Whenever I see a Dem using the term Switfboating, it makes me laugh - In fact I'm reminded of the Princess Bride - What they really mean is that they don't want to be called on the lies they're telling by a public group that has verified documentation.

They don't think it means that though which just goes to show either how stupid or dishonest they are.

democRAT = HYPOCRITES (and that's the least of it)

Their complaint about illegal immigration? What a fecking larf

Don't they say that a day in politics is like a life time...It's so early to say who is going to win..but God help this country if we have Speaker Pelosi...we are doomed!

swiftboat,(v), mod.amer.- inconvenient fact(s) that counter previously favorable misperceptions. (ex) "the lieutenant awarded himself the purple heart due to injuries from falling off a ladder in a war zone" & "the retired lieutenant's sworn congressional testimony during the winter soldier hearings was known by him to be false before he testified".

This is the best sign yet of how desperate they are. They have to know they can't win this one yet they must also know that if they don't they lose everything else. I agree, Matt, Bring It On.

[deleted, violation of comment policy]

I moved to Pennsylvania from the DC area about a year ago. Let me tell you, nobody in DC worries about terrorism so much as getting mugged. Growing up around DC I remember still being able to drive in front of the White House, the only thing that changed in the city after 9/11 was an annoying amount of concrete barriers around the capital. The idea of being safer from terrorists (from the perspective of a person living in a city actually at risk) is a joke BUT it does play well in to people living in places where terrorists will never strike.

BUT it does play well in to people living in places where terrorists will never strike.

How true. And where will the terrorists never strike? The "hotbeds" of W. Virginia, Alabama, Kansas, and Montana.

Regarding the question of "Am I safer today?" Of course I am. Am I now more aware of the kind of things that the President is briefed on each morning in his threat matrix meeting? Of course I am. Does the fact that we continue to eliminate terrorist cells, some eliminations known, some not, convince me that at least something is being done? Of course it does. Does the MSM have enough information to launch the accusations they continually do about the inner workings of this administration? I doubt it, but not because of my own personal bias, but based on what we continue to see them do. Do they fabricate stories for their own agenda? That can be debated for certain but give them enough opportunity, frustrate them enough and they can’t help but reveal their true colors. See http://www.aish.com/movies/PhotoFraud.asp for the latest example.

So here is the way I see it. Character matters. Character reveals itself by remaining silent when the nonsense and political rhetoric is at a fury. Character remains on task and adjusts as best sees fit and is consistent with an ultimate agreed upon goal. Character sees unplanned events not as mistakes but as opportunities for correction and future successes. Persons of character have a goal and our President has made it clear that his goal during his window of opportunity is to keep our nation safe. Does he go to bed at night knowing that at a minimum he has done that? Of course he does!

John Dean, Conservatives Without Conscience

WOW!! Just finished the book and I recommend EVERYONE read it.

Aric and Maf53 , Dean speaks to the conservatives exploitation of fear that you're talking about here.

He really nailed this current Conservative movement cold.

[deleted, offensive]

maf53,

RE: "You have a greater chance of dying in a car accident, or being murdered, or drowning, or simply walking down the street, than you do of dying in a terrorist attack. The boogeyman is not out to get you."

The boogeyman is not out to get you? Glad to know that's the way you liberals believe, but then, we already know that's the liberal Democrat's position. Let's just get that officially incorporated into the Democrat platform and let's hear the Democrats campaigning on that position. That should eliminate liberals and liberalism from America for a few decades!

As to the reduced chances of dying in a terrorist attack... No thanks to the liberal leftist Democrats who encourage terrorists and our enemies by their incessant anti-American propaganda! No thanks to the liberal leftist Democrats who condone and encourage those who illegally release our national defense secrets and information about our programs to find and stop terrorists! No thanks to the liberal leftist Democrats who oppose efforts to close our borders. No thanks to the liberal left Democrats who oppose efforts and laws to make it easier to identify, find, track, and capture terrorists!

Why don't you ask your liberal politicians to introduce a bill to stop spending so much time, effort, and money trying to stop terrorists. After all, liberals believe our efforts to stop terrorists and our enemies only irritates them and causes them to increase their terrorism. Maybe if we just allow them to periodically blow up a few commercial airplanes, blow up a few busses and trains, destroy an occasional building, and periodically kill a few thousand Americans, that will appease them and they will leave the majority of us alone! Maybe if we just allow them to occasionally blow some shoppers in our malls, that will be enough to get their message out to the media and appease them enough to leave the majority of us alone! That should make the rest of us safer, right? Wrong!

