The threat to Little Bear.
By on May 25th, 2007 at 9:42 am
The threat to Little Bear.
During yesterday’s press conference, President Bush warned individual reporters that terrorists were a danger to their kids. “They are a threat to your children, David,” he told NBC’s David Gregory. “It’s a danger to your children, Jim,” he said to New York Times reporter Jim Rutenberg. Dana Milbank notes:
This last warning was perplexing, because Rutenberg has no children, only a brown chow chow named Little Bear. It was unclear whether Bush was referring to a specific and credible threat to Little Bear or merely indicating there was increased “chatter in the system” about chow chows in general.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Health Care
Hoffman
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
O
U
T
O
F
T
O
U
C
H
MORON!
May 25th, 2007 at 9:47 amThe fear card again… played by a 5 y/o.
May 25th, 2007 at 9:47 amThe only people that need to be brought to justice is The Bush Cabal for causing 9/11. This crime against it’s own people is worthy of High Crimes and Misdemeanors.
Why was there a military stand down on that crystal clear September morning?
May 25th, 2007 at 9:48 amEnough of the fearmongering, already! Fear distorts capitalism so that money flows to the wealthiest instead of flowing to the most efficient producer. Fear and cronyism are the imperfections which change capitalism from being an engine for economic efficiency to one of consolidation of wealth. This is why they have such a prominent place in Republican politics.
May 25th, 2007 at 9:49 amIts unfortunate that Bush has to go back to the 2003 playbook and pull out all this “threat” garbage again. We had all sorts of “threats” before the 2006 election but on November 10 last year they seemed to go away. Now Bush is trying to gain favor with a disgruntled public and get Congress to vote his way so we are back to where there is a threat behind every tree. You would have thought by now that Bush would have learned that crying wolf every 8 seconds doesn’t work. But with him incapable of cognitive thought I guess I was hoping for more than he can produce.
Sieg heil, mein Fuhrer von Bush
May 25th, 2007 at 9:50 amtoo funny!
May 25th, 2007 at 9:51 amJesus tap-dancing Christ.
Who else here is sick of the constant fearmongering? Hands?
FDR once (famously) said, “the only thing we have to fear is fear itself”. I wonder if he could have foreseen an administration that ruthlessly used fear as a bludgeon to force its citizens into meek subservience.
The Chimpy administration is using fear to coerce the population. And that’s terrorism, pure and simple.
May 25th, 2007 at 9:53 amal Heart Worm is a real threat people!
May 25th, 2007 at 9:54 amthe wapo article was flabbergasting. the chimp wants us to be afraid of osama but when asked why haven’t we caught him chimp begins to downplay osama as a threat. HUH?
May 25th, 2007 at 9:56 amGo to Hell, Chimpy!
May 25th, 2007 at 9:57 amIt was meant as a threat to all our children — cuz Bush knows he’s incapable. If he could go door to door and tell each family their child is threatened by OBL, he would.
May 25th, 2007 at 9:58 ambushco must continue to justify their plans for Iraq until they can force Iraq to give the American oil giants exclusive rights to Iraq oil. It’s just about done, so expect to hear more about the increasing threat and our need to send more American soldiers to Iraq. . . . also expect to see an incident with Iran which will “require” bush to use military to defend the honor of the USA…..
May 25th, 2007 at 9:58 amI’m glad the left doesn’t use fear-mongering to play up the American people’s insecurities….unless of course you consider the end of the world talk with global warming.
May 25th, 2007 at 9:59 amDubya is not very presidential…more chicken little.
May 25th, 2007 at 10:00 amall the lights are blinking red
chows are the target
quick!
time to go on vacation
May 25th, 2007 at 10:01 amIn Bush’s “church”, there is a picture of OBL on the wall.
May 25th, 2007 at 10:02 amwell… you can’t fault the guy for not knowing which reporters have kids and which don’t.
On the other hand you could fault the guy for running our nation into the ground with trade deficits, civil rights violations, misleading us into one of the most expensive and backwards wars since Vietnam, souring international relations, dividing the nation, trashing the public school system through unnecessary testing and eventual government takeover and being, in general and specifically, a huge dick.
Don’t let his cowboy swagger fool you; he’s smart– Only in a “frat guy you wished you could kick in the balls but never really would due to the fact that if you did, the entire football team would break down your door, rape your girlfriend and clog your toilet with towels while simultaneously shitting on top of it” sort of way.
Thanks to the democrats, there’s another year plus of this crap.
Thanks you spineless bastards!!
May 25th, 2007 at 10:02 amCan someone explain to me why on the FBI’s website 9/11 is not mentioned with Osama Bin Laden’s name?
May 25th, 2007 at 10:02 amIt is a testament to the ridiculousness of Bush that even Dana Milbank manages to successfully mock him.
May 25th, 2007 at 10:03 amWay to go, Bush! Iraqis step up poppy cultivation. It works in Afghanistan, so why not in Iraq?
May 25th, 2007 at 10:03 am“Bush appeared to be in good spirits as he walked briskly across the lawn to the podium … His tone was jaunty … Bush allowed himself only a brief gloat over the Democrats’ surrender — he showed only a hint of a smile when he noted that “we removed the arbitrary timetables for withdrawal” —
Good for him….He earned it. He won a big victory yesterday.
May 25th, 2007 at 10:05 ammaybe the end of your world, timmy, not mine…
May 25th, 2007 at 10:07 amTALK ABOUT LOWERING THE BAR. SINCE THE CHIMP HASN’T CAUGHT OSB HE MUST BE DOING AT LEAST SOMETHING RIGHT SINCE OSB ISN’T LEADING ANY PARADES OR TRAPIESING AROUND. WILL OSB DECIDE TO LEAD A PARADE JUST TO MAKE THE CHIMP LOOK EVEN MORE INCOMPETENT? HOW EMBARRESSING THE PEOPLE THAT VOTED FOR THE CHIMP MUST FEEL NOW.
