the war to Pakistan is perhaps the most foolish thing America can do. Obama is not the first to suggest it, and we already have sufficient evidence of the potentially negative repercussions of such an action. On January 13, 2006, the United States launched a missile strike on the village of Damadola, Pakistan. Rather than kill the targeted Ayman al-Zawahiri, al-Qaeda’s deputy leader, the strike instead slaughtered 17 locals. This only served to further weaken the Musharraf government and further destabilize the entire area. In a nuclear state like Pakistan, this was not only unfortunate, it was outright stupid. Pakistan has 160 million people (better than half of the population of the entire Arab world). Pakistan also has the support of China and a nuclear arsenal.
I predict that America’s military action in the Middle East will enter the canons of history alongside Hiroshima, Nagasaki and the Holocaust, in kind if not in degree. The Bush administration’s war on terror marks the age in which America has again crossed a line that many argue should never be crossed. Call it preemption, preventive war, the war on terror, or whatever you like; there is a sense that we have again unleashed a force that, like a boom-a-rang, at some point has to come back to us. The Bush administration argues that American military intervention in the Middle East is purely in self-defense. Others argue that it is pure aggression. The consensus is equally as torn over its impact on international terrorism. Is America truly deterring future terrorists with its actions? Or is it, in fact, aiding the recruitment of more terrorists?
The last thing the United States should do at this point and time is to violate yet another state’s sovereignty. Beyond being wrong, it just isn’t very smart. We all agree that slavery in this country was wrong; as was the decimation of the Native American populations. We all agree that the Holocaust and several other acts of genocide in the twentieth century were wrong. So when will we finally admit that American military intervention in the Middle East is wrong as well?
John: When Iran permitted agents of the Ayatollah (including the man who is currrently President of Iran) to masquerade as “students” and invade the embassy of the United States WHOSE sovereignty was violated?
Your moral equivalence between the Holocaust and Hiroshima and Nagasaki is profoundly offensive and shows a complete failure to grasp any sort of historical reality.
I’m sorry, but your comment shows that you are not fit, nor able, to provide any rational counterpoint to the questions raised in this post.
One wonders which taxpayer subsidized university you attended that filled your head so full of such crap?
The only real “peacemaker” in this world has been the U.S. military. Without them, you’d be speaking German or Russian by now.
Grow a brain!
DW 5000
15 years ago
President Bush has visited the American war graves in France to pay honor to their sacrifice and demonstrate an understanding of the cost that appeasement, or diplomacy without military force, brings.
This is not what “appeasement” means. Flat-out wrong. That is purely and simply not in any way what the word means. It’s not the dictionary definition, it’s not what the word means in regard to Neville Chamberlain, it’s nothing.
“Appeasement” is giving something away to gain peace. That was Chamberlain’s mistake. “Diplomacy without military force” is a Mike’s America term for what the rest of us simply call “diplomacy.”
Didn’t you see Chris Matthews’s takedown of Kevin James? Get with the program. I read this post, found this massive gaffe, and said to myself, “Ah ha! This was written by Mike.” Sure enough, when I look up at the top of the page, there he is.
P.S.: When is President Bush going to get around to visiting the graves of the soldiers that he sent to war? Has he been to one service yet?
Scrapiron
15 years ago
Hussein O honor the war dead? He doesn’t even know what happened at Pearl Harbor. If this is the smartest the dim’s have to offer the country is done the day he’s elected.
You’re right Dim Wit… I looked appeasement up in the dictionary and low and behold, there was your picture.
You embody the spirit of appeasement and surrender in the face of evil.
Has anyone told you today what a nit wit you are?
bigpapa
15 years ago
Wow John,, that’s quite a stretch to tie slavery, Native Americans and the holocaust to the fact that we are defending ourselves from terrorists.
After 911 President Bush told the world,, if you harbor terrorists you are the enemy too..
What part don’t you undrestand???
Of course they didn’t believe due to the failed policies of the Clintoon administration and they paid dearly..
There were WMD in Iraq, the Taliban was and is still trying to be in Afghanistan..
Pakistan is letting some of them stay there,,,, it’s a fine line they are trying to walk..
Have you done any research on the true intention of these people who hide in other countries?????
I suspect that you would like to be a muslim if you have because you will have to convert or die if they get their way..
Take off the tin foil hat, put down the kool aid and stay away from the DU and daily kos… you’ll be better off for it.
DW 5000,,,
if I give up my honor and let you have your way to the detriment of my country,,,,, that is appeasement.. if we give in to Iran it gives the enemy strength… we lose.
By the logic of some of you if you knew I was going to burn your house down, you wouldn’t intervene becasue someone might think you were wrong…
BTW:
P.S.: When is President Bush going to get around to visiting the graves of the soldiers that he sent to war? Has he been to one service yet?
Did you use the socialist google to check on this…. because he has…
John Maszka, I see you have a book out. I do have a couple of questions, as your profile is all but invisible on the Internet. What is your background to have published such a book?
Then again, your book is out via Publish America. Not exactly a discerning publisher who places value on content and viable authors, but instead gives opportunities to the unbpublished with minimal editing. Altho I read many that are proclaiming to be ripped off royally via royalties and rights. So I suggest you want your financial back with them.
But, to stay on topic, INRE some statements:
Perhaps our “enemies” are such, not because of some inherent “evil,” but because we insist on violating their state sovereignty.
Interesting concept, and if this is your starting place, no wonder you are quite screwed up in your theories and predictions.
The global Islamic Jihad Movement is a Stateless/borderless enemy, therefore it’s quite difficult to “violate” their sovereignty.
The merger of jihad groups with the World Islamic Front Statement of 1998 suggests their main beef is the presence of western culture and US troops in Saudi, and our sanctions on Iraq. This is nonsensical, of course, as it doesn’t even address the rise of terrorism pre-1990… and just where were we evil Americans violating their “sovereignty” then?
At the time of the World Islamic Front Statement, Afghanistan and Iraq were not active fronts with US boots on the ground… hell, not even a glint in Clinton’s eye. The Saudi base was negotiated with the Saudi authorities.. not OBL. His rights to assail the west on the presence of western culture and US bases is not based anywhere in reality, nor sovereignty. Thereby neither is your completely left field statement that we “violated” their sovereignty.
The *only* ones suggesting taking the war to Pakistan is Obama and his merry band of followers. Following 911, the US make them a quasi, if not perfect, ally. Bush has been very careful to respect their positions, much to the chagrin of many.
You mention the 2006 bombing. This was done, of course, with a tacit nod of Musharraf. And I have to wonder if that’s the incident where Zawahiri’s “favorite wife” died. However I’m not so all fired convinced that the 17 locals “slaughtered” were innocents, and not related in any way to aiding or supporting either the neo-Taliban, or AQ. Remember, this enemy not only doesn’t wear State uniforms, they also enlist women, children, and the disabled… and hide behind the local villagers they terrorize, and make their headquarters in mosques.
