The overwhelming lessons of Iowa and New Hampshire are ones that shouldn’t be a surprise to any American, but clearly are to the political power elitists and their old media symbiotes: Americans are tired of the angry political partisan divide.
- We saw it in 1998 after the impeachment
- We saw it in 2000 during the election tie
- We saw it in 2002 when H. Dean deliberately divided the nation and the world by opposing US action in Iraq for his own political power grab.
- We saw it in 2004 when John Kerry lost the popular vote and the electoral vote to a President with less than 50% approval ratings!
- We saw it in 2005 with President Bush’s uber low approval numbers which continue today.
- We saw it in 2006 with a change of Congressional power wrapped around a message of “A New Direction” of this, that, and the other
- We saw it in 2007 with the almost immediate plummet of Congressional approval ratings to the lowest in recorded history!
- We saw it in Iowa where the two candidates who ran almost exclusively as “nice guys” promising “hope” and “change” and bi-partisanship ran away with it.
- We saw it in New Hampshire where an inexperienced new guy almost blew away the Democratic Party’s most partisan player, and he did it on a message of “Yes we can.”
The point is that the American people have been deliberately divided by political partisanship. Republicans are not innocent, and only fools don’t try to identify and accept the Democrats’ sins as well. Average Americans are people who normally don’t care, aren’t interested, or just don’t have the time to pay attention to politics. They are RINOs, DINOs, independents, centrists, or some other labeled demographic. When they see political reporting, they see name-calling, spin, half truths, and misleading statements; politics. As this has steadily increased over the past 10yrs, more and more Americans have become apathetic in disgust and despair.
But Obama and Huckabee are right. There IS something happening here. In addition to the apathy, there’s a new generation taking power. The “Me Generation” (ie “Baby Boomer” generation) has failed. They failed to meet or surpass the patriotic contribution of their parents; members of “The Greatest Generation.” Now, those children of the 50’s, youth of the 60’s, young disco dancing adults of the 1970’s, and the junk bond investors of the 1980’s are about to retire. As they do, their children are taking power, and this generation (people in their 20’s and 30’s) has never known a JFK, a Martin Luther King, a Bobby Kennedy, or for that matter a truly great American President. Some would argue that President Clinton or President Reagan should be on Mount Rushmore, but those are partisan calls not the voice of Americans as a whole.
While the men and women of this new generation take power, they not only have their own lives to shape, but in the past few years they’ve started having children, and now they’re also concerned about more than just themselves. As adults they no longer have the luxury of apathy and despair that they were kids. They see today’s threats and problems and concerns, and they see the legacy of debt, dishonor, disgrace, and divide; an inheritance of political problems are too big, too numerous, and too dangerous to shrug off and pass on to another generation as the “Me Generation” has done.
Democrats and Republicans alike grow more and more desperate for a change in the American political climate. Americans as a whole-regardless of their own individual or group ignorance-cannot fail to see that politics as usual means business as usual; i.e. no business, no accomplishment, no greater United States of America. The impotence of Washington D.C. has just grown too limp to ignore anymore. Viagra and Lipitor sales are just too big inside The Beltway.
The example has been set, seen, can no longer be accepted. People really do want change.
All men may be created equal with certain inalienable rights, but some are born with more than that. Some people are born with unequal skills, abilities, gifts, and particularly resources. Americans are those people. The world knows it, we know it, and politicians know it, but the latter has no problem repressing or dismissing the abilities of a person or this entire nation for their own personal political gain.
It’s been said that, “Words are not action–and as beautifully presented and passionately felt as they are, they are not action.” That’s not entirely true though. Words are in fact action. Words are the lifeblood of a free nation. It’s why freedom of speech is the key to everything in the United States. Words are an action in and of themselves-an action that can divide a nation and stall it, or unite, inspire, and propel a nation forward through even the gravest of times. Whether it’s JFK, Martin Luther King, Bobby Kennedy, FDR, or Lincoln, or our founding fathers…words do matter.
The United States of America is at war, on the edge of economic crisis-even disaster, and bogged down in a quagmire of challenges left behind by a generation that claims to have been “changing” things for 35yrs. Well, that generation has failed. Baby Boomer Presidents have failed. Baby Boomer politicians have failed. Baby Boomer advocates and activists have failed. Now, they want to grab power yet again, try yet again, and at the same time most of their generation is retiring-retiring on a financial gift from their children and grandchildren. That generation’s time has come, and passed.
A new generation is taking responsibility for America. That generation wants this to be a United States of America – not the Democratic Republic of North America, or the Republican States of the Western Hemisphere. No. This is the United States of America. When the American people are united, this new generation knows that the world trembles in awe. People who are oppressed by economic, religious, cultural, or political circumstances look with respect and hope while oppressors and tyrants flee in fear to live for years in caves. This generation, and the world, knows that when united, this country can put men on the moon and make the most incredible endeavor in all of mankind’s history actually look boring.
This generation also knows that it cannot follow in its parents’ footsteps and pass on burdens to yet another generation. The past promise of Americans has always been to pass on from one generation to another a better nation has simply been ignored by the “Me Generation.” Their children want that to change.
