Democrats & Liberals Archives

Who's The Enemy?

The United States has never had a well-defined Middle East policy, but since the 1979 Islamic revolution in Iran we’ve mostly focused on containing Tehran’s Shiite regime. You see, we always pegged the Shiites as far more radical and anti-American than Sunni states like Iraq and Saudi Arabia. Kinda funny when you remember that Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein and all the 9/11 hijackers were Sunnis — still are, in the case of Osama bin-alive-and-kickin-Laden.

So, you'd think that maybe we'd rethink our pro-Sunni stance -- and after toppling the Sunni regime in Iraq and nurturing a new pro-Iranian Shiite government in its place, you might be forgiven for thinking the Bush administration did just that. Don't be fooled. The Bush administration is still anti-Shiite to the core. So much so, that they are funding al-Qaeda affiliated groups through the NSA and the Vice President's office (Iran-Contra redux -- and with many of the same players) to contain the Shiite regime in Iran.

As an interesting side note it turns out that the money for the clandestine funding of these anti-Shiite/pro-al Qaeda groups is laundered through Iraq -- some portion of the hundreds of tons of money and billions of US taxpayer dollars "lost" in Iraq are now funding al Qaeda affiliated groups.

It looks wacky, right? To isolate Iran, the Bush administration is funding al-Qaeda with US taxpayer dollars. Rather than hold countries that harbor al-Qaeda terrorists accountable -- I'm talking about Pakistan -- President Bush sends them billions of US taxpayer dollars and advanced weapon systems instead.

Sound crazy? Only if you think President Bush's priority is taking out the terrorists responsible for the most deadly attack on US soil since Pearl Harbor. Once you get beyond that quaint notion, the administration's Middle East policy makes more sense.

Posted by American Pundit at February 27, 2007 3:18 AM
Comment #209810

The US hates Iran because they threw out the Shah and his CIA-trained Secret Police. After 20 years of investment, the Iranian people simply did not appreciate the effort the US made in saving them from communisn. You would think torturing and killing 100,000 union workers and opposition party members would make them grateful to Uncle Sam.

Nope!!! Those ingrates just rebelled from their US-given Freedoms and established their own government!!! And after all the trouble we went through in overthrowing the first democratically elected one too!!!

Just shows how people misunderstand us, I guess.

Posted by: Juan dela Cruz at February 27, 2007 4:37 AM
Comment #209812

America’s focus should be an all out laserlike focused effort on alternative energy to replace fossil fuels to the maximum extent possible. The Middle East would then cease to be a quagmire for Western Foreign Policy. We could then chart a clear and unambiguous course in the Middle East to prevent terrorist organizations from gaining currency amongst the people of the Middle East without contortion.

Posted by: David R. Remer at February 27, 2007 4:47 AM
Comment #209813

You’re dreaming, Remer. America is owned by Corporations who own stuff that uses OIL!!! It’s not just cars, you know. Everything uses oil either as a byproduct or directly. Can you imagine the loss of profit from that? It’ll never happen.

Posted by: Juan dela Cruz at February 27, 2007 5:01 AM
Comment #209819

“The United States has never had a well-defined Middle East policy, but since the 1979 Islamic revolution in Iran we’ve mostly focused on containing Tehran’s Shiite regime.”

Iran’s declaration of war against the United States is probably a factor.

Posted by: traveller at February 27, 2007 9:19 AM
Comment #209834
Iran’s declaration of war against the United States is probably a factor.

Taking US hostages and being a breeding ground for international terrorism isn’t much of a help either…

Posted by: Rhinehold at February 27, 2007 10:33 AM
Comment #209835

You have a source for that traveller?

I know President Bush allowed North Korea to cross a bunch of lines in the sand and build ten nuclear weapons without consequence… And he stopped going after al-Qaeda in Pakistan, which actually DID declare war on the US… But it seems irresponsible for Bush not to ask for a declaration of war against a state that officially declared war on us.

Posted by: American Pundit at February 27, 2007 10:35 AM
Comment #209836

Erm, AP, that means you supported the war in Iraq? Seeing as they did officially delcare war on the US and reiterated it several times since 1998?

Posted by: Rhinehold at February 27, 2007 10:38 AM
Comment #209842

Of course I supported the war in Iraq — in 1991 where we beat the crap out of em, forced their surrender and ended the war. I also supported the subsequent air strikes the no-fly zones the containment the sanctions and the intrusive WMD inspections.

