Democrats & Liberals Archives

Where's the Good News?

Last week President Bush had a news conference in which he told us that the “long war” will be long and that the media is reporting only bad news about Iraq and not the good news. I guess I can rejoice that he’s not blaming liberals for the Iraqi chaos. Or maybe not, since he is picking on the “liberal media.” The rattled language of Bush about not bringing the troops home soon had to be explained away over the weekend by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. The bad news-good news spat is ridiculous: there is no good news from Iraq.

In his news conference, Bush was asked when our troops would come home from Iraq. He said that the decision would be made by:

“future presidents and future governments of Iraq”

What a booboo! Republicans screamed and Rice was dispatched to several Sunday talk shows to explain that things are going well enough that some troops would be coming home this year. I'm wondering what to believe, the bad news of the president or the good news of the Secretary?

Good news? Where is the good news? Good news usualy refers to the building of the Iraqi infrastructure. Rep. John Murtha gave us a snapshot of the "good news" back in November of 2005, which is not so long ago:

"Oil production and energy production are below pre-war levels. Our reconstruction efforts have been crippled by the security situation. Only $9 billion of the $18 billion appropriated for reconstruction has been spent. Unemployment remains at about 60 percent. Clean water is scarce... And most importantly, insurgent incidents have increased from about 150 per week to over 700 in the last year... Since the revelations at Abu Ghraib, American casualties have doubled."

More recently, NBC's Baghdad correspondent Richard Engel said:

“Most Iraqis I speak to say, ‘Actually most reporters get it wrong--it’s the situation on the ground is actually worse than the images we project on television.’"

Put that together with today's AP headline:

"30 Killed By Suicide Bomber Today, 30 Found Beheaded Yesterday, 16 Killed During US-Led Mosque Raid."

Bush blames everyone else for his mistakes. He is ruining our country with this "long war" and the Republican House and Senate are helping him. We need a new House and a new Senate. Vote out the Republicans and vote in the Democrats. Maybe then we will achieve some good news.

Posted by Paul Siegel at March 27, 2006 3:36 PM
Comments
Comment #136147

wow paul. Nothing going right over there? How about a freed people from decades of oppressive rule? How about implementing a system of government that includes free elections?

What if USA never went into Korea in the 50s??? At least South Korea enjoys economic prosperity, democracy and a good standard of living. Just look to its neighbor to the north. Which country would you rather live in.

We can keep going with this…

Germany after WWII
Japan after WWII
South Korea

Imagine if Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot and others were still in power. You can’t mean to tell me that the US being involved with these conflicts had no positive effect on millions of people around the world??? Sometimes it just takes the benefit of hindsight to see what you should recognize.

Posted by: bombay at March 27, 2006 4:53 PM
Comment #136148

How dare this boob of a president try to shift blame for his own failures to others. Instead of taking the responsibility for their own failures the administration blames the “liberal” media. What a slap in the face to Bob Woodruff and his cameraman! Bob Woodruff recently had to have part of his skull removed to relieve pressure from brain swelling because of injuries sustained while trying to cover Bush’s idea of “good news” in Iraq.

What an insult to CNN’s Duraid Isa Mohammed, 27, a translator and producer, Yasser Khatab, 25, a driver, & CNN cameraman Scott McWhinnie, all killed while pursuing the “good” news in Iraq.

Will this administration ever take responsibility for it’s boobery?

Posted by: JayJay Snowman at March 27, 2006 4:54 PM
Comment #136150
wow paul. Nothing going right over there? How about a freed people from decades of oppressive rule? How about implementing a system of government that includes free elections?

bombay,

that’s not news, it’s history. what you mention has already happened and has already been reported on. we all know about those things. what paul is talking about is what’s happening now.

Posted by: Grant at March 27, 2006 5:04 PM
Comment #136151

that’s the difference between news and history

Posted by: Grant at March 27, 2006 5:05 PM
Comment #136154

Guess you just have to be willing to see BOTH sides.

Posted by: kctim at March 27, 2006 5:32 PM
Comment #136159

bombay,

What if USA never went into Korea in the 50s??? At least South Korea enjoys economic prosperity, democracy and a good standard of living. Just look to its neighbor to the north. Which country would you rather live in.

South Korea and Iraq are very different situations my friend; learn your history. Iraq was invaded to “supposively” find WMDs and wasn’t backed up by the UN, on the other hand, South Korea was a representative democracy whose economy was prospering before the North Korean Communists invaded. Also the desicion to defend South Korea from its invaders was led by a UN force composing of over 16 countries.
In Germany’s and Japan’s situation, they unconditionally surrendered to the allies, and thus put up virtually no resistance to the occupiers.

Posted by: greenstuff at March 27, 2006 6:02 PM
Comment #136160
Imagine if Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot and others were still in power. You can’t mean to tell me that the US being involved with these conflicts had no positive effect on millions of people around the world
Oh yea, Pol Pot was deposed by his own people with the help of the Communist Vietamese, the UN or even the United States did virtually nothing to prevent the massacres caused by Pol Pot. Posted by: greenstuff at March 27, 2006 6:07 PM
Comment #136166

This war is not about making Iraqis adopt our beliefs; it is about installing a system of government that allows their people to choose their own path. Democracy requires universal suffrage and the protection of individual rights. Equal rights have been denied to women within the Middle East region for too long and is a cornerstone of democracy. However, all of these changes are in response to basic human rights and a governmental entity to protect those rights. These issues had to be resolved in America and the other Western Nations and these issues have to be resolved in the Middle East as well. These changes are a threat to those in power, not to the people of Islam. America does not want to change the faith of Islam, only grant the return of the Muslims’ natural rights. But of course, none of these messages come through in the media, because of course that would be telling the whole story.
-Xander Jones
More discussion at:
http://rightbrained-fta.blogspot.com/

Posted by: Xander Jones at March 27, 2006 6:32 PM
Comment #136167

Bombay,

Are you suggesting we did ANYTHING but support Pol Pot? We allied ourselves with Stalin against Hitler and yes we did, obviously, oppose Hitler. Who needs hindsight? two out three wrong aint that great.

RGF

Posted by: RGF at March 27, 2006 6:41 PM
Comment #136170

Bush is a boob, and his henchmen are like unto a goon squad. It’s obvious to me that someone in Rove and Rumsfeld’s offices have been reading Gobbles.

And Bush…can he even read?

Posted by: Liberal Feminazi and proud of it at March 27, 2006 6:54 PM
Comment #136173

Bombay

Interesting that all the examples you sited,(Germany,Japan,Korea) were under Democratic administrations so I am sure you will vote Dem in the future.

