Tuesday, December 01, 2009

SAFE PASSAGE DOMESTIC ABUSE AND KISS BACKSTAGE LOS ANGELES 2009




Facebook live webcast: Hubby rolled into town and took us all to the KISS concert, where I ran into Paul Stanley in the hallway doing the Elvis walk to the stage. Facebook was filming the first live webcast of a rock concert. Paul and I used to date in the 80's and he's a wonderful guy, really sweet and solid. Gene Simmons is a wunderkind: brilliant and amazing at turning everything he touches to gold.


Below are photos of Gene Simmons, Shannon Tweed, Nick Simmons, my beautiful friend Suzan Hughes (Herbalife co-founder, former wife of Mark Hughes and mother of Alex Hughes); Chip Winnans, Paul hubby.









415 comments:

  1. 30,000 American kids being sent off to serve like Beau Geste. What do you think of your hero now, Cliffy?....P.S. I'm sorry, Lydia. I know that this is off-topic. But I just can't sit silent while another American President thinks that U.S. youngsters are expendible/makes these politically expedient and idiotic compromises (30,000 troops instead of 40,000) that accomplish bubkus. It's like, damn it, here we frigging go again.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I doubt very much if you'll hear from the lefties on this one widdle will.

    How would you like to be the parent of the kid killed on day 18 months plus one?

    I'd guess the Islamic world views this president as weak.

    ReplyDelete
  3. C'mon guys, who are you trying to fool? You know Obama is trying to clean the mess you guys left. I'm curious...for the record, did you guys support the last president when he went into Iraq? This will never be Obama's war, he's just the mechanic trying the fix the car after your guys drove it without any oil in the engine. Your guy was and still is a moron, and so is Sarah.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Why do you guys have so much hate for the troops? You know your group is the one that likes war, but you try to make it look like Obama owns the war. He doesn't George Bush and his supporters do, and you are the ones being weak by not owning up to the fact that you guys started these wars with stupidity instead of using smart ideas and tactics to solve the problem. Do any of you morons know how many troops commit suicide each year since 2001?

    ReplyDelete
  5. I bet you idiots don't even know Sarah tried to abort the baby, and you are too dumb to figure out why.

    ReplyDelete
  6. sorry Lydia, they started it...

    ReplyDelete
  7. Those pics are fantastic... I wish I was there. I was a DJ in the 80's and I rocked the place with Kiss

    ReplyDelete
  8. Who is this teeluck moron?

    Sarah tried to abort the baby?

    I'd bet this dimwits mom wishes
    she had flushed him.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Wow! Check out all the cleavage!

    Lydia, thanks for keeping us abreast of .... Wow! What was this post about again?

    Just kidding! Hope you and your friends had fun.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Thanks for keeping us all "abreast". LOL Now THAT was a good one, Mr. Rouse.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Just for the record, Teeluck, I was against the Iraq War from day one. I thought that it was not just unnecessary, but reckless (wait til we leave - all hell is definitely going to break loose again) as well. The Afghan War, I was actually FOR initially. But being that 1) Al Qaeda isn't even there anymore, 2) the government is frigging corrupt, and 3) the longer that a superpower stays in ANY third world country the worse it tends to get, I'm thinking that, yeah, maybe it's time to cut our losses there, too. Oh, and, yeah, if the Al Qaeda training camps come back to Afghanistan, we can definitely blow 'em up easy enough (that, or use some special ops). We certainly don't need to occupy the country.

    ReplyDelete
  12. 30,000 American kids being sent off to serve like Beau Geste.

    Sorry widdle one but the 9-11 attacks weren't part of a celluloid fantasy world you seem to live in. Try real world examples and real world issues son. Finishing the job Bush cut and ran from in 2002,to illegally attack Iraq in 2003, which is part of the undermine America's middle class legacy Bush-Cheney handed off when he quit sh*tting all over the country in Jan 22 2009, is now President Obama's job.

    What do you think of your hero now, Cliffy?

    Sorry widdle one but President Obama is not a hero, just the better person who was on the ballot on Nov 4th 2009. And he is the legal President of the united states, who was handed this mess by Bush-Cheney who cut and ran from to illegally attack Iraq in 2003.

    He has heard advice from many people, much of which neither you or I have heard, which means he made the best choice he could from the fiasco Bush-Cheney created in Afghanistan with their cut and run policy to illegally attack Iraq.

    President Obama campaigned on doing exactly this, and I voted for him so I expected him to keep his word, which he has.

    But I just can't sit silent while another American President thinks that U.S. youngsters are expendible/makes these politically expedient and idiotic compromises (30,000 troops instead of 40,000) that accomplish bubkus.

    I know you and crusty haven't served, nor really understand how strategy actually works, but for all the supposed similarities you can claim to Vietnam and LBJ, I can recite as many dichotomies.

    I know you don't realize this but people who volunteer, like I did, UNDERSTAND sometimes they will be called on to put their lives on the line.

    Why don't YOU ask those who are deploying if they agree with your slanted delusional assessment?

    Because most do not.

    Besides President Obama has done something nobody but Nixon has done since Vietnam (and Nixon lied, he had no secret plan to end Vietnam which he claimed in 1968 when he campaigned he did).

    President Obama has set strategic goals and a time line to achieve those goals.

    Which means he is trying to do what Bush-Cheney SHOULD have done in 2001-2002, actually defeated the Taliban and finish the job, but instead of finishing the job Bush-Cheney cut and ran from to in 2002 to illegally attack Iraq in 2003 ... so it is up to Obama to finish the job Bush-Cheney failed to.

    9-11 was real, and the job to destroy the entire network which enabled bin Laden and possibly kill or capture bin Laden must be finished, other wise he will be back.

    ReplyDelete
  13. It's like, damn it, here we frigging go again.

    No son for many reason we aren't.

    But you seem so delusional in the way you frame the crap you spout on your waste of bandwidth, that arguing with you is like arguing with a 5 year old, however you have no true training in understanding the COIN strategy, how COIN is employed, the real differences between British Empire goals, USSR goals and our goals in Afghanistan. How each tried to achieve those goals, and the limits each faced. Neither the British or the USSR had a 9-11 legitimacy in Afghanistan, even though Bush-Cheney squandered the good will of the entire planet with their illegal war in Iraq.

    Nor do you understand why strategically or historically are Vietnam and Afghanistan are linked except by shallow delusional people with, little relevance to the real issues.

    The pottery barn rule Colin Powell cited for Iraq exists for Afghanistan also, Jimmy Carter accepted the advice of Zbigniew Brzezinski, to use the CIA and Pakistan to undermine the illegal USSR move to occupy Afghanistan to help destroy that country, Reagan followed the same strategy, which allowed the mujahideen to fight the Soviets to a standstill, until the soviets had no choice but to follow the British example and retreat. The final retreat started on May 15, 1988, and ended on February 15, 1989, when Bush 41 was president, and instead of helping our allies there bush 41 cut and ran to save a few bucks, which directly aided the Taliban and eventually bin Laden in establishing their control and the bases bin Laden used to attack the US Cole, 1998 bombings of the United States Embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya and of course New York and Arlington Virginia on 9-11.

    If we abandon the Afghans AGAIN like Bush 41 did we could very well end up with very similar results. I for one am willing to give President Obama 18 months to see if this can be prevented, and am sure the troops are willing to put their lives on the line to prevent the same. That is what someone volunteers for when you join up to serve, put your life on the line for your country if the president determines the necessity. With the historical legacy in Afghanistan, I agree with President Obama and not you son.

    Sorry your panties are in such a twist, however you seem to stay that way son. But you are as wrong on this as George Will is on Global warming

    ReplyDelete
  14. It was a political choice/decision, Clif, for crying out loud. And, yes, Afganistan WAS a just war 8 FRIGGING YEARS AGO! It isn't any longer, YES, because Bush in fact did take his eye off the ball (again with the ridiculous shoving of W in my face). There are only 8 frigging dozen Al Qaeda left in Iraq, Clif. That and the government is corrupt. That and 100,000 troops CANNOT "defeat" the Taliban. Clif, do you not know NOTHING about the history of that region? And, really, if in fact it was a Republican putting forth this mealy-mouthed plan, would you STILL be supporting it? I highly doubt it, buddy (the partisanship oozing from your mouth as you insulate this mediocre President).

    ReplyDelete
  15. This is frigging Beau Geste, Clif. 100,000 troops can't tame that hellish "country". And it certainly can't be done in 18 months (what a frigging joke that is). And the country doesn't support it, Clif. They certainly aren't going to like those flag-draped coffins any more with Obama in charge. I can pretty much guarantee you that fact, fella. I don't know, Clif, most of the honest liberals that I know hate this idea. Too bad that this totally inexplicable man cruch of yours on Obama precludes you from seeing straight.

    ReplyDelete
  16. It was a political choice/decision, Clif, for crying out loud.

    No son it was a military choice, it involves sending troops ALONG with a real strategy (which had been missing so far) to solve the fiasco Bush-Cheney created son.

    And, yes, Afganistan WAS a just war 8 FRIGGING YEARS AGO!

    Still is son.

    It isn't any longer,

    Bull;sh*t, tell that to the troops getting shot at son, it is as much a war in 2009 as it was in 2001, it is just Bush and Cheney f&*ked it all up for their illegal war in Iraq.

    YES, because Bush in fact did take his eye off the ball (again with the ridiculous shoving of W in my face).

    Sorry if the truth husrts so much son

    There are only 8 frigging dozen Al Qaeda left in Iraq, Clif.

    You KNOW this how?

    Exactly what are your sources?

    The CIA and DOD would love to talk to them son.

    That and the government is corrupt.

    Yes just all the previous governments were corrupt, the warlord style of control which the Afghan's use directly feeds corruption.

    That and 100,000 troops CANNOT "defeat" the Taliban. Clif, do you not know NOTHING about the history of that region?

    Yes they can because the Taliban need to use extreme measures to control Afghanistan, which makes them unpopular, they have no real constituency, especially if the Afghan people are given a real choice. (Remember how the population reacted in Dec 2001 when the Taliban lost militarily?)

    And, really, if in fact it was a Republican putting forth this mealy-mouthed plan, would you STILL be supporting it?

    Um widdle one I supported bush in Oct 2001 when he went after bin Laden and the Taliban, so if a republican was actually following good COIN strategy and using their heads like President Obama is, I would be supporting them.

    I highly doubt it

    Shows how WRONG you usually are widdle one.

    buddy

    Sorry I ain't yer buddy son

    (the partisanship oozing from your mouth as you insulate this mediocre President).

    Well two things show clearly here.

    1. Your delusional thunking on how I really think.

    2. Your real views of President Obama who has been much better in his first 10 months then Bush ever was.

    Nice of you to reveal much whether you know it or not son.

    ReplyDelete
  17. This is frigging Beau Geste, Clif.

    No it is NOT a movie son, no matter how much you live in such a delusional world demanding to relate your thinking to fiction.
    100,000 troops can't tame that hellish "country".

    I never said tame son, ( you seem to have unrealistic ideas of what President Obama is proposing son), just give the people a chance of asserting themselves against the Taliban, and giving the people a chance to control their destiny son.

    And it certainly can't be done in 18 months (what a frigging joke that is).

    Care to cite the authority you used to come up with that, the left hemorrhoid on yer ass?

    And the country doesn't support it, Clif.

    Sorry but true national security isn't a popularity contest son.

    bec They certainly aren't going to like those flag-draped coffins any more with Obama in charge.

    Neither will I, however having been in combat and knowing personally people who made the ultimate sacrifice for the USA, I understand why sometimes it is necessary, as regrettable as it is.

    I can pretty much guarantee you that fact, fella.

    And?

    Sounds like another hemorrhoid opinion to me.

    I don't know,

    Yes we all see how much you do not know son.

    Clif, most of the honest liberals that I know hate this idea.

    So freakin what, this is T a popularity contest son, but real national security issues with a long historical legacy which must be included.

    Too bad that this totally inexplicable man cruch of yours on Obama precludes you from seeing straight.

    Damn man must you lie so much.

    No man crush, however you reveal much thinking everyone who agrees with the president must have one.

    I look at the strategy, time line and historical legacy and concluded the president made the best call given the situation and limitations Bush-Cheney handed him.

    Sorry if you can't see or accept a difference of opinion form the deluded one you expressed here son, and have to resort to lies about it.

    ReplyDelete
  18. We see our concerned contributors glee emanating from his posts. The glee literally jumps off the page.

    Apparently he's happy because the Bush Cheney plan worked. Once the realized they couldn't win the two wars they started in the ridiculous time frames they originally presented us all with, they dragged the wars on, so if a democrat took over they could hand it to him\her, so it would be the democrats who "cut and run".

    They handed President Obama a situation in which he was damned if he did, and damned if he didn't. Regardless of whether he chose to stay, or leave, he would be condemned.

    If he leaves, and pulls out now after Bush and Cheney destabilized the two countries, then the consequences to the people we leave behind, could be devastating. In Afghanistan it would be a retaliation blood bath. And what sort of newly emboldened government would be empowered by our withdrawal is of course a serious concern, particularly with the Pakistani nukes so nearby, and Al Quaida sympathetic forces dotting the path to them.

