It is looking more and more like Hillary Clinton will never be Preznit, and the Republicans will not even have had to fired a shot. That is probably a good thing, because they are busy shooting at Mitt Romney.
And I will go on record and say that I love the nickname “Multiple Choice Mitt.”
The Other Steve
The money quote from the NYTimes article is that her supporters are really surprised by how upset everybody is with the Iraq war.
And they all hope this blows over by next year, so she can win the nomination.
Uh huh
zzyzx
I hope that’s true because I think she’s the one person that would get the Republican base fired up, but she has a large enough lead in the polls that I’m not going to count her out yet…
Richard 23
Shrillary will never become president.
Besides everyone knows Brownback’s the man for the job!
dslak
Although I get the sentiment behind this–Democrats don’t want to energize the Republican base–isn’t this really the kind of wishy-washy, go with the flow defeatism that served the Democrats so well prior to 2006? What matters in real terms is the strength of the candidate and his or her ability to appeal to the general electorate.
Sure, you can win elections if you just focus on turning out your base and depressing the base of your opponent, but then you end up governing a party rather than a country. Of course, when the Kool-Aid still tastes good, everybody thinks it’s going great. Then somebody spikes your Kool-Aid with LSD or cyanide and the ponies get lost, and well . . .
Yeah, I’m know I’m being idealistic, but certainly Hillary’s ability to generate people to vote against her is not what’s important, but rather why people have such negative feelings about her. It’s not as if, despite the fact that I am generally in agreement with her (currently) on policy issues, she bears no responsiblility for the antipathy so many have towards her.
zzyzx
You can’t do anything if you’re not in power. It’s not like Hillary has presented anything that shows that she’d be some incredible, once in a lifetime candidate that would be worth taking the risk for. If anything, she’s trying to be just what you feared, the person who would do anything to get elected. I don’t think that Obama or Edwards are a shoo-ins by any means, but they’re both more interesting and more electable.
dslak
Sure. That’s why I wasn’t suggesting that we should entirely ignore a candidate’s electability. I just don’t like the idea of a large bloc of voters thinking merely in the terms of a bunch of campaign managers, rather than thinking what would be good for the country. If you take that approach, it seems to be relatively easy to be led to embrace the converse of “You can’t do anything if you’re not in power,” which is, “If you’re in power, you can do anything.” I’ve quite frankly had enough of that.
ThymeZone
Hell no. First of all, it’s the kind of practical politics that used to be the stuff of smoke filled rooms, back in the day when powerful pols picked nominees, and before the shitty primary system we have now …. which has given us some really lousy presidents, and endless campaign cycles that have now reached back two full years from the general elections to poison our politics. Electability is the single most important quality you want in a nominee. You judge it mercilessly.
Second, your complaint is only valid if Hillary is the best possible choice otherwise. She isn’t. And by that I mean, best choice for the job.
dslak
Oh, I certainly accept that she isn’t. Given however that we have a primary system, I think that both the candidate’s strength (i.e., being the “best possible choice”) and his or her electability outside the party are important, and the precedence should not be given simply to the latter. Hope that makes my view clearer.
Dug Jay
She still leads by fairly wide margins in the polls of REAL potential voters, as contrasted with the fringe wackos on the Lefty side of the blogosphere.
dslak
I always suspected that the people on those liberal blogs couldn’t possibly exist . . .
ThymeZone
Yes.
And mine is that our selection process is seriously broken. I don’t think anything beats the smoke filled room. The people who know the candidates, work with them, even battle with them, are the ones best suited to judge who can be president and who can win an election.
We need to get rid of the primaries, and get rid of the Electoral College, or we are stuck with shitty choices and dysfunctional presidents. What we have now is a huge money-celebrity clusterfuck that has produced shit for presidents and has also produced Karl Rove, and Florida 2000, and Red States, and national gerrymandering.
I’d be in favor of Constitutional reform.
dslak
Yes, but your preferred candidate(s) would have to win an election or two first.
zzyzx
Hillary is an outlier though. It’s not like Edwards has a 55.5 chance of getting elected and Clinton has a 55.1 chance. She’s the only argument the right has at this moment. If you listen to talk radio or read their sites, their leftover Clinton hatred is fueling their interest in 2008. Hannity calls his show, “The Stop Hillary express.” National Review calls their election site, “The Hillary Spot.” Replace her with Obama, and the dynamics completely change.
If nothing else, with Obama or Edwards, we’re much more likely to be talking about Iraq (and maybe Iran) than talking about Vince Foster…
Otto Man
Depends on how she gets replaced. If it comes about through some fake scandal that the right-wing media and blogs get their collective panties in a wad over — or even seems to come though that — then they’ll believe they actually did something, get puffed up and become energized for the next Democrat.
If, however, the Democratic voters just take a pass on her, then the right-wing zoo will be denied its toy and hopefully slink away home.
demimondian
I don’t think so, Otto. If they push her out, then they’ll get all excited about that. If they don’t push her out, then they’ll get excited about how they pushed her out, and they’ll get all excited about that.
ThymeZone
Good comments. The thing about Shrillary is that she takes the oxygen out of the contest. In order to have a chance, you have beat her. No other candidate has that kind of clout. She frames the contest.
But this can work in our favor. Her weakness is Iraq, and her lawyerly defense of her original vote. That one fact is probably going to deny her the nomination. And it should. That’s a good thing. America is god-awful tired of lawyers and their fucking mealy mouthed twisto-speak crap. I for one would love to never again have to listen to a candidate who talks as though he or she is defending his candidacy or office as if it were a client on trial.
“No controlling legal authority” could criticize the Dems who rolled over the Iraq war in 2002.
But that’s exactly why those Dems who now try to use the No Controlling Legal Authority defense are disqualified from higher office. The point is, what the country needed then was something better than a technically defensible position. It needed guts, and hard questions, and the willingness to throw away a political career for the good of the country. And damned, damned few on either side stood up and said, hey, I am putting the country ahead of my career and standing up to this president.
Here we are, four and a half disastrous years later, and some of the STILL won’t speak the truth about that time. Hillary being the best available example. Sure, she can spout a great lawyerly defense … she’s a good lawyer.
But she’s a self-serving politician who has put herself first and the country second, and because she’s a lawyer, she is adept at rationalizing that betrayal into something defensible.
Fuck her, I don’t want another president like that. I’ve had my fill.
Tractarian
I’m just hoping that Dem primary voters have the common sense to realize two things:
1) Hillary is unelectable – NOT because she is a woman, but because she is a Clinton;
2) Obama is unelectable – NOT because he is black, but because of his name and his inexperience.
demimondian
Let’s look at Edwards’ claim: “I made a mistake.” Most people read that as saying “Gosh, I should have listened to the folks on the left and voted against the war on the basis of what they said.”
Hillary doesn’t appear to feel that is correct. What she believes appears to be better summarized as “The evidence I saw had been fudged. I didn’t recognize that. If it had not been fudged, then my vote would have been correct, and, seeing such data again in the future, I’ll double check its sources, but, if convinced of their reliability, I’d still vote the same way.”
Frankly, I’m not sure she’d be wrong to take that position.
AkaDad
fringe wackos = those who are constantly correct with their analysis and predictions
ThymeZone
That’s just silly. He is quite electable, barring a skeleton in the closet, or fatal gaffe.
Punchy
My take–the righties (and the media, for that matter) are incapable of focusing their hatred and vitriol on more than one candidate at a time. The longer HilClin stays in “the running” and takes the full-frontal, O(s)bama and Edwards will get stronger.
Use her as flak jacket, then toss her out come Summer ’08.
