Rumsfeld: ‘I Have Never Painted A Rosy Picture’ About Iraq
Rumsfeld: ‘I Have Never Painted A Rosy Picture’ About Iraq
Testifying before the Senate today, Donald Rumsfeld told Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) that he has “never painted a rosy picture” about Iraq. Rumsfeld insisted that he has been “very measured” and told Clinton “you would have a dickens of a time trying to find instances where I have been overly optimistic.” Watch it:
Here’s just a few of the “overly optimistic” comments made by Rumsfeld (and no, we did not have a “dickens of a time” finding them):
Dec. 18, 2002: KING: What’s the current situation in Afghanistan? RUMSFELD: It is encouraging. They have elected a government through the Loya Jirga process. The Taliban are gone. The al Qaeda are gone.
Feb. 7, 2003: “It is unknowable how long that conflict [the war in Iraq] will last. It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months.”
Feb. 20 2003: “‘Do you expect the invasion, if it comes, to be welcomed by the majority of the civilian population of Iraq?’ Jim Lehrer asked the defense secretary on PBS’ The News Hour. ‘There is no question but that they would be welcomed,’ Rumsfeld replied, referring to American forces.”
Mar. 30, 2003: “It happens not to be the area where weapons of mass destruction were dispersed. We know where they are. They’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.”
Transcript:
CLINTON: Well, Mr. Secretary, I know you would and I know you feel strongly about it, but there’s a track record here. This is not 2002, 2003, 2004-5, when you appeared before this committee and made many comments and presented, you know, many assurances that have frankly proven to be unfulfilled, and –
RUMSFELD: Senator, I don’t think that’s true. I have never painted a rosy picture. I have been very measured in my words, and you’d have a dickens of a time trying to find instances where I have been excessively optimistic. I understand this is tough stuff.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
358 Responses to “Rumsfeld: ‘I Have Never Painted A Rosy Picture’ About Iraq”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Rumsfeld is so very deluded and extremely despicable !
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:31 pmExcept for all the times he did.
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:32 pmWell, what should we expect? The guy is a pathological liar.
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:33 pmWhen I first read the above, I couldn't help but laugh. Apparently, old men have poor memories.
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:36 pmum... what about being "welcomed" as "liberators" and people throwing flowers at our feet?
this is pure orwellian... rewriting history.
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:37 pmer - isn't there some law against lying under oath? i mean - they tried to impeach clinton for that.
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:38 pmI'm waiting for our BushBot trolls to try to split some semantic hairs to defend the psychotic/psychopathic Rumsfeld here.
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:40 pmthe first quote is about afghanistan, and should not be counted. Also I sincerely doubt, that they would be able to put Rumsfeld under oath. I am sure whatever republican who is running the show would squash that.
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:40 pmNot to nitpick, but you should probably strike the first one. It's about Afghanistan, not Iraq. It's a nice, rosy picture, though.
And now we're in Iraq to protect Spain and the Philippines. The man has gall...
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:43 pmThis idiot is the one acting like a macho genius when he was explaining how succesful was his moronic Blitzkrieg Run to Baghdad. Too bad he forgot to capture all the Saddam's Army and secure the ammunition storages...
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:44 pmLet me guess. Clinton did not bother anticipating that Rumsfeld would dodge her questions so she came to this meeting unable to corner him on his lies?
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:44 pm"..east, west, south and north somewhat"
uhhh.... is there any direction on the compass he left out?
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:45 pmGawd those must be some really great shrooms he's eating. Glad I don't live in the same universe as he...oh crap.
Goper's Lament
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:47 pmI hate it when Alzheimer's starts showing signs in people...it is really an ugly thing to witness...
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:47 pmI have watched so many of these. The democrats time and again ask a question that DEMANDS a follow up that is well prepared to counter a lie that will inevidably come and then instead of asking that follow up question they simply say, "Thank you for your time Mr/Mrs so and so.."
Why even bother asking any questions at all?
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:47 pmVictory is just a Friedman away! Or maybe half a Biden ...
Rumsfeld is mentioned in today's Wingnut Roundup at Agitprop.
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:47 pmI have little doubt that Rumsfeld's parents are wringing their hands in heaven(I am sure they are there having done there best to raise this idiot) and asking each other
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:47 pm"where did we go wrong?" What an embarassment as a human being this clown is. But then he is just as much a liar as his boss and his vice-president have proven to be. It must be something in the water that so many of these Repugnants drink that contributes to their constant lying with such ease.
Nice work on this one, TP. It's always reassuring to know that 'our' leaders are so honest and truthful with us!
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:48 pmRummy has the same illness that Liibby, Bush, Cheney and Rove have it's memory loss and an expert can prove that these guys can't remember and lie at will. Americans should notice that when this happepns these guys are under oath. So much for regilious right or morals. I hope our kids aren't following these leaders as exaamples.
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:49 pmHe's never actually painted anything in his life, so technically, he's not lying.
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:51 pm#9 Hmmm... Your country didn't a very good work protecting us... in fact, your country has put us in the Al Qaeda's short list... and fanning the fire in the Middle East and appeasing Israel doens't help our standing as a western country...
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:51 pmThe one thing Rumsfeld, Pace and Abizad made crystal clear today: The Department of Defense (sic) and its minions work for the GOP, not for America and certainly not for the American people. Watching Pace and Abizad make biased and supremely idiotic political statements was right up there among some of my most painful experiences. It was like watching Sean Hannity clones in uniform.
I think we are in some serious trouble, folks. Please tell me I am overreacting.
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:53 pmFareed Zakaria has it right about Rummy:
He seems literally in a parallel universe and slightly deranged. If you listen to what he said last week about Iraq, he’s living in a different world, not a different country.
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:55 pm#12 yes, the hollow earth. A race of terrorist gnomes lives inside of the earth. They hide WMD's and have extensive tunnels between Syria, Iran, Iraq and N Korea and are part of the axis of evil.
August 3rd, 2006 at 12:57 pmWhat about the part following Rumsfeld's retort when Sen. Clinton immediately went to the Chairman and asked to Rumsfeld's previous statements put on the record.
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:03 pmSo much for never having painted a rosy picture.
What drugs is Rummy on?
Damn! Remind me to never put my grandparents on the same meds. They make you goofy and think weird thoughts.
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:06 pmBut...but... AlQaeda *were* gone... they came back, so Rumsfeld didn't lie... and.. and... there are still Nazis in Germany...
Plus... er... uh... the initial phase *did* last less than six months which is what Rusmfeld was talking... not *after* it... so the death toll *after* does not count...
And the WMDs *were* found, Santorum said so...
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:08 pm#24...minor oversight, but you didn't mention the tunnels to Afghanistan and Cuba
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:09 pmI forgot to mention that these Rumsfeld quotes were taken out of context and that it's all Clinton's fault.
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:11 pmRummy to Hillary:
I know you are, but what am I?
(Karl Rove: That's it, that's pure genius... Hey Georgie...)
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:14 pm....and if I did paint a rosy picture it was only to boost prices in my stock portfolio Wink Wink
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:15 pmDon't you just hate it when the clowns run the circus?
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:16 pmAnd the set up for the all out war in the Middle East. al Queda is in Lebanon. The "We can't leave now" excuse is planted in the minds of the public.
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:22 pm
. .
link for #33
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:24 pmRumsfeld wasn't under oath, so he is free to say just about anything, and later claim he just misspoke with no reprocussions.
The whole session is worthless
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:27 pmRumsfeld knows what he is: An outdated punchline...
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:29 pmThat first item is regarding Afghanistan. Should be removed for accuracy.
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:32 pmThe man has lied so much the last 5 years that he can't open his mouth without getting snared in lies of his own making. This guy is totally incompetent.
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:39 pmHere's a blast from the past (1970? or thereabouts; my sister loved this song)
Rose Garden
Lynn Anderson
I beg your pardon
I never promised you a rose garden
Along with the sunshine
There's gotta be a little rain some time
When you take you gotta give so live and let live
Or let go oh-whoa-whoa-whoa
I beg your pardon
I never promised you a rose garden
I could promise you things like big diamond rings
But you don't find roses growin' on stalks of clover
So you better think it over
Well if sweet-talkin' you could make it come true
I would give you the world right now on a silver platter
But what would it matter
So smile for a while and let's be jolly
Love shouldn't be so melancholy
Come along and share the good times while we can
I beg your pardon
I never promised you a rose garden
Along with the sunshine
There's gotta be a little rain some time
I beg your pardon
I never promised you a rose garden
I could sing you a tune and promise you the moon
But if that's what it takes to hold you
I'd just as soon let you go
But there's one thing I want you to know
You better look before you leap, still waters run deep
And there won't always be someone there to pull you out
And you know what I'm talkin' about
So smile for a while and let's be jolly
Love shouldn't be so melancholy
Come along and share the good times while we can
I beg your pardon
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:40 pmI never promised you a rose garden
FADE
Along with the sunshine
There's gotta be a little rain some time
All right, you jackasses, if you don't want to be a bunch of Rumsfeld clones, start doing what he should have done years ago.
Namely, quit making snarky comments to make yourself look clever and start doing your job.
In this case, your job is finding more and better examples of Rumsfeld painting rosy pictures and being excessively optimistic.
Now get to work.
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:42 pmThese people have no shame, they have created a war to fit their own political and economic ambitious, not those of the average American. If they REALLY care about national security and domestic economic growth, they should invest in alternative energy sources, and quit once and for all the addition we currently have on OIL. Make no mistake; the Saudis and the rest of the Arab world are not “friends of oursâ€.
They, from the president down should be arraigned in the international courts and trial as war criminals.
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:42 pmYou have just heard a portion of Donald Rumsfeld's testimony[no questioning of statements or calling him out][crickets]..... NOW,[ominous music] back to the manufactured CRISIS IN THE MIDDLE EAST[music amplified].
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:42 pmCut to Reporter[camera on]; look behind and slightly duck..........3.2.1...now report...audio.
Who doesn't he lie to?
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:42 pmWell it's official Rumsfeld did inhale. This guy is either really stoned, drunk or has been hitting the glass pipe again.
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:43 pm"...and that's why I pessimistically thought we could bring Democracy to Iraq without all those extra troops that the head of the Army, whom I pushed aside, wanted."
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:45 pmdo you sing that song while contemplating the deaths of 10's of 1000's of other human beings ? Torture US massacres ,dead and very wounded servicemen ,rainy days and mondays ever get U down ?
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:45 pmYou liberals have no policy agenda. You're just playing word games here. You have no idea what to do on the war on terror, and you think by running this smear site it will help you politically. It is just a bunch of left wingers slapping each other on the back thinking you have something. You have squat. Voters do not trust liberals with protecting America.
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:46 pmYou conservatives have no policy agenda. You’re just playing word games here. You have no idea what to do on the war on terror, and you think by running this smear site it will help you politically. It is just a bunch of right wingers slapping each other on the back thinking you have something. You have squat. Voters do not trust conservatives with protecting America.
Comment by He Wishes He Was Mr. Big — August 3, 2006 @ 1:52 pm
With a little selective editing, funny how that speech can work for us, too.
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:51 pm>> You liberals
Do you have to be a liberal to hate what's going on? And why do all you "non-liberals" have such a tendency to believe outright lies and ignore hypocrisy?
You think Rumsfeld is "protecting America"? He and his crew are endangering our nation like no adminstration in history. This country will be fifteen trillion dollars in debt and have the whole other 88% of the world hating America by the time he retires. Some protection that is.
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:52 pm[...] Via Think Progress: [...]
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:53 pmThis is National News?...
What kind of alternative universe do we live in? Our media is so brain dead that it is now reporting on a blog post by a Lamont fan--not campaign staff, not even a Lamont volunteer, just a fan and supporter--as if it is news of national import. Never m...
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:53 pmYou liberals have no policy agenda. You’re just playing word games here.
Really? Word games? At least 50,000 people are dead, and the situation is worse now than when Saddam Hussein was killing people.
Your GWB is responsible for this primarily, but people the world over hold Americans generally responsible for this carnage, and you are.
Under Saddam, Iraqis were kidnapped, raped, tortured and murdered. Since we removed him, people are still being kidnapped, raped, tortured, and murdered. Plus now they have no electricity, sewage treatment, or jobs. I'd call that a net loss.
Oh, and a civil war to look foward to.
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:55 pmHere we are playing reallife Alzheimers word games with the lying Secretary of Defense, as hundreds of thousands of lives hang in the balance, and a troll sees word games in the TP comments.hahahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa forever spinning
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:59 pmComment by Mr. Big — August 3, 2006 @ 1:46 pm
Seriously, Mr. Big...it's Rummy who's playing word games here. Making comments and denying he ever made them, even though they are available for all the world to see on video tape and in transcripts.
Just like "we know where the WMD's are" yet 3 years later, "I didn't say that."
Just like the dishonorable Sen. Frist on video stating "She certainly appears to respond to visual stimuli" yet days later saying "I never said she responded to visual stimuli."
Just like Pres. Bush laughing on national TV when told that a majority of Americans polled did not support the war, and then saying "I'm not laughing" when the reporter raising the issue observes him and says, "You're laughing..."
Obviously you don't give a damn. It's as simple as that. The leaders of our country can just f*ck everybody here and rewrite history and block any and every attempt at oversight (and these issues are just the beginning) and you have no problem with it.
We have no use for you.
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:02 pmA dickens of a time? WTF? A dickens?
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:07 pmDude, this is better than The Pentagon Hillbillys!
Under Saddam, Iraqis were kidnapped, raped, tortured and murdered. Since we removed him, people are still being kidnapped, raped, tortured, and murdered. Plus now they have no electricity, sewage treatment, or jobs. I’d call that a net loss.
Oh, and a civil war to look foward to.
Comment by Brian Coughlan — August 3, 2006 @ 1:55 pm
And speaking of sewage, let's add to the list a company called Halliburton who was responsible for providing safe water for our troops to use, and f*cked that up, too.
I personally know the parents of a soldier who drank water from the Euphrates and nearly died. He was assured by his superiors that the water was safe to drink. The man is lucky to be alive, yet struggles EVERY DAY to live, takes lots of medication, and his body is STILL producing and releasing toxins.
Adding insult to injury, let's not forget our wonderful Congress who recently decided that we didn't need any oversight of the various contractors working in Iraq, including Halliburton.
So, Mr. Big, if you are still here, what do you think of that?
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:10 pmIf anyone from the Bush administration told me that the sky was blue, I would have to double-check. They are pathological liars. They lie about big things, little things, and everything in between. Maybe they'll discover the cause of this syndrome one day.
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:11 pmFareed Zakaria is right, he's in a Parallel Universe and Slightly Deranged...
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:12 pmUnder Saddam, Iraqis were kidnapped, raped, tortured and murdered. Since we removed him, people are still being kidnapped, raped, tortured, and murdered. Plus now they have no electricity, sewage treatment, or jobs. I’d call that a net loss.
Oh, and a civil war to look foward to.
Comment by Brian Coughlan — August 3, 2006 @ 1:55 pm
Yes, but now WE get to do the torturing. We even use the same prisons Saddam used. Bush wasn't outraged by Saddam's killing, raping, and torturing. He was envious.
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:14 pmActually Mr Big(self proclaimed), actual conservative Republicans, people like minded to Barry Goldwater who believed in strong national defense and fiscal restraint wan't Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Bush gone as much as Democrats.
