Today on the Tony Snow radio show Charlie challenged Murtha to accompany him to any US military institution in Iraq and find out if soldiers agreed with Murtha that we had lost and are losing the war and that we should pull out tonmorrow. He said bring the media along and report it back to the US. They could leave for Iraq tomorrow if Murtha wanted. He said if Murtha could not he would have to apologize for his comments and retract them.

I wonder if Murtha will get on the plane?

I doubt he will. For the record, I think Murtha was mistaken when he advised our young men and women not to enlist. That is not a proper thing for a senator to say in war time

I did see the other day that a recent poll of active duty service people showed they are less supportive of the Bush Administration then a few months ago. I believe their support is now about 54% compared to more like 70% a year ago. Still way higher than the general public but that's understandable. Our armed forces should believe in their Commander In Chief.

Tony Snow....Charlie Daniels? Who listens to them and why?

Ever watch the Military Channel on cable? Watch the Iraq war episodes and you'll see soldiers that aren't too happy over there.

Dave,
Which polls? link? I have never seen anything even close to those numbers.

Stlhd you must be watching the new gay channel LOGO thinking it is the Military channel. I watch the MC all the time never have seen one thing said against the War or the pres. List the shows you have seen such.

Ask and ye shall receive. Now I suppose it's time to tell us the polls aren't accurate, yada, yada, yada

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060103/wl_afp/usbushmilitarypoll_060102234337

TK, you aren't watching it much. I'm not looking them up for you. Watch the ones where they follow the troops around in Iraq and you'll see them if you take your blinders off.

"On Nov. 14, we mailed questionnaires to 6,000 people drawn at random from our list of active-duty subscribers. Recipients were asked to mail their answers to an independent firm that machine-tabulated the results to guarantee anonymity. We stopped processing incoming questionnaires Dec. 23.

About 4,000 of the 6,000 people who received questionnaires turned out to be on active duty. Only responses from acvtive-duty personnel were tabulated. Of those 4,000, 1,215 responded, a 30 percent response rate.

The margin of error in the survey is plus or minus 3 percentage points at the 95 percent confidence interval, meaning there is a 95 percent probability that results of the poll are accurate within 3 percentage points.

Those polled differ from the military as a whole in important ways. They tend to be older, higher in rank and more career-oriented. Even so, it is perhaps the most representative independent sample possible because of the inherent challenges in polling servicemen and women, according to polling experts and military sociologists.

The poll has come to be viewed by some as a barometer of the professional career military.

Readers can find the questionnaire and the full results of the poll and the questionnaire online at www. armytimes.com. Researchers interested in obtaining the full data set should contact Senior Managing Editor Robert Hodierne at rhodierne@atpco.com. "


I cannot think of any poll showing such problems that would be accepted as accurate and valid.

Would you accept a poll of Wall street journal readers in the same age group and professional status on the state of the union?

TK: It's no wonder anyone takes you seriously. Yada,yada,yada.

Answer the qustion Dave?

"Would you accept a poll of Wall street journal readers in the same age group and professional status on the state of the union?"

Either you would or you would not or you admit you are biased.

It's the History Channel. The show is called "Off to War".

TK: You are nothing if not consistent. I told you I saw a poll that claimed support for Bush was slipping. You asked for proof. I supplied it. That was where you should have said something like, "Oh that's interesting." I knew you were not big enough to do that. I even predicted your response before I saw it.

Would I accept the poll as proof that support for Bush has slipped in the military? Of course I would. Will I debate polling techniques with you? No because you never listen and you never admit even the slightest shred of doubt or possibility of error on your part or that of your beloved president. If I were to prove the polling technique was perfect you would head off on yet another of your endless tangents. Debating with you is simply not worth my effort.

Here is my New Years resolution. I will not debate with TK again in 2006. It's too much like trying to reason with a rock.

I just looked up LOGO, and it really is a new gay channel. Nice to know TK is keeping up on where he can get the newest gay goods and gossip.

