Drudge mentions that during a live press conference in Baghdad, CNN "reporter" Michael Ware heckled John McCain. Video from the event is sure to follow. What will be interesting to see is who in the mainstream press covers it. Will it be covered on CNN? Will the press gossip blogs mention it? Or will this be swept under the rug as usual?
"Objective reporter" Michael Ware is no stranger to spouting his personal opinions. In an interview with Bill Maher he said "I've been given a front-row ticket to watch this slow-motion train wreck … I try to stay as drunk for as long as possible while I'm here … In fact, I'm drinking now.”
Right in line with the the journalist code of conduct.
Comments Policy
I just hope that Tom Tancredo
April 2, 2007 - 04:02 ET byI just hope that Tom Tancredo runs and wins. Sorry, but John McCain is a jerk. He wants to give new citizens, ones who worked here illegally before becoming citizens, Social Security on money earned illegally.
I won’t support a man, just because he is a Republican. Anyone can ‘call’ them self a Republican. I want a true Republican.
And personally, I feel that a man (or woman, in Hillary’s case…hmm..ya, okay), well, anyway, anyone running for office, should be able to take some heckling. However, I am guessing that the mainstream media will not cover it, because it was not done to a Democrat.
Debra…
Too honest for most to deal with, I’m sure. :o)
you are considered honest
April 2, 2007 - 18:32 ET by tumbler_2007Yes, Debra; honest enough in your own household. Why not ?
The more important thing is to honestly assay the real possibilities of winning the American presidency. It's not quite enough to offer your personal support to a candidate over some other one. You have to make a vote count.
Tancredo's no doubt a fine man. Could he defeat a well-funded and eagerly-supported Democrat candidate? Not likely. He would be buried by Hillary Clinton and likely enough fail narrowly against Obamasama. Tancredo isn't much more than a provincial character on a private ego trip. Nobody ever heard of the man in a majority of this nation's state capitals. He's a nobody, IMHO. I'm not demeaning him, but looking at a candidate. A non-starter, frankly.
Hi tumbler, So, you do not kn
April 2, 2007 - 18:52 ET byHi tumbler,
So, you do not know who Tancredo is, but you say he is a 'provincial character on a private ego trip.' lol.. Well, I guess if you have nothing to support you dislike for a person, you just come up with something like that.
Debra...
If anyone would like to know who Tom Tancredo is; click here
And let's remember, that Obama was a nobody a few years back. I believe that Hillary will win over him in the primaries, but then she will not win in the Presidential race itself. America, on a whole, is not ready for a woman president.
Debra, Debra, Debra...Tumbler
April 2, 2007 - 18:59 ET by Clear thinkerDebra, Debra, Debra...
Tumbler has to minimize Tom Tancredo because the man actually wants to DO SOMETHING about illegals in our country. If case you have missed it, tumbler is our resident illegal appologist and gets a weekly paycheck from La Raza to come here and shower us with his pity for the poor illegal.
The liberal MSM has become an enemy of the USA.
Debra...Tancredo is everythin
April 2, 2007 - 19:10 ET by bigtimerDebra...
Tancredo is everything tumbster fears...
More to come tumbster as the election creeps nearer to you and your illegal buddies in La Raza......
LMAO!
As stated in the Drudge Repor
April 2, 2007 - 05:32 ET by old croAs stated in the Drudge Report "This guy is an activist not a reporter."
CNN has moved the line when it comes to "reporting". Imagine a democrat being heckled while speaking on a serious subject, it would be replayed endlessly showing how irreverent and heartless Republicans are. CNN should be shunned (oh wait, they already are according to viewer ship numbers) err, they should be congratulated (yea that's the ticket) on opening the door for other "reporters" to give their personal and political takes on candidates running for president (think hillary). Not that the MSM doesn't do that now, they are just trying to keep the appearance of being subtle.
"Smoking kills. If you're killed, you've lost a very important part of your life."
Brooke Shields (during an interview to become spokesperson for a federal anti-smoking campaign).
Well I guess we are entering
April 2, 2007 - 05:41 ET by tweakthetrollWell I guess we are entering the times when reporters feel the obligation or need to combine news with thier comedy act. Complete bias is not enough I guess. Heck might as well through a lie or two in, with hold a few facts to bugger up the context and we will all have a real good time..........heck Keith Olbermann has been doing this for a couple of years now and look at his suck-cess.
"I try to stay as drun
April 2, 2007 - 06:33 ET by motherbelt"I try to stay as drunk for as long as possible while I'm here …"-MIchael Ware regarding Iraq
And since the above-mentioned press conference was in Baghdad, can we assume that Mr. Ware might have been drunk, or at least drinking, by his own words?