Good job ,Paul

Posted by: BillS at March 27, 2006 7:06 PM
Comment #136177

i think i was trying to make a general point. let me spell it out for those with ADD.

despotism = bad. dictators = bad. you tell me how getting rid of another dictator who has continually thumbed his nose at the world can be anything but good???

regarding south korea, the point i was making there was - what if we never got involved when the north was attacking it - ie one despotic regime attacking a soverign nation. I brought up the other dictators as examples of “gee what would the world be like if these people were left in power”. Guess I was asking a bit too much of you to draw that conclusion.

The main point being that in 50 years, we can look back on the hardships that we are going through today with regards to this war (financial, loss of life) with a bit more objectivity.

Before you flame. Stop and reread. think bigger picture here people.


And in regards to nothing going on right NOW (with now being the operative word). Well, I guess using that logic, we should have packed it up at any point in our military history where we suffered some sort of defeat (ala Tet).

Sure am glad that others have more resolve than some of you people…

Flame away pinkos.

Posted by: b0mbay at March 27, 2006 7:12 PM
Comment #136180

Xander,
You’re sentiments are noble, but you confuse terms, which leads to contradictions.

What you want, what you’re grasping for, is the observance of human rights. That is a good thing.

Democracy, however, is merely a form of government, and it can easily become a tyranny of the majority. We see this happening before out eyes in Iraq. The majority Shia control the Interior Ministry and much of the military, and their death squads are very, very busy.

Yeah, when Bush say ‘Democracy is hard work,’ he had no idea just how hard… For some reason, the death squads use electric drills for torture. They prefer drilling the knees and the head.

Afghanistan is a democracy now. But once again, what you really want is the observance of human rights. The democratically elected majority in Afghanistan is made up of Pashtun tribesmen. Lawfully, their clerics advocate executing a man for converting from Islam to Christianity. This reflects a democracy in action. It violates our concept of human rights.

Observing human rights carries a weight. It means no invading other countries. It means no secret prisons and no extraordinary rendition. It means no torture. We’ll have to wait for another administration before the US can be taken seriously again as a proponent of human rights.

Posted by: phx8 at March 27, 2006 7:18 PM
Comment #136181

bombay,

If you set up an argument, and your analogy has logical fallacies in it, then your argument is invalid. Everyone understands the point you would like to make, but it doesn’t hold up. You have to have credibility if you want to debate.

Posted by: Loren at March 27, 2006 7:24 PM
Comment #136182

Xander Jones

You are right about womens suffrage being necessary for democracy. Same as my last post. Womens suffrage was opposed by the GOP and pushed through by the Dems so I am sure you will be voteing Dem from now on,right?

Posted by: BillS at March 27, 2006 7:29 PM
Comment #136187

loren,

who the @#$#@ are you? Take my argument without the examples if you want. I dont really care. My point AGAIN is that what we are doing over there is GOOD. Unless you would rather have numbnuts still over there torturing his people and being a general nusiance.

OK - Ill bite. Please, with your infinite wisdom and superior debating skills, please - oh please, please, tell me how removing Sadaam was a bad thing. How is freeing a nation of people who were basically enslaved in a despotic regime not in a better situation.

Maybe Castro and Kim-Dung-Il can help you formulate a working argument with that one…

Get over yourself.

Posted by: b0mbay at March 27, 2006 7:35 PM
Comment #136196

bombay,

Loren is correct, that by offering ‘straw man’ arguments (deposing Saddam was not a good thing?) and posting childish insults (flaming pinkos?), you forfeit any respect and future notice of your opinion.

Charlie Cook made the point on Meet The Press that all of this media bashing plays well with the Republican base and gives Conservative pundits and bloggers an angle to finally address the Iraq War debacle. However, despite the official distancing from the credibility-depleted Scott McClellan and the White House, this suddenly popular talking point does not spread throughout the MSM without the blessing or coordination of Karl Rove.

And it only angers the media into being less evenhanded and puts Fox News into the position of sending reporters to Iraq in search of that good news.

Posted by: Bert M. Caradine at March 27, 2006 8:32 PM
Comment #136201

Good point bert.
Not only does Fox NOT have a Iraq bureau, it doesn’t have ANY reporters in Iraq. It also has posted virtually no “good news” stories.
This lack of good news has 2 possibilities.
1. there is no good news
2. any good news there is goes unreported because its too damn dangerous to go poking around looking for it.
So, when they’re bitching about the “liberal” media, they’re should be including their beloved Fox in that category.

Posted by: Norby at March 27, 2006 8:48 PM
Comment #136203

Funny how nobody wants to tackle the actual argument, just how it was constructed. Bravo for ducking.

Still looking for good news. I see it everytime Sadaam shows his ugly puss in court.

Posted by: b0mbay at March 27, 2006 8:49 PM
Comment #136204

I’m not sure what removing Saddam from power has to do with the topic at hand. The topic is this administration trying to scapegoat the media for it’s shortcomings. Saddam was removed from power 3 years ago, do you expect the media to still be covering that? Is that the only “good” news to come out of Iraq in the last 3 years? Certainly not. We all know about the schools and the purple fingertips of voting freedom, etc., so what “good” do we not know about that Bush claims the media is not covering? Is the Bush administration upset that the media is not covering the “good” news, or are they upset that they are covering the “bad” news as well? I guess it makes it a hard sell “all is well” to the American public when the “free” liberal media is reporting on that darn civil war that isn’t happening. How dare they!

Posted by: JayJay Snowman at March 27, 2006 8:53 PM
Comment #136205

Bombie,
The point they are trying to make is that YOU don’t get to frame the argument in your terms.
Is Sadam gone a good thing.
Possibly, if a better situation results.
Is is possible to screw up an attempt at a good thing so badly, that it becomes a bad thing?
Absolutely.
My view on Iraq is
a. it was a low priority
b. it had a low chance of success (an islamic democracy spreading to other countries.
c. either way, it was executed so BADLY, its future succes or failure is tainted.
d. its a HUGE drain on our resources that could have produced far more tangible results in the areas of US security, US brand image (our greatest asset), and our future prosperity.
Do you REALLY think the price was worth the most likely outcome??

Posted by: Norby at March 27, 2006 8:56 PM
Comment #136206

///
If Saddam had not invaded Kuwait, he would still be in power, and we would be allying with him against Iran. He just stepped on the wrong oil wells.
We did not interfere in his war with Iran, in spite of the atrocities. We were just getting cozy with him back then.

