<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.3" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: There They Go Again</title>
	<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/</link>
	<description>Like Kryptonite To Stupid</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 05 Jul 2008 23:26:41 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Duros62</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42897</link>
		<dc:creator>Duros62</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Sep 2006 23:57:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42897</guid>
		<description>But midder, you said we shoudl invade Russia. Oh wait. No, you didn't.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>But midder, you said we shoudl invade Russia. Oh wait. No, you didn&#8217;t.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: midderpidge</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42896</link>
		<dc:creator>midderpidge</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Sep 2006 15:11:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42896</guid>
		<description>Dugger apparently is now conditioned to think the only way to deal with other countries is with a gun.  We could try diplomacy and money to take care of unsecured Nuclear and WMD materials in Russia and other former Soviet Republics.  Difficult concept huh?



&lt;a href="http://democrats.senate.gov/agenda/real_security/" rel="nofollow"&gt;Democrats:&lt;/a&gt;
-Port security
-Airport security
-Alternative Energies
-Rebuild military
-Rebuild National Guard
-Upgrade military equipment and training
-Upgrade training and equipment of 1st responders nationwide
-Finish the job in Afghanistan
-Capture ObL
-Make sure intelligence is free from political pressure
-Secure loose Nuclear mateials

Republicans:
-Stay the failing course
-Focus efforts on weeding out liberals and non-KoolAid drinkers in government.
-Blame critics for problems
-Increase energy dependence
-Ignore Afghanistan
-Encourage contracting abuse
-Ignore New Orleans
-Degrade military capabilities
-Torture
-Racial profiling
-Secure the border from illegal immigrants, oops, that would shut down the low-paid employment pool, nevermind.
-Photo Ops
-Spy on Americans without warrants.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dugger apparently is now conditioned to think the only way to deal with other countries is with a gun.  We could try diplomacy and money to take care of unsecured Nuclear and WMD materials in Russia and other former Soviet Republics.  Difficult concept huh?</p>
<p><a href="http://democrats.senate.gov/agenda/real_security/" rel="nofollow">Democrats:</a><br />
-Port security<br />
-Airport security<br />
-Alternative Energies<br />
-Rebuild military<br />
-Rebuild National Guard<br />
-Upgrade military equipment and training<br />
-Upgrade training and equipment of 1st responders nationwide<br />
-Finish the job in Afghanistan<br />
-Capture ObL<br />
-Make sure intelligence is free from political pressure<br />
-Secure loose Nuclear mateials</p>
<p>Republicans:<br />
-Stay the failing course<br />
-Focus efforts on weeding out liberals and non-KoolAid drinkers in government.<br />
-Blame critics for problems<br />
-Increase energy dependence<br />
-Ignore Afghanistan<br />
-Encourage contracting abuse<br />
-Ignore New Orleans<br />
-Degrade military capabilities<br />
-Torture<br />
-Racial profiling<br />
-Secure the border from illegal immigrants, oops, that would shut down the low-paid employment pool, nevermind.<br />
-Photo Ops<br />
-Spy on Americans without warrants.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dugger</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42895</link>
		<dc:creator>Dugger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Sep 2006 21:58:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42895</guid>
		<description>duros,

We are doing all of those things.  When we Bush-cultists say 'fight the war on terror', we don't actually mean 'respond after the fact to a successful' terrorist attack on US soil.
Are you saying our airports and ports aren't secure? I know of no major problems.  And which 9/11 recos are you talking about?
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>duros,</p>
<p>We are doing all of those things.  When we Bush-cultists say &#8216;fight the war on terror&#8217;, we don&#8217;t actually mean &#8216;respond after the fact to a successful&#8217; terrorist attack on US soil.<br />
Are you saying our airports and ports aren&#8217;t secure? I know of no major problems.  And which 9/11 recos are you talking about?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Duros62</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42894</link>
		<dc:creator>Duros62</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Sep 2006 20:03:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42894</guid>
		<description>Dugger
How do you feel about Midder's less incendiary proposals? i.e., port security, tighter airport security, &lt;b&gt;implementing 9/11 commission recommendations&lt;/b&gt;?
You know, simple shit (by comparison) that we can do today, instead of picking fights with countries that have done nothing to us yet?

