ThinkFast: April 30, 2007
ThinkFast: April 30, 2007
“Five U.S. troops were killed in separate attacks in the capital this weekend, including three in a single roadside bombing, the military said Monday, pushing the death toll past 100 in the deadliest month so far this year.”
“President Bush will not sign any war spending bill that penalizes Iraq’s government” for failing to meet the benchmarks that his own administration has set, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Sunday, “a fresh warning to Congress about challenging him.”
A department of Iraqi Prime Minister al-Maliki’s office is “playing a leading role in the arrest and removal of senior Iraqi army and national police officers, some of whom had apparently worked too aggressively to combat violent Shiite militias.”
A U.S.-led raid Sunday on a suspected insurgent cell in Afghanistan left as many as six Afghans dead, including a woman and a teenage girl, and sparked protests by hundreds of angry Afghans chanting, “Death to Bush!” One resident said, “We are not the enemy. We are not al-Qaeda. Why are they attacking us?”
The New York City Bar, one of the largest lawyers’ organizations in the country, charges that the Bush administration is “trying to evade responsibility for problems at the Guantanamo Bay prison by falsely blaming defense lawyers for the trouble.” The association’s criticism comes as the administration is proposing limiting attorneys’ access to detainees.
House energy committee chairman John Dingell (D-MI) has written the Environmental Protection Agency demanding to know why Bill Roderick, the acting attorney general, “launched a plan back in June to cut 60 of his 360 employees — especially auditors, criminal investigators and the like — via buyouts or resignations.” Around the same time, Roderick received a raise exceeding $15,000.
Women online are increasingly harrassed in “sexually threatening terms — a trend that was first evident in chat rooms in the early 1990s and is now moving to the blogosphere. … A 2006 University of Maryland study on chat rooms found that female participants received 25 times as many sexually explicit and malicious messages as males.”
“Black, Hispanic and white drivers are equally likely to be pulled over by police, but blacks and Hispanics are much more likely to be searched and arrested,” and police were “much more likely to threaten or use force against blacks and Hispanics than against whites in any encounter, whether at a traffic stop or elsewhere,” a federal study shows.
“Tucked inside Frank Rich’s Sunday column in the New York Times is indication that the newspaper will no longer play ball with the annual White House Correspondents Association dinners in Washington, which he calls ‘a crystallization of the press’s failures in the post-9/11 era.’ He writes that the event ‘illustrates how easily a propaganda-driven White House can enlist the Washington news media in its shows.’”
And finally: Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) “turned some heads” last week at a briefing when she wore “dark, oversized shades, even though the classified meeting took place very much indoors.” Clinton’s spokesman said that she didn’t have her regular prescription glasses with her, so she used the sunglasses. “Which is a lot better than the rose-colored glasses the Bush administration puts on whenever they look at their failed policy in Iraq,” he added.
What did we miss? Let us know in the comments section.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Kucinich Challenges Obama Assertion during S.C. Debate that Iran is Developing Nuclear Weapon Technology
Submitted by Press Secretary on Fri, 2007-04-27
Washington, DC - - Presidential candidate and US Congressman Dennis Kucinich Friday challenged Senator Barack Obama's assertion, made in an exchange with Kucinich in Thursday's Democratic Presidential Debate that Iran is in the process of developing nuclear weapons.
"In last night's debate, Senator Obama revealed that he has fallen into the same trap which wrongly took us into war against Iraq. In one breath he conjured Iran as a threat: ('But, have no doubt, Iran possessing nuclear weapons will be a major threat to us and to the region.')
"And in the next breath he asserted that according to experts, Iran is developing nuclear weapons. : ' . . . but they're in the process of developing it. And I don't think that's disputed by any expert.'
"Where is Senator Obama's proof for such a provocative statement?" Kucinich asked.
April 30th, 2007 at 9:15 amGo check out this link. lots of cool stuff happened on this day. Like Hitler's death, Haldeman and Ehrlichman resigned, Saigon fell...........
April 30th, 2007 at 9:21 amhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_30
and Gummitch was born!!!!
April 30th, 2007 at 9:24 amHappy birthday, gummitch.
and police were “much more likely to threaten or use force against blacks and Hispanics than against whites in any encounter, whether at a traffic stop or elsewhere,†a federal study shows.
So, Chinese should invade the US because blacks and hispanics are being repressed?
April 30th, 2007 at 9:27 amPay no attention to that man behind the curtain... I AM THE MIGHTY OZ!!!
April 30th, 2007 at 9:29 amA 2006 University of Maryland study on chat rooms found that female participants received 25 times as many sexually explicit and malicious messages as males.â€
mmmmm...Male sexual frustration has found another way to show itself.
April 30th, 2007 at 9:32 amA 2006 University of Maryland study on chat rooms found that female participants received 25 times as many sexually explicit and malicious messages as males.â€
See Males are getting less, which means that males are being descriminated abainst when it comes to sexually explicit chat room messages.
April 30th, 2007 at 9:32 amWell, actually nobody in the international community doubts that Iran has its eyes on nuclear weapons. Kucinich is noble but naive.
The difference of opinion in the international community is how to respond to this development. Iran is years away and so it is not an imminent threat --no matter how Condi defines the word. In truth, Iran has a right to build such weapons if it withdraws from the non-proliferation treaty. It also has the right to develop peaceful nuclear energy.
The problem is that the US can't threaten countries across the globe with invasion or destabilization and expect them to just take it. And the countries of the Middle East are aware that Israel has nukes and consider it hypocritical that the US says nothing. And all the countries of the Middle East are flouting UN resolutions --including Israel.
I think Obama is being realistic. The appropriate action is diplomacy. And Obama outlined the very responsible action of setting up a nuclear fuel center to make it unnecessary for any nation to develop enriched fuel for peaceful or military purposes. The next step is disarmament and the guarantee of secure borders and the resolution of outstanding border disputes between India and Pakistan, Iraq and Iran, and Israel and Lebanon/Syria/Palestine.
There is a wide gulf between warmongering and gullibility. Kucinich is right to be suspicious of this administrations motives. It has taken the suggestion Iran was developing nuclear weapons as reason to rattle its sabre. But this is typical neo-con hysteria. The threat is years away and diplomatic, political, and economic policy choices are more likely to change Iran's course than threatening them with aerial bombardment and arming guerrilla movements in the south. Indeed, crackdowns on Iranian human rights by the Islamic government are directly related to the level of external threats.
It's time for a little detente. It's time to jaw-jaw and less threatening war-war. Iranian society isn't quite as despotic as protrayed by this White House. And Ahmadinejad would not have been elected had Bush not made his "Axis of Evil" threat. The moderate president before that had made many reforms and expanded freedoms. War and the threat of War always puts a strain on freedoms and rights. That's why someone who knows how to bring opposing sides together --some like Obama-- is needed now.
