I actually cringed reading the piece on Rep. Dave Reichert in this morning’s Seattle Times. It starts out so fawning and trite, I would have shredded the paper to pieces if I wasn’t reading it online. But as the piece continued, it started to reveal the real Reichert to readers. I just hope most people read as far as I did.
I don’t know if it was the reporter’s fault or that of the editor, but if you only read the headline and the first half of the article you’d think Reichert was a rising superstar, instead of the fumbling, pretty-boy loyalist he’s proven to be during his first term. But in that sense this piece is kind of the perfect metaphor for Reichert himself: all hairdo, no head.
While you may have trouble keeping your breakfast down reading about Reichert’s supposed “courage” and “old-fashioned grit,” keep reading until you get to the heart of the piece:
Tall, with a strong resemblance to actor Leslie Nielsen, his demeanor reflected “suave” and “aw, shucks” simultaneously. Capitol Hill papers called him a potential star.
“He’s right out of central casting,” Peter King, R-N.Y, said.
But Reichert’s shiny finish began wearing off almost as soon as he was sworn in.
He was late setting up his office, and finding advisers and issues
C’mon Goldy, give Rubberstamp his due — he’s been a good representative for K Street. Too bad he doesn’t represent the district he was elected from; but these days, where your home district is, is only a technicality.
RubberStampReichert gets a free pass because he’s a republican. Period. It seems like the so-called “liberal” media isn’t so liberal after all. They’ve been sucking the republican cock for six years now and they’re worried they’ll looooooose their precious access if they just do their fucking jobs. Journalism used to be the last protection from a corrupt government. No more.
If it weren’t for the blogs, all we’d ever see is republican press releases dumped word-for-word into the MSM.
Jeez – WA sends Reichart and Murray to DC, two of the dimmest bulbs in Congress. What is it with our state?
The wingnuts just hate it that Patty is so popular.
2 things: You don’t cringe when Hillary Clinton gets described as “centrist”, due to carefully crafted votes she’s taking to create that image. (we all know the REAL Hilarious, from her actions in the early years of her husband’s administration)
Patty Murray sure didn’t return her Abramoff money (didn’t Cantwell get some, too?) and you sure didn’t have a problem with THAT.
double standard here?
No Democrat has been arrested, indicted, received a subpoena or been convicted for taking illegal money from Jackoff Jack the republican lobbyist.
However more than 20 republicans have met that criteria and several of them are in or on their way to jail. But you wingers don’t say jack shit about that.
I have a problem with ILLEGAL contributions. Too bad you wingers don’t seem to care about RULE OF LAW unless it’s behind a Democrat getting his dick sucked.
You didn’t mention the last sentences in that silly article, to wit:
A pro-Reichert blogger, Orbusmax, critiqued the moment.
“I have hard time following him when he speaks … ,” the blogger wrote. “He mixed and mingled three stories of WTO rioting, riding with Ron Sims in the town car, and chasing down crooks that got filmed on TV.
“Sometimes I can’t figure out what his point is.”
Even his supporters sense he is a dim bulb.
Blog site Ace of Spades hit the proverbial nail: the Left is blackmailing America. “Give us back our power or we’ll destroy you. Elect Democrats or we of the media/Democratic party/Leftist organizations will have no concern for Americans’ safety and security whatsoever. We’ll totally ignore law and common sense and reveal whatever we want to reveal to anyone and everyone. We will enable our enemies and demoralize our military at every opportunity.” That’s basically what the NYT and the people they champion are saying to America.
Hey … this is the LIBERAL BIASED media!
What gives?
Please stop writing “to wit…” PLEASE!
That’s all I really have to say about this.
Here’s what is really happening:
The paper writes a review piece of each major candidate. Their goal is to provide a positive piece of the person, his/her background, history, etc.
There should be a similar piece on Darcy with minimal negatives.
They are informing the public about the candidates, their desires, their reasons for running.
Remember, running for office puts one in a position for continued negative criticism. These overview pieces serve to provide info about the candidates in a positive light before the negative stories go forward without restraint.
Man, somebody needs to let Congressman Pascarell in on the joke that is Reichert.
I mean, he comes off as a “useful idiot”, allowing Mundy and the Times to pretend that Dave is moderate and respected, to create the typical MSM double-talk of “fans on both sides of aisle”.
To be fair, though, the article isn’t completely fawning, though the real stuff is buried behind the feel-good crap. I wonder how much reordering was demanded by the editor/Blethen-lackey. And I also note that writers don’t produce their own headlines.
How the fuck can you criticize Reichert by asking if he’s got the brains, yet support Patty Murray? Yes, the Patty Murray who has won the “No Rocket Scientist” award for 5 years straight.
I mean… c’mon… she does what she’s told, but her dining set is clearly missing a couple of chairs…
It really bothers you , eh MTR? Then why did you assholes run Nethercutt against her? The man cannot speak! He has to have his family do the talking for him.
Why didn’t the formidable Ms. Dunn run against our poor Patty?
Hint: Because Patty would have handed Jen her head, too.
You, of all people, should understand the Patty style.
Although she pulls it off far better than you. She’s actually competent.
Murray never took money from Abramoff. She took money from the Indian tribes.
OH, I’m sorry. I forgot. It’s only bad if Republicans take money from Abramoff. How could I not see it?????
And who caught the Green River Killer and has done more for restoring law & order in the most lawless county in the state?
You?
Darcy Burner??
Frank Drebin???
Same reason you righties never see, you are lying.
It works this way:
Abramoff provided the Tigua Indian tribe with a spreadsheet to direct $300,000 in contributions to Republicans. The entire process would be completed between March and December of 2002. In March, the tribe began making the $300,000 in political contributions Abramoff requested, sending checks to organizations such as Majority Leader DeLay’s ARMPAC, Majority Whip Roy Blunt’s Rely on Your Beliefs PAC, Bob Ney’s American Liberty PAC. Ney agreed to deal with the language [allowing the gambling right] in the House and Abramoff told the Tiguas that Connecticut Democrat Chris Dodd would see that it was taken care of in the Senate. Ney was chair of the House committee dealing with the Help America Vote Act and would insert the innocuous line regarding the Tiguas into the bill. Dodd was carrying the bill in the Senate. In truth, Christopher Dodd was never in the deal. His staff had been approached by two Ney staffers asking about the Tigua language. Dodd dismissed the request. In late March, shortly after telling the Tiguas Ney would take care of their business, Abramoff requested $32,000 for the congressman. The money was forwarded through the senior director of governmental affairs in Greenberg Traurig’s D.C. office. The tribe only learned that Dodd was never on board when they contacted El Paso Congressman Sylvester Reyes, who then called Dodd. Without Dodd, there was no hope of delivering what was promised. Yet they kept the tribe invested in the process, while continuing to request political contributions and promise victory.
