| Times Online | 0 | |
| Fox Boston | 0 | |
| Merc. News | 0 | |
| Big Govt | Obama’s Shock Troops: SEIU and Political Intimidation in St. Louis |
0 |
| NYT | 0 |
Audacity of Truth
Whiner-in-Chief:
"[W]hether the grumbling is about Republicans on Fox or bloggers in pajamas, there's a word for what the president and his aides are doing. That word is "whining." And nothing [...] does more damage to Obama's credibility or authority than the sense that a popular president is becoming the whiner-in-chief."
- John Nichols, Nation Magazine - 10/12/09
What the far left expects from the Democratic Congress
While the new majority Democrats are promising investigations and inquiries galore, as well as working on perfecting their Iraq cut and run strategy, their far left base is not going to let so-called “centrist” Democrats forget exactly who put them over the top last Tuesday.
As a reminder, the LA Times prints a laundry list of Nutroots demands and expectations.
Fasten your seatbelts, ya’ll. The next two years are gonna be a very bumpy ride.
Related: Karl at Protein Wisdom factchecks this NYT editorial piece where they falsely claim that Republicans “exercised virtually no oversight of the administration’s misconduct of the war” – while noting that they expect the Democrats to right that “wrong.”
Apparently to the NYT, there was virtually “no oversight” on the admin’s “misconduct” of the war because they disagreed with the conclusions that came from that oversight. Natch.
PM Update: Ugh. Even more depressing.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Trackbacks
31 Responses to “What the far left expects from the Democratic Congress”
Comments
Blogads
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of ST's advertisers, nor do their opinions necessarily reflect ST's. Stats
I won’t hold my breath that anything they “investigate” will be more than a ploy to power-monger.
I was screwed in public service during the Clinton administration. Secretary Shalala and her ilk had no time for me. The Hunt & Easley administrations have had no time for me (like many other things about their record in healthcare, my story is embarrassing for them). Waxman and his minions have had little time for physicians in the same boat as I.
Politics starts at home (www.asheboropediatrics.com). And it’s dirty from bottom to top.
1. I believe that nothing will keep the extreme liberals in Congress from holding multiple investigations of the Bush Administration this next year and perhaps even impeachment hearings. That alone can paralyze foreign policy and weaken America abroad in unimaginable ways!
2. While I do not expect their overeaching about the war in Iraq to appear rash or severe in the MSM, I have little doubt the new Congress will at a minimum, both in private and public, threaten to cut funding for the war in Iraq to force President Bush to make concessions in setting time lines for, by whatever cute euphemism they employ, America to cut and run from Iraq. Sadly, I do not believe Bush will do much more than make a pretense at much resistance in the media. Not because he agrees with them or would choose that course, but without the funding he cannot prosecute this war and it is better to try and salvage as much of his image as possible by pretending to be a part of the decision making process.
3. I believe the Democrats will use their power and threats to pass harmful social legislation, including amnesty, though they will deny it is amnesty, for all illegal aliens. Sadly, Bush has not so far shown any willingness to veto any legistaltion and he likes amnesty.
4. I could go on and on, but unless I am very much mistaken the Democrats will push President Bush into a very small corner; and while he will make feeble attempts at resisting their efforts to continue advancing a socialist, welfare state, weaken our foreign policy and cause us to fall from world power, his will be a much weakened, feckless administration over the next two years.I hope I am wrong and he shows some Reagan like courage, but I doubt it!
Our only hope, in my old, senile, useless opinion, will be if conservatives get damn mad and yes even passionate in making their voices known in the media and get off their behinds in large numbers in 2008 and throw these anti-America socialists out of office. Too dramatic for you, a bit more of the drama king? Perhaps, nonethless I believe the next year, unfortunately, will prove me mostly correct.
Can’t we just go into a coma for the next 2 yrs. and wake up in 2008 seeing that we’ve won everything back?
Interesting that the “investigation” protein wisdom links to are mostly in the last year – not the 1.5 to 2 years he states in his blog. Where was this watchful congress the 2 years before that? If there is anything we desperately need today, it’s oversight.
