Excerpt: Bush has transformed elite units of the U.S.
military - including Special Forces and highly trained sniper teams
- into "death squads" with a license to kill
unarmed targets on the suspicion that they are a threat to American
military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan,
according to evidence from recent court cases.
Though this reality has been the subject of whispers
within the U.S. intelligence community for several years,
it has now emerged into public view with two
attempted prosecutions of American soldiers whose defense
attorneys cited "rules of engagement" that permit
the killing of suspected insurgents.
I've been saying it for years - the Bush Family Evil Empire fights dirty.
That's how they got in bed with Hitler, Osama, Saddam, Noriega and
and any other terrorist who can make more millions for that ugly crime
Frank Rich is every bit the worthless media whore
that Mo Dowd is.
His hatred of the Clintons, and Gore, is monumental.
In their passive/aggressive, "I'm really a liberal"
style, they'll both do everything in their power to make sure
another Republican gains the White House. They
are as worthless as anything on this earth, and every
progressive/liberal/Democrat should shout that
out at every opportunity. Screw 'em both.
I'm sure you're correct about the Dowd whore,
not as sure about Rich.
I'll keep my eye on him and see if you're right.
"You can't go after a woman candidate the way
you can go after a guy. It's very, very difficult to campaign
against a woman candidate." -- Paul Weyrich, sensing that She
will win the Demo nomination, Link
This Paul Weyrich guy (R-Fourth Reich)
is the bastard who said...
They figured it would work for New Orleans, too.
Now, instead of poor negroes in shanty shacks lining the coast,
they have billion dollar casinos and luxury hotels - Mission Accomplished.
Excerpts: Hillary Clinton is tough on Iran. She is also
tough on President Bush. And she is tough
on keeping President Bush from getting too tough
That's the signal she effectively sent today by
co-sponsoring new legislation with Jim Webb of Virginia
which "prohibits the use of funds for military
operations against Iran without explicit Congressional authorization."
Last week, Clinton voted with the majority in
approving a resolution urging the State Department to designate
Iran's Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization,
a measure designed to put additional economic pressure on Iran.
On the Senate floor today, she said, "Iran has
gained expanded influence in Iraq and the region as a result of Bush's
polices which have also rejected diplomacy as
a tool for addressing Iranian ambitions. I continue to support and
advocate for a policy of entering into talks
with Iran, because robust diplomacy is a prerequisite to achieving our
I also support strong economic sanctions against
Iran, including designating the Iranian Revolutionary Guards as a
terrorist organization, to improve our leverage
with the Iranian regime."
If you're one of those who regularly sets their hair on fire with that
"Hillary is Cheney's clone" horseshit,
the time to feel stupid is right now.
In November 2006 the voters gave the Democrats
a large mandate and that mandate was given with the
understanding that the Democrats would work to
get us out of Iraq. The Democratic Party, (including Hillary)
has turned its back on that mandate. And
yet you seem surprised that there is considerable disgust on the part of
many voters with the Democratic party and with
Ms. Clinton regarding her always artful "positioning" on Iraq and now Iran.
- What would you have the Dems do? Cut off funding for the
troops under fire?
Are you, perhaps, related to Bob Shrum?
- Hillary's "positioning" can be artful or inartful. If she has a mis-step,
my guess is we'd have 4-8 more years of worldwide Republican
The current business about Iran is simply the
Iraq business all over again...
Is it really that simple?
...and once again we see the spineless Democratic
Party falling in line with the garbage coming out of the White House,
which causes a good many of us on the left (the
Democratic wing of the Democratic Party) to wonder if Hillary as
President will be signifiicantly different from
George W. Bush as regards our actions in the Middle East.
As you might guess, I'm calling that crazy-talk.
> "Either a nuked-up Iran is a problem or it
is not. My guess is that it is."
Why? Iran does not have any nuclear weaponry,
just as Saddam did not have any WMD.
And while Bush could safely lie about Saddam,
there is no question that Iran does not possess nuclear weapons.
