Open Thread

By NB Staff (Bio | Archive)
January 10, 2008 - 09:44 ET

For general discussion and debate. Possible talking point: CNN beat Fox on Tuesday's primary night. According to Drudge:

Why might this be? Are liberals more interested in these primaries due to the battle between Clinton and Obama? Is it more about the party not in the White House always being more energized? Are the Republican candidates not generating much enthusiasm? Are conservatives disinterested due to the absence of a true conservative candidate as a frontrunner thereby auguring poorly for the GOP? Or, do right-thinking people understand these early primaries in tiny states are irrelevant?

What do these figures mean if anything?

Read comments Free email alerts Take action

Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Speaking of Obama . .

January 10, 2008 - 09:52 ET by FastEd

who came in second in NH - kerry (who fought in Vietnam) will be endorsing him today (ht - Drudge) and it just goes to prove, second place has no boundries.

There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V

CNN figures

January 10, 2008 - 09:52 ET by d1carter

Maybe this is the reason CNN is so pro Dem....

I watched both CNN and FNC,

January 10, 2008 - 13:12 ET by Bruzilla

I watched both CNN and FNC, but after the numbers started coming in I started watching mostly CNN. The reason I did this was while I really like Hume, Michael Barone was doing the updating of the numbers and all he was offering was the totals. At one point Hume mentioned that it was hard to say what areas were reporting in, and what their demos looked like. Shortly after that I switched to CNN, and they had a nifty map display of each district, what the status of each district was, and they discussed what the impacts of votes were likely to be based on demographics.

CNN was providing much more and better information than FNC, so I stayed on CNN most of the night.

Oh Fox could have done that

January 10, 2008 - 13:16 ET by Jack Bauer

Oh Fox could have done that too. It's just that they didn't want anyone to know Mrs Clinton may win because they had invested everything in her losing.

Yep, nuts I know. But bhat's the liberal interpretation, at least!

But by far the most liberal

January 10, 2008 - 09:55 ET by Ken Shepherd

But by far the most liberal of the three nets, MSNBC, came in third, and not even a close third.

I'd argue that the more exciting race in NH was Obama vs. Clinton and that conservatives are objectively interested in politics regardless of a lack of energy about the New Hampshire Republican primary (given the lack of frontrunner and how none of the frontrunners excite Republicans).

Football Comparison

January 10, 2008 - 10:29 ET by Caringwhiteguy

Which game would you rather watch . . . . New England vs. Indianapolis or Detroit vs. Miami?

Primaries are not the general election

January 10, 2008 - 10:40 ET by KC Mulville

During the primaries within each party, you're dealing with party-bred people who largely think alike. The purpose of the primaries, after all, is for the parties to put forward "their" candidate. If you examine Hillary's and Obama's voting record, they're almost identical. Now obviously, you fight about differences, not about similarities. They're not going to fight about ideology, so their fight is going to be about things more fun to fight about: namely, demographics and personality.

In the Democrat race, the fight is more clear because the demographics and personality are sufficiently different. The surprising thing about the Hillary-Obama race is that the race demographic is split down the middle, and the gender demographic is similarly split. However, the big demographic split is about age. People under thirty are flocking to Obama, while the over-30 crowd is sticking with Hillary. Even so, all those demographics are in play, and that makes for a fun fight.
On the GOP side, they also all share the same ideology. But unlike the Democrats, they're all the same basic white guys.

However, we're only in the primaries. The ideology within the parties is identical, so they don't fight about that. Once we get to the general election, however, the ideologies come front and center. Personality is still important, but the fight becomes much more about ideology.

I still think conservatism is (by far) a stronger argument. The weakness in the GOP is that they haven't lived up to their conservatism. Still, in a straight fight between liberalism and conservatism, conservatives should win.

But as Chris Berman says, "... that's why they play the game."

The media still doesn't get it.

January 10, 2008 - 13:39 ET by IamTinman

Per Tom Brokaw:

I have to disagree

January 10, 2008 - 20:23 ET by Gary P Jackson

I have to disagree strongly. The LAST thing we need is a "moderate party". Moderates never do anything or accomplish anything. (political)

No, conservatism wins every time it's tried. No exceptions. The problem on the GOP side is we have few "complete conservatives" running. Not saying we don't have players on our side that have conservative leanings. Just no one who is conservative on every single thing.

The other problem is many have romanticized Ronald Reagan. Now if any man deserves that treatment, it's Reagan! No finer man has ever been President. But so many Republicans want to elect Ronald Reagan, they are dispirited, which in my opinion is silly as hell.

Our party has a fine line up this year. The worst of the front runners would make a better leader than anything the Socialist/Dim party has to offer. Period. Once we get into the general election, it will be game on!

Personally I'm liking Romney more and more, but Fred Thompson and Rudy Giuliani would be just fine. All three are right one the one thing that really matters, national security. I'm likin' Mitt the most because of his bona fides in financial matters.

Again, the last thing we need is a "moderate".

Statistical tie

January 10, 2008 - 09:58 ET by nkviking75

Like political polls, TV ratings are based on "representative samples" of the viewing public. I don't know what Neilsen's margin of error is, but I bet the gap between CNN and Fox is a statistical tie. CNN's number is about 101% of Fox's number. Also, some viewers undoubtedly switched among the networks for coverage.

Another way to look at it: Only about 1% of the US population watched any of the three cable news nets.

When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.

Is this what billy boy clinton was talking about

January 10, 2008 - 10:01 ET by FastEd

when he spoke of "attack ads"?

There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V

And now, today's Shrub

January 10, 2008 - 10:03 ET by Roger the Shrubber

And now, today's Shrub Report®:

2057 years ago today, Caesar crossed the Rubicon…

Obama hearts Farrakhan? Obama is da man. Plus, in keeping with liberals rewarding failure, the failure of 2004 is endorsing the failure of 2008.

He's still alive?

Apparently, the "defeat at all costs" mantra will not change in 2008. Neither will their pay raises.

Fun with headlines! AP uses huge retailers Limited Brands and Pacific Sunwear to showcase how horrible holiday sales were. Even though Wal-Mart and CostCo had better-than expected holidays sales, they are minor, inconsequential players in our economy, right?

Today is big for birthdays of people who made their living with their throat: Jim Croce, Donald Fagen, Pat Benatar, Rod Stewart, and Linda Lovelace were all born on this date.

Remember, Chimpy McHitler is the warmongering fascist, right?

An early Couple of the Year nominee.

No, no, no, you dummy. It's adopt the kids THEN beat them silly, not the other way around…

Newsbusters, what's your carbon footprint?

Here's a John Edwards Update.

CNN finally beat Fox News for one night, for once. Big Whoops. It is more shocking that nobody tuned in to hear HARD NEWS journalists Chris Matthews and Keith Olberman.

And, finally, 26 years ago today, Dwight Clark broke the hearts of heathen scumbag Cryboy fans when he made "The Catch" and earned the 49ers a berth in Super Bowl XVI, where the 49ers made this shrubber's life even better by beating the Bungles.

The 1st DEEP THROAT!

January 10, 2008 - 10:25 ET by PawpawN

Love the Linda Lovelace note. Oh, yes, we know how journalists come up with names now!!!

Cowboys gonna be supper

January 10, 2008 - 10:28 ET by Dan The Man 2

Cowboys gonna be supper bowl champs this year, gona mow down them 49er shrubs.

I think the grounds for divorce are the man was cheating on his wife while she was at work.

Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.

Had a big thing for Pat

January 10, 2008 - 10:32 ET by balboa

Had a big thing for Pat Benatar in high school, riveted to the TV when one of her videos would come on, even that great pile of hilarity know as "Love is a Battlefield."

I hear ya, Bal. When "Fast

January 10, 2008 - 13:52 ET by Roger the Shrubber

I hear ya, Bal.

When "Fast Times at Ridgemont High" came out, they were spot-on about Pat. There were lookalikes in my high school, too!

Unfortunately, there were not enough Linda Lovelace lookalikes, though... hahaha

Fast Times...how great was

January 10, 2008 - 13:56 ET by balboa

Fast Times...how great was that. Cameron needs to get back to good movies like that and Almost Famous. Vanilla Sky and Elizabethtown missed the mark.

As for Linda...there were always rumors about people at school with her..."looks." :-)

Well, bal...

January 10, 2008 - 15:59 ET by Jer

As for Linda...there were always rumors about people at school with her..."looks".

I guess it was too bad you only had a big thing for Pat Benetar.

Jer

Fox and Linda Lovelace

January 10, 2008 - 14:04 ET by Jer

I understand a spokesman for Fox just announced that the ratings loss to CNN occurring on the birthday of Linda Lovelace made it particularly hard to swallow.

Jer

Yuk Yuk Yuk!

January 10, 2008 - 14:55 ET by Roger the Shrubber

Yuk Yuk Yuk!

LOL

January 10, 2008 - 15:03 ET by KC Mulville

Was the Fox spokesperson blonde or brunette?

KC...Well, if the

January 11, 2008 - 01:31 ET by Jer

KC...Well, if the spokesperson were female, I think you have your answer.

Evidently, at Fox, being blonde is a job requirement.

Jer

January 10, 2008 - 19:52 ET by Noel Sheppard

Jer,

Delicious! ;-) ns

Noel...

January 11, 2008 - 01:25 ET by Jer

Noel...

{Groan}...this is one time your favorite adjective may be just a tad too descriptive. [For my tastes, anyway.]

Jer

Gross, Jer. But funny.

January 10, 2008 - 20:58 ET by fitzfong

Gross, Jer. But funny.

Whole Lotta Fluff

January 10, 2008 - 10:15 ET by Santino Corleone

These cauci are a whole lotta fluff. Yes, they count but this election has been the superbowl of soundbytes, internet hit jobs....it is like one long reality show.

The democratic race is more a popularity/likability contest and less about issues. So naturally the left is eating this coverage up faster than you can say "survivor" or "american idol".

Actually electing the next leader of the free world because of his (or her) smooth talk, skin color, silky hair or emotional fragility is damn sad and scary.

Light my fire.

January 10, 2008 - 10:16 ET by Crash

Based on voter turnout, more democrats were interested in the outcome than were republicans; thus more viewers.

If you add up both CNN & MSNBC's numbers, they closely mirror the Dem/Rep turnout ratios. So far, republicans don't seem very jazzed about their choice of candidates.

Talking about voter turnout

January 10, 2008 - 10:25 ET by ForeverOnTheRight

Talking about voter turnout my wife and I are talking about voting in the Minnesota primary for the first time ever.

Does anybody know or have

January 10, 2008 - 10:19 ET by ForeverOnTheRight

Does anybody know or have seen Obamba's real political resume, unpolished, unedited? It's bugging me that I don't know. It seems he's just a community activist that became a junior senator that has the narcissistic view of self to run for President.

IMHO, For starts, the left

January 10, 2008 - 10:25 ET by USA4freedom

IMHO,

For starts, the left watches CNN, we don’t for the most part.

