Date:

08/01/03

Time:

04:52 AM

Comments

Date:

08/01/03

Time:

06:41 AM

Comments

Unemployment down, GDP up, polls showing Americans don't favor same sex marriages........ Another bad week for liberals. Maybe next week will be better for you.

Date:

08/01/03

Time:

07:40 AM

Comments

AWWWWWW! Evidence of WMD plotting found in Iraq

Matilda goes into hiding. Kevin screams STRIKE TWO! (Kevin must be another American ex-pat -- note his baseball metaphor). And the rest of the moronic Dims are silenced. What a surprise.

http://www.portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.j

Date:

08/01/03

Time:

07:54 AM

Comments

A fair and balanced assessment of what's ailing the Dims from the WSJ -- free, but registration required.

http://opinionjournal.com/editorial/?id=110003827

Date:

08/01/03

Time:

06:59 PM

Comments

Maybe it is the few glasses of wine, maybe it is because I am getting mellow in my old age but..... I hope no one doubts my sincerity, but I have to speak out against the taunts against Matilda, Kevin and the other or others who hold the liberal views or may live in France. My libertarian/conservative beliefs compel me to defend those on the defensive. This country is based on freedom, notably of thought, and one should never have to consider whether to speak one's mind for fear of the consequences. Fot that matter, let us not forget that it was a Frenchman (Voltaire, for the uneducated) who said: I disagree with what you say, but I will fight to the death to protect your right to say it."

I will post this before I sober up.

Peter Newark

Date:

08/01/03

Time:

07:33 PM

Comments

Dear Peter,

It must have been the wine (I'm a red man myself). And, I certainly don't begrudge ANYONE's right -- exercised or not -- to a personal point of view. And, I don't dislike Matilda or Kevin (I don't even know them).

But, if they and others like them want to stand on a soapbox and air these views, I feel obliged to speak up and air my own. And, when I think they're being moronic, I'll tell them so.

Date:

08/02/03

Time:

07:39 AM

Comments

White House Won't Declassify Saudi Material in 9/11 Report By Richard W. Stevenson New York Times

Tuesday 29 July 2003

Washington, D.C. -- House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi released the following statement today after the decision by the Bush Administration not to declassify additional portions of the report of the Joint Inquiry of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees into the September 11th terrorist attacks:

"Today's decision not to declassify additional portions of the report is a disservice to the American people. Classification should protect sources and methods, ongoing investigations, and our national security interests. It is not intended to protect reputations of people or countries.

"This Administration has an obsession with secrecy, and this report is overclassified. It took the joint inquiry nine months to complete its work, but it has taken an additional six months just to get the Administration to agree to some level of declassification.

"Our responsibility is to the families of 9/11 and the future security of our country. The families need answers; we need to protect the American people. The Administration's secrecy does not serve either purpose."

Date:

08/02/03

Time:

07:44 AM

Comments

Ah, Nacy Pelosi and the New York Times. They set the standards for non partisanship and honesty. thanks for the article.

Date:

08/02/03

Time:

08:13 AM

Comments

One of them, Byron Dorgan, a Democratic senator from North Dakota, called the concept a "sick idea".

"I think this is unbelievably stupid," he told reporters. "It combines the worst of all our instincts. It is a tragic waste of taxpayers' money, it will be offensive to almost everyone. Can you imagine if another country set up a betting parlour so that people could go in ... and bet on the assassination of an American political figure, or the overthrow of this institution or that institution."

Read more on this "sick" plan at:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/073003B.shtml

Date:

08/02/03

Time:

08:51 AM

Comments

The functionally insane also believe that Iraqis were among the hijackers who allegedly commandeered the planes on September 11, 2001. It is difficult to fathom, but these people are so crazed that they have actually taken the government's already fanciful conspiracy theory, which is itself totally disconnected from reality, and they have made it even more ludicrous by adding some Iraqis to the mix. I'm betting that a few years down the road these same people will also believe that there were a couple of Liberians on one of the planes, as well as an Iranian guy, a couple of North Koreans, a Syrian, and perhaps a Cuban or two. Maybe even a French couple.

Read the rest of this delightful article at: www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr40.html

Date:

08/02/03

Time:

08:58 AM

Comments

CHENEY: "IRAQ HAS RECONSTITUTED NUCLEAR WEAPONS" - BELIEVE IT…OR NOT!

Six days before the U.S. sent troops to Iraq, Cheney said "We believe Iraq has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons" [Meet the Press, 3/7/03]. This echoed his June, 2002 speech in which he said the same thing. He made these claims while offering no evidence, and despite the fact that "the CIA sent two memos to the White House in October voicing strong doubts about a claim President Bush made three months later in the State of the Union address that Iraq was trying to buy nuclear material in Africa" [Washington Post, 7/23/03].

MORE: http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/03/07/30_cheney.html

Date:

08/02/03

Time:

09:54 AM

Comments

The functionally insane also believe that Iraq under Saddam posed no threat to the United States, that Saddam had voluntarily disposed of all of his stores of Antrax and ricin (without documentation), that the Israelis were behind 9/11 and that Big Bill Clinton was the greatest President of all time.

Date:

08/02/03

Time:

09:59 AM

Comments

You bussflash fans need to learn some new tunes. The song you keep singing about no WMD's found sounds pretty flat:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=

Evidence of WMD plotting found in Iraq By David Rennie and George Jones (Filed: 01/08/2003)

The United States has found evidence of an active programme to make weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, including "truly amazing" testimony from Iraqis ordered to dupe United Nations inspectors before the war, the man leading the hunt said yesterday.

David Kay, a former UN inspector and now the CIA's leading consultant who is joint head of the Iraq Survey Group (ISG), offered an unprecedentedly bullish assessment of the hunt for weapons of mass destruction.

Although he called for patience, he predicted that doubters were in for a "surprise" by the time his work was done.

Date:

08/02/03

Time:

02:57 PM

Comments

My dear Peter from Newark. (I was raised in Union City, incidentally).

I feel compelled to write and thank you for your kind words. They are so rare on this message board. And especially I thank you for the Voltaire quote!!!! Don't know if you're old enough to remember the comic strip "POGO"....where Pogo's quote of these famous words came out as "I may not understand what you say, but I will defend to your death my right to deny it." Most of the replies I get on this message board sound more like Pogo than Voltaire.

I created this website before 9/11 and called it "Let's Talk Sense"......in the hope that we might facilitate a dignified and intelligent exchange of ideas. I'm afraid it has hardly been anything like that, especially lately.

For those who keep asking me about myself and what I'm "for".....I would like to refer them to the home page of this website and to the second link called "About this site"...which gives a short synopsis of my life going back to when I was 7 years old. I AM NOT a French Citizen. I'm an American and proud to have served as a Naval officer during the World War II. I was sent to France back in 1967 by my university to take charge of their Junior Year Abroad Program, and have been here ever since. I am now 82 years old and frankly love living here. France is NOT a socialist country. It is a capitalistic country, but it's what I call "compassionate capitalism".....which provides for its people, especially the young and the old. George Bush, in my opinion, doesn't know the meaning of the word 'compassionate' which he used so profligately during his campaign speeches. American capitalism is predatory and motivated by greed. Life in France is very "human", but it would take me chapters to explain what I mean by that.

