Last night at the YearlyKos convention,
Last night at the YearlyKos convention,
DailyKos founder Markos Moulitsas Zuniga offered a stirring defense of the progressive blogosphere. Read the full speech here.
UPDATE: Watch it:
Below is a key snippet:
[Before the blogosphere arose,] people like me could spend hours talking about politics, but it mattered little in the greater scheme of things. Then technology changed everything.
Whether it was blogs, or podcasting, or social networking sites like MySpace and Facebook, or MoveOn, or YouTube, people quickly adopted myriad communication technologies emerging from the web and turned them to political purposes. Millions did so.
And while individually we were still nobodies, together, we became … somebody. A very important somebody. And that makes some people very uncomfortable.
Like David Broder. Joe Klein. Robert Novak. Bill O’Reilly
Echoing what so many of his colleagues think, Bill Kristol on Fox News was outraged that anyone would take us seriously. He called me a, ” left-wing blogger who was not respectable three or four years ago.”
And he was right. In their world, I wasn’t “respectable”. None of us were. As our good friend Atrios likes to say, We weren’t “very serious people.”
You see, we weren’t stupid and gullible enough to fall for the administration’s lies on Iraq.
Those “respectable” people couldn’t stop praising Bush for being “bold,” and “resolute”. They fueled what has now become the biggest foreign policy debacle in American history.
They told us to capitulate to Republicans on Iraq in 2002 and 2004.
Democrats listened… and lost.
They said us crazy bloggers were pushing the party to the left, and that our increasing influence would doom Democrats to electoral defeat in 2006 and beyond.
David Brooks in The NY Times wrote in 2005 that thanks to bloggers — those rabid flying venomous sheep – Democrats would be sure to carry just Berkeley for decades to come.
Many Democrats nodded along in agreement.
Did we listen? No.
In 2006, those respectable people said Democrats couldn’t win unless they continued cheerleading that war.
Did we listen? (No) We weren’t that stupid.
The respectable people said that electing Howard Dean chair of the Democratic Party would doom us to perpetual minority status.
Did we listen? (No)
They said that we had to privatize social security.
Did we listen? (No)
They told us we should fear “San Francisco Liberal” Nancy Pelosi.
Did we listen? (No)
They said there was nothing nefarious about the outing of Valerie Plame.
Did we listen? (No)
They said targeting Joe Lieberman would cost us the Senate.
Did we listen? (No)
No we didn’t listen. Of course not.
And then in 2006, we won.
Blogger Oliver Willis recently put it perfectly: “I used to believe that a lot of these people were just talking over my head, their discourse too lofty for a regular guy like myself. But that isn’t true.
They’re just stupid.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
However, it looks like having won the House and the Senate for the Democratic Party didn’t quite result in the change of politics that was intended. ( see thread below)
August 5th, 2007 at 11:40 am“However, it looks like having won the House and the Senate for the Democratic Party didn’t quite result in the change of politics that was intended.”
It takes more than one victorious battle to win a war.
August 5th, 2007 at 11:48 amI, too, agree that Oliver Willis put it perfectly.
August 5th, 2007 at 11:49 amWe regular people think; we see through the smoke; we are not the stupid ones.
You’ve got to be careful when calling the cheerleaders of the Bush administration “stupid”. They’re not. Or not necessarily.
The reason for their existence is to help push policies that enhance and expand the economic and political power of the ruling classes, no matter the cost to the average American, or the damage done to the peoples of other countries -like Iraq.
To achieve this goal they will berate critics, mislead their audience, confuse, and muddy the issues; they will also flat-out lie if they must. They need to do this in order to mislead the public into supporting criminal policies, such as invading a country that poses no threat, or continuing an occupation that is basically an oil grab.
They are not stupid. They just hope we are.
August 5th, 2007 at 11:50 amThe fundamental reality about freedom of the press is that you do not have freedom of the press unless you control a press. The television broadcast media is controlled by 6 corporate conglomorates and the situation with radio and the print media is not much better. Therefore only a small number of corporations have freedom of the press in those media. It is only on the Internet that ordianary people have genuine freedom of the press. That is why it is so crucially important to preserve net neutrality so that the corporations cannot take this freeom away from the people also.
August 5th, 2007 at 11:52 amYou’re right, Gregor, they aren’t stupid, just evil…
August 5th, 2007 at 11:53 amCaptain Video, I fully agree. The struggle hasn’t ended. Nancy Pelosi said something along the lines of “there’s a new Congress in town..” aimed at your President. Maybe Ms Pelosi and Mr Reid and others should accept that there’s a new and highly informed and highly networked electorate in town, so they’ll finally start thinking and acting along the voters’ wishes.
August 5th, 2007 at 11:57 amThe stupid ones are those who believe the baloney; who don’t challenge their favorite pundits to ferret out the truth; who vote for someone because they believe the hype and/or who is a candidate appears to be someone you’d like to *have a beer with.
August 5th, 2007 at 11:57 am*People actually said that out loud – they advertise their own gullibility and stupidity.
Pelosi is not a liberal, she is a Bush/Neocon enabler.
Taking Impeachment off the table was only the beginning for her Bush enabling, as we now see.
August 5th, 2007 at 12:01 pmAnd when word of the infuriating Dem cave in to W bin Laden regarding FISA came out late Tuesday night, this should have been the ONLY issue at the YKos conference
Obviously, those worthless DINO’s and W lackeys who couldn’t wait to rape our Constitution rather than be accused, absurdly, of “being soft on terrorism” don’t fear their own party’s leadership-Pelosi, Reid, Emanuel-or the “netroots” supposedly represented by Daily Kos, et al
The libroots have been ignored in favor of the Dems numerical minority Blue Dogs, it’s about time the Blue Dogs got put out of everyone’s political misery by getting their asses out of office with the next elections
If Cindy Sheehan actually does run against Pelosi, I’m tossing a few dollars her way, maybe a good rebuke from us libs is about the only thing that will get Pelosi to tell the Blue Dogs to take a hike
August 5th, 2007 at 12:14 pmKos officially supports the Democratice party, though. And the Democratic party just took away all of your privacy rights yesterday.
August 5th, 2007 at 12:16 pmVery well said, Markos.
I still have huge issues with Democrats right now, especially on the impeachment issue, but I think Markos was talking more about the power of the people and the blogosphere.
Maybe we weren’t “very serious people” at some point, but we see what’s going on in this country — we’ve been seeing for years — and we’re making noise and putting a fight, which is what we’re supposed to do.
We do all this in an unconventional manner, and that scares the shit out of the mainstream because they don’t understand it. And you know what? That’s exactly what they need right now — a wake up call.
I anticipate a shitstorm lead by Bill O’Reilly, and it’s going to be fantastic. :)
August 5th, 2007 at 12:18 pmWhen are you people going to realize that we use you to marganalize your causes to the general public. The vast majority of Americans don’t know what Kos is or care. We call you the Far Left and belittle you with great effectiveness. You’re a prop, little more.
August 5th, 2007 at 12:24 pm[Before the blogosphere arose,] people like me could spend hours talking about politics, but it mattered little in the greater scheme of things.
Jeez… this jerk sounds just like one of you Typical Smug Lefties.
August 5th, 2007 at 12:35 pmThey told us we should fear “San Francisco Drag-queen†Nancy Pelosi.
Did we listen? (No)
August 5th, 2007 at 12:37 pm————————————————————————————-
HEyOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOoOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!
I
August 5th, 2007 at 12:37 pmKooze is a doucher!
August 5th, 2007 at 12:38 pmTypical Smug Lefties.
Comment by Konservo
Off with his head!
It’s not like he’s actually using it…
August 5th, 2007 at 12:41 pmOnce again Mr. P shows up with the intent of destroying the thread and absolutely nothing of value to say, which I take as an indication that he is fully aware there is no point in putting lipstick on the pig that the Bush administration has become.
Why he would even bother posting anything at all puzzles me. Must get lonely spending the whole Sunday in his mom’s basement.
August 5th, 2007 at 12:45 pmI love me, I’m back and I’m just as idiotic.
August 5th, 2007 at 12:46 pmSmug lefties? Pot, meet kettle.
If you can’t make a cogent point, then STFU.
August 5th, 2007 at 12:47 pmKonservo is an AAAAAASSSSSSHooooooOOOOOOOLLEEEE!
August 5th, 2007 at 12:48 pmWhat I don’t get is the number of middle class Americans who vote against their own self-interest. They actually think that they are inherently better than everyone else, and that they “earned” their middle class status. Their grandparents would spank them. Once the S hits the F, and it certainly will, they will do exactly what the Nazis before them did: dress like those they tried to destroy and hide among them.
Cowards all.
August 5th, 2007 at 12:52 pmok, some democrats got elected. what do we do next to make less of them pathetic, gutless, spineless jellyfish?
August 5th, 2007 at 12:53 pm“You see, we weren’t stupid and gullible enough to fall for the administration’s lies on Iraq.”
Liberals never said anything about WMD not being in Iraq until well after the invasion. Hindsight is 50/50.
August 5th, 2007 at 12:55 pmKos is right about the blogosphere. The “powers that be” did not know how to control it completely, and the people found a way to use it to their advantage and to start sharing ideas and opinions in ways not possible before (at so little cost; yes, we could all theoretically buy an ad on the back page of the NYT, but who among us has the money to do that?).
I agree with doro that the 2006 elections did not bring about the change we had all hoped for, but I also agree with Captain Video’s response that it takes more than one battle victory to win a war (though I am not terribly fond of war metaphors.) I prefer to think of it more as minds that took decades to be be made up won;t necessarily be changed over night.)
I also agree with Marie in that the big mistake they make is thinking of us as stupid. We are not stupid, we are just being delierately misinformed by both the politicans and the media.
Gregor ios roght, too, but I would add that it was, I believe, John Suart Mill who said something like, “While it is true that not all conservative people are stupid, it is true that most stupid people are conservative.” Those are the “cheerleaders” who mindlessly continue to support the Bush Misadministration in all its illegality because they believe the nonsense that the constitution isn’t enough. They believe Bush when he says that his first job is to protect the American People. he is wrong, of course. his “first job” is to protect the constitution, and he has been trying to do one end-around after another of it to get his way (or Cheney’s way, if you prefer.)
And yes, Marie, picking a president based on who you would like to have a beer with is a poor criterion for choosing leadership. Personally, I would like to see our president abstain from alcohol douring his (or her) term of office. You wouldn’t want to learn years later that the military action a president took was due in some small way to the effects of alcohol, would you?
And Zooey’s analysis is correct – they fear the blogosphere because they don’t understand it and what it can do, but more because, so far, they can’t control it (which is why they don’t want net neutrality). And I would be interested in O’Reilly’s take on it, but only if he admits he read my song about him.
And Konservo’s comment certainly has more of an air of smugness to it than anything Kos said.
August 5th, 2007 at 12:55 pm“And then in 2006, we won.”
No you didn’t. You elected a congress that gives Bush whatever the hell he wants.
August 5th, 2007 at 12:57 pmKos’ prefered candidate, Ned Lamont, got his ass handed to him.
August 5th, 2007 at 12:59 pmLiberals never said anything about WMD not being in Iraq until well after the invasion. Hindsight is 50/50.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 12:55 pm
That’s bullshit. I never believed Iraq had WMD, and was willing to let the inspectors do their work. I said it to anyone who would listen, and many who didn’t want to hear it.
I think you’ll find most of the non-troll commenters on TP felt the same way.
Just because you are a gullible sheep, doesn’t mean everyone is.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:00 pmPelosi is not a liberal, she is a Bush/Neocon enabler.
Taking Impeachment off the table was only the beginning for her Bush enabling, as we now see.
Comment by Wayne — August 5, 2007 @ 12:01 pm
——————————————————–
True, and B. Hussein Os/bama = neocon-black
August 5th, 2007 at 1:01 pm“I think you’ll find most of the non-troll commenters on TP felt the same way.”
TP wasn’t launched until 2005, well after the invasion. Your comment is obviously a lie. No liberal said Iraq didn’t have WMD before the invasion. They only used the comfort of hindsight well after it was launched.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:02 pmHey, numbnuts: You weren’t listening. It was being said everywhere.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:03 pmThat’s bullshit. I never believed Iraq had WMD, and was willing to let the inspectors do their work. I said it to anyone who would listen, and many who didn’t want to hear it.
I think you’ll find most of the non-troll commenters on TP felt the same way.
Just because you are a gullible sheep, doesn’t mean everyone is.
Comment by Zooey — August 5, 2007 @ 1:00 pm
——————————————-
No. That is bullsh!t!
Ha! Liberals… always looking to revise history!
August 5th, 2007 at 1:03 pmHindsight is 50/50.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 12:55 pm
I did. I was against the invasion before it happened. The case for invasion was falling apart as the Bush administration was putting it together.
WMD deployed in in 45 mins? False. Nigerian uranium? False. Meeting in Prague between Atta and a Hussein agent? False. Iraq’s unpiloted drones capable of spreading chemical & biological agents? False.
To make it all worse, the UN’s inspectors called US intelligence on Iraq’s WMD “garbage”. The Bush administration’s lies only fooled the misinformed, the gullible, or those who wanted to believe.
(It’s amazing that, this far into the game, I still have to repeat myself on these facts)
August 5th, 2007 at 1:03 pmHey, numbnuts: You weren’t listening. It was being said everywhere.
Comment by Marcus Aruelius
Links, evidence, sources?
August 5th, 2007 at 1:04 pmTrue, and B. Hussein Os/bama = neocon-black
Comment by Konservo
Racist crap from mr. Pee…..
STFU, adults are talking.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:05 pmKonservo is scared of Obama. How predictable. Clarence Thomas, and his fear and hatred of his own heritage, is a Black Neocon.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:05 pmWMD deployed in in 45 mins? False. Nigerian uranium? False. Meeting in Prague between Atta and a Hussein agent? False. Iraq’s unpiloted drones capable of spreading chemical & biological agents? False.
————
You never said any of these things BEFORE the invasion, only well after.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:05 pm“Konservo is scared of Obama.”
He’s 25 points behind Hillary. What’s to be scarred of?
August 5th, 2007 at 1:06 pm“Racist crap from mr. Pee…..”
What’s racist about it?
August 5th, 2007 at 1:06 pmLiberals never said anything about WMD not being in Iraq until well after the invasion. Hindsight is 50/50.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 12:55 pm
A factually incorrect statement. We were being lied to from the beginning, as Sen Dick Durbin pointed out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5cHBkB_Q6g
Scott Ritter was sounding the alarm in Sep 2002 about the false WMD claims: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,351165,00.html
People who on the left who listened to anyone other than the Bush Administration knew the WMD claims were not supported by the evidence.
And as for the nuclear capability, Mohamed ElBaradei, Director General, IAEA, said in his report, “To conclude: we have to date found no evidence that Iraq has revived its nuclear weapons programme since the elimination of the programme in the 1990s. ” Here is his report: http://www.un.org/News/dh/iraq/elbaradei27jan03.htm
To conclude, the statement you made that “Liberals never said anything about WMD not being in Iraq until well after the invasion,” is factually incorrect.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:06 pm“You see, we weren’t stupid and gullible enough to fall for the administration’s lies on Iraq.â€
Liberals never said anything about WMD not being in Iraq until well after the invasion. Hindsight is 50/50.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 12:55 pm
Dumbass….
Are you having a “half glass empty” moment?
It’s ‘Hindsight is 20/20″
frikkin moron..
GO AWAY.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:08 pmNumbnuts: I don’t know if this site is archived, but you will find quite a number of people who saw through this scam from the very beginning, if it is. Do a search, and let us know what you find.
Don’t forget: Iraq couldn’t beat a bunch of Iranian teenagers armed only with sticks and headbands. I hope you’re a high school drop-out, cause if you’re not, we wasted our money.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:10 pmSTFU, adults are talking.
Comment by Wayne — August 5, 2007 @ 1:05 pm
——————————————————–
What?
What did I say?
I thought this was America!
August 5th, 2007 at 1:10 pm“Scott Ritter was sounding the alarm in Sep 2002 about the false WMD claims”
Unfortuantly, Ritter tried to solicit sex from a minor online. He’s not the most credible guy in the world.
In other words, you have no proof that liberals said there were no wmd in Iraq before the invasion. That’s what I thought.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:12 pmBoy, you’re hard-headed.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:12 pm“Konservo is scared of Obama.â€
He’s 25 points behind Hillary. What’s to be scarred of?
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 1:06 pm
scarred?
What, did she throw boiling oil on him?
Your mom’s calling you, BM from 3DHS. Daddy’s gone again and she ‘lonely’.
Go ‘help’ mommy.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:13 pm“Numbnuts: I don’t know if this site is archived, but you will find quite a number of people who saw through this scam from the very beginning, if it is.”
Again, this blog wasn’t launched until ‘05, so anything that I would search would be hindsight, just as I have been arguing.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:13 pmHallo POPStar(TM)!!!
August 5th, 2007 at 1:15 pmI hope you are doing well.
Did you do a search? No. So what do you do? Cast aspersions and throw up a straw man. What you think is apparently immutable. You refuse to be educated. You are intellectually dishonest. What about the Iraq/Iran war? Answer the question.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:15 pmScott Ritter’s own arrests for soliciting sex with two minor girls occurred in April, and again in June of 2001. The court records of these events were sealed until last week when the FBI obtained a court order un-sealing them to pursue their own charges against Ritter.
http://www.ropma.net/ritter.htm
August 5th, 2007 at 1:17 pmShorter Assmark: “I refuse to investigate, therefore my initial assumptions are correct.”
Sounds like you’re a Gonzales protege.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:19 pmHa! Liberals… always looking to revise history!
Comment by Konservo — August 5, 2007 @ 1:03 pm
You know, It was quite funny(ironic, hypocritical, etc, etc) listening to the REPUBLICANS say they didn’t trust Governors and Mayors to help with the Green Energy initiative establisjed through the new Energy bill….
what was that about right to privacy, small Federal goverment, and LOCAL governments taking on more responsibilities??
Oh, that’s right, we’re in a ‘post 9-11 world’ now.
I’d like a troll to explain what the NEW Republican values are, please.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:20 pmSo? What’s the price of tea in China?
August 5th, 2007 at 1:20 pmMarcus, don’t you love asking trolls to confront facts? I can almost hear their little heads a’popping on my end of the tube….
August 5th, 2007 at 1:22 pmSo, why throw his name into this thread?
August 5th, 2007 at 1:22 pmI wish their heads popping was not a figure of speech.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:23 pmThe blogs have made a world of difference. Without the blogs, Bush would still be a popular President. Tweety would still be getting good wood just thinking about his cod piece, and longing for day when he could go have a beer with him. Broder could be mouthing his spiel and all would just marvel about the dean of beltway pundits. I remember 1998 well. There were no blogs then, or maybe I had just not discovered them. The first two blogs l latched onto were run by Hesiod and Atrios. Hesiod quit, but Atrios didn’t. The world may not be more enlighten, but one little part of California is.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:23 pmComment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 1:17 pm
We could provide you with a very long list of similar aspersions against the president (he lied about his insider trading to the SEC, he lied about his drunk driving arrest), does that make him equally incredible?
What about what Senator Durbin said? What about Mohamed ElBaradei said? Care to refute those?
And, yes, Think Progress was started in Jan 2005 with a post about the president’s State of the Union Address (first thread here: http://thinkprogress.org/2005/02/02/lets-get-it-started/), and the comments even included an ad for sex toys in it. I guess that was before they actually started moderating the site. What? You mean they still don’t? Oh…
August 5th, 2007 at 1:24 pm“Marcus, don’t you love asking trolls to confront facts?”
What fact did Marcus confront me with?
August 5th, 2007 at 1:24 pmThe fact that many people knew that there were no WMds in Iraq prior to the invasion. Are you freekin’ dense?
August 5th, 2007 at 1:26 pmQuit feeding the retards
August 5th, 2007 at 1:27 pm“What about what Senator Durbin said? What about Mohamed ElBaradei said? Care to refute those?”
Durbin’s comments came after the invasion. He may have been against the war, but he never said Iraq didn’t have WMD.
Elbaradei never said there were no WMD in Iraq.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:27 pmWhat fact did Marcus confront me with?
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 1:24 pm
Those facts.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:27 pmThe fact that many people knew that there were no WMds in Iraq prior to the invasion. Are you freekin’ dense?
Comment by Marcus Aruelius
What liberal said there were no wmd in Iraq before the invasion?
August 5th, 2007 at 1:27 pmOooh. Kos convention – a convention that throws out those serve our country in a uniform and who happen to disagree with the left. Or how do you explain the fact that an Army Sergeant was thrown out for asking questions during a panel session?
Typical liberals. All high and mighty about freedom of speech, but when someone disagrees with you, you silence the dissent.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:29 pmYou haven’t confronted me with any facts, only strawmen.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:29 pmQuit feeding the retards
Comment by Texas Democrat — August 5, 2007 @ 1:27 pm
————————————————
So now the Dems are advocating starving the mentally handicapped.
You would make Hitler proud…
August 5th, 2007 at 1:31 pmSaddam couldn’t defeat the Iranians (even with our help). he was pinned-down by UN forces and confined to his little No Fly Zone. There was obviously nothing there. Lots of people understood this (I’m one, and you can’t seem to refute my assertions).
This war is and always was about oil. Are you that stupid, or is your trash simple party-line talking points?
August 5th, 2007 at 1:31 pmMe.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:32 pmThe folks at Knight Ridder papers, which I believe has one of the largest circulations in the US, knew there were no WMD before the war. Frontline did a 1 hour special on it. There were plenty of people who knew there were no WMD in Iraq. They were largely ignored in haze of artificial patriotism.
I thought, at the time that there was WMD in Iraq. However, I had friends that told me, before the war, that this was not the case. To be perfectly honest…I was caught up in the artificial patriotism that one feels when they watch their military prepare for a campaign.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/newswar/part1/wmd.html
Sincerely,
August 5th, 2007 at 1:32 pmAnd, yes, Think Progress was started in Jan 2005 with a post about the president’s State of the Union Address
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider
So how does that prove that liberals here said Iraq had no WMD before the invasion, as Marcus alleged?
August 5th, 2007 at 1:33 pmTisk Tisk, I’m never right about anything, but I’m waay more serious and respectable than you snotty little commenters.
You libs will never remove me from my throne at Fox News Corp.
Bwahahaha.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:34 pmThe White House knew there were no WMD in Iraq before the invasion, but they chose to ignore this fact because they were Hell-bent on deposing Saddam (for their own individual reasons).
http://www.smh.com.au/news/breaking-news/white-house-knew-there-were-no-wmd-cia/2006/04/22/1145344306427.html
Instead, they chose to lie to the American people and drum up fake threats of the “final proof coming in the form of a mushroom cloud.” It was the nuclear threat, more than anything, that concerned Americans, and that threat was phonier than Jim Traficant’s hair.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:34 pmIf your assertion was true, you would have been banned from TP long ago.
Got anything lucid? No? Then, S.T.F.U. and learn.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:34 pmPS it wasn’t liberals that said there were no wmd. It was people doing reporting on weapons research. It was in fact non partisan work that they were doing. There work should refuted on its merits not on some artificial label.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:34 pmWhat liberal said there were no wmd in Iraq before the invasion?
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 1:27 pm
Me.
Comment by Marcus Aruelius
Please provide the relevant links.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:35 pmAnyone know where the Smug-storm created by the Kos convention is heading right now?
August 5th, 2007 at 1:35 pmOne doesn’t. One points to the moral, legal, economic, policy, and ethical failures that riddle this administration like cancer, and says “Just like…”.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:36 pmPS it wasn’t liberals that said there were no wmd.
Comment by ben
I know. None said anything until well after the invasion, when it was too late and only in hindsight.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:36 pm#72: You’re right. TP is not a typical liberal site, I’ll give them that. Try doing this on DKos and you’re banned straight away.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:36 pm#72: By the way, do you deny that an Army Sergeant was thrown out of a panel session?
August 5th, 2007 at 1:37 pmDont feed the retards
August 5th, 2007 at 1:37 pm#77 – I don’t think you read my first post when I discuss the folks who did say something before the war.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:37 pmthe comments even included an ad for sex toys in it. …
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — August 5, 2007 @ 1:24 pm
wow! is that STILL posted???