It is true that with any US action in Pakistan territory, their love for us… which is non-existent anyway… takes a hit. Something Obama should pay attention to. However they have no problem loving our cash. I do, however, believe Pakistan is the next major problem, IMHO… not Afghanistan. That country is merely the checkerboard where the Pakistan/Taliban/AQ jihad game is being played. Again, something Obama needs to learn. However his “Cowboy policy” ain’t gonna fly, and will do little more than take a quasi ally and turn them into an enemy.. PLUS**.
You may “predict” all you like. Free country, free speech. However your strategic analysis leaves much to be desired. Now here’s the PLUS** …. After the Taliban was removed in Afghanistan, the jihad movement enjoyed considerable respect among the Muslim population. It was not until they showed their true colors in Iraq in 2006 that the tides turned, and Muslims started balking at training children for martyrs, and vocally speaking out against jihad. Therefore, had Iraq not happened, they would be still be enjoying support , if not gaining even more. As it is, the respect for them has fallen, and they are being turned out in many Muslim arenas.
As far as strategy, having an Arab democracy in the heart of the Middle East, geographically the garden spot of the region with a plethora of oil and the two rivers, is a major setback for the jihad and their desired Caliphate. Having another Muslim ally (as much as they *can* be an ally with our cultural differences) that sits between Iran and Syria, is nothing short of a strategic coup.
So while we’re all making future predictions, I predict that – with the fall out of favor with jihad, and a strategically located Muslim ally in the Middle East – the Bush Doctrine you suggest is on a par with Hitler’s holocaust is actually a policy that will not be appreciated fully until time unfolds decades from now, and the ME nurtures democratic roots.
You, however, come from a flawed beginning, assuming that the US has violated stateless thugs and murderers “soveignty”. As long as this is your inherent belief, the truth shall pass you by like sails on the sea. Just as I shall do your book….
Arthustone
15 years ago
Mata-
Where to begin?
I know:
‘after the Taliban was removed from Afghanistan’
Date please.
Thanks!
DW 5000
15 years ago
You’re right Dim Wit… I looked appeasement up in the dictionary and low and behold, there was your picture.
You embody the spirit of appeasement and surrender in the face of evil.
Has anyone told you today what a nit wit you are?
Ah, yes: busted on the facts, Mike H.’s America resorts to the ever-handy ad hominem.
Now let’s look at your thesis: if a hypothetical President Obama would not be giving anything away to achieve peace by by negotiation*–that is to say, if he isn’t actually practicing appeasement–what’s the problem with negotiation? One would think that the very existence of an entire cabinet department geared toward practicing diplomacy (the Department of State, in case you didn’t know) would lend credibility to the idea of negotiation.
Another point: many times on this site, the death of Iraqi civilians has been downplayed as part of the “sh*t happens” aspect of collateral damage during warfare. “The insurgents shouldn’t have used them as shields,” is, I think, the way it was framed once.
It looks now like you’re using civilian death as a way of underscoring your own point. What about all the civilians who have died as a result of the American invasion and occupation? Do you think that they are happy we went to Iraq?
—
*With France? Are we at war with France? Why do we need to overawe Paris with military power? One can’t tell from your post what country you actually mean, but you typed your gaffe under the heading “France.”
Dim Wit: If I thought it was worth discussing “facts” with you I might bother. But I’ve learned all such efforts on you are wasted.
You and yours embody appeasement in every sense of the word despite your lame, pathetic denials.
Dreadnought
15 years ago
John is typical of the current PC crowd which chooses to blame us for Islam’s declaration of war with the rest of the world.
Islam mandates war with the non-muslim world. Islamic holy texts mandate that the everyone on earth must either become muslims or be subjegated to Islam as second-class citizens of a theocratic state where government and religion are one and the same. It’s all written down in black and white. Islam dictates that muslims must emmulate Mohamed as the perfect man to which they must model their lives. Christians say the same about Jesus, but where Jesus was a pacifist, Mohamed was a viscious, vindictive, self-serving and intolerant SOB who raped and murdered hundreds by his own hand, even ignoring the many thousands of such acts he ordered.
The Islamic Ummah has been seeking world domination since the 7th century, and was only stopped in the middle ages and again in the 16th century after getting soundly beaten militarily. In each case, Islam calmed down a bit for a few generations following the humiliation of defeat, but eventually, they pick up the Quran again. This is what has been slowly happening over the past 60-70 years, and it has finaly reached critical mass, and it will not stop until they are beaten.
History has shown that every time where Islam was ascendant and that other societies chose to negotiate, appease, or even surrender, they have been wiped out, as Islam sees such behaviour (which we would see as a reasonable attempt to prevent unnecessary bloodshed) as a vindication, proof that God is indeed on their side.
In the 13th century, the Indian City of Bihar was the home of two great universities attended by Hindus and Buddists. It was a city of learning, dedicated to peace. When the Muslim invaders arrived outside the city, the city surrendered without a fight, hoping to be spared. Instead the Muslims massacred everyone, and when they entered the great university libraries, there was nobody left that could even translate the titles of the books. So they simply burned the libraries.
If they don’t kill the population, they are mandated to subjugate them and “make them low”. Sharia law, which some Europeans are now saying they should accept in order to keep the peace, says that non-muslims are worth only a small fraction of a Muslim, in terms of value of life, testemony in court, and so on. Under Islamic rule, if 3 non-muslims are witnesses to a Muslim having commited murder, if the defendant says he did not do it, that’s IT, he’s not guilty.
I am seriously worried that over the next 50 years it will become more and more clear to even the most idealistic of left-wing peaceniks that Islam is incompatible with a modern, tolerant society. This realization will come after several horrendous attacks – probably nuclear, blowing up western cities. It’s only a matter of time before Islamists manage to put the pieces together. As someone once said, “The work of Nobel Prize-winners a few generations ago is the work of a skilled technician today”
When this happens, the western world will be forced to face the choice between the desire to defend itself surgically (like we have so far) in the belief that Islam itself is not the problem, or face the fact that Islam itself must be exterminated as harshly as Nazism..
bigpapa
15 years ago
“I am seriously worried that over the next 50 years it will become more and more clear to even the most idealistic of left-wing peaceniks that Islam is incompatible with a modern, tolerant society. This realization will come after several horrendous attacks – probably nuclear, blowing up western cities. It’s only a matter of time before Islamists manage to put the pieces together. As someone once said, “The work of Nobel Prize-winners a few generations ago is the work of a skilled technician today”
I’m going to agree with you Dreadnought with one exception… I don’t thing it will take 50 years..