I realize there are many, many things upon which we disagree, Peter from Newark......but I always read and respect opposing views.

By the way, Kevin is a dear friend who manages my website. He came to France back in 1980 and was a student of mine. He has remained in France for the same reasons I have. As far as my 'friend' the Hammer is concerned, I don't have a clue about who he is, but I very much appreciate his support and enjoy reading him. Thanks to him too if he's reading this.

Thanks again, and keep in touch please. Matilda

Date:

08/02/03

Time:

05:46 PM

Comments

My dear Matilda,

I don’t for a moment begrudge your right to hold your own opinions or to express them in whatever manner suits you. Indeed, I exercise similar rights myself. It’s your Kevin who’s taken offence and who’s threatened to cut off any (all) anonymous posters who offend him.

Nor am I critical or unappreciative of your age. Congratulations on your ninth decade. I am only sorry that you did not gain the wisdom that ought to have accompanied your years. I’ve given you ample opportunities to defend your “positions”; either you cannot or will not; you parrot the words of others.

I can’t imagine “appreciating” the efforts of MATILDA’s HAMMER? If I had an immature, undereducated, illiterate and self-congratulatory anarchist defending me, I’d like to think I’d ask him to stop – or I’d shoot myself.

Anyway, Yes, France IS a socialist republic. Else, why would the farmers and the truck drivers and the “artists” et al strike against the government for daring to suggest that the current pension arithmetic won’t last? I’m happy for you that you enjoy the fruits of past socialist “victories” and enjoy the “compassion” that accompanies them. If you’re lucky, you won’t live long enough to see France go broke and break its promises.

You see, while the US fought the evil empire of the Soviets, the “OLD” European powers of France and Germany cut their defense spending to zilch – and instead increased “social spending”. And, while they were at it they increased the marginal tax rates and the government meddling to the point where businesses stopped growing and businesses stopped hiring new workers. And folks stopped having babies.

Matilda, you’re living in a society that’s in a death spiral. The only vitality in France is the national blood sport of killing Jews (the one’s that got away whilst the French were carrying water for the Nazis). And all you seem to worry about is the unfairness of the 2000 US presidential elections – how terrible it is that that “moron” (in your estimation) thwarted the power grab by the Dims.

Matilda, you railed incessantly about the then pending war in IRAQ – but you uttered not a peep when Clinton rained death on the Serbians. Now you won’t acknowledge how much better a place this world is now that Saddam is gone.

So, do you want respect for your age or for your wisdom? I’ll do my best on the former – you need to do work on the latter.

Date:

08/02/03

Time:

07:07 PM

Comments

Earth to Matilda:

Your "HOME" link still points to your nonsensical screed bemoaning the results of the 2000 election.

Get over it. GWB was elected. Even if the Supremes hadn't slapped down the out-of-control FL court, Jeb Bush had already certified the Bush electors and if there was a subsequent dispute in the Senate, it would have gone to the House where each State delegation would have gotten one vote. Bush won the election -- no matter how hard the Dims tried to steal it.

Now, Matilda, if you'd like to change your message, feel free to do so. I'd be happy to get off this silly topic. But, it seems your whole reason for being.

Once upon a time, the Democrat party stood for something. This was a long, long time ago. Nowadays it's just about power.

Land Sakes!, I have no love for the Republicans, but if there's a choice to be made, there's no choice at all.

Matilda, wake up and smell the coffee. Your beloved Dimocrats are a fraud! GWB is a good and honorable man who's trying to do the right thing for our country.

And, he's going to win in 2004 by a landslide! Won't that warm your heart?

Date:

08/03/03

Time:

06:43 AM

Comments

We have moved from the most loved and admired country in the world to the most hated and least trusted in just three years. Imagine what the next four could bring. Korea, Syria, Iran? Whoa, Nelly!

So here is my suggestion. Let's start a national dialogue with all who consider themselves liberal, left, green or progressive. Let's take the lead at Fighting Bob Fest on Sept. 6 in Baraboo, where hundreds and perhaps thousands of those desperate for change will congregate to hear great speeches and share ideas.

Someone must start the national conversation among the sensible. You know, people who want Head Start to thrive, who think we need more money flowing to our schools than our prisons, who want national health care for everyone, who believe the Patriot Act must be repealed and John Ashcroft sent back to the Phyllis Schlafly charm school.

This is an appeal to avoid defeating ourselves. We cannot get trapped in the right-wing plot to win in 2004 by getting us to fight one another. (Remember, they haven't won a presidential election in 12 years. Let's make it 16.)

http://hightower.fmp.com/weblogitem.php?id=316

Date:

08/03/03

Time:

06:54 AM

Comments

And just a brief word to my readers. If you disagree with the previous post (as I'm certain many of you do) PLEASE don't respond by name-calling......you know the kind "moron.....idiot.... ex-patriot.....traitor...etc. Defend the Patriot Act, if you can, argue about more money to schools, about health care.....about how great Ashcroft is.. about the ISSUES in fact. Thanks a lot. Matilda

Date:

08/03/03

Time:

07:25 AM

Comments

Hack the Vote How to stop someone from stealing the 2004 election. By Paul Boutin Updated Thursday, July 31, 2003, at 3:31

Paul Boutin is a Silicon Valley writer who spent 15 years as a software engineer and manager.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2086455

Date:

08/03/03

Time:

08:19 AM

Comments

From the New York Post:

http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/editorial/2208.htm

August 3, 2003 -- Joe Lieberman's presidential campaign may be stalled, but at least he understands that his party is headed for electoral ruin if its White House hopefuls keep on questioning the war that toppled Saddam Hussein.

Four of the candidates actually voted to authorize force in Iraq. Yet all but Lieberman are now running away from that position - and accusing President Bush, in increasingly strident tones, of deceiving the American people.

"Some in my party threaten to send a message that they don't know a just war when they see it," the Connecticut senator said in a speech last week.

"And, more broadly, [that they] are not prepared to use our military strength to protect our security and the cause of freedom."

Indeed, he said, the furor over those 16 words in Bush's State of the Union Address has a "disquieting zeal," adding that too many Democrats have seized on the speech "as though it offers proof that they were right all along" to oppose the war. And the same, he said, "is true of some who supported the war but now seem to have forgotten why" - referring specifically to rivals John Kerry and Dick Gephardt.

Lieberman also singled out Howard Dean as one of those who fail to appreciate that "Congress did the right thing in authorizing the war."

Moreover, said Sen. Joe, "nothing we have learned since the end of the conflict should make us doubt that we were right to liberate the Iraqi people from Saddam Hussein and protect America and the rest of the world from his aggression."

We couldn't have said it better ourselves.

