DISQUS

cAPSLOCK,

Care to elaborate a bit? did you decide to answer the call and go join the war effort?

That almost made me want to go and enlist so I could go to Iraq to get bin Laden.

Not quite, but almost. I'm sure other Patriots will feel the same way: they support the sentiment and like to bask in it but not so much that they'll actually go out and actually fight their favorite war, the war against evildoers; the war against Islamofascism that threatens to overwhelm America and deprive me of my right to watch FOX 'News' while I'm waiting at Jiffy Lube.

I sure hope someone answers the call though because our military is running out of bodies:

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/07/army_recr...

I suppose we could always keep the current soldiers in Iraq for a 6th or 7th tour. That won't wear them (or their families) out at all. They volunteered for driving around a country where 70% of the population supports violent attacks against them.

In the meanwhile, I'll show my support by platering everything I own with American flags and pictures of the WTC.

Whew... That was a close call! Those insane, unhinged Georgia liberals would rather be outside (or read) than subject themselves to FOX 'News'. Imagine what would have happened if they had been subjected to the intellectual firepower of John Gibson?

I'm glad you showed the necessary resolve to stay the course and watch teevee.

You should have taunted the liberals by loudly and emphatically saying you wish Jack Abramoff's business partner and Jerry Falwell's Boy Wonder, Ralph Reed, would have won his race for Lt. Governor.

Why don't you write some posts instead? The Great News in Iraq is never covered by the right wing blogosphere anymore. I'm not sure why since conservatives were so pissed off a couple of years ago about the failure of the liberal media to cover the good Iraq news. Maybe you could tell us about all the great stuff that has been happening there since you seem very tuned into the War on Terror?

I was also wondering if you could explain the Religion of Peace Islamic terrorist attack counter on your website. Seen in isolation, the number of attacks (9023) since 9/11 sounds really high. I wonder how many attacks there were in the 6 years preceding 9/11? I didn't see it at their site but think that would give us a good understanding of what is happening with Islamic terrorism. Namely, is there more or less?

The reason I ask is because logically, if we're 'winning' the war on Islamic Terrorists, the number of attacks would be declining after the US spent at least $500 billion & gave the Islamic terrorists 5 years of Shock and Awe. A war would be considered a failure by normal people if the # of attacks continued escalating, right? Or is that somehow a success?

If you could enlighten us, it would be appreciated.

Ms Underestimated,

Why don't you ever engage anyone in debate?

You seem to have strong opinions. Do you not have the confidence to defend them?

Your behavior is sort of cut-and-run-like, don't you think? Your logo cuts a more intimidating figure than you do on your blog.

The questions above seem pretty straightforward. Surely you can answer them as a defender of Libby.

Liberty or Death,

You said:

"Back in the day (as was pointed out in several still pictures in the video) immigrants as part of the requirement to become citizens had to take classes to learn English as well as learn about how our government works, our culture, etc. However, nowadays it’s not “PC” to make someone learn these things as it takes away from their cultural identity!"

It's my understanding that these are still requirements of becoming a citizen. There's still a test (in English, I believe), etc. Likewise, I know it's a popular belief on the right to think that immigrant kids are not taught in English, but I wonder how accurate it really is. When I was in school (only 15 years ago), we didn't have separate classes and as far as I know, while immigrants may take some classes in Spanish (for whatever reason), their schooling in general is in English. If anyone has actual evidence to the contrary, I'm open minded. I hear this complaint a lot, but seldom see actual evidence. I simply don't think many districts offer education in multiple languages, mostly for obvious reasons (lack of money, etc.).

Mike raises an interesting point and I didn't realize there were so many commentors from AZ. Has anyone noticed the large numbers of American seniors who are moving to Mexico, among other cheap 3rd world locales, because they can stretch their retirement savings & social security money out there and get cheaper health care across the border? How many of these Americans are learning, say, Spanish? I know about 12 such people and their Spanish 'ability' is abyssmal. I think collectively they know how to ask where the bathroom is. they are not taking any classes and expect everyone in Mexico to speak English to them.

Once again, Americans aren't exactly practicing what they're preaching, are they?

I suppose the singer ONLY speaks English? Only a monolingual person would feel threatened enough to actually write a song extolling the virtues of the only language she speaks. What next, a song extolling her skin color? Oh... it seems that there is already such a genre of music. My bad.

I wonder if the singer's own ancestors arrived in America speaking perfect English? I know mine didn't and probably many of yours didn't either. After after a period of time, today's immigrants acquire at least some ability to speak English just like previous immigrants learned to speak English. If you've ever studied a foreign language, you know it gets harder beyond the age of 10 so naturally, someone who immigrated when they were 20 years old will almost certainly never completely master the language just as you will probably never master, say, Spanish at this point - even if you moved to Spain and immersed yourself in it.