(who's TK really??, maybe he's Jim West)

I wonder if Chuckie will invite Pace and Rumsfeld along to see the soldier's reaction when told two top commanders admit we can't win this militarily.

That's gotta be good for their morale.

And agreed; Murtha shouldn't of said that.

DV,

Talk about consistant look in the mirror. You could care less where anyhthing comes from as long as it justifies your view. There is not one person here that would accept that poll as anything but biased unless it was negative about Bush. Cut and run it's your proven style in life when confronted with reality.

"They're simply getting tired out. Wouldn't you?"

You did not read the poll then did you?

"Four years of combat have done little to dent the morale of the professional military, results of the 2005 Military Times Poll show.

But there are also hints in the results that the wave of good feeling may have crested.

Job satisfaction remains high: 85 percent say they are at least somewhat satisfied with their job, similar to responses in 2003 and 2004. More than four out of five say they would recommend a military career to others, and about three out of four say they would support their child’s decision to seek a military career.

In follow-up interviews, poll respondents drew a direct connection between mission and morale.

“I think the majority of guys who are getting the chance to go over there are seeing the good we’re doing over there and that we’re doing something important,” said Marine Staff Sgt. Justin ***ala. “To actually be able to go out and do your job has a certain degree of satisfaction to it.” "


So is the poll accurate or are you a liar?


Here is what the pollsters them selves had to say.

"The results should not be read as representative of the military as a whole"

In follow-up interviews, most poll respondents said they remain solidly behind their commander in chief and his policy in Iraq.

“I think we’re fortunate as a country to have someone who has the focus and the persistence that he does because it’s so easy to get sidetracked,” said Navy Cmdr. Jeff Bohler. “The ability of the president to persevere in the face of overwhelming criticism is really impressive. It takes someone with a spine and courage.”

Many attributed the fall in support, both among the public and the military, withto a misguided lack of patience.

“We live in a society where … people want answers right away,” said Air Force Capt. Randall Carlson, a physics instructor at the Air Force Academy, who said he approves of the president’s policies. “Unfortunately with Iraq, there are no easy answers.”

‘They don’t report good news’ While 73 percent of respondents believe it’s likely the United States will succeed in Iraq, that’s down 10 points from a year ago.

“We’re losing a lot of troops. The suicide bombers are not stopping,” said Air Force Staff Sgt. Melida G. Castano. “It doesn’t look promising at this point.”

But others blamed the loss in confidence on the media, which many said has failed to report positive news in Iraq. Four of every five respondents said they believe media reports are often inaccurate.

“They don’t report the good news, and if they do, it’s on the back page,” said Marine Chief Warrant Officer-3 Michael Edmonson.

TK speaks for everyone. He's a man of the people.

I was waiting for Dan to chime in. He is usually the first one all over a polls and use of statistics and validity. Your absent voice here speaks very loud. Typical but loud none the less.

"I'm saying the poll is not correctly portraying what the troops are saying. The text you THOUGHT I didn't read is merely someone else's conclusion."

It's the people that did the polls conlusion of the polls results and after poll follow up.

So its not accurate based on you perception and emotions. Wow and no one wants to take you to task on that? thats a suprise given the audience.

I didn't know what I said mattered that much. I guess I just failed in my obligation to comment on every subject.

"I didn't know what I said mattered that much"

It does not but being consistant is important. Had RB posted something like that your first post would have challenged it. Since it was friendly to your position you let it walk.

Good, we're in agreement then.

"nearest thing to hell that there is on this planet."

AM, that's almost a word for word quote by one of the soldiers in Iraq. And Dan, no I have the History Channel too but this is the Military Channel. They have several serials on Iraq but one in particular is following the grunts both there and when they return wounded. I don't see it every week though.

"Off to War"

Discovery Times Channel.