Phx8: Drills, yuck. Afghanistan is and has always been an enigma. The Russians lost the cold war there, but they still grow a lot of poppies. If we are not there to get specific people, then we had better get out of there, as well as Iraq.

We should invade Cuba instead. It is close to come, has an attractive climate, and no international support. And I hear they have some really big prisons. We could expand Guantanamo to house everybody in the Taliban, and some nasty Iraqis too.

Bush is already dumping on the next president, but Condi promises to bring some troops home for election time. They must be worried about the overseas military ballots.
///

Posted by: ohrealy at March 27, 2006 8:57 PM
Comment #136207

Funny how nobody wants to tackle the actual argument, just how it was constructed. Bravo for ducking.

b0mbay,

It seems that you are the one ducking the argument at hand.

Still looking for good news. I see it everytime Sadaam shows his ugly puss in court.

Yeah, yeah, great! What does that have to do with the topic at hand. Bush claims that the media only reports on the “bad” news in Iraq. Saddam in court is old news and I am sure that is not the “good” news that Bush is talking about. BTW, why doesn’t Bush bring up some of that “good” news at one of his broken record press releases, instead of just bitching about it?

b0mbay

Posted by: JayJay Snowman at March 27, 2006 9:02 PM
Comment #136208

yeah - im all for going after castro.

By the way - I think Fox News Anchor is reporting from Iraq. I guess the rest of your argument falls apart pretty quickly after that. HAH.

Also, read this blog from a captain in Iraq who actually talks about this topic in specific. Remember, if it bleeds it leads. Any reporter is going to show IEDs blowing up a convoy rather than see an Iraqi child breath the sweet air of freedom.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,188504,00.html

Posted by: b0mbay at March 27, 2006 9:08 PM
Comment #136211

///
We should also invade Cuba to get some real sugar. The stuff they are selling in the grocery store does not even sweeten my coffee.
///

Posted by: ohrealy at March 27, 2006 9:18 PM
Comment #136214

You “think” a fox news reporter is reporting from Iraq?? So that makes my argument fall apart? What’s his name? Where does he report from and what’s his “beat”? Ah, details.

I read the blog from that captain. First off, captains HAVE to tow the line. If he said anything negative, he wouldn’t be a captain anymore.
Second, his points are no different than local and national US news. Is the local news “liberal” cause they reported the fatal traffic pileup?
How many reports showing Iraqi’s training to be police could you possibly air?
I’ll tell you what a “good” news story would be.
‘Insurgent attacks now rare’
‘Clean, reliable water at 90%’
‘Electricity now reliable’
‘Shiites and Sunnis sign treaty, vow no more violence’
‘New Iraqi parliment passes motion to formally Thank US for help, says they’ll be sorry to see us go’.
Wake me up when any of that happens.

Posted by: Norby at March 27, 2006 9:35 PM
Comment #136218

Paul. If we could have fought the war the way the ragheads would if they were invading us we would have finished along time ago. But because of you liberal (fight a compassionate war) babies Our hands are tied. In a real world we would have stomped everyone in our way men women and children just as the mongrel arabs do. You dont win wars by fighting fair. Thats for babies. You win a war by killing everyone in the way and breaking all their stuff. Because of you liberal wimps we are sacraficing our brave men and women needlessly to satisfy some childish urge to fight fair.

Posted by: jc at March 27, 2006 9:44 PM
Comment #136221

b0mbay,

You should cite some really good news, i.e., Saddam has been deposed and jailed, his killing of fellow Iraqis is at an end…Cheney/Bush has now killed more Iraqis in three years than Saddam did in twenty…Rah! Rah! Rah!

Posted by: Marysdude at March 27, 2006 9:56 PM
Comment #136223

>> In a real world we would have stomped everyone in our way men women and children just as the mongrel arabs do. You dont win wars by fighting fair. Thats for babies. You win a war by killing everyone in the way and breaking all their stuff. Because of you liberal wimps we are sacraficing our brave men and women needlessly to satisfy some childish urge to fight fair.

Posted by: jc at March 27, 2006 09:44 PM

jc,

Maybe I missed something…haven’t we been doing that? Did we miss some women and children? Go get ‘em Tiger!

Posted by: Marysdude at March 27, 2006 10:00 PM
Comment #136225

So, jc, how do you explain the USSR losing in Afghanistan to the mujahideen? The USSR faced no internal dissent and no media. They waged unrestricted warfare during their occupation, and they confronted some of the same people-literally the same people- using the same tactics that we face today. The USSR enjoyed huge technological superiority over their enemy, yet they bankrupted themselves, and the government fell.

Lesson 1) Self-criticism through a free media and a loyal opposition can provide an option for course correction. The USSR lacked an ability to change. They stayed the course. They lost.

Lesson 2) No enemy of the US will face our military in conventional terms. It’s unnecessary. There’s another way to win. Welcome to 4th Generation Warfare.

Lesson 3) Bush #41 was right. He left Saddam Hussein in power, because in a cold blooded calcuation, he correctly decided an ungovernable country was better off with a brutal dictator. The alternative was chaos, with potential to spread beyond Iraq’s borders.

Lesson 4) Review the Powell Doctrine.

Lesson 5) Don’t bet on a loser. Don’t add to a position when it’s going down. That just increases the size of the loss.

Posted by: phx8 at March 27, 2006 10:07 PM
Comment #136228

>>Don’t add to a position when it’s going down. That just increases the size of the loss.

Posted by: phx8 at March 27, 2006 10:07 PM

Damn…wish I’d said that!

Posted by: Marysdude at March 27, 2006 10:28 PM
Comment #136230
Paul. If we could have fought the war the way the ragheads would if they were invading us we would have finished along time ago. But because of you liberal (fight a compassionate war) babies Our hands are tied.

jc

What the hell are you talking about. Republicans control the legislative, judicial and executive branches of government. You guys are in charge here. The problem is, is that for all your blow-hard rhetoric about being strong on defense, this administration doesn’t have a clue how to fight a war. It sure wasn’t that hard for Bush Sr. Baby Bush just doesn’t have a clue. Look at our borders and ports. Five years after 9/11 and this administration, this republican controlled government, still can’t get its head out of it’s collective butt. Look in the mirror pal, you guys are the ones in charge and are dropping the ball.

Posted by: Grant at March 27, 2006 10:31 PM
Comment #136236

Grant:

Don’t mind jc. He is just trying to blame it all to the liberals.

Remember the Republican motto:

Never allow the public to cool off;
never admit a fault or wrong;
never concede that there may be some good in your enemy;
never leave room for alternatives;
never accept blame;
concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong;
people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one;
and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.