Seriously, Rhinehold. If the un-defeated not-in-a-box state of Iran declared war on us as traveller says they did, then shouldn’t we attack them? Why don’t you think we should take an Iranian declaration of war seriously, Rhinehold?

Oh, I’d like to see Iran’s declaration of war first though. Just to dot the i’s and cross the t’s. Anybody else seen it? Anybody…?

Posted by: American Pundit at February 27, 2007 11:07 AM
Comment #209843


I’m glad you referenced Hersh’s article. I’d hope everyone would actually take time to read it. He makes one heck of a good point, just how do we justify supporting those who supported the perpetrators of 9-11? It’s mind boggling.

I hope you’ll also take time to read (or watch) this interview with former Bob Ney aide Trita Parsi:
Ex-Congressional Aide: Karl Rove Personally Received (And Ignored) Iranian Peace Offer in 2003

“what the Iranians agreed to discuss as a framework of the negotiations was how to disarm the Hezbollah, how to end support to Hamas and Islamic Jihad, how to open up the nuclear program, how to help the United States stabilize Iraq, and, in short, that the government there would not along sectarian lines, and also how to sign onto the Beirut Declaration, which is basically a former recognition of the two-state solution. These are far-reaching compromises that Iran potentially would have agreed to in the negotiations, but the Bush administration, as you reported, decided simply not to respond to the proposal.”

“And the argument by the hardliners, the hawks in the Washington — in the White House at the time was basically that Iran is weak and it’s giving this proposal precisely because of the fact that it is fearful of the United States and that the US can achieve more by taking on the Iranian regime and just removing it than by negotiating. So we had this situation in which, back then, because of America’s strength, the Bush administration argued that it could not negotiate.”

“And we have the opposite situation right now. Now, the Bush administration is saying that because it’s weak, it cannot negotiate. But if you can’t negotiate when you’re strong, because you’re strong, and you can’t negotiate when you’re weak, because you’re weak, that basically means that you’re not interested in negotiations at all.”

Interesting ain’t it?

Posted by: KansasDem at February 27, 2007 11:08 AM
Comment #209864

If Iran declared war on us why did Reagan trade them weapons for hostages? Why has the Bush Administration been selling them military parts? Apparently there are enough people in this country willing to let this administration and dope heads like Rush Limbaugh do their thinking for them.

By the way, the United States has become one of the if not the biggest supporter of terrorist organizations in the world. This administration is now supporting both Sunni and Shia terrorists groups with our tax dolars. There is a good possibility that one of those Sunni terrorist groups is using our tax dollars to buy the weapons that are being used to shoot down our helicopters.

Iran is next on the Pax Americana (wealthy capitalists) hit list. The retoric will be that Iran poses the greatest threat to America ever. Once they have control of the Iranian oil, I imagine that Venezuela will be the next greatest threat to America.

Posted by: jlw at February 27, 2007 1:04 PM
Comment #209871

Very funny American Pundit. To be truthful, such satire regarding the Bush Administration is no longer funny to—it’s just plain sad. That damn terrorist bastard and his corrupt and/or ignorant to core minions have taken our country to lowest it has ever been in its brief history. Some time ago I blogged here that GWB was the head of Al Qaeda in America and it provoke the ire of even some of his harsh critics. That comment I made about the terroist bastard currently occupying the White House was months and months ago. Now look at the head lines—which I did not write (I’m not a reporter). This moron simply had no business being “president.” The supreme court appointed him in 2000, but to that slim majority of lunitic electorates that voted to keep his ignorant ass as cheif executive of nation—thanks a lot! NOT!!!!!

If once again some of you think I am being just too harsh on poor Mr. GWB…look at the stats and the facts!

3000 dead from 9/11—Al Qaeda (Afghanastan/Pakistain)

3000+++ dead in Iraq—GWB a.k.a “Al Qaeda in America”

Decrease American security from Islamic extremists (sunni or shiite)—GWB’s Iraq war!

Inreased influence of Iran in the region—yes that’s right GWB! Of course, he is stupid enough to have mixed up Iran and Iraq, they do differ by just one letter.

No amount of his pathetic rhetoric and spin is going to explain away this world catastrophe that is the “Bush Presidency.” I can’t wait until 2008, when I will be able to quote the late great Gerald Ford. “At last, our LONG national nightmare is OVER!”