The definition of national defense does not include pre-emptive wars with no clear objective(WMD,then false ties to 9/11, then bringing freedom and democracy, and whatever this week's reason for bankrupting this country is) The war has created a focus for the whole world to see us as an occupying force for Iraq's oil.
Give any specific examples you have on how Democrats are weak on the defense of this nation.
You are not a real Conservative. Just a neo-conservative who get's his talking points from Fox News. You follow Bush blindly because the television tells you to do so. You question nothing you are told, and then spout your mis-informed opinions and hatred because you are too lazy to do anything else. You and your vile ilk are a large reason why Americans becoming the most despised people on the planet.
Get off your fat ass and read something, and if capable form your own opinions.
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:17 pmThe picture was never rosy for Iraq. Or, more appropriately, it was only rosy in Rumsfeld's mind and he tried to sell that to the American public.
Now reality is creeping up on the American consciousness, due to reports such as this one:
Military prosecutors and investigators probing the killing of three Iraqi detainees by U.S. troops in May believe the unit's commanders created an atmosphere of excessive violence by encouraging "kill counts" and possibly issuing an illegal order to shoot Iraqi men.[...]
Soldiers referred to ordinary Iraqis derogatorily as "hajis," a reference to Muslims who have made the hajj pilgrimage to Mecca, and considered the 10 or so Iraqi army soldiers and interpreters working for their unit as mostly "terrorists," Mason said. Under questioning, Mason acknowledged saying that even before he arrived in Iraq, he asserted that "every man, woman and child in Iraq deserves to die."
Officers Allegedly Pushed 'Kill Counts'
"Every Iraqi deserves to die". What a mentality of an army who is supposedly there to "liberate".
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:18 pmHe dares to invoke Dickens as he continues to boldface lie to the American public. But then, again, he does live in a world(view) in which "...it was the best of times..." while in our reality-based world, "...it was the worst of times"! Donny Rumsfeld is clearly out of his element.
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:19 pmJust one question Sec. Rumsfeld, "Where do you think Osama bin Laden might be?"
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:19 pmSpeaking of east, west, south and north somewhat.â€
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:21 pm, Rumsfield was asked about the number of attacks by the Taliban increasing. He said something like "Well, they always increase in the Spring, Summer, and Fall." I was waiting for "and Winter, somewhat," .....
Have any of the Bush people ever testified under oath? If they do not testify under oath, they cannot be held accountable for their testimony. Check the record.
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:29 pmScenes We'd Like to See
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:34 pmhttp://billmon.org/archives/001864.html
Here's another "I didn't say that" moment.
Emphasis added.
Source.
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:35 pmNo, the republican chaired committes never put any of them under oath. The only supeona I know of was issued by the Senator from Maine(not Snowe, the other woman R) who was chairing a committe about base closures.
The Pentagon would not offer up the info on how they reached a decision to close which bases until they were seved with that supeona. It's the only one I'm aware of since Bush has been President. The supeona can only be issued from the Chair of the committe which are R.
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:40 pm[...] Transcript: Afghanistan - um, I don’t know who said what about if the Taliban are gone [Ed. note: You did.] but, in fact, the Taliban that were running Afghanistan and ruling Afghanistan were replaced. And they were replaced by an election that took place in that country, and in terms of a government or a governing entity, they were gone, and that’s a fact. [...]
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:43 pmRumsfeld is not accountable to anyone... just like the president...
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:44 pmI wonder how the slanted and unbalanced network, fox, will handle this Rumsfeld statement.
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:45 pmThey won't, but there must be a missing bolnde white chick that can fill the void of them actually delivering news.
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:53 pmI hate Rumsfeld as much as anyone, but you have to admit that the examples he cited above are not exactly damning him with regard to "painting a rosy picture". They might be wrong and stupid, but that isn't the question. Has he said anything since the occupation (as opposed to before the invasion even started) that spins the security there in a much more favorable light? I'm sure he has, but the quotes used above don't disprove his "rosy picture" comments.
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:59 pmWill, I would say that being welcomed with open arms and a conflict that only lasts six months is painting a rosy picture....
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:04 pmCan someone remind Mr. Big who was president on September 11, 2001 - the date of the largest security failure in US history. Also, what political party controlled Congress on that day, you know, the day of the largest security failure in US history? Further, who was president on August 29, 2005 during one of the largest natural disasters in US history, but was AGAIN on vacation and could not anticipate certain levees being breached, even though being assured that they would? Further, who was president on May 11, 2005 when a small Cessna invaded, inexplicably, Washington DC airspace near the White House and a decision needed to be whether to shoot it down, but the president that Wednesday was riding his bike (did mommy take the training wheels off) at 3 pm in the afternoon when MOST people actually are expected to be working?
Talk is cheap Mr. Big but actions speak louder than GOP public relations slogans and soundbites.
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:04 pmI hate to point this out, but all but one of the original examples are prewar, and one isn't about Iraq at all. Clinton says (correctly, I think) that he was overly optimistic through 2005, and none of your quotes are even as recent as '04. Couldn't you find anything more recent than that? Dig deeper, guys.
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:09 pmHey Everyone... Bush is on vacation!!! It's great to be able to get away from alll the shit going on in the world.
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:09 pmMaybe you're right. I just reread what Clinton and Rumsfeld said and it wasn't merely limited to what is presently going on in Iraq. My thinking was that the other statements were incorrect predictions. Upon looking at his quote again, those predictions would certainly be excessively optimistic.
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:11 pmAll cmments carefully selected by TP are taken out of context. For example:
“‘Do you expect the invasion, if it comes, to be welcomed by the majority of the civilian population of Iraq?’ Jim Lehrer asked the defense secretary on PBS’ The News Hour. ‘There is no question but that they would be welcomed,’ Rumsfeld replied, referring to American forces.â€
In context:
"There's obviously the Shia population in Iraq
and the Kurdish population in Iraq have been treated
very badly by Saddam Hussein's regime, they represent a
large fraction of the total. There is no question but
that they would be welcomed"
TP conveniently forgets the celebrations by Iraqis when we removed Saddam from power.
WorldPublicOpinion poll validates Rumsfeld statement 3 years after the invasion. The Kurds and Shia by an overwhelming majority approve of our presence in Iraq, that Iraq is heading in the right direction and think that removing Saddam was worth it.
Thinking about any hardships you might have suffered since the US- Britain invasion, do you personally think that ousting Saddam Hussein was worth it or not?
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:18 pmWorth it
Overall...77%
Kurd...91%
Shia...98%
Sunni...13%
Other...64%
#78. The planning for post invasion known as phase IV was porrly thought out and controlled by Mr. Rumsfeld. Was it Freedom is messy that he said when we flat out did not have enough troops in place to quell the chaos. Sure we were greeted as liberators in the begining but no coherent plan was put in place. This is the fault of this current administration. They took the worst case scenarios to get us into Iraq and used the best case scenarios to achieve the peace. They were wrong on both accounts.
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:28 pmNow why don't you post the answer to question, do you want US troops to stay in Iraq?
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:28 pmRumsfeld on Iraq: "I have Never Painted a Rosy Picture"...
Rewriting history's easy when you assume the populace have the attention span of goldfish....
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:29 pm"Is Iraq going to be a long war?" Mr. Rumsfeld answered, "No, I don't believe it is."
http://washingtontimes.com/national/20060201-113848-8227r.htm
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:29 pmThink Progress, if you want to be honest about what Rumsfeld has actually said, let's see if you post this as an "update":
"The United States...is in for a 'long, hard slog' in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to a memo that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld sent to top-ranking Defense officials last week." USA Today, 10/22/03
That's a "rosy picture"? Are you kidding me?
Again, you liberals have no policy agenda, and have to play pathetic word games because you are so weak on national security. Keep slapping each other on the back and posting snarky comments. You guys have no clue how to keep this country safe. And the American people know it. If you think that voters will ever put somebody like Howard Dean in charge of this country's defense, you're kidding yourselves.
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:30 pmPentagon's pre-war prediction on troop withdrawals
by kos
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/8/3/153352/1943
February 12, 2003.
To stress, the realistic plan (in their minds) from these neocon jokers was a 5-6 month occupation.
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:32 pmIt's hard to say what the biggest security failure of the United States has ever been but so far I'm thinking the Vietnam War ranks up there with the worst...then there was the insurgency in the Phillipines...and, of course, Pearl Harbor. Iraq, however, promises to keep on giving for some time to come so, maybe that'll be it eventually. Certainly it's bankrupting the country, both morally and fiscally...
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:33 pm#84 You are one of the more insignificant farts in the wind. The blinders you decide to keep on have been lifted from the majority of Americans and will continue to do so. This administration is not the answer to the war on terror, they are the reasons it has grown. Borders, ports, Airports are all in need of attention to secure our safety yet the grouip in power has done nothing of significance.
Keep throwing your crap and the fan pointed back at you is getting bigger and bigger. No longer do we live in fear.
Time to take the blinders off big guy.
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:35 pmMarch, 2004-
Iraqis "ought to be concerned," Rumsfeld says. "It's a dangerous place and it's a violent place, and it has been for some time. Many major cities are violent. A lot of cities in the United States and Europe have one homicide a day on the average. That's a lot." But, he adds, "The situation [in Iraq] is getting better every week without question," in terms of basic services, such as schools, medical care, utilities and oil production.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1772449
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:36 pmwhen does he become a convivant of grave dirt & who will drive the first spade into the earth of his final resting place? someone please
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:38 pm#84 -- yes, how's the security policy of preemptive strike working out for ya, Mr. Big. And exactly where is Osama bin Laden -- making rock videos last I saw -- how's that for a national security policy. And please give us the answers to my questions in #75 -- we really want you to give attribution for this incredibly brilliant national security policy team in place on September 11, 2001, May 11, 2005 and August 29, 2005 -- please, we want it right from your own keyboard, please tell us Mr. Big since you are so concerned about the adequacy of national security.
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:42 pmMr. Big,
It's easy for Rumsfeld to make a comment like that now, after we've been in what's turned into a shithole... you need to go to Baghdad with Rep. Steve King...
I know diehard conservatives that are jumping off of the George Bush ship and calling for his impeachment...
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:42 pm84) I usually spend a lot of time trying to understand the minds of the people I debate, in order to properly counter their logic using their own point of view as a weapon. But in your case, the level of denial is so strong, that trying to understand your perspective would probably make me want to hide under the desk and cry.
You gave one quote of Rumsfeld saying Iraq is going to be a slog of some sort.
Liberals and progressives know that quote like the back of our hands. We were the ones laughing about the long slog comment, because just a few months prior, Rumsfeld was saying the stuff that ThinkProgress quoted in response to him saying he never painted a rosy picture. The cognitive dissonance you endure must be unbearable.
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:43 pmWhat do you expect the Defense Secretary of the United States to say, "well we really screwed up and its a mess now, sorry, would someone else please help us". People in positions of authority feel they must never show weakness at all costs. I can see the logic in that except for the "all costs" part.
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:56 pmDave M. said "[I want to] hide under the desk and cry."
And the American people are going to want to put somebody like you in charge of national security? Get real. We need more strength than that. Islamic terrorists want to come over here and kill us. Electing people who want to hide under the desk and cry is not the right way to go, in my opinion.
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:58 pmMr. Big,
Rummy tells the TV camera it wont take 6 mos, then sends an internal memo stating it will be a long slog. I would do that too to cover my ass.
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:59 pm[...] ThinkProgress found ample evidence to the contrary (no word from TP about whether their efforts represented a "dickenss of a time"). AmericaBlog has more. [...]
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:00 pmFor Truth, how long did it take to remove Saddam from power? Under six months? Rummy was right.
He's also right that it will be a long, hard slog in Iraq. That's not rosy. I notice that Think Progress did not update its site to reflect what Rumsfeld actually said. It's really easy to mislead the liberals, and they swallow it whole.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:01 pm#93 -- I suppose it would not come to that (that is, the SOD having to admit he screwed the pooch) if he had actually been held accountable and summarily fired for his incompetence. Then no statements to that effect would have been necessary for him as (i) he could go to his corner on the Eastern Shore and drool in his sippy cup and (ii) the act of dismissal would speak for itself. Then perhaps, a successor (hopefully more competent but, of course with this administration, that is a HUGE leap) could change the course without having to admit to anything other than representing a new start.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:02 pmThanks Mr. Big,
You cleared that up for me, I just needed to hear that worn out talking point just one more time, that did it, all is well now.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:04 pmOh and Mr. Big,
Seems you know a lot about swalling things whole. *burp*
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:05 pmbut it is not misleading. Rummy pre-war painted a very rosy picture of US involvement in Iraq. Predictions of a short conflict with all US troops home soon after. When it became apparent, that the war was going to drag on, he changed his statements, and tried to obscure the original statements, or ad qualifiers that were not there. And guess whatt bubba you bought it, hook, line and sinker.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:06 pmFor Truth, why don't you give the military credit for the swift removal from power of dictator Saddam Hussein? It was rapid, and Saddam was found hiding in a hole in the ground.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:06 pm#90 said, "how’s the security policy of preemptive strike working out for ya, Mr. Big."
Great. No attacks on our soil since 9/11. Al Qaeda had further attacks planned, but couldn't carry them out.
What's the Democrat plan, besides doing nothing?
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:10 pmMr. Big,
That's great that Saddam is captured. It is questionable as to who really knew of Saddam's whereabouts, and who told our military where he was.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:12 pmMr. Big,
How much was Saddam a threat really, I mean Kim Jong Il is much more of a threat, and he should have been removed instead of Saddam.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:14 pmBesides the explicit "everything's going wonderfully" statements, it is just as important that Rumsfeld has continually played down bad news. We had the bunch of deadenders, the looting as a repeated image, the "stuff happens," etc. This tact is painting a rosy picture even if he rarely explicitly said things are rosy.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:15 pmActully several of the democratic senators, have been pushing to secure our borders and ports, something the republicans don't seem to care so much about. As for no terrorist attacks in the US true, but it hasn't worked out so well for the rest of the world. Spain, Britian, India, Iraq, Malaysia, Jordan, Isreal, Singapore, did I miss any?
funny how 8 years of peace and prosperity is bad, but 5 years of war is good.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:15 pmKrazney said: "Rummy pre-war painted a very rosy picture of US involvement in Iraq."
Nope. He did not. But Hillary did. She said Saddam had ties to al qaeda, that he had wmd. Was she right?
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:15 pmGood job Mr. Big,
Focus your attention elswhere now. Good boy.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:17 pm103 -- yes, I expected that inane reponse -- right from the talking points from Fox News -- now talk about selective reasoning, the doctrine of preemptive strike took us to our current national security crisis in Iraq unless of course the deaths of 3,000 American soldiers mean nothing to you. In fact, why aren't you over there serving since you are such a big fan. Iraq alone is a huge national security fiasco and that does not even take into account the policy's unwitting elevation of Iran in the region or the current Israeli/Hezbollah issue.
And, who was president on 9/11? You still have not answered that. And where is OBL? Oh, that's right in a sanctuary in Afghanistan/Pakistan because we are in Iraq.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:18 pmLOL please re-read the quotes. I realize that reading comprehension is not your strong suit, but you should really try.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:18 pmMr. Big,
You have not downloaded the newest talking points that have been out for months. You are using the "no attacks in 5 years" point, and the "well we got Saddam" point. Now back to the current situation in Iraq, and yes the American public was given the impression that this would be relatively short, gas would get cheaper, we would be welcomed and loved. Now when selling the war to the public, wouldn't you tell them these things too, I would.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:20 pmFor Truth said: "How much was Saddam a threat really, I mean Kim Jong Il is much more of a threat, and he should have been removed instead of Saddam."
