Friday, March 02, 2007

CPAC: ANN COULTER'S CRIMINAL INTENT Part 2

God Bless our Vets and Troops. The WALTER REED HOSPITAL SCANDAL is more important than Ann Coulter, but I promised to get the whole Coulter-Borchers incident posted in Borcher's own words before we move on. Tonight's news was riveting as wounded vets testified against the bureacracy. One soldier, whose leg was blown off, was reported having to fill out 22 pages of paperwork before being treated.


Borchers caught this photo of the unknown "cameraman" who followed him, and seemed to be grinning most the time while Borchers was being harrassed by four CPAC/Coulter bodyguards.

This contains Dan Borchers entire statement of exactly what happened to him at CPAC on Friday.

By Lydia Cornell with Dan Borchers

On Friday March 2, 2007 at 11:15 a.m. I called my co-author Dan Borchers of Citizens for Principled Conservatism, http://www.principledconservative.org/ to see how he was doing.
He told me he was at CPAC, having a great time, and had gone to several seminars. I asked him if Ann Coulter was going to speak. He said she was scheduled for later in the day, but that it was probably standing room only. Dan said he was about to interview Mark Smith, an author. Forty-five minutes later, around 12 noon, I got a frantic call from Borchers. He sounded panicked and said, “I've just been assaulted and kicked out of the conference.” I said, “What? Why?” He said, “I don't know, they wouldn't say. But I was wrestled out of the hotel by four bodyguards, one I recognized as being Ann Coulter's - and they shoved me and tried to grab my name tag. They were incredibly hostile; one of them grabbed at me and cut my hand. They wouldn't say who they were.” I told him he should call the police, file a police report. He then told me he was being filmed the entire time, and the cameraman was grinning, as if it was a "set up." He said they forcibly pushed him out of the (Omni Shoreham) Hotel and told him he better get to his car. By the time he got to the parking lot, he said one of the bodyguards was waiting for him. He threatened him. You can read Dan's own account in his own words below.

This is an older photo of the same bodyguard who threatened, wrestled and grabbed Borchers, whom Borchers described as incredibly hostile and menacing. From Dan Borchers: “In September of last year, I sought press credentials for CPAC 2007. Floyd Resnick, Director of CPAC Security, denied those credentials. Resnick was described in Time magazine as “a bourbon-drinking ex-cop who says, quite believably, that he can kill with his bare hands.” I then registered online for a three-day conference pass, paying the $100 fee via credit card, and I received an email acknowledgement confirming my registration. That email acknowledgement was auto-signatured by CPAC Director Lisa De Pasquale.

On March 1, 2007, the morning of the first day of the conference, I arrived at the Omni Shoreham Hotel (2500 Calvert Street NW. Washington, District of Columbia 20008) and registered for the conference. I was immediately given a name badge with my name pre-printed on it: “Dan Borchers, Odenton, MD.”

That day and the next, I listened to speeches, toured the exhibition hall, took photographs, spoke with friends and conducted interviews. During both days, I spoke several times with Ian Walters, an employee of CPAC who has known me since 2002. Everything seemed fine.

At around 1 p.m. on Friday, March 2, 2007, I spoke with author and attorney Mark W. Smith, whom I had previously interviewed a few years earlier at a different venue, and I asked him a few questions which he readily agreed to. His manner was friendly and accommodating. But then I dared to ask a question about Ann Coulter and the Paula Jones case. At that point, Smith interrupted the interview for about ten minutes, then returned and we resumed the interview.

In less than an hour, probably a few minutes before 2 p.m., I was accosted by Floyd Resnick and several other people. Resnick appeared out of nowhere and stood in front of me, body-blocking me. His manner was very confrontational and hostile as he demanded to know who I was. He asked me my name, turned my name badge over to see my name, and then tried to forcibly remove that name badge from around my neck.

At no time did any of the individuals identify themselves by name.

Resnick insisted that I leave the premises and claimed that I was not authorized to be there. I told him that I had registered and paid to attend the conference. He said that my money had been refunded. All the while he insisted that I leave as he kept trying to get my name badge.

After insisting that I be able to retrieve my belongings, Resnick and his crew rushed me to the area where my belongings were located. Resnick continued to try to get my name badge, struggling with me. Once again, at no point did anyone offer any identification or credentials, so I was reluctant to relinquish the one proof of authorization that I had in my possession.

My belongings were near the booth for Muslims for America. I had to pass by the co-founder of that organization, Muhammad Ali Hasan (his phone number is 310-770-6953), to get my possessions.

I reached into my pocket to get my digital voice recorder in order to document what was taking place. At that point, my name badge was in my left hand extended far from Resnick, who then lunged forward, his body against mine, as he ripped the name badge from my hand. It was at that time that my hand was cut - a very minor cut - between my thumb and forefinger.

The Chief of Security for Omni Shoreham was also there. He didn't give me his name, though he later gave his title. He was conciliatory, stating that I would have to go through CPAC for any redress against them, but he was also firmly insistent that I leave the premises because I was not a guest of the hotel. They escorted me out through the curtain separating the basement exhibit hall from a maintenance area and exiting the building, past trash cans and parking. They carefully avoided all of the press in the area, yet throughout this incident, another person was filming the entire event from the beginning.

I repeatedly demanded that I get a copy of that video and the person who later identified himself as the chief of security for the hotel kept reassuring me that I would be given a copy.

We arrived outside the front entrance of the hotel. I was refused re-admittance to the hotel, blocked by their words and their bodies. The Omni Shoreham Chief of Security took my coat check and retrieved my coat, giving it to me.

While he was retrieving my coat, I kept asking the other men, as they circled around me, who they were and why they were doing this. They refused to identify themselves. Resnick did not give me his name, but he eventually told me that he was the chief of security for CPAC and that he was the one who had denied my press credentials. (That's how I know his name.) Meanwhile, we had quite an audience with people at the hotel entrance questioning themselves about what was taking place before their very eyes.

I attempted to take a picture of Resnick at 2:05 p.m., but that photo did not turn out (perhaps the FBI can recover the digital photo). I did take a picture of the cameraman at 2:06 p.m.

After receiving my coat, I was told to leave. I left, walked down the driveway, turned right on Calvert Street, crossed 24th Street and waited at the intersection for the light to change so that I could cross Calvert Street toward the Woodley Park-Zoo/Adams Morgan metro station.

The cameraman was still filming me! Students at that intersection were staring in wonder at what was taking place, asking each other what was going on.

The light changed, I crossed the street and took the two escalators down to the metro station. I turned back to see if the cameraman was still there. He wasn't. Instead, one of Resnick's people, still unidentified, was stalking me. I approached him. He told me I'd better get on the train. He refused to answer my questions or identify himself. Nor did he say what would happen if I did not get on the train, though he ominously held his cell phone conspicuously ready to put to his ear.

As I reached into my pocket, my mysterious stalker threatened me! He said, “If you take out your camera, I'll smash it into a thousand pieces.”

I turned, went through the turnstile and spoke to the metro attendant who was on duty. Turning, I pointed to my stalker and said, “That man is harassing me.” I then briefly explained the situation and the verbal threat. I pulled out my camera to take a photo and my stalker turned and walked away, putting his cell phone to his ear.

After getting the name of my metro station witness, I took that metro train to where my car was parked. At that time I discovered the bleeding cut to my hand. However minor, it is evidence of the assault (photo taken at 2:34 p.m.).

I called the DC police at 2:46 p.m. (cell phone time). A unit arrived about one hour later. I told them my story and showed them the cut on my hand, but they were unable to help because they were from a different district. The name of one of the officers was Officer Douglas A. McAndrew (Badge # 2471).

It is worth noting that Floyd Resnick, Director of CPAC Security, is also Ann Coulter's personal bodyguard and that CPAC Director Lisa De Pasquale is also one of Ann Coulter's publicists. They are seeking to silence me, a conservative who is critical of Ann Coulter.

On March 3, 2007, I received a certified letter from CPAC refunding my registration fee. They had mailed it on Saturday, February 24, 2007, but it didn't arrive at the Odenton Post Office until March 2, 2007, while I was at CPAC. I did not receive that letter until Saturday, March 3, 2007, the day after being accosted at the CPAC convention.

In that letter, Lisa De Pasquale cites my “past behavior at CPAC” as the reason for not permitting me at CPAC, without describing what that behavior was. It was, of course, my CPAC 2002 press kit critical of Ann Coulter.

On March 5, 2007, I spoke with Rafaello McKeython, Chief of Security for the Omni-Shoreham Hotel (202-234-0700) and one of the four individuals copied on De Pasquale's letter to me. [Floyd Resnick was also copied on that letter.] When I asked for a copy of the tape, Mr. McKeython said: “I didn't promise you a tape. They haven't gotten a copy for me yet. I don't even have a copy for myself. They just finished their conference on Saturday and I was off that day. I asked the gentlemen for a copy. Call me back on Wednesday and I should have it by then.”

At approximately 1:50 p.m., I spoke with Police Officer A. DeLosSantos (Badge # 2271) of the Third District. After describing the incident, Officer De LosSantos refused to file a police report on this incident and refused to initiate an investigation into what took place.” - Dan Borchers

The original letter accepting Borcher's registration, sigined by Lisa de Pasquale, as well as photographs Borchers took while being manhandled, are available upon request.

Note: Borchers and I been collaborating on a couple of projects together, including a book from a left wing and right wing Christian perspective. I am not at liberty to discuss the project here. Dan Borchers is a lifelong Republican, a conservative military veteran, whose only crime is being morally offended at the way conservatism has been ruined by people like Coulter, who claims to be a Christian, but indulges in hate-speak and amoral, felonious behavior. He believes it is his moral obligation to bring attention to this, and that "evil triumphs when good men do nothing."

Borchers is the most mild-mannered, humble Christian. He is critical of the way Ann Coulter has "mainstreamed extremism" and has written articles about her. He accused her of plagiarizing her early books, and at the CPAC conference two years ago, he tried to distribute press kits calling for Coulter to stop her hate speak.

For interviews with Dan Borchers or Lydia Cornell, please call:



Just a few hours ago, my friend Dan Borchers — a conservative Christian who is writing a book about Ann Coulter's "extermination speak" — was bodily wrestled out of CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference) by four of Ann Coulter's bodyguards. More below.... but first this:

  • Basham and Cornell Progressive Talk
  • This Saturday morning, March 3, we will interview Paul Waldman of Media Matters on his amazing new book "BEING RIGHT IS NOT ENOUGH: What Progressives Must Learn From Conservative Success." Our show, Basham And Cornell Progressive Talk is broadcast LIVE at 9 am PST Saturday mornings on 1230 AM KLAV in Las Vegas, simulcast on the internet. Last Saturday February 24, we had the pleasure of interviewing former federal prosecutor Elizabeth de la Vega, author of the new bestseller "U.S. vs BUSH" The Case for Impeachment. It was a fascinating interview.

    Doug Basham was on Lou Dobbs last week as one of America's "top talkers." Check out Doug's site for a list of all the incredible guests he has interviewed and see what Senate Majority leader Harry Reid, Pat Buchanan, Joe Conason, Daniel Ellsberg, Catherine Crier, Helen Thomas, Caspar Weinberger, Lou Dobbs, Congress people and best-selling authors say about Doug Basham: Basham Radio

    ANN COULTER'S CRIMINAL INTENT AT CPAC continued...
    Two of these goons claimed they were CPAC security, but Borchers recognized the most hostile one as Coulter's longtime bodyguard. It appeared that they staged the whole thing, for they were following him with a camera. During the altercation, they cut Borcher's hand, tried to pry his name tag and credentials off his neck, physically WRESTLED him out of the hotel, and shoved him. Why? Borchers couldn't get a straight answer out of the four guards, except "you are not permitted to be here."

    Borcher's crime: asking a question of another author (Mark Smith) about Ann Coulter's involvement in the Paula Jones case. Borchers spent money, bought expensive tickets, took time off work and traveled from Maryland as he does every year, to be at CPAC. Lisa DePasquale, the head of CPAC and Human Events, sent Borchers his tickets and wrote him a nice letter welcoming him to the conference. He is a lifelong Republican, a conservative military veteran, whose only crime is being morally offended at the way conservatism has been ruined by people like Coulter, who claims to be a Christian, but indulges in hate-speak and amoral, felonious behavior. He believes it is his moral obligation to bring attention to this, and that "evil triumphs when good men do nothing."

    Borchers is the most mild-mannered, humble Christian. He is critical of the way Ann Coulter has "mainstreamed extremism" and has written articles about her. He accused her of plagiarizing her early books, and at the CPAC conference two years ago, he tried to distribute press kits calling for Coulter to stop her hate speak.

    The news needs to know about this. More to come.

    ILENE PROCTOR
    INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC RELATIONS
    For Immediate Release
    Press Contact, Ilene Proctor

    310 271 5857 -
    email: proctor@artnet.net

    http://www.LydiaCornell.com
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lydia_Cornell
    www.CoulterWatch.com
    http://www.principledconservative.org/
    Basham and Cornell Progressive Talk



    Also check out our new radio blog at
  • Basham and Cornell Progressive Talk
  • 479 comments:

    1. Coulter also called John Edwards a faggot at this same conference.

      It doesn't sound like true Christian values as it comes from a vile, hateful piece of twig.

      The words you speak usually come straight from your heart.

      What a black heart she has.

      ReplyDelete
    2. Thank you Larry, we must continue to call attention to the "bad guys" because they have gotten away with it for far too long.

      Coulter is as corrupt as they come, and her arrogance is chilling.

      I've never heard of so many sociopaths congregating in one place.

      ReplyDelete
    3. All the hate that filled the room at CPAC I'm surprised they didn't turn on each other.

      Arrogance and hate are the norm for this breed of horror.

      ReplyDelete
    4. Right wing vomit bag Michelle Malkin blasted Coulter at the CPAC meeting for calling Edwards a fag.

      They must be vying for the top spot of sludge of the right.

      ReplyDelete
    5. I enjoyed the article you just placed Ms. Cornell and I also am mortified at the things she says.

      ReplyDelete
    6. Larry, while it doesn't sound like true Christian values, it does sound like the values of the religious right. Coulter won my 'Bush Sweetheart' award for today over what she said.

      Lydia, thanks for what you do. I've already plugged your show at my place, and Larry just promised to listen. :-) The tactics you brought up are nothing new. Do you remember the three activists who were expelled without cause from a Bush 'Potemkin Village' event in Denver in 2005? At the time the White House spokesman claimed that the thugs who ousted them were local volunteers. The Denver Post reported yesterday that the thugs testified under oath that they were working for Bush. Anything goes to prevent free speech, as far as Bush is concerned.

      ReplyDelete
    7. The only "free speech" left in America is that of vagabonds like Coulter.

      Others who speak out are hauled out of rooms, roughed up or just ruined by the right.

      Thus is Bush's America!