May 25th, 2007 at 10:07 amWhy am I reminded of the beginning scene in the original Night of the Living Dead?
“they’re coming to getcha, Barbara! They’re coming to getcha!!!”
May 25th, 2007 at 10:09 amMy favorite moment was when he was asked about his lack of credibility.
Not an exact quote, but his reply was something along the lines of, “Because I read the intelligence.”
Yeah, but you have to understand it AND you have to be able to tell the American public the truth, not the way YOU interpret the information.
May 25th, 2007 at 10:10 amhttp://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070522/ap_on_re_us/poll_muslim_americans;_ylt=ArQ4KPLfQzAxaovPXsls0S6s0NUE
1 in 4 U.S. Muslims believe that suicide bombing against civilians to defend their religion is acceptable.
May 25th, 2007 at 10:12 amCheck that Timmy; the world won’t end, just a large chunk of the human population.
The Earth will still be here, just not us.
May 25th, 2007 at 10:13 amDee-de DEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
May 25th, 2007 at 10:14 amDon’t worry, timmy, Lassie will save you.
May 25th, 2007 at 10:14 amCheck that Timmy; the world won’t end, just a large chunk of the human population.
The Earth will still be here, just not us.
Comment by a in pa
Thank you for correcting me on the fear mongering.
May 25th, 2007 at 10:15 amBush added, “And, and… the boogeyman will get ya! Run and hide! Watch out!”
May 25th, 2007 at 10:17 amHeaven help me for feeding trolls, but you’re right, Exley: Bush did win a big victory—a political one. Now, he gets to smirk on camera, while more Americans and Iraqis will die in his unnecessary and unlawful war. Where’s their victory, Exley? Where’s the victory for the families who will lose their sons, daughters, mothers, or fathers? They were led to believe that, in exchange for their service, this government would place them in harm’s way only as a final resort, and we have long since learned that not only was force the only option considered, but the reasons for it were either specious or fabricated. Have they triumphed, knowing that your president spent their sacrifice capriciously?
So what if a majority of Americans and Iraqis want this debacle to end? So what if the war continues only because of Bush’s childish intransigence and a sycophantic Republican Congressional minority? So what if the blood of civilian innocents continues to paint the streets of Baghdad? Bush got his political victory. Now he—and you, evidently—can sleep well tonight.
May 25th, 2007 at 10:21 amTimmy, More disturbing findings from the Pew survery:
“Only 5 percent of U.S. Muslims expressed favorable views of the terrorist group al-Qaida, though about a fourth did not express an opinion.”
ONE-FOURTH of those surveyed would not express their opinion about Al Qaeda???? Indicates they likely have a favorable opinion of Al Qaeda, but would not share that information….
Now THAT is disturbing…
May 25th, 2007 at 10:22 amTimmy.
Look at the context of the question and who responded.
Now tell me, if the exact same question was asked of radical Christian Americans you wouldn’t get a very similar response.
May 25th, 2007 at 10:23 am“Fear and Loafing in Crawford” by G.W. Bush
May 25th, 2007 at 10:24 am#26
May 25th, 2007 at 10:25 amHey timmy,
Does that mean we need to kill the 1/4 that thinks that way. If so, then we need to go after the bombing anti-choicers, and the crusading dicksters like Chucklenuts shrimpya.
I want him hung from the Whitehouse portico with Rove’s entrails.
No fear here timmy. Just unbridled love of country and hate for the traitors that currently administer it. And if you continue to side with them, you will be smeared with the same retibution that is coming their way.
Meanwhile, a spokesman said Welsh Corgis are barking mad about Bush’s slight.
May 25th, 2007 at 10:26 amTimmy, More disturbing findings from the Pew survery:
“Only 5 percent of U.S. Muslims expressed favorable views of the terrorist group al-Qaida, though about a fourth did not express an opinion.â€
ONE-FOURTH of those surveyed would not express their opinion about Al Qaeda???? Indicates they likely have a favorable opinion of Al Qaeda, but would not share that information….
Now THAT is disturbing…
Comment by Exley
Read this:
“That sentiment is strongest among those younger than 30. Two percent of them say it can often be justified, 13 percent say sometimes and 11 percent say rarely”
Now lets do the math 2+13+11=26
I never said anything about Al Qaeda.
May 25th, 2007 at 10:27 amTimmy.
Look at the context of the question and who responded.
Now tell me, if the exact same question was asked of radical Christian Americans you wouldn’t get a very similar response.
Comment by dogjudge
Can you provide a link for this? Or are you just making up figures?
May 25th, 2007 at 10:28 amBush’s warrant-less spying program must have uncovered some children that Jim Rutenberg doesn’t know about. Perhaps the terrorists are so frightening that Jim’s sperm is too afraid to make a baby. Seriously though, Bush is off his rocker.
May 25th, 2007 at 10:29 amAnd just in time for Summer Blockbuster season…Iraq II: This time it’s IRAN”.
May 25th, 2007 at 10:29 amWhy was there a military stand down on that crystal clear September morning?
Comment by Kay
And I keep asking, where are the tapes of the air traffic controllers when those planes were off course? And especially the one that flew into the Pentagon, why were no fighter jets scrambled? Our government doesn’t even feel the need to explain any of it to us.
May 25th, 2007 at 10:30 amHey timmy,
Does that mean we need to kill the 1/4 that thinks that way. If so, then we need to go after the bombing anti-choicers, and the crusading dicksters like Chucklenuts shrimpya.
I want him hung from the Whitehouse portico with Rove’s entrails.
