Andrea Mitchell and Chris Matthews orchestrated a rather obvious flip-flop Monday of a controversial statement the former made on the “Chris Matthews Show” the day before.
In a nutshell, Matthews’ Sunday panel was discussing the politics of Iraq. During several instances, Mitchell stated that Gen. David Petraeus had recently had a private meeting with the Republican caucus promising progress in the embattled nation by August.
The next day on “Hardball,” Matthews, in the middle of a discussion about presidential candidates, suddenly asked Mitchell about Petraeus. She answered by stating the general had recently addressed both Republicans and Democrats about progress in Iraq, after which the discussion quickly reverted back to presidential candidates (video available here).
Here's what Mitchell said Sunday that apparently needed correcting:
I think the Republicans are going to crack. What I've been told from inside the moderate center of the Republican caucus is that the votes in favor of the president this week--was against the president, but the Republicans holding for the president was misleading, that they really are not in favor of the surge, they don't believe it's going to work, that they basically said the president has until August, until Labor Day, to--after that...If it doesn't work, they're running.
[…]
They'll [the Republicans] stick until September, and then they'll leave. I believe very firmly that they're against what he is doing, but they feel that General Petraeus has persuaded them that, for all intents and purposes, they can't vote a withdrawal before September.
[…]
Excuse me, Chris, but Petraeus went to the Republican caucus and told them, `I will have real progress to you by August.' They told him, `We'll stick with you...'
[…]
The Republicans were against the surge, but they felt that it's a fait accompli, and that they were willing to give Petraeus until August. He told them there will be real progress by August. They have told him at a caucus meeting very, very recently that if there isn't real progress by August--and real progress means not a day of violence and a day of sanity...that they're--that they will pull the plug.
These revelations were compelling enough for Joan Walsh to write about at Salon on Sunday (emphasis added throughout):
It's Sunday, so the story may not be reported out until Monday, but there are several mini-scoops hiding in Mitchell's story, and they're worth breaking down. First, did the war commander really meet alone with Republican senators, and if so, why? Democrats are dying in Iraq, too; we hear all the time that this shouldn't be a partisan debate. Party caucuses mainly exist to hammer out positions on legislation, eliminate or manage internal dissent and rivalry, and frame issues for the best political spin. Why was the busy Petraeus at a caucus event helping Republicans?
Yet, the following day, on “Hardball,” in the middle of a discussion about presidential candidates, this happened:
MATTHEWS: What is Petraeus, General Petraeus saying over there about what‘s he been telling people about that?
MITCHELL: Well, it‘s a good thing you bring that out. He‘s been telling senators—he had, in fact, a closed-circuit briefing for the senators, Democrats as well as Republicans, and he is telling them that he will report some progress, that he hopes to be able to report some progress by August. And in turn, what many Republican senators are saying, Chris, is that if there isn‘t real progress by the end of the summer, that‘s when there are going to really break with the president, that they‘re going along with this surge out of respect for the generals. But in his closed briefing—they went over to the Pentagon and had that briefing, Democrats as well as Republican senators, and he made it clear to them that he thinks he can report some progress.
What a difference a day makes, huh? Even Joan Walsh smelled a rat, as she reported Monday:
Monday on "Hardball," in a segment that was actually about the fundraising totals of the 2008 presidential contenders and the troubles of Sen. John McCain, Matthews and Mitchell seemed to correct the record, sort of. Without mentioning what had been discussed on Sunday, Matthews asked Mitchell, rather out of the blue, to talk about what Petraeus was telling senators. "It's a good thing you bring that up," Mitchell replied, and she went on to say that Petraeus recently held a "closed circuit briefing" for senators of both parties, "Democrats as well as Republicans."
[…]
Got it? It seems Petraeus didn't meet alone with Republicans, and I apologize for my role in passing that along (but it would be nice to also hear an apology from Mitchell and Matthews).
Fat chance.
What follows is a partial transcript of the segment in question from Sunday’s “Chris Matthews Show.”
CHRIS MATTHEWS, anchor: Janine Zacharia covers foreign affairs for Bloomberg News. Joe Klein is a columnist for Time. Andrea Mitchell's chief foreign affairs correspondent for NBC News. And Andrew Sullivan is the senior editor of The Atlantic Monthly.
First up, this week, a watershed moment in the four-year-old war in Iraq. On one side, the president's determined. Here's his commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus, upbeat on the surge strategy.
