ThinkFast: June 5, 2007
ThinkFast: June 5, 2007
“The government’s new system for trying Guantánamo detainees was thrown into turmoil Monday,” when military judges dismissed charges against two suspects after “finding that the Pentagon had not followed congressional mandates in bringing the cases.” The judges cited a technicality that effects all Guantanamo detainees, meaning all trials will likely “come to a halt.”
Military chiefs have drawn up plans to withdraw all British troops within a year. “The new timetable, which would see nearly all 5,500 British troops return home by next May,” suggests “withdrawing almost all troops, leaving only a small number of teams in the south to advise Iraqi military forces.”
“Afghan President Hamid Karzai gave Iran his full embrace Monday, saying it has been his country’s ‘very close friend,’ even as U.S. officials meeting with him here repeated their accusation that Iranian-made weapons were flowing to Taliban fighters.”
A military panel recommended yesterday that Iraq war veteran Marine Cpl. Adam Kokesh, “who wore his uniform during an anti-war protest, should lose his honorable discharge status, brushing away his claims that he was exercising his right to free speech.”
Freshman Rep. Steve Kagen (D-WI) issued a statement calling on newly indicted Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA) to “consider resigning for the good of Congress and for the good of the nation.”
Michigan’s third attempt in a decade to ban what right wing activists call “partial-birth abortion” was “declared unconstitutional by a federal appeals court on Monday, less than two months after the Supreme Court narrowly upheld a federal law banning the method.”
“Everybody is overworked” at U.S. military hospitals. The Army has 4,170 doctors, yet it needs at least 180 more. For the past two years, more than half of the Army’s 36 medical facilities “have failed to meet Pentagon standards for providing a doctor within seven days for routine medical care.”
“Hunger in America leads to $90 billion a year in societal costs, such as mental-health problems that may arise when people miss too many meals,” according to a new Sodexho Foundation study.
35 percent. President Bush’s approval rating in a new Washington Post/ABC News poll. Congress’ approval rating fell five points to 39 percent, with “[m]uch of that drop” due to frustration among “strong opponents of the war, independents and liberal Democrats.”
And finally: The CIA wants to appear more “approachable.” It has named Paul Barry as its entertainment liaison, “to showcase the cloak-and-dagger agency in a warmer light in movies, TV, fiction and even children’s books.” The CIA also hated the movie “The Good Shepherd” last year, calling it “a lamentable piece of fiction masquerading as a documentary.”
What did we miss? Let us know in the comments section.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
“Afghan President Hamid Karzai gave Iran his full embrace Monday,…”
There goes Unocal’s pipeline down the tubes…. at least Tehran will get the opium trade under control.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:09 amRep. William Jefferson (D-LA) should at least step down from the Homeland Security Committee. I hope that Michigan’s third attempt to ban partial-birth abortion was worded exactly the same as the federal ban.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:10 amRussia vs NATO: The Commies strike back.
Good. More people to fear.
Mr Putin issued his warning in an interview with foreign reporters ahead of the G8 meeting.
“If the American nuclear potential grows in European territory, we will have to have new targets in Europe,” Mr Putin said.
He said neither Iran nor North Korea had the weapons that the US was seeking to shoot down.
“We are being told the anti-missile defence system is targeted against something that does not exist. Doesn’t it seem funny to you?” he asked.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:10 am
Military chiefs have drawn up plans to withdraw all British troops within a year.
Can someone explain why the British can pull out, not worrying about sectarian violence & it’s aftermath, but the US can’t pull out due to the sectarian violence?
June 5th, 2007 at 9:12 amMilitary chiefs have drawn up plans to withdraw all British troops within a year.
A new opportunity for the junta to funnel more tax dollars to it’s private army Blackwater.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:12 amOn 8 March 1985, a car bomb exploded 9-45 metres from the house of Islamic cleric Sayyed Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah in Beirut, Lebanon, in a failed assassination attempt. The bombing, later discovered to be the work of CIA-trained Lebanese mercenaries, killed more than 80 people and injured 200.
It´s gonna take a lot of propaganda to change that… well, not really. People will buy anything if it makes its country look good.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:16 ammr. putin is not someone to poke. he’s cunning and deadly serious…bushco has marginalized putin…that was NOT smart. any man who can hold off a rioting crowd for HOURS while his staff shreds and burns documents merely by speaking is not to be underestimated.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:16 amwell that cold war thing worked so well for sooooo long the junta thinks it worth a try. what have THEY got to lose? if it doesn’t work who’s going to be around to tell anyone?
June 5th, 2007 at 9:19 amSeen this:
“Earnings of the average US worker with an undergraduate degree have not kept up with gains in productivity…”
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/6c995882-12de-11dc-a475-000b5df10621,dwp_uuid=5aedc804-2f7b-11da-8b51-00000e2511c8.html
June 5th, 2007 at 9:20 amAs for the Putin/Bush situation, is it any wonder why Bush has zippo credibility globally? Is it any wonder why no one can trust the United States? When most americans cannot trust their own government and president, why should foreigners do so? It’s a “no brainer” to me.
Bush has squandered all good will by his cowboy attitude combined with an illegal invasion of a sovereign country based on lies….well, hell…who could possibly trust him???
As they say “actions speak louder than words” and in this case, both the policy (words) and the actions (invading Iraq for no good reason) tell the tale on this president and this country, sorry to say.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:20 amWell, Hamid Karzai can read the writing on the wall. The fashionista president of Afghanistan can see that America has lost the war on terror and that he’d better cozy up to the new sheriff or he’ll have to find someone else finance his GQ lifestyle.
The United States of Amnesia can’t seem to remember the order of events or who is who or why they hate America or anything beyond what the WH and Fox has told them the night before.
The war is LOST. Time to pack up and go home. To remain will just confirm that this is Vietnam Redux; a long drawn out war of attrition with America as the BIG LOSER.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:22 amBritish troops can pull out because they are not the world’s superpower anymore.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:22 amAll the marketing agencies have to do is promote CIA ringtones for American juvenile (regardles of their ages!) cell-phones, get a movie produced and printed on McDonalds hamburger bags, and the CIA will be all warm and fuzzy.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:24 amlabs,
But didn’t the Chimp ‘N Chief say he has looked into Puti’s soul?
Given his superior powers of perception, how could BushBoy be wrong?
/sarcasm
We can’t let this bozo start another cold war by putting a missile defense system in Bucharest on the premise of Iranian / Syrian dangers.
Bush!…They don’t have nuclear weapons yet!
June 5th, 2007 at 9:24 amdavid:
Luckily, most Americans do not think the war is lost.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:24 amBush is letting his geopolitical fantasies about controlling the Middle East interfere with the fight against al Qaeda. Again.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:26 amBritish troops can pull out because they are not the world’s superpower anymore.
Comment by Jake
Let me fix that for you….”British troops can pull out because they are not the world’s stupidpower anymore.” They realize that Imperialism doesn’t work.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:26 amLet’s see, numerous domestic terrorist plots reported, a rise in murder, rape and theft and robbery rates, North Korea and Iran developing nuclear programs, China shooting down satellites and building up their military and a return of the Cold War.
Yep, Hillary Clinton says America is safer now.
Heckuva job Hillary, Bush and Rove need more water-carriers like you.
-GSD
June 5th, 2007 at 9:28 amA military panel recommended yesterday that Iraq war veteran Marine Cpl. Adam Kokesh, “who wore his uniform during an anti-war protest, should lose his honorable discharge status, brushing away his claims that he was exercising his right to free speech.â€
He shouldn’t have taken the IRR bonus, which states that he must “Remain an Enlisted member of the Marine Corps”
Enlisted members of the Marine Corps are denied the right to wear a military uniform to a protest.
It’s like quitting your job at McDonalds and signing a paper that says “I will remain an unpaid employee for $5000″ then going to an anti-junk food convention wearing your McDonalds uniform. They would want the money back and fire you.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:29 amFor the record, 50 years is not Imperialism.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:30 amdavid:
Luckily, most Americans do not think the war is lost.
Comment by Jake — June 5, 2007 @ 9:24 am
Shall I call the fire fighters to put out your pants, Joke?