April 30th, 2007 at 9:38 am25 times as many sexually explicit and malicious messages
The sort of person that would send 1 message of this type is likely to send many. It is a pathology of obsession and failure, much like the trolls here who relentlessly post the same pro-Bush pornography day after day.
April 30th, 2007 at 9:41 amWhy do people let the police search their cars?Is pulling someone over for a routine traffic stop grounds for a involuntary search? Don't the cops have to ASK you to search your car? You know the trick, pull you over, give you a warning, head back to the patrol car, breaking contact, and then coming back and just out of the officer's curiosity, hey mind if I search your car? How about no thanks and have a nice day. I mean they have every right if you have a weapon or a clip in plain sight or a ash tray full of roaches but other than that they can't do squat without your permission.
April 30th, 2007 at 9:42 amIt's noticeable on TP. Female trolls are more likely to be described is sexually explicit slurs than male trolls. I find this surprising and offputting and can only hope that such comments are being made by moles.
April 30th, 2007 at 9:42 amWomen online are increasingly harrassed in “sexually threatening terms — a trend that was first evident in chat rooms in the early 1990s and is now moving to the blogosphere. … A 2006 University of Maryland study on chat rooms found that female participants received 25 times as many sexually explicit and malicious messages as males.â€
Nice of you to emphasize this TP, considering that you have your own pet michael stalking Zooey. Turn that creep in to the authorities already! And anyone here that engages this scum is complicent in encouraging him. So please, please, don't....
April 30th, 2007 at 9:42 am"...pushing the death toll past 100 in the deadliest month so far this year.â€
I could care less about who is being descriminated against by whom or why.
April 30th, 2007 at 9:47 amIt appears America is more concerned about Oakland traffic jams as it grows desentized to the growing numbers of dead and dismembered soldiers and Iraqi children.
#8...Again, where is the proof?
That’s why someone who knows how to bring opposing sides together –some like Obama– is needed now.
For Obama to say that Iran is in the process of developing nuclear weapons without proof is a statement that will push us apart, not bring us together.
I do agree with the general sentiment of your post, however.
April 30th, 2007 at 9:49 amThe next step is disarmament and the guarantee of secure borders and the resolution of outstanding border disputes between India and Pakistan, Iraq and Iran, and Israel and Lebanon/Syria/Palestine.
Im sorry, david. I enjoy your posts but, exactly, who told the US that it can say whats good, bad, correct, incorrect, fair and not fair when it comes to OTHER countries? You see that you (or Obama)are engaging issues you dont get to engage, although you are trying to do it nicely and not like this bunch of murderers.
April 30th, 2007 at 9:50 amThere you go again leftcoast celebrating the death of American servicemen.
/sarcasm off
flyman I think the last half of the paragraph answers your question.
April 30th, 2007 at 9:53 amIm sorry, david. I enjoy your posts but, exactly, who told the US that it can say whats good, bad, correct, incorrect, fair and not fair when it comes to OTHER countries?
Juan, "World Citizens" Have claimed the planet as their home. So that gives them the right to get involved in anything anywhere. Because they are looking out for the best interest of everyone (Which only they really know what that is) it's OK to get involved in every other country.
April 30th, 2007 at 9:55 amTP certainly seems to have something against Dennis Kucinich. There was nothing about his filing of the cheney impeachment bill. I am of the opinion that it is debateable as to the danger to the US if Iran gets a nuclear weapon; they can't really deliver it here unless our marvelous leaders fall down on the job of being alert.
April 30th, 2007 at 9:58 amThere you go again leftcoast celebrating the death of American servicemen.
April 30th, 2007 at 9:58 am/sarcasm off
Comment by klyde — April 30, 2007 @ 9:53 am
Yeah, I know, I should be more sensitive to the narcissists among us.
/sarcasm off
Sen. John McCain Digs His Political Grave!
Monday 30th of April 2007
by Jay Randal
John McCain's service as Navy Pilot ended dramatically, when he was shot down by SAM missile battery, while on bombing mission flying over North Vietnam.
He was injured in the crash of his jet, and captured by NVA troops, then spent the rest of conflict as prisoner of war being used as bargaining chip by the NV government.
They knew that McCain was the son of a US Admiral, so he was valuable prisoner to them, and was released after Pres. Nixon negotiated an agreement to end war.
He became very bitter about the Vietnam War ending, without a clear-cut victory, but he survived because it was ended, otherwise he would have died as prisoner.
John McCain in later life used his service record as a springboard into politics, eventually elected as Senator for Arizona, and positioning himself as moderate too.
After George Bush Junior became President in 2000, McCain allied himself to Bush, backing his Iraq War, but his defense of the fiasco has buried his ambitions!
(Jay Randal, political activist and writer in Georgia, USA.)
April 30th, 2007 at 9:59 amit’s OK to get involved in every other country.
Comment by Tundra — April 30, 2007 @ 9:55 am
Ok, so I guess you wouldnt mind Orange Agent over your children, right?
April 30th, 2007 at 10:03 amBelief is not proof and intelligence is not evidence. There has not been one shred of evidence produced anywhere that Iran is trying to produce nuclear weapons. One of the junta's major talking points during the run up to the invasion of Iraq was that everyone agreed Iraq was working on nulear, biological and chemical weapons. Now just as then anyone who points out that this is the result of the massive echo chamber of western intelligence agencies bouncing the same information back and forth is ignored, drowned out and belittled.
April 30th, 2007 at 10:04 ambut other than that they can’t do squat without your permission.
No they can't search your car without permission, but what than can and will do, is by refusing to allow a search, the cops will claim that's a resonable reason to get a search warrent, you'll sit right there until some judge that signs all search warrant request ( because cops are always right) signs a search warrant. 3-4 hours later they will search the car. If you think telling a cop "no thanks you can't search my car" and he'll respond "okie dokie, have a nice day" you obviously haven't been pulled over in Georgia.
April 30th, 2007 at 10:06 amOk, so I guess you wouldnt mind Orange Agent over your children, right?
Comment by Juan C — April 30, 2007 @ 10:03 am
I never said I was a "World Citizen" I am much closer to the build a wall around the U.S. and let the other countries figure out their own problems. You would really need to direct that to someone who feels we have a right to demand anything from Iran.
April 30th, 2007 at 10:07 am#18....
April 30th, 2007 at 10:07 amAgain it's another Middle Eastern country with no physical capability of EVER attacking the US mainland, or even any of it's territories.
The percieved threat lies to the so called "American Interests" which G.Dubious so frequently mentions.