General DAVID PETRAEUS: (March 9) I think we're doing a bit of this right now. The short answer would be, we are making progress and that we will make more progress as more forces and more resources arrive to do that.
MATTHEWS: But on the other side, public opinion. In the latest Gallup poll, 60 percent of voters want to set a date for withdrawal of all US troops. The House and Senate have heard the message, and this week a real landmark. They sent George Bush a bill forcing troops to get out next year, a bill the president's pledged to veto. The military knows the clock is ticking. On Monday, central command chief Admiral William Fallon said it's now or never.
Admiral WILLIAM FALLON: (From ABC's "World News with Charles Gibson"/Monday) Time is of the essence. It's now, now, now. I just don't believe we're going to have an opportunity, given the debate in Congress it's going to be very difficult to be able to come back and say we got this wrong and we need another chance.
MATTHEWS: Joe, there are three options out there right now. One, this surge shows progress and the president gets a new mandate to continue the war. Two, the stalemate, the one we have right now. The president can veto right now any troop withdrawal. Or three, pressure builds, Republicans defect and Congress tries to force another withdrawal. Joe, which is it going to be?
Mr. JOE KLEIN (Time): Well, I...
MATTHEWS: The rosy scenario. Will the surge work?
Mr. KLEIN: I don't know about the rosy scenario. Baghdad is a little bit quieter now, mostly because the Shiite militias have stood down; they're not fighting. But if we really want to see the future, look what happened in Tal Afar this week. That was a city, the last place where serious counterinsurgency tactics were tried by us and we left. This week there were massive car bombs and then a Shiite massacre of Sunnis. You know, you need years and years for counterinsurgency tactics to work. General Petraeus says it. We don't have years and years.
MATTHEWS: Andrea, same question. Are we on that rosy scenario, the surge working; are we headed to the stalemate we have now, endless back and forth, or will the Republicans crack in their support for the president?
ANDREA MITCHELL reporting:
I think the Republicans are going to crack. What I've been told from inside the moderate center of the Republican caucus is that the votes in favor of the president this week--was against the president, but the Republicans holding for the president was misleading, that they really are not in favor of the surge, they don't believe it's going to work, that they basically said the president has until August, until Labor Day, to--after that...
MATTHEWS: OK, let's talk about the stalemate. Let's talk about this...
MITCHELL: If it doesn't work, they're running.
MATTHEWS: Andrew, let's talk about the stalemate period we're in right now. We look at the Constitution. It's at work. It takes two thirds to overwrite a veto. Two thirds plus one. The Democrats clearly don't have it. What happens for the next several months? Are we going to have this back and forth?
Mr. ANDREW SULLIVAN (The Atlantic): I think we have a stalemate, because I--and the reason I say that is because I just don't think it's in Bush's character inability and mind-set to be able to say, `OK.' I mean, he is fighting this war existentially. He thinks he's on the side of absolute good against absolute evil, and anything that he does to surrender is surrender. And--so he's the brittle one. He won't change. The question is whether he'll be forced to break. But will a country want to see its commander in chief be broken in the saddle? And I don't think so. I actually think Bush--I personally think he's going to carry on the stalemate until 2008.
MATTHEWS: Janine.
Ms. JANINE ZACHARIA (Bloomberg): But the question is, isn't anybody going to compromise and say, `It's OK to set benchmarks in the language, instead of saying you must be out by September '08.' There's going to be a lot of wiggle room for the next few months. People are telling me, this doesn't have to be resolved, as Andrea said, until the summer. They can keep moving money.
MATTHEWS: OK, let's assume that people watching right now fall into two categories. They want this war to end faster than the president wants it to end or they're with him. What good are benchmarks in that debate?
Ms. ZACHARIA: Well, at least it sort of gets the Iraqis--I mean, people were talking about politics in Washington, but what the Iraqis need to know and what Admiral Fallon was telling the Iraqis is that there's no patience here in Washington. You must be making some concrete progress or we're out of here. He himself told me in an interview that he says he's telling them we need time lines. They just don't want it written in the legislation.
MATTHEWS: All right, what about this legislation they're talking about? The Globe broke it late this week...
MITCHELL: Right.
MATTHEWS: ...that we'll be--the Congress will say, `OK, the president can veto any bill that--he can get his spending, but we're going to make it every month.' Like, they're going to put him, put ankle bracelets on the president to basically say...
