Democrats & Liberals Archives

Surprise, Surprise!

The Failure Regime has failed - again.

They sure have had a run of bad luck.

First. Their filthy tax cuts for rich failed to prevent the country from sliding into a recession from which it has yet to recover. Granted, in 2000 a recession was due, but promises of tax cuts and the eventual reality of tax cuts should have had a stimulative effect. A stimulative effect that is, if tax cuts are all the neo-Nazis crack them up to be - so the Failure Regime's policy failed.

Second. The Failure Regime failed at the difficult task of understanding that: "Bin Laden determined to attack inside of the United States" actually meant that: Bin Laden was determined to attack inside of the United States. Now, some will say that I am playing a trick with words here in order to make the Failure look like a failure. Fair enough. If what I and and many others are and have been saying really is unfair, the failure could declassify the contents of that memo in a way that does not compromise sources or methods. There are many ways to do that, but they have not and will not do that because our critique is valid and they know it. They are not stupid.

Third. The Failure read "MY PET GOAT" for seven minutes after he found out that the United States might be under full scale thermonuclear attack, then went AWOL (again) after finding out that the nucs were not coming but that he might see some action. Days later, when they finally tracked him down, they prop him up on a pile of ruble and the Republican Controlled corporate media says he looks commanding. Commanding - my copulating anal orifice...

Fourth... Fifth... Sixth... .... ... ...Thirty Second... Thirty Third... Thirty Fourth

Get the picture. Name one success... I can name a couple just to get you started. Stealing the 2000 election. Stealing the 2004 election. Perhaps, I should name it the Success Regime.

Anyhow, Failure Thirty Five. The lost cause escalation of the lost war has, surprisingly enough, failed, and General Petraeus has been lying to us and giving over optimistic assessments. I did not serve in Vietnam. I was willing to, but was never called. So I do not have post traumatic stress, yet, I am having flash backs to Vietnam... My daughter serves now.

How many more Americans have to die? How many more Americans have to be devastatingly wounded? How many more Americans have to suffer devastating emotional / psychological damage? How many more Iraqis have to die? How much more of the precious treasure that we need to strengthen, grow, and defend our country must pilfered from our coffers by Dick Chaney's company? How many??? How much??? To protect a President's legacy and find someone else to blame his failure on??? Would it help if the Democrats passed a resolution saying: "It is entirely our fault - Bring the troops home Mr. President." Would he put an end to this and bring our troops home then. If we took the blame, passed a resolution calling him the Success President. I am willing to do it. Blame me - you will anyway - but put an end to this now. See: Failure to halt Iraqi violence revealed by Pentagon report


Posted by Ray Guest at June 16, 2007 9:30 AM
Comments
Comment #223281

First, Technically, it is Crypto-Nazi, not Neo Nazis.

Second, The war in Afghanistan is the war for the poppy fields and marijuana forests. OBL/UBL is most likely in Pakistan or maybe Kashmir.

Third, it could have been worse, he could have hidden under a desk.

How many? Many many more. Bush is being declared a lame duck already, with more than a year and a half left in office. His only two accomplishments in office were inviting the Dalai Lama to the White House, and that underwater park in Hawaii.

Posted by: ohrealy at June 16, 2007 10:48 AM
Comment #223282

Careful Ray!

I hope you are prepared for the “Bush hater,” “backward thinking,” “too harsh” rhetoric labels and criticisms that are about to befall you from the right, the left, and the 3rd. It seems most bloggers here—irrespective of which side they claim to support—just can’t seem to tolerate unvarnished, straight-shooting, criticism of the fascist (you say Neo-Nazi) masquerading as “president of the United States.”

“Jack” will no doubt brand you as some “emotional” wreck—as if displaying emotions drawn from concern, care for human life, etc. automatically disqualifies you from having credible, valid, and SUPPORTED criticism regarding the FAILURE REGIME (I would title it as the FASCICST FAILURE REGIME—but that is not news).