August 5th, 2007 at 1:37 pmi remember that, and all the requests/demands
to have it removed… funny… kinda…
.
I’m fixin’ to link my foot and your ass.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:38 pm“The White House knew there were no WMD in Iraq before the invasion”
Even if true, no liberal Democrat exposed it before the invasion.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:38 pmStraight to your house. What’s your address?
August 5th, 2007 at 1:39 pmDont feed the retards
Comment by Texas Democrat — August 5, 2007 @ 1:37 pm
————————————————
So now the Dems are advocating starving the mentally handicapped.
You would make Hitler proud…
August 5th, 2007 at 1:40 pmSo, why did you post your drivel here? by your own contradiction, you now known to be a liar.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:40 pmSo how does that prove that liberals here said Iraq had no WMD before the invasion, as Marcus alleged?
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 1:33 pm
I never said that liberals here ever said anything. You made that part up. But there were people saying the claims of WMD were false. And it turns out that some of those very people worked for the Bush Administration. But they were stifled from speaking up, and the official government position was a bed of lies. All Lies, and you damn well know it! It wasn’t that they were “mistaken” so much as they refused to believe anybody who didn’t tell them what they wanted to hear. Instead, they took the “intel” from sources like “Curveball” (known to be untrustworthy at the time, hence the secret name) and promoted them as hard indisputable facts.
You appear to operate from the assumption that the Bush Administration wants the truth to be known. That is a a false assumption, as the truth is the last thing they want to get out.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:40 pmBrassmask from 3DHS #84 –
I agree that more should have been done before the war, but I’m not sure what this has to with Liberal or Conservative. It seems we would have all benefited from not invading a country based on false or inaccurate information.
Sincerely,
August 5th, 2007 at 1:41 pmI’m fixin’ to link my foot and your ass.
Comment by Marcus Aruelius
You’re a real tough guy. I didn’t think you could back up your assertion. Should I inform TP of this threat?
August 5th, 2007 at 1:41 pm#90
Inform? Pussy!
August 5th, 2007 at 1:42 pmStop or you’ll trip over your pathetic ego. No one owes you jack.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:42 pm#87: I post here because I can, thanks to the unusual policy of the TP admins.
Lies, contradictions? I don’t know what you’re talking about. I’ve been consistent all the time. I never said “all liberals” crush dissent.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:42 pmthe fact that an Army Sergeant was thrown out for asking questions during a panel session?
another “wow”… THAT story deserves to be told…
August 5th, 2007 at 1:44 pmsurely there is a link, a reputable news source
reporting on this important story… not?
.
I know you won’t accept any sources I consider reliable, so I think I’ll just link to the pathetic cover-your-a$$ post on DKos.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/8/5/3940/86488
August 5th, 2007 at 1:45 pmHow can Kos say that he won, when his handpicked candidate, Ned Lamont, got his ass handed to him by Lieberman? (I voted for Lieberman by the way).
August 5th, 2007 at 1:45 pmDo you deny the underfunding of the VA? Do you deny the draft-dodging of your leaders? Do you deny the corruption and incompetence of your leaders? Do you deny that my soldiers in Iraq have been overextended and ill-equipped? Do you deny that the rethuglicans trashed war heroes John McCain and John Kerry? Do you deny the criminality of a preemptive strike?
August 5th, 2007 at 1:46 pm#98: Yeah, and the netroots posterboy, Webb, voted to expand FISA. :) Pathetic.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:46 pm#97: Uh. What does that have anything to do with the Kos convention debacle? Don’t change the subject.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:47 pmGo ahead, you Rethuglican pussy.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:47 pmanother “wowâ€â€¦ THAT story deserves to be told…
surely there is a link, a reputable news source
reporting on this important story… not?
.
Comment by katy
You really haven’t heard about the soldier that was kicked out of the Kos convention?
The lefty blogs are doing a good job keeping you guys ignorant, aren’t they?
August 5th, 2007 at 1:48 pmI didn’t change the subject. How freekin’ disingenuous.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:48 pmThe lefty blogs are doing a good job keeping you guys ignorant, aren’t they?
Indeed. It wasn’t until just a moment ago, they posted a CYA story on DKos.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:49 pm#98: Yeah, and the netroots posterboy, Webb, voted to expand FISA. :) Pathetic.
Comment by Boudin Bob
Temporarily expand, Bob.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:49 pmPoliticians ignore bloggers at their PERIL!
http://OsiSpeaks.com or http://OsiSpeaks.org
August 5th, 2007 at 1:49 pm98. #98:
You’re citing the posting you’re about to post?
Hahahahahahahahaha too funny man!
August 5th, 2007 at 1:49 pm#102: Sure you did. My question was: do you deny that an Army Sergeant was thrown out of the convention? You replied with off-topic screed about completely unrelated topics. Get a grip.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:49 pmIt’s a violation of the TP terms of service to make threats, Marcus.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:50 pm108,
Pussy
August 5th, 2007 at 1:51 pmIf this is true I would like to hear more about it can you provide a link?
Sincerely,
August 5th, 2007 at 1:51 pmTemporarily expand, Bob.
Oh, in the same way as the PATRIOT act was meant to be?
I wonder why you libs never learn.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:52 pmI didn’t change the subject. How freekin’ disingenuous.
Comment by Marcus Aruelius
Yes you did, MarcASS. You diverted the post from the soldier being kicked out of the Kos convention, to healthcare. It was rather pathetic.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:52 pmTemporary is Washington speak for unlimited.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:54 pmIf this is true I would like to hear more about it can you provide a link?
Sure.
http://pajamasmedia.com/2007/08/soldier_censored_at_kos_conven.php
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/8/5/3940/86488
August 5th, 2007 at 1:54 pmFrom the Daily Kos: “Being an Army officer myself, I notice this kind of stuff immediately. My first thought was, “WTF is this guy doing? Has he lost his mind?” The thing is, every soldier knows that you don’t take part in politics while you’re in your uniform. It’s not only highly inappropriate—it’s also illegal.”
So Bob, you’re advocating that this soldier was OK wearing his uniform in a political forum, even though it is illegal?
August 5th, 2007 at 1:55 pmMy question was: do you deny that an Army Sergeant was thrown out of the convention? You replied with off-topic screed about completely unrelated topics. Get a grip.
Comment by Boudin Bob — August 5, 2007 @ 1:49 pm
Jon Stolz, a Captain in the reserve, recognized that the Army Sgt was violating the UCMJ by making political statements while in uniform! (They were quite clear on that to us in Basic Training; when you wear the uniform you represent the Service). He also recognized that allowing it could be seen as being compliant and could bring UCMJ charges upon himself.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:56 pm“So Bob, you’re advocating that this soldier was OK wearing his uniform in a political forum, even though it is illegal?”
That’s his choice. Kos had no right to kick him out.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:57 pmbarfly,
Recently an anti-war soldier was given a dishonorable discharge for attending an anti-war rally in uniform. The rules should apply no matter the venue.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:58 pmMy apologies to Captain Jon Soltz for misspelling his name.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:58 pmBwAhahAHAHahAHahHAhA!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thanks for the links, Bob!!!
What a bunch of hypocrites!?!?!?!
- M r . P
August 5th, 2007 at 1:58 pm35% is the new number of Registered Independent Voters, folks! I would expect this number to soar now with what the Dems did last evening in selling out the people to this czar.
35% is a significant number of people who are totally and utterly dissatisfied with what’s currently going on in our government – and we want change – real change this time – not the sycophantic smoke & mirrors type of change the Dems interpreted from the mandate of the 06 elections either. Those dems who voted to enable illegal spying (warrantless) will suffer the consequences of the loss of their precious seat in Congress AND the people now know precisely whom the shapeshifters are – Webb and Feinstein are the most remarkable in the group and they’ve now ‘over’ in terms of trust of the american people.
Don’t be absurd: Vote for a Third! The third party is becoming a reality whether people like it or not. Move over Dems and Repubs – you’re in for a very wild ride in 08 because the “I’s” are coming and will carry the day, one way or another.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:58 pmJon Stolz, a Captain in the reserve, recognized that the Army Sgt was violating the UCMJ by making political statements while in uniform!
————-
This is a strawman. Ollie North wore his uniform while he was testifying. Kos censored an American solider.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:58 pmThat’s his choice. Kos had no right to kick him out.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS
Do you advocate his arrest for breaking the UCMJ? Or do you endorse lawless behavior?
August 5th, 2007 at 1:58 pm#123 is a strawman.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:59 pm“Kos had no right to kick him out.”
Read Wayne’s post, and apologize for your ignorance.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:59 pmThat’s his choice. Kos had no right to kick him out.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 1:57 pm
Wrong on both counts! The Army soldier was wrong to do what he did in uniform, and as it was a private function, they could kick anybody they wanted to out. They were paying for the facilities and their use, they had the right to decide who could speak and who couldn’t.
When you pay for your own political gathering, you can decide which of us will be welcome and which won’t.
August 5th, 2007 at 1:59 pmOllie North was, and is a punk. He attended a hearing he was summoned to as a part of his job RETARD.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:00 pmThis is a strawman. Ollie North wore his uniform while he was testifying. Kos censored an American solider.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 1:58 pm
Wrong again. Col North was testifying before Congress on his role in the Iran-Contra affair, not attending a political fuinction. If you ever served in the military, you would understand the distinction. Either you never have, and therefore cannot speak from experience on the issue, or you have served, and are lying. Which is it?
August 5th, 2007 at 2:02 pmLook at the Kos Kids and their absolute ignorance of the world in general….if you are a foreign fighter caught on the battle field trying to kill US soldiers and are caught and imprisoned….hey….just wright a poem and all is forgiven….what a bunch of idiots.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:02 pm#123 is a strawman.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS
Look up the definition of strawman, you poor illiterate.
A strawman requires an assertion be made – I only asked a question, hence no strawman. Fox News does it all the time – I’m surprised you haven’t noticed.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:03 pmthanks for that link, bob…
um… did YOU read that story?
always good to have both sides, huh…
and always consider the source…
What Really Happened at the YearlyKos Military Panel
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/8/5/3940/86488
when i clicked on the video link at pjmedia, it crashed my safari…
August 5th, 2007 at 2:04 pmshould’ve known better…
There is no prohibition against speaking at political functions while in uniform. This is a lie. And a strawman.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:05 pmLOL, that Kos guy is a real nut.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:05 pm“Look at the Kos Kids and their absolute ignorance of the world in general”
Coming from someone who wet his pants over non-existent WMD’s, comments like that are to be expected…
August 5th, 2007 at 2:05 pm“When you pay for your own political gathering, you can decide which of us will be welcome and which won’t.”
Right you are, the conserv666atives have been doing this forever! Dubyas appearances are so staged I expect at any minute he’ll break into song ala Oklohoma! All people are hand picked, nobody is turned away because only the ‘right” people are ever let in.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:05 pmLOL, that Kos guy is a real nut.
Comment by muckdog — August 5, 2007 @ 2:05 pm
————————————————————————
He sure is, muckdog, he sure is!
August 5th, 2007 at 2:06 pm“Col North was testifying before Congress on his role in the Iran-Contra affair, not attending a political fuinction.”
A committe hearing is a political function.
John Kerry and his band of misfits also spoke at antiwar political functions while in uniform.
Again, your assertion is a strawman.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:06 pmWayne A. Schneider,
The guy is obviously a right wing Christ666ian conserv666ative, of course he hasn’t served.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:07 pm“When you pay for your own political gathering, you can decide which of us will be welcome and which won’t.â€
Yes, but Kos and the Dem presidential candiates who spoke there will pay a price for silencing a man in uniform.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:08 pmAgain, your assertion is a strawman.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS
And mine was not. Just so we’re straight on that.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:08 pmA committe hearing is a political function.
No it’s not, it’s a legal function. I can see though how a republic666an could not tell the difference.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:10 pmTITLE 10, Subtitle A, PART II, Chap 49 of the US Code spells out misc. prohibitions imposed on active duty military personnel. There is no prohibition against speaking at political functions while in uniform.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:11 pmthe Dem presidential candiates who spoke there will pay a price for silencing a man in uniform.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS
Oh. please. This is a year and a half out – it’s ridiculous to assert this is anything but a small blip.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:11 pmAnd mine was not. Just so we’re straight on that.
Comment by barfly
My bad.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:14 pmI don’t know the code, but it seems to me that committee hearing is not a political rally. It is a government function. Of course if you are requested to appear to answer questions as to your position and your position is a member of the military then you would be allowed, perhaps even required by your superiors, to attend in uniform.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:16 pmRetard,
“11002. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DIRECTIVES PERTAINING TO UNIFORMS
1. Implementing 10 U.S.C. 772, the President, by Executive Order 10554 of 18 August 1954, delegated to the Secretary of Defense the authority to prescribe regulations under which persons may wear the uniform. The following excerpts from DoD Directive 1334.1 of 11 August 1969 outline these regulations:
a. Members of the Armed Forces (including retired members and members of reserve components). The wearing of the uniform is prohibited under any of the following circumstances:
(1) At any meeting or demonstration which is a function of, or sponsored by an organization, association, movement, group, or combination of persons which the Attorney General of the United States has designated, pursuant to E.O. 10450, as amended as totalitarian, fascist, communist, or subversive, or as having adopted a policy of advocating or approving the commission of acts of force or violence to deny others their rights under The Constitution of the United States, or as seeking to alter the form of Government of the United States by unconstitutional means.
(2) During or in connection with the furtherance of political activities…
August 5th, 2007 at 2:17 pmSure thing. Right. Uh huh. Now you can go away and not worry about us in here.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:17 pm#141 – Perhaps that is the problem with the current republican party. They cannot tell the difference between campaigning and governing.
Sincerely,
August 5th, 2007 at 2:19 pmYeah, thats what I thought
August 5th, 2007 at 2:21 pm“(2) During or in connection with the furtherance of political activities…”
Comment by Texas Democrat —
BOOM!
[the sound of Brassmask's argument imploding]
August 5th, 2007 at 2:21 pmIt’s the campaign continuum.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:21 pmMan dont ya know he’s furiously Googling.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:25 pmHey, try conservapedia.org I’m sure you’ll find some crackpot horesh*t there to support your ignorant arguments.
Liberals never said anything about WMD not being in Iraq until well after the invasion. Hindsight is 50/50.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 12:55 pm
Ha! Liberals… always looking to revise history!
Comment by Konservo — August 5, 2007 @ 1:03 pm
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You trolls are nuts! You are blind and deaf fools.
Zooey is exactly right at:
Comment by Zooey — August 5, 2007 @ 1:00 pm
There were plenty expert opinions insisting that the inspectors be given time to prove the assertion. But they were ignored and dismissed. (Bush told the inspectors to get out because the invasion was imminent: did you forget that?) We “liberals” were reading the experts and shouting to be heard — but media pundits, cheerleaders and liars were louder; accusing the rest of us as traitors, cowards and worse — turns out we have been vindicated – you were wrong. But we are taking no comfort in being right from the start; you guys have put us all in a HUGE mess, and someone smarter than the lot of you is going to have to pull us out of it if it is even possible.
How dare you come to TP and ridicule us when you have nothing!!
August 5th, 2007 at 2:25 pmYou have nothing but a lame, stupid man for president, with a sinister and conniving liar as VP, an incompetent AG who can only lie in a feeble attempt to cover up his incompetency and illegal advice to the White House.
You have nothing to brag about. You should feel humiliated.
Zooey, Walt, Wayne, and many, many others here were able to see through the bull-s* that you guys fell into. Now that you and your guys are all covered in manure, you are still calling us fools.
Take a look in the mirror, jerks; you’re still full of s**.
Yeah, this will definitely sink the dems chances next year.
**snerk!**
August 5th, 2007 at 2:26 pmComment by Marie — August 5, 2007 @ 2:25 pm
Well said, Marie. Thank you.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:29 pmBOOM!
[the sound of Brassmask’s argument imploding]
Comment by barfly
Not even close.
The rest of that sentence reads…
“when an inference of official sponsorship for the activity or interest could be drawn.”
It would not be drawn by one guy expressing his sole opinion. Obviously. Just like it wasn’t drawn when John Kerry made speeches at political functions against the war in his uniform. You misread the law and you misreprested it.
Again, this is a strawman to divert attention away from Kos censoring a military man in uniform, a no no during a time of war.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:30 pmFor those who say we didn’t object until we had the advantage of hindsight — I have copies of numerous letters of mine printed in newspapers, Newsweek magazine, and news websites clearly stating my objection and basis for it.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:30 pmIt’s the trolls who were stupid, blind and now stubborn.
“Zooey, Walt, Wayne, and many, many others here were able to see through the bull-s* that you guys fell into.”
Again, that is all just in hindsight, as this blog wasn’t launched until Jan, ‘05. There’s no evidence any of those people made those comments before the invasion, when it was most needed.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:33 pmWrong again. Col North was testifying before Congress on his role in the Iran-Contra affair, not attending a political fuinction. If you ever served in the military, you would understand the distinction. Either you never have, and therefore cannot speak from experience on the issue, or you have served, and are lying. Which is it?
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider
He thinks Republicans are exempt from the rules and laws.
That and obviously he, BrassMask, has never served, since he does not understand.
(2) During or in connection with the furtherance of political activities…
Comment by Texas Democrat
And Brassmask runs off for more talking points after having his argument decimated, lmao
August 5th, 2007 at 2:35 pmFor those who say we didn’t object until we had the advantage of hindsight — I have copies of numerous letters of mine printed in newspapers, Newsweek magazine, and news websites clearly stating my objection and basis for it.
———-
Maybe you were against the war. But you never said Saddam had no WMD before we invaded.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:36 pmLook at the Kos Kids and their absolute ignorance of the world in generalâ€
Coming from someone who wet his pants over non-existent WMD’s, comments like that are to be expected…
Comment by barfly — August 5, 2007 @ 2:05 pm
Go ahead….take a poem to a terriorist there “barfly”……squash!
August 5th, 2007 at 2:36 pmAnd then in 2006, we won
And in 2009 we will create more wars with the powers Bush gave us
August 5th, 2007 at 2:36 pmComment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 2:33 pm
Your monicker here describes your hard head — you are unable to hear over the loud voices inside your head. TP was not launched before the war – but many of us were born before that date, stupid.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:39 pmWe were writing to the established media, we were screaming to be heard, but the brassheads like you wouldn’t hear.
(2) During or in connection with the furtherance of political activities…
Comment by Texas Democrat
And Brassmask runs off for more talking points after having his argument decimated, lmao
Comment by Wayne
Texas Democrat left off the last line which was “when an inference of official sponsorship for the activity or interest could be drawn.”
The soldeir was speaking out against the Kos convention, which obvously doesn’t show officail sponsorship since he was speaking against it. This was also one man, expressing his sole opinion.
Texas Democrat left off that last line because he is a liar and a conartist.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:39 pmWe were writing to the established media, we were screaming to be heard, but the brassheads like you wouldn’t hear.
Comment by Marie
Again, you never stated before the war that Saddam didn’t have WMD, or you simply would provide proof.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:40 pmRetard,
The quote “when an inference of official sponsorship for the activity or interest could be drawn” refers to the sponsorship of the US military for the activity (political convention). It is not authorized because the military can not be seen as sponsoring any political idelogy.
You would know that if you served, it’s covered pretty early on in basic training you draft dodging chickensh*t chickenhawk tough guy wannabe.
Piss off retard.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:45 pmAgain, you misread the law because you don’t understand it.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:46 pmComment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 2:39 pm
So, by your reasoning, the soldier couldn’t infer that the YearlyKos convention wasn’t politally motivated and it was okay for him to be there, at a politally motivated convention, in his uniform?
Watching the video, the Solider himself acknowledges he was “breaking the rules”.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:47 pmOooh. Kos convention – a convention that throws out those serve our country in a uniform and who happen to disagree with the left. Or how do you explain the fact that an Army Sergeant was thrown out for asking questions during a panel session?
Typical liberals. All high and mighty about freedom of speech, but when someone disagrees with you, you silence the dissent.
Comment by Boudin Bob — August 5, 2007 @ 1:29 pm
What branch of the military did you serve with??? Please, do tell……
August 5th, 2007 at 2:49 pmAgain, you never stated before the war that Saddam didn’t have WMD, or you simply would provide proof.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 2:40 pm
Yes we did you stupid fu*k. We were all saying what a disaster it would be, but you mrons like to watch Fox News and not listen to dissenting opinions that aren’t in line with your republican talking points. We have been saying since before your head moron was given the presidency that he planned on invading Iraq and you fu*kers called us conspiracy nuts. Well fu*k you and the horse you rode in on. We were right and have been right all along. You people are wrong and have been wrong all along and by your post I can tell that you will continue to be wrong for a long time to come.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:50 pmComment by Jeannie See
“So, by your reasoning, the soldier couldn’t infer that the YearlyKos convention wasn’t politally motivated and it was okay for him to be there, at a politally motivated convention, in his uniform?”
You’d have to ask him what he inferred.
“Watching the video, the Solider himself acknowledges he was “breaking the rulesâ€.”
Link?
August 5th, 2007 at 2:50 pmLiberals never said anything about WMD not being in Iraq until well after the invasion. Hindsight is 50/50.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 12:55 pm
Ha! Liberals… always looking to revise history!
Comment by Konservo — August 5, 2007 @ 1:03 pm
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You trolls are nuts! You are blind and deaf fools.
Zooey is exactly right at:
Comment by Zooey — August 5, 2007 @ 1:00 pm
There were plenty expert opinions insisting that the inspectors be given time to prove the assertion. But they were ignored and dismissed. (Bush told the inspectors to get out because the invasion was imminent: did you forget that?) We “liberals†were reading the experts and shouting to be heard — but media pundits, cheerleaders and liars were louder; accusing the rest of us as traitors, cowards and worse — turns out we have been vindicated – you were wrong. But we are taking no comfort in being right from the start; you guys have put us all in a HUGE mess, and someone smarter than the lot of you is going to have to pull us out of it if it is even possible.
How dare you come to TP and ridicule us when you have nothing!!
You have nothing but a lame, stupid man for president, with a sinister and conniving liar as VP, an incompetent AG who can only lie in a feeble attempt to cover up his incompetency and illegal advice to the White House.
You have nothing to brag about. You should feel humiliated.
Zooey, Walt, Wayne, and many, many others here were able to see through the bull-s* that you guys fell into. Now that you and your guys are all covered in manure, you are still calling us fools.
Take a look in the mirror, jerks; you’re still full of s**.
Comment by Marie — August 5, 2007 @ 2:25 pm
******************************************************
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Ha! Liberals… always looking to revise history!
————
————
August 5th, 2007 at 2:51 pmExactly right!!
My father was in the Air Force for 47 years and he would never attend a political function in his uniform because he always said it was against military laws to do so.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:51 pmRetard,
This line of reasoning reveals your ignorance:
“The soldeir was speaking out against the Kos convention, which obvously doesn’t show officail sponsorship since he was speaking against it.”
The sponsorship in question is of the military, not the man himself YOU F*CKING RETARD. It doesn’t matter what the man’s beliefs are, it’s about the uniform. Obviously you never served and are out of your element, wade back to the shallow end.
What a putz.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:52 pm“Yes we did you stupid fu*k. We were all saying what a disaster it would be”
Provide the link, please, showing that you are any liberal Democrat said Saddam didn’t have WMD before the war was launched.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:52 pmComment by Marie — August 5, 2007 @ 2:25 pm
Thank for saying that Marie.
We never believed there were WMD. Never.
Brass says we have no evidence of it — f*ck him. We know better.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:52 pmIt’s just his mental masturbation.
From Kos:
“In the Pajamas Media video of the scene, even the sergeant readily admits that he was breaking the rules.”
As did every quoted military person present. Your reading of the statute doesn’t jibe with the general military consensus of those present, Brassmask. Are you saying Wesley Clark doesn’t know this statute’s meaning? He also objected on the same grounds.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:52 pmMy father was in the Air Force for 47 years and he would never attend a political function in his uniform because he always said it was against military laws to do so.
