Speaker Reid and Majority Leader Pelosi write to the President against escalation in Iraq.
"We want to do everything we can to help Iraq succeed in the future but, like many of our senior military leaders, we do not believe that adding more U.S. combat troops contributes to success. They, like us, believe there is no purely military solution in Iraq. There is only a political solution."
"Adding more combat troops will only endanger more Americans and stretch our military to the breaking point for no strategic gain."
"Rather than deploy additional forces to Iraq, we believe the way forward is to begin the phased redeployment of our forces in the next four to six months, while shifting the principal mission of our forces there from combat to training, logistics, force protection and counter-terror."
They also changed the House rule that required a three-fifths majority to raise taxes. The new rules allow tax hikes through a simple majority vote.
Why am I not surprised.
Those Democrats loves them some tax increases!
Yes that matters so much more than people dying well done
As if people couldn’t possibly die as a result of tax increases; not to mention the fact that it’s your witless notion that Republicans like people dying.
We’re not Europeans, after all.
Republicans can’t be trusted with finances, we need Democrats to bail them out time and time again.
Yeah, nothing like cutting taxes and then marching to war to help a nation’s economy.
Well, the economy of the richest one percent, anyway. The rest of us get broke and killed.
No issue is more important than finding an end to the war in Iraq.
This sentence is also in that letter. And it is wrong.
That’s what’s wrong with the Democrats. Curtailing, if not ending, Islamofascist terrorism is THE issue, and the most important issue.
Say what you will about how we got into Iraq, say what you will about body counts — ours, theirs, whoever; we can’t consider leaving in 4 to 6 months (”shifting the principal mission of our forces there from combat to training, logistics, force protection and counter-terror” is code for “our guys will be sitting ducks”).
Period.
we can’t consider leaving in 4 to 6 months
Why? Honestly, what is there left that our servicemen can accomplish over there besides trying to keep things from getting as bad as they presently are? Ive not heard a single response to the question in terms of achievable objectives as far as a reason to stay there, just that if we leave everything gets really really really really affinninninnity bad, and some semi-valid explanation of how, but really is that it? Our men are deployed in a foreign country to keep a non-existant peace? Theres nothing else they can do except get shot at in place of the civilians? Honestly, I’m asking because I want to know, what do you think it is that we can still accomplish? Why can’t we leave in 4-6 months?
Question Mark.
PS, you cant give a Bush non-answer either, such as “We’ll win when we achieve victory over the enemies who are the only obstacle in the way to our success, triumphing over them and accomplishing the victory we already successfully won.”
I’m not going to spar with you. I can’t imagine an answer that would satisfy you.
First of all, the current rules of engagement are even stupider than they were in Vietnam. So what needs to happen is that SOP for fighting asymmetrical warfare needs to be applied.
Second, we need to stand by our men in the field, and start saying things like, “We want you to get in there and kick ass”; not, “Please bring my Johnny home.”
Third, we need to realize that this is a long campaign, not a game of Risk.
These guys have to be taken out root and branch. They don’t have a headquarters to blow up, or a capitol to bomb. They have to be demoralized, and their supplies disconnected. That means action of some kind against Syria and Iran.
There, I’ve said it — escalation. Exercise the discretion of empire.
Now you can tell why that’s all a bad idea.
Why do I waste my time with surrender trendies.
“These guys”? What guys? Who are we even fighting?
We’ve already lost. Bush is just postponing the inevitable. No amount of masturbatory tough talk or board game analogies will change that fact. The only question is: will it be a Republican president or a Democratic one who presides over our withdrawal, and whether the GOP manages to shift the blame for their pet catastrophe.
“The rest of us get broke and killed.”
You must be really “broke and killed” with that computer of yours and an internet connection.
“Who are we even fighting?”
Iran. But you already knew that.
FD, your inability to name a single achievable objective in Iraq begs the question of why you believe we should put more troops in harms way without a goal in their grasp that necessitates such an influx. Likewise your need to retreat to declaring that anyone who disagrees with you sees the war as a game, doesnt support the troops and insulting them as “surrender trendies” apropos of nothing and based upon even less, is equally indicative of your pathetic inability to justify your own positions, which must be oh so easily shattered if you refuse to subject them to even the most incidental scrutiny yourself. The closest thing to an objective doesnt even directly involve the country of Iraq directly, as you propose potential military action against Iran and Syria. Even if I agreed such action were warranted, feasable, achievable, and would result in a positive goal attained in not one but both countries, the need for military action against two additional countries still, obviously to all but you it seems, does not explain what there is to do in Iraq, and why we must not only stay there, but increase our presence there.
So to summarize, not only do you not answer the pertinent question of “to what end are we increasing our presence in Iraq” but you:
A – Flat out refuse to answer the question
B – Fail to explain any problem with the question, leaving us to assume its a valid one
C – Attack anyone who would dare ask such a presumably valid question as infantile, anti-troop “surrender trendies”
D – Insist that even though our military isnt accomplishing anything noticable in one country, we must stretch it to two more countries, in order to fight the people we’re already fighting, and
E – Claim (correctly for once) that your rambling, inarticulate, pointless post, that adds nothing to the debate and addresses no relevant issue, is a waste of time, which clearly, for us its readers as much as you its author, it most certainly is.
