Sen. Thomas: ‘If You Are Talking About Withdrawal, I Don’t Think Most People Favor That’
Sen. Thomas: ‘If You Are Talking About Withdrawal, I Don’t Think Most People Favor That’
On C-Span’s Washington Journal this morning, Sen. Craig Thomas (R-WY) said that he would support Bush’s escalation strategy if it comes to a vote today in the Senate. Thomas justified his stance by arguing, “If you are talking about withdrawal, I don’t think most people favor that.” Watch it:
Thomas’s claim has no support. Recent polls have indicated widespread approval for withdrawal. Here’s a sampling:
USA Today: 63 percent favor a timetable for withdrawal by the end of next year
Pew: 53 percent favor a withdrawal from Iraq
Rasmussen: 55 perecent favor withdrawal within a year
Newsweek reported recently that Thomas is one of Bush’s “dwindling” supporters on Iraq. But even the stalwart conservative senator from Wyoming has privately expressed concern about the escalation strategy. When it comes to public action, however, Thomas is one of the conservatives struggling “to put country over party.”
Transcript:
THOMAS: The idea of withdrawal prior to completing the task that’s there and accomplishing the reason we’re there is a different question. And so I think the key to what you said and you are exactly right, is if you are talking about withdrawal, I don’t think most people favor that. I think they favor let’s get the job done and let’s be able to come home.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
102 Responses to “Sen. Thomas: ‘If You Are Talking About Withdrawal, I Don’t Think Most People Favor That’”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Repugs believe that if you say it enough times, it might as well be true.
February 17th, 2007 at 11:48 amMajority of Americans want the war ended ASAP, and the troops brought back to the US, so Sen. Thomas is full of steaming crap. Shame on him!
February 17th, 2007 at 12:04 pmTypical –
February 17th, 2007 at 12:04 pmSay anything, but in the end back your boy-king and falsely claim that most people agree with you.
How old is this GOP Senator anyways? If he is over 75, then he needs to retire today. Old men like him, love to send young people off to die in wars, so remove the old buzzards from DC.
February 17th, 2007 at 12:09 pmHis statement makes no sense. One can be completely against the escalation, and still not support a withdrawal. They are two seperate actions. The case for withdrawal can be presented at a later date, but today’s debate focuses on sending more troops in, not pulling troops out.
February 17th, 2007 at 12:10 pmAs Bush, Cheney and Rummy’s vise-like grip tightened on Senator Thomas’ testicular sack, the room was filled with his painful and very audible whimperings. Waaa… waaa… !
February 17th, 2007 at 12:16 pm“Disgusting!”, sneered Laura, who stood nearby, washing the fine china in the sink. “George, get ready for dinner”, she said.
Source and spread of poll or this is just another case of bogus reporting.
Source and spread +-, for all you stupid people out there.
February 17th, 2007 at 12:26 pmWait a minute — I thought it was a Rethuglican virtue to IGNORE the will of the people. Why does “what most people favor” have anything to do with the decision Sen. Craig makes? I thought that, for Rethuglicans, not paying attention to polls was the way they demonstrated “courage”.
Can someone explain the shifting standards for me?
February 17th, 2007 at 12:28 pmI wish these interviewers would grow a pair and have these warmonger nail down what exactly we are trying to accomplish in Iraq…What IS the MISSION? What ARE our GOALS?
February 17th, 2007 at 12:29 pm“People” is Republicanese for “right-wing nutjobs”.
February 17th, 2007 at 12:33 pmSource and spread of poll or this is just another case of bogus reporting.
Source and spread +-, for all you stupid people out there.
Comment by callous cat
Since you apparently can’t read too well, I’ll repost it for you:
USA Today: 63 percent favor a timetable for withdrawal by the end of next year
Pew: 53 percent favor a withdrawal from Iraq
Rasmussen: 55 percent favor withdrawal within a year
Now, how are you going to spin the spread? 63% is not going to be whittled down by a +/- of 4 or 5%, is it? 55% can’t be massaged into anything but disapproval of Bush’s strategy. Who’s looking stupid now?
February 17th, 2007 at 12:33 pmComment by Barfly —
Now, how are you going to spin the spread?
>The liklihood of Dem vs Rep pollsters? I mean if you poll in downtown Boston it will be slanted sure.
Any idea what “regions”?