Maybe the chances of being struck by lightening are very small, but that still does not mean people should stand outside during a storm and test the law of averages and probability!

Leftorium,

Let's do all we can to get that message out. Conservative are just playing on our fears to stop terrorists. There no real threat here. Liberals are right. Let the terrorists just kill a few Americans occasionally, and they will be happy. That will make the rest of Americans safer! Sort of like allowing the lions to occasionally kill and eat a few members of the herd to protect the majority from their hunger! ...SHEER LIBERAL INSANITY!!!

Never trust a liberal to tell the truth or to defend America!

AAR

and one more thing..
this whole notion that we have not been attacked since 9/11 because of bush's policies is the biggest boatload of horsetrash i have ever heard. guess what, we were NEVER attacked during the full eight years of clinton's terms - did you hear him boasting about that every six months or so? no.

wow - no terrorist attack from 1941 to 2001 on US soil. 2001 - 2006 - HOLY SH*T NO TERRORIST ATTACKS. must be bc of bush...
so let's see, even though this country has only been hit twice in the last century, bush wants to claim that bc we have not been hit within the last five years, its a mandate on his 'successful' policies?

who comes up with these talking points?

guess what, we were NEVER attacked during the full eight years of clinton's terms

you mean except when the World Trade Center was bombed in 1993, or the Khobar Towers, or our embassies in Africa, or the USS Cole...

nice try KCJ - i was expecting you to throw in the cole and the african embassy. WTC - ok, SIX people died, i'll give you that one. but the rest never happened on US soil. read what i wrote. but if you want to INCLUDE events outside of the US (meaning attacks on US citizens) i suppose we could always throw in world events. so then by that logic, we've been attacked visciously since 9/11. well if you account for the extra 2500 dead in iraq and afghanistan. what else am i forgetting?

let's not then forget pan am flight 103 under reagan in '88.

Matt,

It is nice to know that you feel safe, but how is it, exactly, that you think you can speak for an entire political party? Do you have any data to support your claim? Why should I believe a word you say?

AAR,

What proof do you have that anybody in America wants to see another terrorist act on American soil? Give me one name.

Given the undisputed boost that 9/11 provided for the Republicans and Bush as they preyed on Americans' fears for political advantage, it is reasonable to assume that they would again benefit from another attack, not the Democrats. Maybe next time, if you're lucky and an attack on America happens while the Republicans are still in power, you will be able to eliminate all of our inconvenient civil rights once and for all. You might be able to enjoy total single-party rule, or maybe even martial law. Think of the possibilites!

"No thanks to the liberal leftist Democrats who encourage terrorists and our enemies by their incessant anti-American propaganda!"

"Liberals are right. Let the terrorists just kill a few Americans occasionally, and they will be happy."

Thanks for the laugh - you really are a clown.

"ok, SIX people died, i'll give you that one."

Gosh, only six people. How...disappointed you must be.

"You have a greater chance of dying in a car accident, or being murdered, or drowning, or simply walking down the street, than you do of dying in a terrorist attack."

And if Ted Kennedy is driving you stand a much better chance of being involved in a car crash AND drowning, right?

Please, please, please, keep posting maf. Between your ignorance and prejudice and bloviator's complete lack of understanding about the world you constantly remind me why the left keeps losing elections.

F'n Liberals.

Clinton gets briefed that OBL wants to attack us, and what does ghe do? Goes on vacation to clear brush at his ranch.

There it is proof positive that L:iberals don't care about keeping americans safe.

Oops. That was Bush and the Republicans, of course.

Nevermind.

You feel safer now than before 9/11? According to today's Washington Post, Bush said "The United States of America is engaged in a war against an extremist group of folks bound together by an ideology willing to use terror to achieve their objectives." He also said America was "safer than it has been, but it's not yet safe. The enemy has an advantage when attacking our homeland."

I'm glad its only just "folks" who are planning the attacks. Shouldn't be too hard to nab them as they swing back and forth on the front porch.

But Bush thinks the enemy has an advantage when attacking our homeland. Could that be because all our troops, who are supposed to be protecting America from foreign attacks, are over in Iraq getting themselves killed in a civil war started by Bush?