      ReplyDelete
    8. Reminds me of what George Allen's thugs did to a commenter last year as well, Coulter and her thugs are Nazi's that despise the Constitution and loathe free speech UNLESS the environment is controlled and censored so only their talking points and dishonest perspective is allowed.

      Coulter is too afraid to EVER openly debate anyone unless its some toothless timid left wing scarecrow, and only then in a biased controlled Reich Wing environment like "Fox News" so Sean Hannity can run interference for her.

      Coulter coulnted debate her way out of a wet paper bag, like the trolls in her who worship this stupid hag, she just doesnt anser any question that exposes her lies and rhetoric and portrays her weak riddiculous positions unfavorably.

      The Reich Wing controlled MSM gives this lying witch a bully pulpit to spew her lies, rhetoric and unsubstantiated BS to deceive the weak minded and its repregensible.

      Coulter should be in jail and disbarred for what she did in the Paula Jones trial, lawyers have a Fiduciary duty to act in their clients best intersts not to push their own corrupt self serving political agenda at their clients expense.

      Coulter is an Authoritarian nut just like Bush and Cheney who thinks she is abobe the law of the little people, she thinks no one can touch her......my prediction after the 2008 election this lying vindictive hag will be through, washed up!!!!!!!!!!

      ReplyDelete
    9. Coulter can't be happy in her miserable skin.

      The thought of her being the medias darling because she causes controversy everytime she appears is chilling.

      ReplyDelete
    10. George Bush told victims of the tornado damage that hit the south this week, that the "government knows they are there."

      The government does know they are there, the problem is this government doesn't care.

      ReplyDelete
    11. Great scoop, Lydia -- Ann's stormtroopers give the nation a sterling example of what her Christian love and values are all about. Godless, indeed.

      I grinned ear-to-ear when I noticed you "borrowed" a graphic from our Web site. (Not only am I retroactively granting permission to use, but keep surfing our site for more Ann art!) It's the one with Ann seated in front of that pink banned with the gold lamé swastika -- never has fascism looked so fabulous!

      Naturally, the mainstream media has said zip about Coulter's use of the "F" word, so I sort of doubt that they'll pick up on the news that her bouncer committed what may well be felony assault in our nation's capitol. Move along... nothing to see here!

      ReplyDelete
    12. I have applied the same level of truthiness to Ms. Coulter herself. I confidently await her legal non-response...

      ReplyDelete
    13. I have applied The Coulter Truthiness Test to Ms. Coulter herself. C'mon, Annie baby... send the lawyers in...

      ReplyDelete
    14. What is Coulter anyway. Speculation abounds that Coulter is the future bride of Tom Delay.

      Others speculate that Coulter couldn't find a date in a hog pen.

      Whatever Coulter is, she is morbese and crude.

      ReplyDelete
    15. Anonymous10:35 AM

      I have to post this I found on another website;

      Ann Coulter was described as "the Chief Test Pilot for a Broome Factory"

      ReplyDelete
    16. I bet the brooms hate those tests.

      ReplyDelete
    17. Now, that sounds like a match made in heaven, Larry. I will have to write a story about that on I Love Tom DeLay

      I had previously thought that she and Bill O'Reilly would make a fabulous pair. She would thrill to the sounds of him telling her to "shut up"!

      I can't wait to see Mitt Romney try to weasel out of his enthusiasm for the Coultergeist.

      ReplyDelete
    18. You're right Alicia, Coulter would make a good match for O'Reilly.

      You better post on your Delay site. I noticed it needed Coulter material.

      Check out Alicia's blog at
      www.lastleftb4hooterville.com

      It is good reading and she has a great political cartoon site.

      ReplyDelete
    19. Gene - THANK YOU for letting us use the graphic of Coulter in front of a swastika that you created. It is priceless, and says it all.

      Matthew and Alicia, thank you for your comments.

      We just finished our live radio show, which broadcasts out of Las Vegas, and which can be heard at www.bashamandcornell.com

      We discussed the Ann coulter incident as well as lots of headlines, and then we had Paul Waldman on from Media Matters. He discussed his book "BEING RIGHT IS NOT ENOUGH: What Progressives Must Learn from Conservative Success"

      This is the BEST book I've ever read that gives us solutions to win in 2008 -- and it's the FUNNIEST. Check out the chapter on media manipulation.

      ReplyDelete
    20. The anti-Keith Olbermann site is shutting down.

      This site www.olbermannwatch.com was set up in hopes of gaining enough right wing support to get Olbermann fired.

      The owner of thr site said they had done more harm than good.

      The final nail in the site was Obbermann signing a new contract with NBC.

      Keith Olbermann - The best show on TV.

      ReplyDelete
    21. Alicia, I've been trying to find your blog for awhile. I had lost the address.

      Thank you!

      ReplyDelete
    22. Anonymous11:01 AM

      Lydia, Ann Coulter was trying to quiet someone with a different opinion than hers. She is doing no different than you do on your web blog. If someone has a different opinion they are told to shut up and called names by the lacheys that patrol your sight. Their comments are immediately deleted.

      ReplyDelete
    23. Lydia - I tried to catch your show this morning but none of the links on the site worked for some reason...does the radio station itself have live internet-streaming links?

      If you are archiving them I'll listen to it from there.

      I hope you know that there are a lot of us that have your back and appreciate the way you are standing up to her. I know you have a family and it must be terrifying, but if enough of us refuse to cosign her bulls*** she may finally be exposed for what she is - an amoral, immoral, dangerous, unprincipled hate-spewing opportunist.

      Calling her a trassexual is an insult to transsexuals.

      ReplyDelete
    24. Alicia you have to download Real Player to hear the show. The Windows Media player doesn't work.

      Check on there in a couple of hours and the archive will be up.

      ReplyDelete
    25. anonymous, there is a difference between having a different opinion and spewing hate and bigotry and lies. On my own site, I will remove the posts of people who cannot differ without attacking and insulting. If you consider calling someone a 'faggot' to be 'quieting', you have something very wrong with your hearing or understanding.

      I publish my name when I write, and so does Lydia. I am willing to publicly stand by my opinion.

      ReplyDelete
    26. Bravo Alicia. It's easy to hide behind an anonymous label and throw insults.

      ReplyDelete
    27. a lying troll said "Lydia, Ann Coulter was trying to quiet someone with a different opinion than hers. She is doing no different than you do on your web blog. If someone has a different opinion they are told to shut up and called names by the lacheys that patrol your sight. Their comments are immediately deleted."

      Thats a bald faqced lie, Lydia and every other decent person on this site welcome differing oppinions and opposing viewpoints...........However there is a huge difference between stating an opinion and discussing issues intelligently and using insults, personal attacks and babby talk gibberish to derail the discussion or posting Reich Wing propaganda to spam the site that is not relevant to any discussion or arguments being made by the blogger........This is a liberal blog and while differing opinions are welcome this is not a platform to spew Ann Coulters Hatespeak.

      ReplyDelete
    28. And Volt you can hide your snide remarks and weak arguments on your Pink Pajama blog all you want, but ANYONE with half a brain sees the difference between Ann Coulters Hatespeak, and violence and saying someone needs to be held accountable for their crimes..........How is saying you believe in accounability hate speak Volt, I'm all ears.

      Particularly how is saying Coulter should be held accountable and be in jail equivalent to Coulter.

      1) advocating killing, poisoning or torturing Supreme Court Justices, Liberals, or Anyone who doesnt agree with her.

      2) putting smearing Bill Clinton above the besrt interests of her client Paula Jones.

      3) Committing Voter fraud.

      4) having her thugs assault a man for exercising his free speech and asking a question.


      Coulter is prettuy scared of the question or honest debate huh?

      ReplyDelete
    29. And anonymous why would she be TRYING to QUIET or silence someone with a differing oppinion if she could not counter that oppinion and was afraid of being discredited and humiliated and looking like a fool.

      Her lies and unsubstantiated propaganda cant stand with the light of truth shined on it in HONEST debate thats why she tries to silence people just like Hitler did.

      ReplyDelete
    30. If you notice Coulter just like the trolls in her very rarely use proven facts, no they resort to insults personal attacks, name calling and unsubstantiated smears............notice how she has called Bill Clinton and John Edwards gay..........in fact she called Clinton gay about 30 seconds after raving how he loves women and hits on every skirt that walks by.....you cant have it both ways, not only did she contradict herself, by claiming Clinton was gay but like usual she did not provide a shread of evidence to back up her unsubstantisated lie.

      Coulter would be torn to shreds if she were not so afraid to debate honestly away from biased controlled environments like "Fox News" with Sean Hannity, where she is protected and insulated from being exposed as the lying hippocritical fraud she truly is!

      ReplyDelete
    31. Trying to get Olberman fired, MORE examples of the Reich Wing TRYING to silence dissenting opinions.

      Just like they tried to do with The Dixie Chicks and with Lydia on this blog by having that Hag's trolls try to hack the site and lock people out.

      ReplyDelete
    32. Whats even better is the Reich Wing mentality that what they are doing is ok because someone else did it also,,,,,,

      The anonymous troll here is basically saying that silencing dissenting oppinions, oppsosing free speech and assaulting those we do not agree with is ok because our opponennts might have done it or "MIGHT" do it also.

      All The Reich Wing trolls and many repugs have all stated that what Mark Foley did (soliciting, stalking and trying to molest under age children) isnt really that bad because a democrat also did it ONCE over 3 decades ago.

      Also people like Volt use the weak argument that Coulter's hatespeak, violence or advocating violence or personal attacks or unsubstantiated smears isc ok because some liberals do it also.

      Interesting I havent heard or seen ANY liberals assaulting people for trying to voice a differing opinion, or silence free speech by either assaulting the person or hacking their computers or locking them out of a blog, havent heard any liberals advocating poisoning conservatives either, perhaps youi could enlighten us Volt?

      ReplyDelete
    33. No you guys whine and cry like babies when your OWN strong arm nazi tactics get used right back on you............hippocrites to the end aye Troll Tex?

      ReplyDelete
    34. Speaking of liars and hippocrites where is Troll Tex?????

      Seems he's just like Coulter scared of facts and honest debate and when he cant controll the environment and silence those who expose his lies, weak arguments and flawed logic he runs away like a cowardly rat!

      ReplyDelete
    35. Did any of you guys hear the radio show today????

      I havent heard it yet, any comments???

      ReplyDelete
    36. Coulter is a freak show attraction, even to the neo-Nazi fringe that has taken control of the Republican Party in the US.

      She would have gotten the same reaction from the crowd if she had sex with a horse, defecated on her own face and lit her hair on fire.

      What's really twisted is that they let her out of her cage to speak for their movement publicly and news outfits actually quote her as if she isn't anything besides a disturbed junior high school harpy who reads Mein Kamf under the duvet every night by flashlight.

      ReplyDelete
    37. DCI_is_a-Disease: well put!!

      Alicia, we're trying to figure out why the show wasn't playing on Windows media player.

      It was definitely working as we got calls and emails. But there may be something wrong with the streaming.

      He'll fix it in the taped version. It is also downloadable thru i-tunes and quicktime, as well as real player.

      I'm trying to visit your site, but my computer keeps crashing. Great site www.lastturnb4hooterville.com

      ReplyDelete
    38. I have tried calling the show for two weeks and it only rings. I wonder why they have toll free numbers to call in if they aren't going to use them?

      ReplyDelete
    39. My friend Victoria from Nashville hasn't been able to listen to the show. She can't get the players to work.

      ReplyDelete
    40. There have been over 200,000 soldiers from the Iraq and Afganistan wars, who have sought treatment at one of the VA hospitals.

      Very sad.

      ReplyDelete
    41. Oops Larry, the producer is working out the kinks with the phone lines. Apparently, they got crossed after disabling call waiting, since I'm in Los Angeles — and he's in vegas

      Also, the show for today is not in the archives yet.

      He is working with a new streaming company.

      Sorry for the delays.

      ReplyDelete
    42. The Windows Media Player from the radio show didn't work last week or this week.

      Basham's solo show can't be heard from Windows Media Player.

      ReplyDelete
    43. I was wondering about the phones. Last week I sit for 1/2 hour listening to the show through the phone, but today it only rang.

      ReplyDelete
    44. Chuckie2:13 PM

      The same person that calls someone a faggot in public and the same people that applaud someone being called a faggot in public are the same people that would say and applaud someone being called a nigger or spic in public.

      Ann Coulter should be banned from major media from here on out. She has had more than her 15 minutes. If the media does not take her out, someone else should. No joke.

      ReplyDelete
    45. What a soulless skank. Anyone who applauded should be taken out and shot.

      ReplyDelete
    46. Coulter and her thugs need escorted out of the halls of public life, much like they escorted Dan Borchers and many others.

      ReplyDelete
    47. The only Bushusefools that are still Loyal to the Regime are the ones still in thrall of people like Andy Coulter.
      Violent Extremists.

      Peace.

      ReplyDelete
    48. Even Hitler and Napoleon had a few puppies following around their milkbone of life.

      ReplyDelete
    49. Giuliani, McCain and Romney all denounce Ann Coulter's remrks today, after a flood of emails and phone calls to their campaigns, as well as an uproar in the blogger community in protest.

      Yesterday they had no problem with the remarks. Today after a firestorm of complaints, they denounce the remarks.

      Isn't that called being a hypocrite?

      ReplyDelete
    50. Coulter debated Al Franken a number of times . Your mistaken or perhaps I should say any body is mistaken by thinking A Coulter gives the slightest consideration to fear of consequences . Coulters not interested in the least by anything she says or what is going on . I believe if you were observing this as a production and the actress playing Coulter corrected an inflection or error in syntax you would hear the director , without fail , correct and direct her stating "Read The Lines ."

      ReplyDelete
    51. Among all her wildly performances I also believe Coulter could care less what others think.

      Coulter is raking in millions from every hateful thought she spews and writes.

      ReplyDelete
    52. Anonymous said...
      Lydia, Ann Coulter was trying to quiet someone with a different opinion than hers. She is doing no different than you do on your web blog. If someone has a different opinion they are told to shut up and called names by the lacheys that patrol your sight.


      Which Lachey? Nick or his brother?

      ReplyDelete
    53. DCI_is_a-Disease said...
      She would have gotten the same reaction from the crowd if she had sex with a horse, defecated on her own face and lit her hair on fire.


      Yea, but I would have paid to see that...

      ReplyDelete
    54. By the way, a Romeny supporter dropped by to talk about his introduction (which will now become his "I voted FOR the $87 billion..." moment) and said he was joking.

      Well, um, no. He's not joking anymore...

      ReplyDelete
    55. Norton Nork5:17 PM

      "DCI_is_a-Disease said...

      She would have gotten the same reaction from the crowd if she had sex with a horse, defecated on her own face and lit her hair on fire."

      Talent Agent: "Very interesting. And what do you call your act, Ms. Coulter?"

