Scarborough Smacks O’Reilly for Ignoring Iraq to Focus on ‘NBC Jihad’
Scarborough Smacks O’Reilly for Ignoring Iraq to Focus on ‘NBC Jihad’
For several weeks, Joe Scarborough has been fighting back against Bill O’Reilly’s petty attacks on MSNBC and NBC News. The battle continued yesterday as Scarborough’s production team took a page from Think Progress and tracked the relative importance O’Reilly has been placing on two issues: NBC and the war in Iraq.
According to Scarborough’s figures taken from one week of The Factor, O’Reilly referenced NBC 47 times and mentioned Iraq only 20 times. (11 of those Iraq mentions came during anti-NBC segments.) “While the war in Iraq rages halfway across the globe,” Scarborough asked, “what does Bill O’Reilly spend night after night talking about? NBC News, of course.” Scarborough went on to scold O’Reilly: “Stop being self-righteous.”
Watch it:
Transcript:
SCARBOROUGH: Bill O’Reilly is at it again. Now, while the war in Iraq rages halfway across the globe and America’s deadliest enemy, al Qaeda, is reportedly rearming, using arms against us, what does Bill O’Reilly spend night after night talking about? NBC news, of course.
[snip]
I’m telling him that we have important issues to talk about across the globe. If you look at our show every night, we talk about Iraq, we talked about Iran at the top, we talked about nuclear proliferation last night. We talked about the coming war with Iran.
GUEST: And he doesn’t.
SCARBOROUGH: We talk about Pakistan. Take a look at Bill O’Reilly’s show just over the past week. Let’s see how much time he’s devoting to this “NBC jihad” as opposed to say, an important story like the war in Iraq. We counted a total of 47 references and attacks to NBC, dwarfing the 20 times he mentioned Iraq. All I’m saying — and it gets worse. Some further digging shows that 11 of those Iraq references were during segments where he was bashing NBC.
GUEST: You’re trying to tell him how to program his show. He’s trying to tell you to be straight down the middle.
SCARBOROUGH: No, I’m saying this guy is being self-righteous. You know what I’m saying? It’s biblical, really. Before you look at the plank in our eyes, check the plank out in your own eyes, Bill O’Reilly. Stop being self-righteous.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Password?
February 21st, 2007 at 2:50 pmUh, admin? You need to look at how this appears on the main page.
You’ve got a password prompt showing.
February 21st, 2007 at 2:51 pm.
Who cares?
Move on to substantive matters.
February 21st, 2007 at 2:52 pmpassword?… i don’t remember giving you a password…
February 21st, 2007 at 2:52 pmnow what?
Password wtf?
February 21st, 2007 at 2:53 pmWhat was with the password prompt?
February 21st, 2007 at 2:53 pmRepublicans media pundits fighting each other is always fun to watch. Although, I assume the little Air America / Ed Schultz garbage from the other week was equally amusing for right wingers.
I hope lefties obstain from this behavior in the future.
February 21st, 2007 at 2:54 pmWho is this “Jim Scarborough”? We had Joe and Chuck, now it’s all getting too confusing.
February 21st, 2007 at 2:54 pmProtected: Scarborough Smacks O’Reilly for Ignoring Iraq to Focus on ‘NBC Jihad’
This post is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:
…
i’m for it – but at each thread?
February 21st, 2007 at 2:54 pmwho is JIM scarborough?
February 21st, 2007 at 2:55 pmThanks, admin. For a minute there I was afraid O’Reilly had called FOX Security on you.
February 21st, 2007 at 2:55 pm.
Scarborough must have looked at the success of that Olbermann guy whose show is on MSNBC just before his. Imitation is the highest form of flattery. Go, Keith.
February 21st, 2007 at 2:55 pmPayson,
It’s JOE Scarborough. Not knowing gives you points – you don’t watch ol’ Joe. He’s carried water for the Repugs and Bush a whole bunch.
My fav was after the State of the Union, when Joe and old man Buchanan gushed about how good the Shrub did – how confident he looked. Never mind that the man stood there and didn’t have the decency to mention Katrina.
I doubt Jim (I mean Joe) would be on the rampage, except O’Leilly lumped all of MSNBC/NBC in with his pathological Olbermann hatred.
February 21st, 2007 at 2:56 pmIsn’t it JOE Scarborough??
Also, JT, speak for yourself. I actually wished the entire segment was posted on the site, I enjoy watching the debate.
February 21st, 2007 at 2:58 pmTwo of a kind, ’nuff said.