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3046823&page=1
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/12/AR2006121200278.html
June 5th, 2007 at 9:31 am“For the record, 50 years is not Imperialism.”
Comment by Jake
Perhaps not, but it’s a hell of a good start!
June 5th, 2007 at 9:34 amAnd finally: The CIA wants to appear more “approachable.†It has named Paul Barry as its entertainment liaison
Dick Cheney remains in charge of outing agents (and their covert operation front companies) should they or their spouses disagree with official Administration policies.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:35 ami can believe he looked into putin’s soul zimzone…there’s no more light there than there is in the collective rove cabal soul.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:36 amComment by Tundra — June 5, 2007 @ 9:29 am
Having served in the military I would generally agree with you in how the law is read. However, since republicans have been using troops, both current and former,and in uniform, for their “rallys.” don’t you think it is a little hypocritical of them to be complaining about this particular guy?
June 5th, 2007 at 9:36 am21 – correct. all it takes is invading sovereign nations and installing puppet governments. There’s no need to wait 50 years to decide whether or not a country is imperialistic.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:38 amFor the record “Will the U.S. lose in Iraq?” (future tense) is a different question than “Have we lost the war?” (past tense). Before the Dems caved on the funding bill, even I would have answered “yes” to the first question.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:38 amP.S. Luckily, there is no law against being hypocritical.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:39 amLuckily, most Americans do not think the war is lost.
Comment by JaketheFake — June 5, 2007 @ 9:24 am
Jake, Jake, Jake, Jake. Don’t you have something better to do then pull stupid, made up facts out of your arse? (you know, like cutting and pasting someone else’s war record)
TerrytheTurtle just handed yours on a plate, and even if he hadn’t, all one had to do was read the above thread to ascertain that fact:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/04/AR2007060401230.html
Fake, son, you need help.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:40 amFor the record, 50 years is not Imperialism.
Comment by Jake
Jake, I have to say by now I’m used to you not making any sense, but just what to do base this statement on? It’s one thing to think you have a point, it’s another to just toss cryptic gibberish out there…
June 5th, 2007 at 9:40 am“For the record, 50 years is not Imperialism.â€
A fact you can easily look up in the Jaketionary.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:41 amCheck your no-see-um list – I’m on the list. You shouldn’t be responding to me – starving for attention today eh? Nurse hasn’t been round to empty your bed pan?
June 5th, 2007 at 9:41 amI just want to say “thank you” to those Dems for finally OWNING the war.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:42 amIllinois Representative Rahm Emanuel said it best:
“The Army won the war. George Bush lost the peace.”
June 5th, 2007 at 9:42 amThe CIA wants to appear more “approachable.â€
Ever wonder how ‘bring your child to work day’ works for funeral directors or prison workers? Some things are well-intentioned but still inappropriate… the problem isn’t what someone thinks about the personality of the CIA, it’s that the CIA can’t afford to have a personality at all.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:43 amIf anyone NOT on the “Ignore List” is still having a problem between the future and past tense, let me know.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:44 amComment by Tundra — June 5, 2007 @ 9:29 am
Having served in the military I would generally agree with you in how the law is read. However, since republicans have been using troops, both current and former,and in uniform, for their “rallys.†don’t you think it is a little hypocritical of them to be complaining about this particular guy?
Comment by jules — June 5, 2007 @ 9:36 am
Actually I think that using the military for political props IS against the law. Hypocrisy isn’t the issue.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:44 amFor the record, Shakey, drawing a distinction between “Will the U.S. lose in Iraq?†and “Have we lost the war?†is meaningless, and admitting the war is unwinnable only means that more U.S. soldiers and Iraqi civilians need to die before the folly of this war of imperialistic expansion is finally acknowledged by this administration.
But you go ahead and keep splitting hairs, if it makes you feel better.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:45 amFor the record, 50 years is not Imperialism.
Comment by Jake — June 5, 2007 @ 9:30 am
Where does it say that? I’m looking at the handbook right now, and it doesn’t say anything about timeframes for imperialism. It’s mostly about exploitation and supression. There are sections about about propaganda and stooges and thugs, too. The only thing it says about timeframes is a warning about getting out before the costs of supression exceed the profits of exploitation.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:45 amComment by jules — June 5, 2007 @ 9:36 am
Sure, I’d go with that. The Marine Corps are the ones that made the decission not the Republicans. Should they do the same thing to servicemembers who appear at Republican conventions etc in uniform? In my opinion yes.
Because it was an Anti War rally I’m not giving him a pass either though. He is welcome to attend them, he is welcome to stand up and say all he wants. He cannot wear the uniform while there.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:46 amFor the record, the ABC News/Washington Post poll of 1,141 adults including an oversample of African-Americans and Democrats — big surprise.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:48 amActually I think that using the military for political props IS against the law. Hypocrisy isn’t the issue.
Comment by TerrytheTurtle — June 5, 2007 @ 9:44 am
Yes it is. If you are going to punish this guy for exercising his first amendment rights then you need to punish them all. Including Bush who has worn a military uniform, a flight suit. for political purposes, a photo op.
The republicans cannot have it both ways. We cannot let them have it both ways!!!
June 5th, 2007 at 9:49 am“For the record, 50 years is not Imperialism.â€
Actually, we got our start in 1893, in Hawaii. Then the Spanish-American War. Numerous actions in Central and South America throughout the first half of the 20th century. Iran 1953, Chile 1972. On and on. Read “Overthrow: America’s Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq” by Stephen Kinzer. Excellent overview.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:50 amEvery now and then something is so well written (and explains things really well) — I thought I’d share it :
http://antiwar.com/justin/
June 5th, 2007 at 9:50 amJake, actually, most Americans DO think the war has been lost. And most importantly, the officers in the field think it’s been lost.
In business, one has to decide when to pull the plug on an adventure. There’s no point in pouring good money after bad. Indeed, it’s even more important with war because lives are lost. And military equipment is destroyed. And the morale of the nation is sent plummeting.
The chaos at the trials in Guantanamo is instructive. The military don’t seem to be in lockstep with the WH any more. These tribunals are kangaroo kourts. They are illegal. Military justice is to justice what military music is to music.
The Geneva Conventions are quite explicit about how POWs are to be treated. And how unlawful combatants are to be treated. Bush has blood on his hands. The prisoners at Gitmo have been abused no matter how they’ve been classified. It is inexcusable. The prisoners aren’t being treated as POWs and they’re not being treated as criminals. They are in limbo. And they are presumed guilty and have been tortured and denied basic human rights.
Make no mistake! Everyone knows –that is everyone outside the USA– that the USA has been spouting BS about Freedom and Democracy and Human Rights. The USA believes in NOTHING but power and glory and money.
And let me offer a few verses for the Religious Right. Proverbs 6:16 should be seen as an indictment of this White House and all that this administration has done in the name of God. It is a wicked White House and one needn’t ask Why do they hate us? but Why does the Lord hate us?
If that doesn’t describe Bush, Cheney, and Rove, I don’t know what does.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:51 amComment by Tundra — June 5, 2007 @ 9:46 am
The problem is the republicans are using them, and have been using them since before the 2004 elections, in this manner and nothing is being done about it.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:51 amFrom Websters…
Main Entry: im·pe·ri·al·ism
Pronunciation: im-’pir-E-&-”li-z&m
Function: noun
1 : imperial government, authority, or system
2 : the policy, practice, or advocacy of extending the power and dominion of a nation especially by direct territorial acquisitions or by gaining indirect control over the political or economic life of other areas; broadly : the extension or imposition of power, authority, or influence
Hmm, no mention of time lines there.
Jake, perhaps you could enlighten the unenlightened with your definition of imperialism.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:52 amjules – not be become the analytical overkiller… but odious as Chimpy’s Codpiece-Powered Strut on the USS Lincoln was, it was essentially non-partisan. However, Chimpy has used the military innumberable times for partisan point scoring with his ‘Vote for Me – Everyone Else is a Traitor’ Tour of 2004 and 2006
June 5th, 2007 at 9:53 amYes it is. If you are going to punish this guy for exercising his first amendment rights then you need to punish them all.
Sure
June 5th, 2007 at 9:53 amIncluding Bush who has worn a military uniform, a flight suit. for political purposes, a photo op.