So it seems like people are jazzed over Ob.

I also think that the conservative base is disgusted. They see Mc Cain, the pro immigration, anti tax cutting, Mc Cain/Feingold. OR..Huckabee, pro immigration, pro tax history, unelectable.

These two are whom the MSM seem to want to run. So they are getting two the left can beat, and even if they don’t beat them they will get a flood of immigration, and tax hikes so they win even if they loose. So we cut off Fox because we are pissed.

The person that I feel comes closest to a real conservativeis Fred, 5th place in a race of 6.

I telling you now, it will be a long time in the wilderness again, (thanks Bush, and the over spending congress)+ open borders!

Between business that want open borders, and every politician thinks that they will stay in office because the immigrants will vote for them.

The conservatives will stay home again. (like last time)

I just cut off the TV. I know the Titanic is headed for the ice field, because no one wants to stop it. I don’t need to watch it hit the iceberg. I know how the story ends. My only hope is we hold enough in the house and senate that we can slow down the ship.

I know, cutting off my nose to spite my face, but at this point I’m disgusted with my face. Maybe, just maybe, if they screw it up enough (like Jimmy Carter did) we might get another Reagan. Its sad, and I think that a lot of people think like me.

Fox viewers are down because we (the conservatives) are feeling rather low, so if they are like me they cut off the TV.

The RNC is sooooo clue less, they keep sending me letterswith a check list to what is important to me, then ask for money.

The last one I taped a brick to the letter and told them tobuild a fence and start with this brick. I haven’t gotten any letter lately.

IDIOTS.

Sorry for the rant, I’m a bit pissed off.

These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc. Ronald Reagan- 40th Anniversary of D-Day

I think we are headed for

January 10, 2008 - 10:30 ET by Dan The Man 2

I think we are headed for teh wilderness, hopefully not for 40 years.

Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.

USA4...

January 10, 2008 - 10:58 ET by Clear thinker

All I can add to that is "Amen".

Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/

The part that worries me is

January 10, 2008 - 11:53 ET by USA4freedom

The part that worries me is they will put in place a bunch of nut job liberal judges that even if we re-gain control in a few years they (via judges writing laws) keep the liberal ideas going.

How did we loose a handle on this. We had the President, congress and house.. Idiots, they thought they could our Democrat the Democrats.From the looks of it for example: ear marks, they haven’t learned their lesson.

On January 3, 2007 President Bush called on Congress to cutthe number and cost of earmarks by at least half.

I have a grand idea.. why in the hell don’t you cut them out completely!!! Be a &^%$%#@# leader..!!!

These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc. Ronald Reagan- 40th Anniversary of D-Day

151,000 Dead Iraqis

January 10, 2008 - 10:24 ET by Leon

Between March of 2003 and June of 2006, the WHO and the Iraqi government estimate that 151,000 Iraqis have died.

Well above administration estimates.

LINK

That is a sickening number of innocent people to have died. Couple that with the fact that Iraq is still potentially decades away from standing on their own and you have a terrifying situation.

What happened to the 600,000 or more!

January 10, 2008 - 10:31 ET by PawpawN

Geez, what happened to the 600,000 or more we heard about over 1 1/2 years ago! Guess the EXIT THIS LIFE polling was off!! Some thought they were dead, but really weren't!

Paw, I don't think that

January 10, 2008 - 10:45 ET by Leon

Paw,

I don't think that number has been ruled out. The 151,000 was obtained by interviewing households.

They haven't yet been able to develop an effective way to track the number of deaths suffered by the over 4 million displaced Iraqis.

If they can accurately develop a stat detailing how many displaced Iraqis have died, you'll be sure to see the death count spike.

To date this is the most thorough study ever conducted, but it's still limited in its scope. In no way does this invalidate the 600,000 estimate.

No way ruled out!

January 10, 2008 - 10:50 ET by PawpawN

Geez, from 600,000 or more down to 151,000. Seems someone, WHO, ruled out about 449,000 of them! You logic is like my wife doing reverse logic by telling me the dress cost $600, when actually it cost only $151 and she pocketed the other for another day! Just stupid logic like my example logic!!!

Paw, You have have

January 10, 2008 - 10:55 ET by Leon

Paw,

You have have serious reading comprehension problems. My guess is that you are a retiree, somewhere in your 70s.

What I said made perfect sense.

The 151 was obtained by conducting household surveys, logically, these are the deaths suffered in families that are still in their homes.

It doesn't fully take into account casualties suffered by displaced Iraqis. That number is much to difficult to wrangle down.

So my simple, easy to understand point is that 151,000 is a great start when drilling down on death count, but you could easily argue that the true number could be much higher, once we have the ability to trace the deaths of displaced Iraqis.

Got it? Or are you going to reply with another cute, irrelevant story about your wife?

Leon...

January 10, 2008 - 11:00 ET by Clear thinker

You really do enjoy being rude to people, don't you?

Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/

Typical DIM, can't answer ?s, just attack with nonsense!

January 10, 2008 - 11:04 ET by PawpawN

Typical DIM, can't answer ?s, just attack with nonsense! Doesn't bother me. I helped his parents be safe so he could be born free.

Paw, I gave you an answer

January 10, 2008 - 11:09 ET by Leon

Paw,

I gave you an answer in easy to understand language.

Don't blame me for your inability to read.

Let's break it down for you. I'll try to type slower:

1) 151,000 is an estimate obtained through household survey of Iraqis, aka people that are still in their residences.

2) As a result, this number does not take into account the number of Iraqis that have died within the displaced community.

3) Thus, if you add the number of displaced Iraqis that have died to 151,000 what do you get? A number higher than 151,000 - potentially as high as 600,000 or even higher, the point is we don't know at this time.

Get it? Are you sure? Read it out loud, that helps me sometimes when I'm confused.

You make no sense, Leon

January 10, 2008 - 11:23 ET by PawpawN

Leon, you're going to try and tell us over 449,000 Iraqis have been displaced and died during this time. Geez, no wonder the grave diggers in Iraq have no business, it has been outsourced to other countries! That's how much sense you make, I certainly hope you do make cents tho, to pay for this old man's SS & Medicare benefits, although I ain't there yet buddy!

No Paw, Again, learn to

January 10, 2008 - 12:53 ET by Leon

No Paw,

Again, learn to read.

I said approx. 4 million have been displaced and we don't know how many of them have died.

Good God man, slow down and read what you're responding to.

Pawpaw...

January 10, 2008 - 11:25 ET by Clear thinker

Too bad you had to help HIS parents!

Actually, I take that back. I am a parent and have a son that has been a huge disapointment, so much so I rarely talk about him. To give you an idea how bad, my wife and I are raising his daughter. I imagine Leon being alot like my son.

PS. We love our granddaughter and are happy she is with us (yes. we spoil her just a little).

Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/

CT, I'd appreciate it if

January 10, 2008 - 12:55 ET by Leon

CT,

I'd appreciate it if you didn't displace your failure as a parent onto me.

You don't know me, you don't know anything about me, so you have no right to compare me to your derelict son.

You'd be wise to keep your personal failures to yourself around here.

Let's see, Leon

January 10, 2008 - 11:02 ET by PawpawN

Let's see Leon, how many people lived in IRAQ prior to our provaction? How many people live in IRAQ now? How many people displaced? Maybe your defition would be better if it were MISPLACED! See your comprehension is such that you must be a high school drop out, who thinks he's computer literate. But in doing such fail to know that all previous info on such material as this is readily available.

Paw, I must be a high

January 10, 2008 - 11:07 ET by Leon

Paw,

I must be a high school drop out? I'm not following your logic at all.

The correct term for those people involved in the current humanitarian crisis in Iraq is DISPLACED. I didn't choose this term, this is the official term used by our government.

Maybe you should write a letter to your state senator asking him/her to change the term to misplaced. If you do this, please make sure to use your question approach! haha.

You clearly don't even understand what it is we are discussing so I'm not sure why you feel the need to waste your time and my time.

Poor Leon

January 10, 2008 - 11:12 ET by PawpawN

Poor Leon, he can dish but not take. The fact remains you bring up subject of 151,000 deaths from a new report and that report over rides the 600,000 or more deaths that the MSM and you touted so highly just in the last 18 months. You took discussion off base, so to say, since you'd never be seen on a military base. If you have anything to back up the fact that approx 449,000 deaths were over reported before, then show it. If you feel it could be wrong, then maybe they still over reported and it is only 50,000 as Jack says.

Paw, It hasn't overrode

January 10, 2008 - 11:19 ET by Leon

Paw,

It hasn't overrode anything. I'm not sure where you're getting that from. You're making assumptions and then arguing from an unfounded position.

That's fine, just not a very effective debate style.

No arguing, just providing you with info

January 10, 2008 - 12:02 ET by PawpawN

No arguing, just providing you with info, my dear Leon. You seem to have forgotten the original stories that came out. How you seem to always do that in your hits! & you are not debating, you are just baiting. When someone gives you the facts, you moveon.org to something else. Have a nice day and I'll pray for you also, along with our other enemies and our GREAT TROOPS!

Leon...

January 10, 2008 - 11:15 ET by Clear thinker

If you feel that strongly about what is happening in Iraq, why don't you take your whiney butt over there and help defend the Iraqi's against the militant Islamic scumbags that are killing them.

Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/

How about a famous quote...?

January 10, 2008 - 11:25 ET by Syrius

One death is a tragedy; a million is a statistic. -Stalin

Leon,

They just don't get it. Be it 1 death, 10, 100, 1000,...etc., the Iraqi death total just don't matter to any of them. If you were to ask them what Iraqis were getting killed, they probably would say it's Al-Qaeda in Iraq.

At least 3900 troops have been lost in Iraq & Afganistan since our beloved leader got us into this mess. The best way to support our troops is to bring'em home.

Syrius

"Only the dead have seen the end of war." Plato

New quote for Leon & Syrius

January 10, 2008 - 11:27 ET by PawpawN

"The best way to be sure we have a home is to support our Troops!"

PawPaw...the best way to support...

January 10, 2008 - 11:38 ET by Syrius

Pawpaw,

The best way to support our troops is to...

-give them a mission they can accomplish.

-give them the armor they need.

-give them some time off.

-give them better pay.

-give them better care now & in the future.

-give them whatever they need to support their families.

-give them hope.

-bring them home.

That's what I want to see instead of some idiot driving a huge SUV with a yellow ribbon sticker that says "Support Our Troops!".

You haven't clue on how to support the troops.

Syrius

Exposing & Confronting Liberal Media Bias Critics.

You just don't get it!

January 10, 2008 - 11:45 ET by PawpawN

I'm a veteran and you just don't get it! How is bringing troops home going to keep us safe. Seems putting everyone in 1 spot and letting the enemies surround you is what you say-BRING 'EM HOME. That's the worse strategy there is, any soldier will tell you. You support our troops by praying for them, their families, and, yes, even praying for our enemies. You can also help elect officials who will provide them with the essentials needed-vote them pay raises and not themselves raises. You have a decent list, but you don't believe in it by your posts, etc. You talk a good game, but when it comes to the fight, you give up!