You lose. Good day sir.
Damn html tags.
They don’t have a headquarters to blow up, or a capitol to bomb.
Hence the inrony of the fallacious term “islamofascism.”
“But you already knew that.”
Don’t you love it when the right-wing parrots deploy the tired, worn out slogans from the right wing cliche-o-sphere? I wonder what it’s like to be so intellectually exhausted on every level? Next time, try using “fever swamp” and “idiotarian,” William! That’ll show us!
I term FD as member of the antiIslamic-fascists.
I can’t imagine an answer that would satisfy you.
Thanks for calling me “sir”.
Why is the existence of a name for radically extreme Islam also evidence of a lack of “a headquarters to blow up, or a capitol to bomb”?
Do you know of a democristan, or communismia?
If there such a thing as anti Islamofascists I would gladly count myself among them.
The problem, as I described it above, is that Democrats can’t bring themselves to oppose our enemy — mainly because there is no country they hate more than America, and no ideology they mistrust more than capitalist republican democracy.
The problem, as I described it above, is that Democrats can’t bring themselves to oppose our enemy — mainly because there is no country they hate more than America, and no ideology they mistrust more than capitalist republican democracy.
For an old geezer, you sure are childish. I’ll try to explain this slowly so you can understand:
criticism != hatred
Seriously, where the fuck do you get off telling us how we feel about things. We’re not saying that we don’t oppose terrorism, we’re saying that asymmetrical warfare, the idea you brought up yourself, doesn’t work. Militaries are designed to fight other militaries. Now, I don’t know HOW to fight terrorism, granted. However, throwing armed forces at the problem and hope it goes away is clearly not working.
By the way, congratulations on taking that final step into true unabated ultra-con wingnuttery. See you in the funny pages.
By the way, != means “not equal to”. I thought I’d mention that just in case.
Rex Mundane | Jan 5, 2007 5:20:04 PM
“So to summarize [fd10801], not only do you not answer the pertinent question of “to what end are we increasing our presence in Iraq” but you:
A – Flat out refuse to answer the question
B – Fail to explain any problem with the question, leaving us to assume its a valid one
C – Attack anyone who would dare ask such a presumably valid question as infantile, anti-troop “surrender trendies”
D – Insist that even though our military isnt accomplishing anything noticable in one country, we must stretch it to two more countries, in order to fight the people we’re already fighting, and
E – Claim (correctly for once) that your rambling, inarticulate, pointless post, that adds nothing to the debate and addresses no relevant issue, is a waste of time, which clearly, for us its readers as much as you its author, it most certainly is.”
Nicely articulated, Rex!
Now, I don’t know HOW to fight terrorism, granted
So what makes you think that the US Army is incapable of winning at asymmetrical warfare?
s, You didn’t just copy Rex Mundane’s comment word for word, did you? Holy Crap!
I offer all you lefties a golden opportunity to use your imagination: You’re the President of the United States.
You are the Commander – in Chief of the most powerful Armed Forces that have ever existed.
You have just abandoned Iraq under pressure from the Democratic Congress.
Your next move is:
Zython, if it takes a sentence to explain an exclamatiion point, you might want to consider using “does not equal” next time.
And, I still contend that I have seen no evidence here, or in any left wing blog, or from any Democratic source that they have any interest in opposing terror, or any plan to combat it.
If you know of the location of such a plan or sentiment, please direct me there.
And spare me “we need to get to the root causes of terror.”
I am not interested in putting a smile on their faces. Leaving Iraq will do that. I am interested in making them go away.
BTW, Zython, anytime you’re ready to stop insulting my age, I’ll stop calling you a punk.
It’s uncalled for and reflects on your upbringing. You should know better.
You have just abandoned Iraq under pressure from the Democratic Congress.
Your next move is:
To bask in the gratitude of the American people for finally seeing the light, several years after you should have done so, but late is a lot better than never.
Followed by apologizing for those “signing statements” and agreeing that any inquiries Congress would like to make into the decisions made at the White House over the last six years would be welcomed.
Sending Alberto Gonzales, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Michael Hayden, Condi Rice and Stephen Hadley to Congress with instructions that they were to answer every question fully and without deception either by omission or by commission, and that they would do so under oath and penalty of perjury.
It’s not much, but it would be a good start.
Why is the existence of a name for radically extreme Islam also evidence of a lack of “a headquarters to blow up, or a capitol to bomb”?
I was referring to the use of fascism in connection with radical islam is fallacious in the sense of the definition of facsism. Look it up.
Do you know of a democristan, or communismia?
Sorry, I have no idea what you’re trying to say.
I still contend that I have seen no evidence here, or in any left wing blog, or from any Democratic source that they have any interest in opposing terror, or any plan to combat it.
Have you seen any liberal blogs that actively endorse terrorism, or do you consider failing to endorse a stratagery of blowing up innocent people in Iraq to be the same as supporting terrorism?
