posted January 14, 2006 04:02 PM              

No way to fight back? Are you joking, jwhop? A calm demeanor and an honest answer does wonders in these circumstances. Unless of course an honest answer would dig you into a deeper hole.

I have little sympathy for those who, as a good friend once said to me, walk into a gunfight with a pocket knife. He should be questioned ... and severely. These are serious matters at stake. If Mr Alito and the little lady can't take it, then they need to leave it to stronger folk.

posted January 14, 2006 05:30 PM            

It is the democrats who need to open their minds and give up on abortion rights...which are not a federal right, could not possibly be a federal right and which if put to a vote of citizens of the United States would be overturned tomorrow or severely limited.

You were most certainly talking about abortion acoustic so why are you attempting to duck and cover. You mentioned abortion in the very same breath as beneficial and progress. Abortion is not in any way progress, it's reversion to barbarism and infanticide.

There is no group more mean spirited than the leftist, Marxist democrats and those leftist groups and individuals who support them.

It is you and your leftist friends who need to move on acoustic. Bush is President and will be for 3 more years. The American public has rejected leftist bullsh*t at the polls where we settle such matters and as long as the radical leftist Marxists are in charge of the democrat party that will continue.

posted January 14, 2006 05:41 PM            

Alito will be confirmed as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court with between 60 and 65 votes.

posted January 14, 2006 05:46 PM              

quote:

---

....and which if put to a vote of citizens of the United States.....-jwhop

---

posted January 15, 2006 12:07 AM            

quote:

---

It is the democrats who need to open their minds and give up on abortion rights...

---

Democrats have been willing to move on from abortion since it's been decided. It's Republicans who consistently bring it up. Democrats defend the precedent and the law in reaction to Republicans constantly bringing it up.

quote:

---

You were most certainly talking about abortion acoustic so why are you attempting to duck and cover.

---

No, I was quite clearly speaking about the FIXED nature of your party, and how you can't get beyond tradition and embrace the needs of an evolving society. Abortion is just the largest example of Republican's inability to move on.

It would be most beneficial, and lead to progress if Republicans were able to let go of old ideas and embrace new ones. We could talk about this economically as well. I suppose you would say that deficit spending is fastastic. Is that correct? Worked for Reagan, worked for Bush. Well, it only works on the faith of our debtors. If we lose the faith of our debtors we're pretty well screwed. Considering the Right's foreign policy and diplomatic relations we could screw it up any time now. This is what you guys call forward thinking?

quote:

---

There is no group more mean spirited than the leftist, Marxist democrats and those leftist groups and individuals who support them.

---

posted January 15, 2006 02:58 PM            

One thing you can rely on acoustic, the adults are in charge now and we're going to stay in charge. We intend to roll back the unconstitutional edicts of the leftists in the federal courts, including the Supreme Court and are doing so.

We intend to get rid of lots of regulation related to the Commerce Clause with which leftists have expanded the scope and role of the federal government at the expense of the States. We intend to re-institute real education in America and get rid of the overpaid baby-sitters in the public school system who think getting along is more important than learning how to read, write and count.

You and your radical leftist friends aren't going to like those changes acoustic but they're going to be made anyway.

You comment about deficit spending is laughable. Did you get your economics degree at the same institution you received your degree in foreign policy...Dunceton U? I remember your hug a terrorist today theory of foreign policy.

As a Dunceton U graduate you are no doubt unaware that as a percentage of the GDP, the deficits are falling and are in fact far lower than during the 1980's. Simple economics any kid could and would master....larger income increases the ability to carry debt and makes that debt easier to eliminate.

The real problems facing the economy are the rapid escalation of social program costs as a percentage of GDP. You know Dunceton grad, those programs instituted by leftists to keep the unmotived and uneducated masses voting for leftists.