Posted by: Aldous at March 27, 2006 10:43 PM
Comment #136238

jc
Spoken like a true chicken hawk. Enlist,maybe you will learn something of war.

Posted by: BillS at March 27, 2006 10:48 PM
Comment #136244

“Vote out the Republicans and vote in the Democrats. Maybe then we will achieve some good news.”

Perhaps, but I don’t think they’ll be any good news regarding Iraq for quite some time. The Democrats are as clueless as the Regressives about any ‘realistic’ departure anytime soon. They won’t even seriously consider withdrawal, even though the poll numbers show over %60 of the American people want this thing turned off, sooner rather than later.

The Dems major argument, it seems, is that they would have conducted this whole thing more ‘competently’, more troops, more allies, more common sense…. It doesn’t seem to be considered by the DLC, the DNC and party leaders that the real incompetence part of the equation was going to Iraq in the first place.

The only upside I see to a Dem Senate or House (or both), is the power of subpoena. And that assumes that there isn’t another major terrorist attack, or Bush attacking Iran between now and November to change the subject, declaring martial law, closing down Congress, and making all this discussion moot.

There are days when I wake up in the morning and say, “Well, I’m not in a Halliburton-conjured jail cell, let’s see what the day brings.” I’m not an alarmist by nature, but I have a bad feeling about where all this is heading—one terrorist attack that kills 10,000 in Chicago, one economic crisis triggered by events that noone forsees—I think our freedoms are dancing on the edge of a very sharp knife….

Posted by: Tim Crow at March 27, 2006 11:31 PM
Comment #136246

Paul,

There’s plenty of good news. It’s right here at Alhurra TV:

http://www.alhurra.com/Index.aspx?ID=0

of course you’ll have to brush up on your Arabic first. But just FYI: “Like all forms of U.S. public diplomacy (propaganda), its broadcast is forbidden in the U.S. itself under the 1948 Smith-Mundt Act.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alhurra

See, good news! Your tax dollars are working to spread the good news.

KansasDem


Posted by: KansasDem at March 27, 2006 11:40 PM
Comment #136250

Here’s that damn liberal media, only reporting the bad news again, this time on the homefront.

Investigators enter US with ‘dirty-bomb’ material

Two teams made simultaneous entries at the U.S.-Mexican border and the border with Canada carrying radioactive material in their vehicles in December 2005

Why can’t they report on the good things that are happening in America?

Posted by: Grant at March 27, 2006 11:53 PM
Comment #136253

You say observing human rights is not invading? The people of oppressive regimes are denied their rights by the dictators in power, who will not relinquish their power willingly. Human rights reform is a threat to those in power and must be instituted by those outside of the system, those with the power to bring about change. Don’t defend the rights of oppressive dictators, concern yourself with the rights of the oppressed.

Posted by: Xander Jones at March 28, 2006 12:01 AM
Comment #136254

In response phx8, you’re right that democracy is not equivalent to human rights. However, two closely affiliated components used to measure democratization are: political rights and civil liberties. There exists hundreds of quantative studies and decades of qualitative studies that show once the process of democratization begins, the extension of political rights proceeds relatively rapidly and the extension of civil liberties may or may not progress rapidly, but those rights to progress over time. So while they are not equivilant, they are highly correllated and have some causal relationships.

More on this issue (right, left and everywhere else between) at http://rightbrained-fta.blogspot.com/

Posted by: Xander Jones at March 28, 2006 12:08 AM
Comment #136255

Sorry, one last post. If anyone wants to have some links to any of the afore mentioned studies, email me or post on my site and I will provide them for you.

Xander

Posted by: Xander Jones at March 28, 2006 12:12 AM
Comment #136256

///
The right wing loves paranoia.
Ragheads, what does that even mean, Yassir Arafat? Is he still dead?
terrorist attack that kills 10,000 in Chicago
Yikes, more paranoia. Why not Langley VA, instead, a much better tactical target?

The good news is it is an election year, let’s kick some paranoid ass in November.
///

Posted by: ohrealy at March 28, 2006 12:16 AM
Comment #136261

Actually, there is a very real chance SOMETHING might happen between now and November. This is the Administration that raised the Terror Color Codes everytime the Democrats had a meeting afterall. I am sure BushCo will think of something.

btw… Those radioactive dirty bombs came in LEGALLY. So let’s avoid any illegal smuggling talk ok?

Posted by: Aldous at March 28, 2006 12:39 AM
Comment #136280

His name is Brit Hume. He is the Fox News reporter in Iraq. I even posted a link for you too.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,189147,00.html

By the way, would you really think that a major news station like Fox wouldnt have someone in Iraq? I mean - seriously. That would be like no homeless people standing out in front of a free lunch program.

You libbers don’t have that much time left with BushCO. And believe me, I do feel your pain. I just about wanted to cry after election night 1996. After all, that is what any of these threads turn into - Bush Bashing.
But whoever the next pres is (Rudy baby), I sure do hope HE has more resolve to fight terrorism than some of you faint-o-hearts.

God - please don’t let it be Hil-Billy.

Posted by: b0mbay at March 28, 2006 2:19 AM
Comment #136281

Hey Marysdude to respond to your quote…

b0mbay,

You should cite some really good news, i.e., Saddam has been deposed and jailed, his killing of fellow Iraqis is at an end…Cheney/Bush has now killed more Iraqis in three years than Saddam did in twenty…Rah! Rah! Rah!

Guess what? Im over it. Ive accepted the fact that there are BAD people in this world that need exterminating. Unless you forget, They bombed our WTC, twice! The USS Cole, our foreign embassys…

How much more are YOU willing to take. Bush grabbed the world by the balls after 911. And I am damn proud of that. Oh wait, what’s that I hear in the distance? “Saddam didn’t bomb us. There were no WMDs…etc”

Yeah, but Saddam was giving monetary incentives to palestinian sucide bombers, which to me is aiding a terrorist. Which to me is just as bad if not worse.

To quote an old Arab saying…

The friend of my friend - he is my friend.
The enemy of my friend - he is my enemy.
The friend of my enemy - he is my enemy.
The enemy of my enemy - he is my friend.

Who’s side you on? Why don’t you get in the game there chief.

