Churchill tried to live down the warmonger reputation too, until the Blitz...then they all cried out for the warmonger to save their asses.

It took warmonger Reagan to win the cold war and bring the Berlin Wall down.

And now George Warmonger Bush is kicking terrorist butt.

"There is no argument over the choice between peace and war, but there is only one guaranteed way you can have peace--and you can have it in the next second--surrender." R. Reagan - 1964

"The only "reputation as a warmonger" McCain has appears to be in the mind of liberal talk-radio host Ed Schultz..." 

... and the NYT reporter writing the story.

BTW, the term "warmonger" is so Soviet.

NObama '08

Doesn’t the whole tone and approach of this NYT “article” sound like one of those dirty tricks that the Democrats were so insincerely worried about? Like the email they sent around warning about all of the nasty ways Karl Rove might raise questions about Obama.

They initiate their smear by associating with others.

Impunitas semper ad deteriora invitat.

The NYT liberal staff should be hanging its head in shame. Our soldiers have won great victories in Afghanistan and Iraq. (Today, our soldiers do very little fighting anymore, since in both countries vetted citizens have been well trained to deal with terrorists.)

The NYT times printed Abu Ghraib story 47 days in a row and could not honor our soldiers, that helped to put an end to as much of Al Qaida as possible, by printing respectful stories of praise, even a few days. And show me 47 days in a row of "praise" for our soldiers in the NYT.

IMHO, the NYT does not deserve the right, soldiers bled and died for, that is, freedom of press. I personally think of the NYT as a disgusting, evil, non-American, bigotted, elitist, "lost in space" dis-organization. Oh, did I say dis-organization instead of organization? Oh, well, maybe might mistake is correct.

 Again, this is just my opinion.

George Warmonger Bush has defeated al Qaida on many fronts.

But lets do in the NYT way in the future:

- during the next 9-11 style attack (God forbid), instead of a warmonger president, the NYT expects us all to fold its newspapers into "Tomahawks" and throw them at domestic terrorists

- and when our soldiers go in after Al Qaida in other countries, they will be armed only with NYT papers folded as "Tomahawks".

At least these two ideas will help NYT failing circulation.

I mean we can fill warehouses full of NYT "Tomahawks" for a lot less than UAVs. I mean, don't you think Al Qaida is going to leave Americans alone because of the NYT op-ed pages, especially if we throw lots of these papers at them?

Well these are my opinions of the NYT.

PS: I think I saw a man the other day, who looked suspicious, walk into a "Porta-potty" with a few pages of the NYT and leave without the pages in his hand. Al Qaida terrorist? I could not tell.

Should I call the national hotline for supicious activity because this person looked suspicious or because of what I think he did with the NYT pages?

  It is time for the monthly warmongers meeting. What are we warmongies gonna do without our buddy?

  I would rather be in the warmonger club than the hippy envirofascist Islamo-appeasers wussie club.

  Look, I did not mention anyone in particular up there nor did I mention a party. but someone is gonna take offense. hmm, i wonder who?