Comment by Frank M — December 21, 2007 @ 10:55 am:

I’m amazed that, in spite of the liberal media showing nothing but bad news form Afghanistan and Iraq, support for the war on terror remains still that strong.

Frank, dear, I’m looking for the “good news” stories from the media, that’s all. But to no one’s surprise, you cannot provide ANY. No, instead you come back with some silly-ass response, “I don’t do requests.” Instead, we get the whining from people such as yourself about the horrible liberal press. I have asked many times over the past couple of years, and nobody can show me a MSM news source — “liberal” or conservative — that has archived good-news stories or has one on their front page this very second. Like Lara Logan, I’d like to know. The Baby Noor story was great; there are more, we are told.

People like you and the White House and all the war supporters whine about the liberal press and “all bad news, all the time” coming from them, but when pressed for sources of good news??

Everything goes quiet.

As to my fixation with Fox? One, they are “conservative,” remember? Not one of the members of the bad ol’ liberal press. Two, again you show your ignorance. FoxNews is the biggest supporter of this administration. Why, Fox and Friends alone has been known to b*tch about a Democratic entertainer speaking out against the war (”What does he know…he’s just an actor.“), and the very same week invite a Republican entertainer on the show to talk about…what?….yes, the war. Why do you think they went with Tony Snow as press sec., instead of someone not associated with ANY media outlet? I’m sure you are also aware that Cheney watches nothing but Fox when he travels, or did you miss that little tidbit?

Anyhow, my fixation with Fox is simply this: if any member of the MSM should be reporting on the good-news stories, it should be Fox. As I said, we have been told there are thousands of good-news stories. Fine. Where are they? If more Americans get their news from Fox, where are the stories? Instead, if you want to talk about fixation, let’s talk about Fox’s John Gibson being so fixated with Danny Bonaduce’s shirtless pictures on the Internet that he invites him on the show to talk about it. And Hume, one of the biggest cheerleaders of this administration, should be doing at a minimum one good news story per day. There are thousands of them, remember? Again, where are they?

Any fool can go to Fox and search the archives for stories about Iraq and spend a few minutes scanning a few hundred headlines going back a couple of months You won’t point out any good news stories, because you can’t. It’s much easier to whine whine whine.

Seeing you waiting tables at an Applebee’s, Charles James Napier Wentworth Pigglesmythe IV.

God, that’s just so dumb. Hey stupid, Bush’s grandfather, Prescott Bush, was indicted under the Trading with the Enemies Act for providing banking services to the Nazis during WWII.

Comment by Charles James Napier — December 21, 2007 @ 12:42 pm
Recommend (0) | Report Abuse

Seriously?
Why do you hate irony, Chuck?

Comment by Charles James Napier — December 21, 2007 @ 12:57 pm

Unfortunately Nappy, we can’t say the same for you, can we?

Comment by Frank M — December 21, 2007 @ 12:37 pm

And on the very next thread, Frank, you say nobody listens to that “pervert O’Reilly”. And he is the voice of Fox News. Take your alzheimer’s meds Jake, you’re losing it.

Comment by Charles James Napier — December 21, 2007 @ 11:46 am

Oh hi michael, you couldn’t help yourself could you?

Keep trying, eventually you’ll say something that doesn’t make you look like an enraged crackpot.

Gee, how sweet.

I wish those around me a Merry Christmas, but just for you Chuck, I am going to rearrange the nativity scene with the donkey and Mary showing their love.

Shove your Christmas greeting up your ass.

If a stable govt. is the nucleus of success, how much effort should we put into obtaining this? How much unified sacrifice should americans be willing to make in order to achieve this? then ask yourself how closely did this administration adhere to making this happen.

We can get into the rationale for going in the first place some other time. I’m interested in reading your defense of this.

My definition of success / victory starts with a mea culpa from the one’s who missinformed us. An accountablility from all who short changed the troops for the last 5 years.

Without 3 times as many troops on the ground and 5 times the amount of funding I don’t see how we can create a stable enough atmosphere to obtain “success/ victory”.

I await your reply.

Comment by bob lahblah
——————————————-

Please explain to me how Dr Matt’s comment is ironic.

Success in Iraq would be leaving Iraq stable enough for the Iraqi to govern themselves and continue the trend towards consensual, constitutional government.

It would also includ riding the country of the last remnants al Qaeda and and other like-minded Islamic militant groups.

And we are succeeding at this…
http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/general-barry-r-mccaffrey-report.htm

How would you define success, or as you put it; victory?

Comment by Charles James Napier — December 21, 2007 @ 11:29 am

This hasn’t been supported with any evidence. The republican support has been shown in earlier postings. Iran-Contra and Saddam to name two.

I’m not here to change your mind but you have shown to all here how pitiful your unfounded digital diarrhea is.