Does it give the Dem leaders of Congress pause to realize that the enemies of the United States in Iraq, the people killing our troops, are banking on their political success? Reid and Pelosi might be tempted to dismiss this as the raving of a right-wing blogger. They shouldn't. It is in fact the considered view of someone they surely see as a respected, nay, an authoritative source: no less than the Baghdad bureau chief of the New York Times, John Burns.Burns was a guest on this morning's "Today." In the set-up piece, NBC White House correspondent Kelly O'Donnell rolled a clip of precisely the kind of politics to which Burns later alluded, as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid [D-NV] fumed: "No more will the Congress turn a blind eye to the Bush administration's incompetence and dishonesty." When's the last time Reid spoke with such vitriol about al-Qaeda? Just wondering.
View video here.
Moments later, Matt Lauer asked Burns: "By its very nature a surge is a temporary dynamic. What is the biggest factor in your opinion as to whether they can have success in the near term and the longer term?"NYT BAGHDAD BUREAU CHIEF JOHN BURNS: Well, the number of troops, that's finite. The amount of time they can stay, we think that's probably finite, too. And the calculations of the insurgents, who, as one military officer said to me, will always trade territory for time. That's to say, they will move out, they will wait. Because they know the political dynamic in the United States is moving in a direction that is probably going to be favorable to them.The Dem party is often described as a coalition of interest groups: racial/ethnic minorities, Big Labor, gays, pro-choice activists, etc. Shall we add the Iraqi insurgents to the mix?Story Continues Below Ad ↓
Mark was in Iraq in November. Contact him at mark@gunhill.net
—Mark Finkelstein is a NewsBusters contributing editor and host of Right Angle. Contact him at mark@gunhill.net.




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Yes Mark, I would say that yo
April 24, 2007 - 07:33 ET by liberal_bug_zapperYes Mark, I would say that you have to add Al-Qaeda to the mix. Al-Qaeda has now become one of the Democrat's constituencies. It is just unfortunate that education in this country is such, and that political blinders are turned on with most voters that they are not going to see that the Democrats have now sided with our enemy. They've made their choice of who to give victory to, and it is not the US... it is the terrorists.
____________________________________________________
"We can only reason from what is; we can reason on actualities, but not on possibilities." ~ Thomas Paine
President Bush's mistake was
April 24, 2007 - 07:41 ET by ahusserPresident Bush's mistake was thinking the enemy was terrorists and terrorism. He didn't take into consideration the home grown enemy to his rear. The real terrorist insurgency.
"A mind is a terrible thing." - A comic I forgot the name of.
Well, the oath they took in C
April 24, 2007 - 08:25 ET by dscottWell, the oath they took in Congress has the same provision as the POTUS and VP, "...I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God." Strange, isn't it, that the POTUS who takes the oath very seriously to defend the country is regarded as a dictator, a usurper of freedom and a trampler of civil rights while the Dems commit treason under the guise of freedom, civil rights and peace.
On how many different levels have the members of the Democrat Party broken this oath? You know, we don't give the Founding Fathers enough credit for what they created. They had the foresight to envision politicians and others who called themselves "Americans" to betray their own fellow citizens.
Notice all the concepts of loyalty required of the office holder? Which of these concepts haven't they broken? In my opinion, it all started with the last but most important concept - God (Higher Power), where there is no respect or fear of God, there is no such thing as loyalty.
“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” – Marcus Aurelius
?
April 24, 2007 - 09:01 ET by E4PukeWhat does POTUS mean?
President of the United State
April 24, 2007 - 09:02 ET by Jack BauerPresident of the United States.
Jack,Speaking of Harry Reid,
April 24, 2007 - 11:04 ET by bigtimerJack,
Speaking of Harry Reid, the fearless leader...he was speaking at a group sponsored by The Third Way yesterday when he made the pitiful detrimental speech, which came to my attention when Blair and Clinton were having some kind of a meeting/forum televised on C-Span about the Third Way.
Here are a few links that tells alot about this group...one is the start of it ect...http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=128&subid=187&contentid=895
...another has all the board members and affiliations, I googled a lot of the affiliations some of these members are associated with or belong to, some very interesting info indeed.
Anyway, pay attention to one gal, Susan McCue, very interesting bio indeed, everything from the AP to Harry Reid....