I have the distinct priviledge of sitting in on video-teleconferences between the I Corps CG and commanders in theater. From what I learn during those briefings I can unequivocally conclude that Napoleon is clueless on this subject.

Thank you, and good night.

Now there is some breaking news! Next you are going to tell us the earth isn't flat right?!

Dang it I have to Agree with you this soon in the year..... well said and I will be the first to say it needs to come to a conclusion.

Although I dont doubt the accuracy of the poll. I can agree with a slight drop among active duty support. It would be nice know if it was evenly spread between the different services. Because I'm quite sure you would get slightly different numbers depending on the service you polled, since not all services have the same deployment lengths, some use more reservist or National guard than others. I'm sure their are many other variables, but those are the ones that jump out at me. Just my thoughts

Tony Snow and Charlie Daniels are irrelevant to me, but I thought Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff had it bassackwards in his criticism of Congressman John Murtha. Gen. Pace should have leveled his criticism at President Bush.

After all, Murtha simply said, "The miliatary had no problem recruiting directly after 9/11 because everyone understood that we had been attacked. But now the millitary's ability to attract recruits is being hampered by the prospect of prolonged, extended and repeated deployments; inadequate equipment; shortened home stays; the lack of any connection between Iraq and the brutal attacks of 9/11; and - most importantly - the administration's constantly changing, undefined, open-ended military mission in Iraq."

Because of this common knowledge, Murtha, a 37 year Marine veteran, said if he were eligible to join the military today he would not, nor would he expect others to join. Gen. Pace's position appears to be that of, "my country right or wrong" America's young men and women are obligated to serve our country by joining the military when it's commanded by an administration bent on military misadventure. Congressman Murtha, on the other hand, is representing the very best of independent thinking and free will, that young people with critical thinking skills just might choose to set aside what otherwise might have been an intention to serve in the military at this point in their lives precisely because the military is presently commanded by a president who does not evoke loyalty toward either himself or his mission.

I think Murtha's comments were absolutely the right thing to say if he believes his own words, as I do. Young people join the military for a variety of reasons, patriotism, wanting a break between high school and higher education, parents convince them they need some experience with discipline and structure, educational financial assistance, lots of reasons. But those young people can also think and analyze and weigh those reasons against the prospects of becoming participants in a military misadventure that doesn't square with their personal values.

It's the perfect scenario. I have always thought wars should be fought by people who believe in them, not by people who don't believe in them and are unwilling participants. Reminds me of the Vietnam era saying, "What if they gave a war and nobody came?" It could be that a voluntary military is exactly the best way for our country to avoid military misadventures that the population that would have to fight them can say, "No thanks," at least the prolonged ones.

"It's the perfect scenario. I have always thought wars should be fought by people who believe in them, not by people who don't believe in them and are unwilling participants. Reminds me of the Vietnam era saying, "What if they gave a war and nobody came?" It could be that a voluntary military is exactly the best way for our country to avoid military misadventures that the population that would have to fight them can say, "No thanks," at least the prolonged ones.


I agree it would be real easy to just leave the country and go to one that does not belive in war. Try and find one that did not gain the freedoms you enjoy at the operational end of a fire arm. Talk about living in la la land.

"I have the distinct priviledge of sitting in on video-teleconferences between the I Corps CG and commanders in theater. From what I learn during those briefings I can unequivocally conclude that Napoleon is clueless on this subject.

Thank you, and good night"


I doubt sitting in on a con call about shipping groceries and TP has much to do with this topic.

Military misadventures, by definition, are not wars that directly affect the national security interests of the nation. (take Vietnam, for instance, take Iraq, for instance, . . .) When the nation is attacked, or national security is at stake, Americans volunteer and step up to the task. Notice that military recruitment was not reported as a problem after 9/11 and the focus was on Afghanistan and OBL. Only after news about Iraq having no connection to 9/11 and manipulation of intelligence and an Iraq war situation with no idea of what success looks like, then Americans have second thoughts about joining the military, demonstrating their ability to think and act independently of their loose cannon president. I think it's the prez and KT that live in la la land.