America has more enemies now than before 9/11. Terrorism is more rampant throughout the world now than before. Instead of finishing off the Taliban in Afghanistan and capturing Osama, Bush stupidly launched a war of choice in Iraq, a country that was no threat to us. As a result, Iraq is now a training ground for new terrorists. Thanks, Mr. President. Hey, bring 'em on!

Five years after 9/11 and 3 years after Bush invaded Iraq so we can "fight the terrorists over there so we don't have to fight them here", I can't even bring a bottle of water on an airplane because the government is afraid it might be a bomb.

Bush's "war on terror" has made the world less safe. For every terrorist killed, there are probably 10 willing to step into their shoes because of their hatred of the US. Bush and his gang of incompetents will go down in history as the worst ever.

Terror on the decrease? Right.

http://icasualties.org/oif/

Run the numbers. Roughly 24,000 US service persons have been KIA or med-evaced. The DOD only reports about 1/3 of these as "injuries."

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0916-25.htm

That makes it roughly 13 casualties a day since 9/11. Feel safe?

So I guess you could say these don't count, because they are outside the US? Tell that to their families.

Additionally, over 25% of those returning are reporting mental problems, a significant portion of those being psychosis. Not victims of terror? Why don't you go ask them.

So terror is on the decrease, and you feel safer. Right. All together now....try not to hyper-ventilate....

I feel alot less safer by any standard..
And in point of order, by any measure I am less safe.

but wouldn't it be fair for Democrats to ask why Osama hasn't been captured? The idea that Saddam Hussein had anything major to do with 9/11, while a useful idea, just doesn't stand up to scrutiny. I'm sorry, but your closing words 'bring it on' may be seen as somewhat ironic come November.

Harry Reid, "We killed the Patriot Act!"

Someone should put that on a campaign bumpersticker.

Dear OhioOrrin,

Senator Kerry did not award himself the purple heart, and as for the Winter Soldiers, it turns out that they and not the Army were telling the truth. Read what the recently declassified reports show in this L.A. Times article from last week.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-vietnam6aug06,0,6350517.story?coll=la-home-headlines

re the general post: Do I feel safer because we're dropping the ball on nuclear proliferation, have needlessly enraged the muslim world so scum like Al Qaeda and Osama can expand their influence (yes, I know they hated us before Iraq, even when we were saving Muslim lives in Croatia), and so Hamas and that lunatic are now in charge of Palestine and Iran? Absolutely not. George "OK, you've covered your ass now" Bush and Dick "I'm head of an anti-terrorism task force but haven't attended any meetings" Cheney have only helped this cancer spread, not cut it out.

bomiator,

you truly lack perception....

You dutifully note that there were no terrorist attacks ON U.S. SOIL during the Clinton years.

hair splitting? loyal liberal bot aren't ya!

Uh...Pan Am 103, happened during Bush by the way, was OVER FOREIGN SOIL...so let's remain consistent. How did the terrorists bring the plane down again? Hiding explosives in some electronic equipment? That did not show up on scanner? No reason to be worried now is there? Those terrorists aren't smart enough to pull it off, aren't they?

The attacks on the USS Cole, Khobar towers, the African embassies (foreign embassies are considered home soil!) and other smaller attacks were on OUR FORCES. I guess in your eyes they don't count. Clinton vowed to leave no stone unturned in each case. His own appointment to the FBI stated that he dropped the ball on the investigations...didn't want to look to hard and piss off the Palestinians...that would make it harder for him to get that Nobel Peace Prize he had been panting after.

But, Clinton did what no other President has been able to do, bring out the Homegrown terrorists....you know Timothy McVeigh and the whole Oklahoma City bombing.

But I guess you don't count that either.......

Clinton's inaction had caused the terrorists to get braver and bolder. You brought up, in your party dialectic (in another thread), that North Korea and China were able to build up their nuclear stockpile UNDER CLINTON'S watch and his policies helped them do it! You know - allowing rocket technology to be transfered to the Chinese so they could put up satellites and providing funds and reactor technology to the North Koreans to keep their citizens in heat and electricity....he had to give them something for those foreign campaign contributions....

Keep memorizing those talking points, if you say them often enough, some may start to believe them - you know, fool some of the people all of the time and fool all of the people some of the time.....

Shhhushhh.

Don't let TiredofLibBullshit know that McVeigh was a conservative.
So was the olympic bomber, by the way.

McVeigh, the spiteful piece of shit, was egged-on by the Clinton Derangement Syndrome folk, of course.

Any of ToLBS's friends want to give us the name of a spiteful, piece of shit liberal that killed 200+ Americans during GW's reign?