Bush does not fall under the jurisdiction of any of the armed services who have those regulations though.
I could show up in a uniform and be fine, I am completely out (no IRR, no contract time left) I just wouldn’t.
For the record, anyone who plageurizes a true American hero’s Korean war record gets absolutely no sympathy from me!
For the record, why is the right so vocal regarding Jefferson, but remain silent with the upcoming sentencing of Libby (with the possiblity of a pardon)?
For the record, anyone with an Ignore List is just plain silly, and just proves that said person can’t debate.
For the record, “everyone is overworked” at military hospitals (ie understaffed) is positively unacceptable! Support Our Troops ring a bell to anyone???
For the record, the British get it! We, the majority of Americans, get it. Unfortunately, this administration and congress do not!
For the record, hunger in America does lead to mental illness. I know first hand, as I dispense meds to the mentally ill and homeless.
NO ONE SHOULD EVER GO HUNGRY IN OUR COUNTRY. PERIOD!
For the record, Jake is an idiot (please see my first For the record)
June 5th, 2007 at 9:54 amAll others (with the exception of michael), for the record, have a wonderful day!!!
Comment by jules — June 5, 2007 @ 9:51 am
Well then something needs to be done about that then. The answer is not “We let this guy go because he’s on our side and they do it too”
That sounds like the old “Clinton did it too” defense and we can’t use it. Perhaps letters need to be written, it has to be brought into the general publics scope. But allowing him to go unscathed is not helping because it just cheapens the argument even more.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:56 amJake, I think you’ll find hypocrisy in public office usually involves breaking a number of laws. Why do you think so many Bush officials refuse to speak to Congress under oath or without pleading the 5th or without immunity? It’s one thing to make vague promises one doesn’t keep, but to lie about how one runs the government, about why the country is going to war, or how the war is going, are all punishible under law.
June 5th, 2007 at 9:56 amDRxJ – so what did St Darryl say that had the whole board up in arms last week?
June 5th, 2007 at 9:57 amA fact you can easily look up in the Jaketionary.
Comment by joe
I believe that’s spelled, “Jerktionary”.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:01 amP.S. Luckily, there is no law against being hypocritical.
Comment by Jake
Nor is there one against being clueless.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:02 amdavid:
Perhaps you should review the poll data linked above by someone before claiming what “most” Americans think. If there’s some law you think was broken for the Commander-in-Chief to speak to troops in uniform, please share with the class. As for refusing to testify under oath to Congress, there’s this little matter of SEPARATION OF POWERS — maybe you can borrow Mark’s dictionary.
Mark:
If our stated goal is some limited timeframe, how can that be a POLICY of EXTENDING power?
June 5th, 2007 at 10:04 amhis uniform had no insignia. anyone can buy camoflage clothing in any town in the US. He was NOT “wearing a uniform” unless it had particular markings that distinguish it from what the general public can purchase.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:04 amSo anyone in the armed forces gives up their right of free expression after discharge?
That is ridiculous.
These soldiers are Americans of the first order, he had every right to go to the rally and protest the war as a CITIZEN.
TerrytheTurtle,
June 5th, 2007 at 10:05 amsomething to the effect that I must leave my wife because she was previously married.
In defense of little Daryll (wow, I never thought I’d type that), I had researched his “cult” when he first started posting, and knew that they wholeheartedly do not believe in divorce.
I had repeatedly confronted him about this subject, and he continuously ignored me, until last week.
That’s when his true hypocritical self was revealed.
It was quite humorous, to say the least.
I thoroughly enjoyed watching him make an arse out of hisself!
Anyone interested in the Libby sentencing, go to firedoglake.com
They are blogging live from the courtroom.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:09 amAnd Putin’s gonna believe the chymp because?
A…He’s been so trustworthy in the past
B…He’s a sucker without a clue
C…He looked into Bush’s eyes too, and saw the total lack of a soul
June 5th, 2007 at 10:09 amLet me fix that for you….â€British troops can pull out because they are not the world’s stupidpower anymore.†They realize that Imperialism doesn’t work.
Comment by dlet — June 5, 2007 @ 9:26 am
Iraq has been a possession of England for years. The reason that England collapsed into itself and let go of its global possessions was the USA. England held Iraq as a possession for around 45 years. In the current conflict England’s role is diminishing since it cannot afford the energy costs of the war. Since the USA has the area in a death grip and intends to squeeze even harder the lesser military powers will simply pull out.
The USA’s plan of action has been in the open for years and you can look at it here…
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/Petroleum/fields.htm
Oil Fields as Military Objectives: A Feasibility Study
June 5th, 2007 at 10:09 amWas done in 1975 for the 94th Congress and if you read it and look at the maps and charts it will be clear that this is in fact the operating plan and general plan of the military since 1975. Regardless of what you believe the military has and is making all of the decisions that matter for over 70 years.
I thoroughly enjoyed watching him make an arse out of hisself!
Comment by DRxJ
I’m glad you found it humorous, DRxJ, because I wanted to smash him like the bug he is.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:10 amAh, right. I caught the tail end where the subject of rape came up. According to his value system, there is no such thing as raping your wife…
June 5th, 2007 at 10:10 amFreshman Rep. Steve Kagen (D-WI) issued a statement calling on newly indicted Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA) to “consider resigning for the good of Congress and for the good of the nation.â€
I agree. Jefferson should resign immediately.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:11 amJake, so you don’t think 2/3 of Americans believe the war was not worth fighting?
And I’m sorry, Jake, Executive Privilege does not extend to everyone in the Administration. Congress does have oversight power and has traditionally interviewed civil servants in all departments. What you’re advocating is what is known as an Imperial Presidency.
The President has lied to the American people and to the Congress. For that he could be impeached. Even if Congress fails to impeach him, he could be charged with crimes after he leaves office. This man has corrupted government to the point where American Democracy has become a Farce.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:12 am“For the record, 50 years is not Imperialism.â€
A fact you can easily look up in the Jaketionary.
Comment by joe — June 5, 2007 @ 9:41 am
If you want to pull it out of Jake’s ass.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:13 amMichigan’s third attempt in a decade to ban what right wing activists call “partial-birth abortion†was “declared unconstitutional by a federal appeals court on Monday, less than two months after the Supreme Court narrowly upheld a federal law banning the method.â€
Heh. Maybe the rabid anti-abortion crowd won’t have so many perforated uteruses to celebrate afterall.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:14 amAnd I’m sorry, Jake, Executive Privilege does not extend to everyone in the Administration.
And if the Unitary Executive exists, then we should be able to have a Unitary Impeachment.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:16 amHunger in America leads to $90 billion a year in societal costs, such as mental-health problems that may arise when people miss too many meals,†according to a new Sodexho Foundation study.
Who’s going to be the first troll to say “if you don’t work, you don’t eat?”
June 5th, 2007 at 10:16 amZooey and TerrytheTurtle,
June 5th, 2007 at 10:16 amI knew I was opening a big can of worms with him, but alas, I couldn’t resist.
I had quite a few rebuttal points that would have laid a serious smackdown on him.
but I had more important things to do, like vacationing with my sinful wife and kids
Heh!
DrxJ, what is the cult’s name, I’d like to do a little research myself.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:17 amOn St D’s resume, his CIS degree from Oral Roberts requires like five actual IT classes and three electives.
What a joke.
http://cscmath.oru.edu/pls/portal30//dynmgr.ORU_Dynamic.get_plans?plan_id=127&planyear=2003
For the record, the ABC News/Washington Post poll of 1,141 adults including an oversample of African-Americans and Democrats — big surprise.
Comment by Jake
This is not what it said. Why do you feel you can just lie about anything here and won’t be called on it.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:19 amDRxJ,
What cult does Brother Daryll belong to? He posts some pretty strange stuff. I always thought he was one of the resident trolls in an alternate identity and not a real stand alone person.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:19 amJefferson can’t resign. He needs his congressional salary to pay for his legal fees.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:20 amFor the record it’s not a war.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:21 amdavid:
2/3 of Americans believe the war was not worth fighting because of the biased media. As for Congressional oversight, do they have the power to force a sitting President to testify before them? Would you at least agree that Bush has the power to pardon Libby?