Democrats and Republicans are trying to find ways to market the idea of “change” because most of all, the American people are finally standing up and telling aging leaders that it’s time to either pay up or get out. It’s time to either really change things, or retire like the rest of the “Me generation.”
Author of “Reparations and America’s 2nd Civil War
Reparations and America’s 2nd Civil War: Malensek, Scott: 9798864028674: Amazon.com: Books
Re: “as if we are your generic FOX-watching, Rush-listening, Hannity-worshipping, Coulter-loving, conservative shills. Address us as specific individuals, Steve. None of us speaks for anyone else, let alone ALL conservatives, as if we are one big group-think. We’re not your inflatable doll toy. Don’t project and assume. You’ve been here too long, and to continue to do so demonstrates a willful suspension of having a brain.”
The entire tenor of this site is to generalize Liberals and attack Democratic politicians with broad brush strokes.
I post based on what is the S.O.P. of this site. When I see a Conservative willing to discuss policies with comments that do not start with “Liberals believe…” (which, by the way is also a standard lead in on FoxNews, rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter, which is why I reference them as the source of yoru comments, since I can pretty much map Conservative beliefs and opinons based on the latest broadcast from one of those three.
I cite the Right-wing Christian fundamentalists because that group has veto power and control of the Republican Party. This was amply demonstrated when James Dobson wrote one demanding column, and the Republicans immediately called Congress into session and President Bush flew back from vacation (!) to intervene the federal government into a family decision about life support in Florida.
“a family decision” or murder by an husband in name only, with the approval of a judge who declares that it is legal to with hold even water from a woman for 13 days to cause her death. For the crime of being inconvenient.
Meanwhile, convicted hardened criminals sit on death row for years, because liberals claim that putting them to death is cruel and unusual punishment.
Re: “How can we believe you’d hold Pres Edwards or Pres H Clinton accountable for their actions if you won’t hold them accountable for their actions as Senators?”
“Because I value competence over blind fanatic ideology. ”
Well then…was Sen Clinton or Sen Edwards competent enough to authorize a war? That’s a pretty important question given that you’re gonna support their pledge to continue the war. This is no more a diversion than anything you’ve posted in this thread about “conservatives”, Republicans, etc. as none of those have to do with the original article. You deviated and distracted…not me (remember, I wrote the original article). I noticed you claimed I distracted rather than answer a simple question-an interesting distraction in and of itself.
Re: ““a family decision” or murder by an husband in name only, with the approval of a judge who declares that it is legal to with hold even water from a woman for 13 days to cause her death. For the crime of being inconvenient.”
The autopsy proved that her husband was right and James Dobson and the Republicans in Congress and theWhite House were wrong.
Re: “Well then…was Sen Clinton or Sen Edwards competent enough to authorize a war? ”
Yes, they were, and are competent. What was not known fully was that Geroge W. Bush was NOT competent enough to manage the occupation of Iraq afterward.
Stott: Since you have asked this question about six times in a row, you obviously have some sort of word trap that you will now spring on me for that “yes”. So go ahead, post your canned reply to my “yes” about Clinton’s competency, and crow about it as much as you wish.
It still does not compensate one bit for the American lives that have been lost, and will be lost to make up for George W. Bush’s INcompetence in managing the occupation of Iraq.
LOL! I had to ask it “six times” because you never answered until the last time, and I have to admit, I’m impressed. I’m impressed that you support their decision to authorize the invasion and occupation of Iraq. That’s amazing to me. At least you’ve come to acknowledge that the intelligence wasn’t manipulated or twisted or created now (for if you still hold that position, then clearly Senators Clinton and Edwards didn’t make competent decisions, AND you’re not holding them accountable. Lack of accountability as Senators would make your claim to hold them accountable as President a flat out lie.)
re the incompent management of the occupation, I’ll ask again (and again and again until you answer as you’ve seen), can you show me in military history where an operation of similar scale and condition was conducted better? Lacking that, you’re incompetence claim is actually COUNTER to historical fact, and that fact is: while the price in blood and treasure in Iraq has been high, it has been historically LOW by comparison. More importantly, there is no other place on the planet where this many Jihadis could have been engaged and killed this effectively.
“The autopsy proved that her husband was right and James Dobson and the Republicans in Congress and theWhite House were wrong.”
What is it you think was proven right? No one in the US would dare treat any criminal like that woman was treated. No trial-Not guilty of any crime except being inconvenient means one should be starved to death over a period
of days; How does that make any sense at all?
Re: “That’s amazing to me. At least you’ve come to acknowledge that the intelligence wasn’t manipulated or twisted or created now (for if you still hold that position, then clearly Senators Clinton and Edwards didn’t make competent decisions, AND you’re not holding them accountable. Lack of accountability as Senators would make your claim to hold them accountable as President a flat out lie.)”
I knew you had a trap in there. It was to provide an alibi that Senator Clinton had the same information that the Bush Administration.