God Bless the families of our fallen military. They deserved so damn much more than GWB. But the commitment and service to our nations will not be forgotten nor was it in vain. They served us willingly and proudly! Not even an eternal moronic bastard like GWB can lessen what their lives and legacy mean to this nation.

Posted by: Kim-Sue at February 27, 2007 1:40 PM
Comment #209883

I believe that Democratic party deficit spending is the enemy. When will the democrats for a budget for this year?

Can anyone tell me exactly how “pay as you go” is working out? Good luck with that! I think you have to HAVE a budget before you can actually determine what to apply “pay as you go” to.

Gee, Pay as you go means nothing? Democrats are just spending and NOT paying as they go.

But they promised us they would be more responsible, that deficit spending outraged them, that the would step right in and deal with it.

Has Hillary, Reid, Pelosi even mentioned deficit spending lately? As they spend and spend and spend?

Why does this not surprise me. My number one issue, stop deficit spending, turns out the democrats weren’t really concerned about it after all. So much for saving my children’s future.

You know, with Pelosi being a very concerned grandmother and all you would have thought a budget and control of spending would be her top issue….she said it was. Did someone lie to me? One year and 10 months to go. No balanced budget, no budget at all, no controls on spending because they have no budget, no plan to bring the nation to a balanced budget, and no discussion of controlling spending.

Very sad folks, your party is failing us on the big issues and you just don’t care.

Sort of like Al Gore, burning enough energy each year for 20 average American homes and flying around the world telling us we need to get by with less…..apparently so he can have more. Hypocrites all of them.

Posted by: Stephen at February 27, 2007 4:52 PM
Comment #209884

Stephen: I agree with you 100%. The Democrats should immediately eliminate the Republican tax cuts. If they make it retroactive back to 2001, they can eliminate the Republican deficits of the past six years. No one should get a tax cut during a time of war.

Posted by: jlw at February 27, 2007 5:43 PM
Comment #209890

Thats right. And they should not just stop at the tax give aways. They should also cut stupid Defense dept. spending like star wars and the latest round of destabilizing nuclear weapons developement. Time to stop buying B1s also. 2.2 billion for one airplane?.That enough to build 1000 schools! That is what we need ,a multi-billion dollar airplane to bomb a 20$ tent.It is radar invisable. Great to fight an enemy that has no radar.Did you know that Lockheed-Martin gets more money from the feds than the Dept of Justice?Time to beat the military-industrial complex back into their hole.
How about The Dems get with it and stop the financial hemmorage in Iraq. Its about time the DEms did this stuff to stop the deficit. After all they have held congress for months now. With me Stephen?

Posted by: BillS at February 27, 2007 7:24 PM
Comment #209906


It is a great article by Sy Hersh. Someone described US foreign policy in the Mideast as a “Rube Goldberg” contraption. What a mess. We are chasing our own tail. Invading Iraq introduced instability into an already unstable area, and now we are spinning around faster and faster. We are spending more and more, people are dying, people are fleeing, and everything we do just makes it worse, and we just cannot seem to catch our own tail. We cannot even see that the US military presence is a major part of the problem in the first place.

So we support the Iranian-allied government in Iraq. But that new Iranian ally makes Iran too powerful, since we previously took out another Iranian adversary, the Taliban. The Saudis and Israelis are worried, so we provide a counterweight, and help them by allowing them to back the Sunnis in Iraq. But the Sunni insurgents kill Americans, so we focus the blame on… Iran.

Well, the invasion of Iraq has been called the greatest strategic blunder in the history of our country, and for good reason.

Posted by: phx8 at February 28, 2007 12:00 AM
Comment #209909

AP, good article.
You wrote:

The Bush administration is still anti-Shiite to the core. So much so, that they are funding al-Qaeda affiliated groups through the NSA and the Vice President’s office (Iran-Contra redux — and with many of the same players) to contain the Shiite regime in Iran.