June 5th, 2007 at 10:23 amI had more important things to do, like vacationing with my sinful wife and kids
Heh!
Comment by DRxJ
Cool. I hope you had a wonderful (and sinful) time. :)
June 5th, 2007 at 10:27 amFor the record, shane is on the “Ignore List” but I would be happy to discuss with anyone who is not the polling of only 25% Republicans. Quoting from the actual poll: “Just 12 percent of Democrats, 15 percent of blacks (the most loyal Democratic group) and 16 percent of liberals approve of Bush’s job performance.”
June 5th, 2007 at 10:27 am*
i heard adam kokesh on AirAmericaRadio last week…
quite the story…
Dear Friend of Iraq Veterans Against the War,
My name is Adam Kokesh, and I need your help.
[...]
http://www.ivaw.org/kokeshletter
…
June 5th, 2007 at 10:30 amI had quite a few rebuttal points that would have laid a serious smackdown on him.
but I had more important things to do, like vacationing with my sinful wife and kids
Heh!
Comment by DRxJ
Oh we would have loved to hear more smackdowns. Vacationing with your wife and kids. Is that the work of …. SATAN?
June 5th, 2007 at 10:32 amPlease ignore the Jake troll — unless you are on the Ignore List, then it is mandatory that you respond.
However, you must acknowledge that you are on said Ignore List, showing that you have fully knowledge of such membership, and give Jake every opportunity to show himself as Top Liar and Hypocrite Wanking Troll, by responding “for the record.”
Thank you.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:33 amnanlichi and RUCerious, here you go:
http://www.truthofgod.com/site/enter.asp
Zooey. Yes, we had a great time in St.Louis. Went to the zoo. Stayed at an Embassy Suites which was holding a Missouri Republican Convention that same weekend.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:34 amOh, the irony!
My wife said it’s a good thing I found out about that several hours after the hotel’s free cocktail reception, otherwise I may have “mooned” em all! (and of course, being a Rebulican group, both the females, and males would have enjoyed that one)
:-)
“I just want to say “thank you†to those Dems for finally OWNING the war.
Comment by Jake — June 5, 2007 @ 9:42 am”
OK, let me get this straight. Democrats have been voting for these supplementals since 2003, and for three years, Jake insisted that doing so didn’t give them any “owership” of the war. It was a still a Republican War.
But when Jakey finally realizes that America hates this war, the passage of yet another such supplemental means that the Democrats “own” the war – despite the fact that they first passed a bill mandating its end, which virtually all Democrats supported, and which only failed to become law because Bush vetoed it.
No, Jakey, it’s still the Republicans’ war. It’s still just you people, dragging an unwilling country along in your path.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:34 am#54 Jake we are extending our power over Iraq right now, Afghanistan, right now. Would you deny that we are essentially in control of both countries and that their governments would not exist without our military presence? How is that not imperialism? Limited time frame or not, it is extending our power over a nation…period. and claiming that it will only be 50 years is essentially saying that at least two generations worth of time will be spent there, how is that not permanent? How does a 50 year time frame come into account now? Is the president tacitly admitting that things are so screwed up it will take two generations to fix his mess? Is he admitting that the intention all along was to stay there permanently? Is he admitting that regardless of what the Iraqi government says we are there for the long long long haul? (remember he has said multiple times, if they ask us to leave we will leave…proposing that we stay in a Korea like state for 50 years or more pretty much says that regardless of what the Iraqi’s say we are going to stay.). What if peace breaks out tomorrow? Do we still stay? Why?
Is it a coincidence that Jake and cumtroller are the ones with ignore lists? Weirdos
June 5th, 2007 at 10:35 amWe should play by Republican rules on the matter of Rep. Jefferson. We should immediately award him the Medal of Freedom or give him an ambassadorship.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:35 amJefferson can’t resign. He needs his congressional salary to pay for his legal fees. — Comment by CompTROLLER V-1
You forgot about the freezer he has in his basement.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:36 amJake, you’re a fartleberry on the buttcrack of humanity. Please make sure I’m on your list – for the record.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:37 amSo anyone in the armed forces gives up their right of free expression after discharge?
DA form 4977-R
Then tell him not to sign it next time.
That is ridiculous.
These soldiers are Americans of the first order, he had every right to go to the rally and protest the war as a CITIZEN.
Comment by justice — June 5, 2007 @ 10:04 am
Which he does have, he just can’t represent the Marine Corps, which he was doing.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:37 amYou are excusing him from breaking regulations he agreed to. Somehow he signs a contract, agrees to terms of said contract. Breaks said contract, entity you made contract with enforces said contract. You get mad at them for enforcing it and excuse him.
david:
2/3 of Americans believe the war was not worth fighting because of the biased media. As for Congressional oversight, do they have the power to force a sitting President to testify before them? Would you at least agree that Bush has the power to pardon Libby?
Comment by Jake
Ignore list this, jerkface. 1/3 of Americans believe the war is worth fighting because they WATCH FOX NEWS. You idiot. And you think the rest of the media has a liberal bias. Because they don’t spew the lies Fox does. You are truly pathetic if you don’t see that reality. You’ve been given every opportunity to get slightly enlightened by all the people here who engage you.
And you pulled a total lie out about the ABC Poll and when you got caught I’m back on the ignore list. How convenient you lying coward.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:38 amMy wife said it’s a good thing I found out about that several hours after the hotel’s free cocktail reception, otherwise I may have “mooned†em all! (and of course, being a Rebulican group, both the females, and males would have enjoyed that one)
:-)
Comment by DRxJ
The stuff of legends……heh.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:38 amIs it a coincidence that Jake and cumtroller are the ones with ignore lists? Weirdos
Comment by Mark — June 5, 2007 @ 10:35 am
An idea patented by Chimpy and his Organ Grinder during 2004 elections – no brownshirt, no admittance to the rally.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:38 amDON’T FEED THE JAKE.
(Put me on your little list bitch.)
Now,
If a Soldier is given an honorable discharge and then commits a murder or rapes someone, do they take away his honorable discharge?
Just checking to see if FREE SPEECH is seen by this administration as being worse then murder or rape.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:41 amthanks DRxj for the “daryll link!”
June 5th, 2007 at 10:43 amExplains a lot… I’ve wrestled with the nagging thought that “Daryll” could be a parody, sadly now I realize that there are persons truly this handicapped.
(I’ll be back folks, as soon as I exorcize my computer…)
Bush poking Putin with a sharp stick
He’s just gotta keep spouting off.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:49 amdavid:
Luckily, most Americans do not think the war is lost.
Comment by Jake — June 5, 2007 @ 9:24 am
That’s right! The abstract concept of terrorism is on the run, and we will soon bring this abstract concept to justice!
June 5th, 2007 at 10:49 amEric Alterman was arrested at the CNN debates the other night. Here’s his take on it:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-alterman/top-of-the-world-ma_b_50492.html
June 5th, 2007 at 10:49 amTP, you should have a thread following the chymp’s circus in Europe.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:52 amHe told Putin “not to worry” about the missile shield, now he’s bashing him on impeding freedom.
This dufus really needs some duct tape before his mouth writes checks his brain can’t cash.
Jefferson must resign – Libs are not like Cons – Libs only want honest representitives – Cons love their criminals and will stand by them to the end – it is like a huge Mafia.
Hating the repukian mafia and corrupt officals of any party daily
June 5th, 2007 at 10:52 amComment by Mark
“cumtroller”
I don’t speak to sex-crazed 15-year olds. By the way, what kind of substantial discussion includes sexual references? We all know that liberals, while condemning sexism, are known for heavy sexual misconduct that in turn demeans and degrades women. Keith “Womanizer” Olbermann should be a good consultant for all of your hypocritical needs.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:52 amI don’t believe they do mparker. The link Katy provided above (thanks Katy) shows Kokesh’s story. It states he removed insignia from the uniform.
He is currently receiving a General discharge but it’s still not an Honorable one. He’s appealing.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:53 amKeith “Womanizer†Olbermann should be a good consultant for all of your hypocritical needs.
Comment by CompTROLLER V-1
Can you back up that allegation with any facts?
If so, do you have his phone number?