1. I do not believe Pelosi will allow impeachment proceedings. As deserved as they may be, they would accomplish little.
2. I disagree with I.M.Neiman. I believe congress will not underfund this war in an effort to change the stay the course stategy of this Administration. That would be political suicide by any party.
3. I agree with I.M.Neiman that some form of amnesty legislation will pass – with the help of moderate Republicans and your President.
Congressional oversight is not something the majority of Americans associate the current congress with.
It is also interesting to note that tucked away in a huge military authorization bill that President Bush signed two weeks ago is an order in the form of an obscure provision that terminates the federal oversight agency, the Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, on Oct. 1, 2007. The clause was inserted by the Republican side of the House Armed Services Committee over the objections of Democratic counterparts during a closed-door conference, and it has generated surprise and some outrage among lawmakers who say they had no idea it was in the final legislation. Explain to me how these are the actions of a congress interested in oversight.
- The moonbats can only call all the Clintonesta’s poopey-head, and threaten to fall down and kick and scream, just so much. They’re running out of red meat at the bottom of their chum bucket. A good portion of the Moony-Loons probably didn’t know MataLin and Carville are married. I mean, who needs to know details, when you have BDS by your side.
- The hard left, with Kos and Hampsher leading the pack, are gathering in front of castle Demo-Drac with pitchforks and torches, now that they realize they’ve been….they’ve been
LIEBERMAN’D!!!!
- Bang
To:
1. While Pelosi can exert pressure/influence, a majority of any committee may do just about anything they want, so saying Pelosi would not allow it means she would be a virtual dictator. She may not like it, but investigating ‘possible” articles of impeachment, I believe, is highly likely.
2. I don’t know how the Democrats can do anything else but underfund the Iraq War to force a timetable on Bush for withdrawal. The liberals campaigned on withdrawing from Iraq, what would they say to their supporters if they didn’t at least try? If Bush has the money, what would prevent him from following current policy? Isn’t the only Constitutional power the Congress have over the Executive Branch in time of war the power of the purse?
3. There is supposed to be congressional oversight of the Executive Branch, I have no problem with such oversight; however, there are inherent separation of powers in force by our Constitution, so if the Executive Branch says “screw you, I’ll do what I want,” what can Congress do but withhold funding from the Executive Branch. Those on the left and even those supposedly on the right like Arlen Spectre forget about “three separate but equal branches of government.” My point is that oversight has its limits!
It is natural for the Political Party out of power to demand “oversight” and to want the Congress to be superior in nature and to exert power over the Executive Branch; but that is not what the Founding Father’s intened, they deliberately chose three separate branches of government with equal power to be in constant tension, thus ensuring no one branch can dictate national policy and that thereby the citizens maintain control of our government via the ballot box. It is damn messy, it often makes me angry and especially when the damnable Democrats are in power in either of the three branches, but our Founders by God’s Grace and Wisdom designed our government to be a messy business.
On a brighter note, now that the Dems have control of Congress, we can all look forward to more sunny days, birds singing, and peace, joy and love. I’m sure homelessness is now a thing of the past, corporate profits will no longer be obscene and the minimum wage will miraculously go up without costing any entry-level or unskilled jobs. A couple of nuked cities, perhaps a poisoned water system… these are small prices to pay for the new day dawning in America with those courageous Democrats at the helm. Hey–if you’re gonna make an omelette, ya gotta break some eggs, right?
This is all BS to keep the fringe left complacent. Look the prize is 2008. Dems want the Presidency. They want what the Reps had. Both houses, the Presidency, and they would really love it if they could have the Supremes, which they do mostly. This is just a golden opportunity for them to say “Hey, we have come in from the extreme left”. If they win again in 2008 then there will be huge shift leftward. They can’t do this now. They know that the People are watching. They know they can be kicked out of office just as fast.