Neither of us work for the IAEA, but it's my
understanding Iran has 2,000 centrifuges that are working
as hard as they can to produce fissionable material
(guesswork on that term). I heard someone say that
Iran's nuke capacity right now is at 3.7 and
they need to get to 4 before they can cause any harm.
Your argument is thus, "Well, they MIGHT someday
have the capacity to make nuclear weapons....
so what the hell, let's bomb 'em anyway."
That sort of thinking is as illogical as right wing nutcase thinking.
*I* said "Let's bomb Iran?" You might win a car if you can tell me on which
page I published that.
I might point out that Pakistan, an Islamic nation,
DOES have nuclear weaponry.
Why do you not argue about bombing Pakistan?
From your point of view, that would make much more sense.
When did I say I wanted to bomb anybody? (Recently,
I mean... :)
It strikes me as ridiculously obvious that we
should be working to cool things down in the Middle East,
not heat them up; after all, look where our aggression
in the Middle East has gotten us so far.
Dave, from my point of view, the biggest difference between us is I
don't want Iran to have nukes.
"Some of us had to cover them for eight years.
The thought of doing it all over again is enough to make even
the liberal journalists go pale."
-- Andrew Sullivan, Bush's TOP cheerleader, on the Clintons,Link
Poor Andrew Sullivan, "forced" to root around inside Clinton's
zipper for eight delicious years,
"forced" to write salacious story after salacious story about
Bill's imaginery sex life,
"forced" to interview greedy Arkansas trailer tramps for a story
for FOX News,
"forced" write all those extra-detailed sexual best-selling
stories for the GOP base...
You know you loved it.
Before Clinton's zipper came along - had anyone ever heard of you?
Clinton made hacks like you (and hundreds others) rich, so now you
whine about it?
I suggest you call Judas Maximus and ask him out for drinks.
Excerpt: The Democrats' antiwar campaign has failed.
Bush's ruinous Iraq adventure will continue indefinitely,
despite the fact that a majority of the American
people oppose it. Too divided and afraid of being called
"weak on national security" to stop funding it,
the Democrats have been reduced to hoping that voters
punish the GOP in 2008.
But since Congress' approval rating is even lower
than Bush's (in August, it sank to a low of 18 percent),
it is far from clear that this strategy will
work. The war is increasingly perceived as a low-level annoyance,
barely even making the news. Amazingly, it now
appears possible that the Republicans will suffer no
long-term political damage for arguably the most
disastrous war in U.S. history.
Writer Kamiya thinks voters are smart - I say the just the opposite.
Kamiya wants the Dems to cut off food, water and ammo for our troops
That might be a good idea, but the dumber-than-Fraud-Thompson
voters most certainly would punish the Democrats for leaving our soldiers in the lurch so what
choice to the Dems have?
(Besides that whole filibustering idea which
I still don't get. Why is filibustering off limits to us,
but Inhofe can use it every time he doesn't want a concert held?)
Bush is playing "Chicken" with the lives of the troops and the Dems
smartly refuse to play.
(Did I just give the Democrats credit for being smart?)
are stupid - they don't want what they are demanding.
Sure, they want the war over, but if we shut off funding, Bush's
whore media will find some soldiers who died because of the Dem cut-off and, because they are super-super-goddamn
stupid, voters will look past the 3800 soldiers Bush got killed and focus on the 5 who
died because of the Democrats.
If you're going to argue with me, argue that last sentence or I won't
print your letter.
"Anybody who thinks we're going to elect a
president who cannot lay down unimpeachable credentials on national security, who cannot
demonstrate by his or her record or character that they have the vision to protect America
as well as ending this war is making a mistake."
-- Joe Biden, on why Hillary sometimes votes like a hawk,Link
Excerpt: Halliburton, Dick Cheney's money-laundering machine,
said on Monday second-quarter profit rose 19%,
topping Wall Street views, helped by new international
contracts and stronger demand from its customers.
The company, which opened a headquarters in Dubai
this year in an effort to avoid paying US taxes,
noted recent contract wins in India and Malaysia
that helped offset weakness in its largest market, America.
