Pantagraph.com | Letters | President’s rhetoric is old and ineffectual

Note: All views and opinions expressed in reader comments are solely those of the individual submitting the comment, and not those of the Pantagraph or its staff.

to: Associated Press wrote on Oct 10, 2007 11:57 PM:

" And don't forget, as part of the hidden costs of this war, we are pumping tons of hard earned tax dollars into impoverished countries like Rumania and Georgia so we can say they are part of "the coalition". Even with that, Dominican Republic declared victory and went home. "

No Iraqi ever wrote wrote on Oct 9, 2007 3:58 PM:

" "Now Iraq has freedom, and things have never been better there". I do not believe that and I have never heard, seen, or talked to an Iraqi who would write it. Even the US Army does not spread this kind of false statement around. No Iraqi posted it here but some complete dunce did. "

Associated Press wrote on Oct 9, 2007 2:31 PM:

" A look at troop numbers in the U.S.-led coalition in Iraq: ALBANIA: 120 non-combat soldiers; no plans to withdraw. ARMENIA: 46, serving as medics. AUSTRALIA: 550; no plans to withdraw. AZERBAIJAN: 150; no plans to withdraw. BOSNIA-HERZEGOVINA: 36, BRITAIN: 5,000; Prime Minister Brown says 2,500 to go home by spring. BULGARIA: 155. CZECH REPUBLIC: 100 EL SALVADOR: 300; cuts expected as situation improves. ESTONIA: 35. GEORGIA: about 2,000; to be cut to around 300 by next summer. KAZAKHSTAN: 27 military engineers; no plans to withdraw. MACEDONIA: 40, based north of Baghdad. MOLDOVA: 11 bomb-defusing experts. MONGOLIA: 160; no plans to withdraw. NETHERLANDS: 15, part of NATO mission training police, army officers; no plans to withdraw. POLAND: 900 non-combat soldiers; decision on withdrawal will wait until after 2008 U.S. election. ROMANIA: About 600; no plans for withdrawal. SLOVENIA: Four instructors training Iraqi security forces. SOUTH KOREA: 1,200, ; government assessing whether to extend mission. UNITED STATES: Approximately 168,000; "

Yes Love the Freedom wrote on Oct 9, 2007 1:51 PM:

" You know what they say "love the fetus , hate the child". Pro Life Bush mocked Carla Faye Tucker with facial contortions (not his normal ones) before he executed her. "

Love the Freedom wrote on Oct 9, 2007 11:13 AM:

" Hate the Neo-Conservative so-called Freedom Fighters. The best thing about Bush is his love for all-life. Like most Republican Politicians, read that carefully people, "Republican Politicians," Bush is Pro-Life until birth. Children's health care anyone? "

Johnny Cochran wrote on Oct 9, 2007 8:58 AM:

" "Yawn" if you snooze, you lose! "

Presidents rhetoric is gold and intellectual wrote on Oct 9, 2007 7:49 AM:

" This debate has to end. The facts are that al queda members were thriving in Iraq prior to US intervention. They DID possess WMDs as it was clearly stated by the president. Now Iraq has freedom, and things have never been better there. Why do all of you naysayers hate freedom? "

Yawn wrote on Oct 8, 2007 4:23 PM:

" ZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! "

YadaYada wrote on Oct 8, 2007 10:36 AM:

" Dear "to: Heretherfore", in an earlier comment in this thread, I stated that the Iraq War was sanctioned by the United Nations. You challenged that statement as not true. You stated the UN did not sanction the Iraq War and you cited Kofi Anon's oral opinion as a source. THEN, I countered your challenge and Anon's opinion by specifying several specific written UN Security Council Resolutions authorizing in 2003 the occupation of Iraq by United States and Britain and two additional U.N. Security Council Resolutions extending the authority of the U.S. and Britain to occupy Iraq though, 2005, then 2007. If you can not accept proven facts as the truth, then there is not much sense in people wasting time talking to each other; there could never be a diplomatic solution to problems, leaving war as the only solution to problems between persons. "

to: Heretherfore wrote on Oct 8, 2007 12:00 AM:

" Yada was trying to disprove the point of Koffee Annan, former Sec General of the UN that the Iraq was not poperly sanctioned. "Mr Annan said that the invasion was not sanctioned by the UN security council or in accordance with the UN's founding charter. In an interview with the BBC World Service broadcast last night, he was asked outright if the war was illegal. He replied: "Yes, if you wish." Yada has more information, I guess. "

Heretofore wrote on Oct 7, 2007 1:50 PM:

" You see what I mean. Come on guys! You are going to have to do better! I checked Yada's last post and all of the info I could find was accurate. I forget what point he was trying to prove, but nonetheless, it was accurate! Re-state the argument and refute! "

YadaYada wrote on Oct 7, 2007 6:44 AM:

" "Argument for Yada", it is apparent from your recent post that you have conceded the issue, inasmuch as you submitted for consideration nothing further of a persuasive nature, and, predictably, you lashed-out at the obviously superior intellect with your ad hominem attacks. In the future, choose a pseudonym and use it consistently in the "Name:" block of these commentaries, so others can establish a profile of you. In the meantime, I'll pass on the offer for Walmart greeter; but, thank you for doing me the honor of putting me in the same class of wonderful individuals. I often stop and learn about their lives when they have the time for me. What a wealth of humanity they are. Instead, I shall continue teaching, influencing your children and grandchildren, if indeed your offspring fortuitiously inherit DNA outside your personal gene pool, benefiting them with sufficient intelligence to actually attend high school. "

Argument for Yada wrote on Oct 6, 2007 11:07 PM:

" In an argument of Yada Yada -vs- Yada Yada, who do you think would win? I know who would lose. Us saps who have to listen to you mindlessly talk to yourself. Wal-Mart needs greeters. Apply Within. "

YadaYada wrote on Oct 5, 2007 10:42 PM:

" Dear "to Heretoforewith", is Kofi up to it again? Kofi enjoys no special authority status at the U.N., particularly with the Security Council, so he should really learn to be diplomatic while he is supposed to be a diplomat. The authority for the invasion of Iraq is violations of the cease fire agreement, pursuant to the 1991 U.N. - sanctioned Desert Storm. The Security Council of the U.N. documented some 16 or 17 times numerous continued violations of the cease fire agreement. U.N. Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1483 (22 May 2003) recognizes Britain and the United States as occupying powers ('The Authority). UNSCR 1637 (08 Nov 2005) extends the mandate of the multinational force in Iraq until December 2006. UNSCR 1723 (28 Nov 2006), extends the mandate of the international force in Iraq until the end of 2007. When renewal is required, there will be more UNSCR's extending the mandate of the multinational forces in Iraq. "

to: Heretherforewith wrote on Oct 5, 2007 6:59 PM:

" It is the nature of the beast for the right to be more dogmatic and common in direction, while the left is like a herd of cats. Mankinds's progress, however, never results from everyone doing the same thing. "

to: Heretoforewith wrote on Oct 5, 2007 6:51 PM:

" My observation is that Yada does not answer questions and respond to facts. He is cornered and angry because his belief system is crumbling, so he lashes out with half truths and lies. For example, in one of his rants he states that the Bush war is UN sanctioned. That is B.S. The fact is in the following quote "Mr Annan said that the invasion was not sanctioned by the UN security council or in accordance with the UN's founding charter. In an interview with the BBC World Service broadcast last night, he was asked outright if the war was illegal. He replied: "Yes, if you wish." " "