"American Interests" are in reality corporate interests, and generally involve exploiting the people and resources of developing countries.
every time i see George Bush I realise a vegetable is higher up the food chain than him
April 30th, 2007 at 10:13 amTP works for Hilary clinton
April 30th, 2007 at 10:15 amComment by Raven — April 30, 2007 @ 10:07 am
I agree.
April 30th, 2007 at 10:15 amIran is NO threat to the United States, and if Israel leaves them alone, then NO threat to them either, but Bush wants another war. Big problem is that Bush has screwed up 2 nations, Iraq and Afghanistan, so attacking a third Iran would be a horrific disaster. It could ignite global WWIII and most likely would become Bush's Waterloo too. We would all suffer for it.
April 30th, 2007 at 10:21 am“President Bush will not sign any war spending bill that penalizes Iraq’s government†for failing to meet the benchmarks that his own administration has set, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Sunday, “a fresh warning to Congress about challenging him.â€
This is the flip flopping that I wish would get greater play in the MSM.
April 30th, 2007 at 10:22 amas my son lives in the oakland/berkeley area, the melting highway story was of special interest to me... we travelled that span many times during our visit...
the pics are amazing... some here: http://cbs5.com/topstories/local_story_119083701.html
i found that link reading the story at mother jones... this last paragraph should be very interesting to many:
An interesting note, one engineer who studied the WTC explosions for the National Science Foundation said that the freeway collapse was quite similar. Apparently the fireball erupted precisely at the weak point of the skyway - the underside of the pier where all of the supporting steel girders are bare and unprotected by concrete or anything else, said Berkeley civil engineering professor Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl. The steel supports were baked at 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit (the fire reached 2,000 degrees), the point at which steel turns to rubber, causing the steel to buckle and the double-decker freeway to collapse completely.
http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2007/04/4318_fuel_tanker_mel.html
April 30th, 2007 at 10:23 amThe sort of person that would send 1 message of this type is likely to send many. It is a pathology of obsession and failure, much like the trolls here who relentlessly post the same pro-Bush pornography day after day.
Comment by VerbalKint — April 30, 2007 @ 9:41 am
PROJECTION! PROJECTION! HE'S PROJECTING!
April 30th, 2007 at 10:23 amWhy do people let the police search their cars?Is pulling someone over for a routine traffic stop grounds for a involuntary search?
Comment by the fly-man — April 30, 2007 @ 9:42 am
Spoken like a white man. Ask any black man in a big city, no matter how prominent, if they have been stopped and searched for no reason and I'll bet the percentage that says yes is shocking.
April 30th, 2007 at 10:27 amIt’s noticeable on TP. Female trolls are more likely to be described is sexually explicit slurs than male trolls. I find this surprising and offputting and can only hope that such comments are being made by moles.
Comment by david — April 30, 2007 @ 9:42 am
Sorry david, just the true nature of the "kinder, gentler" liberals shining through. Let's see, which party is the party of hate? Kinda hard to tell around here.
April 30th, 2007 at 10:29 amNice of you to emphasize this TP, considering that you have your own pet michael stalking Zooey. Turn that creep in to the authorities already! And anyone here that engages this scum is complicent in encouraging him. So please, please, don’t….
Comment by Bluedahlia — April 30, 2007 @ 9:42 am
Tell them Bluedahlia. His "stalking" of her is possitively creepy. She repeatedly tells him to leave her alone and he persists more aggressively. That in itself seems like abnormal behavior.
April 30th, 2007 at 10:30 amIt’s noticeable on TP. Female trolls are more likely to be described is sexually explicit slurs than male trolls.
Comment by david — April 30, 2007 @ 9:42 am
I agree with david on this. There's a certain poster (they know who they are) who often used the four-letter "c" word. As a woman, I cringe every time I hear that word, even when it's used against the worst female trolls.
I also mostly agree with david re: Obama. But Obama's flirtation with A I P A C concerns me.
From his March 2, 2007 speech to A I P A C:
"And we can, then, more effectively deal with one of the
greatest threats to the United States, Israel and world peace: Iran."
and
"Iran’s President Ahmadinejad’s regime is a threat to all of us."
Although I was glad to hear Obama talk about "aggressive" diplomacy as well, I think he's walking a very fine line in his pursuit of A I P A C's support.
April 30th, 2007 at 10:32 amPolice searching a car in of itself is not a big deal, but some cops have been known to plant drugs in a car and then claim they found it there. Some police in California were known to keep a bag of pot to frame people and carried a clean gun to plant if they shot somebody by mistake too. Some cops are corrupt, so beware of the risks of allowing them to search your car. If you abject to a search, then demand that a police captain oversees the search to inhibit planting of drugs.
April 30th, 2007 at 10:33 amI guess this is what happens when you dare utter the horrible truth that the Military Industrial Complex has control of our government during a televised nationwide debate...
Mike Gravel Censored OUT of Next CNN Democratic Debate!
Senator Gravel said, “CNN...has been important sources of news for their listeners and readers. Why they want to deprive their audiences of differing political voices that aspire to the highest level of public service by exercising a form of insidious censorship, unbecoming a free society and a state with the motto 'Live Free Or Die' is a mystery.â€
Mike Gravel, a resident of Virginia, is a former two-term Senator from Alaska with a distinguished record that includes successfully ending the military draft with a five-month filibuster, releasing the Pentagon Papers risking both prosecution and jail, playing the leading role in making the Alaska pipeline a reality, and ending nuclear testing in Alaska.
...from nhinsider dot com
April 30th, 2007 at 10:35 amAlthough I don't like some of the rougher language some posters use I applaud all evidence of feistiness. The gloves have come off and we're not gonna take it anymore!
April 30th, 2007 at 10:36 am[obama is] walking a very fine line in his pursuit of A I P A C’s support.
Comment by margaret — April 30, 2007 @ 10:32 am
i've gotten several calls from the obama camp for more money...
i tell them that's all he gets from me for now...
and i'm sure to express my concerns about his too close ties to AIPAC...
obama's performance at the debate was disappointing to me...
April 30th, 2007 at 10:42 ambut i'm not giving up yet... my dream ticket is still EDWARDS/OBAMA...
...
Comment by david — April 30, 2007 @ 9:38 am
Do you really believe everything you said??
April 30th, 2007 at 10:44 amComment by Larry from C — April 30, 2007 @ 10:35 am
that's bad news... i sure hope they change their minds and keep
April 30th, 2007 at 10:46 amGRAVEL in the debate... he was a good, much needed jolt of nerve!
...
Although I don’t like some of the rougher language some posters use I applaud all evidence of feistiness. The gloves have come off and we’re not gonna take it anymore!
Comment by margaret — April 30, 2007 @ 10:36 am
I have to agree. When trolls present lies as truth they need to be exposed and stopped.
