GOP official spinning Iraq on the talk radio this morning, upset that the good news isn't being reported. Here's the best comment I heard on the blogs today:
"I think that there are so many universities that didn't experience a massacre. I don't know why television is spending all this time covering what happened at Virginia Tech and deliberately ignoring the good news."
It was a response to a blog on Laura Bush--who recently stated that, when it comes to Iraq, "No one suffers more than the president and I do".
Yes, She actually said that.
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Cheney Smacked Down by 85-Year Old Man
McGovern responds to Cheney. OUCH...
Vice President Dick Cheney recently attacked my 1972 presidential platform and contended that today's Democratic Party has reverted to the views I advocated in 1972. In a sense, this is a compliment, both to me and the Democratic Party. Cheney intended no such compliment. Instead, he twisted my views and those of my party beyond recognition. The city where the vice president spoke, Chicago, is sometimes dubbed "the Windy City." Cheney converted the chilly wind of Chicago into hot air. [...]
He also said that the McGovern way is to surrender in Iraq and leave the U.S. exposed to new dangers. The truth is that I oppose the Iraq war, just as I opposed the Vietnam War, because these two conflicts have weakened the U.S. and diminished our standing in the world and our national security.
In the war of my youth, World War II, I volunteered for military service at the age of 19 and flew 35 combat missions, winning the Distinguished Flying Cross as the pilot of a B-24 bomber. By contrast, in the war of his youth, the Vietnam War, Cheney got five deferments and has never seen a day of combat — a record matched by President Bush. [...]
On one point I do agree with Cheney: Today's Democrats are taking positions on the Iraq war similar to the views I held toward the Vietnam War. But that is all to the good. [...]
We, of course, already know that when Cheney endorses a war, he exempts himself from participation. On second thought, maybe it's wise to keep Cheney off the battlefield — he might end up shooting his comrades rather than the enemy.
On a more serious note, instead of listening to the foolishness of the neoconservative ideologues, the Cheney-Bush team might better heed the words of a real conservative, Edmund Burke: "A conscientious man would be cautious how he dealt in blood."
Saturday, April 21, 2007
WHO is cutting off funding??
I was furious when I found out that GOP Congressmen, supported by the Bush administration, visited Syria right before Nancy Pelosi, while another accompanied her to Syria. Nary a word from Nancy, other high-ranking Dems, or the media on the hypocrisy of the Bushies bashing Nancy for doing the same thing they support GOP members doing.
And it is happening AGAIN. I keep hearing the right-wing wacko pundits, along with the Dynamic Dumbasses of Bush and Cheney, crying to everyone that Democrats want to cut off funding for the troops in Iraq.
Here's the score folks:
The Democrats sent Bush a funding bill worth over a hundred BILLION dollars to continue funding his misguided adventure! Just this time, instead of the blank check he is used to getting, it requires strategic withdrawals beginning 120 days out--which is MORE than enough time to give his so-called "surge" the chance to work. Experts outside and inside the White House say we should know by summer's end anyway; although everyone outside the White House (besides Baghdad Bob McCain) has already stated the obvious---it's too little, too late.
And by the way, this IS what the AMERICAN people are demanding. Don't they get a say in this?
Bush is threatening to VETO funding for the troops. Draft-dodgers Bush and Cheney have already showed thier contempt by cutting off funding for their benefits, exposing them to predatory lenders, allowing them to fight without the support and armor they needed, and then allowing them to be treated in squalor when they inevitably got hurt as a result. Not to mention (mis)leading them into war based on lies and forcing them to stay to moderate a civil war for no other reason than to save face.
So, my fellow Dems, I ask you-- why the hell are WE being stuck with the cutting off funding label?? Why isn't our leadership screaming on the Sunday talk shows that it is Bush/Cheney who will be cutting off funding for refusing to change their failed strategy?
The GOP has showed that Loud and Wrong always trumps Weak and Right. But Loud and Right wins every hand. We have the Right part, how about the rest?