Date:

08/03/03

Time:

08:36 AM

Comments

“And just a brief word to my readers. If you disagree with the previous post (as I'm certain many of you do) PLEASE don't respond by name-calling......you know the kind "moron.....idiot.... ex-patriot.....traitor...etc. Defend the Patriot Act, if you can, argue about more money to schools, about health care.....about how great Ashcroft is.. about the ISSUES in fact. Thanks a lot. Matilda”

But Matilda, why should you get away with posting vitriol such as this (from the article you posted): “Because George Bush is in meltdown. … I think it is safe to say he is now or soon will be the underdog in 2004. Everyone who is reading the newspapers knows that he lied about Iraq in the State of the Union address. They know that he lied about the economy in order to pave the way for his tax break for the wealthy.”

And then ask us to confine our responses to federal aid to public schools, defense of the Patriot Act and John Ashcroft, etc?

This article and your posts are just more examples of wishful thinking. No, GWB NEVER lied to us about Iraq. It’s you libs who lied and continue to lie. And the American public doesn’t buy it. Saddam was a TERRIBLE man and the world is a far better place with his sons dead and Saddam soon to be dead. And GWB never lied to us about the economy and your attempts to generate a class warfare fall less than flat.

About your wish to debate federal funding for public schools: Can you cite any studies that have successfully correlated increased funding rates with improvements in student scores? Take a good look at the results in East St. Louis, where an out-of-control Federal Judge raided the public purse to build palaces – without effect except to impoverish the citizenry.

As for the Patriot Act – check out the legislation enacted under and signed by Clinton. Where’s the difference? And why exactly do you hate John Ashcroft? Because he defends the Constitution? Because he’s a Christian? (I thought they only hated Jews in France).

And what’s wrong with health care in America? Oh, you get a better deal in France? Then you should live in France – while they continue to pay your fair share for you. Oops, you already do.

Date:

08/03/03

Time:

08:44 AM

Comments

"We have moved from the most loved and admired country in the world to the most hated and least trusted in just three years. Imagine what the next four could bring. Korea, Syria, Iran? Whoa, Nelly!"

Whoa Matilda! Where do you get the idea that the US of A has "moved" from "loved and admired" to "feared and hated" in the last three years?

Seems to me I saw footage of Palestinians dancing int the streets on the 11th of September, 2001. Think that was GWB's fault?

Matilda, your problem is one of wishful thinking. Because you have a pathological hatred of GWB (read your reason for being in your "HOME" section) -- don't assume it's shared by functioning adults in other countries.

What you claim for America is actually true of your beloved France. Why do you suppose tourism is down by half this summer? Do you think ANYONE loves and respects Chirac? Oh, you do. Good luck!

Date:

08/03/03

Time:

10:22 AM

Comments

Our recovery will not be enhanced simply because the Republican Convention will be held near ground zero.

Whatever President Bush and his administration may think, the one important point to remember is this: Since 9/11, they have stonewalled and prevented a transparent investigation of that horrific day.

This is the echo that should be reverberating throughout our country.

MONICA GABRIELLE New York, July 31, 2003

Date:

08/03/03

Time:

10:55 AM

Comments

Dear Monica,

What in the world is a "transparant investigation"?

Is it one where the motives of the outcriers are obvious to all? If so, then you have your transparancy because all this is, is yet another ploy to tray to gain some traction to wrest power back from the Republicans in 2004.

What do you mean by "our recovery"? Do you mean economic recovery from the Clinton recession? Or do you mean "spritual" recovery from the trauma of the 9/11 attacks?

Well, the economy IS coming along, thanks to the Federal Reserve and the Congress (prodded by our beloved President). And, our spiritual recovery was complete when Kabul fell. Now we are resolute. Those who would attack us must be killed -- and placed in shallow graves.

Date:

08/03/03

Time:

11:18 AM

Comments

Matilda, Matilda – you pack so much idiocy into a few short sentences, where should I begin? Let’s see: “. (Remember, they haven't won a presidential election in 12 years.)”

Matilda, do you want to be taken seriously? You claim to be 82 years old. Did you sleep through your civics classes in high school – or were you educated in France? George Walker Bush won the 2000 Presidential Election and was inaugurated in 2001. The Electoral College met and the votes were counted in the Senate. What part of this don’t you understand?

You poor besotted old fool. You think you’re rallying the faithful with your silliness. All’s your doing is further marginalizing yourself and anyone who hears your call. There’s plenty to dislike about what our government has wrought in the last couple of years – but no one’s gonna talk about substance if fools like you keep reciting this silly mantra.

Matilda, at 82 years on this earth, don’t you think it’s time you grew up? Take a page from Phyllis Schafly – who is a bright, bright, older woman. Let’s see you talk sense at last.

OBTW, let’s talk about Korea. Contrary to the whining from the appeasement crowd (Carter, Not-So-Bright, Clinton, et al), North Korea has caved. Score yet another win for the resolute. Boy, am I glad you nitwits are out of power. There’s hope for the human race yet.

I’ll bet Syria and Iran come ‘round pretty quick. Nothing like a show of force from someone you’re convinced means what he says to bring you to your senses.

Hey, on second thought, Matilda, please keep up the good work. We need you spewing your bilious nonsense. Keep up the lunatic fringe pressure on the Democrat party. Let’s see you nominate Dean or Kucinich. HOOHAHH! Four more years!

Date:

08/03/03

Time:

01:29 PM

Comments

"the Phyllis Schlafly charm school"?

Since you bring up the good lady's name (although I think you meant to cast it as an aspersion). She was born in 1926 -- this makes her your contemporary. Here's her bio:

Phyllis Schlafly has been a national leader of the conservative movement since the publication of her best-selling 1964 book, A Choice Not An Echo. She has been a leader of the pro-family movement since 1972, when she started her national volunteer organization now called Eagle Forum. In a ten-year battle, Mrs. Schlafly led the pro-family movement to victory over the principal legislative goal of the radical feminists, called the Equal Rights Amendment. An articulate and successful opponent of the radical feminist movement, she appears in debate on college campuses more frequently than any other conservative. She was named one of the 100 most important women of the 20th century by the Ladies' Home Journal.

Mrs. Schlafly's monthly newsletter called The Phyllis Schlafly Report is now in its 36th year. Her syndicated column appears in 100 newspapers, her radio commentaries are heard daily on 460 stations, and her radio talk show on education called "Phyllis Schlafly Live" is heard weekly on 45 stations. Both can be heard on the internet.

Pretty impressive.

Mrs. Schlafly is the author or editor of 20 books on subjects as varied as family and feminism (The Power of the Positive Woman), nuclear strategy (Strike From Space and Kissinger on the Couch), education (Child Abuse in the Classroom), and child care (Who Will Rock the Cradle?). Her most recent book, Turbo Reader, is a system to enable every parent to teach his child to read.

Mrs. Schlafly is a lawyer and served as a member of the Commission on the Bicentennial of the U.S. Constitution, 1985-1991, appointed by President Reagan. She has testified before more than 50 Congressional and State Legislative committees on constitutional, national defense, and family issues.

