Sunday, July 06, 2008

RUMORS OF OUR PROGRESS HAVE BEEN GREATLY EXAGGERATED...



On Monday July 7, 2008, the Democratic Congresswoman from New York Carolyn Maloney will be the guest on the Basham and Cornell Radio Show at 8 am Pacific Time on AM 1230 KLAV in Las Vegas.

As a young woman, Democratic Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney asked her grandmother for career advice. She was shocked by the reply: "Get married."

Though much has changed for women since then, more has remained the same. On a January night in 2008, Maloney and her daughter attended a Hillary Clinton rally in New Hampshire. Some men in the audience held "Iron My Shirt" posters aloft. This small incident provoked outrage, but it provided an important peephole onto larger problems that women face today.

In her groundbreaking book, Rumors of Our Progress Have Been Greatly Exaggerated: Why Women's Lives Aren't Getting Any Easier... and How we can make Real Progress, Congresswoman Maloney shatters the myths about how far we've come, highlighting how women’s issues permeate every realm of society, and how political change has provided only a fraction of a solution.

The former co-chair of the Women’s Caucus, Maloney has access to a wealth of cutting-edge research that helps her illuminate how far behind we still fall on gender equality in issues from health care to educational opportunities, from poverty to reproductive freedom. It’s a fact that women are working harder than ever, but they're still only paid three-quarters the salary of their male counterparts. She weaves this vital information with gripping stories of real women, making clear that she’s not taking some abstract political position. She’s talking about real people, real lives.

Maloney also points the way forward, sharing inspiring tales of female activists who have managed to make a difference and presenting readers with "take action" guides that show all women practical ways they can help bring about change in their lives and the lives of others.
___________________________________

If the Republicans will stop telling lies about the Democrats, we will stop telling the truth about them. - Adlai E. Stevenson


Now it's time to defeat the "Regressive movement." In light of the unsettling news that Karl Rove is taking over McCain's campaign — and in light of the bizarre news that Rush Limbaugh got a salary raise of $30 million a year — making his total take $400 million until the year 2016 — we need to focus on our Progressive values more than ever. America is a Progressive nation at heart. We can't allow thugs to continue to take over our country. More below on Rove...

MIMI KENNEDY

There are so many good people doing good things, the American experiment cannot fail. I had the honor of co-hosting an event for Progressive Democrats of America and C-SPAN with the amazing Mimi Kennedy last night. Mimi is a tireless advocate of all good causes and I am so proud to call her a fellow Progressive activist and actor. You may remember her as Dharma's mom on the hit series "Dharma and Greg." She is someone who actually does the work we all talk about. She's passionate about social justice, nonviolent conflict resolution, and a healthy environment. Check out her inspiring site at: Mimi Kennedy.org and Progressive Democrats of America.org

C-SPAN BOOK TV

Great Interviews: Please listen in the archives at Basham and Cornell Radio to our shocking interview with Diebold whistleblower Steve Heller.





At the C-Span event last night, July 2, 2008 our guest was author, composer-lyricist, record and television producer Christopher Cerf — who was also our guest on the Basham and Cornell Radio Show at 8 am Pacific Time on AM 1230 KLAV in Las Vegas.

He is perhaps best known for his musical contributions to Sesame Street, for founding National Lampoon, for co-creating and co-producing the award-winning PBS literacy education television program Between the Lions, and for his humorous articles and books.

Photo: Christopher Cerf and Lydia Cornell

Christopher Cerf is also known to the general public for his work as an author and satirist. In 1970, he helped launch the National Lampoon, serving as a Contributing Editor from its first issue until the mid-1970s, and in 1978, he co-conceived and co-edited with Tony Hendra, George Plimpton and Rusty Unger the journalistic parody Not the New York Times.

In 2008, to commemorate the fifth anniversary of George W. Bush's historic (if premature) victory speech aboard the U.S.S. Lincoln, Cerf again collaborated with Victor Navasky to produce “Mission Accomplished! Or How We Won The War In Iraq,” a compendium of misstatements, failed predictions, and outright lies uttered in connection with America's military adventure in Iraq.

______________________

RELAX...IT'S ALL GOING TO BE OKAY * AND STOP TEARING DOWN OBAMA

Despite the uproar from Progressive bloggers over Obama's move to the middle, I truly believe that good will prevail. I personally think Obama was wrong in backing the new FISA bill, and I have firsthand evidence of why this is wrong. But I am not ready to tell my whole story yet - about the death threats and illegal wiretapping that occurred in my home.

But regarding Obama's "Faith Based Initiatives" — please give this a chance. Imagine what good an organization like Union Rescue Mission can do with some government funds. They provide beds, food and clothing for ALL of Los Angeles' homeless men and women. They are a 'Good Samaritan" Christian organization that gives to all, regardless of race, creed, sexual preference or gender.

I think there are more enlightened and motivated faith based groups that need funds to help people in their communities. Many of these people devote all their time to doing "God's work" and are more motivated than those who do not feel a higher calling of service and love to mankind.

On the other hand, if one of these Churches EVER creates a "Creationist Museum" which is where the Bush Faith-based money was wasted, we should protest!!

At a time when Obama is under increasing fire from progressives for moving to the center and sounding like a traditional Democratic pandering pol, the McCain campaign is now morphing into yet another Karl Rove Presidential campaign operation, only this time it’s “unofficial” since Rove doesn’t have an official title or paycheck. But, the Times report confirms, it’s quite real — and those who were counting the days when America would close the chapter on Karl Rove and his style of national politics will have to count for quite a while.
- From The Moderate Voice.com Joe Gandleman

204 comments:

  1. Barack Obama has clarified his position,

    "I will give the Joint Chiefs of Staff a new mission,

    End this war .....".

    Which is the position he has had all alone.

    The MSM still tries to spin it to create controversy .... to help st johnny when he is enlisting the minions of KKKarl Rove to continue the republican war on the middle class of America.

    ReplyDelete
  2. No one could be surprised that Flip Flop Johnny has told yet another lie. This is par for the course.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Oh, and you better believe the Klanservatives are gonna start hauling out the soaked crosses in earnest now. I have said before, and I'll say again, that I don't blame Obama for backtracking on accepting Federal campaign money. He could not go into the game against this bunch hobbling.

    ReplyDelete
  4. What do you all think of Rovian tactics taking over McCain's campaign?

    Rove will do anything to win. He ONLY plays dirty tricks and dishonest tactics, and since they own th media (with Limbaugh's new 400 million dollar salary... -- lies and slander and vote caging seem to be their only way of winning.

    But that's why we must only focus on the GOOD in our Progressive values and in our candidate.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Lydia, this is no surprise at all. The Klanservatives have been using subtle racism for about the last 4 campaigns they've run (the antigay pogrom of 2004 was more about making it OK to be a bigot openly than it ever was about gays getting married.) We can see watching FOX "News" that they've gotten progressively more racist on a near-daily basis. They will make this a racial campaign because they don't have anything else to offer.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Lydia, I see it different,

    But then again I have lived where you don't bing a knife to a gun fight, in real life.

    Sometimes you just fight fire with fire.

    But we use facts for our fuel unlike McSame's newly hired Rove minions who use fear, innuendo, lies and spin for their fuel.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Clif, can't you see that an "eye for an eye" just makes everyone blind?

    ReplyDelete
  8. By the way, I had no idea you used to live in Detroit...

    ReplyDelete
  9. Dolt, fighting Rovian untruths with truth is not the same as the biblical punishment you quote,

    But leave it to a shallow hypocritical bible thumper like YOU, to claim it is.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Yeah, I really think you could think these out a little better before you post them, dolty. Answering lies with truths seems more than fair to me. I know it sucks that the truth sounds as bad as it does for the wingtards, but it is what it is.

    ReplyDelete
  11. For those of you who have never seen the Wingtard of the Month feature, this month's wingtard is a standout. How a guy this whacked out can avoid the men in white coats, I have no idea.

    ReplyDelete
  12. BTW dolt, the gun fight I referenced was a little thingy called Desert Storm,

    but being a GUTLESS chicken hawk,


    you'd never think of that would ya boy?

    ReplyDelete
  13. I love how rusty always shows up when his inbred, nad-deprived self thinks there'll be no one around to show him up yet again for the tool that he is.

    So the Boone's Farm thing didn't work out, boy? I suppose you could just take it, but at this hour your father has probably beat you to it.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Homeless veterans face new battle for survival

    By Mike Mount

    "I can't find the right words to describe when you are homeless," says Iraq war veteran Joseph Jacobo. "You see the end of your life right there. What am I going to do, what am I going to eat?"

    Jacobo is one of an increasing number of veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan who come home to life on the street. The Department of Veterans Affairs is fighting to find them homes.

    Veterans make up almost a quarter of the homeless population in the United States. The government says there are as many as 200,000 homeless veterans; the majority served in the Vietnam War. Some served in Korea or even World War II. About 2,000 served in Iraq or Afghanistan.

    The VA and several nongovernmental organizations have created programs that address the special needs of today's veterans returning from war. In addition to treating physical and mental injuries, there are career centers and counseling programs. But the VA still expects the homeless rate among the nation's newest veterans to rise because of the violent nature of combat seen in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    Officials say many more Iraq and Afghanistan veterans suffer post-traumatic stress disorder than veterans of previous wars. The government says PTSD is one of the leading causes of homelessness among veterans.

    "They come back, and they are having night trauma, they are having difficulty sleeping. They are feeling alienated," says Peter Dougherty, the director of homeless programs for the VA.

    The VA says 70 percent of veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan saw some form of combat, either through firefights, rocket attacks or the most common strikes on troops -- roadside bomb attacks on their vehicles.

    That is three times the rate of combat experienced by Vietnam veterans, according to the VA.

    Jacobo spent more than a year as an Army mechanic in Iraq between 2004 and 2006. He saw many of his fellow soldiers killed during attacks on his base. He suffers from PTSD and found himself homeless after being discharged from the Army in 2006, but recently moved into a VA-funded shelter in Washington.

    Until he found the VA facility, he was sleeping in laundry rooms and washing himself in fast food restrooms until he would be kicked out.

    And McCrazy supports these policies.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I heard a bit about both of those stories but I have been entertaining a son on leave and have not delved into either but I will have to eventually. About Limbaugh what was that? I thought I heard he was getting that from an Arab country or something?
    As for Rove! I haven't heard that at all. In fact I only heard some of those involved with him and Bush were now running parts of McCain's campaign. That in itself is very scary and disconcerting as it means a continuation of underhand lying Politics and 4 more years we will not survive while McCain has many convinced he is honest patriotic and a vote for change. Unfriggenbelievable!

    ReplyDelete
  16. Wanna blow a hole as big as George Bush's credibility gap in the wing nuts drill drill drill arguments?

    Use this;

    ANALYSIS - US oil firms seek drilling access, but exports soar

    While the U.S. oil industry want access to more federal lands to help reduce reliance on foreign suppliers, American-based companies are shipping record amounts of gasoline and diesel fuel to other countries.

    A record 1.6 million barrels a day in U.S. refined petroleum products were exported during the first four months of this year, up 33 percent from 1.2 million barrels a day over the same period in 2007. Shipments this February topped 1.8 million barrels a day for the first time during any month, according to final numbers from the Energy Department.

    The surge in exports appears to contradict the pleas from the U.S. oil industry and the Bush administration for Congress to open more offshore waters and Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling.


    Why if we have such "high" gas prices and the oil corps say they need more oil do they EXPORT from America what they have?

    Greed, pure and simple greed.

    More drilling ain't gonna solve that age old problem of whose with the most wanting even more at the expense of those with the least....

    Jesus commented on the very same problem 2000 years ago and nothing has changed for the greedy who claimed to be religious while being the most avarice people on the planet.

    Jesus decried the greed back then and now a days Christian right wing leaders act so hypocritically when they claim that monetary success means God approves what you have done.

    No, it just means your more greedy then spiritual, and nothing else.

    BTW, I wonder if God approved the actions of the Rich Pharisees and their rich Roman overlords about AD33?

    ReplyDelete
  17. BTW, Jesse Helms just found out in person hell is quite hot.

    First comment he made, was seeing Jerry Falwell and saying "fancy meeting you HERE".

    ReplyDelete
  18. What the hell is wrong with people in Texas?

    One foole runs OUT of his house with a shotgun and shoots two unarmed buglers, THEN has the audacity to claim he was in fear for his life?

    Then this;

    In Memory of Spc. Nicholas Peters and the other Kelly Park boys

    The rules are simple enough for the kids playing in the stickball tournament this morning in Kelly Park: There are to be three people to a team. There are four innings per game. Two outs per inning. You walk on three balls. You strike out on two strikes. The second strike can be a foul ball.

    Any ground ball not stopped or caught is a single. If you hit the ball over the double court line without it being caught or stopped, you have hit a double. If you smack the ball hard off the fence, you have a triple. And if you hit it the ball entirely over the fence, of course, you have hit a home run. If you hit a deep foul ball over the fence, it is unclear whether it is to be counted as a foul ball or home run. In that case, the final decision is left to the whim of a grown up or the good will of the opposing team.

    If you are eleven years old, and get a chance to bat, there are traditions to maintain: You must wear an oversized Red Sox jersey with the name Papelbom on the back. (That is the Sox’s closer for those not literate in such things. In an earlier time your jersey would have had the name Garciappara on it.) You dramatically roll your head from side to side to get the hair out of the eyes. Then you check the stick to make sure you are hitting at the ball from the ride end. (This is very important; however, you hope that nobody sees you doing this.) Then you dig hard into the pavement with your converse high tops, lean way way back on your heels, and then smack at the ball—eyes closed allowed—with all of your eleven year old might. Whether you hit the ball or not, all is right with the world.

    You hope you hit the ball of course. But if you don’t, you still get to have your face painted, hang with the older kids, have a hot dog with anything you want it on it– and then if you are really, really lucky you get to sit on your big brother’s shoulder to watch the dedication of the square to an older boy in the neighborhood.

    The corner of Cragie and Summer is to be renamed in dedication for another little boy who once played stick ball in this park. There are two honor guards, one of which will fire off live rounds, interrupting the morning quiet and send singing birds scattering. A representative of the mayor will say a few words.

    This is the unveiling of the new street sign dedicating Spc. Nicholas Peters Square.

    Nick served a tour of duty in Iraq and came home in one piece. He survived the war but not the peace. Stationed at Ft. Hood, in Texas, someone in a bar did not like the fact that he was wearing a Red Sox jersey, and killed him. ........


    Maybe they need to pipe Bobby Kennedy into their churches instead of the hate filled rants of right wing preachers .....

    ReplyDelete
  19. Wanna know something, Osama bin laden wanted by attacking the USA?

    1. Get US troops out of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, which includes the Muslim holy cities.

    In an interview bin Laden gave to CNN in 1997, he said the ongoing U.S. military presence in Saudi Arabia is an "occupation of the land of the holy places."

    In February 1998, bin Laden issued a "fatwa," a religious ruling, calling for Muslims to kill Americans and their allies. Three other groups, including the Islamic Jihad in Egypt, endorse the ruling.


    George W Bush did this for him on or about May 2003 right after illegally invading Iraq for it's oil.

    THE STRUGGLE FOR IRAQ; Last American Combat Troops Quit Saudi Arabia

    The last few American combat troops pulled out of the Prince Sultan Air Base here earlier this month, officially closing the Persian Gulf headquarters used by the Air Force during both Iraq wars and concluding a nearly 13-year run of extensive United States military operations in Saudi Arabia.