Or it is just another “bogus” report.
February 17th, 2007 at 12:36 pmThey learned from their fore fathers, the Nazis…
Comment by Spudge_Boy — February 17, 2007 @ 12:09 pm
good one… applicable to so much else… repeat often…
February 17th, 2007 at 12:36 pmTo do an *accurate poll, you have to look at a “recent” electoral map with the concentrations of likely voters and what PARTY they voted or will vote for.
Otherwise it is a tainted poll.
Did they ask 50 Dems and 50 Repubs?
I thought not. It was probably taken at “The Kennedy Center” or another Liberal hotbed in America.
I never trust polls and I wont be trusting this poll (?) either.
February 17th, 2007 at 12:39 pm“Disgusting!â€, sneered Laura, who stood nearby, washing the fine china in the sink. “George, get ready for dinnerâ€, she said.
Comment by Liberal in New Mexico
Then Laura said to one of her maids,”Maria,could you bring me a glass of water”;to wash down a handful of sedatives.
February 17th, 2007 at 12:43 pmI never trust polls and I wont be trusting this poll (?) either.
Comment by callous cat
Um, who cares? And for your info, Rassmussen is a conservative pollster, Kittycat.
February 17th, 2007 at 12:44 pmTo do an *accurate poll, you have to look at a “recent†electoral map with the concentrations of likely voters and what PARTY they voted or will vote for.
Well since republicans were trounced in the last election, the electoral map is now mostly blue, with some backwoods holdouts for the GOP; what’s your point?
February 17th, 2007 at 12:47 pm“People†is Republicanese for “Voices in my Headâ€.
February 17th, 2007 at 12:48 pmThis is a great little liberal group grope. Craig Thomas is a Marine and certainly knows what battle is like. I’m quite sure the so-called progressives that are helping Democrats undermine our troops at every turn and making web sites like this one no nothing about service or about defending the nation.
February 17th, 2007 at 12:48 pmOh, and the BS about this site’s APAF being non-partisan — time to change your “terms of use” to reflect reality. Take this liberal piece of crap site down now and serve the greater good.
I never trust polls and I wont be trusting this poll (?) either.
Comment by callous cat
YEAH!!!!
Dem dar facts has a librul bias.
February 17th, 2007 at 12:49 pmCraig Thomas is another deluded Rethug when the polls prove that between 55% and 63% of americans favor complete and total withdrawal. What planet is this guy on?
February 17th, 2007 at 12:54 pmThe Democrats in the Congress need to start investigating where all the billions wasted on Iraq have actually vanished to. The Iraq Fiasco War is really a massive scandal and a giant swindle. Americans have a right to know if Pres. Bush and VP Cheney have secret bank accounts in Switzerland, or the Cayman Islands, or some other overseas location. If they do then that would be high treason, and grounds for their removal, and life in prison for both of them.
February 17th, 2007 at 12:56 pm…by July, it’ll be 70+% of us, and they’ll still be repeating that bullshit.
February 17th, 2007 at 12:56 pmYourMom > go to RedState.com where your fascist drivel is appreciated. This is a blog for Progressives, so we do not care about your GOP views.
February 17th, 2007 at 12:58 pmTake this liberal piece of crap site down now and serve the greater good.
Comment by YourMom
Honey, time for your little blue pill . . .
February 17th, 2007 at 1:00 pmAs for Sen. Thomas > he is an OLD ex-Marine. He has NO right to demand that young men and women die for the Bush Regime to secure oil fields for Petrol Cartel fat slobs like CEO Raymond of Exxon.
February 17th, 2007 at 1:02 pmDesert Storm, Fast Company Marine, all over Iraq…
Washington Post and New York Times Editorial Boards Criticize Dems’ Slow Bleed Strategy for Iraq
Post and Times Call Today’s Vote “Symbolic.†New York Times Says it Requires “No Great Courageâ€
The editorial pages of both the Washington Post and the New York Times today criticized the Democrats’ slow bleed strategy for Iraq. The Washington Post said that the plan demonstrated “alarming ignorance†about conditions on the ground in Iraq. [Washington Post, “Democrats Signal a Wider Battle Lasting the Rest of President’s Term,†Feb. 17, 2007]. And the New York Times said that the Democrats plan “won’t help contain the war or make American troops safer.†[New York Times, editorial, “On to the Hard Part on Iraq,†Feb. 17, 2007]. The Times went on to say that Congress needs to deal with “harder thinking and harder choices†on how to move forward on issues of funding for troops serving in Iraq.