February 21st, 2007 at 2:58 pmJoe Scarborough, not Jim Scarborough. I don’t think you can really call it eating one of their own. Joe may be a Republican, and a former Republican congressman, but he’s been pretty critical of this administration. Remember that he’s the one who had as the theme of one of his programs “Is Bush An idiot?” a few months ago. He let the viewers and guests draw their own conclusions, but it sounded to me like he was leaning towards “Yes”.
February 21st, 2007 at 3:01 pmO’Reilly uses the words SUPPORT OUR TROOPS just as his follow GOP. He means let our troops die and don’t give them any medial attention give all the 2.9 Trillion to support Bush’s lies and rebuild Iraq. As O’Reilly would say the Bush supporter don’t gave a damn about the troops let them die just as long as I get the money to say this stuff. Oh and now the UK families will never have to worry about their soldiers dying based on the lies. Only American middle class or poor people will die as the Rich sit back and laugh as they count their stolen money. As for their kids well the Bush twins and keep drinking and drugging as other families wait for their kids to die in the Iraq civil war. Bush is laughing at Americans as fools who will do what ever he says even knowing he’s a weak coward idiot drunk and druggie now how smart is America?
February 21st, 2007 at 3:04 pmchimpeach –
Poor Joe can’t decide what to do. He, like most thinking people, knows Bush and 6 years with the rubber stampers has been a disaster. Sad part is, if he disavows his people, he’ll get tagged as a liberal. He is no liberal. I believe he’d might still be pushing the Shrub, but the tide of public opinion has turned.
I find his defensiveness regarding O’Leilly hysterical. He’s being forced on the same side as Keith and I think he’d rather be almost anywhere else.
February 21st, 2007 at 3:06 pmCome on, people, it’s “The No Spin Zone,” so clearly the Iraq war just isn’t that important any more.
February 21st, 2007 at 3:10 pmHis name is Joe, Not Jim BTW
Funny to see a right wing pundit going after a right wing pundit.
February 21st, 2007 at 3:11 pmhaha
A lot of us do care. It is possible to cover both substantive and and unsubstantial topics at the same time. If you don’t like this one, don’t post here and post in another one of the other 5 major threads so far today or one of the 9 topics covered in this mornings Think Fast thread, which by the way is an open thread, so you can bring up stuff you want to talk about there.
Just like it is possible for ORielly to cover substantive and unbstantial topics like NBC? If people are so worried about the war, why are so many obsessed with what ORielly and Beck say?
February 21st, 2007 at 3:11 pmTalk about playing to the nation’s A.D.D.! How is it news that two P.O.S. television “personalities” are calling each other names? People are dying from our direct actions and heinous inactions and we are concerned with two loofah sucking falafels spitting at each other?
I mean, what on earth…uh, hold on a minute, Brittney shaved her head? Anna Nicole is dead? Ray Liotta got a DUI? Lindsay Lohan flashed her hoohah?
Ooh, bright shiny things…
February 21st, 2007 at 3:11 pmAnd since when did Joe cover anything but “Hollyweird”?
February 21st, 2007 at 3:12 pmWhy isn’t scarborough in jail?
February 21st, 2007 at 3:16 pmPassword? Oh Crap Rachel really does do NSA!
February 21st, 2007 at 3:16 pmI have the *password
That is why it “briefly” showed up.
Any other questions about my NSA affiliation?
February 21st, 2007 at 3:20 pmYeah, Rach, do you do kids birthday parties too?
February 21st, 2007 at 3:24 pmHitler loved to spew lies day in and day out.
February 21st, 2007 at 3:24 pm#20 detepe
That describes him pretty well. He’s moderate as Republicans go, and he obviously gets along with Keith pretty well when they interact during the transition from one show to the other. Joe even got pissed off at Chris Matthews during the election night coverage, because Chris said something to Howard Dean implying that Joe was being partisan.
Let me put it this way: If Joe Scarborough were the worst that we had to deal with on the right, life would be pretty sweet. That man can reason and be reasoned with.
February 21st, 2007 at 3:25 pm#23 stanman
If people are so worried about the war, why are so many obsessed with what ORielly and Beck say?
It’s because of all the undiscerning morons who watch O’Reilly and Beck and pick up a lot of really stupid ideas from them. We hate to see stupid people being exploited like that.
February 21st, 2007 at 3:28 pmBut….but…but….I thought O’Liely was obsessed with loofahs?? ?????
February 21st, 2007 at 3:29 pmJOE. It’s JOE Scarborough, not Jim. Please correct the post.
February 21st, 2007 at 3:32 pmUh huh. Sure thing loony.
