Right Wing Throws Stones At Pelosi From Glass House
Right Wing Throws Stones At Pelosi From Glass House
Yesterday, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said that if bin Laden is caught tomorrow, “it is five years too late.” She added, “He has done more damage the longer he has been out there. But in fact, the damage that he has done is done. And even to capture him now, I don’t think makes us any safer.”
Pelosi is now under attack for her statements about bin Laden. Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) said Pelosi’s comments “can only have a demoralizing effect on American troops and intelligence personnel who are currently risking their lives in the rugged mountain ranges and deserts of the Middle East in pursuit of Osama bin Laden and his lieutenants.” (More here and here.) Pelosi’s words, however, are no different from what the White House, many foreign policy experts, and the 9-11 Commission have said consistently:
9-11 Commission Said Capturing Bin Laden Would Not End the War on Terror. “The problem is that al Qaeda represents an ideological movement, not a finite group of people. It initiates and inspires, even if it no longer directs. In this way it has transformed itself into a decentralized force. Bin Ladin may be limited in his ability to organize major attacks from his hideouts. Yet killing or capturing him, while extremely important, would not end terror.” [9-11 Commission Report Executive Summary]
Bush Said Bin Laden Was “Not the Issue.” Bush: “We are patient, we’re deliberate. Oh, I know the news media likes to say, ‘Where’s ol’ Osama bin Laden?’ He’s not the issue. The issue is international terror.” [Bush Remarks, 2/5/02]
Cheney Said “You’d Still Have a Problem With al Qaeda” If Bin Laden Were Killed. “He’s not the only source of the problem, obviously, Tim. If you killed him tomorrow, you’d still have a problem with al-Qaeda, with Zawahiri and the others.” [Cheney, 9/10/06]
Rumsfeld War On Terror Was Larger Than Bin Laden. Rumsfeld: “My attitude is if [bin Laden] were gone tomorrow the same problem would exist. He’s got a whole bunch of lieutenants that have been trained and they’ve got bank accounts all over and they’ve got cells in 50 or 60 countries. Would you want to stop him? Sure. Would you want to stop the rest of his lieutenants? You bet. But I don’t get up every morning and say that’s the end, the goal and the end point of this thing. I think that would be a big mistake. Furthermore, the al Qaeda is just one of the networks.” [Rumsfeld, 10/24/01]
Rumsfeld Said Al Qaeda Can Function Without Bin Laden. Rumsfeld: “He could walk in here tomorrow and Al Qaeda would go on functioning.” [Christian Science Monitor, 3/1/02]
Other prominent conservatives have also said that capturing bin Laden will not end the terror threat.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
80 Responses to “Right Wing Throws Stones At Pelosi From Glass House”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Nancy keeps saying things that allow the right wing to nail her. She should have just kept hammering on Bush for not getting usama bin asshole.
September 13th, 2006 at 5:32 pmUntil he’s caught or killed,September 12 should be known nationally as “where’s Osama?” day.
September 13th, 2006 at 5:32 pmI think she blew it here. The bottom line: the Iraq war is a distraction from the real war on terror, which should consist mostly of intelligence gathering and targeted strikes on folks like OBL. When you claim that it wouldn’t matter if we got OBL right now, you diffuse that point.
September 13th, 2006 at 5:35 pmAnd if Nancy Pelosi had said, “The sun rises in the east”, I’m sure that Duncan Hunter or one of the other Republicans would have responded in the same way.
September 13th, 2006 at 5:36 pmBin Laden Is almost certainely DEAD
If Bin Laden dont make some silly speaach just before November elections can we all aggree he must be DEAD
September 13th, 2006 at 5:36 pmI noticed you closed the comments on the Err America post, and I just wanted to add:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
BTW, Pelosi is a zombie.
Just FYI.
BRAINS!!! BRAINSSSSS!!!!!!!!
Heh.
September 13th, 2006 at 5:37 pmShe’ll starve if she stays here…
Republicans: “We don’t care if we said the exact same thing she did. When it’s said by a Republican it means we support the troops. When it’s said by a Democrat it means they support the terrorists. God speaks through us. The devil speaks through Democrats.”