So, what Democrat did something like that?
Ooops. I erased a longer comment.
short version. In the first 3 years of Patty Murray’s first term I thought she was a light-weight pawn, but she clearly built up a staff to get her the information she needs to make careful deliberate decisions and periodic very independent decisions. Her letter/position statements that come back to letter writers are the most consistant and wide ranging I have ever encountered from a representative in the last 25 years. She may not be doing what I want all the time but she has an explaination she is willing to put on paper.
Reichert doesn’t appear to be trying to develop an independent system for arriving at any of his own decisions, and is quite happy to tell us that in fact he IS just following orders. AND he looks bloody lost and confused doing it!
18
DNA
Goldy,
Please stop insulting Leslie Nielsen in your post. Surely you better things to do.
Erik,
I do have better things to do but don’t call me Shirley.
Remeber when Dan Quayle said he was better looking than Robert Redford?
There’s a theme here.
Last week our enemies in the war on terror at the New York Times published a piece over the objections of the adminstration that detailed how we track the terrorist’s financial transactions.
How many of you agree with me that this is a treasonous act and it’s time for the feds to step in and shut down NYT?
Just wondering whose side y’all are on…
And, how ’bout those pop-up photos of McGavick, so prominent in the Times website? Just look at his thoughtful expression. You can just tell he really cares. How could anyone not trust Big Brother McGavick? It makes me feel all warm and fuzzy until I think about it and feel nauseus, (nauseated?) and frightened.
The story on the Green River Killer could have been painted very differently, however unfairly. Basically, they had the killer fingered 3 times in 1982 and 1983. Reichert was a lead on the team set up to find him, but Ridgeway killed more than 40 more people in the next 16 years. Is this good detective work? Is Reichert a super sleuth? A hero? Or did he just luck out when DNA technology finally ID’d, again, a man who was one of the most likely identified suspects from the begining?
What we do know is that the media and the Sheriff’s department managed to keep the large amount of poorly-managed misconduct in the Sheriff’s office from comming out until after Reichert was elected as a Representative. What the record now shows is that Reichert’s Sherrif’s office was a mix of professionalism riddled with old-fashioned cronyism, inepetitude, and vice.
The story on the Green River Killer could have been painted very differently, however unfairly. Basically, they had the killer fingered 3 times in 1982 and 1983. Reichert was a lead on the team set up to find him, but Ridgeway killed more than 40 more people in the next 16 years. Is this good detective work? Is Reichert a super sleuth? A hero? Or did he just luck out when DNA technology finally ID’d, again, a man who was one of the most likely identified suspects from the begining?
What we do know is that the media and the Sheriff’s department managed to keep the large amount of poorly-managed misconduct in the Sheriff’s office from comming out until after Reichert was elected as a Representative. What the record now shows is that Reichert’s Sherrif’s office was a mix of professionalism riddled with old-fashioned cronyism, inepetitude, and vice.
25
Since 9/11, the Treasury Department has made it clear that it makes every effort to track international financing of terror. The financiers of terrorists know this, and have long since moved as much as they can to cruder methods, but continue to use the international banking system when toting suitcases of cash becomes too onerous.
The only people the administration doesn’t want to know about the SWIFT transaction intercepts is the voters, the terrorists have been well aware of it.
So, no, it won’t be necessary to shut down the NYT.
Too bad RubberStampReichert wasn’t a good sheriff either. It took the fool decades to catch one perverted redneck whack job. I suppose the righties on this board are okay with Sheriff Davie taking 20 years to get something done for Washington state too!
MTR @ 25
You would shut down the New York Times? Your posts always hover around lunacy, but you’ve clearly crossed the line this time. The guarantee of the freedom of the press is a value far more important than anything that our current administration does. The press may from time to time make mistakes, but shutting it down is craziness. Bush has no credibility on any issue. Go New York Times!
Speaking of traitors, when the Dems take back Congress, we’re going to start hearings and find ways to put traitors like Dickless Chaney and Karl Marx Rove in the prison where the cowards belong.
proud leftist, What do you think Lincoln or FDR would have done to these POS traitors in wartime? Better question: What did Lincoln and FRD do doing wartime? Suspend habius corpus and created intern camps on the west coast. You libs are truely uneducated.
I’d be wary of anyone, including Murray, taking money from the tribes. Our own state is case in point. The tribes have poured so much money into the dem party that they now own them, and can get whatever legislation passed that they want.
Internet gambling? Do you really think that Margarita Prentice and Christine Gregoire care about this? They are just doing the bidding of the tribes, and eliminating the competition for their casinos. Same with the no-smoking ordinance. It was funded by the tribes as a means to shut down entertainment facilities other than their own.
If the tribes want to be a sovreign nation, then keep them out of our political process. Otherwise, make them subject to the laws and regulations of this nation.
REPUBLICANS PLAY POLITICS WITH WAR
Last week, GOP congressmen excorciated “cut and run” Democrats for demanding troop pullouts from Iraq. Just a day later, the top U.S. commander announced — troop pullouts from Iraq. Moreover, the withdrawals are timed to help the GOP in the fall elections, rather than being governed by military needs.
In other words, Republican liars and hypocrites are going to cut and run from Iraq to save their political hides.
“Report over troop withdrawal angers defeated Democrats
“By Michael Abramowitz and Thomas E. Ricks
“The Washington Post
“WASHINGTON — Senate Democrats reacted angrily to a report Sunday that the U.S. commander in Iraq had privately presented a plan for significant troop reductions in the same week they came under attack by the GOP for trying to set a timetable for withdrawal.
“Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., said the plan attributed to Gen. George Casey resembled the thinking of many Democrats who voted for a nonbinding resolution to begin a troop drawdown this December. That resolution was defeated on a largely party-line vote in the Senate on Thursday.
“‘That means the only people who have fought us and fought us against the timetable, the only one still saying there shouldn’t be a timetable really are the Republicans in the United States Senate and in the Congress,’ Boxer said on CBS’ ‘Face the Nation.’ ‘Now it turns out we’re in synch with General Casey.’
“Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., one of the two sponsors of the non-binding resolution — which offered no pace or completion date for a withdrawal — said the report was another sign of what he termed one of the ‘worst-kept secrets in town,’ that the administration intends to pull troops out before the November midterm elections.