Immigrant children who grow up here, on the other hand, speak it fluently because they learn it in schools, on TV, on the radio, etc.. They may retain their accents, but they still have English ability.

So if it is undisputably revealed that Thompson did in fact lobby for them (thru billing statements, etc.), would that change your mind?

I'm wondering if Thompson, a 20 year lobbyist, had any other unsavory clients. Like Saddam Hussein or some other dictator? Wouldn't that be weird?

Sort of like the Bush family connections to the bin Ladens thru the Carlyle Group private equity investment group.

Sounds like a Republican who says one thing and does another, just to make a buck. Fredrick of Hollywood was a lobbyist for 20 years, after all.

Did you hear Fred Thompson was paid by Family Planning to lobby for abortion rights?

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-thom...

That's too bad. I guess this stuff comes up when you pin your hopes and dreams on a professional lobbyist. Conservatives will need to back Sam Brownback to stop the holocaust that is occuring in America.

Ms Underestimated, you're back! I trust your medical condition has improved. It looks like you can type now, which is great.

Are you ready to rumble?

The President acknowledged Libby's crimes in the announcement that he bravely e-mailed to everyone. He simply thought the penalty was too harsh. [Gee, wasn't there a huge brouhaha about excessive penalties in the right-wing blogosphere recently?] So instead of reducing Libby's sentence from, say, 30 months to 30 days, he reduced it to 0 (Zero!) days and a fine that'll probably be paid by his friends. He basically shortcircuited the Judicial process, like some sort of activist something-or-another.

I wonder if people in courtrooms around the country will start to play the "excessive punishment" card now? Way to go Mr. President! He established a two-tier Justice system. That's very American.

If you could answer even a couple of the questions below, I'd appreciate it.

If the case against Libby was a fraud:

1. Why did the CIA ever ask Justice to open an investigation?
2. Why did Justice agree to do so?
3. Why did John Ashcroft recuse himself?
4. Why did Bush say he'd fire anyone who leaked the info (which of course he didn't do. Flip flop?)
5. For that matter, why did Bush allow millions of tax dollars to be wasted on an investigation of a "non-crime" that he could have declared a non-crime from the get-go?

So Libby was convicted of obstructing justice during the investigation of a "non-crime" and everyone - jury, Republican appointed judge, a further panel of judges - who worked on his case in the justice system was wrong?

Ms U.,

don't worry about spelling and grammar. If it really matters, computers can check your spelling and your readers have grammar that is far worse than yours. When their busy not engaging people with different opinions, they're busy writing nonsense that isn't grammatical. Just lay it all out there and good luck with your surgery.

Orion's mom,

Will you be so casual about our enemies if Bush decides to ally with bin Laden, like Reagan & Bush Sr. did in Afganistan?

Are you happy that we spent $500 billion to overthrow Saddam and now we're arming Saddam loyalists who have benn killing Americans since we invaded?

Am I missing something or have you not given your statement any thought whatsoever?

Orion's mom,

So I guess I should prepare myself for bin Laden becoming our ally when he promises to overthrow Iran?

I hope your nerve problem gets better. Ask the doctor if he thinks acupuncture might help. It could help and at less cost & risk than surgery on your neck.

Why don't you put more of your own opinion into your blog instead of just videos of other people? I haven't really seen you take anyone on the entire time I've been visiting.

You haven't been covering all of the great Iraq news, either. Hey, did you hear that the US is now arming Saddamists and Sunni insurgents after spending $500 billion of our tax dollars to try to defeat them? Patriots are oddly quiet about it. Are they waiting for Karl Rove's talking points & approval before addressing this situation? Are we not allowed to discuss it until the Commander in Chief has explained how arming our enemy will so not-backfire on us?

Maybe I should just preemptively blame Clinton?

Can anyone at all explain - in more than one or two vague sentences - how Muslim hordes will take over America without sounding like an ignorant crackpot?

Am I asking for too much from people whom I presume are adults capable of typing and stringing words together?

Jainphx,

You're a cut and runner, are you? You can't even explain your statement? Is there anyone on this blog who could actually explain, in detail, how the Muslim hordes everyone is so scared of could possibly take over America, as Jainphx seems to think they'll do?

I have NEVER gotten an explanation that is worthy of an adult who has actually considered their statement.

Why don't you elaborate for us? Otherwise, we'll never understand.

Jainphx,

One time I'd like Americans to get out from under their beds and get their lives (and freedoms) back instead of cowering in fear that they're going to be attacked by Muslim hordes who will somehow overwhelm the 300,000,000 mostly non-Muslim Americans who are already living here, don't speak Arabic and are separated by an ocean that the Muslims (who have no navy with which to actually launch an invasion) will have to cross to invade us.

Unless there is some other method they would use to take over America that I'm missing. If so, please fill me in jainphx.