The newspapers both characterized today’s vote as “symbolic,†while noting that Democrats continue to avoid the more important issue of funding for our troops. The New York Times criticized the substance of yesterday’s vote in the House, which will be the same as today’s vote in the Senate, saying that the vote required “no great courage or creativity.†[New York Times, editorial, “On to the Hard Part on Iraq,†Feb. 17, 2007]. An article in the Washington Post acknowledged that Democrats’ failure to build “a broader bipartisan coalition†for the House vote “signaled peril for the Democratic congressional leadership.†[Washington Post, “Democrats Signal a Wider Battle Lasting the Rest of President’s Term,†Feb. 17, 2007].
The editorial boards of both the New York Times and Washington Post criticized the Democrats’ slow bleed strategy for Iraq:
“We fear that clever maneuvers like the one proposed by Representative John Murtha, reportedly with the backing of Speaker Nancy Pelosi, to dress up a reduction in troop strength as a ‘support the troops’ measure won’t help contain the war or make American troops safer.†[New York Times, editorial, “On to the Hard Part on Iraq,†Feb. 17, 2007].
“Mr. Murtha’s cynicism is matched by an alarming ignorance about conditions in Iraq. … It would be nice to believe that Mr. Murtha does not represent the mainstream of the Democratic Party or the thinking of its leadership. Yet when asked about Mr. Murtha’s remarks Thursday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) offered her support. Does Ms. Pelosi really believe that the debate she orchestrated this week was not ‘the real vote’? If the answer is yes, she is maneuvering her party in a way that can only do it harm.†[Washington Post, editorial, “Not the ‘Real Vote,’†Feb. 17, 2007].
Both the New York Times and the Washington Post characterized today’s vote as “symbolic,†while noting that Democrats are avoiding a vote on funding for troops because of political risks:
“For Democrats, the debate is not without political risk. They do not want to seem unpatriotic by advocating withdrawal of financial support for soldiers engaged in battle.†[New York Times, “A Symbolic Vote Is a Sign of Bitter Debates to Come.†Feb. 17, 2007].
February 17th, 2007 at 1:04 pm“It takes no great courage or creativity for a politician to express continuing support for the troops and opposition to a vastly unpopular and unpromising military escalation.†[New York Times, editorial, “On to the Hard Part on Iraq,†Feb. 17, 2007].
“But yesterday’s vote signaled peril for the Democratic congressional leadership as well. Despite deep Republican discontent with the course of the war, Democrats were unable to persuade more than 17 members of the president’s party to register that dissatisfaction with their votes. If Democratic leaders could not build a broader bipartisan coalition for a symbolic vote, it may prove much harder to attract Republican support for proposals to limit Bush’s options in Iraq. Many Democratic strategists remain allergic to repeating the finale of the Vietnam War, when Congress voted to cut funds for the South Vietnamese government and the nation fell to the North in 1975. For years afterward, Democrats have struggled to shed the image of being soft on defense, which is why they were so eager to bring along more Republicans yesterday.†[New York Times, “Democrats Signal a Wider Battle Lasting the Rest of President’s Term,†Feb. 17, 2007].
Craig Thomas is a Marine and certainly knows what battle is like.
He served from ‘55 to ‘59; which war were we fighting then, mom?
He has never been in battle - unless you count the war games he plays in the bath tub.
February 17th, 2007 at 1:08 pmYourMom > you are a paid GOP stooge troll, so go take your meds, and take a nap before you have a stroke.
February 17th, 2007 at 1:09 pmSo to review, “your mom” thinks serving during peacetime makes you an expert on fighting war.
Only to a republican.
February 17th, 2007 at 1:12 pmStupid Senator is probably talking about “withdrawal” as it relates to “birth control”, which OF COURSE Fundies consider a sin.
Stupid old men.
February 17th, 2007 at 1:12 pmCare to respond, mom? Why do you think he is qualified to talk about war, as he has never been in one?
February 17th, 2007 at 1:14 pmDesert Storm, Fast Company Marine, all over Iraq…
and then paste an entire article they didn’t write.
Yawn!