Quite a few others that are interesting too...Thurgood Marshall, Jr., Peter Joseph and his group is very interesting if you look into it, I also looked up the Palladium Group.http://www.third-way.com/leadership/trustees
This is the speech Reid gave in it's entirety if anyone hasn't heard it by now....http://blog.washingtonpost.com/capitol-briefing/2007/04/reid_we_should_be_addressing.html
I sometimes wonder, d, if our
April 24, 2007 - 12:53 ET by Scout FinchI sometimes wonder, d, if our forefathers had the foresight to envision the press being the all-powerful oracle of propaganda that they've become.
YEAH!
April 24, 2007 - 08:59 ET by treshanDemocrats want insurgents to kill their children over here instead of over there! I despise how the republicans, though, admit that the troops will come home eventually. The troops should stay til the job is done! no sooner! even if it's the next 100 years!
But then you should conside
April 24, 2007 - 10:42 ET by kafkakaeferBut then you should consider the U.S. to be broke.
"Hegel says somewhere all great events and personalities in world history reappear in one fashion or another. He forgot to add: the first time as tragedy, the second as farce."
The Eighteeenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte (1852) sect. 1, Cf.
Because they know the poli
April 24, 2007 - 07:39 ET by motherbeltBecause they know the political dynamic in the United States is
moving in a direction that is probably going to be favorable to them. -John Burns
And if you say the Democrats are sanctioning a plan the insurgents like, their automatic response is "How DARE you question our patriotism!!!"
Thats one of those moments wh
April 24, 2007 - 08:14 ET by seth_kegleyThats one of those moments where you think to yourself... "What would WInston Churchill say?" Then you realize... "I question your patriotism, sir, because I find your actions quite unpatriotic." Isn't that what Churchill would say to the Dems of today?
Check out my blog at: http://preacherskid.blogdrive.com/
They'd have to know who Winni
April 24, 2007 - 09:40 ET by FastEdThey'd have to know who Winnie was - their grasp of history, is limited to what they see on the msm (Lsm) news reports, and we KNOW that today's "reporters" have NO knowlege of history at all. It is a case of the stupid attempting to teach the unwilling.
As a test, ask the uninformed - What is the law of the land? and Who is YOUR state senators?
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
I don't know about anybody el
April 24, 2007 - 07:44 ET by rimskyI don't know about anybody else, but I didn't detect any real anti-insurgency tone in Mr. Burns' voice. It's almost as if they have hope for the insurgency! Like, hang in there guys, the tide is turning in your favor over here.. just be patient, we're going to cut and run eventually.. then the whole damn place is yours to do with as you wish..
Any positive reporting on the surge is looked on as being.. well, it's not considered at all! The MSM could just as easily sway public opinion in favor of a victory in Iraq and in general in the WOT, but they very conciously choose to do the exact opposite. To me this is high treason. God help me, I don't think I could loathe these people (MSM) more.
The sad thing about this is t
April 24, 2007 - 07:48 ET by OldSailor88The sad thing about this is that if the Libs win this and we do leave, the ensuing blood bath and loss of innocent Iraqi lives will be completely ignored and not covered on the MSM. They'll just turn our attention to Darfur and call it a day.
Iraq
April 24, 2007 - 08:36 ET by pbanks7... And lecture us on the lessons of war, not even realizing that the lesson to be learned is that, "United we stand, divided we fall."
Nonviolence is the answer! ....to capitulation and enslavement.
Ignorance is bliss. It's easier to repeat a mindless slogan than to do some actual research.
Unfortunately it is becoming
April 24, 2007 - 09:07 ET by ahusserUnfortunately it is becoming very clear that unity is becoming less and less possible. The Republican leadership is in disarray. President Bush has suffered the political death of a thousand soundbites and has been marginalized as some kind of village idiot. The GOP needs to stop running and take a stand against this never ending onslaught by the Left. Having the MSM in your pocket allows you to hammer, hammer hammer at your enemies without respite. In one sense (dont call me a troll) I do blame President Bush for the situation as it exists today. He may have been correct strategically and morally about Iraq, but in hindsight it was a political mistake giving the left a unifying cause which they have used and abused their way back into power.
I couldn't agree with you mor
April 24, 2007 - 09:23 ET by paperheadI couldn't agree with you more. Republicans need to stand up to these dem pussies and take charge! I still support this war effort and what we are doing in the middle east. I do fault Bush for not communicating more to the American people. When he is not on the air, all they have is the liberal MSM driven down their throats. I know public speaking is not one of his strong suits, but what did he think he was getting into when he was running for president? I am still waiting for some reprocussions for Pelosi's trip to Syria. If Newt had done something similiar to Clinton, you can bet they would have been all over it. But then again, Republicans know their place when they are not in charge of the presidency and the way things are going, will know it a lot better as well soon.