    On the other hand, staying isn't likely to do anything either. We are not the first country to occupy Afghanistan, and they know how to wear out an invading Army.

    In fact, if anyone had a clue as to our own history, they'd know its how we beat the British.

    During the revolution, the US was very much like the insurgent armies in Iraq and Afghanistan. Sure at first we went out in full dress and met the British on the battlefield. But after losing every skirmish we engaged in, and literally being chased off the battlefield time and time again, we turned to insurgent (guerrilla warfare) tactics of hit and run, attacking convoys and such, then blending back into the civilian population (watch the movie "Revolution" with Al Pacino if you want an accurate view of how we fought our own insurgent war against the British), thus keeping our soldiers alive to strike at the British over and over.

    ReplyDelete
  19. So the idea of staying and "winning" some sort of victory is an unlikely one.

    Thus, he's damned if he stays.

    Damned if he goes.

    Which is what the right wing wanted. They figured even if they lost the election, they won.

    After all, did the republican party really want John McCain and Sarah Palin inheriting this mess they made?

    Remember when these neoconservative fruitcakes went in they thought it was going to be over in a day. They thought they'd wipe the floor with the Iraqi Army, and conquer Afghanistan all in a twinkling of an eye. They thought this because they thought they were doing God's will.

    Instead they discovered God had taken the Red Eye to Cancun and was unavailable for unleashing hellfire on their enemies.

    They were stuck with it. Even in Afghanistan, just like Russia.

    So rather than end either of them, and work on pulling out, they decided to let it drag on, so they could hand it over to a Democrat, (do we really think the RNC thought John McCain was going to win?) and then let him "cut and run". Then slide in in 2012 for an easy win over the bumbling "cut-n-runner" by pointing out all the horrible disasters that occurred over there once we left the civilian population who supported us unprotected.

    And that's the rub. There will be hell to pay if we leave these people unprotected. The millions who stood by us, or the govt we stood up.

    So we can't just walk away from Bush's mess without cleaning it up the best we can, first.

    So we're stuck between Iraq and a hard place, so to speak.

    We can just walk out, and we can't just keep an open ended meatgrinding war going on forever. In Afghanistan, we need to ensure that the forces that would butcher and oppress the people who helped us, are sufficiently weakened so as to give whatever fledgling govt we leave behind a fighting chance at keeping the people from being slaughtered.

    As for setting a date for withdrawal, it does sound like he's serious about getting out. Of course that could just be a ploy to drag it on, after all its not too hard to keep moving the goal posts as we've seen. But it does appear as if what he's doing is trying to get enough forces in there in order to ensure that the Taliban are sufficiently weakened so that a safe withdrawal can be made.

    Bush and Cheney wouldn't set a date for withdrawal because they didn't want to give a possible incoming democrat President, an easy out. If they had set a withdrawal date then they couldn't call the democrat President a "cut-n-runner" when he eventually withdrew. So they let the war drag on for years and years, never bothering to do anything to end it, just drag it out.

    So while the escalation may be a tough pill to swallow, there just aren't any easy pills to swallow.

    Bush and Cheney started these wars, these messes.

    And then they handed them off to President Obama and acted as if they had nothing to do with it.

    Whatever decision he makes they are going to condemn him. Its how they laid it out.

    What he's doing is not perhaps what I'd do, but I'm not the President. Philosophically it appears he's intent on getting out of these wars, but logistically, it is not that easy.

    At this point I can say I'm glad I'm not the one making the decision, and I hope he's making the right one. I don't know what the right decision is, but I also know we can't turn our backs on those who stood by us in our incursions into their lands.

    Bush and Cheney made this mess.

    President Obama has to try and clean it up.

    ReplyDelete
  20. This is why our founding fathers were philosophically opposed to any sort of offensive or aggressive war being waged by the US in a foreign land.

    Because they know that its a no win situation, unless of course you want to commit mass genocide.

    ReplyDelete
  21. And lets not ignore the obvious.

    If Bush and Cheney and the big mouth Rumsfeld had half the spine (or brains attached to it) that they claim in their peacock strutting patriotic prose, then they'd have taken Bin Laden in Tora Bora, when they had the chance.

    Instead, too timid to make the move (or is there other reasons they let Bin Laden and his men escape?) they allowed those who they said struck us on 911 escape.

    And for 7 years they cowered, too afraid to go after Bin Laden where he ran to, in Pakistan, instead opting to fight a "wag the dog" war in Iraq.

    Killing the Iraqi people not because of anything they'd done to us, but because they were easier to kill.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I'll put it this way.

    My gut and my heart tell me its the wrong decision. We tried the surge idea in Iraq and while that did slow the attacks (although they NEVER stopped), it hasn't led to our withdrawal. So I don't see how its going to here. I think in 18 months we'll just see the goal posts moved a little further down the road, and so on.

    That's how it seems to me.

    But at the same time I don't have all the information, and if there is some scenario they see that allows for a safe withdrawal of the troops and also helps minimize the power of what are some really bad men (lets face it, the Taliban are some of the worst of the worst) to enact revenge on those who for whatever reasons supported us, then that would be better than just leaving and ignoring those who we know will be slaughtered when we do.

    If the Taliban supports Bin Laden as we are told and if they did harbor him and his forces, then fighting them is just.

    If we end up fighting the people of Afghanistan though, then it would be better to leave now.

    So like I said, I'm glad I'm not the one making the decision, and for now all I can do is try to support the President, and hope and pray he knows what the hell he is doing.

    God knows the last one didn't.

    ReplyDelete
  23. First of all, I take no "glee' in this. I was sincerely hoping that the president would do the right thing here and NOT make the same mistakes as Nixon, LBJ, McKinley, etc.. I was hoping that he would listen to Jim Jones, Biden (yeah, believe it or not, I wanted the President to listen to Biden), etc.. But he didn't. He hasn't.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Clif, are you actually telling me (with a straight face, no less) that if McCain had won the election, and it was him who had put forth this cockemamy plan, you would still be supporting it? Yeah, that's what I meant, not whether or not you supported Bush in 2001. Clif, WE ALL SUPPORTED BUSH IN 2001!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  25. Yes, Clif, I know that Beau Geste was a movie (Gary Cooper and Ray Milland). I was referring to the fact Beau Geste joined the French Foreign Legion, and that, yes, President Obama's plan sounds a hell of a lot like that.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Every single expert (regardless of political affiliation) says the same thing, Cliffy. Virtually all of Al Qaeda is currently residing in northwest Pakistan. Very few are still in Afghanistan. You have information that says otherwise? Please, share.

    ReplyDelete
  27. They also say that to achieve anything of a meaningful nature means that we're probably going to have to commit to at least a slog over there. Interesting, you don't agree. But seriously, Clif, what if things aren't any better over there in 18 months? What then? Is there any limit, whatsoever, to your patience with this president. As for this whole man-crush thing, Cliffy, I've never heard you criticize him ONCE. Nada. That, I'm afraid to tell you, is the very definition of a man-crush.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Widdle one, IF McCain had walked back from his Bomb Bomb Bomb Iran idiocy, and had admitted the mistakes Bush and Cheney had made (which he did not), and had worked to end Iraq, not extend Iraq, like he said he was going to do during the campaign, if he had done all that, then I would have backed his doing what President Obama has done.

    But as usual your asking for things which do not exist in reality.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Sorry but President Obama's plan has no relation to the fantasy celluloid delusional thinking you exhibit no matter how much you claim it does.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Bob Herbert referred to Obama's plan as "incoherent". Chris Matthews has compared it to a Rube Goldberg comic. Hell, Cliffy, even Keith (I love President Obama to death) Olbermann is parting with the President on this one, Rachel Maddow, etc.. You, young Clif, are a flat-out island on this one. Oh, and, Clif, Vietnam 101 - you just can't sustain a long and drawn out war if the public doesn't support it....At least it hasn't been the case in the past. I don't know, Clif, you might want to do a little reassessing on this one.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Al Qaeda like the Taliban crosses the border between the north west province of Pakistan and and Kunar Province for example.

    To wit;

    Stop bombing us: Osama isn’t here, says Pakistan

    Osama bin Laden and the top Al-Qaeda leadership are not in Pakistan, making US missile attacks against them futile, according to the country’s interior minister.

    “If Osama was in Pakistan we would know, with all the thousands of troops we have sent into the tribal areas in recent months,” Rehman Malik told The Sunday Times. “If he and all these four or five top people were in our area they would have been caught, the way we are searching.”

    He added: “According to our information Osama is in Afghanistan, probably Kunar, as most of the activities against Pakistan are being directed from Kunar.”


    Or Nangarhar Province

    according to wiki;

    Nangarhar shares a border with Pakistan, and the two regions share very close ties, with large amounts of migration in both directions. Most of the province still uses Pakistani currency rather than Afghan money for commercial transactions. The current Governor of the Province, Gul Agha Sherzai is also reported to have very tight relations with the Pakistani secret service, the ISI which has a presence in the area. The Pakistani government constructed a road from Torkham to Jalalabad to ease traffic and encourage trade.

    Ya thunk Bin Laden or others in al Qaeda could easily slip in and out here, since Pakistan has more influence then the Afghan government?

    Or maybe Nuristan Province a place so ungovernable, even General Stanley McChrystal pulled US troops out in 2009 ....

    The United States has withdrawn its troops from its four key bases in Nuristan, on the border with Pakistan, leaving the northeastern province as a safe haven for the Taliban-led insurgency to orchestrate its regional battles.

    The US has retained some forces in Nuristan's capital, Parun, to provide security for the governor and government facilities. The American position concerning the withdrawal is that due to winter conditions, supply arteries are choked, making it difficult to keep forces in remote areas. The US has pulled out from some areas in the past, but never from all four main bases.

    The move by the top US commander in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChystal, follows the death on October 3 of eight US soldiers as well as a number of Afghan National Army forces


    Ya thunk maybe the Taliban or al Qaeda could be there since the US has little or no assets to actually know anything at the moment? Any estimate(and that is what it really is a guess) relies on having intell assets, which in those provinces we currently do not. The Taliban or their Pakistani allies have control.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Sorry but as usual you ignored the totality of what I said to mock it, typical widdle will concern trolling

    ReplyDelete
  33. As usual you have no proof of your wild ass assertions however I back up mine son.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Why am not surprised you haven't backed up your hemorrhoid based claims yet.

    ReplyDelete
  35. PS given the pentagon budget, no amount of grandstanding by politicians for good press, is going to affect much son.

    The real question is are they going to get the votes to stop funding?

    Wanna bet they do not?

    ReplyDelete
  36. I said;

    IF McCain had walked back from his Bomb Bomb Bomb Iran idiocy, and had admitted the mistakes Bush and Cheney had made (which he did not), and had worked to end Iraq, not extend Iraq, like he said he was going to do during the campaign, if he had done all that,

    and you transposed it to simply;

    if McCain were to admit that Iraq was a mistake,

    Why are you so dishonest all the time son?

    ReplyDelete
  37. Why can't you debate honestly?

    ReplyDelete
  38. Cause you have been repeatedly caught in lies and distortions here,

    why do you have to stoop to that level?

    ReplyDelete
  39. Sorry but this is NOT Vietnam son, nobody put a time line on it,


    President Obama put an 18 month time line,

    So your knee jerk reaction to create a false analogy is just that.

    Sorry but many other incoherences in that flawed comparison also exist.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Like we aren't forcing a western style religion on Afghanistan like Diem tried to force catholicism on Vietnam, which BTW was the main reason so many Islamics went to Afghanistan to fight the Soviets, because they were forcing communism which denied the validity of Islam or any religion.

    We are not doing that.

    PS the British were seen as pushing Christianity at the time they tried but failed to colonize the country.

    ReplyDelete
  41. The Taliban do not have a major world power backing them, unlike the Vietnamese who had both communist china and the USSR helping them, and the US CIA backing the Afghan rebels in the 1980's.

    Nobody is backing or supplying the Taliban today which makes the crimes of Bush-Cheney abandoning the fight in 2002 to illegally attack Iraq all the worse, the Taliban could have been totally finished off in a couple of years if Bush-Cheney hadn't bee such cut and runners, (but then again they both avoided combat like the plague).

    ReplyDelete
  42. There was no secret CIA war in Afghanistan before 9-11, there was no blocked elections like Vietnam (Jesse Ventura also says it was blocked), the public wasn't lied to for years before the pentagon papers revealed the depth of the lies, everyone knows why the troops went in the first place, even if Bush-Cheney screwed up royally ... and unlike LBJ, President Obama has set real strategic goals and a time line.

    I for one am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on this one.

    ReplyDelete
  43. As for your lies about man-crushes, you have never heard 99.99% of what I say or think so you can stick that lie back in your hemorrhoid department where it comes from.

    News flash son, you know very little, and your dishonest statements show it.

    ReplyDelete
  44. For someone claiming they had no "glee", they sure didn't seem to be able to contain it.