Comment by Spudge_Boy
At least HE “CUTS AND PASTES” not “CUTS-N-RUN’S” LIKE DEMPROGS
February 17th, 2007 at 1:16 pmHey Mom, get your facts straight. Thomas is NOT a Korean War vet. His bio says that he served in USMC AFTER college. He graduated from University of Wyoming in 1954. My history book says Korean War ended in 1953. He was 20 years old in 1953 - while it is certainly possible that he could have served as an 17- or 18-year old, he would’ve had a hard time earning college credits in combat in Korea.
Craig Thomas is a Marine and certainly knows what battle is like.
Comment by YourMom — February 17, 2007 @ 12:48 pm
http://thomas.senate.gov/ index.cfm?FuseAction=Biography.Home
After college, he served four years in the United States Marine Corps.
http://www.vote-smart.org/bio.php?can_id=H4351103
February 17th, 2007 at 1:16 pmBirth date: 02/17/1933
Education:
LLB, LaSalle University, 1963
BA, Agriculture, University of Wyoming, 1954.
Professional Experience:
Captain, United States Marine Corps, 1955-1959.
At least HE “CUTS AND PASTES†not “CUTS-N-RUN’S†LIKE DEMPROGS
Comment by callous cat
Get with the program, Morris; we are now “staying the course,” not cutting and running. At least that’s the latest republican spin.
February 17th, 2007 at 1:20 pm“CUTS-N-RUN’S†LIKE DEMPROGS
Comment by callous coward
And just what will Repukes call it when our service men FINALLY DO COME HOME? What’s the term? WHAT IS IT????
iDIOTS.
February 17th, 2007 at 1:20 pmLooks like “your mom” has decided to emulate brave Sir Robin, and run away.
February 17th, 2007 at 1:22 pmCraig Thomas is clearly from that far-away planet called URANUS.
February 17th, 2007 at 1:24 pm#32 Mom, Clearly you should stick to “kitchen duty” because you’re totally out of your league as a troll on this thread. I’ve heard you make a wicked Coq Au Vin?? Now get back to it and save a little self-respect.
February 17th, 2007 at 1:27 pmFact Checker blasts Your Mom out of the water - gotta love it when Rethugs get whomped!
February 17th, 2007 at 1:27 pmI have several very serious questions to posit to the Bush supporters on this thread…
…First though I’ll have to assume that everyone reading this can think back and remember Bush’s post 9/11 warning:
“Any state harboring or providing material support to terrorists will themselves be considered terrorists.”
” We’re going to be on the offensive against terrorists and terrorist states. We’re going to hunt you down.”
etc, etc, etc….
…Now to my questions…
The other day in his staged propaganda session Bush cryptically alluded to the fact that of course there are nations who are opposing U.S. efforts to thwart Iran from acquiring nukes due to their self-interests…
…Anyone with an ounce of sense knows that Bush was referring to: Russia, China, Venezuela and others…
…if Iran is such a threat (requiring Bush’s dispatch of a THIRD Naval carrier group to the region, and continued bluster and threats towards the Ahmadinejad government)…
…and if the Russians are providing the technical expertise and materials to Iran, aiding their nuclear efforts…
…and China and Venezuela have entered into energy agreements with Iran that enrich Iranian coffers, and consequently enable Iran to purchase more weapons to send to Iraq (with which to kill American soldiers as Bush has claimed)…
…then why aren’t we attacking (or threatening to attack) Russia or China?
…are we planning on attacking them AFTER we’ve attacked Iran?
…would Russia, China. and Venezuela be justified in preemptively striking (or helping to strike) U.S. interests worldwide?
…what’s with the hypocritical silence on naming Russia and China enemies of the state?
February 17th, 2007 at 1:31 pmLooks like the wingnuts are at it again….Don’t they ever get tired of hearing themselves squeel???
What a waste of good airtime….
February 17th, 2007 at 1:31 pm…
Only to a republican.
Comment by Barfly — February 17, 2007 @ 1:12 pm
i like that… another “repeat often”…
except change it to REPUBLIC. … only to a republic…
February 17th, 2007 at 1:38 pm…
Fact Checker blasts Your Mom out of the water - gotta love it when Rethugs get whomped!
Comment by veritas
#34
Where’s the love, V?
February 17th, 2007 at 1:41 pmThanks, Katy.
