Outrageous!

God(s) forbid that the Anti-Troop, Anti-American ditto-heads have to see what type of foul mess they have made in their diapers.

Support our troops, bring em' home!

loony left (il)logic:
1) troops are "safe" when they're never killed.
2) war kills troops.
3) ergo, avoid war thru negoiation (chamberlin).

sung tsu:
1) troops are "safe" when they're never killed.
2) war kills troops.
3) ergo, deter war thru inducing fear.

MoveOn.org was started by some retired CIA operations officer like Plame. So, the democrats are going tu use those as an excuse for their advertising and work on the net. Larry Johson, Counter Terrorism blog, etc.

So, how long is the dmocratic party going to allow them to 'go insane' and attack the Administration?

a change in direction is what this country SORELY needs. i'm fed-up with the "hope, wait, and pray, and aimlessly piss in the woods" campaign we've seen since inception. bungling idiots!

the numbers are out and this war is costing us $11 MILLION an HOUR. that's right folks - $11 MILLION an HOUR. Wonder how that will go down with the public when Chimpy asks for yet another $100 BIL for next years operations?

Well, there ya go TEO. Glad to know you are OK with diminishing the memory of these heros. What are you going to do in ten or twenty years when all these veterans are home, involved in politics, and hate your guts?

Good thing rational Dems were in charge during WWII, who didn't see the war in terms of monetary cost. We would all be speaking German or Japanese now.

Unfortunately, there are way to many wackadoodles in teh Dem party to create a split off party. And we will have to deal with these nuts, much like many EU countries have to deal with the Greens.

Kahn,

If you hadn't noticed, the guys coming back from the front are registering Democrat and campaigning for office as such. Perhaps they realize what everyone but the 'back-wash' republicans do, which is that war is hell, and this one has descended into the 7th level of such.

What exactly is wrong with showing what the outcome of an illegal invasion of a country, and the subsequent mangling of the "peace" has done. Maybe you should be more concerned with how they are going to view the establishment who sent them into the cluster-f*^& in the first place.

" $11 MILLION an HOUR."
................................................

bloviator,

You!!!! unlike a lot of people around the world!, You!!!! have food in your belly!! You!!!!have A roof over your head!!,and You!!!! have clothes on your back!!, and good clean water to drink!!

you make me sick!, at your greedy self pity!!

Jeremiah

Jerry,

Glad you finally said something worthwhile. Yes, indeed, what does it say about a country who wastes 11 million dollars an hour on killing other human beings, while 24,000 people a day die from hunger?

TEO,

That ll million is not only fighting the war, it is feeding the less fortunate!!

Now quit making up lies!

Jeremiah

how is it feeding the less fortunate (unless you mean the soldiers over there). as i understand, that money is going to fund ongoing operations for the military campaign - not some fantasy aid and charity campaign you have in your head. oh you mean the recon effort? sorry again, those funds are not being spent on recon, in fact, recon has been dropped entirely as we refocus purely on security.

11 milliion to FEED THE LESS FORTUNATE - COME ON!!! that's so laughable you'd almost get a gig on the redneck comedy hour.

TEO - Not true. A handful have run as Democrat. Say what you want now... it is the futre you are throwing away as a party.

A change in direction... Yes, the democrats enjoyed the days of being smacked around by terrorists.

Kahn,

How many soldiers are coming back and running as Republicans? That would be 1

How many are coming back and running as Democrats? That would be 10

I would say that you guys are going to have REAL problems when the veterans are coming home to be so completely disgusted with the current political class, that they are running against them.

The showing of dead soldiers brings home the cost of the war. To be fully accurate, they would need to explain that defeat would be even more costly. The decision to go to war in the first place may have been misguided. We may have been able to solve this some other way. I think it is higly doubtful but maybe we could have. Maybe we should have tried harder for a diplomatic solution. The bottom line is the enemy we are fighting in Iraq and elsewhere in the war on terror poses a direct survival threat to this country. I suggest a greater committment of manpower and better equipment to the operation. Unfortunately the spirit of appeasement seems to be alive and well today, as it was in the 1930s. Unfortunately to win this decisively will probably require a committment very simillar to what was required to win WWII. The administration over estimated American power and underestimated the power of the enemy. Given that the American people do not seem to willing to make a WWII type committment and the Government will not level with them about the danger the country faces, the best solution is probably to nuclear arm Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan. This should serve as a buffer between Russia and China who are the greatest threats of all. Israel should be allowed to take care of business against the "Palestinians" and they should be stregthened to secure the buffer between us and the Islamic Extremists. If we do this, we should be able to bring some of our troops back home.