February 21st, 2007 at 3:33 pmSpudge, RUCerious
I have a few days left however. I am not leaving today you asswipe.
I have something “in store†for you as a going away gift.
I am sure you will “enjoy†it.
Your bestest buddy always,
Rachel
February 21st, 2007 at 3:34 pmJoe (not Jim), you know, he’s the one who allegedly had the affair with the young female aide who was found dead in his congressional office in Florida. Rumour was she was going to reveal the affair. What was her name? Anyway, the official version was she must have slipped while alone and hit her head on the desk. Absolutely impossible given the forensic evidence, but what the hey—it’s not as if he used the prosecutor’s definition of sexual relations to say he didn’t have sex with her—or anything horrific like that !!!
February 21st, 2007 at 3:36 pmSpudge, RUCerious
I have a few days left however. I am not leaving today you asswipe.
I have something “in store†for you as a going away gift.
I am sure you will “enjoy†it.
Your bestest buddy always,
Rachel
February 21st, 2007 at 3:36 pmNo really, Rachel, my daughter’s fourth birthday party’s a comin and you could do balloon animals, pie in the face routines, you know, your regular clown act!
February 21st, 2007 at 3:38 pmOnly in the modern political and media climate could Joe Scarborough be called a “moderate.” He’s always been fairly conservative.
That said, I’m coming to have more respect for him the more I see him. He doesn’t mindlessly repeat GOP talking points or the scandalette du jour, and I’ve seen him call B.S. on a number of right-wing misstatements. His coverage of the 2006 elections was fairly balanced, and he called the Democratic surge far earlier than most other talking heads. I agree with commenter #30 that he can reason and be reasoned with, and I’d like to see more like him on the conservative side.
February 21st, 2007 at 3:40 pmHere’s a question for this thread, based on some of the comments I’ve seen.
Can someone (conservative or progressive) disagree with the other side/group and still be considered a decent human being worthy of respect.
February 21st, 2007 at 3:40 pmToo damn bad Rach can’t even figure out how to click the mouse once without that darn twitch that does the second click.
February 21st, 2007 at 3:40 pmI wish O’Really could stick to business, I’ve got a real culture war going on here…
February 21st, 2007 at 3:43 pm…my Bush Limpwad culture has swarmed over the side of the petri dish and up into the Beck culture dish…… it has mutated now into something horrifically putrid and disgustingly slimy…. what do I do, Bill?
#40….Dale..
February 21st, 2007 at 3:44 pmAbsolutely!
Sure Dale, they come around now and again.
February 21st, 2007 at 3:46 pmDidn’t you and I find something to agree on just the other day>?
Or don’t you remember?
I have just turned in my “subersives listâ„¢ ” to my superiors. I had a total of 37 off of this site, NO MATTER WHAT IDENTITY YOU POST UNDER.
Nicknames? They are no good to the NSA. When you “own” the source code of subversives hard drives, nicknames are meaningless. You, (at least 37 of you), have been identified not by NAME, but by preassigned NUMBER.
Happy posting.
February 21st, 2007 at 3:47 pmThat should be asswipes. Since you are addressing multiple asswipes at the same time.
February 21st, 2007 at 3:48 pmRaven ~ Only one thing to do.
Kill it before it multiplies, then run screaming from the building.
Sincerely,
February 21st, 2007 at 3:48 pmLoofah Billy
It is one thing to have a different opinion. It is another thing entirely of stating that we are happy that Americans are dying in Iraq as you did last night you fu*king pr!ck.
Why don’t you think about your own damn question and get back to us.
February 21st, 2007 at 3:49 pmI have just turned in my “subersives listâ„¢ ” to my superiors. I had a total of 37 off of this site, NO MATTER WHAT IDENTITY YOU POST UNDER.
Nicknames? They are no good to the NSA. When you “own” the source code of subversives hard drives, nicknames are meaningless. You, (at least 37 of you), have been identified not by NAME, but by preassigned NUMBER.
Happy posting.
February 21st, 2007 at 3:51 pmSpudger, do you remember the assclown “A Real American” on this blog some months past?
February 21st, 2007 at 3:54 pmOMG! I am so askeered~!
February 21st, 2007 at 3:55 pmSource code has nothing to do with drives dumb a$$. source code is for operating systems and other software, not hardware. They use firmware.
God, you should take a class before you post bullsh!t.
February 21st, 2007 at 3:56 pmHer name was Lori Klausutis. Here is a link to Truthout article. I have always found them to be reliable.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_01/01.05B.Klausutis.1.htm
February 21st, 2007 at 3:57 pmI think I know why we are graced with Rachel’s presence today.