Comment by Jeannie See
John Kerry and his band of misfits did it protesting the Vietnam war.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:53 pmOne last time Brasshead
August 5th, 2007 at 2:53 pmAs most people know, it is difficult to prove a negative.
The inspectors were there to find the proof. They found nothing.
But before they could finish the job, Bush told them to get the hell out.
hello! marie!!
August 5th, 2007 at 2:53 pmi love it when you let fly!
!
#170: The link was posted above by Bodin Bob but, here you go again:
http://www.pajamasmedia.com/2007/08/soldier_censored_at_kos_conven.php
August 5th, 2007 at 2:53 pmYou never said any of these things BEFORE the invasion, only well after.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 1:05 pm
Well, since you don’t know who I am or what I did or didn’t say before the invasion, your statement is pure, unadulterated BS.
What an unsurprising development, coming from a Bush supporter.
(And -to reiterate- I did see through the maze of lies before the invasion. Too bad you were so misinformed to believe those lies, and that you now want others to share in the shame. Tough luck)
August 5th, 2007 at 2:55 pmAgain, you never stated before the war that Saddam didn’t have WMD, or you simply would provide proof.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 2:40 pm
Prove it.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:55 pmMarie,
My comment keeps getting lost, but stated more simply — Thank you!
August 5th, 2007 at 2:56 pmProvide the link, please, showing that you are any liberal Democrat said Saddam didn’t have WMD before the war was launched.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS
August 5th, 2007 at 2:57 pmHere:
Did Kerry break the rules when he protested in his uniform?
August 5th, 2007 at 2:57 pmRetards sapping my strength!
August 5th, 2007 at 2:57 pmAgain, that is all just in hindsight, as this blog wasn’t launched until Jan, ‘05. There’s no evidence any of those people made those comments before the invasion, when it was most needed.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS
TP was not the only blog around when the invasion happened.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:58 pmI was blogging warning Bush and Cheney would get us into a war and warning about pnac back in 2000 before the election.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS
mmmm…another troll that has nothing. Next.
August 5th, 2007 at 2:58 pmComment by Juan C — August 5, 2007 @ 2:57 pm
That was simple!
August 5th, 2007 at 2:59 pmTP was not the only blog around when the invasion happened.
I was blogging warning Bush and Cheney would get us into a war and warning about pnac back in 2000 before the election.
Comment by Wayne — August 5, 2007 @ 2:58 pm
Right, Wayne. TP wasn’t around, and I didn’t even have an internet connection then, but I knew they were lying us into war. It didn’t take much digging to find our what was going on.
These submissive followers just relied on what they were told because they are lazy and scared.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:01 pmI was blogging warning Bush and Cheney would get us into a war and warning about pnac back in 2000 before the election.
Comment by Wayne
That’s not what I’m asking. I’m asking for a source where either you or one of the other liberal Democrats here stated that Saddam had no WMD before we went to war, not after. Because your comments are in hindsight.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:01 pmDid Kerry break the rules when he protested in his uniform?
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 2:57 pm
Prove that he did.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:02 pmAgain, you never stated before the war that Saddam didn’t have WMD, or you simply would provide proof.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS
I’ve seen this conservative Three Card Monty before. If you provide a link showing that you didn’t believe the WMD claims, he’ll switch to saying “well, I meant what prominent liberals said…” next it will devolve to “well, I meant what the liberal movement was saying.”
August 5th, 2007 at 3:03 pmProve that he did.
Comment by Zooey
http://polipundit.com/clark_kerry_highlighted.jpg
August 5th, 2007 at 3:05 pmBecause your comments are in hindsight.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 3:01 pm
Basically, we are people of integrity and don’t have to lie about what we do — so we’re not always thinking about how we can prove what we did or did not do. You just have to take our word for it, don’t you? I’m not posting my dad’s phone number so you can call and ask him, or any of my friends or co-workers phone numbers either.
Just because you know YOU can’t be trusted, doesn’t mean we can’t.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:06 pmIf that’s a problem for you — move on.
Again, you never stated before the war that Saddam didn’t have WMD, or you simply would provide proof.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 2:40 pm
Prove it.
Comment by Zooey — August 5, 2007 @ 2:55 pm
Bwahahahaha, she’s got you bonehead! I stated there were no WMD in Iraq as well. Prove that I didn’t idiot.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:06 pmHe was out of the service.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:06 pmPhew bad_troll_day. If they go on like this they’ll soon grow hair on their palms.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:07 pmEven Ted Kennedy said Saddam had wmd.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:07 pmComment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 3:05 pm
He obviously wasn’t in the military then.
You have proved nothing.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:07 pmComment by barfly — August 5, 2007 @ 3:03 pm
I was screaming the fact that there were no WMDs before the invasion to everyone in my office and my boss told me to calm down before I gave myself a heart attack. That was at our company Christmas party in December 2002. If I would have known that someone would ask me to provide proof of that fact 5 years later, I would have recorded the discussion.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:08 pmI was screaming the fact that there were no WMDs before the invasion to everyone in my office and my boss told me to calm down before I gave myself a heart attack. That was at our company Christmas party in December 2002. If I would have known that someone would ask me to provide proof of that fact 5 years later, I would have recorded the discussion.
Comment by Jeannie See — August 5, 2007 @ 3:08 pm
—————————————————————————-
Proove it.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:09 pmBasically, we are people of integrity and don’t have to lie about what we do
Comment by Zooey
No, you are not people of integrity. Far from it.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:09 pmBrassmark,
Still waiting for proof of ANYTHING you say.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:09 pmStill waiting for proof of ANYTHING you say.
Comment by Zooey — August 5, 2007 @ 3:09 pm
————–
Proove it.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:10 pmProve that I didn’t Mr. Pee Pee.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:10 pmDid Kerry break the rules when he protested in his uniform?
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 2:57 pm
Apparently, if I take your word for it. Why don’t you jump into a time machine and go back and have him removed. On your way back, stop by my house in 2002 and I’ll tell you there are no WMD.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:10 pmHe obviously wasn’t in the military then.
You have proved nothing.
Comment by Zooey
He was in the navy reserves at this time. I have proved everything.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:10 pmAnd ultimately, it doesn’t really matter what any of use said before the invasion.
Fact remains Pres Bush misled the nation into a war of choice. (”We know where they are” anyone?)
End of story.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:10 pmNo, you are not people of integrity. Far from it.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 3:09 pm
Prove it.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:11 pmRetard,
Thats one “o”
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/prove
Go to night school for f*ck sake!
August 5th, 2007 at 3:11 pmProve that I didn’t Mr. Pee Pee.
Comment by Jeannie See — August 5, 2007 @ 3:10 pm
Proove that you did.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:12 pmHe was in the navy reserves at this time. I have proved everything.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 3:10 pm
That picture does not prove Kerry was in the reserves.
Nothing proved.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:12 pmbrasshead, why do you think “Old Europe” didn’t join the coalition? Over here we were sure the whole wmd caboodle was just intentionally bs’ing the world into submission to the will of a few American neocons.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:12 pmRetard,
Thats one “oâ€
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/prove
Go to night school for f*ck sake!
Comment by Texas Democrat — August 5, 2007 @ 3:11 pm
—————————————————————–
Prooove it.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:12 pmEnd of story.
Comment by Gregor Samsa
Exactly.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:12 pmKonservo’s an illiterate dork…
Proove it.
Comment by Konservo —
You beat me to it.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:12 pmRetard,
He was in the reserves?
August 5th, 2007 at 3:12 pmProve it.
Dance for me!!! My pathetic Lefties!!!
August 5th, 2007 at 3:13 pmHiya, Zooey.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:13 pmKaty, too. And Wayne.
The bullheaded stuborn idiots here today really got my dander up.
They cannot disguise their own ignorance – they just bluster.
Fact remains Pres Bush misled the nation into a war of choice.
Comment by Gregor Samsa
The fact is no liberal Democrat said that before we went to war. It’s easy to say it now after the long search for WMD. But it’s all hindsight.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:14 pmbrasshead, why do you think “Old Europe†didn’t join the coalition?
Comment by doro
Britain joined it.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:15 pmWho’s pathetic, I mean really, that’s the best you can do.
Sheeeeeeesh what a waste of time.
Bye all.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:15 pmThe fact is no liberal Democrat said that before we went to war.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 3:14 pm
And that is of no consequence to the fact that Pres Bush invaded a country that posed no threat, that he hyped the so-called WMD threat, and that his administration cherry-picked the intelligence on which they based their casus belli.
That is the crux of the problem. Discounting the critics because they might have realised the fraud after the fact is pure stupidity.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:17 pmWho’s pathetic, I mean really, that’s the best you can do.
Sheeeeeeesh what a waste of time.
Bye all.
Comment by Texas Democrat — August 5, 2007 @ 3:15 pm
————————————————
ProooOOOooOOooOOooOoOOOooOOooOoooOOove it.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:20 pmThis is an excerpt fromthe book “The Italian Letter“, by Peter Eiser and Knut Royce.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:21 pm
Don’t let the door hit you on the way out, Texas Democrat!
August 5th, 2007 at 3:21 pmProvide the link, please, showing that you are any liberal Democrat said Saddam didn’t have WMD before the war was launched.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 2:52 pm
Shove it up your a$$ troll.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:21 pmDiscounting the critics because they might have realised the fraud after the fact is pure stupidity.
Comment by Gregor Samsa
Too bad they never said anything before the fact. Hindsight is 20/20.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:23 pmShove it up your a$$ troll.
Comment by Spudge_Boy
Another angry liberal who will be leaving soon.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:23 pmComment by Brassmask from 3DHS
The point is that we had Saddam in a box, he hated fundamentalists, and felt too threatened to give terrorists aid. The world community (except for a few well-bribed “allies”) rightly was against invasion, for the reasons stated before the war began. None of the predictions have panned out, and we are no closer to democracy in Iraq than we were three years ago, despite shoveling half a trillion dollars into the political hopper, along with 3500 of our best soldiers. We are allowing the “dregs and drugs” back into the military – making a mockery of claims that the “new, all volunteer army” is any different than the Vietnam era army, and we still have some who think this fubar can be salvaged.
Good luck selling that in november, ‘08.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:24 pmProoove it.
Comment by Konservo
Prove you don’t bend over for KKKarl Rove and take it daily.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:24 pmbe sure to post all proof you have.
barfly, what have the Dems done to stop the war? They promised they would in ‘06, and they failed on that pledge.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:26 pmToo bad they never said anything before the fact.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 3:23 pm
Again, it doesn’t matter.
A lie is still a lie, and a fraud is still a fraud.
Your defence of the Bush administration’s war of choice is ethically challenged, and morally bankrupt.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:26 pmAnother angry liberal who will be leaving soon.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 3:23 pm
I won’t be going anywhere a$$wipe.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:26 pmShort version of Brassmark’s babble:
If nobody catches my lies as I am spewing them, everything is a-ok.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:29 pm“barfly, what have the Dems done to stop the war? They promised they would in ‘06, and they failed on that pledge.”
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS —
Oh, no you don’t. The dems need the republicans to end this war, and you know it. To rag on the dems while giving the sit-on-their-hands republicans a pass for their non-actions is silly, and exposes how unserious you are about really withdrawing.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:30 pmHindsight is 20/20.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 3:23 pm
i thought it was 50/50 … @ 12:55 pm
ah hahaha! what a trooll…
August 5th, 2007 at 3:32 pmThe only republicans on the national stage who are telling the truth are Paul and Hegel – and even their positions smack of political triangulation…
August 5th, 2007 at 3:33 pmYour defence of the Bush administration’s war of choice is ethically challenged, and morally bankrupt.
Comment by Gregor Samsa
How’s that?
August 5th, 2007 at 3:35 pmThe bullheaded stuborn idiots here today really got my dander up.
They cannot disguise their own ignorance – they just bluster.
Comment by Marie — August 5, 2007 @ 3:13 pm
Brass is the most ignorant of the ignorant. He thinks because he can ask a question that he’s got everything figured out. He was defending f*cking Mark Foley the other night!
He’s never proven a thing on this blog. He’s worthless.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:35 pmTrolls can come here and disrupt all they want with their reduced IQ and childish rants. Whatever. They were wrong, misled and fooled each day since this began. They are still wrong, misled and used.
Piece of mind and integrity are things they never will understand or get.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:35 pmIf they knew the effort it takes me to write a lengthy comment in English. TP ate my last one and it was quite long.
The gist of it was: Britain wasn’t “Old Europe” according to Rumsfeld.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:36 pmI suspect Barssmark is a used car salesman. Or a snake oil salesman.
He certainly wallows in the same unethical behavior and thinking.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:36 pmOh, no you don’t. The dems need the republicans to end this war, and you know it.
Comment by barfly
The Dems lied when they said they could end this war.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:36 pmHe was defending f*cking Mark Foley the other night!
He’s never proven a thing on this blog. He’s worthless.
Comment by Zooey
Wayne was defending Scott Ritter just today!
August 5th, 2007 at 3:38 pmWayne was defending Scott Ritter just today!
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 3:38 pm
So?
August 5th, 2007 at 3:44 pmPiece of mind and integrity are things they never will understand or get.
Comment by Juan C — August 5, 2007 @ 3:35 pm
It’s not hardwired into them.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:45 pmSo?
Comment by Zooey — August 5, 2007 @ 3:44 pm
——-
August 5th, 2007 at 3:47 pmRitter is a pedophile, Foley is just gay. If you can’t see the difference… that is sad.
Wayne was defending Scott Ritter just today!
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 3:38 pm
You really are illiterate, aren’t you? I was quoting him, not defending him. You, on the other hand, are defending the Bush Administration. (Unless you meant the other Wayne, who probably has more information than I.)
August 5th, 2007 at 3:48 pmIt’s not hardwired into them.
Comment by Zooey
Worthless low lives. I dont see the point in engaging them. (now and then :)
August 5th, 2007 at 3:49 pmWayne was defending Scott Ritter just today!
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 3:38 pm
Where was that (B)assmark? He provided a link to Ritter’s assertions regarding WMDs, but I don’t see a defense of Ritter there – are you stupid or just lying again?
August 5th, 2007 at 3:50 pmBlogger Oliver Willis recently put it perfectly: “I used to believe that a lot of these people were just talking over my head, their discourse too lofty for a regular guy like myself. But that isn’t true.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:55 pm
are you stupid or just lying again?
Comment by Quadrajet — August 5, 2007 @ 3:50 pm
Couldn’t he be both? No?
I dont see the point in engaging them.
Comment by Juan C — August 5, 2007 @ 3:49 pm
I can now smell a lie miles away, and have gained a lot of information in debunking their lies. I have also learned a lot in reading others’ debunking of those lies. I’d say it’s been (and still is) a good learning experience.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:56 pmWell, well, well, another raid.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:57 pmThere used to be plenty of op-eds in German newspapers highly sceptical about the wmd claims and predicting the outcome of this war. Quite a few of them were quoting American sources to back their scepticism. Just forget what the brassmonkey has to say. My recollection is working quite nicely I’m not a Gonzo.
Hiyah Zooey! The heaps of books to read getting any lower? I am still struggling to find the time to finish Glenn Greenwald’s!
August 5th, 2007 at 3:57 pmRitter is a pedophile, Foley is just gay. If you can’t see the difference… that is sad.
Comment by Konservo
Foley is a pedophile, you cannot see the difference. You havejust proven so.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:58 pmYes, you are sad ( excuse for a human being )
listening to HOWARD DEAN’s keynote speech at
yearly kow…
w o w…
try to find it… americablog, yearlykos, etc… google it…
…
time for sam!
August 5th, 2007 at 3:59 pmYou really are illiterate, aren’t you? I was quoting him, not defending him. You, on the other hand, are defending the Bush Administration. (Unless you meant the other Wayne, who probably has more information than I.)
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — August 5, 2007 @ 3:48 pm
Wayne, have you ever heard anything about Scott Ritter being a pedophile?
August 5th, 2007 at 3:59 pm“Couldn’t he be both? No?”
You’re right Gregor, he could be – I mean, look at Gonzo.
“I can now smell a lie miles away, and have gained a lot of information in debunking their lies. I have also learned a lot in reading others’ debunking of those lies. I’d say it’s been (and still is) a good learning experience.”
Comment by Gregor Samsa — August 5, 2007 @ 3:56 pm
I agree…..
August 5th, 2007 at 4:00 pmHiyah Zooey! The heaps of books to read getting any lower? I am still struggling to find the time to finish Glenn Greenwald’s!
Comment by doro — August 5, 2007 @ 3:57 pm
Hi doro,
Sadly the stack of books is not getting lower. It took me so long to read “Conservatives Without Conscience,” because I kept having to go back and read things over. These nuts are simply unbelievable. Now I’m spending some time reviewing my new textbooks, and will then try to get one or two more read before school starts. And I need to respond to you on FB. I will!
August 5th, 2007 at 4:04 pmWell, well, well, another raid.
Comment by Jeannie See — August 5, 2007 @ 3:57 pm
C&L have it titled it: PAYBACK TIME. How appropriate. This administration wreaks vengeance with a vengeance. Soon nobody will dare to whistleblow anymore, paradise for the Administration.
August 5th, 2007 at 4:06 pmhave you ever heard anything about Scott Ritter being a pedophile?
Comment by Zooey
Ritter was arrested for soliciting a minor via an online chat room, the case was dismissed and the record sealed.
August 5th, 2007 at 4:09 pmZooey don’t stress yourself over me. I’ll be incommunicado for the next week. I’ll be off seeing my mom and my sister and celebrating weeding day with my man.
Good luck with reading. I had to keep going back rereading, too. I just couldn’t believe the amount of bs that is due to the Mr Bush’s presidency. I just kept sighing. Oh yes there was that as well.
August 5th, 2007 at 4:10 pmnot weeding, wedding :-))
August 5th, 2007 at 4:10 pmSecond attempt to respond to:
Wayne, have you ever heard anything about Scott Ritter being a pedophile?
Comment by Zooey — August 5, 2007 @ 3:59 pm
I heard of the right’s attempt to smear him as such. I’ve heard Randi Rhodes interview him and she and I were convinced that he is no pedophile. The link that he gave was to an anti-Islam website with prejudices and ignorances of their own. The article provided no proof of the claim, only stated, in “hearsay remark” fashion, that Ritter was arrested. The article was from Jan ‘03, and was an obvious attempt to portray the Bush Administration as the only ones who could be trusted. Based on what, who knows?
Strangely enough, I find the argument that “no liberals said anything” before the war to be a dishonest one, at best. Obviously it wasn’t said on this site because it didn’t exist before the Iraq invasion. And many of us DID say something, we just didn’t say it in a forum that documented our comments. My co-workers heard me say we were being lied to before in the invasion of Iraq. But I can’t prove that to anyone’s satisfaction.
August 5th, 2007 at 4:11 pm“Conservatives Without Conscienceâ€
Comment by Zooey — August 5, 2007 @ 4:04 pm
Would you put it on your “recommended reading list”? ;)
August 5th, 2007 at 4:12 pmThanks, Wayne. I found it on the Google. Apparently Ritter was arrested in 2001 in an internet sting, but his case was dismissed and sealed. Interesting the timing of him being exposed by this WH, isn’t it?
I’s never heard it before. Trolls got nothin’!
August 5th, 2007 at 4:12 pmWould you put it on your “recommended reading list� ;)
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — August 5, 2007 @ 4:12 pm
Absolutely!! :)
August 5th, 2007 at 4:13 pmComment by doro — August 5, 2007 @ 4:10 pm
I know what you mean. My wife is always trying to get me to help out with “Weeding Day” in the garden, but I resist. :)
I know, it was a typo, and we all do that. Congratulations and Good Luck with the wedding. Hope to hear back from you soon, but not at the cost of your marriage.
August 5th, 2007 at 4:14 pmWould you put it on your “recommended reading list� ;)
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — August 5, 2007 @ 4:12 pm
Absolutely!! :)
Comment by Zooey — August 5, 2007 @ 4:13 pm
And the lab work can be done right here at TP…..
August 5th, 2007 at 4:16 pmComment by doro — August 5, 2007 @ 4:10 pm
Have a great time, doro!
Heh, my “weeding” day was over 14 years ago — glad I got rid of that one. :D
August 5th, 2007 at 4:21 pmnot weeding, wedding :-))
Comment by doro — August 5, 2007 @ 4:10 pm
yours?!
August 5th, 2007 at 4:21 pmcongratulations and best wishes!
.
Congratulations and Good Luck with the wedding. Hope to hear back from you soon, but not at the cost of your marriage.
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — August 5, 2007 @ 4:14 pm
Thanks, never say never, but we’ve been together for 22 years now, the rougher times should be over, some of the problems have already been “weeded”out.
See you all next week. Bedtime over here.
August 5th, 2007 at 4:21 pmAnd the lab work can be done right here at TP…..
Comment by Quadrajet — August 5, 2007 @ 4:16 pm
No kidding! Mr Pee and his pets are the perfect lab rats for our submissive authoritarian experiments.
How are you doing, QJ?
August 5th, 2007 at 4:22 pmHey! Thanks again all of you!
August 5th, 2007 at 4:23 pmHey Z! All is well here, how’s it goin’ up there? Good to see you my friend….
August 5th, 2007 at 4:26 pmBTW, I found a liberal (or, at least, an anti-war person) who was speaking out before the invasion. He wrote in Jan 2003 about Ritter being set up.
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/j012203.html
August 5th, 2007 at 4:27 pmHey Z! All is well here, how’s it goin’ up there? Good to see you my friend….
Comment by Quadrajet — August 5, 2007 @ 4:26 pm
We’re having some lovely mid-80s weather here, so we’re really appreciating it. Better than the high-90s & 100s we’ve recently had.
Good to see you here!
August 5th, 2007 at 4:29 pmBob Allen {McCain Aide} was busted for soliciting oral sex on undercover cop.
Well, If Allen is gay this Konservo is obviously gay. And If Foley was gay then muckdog is gay. And so is Brassmask gay.
Why, If I use Konservos slanted spraypaint logic, every troll is gay and a pervert.
August 5th, 2007 at 4:30 pmWhy do GOPer trolls defend Mark Foley on TP threads? Foley only likes teenage boys, so he is a borderline pedophile. If he went after 13, and younger, then he would be a real honest to god pervert.
August 5th, 2007 at 4:30 pmDistractions; the troll playbook.
August 5th, 2007 at 4:34 pmAn excellent speech. It just goes to show how wrong the republicans have been for this country. They have been wrong about the Iraq war from the beginning and now we are paying the price for the worst foreign policy disaster in history.
August 5th, 2007 at 4:37 pmOsama Islamo-fascists.
McVey Right wing nut jobs.
Who’s a bigger threat to the American Democratic way of life?
August 5th, 2007 at 4:38 pmProbus: bush and his cronies don’t give a rat’s ass about the price we have to pay for the biggest foreign policy blunder in U.S. history.
August 5th, 2007 at 4:41 pmHow dare you besmirch the reputation of an American war hero, you fascist, neocon pig.
August 5th, 2007 at 4:48 pm“Foley is just gay.”
Comment by Konservo
Yes, in the same way that David Vitter (known as ‘Vitter the shitter’ to the street ‘ho’s in New Orleans) is ‘just straight’
August 5th, 2007 at 4:58 pmJohn Kerry and his band of misfits did it protesting the Vietnam war.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 2:53 pm
Those you call “misfits” are American troops who deserve our respect. They are war heroes and patriots. Dissent is a cornerstone of our democracy. Anyone who served in Vietnam or any other war deserves our gratitude and respect regardless of their views and that includes John Kerry – another combat veteran who served his country unlike Bush with distinction.
August 5th, 2007 at 5:03 pmYes, in the same way that David Vitter (known as ‘Vitter the shitter’ to the street ‘ho’s in New Orleans) is ‘just straight’
Comment by Quadrajet — August 5, 2007 @ 4:58 pm
There really ought to be “sub-categories” to sexuality. Yuck.
August 5th, 2007 at 5:17 pmThick troll mud here I see.
They caved on this FISA 120 day bill because Bushie the boy King said he would veto it. It seems pretty straight forward to me.