Regarding the article contents—

Petraeus is another GWB “pawn,” just like Gates, thrown at the American people as yet another smoke screen attempt to prop up GWB’s delusional picture that invading and subsequently occupying Iraq was a good thing for the world! (Remember Ray, GWB is confident that history will vindicate him—oops, I can’t believe that I forgot the GWB is a total idiot—among other things). Petraeus’ lies originate from the exact same source that Saddam’s world threatening WMDs. Petraeus apparently did not want to be forced into early retirement, so he accepted “responsibility” for GWB’s concoction “surge and secure.” Surge and secure what, more American enmity, more American deaths, more middle-east chaos, more Iran/Syria regional prominence?

Stolen 2004 election, if there were voting irregularities like in 2000 that would have put Kerry over the top and sent the Texas Idiot packing, then Kerry gave it to the Texan by giving in before the issue could again be resolved by GWB re-appointment by the Supreme Court. Admittedly, this issue pales in comparison to all the other points in your article, but like you, I try to give credit where credit is do, and you know how hard that is.

Regarding GWB “presidential” legacy—he is living it! It is my mission, using whatever media necessary (notice I did not say “means”) to ensure that GWB goes down in history as the World’s worst head of state! You Bush-devotees can try to prevent comparisons to other destructive world dictators but “actions will always speak louder than words, rhetoric, and any other sort of “Pro-Bush” pish tosh.”

Posted by: Kim-Sue at June 16, 2007 10:56 AM
Comment #223284

Me? I am still waiting for the national security imperitive that “forces” Bushco to grab dictatorial powers to insure continiuty,ie.”postpone” the election. The stage is set. No reason to assume differently.The cryto-fascist will not give up power easily. It is only a question of how blantant they will be.

Posted by: BillS at June 16, 2007 11:13 AM
Comment #223286

BillS—

Love it! Indeed, it will be interesting. I will have to check and see what Sinclair Lewis foretold.

Posted by: Kim-Sue at June 16, 2007 11:23 AM
Comment #223295

Ray,

First, are you claiming that we’ve been in a recession since the early 2000s?

Second, the memo was declassified. Anyone can Google it.

Third, as Orwell wrote long ago, the term “fascist” used in typical political discourse has ceased to have any real meaning.

Kim-Sue, it’s not that I don’t like unvarnished, straight-shootin’ criticism, it’s that I dislike over-the-top rhetoric. I would be hypocritical to object to it from the Right if I gave a pass to the Left.

Posted by: Gerrold at June 16, 2007 3:14 PM
Comment #223296

Gerold—

I dislike the senseless continued loss of American lives in Iraq. I am mature and intelligent enough to keep the importance of rhetoric in it’s place. Why don’t you try commenting on the cogent issues instead of highlighting the fact that others can use the enlgish language in a more artful, cleaver, urban and perhaps witty manner than you are able to do.

Posted by: Kim-Sue at June 16, 2007 3:55 PM
Comment #223299

Kim-Sue,

Why be insulting? As you say in a later comment, insults do little to contribute to dialogue.

I did comment on some inaccuracies in the article. Look, such rhetoric functions as cheerleading for one side and provocation for the other. It’s not likely to be change any minds; it’s more likely to make achieving our goals more difficult. The facts about this administration are damning enough themselves; if we want to persuade, then we need to debate the issues in such a way that does not automatically alienate.

Don’t assume that I disagree with the gist of the article.

Posted by: Gerrold at June 16, 2007 4:43 PM
Comment #223300

Kim-Sue, you said in a comment removed from this forum:

“My point is simply that if you are going to berate (and I do it, it is fun for me sometimes) the messenger and/or respondents,”

Please take seriously WatchBlog’s Rules of Participation, especially the one in big bold letters at the top of each column which says, ‘Critique the Message, NOT the Messenger’. Failure to observe our rules again will result in your loss of privileges on this web site.

WKW has already lost his. We would prefer you not follow his lead.

Posted by: Watchblog Managing Editor at June 16, 2007 5:00 PM
Comment #223301

Here is the link to the declassified memo. I did not know that it had been. I have very limited internet access while on this vacation and my research was inadequate. Thanks for the correction. My basic points still stand. I am stealing this access and have to run. Thanks all for your comments.

Declassified Memo

Posted by: Ray Guest at June 16, 2007 5:55 PM
Comment #223302

Watchblog Managing Editor,
Which is the reason this is one of the few sites like this I read. My thanks to those of you that keep this site worth reading. — Savage

Posted by: TheSavage at June 16, 2007 6:02 PM
Comment #223303

Ray Guest- Thanks for the memo an have a nice Vacation.