Doesn’t this just go to show us that when our elected members of Congress don’t bother to apprehend criminals within the executive branch, it just emboldens them further?
The Reagan administration should have definitely been impeached over Iran/Contra. They weren’t. Teflon Ronnie and Co. were allowed to get away with that outrage completely. As a result a majority of our people actually believe that Reagan should now share the same reputation as men like Lincoln and both of the Roosevelts. Insane, but true.
These Dr. Strangelove Neocons that comprise the Dick Cheney/George Bush administration (many of whom were as you mentioned unpunished Iran/Contra criminals) took that utter miscarriage of justice as a giant green light to engage in yet more criminal and insane behavior. At this point they are so bloody confident that they will get away with all of their treacherous, lunatic policies and blatant lawbreaking that they laugh in our faces. And why the hell shouldn’t they take that attitude? Impeachment as we all know is now only good for launching a partisan attack — it’s not for serious crimes, violations of the Constitution and glaringly obvious abuses of power! No sir. After all, it’s so pitifully easy to dupe and distract a mindless, dullwitted and gullible public with carefully crafted Newspeak, Swiftboating and Lies. Indeed, it’s Double Plus Good!
That’s why we have The Dead-eye Dick saying that Democratic alternatives to having American soldiers fighting and dying in Iraq’s civil war “only validates the al-Qaeda strategy” and that “if we adopt the Pelosi policy, that then we will validate the strategy of al-Qaeda. I said it, and I meant it.”
Sure you did you Dick — in that utterly Orwellian way of yours. In this manner, everyone in the “Democrat” Party is magically transformed into a bunch of treasonous terrorist bastards, while you and all the other nutcase politicians in the “Republic” Party can fund Al Qaeda and still try to wave the g*ddamn flag like it means something to you besides a lifetime of war profitteering for you and your dearly beloveds.

Kim-sue is spot-on. The people running our country are terrorists who are funding other terrorists — just because it’s highly profitable business for them.
I don’t just want impeachment for these men — they deserve nothing less than jailtime and harsh punishment for their many crimes. But of course, according to Speaker Pelosi, impeachment is “off the table.”
Why that is, I really couldn’t tell you. No guts? No commitment to the Constitution and rule of law? No respect for our collective intelligence? It’s not about a blow job, so it doesn’t count? Who knows? Anyone? Anyone?

Oh, and it looks like the Taliban is doing great with their intelligence network over in Afghanistan, too. Imagine being able to get that top secret info on Cheney’s whereabouts. Impressive isn’t it? Almost as impressive as losing not one, but two wars at the same time. Heckuva job!
Yes, it looks like their Self-fullfilling Armageddon is right on schedule, folks. Let’s all vote Republican in ‘08! The Rapture? The GOP says “bring it on!”

PS. Sorry for the heavy sarcasm. It seems to be my natural reaction to finding my country this far through the Looking Glass.

Posted by: Adrienne at February 28, 2007 12:58 AM
Comment #209913

“I believe that Democratic party deficit spending is the enemy.”

Etc., etc. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. You’re not at all interested in American Pundit’s topic are you? In that case, how about going to do a wee bit of trademark derailing in the Rose-Colored column for a change? New venue might be real refreshing.

Isn’t the constant attempt to derail topics and yammer away repeating the same comments day, after day, after day, viewed as a form of stealth trolling and flamebaiting? And isn’t that a rules violation of some kind? Guess I’m wondering because I know I’m pretty much skating on thin ice around here myself, but can’t help but notice that others seem to get entirely away with being very purposefully annoying on a daily basis. Something I’ve never tried to do, or would want to do.

Posted by: Adrienne at February 28, 2007 2:38 AM
Comment #209916

If you folks would start a topic on Democrat party spending I wouldn’t have to “inject” it.

How about it? Why do you folks FEAR even talking about deficit spending and what the democrats are doing. Why they have no budget, why they aren’t making a budget, why they aren’t getting spending under control as they promised.

Lets start a topic on Democratic party spending. A topic on Social Security and why we aren’t hearing of any efforts to fix it?

Medicare is another good topic. Why no topics on Democrat deficit spending, democrats not fixing social secuirty, demcorats not fixing medicare, democrats not funding the fence on the boarder, democrats not dealing with corruption such as STOPPING ear marks and keeping people like Reid out of leadership positions?

All these big issues the Republicans FAILED at….it appears the democrats plan to fail at to.

Lets go folks.

Posted by: Stephen at February 28, 2007 6:06 AM
Comment #209932


How do you propose the Democrats fix Social Security? Privatize so that it can be white collar crimed into oblivion?

When should the Democrats have a budget that would fix 6 years of Republican controlled spending that created the deficit?

I thought the President’s Medicare program written by and for the benefit of pharmaceutical companies was such a gem.
Why would the Democrats fix it? Is it broke?

