You are being deceptive, which is a waste of time and energy.

Comment by Kilo I know you are a little thick headed so lets make it a little clearer… every person that works around this guy, knows this guy, and reads this article or knows someone that read this article will now look at him in a very different light…its called karma or what comes around goes around….

Comment by Gerald Gibson — July 19, 2007 @ 12:23 pm

Oh riiiiiight…. I get it now.
This story is useful because it has found an obscure article on the internet about this guy and highlighted it.
That his coworkers might not otherwise be able to find on their own.
At his place of employment.
Google.

I did actually mention this earlier nimrod. What, you didn’t get the point ?

Kilo, John Howard was in Washington when 9/11 happened and he said that Australia would help do whatever Bush wanted – it was a blank check.

As was the same statement by all the other countries who said the same thing… even France.

I mentioned this in the post you are replying to. Why are covering the same ground again ?

I note that Howard’s son became a Bush adviser during the 2004 election.

Hadn’t heard that before, but sounds like excellent experience for someone who’s father is up for election this year.

When Murdoch said, “With our newspapers, we have indeed supported Bush’s foreign policy,” he was speaking in the past tense.

Again, you’re telling me something I already wrote here. Not really necessary.

You must feel very insecure to call me an idoit 4 times.
Comment by Martin Gifford — July 20, 2007 @ 1:04 am

Sure. I guess it’s just a coincidence that I mentioned this in response to each idiotic statement you made, which I was quoting.

You are the same Martin Grifford that just suggested Australia had some role in influencing the Bush administration’s decision to invade Iraq aren’t you ?

Kilo, dear, the reason that Congressional approval rating polls don’t get much attention is that they’re irrelevant.
Comment by PaulB — July 19, 2007 @ 10:59 am

Of course that’s the reason, Captain Gullible.
And the fact that they were relevant enough to get published here before the last election and not since is just sheer coincidence.

John Howard was in Washington when 9/11 happened and he said that Australia would help do whatever Bush wanted – it was a blank check.

I note that Howard’s son became a Bush adviser during the 2004 election.

When Murdoch said, “With our newspapers, we have indeed supported Bush’s foreign policy,” he was speaking in the past tense.

You must feel very insecure to call me an idoit 4 times.

expect no less, from the chosen people.

While Saddam’s capabilities were zero – and “overplayed” by the Bush administration – there is no question that Saddam’s repeatedly stated objective was the acquisition of WMDs.

If any of those chickenhawks ever challenge YOU for not enlisting, you can always remind them “I don’t believe in this war the way you people do. You are the ones who refuse to live up to your own ideology, if you believe in everything you claim, then live up to your own standards, or just get used to being labeled a hypocrite.”

Now, did you have a point?

Now that they have stopped playing nice with the Republics, I’m willing to bet the farm that their approval ratings goes way up.

One farm it is then.

By the way, why don’t they do a poll that asks what the public thinks of the Democrats in Congress or the Republics in Congress and not just what the public thinks of Congress as a whole.
Comment by Katie — July 19, 2007 @ 10:02 am

Of course they already do such polls.
The reason you’re not aware such polls exist is that they aren’t posted here.

After all, it would be kind of hard to get the same reaction to daily poll updates for Bush in the % 30s and 20s when the Democrat congress has practically the same approval rating.

Likewise, why complain about poll results for congress as a whole when these receive the same amount — zero — coverage here ?

Is never mentioning this, giving it too much attention ? How could any more be done to spare you acknowledging this ?

I mean TP runs at least a dozen stories about high disapproval ratings for various issues every month. Few of them reach the 70% disapproval rating shown there for congress. That’s as good as it gets. How are you not happy with this ?

How about showing a little bit of gratitude for the filter here. It’s working its arse off for you.

You also know that BL worked for us (we trained him) to fight the Russians in Afghanistan. He was a double agent then so why is it so improbable that he couldn’t still be functioning as one today? Why do you find that so difficult to wrap your mind around? Answer: Because it’s so reprehensible and heinous that you wish not to.
Comment by veritas — July 19, 2007 @ 7:48 am

Really ? Damn. I answered “I find that difficult to believe given that no credible research has ever suggested this was the case, all available research corroborates this never occurring along with the statements all the parties involved.”

You’ll be the representative from the not-so-much-reality-based-community here.

Why post articles like this? Because its pay back time.
Comment by Gerald Gibson — July 19, 2007 @ 8:56 am

Er… yeah. Payback. Against that guy you’ve never heard of before now, nor saw what he wrote in 2003, nor could you even remember the name of without checking the top of this page.
Got him a good one!

I ask again… what’s the position of the head of Ford’s PR on Roe vs Wade ?
Yes that’s correct, the answer is “who gives a shit”.

Now that they have stopped playing nice with the Republics, I’m willing to bet the farm that their approval ratings goes way up.

By the way, why don’t they do a poll that asks what the public thinks of the Democrats in Congress or the Republics in Congress and not just what the public thinks of Congress as a whole. That would be a more realistic snapshot of how the Congress numbers play out. And then the neoCON trolls would not be able to say that the Democratic Congress has low poll numbers. Last time I checked, a little less than half of the members in the House are Republics.

Norm Coleman is already whining that Al Franken is getting money from the Hollywood elitists, and is asking Neoturds for cash. Norm’s worried, as he should be.

A recent report finds his college roommate disclosing Norm’s drug use during those days. Sounds like he was quite the party guy.

He moved to MN because he couldn’t make it in NY. He was a Democrat until he saw a chance to run for Mayor of St. Paul as a Repuke.

Norm is a hypocrite, a shape shifter, and has totally screwed up the office the honorable Paul Wellstone inhabited prior to being killed.

BTW, Dominici is from NM…

While I don’t know if it is due to Bush being a complete incompetent, or is actually doing it on purpose, but his every move since the start of the Iraq war seems to me to have been calculated towards losing the war on terror.

Think about it: He weakens America’s military capabilities by invading a non-urgent target – allowing the guy behind 3000 American deaths to get away.

He then sets about setting record deficits and doubling America’s debt – on a war which frankly nobody really knows the reasons for – and cuts taxes so as to avoid America finding the money to properly fund the war.

At the same time he works tirelessly to maintain the status quo on fossil fuels, the main source of income for the main funders of terrorism.

He then systematically allienates all of America’s allies, to the point where Italy withdraws over a friendly fire incident and Blair, who will go down in history as being Bush’s lapdog, says Britain won’t join America in an invasion of Iran. Poland said more or less the same thing, citing experiences in Iraq as being why.

Then, he hands America’s enemies a major world propaganda victory via his approval of torture (And yes, I realise it was mainly Congress that did this.)

At the same time he handicaps America’s intellegence gathering agencies, via outing shell companies (The whole Plamegate incident) and overloading them with worthless bunk (Via wiretapping America.)

To further make sure that US intellegence doesn’t find anything, there is a mass firing of gay staffers who just happen to speak the same language as the enemy.

Of course, the critical information that gets through, the stuff which really matters like how you are going wrong on the war front, is ignored.

In order to maximise the damage should a terrorist attack go off, Bush has also weakened FEMA and cut funding to maintaining measures designed to prevent major disasters, such as the levies in New Orleans.

He weakens America’s military leadership by firing those leaders who disagree with him, and then strengthens the enemy’s leadership by reporting them dead or captured on an average of every 2 months, only to have to later retract (Thus giving those leaders an aura of invincibility.)

Now, Osama exists. He was there long before Bush came in, he isn’t a new peril, the real question is, is Bush really against him?