ThymeZone
Christ, if you are going to do the phony concern troll thing, you need to elevate your game above Darrellesque blurbs.
“Most people read that?”
Take down your post, man. Seriously, write and ask Joh to take it down. You’re embarassing everybody.
“Most people read that ….” Unfucking believable.
This was a fairly good thread until you shit on it.
Punchy
Fixed for a large population south of the Mason-Dixon…
CaseyL
I’m still making up my mind who to support (and Clinton isn’t on my list) and note that Richardson did surprisingly well at fundraising this week.
I know about the rumors. He needs to address them – not the skirt-chasing so much as the attitude towards women – because if he can get past that, he’ll be a formidable candidate. He certainly has the best experience/background of the entire bunch.
demimondian
Yeah, you don’t like an analysis which reads past your “No tits good, two tits bad” rhetoric.
It’s gotta be “lawyerly rhetoric”, not “maybe she doesn’t say it because it’s not true”? Nah, couldn’t be. After all, the great and insightful TZ knows without saying that it’s just dodging responsibility.
Got any other facts on why United 821 was delayed, puppy?
Tsulagi
“Multiple Choice” Mitt? lol. That’s actually pretty good, and it fits. Whatever your position on an issue, Mitt is for it, or against it, whichever works for you.
On a multiple choice test the correct Mitt answer is All of the Above. It’s not flip-flopping, it’s adapt to win, bitch.
ThymeZone
Eat shit, Demi. Most people clearly agree with me.
Okay, so you got one thing right today.
That’s a start.
ThymeZone
Your flight was delayed becaquse flights are delayed every fucking hour of every fucking day, for reasons you clearly know nothing about, you incredibly stupid shit.
Pb
You know, I’ve thought about this for a while, and I’ve decided that the whole bit about Obama’s ‘inexperience’ is a total crock. First, there’s no reason for anyone in the media to bring this up without pointing out that Barack Obama has had as many years of experience in government as our current President had when he was elected President–and more experience at the federal level, at that. And then there’s the point that ‘experience’ does not make a President–some of our worst Presidents (Buchanan) have had very long and impressive résumés, some of our best (Lincoln), very thin ones. So what’s their point? They don’t like Obama.
Punchy
Feel the love.
Greyhound, bitches.
ThymeZone
If you don’t have enough sense to know lawyerly rhetoric when you see it and hear it, then you have no business being here on a food fight political blog.
Making that distinction is a prerquisite to understanding anything in politics and public affairs today, for crissakes. Basic. Elementary. And so easy, even an intellectual pygmy such as yourself can do it with a little practice.
Maybe you can get a job at the Disney Channel?
Andrew
Someone didn’t take their Paxil this morning!
DougJ
I expect Hillary to win in 2008. I personally find the Democratic primary boring.
The Republican primary is getting exciting though, no? You’ve got Mitt being a big supporter of gay rights, then sucking up to the theocons, you’ve got McCain telling Falwell off in 2000, then sucking up to the theocons, you’ve got Giuliani getting divorced twice, moving in with gay neighbors, flying around the country in Gulfstream IV’s, supporting gay rights and abortion rights, and then sucking up to the theocons.
And then you have Mike Huckabee, who is an actual theocon, looking by far the best of the bunch on t.v.
I see it coming down to Huckabee versus McCain.
Andrew
You’re way overanalyzing this. All Obama has to do is make some posters with some simple slogans:
“Dick Cheney has experience. Dick Cheney’s experience got us in to Iraq. Obama has common sense and basic human decency.”
Andrew
It sounds like someone is letting his man-crush overwhelm his common sense. That weight loss was something, though.
Face
Please. We can do better.
Mitt Romney-jerk
Cant Ad-Mitt
No Longer In the Mitt-le
Machinator Mitt
Dug Jay
TZ says that he opposes lawyers seeking to become President. I guess that means that he would not support any of the top three current Democratic candidates, Hillary, Obama and Edwards, all of whom are lawyers.
Rome Again
Everybody? Hmmmmm, forgot me.
I’m glad Hillary doesn’t have much of a chance. Best news I could hope for right now!
ThymeZone
Is there anybody who can read around here?
I said no such thing. I am talking about behavior and manipulation, not professions.
Idiot.
DougJ
Seriously, have you seen him on the Daily Show? He’s funny, thinks well on his feet, comes across as a natural. McCain’s whole “I’m talking through my teeth ’cause I’m a tough guy” shtick comes off as phony and Giuliani just talks to fast (which obviously goes over well in New York City). Both also lapse into stump speechery far too quickly.
I won’t vote for any of them, obviously, I just think that Huckabee’s the one who comes across best on the teevee.
ThymeZone
Oddly, that’s because it is phony.
DougJ
I assume that all of them _are_ phony. McCain’s is just more obviously so than the others.
Andrew
No, I actually agree. He does a great job of hiding his wacky Christianism. He even did some anti-Christianist Christian things while he was in office, like support taxes to fund anti-povery programs.
ThymeZone
Does he think the earth is 6000 years old?
Bzzzt. Disqualified.
Next.
Andrew
Well, exactly.
Dave_Violence
Hillary! could run as a Gulliani Republican. Looking at her AMAZING record in the Senate per her congressional website, she’s a genuine pro-war politician. Good for her. The liberal stuff she’s for, other than abortion and (though it’s too easy a target for her to bother any energy on) gun control, is difficult to be against without being cast as an “evil” Republican.
So she, to borrow from Jonah Goldberg, seems to be of the opinion that radical Islamic terrorists are more a threat to the American citizen home and abroad than George W. Bush is… Good for her.
I still predict that she’ll get the nomination for president – but if the Dems’ field is weak, watch Al Gore to get in the running again. No one more of an Eco-American than he is, right? And that’s just as important as the GWOT, eh?
Rome Again
That’s called typical Christian behavior, get with the program.
ThymeZone
We have to be relentless against the stealth fundamentalist assholes. Keep bringing them back to the bullshit that is at the root of their belief system.
They want to do anything to obfuscate it. Our job is to expose them at every turn.
Rome Again
Didn’t you know, TZ? In blogmania, the major sport is to twist others’ words around. It can be great fun, but totally confusing.
Rome Again
Too bad that job doesn’t pay well, I could make a killing at it.
Zifnab
I’ve still got my eyes on Brownback. He’s the only true blue Bible hugger and I suspect he’ll be the one channeling God’s money. Dobson, Falwell, and Robertson are just stringing the other candidates along to move that Overton Window. When every Republican-American in the race is embracing death to abortionists, death to gays, and a groin-swelling love for Jesus, Brownback suddenly doesn’t look so radical anymore. Then it’ll be a stealth race between Huckabee and Brownback for the Jesus vote. The Republican-American big business cacaus will get split and de-energized (because, really, who the hell are these guys?), and the emerging candidate will be so far to the right by the time he emerges from the primaries, he’ll get easily curb-stomped by anybody in the current Democratic line-up.
As for the Democrats, I’m still waiting for Al Gore to make his move. If Gore runs, all bets are off. Hillary will have someone just as dynamic and name-recognized as she is to compete against. Obama might have a shot – because he’s got a firm hand on the mid-west and because Hillary has a drain on her voters. And Edwards will make a very nice pick for VP (*sigh*) because there’s no way he’s going to make it, no matter how many puppies I sacrifice to my dark gods for his victory.
Rome Again
That’s NOT God’s money, that money belongs to the other guy.
Pb
re: God and money… cue George Carlin and NIN… I’ll go with Carlin because it’s pretty easy to find “Head Like A Hole” (and the Devo cover is awesome too!):
Rome Again
I’ve always liked Carlin.