That is not correct.
As I have demonstrated earlier, the Bush Administration cooked the books and witheld information from Congress (meaning Senator Clinton) that might (not necessarilly would, unlike your hero Bill O’Rielly, I do not have “body language” experts to help me read people’s minds) have changed their vote.
However they were competent for the vote they made, with the information that the Bush Administration DID provide.
But I knew you were asking that same question, over and over, in order to try to provide another alibi for George W. Bush, the man you appear to believe is the second-greates president of the twentieth century (behind only saint Ronald reagan, of course).
And, again, regardless of how Congress voted, George W. Bush so incompetently managed the occupation of Iraq that Americans have been, and will continue to die to make up for it for years to come.
So, with full hindsight, shame on Senator Clinton for voting to allow an incompetent president the power to launch an invasion, whose aftermath he wold botch so thoroughly that his blunders are directly responsible for the deaths of thousands.
But double shame on Conservatives who will never hold George W. Bush accountable for the botched occupation of Iraq. Never. They are more loyal to that one man than they are to the soldiers now dying for his incompetence.
Actually my comment above, instead of saying, “greates president of the twentieth century”, should have read “second greatest president of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries”.
Re: “What is it you think was proven right? No one in the US would dare treat any criminal like that woman was treated. No trial-Not guilty of any crime except being inconvenient means one should be starved to death over a period of days; How does that make any sense at all?”
This comment makes no sense at all. My point was the degree of control James Dobson, on behalf of radical fundamentalists Christians in the US, has over the Republican Party, and how he demonstrated that power in the case of Terry Schiavo’s vegetative state.
What has your tirade about “criminals” have to do with that point?
Then we have the complaint of incompetence in Iraq. An operation put into effect after the ranking liberal on the Senate Intelligence Committee stated “SEN. ROCKEFELLER: No. The — I mean, this question is asked a thousand times and I’ll be happy to answer it a thousand times. I took a trip by myself in January of 2002 to Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Syria, and I told each of the heads of state that it was my view that George Bush had already made up his mind to go to war against Iraq — that that was a predetermined set course which had taken shape shortly after 9/11.” Article
When did it be come the responsibility of the liberals in Congress to make sure that the enemy got all of our intelligence reports as soon as they were developed? Why do American soldiers have to fight against an enemy that has the advantage of getting our intelligence fed to them as soon as it is developed? An enemy that has been told for years that if they just hold on, the Anti-Americans back in the States will insure that America is not allowed to win in Iraq.
Re: “I’ll ask again (and again and again until you answer as you’ve seen), can you show me in military history where an operation of similar scale and condition was conducted better?”
The occupation of Germany, after WW II. This was planned for years prior to their surrender. The “Werewolves” who fought after the surrender lasted all of about a month, even though Conservatives have trotted out that excuse for years.
We still have troops in Germany, but they are not in full scale combat. A point Conservative conveniemtlt forget.
It wasn’t a tirade. It simply stated facts; no one in America could get by with staving a criminal to death for 13 days, yet liberals think it is acceptable for a woman who committed no crime to be treated that way. How does it make any sense?
Oh Steve, #110 was GREAT! I loved how you tried to excuse Sen Clinton and Sen Edwards for their authorization of the invasion of Iraq by sticking to your talking points. Wonderful! but when you turned right around and said “shame on”X…yeah, real accountability.
I also liked the part about the Werewolves in post-war Germany. Condolezza Rice and Rumsfeld said the same thing. You’re in good company, but I thought you said Rummy was incompetent…which would make your claim/his claim…hmmm, what?
Re: “It wasn’t a tirade. It simply stated facts; no one in America could get by with staving a criminal to death for 13 days, yet liberals think it is acceptable for a woman who committed no crime to be treated that way. How does it make any sense?”
The body had no brain function, and the higher brain (above the reptilian brain and brain stem) were less than half normal size and had no function. She was dead.
And that item STILL has nothing to do with the demonstrated control the Radical Fundamentalist Christians have over the Republican Party, as demonstrated by james Dobson when, on his orders alone, the Republican party called Congress into session and President Bush cut short a vbacation (gasp!).
“And that item STILL has nothing to do with the demonstrated control the Radical Fundamentalist Christians have over the Republican Party, as demonstrated by james Dobson when, on his orders alone, the Republican party called Congress into session and President Bush cut short a vbacation (gasp!).”
Which contrasts so much to the influence and control that Rev King has even today on the Democratic Party or Rev Sharpton or Reverend Jesse Jackson. Foolish-and MOOT since the Republican Congress in question was largely voted out of office, and since Bush bashing rantings against a lame duck President are as impotent as a lame duck is fast.
“she was dead.”
Why did she have be surrounded by armed guard to prevent her being given food and water
for 13 days if she was dead? What was the fear that she was going to get up and leave? That she was going to continue to be inconvenient?
Scott: I see you are still feeding that hatemonger.
Not sure what he’s talking about with “Radical Fundamentalist Christians” controlling the GOP.
I haven’t seen any and I go to the meetings and rallies. Not a bible in sight.