Maybe it's time for the "Big Mouth Sympathy Play".....checking into Rehab.
this explains why the Iraq re
April 2, 2007 - 09:25 ET by Conservative in the Artsthis explains why the Iraq reporting is so negative. When you view the world only from a bar stool, it gets pertty depressing. It also explains why the loosers are not willing to go out and get the good stories, because there isn't a bar close by.
Michelle Ware ... CNN incitat
April 2, 2007 - 07:24 ET by jonathanandersonMichelle Ware ... CNN incitationist and resident 3rd string antichrist ... looks like he's making a push for a starting position.
Why DO the liberals rage and the Democrats imagine a vain thing? Well ... because of first-class idiots like Michelle Ware.
Ware is nothing more than a t
April 2, 2007 - 09:43 ET by FOXFANWare is nothing more than a terrorist partisan, a CNN scumbag. Keep it up CNN, as your viewership drops.
ware's double standard is showing
April 2, 2007 - 08:27 ET by kahoonaWare's double standard is showing...
...specifically:
"WARE: well, let's bear in mind that this is a report that was leaked by
an unnamed official of some kind to a blog, to somewhere on the
internet. no one has gone and put their name forward. we certainly
haven't heard senator mccain say anything about it or any of his staff
have come forward to say anything about it. i did not heckle the
senator..."
So, unnamed sources are uncredible when it comes to making a CNN reporter look bad in front of a Republican and someone who (God forbid) actually supports the troops...but, when it makes a Republican look bad, unnamed sources are perfectly acceptable? Right.
What a jerk.
Well, Ware says that we sho
April 2, 2007 - 08:55 ET by motherbeltWell, Ware says that we should wait and see on the videotape whether or not he heckled. Sounds fair. Maybe the unnamed source is wrong. But the fact that it was "leaked to a blog" doesn't automatically make it wrong, any more than an unnamed source leaking something to CNN makes it true. We shall see.
better said
April 2, 2007 - 09:47 ET by kahoonaexactly my point...thanks for making it better than I did... :)
motherbelt - Drudge made the
April 2, 2007 - 11:58 ET by ding7777motherbelt - Drudge made the claim so it should be up to Drudge to show proof of the heckling
YouTube had a video up and
April 2, 2007 - 12:07 ET by ScottyDogYouTube had a video up and it was linked on HotAir but they removed the video.
Then YouTube allowed a rebuttal to be posted by Michael Ware and it has not been removed.
Google and YouTube must be joined at the hip
Is this Mexico or the USA
What??? POST THE VIDEO FOR
April 2, 2007 - 12:50 ET by dahliatraversWhat??? POST THE VIDEO FOR EVERYONE TO SEE. Why does Ware get to rebut something no one has seen?
McCain's Press Conference vid
April 2, 2007 - 13:56 ET by ding7777McCain's Press Conference video now up RAW STORY - Drudge is wrong
Its the 2nd video (about halfway down the page - 10 minutes long)
I can't convict him without s
April 2, 2007 - 09:25 ET by jondelwicheI can't convict him without seeing the video. I'd love to see it.Yet, it's hard to imagine this report wouldn't have some merit, and yet again would highlight the true media bias despite the ongoing massive Borking of FoxNews (i.e. that fierce "hit-job" question Chris Wallace delivered to Bill Clinton, "did you do enough?") in an attempt to discredit or tone it down.Exactly why do Republican spokespeople apologize for calling these news hacks "partisans?" It should be an everyday word.
that fierce "hit-job&quo
April 2, 2007 - 10:53 ET by dahliatraversthat fierce "hit-job" question Chris Wallace delivered to Bill Clinton
Now THAT was some serious heckling. <sarcasm off>
Yet, we are into year four of
April 2, 2007 - 10:54 ET by jdhawkYet, we are into year four of the war in Iraq and not a single "news" outlet has honored our heroes with stories of their derring-do, courage, and sacrifice. We see no stories about our brave young men and women's bravery and compassion. No stories of risking life and limb so that Iraqi's lives are saved. No accounting of the myriad country rebuilding projects and the impact of the same on the average Iraqi. We hear or view few stories on the ever more vibrant economy, the peaceful Kurdish area in the north western part of the country, and the normalized south eastern areas of the country.
Instead we have the likes of a despicable cur like Ware and the bunch of hotel balcony tele-prompt readers feeding us line and verse the most terrible aspects of this war and the reverberating drumbeat that we are surely losing.