I believe based on my research that in less than 10 years there will be a nuke popped in the US from our “brothers of peace”…
My gut feeling (no evidence) is less than 3…
I’m an old “Cold Warrior” with nuke experience and it really isn’t as difficult as everyone believes…
It may be a dirty bomb just due to simplicity,,, but I think they really, really get a hard on for the mushroom cloud…
It just depends on how patient they can be… and how many they think they can build..
Infiltration isn’t an issue with our open boarders… that’s a no brainer….
Think West coast for major fallout potential..
They find no evidence that FDR attended military funerals, although, like Bush, he spoke of his empathy for those who had lost their lives and their families. Lyndon Johnson attended two funerals out of tens of thousands under his watch in Vietnam. Richard Nixon attended none. Jimmy Carter attended none — but he was present at a memorial service for those who were killed in his aborted mission to free the Iran hostages. The first president Bush attended no military funerals. Neither did president Clinton. Yes, they attended some memorial services — but so, of course, has the current president, most notably after 9/11. There is, then, no “time-honored way” in which presidents have gone to funerals for individual service members.
Can anyone point me to any president who has spent more time visiting with military families who have lost loved ones, or visited more soldiers at Walter Reed than President Bush? Also, see my previous, related post here.
Thanks for amplifying that point so well Wordsmith.
There’s just no one who has watched this President all these years who would deny how much he personally cares about ALL our soldiers and their families.
It’s a shame that the sputtering hatemongers of the left, of which Dim Wit is a part, can’t drop their bile long enough to be as caring as President Bush has been towards the families of those who have lost family members in this war.
And when it comes to caring, President Bush has shown that it’s not just soldiers and their families that he takes to heart. I reminded of the story of Ashley Faulkner, whose mother was killed in the Sept. 11th attacks:
In a moment largely unnoticed by the throngs of people in Lebanon waiting for autographs from the president of the United States, George W. Bush stopped to hold a teenager’s head close to his heart.
Lynn Faulkner, his daughter, Ashley, and their neighbor, Linda Prince, eagerly waited to shake the president’s hand Tuesday at the Golden Lamb Inn. He worked the line at a steady campaign pace, smiling, nodding and signing autographs until Prince spoke:
“This girl lost her mom in the World Trade Center on 9-11.”
Bush stopped and turned back.
“He changed from being the leader of the free world to being a father, a husband and a man,” Faulkner said. “He looked right at her and said, ‘How are you doing?’ He reached out with his hand and pulled her into his chest.”
Faulkner snapped one frame with his camera.
“I could hear her say, ‘I’m OK,’ ” he said. “That’s more emotion than she has shown in 21/2 years. Then he said, ‘I can see you have a father who loves you very much.’ ”
“And I said, ‘I do, Mr. President, but I miss her mother every day.’ It was a special moment.”
Special for Lynn Faulkner because the Golden Lamb was the place he and his wife, Wendy Faulkner, celebrated their anniversary every year until she died in the south tower of the World Trade Center, where she had traveled for business.
The day was also special for Ashley, a 15-year-old Mason High School student, because the visit was reminiscent of a trip she took four years ago with her mother and Prince. They spent all afternoon in the rain waiting to see Bush on the campaign trail. Ashley remembers holding her mother’s hand, eating Triscuits she packed and bringing along a book in case she got bored.
But this time was different. She understood what the president was saying, and she got close enough to see him face to face.
“The way he was holding me, with my head against his chest, it felt like he was trying to protect me,” Ashley said. “I thought, ‘Here is the most powerful guy in the world, and he wants to make sure I’m safe.’ I definitely had a couple of tears in my eyes, which is pretty unusual for me.”
The photo has been circulating across the country, Faulkner said. Relatives have passed it on to friends, bosses and acquaintances. As they tell the story, they also share in Wendy Faulkner’s legacy, which her family continues through the Wendy Faulkner Memorial Children’s Foundation.
“I’m a pretty cynical and jaded guy at this point in my life,” Faulkner said of the moment with the president. “But this was the real deal. I was really impressed. It was genuine and from the heart.”
I realize that’s all lost on Dim Wit. But then, he’s so soaked in hate that every good thing is lost to him and those like him.
Philly_NJ
15 years ago
I voted for President Bush, I don’t agree with him on everything and I have been disappointed in some of his actions/inactions… Still and all when I vote in November I just wish I had some confidence in the person I’ll be voting for, I’ll be crossing my fingers and hoping I’m doing the right thing, making a good choice. I think we Americans and America deserve better than the pitiful choice we are offered, could be, in fact I’m almost certain I’ll be voting against one nominee rather than voting for a President.
.
Buckeye
15 years ago
The ignorant trolls writing here this AM never let truth or facts or history cloud their rant. There are so many muslim and or Marxist countries they could go to live In and be happy if they truely believed in their philosophy. Instead they continue to live here and make life miserable for those of us who prefer the freedoms of Democracy. Get a life guys.
DW 5000
15 years ago
Dim Wit: If I thought it was worth discussing “facts” with you I might bother. But I’ve learned all such efforts on you are wasted.
You and yours embody appeasement in every sense of the word despite your lame, pathetic denials.
Translation: “It has been a bad 24 hours for me here on Flopping Aces. I don’t actually have any facts. It has been revealed that I have no idea what ‘Stalinist’ means, I’ve countenanced the posting of terrorist threats against an American city on my blog, I’ve repeatedly displayed my lack of understanding of world history by misusing ‘appeasement’ even after being apprised of my error, I’ve flipflopped on whether we should use the death of innocent Iraqi civilians to drive our foreign policy, and I’ve called, for no good reason, for war with France. My acute recto-fossal ambiguity is showing, I’m down to repetitious ad hominem attacks, and I hope that somebody like Wordsmith or MataHarley will come to my rescue here.”
That pretty much cover it, cupcake?
I don’t know why they even let you hang around here, buddy.
Arthurstone
15 years ago
MataHarley typed:
You’ll note that, just like cockroaches, you can never remove all scum from the earth. You are living proof of that.
No need to thank me but I do appreciate your kind words. Just doing my job.
As a keen student of history and a crackerjack global policy theorist you must know that the Taliban ‘was not removed from Afghanistan’ and that their removal from political power was/is likely a temporary setback. With a long history of weak central government the Taliban continues to flourish in the tribal confederation which is Afghanistan. Opium and, among other enterprises, marble quarrying, keep them financially viable. Far from ‘removed’ they are gathering strength and aren’t going away anytime soon. Yet another episode of the US imperialist vision biting off more than it can chew and not allocating enough resources to a near impossible mission insure a likely unhappy ending.
Happy to clear that up for you.
Now as for the US interfering the sovereignty middle eastern nations & it’s effect on increasing the number of our enemies. Mossedeq. Shah Pahlavi. Another pathetic episode of the US knowing what’s best for the locals and proceeding to ‘fix’ things with predictably lousy results. And haven’t those birds come home to roost.
Have a great weekend.
Thomas B.