    And Bin Laden said he wanted the price of oil to rise to $144 a barrel;

    ''If bin Laden takes over and becomes king of Saudi Arabia, he'd turn off the tap,'' said Roger Diwan, a managing director of the Petroleum Finance Company, a consulting firm in Washington. ''He said at one point that he wants oil to be $144 a barrel''

    West Texas Intermediate price according to upstreamonline;

    WTI 145.28

    Who has gotten what he wanted outa Georgie's War on Terra?

    Osama has said his goal was to break us financially in the same way they believed they succeeded against the Soviets into a long war in Afghanistan:

    "We are continuing this policy in bleeding America to the point of bankruptcy. Allah willing, and nothing is too great for Allah," bin Laden said in the transcript.

    Billions wastes each week in Iraq?

    He said the mujahedeen fighters did the same thing to the Soviet Union in Afghanistan in the 1980s, "using guerrilla warfare and the war of attrition to fight tyrannical superpowers."

    Sorta the war Bush has created in both iraq and afghanistan, because of the reich wing hubris and incompetence.

    "We, alongside the mujahedeen, bled Russia for 10 years until it went bankrupt and was forced to withdraw in defeat," bin Laden said. ...

    We are now 6 1/2 years into the Afghan war with no end in sight, and over 5 years into the illegal occupation of Iraq with no end in sight'

    "All that we have to do is to send two mujahedeen to the furthest point east to raise a piece of cloth on which is written al Qaeda, in order to make generals race there to cause America to suffer human, economic and political losses without their achieving anything of note other than some benefits for their private corporations," bin Laden said. ...

    Damn he knows the idiot neo-cons and their stupid minions much better then they think he does.

    As part of the "bleed-until-bankruptcy plan," bin Laden cited a British estimate that it cost al Qaeda about $500,000 to carry out the attacks of September 11, 2001, an amount that he said paled in comparison with the costs incurred by the United States.

    Upwards of 6oo billion and rising.

    "Every dollar of al Qaeda defeated a million dollars, by the permission of Allah, besides the loss of a huge number of jobs," he said. "As for the economic deficit, it has reached record astronomical numbers estimated to total more than a trillion dollars. ...

    "And it all shows that the real loser is you," he said. "It is the American people and their economy." ...

    "So the war went ahead, the death toll rose, the American economy bled, and Bush became embroiled in the swamps of Iraq that threaten his future," bin Laden said.


    Who's to say he's not on course to succeed unless we start changing some of our economic and foreign policies that continue to cost us so much financially, and some of our domestic policies which seem increasingly Orwellian in nature?

    When the reich-wingers start squawking NOBODY could have predicted. they should listen to this little admission from Brzezinski, jimmy Carters national security advisor;

    Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.

    Q: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to provoke it?

    B: It isn't quite that. We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.

    Q: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn't believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don't regret anything today?

    B: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter. We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.

    Q: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic fundamentalism, having given arms and advice to future terrorists?

    B: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?


    The reichwingers think it was all Reagan's idea?

    Damn are they dumb;

    But just how dumb?

    All bin forgotten has done is take the strategy Brzezinski proposed to Jimmy Carter to be used against USSR and use it against the stupid neo-cons and their even dumber minions.

    Damn just how stupid is Cheney, Bush and the rest, tricked by bin forgotten with OUR OWN strategies.

    Oh yea, they thought Chalibi was working for US and not Iran .............

    Idiots like Dolt, crusty and the rest of the trolls think we are traitors for pointing these facts out?

    It's a shame you're a traitor for point out truth,

    But a patriot for subverting the US constitution .......

    Underfunding the troops and their care after getting wounded .....

    Lying your way into a war that cost the American people 4113 of it's troops ....

    Tens of thousands other troops severely wounded ....


    Hundreds of billions of borrowed dollars from the Chinese that the American (but not the rich according to the reichwingers) people will have to repay.

    ReplyDelete
  20. 'When John McCain was my captive'

    By Andrew Harding
    BBC News in Haiphong, Vietnam

    Tran Trong Duyet - a sprightly retiree and amateur ballroom dancer - must rank as one of John McCain's more unlikely supporters.
    Four decades ago, during the Vietnam war, Mr Duyet was in charge of the notorious Hoa Lo prison - the place where Mr McCain says he was brutally beaten and tortured during five-and-a-half years as an American prisoner of war.

    "McCain is my friend," said 75-year-old Mr Duyet as he feeds the caged birds he now keeps in his garden in this coastal city.

    "If I was American, I would vote for him."

    Informal chats

    Navy pilot John McCain was shot down during a bombing raid over the North Vietnamese capital, Hanoi, in 1967.

    He ejected from his aircraft and parachuted into a city lake - only to be dragged out by an angry crowd, barely conscious, and with two broken arms and a broken leg.

    From there he was taken to Hoa Lo prison, known to its American military inmates as the "Hanoi Hilton".

    McCain has since described enduring months of solitary confinement and systematic torture which drove him to try to kill himself.
    "I don't know how he'd react if he met me again," said Mr Duyet, flicking through old black and white photographs of himself and his American prisoners at Hoa Lo.

    "But I can confirm to you that we never tortured him. We never tortured any prisoners."

    Mr Duyet reminisces instead about how he often summoned the future US presidential candidate to his private office for informal chats.

    "We used to argue about the war - about whether it was right or wrong," he says.

    "He is a very frank man - very conservative, and very loyal to his country and the American ideal.

    "He had a very interesting accent and sometimes he taught me words in English and corrected my accent. I have followed his career since he left prison."

    Rapprochement

    So is Mr Duyet implying that that Senator McCain lied about his treatment at the Hanoi Hilton?

    "He did not tell the truth," he says.

    "But I can somehow sympathise with him. He lies to American voters in order to get their support for his presidential election."

    John McCain's Close Friend Even Admits McCain Was Not Tortured, And That JOHN MCCAIN IS A LIAR.

    ReplyDelete
  21. John Edwards is supposed to debate Karl Rove at University of Buffalo!

    ReplyDelete
  22. Mike - FOR REAL???
    Wow. Considering Rove is a crook and should be in jail, this is amazing. The Siegleman case, the missing emails, the caging of voters... the dirty, illegal activities with the RNC.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Yep its true.........and your right Rove is none too smart agreeing to a debate with all the criminal charges and litigation he has going........but then we never accused these treasonous Reich Wing idiots of being smart.

    ReplyDelete
  24. john Edwards and Rove that ought to be interesting. I would love to see Rove and Wexler!

    ReplyDelete
  25. I saw at daily kos that Rove said he was above law and didnt have to testify before congress

    ReplyDelete
  26. Rush Limbaugh confesses he has no confidence in his beliefs

    By Ed Martin

    In the late 1940s Joe McCarthy, an ignorant Senator without conscience, knowingly picked an issue without substance to take him from obscurity to the national stage. The fake issue was communism. He used the non-issue of anti-communism to conduct hearings that ruined innocent people's lives by accusing them of being communists. All the while, few noted that being a communist was not illegal in the United States. And, few noted that McCarthy never found a single communist.

    The end result was that McCarthy was shown to be a proven liar. Joseph Welch ended McCarthy's reign of terror with the questions, "Have you no decency, sir? At long last, have you no decency?"

    George Bush, another ignorant man without conscience has done the same thing, knowingly grabbing on to another issue without substance, the faked danger of Iraq, to bring him from obscurity to fame and fortune. Bush has been shot down by the many Joseph Welches of today, pointing out that Bush is a proven liar. And, like McCarthy, Bush has never found a single WMD.

    Rush Limbaugh, another ignorant, conscienceless man has knowingly picked another issue without substance to bring him from deserved obscurity to the national stage, wealth and notoriety. Limbaugh's issue is hard-right, conservative Republicanism, an issue that has been proven, with devastating effect, entirely false by its prime practitioner, George Bush.

    Although Limbaugh will never, ever directly admit that his ideology is flawed, that it has no substance, that it is only a vehicle to make him famous and weallthy, he has indirectly admitted this and confessed that he has no confidence in his beliefs.

    He has done this by bring to the attention of his listening public the one devastating flaw in an unsupportable belief. That one flaw that Limbaugh fears is that if there is just one dissent containing truth, reason and logic from his made up, contrived and invented ideology, it is such a danger to his beliefs that he will be exposed as a faker and his whole, fake ideological empire will be destroyed.

    This fear of dissent and the need for unanimous agreement is the defining characteristic of unfounded, untrue beliefs and ideologies. Everyone must agree with them or their untruth will be exposed. Those who are confident in their knowledge of the facts and the truth have no fear of being exposed as believing in the false. Their knowledge of the truth will always be supported by the evidence.

    That's why Limbaugh must have everyone agree with him, because that is the only support he can get for his unsupportable beliefs. The essence of Limbaugh's quest for unanimity is that those who don't know must have no disagreement with their lack of knowledge, while those who know have no fear of and know that the truth cannot be affected by dissent.

    Limbaugh, in his ignorance, doesn't understand that agreement, even unanimous agreement, is not evidence and is not proof of anything that he might choose to believe.

    That's why Limbaugh has confessed that his beliefs are unsupportable, by actually admitting that the only support he can get is by having no one disagree with him.

    Joe McCarthy died in alcoholic obscurity as a result of Joseph Welch's questions. Joseph Welch's questions to McCarthy are no less appropriate when, at last, they are addressed to Rush Limbaugh. The appropriate result would be the same.

    For Whom The Bell Tolls!

    ReplyDelete
  27. trevor
    Wanted to make sure you saw this! I left this on my site but
    Thanks! I saw your comment on the scum Rove. The slimy bee hive is cocky but right.Remember the Bastard Bush gave him a Presidential pardon and that is for life. That is why he is more dangerous than ever.
    He was freed from the white House so he could pull his slimy underhanded strings on the sly and do his dirty work against our nominee. Just keep an eye on all this it is going to get bad!

    ReplyDelete
  28. LARRY - this Rush Limbaugh article is FASCINATING!! Is it true? Did he really admit this?

    If so, let's get this out there.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I heard obama was interview for the military times and mccain is attacking him for it

    ReplyDelete
  30. Lydia, of course not.

    The whole article is contrived.

    First, since the CIA released the venona papers in 1999 we KNOW McCarthy was telling the truth, and EVERYONE he accused was at least in communication with communist agents if they weren't ones personally. So no "innocent lives" destroyed there.

    Second, have you heard they just transferred 550 metric tons of yellowcake out of Iraq? So much for no WMD's or the capacity to make them.

    And lastly Limbaugh has ALWAYS said he won't quit until everyone agrees with him. He KNOWS that will never happen. It's just his way of saying he'll never quit.

    ReplyDelete
  31. At the risk of being labeled, an insurrectionist, I have to say that Obama, has currently lost my financial support, due to a series of recent shifts, modifications and out and out reverses on important policy decisions.

    I will be writing an article in my blog about this shortly, but I wanted to invite anyone here who is sick of parroting party lines, to hold Obama to the same level of accountability that we have all held Bush to for the last 7 and a half years.

    And its not just me, or the MSM seeing this. Its strong, liberal activists, like Arrinna Huffington, Keith Olberman, and others, who are warning Obama, that a adopting the programs, strategies and language of the Bush administration is not going to earn him their support, or their votes.

    If we want Obama to be the kind of president we want him to be, then his supporters need to start holding him accountable.

    Otherwise all we're going to end up with , is Bush lite.

    :|

    And I hate lite beer.

    Sorry to interupt.

    As you were.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Oh and don't let Voltron Buffalo you with that yellowcake crap.

    We knew the Yellow cake was there for years. The deal to sell it to Canada has been in the works for a while. Its yellowcake used for nuclear power, not bombs, which is why Canada is buying it for their nuclear power program.

    Yellowcake is not a weapon of mass destruction. And that yellowcake, could not be directly used to make one, without some very advanced science and facilities, and even then, not directly.

    ReplyDelete
  33. This god damn war was based on on pack of lies just like the lies you spew for your evil masters voltron.........its pathetic that gutless cowards like you are still trying to justify this infamous pathetic and illegal war of aggression and grab for power and try to put lipstick on the pig of a legacy that will be that treasonous benedict arnolds aka bush.

    you and your kind make me sick voltron.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Is the bush admin such a train wreck, they have stooped to clowns like this to deliver their propaganda bullsh*t .....

    Dana Milbank: Economic Anxiety Disorder or One Nervous Bushie

    and yes you have to watch that lousy commercial first.

    ReplyDelete
  35. I very seldom post but I must say these obsessed war mongers cant let this go.The truth is a foreign language to them.

    ReplyDelete
  36. I hear ya cowboy, i seldom post either, but its like these warmongering conservative punks havent learned a damn thing from the disaster that was vietnam.

    these little punks need to get their asses over there then see how much they love war when they got a gun in their hands.

    whats sad is the democrats dont have it together any more now than they did in the sixties.

    ReplyDelete
  37. regarding that yellowcake load of crap, yellowcake is not wmd, yellowcake is like saltpeter, charcoal or sulpher it can be the precursors to weapons or energy production, just like charcoal can be used to make gun powder or to grill burgers.

    things arent as black and white as you conservatives like to make them, i used to make gun powder when i was a youngster, i currently reside in montana and florida and i still occasionally handload, which even though i am firm anti war liberal exposes your sweeping generalizations as the crappy self serving propaganda it is.

    Now i dont know all that much about wmd, but i do know that centrifuges are required to make yellowcake into wmd, after all that is what all the sceeching and ranting from the bush war pigs to attack iran seems to be about.

    ReplyDelete
  38. As for the dumb right wing screeching about yellow cake and Iraq;

    From the IAEA's Iraq Nuclear Verification Office

    Indigenous production and overt procurement of uranium compounds

    * Imported 4,006 kg of natural uranium and 6,005 kg of depleted uranium (DU) from Italy in 1979
    * Imported 1,767 kg low enriched uranium (LEU) from Italy in 1982
    * Imported almost 50 kg of highly enriched uranium (HEU) from Russia and France
    * Procured 429 drums containing 138,098 kg yellowcake from Portugal in 1980
    * Procured 487 drums containing 148,348 kg yellowcake from Portugal in 1982
    * Procured 432 drums containing 137,435 kg of yellowcake from Niger in 1981
    * Procured 426 drums containing 139,409 kg of yellowcake from Niger in 1982
    * Imported 24,260 kg of uranium dioxide from Brazil between 1981-82
    * Produced 109 tonnes of uranium in 168 tonnes of yellowcake at Al Qaim uranium recovery plant, which was constructed between 1982-84
    * Produced 420 drums containing 99,457 kg uranium dioxide at Al Jesira uranium conversion facility
    * Produced UF6 at Rashdiya Engineering and Design Centre
    * Processed uranium dioxide to produce UF4, uranium metal and UF6 at Tuwaitha Chemical Laboratories
    * Processed UO2 and yellowcake to produce UO2, U3O8, UO3, UO4, UF4, and uranium metal at Tuwaitha
    * Experimental Research Laboratory for Fuel Fabrication
    * Processed UO2 to produce UCl4 at Tuwaitha Chemical Engineering Research laboratories


    No wonder Joe Wilson knew Georgie was a lyin' in his 2003 SOTU address, Iraq didn't need to buy it already held well it held with UN safeguards and no tech to refine it.

    Now why would Saddam want yellow cake up to 25 years before Bush would try to start a war over it?