Heretofortwith wrote on Oct 5, 2007 5:13 PM:

" I see your point, this is not college nor a logic class/debate team. The thing(problem) about the arguments on these pages(in my opinion) is that the right/conservatives are organized, both in their information and ideology. This(again in my opinion) is a microcosm of the state of partisanship at large. The Republicans are united (mostly) by their ideals. Perhaps, this is due to the simplicity of their ideals. Liberals, in general, tend to be a bit more complex(and intelligent,one could argue.) They(liberals) tend to see things on a continuum(which of course is a more accurate interpretation of reality.) But again, this leads to a problem for the democrats as in it is harder for them to organize. The Republicans have cornered the market in talk radio, and Fox news is probably the most widely viewed. I see post after post by Yada types, but nobody is stepping up to the challenge to actually refute his claims step by step. We need more challenge, and we need some talk radio types to step up to the Rushs', Hannitys' and Yadas' of the world. Someone needs to simplify the left-wing messages so the common-man can digest and identify. "

RedNenigan: wrote on Oct 5, 2007 12:39 PM:

" I'm still waiting... "

to: Herethefore wrote on Oct 5, 2007 12:15 PM:

" First, it's emotional "facts" not "emotional" facts. Second a whole new term might have been coined here. It is fact that Congress is less popular than Bush, for a number of reasons that would run to the end of the page. Yada see that fact as an emotional "fact" by shaping it to project popular confirmation of the Bush war. In short, not really a fact at all. I think you are intelligent, but don't know if you are street wise, and I know that you cannot shape an argument against a Yada without sturdying the whole of the person. As for college, been there and passed. Trust me, we are not wrtiting term papers here. "

Heretofore to To: heretofore wrote on Oct 5, 2007 11:23 AM:

" Exactly my point! Why dont you affix Yada into the finely calibrated crosshairs of your intellect! Whats an "emotional" fact? You can't just say, "if you read and study" you will see bla bla blah! You have to make informative statements and cite sources for a real argument. Try college!:) "

to: Heretofore wrote on Oct 5, 2007 10:20 AM:

" Ir is very evident up front that Yada tells half facts and emotional "facts" designed to fit his character. If you read and study, you will understand that Yada is not as armed as you think. "

Heretofore wrote on Oct 5, 2007 8:10 AM:

" When it comes to logic, many of you are failing miserably when it comes to arguing with yada. Simplistic statements about an arguers character have no bearing on a sound argument. It seems clear that he is commited and armed with information. The only way to counterpoint his points is to do the research to see if his premises are justified. Clearly, he firmly believes in his conclusions. A reinterpretation of the facts and events to check the validity of his premises is the only way to logically show whether or not his conclusions are supported. Thanks for tuning in, and have a nice day! "

YadaYada wrote on Oct 5, 2007 2:38 AM:

" Dear "Open the Shades", when an enemy uses deadly force against the homeland where I live, where my family lives and where my friends live, that enemy shall pay a dear price. I advocate using earth moving equipment to excavate a long, deep trench, scooping the bodies of my dead enemies into the ditch, covering the bodies with lime, filling-in the excavated soil and observing a moment of silence. Therefore, I am humane. Dear "Yada's Wet" I don't believe I said Barry Goldwater was a neoconservative. What I said was Barry Goldwater's nomination at the Republican national convention was considered by many to be the first victory of neoconservatism, because neocons supported his campaign after eschewing the Democrat Party. Besides, you may be astonished at how liberal Goldwater really was. And "Come off it Yada " you and I stand no chance of finding common ground. I maintain the original raison d'être for neoconservatism is opposition to communism. Unless you are claiming neocons were former Communists with a penchant for instilling American might around the world. "

YadaYada wrote on Oct 5, 2007 1:46 AM:

" Dear "Hey Yada", it doesn't matter who or how many start the race, it's who finishes and in what postion that counts. After George Bush leaves office in January 2009, American troops will still be in Iraq, but under the leadership of either a second Republican president or a first-time Democrat president. Make no mistake, our troops will win in the Iraqi theater of this larger-scale, longer lasting war. Senator Clinton says the troops will be in Iraq at least until 2012 if she is elected president; and since she is the Democrat frontrunner, let's go with her estimate. The thing that totally amazes me is George Bush has led the Republican Party and conscripted the Democrat party into extending his Iraq policy into the next administration in spite of the clammering and screeching protests to the Iraq War ever since 2003! Now, that's brilliant, that George Bush! I've never known anything like it in the history of the world! "

YadaYada wrote on Oct 5, 2007 1:27 AM:

" Dear "Come off it Yada", hope you don't drown in your own drool, Bucko, while you are unconscious. Neoconservatives, like Reagan, Bill Bennett and Bill Kristol, were newly conservative ex-liberals in rebellion against the new left counter culture of the 1960s. When they crossed-over, they lent a new credibility for conservatism to the intellectual and academic circles, because the neocons possessed previously established intellectual pedigrees, where the classic conservatives, as outsiders, enjoyed no such status. Obviously, Neocons became far more effective critics of the new left than the classical conservatives; consequently they were despised more by liberals and that carries over to this day. To do the concept of neoconservatism further justice requires someone more knowledgeable than me, but that's about the gestalt of it from my perspective. "

Hey Yada wrote on Oct 4, 2007 10:35 PM:

" Just remember that many of those "coalition" countries, like Dominican Republic, peeled off as soon as they got the money. Let's not foget that the majority of the people in virtuallyy all the "coalition" countries, except Polan where it ran slighty above 50% pro, were against the war. How many coalition countries are left Yada? Even Britain, who was so amazingly successful in their province of occupation, declared victory and pretty much went went home. "

Open the Shades wrote on Oct 4, 2007 9:28 PM:

" Yada has a concept of humanity very much like Michael Vick has of dogs. It is not terribly hard to discern that something is wrong in there, folks. Yada, you seem to live in a prison without sunlight. "

Yada's Wet wrote on Oct 4, 2007 9:24 PM:

" Barry Goldwater was conservative, not neoconservative. Ask Pat Buchanan, who worked in the Reagan administration, if Reagan was neoconservative, lol. William F. Buckley is a conservative, not a neoconservative. George Will is a conservative, not a neoconservative. It has been said that there are no conservatives left in Washington, and I tend to agree. "

YadaYada wrote on Oct 4, 2007 9:16 PM:

" Dear "Hey Yada", Saddam shoulda, woulda, coulda been defeated by 48 countries in the world. Nope! But, thanks for reminding me that the Iraq War WAS a coalition of more than 40 countries in a U.N. sanctioned invasion. I keep forgetting that and so do you and your buddies. Also, thanks for reminding me of the Grenada invasion; I had forgotten that one. Did they issue live ammo to our troops during that one? Speaking of forgetting, I even forgot about the great Clinton invasion of Haiti to prop-up Kofi Anon's fraternity bro, Aristide. If I recall correctly, during that big mama our troops were not permitted to occupy a 1st Class cabin on the love boat sailing between Port-au-Prince and Galveston. Tough duty, but it was a Liberal thing, don't you know? "

Come off it Yada wrote on Oct 4, 2007 8:33 PM:

" The main "movement" of neoconservatives under Reagan was that they moved from the Democratic party and some from Communism to cling to the Reagan administration. The acid test for any older and bona fide conservative has always been "did they vote for Goldwater?". Not a single neoconservative did. Bush Sr. kept neoconservatives at bay, as did Clinton. Somewhere before the 2000 election, they were able to mold Cheney and the result is the war in Iraq. "

Hey Yada wrote on Oct 4, 2007 8:22 PM:

" Get over yourself with this "defeat" of Saddam. Saddam could have been defeated by 48 countries in the world. The U.S. engaging Iraq in organized combat is like a 300 pounder going after a 12 year old. Neocons set up Saddam as a straw man in order to be able to have this war. Remember Yada, we also defeated Grenada, don't shortchange us on that one. "

YadaYada wrote on Oct 4, 2007 8:12 PM:

" Amendment: I stated Reagan was a Democrat Governor of California before he was a Republican president. That's incorrect and I did not catch that error until this evening when I returned to my home and read my post. Allow me to acknowledge the error and to correct it. Reagan was an active political Democrat in California. He switched parties from the Democrat Party to the Republican Party in 1962, prior to becoming Governor of California in 1967; but I stand by my assertion that Reagan was a significant player in the neoconservative movement; in fact, Reagan gave a rousing oratory, known as "The Speech" for Barry Goldwater's nomination in 1964, said nomination being considered by many to be the first victory of neoconservatism. That speech earned Reagan the title, "The Great Communicator". "

YadaYada wrote on Oct 4, 2007 7:18 PM:

" Dear "You are right again Yada", I keep forgetting, was Ghandi the one that overthrew Hitler or the one that defeated Saddam? "

YadaYada wrote on Oct 4, 2007 4:45 PM:

" Dear "Crazy for Yada", absolutely I remember the Republican Congress. I agreed absolutely with the deficit spending of 2001, 2001 and 2003. The best way out of the recession that GW Bush inherited was a loose fiscal and monetary policy, in my humble opinion. And I even can not strongly disagree with the deficits of 2004 and 2005. But, I strongly disagree with the Republican Congress' FY 2006 and FY 2007 unbalanced budget. I tell you about it now as I told the Republican leadership then about it. Those budgets should have been balanced. Back to you: Be quite precise, exactly what aspect of the budget is out of control at this point......do you really stand by your assertion that government employees salaries are the reason Democrats can't balance the budget?? Let's take these issues one at a time, and discuss each in detail, if you have the guts. So, pick a budget line item that Dems can't rectify right now and let's discuss it in detail. I'll start, cut $500 billion for the Iraq War....bring the boys home! "

YadaYada wrote on Oct 4, 2007 4:33 PM:

" You know, "Yada's Dream", I mentioned mental illness because I wanted you to reflect upon it. When I first encountered you, you stated that Reagan would never invade Iraq. That's either idiotic or mentally ill. What exactly would Reagan have done? You never tell us. You just make an unfounded, warrantless statement and pronounce it as valid. Then, you state that Reagan's people were "not neocon fools"; that's either idiotic or mentally ill, because Reagan was the quintessential neoconservative, followed by GHW Bush and GW Bush; Reagan's administration was heavily influenced by the neocons. Why do you suppose Reagan, the Democrat Governor of California, abandoned the Democrat Party to become Republican president? Then you stated, "Reagan even used the now long forgotten technique called diplomacy". Oh yeah? Ask Qaddafi!! And, ask the militant Islamic government of Iran.Within minutes of Reagan's inauguration, Iran set free "

YadaYada wrote on Oct 4, 2007 4:32 PM:

" (to Yada's Dream") 52 U.S. diplomats Iraq had held hostage for more than a year. I suppose that the Iranians did that to preclude Reagan from using "the forgotten technique of diplomacy" on them? "Peace through strength", leaves no doubt that diplomacy must be backed by a determination to use force when necessary and appropriate. Reagan advocated the use of force as a precursor to condition, once again, the American people's acceptance of it; to prove to the world that the U.S. was back in the superpower game after a four-year hiatus; and to accent (back-up) diplomatic negotiations. Then, Yada's Dream" you begin drifting incoherently, first spatially from Lebanon, then to Iran and then to Iraq, then temporally from the present time back to the 1950s. It's impossible to hold a logical conversation with you. You never complete an argument. "

Crazy for Yada wrote on Oct 4, 2007 3:12 PM:

" The budget cannot be balanced due to 6 years of a Rubber Stamp Republican Congress (remember them?). The Bush Administration grew the Government too much, while cutting taxes. More Federal jobs have been created under Bush than Bush I and Clinton combined. (Something Reagan would have abhorred) Those people need to be paid. Especially since most of them are cronies. "

YadaYada wrote on Oct 4, 2007 3:00 PM:

" Dear "Confused", the U.S. Government's new fiscal year (FY 2008) began just three days ago on 10-01-2007. The Democrat-controlled 110th Congress (110th) was sworn in on 01-04-2007. The 110th had nine full months to work on this new budget. So, did the 110th cut-off funds to END the Iraq War? Nope. Did the 110th pass either a balanced or surplus budget? Nyet, still deficits. Did the 110th rename a bunch of post offices? Yep. Did the 110th investigate political appointees of the Bush Adminstration? Yep, hooked a couple small fish. Dear "Confused", I ask you, exactly when will the 110th 1) end the war in Iraq; 2) balance the budget; 3) get a meaningful bill to the president's desk for his approval or veto? And, Dear "Confused", exactly why is the 110th's job approval rating the lowest of any Congress in American history? "

You are right again Yada wrote on Oct 4, 2007 2:53 PM:

" Ghandi fired how many bullets? "

Yada's Dream wrote on Oct 4, 2007 2:50 PM:

" Yada, you bring up mental illness for a purpose. It comes out like a thorn in your fantasy description of Reagan's dealing with Iraq and Iran. Reagan, despite the bravado, was neither a war monger nor a despiser of humanity in the manner of you and Bush Jr. and Cheney.. Are you aware of the depravity of the Iraq Iran war? The humanity that was killed and laying in those trenches that you so gloat about? Are you aware that Iraq and Iran were not even our enemies? Are you even aware that we went into Iran in the 50's and deposed their representative government and installed the Sha? Do you even understand that that gave us Khomeni? I do think that your belief in Republicanism is so strong that you are coming unglued during a time of challenge. "

RedNenigan: wrote on Oct 4, 2007 2:13 PM:

" I've called you out on another Blog, one you frequent, yet I still have no response to my question. Why? "

YadaYada wrote on Oct 4, 2007 1:40 PM:

" Dear "Yada Yada's Dream", my actual dream is that mankind would prove, just once, that it could solve an intransigency by diplomacy, without a loss of life or the issuance of a single drop of blood. But, history proves beyond any doubt that war is always mankind's ultimate solution to an impasse. To hope for an alternative to war as a final solution is commendable; to actually expect anything else ranges from naive to mentally ill. "

save the constitution wrote on Oct 4, 2007 12:38 PM:

" Ron Paul for President! "

Yada Yada's Dream wrote on Oct 4, 2007 10:32 AM:

" A very disturbed man, this Yada Yada. Seems to want nothing other than blood and guts and death all over. Very unstable. "

Confused wrote on Oct 4, 2007 10:20 AM:

" Yada Yada's mind must be slipping. I believe President Bush's Congress for the first 6 years of his presidency was Republican. Poor President Bush and his Rubber Stamp Congress did more harm to our Blessed United States, and the World, than any other person in history. Ever! 10 months is not enough time to reverse the damage of 6 years of a "tail between the legs" Congress. Those are the villians, Yada Yada. And, you know this to be true. "

Area Resident wrote on Oct 4, 2007 9:04 AM:

" There must be a "liberal conspiracy filter" on c-span at my house. Because I don't agree with your version pf reality! "

I Agree from yesterday aka Area Resident wrote on Oct 4, 2007 7:40 AM:

" I have nothing against Yada, just his ideals and beliefs. He can call me a commie and pinko all he wants. You know back in the 90's, I probably would have been considered moderate. But now, things have become ridiculous. I listen to Rush and Hannity and other(yada inspiring types)all I hear is goverment-this and socialism-that. When did we forget that the government represents the people. Your darn right I am for government, these corporations and their puppet-politicians have gone too far. Call me a commie indeed. But the FACT remains that we(when it comes to war and other recent actions) have placed a terrible burden on the U.S., the government, and mostly the PEOPLE. While these corporations are making a profit. I served my four years, and now that I am out (as well as when I was in) I see average citizens suffering everywhere. Who was I protecting? The people or the corporations? Pardon me for being enraged, but I am a normal lower to middle class person, with no ties to big business, and I am also the parent of a five year old. And I fear for his future more than ever. "

YadaYada wrote on Oct 4, 2007 6:06 AM:

" George Bush can't run the Iraq War or spend a penny of debt unless the Liberal Democrats let him. Yep, it is the Congress that authorizes deficit spending; the president merely supervises it. It's a fact that Liberal Democrats have had the upper hand in this country for the past 10 months. Yet, the Cuckoos in this blog are trying to lay blame for everything on poor President Bush. But, the Cuckoos actually realize, in spite of being in denial, that if America is in a mess, it is because of the Democrats; and that's because Dems don't know how to lead. Democrats could have balanced the budget, but didn't. Democrats could have stopped the Iraq War, but didn't. In fact, top Democrat presidential candidates revealed they will extend the Iraq War for years. The Cuckoos had a melt-down at that revelation, but instead of attacking Liberals, they whined even louder about Bush. Bush has maneuvered the Democrats into a position where they are forced to continue his policies long after he leaves office; he is absolutely brilliant! Undoubtedly, the best president America has ever had. A genius. "

YadaYada wrote on Oct 4, 2007 3:34 AM:

" "Yada's Dreams", are you stupid? Make a stance in Lebanon? What on Earth for? It would cost more to restore it than it's worth. Reagan did a Foghorn Leghorn on Iran and Iraq; Reagan put his arm on Saddam's shoulder and said, "C'mere boy, I say c'mere, son. Listen here. Now there's, I say there's an enemy (pointing to Iran)......go get 'em, boy. Then Reagan put his arm on Khomeini's shoulder and said, "I'm not an enemy, boy. There's, I say there's an enemy (pointing at Saddam). Go get 'em" And, for the next 8 years, Iran and Iraq ripped each other's throats out, expending precious human and economic resources in the process. All the while making themselves scarce on the world scene. Now that's, I say that's the way to deal with your enemies. "

yada lacks decency wrote on Oct 3, 2007 11:32 PM:

" Yada raves. Violent rage against "atheist schools"; slanderous and nonsensical descriptions of our society (FDR and LBJ were imposing "socialism"), including the inexplicable insinuation that bigots like Yada are oppressed. What's the point, Yaba? Your audience is hiding under a rock. Withdraw and lick your wounds. Maybe someday, many years from now, you can communicate in ways that aren't pointless. "

Let Yada Pay wrote on Oct 3, 2007 7:31 PM:

" Let Yada have the deal. If he wants to fund the occupation of Iraq with his tax money until they have a puppet "democracy", then let him pay. He will be paying until the end of his time, and will maybe take some of the burden off our kids and grandkids who will get stuck for the Bush war expense. Robbing Yada's wallet sure beats borrowing from China. The rest of us, the majority of this country, can use our tax money for infrastructure buildup at home. You know you're in trouble when you have to borrow for your own preemptive wars. "

Yada's hero wrote on Oct 3, 2007 4:18 PM:

" Reagan sold arms to Iran for Heaven's sake! Remember that, Mr. Friends in Langley? "

Yada needs wrote on Oct 3, 2007 4:14 PM:

" an appointment at the VA. Of course that will take 6 months. And, by the way, Yada, YOUR IRAQ WAR is not being funded. If you have any grandchildren (heaven forbid you ever parented), their children will be paying for this god-forsaken throwback to a Cold War mistake. "

Yada's Dreams wrote on Oct 3, 2007 3:26 PM:

" Yada dreams with his alter ego, the one who was a secret agent in the Middle East under the Reagan administration. Yada, however, needs to read a little bit more to understand that Reagan's people were pragmatists, not neocon fools like Bush Jr.'s. There would have been no Iraq invasion under Reagan. Not in our best interest. When our Marines were bombed in Lebanon, the Reagan people withdrew. Not in our best interest to stay. Imagine, Reagan even used the now long forgotten technique called diplomacy. Ok Yada, I have to admit, when you and your little voice inside were in charge of things in the Middle East, things were a lot more professionally handled. "

ThosSpence wrote on Oct 3, 2007 2:44 PM:

" Likewise with your literally demented comments on Iraq. The Al-Maliki government is a nascent democracy that only needs to "mature" a little bit more? Why is it that his government controls virtually no territory outside of the Green Zone? Iraq is not even a sovereign state. Otherwise, why are the criminal mercenaries still there, after al -Maliki banned them? And if the surge is so effective, why do American diplomats need to be surrounded by Rambos every time they step out of the Green Zone? Even allegedly hopeful developments that Petraeus and others have emphasized, like the willingness of Sunni sheiks to work with the American military, undermines the authority of the Shiite-dominated central government. It is no surprise that your ideological convictions and addiction to thuggish red-baiting completely preempt any remote chance of reasoned discussion. "

ThosSpence to Yada wrote on Oct 3, 2007 2:35 PM:

" Your ignorance never ceases to amaze. Ronald Reagan made a great speech, thank you Michael Deaver. But he had nothing whatsoever to do with bringing down the Berlin Wall. Gorbachev took the decisive decision,to focus on internal domestic reform and renewal in the Soviet Union and disengage from the empire he inherited. Just as important was the courage and activism of Germans who challenged the Honecker government and demanded change. Given your deep American chauvinism and nationalism, you will undoubtedly continue to repeat this simplistic nonsense. But that doesn't make it true. "

RedNenigan: wrote on Oct 3, 2007 1:36 PM:

" I'm still waiting for your response.... "

YadaYada wrote on Oct 3, 2007 11:18 AM:

" Dear "I agree" I'll cover the war taxes, you handle the socialist taxes. As far as a smoker's tax is concerned: Nyet, Comrade Pinko! What we'll do, instead, is let the owners of personally-owned-businesses, determine who smokes in their businesses, not the Commie pinko government. In this country, the people control the government, not vice versa; government prohibition doesn't work without the consent of the of the people. And, no, hallelujah, we won't pay a religious school tax in this country either, Stalin. Before we sovereign colonists ratified the Constitution in 1788, we God-fearing worshippers eternally ensured that our right to establish and practice religion would never be tread upon; we even had the guarantee HIGHLIGHTED in the First Amendment! So, what we people of God are going to do, is instill the deity into the spirit of each of our children, dig in our heels, and have prayer in schools if and when our kids want to worship in school. If you don't like it, send your kids to atheist school where you can pay an atheist tax. Simple enough! "