Poor Steve prefers his hate filled delusions to painful and intelletcually challenging task of actually coming up with any practical, rational or mature solutions to the truly life and death issues this nation faces.
It’s sad really. That someone could be so poisoned by hate and willfully so.
Too bad Bush hasn’t built those internment camps nuts like Steve are always blathering about. I would say Steve should be placed in one of those facilities for his own good.
Re: ““she was dead.” Why did she have be surrounded by armed guard to prevent her being given food and water for 13 days if she was dead? What was the fear that she was going to get up and leave? That she was going to continue to be inconvenient?”
Launching off into this digression does demonstrrate one of my other contentions: That Conservatives, while their rhetoric is always about getting rid of the “Nanny State” are actually all for the government intervening and making decisions on behalf of all Americans for all their decisions… as long as the intervening is to impose their personal agenda on everyone else. The vehemence with which Pager defends that intervention, along with the total absence of any disagreement from any other “Conservative” proves that Conservatives are as much about state control of every aspect of our lives as any “Liberal” is portrayed as being… Just as long as Conservatives are the ones doing the interventions.
And those Conservatives who will be doing that intervention in our personal lives are named James Dobson, Pat Robertson, …
“I haven’t seen any and I go to the meetings and rallies. Not a bible in sight.”
You have to go to Rev Sharpton’s meetings or Rainbow Coalition meetings to see those.
No need to put Steve in a camp. Making him support the occupation of Iraq until 2013 and making him vote for people he’s admitted were incompetent is bad enough. Just look at how hard he’s wrestling with it. It is sad, but I think it’s a microcosm of the problem described in the original article. People need to come together. People want the divisiveness to end. People want to find common ground and are tired of the politically alienated who seek to divide and play gotcha politics. This nation was united (albeit only skin deep) on 911. Then it was deliberately divided by the likes of Steve-people who just arbitrarily name call, label, and seek to oppose rather than support, who are against rather than for, who care more about being able to say, “gotcha” somehow, someday, on some message board or blogsite rather than use those sources of communication to research and find truth. Efforts have been made to point out truths to people who have been misled-deliberately misled, but Steve and others don’t care. The irony here is that by closing his mind to the discussion, by averting questions, by deliberately distracting and topic shifting, by constantly name-calling and stereotyping others…Steve has demonstrated that he is not an open-minded liberal, but more akin to a closed-minded Rush Limbaugh yet even more extremist.
By keeping Steve posting on this thread (and it i so easy because he never answers questions and instead tries to topic shift or distract each time) I’ve demonstrated in real time and in great detail the kind of change that I described in the article. Let’s not forget that the CHANGE theme is not exclusively Sen Obama’s, but he is very clearly the most associated with it. We need to bear in mind that most of his support comes from independents, RINOs, centrists, and even Republicans, rather than lockstep lemming DNC parrots or the so-called liberal netroots (nutroots if you’re not one of em).
What I have done here-again, by keeping Steve posting/dancing/spinning/and flatout lying is to show that whether it’s a radical right wing nutjob or their polar opposite…these extremists are not what people want. People don’t want gotcha politics. They don’t want the spin and the misleading. They don’t want the polarization of “conservative” vs the Stevos of America. Nah. Just as readers grow weary of his posts here, Americans in general are weary of such lies, innuendo, half truths, and distortion. They’re tired of the repetitive refusal to face facts, and that’s why I think,
“The overwhelming lessons of Iowa and New Hampshire are ones that shouldn’t be a surprise to any American, but clearly are to the political power elitists and their old media symbiotes: Americans are tired of the angry political partisan divide.”
…a political partisan divide stemming in large part to people such as Steve who go around avidly labeling, stereotyping, inciting, misleading, and ignoring facts rather than accepting them (let alone seeking them) in lieu of encouraging and promoting that partisan divide. Put simply, ya can’t label people this or that, and then say you’re against the idea of dividing people into this and that.
Thanks for your help in demonstrating the extremism that I wrote about, and that Americans are seeking to CHANGE and move away from.
🙂
Re: “Too bad Bush hasn’t built those internment camps nuts like Steve are always blathering about. I would say Steve should be placed in one of those facilities for his own good.”
I’m sure you would have me imprisoned for disagreing with you. I take solace you are more merciful than you hero, Ann Coulter, who would have me put to death for that same “crime”.
Re: “Making him support the occupation of Iraq until 2013 and making him vote for people he’s admitted were incompetent is bad enough.”
Can you document those words coming from any of my posts? or is that Conservative logic?
Re: “Thanks for your help in demonstrating the extremism that I wrote about, and that Americans are seeking to CHANGE and move away from.”
Your comment ending with this statement actually does reflect my personal opinion of extremism. However, while I can admit that Al Sharpton is an extremist, and shame on Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama and other Democrats for pandering to him, Conservatives will not hold their own extremists to a similar level of accountability: Note the parallel discussion regarding James Dobson’s control of a Republican Congress and President and a complete defense of that action or absence of any disagreement with that control.