15 years ago
Where do all these retards come from? The left is getting pissed that Bush was right and the surge worked. Oh and those talking about sovereignty… how about Pelosi and Colombia? How much money did the democrats send to FARC to help overthrow the government? Idiots… the left have to make up lies and tell half truths to justify their drug addled world. It’s a sad life they live.
If you were a more careful reader and one that was less eager to find fault you might not have misread the following sentence:
“President Bush has visited the American war graves in France to pay honor to their sacrifice and demonstrate an understanding of the cost that appeasement, or diplomacy without military force, brings. “
Perhaps it could have been phrased better, but I was talking here about appeasement ORdiplomacy without the backup of a military force component. Though the two are related, I intended them as separate elements.
Of course I understand that you are desperate to distract readers from any criticism of Obama and are simply trying to sidetrack readers with your idiotic, puerile troll droppings.
But it won’t work. Readers here aren’t going to fall for the little bag of tricks that you neosocialists have used to hoodwink the willfully ignorant clowns of the left.
Now stop wasting our time with your bile and go get a life.
OLDPUPPYMAX
15 years ago
Leftists are perpetually unhappy, but never moreso than when our evil United States dares to stand up and fight for its right to exist. How shocked and saddened the visiting trolls on this site are over the deaths of all of those “innocent Iraqi citizens.” Of course these are the same giant intellects who decided that we deserved 9/11. No mourning for 3000 Americans slain. After all, who could be upset about the murder of the imperialists who populated the twin towers. And today we are being treated to a meaningless vocabulary lesson. Perhaps if DW can sufficiently parse the meaning of “appeasement”, no one will notice that he and his fellow travelers are master practitioners, always delighted to “give away” anything to do with the well-being of the US and the American people. Over 6 years we have liberated 40 million people from the most vile of murderous dictatorships, prevented a lunatic and his offspring from the further creation of chemical, biological and eventually nuclear weapons and made certain that American citizens were not subjected to another 9/11. But of course none of this counts because the evil Bush would have to be given credit somewhere along the line. So the left ties itself into a series of breathtaking verbal pretzels, maintaining that Joe Wilson was not a liar, that al qaeda is now stronger not weaker, that the US is more at risk not less and on and on. If the activities of the left did not represent such a danger to the US and the American public, these people and their organizations would just be humorous. But you’ll have to excuse me. It’s time to get my Lab puppy up from her nap. And that is far more important and certainly more stimulating than reading leftovers from the Huffington Post.
Neo
15 years ago
Is it just me or .. do the Obama “military” audiences seems very .. non-white, non-Latino, non-Asian ?
Bridget
15 years ago
Good observation ‘Neo’… Team obammiecommie probably kicked out everyone that didn’t fit their preferred racial profile.
It might be the other way around Bridget. They can’t control the military crowds like they do a campaign rally, since technically these visits are not “campaign” appearances. And yes Neo, the video I have seen (no newswire photos yet) looks like a mainly black military audience.
DW 5000
15 years ago
If you were a more careful reader and one that was less eager to find fault you might not have misread the following sentence:
“President Bush has visited the American war graves in France to pay honor to their sacrifice and demonstrate an understanding of the cost that appeasement, or diplomacy without military force, brings. “
Perhaps it could have been phrased better, but I was talking here about appeasement ORdiplomacy without the backup of a military force component. Though the two are related, I intended them as separate elements.
Nice: “No, I didn’t say what I meant to say, but how dare you take me to task for what I did say?”
“Perhaps it could have been phrased better?” You think? Protip: look up “appositive” in an English textbook some time. It’ll be an education. Don’t try to do the task of writing if you don’t have the tools to do it successfully.
Thank heaven all you New Media types are out there not expressing yourself for the rest of us!
I’m still laughing at the notion that you need a rescue mission, Mike’sA… That would imply you actually have a worthy adversary! ROTFLOL Then again engaging those who vehemently argue that the sky is “bluish gray” when you say the sky is “gray” … or as Thomas B called it, “telling half truths” in order to justify their beliefs ….. is genuinely a waste of time.
Perhaps the most revealing is those that portray the Iraqis as victims of US “imperialism”. Iraqis have demonstrated consistently that they prefer an Arab democracy to despot leadership. And just like Colonial America did in our past, they put their lives on the line to protect what they have started. The liberal/progressives who portray them as US victims in order to demean the US and GWB admin, actually do these brave Iraqis great disservice and disrespect. But then, that’s the lib/progressive way to go… look down, demean, create a victim class and then figure out some welfare program to correct and equalize the situation.
On topic….. Yep, Bridget and Neo, I agree. With all the “breaking news” coverage of BHO, showing us just about everything but him taking his morning dump, I notice the crowds are either very carefully put together… or perhaps they are the only ones interested in seeing His Messiahship. I dunno… the man looks very uncomfortable with our military to me. Nervously chewing quickly and talking with his mouth full at breakfast. This is not a man who looks like he wants to get down in the dirt and play games with enlisted personnel.
Bridget
15 years ago
I’ve spent the weekend doing voter registration out in So. California and had more than my fair share of annoying exchanges with clueless moonbats.
The most outrageous item to report is nothing new… looney dems make crap up on the spot in a bizarre attempt at debate. Of course, CIVIL debate is outside their tunnel vision reality. They go hysterical instantanteously…it’s like watching mental illness in motion. One guy went totally berserk – he was literally foaming at the mouth shouting “illegal war” at me. I kind of wanted to call animal control…I was afraid he might have rabies.
Liberals want us to talk to that hitler over in Iran but, can’t even carry on a civil conversation in their own backyard. Let’s send that mentally unhinged guy I spoke to yesterday. Talk about appeasement! Since they can’t talk their way out of a paper bag, appeasement is the obvious solution to all foreign policy problems for liberals.
So the surge is meaningless and the opportunities for women in Iraq are meaningless and the fact that Olympians from Iraq won’t be executed for not bringing home gold is meaningless…
Liberal hypocrisy! They’re against the death penalty for heinous, sub-human cruelty, but all for late term abortion which is heinous, sub-human cruelty.
They’re against school vouchers but send their kids to private academies.
Leftist Elites like baracka want the populace to stay poor and stupid so that the populace can be controlled by elites and their interventionist policies.
Elites view Freedom of speech as a direct threat to elitism and their oppressive policies.
They don’t understand that Peace is achieved through strength. The world is a crazy place and liberals don’t understand that. This is precisely why they fail miserably at foreign policy.
The so called ‘Democrats’ running for office aren’t Democrats…they’re elitists that have no respect for the Constitution.
Please lend a hand to your local Republican organization and or campaign HQ…help us get people registered…help us get the truth out there….unlike the elites we can’t bus in union workers on the tax payers dime. Dems cheat like there’s no tomorrow. They throw out GOP registrations and that’s just the beginning…
We could use some help out here.