YadaYada wrote on Oct 3, 2007 10:31 AM:

" "Finally", you've got a deal, Bucko! You just hold back your taxes while my taxes support the Iraq War to create a free democracy in an advanced civilization of the middle-East, thereby ensuring peace, stability and economic prosperity for generations of Americans to come. Meanwhile, your taxes can go towards the Liberal, socialist programs of the Roosevelt and Johnson Administrations, ensuring waste, fraud and ineffective entitlement program spending for your kids, and multiple layers of grandkids. Oh, and by the way, my taxes expenditures for the Iraq War ends when this nascent democracy in Iraq matures a little more, but your spending is guaranteed to increase in perpetuity, as it has in the past. "

Tax Sounds Good wrote on Oct 3, 2007 10:19 AM:

" Making the rich pay for a war they support and which supports them is an excellent and almost equitable idea. As long as the lower and vanishing middle class has to provide the kids to go die or get maimed,why wouldn't Cheney's pals have to shoulder some of the responsibility? Why borrow the money from China and put our kids into a financial hole for eternity? You could always give a tax break to those wealthy war supporters who send one or more of their kids to secure Anbar Province. "

YadaYada wrote on Oct 3, 2007 10:12 AM:

" "To Ronald Reagan", I agree with you that it would be preposterous to say that Ronald Reagan knocked over the Berlin Wall; you are correct, that would be dumb. What really happened is Reagan spoke the words and the wall just fell over. Thanks for helping us to clear that up. "

I agree wrote on Oct 3, 2007 7:26 AM:

" Make them pay. If you want war, then you personally pay a war tax. You want to smoke in a bar, then you personally pay a smoker's bar tax to help offset the healthcare costs for the second hand smoke. You want god in the public schools, then you personally pay a religious public school tax. People on the far-right should be made to pay for all of these things that they feel is their "right" or that are in the name of freedom. Taxes should be higher for the wealthy anyway! Simple enough! "

Finally wrote on Oct 2, 2007 2:50 PM:

" A War Tax Proposal to pay for this money pit of a war. If you are truly for fighting this Mistake in Iraq, then you should pony up. Money on the wood makes the bet good. Call your Congressional member and ask them to support this proposal. Or, your Grandchildren will be paying off this debt. The fact is, only soldiers, and their families are sacrificing for this war. For every other American, it is business as usual. "

To Ronald Reagan wrote on Oct 2, 2007 10:19 AM:

" I'm not going to discuss my feelings on President Reagan but if you trully believe HE knocked over the Berlin Wall you're about as dumb as the people accusing Obama of being a terrorist. "

Festus a hollerin' wrote on Oct 2, 2007 7:23 AM:

" That Busch is al'rite, got me a tax-o refud chek. Bot me a nu carborater! wooeeh its perty, if only them dems lern to preciate a crome 4-barra with a dual acselerater pumpers. betcha my truk id' beet ol cleetuss. "

to bush is awesome wrote on Oct 2, 2007 6:52 AM:

" Please don't insult gas station attendants. "

Yabba Yabba wrote on Oct 1, 2007 2:57 PM:

" Yada Yada has more wind in his sails than a politician. More hot air than a hot air balloon. However, no matter how nicely one dresses up an argument, no matter if one uses fifty-cent words, Yada is spoutin' two-bit info. The economy is in the tank and it is no ones fault but the GOP and those lemmings who voted for them. "

hey "Yada Yada".. wrote on Sep 30, 2007 7:19 PM:

" ..is it "Bill Clinton" or "John Kerry" that is a cousin of "George Bush". It "is" one or the other, (perhaps both). A direct "blood relative", (it is true, look it up). I guess "that" would qualify as a complaint, to start anyway. "

ES: For Yada wrote on Sep 30, 2007 5:22 PM:

" I, as a Democrat, blame the cowardly democrats for giving in and agreeing to the war in Iraq without checking the sources of Bush's lies. I also condemn any Democrat who was for the apology to The General Patrakis incident in the New York Times ad, as I never would have backed down. Now what are ypou critical of the Republicans about? "

YadaYada, the Liberal wrote on Sep 30, 2007 2:11 PM:

" Dear "Economic Reasoning", I couldn't agree more. If America could just revert back to the Democrat Golden Age Tax Brackets, we could tax the richest Americans 90%. Talk about incentive to produce more! Oh, yeah, that'll get that old dollar back higher, all right. Well, maybe not, but you'd have permanently bought the "have-nots" votes. And, like you say, that Iraq War debt is not recorded; instead we are using the new Bush Triple Entry Bookkeeping System, to wit: debit, credit and "poof". "Lemmings with your tea, sir?" And, like you, it bugs me that China buys our debt; I prefer Japan, instead. Now, I don't want any of you Conservatives writing and lecturing me on the difference between debt and equity, I just don't care because, right now, I'm concentrating on getting back on a government hand-out program. Go Hilary! Free medical insurance for every legal and illegal resident in the USA. And, all the "Blind Loyalty" said together, "Alms, for the newly poor." "

YadaYada wrote on Sep 30, 2007 1:22 PM:

" "Better Idea", in this public forum, read by hundreds or more individuals, I have demonstrated my ideological and political independence by not only criticizing Democrats, but Republicans as well. As a Conservative, I specified three criticisms I had of recent Republican initiatives, or lack thereof. Unless you are a mindless robot for the left-wing Democrats, disclose some issues you have criticized the Dems about. But, you will NEVER do that, as I have, because you have no intellectual integrity; that is proof that someone else does your thinking for you. "

Economic Reasoning wrote on Sep 29, 2007 4:19 PM:

" Now that the wealthy 1% of Americans have benefitted from the presiden's tax cuts, we find the Euro, British Pound and Canadian Dollar worth more than the US Dollar. Debt to fight our wars have not yet been added into the nearly $9 Trillion National Debt. The real worry, however, should be our (the US) records amount of borrowing from foreign countries, namely China, who seem to be grasping the concept (at least, unofficially) of free market economy. Look out folks, when the US economy tanks within Bush's last year of office, as all indicators (except the White House's) point, there will be no one but the foolish GOP lemmings to blame. Some tried to reason with the President's economic policies, but that Congress of his, which he had for the first six years, suffered from Blind Loyalty. "

Cleetus to Festus wrote on Sep 29, 2007 2:38 PM:

" Thems fightin words! "

Festus to Es wrote on Sep 29, 2007 10:42 AM:

" I likes wot whot you say! Bsides idnt that an ol' dandy! Retoric? whots that! an ol misissipy brand fishin pole I rekon! Thems liberals are tryin t o make us all like the south louisans! "

ES wrote on Sep 28, 2007 5:33 PM:

" How unfair. To quote King George the Second (our President) "Children DO learn." No shortage of brains there, huh? How can anyone say with such intellectual statements such as the above that our President has ineffectual rhetoric? Just another lie from the liberal media, Clinton people, and everyone else in the world because Dubya is not paranoid or guilty of any wrongdoings. "

Cleetus wrote on Sep 28, 2007 10:29 AM:

" heh heh, 10 gallon o' Hat. Five ' gallon head! "