Posted by: b0mbay at March 28, 2006 2:28 AM
Comment #136282

Xander

The notion that we invaded Iraq for the purpose of bringing democracy and /or human rights is naive. Would that it were so. With rare exception US intervention in other country’s affairs have been for strategic/economic reasons. Most often the goal has meant replaceing or preventing democratic reform and the human rights that come with it. The number of times we have done this since WW2 is appaling. To name but a few,Iran,Chile,Vietnam,Nicaragua,El Salvador and many others and these are just the ones we know of.The rest of the world knows this.
Bringing democracy is just an after the fact cover story that might work as a smoke screen long enough for us to get out of a botched attempt to sieze a stable oil supply and satisfy a family vendetta . This is the kind of things the kings of Europe did that kept war rageing for centuries and why only Congress has the power to declare war. I wish they would take it back.
We appear to have gone to the ” Salvador” solution. Empower local police. Police by day,death squad by night,probably with US intelligence directing the attacks. We have seen this before.
If our national goal is to furthur democracy when are we going to invade Saudi Arabia? How about Singapore(that would be easier)?How about Dubai?Believe me I wish you were correct but sadly you are not.

Posted by: BillS at March 28, 2006 2:29 AM
Comment #136283

Bombay
When are you enlisting?Come on .Prove you are not just another chicken hawk. To old? Got any kids in the military? Change my opinion of your rant,please.

Posted by: BillS at March 28, 2006 2:44 AM
Comment #136286

BillS:

Believe me when I post this: You will never get a Republican on this board to enlist. You can’t even get them to post their name and email in order to be contacted by a recruiting officer. I tried and it drove me nuts. Don’t bother trying.

btw… Brit Hume took a helicopter into the Green Zone and never set foot out of it. Brave GOP Hero couldn’t leave even with 20 GI’s guarding his behind.

Posted by: Aldous at March 28, 2006 3:58 AM
Comment #136287

tried to enlist. Right after sept 11th actually. Met with a military recruiter, and since i am a college grad, I didnt have to take the asvab, but a version to qualify for OCS, which I passed. Turns out that because I have cronic tinnitus I did not pass my physical. I make 5 figures a year, but I was very disappointed that day. I didn’t even qualify for a waiver. This was when I was 27 I think. Few years back. Believe me, I would be proud to serve. I am so proud of this country. Not to say that dems arent, but sure seems that way with some of you. Same can be said for the lily livered rich bastards who have been getting out of serving since war was invented. fact of the matter is: I think that war is necessary some of the time. I really do. I feel that Iraq and afganistan are directly in response to 911. I am still pissed off about that day. Makes me so angry that a bunch of well financed fanatics managed to come through our back door and kick us where it counts. Makes me more angry when people lose their resolve along with their short term memory. Every time you see another road side bomb, just be glad that it is on someone else’s soil. Unless anyone else has a different way of cutting off the head (figuratively) of these fanatics - who are resolved to kill our very way of life, Im all for taking the fight to them.

no burden too great (and all that rhetoric).

Posted by: b0mbay at March 28, 2006 3:58 AM
Comment #136292

Aldous,

Bombay made a mistake. It’s actually Bill Hemmer who is the FoxNews guy in Iraq right now. The other day I saw him interviewing soldiers in Fallujah. Brit Hume is a behind-the-desk anchor.

Posted by: Duano at March 28, 2006 7:17 AM
Comment #136293

BTW,

My cousin (Republican) just came home from a two year tour in Iraq (with his fellow Republicans, about 75% of the troops)

Posted by: Duano at March 28, 2006 7:21 AM
Comment #136294

>>Believe me, I would be proud to serve. I am so proud of this country. Not to say that dems arent, but sure seems that way with some of you. Same can be said for the lily livered rich bastards who have been getting out of serving since war was invented. fact of the matter is: I think that war is necessary some of the time. I really do.

bOmbay,

War is a lot more necessary to some than others, i.e., it is necessary to Cheney, who would rather take a defferment and shoot his friends than take a chance in combat, Bush, who would rather duck his Guard obligations than take a chance on being called up, and bOmbay, who would rather…

I don’t believe in war unless it is absolutely necessary for the survival of the nation, yet spent two and a half tours in Nam. I’ll bet you can’t guess why the half tour…

Saddam did not have anything to do with 9/11, and the administration, will sometimes elude to it, but has backed off and no longer says so out loud where thinking paople can hear it.

Saddam was a bad guy, who sometimes killed and/or tortured his own people. Iraq has traded him for Cheney/Bush, who kills and/or tortures Iraqis…wow! what a deal for them.

Posted by: Marysdude at March 28, 2006 7:31 AM
Comment #136298

Paul

Here is an interesting piece published in Minnesota



By Col. Stan Gudmundson, USAF (Ret) Rushford, Minn.

.
One thing we can count on from the mainstream media is a never-ending stream of bad news from Iraq. Reporting is appallingly bad and grossly inaccurate. On just one day in January 2005, according to the Google News Index, there were 7,750 negative stories filed about Iraq and U.S. Iraqi policy and only 96 positive news items. But I suppose you can’t expect much more from an anti-Bush press holed up safe and sound in one of the heavily guarded hotels in the Green Zone.

A recent Zogby poll supposedly indicated that a significant majority of service personnel have turned against the war. But other polls show the opposite. All of the services have exceeded their recruiting and reenlistment goals, and at least two-thirds of U.S. military officers say the war is winnable. That ought to tell us something.

Because of us the Iraqi economy is a mess, right? Well not exactly. In 2002 per capita income was $802. It is now $1,050. Adjusted for inflation, Iraq’s GNP will grow almost 17 percent this year. Traffic is five times heavier than before the war; sales of washers, dryers and computers are way up; cell phone sales are up over 65 percent; and 86 percent of Iraqi homes now have satellite TV. Before the war there were no commercial radios stations. Now there are 72. There are also 44 TV stations and more than 100 newspapers. As Norman Podhoretz points out in the January issue of Commentary magazine, by September 2005, we have helped build or open “3,404 public schools, 304 water and sewage projects, 257 fire and police stations, and 149 public-health facilities.”

There are also at least another 921 projects being worked on.

Seventy percent of Iraq’s citizens say life is good, and 5-to-1 think life will be better in a year. Sixty-one percent say that security is good compared with 50 percent beginning in 2004. The Iraqi army is now more numerous than the U.S. military, and they no longer lose battles. Moreover, two years ago only 39 percent of Iraqi citizens had confidence in the new Iraqi army. Now 67 percent do. Same with the police: Confidence has risen from 45 to 68 percent.

We are creating more terrorists by what we are doing. Isn’t that what we are hearing? Not so fast. Madeleine Albright recently chaired an effort that surveyed 17 nations. Support for terrorists has dropped significantly during the past couple of years: In Lebanon, from 73 to 26 percent; in Morocco from 40 to 13 percent; and in Pakistan from 41 to 25 percent. Osama bin Laden’s support has tanked in almost every Islamic country. Most Muslims don’t like innocents slaughtered any more than we do, and living under a brutal dictator isn’t very appealing either. More Muslims like the idea of democratic rule. In Morocco, Lebanon and Jordan more than 80 percent believe they are ready for democracy. In Iraq itself only 12 percent want an Islamic state while 64 percent favor a democracy. That also means more people in the Muslim world like the U.S. — up 23 percent in Indonesia, 15 points in Lebanon and 16 in Jordan.