On the other hand, we have plenty of evidence from the conservative side that they consider terrorism and assassination to be legitimate tools of democracy.
I haven’t seen anything on a liberal blog that compares with the calls from the right for terrorist acts, or assassinations of public officials or foreign leaders. See: Ann Coulter (”My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building,” “They shot the wrong Lincoln,” [meaning Chaffee]), Pat Robertson (assassinate Hugo Chavez), Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (assassinate Castro), Hal Turner (”Any member of Congress who introduces, co-sponsors or votes in favor of any such amnesty will be declared a domestic enemy and will be considered a legitimate target for assassination.”), Melanie Morgan (advocated murder of newspaper editors who reveal information that embarrasses the White House), Glenn Beck (”Blowing up Iran. I say we nuke the bastards. In fact, it doesn’t have to be Iran, it can be everywhere, anyplace that disagrees with me.”)
There seems to be a lot of support for explicit terrorist acts on the right side of the blogosphere, from people who are prominent members of the conservative movement.
Why do conservatives support terrorism?
I still contend that I have seen no evidence here, or in any left wing blog, or from any Democratic source that they have any interest in opposing terror, or any plan to combat it.
Still waiting.
No, you’re not. Repack Rider posted something forty minutes before you did.
Nimrod:: Are you feeble – minded?
Repack’s comment was not in the least responsive to mine.
Read it again.
He quoted it. It was a direct response. You just didn’t like it. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t count.
LoL! Remember the ‘ol days when Frank spewed cocky bullshit while luxuriating in Republican dominance?
Let’s try this again:
My statement was:
The opening sentence of Repack’s response opens with: “Have you seen any liberal blogs that actively endorse terrorism…?”
Is that responsive or is it not?
I say no.
s: I remember the days when I challenged you to post an actual substantive comment.
I’m still waiting for that…
It’s not OW’s blog according to Frank’s rules of engagement.
Frank’s debate style is not a two way street. You bore me and others by demonstrating disinterest in listening to other perspectives while your arguements disintegrate to name calling.
In recent weeks, it’s been thoroughly entertaining watching Nimrod, Nihilistic, C.S. and others make mincemeat out of your pathetic arguments.
One would think a 60 year old tranny chasing Vietnam vet would have a far more articulate point of view and arguments with substance.
Don’t waste your time on little fd…he’ll just keep shifting the goalposts.
His little troll brain can’t comprehend the fact that the left fully supported the invasion of Afghanistan, and wanted Bush to see that thru to it’s conclusion. Doing so would have increased America’s global standing, and with the resources available to us would have most likely genuinely led to a decline in terror and terrorist organizations.
But li’l Baby Bush had to show up his daddy. Attacking the country he WANTED to instead of sticking with the one he SHOULD have, like a spoiled child.
And now, both countries are in chaos, and trolls like fd can’t bring themselves to admit that they’ve been supporting a sociopathic failure these past seven years.
So they call us traitors and appeasers. Like they’ve always done.
Now, FD, as per our nation’s judicial system (you know, that thing Bush keeps trying to dismantle cuz he thinks ther’s too menny ‘aktivist judges’) the proof of guilt is not on the accused, it’s on the accuser. It is not up to us to prove innocence. It’s up to you to prove guilt.
Show me any left wing blog that has no interest in fighting terror. That actively seeks to appease Bin Laden. That wants to surrender to the ‘islamofasco-communo-flavor-of-the-week’
or whatever it is that’s causing you and your whole side of the aisle to piss it’s pants this week.
You can’t and you know it.
You are merely trying to muddy the waters, as your side always does, in some feeble attempt to convince yourself that we are no better than you.
That your shittly little soul is the best humanity can aspire to.
Now go crawl back into your Gollum-hole.
So what makes you think that the US Army is incapable of winning at asymmetrical warfare?
Because they’ve been doing it for the past 5 yeaers without any sign of good results.
Zython, if it takes a sentence to explain an exclamatiion point, you might want to consider using “does not equal” next time.
Nah, I just said that since you’ve and dugger have made it abundently clear in the past that you never passed grade 6 mathematics.
And spare me “we need to get to the root causes of terror.”
I am not interested in putting a smile on their faces. Leaving Iraq will do that. I am interested in making them go away.
And I’m not interested in killing people for decades. I’m interested in helping makeing the living conditions better thre so that more people won’t have to consider terrorism as a last resort. However, we do need to bring current terrorists to justice, rather than let them find sanctuary in Pakistan or sastisfy our sociopathic desires for vengence on random people.
And, I still contend that I have seen no evidence here, or in any left wing blog, or from any Democratic source that they have any interest in opposing terror, or any plan to combat it.
Using that line or reasoning, I can say that since I’ve never seen you actively criticize the KKK, that you hate black people. Some things just go without saying. I don’t need to yell from the rooftops my condemnation of terrorist acts just to validate my existance.
I offer all you lefties a golden opportunity to use your imagination: You’re the President of the United States.
You are the Commander – in Chief of the most powerful Armed Forces that have ever existed.