Mr. KLEIN: Every three months they're...
MATTHEWS: OK, but these are periodic check backs, and which gives the Congress a leash on the president.
MITCHELL: Well, the Democrats think that they do have the ability now to pull that off. They've got the votes, and force him to veto it and come back to them. But they don't want to be in a position of being told that they are keeping the money away from the troops, so this way that they can dole it out month by month, they think that they are in the driver's seat.
MATTHEWS: OK, moving ahead to the question about how the Republicans are behaving. We know the Democrats are against the war, we know the president's for it. One Republican, John McCain, is joined at the hip to President Bush on the war, we all know that. McCain this week seemed a little less than thrilled when he was asked how long he's willing to wait for this surge over in Iraq to work.
Senator JOHN McCAIN: (Wednesday) We will know in some months ahead in many ways, but, look, the only guarantee of failure is to tell the enemy, `Hey, hang on, we're leaving.'
MATTHEWS: We put it to the Matthews Meter, 12 of our regular panelists: Will Republicans stick with President Bush on the war until the fall? Eight say no, Republicans won't stick with the president till September, four say they will. Andrea, you say they won't not stick.
MITCHELL: They'll stick until September, and then they'll leave. I believe very firmly that they're against what he is doing, but they feel that General Petraeus has persuaded them that, for all intents and purposes, they can't vote a withdrawal before September.
MATTHEWS: Andrew, you say they don't stick even through the summer.
Mr. SULLIVAN: I think that, generally speaking, Republicans are not going to undercut a commander in chief in wartime. Period.
MATTHEWS: So they all--does everybody agree?
Mr. KLEIN: I...
Mr. SULLIVAN: Unless, Chris, there is complete meltdown over there. I mean, if Iraq really does melt down...
MATTHEWS: Oh, actually--I'm talking about the way conditions are and the violence stuff that we read about. We lost 100 people the other day over there to violence. The Shia...
Mr. SULLIVAN: The Shia commander in chief.
Mr. KLEIN: Can I just say...
MATTHEWS: Go ahead, Joe.
Mr. KLEIN: ...there has been a really unfair time line set. Petraeus has said you can't cut it off in August, but everybody's looking to August. And I think...
MATTHEWS: Well, because the term `six months' got into the air.
Ms. ZACHARIA: (Unintelligible).
MITCHELL: No, but...(unintelligible).
Mr. KLEIN: Either those six months--it is absolutely...
MATTHEWS: Who came up with that? The president did, didn't he?
Mr. KLEIN: The president did, Condi did, and especially George Casey, who doesn't like Petraeus very much did.
MITCHELL: Excuse me, Chris, but Petraeus went to the Republican caucus and told them, `I will have real progress to you by August.' They told him, `We'll stick with you...'
Mr. KLEIN: I don't think he did.
MITCHELL: Well, listen, I--excuse me...
Mr. KLEIN: Listen, I'm--I--OK. I...
MATTHEWS: I agree to disagree.
Mr. KLEIN: I believe that he did not, and I think this is a...
MATTHEWS: But the country--the country was led to believe that a--by the way, the nature of a surge, the word itself is an escalation.
Ms. ZACHARIA: (Unintelligible).
MATTHEWS: It's just a short term upgrade of the effort.
Mr. KLEIN: Counterinsurgency tactics are not a surge, they're a glacier that takes years...
MATTHEWS: Well, maybe we're giving the wrong labeling here.
Mr. KLEIN: ...to work.
MATTHEWS: Andrea, we got the label surge from the president himself.
Mr. KLEIN: What--but this is--the important thing is that this isn't going to work.
MITCHELL: The Republicans were against the surge, but they felt that it's a fait accompli, and that they were willing to give Petraeus until August. He told them there will be real progress by August. They have told him at a caucus meeting very, very recently that if there isn't real progress by August--and real progress means not a day of violence and a day of sanity...
MATTHEWS: Let me--let me...
MITCHELL: ...that they're--that they will pull the plug.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.



















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Row, row, row you boat back..
April 3, 2007 - 17:46 ET by SMGalbraithRow, row, row you boat back........ (in print journalism, it's called a row back, the process where journalists correct an error in a previous column with the correct statement in a later one without acknowledging the first mistake).
Having watched off-and-on MSNBC for several years, I've never seen or heard a correction on any of their broadcasts.