August 5th, 2007 at 5:21 pmEach and every move Bushie boy makes that is another obvious power grab is digging his own grave. Don’t think Dems are wimps and fools, as bad as we all feel about this it IS temporary and it gives them yet another coin in the impeachment bank. Remember Nixon? they gathered up the points of impeachment bit by bit until he was forced to resign. I remember the long agonizing time inbetween, and this clown is even more petulant and bull headed than Nixon, and he was incredibly pigheaded. He is a petulant, arrogant man, just like Nixon was. He must know he’s caught in a trap, or why else keep Gonzo> they all must have some idea that the Congress already have the evidence, already have secured the WH, DOJ and RNC emails and holding them somewhere, already have secured the data needed, they just haven’t played their hand. Bushies are corrupt but they are also scared of being caught, so they are doing dumb things,committing more crimes in an effort to coverup what they have done,like torture, spy, delete records. It’s so obvious Gonzo is working for him ONLY to cover for his criminal activity.
Very dumb move. Given enough rope, he will make the case for his removal iron clad ( as if it isn’t already).
As upset as it makes me they caved on FISA, I’, not giving up on them yet.
Justice,
If you haven’t already, read “Conservatives Without Conscience” by John Dean. Very enlightening.
August 5th, 2007 at 5:27 pmThere really ought to be “sub-categories†to sexuality. Yuck.
Comment by Zooey — August 5, 2007 @ 5:17 pm
Sorry I had to throw that out there Z, but as you know well, when dealing with trolls sometimes it gets ugly, hehehehe. BTW, nice shots on FB – just saw the ones of your trip – beautiful country eh?
August 5th, 2007 at 5:28 pmComment by Justice — August 5, 2007 @ 5:21 pm
I won’t dispute anything you wrote, I just have to ask you about this:
If, as you say, the Congress “already have secured the WH, DOJ and RNC emails and holding them somewhere, already have secured the data needed”, then what are they waiting for? Why keep the American people in the dark and frustrated? They know that we don’t want a corrupt, illegal, unconstitutional, immoral Executive Branch our government, so what are they waiting for?
If, as you say, they have all this evidence, then why are they not proceeding with impeaching them?
August 5th, 2007 at 5:28 pmSorry I had to throw that out there Z, but as you know well, when dealing with trolls sometimes it gets ugly, hehehehe. BTW, nice shots on FB – just saw the ones of your trip – beautiful country eh?
Comment by Quadrajet — August 5, 2007 @ 5:28 pm
Yep, take no prisoners when dealing with sick f*ck trolls. :-D
Thanks about the pics. I’d have more up, but I left my camera in Portland last time I was there. Grrrr… But I’m heading over there — again — this time to take Zoo Jr and drop him off to start his life on his own. I won’t put up any pictures of my weeping and wailing — cuz there won’t be any. Heh.
August 5th, 2007 at 5:39 pmI won’t put up any pictures of my weeping and wailing — cuz there won’t be any. Heh.
Comment by Zooey — August 5, 2007 @ 5:39 pm
You can put those pictures up, Zooey. Just change the captions! ;)
“Zooey weeps for the loss of our Fourth Amendment rights”
“Zooey reads latest Supreme Court decision backing Bush”
No one has to know what was really going on. ;)
August 5th, 2007 at 5:43 pmNo one has to know what was really going on. ;)
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — August 5, 2007 @ 5:43 pm
That would include tearing my hair out and scourging — I should charge people to see those. :D
August 5th, 2007 at 5:45 pmAll you’ve done is become disruptive, not course changing. Given that Obama has now sunk in the polls for echoing your words, and that Congress just capitulated to Bush on surveillance issues (which to me means that Dems are hedging their bets that the US will still be in Iraq should they win the presidency and want the tools to win), you are actually losing ground.
You may be driving the Democratic Party, but you are about to backslide in the next election.
August 5th, 2007 at 5:46 pmWayne > The Bush Regime crimes are obvious to everybody in America, but the Democrats in Congress are behind the curve. They think we want them to make deals with Bush baby, but we want his butt gone.
August 5th, 2007 at 5:46 pmComment by Jason M. Hendler — August 5, 2007 @ 5:46 pm
Some things need disrupting, JMH. Deal with it.
August 5th, 2007 at 5:48 pm“but you are about to backslide in the next election.”
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — August 5, 2007 @ 5:46 pm
Thanks, Nostradamus – you said the same thing before the ‘06 elections. There’s no better sign of victory than your prediction of failure.
August 5th, 2007 at 5:51 pmI guess all the TP staff are asleep today, because ZERO new threads today. On the other hand doing a thread on Bush being happy about getting more power could be depressing.
August 5th, 2007 at 5:53 pmYou may be driving the Democratic Party, but you are about to backslide in the next election.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler
Your predictions have all proved false so far.
August 5th, 2007 at 5:54 pmSo, tell us, why should we listen to you now?
Comment by Jay Randal — August 5, 2007 @ 5:46 pm
I think one of our biggest obstacles to a return of the “Rule of Law” is the Washington Media (meaning those who report on the Congress, not simply those in it from that area) and their memes. They have it in their heads what the American People want, and it is often based on old polls (which mean nothing anyway). They are also wrong. vey few politicans in Washington will volunteer information that makes them look bad. Speaker Nancy says that Georgie won’t be facing an impeaching (where have I heard that before?), and rather than press her for a full explanation every time a new revelation comes out that they have not only broken the law numerous times, but it was their intent all along to break the law numerous times, the Wash Press Corps trots out the old meme that the American People don’t want an impeachment (not true; we just didn’t like the way the Repubicans misused it in 1998.)
Notice how you don’t hear the Republicans (or the media) criticize all the lying under oath that the Bush people have been committing (or misleading Congress, or giving false statements to Congress whether or nto under oath). But that was such a big deal when Clinton didn’;t want his wife to find out about his affairs.
Personally, I don’t think the Democrats are so afraid of bringing up impeachment as it is the media who are afraid, because then they would have to acknowledge once and for all that they have no idea what the American people want. That’s just my opinion, of course.
August 5th, 2007 at 5:59 pmFunny how Pelosi tries to act like she could not stop the passage of the FISA override act, but if all of the Democrats in the House had voted NO then the damn bill would be dead today. Notice that only 2 GOPers jumped ship to vote NO on the bill, but 41 Dem turds voted YES on the bill.
Nancy > only a couple Dems should only have crossed over and not 41.
August 5th, 2007 at 6:01 pmThe Blue Dog Democrats have decided that they can do anything they want, since they believe Nancy Pelosi is toothless, so if the party had a tougher Speaker then he/she would kick the Blue Dogs to the curb.
August 5th, 2007 at 6:05 pmIf I was Speaker I would have called up all the Blue Dogs before the FISA vote to inform them to vote the party line NO on that bill. Any that refused would be sorry they ever were born.
August 5th, 2007 at 6:08 pmPersonally, I don’t think the Democrats are so afraid of bringing up impeachment as it is the media who are afraid, because then they would have to acknowledge once and for all that they have no idea what the American people want. That’s just my opinion, of course.
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — August 5, 2007 @ 5:59 pm
Excellent point, Wayne.
The media is a big part of the problem.
August 5th, 2007 at 6:10 pmI’m also getting sick and tired of the Dems caving every time some lying sphincter of a Republican starts to trot out the “The Democrats are not supporting the troops” BS! They passed a bill to fund the war, but with a limit on how long it would last. The president vetoed it, and they caved and gave him what he wanted. Why? Didn’t they think they could convince the American People that it was the president, through his veto, and the Republicans, through their refusal to override it, who were “not supporting the troops”? Apparently, they must also believe that we’re too stupid to understand the disctinction. They did the right thing the first time they passed that funding bill. They did the wrong thing when they refused to simply re-submit it for a vote time after time until the president got the mesage and signed it.
August 5th, 2007 at 6:11 pmIf I was Speaker I would have called up all the Blue Dogs before the FISA vote to inform them to vote the party line NO on that bill. Any that refused would be sorry they ever were born.
Comment by Jay Randal
Majority Leader Steny Hoyer’ job is to make sure the Dems are all on track too.
August 5th, 2007 at 6:13 pmso far it has been a failure for the Dem leadership.
They are all ineffective.
Apparently, they must also believe that we’re too stupid to understand the disctinction.
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider
That is it in a nutshell.
August 5th, 2007 at 6:16 pmThey clearly underestimate our intelligence.
The media is a big part of the problem.
Comment by Zooey — August 5, 2007 @ 6:10 pm
Thanks, Zooey, but I limit my criticism to the Washington Press Corps, not all media. Some of the things we have learned (and not from them) about this government’s illegal activities came from reporters and people working outside Washington. They aren’t brainwashed into believing the meme. And they don’t automatically treat the secrets they laern as “old news” that “everybody knew”. The WHPC wants to protect its access to the few people willing to tell them the truth, but they insist on reporting what the liars are saying to maintain that access. And when the truth does come out, what does the Bush WH do? Admit it was wrong? No, it tries to punish those who exposed the truth.
The Bush Administration values loyalty to George Bush above all else, including the truth, the law, and the constitution. They must not be allowed to remain in power.
August 5th, 2007 at 6:17 pmWayne > Pelosi and Hoyer did not care that the Blue Dogs would betray the party on the FISA bill. Now they are upset, because Democrats like myself are ultra pissed off about it. I heard that Pelosi is being hammered with phone calls, faxes, and e-mails telling her off.
August 5th, 2007 at 6:18 pmThat is it in a nutshell.
They clearly underestimate our intelligence.
Comment by Wayne — August 5, 2007 @ 6:16 pm
Maybe they’re right. After all, we elected them. :}
August 5th, 2007 at 6:19 pmI heard that Pelosi is being hammered with phone calls, faxes, and e-mails telling her off.
Comment by Jay Randal
If she read my email, her eyebrows got singed off hehe.
i let it rip.
August 5th, 2007 at 6:20 pmParty leaders should never exhibit weakness to their membership. Tom Delay was an effective GOPer leader, because he was willing to drop the head-chopper on any Repub who disobeyed him. I do not want to see a corrupt Delay in the Democratic party, but we need tougher leaders than chocolate eating Pelosi and wussy Reid.
August 5th, 2007 at 6:23 pmOne thing that should have been done, before 2006 election, was dumping the melon-head Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska overboard. A real Democrat should have been funded to take him out in the primary election. By burning him it would have sent a message to other wayward Senators like Feinstein to fall in line.
August 5th, 2007 at 6:29 pmThe Bush Administration values loyalty to George Bush above all else, including the truth, the law, and the constitution. They must not be allowed to remain in power.
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — August 5, 2007 @ 6:17 pm
Yes, the WH press corps is seriously falling down on the job, and the WH is attempting to marginalize Helen Thomas — the one who would actually do the job.
Television news is a joke, and that’s where people are getting their information. Frustrating.
August 5th, 2007 at 6:30 pm“Foley is just gay.â€
Comment by Konservo
Yes, in the same way that David Vitter (known as ‘Vitter the shitter’ to the street ‘ho’s in New Orleans) is ‘just straight’
Comment by Quadrajet — August 5, 2007 @ 4:58 pm
Thanks for the laugh Quadrajet. And my screen needed cleaning so no problem with the spewed water.
August 5th, 2007 at 6:41 pmHey shane,
How’s it going down in LA? Keeping cool?
August 5th, 2007 at 6:44 pmHey shane,
How’s it going down in LA? Keeping cool?
Comment by Zooey — August 5, 2007 @ 6:44 pm
I put two 13 year olds on the plane back to Chicago yesterday and other kids would not stop knocking on our door.
My daughter declared she is running for president when she grows up and refused to get into trouble when her friends were advocating it because it would come up during her election. I think she watches wat too much news.
The weather in LA is spectacular. At least it cools off nights.
August 5th, 2007 at 6:50 pmshane,
Your daughter has my vote. Now all we need is a time machine. :)
That’s the good thing about dry heat — there’s nothing holding the heat down at night, and you get to start fresh in the morning. We’re having a string of 83 degree days — nice.
August 5th, 2007 at 6:54 pmThe problems with the Washington press corps are not new, and they are systemic. Mark Hertsgaard wrote a terrific book, On Bended Knee: The Press and the Reagan Presidency in the late 80s that covered it beautifully.
But I F Stone was conscious of it as far back as the 1950s, and produced some of the best journalism through the 50s and 60s because he categorically refused to use “sources” and refused to establish relationships with politicians. “All governments are run by liars and nothing they say should be believed.â€
Dan Froomkin has a review of a recently-published biography of Stone here: http://tinyurl.com/37t29k As he says, the modern liberal blogger is picking up where Stone left off when he closed up the Weekly. Read Froomkin’s piece and then go looking for Stone’s work.
August 5th, 2007 at 6:59 pmMarco is a little too cocky in taking credit for the present dem majority.
The only reason the democratic party is not dead yet is because Bush is such a miserable excuse for a conservative. The neo-cons have set the republicans back quite a bit but most Americans do not support partial birth abortion, abortions for minors without parental consent, gay marriage, the welfare state or socialized health care to name a few issues. Watch your nominee for president swing wildly right as soon as he/she has the ticket from the loony left. And you’ll all be crying about being betrayed like you did last night and this morning over the “Domestic spying” being supported by democrats.
Just like this morning I’ll be saying “I told you”.
August 5th, 2007 at 7:22 pmThe only reason the democratic party is not dead yet is because Bush is such a miserable excuse for a conservative.
No, it’s because Bush exposed the scam of conservatism – that’s why so many “republicans” now call themselves libertarian, and independent.
We had many trolls come here before the ‘06 elections saying the same thing.
They don’t come around much anymore…
August 5th, 2007 at 7:31 pmComment by Troll — August 5, 2007 @ 7:22 pm
The democratic party is flourishing and will win the White House as our presidential candidates have hugely out raised the republican candidates because the republicans support the failed surge and the war.
The issue of abortion is a privacy issue and the government has no say in what a woman decides to do with her body. It is a medical and a personal issue. Gay marriage is also a personal issue and the government has no say in it as well. It is a right that should be afforded to every gay American. It is the government’s responsibility to make sure every American has access to universal health care.
The democratic candidate who ever he or she may be will have the support of all democrats and independents because of the Iraq war. After the incompetence Bush has shown in the last 6 years we will not have another republican president for a very long time. While it is unfortunate that the democrats voted and passed the spy bill the democrats still are a better party than the republicans.
August 5th, 2007 at 7:34 pmComment by Probus — August 5, 2007 @ 7:34 pm
I agree with everything you said (especially the Liberatian stuff, which many Republicans ought to support if the truly believe in getting government out of our lives), but I would caution you against thinking that our only choices are between Democrats an Republicans. The Democrats have let the Liberals of this country down too many times to be given an automatic free pass for the next time. If they want our support in ‘08, they better start acting like they care about what we think. (This is why I stay away from dkos; I’m not a Democrat.)
August 5th, 2007 at 7:42 pmYou should also check out the book Fiasco Zooey.
August 5th, 2007 at 7:50 pmYou should also check out the book Fiasco Zooey.
Comment by PICOT JORI — August 5, 2007 @ 7:50 pm
The story of my life. :-D
August 5th, 2007 at 7:52 pmWe had many trolls come here before the ‘06 elections saying the same thing.
They don’t come around much anymore…
Comment by barfly
If by troll you mean conservative, you are dead wrong. There are more conservatives posting in TP than ever.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:00 pmThe democratic party is flourishing and will win the White House as our presidential candidates have hugely out raised the republican candidates because the republicans support the failed surge and the war.
————–
They can’t use much if any of that money in a general election. The Dems have raised so much because the media focuses almost exclusively on them.
Either Rudy or Fred Thompson is going to be the next president.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:02 pmDo you advocate his arrest for breaking the UCMJ? Or do you endorse lawless behavior?
Comment by barfly
You are so quick to want to arrest a man in uniform serving his country to come to the defense of a shmuck like Kos. The soldier had every right to speak against the leftist liberals at the Kos convention, and it’s sickening that Kos threw him out.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:05 pmThe soldier had every right to speak against the leftist liberals at the Kos convention, and it’s sickening that Kos threw him out.
Comment by Dr. Dog
It is against the UCMJ for activemilitary to speakat apoliticalevent while in uniform, period.
Idiot.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:09 pmIt is against the UCMJ for activemilitary to speakat apoliticalevent while in uniform, period.
Idiot.
Comment by Wayne
Offer him a change of clothes, but do not kick a man serving his country out because you disagree with his opinon. That man had more of a right to speak than any of the front running posers on the Democrat side.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:11 pmIt is against the UCMJ for activemilitary to speakat apoliticalevent while in uniform, period.
Idiot.
Comment by Wayne — August 5, 2007 @ 8:09 pm
They refused to believe those of us who were actually wearing the uniform when we were told this.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:12 pmThey can’t use much if any of that money in a general election. The Dems have raised so much because the media focuses almost exclusively on them.
Either Rudy or Fred Thompson is going to be the next president.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 5, 2007 @ 8:02 pm
Democrats are raising money for both the primaries and the general election and will continue to do so.
Guiliani can’t win because of his stance on abortion and gay rights. The evangelical conservatives will dump him in the primaries. Also his unbelievable incompetence on 9-11 in placing the command center inside the World Trade Center will haunt him.
Whatever momentum Thompson had is gone considering how little money he has raised. He waited too long to declare his candidacy. Both Guiliani’s and Thompson’s wives have fast become campaign issues themselves.
The democratic candidates are more likely to win due to their opposition to the surge and the war.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:12 pmComment by Dr. Dog — August 5, 2007 @ 8:05 pm
11002. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DIRECTIVES PERTAINING TO UNIFORMS
1. Implementing 10 U.S.C. 772, the President, by Executive Order 10554 of 18 August 1954, delegated to the Secretary of Defense the authority to prescribe regulations under which persons may wear the uniform. The following excerpts from DoD Directive 1334.1 of 11 August 1969 outline these regulations:
a. Members of the Armed Forces (including retired members and members of reserve components). The wearing of the uniform is prohibited under any of the following circumstances:
(1) At any meeting or demonstration which is a function of, or sponsored by an organization, association, movement, group, or combination of persons which the Attorney General of the United States has designated, pursuant to E.O. 10450, as amended as totalitarian, fascist, communist, or subversive, or as having adopted a policy of advocating or approving the commission of acts of force or violence to deny others their rights under The Constitution of the United States, or as seeking to alter the form of Government of the United States by unconstitutional means.
(2) During or in connection with the furtherance of political activities
August 5th, 2007 at 8:13 pmDoes anybody here have a crystal ball?
August 5th, 2007 at 8:13 pm#338 it is shameful for you to say that that soldier broke the law. The man has earned his right to speak, and the liberals don’t want to allow it.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:14 pmIf by troll you mean conservative, you are dead wrong. There are more conservatives posting in TP than ever.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 5, 2007 @ 8:00 pm
No, he meant trolls, and there were a lot of them saying we’d get nowhere in 2006 and they were wrong.
We have several conservatives who post here, who are not considered trolls.
Yes, there are more of you trolls than ever, but you weren’t here dogging us about 2006, were you?
August 5th, 2007 at 8:15 pmThat man had more of a right to speak than any of the front running posers on the Democrat side.
Comment by Dr. Dog
Not while actively serving AND in uniform he doesn’t.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:16 pmHe knew that when he showed up.
He should have taken his own change of clothes, why should anyone give him new clothes?
Liberals do not support the troops. They want to silence and arrest them.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:16 pmNot while actively serving AND in uniform he doesn’t.
Comment by Wayne
Did everybody here hear that? Here is a liberal who thinks that a man serving his country does not have the freedom of speech. Isn’t it sickening? And you people wonder why everybody hates liberals.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:17 pm“No, it’s because Bush exposed the scam of conservatism – ….”
Comment by barfly — August 5, 2007 @ 7:31 pm
And the current dems are exposing themselves for the traitors they are now. It’s not like the dems had a landslide in the last election they took majority by a very slim margin. Bushs low polling figures are in part do to the conservatives disgust in this admin not in a change in values. Bush has betrayed the conservatives and they are looking forward to a real conservative. The Iraq war is a major source of discontent but things can change and they often do.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:18 pm#338 it is shameful for you to say that that soldier broke the law. The man has earned his right to speak, and the liberals don’t want to allow it.
Comment by Dr. Dog
I am a disabled veteran, who had to follow that same law, why is it shamefull for me to point out he broke the law?
August 5th, 2007 at 8:18 pmIdiot.
test
August 5th, 2007 at 8:18 pmoh lord please don’t anyone take that stoopid bait…
August 5th, 2007 at 8:18 pmamen.
No, he meant trolls, and there were a lot of them saying we’d get nowhere in 2006 and they were wrong.
We have several conservatives who post here, who are not considered trolls.
Yes, there are more of you trolls than ever, but you weren’t here dogging us about 2006, were you?
Comment by Zooey
The Dems should have won more seats than they did. Howard Dean flubbed it and didn’t put resources in states that he should have. What did the Dems really win though? They haven’t achieved much since they came to power. The confidence level of congress is at an all time low.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:20 pmDid everybody here hear that? Here is a liberal who thinks that a man serving his country does not have the freedom of speech. Isn’t it sickening? And you people wonder why everybody hates liberals.
Comment by Dr. Dog
I am a Ranger and a veteran.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:22 pmI served 9 years and multiple conflicts including Desert Storm.
You sir are a moron.
I am a disabled veteran, who had to follow that same law, why is it shamefull for me to point out he broke the law?
Idiot.
Comment by Wayne
You only say he broke the law because you disagree with what he was saying. That man has earned the right to speak, as you allegedly have. That solider should have been speaking up on stage, not being escorted out of the building. Shameful liberals.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:22 pmI am a disabled veteran, who had to follow that same law, why is it shamefull for me to point out he broke the law?
Idiot.
Comment by Wayne — August 5, 2007 @ 8:18 pm
Because he can’t hear it if he doesn’t want to.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:22 pmI am a Ranger and a veteran.
I served 9 years and multiple conflicts including Desert Storm.
You sir are a moron.
Comment by Wayne
Over the internet you can pretty much say you did anything, can’t you?
August 5th, 2007 at 8:23 pmOver the internet you can pretty much say you did anything, can’t you?
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 5, 2007 @ 8:23 pm
Way to support the troops, asswipe.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:24 pmThe Dems should have won more seats than they did. Howard Dean flubbed it and didn’t put resources in states that he should have. What did the Dems really win though? They haven’t achieved much since they came to power. The confidence level of congress is at an all time low.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 5, 2007 @ 8:20 pm
Try to stick to your own topic.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:26 pmComment by Dr. Dog — August 5, 2007 @ 8:20 pm
Your ignorance makes this all too easy.
First of all, Capt Soltz was trying to protect the soldier (and himself) from being brought up on charges, and the soldier knew he was violating military law by doing what he was doing. If you read any of Stolz’s account on dKos, you would know what happened.
Howard Dean launched someting unprecedented in party hostory, and that was his well-publicized “50-State Strategy”. Never heard of it? You should get out more.
And the main obstacle to Democrats achieving anything has been the Senate Republicans with their anonymous holds on everything but RWA Bush judges.
Finally, those polls to which you refer talk about the public’s perception of the Congress as a whole, not just the Democrats.
Perhaps you should log off and let someone else do this.
Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to go watch Tom Glavine win his 300th game, perhaps the last pitcher who will ever do so for a long, long time.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:27 pmWay to support the troops, asswipe.
Comment by Zooey
That’s all I’m asking you to do for the soldier that was kicked out of the Kos convention. You fools have the guy arrested and in shakles already. For what? Because you disagree with him politically.
If that guy were a liberal, you’d probably want to run him for office.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:27 pmIf that guy were a liberal, you’d probably want to run him for office.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 5, 2007 @ 8:27 pm
That’s bullshit. See Wayne’s comment at #356, and then shut the f*ck up.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:30 pmYou only say he broke the law because you disagree with what he was saying. That man has earned the right to speak, as you allegedly have. That solider should have been speaking up on stage, not being escorted out of the building. Shameful liberals.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 5, 2007 @ 8:22 pm
Spoken like a true “armchair patriot” with no prior military experience. You should listen to Wayne, he knows what he’s talking about.