ThymeZone
Santa?
Rome Again
That would be his nickname… right letters, wrong order though.
ThymeZone
Tip of the hat to our friend, Anna Gram.
Rome Again
I like Acros personally:
SANTA: surely a natural thief, akways.
SATAN: seen as the almighty nowadays.
Rome Again
I like Acros personally:
SANTA: surely a natural thief, always.
SATAN: seen as the almighty nowadays.
Rome Again
whoops, sorry for double post (with correction).
Rome Again
How about:
LUCIFER: Liar under certain incentive for earthly residuals.
ThymeZone
You devil you!
Rome Again
No, sir, that would be my ancestors. I assure you, I’m an angel.
ThymeZone
Nice wings :-)
tBone
Meh. Too wordy. How about “Obama: Has Never Shot a 78-Year-Old in the Face.”
That position might be OK, if she can find a way to convey it that doesn’t make her sound so Kerry-ish. There’s a fine line between careful explanation and weaselly overexplanation, and I fear Hillary will tend to come down on the wrong side of that line.
Tsulagi
I agree with Zif, Brownback could be a serious contender in the primaries. The 28%ers are going to want a real Jesus candidate.
Surger McCain is transparently phony in his kneepad duty to the Holy Trinity: Dobson; Falwell; and Robertson. Multiple Choice Mitt the Mormon Romney? Right. Then we have Cross Dressing Rudy. I’m so looking forward to comedy gold. Rudy publicly getting down on his knees tearfully accepting the Lord and repenting his sins. Hopefully while in his Dolly Parton outfit if it’s not too worn. Maybe tone down the makeup for the solemn occasion.
That leaves Huckabee and Brownback. Granted, Huckabee comes off as smooth and likeable on the teevee. But, he doesn’t have the work ethic Brownback has. Even McCain credited Brownback with killing the Meirs nomination and pushing Alito through. Plus he heads a little uber Jesus group called Fellowship in Congress that meets to come up with legislation they just know Jesus would want. Over 200 Pubs in the House and Senate have attended and participated in at least some of Fellowship’s meetings. Dobson said he could find no faults in Brownback.
If Brownback could buy a personality or at least fake one, he has a good shot. Especially if the swiftboats get nasty and Pubs engage in a little of the Dem time honored tradition of circular firing squads.
ThymeZone
Jesus, is everybody asleep today? That isn’t “OK”, it’s shit.
A country goes to war because our officials got “fudged” information?
THEN FIRE ALL THE FUCKING OFFICIALS.
It’s their job to know, to find out, to ask, to question, to probe, to put processes in place to immunize against the dumb mistake at that level. These people have the power to blow upt he fucking world.
Fudged? What the fuck? IT WAS WRONG and the conclusions drawn from it were WRONG.
“Whoops” is not acceptable. When did we start settling for this level of dumbshit thinking?
I’m a fairly nonsdescript middle class guy out here in Arizona, and I knew that the runup to that war was bullshit. I was able to formulate tough questions that would have provided the framework for proper handling of that situation. What the fuck were these people in Washington doing?
Fingering their pricks, and pricking their fingers, apparently. Fuck them. Fire them. Hold them accountable, totally and completely. Period.
Rome Again
I like it!
Rome Again
Uh, shopping?
ThymeZone
Yes, shopping for their own political self interests.
Shopping for cheap votes.
Shopping, when they should have been working.
For us, who hired them and entrusted them with the keys to the war machine.
Punchy
I’m voting TZ for Assistant to the Traveling Secretary For the Department of the Interior Deputy Assistant in the next Administration. SOMEONE’S gotta know what the fuck is going on…
Rome Again
Money has a way of doing that to people TZ. Personally, I think they should have been given free airline access to get home to visit constituents, a modest allowance to purchase a modest home, and not much more. They should have to live within the means of the average American’s payscale.
Rome Again
TZ Goes To Washington?
ThymeZone
Heh, thanks, yeah. Someone at least needs to know how to ask the right FUCKING QUESTIONS.
A few well-framed questions could have prevented this stupid war and saved a lot of lives. Nobody apparently asked them or insisted on well-corroborated answers. Nobody apparently had any sense of the time we had to get it right.
If our officials can’t do this, what the hell do we need them for?
ThymeZone
{ voice of Jimmy Stewart }
Wull, wull, wull, wull, it’s a dirty job and nobody back there now is doin’ it.
Rome Again
LMAO, I can see you saying that!
ThymeZone
I have no confidence in the people who got us into this pile of crap, and now want to say things like, “Well, let’s not talk about the past, let’s talk about where we go from here.”
Yeah? No, let’s talk about the fucking past.
The past is prologue. Yes, I just coined that phrase.
But it is prologue, and how we got here is critically important if we are to avoid doing it again. Nothing else is more important. Iraq will become what it will become, I am convinced that our involvement now is becoming less and less relevant to that outcome.
But what’s really important is what the US will become. And we can’t manage that without knowing how we deceived ourselves into this collossal fuckup. We can’t afford many more mistakes like this.
“Let’s focus on the future?” Next candidate, please. I want to know what every candidate learned from this shitstorm, and his or her part in it.
Rome Again
That would be ideal, and an awesome start. Probably not coming anytime soon, but awesome just the same.
Pb
More experience that Obama lacks! However, this could be just another “success that hasn’t happened yet”…
ThymeZone
If Netroots has any real future, it must come relatively soon.
Otherwise, Netroots becomes just another retail political idea and a tool for crass manipulation.
I want candidates held to high standards of understanding of reality and history, including their own history.
I am fed up with self serving people who just want to leverage America into a stage on which to act out their giant egotistical fantasies.
Rome Again
I agree it’s necessary, I’m just not very optimistic, I guess.
ThymeZone
I am, a lot more than I was two years ago.
The election of 2006 has renewed my faith in the American experiment. My little red state rejected DOMA (first state to do so) and reelected a gay woman governor by a huge landslide.
That’s progress, folks!
Zifnab
I don’t see what the be-all end-all disgust towards Hillary stems from, TZ. I mean, if you were out against her because she’s the classic Beltway-insider, Blue Dog, Republican Lite candidate, I’d be with you. But so what on this hard-headed Iraq stance. Her position seems fairly reasonable. She refuses to take flak for the bad intel all of America was fed.
I was fooled. Most of the rest of Congress was fooled. Bush played dirty and he got away with it. Saying, “I shouldn’t have voted for a war when my constituency was convinced Iraq had WMDs” seems like rather naive hindesight. Blaming Clinton for her vote is like blaming Bush for Hurricane Katrina. There was nothing anyone was going to do to stop it. What mattered was the aftermath. If Hillary has the balls to go after the treasonous contractors and the scum-sucking Pentagon liars, then she’s got my vote because she’s got the will to clean up the mess. I don’t think Hillary is packing that particular pair of testicles though. That’s why I don’t want to see her as President. It has nothing to do with her shouldering the blame of the con-artists that Hurricaned us into this mess.
The Other Steve
Politics isn’t about winning elections. It’s about forcing change. You can force change without winning. You can box an opponent into the corner such that they relent on an issue or a point.
I hate this wishy washy attitude.
Oh, and as far as Hillary firing up the Republican base. Good. Let’em. See what kind of a campaign they’ve got when the base is running around calling Hillary names on national tv and they lose the middle.
I don’t like Hillary, but that isn’t why.
ThymeZone
Sorry, no sale. She’s equivocating and triangulating. She’s lying.
ThymeZone
Sorry, no sale. While I like you better than I like her, I wouldn’t vote for you for president just on the strength of that one admission. I admire the honesty, but I require more than that from a president or a member of Congress.
