For general discussion and debate. Possible talking point: Pat Buchanan thinks America is coming apart.
"[T]he likelihood of her survival as one nation...is improbable -- and impossible if America continues on her current course...For we are on a path to national suicide."
If you haven't seen Drudge's exclusive preview of Buchanan's new book, you should -- and then come back here to discuss your thoughts.














Comments Policy
Once Again
November 26, 2007 - 11:18 ET by Long Island PeteOnce again Pat spews his blame America, isolationism. I do agree with his way of fixing the border but some of his crap sounds like a Ron Paul commercial.
Can someone explain
November 26, 2007 - 11:20 ET by Clear thinkerCan someone explain "Cakewalk crowd" to me???
Pat wrote..."A purge of neoconservative ideology and the “Cakewalk” crowd” from national power."
Get Email updates from Fred http://socialnet.imwithfred.com/email_alert_july_26.html
The "cakewalk crowd"....
November 26, 2007 - 11:50 ET by Prester John....refers to the supposed hordes of Iraq war supporters who said the war would be a "cakewalk". Now conventional wisdom says there were dozens of such folks throughout the administration who said such a thing, when of course there was exactly one person that I am aware of who said it (Kenneth Adelman I believe) and he wasn't even in the administration.
Ahhemmm, the war portion in
November 26, 2007 - 12:24 ET by dscottAhhemmm, the war portion in May of 2003 was essentially a "cakewalk" in terms of ousting Saddam Hussein from power. We had minimal causualties name me any war where fewer causualties were had in taking over another country????? Can you??? We won the friggen War! Get that in your revisionist heads! Mission Accomplished!
New mission, set up new government in Iraq, chosen by it's own people - Accomplished
Next mission, defeat al Qaeda, almost done, it took 3 years and a change in tactics but we are not going to loose that one either. So get over it whiners. As usual Pat B. is full defeatest nonsense. Listen to this guy and you would think it's the end of the world, hmmm, sounds like Dems whiners who insist we must do it their way, talk, talk, talk, no action. Talking does little good against bombs and bullets. Until the enemy concedes defeat, is on the brink of defeat, is defeated or acknowledges it's a stalemate, talking is merely another means of deception to reorder the battlefield in a more favorable manner. Unlike like Dem leadership in Vietnam, we are there to win, not loose or end in stalemate. Notice, that only the Dems, libs and certain Libertarians want to lose.
Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. dscott's corollary: The line between malice and stupidity is called depraved indifference.
This is a dishonest smear, IMO.
November 26, 2007 - 12:31 ET by sarcasmoWhen libertarians like me say "fiscally, we've already lost" that's not AT ALL the same as somehow "wanting" to lose. Quite the contrary, and everyone knows it. Why not get-honest about the actual costs of this, if you're so-supportive of it? And by actual costs, I include the cost of money we owe our Vets, who deserve nonBS support. Veterans and active duty folks have proven to be quite a bit smarter than the news media desperately-wants 'em to be.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
peace and freedom is not
November 26, 2007 - 12:34 ET by TruthMongerpeace and freedom is not cheap - Bush's ME actions have been a brilliantly conceived AND EXECUTED "investment:)"
The problem with this kind
November 26, 2007 - 13:06 ET by Dan The Man 2The problem with this kind of investment is its a lot like a life insurance policy. You really cant estimate teh worth of it until you need it. And the same goes with the investment Bush made, the worth of it is not readily apparent.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
...so we call it
November 26, 2007 - 19:58 ET by TruthMonger...so we call it "priceless:)?" Sounds good to me...
Short comings or missteps
November 26, 2007 - 13:09 ET by dscottShort comings or missteps of some of our actions does not in any way invalidate the cost of freedom, security or the end result. Constructive criticism is always welcome, it means we can adjust our tactics to ensure the end results of what we want. On the other hand whining and complaining via negative critcism is not welcome, it detracts from our goals, aids and abetts the enemy, in fact gives the enemy a false sense of accomplishment and reason to go on fighting. I do not characterize your criticism as constructive, but divissive. The enemy ceases to fight when they are either dead or convinced any further effort is futile getting themselves needlessly killed. Those who have a death wish must be killed off (that is the reality of fanaticism), the rest will go home and re-think their experience.
Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. dscott's corollary: The line between malice and stupidity is called depraved indifference.
the left is not about
November 26, 2007 - 20:02 ET by TruthMongerthe left is not about constructive criticism...
Bush is Hitler? Hey enemies, check out our secret CIA locations all over Europe! Oh-oh Bush is spying on us again and taking away all of our rights. Puhleeeze...
It's called treason for a reason. The Dems are about undermining Bush, and therefore the US, period.
ENTITLEMENTS and FedGov't PORK run amok
November 26, 2007 - 14:39 ET by Ten7sFiscally, we're losing because of ENTITLEMENTS and FedGov't PORK run amok. Defense spending on GWOT is NOT the problem.
As far as Iraq, our military ousted Saddam Hussien in short order, and is prevailing in spite of Foreign Policy Idealists (aka, NeoConservatives), who've been making MASSIVE mistakes all over the world and especially in Iraq for the past long while. While I, like others here, don't think that isolationism is even worth contemplating in the short or mid term, we MUST wrest power from the Idealists and return to real Conservatism and Realism.
And people don't who understand that Our Nation is disintegrating do not understand what a "nation" is and especially do not understand the history, traditions, and charater of Our Nation. But they will miss it when/if its gone (but probably still won't understand what happened).
?
November 27, 2007 - 04:24 ET by UnsaneWhile I, like others here, don't think that isolationism is even worth contemplating in the short or mid term, Coulda fooled me.
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Already?
November 27, 2007 - 04:22 ET by UnsaneWhen libertarians like me Abandoning the Republican party so soon?
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Reading is fundamental
November 27, 2007 - 07:28 ET by sarcasmoNote the lower-case "l," as if it weren't possible to be both things at once (coulda fooled an entire Republican caucus that's almost 2 decades old!). Yep, I'm still a Republican, just like Fox News is still obviously biased against all candidates besides Rudy & Hillary, whether or not it's Slate catching the bias instead of me...
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
Contradictions collapse
November 28, 2007 - 03:31 ET by UnsaneYou tell me "reading is fundamental", when you are severely crippled by your own selective literacy problems.
Contradictions constantly collapse.
Still, I wait for that "l" to become an "L". All in due time, all in due time...
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
You do mean March of 2003
November 26, 2007 - 20:53 ET by JasonCYou do mean March of 2003 right?
"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte
On a cheerier note.....
November 26, 2007 - 11:49 ET by motherbeltDiPalma Iraq Flick Bombs
The money quote: (emphasis added)
“Redacted" - which “could be the worst movie I've ever seen," said critic Michael Medved
-took in just $25,628 in its opening weekend in 15 theaters, which
means roughly 3,000 people saw it in the entire country. “This, despite
an A-list director, a huge wave of publicity, high praise in the Times,
The New Yorker, left-leaning sites like Salon, etc.
LMAO! You gotta love it.
How long before they blame "the right-wing smear machine"?
The sad thing is that DiPalma probably doesn't care; neither do the stars. Hollywood has quit making movies that Americans want to see...they just want to make movies that fit their own ideology and disperse their own propaganda.
That's fine, but it can't go on forever. Money to make self-indulgent movies isn't endless.
Redacted
November 26, 2007 - 12:09 ET by JimboIv'e heard that there has been an expectation all along that this flick will do much better overseas in markets that are Anti American. If that's true, it just underscores DiPalma's anti American stance if he is willing to play into that market.
Leon says "By the way, I'm not afraid of fat people, I'm repulsed"
Truth Monger Says - "Both are religions [Christianity & Islam], yes - with the same percentage of terrorists."
And if a few more.....
November 26, 2007 - 12:15 ET by Prester John........Jihadists are motivated by this film to go to Iraq to kill some more Americans, it's no big deal.
I mean this is art, right?
I wish all Americans would
November 26, 2007 - 12:37 ET by TruthMongerI wish all Americans would see this film - about how libs REALLY think...
Better yet let's get em on the upcoming lie detector show on Fox - ask them 75 patriotic questions and see how they answer
These gutless wonders would never go for it of course...