February 21st, 2007 at 4:01 pmAll across America, elementary schools are on spring break.
#49 – rachel kinnardi,
February 21st, 2007 at 4:02 pmFor my preassigned number, I’ll take Frank Sinatra sunging ‘Old New York’.
#40: Can someone (conservative or progressive) disagree with the other side/group and still be considered a decent human being worthy of respect.
Of course. If you read the posts, you’ll see several progressives who seem to think Joe Scarborough can be reasoned with.
While I do see Scarborough as considerably more reasonable than most of the right-wing talking heads (Hannity, Limbaugh, Coulter, Savage, Beck, at al.), I can’t help wondering if his latest criticism of O’Reilly is really because O’Reilly is attacking Scarborough’s network. If O’Reilly’s obsession had been about CNN, would Scarborough have responded with such ferocity?
February 21st, 2007 at 4:04 pmCan someone (conservative or progressive) disagree with the other side/group and still be considered a decent human being worthy of respect.
Comment by Dale
When you state things like liberals are happy soldiers are dying you are beneath contempt.
You do not seem to realize there are veterans that post here. If you would have said that to me face to face, I would have busted your jaw at the very least.
The cursing out Spudge ( who also a veteran) gave you was well deserved by you, for the comment you posted.
Want civillity? then be civil yourself.
February 21st, 2007 at 4:11 pmAnd appologize to the veterans who post here for your comments yesterday.
Gee thanks, Loofah Billy!
February 21st, 2007 at 4:12 pmAnd just to show you how greatful I am for your help in saving my life, I’m going to start a culture in your honor!
(I found this really cool stuff underneath the halloween pumpkin I threw out in the garden last fall! It’s green and kinda purplish at the same time, and glows in the dark!!)
Who was the loud mouth banty rooster in the lower left corner of the video? The one with the long schlock of hair that he kept playing with?
February 21st, 2007 at 4:16 pma pair of deuces. just better than nothing at all, but still not worth adding money to the pot for.
February 21st, 2007 at 4:17 pmPlease, I’m trying to forget that :-)
The reason I ask is because of the hate, name-calling, divisiveness I see, not just on this (or other progressive) site, but on a bunch of the conservative ones also.
Since I’ve been posting on this site, I know that I’ve said things that most of you don’t agree with. Fine, I can deal with that. I’ve also been called, at various times, a right-wing fanatic, a stooge for Bush, a troll, etc.; basically implying that I agree with the entire right-wing agenda, which is patently ridiculous. Again, I’m not trying to point any fingers, and I’m also not trying to ‘open old wounds’; I’m not going to try to bring up examples of any of this; it’s just not worth the time. Everybody is guilty of these things at one time or another, some to a greater extent, some to a lesser extent.
Why am I mentioning this? I was reading an afterword to a new book by Orson Scott Card, “Empire”. This book deals with a new US civil war, split along ideological lines.
If you get a chance, read the afterword; it’s pretty interesting. Apparently Mr. Card is a Democrat in the form of Zell Miller; he seems very intelligent and very knowlegdeable, and his afterword, at least, is a pretty good read.
February 21st, 2007 at 4:18 pmI gave specific references on what posts seemed ‘happy’ about the soldiers. However, as former military myself, if I offended any military, I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to.
However, the ‘bust your jaw at the very least’ comment? You’re an idiot.
February 21st, 2007 at 4:20 pmI’m sorry, I didn’t mean to.
However….
Nice applogy that isn’t an applogy……
February 21st, 2007 at 4:27 pm#62… Dale..
February 21st, 2007 at 4:29 pmI read the Orson Scott Card book, I believe, was it the one about the paralell between the Roman empire, and the curent state of affairs in America?
I had a hard time swallowing the concept of wealthy Democrats funding a private army to overthrow the government…
#64, I was apologizing to any military that were offended by my comment. The “however” was addressed to Wayne for his inane comment about busting my jaw.
#65, I haven’t read the book yet, but I enjoyed Enders Game, so I’m planning on picking it up.
February 21st, 2007 at 4:34 pmIt is not “as far as I know. It is what it is and you can’t change that by posting stupid bullshit on a blog thread.
Comment by Spudge_Boy
As far as YOU know.
I’ll never tell.
It is a “state secret” how we track you here.
And track we do.
At least 37 of you.
So far.
And Pud in the ASs BOY?
The “source code” of your hard drive IS your operating system asswiper.
And when you “OWN” the source code, you “OWN” the hard drive.