Or are you not talking to me?
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dugger<br />
How do you feel about Midder&#8217;s less incendiary proposals? i.e., port security, tighter airport security, <b>implementing 9/11 commission recommendations</b>?<br />
You know, simple shit (by comparison) that we can do today, instead of picking fights with countries that have done nothing to us yet?</p>
<p>Or are you not talking to me?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Duros62</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42893</link>
		<dc:creator>Duros62</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Sep 2006 16:23:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42893</guid>
		<description>All right, Mr. Righteous, here you go. Perhaps that wasn't the money quote earlier, but this might be.

&lt;i&gt;On Dec. 11, in the village of Upper Pachir - located a few miles northeast of the main complex of caves where Al Qaeda fighters were holed up - a Saudi financier and Al Qaeda operative, Abu Jaffar, was interviewed by the Monitor. Fleeing the Tora Bora redoubt, Mr. Jaffar said that bin Laden had left the cave complexes roughly 10 days earlier, heading for the Parachinar area of Pakistan.&lt;/i&gt;

&lt;i&gt;"No one told us to surround Tora Bora," Mr. Zahir complained. "The only ones left inside for us were the stupid ones, the foolish and the weak."&lt;/i&gt;

And no one thinks going to war with Russia is a good idea, and no one said that. That part of Midder's suggestion would work in concert with that which we have lost; diplomacy with the russians and improved international relations.

&lt;i&gt;When they actually try to articulate a policy, its ridiculous.&lt;/i&gt;

Well, yeah, it is when you've finished parsing it.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>All right, Mr. Righteous, here you go. Perhaps that wasn&#8217;t the money quote earlier, but this might be.</p>
<p><i>On Dec. 11, in the village of Upper Pachir - located a few miles northeast of the main complex of caves where Al Qaeda fighters were holed up - a Saudi financier and Al Qaeda operative, Abu Jaffar, was interviewed by the Monitor. Fleeing the Tora Bora redoubt, Mr. Jaffar said that bin Laden had left the cave complexes roughly 10 days earlier, heading for the Parachinar area of Pakistan.</i></p>
<p><i>&#8220;No one told us to surround Tora Bora,&#8221; Mr. Zahir complained. &#8220;The only ones left inside for us were the stupid ones, the foolish and the weak.&#8221;</i></p>
<p>And no one thinks going to war with Russia is a good idea, and no one said that. That part of Midder&#8217;s suggestion would work in concert with that which we have lost; diplomacy with the russians and improved international relations.</p>
<p><i>When they actually try to articulate a policy, its ridiculous.</i></p>
<p>Well, yeah, it is when you&#8217;ve finished parsing it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dugger</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42892</link>
		<dc:creator>Dugger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Sep 2006 14:09:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42892</guid>
		<description>duros,

Must I even do the thinking for progressives here.  That says AQ not OBL.  Give me a real lead and I'll be happy to read it.  Or did you do a crappy job on the lead in? Get it right, correct your error or forget it.

But I must warn you, the adults think it is BS that we could have actually captured OBL and didn't (and I'm not talking about Bubba either way)

Midder,

You listed 10 things.  Being generous, two of them were something other than post attack response measures and/or pre attack prevetitive measures.  Those two: first- you would destroy nukes in the USSR. Exactly how?  You do understand that Russia might have some sayso over their own sovereign territory? Right?  Would you go to war with Russia, Midder ol' foreign policy expert. If the casualties in iraq upset you, what do you think they would be in Russia - Mr Foreign Policy?  Secure Afghanistan. Again how? We won major combat ops in Afghan too.  Long time ago.  How many soldiers do you think it would take to guarantee an incident free Afghan, Midder?  You have a clue?  You think we could do it with the soldiers from Iraq?