Where are the Hero Movies
November 26, 2007 - 12:58 ET by Airforce_5_OWhere are the movies on the good things happening in Iraq? Where are the movies on the Heros of the GWOT?
I am so tired of Hollywood and its snobbish hippie hangover crowd. Tom Brocough should burn his book because of these wipes.
The only thing you should feel when shooting insurgents is the rifle recoil.
The "cakewalk crowd"...
November 26, 2007 - 11:50 ET by Prester JohnReposted as a reply to Clear Thinker.
is anyone else getting a good laugh out of the democrats?
November 26, 2007 - 11:50 ET by SqueezerThe main issue with the democrat president candidates is who will win the nominee...clinton, obama, or edwards. but their ideology is all the same. All want socialized healthcare, more taxes, global warming fanatics, restric gun rights, etc. It doesn't matter whom you vote for, they are all the same.
At least with the republican candidates there is some variety which makes the republican presidential nominees and debates interesting to watch.
Buchanan is living in the past.....
November 26, 2007 - 12:03 ET by Missouri ConservativeI agree with Pat on many things, securing our border for one, but I believe Pat is living in the 1920s. The global community is here to stay, Pat. We can't just build walls around our country and stick our head in the sand. He wants to institute a 20% tax on imports - that sounds like a recipe for another Great Depression. Stick to the culture war, Pat.
"women and minorities hardest hit"
...he's hyper critical -
November 26, 2007 - 12:42 ET by TruthMonger...he's hyper critical - but directly opposite to the left - so his intentions are in the right place - which can be very valuable
I don't mind - I think of his messages as an ultra high bar to shoot for - like Sarcy's beloved Ron Paul platform, or the Bible for me...
The path to hell is pave
November 26, 2007 - 13:26 ET by Airforce_5_OThe path to hell is paved with good intentions too Truth.
The only thing you should feel when shooting insurgents is the rifle recoil.
we all have good intentions
November 26, 2007 - 20:04 ET by TruthMongerwe all have good intentions AF:)
LOL TM, agreed..... The
November 26, 2007 - 21:31 ET by Airforce_5_OLOL TM, agreed.....
The only thing you should feel when shooting insurgents is the rifle recoil.
Pat Buchanan will say things
November 26, 2007 - 16:47 ET by motherbeltPat Buchanan will say things that no one else dares to say, and surprise! He's still around! You have to give him credit for that.
Home runs, all....
November 26, 2007 - 12:13 ET by Joe4CoulterSomeone tell me which current GOP candidate is espousing even 2 of these solutions to his very insightful observations! (And DON'T tell me Ron Paul.)
If just one of our current 'serious' contenders would step up and show this type of leadership there would be a grassroots groundswell. But they're too busy doin' the 'media dance' and calculating their positions based on 'internal' polling data.
The only thing Drudge left out was P.B.'s position on MMGW. But I have no doubt it's in the book.
Good Orderly Direction
Pat, pat, pat, pat,
November 26, 2007 - 12:21 ET by wiwfPat, pat, pat, pat, PAT:
Isolationism worked until 1914. There is no way we can go back to that "simpler time." You can thank woodrow wilson for that. Now you just have to bear with it. So do all isolationists/non-interventionists (*cough*RonPaul*cough*)
The Rocky Mountain Collegian: Illustrating Idiocy
Isolationism
November 27, 2007 - 04:26 ET by UnsaneNo, isolationism did too work! It kept this country out of war for ALL of the 1920s and 1930s!!!
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Some people...
November 26, 2007 - 12:25 ET by sarcasmoHave been saying all this spending's unsustainable for a long, long time. And quite-consistently (but he did switch on the death penalty). Enjoy, while trying to imagine ANY of the other candidates maintaining positions this-consistent for that-long! :)
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
History repeats itself. I
November 26, 2007 - 13:07 ET by ConservativeRexHistory repeats itself. I am never amazed when people refuse to learn anything. Joe Kennedy Sr (in the lead up to WWII) . Stated that "democracy was dead or dying and that maybe it should". It ruined him politically, and it should have. Otherwise, we would have had the head henchman of that crime family in power.