Mrs. Schlafly is a Phi Beta Kappa graduate of Washington University, received her J.D. from Washington University Law School, and received her Master's in Political Science from Harvard University.

Phyllis Schlafly is America's best-known advocate of the dignity and honor that we as a society owe to the role of fulltime homemaker. The mother of six children, she was the 1992 Illinois Mother of the Year.

Date:

08/03/03

Time:

03:11 PM

Comments

For years, the worst nightmare of the conservatives was that when the baby boomers began to take power, the country would end up with a president who was a draft-dodging, drug-addled deserter who would wreck the economy and bankrupt the government with deficit spending.

When I think of the money and effort the conservatives put into getting Bush into the presidency, I am appalled at the lengths some people will go, just to be right.

Date:

08/03/03

Time:

04:19 PM

Comments

"draft-dodging, drug-addled deserter who would wreck the economy and bankrupt the government with deficit spending"

You're confused: While Clinton most certainly did inhale -- deeply and often -- and while Clinton did dodge the draft, he was not a deserter. While Clinton did inherit an economy booming out of recession (and fueled by the Reagan tax cuts), and Clinton did deliver to his successor an economy falling into recession -- I'm not sure how much blame to attach to Clinton, persoannly. Certainly, his "soak the rich" tax hike didn't help.

In any event, the country is very, very far from bankrupt. If you're concerned about economies going bust, look to "old" Euorope -- like France and Germany.

Date:

08/04/03

Time:

05:18 AM

Comments

Mr. Bush, You Are A Liar (7/11/03) http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/071103A.shtml

When a leader sends troops out into the field of battle, they become his responsibility. When his war planning is revealed to be profoundly faulty, flawed in ways that are getting men killed, he should not stick his banty rooster chest out to the cameras and speak with the hollow bravado of a man who knows he is several time zones away from the violence and bloodshed.

Such behavior is demonstrably criminal from a moral standpoint. The events that led to this reprehensible display were criminal in a far more literal sense.

Bush and the White House told the American people over and over again that Iraq was in possession of vast stockpiles of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. Bush and the White House said over and over again that this was a direct threat to the United States. Bush and the White House told the American people over and over again that Iraq was directly connected to al Qaeda terrorism, and would hand those terrible weapons over to the terrorists the first chance they got. Bush and the White House told Congress the same thing. Very deliberately, Bush and the White House tied a war in Iraq to the attack of September 11.

It was all a lie. All of it.

Date:

08/04/03

Time:

09:34 AM

Comments

“It was all a lie. All of it.”

My dear Matilda, I assume this was your post (who else would be scrivening this wretchedness at 5am EDT?). I myself choose to post anonymously, so I don’t criticize you for this. But you really need to grow up. You’ll feel better and you’ll be better for it.

What is with you that you ignore events and harbor only your hatred?

For the record, It was CONGRESS who authorized the use of American force in Iraq. The case was amply made that Iraq had refused to comply with UN resolutions for 12 years. And yes, Iraq had WMD’s – by their own admission. And Iraq worked hand-in-glove with Islamic terrorists (Oh, if they’re only killing Jewish babies they’re not really terrorists? And Americans don’t count either?)

Now, the world is a much better place and growing even better by the day. It’s too bad you can’t enjoy it.

Date:

08/04/03

Time:

02:38 PM

Comments

Why did so many on the left march to save Saddam Hussein?

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110003834

This sums it up real well for me:

"The crassest are the statements by supposedly mature people--one of these Clare Short, Britain's former international development secretary, another the novelist Julian Barnes--that this war was not worth the loss of a single life. Not one? So much for the victims of the rape rooms and the industrial shredders, for the children tortured and murdered in front of their parents, and for those parents. So much for those Human Rights Watch estimates and for the future flow of the regime's victims had it been left in place."

The argument for war could be made on the humanitarian grounds alone, even if not even a shred of WMDs are ever located.

The sole justification for U.S. military involvement in the Balkans during the late '90s was humantarian in nature. The sins of the Milosevic regime pale when compared to slaughter conducted in Baathist Iraq.

This is why the endless chattering of the "16 words" in the SOTU address and other nonsense are obscene. Can anyone make a plausible argument that post-Saddam Iraq is worse off today with the removal of this maniac?

This is why I'm convinced that those who engage in the New Age brand of Clintonian politics are narcissists more concerned with the ego gratification of "caring" about the down trodden than actually doing anything to alleviate the suffering.

That's why I contend that the U.S. Army's 3rd Infantry has done more humanitarian work in less than a year than Voices in the Wilderness, International ANSWER and Amnesty International will accomplish in 1,000 of press releases and demostrations

Date:

08/04/03

Time:

02:39 PM

Comments

Why did so many on the left march to save Saddam Hussein?

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110003834

This sums it up real well for me:

"The crassest are the statements by supposedly mature people--one of these Clare Short, Britain's former international development secretary, another the novelist Julian Barnes--that this war was not worth the loss of a single life. Not one? So much for the victims of the rape rooms and the industrial shredders, for the children tortured and murdered in front of their parents, and for those parents. So much for those Human Rights Watch estimates and for the future flow of the regime's victims had it been left in place."

The argument for war could be made on the humanitarian grounds alone, even if not even a shred of WMDs are ever located.

The sole justification for U.S. military involvement in the Balkans during the late '90s was humantarian in nature. The sins of the Milosevic regime pale when compared to slaughter conducted in Baathist Iraq.

This is why the endless chattering of the "16 words" in the SOTU address and other nonsense are obscene. Can anyone make a plausible argument that post-Saddam Iraq is worse off today with the removal of this maniac?

This is why I'm convinced that those who engage in the New Age brand of Clintonian politics are narcissists more concerned with the ego gratification of "caring" about the down trodden than actually doing anything to alleviate the suffering.

That's why I contend that the U.S. Army's 3rd Infantry has done more humanitarian work in less than a year than Voices in the Wilderness, International ANSWER and Amnesty International will accomplish in 1,000 of press releases and demostrations

Date:

08/04/03

Time:

03:46 PM

Comments

http://www.letstalksense.com/articles/accomplishments.htm

Don't miss this one, whatever your political persuasions may be. And these are not opinions.... these are FACTS!!!!! Have fun you guys. Matilda

Date:

08/04/03

Time:

04:53 PM

Comments

What do I mean by "even America's idea of justice"?

I include the sense of things that has a President, once a rich and carefree young man known to have abused various drugs without once suffering a significant penalty, spending his political career as governor of Texas gloating over tens of thousands of poor young men imprisoned for the same act. This rich young man also avoided military service during war, not for reasons of conscience or principle, but to continue his carefree ways, later displaying no hesitation ordering others to their deaths.

America is a country that imprisons world-record levels of its poor population while effectively tolerating gigantic corporate swindles. The people who damage millions of others and steal billions never suffer penalties comparable to the poor who steal something paltry.