February 21st, 2007 at 4:42 pmWell, Dale, I don’t want to spoil it for you… but I don’t know where you got the idea he’s a Democrat.
February 21st, 2007 at 4:42 pmI have read much of his work, and I did enjoy the Enders series.
Card is deeply entrenched in the gaming world, and has connections to military applications for gaming and virtual reality.
He seems to have lost much of his originality, and is now pandering to the market and current events to sell books.
Simply put, I will no longer read any of his future works.
However, as former military myself — dale
Your MOS?
mine was 31b on exit.
However, the ‘bust your jaw at the very least’ comment? You’re an idiot — Dale
Good thing you didn’t tell me face to face that I am happy troops were dying, because you would have found out how serious I would have taken it.
calling mean idiot, I would laugh at your pathetic attempt to insult and walk away.
and an appology given with however, but, andother clairification is not one.
back to the question, your MOS when you got out?
February 21st, 2007 at 4:44 pmYou mean the source code ON your hard drive is the operating system.
And you know that thanks to me. Glad I could help loony.
February 21st, 2007 at 4:53 pmP.S…
February 21st, 2007 at 4:54 pmI thought Empire was a slick twisting of current political realities… and almost an endorsement of relinquishing democracy in favor of an Imperial regime.
It left a bad taste in my mouth.
If you read it, and disagree with me, let me know!
Joe BITCH-SLAPS O’LIElly–WHAT A SIGHT! One repugnant-repub who has partially come to his senses castigates the die-hard rightwingnut Bill-O…Very Enjoyable indeed! We also have a little ditty that goes:
February 21st, 2007 at 4:55 pm“Are you going to Scarborough’s Show
Where he smites O’LIElly with ball and chain
Remember his raspy tongue–you know
The venom on Bill-O he’ll rain!”
#67, Spudge, I wasn’t trying to label all progressives/liberals, but be that as it may, I didn’t mean to offend any military, even you :-).
February 21st, 2007 at 4:57 pmWayne, 445×0G
February 21st, 2007 at 5:00 pmI didn’t mean to offend any military, even you :-).
February 21st, 2007 at 5:00 pmComment by Dale — February 21, 2007 @ 4:57 pm
Does that mean you meant to offend non-military?
No, only you DRxJ (yeesh)
February 21st, 2007 at 5:03 pmApology accepted.
Now, to debate our difference of opinions.
I want the troops out of Iraq, because we did not send enough troops to start with. I base this off of the fact that one of the people in my chain of command, when I was in Desert Storm was Dick Cheney. He was Secretary of Defense at the time.
Dick Cheney said this after George H W Bush decided to not invade Bahgdad:
During Operation Desert Storm, we had 600,000 coalition troops and Dick Cheney did not feel that it would be enough to hold Bahgdad.
This is not taking into consideration anything else, just troops levels.
What do you think about not sending enough troops to do the job?
BTW, I was 13F 4/5 Field Artillery 1st Infantry Division “Big Red One” Fort Riley Kansas.
February 21st, 2007 at 5:10 pmWayne, 445×0G
Comment by Dale
Ahh, Air Force, correct?
now, I welcome good debate. If you can refrain from statements such as “you liberals” and “hate the military”, etc. Then I welcome your input, whether or not we agree.
February 21st, 2007 at 5:11 pmNo, only you DRxJ (yeesh)
Comment by Dale — February 21, 2007 @ 5:03 pm
Am I non-military?
February 21st, 2007 at 5:15 pmAnd just for the record, I think saying liberals were happy over US soldiers deaths is offensive to everyone, not just military.
Jim Scarborough is a newsman. Joe Scarborough (search for ‘Joe’ on this one.) is a political hack from Florida.
February 21st, 2007 at 5:41 pmMy # 81:
February 21st, 2007 at 6:00 pmOops, I really muffed that one! Are the two Joes the same person?
And just for the record, I think saying liberals were happy over US soldiers deaths is offensive to everyone, not just military.
Comment by DRxJ
I agree totally
February 21st, 2007 at 6:02 pmSo maybe O’Reilly just figured out a way to get his face all over NBC when his own show is losing audience. It’s free publicity as far as he’s concerned. All he has to do is insult the Scarborough man or Keith Olbermann and he get’s a free ad for his NOthing but SPIN ZONE on NBC. Ignore him.
February 21st, 2007 at 6:24 pm#78, I don’t think we sent enough troops either to hold Iraq. I also don’t think we’ve held the Iraqi gov’t accountable for what’s going on. I do think we were correct in going into Iraq (I wish Bush ‘41 would’ve finished the job, though I can understand the issues with losing the support of the Arab world).
