Lipsticking the Pug

Is the world safer for terrorism? Yes Nick, because we sucked Al-Qaeda into Iraq like a magnet and pretty much dismantled them. Not only that, but we found terrorist training houses in Baghdad in which training materials were found for hijacking more of those WMD's called commercial aircraft. See the National Geographic video "Inside Special Forces" if you don't believe me in which this is all video'd. Much more factual than Michael Moore's traitor propoganda hit piece:

http://shop.nationalgeographic.com/produ...

By the way, wasn't Tenet appointed by Clinton on July 11, 1997? Was'nt Bush sworn into office on January 20, 2001? Didn't 9/11 happen on 9/11, 2001 after less than 8 months in office dealing with the mess and negligence Clinton left behind? Wasn't there already an attack on the WTC during Clinton's administration? Didn't Clinton have a chance to apprehend Osama after the 1998 US embassy bombings in Africa and passed on the opportunity?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4540958/

Facts don't matter, its so much more convenient to blame Bush for everything. Now you want to blame McCain in advance.

If you think catching Osama Bin Laden would have been the end of terrorism you are flying on a high cloud. He has been rendered powerless by the war on Al-Queda in Iraq. Don't let the woman and her lipstick get to you, at worst, it could mean eight more years of thwarted terrorist attacks on the homeland.

hey Shaw, as a typical wing-nut your only argument as usual is "blame it on Clinton". Dude, wake up and smell the coffin, that is the coffins of dead American troops who BTW have died in greater quantities then 9/11. Maybe I should draw you a picture of how the world today really is, it would be like a Rorschach test for you except that the only thing that you would see are ponies.

Terrorists could care less if we have a hocky mom or a community organizer 'running' things.

There will be terrorist attacks, and some will succeed, no matter what color lipstick the pig is wearing.

Oh, Nick! Palin is Palin, but that list of books she proposed banning is just a new urban legend...don't you at least check snopes.com before you publish?

Good point Pimms. Nick, "I heard" doesn't cut it. It just undermines the reality that she did pressure the librarian, and that librarian finally quit.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/info/kilk...

Ok Chuck, in light of your fact filled persuasive argument - I concede, everything is Bush's fault. Let me understand the logic though -

"American troops ... have died in greater quantities then 9/11" ... so that caused 9/11? So therefore Bush caused 9/11?

Umm... ok. (what a left wing-nut).

Regarding Polar Bears, didn't good liberals used to be concerned about baby harp seals? So then, since baby harp seals are a primary source of food for Polar Bears, then isn't killing Polar Bears a good thing? I'm confused.

Isn't the reason the good liberals were against the Alaskan pipeline and ANWR drilling because of the moose and caribou? Isn't killing wolves then a good thing to protect them? I'm confused. You libs need to figure out which species you want to protect. Whatever best suits your current politics, right?

Things killing other thigns to eat, as they have for thousands of years, isn't a bad thing. Us clubbing things on the head and skinning them alive, and just taking the skins, and putting entire species at risk because we over hunt... that's a bad thing.

But as mayor of Wasilla, Palin tried to fire the town librarian when the librarian refused to remove a whole passel of books from the shelves. Among those books, I heard, were Catch-22, Canterbury Tales, The Decameron, One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, The Shining, The Color Purple, Huck Finn, and, naturally, Fanny Hill.

=============

Jesus, Nick, not you too. Is anyone in this town not a partisan hack?

http://www.snopes.com/politics/palin/ban...

Good thing we stopped Saddam before he got to Yankee Stadium. We sure taught Saddam a lesson, no one blows up our land marks and gets away with it. Oh wait, that was Osama Bin Ladin.

Wow Shaw you finally said something I agree with you whole heartedly. You said "I'm confused", when you go to the airport to get in a plane to go somewhere do you make sure that the plane has TWO RIGHT WINGS?

Chuck, I like you, you're a funny guy. But are you like 12 years old? lol

ASHAW , not equipped to dispute found terrorist training houses & manuals in Iraq , but even you must wonder why we didnt find the same here when ample intelligence existed & higher ups were aware ( Condi comes to mind ) . Please dont waste good space here trying to justify a war we obviously were ( are ) ill equipped to prosecute . I too wish to see Zawahiri screaming through jailhouse bars , however I dont think he is in Iraq where we are stupidly stuck spending your grandchildrens money !

shaw, shaw, shaw: i have only one thing to say to you......neener, neener, neener! oh, yeah, I'm 13 dude, you wanna meet behind the cafeteria so my big brother can beat you up?

Some things are worth the space, whether you think so or not. Yes I do wonder why we didn't have better intelligence here, but water under the bridge, I hope we have learned some lessons. But what does that have to do with whether or not it was the "right war"?

It isn't my grandchildren's money I'm concerned about, it's their freedom. If they have freedom, they will also have the means to make money. Money doesn't come from the government. The government TAKES money they don't MAKE money.