And it is happening AGAIN. I keep hearing the right-wing wacko pundits, along with the Dynamic Dumbasses of Bush and Cheney, crying to everyone that Democrats want to cut off funding for the troops in Iraq.
Here's the score folks:
The Democrats sent Bush a funding bill worth over a hundred BILLION dollars to continue funding his misguided adventure! Just this time, instead of the blank check he is used to getting, it requires strategic withdrawals beginning 120 days out--which is MORE than enough time to give his so-called "surge" the chance to work. Experts outside and inside the White House say we should know by summer's end anyway; although everyone outside the White House (besides Baghdad Bob McCain) has already stated the obvious---it's too little, too late.
And by the way, this IS what the AMERICAN people are demanding. Don't they get a say in this?
Bush is threatening to VETO funding for the troops. Draft-dodgers Bush and Cheney have already showed thier contempt by cutting off funding for their benefits, exposing them to predatory lenders, allowing them to fight without the support and armor they needed, and then allowing them to be treated in squalor when they inevitably got hurt as a result. Not to mention (mis)leading them into war based on lies and forcing them to stay to moderate a civil war for no other reason than to save face.
So, my fellow Dems, I ask you-- why the hell are WE being stuck with the cutting off funding label?? Why isn't our leadership screaming on the Sunday talk shows that it is Bush/Cheney who will be cutting off funding for refusing to change their failed strategy?
The GOP has showed that Loud and Wrong always trumps Weak and Right. But Loud and Right wins every hand. We have the Right part, how about the rest?
Thursday, April 12, 2007
IMUS FIRED, so what about Raggedy Ann and Limbaugh??
Imus lashed out at the Rutgers female basketball team by calling them a racial and sexist slur. Breaking news is that he has been fired by MSNBC for his behavior (And this Thursday morning by NBC). This is big news because Imus is the center of a MULTIMILLION dollar business. And yet the big networks fired him and all major advertisers pulled out--making Rudy Guiliani look like a dork for accepting his apology. (You heard right, Rudy Guiliani actually said he "accepted" his apology and said he would appear on his show in the future--I guess he got over being called a "nappy-headed ho").
Colossal moron Bush didn't condemn the remarks, just congratulated Imus for apologizing. (Heck of a job, Imee). Romney at least said he would tell Imus how bad the remarks are IF he went back on the show... not seeing the irony of last month's embrace of Ann Coulter.
Which brings me to the crux of my diary...
If what Imus did was SO offensive, then how the hell can anyone justify the presence on our TVs, newspaper columns, and radio waves of hatemongers Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh?
Rush Limbaugh has made fun of blacks, hispanics, immigrants, women, and more recently, the handicapped. Ann Coulter completed the circle by making repulsive comments about arabs, asians, native americans and gays. And unlike Imus, neither was ever forced to apologize for their hateful remarks. Neither was ever disciplined. Quite the contrary.
Both receive million dollar royalties and invitations to speak at conservative forums and even the White House.
The liberal side has no one this hateful. The right has tried to make Michael Moore our demon, but Michael Moore hardly engages in hate speech (what ethnic group has he attacked? his movie thanked the troops for their sacrifice and made Bush look like the unprepared idiot he his---is this the same as telling an African-American to "take the bone" out of his nose (Limbaugh) or saying asians, particularly North Koreans, should be "nuked for fun" (Ann)?)
Both of these hateful bigots don't command the audience or money that IMUS does, but he didn't have the one thing he needed -- conservative cover.
If he is smart, he will take to the airways next week on his new show at FOX NEWS network screaming racist rhetoric but this time coupling it with swipes at the Democratic Congress. He will be back on top in no time, and won't ever again have to face Al Sharpton.
Colossal moron Bush didn't condemn the remarks, just congratulated Imus for apologizing. (Heck of a job, Imee). Romney at least said he would tell Imus how bad the remarks are IF he went back on the show... not seeing the irony of last month's embrace of Ann Coulter.