Saddam was a threat to the region, instability. Saddam was also an imminent threat to the Iraqi people. 500 WMDs were recently found in Iraq, and he was desiring them. Sanctions were breaking down. Kay said that terrorists were attracted to Iraq's wmd capability like ants to honey. Saddam and his sons were dangerious men. That problem would never have just gone away by doing nothing.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:21 pmKrazney said: "funny how 8 years of peace and prosperity is bad"
The economy was prosperious under Clinton. He deserves some credit for that. Soe does the Republican congress. However, Al Qaeda also grew in strenth and ferocity on his watch. The 9/11 plot was being planned during his administration. I just think if he was more focused on cutting the head off al qaeda instead of what intern he was going to bed, we would have been far better off security wise.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:24 pmUsing your logic, Mr. Big,
Anyone with weapons and an agenda is a threat to the Middle East, which is about the entire region. Sorry I don't buy your WMD argument. Saddam became a threat after the US empowered him, and depleted his usefulness to us.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:25 pmLOL time to get out there big man, the WMD's were found to be old and useless, and the UN knew about there existence. The Terrorists were working in the northern part of Iraq, where saddam had no control. As for a danger to stability, well what can I say.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:26 pmThe unanswerable question is: Is Iraq more of a problem now, or would it have been more of a problem leaving Saddam in power? I really don't think there is anyway to give a an honest answer to that.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:27 pmNomoreBush said: "In fact, why aren’t you over there serving since you are such a big fan."
For the same reason that you refused to serve when Clinton went to war with Kosovo. I chose a career in business, not the military.
Still it was the right thing to do to remove Saddam from power, and I support our military 100%.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:28 pmI just think if he was more focused on cutting the head off al qaeda instead of what intern he was going to bed, we would have been far better off security wise.
So I suppose your happy with what Bush has done with the head of al qaeda! Just imagine where Bin Laden would be if all those resources that went (and are going) to Iraq would have been spent on getting the bastard responsible for 911. Unless Bin Laden wasn't responsible for 911! hmmmm
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:28 pmMr. Big(head) equating anyone not serving during Kosovo, to people not serving now is well silly. There was never an issue of recruitment goals during the war in Kosovo. Cowards like yourself who talk a good game. should shut up or sign up.
I chose a career in business, what a laughable peice of bullshit.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:31 pmFor Truth asked: "Is Iraq more of a problem now, or would it have been more of a problem leaving Saddam in power?"
Short or long term?
There have been three national elections in Iraq. They wrote a constitution and their economy is getting better.
There has always been violence in Iraq. Just now there is a goverment in place that is trying to do something about it. We should stand with the Iraqi people and try to help them out.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:31 pmMr. Big,
I support the military 100% also, I am impressed at the balls these men and women have to go do that, I want to thank them for their service. I mean that.
I do not support the policy makers at the top, like Rumpsfelt.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:31 pmMr. Big,
You asked "short or long term", I suggest you stop spending time here and notify your fellow Republicans that there is such a thing as "long term" and you honestly didn't make that up.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:33 pmYikes said, "So I suppose your happy with what Bush has done with the head of al qaeda!"
Bin Laden is hiding in a hole somewhere, just like Saddam was. Bin Laden is not leading any parades. 3/4 of the leadership of al qaeda has been captured or killed. Bush's policy is right, and the Democrats have no policy.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:35 pmFor Truth bellowed, "Mr. Big(head) equating anyone not serving during Kosovo, to people not serving now is well silly."
Only in your mind. Liberals were gung ho about removing Melosavich from power. They said he was the next Hitler. How many of you guys signed up for the military for that military action?
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:37 pmMR.Big,
I agree that the Dems need a unifying policy, yes the Dems are coasting and it sucks. However, the current admins policies aren't that great either. I would have more tolerance for the likes of Rumpsfelt and the others if they weren't so damn arrogant and rigid about everything.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:39 pmFor Truth bellowed, “Mr. Big(head) equating anyone not serving during Kosovo, to people not serving now is well silly.â€
Comment by Mr. Big — August 3, 2006 @ 4:37 pm
That's not my post Big Man, better get your stuff straight.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:40 pmFor Truth said, "I support the military 100% also, I am impressed at the balls these men and women have to go do that, I want to thank them for their service. I mean that."
Good man.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:40 pmFor Truth said, "However, the current admins policies aren’t that great either."
They aren't perfect. But at least they have policies. The Democrats don't. They think they can just coast and win back their power, and it's not going to work. You can't beat something with nothing. This '06 election willl not be a referendum on Bush. Elections are a choice. And the Republicans are offering policy. It may not be perfect, but it is something.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:43 pmGood point Mr. Bigglesworth,
The DEMS NEED A POLICY. ok happy now?
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:47 pmI suppose Bush's whole dead or alive speach, contrasted with I don't think about bin Laden much. talk about logical inconsistencies. The dems have offered multiple ideas on how to fix our current problems. the republicans are trying to coast on a stay the course, god, guns, and gays strategy. I think it will not be such a happy idea come fall.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:47 pmhate to say it, because rumsfeld has done a horrible job and iraq is an absolute mess, but those examples of rumsfeld quotes don't really paint a rosy picture. not the best job at contradicting the guy, which is surprising. plus, i think we need a quote more recent than march 2003......
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:52 pmthe thing is the rightards put backing the military and backing the president in the same basket. I don't have anything against our military. they do what they are ordered to do. That is part of the system, and part of the reason that a civilian, the president is in charge of the military. However if the president sends the military into a bad situation, I will damn sure say so.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:54 pmI don't get it. The senators know that Rumsfeld will be
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:55 pmtestifying in front of them. Do none of them do the
research required to pull up these choice quotes to
refute him with? What did Clinton answer Rumsfeld with?
I would have made him eat his 'rosy' words along with
his hat.
Rummy began the Iraq war by predicting it would last less than six weeks. That was the "swallow" to get the majority of Americans, and troops, on board to go to war in the first place.
However, a representative of the CATO Institute told CNN International in November 2003 that the Bush Administration was, in reality, preparing for a "generational commitment" to democratize the entire Middle East to the tune of not tens of billions, as Bush was then asking Congress and the American people for, but hundreds of billions of dollars.
Nearly 3 years later, those comments have become fact, not Rummy's rosy prognosis.
In his testimony before the Senate today, Rummy pulled a "bait and switch," saying the war would be long and drawn out, which was actually the desired outcome. Today Rummy, once again, prepared Americans for "The Long War," aka his “global struggle against violent extremism†aka the “enemies of the legitimate Iraqi government." His desire for war is why he is Sec. of Defense and not Colin Powell.
The outcome of Rumsfeld's tenure may seem like "incompetence" to Sen. Clinton et al, but to the Bush administration, prolonged war was always their plan.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:57 pmIs there a difference between "trusting" the troops and "support" of the troops, you changed my words, thanks a lot.
August 3rd, 2006 at 5:02 pmMr. Tiny,
Why are Republicans calling for Bush's impeachment?
August 3rd, 2006 at 5:03 pmI trust the military to keep us safe and give us the freedoms we enjoy. Without the military, we would not have such freedoms. - Mr. Big
I Disagree. When I was in the Navy we PROTECTED America and it's Constitution, the documents from which our freedoms are derived. The Military has never GIVEN any kind of freedom to anyone anywhere. I trust the military to follow orders but if those orders come from a corrupt government I do not trust it to be anything other than the boot the government places on our necks. Without the military we MAY not have the freedoms we enjoy today but it is a leap to say we definately would not.
August 3rd, 2006 at 5:15 pmWatching Rummy makes me sick at the pit of my soul! To think that this man is in charge of our military is too much to bear. He should be living in an assisted living care home. Oh, I guess the Bush administration is an assisted living care home. It is useless hoping that Bush will replace Rummy because Cheney and Rummy are running the White House. History is going to put these men in the "How did the Bush Administration Ruin America" chapter.
August 3rd, 2006 at 5:20 pmFor Truth, how long did it take to remove Saddam from power? Under six months? Rummy was right.
He’s also right that it will be a long, hard slog in Iraq. That’s not rosy. I notice that Think Progress did not update its site to reflect what Rumsfeld actually said. It’s really easy to mislead the liberals, and they swallow it whole.
Comment by Mr. Big — August 3, 2006 @ 4:01 pm
Rummy didn't say he doubted it would take months to remove Saddam from power.
He said he doubted the conflict would last 6 months.
Funny...I thought there was still a conflict going on.
So it appears Rummy was expecting one of two things:
1) Our forces would defeat any resistance from the Iraqi army and other Saddam loyalists within 6 months and, had he not been found within this timeframe, we'd be free to roam the country looking for Saddam while at worst meeting sporadic resistance.
2) Our forces would defeat the Iraqi army and other resistance fighters, AND capture Saddam, all within 6 months.
Sounds kinda rosy to me.
August 3rd, 2006 at 5:26 pmOoops. Meant to say "Rummy didn’t say he doubted it would take 6 months to remove Saddam from power."
August 3rd, 2006 at 5:27 pmHey y'all. Leave Mr. Big alone. One thing I can guarantee is that he is equally disgusted with the current administration, equally appalled at the lack of intellectual discourse amongst our policy-makers, and just as stunned at the arrogance of the ruling Republicans as any "liberal" might be.
But he's got a problem.
He's been sucked in by the ideology of the modern day conservative/neocon establishment. It's simply impossible for these folks to question or criticise anyone who springs from the same political well. They know they want to, they wish they could, they're scared about the war, hurting from gas prices, stunned at no-foreign-policy towards the Lebanon/Israel conflict, and more than a bit uncomfortable that the evangelical hardliners have come to hold more sway than serious scholars on all manner of issues.
No, guys like him are tortured too. They just can't bring themselves to admit it. So instead they lash out at an imagined "left", they hunker down with dog-eared copies of old Colulter, look for solace in her spew and then log on to try some "red-baiting".
Feel sorry for the sucker - don't make fun of him online. He'll deny it - but secretly he'll vote for change in upcoming elections and we'll all be the better for his repressed and tardy realization of the truth.
August 3rd, 2006 at 5:42 pmMr. Big, if your'e so Big on the military then why aren't you more outraged at how horrible they've been stretched and treated in the last 5 years.
We have lowered the enlistment standards and extended the age limit just to meet the needs of keeping soldiers in.
The Stop loss order is still in effect so many soldiers after completing their obligation aren't allowed to leave.
We are a step away from a draft but that won't happen until after the elections.
The reserve units are depleted of equipment.
The forces currently serving in Iraq and Afghanistan are police units now (wasn't the Repubs against being the world's police)?
There are still grave concerns about proper armament on equipment and body armor for our soldiers.
The medical benifits are being cut
The list goes on and on but you blindly follow the one's who don't have a plan.
By the way go to the DNC's website, there are detailed plans it's just that the current do nothing congress is run by Repubs.
August 3rd, 2006 at 5:46 pmPants on fire, meet liar.
August 3rd, 2006 at 5:51 pmJustanobserver said, "We are a step away from a draft but that won’t happen until after the elections."
Actually it was Democrats like Charlie Rangle who have called for a draft. You must mean if the Dems retake control of congress besides trying to impeach Bush they will call for the draft?
August 3rd, 2006 at 5:59 pmSo, Mr. Big you stand by your point about Howard Dean. And that was relevant exactly how so??????? No, what has divided our country and made things worse is the utter disregard of leadership of the current administration and Congress, each of which confuses governing with running a political campaign. Those are two entirely separate functions. Every goddamn policy is intended as a wedge issue to divide -- Terry Schiavo, the current minimum wage hike legislation, amendments to the Consitution prohibiting flag burining or gay marriage to name a few. Howard Dean's rhetoric is hardly the stuff that is dividing our country. Hardly, surprising that you cannot realize that through your myopic, neocon-tinted glasses.
August 3rd, 2006 at 6:11 pmnomorebush said, "what has divided our country and made things worse is the utter disregard of leadership of the current administration and Congress"
You're ignoring the role Democrats have played in this. The Democrats are against everything. Now they will vote against the minimum wage package. They can't comprimise one bit. They try to block everything. They are the party of no. Liberals call Bush hitler. They call Republicans all sorts of nasty names. You have to look at your leadership and place the blame. Howard Dean is your party leader. He doesn't get a free pass.
August 3rd, 2006 at 6:15 pmMr. Big -- why do you ASSUME Howard Dean is my party leader? Genius -- I vote Independent. I am an independent. For instance, I voted for John Warner (R) for Senator of Virginia and will vote for him again. Also, genius, last I saw, the R's have the majority in the House and the Senate, so they can pass whatever the hell they want presumably, correct? So it matters little what the Dems support.
August 3rd, 2006 at 6:39 pm"Senator, I was for optimism before I was against it."
August 3rd, 2006 at 6:48 pmNomoreBush said, "So it matters little what the Dems support."
They don't support anything. Democrats could move legislation in the senate by just getting 6 moderate Republicans like John Warner, who you claim to have voted for, to work with them. The Dems are not interested in that, though. They are interested in blocking Bush's agenda. A Democrat like Lieberman is pretty much kicked out of the party for trying to work with Republicans. Democrats are eating themselves alive. It is not fashionable to the liberal kook base to work with Republicans and get something done. It is dividing the country. Howard Dean's nasty rhetoric against Republicans is dividing the country.
August 3rd, 2006 at 6:52 pmTP, you missed Rumsfeld's patronizing "henny penny, the sky is falling" remark from April 11, 2003:
RUMSFELD: "I picked up a newspaper today, and I couldn't believe it. I read eight headlines that talked about chaos, violence, unrest -- and it was just, 'Henny Penny the sky is falling.' I've never seen anything like it.
RUMSFELD: "And, you say, 'Well, what was it in the plan?' The plan is a complex set of conclusions or ideas that then have a whole series of alternative excursions that one can do, depending on what happens. And, they have been doing that as they've been going along. And, they've been doing a darn good job."
Actually, read the whole damned transcript. He seems to me he was trying to "paint a rosy picture":
August 3rd, 2006 at 6:57 pmhttp://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2003/tr20030411-secdef0090.html
Starwheel, is it trying to paint a rosy picture when you explain the schools that are opening in the Iraq. The hospitals that are reopening. The economy that is getting better. The three national elections where millions of Iraqis turned out to vote for their own government. Or is that just providing the proper context to why we are there? There is more going on in Iraq than just roadside bombs. It seems the media doesn't want to talk about it much, though. That wouldn't help their agenda.
August 3rd, 2006 at 7:07 pm[...] The AP is reporting that Senator Hillary Clinton is calling for Donald Rumsfeld’s resignation. I’m not exactly a fan of the Senator, but I’m heartened to see that ‘moderate’ Democrats are pushing back. I think Clinton did an excellent job the last time Rumsfeld came to lie to the Senate, and her call today is appropriate, given Rumsfeld’s repeated lies and strategic failures. [...]
August 3rd, 2006 at 7:42 pmSure sounds like Rummy has some type of dementia, like his mentor Ronnie Reagon.