September 13th, 2006 at 5:37 pmSo, tell us, Mr. Duncan “Chicken Pilaf” Hunter, why is it that the same comments from the 9/11 Commission, President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld are not going to have “a demoralizing effect on American troops”? Why is it only “demoralizing” when a Democratic person says it?
I don’t think we can ever have an intelligent debate on the issues and what to do about them as long as dimwits like Hunter fill the Republican ranks. I mean, you can’t have a discussion like this with someone unless you both agree on what constitutes reality.
September 13th, 2006 at 5:41 pmSorry Jimmyb, no-one’s going to visit your crappy blog. Go troll for hits somewhere else
September 13th, 2006 at 5:43 pmi think it’s unreal to think that the troops would hear pelosi’s words … those guys are only fed limpball propaganda and assorted other reichwing talking points…
well… so, i guess they will hear limpball regurgitate those comments…
so, who is hurting the troops?
it’s insulting them to think they don’t already know this anyway…
September 13th, 2006 at 5:46 pm…
By Hunter’s logic, W’s shutting down of the CIA’s bin Laden unit must have left the US troops far more depressed than Pelosi’s comments ever could
Or maybe it was W’s deliberately sending them into battle without enough effective body & vehicle armor that left them demoralized
September 13th, 2006 at 5:53 pmDESPERATE ACTS OF DESPERATE INDIVIDUALS - WHO SHOULD REALIZE THAT PEOPLE WHO CLEARLY LIVE IN GLASS HOUSES SHOULD NEVER THROW STONES OR THEY’LL BE THE ONES PELTED IN THE END.
September 13th, 2006 at 6:00 pmBarfly - Better if I post w/no link link to my site?
No problem.
Allow me to reiterate.
HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
jimmyb
September 13th, 2006 at 6:03 pmonly sorta off topic… i heard randi talk about this earlier - i’m sure some will find this very interesting:
Why protect the Saudi royal family and Pakistani military? - September 13th, 2006 BY GERALD POSNER
September 13th, 2006 at 6:08 pmhttp://www.therandirhodesshow.com/live/node/4023
…
because some “had advance knowledge about the 9/11 attacks.” ???
…
On November 7th, there will be a giant flushing sound across this great land as Americans pull the plugs on the GOP corporate thugs in the House and the Senate. On November 8th, America will be bright patriotic blue again and readers of TP probably won’t read much from the Reich-wing trolls as the Senate and House investigations into Bush treason, Cheney treason, Rumsfeld treason and GOP coverups get going… Six years of GOP fascism is enough, thank you very much!
September 13th, 2006 at 6:21 pmCheers.
I think this Republican Administration and particularly this Congress deserve this polite and erudite response to their bullshit:
“Yo, Hunter! You there, c’mere! I just wanted to tell you what I think of you. You wouldn’t be any less blind if you did pull that head of yours out of your ass.”
You can quote me on that.
September 13th, 2006 at 6:23 pmThe Dems keep thinking that rational, intelligent discourse is the way to go.
September 13th, 2006 at 6:25 pmAnd the Repub response to Pelosi? An emotionally based irrational response laced with fear. So then TP digs up facts and its well noted that many from the right have said the same thing. But what does that do? Preach to the chior(sp)? I know the left is “better than that”, but it ain’t workin’ with the sheeple. Now even Nancy probably has become emotional in her reaction to the Repubs, probably angry. See how emotions are so powerful. The Dems don’t use that. The Repubs have cornered the market on your limbic system, which naturally overrides the frontal lobe, due to survival insincts.
another prime example of the hypocrisy, i posted it earlier on the FAST THREAD - works here also:
Republicans on Tuesday distanced themselves from campaign activities that encourage college students to “Catch an Illegal Immigrant” and shoot cardboard cutouts of leading Democrats with a BB gun or paintball gun.