June 5th, 2007 at 10:54 amComment by DumpTROLLER V-1 — June 5, 2007 @ 10:52 am
Post #97.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:58 amPlease elaborate on your nonsensical paragraph?
Seriously, it makes absolutely no sense, unless you like typing “sex” alot, and referencing Mr.Olbermann.
Freudian slip, p’haps?
Comment by Oversight is a Bitch
Please, just stop. Now is not the time to hold Democrats to their own “high” standards. Leave Mr. Jefferson alone. We need to get back quickly to hawking about “criminally-indicted” Tom DeLay, as we’ve been doing for two years now. Mr. Jefferson is supposedly just “indicted” or “ethically-indicted” and should get to keep his seat, committee seats, and hell, and maybe even a good run for President.
Mr. Jefferson, the American people look forward to working with you.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:58 amI am a sex crazed 15 year old, I continually attempt to engage others here in unsubstantiated discussions.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:58 amMr. Jefferson, the American people look forward to working with you.
Comment by CompTROLLER V-1
It’s hilarious that you trolls are the ONLY ones saying we’re saying Jefferson shouldn’t be investigated. Keep saying it and some idiot might believe you, right?
DeLay!! Waaaaah!
June 5th, 2007 at 11:03 amhttp://www.nypost.com/seven/10092006/gossip/pagesix/pagesix.htm
Also, I didn’t know that someone needs to have a “phone number” in order to prove adultery. You’re overstretching your requests to try to water down my contention. Don’t act stupid.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:05 amCorrection: I meant womanizing, not adultery. That’s just as bad, if not worse.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:07 amIdiot, she wants his # because he is a hot and intelligent man.
Smarter trolls, please.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:08 amComment by DRxJ
It’s is sensical. “cumtroller” That’s a spin-off that only a 15-year-old mind would use. Sorry to confront the stupidity of this party, but it doesn’t make my words “non-sensical.” It reads pretty clearly. There are always remedial classes available on your behalf.
By the way, “cumtroller” is non-sensical. Why aren’t you condeming that?
June 5th, 2007 at 11:10 amIs Dump-controller actually St. D in disguise? Now adults can’t engage in consensual adult behavior? Get a life instead of watching everyone else’s.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:11 amUh I think Zooey was looking for the phone number to hook up with Keith, not so you can prove that he has. Besides Newt has had his share of adultery doesn’t seem to bother the right too much. Hehe
June 5th, 2007 at 11:11 amCompTROLLER V-1 sez:
Womanizing is worse than adultery now? Funny I don’t recall which Commandment reads: “Thou shalt not commit womanizing”. Can you refresh my memory?
June 5th, 2007 at 11:12 am#104,
Comment by DumpTROLLER V-1 — June 5, 2007 @ 11:05 am
sounds like someone is a widdle jealous.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:12 amor completely obsessive.
Take you pick.
either way, it’s creepy
makes sense to me
June 5th, 2007 at 11:12 amhttp://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/05/31/america/NA-GEN-US-Military-Protest-Hearing.php
He was supposed to go to Iraq a second time, but was demoted from sergeant to corporal and not allowed to return after it was learned that he brought a pistol back after his first tour in 2004.
I’m kind of offended he still received an Honorable discharge in the first place.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:12 amAlso, I didn’t know that someone needs to have a “phone number†in order to prove adultery. You’re overstretching your requests to try to water down my contention. Don’t act stupid.
Comment by CompTROLLER V-1
It was a JOKE. Why are yo uso stupid?
June 5th, 2007 at 11:12 amComment by Bluedahlia
Intelligent and hot…hmmm….And who would that be?
June 5th, 2007 at 11:13 amCorrection: I meant womanizing, not adultery. That’s just as bad, if not worse.
Comment by CompTROLLER V-1
Horrors!! A single guy dates women, and sometimes has sex. By the way, thanks for the link to the gossip rag — a lot of truth to be found there. NOT.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:15 amComment by TripMaster Monkey
NAILED IT! Thank you for finally condemning Mr. Clinton.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:15 amThere are always remedial classes available on your behalf.
Comment by DumpTROLLER V-1 — June 5, 2007 @ 11:10 am
dangit all. I know I shouldn’t engage, but this is too tempting to resist:
But how does DumpTROLLER V-1 begin his oppositional post?
June 5th, 2007 at 11:17 amIt’s is sensical
It is is sensical?
Care to join me in that remedial class, there, TROLLER boy???
Intelligent and hot…hmmm….And who would that be?
Comment by CompTROLLER V-1 — June 5, 2007 @ 11:13 am
Not you.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:17 amPlease, we don’t need another freak obsessing about Zooey. We are all full up there.
Mr. Tripping Monkey,
Using women for sexual favors (ex., Olbermann) and refusing to speak with them afterwards is quite hurtful and demeaning. If I could correct my previous statement, womanizing is just as a bad as adultery.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:17 amIdiot, she wants his # because he is a hot and intelligent man.
Smarter trolls, please.
Comment by Bluedahlia
Is that sad, or what? Yeah, I want the phone number so I can call KO and ask him if it’s true he’s a womanizer. Duh.
**eyes rolling**
June 5th, 2007 at 11:17 amNAILED IT! Thank you for finally condemning Mr. Clinton.
Comment by CompTROLLER V-1
Has anyone been claiming Clinton was NOT an adulterer? Um, NO!
It’s just none of OUR business. It’s between him and Hillary.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:20 amNot you.
Please, we don’t need another freak obsessing about Zooey. We are all full up there.
Comment by Bluedahlia
Oh ick. Don’t go there. :P
June 5th, 2007 at 11:21 amUsing women for sexual favors (ex., Olbermann) and refusing to speak with them afterwards
Comment by DumpTROLLER V-1 — June 5, 2007 @ 11:17 am
sounds like someone is either
a) a playa wanna be
or
b) been dumped too many a time
either way, it’s still pretty flippin’ creepy
June 5th, 2007 at 11:22 amCompTROLLER V-1 sez:
Huh? You’re making even less sense than usual this morning, Compy…a feat I had previously thought impossible.
You’ve had too much drugs…or too little…I’m not sure how it works with you.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:23 amComment by Zooey
“gossip rag?” Like all of those left-wing blog links you provide to “support” your contention? This comes from an official newspaper, by the way, so hold your horses. Unlike the New York times, I’m sure they wouldn’t want their reputation ruined. You’re just in desperate denial to keep face on your fake idol, that’s all. You know, like disregarding a woman’s feelings all of a sudden because she points your leftist friend’s indiscretions. There are probably more women, too. Ignore them all should you choose, just don’t attack me for your ignorance.
“Horrors!! A single guy dates women, and sometimes has sex.”
You consider that the definition of womanizing? I see you only have a right-wing definition of sexism. Consider the other side’s definition and your head might explode. Be careful…
June 5th, 2007 at 11:24 amUsing women for sexual favors (ex., Olbermann) and refusing to speak with them afterwards is quite hurtful and demeaning.
Hey wait a minute there. You are attaching sex to a relationship. Two completely different things. You are also attaching commitment and future relations to sex. Not needed. People are free to do what they please, if you choose to have sex (Man or woman here) it’s a choice. You can’t assume that more is offered, it’s like saying oh you bought my cheeseburgers, now you must purchase a shake and chocolate sundae.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:25 amFederation of Oil Unions : Strike at Pipelines
The strike started at 6AM, Monday 04-06-2007.
The strike will be in two stages:
The First Stage
- Closure of the 14 inch of petroleum products gas, petrol and paraffin
- Closure of 14 inch liquefied gas (reverse-pumping pipeline) supplying
Nassiriya, Diwaniya, Hilla [these major cities south of Baghdad-SR] and
Baghdad
- The port [of Basra-SR] has stopped receiving imported petrol. No
export of crude oil (RCR) or products of the refinery.
- Loading: no loading of transporters of petroleum products to the
governorates, except Basra, Amara and Nassiriya cities.
The Second Stage
1. Closure of the 48 inch pipeline delivering gas from North Rumaila to
Khor Al-Zubair, feeding all electricity plants in Basra and all
petrochemical, fertiliser and steel plants, and Southern Petroleum and
Southern Gas [companies-SR].