I wasn’t fooled, and it wasn’t that hard not to be fooled. Sorry, yes I am taking a hard line, and I urge everyone to take the same hard line.
“Oops, sorry” is just bullshit. That’s what Bush tried to do with his famous “are there WMDs under my sofa cushion” routine. Get a pass. Fuck him and fuck any other official who wants a pass.
If we can’t have that level of accountability, then we are sorely fucked in the ass, I am not settling for less.
Rome Again
That appears to be part of the problem. Neither TZ, nor I were fooled. It was far too obvious to a few people.
No offense Zif, I think you’re a great person, I like your politics, BUT, don’t you think the game this administration played was just a little too obvious?
ThymeZone
Let me very clear on this. What was obvious was that the proper processes were not being followed, and the proper questions not being asked.
The story being told made no real sense, it didn’t add up, and it failed all sorts of easy tests. Even if Saddam had HAD the famous WMDs, they had to have been so well hidden that getting them ready for use would have given us plenty of time to just blow them up. We had no physical evidence. We had aerial photos of oil trucks being filled, but couldn’t find one of WMDs being loaded onto trucks?
Even if you passed those tests… where were the means of delivering the WMDs to any target? Nonexistent.
WMDs were illusory. Everything pointed to their being imaginary, or unusable, or both. And then … what would the motive and rationale have been? To provoke the US and invite disastrous reprisal? Hussein was a fucking thief, nothing more or less. A sociopathic thief who stole his country’s oil money. Everything he did served that interest. Everything. He wasn’t out to prove any particular point or engage in any religious jihad. He was out to line his pockets.
Everything about it stunk. And the history of the region indicated that everything we were being told, including all the way back to fucking 1991, stunk.
Any curious person willing to ask the tough questions could have gotten enough information to say, hold on. What the hell is the rush to have this war?
It was just bullshit. And the Hillaries of the world blew it. They blew it big time, and now they want a pass?
FUCK THEM.
Rome Again
Yup. It was obvious to me when I was nothing more than a married administrative assistant with “some college”. I’m poli-sci geek. It wasn’t that hard to figured out if you just didn’t take politicians at their word.
The whole “mushroom cloud” thing stunk to high heaven to me.
Rome Again
Whoops! “I’m no poli-sci geek” I meant to say.
ThymeZone
Classic, bullshit manipulation. Even if you took the yellow cake and aluminum tubes thing as a worst case scenario story, Iraq would have been years away from any weapon capability, and even if you had that happen … what could possibly be the motive or agenda for a thief to employ a nuclear weapon in the face of certain retaliatory destruction? Utter and complete bullshit from the get-go.
That anyone fell for this crap at the White House – Congress level only tells you how completely incompetant and self interested these assholes were. And the moral of this story is HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE.
All of them, and all the way. Hillary the lying bitch has not even come CLOSE to taking responsibility or explaining why we should now trust her with that power. Not even close.
Andrew
It’s even more basic than that. If a case has to be made to convince people to fight a war, then that war is not worth fighting. The end.
ThymeZone
Agreed. FDR and ‘a day that will live in infamy’ was a fair sales job, but the calculated campaign of fear and plausible deniability mounted by these fuckheads was treasonous AFAIC.
And Congressional oversight? Complete, utter failure. And I am not willing to give them a pass or a mulligan.
This is the ONE THING that they have to do right. They did it wrong. THEY’RE FIRED.
Get out, bring in new people who can do the job.
Punchy
No. It was WAY easy to be fooled. Colin Powell had “pictures” of “mobile labs”. Maybe YOU know what mobile bio-labs look like, but I don’t, and most didnt either. So when he showed the world these pics, most believed. While I didn’t buy the line about AQ and Saddam, I did about the WMDs. Why wouldn’t I have trusted these guys circa late 2002/early 2003? What had they done dishonestly up to that point (that we knew about–very important qualifier)?
Pb
I believe the war supporter calculation went something like this… The first Gulf War was a cakewalk, therefore the second Gulf War will be a cakewalk, ergo, if you don’t support the President on this now, you’ll just end up looking weak and stupid later on.
Of course, the military phase of both operations was relatively quick and easy as these things go, because… repeat after me… Iraq really isn’t that much of a military threat, period, never was. So what’s the difference? Subsequently trying to take and hold the whole country and convert it to a Democracy… now that was the really stupid part. If Bush had just finished the mission in the ‘Mission Accomplished’ speech instead, I’d think that Hillary’s star would be a lot brighter now… along with Bush’s.
mrmobi
Personally, I was paying attention, and when Colin Powell stepped up and put his reputation on the line at the U.N., I accepted the claims of WMD, based pretty much solely on his personal integrity.
There was plenty of really stupid bullshit going on at that time, including slamming our European allies as “surrender monkeys,” but Colin turned me, shame on me. I guess for former Generals, loyalty to party trumps the truth. If he didn’t know, he must have been mighty suspicious, but he just sat there and did his job.
On Hillary, you’ve got to remember she studied with the greatest triangulator of this era, the Clenis. I’d vote for her if that is what this incredibly fucked-up primary process ends up delivering, but I won’t like it.
I’ve got to agree with you, TZ, about staying mad about this. This is no time for non-binding resolutions. It’s time for adults to stop this catastrofuck in its’ tracks.
It’s time to expose what “supporting the troops” really means to the party of torture. Have you all seen this WaPo article?
I guess now I know what all those bumper stickers mean.
Rome Again
Well, for starters, they were PNAC imperialists, many of them coming from former Republican administrations that chose to do things in ways that were not kosher (Nixon, Reagan, Bush? aka Watergate/Iran Contra/BCCI/etc…) and wrote a document asking for pre-emptive war to reshape the hotspots of the world into an American vision. ??
Pb
The whole rush to war was just that–obviously rushed and bogus, what with the shifting rationalizations and the refusal to let the weapons inspectors do their jobs, and the intense focus on Iraq to the point of outright ignoring North Korea’s continuing proclamations of nuclear weapons capabilities, etc., etc.
Rome Again
that’s a bad link mrmobi… got another? I’m interested in reading that material.
mrmobi
Sorry about that link.
I guess I don’t know how to do that yet.
It from today’s WaPo, about conditions at Walter Reed Hospital.
ThymeZone
They believed because they were lazy, didn’t follow an effective process, didn’t ask tough questions.
They blew it. If they can’t do the job, then get people who can and will.
If you aren’t willing to demand that, then you just have to settle for what you have now.
Maybe you will, but I won’t. Not even close.
Pb
mrmobi,
Colin Powell is–as Col. Wilkerson described him–“the world’s most loyal soldier”. Which is probably why Colin Powell had this to say in Vietnam regarding the My Lai massacre:
He didn’t change a bit–rather, that’s exactly how he got to where he was in government–through loyalty to the executive.
Pb
mrmobi,
You just accidentally stuck a space in the middle of the link–here it is.
Rome Again
Agreed Pb.
ThymeZone
I appreciate the support but it’s not about “staying mad.”
It’s about knowing what a government is for, and holding it to a high standard, and expecting the people IN IT to hold themselves to high standards, and to create, adopt and follow processes that prevent stupid catastrofucks from happening in the first place. Only a few years ago we trusted these FUCKHEADS with the keys to nuclear annihilation. And this is the best they can do with the fucking little problem of Iraq and its nonexistent fucking weapons of mass destruction?
It’s worse than a disgrace, it’s treasonous, as I said, and I will not sit here and be placated by the spinnish lawyerly self serving crap dished out by the likes of Hilllary Clinton or anyone else in the boat she is in.