Here is a list of Bush and Republican ruled government failures.
Intel failure to prevent 9/11.
Intel failures leading to invasion in Iraq.(I’m being kind here)
The handling of the Iraq war.
No bid contracts and no oversight leading to millions of wasted tax payer dollars.
Osama Bin Laden “Chillin” in Pakistan.
Social Security overhaul
Oil and energy policy written by energy CEO’s leading to higher costs for Americans and larger profits for CEO’s.
Hurricane Katrina response.
Gulf area rebuilding effort.
Iraq rebuilding effort.
Record deficit.
Record trade imbalance.
Impending recession.
Huge debt owed to China.
Thousands of dead Americans
Thousands of dead Iraqis.
Thousands of wounded.
Cuts to Vetrans benefits.
Poor care for returning soldiers.
Weakening our military.
Killing our reputation in the world.
Stomping on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Record wealth disparity.
etc. etc.
Those who continue to play the Rush Limbaugh, it’s all the Dems fault are either ignorant of the world around them or just silly.
The United States government is failing us. Democrats are weak and play politics with the real issues instead of fix them. The Republicans are in the pockets of the wealthy, created an absolute mess of our nation and are greedy and corrupt.
It’s our government as a whole that is failing. We need to impeach this administration. Jail them. Vote out bad politicians from both parties and continue to do so until we receive the representation that our fore fathers invisioned we would have.
Play blame the other side all you want. Unless you are a member of the wealthiest 15% of America, you don’t count regardless of what party you belong to.
Here are the two sides. Wealthy 15% of America who are represented by our government vs. Poor, Middle Class, Elderly, Military personel and their families and the rest of us. Pretend you belong if you want Stephen. Maybe you do. Maybe you’re some wealthy CEO and you actually have a say in government.

Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at February 28, 2007 10:25 AM
Comment #209935


No apologies necesary here. I think you reached the very core of all the ridiculously obvious and silly blind party posturing which goes on in the face of very real and relevant issues of importance. Very well stated and with such passion. I am impressed!

Posted by: ILdem at February 28, 2007 11:12 AM
Comment #209936


Just remember that Sheeple have the right to be less than intelligent in the same way we have the right to ignore them…

Posted by: Dave1-20-2009 at February 28, 2007 11:16 AM
Comment #209937


I, and many other middle class people, are in that top 15%. I, and many other middle class people, are poorly represented by the federal gov’t. The number of “well represented” is probably closer to 0.15% or even 0.015%…
The (r)wingnuts like to talk about quintiles but that is an intentionally misleading grouping.

Posted by: Dave1-20-2009 at February 28, 2007 11:20 AM
Comment #209942


“If you folks would start a topic on Democrat party spending I wouldn’t have to “inject” it.

How about it? Why do you folks FEAR even talking about deficit spending and what the democrats are doing. Why they have no budget, why they aren’t making a budget, why they aren’t getting spending under control as they promised.”

You are not being fair Stephen. You are expecting the dems to repair in a couple of months six years of reckless and thoughtless regpublican policy. I personally would rather see unhurried careful and thoughtful debate on the proper directions to take as opposed to the republican party control method of marching in lockstep rather than questioning purpose at the risk of being chastised or ignored by party leaders.

Posted by: ILdem at February 28, 2007 12:07 PM
Comment #209945

“Isn’t the constant attempt to derail topics and yammer away repeating the same comments day, after day, after day, viewed as a form of stealth trolling and flamebaiting?”


At the very least it’s annoying. Such comments are IMO best treated like the noise of children playing in the background while the grown-ups try to discuss serious matters. Just the fact that anyone would expect the House (in whom the Constitution places the responsibility of writing a budget) would be able to do so in only 8 weeks is either preposterous or incredibly naive.

OTOH look at the obvious positive effect a Democratic majority is having on the Bush “doctrine”. No more Rummy, Bush agreeing to North Korean negotiations, and the inclusion of Syria and Iran in an Iraqi regional summit. Hopefully it’s not “too little-too late”.

Never let the sound of the kids in the backseat asking, “are we there yet”, distract you from driving safely. IMO the new Democratic majority is “driving safely”.

Posted by: KansasDem at February 28, 2007 12:27 PM
Comment #209948


You are stuck in the past. This IS the DEMOCRAT PARTY WATCH. It is the DEMOCRAT CONGRESS THAT HAS NO BUDGET! Get it? They HAVE NO BUDGET and they are not working toward creating one and they told us they would be more responsible.

So far, it appears all the democrats want to do is pass a few “feel good” bills aimed at getting them elected in 08 and to deal with none of the hard issues they told us they would take on.