2. Closure of the 32 inch pipeline feeding al-Hartha and al-Najeebiya.
3. Closure of the 48 inch pipeline, starting from GTU and heading for
Baghdad, Najaf and governorates.”
End of statement.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:25 amWeren’t republicans wanting to have less intrusion into your own lives?
Tundra, you were offended because the soldier brought home a pistol and was demoted but still received an honorable discharge?
You must get a lot of nosebleeds sitting so high up on that horse.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:25 amOh ick. Don’t go there. :P
Comment by Zooey — June 5, 2007 @ 11:21 am
My bad. Sorry, Zooey. :-( *Slaps wrist*
June 5th, 2007 at 11:27 amUsing women for sexual favors (ex., Olbermann) and refusing to speak with them afterwards
Comment by DumpTROLLER V-1 — June 5, 2007 @ 11:17 am
More sounds like a horny teenager, and no I don’t think it is okay, but well most of us did things that we are not so proud of later. Me included.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:27 amComment by Bluedahlia
I’m not obsessing about anybody. Don’t you dare levy your left-wing accusations against me. Name one comment where I’m obsessing about anyone. False accusations and a misuse of justice, Democratic style. Applied so well to the duke case, didn’t it? Sorry you didn’t get the result you wanted there.
Also, you’reso smart to label someone as “not hot” over a computer. How original.
And Zoeey, I don’t need to hear from you directly that “don’t support adultery.” You condemned Clinton’s impeachment and praised his politically-motivated acquittal, didn’t you?
June 5th, 2007 at 11:30 amJust like a right-wing-nut-job to keep up on the sex lives of others. I did not even know that Olberman was single, and I am in love with him. I am just not as obsessed as DumpTROLLER I guess. Maybe he/she is jealous? Maybe he/she wants a “piece” of Olberman?
Tundra is right. Sex does not make for a relationship. If a person, whether male or female, chooses to have sex with a person they are not in a relationship with, they should not whine about it if that person does not want then to pursue one.
All about choices.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:34 amI’m getting so sick of these idiot trolls that I may start fishing for salmon only by mooching.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:34 amComment by DRxJ
Sorry, pal. I AM NOT A LEFTIST. Only Leftists are capable of being “playas” and street thugs and anti-police. That’s not my language. Speak English or go back to your day job. Stop distorting my posts. My point is to CONDEMN womanizing. Where do you get that I’m part of that picture?
You are braindead, I’m sorry.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:34 amAnd Zoeey, I don’t need to hear from you directly that “don’t support adultery.†You condemned Clinton’s impeachment and praised his politically-motivated acquittal, didn’t you?
Comment by CompTROLLER V-1
_______________________________
Typical. All-or-nothing choices. Go back to reading the gossip columns and leave the truth to those who can think beyond such a limited scope.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:37 amYou must get a lot of nosebleeds sitting so high up on that horse.
Comment by hellinabucket — June 5, 2007 @ 11:25 am
I’m on a high horse because a soldier in a foreign country, obtained a firearm somehow. Brought said firearm into the United States unregistered and untracked.
Personally unregistered firearms are a big issue with me, sorry you don’t hold those standards. While I believe in the right to own a firearm, the right to have unregistered/untracked pistols however is a little much.
Personally I don’t think that is an example of an Honorable Marine. I also am one for harsh punishments to crimes. You may feel that making all kinds of things crimes, but then wrist slapping all day is the way to go. Fair enough, your choice.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:37 amDRxJ,
Have you ever heard of a typo?
Left-wing rule: When you’re losing a discussion, resort to pointing out minor, unintended lapses in grammar rules on a CASUAL BLOG.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:37 amWow…Compy’s definitely off his meds this morning.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:38 amwould you like to engage in some man-izing then?
June 5th, 2007 at 11:38 am“gossip rag?†Like all of those left-wing blog links you provide to “support†your contention? This comes from an official newspaper, by the way, so hold your horses.
Yes, GOSSIP RAG. Page Six of the New York Post is a self-acknowledged gossip page, halfwit.
“Horrors!! A single guy dates women, and sometimes has sex.â€
You consider that the definition of womanizing? I see you only have a right-wing definition of sexism. Consider the other side’s definition and your head might explode. Be careful…
Comment by CompTROLLER V-1
No, I don’t consider that the definition of womanizing, I consider it a simple statement. Don’t make assumptions about me.
Maybe you can provide “ther other side’s definition” of womanizing, and I’ll let you know if I agree.
I’ll take my chances with the exploding head thing.
“Be careful” Stow it, freak.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:39 amComment by jules — June 5, 2007 @ 11:34 am
Heck, I wish I could get used for sex a little more often personally. Especially if they don’t want a relationship.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:39 amAnd Zoeey, I don’t need to hear from you directly that “don’t support adultery.†You condemned Clinton’s impeachment and praised his politically-motivated acquittal, didn’t you?
Comment by CompTROLLER V-1
Link?
June 5th, 2007 at 11:40 amI’m not obsessing about anybody. Don’t you dare levy your left-wing accusations against me. Name one comment where I’m obsessing about anyone. False accusations and a misuse of justice, Democratic style. Applied so well to the duke case, didn’t it? Sorry you didn’t get the result you wanted there.
Also, you’reso smart to label someone as “not hot†over a computer. How original.
And Zoeey, I don’t need to hear from you directly that “don’t support adultery.†You condemned Clinton’s impeachment and praised his politically-motivated acquittal, didn’t you?
Comment by CompTROLLER V-1 — June 5, 2007 @ 11:30 am
Wow, I must have hit a nerve somewhere. Couldn’t have happened to a better troll. I can just see the back hairs raising/bristling. Anyone else? Heh
June 5th, 2007 at 11:40 amComment by CompTROLLER V-1 — June 5, 2007 @ 11:30 am
You are such a freaking moron. What Clinton did was violate his marriage vows. That is between a man and his wife. Did he lie? Yes. Did his lie harm the security of the US or probably put a number of covert agents and their allies in danger. No. That is what your party is about. Not ours!
You repugnuts say you want less government intrusion in private lives. But that is only when it comes to your fellow wing-nuts. You are all about the guns and the corruption, but forget about a woman making a decision about what to do with her own body!
June 5th, 2007 at 11:40 amWow…Compy’s definitely off his meds this morning.
Comment by TripMaster Monkey
Compy don’t like the uppity wimmin.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:41 amWow…Compy’s definitely off his meds this morning.
Comment by TripMaster Monkey — June 5, 2007 @ 11:38 am
It’s all the pee someone left in his Wheaties…..
June 5th, 2007 at 11:43 amCompTROLLER V-1, what is your continued fasination with Clinton? Do you have so much anger inside against him that you ignore what’s around you now?
I’m amazed how many times Clinton will be mentioned just to knock him down but no support for good ol’ GW and his piss poor handling of the mess in Iraq.
Let’s weigh the two. Clinton/Adultery. Bush/misscalculated a military action that has cost our country over 3,500 lives, wounded 10’s of thousand more soldiers, spent billions in supplementals that haven’t been accounted for and I could go on.
That attack on adultery doesn’t compare to the atrocities GW has committed so instead of coming in here to bash a past president try defending the a$$crack in the oval office.
If you can’t and continue the sophmoric charge of moral superiority you’ll be treated as the excitable child you so far have shown yourself to be.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:43 amComment by jules
TP’s new snippy attack dog. You get too many benefits.
“Jules” That’s quite misleading…
You talk about conservative “intrusion.” How about talking about the lewd plastering of the R-rated filth onto everyday television, magazines, you name it. Intruding into your private life? You lefties make it public! Lewd You have no problem SPILLING it out on the airwaves! The right is engaged because you’ve indirectly invited them to, and they’re simply looking to tuck your shirt in while in public. I don’t think common decency is too much to ask.
Don’t break your chain, now….
June 5th, 2007 at 11:45 amComment by Tundra — June 5, 2007 @ 11:39 am
My husband told me about an arrangement he had like that years ago. Until he opened his mouth and said “this is great, we have sex and I don’t have to buy you dinner or take you out.” Needless to say, he never saw her again.