Buchanan has done the very same thing to himself. Good. This country does not need any more defeatist running around spouting their garbage. We already have a bushel of 'em, thank you very much!
Who needs that crap? And who need Buchanan? Nothing new to add. Ignore him, ignore his book. His yellow streak is showing through now like a neon light. He is a coward, a weak man.
Pat and others...
November 26, 2007 - 13:22 ET by planetrepublicanWhen Pat ran for pres and was up here in NH he developed this kind of rebel yell when campaigning. It was annoying to say the least but I also got the impression he was pissed off. He, like Gore, like Edwards (in my opinion), like Carter, like oh so many failed politicos, seem to want to hurt the USA; a kind of meanness sets into their tone, like revenge...a "how dare they" kind of thinking. I think they are all arrogant bastards and I am very glad they were not president or as in the case of Carter, short termed.
Just change human nature. Easy, huh?
November 26, 2007 - 13:41 ET by WoodyMIf Pat Buchanan is so smart, then why doesn't he run for president. Oh, wait.
- - -
I do believe that our country, like Rome, will eventually break up over factions rather than territory.
"• However, I do accept Torn asunder by a culture war, America has now begun to break down along class, ethnic and racial lines."
- - -
The following will never happen. How else could liberals get their left-wing agendas as law?
"• To reach a cold peace in the culture war, Buchanan urges a return to federalism and the overthrow of our judicial dictatorship by Congressionally mandated restrictions on the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court."
- - -
Next, been there, done that. Appeasing Russia didn't work. They only understand force.
"• To avert a second Cold War, the United States should “get out of Russia’s space and get out of Russia’s face,” and shut down all U.S. bases on the soil of the former Soviet Union."
- - -
English as the offical langauge will never pass because the left will say that it promotes one culture as better than another. Of course, they're wrong, but the Democrats will play along.
- - -
Give up, Pat. I accept your inevitable overall conclusion based upon the histories of empires, but not your solutions. Even Rome tried replacing a republic with dictators and that only worked during one phase. The problem is human nature, and nothing will change that.
And now, an abbreviated
November 26, 2007 - 13:39 ET by Roger the ShrubberAnd now, an abbreviated Steelers MNF edition of The Shrub Report®:
Today's Global Warming Update.
The biggest secret in Pennsylvania will soon be revealed…
Here is a special Leon Claims We Are In A Civil War in Iraq update.
Happy Sparkle Season, everybody! Did you all survive Black Friday?
Here is a list for you all to enjoy.
RtS - loved the list, but
November 26, 2007 - 14:20 ET by FastEdI really like Howard the Duck - was simple, dumb, no thinking allowed, and was better to all the movies I wouldn't go to - such as reeldacted - seems that one was completly blocked out.
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
Eduardo, do you have still
November 26, 2007 - 14:33 ET by Roger the ShrubberEduardo, do you have still have a Lea Thompson fetish?
PA
November 26, 2007 - 14:47 ET by JDWI saw the PA reference and immediately thought of this
JDW
Sen Clinton: Distinguished Founder of Media Matters
Street has no political
November 26, 2007 - 15:58 ET by Roger the ShrubberStreet has no political capital to burn, I guess. His term ends on December 31. Luckily there were no murders during the ceremony.
PA
November 26, 2007 - 16:12 ET by JDWThis state has been destroyed by taxes, union problems, education problems... libs in general. Hopefully these actions will demonstrate even further to the general what must be done to improve their situation.
JDW
Sen Clinton: Distinguished Founder of Media Matters
Look at the two big PA
November 26, 2007 - 16:26 ET by Roger the ShrubberLook at the two big PA cities:
Philly - no Repub mayor in 60 years.
Pittsburgh - no Repub mayor in 70 years.
In this decade, only New Orleans had more workers leave their city than Pittsburgh.
Funny you should mention
November 26, 2007 - 16:46 ET by dscottFunny you should mention philly, the one city that has more registered voters who actually vote than there are people over 18 counted by the Census Bureau. LOL
Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. dscott's corollary: The line between malice and stupidity is called depraved indifference.