Meanwhile, the "news" outlets blithely reference Vietnam without accounting for their on hand in causing millions of human beings' deaths and even more millions to face torture and decades of incarceration at the hands of ruthless communists governments. Never mentioned is the possibility of the same occurring should we lose in Iraqi.
Ware
April 2, 2007 - 11:08 ET by iveseenitall"I did not heckle the senator"--- heckle, smeckle, Ware. A rose by any other name. Another partisan "journalist".
NEVER,NEVER trust a liberal
Do not forget it was Michae
April 2, 2007 - 11:27 ET by ScottyDogDo not forget it was Michael Ware that provided the tape of our solders being killed by snipers. He has embedded with the insurgents on numerous occasions to the point the military was investigating him for possible aid to the enemy.
His credentials should have been revoked a long time ago. He is a traitor and should not be allowed to continue spreading propaganda for the enemy.
Is this Mexico or the USA
Nice to know that being &qu
April 2, 2007 - 14:03 ET by Rupert CadellNice to know that being "investigated" for "possible" wrongdoing equals automatic treason. Isn't that sort of attitude precisely what had conservatives freaking out about the Scooter trial?
"I'm liberal, but to a degree; I want everyone to be free." -B. Dylan
No stories of troops' sacrifi
April 2, 2007 - 13:13 ET by waka wakaNo stories of troops' sacrifice and heroics? Do you even read or watch the news? Where have you been?
And I LOVE it when you warbloggers bravely diss the reporters who are actually there from the safety of your living rooms. That speaks volumes.
Reality has a well known liberal bias.
Do you know what your link
April 2, 2007 - 13:18 ET by MightyMouthDo you know what your link points to waka waka? A good start! *rimshot*
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Monkey Boy is back
April 2, 2007 - 13:26 ET by RJMonkey Boy is just here to throw things from the safety of his tree, MM. This site has a much highter percentage of active military, vets, and their families than the general population....which, unfortunately, has to include the whining leftists who won't lift a finger to protect their precious freedom of speech. That irritates Monkey Boy, 'cause he knows it's true.
War is hell RJ. I wonder h
April 2, 2007 - 13:34 ET by MightyMouthWar is hell RJ. I wonder how many of those "brave" journalists got themselves killed trying to inbed themselves too close to the "freedom fighters"? Probably trying to get their side of the story against the "evil" US military. The NYT will gladly pay good money for those stories. Playing with fire, CAN get you burnt!
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Where have I been Fozzie?
April 2, 2007 - 13:24 ET by The Wicked ConservativeWhere have I been Fozzie? I can't think of any from any MS M except for Fox on occasion. And your "brave" reporters that hide in the green zone till a report of dead troops comes around then they scurry like cockroaches
to take pictures of the corpse and then scurry back to the safety of the green zone. You make me ill. You have no right to speak of bravery. You who speak of the bravery of reporters while insulting our troops. We'll see your bravery when militant islam comes here to the US because of the actions of those you support in our crippled by PC government.
Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realizes that it bears a very close resemblence to the first.
- Ronald Reagan
The current issue of Newswe
April 2, 2007 - 13:58 ET by Rupert CadellThe current issue of Newsweek is exactly that of which you're bemoaning a lack. Not to mention several hundred articles, documentaries, and other pathos-laced tributes from the past 4 years designed to counteract the whole "They don't support the war so obviously they also hate the troops" rhetoric.
"I'm liberal, but to a degree; I want everyone to be free." -B. Dylan
And, um, where exactly did
April 2, 2007 - 14:01 ET by Rupert CadellAnd, um, where exactly did Waka insult the troops? Oh, you were just reading maliciously into his benign words and finding something that wasn't there? That explains it.
"I'm liberal, but to a degree; I want everyone to be free." -B. Dylan
I asssure you it was a swipe, Rupert
April 2, 2007 - 19:21 ET by RJBenign? Clearly, either you haven't been paying attention to Waka's posting, or you're wearing rose-colored glasses. Virtualy everything he posts is sarcastic. He's aware that there are many, many active military, vets, and military families on this board. I assure you that his post was a swipe against the military.
Look at it this way: I call him Monkey Boy. That's because he sits in his tree and throws things.....and that's all he does.
Waka has always been whacked
April 2, 2007 - 19:35 ET by bigtimerWaka has always been whacked since he got here RJ....maybe you were on leave of absence of such...
LOL!
Rip..er Rup.... has never been far behind.
Just IMHO.