    In fact he couldn't wait to jump in and taunt Clif with devilish glee, "What do you think of your hero now, Cliffy?". First post on the page, essentially "neener neener neeener".

    The glee was jumping off the page.

    ReplyDelete
  45. From Taegan:

    Chip Reid asked White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs if senators were correct calling the July 2011 date for beginning to withdrawal troops from Afghanistan a "target," meaning there was some wiggle room.

    Writes Reid: "After the briefing, Gibbs went to the president for clarification. Gibbs then called me to his office to relate what the president said. The president told him it IS locked in -- there is no flexibility. Troops WILL start coming home in July 2011. Period. It's etched in stone. Gibbs said he even had the chisel."


    About fixes that one doesn't it?


    President Obama says it is set in stone.

    ReplyDelete
  46. And as for Al Quaida being in Pakistan, I wonder which country our concerned contributor feels would make a better location with which to launch operations and incursions into Pakistan from.

    And how exactly would he keep Bin Laden and his murderous bunch from sneaking back into Afghanistan, if they didn't "own the border".

    Not saying that's what he's doing (and hopefully he's smart enough not to tell us until the mission is complete) but if it is what he wants to do, i.e. capture and or kill Bin Laden, then that would be a logical move. It would be the best place to launch special forces operations from and it would provide them with a US owned area near by to retreat to.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Hey slade, is Sarah the only comment you can tackle? That's news to you huh? I bet you are a Sarah water carrying lackey, but if you want the truth about the aborting thing, just ask. I ask again, how many troops commit suicide per year, since 2001?

    ReplyDelete
  48. Should be about time for the Glee Club to start warming up again.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Teeluck you are arguing with a fictional sock puppet, who also posts under the handles of rustyridesagain, returnofrusty, anonymous, and of course the current sock puppet role you are addressing.

    Col Frank Slade (RET) is not a real military figure but a celluloid fictional character the clown uses to try to stir up animosity from the normal posters here, and help widdle will when he is being called on his normal concern trollin' crap.

    from: Scent of a woman

    Lieutenant Colonel Frank Slade [played by](Al Pacino), a cantankerous middle-aged man who lives with his niece and her family, and who is now blind, alcoholic, eccentric, and nearly impossible to get along with.


    In other words a totally fictional character.

    Like most of crusty's sock puppets have been.

    Funniest thing is why did crusty have to register two versions of his rusty sock puppet?

    Why can't he use the original Rusty Shackleton one?

    Is it because the person who created that fictional sock puppet, doesn't post here any more and the crusty impersonator needed new ones to continue the sock puppetry?

    Why does crusty cut and run every time his fictional frank slade character is revealed?

    He seems to have lots of problems with the truth.

    Almost as many as widdle will does it seems

    ReplyDelete
  50. And ironically, they always seem to show up with "widdle Will".

    Of course Will wants you to believe its just a series of coinkydinks.

    :|

    An endless series of perpetual coinkydinks.

    ReplyDelete
  51. No prob.

    And don't sweat the trolls. They're harmless, unless of course you actually try to make sense out of what they're saying.

    :|


    That has been known to cause brain injuries.

    ReplyDelete
  52. ...like cranial implosions.

    ReplyDelete
  53. ...chronic cross eyed syndrome... cerebral rot...you know.

    The usual stuff.

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

    ReplyDelete
  55. clif said...

    ahhh the good old days.

    Ahh yes. The good ole days, when trolls were trolls.

    Not the "concerned contributors" that they now try to present themselves as.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Clif said...

    2006 when the line up was crusty with his sock puppets, freedum fan (ie gaydorf) and his sock puppets, tiny texan and his chicanery, voltron in his various disguises (ie Eric and voltaire among others)


    Yes, and lets not forget "Big K".

    :|

    Or was that "Special K"?

    ReplyDelete
  57. I forgot him, but after his very embarrassing stupid human knife tricks he cut and ran till this year when he reappeared to further embarrass himself one more time.

    ReplyDelete
  58. wow, wished i'd been there

    ReplyDelete
  59. hey guys, you can visit my blog and be amused, it's new, my first blog, tell me what you think

    ReplyDelete
  60. The GOPer hypocrisy parade just keeps on keepin' on .......

    Ga. speaker resigns after lobbyist affair claim

    Why don't they ever learn?

    ReplyDelete
  61. Hey widdle will you ain't the only one living thru movies instead of in reality,

    Looking into the minds of conservatives: Bill O'Reilly believes George C. Scott's 'Patton' performance is reality!

    Lookie widdle one, you and Bill O have lots in common, ironic ain't it son?

    ReplyDelete
  62. I hope that Al Qaeda DOES come back to Afghanistan, Clif. That way we can blow them to smithereens without having to worry about destabilizing a nuclear country. And we don't need 100,000 troops at $1,000,000 a year a piece to chase down 100 Al Qaeda fighters (yes, Clif, that is the number that virtually every expert - other tha you, Im saying LOL - is saying). This is an idiotic plan that, if in fact McCain had chosen it, you'd be calling him a frigging Nazi.

    ReplyDelete
  63. You didn't answer my question, boy. What if things aren't better in 18 months? Then what? What if Obama asks for another 18 months? Face it, boy, the only way that we're going to be able to accomplish anything over there is if we do what we did in Iraq; make some stupid assed deals with piggly wigglies. I mean, come on, Clif, who ARE the good guys over there?

    ReplyDelete
  64. Yes, Clif, Beau Geste was a movie, starring Gary Cooper. I was making an analogy, providing a literary counterpart. I mean, what, is this above and beyond your pay grade or something, Clif? Face it, boy, your hero backed himself into a corner here....and he's grasping.

    ReplyDelete
  65. Widdle Will,if Obama had asked for 100,000 additional troops Clif would have thought it a wonderful idea.

    Would'nt it have been great if we told the Germans we were going to quit in 1944.

    Obama has a very difficult time mouthing the word victory.

    Someone should put it on his teleprompter.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Lydia is one lucky girl.
    A star, terrific looking and backstage with KISS.
    The pics are great.
    But then, so is Lydia.

    George Vreeland Hill

    ReplyDelete
  67. You didn't answer my question, boy. What ...blah blah blah if?

    Sorry son, but here I'm gonna have to go along with Ronald Reagan,

    I don't answer hypothetical questions;

    ..... especially from a hemorrhoid thought based concern troll.

    ReplyDelete
  68. I was making an analogy, providing a literary counterpart.

    So was Bill O son;

    So was Bill O



    PS widdle one, he ain't my hero,

    ..... just the sitting President of the United States.

    For some reason the rectal lock on your widdle brain prevents that from reaching your cranium.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Lookie the concern troll is pretending the sock puppet troll is a real HONEST person.

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

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

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

    ReplyDelete
  73. 100 Al Qaeda fighters in Afghanistan, Clif - this, according to ABC News. It was a Brian Ross story, one of the best investigative reporters in the business. Oh, and, yeah, U.S. intelligence officials were his prime sources. Spin that, partisan boy.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Sorry son but your off base and you can't admit it, you demand I attack President Obama for keeping his word,

    Sorry but I knew this when I voted for him,

    Did you expect him to break his word to finish the war in Afghanistan he campaigned on?

    Oh right you don't answer questions just live in a celluloid fantasy world.


    Nice to see the sock puppet fictional clown still is your wing man BTW.

    Tell him Al Pacino says he is f*&kin' up the character, and he needs to go back to another of his fictional sock puppet routines .....

    ReplyDelete
  75. I have no idea who Frank Slade is, Clif. For all I frigging know, it's you.

    ReplyDelete
  76. I was hoping that he'd break this promise, Clif. Kind of like he did with lobbyists in his cabinet, gays in the military, etc..

    ReplyDelete
  77. 100 Al Qaeda fighters in Afghanistan, Clif - this, according to ABC News. It was a Brian Ross story, one of the best investigative reporters in the business. Oh, and, yeah, U.S. intelligence officials were his prime sources. Spin that, partisan boy.

    Tell me how many are in Kunar Province, Nangarhar Province, or Nuristan Province.

    remember the CIA has virtually no live on the ground sources in areas the Taliban controls which is why they don't have a clue where Bin Laden really is.

    The Pakistani Government (who usually has better sources concerning the Taliban and Al Qaeda)says he is in Kunar province, however the CIA can neither confirm or deny that assertion son.


    PS ain't spin like you push son just facts

    ReplyDelete
  78. I have no idea who Frank Slade is, Clif. For all I frigging know, it's you.

    Another dishonest statement.

    He is YOUR wingman not mine son.

    He used to reside at voltron's and run with your three clowns when you used to do your don Quixtoe routine like you did at Tomcats and existential cowboys.... why are you so dishonest all the time son?

    He shows up to help ya when your celluloid fantasies are being disassembled like here.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Umm son President Obama hasn't broke his promise, however with repubie obstruction in the congress and the real world challenges to the economy and national security, gay rights has to be pushed back a little


    sorry if reality don't conform to your celluloid fantasy world son,


    but that is how real world politics happens especially when the party of NO stalls everything they can.

    ReplyDelete
  80. The wingnuts, (and widdle will)'s heads are about to explode;

    ACORN Strikes Again!

    Allowing Americans who don't fit the dishonest right wing "real american" meme to vote?

    Damn how are the Glenn Becks and Sarah Palins gonna steal the election, when the illegal tactics Kenneth Blackwell used to steal the 2004 Ohio results are legally disavowed?

    ReplyDelete
  81. Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

    I was hoping that he'd break this promise, Clif. Kind of like he did with lobbyists in his cabinet, gays in the military, et


    I see the glee club is tuning up again.

    Note the Freudian slip here, showing the true nature of wills "concern".

    "I was hoping he'd break this promise"
    , or in other words, "I was hoping he'd fail"

    Of course, any true "moderate" knows that he is actually KEEPING his promise, to shift the focus from Iraq, which was Bush's diversion, to the war in Afghanistan.

    He made that clear throughout his campaign.

    He said this is what he'd do, and yet the "Concerned one" doesn't acknowledge this.

    Instead, he's just doing what he's always doing. Bashing President Obama and trying to undermine support for him.

    ReplyDelete
  82. All you need to know about Will, is contained in this revelation.


    Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

    I was hoping that he'd break this promise

    :|

    So much for his "concerns".

    ReplyDelete
  83. I don't have a "wing-man", Clif. And I DON'T know who Frank Slade is. Volt says it's not him. He's never lied to me. Maybe it's Rusty (who I've never run with, except for the fact that we both detest you - ah, the ties that bind). Maybe it's you. I mean, who has more spare time/depravity than you? Other than that, I could give a rat's ass who it is.

    ReplyDelete
  84. Rooting for Obama to fail? That's funny, in that hoping that he'd break a promise that could potentially ruin his Presidency sounds like I'm rooting for him NOT TO FAIL! And like I proved before (with copious amounts of documentation), Clif, Obama could get rid of "don't ask-don't tell" (for the rest of his Presidency anyway) with an executive order. He refuses (this despite the fact that HE'S the Commander in chief). And, yes, there ARE lobbyists in his administration. That's a fact.

    ReplyDelete
  85. Clif, just do a frigging search, would you? Every frigging estimate says that Al Qaeda for the most part has vacated Afghanistan. Why are you arguing about this. You're like a child who just lost ballgame, for Christ.

    ReplyDelete
  86. I see its Spin Class time.

    Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

    Rooting for Obama to fail? That's funny, in that hoping that he'd break a promise that could potentially ruin his Presidency sounds like I'm rooting for him NOT TO FAIL!


    lol

    Listen to the concerned one trying to spin. Unfortunately he once more talked himself into a corner.

    See, Will's obvious and anticipated spin leaves him with two rather unsavory positions.

    1. In order for his spin to work he has to be claiming that he is GLAD President Obama broke his campaign pledge of no lobbyists in his cabinet.

    2. He has to be glad the President Obama broke his promise to get rid of Don't Ask Don't Tell, and permit Gays to serve openly in the military.

    Observe:


    Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

    I was hoping that he'd break this promise, Clif.

    Kind of like he did with lobbyists in his cabinet, gays in the military, etc..


    So much for Will's spin class.

    ReplyDelete
  87. And lets not forget that all of that's moot anyway, because President Obama didn't break his campaign promise with regards to Afghanistan.


    In fact, he's keeping it, as several independent AP articles have already pointed out.

    He promised he would shift focus off of Bush's diversionary war in Iraq, and back on Afghanistan where he told us he felt it should have been in the first place.

    Whether you agree with his strategy or not, the President is KEEPING his campaign pledge to focus on the war in Afghanistan.

    NOT "breaking it", as the concerned one here is trying to claim.

    So his argument, is based on a lie about the President right off the bat.

    The President didn't "break his promise".

    He's keeping it.

    ReplyDelete
  88. Will "take no concerners" Hart said...

    Clif, just do a frigging search, would you? Every frigging estimate says that Al Qaeda for the most part has vacated Afghanistan. Why are you arguing about this.