    Saddam of course had a nuclear program, the one the Israelis bombed into oblivion in 1981. In 2002, he had no such program. For the minority that do take Reynold's tacked on advice to "read the whole thing" they will learn that:


    Israeli warplanes bombed a reactor project at the site in 1981. Later, U.N. inspectors documented and safeguarded the yellowcake, which had been stored in aging drums and containers since before the 1991 Gulf War. There was no evidence of any yellowcake dating from after 1991, the official said.

    (from instapundit, but NO I won't link to it.)

    If you feared that one day Saddam might possess nuclear weaponry, it wasn't a lack of uranium but a lack of technology which hindered the program, and then it was forcibly shut down. But reichwing war mongers forget that little fact in 2002 and 2003 didn't they?

    See Saddam had that yellow cake when Bush the elder allowed him to keep it, well sorta, bush 41 had the UN send in inspectors who DESTROYED all the pretty machines Saddam had assembled to enrich yellow cake, ask Scott Ritter he was there at the time and can tell you all about it

    Which is why Scott Ritter was sayin' Bush ET Al were full of SH*T at the time(2002-2003)

    Saddam had it for over a quarter of a century but without the tech to refine it, centrifuges to enrich it, (remember centrifuges, bush and the reichwing are all apesh*t about Iran's centrifuges) all he had was yellow cake but NO weapons level grade uranium.

    However reich wing liars like Voltron, among others will continue to LIE about this and most everything else.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Larry, that WAS a GREAT article on limpbaugh!

    ReplyDelete
  40. Trevor said...
    I saw at daily kos that Rove said he was above law and didnt have to testify before congress"


    He DOES seem to think that Trevor.........lets hope he's wrong as usual!

    ReplyDelete
  41. BARTLEBEE said...
    At the risk of being labeled, an insurrectionist, I have to say that Obama, has currently lost my financial support, due to a series of recent shifts, modifications and out and out reverses on important policy decisions."

    Well Bart, i dont like his cowardly pandering to the Reich Wing either, particularly on FISA, on wearing a lapel pin to appease the PHONY patriots.......i also dont like how he is dancing to McSame's tune and not pushing the issues........he is allowing McSame to paint him as an elitist tax increaser that is against drilling.....and i think its a mistake.

    I havent contributed to his campaign in a few months for the same reason plus i wanted to be sure he won the primary..........bottom line he is saying what he thinks he needs to, to get elected......i dont like it or think its right or even neccessary.......but we still need him to win.......whats the alternative letting McSame stack SCOTUS with freedom hating goosestepping fascists.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Oh look Volt is STILL trying to justify the illegal invasin of iraq based on MORE Reich wing lies spin and BS..............kinda funny how you say you dont defend the treasonous loser then proceed to spin like a top all day defending him and his criminal policies.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Mike I posted a little truth for him, some from my post here but funniest of all this quote;

    clif said...

    BTW this is from the Fox news story dolt;

    Israeli warplanes bombed a reactor project at the site in 1981. Later, U.N. inspectors documented and safeguarded the yellowcake, which had been stored in aging drums and containers since before the 1991 Gulf War. There was no evidence of any yellowcake dating from after 1991, the official said.

    Even fox says it ain't nothing from when Georgie lied about.

    July 6, 2008 10:18 PM

    The widdle id-jet it seems doesn't even READ what he quotes from.

    ReplyDelete
  44. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

    Clif, didnt the lying welshing troll tex also try to dig up and recycle a decades old story to misrepresent the facts and justify the Reich Wing's lies.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Yes mike, but that welsh slunk off into the nether-lands after getting handed his ass over his lying about a bet he lost and realizing just how dumb he looked after the results of Nov 2006 became known, sorta like freedum fraud did also.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Well I guess at least some of the the trolls have enough pride to go hide their head in the sand and not show their stupid faces out of embarrassment.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Yea mike, but not all of them have a sock puppet like dolt uses crusty, to follow him around the tubes and defend him (if that is what you could call the ignorant rants crusty tries to inflict, crusty reminds me of the dumber of the good cop-bad cop routine .... )

    Have you ever noticed, crusty ALWAYS appears, after dolt gets handed his sorry ass, ONE MORE TIME?

    ReplyDelete
  48. Hi Lydia!

    Isn't it pitiful how these losers living in their mom's basements still support these war criminals and defend the war and Constitutional infringements of a failed presidency.

    One positive point we need to look at is that the Conservatives used to own the military vote, it used to be a given, not only have the Conservatives lost the military vote, but they have lost the largest generation since the Baby Boomers, my generation for good.

    Picture the Conventions this fall, one will be like a rock concert with 70,000 screaming enthusiastic people, the other will look like a funeral with 3000 or so old people who look like they are in mourning because the Republican Revolution is dead.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Look Bartlebee, I feel your pain bro, I dont like Obama caving in on key issues or pandering to the "Wrong" Wing, but what the hell type of options do you have, you gonna vote for Mcain or straddle the fence and let him use my generation as cannon fodder in the Republicans neverending wars, or stack the courts with loonies for 40 years.

    You cant straddle the fence on this one bro, or your gonna get your balls busted and our country will be ruined.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Thanks Sara and Jimmy.. Welcome

    ReplyDelete
  51. Somebody ought to tell St johnny the delusional that the Iraqis really don't want us there for 100 years in fact they really want us to get the hell out of THEIR country we illegally invaded in 2003.

    Iraq raises prospect of US withdrawal timetable

    Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki raised the prospect on Monday of setting a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops as part of negotiations over a new security agreement with Washington.

    It was the first time the U.S.-backed Shi'ite-led government has floated the idea of a timetable for the removal of American forces from Iraq. The Bush administration has always opposed such a move, saying it would give militant groups an advantage.

    In a statement, Maliki's office said the prime minister made the comments about the security pact -- which will replace a U.N. mandate for the presence of U.S. troops that expires on December 31 -- to Arab ambassadors in the United Arab Emirates.

    "In all cases, the basis for any agreement will be respect for the full sovereignty of Iraq," the statement quoted Maliki as saying.

    "The current trend is to reach an agreement on a memorandum of understanding either for the departure of the forces or a memorandum of understanding to put a timetable on their withdrawal."

    It said Maliki, who is on an official visit to the United Arab Emirates, was responding to questions from the ambassadors about the security talks with the United States.

    U.S. officials in Baghdad had no immediate comment. Last month Maliki appeared to catch Washington off guard when he said talks on the security deal were at a "dead end". Both sides later said progress was being made.

    Maliki, dismissed as weak and ineffective for most of his tenure since taking over as prime minister in May 2006, has been increasingly assertive in recent months.

    He has launched crackdowns on Shi'ite militias and also al Qaeda militants, with U.S. forces playing a mainly supporting role.

    He has also called on Arab states to re-engage with Iraq.

    Sunni Arab countries have long been reluctant to extend full legitimacy to the Iraqi government because of the U.S. presence, as well as Baghdad's close ties to non-Arab, Shi'ite Iran.

    But Arab ties have begun to improve.



    Damn he is more an Arab then a neo-con punk after all .......

    I guess McSame ain't gonna hear this one either,

    and Murdoch's dishonest press outlets will brand him as a surrender monkey also ....

    after all it is how gutless chicken hawks fight wars,

    check out how Dolty boy lies about the non-existent 2000-2002 purchases of yellow cake from Niger,

    the Iraqis got that yellow cake in 1981-82 while Saddam was Reagan's best friend fighting Iran FOR Reagan like chicken hawks always do let somebody fight THEIR wars.


    I guess Forest Gump was right after all, a chicken hawk is as a gutless reichwinger does.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Hey guys get the popcorn ready, the numbskull reichwingers are gonna try and TELL McSame how to write the reichwing plank he is gonna campaign on;

    Conservatives don't want McCain input on GOP platform

    damn even the title is funny,

    the reichwingers seem to forget McSame won the RIGHT to decide what he runs on .... damn they really are wanna be fascists after all.

    All the blather over the democratic primary, this will be the real political fight this year,

    whether the republicans continue their FAILED path on failed policies or they actually remove their heads from their rectums and change.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Zogby: Obma Leads in Electoral College 273-158;
    Barr Badly Hurting McCain




    Zogby Poll: Building Mo-bama! Democrat Leads McCain in Electoral College Tally, 273-158

    The Democrat also leads 44% to 38% in the nationwide horserace test as Libertarian Bob Barr wins 6%

    UTICA, New York – As the race for President passes the Independence Day holiday and heads toward the dog days of summer, Sen. Barack Obama holds a 44% to 38% lead over Sen. John McCain in the horserace contest, but also leads by a substantial margin in a state-by-state Electoral College tally, a new Zogby Interactive poll shows.

    The extensive national poll of of 46,274 likely voters also shows Libertarian candidate and former Congressman Bob Barr wins 6% support, eating into McCain’s needed conservative base of support.

    The online survey was conducted from June 11-30, 2008. It carries a margin of error of 0.5 percentage points. After nearly a decade in development, the Zogby Interactive survey on a state level was remarkably accurate in the 2006 midterm elections. In 18 U.S. Senate elections polled two years ago, the Zogby online survey correctly identified the winner of 17 of 18 races, and in the 18th race – in Missouri, it was still within the margin of error, though it had Republican Jim Talent winning (he was defeated narrowly by Democrat Claire McCaskill).

    Zogby’s Electoral College Count


    7-7-2008

    Obama: 273

    McCain: 158

    Undecided: 105

    This latest extensive survey of all 50 states reveals that while Obama holds a narrow lead in the national preference test, he holds a substantial advantage right now in the Electoral College. Using this survey - and an average of other public state polls in certain states to corroborate the Zogby results – Zogby calculates that Obama leads McCain, 273-158. A total of 11 states with 105 electoral votes are within the margin of error and therefore too close to call. A candidate needs 270 to be elected President.

    Neither Obama nor McCain breaks a 50% favorable rating. Obama is viewed as very or somewhat favorable by 49.7%. For McCain, that number is 43.2%.

    Pollster John Zogby: “Obama is in the driver’s seat right now, especially where it really counts - in the electoral votes. Bob Barr could really hurt McCain’s chances. McCain can’t afford the level of slippage to Barr we found among conservatives in this polling. While there has been plenty of talk about Obama’s recent emphasis on his centrist positions, he can get away with it during these dog days of the campaign as McCain finds himself still trying to shore up the conservative base. McCain will have to move to the center because right now Obama is clobbering him among independents. But there is the rub for McCain: Bob Barr has some juice among conservatives and is hurting him in several states.

    Bob Barr receives the support of 7% of voters who identify themselves as conservative or very conservative voters. Barr gets 43% of libertarians and 11% of independents. McCain’s support among conservatives is 74%. On the left, Ralph Nader gets less than 2% nationally.

    Obama has the support of 83% of Democrats, while McCain gets 75% of Republicans.

    Independents break 39% for Obama, compared with 31% who support McCain.

    For white voters, race doesn’t appear to be playing a significant factor. McCain leads Obama, 43%-39%, with Barr at 6%. Among black voters, Obama wins the vast majority of support.


    Obama: 273

    Just so's the trolls understand, boys it takes 270 electoral votes to win the White House, and Obama seems to have at least 273 rapped up ........

    No Florida or Ohio hi-jinks this time boys .... enjoy.

    and this is all before the MSM starts tellin' the real truth about the dishonest flip-floppin' McSame.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Oh and BTW boys read fivethirtheight for more understanding why this time the crimes of diebold, Kathrine Harris or Kenneth Blackweell won't help ya ...............

    they hold the current election to be;

    Obama 309 electoral votes and McSame 229 .... not close enuf to steal this time.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Did anyone hear our amazing show this morning? We had congresswoman Carolyn Maloney and her new book RUMORS OF OUR PROGRESS HAVE BEEN GREATLY EXAGGERATED... Why Women's Lives Are Not getting better
    She discusses the American sex slave trade, the health care system, the ERA (non-existent because of Republicans...)

    ReplyDelete
  56. One more thing regarding Obama, i personally dont like his stance on nuclear power as well as his stance on FISA or wearing a lapel pin........I think we need to build as many nuclear reactors as we can along with a huge push for solar and wind.........virtually ALL of our electricity should be coming from wind, solar and nuclear by 2020, that would free up electricity and natural gas to power our transportation needs and vastly reduce our reliance on imported oil.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Mike said..

    Well Bart, i dont like his cowardly pandering to the Reich Wing either

    Well put.

    Because thats what it is, "pandering to the reich wing".

    ReplyDelete
  58. Lydia said...

    RELAX...IT'S ALL GOING TO BE OKAY * AND STOP TEARING DOWN OBAMA




    Excuse me, but how exactly is holding our candidate to the same standards we hold the opposition, "tearing him down"?

    We have spent years holding the right wing to a very high standard, pouncing on each and everything they say.

    How is it then, that we have become complacent at the notion that we should not at least hold our own candidate accountable when obvious position shifts are occuring?

    ReplyDelete
  59. Lydia said..


    But regarding Obama's "Faith Based Initiatives" — please give this a chance.




    You're kidding, right?

    First, they're not "Obama's Faith Based Initiatives".

    They're Bush's.

    And second, is this not the same blog I spent years in where we ALL decried Bush for these constitutionally flawed programs, that re-mingle Church and State?

    Is this the Lydia Cornell who was so adament about Bush's crimes in mixing Church and State, or has someone taken over her body?

    ReplyDelete
  60. :|

    Red Rover, Red Rover, send Lydia right over.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Something weirds happening to the "progressive" party.

    Every day they sound more and more like the neocons who we used to attack for making similar statements.

    In the past two weeks, I've been banned from two progressive blogs, merely for voicing concerns over Obama's apparent "flip flops" on several key issues, which ironically he has put out there over the past two weeks.

    In the past two weeks, Obama's gone from being the ultimate candidate, to what appears to be "Bush Lite".

    Examples?

    1. Voting for FISA immunity for the telecoms

    2. Wearing flag pins and cowboy hats (to look more like Bush)when he said he would not wear the flag pin.

    3. Parroting word for word the Bush administrations patent excuse for not leaving Iraq; "I'll listen to the commanders on the ground"

    4. Declaring he would not only extend Bush's unconstitutional program called "Faith Based Initiatives", but he would "EXPAND" it.

    These are just some of the issues that have made Obama seem more like a Bush Lite than a premium brew, and they all happened over the last 2 weeks, (right about the time the clinton camp got involved).

    I'm not sure whats going on, but it is NOT a progressive virtue to hold the oppositions candidate to a high standard, and wear blinders when it comes to our own.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Churches are already tax exempt.

    Establishing laws that mingle church and state, are about as unAmerican, and as far from the framers intent than anything I could ever think of.

    Regardless of the "safeguards" put in place, they will ultimately be abused, and severely, as we've seen over the past 7 years, just like the tax exempt status is now so widely abused that all I have to do to stop paying income tax is fill out an add in the back of a comic book, wait for my "ordination" certificate to arrive and thus declare my house a "church" and me its pastor. So I won't have to pay taxes ever again.

    Faith Based Initiatives made everyone here, including you Lydia, cringe. We all decried them for years.

    So how is it, now that Obama's embracing them, that they're suddenly "ok"?

    Hint.... they're not.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Part of being "progressive" means holding our OWN candidate, to the same standards we hold the opposition candidate to.

    Otherwise, we're just a bunch of partisan hacks.

    ReplyDelete
  64. We should never be so afraid of losing elections, that we're afraid of the issues.