PawPaw, As RJ would like to argue...

January 10, 2008 - 12:01 ET by Syrius

PawPaw,

RJ would have to disagree since you've served in a war. She would probably raise an issue on how you've been influenced and brainwashed by your experiences much like McCain-(sarc for RJ). Thinking that war is the best solution to solve the problems that exist is foolhardy. Eventually, you've got to rein in the dogs. So, when do you bring'em home? We're safe from Vietnam since we brought our troops home, right?

We need to regroup & attack the true Al-Qaeda, which resides in the Afganistan/Pakistan region.

Why must we stay in Iraq? For how long?

Syrius

Exposing & Confronting Liberal Media Bias Critics.

Where are our troops located now?

January 10, 2008 - 12:04 ET by PawpawN

See, you have no idea on how to keep country safe. We have troops all over the world. Why are they there? Think about that for a while.

Syrius,

January 10, 2008 - 12:12 ET by Agnostic

"We need to regroup & attack the true Al-Qaeda, which resides in the Afganistan/Pakistan region."
The reasons we can't go into Pakistan are obvious and have been discussed.
Troops are in Afganistan but I would agree not enough but we are spread a little thin right now.
"Why must we stay in Iraq? For how long?"
Because we made a commitment to the Iraqi people. Without honoring that commitment we ruin our ability to ever negotiate with any country.
How long? I wish I knew but my guess is that there will be military, not necessarily in force, in Iraq for at least five generations or until the government requests that we leave completely. Hopefully the US and Iraq will be allies and see peaceful times during most of that period.

Agnostic, What's the

January 10, 2008 - 12:58 ET by Leon

Agnostic,

What's the point of having a war on terror if we aren't even willing to attack the terrorist hotbeds and training grounds?

We violated the sovereignity of Iraq who had a handful of Al Qaeda to fight terrorism, yet we sit by and watch as Pakistan allows terrorism to flourish and call them an ally.

SO are we really trying to win the war on terror?

I don't think so. If we were we'd be dropping bombs in Wajiristan.

Leon, nice thoughts but...

January 10, 2008 - 13:28 ET by Agnostic

Regardless of whatever dislike for the administration you may have they made their argument for the invasion of Iraq on several key issues not the least of which was the support that Sadaam's regime gave to terrorist. Al Qaeda may have been the group that is responsible for 9-11 but the war on terror is a bigger picture than just one group of terrorist. On a side note, I would like to see the scope of the War on Terror more clearly defined. This argument won nearly all the votes in congress and was popular among the population at the time.
As for entering Pakistan or widening our influence in Afghanistan, it is not likely to happen unless the current governments in those two countries collapse and they are taken over by people who openly support and spread terrorism. It would also help if they violated several UN sanctions, committed atrocities against their own people and smoked in their restaurants (for the liberal vote).
I agree something most be done about the training bases but as long as the governments of these two countries at don't capitulate and start actively supporting the terrorist I don't think anything can be done and I doubt any nation in the world would support our efforts if we tried to do it by force (Unlike others I do believe that our actions must be defendable to but not defined by our allies). However, a lot and I can not stress enough on how much more pressure needs to be put on the governments of Afghanistan and Pakistan to remove or allow the removal of these threats.

This is all reasonable and

January 10, 2008 - 16:54 ET by JasonC

This is all reasonable and well-laid-out, but it just reiterates the fact that, despite being consistently presented under the pretext of "The Major U.S. Issue That Trumps All Others", the War on Terror, such as it is, will always take a backseat to the walking-on-eggshells realpolitic of economic and diplomatic backscratching.

"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

Exactly Jason..

January 10, 2008 - 17:01 ET by Leon

...and that's the problem.

As Michael Madsen so aptly stated, "Are you gonna bark all day little doggie, or are you gonna bite?"

US does a lot of barking about terrorists, but not a whole lot of biting.

If the war on Terror was TRULY our number one issue (as the BUSH admin would have us believe) then we'd be all over any country that harbors terrorists. Until we start doing this, it's really nothing more than meaningless slogan.

Well, after that SOTU

January 10, 2008 - 17:06 ET by JasonC

Well, after that SOTU speech about what a big national crisis we have due to steroids in baseball, I know my concerns have been elsewhere. That and making sure them homos don't be marryin'.

"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

OK?

January 12, 2008 - 10:53 ET by Agnostic

Thank you! But do you believe it is okay that everything political eventually degenerates in to "walking-on-eggshells realpolitic of economic and diplomatic backscratching"? The war is not the only thing that gets this treatment in our current political climate. Any thing that can grab a headline becomes a political battlefield. I agree whole heartedly that their definitely is a mixed message coming from the administration when this happens but it is still my opinion that the invasion of Iraq was the right thing to do and it would have been even more correct if the job was done the first time around during the Gulf War. I see why the administration made the decisions they did about Pakistan and Afghanistan but that doesn't mean that I don't think more pressure should have been applied. Especially now with veiled threats coming from Pakistan.

Support the troops...

January 10, 2008 - 11:46 ET by Clear thinker

Let them win!

Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/

We already did the math, Leon

January 10, 2008 - 20:41 ET by timothe

600,000 deaths = about 520 deaths per day.

The largest single death toll reported for one incident was 131 people. The largest single death toll reported for one day was 233. (The key word is LARGEST)

600,000 deaths = total fabrication

150,000 deaths = likely fabrication

Between March of 2003 and

January 10, 2008 - 10:32 ET by Dan The Man 2

Between March of 2003 and June of 2006, the WHO and the Iraqi government estimate that 151,000 Iraqis have died. Why does a rock band like the WHO have statistics on Iraqi deaths? And further why should we care what a defunct rock band thinks.

Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.

Dan, For a

January 10, 2008 - 10:40 ET by Leon

Dan,

For a self-proclaimed Christian you sure revel in making light of other people's misery.

Apparently you don't WWJD.

Your a CINO. Christian in Name Only.

Leon, I am confused, here.

January 10, 2008 - 10:47 ET by bassndude

Leon, I am confused, here. We have only killed 151000 Iraqis? But I thought the whole reason for going to Iraq was to kill Iraqis, and Syrians and Iranians and...

We must be running low on ammo, or their better at ducking.

Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!

Leon I look to the Bible

January 10, 2008 - 11:30 ET by Dan The Man 2

Leon I look to the Bible for WWJD, do you? I wasnt making light of anyones suffering I was making light of your statistics. And furthermore I am not concerned those peopel died. People die daily for different reasons. The only thing I am concerned with is are they saved or not. The answer is probably not, but that is not my concern but God's concern.

To restate I was making fun of your source and in doing so you.

Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.

Dan, I liked it.. I bet Leon

January 10, 2008 - 12:20 ET by USA4freedom

Dan, I liked it..I bet Leon likes the back street boys..

These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc. Ronald Reagan- 40th Anniversary of D-Day

Actually USA, I've seen

January 10, 2008 - 13:00 ET by Leon

Actually USA,

I've seen the WHO live 6 times, which is pretty good considering I was born in 1981.

The problem with the WHO for me is simply that I've listened to their songs so much, I can't listen anymore.

You don't want to dance over music with me USA. You'll find yourself quite outmatched.

I'd put my record collection up against anyone in the world.

Don’t be so sure I ran

January 10, 2008 - 13:16 ET by USA4freedom

Don’t be so sure I ran the music at my bar for 10 years. When I left I had almost 11 beer boxes of CD’s

These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc. Ronald Reagan- 40th Anniversary of D-Day

USA, That's a solid

January 10, 2008 - 13:30 ET by Leon

USA,

That's a solid number of cds. Can't argue with you there, but 11 boxes is not that much.

I'm talking thousands and thousands of records. Inherited my mom and dad's collection and have been building on it for the past 14 years.

With records (esp. vintage) being so cheap, it's much easier to build a huge collection than with cds (unless you're cheating and burning cds).

Now THAT's the Hater we've

January 10, 2008 - 13:43 ET by Roger the Shrubber

Now THAT's the Hater we've been missing the past few months. Let it out, Heinrich. Let it all out.

When it comes to music, you should, perhaps defer to the NUMEROUS people on this board who have established a track record of knowing what they are speaking about. After all, claiming to see THE WHO six times in your short lifetime only reinforces the belief that you crappy taste in music.

But, by all means, don't let us stop you. Proceed.

I wonder how many times he's

January 10, 2008 - 13:46 ET by Jack Bauer

I wonder how many times he's seen Abba?

I am sure more times than

January 10, 2008 - 14:45 ET by Roger the Shrubber

I am sure more times than The Who. I bet his extensive collection of ticket stubs from Mama Mia! is the centerpiece of his 1-bedroom apartment.

Shrub, Why would seeing the

January 10, 2008 - 15:20 ET by Leon

Shrub,

Why would seeing the Who 6 times reaffirm my crappy taste in music?

I'm not following. I think 6 times is a lot for someone my age considering how infrequently the Who have toured in the 90s and 2000s

Or are you claiming that liking the Who makes my taste in music crappy?

I'll dance with anyone on music. I posted my comprehensive list of some of my favorite groups a while back and a lot of people agreed with me/complimented me on my selections. I guess you missed that one.

Since 1988, The Who played

January 10, 2008 - 16:26 ET by Roger the Shrubber

Since 1988, The Who played Phlly, your hometown, TEN times, seven of them since 1993, so spare me your melodrama about how "rare" seeing them live is.

I guess I have to spell it out for you: The Who blows. Great musicians, but they are both dead. I saw them on their "Farewell Tour" in 1982. How many "Farewell Tours" have they had since? They have become a joke, ever since they sold out and had Schlitz sponsor them. How pathetic is that?

As for your offer to "dance with anyone" on music, it really doesn't matter what you say, because there is no way you can defend your honor, aside from a Zoolanderish "walk-off", so your chest-thumping and boasting and begging for acceptance from your betters here at NB just makes you look even less of a man.

Rog, you don't like The

January 10, 2008 - 16:33 ET by balboa

Rog, you don't like The Who?

Would it be fair to say

January 10, 2008 - 16:35 ET by tracheostomy

Would it be fair to say that they haven't aged well?

-PJ

"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07

I wonder if Pete spends a

January 10, 2008 - 16:37 ET by Roger the Shrubber

I wonder if Pete spends a good bit of time vacationing in Thailand?

Ouch! That was a low blow

January 10, 2008 - 16:47 ET by tracheostomy

Ouch! That was a low blow Roger, and has nothing to do with the music. Well, maybe Ivar the engine driver, but that's it. Oh, and maybe some bits of Tommy. But that's it. He was just doing research. He's innocent I tell you. Innocent.

-PJ

"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07

I used to back in the 70's,

January 10, 2008 - 16:39 ET by Roger the Shrubber

I used to back in the 70's, Bal. Then, like I explained above, they sold out, and then went Striesand and Cher on us with all these "Farewell Tours". Ugh. Give me a break.