Was he a dawg? Oh yeah! Does he regret it? Only being stupid enough to speak what he was thinking :) Is he a horrible person? No way in hell!!!! He is an awesome husband and the most wonderful step-father I could ever have hoped to have for my child. We all have a past, and hopefully we grow out of it!
June 5th, 2007 at 11:49 amComment by Zooey
I’ve provided you links. You choose to disregard them because you seem intent on not accepting my premise, no matter how true. Getting you to admit that you’re wrong isn’t necessary. Hey, a criminal doesn’t have to admit his wrongdoing in order to be convicted, thankfully.
“Link?” Doesn’t matter, you’ll just levy out a far-fetched “right-wing” accusation anyway. And I’m the freak for condemning adultery/womanizing? My god, you do have your head on backwards.
I don’t like crazy communist women, if that’s what you define to be “uppity women.”
The New York post is a real newspaper. It’s “gossip” section sure beats these hollywood tabloids. It’s sexist to use a woman for intercourse, then reply to her in an email to never speak to him again directly afterwards. Why do you think that woman would lie? But your partisan hard-headedness seems to be in full effect.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:55 amComment by CompTROLLER V-1 — June 5, 2007 @ 11:45
Turn off the television you a*shat and give your kids a book. My daughter just graduated from high school and is getting ready for college. Do you know what she has done in the past week and a half? Read two very large hard cover books and then went out and bought two more.
We do not even have cable because we watch TV so rarely. The only shows on are these stupid reality shows. No thank you. If that is the way you are raising your children then shame on you. But do not blame liberals for your shortcomings as a parent!
June 5th, 2007 at 11:56 amComment by CompTROLLER V-1 — Your right you were not obsessing, because that isn’t a word. You obsess
(Ob-sÄ•s’)
v.tr.
To preoccupy the mind of excessively
Your:
ob·ses·sion (ob-sÄ•sh’n):
1. Compulsive preoccupation with a fixed idea or an unwanted feeling or emotion, often accompanied by symptoms of anxiety.
2. A compulsive, often unreasonable idea or emotion.
You are being:
ob·ses·sive (Ob-sÄ•s’Äv)
adj.
1. Of, relating to, characteristic of, or causing an obsession: obsessive gambling.
2. Excessive in degree or nature: an obsessive need to win.
Did you ever think of these terms CompTROLLER V-1. I think these better discribe your condition:
crack·pot (krăk’pÅt’)
n.
An eccentric person, especially one with bizarre ideas.
—-
id·i·ot (Äd’Ä“-t)
n.
1. A foolish or stupid person.
2. A person of profound mental retardation having a mental age below three years and generally being unable to learn connected speech or guard against common dangers. The term belongs to a classification system no longer in use and is now considered offensive.
—-
freak (frēk)
n.
1. A thing or occurrence that is markedly unusual or irregular: A freak of nature produced the midsummer snow.
2. An abnormally formed organism, especially a person or animal regarded as a curiosity or monstrosity.
3. A sudden capricious turn of mind; a whim: “The freaks of the psyche can no more be explained than the Devil†(Maurice Collis).
Slang.
a. A drug user or addict: a speed freak.
b. An eccentric or nonconformist person, especially a member of a counterculture.
c. An enthusiast: rock music freaks.
—-
You suck as a troll.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:59 amTP’s new snippy attack dog. You get too many benefits.
“Jules†That’s quite misleading…
Jules has been around for a while. You’re just a new troll.
CompTROLLER V-1
You talk about conservative “intrusion.†How about talking about the lewd plastering of the R-rated filth onto everyday television, magazines, you name it. Intruding into your private life? You lefties make it public! Lewd You have no problem SPILLING it out on the airwaves! The right is engaged because you’ve indirectly invited them to, and they’re simply looking to tuck your shirt in while in public. I don’t think common decency is too much to ask.
Comment by CompTROLLER V-1 — June 5, 2007 @ 11:45 am
Turn off your television. Don’t rent anything over a PG-13 movie. You can’t control what other people do, you can only control what goes on in your own life. Jesus….good luck.
June 5th, 2007 at 11:59 amWe all have a past, and hopefully we grow out of it!
Comment by jules — June 5, 2007 @ 11:49 am
and some of us not only have a few skeleton in our closests, we have a full damn cemetary.
June 5th, 2007 at 12:02 pmSounds like DumpTROLLER V-1 is begging for at least one skeleton.
This may indicate his age, and maturity (and, dare I say, loneliness)
Just sayin…
Lunch time
I’m off!
Comment by CompTROLLER V-1 — June 5, 2007 @ 11:55 am
Dude, I read your stupid links. Gossip is gossip, no matter where it appears.
Your sexism is shining brightly, as usual. Your assumption is that the woman involved in said “womanizing” is a helpless victim. Frankly, if a one night stand is taking place, she has volunteered for that duty. If the guy wants no further communication, that’s the chance she takes — or he takes. It could go both ways.
You can’t impose your version of morality on anyone but yourself.
June 5th, 2007 at 12:04 pmComment by CompTROLLER V-1 — We should now talk about your tendencies and your sexual obsession with Keith Olbermann.
The expression “being in the closet” has been used to describe keeping secret one’s sexual behavior or orientation, most commonly homosexuality or bisexuality, but also including the gender identity of transgender and transsexual people. Being “in the closet” is more than being discreet or private, it is a “life-shaping pattern of concealment” where gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender individuals hide their sexuality/gender-identity in the most important areas of life, with family, friends, and at work. Individuals may marry or avoid certain jobs in order to avoid suspicion and exposure. Some will even claim to be heterosexual when asked directly. “It is the power of the closet to shape the core of an individual’s life that has made homosexuality into a significant personal, social, and political drama in twentieth-century America”. (Seidman 2003, p.25).
June 5th, 2007 at 12:10 pmAlso, I didn’t know that someone needs to have a “phone number†in order to prove adultery. You’re overstretching your requests to try to water down my contention. Don’t act stupid.
Comment by CompTROLLER V-1
So the swiftboating of Olbermann begins. But tell me how having a one night stand with a willing partner is a crime. Only in neocon bizarro is dating considered immoral.
June 5th, 2007 at 12:12 pmGuys, go gentle on Compy. He’s clearly in distress for some reason, and your relentless assault upon his flawed positions can’t be good for his already precarious mental state.
Remember, if you push too hard and he breaks, we won’t have him to play with anymore.
June 5th, 2007 at 12:13 pmCorrection: I meant womanizing, not adultery. That’s just as bad, if not worse.
Comment by CompTROLLER V-1 — June 5, 2007 @ 11:07 am
Why?
June 5th, 2007 at 12:13 pmCompTROLLER V-1
My guess is that that woman accusing Olberman is lying as part of her fantasy life, which I believe you can relate to because of yours. Whether you provide a website as evidence or not, you are still one of our “missing links”.
June 5th, 2007 at 12:14 pmMethinks the Troller protesteth a bit much!
June 5th, 2007 at 12:14 pm-Comment by Jules
To tone it down, I’m sure you’re a very successful parent and I’m glad that your daughter does the reading that she does. To counter your “failure as a parent” statement, however, I assume that I’m half your age, and thus could not be a suitable parent. I would go for it in later years if I could have the assurance that I could turn my own child(ren) out to be as well as yours.
I’ll be cooling it for now, people. Trip, Zooey, others, I shouldn’t have enabled this discussion to get this heated. Please accept my apologies.
June 5th, 2007 at 12:15 pmCompTROLLER V-1 – Have you talked to anyone about these feelings? This obsession with Kieth Obermann.
com·ing-out (kÅm’Äng-out’) also coming out
June 5th, 2007 at 12:17 pmn.
1. A social debut.
2. A revelation or acknowledgment that one is a gay man, a lesbian, or a bisexual.
Comment by Zooey
There are no sexist statements in here. You can choose to disagree with someone without using ____ ist and other derogatory remarks. Condemning adultery and womanizing has never been said to be “sexist.”
I’m sorry, but your own inferences are your own. If I don’t state them literally, I didn’t state them.
June 5th, 2007 at 12:19 pmComment by CompTROLLER V-1 — June 5, 2007 @ 12:15 pm
Sounds like the Thorazine is finally kicking in. Glad to hear it, Compy.