You have just abandoned Iraq under pressure from the Democratic Congress.
Your next move is:
I don’t have access to the necessary information to make an informed decision. Also, you’re opperating under the fallacy that just because I can’t do something means that I can’t criticize people on doing a poor job at it. I can’t program, but I can still say that a certain video game sucks. I’m not fluent in Japanese (yet), but I can still say that a certain anime dub sucks. You probably can’t direct, but I’m sure you’ve seen a movie or two that you thought was bad. Likewise, I can’t make foreign policy, but I can still criticize one that is clearly not working.
And, I still contend that I have seen no evidence here, or in any left wing blog, or from any Democratic source that they have any interest in opposing terror, or any plan to combat it.
That’s two failures to respond.
Let me re-phrase:
I will grant you that you oppose terror, if you can show me where there is a plan to combat it, on the left.
Now, you don’t need to know how — you just need to point me to someone on the left who does, AND what they plan to do to oppose it.
The reason why I said “don’t tell me about ‘root causes’” is because any damn fool that has read a newspaper since 2002 knows that they are not driven by poverty,or any of the other psychobabble that passes on the Left for reasons why otherwise sane men want to kill other men.
They are religious fanatics, for which there is more than ample evidence, and they will not be satisfied until Iraq is totally under the rule of the fundamentalist sharia.
Now I am beginning to suspect that no one on the Left can find either a plan or a good reason to defeat terrorism. I say that because you have access to all kinds of blogs, columnists and authors; at least one of them should have come up with a better idea than “I don’t want to kill anyone.” I agree. I want them all to surrender.
Now — in the unlikely event (from your point of view) that they don’t want to surrender, what next?
The latest news is that the Israelis are training (i.e., planning) to bomb a nuclear facility in Iran. See here.
Pres. Bush is planning a full court press in Iraq. See here
.
Grouse and grumble all you want. {Welcome, Jody}
It’s going to happen.
I’m not sure which person it was that wanted me to reproduce every single left wing blog and link in the blogosphere to show there was no evidence that they wanted to fight terrorism, but I’m not going to do that.
If there is any evidence out there that one leftist blogger has a plan to fight terrorism I would like someone to find it for me.
I know a whole bunch of people voted to invade Afghanistan. Nearly all of them have stated that they were tricked into voting for the invasion of Iraq, or that they would change their Iraq vote if they could.
Since I have already stipulated that I will accept that the left is opposed to extremist Islamic terrorism (I emphasize, without evidence), I am now asking less: Merely show that at least one influential figure on the left — be they a commentator, columnist, blogger or a politician — has a plan to combat global terrorism.
Kos?
Wolf Blitzer?
Sen Reid?
Rep Murtha?
Bueller?
Bueller?
Attack Syria and Iran?
HAHAHAHAHA
With what political capital? Who is going to approve such utter bullshit?
Why to save Bush’s ass like he is currently trying with the surge?
Republican idiots want to destroy the entire middle east to achieve victory when their strategies fail. Count on it. History supports this.
They always want what the American people are not willing to GIVE THEM. LOOK AT LAOS and Cambodia.
There’s more.
And more.
What about Laos and Cambodia?
It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that President Bush is not going down in history as the President who walked out of Iraq.
Holler,laugh, whatever
Two links about what?
Wishful thinking. Killing 30 militants. High rollers those Iraqis…? Again, what is the strategy…knocking door to door? Get real. Bush has had years to pacify Iraq with not even a hint of success. In any industry that is called getting fired. If only it were that easy to fire this president and kick him to the curb.
In case you havent got the clue yet Iraq was an ARTIFICAL country held together by Hussein. Now that he is dead all hell has broke loose. Bush was warned. Bush’s dad even tried to help his dumb ass son. His son chose to ignore the ISG. Now Congress and the American people are going to have to make him look stupid.
Militants, Insurgents, Terrorists ??? Republicans need to stick with one name for their boogeymen.
As far as Laos and Camobida Republicans are still crying to this day that the U.S. not allowing an invasion into those countries was the reason we lost ‘Nam. However, those countries were never on the table. You have to fight wars in the box. The American people dictate that box. If you aren’t happy with that then move your tail overseas to Russia or a similar country run by a strongman.
Republicans dont seem to realize this and think we are still in the Roman Empire.
Btw… Why trust Bush? In any Fortune 500 company he would be fired with his record. He has been wrong on every occassion. The Republican stubborness is amazing. In public they support the chimp but in private I am sure they wouldnt trust him babysitting their children or watching their dog.
Notice the way little fd shifts his goal posts around, faster and faster, in his desperate attempt to convince himself that he’s right.
When asked to provide the forum with evidence, ANY evidence, of left wing collusion with the enemy, he puffs up like a bullfrog and starts farting on about how he’s not going to “reproduce every single left wing blog and link in the blogosphere to show there was no evidence that they wanted to fight terrorism”.
But he wasn’t asked to do that. That would be proving a negative, and as we tried to explain to his side of the aisle when they were busy kicking the UN inspectors out of Iraq, you can not prove a negative.