She.Did.Not.Do.Her.Fucking.Job.
ThymeZone
I cannot fucking believe that people here are falling for this “whoops” crap.
Here’s what you have to believe to fall for it:
Hillary Clinton, big time First Lady and Senator, watches Powell at the UN on tv along with the rest of us. Like me, poor old ppGaz out here in Arizona.
ppGaz is not convinced. He has questions, he has issues with the history of the region, with the rationale for the war, with the WMD story being told which makes no fucking sense at all. He says, this war is not justified. Keep digging, keep searching for the answers.
Clinton says, “Welp, I’m convinced, I vote for war.”
Four years later, here we are … and you are going to sit there and tell me that SHE WAS RIGHT TO DO WHAT SHE DID?
AND WHAT? I WAS FUCKING WRONG?
Cut the fucking crap, people. You have a government that shot itself, and us, in the ass. Get a new government.
What part of this don’t you fucking get????
Rome Again
I got it from the beginning like you, TZ, but apparently, we’re a rarity.
Andrew
Their greatest sin, of course, was not their falling for Powell’s “Oh noes, WMDs!” presentation, but that people fell for the administration line that we must invade if they had WMDs. The game was over well before the UN fiasco, as the administration could (and did) make up whatever technical information they wanted, to fit their “WMD = must invade” story line.
ThymeZone
Well, either everybody here is a goddammed concern troll spoof, or else they really do deserve the government they have right now.
What the fuck? Do people think that good government is going to be handed to them on a silver platter?
You have to demand it, and it starts right here. If you can’t hold Hillary Clinton accountable for her Iraq war vote, then frankly, you don’t belong on a blog, or in a voting booth. You deserve whatever the Saudi Royal Family thinks is good enough for you, and you should just shut the hell up, bend over, and take it in the ass.
Rome Again
I’m taking my crystal ball and going into business as a clairvoyant. It apparently is a necessary skill.
ThymeZone
That’s why the Founders gave us a congress.
Which is only a good thing if they DO THEIR FUCKING JOBS.
Rome Again
Their greatest sin, of course, was not their falling for Powell’s “Oh noes, WMDs!” presentation, but that people fell for the administration line that we must invade if they had WMDs.
Absolutely!
mrmobi
Pb, thanks for fixing and re-posting the WaPo link.
That link about Powell and My Lai is saddening. It appears he has always been loyal to a fault.
Rome Again
mrmobi, I take some responsibility for the bedding at
Walter Reid. My father sold them that bedding. I fear he made more on the commission then the government paid for the product itself.
ThymeZone
I don’t think a black man gets to be a general in the US Army by being a maverick.
The really sad thing about Powell is that he was right about Iraq, and they didn’t listen to him. He also knew that the dog and pony show at the UN was bullshit, right?
But again, we have a congress. Their job is to take the war mongering administration and hold their feet to the fire. Not to cave in, to be totally lazy, to let 911 fears cloud their judgment. To ask tough questions, demand tough answers, not scary rhetoric. Facts, corroborations, plans. Measurables. Understandable goals. Congruence with history. Whatever it takes to prevent Iraqs from happening, that’s what they are supposed to do, and they did not do it.
Rome Again
You mean it’s not “just a job” TZ? (you KNOW I don’t mean that, or you BETTER know…)
S.W. Anderson
I can understand people not wanting Hillary Clinton to get the nomination for several credible reasons. That she voted to authorize the use of force in Iraq in ’03 isn’t one of those credible reasons.
In fact, that vote can be justified on the basis of a widely shared belief at the time that even George W. Bush wouldn’t deliberately lie and mislead about something as costly and dangerous as going to war. It can be justified as an intention to err on the side of national security. It can be justified at least in part as unwillingness to allow herself and other Democrats to spend decades more being branded as weak on defense.
Now, as a candidate, she’d like to deny opponents in both parties the useful pleasure of tagging her as a hopeless flip-flopper, since only Bush can get away with chronic and recurring flip-floppery. So, she won’t come out and say she made a godawful mistake voting for authorization — of being for it before she was against it.
There is a technical justification for that vote. So far, as best I can tell, Hillary has passed on making it. It’s the one where the senator explains in detail how a vote for authorization is actually different from a vote to invade.
To my mind, that argument is too much like triangulating and being too cute by half. You can call what she’s been doing those things, but I give her credit for not bowing to the pressure of those who want her to admit a horrible mistake and then grovel.
I’m not endorsing her for the nomination, just weighing in on her refusal to say her ’03 vote was a mistake.
Rome Again
Hence I’m still an Independent… I will not change my affiliation back to DEM until I see real change.
ThymeZone
No sale, at all. One did not have to believe that Bush was lying, only that he was wrong. Erring on the side of national security only works as a defense if one concludes that invasion is the result of that error. There was no proof of that, at all. In point of fact, erring on the side of security would have resulted in NOT invading. And the Dems-weak thing? If the Dems cave in to that con job because they are afraid to stand up, then guess what?
They are fucking weak, and deserve the rap.
Nope, no sale at all. And every day that Clinton fails to address these truths and take real responsbility for what she did is, I hope, one day closer to the day when her bid is toast. She deserves to be gone from the Senate, not promoted.
Andrew
A belief widely shared by people not qualified to run for city council, let alone Congress.
Guess what? You don’t Jesus (not the yard guy) on his word on matters of war. You sure as fuck don’t trust an alcoholic cokehead puppet of PNAC.
Andrew
Er, that’s “take Jesus on his word…”
Pb
You’d think that anyone in Congress worth a good goddamn would at least have known something about Dick Cheney (and friends), his past history, and his role in this. As for Bush, even if he didn’t “deliberately lie and mislead” (fat chance), he could still be misled as well–the man has all the intellectual curiosity of a box of rocks–or less.
Rome Again
Six points! and POTD!
ThymeZone
While true and the point well taken, in fact, congress’ job is not to take any president’s “word” on any of this.
If all they do is “take the word” of the executive, then oversight is just a myth.
They can be tough and do their jobs no matter who the president is. If it costs them reelection, then too bad. They either do their job, or they don’t.
Hillary Clinton, along with a lot of other lazy people over there on the Hill, did not do her damned job.
Rome Again
Oversight, hmmmm, an interesting and profound idea.
S.W. Anderson
That’s a valid point, but to get there the Congress critters would’ve had to go against the president and what they were being told was the best assessment of the intelligence machinery.
I think it’s relevant that six and a half years removed from 9-11 and four years from the invasion, clearer heads can look back at the purported evidence about how dangerous Iraq was supposed to be and find it almost absurd. Hindsight is always 20/20.
While I’m not ready to join you in it, TZ, I can appreciate how you feel and why you feel that way.
Rome Again
Pg, thanks for posting that Frontline link. Clicking the Clinton timeline activities brings up a very interesting read. Truly appreciated.
Rome Again
Pb, apologies, I have a computer with a skipping mouse. Sorry for the name change, I changed my own name as well, yesterday, accidentally.
CaseyL
Enough people weren’t fooled – including members of Congress who voted against the AUMF – to undermine Clinton’s argument.
I remember the run-up to the war. The stovepipe intelligence story was reported; Powell’s presentation to the UN was debunked right after he made it; Bush’s claims about Iraq purchasing yellowcake (those famous 16 words) were known to be false. And that’s not even including how the Bush Admin worked mighty hard to tie Iraq to the 9/11 attacks and to OBL, which was also known to be bullshit at the time.
Andrew
Indeed, I recall that many of the “facts” were debunked within hours, certainly days. In particular, the mobile bio-weapons labs that looked like concept art for a RTS game with dismissed very quickly.