      "The Aristocrats!"

      ReplyDelete
    56. Jerry Falwell says Global Warming is the fault of the Weather Channel, not Bush policies or corporate America.

      Won't he ever stop talking???

      ReplyDelete
    57. Oh, a sleeping drunkard
      Up in Central Park,
      And a lion hunter
      In the jungle dark,
      And a Chinese dentist,
      And a British queen-
      All fit together
      In the same machine,
      Nice, nice, very nice,
      Nice, nice, very nice -
      So many different people
      In the same device.

      Kurt Vonnegut

      ReplyDelete
    58. What kind of fool could still support Coulter or GWB, only the backwash of America, the lowest of the low could support these two pieces of trash, the are dispicable excuses for human beings.

      ReplyDelete
    59. The big 3 Republican contenders for the Republican nomination backpeddled today on Coulter.

      It seems America is outraged at her any any phony conservative who supports her.

      ReplyDelete
    60. Coulter's and the Neo Con's time is OVER, theyre finished, they've had their 15 minutes of fame and fun, and now American's have woken up with a headache from their drunken stupor and said "ENOUGH!!!!!!"

      We've had enough of the Nazi propaganda, lies, fear mongering and hatespeak......We've had enough of the perpetual war and death.....we've had enough of the suppression of freedom of speech and the destruction of the US Constitution and the Freedoms it protects.

      We've had enough of a group of fringe wacco's trying to force their agenda on us and tell us whats best for us when its best for a select group of elites and far worse for the unspoken majority.

      ReplyDelete
    61. Even hateful Michelle Malkin was blasting Coulter.

      Malkin is just as bad.

      ReplyDelete
    62. Then if they backpedaled that should tell the nation and the World that these men have no honor, they are hippocrites and.........FLIP FLOPPERS!!! that have no no credibility and integrity, they just crave the power of being the "DECIDER"

      The repugs are finished in 2008, ANYONE with half a brain can see right through these guys.

      ReplyDelete
    63. I mean look how weak and riddiculous their arguments are, in fact lets examine a few of their arguments and talking points shall we?

      ReplyDelete
    64. It only took the wanna be next reichwing pretender to the throne to decide coulterguists remarks were far too inflamitory for them to stay silent, guess the internal pollinng and email campaigns do work on the reichwing even if they deny it all the time.

      ReplyDelete
    65. Coulter and her hired minions are a pure example of the hate within the conservative movement.

      Imagine the uproar if a progressive said Guiliani was a faggot.

      ReplyDelete
    66. All three had no problem with Coulters remarks until it spread like wildfire.

      ReplyDelete
    67. First theres the old tried and true we need to wage war now so we can avoid war later and have peace.........thats a real winner......kinda like saying you should drink poison now or eat as unhealthy as possible to live longer and healthier..........interesting philosophy, wonder if it was proposed by a retard?

      ReplyDelete
    68. Did you guys know there are several coulter blogs that hate her?

      ReplyDelete
    69. Coulter has nothing to worry about. The right wing media promote her and shows like Chris Matthews want her on for ratings.

      ReplyDelete
    70. Mike:

      Check out Alicia's blog when you get a chance. She is a good writer.

      www.lastleftturnb4hooterville.com

      ReplyDelete
    71. Then theres the classic "we need to fight them over therte rather than over here"

      Now this is so damn stupid I think I need to provide a few examples to show just how stupid Dick Cheney's stupid talking point really is.

      Now if you invade a mob boss's or steet gang's territory and attack them, unless your a complete fool, or resort to genocide and wipe out every single person you know damn straight he's going to hit you back and attack you where you live as well, to think he'll just be content to fight you on his own turf and see it destroyed is ludicris.

      Same for a person, I know if someone attacks me at my home, then their home is fair game as well, in fact retaliation on their home turf would be the OBJECTIVE of most who are attacked at home..............funny how they preach an eye for an eye but delusionally think the enemy wont follow the same philosophy.

      ReplyDelete
    72. While we are attacking them over there, they are planning a big attack over here and we are unprepared.

      ReplyDelete
    73. Does coulter work for fox news? I see her on that channel a lot.

      ReplyDelete
    74. Wow, this is unbelievable. I hope someone got video of this. Borchers treatment is symbolic of the brown shirt mentality and methods employed by todays uber right wing.

      I hope someone got this on film.

      ReplyDelete
    75. If it was filmed they probably confiscated it.

      ReplyDelete
    76. Larry said "Coulter has nothing to worry about. The right wing media promote her and shows like Chris Matthews want her on for ratings."

      For now Larry, I think in another year or two she will be so discredited, she'll be like a hot potato, no one will want to touch...............i'm sure the Reich Wing will find some other bimbo like her or Malkin to try and charm their base with but she will be much younger......Coulter will be finished, I wonder what she'll do to get attention then because she is a pathetic loser like Moo Moo that craves atention.

      ReplyDelete
    77. How would the right winger have blown up if someone attacked a journalist at an event with Maureen Dowd.

      It's different if it is one of them.

      ReplyDelete
    78. The Right USES Coulter and Malkin to appeal to men, i've heard men talking on the radio or at bars and they like Malkin and Coulter just because "THEY" think they are fairly attractive, the Right uses these Bimbos to attract an audience and build their base........its really pathetic but people are sheep and if they get sucked into the Reich Wing because they start watching a bubble headed nazi bimbo they arte likely to stay repug, but fortunately that works both ways the repugs are losing the largest generation since the babyboomers because of thier war and their greedy mortgaging of this generations future.......I think demographics are clearly against the repugs.

      ReplyDelete
    79. How could anyone think that the skank Coulter is hot?

      She couldn't get a real date in a dog pound.

      ReplyDelete
    80. Holy Cow batman, its Batworfeus,,,,,,,,,,,,not only that Mikes here on a Saturday night........It must be a full moon!

      ReplyDelete
    81. Maybe the Global Warming has messed up your timetable.

      ReplyDelete
    82. Well, Ive never been impressed with Coulters posting of Lydias info......completely inappropriate.

      On the other hand, Im trying to understand Coulters strange tactics insofar she has to battle the libs immoral methods.

      ReplyDelete
    83. Larry said "How could anyone think that the skank Coulter is hot?

      She couldn't get a real date in a dog pound.

      6:56 PM"

      Larry i'm talking Reich Wingers like Bush Cheney, Moo Moo, TT, oits iffy if these losers could get laid in a whore house with a $500 bill taped to their forhead.

      ReplyDelete
    84. Once Coulter started running her mouth and complaining, they would give the $500 back and tell her to get lost.

      ReplyDelete
    85. Lets examine some more talking points like

      lying and saying that those who disagree with you are in league with or supporting the terrorists or hate our country and military and want it to fail.

      WHEN THEY clearly hate our military since they are cutting benefits to veterans, allowing them to live in rat and roach infested squalor and trying to punish and or silence those that have or might skeak out.

      Then there is the "DECIDER" sending our troops to die in an unwinnable war that was a war of choice!

      ReplyDelete
    86. Then there's the classic....The terrorists hate us for our freedom, but our Brave Decider wants to sacrifice those very precioius freedoms that make us special to "APPEASE " the terrorists.

      ReplyDelete
    87. A freshie said

      "The same person that calls someone a faggot in public and the same people that applaud someone being called a faggot in public are the same people that would say and applaud someone being called a nigger or spic in public."

      Like Carl.......he uses the "N" word, picks on children, and immorally shows no respect for deceased loved ones who recently passed away......truly a psychopath and pussy.....period!


      Also, asshole, dont use that word in this room.....type a capital "N" in qoutations.

      ReplyDelete
    88. If Bush and Cheney would go visit the troops they send to their wars, in a VA hospital, would they tell the generals in charge that they are doing a keck of a job?

      ReplyDelete
    89. If Bush and Cheney visited the VA hospitals where the soldiers are after serving in Bush's war, they would tell the generals they are doing a heck of a job.

      ReplyDelete
    90. Whats up Worf......whatcha been doing?

      ReplyDelete
    91. There are a lot of anti-Coulter blogs and the list is growing.

      ReplyDelete
    92. Coulter having Borchers dragged out of the CPAC meeting hasn't made the news and never will.

      ReplyDelete
    93. Oh and there's always the old wives tale that repugs are the party of national security, a strong military and fiscal responsibility......excuse me for a minute.........BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!


      The Repugs have controlled Congress for the past 12 years, and wielded complete unfettered unchecked power for the last 6 and they have destroyed and greatly weakened our military, made our country MUCH MUCH less safe, done virtually nothing to secure our borders or ports despite blatherting nonstop rhetoric about how they are the party of natoional security and only THEY can protectect us and keep us safe from the evvvill teworists.

      As for fiscal responsibility, they have turned a surplus into the largest deficits EVER in recorded history, under GWB, we have seen the worst job creation in the probably the last 30 years, and the poor and middle class has never faired worse.

      The Stock market has performed terible since adjusted for inflation it is still WELL below the highs of 7 years ago.

      ReplyDelete
    94. This ones for you Larry.

      The man of knowledge must be able not only to love his enemies but also to hate his friends.

      Friedrich Nietzsche

      ReplyDelete
    95. Fox news was blaming Greenspan for the stock market tumbles this week because he said we were heading into a recession.

      Didn't he used to be one of them?

      ReplyDelete
    96. Well Larry, thats why the newly elected democratic congress have to get off their =butts and break up these media empires that have become nothing more than REich Ing propaganda ans spin machines.

      ReplyDelete
    97. Mikey said

      "The Repugs have controlled Congress for the past 12 years,"


      Cant imagine why when you have followers who invent excuses for leaving their ten year old children around political blogs...LOL!

      :|

      ReplyDelete
    98. The LA Times is going to be sold and no doubt to a conglomerate.

      XM and Sirrius are merging and Murdoch is trying to buy more media empires.

      ReplyDelete
    99. Hey Mike have you seen the blog American Politics Journal?

      They have some stuff on Coulter.

      www.apj.us

      ReplyDelete
    100. Ted Turner is a media mogol himself and he said that Rupurt Murdock is the most dangerous man on the planet, and he;s right because the piece of slime uses his empire to deceive people and sway public opinion rather than report honest unbiased news.

      ReplyDelete
    101. Notice how the libs lack the strength of character to tell Carl what a piece of shit he is for using the "N" word......cowards!

      ReplyDelete
    102. Ted Turner should have never sold out to Time Warner.

      He has an agreement to stay out of it for so many years and look what CNN has become.

      ReplyDelete
    103. No Larry, I havent seen it, but i'll check it out later tonight when check out Kays and Tomcats blogs.

      ReplyDelete
    104. There was a time when I agreed with the libs for the most part........at least I had the balls to disagree with their viewpoints...... unlike the cowardly yes men in here.

      ReplyDelete
    105. He was pushed out after the Time Warner merger.........believe me he regrets that merger as well.

      ReplyDelete
    106. Willhelm Keitels.....the lot of ya......LOL!

      ReplyDelete
    107. Tomcat has different articles every day and his audience is growing.

      Kay's blog is getting alot of Americablog visitors.

      ReplyDelete
    108. Hey guys there is a NEW scandal brewing, which is connected with roves attempts to fire competent US procecuting attorneys and replace them with Bush reichwing sycophants, however this one has heather Wilson and pete Dominaci trying to illegally pressure a US Attorney to bring charges against Wilson's opponate last fall just before the election.

      That is illegal, and could result in more congressional investigations of this scandal, which already has hearings scheduled,

      Quick rundown of the over all scandal here


      Heather wilson special here

      Heather wilson special and here

      this one hasm legs and appears to be growing, BTW if Domenaci or Wilson has to "resign" then Either Bill richardson, or the democratically controlled state senate would name their replacement until 2008,

      suck on that joe Lieberman.

      ReplyDelete
    109. This does look big Clif. I saw on Huffingtonpost that the White House admitted approving the firings.

      ReplyDelete
    110. Looks like Loserman might be irrelevant.

      ReplyDelete
    111. Great.......heres Commando Jelly coming out of hiding;

      I CRUSHED you Jelly with my factual Yalta post and you simply are an illusionist too scaredy cat to face the truth that genuine offers of peace do not work.

      Coward

      ReplyDelete
    112. I would like to see Domenaci brought down.

      He has been a Bush defender for years.

      ReplyDelete
    113. Keith Olbermann will interview Valerie Plame march 17th.

      Great TV.

      ReplyDelete
    114. Hello

      We are liberals........we know whats best for everyone.....LOL!

      Yuk Yuk

      ReplyDelete
    115. here is a very GOOD article which explains why iraq was wrong especially the way Dumsfeld and Wolfowitz demanded it be fought. (yes I know it is LONG, but explaining why Bush and Cheney were wrong, andf Dumsfeld and Wolfowitz were incompetent is not a short article.)

      Before you plow into Stroud’s article you may need a cheat sheet to understand the acronyms. Here’s some help:

      OPLAN–Operations Plan

      CINC–Commander in Chief

      CINCCENT–Commander in Chief Central Command

      CENTCOM–Central Command

      SWA MRC–Southwest Asia Major Regional Conflict

      CINCPAC–Commander in Chief Pacific Command

      ARCENT–Army Central Command

      http://www.sftt.org/cgi-bin/csNews/csNews.cgi?database=Unlisted%202007.db&command=viewone&id=12

      Iraq: What Could Have Been, What Should Have Been…

      President’s Note: The author of this piece is a retired Colonel of Infantry, US Army. His essay should be required reading at all our Professional Military Education centers/schools/colleges. More than that, it should serve as the starting point for a congressional inquiry into how our senior military leaders so blithely tugged their forelocks and said, “Yes, master,” when they should have said, “Over my dead body, sir!” Read it, and weep. And, while doing so, please recall that this is not some sterile academic exercise. America’s Grunts are paying with lives, limbs and blood for the “go along” to “get along” mentality that permeates the Perfumed Princes and their careerist approach to what should be seen as a sacred trust. s/f, Rog Charles NB: The title was added by me; the essay came without a title.

      By Richard L. Stouder, Director Technology Development and Deployment, National Security Directorate, Oak Ridge National Laboratory

      Editor’s Note: No editing of this piece has occurred. Some may not like the author’s tone, but it is his tone, not DefenseWatch’s tone. The excerpt immediately following gives the reader an inkling of the frustration he feels about today’s mess in Iraq. It could have, and he argues, should have been different.

      I was assigned to US Central Command in 1992 after graduating from the National War College. For my first year I was assigned as the lead for the OPLAN that was the redux of Desert Shield - Desert Storm. The culmination of that first year was Gen Hoar and I briefing the OPLAN for approval to the SecDef. In the room were Dick Cheney, the CJCS, Colin Powell, and the one of Cheney’s Undersecs, Paul Wolfowitz. This was the first rewritten OPLAN since the first Gulf War. I think it is illustrative and a portent of things to come when the major sticking point was a discussion of the number of Army and Marine forces and the number of USAF fighter squadrons. The person who was arguing for more Air Force and less ground forces was Wolfowitz.