My point being that I acknowledge that there are horses a**’s in the Democratic party, hypocrits and even those who are incompetent.
John Kerry is an example of the first.
Hillary Clinton is an example of the second and jimmy Carter is an example of the third.
And they are all Democratic past (or possibly future) presidential nominees.
Conservatives, as I have been consistently asserting, give Republicans of the same stripe a free pass: Particularly the most egrigious of them: George W. Bush, whos occupation of Iraq has been botched and continues to cost Americans and Iraqis their lives. but Conservatives gloss over blunders that they wold demand impeachment for had they been committed by a Democratic President.
That is, and has been, my point.
And, knowing that it is absolutely impossible for any Conservative, anywhere, any time to admit that Geroge W. Bush botched the occupation, I recommend you close the thread: After, of course, another round of name-calling against me, wishing me ill, and hoping that I die a lingering, painful death with much family suffering.
Hillary or Sen Edwards win the nomination, you will have to vote one of the two people who demonstrated incompetence by authorizing the war in Iraq, and both people have said they’d keep the war going until 2013. By voting for either one of them, you will vote to continue the war until 2013 under the leadership of people who demonstrated incompetence.
Keep that labeling coming. It makes the thread article’s point all that more proven/demonstrated.
“Your comment ending with this statement actually does reflect my personal opinion of extremism. However, while I can admit that Al Sharpton is an extremist, and shame on Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama and other Democrats for pandering to him, Conservatives will not hold their own extremists to a similar level of accountability: Note the parallel discussion regarding James Dobson’s control of a Republican Congress and President and a complete defense of that action or absence of any disagreement with that control.”
Lack of disagreement? They were voted out. Republicans lost the Congress after that. That’s accountability. When Republicans disagree with the extremists in their party, they vote em out or kick em out.
Democrats?
“John Kerry is an example of the first.
Hillary Clinton is an example of the second and jimmy Carter is an example of the third.”
Apparently Democrats don’t kick em out. They nominate them for President-even elect em. See also your inevitable vote for Sen Clinton if she wins the nomination as well as the failure to hold her to account for authorizing the war invasion of Iraq.
Re: “you will have to vote one of the two people who demonstrated incompetence by authorizing the war in Iraq”
Please explain. How have they demonstrated incompetence from that vote?
Re: “See also your inevitable vote for Sen Clinton if she wins the nomination as well as the failure to hold her to account for authorizing the war invasion of Iraq.”
I will hold her accountable for that vote.
Will you hold Geroge W. Bush accountable for the botched occupation?
What a filibustering fool! Don’t you know how you have damaged the credibility of any rational opposing argument to conservativism?
The discussion started with: “I cite the Right-wing Christian fundamentalists because that group has veto power and control of the Republican Party. This was amply demonstrated when James Dobson wrote one demanding column, and the Republicans immediately called Congress into session and President Bush flew back from vacation (!) to intervene the federal government into a family decision about life support in Florida.”
Any one who had a real interest in justice would have realized the “husband” had a serious conflict of interest beginning years before the woman was starved to death.
Had her parents be given custody, when they should have, no other intervention would have been needed. The “husband” could have been granted a divorce and gotten on with his life with his new family. Everyone would have been happy, but no; for some reason she had to DIE. Starved to death for 13 days, with armed guards to make sure she did not escape her fate.
Meanwhile we are told “I’m sure you would have me imprisoned for disagreing with you. I take solace you are more merciful than you hero, Ann Coulter, who would have me put to death for that same “crime”.
Terri Schiavo was put to death, not for a crime, just because she was inconvenient. She was a real human life and death situation, not some joke.
Re: “See also your inevitable vote for Sen Clinton if she wins the nomination as well as the failure to hold her to account for authorizing the war invasion of Iraq.” resp:”I will hold her accountable for that vote. Will you hold Geroge W. Bush accountable for the botched occupation?”
1) How can you hold her accountable for her vote AND support her
2) if you’re not holding her accountable now, how can anyone believe you would in the future
3) re the incompent management of the occupation, I’ll ask again (and again and again until you answer as you’ve seen), can you show me in military history where an operation of similar scale and condition was conducted better? Lacking that, you’re incompetence claim is actually COUNTER to historical fact, and that fact is: while the price in blood and treasure in Iraq has been high, it has been historically LOW by comparison. More importantly, there is no other place on the planet where this many Jihadis could have been engaged and killed this effectively. The werewolves thing was cited by Rumsfeld-someone you’ve tried to say is incompetent, so his claim (your werewolves idea) must be incompetent. History supports you here. The werewolves were nothing at all in size, tactic, orientation, or dedication compared to the Jihadis in Iraq. So find a comparable military operation in scale and condition that was handled better, and your case for incompetence will be strengthened. Vietnam and Afghanistan are the typicals, but in both cases the costs in blood and treasure were several fold worse.