(Translation: The US TReasury is empty,
we need to find a new bank to loot.)
Rich Republicans sent shares of Halliburton to
$38, the highest level in more than a year.
Bart, I served 17 years in the Infantry in some
pretty shitty parts of the world.
I don't agree with this war. If that fat bastard
called me a "phony soldier" to my face
I'd put my "phony" Army issue boot so far up
his ass he'd have kiwi stains on the back of his teeth.
Excerpt: Wall Street began the fourth quarter with a huge
rally Monday, sending the Dow Jones to a record close.
Stocks were buoyed by a growing belief that the
worst of the credit crisis has passed.
Meanwhile, the market was optimistic that new
economic data might nudge the Federal Reserve
toward another interest rate cut at its Oct.
30-31 meeting. The dollar was mixed Monday against
other major currencies, while gold prices
How many times will they trumpet Bush's DOW breaking
14,000 again and again?
And gold prices are rising?
You know what that means...
Bart, this was my point about Hilary's explanation
of her vote giving Bush the war power
the first time and then this last week she voted
to declare the Iranian Revolutionary Guard
a "terrorist group" thus enabling him to again
go after the terroists inside Iran.
Her first vote she claims was misgiven and mis-used
and then she gives it again
to the same mis-user of her first vote.
AGAIN & AGAIN & AGAIN??
She can't be trusted, not with my vote . . . anyway.
BTW, thanks for the BCR .
Earl, I think she knows what she's doing.
I think she and Bill know more about politics than either of us.
Judge her on her presidency, not what she had to do to get there.
"I was having drinks with a friend, a lifelong
Republican, big Wall Street legal brain (but now retired), sometime generous contributor to party funds,
normally good-natured and mild-mannered. We weren't even talking politics. The topic was the current
woes of the poor old dollar. Suddenly, with uncharacteristic anger, my drinking buddy said something like
this: "The federal government's main functions are to maintain a stable currency, keep us out of
unnecessary foreign entanglements and wars, and patrol the coasts and borders. That's three strikes on
George Bush, that goddamn piece of shit! The man's been a total fucking disaster. What the goddamn fucking
hell was I thinking of, voting for this braindead c*nt?" -- John Derbyshire, who's so Republican, he called for Chelsea
Clinton to be killed, Link
Excerpt: At the par-3 17th, captain Jack Nicklaus and
several of the American players assembled by the green.
They were ready to congratulate Mr. Perfect if
he were to win the hole, and thus the match.
Yet Weir made birdie to send it to 18. It was
all square again.
Amazingly, Woods pulled his drive into the water
and lost the hole.
The crowd went crazy. The Presidents Cup belonged
to the Americans, but the fans didn't care.
All they cared about was that the best player
in their country had knocked off the best player in America.
> Either a nuked-up Iran is a problem or
it's not. > My guess is that it is.
So you agree that we should go to war with Iran?
No, and why would you think I did?
You'll know when I think we should go to war
with Iran when I write,
"We should go to war with Iran."
You can't have it both ways.
It's you who has it wrong, Grasshopper.
There are more options than the two you thought
Either you support Hillary, Dick Cheney and the
Chimp on this, or you don't. which is it?
Is that your idea of a trap?
Lumping our front-runner with two mobsters then
barking at me?
You need to go back to trap-building school.
I can't speak for our next president, but I can
take a guess.
I think she's going to ride out Der Fuhrer's
term and then negotiate peace with Iran.
Ahmahandjob may want war, but the people of Iran
and the Ayatollah's don't.
The ayatollahs are moving to curb Ahmahandjob's
power as we speak.
They just won a war - why would they want to
start another one?
BTW, are you new to politics?
Her current job is getting elected.
She's in the lead because she's the best one
in the field.
Once she takes the oath, her job changes.
Our motto for
this year is - "No Anti-Bush Site Left Behind".
So - if you have an anti-bush site and you are choking on hosting
fees or dealing with threats - let us know and we'll help keep you online.
have that strongest server side spam filtering on the planet.
Check out Marx
Mail for info on how you can have a Spam
Free Email Account.