Can't trust Republicans to tell the truth Theres the bumper sticker.
August 3rd, 2006 at 7:47 pmKrazy, no doubt that Bush will back up Rumsfield with a " you're doing a heck of a job Rummy"- heh, heh.
August 3rd, 2006 at 7:47 pm[...] Think Progress lost no time in debunking that statement. [...]
August 3rd, 2006 at 8:04 pm#164 - I hope Bush says that to Rummy - it's like the "kiss of death" that he gave to Lieberman.
Can't trust Republicans to tell the truth, after all, Jesus was a Liberal persecuted by Conservatives.
August 3rd, 2006 at 8:15 pmKeep dreaming, Mr Big, just like your inept party leaders.
November is going to bitch-slap you all SO hard, I can't wait!!!
Keep up the stale rhetoric (DEMS HAVE NO PLAN, STAY THE COURSE, BLAH BLAH), it's going to really help push the Dems over the top in Congressional power.
Thank you, thank you, THANK YOU.
August 3rd, 2006 at 8:24 pm"It seems the media doesn’t want to talk about it much, though. That wouldn’t help their agenda." Mr. Big
Mr. Big, the media's "agenda" was promoting the damned war a few short years ago.
But three years since Rumsfeld's patronizing remarks about "henny penny the sky is falling", the conditions in Iraq have deteriorated. And, to date, no one in this administration has been held accountable for this fiasco.
But, I, for one, am sick of excuses. And for Rumsfeld to sit up there in front of the Senate and deny his part in intentionally misleading the public about the situation in Iraq to protect his ass makes me want to puke.
If you want to keep putting lipstick on a pig, be my guest.
I'm not that damned naive.
August 3rd, 2006 at 8:29 pm"Mr. Big" appears to have spent a great deal of time committing every Republican 'talking point' to memory, and now wants to 'show off' for all of us. But like all rightwing fanatics, he just goes on and on, deaf to any and all other opinions. And the defensive tactic of taking their own failures, and attempting to pin them on Democrats, is merely another day in BushCo's "Opposite World", they do this all the time. Or if they can't weasel their way out by lying, we get the "Well, 'so and so' did it too!" The end result is always that it is never their fault, or their responsibility. They always have an excuse ready, and nothing changes, except for the worse. It makes no difference what "Mr. Big" thinks, or says. It is all a bunch of noise, in the end.
August 3rd, 2006 at 8:50 pm[...] [...]
August 3rd, 2006 at 8:52 pmDemocrats could move legislation in the senate by just getting 6 moderate Republicans
And with Republicans holding a five seat majority, all they have to do to block that legislation is co-opt a handful of "moderate" Democrats like, say... oh, I don't know... Joe Lieberman. Which is exactly why so many of us here in Connecticut (one of the rich "liberal" states that is financing your war with our tax dollars) will vote for Ned Lamont next week. Anybody who has tried to work with the Republican leadership has ultimately been stabbed in the back. The only way to beat them is to fight back against their smears, lies and anti-American tactics by meeting fire with fire. Besides which, anti-war candidates such as Lamont now represent the overwhelming majority of Americans who believe this so-called war is a catastrophe.
Howard Dean’s nasty rhetoric against Republicans is dividing the country.
Oh yes, and the Republicans conduct themselves like true gentlemen. Why don't you ask Ann Richards, John McCain, Max Cleland, John Kerry, Cindy Sheehan, John Murtha and Tom Daschle about what it feels like to be on the end of "nasty rhetoric"? Why don't you ask them what it feels like to be compared to terrorists on a daily basis by think-tanks and special interest groups funded by the likes of right-wing wackos such as Richard Mellon Scaife, Amway founder Jay Van Andel and Joseph Coors? Without years of vicious Republican smears, lies and personal attacks, Howard Dean would never have existed. He is a product of Republican tactics, because after years of trying to work with Republicans and getting kicked in the teeth for it, Democrats decided it was time to fight back.
is it trying to paint a rosy picture when you explain the schools that are opening in the Iraq. The hospitals that are reopening. The economy that is getting better. The three national elections where millions of Iraqis turned out to vote for their own government. Or is that just providing the proper context to why we are there? There is more going on in Iraq than just roadside bombs. It seems the media doesn’t want to talk about it much, though. That wouldn’t help their agenda.
That is like saying, "Yes, I know you have terminal cancer, but at least you have a nice complexion!". As a percentage of population, the number of Iraqi civilians that have died in the last two months is equivalent to America suffering a 9/11 attack every two days. Let me repeat that. A 9/11 ATTACK EVERY TWO DAYS!!! And you expect people to get excited about schools and hospitals??? They had schools and hospitals before we invaded, dimwit. Most of those that are being reopened are those that have been damaged or destroyed since we invaded. Taking your "logic" to its natural conclusion, the media had no right kvetching over the 9/11 attacks, since they were ignoring all the wonderful things that were going on in America. So if you think things are so rosy over in Iraq, why don't you go over there to live? And while you're there, tell the families of the 50,000 Iraqi civilians who have died how blessed they are to be living in your neocon paradise. Let me know how that works out for you.
August 3rd, 2006 at 8:55 pmMore old rosy quote from Red Rumsfeld...
Good stuff over at Think Progress on the lies from Rumsfeld about how he tried to sell Americans on a quick war. It gets even better than what they have listed there...(CBS) There will be no World War III starting...
August 3rd, 2006 at 9:12 pmRumsfeld is a senile old man, who most assuradly has lost touch with reality. Furthermore, he is a serial liar. I almost shit when I watched the exchange between Hillary and him, since I have personal knowledge that he ignored, shunned, and made fun of many military war prep documents, not the least of which was the TipFid (Time Phased Force Deployment Data). Using the TipFid would have saved many of our troops lives, and that blood is directly on the hands of Rumsfeld. In a real democracy, he would be in prison along with Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Perle, and the rest. I can think of no higher crime against this country than what these people have done. Not even fallatio between consenting adults.
August 3rd, 2006 at 9:19 pmDienowforpeace said, "November is going to bitch-slap you all SO hard, I can’t wait!!!"
You mean like Brian Bilbray got bitch slapped? hehe
You Dems are so confident. Nancy Pelosi is measuring the drapes already in the speaker's office. John Murtha thinks he's going to be majority leader.
The Dems are very arrogant. With no agenda what makes you think Dems are going to retake congress?
August 3rd, 2006 at 9:23 pmStarwheel said, "And, to date, no one in this administration has been held accountable for this fiasco."
Yeah, you had your chance. It was the 2004 election to hold Bush accountable. You guys lost. Deal with it.
August 3rd, 2006 at 9:25 pmShaggy6 said, "all they have to do to block that legislation is co-opt a handful of 'moderate' Democrats like, say… oh, I don’t know… Joe Lieberman."
Except Lieberman votes with the Dems 90% of the time. He may be right on the war on terror, but he is wrong on almost everything else.
I can't believe Lieberman may get kicked out of the Democrat party. He was your vice presidential nominee only 6 years ago. It seems the Democrat party has been taken over and is being held hostage in a sense by the hardcore moonbat left. They have to trash Republicans to be accepted. They can't work together to get something done on behalf of the American people.
And to appease that hardcore base, Democrats refuse to work with Republicans and call them all sorts of nasty names. It's time for Democrats to own up and take responsiblity for their share in causing the divide in this country.
August 3rd, 2006 at 9:30 pmGophater said, "I almost shit when I watched the exchange between Hillary and him"
What exchange? Hillary was reading off of a prepared script. There was no thought put into what she said.
In fact, before the war she was giving "rosy scenerios" of her own, saying Iraq had ties to al qaeda, that it had WMD.
August 3rd, 2006 at 9:32 pmYeah, you had your chance. It was the 2004 election to hold Bush accountable. You guys lost. Deal with it.
Comment by Mr. Big —
We all lost. And we're all dealing with it. Life goes on for some of us. It is why the mid-term elections are so important.
Keep gloating, though. I bet the families of dead American soldiers appreciate that.
August 3rd, 2006 at 9:46 pm"In fact, before the war she was giving “rosy scenerios†of her own, saying Iraq had ties to al qaeda, that it had WMD. "
Comment by Mr. Big
What do you know. You and I agree on something.
August 3rd, 2006 at 9:47 pmExcept Lieberman votes with the Dems 90% of the time. He may be right on the war on terror, but he is wrong on almost everything else.
So he was wrong to approve John Roberts and Sammy Scalito to the Supreme Court? He was wrong to vote for Bush's other judicial nominees? He was wrong to vote for the Bush tax cuts for billionaires? I'm pleased to hear you admit it.
The Dems are very arrogant. With no agenda what makes you think Dems are going to retake congress?
Well, the polls are providing a very strong hint. Even Republican pollster Frank Luntz recently said that every indication is a Democratic sweep in November?
As for your "no agenda" comment, I'm pleased to see that you are up to speed with the latest talking points being distrubuted by the RNC, but isn't that cliche getting a bit old and tired now? Sure Democrats have an agenda, not that you would be interested in hearing it, because it has to do with fairness for ALL Americans, not just billionaires and religious fundamentalists. It means a responsible, multilateral foreign policy, not one based on hubris and fantasy that leaves us militarily exposed and universally despised. It means leaving NO American behind, not just governing for the benefit of the Paris Hiltons and Corporate CEOs. It means fiscal responsibility, not mortgaging our nation's future to China. It means returning this country to a place where we are respected for our freedoms, not despised for our hypocrisy. It means stopping the slow march to dictatorship. But most importantly, it means restoring a system of checks and balances and holding our leaders accountable for their actions. That must be an amazing concept for someone like you.
August 3rd, 2006 at 9:51 pm"It seems the Democrat party has been taken over and is being held hostage in a sense by the hardcore moonbat left. "
Actually, Lieberman was taken hostage by the hardcore wingnut right. The same hardcore wingnut right that has taken over the country.
August 3rd, 2006 at 9:53 pmIt's the hardcare wingnut right (Hannity, Coulter, and now Delay) who is endorsing Lieberman. We sure as hell don't want them taking over the Democratic Party.
So.... Was there supposed to be a demonstration of Rumsfeld painting a rosy picture? I didn't see one.
August 3rd, 2006 at 9:56 pmWe all lost. And we’re all dealing with it. Life goes on for some of us. It is why the mid-term elections are so important.
Keep gloating, though. I bet the families of dead American soldiers appreciate that.
Amen, Starwheel, I couldn't have said it better myself. No matter how good the GOP's "get out the vote" operation is, I can't escape the feeling that most Republicans are unmotivated and couldn't care less about this election. They've suffered as much as anybody else (more so in many of the red states). I don't expect a surge of Republicans to suddenly vote Democratic---the country is too polarized for that---but my gut feeling is that Republican turnout will be extremely low. True conservatives of the Reagan/Goldwater brand are viscerally opposed to the current GOP leadership, and they comprise a much larger Republican voting bloc than the 20% or so of Bush cultists. On the other hand, Democrats of all stripes seem more motivated this year than even in 2004.
This is why so many Republican candidates are deliberately avoiding labeling themselves as Republicans this year. The "R" word is becoming despised, and the "L" word is coming back into fashion again after a 30-year hiatus.
August 3rd, 2006 at 9:57 pm“It seems the Democrat party has been taken over and is being held hostage in a sense by the hardcore moonbat left. â€
You mean like the moonbat right did to the Republican Party. Look how many true conservative Republicans have come out against the GOP leadership over the past few years. Here is a few for starters. Brent Scowcroft, Paul O'Neill, Christine Todd Whitman, John Danforth, Lawrence Wilkerson, Chuck Hagel to name just a few. The current Republican Party serves no agenda other than power for power's sake. And to build a ruling coalition, they have had to unite religious fundamentalists with the worst excesses of big business. Don't get me wrong, they have been damn good at it, but they have left true conservatives behind, which is why they are forced to pander to their base during every election.
Since Bill Clinton emerged from the center of the Democratic Party in 1992, the Dems have been gradually drifting to the right. For years, they continued trying to work with Republicans in a bipartisan fashion, even as the GOP became more radicalized. But there is a shift taking place now. The party is returning to its progressive roots, because we have figured out that there is no point trying to work with Republicans any more. Sad, but true. Perhaps the Democratic Party may become radicalized in the same way as the GOP has in the past couple of decades. My hope is that the GOP will listen to its elder statesmen and return to sanity, because only then can we have a real conversation about the issues facing this country instead of all the vicious partisanship we have today.
August 3rd, 2006 at 10:08 pmI am glad to see Seixon is keeping up his house, and making room for us when we come to live with him in Norway.
August 3rd, 2006 at 10:15 pmMarc at #150 you noted that Mr.B. had a 'problem'. True.
And in the comment made by B. at #118 the 'problem' was explained.
In that comment the "Dick" Cheney reasoning was invoked--Mr. B. had
"---other priorities", and also the pRres. (an AWOL/Deserter) reasoning for opting out of the Guard Service "--to go to Harvard business School".
Certainly Mr. B. while admitting to following such sterling examples of dedicated service to country in time of need would now justify those examples of 'Pug service and sacrifice as 'honorable' since there is his 'support the troops' plugs throughout his written comments.
Yes. From his sitting position in a comfortable plush chair behind a Big desk he will "support the troops"--Semper fi!
Big deal, Mr B.
August 3rd, 2006 at 10:34 pmMr. Big,
The sky is blue.
Well, it is if you look at it from our side.
However, if you're out there in space - it's black.
Well, for us down here on the planet Earth it's blue.
Please, come down from space - and bring dumbsfeld with you ...
August 3rd, 2006 at 10:38 pmSputter and mutter all you want.
But Rumsfeld is the best Secretary of Defense we have had in my lifetime.
And if Hillary Clinton had her way we would have lost the Iraq war a long time ago.
P.S. And if the rest of you loonies had your way, the Berlin Wall would still be standing and the Soviet Union would still imprison Eastern Europe and threaten the US with nuclear annihilation.
August 3rd, 2006 at 10:41 pm#189 I take it you are only 5 years old then. And what do you use as criteria for the Best Sec Def? who screwed the troops the most in your lifetime? Well then your'e right.
You're PS is BS.
August 3rd, 2006 at 10:52 pmWas there supposed to be a demonstration of Rumsfeld painting a rosy picture? I didn’t see one.
oh, seixon, of all your comments i've seen, this one is the most inane yet.
rumsfeld on how long the iraq conflict would last: "i doubt six months"
if, 3 years later, you can't see that as blatantly overoptimistic, if not a complete used car salesman's approach to war-hocking (or should i say 'hawking'?), then methinks your brain must be numb from the norwegian permafrost (which, incidentally, is thawing).
no, we've been bait-and-switched. this is a multi-trillion dollar boondoggle that the war machine only had to sell in the most opportunistic way possible. of course they were optimistic; it was such a great deal -- for them.
and sorry, america, but all sales are final. this war is a lemon and you're stuck with it. you should've read the fine print. that's what our used car salesman administration are trying to tell us.
August 3rd, 2006 at 10:59 pmstarwheel said, "We all lost. And we’re all dealing with it."
Cheer up my friend. The economy is good. Unemployment is low. GDP is growing strong. Revenue to the government is at an all time high. Those Bush tax cuts are working pretty good.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:08 pmShaggy6 said, "Sure Democrats have an agenda, not that you would be interested in hearing it"
Your cheif fundraiser is John Murtha. He wants to cut and run from Iraq. Is that the agenda you're talking about?