Imagine what would happen if the press where behind the effort? Imagine what would happen if people where informed about the real issues Re; "radical Islam"

Take WWII and treat it the same way Iraq and the war on terror are being treated in this country and you would be speaking German or Japanese today.

Americans do not have a need that they cannot fill by going out and buying something or getting the govt. to provide it. A by product of that is a short attention span and a need to push aside any discomfort. It would be a big mistake to swallow what you hear,see and feel as validation of your opinions and feelings.

TK, for the last time, this isn't WWII no matter how much you wish it were. Nobody is marching on the world. In fact not one dang country was invaded until we did the invading. Are you comparing us to Nazi Germany or something?

Oh I forgot Stlhd gets to frame the discussion to his liking. Maybe I should just PM you my posts for approval first?

It would sure cut down on the idiotic posts here.

Yeah, KT, could ya' do that? Like Harley suggests, it sure would improve the IQ of this forum.

Funny I was sure he was talking about you and the other doorknobs here.

Actually, I was thinking, along the lines of Gen. Pace's criticism of Murtha being misplaced, that it really is the administration that undermines national readiness for defense. People are less inclined to opt for military service if they believe the administration is not using the military for the highest priority of national defense. Murtha's remarks are so right on the money I'm surprised that there hasn't been significant media and editorial follow-up. Pace, if he didn't have to suck up to the administration, should be criticizing the prez, not Murtha.

"People are less inclined to opt for military service if they believe the administration is not using the military for the highest priority of national defense."

Talk about a leap in logic. It's the people not joining for the slackers lifestyle and college education bennies. The guys like GH that were option limited out of HS. With the economy adding all those jobs a Burger King they can be safe flipping burgers and smoking rope rather that really having to do something. I think that people that really believe in this country what it stands for are still signing up like they did before. You America haters "which btw usually work for the govt. or a govt. contractor" want to always beleive the worst about the president. The right haters had the same excuse when clinton was president. Except then I think the slackers signed upo in droves and the real mene did something else.

Kids sure have changed since I joined the army.

Now they are "people that really believe in this country what it stand for".

And I read just the other day where our troops in Iraq are America's "finest young men and women."

We weren't like that when I joined the army. We didn't believe in the country more than average people. Or at least I never heard anybody talk like they did the years I was in the army.

And we sure weren't America's finest young men and women. We were pretty average, really. We joined up for all sorts of reasons. But all and all, we were just average guys.

Words you'll never see TK type. But wait a second and TK will tell you what being in the Army is really like. Since you clearly have no understanding what Army life is all about.

KT: "You America haters "which btw usually work for the govt. or a govt. contractor" want to always beleive the worst about the president."

That's funny. Why would an America hater care who's president? Perhaps an America hater would want America to have a stupid, incompetent, dolt for the president. Some one who cares about America wants the country to have the best possible person as president.

"I think that people that really believe in this country what it stands for are still signing up like they did before. You America haters "which btw usually work for the govt. or a govt. contractor""

He's never been in the military and claims to have had a contract with the navy....you worked for the government brainiac. What a dolt.

People aren't signing up because:
We are in a wrong war.
People are getting killed.
Military pay sucks.
Benefits have been cut.
Retirement isn't what it used to be.
This admin has demonstrated that it can and will hold you longer than your commitment against your will.
This admin tried to reneg on it's promised bonuses.
This admin has treated veterans like crap.
This admin has treated the returning wounded like crap.
This admin has not furnished the troops with proper equipment.

After posting to nearly every response tk is no where to be found. He must be holding his breath and turning blue. I bet he has played more vide games involving "ARMY" and "FPS" than every one else. He might be a Major in HALO by now. My own son was expressing a desire to join the military over the last year an I explained to him that as long as Dumbya was in the White House mismanaging this country to stay the he!! out of the military. Our clueless leader couldn't manage two companies he ran into the ground and he is doing the same to this country. th come up for air I miss your insightful comebacks.