June 5th, 2007 at 12:19 pmUsing women for sexual favors (ex., Olbermann) and refusing to speak with them afterwards is quite hurtful and demeaning. If I could correct my previous statement, womanizing is just as a bad as adultery.
Comment by CompTROLLER V-1
Well here’s a tip for the disgruntled Olbermann ladies. Men don’t marry women who sleep with them the first time they meet. And not too many men say no to a woman who wants to sleep with them. And if I had a dollar for every woman who slept with a celebrity the first time she met him, I’d have so much money I’d consider being a Republican, not. And you DampTOILET V-! are a megajackass.
June 5th, 2007 at 12:20 pmJTitor
[Ignore]
June 5th, 2007 at 12:21 pm[System determines this 'JTitor' robot to make useless and viral statements. Contains virus, must be deleted.]
Has anyone been claiming Clinton was NOT an adulterer? Um, NO!
It’s just none of OUR business. It’s between him and Hillary.
Comment by Zooey
Okay you take Olbermann’s number and I’ll take Clinton’s. See how easy it is for us all to get along, DUMPtroller.
June 5th, 2007 at 12:22 pmComment by CompTROLLER V-1 — June 5, 2007 @ 12:21 pm
So much for the Thorazine. Up the dosage, Compy.
June 5th, 2007 at 12:22 pmComment by CompTROLLER V-1 — June 5, 2007 @ 12:15 pm
Either his meds kicked in or somone stole his handle. Whichever, thank you for the compliment.
Just one piece of advice. You can be assured to be a good parent if you are ACTIVELY involved in your childs life. The operative word in child-rearing – consistency.
I teach high school. I have seen too many kids turn bad because their parents do not want to take the time to raise what they CHOOSE to bring into the world.
June 5th, 2007 at 12:23 pmMen don’t marry women who sleep with them the first time they meet.
All my wives slept with me on the first date.
June 5th, 2007 at 12:32 pmI’m sorry, but your own inferences are your own. If I don’t state them literally, I didn’t state them.
Comment by CompTROLLER V-1
The defense of the weak-minded in denial.
June 5th, 2007 at 12:32 pmRemember, if you push too hard and he breaks, we won’t have him to play with anymore.
Comment by TripMaster Monkey
And how is that a bad thing? It’s not like he’s amusing or informative.
June 5th, 2007 at 12:32 pmOkay you take Olbermann’s number and I’ll take Clinton’s. See how easy it is for us all to get along, DUMPtroller.
Comment by shane
Deal. :)
June 5th, 2007 at 12:33 pmMen don’t marry women who sleep with them the first time they meet.
All my wives slept with me on the first date.
Comment by Tundra
Is that a requirement or a warning? :-D
June 5th, 2007 at 12:34 pmAll my wives slept with me on the first date.
Comment by Tundra — June 5, 2007 @ 12:32 pm
You are too twisted for words :)
June 5th, 2007 at 12:36 pmshane sez:
Certainly not informative in any sense…but I derive no end of amusement from his abortive, vitriolic attempts at debate. ^_^
June 5th, 2007 at 12:36 pmComment by Zooey — June 5, 2007 @ 12:34 pm
Comment by jules — June 5, 2007 @ 12:36 pm
haha, I couldn’t resist.
June 5th, 2007 at 12:39 pmAll my wives slept with me on the first date.
Comment by Tundra
Is that a requirement or a warning? :-D
Comment by Zooey
Good one Zooey. But Tundra, I take this as an indication you’re a little harder up then most men. I wouldn’t brag. And I’m sure your wife appreciates you letting the world know, or all they all ex-wives?
June 5th, 2007 at 12:39 pmCertainly not informative in any sense…but I derive no end of amusement from his abortive, vitriolic attempts at debate. ^_^
Comment by TripMaster Monkey
Okay, we’ll be gentler. But we’re only doing it for you!
June 5th, 2007 at 12:40 pmOkay, we’ll be gentler. But we’re only doing it for you!
Comment by shane
TMM just got an elephant gun, and he’s hoping for the designation “Big Troll Hunter.”
We’ll have to start called him Bwana, or some such. Oh dear….
June 5th, 2007 at 12:44 pmComment by shane — June 5, 2007 @ 12:39 pm
Oh all Ex-Wives
I wouldn’t say I am harder up than most, since my last divorce I have been involved with every college co-ed, single mother (And friends sometimes, nice) Lonly widows, Fast food managers, hippy artists, mid 30’s never been marrieds, I can find. We all have (had in some cases) very understandable and equitable relationships.
Wouldn’t want to be accused of being in the closet by keeping my sexuality a secret and all.
June 5th, 2007 at 12:51 pmOh sorry forgot, lonly housewives who’s husbands travel too much.
June 5th, 2007 at 12:52 pmTundra = self-sacrificing all-purpose handyman
Heh.
June 5th, 2007 at 12:55 pmTundra, dude..
June 5th, 2007 at 12:56 pmand you have time to post here?
Unless, of course, all of the above mentioned, you haven’t “found” yet, eh?
:-)
Comment by Tundra — June 5, 2007 @ 12:52 pm
Good for you. We all need a hobby!
June 5th, 2007 at 12:59 pm[Ignore]
[System determines this ‘JTitor’ robot to make useless and viral statements. Contains virus, must be deleted.]
Comment by CompTROLLER V-1 — How are my observations of you any different then your observations of Keith Obermann? Your obsession with Keith Obermann’s sex life and then trying to frame it in a way that puts Obermann in a bad light shows your frustration with your own believes. You can’t come in here and debate real issues. You resort to trying the “destroy the messenger” tactic. Your observation of Mr. Obermann taken from a woman that obviously has some deep mental issues is childish. Did you even background the story before spewing it on this blog? She started a blog specifically to “work out her own issues”, about Mr. Obermann (one night stand). She obsessed on a daily basis through this blog why he didn’t call her back (one night stand)? Then when it was apparent he wasn’t going to call her back she became vitriol (again, one night stand). She’s a nut.
June 5th, 2007 at 1:00 pmTundra, Tundra, Tundra …
“If wishes were horses then beggars would ride…”
Not that WE blame you. It does seem that POOPtroller is quiet on your alleged indiscretions though.
June 5th, 2007 at 1:11 pmOh sorry forgot, lonely housewives who’s husbands travel too much.
Comment by Tundra — June 5, 2007 @ 12:52 pm
Apparently Henry Kissinger’s model for his “Useless Eater†was you or someone like you. Live to eat and eat to live seems the same as live to F and F to live when the useless eater is defined as far as I’m concerned. Essentially you are helping to prove Henry’s philosophical point along with the point of those that want forced sterilization. How does it feel to be that transparent and shallow to brag about your sexual inadequacies?
June 5th, 2007 at 1:37 pmHenry’s philosophical point along with the point of those that want forced sterilization.
Wasn’t forced, done by choice (I like to keep my cash)
How does it feel to be that transparent and shallow to brag about your sexual inadequacies?
June 5th, 2007 at 1:59 pmShallow, yeah
Transparent, yeah
The only inadequate thing though is I lack the “Cuddling afterwards” and “What are you thinking right now” talks. Sniffle
From reading the compTROLLer’s posts, it sounds like he’s the one man that Ann Coulter turned down. Oh, by the way, TROLL, how does Annie’s well-publicized trampiness sit with you? Considering you’re condemning Olbermann for his “womanizing” (hardly an offense in the real world, but fun fodder for Hollywood–John Tucker Must Die stands as a recent Exhibit A), do you condemn Annie for her, um, “manizing”? (Did I just create a new word? Is there an already existent female version of “womanizing”?)
June 5th, 2007 at 2:20 pmdo you condemn Annie for her, um, “manizing� (Did I just create a new word? Is there an already existent female version of “womanizing�)
I don’t know if there is a word, but they do exist. Fascinating creatures I assure you.
June 5th, 2007 at 2:52 pmLatest Dem preference polls
USA Today/Gallup Poll. June 1-3, 2007. N=470 Democrats and Democratic leaners nationwide. MoE ± 5.
Barack Obama 30
Hillary Clinton 29
Al Gore 17
John Edwards 11
Wow, what a difference one debtate made!
June 5th, 2007 at 3:53 pm