Yoohoo! Leon! You have had
November 26, 2007 - 19:40 ET by Roger the ShrubberYoohoo! Leon! You have had weeks and weeks and weeks to elaborate on your easily-backed-up-with-facts theory that Iraq is in the midst of a civil war, yet, strangely, you prefer to engage in trolling open thread postings instead of tackling a real issue like this.
Why is that, Hater? Are you hoping this embarrassment for you will *poof!* go away?
He's found a fellow traveler
November 26, 2007 - 20:01 ET by Free StinkerRog - I don't think you'll get Leon's attention now.
He's found a fellow traveler in The Prof and will be busy learning new talking points.
"This generation is so damned spoiled and lazy, they wouldn't know a real threat to their freedom, until it interupted the power-source to their X-box, and killed a half a million people!" - George S. Patton (sort of)
As Blonde says so succinctly
November 26, 2007 - 20:04 ET by RJWe need a better class of Troll
Rog,I didn't even see
November 27, 2007 - 08:51 ET by LeonRog,
I can't remember the last time we had an Iraq civil war discussion. It was months and months ago. Nice try trying to act like this has been a current topic of discussion for Leon.
I didn't even see your post. After last week's temper tantrum, I'm not sure if I should even waste my time with you. You're no longer on the radar.
Obvious answer to your question. Civil war's over for now. Ethnic cleansing in Baghdad complete. Baghdad now divided along ethnic lines. I guess that's success.
Although if our goal is to break Iraq into 3 seperate states, then we're doing a great job and we're almost there.
The reason you cannot
November 27, 2007 - 11:38 ET by Roger the ShrubberThe reason you cannot remember the last time you spoke of the "civil war" is because, even though you have been called out REPEATEDLY over the past couple of months, you have been avoiding the topic, obviously out of shame. Don't feed me the BS line that this is news to you, as if you do not read Newsbusters on a daily basis. This is "old news" to you because you know you have been wrong from the start, and hoped to avoid further embarrassment.
There never was a civil war, Hater. You know it, and I know it. It has been Al-Qaeda and Iran all along. I have posted a copious amount of evidence throughout the past weeks, and yet, there was always a silence from you. The best you can come up with now is "the civil war is over?" "The ethnic cleansing is complete"? Laughables attempt to twist your original premise: that Al-Qaeda is a negligible presence in Iraq. But, then again, isn't that what you are all about? Moving the goalposts when shown to be a dumbass?
You have proven that, once again, you come to the table with nothing but the standard Progressive talking points. All you are good for is baiting for fights on the open thread. What bait will you use today? Evolution? Abortion? Christianity? Gun control? I am no longer on your radar because you cannot compete with your betters. You are only pertinent at Newsbusters because you make a convenient whipping boy for the majority here. You must enjoy your status as a punching bag here, because you keep coming back for more.
I will gladly smack you around as long as you please. It never grows old, Hater, regardless of what name you are posting under.
You may go now.
Roger, You're simply
November 27, 2007 - 12:55 ET by LeonRoger,
You're simply wrong.
Iraqi Sunnis killing Iraqi Shiites = civil war
Iraqi Shiites killing Iraqi Sunnis = civil war
Not sure what Iran or Al Qaeda has to do with the massive number of casualites that have resulted from Iraqi v. Iraqi killing.
hey leon - glad yer
November 27, 2007 - 13:04 ET by TruthMongerhey leon - glad yer here
what hypocracy were you referring to regarding the sweatshops? I can't seem to find it on the thread here bro
TM, What are you talking
November 27, 2007 - 13:09 ET by LeonTM,
What are you talking about?
Are you implying that sweatshops embody the principles of Christianity or the teachings of Jesus Christ?
You're asking me what's hypocritical about Christians supporting sweatshop labor?
absolutely! pick up your
November 27, 2007 - 13:13 ET by TruthMongerabsolutely!
pick up your cross and carry it
blessed are the poor in spirit, blessed are the persecuted, the meek shall inherit the earth (the "beatitudes" from the sermon on the mount)
it's easier for a camel to get through the eye of a needle than a rich man to get into heaven
the general message from Jesus was the worse your life is here the better off you really are, essentially - brings you closer to God
more scripture where that came from
I could have saved you guys alot of time yesterday - sorry
TM, It's not hypocritical
November 27, 2007 - 13:25 ET by LeonTM,
It's not hypocritical for the sweatshop laborers to work in sweatshops. Are you serious?