This might seem like a a sm
April 2, 2007 - 13:26 ET by ChumlyThis might seem like a a small detail, but, we are into YEAR 5, not year four. Year four is over and gone along with over 3,200 brave Americans and countless Iraqi civilians (upwards of 150,000?). We are in the 5th year of this war with nothing but death and destruction of a country to show for it.
We have been in this war for longer than we were in World War 2!!
People, we have been involved over there for so long because this can't be solved by military force. We are in the middle of a civil war.
Please tell me who our enemy is over there?? Can you?
BTW, show me the video of Ware heckling McCain. I have not seen it yet.
See ScottyDog's post at 12:07
April 2, 2007 - 13:36 ET by dahliatraversSee ScottyDog's post at 12:07, Chumley. It was on YouTube, then it was taken down. Only CNN would have authorization to tell YouTube to yank it.
Best guess is that initial reports about the press conference are correct and CNN doesn't want the whole world to see one of their reporters behaving unprofessionally.
You're right, dahlia. Not!Man
April 2, 2007 - 14:11 ET by waka wakaYou're right, dahlia. Not!
Man, you guys will believe anything.
Reality has a well known liberal bias.
We have been in this war fo
April 2, 2007 - 13:41 ET by MightyMouthWe have been in this war for longer than we were in World War 2!!
Ya wanna know why Chumley? Because idiots like you wont let the president fight the war! The war is dragging on because of Democrats and their fawning MSM. If you idiots would shut up and support victory, maybe there would be some! How much soldier's blood is on YOUR ilks hands?
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Bush has had an open pock
April 2, 2007 - 13:58 ET by ChumlyBush has had an open pocket book to do as he pleases over there. Liberals have had little to no influence on what Bush does over there.
BTW, I have absolutely zero influence over what Bush does over there. Thanks for the complement, though.
Victory? How would we leave Iraq as victors? How would you describe victory? And, who would we be victorious over?? Who are we fighting over there?
Our boys and girls are being killed by Sunnis, Shias, and Al Qaeda-in-Iraq (which is different than Al Qaeda). About 90 percent of the Iraqis want us out of there, so I have read.
Exactly Chumly, thank you!
April 2, 2007 - 14:12 ET by Rupert CadellExactly Chumly, thank you! Let's not forget that the media largely supported Bush in the run-up to the war, its combat operations, and for a good long while into the "rebuilding" process.
Let's see: Abu Ghraib, no bin Laden, no WMD, laughable flightsuit incident, major U.S. casualties, lukewarm reception from Iraqi people, no functional Iraqi army. If you ask me, Bush was given every courtesy right up until it was apparent that he had NO plan for the country that didn't involve problems solved by firepower.
"I'm liberal, but to a degree; I want everyone to be free." -B. Dylan
Rupert, it's not the war, it's "get GWB"
April 2, 2007 - 14:23 ET by RJRupert, your post clearly demonstrates that the left's attacks have little to do with the war in Iraq and everything to do with "get GWB." Your BDS has been so virulent, dating back to 2000, that even encouraging the terrorists and discouraging our military is of no matter to you.
Actually, RJ, the only item
April 2, 2007 - 14:33 ET by Rupert CadellActually, RJ, the only item in my post that pertains to Bush personally rather than his war is the one about him playing dress-up. And besides which, this thread is about whether and at what points in time the MsM has been behind him. So, um, what's your point again?
"I'm liberal, but to a degree; I want everyone to be free." -B. Dylan
Rupert, do you and have you not
April 2, 2007 - 14:47 ET by RJDo you and have you not blamed virtually everything on GWB? Hasn't that been the underlying driving force of the media and the left?
And this belies your claim that your post was not all about GWB: "Bush was given every courtesy right up until it was apparent that he had NO plan for the country that didn't involve problems solved by firepower."
That's what the thread was
April 2, 2007 - 14:55 ET by Rupert CadellThat's what the thread was about. And you can't separate Bush from the war entirely, no matter how much some of those things were beyond his immediate control
"I'm liberal, but to a degree; I want everyone to be free." -B. Dylan
Non-responsive, Rupert
April 2, 2007 - 14:59 ET by RJ"Let's see: Abu Ghraib
April 2, 2007 - 14:23 ET by MightyMouth"Let's see: Abu Ghraib, no bin Laden, no WMD"
You dimwits have been bombarded at this site with post after post from people willing to take the time to answer your stupid talking apoints and yet you STILL come back and post them! What a bunch of baffoons!!
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
You are truly delusional. &
April 2, 2007 - 14:18 ET by MightyMouthYou are truly delusional. "Liberals have had little to no influence on what Bush does over there"
Well howabout enboldening the enemy by your war protests? And believe me chum, I was not giving you a complement, but isn't it just like liberal scum to be accused of helping to kill US troops and then taking it as a compliment!
