Sometimes I wonder if you even finished high school.
Posted by: mike | Jun 24, 2007 1:33:51 PM

This is the kind of crap why I will always attack Reynolds.

Now, Oliver, I’m very disappointed in you. I want you to diagram that sentence and then rewrite it grammatically.

— Sincerely
Your Fourth Grade Teacher.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | Jun 23, 2007 9:53:26 PM

I love simpletons like Mike & Charlie, they have the rhetorical skills of a second grader so they try and find grammatical errors as if that proves anything. How about presenting some sort of argument? Go play on Myspace or something.

No Instalanche for you.

Nice try, though. Remain in obscurity.

And that matters how? The Germans never managed to breach the Maginot line. That really wasn’t much of a consolation for France.

The enemy knows it cannot win and engagement on the open battlefield. Thus, the enemy purposefully chooses to engage the US where it can win– via guerilla attacks.

leaving is most definitely losing

That is the source of your irrational pathology. You can’t just say, “ok, time to go home.” You’re hung up with the idea that “leaving == losing”

No, Frank, leaving is what you do after you’ve lost. And you lose as soon as you go into a war without a plan.

Without a plan for victory, or even a way to define victory, you have lost.

Sometimes I wonder if you even finished high school.

What is actually happening in Iraq doesn’t matter to them. All that matters is that they never have to accept that it was the wrong war, at the wrong time, poorly planned and executed by the president he supported with so much fervor.

I’m sure the Kurds are especially appreciative of your support for our efforts in Iraq.

And that’s happening because of morons like you who elected and then re-elected the most imcompetent (sic) president of the last 100 years.

Pointing out when someone fails is not the same as wanting someone to fail.”

O.k., assholes, you say you don’t want to lose in Iraq, but cannot wait to surrender to the enemy a battlefield victory he cannot win.

You say its obvious we are losing, but exactly how is the enemy winning (other than in the halls of Congress and other courageous places like this blog)? How is the enemy consolidating his victory?

You say you’re only pointing out failure without wanting us to fail. Yet the enemy has not defeated us on the battlefield, and he cannot make us leave Iraq without your help. He needs your help, desperately, to get us out of Iraq. And since 18 March 2003 you have been helping him as much as you possibly can to give him his victory in Iraq over us.

Our enemy cannot win without you. He cannot defeat us without you. He’s counting on you, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and all of America’s Democrats to give him a victory in Iraq over the U.S. he cannot ever win on his own.

Losing? The enemy is losing in Iraq. He cannot and will not win without your help.

God save us from “Americans” like you.

Just exactly how is it in our interest to lose in Iraq?

And why is it so damned important to you that we do lose in Iraq?”

What the fuck are you smoking? We don’t want to lose in Iraq, but it is obvious that is exactly what is happening.

And that’s happening because of morons like you who elected and then re-elected the most imcompetent president of the last 100 years.

Pointing out when someone fails is not the same as wanting someone to fail.

As soon as he is right on anything, let me know.

Until then, STFU.

His business plan is holding the “center” “moderate” position in the MSM. Though he derides the MSM, he depends on TV appearances and newspaper columns and to get those he positions himself as moderate and internet expert.

So he can never take an actual opinion.