John Chuckman

Date:

08/04/03

Time:

05:04 PM

Comments

A Marine's view on the "opposition party" by Sean Bell A MUST READ!!!!

http://www.anti-sheep.com/articles/030728-oppositionparty.php

Date:

08/04/03

Time:

05:10 PM

Comments

The Kids Are Not All Right

by W. David Jenkins III

...............I have a very dear friend who happens to be a single mom raising three daughters, ages 11-17, and — thanks to the latest round of compassionate conservatism — will most likely not be receiving a check this summer. She has mastered the art of “organized chaos” that so many single parents are undoubtedly familiar with when it comes to maintaining a home, so she doesn’t have the time to be up on the latest news. But something happened on my last visit to her home which shocked and inspired me. We were sitting in the living room talking while the news was on television when her youngest daughter, Staci, spoke up. The news story was on the Iraqi resistance against the American soldiers and the mounting death toll.

“If we’re over there helping them then how come they’re shooting at us?”

I looked at my friend in disbelief and then turned to Staci. I never would have guessed that such thoughts were going through this eleven-year-old's head. She’s a classic kid, messy room and all. I just figured she was too busy with soft ball, dance competitions and teasing her sisters to even know there was a war – er, sorry – invasion taking place. How was I going to answer this young lady without going into the usual rant which I’m prone to?

Date:

08/04/03

Time:

05:28 PM

Comments

Tell Staci that the United States in the process of making the world a better place. We have defeated a murdering dictator and freed the Iraqi people from worrying that their children will be the next rape or torture victims.

There still are a few evil people in Iraq that supported the old dictator and those are the ones that are cowardly murdering American soldiers in Iraq. Just as there are evil people in the United States that wish for our economy to falter and wish that the United States will be embarrased in Iraq (we call the liberals).

We can not run and hide when things get tough in Iraq. The majority of the people there fear will will do this, then the bad guys can take power again.

Then make sure she stops watching Kati Couric, Dan Rather and CNN so she will stopped being brainwashed.

Date:

08/04/03

Time:

05:31 PM

Comments

Aide: Saddam strategy on WMD backfired By Slobodan Lekic - Associated Press Writer

Saturday, August 2, 2003

Baghdad, Iraq — A close aide to Saddam Hussein says the Iraqi dictator did in fact get rid of his weapons of mass destruction but deliberately kept the world guessing about it in an effort to divide the international community and stave off a U.S. invasion.

The strategy, which turned out to be a serious miscalculation, was designed to make the Iraqi dictator look strong in the eyes of the Arab world, while countries such as France and Russia were wary of joining an American-led attack. At the same time, Saddam retained the technical know-how and brain power to restart the programs at any time.

Both Pentagon officials and weapons experts are considering this guessing-game theory as the search for chemical, biological and nuclear weapons continues. If true, it would indicate there was no imminent unconventional weapons threat from Iraq, an argument President Bush used to go to war.

Saddam's alleged weapons bluff was detailed by an Iraqi official who assisted Saddam for many years.

But in several interviews, the former aide detailed what he said were the reasons behind Saddam's disinformation campaign -- which ultimately backfired by spurring, rather than deterring, a U.S. invasion.

According to the aide, by the mid-1990s "it was common knowledge among the leadership" that Iraq had destroyed its chemical stocks and discontinued development of biological and nuclear weapons.

But Saddam remained convinced that an ambiguous stance about the status of Iraq's weapons programs would deter an American attack.

"He repeatedly told me: ‘These foreigners, they only respect strength, they must be made to believe we are strong,'" the aide said.

Date:

08/04/03

Time:

06:16 PM

Comments

Dan Rather, the NY Times, et al must have missed it, but the 8/4 Wall Street Journal reported that after blowing sands US troops noticed what appeared to be a tail fin sticking out of the sand.

They found 30 MIG Jets buried in the sand, all with US troops on the lookout.

Probaly wasn't covered in the liberal press because anyone with a brain would think -'Hey if they could bury 30 MIG Jets without us knowing, they could bury WMD.'

It would be a lot harder to stumble upon them by accident.

Date:

08/05/03

Time:

06:26 AM

Comments

Stealing The Internet </A> http://www.tompaine.com/feature2.cfm/ID/8528

We knew corporations and government couldn't tolerate having free, unfettered access to the internet - I might add, particularly now that internet activists have proven so troublesome to the powers that be, and have changed electoral politics via internet activism. Go to the articles to read the details of how the internet will be taken away piece by piece (along with any last vestige of privacy).

Date:

08/05/03

Time:

07:12 AM

Comments

For Matilda, "France is NOT a socialist country" ...

From today's Dow Jones Newswire:

France Is Slow to Trim Jobs

Prime Minister Raffarin Backtracks on Plans To Cut 30,000 Jobs From Bloated Civil Service

... France has long been saddled by an excessive number of civil servants compared with its neighbors. Even today, one in four French workers gets paid a state salary, and France -- along with Austria -- is the only euro-zone country where public spending accounts for over 50% of gross domestic product.

All that was supposed to change under the right-leaning government of Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin, who came to power last year promising substantial reforms. Now, however, under pressure from powerful teachers unions, Mr. Raffarin has backtracked on plans to slash 30,000 jobs in the public sector. The cuts were aimed at making France's civil service more efficient, while at the same time reducing the country's yawning budget gap.

But last week the government backed down, saying that only 5,000 jobs will go and none of them in the educational sector, which accounts for over half the government payroll of 2.2 million workers.

Date:

08/05/03

Time:

07:45 PM

Comments

I'm a High School teacher in the United States. This year I am telling the 400+ graduating class of our private school to check the race box for black.

That way they can get the advantage in admissions.

Date:

08/06/03

Time:

03:51 AM

Comments

"They have always taught and trained you to believe it to be your patriotic duty to go to war and to have yourselves slaughtered at their command. But in all the history of the world you, the people, have never had a voice in declaring war, and strange as it certainly appears, no war by any nation in any age has ever been declared by the people."

-- Eugene Debs, Socialist candidate for president, June 16, 1918

The speech led to Debs's being stripped of his citizenship and sent to jail for 10 years.

Date:

08/06/03

Time:

03:58 AM

Comments

Rose: Arrogance, or something darker?

By John David Rose Carolina Morning News

If you want to know why 9/11 was allowed to happen you may not have to look any further than the Oval Office.

A little more than a month before the attack, in his Aug. 6 daily intelligence briefing, Bush was "told that morning of the al-Qaida terror network's interest in conducting a strike within the U.S., and that it might involve highjacked airplanes," reports the Wall Street Journal (7/24/03.)

Why didn't he order airlines to be alerted, inform the Federal Aviation Administration of the threat, put the military air commands on a high level of readiness and tell the FBI, CIA and INS to be super vigilant?

He brushed the warning aside.

"Nine months before 9/11 the Clinton administration had a bold plan to attack al-Qaida," wrote Time magazine (8/12/02) before it could attack us. Weakened by the impeachment battle, Clinton put the plan on hold as a courtesy to the incoming Bush. In January 2001, the Clinton security team attempted to brief incoming Bush officials of the al-Qaida threat and the plan. Again they were given the brushoff.