“‘It shouldn’t be a political decision, but it is going to be with this administration,’ Levin said on ‘Fox News Sunday.’ ‘It’s as clear as your face, which is mighty clear, that before this election, this November, there’s going to be troop reductions in Iraq, and the president will then claim some kind of progress or victory.’
“At issue was a report in The New York Times that Casey presented a private briefing at the Pentagon last week projecting the number of U.S. combat brigades … would decrease from 14 to five or six by the end of 2007. …”
http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....icy26.html
BUSH OKAYS AMNESTY FOR INSURGENTS WHO KILLED G.I.S
In other news, the Bush administration has stabbed our troops in the back by supporting an Iraqi plan to grant amnesty to insurgents who killed American soldiers:
“Peace plan could mean some Iraqi insurgents get amnesty
“By Borzou Daragahi
“Los Angeles Times
“BAGHDAD, Iraq — Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki unveiled an ambitious U.S.-backed plan for bringing together ethnic and sectarian factions that leaves open the possibility of offering amnesty to some insurgents who have killed American or Iraqi troops. …
“U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad, speaking after the parliamentary session, also did not rule out the possibility of pardons for insurgents who had belonged to groups that had taken up arms against American forces.
“Only ‘irreconcilables’ — insurgents who fundamentally oppose the Iraqi state, either by fighting for a return of Baath party dictatorship or for al-Qaida’s vision of an Islamic caliphate — would be categorically excluded, he said.
“Al-Maliki’s plan, forged in close consultation with U.S. political and military leaders, … drew criticism from one opponent of the Bush administration’s Iraq policies.
“‘For heaven’s sake, we liberated that country,’ said Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., in a Fox television interview. ‘We got rid of a horrific dictator. We’ve paid a tremendous price. The idea that they should even consider talking about amnesty for people who have killed people who liberated their country is unconscionable.'”
http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....raq26.html
Now ask yourself this. If voters return Rubberstamp Reichert to Congress, is he going to vote “aye” on pulling troops from Iraq for the GOP’s political advantage, regardless of whether it’s militarily wise or safe for our troops? Is he going to vote “aye” on amnesty for insurgents who killed American soldiers? Of course he will! This sycophant will do whatever the White House tells him to.
That’s why we call him Rubberstamp Reichert. He doesn’t think for himself, nor does he represent his district. Karl Rove does his thinking for him. The only thing Reichert decides is whether to pick up the rubberstamp with his left hand or his right hand.
Hmmm … for someone of Rubberstamp’s shallow intellect, that could be a tough decision.
Darcy Burner doesn’t need to get someone’s permission to hug a rabbit.
3, 4
“Jeez – WA sends Reichart and Murray to DC, two of the dimmest bulbs in Congress. What is it with our state?” Commentby Wondering…— 6/26/06@ 9:31 am
“The wingnuts just hate it that Patty is so popular.” Commentby Harry Tuttle— 6/26/06@ 9:44 am
Yeah, but to give credit where due, at least one wingnut recognizes there isn’t much electricity flowing through Reichert’s filament.
Rubberstamp Reichert is a 3-volt bulb running on a 1.5-volt battery.
5
“Patty Murray sure didn’t return her Abramoff money (didn’t Cantwell get some, too?) and you sure didn’t have a problem with THAT. double standard here?” Commentby Bunny— 6/26/06@ 9:51 am
No, because neither Murray nor Cantwell received money from Abramoff. Your lying about it doesn’t make it true.
Let’s recap:
“There are ZERO Democrats who took Abramoff money.
“by dengre
“Tue Dec 27, 2005 at 10:06:55 PM PDT
“Just take a look at his listed donations on Open Secrets here and here. There isn’t a Democrat on the list.
“It is true that some employees of the large lobbying firms he worked at and some of his clients gave to Democrats as well the GOP. These are the Abramoff-connected donations that we read about in the press. They are always separated from Jack by two or more degrees and most often the connection is a single thread.
“The same is not true for the GOP. Jack was a 25-year GOP bagman. He collected and moved money around. He may cut a deal at any moment. This is a BIG problem for the GOP and they will try and tie Jack to Democrats. It’s just bullshit and it won’t work.
“The GOP Talking Points are out: Everybody does it and Abramoff gave equally to both parties. Hell, even George W. Bush himself has been trained to repeat them, but Bloomberg (and many others) have looked at the facts:
” … Between 2001 and 2004, Abramoff gave more than $127,000 to Republican candidates and committees and nothing to Democrats, federal records show.”
http://www.dailykos.com/storyo...../1655/0100
Here is a detailed list of Abramoff’s contributions:
http://www.capitaleye.org/abramoff_donor.asp
Bottom line: The GOP’s defense — “everybody does it” — is not only LAME, it’s FALSE, a LIE.
So, the next time a trollfuck asserts that Democrats took money from Abramoff, call him or her a LIAR, because that’s exactly what he or she is.
Bunny @5
Oh, before I forget — Bunny, you’re a LIAR.
LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE
18
If every cop took 19 years to catch killers, we’d all end up dead.
Josef — it’s that “competence” thing again, that Republicans do so poorly at. BTW, have you asked Zits for a date yet, or are you still pining away in loneliness? If you haven’t, what are you waiting for? Betcha she’d lay you on the first date — she seems like the type.
I just saw a hilarious anti-estate tax TV ad aired by a rightwing lie tank! They show a bunch of cartoon vultures nesting in a cartoon tree, with Cantwell’s face pasted on one of the cartoon vultures. The voice-over line goes, “No taxation without respiration!” FUNN-EEEE. It’s so transparently absurb that I think it will actually help Cantwell, by getting the word out to voters that she voted against this ludicrous millionaire tax break.
I think estates should be taxed at the same rate as wages, with the same exemptions.
Why should people who receive unearned windfalls get special treatment over people who WORK for their money?
“Hard work” is another of those virtues that Republicans pay lip service to, but have no respect for. Republicans ferbently beleive “hard work” is what CHEAP LABOR should perform so REPUBLICAN FREELOADERS can live in luxury without working at all.
The whole point of being a Republican is to live off other people’s work, so you don’t have to work at all.
“RIGHT-WING IDEOLOGY IN A NUTSHELL
“When you cut right through it, right-wing ideology is just ‘dime-store economics’ – intended to dress their ideology up and make it look respectable. You don’t really need to know much about economics to understand it. They certainly don’t. It all gets down to two simple words.