No fear here timmy. Just unbridled love of country and hate for the traitors that currently administer it. And if you continue to side with them, you will be smeared with the same retibution that is coming their way.
Comment by Wretched Refuse
I never said to kill anybody. I am just pointing out that there is a real threat. There are an estimated 2,350,000 muslims in America. According to this survey 611,000 of them think that suicide bombing against civilians can be justified.
May 25th, 2007 at 10:31 amdogjudge brings up an excellent point!
If we were to survey only Christians, and ask:
Is it justifiable to bomb abortion clinics?
Yes
No
Uncertain/No comment
I wonder what the percentage of Uncertain/No comment’s would be?
May 25th, 2007 at 10:31 amIf Bush put on a puppet show with “Mr Evil” on one hand and “Mr Goodguy” on the other, the press would treat him with respect and consideration – as they did yesterday. There is literally no level of stupidity Bush can sink to that the press won’t treat him with that continuing undue respect and consideration. To say nothing of the overt derision the Democratic party should be heaping on him EVERY TIME he makes an utter fool of himself as he did yesterday (and most likely will do again today).
Clinton said he “didn’t inhale”, and for 8 years we heard that repeatedly. Yet, President Barney Fife makes a mockery out of not only the office of the the President, but a mockery out of being a MAN, and the press completely overlooks it and gives him their undying respect and consideration for his verbal pants-wetting and bed-shitting.
Does it mean that the press is as devoid of adult behaviour as the retarded blue-blooded mamas-boy occupying the White House? WHEN are they going to respond with a, “but seriously Mr President ..” while laughing at him for being so childish and so completely in over his head in a job he cannot even begin to grasp?
May 25th, 2007 at 10:32 amI don’t expect the f’ng president to know which reporter has children or not.
He was obviously speaking rhetorically.
Petty smart-a** non-news stories like this damage thinkprogress’s reputation as a credible source of real news – please stop doing stupid and pointless stories like this.
May 25th, 2007 at 10:34 amTimmy, More disturbing findings from the Pew survery:
“Only 5 percent of U.S. Muslims expressed favorable views of the terrorist group al-Qaida, though about a fourth did not express an opinion.â€
ONE-FOURTH of those surveyed would not express their opinion about Al Qaeda???? Indicates they likely have a favorable opinion of Al Qaeda, but would not share that information….
Now THAT is disturbing…
Comment by Exley
Just going off of the 5%, that would mean that 117,500 Muslim Americans have a favorable opinion of Al Qaeda, disturbing indeed.
May 25th, 2007 at 10:35 amOur government doesn’t even feel the need to explain any of it to us.
Comment by shane
I have to remind everybody that in 9/11, blah, blah, blah, Al-Qaeda, blah, blah, blah, bring them on, blah, blah, blah, will hear from us, blah, blah, blah. Is that clear?
May 25th, 2007 at 10:36 amPerhaps there was increased “chatter” inside the Deciderer’s head at the moment.
May 25th, 2007 at 10:36 amONE-FOURTH of those surveyed would not express their opinion about Al Qaeda???? Indicates they likely have a favorable opinion of Al Qaeda, but would not share that information….
Now THAT is disturbing…
Comment by Exley
Wow Exley, you are one GOOD LITTLE SOLDIER.
May 25th, 2007 at 10:40 amTimmy, this is the real threat.
May 25th, 2007 at 10:42 amPetty smart-a** non-news stories like this damage thinkprogress’s reputation as a credible source of real news – please stop doing stupid and pointless stories like this.
Comment by dave
This is not a news outlet it is a political blog. Perhaps you are at the wrong place.
May 25th, 2007 at 10:46 amTimmy, this is the real threat.
Comment by Juan C — May 25, 2007 @ 10:42 am
Juan, we have have a very large number of bases in South Korea. Why do you think that is? It is because North Korea is a threat and we were at war with them. Same situation here, Iraq is not stable and Iran is next door, which is a threat. It is over-simplifying to say it is because of oil.
May 25th, 2007 at 10:48 amI have to remind everybody that in 9/11, blah, blah, blah, Al-Qaeda, blah, blah, blah, bring them on, blah, blah, blah, will hear from us, blah, blah, blah. Is that clear?
Comment by Juan C
And that is all the explanation we the peasants of America need. How dare we question anything! Good job emulating the Commander in Cheats rhetoric though.
May 25th, 2007 at 10:50 amThis is not a news outlet it is a political blog. Perhaps you are at the wrong place.
Comment by shane
Exactly, political blogs were created to distort news, not report it.
May 25th, 2007 at 10:50 amfirst they came for the chow chows…
May 25th, 2007 at 10:51 amtimmy (or is it….timmmmeeeeee!!!!)
May 25th, 2007 at 10:53 amWhy have you not commented on my hypothetical Christian survey post?
Just going off of the 5%, that would mean that 117,500 Muslim Americans have a favorable opinion of Al Qaeda, disturbing indeed.
Comment by timmy
Al-Qaeda advocates nationalism/religion for support. In that sense, it is really no different than President Bush advocating patriotism for support bombing a helpless country.
Why Al-Qaeda leaders dont put themselves a bomb and detonate it? Why they send kids in order to do that? Why President Bush is not in Iraq fighting personally the evildoers (sic)? Because it is all BS. Islam fundamentalism is bullcrap just like US national fundamentalism.
Now, wont you ask how many jewish from the Likud party agrees with the civilian extermination in Palestine?
May 25th, 2007 at 10:55 amDoes he know how to talk WITHOUT using straw men?
May 25th, 2007 at 10:56 amWhy have you not commented on my hypothetical Christian survey post?
Comment by DRxJ
Because it is hypothetical. Show me a real survey and we will talk.