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:10 pmP.S. And if the rest of you loonies had your way, the Berlin Wall would still be standing and the Soviet Union would still imprison Eastern Europe and threaten the US with nuclear annihilation.
no, actually, that was rumsfeld's idea also. this guy has been a constant fear mongerer. back in 1975, after nixon had signed a weapons treaty with the soviets, rumsfeld came out like a madman claiming the soviets were actually ramping up their weapons systems instead. he pointed to supposed satellite photos (which have never seen the light of day) and the ever popular "that we can't prove they have these weapons only proves that they have weapons we can't prove they have" theory (yea, try and get your head around that one -- it's really easy for a neo-con, and hey, it worked for iraq also).
history shows that rumsfeld was wrong. the ussr was already in its decline, and were certainly not involved in any of the proliferation that rumsfeld (and the so-called 'b-group') alleged at that time. but guess what? rumsfeld's sabre-rattling did achieve one objective -- it got the soviets to start ramping up their weapons programs again, in response to the bellicosity they were hearing form the united states, courtesy of donald rumsfeld.
the guy has been consistent, i'll give him that. a consistent liar.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:12 pmstarwheel said, "Actually, Lieberman was taken hostage by the hardcore wingnut right."
Come on now. The man is a life long Democrat. He has an ADA liberal rating of 75%. That's hardly rightwing.
Don't get carried away now. Bill Clinton was recently campaigning with Lieberman. Is he wingnut right? I can't believe you are throwing him over the bus because you have a disagreement over the war.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:12 pmmr. big, you're supposed to add water to the koolaid before you ingest it.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:13 pmShaggy6 said, "the 'L' word is coming back into fashion again after a 30-year hiatus."
Democrats have to pretend to be somebody they're not when they run for office. They have to refashion themselves as moderates, or progressives to avoid that liberal label. Hillary has been trying to act like a moderate for a few years now to hide who she is. When Democrats run on who they actually are, liberals, they lose.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:15 pmMr. Big what does cut and run mean? Really, has anyone said let's just drop everything and leave. Oh your'e right it was brought up. A bill was presented by the Republicans to leave immediately. What is cut and run?
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:17 pm#33 is spot on. Which coalition of countries is stupid enough to carry out this all out war in the Middle East? Lets hope these crusader proxies at least have the capacity to uphold some minimum standards in their warring. For instance, Australia is investing in prison ships to lock up prisoners, because its offshore island Gitmos are full. We don't want a repeat of Afghanistan where hundreds of prisoners were stuffed into searing hot 20 ft shipping containers and left to die!
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:17 pmHas Rummy inherited Hitler's modus operandi as well as his uniform and service revolver? There really are more Nazi uniforms near this guy than you would expect.
Big guy what's a liberal? and what are you?
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:18 pmProgressaurus rex said, "this is a multi-trillion dollar boondoggle that the war machine only had to sell in the most opportunistic way possible."
What is the Democrats' excuse for voting for the war? Hillary, Kerry, Edwards, Biden, Rockefeller all voted for the war in Iraq. What did they have to gain from it?
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:21 pmThe economy is good. Unemployment is low. GDP is growing strong. Revenue to the government is at an all time high. Those Bush tax cuts are working pretty good.
bush outspent clinton's eight years in only five years.
this year's deficit is actually at least twice what the government states.
over the last five years:
Job growth is the weakest on record.
The US economy came up more than 7 million jobs short of keeping up with population growth.
Over the past five years the US economy experienced a net job loss in goods-producing activities.
US manufacturing lost 2.9 million jobs, almost 17% of the manufacturing work force.
Communications equipment lost 43% of its workforce.
Semiconductors and electronic components lost 37% of its workforce.
The workforce in computers and electronic products declined 30%.
Electrical equipment and appliances lost 25% of its employees.
The workforce in motor vehicles and parts declined 12%.
Furniture and related products lost 17% of its jobs.
Apparel manufacturers lost almost half of the work force.
Employment in textile mills declined 43%.
Paper and paper products lost one-fifth of its jobs.
The work force in plastics and rubber products declined by 15%.
Manufacturers of beverages and tobacco products experienced a 7% shrinkage in jobs.
The information sector lost 17% of its jobs, with the telecommunications work force declining by 25%.
Computer systems design and related lost 9% of its jobs.
Today there are 209,000 fewer managerial and supervisory jobs than 5 years ago.
The low measured rate of unemployment does not include discouraged workers. Labor arbitrage has made the unemployment rate less and less a meaningful indicator...Economists who look beyond political press releases estimate the US unemployment rate to be between 7% and 8.5%. There are now hundreds of thousands of Americans who will never recover their investment in their university education.
yes, keep touting that "strong economy".
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:22 pmMr. Tiny,
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:23 pmWhat makes us arrogant are people like you and your party who are easily paving the path to a Democratic landslide.
It's quite fun just to sit back and wait to see what totally moronic action they/you take next.
Pass the popcorn.
#195 stomping for Joe!
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:25 pmThat's as bad as that "Kiss". Go Joe, just go. Take B. with you.
progressaurus rex, this economy is on fire. It's much stronger than during the Clinton years. How much has the value of your home gone up over the past 5 years, big guy?
Do you have a url for those talking points?
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:26 pmWhat is the Democrats’ excuse for voting for the war? Hillary, Kerry, Edwards, Biden, Rockefeller all voted for the war in Iraq. What did they have to gain from it?
well, not being a democrat myself, and also having been against the war from the very beginning, i couldn't care less (although i hear they claim it was the faulty intelligence although i'm sure the bloodlust of the administration might've had something to do with it). to me, any candidate that supported the war has blood on their hands.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:26 pmDieNowForPeace, when you are wrong about that Democrat landslide, can I gloat?
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:27 pmprogressaurus rex said, "to me, any candidate that supported the war has blood on their hands."
Interesting take. That would include most Democrats in the senate, no?
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:29 pmthe url is posted -- click on the highlighted words "over the last five years" in my prior post. those figures are from an article by paul craig roberts. he takes the information directly from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
paul craig roberts was the assistant secretary of the treasury under reagan, also has been an associate editor of the wall street journal editorial page and contributing editor of national review.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:30 pmThat would include most Democrats in the senate, no?
i don't stutter.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:30 pmespecially all of those people mentioned -- beltway insiders who love the congressional plantation.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:31 pmWhat is the Democrats’ excuse for voting for the war? Hillary, Kerry, Edwards, Biden, Rockefeller all voted for the war in Iraq. What did they have to gain from it?
so that's your'e argument to be against Dems? Because they voted the same as repbulicans? Makes as much sense as the "known knowns" blurb by Rummy.
Economy on fire? Better than Clinton's? do you have a URL for these points?
What is cut and run?
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:33 pmprogressaurus rex, 4.6 unemployment is nothing to sneeze at. The economy is humming along quite nicely.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:34 pmYour cheif fundraiser is John Murtha. He wants to cut and run from Iraq. Is that the agenda you’re talking about?
Oh dear, Mr. Little, for a moment there you veered away from the main RNC talking points. According to the RNC, our chief fundraisers are George Soros and "Hollywood liberals". Since when did Murtha become the chief fundraiser? Do you have evidence? Sources? Of course not. You guys never do. You just make mindless statements and then expect everybody to believe them without any obligation to the truth. Anyway, I would rather our chief fundraiser be a decorated war hero like John Murtha than the CEO and founder of Amway and a reclusive billionaire who advocates segregation.
As for your "cut and run" comment, do you guys ever have an original thought or do you always talk in tired old cliches? Yes, yes, I know that the RNC has brainwashed you into using that "cut and run" cliche as one of your five big talking points, but they don't equip you with the intelligence to understand what you are saying. Are you saying that Murtha advocates the same "cut and run" strategy as the Pentagon, which has recommended a drawdown of troops consistent with Murtha's recommendations? Do you think that perhaps Murtha, a man who knows the smell and feel of combat, knows a little bit more about combat than you? Probably not. After all, none are braver than America's fighting armchair warriors, right?
Why am I even bothering? There is no point arguing with ignorance, but it can be fun sometimes.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:37 pmUnamerican said, "so that’s your’e argument to be against Dems? Because they voted the same as repbulicans?"
What's going to make the liberal left come out and vote for the Dems, when they vote the same as the Republicans. According to progressiverex, most Dems have blood on their hands. How can they retake congress, when liberals seem to despise them? It doesn't sound like you guys are going to be very motivated to vote.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:38 pmshaggy6, you ever serve in the military?
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:40 pm#201 What is the Democrats’ excuse for voting for the war? Hillary, Kerry, Edwards, Biden, Rockefeller all voted for the war in Iraq. What did they have to gain from it?
Hey, wisenheimer:
Of the Democratic presidential wannabees who were in the Senate back then, just about all of them — Sens. John Kerry, John Edwards, Hillary Clinton, Evan Bayh, Chris Dodd — also voted for the resolution empowering the president to use force against Iraq. Among presidential aspirants, only Wisconsin Sen. Russ Feingold voted “no.â€
You can keep Hillary, Kerry, Edwards, et. al. since they seem to support your "kill em all" agenda.
Mr. Feingold appears to be the ONLY Congressman with original ideas whose not afraid to speak his mind (and he's not a filthy liar, like most Senators).
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:41 pmFor a name like Mr. Big you sure think small Post #202 gives you a laundry list (with link) to show that it's not all rosey. The last paragraph shows an estimated unemployment almost twice what you state and you still ignore this. Your post at #213 totally ignores the facts provided in #202. do you just like the look of your words after you think them up?
What is cut and run? What is a liberal? What are you?
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:41 pmYou guys are crazy! Those excerpts above paint nothing of a rosy picture.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:42 pmwhatever, big.
sure, the economy is great, if you think that flipping burgers at mcdonalds is better than making cars on an assembly line. those figures don't lie. unemployment numbers have always been politicized, and 4.6% doesn't include the people who have stopped looking for work.
i reiterate: "Economists who look beyond political press releases estimate the US unemployment rate to be between 7% and 8.5%."
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:43 pmDienowforpeace said, "You can keep Hillary, Kerry, Edwards, et. al. since they seem to support your “kill em all†agenda."
And you think Democrats are going to retake congress? You guys on the liberal left don't even seem to like the Democrats.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:44 pm#207
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:45 pmI'd suggest holding your breath until after the November results in hopes of there NOT being a Dem landslide...
Mr. Small said: "Democrats have to pretend to be somebody they’re not when they run for office. They have to refashion themselves as moderates, or progressives to avoid that liberal label. Hillary has been trying to act like a moderate for a few years now to hide who she is. When Democrats run on who they actually are, liberals, they lose."
Wrong. Name me one national Democrat over the past few years who has run an election as a liberal. And I'm not talking about your perception of what a liberal is, because you would name everybody to the left of Genghis Khan. I'm asking you to name one who has stood up and said "I am proud to be a liberal". Provide sources and links.
You are right that people like Kerry and Gore have run away from the liberal label. And what happened? They lost. They didn't lose because they ran as liberals. They lost because they ran AWAY from the liberal label. If she does the same thing, Hilary Clinton will lose for the same reason. The simple fact is (and I know that facts have a liberal bias) that the vast majority of Americans trend liberal on just about every issue. It is just the word that has been rebranded by the Republican smear machine as a pejorative.
You didn't acknowledge the point I made that Republican candidates are running away from the word Republican as fast as they can. This tells me a sea change is taking place. Every few decades, the political pendulum swings. You guys have had your shot at one-party rule and, God willing, it is coming to an end and we will clean up your mess for you.
One more thing. You don't need to have an agenda to provide effective leadership. Agendas can be bad things. After all, Hitler had convictions. Hitler had an agenda. Does that mean you would vote for Hitler over Hilary Clinton, who supposedly has no agenda?
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:46 pmAccording to progressiverex, most Dems have blood on their hands.
i didn't say that. don't twist my words. the fact is there are MANY anti-war democrats running in november. all i'm saying is if those dems that voted for the war got kicked out, i would have no pity for them whatsoever.
it's too bad you folks on the right are desperate for anyone to agree with you now.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:47 pmProgressaurus rex said, "Economists who look beyond political press releases estimate the US unemployment rate to be between 7% and 8.5%."
As it was during the Clinton years then, if they looked at the numbers the same way.
There are more people working now than at any other time in history.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:47 pm#221
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:47 pmOf course, the sheeple of America can only think Rep or Dem, so when they're tired of one party, they'll swing over to the other - happens, oh, every 8 years or so, or do you not like to learn from history?
You guys are crazy! Those excerpts above paint nothing of a rosy picture.
i can only presume that you're still caught up in 'the great neo-con fear experiment of 2001'.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:48 pmshaggy6, you ever serve in the military?
Yes, but I'm not about to use that to advance my political views or to belittle yours, so you won't catch me bragging about it.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:49 pmShaggy6 said, "You don’t need to have an agenda to provide effective leadership."
You need an agenda to win an election. You can't beat something for nothing. You guys think the Democrats are going to win on their good looks?
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:50 pmMr Big (are you in charge of the band 'Mr. Big' and their fan club? They sucked),
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:51 pmMy goal, and everyone I can convince, which has been VERY easy so far, is to NOT VOTE FOR ANY INCUMBENT. We can control these out-of-control, so-called "Representatives" by simply voting for ANYONE BUT AN INCUMBENT - as long as they are pro-peace.
...and as for a Democratic agenda, I'm sure the American people would swallow the old "Do you really want 4 more years of this?" argument, hook, line and sinker. It's worked in the past.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:52 pmDienowforpeace said, "Of course, the sheeple of America can only think Rep or Dem, so when they’re tired of one party, they’ll swing over to the other"
Nah, they'll just stay home.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:55 pm#232 Think AGAIN, again.
People are more fed-up than EVER. You'll see record numbers at the polls this fall, which of course, spells DOOM for you and your kind:
A posting at on Online news site of a Scripps Howard story further notes that “anger against the federal government is at record levels,†with 54 percent of those polled saying they “personally are more angry†at the government than they used to be. Meanwhile, overall, 36 percent of the respondents said it is “very likely†or “somewhat likely†that federal officials either participated in the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, or took no action to stop them “because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East.â€
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:58 pmoh good, a clinton tie-in. it was only a matter of time.
if all else fails, "clinton did it too!"
when republicans want to talk about their own accountability, they've had one reliable answer for the last 13 years: bill clinton.
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:58 pmMr. big guy you are a sad sack of republidung. You ignore facts in your face and just jump to another talking point from uncle rove. Get a grip man. You haven't answered any of my questions. you just pull out another card from the neo deck. You don't talk Big, you don't think Big and you can't stand Big behind any of your bullshit statements.
August 4th, 2006 at 12:00 amThere are more people working now than at any other time in history.
there are more people living now than at any other time in history. give me a fact that actually says something.
again, from above: "The US economy came up more than 7 million jobs short of keeping up with population growth."
August 4th, 2006 at 12:00 amYou need an agenda to win an election. You can’t beat something for nothing. You guys think the Democrats are going to win on their good looks?
Many historians believe that John F. Kennedy beat Richard Nixon purely for cosmetic reasons. Many current day analysts still believe that Al Gore "lost" to George Bush because of his haughty conduct during the debates (he still won more votes, but that didn't count for anything with a Republican-loaded Supreme Court). Bush certainly didn't win because of his "agenda".