And, on my parallel track of Rightwing Christian Control of the Republican party, here is why Mike Huckabee is one of the leaders of the pack right now and why I beleive he will get the nomination for President from the Republican Party:
“I have opponents in this race who do not want to change the Constitution. But I believe it’s a lot easier to change the Constitution than it would be to change the word of the living god. And that’s what we need to do — to amend the Constitution so it’s in God’s standards rather than try to change God’s standards so it lines up with some contemporary view.”
Mike Huckabee, Republican Presidential Candidate.
Monday, January 14, 2008
“And those Conservatives who will be doing that intervention in our personal lives are named James Dobson, Pat Robertson, …”
A quick search of Google reveals no reports of anyone’s life being ruined or ended by anyone named James Dobson, or Pat Robertson.
Type in numbers killed by John Kerry’s aid to North Vietnam and get 352,000 articles. That’s not the numbers killed. The number’s killed are much higher.
There is no way to know how many American
names are on the Vietnam Wall because Walter Cronkite, Jane Fonda, Ramsey Clark, John Kerry, and other Americans encouraged the North Vietnamese to keep fighting until America gave up. How many Vietnamese and others in SE Asia are dead because the American left was able to do what the North Vietnamese could not do, defeat America.
There is no way of knowing how many Americans, Afghanistanis, or Iraqis have been killed and will be killed in Afghanistan/Iraq because Democrat political leaders and anti war demonstrators have encouraged the terrorists to keep fighting.
James Dobson, and Pat Robertson don’t cause
the deaths of American Service members who are killed by the enemy. Americans who help the enemy do.
James Dobson and Pat Robertson don’t cause wives to grow old and alone as widows. Americans who help the enemy do.
James Dobson and Pat Robertson don’t cause children to grow up never knowing their fathers or mothers who were killed by enemies the US is fighting. Americans who aid these enemies do.
Re: “How can you hold her accountable for her vote AND support her”
Because, despite her vote on the authorization, I belive that she could take the necessary actions to get our troops out in an orderly fashion.
Unlike Republicans, she does not have to justify Bush’s botched occupation, which Donald Rumsfeld predicted at six months. And, the Iraqi government, knowing that they will not have Republican openn-ended commitments to provide thier “policing” for them, will have to settle their civil war themselves. As long as Republicans are running the war from the White house, the three sides of the Iraqi civil war know that they can continue to fight and the US will provide a blank check to do all the work for them. I’m sure at this point you will provide fifteen links declaring what a “heckuva job” the Iraqi military is doing and that “more than 100,000” have been trained (something we’ve heard fro the White House every six months since 2004).
As I’ve said before, The Bush White House has sprinkled too many “Loyal Bushies” in all branches of the executive government, as documented in “Enemy at the Gates”. Of course, no Conservative was permitted to read that book, so I assume you have not even heard of it, or if you have,you learned of it from the FoxNews “rebuttal”.
The occupation of Germany after WW II was a LARGER scale than Iraq, but accomplished much more efficiently.
The occupatin of Japan was accomplished much better. Of course, McAuthor did not disband the military and police forces, then send them home with their weapons and fail to secure a single one of the military supply depost. But then, no Conservative can hold Donald Rumsfeld accountable for those decisions, can they?
The post-US Civil War occupation of the Confederacy ws not accompanied by a “ten-year” war or civil war among the various Confederate States. (not really a good analogy, since there were differences).
But there are three. I’m sure your White House operatives will quickly supply you with lots of nit-picking “differences” that you can post back in defence of George W. Bush. I work alone and have to do my own research, so I apologize for not having paid white House staffers to assist my blogs, as Conservative bloggers do.
regarding killling al Qaeda in Iraq:
As we have read from military analysis, the occupation of Iraq has provided a recruiting poster that has gained more al Qaeda recruits than have been killed in Iraq (the “we’ll lure 100% of the terrorists in the world into iraq and kill them all” excuse that Conservatives trot out every few months).
Of course al Qaeda wold not exist much at all had George W. Bush not let him go at Tora Bora in order to prep for (authorized) invasion of Iraq. Perhaps had he completed the job in Afghanistan, we would not be watching the government of Pakistan teeter on the edge right now.
But then, Conservatives, with their “perfect Bush” requirement, cannot admit that happened either, can they?
Finally, Afghanistan is not a good analogy to use for your ideal results in Ifraq: Considering how the Soviet Union’s ten year occupation of Afghanistan turned out for that the Soviet Union itself. But then, as we heard from your hero Rush Limbaugh, the losses in Iraq are “not material” (unless your are a family member of somone who has died to counter Bush’s failings).
I consider $3 billion a week to be too high a cost in $’s.
I consider 1,000+ American dead a year too high a cost in lives.
I consider 16,000 (and counting) maimed too high a cost on an underfunded VA system (apparently the Bush Administration was “caught unawares” that a war would mean wounded veterans would come back).
You, like all Conservatives, would be just fine if this war went on for 100 years.
Re: “Type in numbers killed by John Kerry’s aid to North Vietnam and get 352,000 articles. That’s not the numbers killed. The number’s killed are much higher.”
Can you document that from someting other than “Swiftboat Veterans for Truth”, or its clones?