    Otherwise, our candidates have no incentive to actually hold true to their promises, and the issues we all put forth.

    If our candidate knows that we'll vote for them, and give them money, just to keep the other guy from winning, then we've already lost.

    ReplyDelete
  65. “Listen up. Our ground game isn’t working.

    We’re going to put the ball in the air.

    If we’re going to walk into walls, I want us running into ‘em FULL speed.

    We’re going to lose some of these battles. We might even lose the White House.

    But we’re not going to be threatened by the issues.

    We’re going to put them front and center.

    We’re going to raise the level of public debate in this country.

    And let THAT be our legacy.”


    Leo McGarry,
    (The late great John Spencer)
    The West Wing
    Episode 19, “Let Bartlet be Bartlet

    ReplyDelete
  66. Bart you either don't hear well or you want to create controversy here where there is none,

    3. Parroting word for word the Bush administrations patent excuse for not leaving Iraq; "I'll listen to the commanders on the ground"

    OBAMA HAS CONSISTENTLY SAID HE WILL LISTEN TO COMMANDERS ON THE GROUND IN IRAQ


    June 2008: Obama: I've Consistently Said That I Will Consult With Military Commanders On The Ground And Be Open To The Possibility Of Tactical Adjustments. Obama said, "I've also consistently said that I will consult with military commanders on the ground and that we will always be open to the possibility of tactical adjustments. The important thing is to send a clear signal to the Iraqi people and most importantly to the Iraqi leadership that the U.S. occupation in Iraq is finite, it is gonna be coming to a foreseeable end." [MSNBC, 6/16/08]

    March 2008: Obama Said He Would Give Senior Military Leaders Opinions Great Weight In Implementing His Iraq Plan But As Commander In Chief Would Make His Own Assessment Of The Situation. Obama was asked "what weight will you give to the counsel of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, the CENTCOM [U.S. Central Command] commander, the combatant commander on the ground in Iraq and current intelligence chiefs on the ground in Iraq regarding an immediate phased withdrawal?" Obama said, "I will give their counsel great weight. But, as commander in chief, it is my responsibility to make my own assessment of the situation. We must send a clear signal to the Iraqi political leadership that we are leaving Iraq on a timeline. Doing so will put pressure on those leaders to begin to resolve the political impasse at the heart of this civil war. But I also want to be clear about another thing. I am worried our Army is overstretched and that we have asked an awful lot from our military families. Many in our senior military leadership are worried about a plan that will keep 130,000 troops on the ground in Iraq for the foreseeable future. So, as commander in chief, I will also have to take into consideration the counsel of other senior military leaders who may be concerned that Iraq is undercutting our ability to confront other security challenges." [Washington Post, 3/2/08]

    March 2008: Obama Said The Size Of The Residual Force Will Depend On Consultation With Military Commanders And "Will Depend On The Circumstances On The Ground." Obama said, "The precise size of the residual force will depend on consultations with our military commanders and will depend on the circumstances on the ground, including the willingness of the Iraqi government to move toward political accommodation. But let me be clear on one thing: I will end this war, and there will be far fewer Americans in Iraq conducting a much more limited set of missions that include counterterrorism and protection of our embassy and U.S. civilians." [Washington Post, 3/2/08]

    November 2007: Obama Said He Would Leave Residual Troops In Iraq Based On The Levels Of Violence, "It's Not My Job To Specify Troop Levels." Obama said, "If we see a serious effort by the Iraqi leadership to arrive at an agreement and an accommodation and you've seen continued reductions of violence, then you need one level of troop protection for the embassy…If things have gone to hell in a hand basket then you need another ... It's not my job to specify troop levels. My job is to tell our commanders on the ground, 'Here's your mission. Protect our embassy, protect our diplomats and our humanitarian workers in the area and make sure al Qaeda in Iraq, or other terrorist organizations inside of Iraq are not re-establishing bases there." [Fosters, 11/28/07]

    November 2007: Obama Said U.S. Has To Make Sure "We Are Not Just Willy-Nilly Removing Troops" And That It May "Take A Little Bit Longer" In Some Areas Where There Is Less Stability. "According to all the reports, we should have been well along our way in getting the Iraqi security forces to be more functional. We then have another 16 months after that to adjust the withdrawal and make sure that we are withdrawing from those areas, based on advice from the military officers in the field, those places where we are secured, made progress and we're not just willy-nilly removing troops, but we're making a determination – in this region we see some stability. We've had cooperation from local tribal leaders and local officials, so we can afford to remove troops here. Here, we've still got problems, it's going to take a little bit longer. Maybe those are the last areas to pull out." [New York Times, 11/1/07]

    November 2007: Obama: "If The Commanders Tell Me They Need X, Y And Z, In Order To Accomplish The Very Narrow Mission That I've Laid Out, Than I Will Take That Into Consideration." "You raise a series of legitimate questions. As commander in chief, I'm not going to leave trainers unprotected. In our counterterrorism efforts, I'm not going to have a situation where our efforts can't be successful. We will structure those forces so they can be successful. We would still have human intelligence capabilities on the ground. Some of them would be civilian, as opposed to military, some would be operating out of our bases as well as our signal intelligence…But listen, I am not going to set up our troops for failure and I'm going to do something half-baked. If the commanders tell me that they need X, Y and Z, in order to accomplish the very narrow mission that I've laid out, than I will take that into consideration." [New York Times, 11/1/07]

    November 2007: Obama: "Even Something As Simple As Protecting Our Embassy Is Going To Dependent On What Is The Security In Baghdad…If There Is Some Sense Of Security, Then That Means One Level Of Force. If You Continue To Have Significant Sectarian Conflict, That Means Another." "I have not ascribed particular numbers to that and I won't for precisely the reason I was just talking to Michael about. I want to talk to military folks on the ground, No. 1. No. 2, a lot of it depends on what's happened on the political front and the diplomatic front. Even something as simple as protecting our embassy is going to be dependent on what is the security environment in Baghdad. If there is some sense of security, then that means one level of force. If you continue to have significant sectarian conflict, that means another, but this is an area where Senator Clinton and I do have a significant contrast." [New York Times, 11/1/07]

    September 2007: Obama Said He Believed "That We Should Have All Our Troops Out By 2013, But I Don't Want To Make Promises." Obama said, "I think it's hard to project four years from now, and I think it would be irresponsible. We don't know what contingency will be out there. What I can promise is that if there are still troops in Iraq when I take office -- which it appears there may be, unless we can get of our Republican colleagues to change their mind and cut off funding without a timetable -- if there's no timetable -- then I will drastically reduce our presence there to the mission of protecting our embassy, protecting our civilians, and making sure that we're carrying out counterterrorism activities there. I believe that we should have all our troops out by 2013, but I don't want to make promises, not knowing what the situation's going to be three or four years out." [NH DNC Debate, 9/26/07]


    McSame wishes he was THAT consistent.

    BTW as a former military officer I would have a BIG problem if he wasn't willing to listen to the commanders on the ground.

    I just DO NOT want him to do a Bush and USE that phrase to hide behind, however his second press conference he said;

    "I will change the mission to ending the war."

    Did you miss that part,

    Then he said listen to the commanders on the ground for tactical advice, NOT using the term to hide behind a failed strategy, like Bush does.


    Lincoln listened to his commanders but when they failed he replaced them until he got people who could succeed.

    Wilson listened to Pershing,

    FDR listened to Marshall, Eisenhower, and Macarthur,

    Truman listened to Ridgway and Macarthur, then fired him for failing to follow the orders of the Commander in chief,

    Eisenhower listened to Clark,

    Johnson unfortunately listened to Westmoreland (read the pentagon papers),

    Nixon I hope listened to Abrams but it seems Kissinger had other ideas anyway,


    Bush 41 listened to Schwartzkopf for advice,


    and commander in chief who doesn't listen to the commanders on the ground when they are thousands of miles away are as stupid Bush ET Al were for refusing to accept the tactical plan before Rumsfeld got his incompetent hands on it.

    and advise from Gen Zinni, Shinseki, and even generals in Iraq in the first year when L Paul Bremer was doing so many things wrong.

    Or as stupid as Bush was in Afghanistan in Dec 2001 when Bin forgotten was trapped in Tora Bora and Bush refused 500 rangers to lock the door and capture him.


    Bart the flip flop by Obama on Iraq is a media creation and nothing more.

    I agree with you about FISA,

    The rest I am more ambivalent because many many times in the past the US government have used separate arms of religious organizations to help the poor and in emergencies; but with out the right wing over lay of conversion to jebus before help (which is the layer Bush allowed right wingers to put on it.)

    BTW the flag pin argument is just plain dumb from every angle.

    We have so many problems that whether somebody wears a made in china piece of jewelry or not IS NOT an issue that requires key strokes.

    If the debt, war, energy crisis, global warming, crumbling middle class, poverty, health care and Washington is cleaned up from the past eight years, then I'm willing to think it should be a campaign issue, from any side.

    ReplyDelete
  67. John McSame the ultimate hypocrite;

    McCain took Congress to task for taking a July 4 recess without completing action on a housing rescue plan, calling it "incredible that Congress should go on vacation while Americans are trying to stay in their homes.

    Oh and BTW the last time St Johnny decided to show up to his day job was;

    April 8th.

    McCain had missed 367 votes (61.4% of the total) during the 110th Congress.

    McSame's the Senate's top absentee, passing Democratic Senator Tim Johnson of North Dakota, who suffered a brain hemorrhage in December 2006 and was unable to return to the Senate until last fall, in terms of votes missed.

    He's decrying the rest of his co-workers taking the Fourth of July weekend off?

    What a freakin' hypocrite.

    ReplyDelete
  68. The tobacco companies have been wildly successful in convincing young girls that cigarettes equate to independence, which is about as perverse a twist oon things as I've ever seen.

    If our educational system had spent even half the money the tobacco companies spent on empowerment campaigns, I wonder how much progress women might have made?

    ReplyDelete
  69. doltron lied yet AGAIN,

    First, since the CIA released the venona papers in 1999 we KNOW McCarthy was telling the truth, and EVERYONE he accused was at least in communication with communist agents if they weren't ones personally. So no "innocent lives" destroyed there.


    Even high schoolers know this is bullshit. Have you no self-respect, sir?

    ReplyDelete
  70. Clif said,

    I just DO NOT want him to do a Bush and USE that phrase to hide behind, however his second press conference he said;

    "I will change the mission to ending the war."

    Did you miss that part,


    No, I didn't miss it.

    What I am looking at is the phrasing of it.

    You quote him in March, and April, but notice the wording?

    Its changed.

    Before, he was careful to not sound as if he was parroting Bush.

    Now, its seems he WANTS to parrot Bush.

    Bush;
    "I will listen to the generals on the ground"

    Obama last week

    "I will listen to the commanders on the ground"

    ReplyDelete
  71. Let's get rid of yet another doltron lie while we're at it...

    The Tuwaitha nuclear complex was dismantled after the 1991 Gulf War. But tonnes of nuclear material remained there under the seal of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), until the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq when it was left unguarded and looted by Iraqi civilians.

    Yep. WE set up a potential free-for-all with some very dangerous stuff. Stuff we KNEW was there, and KNEW was under seal.

    Now please, dolty, get it straight next time.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Now, that being said, I do understand he's qualified that with his determination to end the war.

    And he still has his 16 month plan on his website.

    But notice, when he qualified that statement, he what he didn't say? He didn't mention his 16 month plan.

    Its that, what he didn't say, while at the same time now "Parroting" the Bush line of "listening to the commanders on the ground" thats worried me, and others.

    ReplyDelete
  73. If he was committed to this 16 month plan, then why isn't he saying it?

    Sure, its on his website, and that does give me comfort, but why not state it when he's trying to sound like Bush?

    One possible reason is because he doesn't want the sound bite, to...well.... "bite him"... down the road.

    Which means he may be already backsliding on that commitment.

    After all, a comment on his website can be changed anytime.

    But a soundbite lasts forever.

    ReplyDelete
  74. And as for not wanting a president who would not listen to the generals on the ground, well of COURSE he has to listen to the generals. Thats a given. He doesn't have to follow their advice but he does need to listen to it. Its not something he needed to say. No one doubted that.

    He said it in such a way as to sound like Bush, or at least so it would seem.

    For example, keep in mind that at the same time he said that stuff using the language of Bush, something he's never done, he is also strutting around Montana, (a state with 3 electoral votes) wearing Cowboy hats, Flag Pins and eating steaks, while declaring he loves Bush's mingling of Church and State plan so much, that not only will he KEEP it once he's president, but that he will EXPAND it.


    You can label me deaf, or stupid if you like, but I'm only stating what I am seeing from him.

    And I did NOT say he flip flopped on Iraq. He seems to be "softening" his position, not reversing it.

    It seems as if he's preparing for the possibility of a longer stay than the 16 month promise he made.

    And it seems as if he' doing that, along with other thing, to try to look and sound more like Bush.

    ReplyDelete
  75. I mean, wearing a Cowboy hat on the 4th of July, in "MONTANA", AND a flag pin (but no tie) while eating steak and declaring his love for Bush's constitutionl nightmare program, "Faith Based Initiatives"?

    I don't think I'm being unreasonable in at last questioning his motive, and action.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Bart just to let you know .... every military plan changed once factors on the ground were encountered.

    Every plan, no excemptions;

    Those that refused to adapt to factors on the ground .... LOST. (ask Westmoreland about those pesky factors he could never overcome even with distorted reports to Washington claiming wins he really didn't have)

    History is clogged with examples of those who refused to allow for factors on the ground,

    so a concrete 16 month timetable is NOT including factors on the ground,

    what is Obama supposed to do when a 4 star general tells him we can't safely do 16 months Mr president, but we can do 18 months safely for the US troops?

    I want the War ended quickly but I want it ended as safe for the troops as possible.

    ReplyDelete
  77. And the fact that I am questioning these things, does not mean I'm "against him", as I've been labeled now in two progressive blogs.

    To me, holding our leaders accountable is a progressive principal that is not limited to merely holding the opposition leaders accountable.

    If anything it should apply more to our own.

    ReplyDelete
  78. I also am not saying don't vote for him. I am saying hold him accountable.

    One way, is to do like I did, and stop sending him money, and instead send him a note that says "this could have been a donation check, but for these issues".

    Obviously we'll never have a candidate who does everything we want the way we want.

    But some of these decisions are almost a slap in the face to us.

    FISA? Telecom immunity? Close the books on the Bush years and let them get on with their lives?

    I mean come on.

    This is a little difficult to swallow. The FISA bill was real. And he blew it. And in doing so he used the "fear tactics" about "protecting Americans" that Bush has used for the last 7 years.

    I 'HOPE' I am wrong about his motives recently, and honestly I don't think its him. I think its David Axelrod, and Susan Rice, and his other "handlers" making this milktoast decisions for him.

    So hopefully, he'll get the message and either fire them or tell them to reign it in.

    But he can't get the message if his followers are too busy defending EVERYTHING he says.

    He won't get the message, if we won't send it.

    The message?

    "Let Obama be Obama"

    ReplyDelete
  79. BTW religious groups have gotten public funding to help the poor for quite a while;

    and I would have NO problem if somebody like Jim Wallis was running such a program for an Obama Admin.

    I don't want to discriminate against religious groups if they really wanted to help the poor or help in emergencies, just that they follow the laws and NOT be allowed force anybody to do things that US US laws or the constitution say they don't have to do to get the help.