Right war or not, there have been no further attacks on the homeland, and that was and should have been the goal. Don't be fool enough to believe no further attacks had been planned. So something must have been done right - despite traitorous liberals determined to undermine it every step of the way. And as much as you may hate the idea, Iraq is now pretty much a victory despite our admittedly being ill equipped to prosecute it, and the mistakes made in executing it.

When are you people going to give up and admit defeat in your agenda of everything possible to assure that we lose the war? Or will a surge be coming?

Any idea yet, how many of our soldier's lives were lost due to your giving the insurgents the idea that if they keep it up we will be forced to pull out due to the political pressure from the left? Yes it is all on Al-Jazerra TV, your rantings against the war, your demands to pull out the troops..

What about the demoralization you have created for our soldiers, telling them they are fighting the "wrong war"? Does that help them fight it at their peak capacity? Does a football team do better with cheerleaders or boos from the crowd? Yes it is all on the military media.

This war would never have taken so long or cost so much if we had stood united in support of it as a country. But...in spite of it, Mission Accomplished! (just said that to annoy you :)

wow shaw, that was really touching, i'm wiping tears from my eyes right now. it's apparent to me that you don't give a damn about your grandchildren's future in anyway. it's chickenhawks like you that make this whole situation pathetic. your hero Bush is also a chickenhawk like you and all you neocons who spew the line that we haven't been attacked since. you have no idea just how specious that argument is (sorry am i using a word that is too big for you to understand). you can give up all YOUR constitutional rights for your twisted love of war, whether right or wrong. it's ok though, you will be on the outside looking in after Obama is our next president. Here's a big wet kiss for you, or maybe you'd rather have a reach around instead.

Wow some people really love Bush on this site. There is no need to defend Bush's record, it stands out there for everyone to see, like a smoking wreck on the freeway. I know that even the Republican presidential candidate is careful not to seen in the same place as Bush or even say his name. Bush is why "change" is the theme of the election. When Obama does become president, it will be because a lot of moderate traitors(Republicans) will have voted for him.

That's about what I expected - a lot of name calling, Bush blaming and not a single fact or argument to back it up. More of the same. Intellectual laziness and cynicism is the change we can expect. I'm glad you are putting it on display for all to see. That's the only reason a man that could not even get into the Secret Service or FBI because of his terrorist associations (Bill Ayers) just may be the president - the other reason is because he's black.

Interesting how I didn't have a word to say about Bush but you folks not surprisingly have Bush Tourettes syndrome...it's all you can think about. I knew the Mission Accomplished would set you off lol

"Mission Accomplished" yes, this is mentioning Bush Ashaw.For 3 trillion dollars I would hope we got something accomplished.

"Bush blaming and not a single fact or argument to back it up" Shaw, where have you been for the last 8 years? The example is where we as a nation are now. Are you truly happy with the way things are NOW in America? (Massive debt, an endless war that unwittingly will give Iraq to Iran, Russia and Iran free to do what they want, Afghanistan heating up, not to mention the economy and loss of jobs). You are right though, I wish I didn't have to think about Bush more than I do, but I have too. He's like a bull running in a China shop. I'm not the only one either, 80% of Americans from all political walks(yes, Republicans too) don't like the direction this president has taken us to. It will be nice when we have a competent driver behind the wheel, at this point I almost don't care who it is.

simply put, " WHAT DO TALK ABOUT WHEN YOU HAVE NOTHING TO SAY? WHAT DO YOU TALK ABOUT WHEN YOU CAN'T EXPLAIN THE LAST 8 YEARS OF FAILURE?

Joe Biden, Sept. 5, 2008

need I ask more?

"no matter how bone-headed he or she may appear". What's up with this "may appear" stuff? How about "is"?

ashaw , check into which presidential candidate is recieving the lopsided majority of donations from active servicemen to guage their feelings about the Bush war . It must be very frustrating for you to know that about 2.8 peope out of 10 share your extreme values .

You libs are so much fun to toy with I know all the strings to pull lol - I haven't mentioned Bush once and you can't shut up about him. Hey hurry up you only have a few more months to impeach.

Guess what? I don't like him either, but probably for entirely different reasons - he is too liberal! He spends money like we have it, he hasn't done a thing about rampant illegal immigration, other than encourage it...I can blame the economic problems equally as much as the war on illegal immigration and his encouraging and almost forcing banks to give mortgages to illegals that can't afford it, massive donations to Africa etc .

Gotta love when web admin admonishes personal attacks then calls me a bone head lol! Enough of you silly name calling angry lunatics - Peace out! Next time I will just say "Palin" and watch you go ballistic...