      I then became the Chief of War Plans Division and began work on the next generation of War Plans. As we were trying to figure out how to execute the requirements in the Joint Strategic Capabilities Plan (JSCAP), the bi-annual document where CINCs are tasked for war planning, we encounter a problem. As George H.W. Bush and Cheney were carrying out the “Peace Dividend” they started an aggressive program to downsize the Armed Forces. As you remember we dramatically cut the size of the military during this timeframe. This reduction of the military was at odds with the tasks to the CINCs in the JSCAP; there were not enough forces to meet the taskings to CINCCENT (SWA MRC) and CINCPAC (Korea MRC). We in CENTCOM were the genesis of the Two MRC strategy when we got Gen Hoar to assign unacceptable risk to our OPLAN when war in SWA followed war in Korea . The major point here is Bush the first and Cheney as the SecDef began the cutting of our military to the point where we could not execute the taskings of the JSCAP.

      In the 1994 planning cycle we hit an immediate hurdle. The JSCAP directs CINCS to use the National Intelligence Estimate as the basis for the threat assessment that is building block for the respective OPLANs. I got very involved in this and had many meetings with the CIA (responsible for the NIEs) and DIA. For any who have seen inside the NIE process you are quickly disabused of the idea that NIEs are pure intelligence. The NIE process is fraught with politics. It is supposed to be a consensus document, that is, intelligence assessment by committee. This NIE had serious fundamental flaws and we got the new CINC, Gen Peay to non-concur and to request the CJCS allow CENTCOM to use the CENTCOM intelligence assessment as the basis for planning vice the NIE; this was unprecedented. After a year of debate we finally won. This is also illustrative of things to come.

      It was in the planning for this OPLAN where we began to have serious internal CENTCOM debate on Phase V, post conflict. The discussions included most every issue that has now come to light in the current war. Fundamental to our assessment was the complex society that was Iraq. Saddam Hussein was the glue that held Iraq together. If we remove Saddam there was a great chance that Iraq would come apart at the seams. Combine that with the fact that we were charged by the JSCAP to defeat Saddam while 1) maintaining as a nation-state, and 2) insuring Iraq remained a counter-balance to Iran and 3) had the capability for self defense. This required some new thinking about how we approached post conflict operations. This was to be the first OPLAN that seriously addressed this complex phase of the operation, for we had no doubt we could win “the war,” but we had to insure we had a plan “to win the peace.” This OPLAN was eventually approved by the then SecDef, William Perry.

      The 1996 planning cycle then provided more detail to post conflict operations. We had another huge debate with OSD regarding the number of ground forces vice the number of air forces. We conducted detailed modeling and simulation to defend our force ratios. One of the other important aspects of our justification for ground forces was post conflict operations. There was tremendous pressure from OSD that mirrored the Air Staff view that precision weapons delivered by air would win the war and we could cut ground forces significantly. In the end, SecDef Cohen approved the OPLAN.

      I spent two years in another assignment and in 1998 I was assigned as the G3, Third US Army/ARCENT working for then LTG Tommy Franks. CINCCENT Tony Zinni designated ARCENT as the Combined Force Land Component Commander (CFLCC). In this capacity ARCENT was responsible, in peacetime, for planning and coordinating all land operations, and in war, employing all land forces. As we developed the land operations in support of CENTCOMs OPLAN and briefed it to Gen Zinni, he was most uncomfortable with post conflict planning; there was not enough detail. Gen Zinni fully understood the complexities in Iraq and the role that Saddam played. He also said that what kept him awake at night was the thought that Saddam “might die in his sleep” or “be assassinated,” and the US would be left to go into Iraq to quell the ensuing chaos. We then went into several months of detailed planning for post conflict operations. Every possible scenario and every branch and sequel that could be conceived was identified and planned for. Gen Zinni also knew that even with the best of military plans, the solution to post conflict had to include the interagency process of the US Government. He caused a two day meeting in Tysons Corner where the CENTCOM plan, the Service Component Commanders plans were presented to a large interagency working group. In the end this effort failed because the various agencies of the US Government refused to take responsibility for their Titled functional areas. Nevertheless, for the first time there was a detailed military plan for post conflict operations. These plans covered consequence that has come to pass since we invaded Iraq. The person who briefed the land component plan was LTG Franks.

      So Bush the second was convinced we needed to go into Iraq and remove Saddam. We had a military plan that was developed and improved upon since 1992 and had been briefed to every SecDef that served during that timeframe. Success depended on very thoroughly thought out and war gamed force levels. The plan had very detailed concepts for post conflict operations. The first thing the serving SecDef, Rumsfeld, did was tell CENTCOM to trash the OPLAN. Rumsfeld and his advisors believed that we could win with “shock and awe” and didn’t need many ground forces. In the total ignorance of Iraq and Arab culture, Rumsfeld and his advisors said they didn’t have responsibility for nation building. Rumsfeld and his advisors based their justification on the current Iraq NIE. Who was the primary advisor, none other than Paul Wolfowitz. The Army and Marine Corps has been hand cuffed since they crossed the Line of Departure. The lack of ground forces has now proven to be the fundamental flaw of the Rumsfeld strategy, and we have never recovered from this. Key to the Zinni post conflict plan was keeping the Iraqi Army intact. There were plans for how to not destroy the Iraqi Army so that they could be the foundation for rebuilding the Iraqi military so that Iraq could remain a counter balance to Iran. Also key to our post conflict plan was rapidly rebuilding an Iraqi government. The first acts of Paul Bremmer were to disband the Iraqi Army and refuse to allow former Baathists in the new government. If the paucity of ground forces didn’t doom the U.S. effort, these two acts did. We have been playing catch-up ever since. The Army and Marines have carried this war and every success we have had has been on the backs of the Soldiers and Marines that walk patrol everyday.

      The military of our country is charged with fighting our nation’s wars. Since the end of the first Gulf War our military has been reduced to levels below required to defend our national interests. Funding for our military, as a percentage of GNP, has been at the lowest in generations. We have a military planning process that is designed to execute our National Military Strategy. We have a professional military that knows how to fight our nation’s wars. Unfortunately when the military strategy is ignored by so-called civilian experts, when we have a generation of senior military leadership that have been cowed by a “my way or the highway” SecDef, we have the mess we are in now. The Army is unfairly taking the blame for this debacle in Iraq. The Army is too small for the requirements asked of it, its people are over-extended and tired, its equipment is in shambles, and its future modernization is in jeopardy due to funding. The Army and the United States of America will unfairly pay for this folly for generations.

      ****************************************************************

      I know this a few pay grade levels above either your or probably your son’s understanding, BUT IT IS THE TRUTH. So your reichwing disinformation is just that, And this article helps explain why Gen Shinseki stated correctly we needed 300,000 troops tio WIN in Iraq, not just attack and end up, in a futile insurgency which has also become the basis of the iraqi civil war.

      ReplyDelete
    116. If these two "conservatives" are brought down then poor Bush lapdog Liebermann won't have any bargaining chips.

      ReplyDelete
    117. Princess Dianna was a good role model and decent human being.

      Libs honor Anna Nicole???

      :|

      ReplyDelete
    118. So Larry, did you hear the radio show today.

      ReplyDelete
    119. Well Heather Wilson refuses to answer any questions about it.

      too bad tthe re-pubies no longer control the ethics committee, they will no lo0nger be able to COVER UP crimes like this.

      ReplyDelete
    120. These guys are either the most incompetant mess the modern world has ever had, or they are flat out trying to destroy America.

      Hard to choose which one.

      ReplyDelete
    121. It takes so much intelligence to cut & paste.......here, I have one.

      ReplyDelete
    122. Clif said "Well Heather Wilson refuses to answer any questions about it.

      too bad tthe re-pubies no longer control the ethics committee, they will no lo0nger be able to COVER UP crimes like this."


      HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! Lifes great isnt it boys!

      ReplyDelete
    123. Mike I did hear the radio show today and their guest has a great book that is worth the read.

      ReplyDelete
    124. Well, Larry and MIKE, I have to run enjoy the evening.

      ReplyDelete
    125. Heather Wilson thinks she is above the law and above getting voted out of office.

      Much like the rest of her party.

      ReplyDelete
    126. Later Clif, Thanks for the posts. They are good reading.

      ReplyDelete
    127. BTW for those that didnt see it on the previous blog check this out:


      The Rolling Stones call George W Bush 'full of shit'
      Mick Jagger lays into the US President on the band's new album...
      THE ROLLING STONES accuse US President GEORGE W BUSH of being "full of sh*t" on their new album.


      The track 'Sweet Neo Con', one of the tracks on the forthcoming 'A Bigger Bang', was already known to be fiercely anti-Bush.


      However, frontman Mick Jagger's disdain for the American leader has now been confirmed, with Rolling Stones singer revealing some of the lyrics in an interview with Newsweek.


      But the singer has revealed that guitarist Keith Richards, who lives in the US, is a bit worried about the direct nature of the words.


      An extract from 'Sweet Neo Con' features the following lines: "You call yourself a Christian, I call you u a hypocrite/You call yourself a patriot, well I think you're full of sh*t."


      Jagger said of the track: "It is direct. Keith said: 'It's not really metaphorical.'

      "I think he's a bit worried because he lives in the US. But I don't."

      ReplyDelete
    128. March 3, 2007

      By Adam Nagourney

      There’s some big fallout from the meeting in Washington of the Conservative Political Action Conference, three days of conferencing, caucusing, presidential addressing and book-hawking. These conferences have historically been known for displaying what its own organizers would describe as over-the-top behavior, and one of the regular speakers – Ann Coulter – offered an example of it when she used an anti-gay epithet on Friday to describe John Edwards, the former senator from North Carolina and Democratic presidential contender.

      “I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, but it turns out you have to go into rehab if you use the word ‘faggot,’ so I — so kind of an impasse, can’t really talk about Edwards,” she said, speaking to an overflow room of activists.

      That rehab remark was apparently a reference to Isaiah Washington, one of the stars on Grey’s Anatomy, a television series, who called a co-star T.R. Knight anti-gay names and went to rehabilitation over it.

      Mr. Edwards’s campaign quickly responded.

      “John was singled out for a personal attack because the Republican establishment knows he poses the greatest threat to their power,” said his campaign manager, David Bonior. “Since they have nothing real to use against him, Coulter’s resorting to the classic right-wing strategy of riling up hate to smear a progressive champion.”

      Howard Dean, the Democratic National Committee chairman, said: “There is no place in political discourse for this kind of hate-filled and bigoted comments. While Democrats and Republicans may disagree on the issues, we should all be able to agree that this kind of vile rhetoric is out of bounds.”

      Democrats were not the only denouncing Ms. Coulter. “The comments were wildly inappropriate,” said Brian Jones, a spokesman for Senator John McCain, a Republican candidate for president who did not attend.

      Kevin Madden, a spokesman for Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, said: “It was an offensive remark. Governor Romney believes all people should be treated with dignity and respect.

      The question of whether the remark was offensive enough aside, the Edwards campaign saw an opportunity in the remarks of a woman who is about as popular in liberal Democratic circles as Hillary Rodham Clinton is in Republican circles (not very). Mr. Bonior sent an e-mail to supporters last night urging them to make contributions to the Edwards campaign.

      “If we can raise $100,000 in “Coulter Cash” this week, we can show that bigotry will only backfire on those who use it,” Mr. Bonior wrote. “John is not the first progressive leader to face this kind of slime, but together, we can make sure he is one of the last.”

      Times being what they are, Mr. Bonior let in to a little bit of excess in his plea for cash. “Coulter’s attack was no accident,” he said. “It happened on national television at one of the year’s biggest conservative conferences. Dick Cheney and most of the Republican candidates were in the audience. She was even introduced by Mitt Romney.”

      Mr. Cheney was not there. Mr. Romney preceded her and mentioned that she was speaking later — he jokingly referred to her as a “moderate” — but he did not formally introduce her.

      That said, attendees said that Ms. Coulter not only spoke warmly about Mr. Romney but all but endorsed him.

      Not one word from the person being attacked, even though Mr. Nagourney had Ms. Coulter’s written response. Nor is there one word in the article spoken in her defense.

      Surely there are plenty of people who understood her joke and what it was referencing. The video tape shows that the audience laughed. They "got it."

      But what can one expect from the New York Times?

      Although, of course, in every good joke there is a little bit of truth:

      ReplyDelete
    129. I just looked at the politics journal you mentioned. They have lots of information.

      ReplyDelete
    130. The Stones are probably afraid they will be villified like the Dixie Chicks.

      The Stones have been around longer and more popular.

      ReplyDelete
    131. WORFEUS said...
      You know, if I were a Republican, I'd be furious with Bush and the entire Bush gang.

      Bush is like an "anti-republican", if you use the literal definition.

      In fact, our Constitution "ensures" us a Republican government, (not meaning governed by the Republican Party). Section 4, Article 4 of our Constitution states,

      The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government


      And we can turn to Websters for our definition for what constitutes a republican government.

      Republic
      republic n

      1 : A government having a chief of state who is not a monarch and is usually a president

      2 : A government in which supreme power is held by the citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives governing according to law;

      Based on America's definition of what it means to be Republican, doesn't it drive you republicans out there crazy that George Bush and his people have set him up as more of an Emporer and Monarch rather than a President governed by the People?

      More than 2 Thirds of Americans are opposed to this President and pretty much of everything hes doing.

      My question to republicans, democrats and everyone else?

      Where is the voice of the People in all this?

      ReplyDelete
    132. The people have lost their voice but if things don't change will have to take it back.

      ReplyDelete
    133. Worf said "The "voices" of the people are stored digitally on a SuperComputer somewhere at NSA waiting to be data-mined and later used against them at the Governments pleasure."

      Thats exactly true, there is no other reason to explain the Spying on Americans thing except that they are doing it for political gain to get dirt on their enemies, i become livid every time I even think about the fact that I cant even talk privately on the phone anymore without some jackaqss monitoring the call. there is no way in hell that monitoring EVERY citizens calls makes our country safer, instead of wasting our resources in this stupid manner they should be securing our ports and borders. BTW look at Bush's stellar track record in both of those areas he wanted to sell our port security to a country were several of the hijackers came from and the money was laudered that financed 9/11.

      ReplyDelete
    134. Speaking of Jesus.......where is he in time of need????

      Floating on some cloud watching you piss ants......LOL!

      I challenge him to a debate this very instant.

      ReplyDelete
    135. Look at all the tracking cookies you get each day from the internet.

      Look at all the data the have sent to outsourcing companies in India.

      We have no privacy. Thanks to Bush.