Ahhhh. Gotcha. I love the

January 10, 2008 - 16:47 ET by balboa

Ahhhh. Gotcha. I love the old stuff. The most recent I can do is "Eminence Front."

I never really liked 'em, but these songs kept turning up on Cameron Crowe soundtracks, and commercials.

I agree, Bal, "Eminence

January 10, 2008 - 17:09 ET by Roger the Shrubber

I agree, Bal, "Eminence Front" is indeed a great tune. I was always a big John Entwistle fan. Not so much of Daltry or Townshend, and when they became a sell-out for crap beer like Shlitz, that sealed the deal for me.
You on a Cameron Crowe kick lately or what?

Rog, How does a band's

January 10, 2008 - 17:13 ET by Leon

Rog,

How does a band's action in the present change the quality of their music in the past?

Does Led Zeppelin all of the sudden suck b/c there songs are in every other car commercial?

You must be a Schlitz fan.

January 10, 2008 - 20:19 ET by Roger the Shrubber

You must be a Schlitz fan. I thought Swarthies drank wine coolers and Zima.

You a big Michael Jackson fan, Hater? Gary Glitter? Roman Polanki?

As for "selling out", I love hearing Supertramp on a tv commercial. I have no problem with hawking 30-year old tunes for some bucks. The Who accepting Schlitz as a sponsor was insulting: Keith Moon had recently died from alchoholism and Pete Townshend was a recovering alchoholic/heroin/cocaine addict.

Rog, Hmm begging for

January 10, 2008 - 17:07 ET by Leon

Rog,

Hmm begging for acceptance at the NB? LEON? Riiight.

My posts certainly show a desperate desire to become one of the gang! haha.

I'm not disagreeing with your assessment of the current WHO situation. They definitely sold out, but they still have moments of greatness. The 9/11 show was amazing. Even though Daltry sounded old as hell, they rocked out, and represented for NYC. It was a powerful performance no matter how you slice it.

Furthermore, your quip about how many times the WHO has played in Philly is stupid. 1988? I was 6. Sorry I wasn't quite old enough to go to concerts yet. I didn't go to my first concert until 1994 when I was 12. So for me, WHO shows were in fact a rare occurence.

Begging for acceptance from a bunch of housewives and retirees? I love it.

If you paid attention, I

January 10, 2008 - 17:13 ET by Roger the Shrubber

If you paid attention, I broke down the tour date to a more reasonable timeframe for attending concerts. My first was at age 12, so I took that as an acceptable starting point. My pointing out that you are full of crap stands.

You scream for acceptance here, otherwise you would have left Newsbusters about a dozen banned usernames ago. Tossing poorly-aimed personal potshots doesn't cover up your neediness.

Roger, How am I full of

January 10, 2008 - 17:17 ET by Leon

Roger,

How am I full of crap? You proved that I didn't go to 6 shows? Or you proved that wasn't a lot? I don't get it.

I'm glad you've analyzed my neediness. I was hoping I'd get a chance to talk about how much I loved and needed all you guys. Really, all of the positions I disagree with you all on, I just do that to get attention. I'm hoping if I can get enough attention, you'll let me into the fun inner NB circle where we can type together and live chat and make jokes about all the silly liberals and how much smarter we are than them. Oh boy oh jeez, please please please let me in.

I'm here to stop you all from busting all over each other's backs and you should be thanking me for it.

...thank you Leon, simple

January 10, 2008 - 17:20 ET by vrwc13

...thank you Leon, simple and plain...

I simply proved that seeing

January 10, 2008 - 20:04 ET by Roger the Shrubber

I simply proved that seeing The Who six times is no big deal. ANYONE on the east coast could have done that in the past 15 years. So, yes, you are quite ordinary. VERY ordinary.

Ordinary and needy, based on your implosion I just enjoyed reading. Po wittle Hater needs a hug?

Oh, and you do post here to get attention. I thought that has been plainly laid out in the past. No matter. You will be back again tommorrow, or the next day, because you need us.

Begging for acceptance from a bunch of housewives and retirees?

January 10, 2008 - 17:18 ET by vrwc13

..along with fat people...homescoolers...retail clerks...Bible thumpers...

So I guess unless you are a "hip", government educated, physically fit, "professional", secular kind of guy, you don't count for much?

"At least I am a guy and not desperately trying to be one." Leon

V, 1) Hip - Yes.

January 10, 2008 - 17:21 ET by Leon

1) Hip - Yes. Extremely.

2) Government educated? No I went to a private college

3) Physically Fit - Certainly as we all should be

4) Professional - as indicated by my business card

5) Secular - don't need religion to fill a void in my life - I'm complete without it.

As for your final line, you still count, but thankfully not for much longer.

As for your final line, you still count... - Leon

January 10, 2008 - 17:24 ET by vrwc13

Gee thanks Leon, coming from you that means soooo much.

"V,
You've officially won the award for least value added to Newsbusters." - Leon

I pray you will find Jesus, Leon.

January 10, 2008 - 19:59 ET by PawpawN

I'll pray for you, Leon. May the good Lord shine upon you and you accept Jesus into your life and be saved.

Watch it, Leon!

January 10, 2008 - 21:02 ET by Syrius

Leon,

Me thinks they got a BIG flashlight to shine upperUS. Full body cavity search as they look for a soul. Run away fast, my friend, them crazy folks! Shoo y'all!

Syrius

"Fear is the mother of morality." -Nietzsche

"It is the absolute right of the State to supervise the formation of public opinion." -Goebbels

Rog...despite the fact that

January 10, 2008 - 16:45 ET by Jer

Rog...despite the fact that I think you're being a little tough on Leon and The Who, it takes a lot to make me burst out laughing while reading NB comments [particularly when I'm not in a very good mood to start with], but you just did. Thanks.

Jer

CSI episodes don't count

January 10, 2008 - 13:47 ET by Jack Bauer

CSI episodes don't count Leon.

Leon, bring it on-how many LPs, 45s, CDs, 12 inch, 8 tracks, cas

January 10, 2008 - 19:11 ET by PawpawN

Leon, bring it on-how many LPs, 45s, CDs, 12 inch, 8 tracks, cassettes, mp3s, wavs, etc., etc.

The Gumbys

January 10, 2008 - 19:25 ET by mastersofdeceit

Whatever he's got, I'd be shocked if he has The Gumbys LP. (I can record a copy if anyone wants it)

Or Cat Mother and the All Night Newsboys

January 10, 2008 - 19:36 ET by PawpawN

Or Cat Mother and the All Night Newsboys; all of Paul Williams; great writer Mark James; etc, etc. The list goes on and on!!

You'd Better, You Bet

January 10, 2008 - 11:15 ET by Hero Squad

Between September of 1978 and June of 2002, the Iraqi government estimates that 2 members of The Who have died.

*****

"There are no stupid questions. Only stupid people who ask questions." - Chris Berman

Why does a rock band like

January 10, 2008 - 16:43 ET by JasonC

Why does a rock band like the WHO have statistics on Iraqi deaths? And
further why should we care what a defunct rock band thinks.

Sweet merciful McGillicutty, tell me this is a joke...

"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

A gold star for Jason for

January 10, 2008 - 16:46 ET by Roger the Shrubber

A gold star for Jason for his semi-astuteness.

I won't be placated until

January 10, 2008 - 16:50 ET by JasonC

I won't be placated until Dan "I don't care if they die as long as they're saved" the Man confirms that he didn't really think Leon was talking about a boring, washed up rock band. I give it 50/50.

"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

Hey Leonitsky Since 2003 in America..

January 10, 2008 - 10:37 ET by JayTee

60,000 thousand Americans have been murdered in the USA(15,000 a yr)...."That is a sickening number of innocent people to have died"

If you wanna do the Math on Auto Accident Deaths, it's 45,000 a yr in America.....I'll let you do the Calculas on that one, as it's bigger than your Iraq number. And we don't have IED's in the USA, but we kill more on the highways.

All we need is the MSM to video every Traffic accident and feed us non-stop on the airways........that'll work !! People will be scared to drive, stay home and we will cut our Energy consumption.

JayTee, Your comparative

January 10, 2008 - 10:42 ET by Leon

JayTee,

Your comparative analysis is ridculous. Comparing war deaths to auto accidents is downright silly.

I do so enjoy watching you rationalize innocent people's deaths however. I'm sure the families of those killed would understand your comparison and agree with you.

The lightness with which you NBs respond to the horrific Iraqi casualty count just proves what everyone already knew about you all. You don't care about Iraqis. All you care about are yourselves and 'beating' liberals. It's sick. You should be ashamed of yourself, although with your diseased sense of personal infallibility, I'm sure you aren't.

Leon.....I'm silly ? ?

January 10, 2008 - 11:20 ET by JayTee

There is no WAR in the USA, and yet we as a Country approach and Pass the Iraq numbers you are quoting in a WAR Zone.

If you casually dismiss the Murder rate in USA as half that of Iraq, then Your numbers are insignificant and should be dismissed.

I'm not rationalizing anything, I'm showing you that we Live in a Violent World, and the War in Iraq has been only twice as murderous as American Cities.

I'm pointing out that if you DRIVE to Work in the USA, watch out, you might just get Killed/injured on the way. See Florida 100 car pile-up this week.

These statistics don't make me anything, just as the Iraq Statistics don't make you anything, but when you start saying things like "That is a sickening number of innocent people to have died", you are suddenly becoming a victim of the MSM Iraq Propaganda machine feeding you numbers without perspective.

How can you be SICK of the Iraq numbers, and ignore the BIGGER numbers, and half as Bad numbers in your own back yard ? Is it because you can't blame Bush for the Florida Traffic deaths this week ?

Why Leon? Both forms of

January 10, 2008 - 16:51 ET by tracheostomy

Why Leon? Both forms of death are preventable if laws are obeyed.

Where's the break in the association? It's perfectly valid.

-PJ

"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07

Two quick observations on

January 10, 2008 - 10:47 ET by Airforce_5_O

Two quick observations on your article.

They use the word “estimate”. So I could estimate 50, 000 and still be in the ball park with this article.
It is a war. Innocent people will and do die in wars. Neither a smart bomb nor a bullet has the ability to discern from friendly and foe.

Consider this, from 1939 to 1943 there were 25, 000,000 civilian casualties. Also consider that most of the civilian deaths in Iraq were done by insurgents.

Any innocent death is tragic but war is never easy.

Airforce, I fail to see

January 10, 2008 - 10:50 ET by Leon

Airforce,

I fail to see how you can rationalize Iraqi deaths by citing past statistics. Who cares how many people died between 1939 and 1943?

What does that have to do with the number of deaths that have resulted from our pre-emptive and unneccessary war?

This is a favorite NB tactic and it makes no sense.

Past deaths in no way justify present deaths. It's a disturbing argument.

The people who died families, you nitwit!