Feel free to make it up, like the swiftboaters.

JML,

Yes, maybe once and for all, we can get rid of the weak liberals; their liberalism; their agenda; their social engineering; their anti-competitiveness; their anti-religion and anti-Christianity; their pro-criminal ACLU; their activist law-giver judges; their ineffective schools used to indoctrinate our children and spread their liberalism; their careerist welfare system; and their gay marriage; along with their incessant anti-Americanism, anti-Israeli, anti-military, and pro-terrorist propaganda... before they reduce the United States to a third rate nation -- morally, economically, and militarily!

Liberals and Liberalism... weakening the strong rather than strengthen the weak!

AAR

Barnaby,

Yes, our soldiers and Iraqi families, killed and injured by terrorists encouraged, motivated, and emboldened by the liberal Democrats and their never ending anti-Bush, anti-American, anti-military propaganda. The liberal Democrats who make it clear to the world, our enemies, and terrorists that, if they are elected, the world can count on their usual hi-tail, cut and run strategy in the future as in the past. The terrorists hear the Democrats very well. The terrorists hear the Democrats demanding our troops leave Iraq to avoid more deaths and injuries from terrorists. The terrorists hear the Democrats demanding that we leave Iraq to the terrorists for their new oil rich homeland and center of terror operations. In return, the terrorists give the Democrats what they want for their propaganda mill -- more American and Iraqi deaths and injuries!

Yes, the terrorists are casting their votes every day for the Democrats. Each and ever death and injury to an American soldier or Iraqi man, woman, or child by a terrorist is their vote cast for the Democrats. Yes, terrorists and our enemies around the world have no doubt about who they want in office. They want the cut-and-run, all-talk-but-no-fight weak-willed Democrats!

Terrorism on the increase? Blame the white and yellow flag waving Dimocrats!

AAR

Hey Tired...

So, Clinton is directly responsible for Oklahoma City? By this logic, I suppose the rash of church burnings in Alabama and Mississippi earlier this year were Bush's fault.

You mention China's and North Korea's arms advances. What, exactly, has Bush done to combat the rising threats from those countries?

You suggest that Clinton left a few stones unturned in his pursuit of the attackers of Khobar, USS Cole, and the embassies. Bush said that he would "smoke the terrorist out of their holes." Guess what - the terrorists are still there five years later. If you're going to accuse Clinton directly for those attacks, then it is only fair to hang 9/11 around Bush's neck.

Let's use the same standards for both presidents. There's a lot of 20/20 hindsight to be had.

AAR,

I was hoping to hear back from you.

That's quite a tirade there! I think you managed to cram every right-wing catch phrase in one sentence. Color me impressed.

Your last post is also quite telling. I assume that you actually are in favor of a single-party system in the US, or maybe you would prefer martial law. (That should do wonders for accountability.)

But, again, think of the possibilities! We could have your conservativism; conservative social engineering (eliminate the minimum wage!); conservative anti-competitiveness (eliminate anti-trust laws and promote monopolies!); conservative anti-science and anti-religion-other-than-Christianity; the pro-death NRA (no background checks for gun purchases, even if you are a terrorist!); conservative activist judges; underfunded schools to innoculate our children against science and promote conservativism; careerist corporate welfare; the elimination of individual choice as to whom we spend the rest of our lives with; incessant anti-environmentalism; anti-world; anti-peace; and pro-military-industrial-complex propaganda. Then America will be a first-rate banana republic morally, economically, and militarily, the likes of which would make most South American countries jealous! But the lucky few, aka the "chosen ones," would truly be in heaven.

BTW: How would you go about ridding Amrerica of libruls? Deportation? Confine them to forced labor camps? How about "liquidation"? Would you use taxpayers' dollars to do it? Give us some details!

JML,

To quote a great American... "My Goodness!"

Nice dump of left wing propaganda (trash) ... but wrong! You really should try doing some reading on those topics and learn some facts rather than accepting what your liberal handlers teach you. Check in on future posts though -- we'll eventually get to most of those topics [again] in due time. Until then, Rush can help.

As to how to remove liberals? How about a one way trip to liberal utopia -- France!

Liberalism is the real threat to America -- more so than the terrorists you liberals encourage and support by your anti-American propaganda and weakness!

AAR

"...they'll say they don't feel safer, simply to find fault in President Bush. But, we know better."