“‘Cheap labor’. That’s their whole philosophy in a nutshell …. You’ve heard of ‘big-government liberals’. Well they’re ‘cheap-labor conservatives’. …
“You see, cheap-labor conservatives are defenders of corporate America – whose fortunes depend on labor. The larger the labor supply, the cheaper it is. The more desperately you need a job, the cheaper you’ll work, and the more power those ‘corporate lords’ have over you. If you are a wealthy elite – or a ‘wannabe’ like most dittoheads – your wealth, power and privilege is enhanced by a labor pool, forced to work cheap.
“Don’t believe me. Well, let’s apply this principle, and see how many right-wing positions become instantly understandable.
Cheap-labor conservatives don’t like social spending or our ‘safety net’. Why. Because when you’re unemployed and desperate, corporations can pay you whatever they feel like – which is inevitably next to nothing. You see, they want you ‘over a barrel’ and in a position to ‘work cheap or starve’.
“Cheap-labor conservatives don’t like the minimum wage, or other improvements in wages and working conditions. Why. These reforms undo all of their efforts to keep you ‘over a barrel’.
“Cheap-labor conservatives like ‘free trade’, NAFTA, GATT, etc. Why. Because there is a huge supply of desperately poor people in the third world, who are ‘over a barrel’, and will work cheap.
“Cheap-labor conservatives oppose a woman’s right to choose. Why. Unwanted children are an economic burden that put poor women ‘over a barrel’, forcing them to work cheap.
“Cheap-labor conservatives don’t like unions. Why. Because when labor ‘sticks together’, wages go up. That’s why workers unionize. Seems workers don’t like being ‘over a barrel’.
“Cheap-labor conservatives constantly bray about ‘morality’, ‘virtue’, ‘respect for authority’, ‘hard work’ and other ‘values’. Why. So they can blame your being ‘over a barrel’ on your own ‘immorality’, lack of ‘values’ and ‘poor choices’.
“Cheap-labor conservatives encourage racism, misogyny, homophobia and other forms of bigotry. Why? Bigotry among wage earners distracts them, and keeps them from recognizing their common interests as wage earners.”
http://www.conceptualguerilla......php?id=103
Wow. I wonder if Mark The Cowardly Redneck wants to see the right wing Wall Street Journal shut down too? Since they ran the same set of stories on the Bush regime’s illegal spying, they must be traitors too right? right? The silence is notable.
JanetS says beware anyone taking money from tribes.
Gues what you stupid bitch, that means beware – you guessed it – Rubber Stamp Reichert who took 20,000 from them. I can’t WAIT to hear your reply to this and I am sure you will now viciously attack Rubber Stamp Riechert since your etics aren’t situational — NOT!
So how did a so-called “centrist” district go for this guy? Even if Ross didn’t wear out enough shoe leather or shake enough hands . . .
“THE CHEAP-LABOR CONSERVATIVE ‘DIRTY SECRET’: THEY DON’T REALLY LIKE PROSPERITY
“Maybe you don’t believe that cheap-labor conservatives like unemployment, poverty and ‘cheap labor’. Consider these facts.
“Unemployment was 23 percent when FDR took office in 1933. It dropped to 2.5 percent by time the next Republican was in the White House in 1953. It climbed back to 6.5 percent by the end of the Eisenhower administration. It dropped to 3.5 percent by the time LBJ left office. It climbed over 5 percent shortly after Nixon took office, and stayed there for 27 years, until Clinton brought it down to 4.5 percent early in his second term.
“That same period – especially from the late forties into the early seventies – was the ‘golden age’ of the United States. We sent men to the moon. We built our Interstate Highway system. We ended segregation in the South and established Medicare. In those days, a single wage earner could support an entire family on his wages. …
“These facts provide a nice background to evaluate cheap-labor conservative claims like ‘liberals are destroying America.’ In fact, cheap-labor conservatives have howled with outrage and indignation against New Deal liberalism from its inception in the 1930’s all the way to the present. You can go to ‘Free Republic’ or Hannity’s forum right now, and find a cheap-labor conservative comparing New Deal Liberalism to ‘Stalinism’.
Cheap-labor conservatives opposed virtually all of the New Deal, including every improvement in wages and working conditions.
“Cheap-labor conservatives have a long and sorry history of opposing virtually every advancement in this country’s development going right back to the American revolution.
“Cheap-labor conservatives have hated Social Security and Medicare since their inception.
“Many cheap-labor conservatives are hostile to public education. They think it should be privatized. But why are we surprised. Cheap-labor conservatives opposed universal public education in its early days. …
“Cheap-labor conservatives hate the progressive income tax like the devil hates holy water.
“Cheap-labor conservatives like budget deficits and a huge national debt for two reasons. A bankrupt government has a harder time doing any ‘social spending’ – which cheap-labor conservatives oppose, and . . .
“Wealthy cheap-labor conservatives like say, George W. Bush, buy the bonds and then earn tax free interest on the money they lend the government. [Check out Dubya’s financial disclosures. The son of a bitch is a big holder of the T-bills that finance the deficit he is helping to expand.] The deficit created by cheap-labor conservatives while they posture as being ‘fiscally conservative’ may count as the biggest con job in American history.
“‘Free Trade’, globalization, NAFTA and especially GATT are intended to create a world-wide ‘corporate playground’ where national governments serve the interests of corporations – which means ‘cheap labor’.
“The ugly truth is that cheap-labor conservatives just don’t like working people. They don’t like ‘bottom up’ prosperity, and the reason for it is very simple. lords have a harder time kicking them around. Once you understand this about the cheap-labor conservatives, the real motivation for their policies makes perfect sense. Remember, cheap-labor conservatives believe in social hierarchy and privilege, so the only prosperity they want is limited to them. They want to see absolutely nothing that benefits the guy – or more often the woman – who works for an hourly wage.
“So there you have it …. See how easy it is to understand these cheap-labor conservatives. The more ignorant and destitute people there are – desperate for any job they can get – the cheaper the cheap-labor conservatives can get them to work.”
http://www.conceptualguerilla......php?id=103
Nothing demonstrates the GOP’s antagonism to workers and prosperity than their jobs record. Every Democratic president of modern times has created more jobs than ANY Republican president:
(job growth as percentage of workforce)
Democrat Roosevelt 5.3%
Democrat Johnson 3.8%
Democrat Carter 3.1%
Democrat Truman 2.5%
Democrat Clinton 2.4%
Democrat Kennedy 2.3%
Republican Nixon 2.2%
Republican Reagan 2.1%
Republican Coolidge 1.1%
Republican Ford 1.1%
Republican Eisenhower 0.9%
Republican Bush Sr. 0.6%
Republican Bush Jr. (0.7%)
Republican Hoover (9.0%)
Source of data: James Carville, “Had Enough?” (Simon & Schuster, New York, 2003), p. 87.