May 25th, 2007 at 10:59 amIt is because North Korea is a threat and we were at war with them. Same situation here, Iraq is not stable and Iran is next door, which is a threat. It is over-simplifying to say it is because of oil.
Comment by timmy
You mean North Korea was a threat before or after US invaded and separated that country? You mean Columbia was a threat, just after or before US separated from Panama (and take the Channel, of course)? you mean hutus and tutsis were a threat to each other before or after Europeans sold them weapons to exterminate each other? you mean Okinawa was a threat to Japan before or after US took it? you mean, Hawaii was a threat to Tahiti before or after the US put marines in there and abolished Hawaian national constitution?
Oh, too many threats, dont you think?
May 25th, 2007 at 11:00 amGood for him….He earned it. He won a big victory yesterday.
Comment by Exley
This is the definitive Exley. He said virtually the same thing the other day, and then backpedalled like mad when confronted. Yet here is the same sentiment, once again.
Exley, don’t bother to explain, you’re busted.
I’ve had it with you.
May 25th, 2007 at 11:01 amAl-Qaeda advocates nationalism/religion for support. In that sense, it is really no different than President Bush advocating patriotism for support bombing a helpless country.
Why Al-Qaeda leaders dont put themselves a bomb and detonate it? Why they send kids in order to do that? Why President Bush is not in Iraq fighting personally the evildoers (sic)? Because it is all BS. Islam fundamentalism is bullcrap just like US national fundamentalism.
Now, wont you ask how many jewish from the Likud party agrees with the civilian extermination in Palestine?
Comment by Juan C
Yes poor helpless Iraq. When Saddam was in power they never had WMDs or gassed their own people. They were always more than coopertaive with U.N. inspectors.
May 25th, 2007 at 11:01 amThat’s why he added the addendum to the threat to draft your children, ‘and your little dog too’.
May 25th, 2007 at 11:01 amBecause it is hypothetical. Show me a real survey and we will talk.
Comment by timmmmmehhh! — May 25, 2007 @ 10:59 am
that’s it? What are you afraid of regarding this particular discussion?
May 25th, 2007 at 11:02 amthat’s it? What are you afraid of regarding this particular discussion?
Comment by DRxJ
I do not think that 25% of Christians would support bombing of abortion clinics. If you can show a survey or a study that shows otherwise I will certainly discuss it, but it looks like you are simply deflecting the issue I presented. Why have you not commented on the survey I posted?
May 25th, 2007 at 11:04 amPetty smart-a** non-news stories like this damage thinkprogress’s reputation as a credible source of real news – please stop doing stupid and pointless stories like this.
Comment by dave — May 25, 2007 @ 10:34 am
I think it is newsworthy whenever Bush uses fear-mongering to manipulate the citizens.
I also believe that there are very dangerous repercussions with this administration’s tactic to use fear at every turn. There’s the possibility that if/when there is a REAL threat people won’t take it seriously after Peter’s been crying Wolf so long, for example.
May 25th, 2007 at 11:09 amEveryone knows that Chows are the honorable member of the Axis of Evil. And if we can stop Kim Jong Il from getting nukes, Chows will be North Korea’s replacement in the trinity.
CURSE YOU WICKED CHOWS!!!
May 25th, 2007 at 11:10 amWhen Saddam was in power they never had WMDs or gassed their own people. They were always more than coopertaive with U.N. inspectors.
Comment by timmy
Good that you know this. Who sold those weapons to Saddam in order to exterminate Kurds and Iranians? Oh…I guess you wont hold any responsibility in those acts, right? Nope. We are good, they are bad.
Now, about breaking UN resolutions… mmmmm… you know what follows, right?
May 25th, 2007 at 11:10 amExley, don’t bother to explain, you’re busted.
I’ve had it with you.
Comment by Zooey
He is provoking, Zoo. Sad.
May 25th, 2007 at 11:12 amI do not think that 25% of Christians would support bombing of abortion clinics.
May 25th, 2007 at 11:14 amComment by timmy — May 25, 2007 @ 11:04 am
Thank you for not hiding like most “debaters of the right” here do!
Now
I disagree. I think maybe 10% would support or agree, but I think another 15 to 20 percent would be non commentive. Again, this is all hypothetical, my point being, with any religion, there are extreme fundamentalists whording (yes, it is a made up word) their political views and agendas as the word of God. The majority, would not agree, and simply distance themselves from the madman.
Christianity is no different. We need more Muslims to speak out against the ills of Al-Quaeda. We also need more Christians to speak out against the ills of those who use Jesus to further their agenda.
It’s not “What do I think Jesus would do…”
It’s “What did Jesus say…”
Good that you know this. Who sold those weapons to Saddam in order to exterminate Kurds and Iranians? Oh…I guess you wont hold any responsibility in those acts, right? Nope. We are good, they are bad.
Now, about breaking UN resolutions… mmmmm… you know what follows, right?
Comment by Juan C
Can you give any proof that we sold WMDs to Iraq?
May 25th, 2007 at 11:17 amHe is provoking, Zoo. Sad.
Comment by Juan C
Doesn’t matter, Juan, I’m done. He’s a f*cking troll.
May 25th, 2007 at 11:18 amCan you give any proof that we sold WMDs to Iraq?
Comment by timmy
How about a handshake? ;)
May 25th, 2007 at 11:23 amCan you give any proof that we sold WMDs to Iraq?
Comment by timmy
Go read a book, timmy. Or start with a little reading about the Iran-Iraq war.
Or do a search on “Cheney Saddam”.
May 25th, 2007 at 11:24 amThank you for not hiding like most “debaters of the right†here do!