Do you now? Do you really know what I'm thinking? First the phone conversations, now this. And any other opinion I might have about what is happening to our country is a symptom of my delusions.

The Repugs are finally right; the government is now something to be afraid of.

AAR,

Thanks for the Tuesday night comedy.

AAR,

Which great American do you quote? Just curious.

You really should try doing some reading on those topics and learn some facts rather than accepting what your conservative handlers teach you.

How am I wrong, exactly? Aren't the things I describe above what conservatives are really pining for? I am in the darkness, please bring me into the light.

What the hell does Rush have to do with any of this? They haven't put out a decent record since "Grace Under Pressure," and that was in 1984.

Who is gonna pay for all of those one-way tickets to France? As much as I find the French generally annoying, I'd love to see Paris, especially the Louvre. Are you offering to pay my way over there? I'll take care of the return ticket...

Please describe how liberalism is more dangerous than terrorism. It seems that liberalism is dedicated to allowing individuals to live their lives as they see fit and terrorism is dedicated to indiscriminate death. Those two are wildly divergent. Further, please demonstrate how liberalism is un-American. Again, I am in the darkness, please bring me into the light.

One other thing: Please point out where I identify myself as Leftist in my previous posts. Here's a complimentary set of quotation marks that you can use (" ").

If you're gonna make accusations regarding somebody's loyalties to America, please back them up. Otherwise, you come across as nothing more than a partisan hack at best, or a misguided fool at worst.

Peas.

Right on JML. I saw nothing wrong w/ your previous statements. They were objective and intelligent. Funny how that angers some people. It's seems as though hyper-nationalism is a disease too.

I believe in our democratic ideals... and yet some people seem to think they're anything but that. I suggest a history 101 course for the people who decry democrats or liberal thinking.

And for your first your lesson.. a little thing called the right to free speech. How dare anyone decide that an opinion is somehow against this nation simply because you're so close-sighted you can't allow a different idea into your heart or mind? Shame on all of you who feel yours is the only answer. Shame on anyone of us who are stupid enough to believe that.

Thank (whoever you want to insert here) that JML is speaking w/ her/his heart and is unafraid of the crazy retaliation you dish out.

"...if you asked Democrats in a poll, they'll say they don't feel safer, simply to find fault in President Bush."
what tripe. you would say you feel safer just to support bush. so what's the point? look at facts.
iran is closer to nuclear arms today than ever before. we have inflamed anti-american feelings in the middle-east, and the rest of the world. we have emboldened the enemy by our faulty strategies and tactics, and incompetent execution by the civilian leadership. we have aided in the recruiting of soldiers by our enemies, while weakening our own military. and al-queda is still out there planning to strike us. we have weakened our own constitution, and squandered billions which our grandchildren will be paying for.
safer? stop drinking the kool-aid.

Right on JML. I saw nothing wrong w/ your previous statements.

Of course you don't. You're as uninformed as JML.

They were objective and intelligent.

Did somebody tell you that? Your high school teacher maybe?

Funny how that angers some people. It's seems as though hyper-nationalism is a disease too.

Oooooh. "Hyper-nationalism." Lib code for "you can't hate America if you love it, so loving it is B.A.D.

I believe in our democratic ideals...

Hard to believe in something that you don't have a clue about, although from the look of things, it hasn't stopped you up to this point...

and yet some people seem to think they're anything but that.

Ahhh. "Some people."

I suggest a history 101 course for the people who decry democrats or liberal thinking.

That'll clear it all up, right?

And for your first your lesson.. a little thing called the right to free speech.

No such thing on a blog. Sorry you have to hear it so harshly.

How dare anyone decide that an opinion is somehow against this nation simply because you're so close-sighted you can't allow a different idea into your heart or mind? Shame on all of you who feel yours is the only answer. Shame on anyone of us who are stupid enough to believe that.

So, let me get this straight. You're attacking peoples' opinions that are different than your idiotic rantings because they attack your opinions. That about it? Is this an example of "well-thought-out" logic that you employ every day? It must be fun to see what you look like after you dress yourself in the morning - or do you have someone do that for you?

Thank (whoever you want to insert here) that JML is speaking w/ her/his heart and is unafraid of the crazy retaliation you dish out.

So the idiotic moonbat rantings are "speaking of the heart" whereas any refutation or challenge to these rantings is "crazy retaliation?" That seals it. You are even dumber than JML and I didn't think that was possible. So tell me, what is it like, living under that rock and when can we expect you to return home to it? Soon I hope.