John Ryan
15 years ago
Bridget perhaps some of this attitude may have been a reflection of your own predjudices. Could you go back and count the number of adjectives in your post that were shall we say less than flattering ? I do applaud your effort in voter registartion although of course the democrats are leading in that especially in CA where new voters are about twice as likely to register as a democrat
Bridget
15 years ago
Yo. Ryan. Pay attention.
Were you out in the 90 degree weather alongside me? NO. Did I invite these morons over to bleat in my face? NO. They invited their own stank selves to scream in my face. Do not pontificate to me Pal, on something you know nothing about.
Less than flattering? How about reality, pal. While you sit on your pompous ass, lecturing me about adjectives, ( what a liberal fricking elitist thing to do, by the way ) I’m out there talking to people about the lies your beloved MSM is shoving down their throats in collusion with the elites to send this great country down into the sewer of socialism.
Adjectives? Don’t like the truth, do ya. Too bad. Get used to the truth about you and your slovenly co-horts being exposed. Adjectives? I got more for the likes of you!
Are you from California? Where do you get your holier than thou attitude about the latest stats regarding how new voters are likely to register? You liberals couldn’t source one of your so called facts if it slapped you in the face. You don’t deal with facts. You make crap up as you go along.
When you’ve got cheating democrats prancing around on the taxpayers dime lying their empty heads off you might slither away with a few registrations. Unfortunately for you and your elitist friends we’re out there informing people about you and your lazy ilk. We have more people in my county switching from the sleazy dem party to the GOP because of the crooked DEMS up in Sacramento. It’s because of sleazy dems like you that AAA and Toyota have just announced that they’re leaving CA. Californians know that DEMOCRATS KILL JOBS!
You sound like a blood sucking, tax bloated elitist – complacent elitism creates adjective counters like you.
Perhaps our “enemies” are such, not because of some inherent “evil,” but because we insist on violating their state sovereignty. Have you ever asked yourself that question?
Taking the war to Pakistan is perhaps the most foolish thing America can do. Obama is not the first to suggest it, and we already have sufficient evidence of the potentially negative repercussions of such an action. On January 13, 2006, the United States launched a missile strike on the village of Damadola, Pakistan. Rather than kill the targeted Ayman al-Zawahiri, al-Qaeda’s deputy leader, the strike instead slaughtered 17 locals. This only served to further weaken the Musharraf government and further destabilize the entire area. In a nuclear state like Pakistan, this was not only unfortunate, it was outright stupid. Pakistan has 160 million people (better than half of the population of the entire Arab world). Pakistan also has the support of China and a nuclear arsenal.
I predict that America’s military action in the Middle East will enter the canons of history alongside Hiroshima, Nagasaki and the Holocaust, in kind if not in degree. The Bush administration’s war on terror marks the age in which America has again crossed a line that many argue should never be crossed. Call it preemption, preventive war, the war on terror, or whatever you like; there is a sense that we have again unleashed a force that, like a boom-a-rang, at some point has to come back to us. The Bush administration argues that American military intervention in the Middle East is purely in self-defense. Others argue that it is pure aggression. The consensus is equally as torn over its impact on international terrorism. Is America truly deterring future terrorists with its actions? Or is it, in fact, aiding the recruitment of more terrorists?
The last thing the United States should do at this point and time is to violate yet another state’s sovereignty. Beyond being wrong, it just isn’t very smart. We all agree that slavery in this country was wrong; as was the decimation of the Native American populations. We all agree that the Holocaust and several other acts of genocide in the twentieth century were wrong. So when will we finally admit that American military intervention in the Middle East is wrong as well?
John: When Iran permitted agents of the Ayatollah (including the man who is currrently President of Iran) to masquerade as “students” and invade the embassy of the United States WHOSE sovereignty was violated?
Your moral equivalence between the Holocaust and Hiroshima and Nagasaki is profoundly offensive and shows a complete failure to grasp any sort of historical reality.
I’m sorry, but your comment shows that you are not fit, nor able, to provide any rational counterpoint to the questions raised in this post.
One wonders which taxpayer subsidized university you attended that filled your head so full of such crap?
The only real “peacemaker” in this world has been the U.S. military. Without them, you’d be speaking German or Russian by now.
Grow a brain!
This is not what “appeasement” means. Flat-out wrong. That is purely and simply not in any way what the word means. It’s not the dictionary definition, it’s not what the word means in regard to Neville Chamberlain, it’s nothing.
“Appeasement” is giving something away to gain peace. That was Chamberlain’s mistake. “Diplomacy without military force” is a Mike’s America term for what the rest of us simply call “diplomacy.”
Didn’t you see Chris Matthews’s takedown of Kevin James? Get with the program. I read this post, found this massive gaffe, and said to myself, “Ah ha! This was written by Mike.” Sure enough, when I look up at the top of the page, there he is.
P.S.: When is President Bush going to get around to visiting the graves of the soldiers that he sent to war? Has he been to one service yet?
Hussein O honor the war dead? He doesn’t even know what happened at Pearl Harbor. If this is the smartest the dim’s have to offer the country is done the day he’s elected.
You’re right Dim Wit… I looked appeasement up in the dictionary and low and behold, there was your picture.
You embody the spirit of appeasement and surrender in the face of evil.
Has anyone told you today what a nit wit you are?
Wow John,, that’s quite a stretch to tie slavery, Native Americans and the holocaust to the fact that we are defending ourselves from terrorists.
After 911 President Bush told the world,, if you harbor terrorists you are the enemy too..
What part don’t you undrestand???
Of course they didn’t believe due to the failed policies of the Clintoon administration and they paid dearly..
There were WMD in Iraq, the Taliban was and is still trying to be in Afghanistan..
Pakistan is letting some of them stay there,,,, it’s a fine line they are trying to walk..
Have you done any research on the true intention of these people who hide in other countries?????
I suspect that you would like to be a muslim if you have because you will have to convert or die if they get their way..
Take off the tin foil hat, put down the kool aid and stay away from the DU and daily kos… you’ll be better off for it.
DW 5000,,,
if I give up my honor and let you have your way to the detriment of my country,,,,, that is appeasement.. if we give in to Iran it gives the enemy strength… we lose.
By the logic of some of you if you knew I was going to burn your house down, you wouldn’t intervene becasue someone might think you were wrong…
BTW:
P.S.: When is President Bush going to get around to visiting the graves of the soldiers that he sent to war? Has he been to one service yet?
Did you use the socialist google to check on this…. because he has…
John Maszka, I see you have a book out. I do have a couple of questions, as your profile is all but invisible on the Internet. What is your background to have published such a book?
Then again, your book is out via Publish America. Not exactly a discerning publisher who places value on content and viable authors, but instead gives opportunities to the unbpublished with minimal editing. Altho I read many that are proclaiming to be ripped off royally via royalties and rights. So I suggest you want your financial back with them.