I am not completely against a timetable. Say 3 years out, with an extra year or two if the Iraq Government wants us to stay, at their option. 1) It would tell the Iraqis and the world, we ain’t going to be there forever. 2) If our enemies go underground sad for them as we will find them. We will hunt them down. They will lose one of their recruiting tools, and they will stop blowing up Iraqi recruits. 3) This should give us enough time to get the Iraqi Government and Military up and running much better than it is presently. 4) It will set up an expectancy that the Iraqi Gov. and Mil. will have to fend for themselves soon enough. 5) It keeps the people here happier. 6) It gives our troops something to look forward to. I know, I know you all think I am channeling some lib, and maybe I am. But the 30 year WOT was not intended to be only in Iraq. We have done more than any lib out there ever thought we could do. I am so damn proud of our troops, and all that they have accomplished. They are amazing. I am also hoping under Gates we might be able to get some of the Intel problems cleared up so that we can get the bad guys easier. – Lorica
A timetable, if it is made public, gives the terrorists a set date or dates to push us out and take over. We had a set date to leave Vietnam and we, I mean me, my brother, brother-in-law and many close to me were running as fast as we could ahead of the murderous Viet Cong and the Vietnamese people were being slaughtered. Vietnam was a perfect example of cut-and-run and being defeated in war by the Democrats.
If Bush meets privately with Maliki and sets key dates wherein they must achieve certain goals and stage by stage as they take over we pull back and reduce troop levels – at a fairly swift pace, no problem. But, if the damn American media engages in their usual traitorous behavior and makes the schedule known to the world, then we are back to the Vietnam solution.
Therefore, it is better, in my senile, half-assed opinion, that Bush and his military leaders need to agree on certain absolute benchmarks for unit pull backs and reductions (12-18 months max to a modest strike force left in Iraq); and make it crystal clear to Maliki that barring unforseen, absolutely overwhelming circumstances, we will keep to that schedule quietly, privately and ‘get-r-done.”
Sadly, even that is flawed because we have so many people in our government willing to violate national security for partisan ends that even my plan would sooner or later be exposed.
Well, it wouldn’t surprise me for the impeachment process to start in early 2008 and then somehow they aren’t finished by election time. This way Pelosi can pacify the rabid dog left wing, but at the same time Bush isn’t officially impeached. Pelosi is many things, most of which I won’t repeat on this site, but she is not stupid.
Well just possibly Bush is incredibly stupid! I just read where he is opening up the door to ideas from Democrats and having meetings with them and others to work out how to proceed in Iraq, read – “cut-and-run,” Vietnam Redux!
The article indicates Bush is humbled by the election losses and feels he needs to rethink Iraq! Good Lord that man has made me so mad the past few years!
Yes, maybe it is a clever gambit, but I absolutely believe that to redeem his place in history Bush is getting ready to pull out of Iraq and let it fall to the terrorists.
Someone above said they doubted Pelosi would allow impeachment of Bush, well part of an article in World Net Daily today said,
“Actually, according to a Newsweek poll in October, there is more support among U.S. voters for impeachment of Bush than at any point for impeaching Bill Clinton. The poll 28 percent of respondents thought impeaching Bush should be a top priority of a new Congress, and 23 percent thought it should be a lower priority, while only 44 percent thought it was a bad idea altogether. Of course, if both Bush and Cheney were impeached, convicted and removed from office the Congress, Pelosi would be next in line for the presidency.”
Sounds like she has sufficient motive to me. Plus San Francisco and Bezerkely, Nancy’s constituents, voted in large numbers for Bush to be impeached. Of course, I am an old man, senile and probably dead wrong!
What would the Dems gain by impeachment? Reducing the administrations credibility? It hasn’t got a whole lot left. Do you think the Dems want Cheney at the wheel? No. It will be enough for them to tyr to expose any misdeeds of past 4 years with the power of subpoena. I say the sooner they start, the better.
The Democrats can only influence our policy in Iraq by influencing public opinion. Investigations will be the tool to do so. A little sunshine to kill the mold, you might say.
Tom: If they go after Bush and Cheney at the same time, the Democrats could get President Pelosi before 2008! That is, if they were successful!
Oh, so you want the President weakened even further and American power and influence with it? Isn’t that cutting off your nose to spite your face?
What would the Dems gain by impeachment?
Payback for Clinton, enough said.