Leftists wonder why adults won't listen to them. The reason is simple; having heard what leftists think, adults realize leftists aren't capable of rational thought.

posted January 15, 2006 04:46 PM              

Am I the only one catching the irony of that statement?

posted January 15, 2006 05:32 PM              

quote:

---

the adults are in charge now

---

That would be the 'ADULTS' that say things like...

"I don't understand how poor people think."
- George W. Bush, confiding in the Rev. Jim Wallis, New York Times, 08-26-03

and

"We're going to keep building the party until we're hunting Democrats with dogs."
- Senator Phil Gramm (R-TX), Mother Jones, 08-95

and

"And there is, I am certain, among the Iraqi people a respect for the care and the precision that went into the bombing campaign."
- Donald Rumsfeld, defenselink.mil, 04-09-03

and

"Probably nothing."
- Jeb Bush, during his losing 1994 bid for Florida Governor, when asked what he would do for black people, quoted by Salon on 10-05-02

and

"The homosexual blitzkrieg has been better planned and executed than Hitler's."
- Rep. William Dannemeyer (R-CA), The New Republic, 08-01-94

and a word from Babs, Georgie porgie's mother

"Why should we hear about body bags and deaths and how many, what day it's gonna happen? It's not relevant. So why should I waste my beautiful mind on something like that?"
- Barbara Bush, said on 'Good Morning America' the day before the Iraq war started, New York Times, 01-13-03

and perhaps we should leave the final word to the great Commander in Chief himself; take it away George!

posted January 15, 2006 10:59 PM              

That Tennessee one has been my favorite since it stumbled out of his mouth!

posted January 15, 2006 11:13 PM            

Bill Clinton came into office as an adulterer, a rapist, a governor who had taken at least one bribe we know about, had helped loot an Arkansas Savings and Loan, had taken a 50% position in a land company with absolutely no out of pocket cash. First thing on the agenda for Commander Corruption was to hire White House staff, White House staff who could not get a security clearance...because of illegal drug residue in their blood streams, an administration which initially banned the wearing of American military uniforms inside the White House. An administration which appointed a Sec. Defense who was a dove on military matters and got US military personnel killed in Somalia. Appointed a Half Bright to the post of SEC State...who believed it wasn't fair America was the only super power and proceeded to open up US defense installations to Chinese and other foreign spies to rip off...steal American military technology. An administration which appointed a Surgeon General who thought drug users were the best and brightest America had to offer. An Administration which appointed an Attorney General to run interference for it's corruption and who used American Military equipment against American civilians....killing children...to save them...and later killed a woman who threatened BATF agents with an assault baby. An administration which cut the military forces of the United States by about 40% at the same time America was under attack both at home and abroad. An administration involved in more "Gates" than any administration in US history and the most corrupt. An administration which lied through it's teeth daily to the American people and finally, an administration which trashed the White House on the way out of office and stole art objects given to the United States. Not to mention Commander Corruption's sex parties in the Oval Office, subornation of perjury, perjury, treason and obstruction of justice and selling the Lincoln Bedroom for campaign contributions. All in all, a very good record...if you're a kiddy set leftist. And all the kiddy leftists cheered the immature, self serving traitorous Clintonistas.

posted January 16, 2006 08:53 AM            

I wonder if he didn't show because the leftist organ, the NY Times broke the story terrorist cell phones and other electronic communications were being traced and monitored. Certainly, anyone with an ounce of common sense would alter any plans they'd discussed by electronic means.

That the best you can do Cardinalgal....in response to a long, long, long list of childish, hedonistic behavior by Commander Corruption?

It seems to me, that in a war the enemy declared and started, the adult thing, the reasonable thing, the logical thing to do is to attack them where ever they are. That's what is happening.

posted January 16, 2006 12:01 PM              

It's like using a sledge hammer to crack a walnut. "Smoking him out" (the archaic 'Cowboy's and Injuns' phrase that Bush insits on using over and over) clearly isn't working. Bin Laden (who it would appear from several intelligence sources is actually merely the money behind the group) hasn't been seen for over a year and his 'second in command' Ayman al-Zawahri is just as elusive.