If agendas are so important, then why did Republicans spend so much time and money attacking John Kerry's wife in 2004 and promoting the Swift Boat liars?
Okay, so let's go back to my hypothesis. You are saying you would vote for Hitler over Hilary, because Hitler had an agenda and Hilary does not, correct?
More importantly, you are wrong again. There have been numerous instances where one party has won an election simply because the country is tired of the incumbent party. Even in 2000, most of the folks I knew who voted for Bush couldn't tell you what he stood for. All they knew was that Al Gore invented the internet (another Republican talking point) and that they would rather have a beer with George W. Bush. It had nothing to do with Bush's agenda. Most Americans couldn't tell you what either party stands for.
If you were right and the Democrats have no agenda, and agendas are essential to winning elections (you are wrong on both counts, but that is besides the point), then why are Democrats currently holding double-digit leads over Republicans in every single poll, even those conducted by Fox News and the Wall Street Journal? Simple, because even Americans who believe that Democrats have no agenda know that it's better to have no agenda than to have more of what they have suffered for the past few years. If the past six years of Republican one-party rule is what having an agenda means, then you can shove it. At least that is what I hearing from people all around the country, even in staunch red states.
August 4th, 2006 at 12:01 amDienowforpeace said: "and as for a Democratic agenda, I’m sure the American people would swallow the old 'Do you really want 4 more years of this?' argument, hook, line and sinker. It’s worked in the past."
When faced with the alternative, the Democrats, yes they will probably go for that. Would the American people stomach a speaker Pelosi? I doubt it.
The political environment right now should be very helpful to the Democrats in november. The party in office usually loses seats in the 6th year of his term. But again, the one big thing Republicans have going for them is the Democrats. They almost always do something foolish to lose in the end. They almost always overplay their hand. Remember the Welstone memorial? That was over the top man.
August 4th, 2006 at 12:02 am#234 Prog-rex,
Yeah, they always throw around Clinton because they're mad that a Democrat could be such a damn good President. In fact, it was so easy for him to run the country, he had time for a "nooner", and I don't recall that directly affecting any of us, unless your just jealous?
August 4th, 2006 at 12:02 amShaggy6 said, " then why are Democrats currently holding double-digit leads over Republicans in every single poll"
Democrats are oversampled in those polls.
August 4th, 2006 at 12:18 amProgressive rex said, "oh good, a clinton tie-in."
You have to look at the numbers the same way then. If you want to skew the unemployment numbers now, you have to use the same formula for Clinton.
The fact is, the unemployment rate now is lower than the average of the 1990's under Bill Clinton.
August 4th, 2006 at 12:23 amRummy's lies are beginning to wear very thin, so he needs to resign immediately!
August 4th, 2006 at 12:23 am#239, I'm throwing around Bill Clinton, because the economy is stronger now than it was during his term.
August 4th, 2006 at 12:25 amMr. Big and friends are like the faithful wife who won't admit that Daddy is raping their 12 year old daughter, despite the bloody sheets and the cries at night. He's a good man, he wouldn't do such a thing.
Bush is defiling our country, and these pukes still defend him.
"He's a good man." just ask KKKarl.
Take another sleeping pill Biggy, and pull the pillow over your ears.
August 4th, 2006 at 12:26 amDienowforpeace said, "People are more fed-up than EVER."
They are fed up with Democrats as well. There is no great love out there for the Democrat party. In most polls they have lower approval ratings than the president.
August 4th, 2006 at 12:28 amNanlichi, does the name Juanitta Broadrick mean anything to you?
August 4th, 2006 at 12:32 am#47,
You liberals have no policy agenda. You’re just playing word games here. You have no idea what to do on the war on terror, and you think by running this smear site it will help you politically. It is just a bunch of left wingers slapping each other on the back thinking you have something. You have squat. Voters do not trust liberals with protecting America.
Comment by Mr. Big — August 3, 2006 @ 1:46 pm
August 4th, 2006 at 12:32 amVOTERS, including REPUBLICAN Voters, do not trust Republicans with protecting AMERICA
I’m throwing around Bill Clinton, because the economy is stronger now than it was during his term.
you have just completely discredited yourself. no one in their right mind claims this; it's utterly preposterous.
August 4th, 2006 at 12:35 amMarley squeeked, "VOTERS, including REPUBLICAN Voters, do not trust Republicans with protecting AMERICA"
Of course they do. They certainly don't trust somebody like John Murtha, who thinks fighting the war on terror should be done in Japan. Or somebody like John "cut and run" Kerry.
August 4th, 2006 at 12:36 amMr. Big and friends are like the faithful wife who won’t admit that Daddy is raping their 12 year old daughter, despite the bloody sheets and the cries at night. He’s a good man, he wouldn’t do such a thing.
Bush is defiling our country, and these pukes still defend him.
“He’s a good man.†just ask KKKarl.
Take another sleeping pill Biggy, and pull the pillow over your ears.
Comment by Nanlichi — August 4, 2006 @ 12:26 am
YOU NAILED IT!!! I was abused in a home where no one spoke up. Same thing here!
August 4th, 2006 at 12:40 amSHAME ON AMERICA!!
Marley screamed, "YOU NAILED IT!!! I was abused in a home where no one spoke up. Same thing here! SHAME ON AMERICA!!"
I hardly think that you on the liberal left haven't been speaking up. You've been using blogs like this and DailyKos, to express your hate and anger for some time now.
August 4th, 2006 at 12:42 amWealthy Repubs think Bush's economy is wonderfull, but everybody else knows it sucks, so is Mr. Big guy a rich GOP swine, or just a GOPer who hopes to be rich and therefore is brain dead?
August 4th, 2006 at 12:43 amLets be real, Donny wouldn't admit the truth if it bit him in the ass! Hillary is dead on and all we hear from Rumsfeld is the same old lies, lies, lies. If you tell a lie or lies long enough you start to believe them. Donny has so a power trip it is starting to eclispe that of J. Edger Hoover.
August 4th, 2006 at 12:44 amDemocrats are oversampled in those polls.
Prove it. Once again, you make a bold statement without any evidence or sources. Specific ones, please. I've asked you several times to back up your statements, but you never do, which tells me that you're just parroting another Republican talking point.
August 4th, 2006 at 12:45 am#252, there is more homeownership and minority homeownership now than under Clinton.
August 4th, 2006 at 12:45 am#254,
http://www.floppingaces.net/2006/02/28/the-big-bad-cbs-poll/
UNWEIGHTED Total Respondents 1018
Total Republicans 272 27%
Total Democrats 409 40%
Total Independents 337 33%
WEIGHTED
Total Respondents 1018
August 4th, 2006 at 12:47 amTotal Republicans 289 28%
Total Democrats 381 37%
Total Independents 348 34%
Of course they do. They certainly don’t trust somebody like John Murtha, who thinks fighting the war on terror should be done in Japan. Or somebody like John “cut and run†Kerry.
Once again, where is your evidence? Where did John Murtha say anything about Japan? What does "cut and run" mean? What is the difference between the Murtha/Kerry strategy and the Pentagon's recommended drawdown of troops? Is Rumsfeld a "cut and runner"?
Come on, man, unless you can back up some of these big, bold Republican talking points with real evidence, you are nothing more than a sad joke. Who do you think you are kidding?
August 4th, 2006 at 12:48 am#257, "Where did John Murtha say anything about Japan?"
"We can go to Okinawa. We can redeploy there almost instantly."
Mr. Russert, mindful of the fact that Okinawa, Japan, is 4,899 miles from Baghdad, offered Mr. Murtha an escape, in case he had misspoken. "But it would be tough to have a timely response from Okinawa," he said.
But Rep. Murtha dug himself in deeper. "When I say a timely response, you know, our fighters can fly from Okinawa very quickly," he said.
Mr. Murtha has been recommending redeployment to Okinawa ever since his rebirth as a dove last year, so what he said on "Meet the Press" was no slip of the tongue.
Let us be clear about the Murtha "strategy." It is insane. It would be easier to defend Germany from Chicago; Alaska from Miami, or Hawaii from Pittsburgh than to defend Iraq from Okinawa.
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06176/700770-108.stm
August 4th, 2006 at 12:52 am# 257, "What does 'cut and run' mean?"
To leave Iraq before the Iraqis can defend themselves from cutthroat terrorists.
"What is the difference between the Murtha/Kerry strategy and the Pentagon’s recommended drawdown of troops?"
The pentagon's plan is condition based, while the Murtha/Kerry cut and run plans set a date certain no matter the conditions on the ground.
"Is Rumsfeld a 'cut and runner'?"
No. He is a stay the course kind of guy.
August 4th, 2006 at 1:00 amActually, Murtha's full quote was: "Kuwait's one that will take us. Qatar, we already have bases in Qatar. (Also in) Bahrain. All those countries are willing to take the United States... We don't have to be right there. We can go to Okinawa. We can redeploy there almost instantly." You notice that he mentioned several Middle Eastern countries.
He went on to say: "We currently have a Marine division headquartered in Okinawa, thus logistics and existing facilities are already in place. Additionally, during the course of this war, Marines at the battalion level or lower have already been deployed from Okinawa to Iraq."
In fact, Murtha is correct. We have made several deployments from Okinawa to Iraq during the course of the war. In today's world, such deployments can take place within hours. If a more immediate response is required, then we have garrisons in Turkey, Qatar, Bahrain and Kuwait.
That is the point Murtha was making, but it is much easier to spin it as "Murtha wants to fight the war on terror from Japan."
I apologize for forgetting about this quote when I challenged you to tell me when he had mentioned Japan, but it was such a throwaway line. I didn't realize it was such a big deal to you guys who know much less about national security than John Murtha.
August 4th, 2006 at 1:05 am"I apologize for forgetting about this quote when I challenged you to tell me when he had mentioned Japan"
No problem. I accept that apology. I like your tough debate tactics. Keeps me on my toes.
August 4th, 2006 at 1:08 amBy "cutthroat terrorists", I presume you mean the Sunni and Shi'a Iraqis who are now engaged in a domestic sectarian conflict.
Let's be clear about something here. The Iraqis will not step up for as long as our soldiers are doing the dying. Why should they? Besides which, most of the security forces there have been infiltrated by death squads. We are in a no-win situation, and the vast majority of Americans, as well as most Republicans and nearly every military expert on the planet, realize that. Nobody is buying this "stay the course" crap any more. Hell, even the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs is admitting that the situation is getting worse. Meanwhile, we are militarily unable to respond to other flare-ups in the world, which is why Iran and North Korea are treating us like the toothless tiger we have become thanks to your "stay the course" blowhards in the White House.
No. He is a stay the course kind of guy.
No. He is a stubborn, arrogant, bloody-minded, pig-ignorant fantasist who has been wrong about every prediction he has ever made. He is one of the biggest reasons that we are now a laughing stock in every country around the world.
August 4th, 2006 at 1:11 amLots of foreclosures on houses now Mr. Big and lots of bankruptcies as well too! Those who have money are doing well under Bush, but most Americans are losing economic ground now!
August 4th, 2006 at 1:12 amLots of foreclosures on houses now Mr. Big and lots of bankruptcies as well too! Those who have money are doing well under Bush, but most Americans are losing economic ground now!
45 million Americans without any form of health insurance and therefore one accident or sickness away from bankruptcy..... except the Republicans have even made it harder for those folks to declare bankruptcy. You see, it is more important to ensure that Paris Hilton gets her tax breaks than to make sure that American children receive basic healthcare. When I tell foreign friends that over 14 million American children are denied basic healthcare, they look at me like I'm crazy. One even said, "what kind of a barbarian country does that to children?" I replied, "A Republican one."
When confronted with such issues, Republicans tend to run around screaming "Class War! Class War!" And you know something? They are right. There is a class war going on in this country. They declared war on the middle and working class and they are winning.
August 4th, 2006 at 1:17 amYes shaggy the GOP made it harder for people to file for bankruptcy > they prefer debtor prisons for them now instead > you have to work with a judge on how much a month you can pay to creditors > credit card companies want Americans to be in debt till their deaths, so one can assume the GOP might pass a bill, if they remain in control after November, to pass that debt onto children of the deceased > NOT the wealthy ones like Paris Hilton > lol.
August 4th, 2006 at 1:25 am#259 - “What does ‘cut and run’ mean?â€
To leave Iraq before the Iraqis can defend themselves from cutthroat terrorists.
AS IF our military has been able to defend the Iraqi's from "terrrrrists"? Sheesh, what a DOPE you are.
WTF? Lose the Faux "News" talking point crap. Besides, just because it sounds "cowardly" (since the GOP is more of an ad agency than a political party), doesn't mean it's a bad idea. Being in Iraq in the FIRST PLACE was even worse. But, then again, you probably believe that eating a "normal" size value meal at McDonald's/Corporate Death Burger is "healthy" too.
August 4th, 2006 at 1:45 amIs the "moonbat left" the same "moonbat left" who has been 100% RIGHT ABOUT IRAQ from DAY ONE? The very same "moonbat left" who was derided for claiming Saddam Hussein was better off "contained" than being toppled which would lead to chaos in the Middle East? Just wondering because the "UNAMERICAN FASCIST RIGHT" would like us to believe their MYTHS, re-write history and listen to their non-existant memory by playing along that somehow we WEREN'T RIGHT ABOUT EVERYTHING. Everything the "moonbat left" said would happen... HAS HAPPENED. THE RIGHT WAS WRONG ABOUT EVERYTHING, so GO TO HELL REPUBLICANS AND ANYONE WHO ENABLED BUSH & CO. You idiot Republicans REALLY need to just SHUT THE HELL UP and listen for once, instead of GAMBLING AWAY our nation on your spent neo-con fantasies.
August 4th, 2006 at 1:53 amBy the way, RIGHTIES... where the HELL is OSAMA BIN FORGOTTEN?
August 4th, 2006 at 1:54 amSpeaking of "cut and run" being cowardly... what is more cowardly? Having soldiers "cut and run" or having them die because you want to score political points?
August 4th, 2006 at 1:56 amDon't forget, folks. Republicans have not allowed a minimum wage increase because they would not give it a FAIR "UP OR DOWN" VOTE without attaching it to the BULLSHIT "PARIS HILTON" tax cut. Republicans can't bring themselves to give the working poor a raise, without rewarding the "entitled and spoiled" wealthiest 2% of Americans. Republican values in action, folks! Be sure and remember THAT when November 2nd rolls around. You like giving tax cuts to Paris Hilton then pull that lever for Republicans. If not, then VOTE DEMOCRATIC FOR A CHANGE!
August 4th, 2006 at 1:59 amGood for Hillary. Maybe she will make a good and tough Senator from NY, after all. As far as President? She lost me with her support of flag burning, and the Clintons buddying up to the Bush family. Its too obvious they are now "establishment" types. No amount of reinvention is going to work with me. The flag burning amendment was the LAST STRAW for me. I even had it EXPLAINED to me, during the Cold War, that I was serving on submarines for the right for some idiot to prove our flag stood for the freedom to burn it. If she doesn't understand that then I can't support her or any other politician who feels that way. Case closed with me.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think Rumsfeld should be charged with contempt of congress when he goes off on his "self 'Question and Answer' sessions." It is ONE THING for him to do a self "Q&A" when being questioned by the press but to go off and do that with the Senate shows UTTER CONTEMPT. He is basically patronizing them and trying to show he is somehow more strategic than they. They should just SLAM THEIR FIST down and direct him to SHUT UP by shouting, "Sir! Sir! We will be asking the QUESTIONS here. We will not be subject to any of your diversions by asking and answering your OWN RHETORICAL QUESTIONS! Do you understand that, Sir?"