April 30th, 2007 at 10:51 amBelief is not proof and intelligence is not evidence. There has not been one shred of evidence produced anywhere that Iran is trying to produce nuclear weapons.
Comment by klyde — April 30, 2007 @ 10:04 am
There is circumstantial evidence, while certainly not reason enough for military action, it is reason enough for suspicion and careful observation. Such things as Iran having hidden its enrichment activities for years, refusal to accept fuel for its reactors made by its friend Russia instead of creating its own, Iran's failure to implement the protocol that it signed to verify the absence of undeclared nuclear material all give reason for suspicion. The Iranians don't exactly have a reputation for being peaceniks, now do they?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4031603.stm
“World Citizens†Have claimed the planet as their home. So that gives them the right to get involved in anything anywhere."
This is a lefty goal, ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT. You must recognize this one, Juan.
April 30th, 2007 at 10:55 amSorry david, just the true nature of the “kinder, gentler†liberals shining through. Let’s see, which party is the party of hate? Kinda hard to tell around here.
Comment by upright left — April 30, 2007 @ 10:29 am
No it isn't. The party of hate is the one that comes to a progressive site, tells lies learned from Limbaugh, O'Reilly and Hannity, harrasses posters and calls them names. Then hides under cover by saying things like "projecting" while hatefully antagonizing posters.
April 30th, 2007 at 10:56 am#42 Katy...The most disappointing moment in the debate for Obama was when he didn't raise his hand when asked if he'd support Kucinich's impeachment articles against Dick Cheney.
If Obama won't defend the Constitution from Cheney's lies which sent us to war and killed 700,000+ and bankrupted our treasury when will Obama defend the Constitution?
Same goes for Hillary, John, Joe and Chris.
April 30th, 2007 at 10:57 amComment by Jay Randal — April 30, 2007 @ 10:33 am
In the news this morning, charges filed against police officers for shooting to death a 92 year old black woman during a botched drug raid and planting marijuana on her.
April 30th, 2007 at 10:59 am#44 - "This is a lefty goal, ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT. You must recognize this one, Juan."
Comment by upright left — April 30, 2007 @ 10:55 am
Just like the righty goal is to force all other governments to submit to the US as the only country in which anything they do is right and every other country in the world is wrong. In other words U.S. RULE OVER ALL OTHER COUNTRIES!
You must recognize this one, UL.
April 30th, 2007 at 10:59 amGood Morning Margret and Shane, I agree..We have come a long way and if we want to use a little ( or a lot ) vulgarety to emphasize our point's like the men have done all along it is our right and I for one am not shy in doing so..Stalking has to be stoped, such as the case of michael against Lady Z and we all must fight back with the truth against the troll's....
Another terrible month in bull shit bush's terrorest's attack's...Damn I hate this war and the people doing the killing....Blessings
April 30th, 2007 at 11:00 amhave to agree. When trolls present lies as truth they need to be exposed and stopped.
Comment by Shane — April 30, 2007 @ 10:51 am
rotflmao!!!! Of course you agree, you're one of the filthiest posters on TP!
April 30th, 2007 at 11:01 amIf Obama won’t defend the Constitution from Cheney’s lies which sent us to war and killed 700,000+ and bankrupted our treasury when will Obama defend the Constitution?
Same goes for Hillary, John, Joe and Chris.
Comment by Larry from C — April 30, 2007 @ 10:57 am
I agree. Although since Edwards is out of office maybe he's not in a position to act on impeachment.
April 30th, 2007 at 11:01 amJust like the righty goal is to force all other governments to submit to the US as the only country in which anything they do is right and every other country in the world is wrong. In other words U.S. RULE OVER ALL OTHER COUNTRIES!
You must recognize this one, UL.
Comment by Democrat Soldier — April 30, 2007 @ 10:59 am
Aw c'mon demo, the U.S. isn't the ONLY right country. There are at least 3 or 4 others.
April 30th, 2007 at 11:04 amrotflmao!!!! Of course you agree, you’re one of the filthiest posters on TP!
Comment by upright left — April 30, 2007 @ 11:01 am
Really, I guess if you'd use the same name we'd better be able to judge your behavior. But, I said I AGREE so I'm doing what I believe in.
Righties don't believe in anything unless they're told to. Why are you here? Who tells you to post here? See, that's civil.
April 30th, 2007 at 11:05 amOff to do errands and work in my garden. Bye all and take care.
April 30th, 2007 at 11:05 amGood morning Sharon. Look at "upright left" acting all righteous while calling names in every post.
That's why we need Zooey, she's the best at pinpointing a troll with an alias. Any guesses on who this, already tedious, troll is?
April 30th, 2007 at 11:08 amGood post's as alway's Larry from C, I agree, I was for Obama untill recently...Not any more because I see he is becoming another carbon copy of Hillery and the other's...Sad to say all but Kucenich and the old guy sound the same...Hope they keep Garvel in the race just to liven the group up if for no other reason..I do like him as well...
Where are you, what state.? just wondering...Blessings
April 30th, 2007 at 11:11 amAny guesses on who this, already tedious, troll is?
Comment by Shane
My guess is a newly-banned michael. The same condescending paternalism.
April 30th, 2007 at 11:11 am#52 - Not accoring to the righties in the world! Have you ever listened to the right-wngers?
They automatically hate anyone and everyone that is not American, and they think that more than half of Americans should be thrown out of the US for not agreeing with them wholeheartedly!
Seriously, UL, wake up to the danger that the ultra-rabid right-winger neo-cons are to the US and our Constitution.
April 30th, 2007 at 11:13 amRighties don’t believe in anything unless they’re told to. Why are you here? Who tells you to post here? See, that’s civil.
Comment by Shane — April 30, 2007 @ 11:05 am
Did you miss Klyde's post earlier about how belief is not proof? Someone tells me to post here? You people with your conspiracy ideas are whacked out! You know, they have medicine for that. You need to get out into the real world a little more. No one is following you really. And, unless you are consorting with terrorist groups, no one is listening to your conversations.
April 30th, 2007 at 11:13 amIf Obama won’t defend the Constitution from Cheney’s lies...
Comment by Larry from C — April 30, 2007 @ 10:57 am
agreed... that was one of the problems for me...
i can't recall specifics, but too many of his answers were too circular...
i was hoping for straight to the point replies from him...
he was following a script... more noticable that some others...
and i was wondering if the candidates were given the questions...
out to mowe... later...
April 30th, 2007 at 11:15 amSeriously, UL, wake up to the danger that the ultra-rabid right-winger neo-cons are to the US and our Constitution.
Comment by Democrat Soldier — April 30, 2007 @ 11:13 am
That's maybe a million people out of 300 million. Probably about the same as the number of ultra-rabid left winger secular progressives.