    And as for his lame brain argument against Clif, notice that once more he fails to acknowledge the Taliban (who just butchered 30 people today in a Pakistan Mosque) and the fact that the reason there is only a small amount of Al Quaida in Afghanistan, is because THEY ARE SITTING ON THE PAKISTAN SIDE OF THE BORDER, MOVING IN TO KILL OUR TROOPS, THEN MOVING BACK ACROSS THE BORDER.

    This is common knowledge and has been told to us again and again, and there's no way that someone running his own "liberal blog" would not know this.

    But will doesn't acknowledge all that.


    Because his goal is not to support the President.

    His goal is to undermine support for the President.

    And that's why that's all we ever see him do.

    ReplyDelete
  89. Um widdle one who do you think knows more about what is happening on the Pakistan-Afghan border, ABC or the Pakistani Intelligence Service?

    Cause the Pakistani say Bin Laden is in Afghanistan, and he is the head of al Qaeda, so ya thunk he has more then 100 people protecting him?

    Or are you still stuck on stupid believing a clown like Ross,

    You know the guy Bill O trusts to give him good spin ... again and again and again? Mostly with bad intell framed so Bill O can spout his normal talking points.

    The guy who falsely claimed the 2001 anthrax attacks were from Iraq? Ya thunk the FBI agrees with Ross?

    For years Ross relied on Alexis Debat—an ABC News consultant who was revealed in 2007 to have concocted fake interviews with American politicians for publication in a French journal—for stories ranging from secret U.S. operations in Iran to Americans joining the Taliban. So good on intell he couldn't tell he was being scammed for years.

    Or the guy who screwed up his version of the Hasan story this fall?

    Somebody who, falsely accused Robert F. Kennedy Jr. of calling Barack Obama an "indentured servant" to the coal industry by taking a quote from his interview with Kennedy dramatically out of context.

    That Brian Ross?

    Or maybe the guys who live there 24-7, and speak the language ......

    You want me to accept the word of a clown who claims torture worked, Iraq caused the anthrax attacks, was pawned by a fraud for years and dishonestly reports comments to hype the story?


    You might,

    I don't ...... sorry widdle one.

    ReplyDelete
  90. He doesn't want to acknowledge any of those facts Clif.

    When difficult facts confront will that dismantle his arguments against the President, POOF.

    He vanishes.

    The more difficult it is to fabricate spin to combat his foot in mouth disease, the longer he will be gone.

    ReplyDelete
  91. He's off now coming up with a trick to explain why he omitted mentioning the border of Pakistan, the common knowledge that Bin Laden is there, the Taliban and their affiliation with Al Quaida and their butchering people in Pakistan, etc.

    And of course, trying to figure out how to explain why he lied about President Obama breaking his promise.

    President Obama said from day one of his campaign that if he were president, he'd turn his focus to the war in Afghanistan.

    So Will has to figure out how to try to spin his lying that the President broke his promise, when in fact he kept it.

    ReplyDelete
  92. I do however, have the utmost confidence that he'll come up with something.

    He's never failed in the past, and I'm sure he won't fail here. He'll come up with something.

    It will just take a little longer, since he talked himself into not one, but several corners this time.

    ReplyDelete
  93. Of course, its going to be pretty hard to concoct one of his bold faced lies that would be even remotely plausible to explain away why he lied about the President breaking his campaign promise on Afghanistan when everyone already knows he was keeping it.

    That's going to be a sticky wicket for the willyworm to wiggle out of.

    But I'm sure he'll make a sincere attempt.

    :)

    And that ought to be fun to watch.

    ReplyDelete
  94. At least if your "Human Phlegm", like me.

    :)

    ReplyDelete
  95. Let me just try and explain this to the brain dead here. 1) I'm PISSED (not gleeful or amused - PISSED!) that the President broke his promise about lobbyists and gays in the military. And 2) I was hoping that he WOULD break his promise about surging in Afghanistan. This, hello, BECAUSE Al Qaeda is NOT in Afghanistan - they're in frigging Pakistan! That's the whole frigging point! And, NO, we can't surge (the drones are bad enough - read the latest article in The Nation about them; the civilian casualties, etc.) in Pakistan because that's an unstable country with nuclear weapons and, plus, they haven't given us permission. What is your problem, dude? My God, are you ever crazy.

    ReplyDelete
  96. I didn't "lie" about the President breaking his promise about Afghanistan (THAT IS A LIE!!!!!!). I said that I was hoping that he WOULD break his promise and NOT surge in Afghanistan. This, in that I'm very fearful of Afghanistan turning into another quagmire. That, and I don't frigging like war. Oh my God, this is so frigging idiotic.

    ReplyDelete
  97. Al Qaeda is hiding in Pakistan. They are not killing our troops. Afghans are killing our troops. No, the Taliban ISN'T popular. But, at this point, I doubt that we are, either. THIS IS AN UNWINNABLE WAR. Jack Murtha says that it'tt take at least TEN YEARS to accomplish anything over there. Is Jack Murtha part of the right-wing establishment, too, Clif? Brian Ross didn't say that torture worked. He just reported on what some officials said. I know this because I saw him on O'Reilly. O'Reilly tried to coax him into declaring that, AND HE WOULDN'T. Why do you always assassinate people's characters, Clif?

    ReplyDelete
  98. Bravo.

    The best contortions yet.

    ReplyDelete
  99. And of course he is wrong. Al Quaida is moving across the border, striking our troops, then retreating back across the border, not to mention recruiting from among the Afghani people to recruit insurgent fighters to fight for their cause.

    And as his "glee", allow me to refresh everyones memories once more.

    ---
    Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

    What do you think of your hero now, Cliffy?.

    and this little diddy,

    Face it, boy, your hero backed himself into a corner here....and he's grasping.


    Not only does this "moderate" show zero respect for President Obama, he steadily, gleefully mocks him calling him things like "hero"(sarcastically_ and "boy".

    Last I checked, most educated "moderate liberals" have long since evolved from a place where referring to a black American Man as "BOY" was even remotely acceptable, in any context.

    Indeed, subtle racist glee jumps right off the page.

    ReplyDelete
  100. I already pointed out I disagree with the decision, but I like most people who support their President and their country up and to the point humanly and morally possible, I did not rush in to gleefully mock and ridicule liberal posters and lambaste the President, undermine support for him and mock and ridicule him using what is racist monikers.

    When the self proclaimed "liberal moderate" is hell bent on expressing his "concerns" refers to President Obama, the first African American President in history, as "your BOY", then it doesn't take Matlock to discern the origins of said contributors "concerns".

    Its clear at that point from whence they came.

    ReplyDelete
  101. Why do you always assassinate people's characters, Clif?

    sorry widdle one but if reporting FACTS is assassinating a person's character, well that is the breaks, cause a person's character should be based on facts about that person don't ya think?

    Sorry if his real history ain't what you want it to be.

    One interesting FACT you admitted is you detest me,

    why?

    I have never done anything but type into a keyboard, on a computer .....

    that is all .....

    Just use my first amendment right to express myself .......

    say what I think .....

    like the rest of the people who post here do,

    Like you do .....

    and I detest nobody here,

    not crusty, ( in all his sock puppet poses)

    not voltron,

    not freedom fan,

    not mike,

    not worf,

    certainly not lydia,

    (she graciously allows us to post here, which in itself is another way to defend the first amendment)

    ........

    not even widdle 'ole you.

    No widdle one I do not detest anyone here at all.

    No one ....

    not even you ....

    it is a blog, after all



    an expression of the rights we all have to say what we want freely;


    I understand the first amendment, and respect each of our rights to use it,

    I have never cried like some do to have things changed here.

    EVER

    I respect the constitution including the first amendment enough I volunteered to defend all of OUR rights to use it,

    .... and YOU detest me?

    Interesting .......

    ReplyDelete
  102. And we don't "need Pakistan's permission" to go after Bin Laden if they're harboring him or permitting him to be harbored.

    That's what we were SUPPOSED to be doing when the Taliban were harboring him in Afghanistan.

    I don't like the troop build up anymore than the "concerned" contributor who is now "pissed" at the President, but I also unlike this "moderate liberal" am willing to give the President a chance.

    If Bin Laden is in Pakistan (which I always said he was) and if they are harboring him or permitting him to be harbored then it is unfortunate for them that we will have to come get him. With or without their help.
    Don't like it but that's the way it is.

    Bush made this more difficult by lying, and invading a small country that had nothing to do with the attack on our country, and now its hard for President Obama to drum up support to get the job done. But it looks like that's what he's doing.

    The UN agrees us. NATO is agrees with us. The EU agrees with us. So I have a hunch, that the real goal here is to get Bin Laden and ensure the nukes are stable and safe. And for that I could see the need for more ground troops. I don't know. But that's my hunch.

    Either way I am not willing to try undermining support for him or his efforts simply because I don't agree with the way he's going about it. I agree with him in principle. Al Quaida = Bad. Bin Laden needs to go. Pakistan needs to get their shit together and ensure the safety of the nukes, and get Al Quaida in check. And we need to end the war and get out, as quickly as possible.

    Deciding how we go about doing that is what we hired him for. If I disagree, I'll say so. But I won't work to undermine support for him, mock him and demean him with racial insults.

    When someone proclaiming themselves as a "moderate liberal" calls the first democratic African American President in history a "boy", then you can bet on one thing.

    He ain't no "moderate liberal".

    :|

    Even if HE thinks he is.

    ReplyDelete
  103. Let me put it another way.

    Lets say the republicans stood up Mitt Romney in 012, and he beats President Obama.

    Romney's pretty moderate as conservatives go. And he's experienced and no one can argue he isn't an intelligent man, at least with regards to business. He also has some neoconservative views that I can't stand, but all in all he's a fairly reasonable alternative to the typical republican candidate.

    If he won, I wouldn't immediately set out to undermine support for him each time he did something I disagreed with. I wouldn't take glee in disrespecting him, or his efforts, and I wouldn't mock and ridicule him. I supported George W Bush (even though I couldn't stand him) for years until he went mad and started dismantling the Constitution and conquering foreign nations that had not attacked us. And I'd support someone like Romney, or anyone for that matter who was reasonable and was not openly and visibly corrupt.

    I think any good American would. And should.

    Now, no one can argue that President Obama is not reasonable. If he is anything at all, he is that.

    He is also moderate. Extremely moderate. In fact he took office and moved straight to the center. He actively tries to see all sides of a situation. Perhaps sometimes to his detriment, but nonetheless he is thorough, thoughtful, careful, and above all else, reasonable.

    So that leaves poor little "Human Phlegm" like me to ponder the nature of those who would boldly and constantly proclaim their "moderate liberal" philosophies while simultaneously working openly to undermine support for a President such as our current one.

    That begs the question, 'to what end?'.

    For me the answer is obvious.

    Others are free to draw their own conclusions as they see fit.

    ReplyDelete
  104. GHOST OF WORFEUS said...
    And we don't "need Pakistan's permission" to go after Bin Laden if they're harboring him or permitting him to be harbored.

    That's what we were SUPPOSED to be doing when the Taliban were harboring him in Afghanistan.

    I don't like the troop build up anymore than the "concerned" contributor who is now "pissed" at the President, but I also unlike this "moderate liberal" am willing to give the President a chance.

    If Bin Laden is in Pakistan (which I always said he was) and if they are harboring him or permitting him to be harbored then it is unfortunate for them that we will have to come get him. With or without their help.
    Don't like it but that's the way it is. "


    EXACTLY if Pakistan is harboring him in some remote region with or without their consent then we SHOULD go in and get him regardless of what Pakistan wants..........if they dont want our military in their country then THEY shouldnt have allowed Osama and the Taliban to take up residence and operations in their country then.

    I dont think an occupation can be successful and I want our troops out of there as soon as possible as well...........BUT I wholeheartedly supported Bush's quick strike against Afghanistan and the Taliban..........I also supported Bush's warning that we would go into any country harboring these terrorists to get them because these were the people that actually attacked us and they NEED to be held accountable.............I even supported GWB's first surge even theough i STRONGLY opposed the invasion of Iraq from day one........even THOUGH I didnt support the war and no longer supported GWB I was WILLING to support a try to clean up the mess he mase and "TRY" to stabilize things .

    It was the di8shonest propaganda campaign to TRY to sell, justify and even glorify an invasaion of a country (Iraq) that had absolutely NOTHING to do with attacking to control their oil like PNAC's plan for worlddomination and endless war stated, while letting the REAL terrorists escape in Afghanistan that caused me to no longer support GWB........and when I say he let Osama escape in Tora Bora thats EXACTLY what it looked like.......it looked like he WANTED a boogy man to trot out to scare Americans whenever uncomfortable information came out or when Bush wanted to ram through more laws to dismantle the Constitution to seize even more power.

    It was GWB's dishonest propaganda and lies, his treasonous war and dismantling of the Constitution and subsequent surges that were clearly nothing more than shams to buy time to continue unpopular wars that were based on a treasonous pack of lies that caused me to no longer support him........BUT he had my support for the entire first year of his presidency and for the first surge.