The fact is... without Gingri
April 24, 2007 - 11:30 ET by seth_kegleyThe fact is... without Gingrich or Delay the Republican party is devoid of Legislative Leadership... McConnell is doing what he can but he has no help from the House side... if Newt or Delay were in Congress they could help Bush keep the message going out to combat the Dem's Ministry of Propaganda (better known as the MSM)... by the way if you don't already everyone on here should check out Pat Dollard's website... http://patdollard.com/ he has actually gone over to Iraq and done REAL reporting and shockingly its a lot different of a story than what you hear on the news, how could that be?
Check out my blog at: http://preacherskid.blogdrive.com/
Following up on my previously
April 24, 2007 - 07:50 ET by dscottFollowing up on my previously stated opinion what the Dems are up to, the libs are divided between two groups, the raving ultra left loons and the power hungry salesmen. Sorry Joe Lieberman, while you are a liberal Democrat which one can have an honest difference of opinion, your kind has become so insignificant in the party that you have become the fringe group.
The power hungry libs like Pelosi, Reid and Dean sold the ultra left loons to get their vote. When Howard Dean tried to renege on the campaign promise (which he had no intention of keeping) to pull out of Iraq, he found himself facing a tough situation. He like Pelosi and Reid know full well the results of such a pull out, a massacure. Now when the chits are being called by the likes of Sheehan and Moore they have to play the game of chicken with George W Bush. On one side of their mouths they utter their their contempt of Bush, but on the other side they are praying fervently that Bush will stand his ground. Why? So he can take the blame thus they don't have to from the loons for not trying or lying to them and at the same time they get to take pot shots at the POTUS and Repubs. It's all a very Machiavellian game, a selfish power hungry game to discredit the POTUS and at the same time get kudos for themselves. My opinion of the Dems could not get any lower.
“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” – Marcus Aurelius
Oh yeah? Well they want to
April 24, 2007 - 11:47 ET by Ruths husband BenOh yeah? Well they want to raise taxes too. Think about that......Now your opinion of them can't get any lower.
Yaba daba doo! -Fred Flintstone campaign slogan
The Heisenberg uncertainty pr
April 24, 2007 - 08:06 ET by KC MulvilleThe Heisenberg uncertainty principle is all about how the observer changes the event being observed. The terrorists count on the media and Democrats to react to staged violence. Terrorists stage these bombings for the media's sake, and the MSM responds on cue. Then the Democrats run to the microphone, on cue, to pretend that the horror is too much to bear any longer. The terrorist strategy is to start a media itch and let the Democrats scratch.
What's infuriating is that the Democrats know what they're doing. But they don't care, because they want to win the political game at home, even at the expense of the war. Reporters were beginning to report progress in the surge. So what happened? The terrorists staged a wave of bombings. Harry Reid, on cue, sprinted to a microphone to declare that the war was lost. The full complement of soldiers to carry out the surge hasn't even deployed yet, but Reid couldn't help himself.
The disgraceful part is that these Democrats know that the only way to defeat terrorists is patience and endurance. Instead, they exploit this treason theater. Why? For a couple bucks added to the minimum wage? To pass more taxes? To preserve partial-birth abortion? It is a disgrace.
KC - you are so right . Ex
April 24, 2007 - 08:32 ET by Dee BunkKC - you are so right . Except I would say that there is a percentage of them who are naive enough to really believe it's the right thing. Going into Iraq was definitely more debatable than leaving. The most despicable people are the dems who voted for the Iraq war but are now advocating pulling out. People can change their minds about whether going in was right, but that still doesn't make it logical to pull out and leave a free for all.
If anything it should be the opposite. There should be more dems in favor of staying than who voted for the war because whether it's Bush's fault or not, the major reason he gave for going in was to prevent collusion with terrorists. There is no doubt that Iraqi nationals are working with the terrorists and now those who voted for the war are willing to hand them power.
Either way you look at it, the dems who voted for the war are 100% political with little regard for what is best for the country, because there is a much better reason for staying than there was for going in. They were either disingenuous when they voted to go in or now.
Yeah, I know. Going to war is
April 24, 2007 - 09:00 ET by KC MulvilleYeah, I know. Going to war is like Evel Knievel jumping over buses ... once you start down the ramp, you can't change your mind. Halfway into the air, the Democrats decided to pull up and point fingers at Bush ("wow, we didn't realize it was this hard!"). You can't do that. You either hit the gas or you splatter on the buses.