-

Posted by: -DAVID- at June 16, 2007 6:51 PM
Comment #223306

Gerold,

Heard all that preaching before. I am not aware of the 1st amendment being repealed. You are entitled to your opinions as I am entitled to mine. I am also entitled to express my opinions as I choose as long as I am willing to bear the responsibility of what I post and, of course, the WATCHBLOG rules; and I am! So you keep your advice to yourself or to those who desire it—I do not! Thank you.

Posted by: Kim-Sue at June 16, 2007 7:28 PM
Comment #223307

ray

“Get the picture. Name one success… I can name a couple just to get you started. Stealing the 2000 election. Stealing the 2004 election. Perhaps, I should name it the Success Regime.”


this is BS, it was gore who attempted to steal the election. and what about 04 ? why is it any time the left loses an election it’s because it was stolen, or the voters were to stupid. i geuss the natural order of things is there’s no way the right could ever win an election with out stealing it. you ever thought just for a second that the voters got your message loud and clear, and rejected it.


you guys whine constantly about voter fraud, but every time someone tries passing a law to require some form of voter ID to help prevent fraud, you oppose it. why are you scared of requiring ID so long as it’s available to all legal voters free of charge ?


have you noticed we on the right are not whining about the 06 elections, or acussing the left of stealing them. you win some you lose some. move on, the constant whining is getting annoying.

Posted by: dbs at June 16, 2007 7:43 PM
Comment #223309

Gerrold


“Why be insulting? As you say in a later comment, insults do little to contribute to dialogue.”


this shouldn’t suprise you, comming from someone who believes that over the top rhetoric has some integral place in a reasonable debate.

Posted by: dbs at June 16, 2007 8:34 PM
Comment #223312

Ray and Kim-Sue:

It is a weekend and I have some time so I will respond. Before we go any further, would you care to respond to the allegations that I made on Paul Siegal’s thread “Stop Dingell & Boucher Now”? Personally, I think that the “liberal/left/Democrat” hypocrisy should be adressed before any credence be given to your arguements.

In your first point, you state that the tax cuts are “filthy”. Out of curiocity, did you benefit from them, and if so, did you accept the money? Surely a man of your intellect and integrity and with the views that the tax cuts are “filthy” would have known that he could have mailed a check to the IRS for the difference, just to avoid the apperance of being a “Neo-Nazi”. I am just curious if you have these convictions or are just trying to score some political points.

Seeing that you brought upthe term “NEO-NAZI”, let us explore that for a minute. I just happened to look that up at http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/nazi and now I ask how the ideals and opinions from the left/liberal/Democrats are different from “Nazi” ideals. Shall we look at some of the posts from here at Watchblog:

1. Posted by dbs:
maybe we need to pass a law that forbids the teaching of religious creationism by parents, then those of you who have no faith in anything but science wouldn’t have this problem. what you can’t and won’t ever be able to understand about faith is that is a very personal part of life to many, and forcing someones child to be taught that we are descended from primates is like trying to teach thier children to believe in another religion they don’t agree with.

Pass a law that prohibits parents from teaching their children about their religion, is that liberal/left, but it has become the mainstream Democrat idea. To support my view, I cite all of the following left/liberal/Democrat speakers that rebuked the thesis on that thread:
Sorry, but in five days I counted zero.

2. All of the threads/posts blasting Libby and calling for his head. Although I think that he is probably guilty, I dare someone on this site to count the number of posts from the left/liberal/Democrat side calling for his head that have also called for the head for rep. William Jefferson.

3. David R. Remer in his post on the thread “Energy Independence vs. Green Energy”:

“The greatest source of pollution on this earth is the human population. All roads to solving energy and pollution problems must lead to reducing the population of the human species on this earth. We are surpassing our planet’s carrying capacity for human population numbers, as potable water and food distribution will claim ever larger numbers of human lives in tragic and suffering circumstances.

There is a moral imperative here. Humankind must agree to reduce its population imprint on the earth’s finite resources.”