Stever,

I have several realtives active military now and they say things have never been better. They explain it like this . The bitiching you do hear now is the same stuff that goes on even in times of peace. Only now you have a lineral and the media with with a camera or a microphone looking to take advantage of it. When the war I Iraq is over things the liberals and the press will have no use for them so the bitoching will fall on deaf ears. In the next year all the Dems will be all over how bad Bush treats the Mil. Go back and recycle all the old articles from when Clinton was president that the right used agasint Gore. Take out Clinton/Gore and put in Bush Cheney and save a lot of work. You people keep falling for it so they keep selling it. Supply and demand. Same thing happens in the real world. Boeing just had a record year an watch all the biotchers crawl out of the woodwork about how they are over worked and underpaid yada yada yada. People, liberals specifically, are as predictable as the horses in my pasture. They do the same thing at the same time every day.

You know TK, my son just got back for Afganistanfor the third time. After talking to him I finally know for sure that you are full of crap.

http://www.ajc.com/news/content/shared-gen/ap/US_Presidential_Cabinet/Military_Recruiting.html

US military hits recruiting goal for 7th straight month.

You hand wringers paint a picture that it's the end of the world and everyone is opposed to the war and no one will join the military yada yada yada. What a bunch of stooges.

missing a goal by 12% is overwhleming evidence. When you take into consideration the renlistment has been over achieved each month it becomes a catasrophic statistic for the adminsitration. I think all the toxins from the cigs has affected the last few brain cells wandering around your head.

Salmo G. put it best when he said that to Bush our soldiers are just the "hired help."

"Never mind the fact that for what the government pays out for one fatality caused by substandard body armor"

This shows how biased you are if not ill informed. The reason there is a shortage of body armor is tests showed that fewer troops would wear it due to the increased weight affecting mobility etc. Devlopments in Iraq with the enemy adjusting thier techniques forced some rethinking on the issue. The mess hall bombing made it required gear in camp etc. There is a shortage of body armor and they are producuing the certifed version as fast as they can. In addition there has been a debate about body armor since late in the Vietnam war. Is the added weight and the effets of that weight worth the risk. Some troops want it some troops do not. There are many reports of troops going on patrol and taking out the 16lb protective plates. Feeling the weight added to the 40 to 70 lbs they normally carried made them too slow.
You paint the pic that the admin stuck it's middle finger up at troops requests. Look at all past wars there have been shortages of everything from time to time. Look at the requirements in WWII for tanks, ships, planes etc. This is the real secret about WWII that you surface skimming historical retards miss. Private industry in this country out supplied the Japs and the Germans 10 to 1 on such gear. With out a doubt enabling us to win the war. No country on the face of the earth is as willing and able to supply their troops with needed items.

98% emotion. 2% possible fact.

Still more than you had.

But he has several family members who are active military. So are they also societies losers?

Or would that just be TK?

Big difference between being option limited and being a loser.

Lucky for Napoleon's kin that the military will enlist losers in times like this. Of course being fat little REMFs, they still provide some service I'm sure.

I like that part. I keep telling him to stay out of discussions he knows nothing about. I can imagine the conversation:

"Private, get you gear on."
"No, Sarge, it's too heavy so I'll go on patrol without it today. In fact, this pro-mask is too bulky, and I'd rather wear these Nikes 'cause I can run faster with 'em."
"Well, okay, if that's what you want."

I would suggest that TK dosn't know what it's like NOT to be option limited.........

I suppose you call the State patrol when yopu intend to speed to let them know Harley? It has to hurt your small mind when those two brain cells bump into each other and form a primative thought.

Well at least he can spell YOU :p

I suppose in your military you allow privates to go on patrol without leadership?

Further evidence that you are clueless in regards to things military.

I just read an article last week that said officers where most likely to violate the mandatory rule for body armor. I see if I can find it.