      ReplyDelete
    136. Larry, the Neo Con's goal was to control and develop the enormous Oil and natural gas reserves of Iraq and iran, they realize the Saudi's reserves are or already have peaked and thats what this war is all about Oil and Gas, who ever controls the worlds energy in the 21st century controls the word and now that these resources have become scarce and there is competion for them from China, The Neo Cons are using scams and wars to push their agenda.

      ReplyDelete
    137. But, I know he's a no show coz he's an illusion invented by people without hope for mankind....period!

      ReplyDelete
    138. Once the U.S attorney firings blow up in Bush's face coupled with the horrible mess at Walter Reed, it's about time for another war.

      ReplyDelete
    139. 14 kidnapped Iraqi policemen found slain

      By ROBERT H. REID, Associated Press Writer Sat Mar 3, 12:51 AM ET

      BAGHDAD, Iraq - The bodies of 14 policemen were found Friday northeast of Baghdad after an al-Qaida-affilated Sunni group said it abducted members of a government security force in retaliation for the rape of a Sunni woman by members of the Shiite-dominated police.

      The brutal killing occurred in one of the provinces surrounding Baghdad, where violence remains high despite a sharp drop in bombings and sectarian killings in the capital since the start of the U.S.-led security crackdown last month.

      Brig. Gen. Abdul-Karim Khalaf, an Interior Ministry spokesman, said the bodies were discovered Friday afternoon in Diyala province. The policemen were kidnapped Thursday on their way to their homes in Diyala for leave, he said.

      Earlier Friday, the Islamic State of Iraq said in a Web statement that it seized 18 Interior Ministry employees in Diyala in retaliation for “the crimes carried out … against the Sunnis,” including the alleged rape last month of a Sunni woman by policemen in Baghdad.

      In a second statement, the group announced that its “court” had ordered the “execution” of the men and that a video depicting their deaths would be posted later, according to the SITE Institute, which monitors extremist Web sites.

      Photos accompanied the claim, showing up to 18 blindfolded men, seven of them wearing Iraqi military uniforms. All had their hands tied behind their backs.

      But Khalaf cast doubt on whether the 14 slain policemen were the same men shown on the Web site photos.

      “We found the 14 policemen’s bodies, but they are not those who are in the fabricated images on the Web site,” he told The Associated Press. “The Diyala police told us that they don’t know who those people shown on the Web site were.”

      Nevertheless, he blamed al-Qaida for the killings and said Iraqi authorities would “chase those who assassinated these unarmed people.”

      Also Friday, two U.S. soldiers and an interpreter were killed by a roadside bomb northwest of Baghdad as they were trying to clear a highway of explosives.

      The military also announced that a U.S. Marine was killed two days before in combat in Anbar province, a Sunni insurgent area west of the capital.

      Police in the Anbar capital of Ramadi said gunmen shot dead two members of a local soccer club practicing in a public field.

      The New York Times quoted witnesses as saying 10 gunmen shot the two players — Mohammed Hameed Nawaf and Mohammed Mishaan — execution-style in front of horrified spectators after accusing them of collaborating with a Sunni group with ties to the Americans.

      The assailants tied the players’ hands and tried to drag them toward the cars, but the players resisted and struggled. Mishaan broke free and fell to the ground where he was shot, the newspaper said. Nawaf was then shot, the newspaper said.

      It’s clear civilians are facing increasing risks in the Sunni-dominated areas west of Baghdad, where insurgents have turned their killing power on those who have stood against them. Last week, a truck bomb killed more than 50 people leaving a mosque near Ramadi after the imam had preached against groups such as al-Qaida in Iraq.

      The Islamic State of Iraq had threatened to kill the hostages within 24 hours if the Iraqi government did not hand over officers accused in the rape case, and release all Sunni women held in Iraqi prisons.

      “This blessed operation is a response to crimes carried out by those infidels in their fight against the Sunnis,” the statement said. “The latest of the crimes committed by these traitors was to rape our sister in religion.”

      A 20-year-old woman told Arab television stations that she was detained in a Sunni area of west Baghdad on Feb. 18, taken to a police garrison and assaulted by three officers. The woman gave a name which identified her as Sunni.

      Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, a Shiite, announced an investigation Feb. 19 but cleared the officers the following day, stirring outrage among Sunni politicians.

      Al-Maliki said the rape claim was fabricated to tarnish the reputation of the police and the ongoing security crackdown in Baghdad.

      Friday’s statement from the Islamic State of Iraq referred to the rape victim by her name and identified her as Sunni.

      However, officials of the Iraqi Islamic Party, the country’s largest Sunni group, said the woman used a false name and that she is in fact a Shiite. The party’s human rights office had been looking into the case.

      Names of the officers involved in the case were not released, and it was unknown whether they were Sunni or Shiite…

      Of course this rape wasn’t just an excuse for the senseless murder of some more people.

      We all know that the Muslims will stop at nothing to protect the dignity of women.
      6 Comments »


      Muslim Murderer Buried In Bosnia, Dad Blames US
      March 3rd, 2007

      From a mournful Associated Press:

      Teen who shot 5 in Utah buried in Bosnia

      Photo

      By ALMIR ARNAUT, Associated Press Writer

      TALOVICI, Bosnia-Herzegovina - The teenager who killed five people in a Utah shopping mall and died in a police shootout was buried Saturday in his native village in eastern Bosnia.

      The father of Sulejman Talovic said his son “wounded the hearts of all our family” when he opened fire on Feb. 12 at the mall in Salt Lake City, killing five people and wounding four.

      “I feel sorry for my child, but I also feel sorry for all the innocent people he has killed,” the 18-year-old’s father, Suljo Talovic, told The Associated Press.

      Suljo Talovic spoke while standing where his family’s house once stood in Talovici, an eastern Bosnian hamlet that still bears the scars of the 1992-95 war, including houses pocked with machine-gun fire or, like Talovic’s, reduced to rubble by shelling.

      Moments later, several hundred people gathered at the nearby cemetery for Sulejman’s open-casket funeral. His crying mother, Sabira, collapsed after touching her son’s face and was carried away.

      Suljo Talovic said he would not make excuses for his son, but did not understand how a teenager could buy a gun in the United States.

      “The authorities are guilty for not alerting us that he bought a gun. In the U.S., you cannot buy cigarettes if you are underaged, but you can buy a gun,” he said.

      The Talovic family had left for the United States in 1998 following years of violence and upheaval, after fighting broke out in 1992. Serb troops laid siege to the eastern hamlet of Talovici, bombing it for a year before invading in March 1993…

      Apparently the media was able to solicit enough donations from the locals so the family could afford this extravagance. (As opposed to giving some reparations to the families of the victims their son murdered.)

      And still the father tries to blame his son’s murder spree on the US:

      “The authorities are guilty for not alerting us that he bought a gun. In the U.S., you cannot buy cigarettes if you are underaged, but you can buy a gun,” he said.

      Of course it is against the law for minors to buy guns. It is also against the law to murder five people.

      If only they had all stayed in beautiful Bosnia.
      10 Comments »
      Speilberg Had Famously Stolen Norman Rockwell
      March 3rd, 2007

      From the St. Louis Riverfront Times:

      The Purloined Rockwell

      Stolen in St. Louis in ‘73. Found today — on Steven Spielberg’s wall
      By Kristen Hinman
      Published: February 28, 2007

      Academy Award-winning director and producer Steven Spielberg has turned over to federal authorities Russian Schoolroom, a 1967 oil on canvas by Norman Rockwell that was filched from a Clayton art gallery in 1973, according to the FBI.

      No charges have been filed in the case, and federal officials say they have no evidence that Spielberg knew the painting had been stolen when he purchased it in 1989.

      “It appears that he is an innocent buyer,” says St. Louis-based FBI agent Frank Brostrom, a member of the agency’s Art Crime Team, who initiated the investigation. Spielberg is an avid Rockwell collector who helped fund the construction in 1993 of the Norman Rockwell Museum in Stockbridge, Massachusetts, and who joined its board of directors this past September. According to a December 3 article in the Washington Post, Rockwells from Spielberg’s collection adorn numerous rooms in his office compound at Universal Studios in Hollywood.

      The director of Schindler’s List and Saving Private Ryan, among other celebrated films, did not return a phone call from Riverfront Times requesting comment.

      Despite its recovery, many details of Russian Schoolroom’s journey from a St. Louis suburb to Spielberg’s collection remain a mystery.

      The painting was stolen on the night of June 25, 1973, from a Rockwell exhibit at the Circle Art Galleries in Clayton, by a thief or thieves who smashed through the gallery window and left every other work untouched.

      For the next fifteen years, the artwork went underground. According to the FBI, the painting resurfaced in New Orleans in October 1988 at the Louisiana Purchase Auction at Morton Goldberg Auction and Gallery, which has since closed.

      The FBI says the painting appeared on the market again in the summer of 1989, when Judy Goffman Cutler, an art dealer on New York’s Upper East Side, put the piece up for sale. Cutler is also the founder of the National Museum of American Illustration, located in Newport, Rhode Island, which owns many of Rockwell’s works.

      At least two people, including Mary Ellen Shortland, the manager of the Circle Art Galleries at the time of the theft, saw Cutler’s advertisements for the painting and attempted to get police to relaunch an investigation, but to no avail.

      “For whatever reason,” FBI agent Brostrom says, “authorities at that time were unable to locate the original police report or confirm the painting had ever been stolen.”

      What led Brostrom to reopen the cold case fifteen years later, in 2004, the agent says, was a message from “a friendly source in the community” who tipped him off to a 1989 Riverfront Times story about Shortland’s efforts.

      That story, by longtime contributor Wm. Stage, recounts a conversation with Goffman Cutler, noting that the art dealer “doubted whether the Rockwell in her possession had likely been stolen.” Stage wrote that Goffman Cutler “had gotten it from someone who’d purchased it at auction,” and that “the stolen Rockwell was a different version of the one she had just sold — to an undisclosed person for an undisclosed sum.”

      The FBI art crime team believes that “undisclosed person” to whom Goffman Cutler refers was Spielberg.

      Brostrom says his “friendly source” indicated the “undisclosed sum” was $200,000.

      Goffman Cutler did not return a phone call requesting comment for this story.

      Jack Solomon, the former owner of Circle Art Galleries, was Rockwell’s dealer up until several years before the painter’s death in 1978, and was the owner of Russian Schoolroom when it was stolen. “She should have known better,” says Solomon, who now owns S2 Art Center, a Las Vegas gallery, in reference to Goffman Cutler. “She could have checked that — there’s been a record of this ever since the day it was stolen.”

      The case broke open suddenly late last week, when the FBI received a call from a Spielberg representative. Someone in the director’s entourage had recently noticed a year-old alert on the FBI’s Web site describing the stolen painting.

      The call from Spielberg’s representative came at about the same time that a New York-based member of the FBI Art Crime Team began querying dealers and galleries there in order to determine the most prominent collectors of Rockwells.

      That group, according to Rockwell Museum curator Linda Pero, includes former presidential candidate Ross Perot and film director George Lucas, in addition to Spielberg.

      An FBI agent in Los Angeles spent the past week negotiating the painting’s return.

      “It’s not a typical Rockwell,” notes Solomon, the artwork’s former owner. “He did it when he traveled to Russia at the end of the Cold War. It’s beautiful. It has a lot of reds in it.”

      Authorities expect a legal skirmish to ensue over title to the work. The FBI says Spielberg will retain possession until the matter is resolved.

      Solomon hopes he’ll be declared the rightful owner. “I’m sure in two calls I could turn it over for X million dollars before the sun goes down,” he says.

      Yes, Mr. Spielberg is a Rockwell collector who never bothered to Google the name of this painting, which would have told him within seconds it was stolen.
      9 Comments »
      Democrats Send Out First Subpoenas For Show Trials
      March 2nd, 2007

      From The Hill:

      Democrats send out first round of subpoenas

      By Susan Crabtree

      A House Judiciary subcommittee approved today the first in what is expected to be an avalanche of subpoenas to Bush administration officials. They will likely explore corruption and mismanagement allegations on everything from pre-war Iraq intelligence to the mishandling of the response to Hurricane Katrina.

      The first round of subpoenas concern the recent controversial firings by the Bush administration of seven U.S. attorneys, some of whom were pursuing public corruption cases against Republican members of Congress.

      The House Judiciary subcommittee on commercial and administrative law, chaired by Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.), approved subpoenas requiring four former U.S. attorneys to appear at a subcommittee hearing next Tuesday. The former U.S. attorneys include Carol Lam of California, David Iglesias of New Mexico, H.E. Cummins III of Arkansas, and John McKay of Washington state. The subcommittee approved the subpoenas by voice vote; no Republican lawmakers were present.

      Tuesday’s hearing will consider a bill by Rep. Howard Berman (D-Calif.) that would reverse a new Patriot Act provision allowing the attorney general to appoint federal prosecutors without Senate confirmation through the duration of the Bush administration.

      Democrats have come to the defense of several dismissed prosecutors, in particular Lam and Cummins of Arkansas. They have noted that Lam was leading the probe of ex-Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham (R-Calif.), while Cummins was removed to make room for a former aide to White House senior adviser Karl Rove. Other U.S. attorneys, including those in Nevada and Arizona, were acting on corruption charges against GOP lawmakers before their resignations were requested.

      Iglesias, a New Mexico U.S. attorney, asserted at a press conference yesterday that he was fired for purely political reasons. He also charged that prior to the November elections, two federal elected officials asked him to speed up the probes of local politicians.

      Democrats, such as Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), have expressed outrage over the firings. She and Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) have demanded to see the attorneys’ performance evaluations.

      The White House has denied that the attorneys were fired for anything other than performance-related issues. And Republican lawmakers, such as Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), have argued that Democrats are making up a controversy where none exists.

      After the vote on the subpoenas, Sanchez took exception to the White House’s assertions that they can fire the attorneys because they are “at will” employees.

      There are several exceptions when an “at-will” employee cannot be fired, Sanchez asserted, such as sex or race discrimination.

      “There are several public policy reasons why we don’t fire people,” she said. “Are these people being [fired] because they’re doing their jobs and they’re doing them to well? Is this an ideological purge?”

      She went on to stress the importance of a judiciary branch that is separate and independent from the executive branch.

      “When the executive branch is interfering in the justice system—in other countries we call that corruption,” she said. “It’s very troubling to me that there seems to be this undercurrent.”

      House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.) also weighed today, with a speech on the House floor.

      “So this Administration either originally hired incompetent attorneys in the first place, or hired competent U.S. Attorneys, but incompetently fired them. Which is it?” he asked. “Many Americans believe these U.S. Attorneys are not being fired because they failed to go after public corruption, but because they did and were successful.”

      The Justice Department did not respond to a request for comment by press time. It has opposed a Senate bill similar to Berman’s. A senior administration official also previously told The Hill that Democrats were trying to create a scandal where there isn’t one.

      “This sounds to me a little more like Democrats trying to play politics and use the S-word than it does trying to obtain substantive information,” the official said.