Yeah, it’s not like we’re in a dictatorship, or anything . . .
February 17th, 2007 at 1:43 pmCraig Thomas is clearly from that far-away planet called URANUS.
Comment by veritas
Any chance you can put a “whole” 3 thoughts together in just 1 (one) post?
These “3 at a time” staccato bursts from you are getting really old.
Posts 124-127 is what I am talking about.
All 3 took place within (3) three, minutes of eachother. How about THINKING FOR AN ENTIRE THREE MINUTES FIRST, then post.
Any lamebrain could hancdle this much.
February 17th, 2007 at 1:43 pmAny lamebrain could hancdle (sic) this much.
Comment by Fat Freddy’s cat
And your posts are such shining beacons of considered thought. Right.
February 17th, 2007 at 1:49 pmexcept change it to REPUBLIC. … only to a republi…
Comment by katy — February 17, 2007 @ 1:38 pm
Thanks, Katy.
Yeah, it’s not like we’re in a dictatorship, or anything . . .
Comment by Barfly — February 17, 2007 @ 1:43 pm
i think you may have misunderstood my, barfly… and when i read again, i can see why…
but it was referring to the lates house floor speech when the rep was calling repugs “republics”, a payback for the repugs slight of saying democrat instead of democratic…
but, yea, it’s enough of a dictatorship to me…
February 17th, 2007 at 1:53 pmmisunderstood ME, barfly…
February 17th, 2007 at 1:54 pmOh, I forgot about the whole “republics” brouhaha!
February 17th, 2007 at 1:55 pmCraig Thomas is clearly from that far-away planet called URANUS.
Comment by veritas
Any chance you can put a “whole†3 thoughts together in just 1 (one) post?
These “3 at a time†staccato bursts from you are getting really old.
Posts 45-46-47 is what I am talking about.
All 3 took place within (3) three, minutes of eachother. How about THINKING FOR AN ENTIRE THREE MINUTES FIRST, then post.
Any lamebrain could hancdle this much.
February 17th, 2007 at 1:57 pmCraig Thomas is clearly from that far-away planet called URANUS.
Comment by veritas
Any chance you can put a “whole†3 thoughts together in just 1 (one) post?
These “3 at a time†staccato bursts from you are getting really old.
Posts 45-46-47 is what I am talking about.
All 3 took place within (3) three, minutes of eachother. How about THINKING FOR AN ENTIRE THREE MINUTES FIRST, then post.
Any lamebrain could hancdle this much.
February 17th, 2007 at 2:00 pmChallenge to Dems in Congress: Put UP or SHUT up! IF you are SO convinced the war in Iraq is a “debacle” simply pull the plug on the $$$$. According to your reliance on the polls, the American people should reward your Party.
February 17th, 2007 at 2:01 pmsimply pull the plug on the $$$$. According to your reliance on the polls, the American people should reward your Party.
Comment by valiant venus #60
virulent venereal disease,
A poll this morning showed 68% of the people are AGAINST pulling funding…
…only because they’re too ill-informed to understand the real implications of such an action…
…and of course you right wing conned’self-servative TRAITORS are doing your number on them…
…planting the lies that perpetuate the belief that troops would be “abandoned“…
…Americans’ own stupidity (coupled with the right wing’s TREASON) is going to destroy this nation (as we’ve known it)…
…which is why the civil war (in America) must have closure…
February 17th, 2007 at 2:09 pmchange the word ‘withdrawl’ to ‘quit’, ’surrender’ or ‘give up’ and retake the poll. If people understood the ramifications of withdrawl, I think the senator may be right.
February 17th, 2007 at 2:12 pmChallenge to Dems in Congress: Put UP or SHUT up! IF you are SO convinced the war in Iraq is a “debacle†simply pull the plug on the $$$$. Comment by valiant venus — February 17, 2007 @ 2:01 pm
While you care nothing for our troops, the democrats do. Challenge to Bush, honor the will of he american people, and congress and bring them home. Challenge to you, eat something mizz anorexia, and stop disgracing our troops, and defending bush’s immoral behavior.