I just talked to a few NCOs recently back from Iraq. I wonder which has more credibility?

Just like AM and BW a few or one conversation means everyone is like that. Keep trying to get those two brain cells to line up. Maybe you can ask someone if they want fries with their order and earn a promotion.

I have several close friends, and fellow coworkers who have done atleast 2 tours in Iraq, and am quite sure they are everybit as creditable as the NCO's you talked with "goharley" and all of them said that the body armor they were issued was to heavy, hot, and uncomfortable. And that when on a patrol very few ever wore the complete issue, nor did very many of the marines on those patrols.

Well, I can only tell you that the guys I talked with today said that there were a few "stupid ones" that would remove a plate or two. But they said those were definately the minority. They did say it was usually the drivers that removed the back plate because it hurt when driving a Stryker.

They have some vests they brought back that prove their effectiveness. One took a direct hit from an RPG; another took three rounds in the center of the chest. Both guys are alive today.

They also said that after wearing it awhile you don't notice it. So maybe some guys weren't in an environment where it was as necessary as others.

I don't doubt their crdibility, gv, but if given the choice between face-to-face accounts by Stryker NCOs versus an obscure article written by someone interpretting what a public relations officer told them, well, that's a no-brainer.

GH, I agree actuall conversations with people actually involved carry alot more weight than, an article written by some unknown person (if this article even exists).
They people I've talked with, to removed the back plate as well, they never really said why. They almost were always on foot patrol, so the "driving" reason wouldnt hold up.
Wasnt trying to cast doubt on your statement, it just seemed to me that maybe for once TK was saying something that could be confirmed by others.

Heat dissapation is the reason you would remove the back plate. If you have ever backpacked it would make sense. Harley I never questioned the effectiveness of the equipement. I questioned wheter it was as big an issue as the press makes it out to be or is it just another I hate Bush propaganda piece.

Families over react as well. Listen to the hand wringers on the main board talk about water safety. I grew up on the rivers here and the salt. I don't know anyone that has ever used a life jacket. Is it safer? sure it is. I wear one now when I have the kids with me but I still do not when alone. Never will.

No it is not a law enacted for a good reason. If our laws intent is to save lives then they would not allow people to drive since nearly 50k a year die in cars. They would not allow people to over eat etc. Kids drowning in boating mishaps might make the top 10,000 reasons kids die list.Their parents are more dangerous but you do not need a licsense to parent.

"If it costs us less financially and emotionally to "over-react" with life saving extra body armor, we should be doing it."

Agreed but lets not allow people to play politics or blow it out of proportion on either side of the isle. It's my only point in this whole discussion.

Take it a step further and make your point even more idiotic by saying that if we were really interested in saving lives we would prevent births from taking place.

The mushroom cloud thing was not blowing things out of proportion.

It is Our Glorious Leader's perogotive as CIC to tell the American people whatever to rally them behind any war he chooses to start!

It was a risk well worth taking. Looks like we get to see it play out all over again WRT Iran.
But I suppose you all think that Iran saying that it's for peaceful purposes in one breath and saying Isreal should be wiped off the face of the earth in the next breath are mutually exlusive ideas? If not you will probably say its none of our business what another country does lets let them self determine. While you look up sex offenders and insist that your kids school not hire them.

You're right Aunty M. It's really boring around here. If the rivers fell into shape I might even go out and fish for old dark summer runs while the Westsiders load up on chrome.

Oh, now you think it's a good thing for schools to hire sex offenders? Next thing you know you will be trying to get Sol hired as the high school girls volleyball coach.

TK's drunk.

"It was only worth the risk in your opinion and the majority of Americans don't agree with you."

A majority of Americans are not informed of the issues and theirs like yours is an emotional response not a logical response.

"As to Iran, I sure hope you're planning on enlisting soon, because this Army is just about maxed out."

looks like the Euroweeenies will get involved in this one. They will talk themselves blue in the face first unless Isreal gets froggy and lights things off.