He was asked to show one traitorous leftist blog.
And he can’t.
So he shifts the goalposts and changes the subject, declaring victory.
Such sociopathic behavior is endemic of the right wing. Hell, it’s George W. Bush’s life story.
And the rest of us pay for it.
Jody, you twit. Way, way back, I asked for some evidence that there was anyone on the left who was opposed to extremist Islamic terrorism, AND if any of those opponents had a plan to end terrorism.
Eventually, I relented, and without evidence forthcoming, stipulated that everybody opposes terrorism.
So then I asked: Please direct me to a blog, a column, a commentary, or a news item, a statement by a liberal, leftist or Democratic politician indicating that they have a plan to fight terrorism.
No one has been able to do this.
C’mon!
Surely, there is one liberal with a plan to fight terrorism.
Now, indicate to me where I said lefties support terrorism, and I will apologize.
I know lefties never admit to making mistakes, or apologize, but you could stop badgering me to prove a statement I never made, rather than simply admitting that there IS NO liberal plan to fight terrorism.
Never has been.
Never will be.
My point, though arguable, is not, nor was it ever, that the left is not opposed to terrorism.
My point is, and was, that they are not committed to the struggle against it.
Sure, when we stomped into Afghanistan after bombing themn into submission, everyone was cheering — kind of like Southerners probably did in the first years of the Civil War.
But when we got our nose bloodied, then like the knights in “Monty Python’s Holy Grail”, the left began shouting “Run away!” “Run away!”
So, I’m asking one more time, not for an evacuation plan from Iraq, but for a plan (from the left) to fight the Global War on terror.
Afghanistan? The left asked for more and more consistent commitment in Afghanistan FD10801. It is the Iraq-Bushies that have ignored and forgotten that Bush wavered and screwed up Afghanistan to adventure in Iraq. You seem to get things confused in your head.
The left has an actual effective plan for fighting terrorism, FD10801, which is where they differ from the Bushies. Iraq has been a huge negative step as far as US anti-terrorism efforts. Another point you seem to get confused on.
Frank:
“Please direct me to a blog, a column, a commentary, or a news item, a statement by a liberal, leftist or Democratic politician indicating that they have a plan to fight terrorism.”
How about this:
“Democrats have a plan that is comprehensive– from repairing our military, to winning the war on terror…” [emphasis mine]
Nice, N D :: But what is the plan?
Damn, you guys are obstinate!
And years of deteriorating Iraqi invasion is cunning strategy …?
Gee, Frank, you asked for “a statement by a liberal, leftist or Democratic politician indicating that they have a plan to fight terrorism.”
I gave you what you asked for. What are you complaining about?
S:
“And years of deteriorating Iraqi invasion is cunning strategy …?”
No, no. The Iraq screwup is just a side-effect of the master plan. The actual strategy is to kill all ragheads. Ask any Freeper and they’ll gladly tell you that’s what we should do.
N D :: Surprise! Surprise!
You could have told me anybody had a plan. Did you really think I wasn’t going to ask what it was?
They also claimed they were going to repair the Armed Forces. I didn’t know they were broken.
ND :: You’re just confirming my ever deteriorating opinion. You’re not even a proficient wiseguy…
And you converse with “s” — eyeeew!
As they say in the intra-nets: roflcakes.
Here we have fd yet again attempt to shift the goal posts, by demanding that the inhabitants of a small internet forum produce for him detailed plans for battling terror.
Never mind that, once again, you can not prove a negative.
Never mind that, once again, the Iraq War had nothing to do with the War on Terror. Nothing whatsoever. That is, until Iraq became a terror breeding ground, thanks to the actions of President Bush.
NEVERMIND THAT THE LEFT’S “PLAN FOR THE WAR ON TERROR” WAS ‘USE OUR CLOUT ON THE WORLD STAGE TO OCCUPY AFGHANISTAN, CAPTURE BIN LADEN, AND BUILD A STABLE NATION THERE’.
Nono, to fd, none of this matters. As far as he’s concerned, even tho his side of the aisle shit the bed (hell, bombed it into a flaming crater of dogshit), it is on the left to provide us with the miracle way out.
Anything less than a plan for total victory is rank appeasement to fd and his ilk.
Anything resembling a realistic assessment of the unbelievably shitty situation in Iraq that WE HAVE CREATED is akin to treason for fd’s little troll brain.
Accountability means nothing to fd. Only that his side can never, ever be wrong, no matter how badly it fucks up.
And yet, to his mossy brain, we are the ones being obstinate.
It would be funny if it weren’t so flamingly tragic for hundreds of thousands of people.
Hey, take away the insults from your post and there are about six words left. Come back when you have a vocabulary.
By the way, where did you get that “Plan”? Doonesbury?
Hey guys, get this. Fd thinks I’m engaging it in a dialogue.
All I’m doing is describing his modus operandi. Revealing it for what it is. And he takes it as an insult.
Granted, it would be incredibly insulting if it weren’t so true.
If every time I think my outrage meter has finally been redlined to death, the right finds another way to send it spiraling higher into the stratosphere.