January 10, 2008 - 10:53 ET by PawpawN

You make compassioned plea, then blow it all off with "Who cares how many people died between 1939 and 1943'.... Wow, you make Nancy P & Sen Reid look like angels!!

You all have to remember,

January 10, 2008 - 11:22 ET by Roger the Shrubber

You all have to remember, To Leon, history did not begin until 2001.

Everything before that is swept away with a wave of the hand.

Roger S....How insightful

January 10, 2008 - 11:29 ET by JayTee

I think you've hit Leon on the head. 2001 as the beginning of history as he knows it, is a start. Maybe he'll do research into the most Americans EVER killed in a War...and find out about the Civil War in the 1860's.

yep shrubbo, who cares

January 10, 2008 - 13:11 ET by Jack Bauer

yep shrubbo, who cares about all those Jews exterminated by the Norwegians in the 1920s. They probably asked for it, being fat and whatnot.

Like... that happened like so long ago dude, they didn't even have iPODs, cell-phones or granola.

Leon

January 10, 2008 - 11:59 ET by Airforce_5_O

I do not take the deaths of civilians lightly. The piont is that again you site a report mired in grey. Your report is a "guess" and not fact.

My piont is not a justification of the deaths. I am just saying that these deaths will and do happen in war.

You have only proven that war is brutal

Airforce, I never said it

January 10, 2008 - 13:03 ET by Leon

Airforce,

I never said it was ultimate fact, but they are refining their tracking methods and slowly getting more accurate.

Of course deaths happen in war, however, many people will not accept the horror of what has happened in Iraq until they truly know how many have suffered.

Please, during the course of daily life in America, you'd be hard pressed to find any indication that we are a country at war. We have not sacrificed anything for this war. Christ, people are already making movies about it and it's not even close to over. It's sickening to me. Life goes on undisturbed back home, while in Iraq, people die daily.

In no previous war were American civilians so detached from reality or sacrifice.

Leon, another WW II comp

January 10, 2008 - 13:30 ET by Airforce_5_O

That’s why there is an all volunteer force Leon, so the impact on society as a whole is minimal. The war was felt in Vietnam, Korea and WW II because of the draft. Plus the fight here is not as large scaled as the other 3. We felt the impact of Desert because of the mass mobalization of the reserves.

Refining their way of counting is one thing but considering they didn’t keep count in the first place we will never know for sure.

Leon with this "Of course

January 10, 2008 - 14:13 ET by Dan The Man 2

Leon with this "Of course deaths happen in war, however, many people will not accept the horror of what has happened in Iraq until they truly know how many have suffered" you demonstate that you know little about ordinairy people. People dont want to know and dont care unless it affects them. Sorta like 911, it affected people, they were scared and demanded action. Action that keeps them safe. Only after the scare wears off the people are complacent again.

It is human nature, and the cycle will be repeated time imomorial.

Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.

Doubled

January 10, 2008 - 12:08 ET by Airforce_5_O

Doubled

Leon, we are to trust you,

January 10, 2008 - 12:24 ET by USA4freedom

Leon, we are to trust you, the WHO, and the Iraqi government.

Well I guess that ends the argument then.

So under Saddam, he killed 20,000 - 100,000 Kurds, Some 60,000 – 130,000 Shiites. Some 500,000 in the war with Iran.

So if deaths bother you, why did you not care when Saddam was killing, raping and torturing his own people.

These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc. Ronald Reagan- 40th Anniversary of D-Day

USA, I did care. What

January 10, 2008 - 13:06 ET by Leon

USA,

I did care. What are you talking about?

Try to refrain from putting words in my mouth.

And just a quick question, hadn't most of that killing been committed prior to our first invasion?

That's what I thought.

I take those figures with

January 10, 2008 - 10:49 ET by Jack Bauer

I take those figures with the same degree of belief as the 600,000 Iraq children allegedly killed by the U.N. sanctions maintained by the Clinton administration.

However, as I haven't heard you condemn the deaths of the 600,000 children so wickedly killed by the actions of the Clinton administration, I think we can all jump to the instant conclusion that you are an uncaring bastard.

That seems very fair to me!

Jack, 1) It hasn't come

January 10, 2008 - 10:51 ET by Leon

Jack,

1) It hasn't come up in discussion.

2) I wasn't actively involved in politics at that time.

3) It has nothing to do with the current situation.

Haven't we played the blame game long enough? The 'he did it too' argument just doesn't hold water anymore and merely serves to prevent any sort of progress.

Grow up.

2 - paragraphs

January 10, 2008 - 11:07 ET by Agnostic

Below is the first two paragraphs from your link:

1. Died from violence does not necessarily mean the war or due to the US military
2. The words 'About', 'estimate' and 'projections' are used in the first two sentances.
3. The problem with this poll, which does seem better than the one that came up with 600k, is that it doesn't say how they insured they weren't counting people twice or how they verified the death. As we know there have been entire families claimed killed in the war only to show up on camera waving their hands.
4. I haven't seen the death totals lately from the estimates (that word again) on Sadaam's mass graves but life before US involvement wasn't exactly a picnic for most of the population.
5. Loss of life is a tragic event, especially that of the innocent, and unfortunately it is something that happens everyday and we usually have little to no control over these sad events. However, one must rein in your emotion before going to far in accusations; for example, implying that our soldiers are willfully slautering innocent Iraqis. I don't necessarily believe this is what you mean but that is the point you will be making as you continue down this road of 'US causing the deaths of innocents' arguement that you have taken on.

From the article -
"About 151,000 Iraqis died from violence in the three years after the United States invaded, concludes the best effort yet to count deaths — one that still may not settle the fierce debate over the war's true toll on civilians and others.
The estimate comes from projections by the World Health Organization and the Iraqi government, based on door-to-door surveys of nearly 10,000 households. Experts called it the largest and most scientific study of the Iraqi death toll since the war began."

Ok Agnostic, Thanks for

January 10, 2008 - 11:11 ET by Leon

Ok Agnostic,

Thanks for the summary, but what's your point?

Leon..

January 10, 2008 - 11:21 ET by Clear thinker

After reading Agnostics summary, then your brilliant comeback, I am now convinced you are nothing more than a useless idiot!

I know name calling is not exactly civil, but you have to admit, Leon deserves it at this point.

Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/

Faulty Leon Info

January 10, 2008 - 11:32 ET by PawpawN

See Leon tries to drum up something with this new report that 151,000 died, but failed to remember that originally the figure was over 600,000. It's like taking all the votes from Chicago of dead DIM voters away, the number becomes soooo much smaller!

CT, I never claimed this

January 10, 2008 - 13:08 ET by Leon

CT,

I never claimed this study was the end all be-all. I merely stated that they are refining their tracking abilities and as they get better at tracking, we find the death count rising.

On a side note, I'd rather be an idiot than a failure as a parent.

Seems to be dropping, Leon

January 10, 2008 - 19:16 ET by PawpawN

Let's see, 18 months ago they said 600,000 or more. Now they say 151,000. According to math I was taught, that's a decrease. Of course I was born before 1981 and well before 2001....

OK Leon,

January 10, 2008 - 11:25 ET by Agnostic

Points,
Lots of estimates
Didn't correct the multiple problems with original poll
Past not taken under consideration (I wouldn't but I could assume you are just upset that Ba'ath Party are not the ones doing the killing but that would be a similar leap in logic that suggest that US military are slaughtering innocent Iraqis)
Taking a broad swipe at the war you are insulting the troops

Death bad. Innocent death worse. Not all the fault of US.

Ag, 1) Of course it's a

January 10, 2008 - 13:11 ET by Leon

Ag,

1) Of course it's a lot of estimates. Feel free to show where I claimed this number was 100% accurate.

2) I never stipulated who was doing the killing, I simply pointed out the number of deaths.

3) I never took a broad swipe at the war nor did I insult the troops. Explain how posting a death toll is an insult of our troops? I'm not following.

4) I never made any claims as to who's fault it was. I merely stated that we started the war and while many of these deaths aren't our fault, they are indireclty a result of the war in general. Why are you putting words in my mouth?

I suggest you re-read my original claim.

Blackwater killed them

January 10, 2008 - 13:15 ET by bassndude

Blackwater killed them all!!!! With CS gas!!!

Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!

bass -- and Blackwater will

January 10, 2008 - 13:21 ET by Jack Bauer

bass -- and Blackwater will assassinate Barack Obama too.

But they'll use Greenhouse Gases, to ally suspicion.

Brilliant idea Jack. Who

January 10, 2008 - 13:23 ET by bassndude

Brilliant idea Jack. Who sayes mercs are all dumb and trigger happy? :-)

Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!

Leon,

January 11, 2008 - 07:41 ET by Agnostic

You are the one putting words in your own mouth. I simply pointed out the problems with the original survey were not fixed and that general statements about US causing the deaths of innocents is a broad swipe that ends up hitting the military.
1) At no time did I say you did - it isn't about you.
2) that is a major problem with these numbers - it still isn't about you.
3) I don't believe you do but you don't seem to be aware of what your claims are insinuating - That is a little about you only because it relates to your purposes and I made no claims at to what those were.
4) Still talking about the survey and not you.

Not that you are but it seems likely you are trying take the focus off the problems of the survey that you posted (by the way it could be a good tool if regional data and household information were kept to use in the rebuilding phase of the mission; even with faulty data it is starting point) and place it on yourself by insinuating that I am somehow attacking you but my only points have been about the survey and the problems that arise from interpreting bad data or good data in bad way. This is not about you. This about Iraqis, soldiers, democracy and trying to provide a better way of life to people in the US, Iraq and anywhere where terrorist actions may be used to keep a population under duress (trying being the key word). The only thing that has been about you in anything I've typed is the part of this post trying to get you to realize it is not about you.

Great point Jack - and that's just the children. 1.5 million

January 10, 2008 - 11:17 ET by Dee Bunk

In total were killed according to the Iraq government in 2001. The Soros funded study used a guy from Saddam's Regime and they could only come up with 600,000. So if you trust Saddam Regime numbers, the death rate is about the same. That guy really knows how to estimate. It's about 150,000 per year in either case. What a coincidence!

Hey, no football, just reruns, etc., on TV, so reality show wins

January 10, 2008 - 10:29 ET by PawpawN

Hey, no football, just reruns, etc., on TV, so reality show wins! On most TVs in bars, hotels, diners, etc., they keep tuned to CNN, so all they did was call then to see what channel they were tuned to, etc. I really think GOP is doing the right stratergie, yea, I love it, stratergie by not putting so much money or emphasis on all this. Save it for the after convention ads, etc.

How are these figures obtained ? Polls ?

January 10, 2008 - 10:30 ET by JayTee

It was Tuesday night, and NH is right next to New York and Mass., so the left tuned in to CNN......I think the Dem. Presidential candidates spurn Fox so that their supporters will do the same, and find out that their Republican opponents are not empty Suits.... since the Alphabet networks do not cover the republicans, other than to throw rocks at them.

We are fast becoming a partisan Network Country.....Dems have their half dozen networks, and Republicans have their ONE...plus Talk radio.