Be interesting to find out what their corrections policy is.
Or if they even have one (insert Keith Olbermann joke here____________).
SMG
Or if they even have one (ins
April 3, 2007 - 21:27 ET by bigtimerOr if they even have one (insert Keith Olbermann joke here___________).
SMG
Okay SMG...
Keith Who?
This is what's known in the b
April 3, 2007 - 17:47 ET by NoMoreClintonsThis is what's known in the biz as a "set-up" . . . CM sets up AM to "clear" the air over her obvious mistake without her having to admit it. But it's a real weasel type of technique and believe me won't win her any respect. Liberal weasels . . . can't even admit their mistakes.
Ratings
April 3, 2007 - 21:20 ET by pbthinkerConsidering the ratings of both shows, what do you think the chances are that the people that watched the first show, saw the second show. Then, after considering that, how many do you actually believe are capable of putting 2 and 2 together?
There already has been progress in Iraq
April 3, 2007 - 18:24 ET by SportPoliticsNews flash to the lying liberals:
There already has been progress in Iraq.
Of course, the idiot democrats will claim there has to be "real progress", and of course that has been pre-determined to have been defined out of existence.
What hasn't been said is the Constitutional argument I've heard several times, but never on the msm. Some of the scholars are claiming the democrats bill has USURPED the power of the CIC. They are claiming the bill is unconstitutional.
My mind goes to Duncan Hunter, who brought up page 72 of the demo pork bill of backroom congressional armchair generals. He pointed out that troop movements require notification and a 15 day wait sent to the congressional committee on which he sits.
So, what the dems have written in, is a 15 day wait for Patraeus, contingent upon the committee clearance for the on the ground war troop movements.
The news is so bent on idiot talking heads pretending they are ignorant partisan fools, that they don't discuss the bill or what is in it, but instead fight over " the President has now ridiculed the democrats over their bill ".
Yeah, the lib msm is whining the President ridiculed the democrats. LOL
Can you imagine ? Chrissy Matthews whined it 5 times tonight.
Do any of the msm'ers ever whine that the democrats have been ridiculing the President ? I've never heard them complain about it, I've only heard them do it, about 20 times each and every broadcast for a couple of years now.
The msmer's are very sensitive,since the republicans including President Bush have nearly always given them far too much respect.
I guess when the republicans, including the President disagree with democrat armchair generals that are violating the Constitution and the law with their takeover the running of the war on the ground bill, the democrats immediately feel "ridiculed".
Wow, we've got one screwed up set of democrats in this country.
Chrissy matty the demolib drooling pattycake cheerleader just asked Wrangle : Do you think, you do think don't you,that democrats run wars better, you see a pattern don't you, you were in, I mean from LBJ to JFK and Clinton, you see the pattern that demcorats run war better, don't you ?....
ROFLMAO
I could hardly believe it.
NEWS FLASH chrissy the slobbering lib:
The democrats don't want to run the war, they want to pull out and surrender, calling it defeat. There will be no running, just ENDING,you blathering idiotic nincompoop.
What the ___ happned to Andrea Mitchell's face?
April 3, 2007 - 19:20 ET by Guy Arthur ThomasIn no way is the context of my question intended to communicate Andrea Mitchell's qualifications as a television news reporter nor the quality of her work one way or another...
But what the he!! is going on with Andrea Mitchell's face? : 0
Shut up and blog! If you claim to be a conservative, please don't disgrace yourself and conservatism by thinking and arguing like a liberal. Go Rudy!
Will Mitchell be providing an
April 3, 2007 - 19:29 ET by TEWill Mitchell be providing any evidence to support her allegation about what "Republicans" are "saying"? I love seeing leftist fools like Mitchell claim to know what "Republicans" are thinking or saying when leftist fools like Mitchell are completely incapable of repeating what Republicans are saying because fools like Mitchell don't know a damn thing about Republicans.
Andrea Mitchell
April 3, 2007 - 21:25 ET by pbthinkerLet's face it, Liberals, including Ms. Mitchell, don't have to provide evidence to support any allegation. The allegation is sufficient, in itself, to cause the event or person, whom the allegation is against, to have to prove it wrong. This is true only if that person is a Republican, if it's a Democrat, and the allegation is from FoxNews, you assume it is false and Fox has to put out a major team to investigate and prove it correct.
