Just one more of these speeches by this disgraceful man and America can be great again.
UPDATE: See what I mean?
Breaking News
Oprah Quitting TV Show In 2011
State Of The Union 2007
January 23rd, 2007
34 Comments
What a kick ass response by Webb! NO mamby pamby appologetics, holding the president to account. Wow, John Kerry, that’s what you were supposed to do Two years ago, please take notes.
I especially loved the last line of his response: “If he does not, we will show him the way.”
Loving it.
Webb’s a badass, no doubt. That’s probably the best SOTU response I’ve ever seen.
Two
“Regarding the economic imbalance in our country, I am reminded of the situation President Theodore Roosevelt faced in the early days of the 20th century. America was then, as now, drifting apart along class lines. The so-called robber barons were unapologetically raking in a huge percentage of the national wealth. The dispossessed workers at the bottom were threatening revolt.”
Whew – time to open the windows and clear the room of that funny smelling smoke.
Robber barons??? Workers threatening revolt??? WTF???
Man, the ultimate insult — referring to Democrats as “Democrats” and not “Democratics.”
I’ve never heard such incendiary rhetoric in all my life.
That “Snap” thing annoys me. But then I’m obsessive-compulsive.
Thanks to Democratic liberals,
and their MSM cheerleaders, the United States has been, for forty years, skittish
about using force as an extension of foreign policy.
These Lib – Dems view warfare as neat and tidy, and when things get messy, then it is time to end it, not win it.
However, unlike Vietnam, where we could walk out, change the subject and pretend we never heard of the place, the terrorists will not go home when we leave (and you know, as well as I do, that we will leave sooner rather than later) — they will come here.
Do you doubt that?
Do you doubt that there are sufficient forces in play in Iraq to quell the anticipated violence?
Then, I ask you, what are the Democrats proposing?
That we leave Iraq right away?
Immediately?
If not immediately, when?
Should there be a “drop – dead” deadline that signals the terrorists and the Sunni – Shi’ite forces, “Wait until such – and – such a date”?
Why can’t the Democrats be clear on the point that either they have no clue as to how to resolve this impasse, or they have a plan to resolve which they are willing to commit to, or they just want the troops out, and the devil take the hindmost?
Why does the President need a concrete, unassailable “exit strategy”, while the Democrats are free to hem and haw, and procrastinate?
Finally, and I believe this is the hardest question for liberal Democrats to answer: Are 150,000 troops the limit of our commitment to a world – wide war on terror?
Are 3,000 soldiers the limit of our resolve?
Do we pack it in — again — and imagine, like babies, that if we close our eyes, the bad guys go away?
The mistake there is assuming that the one leads to the other vis-a-vis (the War on) Terrorism and Iraq. Placing them together in rhetoric like they belong together is disingenuous at best, dishonest at worst.
How about BECAUSE HE’S THE FUCKING PRESIDENT.
What a question.
Oh boy, Frank pulled out an oldie but a goodie: We have to fight them over there, so we don’t have to fight them here!
Goddamn, Frank, you’re a moron. Spare us the cheesy rhetorical questions that imply information that is demonstrably false.
You’re just dead wrong about most things, aren’t you? How about a little arithmetic? What’s 100 divided by 5? Can you at least get that right? Use a calculator if you need to.
Jesus tapdancing Christ, you’re an idiot.
If all the terrorists are over there, why do we still have to take our shoes off at the airport?
Finally, and I believe this is the hardest question for liberal Democrats to answer: Are 150,000 troops the limit of our commitment to a world – wide war on terror?
Funny, I’d like to ask the same question of the celebrated Iraq War Chickenhawks. Liberal Democrats aren’t the ones confusing whatever the hell is going on in Iraq with this so-called global war.
N G :: The President doesn’t run this country alone. The Democrats are his political adversaries. I realize that you are ignorant of American politics; try not be so blatant about it.
As for you chickenIQ: i must confess I don’t know I should divide 100 by 5. Perhaps you would be kind enough to explain.
While you’re at it, perhaps you could revel to us from which source you obtained the information that Islamic terrorists have promised not to engage in any activities in the United States, as soon as we depart from Iraq.
Spare us the cheesy rhetorical questions that imply information that is demonstrably false.
If it is demonstrably false, then perhaps you’d care to demonstrate it. Or is this another topic you refuse to discuss.
Pretty soon, you’ll be doing nothing but insulting me, like your “colleagues” nimrod, zython, and “s” — the Three Stooges.
Oh, I almost forgot. Go fuck yourself.
michael: Perhaps you are taking your shoes off at the airport. I wouldn’t know. But I suppose if it would make you feel better, you could stop flying in planes.
If you read what I had written, instead of pasting in your response from another blog, you would have noticed that I NEVER SAID that we are fighting them over there so that we don’t fight them over here.