Democratic Chairman Howard Dean said in a letter to his Republican counterpart, Ken Mehlman, on Tuesday that such activities, reportedly put together by a GOP college organizer, “can only be described as divisive, potentially dangerous and discriminatory.”
September 13th, 2006 at 6:25 pm…
http://www.newsvine.com/ _news/ 2006/ 09/ 12/ 359916-gop-denounces-immigrant-activities
…
MORE, with DEAN’S letter:
http://www.therandirhodesshow.com/live/node/4021
…
It appears that the right wing would prefer that we lie to the troops. If I were in the military I would want to hear the truth, not cheerleading to keep me fighting blindly.
September 13th, 2006 at 6:27 pmThere is nothing wrong with what she said…there is something wrong with the reichwingnuts who believe the lying bastards in the fascist party of America. They only care about a war that has gone bad…today’s news is that Iraq goes to Iran for Security assistance and Iran says that if the USA would get out, things will get better. Now tell me who we have been fighting for the past three years. Tell me why Bushboy and his cabal has stooped so low. It is because all they care about is profit for the military industrial complex and oil company executives. It is what the PNAC and zionist organizations want….it is not about terrorism or our security. Dubya and his cabal are the worst thing to ever happen to this great nation.
September 13th, 2006 at 6:29 pmIf you think that is bad, check out this guy who thinks that:
God Demands That We Profit From 9-11 (I hope he is not being serious.)
September 13th, 2006 at 6:30 pmLooking forward to PAYBACK for these rubber stamp Republican asshole zombies when the Dems take back the House in Nov.
It’s going to be glorious kicking their worthless asses six ways to Sunday !
September 13th, 2006 at 6:33 pmHey, those really aren’t speeches anymore, you know, they sound more like screeches.
September 13th, 2006 at 6:39 pmYes more Comrade Pelosi. I hope she and Murtha hit the campaign trail together.
September 13th, 2006 at 6:44 pm#22
Don’t you as a voter need a reason to vote FOR the Democrats rather than casting a protest vote against the Republicans? If you are NOT casting a vote in November for the Democrats because you agree with what they say they stand for, then you need to abstain from voting.
September 13th, 2006 at 6:44 pmThere we go again trying to argue facts with these people. It doesn’t matter what is said by us as Dems, the unscrupulous pricks on the right will always turn it around.
September 13th, 2006 at 6:50 pmThe troops want to be lied to, the people want to be lied to, its much safer, easier, and simpler. So when this all hits the fan, it may take another 50 years, we have already told you so. Putting head in sand is only effective for so long.
September 13th, 2006 at 6:51 pm#25….in America you can vote for the candidate of your choice for whatever reason suits you. You do not have to publicly disclose why or consult with a conservative to determine if your reason is good enough.
September 13th, 2006 at 6:56 pm#25 Wake or grow up and get a clue !
The GOP today is a worthless rubber stamp Congress with no shame mainly because they are power-mad sociopaths who haven’t clue one about what it means to stand for American principles and ideals much less the Constitution which enshrines them into law.
September 13th, 2006 at 6:57 pm...a reason to vote FOR the Democrats rather than casting a protest vote against the Republicans?…
Comment by Tracy — September 13, 2006 @ 6:44 pm
another of the latest memes…
September 13th, 2006 at 7:09 pmbut to answer the question: nope… not these days…
a vote against republicans is a VOTE FOR THE CONSTITUTION.
it’s that simple…
…
#31…Nancy Pelosi is not a retard or an idiot or a jack-off. What she said has already been said before. Why is it such a turn off when Pelosi says it but when Republicans say it it’s ok?
September 13th, 2006 at 7:14 pmI dream of one day when a Blitzer or a Matthews or an O’Brien will listen to someone like Duncan Hunter vilify Pelosi for saying the same thing that the exalted leader Darth Cheney said, and tell the bastard to STFU!
September 13th, 2006 at 7:21 pmI can’t stand hearing their own words and sentiments repeated back to them and they accuse the speaker of demoralizing the troops or aiding the enemy.
I know it’s a dream, but daydreams are comforting for a brief moment.