Now
I disagree. I think maybe 10% would support or agree, but I think another 15 to 20 percent would be non commentive. Again, this is all hypothetical, my point being, with any religion, there are extreme fundamentalists whording (yes, it is a made up word) their political views and agendas as the word of God. The majority, would not agree, and simply distance themselves from the madman.
Christianity is no different. We need more Muslims to speak out against the ills of Al-Quaeda. We also need more Christians to speak out against the ills of those who use Jesus to further their agenda.
It’s not “What do I think Jesus would do…â€
It’s “What did Jesus say…â€
Comment by DRxJ
I agree that there are radicals in every relgion. However as Christians bombing abortion clinics, I believe the percentage would be 2-4% max that would support it. I even think that might be high. I also agree that we need leaders of all religions that to speak out against radicals. I feel that the Muslim religion has a very different dynamic than present day Christians, in that Christianity has evolved a great deal more in the last 50 years than Islam. Just look at countries that have a majority of Muslims and the countries that have a majority of Christians and tell me which country is more tolerant of other faiths.
May 25th, 2007 at 11:25 amDoesn’t matter, Juan, I’m done. He’s a f*cking troll.
Comment by Zooey
His comment was disgraceful, I agree.
May 25th, 2007 at 11:25 amThis handshake, Juan? :-D
http://www.awolbush.com/rumsfeld_saddam.jpg
May 25th, 2007 at 11:25 amHow about a handshake? ;)
Comment by Juan C
I don’t understand.
May 25th, 2007 at 11:25 amHere you go Timmy – a link to help you in your research. I appreciate your apparent desire to understand how we got to where we are now.
“Reagan’s WMD Connection to Saddam Hussein” http://www.fff.org/comment/com0406g.asp
May 25th, 2007 at 11:32 amJust look at countries that have a majority of Muslims and the countries that have a majority of Christians and tell me which country is more tolerant of other faiths.
Comment by timmy
Timmy, serious question. Have you ever lived in some Muslim-majority country?
May 25th, 2007 at 11:38 amtell me which country is more tolerant of other faiths.
Comment by timmy — May 25, 2007 @ 11:25 am
believe or not, pre-invasion Iraq was very tolerant of other religions.
May 25th, 2007 at 11:38 amsadaam even had Christians as part of his administration.
#33 I suspect the American Muslim population is no different than other populations around the world… who now have a very negative view of the U.S. Is it because we went after terrorist? I don’t think so. In the days following 9/11 chimpy had an opportunity to unite EVERYONE behind him, until he went off on HIS Iraq tangent.
“Im gonna get the man who tried to kill my daddy”.
NOW THAT IS DISTURBING…
May 25th, 2007 at 11:42 amHere you go Timmy – a link to help you in your research. I appreciate your apparent desire to understand how we got to where we are now.
“Reagan’s WMD Connection to Saddam Hussein†http://www.fff.org/comment/com0406g.asp
Comment by margaret
Thanks for the link. I read quickly through the articles and will read deaper later (when I’m not at work;) when I can search on credibility of claims from other sources.
May 25th, 2007 at 11:49 amTimmy – you are most welcome. Please share the good bits with us!
May 25th, 2007 at 12:00 pmTimmy, serious question. Have you ever lived in some Muslim-majority country?
Comment by Juan C
No, but in places like Afganistan where converting from Islam is punishable by the death penalty, I think I will pass.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/03/28/christian.convert/index.html
May 25th, 2007 at 12:00 pmbelieve or not, pre-invasion Iraq was very tolerant of other religions.
sadaam even had Christians as part of his administration.
Comment by DRxJ
This is true.
May 25th, 2007 at 12:00 pmAnd by ‘good bits’ I don’t just mean good news (always welcome).
Good bits as in helpful nuggets of information. The posters at TP would rather live in a reality-based environment and can handle bad news.
May 25th, 2007 at 12:02 pmwell, many Muslims do not like dogs… some consider them as “dirty” as pigs… so, Bush may have been (inadvertantly) correct… that’s the only kind of correct he ever is…
May 25th, 2007 at 12:09 pmCan you give any proof that we sold WMDs to Iraq?
Comment by timmy — May 25, 2007 @ 11:17 am
You mean the mass graves of innocent Iraqis aren’t enough proof?
And just what do you think killed those civilians at Halabja, warm regards and sunny smiles?
Also, why weren’t any of the Neocons now blathering about what an evil dictator Saddam Hussein was complaining about his atrocious human rights record BEFORE Iraq invaded Kuwait?
The ONLY ones who have been consistent in condemning the Hussein Crime Regime were us libs and human rights groups during the decades the US backed Saddam Hussein
And the ultimate sick irony is how many innocent Iraqis who survived the “torture and rape rooms” during the Hussein regime have been killed thanks to W’s “liberation” efforts
W has the blood of every single dead, maimed and traumatized person on his head since the invasion occurred
May 25th, 2007 at 12:23 pmTimmy-
Global warming will melt your balls
-Cucker Tarlson
May 25th, 2007 at 12:25 pmGod, terrorists are after the puppies, too! I knew they were bad, but this is devilish!
May 25th, 2007 at 12:51 pm#79 I don’t understand.
Comment by timmy — May 25, 2007 @ 11:25 am
We know since your first post.
May 25th, 2007 at 1:02 pmThere is so much in these comments and so many of them how does anyone decide what to respond to?
You can certainly have your disagreements with Bush and hate him if you want, but what do you need to hear or read to even glimpse what this is all about? Why is it so mistaken?
I’m here reading so many intelligent wise-acre barbs, yet they’re not worth much more than ‘good one.’
For the most part this is very negative stuff that requires a very strong and willful grip of ones beliefs; that are not necessarily the “reality-based environment,” you all think it is.