My proposal for fixing social security is that the democrat party admit it’s broken, sit down with the republican party in a back room where they wont have to pander to idiots on TV and come up with the compromises needed to move a fix through congress. I am tremendously disappointed we see no effort by the democrats to fix one of our most important and BROKEN social programs. I’m disappointed that you are smearing one possible part of a fix that would be very beneficial before anyone even can admit it’s broken and sit down to discuss a fix. Where is “truth to power”. When do democrats demand their party do something for the budget for social security, for medicare, to stop corruption?

My proposal for a balanced budget is that Pelosi and Reid get up and announce they will work toward a balanced budget. Then they establish a budget for 07, the year they are now in that moves us in the right direction. Why isn’t that happening now? How long are you folks going to cover for your NO BUDGET democrats? Thank God the Bush economy is flooding the US with tax dollars by stimulating the economy with tax cuts! Otherwise your no budget democrats would really be in over their heads!

Why haven’t they announced a committee to meet and fix Medicare?

Why won’t they fix these important social programs and then, with a balanced budget, a secure social security, secure medicare, come up and PAY FOR national health care for the uninsured?

Start some threads people. Start a thread on WHEN WILL PELOSI AND REID DEVELOP AN 07 budget. You know what I think? They want to spend massively and not be accused of deficit spending. The longer they can run with no budget, the longer they can increase deficit spending and not be held accountable.

No one answered my question, how do you impliment “pay as you go” when you have NO BUDGET???

Was pay as you go nothing but a feel good, toss away, trash bill designed to get votes in 08? Looks like it to me. Pay as you go got up and went!

I told you folks before they took office the democrats would: Not balance budgets, not fix social security, not fix medicare, not remove corruption, not secure the boarder, not deliver national health care.

Well, here we are. They have used up about 8% of their two years and they can’t even develop a fiscal budget for the year they are in. And all the big promises have evaporated and we are left with a radical, anti war party passing feel good bills trying to win in 08 without addressing our nations very real budget and social service programs problems.

Start a thread folks. Dare to go where no liberal has gone. Dare to speak out about how your party needs to get off it’s collective do nothing behind and address the real, boring, actual, financial issues this nation faces.

Posted by: Stephen at February 28, 2007 1:00 PM
Comment #209953


What did the Republicans do with 4 years?
See list from previous post.(Horrible, harmful, failure after failure)

What have the Democrats done in 2 months?

Halt or at least slow down the full bore charge of Bush’s failed foreign policies.(good, underachieving)
Politicize every other issue they have faced.(Horrible, useless)

I am not defending Dems, I’m just pointing out how silly it is to try to defend Republicans.

Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at February 28, 2007 2:32 PM
Comment #209955

Stephen, just to bolster what Adrienne said, this shows that you aren’t interested in doing anything but poking at Dems with the same stick you’ve carried around for a while.

“I heard Pelosi is spending money like there is no tomorrow, not applying “pay as you go” and has no budget. By the way, it’s here responsiblity to create the budget not the presidents. He can submit suggestions but congress has the power of the press.

When will Pelosi have a budget? When will she stop increasing the deficits that our chidren face? How can she spend our childrens future like this? Can we force her somehow to work toward a balanced budget?

Gee, Democrats still bitching about spending and blaming republicans and the democrats are the one with the power of the purse and doing all the spending! LAUGH. So much for democrats giving us fiscal responsbility.

On thats right, we are only TWO MONTHS in they need more time…..maybe in 08 the democrats will run on “we really really plan to be responsible next year if you vote for us”? LAUGH.”

Posted by: Stephen at February 8, 2007 01:08 PM

Mayebe it’s just that so many have gotten used to the Republican way of doing things, that we can’t deal with something different and more positive when it happens?????

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at February 28, 2007 3:26 PM
Comment #209960

The Republicans failed! I agree! I admit it. I acknowledge it! News Flash: THAT’s THE PAST!!! and now the democrats have a shot. And News Flash, you folks can see it now, the democrats are FAILING TOO!!!

We have NO BUDGET for 07 now because the DEMOCRATS CONTROL CONGRESS and AREN’T INTERESTED at this time in having a budget. There is NO OTHER ANSWER. In January we had no budget because the republicans failed. But after two months, the democrats take ownership. We have no budget now because the democratic party is failing us.

They could have a budget TODAY had they started on it on day one. They haven’t even STARTED on it. Being fiscally responsible isn’t even on their radar…but they told us it was a priority. DID THEY LIE? Put up a thread, pressure them to get moving.