If we believe the mainstream media, it would also seem that the entire country of Iraq is a hostile combat zone. That is also wrong. Only three of Iraq’s provinces and areas in and around Baghdad are significant problems. The vast majority of the rest of the country is peaceful. Does this all suggest that utopia is about to be achieved in Iraq? Of course not. It will still be a challenge, but it is a far cry from millions of refugees some had expected, building-by-building fighting to take Baghdad, the oil fields set on fire, and a civil war.

There is only one realistic outcome in Iraq. Victory. If we don’t win, the future will be far bloodier than we can ever imagine. And we will, no thanks to our liberals and the biased media who both continually wrap themselves in the white shroud of surrender. But there is fear that the U.S. left, virtually allying themselves with the terrorists, will prevail. The first prime minister of Singapore says this. “If the jihadists win there, I’m in trouble here. …Their attitude would be ‘we’ve beaten the Russians in Afghanistan, we’ve beaten the Americans and the coalition in Iraq. There’s nothing we cannot do. We can fix Southeast Asia too.’”

Wouldn’t it be nice if we also got this side of the news instead of the continual bias we get from the main stream media now essentially acting as an outlet of the Democratic National Committee?

It is no wonder that newspaper circulation is dropping. There are, for example, no, as in zero, large-circulation conservative newspapers in Minnesota that I am aware of. Additionally, with the exception of the Winona Post, virtually every local weekly’s editor is also of the loony left fringe variety. Though a little left of center, I do however, have to give credit to the Winona Daily News for at least trying to maintain some balance. Thank you for that.



Posted by: Sicilian Eagle at March 28, 2006 7:54 AM
Comment #136299
Because of us the Iraqi economy is a mess, right? Well not exactly. In 2002 per capita income was $802. It is now $1,050. Adjusted for inflation, Iraq⦣x20AC;™s GNP will grow almost 17 percent this year. Traffic is five times heavier than before the war; sales of washers, dryers and computers are way up; cell phone sales are up over 65 percent; and 86 percent of Iraqi homes now have satellite TV.

Amazing what pumping 50 billion a year of our tax dollars into a country the size of california can do, isn’t it?

Posted by: Schwamp at March 28, 2006 8:26 AM
Comment #136301

“I am so proud of this country. Not to say that dems arent, but sure seems that way with some of you. Same can be said for the lily livered rich bastards who have been getting out of serving since war was invented.”

— Oh, like George Bush and Dick Cheney, eh Bombay?

Posted by: Mister Magoo at March 28, 2006 8:46 AM
Comment #136303

Absolutely Mr. Siegel, it’s only by voting out the republicans in the next congressional election(s) will we see the much needed changes that our country despertly needs.
With respect to the “Long War” that Bush constantly refers to, that’s nothing more than a rephrasing of the “War On Terror” that the Bush camp invented because more and more Americans are getting fed up with the “War On Terror.”
I wrote about that in the February edition of my blog if anybodys interested.
VOTE DEMOCRAT FOR THE UPCOMING ELECTION!!!

Posted by: Michael Ajitsingh at March 28, 2006 9:00 AM
Comment #136307

“there is no good news from Iraq”

Nope. No good news at all.

http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/

Posted by: kctim at March 28, 2006 9:14 AM
Comment #136311

Michael,

You’ve convinced me! It doesn’t matter that the Democrats have no plan for Iraq or anything for that matter, I’m voting Democrat in November because you put it all in capital letters!!

Posted by: Duano at March 28, 2006 9:31 AM
Comment #136313

>>I’m voting Democrat in November because you put it all in capital letters!!

Posted by: Duano at March 28, 2006 09:31 AM

Thanks, Duano, if Deibold counts your vote, it will help a lot…

Posted by: Marysdude at March 28, 2006 9:54 AM
Comment #136314

I just remembered some good news from Iraq that I heard recently. Cell phone usage is up from a few hundred thousand to something like over 5 million, which is a really good thing because the Iraqis can use the glow from their cell phones to light thier homes at night as there’s no electricity.

So let’s dispel this rumor that there’s no good news, alright? :)

Posted by: Grant at March 28, 2006 9:56 AM
Comment #136317

“In 2002 Baghdad had access to electricity on a near continuous basis while the rest of Iraq was limited to 3 to 6 hours daily. The U.S. government has made significant progress in improving electricity supply in Iraq and distributing it more equitably throughout the country. USAID has added over 1490 MW of new or rehabilitated capacity to the electrical grid”

http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/accomplishments/electricity.html

Posted by: kctim at March 28, 2006 10:12 AM
Comment #136318

Marysdude,

If Diebold can steal elections for Republicans whenever they want, then why do Dems even bother to vote at all? The Dems should do the right thing for the country and just dissolve their sad excuse for a political party.

Posted by: Duano at March 28, 2006 10:13 AM
Comment #136321

“btw… Those radioactive dirty bombs came in LEGALLY. So let’s avoid any illegal smuggling talk ok?”

Posted by: Aldous at March 28, 2006 12:39 AM
Well yaaa…if you consider that a planned scenario to check security status at various entry points as being “legal”. Don’t think that is the issue, but that we aren’t much safer from those intending to harm us than we were 5 years ago. So, all these agencies that have been formed, re-formed or malformed still need a lot more work!! Homeland Security way too big….too many agencies under the umbrella to be functionally effective. Two specifically, F.E.M.A. and I.N.S.

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at March 28, 2006 10:18 AM
Comment #136336

>>If Diebold can steal elections for Republicans whenever they want, then why do Dems even bother to vote at all? The Dems should do the right thing for the country and just dissolve their sad excuse for a political party.

Posted by: Duano at March 28, 2006 10:13 AM

Duano,

Because we’re stupid, America haters, and too stubborn to quit without a fight.

Posted by: Marysdude at March 28, 2006 11:16 AM
Comment #136338

Marysdude,

Thanks for finally admitting the truth about liberals. You hate America. Now that you’re being truthful, maybe we can get somewhere.

Posted by: Duano at March 28, 2006 11:33 AM
Comment #136343

>>Now that you’re being truthful, maybe we can get somewhere.

Posted by: Duano at March 28, 2006 11:33 AM

Duano,

Glad to oblige…anything else I can do for you?