    I have no problem if the law is followed and groups like the Salvation Army or Catholic Charities is involved, just NOT the front groups supporters of Bush run.

    ReplyDelete
  80. BTW I agree on the FISA bill and anm waiting to see just how Obama ACTS, not the words of thousands of different people on the web each with their own agenda as to why they claim he is doing something they disagree with, which is what is happening now with the brain dead MSM spinnin' as fast as they can FOR McCain on many issues .....

    ReplyDelete
  81. The A for one is now basically Faux Noise lite because of how it spins so much in its wire stories.

    and the Washington Post is soon to be run by a former Wall Street Journal editor which Murdoch found NOT slimy enuf to run that rag for him.

    just like ABC-Disney ran that fairy tale path to 9-11 the MSM spins lies as fast as they can for their corporate masters.

    ReplyDelete
  82. But on Iraq, I am hoping you're right.

    After all, he has the same 16 month plan on his website, which does give me hope.

    But his refusal to comment on it on camera recently is troubling.

    Why?

    Because of something you left out in your assessment of his statements on Iraq.

    That last comment, in June, was in response to a reporter who had asked him about his 16 month plan, and if he still intended to stick to it.

    THATS when he responded, like Bush, by saying "I'll listen to the generals on the ground".

    So when you take into context the QUESTION that was being asked, it suddenly shines a new light on that statement.

    Not ONLY did it parrot Bush's famous cop out statement for keeping us there, but it also AVOIDED confirming that he intended to keep his 16 month plan for withdrawal.

    Like he didn't want the soundbite to come back and bite him on the ass down the road should he not be able to follow through on his 16 month promise.

    ReplyDelete
  83. I just put much less faith in the MSM since they rolled over for Bush in 2000 ... and refused to question his inactions about the bombing of the Cole after the FBI told HIS Admin Bin Laden was behind it.

    Not to mention their never asking any real questions like good propagandists in the run up to the war Crimes Bush ET Al have committed by invading Iraq.

    ReplyDelete
  84. clif said...
    BTW religious groups have gotten public funding to help the poor for quite a while;


    Yes, It called Tax Exemption.

    And its been abused beyond belief.

    And whats happening now, is not just some help.

    The Faith Based Initiatives program, essentially creates a division of the Federal Govt that is tied to the Churches.

    THAT is against ANYTHING the framers had in mind.

    And we should all be terrified by it.

    ReplyDelete
  85. Bart would YOU have him stick to a campaign promise of getting all troops OUT in exactly 16 months, IF it meant some were in a very precarious situation where waiting for what ever the generals who know better say they need to safely remove all troops safely?

    Obama needs the ability to modify a plan made when he didn't get all intell like he will get as president,

    expecting him NOT to change is sorta like the reichwing expects reality to bend their way just because Jebus said so.

    ReplyDelete
  86. Well Bart we just disagree on that issue, but I ain't gonna spend three days arguing with you about it.

    ReplyDelete
  87. And its already been abused horribly, giving preference to only Christian faiths, and then only "preferred" sects within those.

    Its a presecription for disaster, and it goes against the very foundations of our constitution, and in fact, one of the reasons America is here. (the escape of religious persecution was PIVOTAL to the foundation of the Republic).

    It is UnAmerican, and it is WRONG.

    ReplyDelete
  88. Well Bart we just disagree, however I won't spend all night let alone three days arguing with you about it.

    ReplyDelete
  89. The FISA vote, and this, are my key stumbling blocks.

    The flag pin however, while not perhaps major, was to me, a "token".

    Obama made a stink about NOT wearing one.

    He said the right things, like the flag is not an "idol".

    But then, when the pressure was on, he rolled over like a dog on a waterbed.

    That was the one that first alarmed me.

    Its not a biggie. But its ugly.

    Real ugly.

    ReplyDelete
  90. Whatever, good night bart.

    ReplyDelete
  91. The flip on the flag pin says, "he can't hang on the minor issues, so what the hell is he going to do on the major ones?"

    I am concerned. Thats it. I'm not "against" him. I'm not for McCain (never in a million kazillion years).

    But I'm "worried", that we're trading one nude emperor, for another, "lite" version.

    ReplyDelete
  92. clif said...
    Well Bart we just disagree, however I won't spend all night let alone three days arguing with you about it.



    ...ooookayyyyy.... didn't plan on it either.

    :|

    And I wasn't aware simple expression of a different opinion in a political blog constituted "arguing".

    I thought we liked to debate the issues in here.

    Please don't tell me that this place also has turned into another echo chamber.

    I don't think I could handle that.

    ReplyDelete
  93. clif said...
    Clif said...

    Bart would YOU have him stick to a campaign promise of getting all troops OUT in exactly 16 months, IF it meant some were in a very precarious situation where waiting for what ever the generals who know better say they need to safely remove all troops safely?


    In 16 months, not only get them out, we could build the ships they were leaving on.

    If he wants to leave, we'll leave.

    ReplyDelete
  94. BARTLEBEE said...
    And the fact that I am questioning these things, does not mean I'm "against him", as I've been labeled now in two progressive blogs.

    To me, holding our leaders accountable is a progressive principal that is not limited to merely holding the opposition leaders accountable.

    If anything it should apply more to our own."


    Look Bartlbe, there's NOTHING wrong with questioning him, i'm questioning him myself on many of those issues and i'm not happy either that he feels the needc to pander to the Reich Wing losers he stood up and opposed months ago.....all that does IMHO opinion is give weight to and validate their empty rhetoric and dishonest talking points.

    That said.........the guy NEEDS to get elected, and although i'm not completely happy with some of the things he's saying or doing and view them as cowardly pandering..............I'm willing to cut him some slack and try to keep an open mind.........obviously he feels he NEEDS to tactically neutralize the repug wedge issues like the lapel pin, Fisa and faith based initiatives.....i think he should do the same thing with drilling.

    Honestly though Bart i dont think he has changed his position on the war at all, i think it HAS been consistent........he has said from the beginning that we need to be as careful getting bout as we were foolish and reckless getting in, he has also said he will listen to his commanders on the ground.........i honestly believe he wants to end this war, you've known me for quite a while, you know how I feel about the war as well and about the spying..........i want both to end ASAP........but issuing a set in stone statement that ignores the the possible facts on the ground can be used as a wedge issue for the repugs to shriew he is inexperience and has poor judge and can only come back to bite him if it doesnt happen............look if Obama doesnt get elected and McSame wins the war will NEVER end.

    Would you rather endure a little gutless pandering to see him win or would you rather have McSame win........I dont like the faith based iinitiatives crap either.......but if neutra;izing the wedge issues of FISA, faith based inits, lapel pins, drilling, the war etc.......help put him over the top........i'm willing to live with it and give him the benefit of the doubt..........i ALWAYS give people the benefit of the doubt till they PROVE they dont deserve it

    ReplyDelete
  95. If Obama's the real McCoy, then fine. He's got my vote.

    I don't think examining exactly what he's saying however, or holding him accountable when I think he's off track, is wrong.

    On the countrary, its supposed to be what we're all about.

    Least thats what you all told the trolls for the last 4 years, that is, that we hold OUR leaders, to the same standards we hold THEIR leaders.

    Right?

    Holding our leaders accountable, and questioning their positions when they seem off base, is not just what we oughta be doing.

    Its our duty.

    ReplyDelete
  96. Mike said..

    the guy NEEDS to get elected, and although i'm not completely happy with some of the things he's saying or doing and view them as cowardly pandering..............I'm willing to cut him some slack and try to keep an open mind...

    Well so am I.

    I am keeping an open mind.

    I'm listening to your views on the matter, and trying to see it differently than I see it now.

    But do you see the kunundrum there, in what you said?

    I don't like it... but....the guy NEEDS to get elected.

    Honestly, if the groom thinks the bride will marry him whether or not he sleeps with the whores, then whats to stop him from sleeping with the whores?

    ReplyDelete
  97. And let me just clarify my last statement so it is NOT misinterpretted...........i think the lapel pin and FISA are mistakes............however i think stating point blank a specific time we will be out without knowing the facts that could happen at the time could be a serious wedge issue that could cause MANY to question Obama's judgement and cause people to view him as naive.........same for drilling this could be a wedge issue that could cause MANY rednecks and moderates to oppose or question Obama..........but i agree that the knuckle draggers that would question Obama's patriotism for not wearing a lapel pin would not vote for him anyway..........same goes for the freedom hating cowards who support FISA and the Patriot act.

    ReplyDelete
  98. If Obama thinks that no matter what positions he takes, or backpedals on, we'll all just guild it in our own minds so we can swallow it, and still give him our money and our votes, then what the hell are we doing here?


    Why is he even talking?

    Just everyone go vote for him, because at that point, the issues don't mean a thing.

    Issues, smissues... he's got the vote.

    :|

    Do you see that?

    I do, and I can't go that way.

    ReplyDelete
  99. For 4 years I've been in here, and elsewhere, decrying guys like Voltron for pulling the blinders over their faces on the issues, and whitewashing their candidates just because of partisanship.

    How in the hell then, am I supposed to sit here now, and say....."yea, flag pin,....good.....yea....telecom immunity,....close the books on it.,....let Bush go.....yea.....Faith Based Initiatives....hated them once....but I luv em now. ...?


    How am I supposed to do that exactly?

    ReplyDelete
  100. Mike said...

    however i think stating point blank a specific time we will be out without knowing the facts that could happen at the time could be a serious wedge issue that could cause MANY to question Obama's judgement

    Really?

    Then why did you like it when he said it last year?

    And why are you not decrying it now, because its on his website.

    The 16 month FIRM withdrawal plan, is right on his website.

    I have NO problem with a 16 month firm withdrawal plan.

    Our military got in there in a few weeks.

    Don't try and tell me they can't leave in a almost a YEAR AND A HALF.

    ReplyDelete
  101. Look, i'm with you on this one, your preaching to the choir........but consider this......if he DOESNT get elected and that war mongerring Neo Con idiot gets in its game over..........you know i always give people the benefit of the doubt........i judge people more by actions than words........if after being elected he proves to be Bush lite then i'll condemn him just as loudly as i did Bush and the Neo Cons........but i really think he's the real deal.........although he is a politician..........sometimes you gotta swallow your pride or sacrifice for the greater good.

    Just think if he can steal just enough of the loonnie evangelical wack jobs and a few moderates from both sides he's got it and then with Copngress and the Whitehouse firmly in the Progressive grasp he can say and do what he REALLY wants..........i'm not defending him here just trying to be open minded........dont tell me you've NEVER compromised your principles either verbally or in deed at work due to politics?

    ReplyDelete
  102. Don't try and tell me they can't leave in a almost a YEAR AND A HALF.

    Then you don't know MUCH about cleaning up a 6 year occupation where you spent over quite a few years importing things that we really don't want to leave behind and providing security PEACEFULLY as much as possible, or would you prefer we left as violently as we entered?

    ReplyDelete
  103. BARTLEBEE said...
    For 4 years I've been in here, and elsewhere, decrying guys like Voltron for pulling the blinders over their faces on the issues, and whitewashing their candidates just because of partisanship.

    How in the hell then, am I supposed to sit here now, and say....."yea, flag pin,....good.....yea....telecom immunity,....close the books on it.,....let Bush go.....yea.....Faith Based Initiatives....hated them once....but I luv em now. ...?


    How am I supposed to do that exactly?"



    Go back and read what i just said on FISA and the lapel pin..........i said they were mistakes that will only hurt his credibility and not gain him ANYTHING!

    ReplyDelete
  104. As for the rest of your putting words in our mouths sounds like your the one who changes after your little bru ha ha with Lydia, because I never said any of this;

    "yea, flag pin,....good.....yea....telecom immunity,....close the books on it.,....let Bush go.....yea.....Faith Based Initiatives....hated them once....but I luv em now. ...?

    neither did Mike so who do you CLAIM said it?

    ReplyDelete
  105. And I am going to say something here that is quite troubling to me. A phenomenom I've noticed recently.

    In blogs where I was quite popular, all of my friends have turned on me, simply because I am not willing to just fall in line on everything Obama.

    Its a strange revelation, to go into a blog where friends you've talked to for years, suddenly call you a right wing stooge, and other vicious diatribes until they run you out, simply for not towing the party line.

    This is not a comfortable, or warm sensation. On the contrary, it reeks of the sort of political censoring and partisan hatred that we decried the right for for the last 7 years.

    I'm not seeing it in here, yet. But I can't help but notice Clifs tone, in responding to me... as if to dismiss me as ignorant.

    You guys know me.

    Do you honestly think I'm an ignorant?

    Do you honestly think I'm a right wing hack?

    Its disturbing to wake up one day, and find the emporer not as well dressed as you like.

    But its more disturbing that when you bring that to your friends attention, to have them attack you as the enemy.

    Its quite disturbing. And quite illuminating.

    ReplyDelete
  106. Clif said...

    neither did Mike so who do you CLAIM said it?

    I didn't say he did Clif.


    Don't put words in my mouth, ok?

    ReplyDelete
  107. I'm not seeing it in here, yet. But I can't help but notice Clifs tone, in responding to me... as if to dismiss me as ignorant.


    Sorry BUT that is NOT what I'm sayin'

    I am asking questions BASED on what your posting and Based on both deploying AND redeploying to a combat zone.

    ReplyDelete
  108. Ok.

    Enough.

    Mike, I didn't say you did say that. I was pointing out the kunundrum of on the one hand not agreeing with those things, yet on the other hand still voting for him.

    ReplyDelete
  109. Clif said...

    neither did Mike so who do you CLAIM said it?

    I didn't say he did Clif.


    Don't put words in my mouth, ok?

    8:23 PM


    are you saying I did?

    ReplyDelete
  110. BARTLEBEE said...
    Mike said...

    however i think stating point blank a specific time we will be out without knowing the facts that could happen at the time could be a serious wedge issue that could cause MANY to question Obama's judgement

    Really?

    Then why did you like it when he said it last year?

    And why are you not decrying it now, because its on his website.

    The 16 month FIRM withdrawal plan, is right on his website.

    I have NO problem with a 16 month firm withdrawal plan.

    Our military got in there in a few weeks.

    Don't try and tell me they can't leave in a almost a YEAR AND A HALF."


    Well i like it for the same reason as you because I thought he the other candidates were ALL committed to war and he was the ONLY one committed to ending it...........consider this though what if Israel or the Neo Cons attack Iran right before the Demacratic Convention and the Iranions invade Iraq and its chaos........think how that blanket statement would make Obama look if total chaos erupted and it wass immpossible to pull out in 16 months it COULD make him look naive and inexperience and tip the election to McSame.....you can be committed to ending the war in 16 months,............but slamming your fist on the table and saying "i'm the decider and thats the way its gonna be.......regardless of the facts is acting like GWB and is a dangerous way to behave if your trying to portray yourself as the voice of reason and the one with the cool head and good judgement.

    ReplyDelete
  111. Clif said...

    I am asking questions BASED on what your posting and Based on both deploying AND redeploying to a combat zone.

    Yea?

    What "question" were you asking when you dismissed me as basically uninformed?

    What question were you asking when you accused me of arguing, and said "whatever bart" ...?

    What question did I miss?

    ReplyDelete
  112. We'll, I can see where this is going.

    This has been very illuminating for me.

    I wasn't going to come back in here, for several reasons, and now see that would have been a better plan.

    I came in, because I have SERIOUS questions on Obama's positions over the past 48 hours, and wanted some answers.