Huh?

January 10, 2008 - 19:52 ET by Del Dolemonte

New Hampshire is not "right next to" New York. I live in NH so I know this for a fact. We don't even border them.

Can we be done with Blackwater? Please...

January 10, 2008 - 10:30 ET by Leon

So now Blackwater is dropping CS gas, which even the military can't use without top military approval.

Who are these cowboys, why do they blatantly violate the rules, and why do they constantly get away with illegal/detrimental behavior?

Blackwater are the scum of the earth. Profiting off war, while performing their job in a sloppy, lazy manner.

One soldier described the incident and the damage caused by Blackwater perfectly:

“This was decidedly uncool and very, very dangerous,” Capt. Kincy Clark of the Army, the senior officer at the scene, wrote later that day. “It’s not a good thing to cause soldiers who are standing guard against car bombs, snipers and suicide bombers to cover their faces, choke, cough and otherwise degrade our awareness.”

Get these cowboys out of Iraq! They are enemies against the American strategy. They are actively working to make the jobs of our troops, diplomats, and the Iraqi Government more difficult.

Time to Go!

You can tell Blackwater feels the tide is turning against them (or maybe they finally realize they've messed up one too many times) b/c now they're ramping up their lobbying efforts on Capitol Hill. I guess they're hoping they can take advantage of Bush's history of rewarding people that fail (fail upwards) before he leaves office.

We need less Blackwater, not more.

Thanks for hurting our war efforts! Thanks for profiting off of death! Thanks for directly putting our brave troops in danger!

Live by the cowboy, die by the cowboy!

Capt. Kincy Clark..

January 10, 2008 - 10:45 ET by PawpawN

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A9535-2004Aug17.html

So Paw, Blackwater didn't

January 10, 2008 - 10:48 ET by Leon

So Paw,

Blackwater didn't drop CS gas? I'm not sure what your link has to do with the topic at hand.

Seems like a pathetic attempt by you to slander an American soldier for your own personal gain.

Why do you love Blackwater so much? The Newsbusters claim to support the troops but whenever there is a conflict between Blackwater and our soldiers, you side with Blackwater. It's insane.

Leon, who cares if they

January 10, 2008 - 10:55 ET by bassndude

Leon, who cares if they used cs gas? Its not like it is fatal or anything. The police use it here all the time. Poor little Leon, dosent know what CS gas is.

Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!

United States Army Center

January 10, 2008 - 11:02 ET by Leon

United States Army Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine and John C. Danforth disagree with you.

And you're missing the point of my post. It's not about the toxicity of CS gas or even the usage of CS gas.

It's about Blackwater once again interfering, ignoring US Military guidelines, and doing whatever they want, cowboy style, all while putting our troops at risk.

Leon, As your so fond of

January 10, 2008 - 11:14 ET by bassndude

Leon, As your so fond of pointing out, Blackwater is not part of the US Military. My Nephew just went back over to Iraq. Blackwater is the guys he likes for the security of his area. His view is, they are not hampered by the goverment and most of the time, the bad guys want nothing to do with them. They avoid Blackwater secured areas most of the time.

Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!

Pawpaw wait a minute

January 10, 2008 - 15:31 ET by JayTee

That article post you put up says...."The San Francisco-area man"...must be a misprint, there isn't no such thing.

Aw, JT

January 10, 2008 - 15:34 ET by MassConserv

Now I gotta clean coffee off my monitor.

Wrong Jay Tee....

January 10, 2008 - 16:23 ET by Airforce_5_O

he goes by name Nancy.

But he couldn't tell Army Reserve

January 10, 2008 - 19:19 ET by PawpawN

No tell policy of BJC I guess!

Leon, lol. Do you even know

January 10, 2008 - 10:49 ET by bassndude

Leon, lol. Do you even know what CS gas is?

Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!

Sure Bass, A gas used

January 10, 2008 - 11:00 ET by Leon

Sure Bass,

A gas used primarily for riot control that has strict usage guidelines in the military.

Furthermore, although classified as non-lethal, the jury is still out on the actual toxicity. When researchers studied the usage of CS on the Branch Davidians, they came to the conclusion that when used in small areas or when used improperly, it can be lethal.

Other reports have also shown that CS gas can cause direct abnormal chromosome changes (yippeeee!)

As a result, the US military has strict regulations governing the use of CS gas.

Blackwater clearly does not.

PS do you know what metabolized CS gas creates in the human body?

Lethal? Ha! I used to carry

January 10, 2008 - 11:10 ET by bassndude

Lethal? Ha! I used to carry CS gernades with me much of the time. Used them alot. I dident need any special permission, dident have to call anyone on the radio. It was my discretion. Never saw anyone die because of them. Might choke, eyes tear up, cough some but never fatal, not even in a small confined space such a tunnel. It did make it unnessary to kill someone tho. And in some cases, easier to kill them.

Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!

Bass, 1) I'm sorry but

January 10, 2008 - 11:16 ET by Leon

Bass,

1) I'm sorry but I'm going to have to go with the PHDs on this one.

2) Not to sound like a jerk, but I'm sure the rules of the military have changed since your time in (as clearly shown in the article I linked to the US military in Iraq is not able to employ CS gas without high level approval - this is a fact of the current situation, regardless of what you were allowed to do back in the day)

3) When metabolized by the human body, CS gas creates CYANIDE. What does CYANIDE do again? Is it healthy? I heard it's great for aging skin!

4) The first time people began to seriously question the use of CS gas irresponsibly came after WACO as dictated by John C. Danforth. You can read the study here

5) So while your personal experience is all well and good, it's quite dated. Hell, they used to Agent Orange wantonly all over Vietnam, do they still use that today? No? that's because times change, people learn more about what they're doing, and they change the rules accordingly.

It's time to start calling them...mercenaries.

January 10, 2008 - 11:00 ET by Syrius

Leon,

I couldn't agree more.

The Gov't should invoice Blackwater for the initial training most of them got while serving in the Armed Forces. Freakin' profiteers!

Exposing & Confronting Liberal Media Bias Critics.

Syrius, There is no other

January 10, 2008 - 11:03 ET by Leon

Syrius,

There is no other way to describe them.

Mercenary Cowboys.

aka Scum of the Earth.

They should just give up the charade and go train child soldiers in Sierra Leone.

Whoops. I thought the UN was

January 10, 2008 - 11:18 ET by Roger the Shrubber

Whoops. I thought the UN was training the soldiers of Sierra Leone before they left two years ago?

crickets chirping.

January 10, 2008 - 13:31 ET by Roger the Shrubber

*crickets chirping*.

Leon.... Scum of the

January 10, 2008 - 13:39 ET by bigtimer

Leon....

Scum of the earth?

Pathetic coming from you.

Not to mention

January 10, 2008 - 14:36 ET by ckc1227

Not to mention hypocritical.

Leon, these cowboys are

January 10, 2008 - 11:05 ET by bassndude

Leon, these cowboys are former Special Forces, Ranger, Seals, and Marine Recon. They broke no rules. The Geneva Convention spicifically OKs the use of CS gas. I dont know who this Cpt. Kincy Clark is, but he sounds pretty much like a cry baby. Every military person is exposed to CS gas in basic. Nobody cares about CS gas. Not even Geneva.

Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!

Classic NB

January 10, 2008 - 11:18 ET by Leon

Cpt. Kincy Clark is, but he sounds pretty much like a cry baby

Support the troops until they do or say something you disagree with. Petty much?

yet again, you put Blackwater mercenaries above our troops. Makes literally no sense at all.

By dropping the CS gas Blackwater put our troops in danger. Period.

You can stop now, bassndude

January 10, 2008 - 11:20 ET by OldSailor88

You've explained it to them and it won't do any good. There's no use in interrupting the mutual masturbation session of these two trolls. If they would have served, they would know. All they know of the Military comes from the Huffpo and Tom Clancy.

Faciem durum cacantis habes

No soup for you!...

January 10, 2008 - 12:11 ET by Syrius

OldSail,

Professionally speaking, you don't know me, who I am, where I've been, or anything else for that matter. Please stop assuming how much I know or don't know. Eventually it will lead to you bailing out with a "Trust me, if I say it is true- it is." Go ahead, bloviate! We're all listening to your line of BS!

Syrius

Exposing & Confronting Liberal Media Bias Critics.

You have yet to persuade any

January 10, 2008 - 13:31 ET by Roger the Shrubber

You have yet to persuade any of us to believe that you possess an amazing skill set, since you never seem to have evidence to back yourself up with when you post, only chest-thumping and attitude.

Syrius, much of what we

January 10, 2008 - 14:47 ET by bassndude

Syrius, much of what we know about you, comes from not so much as what you say, but how you say it and what you dont say. I seriously doubt that you ever engaged the enemy in close combat. Eye to eye, so to speak. Not with your attitude, perhaps finance or maybe personal, but not combat arms. And I seriously doubt military service, unless it was brief and medical or section 8 or undesirable.

Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!

these guys do have all the

January 10, 2008 - 15:24 ET by TruthMonger

these guys do have all the cliches down pat tho - that must be worth something - NB honorable mention...?

"Blackwater are the scum of

January 10, 2008 - 14:33 ET by ckc1227

"Blackwater are the scum of the earth. Profiting off war"

Yeah, it would be much better if they and every other contractor helping in the war effort were losing money instead. I'm sure they'd all line up to help under that scenario.

after check out the left

January 10, 2008 - 15:25 ET by TruthMonger

after check out the left profiting massively from the war back here:)

Fox News...

January 10, 2008 - 10:34 ET by Syrius

Fox was one of the most conservative in calling the Democratic race. As I watched Obama start to congratulate Hillary, Good ol' Brit Hume announced Hillary won the primary. Now, that's conservative.

Syrius

Exposing & Confronting Liberal Media Bias Critics.

Syrius.....what is the point ?

January 10, 2008 - 12:05 ET by JayTee

"Brit Hume announced Hillary won the primary" .....So telling the truth is Conservative ? OK, if that's the way you think.

But you're falling way short of your footnote...... "Exposing & Confronting Liberal Media Bias Critics" unless you're complaining about truthful statements on Fox.

I'll bet even you can't watch/stomach Chriss Matthews.

They were twisting...

January 10, 2008 - 12:24 ET by Syrius

JT,

FoxNews wanted to be the first to announce her defeat. It didn't happen and they were caught behind the 8 ball. They just didn't want to believe she had won. They finally capitulated and announced her victory. That was my point.

Yes, I do think Chris Matthews has a certain disdain for Hillary. I've watched him disparge her with Delay...

http://www.youtube.c...

Syrius

Exposing & Confronting Liberal Media Bias Critics.

Your point is bogus, and

January 10, 2008 - 12:35 ET by Jack Bauer

Your point is bogus, and yawningly tedious.

Neither Hulme, nor his panel, nor the Fox producers or executives made any decision on when or when not to "call" the result.

As in previous elections, and as on all networks, their Decision Team of poll experts use their expertise and computer polling models to call the result.