But, to stay on topic, INRE some statements:
Interesting concept, and if this is your starting place, no wonder you are quite screwed up in your theories and predictions.
The global Islamic Jihad Movement is a Stateless/borderless enemy, therefore it’s quite difficult to “violate” their sovereignty.
The merger of jihad groups with the World Islamic Front Statement of 1998 suggests their main beef is the presence of western culture and US troops in Saudi, and our sanctions on Iraq. This is nonsensical, of course, as it doesn’t even address the rise of terrorism pre-1990… and just where were we evil Americans violating their “sovereignty” then?
At the time of the World Islamic Front Statement, Afghanistan and Iraq were not active fronts with US boots on the ground… hell, not even a glint in Clinton’s eye. The Saudi base was negotiated with the Saudi authorities.. not OBL. His rights to assail the west on the presence of western culture and US bases is not based anywhere in reality, nor sovereignty. Thereby neither is your completely left field statement that we “violated” their sovereignty.
The *only* ones suggesting taking the war to Pakistan is Obama and his merry band of followers. Following 911, the US make them a quasi, if not perfect, ally. Bush has been very careful to respect their positions, much to the chagrin of many.
You mention the 2006 bombing. This was done, of course, with a tacit nod of Musharraf. And I have to wonder if that’s the incident where Zawahiri’s “favorite wife” died. However I’m not so all fired convinced that the 17 locals “slaughtered” were innocents, and not related in any way to aiding or supporting either the neo-Taliban, or AQ. Remember, this enemy not only doesn’t wear State uniforms, they also enlist women, children, and the disabled… and hide behind the local villagers they terrorize, and make their headquarters in mosques.
It is true that with any US action in Pakistan territory, their love for us… which is non-existent anyway… takes a hit. Something Obama should pay attention to. However they have no problem loving our cash. I do, however, believe Pakistan is the next major problem, IMHO… not Afghanistan. That country is merely the checkerboard where the Pakistan/Taliban/AQ jihad game is being played. Again, something Obama needs to learn. However his “Cowboy policy” ain’t gonna fly, and will do little more than take a quasi ally and turn them into an enemy.. PLUS**.
You may “predict” all you like. Free country, free speech. However your strategic analysis leaves much to be desired. Now here’s the PLUS** …. After the Taliban was removed in Afghanistan, the jihad movement enjoyed considerable respect among the Muslim population. It was not until they showed their true colors in Iraq in 2006 that the tides turned, and Muslims started balking at training children for martyrs, and vocally speaking out against jihad. Therefore, had Iraq not happened, they would be still be enjoying support , if not gaining even more. As it is, the respect for them has fallen, and they are being turned out in many Muslim arenas.
As far as strategy, having an Arab democracy in the heart of the Middle East, geographically the garden spot of the region with a plethora of oil and the two rivers, is a major setback for the jihad and their desired Caliphate. Having another Muslim ally (as much as they *can* be an ally with our cultural differences) that sits between Iran and Syria, is nothing short of a strategic coup.
So while we’re all making future predictions, I predict that – with the fall out of favor with jihad, and a strategically located Muslim ally in the Middle East – the Bush Doctrine you suggest is on a par with Hitler’s holocaust is actually a policy that will not be appreciated fully until time unfolds decades from now, and the ME nurtures democratic roots.
You, however, come from a flawed beginning, assuming that the US has violated stateless thugs and murderers “soveignty”. As long as this is your inherent belief, the truth shall pass you by like sails on the sea. Just as I shall do your book….
Mata-
Where to begin?
I know:
‘after the Taliban was removed from Afghanistan’
Date please.
Thanks!
Ah, yes: busted on the facts, Mike H.’s America resorts to the ever-handy ad hominem.
Now let’s look at your thesis: if a hypothetical President Obama would not be giving anything away to achieve peace by by negotiation*–that is to say, if he isn’t actually practicing appeasement–what’s the problem with negotiation? One would think that the very existence of an entire cabinet department geared toward practicing diplomacy (the Department of State, in case you didn’t know) would lend credibility to the idea of negotiation.
Another point: many times on this site, the death of Iraqi civilians has been downplayed as part of the “sh*t happens” aspect of collateral damage during warfare. “The insurgents shouldn’t have used them as shields,” is, I think, the way it was framed once.
It looks now like you’re using civilian death as a way of underscoring your own point. What about all the civilians who have died as a result of the American invasion and occupation? Do you think that they are happy we went to Iraq?
—
*With France? Are we at war with France? Why do we need to overawe Paris with military power? One can’t tell from your post what country you actually mean, but you typed your gaffe under the heading “France.”
Removed as the governing regime, Arthurstone. That all you got?
You’ll note that, just like cockroaches, you can never remove all scum from the earth. You are living proof of that.
Dim Wit: If I thought it was worth discussing “facts” with you I might bother. But I’ve learned all such efforts on you are wasted.
You and yours embody appeasement in every sense of the word despite your lame, pathetic denials.
John is typical of the current PC crowd which chooses to blame us for Islam’s declaration of war with the rest of the world.
Islam mandates war with the non-muslim world. Islamic holy texts mandate that the everyone on earth must either become muslims or be subjegated to Islam as second-class citizens of a theocratic state where government and religion are one and the same. It’s all written down in black and white. Islam dictates that muslims must emmulate Mohamed as the perfect man to which they must model their lives. Christians say the same about Jesus, but where Jesus was a pacifist, Mohamed was a viscious, vindictive, self-serving and intolerant SOB who raped and murdered hundreds by his own hand, even ignoring the many thousands of such acts he ordered.
The Islamic Ummah has been seeking world domination since the 7th century, and was only stopped in the middle ages and again in the 16th century after getting soundly beaten militarily. In each case, Islam calmed down a bit for a few generations following the humiliation of defeat, but eventually, they pick up the Quran again. This is what has been slowly happening over the past 60-70 years, and it has finaly reached critical mass, and it will not stop until they are beaten.
History has shown that every time where Islam was ascendant and that other societies chose to negotiate, appease, or even surrender, they have been wiped out, as Islam sees such behaviour (which we would see as a reasonable attempt to prevent unnecessary bloodshed) as a vindication, proof that God is indeed on their side.
In the 13th century, the Indian City of Bihar was the home of two great universities attended by Hindus and Buddists. It was a city of learning, dedicated to peace. When the Muslim invaders arrived outside the city, the city surrendered without a fight, hoping to be spared. Instead the Muslims massacred everyone, and when they entered the great university libraries, there was nobody left that could even translate the titles of the books. So they simply burned the libraries.
If they don’t kill the population, they are mandated to subjugate them and “make them low”. Sharia law, which some Europeans are now saying they should accept in order to keep the peace, says that non-muslims are worth only a small fraction of a Muslim, in terms of value of life, testemony in court, and so on. Under Islamic rule, if 3 non-muslims are witnesses to a Muslim having commited murder, if the defendant says he did not do it, that’s IT, he’s not guilty.