Re: “Americans who aid these enemies do.”
Am I an enemy?
Google is pretty simple to use;
“Re: “Type in numbers killed by John Kerry’s aid to North Vietnam and get 352,000 articles.”
McCain hasn’t been critical? Romney hasn’t criticized? Pundits haven’t been critical? Pat Buchanan hasn’t been critical? Newt Gingrich hasn’t been critical?
Take the blinders off!
Oh, you are such the persecuted martyr! Give me a break!
You do realize that things don’t always play out like this, right? Sometimes a reasonable decision could later have proven to be the wrong one made; yet, based upon what we might know at any given moment, the decision and conclusions drawn could be justified. And vice versa. (Speaking in general, here).
I don’t want to revisit the whole Terri Schiavo episode, as my feelings on it were mixed. It’s your pet peeve. Not mine. But I do think you are (mis)characterizing the whole affair through your partisan anger.
What was so unreasonable, anyway, in allowing the woman’s family to go on caring for her? In hoping? If she was in fact as brain dead as you say she was, then there’s no harm done. Not to Terri (she’s dead, remember? So you can hardly claim she’s “trapped” in her body). Not to the husband, who had already “moved on” with his life, basically. But it did mean something to those who raised her, and grew up around her.
Something else to consider, and it’s not an isolated happenstance:
More from Steve:
How about within your same comment:
“Out of control” were my words. Why don’t you examine your own language, and tell me that it doesn’t describe your belief:
So you believe they are “out of control”?
So…”out of control”?
These aren’t the only instances where you express a paranoia that George Bush and the “religious right” are “out of control”.
Why do you bog yourself down in these small-potato word-mincing? Why not go after the meat?
Probably because that’s all you can do. Just like your criticism of George Bush, wanting validation in your OPINION that he has conducted the post-war operations in Iraq with “incompetence”. Forget about historical context. Forget about confronting Scott’s challenge to you, as if nothing ever went wrong at Normandy and Iwo Jima from poor planning, leave alone for a moment, the fact, that you have a thinking enemy that doesn’t go by the playbook and will not lie down easily.
You take mole-hills and see them as mountains. You love to hyperbolize every misstep and shine the spotlight on every misspeak, because “gotcha” politics is your refuge. Because you refuse to let go, for just one moment, your partisan hatred of George Bush. You don’t care about the truth and reality. You think you do. But all you really want is to seek validation from “right-wingers”, that you aren’t crazy. You need our validation, don’t you, that it isn’t just you and the KosKiddies and DUers who think Bush is incompetent; you need our help to prove to your own mind, that you aren’t losing it. That you aren’t certifiably afflicted with BDS.
Sorry, Charlie.
Re: “How can you hold her accountable for her vote AND support her” resp:”Because, despite her vote on the authorization, I belive that she could take the necessary actions to get our troops out in an orderly fashion.”
Question was HOW not why
Germany: the scale and condition of the enemy isn’t at all the same
Japan: there was an insurgency there?!
Reconstruction US: gotta go back 140yrs for a comparison? Nah, military art/science of today is not at all comparable to that of the Civil War.
While your partisan talking point count is increased by the following, it remains as moot as earlier ones:
“As we have read from military analysis, the occupation of Iraq has provided a recruiting poster that has gained more al Qaeda recruits than have been killed in Iraq (the “we’ll lure 100% of the terrorists in the world into iraq and kill them all” excuse that Conservatives trot out every few months).”
Ya don’t have to be a mathematician to know that in A+B=C, if you don’t know A or B, then you can’t really know C.
“Of course al Qaeda wold not exist much at all had George W. Bush not let him go at Tora Bora in order to prep for (authorized) invasion of Iraq. Perhaps had he completed the job in Afghanistan, we would not be watching the government of Pakistan teeter on the edge right now.”
Clear demonstration of how little you really know about the war in Afghanistan, what happened there, and/or when the buildup for the invasion of Iraq began. Check a calendar/timeline. Nah, why believe a calendar when the talking points fit the hatespeak so much better, right?
“You, like all Conservatives, would be just fine if this war went on for 100 years”
Really, who ever said they’d be fine fighting in Iraq for 100yrs? McCain said the occupation could last 100 and-like you did-cited a peaceful occupation of Japan. He specifically said he didn’t want the fighting to last 100yrs. Curious, do you ignore these facts or truly not hear the second half of a sentence?
Btw…” I work alone and have to do my own research, so I apologize for not having paid white House staffers to assist my blogs, as Conservative bloggers do.” You have no idea how flattering that is for me, and how gullible that paints you.
That’s because “occupation” was not part of Rumsfeld’s original plan. But it became one, because partisan officials within the State and CIA Dept botched things up, as related in “Shadow Warriors” which “no liberal is permitted to read” (*snicker*), and I am “not surprised you have not even heard of it”, unless it is to read the “rebuttal” at Think Progress (*LMAO*).
Btw, go back and read President Bush’s “Mission Accomplished” carrier speech. Sure doesn’t make it sound like we’d only be in Iraq a short 6 months, to me.