      Yes, this new Congress is getting so much done.

      The country is in great hands.
      12 Comments »
      New York City Declares The ‘N-word’ Off Limits For All
      March 2nd, 2007

      From The Scotsman:


      New York bans ‘N-word’

      SARA KUGLER AND ANAHAD O’CONNOR IN NEW YORK

      NEW York City has declared the word “nigger” off-limits to whites and blacks alike in a symbolic resolution prompted by its increasingly casual use.

      The measure urges New Yorkers to voluntarily stop using the word, sometimes referred to as “the N-word” because of its sensitivity and painful history intertwined with slavery.

      “People are using it out of context,” said Leroy Comrie, a black city councillor who sponsored the measure that was unanimously approved. “People are also denigrating themselves by using the word, and disrespecting their history.”

      New York’s resolution is not binding, but leaders of the largest city in the United States hope to set an example.

      Rudis Mata, 21, of New York, said it was pointless to ban the word if the city had no plans to enforce it, adding that he thought it a violation of free speech.

      “I don’t necessarily think people should ban the word, but it’s a derogatory term and it shouldn’t be used,” he said. “It’s different from other curse words. It has a history.”

      Other municipalities in the United States have passed similar measures since a debate over the slur rose to a fever pitch late last year after the Seinfeld actor, Michael Richards, spewed the word repeatedly at a comedy club in Los Angeles.

      Later, Mr Comrie seethed as he listened to some black teenagers on a street in Queens, New York. “They were saying ‘nigga’ or ‘niggas’ every other word,” said Mr Comrie. “I could tell they didn’t get it. They don’t realise how their self-image is debilitated when they use this awful word in public.”

      At New York’s City Hall, supporters cheered passage of the resolution, with many of them wearing pins featuring a single white “N” with a slash through it.

      Kurtis Blow Walker, a pioneer of hip-hop music, said that blacks needed to stop using the word so “we can elevate our minds to a better future”.

      Others argued that use of the word by blacks was empowering, that reclaiming a slur and giving it a new meaning took away its punch. Jamie Foxx, the Oscar-winning actor, has said that he will not stop using the word and that he does not see anything inappropriate about blacks using it within their own circles.

      John Ridley, a black author and film-maker, said efforts to abolish it were insulting because they suggested black Americans would allow themselves to be cowed “by six letters and two syllables”.

      Unlike the politicians trying to quash the word, Ridley added, those who embraced it were showing backbone by declaring “we’re owning it”.

      “With everything that’s going on in America, the idea of trying to ban a word to solve a problem is just ridiculous,” he said. “And for people of colour - with us possibly on the cusp of having a black man become president, for us to be worried about this word is ridiculous.”

      Many rap artists use the slang pronunciation, with an “a” or “az” instead of an “er,” in lyrics, such as Snoop Dogg’s For All My Niggaz & Bitches or 50 Cent’s Realest Nigga, as a statement of pride. But black leaders including the Rev Jesse Jackson said it is impossible to paper over the epithet’s ugly history .

      “I forgive those young people who do not know their history, and I blame myself and my generation for not preparing you,” New York City councillor Albert Vann said.

      The word nigger, in all its variations, stems from “niger”, Latin for black. One of the earliest recorded instances of its use in North America was in 1619, when a Jamestown colonist, John Rolfe, noted in his diary the arrival of a Dutch man-of-war with 20 African captives, or “negars”, according to Jabari Asim, author of a new book, The N Word: Who Can Say It, Who Shouldn’t, and Why.

      There is some debate among scholars as to whether Rolfe intended the word as a pejorative or not; Asim said he believes it was an insult because otherwise Rolfe would probably have chosen the more neutral “negro”, which had been in use as far back as 1555.

      By the early 1800s, the word had become common as a slur meaning subhuman and inferior, Asim said. Two centuries later, in 1988, the rap group N.W.A. used the word four dozen times on a best-selling album, Straight Outta Compton, igniting a debate over whether the racist connotation is removed when the word is culturally claimed by blacks themselves.

      This must mean that there is no rap music being recorded in New York City. Nor any disc jockeys playing same.

      Nor any public readings of Huckleberry Finn, Uncle Tom’s Cabin, The Autobiography Of Malcome X (as told to Alex Haley) and a thousand other books.

      The word nigger, in all its variations, stems from “niger”, Latin for black. One of the earliest recorded instances of its use in North America was in 1619, when a Jamestown colonist, John Rolfe, noted in his diary the arrival of a Dutch man-of-war with 20 African captives, or “negars”, according to Jabari Asim, author of a new book, The N Word: Who Can Say It, Who Shouldn’t, and Why.

      What nonsense.

      As the Oxford English Dictionary points out, came into the language via the French and Spanish:

      neger. Now north. dial. and Sc. Forms: 6­7 (9) neager, 6 (9) neeger, 7 negar, 7, 9 negre, 9 negur, 7­ neger.
      [ad. F. nègre, ad. Sp. negro Negro. So Du., G., Da., Sw. neger.]
      1. A Negro, esp. in disparaging use.
      1587 MS. Robert Leng (Brit. Mus.), There were also in her 400 neegers, whome they had taken to make slaves.
      1599 Minsheu s.v. Caçuéla, Vpon Moores or Neagers, and on other malefactors.

      Which makes sense, as it was Spain which began the Atlantic slave trade. Followed by the Portugese and then the Dutch.

      But it’s probably breaking the law to even mention such things.

      ReplyDelete
    140. Attorney General Gonzales says he is to busy to respond to subpoenas he was given about the U.S attorney firings.

      Guess he is above the law also.

      ReplyDelete
    141. Larry said "Look at all the tracking cookies you get each day from the internet.

      Look at all the data the have sent to outsourcing companies in India.

      We have no privacy. Thanks to Bush."

      Bush wants to turn America, the land of the free and home of the brave into an Orwellian Police state, where the citizens are mere sheep living in perpetual fear and craving the "so called" protection of GWB regardless of the price.

      ReplyDelete
    142. In many ways the U.S has bypassed the proclamations of Orwell's book.

      The other things are falling into place.

      ReplyDelete
    143. Hi

      My name is Mike

      Im in love with Lydia Cornell. I used to watch her show as a teenager....Ive taken a sudden interest in politics just to impress her.

      Nothing will stand in my way to agree with her 100% all of the time thus I fear she may not like me.


      Except her philosophy baloney, of course which I pretend to like...hehe.

      When I first came here I told her how beautiful she was and how TCFC was the greatest show the universe had ever seen.

      Well, see ya!

      ReplyDelete
    144. The Right Wing Progress for America had to pay $750,000 penalty to the SEC for violating campaign fiance laws in Bush;s 2004 election.

      Any progressive group would have paid far more.

      ReplyDelete
    145. Wow, Cliff again has conveniently cowarded away from my Yalta post.....LOL!

      ReplyDelete
    146. Hi,

      My name is Larry.

      Im a coward who is quite unable to face Carl & tell hih what a piece of shit he is for using the "N" word.

      Not to mention I agree with him in having no respect for the dead...irrellevant!

      What is rellevant is I happily report the growing number of deaths in Iraq for my personal climb up the ladder of power.....hehe!

      Well, see ya!

      ReplyDelete
    147. Lydia Cornell said...
      Our country is an industrial-military empire. We seem to be under the delusion that America wants peace. Peace does not bring in profits. There's a reason we are so gun-crazy and more deaths are caused by gunshots here than in other nations. We don't really believe in peace. IN fact, according to Mort Sahl, who actually was a speechwriter for Nixon, JFK, and BOTH Bushes, he says it's common knowledge that JFK's assassination was an inside job. The "powers that be" inside the government realized that JFK was suddenly becoming a "peacemaker" - whereas in the beginning, he wasn't that enlightened, as he became more awake to the wrongs being done, he started to make decisions as Martin Luther King would, he started truly "caring" about people. This threatened the military industrial complex, and he had to be eliminated -- as ALL GREAT PEACEMAKERS are."


      Our government doesnt want peace anymore than they want low oil prices, our government has deficits as far as they eye can see from their inept economic and foreign policy and they currently derive 25 cents in revenue fort every dollar Exxon and the other oil giants earn.........its in their best intertests to have perpetual war and high oil prices even though its clearly NOT in the best interests of the overwhelming majority of this country.

      ReplyDelete
    148. What kind of ties do Bush and Cheney have in Exxon?

      Exxon posted the largest profits ever of a company in America.

      Coincidentally oil prices are also at an all time high since Bush took office.

      ReplyDelete
    149. There was a poll on the evening news that the republican voters want newt gingrich over the others.

      ReplyDelete
    150. Capital News:

      Bush offers comfort to tornado victims in Alabama.

      They better enjoy the comfort because he won't do anything else for them.

      Ask Katrina victims.

      ReplyDelete
    151. Holly, I dont think it matters who the repugs scrape out of the toilet as a candidate.......their Finished and in 2008 that will be clear even to brainless goosestepping nazi's that still support GWB and Ann Coulter.

      ReplyDelete
    152. That's pretty bad when all the Repug candidates are kissing the ring of Jerry Falwell to get a few bucks.

      ReplyDelete
    153. Capital News:

      Barak Obama says Bush's war in Iran has strengthened Iran's position in the mideast.

      Such true words.

      ReplyDelete
    154. clif said...
      PRESIDENTIAL TRIVIA QUIZ

      What American President holds the record for:

      1. ordering the most executions in any state while serving as Governor?

      2. being the first President to enter office with a Criminal Record?

      3. having the largest annual budget deficit?

      4. being President during the 12 month period in which the most private bankruptcies were filed?

      5. being President during the 12 month period in which the most mortgage defaults were filed?

      6. being President during the largest stock market loss in the history of the market?

      7. having the richest Cabinet Members?

      8. having the most campaign fund raising trips while in office?

      9. the most private use of Air Force One? (Including as a U-Haul moving van for his daughters.)

      10. receiving the most Corporate campaign donations?

      11. having his largest campaign contributor presiding over the largest corporate bankruptcy fraud in the US?

      12. allowing the highest gasoline prices in US history?

      13. being President during the largest job loss in US history?

      14. being President during the largest shift of jobs outside the Country in US history?

      15. the most pre-emptive invasions of independent countries?

      16. creating the largest (and probably the most inept) governmental bureaucracy in US history (Homeland Security)?

      17. breaking the most international treaties?

      18. being the first President to remove the US from the Human Rights Commission?

      19. being the first President to remove the US from the World Court of Law?

      20. being the first President to violate the Geneva Convention?

      21. being the first President to refuse entry into the US by the UN Elections Inspectors?

      22. holding the fewest number of press conferences since the advent of TV?

      23. taking the most vacation days in 12 months?

      24. causing the US to be viewed as the most hated nation in the world?

      25. having the greatest failure of diplomacy of any free world country?

      26. not preventing the worst security failure of US history?

      27. not responding in a timely manner to one of the worst natural disasters in US history?

      28. having the most world protestors against any US President?

      29. earning the distinction of being viewed as the biggest threat to world peace and security?

      Hint: It wasn't George Washington or Bill Clinton, or any of those in between.

      Found at:

      http://www.storytimedolls.net/mmff.html

      ReplyDelete
    155. Hi

      We are the liberal party.

      We ignore our own mistakes.......its much more fun to point out other peoples.............hehe!

      This is the answer....hehe!

      ReplyDelete
    156. Hi Lydia

      Can you recommend any books on Hitlers rise to power?

      Thanx

      Mike

      ReplyDelete
    157. Mike the trivia questions all point to Bush.

      He is a criminal, his cabinet is filthy rich and he is the pathetic wonder listed in all the other questions.

      ReplyDelete
    158. Lapdog Lieberman delivers the Democrats radio address today.

      I bet that was a real winner!

      ReplyDelete
    159. Please allow me to expand minimally on my previous thesis regarding Stalins backstabbing of the west in WWII and its direct link to the Vietnam and Korean Wars. I previously mentioned to Cliff that the Vietnam War was nothing more than the good intentions of the U.S to prevent itself from becoming a lonely island surrounded in a sea of communism.

      Stalins deliberate betrayal of the agreements reached at the "Yalta Conference" has produced haunting ripples of political paranoia that can still be felt to this day......period!

      Hell, Stalins refusal to shake Winston Churchill’s hand at the" Tehran Conference" would have been more than enough to satisfy me Stalin had nefarious designs of political domination.
      ................................................................................
      "Roosevelt, who had not been a student of history,
      or of Russia, or of Communism, like a wild gambler
      based his pro-Soviet policy on a hunch. "I just have a hunch," Roosevelt told
      William C. Bullitt, "that Stalin... doesn't want any-
      thing but security for his country, and I think that if
      I give him everything I possibly can and ask nothing
      from him in return, noblesse oblige, he wouldn't try to
      annex anything and will work with us for a world of
      democracy and peace"

      "If I can convince him," Roosevelt said to Ross McIntire when talking of Stalin, "that our offer of co-operation is on the square, and that we want to be comrades rather than enemies, I'm betting that he'll come in."

      However...

      ................................................................................
      "On February 24, 1945, in violation of the Yalta
      pact -- which had been signed on February 11 -- the
      U.S.S.R. indicated her unwillingness to co-operate in
      the Allied Control Councils in Bulgaria, Hungary, and
      Roumania, and on February 27, Andrei Y. Vishinsky,
      in another violation of the Yalta pact, insisted by an
      official demarche that King Michael of Roumania sub-
      stitute Communists and Communist tools for certain
      members of his cabinet."

      "Stalin promised free elections in Poland, notwithstanding the recently installed Communist puppet government. However, it soon became apparent that Stalin had no intentions of holding true to his promise of free elections. The elections, which were held in January 1947 and resulted in the official transformation of Poland into a socialist state by 1949, were widely considered rigged in favour of communist parties."

      "Roosevelt met Stalin's price, hoping that the USSR could be dealt with through the U.N. Some Americans later considered Yalta to be a 'sellout,' because it encouraged the Soviets to expand their influence into Japan and Asia and also because Stalin eventually violated the terms by forming the Soviet bloc."
      ................................................................................
      Cliff has previously retorted that the US backed Diem up instead of backing free elections in Vietnam. BIG DEAL! Imagine that......... Eisenhower and Secretary of State Dulles imposing the same sneaky tactics that Stalin (murderer of millions) kindly bestowed upon the west which ultimately formed a paralyzing suspicion(McCarthyism if you will) that negotiating with communists, despite the most sincere intentions of peace, inevitably leads to betrayal!

      In other words, the democrats failed miserably; the Yalta Conference is 100% proof of this! I do not consider decades of Cold War and constant fear of nuclear war political achievements.

      "President Eisenhower and particularly Secretary of State Dulles were determined to prevent this. Hanoi, they believed, would become Communist China's gateway to South-east Asia, and South Vietnam had to be given every chance to develop independently or the small nation would topple like dominoes."

