The democrats have become so bitter they are now trying to influence the murder of a US president.
They are testing the waters the more they talk/joke about it.

I can almost hear the man blubbering like a child: "I was supposed to win! ME! This isnt fair! They cheated, the conservatives cheated by not believing in my double-secret plan that could only be revealed AFTER I was elected!"

You want to know the real reason that libs hate Bush, its because of what the man represents; all those sixty million so-called maroons who dared to vote for him, the folks who are regularly maligned by the left as doltish, flyover-country boobs.

A few years ago, I found mattmargolis.com when I did a search on the phrase "john kerry is an asshole." I found the site in the middle of a discussion about John Kerry laughing about Bush crashing his mountain bike.

John Kerry is still an asshole.

"unreasoning hatred"

Unreasoning hatred!?!?!?!?!

Do you really think that? Did you know that thousands of Iraqi civilians die because of your glorious leader?...answer me Mark, is that a reason?

The Conservatives of your party are going to kill two birds with one stone come Nov. 7th. They will either not show up at the polls or will vote Independent or Democrat.
Then we will have our democracy back and working as it should with real checks and balances. Then we'll see how many people love Bush...lol!!

have you see kerry throw? he couldn't break a pane of glass with a stone.

USA,

Yeah, we know: only civilians and US troops have died, and the terrorists didn't kill any civilians, because of their humanitarian concern for basic human rights...

Now that all the polls show that you are in an ever shrinking minority of citizens that still believe the Bush Administration, I will treat you far better than you treated us "liberals" when we the minority opinion.

Only 17% of Americans think that the Iraqi occupation is going well and that Bush is telling the truth about it.

Mark, you are now the one well out of touch not only with mainstream America but with reality as well.

Wade

Lomstradamus - you're making the big mistake of swallowing the MSM lines about "turnout." Their current step in their strategy are these insanely statistically biased "polls." It happens every time around this far out from an election.

Wade,

Just remember to be here on November 8th, ok?

Mark, if for nothing else, I like your totally predictable consistency. No matter how much sh*t hits the fan, you're a true Bush partisan.

You never give the impression of leaving your little comfort zone, and I know your delusions will always be here when I come back to your little pathetic blog empire.

I just wonder: is your apparent "comfort zone" a facade, that you question everytime facts contradict what you say? Or are you truly the blind partisan you present yourself as?

winnow,

Time will tell if I'm a blind partisan or someone who has thought things trough more carefully, perhaps, than you have.

All I can say is what I've been saying all year - I see zero evidence of this surge to the left by the American people which would be necessary for the Democrats to win. Polls aren't evidence anymore - too many of them have been proven too often to be relentlessly biased in selection of questions and the polling sample.

If we were about to be crushed, the we wouldn't be neck and neck in New Jersey and Maryland - period. Those are two of the bluest blue States, and we've got a 50/50 shot at winning both Senate seats. And that is just one of a score of bits of EVIDENCE I have for my view...what do you have? Polls...

winnow,

Oh - in addition; doing the right thing always makes me comfortable, even if everyone else is opposed to be doing it. Under President Bush's leadership, the only thing we've done wrong is CFR...other than that, we've done quite well with doing the right thing.

"Oh - in addition; doing the right thing always makes me comfortable, even if everyone else is opposed to be doing it."-MN

Amen to that! Go USA! Go President Bush!
:)

Mark,

I can respect any set of beliefs that are grounded in a solid ideological framework, no matter how much I disagree with them.

But you don't seem to function that way. You are a blind partisan. Period.

You ridicule "the left" for promoting sexual permissiveness - then you defend Hastert, who turned a blind eye to someone preying on children.

You give lip service to fiscal conservatism, while defending record deficits.

You claim to be Christian while supporting a war of "prevention," and when things turn south you blame everything but your ideas - blame the Muslims, blame liberals who are "aiding and abetting the enemy." But never do you shed a tear for the innocents who have been killed in this fool's game. "Turn the other cheek," indeed.

And here tonight you say, "Yeah, we know: only civilians and US troops have died, and the terrorists didn't kill any civilians, because of their humanitarian concern for basic human rights..." What does 9/11 have to do with Iraq? When will you give up that canard? I know the answer: you won't, because you are - drum roll - a blind partisan who ignores obvious reality.

Mark,

I can respect any set of beliefs that are grounded in a solid ideological framework, no matter how much I disagree with them.

But you don't seem to function that way. You are a blind partisan. Period.

You ridicule "the left" for promoting sexual permissiveness - then you defend Hastert, who turned a blind eye to someone preying on children.

You give lip service to fiscal conservatism, while defending record deficits.

You claim to be Christian while supporting a war of "prevention," and when things turn south you blame everything but your ideas - blame the Muslims, blame liberals who are "aiding and abetting the enemy." But never do you shed a tear for the innocents who have been killed in this fool's game. "Turn the other cheek," indeed.