Reducing the administrations credibility? It hasn’t got a whole lot left.
In your opinion.
Do you think the Dems want Cheney at the wheel?
Seems to me that dems don’t plan ahead very well. With Nancy Pelosi at the helm, you only have to look at the people she represented, namely San Francisco, to see where she comes from.
A little sunshine to kill the mold, you might say.
I love how you refer to the dems as if they are some untouchable, incorruptable, force for good, it’s so amusing.
Oh, so you want the President weakened even further and American power and influence with it?
IM, I don’t agree with the premise. The US has less influence and credibility internationally now than we did 10 years ago?
NC Cop: I’m glad you amused. This administration doesn’t have much credibility in my opinion as well as a mjority of Americans and a majority internationally. No arguing that. And this has nothing to do with thinking the Dems are incorruptible. Clearly they are not, but if there was corruption in this adminstration, I want it uncovered. Don’t you? If this congress was still controlled by Republicans, I would want (but not expect) them to investigate also. Corruption in government should not tolerated by any party- and for independent voters, judging by election results, it isn’t, thankfully. Why conservatives continue to endorse a party that invented the “K-Street Project” is beyond me. If there is nothing to hide, there is little harm to congressional investigations. Information is power – you should demand more of it.
This administration doesn’t have much credibility in my opinion as well as a mjority of Americans
And in a recent poll, most Americans had no clue as to who Nancy Pelosi was, so forgive me if I feel that the American public have been the victim of a propoganda campaign that even Joseph Goebbels would be proud of.
but if there was corruption in this adminstration, I want it uncovered. Don’t you?
Of course, but I’d like it to be for the right reason, rather than revenge. If I thought that such investigations were to uncover “corruption” rather than revenge, I might support it a bit more. Not to mention, what constitutes “corruption”? Will it be a simple question about a program? Will that be enough to fire up congressional investigations for months? You might as well plan on having investigations into every Presidency from here on out, simply because parties want to dig up dirt on the other side.
K-street project? That’s the best you got? Personally I dont know how liberals continue to support a party that has been asleep at the wheel as Islamic extremism grew into a dangerous threat on their watch; has basically given the Iranians a blueprint on a nuclear bomb; got duped by N. Korea after giving bribes to them and then they continued their nuclear research while the dems sat back here patting themselves on the back.
Which do you think is more important?
Also let’s talk about Dems attempt to track down some of these leaks. Uncovering these very important programs has only weakened our stance with the GWOT. Do we hear all the screaming that the “Plame Game” got?? Come on Tom, let’s get the screaming started with this new un-corrupted Congress. – Lorica
It is good to know that we are back to governing via public opinion polls.
This administration doesn’t have much credibility in my opinion as well as a mjority of Americans and a majority internationally. No arguing that.
In today’s world of demographics, most pollsters can get the result they are looking for. Even if they asked 100 percent Republican’s about the “Credibility” of this administartion, but only Republicans in Conn, I bet they would get a response that would make the President look bad. Then they could report, we took a poll of Republicans…blah blah blah. From what I see the rest of the world is fighting radicals in the Islamic Religion, and won’t even acknowledge the fight. Where is their credibilty?? I say they have none. When’s the last time we heard any MSM outlet talk about the rioting that is STILL going on in France??? Tom seriously, the MSM takes you for granted. You would be wise to look abit deeper into these things. – Lorica
Good point, Lorica.
Remember Tom, Information is power – you should demand more of it.
And in a recent poll, most Americans had no clue as to who Nancy Pelosi was, so forgive me if I feel that the American public have been the victim of a propoganda campaign that even Joseph Goebbels would be proud of.
I know, you think Pelosi is the anti-Christ. That doesn’t change Bush’s approval rating of 31%. In fact, knowing who Pelosi is has no bearing on recognizing our decider-in-chief is inept. Unless you’re an unwavering partisan Republican apparently.
I’d like it to be for the right reason
I get the feeling this adminstration could do about anything and it wouldn’t be a good reason to you. Corruption to me is no bid contracts in Iraq, manipulation, distortion and supression of science for political (or personal) gain, questionable contracts for Katrina cleanup, and cronyism resulting in inept or corrupt adminstration of our government agencies.