When you put on the uniform of the United States Military, you have only those rights they give you. You lose your rights as a civilian. If the soldier showed up in civilian clothes, even though Stolz knew what he was going to say (because he confronted Stolz before), he probably would have let him speak. But since he risked military punishment (both the soldier for speaking in uniform and Stolz for letting him), Stolz tried to stop him.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:31 pmshut the f*ck up.
Comment by Zooey
You liberals are on a power trip. You want to silence everybody.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:31 pmBut since he risked military punishment (both the soldier for speaking in uniform and Stolz for letting him), Stolz tried to stop him.
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider
If you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you.
Stolz could have offered him a change of clothes if he was so concerned about him.
This has more to do with stopping somebody from speaking whom you disagree with than anything.
No, liberals do not support the troops.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:33 pmAnd yet Stolz plasters a photo of himself in uniform on his Web site. Heh. Hypocrite.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:34 pmTry to stick to your own topic.
Comment by Zooey
You already ceded the point. There are more conservatives posting in here than ever, and I love it!
August 5th, 2007 at 8:36 pmAnd yet Stolz plasters a photo of himself in uniform on his Web site. Heh. Hypocrite.
Comment by Exley
Whoops, Wayne left that little fact out. I wonder why?
August 5th, 2007 at 8:36 pmWhy not go with someone that thinks not about politcal gamesmanship, but rather the pros and cons of each and every decision… not chest thumping cheerleading but reasoned point by point cause and effect… this type of person can be wrong about something and then be willing to change their opinion if you provide intelligent evidence in order to sway him… wouldnt this be a great change from what we got on the left and right today where someone defends their position no matter what evidence is provided simply because THEY said it and their EGOs must be protected at all cost?
Yes?
Google: Ron Paul
August 5th, 2007 at 8:39 pmYes?
Google: Ron Paul
Comment by Gerald Gibson
Rudy or Fred.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:40 pmWhoops, Wayne left that little fact out. I wonder why?
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 5, 2007 @ 8:36 pm
Because that you are allowed to do.
Exley, my friend, you don’t want to get into this one. Dr. Dog is way off base and knows nothing about the military. Better to turn on ESPN and watch Glavine make history (he just got a hit to bring in the first run of the game.)
August 5th, 2007 at 8:41 pmComment by Probus — August 5, 2007 @ 7:34 pm
Your positions on the issue is not what matters its what the majority think and the majority dont like the ‘Progressive” agenda. They may dislike the war but a few years ago this same voting public supported that same war and the president had fantastic polling figures. The voters are fickle and if things change in Iraq you don’t have a winning issue.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:42 pmNo, liberals do not support the troops.
Comment by Dr. Dog
Your days of stroking your ego in public and getting cheered for it are over…
Military donations given thus far:
#1) Ron Paul
#2) McCain
#3) Obama
#4) Clinton
Thats from Fox News…
You dolts had your chance… you have had longer than WWII and you still cant even decide what the mission is and exactly who we are supposed to destroy in this “War”… and of caorse you have FAILED to deliver justice for the American 911 victims…
Move over… you failed.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:42 pmExley, my friend, you don’t want to get into this one. Dr. Dog is way off base and knows nothing about the military. Better to turn on ESPN and watch Glavine make history (he just got a hit to bring in the first run of the game.)
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider
Go Tommy!
August 5th, 2007 at 8:42 pmGerald, if you are a soldier and want to speak, you better be a liberal or the haters here are going to want to see you chained, shackled and arrested. This has got to be a new low for the liberal left.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:45 pmWayne, my friend….Believe me. I have ESPN on right now and saw Tommy drive in Milledge for the go-ahead run….But the fact is that Stolz was way off base yesterday and tried to hide behind regulations (which he seems to think do not apply to him) in order to silence someone — a fellow soldier — who dared disagree with him.
Stolz:
http://www.votevets.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=199&Itemid=80
Kos:
http://dailykos.com/special/about2#mmz
August 5th, 2007 at 8:45 pmGerald, if you are a soldier and want to speak, you better be a liberal or the haters here are going to want to see you chained, shackled and arrested. This has got to be a new low for the liberal left.
Comment by Dr. Dog
I have been on this site for years… I dont agree with everyone here but I am willing to REASON with them… which means concede when they are correct and expect them to concede when I am correct… and we can prove it… correct based on evidence is what defines correct… loud mouthed cat calling is not evidence…
You have no standing on which to feign shock… what the rightwing nutters in this country have done the past few years is push Americans LEFT and RIGHT… aka REAL Americans… to the point of being at each others throats because you can no longer make a point based on reasoning because the nutters just start cheerleading in response as if that is intelligent thought… hardly…
If you want to be taken seriously go back and find all the instances where war opponents were silenced or lies were put in their mouth by Fox news and Bushies and point out how WRONG that was… and THEN say “Now isnt silencing this soldier the same thing?” … can you actually point at the wrongs done by the “right” over the past 7 years?
Start with humility then reasonable people will listen.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:50 pmComment by Exley
You’re equating a photo of a man in uniform with a man showing up to a political conference while in uniform? Are ya nuts?
What about this guy: http://www.johnmccain.com/About/
It’s not even remotely the same thing.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:51 pmExley,
I know you really care about rules, so here they are from a comment above.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:52 pm“Your positions on the issue is not what matters its what the majority think and the majority dont like the ‘Progressive†agenda.”
No. The public is rejecting the conservative ideology after having lived through a republican House, Senate and presidency.
“They may dislike the war but a few years ago this same voting public supported that same war and the president had fantastic polling figures. – Comment by Troll”
It was support based on erroneous facts. There’s a lot more info about what got us into this war and the agenda of some of these criminals in the White House.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:54 pmcan you actually point at the wrongs done by the “right†over the past 7 years?
Start with humility then reasonable people will listen.
Comment by Gerald Gibson
Besides you, there really aren’t any reasonable people here. They are reflexevly liberal.
Some on the right have 1) spent too much, 2) not protected the border 3) some were corrupt.
Happy now?
Why do I have to denounce conservatives in order to call to task liberals who want to silence a man in uniform?
August 5th, 2007 at 8:54 pmDr. Dog!!! What’s happenin’, my brother!?!?!?
August 5th, 2007 at 8:55 pmI continue to be bemused when “conservatives” come to a liberal blog, spout off rude and offensive comments at great length, and then accuse liberals of squelching debate.
One episode at a conference turns into a huge cause, when there have been scores of examples over the last years of liberals being refused the opportunity to speak, or even attend “town halls” run by Republicans, or shown the door when they attempt to speak up at events like the YAF conference.
The irony of “conservatives” accusing liberals of suppression of free speech has become nauseating in its incredible hypocrisy.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:55 pmOnce again, I feel I should publicly apologize for getting his name wrong. It’s Capt Jon Soltz, not “Stolz“. My error, repeated by the others, I’m sure.
Trust me, Exley, you are backing the wrong horse on this one.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:56 pm(2) During or in connection with the furtherance of political activities…when an inference of official sponsorship for the activity or interest could be drawn.
————–
That inference could not be made in this case.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:57 pmI continue to be bemused when “conservatives†come to a liberal blog
———–
This is not a liberal blog. It is non-partisan.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:58 pmKonserv, what’s up, bro!
As you can see, I’m back. Thanks to you.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:00 pm“No. The public is rejecting the conservative ideology after having lived through a republican House, Senate and presidency.”
Comment by Nat — August 5, 2007 @ 8:54 pm
Do you really think people are that shallow and stupid ? I think most people recognize that Bush is a poor leader and they retain the values they began with but search for a better leader.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:01 pmThis is not a liberal blog. It is non-partisan.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 8:58 pm
BWAAAAahAAAhaAAA haaa. Dude you are at TP.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:02 pmBWAAAAahAAAhaAAA haaa. Dude you are at TP.
Comment by Troll
Point taken.
But it is technicaly a non-partisan site, according to the tax code.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:04 pmKonserv, what’s up, bro!
As you can see, I’m back. Thanks to you.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 5, 2007 @ 9:00 pm
—————————
Well, I can’t take all the credit. TripMaster Monkey did explain how it all works. I’m just happy to pass along the info.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:06 pm#380, Wayne, You’re wrong, but more importantly…while I hate to see any ballplayer — especially a good one like Soriano — get hurt, I am glad the Mets got that out at third!
August 5th, 2007 at 9:06 pmBut it is technicaly a non-partisan site, according to the tax code.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 9:04 pm
And god forbid the liberals should pay taxes. They just want everyone else to pay.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:07 pmWhy do I have to denounce conservatives in order to call to task liberals who want to silence a man in uniform?
Comment by Dr. Dog
Why? Because it sets a baseline as to whether you are only a chest thumper or someone that can list intelligent points… take Exley for example… I guarantee if you search the archives on this site you will see some very venomous debates with that person… yet they are often treated with courtesy… because they can at least sometimes make a case that is based on reasoning (even if sometimes misinformed or ideologically limited) ….
Most of the “neocons” or “bushies” simply are sound bite repeating machines and cannot be swayed by evidence… they are cheerleaders… they like to make agreement not by intelligent reasoning over evidence, but rather by having a man in a suit up on a podium telling them what they think…HOOAAAAA! AMEN! Thats what I feel to!
So which is it with you? List examples of where in the past the exact same thing was done to someone you consider to be on the “left”. THEN you have backing on your side to say that those two situations MAY be equivalent… and then let the person on the other side try to show how they are not equivalent or reduce themselves to name calling or something…
August 5th, 2007 at 9:08 pmBut it is technicaly a non-partisan site, according to the tax code.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS
Technically, you’re a troll.
This is “Think Progress” and is clearly dedicated to liberal progressive issues. Your attempt to redefine it as “nonpartisan” is merely a pathetic attempt to avoid the point: conservative commenters and “conservative” trolls are tolerated on this blog in a manner that would be incomprehensible on a right wing blog. A liberal showing up on one of those and behaving as you have here would have their account shut down in minutes.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:09 pmDo you really think people are that shallow and stupid ? I think most people recognize that Bush is a poor leader and they retain the values they began with but search for a better leader.
Comment by Troll — August 5, 2007 @ 9:01 pm
On most issue, Americans overwhelmingly agree with progressives.
And it wasn’t Bush alone. He had a republican Congress that enabled him.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:10 pmAnd god forbid the liberals should pay taxes. They just want everyone else to pay.
Comment by Troll
How are these “liberals” getting out of paying taxes? We could all do what they are doing…
August 5th, 2007 at 9:12 pmComment by Exley
Sorry Exley, People having pictures of themselves in uniform on their website does not violate the UMJC
Speaking in a political function while in uniform does, period.
Both you and Dr. Dog are wrong, no matter how much you attempt to twist it in the wind.
The facts do not support your argument
August 5th, 2007 at 9:12 pmOne more…I am sure all those who claim to outraged by the actions of the soldier at the YearlyKos were equally outraged by this:
http://wwwimage.cbsnews.com/images/2004/03/22/image607668x.jpg
August 5th, 2007 at 9:12 pmComment by Exley — August 5, 2007 @ 9:12 pm
HEyOOOOOOOoOOOOOOOOoOOOOOOOOOOoOOoOOoO!
August 5th, 2007 at 9:14 pmIs Eck around?
August 5th, 2007 at 9:14 pm“And god forbid the liberals should pay taxes. They just want everyone else to pay.
Comment by Troll — August 5, 2007 @ 9:07 pm”
I pay a lot of taxes and I don’t particularly like it but it’s the price I pay to live in a civil society.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:15 pmOne more…I am sure all those who claim to outraged by the actions of the soldier at the YearlyKos were equally outraged by this:
http://wwwimage.cbsnews.com/ images/ 2004/ 03/ 22/ image607668x.jpg
Comment by Exley
In that picture, he was testifying before Congress. Wearing a uniform for that is allowed, not subject to the UMJC, next…….
August 5th, 2007 at 9:15 pmHEyOOOOOOOoOOOOOOOOoOOOOOOOOOOoOOoOOoO!
Comment by Konservo
You really are a moron, PeePee. A complete, unredeemable moron.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:16 pmComment by gummitch — August 5, 2007 @ 9:09 pm
I actually do troll on conservative sites. I have not been shut down and I am not a conservative. I find the posts there far more cerebral than the posts here.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:17 pmOne more…I am sure all those who claim to outraged by the actions of the soldier at the YearlyKos were equally outraged by this:
http://wwwimage.cbsnews.com/ images/ 2004/ 03/ 22/ image607668x.jpg
Comment by Exley
In that picture, he was testifying before Congress. Wearing a uniform for that is allowed, not subject to the UMJC, next…….
Comment by Wayne
Not to mention: NO ONE IS OUTRAGED. Lies piled on lies, typical of “conservative” values.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:17 pmconservative commenters and “conservative†trolls are tolerated on this blog in a manner that would be incomprehensible on a right wing blog.
—————
Because of TP’s tax exempt status. Free Republic does not have any such status.
My main issue is that I think liberals need to be confronted and rebutted at all times, so nobody will think their baseless allegations are true.
I’m really pleased that so many conservatives are coming here to do just that. As Zoobey said, there are more conservatives here than ever!
August 5th, 2007 at 9:18 pmI actually do troll on conservative sites. I have not been shut down and I am not a conservative. I find the posts there far more cerebral than the posts here.
Comment by Troll
Then, please, don’t waste your giant brain here. P!ss off and troll somewhere else.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:18 pmHow are these “liberals†getting out of paying taxes?
Comment by Gerald Gibson — August 5, 2007 @ 9:12 pm
By pretending this is a non-partisan blog.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:19 pmI know Im gonna regret saying this but Exley, nice to have you back.
I rather read your obnoxious, really misled POV about US foreign policies than trolls having 15 y/o epiphanies here.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:20 pmComment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 9:18 pm
Agreed!!!
August 5th, 2007 at 9:20 pmWearing a uniform for that is allowed, not subject to the UMJC, next…….
Comment by Wayne
Only because you agree with what Kerry was spewing there. If he were a conservative, you would want him in cuffs. Your double standard is glearing.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:20 pm#380, Wayne, You’re wrong…
Comment by Exley — August 5, 2007 @ 9:06 pm
Oh, is that how they explained it to you when you were in the military?
August 5th, 2007 at 9:21 pm#399 Wayne
Sorry, but Kerry was not testifying as a member of the U.S. military there. He was testifying as a member of the political advocacy group VIETNAM VETERANS AGAINST THE WAR.
As he himself said in 1971:
Mr. Kerry: Thank you very much, Senator Fulbright, Senator Javits, Senator Symington, Senator Pell. I would like to say for the record, and also for the men behind me who are also wearing the uniforms and their medals, that my sitting here is really symbolic. I am not here as John Kerry. I am here as one member of the group of veterans in this country, and were it possible for all of them to sit at this table they would be here and have the same kind of testimony.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:22 pmLiberalism = self-defeating
August 5th, 2007 at 9:22 pmAs a TDD, I would like to say that I do not agree with the military’s policy of discouraging Soldiers from voicing their opinions while in uniform. I do think that any Soldier in uniform who does so should be required to make it clear that he is not speaking officially for the military.
I have not read articles or viewed the videos relating to this particular incident. The YearlyKos convention clearly had the right to do what they did, just as any convention of College Republicans can boot out whoever they want, or as officials can expel someone exercising their free speech at a Bush political rally.
Certainly if someone, in or out of uniform, is being disruptive of some previously agreed-upon format for a convention function, there is ample justification for having that person removed.
From what I have heard, YearlyKos probably did not handle this incident as diplomatically as they might have, even if the Soldier was breaking military code by speaking out in uniform.
Is it true that the Soldier who spoke at YearlyKos was arrested?
Ultimately, the “support the troops” debate is most vividly reflected in those who want to bring those individuals safely home ASAP from a misguided and misbegotten war with no end in sight, and who are in favor of giving Soldiers and Veterans the care and support they so richly deserve.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:22 pmBecause of TP’s tax exempt status. Free Republic does not have any such status.
My main issue is that I think liberals need to be confronted and rebutted at all times, so nobody will think their baseless allegations are true.
I’m really pleased that so many conservatives are coming here to do just that. As Zoobey said, there are more conservatives here than ever!
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS
So FreeRepublic is free to behave in an authoritarian fashion, shutting down dissent because they are free to do so. That certainly sums up the “conservative” and Republican approach to free speech. Thanks for the clarification.
Second: you can post your baseless allegations here, but it will do no good to your grand cause. Most of the people who are here on a regular basis have more than enough information about what has really happened on this planet to ignore your lies and distortions, and occasionally to point them out.
Zooey said nothing of the kind, and it would have been inaccurate if she did. She said we have had a lot of trolls lately. One of them just made it clear he’s not a conservative, and most of the others are so brain-dead that no reasonable political movement would want anything to do with them.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:23 pmComment by Exley — August 5, 2007 @ 9:12 pm
Wow Exley, you are being deliberately obtuse. Just ignore all the rules cited, and actual veterans telling you how the UMJC works, cuz YOU know what’s right. Is that it?
Are you trying to earn your troll credentials?
August 5th, 2007 at 9:23 pmLiberalism = self-defeating
Comment by Konservo
Probably, but liberalism gave you democracy, republic, 8 hour labor day, banned child labor in industrialized countries, etc. So shhh.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:24 pmMy main issue is that I think liberals need to be confronted and rebutted at all times, so nobody will think their baseless allegations are true.
I think you should go to conservative sites and rebut their baseless and inane allegations. There’s no problems here.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:25 pmSo FreeRepublic is free to behave in an authoritarian fashion, shutting down dissent because they are free to do so.
————
TP would be doing the same thing if they weren’t tax exempt.
Crooks and liars deletes conservative. Atrios deletes conservatives. Kos deletes conservatives.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:26 pmProbably, but liberalism gave you democracy, republic, 8 hour labor day, banned child labor in industrialized countries, etc. So shhh.
Comment by Juan C
Republicans gave you those things.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:27 pmOnly because you agree with what Kerry was spewing there. If he were a conservative, you would want him in cuffs. Your double standard is glearing.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS
Doesn’t matter if he was conservative or liberal, he was asked to testify in front of Congress and he wore his uniform, which is allowed whether a liberal or conservative.
Please point out why that is a double standard, moron.
Man these trolls are really lacking in the intuitive thinking area…….
August 5th, 2007 at 9:27 pmThere’s no problems here.
Comment by Nat
Nice grammar, Nat.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:27 pmRepublicans gave you those things.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS
*yawn*
August 5th, 2007 at 9:27 pmCrooks and liars deletes conservative. Atrios deletes conservatives. Kos deletes conservatives.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 9:26 pm
———————————————-
TP DELETES CONSERVATIVES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
August 5th, 2007 at 9:28 pmCrooks and liars deletes conservative. Atrios deletes conservatives. Kos deletes conservatives.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS
More lies. Those blogs delete trolls. Not conservatives.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:28 pmProbably, but liberalism gave you democracy, republic, 8 hour labor day, banned child labor in industrialized countries, etc. So shhh.
Comment by Juan C
Conservatives did not give us these things.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:29 pmTP deletes everybody.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:30 pmBTW, being “non-partisan” means not supporting one political party over another. It is not equivalent to being liberal or conservative.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:30 pmCrooks and liars deletes conservative. Atrios deletes conservatives. Kos deletes conservatives.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 9:26 pm
Some proof?
August 5th, 2007 at 9:30 pmTDD wrote:
“From what I have heard, YearlyKos probably did not handle this incident as diplomatically as they might have, even if the Soldier was breaking military code by speaking out in uniform.”
In their defense, it was not YearlyKos as a whole that resorted to cowardly bullying and intimidation when confronted by a member of the military who tried to engage people in a debate….It was only Soltz who acted so reprehensibly and cowardly. Let’s not paint all of YearlyKos with the Soltz brush.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:30 pmI’m really pleased that so many conservatives are coming here to do just that. As Zoobey said, there are more conservatives here than ever!
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 9:18 pm
First, the name is Zooey, and if you address me at all, I’d appreciate you using it.
Second, I never said any such thing, so don’t put words in my mouth.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:31 pmI said there are more TROLLS here than ever.
Republicans gave you those things.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 9:27 pm
Republicans gave us democracy? How so?
August 5th, 2007 at 9:31 pmhe was asked to testify in front of Congress and he wore his uniform, which is allowed whether a liberal or conservative.
————-
Actually it’s not allowed because it gave the inference that his antiwar comments had the offical sponsorship of the military.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:32 pmIt was only Soltz who acted so reprehensibly and cowardly. Let’s not paint all of YearlyKos with the Soltz brush.
Comment by Exley — August 5, 2007 @ 9:30 pm
Can we check and make sure this individual was actually a soldier?
August 5th, 2007 at 9:32 pmRepublicans gave us democracy? How so?
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity
Don’t you remember? Those Republicans who signed the Declaration of Independence and wrote the Constitution. Sheesh.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:33 pmTP DELETES CONSERVATIVES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Comment by Konservo
There’s no doubt about that.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:33 pmNice grammar, Nat.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 9:27 pm
Thanks.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:33 pmNo military person in uniform should be allowed to testify as to their personal opinions before Congress????
August 5th, 2007 at 9:34 pm#406, Hey Juan….I appreciate you welcoming me back. But to be honest I haven’t really gone anywhere. I come to the site every day. But recently TP has just been about posters lambasting Pelosi and Reid and the Congressional Democrats. Since I too hold those people in such low regard I have really not have anything else to add. I have just enjoyed reading the site lately.
Mets take a 2-0 lead!
August 5th, 2007 at 9:34 pmZooey said nothing of the kind, and it would have been inaccurate if she did. She said we have had a lot of trolls lately. One of them just made it clear he’s not a conservative, and most of the others are so brain-dead that no reasonable political movement would want anything to do with them.
Comment by gummitch — August 5, 2007 @ 9:23 pm
Thanks gummitch, I hadn’t seen this when I answered that troll. :)
August 5th, 2007 at 9:34 pmLet’s not paint all of YearlyKos with the Soltz brush.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:34 pm——–
Classic!
Republicans gave us democracy? How so?
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity —
Republicans gave us the 8 hour work day and banned child labor in industrial countries.
The founding fathers were not liberals, if that’s what you are inferring. They would turn over in their graves at the likes of Ted Kennedy and you.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:35 pmLiberalism = self-defeating
Comment by Konservo — August 5, 2007 @ 9:22 pm
Why, this comment is as meaningful as, oh say,
Conservatism=pedophilic…
August 5th, 2007 at 9:35 pmComment by gummitch — August 5, 2007 @ 9:18 pm
Regardless of or maybe because of the sentimentalism Trolling here is so much more fun. So I stay.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:35 pmLet’s not paint all of YearlyKos with the Soltz brush.
_______________
Why can’t liberals all walk in lockstep like the Republicans do?
August 5th, 2007 at 9:36 pmLet’s not paint all of YearlyKos with the Soltz brush.
——–
Classic!
Comment by Konservo
Yeah, that was good.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:36 pmThe founding fathers were not liberals, if that’s what you are inferring. They would turn over in their graves at the likes of Ted Kennedy and you.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 9:35 pm
______________
Source?
August 5th, 2007 at 9:37 pm*yawn*
Comment by Juan C — August 5, 2007 @ 9:27 pm
I join you in that *yawn* :)
August 5th, 2007 at 9:37 pmActually it’s not allowed because it gave the inference that his antiwar comments had the offical sponsorship of the military.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 9:32 pm
So Congress actually thought Kerry had the official sponsorship of the military?
August 5th, 2007 at 9:37 pmWhy, this comment is as meaningful as, oh say,
Conservatism=pedophilic…
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity
Scott Ritter is no conservative. Wayne actually used this creep to back up one of his arguments today!
August 5th, 2007 at 9:38 pmThose a$$bags from TP had better get registration by the 16th of this month.
(The one month deadline Faiz promised.)
These idiots are too much.
Konservo thinks TP deletes his posts simply because they are conservative? What a twat. They delete them because he is a stalking, anti-social, disruptive jerk.
I say we ignore them, and talk amongst ourselves.
….So sick and tired of these Rove douchebags.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:38 pmCrooks and liars deletes conservative. Atrios deletes conservatives. Kos deletes conservatives.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 9:26 pm
Some proof?