I mean, arrest me for talking to the press and call me Jamil, but these guys have no sense of self-reflection.
I will concede one point tho. The deaths of hundreds of thousands of people, the wounding of hundreds of thousands more, and the displacement, orphaning, and sheer inhumanity inflicted on still more people, IS an insult.
It is an insult of the worst order, and what makes it worse is that the people who perpetuate it and defend it insist they’re doing it for the good of the people.
Not that that matters to fd. He just wants to fling poo.
You abandoned the dialogue for insults, jody. Now you’re blaming me?
Your opinion isn’t worth a sack of beans to me. Your lack of knowledge about what is going on the world is staggering — nay, astounding!
Do you think this really about killing people?
Do you think the killing stops when “Johnny Comes Marching Home”?
fling poo
There’s the most intelligent thing you’ve said since you gracelessly entered on these threads — ostensibly, to insult me, because you haven’t done much of anything else.
Now it takes calls for evidence and observations about it’s behavioral patterns as ‘insults’.
…As if coming in here and declaring the left is nothing but a bunch of “surrender trendies”, is no insult.
…As if sending someone else’s kids off to die in a war that was waged on a lie is some model in courage.
…As if people who’ve been spouting and supporting this madness for the past three years shouldn’t be insulted, or better yet marginalized, for being mind-bogglingly, catastrophically wrong, wrong, WRONG about the whole affair, dragging our nation into a gutter of torture and warrantless seizure.
…As if I cared what he thought.
He has his new talking point now, tho. Soon enough I expect him to waddle off, crying about how those durn lefties can be so gosh-darn insulting, and claim victory due to bad sportsmanship on our part.
Because we treasonous lefties, who are cowards to a man and want to surrender us all over to the Islamocommunohomofascists so they can convert us to Islam and make us all get gay married and have abortions, can be so UNCIVIL.
Snort.
They also claimed they were going to repair the Armed Forces. I didn’t know they were broken.
To be fair, as you’ve demonstrated numerous times before, what you don’t know could fill a warehouse.
Do you think this really about killing people?
No, it’s about embezzlement.
My point, though arguable, is not, nor was it ever, that the left is not opposed to terrorism.
*cough*
The problem, as I described it above, is that Democrats can’t bring themselves to oppose our enemy — mainly because there is no country they hate more than America, and no ideology they mistrust more than capitalist republican democracy.
And frank, ^ that’s the point where the “diologue” ended.
Also, you still have yet to prove this statement as accurate.
Damn FD, you asked for the plan, why don’t you know what it is from the Democrats? I mean there was an election not too long ago and the dems had their plan out, strengthening port security, implementing the 9-11 commission recommendations, cooperation with other countries etc. etc. I guess there were too many words and ideas for you to keep track of. I guess Bush’s ineffectual flailings in Iraq appeal to your own deep seated inadequacies.
At last, midderpidge has found an answer to a simple question I asked, what, three days ago?
As for zython and jody, you’re fair to middling at insults, but I have no plans to discontinue posting until I am banned by Oliver.
What has me puzzled is what you think you accomplish.
Do you get some sort of a woody insulting me?
Why don’t the two of you eMail each other, put a brain cell or two together, and see if you can come up with something to say.
See here for details
Crazy. When presented with proof that the left does indeed have a plan for fighting terror (something I didn’t even feel worth producing, as the idea that the left has no plan is laughable even on the face of it), fd still can’t bring himself to concede, or even to depart.
He has to sit there in his little troll hole, flinging away, shrieking about how it’s wrong that we’re insulting him and then insulting us in the next sentence.
This is the right’s modus operandi, as previously stated. Throw out spurious allegations, shift goal posts, insult like a third grader, and then whine about the incivility of it all should someone fire back or reveal their bullshit for what it is.
And when he’s out of ammo, all his little points shot down one after the other, he’ll just keep posting, thinking he’s in some kind of pissing contest.
But he’s not in a pissing contest. All I’m doing is pointing out the incredible inanity of his talking points.
Which, naturally, he takes as insulting.
Which, naturally, it might actually be if it weren’t so true.
He thinks I ENJOY the fact that there are people out there, right now, in my country, who cannot see this flaming debacle for what it is, and want to blame everyone but themselves for the mess they helped cheerlead into fruition.
He thinks I enjoy pointing out to him and his slack-jawed brethren how their beliefs have gotten hundreds of thousands of people killed.
…of how his whole side of the aisle has been abysmally, flamingly WRONG about EVERYTHING.
…and of course, how they refuse to see it for what it is, so instead they blame us.
In the wake of tragedy there is no solace in being right.
Jody, you must be a comedian, because you can’t be that ignorant.
Do you even realize that you’re using the passive voice with regard to my being presented with proof that there was indeed a plan to fight terrorism generated by the Dems (however redundant and insubstantial most of it is) because it was done by someone else?
Do you even realize that I had no reason whatever to suppose the Democrats had a plan to fight terrorism, and that if it were so obvious, anyone of you could have found with a few minutes research — not the 48 plus hours it took for someone to come up with it — without a link, of course?