      Not signing the Geneva Accord's was clearly the honorable intention of the U.S. to politically combat Ho Chi Minh's effective brainwashing over his people, thus ensuring himself a communist victory and marking another defeat for humanity’s right to freedom. Do we really sit by while democracy shrinks? I think not! Naive, yet, genuine negotiation completely failed.......period!

      While not infallible, I believe the U.S. deserves more credit in its efforts to promote global stability despite the blunders of the current administration. And, to those intellectually lazy morons who like to compare republicans to Nazi’s...........
      http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/children_awaiting_execution.html

      ReplyDelete
    160. Hi again

      My name is Mike.


      Did I ever mention I completely 100% failed to protect a girl?


      Well, I did.


      She actually ran out of some hotel in Vegas weeping coz I allowed some guy to pick on her........"who cares!"


      Hey, any girls out there wanna date????????????????????

      Please ignore my never been married status at the age of 37.....hehe!

      Well, see ya!

      ReplyDelete
    161. Hi,

      My name is Larry.

      Im a coward who is quite unable to face Carl & tell hih what a piece of shit he is for using the "N" word.

      Not to mention I agree with him in having no respect for the dead...irrellevant!

      What is rellevant is I happily report the growing number of deaths in Iraq for my personal climb up the ladder of power.....hehe!

      Well, see ya!

      ReplyDelete
    162. Oil, Death And The Dollar

      Cliff Droke

      In the previous commentary entitled "A new age of perpetually high oil/gas prices?" we examined some of the factors behind the fuel price spike and how it is being carefully managed by the oil oligopoly. In this installment we'll look at how violence in the Middle East and elsewhere is contributing to the rising oil price trend and also the connection between oil and the U.S. dollar.

      A gentleman responding to my previous commentary made this very thoughtful observation: "It seems to me that higher oil prices are offsetting reduced Asian support for the US bond market. Windfall profits of the OPEC, especially Mid-East producers, are turning up as Treasury purchases via U.K. and offshore intermediaries (to avoid potential asset seizure in the event of hostilities, I presume). Thus, a tax (higher oil prices) on U.S. consumers, gets recycled back into the bond market, which in turn supports the dollar. A corollary effect is that higher prices force more spending of Asian dollar reserves, which would also feed into this petro-dollar recycling scheme."

      The above comments are definitely worth investigating and I think we'll find an answer to them as the year progresses. We'll all be able to observe the dollar/oil/bond connection and get some sense of where the links are further down the road. Food for thought to be sure.

      Apparently there is still quite a bit of resistance out there to the idea of the oil oligopoly managing petroleum output and thereby controlling the price trend. Is it so hard to believe that oil companies have conspired to create artificial shortages for the purpose of driving up prices at the pump? An anonymous observer made waves back in late 2004 when he published photographs he had taken out in California of a gasoline tanker truck unloading its contents into the desert sands. The concerned citizen promptly sent copies of the photos to the oil company from whose truck the gas was being purposely dumped. He later received this response: "You didn't see what you thought you saw...what you thought you saw was something you didn't actually see."

      A Shell refinery in Bakersfield, Calif., made headlines in back in '04 when it closing down despite having the biggest refiner margins of any Shell refinery in the nation and despite a dire need for more gasoline supplies in the state. "Only an oil company that wants to short the market and artificially drive up the price of gasoline would demolish a highly profitable refinery rather than sell it," said Jamie Court, president of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in response to the move at that time. Truly, the motives of the erstwhile "seven sisters" (which have now been further consolidated through industry intermarriage) can be clearly seen through actions such as these.

      In reference to the above headline, there is of course a connection between the price of oil and violence in the Middle East. The violence is both a consequence of the oil and a contributor to the higher oil price. As one commentator asked rhetorically, "Would the U.S. be in the Middle East if there wasn't oil there?" Indeed, U.S. military occupation of Iraq and, before long, Iran, is primarily an economic motivation as are most things in this world.

      ReplyDelete
    163. By 2020, U.S emissions will have risen by 19%, which will lead to further Global Warming.

      ReplyDelete
    164. Look at all the oil wells that are not producing.

      Look at how China is financing the Bush debt.

      Look at how housing and auto sales are falling.

      We are in the Bush recession and it is getting deeper and deeper.

      ReplyDelete
    165. Yeah Larry, it looks like Loserman might me marginalized and then in less than a year the repug party will self destruct thanks to GWB, Cheney, Coulter, Rove, Gonzalez, and all the Volksturm trolls that support this backwash of America...............America is sick and tired of the Reich Wing's BS lies, nazi propaganda and failed ignorant policies that benefit the elite few, hurt then silent majority and inflame world hatred of American and turn the World against us more by the day.

      ReplyDelete
    166. Hey Larry, lets play a little game, lets try to be more positive and try and find things that Bush and his pack of Neo Con fols said that we actually agree with, here i'll start us off.

      ReplyDelete
    167. New York bans ‘N-word’

      SARA KUGLER AND ANAHAD O’CONNOR IN NEW YORK

      NEW York City has declared the word “nigger” off-limits to whites and blacks alike in a symbolic resolution prompted by its increasingly casual use.

      The measure urges New Yorkers to voluntarily stop using the word, sometimes referred to as “the N-word” because of its sensitivity and painful history intertwined with slavery.

      “People are using it out of context,” said Leroy Comrie, a black city councillor who sponsored the measure that was unanimously approved. “People are also denigrating themselves by using the word, and disrespecting their history.”

      New York’s resolution is not binding, but leaders of the largest city in the United States hope to set an example.

      Rudis Mata, 21, of New York, said it was pointless to ban the word if the city had no plans to enforce it, adding that he thought it a violation of free speech.

      “I don’t necessarily think people should ban the word, but it’s a derogatory term and it shouldn’t be used,” he said. “It’s different from other curse words. It has a history.”

      Other municipalities in the United States have passed similar measures since a debate over the slur rose to a fever pitch late last year after the Seinfeld actor, Michael Richards, spewed the word repeatedly at a comedy club in Los Angeles.

      Later, Mr Comrie seethed as he listened to some black teenagers on a street in Queens, New York. “They were saying ‘nigga’ or ‘niggas’ every other word,” said Mr Comrie. “I could tell they didn’t get it. They don’t realise how their self-image is debilitated when they use this awful word in public.”

      At New York’s City Hall, supporters cheered passage of the resolution, with many of them wearing pins featuring a single white “N” with a slash through it.

      Kurtis Blow Walker, a pioneer of hip-hop music, said that blacks needed to stop using the word so “we can elevate our minds to a better future”.

      Others argued that use of the word by blacks was empowering, that reclaiming a slur and giving it a new meaning took away its punch. Jamie Foxx, the Oscar-winning actor, has said that he will not stop using the word and that he does not see anything inappropriate about blacks using it within their own circles.

      John Ridley, a black author and film-maker, said efforts to abolish it were insulting because they suggested black Americans would allow themselves to be cowed “by six letters and two syllables”.

      Unlike the politicians trying to quash the word, Ridley added, those who embraced it were showing backbone by declaring “we’re owning it”.

      “With everything that’s going on in America, the idea of trying to ban a word to solve a problem is just ridiculous,” he said. “And for people of colour - with us possibly on the cusp of having a black man become president, for us to be worried about this word is ridiculous.”

      Many rap artists use the slang pronunciation, with an “a” or “az” instead of an “er,” in lyrics, such as Snoop Dogg’s For All My Niggaz & Bitches or 50 Cent’s Realest Nigga, as a statement of pride. But black leaders including the Rev Jesse Jackson said it is impossible to paper over the epithet’s ugly history .

      “I forgive those young people who do not know their history, and I blame myself and my generation for not preparing you,” New York City councillor Albert Vann said.

      The word nigger, in all its variations, stems from “niger”, Latin for black. One of the earliest recorded instances of its use in North America was in 1619, when a Jamestown colonist, John Rolfe, noted in his diary the arrival of a Dutch man-of-war with 20 African captives, or “negars”, according to Jabari Asim, author of a new book, The N Word: Who Can Say It, Who Shouldn’t, and Why.

      There is some debate among scholars as to whether Rolfe intended the word as a pejorative or not; Asim said he believes it was an insult because otherwise Rolfe would probably have chosen the more neutral “negro”, which had been in use as far back as 1555.

      By the early 1800s, the word had become common as a slur meaning subhuman and inferior, Asim said. Two centuries later, in 1988, the rap group N.W.A. used the word four dozen times on a best-selling album, Straight Outta Compton, igniting a debate over whether the racist connotation is removed when the word is culturally claimed by blacks themselves.

      This must mean that there is no rap music being recorded in New York City. Nor any disc jockeys playing same.

      Nor any public readings of Huckleberry Finn, Uncle Tom’s Cabin, The Autobiography Of Malcome X (as told to Alex Haley) and a thousand other books.

      The word nigger, in all its variations, stems from “niger”, Latin for black. One of the earliest recorded instances of its use in North America was in 1619, when a Jamestown colonist, John Rolfe, noted in his diary the arrival of a Dutch man-of-war with 20 African captives, or “negars”, according to Jabari Asim, author of a new book, The N Word: Who Can Say It, Who Shouldn’t, and Why.

      What nonsense.

      As the Oxford English Dictionary points out, came into the language via the French and Spanish:

      neger. Now north. dial. and Sc. Forms: 6­7 (9) neager, 6 (9) neeger, 7 negar, 7, 9 negre, 9 negur, 7­ neger.
      [ad. F. nègre, ad. Sp. negro Negro. So Du., G., Da., Sw. neger.]
      1. A Negro, esp. in disparaging use.
      1587 MS. Robert Leng (Brit. Mus.), There were also in her 400 neegers, whome they had taken to make slaves.
      1599 Minsheu s.v. Caçuéla, Vpon Moores or Neagers, and on other malefactors.

      Which makes sense, as it was Spain which began the Atlantic slave trade. Followed by the Portugese and then the Dutch.

      But it’s probably breaking the law to even mention such things.

      ReplyDelete
    168. Mitt Romney started the Bain Capital, which is one of two private equity firms that purchased Clear Channel.

      And he decries the mainstream media.

      ReplyDelete
    169. GWB said "I am a uniter not a divider"

      I agree with that since in a mere few short years he united almost the entire world against us and inspired even former adversaries to put aside their differences and join together to counter America which is fast becoming the most hated and despised country on earth if we are not there allreaddy thanks to GWB.

      ReplyDelete
    170. Hi again

      My name is Mike.


      Did I ever mention I completely 100% failed to protect a girl?


      Well, I did.


      She actually ran out of some hotel in Vegas weeping coz I allowed some guy to pick on her........"who cares!"


      Hey, any girls out there wanna date????????????????????

      Please ignore my never been married status at the age of 37.....hehe!

      Well, see ya!

      ReplyDelete
    171. Hi,

      My name is Larry.

      Im a coward who is quite unable to face Carl & tell hih what a piece of shit he is for using the "N" word.

      Not to mention I agree with him in having no respect for the dead...irrellevant!

      What is rellevant is I happily report the growing number of deaths in Iraq for my personal climb up the ladder of power.....hehe!

      Well, see ya!

      ReplyDelete
    172. Bush said God told him to go to war with Iraq.

      That may be true, we just don't know which false god he worships.

      ReplyDelete
    173. Lets try another one, back in 1992, Dick Cheney basically said it would be foolish to invade Iraq because it would be an unwinnable quagmire..................I agree with that, boy he sure was smarter back then wonder if all the heart attacks or strokes or fumes he inhaled at Halliburton killed most of his brain cells or something.

      ReplyDelete
    174. How about Bush saying he looked into Putin's eyes and seen his soul.

      That is true and he also saw a mirror of his own blackened soul in there as well.

      ReplyDelete
    175. Appeasement and Jesus is the only way........we have all the answers!

      Thanx

      Liberal party

      ReplyDelete
    176. How bout this quote "America is a Nation with a mission - and that mission comes from our most basic beliefs. We have no desire to dominate, no ambitions of empire. Our aim is a democratic peace - a peace founded upon the dignity and rights of every man and woman.
      George W. Bush


      I agree with that quote, too bad GWB doesnt agree wiith his own quote. LOL

      ReplyDelete
    177. First, I would like to thank the liberal/socialists on the web for giving me an English lesson on the meaning of “Scandal”and “Impropriety.” Not that I didn’t know, but I didn’t think they did, with their continued and undaunted and slavish devotion to Bill Clinton. It comforting to know they have a Webster’s at hand. Please go to “pathological” and “Liar”. You will find Bill Clintons’ name there.

      I was going to compare GW and Bill, but then I realized that just listing all of Bills’ lies, scandals and
      improprieties would take up the whole piece.

      I read that Americans smiled and felt they had a genuine nice and honest guy when he sheepishly told a bunch of teeny-bops what kind of undies he wore. The gigantic leap is made that somehow...all the world leaders also had a revelation that gee, this is a NICE guy.

      It was this “endearing quality” Bill had that made you reel with disbelief when he admitted he had been “naughty” with an intern. AWWWWW....you were SO hurt that he had not been completely honest with you. I have no idea how old this particular person is in years, but maturity wise, I would guess about 5.

      Let me clue you folks in on something. Bill Clinton has spent his life lying. It is not second nature to him. It IS his nature. Remember 60 Minutes? The Gennifer Flowers scandal had hit the news...she had tapes and he knew he was in trouble before he even got the nomination. He and Hillary went on 60 Minutes and sat, holding hands, teary eyed and spoke of how he had “caused pain” in his marriage, but that was all behind him. Hillary, who wanted desperately to be Co-President, swallowed what little pride she had left and said she forgave him and loved him...blah, blah, blah...Well, that was not his first lie...but it was his first big lie to America.

      We know now that he cheated on Hillary before they were married. While they are married and has bragged that sometimes it was two at time. He never stopped, never intended to stop and never will stop. In fact, I read just today that Hillary picked half his staff at his Harlem office just to keep an eye on him so he does nothing to publicly embarrass her, now that she is a Senator. A babysitter system for an ex -President. Now there is a loving, trusting marriage for you. What a crock. It's a lie every time they are seen together.

      I guess the next big lie was when he took the oath of office. He never meant a word of it. What he should have said is: “I, William Jefferson Clinton, do hereby swear to really have fun the next four years chasing women, lining my pockets with money, selling high tech secrets to our enemies, (something he started doing even before being elected in the back seat of a limo when he met with Chinese agents), ignoring any and all attacks on our country because, well, hey, that would just take up to much time away from my party time with the girls. I also swear to sell the White House and honor and dignity of the Office at every opportunity using the Lincoln Bedroom, Air Force One and even selling plots in our most sacred cemetery, Arlington. I will sell pardons to criminals and friends who supported me...and if I am re-elected, I will sell pardons for votes and money for my wife in whatever endeavor she may have in politics. I will harass, threaten and torment anyone who tries to come forward with anything bad about me. I will do everything in my power, including attempting to repeal the 22nd Amendment so I can stay in office for life and be king because, hey, this is fun...It’s GOOD to be the king. I will even check into using the military as a tool to keep me in office. (That one didn’t work out so well for him)

      Let’s see. When did the Clinton scandals start? Oh, that’s right, before he was even nominated by his party. They never stopped.