“…can only have a demoralizing effect on American troops…”
I would suspect that about the only WORDS that have a demoralizing effect on our troops are those words uttered by their Commander in Chimp when he says we must “Stay the Course, your tour is extended for the duration plus six months.” If bushco are concerned and truly want to raise the morale of the troops they (bushco) should start singing one of their own hymns: “Come Home! Come Home! Oh, ye that are weary, come home.”
Hyprocracy Rules! Stupid is Forever!
September 13th, 2006 at 7:22 pmSince we now know that he’s hiding out in Pakistan (it’s the first time since Tora Bora that we’ve known his whereabouts), has anyone seriously advanced the idea of sending the Delta Force team in and snag him and his lieutenants? What would Musharraf do about it, since he’s publicly denying giving him safe haven?
Fortunately, unlikwe the neocons, most of us on the west side of Blogostan appreciate the truth, as my weekly blogwhoring handily proves. Maybe it was a mistake listing bloggers who all enjoy more traffic than I do but these news items and observations they posted were too good to ignore. So, on the off-chance that you haven’t already been to the Rude One’s, Shakes’s Sis or D r i f t g l a s s’s sites, go see what they’ve been doing over the last few days.
September 13th, 2006 at 7:22 pmOh really, I’m glad I’ve been freezing my ass off at over 20 thousand ft. above sea level for 4 years, thanks for telling me now.)
September 13th, 2006 at 7:25 pmComment by ren
Anyone thinking that US invaded Afghanistan to capture OBL is -sorry- an ignorant. After all US occupations in history, there is no room to say US is there for one guy or one organization. Thats simply stupid. Its like saying: hey, we had to invade Panama to get Noriega. You all know how tough Panama 3000 soldiers are against our 27,000. (The main reason for the invasion was to make sure that the Panama Canal remained under U.S. control)
#30
“Tell that to all of the Republican voters who are voting for Torture, Rendition, Illegal WireTapping, Corruption, Kickbacks and destruction of american civil liberties!!!”
I will do just that as long as you do the same for all of the Democratic voters who are voting for not reforming Social Security, for tax increases, for the BS redeployment strategy, for negotiating with states that sponsor terrorism, for returning to treating terrorism as a law enforcement issue, for giving terrorists held at Gitmo access to classified intelligence, and for not securing our borders.
“That’s great advice Tracy - I hope your fellow republicans follow it!!!!”
I hope your fellow Democrats follow it to.
September 13th, 2006 at 7:30 pmOn the other hand, Duncan Hunter was heard to say one morning on C-
September 13th, 2006 at 7:32 pmSpan that if there is a terrorist attack on a US city involving a nuclear weapon, the “Constitution is out the window”. Hence, to concur, a vote against the Republicans is a vote for the Constitution.
Make no mistake: bin Laden should be captured and tried, and hopefully convicted and punished for his crimes against humanity.
But it is also true that doing that will not prevent terrorism, any more than trying and convicting one murderer will stop all murders henceforth.
That’s just reality….
Cheers,
September 13th, 2006 at 7:32 pm#32
But not a vote for Democrats either, don’t forget.
September 13th, 2006 at 7:32 pmOh yeah: And if Dubya hasn’t managed to capture bin Laden, Dubya’s not doing his job. It’s not like Dubya hasn’t had any time for vacation lately…..
Cheers,
September 13th, 2006 at 7:34 pmUntil he’s caught or killed,September 12 should be known nationally as “where’s Osama?†day.
See my latest post. FWIW, I’ve checked, and no one owns “itsbeenfiveyears.com” or “itsbeenfiveyears.net”. Go for it, someone!
Cheers,
September 13th, 2006 at 7:37 pm“Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) said Pelosi’s comments ‘can only have a demoralizing effect on American troops and intelligence personnel who are currently risking their lives in the rugged mountain ranges and deserts of the Middle East in pursuit of Osama bin Laden and his lieutenants’.”
Except that the Boy Emperor Clown Criminal called off the hunt for Osama bin Laden SIX MONTHS after 9/11. So just who is “risking their lives” in the “rugged mountain ranges” and who will be demoralized ?