Oh and good luck on that Obama thing and the change you're stupid enough to believe in - don't you get it yet? It's a marketing campaign. He's just another politician pulling your Bush chain and polling you so he can tell you everything you want to hear, promising everyone presents, so he can get elected and enact his socialist Marxist government and control all of you. THAT's the change you will get.

ashaw , you say you dont like Shrub either , but I am willing to wager you voted for him both times . If so , you share responsibility for this train wreck . Assuming you were paying attention to the voting tallies , you may recall that he actually did not win the popular vote. Many of us saw the results of his incompetence while governor of Texas , and private sector endeavors , and did not choose this very predictable outcome . If you did indeed vote for him , I want to personally thank you for all the great improvements in all our lives over the past 8 years . I used to think a lot like you , asaw, until I really started thinking about what it meant to be a proud middle class American . Maybe you too can someday ditch all the baggage you seem to carry and come to the middle . Seems like thats where we need to return if progress is to be made in the future .

shaw, now that you have patted yourself on the back many times and stuck your tongue out at us "libruls" i still ask you this, What do YOU have to say to defend the last 8 years of failure? I suspect that you have nothing to say, lol.

Charles U. "Chuck" Farley writes :"Maybe I should draw you a picture of how the world today really is"

OK Chuck, draw me the picture. (Or are you just trying to keep me in suspense)

Chuck U. Farley also writes: "you will be on the outside looking in after Obama is our next president."

Chuck: How do you address Obama's sixteen-month plan to deal with Afghanistan? In other words, I don't think things are going to change once he gets in. (And I think we're in agreement that Obama is our next president)

Just so you know that I'm not part of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy, I'm against this war and I'm not voting for either one of these candidates because they are both pro-Patriot Act (a little fact that phony Hollywood Libs are strangely silent about) and from what I see based on the sixteen-month plan, both pro-war.

So anyway Chuck, this is my drawing, do you have one to match?

Love those emotions...even the administrator can't resist...

I must say I am more on AShaw's side...then not,--at least at this point.

I am very very proud of Nick who voluntarily ate his crow with nary a nasty peep...gives me hope...

billclausen: thanks for responding, i respect you very much for that unlike others (ashaw, your silence is deafening). i agree with you bill, i don't think anyone that becomes president is going to change anything significantly in DC. if my choice is the lesser of two evils then i can live with that. i just can't stand all the lies and half truths that are coming out of the McCain camp and if Palin doesn't scare the living daylights out of rational thinking people like i believe you are then there is no hope for our country. that being said, i still would like someone, anyone out there to defend the last 8 years of failure.

chuckU I think you missed the part where I said: Enough of you silly name calling angry lunatics - Peace out!

But if you insist, why would I want to "defend the past 8 years of failure" when I don't consider it a failure? There have been many things that could and should have been done better, but basically we are safe, and Al-Queda has been deballed:

See US officials: Al-Qaida unpopular and 'imploding'
for the latest news:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080916/ap_o...

This is not an article from a far right wing website, it is from the very liberal democratic anti-war Associated Press.

I don't consider that a complete failure. Now if Gore or Kerry had been elected...
__________________________________

"Please attack and argue with the ideas and comments presented, not personal attacks on the commenter -- no matter how bone-headed he or she may appear.

--WebAdmin"

Yes you're right if we had a lawyer you would win the argument, it was a subtle association right after you removed a comment from chuckU that most probably was a personal attack on me. But you destroyed the evidence. Very clever lol. No hard feelings web admin, you have been very fair, I just thought it was funny.

And if progress is to be made, we really need to get over the irrational Bush hatred thing, the blame Bush for everything thing (including hurricanes and other acts of God) , and the grudges...

There will be liberals wanting to impeach him long after he is no longer president. (You know you're a liberal if.. you still want to impeach Bush in his third term) I predict McCain will be the next target SHOULD he become elected, no, more likely Palin - shall we begin impeachment hearings? Yes I voted for him twice, so what? Did you see the alternatives? Am I supposed to be ashamed?

shaw, what a great synopsis! you clearly have a grasp of the reality of today's political atmosphere and your eloquence is only exceeded by your graciousness and pensive outlook on life. but i would like to know 2 things, is the sky blue in your world and what is the flavor of the Kool-Aid you are drinking?

For those who think Sarah Palin and McCain are going to right the moral wrongs of the nation in a Christian sense, I offer these Bible verses. (King James translation)

Isaiah chapter 3, verses 6, 7, and 8.

6 When a man shall take hold of his brother of the house of his father, saying, Thou hast clothing, be thou our ruler, and let this ruin be under thy hand:

7 In that day shall he swear, saying, I will not be an healer; for in my house is neither bread nor clothing: make me not a ruler of the people.

8 For Jerusalem is ruined, and Judah is fallen: because their tongue and their doings are against the LORD, to provoke the eyes of his glory.

So with these verses in mind, why does Palin think she can help this God-forsaken nation?