Wow. You are dense.
It's hypocritical to pretend to be a christian while exploiting and abusing your fellow man aka owning a sweatshop.
Show me in the Bible where it says blessed are those that enslave their brothers for the purpose of exploitation.
I'm dense? The world is
November 27, 2007 - 13:27 ET by TruthMongerI'm dense?
The world is dense buddy and you absolutely wallow in it
http://www.evilbible.com/Slavery.htm
TM, You argued that the
November 27, 2007 - 13:29 ET by LeonTM,
You argued that the sweatshop workers are blessed.
Where did I ever dispute that? I never claimed the WORKERs were hypocritical.
I claimed the CHRISTIAN company that buys it's crosses from sweatshops are hypocritical.
You haven't explained anything. In fact, you've barely made any sense.
well to borrow your phrase
November 27, 2007 - 13:32 ET by TruthMongerwell to borrow your phrase then - please show me in the Bible where it says the Christian patrons are hypocritical for doing this:)?
I explain - you just can't comprehend - it's not my fault
the Biblical lifestyle does not make any sense at all to liberals - and also Satan, incidentally:)
TM, Let's just be
November 27, 2007 - 13:39 ET by LeonTM,
Let's just be clear. Are you arguing that it's not hypocritical for a Christian company to use sweatshop labor b/c the Bible condones slavery?
So you're PRO-Slavery?
That sure is a bold stance this day in age. Wow. You're incredible. This whole Bible thing's got you twisted in knots. Must suck to LITERALLY interpret the Bible.
I hope you keep you wife isolated when she's menstruating and I hope you never wear clothes of mixed fabrics.
The Law of Moses does talk
November 27, 2007 - 13:42 ET by Conservative VoiceThe Law of Moses does talk about slavery and what is considered ok and not ok.
I'm pro-God, and God is
November 27, 2007 - 14:36 ET by TruthMongeryes i am
I'm pro-God, and God is apparently pro-slavery - it wasn't my decision
I don't isolate my wife, or avoid the mixed cloth - and I do eat shrimp:) - you are confused as usual about the OT laws - slavery is allowed - doesn't mean you have to practice or support - but you can practice and support it without being a hypocrit...
As for the shrimp, cloth, etc - Jesus fulfilled the law on all that bro
you really need to put some thought into this
how is corporate America today fundamentally different than an old deep south plantation, really?
it's a little more comfy and that's about it
TM, Is it cool if I call
November 27, 2007 - 17:33 ET by LeonTM,
Is it cool if I call you Jefferson Davis from now on?
Your post is a joke and your support of slavery is demented.
While I agree that is a
November 27, 2007 - 13:21 ET by Conservative VoiceWhile I agree that is a gross interpretation of the sermon on the mount, the fact is they have a job. The alternative is selling daughters as sex slaves. America started its industrial revolution by having sweat shops.
Believe me even though they are only getting paid dimes on the dollar, they are getting more that what they had before or they wouldn't take the job. You are hurting them by shutting down the business.
there is nothing
November 27, 2007 - 13:25 ET by TruthMongerthere is nothing un-Christian about patronizing a sweatshop - it is a liberal problem - their comfort is found in the world - naturally sweatshops don't fit the template
Jesus would probably have gladly patronized a "sweatshop" - he would probably have been very impressed with the humility of the workers there...
TM for the most part we
November 27, 2007 - 13:39 ET by Conservative VoiceTM for the most part we agree, but the sermon on the mount wasn't saying blessed are the employees of the sweatshop.
Not that he would have anything against the sweat shop either...because the company is paying a fair wage for the area. Unlike the railroad company who hired people to work at a very good wage, but then charged them for food and lodging to where they were getting negative pay.
CV, Do you work for
November 27, 2007 - 13:27 ET by LeonCV,
Do you work for NIKE?
Ha. That tired old argument is all washed up. Sure it's better than nothing, but is that really the standard we're establishing for gigantic multi-national corporations that could easily afford to provide safe working conditions and decent wages?
No I have my own business.