Unlike you, however, I don’t pretend that all the terrorists in the world are in Iraq, or that they will jump on a jet plane to come here when the war is over
.
My point was that the terrorists are not trying to take over Iraq, and then go on vacation. They will continue to try and come here no matter what we do in Iraq.
That doesn’t mean that they will NOT be encouraged, if we sneak out with our tails between our legs.
Finally, it seems to be that liberal democrats are as fixated on Afghanistan, as they pretend the right is with Iraq.
I’ve heard a lot of mouth from the Democrats about fighting terrorism and “supporting the troops” (even if that means not supporting them in their mission), but I’ve yet to hear a plan of action.
Yeah, yeah, I know, search cargo, talk to Germany, France and Russia, yadda, yadda, yadda…
fd10801 | Jan 24, 2007 9:33:21 AM
“I’ve heard a lot of mouth from the Democrats about fighting terrorism and “supporting the troops” (even if that means not supporting them in their mission), but I’ve yet to hear a plan of action.”
Years after the highly successful invasion, what is The Decider’s definition and plan of action for success in Iraq OTHER than to hand the clusterfuck to his successor cuz he don’t know what to do?
What you said was that the terrorists will come here after we leave Iraq. In fact, the direct quote was :
the terrorists will not go home when we leave (and you know, as well as I do, that we will leave sooner rather than later) — they will come here.
That seemed pretty clear-cut to me.
Frank makes less sense as he gets more and more bitter and cranky.
“Are 3,000 soldiers the limit of our resolve?
Do we pack it in — again — and imagine, like babies, that if we close our eyes, the bad guys go away? “
By “We” and “Our” hopefully you meant the “U.S.”, because your miserable ass hasn’t been seen around Iraq and in need of withdrawal.
Try to reserve that plural argumentative for soliders, not armchair assclowns.
Frank, your manifest incompetence has managed to reach a kind of terminal velocity I fear, where your posts are now so frequent and disjointed that youre practically saying nothing at all and only embarassing yourself in the process. nevertheless I feel I must at least attempt to adress what ew points you seem to believe youve made.
The president needed to have had an exit strategy going into the war in order to minimize damage to our military in case things went horribly wrong. Outlandish hypothetical I know, particularly in the face of its current, obvious success, but there it is. Attacking the Democrats for “not having a plan” (which is to say “not having a precise and agreed upon set of specifics for withdrawl instead of their agreement that it must be done) doesnt alleviate the President of his responsibility to the military.
Further, fighting them there so we dont have to here s not specifically demonstrable for us in the United States, but to our european allies in the war ot terror, particularly Spain and england who have been attacked since the beginning of this war. Not that the war caused those attacks of course, but it certainly didnt do a very god job preventing them either, which begins shooting holes in the theory.
Democratic “support of the troops” doesnt need to manifest itself as supporting the everlasting continuation of an ill-conceived war either, but even you cant be dense enough to have not realized that.
So if the war is not having a negative impact on the terrorists ability to attack citizens, and we keep losing more and more soldiers to a cause that doesnt look likely to turn in our favor anytime soon, why exactly are we there? I’ll ask for the umpteenth time here, what objectives are there or will there be for our military to accomplish so we can leave the region in a victory end-game state? Being as Ive yet to recieve one in all the time I’ve been asking, I’m presuming there are none, which leaves us as a police force for a people who distrustus and have no interest in forming their own, electing to let us get shot at for them, which is in my view the polar opposite of progress.
Also, Eat dick, Frank.
“While you’re at it, perhaps you could revel to us from which source you obtained the information that Islamic terrorists have promised not to engage in any activities in the United States, as soon as we depart from Iraq.”
Didn’t say that. But I will confidently assert that these same “Islamic terrorists” made no promises to NOT attack the U.S. if we stayed in Iraq.
Frank, you’re hopeless. Most of the country figured out long ago that the war in Iraq doesn’t equal the war on terrorism. What’s wrong with you?
Iraq is, as Jon Stewart eloquently puts it, a “catastrophuk” (maybe “catastrofuck”?) Get a goddamn clue, get over yourself, for once in your life, and face the truth.
Finally, I don’t believe I’ve ever unjustly insulted you, per se. I’ve called you an idiot, a moron, and ignorant of science, yes. But as a scientist, I recognize that the evidence strongly indicates that these labels are apt for you. Based on your behavior, I can safely conclude that you’re the dumbest, most hopeless individual on this blog.
You, on the other hand, resort to phrases like “Go fuck yourself” and calling me “chickenIQ” and “shithead”. How old did you say you were, again?
Idiot.
ReFLUBican party?
Does it occur to anyone else that when that the right uses that oldie but goody “what’s the democrat’s plan for Iraq?” they only ask because they don’t have any fucking idea either?
When you ask them, they just say we’ll stay unitl the job is done or when we achieve victory, whatever the fuck taht means.