    I've NEVER seen a president attacked and targeted for EVERY SINGLE THING HE DOES like Obama is from day one now the Right Wing fools are TRYING to rewrite history and make it like this is Obama's economic collapse when he's just the guy yrying to clean up the mess GWB left us.........its so glaringly obvious that the Repugs are out to destroy Obama and attack everything he does.......if he helped a little girl cross the street the repugs would spin it like he tried to molest her.

    I mean consider what would happen to the repugs if Obama got health care passed stabilized and got our military out of Afghanistan and got our economy recovering........the repugs would be finished for DECADES.........THEY CANT HAVE THAT.........so its scorched earth policy like we see now,

    ReplyDelete
  105. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates admitted that it has been years since the US had any good intel on the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden.

    The United States does not know where al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden is hiding and has not had any good intelligence on his whereabouts in “years,” Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Saturday.

    Speaking in an interview to be aired on Sunday on ABC's "This Week" program, Gates also said he could not confirm reports this week that a detainee might have seen bin Laden in Afghanistan earlier this year.

    "We don't know for a fact where Osama bin Laden is. If we did, we'd go and get him," Gates said in excerpts released by ABC.

    ‘I think it’s been years’


    Asked when was the last time the United States had any good intelligence on his whereabouts, Gates said, "I think it's been years."

    The British Broadcasting Corp. reported earlier this week that a detainee in Pakistan claimed to have information that bin Laden was in Ghazni in eastern Afghanistan in January or February.

    The U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee released a report late last month that blamed the lack of concerted efforts by former President George W. Bush's administration and U.S. military commanders for allowing bin Laden to escape from the Tora Bora caves of Afghanistan in late 2001.


    Hmmm ... somebody needs to tell Brian Ross that Sec of Def Gates says we don't know what Ross claims we know ........ it also looks like Bin Laden might be moving around a bit.

    PS, somebody ought to tell our concern troll too.

    ReplyDelete
  106. Do you think al Qaeda might be around bin Laden, or is he on a solo road trip, for old times sake?

    according to the concern troll the CIA is doing a head count in Afghanistan, while they have no clue(see Sec gates statement) where bin Laden is.

    Kinda wacked don't ya think widdle one?

    ReplyDelete
  107. Taliban detainee says Bin Laden is in Afghanistan

    A Taliban detainee in Pakistan claims to have information about Osama Bin Laden's whereabouts in January or February of this year.

    His claims cannot be verified but a leading American expert says his account should be investigated.

    The detainee claims to have met Osama Bin Laden numerous times before 9/11.

    He told British Broadcast that earlier this year he met a trusted contact that had seen Bin Laden 15 to 20 days earlier across the border in Afghanistan.

    "In 2009, in January or February I met this friend of mine. He said he had come from meeting Sheikh Osama, and he could arrange for me to meet him," he said.

    According to the detainee, his contact is a Mehsud tribesman, responsible for getting al-Qaeda operatives based abroad to meetings with Bin Laden.

    "He helps al-Qaeda people coming from other countries to get to the sheikh, so he can advise them on whatever they are planning for Europe or other places.

    "The sheikh doesn't stay in any one place. That guy came from Ghazni, so I think that's where the sheikh was."


    Damn it wasn't one of the places I thought he might be;

    Much deeper inside Afghanistan, it would be quite a walk from Tora Bora, however thanks to Bush-Cheney's incompetency, he has eight years to make the journey.


    Nice little tidbit from wiki;

    Since the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001, there has been a Provincial reconstruction base and a Nato forces base. These western forces (mostly Polish Armed Forces) are hunting Taliban militants and al-Qaida, who are still active in the area causing deaths to Afghan government employees and local civilian population of the province as well.

    Like many southern Afghan provinces, Ghazni has a precarious security situation. The Taliban are reported to control most of the rural areas outside of the capital , and are heavily involved in attacks on provincial schools and government infrastructure. The province has avoided the outright warfare seen in other areas of Afghanistan such as Helmand Province and Kandahar Province, but that is due more to political expediency and the tactical plans of the NATO ISAF force than the existence of a stable security situation in the province. Ex-Governor Taj Mohammad was killed by terrorists in 2006 after being appointed police chief of the province with a mandate to quell the power of the Taliban. On the same day there was an unsuccessful attempt on the life of the governor at the time, Sher Alam Ibrahimi . There is an Polish and American Provincial Reconstruction Team base located in Ghazni City.

    In late April 2007, news agencies reported that Taliban fighters had taken control of Giro District in the province. The Taliban reportedly killed the district administrator, chief of police (who had been on the job for only one month) and three police officers. The Taliban withdrew from the district center one day later.

    In July 2007, 23 South Korean volunteers were kidnapped in the Ghazni province by the Taliban. Two of them were killed and their bodies were dumped in various places. As of August 1, security force was planned to be deployed to secure the release of those kidnapped.


    Wanna bet Brian Ross or the concern troll don't know that either.

    Maybe the two of them need to take their own road trip and go check it out personally.

    It would make Gene Simmons much happier if the concern troll weren't pressing him to change his name, so the concern troll wouldn't get so embarrassed discussing his late night fantasy material ..... jus' sayin'

    ReplyDelete
  108. For the record, I'm against the surge. In fact, and will knows this as I've stated it for years now, his ideas about strike forces working to get at Bin Laden and followers, special ops stuff, air, etc, is how I'd go after Bin Laden and Al Quaida. I would not escalate the war, or send in more troops. I don't believe it will work. I don't see how it will work. I don't know where the soldiers are coming from. I don't know how we're going to pay for it. And I don't know how serious they really are about leaving next year. From what Patraeus and Clinton said this morning on the talk shows it sounds like they're none too serious about it at all.

    So if I were making the call, I'd say pull out the troops, leave only enough to guide in air strikes if needed and have done with it. Then turn the Bin Laden problem over to the CIA (where it belonged in the first place) and go blast his ass when they locate him.

    That's what I'd do. Which is pretty much what Will is claiming he'd do. But I wouldn't come out bashing the President, mocking him and working to undermines support for him when he hasn't done anything to merit that.

    Bush earned our enmity by starting an illegal war that cost the lives of hundreds of thousands. I didn't want to not support him then, but he left me know choice. He left the country no choice. That's why they turned on him. We didn't turn on him because he was a republican (at the time he was elected I was just figuring out the philosophical differences between the two parties). It wasn't personal. It was that he was asking us to ignore the difference between necessary war and murder, and most of us couldn't make that stretch.

    Most people morals would not permit such a compromise. Individually we had no power to stop him, but collectively, as a group, we hoped we could change hearts and minds and stop the senseless killing.

    President Obama wasn't my choice. I told everyone I could not support him as a candidate when he caved on the 4th Amendment. I told everyone that day he lost my vote. And he did. I did not vote for him. And if this escalation turns out to be just more of the same, i.e. sending more bodies into the meatgrinder for nothing, then he won't get my vote in 2012. (unless of course the republicans are dumb enough to stand up someone like Sarah Palin, at which point I imagine 2 thirds of the country will vote for him just to vote against her).

    But at this point it is incumbent upon me to give him the same support I gave President Bush up and until he decided to drop the ball on Bin Laden and go after Iraq, simply because it looked easier.

    If some people don't want to support him at this point, and believe he has failed to offer real change, then that is their right and they are not "bad people" for making that decision. I think they're premature, but if they choose that then that is their right. Especially those who TRULY supported him up until now. Lets face it. He's starting to sound more and more like George W Bush. And that's very discouraging.

    But there's a difference between those people, and the people who have been working to undermine him since day one. Will has worked, (at least with his posts in here) since day 1 to undermine support for him. That's what I've seen. That's what most of us have seen. And a prime example is his first comment (the very first comment on the thread) in here, where he gleefully pounces on the President, using terms like "Beau Geste", "hero" (sarcastically) and worse, the outright racist "boy"


    I might disagree with what the President's doing, but he is not the one who started the war.

    ReplyDelete
  109. He is however the person hired to clean it up. So at the end of the day its up to him to decide how best to accomplish that clean up. And early on like this, all we can do as Americans is support him, even if we disagree with his strategies. Hope and pray he knows what he's doing, and encourage him to move in the directions we want the country to move in.

    Hiring a new President is sort of like hiring a chef.

    If you hire him to make the meal, then you've got to let him choose the recipe.

    I hope and pray the President is right. I hope and pray he knows what he's doing. And if it looks like he's not going to get us out, then I am confident the American people will vote him out in a few years.

    ReplyDelete
  110. But for now, less than 1 year into his administration, I think we owe it to him to support him and pray for the success of his efforts.

    As long as it doesn't involve any more illegal war.

    And since the international community, (ISAF,NATO) have nearly as many troops in Afghanistan as we do, its clearly not just President Obama who sees a threat to the world originating from Afghanistan and the surrounding region.

    So regardless of my own doubts or "concerns" I am compelled to support him and his efforts and pray for their success.

    If I am wrong to trust in him, I'll know soon enough. We'll all know soon enough.

    ReplyDelete
  111. Adviser: Obama plans to launch Bin Laden hunt anew

    The United States will launch a new effort to track down Osama bin Laden who is believed to be hiding in the mountains along the Afghan-Pakistan border, a senior US official said on Sunday.

    Intelligence reports suggest the Al-Qaeda chief "is somewhere inside north Waziristan, sometimes on the Pakistani side of the border, sometimes on the Afghan side of the border," said national security adviser James Jones.

    Asked if President Barack Obama's administration planned a fresh attempt to go after Al-Qaeda's leader, Jones said: "I think so."

    Bin Laden was a "very important symbol of what Al-Qaeda stands for" and it was crucial to make sure he was on the run or captured, Jones, a retired Marine general, told CNN's "State of the Union" program.

    His comment that Bin Laden sometimes crossed to the Afghan side of the mountainous border contrasted with previous accounts from US officials that suggested the Al-Qaeda chief was hiding in Pakistan.


    So he is crossing the border according to James Jones,

    Does Brian Ross consider him a more reliable source then, Alexis Debat?

    The President of the United States certainly does, since he hired him and not Debat or even Ross for a national security position.

    But widdle one claims Ross knows all ...........

    ReplyDelete
  112. I don't have a "wing-man", Clif.

    As for crusty (or his sock puppets)NOT being your wingman widdle one;

    There is this gem from Voltron's place;

    Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

    Tom? I'm ready to sick Rusty after him at this point.

    May 29, 2008 3:40 PM



    Hmmmm ...... you claim to be able to sick him on people who frustrate you there son.


    Another lie from the guy who claimed not to be a "liberal" after he claimed to be a "liberal" at Media Matters to foole people to read his waste of bandwidth.

    Your character seems to be partly made up of deceit and dishonesty

    Why is that widdle one?

    ReplyDelete
  113. I wonder if Lydia ever read that thread Clif. All of Voltron's "why Miss Cornell, your hair looks lovely today" would dissolve in an instant if she did.

    That entire thread is Voltron, Crusty, Will, etc all mocking Lydia, her career, TCFC, etc.

    And I don't mean in a light hearted way. Ugly insults about her, her career, her website and radio show, etc.

    Comment after comment from all of them, Will included, show what they REALLY think about Lydia.

    And show's Will in his true comfort zone.

    A zone made up of far right wing neoconservative lunatics.

    But Will's not one of them.

    :|

    He just hangs out with them and helps sell their talking points, thats all.

    ReplyDelete
  114. A few highlights from that thread, where Voltron and Will express their true feelings towards Lydia.

    ---

    Voltron said...

    Anyone else notice this over at Lydia's?

    There is an article on "Yahoo News" about her radio show.

    She and they are acting like they've been "discovered" or something. People are congratulating her, and she's all smiles and thank you's.

    But if you look, it's on "PRweb"...

    Somebody PAID for it.
    (Probably her or Basham)

    And this from PRweb, "PRWeb, a leader in online news and press release distribution, has been used by more than 40,000 organizations of all sizes to increase the visibility of their news, improve their search engine rankings and drive traffic to their Web site."

    What a disingenuous load of horse crap!

    ReplyDelete
  115. Voltron said...

    You know, maybe I ought to do a post on how this crap got started eh?

    How to build a career on someone else's back and never say thank you?

    Rustyridesagain said...

    The thread reads as if Lydia wrote it herself,which I'm sure she did.She continues to trade on a sitcom thats been off the air for 20 years.She makes her living doing autograph shows with other has been "D" listers and selling 20 year old semi-nude photos of herself on the web site.As for her Ann Coulter book....she was spouting off about it hitting the shelves,that was four years ago.



    Voltron said...

    LOL, you do know how to cut through the bullshit don't you?

    How come nobody mentions her book anymore? She's been writing the one about Ann and a couple of others now for years.

    By the time she gets it published nobody will remember why it was ever written. (not that I actually believe she's writing even one anymore)


    Voltron said...

    I got a helluva good start on a post regarding Lydia. I just don't know wether to publish it yet or not.


    ReplyDelete
  116. And then there's this one from the "moderate" will who has "so much respect" for Lydia.


    Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

    I always liked the brunette on that doltish show way better.

    You see, I had good taste even back then (is Mike laughing?).