KC
Who didn’t see this coming? I really wish Hillary would have focused on her Senate career.
Zifnab
No, I don’t think the game they played was obvious. You had Colen Powell in front of the UN saying “Here are pictures of mobile weapons labs, here are sources who say they know he’s got weapons, here are CIA reports that clearly state Saddam had and is building weapons. Nigerian Yellowcake. Al-Qaeda contacts.”
Reading this in the paper, day after day, without all these allegations and Plamegates and empty stockpiles coming to light till much later, my general response to the Iraq Invasion was “It’s not how I would have done it, but I’m not the President.” No one knew about “The Office of Special Plans” or “Curveball” then. It was perfectly rational to assume that Bush was trying to nip another Afganistan in the bud. At least from where I was sitting.
Chuck Butcher
How about we back up the train on the “I was lied to and believed it,” crap. One quarter of the Senators voted against the Authorization, some folks on the comments list figured it out, I figured it out, and the POLLS showed war hugely positive. I wonder how the hell these “in the Know” people got mislead. The fact is that 20some Senators took political risk to vote against it. A bunch of Democrats caved. If C Powell was your idea of a credible hero type independent thinker, then you bought the media pap and not the published reality of Powell. He was almost as much a power center shill as Condi.
Hillary sucks, not because the Right loathes her, she sucks because she’s a poll driven corporate whore who believes in an imperial presidency. The media is starting to pay attention to the price she’s paying for her Senatorial junk, it’ll get worse as the questions get louder.
Rome Again
Well, then all I can say is our seats must have not been located in any adjacent sections.
tBone
You seem to be confusing me with someone who likes Hillary Clinton.
I don’t agree with her equivocations on Iraq, I hope she doesn’t get the nomination, and if I end up having to vote for her I’m going to need a giant clothespin and barf bag to do it.
I was just saying, I think it’s possible to sell the “no one could have anticipated we would be misled into war” argument (even though I think it’s a load of crap) – but I don’t know if she’s capable of doing it.
Andrew
If you love Hillary so much, tbone, why don’t you marry her?
Perry Como
Gay marriage is illegal, moonbat.
DougJ
Did you guys see this about the big Republican donor sending 150K to terrorists in Afghanistan? Good story, huh?
Perry Como
It just shows how much Republicans support the War on Terror.
tBone
I hate you whackjobs.
And I would marry Hillary, but I’d be afraid that her ex-husband would add me to the vast trail of victims he’s left in his wake. I don’t want to end up ‘killing myself’ in Fort Marcy Park or being murdered by a train or something.
tBone
Wake up, moonbat. The money was transferred to a bank account in Montreal. Presumably the funds are being disbursed throughout the Canuckistani insurgency as we speak. So, obviously this plot was related to the War on Christmas, not the War on Terror. How ‘honest’ of you to pretend otherwise just so you could bash Republicans.
Scruffy McSnufflepuss
Well, if the lock on the front door is really, really complicated…
When Colin Powell gave that speech at the UN, I felt like he’d sacrificed a lifetime’s reputation for integrity, any chance at ever becoming President, and the lives of God-knows-how-many Americans, all for the sake of his boss. He’s not the only person whose reputation (deserved or undeserved) has been tarnished since 2000 by working with Bush, though. The list goes on and on: Christie Todd Whitman, McCain, Blair, Lieberman, Hillary, Daschle, etc., etc., etc. Think of all the careers ruined or crippled by the Bush touch, and it’s kind of impressive.
One good thing I’ll say for Brownback is that in 2000, when the Northern Alliance sent emissaries to Congress to ask for military aid in fighting the Taliban, he was the only person in Congress who would meet with them to hear their case. No one else could be bothered. He’s batshit crazy, he’s a theocrat, and he wouldn’t get my vote unless you- literally- held a gun to my head, but I have to give him credit for trying to do something about the Taliban threat at a time when not many people in Congress, or in America, really gave two shits. (I’m not sure if he buddied up to Clinton and Richard Clark on this issue, but somehow I doubt it.)
DougJ
Better to fund the terrorists over there than to have them looking for money over here. Smart. Strong.
tBone
I can’t wait to hear all the stories about how growing up in a conservative Republican suburb led him to support terrorists.
DougJ
I’ll bet it was the fact that he grew up in such a liberal state. It left him no choice but to send money to terrorists.
That or he was undercover.
Zifnab
Even then, I’d like to know who else was on the ballot.
Scruffy McSnufflepuss
It was that damn liberal New Yorker culture. Even a staunchly Republican brain can get infected by it eventually.
Perry Como
I would expect that kind of extreme position from a Leftard. Let me guess, you also think the Earth revolves around the Sun? I hope you shout it from the rooftops so people can see how far out there you really are.
Scruffy McSnufflepuss
Fuck you DougJ, you stole my joke!
Well, maybe he was masturbating to Hustler magazine spreads of Anna Nicole Smith spread-eagled, and accidental perusal of the liberal tripe in the rest of the magazine subconsciously led him into the arms of radical Islamists. So really, I think when the dust settles we’ll be able to pin this one on Larry Flynt.
Touche.
Scruffy McSnufflepuss
Now, let’s look at this objectively for a minute. Granted, dinosaurs only lived for a thousand years or so between the Creation and the Flood; but still, wouldn’t their stompings cause the Earth to move? What if they rolled us right off that turtle’s back? Wouldn’t we all have gone plummeting into the void to Hell, if not for the Infinite Love of God causing magical forced to swoop us safely around the Sun once or twice, to settle majestically back onto the shell of the Giant Turtle?
I’m not saying that the Earth still revolves around the Sun; but isn’t it possible that the dinosaurs made us revolve around it once or twice before the Universe was set aright again? And wouldn’t that explain why God didn’t want Noah to bring any dinosaurs on board the Ark? They sinned; they paid for it.
I bet there’s a whole level in Hell where you get chased by the demon spirits of dinosaurs. Take THAT, moonbats!
DougJ
I realize maybe this guy is on the other side, but at least he’s not trying to defund his troops. More than you can say for John Murtha. I’ll take a guy who sends money to terrorists over a guy who won’t spend more money on our troops any day.
tBone
Bingo. That’s got to be it. He was just sending money to the terrorists so he could gain access to their financial records and discover all of the Hollywood liberals who donated.
tBone
Let’s not overcomplicate this. The elephants holding up the turtle probably caught anyone who fell off with their tusks and tossed them back up. (It goes without saying that the elephants were just instruments of God’s will, of course.)
Perry Como
“Secular Jew” Hollywood liberals.
tBone
Well, yeah. If the terrorists didn’t have enough money to continue their operations, it would just give the Democrat Party an excuse to cut funding to our troops. So really, it was his patriotic duty to send the terrorists whatever he could spare.
tBone
Redundant.
DougJ
I think that’s what Sean Penn was doing when he was down in New Orleans “saving” people. Think about it: a big disaster, chaos everywhere, it’s the perfect opportunity to transport large sums of cash to terrorists. It’s the oldest trick in the book.
tBone
Now the big excuse is that they’re “adopting Third World babies.” Has anyone ever seen Angelina Jolie’s or Madonna’s “adopted” children? If they actually exist, they’re probably just used as mules to smuggle cash to terrorists.
Frank
CaseyL- I think you put your finger on something fundamental here: “And that’s not even including how the Bush Admin worked mighty hard to tie Iraq to the 9/11 attacks and to OBL, which was also known to be bullshit at the time.”
But I have to say; Known to SOME.
IIRC about half the population still thinks OBL and Saddam were working together.
Most people don’t have the time or inclination to figure out what is going on. And some just dont have the brains.