@33:….”habius”….
It’s habeas nimrod. Since you’re the kind of jerk who critiques the spelling of others, I’d say stick it where the sun does not shine.
Yes, Lincoln suspended this vital protection during the Civil War. So did your hero, the traitorous Jefferson Davis. Grant followed suit in some select areas of the south during Reconstruction.
Unlike the two republicans above and the nitwit current president, FDR didn’t feel compelled to take this drastic action. The shame of the internment of Japanese-Americans during WWII is widely acknowledged (Michelle Malkin must have missed the memo).
The same holds true using other economic measures:
From Harding In 1921 to Bush in 2003:
–Democrats held White House for 40 years and Republicans for 42.5 years.
–Democrats created 75,820,000 net new jobs — Republicans 36,440,000.
–Per Year Average-Democrats 1,825,200—Republicans 856,400.
–Republicans had 9 presidents during the period and 6 had depression or recession.
–DOW-grew by 52% more under Democrats.
–GDP-grew by 43% more under Democrats.
Comparing Clinton to Reagan:
–JOBS-grew 43% more under Clinton.
–GDP-grew 57% more under Clinton.
–DOW AVERAGE-grew 700% more under Clinton..
–NASDAQ-grew 18 times as much under Clinton.
–SPENDING-grew by 28% under Clinton, 80% under Reagan.
–DEBT-grew by 43% under Clinton, 187% under Reagan.
–DEFICITS-Clinton got a large surplus; debt grew 112% under Reagan.
–NATIONAL INCOME-grew 100% more under Clinton.
–PERSONAL INCOME-grew 110% more under Clinton.
Sources – Bureau of Labor Statistics (www.BLS.gov)
Wingnuts are not just liars; they’re irrational liars. Consider this:
They claim Clinton doesn’t deserve credit for the economy while he was in office, but they blame Clinton for the economy while Bush is in office.
“Sherriff Dave” doesn’t represent my district, so I didn’t pay a lot of attention to him until recently.
But a year or so ago there was a TV special about the “capture of the Green River Killer”. Lots of film of “Sherriff Dave” cozying up to the guy, getting him to confess and give new details. Okay, that’s a standard interrogation proceedure. But then at the end there is a rather gratuitous scene where “Sherriff Dave” then chews out the guy, on camera, telling him what a terrible human being he is. What struck me as strange was that it seemed very set up, and gratuitous. They had his confession, they had located as many bodies as they were going to, the plea deal was already in place. Why continue the conversation? The camera angle was too good, and the camera quality was far and away better than that you would usually get in a police interrogation room. It seemed to me that “Sherriff Dave” wasn’t making the speech to the killer, but making sure he had it on record for the camera. At that point it was clear that he was already making his preperations for his life in politics thereafter.
Excuses and rationalizations — that’s what right wingers offer to America’s unemployed workers. Blame Clinton, blame the news media, claim there’s plenty of jobs, claim only “lazy” people are unemployed — anything to avoid admitting Bush’s economic policies are a miserable failure for America’s working families.
The economy must create 156,000 new jobs a month just to stay even with population growth. Job growth reached that level in very few of the months Bush has been in office. For most of his presidency, unemployment has gone up, not down. It couldn’t be clearer: Bush’s policies don’t create jobs, they only create wealthier business owners and stockholders.
It’s time for a change. Democrats always create more jobs. Republicans don’t care about wage earners. Rubberstamp Reichert will do nothing in Congress except rubber stamp the CHEAP LABOR CONSERVATIVES’ agenda of forcing down wages by increasing unemployment.
WINGNUTS DON’T SUPPORT THE TROOPS!
First of all, ask yourself why a private charity is asking the public to donate money to buy battle helmets for our soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq. Because our wingnut-run government didn’t. It’s hard to imagine a more basic responsibility of government than providing basic equipment to the soldiers they send in harm’s way — but they don’t.
Second, not a single trollfuck who posts wingnut propaganda on this board is willing to spend one (1) cent of his/her own money to help save the lives of our soldiers deployed to combat zones. Our troops have to depend on donations from liberal soldier-lovers and liberal veterans like Roger Rabbit.
Roger Rabbit sent $99 to Operation Helmet to buy a battle helmet upgrade kit for a soldier. Roger Rabbit is a liberal. Roger Rabbit supports the troops. Wingnuts don’t support the troops.
So far the score is:
Liberals – 1
Wingnuts – 0
I hope some of my fellow liberals on this board will join me in supporting the troops by sending a donation to Operation Helmet. Let’s show those lying bastards on the Far Right that we support the troops. We already know they don’t. They pay lip service to supporting the troops, but where the nickel meets the pocket, they’re welshers.
http://www.operation-helmet.org/
Not that I think political campaigns should be decided the way Hollywood casts actors, but since Blethen’s Bull Sheet is getting so dewey-eyed about Reichert’s “hunk” factor, it would at least be fair play for Darcy to get with a better photographer. She’s a hell of a lot better looking in person than any picture of her I’ve seen in print.
Unlike the two republicans above and the nitwit current president, The shame of the internment of Japanese-Americans during WWII is widely acknowledged (Michelle Malkin must have missed the memo).
Commentby Proud To Be An Ass […………………………………………………………………Er, Idiot, Remember there was MARSHAL LAW in Hawaii……ALL APPROVED BY FDR………………………………………. “FDR didn’t feel compelled to take this drastic action.” [PTBAA] Let’s pretend Bush did the same. You traitor libs would be howling!!! hehe, JCH Kennedy
I’m actually quite impressed by this journalists political reporting! I particularly liked her Sunday ‘eyeopening’ piece explaining how Congress REALLY works. IMO it’s about time people know what is going on ‘Behind The Curtain’ — how deals are made supposedly between two enemies within the DC Beltway — I hope after ready this front pager — some political novices got why it’s important to have ‘Checks & Balances’ in Congress to have at least TWO parties — instead of what appears to be merging into one! and secondly, the movers and shakers in the art of political Horsetrading and Bribery!
“…However, the final sentence he muttered is more crucial to understanding the depth of Stevens’ anger. As he ended, he stared at his colleagues and said, “The time I’ve spent with you, working on your problems … .”
They owed him. Ultimately, he would collect those IOUs.
Stevens, the most senior Republican in the Senate, is the high priest of bare-knuckle politics. For almost longer than Cantwell has been alive, he has practiced that religion fervently in public, and more fervidly behind closed doors.