TEO

You seem to be correct that some of the soldiers who are returning are registering Democrat and running as Democrats. I think also recall some running as Republicans and some of them have spoken out in support of the war effort. From the soldiers I have spoken with, some of them are excellent military tacticians but they do not always grasp the geo-political realities. That seems to be another mistake we made. We went in without the understanding of the culture we should have had or we did not use the expertise that was available to us. Unfortunately we still do not seem to have gotten this right. The war may have been misguided but the problem with declaring it "illegal" is the UN plays the role as the cops in this situation. The former Iraqi regime had used its vast oil reserves to buy off the cops. In otherwords, they were corrupt. The problem with international law is the nations within the UN place their own interests above the good of world peace. The same thing is happening with North Korea. In this case Russia and China are running interference for North Korea. I don't trust international law to look out for American security. This is especially so since we have very little we can bargain with. This was true before the war in Iraq and it is true today.

I say support the troops by giving them more and better equipment and by increasing their numbers. This can help us get the security situation under control, so they can come home sooner. If we are unwilling to make the committment, we can do what I suggested earlier in this post.

Right - The Republicans are re-enlisting and staying in the fight. Long term TEO - Long term.

Ha ha...good one Kahn! Third Eye must have stepped into that one cuz he's blind in the other two. A few libs come home to be dems, many of them run to Canada to be cowards, and the MANY stay to keep the dems free to use their constitutional rights, to be complete asswipes.
Sheehans all...abortion facilitators, high taxers, better than thou academic elites, penis stuffers, and outrageous baby threateners...the legacy of the militant democrat. They have their own army, top rank is 'Anklebiter'; no wonder conservatives are consistently happier.

TEO

Kahn & others of his ilk (Jeremiah & keefer are in a league all to themselves) are now getting so desperate that it doesn't matter to them if what nonsense they throw forth.

In a hopeless attempt to keep supporting this administration, all logical thought is dismissed as being unpatriotic. Their blind adoration of Bush has simply left them without a clue as to what is happening all around them.

Republicans are getting back with their families, returning to work, and supporting America.

Democrats, on the other hand, are returning to join the Sheehan and left-wing liberal anti-American wackos and nuts. They want to use their service in Iraq for political gain and a political statement. Even if they don't have a chance of winning, it gives them a pulpit and free media coverage to preach the liberal Democratic hate and propaganda!

Just more of the Democrat's tactics for free press and media time to spew forth their hatred for America!!!!!

It's too bad there isn't a way to show Americans how many American soldiers and Iraqi families have been killed because of the liberal Democratic support and encouragement for the terrorists in Iraq!

And we already know what the Democrats oppose -- they OPPOSE EVERYTHING -- except their own views, liberalism, and agenda.

What do they propose to do or change? More importantly, just what are the actual DETAILS and HOW do they propose to do it?

It's nice to say they will stop future hurricanes, but how are they going to do it? It's nice to know they are going to stop North Korea and Iran by supporting more ineffective talk and impotence from the U.N., but what are they going to do knowing that won't work? It's nice to know they are going to stop terrorists, but how? It's nice to know they are for motherhood and apple pie, but so is everyone else!

It's nice to know they are going to reduce the price of gasoline since they helped create the high prices. Do they now plan to vote to allow drilling near the coast, in ANWR, and other locations within the U.S.? Do they plan to vote to allow America to use it's coal and tar sands? Do they now plan to vote to allow more nuclear energy to produce electricity? Do they now plan to vote to allow more refineries to be built -- IN AMERICA! Do they now plan to vote to allow the production of more AMERICAN OIL, GAS, AND COAL and stop sending TRILLIONS of our dollars, billions in tax revenue, and millions of jobs to nations like Iran and Venezuela?

Or is the Democratic solution to lower energy costs to reduce the speed limit to 55 miles per hour? To encourage or impose car pooling? To encourage or impose mass transit? Perhaps they would like to go back to 1974 with even-odd day gas rationing? Who knows what the Democrats will try next!

Democrats are full of HOT AIR or worse! They talk a good game, but don't want the people to know what they REALLY plan to do!!!