April 30th, 2007 at 11:17 amMy guess it is a michael, but then all these troll's sound and act the same. canned talking point's full of lies and personal attack's..No matter they are all just a waste of band width and user's of oxygen, no substance and no life or they would be on their own site's for heir bull shit bush and rounding up new nazis for rallies...LOL...Blessings
April 30th, 2007 at 11:19 amand Gummitch was born!!!!
Comment by gummitch
HAPPY BIRTHDAY, GUMMITCH!!
April 30th, 2007 at 11:24 am#61 - "That’s maybe a million people out of 300 million. Probably about the same as the number of ultra-rabid left winger secular progressives." Comment by upright left — April 30, 2007 @ 11:17 am
Yeah, about the same number as the ultra-radical right-winger neo-con "force their lifestyle & religion on everyone else no matter what they want" conserva-nazi's.
Before you get your knickers in a knot about the term "conserva-nazi's", don't forget who coined the term "fema-nazi". A conserva-nazi of the largest order: Rish Limbaugh.
Also, I haven't called you a "conserva-nazi". I'm waiting to see if you begin spouting their pernicious and mendacious phrases all the time. The only calumny that you've repeated so far is: liberals all want one world government.
April 30th, 2007 at 11:25 ammmmmm…Male sexual frustration has found another way to show itself.
Comment by Juan C
I can't imagine that they would think they'd get anywhere with that kind of behavior. Seems more aggressive to me.
April 30th, 2007 at 11:26 am#56...Obama is my Senator.
April 30th, 2007 at 11:26 amGood morning Sharon. Look at “upright left†acting all righteous while calling names in every post.
That’s why we need Zooey, she’s the best at pinpointing a troll with an alias. Any guesses on who this, already tedious, troll is?
Comment by Shane — April 30, 2007 @ 11:08 am
Shane, you are master at deflecting attention whenever something hits a little close to home or you are losing an arguement. Righteous? Never, just enjoy pointing out lefty's hypocrisy and foolishness. But, I admit, I do take pleasure in the conspiracy nuts here. I didn't realize that had carried over so big from the 70's. Military industrial complex? Did that idea just come back with hip huggers, or has it been lingering all this time? You have a good day, now ya hear? (but don't turn your back...booo!)
April 30th, 2007 at 11:27 am#31 - katy
I know exactly where that is. Thank goodness it happened at almost 4 in the morning.
April 30th, 2007 at 11:31 amG'morning Sharon - good to see you here.
For too long progressives have had their civility used against them. Just because we care about others doesn't mean the bullies of the right wing can push us around!
These days, when we stand up for our values, we should expect to be attacked but it doesn't mean we have to let them beat us up with lies and verbal abuse.
April 30th, 2007 at 11:35 amMy, the troll is up early today. Back to sleep, troll! Save your energy for May Day.
April 30th, 2007 at 11:36 amupright left is not michael.
However, he has posted here before, but is too cowardly to use the same name for very long.
April 30th, 2007 at 11:37 amGood morning, all!
Thanks for the kind words. :)
April 30th, 2007 at 11:37 amAlso, I haven’t called you a “conserva-naziâ€. I’m waiting to see if you begin spouting their pernicious and mendacious phrases all the time. The only calumny that you’ve repeated so far is: liberals all want one world government.
Comment by Democrat Soldier — April 30, 2007 @ 11:25
Call me whatever you like, I can take it. Makes no difference to me what someone on a blog calls me. The only thing that matters is that we all acknowledge that libs and conservs are equally guilty. I don't have the time now, but I'll get back with you later on some references to liberal
April 30th, 2007 at 11:41 amthought on one world government if you are unaware of it. Maybe you don't agree with it, but it's there. Just like not all conservs are bigots. See how that works?
#44 upright left
This is a lefty goal, ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT. You must recognize this one, Juan.
#67 upright left
But, I admit, I do take pleasure in the conspiracy nuts here. I didn’t realize that had carried over so big from the 70’s. Military industrial complex? Did that idea just come back with hip huggers, or has it been lingering all this time? You have a good day, now ya hear? (but don’t turn your back…booo!)
upright left, have you ever met yourself? It looks to me like the upright left in #44 is one of those "conspiracy nuts" you're talking about in #67. I can arrange an introduction if you'd like.
April 30th, 2007 at 11:47 amAgain, I post my gentle reminder:
The trolls are paid to come here and be a speed bump or spider’s web. Their job is to tie you up in endless arguement and waste your time and energy. Don’t play their game. Use your precious skills, time and energy to write editorials for newspapers and call your representatives. Its easy to fall into troll quicksand. Be smarter and avoid the trap.
April 30th, 2007 at 11:48 amComment by katy — April 30, 2007 @ 10:46 am
Katy, even though you are a “set back†to the US Constitution by wanting the government to "regulate" my 2nd & 4th Amendments away; even though you don't understand how energy works and believe that alternatives exist without drastically and abruptly throwing the US into an economic tail-spin and a possible population die-off...
I agree 100% and possibly a bit more agree that Mike Gravel is the only possible candidate. I 99.9% doubt that the Democratic Party is any less corrupt than the Republican Party though Gravel seems pretty honest. My money says that the Party will paint him as a loon and push Hillary, Obama & Edwards at us till the end.
It is true that we are all going to die no matter what we do. It is quite possible that humanity may snuff itself out for the reasons I already stated. We humans by going to the moon have reached our APEX and have no place left to go but down (I am not alone in that opinion). I mention this since no matter what happens I will attempt to survive. I doubt that turning in my firearms will be an asset and I doubt that Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama or John Edwards have the citizens and voters in their hearts and minds.
I like the idea that Mike Gravel honors the Constitution unlike Dennis Kucinich who wants to fracture the 2nd & 4th Amendments while at the same time holding up a pocket constitution during a debate. He expects me to turn in my handguns while he continues to own his own handguns. A while back in the news he mentioned that he "PACKS" since he needs to protect himself. My need to "PACK" according to he and the rest is nothing more than paranoia. I will be more secure provided I give the feds my guns!
Imagine your property and home and possessions being put under the scrutiny of the police when you have committed no crime. Imagine losing your rights one after another. Imagine being made a criminal tomorrow or even today for something that you were given or bought in the past that had always been legal. Once they take one possession protected under the 4th Amendment there is nothing preventing the government from taking EVERYTHING including YOUR LIFE!
Mike Gravel seems to be life and liberty loving and it is my belief that if he or someone like him were elected he/she would be able to set an appropriate example for all of us to live by. Honesty, wisdom, integrity and true moral fiber are true hallmarks that seem to be lacking in the majority of the candidates.