"An AP reporter who visited the scene about 12 hours after what villagers said was an air strike saw three destroyed houses, hundreds of yards apart. Villagers, who denied any links to the Taliban or al-Qaida militants, had buried at least 15 people, including women and children, and were digging for more bodies in the rubble. There were no security forces in the area."
http://www.breakingnews.ie/2006/01/14/story239570.html

If the US forces/CIA or whoever was behind this attack were certain that Zawahri was there, do you not think it's strange that there were no security forces searching through the rubble for bodies, evidence etc? And why wasn't a squad comprising special forces for example sent in to capture him if they were so certain he was there, instead of wiping out 18 civillians including women and children?

quote:

---

I would suggest that one of the drawbacks to harboring terrorists is the likelihood you are putting your own life in danger. Some of these villages along the Pakastani/Afghanistan border are lawless towns which do harbor al-Queda. The intelligence was that the terrorist the US was looking to kill was to be at a dinner there. He didn't show.

---

1) First of all, is it a given fact that these villagers know exactly who the terrorists are? Is there proof that they are aware of the identities of everyone who crosses the border? Identities for example, that would be fiercely guarded because of the risks of discovery.

2) Perhaps you're not aware of Muslim customs in Pakistan, but it is part of their culture that any visitor (even if he is their sworn enemy) must be given shelter and offered a roof over their head. It is not a custom they are likely to relinquish easily, and bombing it out of them also will not work. It will simply drive them further to their faith, their customs and eventually, more than likely to the side of the terrorists. It is ignorant to think otherwise - that's why, "Shock and awe" and the rest of these ill considered 'posse mentality' tactics will foster nothing but hatred and do nothing but isolate the west.

3) "The intelligence was that the terrorist the US was looking to kill was to be at a dinner there. He didn't show." Then if he didn't show, why did the airstrike go ahead? If the target doesn't arrive, why in God's name are the US wasting amunition and blowing 18 men, women and children to smitherines? For the hell of it perhaps? Part of 'smoking him out' was it?

quote:

---

It seems to me, that in a war the enemy declared and started, the adult thing, the reasonable thing, the logical thing to do is to attack them where ever they are. That's what is happening.

---

No that's not what's happening jwhop - what's happening is yet another embarrasingly botched military op created by badly gathered 'intelligence' in which several people lost their lives for a crime they more than likely knew nothing about, let alone had a hand in perpetrating.

What's happening is that the US are now in danger of alienating possibly the most important Islamic ally they had by the sheer thoughtlessness and arrogance of this act; and they may just have created yet more terrorists into the bargain. Where's the 'intelligence' in that?

posted January 16, 2006 12:24 PM            

One of the leftist kiddies I presume Cardinalgal. But then, if leftists were rational adults, they wouldn't and couldn't be leftists to begin with.

posted January 16, 2006 01:35 PM              

An intelligent person questions. The fact that you are so willing to accept every official explanation and argument provided by the Bush administration without question or further investigation is either the most tremendous example of faith and belief in our times, or... well I won't embarrass you any further with that line of reasoning. Interestingly enough however, the extremists who perform suicide bombings are just as unwavering in their belief and support of their leaders.

I would also 'guess' that due to your tone and the quality of your debating skills (i.e. calling people silly names, attempting to insult people because of their political persuasion, and conducting yourself in a genreally rude and obnocscious manner,) that it is you who is the whining child my dear.

I do hope you will take this in the manner it is offered, (one of polite observation,) that you're in danger of becoming a broken record jwhop; forever citing anyone who disagrees with you or your precious party as idiots, traitors and now children. Do please find another argument as it's beginning to get tedious to read through the endless repetition of these attempts to insult and upset those of us who do question the things that are done in our names, and who hold our governments accountable for their actions.

Truth is always the first casualty of war; and that is why we have to examine the events more closely to find it, and not merely accept 'official' explanations at face value.