You guys never disappoint, that's for sure.
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Well howabout enboldening t
April 2, 2007 - 14:26 ET by Rupert Cadell"I'm liberal, but to a degree; I want everyone to be free." -B. Dylan
Well howabout enboldening t
April 2, 2007 - 14:28 ET by Rupert CadellWell howabout enboldening the enemy by your war protests?
The majority of large-scale protests came before the actual invasion. I don't think it's accurate to characterize this as some sort of anti-American activity, wanting to express disagreement with a president's foreign policy decision, especially before combat has begun.
Nor do I agree with Bill O'Reilly's delicately phrased maxim that "Once the war begins, dissenters had better shut up." Talk about anti-American. If the people you're talking about had said "We want the Islamofascists to beat the US military", then I'd agree with you. Even though the right implies that the left says this every day, I have yet to see a documented example of it.
"Emboldening the enemy"....get some new material.
"I'm liberal, but to a degree; I want everyone to be free." -B. Dylan
I am sorry, I must give up
April 2, 2007 - 14:34 ET by MightyMouthI am sorry, I must give up on you two. There is no reasoning with people who are so utterly full of shit. Claim victory over another freeper troll if you must. If you guys weren't so tragic, you'd be funny...
Oh what the heck!! ROFLMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Here's a "documented example" Rupert
April 2, 2007 - 14:41 ET by RJHere's a "documented example" Rupert: Viet Nam has admitted that they couldn't have forced America to leave without the assistance of the left and the media. In fact, they said analysis of the activities of the media and the left were part of their daily military briefings. The same thing clearly applies with Iraq. "Emboldening the enemy" is exactly what the left has done, and your whining that the material is "old" doesn't change it.
And your assertion that large scale protests essentially came before the beginning of the war is foolishly inaccurate. They have been constant, and their genesis is "get GWB", not anti-war.
You're right RJ. We on the le
April 2, 2007 - 14:48 ET by waka wakaYou're right RJ. We on the left are dying for the Islamofascists to win. Bring em over here, and quick! Because you know they'll be so kind to us, what with the way we're all for equal rights for women and gays, don't want anyone shoving their religion down our throats and disapprove of the death penalty. We'll get along great once they're in charge over here. You right wingers have nothing in common with these guys, just ask D'Souza.
Reality has a well known liberal bias.
Still throwing things, Monkey Boy?
April 2, 2007 - 14:57 ET by RJStill throwing things from the safety of your tree, Monkey Boy? For all your sarcastic howling and your posturing about wanting the best for America, it all boils down to your BDS and the desire to "get GWB"
Actually, that's not docume
April 2, 2007 - 14:49 ET by Rupert CadellActually, that's not documented at all since you don't even provide so much as a link. But hey, if you say that one Vietnam official said that they "won" the war (as far as I'm concerned there were no winners in that monstrous conflict) because of some nebulous claim about watching American news reports and what "the left did," then I guess I'd better forfeit the debate right now, 'cause man, that is some incontrovertible evidence right there!
Basically, you and MM want people to shut the hell up when their country spends billions of dollars a week to send young men and women into combat against a weaker nation. given the circumstances, I'd say it's entirely appropriate to speak up and hold our leaders accountable for the reasons behind their decisions.
"I'm liberal, but to a degree; I want everyone to be free." -B. Dylan
If you say there are no winne
April 2, 2007 - 14:56 ET by BDIf you say there are no winners from the final outcomeof Vietnam, the ghosts of the re-eduation Centers and the washed up bodies of the boat people would disagree with you.
THe same power mad commies who shoved bodies onto the wire of US firebases are STILL in power, not only in Hanoi - but Saigon as well. THe formerly free population from the south is now not free at all. THe montagnards, Nung, Bodes, and others are damned near now extinct as peoples.
So I guess the north and American Left won, right?
well, well, Rupert
April 2, 2007 - 15:06 ET by RJWell, well, Rupert. You're now openly admitting that YOU DON'T CARE if your behavior emboldens the terrorists, because the big, bad Americans are picking on a "weaker nation".....
And your words, "against a weaker nation" is ALSO an admission that you see America as being in a war directly against Iraq, not against terrorists.....amazing....what a truly pathetic unAmerican piece of work you are, Rupert.
Yes, he would allow us to fig
April 2, 2007 - 15:16 ET by BDYes, he would allow us to fight for the downtrodden and oppressed in a "Stronger Nation" but apparently there is some sort of prohibition against fighting weaker ones.