Andre Mitchell is despicable
April 3, 2007 - 19:55 ET by bigtimerAndre Mitchell is despicable aiding and abetting... dyed blond, pock-marked, leftist witch...always has been, always will be.
Period.
Saucer of milk, table two.
April 3, 2007 - 19:59 ET by Airforce_5_OSaucer of milk, table two. Rwwwwwwwwwwww
Andrea
April 3, 2007 - 21:14 ET by Jerry MackAndrea must have hurt some Democrat Senators feelings with her initial report.
hateful, stupid conseratives
April 4, 2007 - 01:19 ET by mmodano77well, here we go agin. are you kidding me? he asks, incredulously. you complain aboot pelosis trip yet 3 repugs just went there (thats okay ...), e'en when KERRY went there recently, the evil repigs, i mean, repugs, not a word was mentioned ... look, dontacha get it? YOU LOST, BIG TIME! santorum is gone, pombo is gone (y'know, yor sik repigs are trying to kill pombo's daddy, but its o'er! YOU LOST!) sure, bushit is standing tough but the people have SPOKE! we're gonna lose on the funding, we're gonna lose on the surge, & the sad thing is: we're gonna lose on the o'er soon to be 4000 am dead; the nearly one million innocent iraquis DEAD. it is so distressing to see bloggers talk aboot this war that dont enlist. i am SIK of hearing from you jerks that talk so tough but wont put it in the line. ENLIST, YOU JERKS! it is yor war, OWN UP TO'T. goodbye, you hateful, mean people, who only care aboot the dollar, & nothing for any other person in this great country of ours. there will be a daie, & it is v near, when you a##hole losers will be holding yor hand oot to me, & i will say, "yes, brother, i love you, lets make this the greatest country e'er!" santorum lost. thats yor stud. goodbuy, the repig revolution is o'er! did you catch newt comparing spanish speaking americans to the GHETTO? thats yor best candidate. youre gonna get creamed in 2008. love you,
fluff
April 4, 2007 - 01:26 ET by mmodano77did it e'er occur to you that at least keefs show is FUNNY? maybe you dont agree w/ him, okay i know you dont AGREE W/ HIM, but at least his show is funny & fun. i DEFY you NB a%%holes to say you dont laugh when he does his show. oh, btw, monica goodling: "would jesus take the fifth?"
where r you a%%holes
April 4, 2007 - 01:34 ET by mmodano77you are a sad & sorry bunch, that deseves to be loked up in the hole like newman & a failure to communicate. you thought it was o'er, that rove had delivered the winning blow, that conservatism spread across this country like kudzu, BUT YOU WERE WRONG, V WRONG. look at santorum, look at macaca, look at POMBO. take yor small battles NOW, THE WAR IS O'ER!
pls keep bitching aboot global warming, it just distracts from the v real issues todaie.
mmondano77 - you are a **** hair away from losing
April 4, 2007 - 02:07 ET by SportPoliticsmmondano77 - you are a **** hair away from losing it all in the senate, you fool.
When the American people "spoke" - only half of them babbled your idiocy.
You don't have the Presidency, idiot, either. You're in the minority.
wrong agin
April 4, 2007 - 03:10 ET by mmodano77you doofus, gore won the popular vote, & dems crushed in the 2006 mids. NEXT! ...
Seem to recall that the popul
April 4, 2007 - 05:48 ET by BDSeem to recall that the popular vote is not what counts.
If one looks at long term trends, wearing tye dyed t-shirts, raging at the capitalists, bad mouthing the US military, and refusing to capitalize in a posting on Newsbusters are all slowly becoming less in-vogue.....
Perhaps your should re-examine.
No, he's a bore. Jon Stewar
April 4, 2007 - 01:34 ET by sarcasmoNo, he's a bore. Jon Stewart can be funny, and Steven Colbert's hilarious on a regular basis (especially when he's mocking O'Reilly!) so funny lefties do exist, but I'm sorry, Olberloon's just not one of 'em. Keith can fling paper around all he wants, and he'll still be a dull, washed-up, left-wing ex-sportscaster with a tiny audience (consisting almost entirely of NB editors) to me.
JMR
Got a live whiz-bang here...H
April 4, 2007 - 01:34 ET by bigtimerGot a live whiz-bang here...
Have fun with him whoever is up this time of day...