    ReplyDelete
  117. So there's Will, over there yukking it up with the most far right neocons to hit this country since Tailgunner Joe.

    But when he comes in here, hes suddenly her "concerned friend".


    "My, isn't your hair looking lovely today Mrs Cornell"

    ReplyDelete
  118. A friend doesn't always say what you want to hear. A friend sometimes gets into arguments with you, because they tell you what they truly think, not what you want to hear.

    A friend isn't the guy who acts reasonable to you in person, then ridicules you to everyone else behind your back.

    ReplyDelete
  119. The Taliban just slaughtered another 50 people today in another Pakistan suicide attack.

    With the Taliban around, who needs Al Quaida?

    ReplyDelete
  120. Worf, you and Mike are on top of the news.

    ReplyDelete
  121. Worf and Mike get sloshed at the town wateringhole.

    ReplyDelete
  122. We're not as think as you drunk we are...

    ReplyDelete
  123. Remember the Acron are worse the al Qaeda reich wing talking point from a certain video?

    Wanna see something interesting?

    ACORN Report Finds No Illegal Conduct

    the real story;

    The videos that have been released appear to have been edited, in some cases substantially, including the insertion of a substitute voiceover for significant portions of Mr. O'Keefe's and Ms. Giles's comments, which makes it difficult to determine the questions to which ACORN employees are responding. A comparison of the publicly available transcripts to the released videos confirms that large portions of the original video have been omitted from the released versions.

    In other words they people who made the video CHANGED what they recorded, to make the results appear different then they actually recorded.

    Wanna bet the concern troll (who wants Gene Simmons to change his name to stop his embarrassment) totally ignores this..

    fake noise also?

    we know volton will.

    Wanna bet the GOPers who piled on forget their piling on and don't ask for the real truth instead of the reich wing-fake noise propaganda.

    ReplyDelete
  124. You're lying about my record again, Clif. I've only sharply criticized ACORN once, for their hypocrisy - this, for their constantly pushing for unionizing and minimum wage increases but opposing them for their own workers. YES, a-holes like Ensign and Sanford SHOULD be called out for hypocrisy, but so should left-wing pressure groups like ACORN. What's fair is fair.

    ReplyDelete
  125. Feelings and relationships can change over time, Clif (well, maybe not for you but for most people). I didn't like any of you guys at first. But Lydia seems like a decent person who is willing to grow, move on, give people chances, etc.. That's a commendable thing, Clif. You might want to try it yourself some time.

    ReplyDelete
  126. Hey, widdle one,

    Has Gene Simmons got back to ya yet on your delusional request?

    Bhawahwhahwhawhwhwahahwhahwhaaaa ....

    That was a funny one widdle one.

    Askin Gene Simmons to change his name cause your embarrassed when you talk to your 'friends" about your late night fantasies ....

    ..... and you publicly blogged about it.

    Good one son.

    ReplyDelete
  127. Sorry widdle one but you MISSED the real story AGAIN.

    The total hypocrisy of Breitbart, fake news ET Al to put the bogus video tapes to attack Acorn, and getting their collective panties in a bunch.

    We don't see the same effort to correct the record do we?

    Reich wing hypocrisy rules the day again, and widdle will can't see it.

    Why am I not surprised?

    ReplyDelete
  128. Merry ChristmaKwanzannukah everyone.

    ReplyDelete
  129. On a shell torn section of the trenches along the Western Front, on a cold Christmas Eve in 1914, German soldiers put down their weapons, and did something astounding. They began decorating what was left of the trees in the war torn battlefield with candles. Then they began to sing. They sang a song called "Stille Nacht", Silent Night to us, loudly enough for the English soldiers in could hear them across No Mans Land, in their own trenches. They literally began singing Christmas carols to the men they had been shooting at just hours before.

    The British soldiers, instead of using the sound to hone in on targets, responded by singing carols back to the Germans.

    This led to even more amazing circumstances that night, as the soldiers began walking out into the open of No Mans Land (The DMZ between the trenches) and shaking hands, exchanging stories, gifts, and helping each other retrieve the dead.

    This spirit of Christmas spread.

    Soon, soldiers further down the line were doing likewise, and soon soldiers were literally coming into each others trenches unharmed, to exchange food, gifts, stories, even addresses so they could write each other after the war (which many of them did, even becoming life long friends).

    They did this to the chagrin of the British command. They did this on their own.

    Soon this spirit of Christmas peace, spread to the French lines and the guns fell silent across the Western Front, and in many sections this peace continued all the way up until News Years.

    If these men, who a day earlier had been brutally killing one another, could lay down their arms and their differences in a celebration of the hopes and dreams of us all, peace and good will toward men, then wouldn't it be nice if the warring parties in this country could just call a truce too, to honor the spirit of the season?

    Wouldn't it be a great Christmas, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, etc, if we all took time out of our partisan civil war (and it is a civil war in this country, currently a war of words but nonetheless a civil war) and embraced the values we all hold dear at the core?

    Wouldn't it be nice if for the holidays we embraced the spirit of the season and put down our guns long enough to greet each other with glad tidings and a welcome respite from our fighting?

    If men shooting and killing each other could do it then it seems we as a country ought to be able to as well.

    ReplyDelete
  130. Sometimes I feel like I'm in that old episode of Star Trek called "The Gamesters of Triskelion", where crew members are captured by a race of disembodied beings who's sole pleasure in life is watching and betting on others who they entice and compel into combat.

    Only in this instance, its the press and the political leaders who are playing us against each other.

    Most of the German and British soldiers who crossed the trenches that Christmas evening 95 years ago on the Western Front to exchange gifts and friendship didn't really even know what the war was about. Just that their leaders ordered them off to fight it on their behalf, and so there they were. And for that special night, and for some several nights to follow, they said "enough" and cast off their puppet masters ideologies and whims and refused to participate in the grand spectacle of death.

    And the truth is many of us in this country side with our leaders often not even knowing why or for what. And the leaders, our puppet masters, and their vehicle which is the Press, pull our strings up and down and cause friends and families to turn on each other while they rake in the dough. The Press after all is one of the biggest culprits here next to the political leaders themselves, always fanning the fires of discord, always fueling the discontent. Rather than actually reporting truth, they report what "both sides" have to say, regardless of how utterly unfounded and non factual one side or the other may be. And the Press has been raking in the dough ever since with their 24x7 non stop "news". If this were a street fight in school, the Press would be the ones egging two fighters on.

    Wouldn't it be great if this Christmas we did like the soldiers on the Western Front did that Christmas even 95 years ago and effectively told the Press and the Politicians to stick it, and we as Americans reached across the trenches to find what common bonds we still share? Find the common humanity that is within most of us? Rather than allow our puppet masters the pleasure of robbing us of our joy for another consecutive Christmas?

    The spirit of brotherhood in this country hasn't been felt by all for almost a decade now, and I think its time we invited it back in, and booted out our puppet masters from our hearts for a little season.


    They've had enough fun, and made enough money at our expense.


    "1000 quatloos on the newcomer"

    ReplyDelete
  131. Where's that old bulls---ing Mike been hiding?

    Off by himself somewhere doing something with himself.

    ReplyDelete
  132. Or Mike is hiding at the corner bar.

    ReplyDelete
  133. Someone PLEASE tell me why Joe Liebermasn hasnt been stripped of his committee position yet?

    ReplyDelete
  134. Because Harry Reid is more concerned with passing a bill, any bill, and placating to the republicans rather than actually doing anything to help the American people?

    ReplyDelete
  135. U.S. health bill passes crucial Senate test

    In a middle-of-the-night vote in a snowbound U.S. capital, Democrats unanimously backed the first in a series of three procedural motions to cut off debate and move the bill to a final vote by the night of Christmas Eve.

    ReplyDelete
  136. Citadel Broadcasting Bankruptcy: Imus Radio Syndicator Files For Bankruptcy Protection

    Citadel Broadcasting Corp., the nation's third-largest radio broadcasting company, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on Sunday in an effort to restructure its hefty debt load as it continues to face declining advertising revenue.

    Citadel owns and operates 224 radio stations, including KABC-AM in Los Angeles, WLS-AM in Chicago, WABC-AM and WPLJ-FM in New York and KGO-AM in San Francisco. Citadel's WABC is home to several syndicated hosts, including Don Imus, Rush Limbaugh, Joe Scarborough and Mark Levin.


    I wonder if the fat old drug addict is gonna take a pay cut?

    Or the dead intern guy?

    Bhawawahwhahwhahwahwaaaa

    the wing nuts can’t pay their freakin bills

    cause nobody wants to pay money to listen to their lies anymore,

    way too freakin' funny,

    they can't get enuf wingnuts to buy the crap they are sellin' anymore,

    either figuratively or in reality.

    totally karmatic

    freakin outstanding.

    ReplyDelete
  137. Merry Christmas Clif.

    Merry merry Christmas.

    ReplyDelete
  138. Merry Christmas; Worf, Lydia, Mike, Jolly, Tomcat, Frank Frey, Teeluck, Robert Rouse, egnima4ever, James Hillis Ford, and everyone else.

    ReplyDelete
  139. For stocks, the worst decade ever

    Since End of 1999, U.S. Stocks' Performance Has Been the All-Time Clunker; Even 1930s Beat It

    Thank you G W Bush, Alan Greenspan, Phil Gramm and the rest of the republiscum who have worked diligently to destroy the America we all love to return us the the failed policies if the gilded age;

    heck of a job guys ......

    Looks like they succeeded.

    ReplyDelete
  140. They have done much more to destroy America the Bin Laden ever could dream of doing.

    ReplyDelete
  141. Merry Christmas Clif, Lydia, Worf and Everyone else!!

    ReplyDelete
  142. To those that remember the most important and most simple rules to life...and even to those that make a mockery of even the suggestion of these rules...
    Merry Christmas...if you celebrate...and A New Year of all blessed miracles and events.

    Remember to love and respect others...as you would like done unto you. Forgive what hurt you and allow it to not happen again. The old eye for an eye would have each one of us blind by now. Remain loyal to what you heart and soul know is right...and if you don't know what's right...learn.
    Stop bitch slapping everyone just because you feel entitled to.
    Remember people have feelings...and drop in on an eldery, lonley widow. Compliment someone on something even if you feel they are butt ugly.
    Support those hurting, hungry, scared, lonley or dying with a gentle word, a touch or even a quarter if you can spare it.
    Never be ashamed of who you are...you are the bomb like Superman, Garbo and even Horshack (welcome back kotter).
    Belive in healing,love,peace,kindness...

    Worry not about whow has the most money and power...you can't expect it to pay for a ticket to heaven.
    Be psyched that you can drink your favorite grape tonic...feel how warm your feet are...or the fact that you can read this.
    Let everyone do the best they can just like you are doing...collectively, that's how the Berlin Wall came down...Hitler was stopped for the most part...disease is cured...and a family is collective.
    Find and seek good.
    Turn from bad.
    Say something nice.
    YOU are not the reason and the way the sun, moon and stars exist.
    All of us are.
    ALL OF US.
    Bless and much love to you all...
    Jim

    ReplyDelete
  143. Mike and Clif, you two don't have a pot to piss in.

    ReplyDelete
  144. "The system worked." Janet Napolitano....Oh, yeah, I feel real safe with this idiot in charge. Brownie, you did a hell of a job!

    ReplyDelete
  145. You calling somebody an idiot is like the pot callin' the kettle black widdle one.

    ReplyDelete
  146. The system worked!!!! Oh,the system failed!!! No wait,the system worked!!! It did'nt? I'm sorry the system failed.Yea,thats the ticket...the system failed.

    On second thought it was Bushes fault...yes,thats it.

    ReplyDelete
  147. A carpet muncher in charge of homeland security.Now there's a bright move.

    ReplyDelete
  148. Obama vows to use his powers to twart terrorist.....

    He's gonna yell Booga Booga at them.

    ReplyDelete
  149. 4 serious problems with the health bill. (both of them)


    1. It compels all Americans to buy health insurance. Those who can't afford to but are over the poverty level will be either compelled to or fined every year on their taxes.

    2. It doesn't expand Medicare to cover everyone.

    3. It promises to simply reward the insurance companies by compelling people to purchase their plans. They have raped the people for decades and now we're ordering Americans to buy their insurance? Incredible.

    4. It won't ultimately save anyone any money or help people who can't afford insurance to purchase it.

    Insurance for a single individual who cannot get it through their work is about 1000 dollars a month. Who the hell has that much money to pay some rotten insurance company?

    The republicans have fought tooth and nail to make sure any health insurance bill that comes out of the democratic congress is so worthless as to ensure that it does absolutely zero good.

    And the democrats, spineless, worthless bootlickers of the republicans that they are, have rolled over completely, and placated to every rotten republican demand.

    I honestly don't know which is worse.

    The republican scumbags who care NOTHING about the American people and who work to keep any real help for the average American out of reach, or the spineless democrats, who do nothing but placate to them.

    ReplyDelete
  150. This bill actually is a threat to all Americans liberty. Its a threat because of a demand that the republicans dreamed up, and that the democrats adopted to placate to them.