November 27, 2007 - 13:35 ET by Conservative VoiceNo I have my own business. What business is it of yours to dictate to another business how much they should pay and how much benefits they offered. The price for services rendered were acceptable. When the economy has it to where you are lucky to make a dollar a week, by golly a dollar a day is an increase in pay 7 times! Not only that but increases the likelihood that other businesses will invest in the area until their economy booms. Everyone benefits.
If you think you could do better than Nike, by all means open up your own factory and compete.
Of course you are not sure
November 27, 2007 - 13:13 ET by Roger the ShrubberOf course you are not sure what Al-Qaeda and Iran have to do with Iraqis dying. That would trump your flimsy argument, and reveal how wrong you are. Claiming ignorance is no excuse. Like I said before, I have posted a copious amount of evidence proving you wrong. I cannot help it if you have chosen to ignore, pretend it does not exist, or dismiss the facts. The facts are there.
You still here? Sticking around for more abuse?
Roger, You argument isn't
November 27, 2007 - 13:18 ET by LeonRoger,
You argument isn't following any logic.
I've never claimed Al Qaeda wasn't killing any Iraqis. I claimed they weren't killing MOST Iraqis.
I have no idea where this evidence you speak of is. If you have posted so much evidence, it shouldn't be hard for you to find it and share. I'm not going to go look for it so don't bother telling me to do my own research.
What do Iran and Al Qaeda have to do with the majority of killings in Iraq that resulted from Iraqis killing Iraqis?
You actually said that less
November 27, 2007 - 15:19 ET by Roger the ShrubberYou actually said that less than 10% of the "insurgency" was Al-Qaeda.
July 5, 2007: Leon said: Iraq is not loaded with Al Qaeda. Definitely wasn't before, and now not very much. Sorry son, it's Iraqis killing Americans and each other. No more than 10% of the insurgency is Al Qaeda.
Check out this link, for starters. NB's search function blows (which you are surely banking on, Hater), so it might take until tomorrow for me to dig up more proof. In the meantime, your naive "what does Al-Qaeda and Iran have to do with Iraq?" question only makes me ponder: are you really this dense and stupid?
Roger, 1) Your claim
November 27, 2007 - 17:28 ET by LeonRoger,
1) Your claim that we've been discussing this recently is clearly wrong. Thanks for proving that. As I stated, we haven't talked about this for months. Almost 5 to be exact. Way to act like i was attempting to avoid the debate. I wasn't avoiding, we haven't talked about it. Next.
2) Your post is an interesting theory based on a massive amount of inference and even if everything that guy says is true, I don't see how it disproves my claim. How can you determine the makeup of the insurgency by simply looking at number of casualities? So casualties outside of baghdad have gone up since the surge. The author says this must be due to Al Qaeda. Ok, so Al Qaeda has been active the past few months. What's your point? I'm not sure how this in any way gives us any sort of estimate concerning the number of Al Qaeda insurgents.
How are you concluding from the rising casualty rates that my 10% number is wrong?
I've never argued that Al Qaeda wasn't in Iraq, I simply argued they made up less than 10% of the insurgency. I still stick to that argument and until you can show some actual demographic data you're a long long long way from proving that I'm wrong.
Nice try Rog, but not even close. Wow considering how condescending you were I actually thought you were going to bring some heat. Apparently not.
We haven't talked about it?
November 27, 2007 - 21:19 ET by Roger the ShrubberWe haven't talked about it? I bring it up all the time, yet you are nowhere to be found. You are always there to troll and toss bait into the NB pond, yet, when called out for being wrong, you run and hide. I have been calling you out for a long time now.
Here is an example for November 2007 to show you how incorrect you have been for months and months. There have been around 500 Iraqi deaths so far this month. Based on Al-Qaeda tactics (bombs and suicide bombers, reinforced by the previous link you ignore and do not accept because it conflicts with your theory), there have been at least 55 bombings in Iraq, with over 200 casualties. That amount is almost 40% of the civilian and Iraqi Security Forces deaths for November. The numbers have been like this for months and months and months.
I never said you claimed Al-Qaeda NEVER was in Iraq, merely that your dismissal of their presence as being inconsequential is stupid and wrong. Al-Qaeda's presence ruins your fantasy of the Iraq Civil War, thus you deny the facts.