    What I am getting however, is not answers, but people desperatly trying to convince themselves that I am some sort of antagonist, and merely trying to hurt Obama's chances.

    What I am getting, is the same vicious diatribes by the other so called "progressives", who can't seem to take anyone questioning the almighty Obama.

    So, gentleman, I will repent of this sin, and bid you once more, and for the last time, adieu.

    I won't be back.

    ReplyDelete
  113. How about the EXCELLENT question Mike just asked about how the situation could change between now and November or November and April 2010?

    Bart you seem to enjoy drumming people down and i am NOT into that kind of attack even if Ou don't see it as such;

    Part of your problem at TP during your three day marathon about atheism wasn't the content of your argument BUT the way you presented it.

    and I am NOT into that

    If I offended you some way I will apologise because ain't into a TOP style disagreement because we just DISAGREE on some things.

    happens in a democracy sometimes.

    ReplyDelete
  114. You know where to find me if you want to talk Mike.

    For the rest? Enjoy the echo chamber.


    Asta La Vista.

    ReplyDelete
  115. later bart enjoy.

    ReplyDelete
  116. BARTLEBEE said...
    And I am going to say something here that is quite troubling to me. A phenomenom I've noticed recently.

    In blogs where I was quite popular, all of my friends have turned on me, simply because I am not willing to just fall in line on everything Obama.

    Its a strange revelation, to go into a blog where friends you've talked to for years, suddenly call you a right wing stooge, and other vicious diatribes until they run you out, simply for not towing the party line."


    I kinda felt the same way when i spoke out against Clinton..........look like i said 'm willing to "TOLERATE" a little questionable tactics that i find difficult to swallow..........if strategically it takes ius to the promised land.........i give EVERYONE the benefit of the doubt if Obama proves unworthy of that benefit after he's elected i'll attack him then.........but like i said its game over if McSame wins....i can understanding you not liking what you hear and questioning him thats a good thing he needs to KNOW were his base stands............I'm with you, i'm questioning him as well.........but right now we need to support him,,,,,,,,,he's figuring if he holds his base and chips away at McSame's fringe supporters and undecided he can win this and then he can do the right thing.

    At this point I think you need to be skeptical but have faith.

    ReplyDelete
  117. You know what clif?

    Why don't you not talk about things you know nothing about?

    Like that 6 week atheism debate, (Not 3 days).

    And if you had the inkling of intelligence to READ, you'd have known that as in here tonight, I did not get defensive, UNTIL I was FIRST insulted, and attacked.

    Don't come at me with your tired bullshit.

    Stick to telling everyone what a great war hero you are and how we all know nothing.

    You'll sound smarter.

    LAter.

    ReplyDelete
  118. Looks like the "special" kids got their computer time. How cute.

    ReplyDelete
  119. look mike, not trying to pile on here but i think you are naive and a little deluded to be pushing nuclear reactors. obviously you are too young to remember three mile island and chernoble.

    now i'm no phd or wildcatter, but we have a ton of oil right here in montana and the dakotas we should be drillin for. as for drilling in the ocean, in the deep water yeah, but consider how much of floridas economy is tourism and how many come to go to those pristine beaches then ask your self if we should risk em by drillin, my answer is hell no.

    ReplyDelete
  120. I think it is quite reasonable to question Obama. I don't think there's a thing wrong with examining what he says.

    Most of us are going to vote for him in November, but a few of us will be holding our noses because of things like FISA, as well we should.

    ReplyDelete
  121. one more thing, this war is an abberation, i knew vietnam was wrong immediately, just like i knew this illegal war was wrong right away.

    the republicans came into power in 80 and 94 like a house of fire promising to fix the problem, those damn liars added fuel to the fire and showed themselves to be much worse than what they screeched they need to fix.

    the morons in power are ruinin our country with their wars and ignorant spending with no damn money. me i got two houses paid for in two different states, i have no debt, but the stupid punks running this country are mortgaging our kids future to china like its a damn game of monopoly or something.

    not a damn thing has been learned from vietnam or the seventies, not a thing.

    ReplyDelete
  122. Jolly Roger said...
    I think it is quite reasonable to question Obama. I don't think there's a thing wrong with examining what he says.

    Most of us are going to vote for him in November, but a few of us will be holding our noses because of things like FISA, as well we should."

    Well said as usual JR.......i couldnt agree more!

    ReplyDelete
  123. Jimmy Glover said...
    look mike, not trying to pile on here but i think you are naive and a little deluded to be pushing nuclear reactors. obviously you are too young to remember three mile island and chernoble."


    Well jimmy, your certainly entitled to your opinion, as for me being naive or too young to remember 3 Mile Island or Chernoble.........i remember them well.

    I stand by my statement that we NEED a multipronged approach deal with the energy crisis.......Solar, wind, LNG, clean coal, more drilling and refineries particularly in the Canadian oil sands and nuclear.......i guess we'll just agree to disagree.

    Welcome to the blog BTW!

    ReplyDelete
  124. CLIF said:

    "Bart, the flip flop by Obama on Iraq is a media creation and nothing more.

    I agree with you about FISA,

    The rest I am more ambivalent because many many times in the past the US government have used separate arms of religious organizations to help the poor and in emergencies; but with out the right wing over lay of conversion to jebus before help (which is the layer Bush allowed right wingers to put on it.)

    BTW the flag pin argument is just plain dumb from every angle.

    We have so many problems that whether somebody wears a made in china piece of jewelry or not IS NOT an issue that requires key strokes.

    If the debt, war, energy crisis, global warming, crumbling middle class, poverty, health care and Washington is cleaned up from the past eight years, then I'm willing to think it should be a campaign issue, from any side.

    *************
    I agree about FISA, but everything else I say we stop pulling down the only hope we have because the right wing smear machine OWNS all the radio stations and networks -- and RUSH just got 400 million while Bill Kristol, Tony Snow and several other neocons just got fat, cushy jobs and promotions in the media to spin their hatred and lies.

    And most disturbing of all: ROVE's hand is all over McCain's campaign now and Rove just refused to appear for questioning, showing CONTEMPT for Congress. Rove thinks he is above the law. And you know what? it's because we, as liberals, are so wishy-washy and can't get behind our candidate NO Matter what! We should put our full force behind Obama and trust he knows what he's doing to avoid controversy and fly beneath the ugly MSM radar that whacks at him ie: the Rev Wright scandal, etc.

    Obama is not moving to the right; I heard John Dean tonight and he said Obama is TRYING TO WIN BECAUSE IF WE LOSE AMERICA IS OVER. The Supreme Court will become somewhat fascistic.


    Obama has a pretty interesting explanation for his FISA stance, but I'm still not convinced. I have a big issue with this.

    But we have to be very careful. We have to be part of the solution, not the problem, because

    ReplyDelete
  125. Because Rove will again do everything in his bag of dirty tricks including vote caging...

    If they can spin the idea that McCain has a chance, they can steal the election again -- just by selling us the propaganda that is might be a close election.

    Rove is very dangerous. They can't steal an election that has a wide margin, just a close one.

    And we are tearing down our only hope.

    ReplyDelete
  126. Lydia, that was a great interview you had.

    ReplyDelete
  127. Lets get real here people and look at the issues, rather than fight amongst ourselves like children.

    Obama is our only hope, i worked 2 jobs to put myself through college, and am currently working 3 jobs as a waitress, an aerobics instructor and taking gigs as they come up in other fields, all without health insurance of course.

    Do any of you think that LOSER mcain will provide health insurance for Americans, or get better paying jobs, all he will give us is more wars and a bunch of loonies in the courts, he'll probably help to overturn Roe Vs Wade and a woman's right to choose also.

    ReplyDelete
  128. Who's this cryptic goon?

    ReplyDelete
  129. What we need is health care for every single American, Keith Olberman on every channel, a permanent liberal majority on the courts and Roves's televised execution for Constitutional infringements and crimes against humanity.

    ReplyDelete
  130. It is good, in my opinion, to remind Barack that we are watching and listening. It is the Goppers who blindly rally 'round the daddy figure; as sentient beings, we shouldn't be expected to do the same thing.

    If Barack wants to work for us, he should go to Washington with the realization that it is truly US that he's working for.

    ReplyDelete
  131. Lydia, thats a reasonable and honest response, and thanks for always being a class act, even when we're not.

    You can read my response to it at my blog. I'd post it here but I'm afraid of being labeled a troublemaker, or whatever.

    Thanks
    BART

    My Response;

    http://bartlebee.typepad.com/apocrypha/2008/06/science-atheism.html?cid=121478918#comment-121478918

    ReplyDelete
  132. And Clif?

    Sorry about that old friend. We've been friends too long to say stuff like that to each other.

    Just feel free to delete my comment. I didn't mean it anyway. You just came on a little strong, and touched on something you probably shouldn't have but I'm sorry nonetheless. I didn't mean that.

    ReplyDelete
  133. Sara - thank you! Wow - working 2 jobs to put yourself through college, and now 3 jobs with no health insurance. It's SO SICK!

    Yes, I like your plan: Olbermann on every channel, etc.

    Rove must be put on trial. Someone should arrest him now.

    His arrogance is beyond the pale.

    And Bart - thank you for your reasoned response.

    ReplyDelete
  134. You may not think so, when you read my latest article, lol.

    It All Ends Tomorrow

    ReplyDelete
  135. Shhhh don't tell the oil corps, St Johnny or the drill drill drill gutless chicken hawks brigade,(you know people like crusty, dolt and will)

    Mercedes to cut petroleum out of lineup by 2015

    In less than 7 years, Mercedes-Benz plans to ditch petroleum-powered vehicles from its lineup. Focusing on electric, fuel cell, and biofuels, the company is revving up research in alternative fuel sources and efficiency.

    The German car company has a few new power-trains in the line-up that European journalists have had the opportunity to test out in the Mercedes facility in Spain. One vehicle includes the F700, powered by a DiesOtto engine that combines HCCI and spark ignition to get nearly the same efficiency as diesel, but minus the expensive after-treatment systems.

    The engine can run on biofuels, and we may have a purchasable vehicle by 2010 -- a year that seems to be popular for the debut of a lot of new alternative fuel car models, making ’08 and ’09 simply thumb-twiddling years for consumers. I don’t know, maybe car makers just like the roundness of “2010.” The company’s next big step will be to launch a Smart electric car which is fuel and emission-free.

    Anyway, Mercedes is looking into electric vehicles, both battery-powered and fuel-cell powered. Not only are models in development, but we’ve also seen the company making steps towards its zero-petroleum goal right now, from better cabs in London to li-ion battery improvements. The company also has about 100 Smart electric cars undergoing testing in London, with that favorite 2010 year as the projected market release date.

    Mercedes is making serious investments, already putting nearly $4 million into the pot of its long-term Sustainable Mobility plan, with another nearly $1.4 billion going in before 2014.


    It is interesting the "socialists" in Europe are finding ways of leaving the oil powered car behind, while the id-jets here in America still want their SUV's and gas guzzlers.

    Maybe that is why Mercedes Benz has bought and sold Chrysler, and are leaving GM and Ford in the dust.

    This also explains why Mercedes is still growin' but Ford and GM keep cuttin' staff, middle class workers, and closing plants.

    I guess the Reaganesque stupid ideas (like drill dry wells here in the USA almost eight to ten years after the US peaked) didn't really turn out THAT well in the long run, like only a generation and a half. (How about all that new tech to replace the finite sources of Oil Reagan was for to help future generations have the same life-style that empty suit poser had).

    Why are reichwingers such idiots when it comes to planning for future generations?

    Don't they ever think we will have future generations?

    Oh right that rapture thingy which is probably the greatest fraud perpetrated in the last 200 years on stupid right wing Christians, and considering the frauds they fall for like a 6000 year old planet or jebus wanted you filthy rich and creationism, that is sayin' something.

    Then again those people keep sending their hard earned money to these out right frauds but scream to holy hell about taxes ...... just NOT the frauds who dupe them year after year in the name of religion. (wanna bet they lost more to the pseudo religious hucksters?)

    At least they get a relitively safe(in a NON GWB admin) workplace, less dangerous (in a NON GWB admin) products, safer cars, and limits (in a NON GWB admin) on the ability of hucksters {except the religious and wall street types} education (in a NON GWB admin) for their children and roads for their taxes, but nada from the religious hucksters.

    While the very same people still want NASCAR and SUV's while gas prices rise ever higher, and most of the rest of this planet have plans when we don't have enuf gas fur 100,000 new hummers each year ......


    Remember the days of FDR and Kennedy where innovation was about what we made and not the lies we told about our finances?

    Remember when we were the envy of the planet,

    NOT it's laughing stock (at least when the rest of the planet doesn't think of the War Crimes of illegally invading a country for it's oil).

    BBBBuuuttt we have all those SUV's and Hummers to feed, so Bush-Cheney had to invade RIGHT?

    Just ask the gutless chicken hawks who are sacred sh*tless when they think about signing up and going themselves, they'll tell ya all about it ........

    ReplyDelete
  136. Ladies and gentlemen.

    I am sorry to inform you, that at 3:06 PM on this day of July 9th, 2008, the 4th Amendment passed away.

    Comfort yourselves in that it passed quietly, and without any pain at all, and hardly a whimper from the progressive camp.

    Rest In Peace 4th Amendment. Rest in Peace.

    ReplyDelete
  137. On an side note, at the moment the gavel sounded, announcing its passing, CNN and MSNBC broke in with "Breaking News" in the Jon Bonet Ramsey case.

    :|

    Look Americans. Look at the pretty Jon Bonet Ramsey story...... just pay no attention to those senators in the capitol...

    ReplyDelete
  138. In other sad news, another sad passing, as Barack Obama's chances of ever seeing another red cent from me, or tens of millions of his net-root supporters, like me, passed away along with any hope for our votes, and most likely, his chance for winning in November.

    Farewell Mr. Obama... we thought we knew you well.

    ReplyDelete
  139. its a sad day in America or the 4th Reichnot sure which is more accurate anymore.

    FISA is the one that makes me sick.........i dont like the lapel thing, or the faith based initiatives......AND his stance on the war has not flip flopped i think it has been consistent.........But there is no good reason for siding with the police state and legitimizing GWB's treasonous crimes.........and legitimize them is just what he and CONgress did.

    ReplyDelete
  140. Obama used to be a Constitutional lawyer..........THAT makes this vote even worse and more pathetic.....Shame on him!

    ReplyDelete
  141. You know what Bothers me after reading all the comments? Not a one of Bush's idiots in crime will be held accountable including the the chief idiot. Like Rove they will all get life long Presidential pardons and with protection be loosed on us to continue the lie, the new truth we are all living today!

    ReplyDelete
  142. Yea but there's a more important issue here today than just "catching" Bush.

    He'll I would have been GLAD to let Bush go, if it meant retaining our 4th Amendment protections.

    What happened today was more than just making it legal to spy on Americans without warrant to help Bush get out of criminal prosecution for already having done that (with his signing statements, which were illegal).

    What happened today is that they simply made it legal!

    The 4th Amendment says they cannot look into your personal doings without a duly sworn warrant. FISA, gave them the ability to do that "prior" to the warrant in "emergencies", but still required a warrant to do so.

    And if the application was turned down, that was it.

    Todays vote, removes all of those protections, and says regardless of what a court says, the govt can spy on you indefinately, without warrant, and no one can do anything about it.

    Ever.

    So be sad, but not because we're letting Bush get away.