I am now looking it up in the Ivy book of liberalism to see exactly what the liberal ground rules are.
Di Opressor Libre - For all my SOF friends....
BD...The rule book clearly st
April 2, 2007 - 15:29 ET by Clear thinkerBD...
The rule book clearly states that all wars must be blamed on the military industrial complex. Then we are supposed to lie down and take it up the rear. All gays and liberals are supposed to smile!
The liberal MSM has become an enemy of the USA.
Rupert admits that he doesn't care if he helps terrorists
April 2, 2007 - 17:01 ET by RJWell of course. Blame America first leftists like Rupert openly admit they don't care if their behavior emboldens the terrorists. Rupert says that big bad America isn't fighting terrorism, you see. We're fighting "a weaker nation." It's good to get them on this board, where we can see their true anti-American nature.
Rupert, your nuts. No winner
April 2, 2007 - 15:44 ET by bassndudeRupert, your nuts. No winner in Vietnam? Engagement wise, we, the American military, won. Hands down, everytime. The brave men and women in the Armed Forces today are all volunteers. All have more courage in their hearts than the likes of you can even imagine. The left cannot even phantom the depths of a patriots soul. It is true that you and your kind emboledened the enemy during the time frame of Vietnam. Even Diep said they could not have suceeded with out the American left. And the scorn you heaped upon our returning soldiers was then and is still now, disgraceful. If your kind succeed in pulling the troops out of Iraq, it is your kind that will be begging for your lives on you knees, and begging those same troops to defend you here at home.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Mouth, you did not accuse
April 2, 2007 - 14:33 ET by ChumlyMouth, you did not accuse me of helping kill Americans over there, you accused me of having influence over what Bush has accomplished over there. How do you streeeeetch what I said into such a lie or, at least, a very huge misrepresentation?
BTW, what do you consider victory? Who are we fighting? Who is killing or sons and daughters over there?
The ONLY ones that should be accused of helping to get our soldiers killed over there are you guys...the people who buy the crap that they sell on Fox "News".
Emboldening our enemies by practicing democracy? Un fing believable!
Bush is trying to shove democracy down their throats over there. Thats the ticket! We'll force them into democracy by force of arms.
Is he supposed to force democracy and at the same time repress democracy in our country? Come on!
It's only democracy if you ag
April 2, 2007 - 14:51 ET by waka wakaIt's only democracy if you agree with Bush. Everything else is TREASON!
Reality has a well known liberal bias.
Disagreeing with him is not
April 2, 2007 - 15:02 ET by MightyMouthDisagreeing with him is not treason, going out of your way to undermine a Congressionally authorized war, just might be!
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Totally! That traitorous Demo
April 2, 2007 - 14:22 ET by waka wakaTotally! That traitorous Democrat Congress forced Bush to use an inadequately sized force and not plan for the aftermath of Saddam's overthrow. And to top that off, they forced Bush to send over civilian administrators based on their opinion of Roe v. Wade and not their competence. And then ordered up some no-bid contracts for Halliburton that were never fulfilled and disbanded the Iraqi military. And don't forget Abu Ghraib. That has "General" Pelosi's fingerprints ALL over it.
Hilarious MM! Keep 'em coming, please.
Reality has a well known liberal bias.
Look kid, I am no Bush apol
April 2, 2007 - 14:29 ET by MightyMouthLook kid, I am no Bush apologist. He has pissed me to no end, BUT I am mature enough to know that we are at WAR! And I don't root for the other side! WHEN WILL YOU DUMBASSES GET THAT THROUGH YOUR THICK HEADS!!!
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Since MM is engaging in unm
April 2, 2007 - 14:37 ET by Rupert CadellSince MM is engaging in unmitigated flaming and mouth-frothing personal insults, I can only assume that his enlightening post will soon be deleted. However, it apparently proves that MM and I are in disagreement about the notion that once a war begins, anyone who believes it is a giant mistake and that that mistake should be addressed, ought to just "shut up." Apparently, believing that also automatically equals "rooting for the other side", easily one of the more ludicrous ideas that the right has tried to pass off in the last few years. I mean, I disagree with the war, but I don't go around accusing you of such obviously untrue things.
"I'm liberal, but to a degree; I want everyone to be free." -B. Dylan
LOL, trying to sound like y
April 2, 2007 - 14:49 ET by MightyMouthLOL, trying to sound like you're sane and MM is the nut huh? Too young to remember Vietnam and how the anti war protest at home helped the enemy and hurt the cause? Back to mama's basement kiddies.