K-street project? That’s the best you got?
Thats all I need. Problem is there is so much more. What is it about the K-street project that you thinks serves us so well? You can thank it for a Democratic congressional majority, that’s all I can think of.
asleep at the wheel as Islamic extremism grew into a dangerous threat on their watch HA! How so?
has basically given the Iranians a blueprint on a nuclear bomb; We publish this on the internet now for all to see, didn’t you hear?
So, Lorica, you’re telling me that Bush’s low approval rating is just the pollsters spinning? An election in a Democracy basically is an opinion poll. This is not dictatorship-yet. Public opinion matters.
Your tirade against the MSM grows tired. Both the far-left and far-right complain about them. Makes me wonder if they’re not actually in the middle. Don’t read the MSM if you don’t like it.
Rioting in France? I’m not following where you’re going with this, sorry. Has there been more rioting since last year?
I know, you think Pelosi is the anti-Christ.
I never said any such thing. But do you honestly think that if the American people knew what Pelosi stood for, and especially the people she represents, they would have voted the way they did? In the last two years San Francisco has banned firearms from private citizens, refused to allow the U.S.S. Iowa, one of the most storied naval ships in history, dock in it’s port, suggested that school campuses ban military recruiters, and declared itself a haven for illegal immigrants. I have a feeling if the media had covered more of this, the election might not have turned out the same.
That doesn’t change Bush’s approval rating of 31%.
Sometimes doing the right thing isn’t always the popular thing. Personally, I’m glad to have someone in office who doesn’t govern by the polls, for a change.
I get the feeling this adminstration could do about anything and it wouldn’t be a good reason to you.
Just as I get the feeling that no matter what the administration did you will find something wrong with it, no matter what. So what does that prove?
HA! How so?
Wow, you really are in the dark, aren’t you? Let’s see:
LINK
LINK
Here’s a gem from that link:
As an American Muslim and a political supporter of Clinton, I feel now, as I argued with Clinton and Berger then, that their counter-terrorism policies fueled the rise of Bin Laden from an ordinary man to a Hydra-like monster.
Let’s not forget FBI Director Freeh:
LINK
Freeh says the former president let down the American people and the families of victims of the Khobar Towers terror attack in Saudi Arabia.
Charles Krauthammer:
Otherwise, the period between 1993 and 2001 was a waste, eight years of sleepwalking, of the absurd pursuit of one treaty more useless than the last, while the rising threat—Islamic terrorism—was treated as a problem of law enforcement.
Who was President from 1993-2001??
So, shall I save you the trouble and call all these sources right wing, Bush loving, Clinton hating, loyalists or will you??
From the 1993 Bombing of the WTC to Kohbar towers to USS Cole to the African embassy bombing, Clinton did nothing to combat these forces and we paid for it with 9/11.
Your tirade against the MSM grows tired.
As tiring as your Bush hating, conservative bashing tirades.
We publish this on the internet now for all to see, didn’t you hear?
Indeed I did. Perhaps if people were’nt screaming that Bush is a liar every 10 seconds, he wouldn’t have to publish it. More importantly, what do you think of them finding nuclear bomb plans in Iraq??
I also understand the site was taken down. That’s a bit different that handing the Iranians an actual blueprint for a bomb, I’m afraid.
Rioting in France?
Yes there has been, but not to the same scale as last year. You were saying something about the MSM???
Remember, Information is power – you should demand more of it.
Tom wrote, “Your tirade against the MSM grows tired.”
I suppose you won’t read this then. They aren’t in the middle. They are lazy. They sympathize with Democrats and therefore don’t do due diligence but report what Democrats say.
But do you honestly think that if the American people knew what Pelosi stood for, and especially the people she represents, they would have voted the way they did? Yes I do. I think people vote for their best candidate, regardless of who the congressional leader might be. I think demagoging Pelosi is yet another in a string of Republican talking points.
Sometimes doing the right thing isn’t always the popular thing.