He has used his seat on the Appropriations Committee and his perfect knowledge of lawmaking’s arcane details to reward supporters and punish opponents…
A bare-knuckles politician hulks over Senate race here
By Alicia Mundy — Seattle Times Washington bureau
http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....ns25m.html
Also, coming from a different angle — I did find it interesting that while Mundy says Cantwell wasn’t working well with Stevens, and Murray had “learned to work with Stevens” — it should be noted that Murray still has been able to maintain a more progressive and friendly to the middle class voting record than Cantwell!- ummm… Just because we are expected to vote for Cantwell regardless – IMO she still has some explaining to do!
The Drum Major Institute released its 2005 legislative scorecard for Members of Congress, rating lawmakers on how they voted on the core bills that affect America’s middle class.
http://www.drummajorinstitute.com/congress/
SENATE
Cantwell 63% C
Murray 88% B
HOUSE
Inslee D100% A
Smith D 88% B
Reichert R 0% F
McMorris R 0% F
McDermott D 100% A
Larsen D 38% F
Hastings R 13% F
Dicks D 75% C
Baird D 63% C
Now THIS is funny. Wanna watch a right wing coward get smacked down like a little bitch to the point where he runs?
http://movies.crooksandliars.c.....ders-S.mov
64
You would support suspension of any and all of our civil liberties–speech, press, due process–if Bush said it was necessary in the “War on Terror.” You would do so because the bottom line for neoconservatives is that liberty is nothing more than a concept to espouse when invading foreign lands. You unpatriotic bastards don’t really like liberty because it can produce messy, unpredictable results. You freaks can’t think for yourselves, and are scared of those who do think for themselves, so you want autocratic leadership. FDR, even in a time when the external threat to our nation was clear and present, was wrong to order the internment of Japanese-Americans. There is no current threat that begins to justify the widespread suspension of civil liberties that neoconservatives seek. The greatest threat to the American way of life that we presently face is the Bush Administration.
63
Few things are so pathetic as over-the-hill hunks.
How do you WINGNUTS feel about Bush’s CUT AND RUN Iraq policy?
How do you WINGNUTS feel about AMNESTY for insurgents who killed Americans?
You traitors sure are quiet ever since this news of Bush’s TREASON broke.
REPUBLICANS ARE TRAITORS!
REPUBLICANS ARE TRAITORS!
Neener neener
66
Oh, that’s must see TV.
Just too good to miss.
Bernie Ward smacks down wingnut talk show host
I think MTR is Chris Baker. Watch how he melts down on camera, just like Reddick.
Left 31, like I said, just wondering whose side yer on. Now I know…
I just chuckle over the left nutroot’s own version of the “Culture of Corruption.” http://www.noagenda.org lists over 70 Democrats under ethics clouds-and…the number is growing!
Just too good to miss.
Bernie Ward smacks down wingnut talk show host.
Hell, just get it from #66.
73
This week our enemies in the war on terror decided to CUT AND RUN from Iraq and give AMNESTY to insurgents who kill Americans.
Hey Reddick — are you one of those TRAITORS who doesn’t support the troops? http://www.operation-helmet.org/ I’ll bet you are!
Not ONE – no not ONE Democrat has received a subpoena, been arrested, indicted, tried or convicted because of ties to REPUBLICAN Jackoff Jack. NOT ONE. But more than 20 REPUBLICANS have received a subpoena, been arresed, indicted, tried or convicted because of their crooked dealings. MORE THAN 20! That’s a culture of corruption.
Dems – 0
Rethugs – 20
Culture of corruption.
75
“Baker: Time of War! New York Times Treasonous! Bush Haters!
Ward: Should the government control what a newspaper prints?
Baker: Time of War! New York Times Treasonous! Bush Haters!
Ward: Answer the question. Should the government control what a newspaper prints?
[Repeat until Baker loses his mind, calls Ward names, and storms off because his Rove-approved talking points aren’t working.]”
Man, that’s rich! Those fuckers lose it when they have to answer a rational question! Take away their talking points and they’re lost at sea!
Dick Cheney, the Republicans in Congress, and their lapdog media virulently attacked Democratic senators for calling for a troop redeployment at the same time the Administration and the Pentagon were officially “planning” just that.
If people who have advocated saving our troops by exiting Iraq are traitors, then the Bush Administration was covertly planning “traitorous” acts.
More wingnut double-speak.
79
Not ONE – no not ONE of the trollfucks on this board has supported the troops by sending a donation to Operation Helmet.
Score:
LIBERALS: $99
WINGNUTS: Not a fucking penny! Not now, not ever! Hell no, we won’t pay! Fuck the troops! Let them DIE!!!
Apparently none have given to the Wounded Warrior Project either.
“No matter how you carve it — you can call it anything you want — but basically, it is packing it in, going home, persuading and convincing and validating the theory that the Americans don’t have the stomach for this fight,”
— Dick Cheney
Report: Gen. Casey plans to reduce Iraq force in 2007
81
Not a single one of the trollfucks has commented on the news that Bush is planning to CUT AND RUN from Iraq in order to win the fall elections, and agreed to AMNESTY for killers of American G.I.s.
They’re waiting for the official talking points from Noise Machine Central.
It’ll be interesting to see how the neoCONjobs spin this one.
AN INCONVENIENT QUESTION FROM MTR:
Have you guys noticed how THE FUCKING SUN is makin’ it kinda warm out there today?
That solar warming thing sure is something…
From now on, American voters will have to memorize a new phrase:
CUT-AND-RUN REPUBLICANS
87
… and they’re soft on crime, too.
74
No question about it, johnnylicker, we’ve got some corrupt Democrats in our midst. How come you don’t mention the difference in how the parties deal with miscreants in their ranks?
GOP — deny, lie, block investigations, cover up, emasculate the ethics rules, raise legal defense funds, promote to committee chairmanships
Democrats — kick ’em off committees and hand ’em their ass on a platter
The entire GOP is one big organized crime family.
54
“So how did a so-called “centrist” district go for this guy? Even if Ross didn’t wear out enough shoe leather or shake enough hands . . . ” Commentby skagit— 6/26/06@ 1:08 pm
Who do you think you’re kidding? Republicans used to OWN that district. It was gerrymandered just for them. Reichert is occupying Jennifer Dunn’s seat. The Eighth was supposed to be Republican forever. Ross came within in ace of taking it away from the Party of Lies and Corruption, and Burner WILL take it away. Watch and see. Even Republicans don’t vote Republican anymore.
50
Ssssssssh, Roger. If people figure out that we live off of their work, they’ll want a piece of the action. Soon we’ll have to share the country clubs with commoners. Can’t have that, now can we?