Perhaps she believes God hasn't forsaken the nation, rather, the nation has forsaken God.

But is Sarah Palin calling upon America to change it's ways or is she merely presenting herself as the instrument of God?

When was the last time any politician who called themselves a Christian took America to task for their anti-Christian ways? If Palin did this, she would not be very popular and this makes me think she is a wolf in sheep's clothing.

The problem with the average American is that they want their elected officials to do it all for them, whether it's to restore morality, fix the gang problem, or reduce out-of-wedlock pregnancy. The problem is, the garbage actually rolls from the bottom up and Palin should be telling people that they are on the wrong track.

Just as the Left has fallen for Obama's package of goods and believe he will bring us "hope and change", (not likely given some of his previous actions) the Religious Right also will buy into anyone the Republican Party raises up because they figure that the enemy of their enemy must be their friend.

As the saying goes "Be ye not deceived".

Is this an Ashaw/chuckUFarley personal potshot blog page? Jeez!! Is anyone here even familiar with the writings of Karl Marx. Is anyone here even familiar with what Marx had to say about about communist Russia? Stop making comparisons about history until you read up on your history. Maybe all of you should read about "Jainism". Just because other people don't agree to your personal opinion, doesn't make them traitors, "pinkos" or gun toting fools, or lipstick vendors.

is anyone here even familiar with what Marx had to say about about communist Russia?

Marx died in 1883, Russia went communist in 1917.

Russia was already in interim communism

let me correct myself, billclausen. Friedrich Engels actually condemned the communist movement in Russia, on behalf of Marx's memory. The Tsar was still in power, but communist "terrorists" had already stared making inroads in some outlying areas, before Trotsky, Lenin, and Stalin. It was a radicilation of Marx's theories. Marx was a philosopher, not a working politician.

jomo, thank you for the update. You have a one-of-a-kind grasp of history.

I remember the other name for the "interim communism" Russia was under until 1917: tsarist autocracy.

Please share with us Marx's quotes about the Russian Provisionals and the Soviet Union...

[this reminds me of that classic T-shirt of old, emblazened with --

MARX : LENNON

and pictures of Groucho & John ].

http://www.marx-brothers.org/whyaduck/ca...

http://growabrain.typepad.com/photos/unc...

http://www.freakingnews.com/pictures/600...

Binky: Do you have any idea how close this thread is to approaching Godwin's law? I'm tempted to say his name...OK, I'm better now.

How come no one names their kid "Adolph" anymore?

Because there is only one Adolph Coors.

Come on Binky, say it. H-I-T-L.... you can do it.

Binky. I like the T=shirt scenario. Reprint appeared in the 1886 book "Die schlesische Milliarde". Von Wilhelm Wolff. with Friedrich Engels, 1886. Basically, Marxism comes in more than one form. Whereas, Marx favored Capitalistic materialism, others usurped his philosophy to meld with their own ideologies. Engels did not feel that Marx would appreciate the shift in targets. Sorry, I cannot quote the exact words.

Jomo: What are your thoughts on Tito's brand of communism? For whatever it's worth, I met a militant anti-communist who had escaped from behind the iron curtain yet in spite of his intense hatred of Soviet-style communism he spoke rather well of Tito.

billcalusen - Tito, in my thoughts, was a unique individual and a unique communist. He did, indeed, follow the tenets of a true Marxist communism. De-centralising the national government, starting the "non-aligned" nation group were star making decisions. He was independent, without being egotistical or self-serving. The reality of holding the different cultures in Yugoslavia failed after his death. That does say something for his tenacity and charisma. I spent time in Yugoslavia and talked to lots of people from the different cultures. Very few had total hostility towards him. I'm sure he wasn't perfect, but by promoting Yugoslavia independence and cultural values, he endured himself to most people(in my view). Forcing the serbs, croats, and a myriad of other cultures to get along was not was not easy, I'm sure, nor was it always pleasant, and not successful, in the long run. He was unique, and I believe, somewhat more successful than Stalin in promoting communism. Indeed, he seemed more successful than many leaders of communist nations, in general. These are my personal views of a leader that I'm not totally familiar with.

As I recall Tito also was better spoken (In English I might add) then the guy we have in the White House right now.

As you pointed out, he wasn't perfect by any means, but he sure seemed to hold the country together and furthermore, according to what I read many years ago, criticism of the government not only was allowed, but encouraged.

So here was Tito--born Josip Broz--who was a communist who reached out to capitalist nations such as ours and said in effect "we can be different yet we can be friends". I wonder why the U.S. can't say the same to Cuba.

My own feeling--and there are probably those who disagree with me--is that for some countries capitalism is the answer and others communism and yet others may do better with a combination of the two. In any case, it seems best to work within these differences and jettison the "winner-takes-all" mentality.

"How do you tell a communist? Well, it's someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It's someone who understands Marx and Lenin."

Ronald Reagan