Do not treat him/her or it gently.
he's funny
April 4, 2007 - 01:42 ET by mmodano77olbermanns funny & YOU KNOW'T! fess up!
gently
April 4, 2007 - 02:03 ET by mmodano77gently? there are 3500 dead now you a&&shole! enlist, damnitt. make a difference. the surge is NOT working, why dont you MAKE IT A REALITY! coward.
Nut found...
April 4, 2007 - 02:07 ET by sarcasmoPrediction: A click on the username "mmodano77" will yield a "not found" by noon, eastern time, today.
JMR
Really, are you there? Have y
April 4, 2007 - 05:50 ET by BDReally, are you there? Have you eaten countless meals at the Camp Victory Messhall, or patrolled the streets of Sadr City?
If not, I will believe my own counsel, and that of my compadres who have.
moron mmodano77
April 4, 2007 - 01:42 ET by SportPoliticsmoron mmodano77 - Jesus DID take the 5th, you idiotic,unlearned, incompetent fool.
It is you who say I am.
I don't watch the blithering idiot keef, you eubonically impaired tard, but his linked vids here give me insight to how mindless democrat insanity and hatred and foolishness has become. It's like one big moronic SNL skit, even at the national dem politician level.
I have lifelong demcorat supporters say aloud to me while shaking their heads " The democrats have gone crazy."
Yes, it seems most of them are ignorant lying kookballs with childish self esteem issues. Teddy drunken Kennedy now looks good when compared to the democrat leadership, that is certainly a near miracle.
(COUGH)
April 4, 2007 - 01:46 ET by Mr. Bishop<cough>Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone... <cough>
"Stop global warming! Asphyxiate a liberal!" - Show us how far you're willing to go to stop "global warming"
I didn't say I was going to stone him to death
April 4, 2007 - 01:50 ET by SportPoliticsI didn't say I was going to stone him to death for being a slut like Bill Clinton.
In fact he looks like such a crazed moron, I doubt I could stone him. I'm sure his Islamic friends are willing, though.
No...
April 5, 2007 - 02:00 ET by Mr. BishopYou misunderstand... I was quoting another famous Jesus pleading the fifth line.
"Stop global warming! Asphyxiate a liberal!" - Show us how far you're willing to go to stop "global warming"
the fifth
April 4, 2007 - 01:58 ET by mmodano77CLASSIC, someone here on THIS website has admitted that Jesus, our Lord, has taken the 5th. YOU IDIOT! Jesus would only speak the truth, no matter what prevailed agin him. monica got her degree at a evangelican college. youre telling me that SHE'S ALLOWED TO TAKE THE 5TH? someone that in love w/ Jesus has GOT TO HIDE BEHIND LAWYERS? answer that. you a%%holes HATE LAWYERS! puh-leese. did you see jesus camp? "yeh, i bought the meth, but i dint use't. I suked his penis but HEY it dint count! Im cured now (after 3 weeks of PRAYER ...) puh-leese, this is what youre hanging yor hat on, sad.
You, just like some on the
April 4, 2007 - 02:04 ET by sarcasmoYou, just like some on the rightwing bores on this site, need to consider a more lithium-enriched diet.
JMR
classic
April 4, 2007 - 02:32 ET by mmodano77hey sarcasmo, you dint answer the question. haggard suked penis, & did meth. maybe you like those things 2. those are some repug, repig heroes we're talking aboot, after all.
Oh, yes I did. The answer f
April 4, 2007 - 02:56 ET by sarcasmoOh, yes I did. The answer for you (among others...) is lithium, just like I said.
JMR
love
April 4, 2007 - 03:05 ET by mmodano77i love you guys. i really do. im drinking cheval blanc, & 95 corton-charlegmane & really trying to be yor friend. there are 3200 dead now, & a standoff w/ iran. seriously, do you want a war w/ iran? are you that blood-thirsty? really, look inside yorselves & ask, "is this what i really want?" fine, yor hero wins the surge/appropiation battle, but there are 5 us soldiers (at the least) DYING EVRYDAIE. pls tell me WHAT YOU REALLY WANT from iraq, pls tell me that democracy in iraq is gonna change israli/palestinian relations, b/c I JUST DONT BELIEVE ITS TRUE! are you that blood-thirsty? as much as i hate you conservitive a##holes, at least i believe you DONT REALLY believe that iraq will spur A NEW DEMOCRATIC ARAB NATION. its just not true. brothers & sisters, we need to stop supporting israel. we need to close our eyes, bite the bullet, & make friends w/ the arab/persian peoples in the area. GODDAMMIT, we thru the cia have run o'er ALL their options as a free state. A free Iraq & Iran, w/oot interruption from western imperials, ... gosh, ...what a thought.