    Be sad, because the 4th Amendment, which protected Americans for over 2000 years from illegal search and seizure, died today.

    Died from abuse. Died from neglect.

    Died, because no one cares anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  143. And since most bloggers do not wish to take my word for it, then take the Dean of Law at Geoergetown University's word, Jonathan Turely.

    Here's his warning, saying exactly what I just said, delivered last night, on Countdown with Keith Olberman (Rachel Maddow sitting in).

    In this interview, you'll hear exactly what actually took place today, funded by the democrats, not just the republicans.

    And Barack Obama, was front and center, voting for a bill, to remove YOUR 4th Amendment rights.

    Watch the Entire Interview Here and Learn the Legal Facts, of what happened

    If that link doesn't work, use this one.

    http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Turley_on_FISA_bill_The_fix_0709.html


    Sorry, its got some popups, but its from "Rawstory". Just close the pop up ads and either download the interview, or watch it in the window.

    ReplyDelete
  144. But don't quit speaking out because you're discouraged.

    If you stop speaking out, then they'll go as far as they want.

    Hold them accountable. Fill the blogosphere with your indignation at this unAmerican vote.

    And WATCH that interview.

    Watch it.

    Don't even "try" to formulate an "excuse" for Obama, until you watch that interview.

    It will explain, everthing you need to know about the FISA vote.

    Everything.

    ReplyDelete
  145. Ok.

    If you want you can be discouraged.

    After all, we should be.

    We lost today, our most basic protections to civil liberty, the right of protection from illegal search and seizure.

    Its gone, and it ain't likely ever comin back.

    ReplyDelete
  146. How many of you remember me saying Hilary Clinton hasn't conceeded?

    Remember me telling you she'd try and steal the nomination at the convention?

    After all, she NEVER released her delegates. She has a seat at the convention.

    Well, did anyone noticed that AT THE LAST MINUTE, she switched her vote?

    Here. Here's Hilary.

    Hey Barack, better vote for the FISA ammendments if you want to win....

    Does anyone see yet?

    She's going for the brass ring.

    She probably told Obama she was voting with him, yay, and then voted yay, and changed her vote to nay, after Obama voted.

    So clearly, she's planning on stealing the nomination at the convention.

    And at this point, I'm starting to think we should let her.

    After all, at the end of the day, its about who will actualy VOTE with the people.

    She may be a big phony.

    She may be a pulling a fast one on Obama.

    But if she LISTENS to the people, and votes accordingly, isn't that at the end of the day all we really want?

    :|

    Something to ponder, for sure.

    ReplyDelete
  147. Bart i think you may be right......i started to think something was wrong last week then on Monday it hit me Clinton still wants to win and thinks she can torpedo Obama and steal this thing and your right she didnt concede her votes........i'm not sure i want to trade one pandering phony for another sure she voted the way i wanted but i have to wonder if she means it or not.

    ReplyDelete
  148. Well Mike, at this point I honestly could care less whether she means it, know what I mean?

    I mean, if she is willing to listen to the people, and vote the way the people want her to vote, regardless of left or right wing pressure from political operatives, then thats all I guess really matters.

    Obama's shown himself to be spinally challenged when pressure is on, particularly from other democrats and repubicans.

    At times like that, he ignores the peoples will, and goes for the easy win.

    Like the flag pin.

    Everyone in some other blogs, even in here a few did, (cept you of course) gave me sh#t for even bringing up the flag pin issue.

    They said it was a small thing, and mocked me for worrying about something so ridiculous.

    But I saw it differently.

    I saw it as, if he'll cave on something so insignificant, so easy, then what do we think he's going to do on the big issues?

    When I saw him cave on the flag pin, just because the right wing put a little pressure on, I realized he was not going to stand strong on the big issues.

    I told everyone that in TP Zoo, and they laughed at me.

    Well, after this afternoons vote, they're not laughing now.

    ReplyDelete
  149. And today, the left is jumping all over Jesse Jackson for his open mic comment.

    Once again they're ignoring the issue, and crying "don't hurt Obama!....Leave him alone.".

    Like the "Leave Brittany alone! girl, they cry whenever anyone says anything bad about Obama.

    But they ignore the issue.

    What did Jackson say?

    He criticized Obama for caving on the unconstitutional Bush program called "Faith Based Initiatives".

    So?

    Everyone should be critcizing him for that.

    IF we'd criticize him publically, then we would not be "giving ammunition to the right". They ALREADY HAVE the ammunition, as soon as Obama takes one of these indefensible positions!

    It would be helping Obama, NOT ruin his chances of being elected by alienating his base.

    And it would be helping US, by keeping our Constitution intact.

    If he thinks we'll vote for him anyway, and if no one is publically criticizing him except for those on the right, then obviously he's going to think he can get away with anything.

    Like he did this afternoon, as he helped a few dozen other democratic senators, kick the 4th Amendment to the floor, and kill it, once and for all.

    ReplyDelete
  150. If Obama's supporters did not like todays vote, along with the removal of their 4th Amendment protections permanently, then I suggest they start holding their candidate accountable, and voicing loudly their concerns.

    The bullsh$t defense of "the republicans might hear" is just that. Bullsh$t.

    You think the republicans don't own TV sets, or computers too?

    The truth is, it is YOU (not you Mike, its a figurative statement) who are hurting Obama, each and everytime you give him a pass when you should be holding his feet to the flame, and helping steer him down the road to the White House.

    The "LEAVE OBAMA ALONE" cry isn't helping us win, nor is it helping us undo the damage to our constitution over the last 7 years.

    All its doing, is enticing Obama to do exactly what he did today.

    Vote republican, to try and garner more votes from the enemy camp.

    After all, he figures yours are already sewn up.

    ReplyDelete
  151. I'll tell you this though, with regards to the possibility there is some skullduggery here on the part of Hilary.

    If Barack Obama, is dumb enough to be tricked into voting against the constitution by some of Hilary's manuvering, and if Hilary is smart enough TO trick him into voting against the constitution to manuver herself into the nomination, ..... then she deserves it.

    Because right now, I've pretty much given up on integrity in my public officals.

    Now I'll settle for smart.

    ReplyDelete
  152. The truth is, it is YOU (not you Mike, its a figurative statement) who are hurting Obama, each and everytime you give him a pass when you should be holding his feet to the flame, and helping steer him down the road to the White House.

    The "LEAVE OBAMA ALONE" cry isn't helping us win, nor is it helping us undo the damage to our constitution over the last 7 years.


    I'm inclined to agree with this. You can say whatever you want to about Hillary Clinton, but she was on the right side of a pretty damned important issue today.

    The law as written is unconstitutional and will almost certainly be stricken down just like the MCA was. To make sure that will happen, I'll probably vote for Obama, as he is quite likely to appoint SCOTUS Judges who think for themselves. But you know, Bob Barr might do the same thing.

    As much as I detest a lot of Barr's domestic positions, his respect of the Constitution is something that he and this old lefty have in common. If Obama wants to continue to pander to the wingtards, and make himself steadily more detestable, he is inviting people who support him right now to start looking for common ground elsewhere. Those are the facts, and excusing moves like this one or his "faith-based initiative" pander does nothing but make people who would support him even more suspicious of him. He's never going to draw any wingtard votes anyway, so why alienate the people he HAS to depend on?

    ReplyDelete
  153. Well said JR.........i agree completely with what you just said.

    Obama lost my financial support and i just quit his campaign strategy team...........but at this point i still want him to win this BECAUSE OF SCOTUS!

    ReplyDelete
  154. Mike said...

    You can say whatever you want to about Hillary Clinton, but she was on the right side of a pretty damned important issue today.

    Darn tootin!

    ReplyDelete
  155. Sorry Mike, that was JR who said that.

    ReplyDelete
  156. At the end of the day, its all about the issues.

    While the mindnumbingly ignorant "talk show hosts" calling themselves journalists talk about "likability" and "who'd we like to have a beer with", the fact is its the issues.

    How will they vote on the issues.

    Obama's great at contorting his postitions verbally so well that most people have no idea what hes doing until he does it.

    Like today.

    Clinton on the other hand, is pretty obvious. She's going to go with "whats popular".

    And whats "popular" is usually going to mean the will of the people.

    So, if Hilary is capable of listening to the people, modifying her positions, and voting accordingly, then I'd say that puts her out there at the head of the pack with regards to being the president who will actually heed the will of the people.

    And thats pretty much the acid test, at least from my chair.

    ReplyDelete
  157. Lydia said...

    But that's why we must only focus on the GOOD in our Progressive values and in our candidate.


    Well, we see where that plan got us today.

    Perhaps its time for a retooling of that value.

    We must focus on holding our candidate, to the same standards we hold the opposition candidates too.

    That way, votes like today won't happen, and our constitution won't be dismantled before our very eyes, by our own candidate.

    Holding them accountable, means helping them to do good works.


    Besides. If we won't hold our candidates to the same standards we hold the right wing candidates too, then what is it again that makes us different?

    ReplyDelete
  158. Make no mistake about it.

    Today, Barack Obama not only voted to dismantle the 4th Amendment, but he voted WITH the republicans.

    Now, how does that make him our ideal candidate again?

    He has all the power in the world right now, yet he caved, and voted WITH the republicans, to of all things, eviscerate our 4th Amendment rights.

    I know its hard to change horse in mid stream, but if we don't, we're going to end up with a lame horse.

    ReplyDelete
  159. Voting with the republicans is what we hate our congressional leaders for.

    Pelosi, Reid, Hoyer, all worthless, spineless jellyfish.

    We have enough jellyfish.

    ReplyDelete
  160. Anybody who thinks I'm kidding about Barr is mistaken.

    I've had several exchanges with the guy. His regret at his past associations is genuine, and he's as concerned about the Constitution as I am. What you have to understand is that Obama is about as bad as anyone else is if he supports throwing away the Bill of Rights. Liberals and Libertarians have a love of the Constitution as common anchor points, and every move someone else makes against the Constitution strengthens those ties.

    Barr is already polling somewhere around 20% in New Hampshire, depending on which poll you look at. Do I think his domestic programs are any good? Except for his viewpoint on the insanity of the "War on Drugs," I don't. But I DO have a tremendous respect for his positions on the Bill of Rights and the Iraq War, and unlike Obama, he isn't backing away from them.

    I don't think that any reform Obama undertakes means a damn thing if we lose our Constitution. Our Constitution is what makes the United States a good place to live; without it, we can turn into a wingtard tin-pot dictatorship, or perhaps a Soviet type of state under a different leadership. Neither option is an acceptable one to me, in the least.

    Keep it up, Barack. There are already sizable numbers disgusted this evening, from what I'm reading. Just keep pushing us.

    ReplyDelete
  161. Bart said "Besides. If we won't hold our candidates to the same standards we hold the right wing candidates too, then what is it again that makes us different?"


    Sorry to sound like a broken record here..........BUT thats EXACTLY what I was saying from January too may and I was attacked, pooh poohed and dismissed

    You cant CLAIM to be better you have to ACTUALY BE BETTER.

    ReplyDelete
  162. Jolly Roger said...
    Anybody who thinks I'm kidding about Barr is mistaken.

    I've had several exchanges with the guy. His regret at his past associations is genuine, and he's as concerned about the Constitution as I am. What you have to understand is that Obama is about as bad as anyone else is if he supports throwing away the Bill of Rights. Liberals and Libertarians have a love of the Constitution as common anchor points, and every move someone else makes against the Constitution strengthens those ties.

    Barr is already polling somewhere around 20% in New Hampshire, depending on which poll you look at. Do I think his domestic programs are any good? Except for his viewpoint on the insanity of the "War on Drugs," I don't. But I DO have a tremendous respect for his positions on the Bill of Rights and the Iraq War, and unlike Obama, he isn't backing away from them.

    I don't think that any reform Obama undertakes means a damn thing if we lose our Constitution. Our Constitution is what makes the United States a good place to live; without it, we can turn into a wingtard tin-pot dictatorship, or perhaps a Soviet type of state under a different leadership. Neither option is an acceptable one to me, in the least.

    Keep it up, Barack. There are already sizable numbers disgusted this evening, from what I'm reading. Just keep pushing us."


    I really dont know much about Barr, JR........but your 110% right on this issue............protecting our Constition and the freedoms liberties and privacies it is SUPPOSED to protect and stopping the transformation of our country into a police state is THE MOST OMPORTANT issue to me bar none........more omportant than the war, more important than economic or tax issues.

    I'll look at Barr closer but I dont think he has a chance in hell to pin and I dont want McSame to win that would be the worst thing of all.

    ReplyDelete
  163. I don't know if Barr can win or not, but I'm guessing his chances get better every time the DINOcrats cave to Chimpy. Traditional Conservatives are as pissed off as we are, and Barr has picked up about a percentage point a week, nationally, for the last 3 weeks.

    Force me to vote my conscience, and I'll vote my conscience. As you should. As anyone should.

    ReplyDelete
  164. Well at this point, I'm honestly willing to look at anyone who is willing to respect our Constitution.

    If Slappy White said he'd vote no on HR 6034, and had a halfway decent plan to get us out of Iraq, I'd hear him out.

    ReplyDelete
  165. Clif please come back. You are one of our military veterans, a personal hero of mine.

    ReplyDelete
  166. Bart - you owe Clif an apology.

    ReplyDelete
  167. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  168. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  169. Feingold basically said the Obama vote was a tactical shift for the piurposes of pandering.

    Am I the only one disturbed that they can just about admit it these days, and nobody seems to care?

    ReplyDelete
  170. Lydia, Bart did apologize, and it is finished as far as I'm concerned.

    I'm just busy in the non-cyber world working around my house and helping a neighbor who needs help so I'm not checking in as much.

    I see his position and just because I'm not in total agreement doesn't mean I don't think about what he says or appreciate his opinion.

    We all need to step back and respect each other a little bit more and hyperventilate a little less me included.


    Take care, I'm going to be busy for a little while but I'll be around also.

    ReplyDelete
  171. Lydia, Clif just posted in my blog and told me that he had not left your blog, and also was aware I had already apologized.

    So I'm not sure why you came in and said that about me owing him an apology, but me and him are fine.

    As I thought, Clif's a man, not a mouse, and like most men, brushed off my little quips, as I did his.

    Anyway, me and Clif are fine, so sorry for my comment to you, but I'm not sure why you did that.

    Could it be you're angry at me for criticizing Obama's actions, or was this just one big misunderstanding?

    Anyway, no hard ones.

    I'll delete my previous two comments.

    Also, if they bother you, I will keep my holding Obama accountable, to my blog.

    ReplyDelete
  172. On another note, yesterday, Karl Roves lawyer sent a letter to our spineless congress, declaring he was claiming "executive privilege", and therefore would not comply with the Congressional order to testify today.

    Just a few problems with that.

    A. President Bush has NOT invoked Executive Privilege for Rove

    B. Rove is now a private citizen, thus invoking Executive Privilege is moot.

    C. Karl Rove fled the country today.

    Thats right.

    Today, after claiming Executive Privilege, Karl Rove fled the United States, in search of asylum somewhere else.

    Could it be that there were rumors running around that Conyers and the rest had finally grown a pair, and were planning on using the power we gave them?

    Could it be an arrest warrant was immenent?

    I doubt it, but it does seem odd he'd flee the country like this.

    ReplyDelete
  173. Anyone who thinks that the monkey isn't going to join Der Rovesmarschall abroad ought to look harder at the furious preparations they've made. Those preparations are now in hyper-mode.