    For the first time in history, all Americans are being compelled to purchase a product of mega corporations or be fined by the government.

    Since when is this acceptable in America? Private corporations, mega giants who have robbed and raped the American people for decades with their rotten insurance programs and overpriced premiums are now to be rewarded by a government decree compelling every person in the country to buy their products?

    What the hell is that?

    What comparison is there to that?

    Some idiots try to liken it to the mandate to purchase auto insurance, but its not even remotely comparable.

    Driving an automobile is a privilege, not a God given right. Driving an automobile threatens other life and property, and hence one of the requirements to drive is to be adequately insured to cover others. In most states there is no law that your auto insurance covers yourself or your own property. Just the other guys.

    The guy you plow into while texting.

    But this bill, this "health care reform" (what a laugh) demands that from now on, just to BREATH OXYGEN, ....just to EXIST.....you must purchase the products of these mega insurance companies.

    Congress looks at a problem, the problem of the insurance companies ripping off the American people and killing them by denying needed coverage, and what "solution" do they come up with?

    Why do decree that every person in the land must purchase their products, of course.

    :|

    Its amazing that they're getting away with it, but the liberals and progressives so tired of living under neocon rule, are afraid to speak up and out against the democrats or the President that they let failures like this occur. They're afraid of not supporting him and giving the republicans an edge, because they don't want to live under republican rule again.

    Well, I've got news for them.

    We already are.

    ReplyDelete
  151. In fact, we never left republican rule.

    As long as the democrats in power haven't the spine to exercise that power, we'll always be under republican rule.

    ReplyDelete
  152. GHOST OF WORFEUS said...
    In fact, we never left republican rule.

    As long as the democrats in power haven't the spine to exercise that power, we'll always be under republican rule."


    Thats what it seems like to me If I were Obama, Pelosi and Reed I would be very careful of thumping my chest and declaring victory and proclaiming "REAL" Health Care Reform has happened because if regular people STILL see their premiums rise 400% faster than the general rate of inflation and still cant afford health insurance or the most basic access to medical care and/or get fined for not being able to afford adaquate health care there may well be another throw the bums out movement or at least apathy to come out and vote for the liberal base.

    ReplyDelete
  153. GHOST OF WORFEUS said...
    This bill actually is a threat to all Americans liberty. Its a threat because of a demand that the republicans dreamed up, and that the democrats adopted to placate to them.

    For the first time in history, all Americans are being compelled to purchase a product of mega corporations or be fined by the government.

    Since when is this acceptable in America? Private corporations, mega giants who have robbed and raped the American people for decades with their rotten insurance programs and overpriced premiums are now to be rewarded by a government decree compelling every person in the country to buy their products?

    What the hell is that?"


    My thoughts EXACTLY.........its DEMANDING we purchase these bloodsuckerws product at WHATEVER price they feel like charging us under penalty of fine.


    There is NO WAY this can work without a clear component and/or mechanism to hold down costs and make premiums more afforable.........minus such a mechaism it is nothing more than a boon to the insurance industry written by insurance industry lobbyists to benefit the insurance industry at the expense of regular American citizens and taxpayers.

    ReplyDelete
  154. cosmiccowboy said...
    The system worked!!!! Oh,the system failed!!! No wait,the system worked!!! It did'nt? I'm sorry the system failed.Yea,thats the ticket...the system failed.

    On second thought it was Bushes fault...yes,thats"


    Hey STUPID you and your kind dont have a leg to stand on in telling us what works to keep us safe...........the biggest terrorist attack in our nations history happened under GWB's watch and yet you IDIOTS thump your chest and lower the bar so low as to try and pretend nothing happening after this collossal failure is a reason to thump your chest and tell yourself what masters of the universe you are.

    Tell me would you look to take advise from a supposed safety expert who had the worst accident in history happen on his watch..........or would you listen to an alleged security expert whose failure was so epic that the biggest bank robbery of all time occured when his firm was on the job..............how about a former drunk driver guilty of manslaugher will driving drunk lecturing us on the virtues of safe driving and not driving drunk

    You just cant make this up the worst act of terrorism in our history happened because of the Bush administrations epic failure on 9/11 and you clowns try and spin that epic failure and pretend you actually did a good job and we should be listening to anything you say to keep us safe.

    It just boggles the mind Obama has kept us safe with NO terrorist attacks whatsoever while Bush's epic failure resulted in the worst terrorist attack in our 200 year history and you FOOLS mock the guy who has kept us safe while extolling the virtues of the pack of morons who failed so utterly and completely as to allow 3000 Americans to die in the worst act of domestic terrorism in Americas history........it truly bogges the mind.

    ReplyDelete
  155. Voltron crawled out from under his rock with his Cosmic Cowboy sock puppet.....how cute

    ReplyDelete
  156. Poor deluded Mike again tries to make custard out of mustard.

    Yes its true 9-11 happened eight months after Bush took office but it seems to me there was'nt another the following seven years.Looks like W kept you safe Mike....you should be thanking him.

    Why would Mike and Worf be so damn upset over the pending health care bill? After all you guys elected these folks.What the hell did you expect.Do you two honestly think there are'nt any Dems in the pockets of insurance companys? I mean,come on Dodd and Frank owe their souls to mortgage companys.Would'nt you just love to see what kind of gifts were delivered to some of the Dems houses this past month.You two were like giddy teenage girls in Nov.of 2008 and now your idols have thrown you under the bus.

    ReplyDelete
  157. Mike, I agree 100%. 9/11 happened under Bush's watch and, yes, he and his administration need to take responsibility for it. I do, however, agree with cosmic cowboy on Janet Napolitano (no, not the carpet munching part). She has got to be Obama's worst appointment EVER (especially when compared to Gates, Jones, and Hillary)!!

    ReplyDelete
  158. cosmiccowboy said...

    Poor deluded Mike again tries to make custard out of mustard.



    We'll have to give you that one being as you're the resident expert on mustard custard.

    ReplyDelete
  159. cosmiccowboy said...

    Why would Mike and Worf be so damn upset over the pending health care bill? After all you guys elected these folks


    Well lets see. First "you guys" go in and rip the bill to shreds, removing anything decent in it, shoving in provisions like "mandatory coverage" to fully ruin the bill, then sit back and wonder why normal people don't support the bill.

    And by "normal" people I mean anyone other than a neocon like yourself.

    As for your neocon lie about you guys electing these folk, all I can say is stick to your medication. One day it might work, and help your brain correlate enough data to remember that I am not a liberal, democrat or a progressive and did not vote for "these folk". I didn't vote for President Obama and I sure as hell didn't vote for Pelosi and Reid.

    Perhaps you haven't gotten far along enough in school to learn that in order to do that, I'd have to live in their state.

    Maybe your were playing hookey the day they taught that.

    And even with your displayed ignorance of that simple fact, you still know that I've done nothing but condemn Pelosi and Reid for years.

    So you're either incredibly ignorant AND selectively amnesic, or you could just be lying for the sake of lying.

    :|

    The latter being as easily believable as the former.

    ReplyDelete
  160. Some day you'll learn that you can disagree with a President, and not even vote for him, but still support him. Like I did for George W Bush, who I couldn't stand. I supported him for 3 years.

    Unlike the republicans, who call themselves patriots yet haven't supported this President for 3 minutes.

    ReplyDelete
  161. Yes its true 9-11 happened eight months after Bush took office but it seems to me there was'nt another the following seven years..

    BULLSH*T

    Anthrax attacks, Oct 2001

    less than one month later;

    The 2001 anthrax attacks in the United States, also known as Amerithrax from its Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) case name, occurred over the course of several weeks beginning on September 18, 2001. Letters containing anthrax spores were mailed to several news media offices and two Democratic U.S. Senators, killing five people and infecting 17 others. (A 2004 study however, has shown that the total number of harmed people should be raised to 68)

    Richard Reid

    attempted shoe bomber;

    Reid, according to the FBI using the aliases Tariq Raja and Abdel Rahim , was arrested on 22 December 2001 for attempting to destroy a Boeing 767 on American Airlines Flight 63, a flight from Paris, Charles De Gaulle International Airport to Miami International Airport, USA, by igniting explosives hidden in his shoes.

    BTW they tried Reid in Civilian court, the exact thingy the repubies have their collective panties in such a twist cause the DOJ wants to do the EXACT same thingy now.

    Also President Obama responded with in 3 days, bush didn't respond to Reids attack for over a week

    ReplyDelete
  162. Wanna try again crusty?

    ReplyDelete
  163. So on Bush's watch bin laden attacks America and is STILL walking free ....

    Somebody attacks both the US congress and media with anthrax, KILLING American citizens, and NOBODY has been convicted, though right before bush cut and ran from Washington DC they lamely tried to blame somebody (after screwing up by wrongly blaming somebody else) .....


    Two attacks UNANSWERED, no complaints from crusty, only dis-info about it.


    Obama one FAILED attack suspect in custody awaiting trail, just like Richard Reid did ...... and crusty seems to think this is a bad thingy.


    Seems he has a credibility problem on this issue, sorta like the Dead Eye Dickster does.

    ReplyDelete
  164. cosmiccowboy said...
    Poor deluded Mike again tries to make custard out of mustard.

    Yes its true 9-11 happened eight months after Bush took office but it seems to me there was'nt another the following seven years.Looks like W kept you safe Mike....you should be thanking him."


    Lets see here according to Einstein over here "I"M" the one trying to make custard out of mustard????

    Here is a PERFECT "TEXTBOOK" illustration of repugie delusional blindly loyal partisan denial and "magical thinking"...............according to this Moron failure is success and success is failure...........incompetence is good and acceptable and competence is unacceptable and should be mocked and riddiculed.

    According to him GWB kept us safe EXCEPT for the KEY "CRITICAL" time he didnt keep us safe...............I have but this one question for you troll DID GWB keep os safe or didnt he.........the only possible answer is NO he failed utterly and completely in keeping us safe in fact his record in that regard is abysmal in that he is the ONLY president to ever have such a catastrophic terrorist attack and failure of this magnitude to keep us safe in our countries entire history.

    ReplyDelete
  165. According to our good buddy "Cosmic Cowpie" we should "THANK" GWB for keeping us safe.........EXCEPT for the key CRITICAL time he FAILED to keep us safe.

    GWB was "as effective" at keeping us safe as a condom with a hole in it.............So by "Cosmic Cowpie's" logic if he used a faulty mismanufactered condem with a hole in it and it failed utterly and completely to protect him and he and 3000 others caught AIDS they should thank the condom manufacturer for not screwing up and and failing again EXCEPT for the first time he screwed up and failed.

    ReplyDelete
  166. By "Cosmic Cowpie's" twisted logic the guy who actually HAS kept us safe should be ridiculed criticized, mocked and labeled as "WEAK"..........while the guy who actually did FAIL TO KEEP US SAFE shoul;d be lauded, thanked and respected as a pillar of strength and some kind of "Great Protector" when he was the one who FAILED TO KEEP US SAFE.


    I cant make shit this good up.......according to the delusional partisan troll we should thank and admire the guy who failed and mock and riddicule the guy who actually DID succeed in keeping us safe.

    You cant "ALMOST" catch a train little troll either GWB kept us safe or he didnt and the ONLY truthful and honest answer is HE DIDNT!

    ReplyDelete
  167. Its Orwellian the "logic" or lack thereof these clowns use!

    ReplyDelete
  168. That last posting by Mike was a real doozy.He should'nt be drinking while on his meds.

    ReplyDelete
  169. Pretty amazing how Moe,Larry and Curly all show up to protect Obie.

    ReplyDelete
  170. Worf says "you guys" ripped the bill to shreads? News flash numbnutz.....the bill was written in the dark by Dems and Dems only.

    Yea,the people you voted for.

    ReplyDelete
  171. cosmiccowboy said...
    Poor deluded Mike again tries to make custard out of mustard.

    Yes its true 9-11 happened eight months after Bush took office but it seems to me there was'nt another the following seven years.Looks like W kept you safe Mike....you should be thanking him."


    Lets examine the FACTS here.......like Cosmic Knuckehead said GWB completely redesigned and revamped our homeland security apparatus to as he CLAIMS keep us safe.............he was in power for another 7 plus years and yet Cosmic Cowpie doesnt seem satisfied with the ineffective incompetent bureaucracy his self proclaimed "GREAT PROTECTOR" created to protect us...............yet his logic says to THANK the IDIOT that created this ineffective incompetent bureaucracy that he he CLEARLY states is ineffective and instead like a transparent blindly loyal partisan that puts party over country he attemps to blame the next guy for not changing the ineffective incompetent bureaucracy that was in place for over 7 years by his "GREAT PTOTECTOR" GWB.

    You cant make stuff up this good.............BWAHAHAHAHAHA

    ReplyDelete
  172. Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...
    Mike, I agree 100%. 9/11 happened under Bush's watch and, yes, he and his administration need to take responsibility for it. I do, however, agree with cosmic cowboy on Janet Napolitano (no, not the carpet munching part). She has got to be Obama's worst appointment EVER (especially when compared to Gates, Jones, and Hillary)!!"