mmodano77 - you fool
April 4, 2007 - 02:14 ET by SportPoliticsmmodano77, read the part where Pontius Pilate accuses Him, you dork.
stoning
April 4, 2007 - 02:17 ET by mmodano77so youre gonna stone me. becky fischer is dead, ted haggard suks penises & takes meth, newt compares spanish speaking people to people in the ghetto, coulter sez faggot is a schoolard taunt, santorum is a disgusting result of anal sex. you guys just dont get it. while you bitch aboot global warming, & hilary (but but but clinton ...) & obama (HOW DARE HANNITY-yor hero-BITCH ABOOT HIS ALL BLAK CHUCH IN CHICAGO!) you are a sad & sik human being that does not accept OUR MESSAGE OF LOVE! we are the party of LOVE & great govt. YOU are the party of selfishness, & hate, & war, & destruction, but Jesus is watching, a&&holes, & you WILL PAY!
Oh I see, mmodano77
April 4, 2007 - 02:40 ET by SportPoliticsOh I see, mmodano77. You want to get stoned. You murdered TerrySchiavo and 45million babies. Barney Franks has live in gay pimps, Pat Kennedy drives stoned on pills at midnight and crashes into cop cars. Dick Dirtbin says nazi gulags are run by the USA as a schoolyard taunt. Monica sucked Bill's anus, and you'll never stop doing it either. While you whine about war you are a sad and sick self hater. You accept those who murder women and gays as freedom lovers, and your party steals from everyone, hates the Constitution, destroys society, and uses religious referrence like Santa's elves manning the gates of gehenna, and you hate Christmas and all Holidays to boot, because your relatives are freaks, too, just like you.
gay pimps
April 4, 2007 - 03:33 ET by mmodano77oh yeh, youre gonna tell me that we'd have 45 million warriors for YOR CAUSE if roe v wade dint happen? what? youre taking care of those babies? i love how these pro-lifers talk aboot the babies theyd LIKE to save but arent really, b/c theyre mainly "ghetto", YOR BOIE GINGRICH, well, we know how HE feels on the subject, thats for sure. same olde story, BROWN: move to the bak of the line; WHITE: step forward, we have the PERFECT job for you. do not try & fool me. i work in the wine industry & i see the prejudice & hatefulness EVERYDAIE! i see it & know't. FINE, abortion is states rights. ...me and my gurlfriend dont want ANYTHING to do w/ yor crappy-ass state. dont you see how pressing the issue on "national" social issues is just gonna marginalize yor ass? i guess not. too bad. join the fight, work for social issues you want & STOP THE WAR!
Why do the libs HATE their co
April 4, 2007 - 05:54 ET by BDWhy do the libs HATE their country so much?
It is a question that had plagued mankind through the ages. (That and "What is it with Libs that they think they look more 'authentic' when they misspell and use foor grammer?")
Amazing
April 4, 2007 - 08:24 ET by RJAmazing. I wish there were a way to widely publicize this idiot's rants...let the public see who populates the left.
Do you write for the Olberman
April 4, 2007 - 02:18 ET by maggieqpublicDo you write for the Olbermann program?
angel
April 4, 2007 - 02:24 ET by mmodano77angel, i wish i did. i think i like you. why dontcha tell me what YOU REALLY FEEL. i think we can make some beautiful music, gal.
my number is
April 4, 2007 - 03:37 ET by mmodano77c'mon, angel. i really want to get to know you. all aboot you. pls, lets break the norm, a die-hard liberal & a sexy-ass conservitive, republican a**hole. lets break the rules & make it HAPPEN. I LOVE YOU!
shepard, the sheep are escaping ...
April 4, 2007 - 04:34 ET by mmodano77how do you sleep at night? bastard.
Are you calling yourself a ba
April 4, 2007 - 05:56 ET by BDAre you calling yourself a bastard?
Perhaps Sarc is right and lithium is required.
Dude, lighten up. And are
April 4, 2007 - 06:10 ET by TexasOptimistDude, lighten up.
And are you a Mike Modano fan? You give us hockey fans a bad name.
George W. Bush is not a conservative, but I still support his presidency. I'd rather have him as president than ANY of the Democrats.
Merry Christmas 2007.