"By last summer (of 2001)," Time related, "many of those in the know - the spooks, the buttoned-down bureaucrats, the law enforcement professionals in a dozen countries - were almost frantic with worry that a major attack against American interests was imminent."

Then came that fateful August intelligence briefing noted above, the full report of which was excised from the recently issued Congressional report on the 9/11 tragedy for "national security" reasons.

National security my foot. That information was blacked out to protect the arrogant bunch in the White House that ignored warnings that might have prevented the attacks.

But perhaps the Bushies had a reason for ignoring the warnings. Something brushed over in the Congressional 9/11 report suggests the possibility of one of the worst conspiracies of American history.

PNAC, Project for the New American Century, was organized in 1997 by Zionist neo-cons Robert Kagen and William Kristol. It is funded by three foundations closely tied to Persian Gulf oil and the weapons and defense industries.

Members of PNAC included Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Jeb Bush and Paul Wolfowitz, a director of the organization.

All signed a statement of principles, one of which was to promote "American global leadership" with special emphasis on Arab countries. Another was to "transform" the U.S. military with huge increases in defense spending.

Here's the chilling kicker: To convince the American people to spend extra billions for defense instead of on Social Security, Medicare, etc., PNAC suggested it would take a "catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor." (PNAC's exact words.)

One bit of confirmation: Former Gen. Wesley Clark told Tim Russert (Meet the Press) that "There was a concerted effort to pin 9/11 and the terrorism problem on Saddam Hussein. I was on CNN (on 9/11) and got a call at my home (from people around the White House) saying 'you got to say this is connected to Saddam Hussein.' I said, 'I'm willing to say it, but what's your evidence?' And I never got any evidence."

Perhaps it wasn't arrogance that made the PNAC-influenced administration dismiss multiple warnings of a terrorist attack using highjacked airliners. The truth may be far darker.

John David Rose is a long-time Hilton Head Islander and political observer.

Date:

08/06/03

Time:

05:14 AM

Comments

Hindsight is always 20/20.

Date:

08/06/03

Time:

06:53 AM

Comments

Matilda – who I believe posted the silly piece by John David Rose (who else is awake at 3:58am edt?)

What do you and your “hammer” have in common? Is it a pathological hatred for Jews? This piece you present for our edification is riddled with anti-Semitism (“Zionist neo-cons”). Did you get this way because you’ve lived in France most of your adult life – or is this why you live in France?

Anyway, with regard to Mr. Rose’s “points” (his anti-Semitism doesn’t warrant a response).

Yes, the WSJ article contained the quote cited by Mr. Rose.

No, the WSJ article did NOT say, “He [Bush] brushed the warning aside.”

In fact, the WSJ article says that the Congressional intelligence report (the subject of this article) said, “no information received by the White House or U.S. intelligence agencies "would have provided specific warning of the details of those attacks,"

As for Roses’ rosy homage to Bill Clinton, and what he woulda done … Yeah, let’s quote from Time magazine. Nah, they’re not biased. Sure, Clinton had a plan. He woulda killed all them bad guys. We just never gave him a chance – the Constitution getting in the way of his becoming king for life.

Clinton – a guy who wouldn’t get out of his chair to service his girlfriend – had “a plan” to take care of Al-Quaida? What was he going to do? Blow up another camel in the desert?

Date:

08/06/03

Time:

07:00 AM

Comments

The Pentagon takes steps to stifle news coverage of complaints from troops and their families, among them curtailing the embedded journalist program,

http://www.prweek.com/news/news_story.cfm?ID=186846&site=3

The 3rd Infantry Division, from where many complaints have arisen, has expelled many of its embedded reporters, and its troops are no longer allowed to talk to the media outside of pre-approved news features. ... Soldiers' families are also being advised not to complain to the media, according to news reports," PR Week writes.

Date:

08/06/03

Time:

07:12 AM

Comments

FORMER CONGRESSWOMAN CYNTHIA MCKINNEY DELIVERS FEARLESS ADDRESS IN HARLEM In what may be the start of a comeback worthy of Muhammad Ali, the now vindicated former Georgia Congresswoman minced no words as she talked about 9/11, Civil Liberties, Race Relations, Independent Media, Pacifica Radio, FTW and the efforts of the major media to suppress our national ad campaign.

Read Now: http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/080503_take_it_back.html

Date:

08/06/03

Time:

11:09 AM

Comments

Cynthia McKinney's "Vindication"?

http://www.nationalreview.com/goldberg/goldberg051702.asp http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/5/17/141806.shtml

Oh, the "Jews" caused her to lose her House Seat? Oh, she never took Arab money?

Are the folks posing as libs on this site really as Anti-Semitic as they seem?

Date:

08/06/03

Time:

02:00 PM

Comments

Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry stressed that he was the only Vietnam veteran among the Democrats hoping to oust President Bush.

"I cannot wait to stand up and remind him that having a skilled Navy pilot land you on an aircraft carrier in a borrowed suit does not make up for losing 3 million jobs," Kerry said. "It does not make up for going back on civil rights. It does not make up for failed economic policies."

Date:

08/06/03

Time:

02:09 PM

Comments

I think expelling the embedded journalists is a good thing. It allows soldiers to do their job instead of trying to protect an extra civilian or trying to get camera time.

On other matters,

Time Magazine does have a liberal bias, the liberals, for some reason, do seem anti-semetic, and Kerry look to inbred to be President.

Tom

Date:

08/06/03

Time:

02:50 PM

Comments

What he REALLY meant, “Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry stressed he only talks about his Vietnam veteransmanship because he has nothing else to offer.”

Date:

08/07/03

Time:

02:17 PM

Comments

Previously, this notice was sent out to the authoritative websites listed as "humorous" on a major anti-Bush compilation website. It should be self-evident why that would be only sensible.

After some thought, however, it was decided that limiting this notification to only so-called humorous sites was silly. If certain humorous websites can be considered authoritative, then surely certain "serious" websites should also be likewise. So, that's why you're received this notice.

Now then, if you'd like to know what the doofus should've said, please consider clicking on the hyperlink below. warmest regards

Your Friend A Alexander "Bogey" Stella considered the following article interesting and wanted to send it to you.

''Bring'em on,'' said the doofus bombastically (Date: 2003-07-28 12:57:42) Topic: A. Alexander Stella

URL: http://www.bcvoice.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=130

Date:

08/07/03

Time:

04:22 PM

Comments

Productivity, Jobless Data Bode Well for Economy

Matilda reportedly "in deep depression"

By MICHAEL SCHROEDER Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

WASHINGTON -- A slew of positive news about productivity, employment and wholesale sales offered further evidence the economy is on a steady path to recovery.

Labor productivity soared at an annual rate of 5.7%, the fastest pace in nine months, in the second quarter, the Labor Department reported Thursday. Productivity grew at a 2.1% pace in the previous quarter.