A few things here. First, does the solution here fit the bill for the definition of “nazi”. Again the definition from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/nazi . I point out “suppressing all opposition and establishing a dictatorship over all cultural, economic, and political activities”. Can anything be more Nazi than the control of procreation. The solution hinted at by Mr. Remer is not only the right to BE, but the right to be with child. I also woud like you to check http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=fascism .
To me, the solutions from the left/liberals apparently are not only Nazi, but also Facist. As a disabled veteran, I have sacrificed not only my time and life, but my immediate health for the freedoms of mankind both American and European(along with others) with whom I may disagree. Many on the left have also. But my question for the left/liberal/Democrats is where is the outrage, rebuke or rebuttal for such words and ideas? Not for the ability or rights to speak them, but for the ideals themselves? One must assume that if one is in the arena of ideas/ideals and is silent on an issue, he supports and/or is willing to benefit from it.

I would point out that any right comes with responsibility. John Jay said that the right of fredom of speech does not give one the right to yell “Fire!” in a crowded theatre. Can anyone compare the words of Mr. Remer and the “Climate Change” group of the left/liberal/Democratic party with “FIRE!”. The crux of their arguements are that man is what is wrong with the Earth, and that MAN must be controlled and or eliminated for Earth to survive.We only have five years to get the solution in place, and by the way, it is worse than we thought, it is escalating three times faster than we thought and the only solution to save mankind is to eliminate his….rights to BE? And how many from the left/liberal/Democratic party have spoken out against this point…..still waiting. To the left/liberal/Democrats on this site, I ask you if you believe that “Mother Earth” has rights that supercedes the rights of Man? Please choose carefully and respond. Please evaluate your previous posts and look for constistancy in your statements and omissions. Laugh hard righties/Conservatives/Republicans….but do the same.

As for the sucesses, I can name several including the tax cuts in a debate, but I dare you to establish your credibility. As a matter of fact, I demand it. It is a shame that we dont do that with politicans. Excepting for Democrats that dont cede their rights and votes to the majority leader. Those Democrats should be run out of the country as traitors to their country. How Facist/Nazi of you.


Posted by: submarinesforever at June 16, 2007 9:36 PM
Comment #223317

Please note that this a critique of the message, not the messenger—so don’t confuse the two.

This message seems to have been designed to provoke angry responses, but for me (at least) it fails because it has neither the qualities of a logical albeit strongly-worded argument OR a theatrical, hyperbolic rant which bases its appeal on skewing its subject with clever barbs (something I could also enjoy).

I say this as a conservative who actually enjoys watching Michael Moore movies because even though I don’t agree what their point, I think they’re funny and clever and at least warp the truth in an original and entertaining way.

My point is that for a verbal attack like this to work, it needs to be accurate or at least funny.

But come on. We’re in a recession? That’s definitely news! When Bush was told that two airplanes had crashed into the World Trade Center, he was told or should have concluded that this was “a full scale nuclear attack” and that the “nucs” (sic) were on the way? General Petraeus has been “lying” (about what, pray tell?) and is a Bush pawn?

None of this makes any sense—and that would be okay if were funny or well-written, but it’s not.

Posted by: Loyal Opposition at June 16, 2007 11:38 PM
Comment #223318

Bush lied people died … Zzzzzzzzzzzz. This is why they got rid of Bob Sagat on America’s Funiest Home videos, his material was getting old and redundant.

Weren’t we reading a lot about the Democratic Congress & Senate changing all this in December 2006? Weren’t we reading how they will defund the war? Weren’t we .. choke, gag, hack.

Posted by: Honest at June 16, 2007 11:46 PM
Comment #223320

Kim-Sue,

You’re not coming off very well. If you don’t want me to respond to comments you make to me, then don’t make them.

Ray,

You haven’t given any indication that you’ve done this, but please don’t take my comments personally. I’ve read a number of fine articles of yours. My concern, though, is that in our passion we can sometimes express our beliefs in ways that polarize. At any rate, my political beliefs skew left; I’m writing in this thread as an ally and not an opponent.

Loyal Opposition,

Well stated. And if I could find a funny right-wing commentator, I’d acknowledge him or her. (Jackie Mason doesn’t do it for me.)