Sometimes realizing and admitting you’re wrong is the right thing. Bush seems to have done this many years to late. You’re gonna be upset with him when he stops ’staying the course’ and decides to start ‘cuttin and runnin’.
Just as I get the feeling that no matter what the administration did you will find something wrong with it, no matter what. So what does that prove?
I guess it proves I am more skeptical than you, that I question authority more than you. I say investigate any credible accusations, and if nothing is found- great. If problems are found, we can correct them.
Regarding your idea that Islamic extremism grew into the threat only during the Democrats watch: This is ridiculous. While Clinton certainly had missteps and missed opportunities,these go back decades. Many think Bush (W) policies have made it worse. And yes thanks for noticing all of your links are from Republican partisan sources. Krauthammer? Thats like me linking to Gore Vidal qoutes.
Perhaps if people were’nt screaming that Bush is a liar every 10 seconds, he wouldn’t have to publish it.And I like your position that its OK to politicize sensitive and secret documents by posting them on the internet. This fits in well with your assertion that doing the right thing isn’t always the popular thing.
I still have no idea how the rioting in France fits in with any of this. Not the same scale, huh? Couple of naughty muslims teens tip over a Renault?
Oh, and I’m glad you like my statement about information and power. If you keep using it I’m going to have to charge you royalties. Hope you take it to heart and expand your reading beyond the Washington times and the Drudge report.
Yes I do.
Well, have fun in your own little world then. Maybe some day I’ll visit there.
I think demagoging Pelosi is yet another in a string of Republican talking points.
I know, thank God the dems have never done anything like this, huh? Pot, meet kettle.
You’re gonna be upset with him when he stops ’staying the course’ and decides to start ‘cuttin and runnin’.
Interesting, I don’t recall Bush ever saying anything about cutting and running, yet it seems to be the only plan the dems have for Iraq. Keep trying to blame that possiblity on Bush, though. Again, maybe I’ll visit your world someday.
I say investigate any credible accusations
Of course, as long as they are against Republicans, right? what’s your definition of “credible” accusations, ones made by dems?
This is ridiculous. And yes thanks for noticing all of your links are from Republican partisan sources.
Did I call that one or what?! People like you are so preditable, tom. I guess your source on the suppression of science which was, and I quote from your source: “at the request of Rep. Henry A. Waxman, the Democratic staff of the Government Reform Committee in the U.S. House of Representatives assessed the treatment of science and scientists by the Bush Administration.”
Surprise, surprise, the dems got together and came up with a negative report about Bush. Shocked! Shocked, I am!!! Very nice non-biased story. Again, pot, meet kettle.
I also like the way you failed to address the issues on those sites. So I guess Louis Freeh, who Clinton appointed, is a right winger now, huh? I guess he’s not reliable since he’s actually criticizing Clinton. I see it now.
And I like your position that its OK to politicize sensitive and secret documents by posting them on the internet.
Yet, you refuse to answer my question on what you think of nuclear bomb plans being found in Iraq? Denial, perhaps. No matter, it goes well with your denial that Clinton was busy “interviewing interns” rather than defending the country.
I still have no idea how the rioting in France fits in with any of this.
I didn’t bring it up. I do find it interesting that you had not heard of it yet. I guess they didn’t report that on CNN, huh? Try changing the channel every now and then, you might actually find out what’s going on in the great big world.
Couple of naughty muslims teens tip over a Renault?
That’s it, downplay it. Sounds like it came out of the mouth of Pelosi, Reid, Clinton, Dean, etc. Take your pick.
Oh, and I’m glad you like my statement about information and power.
Oh, but I do. I think it should be Katie Couric’s sign off. I like that way you suggest that someone who differs in opinion with you, somehow does’nt know as much as you. Very…..fitting.
Remember, Information is power – you should demand more of it.
tom the political scientist pontificates: I think people vote for their best candidate, regardless of who the congressional leader might be.