President Bush Announces Combat Operations in Iraq Have Ended
Remarks by the President from the USS Abraham Lincoln
At Sea Off the Coast of San Diego, California
“The war on terror is not over; yet it is not endless. We do not know the day of final victory, but we have seen the turning of the tide”
Scott asked of Philly Steve:
Rofl!
Set BDS-filter to “off”.
It seems apparent to me that Steve believes actionable intelligence should be ignored if there is any dissenting or contrary intelligence. That’s not in line with any of the candidates he’ll be forced to vote for in a few months time. Nope. They’d march into a nuclear war in Pakistan if there was actionable intelligence.
Don’t tell this to Chuck Norris. You wouldn’t want to make him angry, by minimizing his contribution to the Huckwagon. You wouldn’t like him when he’s angry.
When Bruce Banner gets angry, he turns into the Hulk. When the Hulk gets angry, he turns into Chuck.
According to right-winger partisan shill Michael Medved:
I am just more and more amazed with the gullibility that is intrinsic to political partisanship. I mean, do the people that rant and rave about how bad GWB is, or who label everyone who doesn’t follow their dogma a “conservative, or who cut/paste talking points as if from an automated DNC database…do such people realize how pawned they are by their own candidates? Do they realize that the very Bush doctrine they rail against has been embraced by the people they’ll be voting into office? If they do, then they’re effectively saying the Bush doctrine (under a different name) is a perfectly acceptable or even a good idea. Mark my words: Hillary, Edwards, or Obama would invade Pakistan, risk a nuclear war that could destroy the US and kill a billion or two billion people, just to get 1 guy. If any of those three were President and were told by multiple international intel agencies as well as the CIA, NSA, DIA, etc that AQ was in location X inside Pakistan, and they might have WMD…those DEMOCRATS would invade Pakistan and be held as accountable for that as they’ve been held to account for their authorization of earlier wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. (ie, not held accountable at all).
Oh man, do I love this. I think I may get it framed:
Woops, hold on….getting a call on the bat phone from one of those White House staffers right now!
Hmmmmm, they’re telling me Philly is actually a double agent working with the Rigellians. Kang and Kodos are mighty upset with you blowing your cover Philly!
Re: ““Re: “Type in numbers killed by John Kerry’s aid to North Vietnam and get 352,000 articles.”
The fact that rightwing pundits and bloggers have flooded the internet with articles declaring their hatred for john Kerry does not make him guilty of anything.
There are similar numbers of articles on UFO’s, which does not make ET any the more real either.
Re: “I don’t want to revisit the whole Terri Schiavo episode, as my feelings on it were mixed. It’s your pet peeve. Not mine. But I do think you are (mis)characterizing the whole affair through your partisan anger. ”
I am not angry. I was just using it to demonstrate how one person, James Dobson, was able to command the immediate obedience of the Republican Congress and Republican President.
My comment received many angry retorts, trying to justify the action and totally ignoring the aspect of the power it demonstrated on the part of James Dobson. And not one single Conservative here has, or will,, comment on that aspect of the events, since it absolutlely confirms my premise of Radical Fundamentalist Christian control of the Republican Party.
Re: ““Out of control” were my words. Why don’t you examine your own language, and tell me that it doesn’t describe your belief:”
It doesn’t describe my belief. My coments were about total control, not out of control. And the controlling group are fundamentalist Christians.
Re: “I mean, do the people that rant and rave about how bad GWB is, or who label everyone who doesn’t follow their dogma a “conservative, or who cut/paste talking points as if from an automated DNC database…do such people realize how pawned they are by their own candidates? Do they realize that the very Bush doctrine they rail against has been embraced by the people they’ll be voting into office?”
It is, obviously, completely impossible for a Conservative to confront the appaling lack of competence on the part of the Bush occupation of Iraq without attempting, every time, to transfe the argument into one about votes in Congress, as though Congress was also the ones who appointed green “Loyal Bushies” to administer the city of iraq, based solely on personal loyalty to George W. Bush rather than competence.
I have never brought up the Congressinoal votes first, Conservatives here have, every time.
My intense belief is that, through arrogance, carelessness and incompetence (not “badness”), the Bush Administration has cost the lives of many thousands of people, and is the reason we are not spending $3 billin a week to try to dig out of the hole they have created in Iraq.
And the worst that most Conservatives can say is that “mistakes happen”, as though they fell from the sky.
I acknowledge that Pat Buchanan has been brutal on the Bush regime, as have a few others.
However, George W. Bush, in my opinion, should personally apologize to America for the harm he has bestowed by his actions.
I do not hate Bush (unlike Conservatives, who have frothing-at-the-mouth hatred of Hillary Clinton, every single one, without exception). But I do believe he has harmed my country badly. And I am angry that Conservatives will never admit that harm,not because they do not believe it, but because they are more loyal to George W. Bush the man than they are to their own conscience.
Conservatives would NEVER excuse the appaling cost of the botched occupation of Iraq from a Democratic President. Never.