Andrew
This was a secret area in Doom 2.
The Other Steve
Well, it’s CBS… So what do you expect but liberal pandering?
And you look at the reporting, it’s just sloppy
Which is it? Pakistan or Afghanistan? Can’t very well setup an Afghanistan terrorist training camp in Pakistan, now can you?
And this crap…
How is any of this relevant?
And who is to say that these were terrorists he was sending money to. They could very well have been freedom fighters, preparing our way to liberate Pakistan from the islamofascists!
In fact, I’ll bet that he was part of a super secret under cover government operation which has just been busted wide open by the liberal media at CBS!
As much whining as you moonbats do about Valerie Plame, you’d think you’d have some respect for this kind of covert operation.
Andrew
jake
Translation: People who gave us a lot of cash. As for his being named Businessman of the Year by the NRCC, I know two people who have received this honour and neither man would shit on a Republican if you offered him a footlocker full of Benjamin Franklins.
I tell you, crap like this will put The Onion out of business.
tBone
Either/or.
To be fair to Angelina, though, I think she probably has a dual motive for adopting Third World kids: 1) so that the adoption fees can be funneled to terrorist organizations, and 2) if she doesn’t feed on the blood of an infant at least once or twice a week, her lips and breasts begin to deflate.
Perry Como
Angelina Jolie and Nancy Pelosi are the same person?
Zifnab
Notice they’re never in the same place at the same time. Someone should post this on FreeRepublic. I think we’re on to something.
Perry Como
I was thinking of writing a hard hitting diary on RedState.
DougJ
How come we never hear about the Republican donors who _don’t_ send money to terrorist camps in Afghanistan? Is it because the liberal media is too lazy to get out of their offices on the Upper West Side and go looking for them?
Andrew
You know, I think it’s gay for tBone to not marry Hillary, and then have a 3/4-way with Hil and Angelina/Nancy.
whatsleft
Sorry I’m so late to the party, but here’s my $.02 on Hillary – I stopped liking her when she sat there as the dutiful wife squeezing her (multiple times) unfaithful husband’s hand as he lied to the nation. Now, don’t get me wrong, I’m not blaming Bill for the lying – that’s only natural. At the time I thought, well, certainly she’ll divorce him after 2000, but noooo. So, her integrity factor has sucked down to zero for me.
As for Teh War Vote – I’m with TZ, except that besides being able to see the fairly transparent lies coming from the White House, I held the position then and now that America should not attack any person or country based on what we THINK that person or country MIGHT do. It’s just wrong. And it’s proven to be spectacularly wrong, and it has taken our troops, time and attention from the perpetrators of Sept. 11, which is seriously wrong.
Perry Como
I’m really glad we invaded Iraq to fight al Qaeda:
Take that Defeatocrats!
Pb
Zifnab,
False.
ThymeZone
Off topic, but since it’s the live thread:
This is some background on the Jet Blue story.
Reading between the lines, you can get an idea the complexity of airline operations. JB just isn’t a mature airline in this regard and isn’t up to handling disaster recovery. Complete collapse of their systems.
Of course, if you want the “EVIL!” ranting bullshit for sale around here, you can always go with that. But I’ve always preferred facts.
There are few things in the world that happen on a daily basis, to compare with the complexity of airline operations. You can’t tell what’s going on from the inside of a tarmac-bound airplane. Period.
Punchy
Please…just let this go. Exhale. Focus on Hillary.
Andrew
Revised:
I think that tbone is gay if he doesn’t marry Hillary on a JetBlue flight that is stuck in Baltimore.
Also, he should travel back in time and have a chat with Vince Foster.
tBone
Up yours, pal. I’m going to take a JetBlue flight and get married to Hillary on Vincent Foster’s grave. Then we’ll hop on Nancy/Angelina’s C-32 and fly all over the country with no particular destination in mind, just to waste taxpayer money. We may even travel overseas for a fresh batch of infants. That’ll show you.
Scruffy McSnufflepuss
That settles it, then.
I’ve been thinking a lot about this terrorism problem, and maybe it’s becoming a case of “if you can’t beat ’em, join ’em.” Maybe that’s what the New York GOP guy was on to, as well.
Look, we all want the same thing as these Islamists anyway: perpetual war, a ready supply of money, and global theocracy of one sort or another. Maybe we can make a deal with them. If they start donating money to the GOP, instead of the other way around, we’ll start meeting them halfway with cocaine shipments and weapons supplies for their fight against the Franco-German troops in Afghanistan. We’ll pull our troops out of there, and send them over to Iraq to bring freedom to that country. So the terrorists can have Afghanistan, plus new and improved supply lines and drug shipments, but we get to have more troops in Iraq plus a Huckabee/Brownback Presidency in 2008. If the media gets ahold of this story, we can always point out that the Democrats didn’t have a plan for winning in Iraq or Afghanistan or anywhere else, while our plan solves all our problems; also, that Bush’s willingness to implement the plan despite the outraged snipings of some ANSWER-placard-waving leftards demonstrates his commitment to American security. (Also, this plan will help keep the Saudis happy, too, especially if we start helping the Sunnis wipe out the Shiite majority to regain control of the country.)
How come we don’t hear the good news about donating money to Al Qaeda? I thought making friends in the Middle East was supposed to be a good thing. All of a sudden, when a Republican starts doing it, you moonbats get really picky about whom we’re friends with. Typical leftist tripe. It really shows how dishonest you leftist kooks really are.
Scruffy McSnufflepuss
Don’t forget to tie up air traffic at LAX for an hour while you get haircuts and manicures. That’ll always piss decent Americans off.
Punchy
As if the AQ youngsters dont need fillings for their choppers, contact lenses to improve their eyesight and shooting accuracy, and vitamins to keep them healthy and strong and in prime close-combat-like-in-a-fuselage fighting shape.
It’s only a matter of time before I see those infomercials, with flies buzzing all over the place, with some poor AQ child in need of a warm meal and armor-piercing hollow-points for only like 13 cents a day. Where’s my checkbook?
DougJ
You just don’t like them because they threw those mullahs off the plane that time.
Scruffy McSnufflepuss
\
Most of the funding deficit will be made up for by a drug partnership with them, in which illicit funds are split with the Taliban and AQ and used to finance covert operations against the Shiite mullahs in Iran.
Your quarter a day is helpful, but your dime-bag-a-day heroin habit will be of even greater assistance. Won’t THOSE make fun commercials?
Zifnab
Scruffy, I don’t know what you’re talking about. We’ve always been at war with Eurasia.
ThymeZone
You’re slipping, Doug.
One, different airline.
Two, I supported the deplaning of the mullahs. It was the right call, and it will be again the next time it happens, which it will. In fact, boarding refusals and deplanings happen every day. No big deal.
tBone
Good call. If we could find a stylist who does hair, nails, and recreational abortions, we’d be all set.
Punchy
Becuase said group was praying? Really…this happens every day? The Christian Coalition gets booted for too many “Amen”s? Orthy Jews denied because beards are too long and/or robes are too disconcerting?
Oh, PLEASE link to this! I had NO IDEA this happened on a daily basis.
Hey, TZ–define “it” here. Otherwise, shorter TZ: “No Muslims allowed on airplanes”
Wow.
Scruffy McSnufflepuss
S
We have? Well, I don’t know who Eurasia is, or where they are, but if we’ve always been at war with them I think we should nuke them. Maybe Al Qaeda doesn’t like them either. Perhaps we could all see eye to eye on this Eurasian threat thing.
Scruffy McSnufflepuss
Also, pray to Mecca. Tie all of America’s foes up in one Hillary-connected flight. Good luck with all that.