Well Marc, as long as we're dealing in hypotheticals, I bet if the number of attacks on US forces in Iraq continue to escalate, you'll still swear that that is evidence that we're "winning".

I bet if American forces end up stranded in parts of Iraq as the Iraqi civil war - that Bush unleashed - spirals out of control, you'll blame Clinton. Or Gore. Or Carter. Anyone but the Commander-in-Chief.

Thank you for your astute insight, Jack. do you happen to know when bin Laden will receive what is coming to him?

We've had effectively *unlimited resources* at our disposal to find him for the past 6 years. A substantial portion of the US population would be happy to get him so I don't know why it seems to be such a low priority. I bet if Osama was in Iraq, we would have caught him already...

These are explosive revelations! An Iraqi government official met with bin Laden. The whole war makes complete sense now and is not a catastrophic, deadly boondoggle at all.

Since it appears that bin Laden is now in Pakistan - and Pakistan actually has nuclear weapons - should we be getting ready to spend another $500,000,000,000 invading them, too?

What about bin Laden's financiers, the Saudis? When do we roll on them? After Iran? When will we get Venezuela and Cuba then? After Syria?

I'm locked and loaded. I'll be awaiting the orders and when the time comes will terminate them with extreme prejudice by using my nifty, Rummy-Approved USB Office Artillery.

Tom,

I'm not sure Ms Underestimated's readers are actually listening to the contents of Gore's speech. Otherwise, they would have noted that Gore was asking why the US (Bush Sr., Reagan) were so passive when Saddam gassed the Kurds, or why we sold Saddam weapons when we knew he was a despot. He was no Hitler, but he wasn't someone the US should have been associating with if we were at all serious about standing up for human rights & democracy. Why the gassing of the Kurds was used as a pretext to invade Iraq 15 years later is a mystery to me and I'm sure many others.

Orion's mom is falling into the same trap right wingers always fall into:

1. Assuming that all Muslim terrorists are the same (childish view of the world). Abu Nidal does not equal Osama bin Laden.
2. Assuming that dropping nukes will solve our problem and not contaminate Israel, or our troops in the region or our allies with radioactive fallout at all. Do right wingers give their ideas any thought whatsoever?

I can barely understand Orion's mom's illiterate ramblings. In keeping with the leanings of this blog, I suggest that Orion's mom be deported to her native country or learn to write proper English.

LTCPMax,

There is no evidence in the modern republican party to support your assertion that they are not supporters of big government. The numbers tell the story.

And the fact that they throw money at their contributors while we get the shaft is undeniable. No negotiating prescription drug prices in their new entitlement program? What's conservative about that?

I don't want a good speaker for President. I want someone who has ideas and who can solve problems. Not someone who promises to keep doing what Bush is doing, except more irresponsibly.

Basically, you're saying that Thompson can speak Englsh reasonably well, unlike the rest of the contenders, right? There's not an original thought in the man's head.

'Respectable' performance in the Senate? Your statement about his 'good attendence' record is faint praise. yet you try to make it sound like a sign of greatness. Does that mean he'll vacation less than Mr. 28%? Republicans have such low, low expectations from their candidates.

My assertion that debt would continue to explode under Thompson - or any of the other top contenders - was based on their unquestioning support of massive defense spending, Prescription drugs and other wealth redistribution shemes that the Republicans LOVE. They have happily spent hundreds of billions of dollars on them over the past 6 years. Our money. There is no real discussion, outside of Ron Paul, about real changes that must be made to our federal finances and priorities. Republicans used to OWN this issue. Now no one in their right mind would say Republicans have bettered our national financial position.

Fundamentally, the major candidates are all proposing a continuation of what Bush, who is increasingly unpopular even on the right, has been doing for the last 7 disasterous years. Fred Thompson is just like the rest of them. Oh... he'd pardon Scooter Libby. Big whoop! So we know he condones criminality, like the other major candidates.

And you want to make him President because of that?

do you people have no brains or do you just think Americans are stupid and therefore best served by an average man because he looks like a leader on teevee?

LTCPMax,

Sorry, regarding the breaking US military, from Sept. 2006:

"General Barry McCaffrey, now retired, said of the current state of the US military, "I think, arguably, it's the worst readiness condition the US Army has faced since the end of Vietnam." This isn't a big surprise when we consider the facts that many soldiers are already into their third combat tour, frequent deployments have cut training time at home in half, and two thirds of all Army combat units are rated not ready for combat."

Regarding the spendthrift Republican front runners, there is literally no evidence to suggest deficits will decline if they win. They plan to continue the Iraq occupation, they plan to "transform" the military. The Prescription drug bill will still be bleeding the treasury, and they'd probably try to privatize social security at a huge cost to us, by the way, if they could. Any savings they talk about are marginal.

So now that I have answered your questions, why do you think Fred Thompson is a good or even the best candidate?