AAR

Canadian Ob - While in Montreal this week I saw the handringing in Canada over a single corporals death in Afghanistan. I understand that YOUR nation has no stomach for anything hard. The AMERICAN military IS largely conservative. Larely Republican. And largely sick of being undermined by foreign subversives (you are a foreigner to us, eh?) and liberals bent on destruction of George Bush at any cost.

Climb back up a maple tree and enjoy your four weeks of summer.

It is a bit astonishing to read the comments here. I knew liberals hated our troops, I just never knew how viciously.

AAR,

There may be no way to show your assertions of how many people died because of liberals and Democrats opposition to the war, but the body count is over 2500 for the 'dead-ender' conservatives' policies.

The conservatives can't even TALK a good game, without stumbling over their own falseities and backpeddling away from Sunday Morning Slip-ups. I am sorry buddy, but I will save you a seat for the impeachment proceedings. LOL

The democrats are pathetic. The dems express phony anger when President Bush, a hero of 9/11, shows a picture of himself after 9/11. Meanwhile, the dems have no problem using dead american soldiers as political props, so they can push their hate america/hate Bush agenda, giving aid and comfort to our enemies, just so they can try and win a House seat. President Bush has made me so proud to be an american. The dems make me feel ashamed to be an american. President Bush protects our right to live. The dems just protect the terrorists. Don't the dems even remember 9/11, you know those two big buildings and all that smoke and stuff.

AAR,

I saw your post on Sunday about foreign/domestic oil. I wrote a brief response. I don't think my response went through, for whatever reason.

I like how I am seeing more posts on energy.

I look forward to discussing oil and energy in future posts. I'm going to get to the bottom of this issue of the liberals blocking attempts to become energy independent. I can't agree with you until I find it our for myself.

I have to do my homework on that argument you brought up, but I have to finish the college semester first to get into the economic mainstream.

The only thing that matters.

I am sorry buddy, but I will save you a seat for the impeachment proceedings.

Good luck with that. You do realize that impeachment is a political process and the DemoRats are in the minority, no? So you might want to channel your hopes and dreams into something a little more realistic, such as a faster than light drive for your spaceship. Otherwise your setting yourself up for one hell of a fall.

The 'war' in Iraq is not part of the 'war on terror'. In fact they are not wars at all since only Congress can declare war, and they haven't done so.

Keep your wars separate as to what they are about - terrorism, or oil and payback for daddy.

At last count there were about 40 countries with terrorist activity. Are we to invade each of them one at a time or all at once? And if we do not invade them, is that considered "cutting and running" by the Rightwing extreamists in the USA? The Rightwing in this country needs to get real and understand that the war on terror is linked to the foreign policy of the USA and is a head trip and not a war that can ever be won with rifles and bombs. Peace

TEO- Is Paul Hackett one of those vets you're talking about? How did the dem establishment treat him?

There seem to be two options on the table. 1.) We can continue the same course of action and hope it will work out. We hope Iraq will become democratic. We hope that the democratic Iraq will be allied with us. We hope the seed of Democracy will spread throughout the middle east. Finally, we hope that the Iraqi security forces will be up to the job. This is the policy put forth by the Republicans. Maybe it will work and maybe it won't. The enemy we face in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere in the GWOT is a major security threat to America and possibly a survival threat to the nation. Given the seriousness of the situation, I don't like policies that are based on hope. 2.) We have the "change direction" set forth by the Democrats. This means set a time table for withdrawl. This is the same thing as setting a time table for America's defeat. If we wish to withdraw, we should do it now. No delays. A withdrawl at this point would be a defeat for America and win for the terrorists. Besides I predict that if we withdraw from Iraq now we would only have to go back in within a year or two!! Then it would be even more difficult than it is now. With option 1 we might succeed but option 2 is almost certain to be catastrophic. I suggest a third option.

Commit more troops and resources to Iraq while keeping the military flexible enough to respond to other threats. More troops should help us to get the security situation under control. We cannot say Iraq is truly liberated until the security situation is under control. We will need to find some way to identify the former regime elements, Al Qaeda, the local militias, and the Iraqis who just want to get on with their lives. The former regime elements and Al Qaeda are major national security risks to the US. The local militias likely are not.