Richard 23
Sensible policies for a sensible America.
Richard 23
Well, if All*h is so powerful, he can give them a magic carpet ride. Maybe someone should start a GOP-only airline. Moonbats and mooselimbs need not apply.
ThymeZone
Jesus, nmym, you guys are thickheaded and tedious.
Sorter TZ: Airlines (via their employees on the scene) pretty much decide who flies. The end.
That’s the way it has always been and will always be, and should be, and must be.
If you don’t like it, you can always use some other form of transportation.
Or you could sit around here trying to hook social and political crap to a situation that has no social or political imperatives or protocols.
Nope. Because the crew decided not to fly them. It’s their call, and it doesn’t get second-guessed, and won’t.
Again, don’t like it? Don’t fly.
Punchy
So…no Blacks can fly if the pilot says so? I’m going to call United and ask. I SWEAR there was an amendment to the Constitution about this….
I cannot WAIT for my first all-white, all-Christian, no-fat-chicks, or crying babies flight. After all, if the crew wants it, they get it. TZ knows this.
The Other Steve
I gotta ask… Why?
I think it’s interesting. With Americans divorcing one another for far less, these two stuck together.
And they did it without some law forcing them to stay together.
Punchy
Lets apply this logic to other stuff…
Dont like the Government? Dont vote.
Dont like that men make more than women? Dont work!
Dont like the prices of food? Dont buy any food!
Dont like health insurance premiums? Dont buy any insurance!
Sounds about right.
Andrew
A friend of mine had a nice saying about sitting next to fat people on airplanes:
Normally, it sucks, but if you have no shame, they’re quite comfortable.
Pb
IIRC, TZ’s position on this one was essentially that, on his airplane, the pilot is King–which is true at least once the plane starts moving. However, this particular case had nothing to do with that, and a lot to do with apparently false hearsay from a third party that shouldn’t be enough to get anyone, anywhere removed from a plane. So come on, U.S. Airways, get a policy on this one–can six obviously religious Muslim men be permitted to fly on one of your airplanes in America, or not? That’s essentially the question.
Richard 23
No fat chicks and no welfare queens.
Richard 23
I think Pb is on the right track here. Throw them from the plane once it begins taxiing or is already in flight. That’ll discourage swarthy people from boarding in the first place.
Zifnab
I totally give that airline a month before it A) racks up half a dozen lawsuits by the ACLU, B) leaves over half its flights on the tarmac for over 8 hours each, C) gets hijacked by religious extremists who received discount tickets to fly first class, D) gets a citation for most number of drunken on-duty aviators, E) goes bankrupt and comes crawling to the federal government for a bail-out, and F) embezzles more than a million dollars from its shareholders of which at least one dollar in ten gets funneled to the RNC.
That’s assuming the whole business isn’t a front for lobbyist campaign contributions.
Zifnab
and one dollar in three gets funneled to Global Warming denial.
DougJ
Smart. Strong.
I suppose you’d rather that _all_ the money get sent to terrorist training camps.
DougJ
You’re forgetting that the whole thing would be run by 26 year-old interns from the Heritage Foundation.
Zombie Santa Claus
I hope Huckabee runs on it. He’ll win my vote, that’s for sure.
Damn straight. How else are we supposed to make friends with them if we don’t send them money, weapons, and cocaine, help them smuggle heroin into America, and team up to undermine the mullahs of Tehran and the, the whatevers of Eurasia?
whatsleft
TZ – thanks for asking – because sucking up public humiliation for a bad or broken marriage is one thing. Continuing to enable it, and trying to exact political benefit from it shrieks lack of personal integrity to me. If you stay married to a hound, that says to me that you have character and self-esteem issues. I don’t see the “sticking together” as laudable, but rather self-serving, passive-agressive, and very unhealthy.
whatsleft
Doh! Not response to TZ, but to TOS. Darn unable-to-edit feature
tBone
Hmm, yeah. Let’s try this:
That should do it. There’s got to be thousands of people who would be qualified in San Francisco alone.
ThymeZone
Marriage is not a union between one man and one dog?
A lot of hill people are going to be disappointed.
whatsleft
It’s not the marrying of the hound, TZ, it’s the STAYING married. Card-carrying leftards do not discriminate against inter-species relations, dontcha know!
Zifnab
Can we give the hound an abortion?
whatsleft
That’s a choice between the bitch and her vet. Did you not get your DLC talking points today?
Scruffy McSnufflepuss
Don’t forget Poland!
I recall Santorum saying something about it. I forget if he was for it or against it, though. Maybe he was for it before he was against it.
Not me. I’m pro-life. I feel very strongly about this.
CaseyL
If lack of personal integrity was your only criterion for judging a politician’s fitness for office, hardly any of then would pass your muster, since an awful lot of them have screwed up personal lives in one way or another.
Take McCain, for example: here’s a man sucking up to the same people who slimed his family. One of these days, his ‘bastard nigger daughter’ is going to come face to face with the very people who put out that ghastly attack – who her daddy is now making nice to. What kind of parent does that to their kid?
Or take Giuliani, or Gingrich, whose martrimonial dealings are the stuff of legend. Giuliani, who kicked his wife out of the Governor’s Mansion so his girlfriend could move in. Gingrich, who told his first wife he was leaving her while she was still in the hospital recovering from cancer surgery; and told his second wife he was leaving her while she was attending to her dying mother.
Are you crossing everyone off your list who ever treated their families badly? Or is your beef not with the ones who caused the hurt, but the ones who suffered it, and didn’t respond as you think appropriate?
whatsleft
Not to worry – McCain, Giuliani and Gingrich are absolutely crossed off as well.
And no, that is not my sole criterion. In addition to listening to the voices which penetrate my stylish shiny metal hat, I try to judge people by the totality of their actions. While the incidents previously cited put me off of Hillary, her actions subsequent for the most part cemented that judgement.
But I’m not crossing off all who ever treated their families badly, just ones who deal with it so very poorly. I think you would agree that all of these people listed meet with tha criterion, yes? After all, those family dynamics will continue to intimately affect a leader on nearly a daily basis. If you cannot deal with your own family with integrity, how can I expect you to treat me with integrity?
Do I expect people not to be human? I hope not.
CaseyL
Well, the weird thing is, I kind of agree with you, insofar as the decisions one makes in one’s personal life aren’t usually worlds different from the policy ones. It’s the same decision-making apparatus, after all, and the same mentality/personality at work.
I’m just not sure what Clinton’s determination to keep her marriage intact means, though. Whether it means she’ll settle for less than optimal in the name of a greater good, or settle for less than optimal because she lacks the imagination to insist on, or look for, something better.
I don’t think she stays with Bill for Lady MacBeth reasons, though. Their marriage has had ups and downs too long (I mean, if it was all about power, she could’ve left him after he lost re-election back in 1980; or at any time before he decided to go for the Presidency: being First Lady of Arkansas isn’t exactly top of the world, y’know?).
I don’t know why, really, people find it hard to believe she loves him. Bill Clinton is a spell-binding, charismatic, brilliant man. Quite frankly, given a choice between him and someone who’s faithful but uninteresting, incurious and dull? – I’d keep Bill.
raj
Well, of course sHillary will never be pResident. She isn’t as good a liar as Bill.
Bill was an excellent snake-oil salesperson. sHill just can’t pull it off. Must be different coming from Illinois instead of from Arkansas.
Love the nickname for Romney, btw.
Stop Hillary
Jump onto the Stop Hillary Express.
http://www.cafepress.com/stophillaryexp
Stop Hillary
Hillary Clinton is a communist.
http://www.cafepress.com/comradehillary