Now what is it one says to children when they behave rudely... ah yes, "Manners cost nothing. Now Sh. The grown ups are talking."

posted January 16, 2006 01:57 PM            

I don't subscribe to that mistaken notion and when someone...you, Cardinalgal or anyone else suggests the US shouldn't actively pursue, capture or kill those who would, if given a chance kill us all, because we might make them angry or make those who support them angry; I dismiss that kind of nonsense out of hand.

There are many other leftist arguments which deserve no discussion either. So don't expect a point by point refutation of nonsense.

posted January 16, 2006 02:24 PM            

Meow!

From firebrand to pussycat: Galloway's TV transformation

Respect MP's stunt draws jeers from opponents and alarms supporters

Audrey Gillan
Saturday January 14, 2006
The Guardian

He purred and mewed, his greying whiskers giving his face the appearance of a Cheshire cat. Next, George Galloway, the Respect MP for Bethnal Green and Bow, and scourge of Capitol Hill, got on all fours and pretended to lick milk from the cupped hands of the once-famous television actor Rula Lenska. She rubbed the "cream" from his "whiskers" and stroked his head and behind his ears.
When he steps out into the real world, Mr Galloway may regret his decision to accept the producer's challenge to mimic a pet on live television last night. He may feel his flirtation with a reality TV youth audience was not worth the loss of credibility that many of his critics claimed yesterday was an inevitable consequence.

The firebrand parliamentarian earned the grudging respect of even his political enemies through his performance before the US Congress last year. But yesterday viewers only saw rolling footage of the cat performance. Commentators called it excruciating and his own supporters said it was an indignity.

As the cat scenes continued to play out, the Labour party moved into the absent MP's constituency, in the form of Westminster chief whip Hilary Armstrong armed with a petition - as well as her own television cameras - demanding that the missing MP return to work. She urged Mr Galloway to "respect his constituents, not his ego".

And as supporters argued that Channel 4 was censoring Mr Galloway's political message, the Big Brother website was laden with innuendo after the cat incident, saying: "The task may be over, but George, it seems, just can't keep his inner beast caged. George seemed to be feline frisky. First he starts a restless circling of the kitchen, looking every bit like a caged tiger marking his territory. Next he purrs something quietly in fellow feline Rula's ear that makes her bottom jump and tighten excitedly. Sadly we don't know what George said, but whatever it was got this reaction from our Polish thoroughbred: 'Well I'm glad it can still do that for you.' "

Those working for the MP said he had been prepared to suffer such indignities in the belief that his political message was getting across to millions of viewers. But, they claim, when he discovers his political message has been muted, he will be furious.

Silliness

Ron McKay, Mr Galloway's spokesman and friend, said: "I would hope people will realise it's just a bit of silliness and even MPs can indulge in that. I rather wish he hadn't been given that particularly silly task.

"They have these indignities thrust upon them by Big Brother. It was a calculated risk to do the show but it was predicated on not being censored and him being able to get his message out but when he says anything political they bleep him or tweety-bird it.

"The producer admitted George has talked a lot about politics and they censored it out. It's the height of cynicism when you accept a controversial MP, with the expectation that the audience will find him controversial, and then silence him, citing the Broadcasting Act. It's political censorship. The idea was to reach a mass audience, including some of the third of 18- to 24-year-olds who didn't vote in the last election."

The show's producer, Peter Bazalgette, denied the claims, arguing that broadcasting rules on political balance meant the MP's thoughts on the Iraq war and poverty in Tower Hamlets could only be aired on the daily highlights programme if "countervailing views" were also screened. He was considering whether there should be a political debate within the house.

Arcane rules

"There are these arcane broadcasting regulations. George has been talking about Iraq and the poll tax, but you have to show countervailing views," he said on BBC1's This Week programme.