    No Will your getting caught up in the repug noise machine Lets examine the FACTS here.......like Cosmic Knuckehead said GWB completely redesigned and revamped our homeland security apparatus to as he CLAIMS keep us safe.............he was in power for another 7 plus years and yet Cosmic Cowpie doesnt seem satisfied with the ineffective incompetent bureaucracy his self proclaimed "GREAT PROTECTOR" created to protect us...............yet his logic says to THANK the IDIOT that created this ineffective incompetent bureaucracy that he he CLEARLY states is ineffective and instead like a transparent blindly loyal partisan that puts party over country he attemps to blame the next guy for not changing the ineffective incompetent bureaucracy that was in place for over 7 years by his "GREAT PrOTECTOR" GWB.

    Sure Obama and his admin should look to make government agencies more efficient but the current system to keep us safe was created by GWB and left in place for over 7 years if its not effective at keeping us safe we need to fix it but CLOWNS like Cosmic hippocrite cant CLAIM Bush kept us safe while criticizing the current admin for keeping in place GWB's" keep us safe" policies that he feels DONT actually keep us safe.

    ReplyDelete
  173. GWB made lots of CLAIMS we are finding out are riddiculous and untrue.......lets examine them

    1) GWB CLAIMED his policies kept us safe when today lo and behold one of his most rabid Neo Con sock puppets and blog trolls just reveals that the policies he created specifically TO KEEP US SAFE and left in place for over 7 years to keep us safe or about 90% of his prersidency dont really keep us any more safe than when he FAILED to actually keep us safe during the first 10% of his presidency.

    2) GWB CLAIMED "Mission Accomplished" and Claimed we won the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and lo and behold almost 9 years later those wars are STILL going on and Americans are STILL dying after Our "Great Protector" declared victory..............go figure.

    ReplyDelete
  174. Lets recap things here for those that are a little slow and not too bright...........according to Cosmic Cowpie GWB should be be THANKED for the slambang job of keeping us safe............................... except for the first year where he actually FAILED miserably to keep us safe and then for the remaining 7 years of his tenure where the policies he designed and put in place specifically to keep us safe proved to be ineffective, incompetent, and bureaucratic to ACTUALLY keep us safe..........so without even breaking stride Cosmic Cowpie tries to Blame the next guy for keeping in place the same policies , he just CLAIMED kept us safe for 7 years under GWB and say THEY are the reason we are not safe and the current administration should be held accountable.

    This crap is too good to make up folks.

    ReplyDelete
  175. Mike, I think you misunderstand. I'M BLAMING BUSH FOR 9/11, not supporting/defending him. And I especially blame him for screwing around in Iraq - this, instead of going after the lower hanging fruit in Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, etc.. My only agreement with cosmic cowboy on this thread is the apparent lack of confidence we both seem to have in Napolitano. When she said, "the system worked", that to me was a "Brownie, you're doing a hell of a job" moment.

    ReplyDelete
  176. Nice to see crusty deflect from his OBVIOUSLY false claims above.

    PS the fat loud mouth drug addict is in a hospital in Hawaii, with chest pains, hope he stays there, karma in action if ya ask me.

    ReplyDelete
  177. Will Of course we need to revamp things and make things more efficient.........I've said from day one that the spying on EVERYONE and the no fly list that had half a million people on it, including Senator Kennedy was a massive waste of resources and made us MUCH LESS SAFE than targeted intelligent use of resources and I was clearly right............but that doesnt change the fact that although Napolitano clearly misspoke and the same flawed and ineffective system that GWB put in place and kept in place for over 7 YEARS that doesnt keep us safe needs to be revised that doesnt change Cosmic Cowpie's blatant and outrageos hi[ppocrissy.

    ReplyDelete
  178. And No Will I think its YOU that misunderstand what i'm trying to say.........you cant blame Napolitano and Obama for not changing a flawed system that doesnt keep us safe without first accepting the following premises.

    1) GWB WB completely redesigned and revamped our homeland security apparatus to as he CLAIMS keep us safe.............he was in power for another 7 plus years and yet Cosmic Cowpie doesnt seem satisfied with the ineffective incompetent bureaucracy his self proclaimed "GREAT PROTECTOR" created to protect us...............yet his logic says to THANK the IDIOT that created this ineffective incompetent bureaucracy that he he CLEARLY states is ineffective and instead like a transparent blindly loyal partisan that puts party over country he attemps to blame the next guy for not changing the ineffective incompetent bureaucracy that was in place for over 7 years by his "GREAT PTOTECTOR" GWB.

    You cant make stuff up this good.............BWAHAHAHAHAHA

    ReplyDelete
  179. Lets recap things here for those that are a little slow and not too bright...........according to Cosmic Cowpie GWB should be be THANKED for the slambang job of keeping us safe............................... except for the first year where he actually FAILED miserably to keep us safe and then for the remaining 7 years of his tenure where the policies he designed and put in place specifically to keep us safe proved to be ineffective, incompetent, and bureaucratic to ACTUALLY keep us safe..........so without even breaking stride Cosmic Cowpie tries to Blame the next guy for keeping in place the same policies , he just CLAIMED kept us safe for 7 years under GWB and say THEY are the reason we are not safe and the current administration should be held accountable.

    This crap is too good to make up folks.

    ReplyDelete
  180. GWB made lots of CLAIMS we are finding out are riddiculous and untrue.......lets examine them

    1) GWB CLAIMED his policies kept us safe when today lo and behold one of his most rabid Neo Con sock puppets and blog trolls just reveals that the policies he created specifically TO KEEP US SAFE and left in place for over 7 years to keep us safe or about 90% of his prersidency dont really keep us any more safe than when he FAILED to actually keep us safe during the first 10% of his presidency.

    2) GWB CLAIMED "Mission Accomplished" and Claimed we won the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and lo and behold almost 9 years later those wars are STILL going on and Americans are STILL dying after Our "Great Protector" declared victory..............go figure.

    ReplyDelete
  181. As much as the "SYSTEM" GWB created and left in place for over 7 years to "keep us safe" failed the other day the bootom line Will is that GWB actually FAILED to keep us safe and there was a terrorist attack on his watch..........GWB then actually failed again to competently revamp and design a new homeland security system to actually keep us safe and then left that flawed inefficient system in place for 7 yaers or almost 90% of his presidency.

    While Obama ans Napolitano may have been guilty of not revamping and improving the same flawed and ineffective system GWB created and left in place for over 7 years the fact is Obama has kept us safe and there hasnt been a terrorist strike and during his presideny Will.........those are facts that cany be denied!

    ReplyDelete
  182. That guy should have never been allowed to get on a the plane, Mike. If you want to blame George Bush for the fact that he WAS able to get on a plane, I guess that that's your perogative. But, really, things need to change and they need to change rapidly. Me, I'd get rid of Napolitano and put in somebody else (Wesley Clark, maybe).

    ReplyDelete
  183. Lets be clear here Will are YOU saying you WOULDNT blame the person who actually created this flawed ineffective bureaucracy and left it in place for over 7 years when it not only clearly DIDNT keep us safe but made us much LESS SAFE?

    If thats the case I find it very curious...........I also find it curious that you seem to be implying i'm the partisan for placing the blame where it belongs:

    1) On the guy who ACTUALLY did fail to keep us safe.

    2) On The guy who created an incompetent ineffective bureaucracy that actually made us much less safe while falsely CLAIMING to keep us safe.

    3) On the guy who kept the ineffective system that he created in place for over 7 years or 90% of his presidency despite the fact it clearly didnt insure our safety.

    I clearly admitted Napolitano misspoke and the current sysyem GWB created is deeply flawed and needs to be redesigned to ACTUALLY make us safer not just spin things to create the false impression of safety........but like I said I find the fact that you clearly want to shift the blame away from the guy who actually created said system and left it in place for over 7 years and on to a person who has only kept said flawed sysstem in place for a little over 6 months or so.

    ReplyDelete
  184. I'm not saying that you're partisan, Mike. And I'm NOT saying that Bush did a good job. I just want to know why that this obvious lunatic (a one-way ticket to Detroit, no winter jacket, already on a watch list) was able to get on that airplane. Fine, Bush created the bureaucracy. But, please, let's get it fixed now, O.K.?

    ReplyDelete
  185. I find it "interesting" that you could try to whitewash and shift the blame away from the incompetent who designs a system that places Senator Kennedy et al on a watch list/no fly list but not this terrorist that tried to blow up an airplane and whose own father warned the CIA abut him.............sure Napolitano deserves "some" blame for not fixing this idiotic system but the bulk of the blames should go to the man who designed a and kept in place for 7 years a system that places Senator Kennedy and half a million others on a list but leaves real terrorists whose fathers warn the CIA about them off of said list.

    ReplyDelete
  186. Like I said this shit is too good to make..........you guys are spinning and contorting so hard your gonna screw yourselves into the ground!

    ReplyDelete
  187. Sure it NEEDS to be fixed Will i've said this since this monstronsity was created 8 years ago...........but the point i'm trying to make is I dont see you saying a damn thing to set the record straight that according to your buddy Cosmic Cowpie the guy who designed created implemented and left in place for over 7 years the very same system Napolitano left in place for a little over 6 months actually KEPT US SAFE.........while the idiot who merely left that system in place for a little over 6 months is compromising our safety.

    I'm not trying to be an ass or give YOU personally a hard time Will but that level of hippocrissy is astounding and NEEDS to be called out and be exposed to the light of day if we EVER want to get good policy that actually helps regular people and does what it was SUPPOSED to actually do rather than be used for partisan political gain.

    ReplyDelete
  188. cosmiccowboy said...

    Worf says "you guys" ripped the bill to shreads? News flash numbnutz.....the bill was written in the dark by Dems and Dems only



    Newsflash nonutz....the dems wrote the bill then the republicans rewrote it with their changes and amendments.

    Apparently you don't know how the legislative process works. You might want to take a high school course or two on the Legislative branch and how a bill is passed before you try lecturing others in political matters.

    Just sayin...

    ReplyDelete
  189. And as for this so called underwear terrorist, he didn't get on an Airplane in the United States, so lets just cut this bullshit in the bud.

    The neoconservatives have been dying for a chance to try to muddy the memory of Bush's incompetence in permitting the 911 hijackers free reign in the US, even including flying lessons for jumbo jets, and ignored clear written warnings from the intelligence community, by finding something to pin on President Obama.

    Unfortunately for them, this ain't it.

    This guy didn't get on a plane in the US. The guy made his connection flight to the US in Amsterdam, so while screening officials screwed up, blaming this on the President is laughable. We already know we cannot completely protect from this sort of thing. For the entire Bush administration people boarded planes with weapons, explosives, etc and you didn't see Condom Cowboy or the Concern troll in here crying about it then.

    This guy didn't get on a plane in the US. He got on a connecting flight in Amsterdam. President Obama isn't in charge of airport security in European airports.

    This is just another attempt by the right wing to try and attack and undermine this President.

    And once more we find the "Concerned one" in here carrying the water of the right wing.

    ReplyDelete
  190. We'll have to change his name to the Waterboy.

    ReplyDelete
  191. That guy should have never been allowed to get on a the plane, Mike.

    In a freakin FOREIGN nation where no US official has jurisdiction numbnuts.

    Damn now you concern trolls and reich wing clowns want to blame President Obama for all the bad in the entire world.


    He bought his ticket in a foreign nation and boarded the plane overseas, just like he had done previously, with no attacks.


    Janet Napalitano NOR any other US official was there.


    If things had happened in the US

    LIKE they did on 9-11

    blaming US officials would be appropriate,

    However it wasn't US officials who screened him before he boarded the plane, nor oversaw the people who did the screening.

    Nice to see the concern troll can still spout reich wing talking points with out the facts involved.

    ReplyDelete
  192. Mike, for the final time, I blame Bush fully for 9/11. I blame Bush for getting us bogged down in Iraq. I blame Bush for not going after the low hanging fruit. I've said repeatedly that he was one of the 5 worst presidents ever. I'm not sure what else you want me to say. Cosmic Cowboy and I shared one opinion. If that's your definition of friendship, then you and I are friends, too.

    ReplyDelete
  193. You really have to be careful about this, Mike. Obama's been in charge for over 11 months. Bush was only in charge 7 when 9/11 happened. Using your criteria, the right-wingers will be able to say that Clinton was to blame for it.....This idiot's father (a well respected man and credible) went to the embassy and warned folks that this son of his was a possible danger and that he probably shouldn't be allowed on the plane. It's George Bush's fault that he WAS allowed on the plane?

    ReplyDelete
  194. See the waterboy carrying his water for the neocon right wing?

    Careful waterboy.

    Don't want to spill any.

    ReplyDelete
  195. No reasonable individual could possibly blame President Obama for something that was the responsibility of the Dutch authorities.

    No one.

    But yet here we see Will,.... spreading the right wing neocon message, blaming President Obama for a failure in the Dutch screening processes.

    Here we see Will, the "concerned" Will, once more carrying the right wings water.

    :|

    Carry on Waterboy, carry on.

    ReplyDelete