You well illustrate why progressives stick with Bush hate.  When they actually try to articulate a policy, its ridiculous.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>duros,</p>
<p>Must I even do the thinking for progressives here.  That says AQ not OBL.  Give me a real lead and I&#8217;ll be happy to read it.  Or did you do a crappy job on the lead in? Get it right, correct your error or forget it.</p>
<p>But I must warn you, the adults think it is BS that we could have actually captured OBL and didn&#8217;t (and I&#8217;m not talking about Bubba either way)</p>
<p>Midder,</p>
<p>You listed 10 things.  Being generous, two of them were something other than post attack response measures and/or pre attack prevetitive measures.  Those two: first- you would destroy nukes in the USSR. Exactly how?  You do understand that Russia might have some sayso over their own sovereign territory? Right?  Would you go to war with Russia, Midder ol&#8217; foreign policy expert. If the casualties in iraq upset you, what do you think they would be in Russia - Mr Foreign Policy?  Secure Afghanistan. Again how? We won major combat ops in Afghan too.  Long time ago.  How many soldiers do you think it would take to guarantee an incident free Afghan, Midder?  You have a clue?  You think we could do it with the soldiers from Iraq?</p>
<p>You well illustrate why progressives stick with Bush hate.  When they actually try to articulate a policy, its ridiculous.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: midderpidge</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42891</link>
		<dc:creator>midderpidge</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Sep 2006 03:38:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42891</guid>
		<description>Well Dugger, what would the Democrats do?  Increase airport and port security, screen cargo, update first responder equipment, work with other countries instead of alienate them, not invade countries that have nothing to do with the war on terror, secure Afghanistan, destroy nuclear materials abroad such as in the old USSR, update military equipment, follow the 9-11 commission's recomendations...
Remember, Department of Homeland Security as an actual agent to securing and protecting the country is the Democrat's idea.  The cronyism   is Republican.  Basic accounting, fllowing the geneva conventions...

What are the Republican ideas they have enacted?  Ferret out those not fanatically devoted to them, stealing the democrat's ideas,  talk big, expose covert agents, reveal turned Al Qaeda personel, spy on everyone, torture, violate civil rights in various ways, cronyism, corporate welfare, throw cash away with no accounting, invading countries that have nothing to do with terrorism, fail to provide security in the countries they do invade, and generally fuck up.  Nice record there.

Oh yeah  and $40 billion for a color coded terror alert system that seems most attuned to political alarms.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well Dugger, what would the Democrats do?  Increase airport and port security, screen cargo, update first responder equipment, work with other countries instead of alienate them, not invade countries that have nothing to do with the war on terror, secure Afghanistan, destroy nuclear materials abroad such as in the old USSR, update military equipment, follow the 9-11 commission&#8217;s recomendations&#8230;<br />
Remember, Department of Homeland Security as an actual agent to securing and protecting the country is the Democrat&#8217;s idea.  The cronyism   is Republican.  Basic accounting, fllowing the geneva conventions&#8230;</p>
<p>What are the Republican ideas they have enacted?  Ferret out those not fanatically devoted to them, stealing the democrat&#8217;s ideas,  talk big, expose covert agents, reveal turned Al Qaeda personel, spy on everyone, torture, violate civil rights in various ways, cronyism, corporate welfare, throw cash away with no accounting, invading countries that have nothing to do with terrorism, fail to provide security in the countries they do invade, and generally fuck up.  Nice record there.</p>
<p>Oh yeah  and $40 billion for a color coded terror alert system that seems most attuned to political alarms.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Duros62</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42890</link>
		<dc:creator>Duros62</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2006 22:14:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42890</guid>
		<description>Here you go, Dugger, since you asked. From that timeline you refuse to look at.

&lt;b&gt;How bin Laden got away&lt;/b&gt;
A day-by-day account of how Osama bin Laden eluded the world's most powerful military machine.
By Philip Smucker &#124; Special to The Christian Science Monitor