On Brick Lane, Ms Armstrong was surrounded by placard-wielding local people demanding their MP set foot in the constituency's streets. The petition said: "We believe this egotistical action shows a shameful lack of respect for the people of this constituency. We call on him to represent and respect his constituents, not further his own ego, as he is by remaining totally out of touch in the Big Brother house."

Mr McKay called the protest a stunt. "The wicked witch of Westminster goes to Brick Lane," he said. "He is not just a constituency MP. He is party leader, it's his duty to propagandise for the party and get in as many members as possible, and that's what he wanted to do on Big Brother." He added: "If the people on Big Brother had all been terribly nice, bright, funny people, George would have come out of this a lot better."

Anas al-Tikriti, of the Muslim Association of Britain, said: "I think George has proved he is a man that connects with the common people and that's important. Being a cat wasn't something he just brought upon himself. It was a task he had to do and he acted diligently, otherwise he would have been seen as a hypocrite. You can't have it both ways.

"I think he brings a side to Big Brother that we haven't seen before. Galloway is exposing this is the kind of generation we have to deal with - where a 23-year-old woman doesn't know what a gynaecologist is. He has made a lot of people from political circles aware of what this generation is like."

Cat's whiskers: George and Rula at play

Rula is with George in the living area. He is on the sofa and she is on the rug. Big Brother has suggested they try some animal role play exercises to warm up for the tasks ahead.

George: "Would you like me to be the cat?"

Rula: "Yes please."

[George proceeds to clamber down on to the rug beside Rula, and purrs throughout the exchange.]

Rula: "Here pussy, pussy, pussy, yes ... more tickles it's OK ... Oooh little pussy cat, there there pussy cat ..."

[George slowly licks his lips.]

Rula: "You stay there, I'll get you some milk, you like that don't you ..."

[Rula pretends to get some milk. George is now on all fours, lapping pretend cream from Rula's cupped hands.]

Rula: "Yes, good pussy cat ... that's right, delicious! Good girl, good girl ..."

[George licks his lips and moustache.]

Rula: "You've got cream all over your whiskers."

[She rubs his sideburns and says: "Good pussy cat." George nuzzles into her lap and starts purring. Rula strokes his head and behind his ears.]

posted January 16, 2006 03:59 PM              

quote:

---

There are many other leftist arguments which deserve no discussion either. So don't expect a point by point refutation of nonsense.

---

As for this remark, you're merely proving my earlier point about your inability to enter into discussion or debate on these topics, and you're attempting to mask it by being rude again. Tut, tut my dear, you really must learn some manners.

posted January 16, 2006 04:43 PM            

There isn't anything of substance to debate with you Cardinalgal. The premises you operate under are nonsense, the kind of nonsense no rational person would indulge. A quick review of the record of leftist error reveals the left has been either wrong or lying in every argument they've made against the war on terror and the war in Iraq.

posted January 16, 2006 04:56 PM            

Your number 2:

quote:

---

It will simply drive them further to their faith, their customs and eventually, more than likely to the side of the terrorists. It is ignorant to think otherwise - that's why, "Shock and awe" and the rest of these ill considered 'posse mentality' tactics will foster nothing but hatred and do nothing but isolate the west.

---

...has been discussed before. Jwhop still hasn't figured out this concept (as evidenced by him calling it 'nonsense'). In fact, Jwhop always sides on the side of violence unless he's in his fake humanitarian mode...then he reverses position. In fact, it would be safe and reasonable to say that we've learned from his posts that U.S. killing is ok as long as it's under a Republican president. All other killing is morally reprehensible in his book.

What's wrong Jwhop? Can't muster any compassion for the loss of innocent lives? If a Communist, Saddam or a Democrat had killed these people you'd be all over it wouldn't you?

CardinalGal, if I had to theorize why they did that attack that way it might be due to financial reasons. As estimated the other day in Knight-Ridder newspapers the Iraq war could cost as much as $2 trillion. We can't really afford our war activity.
http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/13622020.htm