Frank is just happy the National Guard has something to do other than wash their trucks. As much as he talks about terrorism and oil and the middle east, he’s just sick and tired of seeing the lazy National Guardsmen wash their trucks.
Thanks to Democratic liberals,
and their MSM cheerleaders, the United States has been, for forty years, skittish
about using force as an extension of foreign policy.
And proud of it!
If you don’t know what victory means, and you have already framed the question so the answer is “Time to get out,” then what would be the point in answering you?
The facts are these:
War is messy and chaotic — that will never change.
People die in wars — soldiers, civilians on both sides — people end up dead. To try to engage a suicidal religiously motivated, expecting otherwise is beyond foolishness, and approaching dangerously stupid.
This last push is as politically motivated as an immediate withdrawal, oops, strategic redeployment.
The game plan is to stabilize Baghdad, and cajole the government there to get the shi’ites and sunnis to sort their crap out without bloodshed.
There is another area, whose name I have currently forgotten, that is a similar trouble spot. The plan in both places is for allied forces and Iraqi troops to go “door -to – door”. They have brought in a new general, who has a great deal of experience on the ground in Iraq — he literally wrote the new book n counterinsurgency — and a new strategy will be employed.
But I linked to three articles that made these points weeks ago, when the President when on television to announce the Surge.
I am not surprised no one read them. Insulting me is so much more fun, than using your head for something beside letting the blood run out of your neck, right?
The game plan is to stabilize Baghdad, and cajole the government there to get the shi’ites and sunnis to sort their crap out without bloodshed.
How very lovely. Because if theres any group of people who can put personal differences aside and come together for the betterment of their people, its violent fundamentalist Islamics. For chrissake Frank, youre talking about changing their entire society to be able to get them to acknowledge as much as the basic humanity of each other. Ive pointed so many times to that article about the Sunni military academy graduates refusing to protect the Shi’ite controlled area that Ive forgotten where the link is. They dont just disagree, they want each other Dead! They’re not going to just decide to come together for their own betterment any time soon. It may be cruelly pragmatic, but for their good we have to get out of there and let the most violent factions among all sides self destruct, hopefully leaving enough people to form some kind of government control. It is our absence that will cause whatever peace there may ever be over there, Frank, not our presence. The tragic fact of Bush’s war is that good can only come of our not being there any longer, but since the Pres-o-dent sees leaving as losing, so do you. You see it as surrender to terrorism, chaos, communism, satanism, and worse, Nancy Pelosi.
I read your articles (which you graciously reposted here for easy reference) and like you, and like every war supporting friend of yours, they do not and cannot list a single achievable military objective at this stage of the game, much less one that will be attainable with this troop increase that was not before. All we can do is try to subdue the ever-present violence that will not stop until we get out of there and let it stop itself.
Of course, its possible I may be wrong. You say we dont know what victory means. Tell us Frank, what is victory? What will happen that means we’ve “won” the Iraq war? Peaceful coexistence between bitter ideological enemies? Harmonious calm in a region of the world inherently rife with violence? How about a victory parade complete with flying pigs and ice-skating hellbeasts?
Or maybe smaller scale. Maybe getting these people to agree that they just need to put ideological differences aside so they can get about the business of operating their country fairly and equitably to all. Seriously, what do you give the odds of that happening.
Eat dick, Frank.
I know all that. It doesn’t explain why you think the opposition party (and until a few weeks ago, minority party to boot) needs to have a plan more than the actual current sitting President of the fucking United States.
This is what explains it: said minority party are the Democrats. That’s it.
Keep acting like a jerk, though, it works for you. And by that I mean, throws your stupidity into even sharper relief. And you can of course eat dick now.
Frank,
Quit bitching about people insulting you. You engage in similar behavior, and thus have little or no room to complain about it.
btw, in my earlier post, I forgot to list you have also called me a “cretin.”
You are a ridiculous, raving idiot, Frank. For the love of everything good in this world, get help.
You can put the words on the teleprompter, but that doesn’t mean bush is capable of uttering them. BTW, the whitehouse.gov site has what he actually said: Democrat majority.
Hagel just said there is no plan– that Bush is just dumping more Americans in there.
” In fact, I would even challenge the administration today to show us the plan that the president talked about the other night. There is no plan.
I happen to know Pentagon planners were on their way to the Central Com over the weekend. They haven’t even team B’ed this plan.
And my dear friend Dick Lugar talks about coherence of strategy. There is no strategy. This is a ping-pong game with American lives.”
Hey, um, Frank just commented on my blog saying he thinks he’s been banned. This true? And if so, who will I have to tell to eat dick?
That may be his brain working against him. The conscious parts have banned his crazeee parts.
Oh, and I like the Snap thingy too.
NOOOO! He can’t be banned! Just when we were starting to have fun!
Seriously though, what’s the deal?
Was it for this?
Catamite? What the fuck?
(I know what the word means, I’m just saying…what the fuck?)