If the news was that you were wrong, would you be able to handle it?
May 25th, 2007 at 1:02 pm“The ONLY ones who have been consistent in condemning the Hussein Crime Regime were us libs and human rights groups during the decades the US backed Saddam Hussein”
Condemnation is easy…doing something other than talking is not. Overall wrong too
May 25th, 2007 at 1:06 pmWe know since your first post.
Comment by Evil Spaniard
Timmeh’s lack of understanding is transparently wilfull.
May 25th, 2007 at 1:08 pmCondemnation is easy…doing something other than talking is not. Overall wrong too
Comment by Blandly Urbane
What’s your point?
Do you actually think commenting on this blog is all we do?
Get a clue.
May 25th, 2007 at 1:15 pmWe know since your first post.
Comment by Evil Spaniard
Timmeh’s lack of understanding is transparently wilfull.
Comment by Zooey — May 25, 2007 @ 1:08 pm
But playing dumb wilfully makes him dumber :D
May 25th, 2007 at 1:21 pm“What’s your point?
Do you actually think commenting on this blog is all we do?
Get a clue.”
Zooey
Don’t argue with something I didn’t say or even imply. That’s another thing you guys like to do.
My point since you don’t see it is “us Libs condemned,” yet really didn’t do much more than that….that was my point.
May 25th, 2007 at 1:21 pmCondemnation is easy…doing something other than talking is not. Overall wrong too
Comment by Blandly Urbane — May 25, 2007 @ 1:06 pm
So when people don’t have other resort than condemnation against brutal dictators because the factic powers are in bed with them, they are moonbats, peacenicks, and commie pinkos, and when they reach the power you say “why don’t you acted before, if you knew he was a viciuous murderer?”? You’re an hypocrite and an idiot.
May 25th, 2007 at 1:24 pmBut playing dumb wilfully makes him dumber :D
Comment by Evil Spaniard
That’s a given… :D
May 25th, 2007 at 1:27 pmDon’t argue with something I didn’t say or even imply. That’s another thing you guys like to do.
Um, you did write this: “Condemnation is easy…doing something other than talking is not.” Didn’t you? Seems pretty clear to me what you said.
My point since you don’t see it is “us Libs condemned,†yet really didn’t do much more than that….that was my point.
Comment by Blandly Urbane
No worries. I got it. So, what do you do — other than condemning the condemnation of liberals? And blogwhoring?
May 25th, 2007 at 1:30 pmSo when people don’t have other resort than condemnation against brutal dictators because the factic powers are in bed with them, they are moonbats, peacenicks, and commie pinkos, and when they reach the power you say “why don’t you acted before, if you knew he was a viciuous murderer?� You’re an hypocrite and an idiot.
Comment by Evil Spaniard
Ohhhh, I like yours better.
Um, good one. :D
May 25th, 2007 at 1:32 pmTimmy wants proof? I guess it’s hard to see when you walk around with your eyes closed all the time.
“And now the liberals want to stop President Reagan from selling chemical warfare agents and military equipment to Saddam Hussein, and why? Because Saddam ‘allegedly’ gassed a few Kurds in his own country.
“Mark my words. All of this talk of Saddam Hussein being a ‘war criminal’ or ‘committing crimes against humanity’ is the same old thing. LIBERAL HATE SPEECH! And speaking of poison gas . . . I SAY WE ROUND UP ALL THE DRUG ADDICTS AND GAS THEM.”
Rush Limbaugh, Nov. 3, 1988
May 25th, 2007 at 1:35 pm“So when people ……… You’re an hypocrite and an idiot.”
Evil Spaniard
Sorry, didn’t quite follow that so can’t respond
“Do you actually think commenting on this blog is all we do?
No worries. I got it. So, what do you do — other than condemning the condemnation of liberals? And blogwhoring?”
Zooey
I rarely comment because it’s pretty pointless, but I was bored. When you said “No worries, I got it.” Do you mean you understand that I didn’t mean you just comment all day?
May 25th, 2007 at 1:36 pmFear-mongering John Boehner’s pitiful whine yesterday:
“Ah’m just so a-scairt o’ them terra-ists. They’s a-coming to get us. Don’t ya see? Please don’t defund the war. I’ll do anything. Please Mr. Bush, take mah civil liberties, break the treasury, do whatever you want with the Constitution, kill as many of our troops and as many Iraqi civilians as you need to. Just don’t let the evil terra-ists get me!”
May 25th, 2007 at 1:39 pmWhen you said “No worries, I got it.†Do you mean you understand that I didn’t mean you just comment all day?
Comment by Blandly Urbane
Actually, I meant that I understood you were backing off your original comment.
But if you really didn’t mean to say we just comment all day, I’ll accept that.
May 25th, 2007 at 1:42 pmNew republican party line: “Vote for us or the puppy gets it!”
May 25th, 2007 at 1:45 pmOhhhh, I like yours better.
Um, good one. :D
Comment by Zooey — May 25, 2007 @ 1:32 pm
I liked yours, too (and Toom’s one, with the own words of one of the R’s himself).
Team Trollslapping is far more funny.
May 25th, 2007 at 1:46 pm#105 “So when people ……… You’re an hypocrite and an idiot.â€
Evil Spaniard
Sorry, didn’t quite follow that so can’t respond
Comment by Blandly Urbane — May 25, 2007 @ 1:36 pm
Zooey, I can conclude that he’s not playing dumb…
May 25th, 2007 at 1:48 pm“But if you really didn’t mean to say we just comment all day, I’ll accept that.”
Zooey
Saying you “comment all day,” would be getting off subject and I would like to try to not do that, although it is easy to do.
As far as “comdemning and doing nothing but talk” I stand by, if it’s necessary to point that out.