In addition, new claims for jobless benefits fell by 3,000 to a seasonally adjusted 390,000 claims for the week ended Saturday, the lowest level in six months. Economists had expected claims to increase by 8,000. The important four-week average, which smooths out weekly fluctuations, fell by 12,750 to 397,250, the lowest level since February. Claims of 400,000 or more typically signal a weak job market.

Date:

08/07/03

Time:

05:00 PM

Comments

Here's an excerpt from Al Gore's speech:

"I mentioned the feeling many have that something basic has gone wrong. Whatever it is, I think it has a lot to do with the way we seek the truth and try in good faith to use facts as the basis for debates about our future -- allowing for the unavoidable tendency we all have to get swept up in our enthusiasms.

That last point is worth highlighting. Robust debate in a democracy will almost always involve occasional rhetorical excesses and leaps of faith, and we're all used to that. I've even been guilty of it myself on occasion. But there is a big difference between that and a systematic effort to manipulate facts in service to a totalistic ideology that is felt to be more important than the mandates of basic honesty.

Unfortunately, I think it is no longer possible to avoid the conclusion that what the country is dealing with in the Bush Presidency is the latter. That is really the nub of the problem -- the common source for most of the false impressions that have been frustrating the normal and healthy workings of our democracy."

You can read the entire speech transcript, and, by 5pm EST today, view streaming video of the event at our homepage:

http://www.moveon.org

Date:

08/07/03

Time:

05:37 PM

Comments

So let's put Gore's speech in context:

Congress overwhelmingly authorized the overthrow of Saddam last fall.

The Dims tried for months to terrify the world with predictions of hundreds of thousands of deaths and the spectre of Viet Nam were we to actually follow through on our promises.

The US of A kicked the living s**t out of the Iraqi regular forces and the few thousand jihadists imported from Syria.

The Dims have been reduced to nattering about how they "were deceived" -- but they can't actually demonstrate even a minor falsehood -- and better than a third of them voted for the force resolution.

And now Gore is worrying about how our Democracy is threatened.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

The only threat is to the existance of the Dims as an effective minority party. They seem determined to exterminate themselves.

Date:

08/07/03

Time:

05:43 PM

Comments

From today's Best of the Web:

http://opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110003853

The Running Man You may remember him from such films as "Last Action Hero" and "Junior," but Arnold Schwarzenegger may be the next governor of California. The Austrian-born actor made the announcement on "The Tonight Show" last night, surprising everyone but our John Fund, who predicted it two weeks ago. James Lileks has a nice take:

Will he win? Well, he'll bring new voters to the polls--we saw this in Minnesota with Jesse [Ventura]. People who never voted will find it cool to vote for Arnie, and even though they might not be the most sophisticated participant in the process, they'll probably intuit that a vote isn't just a thumbs-up statement. It means something. Yelling "I bought your video" doesn't really put an actor in your debt, but shouting "I voted for you" somehow does.

In any case, it'll change a few minds about the possibilities of politics. All their life they saw politicians as nothing more than nerdy bloodless grinbots, and now here's this guy: a giant with a gap-tooth smile smoking a Montecristo the size of Gray Davis' shinbone. Heck yeah!

Only in America. And I say that as a good thing. Which reminds me: like all typical examples of American craziness, this will just horrify the Europeans.

We can vouch for that final point. Last week found us at a family gathering where a European aunt held forth disdainfully on "that horrible Schwarzenegger."

Schwarzenegger offends Old European sensibilities because he's a flamboyantly macho American, of course, but there's more to it than that. He's an American by choice, a native of Old Europe who left the Continent for America in 1968, when he was in his early 20s, and became a U.S. citizen just 20 years ago. His is a classic immigrant success story, a reminder that America is the land of opportunity while Europe is a place opportunity-seekers flee.

Schwarzenegger would not be the first actor to become governor

Date:

08/07/03

Time:

07:37 PM

Comments

How long do you think it will tke the Democrats (the party of tolerance of all others) to start calling Arnold a Nazi?

Plus another reason for Mailda, Kevin and the hummer to be depressed -> No military deaths in Iraq all this week.

Date:

08/07/03

Time:

08:04 PM

Comments

Dean admits lying [Says He Misspoke] on Social Security NEDRA PICKLER Associated Press

WASHINGTON - Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean said Wednesday that he misspoke when he told the AFL-CIO he never favored raising the retirement age for Social Security benefits to age 70.

Dean acknowledged that he had called for such an increase when the country was faced with a deficit in 1995, but said he no longer thinks it is necessary.

Date:

08/07/03

Time:

11:14 PM

Comments

Well looks like it's the pot calling the kettle black, when Dean calls Bush a liar. BTW, Dim Katie Couric called Arnold's father a Nazi on the Today show this morning. Is that quick enough?

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_080703/content/rush_is_right.guest.html

Date:

08/07/03

Time:

11:23 PM

Comments

Dean also said this week, "I opposed the Iraq war very early on - and the reason why is I simply did not think the president was being candid about the uranium deal with Iraq."

There's no doubt Dean opposed the war early, but not because of President Bush's uranium claims. They didn't come until very late, in Bush's Jan. 28 State of the Union speech, just weeks before the war began March 19.

Now that Dean is the front-runner, he can expect to be held to a higher standard of truthfulness

Date:

08/08/03

Time:

06:39 AM

Comments

August 7, 2003

Wolfowitz Lets Slip

Iraq Was Not Involved in 9/11; No Ties to Al-Qaeda

By JASON LEOPOLD

Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, one of the main architects for the war in Iraq, admitted for the first time that Iraq had nothing to do with the September 11 terrorist attacks, contradicting public statements made by senior White House and Pentagon officials whose attempt to link Saddam Hussein and the terrorist organization al-Qaeda was cited by the Bush administration as one of the main reasons for launching a preemptive strike in March against Iraq.

In an interview with conservative radio personality Laura Ingraham, Wolfowitz was asked when he first came to believe that Iraq was behind the 9-11 terrorist attacks.

"I'm not sure even now that I would say Iraq had something to do with it," Wolfowitz said in the interview, aired Friday.

Wolfowitz's answer confirms doubts long held by critics of the Iraq war that the Bush administration had no evidence linking Iraq to 9-11 or al-Qaeda, but simply used the horrific terrorist attacks as a reason to overthrow Saddam Hussein and his Baathist regime.

Date:

08/08/03

Time:

06:44 AM

Comments

No you forget, the reason for the war was that Iraq did not comply with UN sanctions. I wish you dimocrats would stick to the facts and not try to muddy the water. All the other reasons Saddam's regime should be destroyed was simply added incentive.

Date:

08/08/03

Time:

06:53 AM

Comments

Let's talk about "Lies" -- and the everyday practices of you Dims:

A recent poster to this board had this to say:

"Wolfowitz Lets Slip Iraq Was Not Involved in 9/11; No Ties to Al-Qaeda "

But the citation (of Wolfowitz) actually reads:

"I'm not sure even now that I would say Iraq had something to do with it [9/11 attacks]"

Now, anyone who's not a moron or hasn't an axe to grind would interpret Wolfowitz's statement as it reads -- to wit, he's NOT YET prepared to accuse Saddam of collusion in 9/11 -- Not that he'd declare Saddam innocent, Nor did Wolfowitz say ANYTHING about Saddam's KNOWN ties to Al-Quaida!