August 4th, 2006 at 2:07 amrumsfeld is the president of the war criminals club.
August 4th, 2006 at 2:11 amvice president is, of course, dick cheney.
Rummy jumped the shark
August 4th, 2006 at 5:52 amThe Buck stops with George W. Bush. Impeach Bush.
August 4th, 2006 at 6:42 am[...] Under criticism yesterday by Senator Clinton during questioning in the U.S. Senate, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld insisted “that he has “never painted a rosy picture†about Iraq. Rumsfeld insisted that he has been “very measured†and told Clinton “you would have a dickens of a time trying to find instances where I have been overly optimistic.— Within hours the blogosphere was building a list of instances in which he had done just that. Perhaps what Senators need to start doing is blogging their questions during these sessions, the better to have rebuttal information before they’ve ended. Related Posts [...]
August 4th, 2006 at 6:56 amGood Job!!! Hillary :)
Thats exactly what is needed to get control over this mess.
August 4th, 2006 at 9:02 amCan we be objective for a moment? These are not very powerful examples of Rummy painting a rosy picture. Obviously the example about Afghanistan is one, but that was early on shortly after we started the campaign there. Certainly, he offered a rosy view of how long the war in Iraq would last, but that was a prediction, not an assessment. The issue of WMD's isn't even relevant to the topic. When I heard this exchange yesterday, I was really hoping to see what Think Progress would come up with. Unfortunately, it appears not much... and even less if you take the exchange in its context: Rummy offering rosy assessments to the Congress. I would have expected to see more examples of this, but I guess you haven't found them yet. There are an endless number of reasons to attack Rumsfeld and he should have been fired or had the guts to resign a LONG time ago. But when charged with a specific task of demonstrating thta he has offered rosy assessments of the the war in Iraq to the Congress (or even in the media), let;s stick to finding specific examples that do indeed demonstrate that fact.
August 4th, 2006 at 9:23 amSept. 10, 2001............
It is so nice to live in that world.
August 4th, 2006 at 9:28 amWe waste a lot of time going back and forth with the brainless folk out there. Those like "Mr. Big". I mean, look at the name he picks out for himself. Most likely he has a low paying hourly job somewhere in the south, and regularly beats his wife and dog, if he has a wife and dog. He probably extols on the virtues of American life ad nausea while destroying it. Forget him, get out and canvass, work a phone bank, whatever.... we have to get the country back first, then we can all sit back and laugh at the trailer trash.
August 4th, 2006 at 9:54 am#49.
Rumsfeld and this administration have the unfortunate job of doing what the previous administration failed so miserably to do. So the current administration, SOD, SOS, Repubilcans, conservatives, what have you, are blamed for doing/supporting the dirty work. I bet you smugly voted for Clinton and are now all proud that you voted for peace throughout the world, while sitting back 10 years ago and allowing the media, which appears to be where most of you get your regurgitated rhetoric, to tell you that the only scandal in Washington was a pervert who couldn't keep off the fat girls. I'm sorry, that's not true. Paula Jones was not fat.
Oh, and GOPHater, your name is any better than Mr. Big???? Way to show your immediate unwillingness to consider debating an issue and reviewing alternative points-of-view before you pass judgement. No, it's better to just hate all Republicans. It keeps you from having to get your learn on. By choosing your posting name and suggesting that someone who posted is likely from the "South", because of their views, you are perpetuating a stigma that some conservatives place on liberals. You have reduced your point, if you even have one, to name-calling and have offered nothing for my consideration relative to this discussion, except to consider that you are uninformed and unintelligent. Excellent debate. And by the way, it's "ad nauseam" jerk-off. There, are you happy? Now you've made me call you names.
vomit.
August 4th, 2006 at 10:28 amTake a look at the agendas of the Assemblies of God and the Pentecostal denomination. They both strive to intentionally bring on the "end times" or Jesus baiting, as I refer to it.
Compare their agenda with the actions and intentions of the Bush Administration. Nary any discrepancy. It's anti science and research, anti reason, theocratic dogma, disintegration of hte separation of church and state, intentional erosion of individual and civil liberties, world dominance, and continued strength of Israel at the expense of everyone else in the Middle East.
The oil grab benefits Cheney and Bush's business affiliations, and it's most likely a secondary benefit of the policy.
It's important to deny the people who believe in bringing on the "end times" the resources needed to do so. However, those people currently reside in the executive positions, the cabiniet, they control both the House and the Senate, and they are close to becoming a majority on the SUpreme Court.
August 4th, 2006 at 10:53 am#281... Well, it only took 280 posts for the old "blame Clinton" buck-passing to rear its ugly head. After six years, that record has worn out. The current administration is not being blamed for doing, as you put it, "the dirty work". They are being blamed for being so damn incompetent at it. After 9/11, the administration had the support of the entire country, not to mention the rest of the civilized world. Instead of using that support to reach across party lines and build a bipartisan coalition in which ALL opinions would be entertained, the administration used terrorism as yet another political wedge issue and used what Bush called his "political capital" for short-term political advantage. The result? Iraq is in chaos, Bin Laden is still on the loose, the nation has been spent to the brink of bankruptcy, we are despised around the world, oil is at $3 a gallon and rising, and we have become an incompetent, toothless tiger in the eyes of the rest of the planet.
I agree with you that far too much attention was wasted on the Monica "scandal", but I find it rich that you blame the media. Clinton had to endure years of vicious attacks and endless investigations from a Republican congress that was obsessed with his sex life. Do you think that maybe the Republican witch hunt distracted the Clinton administration from pursuing terrorists? Oh, but of course, he got a BJ, which is far more important than terrorism. I don't remember any Republicans saying that Clinton should be going after terrorists and reforming the Middle East. Those pious hypocrites were too busy feigning outrage over the Monica "scandal". In fact, when Clinton tried to pass a hardline anti-terror bill after Oklahoma City, Republicans watered it down because they decried many of its provisions as unconstitutional. Ironic how some of those same provisions resurfaced with the Patriot Act.
And what was George W. Bush's foreign policy before 9/11? Easy, he didn't have one. If anything, he was an isolationist and bragged about the fact. I just did a search and couldn't find a single mention by George W. Bush about terrorism during the 2000 campaign. Al Gore, on the other hand, said on several occasions during that campaign that extremism and terrorism was one of the gravest threats we faced. I know this doesn't reconcile with your RNC talking points, but then since when have facts mattered to Republicans?
So once again, I'd like to know exactly what "mess" these incompetent crooks are supposed to have cleaned up.
August 4th, 2006 at 11:39 am#282. Fortunately, there are still many true patriots in the higher echelons of the military who are sickened at what these vermin are doing to America and will ultimately prevent them from imposing their vision of Hell on Earth upon us all. They swore an oath to the Constitution of the United States, not to the Republican Party and not to George W. Bush. In dark times such as these, the will of good men always prevails.
August 4th, 2006 at 11:42 amHey papa,
You might want to google ad nausea, you might learn something. I would call you a jerk off like you did me, but I've got to get busy here. We're taking you down. Now get back in your trailer with Mr. Big and watch Fox "News".
August 4th, 2006 at 12:45 pmThe guy is insane. In every press conference or interview Rumsfeld has given, he states how things are going so well in Iraq. He doesn't seem to be living in reality.
August 4th, 2006 at 12:55 pmShame on all of the committee members, especially the democrats for not being ready, yet again, to handle Rumsfelds dodgeball tactics. I just can't understand why our leaders are so afraid to lead. Someone has got to take the chance that the American public is fed up enough and intelligent enough to reward a brave soul (A Congressman/Senator) who is willing to be a true statesman. Get real, get tough, be honest, get the job done for the people of America and the world. You will probably still get the vote. If not you can still tell your grandchildren that you did the right things for the right reasons. Lord help us, Rumfleld wins again.
August 4th, 2006 at 1:41 pmDon't forget that General Shinseki told Rumsfeld they would need several hundred thousand troops at least. Rumsfeld then orchestrated a behind-the scenes push to have Shinseki take "early retirement".
August 4th, 2006 at 1:50 pm[...] Still not convinced? ThinkProgress has even more. [...]
August 4th, 2006 at 2:19 pmYou have to remember, this is the same guy who lies CONSTANTLY. I was watching a show a year or two ago where the two interviewers asked him about the administration constantly trying to tie Saddam and 9/11 together. Rummy, of course, insisted they'd never done any such thing, and it was just the "liberal media" making it sound like they had.
They pulled up two clips of him saying EXACTLY what he had just denied saying.
The expression on his face was priceless. He just sat there in stunned silence for probably 4-5 seconds, then started in with the "well, uh, well..."
I think a lot of the older politicians keep forgetting (or want to ignore) the fact that it's not hard at all to pull up exactly what was said, on film. It used to be, back in "their day" (the 60's and 70's) that the "mainstream news" was only newspapers, radio and television, and pulling up a quote from a year or two previous involved digging through newspaper archives or trying to paraphrase. Now you can pull up video clips of them with ease.
As Bush said (to paraphrase), "Sometimes you just have to keep repeating things (ie, lies) over and over again before it sinks in, to kind of catapult the propaganda."
As the old saying goes, "A lie repeated often enough eventually becomes the truth."
Bush and all his cronies need to be dragged out of office and imprisoned for crimes against the country and against humanity.
Sadly, it'll never happen. Bush will just pardon everyone, and they'll walk off laughing after crapping all over the constitution, the country, and the world.
August 4th, 2006 at 2:29 pmOf course Dumbsfeld is lying. All of the Bush criminals do and have. The problem is, they don't lie in private, but in front of microphones and television cameras and reporters. Further, they are piss poor liars since they have every time been caught in the lies. They speak of an imminent civil war in Iraq when in fact, there has been a civil war in progress for about a year now. Not like OUR civil war? Not like a "classical" civil war. Our civil war was a disgrace of the highest order. What a 'classic' civil war is is known only to Dumbsfeld and the Marine COWARD pete pace. Both Afghanistan and Iraq are now, by the loosest definitions failed states. The George's Dick (cheney) has been mouthing off to the Russians, but Mr. Putin shut him down quickly bringing up, once again, Cheney's drunken shooting of his lawyer pal. IF in fact, the US survives the Bush Crime Family, and IF these wretches are not killed one and all, then the US is ripe to build a new form of government that is responsive to the people. Not to big business. It's time that the Demand side of the the "Law of Supply and Demand" was returned rightfully to the superior side of this equations. There can be no question now that "supply side" economics is a collosal failure. Lots of dead Iraqis and Americans to prove this, but there you have it.
August 4th, 2006 at 2:51 pmRumsfeld has used the "Stars and Stripes" newspaper to promote his war policy in the form of editorial letters to the troops. This list of commentaries should include one of those letters. Not only does Rummy paint a glowing picture of Iraq, but he ties Iraq to 9-11, contradicting Bush.
Sorry, no URL was available, but a search on http://www.estripes.com may bring it up.
US TROOPS' SKILL EMANCIPATED IRAQ
Published in Stars and Stripes on/around June 26, 2004
To the troops:
More than 15 months ago, a global coalition ended the brutal regime of Saddam Hussein and liberated the people of Iraq.
As in all conflicts, this has come at a cost in lives. Some of your comrades made the ultimate sacrifice. For your sacrifices, our country and the president are deeply grateful.
In a free, democratic country we have vigorous debates over important public policy issues--none more heated than a decision to go to war. But this should not distract us from the mission at hand or lessen the magnitude of your accomplishments.
The threat we face must be confronted. And you are doing so exceedingly well. Indeed it has been a historic demonstration of skill and military power.
On Sept. 11, 2002, 3,000 citizens were killed by extremists determined to frighten and intimidate our people and civilized societies. The future danger is that, if the extremists gain the potential, the number of casualties would be far higher. Terrorists are continuing to plot attacks against the American people and against other civilized societies. This is a different kind of enemy and a different kind of world. And we must think and act differently in this new century.
These extremists think nothing of cutting off innocent people's heads to try to intimidate great nations. They have murdered citizens from many countries--South Korea, Japan, Spain, the United Kingdom and others--hoping to strike fear in the hearts of free people.
Theirs is an ideology of oppression and subjugation of women. They seek to create radical systems that impose their views on others. And they will accept no armistice with those who choose free systems.
They see the governments of the Middle East, the United States and our stalwart allies as targets.
Consider the background. In the span of 20 years, Saddam's Iraq invaded two neighbors, Iran and Kuwait, and launched ballistic missiles at two more. He employed poison gas against soldiers in Iran and against kurdish villages in his own country.
The United Nations and the U.S. Congress shared the view that Saddam's regime was a threat to the region and the world. Indeed, in 1998, our Congress passed a resolution calling for the removal of the regime. And over the years the U.N. passed 17 resolutions condeming Saddam's regime and calling on him to tell the U.N. about his weapions programs. He ignored every one.
Information gathered since the defeat of Saddam's regime last year confirms that his last declaration to the United Nations about his weapons programs was falsified. The U.N. resolutions had called for "serious consequences" should Saddam not comply. He did not.
The president issued a final ultimatum to Saddam to reliquish power to avoid war. Saddam chose war instead.
By your skill and courage, you have put a brutal dictator in the dock to be tried by the Iraqi people and restored freedom to 25 million people. By helping to repair infrastructure, rebuild schools, encourage democratic institutions and deliver educational and medical supplies, you have shown America's true character and given Iraq a chance at a new start.
But most importantly, your fight--and ultimate victory--against the forces of terror and extremism in Iraq and the Middle East will have made America safer and more secure.
You are accomplishing something noble and historic--and future generations of Americans will remember and thank you for it.
The Stripes letters of rebuttal to Rummy's letter are below Rummy's--"What protection?" and "Response to Rumsfeld."
What protection?—Aug. 2, 2004
http://www.estripes.com/article.asp?section=125&article=23299&archive=true
Response to Rumsfeld—Aug. 20, 2004
August 4th, 2006 at 2:55 pmhttp://www.estripes.com/article.asp?section=125&article=23942
This is what you get when you elect a bunch of people who have either ducked or avoided military service and pursued a war for the enrichment of themselves and their buddies. This administration is so thoroughly disgusting. They make me sick!
August 4th, 2006 at 3:48 pmStarwheel, is it trying to paint a rosy picture when you explain the schools that are opening in the Iraq. The hospitals that are reopening. The economy that is getting better. The three national elections where millions of Iraqis turned out to vote for their own government. Or is that just providing the proper context to why we are there? There is more going on in Iraq than just roadside bombs. It seems the media doesn’t want to talk about it much, though. That wouldn’t help their agenda.
Comment by Mr. Big — August 3, 2006 @ 7:07 pm
Where's Fox News when you need them, Mr. Big? Why aren't they leading the charge and reporting all the good news? They are the cheerleaders and the mouthpiece of this administration, however. One of the soldiers who assisted in bringing Baby Noor to the U.S. said in an interview that there were "thousands" of good-news stories such as her's. And that's a quote. So where the hell are they?