Which brings me to the crux of my diary...
If what Imus did was SO offensive, then how the hell can anyone justify the presence on our TVs, newspaper columns, and radio waves of hatemongers Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh?
Rush Limbaugh has made fun of blacks, hispanics, immigrants, women, and more recently, the handicapped. Ann Coulter completed the circle by making repulsive comments about arabs, asians, native americans and gays. And unlike Imus, neither was ever forced to apologize for their hateful remarks. Neither was ever disciplined. Quite the contrary.
Both receive million dollar royalties and invitations to speak at conservative forums and even the White House.
The liberal side has no one this hateful. The right has tried to make Michael Moore our demon, but Michael Moore hardly engages in hate speech (what ethnic group has he attacked? his movie thanked the troops for their sacrifice and made Bush look like the unprepared idiot he his---is this the same as telling an African-American to "take the bone" out of his nose (Limbaugh) or saying asians, particularly North Koreans, should be "nuked for fun" (Ann)?)
Both of these hateful bigots don't command the audience or money that IMUS does, but he didn't have the one thing he needed -- conservative cover.
If he is smart, he will take to the airways next week on his new show at FOX NEWS network screaming racist rhetoric but this time coupling it with swipes at the Democratic Congress. He will be back on top in no time, and won't ever again have to face Al Sharpton.
Tuesday, April 03, 2007
Baghdad Bob McCain Touts Success 1 Day before ATTACK
I think I will retract my previous dailykos diary that claims McCain will be the GOP nominee.
As you’ve no doubt already heard, he “jumped the shark” two days ago by staging a photo-op at a Baghdad marketplace subjected to massive car bombings, like the one in February that killed 71 people, to prove that Iraq is now safe and sound due to his surge. (Despite the inconvenient fact that the death toll has risen). According to McCain, we weren't getting the "full story" from the liberal media. That's all.
McCain’ idiot non-savant sidekick, GOP Congressman Mike Pence, who now can replace Dan Quayle as the dumbest politician to come from Indiana, actually compared the market they visited as:
I guess this is an indication of how Congressman Mike Pence would handle terrorist attacks on flea markets in Indiana: Don a flak jacket and claim the true problem isn’t the terrorists, it’s the liberal media failing to report on how many people weren’t killed by car bombs.
The charade required 100 US troops to secure the area as well as helicopter protection--not like they have something better to do than to provide cover for a photo-op.
ONE DAY LATER, yesterday, snipers attacked the very same marketplace.
No wonder those Hoosiers do most of their shopping by Internet...
UPDATE: ONe of my readers sent me this:
As you’ve no doubt already heard, he “jumped the shark” two days ago by staging a photo-op at a Baghdad marketplace subjected to massive car bombings, like the one in February that killed 71 people, to prove that Iraq is now safe and sound due to his surge. (Despite the inconvenient fact that the death toll has risen). According to McCain, we weren't getting the "full story" from the liberal media. That's all.
McCain’ idiot non-savant sidekick, GOP Congressman Mike Pence, who now can replace Dan Quayle as the dumbest politician to come from Indiana, actually compared the market they visited as:
"a normal outdoor market in Indiana in the summertime."
I guess this is an indication of how Congressman Mike Pence would handle terrorist attacks on flea markets in Indiana: Don a flak jacket and claim the true problem isn’t the terrorists, it’s the liberal media failing to report on how many people weren’t killed by car bombs.
The charade required 100 US troops to secure the area as well as helicopter protection--not like they have something better to do than to provide cover for a photo-op.
ONE DAY LATER, yesterday, snipers attacked the very same marketplace.
No wonder those Hoosiers do most of their shopping by Internet...
UPDATE: ONe of my readers sent me this:
The latest massacre of Iraqi children came as 21 Shia market workers were ambushed, bound and shot dead north of the capital.
The victims came from the Baghdad market visited the previous day by John McCain, the US presidential candidate, who said that an American security plan in the capital was starting to show signs of progress.
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)