Your assertion about what Fox did or did not want to do regarding being first to call Mrs Clintion losing are merely your opinion. Supported by what?

Have you got any real points to make?

Check out my exclusive edit of BBC News America's interview with Mrs Clinton: It's news to me!

Syrius, you can't be serious.

January 10, 2008 - 12:51 ET by Airforce_5_O

"FoxNews wanted to be the first to announce her defeat."

You are kidding right? You can't be serious with this statement? Are you Clairvoyant or something that you know this or would you like to share a fact that supports this claim?

Sounds like they want to be sure before annoucing a winner.

Airforce -- you'll note

January 10, 2008 - 13:03 ET by Jack Bauer

Airforce -- you'll note that in his strapline, this "genius" admits there is liberal media bias...

Yet all he wants to do is confront the critics of the liberal media bias.

How weird is that? You'd think he'd have beter things to do.

How shocking to see a

January 10, 2008 - 13:22 ET by Roger the Shrubber

How shocking to see a Socialist, er, Progressive want to silence their critics...

My flabber is totally gasted

January 10, 2008 - 13:28 ET by Jack Bauer

My flabber is totally gasted by this revelation of socialist, er Progressive tactics.

All of you are correct....I'll have to change it.

January 10, 2008 - 16:11 ET by Syrius

Thanks to all for correcting me on my tagline (strapline, ha-ha, you're funny)!

It's not everyday when I've been shown the error of my ways in my comments and very own tagline. All of you are correct, there is NO Liberal Media Bias. There is no proof, whatsoever. So I guess we should move this entire site over to AirAmerica and enjoy the lovefest over there. WWM?

I hope you like my new gems for my tagline!

Syrius

"Fear is the mother of morality." -Nietzsche

"It is the absolute right of the State to supervise the formation of public opinion." -Goebbels

Nothing to see here. Move

January 10, 2008 - 16:30 ET by Roger the Shrubber

Nothing to see here. Move along. Just pretend I was revealed to be a lying scumbag. There is no ilberal media bias. I repeat, THERE IS NO LIBERAL MEDIA BIAS!

Whatever you say, Chip.

Rog, I agree with you...

January 10, 2008 - 21:16 ET by Syrius

There is nothing to see in your posts.

I'm movin' along.

I'll pretend you were revealed as a lying scumbag.

There is no ilberal(sp?) media bias.

I'll repeat again for you, THERE IS NO LIBERAL MEDIA BIAS!

Okay?

Syrius

"Fear is the mother of morality." -Nietzsche

"It is the absolute right of the State to supervise the formation of public opinion." -Goebbels

"FoxNews wanted to be the

January 10, 2008 - 14:27 ET by ckc1227

"FoxNews wanted to be the first to announce her defeat. It didn't happen
and they were caught behind the 8 ball. They just didn't want to
believe she had won. They finally capitulated and announced her
victory. That was my point."

Yeah, they probably should have just called it for Obama early on so Michael Moore would have material for a new movie. It would probably be something like "Fox News causes Obama to lose, handing George Bush the 2008 election".

'Splain This, Serious:

January 10, 2008 - 19:59 ET by Del Dolemonte

You seem to forget that Rupert Murdoch is a Hillary supporter, and in fact hosted a fundraiser for her.

http://www.cbsnews.c...

Move along, folks, nothing to see here...

Why CBS not FOX?

January 10, 2008 - 21:23 ET by Syrius

Mo'money for Hillary!

I'll have to keep watching The Simpsons for the next fundraiser!

Syrius

"Fear is the mother of morality." -Nietzsche

"It is the absolute right of the State to supervise the formation of public opinion." -Goebbels

The ClintonInc CNN machine

January 10, 2008 - 10:41 ET by Jack Bauer

The ClintonInc CNN machine probably bussed the viewers in, just to beat Fox.

And how many of CNN's 3,298,000 "viewers" were dead, or illegals, or just house pets called Snowball, or Lassie?

One night doesn't equate a beating

January 10, 2008 - 10:41 ET by Pam

Let me turn this around on the NewsBusters management staff...If all of the companies under your parent company had month after month of losses, and one month where you were profitable..would they get off your back? Heck no...They would try to figure out what you did right and hopefully continue in an upward direction.

In this case, the left did watch because the WH is theirs to lose(theoretically). They had a vested interest in the results and the biased coverage is what suited their needs..

Huckabee's tax lies compare to Gov. Weicker in CT

January 10, 2008 - 10:47 ET by RJ

Here in Connecticut, Lowell Weicker campaigned for governor on a lower tax/anti-income tax platform. But immediately upon being elected, he reversed himself and announced that he would work with the Democrats to implement an income tax.

In spite of outrage and a 10,000-strong protest demonstration at the Capitol, he went through with his plan.

How does that compare to Gov. Huckabee? Huckabee also campaigned on promises of lower taxes for Arkansas.

He often said then: "If I give something out of my pocket for your needs, that's charity. If I take out of your pocket and give it to someone else - in the old days, that was called theft."

But within six months, Huckabee reneged on his tax cut promises, and, as Romney said in the debate, increased taxes in Arkansaw by more than half a billion dollars.

RJ's "lies" about Huckabee's "lies"...

January 10, 2008 - 11:15 ET by vrwc13

RJ's "lies" about Huckabee's "lies"...

...it's all relative as the following from RJ's link provides:

"In November, Huckabee repeatedly defended his record, calling himself a "fiscal conservative" and pointing out that he had cut taxes 90 times as governor.

"The income tax remained exactly what it was," he said in a debate on Nov. 28. "The sales tax is one penny higher. I did do a number of tax cuts that helped people all over the place, like eliminating the marriage penalty, doubling the child care tax credit, getting rid of capital gains on the sale of a home, cutting capital gains on other things."

The numbers show that taxes increased at an average of $15 per person per fiscal year during Huckabee's tenure (1996-2007)."

ALL things considered, $15/person with a Democratic Congress, seems like awfully good results.

btw RJ, do you work for the MSM? If not, you could have a promising career there.

"…you are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts." -the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan.

vrwc...

January 10, 2008 - 11:17 ET by Clear thinker

Where did you get those screwy numbers from?

Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/

From RJ's link... :) v

January 10, 2008 - 11:25 ET by vrwc13

From RJ's link... :)

But your selective quoting ignores this, vrwc:

January 10, 2008 - 11:36 ET by RJ

Did Huckabee campaign on a tax cut platform?

Did Arkansas taxes increase by more than half a billion dollars during his tenure?

Huckabee looks to me a lot like the false "campaign tax promises" brother of CT's lying Governor Lowell Weicker.

Did Romney support abortion

January 10, 2008 - 11:43 ET by vrwc13

Did Romney support abortion before he was against it?

...context RJ, context...

"Did Huckabee campaign on a

January 10, 2008 - 11:47 ET by vrwc13

"Did Huckabee campaign on a tax cut platform?" ...yes Huckabee did...

"Did Arkansas taxes increase by more than half a billion dollars during his tenure?" ...yes ARKANSAS did...

...get the difference?

He cut taxes...

January 10, 2008 - 11:50 ET by Clear thinker

But his tax increases outweigh the cuts by some $500,000 million dollars.

If this is your idea of good tax policy, please do not run for office.

Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/

Only a liberal could see the "difference" vrwc

January 10, 2008 - 11:54 ET by RJ

Only a liberal could see the "difference" vrwc. Just like the liar Lowell Weicker, Huckabee told his legislature to go ahead and raise taxes.

A conservative (and an honest man) would have looked for spending cuts and/or ways to stimulate the economy.

Your understanding of

January 10, 2008 - 12:20 ET by vrwc13

Your understanding of government seems rather rudimentary.

I doubt any elected official, including Romney, is ever able to fulfill all their campaign promises. Our systems provides numerous checks and balances, rightfully so.

So instead of belabouring your mantra of "lying"; check facts, context, and try not to be so "tunnel-visioned" about your choice of candidate by always trying to tear down the others.

Ah, it's the "nuances" of leadership, right, vrwc?

January 10, 2008 - 13:16 ET by RJ

"All" of his campaign promises? Nah, just the broad ones, like running on cutting taxes and then telling the legislature to go ahead and raise them.....Weicker rationalized his reversal, too.....just doing it for the good of the state, he said. Ha!

Admit it. You Huckabees are willing to vote this liberal into office solely because he agrees with your one issue of right to life.

P.S. You share a behavior of Huckabee: he often whines about being "attacked" and "smeared", while sticking the knife in.

And you whine about me "tearing down" Huckabee by using specifics, while you twice attempt to do just that to Romney on this thread....using only generalities.

RJ...how quickly you forget...

January 10, 2008 - 14:13 ET by vrwc13

"Admit it. You Huckabees are willing to vote this liberal into office..." RJ

This is from a professional site dealing with stats and polls:

Candidate / Conservative / Moderate / Liberal
Thompson / 45 / 25 / 7
Huckabee / 43 / 24 / 9
Romney / 42 / 28 / 8
McCain / 31 / 45 / 8
Guiliani / 29 / 43 / /16
Paul / 23 / 27 / 11

http://www.rasmussen...

Sorry, vrwc

January 10, 2008 - 14:51 ET by RJ

My agreement with your use of that post had to do with people calling all the candidates RINOs, not with the assigned ratings.

Now that you want me to agree with their conclusions, I looked for their methodology but was unable to access it.

But, looking around, I came across a Forbes link that shows a different rating for each of them. I'm guessing that if I keep looking, all the charts will have different rankings for each candidate.

Huckabee is a liberal.

RJ...

January 10, 2008 - 14:55 ET by Clear thinker

You got it half right. Huckabee is a liberal RINO!

Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/

"Huckabee is a liberal RINO! " - CT

January 10, 2008 - 14:58 ET by vrwc13

"…you are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts." -the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan.

"The numbers show that

January 10, 2008 - 14:18 ET by ckc1227

"The numbers show that taxes increased at an average of $15 per person per fiscal year during Huckabee's tenure (1996-2007)."

ALL things considered, $15/person with a Democratic Congress, seems like awfully good results"

Then why did he have such a hard time answering Mitt's simple question the other night?

ckc 1227...Did not see Romney/Huckabee exchange...help?

January 11, 2008 - 12:05 ET by vrwc13

Did not see the exchange...so could you explain to me how he had such a hard time answering Mitt's simple question?

edit: no response?

"But within six months,

January 10, 2008 - 11:33 ET by vrwc13

"But within six months, Huckabee reneged on his tax cut promises, and, as Romney said in the debate, increased taxes in Arkansaw by more than half a billion dollars." - RJ's comment

"But six months into the term, Huckabee - citing stiff opposition from the Democrat-controlled state legislature and concerns there would not be funds for education, Medicaid, and health insurance for poor children - took his tax cuts off the table." - RJ's link

hmmm...the Governor "reneged" to help fund "education, Medicaid, and health insurance for poor children"

A fitting answer for a liberal defender, vrwc

January 10, 2008 - 11:48 ET by RJ

You make the same argument as every tax-raising liberal I've ever heard. You can't hide from the fact that Huckabee campaigned on lower taxes but raised them instead.