If we pull out now, however, all of the troops sacrifices will have been in vain; another Hussein will eventually emerge… I think it’s vital that we stay there until we’re done, which is why I support the troop surge.
FYI, most troop comments I’ve heard also would not like to see us pull out, and many of them (again, that I’ve heard) feel anybody asking for an immediate withdrawal is not properly supporting them.
I’d give cites, but that’ll have to wait for another time; much to do tonight.
Spudge/Wayne/etc, I *usually* don’t try to intentionally insult someone… (unless I get frustrated); but when I get labeled as believing in all of the right-wing agenda I get frustrated. As far as any ‘threats’ against me however, from now on I’m just going to ignore them AND the poster; I don’t feel like spending any time on them.
Night! :-)
February 21st, 2007 at 7:05 pmDale, you do keep posting these insults about how Democrats “hate” the troops or embrace defeat or whatever, etc. etc. You and those who think like you need to go here: http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,117439,00.html
These people are all veterans. Liberals have said this until they’re blue in the face, but it is literally unamerican to question a citizen’s patriotism because he doesn’t agree with political policy. When are you people going to get that through your thick mellons.
Keith, I believe Joe’s intern’s name was Lori Kausitis. She did die in his offices under questionable circumstances. He did resign quickly from Congress after this happened for vague reasons. Since Joe was a good republican, the “liberal media” decided there was no real story there. Funny how that works, huh.
February 21st, 2007 at 7:23 pm“I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarifiedrules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our overextended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today”
 Â
-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)
Dale, I don’t remember anyone implying that Tom Delay was not supporting the troops. Nobody accused him of being FOR defeat. Nobody accused him of taking the side of Bosnian Serbs who were commiting genocide. Why do you think that is?
February 21st, 2007 at 7:27 pmDale,
First and foremost, The administration lied about the WMD issue to get us into the war. When they won, they left known ammunition dumps and storages unguarded and unblown. They instead secured the Oil Ministry first.
If they were after WMD’s why did they leave the ammo dumps unguarded? By the time they got around to checking on them again, they had been emptied by the resistace.
February 21st, 2007 at 8:01 pmWayne, check out this piece. The author is talking about the ‘lies’ regarding WMD’s. The most important point, and one that I’ve mentioned a number of times to various people, is that the US was not the ONLY country that believed there were WMD’s. A rather lenghty excerpt (so I’m not accused of cherry-picking)
So if Pres. Bush lied, then so did the leaders of France, Germany, Russia, etc.
Unless you believe that those countries relied on ‘our’ intelligence, and didn’t investigate on their own. (a pretty absurb assumption, but one I’ve heard before).
February 21st, 2007 at 8:11 pmAs far as looting the sites, consider this:
Looting took place in the days following. It was reported that the National Museum of Iraq was among the looted sites. The assertion that US forces did not guard the museum because they were guarding the Ministry of Oil and Ministry of Interior is apparently true.[59] According to U.S. officials the “reality of the situation on the ground” was that hospitals, water plants, and ministries with vital intelligence needed security more than other sites. There were only enough US troops on the ground to guard a certain number of the many sites that ideally needed protection, and so, apparently, some “hard choices” were made. Also, it was reported that many trucks of purported Iraqi gold and $1.6 billion of bricks of US cash were seized by US forces.
True, Wikipedia’s accuracy is in doubt about a lot of things, but your own assertion that we didn’t have enough troops seems to back this up.
February 21st, 2007 at 8:15 pmGoon on Joe for standing up
to that punk.
Too bad he had to learn it
by watching Olbermann
and too bad he had to be
attacked to start showing
a modicum of caring about
the TRUTH!
Keep working on him, KO
February 21st, 2007 at 8:26 pmHe’ll get to the light
Have you hugged your local resident NSA surveillance spy today?
February 21st, 2007 at 8:32 pm#89 – Dale,
February 21st, 2007 at 8:38 pmCheck out your source.
Dale,
Read my post in number 78 and then read yours. My opinion is based off of my own real life experience and yours is based on some articles by people you don’t know.
Do you see the difference there?
I would like to know why you feel the way you do and I mean just that, nothing else implied, since we are going to debate.
February 21st, 2007 at 8:58 pmSo if Pres. Bush lied, then so did the leaders of France, Germany, Russia, etc.
Comment by Dale — February 21, 2007 @ 8:11 pm
This meme has been repeated ad nauseam and it is simply not true. Pres Bush and PM Blair were the ones pushing for an invasion.