Ahussers post above made me r
April 24, 2007 - 09:26 ET by Dee BunkAhussers post above made me realize that I should not have specified the Democrats that voted for the war, Republicans who voted for it and are now advocating pulling out are just as despicable
Those rhinos needed to lose t
April 24, 2007 - 09:30 ET by paperheadThose rhinos needed to lose their primaries next spring like Hagel. Polls in Nebraska have him down 9 points to his challenger. Thank God the people of Nebraska have finally woken up!
Why? For a couple bucks added
April 24, 2007 - 08:32 ET by dscottWhy? For a couple bucks added to the minimum wage? To pass more taxes? To preserve partial-birth abortion?
I think the why is not what you stated, IMO these are more of the same along with the anti-war movement, exploiting the emotions of special interest groups for the sole reason of staying in power. You support enough special interest groups you are bound to get enough votes to represent fractured causes but not represent the public at large. This is a definite weakness in Representative type governance, the tyranny of the special interests coming together to scratch each other's back so they all can get their hands into the pie at the expense of the whole.
“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” – Marcus Aurelius
9 dead
April 24, 2007 - 08:38 ET by cvgbuckeyeI heard an enormous cheer go up this morning from Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, the democrat party and the MSM. It was in response to the news that 9 American Soldiers were killed in Iraq yesterday.
I am dead serious. The first I heard about it was from a so-called American citizen residing in Britain, a reporter named Linda Albin. She was beside herself with glee and you could tell she was wetting herself in anticipation of getting out her good news.
Our local liberal, a guy named Jim (somebody), on WLW Cincinnati, was even disgusted by her glee and did everything he could to get her off it as soon as possible.
I swear that these people would set off the bombs themselves if they thought it would hasten the demise of President Bush. All of this reverse patriotism has NOTHING to do with foreign policy disagreement. It has everything to do with Bush-Hate. If Slug Clinton was still the president, all these lefties would be defending the Iraq situation with all they hold dear.
Of course there would be nothing to defend since that CHARACHTERLESS CLOWN never did and never would do anything to defend this nation and that crowd of spineless defenders of him would cheer all the way.
CHARACHTERLESS CLOWN That is
April 24, 2007 - 08:49 ET by dscottCHARACHTERLESS CLOWN
That is why Clinton turned tail in Somalia with the blackhawk down incident. From that point on, OBL said he knew America would turn their backs everytime if they just stuck to their guns (literally). We have this spineless coward to thank for 8 years of doing nothing to prevent 911. He encouraged them with his spinelessness, he had 10 chances to kill OBL, he failed; he had a chance through the findings of ABLE DANGER to disrupt 911 directly, he failed not once but twice in this regard, info came out later that he received other intelligence about the 911 attack.
“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” – Marcus Aurelius
Conspiring with the Enemy
April 24, 2007 - 09:09 ET by ChasvsWhat the charge and penalty for such activity? Didn't we use to hang people for this? Let's start with Reid and Pelosi! We can see the Enemy and he is us!
This is the second remark t
April 24, 2007 - 09:16 ET by Right2thePointThis is the second remark this two square waste of TP has made because he seems to think he is embolldened by a paper thin marginal control of the house and an almost toss up in the senate where his butt sits.
The last one got backlash that was well deserved.
I guess he is hoping some now are backlash weary and he can proceed at will.
Somebody put a shoe to this guy, real quick and real hard and right where it hurts.
Back in Nov 2002, I spoke w
April 24, 2007 - 09:21 ET by MilesDBack in Nov 2002, I spoke with a representative from the UN Iraq Survey Group, who was responsible for making sure Iraq didn't arm themselves again with things that were banned. He said they were sure they had cleaned it up ten years ago. Positive? Yes, checked eight levels down, nothing left. Bad, I thought, this will be found out and the case for taking Saddam out will lose credibility.
The war started, Bremmer took over, made a lot of decisions I thought were short-sighted - dismissal of the Iraqi Army, clean out the Baathists without finding out who they were, centralizing a banking system that was previously under Provincial control, making it harder for local leaders to get money to rebuild. That, and pandering to questionable Iraqi ex-patriots who were out for themselves, instead of engaging the people who the US should have deffered to all along, namely tribal leaders.
I complained to my wife about the mistakes. So much so, she told me to shut up and do something about it, or just shut up about it period.