    The CONgress gave Chimpy a temporary gift yesterday, and I'm sure his handlers understand that. By the time it gets fixed, the moronic monkey will be swinging from the trees of Paraguay. I hope he takes as many of his family as Paraguay will accept.

    ReplyDelete
  174. Paging Ted haggard,

    Paging Ted Haggard;

    You've been one upped in republican hypocrissy

    Gay-Bashing Alabama A.G. Caught Having Gay Sex?


    Wonkette:

    This may come as a shock, but a prominent anti-homosexual Republican attorney general has apparently been caught having homosexual sex intercourse with his homosexual gay male assistant. Bonus: The dude’s wife caught him, in their bed. This is the rumor that the AG’s office has officially denied, so now of course everybody is spilling the sordid details.

    AG in question is Troy King, who, of course, is only interested in outlawing homosexuality and sex toys. His gay lover is either a college “buddy,” or a very young youngster and “Homecoming King” from Troy University. What are the odds of a dude named Troy King getting caught in bed with a Homecoming King from Troy University? This seems like a wacky sitcom plot, on a gay porn channel. (Is this what that Will & Grace was about?) Read on…

    King, (pictured above, seated on the left) the State Chairman of John McCain’s Alabama campaign, joined a number of Attorneys General who supported the GOP presidential candidate this past spring and the following is a quote from King on John McCain’s campaign website:

    “Alabama is a state where actions definitely speak louder than words,” said King. “More than just talk, John McCain’s strong record of support for state rights, and his devotion to the conservative principles of protecting life and the institution of marriage make him the right leader for Alabama.”

    Yes, Mr. King, actions certainly do speak louder than words. I wish I could I could take credit for writing something this hilarious, but I can’t. It appears King has made a few enemies during his tenure in Alabama as well.

    ReplyDelete
  175. What a freakin tool!!!!!!!

    President George Bush: ‘Goodbye from the world’s biggest polluter’

    The American leader, who has been condemned throughout his presidency for failing to tackle climate change, ended a private meeting with the words: “Goodbye from the world’s biggest polluter.”

    He then punched the air while grinning widely, as the rest of those present including Gordon Brown and Nicolas Sarkozy looked on in shock.


    what a freakin' national embarrassment.

    ReplyDelete
  176. BTW today while Obama and McCain, with a little Jesse Jackson on the side, were entertaining all the talking heads with their flip flops and gaffes, the feds seized a bank in California;

    Regulators Seize Mortgage Lender

    Federal regulators seized IndyMac Bancorp on Friday evening, marking one of the largest bank failures in American history.
    Skip to next paragraph

    The bank, once part of the Countrywide Financial Corporation, is the first major bank to shut its doors since the mortgage crisis erupted more than a year ago. (IndyMac is not related to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the big mortgage finance companies that alarmed the stock market this week.)

    The closure followed a frenzied week during which IndyMac’s executives tried to bolster the ailing bank. IndyMac, based in Pasadena, Calif., stopped making new loans and announced layoffs of more than half of its 7,200 workers. But IndyMac’s customers, afraid their savings might disappear, stampeded tellers and demanded their money.

    Most of IndyMac’s deposits are guaranteed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, which will operate the bank and try to sell it.


    IndyMac is the largest American bank to fail in nearly a quarter of a century -- and second largest ever ..... and Phil Gramm says it is all in our heads?

    damn you'd think he was whining or something ......

    ReplyDelete
  177. Lydia said...
    I think there are more enlightened and motivated faith based groups that need funds to help people in their communities. Many of these people devote all their time to doing "God's work" and are more motivated than those who do not feel a higher calling of service and love to mankind.

    On the other hand, if one of these Churches EVER creates a "Creationist Museum" which is where the Bush Faith-based money was wasted, we should protest!!



    I don't think anyones questioning the concept of giving churches money Lydia.

    The problem is the establishment of a federal office to do that.

    Tax exemption was seen as the way to do that for the various religions of this country.

    Tax exemption means churches get to keep all of their contributions, which can be substantial, and also purchase goods and services without paying a dime in sales tax, which when larger "mega-churches" utilize this feature, can mean literally millions of dollars each year or more.

    But whats more Tax exemption was a way to do this, and give the churches moneies, without establishing a federal regulating agency to do it, which would of course violate the inherint provision for separation of church and state.

    The IRS does not regulate Churches funding. They tax, or exempt everyone according to the laws of our land, and do not have any specific control over the value of the exemption.

    On the other hand, Faith Based Initiatives is a clear and outright violation of the implied mingling of church and state, by doing the unthinkable.

    Establishing a Government agency to regulate church funding throughout the country.

    It goes against all that our constitution stands for, and violates that sacred trust to keep religion, out of our government.

    You should, as an American, and a Christian, be appalled at this, as it opens a Pandora's box of legal ensnares for the regulation of religious beliefs in this country and the descimation of the less popular ones.

    You should not accept that what you condemned in Bush so adamantly just a few short years ago, but instead herald your opposition to this attempt at regulation of belief systems.

    ReplyDelete
  178. On another note, and speaking of religion, I thought you might find this interesting. Its a comment I made in another blog to some bloggers mocking the idea that people would believe that Jesus ever existed.


    We were discussing a newly discovered artifact which appears to put to rest the notion of whether or not the historical person Jesus, ever lived.

    This artifact is a tablet, that bears Hebrew writing discussing the execution of Christ.

    This tablet demonstrates that the Jewish history also acknowledged the life and execution of Jesus of Nazareth, and thus ads astonishing credibility to notion that he was a real, flesh and blood individual, and not a fabrication of the Christians.

    It also adds credibility to the account of the crucifixion in Flavius Jospehus' "Antiquities of the Jews", which sceptics have heretofore attempted to discredit.

    Its an exciting find.

    Anyway, here's what I told them.
    -----------------------


    While I can understand the tendency for some to think Jesus was a fabrication developed by the Roman’s to pacify the Jewish population, a closer examination, and evaluation of the evidence that already exists, along with recent discoverys other than the discovery of this tablet, points the more likelyhood that someone named Jesus, son of Joseph, which there were many, did start a movement, and did teach some somewhat radical concepts for his time, to at least the point to draw the attention of the local Sanhedrin, and Roman government enough to sentence him to death.

    Critics demand “absolute irrefutable proof” for his existence, which is fairly laughable, given the lowly circumstances of this contemporarily obscure man. After all, crucified prophets in Jerusalem were a dime a dozen, hence, the notion that one specific prophet, with a relatively small following at the time, who was summarily crucifed by a roman magistrate along with petty criminals, …well, not exactly someone they were building monuments to.

    Plus, given the persecution of early Christian’s subsequent to his death, its suprising we have as what we do. Aside from the original codices, including fragmants which support the translations, (like the Chester Beatty Papyrus), along with other references or items, i.e. the Basillica, the references in Josephus, and even the recent archeaological evidence, like the discovery of the Ossuary of James, just adds more credence to the likelyhood that the man, the “Historic Jesus”, actually existed.

    Of course that says nothing as to his divinity, or the veracity of the claims as to his supernatural powers, and events, but it does at least point to the probability of “someone” with that name starting a movement which subsequently got him excuted by the state, having lived.

    As for the surpise by some that Jewish traditions may have acknowledged him, well, he was after all, Jewish. In fact, as best we know, he was a Rabbi, married, and worked as a stone mason during his early years. (not a carpenter, like most accounts point to).

    So I find this discovery exciting, and well wait to see whether its authenticity is proven before making any further observations.

    ReplyDelete
  179. Wow, that is so cool, this tablet discovery.

    ReplyDelete
  180. Bart,

    We've been through this before. The establishment clause,

    "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

    has been used and abused by liberals for decades trying to remove all forms of religious expression from public display.

    It was meant to prohibit the government from officially sanctioning ONE particular religion above all others, and to guarantee our right to worship however we see fit.

    The original intent has more to do with protecting religion from government than it does in protecting government from religion.

    Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists, (where the phrase "separation of church and state" comes from) is a confirmation of this.

    There is nothing inherently wrong with the government supporting religious outreach, (or even religious expression within its own hallowed halls for that matter) as long as it does so evenhandedly and equally to all religions that wish to take part.

    The push of the past several decades spearheaded by the ACLU to remove ALL religion (except Islam for some strange reason) from public discourse is wrongheaded and anti-constitutional in this.

    The correct move would be to embrace ALL religious expression.

    ReplyDelete
  181. Voltron said..

    It was meant to prohibit the government from officially sanctioning ONE particular religion above all others,

    Well, more correctly put, from sanctioning or "empowering" ANY particular religion above all others.

    But given YOUR interpretation, your argument still falls flat, as Bush's "Faith Based Initiatives" have "sanctioned" by empowering Christianity, above all others.

    The fact is that there is something inherintly wrong with the govt supporting religious outreach.

    Your argument overlooks the absolute abhorence to the notion of religion mingled with state that permeated the early colonists, and continued on to the framers of the Constitution.

    After all, Church and state were the norm in most civilized governments at the time, and in England, whence they came, the church weilded unholy rule and the persecution of the protestant religions throughout Europe, was appalling.

    There is no reason, no just cause, and no precedent for the Govt, establishing a government office to oversea religions in this country, and fund some while allowing others to falter.

    Tax Exemption IS the government helping religions to thrive, and it does it on an even scale, where none is favored over the other.

    Establishing a govt office however, to decide "who gets what", is about as far from the foundations of this great land, as one could imagine.

    And I'd think any good American, would cringe at the notion.

    ReplyDelete
  182. Lydia Cornell said...
    Wow, that is so cool, this tablet discovery.


    Yes its very, very exciting.

    If proven authentic, which probability is looking extremely likely that it is, it will pretty much put to rest the tired argument of those opposed to Christianity, of that Jesus was merely an invention of the Romans to pacify the Jews.

    If proven authentic, whether one believes in him or not, they'll nonetheless need to acknowledge him as a historical figure.

    And thats very exciting.

    ReplyDelete
  183. On another sad note, another young man in the media, has died.

    Too many are dying, too young.

    I of course didn't agree with Tony most of the time, and saw him as the opposition, however I've noted some who knew him, from both camps, are profoundly saddened, and I will not demean nor dismiss that loss.

    I wrote this, for one his friends in another blog, who happened to be a liberal, (actually a civil libertarian), and will repost it here, as my only sentiment, on the loss of Tony Snow.

    ReplyDelete
  184. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  185. I was thinking about the financial mess this morning and know this is nothing. This is just starting. Put this along with everything else. I was going to talk about indy mac and the rest then Iran but it is all part of the whole manufactured perfect storm. Relax and take care!

    ReplyDelete
  186. For Tony;

    There are those whom I’ve met,

    and those whom I’ve not,

    And those whom I’ve seen from afar;

    Yet they all have their role,

    in shaping my soul,

    And some even shine like a star.



    So when one passes on,

    to that place far beyond,

    Where I know someday too I must go;

    I am saddened inside,

    and my tears cannot hide,

    So I’ll say fare thee well, Tony Snow.



    I’ve seldom concurred,

    with the words that you spoke,

    but sometimes my brow I must bend;

    When I see someones loss,

    from that unearthly cost,

    at the sadness of losing a friend.


    - Bartlebee

    ReplyDelete
  187. Hey bart, do you know the Egyptian story of Horace? It also predates Christ by a few thousand years. If you're not familiar, check it out.

    ReplyDelete
  188. bart said,

    Well, more correctly put, from sanctioning or "empowering" ANY particular religion above all others.

    But given YOUR interpretation, your argument still falls flat, as Bush's "Faith Based Initiatives" have "sanctioned" by empowering Christianity, above all others.


    Dolty obviously knows nothing of the thoughts of the Founders as well, although their writings can be found with anyone willing to use "the google."

    ReplyDelete
  189. Jolly Roger said...
    Hey bart, do you know the Egyptian story of Horace? It also predates Christ by a few thousand years. If you're not familiar, check it out.


    Well I'm not sure what you're referring to.

    I'm familar with Quintus Horatius, who was a Roman philospher and poet, who is known as Horace. But he studied Latin and Greek. He was the guy who came up with "Carpe Diem", (seize the day).

    The only thing close to anything Egyptian I can think of was the myth of the Egyptian sky god, Horus.

    Is that who you mean? Or is it something else?

    ReplyDelete
  190. Clif said...

    Dolty obviously knows nothing of the thoughts of the Founders as well, although their writings can be found with anyone willing to use "the google.

    Exactly. Its not as if this is some obscure fact I'm putting forth.

    Every kid who attends a public grade school learns as one of their first history lessons, is how the founding fathers sought freedom from religious persecution as meted out by the mother Church at England.


    The concept of establishing a Federal govt office to regulate anything religious was as far from the framers intent as one could imagine, and this is not an obscure point.

    Everyone should understand, that just because something seems like a "nice idea", doesn't mean it is.

    The mingling of Church and State is the door to disaster for any govt. History has shown us this time and time again.

    Religious govts produce totalitarianism, corruption, and persecution of the masses. We've seen this everytime the concept of mingling religion with government rears its ugly head, as we do now with these relgious governments in the middle east.

    They persecute their women, brainwash their men and kill anyone who won't convert.

    Just like the Christians did to them in the middle ages when Queen Isabella ordered 5,000 muslims decapitated, merely for recanting their conversions to Christianity.

    Religion and Government.

    No matter how good it sounds, equals disaster.

    ReplyDelete
  191. And we, as Americans should be diligent in avoiding the very appearance of it, lest we find ourselves that which our forefathers fled from.

    The way to avoid errors, is not to even get close to them.

    ReplyDelete
  192. All the water in the world,

    However hard it tried;

    Could never sink the smallest ship,

    Unless it gets inside.



    And all the evil in the world,

    The blackest kind of sin;

    Can never hurt you the least bit,

    Unless you let it in.


    Ella Wheeler Wilcox

    ReplyDelete
  193. This is going to be all over the new Monday.

    Watch that video. Its UNBELIEVABLE.

    :|

    Well, actually its quite believeable.

    Its what we believed about them all along.

    Whats unbelieveable is one of them was dumb enough to get caught on camera.

    ReplyDelete
  194. "Every kid who attends a public grade school learns as one of their first history lessons, is how the founding fathers sought freedom from religious persecution as meted out by the mother Church at England."

    Exactly.

    "The concept of establishing a Federal govt office to regulate anything religious was as far from the framers intent as one could imagine, and this is not an obscure point."

    Don't you think the concept of establishing a RELIGIOUS office to regulate the Federal government would be just a tad worse?

    ReplyDelete
  195. Don't you think the concept of establishing a RELIGIOUS office to regulate the Federal government would be just a tad worse?

    Like a large part of the extreme right wants to do to the rest of the USA dolt?

    Screech about things which THEY claim is destroying the country BASED in a book of religious values and get laws passed to enforce it.

    Sunday blue laws?

    Demand businesses like bars close on Sunday and No liquor sales.

    Attack people who don't want to practice any religion or practice the wrong religion?

    Push for forcing their version of a religion on the troops especially their future commanders during their initial training.

    How about the other ways people do exactly what you complain about?

    Like attacking music, movies and the way people dress based on their interpretations of a religious text.

    Yo dolt, tell the idiots who wanna regulate gay marriage on the basis of RELIGION to wit, Leviticus from the old testament ..... you know the ones who voted like YOU did in 2004 against allowing people to get married based on a religious command.

    Damn son you sure HID this little complaint the last 3 years .....

    ReplyDelete