Now we’re even, okay? You vote democratic in the next election and I’ll admit to being stuborn…fair enough…

Posted by: Marysdude at March 28, 2006 11:42 AM
Comment #136360

Marysdude,

You have to admit that you stubbornly hate your own U.S.A., despite it being the greatest nation in the history and the future of the world. Then I’ll vote Demo rat.

Posted by: Duano at March 28, 2006 12:33 PM
Comment #136365

dude,

Don’t bother arguing with religious fanatics. To paraphrase my kids say when they see something stupid: “When can I read about them in the Darwin Awards

Posted by: Dave at March 28, 2006 1:06 PM
Comment #136366

There is very little Good News about Iraq, and there hasn’t been for a long, long time.

To you righties who blog here: I know it seems impossible to believe, but it is quite possible for people to love America and want only the best for our troops, while thoroughly hating what George Bush and Co. are doing to it all at the same time.

Bad news:
Undisclosed documents shed light on further Halliburton billing abuse; $57m in new questioned charges

To you lefties: anyone here ever read Juan Cole’s blog? At least once every week I like to read his daily weblog “Thoughts on the Mideast”. Very thorough and informative, IMO.

Posted by: Adrienne at March 28, 2006 1:14 PM
Comment #136370

Good news:
The Iraq Child Health Program - 03/01/06
During Saddam Hussein’s rule, estimates of child mortality rates hovered at 125 deaths per 1,000 births for children under the age of five. Diarrhea and acute respiratory infections accounted for 70 percent of the deaths. While the health situation for Iraqi children remains a concern, reports from the Ministry of Health and Environment indicate that the last year has witnessed an important drop in rates of disease among children under five, particularly for cholera and diarrhea.

To you lefties who blog here: I know it seems impossible to believe, but it is quite possible for people to see both sides of whats going on and come to rational conclusions without “blindly” following Bush.

Posted by: kctim at March 28, 2006 1:30 PM
Comment #136376

We will win in Iraq. We will stop the proliferation of terrorism. There is no other choice. This is not Vietnam. Sorry for your injuries, but I thank you for your service. My dad did two tours in the marines as well. stationed in I corps during Tet. I see what the war has done to him as well. But again, this is not vietnam. Vietnam was (in our view) about stopping the spread of communism (an ideology). Terrorism is not an ideology per say. Terrorism is the act of using terror to further a goal. Whether is be to bomb an abortion clinic or slam a plan into a building. Either way, I think that it is worth fighting for. I mean, how many more buildings you want them to bomb, or poison our water supplies…

Every time I get fired up about threads like this. I’ll hit my IPOD and listen to George C. Scotts gravelly voice as only he could play Patton admonishing his troops that

“Now I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country.”

“Now there’s another thing I want you to remember. I don’t want to get any messages saying that we are holding our position. We’re not holding anything. Let the Hun do that. We are advancing constantly and we’re not interested in holding onto anything except the enemy. We’re going to hold onto him by the nose and we’re going to kick him in the ass. We’re going to kick the hell out of him all the time and we’re going to go through him like crap through a goose.”

“Thirty years from now, when you’re sitting around your fireside with your grandson on your knee and he asks you, “What did you do in the great World War II,” you won’t have to say, “Well… I shoveled shit in Louisiana.”

and my personal favorite…

“Men, all this stuff you’ve heard about America not wanting to fight - wanting to stay out of the war, is a lot of horse dung. Americans traditionally love to fight. All real Americans love the sting of battle. When you were kids, you all admired the champion marble shooter, the fastest runner, big league ball players, the toughest boxers. Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser. Americans play to win all the time. I wouldn’t give a hoot in hell for a man who lost and laughed. That’s why Americans have never lost and never will lose a war, because the very thought of losing is hateful to Americans.”

Posted by: b0mbay at March 28, 2006 1:50 PM
Comment #136447

Oh great. Now were quoting Patton as justification for this war.
Got news for ya. If Patton was alive, he’d march up to Rummy’s office and admister a little ‘boot to the ass’ justice for screwing with real military planners and causing untold unnecessary deaths.
Sorry bub, terrorism was not spawned or fostered in Iraq, were barking up the wrong tree and wasting precious resources chasing our tails.
All this has done is inspire another generation to hate us, and be willing to become martyrs.
I don’t disagree with bush’s tactics cause I hate him, I hate him because I disagree with his tactics.

Posted by: Norby at March 28, 2006 5:34 PM
Comment #136453

So, kc, your justification for a war that has killed over 100,000 Iraqis, 2000+ American troops, and cost hundreds of billions of dollars, is that Iraqi child mortality rates have dropped by an undefined number?

Posted by: Dave at March 28, 2006 5:47 PM
Comment #136458

Guano…er, sorry…
Duano,

IF you can wave the flag, call it patriotism, while the constitution is ignored, undermined and disregarded…
If you can stand by and shout slogans while our nation ignores International law…
If you can call it patriotic to support an administration that is sytematically destroying American law and disregarding the rights and protections of American citizens…

Then it is you who HATE AMERICA. It is such hypocrisy that is the greatest to us now, not terrorism. Those of us who beleive in America are the ones who are trying so hard to put us back on the right track. the track we know and beleive in. the track that our founding fathers set us on. The track of being a nation of laws - A constitutional democracy.

RGF

Posted by: RGF at March 28, 2006 6:19 PM
Comment #136462

yup norby - I agree with you there. Back in those days commanders commanded, and politicians politicked. Patton did know his place in the RHIP line though. Eisenhower chewed his ass out on a number of occasions. But damnit he was a great general. Right up there with Chesty and the rest.

I do disagree with you with regard to:

“Sorry bub, terrorism was not spawned or fostered in Iraq, were barking up the wrong tree and wasting precious resources chasing our tails.”

I seem to remember that Saddam was paying suicide bombers in palestine. Kind of like a stipend if you will, to the family of the terrorist. Sounds kinda like fostering to me. Let me check the dictionary just to be sure…

fos·ter ( P ) Pronunciation Key (fôstr, fstr)
tr.v. fos·tered, fos·ter·ing, fos·ters
To bring up; nurture: bear and foster offspring. See Synonyms at nurture.
To promote the growth and development of; cultivate: detect and foster artistic talent. See Synonyms at advance.
To nurse; cherish: foster a secret hope.

Unless of course you agree with hezblowup and others taking out crowded malls in isreal with some c4 and ball bearings.