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — August 5, 2007 @ 9:30 pm
Heh. I guess we know where Brass has been. :-D
August 5th, 2007 at 9:39 pmThe founding fathers were not liberals, if that’s what you are inferring. They would turn over in their graves at the likes of Ted Kennedy and you.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 9:35 pm
They started rolling when Bush and these modern day conservatives took over.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:39 pmRepublicans gave us the 8 hour work day and banned child labor in industrial countries.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS
Beg to differ. It was in 1838 when the working class in Europe mobilized itself to ask for better working conditions, end of child labor, women vote, etc. Owners and ruling, conservative class didnt like the idea of having to pay higher wages and not having kids in their factories working for free. Thats the ideology you defend.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:39 pmSo Congress actually thought Kerry had the official sponsorship of the military?
Comment by Nat
That was the inferrence from Kerry’s anti-American comments.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:39 pmThey delete them because he is a stalking, anti-social, disruptive jerk.
I say we ignore them, and talk amongst ourselves.
….So sick and tired of these Rove douchebags.
Comment by trueblue
Personal attacks, with no rational thought. That the best you can do, sweetheart?
August 5th, 2007 at 9:41 pmI join you in that *yawn* :)
Comment by Zooey
Oh, you are not getting cozy around me, are you? :D
August 5th, 2007 at 9:41 pmRepublicans gave us the 8 hour work day and banned child labor in industrial countries.
The founding fathers were not liberals, if that’s what you are inferring. They would turn over in their graves at the likes of Ted Kennedy and you.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS
This is the sort of “challenge” I told you was a waste of time. No one here (except maybe morons like Pee) believe that Republicans are responsible for the eight hour day. Because Republicans have always been a little hostile toward Labor. Just a smidge.
The founding fathers were indeed free thinking men who would be horrified by the authoritarian mindset of the modern Republican party. The Republicans are trying to create a dictatorship, everything that the Founding Fathers held most vile.
Spew your lies on a wingnut blog where your fellow “conservatives” can join the chorus.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:42 pmThat was the inferrence from Kerry’s anti-American comments.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 9:39 pm
So Congress actually thought Kerry had the official sponsorship of the military?
August 5th, 2007 at 9:42 pmNo military person in uniform should be allowed to testify as to their personal opinions before Congress????
Comment by Typical Defeatest Democrat — August 5, 2007 @ 9:34 pm
Actually, TDD, I have no problem with Kerry wearing the uniform when he did. Or with Soltz and Kos plastering photos of themselves in uniform on their Web sites in an effort to innoculate themselves against criticsm.
What I do have a problem with is the hypocrisy of those who have not a word of criticism for anti-war advocates who use the uniform as a political prop but who feign indignation when they see someone in uniform who supports the mission in Iraq speak out.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:42 pmTrue ;)
Im with you. We should not engage them directly, just make fun of their comments.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:42 pmI say we ignore them, and talk amongst ourselves.
….So sick and tired of these Rove douchebags.
Comment by trueblue — August 5, 2007 @ 9:38 pm
Hi true! If there’s no registration up or close by on 8/16, let’s leave this blog to the trolls. What do you think?
August 5th, 2007 at 9:42 pmComment by gummitch — August 5, 2007 @ 9:42
Dude… you’re not even American. I can tell you have a British accent by the way you write.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:44 pm———-
Just another Feminist “Take Back the Night” event.
Yawn.
Anxiously awaiting the bi-weekly post by TP about how low the Pres. approval rating is.
———-
August 5th, 2007 at 9:45 pmHi true! If there’s no registration up or close by on 8/16, let’s leave this blog to the trolls. What do you think?
Comment by Zooey — August 5, 2007 @ 9:42 pm
Great Idea!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
TROLLS WIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
August 5th, 2007 at 9:45 pmOh, you are not getting cozy around me, are you? :D
Comment by Juan C — August 5, 2007 @ 9:41 pm
Yep, I am. Can I put my head on your shoulder? :D
August 5th, 2007 at 9:45 pmPersonal attacks, with no rational thought. That the best you can do, sweetheart?
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS
Everyone Reaches Their Breaking Point, Pal.
And don’t call me “sweetheart.”
August 5th, 2007 at 9:45 pmActually, TDD, I have no problem with Kerry wearing the uniform when he did. Or with Soltz and Kos plastering photos of themselves in uniform on their Web sites in an effort to innoculate themselves against criticsm. – Comment by Exley
How do you know this?
August 5th, 2007 at 9:45 pmAnxiously awaiting the bi-weekly post by TP about how low the Pres. approval rating is.
———-
Comment by Tooty From Facts of Life — August 5, 2007 @ 9:45 pm
Another classic!
August 5th, 2007 at 9:46 pmWe would have to be delusional to actually believe that there are not members of the military who support the Iraq occupation.
Certainly not every last one of the occupation’s supporters are chickenhawks!
August 5th, 2007 at 9:47 pmDude… you’re not even American. I can tell you have a British accent by the way you write.
Comment by Konservo
gummitch wears his fanny pack so the blokes don’t grab his naughty bits.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:47 pmYep, I am. Can I put my head on your shoulder? :D
Comment by Zooey — August 5, 2007 @ 9:45 pm
—————-
Get lost, Libtrolls!!!!!
August 5th, 2007 at 9:47 pmDude… you’re not even American. I can tell you have a British accent by the way you write.
Comment by Konservo
I’m always amazed that, just when I think you can’t possibly be any more stupid, you come up with a line like that. Your stupidity really knows no bounds.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:47 pmYep, I am. Can I put my head on your shoulder? :D
Comment by Zooey
Arm Wrestle you for him……
;)
August 5th, 2007 at 9:47 pmTooty clean your room!
Congress’ approval rating is only 14%!
August 5th, 2007 at 9:48 pmOr with Soltz and Kos plastering photos of themselves in uniform on their Web sites in an effort to innoculate themselves against criticsm.
Comment by Exley
_____________
It certainly hasn’t worked! These military men are criticized freely.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:48 pmI’m always amazed that, just when I think you can’t possibly be any more stupid, you come up with a line like that. Your stupidity really knows no bounds.
Comment by gummitch — August 5, 2007 @ 9:47 pm
He fantasizes that you’re Sean Connery. :-D
August 5th, 2007 at 9:48 pmHi Juan.
Hi Zooey.
Sorry for the words I don’t normally say (at least around here.)
I am just so tired of them.
So tired. I am ready to go, as long as you two come along.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:49 pmgummitch wears his fanny pack so the blokes don’t grab his naughty bits.
Comment by Dr. Dog
Interesting that you think a fanny pack would protect your naughty bits. Like so many trolls, you’ve got a serious ass fetish.
And it’s always the male ass that intrigues trolls. Interesting.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:49 pmHi true! If there’s no registration up or close by on 8/16, let’s leave this blog to the trolls. What do you think?
Comment by Zooey — August 5, 2007 @ 9:42 pm
I’m with you there. (Assuming you tell me where “there” is.)
August 5th, 2007 at 9:50 pmHi true! If there’s no registration up or close by on 8/16, let’s leave this blog to the trolls. What do you think?
Comment by Zooey
Sounds good.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:51 pmTooty clean your room!
Congress’ approval rating is only 14%!
Comment by Mrs. Garret — August 5, 2007 @ 9:48 pm
That’s because they have dead weight (republicans) dragging them down.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:51 pmHow funny would it be if the only commenters left on a progressive site like this were Karl Rove’s employees?
August 5th, 2007 at 9:51 pmJust 24% give the president favorable ratings of his performance in handling the war in Iraq, but confidence in Congress is significantly worse – only 3% give Congress positive marks for how it has handled the war.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:51 pmI actually do troll on conservative sites. I have not been shut down and I am not a conservative. I find the posts there far more cerebral than the posts here.
Comment by Troll
This is certainly false… I have personally been to several of those sites a few years ago when I thought I might be able to use examples from people like Reagan and Eisenhower and Lincoln to convince them to look at the world differently … they booted my ass… so you cant really disagree at all or you are off…
August 5th, 2007 at 9:52 pmI hate Congress. They have no testicles, or are in bed with the Republicans or, more likely, both.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:53 pmHow funny would it be if the only commenters left on a progressive site like this were Karl Rove’s employees?
Comment by Typical Defeatest Democrat
Very.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:53 pm#483,
You have to remember, however, that that poll is from Zogby…So, take it with a very large grain of salt.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:54 pmLiberalism = self-defeating
Comment by Konservo
This is the sound bite machine talking… this is what I was talking about.. this passes for intelligent on the right… of coarse as this thing goes on the left is becoming more and more like that also… that is what is meant by the “divisions in the country”
August 5th, 2007 at 9:55 pmYuck. I go to the grocery store, come home, cook dinner, and the trolls are still here. I do have to admit that it is quite entertaining how you guys put the smack down to them.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:55 pmI hate Congress. They have no testicles, or are in bed with the Republicans or, more likely, both.
Comment by Typical Defeatest Democrat
Don’t worry, the GOP is going to take back the congress from these impotent aswipes next year, boy!
August 5th, 2007 at 9:56 pmI do have to admit that it is quite entertaining how you guys put the smack down to them.
Comment by Jeannie See
You must be doing smack. What smack down are you referring to?
August 5th, 2007 at 9:57 pmDon’t worry, the GOP is going to take back the congress from these impotent aswipes next year, boy!
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 5, 2007 @ 9:56 pm
____________
Doesn’t matter. You get the same results either way.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:57 pmI stand corrected. The Democrat congress only has a 3% approval rating. Could it possibly go any lower? Could it be at an asteric by the 08 election?
August 5th, 2007 at 9:59 pmDoesn’t matter. You get the same results either way.
Comment by Typical Defeatest Democrat
Agreed.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:59 pmArm Wrestle you for him……
;)
Comment by trueblue — August 5, 2007 @ 9:47 pm
Mr Pee will get all jealous and will feel left out.
What a toad. Waaahhh!!
August 5th, 2007 at 9:59 pmThis is certainly false… I have personally been to several of those sites a few years ago when I thought I might be able to use examples from people like Reagan and Eisenhower and Lincoln to convince them to look at the world differently … they booted my ass… so you cant really disagree at all or you are off…
Comment by Gerald Gibson — August 5, 2007 @ 9:52 pm
Red State banned me last week and I can no longer go their site. I thought I showed considerably restraint when posting but yet they still removed me.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:01 pmTwo liberals arm wrestling. That would be funny to watch.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:01 pmI wonder if Congress’s approval rating would be much better if there were no Republicans or Democrats in it.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:01 pmRed State banned me last week and I can no longer go their site. I thought I showed considerably restraint when posting but yet they still removed me.
Comment by Nat
Why were you posting at a conservative site?
August 5th, 2007 at 10:02 pmDoesn’t matter. You get the same results either way.
Comment by Typical Defeatest Democrat — August 5, 2007 @ 9:57
————————————————————-
Typical Defeatest Democrat
August 5th, 2007 at 10:02 pmTwo liberals arm wrestling. That would be funny to watch.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 5, 2007 @ 10:01 pm
———————
The funny thing about liberal arm wrestling is that the goal is to be defeated!
August 5th, 2007 at 10:03 pmTwo liberals arm wrestling. That would be funny to watch.
Comment by Dr. Dog
Steve Erkel vs. Pee Wee Herman.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:04 pmThe funny thing about Republican arm wrestling is that the goal is to kill all Muslims.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:04 pmWhy were you posting at a conservative site?
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 5, 2007 @ 10:02 pm
Why does it matter?
August 5th, 2007 at 10:04 pmBoy, Brassmark/Dr. Dog/Konservo sure is having fun talking to himself.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:05 pmHillary Rotten Clinton has a net negative approval rating.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:05 pmHillary Rotten Clinton has a net negative approval rating.
Comment by Mrs. Garret — August 5, 2007 @ 10:05 pm
___________
I’d like to think I had something to do with that.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:06 pmThe funny thing about Republican arm wrestling is that the goal is to kill all Muslims.
Comment by Typical Defeatest Democrat
A liberal wants to drink tea with a muslim terrorist and send them to theropy.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:07 pmSteve Erkel vs. Pee Wee Herman.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS,/em>
A$$hat,
You’ve gone from calling me sexist “Sweetheart” to now demeaning Erkel/ PeeWee.
Isn’t that an example of “Personal Attacks”?
August 5th, 2007 at 10:07 pmWhy were you posting at a conservative site?
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 5, 2007 @ 10:02 pm
Why does it matter?
Comment by Nat
I would like to know. Why were you posting at a conservative site?
August 5th, 2007 at 10:08 pmA liberal wants to drink tea with a muslim terrorist and send them to theropy.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 5, 2007 @ 10:07 pm
Which Liberal?
August 5th, 2007 at 10:09 pmA$$hat,
You’ve gone from calling me sexist “Sweetheart†to now demeaning Erkel/ PeeWee.
Isn’t that an example of “Personal Attacks�
Comment by trueblue
Nope. You are my sweetheart, and Erkel and Pee Wee are liberals.
It’s the truth, not a personal attack.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:10 pmI would like to know. Why were you posting at a conservative site?
Comment by Dr. Dog
………………..
August 5th, 2007 at 10:10 pmYeah, and we’d like to know why you troll around over here.
Not likely to get a legit answer from you, so STFU until you can answer that question truthfully.
Zoo, true…my post didnt appear. I think it was pretty catchy. :}
Anyway, just tell me where to go, and Ill be there.
Oh, reminds me of this song.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:10 pmI would like to know. Why were you posting at a conservative site?
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 5, 2007 @ 10:08 pm
I’d much rather debate conservatives.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:11 pmYeah, and we’d like to know why you troll around over here.
Not likely to get a legit answer from you, so STFU until you can answer that question truthfully.
Comment by trueblue
Where else can I engage a liberal online?
August 5th, 2007 at 10:12 pmJust 24% give the president favorable ratings of his performance in handling the war in Iraq, but confidence in Congress is significantly worse – only 3% give Congress positive marks for how it has handled the war.
Comment by Konservo
24% are mad at Congress because they dont give Bush the rest of the power Congress has left.
another 20% is mad at Congress because Republicans are not in charge..
another 40% are mad at Congress because they wont make the Iraq war end or get it under control somehow…
and another 16% are mad at Congress because they wont impeach bush and cheney and a few others and end the war in iraq…
just a guess but that is what I imagine whenever someone stats how much Congress is disliked…
August 5th, 2007 at 10:12 pmBrass -
I’m not ANYONE’S sweetheart.
It’d demeaning and sexist and offensive.
I am a human being.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:13 pm2nd time I’ve notified you that the term is not cool.
I’d much rather debate conservatives.
Comment by Nat
OK.
The liberals here really don’t want to debate. They just want to call Bush names and attack conservatives.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:13 pmDon’t worry, the GOP is going to take back the congress from these impotent aswipes next year, boy!
Comment by Dr. Dog
At this point I am not happy with the democrats or the republicans.. but I cant see how that could possibly happen… at this point even another terrorist attack would likely end up being seen as another failure like all the others of the past 7 years under the republican watch… Though I do hope enough people listen to the actual reasoning of Ron Paul enough to not let the name “republican” put him totally out of bounds…
August 5th, 2007 at 10:15 pmBrass -
I’m not ANYONE’S sweetheart.
It’d demeaning and sexist and offensive.
I am a human being.
2nd time I’ve notified you that the term is not cool.
Comment by trueblue
Fine, I’ll leave.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:15 pm-test-
August 5th, 2007 at 10:16 pmNope. You are my sweetheart, and Erkel and Pee Wee are liberals.
It’s the truth, not a personal attack.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 10:10 pm
I don’t know if they are liberals are not but Jaleel White could probably beat most conservatives in an arm wrestling match.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:16 pmWhat I do have a problem with is the hypocrisy of those who have not a word of criticism for anti-war advocates who use the uniform as a political prop but who feign indignation when they see someone in uniform who supports the mission in Iraq speak out.
Comment by Exley
Your made up outrage has not been supported by facts, such as what is allowed by UMJC or not allowed.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:17 pmThere has been no hypocrisy, except in your own mind.
You are being intentionally intellectually dishonest.
Fine, I’ll leave.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 10:15 pm
_________
Just one lie after another.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:18 pmOh, reminds me of this song.
Comment by Juan C
Juan,
You are so sweet. I loved that song.
:)
August 5th, 2007 at 10:18 pmJust a warning,
don’t say the name of the guy who used to post really long
c o n s p i r a c y t h e o r i e s .
August 5th, 2007 at 10:19 pmGerald, I agree with most of your summary, but I think that most of the “20%…mad at Congress because Republicans are not in charge” belong to the 24% category you first mentioned. I think that the rest of the people (some 70+%) are disgusted because the Democrats in Congress have done nothing to end the Iraq occupation, have not started impeachment procedings against any of the ‘big three’, and have pretty much rolled over and caved to Bush’s demands.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:19 pmFine, I’ll leave.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 10:15 pm
Promise?
August 5th, 2007 at 10:20 pmAt this point I am not happy with the democrats or the republicans.. but I cant see how that could possibly happen…
Comment by Gerald Gibson
Because the approval rating of the Dem congress is so low.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:20 pmThe liberals here really don’t want to debate. They just want to call Bush names and attack conservatives.
Comment by Dr. Dog
No,we just don’t debate you, because you drink out of the toilet and your breath stinks, Dog.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:20 pmThat and you’re way out of touch with reality.
Your made up outrage has not been supported by facts, such as what is allowed by UMJC or not allowed.
There has been no hypocrisy, except in your own mind.
You are being intentionally intellectually dishonest.
Comment by Wayne
Are all liberals this dense?
August 5th, 2007 at 10:23 pmComment by Jane E. Schneider
There is a large group of people in each party that looks at it mostly as “I have always been a republican and my daddy was etc…” .. BS .. and those people would rather republicans to continue to try to “fix” Iraq… they are not Bush worshipers… just think in terms of all this important stuff as being like football game or something… they dont like admitting fault even when it would improve their situation and so stick with their team…
August 5th, 2007 at 10:23 pmNo,we just don’t debate you, because you drink out of the toilet and your breath stinks, Dog.
That and you’re way out of touch with reality.
Comment by Wayne
I haven’t seen any rational comments by you at all.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:24 pmBecause the approval rating of the Dem congress is so low.
Comment by Dr. Dog
You can keep telling yourself “Dem Congress” but that is just a talking point you picked up somewhere… it isnt true… think about that number 3%…. that means DEMOCRATS ARE MAD AT THEM ALSO… and democrats are not mad because they wont help bush invade Iran…. think about it really… it will make you sound smarter…
August 5th, 2007 at 10:25 pmAre all liberals this dense?
Comment by Dr. Dog
He served. You dont. STFU.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:25 pmWayne Schneider is a gay man.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:25 pmHe served. You dont. STFU.
Comment by Juan C
At McDonald’s.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:26 pmTrue. ;)
August 5th, 2007 at 10:26 pmWayne Schneider is a gay man.
Comment by Lepiear — August 5, 2007 @ 10:25 pm
I wish.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:27 pmYou can keep telling yourself “Dem Congress†but that is just a talking point you picked up somewhere… it isnt true
Comment by Gerald Gibson
The Dems have a majority. Ergo, it is a Dem congress. Don’t run away from it now that their approval rating is down the toilet.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:28 pmAt McDonald’s.
Comment by Dr. Dog
It would be quite interesting watching you telling Wayne that in person.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:28 pmI haven’t seen any rational comments by you at all.
Comment by Dr. Dog
Obviously you haven’t pulled your head out of the toilet long enough to learn how to read, then.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:29 pmAre all liberals this dense?
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 5, 2007 @ 10:23 pm
He’s not the one being dense, you are. Why would you disbelieve a veteran when it comes to the rules regarding wearing a military uniform in public? From what authority do you speak, your own military experience?
August 5th, 2007 at 10:30 pmBecause the approval rating of the Dem congress is so low.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 5, 2007 @ 10:20 pm
The Dems have a big problem. Most Democrats don’t support them because they’re too weak-kneed. They won’t get my support until they introduce articles of impeachment.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:30 pmWayne Schneider is a gay man.
Comment by Lepiear — August 5, 2007 @ 10:25 pm
I wish.
Comment by Egreggious — August 5, 2007 @ 10:27 pm
1) Wayne A. Schneider is definitely NOT gay.
2) Egreggious, I thought that you liked ME! :)
August 5th, 2007 at 10:31 pmHi Jane!
Willie is over-managing!!!!!
August 5th, 2007 at 10:32 pmIt would be quite interesting watching you telling Wayne that in person.
Comment by Juan C — August 5, 2007 @ 10:28 pm
I’d like to see someone try saying that to either Wayne in person! Ha!
August 5th, 2007 at 10:33 pmWhy would you disbelieve a veteran when it comes to the rules regarding wearing a military uniform in public?
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider
Because he could be Wayne Newton for all you know.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:33 pmBecause he could be Wayne Newton for all you know.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 5, 2007 @ 10:33 pm
And this proves that you are right and he is wrong because…
August 5th, 2007 at 10:34 pmIt would be quite interesting watching you telling Wayne that in person.
Comment by Juan C
Next time I see him working at McDonald’s, I will.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:34 pmThe Dems have a majority. Ergo, it is a Dem congress. Don’t run away from it now that their approval rating is down the toilet.
Comment by Dr. Dog
Those parsing games got old 3 years ago… pretty dumb playing like that now…
I dont know ANYONE that thinks of Congress like that… only read about it being talked of like that by people that make their full time lives in politics…
August 5th, 2007 at 10:34 pmAnd this proves that you are right and he is wrong because…
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider
He could be posting from the back room at McDonald’s for all you know.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:35 pmHi, Ex! Yeah, but we’re winning anyway, right? Good game! :D BTW, did you take a look at the Mets pictures that I put up on our blog? Not my best (I still have to scan and download the good ones), but I think you’ll enjoy them.
Also BTW, please believe what both Waynes have been telling you, they really do know what they’re talking about.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:36 pmComment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 9:57 pm
I smacked you down when I gave you the link (which was previously providied by Boudin Bob) that the Soldier in question admitted on film that he was breaking the rules by attending a politically motivated function while in uniform. He knew what he was doing when he did it and he didn’t seem to care about the consequences he knows he will suffer.
You can try to spin it any way you want, but the fact is, you have already been debunked by people posting on this site that have served in the Military or have family members whom have served. You really need to give it up. You have lost this one.
Also, he wasn’t kicked out, or escorted out. That part of the forum was already finished and he was given the courtesy to say what he wanted to say, however, both Captain Soltz and General Clark would have been remiss in their duties if they did not remind the Solider that he was leagally prohibited by Military Law from attending a politically motivated funtion while in uniform.
You need to pick up another talking point because none of us are buying you bullshit. We know better.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:37 pmComment by Wayne A. Schneider
Dog is just too stupid for facts to sink into his pointy head. hehe.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:37 pmHe could be posting from the back room at McDonald’s for all you know.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 5, 2007 @ 10:35 pm
Well, I seriously doubt that he is, but even so, how does that make what he said wrong and what you said right?
August 5th, 2007 at 10:37 pmThe fact is that the soldier at the YearlyKos seminar was not engaged in political activity nor making a political speech. He was describing his experiences in Iraq. If anyone had watched the video of the encounter with Soltz, they would know that. They also would have seen how cowardly and thuggish Soltz acted.
In short, the soldier did not violate Army rules, regulations, or codes, despite Soltz’s efforts to hide behind that claim.
Ugh…5-3 now.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:39 pmBecause he could be Wayne Newton for all you know.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 5, 2007 @ 10:33 pm
Nah, he doesn’t sing all that well. Besides, he’s sitting right across the table from me right now, so I’m pretty sure he’s the Wayne A. Schneider to whom I’m married.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:39 pmWell, I seriously doubt that he is, but even so, how does that make what he said wrong and what you said right?
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider
Don’t put words in my mouth. You said he was some kind of veteran. But the only thing he’s probably served was french frys at McDonald’s. Got it yet?