According to your reliance on the polls, the American people should reward your Party. Comment by valiant venus — February 17, 2007 @ 2:01 pm
With responsible action, which is why they’ll punish bush and the rest of you for defying their will while blaming democrats for the defiance. See twiggy, we’re not as stupid as your side is, but then again, we wouldn’t expect you to know that ;)
February 17th, 2007 at 2:13 pmchange the word ‘withdrawl’ to ‘quit’, ’surrender’ or ‘give up’ and retake the poll. If people understood the ramifications of withdrawl, I think the senator may be right.
Comment by paul
Or change it to “winning on all fronts,” and then watch the numbers change! This semantic sillyness is just the thing that has us mired in the Big Muddy.
“Dead-enders” ring any bells, Paul?
February 17th, 2007 at 2:20 pmchange the word ‘withdrawl’ to ‘quit’, ’surrender’ or ‘give up’ and retake the poll. If people understood the ramifications of withdrawl, I think the senator may be right. Comment by paul — February 17, 2007 @ 2:12 pm
Change the word to impeach, and retake the poll. The people do understand the ramifications, and your arrogance in assuming they don’t is typical of wanna-be elitist republican fools. It’s fools like you represent that don’t understand ramifications of anything, ‘greet us with flowers’ fools we like to call you.
February 17th, 2007 at 2:35 pmWhat?
…No Repulsivescum (or other conned’self-servative Bushite) takers on #48?
…told ya these inbred al Crackkker Bush-worshipping sombiches…
…are intellectually and morally bankrupt…
February 17th, 2007 at 2:36 pm#65 - Did you think of those adjectives and adverbs all by yourself?
February 17th, 2007 at 2:41 pmwell now…
…there IS semi-intelligent life…
…in Bushland…
…gimme some feedback to #48 virulent vd..
February 17th, 2007 at 2:53 pmComment by valiant venus
Are you that skanky, crankhead that goes by the name MA shown on Facebook? It’s no wonder you post here; few people would want to be any where near that.
And tell your buddies in the band “Crankfactory” that they are so ’90’s.
February 17th, 2007 at 3:00 pmI live in Wyoming. Wonderful scenery, but as a whole the state is stuck in the early 20th century. “We’ve always done it this way” may as well be the state motto. Although I disagree with Senator Thomas on just about everything and have never voted for him, he is not a bad person. But he’s stuck in old thinking and old loyalties (he and Cheney go way back). Unfortunately, that old thinking is now costing lives. I write or call his office often, hoping to make a difference in his thinking, but I don’t hold my breath.
Most people as they age (and Thomas is battling leukemia as well) become less and less flexible in their thinking. Those of you spewing such hate here on both sides should beware of freezing your own thinking on any issue.
February 17th, 2007 at 3:04 pmThose of you spewing such hate here on both sides should beware of freezing your own thinking on any issue.
Comment by Thinking Person
Um, we now respond in kind when attacked. Tried that whole “turn the other cheek ” thing, and got suckerpunched. No progressive freezes his thinking, and if you knew anything about progressives, you’d know that.
February 17th, 2007 at 3:09 pmif you knew anything about progressives, you’d know that.
Comment by Barfly #70
Barfly,
Thinking Person #69…
…did say he/she lived in Wyoming…
…not exactly a bastion of Progressive thought…
February 17th, 2007 at 3:15 pm“It’s fools like you represent that don’t understand ramifications of anything”
Comment by ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus — February 17, 2007 @ 2:35 pm
And you do?
February 17th, 2007 at 3:20 pmWell, there are progressives in Wyoming, and I’m one of them. It’s risky business there, but we’re tough. Someone crashed down the post that holds my mailbox a few days ago.
February 17th, 2007 at 3:37 pmAnd you do?
Comment by michael
Ooh, there’s a riposte that will leave a mark - a skid mark.
February 17th, 2007 at 3:40 pmWell, there are progressives in Wyoming, and I’m one of them.
Oh, really?
Then please give examples of the following:
Those of you spewing such hate here on both sides should beware of freezing your own thinking on any issue.
This “spewing such hate on both sides” is a strawman argument. If you can make your case, fine, otherwise . . .
February 17th, 2007 at 3:43 pm“Ooh, there’s a riposte that will leave a mark - a skid mark.
Comment by Barfly — February 17, 2007 @ 3:40 pm”
barfly, you understand the ramifications? How about elaborating for us?
February 17th, 2007 at 3:48 pmbarfly, you understand the ramifications? How about elaborating for us?
Comment by michael
Better than you.