      Hillary wasn’t clean in all this either. She is the one who invested a small amount of money and just a short time later made a fortune! Hillary was the one up to her eyeballs in Whitewater, shredding documents left and right.

      Then there was the glorious firing of the Travel Office folks. Some of these non-partisan people were
      faithfully doing their jobs for 25 years. Now, it was the Presidents right to remove them and replace them with whomever he wanted...but fearing this would look bad to the public, they invented some false charges and those poor people were met at their desks by security guards and loaded in a windowless van and unceremoniously dumped off the White House grounds. Their reputations destroyed, their life savings wiped out defending themselves. All because Bill and Hill wanted to put their Hollywood friends in charge of the travel office. It took a jury...I think..90 seconds to come back with a “not guilty” charge for those involved. The Clintons lied. There had been no wrong doing by anyone at the travel office.

      Another little noticed item that they did was immediately fire all full-time White House workers and re-hire part time so that they did not have to pay benefits or health insurance. So much for Bill and Hill caring about the “little people”. That was a lie as well.

      How about the FBI files? At first they said only a few, then it grew to several hundred and finally ended up over a thousand. All there illegally. They said it was an “accident”. One or two, I can see, but when the numbers grew to over a thousand...all Republicans, all considered “enemies” and sent for by the son of a good friend of Hillary’s who got the job as payback...no way. Among those, I believe, was the file of one Linda Tripp. Her confidential information was handed out to the press, when Bill needed to discredit her. Some information had been transferred to disk and taken home by White House staffers. An accident? Was it an accident information ended up White House Staffers home computers? I don’t think so. Another lie.

      Then there was the infamous papers and documents, demanded by the Congressional hearings that
      showed up, mysteriously, two years later in the White House residence. “I don’t know HOW they got here.” Hillary proclaimed. Gee, I guess some Republican gnome snuck in with them. Did anyone believe Hillary? Of course not, but it’s not nice to pick on the first lady, so she got a pass. Hillary got a lot of passes that way.

      Let’s not forget Paula Jones. She was ridiculed, called “trailer trash” and a liar. She fought back. Oh, she tried all the usuals for help. Women’s groups and such, they all turned her down. We now know why. The NOW gang got hush money illegally (tax dollars) from Clinton to keep their mouths shut about his treatment of women. We all wondered at the time why they would tolerate that. I guess everything around Bill was for sale. So little Paula got offers from yes, right wingers who hated Bill Clinton and she was crucified for it. But, bless her heart, she stuck to it and she won. Bill finally settled out of court. He was ripped by the federal judge (one he appointed) for his “misleading” testimony. He lied about Paula Jones. Doesn't it bother you just a little that the man in OUR White House, saw nothing wrong with the behavior of inviting a woman into his hotel room and then dropping his pants?

      Then little dim-witted Monica came along. He lied about her too didn’t he. Now this lie to America about Monica was not a garden variety, caught on the spot kind of lie. Oh no, it was a planned, premeditated and rehearsed lie. He brought in his good friends from Hollywood (the same team that took over and screwed up the travel office) to coach and rehearse him on how to do it SO convincingly, that all would believe him. There is not one Hollywood actor that could have done it better. He would have gotten away with it to...had it not been for a blue dress with a stain on it. God love Linda Tripp. She knew what kind of people Monica was dealing with. That dress is all that saved her.

      What about Juanita Brodderick? What about Kathleen Wiley? Did he lie about them as well? My guess is he has. Kathleen Wiley was threatened, her family was threatened and her cat taken and killed and then left on her porch. A little message from Bill? But he’s SUCH a nice guy! Was the man who stopped her while she was jogging to inquire about the health of her family...and oh, did you find your cat? I guess he was just a concerned citizen. The identity of this man was finally discovered and he was a known friend of the Clintons.

      Then there is the Ron Brown incident. Just after being notified he was going to be called before a
      Congressional hearing investigating the selling by Loral and others (large Clinton donors) of top secret ICBM rocket information to the Chinese, he was heard to say...”I’m to old to go to jail...I won’t go down alone for this.” He was sent on a trip by Clinton and never came back. Well, he came back, but there was no way he would be testifying about anything. I saw on PBS two people who were there during his autopsy. One was a photographer. They both said the x rays and photos showed that Ron Brown did not die in the crash. He was dead when it crashed from a gun shot wound to his head. But all the records, x rays and photos were “lost”. When the family wanted an independent autopsy, they were refused on grounds of “National Security.” Can anything be proven? No, but it sure smells doesn’t it? Then there was the infamous scene of Bill and a friend leaving the WH to go to meet his dear friends body. He was laughing and joking and when he spotted a camera, in an instant, he was a different man. Dejected, sad, tearful...biting his lip. Perhaps his greatest lie...that he actually cared a friend was dead. Ron unfortunately learned the hard way, you don't cross the Clinton's.

      Vince Foster. By all accounts, Vince Foster was a very nice man. He was much happier in Little Rock than Washington. He had ethics and it was rumored that he and Hillary had an affair going. Who knows, who cares. He was devoted to Hillary at any rate. Did he commit suicide? Everyone says he did. Even Ken Starr said he did. Remember that minutes after word broke, White House aides broke into his office and started taking documents out? By the box load they grabbed them and ran, before the office could be sealed. Why? Did he kill himself in that park? As a nurse, I find it impossible to believe that anyone could blow off half their head and have NO blood, NO skull or brain bits found at the scene. I know because I have seen gun shot wounds to the head and they are a bloody mess. But the scene where Mr. Foster’s body was found was nearly sterile. He was laid out, on his back as if in a coffin. No blood, nothing. He was moved to that park...by whom and why, we will never know. I think Ken Starr’s main goal was: did he kill himself? He concluded he had and if he was moved...that didn’t change the fact, so he let it go.

      Here is a truly disgusting lie. Oh, not about money or anything like that...just one more sign that Bill is a really disgusting human. While relaxing on AF One with reporters, he commented on how good the "timing" of the Oklahoma City Bombing was for him. That he had been worried, with all the scandals and all that the American people might not re-elect him, but looking sympathetic about the "tragedy" gave him a chance to look presidential. One of his most appalling lies, in my opinion, was going there and acting like he gave a damn. For him, it was convenient. a chance to make people forget about what sleaze he really was. Sickening.

      I could go on and on...the pardons sold and on and on.

      Now we have Enron. The honorable Mr. Waxman, who is an admitted card carrying Socialist, knows very well that he has no right to the information he is demanding from the WH. He knows that either way, he wins. If GW turns over the information, precedence is set and no future president will ever be able to meet with anyone ever again without having to turn over names and transcripts. If GW keeps the information, the Democrats can make it look as though he is hiding something. He can steal power from the Executive Branch or make GW look guilty of something...what doesn’t matter. Either way, he wins.

      Let me end this in this way. If I listed every scandal or impropriety that took place while Bill Clinton was in office, I would have a novel. All the ranting Clinton supporting socialists out there have on GW is innuendo and gossip. They say he has lied about this and lied about that, but in truth, he has not. He just isn’t Bill Clinton, so the standard is different. If GW stays within the law, but doesn’t do what they want him to do...he is lying or covering up. He realizes that it is business and private enterprise that keeps the country economically stable, not more welfare programs for them. Get a life...get a job...get on medication...get a reality check on Bill Clinton. You need one badly because if you were shocked that he lied about Monica...you are in for real let down when the heavy stuff starts to come out.

      ReplyDelete
    178. Bush said in September 2001, we are going to get Bin Laden dead or alive.

      I agree with that, it just won't be until after Bush is out of office and a real President is in there, who will look for him.

      ReplyDelete
    179. Cut & pastes are cool, eh Cliff!

      LOL!

      :d

      ReplyDelete
    180. Hi,

      My name is Larry.

      Im a coward who is quite unable to face Carl & tell hih what a piece of shit he is for using the "N" word.

      Not to mention I agree with him in having no respect for the dead...irrellevant!

      What is rellevant is I happily report the growing number of deaths in Iraq for my personal climb up the ladder of power.....hehe!

      Well, see ya!

      ReplyDelete
    181. That game you guys are playing is hard since everything they say is false.

      ReplyDelete
    182. "Any government that supports, protects or harbours terrorists is complicit in the murder of the innocent and equally guilty of terrorist crimes.
      George W. Bush"

      Interesting since Iraq did not support harbor or protect terrorists yet GWB attacked them, while Pakistan and Afghanistan do and Bush does nothing while the terrorists in Pakistan could foment a coup an seize a nuke, and while the taliban reclaim power after he once again prematurely declare victory.

      Also Interesting how the repug relection committe had know terrorists supporting and contributing to it.

      ReplyDelete
    183. How about anyone in my adminisration that is involved with leaking a CIA operatives name will be dealt with.

      I agree he did deal with them He is protecting Rove and Cheney and has a pardon written up for Scooter.

      ReplyDelete
    184. "Any outlaw regime that has ties to terrorist groups or seeks to possess weapons of mass destruction is a grave danger to the civilised world and will be confronted. "
      George W. Bush

      Interesting how both the repug party and the Bush administration has both ties to known terrorists and has received support from known terrorists some contributing to repug congressional elections for years...........so despite GWB's and Rove;s lies the terrorists clearly want the repugs in power not the democrats.

      Also GWB's outlaw regime posseses WMD and is clearly a grave threat to our own country and the world.

      ReplyDelete
    185. Thats a good one Larry!

      ReplyDelete
    186. How about in the 2000 elections, Bush said he was coming to Washington to change the atmosphere of politics.

      He sure did that. This is the most corrupt, evil and hate spewing administration in America's history.

      ReplyDelete
    187. One year ago almost everyone said they were tired of the over-extenteded media concerning the death of JonBenet Ramsey.


      Agreed, however.......


      What did Mike say:

      "Who cares" concerning her death.

      ReplyDelete
    188. Hi,

      My name is Larry.

      Im a coward who is quite unable to face Carl & tell hih what a piece of shit he is for using the "N" word.

      Not to mention I agree with him in having no respect for the dead...irrellevant!

      What is rellevant is I happily report the growing number of deaths in Iraq for my personal climb up the ladder of power.....hehe!

      Well, see ya!

      ReplyDelete
    189. "Everywhere that freedom stirs, let tyrants fear. "
      George W. Bush

      Thats a winner huh Larry?

      ReplyDelete
    190. How about the government will take care of the victims of Katrina.

      He sure did that. He cut their funding off for homes and the crime rate has soared in New Orleans.

      ReplyDelete
    191. "Free nations are peaceful nations. Free nations don't attack each other. Free nations don't develop weapons of mass destruction."
      George W. Bush

      Heres a winner Larry, too bad he's a flip flopping hippocrite that doesnt practice what he preaches.

      ReplyDelete
    192. One year ago almost everyone said they were tired of the over-extenteded media concerning the death of JonBenet Ramsey.


      Agreed, however.......


      What did Mike say:

      "Who cares" concerning her death.

      ReplyDelete
    193. Hi,

      My name is Larry.

      Im a coward who is quite unable to face Carl & tell hih what a piece of shit he is for using the "N" word.

      Not to mention I agree with him in having no respect for the dead...irrellevant!

      What is rellevant is I happily report the growing number of deaths in Iraq for my personal climb up the ladder of power.....hehe!

      Well, see ya!

      ReplyDelete
    194. Think about that one for a moment, the man said Free nations are peaceful nations, free nations dont attack each other.

      Now since WE attacked Iraq and since our freedoms liberties and privacy are being destroyed and sacrificed every day by this very man, I have to ask are we still a free country or are we shifting in the opposite direction.

      This man is an enemy of freedom and democracy and he makes that more clear every day.

      ReplyDelete
    195. If Clinton would have attacked Iraq the right wingers would have went crazy.

      ReplyDelete
    196. Worf to Mike & JMM over a year ago.:

      "You speak what I tell you to speak & when"


      Mikes response: Okay Worf....your right!


      JMM's response: WTF??? Who the hell are you ?

      ReplyDelete
    197. Nite Larry & Mike

      Love ya

      ReplyDelete
    198. http://www.liberalslikechrist.org/about/blindleaders.html

      Ann Coulter, nationally syndicated Conservative spokeswoman:

      Right-wing pundit Ann Coulter titled her August 30 syndicated column on the Rhode Island Senate race: "They Shot the Wrong Lincoln." The headline is a reference to Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R-RI), whom she excoriated throughout the piece -- calling him a "half-wit" and a "silver-spooned moron" -- while expressing her support for his challenger in the September 12 Republican primary, Stephen Laffey. This is not the first time Coulter has alluded to killing those she disagrees with:
      Commenting on radio host Melanie Morgan's assertion that, if New York Times executive editor Bill Keller were convicted of treason, she "would have no problem with him being sent to the gas chamber," Coulter said, "I prefer a firing squad, but I'm open to a debate on the method of execution." She later suggested that (other) Times staff members should be "executed."
      Coulter said of the suggestion that media had been hurt by the military: "Would that it were so! ... that the American military were targeting journalists."
      Coulter suggested that Rep. John P. Murtha (D-PA) is "the reason soldiers invented fragging," -- military slang meaning the intentional killing of a member of one's own unit.
      Coulter argued that the national debate during the Monica Lewinsky controversy should not have focused on whether former President Bill Clinton "did it," but rather "whether to impeach or assassinate" him.
      Coulter said of Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens: "We need somebody to put rat poison in Justice Stevens' crème brulée.''
      commenting on the young American who fought with the Taliban, in her address at the "Conservative Political Action Conference" (CPAC) in 2002 : "When contemplating college liberals, you really regret once again that John Walker is not getting the death penalty. We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals, by making them realize that they can be killed too. Otherwise they will turn out to be outright traitors."
      ( Coulter would obviously like to be among those doing the killing of college liberals. But she is totally oblivious of the fact that the Taliban which Walker joined are ultra-Conservatives who hate the United States for being such a symbol of Liberalism! I trust that she is likewise ignorant of the fact that John (whose last name is Lindh, and whose middle name is the same as George W. Bush's), joined the Taliban at the very time the the U. S. A. had given the Taliban government of Afghanistan 43 million dollars. If John Lindh was an enemy of the U.S. for helping the Taliban at that time, then so was George W. Bush. Thank Mammon for "Christians" like Coulter! When asked where she worshipped, Coulter answered "Redeemer Presbyterian Church", in Manhattan. Funny, but the membership secretary of that church has no knowledge of Ann Coulter EVER having attended her church! Conservative "Christians", however, view Ms. Coulter as an authority on Christianity.)

      ReplyDelete