Posted by: Gerrold at June 17, 2007 12:12 AM
Comment #223324

“Well stated. And if I could find a funny right-wing commentator, I’d acknowledge him or her. (Jackie Mason doesn’t do it for me.)”
Posted by: Gerrold at June 17, 2007 12:12 AM

Gerrold,

Try catching the Rush Limbaugh show when you get the chance. I’m sure you would find him entertaining, and he might even inspire from time to time!

JD

Posted by: JD at June 17, 2007 12:41 AM
Comment #223328

JD,

Eep. I’m sorry, but I really dislike Rush. Maybe it’s because I can’t take a joke at the expense of my beliefs, but I like to think it’s because he’s not funny, intentionally at least. …

Posted by: Gerrold at June 17, 2007 1:36 AM
Comment #223331

Gerrold,

At one time Rush actually understood he was entertainment.
That was before he decided that he could make more money by being a prick.
I have been a listener of Rush since the early 90’s, and make no mistake about it, Rush always has been and always will be a pompous blowhard.
He enjoys being a grenade thrower, and he rarely tells the complete truth.
I think all those Oxycontin/Viagra cocktails have rotted his brain.

Posted by: Rocky at June 17, 2007 2:17 AM
Comment #223335

submarinesforever, you have taken great and unfounded liberties in reading far more into what I wrote than what I said.

I defy you to quote any passage of mine which recommends governments legislate who can and who can’t have children. There are many ways to reduce the world’s population, greater wealth distribution decreases birth rates, as the governments of all western and modern economies will testify. Nothing inhumane or fascist about increasing the wealth of poor people through managed work and effort, is there?

Of course, there is the other alternative, let the population continue to exceed the carrying capacity of the earth’s resources. For that, as we are already witnessing, has self-correcting measures in the form of disease, war, famine, and failed essential needs goods and services distribution systems.

Are you aware Denghi Fever (a horrible hemorrhagic disease) is now in the U.S. due to rising temperatures, and as the temperatures increase, the Eastern Seaboard and South of the United States will become familiar with previously unheard of tropical diseases?

The illegal immigration problem in the U.S. is a direct result of Mexico and S. American countries having overpopulated their capacities to provide decent living and wage standards for their people, causing them to seek out the U.S. as their salvation. These migrations of millions of people who have exceeded the carrying capacity of their own homelands will be one of the greatest human tragedies of the 21st century. It is already underway in the Sudan, Ethiopia, Mexico, Central America, and in many areas in China.

Arizona is caught between a rock and hard place as temperatures increase and water becomes scarcer. Nevada is already feeling that same squeeze in their near future, and water has already caused the U.S. to violate its water treaties with Mexico. The growing population of this planet is integral to the the enormous problems facing humankind in this century. There is no escaping the evidence of this.

We can choose to manage the problem and alleviate the worst outcomes possible, or, we can say, that is the next generation’s problem that they will starve, dehydrate, be forced to migrate to nations that refuse them, or use them as second class cheap labor. Nature will take care of the overpopulation by its own rules, but, then, nature is not constrained by mercy, empathy, and charity.

It remains to be seen if human governments and social systems will observe such constraints in their approach to the coming death and displacement and suffering caused directly by the numbers of people making demands upon the earth’s limited resources.

Posted by: David R. Remer at June 17, 2007 3:15 AM
Comment #223339

David:
Your response to my post is:
“I defy you to quote any passage of mine which recommends governments legislate who can and who can’t have children. There are many ways to reduce the world’s population, greater wealth distribution decreases birth rates, as the governments of all western and modern economies will testify. Nothing inhumane or fascist about increasing the wealth of poor people through managed work and effort, is there? Of course, there is the other alternative, let the population continue to exceed the carrying capacity of the earth’s resources. For that, as we are already witnessing, has self-correcting measures in the form of disease, war, famine, and failed essential needs goods and services distribution systems.”

Let me focus on “There is a moral imperative here. Humankind must agree to reduce its population imprint on the earth’s finite resources.”
You defined the problem as humans and the core solution as reducing the population. The only way to reduce the population is to procreate at a lesser rate than the death rate. The word “must” is defined as “to be required, compelled or forced”. Unless I am totally misreading your point, the solution you suggest is to force, compel or require mankind to reduce their procreation rate and therefore the overall population. That is where you stopped on that post. No methods to achieve the goal were offered. Given the problem and solution you defined, and without any details or clarification, I do not think I have taken great and unfounded liberties in reading your post. Please reread the post and correct me correct me if I am wrong.Until then, I stand by my post.