&lt;i&gt;"The border with Pakistan was the key, but no one paid any attention to it," he said, leaning back in his swivel chair with a short list of the Al Qaeda fighters who were later taken prisoner. "And there were plenty of landing areas for helicopters, had the Americans acted decisively. Al Qaeda escaped right out from under their feet."&lt;/i&gt;
&lt;a href="http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0304/p01s03-wosc.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0304/p01s03-wosc.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0304/p01s03-wosc.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here you go, Dugger, since you asked. From that timeline you refuse to look at.</p>
<p><b>How bin Laden got away</b><br />
A day-by-day account of how Osama bin Laden eluded the world&#8217;s most powerful military machine.<br />
By Philip Smucker | Special to The Christian Science Monitor</p>
<p><i>&#8220;The border with Pakistan was the key, but no one paid any attention to it,&#8221; he said, leaning back in his swivel chair with a short list of the Al Qaeda fighters who were later taken prisoner. &#8220;And there were plenty of landing areas for helicopters, had the Americans acted decisively. Al Qaeda escaped right out from under their feet.&#8221;</i><br />
<a href="http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0304/p01s03-wosc.html" rel="nofollow"></a><a href="http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0304/p01s03-wosc.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0304/p01s03-wosc.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dugger</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42889</link>
		<dc:creator>Dugger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2006 19:16:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42889</guid>
		<description>Who, in apositon to knowm says we could have captured Bin laden and chose not to?
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Who, in apositon to knowm says we could have captured Bin laden and chose not to?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: factcheck</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42888</link>
		<dc:creator>factcheck</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2006 18:29:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42888</guid>
		<description>Good post, zak.  Don't say the president mislead us in to war, say he LIED.  Which is what anyone with two firing brain cells now knows (that leaves out dugger, obviously).
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good post, zak.  Don&#8217;t say the president mislead us in to war, say he LIED.  Which is what anyone with two firing brain cells now knows (that leaves out dugger, obviously).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dugger</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42887</link>
		<dc:creator>Dugger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2006 14:59:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42887</guid>
		<description>Zak and/or Nimrod,

Are you saying the military could have efinitely captured BIn Lane and let him get away?

Or are you even saying that they could have and Bush would not give them the go ahead?
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Zak and/or Nimrod,</p>
<p>Are you saying the military could have efinitely captured BIn Lane and let him get away?</p>
<p>Or are you even saying that they could have and Bush would not give them the go ahead?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: zak822</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42886</link>
		<dc:creator>zak822</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2006 14:52:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42886</guid>
		<description>"...charges that many Democrats say distort their stated positions."

First, when are Democrats going to get the rhetoric side of political competition.  Saying "you distorted my postion" is so weak it makes me puke.  Call the other side "con artists".  Use strong language; the GOP did not reach its current position using weak language like "distorted my position".  Weak words equals loser.  All they need is signs saying "they let bin Laden get away."

Second, please don't feed the trolls.  They lose their ability to forage for their natural food, other trolls.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;&#8230;charges that many Democrats say distort their stated positions.&#8221;</p>
<p>First, when are Democrats going to get the rhetoric side of political competition.  Saying &#8220;you distorted my postion&#8221; is so weak it makes me puke.  Call the other side &#8220;con artists&#8221;.  Use strong language; the GOP did not reach its current position using weak language like &#8220;distorted my position&#8221;.  Weak words equals loser.  All they need is signs saying &#8220;they let bin Laden get away.&#8221;</p>
<p>Second, please don&#8217;t feed the trolls.  They lose their ability to forage for their natural food, other trolls.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nimrod Gently</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42885</link>
		<dc:creator>Nimrod Gently</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2006 13:43:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42885</guid>
		<description>Goddammit, I posted that without typing "apart from the last two lines" and I don't know how.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Goddammit, I posted that without typing &#8220;apart from the last two lines&#8221; and I don&#8217;t know how.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nimrod Gently</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42884</link>
		<dc:creator>Nimrod Gently</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2006 13:25:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42884</guid>
		<description>And yes, that was quite a cogent comment from Mike at the top of the thread, I just don't see what the criticism is. Seems about right to me.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And yes, that was quite a cogent comment from Mike at the top of the thread, I just don&#8217;t see what the criticism is. Seems about right to me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nimrod Gently</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42883</link>
		<dc:creator>Nimrod Gently</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2006 13:23:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42883</guid>
		<description>Still pretending that getting out while the getting is good constitutes surrender?

We've lost, Dugger. Admitting it is not weakness.

And how's about this for a progressive plan for fighting the war on terrorism: start by finding out where the Christ Osama bin Laden might be now.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Still pretending that getting out while the getting is good constitutes surrender?</p>
<p>We&#8217;ve lost, Dugger. Admitting it is not weakness.</p>
<p>And how&#8217;s about this for a progressive plan for fighting the war on terrorism: start by finding out where the Christ Osama bin Laden might be now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dugger</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42882</link>
		<dc:creator>Dugger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2006 13:05:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42882</guid>
		<description>Love the progression of posts here.  Mike starts with a rather cogent comment about Democrats and their idea of fighting T. Then some progressives respond with outrage.  How dare you insult us! 'We too are strong on fighting terroism.'  And then, whoops.  A bunch of other progressives chime in that "yeah, the main thing is to get Bush and Rummy.  Thats the ticket!"