Hey Reddick — how come you got nuthin to say about the GOP’s cut-and-run Iraq plan? Cat got your tongue?
Uh… you must be reading something I’m not. If you listened to real fucking news instead of that shit you get, you would have heard the President say we’ll leave when the fucking job is done.
91
I agree that billionaires sharing their country clubs with commoners is a bad idea. Why should the commoners share country clubs their work paid for with their lazy bosses? They should confiscate the country clubs.
93
Pull the cotton out of your ears and listen again.
Is the United States winning the war on terror? Not according to more than 100 of America’s top foreign-policy hands.
Despite today’s highly politicized national security environment, the index results show striking consensus across political party lines. A bipartisan majority (84 percent) of the index’s experts say the United States is not winning the war on terror. Eighty-six percent of the index’s experts see a world today that is growing more dangerous for Americans. Overall, they agree that the U.S. government is falling short in its homeland security efforts. More than 8 in 10 expect an attack on the scale of 9/11 within a decade. These dark conclusions appear to stem from the experts’ belief that the U.S. national security apparatus is in serious disrepair. “Foreign-policy experts have never been in so much agreement about an administration’s performance abroad,” says Leslie Gelb, president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations and an index participant. “The reason is that it’s clear to nearly all that Bush and his team have had a totally unrealistic view of what they can accomplish with military force and threats of force.”
Redneck,
I trust the New York Times far more than I do anything coming from the Bush Administration. The Times tries to get it right; the Bush Administration only cares about pushing its agenda. That’s all you care about as well–ideology, not reality.
Proud – OK… that’s good… go ahead and get your “news” from NYT. Stick your head allllll the way up there so you don’t get any real factual info. Just stay right there where it’s warm and dark…
Our soldiers didn’t die for nothing
Common sense can confirm:
They gave their lives so President Bush
Could have a second term.
What a “moonbat”:
“I’m not an enthusiast for dynastic wealth, particularly when 6 billion others have much poorer hands than we do in life,” Mr. Buffett said at the New York Public Library, where he was appearing with Bill and Melinda Gates, the only Americans richer than he is.
Mr. Buffett said on Sunday that he would give away 85 percent of his fortune — about $37.4 billion worth of stock in Berkshire Hathaway, the company he runs — to five charitable foundations, with the greatest share, about $31 billion, going to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which is dedicated to improving health and education, especially in poor nations.
Obviously Buffet isn’t on the same page as some of our enlightened righties. First of all he should realize that “it’s his fucking money.” Translation: leave every penny he doesn’t spend, tax free of course, to his heirs who will in turn leave every penny they don’t spend, tax free of course, to their heirs and so on. After all, “it’s their fucking money.”
This must be heartbreaking news to our righties who were raised on re-runs of Dynasty on TV and therefore are 100 percent in support of repeal of the estate tax. It’s especially bad news to the 18 families who are paying Congress to eliminate the federal estate tax along with the Nordstroms and the Blethens who are paying signature gatherers to lie for their cause.
Holy shit Rabbit, are you saying the GWB finally agrees with our enemies like Kerry, OBL, Kennedy, Hussein, Pelosi, OOday, Murtha, and Zarqawi?
Yeah, that must be it. Good catch… BTW, where’d you get that? The fucking New York Times?
That’s a good one. Stay tuned to NYT rabbit…
94
Well, Roger, I’ll be fair about this. I used to share my country club with Mark the Redneck. Tipped him well when he brought me my drinks and cigars on time, too. But then there was that little incident with the silverware that I probably shouldn’t bring up.
ProudtobeAnAss@57 I must take exception to this remark. The vacuous,drooling syphilitic @33 is NumbRod.
Why not a compromise on the estate tax issue? Raise the tax-free transfer amount to $1 milion per heir (indexed for inflation). Anything exceeding those limits is taxed at 10% or 15%. Anything left to charity is excluded from taxation, too.
A good compromise because:
1. Easy to compute.
2. Protects family businesses.
3. Lets the decendent designate where the wealth gets re-distributed to, but the wealth is residuitributed none-the-less. Not just concentrated in one or two heirs.
I guess the “liberal” Wall Street Journal is wrong too? Mark the cowardly redneck, does it hurt to be THAT stupid?
Redneck
When the New York Times gets it wrong, it tends to be when it gives too much credibility to the Bushites. The Judith Miller episode, of course, is a glaring example. Objective journalism begins by assuming that anything that Tony Snow, or whoever might be speaking for the administration, is untrue.
Roger – even you can’t be so stupid as to compare the Dems action to set an exit date with the Military coming up with a reasoned plan.
The Dems want to set an arbitrary date, devoid of all facts. It is the date that is important, not the mission, even if the date is meaningless grandstanding. Even the dems recognized this for what it was.
On the other hand, it would be irresponsible for the Pentagon and the Administration not to have plans in place for every contingency. If the Iraqis are trying to put together a plan to take care of their own country, wouldn’t it only be logical for them to know what we are able to do on troup withdrawal?
The dems braying about this now is just politics – they were upstaged by grownups, and they know it. This is why the president is the commander in chief, not the congress.
98
Hey Reddick — how come Republicans refuse to pay for homeland security? Why don’t they want cargo containers inspected? Are you guys planning another terrorist incident?
107
Janet — you’re right, I’m not that stupid. The Republicans have no plan. Their plan is “shit happens.” But there’s no doubt you’re stupid enough to believe the GOP is capable of coming up with a “reasoned plan,” despite overwhelming experience to the contrary.
Hey Janet — can YOU explain why Repubicans refuse to pay for homeland security? Do they WANT another 9/11? It sure looks that way.
Nov. 14, 2001: Senate Democrats propose $15 billion for homeland security; the White House warns against “permanent spending on other projects that have nothing to do with stimulus and that will only expand the size of government.”
Dec. 4, 2001: Senate Appropriations Committee votes 29-0 in favor of $13.1 billion for homeland security; the next day, Bush threatens to veto it.
Dec. 6, 2001: Senate Republicans reduce homeland security funding by $4.6 billion.
Dec. 19, 2001: Under pressure from White House, House-Senate conferees eliminate another $200 million of funding for airport security, port security, nuclear facility security, and postal security.
June 7, 2002: Senate votes 71-22 for $8.3 billion of homeland security funding; the next day, Bush’s advisors recommend a veto.
July 19, 2002: Under White House pressure, homeland security funding is further reduced by cutting money for food security, cyber security, nuclear security, airport security, port security, drinking water security, coordination of police and fire radios, and lab testing to detect chem-bio weapons.