There is a reason why Rumsfeld dimissed France, and Germany as “Old Europe” -or have you forgotten the anti-French furor that swept the US to the extent of renaming the French fries “Freedom Fries”? And don’t forget that the Russians were smeared by the right-wing noise machine of moving Hussein’s WMD to Syria, after the invasion. What caused all this animosity, I wonder?
Well, it was because France, Germany, Russia all opposed military action against Iraq. They insisted the inspections were working, declared that the UN resolution 1441 did not authorise the use of military force, that another resolution was needed to authorise it, that the Bush administration refused to seek said resolution, and that Pres Bush formed an ad hoc “coalition of the willing”.
No matter how you spin it. Anyone who was paying attention during the run-up to the invasion remembers how traditional European allies were bypassed, that the UN was unilaterally declared “irrelevant”, and that the Bush administration proceeded to invade Iraq.
European leaders might have suspected Hussein’s regime of trying to obtain WMD -but they didn’t see it as a threat great enough to warrant a full-blown military action, and certainly didn’t peddle it to their citizens.
February 21st, 2007 at 9:20 pmTest
February 21st, 2007 at 9:41 pmSo if Pres. Bush lied, then so did the leaders of France, Germany, Russia, etc.
Comment by Dale — February 21, 2007 @ 8:11 pm
This meme has been repeated ad nauseam and it is simply not true. Pres Bush and PM Blair were the ones pushing for an invasion.
There is a reason why Rumsfeld dimissed France, and Germany as “Old Europe” -or have you forgotten the anti-French furor that swept the US to the extent of renaming the French fries “Freedom Fries”? And don’t forget that the Russians were smeared by the right-wing noise machine of moving Hussein’s WMD to Syria, after the invasion. What caused all this animosity, I wonder?
Well, it was because France, Germany, Russia all opposed military action against Iraq. They insisted the inspections were working, declared that the UN resolution 1441 did not authorize the use of military force, that another resolution was needed to authorize it, that the Bush administration refused to seek said resolution, and that Pres Bush formed an ad hoc “coalition of the willing”.
No matter how you spin it. Anyone who was paying attention during the run-up to the invasion remembers how traditional European allies were bypassed, that the UN was unilaterally declared “irrelevant”, and that the Bush administration proceeded to invade Iraq.
European leaders might have suspected Hussein’s regime of trying to obtain WMD -but they didn’t see it as a threat great enough to warrant a full-blown military action, and certainly didn’t peddle it to their citizens.
(Sorry for the lack of links, but ThinkProgress’ filter “eats” my post if I include them)
February 21st, 2007 at 9:44 pmDr. Condoleezza Rice: magnificently accomplished and educated woman; brilliant scholar; concert pianist; gracious lady; presidential confident and trusted advisor; dedicated public servant; political giant and National Security Advisor to The President of the United States of America. And now, Secretary of State of the most powerful country on the planet. The first African-American female Secretary of State in our history.
Why would such an accomplished American woman be so savagely and viciously trashed and dishonored by the liberal elites and the left-wing Democratic Party? Not only trashed, but insulted, bad-mouthed, ridiculed and humiliated.What does a girl have to do to win the accolades and approval of these people?
Condi Rice has garnered the scorn of her Democratic colleagues, not because of what she has accomplished, but because of who and what she is. She is a black American, who is guilty of an unspeakable crime in liberal eyes.Her crime? She does not worship at the altar of the Democratic Party. Condi Rice has committed the unpardonable sin.She has dared to carve out her own political path while black.
And so has any black American sinned who dares to look the Democratic Party in their face and say, “You are wrong. I don’t need you.I don’t want you.I can do better than youâ€. And so she has.
The Democrats haughtily assume they own black America and their votes.They ridicule and belittle any black who dares to wander off their liberal “plantationâ€.
They think any black American who seeks a life free of Democratic ownership, is stupid, ignorant, uneducated and misinformed. Condi Rice, in particular, has been labeled a bald-faced liar, a puppet, a sycophant, and a mindless, thoughtless, robotic, brainwashed slave of George W. Bush. In their eyes, any black who dares to snub the Democrats is a traitor.
Countless cartoons and articles have insulted and offended her and her blackness in ways we have not seen since the pre-Civil War south.
Condi Rice dared to tell the Democratic owners that she believes the conservative mindset is her home. She dares to be a black Republican. And so they savaged her.
The liberal elites cry foul! She is black and not allowed to be a conservative! She is beholden to them, and only them, for the freedom she has attained. They own her and she has not paid them back for the favors they bestowed upon her and her people. Not only is she uppity, she is ungrateful!