August 5th, 2007 at 10:40 pmComment by Jeannie See — August 5, 2007 @ 10:37 pm
Thank you, Jeannie. He won’t listen to Wayne (who has served in the military, nor me for that matter), but maybe he’ll listen to you. Good luck with that. I’m sure if Rush or Hannity or Drudge says the guy was within his rights to speak at a political function while in uniform, you can bet they’ll run away with that as proof (even though none of those three have worn the uniform, either.)
August 5th, 2007 at 10:40 pmUgh…5-3 now.
Comment by Exley — August 5, 2007 @ 10:39 pm
Uh-oh, what inning? Maybe I’d better go keep an eye on them.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:42 pmDon’t put words in my mouth. You said he was some kind of veteran. But the only thing he’s probably served was french frys at McDonald’s. Got it yet?
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 5, 2007 @ 10:40 pm
What words did I put in your mouth?
(For the record, I happen to believe that Wayne is an Army Ranger veteran based on the numerous posts he’s made.)
As always, Wayne, thank you for your service to our country. But you’ll never catch me jumping out of a perfectly good airplane. ;)
August 5th, 2007 at 10:43 pmDr. Dog is not an American.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:43 pmComment by Jeannie See
The soldier at the end of the video said that he would like to see soldiers break the rules to help the Iraqis…
It is because of exactly this type of thinking why it is against the rules to wear the uniform while making a political spectacle of yourself… if soldiers started all acting and thinking like that then America would become a military dictatorship… that most certainly wasn’t written into the Constitution.
The soldier was an activist but he did not get irate … he said he thought highly of the progressives their and only wanted to try to make them see the Iraq situation like he does… the people at the convention also treated him well and the only real bad feelings seemed to be with the Pajamas media camera guy…
Its seems to be a big ado about nothing….
August 5th, 2007 at 10:44 pmJane,
Yes, I saw the photos on the blog. They were great…Always good to see Shea again.
I respect that the Waynes probably believe they are correct. I am just pointing out that they hold those who support the mission in Iraq to a higher standard than those who oppose the mission. Plus, the wording of the relevant section is very straightforward and shows that the soldier in question was not in violation.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:44 pm(For the record, I happen to believe that Wayne is an Army Ranger veteran based on the numerous posts he’s made.)
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider
Rangers are more intelligent than Wayne seems to be, so you don’t mind if I have a different opinion, do you?
August 5th, 2007 at 10:45 pm#559 Jane
8th inning. Willie took out Glavine and our bullpen is screwing up again.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:46 pmAmericans are smarter than Dr. Dog.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:46 pmAs always, Wayne, thank you for your service to our country. But you’ll never catch me jumping out of a perfectly good airplane. ;)
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider
But that is the quickest way to get back on solid ground!!!
August 5th, 2007 at 10:46 pm/smirk
you don’t mind if I have a different opinion, do you?
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 5, 2007 @ 10:45 pm
If your opinion is based on facts, then no. But if it is based on misinformation (as your appears to be regarding wearing a military uniform in public), then I do mind.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:47 pmIn short, the soldier did not violate Army rules, regulations, or codes, despite Soltz’s efforts to hide behind that claim.
Ugh…5-3 now.
Comment by Exley
I watched the entire thing over at Pajama media… the soldier did make a statement that could have come right off of Fox news… He was not belligerent about it just empasioned… and he was not treated badly… he was treated just as I saw young soldiers be treated by officers when they were caught smoking in their Marine Blues… the soldiers actions should be looked at as how determined American soldiers are to complete whatever task they are given… they are dedicated… it is why they are so good… but not all soldiers let themselves think solely in those terms… that is why the military is made up of republicans and democrats and independants and people that just dont care about politics at all…
August 5th, 2007 at 10:48 pmComment by Dr. Dog — August 5, 2007 @ 10:45 pm
If you want to keep on being stupid, go right ahead. But isn’t it time for you to stop and lick your balls?
Comment by Exley — August 5, 2007 @ 10:46 pm
Okay, I’m going in to watch the rest of the game. See you in a bit.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:49 pmHe could be posting from the back room at McDonald’s for all you know.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 5, 2007 @ 10:35 pm
I’ve had enough discussions w/ Wayne about the martial arts to know he ain’t faking that. Please, accept our offer of airfare to Wayne’s home state for a little free sparring – just a little friendly athletic competition. Please…
August 5th, 2007 at 10:49 pmBut that is the quickest way to get back on solid ground!!!
/smirk
Comment by Wayne — August 5, 2007 @ 10:46 pm
Yeah, but “any landing you can walk away from…”
If it’s all the same to you, I’ll just trust the flyboys in the cockpit, thank you. ;)
August 5th, 2007 at 10:50 pmthat is why the military is made up of republicans and democrats and independants and people that just dont care about politics at all…
Comment by Gerald Gibson
They are mostly Republicans.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:50 pmBut isn’t it time for you to stop and lick your balls?
Comment by Exley — August 5, 2007 @ 10:46 pm
And eat your own sh*t? Or are you lying about being a dog?
August 5th, 2007 at 10:50 pmThey are mostly Republicans.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 5, 2007 @ 10:50 pm
Substantiation, please
August 5th, 2007 at 10:53 pmThey are mostly Republicans.
Comment by Dr. Dog
If so it is a small majority… From personal experience I would say most try to be A-political… most know they swore to protect the U.S. Constitution and that politics is not where their loyalities belong…
August 5th, 2007 at 10:54 pm#572 RoS,
I think you misunderstood Jane’s posting. “But isn’t it time for you to stop and lick your balls?” was not my comment nor was it directed at me.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:55 pmRepublicans hold a majority in the armed services, with 57% of active military personnel and 66% of officers identified as Republican in 2003.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_(United_States)#_note-Lobe.2C_J._.281_January.2C_2004.29._Military_More_Republican.2C_Conservative_Than_Public_.E2.80.93_Poll._.27.27LewRockwell.com.27.27.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:56 pmFine, I’ll leave.
Comment by Brassmask from 3DHS — August 5, 2007 @ 10:15 pm
He’s lying. He pulled this same nonsense a couple of weeks ago. He’ll be back posting more gibberish.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:57 pmThey are mostly Republicans.
Comment by Dr. Dog
Even as long ago as December 2006, members of the military were turning against the Occupation.
http://tinyurl.com/urdyt
August 5th, 2007 at 10:58 pmComment by Dr. Dog
Sounds like a small majority to me… I will just trust your link… sounds about right.
August 5th, 2007 at 10:59 pmHe’s lying. He pulled this same nonsense a couple of weeks ago. He’ll be back posting more gibberish.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — August 5, 2007 @ 10:57 pm
———–
August 5th, 2007 at 10:59 pmYou have to be the dumbest libtroll ever.
Wayne and Jane should be pretty happy about now, and I think Tommy Glavine got #300 under his belt.
August 5th, 2007 at 11:00 pmI’ve had enough discussions w/ Wayne about the martial arts to know he ain’t faking that.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity
What do you both (Wayne and TRoS) practice?
August 5th, 2007 at 11:00 pmSounds like a small majority to me… I will just trust your link… sounds about right.
Comment by Gerald Gibson
It’s also from 2003. A heck of a lot has changed since 2003.
August 5th, 2007 at 11:00 pmDr. Dog is not an American.
Comment by Typical Defeatest Democrat — August 5, 2007 @ 10:43 pm
He’s not human or canine either.
August 5th, 2007 at 11:03 pmIt’s also from 2003. A heck of a lot has changed since 2003.
Comment by gummitch
True… from the history of the past 30 years I would guess that a small majority would be republicans… however many republicans are calling themselves “independant” nowadays… either way it doesnt prove much… our military take pride in being professionals… they dont take pride in being part of political clic … their pride comes in the Marines… or the Army… or the Air Force… and that Flag… not Clinton or Bush or whatever…
August 5th, 2007 at 11:04 pmComment by Gerald Gibson — August 5, 2007 @ 10:44 pm
Understood, but the fact that he appeared in Military Uniform to a politically motivated funtion is what is in question and he was wrong to do so. My Father served in the Air Force for 47 years and he would never, ever, appear at such a function in his uniform. It went against not only the Military Laws that they had to follow, but it went against his own ethics. The Military is there to serve the people, no matter what. It never mattered what he believed politically, his first obligation was to “We the People”.
Bottom line is that the Solider was wrong to go to the Convention in his uniform. Plain and simple.
August 5th, 2007 at 11:09 pmComment by Exley — August 5, 2007 @ 10:55 pm
Exley’s right, that was my response to the Dog’s comment.
Gummitch, game’s almost over but not in the bag yet. They’re held up right now because the home plate ump had to leave due to a possible concussion. See something new all the time in baseball!
August 5th, 2007 at 11:12 pmComment by Jeannie See
Absolutely. He put his feelings before the Army. Which is understandable but not very often tolerated… he can be respected for his feelings and still be punished for violating the Army… a professional Army doesn’t let things like that slide often… though they are not harsh about it often either.
August 5th, 2007 at 11:14 pmComment by Dr. Dog — August 5, 2007 @ 10:56 pm
How about some updated figures? Those are from 2004. Just has Bush’s numbers have dropped since then, there’s a very good chance those numbers have changed. Also, that particular poll didn’t include National Guard members.
“Hodierne stressed that the survey did not include members of the reserves or the National Guard, who make up almost 30 percent of the soldiers currently deployed to Iraq or its neighboring states.
Members of these two services, whose numbers also total about 1.4 million, have tended to be far more critical of the Iraq deployment than the full-time military.
Hodierne said he believed that the sample was not a perfect cross-section, even of active-duty personnel. “Our sample tends to be older, higher-ranking, and longer in service,” he said, noting these variables might also contribute to a somewhat more Republican and conservative result.”
What the hell is LewRockwell.com? (Other the the source of your numbers) And if you want to take LewRockwell.com seriously, waht about some of the other articles posted there…
“Mr. Bush appears to have dimly recognized (but not publicly acknowledged), the realities that surround him, even as he continues to flail against them. Of late, the vast majority of the American people apparently consider him to be a failure. Unfortunately, instead of confronting this sad fact, he has taken several steps – actually, he has borrowed them from the Marxist dialectic – to make it irrelevant. The most prominent failures commonly attributed to Mr. Bush, you see, are actually somebody else’s fault – every one of them.
Bush and Marxism??? WTF???
August 5th, 2007 at 11:19 pmBush and Marxism??? WTF???
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — August 5, 2007 @ 11:19 pm
I was surprised to learn that a lot of neo-cons were once Communists. (Leo Strauss, for one.)
August 5th, 2007 at 11:22 pmComment by Gerald Gibson — August 5, 2007 @ 11:14 pm
I’m not saying I don’t respect him for his opinion. He is in his right to give it. But, he is not right to give it while serving 300 million people that pay his wage. He has to be a-political. If he can’t be that, he has no right to serve in our Military.
That just my opinion.
August 5th, 2007 at 11:23 pmGoing to bed now. 6:00 comes up early on this side of town.
August 5th, 2007 at 11:24 pm#590: Sorry, meant to add “while in uniform”. I think my brain works faster than my fingers or vice versa. LOL.
August 5th, 2007 at 11:27 pmGummitch, game’s almost over but not in the bag yet. They’re held up right now because the home plate ump had to leave due to a possible concussion. See something new all the time in baseball!
Comment by Jane E. Schneider
Wow. That’s a new one to me. Although there was recently a first base coach in a minor league game who was killed by a foul ball. And I did see the Mariners game in which Rafael Soriano was drilled in the skull up on the mound. I hope I never have to hear that sound again.
August 5th, 2007 at 11:27 pmI was surprised to learn that a lot of neo-cons were once Communists. (Leo Strauss, for one.)
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider
Pretty much the definition, at least of the prominent neocons. They certainly brought the authoritarian streak along with them.
August 5th, 2007 at 11:29 pmWhat do you both (Wayne and TRoS) practice?
Comment by Juan C — August 5, 2007 @ 11:00 pm
I’ve done mostly Chinese internal and had a very good friend who was a 6th degree black belt in Tai Kwon Do. He was never my formal teacher but he was quite generous in private w/ his knowledge. I spent many a night w/ him chasing me around his living room and me screaming for my dear life. At one time, almost all my friends were martial artists, and some of them were quite good.
I won’t speak for Wayne. He mentioned some style one night – mostly Korean, as I recall. We both dropped the same name – Wally Jay – in e-mails one night that passed in transmission. It was a pretty funny moment. If you know who Professor Jay was, you know your martial arts.
August 5th, 2007 at 11:29 pmMETS WIN! Glavine gets his 300th career win…Nice!
August 5th, 2007 at 11:30 pmSheesh, tough Mets game. Looks from mlb.com as if the second baseman got hit in the head as well. Good thing it’s over before anyone else gets hurt.
August 5th, 2007 at 11:30 pmJust 24% give the president favorable ratings of his performance in handling the war in Iraq, but confidence in Congress is significantly worse – only 3% give Congress positive marks for how it has handled the war.
Comment by Konservo — August 5, 2007 @ 9:51 pm
August 03, 2007
Democratic Seats Secure, Republicans at Risk
The latest strategy memo from James Carville and Stan Greenberg touts a recent poll in the 70 most competitive Congressional districts which shows the Democrats “in a strong position to hold their gains from 2006 and move far into Republican territory in 2008.”
“Indeed, Democrats hold an 18-point electoral advantage in their own districts while Republicans are losing their districts by 5 points overall — 7 points in their most vulnerable districts, 51 to 44 percent.”
Key finding: “Republican incumbents are paying a big price for the deep discontent in the country and for aligning with the President who is no more popular in the Republican districts than in the Democratic ones. ”
http://politicalwire.com/
August 5th, 2007 at 11:31 pmStupidity, you have no idea what you are talking about, do you?
August 5th, 2007 at 11:31 pmI won’t speak for Wayne. He mentioned some style one night – mostly Korean, as I recall. We both dropped the same name – Wally Jay – in e-mails one night that passed in transmission. It was a pretty funny moment. If you know who Professor Jay was, you know your martial arts.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity
I actually saw Wally Jay do a demonstration of his approach, years ago. Local groups in the Bay Area did an annual event, run by one school or another each year, with demonstrations of lots of different arts.
August 5th, 2007 at 11:32 pmI think this Dr. Dog guy is an insult to dogs everywhere. He should change his name to Dr. Pondscum or Dr. Slimeball.
I was told that the uniformed soldier even attending a political event is a breach of protocol and against the rules regardless of what he said.
August 5th, 2007 at 11:34 pmWhat do you both (Wayne and TRoS) practice?
Comment by Juan C
Trying again ( post keeps getting eaten )
I always work on my Tang Su Do Forms, every day.
When I have someone to work out/spar with, I like to work on Hapkido, Judo/Jujitsu techniques (not the new Brazillian style of jujitsi, Japaneese style ).
———
Yeah, but “any landing you can walk away from…â€
If it’s all the same to you, I’ll just trust the flyboys in the cockpit, thank you. ;)
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider
Marines may be “Always Faithful” ( Semper Fidelis ), but “Rangers lead the way.”
Like I said before, it takes a certain amount of crazy to jump, hehe
Got vacation time the week of the 20th and thats what I’m gonna be doing with some friends. I love it. =)
August 5th, 2007 at 11:35 pmMETS WIN! Glavine gets his 300th career win…Nice!
Comment by Exley — August 5, 2007 @ 11:30 pm
And on that we can agree!
August 5th, 2007 at 11:38 pmComment by gummitch — August 5, 2007 @ 11:27 pm
Speaking of Soriano, he had to leave this game, too, after pulling up lame coming into third.
“METS WIN! Glavine gets his 300th career win…Nice!”
Comment by Exley — August 5, 2007 @ 11:30 pm
Hooray!
And now back to our regularly scheduled on-topic comments…
August 5th, 2007 at 11:40 pmI actually saw Wally Jay do a demonstration of his approach, years ago. Local groups in the Bay Area did an annual event, run by one school or another each year, with demonstrations of lots of different arts.
Comment by gummitch
My first Martial Arts instructor taught Judo & Jujitsu and was a student of Wally Jay.
Small circle techniques just plain rock. And it blends into so many forms from other styles.
In forms, every strike can be a block, every block can be a strike and hidden within are also the throws.
August 5th, 2007 at 11:42 pmI actually saw Wally Jay do a demonstration of his approach, years ago. Local groups in the Bay Area did an annual event, run by one school or another each year, with demonstrations of lots of different arts.
Comment by gummitch — August 5, 2007 @ 11:32 pm
Wally Jay was brilliant. Some of his students still teach Small Circle Jiujitsu in the Bay Area.
August 5th, 2007 at 11:44 pmIn forms, every strike can be a block, every block can be a strike and hidden within are also the throws.
Comment by Wayne — August 5, 2007 @ 11:42 pm
Here we are again, Wayne, in passing. :-D!!!
Funny, Mr P never took us up on that offer – airfare to meet your daughter. What a shame.
August 5th, 2007 at 11:45 pmAnd now back to our regularly scheduled on-topic comments…
Comment by Jane E. Schneider — August 5, 2007 @ 11:40 pm
And now we host the Braves at Shea…
August 5th, 2007 at 11:46 pmAnd now we host the Braves at Shea…
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — August 5, 2007 @ 11:46 pm
And we must…MUST…take at least two out of three from them. We haven’t beat them in a series all season!
August 5th, 2007 at 11:49 pmComment by The Republic of Stupidity — August 5, 2007 @ 11:46 pm
Yeah, on to the really tough division games–gotta keep ahead!
August 5th, 2007 at 11:52 pmComment by Exley — August 5, 2007 @ 11:49 pm
Absolutely, they must. And frankly, I hate losing to Atlanta more than they hating losing to us.
But we really should get back on topic, don’t you think? So, Exley, do you think that Tom Glavine should have been speaking at Yearly Kos in his Mets uniform?
August 5th, 2007 at 11:54 pmFunny, Mr P never took us up on that offer – airfare to meet your daughter. What a shame.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity
That still would be fun to watch. hehe
August 5th, 2007 at 11:56 pmJane, Exley… agreed. We have 15 games left against the Braves and Phillies. We have to split, at the least. We took 3 of 4 from the Dodgers, lost the sereis against the Pads, and took the series against front runners Brewers and Cubs. 16 hits tonight! And 4 RBIs for Delgado.
We play both the Pads and Dodgers coming up this month, and the Braves both here and in Atl, plus the Phils in Phi. Tough, tough stretch, but we seem to be playing better again. Did Castillo get hurt tonight?
August 5th, 2007 at 11:57 pm“So, Exley, do you think that Tom Glavine should have been speaking at Yearly Kos in his Mets uniform?”
NEVER! I think that the civil and friendly relations between us (and RoS) that stems from our mutual love of the Mets shows that the Mets must be kept non-partisan….The Mets bring people of varying viewpoints togther!
August 5th, 2007 at 11:57 pmRoS,
“Did Castillo get hurt tonight?”
Nope…He left the game early because of heat exhaustion. He’ll be fine.
August 5th, 2007 at 11:59 pmDid Castillo get hurt tonight?
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — August 5, 2007 @ 11:57 pm
“Heat prostration”, according to the annoucers. He’ll be fine.
August 5th, 2007 at 11:59 pmSo, Exley, do you think that Tom Glavine should have been speaking at Yearly Kos in his Mets uniform?
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider
He what? Isn’t that against Baseball’s …………. ummm,……… guess it’s not…..
August 6th, 2007 at 12:00 am=D
That still would be fun to watch. hehe
Comment by Wayne — August 5, 2007 @ 11:56 pm
I, for one, was so looking forward to it. The offer still stands, as far as I’m concerned. I would pay good money for a DVD of that little sparring match. I saw some cane work in a movie one time. Yes, it was choreographed, but you could clearly see how it worked and it was cool as hell.
Ever feel a one-inch punch?
August 6th, 2007 at 12:00 amComment by Exley — August 5, 2007 @ 11:59 pm
Comment by Jane E. Schneider — August 5, 2007 @ 11:59 pm
Okay, that was kinda scary.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:01 am#618….Spooky! But when it comes to the Mets, we are of one mind.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:02 am“Heat prostrationâ€, according to the annoucers. He’ll be fine.
Comment by Jane E. Schneider — August 5, 2007 @ 11:59 pm
That’s a relief. He’s starting to hit for us. W/ Reyes and Castillo clogging up the bases, Wright and Delgado might get some serious RBI numbers from here on in. Sure hope Beltran’s rest does him good.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:04 amThe Mets bring people of varying viewpoints togther!
Comment by Exley — August 5, 2007 @ 11:57 pm
T’is true… t’is true!
August 6th, 2007 at 12:07 amSpeaking of Soriano, he had to leave this game, too, after pulling up lame coming into third.
Comment by Jane E. Schneider
Different Soriano. Ours was a pitcher that the M’s traded away in their usual stupid fashion.
You really don’t want to watch the video, but the incident is written up here: http://tinyurl.com/34wrpb
August 6th, 2007 at 12:09 amComment by The Republic of Stupidity — August 5, 2007 @ 11:19 pm
You have no idea what any of that means do you?
August 6th, 2007 at 12:10 am“But when it comes to the Mets, we are of one mind.”
Comment by Exley — August 6, 2007 @ 12:02 am
Still kinda scary! :D Too bad we disagree on just about everything else (politically, anyway)!
August 6th, 2007 at 12:10 amWally Jay was brilliant. Some of his students still teach Small Circle Jiujitsu in the Bay Area.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity
I think someone was teaching here in Portland, but that’s a vague-ish memory and may be wrong.
Is Wally Jay still alive? I can’t find any record of his passing, and at least one reference to him at age 90 (born 1917).
August 6th, 2007 at 12:13 amI think this Dr. Dog guy is an insult to dogs everywhere. He should change his name to Dr. Pondscum or Dr. Slimeball.
Comment by Justice
You’re so dumb, you stare at an orange juice can just because it says concentrate.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:15 am*yawn*
Is it still baseball season? :-)
August 6th, 2007 at 12:15 amGood one, Dr. Dog!
August 6th, 2007 at 12:17 amComment by gummitch — August 6, 2007 @ 12:09 am
Sorry, I wasn’t aware that there were two Sorianos. Thanks for the link–sorta. Sounds really gruesome.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:17 am#627…It sure is, Zooey….It sure is!
Good night, my fellow Mets fans (and others).
August 6th, 2007 at 12:19 amIs it still baseball season? :-)
Comment by Zooey — August 6, 2007 @ 12:15 am
No, it’s arm wrestling season! When do we get to see the big match and the winner run off with Juan C?
August 6th, 2007 at 12:20 amGood night, Exley. And say good night to your Tom Glavine poster for me, too. :)
August 6th, 2007 at 12:21 amNo, it’s arm wrestling season! When do we get to see the big match and the winner run off with Juan C?
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider
I can take any liberal here.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:21 amSorry, I wasn’t aware that there were two Sorianos. Thanks for the link–sorta. Sounds really gruesome.
Comment by Jane E. Schneider
You may see him, since the M’s traded him to the Braves. I have no idea how he’s doing now, but he was an amazing reliever before he got hit.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:21 amWhy, thank you Pyrrho. You have a good sense of humor!
August 6th, 2007 at 12:22 amIs it still baseball season? :-)
Comment by Zooey — August 6, 2007 @ 12:15 am
Yes it is, and the Mets scored 8 touchdowns! ;-) Gooooaaaaalllll!
August 6th, 2007 at 12:22 amYes it is, and the Mets scored 8 touchdowns! ;-) Gooooaaaaalllll!
Comment by Jane E. Schneider
That was a lousy joke.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:23 amNo, it’s arm wrestling season! When do we get to see the big match and the winner run off with Juan C?
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — August 6, 2007 @ 12:20 am
Ah hell, I’d win that just by staring hard at trueblue. Heh.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:23 amGoodnight, Ex!
August 6th, 2007 at 12:24 amDr. Dog,
This is Kapt’n K. / M r P
As a warning, don’t say the name of the guy who used to post all of those c * n s p i r * c y t h e o * i e s, also don’t say the “J” word that ends in a “w”
August 6th, 2007 at 12:24 amI’m itching for a fight.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:25 amYes it is, and the Mets scored 8 touchdowns! ;-) Gooooaaaaalllll!