So I did. I was in Iraq for two years, until a couple of months ago, working for our government to help Iraq rebuild their industry. Saw a lot of people get killed, I made it back okay, it is a hard thing to live with.
We cannot abandon the Iraqi people, the good ones, the ones who believe our promise to help them be a free democratic society. Right now they cannot protect themselves from a whole lot of losers and haters who would like to end it all for them.
The President, to his esteemed credit, has never backed away from the responsibility to follow it though to the peaceful end, never once holding his critics in contempt, never questioning people's right to question him. He is a good man, and many people do not recognize his strength in his humility and forthrightness.
So to war critics out there, if you don't like it, go there and help them out, your criticicsm will carry a lot more weight.
Think about what would happen if you delivered your message, "Impeach Bush! Hang Cheney! This war sucks!!"
in Firdos Square, Baghdad, 1985: "Impeach Saddam! Hang al-Ramadan! This war with Iran sucks!!"
You wouldn't live to see the sun set that day, and nobody in your neighborhood with your last name would see the following week.
And send an especial thanks to the families of the nine US men killed yesteday for your privielege to mouth off
Excellent post Miles! Thank
April 24, 2007 - 09:31 ET by MightyMouthExcellent post Miles! Thanks for sharing your experience with us.
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Jinx you owe me a beer MM
April 24, 2007 - 09:33 ET by Dee BunkJinx you owe me a beer MM
Gladly Dee! :-) "Ther
April 24, 2007 - 09:37 ET by MightyMouthGladly Dee! :-)
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
I guess since we live too far
April 24, 2007 - 09:58 ET by Dee BunkI guess since we live too far apart - you will have to have one for me! I like Corona with lime please.
Coors light in a frosty mug
April 24, 2007 - 10:58 ET by MightyMouthCoors light in a frosty mug at Hooters. (Like you, I am very specific about beer) :-)
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Any beer with light in the ti
April 24, 2007 - 11:25 ET by FastEdAny beer with light in the title in NOT a beer. If you can find it, try Sternbrau. Light in color, heavy in taste. 'Course, if you're at Hooters, you not really concerned about the beer ;)
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
Just watchin the ole waist
April 24, 2007 - 11:29 ET by MightyMouthJust watchin the ole waist line Ed. And you're right, I go to Hooters for the wings, not the beer! :-)
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Great post Miles and thank yo
April 24, 2007 - 09:31 ET by Dee BunkGreat post Miles and thank you for your service.
1.) Actually, if you count
April 24, 2007 - 09:41 ET by BD1.) Actually, if you count prohibited long range missiles, pods, binary rounds, etc, there were items prohibited by the UN that were found. So your friend from the UN was incorrect.
2.) I do not believe the De-baathisization policy was faulty. Like the Nazi's we needed to remove them and re-establish the organization in total. Sure, it was painful in the beginning, but imagine if our trust issues with the Iraqi army were ten times worse what the current situation would be.
I did a tour at Balad and another at Camp Victory. Ever make it to "Mortaritaville?" Not so bad actually when you got used to it.
You wonder how they kept sh
April 24, 2007 - 10:11 ET by MilesDYou wonder how they kept shooting those things into Balad. Thirty in a day, my highest count
I think the US could have absorbed the Iraq Army right away, and taught them their new mission, give them pay and remind them of the vision to a free Iraqi people, I think it could have been managed easier, maybe we didn't have enough people at the time to insure it was successful
A lot of Baathists went to college in England, and the US, and they really understood Democracy, and their own people too, sometimes you have to trust people, I think the trust would have paid more dividend than trouble
Naw, i just do not think we c
April 24, 2007 - 10:46 ET by BDNaw, I just do not think we could have trusted the Baathists with control of units regardless of education. Sure it was painful, but I think the pain would be worse right now if we had not removed them from the leadership. Regardless, the army we are fielding there now is heads and shoulders better than the army in place in 2003.
The one in 2003 was capable of public repression and not much more. Patrolling, pacification etc takes more skill than lining crowds up and whacking em.
Unless the circumstances we
April 24, 2007 - 11:16 ET by MilesDUnless the circumstances were extreme, nobody managed anything in Iraq unless they joined the party. They knew how the country actually worked, and they understood the values and morals of the West. They took pride in doing right for its own sake, at least those I spoke with.