Lets stop looking in the PAST at last year and HOLD THIS CONGRESS which is power this year ACCOUNTABLE for WHAT THEY ARE NOT DOING this year!

They are not balancing the budget. They are not even working on a budget for 07. They are NOT fixing social security. They are NOT fixing Medicare. They are NOT sealing the boarder from Illegals. They are not creating a national health care bill AND FUNDING IT. They are NOT paying as they go….the bill they passed. They have NOT ended ear marks or corruption…in fact they put Harry Reid in charge of the senate. Mr. 1 million dollar property deal who never returned his Ambramoff pay off money and has children who are paid to lobby him!

You folks WANT them to succeed don’t you? Don’t you think you could help your party to succeed if you pressured them to work on this important issues that they CLAIMED they would. They do look at the blogosphere for issues and what’s important.

how many more months or years will you use the past republican failures as an excuse to cover for the present democratic party failures? How many more months or years will you say they still need to “warm up” their chairs?

They were voted in to fix these things, not to warm chairs. Let them stand up and work without chairs until they come up with a balanced budget plan. Then they can set down AFTER they pass a plan to balance the budget through both the senate and the house.

I agree the Republicans failed. What’s pissing me off is that the democrats are failing too and started PROVIDING COVER FOR FAILURE on day one! You folks have become republicans….you are covering up for your failing congress. You are so “politically correct” you can’t even put up a thread discussing the failure of your party to put forward a credible budget that can help us get STARTED on the path to an ultimate balanced budget a few years down the line. I think democrats are hoping the Bush economy will bail them out of their EXPANSION of government spending.

Grow a pair folks! Kick them in the pants….put them to work for all of us!

Start a thread on why we need a budget for this year and that budget should be leading us toward a balanced budget in the future.

Start a thread on why the democrats need to pass a balanced budget plan.

Start a thread on why democrats need to fix social security. Then start one for Medicare. Then one for the boarders.

Stop using Iraq as cover for a democratic party senate that is expanding government spending and refusing to deal with the important issues they should deal with in our domestic social support system.

Posted by: Stephen at February 28, 2007 4:33 PM
Comment #209974

So steven you mean you don’t want to discuss the part of the iraq budget that gets funneled to al-quaeda affiliated groups?

I can’t understand why are you trying to distract the conversation from the United States funding Al queda linked affiliates.

I think its pretty clear that this tread is about the lost billions of dollars that have gone unaccounted for in Iraq. Billions of dollars with no trace, that may be currently in the pockets of terrorist organizations.

I think that it is very important to discuss the way that money has been spent in Iraq over the past four years to better understand the presidents budget requests.

I think that every dollar gone to Iraq or the war on terror should come with a receipt. Even if that is an unreasonable request. A discussion about where the money has gone is still vital.

Just in case anyone may have gotten confused this is still an article about american dollars funding terrorist groups.

I’ll go on record and say the president needs a more restricted and transparent budget for his fubar war.

Posted by: darren159 at February 28, 2007 6:31 PM
Comment #209978

darren 159, you’re right about the budget and Iraq being so closely connected. Iraq, Iran, under-the-table,back-door funneling of $ towards terrorism, have become so all consuming that they would seem to leave little time to divert Congressional attention.
You’re also right about the continued effort of bushco hangers-on to continue trying to de-rail Democratic thoughts and actions away from getting this damned debacle in Iraq to the point where we can get our military OUT OF THERE !!!!

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at February 28, 2007 6:45 PM
Comment #209985


Hersh article deserves your post, indeed.
Since years, from my european point of view, I found him being maybe your most valuable journalist today.

Who’s The Enemy, you ask?
Ourself. And that always the worst one.
In the long term, all these years have made damage to US and the western that amount beyond immagination.

Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at February 28, 2007 7:08 PM
Comment #209994

You people give up easy. Your party is failing and you are ashamed to admit it, and only offer up lame defense?

It’s a sorry sight. The demcorats got congress by telling us they were worried about our childrens future, that they would fix the budget.

Now we here they don’t care? It’s not important? Forget about it? Not on their radar? They need to warm their chairs?

This is no better than the yahoo stock boards.

Are there any democrats out there AFTER the election that still want a democratic congress to take charge and create a budget? To lead us to a balanced budget?

Your message to Pelosi and Reid is “be as corrupt as you want, we will not hold you responsible”? Very sad.