I still don’t follow evil spaniards remark: “So when people d……. an idiot.” What did that mean, it’s too broken for me to be sure what he meant.
May 25th, 2007 at 1:51 pmI liked yours, too (and Toom’s one, with the own words of one of the R’s himself).
Oy, Limbaugh’s words should always haunt him – -but they won’t.
Team Trollslapping is far more funny.
Comment by Evil Spaniard
You should have seen us whacking that michael troll a couple nights ago. Too much fun.
Zooey, I can conclude that he’s not playing dumb…
Comment by Evil Spaniard
True. I understood you perfectly. :)
May 25th, 2007 at 1:51 pm“Zooey, I can conclude that he’s not playing dumb…
Comment by Evil Spaniard
True. I understood you perfectly. :)”
So what is it?
May 25th, 2007 at 2:02 pmSo what is it?
Comment by Blandly Urbane — May 25, 2007 @ 2:02 pm
What do you mean saying “So what is it?”?
May 25th, 2007 at 2:08 pmI still don’t follow evil spaniards remark: “So when people d……. an idiot.†What did that mean, it’s too broken for me to be sure what he meant.
Comment by Blandly Urbane
Just read it. It’s not hard to understand.
May 25th, 2007 at 2:08 pm“So when people don’t have other resort than condemnation against brutal dictators because the factic powers are in bed with them, they are moonbats, peacenicks, and commie pinkos, and when they reach the power you say “why don’t you acted before, if you knew he was a viciuous murderer?â€? You’re an hypocrite and an idiot.”
“when people don’t have other resort”?????
Is “factic” fanatic?
‘”why don’t you acted before – Why didn’t you act before if you knew he was a nasty sob?
Thats my guess. Why would you want me to misunderstand what you are saying? I don’t really feel like going through continuous clarification.
It strikes me that English is not your first language, so I certainly am not giving you a hard time, but I do want to be clear on what you said so that I can hopefully respond clearly. I’ve got an idea, but I’m not going anywhere if it is based on my not reading it right.
May 25th, 2007 at 2:18 pmEvil Spaniard is in Spain, BU.
Sorry, but I’m not going to insult him by “translating” for you.
May 25th, 2007 at 2:24 pm#52:”This is not a news outlet it is a political blog. Perhaps you are at the wrong place.”
Comment by shane — May 25, 2007 @ 10:46 am
No, you should realize that this kind of sarcastic examination of a moment at a press conference belongs on the Daily Show, not here, where serious discussions of real issues should prevail. It makes the site look petty, unprofessional and immature.
Focus on the real issues, not whether or not the president knows the family make up of a fu**ing journalist.
May 25th, 2007 at 2:34 pmComment by Blandly Urbane — May 25, 2007 @ 2:18 pm
Well, in fact, no, English isn’t my fisrt language, but my fourth one.
Anyhow, I fail to understand what is so difficult to understand in the phrase “when people don’t have other resort thanâ€. Please explain me exaclty what clarification are you asking.
And instead the term “factic”, use factual if you prefer that term. Then you can understand (?) that “factual powers” are the powers like oligarchs, big corporations, dominating religion, the military, etc. The ones that have the real power, and not the people (of the USA) itself.
May 25th, 2007 at 2:37 pmI’m sorry but this is ridiculous.
This is a prime example of “condemning” and “talk” and we have gotten absolutely no where; we’re still talking about talking.
I would hope the Evil one would not be insulted, if he is, he is entirely too fragile and I doubt that is the case. He has a fine grasp of the language. I have no grasp of any other language and perhaps that is my loss.
I can certainly sleep soundly even if proven to be a “hypocrite and an idiot,” and am comfortable with “insults” pointed at me; like ‘not playing dumb’ implying that I’m not just playing at it, but am in fact dumb and any other crap you would like to pinch.
I wouldn’t preach about all the woes upon the planet being generated by Bush and Rightwing nutjobs like myself, when civil discourse cannot even begin here.
May 25th, 2007 at 2:39 pmHe’s clearly gone mad.
May 25th, 2007 at 2:44 pm#62,
Zooey,
You are quite inaccurate when you say I “backpedaled” after I noted that Bush had won a big victory when the Democrats dropped their demand for timetables. I never did any such thing. It was and is a big victory for Bush and, as the NYTimes wrote, a “wrenching defeat” for the Democrats.
Do you deny that? Are you claiming yesterday’s vote was a victory for Democrats? If so, you are pretty much alone on this site. I have seen pretty much unanimous condemnation of the Democrats on this site for their vote yesterday.
As for being “busted,” your words are again baffling. Have I ever said anything different than that I believed withdrawal timetables were a terrible idea? No, I have not. So, again, you are inaccurate.
May 25th, 2007 at 2:46 pmExley
Sorry to bring you into this inane back and forth that I am in, but “baffling,” and misunderstanding seem to be all a part of the arguments here.
“He’s clearly gone mad.
Comment by xenon”
If you are implying me, I haven’t gone mad….I never left…
May 25th, 2007 at 2:58 pm#120 I’m sorry but this is ridiculous.
This is a prime example of “condemning†and “talk†and we have gotten absolutely no where; we’re still talking about talking.
I would hope the Evil one would not be insulted, if he is, he is entirely too fragile and I doubt that is the case. He has a fine grasp of the language. I have no grasp of any other language and perhaps that is my loss.
I can certainly sleep soundly even if proven to be a “hypocrite and an idiot,†and am comfortable with “insults†pointed at me; like ‘not playing dumb’ implying that I’m not just playing at it, but am in fact dumb and any other crap you would like to pinch.
I wouldn’t preach about all the woes upon the planet being generated by Bush and Rightwing nutjobs like myself, when civil discourse cannot even begin here.