The Iraq Army was the best trained in the Middle East. They knew, and loved, their own people, most of the people in Iraq, by and large, saw Saddam as not much more than a guerella, they hated the damn war with Iran because it was senseless, and I think they would have been part of an army that would to what it could to prevent more senseless wars against their own people.
So we differ, good for us, let's celebrate our differences, and our mutual hope for the future
The same was said about the N
April 24, 2007 - 11:49 ET by BDThe same was said about the Nazi's, even by George Patton. But the Bundeswehr was not officially reformed until long after the war and even then it was denazified.
The German Polizei was reformed before the military, yet members of the Gestapo were not allowed in.
The Iraqi military that I knew also consisted of the IRG who had the only real equipment and training and who also caused huge atrocities on their people.
"Go stop them looters!
April 24, 2007 - 12:47 ET by MilesD"Go stop them looters!" "Go get that Russian rocket sh*t out of the magazines, and blow it up."
- There was only one group of people who could follow those orders, and they weren't issued
After reading through the
April 24, 2007 - 18:49 ET by rainlillieAfter reading through the post here, I've come to
the realization that you guys have created your own reality. There's no point
in trying to reach you. The majority of Americans have turned against this war
and Bush's handling of it. Our troops have done everything that they've been
asked to do. They've searched for the WMD'S, and they've removed Saddam.
The Iraqis are engaged in a civil war, the
different factions hate each other and they also hate our troops. How can our
troops take a side in this fight? If they take a side which side will they
choose? This conflict has been going on for thousands of years, building a wall
or sending more troops isn't going to stop the senseless killing or the attacks
on American troops. The leaders from each side must come together and make it
work, our troops can't do that for them. In the month of April 84 young American
men and women had died fighting in this civil war.
Just last night nine were killed...I'm currently
working with a few other people to build a website that will allow people to
send sympathy cards in snail mail to our soldiers families. I'm too young to
remember the Vietnam war, but this war has had a profound affect on me, It's
truly heartbreaking to see the names, faces, and ages of the soldiers who have
lost their lives. I will continue to speak out, write, march and help in anyway
that I can. I thank the site owners here for allowing me the opportunity to
express my views. I hope that we all can agree to disagree without questioning
one's love for their county.
Some
Bush Supporters have told anti-war people to "love it or leave
it."
Meaning if you criticize America your
don't love it. I see America as my mother, father, sister, brother or child. If
you're right I'll fight like hell to defend you...But if you're wrong I'm going
to bring it to your attention.
I'll never walk away from you even when things
get tough...Because I love you. I want you to live up to your full potential I
won't accept anything less.This is why I have spoken out against the invasion of
Iraq, and every single day... I'm proven right.
The biggest threat to the Bush Administration is an informed public.
rainlillie...When are you guy
April 24, 2007 - 18:56 ET by Clear thinkerrainlillie...
When are you guys gonna let Big Foot go. You and your group of friends have kept him on the UFO long enough, or are you still interogating him to see if he and Bush were responsible for 911?
The liberal MSM has become an enemy of the USA.
"I see America as my m
April 24, 2007 - 19:07 ET by Jerry"I see America as my mother, father, sister, brother or child. If you're right I'll fight like hell to defend you...But if you're wrong I'm going to bring it to your attention."
And how often the immature little know-it-all brat is critical of his parents, unaware of the wisdom of their words and oblivious of their undivided love and singular goal of protecting their child while providing a firm foundation from which to grow and prosper.
When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment
vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any
President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).
Jerry,I could hug you...you s
April 24, 2007 - 20:31 ET by bigtimerJerry,
I could hug you...you said it all for me.
Thank you sir.
BT, hugs are always appre
April 24, 2007 - 20:37 ET by JerryBT, hugs are always appreciated. Thanks.
When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment
vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any
President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).
rainlillie, if you're serious and not just mouthing platitudes,
April 24, 2007 - 20:24 ET by RJ"It's truly heartbreaking to see the names, faces, and ages of the soldiers who have lost their lives. I will continue to speak out, write, march and help in anyway that I can. I thank the site owners here for allowing me the opportunity to express my views. I hope that we all can agree to disagree without questioning one's love for their county."
rainlillie, if you're really serious and not just mouthing platitudes, here's a suggestion: talk with some military personnel. They're very easy to find. One great source (but not the only one) is a VA Hospital. Talk to them about how they feel about what they're doing. Ask how the behavior of people like you affects them.
In other words, rather than continuing on the basis of your assumptions, learn the facts directly from the source....if you're brave enough and serious enough, that is.