The man is a big-government, big tax liberal.

"Huckabee is a compassionate conservative only in the sense that calling him a conservative is being compassionate. -Ann Coulter

vr... Just wanted to

January 10, 2008 - 11:50 ET by bigtimer

vr...

Just wanted to throw in my thoughts on Huckabee/Clinton.

I watched his speech after winning in Iowa...first thing I thought of with his snake-oil speech which he delivers so well as only a tent revivalist snake-oil salesman can looking you right in the eye, making you feel as if he is talking to only you and he will take care of you and yours if you just follow his teachings/BS....made me immediately think of Hillary, if she had one ounce of any of his BS I would be worried she may be Prez in '09.

He's good with convincing people with his cute by half rhetoric...she can't hold a candle to it.

Thank God.

Yes to almost all of the above...

January 10, 2008 - 11:18 ET by c5then

Yes, yes, yes, not entirely. The last one...The "momentum" from the early primaries will help the media "annoint" their chosen candidate and influence those who don't really vote using principles and values, but simply want to be able to say that they picked the winner.

The GOP race this time is being very negatively impacted by the media and the vatous State GOP organizations trying to exclude candidates they they don't want people to choose. Both Ron Paul and Alan Keyes have been victims of this and thier supporters are extremely "pissed off". It also doesn't help that Romney, Gulliani, McCain and I suspect Huckabee are all RINOs and not true conservatives.

The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Alan Keyes '08.

Obama finished. OFFICIAL.

January 10, 2008 - 11:34 ET by Jack Bauer

Obama finished. OFFICIAL.

The "winner" with two left feet and one left brain... Jean Francoise Kerry has endorsed the Barack Girl.

With edorsements like that...

Hi Jack... My sentiments

January 10, 2008 - 11:43 ET by bigtimer

Hi Jack...

My sentiments exactly when I heard the so-called breaking news....be careful what you wish for.

BT -- yeah, apparently

January 10, 2008 - 11:51 ET by Jack Bauer

BT -- yeah, apparently there's a GANG OF FOUR leading democrats who despise Clinton with a vengeance, and are doing everything they can to sabotage her.

Come on, Jack. Obama

January 10, 2008 - 12:30 ET by fitzfong

Come on, Jack. Obama isn't finished just because Haughty John Kerry endorsed him.

Now if ManBearPig endorses him, that's a different story...

The economy

January 10, 2008 - 11:54 ET by iveseenitall

Had some relatives in town last night. Went to Olive Garden. A Wednesday night and it was packed! Couln't help but think what a terrible economy we have.

NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"

Wait until Sunday

January 10, 2008 - 13:28 ET by ricklail

When I was back home the Sunday before Christmas, we went to Hickory to do some shopping. There were people lined up at about every place to eat. Hickory, NC is supposed to be one of those economicaly depressed areas. The shopping centers were packed. Really depressed area.

Around here it is hard to find a placed that is not packed on a Sunday either. We don't have an Olive Garden but there is a Ham's, Outback, and Golden Corral that are packed every night. I thought that when times were hard that eating out was one of the first things for a family to cut out. Either times are not that hard or families must have cut out something else.

By the way, I refuse to stand in line to eat anywhere.That really pisses my wife off. But, as I tell her I got enough standing in line in the Army.

"May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won't.” General George S. Patton.

Ann Coulter's Column

January 10, 2008 - 11:59 ET by ricklail

Ann Coulter's column for this week is a good read. It is on the death last Friday of her dad.

"May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won't.” General George S. Patton.

re: Ann Coulter

January 10, 2008 - 12:02 ET by QueenMum

I thought it was one of her best ever. Her dad must have been very proud of her.

Power to the people!

a man

January 10, 2008 - 12:13 ET by iveseenitall

Looks like Coulter's dad was a real "man", as she put it. More reason for the "liberal" whimps to despise her.

NEVER, NEVER trust a "liberal"

Why Obama's Candidacy Might Not Be Stoppable

January 10, 2008 - 12:25 ET by Caringwhiteguy

The Golf Channel has suspended anchor Kelly Tilghman for two weeks for making a "racially insensitive" remark. http://sportsillustr.... The network clearly over-reacted to the situation. However, every race baiter in the country found a way to be "outraged" at this incident. Too many people are scared sh**less of the true 3rd rail in American politics. (Social Security could at least be debated at some level). As the campaign unfolds, the race card will be played over and over again, subtly and not so subtly. The results can be devastating. Can anyone say "MACACA"?

Fox

January 10, 2008 - 12:43 ET by Ryan Mc.

Fox was calling Romney dead because he didn't win. They called McCain the new frontrunner even though he was third in delegate count even after his win. I was so tired of poor analysis that I was forced to turn it off. There was no perspective. There was no mention of the effect that idependents played and that in other states McCain couldn't count on them. I turned to CNN and they actually for this rare occasion had better info. All the bias I expected but at least they listed the delegate count and had all the candidates results.

Everyone seems to be

January 10, 2008 - 13:33 ET by Chris Norman

Everyone seems to be reporting (or NOT reporting) the GOP campaign in a vacum or compartments. There is no view to the candidates' overall popularity or their chances in upcoming primaries. They seem to be teating these early primaries as elections in themselves. How could anyone possibly think their will be a groundswell of support for McCain, across the country, that will carry him to the nomination?

Chris... How could anyone

January 10, 2008 - 13:43 ET by bigtimer

Chris...

How could anyone possibly think their will be a groundswell of support for McCain, across the country, that will carry him to the nomination?

The anyone would be the leftists in the party and msm hoping, just hoping if the repeat it often enough it will be so.

Not gonna' happen...only in their silly little rose colored dreams.

Question

January 10, 2008 - 13:21 ET by iveseenitall

I have a question which won't ever be asked during this campaign. What "representation" is being given Arizona, New York, and Illinois in Washington at this time? It would be nice if those so concerned about what is happening in our government would let others do their job if they want to do other things. After all, they were elected to serve for six years-- not four, not two.

NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"

A valid question.

January 10, 2008 - 13:33 ET by MassConserv

However, the simple answer is, they (the states) got what they asked for.

Oliver North...

January 10, 2008 - 14:50 ET by Clear thinker

Ollie was in SC yesterday to support Fred Thompson.

http://fredfile.fred08.com/blog/2008/on-the-road-in-myrtle-beach-sc/

Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/

Hey Ct... That is great!

January 10, 2008 - 14:56 ET by bigtimer

Hey Ct...

That is great!

Leon Right Once Again.

January 10, 2008 - 14:54 ET by Leon

The Iranian boat provocation story = BS!

Big shocker.

If I remember correctly I was called an idiot for my posting claiming this story reminded me of historical lie that pushed America into war.

Turns out I was right and now the Pentagon is backtracking on their original claims:

LINK

More lies under the Bush Admin? No way!

Please just read the link before commenting on it. Or don't comment. Thanks.

Read the link Leon...troll

January 10, 2008 - 15:06 ET by vrwc13

Read the link Leon...troll away...

...and to think you take issue when someone uses Wiki!

V, Uh I read it which is

January 10, 2008 - 15:24 ET by Leon

Uh I read it which is why I posted it.

And I see only one thing. A whole lotta backpedaling.

Why, did you want to point out something specific or what?

Leon...

January 10, 2008 - 16:23 ET by Clear thinker

And of course only your source is correct, is that it?

Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/

CT

January 10, 2008 - 16:29 ET by MassConserv

Leon Sez.

Leon

January 10, 2008 - 20:51 ET by Noel Sheppard

Leon,

You know you're one of my favorite libs here, but citing a piece that begins, and I quote, "As the Righties get their knickers all twisted because some of us don't - gasp - immediately take the US military and the Bush administration at their word over what happened in the Gulf on Sunday...Iran releases its own video of the events," doesn't ingratiate you to the populace, or possibly result in a reasonable discussion about the issue presented.

On the other hand, it certainly evoked a harsh reaction from our members. Was that the goal? ns

OK, I know I post links to

January 10, 2008 - 17:19 ET by JasonC

OK, I know I post links to The Onion a lot, but this is utterly hilarious, especially if you find Jimmy Carter's speaking voice to be comical.

"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

Good link, Jason!

January 10, 2008 - 19:46 ET by Roger the Shrubber

Good link, Jason!

JC

January 10, 2008 - 20:37 ET by Noel Sheppard

JC,

Very delicious. Thank you for the HUGE smiles! :-) ns

Glad you liked it. It took

January 10, 2008 - 20:47 ET by JasonC

Glad you liked it. It took me about 15 minutes to read 'cause I kept dissolving into fits of laughter. I'd mention my favorite part, but this is, after all, a family site.

"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

Debate tonight

January 10, 2008 - 18:01 ET by bigtimer

Anyone going to watch the republican debate tonight on Fox?

I hope to catch it if possible...may have to watch the rerun though.

Could be interesting.

bt...

January 10, 2008 - 19:09 ET by Clear thinker

My wife and I are sponsoring a "watch Fred" party tonight. Company starts arriving around 8:30.

Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/

Edmund Hillary dies -- no comment from Hillary Clinton

January 10, 2008 - 18:41 ET by Jack Bauer

SIR EDMUND HILLARY, FIRST MAN TO CONQUER MOUNT EVEREST IN 1953, DIES AT 88

He was, of course, the man for whom Hillary Rodham was named after being born in 1947.

Unlike Her, He Was a Class Act

January 10, 2008 - 20:12 ET by Del Dolemonte

from a news story

" Hillary's life was marked by grand achievements, high adventure, discovery, excitement — and by his personal humility. Humble to the point that he only admitted being the first man atop Everest long after the death of climbing companion Norgay. "

Previously, Ed had always said Tenzing got to the top before he did, or implied it. In 2003, Ed's son Peter, and Tenzing's son Jamling, climbed Everest together on the 50th anniversary.

Ed's life wasn't all a bed of roses-his first wife and one of his daughters were killed in a plane crash in Nepal in 1975

TV?

January 11, 2008 - 01:50 ET by Lorraine

I don't watch TV, ever, I have more important things to do with my time.

I get whatever news I want online, clips and everything with no commercials. You can't beat that.

Maybe there are others like me out there.

Another Clinton Lovefest Coming-Tina Brown Book

January 11, 2008 - 08:16 ET by PawpawN

Tina Brown to write book on Clintons-the woman who said this about BJC "For those of us who had dismissed him ... see him instead as his guests do: a man in a dinner jacket with more heat than any star in the room (or, for that matter, at the multiplex)," she wrote. "His height, his sleekness, his newly cropped, iron-filing hair, and the intensity of his blue eyes project a kind of avid inclusiveness that encircles every jaded celebrity he passes. He is vividly in the present tense and dares you to join him there." Oh my goodness, can't wait, can ya!!!