The decision to go into Iraq in the first place may have been misguided, however, the terrorists have chosen to make this a major front in the GWOT. This has rendered the debate on whether we should have gone in moot. What is needed now is to work together to figure how to win. Frankly trying to impeach the president over the decision to invade Iraq which most Democrats agreed with at the time is counter productive. It would only serve to draw resources away from the GWOT. Winning this should be our top priority. Since the terrorists have taken the fight to Iraq by extension this means prevailing in Iraq also.

Kahn

Why in the world would you want to contaminate yourself by visiting a city of foreign subversives? By the way, we have enjoyed our four weeks of summer and there seems to be no end in sight.

The ads go over the top and are inappropriate. then again, all attack ads are inappropriate.

Rich,

If you're refering to the sour-grapes from the guy snubbed in Ohio from getting Democratic backing when Hackett entered the race, then I think you have a hard case in maing it out that Howard Dean and the rest of the Democratic national structure backing him, is somehow the Dems treating him bad.

Oh how magnanimous the Republicrats have been to their (few) military vets. *cough* McCain *Cough*

Democrats are full of HOT AIR or worse!

AAR, too bad someone can't figure out a way to harness that "HOT AIR". Then at least Democrats would be good for SOMETHING, heh.

TEO: I think the differences some Republicans have had with John McCain have to do with his policies as a Senator and not with his military record. The people who seem to have the most trouble with McCain seem to be the Conservative bloggers who do not represent most of the party. As I recall, even McCain's harshest critics have praised his military record. I might be wrong, of course.:)

Well I'm pretty sure Sherrod Brown was endorsed by the DNC over Hackett but maybe I'm wrong. As far as McCain, he is probably going to be the next president. As far as losing Afghanistan, this is from the ap today,

"More than 700 people, mainly insurgents, have been killed since coalition forces began the offensive in mid-May. More than 20 coalition soldiers have died in the same time."

Sounds like the Taliban is really kicking our butts over there, losing 35 men to every one of ours.

B.

I wasn't alluding to his military record, i was just making a point that the Republicans are pretty harsh on a guy who had a pretty stellar military record; the assertion from Rich was that somehow the Dems were beating up on Hackett, but I don't see any evidence of that.

Republicans joining the Military? That's the biggest joke I've heard in AGES!

bloviator,

Well, we're also speding $32 million an hour on Medicaid, $6.7 million an hour on transportation, $13.7 million an hour on education, $8.4 million an hour on homeland security, $6.2 million an hour on welfare...what is your point?

Willem,

Well, it does explain why the military went by very large majority for President Bush in 2004 - and why, in spite of years of slanderous leftwing effort, the men and women of the armed forces still loudly cheer the CinC, and keep re-enlisting at record rates..

Rich,

Dean and the DNC supported him in '05.

I think you're refering to Reid and Schumer who supposedly asked him to bow out of the race in '06, I can't say for sure what their deal is, but it was probably some turf battle between him and Brown. Officially though , during his campaign in '05 (which was the only one he ran in) the DNC was behind him.

I would actually consider voting for McCain...depends on the other options, but he has a few good ideas, and he has proved he is willing to actually listen to the other side of the isle.

As far as Afghanistan, the mere fact we are still seeing influxes of foreign fighters is a bit disturbing. Afghanistan is slipping back into old patterns, and most of the country is still not under the control of the government, growing poppies still, and repressing women. The question is are we going to let them twist in the wind like we did in the 80's, or make a conserted effort to raise their issues to more international importance.

bloviator,

Here is your answer!

Since the end of combat operations in Iraq, the United States and the United Nations World Food Program (WFP) have moved swiftly to supply food to the Iraqi people.

The total value of U.S. food assistance to Iraq is $478 million.

Just where did that 11 million of yours go?

GRUB!!!

Jeremiah

Mark, your assessment of the outrageous DNC flag-draped coffin ad is right on the money. I think the DNC's ad will illicit pure disgust from the American public.

The ads will not illicit disgust-Bush's ill-advised, badly bungled, obscenely expensive war in Iraq and lack of exit plan is illiciting disgust from the public-a disgust they will finally get to vent when they vote Republicans our on Election Day!

Nick Edmunds,

I read your post. Good luck on your college courses. Just watch out for those liberal instructors. They tried to get me, but never succeeded! (Actually, overall, I had some really good instructors when I attended college. There were very few who tried to use the course to convey their political views. It helped that I did not attend a liberal university!)