I remember the 2004 vice presidential debate and Edwards decided to use the mention of Cheney's daughter's sexual preference. To me this summed up Edwards' character in a blink of an eye. He is the type to say anything to get what he wants even if it is in poor taste. I don't like Cheney but Edwards failed to rise above the dirt. To me he was a poor choice for the Vice President position so then he is an even worse choice for the Big Desk...
I could go on but the point is made!
April 30th, 2007 at 11:48 amGood Morning Lady Z and back at ya Margaret,..upright and sucking air is just another troll, as I said before they all read the same to me, same point's, same attempt's at derailing and same nazi skin head mentalety..Most are 20 something like M.A. and way to much sugar and kool aid in their diet's..All are such tiny little people then need to have a dictator and message hand out's...Haven't seen even one that add's any truth or individule thought's and none are true conservatives they are all deluded neo-con's...No matter their number's are falling and soon we will have our country back, totaly...Blessings
April 30th, 2007 at 11:48 amFor too long progressives have had their civility used against them. Just because we care about others doesn’t mean the bullies of the right wing can push us around!
Comment by margaret — April 30, 2007 @ 11:35 am
Anyone else spit their coffee choking on that???? Margaret, you sound like you believe this. You must have been fortunate enough only to run into the good, kind lefties. Oh yes I know they exist because I know several myself. They just never seem to make it to positions of leadership in the various special interests that have taken over the Democratic party and they are in desperately short supply on liberal blogs. Have a nice day.
April 30th, 2007 at 11:50 amOooh, 15 Love your serve
April 30th, 2007 at 11:51 am#73 - I agree with you. There are extremists in both parties. I think you have a misperception about which side has more extremists.
There are lefties that want one world government just as there are righties that want the US to be a white nation that controls all other countires in the world. I believe that the number of extremist righties outnumbers the leftie extremists. Also, the rightie extremists are much more vocal about their ideology. Again, that's been my personal experience.
I also agree that not all conservatives are bigots. Just as not all liberals are embracing of those with differences of opinion. I still believe that the conservatives are much less likely to consider differences of opinions than are liberals. I have reached this opinion by comparing the people that are screened from righty talk-shows, and the people that are screened from leftie talk-shows.
If you don't agree with Limbaugh, Malkin, Coulter, Savage or Beck you have a much lower chance of being allowed to talk than if you don't agree with Madow, Schultz, Seder, Rhodes, or The Turks.
April 30th, 2007 at 11:52 am#73 upright left
The only thing that matters is that we all acknowledge that libs and conservs are equally guilty.
Oh goody, another phony 'independent'. That's how much trouble the GOP is in now. They have a lot of their trolls claiming to be independents or former Democrats to try to give them credibility. I guess "Republican" is the new "liberal".
April 30th, 2007 at 11:54 am#44 circumstantial evidence. Where? And where in my post did I claim the Iranians are or ever were peaceniks? And why would they have to be? The Iranians persue their interest financial and military just like every other normal country.
The Money Q&A from the link:
Is Iran under inspection by the IAEA?
The IAEA has access to Iranian nuclear facilities under a safeguards agreement, and in February 2007 verified that Iran had not diverted to illegal use any material it had declared. However, Iran has not implemented a more intrusive Additional Protocol it signed in 2003, so the IAEA says it cannot verify the absence of undeclared nuclear material.
They can't find any undeclared nuclear material so Iran must have undeclared nuclear material The last part is dick big time cheney logic. "We can't find the WMD and that proves Saddam is hiding his WMD."
April 30th, 2007 at 11:58 amComment by chimp leach — April 30, 2007 @ 11:47 am
Main Entry: con·spir·a·cy
1 : the act of conspiring together
2 a : an agreement among conspirators b : a group of conspirators
synonym see PLOT MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX
Main Entry: goal
2 : the end toward which effort is directed : AIM
INTENTION ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT
Liberals have advocated one world govt. Like I told Dem Sold earlier, I can get back to ya later with references if ya need em. Y'all have a great day, now ya hear
April 30th, 2007 at 12:00 pmSaywho, do you have any link's on Kucenich that show he is against any part of the constitution.?. I'm serious, would like to read them...Thank's in advance.....Blessings
April 30th, 2007 at 12:00 pmAnd, unless you are consorting with terrorist groups, no one is listening to your conversations.
Comment by upright left — April 30, 2007 @ 11:13 am
Yeah, and nobody is tracking your posts here so don't worry, just keep spewing.
April 30th, 2007 at 12:10 pmMilitary industrial complex? Did that idea just come back with hip huggers, or has it been lingering all this time? You have a good day, now ya hear? (but don’t turn your back…booo!)
Comment by upright left — April 30, 2007 @ 11:27 am
So you think a "military industrial complex" doesn't exist?
Well I guess you think I'm afraid of you so you obviously don't think too clearly.
I was just wondering why you come to a site that doesn't agree with your political leanings instead of going some place where people agree with you. Would you like to answer or just keep dodging the issue.
April 30th, 2007 at 12:16 pm#73 upright left
The only thing that matters is that we all acknowledge that libs and conservs are equally guilty.
Oh goody, another phony ‘independent’. That’s how much trouble the GOP is in now. They have a lot of their trolls claiming to be independents or former Democrats to try to give them credibility. I guess “Republican†is the new “liberalâ€.
Comment by chimpeach — April 30, 2007 @ 11:54 am
Dang it chimpy, I really need to need get to work. You are so hard to ignore. Ya know all those "average folks" who elected the Republicans the last few years? Where do ya think they came from? Immigration? No, no, no my liberal friend. They did, and in many cases, still, consider themselves Democrats and/or Independents. The Democratic party shifted so far left that they had to leave and vote for candidates that they didn't want to support, but were the lesser of two evils. And if you've been active in party politics, you contributed to the problem. Get out away from your ultra liberal friends and talk to real folks with real lives. And please, please, please don't flatter yourself by saying anyone wants to become "liberal like you" Just because you can't conceive of a true Independent, don't deny they exist. You can't see gravity, but you don't have to drop a brick on your foot to prove it, now do you? Chimpy, there really are people who don't agree with every position of one major party or the other. I seem to recollect seeing folks around here post that conservs think everything is black and white? How do ya feel about that chimpy?
April 30th, 2007 at 12:18 pmupright left needs to stop stealing time from his employer and get busy -- at work. If he actually has a job, that is.
April 30th, 2007 at 12:24 pmWell shoot, just one more for Zoo. I'm not at work yet! Just now leaving! Not your regular 9-5, see? And if I don't have a job, I'm getting paid pretty well in spite of it. Maybe I'll try not showing and see if I still get paid. That'll show fer sher if it's job or not, ya think?