Jody, do you even realize how condescending and patronizing you sound, proclaiming that hundreds of thousands of people have been killed, as if I don’t know or care? I don’t know who you’re showing off for by using the third person, but I am not in the least impressed by your barrage of insults — yes, insults.
You can’t be stupid enough to believe that all those things you’re saying about me are true, can you?
By your reckoning, I shouldn’t even be intelligent enough to understand you, you elitist, pretentious twit.
Jody, you’re thoroughly, truly entertaining.
Frank finally got it: “By your reckoning, I shouldn’t even be intelligent enough to understand you.”
I know, it took time and effort, but he DID get there.
There you go, Jody — “s” is on your side! YaY!
Thank you S…I’m trying to entertain as much as illuminate here. Glad to see I have an audience.
But you’ll notice by now that fd’s shifted the goal posts so far that by now they must be orbiting Jupiter’s third moon.
Here he persists in his belief that I’m actually debating him on some level. All I’m doing is pointing at him.
He asks for a leftist plan for fighting terror, and he gets one, but now it wasn’t produced in time or by the right people.
Never mind that by his reckoning, the ‘right people’ are the ones that have turned this flaming train wreck into a veritable armada of locomotives, all filled to the brim with nitroglycerin and ball bearings, hurtling at each other at supersonic speed and crashing into one another in an inferno of flaming steel and fire.
And the “right people’s” solution to this mess is to add more trains.
He denies my implications that neither he nor any on his side give two shits about the hundreds of thousands of people killed and maimed in the name of George W Bush’s War To Show We Have The Biggest Peenies, Part II…and yet he feels the only moral solution, by his own reckoning, is escalation.
…escalation involving someone ELSE’S kid, no doubt.
Take ‘em out root and branch. Invade yet more uninvolved countries. Gotta show ‘em we’re serious. Gotta break a few eggs when making an omelette. It’s the only solution. The final solution.
He rails against how condescending and patronizing I sound. He is still bleating about how ‘insulting’ I come off as.
Never mind that the folks that subscribe to his brand of thinking are so sociopathic, so flat out WRONG, that they SHOULD be condescended to.
What’s more, they should be marginalized to the point where they are allowed to handle nothing more dangerous than a boiled egg, much less the entire political party over which they now hold sway.
They have dragged us into a cesspit of blood and war, and they want to be treated with respect. They shriek for more war as they rail against those who have shown the war for what it is.
And they demand civility in return.
Rhetorically, I haven’t shifted very far from my original post. All I’ve done is point out the flaws in each of fd’s arguments. There has certainly been a fair bit of scorn thrown in, as is owed to any who feel that the best way to fight terror is to invade unrelated nations and turn them into chaotic hellholes, emptying our treasury and sacrificing our young people in the process.
He petulantly defends himself, thinking I can’t possibly believe all the horrible, insulting things I’ve been saying about him.
…when ALL I’VE BEEN DOING THIS ENTIRE TIME IS SHOWING HIM A GODDAM MIRROR.
Let me level with you, jody. You’re really coming off here as a world – class a-hole.
If you think impressing “s” is any better than pissing in a hurricane, you’re a buffoon.
Most of what you have said so far has made little sense. It has been about 6 posts since there was any relevance to even a small portion of your meanderings.
Back in the day, when I was a substance abuser, I could drink, drop acid and smoke pot, and make more sense than you, you scatterbrained lunatic.
Whatever you’re smoking, either stop smoking it or smoke more of it. You’re lost in the Universe, tiny minded one.
Notice how all he has to do to stop the madness is to stop trolling in here, but he can’t bring himself to do it. He NEEDS to get the last word. And no doubt he will, weeks from now, when this discussion has long migrated off the front page and he sneaks in to get one final, snotty comment, unnoticed by any except his fellow trolls, for whom he will approvingly link this thread and point out how his superior debating tactics left me mute. Perhaps he will copy and paste it for them in one of their forums, removing the time and date stamps at the end of each post, thereby destroying the evidence. Who can tell.
All I’ve been DOING is levelling with him; pointing out how counterproductive his entire side has been for this entire debacle.
He implies I’m a drug addict. The condition his side of the aisle has left this country in makes me wish I WAS one, and that this was all one long, horrible trip, from which I shall soon awaken.
But it isn’t, and I’m not. The president he voted for, along with the congress he voted for, have turned this country into a shadow of it’s former self. They’ve dumped us into a long national nightmare from which, with luck, we have begun to awaken from. But it will take decades to undo all the damage they’ve wrought.
And yet he thinks he deserves some respect from me. From our side of the aisle. After coming in here and trolling, no less.
Just shows you how far we’ve sunk as a nation.
Why do you keep referring to me in the third person?
And I didn’t imply you were a drug addict. I said you seemed to be on drugs. Whether or not you are an addict is up to you.
Poor, poor Frank. He just doesn’t get it.
He comments on virtually Every. Single. Thread. When someone disagrees with him, they receive his wrath.
How’s the posting/tranny chasing multi tasking working for ya, Frank?