Once again, we see the LIARS calling their betters, names.

Date:

08/08/03

Time:

10:00 AM

Comments

Someone doth protest too much, methinks.

A bit of buyer's remorse?

Date:

08/08/03

Time:

10:11 AM

Comments

High Ranking Pentagon Official Turns Whistle Blower http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/080803B.shtml

Excerpt:

"What I saw was aberrant, pervasive and contrary to good order and discipline," Kwiatkowski wrote. "If one is seeking the answers to why peculiar bits of 'intelligence' found sanctity in a presidential speech, or why the post-Saddam (Hussein) occupation (in Iraq) has been distinguished by confusion and false steps, one need look no further than the process inside the Office of the Secretary of Defence" (OSD).

Date:

08/08/03

Time:

11:52 AM

Comments

A bit of buyer's remorse?

No, a rebuke to Matilda and kin, and a reminder of the lies Lenin told through his network of "useful idiots" -- whose mantel has been assumed by the modern Democrat Party.

Wait'll you see how the other would-be Dem nominees go after Dean for his lies.

Date:

08/08/03

Time:

11:56 AM

Comments

"High Ranking Pentagon Official Turns Whiner"

Whistle blowers actually have to have evidence of misdeeds -- not whiny complaints about how well things have gone since GWB put adults in charge.

Wait 'til next term when GWB cleans house at State.

Date:

08/08/03

Time:

07:58 PM

Comments

Hi all you Dims! i am a conserva-nazi Repugnatcan idiot who will prove my low I.Q. by spewing fabricated bull*#@! and prove that i am smarter than you because i listen to Rush Slimeball! all you Dims do is call us real white-trash Amerikkkans names, you bunch of #@&*$#@!, and bleeding heart #@!%$! i like to take many 'coffee breaks' inorder to get on this website and waste my employer's money...just so i can give you liberal *&%$#!! a piece of my *&%#! for brains commemtary...which is in fact taken directly from the mouth of my hero, Rush Slimeball! there is nothing more i would like to see than all of you Dims lined up and shot, because then us conserva-nazis can continue with our plans for white domination of Amerikkka, and eventually, as Grand Wizard Paul Wolfowitz has stated, the world! we will have global empire! well, i have gotten soo exited, i came in my shorts! time for another coffee break!

Date:

08/08/03

Time:

08:27 PM

Comments

Hey Hummer, isn't it hard to type with your fingers all puckered up from washing all those dishes?

Doesn't your kitchen boss get pissed when you log onto the intetnet on the steward's computer?

Date:

08/09/03

Time:

06:41 AM

Comments

It was then that the White House propaganda drive began in earnest, with the appearance before television cameras of George Bush and Tony Blair at Camp David. Between them, the two politicians cited a "new" report from the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency that allegedly stated that Iraq was "six months away" from building a nuclear weapon. "I don't know what more evidence we need," declared the president.

For public relations purposes, it hardly mattered that no such IAEA report existed, because almost no one in the media bothered to check out the story. (In the twenty-first paragraph of her story on the press conference, The Washington Post's Karen DeYoung did quote an IAEA spokesman saying, in DeYoung's words, "that the agency has issued no new report," but she didn't confront the White House with this terribly interesting fact.)

What mattered was the unencumbered rollout of a commercial for war - the one that the White House chief of staff and former General Motors executive Andrew Card had famously withheld earlier in the summer: "From a marketing point of view, you don't introduce new products in August."

Continued: http://www.cjr.org/year/03/3/macarthur.asp

Date:

08/09/03

Time:

09:00 AM

Comments

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/002/974mmymz.asp

Excerpts from Gore Goes Gaga From the August 18, 2003 issue: The paranoid style in Democratic politics. by Stephen F. Hayes

In a broad, rambling lecture that began with and returned many times to Iraq, former Vice President Al Gore toyed with some of the very same conspiracy theories peddled by the crazies outside. In 35 minutes, he managed to squeeze in several bizarre and acidic accusations directed at the Bush administration--recycling the blood-for-oil claim, suggesting the Iraq war was conceived and conducted to "benefit friends and supporters," labeling the administration "totalistic," and, in a reprise of an argument he made last fall, claiming that the Iraq debate had been cooked up to get Republicans elected.

At one point, Gore even seemed to suggest that the Bush administration itself might have been behind the forged Niger documents. "And on the nuclear issue of course, it turned out that those documents were actually forged by somebody--though we don't know who," he said, drawing out the last phrase for dramatic effect. The audience of activists from MoveOn.org laughed loudly and traded knowing looks.

If the other Democratic presidential candidates have thus far avoided Gore's term-paper rhetoric, they clearly agree with his message. Howard Dean and Joe Lieberman were the first to issue statements praising Gore's speech. And so it seems we have the Democratic party's talking points for the 2004 election: President Bush and his advisers are not only wrong, they're dishonest. They're dangerous. They're virtually un-American.

It's one thing for Al Gore, who insists he's not running, to make such claims. But it's startling that all of the major Democrats agree with him.

It's a risky line, of course, because most Americans continue to support President Bush, the war in Iraq, and the broader war on terrorism. Convincing these Americans not only that the Iraq war was a bad idea, but that they are less secure in its aftermath will be difficult--at least in the absence of another terrorist attack, something that would transform the political landscape heading into the 2004 election.

Without another attack, as Democrats become more desperate to chip away at the president's popularity, Bush's political advisers expect a campaign of finger-pointing, insinuation, overstatement, and in some cases outright lies. A few examples from Gore's speech provide a useful preview.

*For months Democrats shelved suggestions--made by Dick Gephardt and Hillary Clinton, among others--that President Bush may have ignored warnings of the September 11 attacks. Those accusations are back. Gore urged President Bush to order his appointees to cooperate with the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, and insisted that Bush "let this National Commission know how he and his staff handled a highly specific warning of terrorism just 36 days before 9/11."

*Similarly, even as they have criticized many other aspects of the campaign in Iraq, Democrats have avoided repeating Tom Daschle's prewar claim that these mistakes would lead to the deaths of American soldiers. No longer. "Too many of our soldiers are paying the highest price for the strategic miscalculations, serious misjudgments, and historic mistakes that have put them and our nation in harm's way."

*Gore wasn't always so direct, sometimes preferring the passive voice to soften his harsh attacks. Before he accused the Bush administration of deception and dishonesty, he asked his audience to leave "aside for the moment the question of how these false impressions got into the public's mind." That is, who cares if no one from the Bush administration was actually deceitful, but blame them anyway.

*Moments after Gore waxed pedantic about the "mandates of basic honesty," he blamed the Bush administration for creating the "false impression