Reverend,

Were you saying something? Nice long screed you have there. Can you do anything other than call people names? Any jackass can scream "moonbat!"

Try this, if it isn't too intellectually taxing: Choose a point that I made and create an argument against it, or choose a point that I refuted above and support it.

JML,

In due time, JML. In due time!

Where do you identify yourself as Leftist in your previous posts? You've GOT to be kidding, right? Unless of course you are really Karl Rove trying to incite the Conservative base!

If you think I am going to waste my time going through all of your tripe on this thread so you can re-post your usual liberal propaganda lines in response, dream on! Take a trip over to KOS or some other ultra leftwing site if you have the need to make another dump of liberals lies. Otherwise, either read back through the B4B archives and do the research yourself, or wait for the next time your topic is discussed. I'm sure we will get to all of them in due time.

If you don't know what Rush has to do with it, try listening to him and you may figure it out on your own -- other left wingers listen. Even if you don't like his correct analysis, you will hear some news you won't get from the libbie media. If you don't like Rush, try Hannity or some of the other Conservative talk shows to get a dose of sanity from that anti-American rhetoric you so admire from the ultra left and your liberal handlers!

Which great American made the quote? I'm sure you already know the answer to that question. If not, try Google or ask one of your leftie friends!

Please describe how liberalism is more dangerous than terrorism. Check back through the archives... or better still think! Liberalism is destroying America, culturally, socially, economically, politically, internationally, and militarily. You will find some comments on some or most of these topics in the archives, but check with Rush for the latest!

As to your comments about making a point... you didn't make any points worth discussing or wasting time on them. If we want to read your comments about those [supposed] points... we can go back through the previous leftie posts or to any left wing blog and read them there -- repeated over and over. No point wasting space and cluttering up this site with any more left wing propaganda lies than has already been dumped here.

A return ticket? You wouldn't need it. Returning requires a valid passport!

bryan,

They were objective and intelligent? The B4B error screen must have wiped out those comments!

It's seems as though hyper-nationalism is a disease too. Well, we certainly can't accuse the left of any nationalism or patriotism, can we? But, anti-Americanism and anti-patriotism from the left? Absolutely, it's time we stop the political correctness and call it what it is! Listen to the left wing propaganda and compare it to what Hezbollah, al Qaeda, terrorists, and our enemies are "preaching" around the world! I'm sure the terrorists appreciate all of the help and encouragement they get from the liberals [progressives] and the Democrats. They couldn't expect a better job if they were paying for it! Speaking of paying, it's time we find out where the terrorists cells are in America and which political organizations [if any] they have infiltrated or are supporting. It's time we find out where that money is going which the far left wing liberals and liberal Democrats fight so hard to keep secret. And those phone calls...

The right to free speech? Abuse it... and you lose it. And the left has certainly abused it!

And speaking of free speech... we really do need to look at the abuse and misuse of academic freedom. It's way past time to start reining in those "liberal [progressive] professors" who use "academic freedom" to brainwash and indoctrinate our children and to preach anti-Americanism, anti-American views, and hatred for American!

AAR

AAR,

You should stop smoking that stuff--it really isn't good for you.

Flag waving democrats causing terrorism? Are you serious? How about invading other Muslim countries? How about torturing people? How about bombing cities?

No, those can't possibly cause terrorism. AAR, grow a brain, or shut up, please.

Barnaby

AAR,

You're a real treasure!

There you go again with the laundry list of perceived liberal sins, but it is nothing more than a list. Again, it amounts to little more than name-calling, which achieves nothing. What you have achieved, however, is reinforcement the stereotype of conservatives as people who are only capable of seeing in black and white.

Pick something from the multitude of liberal sins and tell us all why it is so bad and then perhaps we can have an adult conversation.

BTW, do you feel comfortable speaking on behalf of conservatives as a whole in calling for the virtual abolition of free speech? Given that free speech is the bedrock of our society and democracy in general, it seems to me that it is something that even most conservatives value. How would you "rein in" those who dare to hold views other than your own?

Were you saying something?

I never waste my time with liberal trolls. Buzz off, troll.

JML,

Liberal Baloney... Noted!

Baiting and Fishing... Detected!

Thanks for participating on the BLOGS FOR BUSH website!

Please clean-up and remove your trash upon departing!