If that’s the case, then why was the whole Democrat campaign this fall based on attacking Bush? If you’re right, then the Dems should have been talking only about how good their people were, not running grainy black-and-white pictures of GOP candidates with the caption “Supports Bush.” Nope, you’re dead wrong on this one. Again.
tom the philosopher says profoundly: Sometimes realizing and admitting you’re wrong is the right thing.
You might well think about taking your own advice here. For example, at the same time al Qaeda is planning to go nuclear, you want to retreat from the WOT and give them a new privileged sanctuary in Iraq. Not a very good idea. Wrong again.
tom the elitist looks down his nose at the peasantry: I guess it proves I am more skeptical than you, that I question authority more than you.
Really? The blogosphere is overflowing with people, including commenters here, who take issue with the President and the GOP leadership on a range of issues, such as illegal immigration or how to conduct the WOT. That’s call independent thinking. On the other hand, your side robotically follows one far-left dogma. Questioning that authority isn’t permitted. I call Joe Lieberman as first witness of what happens when you dare dissent from the Dem party line on even one point. So tom is wrong again. That makes three…
tom the historian loses sight of the present: Regarding your idea that Islamic extremism grew into the threat only during the Democrats watch: This is ridiculous. While Clinton certainly had missteps and missed opportunities,these go back decades.
Let’s assume for the moment that you got this one right. That would mean W is the only president – of either party – who has dared to fight back. And you have a problem with that.
tom the semanticist parses his words: Many think Bush (W) policies have made it worse.
By “many” he means liberals who get queasy at the idea of defending the country.
tom the moralist tries jumping to a conclusion and misses: And I like your position that its OK to politicize sensitive and secret documents by posting them on the internet.
First, you’re assuming that posting the documents was a political move, not simply a routine matter of posting documents as they’re translated. No evidence of that. Second, you’re implying that the decision to post these documents came from Bush or someone else in the administration. No evidence of that either. Third, since when do you libs have a problem with publishing sensitive or secret documents? If this had popped up on page 1 of the NY Times you’d be claiming it a triumph of free journalism, because, you know, al Qaeda has the right to know whether we’re tapping their phones, or monitoring their financial transactions, or how to make a bomb. Wrong again.
tom concludes by putting on a dunce cap: I still have no idea how the rioting in France fits in with any of this. Not the same scale, huh? Couple of naughty muslims teens tip over a Renault? Let’s try once again explaining this to you. It’s a global (that means the whole world) war on terror. The islamofascists don’t care whether you’re a Marine fighting bravely in Iraq or a coward sniveling under a bed in Paris. They want everyone who is not one of them dead. That includes not just me, NC Cop, Baklava, and Lorica. It includes you. So once again you’re wrong.
But thanks for being our celebrity guest on the “Spot the Troll” game anyway.
I brought up the on going French rioting. The reason I did, is because tom wants us to take the opinion of these people as some sort of a standard of intelectual thought. I never thought I would kill 2 birds with 1 stone. 1st bird is proving my point that the French are still dealing with radicals in the Islamic religion. To the tune of doubling incidents of police being hurt on the job over 2005, which was the year of the “big riot”. But you really should read the article. Which I easily found at Wikipedia and typed in “French Rioting” and that led me to “Permanent French Infitada”, which from that title shows they are fighting a war, but refuses to admit it. I also find it interesting that the 2 best articles are ABC News and BBC, but yet the majority of Americans have not heard of this. You decide.
LINK
The 2nd bird is how tom goes on about left wing / right wing having some sort of media conspiracy. LOL But yet when there is, what I would call major news, he doesn’t know about it. Tom do you know that every major country in Europe is dealing with Islamic Radicals??? Spain, England, France have all had major attacks with dozens killed, but yet refuse to deal with the situations. Then they go around and tell us how evil and wrong we are. And people like you want us to concern ourselves with their opinion regarding us. How many Aussies were killed in the Bali bombing tom?? Just what do you know regarding terrorism by radical Muslims???
Sorry if this post seems to ramble abit, but in all seriousness. I cannot take anyone’s opinion serious when they are so negligent regarding world news. It is sooooo easy to get on this site and “slam” the stupid conservative, but if you are going to be so un-informed do us all a favor and just slip into read only mode. – Lorica