Comment by Blandly Urbane — May 25, 2007 @ 2:39 pm
First of all, you appear in this blog coming from nowhere, shooting your “witty” barbs left and right, and then, when you get an answer, you start speaking of canonic English language, and how the other posters use foul language with poor you.
Maybe you think that irony, sarcasm or cynicism is something alien to us, but, please, you’re not fooling anyone.
I stand up for my previous characterization of your alter ego in this blog: you’re an hypocrite and an idiot. Oh, and presumptuous.
May 25th, 2007 at 3:06 pmComment by Blandly Urbane — May 25, 2007 @ 2:39 pm
I stated that inelegantly, so I will do it over:
I would feel like I was insulting Evil Spaniard if I translated for him.
M’kay?
May 25th, 2007 at 3:11 pm#123 Blandly Urbane,
I sympathize. I have not been following your particular discussion so I don’t know what it is all about. But I have no doubt there has been a lot of word-twisting and disingenuousness and inaccuracy by your debate opponets. It happens alot. Not by everybody. There are some good, thoughtful posters here.
May 25th, 2007 at 3:19 pm““So when people don’t have other resort than condemnation against brutal dictators because the factic powers are in bed with them, they are moonbats, peacenicks, and commie pinkos, and when they reach the power you say “why don’t you acted before, if you knew he was a viciuous murderer?â€? You’re an hypocrite and an idiot.â€
So when people don’t have anything to resort to other than condemnation against brutal dictators because “factual powers†are in bed with them; they are called moonbats, peaceniks and commie pinkos. Once in power you say, ‘if you knew he was such a vicious murderer, why didn’t you act before?
Who are these “moonbats, peaceniks and commie pinkos?” Are you speaking of Democrats in the U.S.? Are you saying they were up against the MAN and could do nothing but condemn due to ‘”the powers like oligarchs, big corporations, dominating religion, the military, etc. The ones that have the real power, and not the people (of the USA) itself.”‘
As to appearing in this blog coming from nowhere; I’ve got to arrive somewhere. There are 90+ comments when I roll in that I have to start somewhere.
‘”irony, sarcasm or cynicism is something alien?”‘ One doesn’t have to be here long to realize these are not alien to anyone here; in fact it is the M.O. and the main reason our discussion has gotten no where.
‘”I stand up for my previous characterization of your alter ego in this blog: you’re an hypocrite and an idiot. Oh, and presumptuous.”‘
That’s fine, now let’s move on…
May 25th, 2007 at 3:27 pmBlandly Urbane,
“You can certainly have your disagreements with Bush and hate him if you want, but what do you need to hear or read to even glimpse what this is all about? Why is it so mistaken?”
I don’t understand your questions. Are you asking why we need/like to get to the bottom of things? And what is mistaken?
“For the most part this is very negative stuff that requires a very strong and willful grip of ones beliefs”
Yes the world is not a rosy, happy place right now. Although it’s a lot happier here than in Iraq for example. But a “willful grip of ones beliefs”? What do you mean by that?
And yes it would be nice if we could all participate in “civil discourse” but people like Rush L. and Bill O. and Fox “news” kinda threw a wrench in that so we’re in there scrapping it out like they do. Just because we’re, dare I say, liberals doesn’t mean we’re going to let ourselves get pushed around.
May 25th, 2007 at 3:28 pm“I stated that inelegantly, so I will do it over:
I would feel like I was insulting Evil Spaniard if I translated for him.
M’kay?”
Zooey
Nothing inelegant as far as I am or was concerned; it’s just rather slow going when I can’t get a straight answer to move on with instead of standing in one place waiting for the green light on what we are talking about.
M’kay
May 25th, 2007 at 3:31 pmComment by Blandly Urbane — May 25, 2007 @ 3:31 pm
What margaret said in #128.
I don’t know about you, but I’m done. See ya.
May 25th, 2007 at 3:34 pmI’ll check in later B.U. – got stuff that needs doing.
May 25th, 2007 at 3:42 pm#128
It appears that various issues don’t go away; like it was all a lie to get us into Iraq (for lack of a better example). Any of those arguments that get us all wrapped up in discussing five years ago or less instead of today.
“what is it so mistaken?” Why is Bush or the belief that what is taking place in Iraq is so mistaken? Setting aside tactical errors or anything like that. What if you are wrong?
I can understand being wrong, I’ve seen the glimpses of that and as lame and repeated as this is, we’re there now and the idea of boogeying on out is not a pleasant option. I would love to be wrong and if I am (which obviously I don’t believe I am), that still does not change the realities of what is going on in Iraq right this moment. What if you are wrong?
The world has never been a rosy place, even when we don’t realize it and think it is. My “willful grip” remark regards the absolutist belief that everything would be just great or rosier if it just were not for Bush and the rest (myself included in there I guess). Regardless of what one thinks we are past that point now.
I don’t have time to watch Fox or any other cable news program, but I don’t buy all that Rightwing claim. The majority that it appears people like yourself don’t like are the opinion programs on Fox, that isn’t news and isn’t meant to be. But your stance on the leanings of media and mine don’t mean diddly with regard to my question.
May 25th, 2007 at 4:06 pm#131 sorry for taking so long, I got caught up in other stuff in my world
May 25th, 2007 at 4:09 pmWhat’s amazing to me is that dispite an approximate 70% disapproval rating, there are still about 30% of people in this country that actually APPROVE of the job this moron is doing!
May 25th, 2007 at 7:52 pmWhat’s amazing to me is dispite a 70% disapproval rating there are still about 30% of people in this country who actually APPROVE of the job this moron is doing!
May 25th, 2007 at 7:58 pmsorry for the duplication….
May 25th, 2007 at 7:59 pm