Between April and June I checked Foxnews.com once or twice per week to see what good news stories they were posting. I did this for 7 weeks. SEVEN! Not one...ONE..."good news" story to report.
But, Mr. Big, there's one teeny problem with reporting the good news. CBS reporter Lara Logan recently said that they wanted to get out and report the good news stories. However, she said our very own State Dept. wouldn't let them because if they did, the terrorists would find out the location of the new school, or new hospital, or new waste treatment plant and then go and blow it up. So, Mr. Big, tell us the answer.
August 4th, 2006 at 3:52 pmI am very sick and tired of the rhetoric from Rumsfield (and frankly form Bush and Cheney, too.) They have got us into a mess, and it is time to get out with our providing support from nearby bases.
I see our country as a laughing stock in the world. We may be a super-power, but it seems to me that we have made serious blunders that make us as a nation look foolish and unyielding in our approach to others in the world.
Rumsfield must go. I wish Bush and Cheney would do so, too.
August 4th, 2006 at 4:14 pmAs the old saying goes, “A lie repeated often enough eventually becomes the truth.â€
Heh...I've got a mother-in-law that is living proof of that.
August 4th, 2006 at 4:38 pmThe expression on his face was priceless. He just sat there in stunned silence for probably 4-5 seconds, then started in with the “well, uh, well…â€
I understand the same thing happened recently. Soon after he and Condi flew in to Iraq for a quick visit, a reporter asked him something like, "If things are going as well in Iraq as you say they are, why did you have to have increased security and why was your visit unannounced?"
Word is that Rummy and Condi looked at each other in stunned silence.
August 4th, 2006 at 4:41 pmPosted a few more POST-war cases of optimism here: http://progressive.org/blogressive_rummy84
August 4th, 2006 at 5:25 pmHillary should have had this quote at her fingertips when she was questioning Rumsfeld, along with other similar quotes from other administration officials such as Wolfowits, Feith and Cheney. Many of them were predicting a short war, that it would pay for itself, that we would be welcomed as liberators, that the insurgency was in its last throes etc. She could have confronted Rumsfeld directly with these rosy scenarios and then asked him, "Why should we believe you now after what you told us then?" It would have been far more effective and decisive.
August 4th, 2006 at 8:27 pmQuite frankly, you'd have a dickens of a time finding anyone outside of Sec. Def. Psychopath who uses the word "dickens", and in particular to suggest a much more thoughtful, reflective person than this dickhead is. This man will be taking over hell along with Monkey Boy when they're done here on Earth.
August 4th, 2006 at 8:57 pmprogressaurus,
oh, seixon, of all your comments i’ve seen, this one is the most inane yet.
rumsfeld on how long the iraq conflict would last: “i doubt six monthsâ€
if, 3 years later, you can’t see that as blatantly overoptimistic, if not a complete used car salesman’s approach to war-hocking (or should i say ‘hawking’?), then methinks your brain must be numb from the norwegian permafrost (which, incidentally, is thawing).
What did he mean? Did he mean the entire military operation, or the removal of the regime of Saddam Hussein? I'm leaning towards the latter, which turned out being what, less than 2 months? In fact, his comments indicate that this is what he meant. Check it out:
Here Rumsfeld clearly distinguishes the period he was talking about as the "major military operations" that Bush declared over on May 1, and then the "after that" of piecing together Iraq after Saddam was removed. Rumsfeld's guess of six weeks seems to have been right on the money.
As I was saying, this is the best you can do to claim that Rumsfeld painted a rosy picture? Rumsfeld accurately stating that major military operations would not last 6 months, which they didn't?
Yawn.
August 4th, 2006 at 9:39 pmSexion,
In light of my post above, do you really think Dumsfeld meant just the initial bombing? You lie to yourself. Yawn, yawn... You are all alike. Yawn.... Yawn....
August 4th, 2006 at 10:22 pmRummy is a dummy.
August 5th, 2006 at 2:05 amWatching the testimony of Donald Rusmfield in front of Congress was eye-opening. Although he has frequently demonstrated contempt of anyone who would question his decisions or strategy, that contempt has been nowhere more evident than it was when he responded to questions and concerns of Senator Clinton. His response again mischaracterized what his prior positions have been and provided excuses for why we are where we are now in Iraq and Afghanistan. Watching his mannerisms while she talked, while he talked and after they both talked, it was evident that he despises anyone who has the temerity to question his judgment. His hands were literally shaking as he talked. He scowled when he did not know the cameras were on him (or maybe he did know it). He is the most responsible for the mess we are in (with the possible exception of Cheney), yet he is angry at everyone else. Even General Francona, no apologist for the military, admitted in his commentary on MSNBC, that terrible mistakes were made after the initial fall of Saddam, but Rumsfield would not admit that. He is a poor excuse for what he claims to be, but Bush is locked in to him and there will be no getting rid of him. Michael Townes Watson, author of America's Tunnel Vision--How Insurance Companies' Propaganda Is Corrupting Medicine and Law.
August 5th, 2006 at 7:12 amWe are in an era of misinformation, misspeak and lies. The only problem we have now is to determine when and if their is any truth to anything that anyone says.
August 5th, 2006 at 7:55 amA state of utter confusion with control factors to support the lies and misspeak.
Cronyism and corruption cannot be left out of the picture either..
The Ed Schultz show played at least three other clips of Rumsfield painting a "rosy picture". One was immediately after the at Marine asked about why they had to scrounge through dumps to get metal to up-armore their vehicles. Rummy stated that (paraphrasing), "Schools are open, hospitals are open, water and electricity are working at pre-war levels. Lots of things are going very well"
Not only was he painting a rosy picture, he was either completely uninformed as to the reality on the ground--the water and electricity are STILL NOT at pre-invasion levels nor is oil production--or he was lying. He also neglected to mention that the schools and hospitals were open before the attacks on Iraq and had to be RE-opened after being blown up by US bombs.
August 5th, 2006 at 10:48 amThis is a very long thread, I didn't read it all (I'll go back and finish), but felt I had to respond to Mr. Big.
Mr. Big:
You said " I chose a career in business, not the military..."
You appear to be a coward. In time of war, many "businessmen" give up their careers (some temporarily, some permanently - if you get my drift) to protect their counrty and fellow countrymen.
To continue on your career path, while a war is raging and our country is under such a grave threat (according to the neocon ideology and propaganda, which you appear to espouse), is the height of selfishness, the abondenment of your country, and displays rank cowardice.
The idea that your business interests outweigh the survival of your country (you do seem to imply that the survival of your country is sufficiently threatened - thus the need for a preemptive war), shows just what kind of courage and moral fiber you are composed of.
It would be much more honest, forthright, and accurate to simply admit one (or all) of the following:
1. You are a coward;
2. We did not go into this war for legitimate reasons, and therefore, I see no need to risk life and limb;
3. I'm all about the money and material things - forget principles and/or patriotism - I just want more for me.
You, sir, are a coward.
August 5th, 2006 at 11:12 amgive me a break, find something from post 2003. or let it be.
The Taliban and al Qaeda are out of power in Afghanistan.
Saddam was out of power well with in the 6 months.
many did welcome the troops (besides that was clearly his opinion)
and in March 2003 it was still assumed by the likes of Bill and Hillary Clinton and john Kerry thought they were there and that we would find them.
really people if you have to go back 3 or 4 years to find statements you PHAIL!
August 5th, 2006 at 6:21 pmHillary's questioning of Rumsfeld was a joke.
She sounded like a teenager who was angry that she coudn't use the car, so she decided to recite a litany of all the things her parents had done to ruin her life.
And Daddy Rumsfeld's reply ""Oh My Goodness" was perfect...meaning, "you poor child, when are you going to grow up already."
She sounded and acted like a child and he put her in her place.
Anyone who actually watched the exchange knows that Rummy won.
As for the "Rosy Picture"...the quotes you pulled are from the very beginning of the conflict when the military and administration were generally optimistic and had no reason not to be at that time. Why don't you post the multitude of quotes by Rumsfeld since then which have reflected the changing conditions on the ground and the difficulties that we are facing.
By not posting those much more recent comments, you are far more dishnest and deplorabel inyour actions then Rummy ever has been.
August 5th, 2006 at 9:55 pm[...] [...]
August 6th, 2006 at 10:17 amDonald Rumsfeld = Psychopath.
August 6th, 2006 at 2:54 pm(Psychopaths commonly lie and use Psychological Projection)
Derf,
Just watched General John Batiste on Hardball. He seems to think Dumbsfield blew it. I wonder what you know that he and the other retired generals calling for Dummy to step down don't know. Have you ever been in the military? Here's a link as to what the generals think of Dummy:
August 7th, 2006 at 7:25 pmhttp://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/jan-june06/iraq_4-13.html
Also, your critque of Hillary seems a bit odd as well. Do you actually work for the White House, or are you just stupid?
HA! HA! HA! HA! This guy is bizarre ! Mr.Donald "Pinochio" Rumsfeld. HA! HA! HA!
August 9th, 2006 at 12:49 pm[...] Frankly, I’ve seen this toxic combination of hubris, incompetence and corruption in only one other place. Which leads me to ask: when did Ehud Olmert sack Amir Peretz in favor of this man? [...]
August 15th, 2006 at 2:54 am[...] You know, a guy who on not once, not twice, but three times got caught trying to say he never said something should probably avoid accusing others of any kind of confusion. And then there’s his problem with history. [...]
August 29th, 2006 at 3:02 pmJericho:Gutenberg ominousness,Runyon undefinability orchid - Tons of interesdting stuff!!!
October 15th, 2006 at 11:08 amSex Gay Sex Anime Sex
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 14th, 2008 at 7:53 pmHardcore Sex Sex Hardcore Hardcore Porn Videos
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 16th, 2008 at 5:45 pmJessie
One notable blogging tool that does not support trackback yet is Blogger. The TrackBack specification was created by Six Apart, who
March 18th, 2008 at 6:04 amHardcore Sex Gay Hardcore Sex Hardcore Blowjob
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 18th, 2008 at 8:28 amVacation Rental Travel Search Engines Costa Rica Travel
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 18th, 2008 at 6:25 pmHealth Insurance Gulf Breeze Insurance Flood Insurance
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 19th, 2008 at 6:06 amGay Sex Gay Sex Videos Black Gay Men
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 19th, 2008 at 10:23 pmHaifa Wehbi
March 20th, 2008 at 7:14 amPee Public Pee Public Pissing
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 20th, 2008 at 2:54 pmcard credit debt void
March 20th, 2008 at 6:07 pmFree Granny Porn Milf Camps Friend's Hot Mom
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 21st, 2008 at 2:26 amretirement letters
Some weblog software programs, such as Wordpress, Movable Type and Community Server, support automatic pingbacks where all the links
March 21st, 2008 at 2:40 pmPreteen Preteen Pussy Model Pre Teen Underwear
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 21st, 2008 at 10:51 pmGay Sex Gay Teen Gay Men Having Sex
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 22nd, 2008 at 4:02 amHardcore Sex Hardcore Sex Stories Hardcore Toons
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 22nd, 2008 at 7:50 amBusiness Plans Templates
Thanks for creating this blog. I thought it was a very interesting read. It is so interesting reading other peoples personal take on a subject.
March 22nd, 2008 at 8:25 amcosmetic teeth
Interestingly, this was on CNN last week.
March 22nd, 2008 at 10:10 pmProm Dresses Hat Hollister Clothing
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 22nd, 2008 at 10:42 pmJessie
Man i love reading your blog, interesting posts !
March 23rd, 2008 at 7:00 amChubby Grannies Chubby Blonde Mature Chubby Mature Thumbs
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 23rd, 2008 at 7:49 pmwc metal
Very interesting post. A little bit confusing, but still ok. do you know what is the first? i`ve the new album at my blog
March 24th, 2008 at 9:57 amHome Insurance Pittsburgh
I couldn't understand some parts of this article, but I guess I just need to check some more resources regarding this, because it sounds interesting.
March 27th, 2008 at 9:19 ambusiness letters templates
One notable blogging tool that does not support trackback yet is Blogger. This is similar to comment spam but avoids some of the safeguards
March 27th, 2008 at 9:36 amOnline Home Furniture Accounts
I don't mean to be too in your face, but I'm not sure I agree with this. Anyhow, thanks for sharing and I think I'll come to this blog more often.
March 28th, 2008 at 9:01 amWeight Loss Pill Identifier Pills
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 28th, 2008 at 12:11 pmChubby Grannies Mature Chubby Women Mature Lesbians Blonde Chubby Bbw Fat
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 28th, 2008 at 4:36 pmGay Sex Gay Twinks Gay Hunks
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 29th, 2008 at 2:50 amGay Incest Gay Cumshots Gay Jock
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 29th, 2008 at 3:49 amInsurance Automobile Insurance Home Owners Insurance
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 30th, 2008 at 3:23 amKds Bbs Pics Childporn Underage Nudist
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 30th, 2008 at 4:20 amexchange list for meal planning
Your site regarding %TITLE% looks very interesting to me. I found it doing a search for %KEYWORD%.
March 30th, 2008 at 9:16 pmGay Incest Gay Male Sex Gay Brothers
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 31st, 2008 at 2:21 amJack
Interesting site.
April 2nd, 2008 at 6:00 pmJim Crow Laws Employment Law Us Supreme Court
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 2nd, 2008 at 8:05 pmInsurance Small Business Health Insurance Nationwide Insurance
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 2nd, 2008 at 8:46 pmHealth Insurance California Health Insurance Michigan Health Insurance
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 4th, 2008 at 12:08 amGay Incest Old Gay Men Gay Male Galleries
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 4th, 2008 at 6:29 amJack
Thanks for sharing. I agree and would add that th
April 5th, 2008 at 2:19 pmRorie
Dork.
April 6th, 2008 at 8:13 amSex Girls Having Sex Rough Sex
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 7th, 2008 at 6:16 amConnecticut Bankruptcy Lawyer Authority Sources
Found your blog on yahoo - thanks for the article but i still don't get it.
April 7th, 2008 at 8:55 amlivecam sex
amazing stuff
April 7th, 2008 at 8:45 pmAss Round Ass Tight Ass
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 8th, 2008 at 6:29 amKds Bbs Pics Russian Child Models Ls Girls
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 9th, 2008 at 8:17 pmGay Sex Gay Ass Gay Ass
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 10th, 2008 at 2:26 pmJoe
All I can say is WOW! Extremely nice layouts, awesome graphics and great articles. No matter how many times I come here, I am still impressed by the very professional appearance. Congratulations on a job well done.
April 11th, 2008 at 2:19 pmprognosis cancer
This article will also explain why natural progesterone is the best treatment, and a much better choice compared to birth control pills.
April 13th, 2008 at 7:16 amHealth Insurance Quotes Instantly
If you can dream it, you can do it. Always remember that this whole thing was started with a dream and a mouse. ~ Walt Disney
April 13th, 2008 at 6:20 pmFunny Quotes Retirement
Interesting - because that is the same thing I found out last Thursday.
April 13th, 2008 at 8:35 pmSex Free Sex Pictures Office Sex
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 14th, 2008 at 12:42 amPee Female Pee Pee Hole
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 14th, 2008 at 1:53 amCock Mommy Loves Cock Cocks
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 14th, 2008 at 2:25 amAnimal Sex Free Animal Sex Stories Sex With Dogs
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 14th, 2008 at 4:05 am