At this point, when faced with these facts, you still cling to your pathetic idealogy, which is what I expect from someone like you. You have yet to produce evidence to support your claims, yet I am the one who does not bring any heat? You are a joke.
And next time, Sparky, post your whinings on this thread, not in PM's.
Roger, You argument isn't
November 27, 2007 - 13:18 ET by LeonRoger,
You argument isn't following any logic.
I've never claimed Al Qaeda wasn't killing any Iraqis. I claimed they weren't killing MOST Iraqis.
I have no idea where this evidence you speak of is. If you have posted so much evidence, it shouldn't be hard for you to find it and share. I'm not going to go look for it so don't bother telling me to do my own research.
What do Iran and Al Qaeda have to do with the majority of killings in Iraq that resulted from Iraqis killing Iraqis?
Go back and do your own
November 27, 2007 - 13:19 ET by JimboGo back and do your own research.
Leon says "By the way, I'm not afraid of fat people, I'm repulsed"
Truth Monger Says - "Both are religions [Christianity & Islam], yes - with the same percentage of terrorists."
Jimbo, Why would I waste my
November 27, 2007 - 13:22 ET by LeonJimbo,
Why would I waste my time sifting through Roger's post trying to find his 'evidence'?
It's much easier for him to simply repost it here so we can run with it.
Look at you following me all over the place. Isnt' this special.
Here Leon
November 27, 2007 - 13:28 ET by JimboHere leon - I did your homework for you. Now you have no excuse.
http://www.qfunk.fm/...
Leon says "By the way, I'm not afraid of fat people, I'm repulsed"
Truth Monger Says - "Both are religions [Christianity & Islam], yes - with the same percentage of terrorists."
Leon, it doesn't matter what evidence
November 27, 2007 - 13:31 ET by professor truthyou present, these guys will claim your source is 'discredited', like this guy unsane wh discounted my NY times article on the cost of the war. They live in their fantasyland of ubiquitous jihadists and free market theology. I'm listening to Chomsky right now, learning more from him in a minute than at NB over a 3 day period.
Trust me I know PT. It's
November 27, 2007 - 13:32 ET by LeonTrust me I know PT. It's brutal.
Has RJ used a single fact yet?
I bet she hasn't. Facts aren't her forte. More a general unfounded statement kind of gal.
Back in the restroom stall with your laptop, leon?
November 27, 2007 - 13:43 ET by RJ....and your creepy mid-day fantasies?
For the sake of your fellow employees, I hope it's not unisex....yuk!
Читает!!!
November 28, 2007 - 03:38 ET by Unsaneunsane wh discounted my NY times article on the cost of the war Профессор Правда не читает.
I evaluated the source. Try it sometime. I know that the Times hates the war and thus will do anything and everything to portray it in a bad light.
Besides, where did you learn this shocking revelation that wars (like every single damn thing else) has a COST???
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Retail update
November 26, 2007 - 14:01 ET by JDWAP- Strong start... BUT
If it had been a weak start how would AP had reacted?
JDW
Sen Clinton: Distinguished Founder of Media Matters
Hero Squad did his part on
November 26, 2007 - 14:42 ET by Hero SquadHero Squad did his part on Black Friday, waking up at 4 frickin' a.m. to get to Toys R Us by 4:30 and stand in line with the hopes of scoring a great deal on Playstation 2, plus other deals for the young'uns.
Score!
It's the first time I've ever done that. Truly one of the wackier things I've experienced... walking around a crowded mall at 6 a.m. and having it feel like its 2 p.m. on the Saturday before Christmas.
Worth doing... but everyone else on the Christmas list is getting gift cards.
*****
"The empty wagon makes the most noise." - Derrick Mason
Gift cards
November 26, 2007 - 14:50 ET by JDWWe give the teens cash and they hit the after Xmas sales. I like your method.
JDW
Sen Clinton: Distinguished Founder of Media Matters
MRS CLINTON
November 26, 2007 - 14:41 ET by JDWABC- Obama- Mrs Clinton is claiming basically the entire 8yrs of the Clinton presidency as her own exce