AAR

kritter,

So goes the word out there on the left - but I think you're about to find that all the hoo-ha for this past year has really just been a smokescreen to prepare for a Gore run for President in 2008...gotta keep in mind that all leftist leaders, especially, are dishonest. There never was much a chance of the Democrats winning either house of Congree this November, and what slight chances there were are quickly evaporating...

But, the lefty leaders got you all ginned up...did you donate any money?

Retired Spook,

You got that right!

I know you communicate with keefer via e-mail. Let him know that I did more reading on that Scrutinator site. I still haven't figured our what's really going on there, but if it is a "spoof" site, and if most of those posting there were "spoofers", and if he got sucked in by them, I can understand how and why he got so fired up. I did see one post there by an "AAR". That was not me!

AAR

Gore/Dean in '08: The Democrats worst nightmare. Lamont beats Lieberman, another Demo nightmare. I support both outcomes. Peace

Do these IDIOT liberals here realize that this policy has been in effect for almost 65 years?

FDR...a DEMOCRAT...instituted the policy.

It was then RE-ASSERTED by Bill Clinton...a DEMOCRT..in the 1990's.

Unbelievable.

By the way, I've been jet skiing the last 4 days on a remote lake in NOrthern California so if there is ONE message from me on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, or prior to this one today on Thursday...then it's just more liberal a-holes spoofing.

"Well, we're also speding $32 million an hour on Medicaid, $6.7 million an hour on transportation, $13.7 million an hour on education, $8.4 million an hour on homeland security, $6.2 million an hour on welfare...what is your point?"

I'd say one (military spending) is spent on killing. The other is spent to improve lives.

Hmmm...don't think so Ash. We've proven as a nation for decades the more you spend on education does not improve education necessarily. Welfare...yeah that improves lives short term until they become reliant on it.

And excuse me, did you really say that spending money on the military is spent on "killing"? It amazes me how little you Canadians know about the military. You realize the military also DEFENDS and AIDS nations around the world....including the frozen north of Canada.

Humanitarian aid for tsunamis, earthquakes, hurricanes...national guard rescue activities in respective states, Coast Guard operations (including enviornmental clean up, etc).

Why are you this ignorant Ash? Is it a skill or were you born with it? How many Billions of people in the last 100 years has the U.S. military and various allies FREED in this world and as a consequence their offspring and their offspring and on and on?

As a distant observer, I find debates in American politics interesting. Some questions.

Why do many people see being a liberal progressive as a bad thing?

How does invading Iraq, a secular country from which NONE of the 9/11 terrorists were from, help defeat terrorism?

What actual evidence is there that "democrats hate the military"? I would have thought sending soldiers to their death in a pointless war by deception was a greater indication of hate for the military.

Please advise

Mark- We donated to the party-not to any one political candidate. I would not be disappointed if Gore ran, in fact might donate more. It's not necessary that the Dems win both houses in '06 -one will do.
Believe it or not, I advocate at least one house of the legislature or the Presidency be held by the opposition-so they can keep each other honest. (which is an oxymoron in politics) Part of the problem that the Republicans are currently experiencing is that they've gotten complacent from being in power too long.

mmm warboy...so cut out all funding for education? Of course that would provide a lot more uneducated types that like being in the military duty. I see your point.

Well what the hell do we have a military for if not to kill? I'd rather see humanitarian operations left to well...humanitarians, not bonzai military folks.

Bet you have a major boner, what with all the bombing and killing going on in the middle east. I can see your creepy self taping all this and playing it back in slo-mo. Sick.

Funny how no one remembers or got offended when the 2004 GWB campaign ad showed a flag draped body being removed from the World Trade Center wreckage.

By the way, I've been jet skiing the last 4 days on a remote lake in NOrthern California

Bet all the critters around that remote lake LOVED all the noise pollution you provided. Gas fumes. Yuk. I'm not a water person, but I also was at a remote lake in Montana recently and saw several people kayaking. Next time give it a try. The animals you share the planet with will thank you for the peace and quiet.

Nard

Don't hold your breath waiting for answers from Bush supporters to the questions you pose.

They will do a lot of name calling but will not provide you with truthful responses to any legitimate questions.

Most of them have their heads firmly buried in the sand and are content to remain there. To come out and face reality would be just too painful.