I am seriously worried that over the next 50 years it will become more and more clear to even the most idealistic of left-wing peaceniks that Islam is incompatible with a modern, tolerant society. This realization will come after several horrendous attacks – probably nuclear, blowing up western cities. It’s only a matter of time before Islamists manage to put the pieces together. As someone once said, “The work of Nobel Prize-winners a few generations ago is the work of a skilled technician today”
When this happens, the western world will be forced to face the choice between the desire to defend itself surgically (like we have so far) in the belief that Islam itself is not the problem, or face the fact that Islam itself must be exterminated as harshly as Nazism..
“I am seriously worried that over the next 50 years it will become more and more clear to even the most idealistic of left-wing peaceniks that Islam is incompatible with a modern, tolerant society. This realization will come after several horrendous attacks – probably nuclear, blowing up western cities. It’s only a matter of time before Islamists manage to put the pieces together. As someone once said, “The work of Nobel Prize-winners a few generations ago is the work of a skilled technician today”
I’m going to agree with you Dreadnought with one exception… I don’t thing it will take 50 years..
I believe based on my research that in less than 10 years there will be a nuke popped in the US from our “brothers of peace”…
My gut feeling (no evidence) is less than 3…
I’m an old “Cold Warrior” with nuke experience and it really isn’t as difficult as everyone believes…
It may be a dirty bomb just due to simplicity,,, but I think they really, really get a hard on for the mushroom cloud…
It just depends on how patient they can be… and how many they think they can build..
Infiltration isn’t an issue with our open boarders… that’s a no brainer….
Think West coast for major fallout potential..
Is this really a fair and honest criticism? Or are you just saying it about THIS president because you happen to oppose THIS war?
Andrew Sullivan writing for TNR said it well in 2003:
More run down of past presidents attending military funerals (Not!).
Can anyone point me to any president who has spent more time visiting with military families who have lost loved ones, or visited more soldiers at Walter Reed than President Bush? Also, see my previous, related post here.
Thanks for amplifying that point so well Wordsmith.
There’s just no one who has watched this President all these years who would deny how much he personally cares about ALL our soldiers and their families.
It’s a shame that the sputtering hatemongers of the left, of which Dim Wit is a part, can’t drop their bile long enough to be as caring as President Bush has been towards the families of those who have lost family members in this war.
And when it comes to caring, President Bush has shown that it’s not just soldiers and their families that he takes to heart. I reminded of the story of Ashley Faulkner, whose mother was killed in the Sept. 11th attacks:
I realize that’s all lost on Dim Wit. But then, he’s so soaked in hate that every good thing is lost to him and those like him.
I voted for President Bush, I don’t agree with him on everything and I have been disappointed in some of his actions/inactions… Still and all when I vote in November I just wish I had some confidence in the person I’ll be voting for, I’ll be crossing my fingers and hoping I’m doing the right thing, making a good choice. I think we Americans and America deserve better than the pitiful choice we are offered, could be, in fact I’m almost certain I’ll be voting against one nominee rather than voting for a President.
.
The ignorant trolls writing here this AM never let truth or facts or history cloud their rant. There are so many muslim and or Marxist countries they could go to live In and be happy if they truely believed in their philosophy. Instead they continue to live here and make life miserable for those of us who prefer the freedoms of Democracy. Get a life guys.
Translation: “It has been a bad 24 hours for me here on Flopping Aces. I don’t actually have any facts. It has been revealed that I have no idea what ‘Stalinist’ means, I’ve countenanced the posting of terrorist threats against an American city on my blog, I’ve repeatedly displayed my lack of understanding of world history by misusing ‘appeasement’ even after being apprised of my error, I’ve flipflopped on whether we should use the death of innocent Iraqi civilians to drive our foreign policy, and I’ve called, for no good reason, for war with France. My acute recto-fossal ambiguity is showing, I’m down to repetitious ad hominem attacks, and I hope that somebody like Wordsmith or MataHarley will come to my rescue here.”
That pretty much cover it, cupcake?
I don’t know why they even let you hang around here, buddy.
MataHarley typed:
You’ll note that, just like cockroaches, you can never remove all scum from the earth. You are living proof of that.
No need to thank me but I do appreciate your kind words. Just doing my job.
As a keen student of history and a crackerjack global policy theorist you must know that the Taliban ‘was not removed from Afghanistan’ and that their removal from political power was/is likely a temporary setback. With a long history of weak central government the Taliban continues to flourish in the tribal confederation which is Afghanistan. Opium and, among other enterprises, marble quarrying, keep them financially viable. Far from ‘removed’ they are gathering strength and aren’t going away anytime soon. Yet another episode of the US imperialist vision biting off more than it can chew and not allocating enough resources to a near impossible mission insure a likely unhappy ending.
Happy to clear that up for you.
Now as for the US interfering the sovereignty middle eastern nations & it’s effect on increasing the number of our enemies. Mossedeq. Shah Pahlavi. Another pathetic episode of the US knowing what’s best for the locals and proceeding to ‘fix’ things with predictably lousy results. And haven’t those birds come home to roost.
Have a great weekend.
Where do all these retards come from? The left is getting pissed that Bush was right and the surge worked. Oh and those talking about sovereignty… how about Pelosi and Colombia? How much money did the democrats send to FARC to help overthrow the government? Idiots… the left have to make up lies and tell half truths to justify their drug addled world. It’s a sad life they live.
Dim Wit:
If you were a more careful reader and one that was less eager to find fault you might not have misread the following sentence:
“President Bush has visited the American war graves in France to pay honor to their sacrifice and demonstrate an understanding of the cost that appeasement, or diplomacy without military force, brings. “
Perhaps it could have been phrased better, but I was talking here about appeasement ORdiplomacy without the backup of a military force component. Though the two are related, I intended them as separate elements.
Of course I understand that you are desperate to distract readers from any criticism of Obama and are simply trying to sidetrack readers with your idiotic, puerile troll droppings.
But it won’t work. Readers here aren’t going to fall for the little bag of tricks that you neosocialists have used to hoodwink the willfully ignorant clowns of the left.
Now stop wasting our time with your bile and go get a life.