The ramifications of what? The failed war strategy? The lost credibility of the US? The billions of dollars spent on lousy food for the troops, “training facilties” that showers it’s occupants with sewage, and no accountability for Iraqis killed by cowboy soldiers, and with no cultural understanding of the people they control?
February 17th, 2007 at 4:00 pmSo Michael asks for my elaborations, but never gives any of his own when pressed?
Coward?
February 17th, 2007 at 4:27 pmComment by Barfly — February 17, 2007 @ 4:00 pm
oh… ok…
February 17th, 2007 at 5:14 pm#64: [C]hange the word ‘withdraw[a]l’ to ‘quit’, ’surrender’ or ‘give up’ and retake the poll. If people understood the ramifications of withdraw[a]l, I think the senator may be right.
So, in other words, craft the question to represent every Republican talking point you can think of, and then ask it until you get the results you want. If that doesn’t work, substitute phrases like “betray the troops,” “embolden the enemy,” and “git ‘er done.”
I think most people understand basically what the ramifications of our being in Iraq are, and I think that’s why most people want the troops to come home. If we leave, Iraq will be in a civil war (which is already the case), there will be enormous bloodshed (which is already the case), and there will be Islamic extremists who wish to kill Americans (which is already the case).
February 17th, 2007 at 5:20 pmmichael just shows up with rhetorical questions that he already knows the answer to but has to try to divert attention to himself…
but, you already knew that…
February 17th, 2007 at 5:25 pmComment by Thinking Person #73
Don’t let ‘em scare you TP…
…some of us live our whole lives fighting THEM…
…the cowards who always do things in the dark, and under masks…
…just remember…
…they’re YOUR family members, neighbors, friends , co-workers, and acquaintences…
…who fear “change” more than anything…
…but cannot stop it…
February 17th, 2007 at 5:28 pmmichael just shows up with rhetorical questions …
…has to try to divert attention to himself…
Comment by katy #81
Hey katy,
The thing about “retards” like michael…
…(and I mean no disrespect to seriously medically challenged folk)…
…is that you’ve gotta have a little fun with ‘em…
…sorta’ like a cat playin’ with a ball of yarn…or better yet- a dead mouse that…
…because you’re not hungry you don’t want to eat…
…they have no cogent argument…
…their president, their party, their ideology have all disintegrated…
…so they pose strawman arguments and make asinine childish comments…
…but then…
…I think you already knew that… :)
btw…found your butcher shop anecdote quite amusing…
…and simultaneously…
…provocative…strong>
February 17th, 2007 at 5:39 pmbtw…found your butcher shop anecdote quite amusing…
…and simultaneously…
…provocative…strong>
Comment by big papa — February 17, 2007 @ 5:39 pm
thanks! …”strong”, because i held my tongue? … heh…
i’ve got another about the fish measuring ruler i bought my EXhusband… also one of the “measuring impaired”… the increments were in half scale…
February 17th, 2007 at 6:15 pmthat’s all about that… :)
So, where did our Senate “majority” go?
February 17th, 2007 at 6:25 pmComment by katy #84
actually the “strong>”
…was a site malfunction…
…sorry about your “trouble” though…
February 17th, 2007 at 6:27 pmSo, where did our Senate “majority†go?
Comment by keepinon — February 17, 2007 @ 6:25 pm
from another thread:
Democrat Controlled Senate…
if only that were true… however, as LIEberman is actually a REPULIC, and johnson is still recuperating from a BRAIN BLEED (bless him), there is no real DEMOCRATIC controlled senate right now…
and it would do you all well to remember that, next time you want to blast the dems for any perceived inaction…
just sayin’…
February 17th, 2007 at 6:52 pmand correct me if i’m wrong…
Comment by katy #84
actually the “strong>†…was a site malfunction…
ah, i see now… but you picked up the “provocative” :)
…sorry about your “trouble†though…
Comment by big papa — February 17, 2007 @ 6:27 pm
no more “trouble”… EX trouble…
February 17th, 2007 at 6:55 pmno more “troubleâ€â€¦ EX trouble…
Comment by katy #88
…then I suppose “congrats” are in order…
February 17th, 2007 at 7:01 pmi suppose… it’s not too unlike a death… but i’m over it…
February 17th, 2007 at 7:05 pmComment by katy #90
…at least you’ve still got “passion”…
…even if it is fighting TREASONOUS right wing scum…
…keeps you occupied…
February 17th, 2007 at 7:12 pmmaybe most of his bumpkin constituents still want “victory” (whatever that is), but most of us want our armed forces the hell out of Iraq. Cheney’s from Wyoming isn’t he? Figures this assclown is one of Darth’s boot lickers.