What a PUTZ.
September 13th, 2006 at 7:38 pm#37
Juan,
The US recently invaded a sovereign Country with the sole (but unadvertised) purpose of getting one person and one organization. Contrary to the rhetoric of the last five years, the US invaded Iraq to oust Saddam and take over the Iraqi oil infrastructure and organization. I agree that it is stupid but it is also true.
September 13th, 2006 at 7:40 pm#38 I think you have your political parties mixed up. It’s the Republicans who are the obstructionist party which is exactly why voters have tired of them and will be kicking them out in November. That’s the only reason anyone needs to vote for a Democrat.
September 13th, 2006 at 7:42 pmHow many times do you think this nugget on Fristpraising Gitmo will be played on TV?
September 13th, 2006 at 7:46 pmBill Frist rturned from Guantanamo and said they have 24/7 health care there — that’s more than many Americans.
Moron.
Since we now know that he’s hiding out in Pakistan (it’s the first time since Tora Bora that we’ve known his whereabouts)…
Comment by jurassicpork — September 13, 2006 @ 7:22 pm
i can’t help but think, if he’s not dead, he’s now being kept safe and sound, awaiting that “october surprise”… pakistan didn’t make that offer without blessings of some kind… just a gut feeling…
September 13th, 2006 at 7:50 pm…
Thr right-wing is pathetic. It’s as if they don’t even expect us to remember these comments from them. They just will trash the Dems any chance they get.
http://www.polibuzz.blogspot.com
September 13th, 2006 at 7:52 pmAl Sharpton, John Edwards, and Al Gore - All are on Political Buzz
http://www.polibuzz.blogspot.com
The US recently invaded a sovereign Country with the sole (but unadvertised) purpose of getting one person and one organization. Comment by Clyde the Ripper
Is that Afghanistan? Dont you think all CIA resources could take over almost any guy in any place? So whats the need for a complete invasion? Occupation of the land. Afghanistan had the highest opium production this year, along with the geostrategy of the zone.
September 13th, 2006 at 7:54 pmClyde, what I meant is that given US invading record (and the real reasons for these invasions) it is really hard to think they went in Afghanistan for OBL.
Cheney said last Sunday that we would have invaded Iraq even if the White House believed Saddam had no WMDs (which it knew anyway).
So why DID we invade Iraq, if Cheney says we didn’t invade about WMDs?
Remember, this is the same Cheney who insisted that Iraq DID have WMDs and it was the reason we were invading them.
These Republinazis are driving me CRAZY!!
September 13th, 2006 at 7:58 pmAfghanistan had the highest opium production this year…Thank you, Chimpy.
Theres an article on RawStory saying the Taliban are in control of the opium crop and they intend to flood Europe with cheap smack.
The Taliban have figured out that drugs can be a weapon.
We’re in trouble now, because we’ve been losing the War on Drugs for decades longer than we’ve been losing the War on Terror.
September 13th, 2006 at 8:01 pmIt’s not a fair criticism of Ms. Pelosi, but I watched her talk and didn’t like it either.
She as minority leader is “trying to have her cake and eat it too”. The problem with her and John Kerry and several other Democratics is that they cannot deliver a succinct speech or message. Make direct points 1 through N, then get on with it. Answer questions without countless caveats. If the answer is yes or no, say so without exception. If there are significant exceptions use the word “generally” with yes/no. When you are done STOP TALKING. Don’t repeat your points all over again for every question. It’s lazy and boring. If you are going to provide a laundry list, just give the reporters the list, shut-up and get back to work.
I watched Kerry give a pretty good anti-Iraq war speech on C-span a few nights ago. Generally correct on content…..However, his speaking method sounds too much like campaigning and is awkward. It seems like he begs for applause in his pauses instead of applause interuppting his speech.
JFK, now he could give a clear speech. I can think of a few Republican who could give a clear speech too (RR)…. evn if simplistic or wrong, the message got through!
September 13th, 2006 at 8:14 pm#50 Juan
You are correct, I apologize for misreading.