April 30th, 2007 at 12:29 pmupright left,
You're gonna be late. Hurry up and go, I need time to recover from your stinging wit.
**eyes rolling**
April 30th, 2007 at 12:40 pmupright left is valiant venus. It's the same patter, but with an accent.
April 30th, 2007 at 12:42 pm#87 - " The Democratic party shifted so far left that they had to leave and vote for candidates that they didn’t want to support, but were the lesser of two evils." Comment by upright left — April 30, 2007 @ 12:18 pm
I guess that means that in November of 2006, the majority of Republicans woke up to the fact that the neo-cons have hijacked their party, and moved so far to the right that rather than normally supporting the Republican party were so sickened by the culture of corruption that the Bush Administration fostered in the White House and Washington DC, they voted for Democrats to help put things back on an even keel.
Don't worry. I'm sure the Republicans will eventually clean their party of the extremists and neo-con cabal. It won't happen over night, nor will it happen by 2008 (I predict) so the Republicans will find themselves remaining the minotory party while the Democrats have to clean up the mess they've left behind over the past 6+ years.
April 30th, 2007 at 12:43 pmWell, things have moved on. So it's probably too late for me to answer. I won't comment on upright left/Valiant venus/valiantthehater/LibSlayer or whatever the nom du jour is.
I don't think, Juan C, that America has a right to meddle in other countries. And I do think it should pay compensation of Vietnam for the continuing tragedy of Agent Orange. I don't think America should subvert foreign governments, invade them, or bully them into doing what's good for America but bad for them. However, America does have the right to try to influence foreign government diplomatically and economically. And this should be done in the public interest and not the interest of the oil, drug, or arms lobby.
Whenever America sits down to talk with another country, it has to remember that there's something the other side wants. I'm always amazed to see American commentators being abusive of France or China or whoever because they think what's good for GM or Exxon is good for the world. It's not. And too often the American position is straight dogma curtesy of the WSJ.
I'm not worried about Obama and AIPAC. He words himself carefully. And, if you've read what Haaretz has to say about him or his words in Tikkun, you'll see he's much more nuanced than Bush and the Christian Right. (It helps not to believe the creation of a Greater Israel will trigger the Return of Jesus Christ.)
I think you'll find this summer will be very violent in the Middle East. It's the 40th anniversary of the Six Day War. And anniversaries do matter. Frankly, I'm not sure what the best way forward is, but we've had 40 years of stalling. Israel should just annex the occupied territory and become a secular state with a Palestinian majority or return to the 1966 borders and a two state solution. Time is running out. The IDF fiasco in Lebanon last summer --the report came out today-- shows that there is no military solution to what is a political problem.
And again, this is why I have hope in an Obama presidency. He can bring the most hostile people together and find common ground. As Rabin said, you don't talk peace with your friend, you talk peace with your enemy.
April 30th, 2007 at 1:09 pmDavid, I agree with much of what you write but not about Obama..In his first speech, way back at the Dem. party he was my great hope for our country...Now I watch every one of the candidate's and their voting record's along with their speeches and sadly Obama has fallen behind Hillery . Edward's and Dodd for me..They are all carbon copies of Rep. Lite...I would vote for Edward's before Obama and indeed if he or Hillery get the nod I will do a party write in for Kucenich or Gravel..No more the lesser of two evils for me...Blessings
April 30th, 2007 at 1:49 pm#83 upright left
Liberals have advocated one world govt. Like I told Dem Sold earlier, I can get back to ya later with references if ya need em. Y’all have a great day, now ya hear
Really? Which ones? How many? What percentage of liberals? If you're not making a statement about liberals in general, what is your point? I took at as a general statement about liberals wanting one world government. If you're only talking about an isolated few of them, again, what's your point? I can say that conservatives have advocated blowing up federal buildings, blowing up newspaper publishers, poisoning supreme court justices, assassinating heads of state, and on and on. If I'm only talking about a few of them who have actually said such things, that would seem to be a dishonest way of saying it. To me, anyway.
You weren't trying to be dishonest, were you?
April 30th, 2007 at 2:20 pm#83 uptight eft
By the way, I'm glad to see you using a dictionary. Keep it handy.
April 30th, 2007 at 2:22 pmSaywho, do you have any link’s on Kucenich that show he is against any part of the constitution.?. I’m serious, would like to read them…Thank’s in advance…..Blessings
Comment by Sharon — April 30, 2007 @ 12:00 pm
Kucinich is currently drafting legislation that would ban the purchase, sale, transfer, or possession of handguns by civilians. A gun buy-back provision will be included in the bill.
http://kucinich.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=62819
April 30th, 2007 at 2:22 pmthe report came out today– shows that there is no military solution to what is a political problem.
as with most, if not all, of the ME...
also, understood about obama's measured words...
i'll keep listening...
And again, this is why I have hope in an Obama presidency. He can bring the most hostile people together and find common ground. As Rabin said, you don’t talk peace with your friend, you talk peace with your enemy.
Comment by david — April 30, 2007 @ 1:09 pm
i'm hopeful also... i'm sure he will be president someday - if not this round, then the next... IF the dems can get back the presidency...
and the only way that will happen is OVERWHELMING VOTER TURNOUT...
remember that one?... more important than ever...
what do you think all those attorney purges were about? ... i'm convinced it all goes back to the repugs trying to steel this election...
with the judges on your side, how could you loose?...
OVERWHELMING DEMOCRATIC VOTER TURNOUT ... that's how...
you can do it your way next time, sharon...
April 30th, 2007 at 2:26 pm:-)
#87 vv
And please, please, please don’t flatter yourself by saying anyone wants to become “liberal like you†Just because you can’t conceive of a true Independent, don’t deny they exist.
We're awfully presumptuous today, aren't we. I don't doubt for a minute that independents exist. I saw how they shifted in the last couple of elections, especially last year's, away from the loony right. They've found a lot more to like about the Democrats than the Republicans. Most independents are against Bush's plan to keep troops in Iraq forever. Most of them have seen through Bush's bullshit for a long time. On top of that, more people identify themselves as Democrats now than a few years ago. And, certainly more of them identify as Democrats than Republicans now.
But, when you've got your lips pressed firmly against Bush's behind, it's tough for you to make a credible case that you're some kind of an independent. Kind of a stetch, don't you think?