February 17th, 2007 at 7:58 pmmore like PREoccupied…
my (adult) kids give me grief all the time… i tell them i’m “fighting” for their future… they are starting to wake up too…
i was heartened to hear one of my 21yr old daughter’s friends remark that he thought most everyone (meaning their age) was done with bushco and what it’s done to the country… not too long ago, they seemed much too apathetic…
February 17th, 2007 at 8:03 pmSorry katy, I go to school with way too many 21 year olds that are so apethetic I want to slap them across the face. But yeah, more are finally getting the picture, just not enough, fast enough.
February 17th, 2007 at 8:26 pmUm, like you do? Put 3 idiotic thoughts in a row? I could probably give that a shot, Corky.
February 17th, 2007 at 11:11 pmbuzzbomb… do i remember that you are in illinois?
do you think that OBAMA will light that fire under those “kids”?
he was what excited the kids i was talking about… made me happy…
but, i also understand the seeming ambivalence college students show -
i’ve allowed my kids to do their job - which is studying and getting that degree within four years (and having enough of a “college life”, just enough, to make it worth the while) - without much political carping on my part… but now that they are closer to the real world, i’ve been more determined with my updates and forwards to them… “yes, mom…”
and it is working… i just found out that my daughter claims to be a “liberal” on her facebook profile… yay!
February 17th, 2007 at 11:46 pm#96 Gratz, Katy, you taught her well. :)
February 17th, 2007 at 11:52 pmthank you for that, jpark… :-)
February 18th, 2007 at 12:26 amOld, White and out of touch with reality…sounds like a Repub to me…no surprises here
February 18th, 2007 at 2:12 amYeah, forget the troops, screw the Iraqis, let the terrorists win. After all, they are just practicing a religion of peace, they don’t want to come to America and kill liberals and conservatives alike, Nah…
absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
don’t support the troops
deny them any more help
February 18th, 2007 at 2:22 amcall their mission a failure
.
Yeah, forget the troops, screw the Iraqis, let the terrorists win. USpaz
First Stage Republicanism: arm terrorists who hold Americans hostage.
Second Stage Republicanism: arm dictators, to offset consequences of step one.
Third Stage Republicanism: whine about war deaths on both sides of conflict , to justify invading both countries.
Fourth Stage Republicanism: Blame others for consequences of steps one through three.
February 18th, 2007 at 2:48 am12th Stage Drunk = Barfly
February 18th, 2007 at 6:09 amFunny. A poll in today’s (2/17/07) Stars and Stripes shows 72% of the military in Iraq say get us out –by the end of the year, but get us out of here!
February 18th, 2007 at 10:03 amBelow is the rating given by the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA) for this Senator :
“Senator Craig Thomas (R-WY)
3rd-term Republican from Wyoming.
IAVA Congressional Rating
D
The IAVA Rating is based on this legislator’s voting history on issues that affect US troops, Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans, and military families.
Sample Legislation:
Voted FOR Healthcare for Reservists (TRICARE).
Voted AGAINST Increasing the Military Death Gratuity.
Voted AGAINST Increasing Funding for Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) Research.”
Not too good, is it, Ms.-not-my-mother-troll?
February 19th, 2007 at 12:34 amCraig Thomas is a fossil, a behind-the-times repugnant-repub whose mind is gone…he is not in step with the American People, so get out of the way, Thomas, STOP BEING AN OBSTRUCTIONIST and GET WITH IT or be LEFT BEHIND and VOTED OUT OF OFFICE in 2008!!!!!
February 20th, 2007 at 7:20 pmAuto Loans Financing
Coed lately applied for an auto loan and got accepted soon enough , without considering there horrific money problems !
March 17th, 2008 at 6:18 amCollege Financing Options
Interesting - because that is the same thing I found out last Thursday.
April 2nd, 2008 at 8:30 amBank Of New York Trust Company
bank of punjab credit card
April 8th, 2008 at 10:34 am