[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
How the hell does declaring a war lost embolden our enemies?
Snap back to reality…(Eminem)
[/quote]
Yeah, but seriously though…
If Al qaeda desperately wants us to be in Iraq (good for business) and insurgents attack us because we’re there, and in Anbar sunnis have declared VICTORY over U.S. forces…does this ol’ tall tale (embolden the enemy) make any sense?
[quote]HH wrote:
Did Limbaugh name names? Did he point someone out specifically? Did he take someone’s name and try to turn it into an insult, all for political gain?[/quote]
I don’t get your logic. Is insulting thousands of insults somehow supposed to be less offensive than singling out one in particular?
Last I checked, he did call the troops who oppose the war “phony soldiers”.
Anyway, here’s one of them…
Iraq vet plans to return his medals in protest
[i]MADISON, Wis. â¿¿ An Iraq war veteran said Tuesday he is returning his military medals in what anti-war groups are calling a rare and powerful protest.
Josh Gaines, 27, plans to mail the Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal and National Defense Service Medal to former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. He said he will do so during a protest scheduled for Wednesday in Madison.
â¿¿Iâ¿¿m going to give those back because I truly feel that I did not defend my nation and I did not help with the Global War on Terrorism,â¿¿ said Gaines, who lives in Madison. â¿¿If anything, this conflict has bred more terrorism in the Middle East.â¿¿[/i]
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/09/ap_givebackmedals_070925/
[quote]bigflamer wrote:
100meters wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
Magnate wrote:
At minimum, George Soros and his minions should get hit for slander.
That’s more reasonable, I don’t see a problem if the General takes them to court in a civil suit for that ad.
I agree and would like to see the General pursue this route. However, for the Congress to spend time officially condeming this ad, is, IMHO, a misuse of their important time. This kind of shit is why Congress has such a low aproval rating.
Let’s get some real fucking work done on both sides of the aisle.
Again the low approval rate is for not ending the war. So not something you really wanna keep mentioning.
Also republicans don’t work in congress (remember?)
You’re such a leftist cheerleader that it makes me want to vomit. In your eyes, the dems do no wrong, shit golden truffles, and have the right answer for everything. You’re a joke. I believe that Professor X used to refer to this as a “football mentality”. Your team vs my team kind of BS.
You want to bury your head in the sand and pretend that the low approval rating for Congress is due to the single issue of Iraq then that’s fine. It’s your own little fucked up world. I realize that this is your attempt at spinning the poor ratings in the direction of the GOP. That’s just how you roll; dems=good, GOP=baaaaad.
But the sad reality is that the dems aren’t doing such a hot job right now and are failing to deliver on the overpromising they did to get elected. They have their own scandals cropping up and are unable, and apparently unwilling to “drain the swamp” of corruption in washington, as pelosi said.
You consistently reaffirm yourself as a political hack and a joke on this forum. Keep up the good work bro.
[/quote]
Nevermind that I said something true again…sigh.
While obviously dems do something annoying everyday it seems (condemn moveon.org ad, approve Kyl-Lieberman, don’t force repbublicans into real filibusters, etc…) and of course we’ll always need more and better democrats.
That said, they have done what they said they’d do in terms of drawing up the promised legislation. However they don’t have the votes to make things veto-proof. So as things move from the house to senate they get bottle necked by republicans, not by a lack of conviction to pass what was promised. So the only thing to really get mad at are the Republicans that are playing politics with soldiers lives.(Know the war isn’t working, want to end it, but fear “reprisals”).
But obviously the vast majority of the country want the troops home and disapprove of the president’s handling and expect congress to end it, but they don’t have the veto-proof majority, and alot of folks including yourself don’t seem to get that.
The noise about this aside - MoveOn’s atrocious claim, which does nothing for the important discourse needed on the Iraq issue, only helps us “spot the idiot”, so I think they should be able to run any ad they want - the NYT has possibly run afoul of the campaign finance laws its’ editorial page so often champions.
And, curiously, we get silence from the FOXNews hate fetishists when the gray old lady of journalism actually bumps up against legal trouble for its political pandering…
…“but…but…Sean Hannity don’t let liberals talk on his show!”
…“but…but…FOX has a waving American flag on its crawl!”
…“but…but…FOX called a Republican who got into trouble a Democrat, probably on purpose!”
Now, we have one of the most venerable journalistic outfits in America likely breaking a law the Left loves to champion…where is the outrage?
I don’t worry much about MoveOn - they are a giant moonbat anchor around the neck of the Democratic Party who wasted thousands on their ad against one of the most respected military men in the country. Nor do I mind that the House shamed MoveOn - free speech cuts both ways - good for the House.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Now, we have one of the most venerable journalistic outfits in America likely breaking a law the Left loves to champion…where is the outrage? [/quote]
Did all of you miss the part where the NYT was publishing stories about how the WMDs were in Iraq?
They are as guilty as the rest of the corporate media.
[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
The House shouldn’t worry itself about what MoveOn.org is doing with its ridiculous ad. [/quote]
Exactly.
Hopefully, all you guys have written to your representatives to let them know you don’t appreciate having them waste their times on such trivial issues?
[quote]pookie wrote:
Rush can only dream of one day having that kind of impact.[/quote]
Seems I was wrong… a bunch of representatives spent part of yesterday denouncing Rush and his “phony soldiers” comment.
Sigh. Note to self: It is impossible to underestimate the stupidity of politicians.
[quote]bigflamer wrote:
100meters wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
Magnate wrote:
At minimum, George Soros and his minions should get hit for slander.
That’s more reasonable, I don’t see a problem if the General takes them to court in a civil suit for that ad.
I agree and would like to see the General pursue this route. However, for the Congress to spend time officially condeming this ad, is, IMHO, a misuse of their important time. This kind of shit is why Congress has such a low aproval rating.