And here tonight you say, "Yeah, we know: only civilians and US troops have died, and the terrorists didn't kill any civilians, because of their humanitarian concern for basic human rights..." What does 9/11 have to do with Iraq? When will you give up that canard? I know the answer: you won't, because you are - drum roll - a blind partisan who ignores obvious reality.

Mark,

I can respect any set of beliefs that are grounded in a solid ideological framework, no matter how much I disagree with them.

But you don't seem to function that way. You are a blind partisan. Period.

You ridicule "the left" for promoting sexual permissiveness - then you defend Hastert, who turned a blind eye to someone preying on children.

You give lip service to fiscal conservatism, while defending record deficits.

You claim to be Christian while supporting a war of "prevention," and when things turn south you blame everything but your ideas - blame the Muslims, blame liberals who are "aiding and abetting the enemy." But never do you shed a tear for the innocents who have been killed in this fool's game. "Turn the other cheek," indeed.

And here tonight you say, "Yeah, we know: only civilians and US troops have died, and the terrorists didn't kill any civilians, because of their humanitarian concern for basic human rights..." What does 9/11 have to do with Iraq? When will you give up that canard? I know the answer: you won't, because you are - drum roll - a blind partisan who ignores obvious reality.

Mark, the terrorists weren't there until we showed up.

Oh, and neck and neck in New Jersey according to who? That couldn't be from a poll could it? Because, you know, you just said that polls mean nothing. Or is it only polls that you don't like?

Secret service should investigate!

No matter how many time you post this Winnow, you still don't get it.

You've ignored the basic evidence that Hastert did do something, based on the information that he was given...which even the MSM and FBI could not construe as being borderline illegal. Should Hastert have ordered Foley's emails to be seized and Foley placed on 24-hour survellance? On what grounds? If a member of Congress was accused of taking bribes and puting them in his freezer, would Hastert have this same authority?

You and the MSM gambled on the Foley incident to push the elections your way. Your accusations of Republicans covering up pedophiles are disgusting, because they are not only complete lies, but they have manipulated parents' worst fears for no logical reason.

9/11 wasn't even mentioned in this post, but you provide the usual knee-jerk comment. Terrorists have been attacking civilians long before 9/11, but to liberals terrorism started when Bush took office, and it'll go away when he leaves. Kerry suffers under that delusion, because his magic CIA hat told him so.

unreasoning hatred

my god - this site has devolved into a bunch of right-wing WHINERS (kjstrouble). for years you've sat back and egged-on the likes of rove, o'reilly, coulter, dobson, bush, cheney, savage, hannity, as they spewed forth vitriol and sanctioned violence against those that disagreed with their myopic view of the world. and now, NOW, when this house of cards has fluttered to the ground leaving the integrity of your agenda and ideology in serious question, you yourselves can't stand to sit on the burner?

at least i give mark credit for keeping the forum open to 'dissenters'

Just four more weeks. Investigations. Oversight.
And dare I say, impeachment?

Actually, I'm surprised that the secret service has not paid Mr. Kerry a visit about this outburst. Pretty pathetic, if you ask me.

As to the 9/11 thing brought up in this thread: I'm sorry, but Saddam was at least partly responsible for 9/11.

To wit:

1. Saddam invaded Kuwait.

2. The first Gulf War was fought, with us placing troops in Saudi Arabia (at their request - they thought him a madman too, and wanted our help).

3. Osama Bin Laden considered our troops to be on "holy land", and as such, vowed to fight us.

4. Lots of attacks, culminating with 9/11, happened because of that process.

Nothing that is over there happens in a vacuum. It is all inter-related.

oh boy - the funny talk never ends.
put your tin-foil hats on boys and girls.

by the tortured and stretched logic that ozemc has reached for in linking saddam with 9/11, we should have invaded saudi arabia as well. after all, it was they who asked that we station troops in the "holy land".

however:

Actually, I'm surprised that the secret service has not paid Mr. Kerry a visit about this outburst.

O’Reilly asked an interesting question last night? He asked “Where does this hatred from the left come from”? He was to try to identify the core or origination point of this hatred. His 2 guest, Michelle Malkin & Kirsten Powers, made some observations about this but O’Reilly suggested it exist because they (the left) know they can’t win.

At first it seemed too simple an answer. The left “followers” get worked into a frenzy about emotional issues with a lot of “stuff” that sounds right. The left “leaders” make great sounding emotional issues an art form. Those so called “leaders” know what their saying has little or no truth and therefore no virtue. Their aim is simply one of power. Anything and everything is fair game in their quest to regain power.

When the general population starts to see (thank God for blogs) how twisted information is from so many sources, they tend to shut it all out and step back, think a little and evaluate. This has created a slow but sure shift –from- the culture of political correctness, social feel good policies and let government take of everything mentality –to- one of personal responsibility, personal charity and striving toward good for our country and the world by standing up to evil.

It is often a difficult transition if you were duped for a long time and have to admit you were wrong. What I’m seeing is far more former Democrats either turning Republican or at least turning away from the run away train the left is taking the Democrat party than the other way around.