As to the rest of your response, I found it interesting and mostly agreeable. Although I was not aware of Denghi Fever being here, I am not suprised. The Earth’s climate has never been static and with fluctuation comes different problems.

Just to offer food for thought on your statement “The illegal immigration problem in the U.S. is a direct result of Mexico and S. American countries having overpopulated their capacities to provide decent living and wage standards for their people, causing them to seek out the U.S. as their salvation.”, I ask you if it would be more accurate to change the word Capacities to “willingness” when referring to Mexico? It may not be, I am curious to your thought process on that.

Posted by: submarinesforever at June 17, 2007 7:40 AM
Comment #223351

Submariner:

You presume too much in your definition of David’s use of must, there are many acceptable definitions and usage:


–auxiliary verb
1. to be obliged or bound to by an imperative requirement: I must keep my word.
2. to be under the necessity to; need to: Animals must eat to live.
3. to be required or compelled to, as by the use or threat of force: You must obey the law.
4. to be compelled to in order to fulfill some need or achieve an aim: We must hurry if we’re to arrive on time.
5. to be forced to, as by convention or the requirements of honesty: I must say, that is a lovely hat.
6. to be or feel urged to; ought to: I must buy that book.
7. to be reasonably expected to; is bound to: It must have stopped raining by now. She must be at least 60.
8. to be inevitably certain to; be compelled by nature: Everyone must die.
–verb (used without object)
9. to be obliged; be compelled: Do I have to go? I must, I suppose.
10. Archaic. (sometimes used with ellipsis of go, get, or some similar verb readily understood from the context): We must away.
–adjective
11. necessary; vital: A raincoat is must clothing in this area.
–noun
12. something necessary, vital, or required: This law is a must.

Posted by: womanmarine at June 17, 2007 4:35 PM
Comment #223356

dbs - you said:

you guys whine constantly about voter fraud, but every time someone tries passing a law to require some form of voter ID to help prevent fraud, you oppose it. why are you scared of requiring ID so long as it’s available to all legal voters free of charge ?

I haven’t heard anyone on the left whining about voter fraud but rather of election fraud. Voter fraud hasn’t been found anywhere that I know of. Election fraud on the other hand has been found and actual people where convicted of it in Ohio since the last election.

Posted by: Lil Sue at June 17, 2007 8:49 PM
Comment #223363

Gerold,

I’m so so sad that you posted that about me—-NOT! Your personal assessment of who you think I am and how I come across makes no difference to me whatsoeever. Respond to whatever you like in this forum and I will continue to do the same until I am asked not to do so any longer, ok!

Posted by: Kim-Sue at June 17, 2007 10:15 PM
Comment #223365

Submarinesforever,

You post is quite long. I will read it and respond particularly since it seems you have taken the time to prepare a thoughtful discussion.

Posted by: Kim-Sue at June 17, 2007 10:18 PM
Comment #223381

This is just too foolish.

The recession. I sure hope we never recover from that 4.5% unemployment rate and that 3-4% growth rate after 2003 was sure hard to take.

It might be better just to sum it up with “I hate Bush” rather than stretch credulity beyond its breaking point.

Posted by: Jack at June 18, 2007 7:24 AM
Comment #223388

Lil Sue


“I haven’t heard anyone on the left whining about voter fraud but rather of election fraud. Voter fraud hasn’t been found anywhere that I know of. Election fraud on the other hand has been found and actual people where convicted of it in Ohio since the last election.”


you obviously don’t remember the 94 congressional race between bob dornan and loretta sanchez. it was determined that illegal aliens had been registered and voted in that election that sanchez won. we need voter IDs. there are scams that go on in all elections. and the dems have run thier share of them. they are not exclusive to either party.

Posted by: dbs at June 18, 2007 10:17 AM
Comment #223492

dbs-

So your are claiming that we have been whining about voter fraud because a Demacrate won an election over 10 yrs ago, even though it was determined that voter fraud played no role in the win. Again I know of no one on the left even talking about voter fraud. Just election fraud.