I have yet to see the progressive plan for fighting the war on terrorism.  So far the only specific I've seen is surrender in Iraq.

Now, if you were a soldier and you saw what the Democrats did vis a vis Iraq, would you feel very good about responding to a Democratic CinC's order to go into combat?
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Love the progression of posts here.  Mike starts with a rather cogent comment about Democrats and their idea of fighting T. Then some progressives respond with outrage.  How dare you insult us! &#8216;We too are strong on fighting terroism.&#8217;  And then, whoops.  A bunch of other progressives chime in that &#8220;yeah, the main thing is to get Bush and Rummy.  Thats the ticket!&#8221;</p>
<p>I have yet to see the progressive plan for fighting the war on terrorism.  So far the only specific I&#8217;ve seen is surrender in Iraq.</p>
<p>Now, if you were a soldier and you saw what the Democrats did vis a vis Iraq, would you feel very good about responding to a Democratic CinC&#8217;s order to go into combat?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mikefromtexas</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42881</link>
		<dc:creator>mikefromtexas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2006 06:12:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42881</guid>
		<description>Sounds like mike is talking about Iraq, but mistakenly typed Serbia.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sounds like mike is talking about Iraq, but mistakenly typed Serbia.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42880</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2006 05:37:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42880</guid>
		<description>I'm still reeling over rhetoric like "kill," "capture," "punish," and "avenge" coming from a supposed spokesman for the Party of Peace.

Or is it that Democrats really don't want peace, they just want wars where no Americans die, like Bill Clinton's great "victory" in Serbia?

Maybe someone can explain to me how bombing/nuking/invading Pakistan and southern Afghanistan is going to have a chilling effect on world terrorism.

Unfortunately Al Qaeda shoots back.  If we are going to fight terrorists, then we no longer have the luxury of bombing nations like Serbia that never had any intention of engaging us in battle and weren't capable of shooting back at our planes.

Sorry, I'm not the one living in the weird parallel universe.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m still reeling over rhetoric like &#8220;kill,&#8221; &#8220;capture,&#8221; &#8220;punish,&#8221; and &#8220;avenge&#8221; coming from a supposed spokesman for the Party of Peace.</p>
<p>Or is it that Democrats really don&#8217;t want peace, they just want wars where no Americans die, like Bill Clinton&#8217;s great &#8220;victory&#8221; in Serbia?</p>
<p>Maybe someone can explain to me how bombing/nuking/invading Pakistan and southern Afghanistan is going to have a chilling effect on world terrorism.</p>
<p>Unfortunately Al Qaeda shoots back.  If we are going to fight terrorists, then we no longer have the luxury of bombing nations like Serbia that never had any intention of engaging us in battle and weren&#8217;t capable of shooting back at our planes.</p>
<p>Sorry, I&#8217;m not the one living in the weird parallel universe.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MJB</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42879</link>
		<dc:creator>MJB</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2006 00:51:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42879</guid>
		<description>"since the last Democrat (sic) administration committed to fighting and winning a total war was Lyndon B. Johnson."

That turned out well, didn't it Mike?
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;since the last Democrat (sic) administration committed to fighting and winning a total war was Lyndon B. Johnson.&#8221;</p>
<p>That turned out well, didn&#8217;t it Mike?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Duros62</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42878</link>
		<dc:creator>Duros62</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Aug 2006 22:08:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2006/08/31/there-they-go-again/#comment-42878</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;"killing, capturing and punishing America's true enemies" means impeaching Bush and then sending him, Cheney, and Rumsfeld to the Hague to be tried by the International Criminal Court for war crimes.&lt;/i&gt;

Hey, that's a start. Democracy's hard work, y'know.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>&#8220;killing, capturing and punishing America&#8217;s true enemies&#8221; means impeaching Bush and then sending him, Cheney, and Rumsfeld to the Hague to be tried by the International Criminal Court for war crimes.</i></p>
<p>Hey, that&#8217;s a start. Democracy&#8217;s hard work, y&#8217;know.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