SS,

"Oh, now you think it's a good thing for schools to hire sex offenders? Next thing you know you will be trying to get Sol hired as the high school girls volleyball coach. "

Both actions are preemptive. It seems it is OK to take preemptive actions for personal safety but not national security. Its Ok to lose 3000 people doing nothing but not 2000 trying to stop it.

2000? I was just reading yesterday that best estimates are around 100,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed. God knows what the toll of civilian wounded is.

And we have around 15,000 wounded ourselves. Kinda tough being 20 years old looking forward to a life with no legs.

I would respect the man for accepting the possible outcome of his decison to go into such a career. I would not belittle him by assuming he would need or want my sympathy. We have multiple purple hearts in my Family and you were a fool to go down that road with any of the recipients.

Jeez TK! Weren't you ever young? When I joined the army the possibility of being killed or maimed never entered my mind. If young guys thought about things like that the way middle aged men do, not many would join the army!

"decision to go into such a career" my a$$!

SS,

I know I was rasied to understand and accept the consequences of my actions. It why I am not a liberal.

Maybe we should raise the drinking, voting driving etc age to 30 because as you claim these youngsters do not think ahead ? Oh whats that? its situational, ya right.

Funny, I was raised to understand natural and logical consequences and was invariably held accountable. Yet I'm a social liberal. So the difference isn't how one is raised. Perhaps it's whether one has a heart and a conscience.

SG,
I doubt you liked it much and rebelled. Swung the other way as a reaction instead of a choice based on reason. Like the doper that substittes religous zelotry for the high he used to have. They rarely stop near the middle when they react.

Funny someone mentioned Iran because what we are doing right now is the way we started in Iraq. First get U.N sactions then tell them to stop it (whatever they are doing) tell the U.N that sanctions aren't working. Send in inspectors, remove inspectors. Drop bombs, send in troops, drop more bombs....... Check out Scott Ridders book about Iraq. Remember he was a wepons inspector there for several years.

"Check out Scott Ridders book about Iraq. Remember he was a wepons inspector there for several years."

Heck, why not read Doonesbury it is more factual.

Aha! TK lets slip how he got the way he is! It was a substi-[Bleeeeep!]-ation for dope!

Yeah, didn't hear much about Scott Ridder for awhile. He was smeared and slimed to hell and gone. Then it turned out that everything he had said was true. And everything the slime artists in the administration said was a lie.

Nope I somked the rope for a few years but I was even more hardcore conservative back then.

Conservative! You're no conservative!

If you were a conservative you would be outraged that Bush is spying on the American people!

If you were a conservative you would be outraged that Bush is the most fiscally irresponsible president in history, running record deficits and putting the country in hock to the Chinese!

If you were a conservative you would be outraged that Bush is presiding over a government culture of crony capitalism and corruption!

If you were a conservative you would be outraged that Bush regards the Constitution of our great nation as a "goddamned piece of paper".

You, TK, are not a conservative!

You have it wrong SS. To believe the things you post I would have to be psychotic or ignorant. I don't think you are ignorant.

I enjoy reading Doonesbury. And it's often not as far off as the humor might make it seem.

KT still thinks he knows something about me. Aha, border-line psychotic that he is, no wonder.

My mix of moderate, conservative, and liberal values has stayed pretty much the same since I reached adulthood. Most significant change I can think of is going from Ok with capitol punishment, to opposing it, back to OK with it.

exactly suckersnagger- tk is NO conservative....we dont often hear from conservatives anymore in the media or in conversations......... i still ove to listen to pat buccahnon cuz he seems to be one of the few conservatives left.....

tk and the bu****es are just ignorant, murdering criminals run amok..... why they still cling to the term "conservative" is a mystery

not sure why the word "buschites" gets censored i had to mispell bush to get it in print

"If you were a conservative you would be outraged that Bush is spying on the American people!"