Bushco, under the pretext of going after OBL sent troops to Afghanistan to get them closer to the true objective, as history has proven: Iran and OIL.
With Iran and Iraq playing footsies and talking about converting their combined oil sales to the Euro, they have almost guaranteed an invasion of Iran by bushco. If the world changes from the petrodollar to the Petroeuro, as Saddam threatened, the US big oil companies are gone and the US will be in bad shape due to the imbalance in trade. If China doesn’t need dollars to buy oil the US has no trade leverage and China can recall the loans to the US in Euros or Chinese currency. Those old sayings have been around for so long for a reason. Namely “Don’t bite the hand that feeds you.”
September 13th, 2006 at 8:29 pmI would like to select the next troll to post, to be the recipient of my vote cancelling out their vote. I’ll sacrifice mine for that.
No just kidding, thats rediculous. But I am just as frustrated as any Dem or Repub, is there really a solution to “winning” a war on “terror”. Maybe we can “keep terror at bay”, or “prevent terror attacks”
September 13th, 2006 at 8:50 pmThe gop is trying to paint a 67 year old grandmother as the face of evil. That is just silly. It’s like saying Bush is smart. Both are gross distortions.
September 13th, 2006 at 8:51 pmI wouldn’t have any problem with those who voted for the war opposing it now, if, after they voted for it, they had given a 100% effort in helping America win the war for which they had voted. Unfortunately, most Democrats gave hardly any effort after their initial vote; instead they opted to jump on all the negative things coming out of the war, latching on to any thing they could beat Bush over the head with. To anyone who looks objectively at this, you see right from the start that the Democrats didn’t really believe in the war for which they had voted, but went through the motions because of the up-coming election. This was the case in almost all those who are now coming out against the war. How can any of these people now be trusted to make any decision, on anything, given that they were, if their newly found courage to speak out is to be believed, wrong in their initial votes for the war? Does this not speak to their decision-making? If they can be so wrong, on something so serious, or even worse, go against all of their beliefs for political points and help put are soldiers in harms way knowing from the start that they were never behind the war, don’t they deserve to be booted out of office sooner than their Republican counterparts, for theirs is a more sinister abuse of political power?
September 13th, 2006 at 9:21 pm#38 Dems are voting for fiscal responsibility??? Shocking!!!
September 13th, 2006 at 9:51 pmBut … but … but … Clinton had three opportunities to kill bin Laden! Three opportunities! I saw it in a movie once! It must be true! C’mon, guys, get upset with me! He’s a coward … a-an’ a traitor too, dammit!
C’mon … it’s just gotta be all his fault …
Guys? Guys?
September 13th, 2006 at 10:49 pmThe reason some Democrats voted for the war is because they were lied to by the Republican administration. Even Colin Powell, who had the most credibility out of all the clowns, said that the danger was imminent. I applaud the Democrats who came to their senses when they realized they had been lied to. If the Republicans won’t admit their mistake and come to their senses and apologize to the people then the people will vote their lying asses out of office and the GOP won’t have anyone to blame but themselves.
September 13th, 2006 at 10:52 pmhahaha! my last comment was scrubbed from this thread…who’s cock is ThinkProgress sucking this fine evening?
-slaqqer
September 13th, 2006 at 10:53 pmHey!! My comment is back!
Not that there is anything wrong with TP sucking a fat cock…if it’s of that bent…
-slaqqer
September 13th, 2006 at 10:59 pmMine!
September 13th, 2006 at 11:06 pmHere’s a history of ,a href=”http://www.perrspectives.com/blog/archives/000311.htm”>Bush flip-flops on Bin Laden.