The Democratic Party is the party of Sen. Robert Byrd, a former Grand Dragon in the Ku Klux Klan. This pitiful excuse for a human being still throws the “N†word around like it is butter, and is never corrected by his liberal cronies. This sad, pathetic man has the blind hubris to say Condi Rice is not fit to serve, when he himself is not fit, nor shall he ever be fit, to walk the hallowed halls of Congress.
Bulletin to Democratic liberals: Condi Rice owes you nothing. Clarence Thomas, who your leader, the disgraceful Harry Reid, called “an embarrassment to the courtâ€, owes you nothing.You don’t own them anymore.They are not beholden to you for anything.Stings, doesn’t it?
But isn’t that the country you’ve always preached about? At least until someone dares to leave your plantation. Then you turn back the clock and call them lying buffoons who don’t have enough sense to hold high office; too stupid to see that George Bush is a war mongering fraud.
And this same fraud just happens to be bringing freedom to a tyrannized people and is changing the face of the planet we live on; something you people have never even thought about doing and wouldn’t have the courage of conviction or the stomach to do it anyway.
And not one of you, not Robert Byrd, not Barbara Boxer, not Ted Kennedy and not Harry Reid is fit to tie Dr. Condoleezza Rice’s shoelaces.
Get over yourselves. The slaves have been freed. Get used to it. And in case you hadn’t noticed, they were freed by a Republican. His name was Abraham Lincoln.
February 21st, 2007 at 11:02 pmCondi08 – Great observations about a woman who is head and shoulders above recent Secretary’s of State. Funny thing – the Dem Party LOVES poooor downtrodden minorities for the votes they can cull. Look how long Dems have been running and allowing the ruin, of so many blighted areas and school systems. The dirty little secret – too many Dem pols need to keep this constituencey down. They have no use for black conservatives and little use for “uppity” blacks.
February 21st, 2007 at 11:12 pmCondi08 – Great observations about a woman who is head and shoulders above recent Secretary’s of State. Funny thing – the Dem Party LOVES poooor downtrodden minorities for the votes they can cull. Look how long Dems have been running and allowing the ruin, of so many blighted areas and school systems. The dirty little secret – too many Dem pols need to keep this constituencey down. They have no use for black conservatives and little use for “uppity†blacks. Comment by valiant venus — February 21, 2007 @ 11:12 pm
That whole post is so loaded with racism, classism, bigotry and general ignorance, one wonders whether you are so skinny if your head might be permanently lodged in your buttocks.
If anyone loves the downtrodden, it’s you freakish fascist that seem to breed them every time you come to office.
As for uppity? Are you referring to classism again? Classism isn’t relegated to race, it just prefers it – stupid c*nt.
February 22nd, 2007 at 2:29 amTo be blunt. Bill O’Reilly is on the verge of a meltdown with his obsession with NBC. He will soon join Brittany Spears in the tabloids.
February 22nd, 2007 at 2:35 amJoe Scarborough has indeed produced some
February 23rd, 2007 at 5:29 ambackbone in the past year or two. Where as
he at one time, stayed in lockstep with the
Right wing talking points, he has started to
set the Kool-Aid aside, and actually shock
one with his candor. Point being: Scarborough
has stopped de’mon·i·za’tion of the Democrats
and finds common ground whenever he can. He
also does not shy away from criticizing the more
reactionary types on the Right, and the Left, on
an equal basis. Bill “passion of the christ” O’Reilly
is strictly an agent of “Wedge Issue Politics” at
every turn. Joe’s attitude is becoming more and
more one of inclusion, and reconciliation of our
differences, while Bill O is at all times an attack
dog, using schorched earth policy, towards anyone
that would dare to have a different opinion than
his, or voice the least criticism of the sanctified
nature of the republican party, and Far Right Wing
ideology. Both the Faux Non News Hauptsitze,
and independent right wings pundits, are on a
new Jihad against MSNBC, for daring to step out,
and actually be fair and balanced, to both ends
of the political spectrum. Millions of Americans have
become disenchanted by the constant use of
Wedge Issue demagoguery by the likes of Rush,
Coulter, Faux, etc, etc. MSNBC has decided to start
tapping into a market that actually out numbers the
reactionary ideologue’s, and take the time to build
an audience drawn from the silent majority. MSNBC
will come out on top, if they don’t succumb to the
Swiftboat attacks directed at them by Lockstep Bill,
and the other megalomanics, that can’t break the
rabid attack dog tactics habit. Bravo MSNBC!!!!!