Not too concerned about phone numbers being processed through a computer system picking out key words and then linking them to overseas known operatives. Every president has done it during wartime in cluding the first real liberal Abe Lincoln.


"If you were a conservative you would be outraged that Bush is the most fiscally irresponsible president in history, running record deficits and putting the country in hock to the Chinese!"

You have a minor point here. If you looked a tthe line item budget the largest increase comes from mandatory increases put in place by other admins. The controlling party has not helped matters however and it is an issue on both sides. Which programs do you propose we cut?

"If you were a conservative you would be outraged that Bush is presiding over a government culture of crony capitalism and corruption!"

I am outrages and have been ever since I started voting. It is the system not the president.

"If you were a conservative you would be outraged that Bush regards the Constitution of our great nation as a "goddamned piece of paper"."

Ya right. He is also heavily medicated part of the new world order and is part of a plot for a one world govt owned by the corps.

Yeah TK,
There has been a story going around that Bush is on meds. Also that he's back on the sauce.

Somethings wrong with him. What do you think is the matter with him?

But about him saying the Constitution is just a "goddamned piece of paper."

He made the statement at a meeting in the White House attended by Republican Congressional Leadership and a bunch of aides.

Doug Thompson broke the story on Capitol Hill Blue, saying his sources were three people who were at the meeting.

Have any of the people who were at the meeting have come forward to say the story was false?
Why not?

SS,

Seek professional help.

And TK, you say that the budget problems came from mandatory increases in programs put in place by other administrations.

Let's ignore the huge cost of Bush's war in Iraq and assume for the sake of argument that mandatory increases in Bill Clinton's programs are the problem. Wouldn't Bush have known madatory increases in programs were coming at the time when he got huge tax cuts for the rich?

You're implying, though you probably don't realize it, that Bush deliberately cut taxes for the rich knowing it would create the largest deficits in history.

Your point about domestic spying is too incoherent to respond to. Abe Lincoln and his computers?

Abe listened in on phone calls.

SS,
First off I did not say that the mandatory increaes were the only problem.
It is real simple. Do nothing and let the economy go into one of the biggest recessions in history. How big would the deficit be had the economy not turned around?
Lets take your scenario and increase taxes and see what happens. Spending would have increased had GW and congress not spent dime. Taxes would have to increase because collections would have been through the floor.
You history buffs should read up on Abes activites during the war. I'll let you off the first time because you are ignorant. Next time you will just be stupid as usual.

"Which programs do you propose we cut?"

Typical trickle down Reagonomics but to the extreme. As we've seen the "cuts" are always performed on social programs. Make it harder to go to college just like Reagan did. A method already proven not to work.

Here's some proposals:

Get rid of a missile program proven not to work. Removal of corp subsidies. Does the very profitable oil industry really need or deserve billions in subsidies? Gasp....no we need to cut medicare, social security, student loan programs, welfare, etc.

What a burden tk must bear. Having to support Dumbya all on his own. Everyone else is wrong only tk is right, everyone else is stupid, only tk is smart. The world is wrong , tk is right. Oh tk you are my hero, you and Dumbya that is. Two nuts in the same shell. Over 4650 posts and he doesn't even fish any more if he ever did. More likely just a monkey humper.

Stever

Two white flags from you in one day. Did you turn French in the new year?

Blah, Blah, Blah. More of the same out of your pie hole tk. Your hardly worth the time to respond to as you really don't bring anything new to the table just the same old tired snit.

I don't know Stever several posts by you today and not one point Re: the topic at hand. Sounds like you are going a little Al Gore on us.

Just trying to to emulate my hero, you
No point, just try to drag the other one down to your level. Kind of like wresteling a pig in the mud. The pig loves it. Thanks for comparing me to Al Gore. Vice President of the United States for 8 years. Graduated from Harvard, roomates with Tommy Lee Jones. Here read all about it. Just follow the link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Gore

can I get a hell yeah?