September 13th, 2006 at 11:51 pmhttp://thecommonmen.blogspot.com/ Taken from Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II by William Blum,
September 14th, 2006 at 12:10 amAnd After this list what American Government Say about following facts Zbigniew Brzezinski revealed a hidden Fact that on July 3, 1979, unknown to the public and American Congress that President Jimmy Carter secretly authorized $500 million to create an international terrorist movement that would spread Islamic fundamentalism in Central Asia and “de-stabilize” the Soviet Union… The CIA called this Operation Cyclone and in the following years poured $4 billion into setting up Islamic training schools in Pakistan (Taliban means “student”). These people were sent to the CIA’s spy training camp in Virginia, where future members of al-Qaeda were taught “sabotage skills” - terrorism. Others were recruited at an Islamic school in Brooklyn, New York, In Pakistan; they were directed by British MI6 officers and trained by the SAS. The result, quipped Brzezinski, was “a few stirred up Muslims” - meaning the Taliban. The Wall Street Journal “The Taliban are the players most capable of achieving peace. Moreover, they were crucial to secure the country as a prime trans-shipment route for the export of Central Asia’s vast oil, gas and other natural resources.”
¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤
“Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has offered Iraq full support in stabilising the security situation in the country.
He made the remarks in Tehran after talks with the Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki.”
¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤§¤
Hell, mebbe they should allow the Iranians to help, I mean wtf at this conjuncture?
September 14th, 2006 at 12:40 amNancy Pelosi is no film-star; she comes through as boooring in her public appearances, and I’m surprised to hear that anyone’s still listenign to her. But, if she can “demoralize” our troops… Good on her :)
Our troops had been lied to, repeatedly, for 3.5 yrs. They have been exploited way beyond what’s decent of any country to ask of its most vulnerable. They’re beginning to “get it” but, whenever they try to look for info that goes beyond the officially approved pap, they get squashed — both on the topmost and the lowermost level. They have to be out of the system entirely — a difficult thing to achieve, with th various backdoor-draft techniques in operation — before they dare speak and, even then, they’re risking a lot.
Screw *that* for a “democratic” system!
It’ll take a totally “demoralized” army to take Nancy Reagan’s advice and “just say no”. So, while I’m no fan of Pelosi in general, on this subject she has my blessing to go full steam :)
September 14th, 2006 at 12:46 amWhat are ‘you’ people?
You act as mad depraved little machines dissembling every word and statement thus forming delusional and paranoid visions of a world that does not exist. Everything I have laid eyes upon here is a hoax. Progressive non-theorists built a crazed matrix of inverted reality then impose their ludicrous imaginations upon it.
Dr. Freud would have found a considerable numeration of subjects here of great scientific and psychological merit as they would investigate, dissemble this peculiar Phenom of blog-0-Fascism.
September 14th, 2006 at 12:55 amNot that there is anything wrong with TP sucking a fat cock…if it’s of that bent…
-slaqqer
In “slaqqer world” that’s more like choking the chicken…
September 14th, 2006 at 12:58 am#68…At first I was sure you were talking about Republicans until I read all of your rant. Now I see that you’re just using classic projection. Everything that is wrong with Republicans has been projected onto Democrats. And your post is really disconneted. Sounds like you are on some bad drugs.
September 14th, 2006 at 1:37 amslaqqer is a slacker. We need to call his parents so they can get him off line.
September 14th, 2006 at 1:38 amThe Democrats who voted for the war didn’t vote because of WMD’s. Please! The voted because it was an election cycle and they didn’t want to be seen as weak on defense. I’ll give Howard Dean credit, while Kerry was busy voting for the $87 billion before he voted against it, Dean came out agaist the war. But once he did that, the lemmings soon followed. Now if you are going to honest about it, as soon as all the leading Dem’s started to question the war and speak out against it, our soldiers started getting killed in large numbers. Could it be because once the Dems showed a weakness in staying in Iraq, the terrorist increased their attacks to break our will going into the 2004 elections? Me thinks so. Thanks Howard!
September 14th, 2006 at 2:35 amSo lets see: You can vote for immoral political hacks that are destroying what makes America America, which thus far have proven less then effective at dealing with terrorism or any other threats to America.
Or you can vote for a bunch of people who believe:
1: Nobody wants to see beggars on the sides of the road. Nobody wants to see their granny eating catfood, hence social security is a good thing.