Posted by: Lil Sue at June 19, 2007 7:04 PM
Comment #223513

“Are you aware Denghi Fever (a horrible hemorrhagic disease) is now in the U.S. due to rising temperatures, and as the temperatures increase, the Eastern Seaboard and South of the United States will become familiar with previously unheard of tropical diseases?”
Posted by: David R. Remer at June 17, 2007 03:15 AM

David,

Did you stop to think that the disease problem may have nothing to do with warming or heat at all. Perhaps, it is tied to the unhindered passing of illegals with who knows what diseases from other countries because Democrats are so intent upon keeping the borders from being secured and controlling the influx of immigrants like they used to in New York harbor. It used to be that immigrants coming from certain countries where diseases were rampant were quarantined until they were given a full bill of health. I say blame the diseases on the immigrants from those warmer countries where diseases are allowed to flourish because of their third world health care systems. Most diseases don’t just show up, David. They are carried. Perhaps that is why they are “showing up” in those warmer southern states closest to the border, hmm, methinks!!!

JD

Posted by: JD at June 19, 2007 9:36 PM
Comment #223524

JD,

Tropical diseases that thrive in warm climes… Yes of course they are carried here by a number of vectors including Americans traveling to undeveloped tropical countries, so called free trade bringing food products from undeveloped tropical countries, exploitive American corporations using illegal aliens for various tasks including to process food, and so on. None of that negates the fact that these diseases thrive in the tropics and global warming is turning the southern US into a tropical zone. Flora and fauna, including disease organisms, move with climate change. We could argue about whether the climate change is caused by man, except we cannot argue about that, because there is no argument about that. That has passed from a very well supported theory into a proven scientific fact that only idiots, rigid ideologues, or dissemblers can deny.

Posted by: Ray Guest at June 20, 2007 12:02 AM
Comment #223529

Ray,

I wonder if Bird Flu is a tropical disease caused by Global Warming? It must be, because it never amounted to anything other than an anti-Bush / anti-Republican attack from the left, too! Why is it that all the liberal issues out there are about how people are going to die of some unfounded, unproven theoretical consequence? I guess before long the left is going to start parading sick southerners with dreaded tropical diseases down Pennsylvania Avenue to force Bush to do something about Global Warming.

JD

Posted by: JD at June 20, 2007 1:42 AM
Comment #223561

JD,

Yes, the failure Regime is incompetent about bird flu too. Your point? The only thing that they did do was to create a boondoggle for big pharm. They did the same thing with the anthrax scare. They bought antibiotic from Rummy’s company. They did not miss that opportunity to exploit a conflict of interest. They are the Success Regime after all.

Posted by: Ray Guest at June 20, 2007 12:01 PM
Comment #223663

Lil Sue


“Voter fraud hasn’t been found anywhere that I know of.”

you said it, i just pointed out that it in fact does happen. i used that example because it was in a district close to mine, and was the one i was most familiar with.


i find it interesting you’re so concerned about one, but could care less about the other. both are problems. seems you only care if you feel you lost an election because of it, but don’t care about the integrity of an election regaurdless of who wins. if you go back and look you’ll probably find there were many incidents where there were attempts to affect the out come of an election, like the one where tires were slashed on cars used by the gop to drive poeple to the poles who couldn’t get there on there own. people that live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

Posted by: dbs at June 21, 2007 3:39 PM
Comment #223995

dbs-

You are right I am more concerned with election fraud than voter fraud. That is because election fraud is a deliberate attempt by someone or a group of someones trying to change the results of an election through illegal actions. Voter fraud, which is illegal and should be prosicuted when found, is an individual voting in an election illegally. I hardly think one vote will throw an election. In the election you spoke of it was ruled that voter fraud took place, yet no one seems to have been charged or convicted, but had no effect on the out come of the election. They should have charged and convicted those who voted illegally.

Your original statement said we are whining about voter fraud but refuse to do anything about. And my responce then and now is no one on the left is whining about voter fraud it is election fraud that is talked about.

Posted by: Lil Sue at June 24, 2007 7:13 PM
Post a comment