Im all for taking out any of these despots - whereever they are. North Korea does scare the shit out of me tho…

Posted by: b0mbay at March 28, 2006 6:47 PM
Comment #136465

b0mbay,

Are you still talking about combat/war as if it is a video game on your X-Box? Please get real…there is nothing romantic about getting your guts blown out or your legs blown off.

Posted by: Marysdude at March 28, 2006 7:02 PM
Comment #136469

bombay,

Does the the Country of Iran bring back any memories. We went into Iran in the mid 1950’s and over threw the dictator at that time. We installed our choosen leader, the Shah of Iran?
We helped over throw a leader only to place a new leader who in the end wound up being worse than the person we replaced him with. Thus you got the kidnapping of US people in Iran 1980. They still hate us today, and it is our fault. We tried to get involved in another country and tell them what was best for them. It has backfired and I’m sure Iraq in the end will too.
When we leave Iran, in time a new leader will stand up and take over. He may even wind up to be worse than Sadam was. We rep what we sew.
In your earlier writing you mentioned Germany and Japan. Japan attacted us. They got what they had comming to them. Germany attacted our best friend, Brittian. They got what they had comming to them. Iraq doesn’t compare to those two countries. They were no threat to the USA. And we now know they were no threat to any of thier neighbors.

Posted by: Rusty at March 28, 2006 7:32 PM
Comment #136481

Hey Bro. Again sorry for your sustained injuries. Again, I have seen what war can do to wreck a persons body and spirit. My father being a prime example who is also handicapped from vietnam. Please quit with the condecending remarks about that. That is one thing I take VERY seriously.

Also, what is different about todays military then when you served, is that it is made up of ALL VOLUNTEERS. It’s still true that a lot of underpriveleged join for the opportunity to better their lives for training, education, and job opportunities. However, much of the military includes those middle income and upper income kids who are looking for some action and adventure. It’s true. My cousin who came from a great family joined the army. Rangers actually. Got to fly helicopters and the whole bit. Loved every minute of it.

War is hell. How could it be anything but. However, until this human race changes how we think, feel, live, interact - our whole psyche(and as a whole population too), war IS necessary. Say it with me. War IS necessary. That is a fact. And given that fact, yes young kids with their whole lives ahead of them will suffer the tragedies of combat. I see no other alternatives, whether you disagree with this particular war or not.

By the way, I am in my 30s and don’t really play the XBox anymore. I am going to refrain from making age related jokes on your behalf. You deserve at least that much for serving my beloved country.

Posted by: b0mbay at March 28, 2006 8:16 PM
Comment #136486

>>Say it with me. War IS necessary. That is a fact. And given that fact, yes young kids with their whole lives ahead of them will suffer the tragedies of combat. I see no other alternatives, whether you disagree with this particular war or not.

b0mbay,

No, I won’t say it that way. Some wars are justifiable, but many are not. This particular is not only not justifiable, it is a concoction of a Cheney/Bush wet dream. You may take it lightly that our military are dying by the hundreds and Iraqis are dying by the thousands, but most grown-ups don’t.

However, my problem is not with how cavalier you take war, but rather how apathetic toward it many Americans are. You may have an excuse, but those with no concept of how damaging war is and no observable interest in it makes me fearful for our national ethic.

Posted by: Marysdude at March 28, 2006 8:32 PM
Comment #136592

Dave
“So, kc, your justification for a war that has killed over 100,000 Iraqis, 2000+ American troops, and cost hundreds of billions of dollars, is that Iraqi child mortality rates have dropped by an undefined number?”

No. I was not trying to justify or condemn this war. The news about what is going on daily in Iraq has nothing to do with justification.
Disagreeing with the reasons for this war should not mean you have to ignore the good and agreeing with it should not mean you ignore the bad.
One’s hate for the President or their quest for power should not involve the military either, but it does. They are caught in the middle.
The daily hardships our troops face AND the good things that our troops accomplish should be recognized. Refusing to do either is nothing but partisan BS.
Where’s the good news?
Free your mind and just open your eyes.

Posted by: kctim at March 29, 2006 9:20 AM
Comment #136608

Good news is coming. Just have to wait 10-20 years to see the WHOLE picture.

You know - 10-20 years when my generation is footing the bill to buy you guys adult diapers and filling your upteen amounts of Rx.

I sure hope in 10-20 years we have the terrorism thing under control, cause Im not sure how we are going to afford to take care of you guys and make sure that the world is safe for the working generation as well as our children.

Sorry for the interruption. Please return to your regularly scheduled Bush Bashing.

Posted by: b0mbay at March 29, 2006 10:35 AM
Comment #136617

“the track that our founding fathers set us on. The track of being a nation of laws - A constitutional democracy”

Ah, public schools.
The track was that of a Constitutional Republic, that is why we were successful.
We are now a constitutional democracy and that is why we are now failing.

Posted by: kctim at March 29, 2006 11:27 AM
Comment #136746

simple suggestion here, If there was any good news coming out of Iraq don’t you think fox news would be running it 24/7. Instead they cover mindless crap.

Posted by: Fillosofer2001 at March 29, 2006 8:54 PM
Comment #136880

it seems most bush haters think the president has an easy button.they think the president can fix all problems of the world but he just does not want to.to beleive this you have to beleive he wants death and distruction on a daily basis.he must like being called terrorest he loves it when leaders in the senate say he was aware of 9-11.if you beleive this then you are truly anti america.if you beleive condi rice don rumsfeild dick cheny are in this plot with the preident you are not only anti america you are also mentally retarded.how about the first lady she has to be in on this.and the lies about iraq’s w.m.d.s when will some smart news writer go back to 2000 before election day and go throgh all commity records to see what the facts were before george bush took the oath of office.theres an old saying you cant handle the truth.well it applys today.dems.dont want to know the facts before g.w.if these facts were published it would bring down the dems.party like a ton of brick.one thing for sure it will come out.my heart bleeds when i think of how a lot of folks treat the preident.thank god for his strength and trust in the american people as a whole.

Posted by: jcmasterblaster at March 30, 2006 1:33 PM
Comment #136956

>>my heart bleeds when i think of how a lot of folks treat the preident.thank god for his strength and trust in the american people as a whole.

Posted by: jcmasterblaster at March 30, 2006 01:33 PM

jc,

And, my heart bleeds when I think of the way Cheney/Bush treats the American, and Iraqi people. You and I bleed the same, but for opposite reasons…

Posted by: Marysdude at March 30, 2006 6:34 PM
Comment #137085

RGF,

Isn’t the guano thing getting old by now? Don’t do that and then post just initials that could easily be interpreted as Really Gay Fruitcake.

Posted by: Duano at March 31, 2006 10:40 AM
Post a comment