Festus wrote on Sep 28, 2007 7:35 AM:

" I sa'll this a videa, were Busch was diggin some dirt up! I likes the way that man s put together. Had a snakes skin ten o' gallon Hat- he did! Takes me bak to the good ol' times when a man was mesured by the messes he maid! "

President Bush wrote on Sep 27, 2007 10:29 AM:

" my rhetoric may be old and ineffectual, but is not even close to being as fuzzy as my "fuzzy math." Remember when I said that. I meant it, too. No "nation-building" or "fuzzy math." Just watch the economy when I leave office. If you think it is stalling now, just wait. "

So what if George is dumb wrote on Sep 27, 2007 10:00 AM:

" He is from Texas, and yall can't mess with Texas! The US Americans need more than just some chump leader that can talk good. We need someone with some swagger that knows how to shoot guns and stuff. Gearge is the man, and I don't cae what y'all say I don't see how he is like Junior in the Smokey and the Bandit movies. Burt Reynolds and George Bush would be unstaoppable man. fear that terrorists. "

i think wrote on Sep 27, 2007 8:09 AM:

" LOL omg!!!!! "

Bush is Awesome wrote on Sep 26, 2007 7:56 PM:

" Dang yall, I was at Walmarts tonight and was talkin to my tractor pull buddies about how dang cool Bush is. I mean, he sounds just like me, you know? And, i bet he can kick but, like Chuck Norris. Dang, no body better never mess with Bush man. This world needs a leader that talks, acts and looks like your local gas station attendant. Bush rules, dang heck yeah. "

Romans wrote on Sep 26, 2007 5:00 PM:

" I like the US. They are the new Romans and they'll kill the people of any country they want. I'm glad the people of the world are som much poorer than us as I can buy my cloithes from Walmart for just a few dollars and our corporations only pay those porr pathetic foreigners ten cents an hour. They desrve no more, since they are evil and not good like Americans. Long live Bush. "

Sox 05 wrote on Sep 26, 2007 3:31 PM:

" We need another Clinton in the White House so the economy can be another lie for 8 years and major companies can doctor their books. "

to: does it matter wrote on Sep 26, 2007 11:21 AM:

" Yes, there will be those who pick on the next President: that is part of the democratic process. But Bush earned his scorn, by setting up his own regal government with no relationship to the majority of Americans. He arrogantly plays us as chumps. You cannot equate 'patriotism" with following Bush. Patriotism is when you educate yourself to what is going on and say "enough". "

i think wrote on Sep 26, 2007 8:53 AM:

" you ppl need help! my god what has made you all so hatefull? honestly reading what is on this blog, it is starting to become VERY clear what is wrong with this country!! i thought thats what made our country great, you can have your own ideas and live the way you want to, but seeing you are attacking each other over difference opinions. my goodness do you ppl realize how much energy it takes to be so angry all the time. calm down! this is not the end of the world. it is sad that so many of our troops are being killed for a needless reason. they have fought since the times of christ. leave it alone. move on. just enjoy the fact that we don't have to live like them, lets work on our country and our homeless and our budgets and you don't have to be a hippy just to want happiness and peace! just some fyi for all you hate mongers!! hopefully this will all be over soon, our troops will be home and ya'll can argue over the next president! "

To Dubya is Great!!!! wrote on Sep 25, 2007 11:18 PM:

" Oooh! I am so riled up. Oh, my! I am red with rage. My hippie-dippie psychedelic VolksWagon bus with paisley stickers on it, is even mad. It is acting like a gas-guzzling 8 cylinder American made Yukon. Ooh, my blood is pumping like Middle-Eastern oil into the pocketbooks of American Oil Men. I am so mad, I could spit. God needs to bless America, because the current administration is pure evil. "

does it matter wrote on Sep 25, 2007 9:33 PM:

" ...who is president. All this nitpicking will go on with the next president and the one after. No one is happy about the president any more. No one backs the president any more. We almost have to face the reallity that we will never be happy with any politcal leader. Gone are the days of patriots. "

ThosSpence wrote on Sep 25, 2007 6:45 PM:

" Democrats love Saddam? It was your hero Reagan who acted as Saddam's ally during the Iran-Iraqi war, transferring billions in economic aid as well as crucial intelligence and essential support for weapons systems. It was Reagan's State Department that denied the massacres at Halabja had taken place. Not a single democrat that I am aware of has ever said anything remotely positive about Saddam. In contrast, your hero embraced him. When Saddam was doing his worst, he was America's de facto ally. It was only when Saddam was gravely weakened that he became an unendurable scourge of the earth. Learn your own history instead of repeating illiterate nonsense. "

To: I Like Dubya wrote on Sep 25, 2007 5:55 PM:

" Your blind support of Bush is at the expense of our brave men and women in uniform. What reality do you subscribe to? "

Ronald Reagan wrote on Sep 25, 2007 4:39 PM:

" President Reagan was a Great President to everyone but the hipsters and pro communist.HE knocked over the Berlin Wall with out a shot being fired.God Bless him. And to hell with the anti christian Liberal Democrats. "

TIMMY !!!!!!!! wrote on Sep 25, 2007 4:33 PM:

" Saddam,Fidel and Che Killed Millions, MILLIONS of CIVILIANS are gone at their hands. Yet the DemocRATS worship them and Buy Che shirts at the mall. 1000s more died REMOVING a President Hussein Now democrats want us to VOTE FOR A Hussein ?? (Barak hussein obama).NO way ? "

Why do wrote on Sep 25, 2007 4:28 PM:

" Democrats Love Saddam Hussein ?????? Why do democRATS love dictators ????? GW Bush has done a remarkable good job fighting the Communist,Facist,Terrorist,Democrats,Socialism. He is a REAL American Hero "

Dubya is GREAT !!! wrote on Sep 25, 2007 4:23 PM:

" Thats enuff,The title should rile up the hippies enough... God Bless Dubya and The USA . As for the guy who claims Saddam would have been but a blip in history,Tell that to the familys of the 100s of thousands he executed. "

i think wrote on Sep 25, 2007 3:21 PM:

" that we need Clinton back! who cares if he was unfaithfull to his wife!! really almost every president in history screwed someone besides his wife! and look at it this way we were BETTER off!! OUR country had more money and soldiers at home. i vote Clinton. (well if it were an option) LOL Americans do hate each other over politics. and thats very sad because thats the very thing that lets the"bushes" of the world do their damage!! sad but true!!! maybe if Hillary gets in office she will remember some of the things her husband did right and not any of what he did wrong and a woman will right the world. i am really not political at all, its all too depressing!! but i think that would be the best considering the situation OUR country is in! thats right i said OUR i think you all need to remember that. we all want whats best! and women are ALWAYS right! right? LOL lighten up ppl you have at least a lil while before the end of times!!! "

Sad wrote on Sep 25, 2007 1:08 PM:

" It is so sad that we Americans have become so divided by politics that we cannot be kind to one another! Everything has become tainted by our hate of the opposite party. How about being proud to be an American and willing to be civil to one another? How about a Congress that is not so divided that they find it impossible to work out any compomise for the American people? It is time for cooperation by the Congress and time for President Bush to accept what the congress is able to agree on and not tell them ahead of time he is not going to sign it! "

I Don't Like Dubya wrote on Sep 25, 2007 10:58 AM:

" To say that Bush will be remembered as one who ridded the world of Saddam is an absurdity. Saddam would have been a blip in history had not Bush and the neocons invaded his country as the first step of a master scheme of dominating the Middle East and killing them into democracy. The Iraqi military ranked 48th in the world and was 1.8% of ours. What kind of accomplishment is that? Bush will be remembered as the man who through sheer stupidity and arrogance, began the downslide of the United Stqates as a respected world power. He may even be remembered as the man who reinstated the Cold War. Bank on it. "

Also To: I Like Dubya wrote on Sep 25, 2007 9:02 AM:

" Reagan a good President? What planet are you on. You know, there is a Reagan Peace Garden over in Eureka at the college. It is the most weed choked garden in the western hemisphere. To that effect, Reagan and Bush II did nothing more than pedal fear to the masses and ran up the most massive deficits in American history. That is what is on the History Channel. 9 Trillion dollars in deficit spending in 5 1/2 years, without counting the war! (Check out the Pantagraph's Editorial page on Sunday.) That is Bush's greatness. He took after a master spender Reagan. Please, community, let us talk about how great of an economy the US has now (or had during the Reagan years, for that matter.). Let us also compare corporate scandals and skalawags during those years. You can like Dubya all you want, however, that doesn't make him a good president. "

To: I Like Dubya wrote on Sep 24, 2007 9:45 PM:

" The following statement says a lot about you and the rest of the 26% "GWB does a tough job,has tough choices to make" What? Look, Bush has no ability to communicate, he has no ability to build consensus and he has no ability to grip reality. These are mission critical leadership qualities that Bush has never possessed. History will not look kindly on the GWB presidency. Bush squandered the world unity that followed 9/11 with is 5th grader cowboy mentality. Bush manipulated data so as to sell a war that would have otherwise not been initiated. Bush failed to plan an exit strategy for his concocted war. Bush has politicized 9/11 each and every year of his presidency. At every turn, Bushees love for the republiCON party has been at the expense of the American Troops. Bush has made it clear that he will not be cleaning up the messes that he has created, leaving the clean up for his successor. "

To Wat, From ThosSpence wrote on Sep 24, 2007 9:28 PM:

" I just reread your idiot post . I can't believe that you have distorted my writing, which is far clearer than yours, to suggest that I endorse an Iranian-dominated Iraq. My wishes have nothing to do with it. But everyone who had any grasp of the region, its politics and religion, knew that unless Bush was planning on occupying Iraq for decades, a Shia-dominated Iraq would gravitate towards Iran. That was an easy one. I sometimes think that the logic of the pro-war position on Iraq is to identify an issue that will allow reactionary thugs red-bait. "

To Wat Tyler, From ThosSpence wrote on Sep 24, 2007 9:19 PM:

" Your comments about Iraq betray the most elementary ignorance. Even worse than your base ignorance is the apparent inability to think coherently. To have any chance of meaningful exchange, people have to be truthful and they also need to actually know something. Unfortunately, there can be no discussion with one who is so cloistered that he actually doubts that Bush's invasion set off a raging fire in Iraq or who literally believes that terrorist insurgencies (Sunni/ Shia?) existed and were tolerated under the Bathist regime of S. Hussein. It is common knowledge that every major Shia political party, including SCIRI and DAWA, survived the Saddam years in Iran. Al-Sistani, the most important Shiite Mullah, is an Iranian! To dispute that the Iranians are not very closely tied to the ruling Shia parties in Iraq is to confess to bewildering foolishness. Every one who knows anything about the region grasps that Iran is the big winner. Why don't you? And why didn't your hero's genius advisors explain this to him? "

I LIKE DUBYA !!! wrote on Sep 24, 2007 12:28 PM:

" Historically George W Bush will be seen a Great President. Even the Hippies and democRATS cant stop that. Nor can the Anti American Move On. I recall the constant bashing President Reagan took . Now the History Channel list him as the greatest American EVER !!! GWB does a tough job,has tough choices to make. Clinton,Will always be the guy with his schmo in a fat girl. George will be remembered for ridding the World of Saddam and his sons. God Bless the President. "

gladImGone wrote on Sep 24, 2007 11:04 AM:

" ....so is yours....... "

Better Idea wrote on Sep 24, 2007 10:32 AM:

" Well Mr. Doubting Yada. I think it might be interesting to know just what you mean by "Criticizing". Do you mean just posting and posting and posting here under a pseudonym? Or can you, as I can, document it with copies of e-mails to public officials and copies of responses I have received via the regular mail? You can whine and rail all you want in a blog BUT THEY ARE NOT READING THEM. I know they get many of mine, and that at least a staffer somewhere reads it. I am also pretty good at button-holing them at events. Want to compare just posts or files and reputation in the Real World? "

YadaYada wrote on Sep 23, 2007 11:07 AM:

" Dear "Yada Oughta Getta Clue", I've publicly and strongly criticized the Republicans for a number of things, three of which I shall repeat here: Tacking-on a prescription drug benefits plan to social security; failing to take action, decisively dealing problems associated with our open borders issue; and failing to curb spending in the last two national budgets (prior deficit budgets I agreed with to accomodate ending the recession beginning in 2000 and extended by 911). Now, you name me three things for which you have been critical of the Democrats. "

YadaYada wrote on Sep 23, 2007 10:57 AM:

" Question for all you Iraqi-Shia and Iranian-Shia alliance prognosticators: Iraq is Arab, Iran is Aryan, do you really believe that their common religious affiliation will supercede their national origin and cultural polorization? Good grief! Armchair diplomats! "

YadaYada wrote on Sep 23, 2007 10:43 AM:

" The New York Times stated the following in its book review of Fox's “Revolution of Hope,”: "But when it comes to Mr. Bush himself, Mr. Fox seems charmed. He labels him “the cockiest guy I have ever met in my life,” A REMARK CLEARLY MEANT AS A COMPLIMENT. “Bush evokes the go-getter qualities I’ve always admired in Americans, Mr. Fox wrote" Obviously, it takes a registered, actual, rootin tootin, dyed-in-the-wool, fool Democrat to redact some words and twist others just to create lies about George Bush. Johnny said: If it don't hurt George a bit, then your nasty words you gotta quit". Dems, you're in charge, now! How about doing something more useful for the world than just re-naming post offices and conducting witch hunts of civil servants. What is this, the "Don't expect nuthin' Congress"? "

Yada Oughta Getta Clue wrote on Sep 22, 2007 3:00 PM:

" Democrats don't criticize their own? HA! HA! HA! On what planet do you live? Good Democrats are just as contrary as our mascot just as true Republicans as just as bloated, plodding and set in their ways as their Elephant. "

Wat Tyler wrote on Sep 22, 2007 11:22 AM:

" Windshield Cowboy said "Bush asked Fox to ride a big Palomino at Crawford. When they got to the horse, Fox, an esperienced horseman, said Bush backed off and looked scared." But according to the news reports at the time, WC has made some telling mistakes here. 1. This incident happened in Mexico. 2. Fox offered Bush the ride. and 3. According to Fox, Bush declined. Fox never said Bush looked scared. Melvin, no doubt a partisan democrat, has no trouble embellishing a good story to make our President look worse. But now you know the real story. "

Hmm wrote on Sep 22, 2007 10:02 AM:

" it seems, by all accounts, democrats/republicans, liberal/conservative or independents, the sitting president has been a failure militarily and economically, with the exception of the already wealthiest Americans, Oil Companies, and Military Contractors are the only entities who have conitinued to post record profits over the past five and a half years. 99% of Americans have been left behind in this president's economy. And, America has 165,000 troops poised to walk into Iran, the real reason we're in the Middle East. A Bad President if there ever was one. "

to Iran again wrote on Sep 21, 2007 7:43 PM:

" Meant to say "Sunni minority". Don't want you to think I'm stupid like the people who invaded Iraq, lol. "

Windshield Cowboy wrote on Sep 21, 2007 7:24 PM:

" Interesting that Vincente Fox called Bush a "windshield cowboy" in his new book, and "the cockiets guy I've ever met". Bush asked Fox to ride a big Palomino at Crawford. When they got to the horse, Fox, an esperienced horseman, said Bush backed off and looked scared. Rove had Bush buy the ranch in 1999, to make him look like a vigous outdoorsman and Reaganesque for the 2000 election. The ranch has no horses (Palomino must have been shipped in), or animals except for 5 cows. The fake accent, which he turns on when in trouble, does not make him a cowboy. What a piece of work this Bush is. "

to Iran wrote on Sep 21, 2007 7:16 PM:

" The winner of the Iraq fiasco does appear to be Iran. By destabilizing Iraq, yes, the Shia will drift more toward Iran. The Saudis do not look forward to this since they are Sunni, and are concerned about the Sunni majority, who formerly controlled Iraq prior to the Bush invasion. The Saudi royal family is in it for themselves and connected to Bush. They want to keep the oil revenue flowing. They will not align with any radical Shia government. The Kurds will press for guerilla war with Turkey to establish their own country. It is a mess, but we cannot afford to stay for too much longer without the draft. Americans won't go for that, nor continued moeny going down the toilet. "

AL GORE wrote on Sep 21, 2007 7:00 PM:

" If elected, I would stop the war, solve global warming, and outlaw lead tainted Chinese toys. In addition, I would re-invent the internet and invent an electric car and provide free health care for everyone and food stamps and carbon footprint credits for all! "

Why arn't you experts working for Bush? wrote on Sep 21, 2007 6:04 PM:

" I am sure he could use the help. Maybe he will listen to you. He hasn't listened to anyone yet that has turned out to be competent. Another thing: Are the Bush folks lying about the economy? There are rumors China may dump their dollar holdings. Basically, The Bush people have lied about everything from his service record to WMD. They lied about Tillman and Lynch. They lie about Iraq. They lied about firing the U.S. Attorneys. I believe there is no credibility left within The Bush Administration. We may be in for some rough times. The last time Republicans controlled things this long, we had the worst depression in our history. "

Iran wrote on Sep 21, 2007 3:53 PM:

" My point is, that we now have no choice but to remain in some capacity. Regardless of any errors that have come before, a pull-out would empower Iran to consolidate the region as a power block. Saudi Arabia would find it politically expedient to support the fundamentalist government. This could facilitate a large scale terror campaign in the west. (Funded by oil money.) Iran could find that a takeover attempt boomerangs against them into a civil war in both countries. Unfortunatly, that could destabilize the region further. Why should we care? Unfortunatly Americans are hooked on oil. Solve that problem, and you empower our government to ignore the region. "

Breaking News! wrote on Sep 21, 2007 2:52 PM:

" The war in Iraq has already been lost. What this is all about now is one individual's legacy. How many dead young Americans is that worth? "

Iran, So? wrote on Sep 21, 2007 2:29 PM:

" What did you think they were going to do after we invaded the country next door? Then also , do you seriously believe that the majority Shia in Iraq are going to have more allegience to us than to their natural religoious ally, Iran? Do you think we can just go into a country and sit down, without consequences? "

to Wat Tyler wrote on Sep 21, 2007 2:26 PM:

" Iraq was the most progressive of the Arab countries befoe we invaded. Things were held together by a harsh dictator. We have replaced that dictator and the place has fallen apart. It was and is of grave concern to world leaders that we have destabilized Iraq, and consequently the entire region. If the region becomes further inflamed, there will be hell to pay. To think we have not destabilized Iraq is delusional and uniformed. "

RedNenigan: wrote on Sep 21, 2007 2:25 PM:

" I'm waiting....... "

Iran wrote on Sep 21, 2007 2:10 PM:

" Its is no longer just about Iraq. (If it ever was) No President, either Democrat or Republican will be able to risk a pullout of US forces. Iran has made it clear, that they are willing to "assist" Iraq. They have also made it clear that they consider you and I to be enemies of humanity. "

To: Todd wrote on Sep 21, 2007 2:09 PM:

" You are the same type of person that makes the following claim: "they attacked us first". No, THEY did not. Iraq had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. By the way, Bush was President when we were attacked on 9/11. If Gore weas president, we would not have been attacked on 9/11......I agree, it is an outrageous claim, but so are yours. "

to Todd wrote on Sep 21, 2007 12:26 PM:

" With Al Gore there is no Iraq war. Nothing can say more plainly why we would have been in better shape. "

Wat Tyler wrote on Sep 21, 2007 12:14 PM:

" I would like to respond to ThosSpence. While I will admit that I am optimistic in my outlook, I deny that I am impervious to reason or evidence. What ThosSpencer offers is neither evidence nor reason, it is partisan rhetoric. Thos offers the premise that our occupation inflamed the region. The facts, as evidenced by the attacks, deaths, published threats and inflammatory posturing support the premise that the region was inflamed before we arrived, that our presence is nothing more than talking point to the mullahs and democrats. Thos correctly infers that I believe that radical Islamic terrorists existed in Iraq prior to the invasion. In my opinion Thos and others that don’t are in denial. But if Thos can provide documentary evidence that the terrorists in Iraq in 2001 were Christians, I will reluctantly recant my views. Finally, is it in the best interests of Thos to allow Iran to convert Iraq into a puppet state? While Thos seems prepared to accept that wretched state of affairs, I am prepared to defend Iraq from the predatory actions of expansionist Iran until they are able to defend themselves. "

So wrote on Sep 21, 2007 11:41 AM:

" some miserable sap writes a letter in a newspaper saying that he thinks the president is "uninspiring", and it elicits all these nasty and hateful attacks by anonymous individuals levelled against other anonymous individuals. Wierd. I always thought Bloomington -Normal was a friendly place to be. I guess these blog things really show the dirty underbelly of a place. "

Golffan wrote on Sep 21, 2007 11:32 AM:

" There's no doubt about it: To the bewilderment of many and the delight of the Politicos, when it comes to political parties, Party faithful, like lovers, go deaf, dumb and blind. For example, try convincing a young lover that his or her mate looks like something only a mother could love. But, somewhere in here lies a cautionary tale. A tale for the 'starry eyed', perhaps. Plato has Socrates telling the story of Thales, perhaps our first great natural philosopher, a man who, apparently, wore several hats. Thales, on an evening 'starry eyed' stroll, was so intent upon watching the 'stars' that he failed to watch where he was going. And fell in a well. "

Registered Republican: wrote on Sep 21, 2007 11:27 AM:

" I'm with ya. Richardson is the most qualified candidate to be President, from any party. "

to: Gotta Love it wrote on Sep 21, 2007 11:15 AM:

" "hate Bush at all cost losers" , y

Ads by Yahoo!

Shopper Newspaper Illinois

illinois Newspaper Articles

1 rule of a Flat stomach : obey