2: America should at least charge enough in the way of taxes to cover its expenses and make a start on paying off its debts.
3: America should change its strategy in the middle East seen as the current one does not seem to be working, and is giving America a shit press besides.
4: It might be a good idea to try and talk these guys who support terrorism out of it, after all if you can get them to pull the funding without having to send soldiers in it is cheaper then having to send soldiers in.
5: America should find out who the terrorists actually are before trying to imprison people for being terrorists. (In other words, send in experienced investigators before just rounding people up en masse and giving your opponents a propaganda freebie.)
6: That if you are going to treat people as criminals they have the right to hear what evidence is being used against them. Further if this evidence is secret, that American Judges and Juries are not generally traitors, and that defendants can have their letters back home censored.
7: That if you are going to treat people like POWs then they don’t have to stand trial (And therefore hear that sensative information) but they still have rights under the Geneva conventions and America cannot claim moral superiority so long as America is violating those rights.
So in short, you are either for complete and total evil, or you are for common sense and the rule of law. Nice to see Tracy admitting which side he is on.
P.S. Note on Tracy’s last “Point”:
September 14th, 2006 at 5:32 amThe Republicans have had how many years of holding all three houses and they have done what exactly? America’s borders is not exactly a strong point for the Republican Right (AKA: Nutters.)
Very well said, Bruce Gorton.
September 14th, 2006 at 9:44 am#46
That’s funny considering the Dems have opposed everything and proposed nothing.
September 15th, 2006 at 3:08 pmhow come hilary and co dont mention inside job they are all in on it,look at this picture carefully is that a demolition or what http://thumbsnap.com/v/5GJpB2ET.jpg
September 16th, 2006 at 8:19 pmyou guy’s better get an indipendent party ,dems and repug neocons in on it
hilary and co in on ithttp://thumbsnap.com/v/5GJpB2ET.jpg
September 16th, 2006 at 8:22 pminside job look closly at this picture why is hilary staying quite the iluminat
#73
“1: Nobody wants to see beggars on the sides of the road.”
But the Dems do, it keeps their money flowing under the guise of combating poverty.
“2: America should at least charge enough in the way of taxes to cover its expenses and make a start on paying off its debts.”
No, the government should spend less.
“3: America should change its strategy in the middle East seen as the current one does not seem to be working, and is giving America a shit press besides.”
Which is? I would like to see it.
“4: It might be a good idea to try and talk these guys who support terrorism out of it, after all if you can get them to pull the funding without having to send soldiers in it is cheaper then having to send soldiers in.”
How would you do that? What would you say in order to basically tell them that their support for terrorism is not a worthy cause? This is a government policy of theirs, i.e. to not reign in the militants.
“5: America should find out who the terrorists actually are before trying to imprison people for being terrorists. (In other words, send in experienced investigators before just rounding people up en masse and giving your opponents a propaganda freebie.)”
And just where are these investigators going to get their information about these guys from?
“6: That if you are going to treat people as criminals they have the right to hear what evidence is being used against them. Further if this evidence is secret, that American Judges and Juries are not generally traitors, and that defendants can have their letters back home censored.”
Considering the war is ongoing the information should have to be declassified untill hostilities cease under your rationale for letting suspected terrorists see classified information. That could be awhile you know. Letters back home censored? Oh that’s full proof! If they aren’t convicted after they have already seen the classified information do you think that they can be censored after they have already been released? How do you propose we monitor the information that they have already seen?
“7: That if you are going to treat people like POWs then they don’t have to stand trial (And therefore hear that sensative information) but they still have rights under the Geneva conventions and America cannot claim moral superiority so long as America is violating those rights.”
That is why they need to stand trial because we can’t hold them indefinately.
September 18th, 2006 at 1:28 pmCock Dog Dick In Pussy Sucking Dick
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 20th, 2008 at 2:23 amCock Massive Cocks Cumshots Big Gay Cock
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 24th, 2008 at 4:12 amCock Very Young Boy Cock Small Cock
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 27th, 2008 at 2:25 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 30th, 2008 at 4:40 am