I had hoped that the democrats meant it when they said they would usher in fiscal responsiblity. Now they spend like drunken sailers and pray to God that he will bring in enough tax revenue in this current economic expansion to cover their expansion of spending.

America has been lied to, you folks are already admitting it by defending it.

Posted by: Stephen at February 28, 2007 8:32 PM
Comment #210006

Derailing Stephen:
“If you folks would start a topic on Democrat party spending I wouldn’t have to “inject” it.”

That’s DEMOCRATIC PARTY, and none of the writers in this column have to do ONE DAMN THING for you. You got that, endless grudgemeister?
If you want to be a editor for the red column why don’t you apply? I personally don’t see why you wouldn’t stand a good chance of being accepted — after all you’re already getting away with trying to derail every thread in this column EVERY FREAKING DAY, and you don’t seem to have been issued a warning or been banned from this place so far, right? So why not give it a whirl? There aren’t that many writers over there — and your unceasing and nauseatingly repetitious attacks on liberals and Democrats is at least a match for the sort that are frequently dished out over there. Then you can write the same damn thing you do in these threads every bloody day — but over in YOUR Red column. Hopefully deriving enough happiness from endlessly repeating that irritating, festering, boil-like grudge about how this party hasn’t managed fix every problem you perceive in eight weeks time, that you’ll at last find a way to quit TRYING TO DERAIL AND RUIN EVERY TOPIC POSTED HERE. But of course that isn’t really the game is it? No, the game is to try to ANNOY AND DISTRACT US FROM HOW STUPID AND F*#%ED UP A JOB THE NEOCON “REPUBLIC” PARTY IS DOING WITH THEIR UNLIMITED AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL UNITARY EXECUTIVE POWERS, THEIR FAILED WARS AND POLICIES, AND THEIR TRAITOROUS, BUT FAMILIARLY IRAN/CONTRA-LIKE FUNDING OF AL QAEDA.
In other words, you are trolling and flamebaiting.
Let me take a guess here, it’s either Coulter, Rush or Malkin who is cutting a check for such efforts every month, right?

“This is no better than the yahoo stock boards.”

Oh good. Time to run along then, isn’t it, chief?

Posted by: Adrienne at February 28, 2007 9:44 PM
Comment #210014


He’s not worth the trouble. You, on the other hand, are. So, here’s a question: What do you think of this viewpoint on illegal immigration?

Posted by: Dave1-20-2009 at February 28, 2007 10:35 PM
Comment #210015

“Very well stated and with such passion. I am impressed!”

Very kind of you to say. Thanks so much!


“Just remember that Sheeple have the right to be less than intelligent in the same way we have the right to ignore them…”

But sometimes, when it’s like unto a gnat buzzing around your head when you’re trying to concentrate on the subject at hand, one feels the need to just reach for the fly-swatter…

Kansas Dem:
“Never let the sound of the kids in the backseat asking, “are we there yet”, distract you from driving safely.”

Yeah, I know. You’re right, of course. But I felt I just had to pull over and say something here. And truthfully, what I’ve seen here reminds me of another scenario: It’s like being singled out for a stop for simply following the flow of traffic, but with California plates, in the state of Georgia by a surly, ill-mannered cop who immediately takes your license, which will cost you fifty dollars to get back — and while you’re sitting there listening to his long lecture, you note that the cars with Georgia plates are bulleting past the man’s ass, going at least 30 miles over the limit, like a blur.
Btw, true story.

Posted by: Adrienne at February 28, 2007 10:39 PM
Comment #210018

Adrienne… someone else who knows what attention driving in other parts with California plates gets you…slow down a bit and smile when the troopers check you out! The ride might not give you the same thrill, but it does last longer ;).. You make a far-too important contribution in here to lose you…..and I for one, thank you for your input.

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at February 28, 2007 10:48 PM
Comment #210025

“So, here’s a question: What do you think of this viewpoint on illegal immigration?”

I think it’s very funny! It also hits upon a lot of the same things that I’ve thought about on that subject. Thanks, Dave.

Thank you. I truly appreciate that, and I enjoy your contributions here just as much.
Oh, and as far as that Georgia cop went, I suspect he had a monetary quota to meet for the month, and you know how that goes. Also after his lecture, I knew there was no amount of beauty or charm in the world that was going to sway a guy like him — and believe me, I did try! :^/

Posted by: Adrienne at February 28, 2007 11:27 PM
Post a comment