Comment by Jane E. Schneider — August 6, 2007 @ 12:22 am
Cool! They must be exhausted from running up and down that court. :-D
August 6th, 2007 at 12:26 amYes, Good night Exley,
Keep bashing these moral midgets!!!
August 6th, 2007 at 12:26 amI’m going to bite and snarl at horrible liberals.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:27 amIs Wally Jay still alive? I can’t find any record of his passing, and at least one reference to him at age 90 (born 1917).
Comment by gummitch
last I heard he still lives in Alameda,Ca.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:27 amVery much alive.
That was almost a year ago though.
He still does seminars now and then, not as many as he used to though.
Comment by Pyrrho — August 6, 2007 @ 12:24 am
Talking to yourself again? Seriously, I think you should seek professional help for that. You keep changing your name and outing yourself.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:27 amComment by Wayne A. Schneider — August 6, 2007 @ 12:27 am
That post is clearly addressed to Dr. Dog.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:29 amTalking to yourself again? Seriously, I think you should seek professional help for that. You keep changing your name and outing yourself.
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider
As if you’re not changing your name from Jane to Wayne.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:29 amlast I heard he still lives in Alameda,Ca.
Comment by Wayne — August 6, 2007 @ 12:27 am
Cool. I grew up there. :)
August 6th, 2007 at 12:31 amIs Wally Jay still alive? I can’t find any record of his passing, and at least one reference to him at age 90 (born 1917).
Comment by gummitch — August 6, 2007 @ 12:13 am
I thought Wally had died but I can’t find any info about it.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:31 amJane and Wayne were connected at birth.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:32 amThere pictures of my wife Jane on our blog and of me in my profile. Unlike you and your “friends” here, Jane and I really are two separate people.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:32 amlast I heard he still lives in Alameda,Ca.
Comment by Wayne — August 6, 2007 @ 12:27 am
Cool. I grew up there. :)
Comment by Zooey — August 6, 2007 @ 12:31 am
Yeah… that’s always been his home. Some of his students still teach there.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:32 amJane and I really are two separate people.
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider
Sock puppets is more like it.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:34 amI’m itching for a fight.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 6, 2007 @ 12:25 am
Got tired of licking your own… ???
August 6th, 2007 at 12:34 amGot tired of licking your own… ???
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity
I’m sick of licking you in debate. I need a real challenge.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:34 amAs if you’re not changing your name from Jane to Wayne.
Comment by Dr. Dog
He’s not.
But what would a self professed Dog know?
Obviously nothing that deals with logic.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:35 amSo, go chase your tail, or go bark at the squirrel up the tree.
I’m going to snap at any liberal who gets in my way.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:36 amHe’s not.
But what would a self professed Dog know?
Obviously nothing that deals with logic.
So, go chase your tail, or go bark at the squirrel up the tree.
Comment by Wayne
Good one, Wayne. I will write that one down.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:37 amdon’t say the “J†word that ends in a “wâ€
Comment by Pyrrho — August 6, 2007 @ 12:24 am
According to your previous body of work under another name, I thought that it ended in “oooooooos”?
————————–
Comment by Zooey — August 6, 2007 @ 12:26 am
Yeah, the rink was really hot tonight, too!
August 6th, 2007 at 12:37 amI’m itching for a fight.
Comment by Dr. Dog
There is always Iraq.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:38 amMy husband is right about Wayne and Jane.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:38 amThere is always Iraq.
Comment by Juan C
There are mostly Republicans there.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:38 amYou have no idea what any of that means do you?
Comment by Pyrrho — August 6, 2007 @ 12:10 am
Oh gosh, what a devastating remark. I’ll probably die six months earlier than I would have otherwise… sniff** sniff**… no, I understand none of it, except this one line…
“Of late, the vast majority of the American people… consider him to be a failure…”
August 6th, 2007 at 12:39 amYeah, the rink was really hot tonight, too!
Comment by Jane E. Schneider
Have you ever danced with the devil in the pale moonlight, Wayne?
August 6th, 2007 at 12:39 amYeah, the rink was really hot tonight, too!
Comment by Jane E. Schneider — August 6, 2007 @ 12:37 am
No wonder that lineman got the vapors!
August 6th, 2007 at 12:40 amThere are mostly Republicans there.
Comment by Dr. Dog
mmmm…another sissy.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:40 amThere are mostly Republicans there.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 6, 2007 @ 12:38 am
Apparently there aren’t enough.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:41 amThere are mostly Republicans there.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 6, 2007 @ 12:38 am
The Iraqis are not Republicans.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:41 amHave you ever danced with the devil in the pale moonlight, Wayne?
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 6, 2007 @ 12:39 am
What is this, movie trivia night?
August 6th, 2007 at 12:41 amHave you ever danced with the devil in the pale moonlight, Wayne?
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 6, 2007 @ 12:39 am
————————————
You’re not “The J***r,” are you?
August 6th, 2007 at 12:41 amGreat speech by Kos. He truly speaks for liberals everywhere. I wish he would run for office. He would make a great Congressman, Senator or whatever he sets his mind to. The convention was also a great success.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:42 amYou’re not “The J***r,†are you?
Comment by Pyrrho — August 6, 2007 @ 12:41 am
Hell no. At least Dr Dog understands basic grammar and spelling.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:43 amThere are mostly Republicans there.
Comment by Dr. Dog
mmmm…another sissy.
Comment by Juan C — August 6, 2007 @ 12:40 am
There are mostly Republicans there.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 6, 2007 @ 12:38 am
Apparently there aren’t enough.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — August 6, 2007 @ 12:41 am
There are mostly Republicans there.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 6, 2007 @ 12:38 am
The Iraqis are not Republicans.
Comment by Zooey
————
Wow, look at all those responses. That one got your goat, didn’t it? Most of the military over in Iraq are Republicans. 57% to be exact.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:43 am57% to be exact.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 6, 2007 @ 12:43 am
Old stats, flawed survey. NEXT!!!
August 6th, 2007 at 12:44 amYou’re not “The J***r,†are you?
Comment by Pyrrho
You are correct. Come on down!
I’m not the poster The Joker, but that was from the movie Batman.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:44 amWow, look at all those responses. That one got your goat, didn’t it? Most of the military over in Iraq are Republicans. 57% to be exact.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 6, 2007 @ 12:43 am
Your statement was particularly stupid.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:45 amOld stats, flawed survey. NEXT!!!
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity
Wrong!
August 6th, 2007 at 12:45 am“Sock puppets is more like it.”
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 6, 2007 @ 12:34 am
Of course, that’s exactly right. Wayne and I are sock puppets. How did you figure it out? Wow, sock puppets have come a long way, haven’t they, now they can type, too, and write blogs, and take pictures, pretty amazing, huh?
/sarcasm off
It’s a sad day when a talking cartoon dog (Brian from Family Guy) is smarter and funnier than a supposedly real person pretending to be a dog.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:46 amYour statement was particularly stupid.
Comment by Zooey
How so?
August 6th, 2007 at 12:46 amIt’s a sad day when a talking cartoon dog (Brian from Family Guy) is smarter and funnier than a supposedly real person pretending to be a dog.
Comment by Jane E. Schneider
My name is Dr. William Dog. I’m not pretending to be a dog, Wayne.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:47 amIt’s a sad day when a talking cartoon dog (Brian from Family Guy) is smarter and funnier than a supposedly real person pretending to be a dog.
Comment by Jane E. Schneider
Thats is so funny
August 6th, 2007 at 12:48 amProbably because it’s also so true, lmao.
Your statement was particularly stupid.
Comment by Zooey — August 6, 2007 @ 12:45 am
Well put, but perhaps too… well worded for a dog to understand…
Yur wordz was reeel stuped. There. I’m sure Dr. Dog will understand it now. Oops, he’s busy eating his own … damn, now he’s rolling in it. He really is a dog!
August 6th, 2007 at 12:48 amI call him Bill.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:48 amSometimes Little Willy.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:49 amCompared to civilians, members of the military are significantly more religious, and they’re also far more likely to be Republicans. A 2005 Military Times poll found that 56% of military personnel described themselves as Republicans, and only 13% described themselves as Democrats.
————–
These are updated stats for TROS.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:50 amhttp://ctgop.blogspot.com/2007/07/all-jokes-aside.html
Well put, but perhaps too… well worded for a dog to understand…
Yur wordz was reeel stuped. There. I’m sure Dr. Dog will understand it now. Oops, he’s busy eating his own … damn, now he’s rolling in it. He really is a dog!
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — August 6, 2007 @ 12:48 am
Well, don’t tell the Dog, but tomorrow he’s going to the et-vay to get eutered-nay. He thinks we’re going to the beach!!
August 6th, 2007 at 12:51 amYur wordz was reeel stuped. There. I’m sure Dr. Dog will understand it now. Oops, he’s busy eating his own … damn, now he’s rolling in it. He really is a dog!
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity
56% of the military now serving in Iraq are Republican.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:52 amWrong!
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 6, 2007 @ 12:45 am
Sorry, dog. Followed your link to Wiki, then from Wiki to the source. The survey was from 2004 and the it did not include National Guardsmen.
“Hodierne stressed that the survey did not include members of the reserves or the National Guard, who make up almost 30 percent of the soldiers currently deployed to Iraq or its neighboring states.
Members of these two services, whose numbers also total about 1.4 million, have tended to be far more critical of the Iraq deployment than the full-time military.
Hodierne said he believed that the sample was not a perfect cross-section, even of active-duty personnel. “Our sample tends to be older, higher-ranking, and longer in service,†he said, noting these variables might also contribute to a somewhat more Republican and conservative result.â€
Sorry, but you’re wrong, again. But you’re doing well, for a dog.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:52 am56% of the military now serving in Iraq are Republican.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 6, 2007 @ 12:52 am
reference?
August 6th, 2007 at 12:52 amI’m not pretending to be a dog, Wayne.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 6, 2007 @ 12:47 am
And I’m not Wayne pretending to be Jane. Ask anyone–even one of your alter egos.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:53 amWell, got to work tomorrow, Night all, Zooey, Tros, Wayne S. and Jane S. =)
Don’t torture the Dog too much, hehe
August 6th, 2007 at 12:54 amCompared to civilians, members of the military are significantly more religious, and they’re also far more likely to be Republicans. A 2005 Military Times poll found that 56% of military personnel described themselves as Republicans, and only 13% described themselves as Democrats.
————–
These are updated stats for TROS.
http://ctgop.blogspot.com/2007/07/all-jokes-aside.html
Comment by Dr. Dog
August 6th, 2007 at 12:54 am56% of the military now serving in Iraq are Republican.
Comment by Dr. Dog —
Wrong.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:55 amAnd I’m not Wayne pretending to be Jane. Ask anyone–even one of your alter egos.
Comment by Jane E. Schneider
Do you mind if I have a different opinion?
August 6th, 2007 at 12:56 amThese are updated stats for TROS.
http://ctgop.blogspot.com/2007/07/all-jokes-aside.html
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 6, 2007 @ 12:50 am
That’s real cute.
Now, can you roll over and play dead!? Here’s a biscuit!
August 6th, 2007 at 12:56 amGoodnight, Wayne! Hey, I would never torture an innocent animal…oh, you mean our “good doctor”!
August 6th, 2007 at 12:56 amWrong.
Comment by barfly
A 2005 Military Times poll found that 56% of military personnel described themselves as Republicans, and only 13% described themselves as Democrats.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:56 amDo you mind if I have a different opinion?
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 6, 2007 @ 12:56 am
Only if it’s reality based — which it’s not.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:57 amGoodnight, Wayne! Hey, I would never torture an innocent animal…oh, you mean our “good doctorâ€!
Comment by Jane E. Schneider
I’m not an animal. My name is Dr. William Dog.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:58 amI think it’s fine if you have a different opinion, dear.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:58 amGoodnight, Wayne!!
August 6th, 2007 at 12:58 am“A 2005 Military Times poll found that 56% of military personnel described themselves as Republicans, and only 13% described themselves as Democrats.”
All this shows is that those who chose to respond to the poll (they aren’t under any orders to participate, you know) polled that way. The military doesn’t compile statistics according to political affiliation.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:59 amI’m not an animal. My name is Dr. William Dog.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 6, 2007 @ 12:58 am
Link?
August 6th, 2007 at 12:59 am“Do you mind if I have a different opinion?”
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 6, 2007 @ 12:56 am
Yes. Yes, I do. But if you really enjoy being wrong, don’t blame me.
Goodnight, Zooey, TRoS, I’m off to bed–don’t give the dog too many biscuits. Wayne says goodnight, too!
August 6th, 2007 at 1:00 amJane and Wayne are getting up early to go to the conjointed twins convention.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:00 amLink?
Comment by Zooey — August 6, 2007 @ 12:59 am
___________
You have my word for it.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:00 amMy name is Dr. William Dog.
Comment by Dr. Dog
Well “Doc,” you sure got suckered with that poll…
August 6th, 2007 at 1:01 amI’m outta here, too.
Goodnight all (except the trolls and dog)!!
August 6th, 2007 at 1:01 am“Jane and Wayne are getting up early to go to the conjointed twins convention.”
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 6, 2007 @ 1:00 am
So we ARE two different people! Hah! BTW, it’s “conjoined.”
Okay, I’m really outta here now!
August 6th, 2007 at 1:02 amLink?
Comment by Zooey
http://www.drwilliamdog.com
August 6th, 2007 at 1:02 amPlease, Doc, tell me you’re a veterinarian – ’cause the thought of someone so obviously naive working on humans is a scary thought.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:03 am‘Yo, Dog. Do you concede your assertion about political affiliation of military members is bogus?
August 6th, 2007 at 1:04 amComment by Dr. Dog — August 6, 2007 @ 1:02 am
Linkee no workee. BAD DOG!!
August 6th, 2007 at 1:04 amit’s “conjoined.â€
Comment by Jane E. Schneider
Bridgett played a powerful assassin nick named Wolf Girl. She was adopted by the powerful evil conjointed twins(Elian Lui and Francis Ng) during a battle when she was a little girl. They trained her to become their most lethal sidekick to fight against the good side.
http://www.amazon.com/Bride-White-Hair-Brigitte-Lin/dp/customer-reviews/630502054X
August 6th, 2007 at 1:05 amhttp://www.drwilliamdog.com
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 6, 2007 @ 1:02 am
_____________
This is a perfectly legitimate site. I designed it myself.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:06 amLinkee no workee. BAD DOG!!
Comment by Zooey
I haven’t paid my bill.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:07 amI spent all our money on flea spray.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:07 amYo, Dog. Do you concede your assertion about political affiliation of military members is bogus?
Comment by barfly
It wasn’t an assertion. I provided two polls for you. Only 13% of the military in Iraq are Dems.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:08 am“conjointed twins”
I’ve rolled doobies like that…
It starts out as two, and burns down to one.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:08 amI’ve rolled doobies like that…
It starts out as two, and burns down to one.
Comment by barfly
I own a 6 foot bong.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:09 amDid someone say sumpin’ ’bout doobies?
August 6th, 2007 at 1:10 amLMAO at 715!
August 6th, 2007 at 1:11 amComment by barfly — August 6, 2007 @ 12:59 am
Thank you, Barfly. The aticle at Military Times also says the followint, AGAIN…
“The results should not be read as representative of the military as a whole; the survey’s respondents are on average older, more experienced, more likely to be officers and more career-oriented than the military population.”
Traditionally, the US Armed Forces have prided themselves on being essentially apolitical and fully responsive to civilian authority. When they became an all-volunteer force after the draft ended in the early 1970s, many analysts expressed concern the military could become increasingly divorced from the society that it was sworn to defend.
It’s NOT a good idea to politicize and stamp religious affiliation onto the military.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:12 am“It wasn’t an assertion. I provided two polls for you. Only 13% of the military in Iraq are Dems.”
Comment by Dr. Dog
It was an assertion, supposedly buttressed by the polls. Except that these polls are not reliable indicators of political affiliation of military members, for the reason I stated. The defense department doesn’t compile these type of stats – I’ve checked this all before. Your assertion that the soldiers serving are overwhelmingly republican is wrong – and unsupported by any proveable means.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:13 amIt’s ok, Republic.
They periodically appear with this same crap, and I shoot’em down every time.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:15 amExcept that these polls are not reliable indicators of political affiliation of military members, for the reason I stated.
Comment by barfly
They are a representative sample just like any other poll. You are spinning out of control.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:15 amThey periodically appear with this same crap, and I shoot’em down every time.
Comment by barfly
You haven’t shot anything down. You’re shooting blanks.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:17 amIt wasn’t an assertion. I provided two polls for you. Only 13% of the military in Iraq are Dems.
Comment by Dr. Dog — August 6, 2007 @ 1:08 am
And it doesn’t measure the National Guard numbers, mostly just career officers. Even Military Times admits that. Additionally, the military is not supposed to stress politcial affiliations.
“Traditionally, the US Armed Forces have prided themselves on being essentially apolitical and fully responsive to civilian authority.”
Clearly, you do not understand the folly in pursuing this line of thought.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:17 amThey are a representative sample just like any other poll. You are spinning out of control.
Comment by Dr. Dog
Except that these numbers aren’t any true indicator, because soldiers can choose not to respond – all you can point to is the stats for those who responded. Are you truly this dense?
August 6th, 2007 at 1:19 amKeep slapping him around, Barfly. He’s an idiot w/ no real point to make. I have to go eat dinner, finally.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:19 amAdditionally, the military is not supposed to stress politcial affiliations.
“Traditionally, the US Armed Forces have prided themselves on being essentially apolitical and fully responsive to civilian authority.â€
Clearly, you do not understand the folly in pursuing this line of thought.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity
Only 13% are Dems, TROS. You can’t spin that.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:20 amExcept that these numbers aren’t any true indicator, because soldiers can choose not to respond – all you can point to is the stats for those who responded. Are you truly this dense?
Comment by barfly
There is a 2 or 3% error rate for the Military Times poll.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:22 amKeep slapping him around, Barfly. He’s an idiot w/ no real point to make. I have to go eat dinner, finally.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity
Shorter TROS: “I can’t spin my way out of this.”
August 6th, 2007 at 1:22 amI hear the hotel ran out of tinfoil during the meeting.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:23 amLet me put it this way: if someone conducts a poll that respondents feel pressured to respond to in one way or another, whether by peer pressure, or pressure from above – as can be expected in this highly-charged situation – the results of such a poll are highly suspect, and not to be taken seriously.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:24 am“There is a 2 or 3% error rate for the Military Times poll.”
Comment by Dr. Dog
For those who chose to respond…
August 6th, 2007 at 1:26 amLet me put it this way: if someone conducts a poll that respondents feel pressured to respond to in one way or another, whether by peer pressure, or pressure from above – as can be expected in this highly-charged situation – the results of such a poll are highly suspect, and not to be taken seriously.
Comment by barfly
The poll was totally anonymous.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:26 amFor those who chose to respond…
Comment by barfly
Just like any poll.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:26 amAnd the fact that soldiers are under no orders to respond to this poll, means that they can choose not to respond, which would naturally skew the stats.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:28 amAnd the fact that soldiers are under no orders to respond to this poll, means that they can choose not to respond, which would naturally skew the stats.
Comment by barfly —
Enough answered to give a + or – of 2 to 3%.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:29 am“Just like any poll.”
Comment by Dr. Dog
Um, no. Other polls don’t have the ability to possibly impact a soldier’s future, or present. “Anonymous” polling isn’t normally done in a barracks situation is it? To think that peer pressure might affect the outcome of this poll is only natural.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:33 amEnough answered to give a + or – of 2 to 3%.
Comment by Dr. Dog
Of respondents. We keep going round, and round…
August 6th, 2007 at 1:34 amUm, no. Other polls don’t have the ability to possibly impact a soldier’s future, or present. “Anonymous†polling isn’t normally done in a barracks situation is it? To think that peer pressure might affect the outcome of this poll is only natural.
Comment by barfly
This is all spin. The proof is in the polling. Deal with it.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:37 amOf respondents. We keep going round, and round…
Comment by barfly
You only need a small sample to poll 1.5 million. Enough was polled to get a + or – of 2 to 3%. You are way off base here.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:38 am“This is all spin. The proof is in the polling. Deal with it.”
Comment by Dr. Dog
I already have. But you’re right about the poll being all spin. I would only hope that you would get tired of chasing your tail sooner or later…
August 6th, 2007 at 1:39 amI would only hope that you would get tired of chasing your tail sooner or later…
Comment by barfly
You are chasing your tail. You have ridiculous spin.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:40 amYou only need a small sample to poll 1.5 million. Enough was polled to get a + or – of 2 to 3%. You are way off base here.
Comment by Dr. Dog
A small, accurate sample. This one isn’t, for the reasons I’ve stated. Your poll is still bogus – but if it gives you comfort to believe it, go ahead.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:42 amThe margin of error is a statistic expressing the amount of random sampling error in a survey’s results. The larger the margin of error, the less confidence one should have that the poll’s reported results are close to the “true” figures; that is, the figures for the whole population.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margin_of_error
There is only a 2 or 3% sampling error in the Military Times poll. It is pretty close to being dead on balls accurate.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:43 am“You have ridiculous spin.”
Comment by Dr. Dog —
I noticed that you haven’t challenged any of my assertions, merely hugged your poll ever tighter like a security blanket. That you can’t mount any kind of real defense shows how little serious thought you’ve given the matter.
Big surprise.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:46 amI have seen polls with a 10-15% error rate, where too many people chose not to respond. This one is pretty accurate.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:51 amThere is only a 2 or 3% sampling error in the Military Times poll. It is pretty close to being dead on balls accurate.
Comment by Dr. Dog
“The margin of error.”
And what is the criterion used for determining it, in this specific poll? Your link doen’t specify.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:52 amI have seen polls with a 10-15% error rate, where too many people chose not to respond. This one is pretty accurate.
Comment by Dr. Dog
Examples?
August 6th, 2007 at 1:54 amThe poll has come to be viewed by some as a barometer of the pro fessional career military. It is the only independent poll done on an annual basis. The margin of error on this year’s poll is plus or minus 3 percentage points.
—————–
This is all I have.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:54 amThe poll has come to be viewed by some …
And some view the Cubs as a viable contender for the pennant…
August 6th, 2007 at 1:56 am3% is almost dead on balls accurate.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:58 am“This is all I have.”
Comment by Dr. Dog
Oh, come now, Doc. You were so confident just a short while ago. What happened?
August 6th, 2007 at 1:58 amOh, come now, Doc. You were so confident just a short while ago. What happened?
Comment by barfly
You’re a moron.
August 6th, 2007 at 1:59 am3% is almost dead on balls accurate.
Comment by Dr. Dog
Until we know the criterion used for determining the margin, we don’t know anything. So next time, do a little research before putting up a questionable poll, and perhaps it won’t also bite you on the ass.
Now, I’ve got to turn in, but rest assured I will be around tomorrow, so if you try to float this poll again I’ll be here, to stick pins in it..
August 6th, 2007 at 2:02 amUntil we know the criterion used for determining the margin, we don’t know anything.
Comment by barfly
YOU don’t know anything. Most people know what an error rate is of a poll. The higher the less accurate. The lower the more accurate. But you’re too stupid.
August 6th, 2007 at 2:05 amAny more liberals want to fight? I’m snarling.
August 6th, 2007 at 2:08 am#753 – “In addition to sampling error, one should bear in mind that question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of opinion polls.”
Hat eto burt your “I’m so right” bubble, but the error rate is not the end-all answer for accuracy.
Here’s a poll that you might disagree with on many levels, but the “error rate” is between 2.5 and 3.5. INCREDIBLY accurate based on your criteria.
http://people-press.org/reports/pdf/312.pdf
August 6th, 2007 at 8:05 amI wouldnt exactly call that a “stirring defense”
August 6th, 2007 at 8:32 amI wrote a pretty nice, thoughtful post that was actually on-topic, and it appears to have been eaten by trolls. Nothing insulting or inappropriate. Guessing that this one shows up, but I give up here. I’ll continue to read, but when the posts of disruptive readers stand, while too many of my own disappear, it’s just too hard to be too involved here.
August 6th, 2007 at 8:56 am