Aug. 13, 2002: Bush decides not to spend $2.5 billion appropriated for homeland security on the grounds of “fiscal responsibility.”
Jan. 16, 2003: White House reacts to Democratic efforts to increase homeland security funding by stating, “The Administration strongly opposes amendments to add new extraneous spending.” Later that day, Senate Republicans vote against funds for smallpox vaccine.
Jan. 23, 2003: Senate Republicans cut security funding for the FBI, FEMA, INS, TSA, Coast Guard, and National Nuclear Security Administration.
Feb. 3, 2003: Bush submits a 2004 budget cutting homeland security funding by nearly 2 percent.
Feb. 14, 2003: Senate Democrats request money for smallpox vaccine, police and fire radios, and public transportation security; no Republicans support it.
March 21-25, 2003: Republicans defeat 7 amendments to bolster homeland security.
April 2, 2003: Senate Republicans reject Democratic amendment to provide $1 billion for port security.
April 3, 2003: Republicans reject protection of commercial airliners from shoulder-fired missiles and four other pro-homeland security amendments.
June 2003: House Republicans reject Democratic proposal to raise $1 billion for homeland security by reducing tax cuts for 200,000 millionaires by an average of $5,000 each (from $88,000 to $83,000).
Source: James Carville, “Had Enough?” (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2003), pp. 41-43.
“Although Bush took credit for creating the new Department of Homeland Security, he vigorously opposed the idea when Democrats first proposed it. He insisted that a presidential adviser with no accountability to the American people would be more effective than a new Cabinet member. White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer said President Bush thought that a Department of Homeland Security was ‘just not necessary.’ Tom Ridge — then homeland security adviser — said that he would recommend that Bush veto legislation to create a Cabinet-level Department of Homeland Security.”
Source: Democratic National Committee Newsletter, Jan. 29, 2003: http://www.democrats.org/news/200301290004.html
“While the Department of Homeland Security has issued new warnings of terrorist hijackings on commercial airlines this summer, Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee voted just last week against a Democratic amendment to add $50 million in funding to prevent the Transportation Security Administration from cutting the number of air marshals. The vote came during the Committee’s mark-up of the 2003 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations bill, which funds the TSA’s air marshal program.”
Source: Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee press release, July 31, 2003: http://216.25.5.15/press/newsr.....07-31.html
“Senate Republicans once again blocked a vote on homeland security legislation solely because it preserved collective beginning rights and civil service protections for the 170,000 federal workers who would make up the new department.Sixty votes are needed to end debate and bring the measure to a floor vote, the move failed by a 52-45 count, with almost solid GOP opposition. President Bush has threatened to veto any measure that does not give him unlimited power over the workers and Senate Republicans also rejected a bipartisan bill that gave Bush most of what he sought.”
Source: International Association of Machinists, Oct. 8, 2002: http://www.iamaw.org/publicati.....8_2002.htm
Comment by Roger Rabbit — 6/26/06 @ 12:53 pm and others replying to my first comment at 18
I read Rep. Reichert’s book and watched last Sunday’s KING 5 UpFront. DNA Dave Reichert got the old fashioned way.
And it’s Mary Lane as in Executive Director of the Forward Washington Foundation, $60 richer today. I wasn’t born yesterday.
Roger-military strategy shouldn’t be planned in congress, that was my point. Just because the congression GOP doesn’t have a plan doesn’t mean that the military and the president doesn’t. Sorry they aren’t telling you all the details.
If Kerry’s little stunt had passed, it would have undermined the Iraqi govt by taking away a bargaining chip. Now the insurgents know they have to give up arms and join the civilized world if they really want their country back. That’s going to split them from the foreigners trying to cause civil war. But, Kerry was willing to sacrifice all that so he could be in the news, along with his buddy Murtha.
Reichert is just the kind of guy Bush likes. He’s a total “bottom.”
Remember when Reichert had a hissy and refused to debate Diane Tebelius and Luke Esser? Doubt his handlers planned that one! Diane and Luke can be a little scary, especially in front of the big, bad Mercer Island Rotary Club, but really, where are the brass balls?
So of course the GOP handpicked his staff, his underwear, whatever. They keep it all straight for him. He’s being groomed. The homoerotic underpinnings of the Bush regime make him the perfect choice for VP in four, maybe eight, years.
Roger: How about the 5-convictions-in-10-years law for drunk driving the dems passed. Talk about soft on crime! The Dems weren’t really acting serious when they passed that. How about 2 convictions in 10 years?
@64: “Remember there was MARSHAL LAW in Hawaii……”
Hey, dipthong, it’s martial law. Christ, what a maroooon.
Exhibit A
Why I vote for Dave:
He holds the values I do…
on abortion, [1]
on stem cells, [1]
on frivolous lawsuits, [2]
on tax cuts,
on homosexual “marriages” [3]
on faith matters [4]
on guns…
Commentby howcanyoubePROUDtobeanASS— 6/30/06@ 9:26 pm
Exhibit B
Moonbats, are you all the party of God? Barack Obama says you need to court Christians. How do you plan to do that? You all hate God:
In the Pledge of Allegiance
By Killing unborn Children [1]
By Supporting Gay Marriage [3]
In removing crosses from city, county, and state symbols [4]
Through frivilous law suits by ACLU [2]
Through saying the founding fathers were diests [4]…
Commentby Puddybud Fitzgerald Kennedy— 6/30/06@ 5:26 am
83. This is her statement. It is what it is.
It is a given that your only purpose is to denigrate her, but it isn’t she who has a record to run on. We only have to indicate that she can do better than Reichert’s pro-Bush record, because only 39% of 8th Congressional District voters support Reichert’s re-election!
I’m truly amazed at how american pinheads equate Iraq with a true war of liberation and freedom like WW2. Iraq has nothing to do with freedom or protection of the US. Iraq is all about PROFIT for the rich and well connected. It’s Vietnam all over again except americans are too stupid to know their own history. Most americans think the Vietnam conflict was about communism. They’re too mentally challenged to look beyond the BS that flows from the White House.
I just came back from HCMC (Sai Gon), and if that’s communism, the world needs more communism. The people were nice including the Immigration officials, the women are beautiful and sensuous, the food is great and the economy is on the rise. Canada Day sponsored by the Canadian Chamber of Commerce was one of the greatest parties I’ve ever been to. Canadians are very cool.
So Fuck The Troops and their small mindedness and Fuck Their Supporters. The troops are murderers not brave soldiers. The US government is a spin machine that feeds Faux News which then supplies the info-jism for the US public to suck on.
Fuck The Troops.