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
MightyMouse, don't have a cor
April 2, 2007 - 14:43 ET by waka wakaMightyMouse, don't have a coronary bro!
Reality has a well known liberal bias.
Who is rooting for the ot
April 2, 2007 - 14:46 ET by ChumlyWho is rooting for the other side? Who IS the other side?
Bush, and his supporters (people like you) have done EVERYTHING to play into the Real Al Qeada's hands. He has given them everything AND MORE than they could have ever dreamed of. He has broken us financially. He has helped devide our country. He has stopped going after Bin Laden. He and his supporters, (again, people like you) are responsible for killing over 3,200 of our bravest, and over 100,000 Iraqi civilians. Oil prices are through the roof!! The Saudis are just loving it!!!!!
Talk about thick?!
The big lie coming from Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh is that wanting our sons and daughters home safe from Iraq is like being against our troops. Wanting our country's reputation and credibility back and intact is like being against our troops.
Now, doesn't that sound like a stupid thing to believe? I am not talking just a little stupid. I am talking Big League stupid.
Rupert, what gives YOU the
April 2, 2007 - 15:15 ET by MightyMouthRupert, what gives YOU the right to tell the president (or anyone
else for that matter) who and where the enemy are? Are you in country?
have you ever been in country? Where do you get your information?
Don't
you think it's more prudent to trust what your government tells you
about the War in Iraq? I have a nephew who served and came back and
told me the truth .He didn't seem to think the government is
lying. He did say the media is bias and only reports the violence not
the good.
Now, unless you speak with authority on the subject of the Iraq war, I suggest you get back to your video games!
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
The other side is those who w
April 2, 2007 - 15:32 ET by BDThe other side is those who would sacrifice our gains for their own personal reward. John Kerry comes to mind....
If Bush has played in to AQ hands, I must have missed it since the latest AQ 20 year reunion list is getting shorter by the day. We have taken back two whole countries that theyhad free reign in (Afghanistan and Yeman) and have removed the southern Phillipines from their AO. (THank God the Abu's are mostly room temperature and moldering now.)
In Iraq we have teams being formed amongst the population to go hunting. ANd eventually they will act as a counterweight to those in Iran who have been unburded since Jimmy Carter gave in.
Bush has not divided our country. THe left has done that out of fear that a successful war will endanger their OWN true and singular goal - sex without consequense. When I look at Code Pink protests and those unwashed masses on the capital mall, I do not see people who car whether I or my conrades live or die. THey would not deign to talk to us barbarians in the first place, they consider us uneducated fascists. THey simply cannot face the fact that our culture is moving away from them and are rebelling.
Regarding our countries reputation. It has never been better. We are now known for as a country who will do what it says, rather than what we had been. We were known as the country who would make bold proclamations, but then not follow them up -sort of like the parents of spoiled children.
Liberal method...
1.) You must stop funding terrorists.
2.) Really, you gotta stop funding terrorists.
3.) PRetty Please, stop funding terrorists...
4.) We will all get upset unless you stop funding terrorists.
5.) People wont like you unless you stop funding terrorists...
And on and On and On until we actually got a conservative in place.
Conservative method.
1. """BAM""" See, he should have stopped funding terrorists. Anyone elase wanna go?
You are making the mistake
April 2, 2007 - 15:58 ET by ChumlyYou are making the mistake of assuming that we are fighting the war on terror in Iraq. Wasn't a single AQ terrorist in Iraq before Bush invaded. Not one. Now, it is a terrorist training ground. it is a terrorists DREAMLAND. Not only do they get great training, but, they also get to kill Americans.
If our reputation is doing so well, what has happened to all of our allies?? I think the Republic of Palau is still with us.
We look like fools in the eyes of the majority of the world. We look ignorant...i.e. two weeks before the Iraq invasion, OUR President did not even know about the sectarian devide over there. He said "I thought they were all jist Moslems".
We had no idea what we were getting our soldiers into over there. Huge cultural gap.
AND, you guys are in the minority here in this country. The majority of the US population does not support Bush or his war.
Your assumption is that we ar
April 2, 2007 - 16:10 ET by BDYour assumption is that we are fighting terrorism as a law enforcement exercise. We break down doors of countries that host terrorists, and only engage those that can be prosecuted for previous offenses.
THis is not the case. In order to win the war we will be forced to engage the center of gravity of the Islamo Fascist effort. In order to do that we will be forced to gain and control the popular will of the Islamic (Particularly Arabic) states and convert them to our philosphy. In orde rto do that we will need access to the populous.