April 30th, 2007 at 2:34 pmThank's Saywho, guess all I can say is Damn, another one hit the dust...Since I am a bleeding heart libral that believes in the constitution I won't go with any one anti gun or anti any thing in our constitution, especiely since I am an avid shooter and gun owner...What they need to do is take the gun's away from the gangs and bad guy's, which requires more police not more legislation and surrender of gun's from ordinary citizen's...Oh well.! back to square one on the pick's for pres..Your correct Katy, didn't we have this conversation before the 2006 election.? I think so..I won't let ya down....Blessings
April 30th, 2007 at 2:53 pmTo me this summed up Edwards’ character in a blink of an eye. He is the type to say anything to get what he wants even if it is in poor taste. I don’t like Cheney but Edwards failed to rise above the dirt. To me he was a poor choice for the Vice President position so then he is an even worse choice for the Big Desk…
I could go on but the point is made!
Comment by Saywho
She was the "gay spokesperson" for a major american brewer; her sexuality wasn't a secret. Your fake disdain for Edwards masks a truer disdain for gays. Otherwise, why be bothered about her being unmasked for something she openly touted? Methinks thou dost protest too much.
April 30th, 2007 at 4:27 pmShe was the “gay spokesperson†for a major american brewer; her sexuality wasn’t a secret. Your fake disdain for Edwards masks a truer disdain for gays. Otherwise, why be bothered about her being unmasked for something she openly touted? Methinks thou dost protest too much.
Comment by barfly — April 30, 2007 @ 4:27 pm
She is someone not running for office being mentioned by an opponent. Edwards did something we would expect Cheney to do by using low blows, dirt and gossip. It is true that the Bush position is insane, so there was no point in Edwards joining in with poor taste of his own. By the way barfly, I voted Democratic in 2004, I didn't like Edwards and since Kerry was related to Bush I assumed correctly that the whole thing was fixed.
Now to your comment:
I will have words with you and call you names like IDIOT, ANUS, STUPID and anything else you can imagine but it I were to bring up your wife's drinking habit and her being a slut during my campaign that is what Edwards did and I don't have to like gays to understand that there are things best not done when image is everything. Edwards participated with the same sort of mudslinging as Bush & Co. but they needed to appear more honorable than the Bush team...
April 30th, 2007 at 5:24 pmIt is not honorable to publicize one's spouses medical condition. It is no honorable to dengrate our troops in harms way! It is not honorable to say the war is lost while some are losing their lives! It is not honorable to conduct International policy while speaker of the house! It is not honorable to extort facts for political money under the guise of global warming! It is not honorable to denigrate this country's reputation because you believe in socialism! It is not honorable to cheat on your wife!
April 30th, 2007 at 5:46 pmbarfly - could it be that saywho is confused, even mistaken? (being nice)
i seem to recall that darth was rather appreciative of edward's comments about the gay daughter...
it was kerry who tried but didn't get away with it... much ado about nuttn'...
i could be mistaken myself...
April 30th, 2007 at 6:15 pmi could be mistaken myself…
Comment by katy — April 30, 2007 @ 6:15 pm
Yes as usual Katy you are mistaken and ignorant.
April 30th, 2007 at 7:24 pmi feel now it is within my rights to say that saywho is an ass...
it's just how i feel about that...
Campaign feud continues over Cheney's daughter
Mary Cheney finds herself in eye of political storm
WASHINGTON - Mary Cheney typically works quietly behind the scenes on her father’s vice presidential campaign, but she was dragged front-and-center after John Kerry noted that she is a lesbian during his debate with President Bush.
Her parents were furious at Kerry. But others who have publicly navigated the waters of politics and homosexuality say Vice President Dick Cheney and his wife may have overreacted to what Kerry called an attempt to compliment them on how they have dealt with having a lesbian daughter.
The Cheneys went on the attack immediately after the debate, where Kerry had suggested their daughter’s sexual identity was formed at birth.
[...]
“Lynne and I have a gay daughter, so it’s an issue our family is very familiar with,†Cheney said in Davenport, Iowa.
And the vice president stated no objection when Edwards, a North Carolina senator, brought up Mary Cheney during their debate last week. Edwards expressed “respect for the fact that they’re willing to talk about the fact that they have a gay daughter, the fact that they embrace her. It’s a wonderful thing.â€
Cheney thanked his opponent for the “kind words he said about my family and our daughter. I appreciate that very much.â€
So why was Cheney’s reaction so different this week?
It may be partly that Kerry is the presidential, not the vice presidential, candidate, so the stakes are higher [...]
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6254301/
April 30th, 2007 at 8:10 pm...
Comment by katy — April 30, 2007 @ 8:10 pm
Nice effort... This trumps all that..............
I decided that Edwards in my opinion is ta da A BUMB back in 2004 though I did vote for him... go figure! Got that sweets?
April 30th, 2007 at 8:33 pmI still believe that the conservatives are much less likely to consider differences of opinions than are liberals.
Comment by Democrat Soldier — April 30, 2007 @ 11:52
You may be right on this one. Righties are much more likely to believe that there is such a thing as right and wrong. Liberals "find there own truth."
"Yeah, and nobody is tracking your posts here so don’t worry, just keep spewing.
I was just wondering why you come to a site that doesn’t agree with your political leanings instead of going some place where people agree with you. Would you like to answer or just keep dodging the issue.
Comment by Shane — April 30, 2007 @ 12:10 pm
lol, no shane, no body is watching me. It's just you THEY are after. I come here for the DIVERSITY of opinion. C'mon shane, you should have guessed that one, Bud. Just like you seek diversity of opinion rather than listening to only one side of an issue.
#95. Really? Which ones? How many? What percentage of liberals? If you’re not making a statement about liberals in general, what is your point? I took at as a general statement about liberals wanting one world government.
By the way, I’m glad to see you using a dictionary. Keep it handy.
Comment by chimpeach — April 30, 2007 @ 2:22 pm
Chimpy, my statement was most definitely a generalization. Still true, though. Check out Robert Muller and his Idea Dreams for a Better World, Parliamentarians for Global Action which is supported by Kucinich, Tom Harkin and Barney Franks among others. Also, try Citizens for Global Solutions. The latter two aren't currently openly seeking one world government. If you read enough on their sites, you see that they acknowledge that there isn't currently enough political support for that. So they are currently pushing "globalization" instead.
You lost me on the dictionary comment. I can't say as I've had need of a dictionary for a couple months.
#92. " guess that means that in November of 2006, the majority of Republicans woke up to the fact that the neo-cons have hijacked their party, and moved so far to the right that rather than normally supporting the Republican party were so sickened by the culture of corruption that the Bush Administration fostered in the White House and Washington DC, they voted for Democrats to help put things back on an even keel.
Comment by Democrat Soldier — April 30, 2007 @ 12:43
Tsk, tsk, tsk, Demo, you aren't even trying, now. There wasn't a major defection of Republicans. Remeber all the Democrats that have been voting Republican in the last few elections because the Democratic Party moved so far left? They were so disillusioned with the war that they voted Dem this time.
May 1st, 2007 at 3:30 pm