The problem, as I described it above, is that Democrats can’t bring themselves to oppose our enemy — mainly because there is no country they hate more than America, and no ideology they mistrust more than capitalist republican democracy.
Frankie-boy has yet to own up to this little gem of idiocy. You have yet to prove this as a valid statement.
I especially enjoy the way fd tells me I’m coming off as a world class a-hole a buffoon, and a scatterbrained lunatic, then in his very next post makes a plea for comity.
…In much the same fashion that the Republicans, now that they no longer control all three branches of the government, are telling the Dems that they should play nice.
After telling the nation that bipartisanship was date rape.
After saying that the dems will calm down and get accustomed to their minority status ‘like a neutered animal’.
These assholes do not understand civility; only civility towards themselves. Everyone else can go fuck themselves with a rusty pipe cleaner. And they say as much.
But as soon as someone so much calls out their hideous, flaming bullshit catapult, it’s pearl-clutching fainting-couch hanky-grabbing time.
And the press falls for it.
The politics of victimization is what’s kept the right wing mobilized for decades now. They didn’t even bother to sideline it while they controlled all three branches of government, and railed about how the mean ol’ Dems were keeping them down by only allowing all of their legislation thru except the one where they told the eldery that cat food was a fine meal replacement.
And NOW it’s “waaah, those mean ol’ Dems might not allow Bush to ship MORE of our kids off to the war which EVERYONE KNOWS WAS A LIE AND THE WORST MISTAKE OF OUR GENERATION simply so he can save face and pass the blame of ‘retreat’ on to the next guy!!!! Sob…”
I really. REALLY. Want to know why these people want to destroy our country so bad.
Why are you talking about me in the third person?
Who do you imagine you are addressing?
One would think a 60 year old tranny chasing Vietnam vet would have a far more articulate point of view and arguments with substance.
Posted by: S | Jan 6, 2007 4:02:20 PM
OOOOHHH, SNAP!!!
Well, Duros, I guess if think that was clever that says more about you than him.
And I thought you had some integrity. You’re just one of all the other cowards on this blog, who can flame me relentlessly, while “Baby ’s’” has failed to comment an anything ever, except to annoy me, and not one of you has the balls to call him on it.
I guess that would be treating me too good, eh?
For what it’s worth, Duros, you’ve just shown yourself to be a punk just like him.
Congratulations.
s: I’m sorry that there is so little going on in your life, that you can’t even watch the news, or read a book, or read a newspaper, or read another blog, to come up with one comment in a whole year.
I can only ask one final question: Do you have a crush on me?
Poor wittle Fwanky can’t take it that we point out that his shifting the burden of proof is total BS.
Actually “pepperoni” zython, what I was thinking was that Duros was possibly a mensch, and now I am somewhat disappointed that he finds any humor at all in the juvenile stalker known as “s”.
You see, “s” isn’t funny or clever — he is a puny, insignificant person, so useless to this thread, that he has yet to post a comment in a year.
You, on the other, I have known to be a schmekel for some time. You have posted a comment or two from time to time, but of late, you have been reduced to following me around saying bad things about me — hardly a sign of intelligence — like your ridiculous “partner in crime”, Jody.
It is amazing to me how fast the flame comes on when you run out of things to say.
You see, I have not run out of things to say — I have chosen not to say any more to you — or Baby s, or Jody, or Duros.
You’re no longer worth it.
fd10801 | Jan 10, 2007 8:20:04 AM
“I have chosen not to say any more to you — or Baby s, or Jody, or Duros. You’re no longer worth it.”
Until the next time Frank feels compelled to comment … one last time.
Oh, come on, Frank, don’t be like that.
Personally, I thought that comments was over the top. Still pretty funny if you can look at it from a distance, but perhaps we don’t have to go there.
You know?
Sorry I haven’t checked in. I’ve been travelling. I’m a bit surprised to see this still on Oliver’s front page.
What I am not surprised about, however, is fd’s three posts about how we are not worth his time.
Matches up nicely with everything I’ve said, don’t you think?
The stubbornness. The pettiness. The hypocrisy. It’s all there, the heart and soul of their entire movement, for anyone who’s willing to see.
The only thing that gives me hope is that apparently people are STARTING to see.
After twenty five years of batshit insanity, people are starting to notice what happens when you allow a bunch of sociopathic flaming ideologues anywhere near the levers of power.
One can only hope this is the start of a genuine return of the pendulum towards sanity.
I for one will not afford anyone who expresses the sort of viewpoints demonstrated by fd or his halfwit friends the least amount of respect ever again. They shit the bed-hell-they shit the bed so much there’s now far more shit than bed, now they must sleep in it. Maybe some of them will learn from their mistakes the way the rest of us FUCKING KNEW ALL ALONG, but frankly I have a feeling we’ll just have to wait for many of them to just age into irrelevance.
And of course there are still a lot of them out there, popping hillbilly heroin and spewing their bile across the AM dial, on Fox News, in our government. We still have a long way to go.
But people have now seen what happens when ‘the grownups’ are in charge.
I only hope the damage isn’t beyond repair.
Well put, Jody.