THere is no better place to gain such access as Iraq since it sits square in the middle of the Arabic populations, is highly educated, and has the ability to grow in the directiion we wish it to go. Our selected weapon to use in this effort is very powerful - it is called democracy and is hailed everywhere, except Berkeley for some reason.
How else would you engage the Islamo Fascist Center of Gravity?
Regarding your assessment that we have somehow lost our allies. I will have to tell that to the Poles, Ukranians, US, AUS, and others whom I meet next time I am in Bagdhad.
Hell, we have more support now for this cause than Bill Clinton ever had for actions in Serbia, Haiti, and SOmalia....
If I am in the minority of our country, it is good to know that I am in the minority that includes the vast majority of the troops engaged and in uniform.
Your assumption is that und
April 2, 2007 - 16:18 ET by sarcasmoYour assumption is that under enforced-democracy Iraq would remain one country, but it's not one country. It's three: Kurdistan, Shiastan, and Sunnistan; and absent a Tito/Saddam style brutal-strongman feared-ruler, it's likely to keep moving towards what's natural, which is becoming 3 countries. Nobody seems to like hearing this, like most of the stuff I say around here, but IMO it's true so I'll keep on saying it.
JMR
Could be, but you could make
April 2, 2007 - 16:37 ET by BDCould be, but you could make the same case refence the US being several regional countries added into a mix as well. Not worth discussing in this case since the facts on the ground would remain the same regardless as long as a democratic government could flourish in all or in the singular country.
I think the case was instea
April 2, 2007 - 16:57 ET by sarcasmoI think the case was instead for (cheaply) killing Saddam & sons and letting the 3 new countries that emerge sort things out as they will. No, it won't be "fair," especially WRT oil, but the important part for the future, as oil-less Dubai proves nearby, is which one has the most economic freedom. From that stems hope for the other kinds of freedom, IMO, and I think 3 tiny governments are a better result for individual freedom than one that's big enough to keep citizens afraid. I also think the dictatorships of the UN and various other big governments don't want to hear what I've said.
JMR
BD, please be honest. Ther
April 2, 2007 - 17:14 ET by ChumlyBD, please be honest. There have been more US contractors killed in Iraq than all of our allies (including Brittain) combined!
Who is fighting this war? We have no real allies here.
You are incorrect. More Ira
April 2, 2007 - 18:13 ET by BDYou are incorrect. More Iraqi's have been killed lining up to enlist than US troops killed in action to date.
I guess Iraqi's are not allies?
Oh, and I forgot. THere wer
April 2, 2007 - 16:14 ET by BDOh, and I forgot. THere were no German Field formations in Western North Africa when FDR invaded during WWII either. THe Germans did not arrive until weeks after we finished fighting our "Erstwhile Allies" the frogs in Algeria and Morrocoo. Surprisingly our casualties from Iraq and North Africa are quite similar...
So, should we dig up FDR and throw his body in the trash while tearing down his statue in Washington for his transgressions?
Well gee RJ, just like your
April 2, 2007 - 16:21 ET by Rupert CadellWell gee RJ, just like your implication that to question a war is to embolden the enemy. Did you come up with that phrasing all by yourself? Uh, no, it's what head-in-the-sand hawks have been saying from day 1. So, to paraphrase you, just cause it's an old sentiment doesn't make it true.
And as to the content of what you're responding too, none of us on the moderate-left side are saying anything radical. We're saying things that the majority of the country agree with, only I (and I'm betting waka and chumly) were in on the ground floor. You're the ones trying to suppress free speech because you have some vague, abstract idea that we're actively supporting the enemy by saying "Gee, this war was a bad idea."
"I'm liberal, but to a degree; I want everyone to be free." -B. Dylan
Uh, I am not RJ..... I am B
April 2, 2007 - 16:42 ET by BDUh, I am not RJ..... I am BD, Glad to meet you.
Now reference your point that nothing the left is saying is not radical:
We have had several cases of liberals indicating the US troops are routinely committing war crimes, that US forces are torturing people in Guantanamo, and that US forces have committed genocide.
I personally consider this radical and not in keepign with what the US public feels.
Concur BD
April 2, 2007 - 18:04 ET by acumenNot to mention the flushing Korans lie that resulted in the loss of many lives....
Rupert, you're behaving even more stupidly than usual
April 2, 2007 - 16:45 ET by RJWhat the hell are you talking about, Rupert? You're behaving even more stupidly than usual. Your post is under BD but you're addressing me. And I think someone else used the word "embolden."
Even so, all you did was prattle on with generalized one-post-fits-all DUmmie talking points that aren't specific to anything anyone has said.
What a clown.