AAR

Asking someone if they feel safer now than on Sept. 11th is like asking someone who's home got robbed if they feel safer 2 years after it happened. They would most likely say "yes" if there had been no reoccurances. As to whether we are actually safer, well that's nearly impossible to tell. There are many with the opinion that we are not and that Bush is making it worse by exacerbating Mideast tensions, while others claim we have engaged the enemy overseas, thus we're safer in the homeland. Whether we FEEL safer is another issue and more of a political one, I think. One that will be toted around by politicians of both ilks. But remember FEELING safe when we weren't was the reason 9/11 could happen, so be careful which side your leaning on...it might fall out from underneath you.

Wow,

I've been reading some of the blogs posted and I must say it saddens me to see such hatred being thrown back and forth between the Dem and Rep!!! Can't we just get ourselves to see the big picture instead? Our government is getting more and more currupted by the minute and they want to numb us with these stupid issues so that we could create "teams" and get so stuck on supporting stupid issues while they only have power and money in their minds! I am NOT a Republican and I am NOT a Democrat... I vote for the person who will do the job with intelligence and responsibility fot the good of our nation.
Democrats dont defend themselves correctly because they are just as currupt as the Republicans and they know they would have done the same. Ont the other hand, it disgusting to see how much hatred is involved when I see a Republican write an opinion... c'mon! We have to stick together PEOPLE!!!! We need to balance things out and worry about the BIG issues! You all know Bush had FAMILY INTERESTS involved when he started a WAR with Iraq... what the Hell is THAT! I mean... wern't we looking for Bin Laden?? NO... because the Bush family does business with them! People this is NOT about Democrats and Republicans... it's about finding a way to have more responsible people RUNNING FOR OFFICE! The people that are representing us are SHAMEFUL, CURRUPT and FAKE completely pathetic! We can do better than this... we need to stick together and start talking about REAL ISSUES.

DSCC racist? This AP story says that an ad on the DSCC web site has caused a backlash in the Hispanic community, which is now accusing the Democrats of being racists. Poetic justice.

WASHINGTON - A Democratic political ad is under fire from Hispanics who say it unfairly compares Latino immigrants to terrorists.

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee sponsored a 35-second ad on its Web site that shows footage of two people scaling a border fence mixed with images of Osama Bin Laden and North Korea President Kim Jong Il.
...
"This is the same kind of fear mongering we condemn in the extreme media and now we are seeing it at the DSCC," said Lisa Navarrete, spokeswoman for the National Council of La Raza. "It‘s appalling."

You can see the racist Democrat ad here.

GC,

Wow indeed!

Are you JML or perhaps Barnaby masquerading under an another ID? An "alter ego" perhaps? Or just as passing liberal feigning concern for the hate your liberal left Dimocrats have created and fostered? Perhaps just a liberal chummin' and trollin' on a Conservative site to see what you can dredge up! (You sure write like JML!)

You jump in and talk about how it "saddens" you to see such hatred and then you dump another load of anti-Bush liberal lying propaganda! If you believe that liberal tripe and the rest of the looney left's anti-Bush, anti-American propaganda and support the left wingers hatred for America, that's your problem!

AAR

"Were you saying something?

I never waste my time with liberal trolls. Buzz off, troll."

Classic Rev! You respond to almost every 'lefty' post and then a post or 2 later the old 'I never waste my time with liberal trolls.' line comes out. Priceless!

AAR,
Your answer seems to be fight hate with hate. Excellent solution!

Hi - I'm a former Republican-leaning independant and a current Democrat and I can say for certain that I feel much less safe today than I did on Sept. 10, 2001 (A better baseline than the 11th). I was in Guatemala doing missionary work in 1989, during the civil/proxy war there, when US citizens would be pulled off public busses and shot in the jungle, and what we've done since 9/11 is far worse. I remember the fear of the '80's, wondering if somewhere in secret a lunatic might have his/her finger on the bomb trigger, and today there are at least three of those lunatics in the White House. It was the legacy of Clinton that Bush got a brief titled "bin Laden determined to strike within the US" during his first Crawford vacation, and the Bush administration who ignored it.

So, no, I don't feel more safe. Which is a good thing, because we are less safe.

AAR,

High-tailing democrats?

So now Ronald Reagan (America's original Cut and Run President) is a Democrat?

Does making shit up make you feel safer?