Let’s get some real fucking work done on both sides of the aisle.
Again the low approval rate is for not ending the war. So not something you really wanna keep mentioning.
Also republicans don’t work in congress (remember?)
You’re such a leftist cheerleader that it makes me want to vomit. In your eyes, the dems do no wrong, shit golden truffles, and have the right answer for everything. You’re a joke. I believe that Professor X used to refer to this as a “football mentality”. Your team vs my team kind of BS.
You want to bury your head in the sand and pretend that the low approval rating for Congress is due to the single issue of Iraq then that’s fine. It’s your own little fucked up world. I realize that this is your attempt at spinning the poor ratings in the direction of the GOP. That’s just how you roll; dems=good, GOP=baaaaad.
But the sad reality is that the dems aren’t doing such a hot job right now and are failing to deliver on the overpromising they did to get elected. They have their own scandals cropping up and are unable, and apparently unwilling to “drain the swamp” of corruption in washington, as pelosi said.
You consistently reaffirm yourself as a political hack and a joke on this forum. Keep up the good work bro.
[/quote]
Wanna know the promise the couch potatoes of this country actually care about? You guessed it! Ending the fucking war in Iraq!
The low approval rating for congress = They’ve done jack shit about Iraq, good or bad.
What other issue could it possibly be? You realize most Americans cannot be bothered to keep up with politics right?
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
What other issue could it possibly be? You realize most Americans cannot be bothered to keep up with politics right?[/quote]
The war in Iraq is by far the biggest reason for their negatives, but their inability to get shit done isn’t helping at all (child welfare bill going to be veto’d, and theyll probably back down from that too), also I think many American’s are growing tired of hearing about all the congressional hearings on the nightly news and is starting to think of Congress as a nuisance more so than an asset.
Army of Dude with pics of all those phony soldiers in Iraq
Did Congress’ statement actually mention MoveOn specifically? I may be wrong, but I don’t think it did. I’d like to check out Headdunder’s source, but he didn’'t provide one. If you quote somebody, you are supposed to supply a source. A school teacher should know that. Maybe Headddunder teaches Home-Ec though.
I think Congress’ resolution was a waste of time, but in the future, maybe it will lead to Congress condemning groups like the Swift Boat Liars for Truth, and other jackasses.
[quote]Magnate wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
What other issue could it possibly be? You realize most Americans cannot be bothered to keep up with politics right?
The war in Iraq is by far the biggest reason for their negatives, but their inability to get shit done isn’t helping at all (child welfare bill going to be veto’d, and theyll probably back down from that too), also I think many American’s are growing tired of hearing about all the congressional hearings on the nightly news and is starting to think of Congress as a nuisance more so than an asset. [/quote]
Agreed 100%. Dem’s can’t get fucking mobilized on anything. But the low approval ratings are due to the fact that they can’t get mobilized enough to end the Iraq war, or at least force Bush to make a timetable or exit plan.
[quote]Brad61 wrote:
Did Congress’ statement actually mention MoveOn specifically? I may be wrong, but I don’t think it did. I’d like to check out Headdunder’s source, but he didn’'t provide one. If you quote somebody, you are supposed to supply a source. A school teacher should know that. Maybe Headddunder teaches Home-Ec though.
I think Congress’ resolution was a waste of time, but in the future, maybe it will lead to Congress condemning groups like the Swift Boat Liars for Truth, and other jackasses.[/quote]
I think the Senate vote was specifically to condemn the moveon.org ad in the new york times. I am not sure if they mentioned moveon.org by name, but I imagine in the debate they had it had to come up at some point.
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Agreed 100%. Dem’s can’t get fucking mobilized on anything. But the low approval ratings are due to the fact that they can’t get mobilized enough to end the Iraq war, or at least force Bush to make a timetable or exit plan.[/quote]
That seems odd to me - if that is why Congress’ ratings were so low, why are Bush’s ratings higher than Congress’?
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
Agreed 100%. Dem’s can’t get fucking mobilized on anything. But the low approval ratings are due to the fact that they can’t get mobilized enough to end the Iraq war, or at least force Bush to make a timetable or exit plan.
That seems odd to me - if that is why Congress’ ratings were so low, why are Bush’s ratings higher than Congress’?
[/quote]
Well combine the republicans who would normally disapprove of democrats plus the really high numbers of the democratic base.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
Agreed 100%. Dem’s can’t get fucking mobilized on anything. But the low approval ratings are due to the fact that they can’t get mobilized enough to end the Iraq war, or at least force Bush to make a timetable or exit plan.
That seems odd to me - if that is why Congress’ ratings were so low, why are Bush’s ratings higher than Congress’?
[/quote]
Because he did SOMETHING. He did the surge, regardless of how it worked, at least he tried something new. And he “removed troops” (the surge) after it “worked”. That’s why his approval ratings are higher.
[quote]100meters wrote:
thunderbolt23 wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
Agreed 100%. Dem’s can’t get fucking mobilized on anything. But the low approval ratings are due to the fact that they can’t get mobilized enough to end the Iraq war, or at least force Bush to make a timetable or exit plan.
That seems odd to me - if that is why Congress’ ratings were so low, why are Bush’s ratings higher than Congress’?
Well combine the republicans who would normally disapprove of democrats plus the really high numbers of the democratic base.
[/quote]
That too.
[quote]pookie wrote:
BostonBarrister wrote:
The House shouldn’t worry itself about what MoveOn.org is doing with its ridiculous ad.
Exactly.
Hopefully, all you guys have written to your representatives to let them know you don’t appreciate having them waste their times on such trivial issues?
[/quote]
I would have them piss away time on this stupidity rather than raising my taxes, telling me what to eat or other nonsense.