Leftists are perpetually unhappy, but never moreso than when our evil United States dares to stand up and fight for its right to exist. How shocked and saddened the visiting trolls on this site are over the deaths of all of those “innocent Iraqi citizens.” Of course these are the same giant intellects who decided that we deserved 9/11. No mourning for 3000 Americans slain. After all, who could be upset about the murder of the imperialists who populated the twin towers. And today we are being treated to a meaningless vocabulary lesson. Perhaps if DW can sufficiently parse the meaning of “appeasement”, no one will notice that he and his fellow travelers are master practitioners, always delighted to “give away” anything to do with the well-being of the US and the American people. Over 6 years we have liberated 40 million people from the most vile of murderous dictatorships, prevented a lunatic and his offspring from the further creation of chemical, biological and eventually nuclear weapons and made certain that American citizens were not subjected to another 9/11. But of course none of this counts because the evil Bush would have to be given credit somewhere along the line. So the left ties itself into a series of breathtaking verbal pretzels, maintaining that Joe Wilson was not a liar, that al qaeda is now stronger not weaker, that the US is more at risk not less and on and on. If the activities of the left did not represent such a danger to the US and the American public, these people and their organizations would just be humorous. But you’ll have to excuse me. It’s time to get my Lab puppy up from her nap. And that is far more important and certainly more stimulating than reading leftovers from the Huffington Post.
Is it just me or .. do the Obama “military” audiences seems very .. non-white, non-Latino, non-Asian ?
Good observation ‘Neo’… Team obammiecommie probably kicked out everyone that didn’t fit their preferred racial profile.
It might be the other way around Bridget. They can’t control the military crowds like they do a campaign rally, since technically these visits are not “campaign” appearances. And yes Neo, the video I have seen (no newswire photos yet) looks like a mainly black military audience.
Nice: “No, I didn’t say what I meant to say, but how dare you take me to task for what I did say?”
“Perhaps it could have been phrased better?” You think? Protip: look up “appositive” in an English textbook some time. It’ll be an education. Don’t try to do the task of writing if you don’t have the tools to do it successfully.
Thank heaven all you New Media types are out there not expressing yourself for the rest of us!
I’m still laughing at the notion that you need a rescue mission, Mike’sA… That would imply you actually have a worthy adversary! ROTFLOL Then again engaging those who vehemently argue that the sky is “bluish gray” when you say the sky is “gray” … or as Thomas B called it, “telling half truths” in order to justify their beliefs ….. is genuinely a waste of time.
Perhaps the most revealing is those that portray the Iraqis as victims of US “imperialism”. Iraqis have demonstrated consistently that they prefer an Arab democracy to despot leadership. And just like Colonial America did in our past, they put their lives on the line to protect what they have started. The liberal/progressives who portray them as US victims in order to demean the US and GWB admin, actually do these brave Iraqis great disservice and disrespect. But then, that’s the lib/progressive way to go… look down, demean, create a victim class and then figure out some welfare program to correct and equalize the situation.
On topic….. Yep, Bridget and Neo, I agree. With all the “breaking news” coverage of BHO, showing us just about everything but him taking his morning dump, I notice the crowds are either very carefully put together… or perhaps they are the only ones interested in seeing His Messiahship. I dunno… the man looks very uncomfortable with our military to me. Nervously chewing quickly and talking with his mouth full at breakfast. This is not a man who looks like he wants to get down in the dirt and play games with enlisted personnel.
I’ve spent the weekend doing voter registration out in So. California and had more than my fair share of annoying exchanges with clueless moonbats.
The most outrageous item to report is nothing new… looney dems make crap up on the spot in a bizarre attempt at debate. Of course, CIVIL debate is outside their tunnel vision reality. They go hysterical instantanteously…it’s like watching mental illness in motion. One guy went totally berserk – he was literally foaming at the mouth shouting “illegal war” at me. I kind of wanted to call animal control…I was afraid he might have rabies.
Liberals want us to talk to that hitler over in Iran but, can’t even carry on a civil conversation in their own backyard. Let’s send that mentally unhinged guy I spoke to yesterday. Talk about appeasement! Since they can’t talk their way out of a paper bag, appeasement is the obvious solution to all foreign policy problems for liberals.
So the surge is meaningless and the opportunities for women in Iraq are meaningless and the fact that Olympians from Iraq won’t be executed for not bringing home gold is meaningless…
Liberal hypocrisy! They’re against the death penalty for heinous, sub-human cruelty, but all for late term abortion which is heinous, sub-human cruelty.
They’re against school vouchers but send their kids to private academies.
Leftist Elites like baracka want the populace to stay poor and stupid so that the populace can be controlled by elites and their interventionist policies.
Elites view Freedom of speech as a direct threat to elitism and their oppressive policies.
They don’t understand that Peace is achieved through strength. The world is a crazy place and liberals don’t understand that. This is precisely why they fail miserably at foreign policy.
The so called ‘Democrats’ running for office aren’t Democrats…they’re elitists that have no respect for the Constitution.
Please lend a hand to your local Republican organization and or campaign HQ…help us get people registered…help us get the truth out there….unlike the elites we can’t bus in union workers on the tax payers dime. Dems cheat like there’s no tomorrow. They throw out GOP registrations and that’s just the beginning…
We could use some help out here.
Bridget perhaps some of this attitude may have been a reflection of your own predjudices. Could you go back and count the number of adjectives in your post that were shall we say less than flattering ? I do applaud your effort in voter registartion although of course the democrats are leading in that especially in CA where new voters are about twice as likely to register as a democrat
Yo. Ryan. Pay attention.
Were you out in the 90 degree weather alongside me? NO. Did I invite these morons over to bleat in my face? NO. They invited their own stank selves to scream in my face. Do not pontificate to me Pal, on something you know nothing about.
Less than flattering? How about reality, pal. While you sit on your pompous ass, lecturing me about adjectives, ( what a liberal fricking elitist thing to do, by the way ) I’m out there talking to people about the lies your beloved MSM is shoving down their throats in collusion with the elites to send this great country down into the sewer of socialism.
Adjectives? Don’t like the truth, do ya. Too bad. Get used to the truth about you and your slovenly co-horts being exposed. Adjectives? I got more for the likes of you!
Are you from California? Where do you get your holier than thou attitude about the latest stats regarding how new voters are likely to register? You liberals couldn’t source one of your so called facts if it slapped you in the face. You don’t deal with facts. You make crap up as you go along.
When you’ve got cheating democrats prancing around on the taxpayers dime lying their empty heads off you might slither away with a few registrations. Unfortunately for you and your elitist friends we’re out there informing people about you and your lazy ilk. We have more people in my county switching from the sleazy dem party to the GOP because of the crooked DEMS up in Sacramento. It’s because of sleazy dems like you that AAA and Toyota have just announced that they’re leaving CA. Californians know that DEMOCRATS KILL JOBS!
You sound like a blood sucking, tax bloated elitist – complacent elitism creates adjective counters like you.
“looney dems make crap up on the spot in a bizarre attempt at debate.”
You don’t have to go out in the heat to find that Bridget. There are quite a few of those smelly lib trolls online at this blog doing the same thing.
THIS COMMENT HAS BEEN DELETED BY THE SITE MODERATOR. THE LEFTY TROLL WHO WROTE IT IS OVERQUOTA FOR OFFENSIVE IDIOCY FOR ONE DAY.