Do we feel safer now that we did on 9/11? What a dumb question. Everyone was in an absolute panic on 9/11. Everyone thought the sky was going to fall in. Now, for some common sense. Bin Laden is through with us, and Bush knows it. All OBL wanted was for our troops to leave Saudi Arabia. Bush ordered them out 2 days before his Mission Accomplished BS. That's why he said he wasn't concerned about OBL. So any "terrorist" attacks will come from crazies--not associated with OBL. And our youngsters are still dying in Afghanistan (and the British, and the Canadians). For what? This whole war business is a nightmare.

Morphie,

I've tried talking rationally and logically to liberals. It does not work with the vast majority. Liberals live in a different universe. That well known book might just well have been titled: "Conservatives are from Mars, Liberals are from Venus." Yes, there are a few liberals posting on B4B who generally discuss the issues, and who offer some good discussion and input. Most, however, are here solely to be disruptive and repeat the same old liberal party rhetoric. It's pointless to even attempt a rational discussion with them -- they aren't here for that purpose.

AAR

"Don't let TiredofLibBullshit know that McVeigh was a conservative.

So was the olympic bomber, by the way.

McVeigh, the spiteful piece of shit, was egged-on by the Clinton Derangement Syndrome folk, of course.

Any of ToLBS's friends want to give us the name of a spiteful, piece of shit liberal that killed 200+ Americans during GW's reign?

Feel free to make it up, like the swiftboaters."

Wow, what a comeback!!!

Uh, using the liberal talking point "it happened under his watch........". Libs blame Bush, because "it happened under his watch". So, let's be consistent now. But of course, libs are never consistent when it concerns their own.

Ok Robbie......

I'll make up some stuff.

How long did the reign of terrorism by the Unibomber last??? and oh, he was a certifiable lib.

Let's also talk about the eco-terrorists who burn SUV dealerships and other such destructions of personal and private properties, spiking of trees, etc etc. Let's discuss the razings and bombings of ROTC offices at colleges by the radicals of the 60s and 70s. The list goes on and on.........

oh, and enough of the "swiftboating". It a catch little phrase libs use ad nauseum. It isn't "swiftboating" when it's the truth.

AAR,

"I've tried talking rationally and logically to liberals."

What? I've tried to engage you on a number of occasions now and all I have received in return are tired cliches about liberalism and anti-Americanism. In fact, you spent so much energy calling myself and others names that you have never fully articulated a position on any single issue, except for your lust for abolishing free speech. For example:

Up above, you said, "Yes, our soldiers and Iraqi families, killed and injured by terrorists encouraged, motivated, and emboldened by the liberal Democrats and their never ending anti-Bush, anti-American, anti-military propaganda."

That's one hell of an accusation. Prove it. Buy a verb while you're at it. Here's where you support your claim with solid evidence. But, you know what? I don't expect you to offer any evidence (because there is none). I expect you to call me names. Is that what the conservative movement has been reduced to - namecalling?

Earier, I had hoped to engage you in some substantive conversation. I have since lowered my expectations. In fact, you're really kind of boring. You have added nothing to the discussion here.

Tired...

Guess what? The 60's are over. Have been for a while now. The 70's are over too.

"Uh, using the liberal talking point "it happened under his watch........". Libs blame Bush, because "it happened under his watch". So, let's be consistent now."

Let's be consistent indeed. Bush obvioulsy should not be held accoutable for anything that happens / happened during his presidency. That's way too much to ask of a president. However, the Right holds Clinton accountable for every act of terrorism during his presidency. Let's be consistent. Either presidents are responsible for terrorist acts during their terms or they are not. Which is it? Do we allow free passes to Republicans, but not Democrats?

Please defend Bush's choice to ignore warnings of an imminent attack. If you think about it, Bush's response to the August 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Briefing announcing Bin Laden's intent to attack America makes perfect sense. Consider the following:

1) Any attack on America was/is likely to occur in a major metropolitan (read: liberal) area, such as NYC.

2) Such an attack would kill lots of liberals (that is, Democrats), foreigners, illegal aliens, and other un-American types, maybe even some French.

3) The public would rally around the president, whoever that happened to be. Bush enjoyed an almost immediate approval rating of 90 percent, and that is before any retaliation took place.

4) The MSM, which the Right loves to villify as being leftist, cowered in the shadows of 9/11. They were scared to death of challenging the Bush
Administration on virtually every point whether or not it involved terrorism.

So, what's not to love?

JML,

The fish aren't biting!

AAR

Seems the writer and a lot of folks making comments feel much safer nestled in the comfort of all the straw man arguments that are being made. Best of luck with that.