The Democrat party was in a similar position before where they were losing a hold of the majority. That’s when FDR instituted the so called “New Deal” otherwise known as welfare. This brought swarms of individuals back to the Democrat party looking for a free handout. The destruction of this system caused a very real group of second class citizens with a rather real but invisible ceiling. These second class citizens could continue to receive the freebies but only if they continued to elect the party who would provide the handouts. What they failed to see is they also locked themselves into a system which forever kept them in bondage. That bondage ensured they would never enjoy the potential of real wealth obtained by the fruits of they own labor. They would never know the joy of taking a chance to succeed and reaching their goal.

Fortunately some of those second class citizens escaped these chains and realized their dreams. It was not easy for they were opposed by both the elitist who snubbed their nose at them AND from those who were till stuck in the bondage of second class citizenry. But what they did is start the movement for others to follow. The movement grew and continues to grow today. That is in large part why we’re experiencing many blacks and minorities entering into successful businesses.

The opportunities to own and grow a business are largely the policies of the Republican Party AND of the more conservative Democrats. The liberals and liberal leaning Democrats work against this effort and continually call on business to pay more. Why? Because they need more money to control they group of puppets and thereby retain power.

The shift away from the left is creating a loud and disturbing sound to the liberal leaders. They have no “New Deal” to stop the train this time and are apparently left with lies. With lies you have no basis, no facts to stand by and cannot win your argument. All you have left is hatred.

Either the left will need to transition (rather quickly) into a party that accepts the truth and does what good for America and the good citizens of the world -OR- the rest of us will have to deal with a fraction of our own citizens bent on our destruction for their own personal gain.

Hatred is destructive. Let it go or it will swallow you into its void and emptiness.

Yeah, there is NO ONE more confrontational and bitter than Kerry! It's not like that (loving) vice-president said to his political enemy on the SENATE FLOOR "Go F**K Yourself!" (WWJD?) Geez, nearly everything out of the VP's mouth is hate-laden, bitter, or profane! How about Rush Limbaugh? He's NEVER said anything bitter or vile, has he? ("Go take that bone out of your nose and call back!", "I thought they all (middle easterners) soil themselves!", etc)

"Mark, if for nothing else, I like your totally predictable consistency. No matter how much sh*t hits the fan, you're a true Bush partisan."

That's the way he rolls. Mark sees the errors of this administration but chooses not discuss them by saying the same lines over and over or by simply not answering. If he did that he might lose some sponsorships and might not have a book deal.

Bill Maher is political comedian on a comedy show, Real Time. Lighten up...Kerry wasn't 'trying to influence the murder of a US President.' That's ridiculous! Those who didn't see the show shouldn't comment. And thats not all that was said...Talk about major cherry picking!

DM - that was one mother of a diatribe but this graf really takes the cake:

Either the left will need to transition (rather quickly) into a party that accepts the truth and does what good for America and the good citizens of the world -OR- the rest of us will have to deal with a fraction of our own citizens bent on our destruction for their own personal gain.

If you just changed ONE word in that entire paragraph, you would be smack on point!

i think what we have here is a genuine sense of fear and trepidation from the right, a bunch of bullying and obnoxious ideologues accustomed to bulldozing their way through the echo-chamber.

well my oh my have the tides changed and have their foes on the other side of the aisle learned to fight back. i'll admit, i'm surprised the dems have actually grown a spine, but i won't deny this is the epitome of schadenfreude. to see people like o'reilly and malkin whining about how evil and mean the left is is like listening to limbaugh lecture us on drug use and prostitution.

"Oh, and neck and neck in New Jersey according to who? That couldn't be from a poll could it? Because, you know, you just said that polls mean nothing. Or is it only polls that you don't like?"

Of course his 'EVIDENCE' is from a poll. A poll he agrees with is FACT, a poll he disagrees with is a MSM biased poll....

Still waiting for a response about his claims we found WMD in Iraq, when the President said we did not. Maybe he'll come clean one day....but I doubt it.

Morphie,

We did find WMD after we liberated Iraq, just not in the quantities we expected. Read here.

The bigger question is, where are the missing WMD? UNSCOM reported that the following are unaccounted for: over 30,000 special munitions for delivery of chemical and biological agents; 3,000 tons of precursor chemicals; 360 tons of bulk CW agent including 1.5 tons of VX (1.5 tons of VX is enough to kill approximately 150,000,000 people - equal to 1/2 the US population or the combined population of Canada, Great Britain, and France); and large quantities of growth media acquired for use in the production of biological weapons—enough to produce over three times the amount of anthrax Iraq admits to having manufactured.

So when the President says we didn't find the WMD, he means the tens of thousands of munitions that are still missing. Unfortunately, the 500+ that have been found are just 1.67% of the total that Iraq was know to have had before 2003. We need to find and destroy the remaining 98.33%.

That Santorum memo has been debunked time and time again. If Santorum actually read the DOD, ISG, and Duelfer reports he would have realized that the "chemical weapons" he was touting are old, ineffective munitions manufactured before 1991 that had been discarded or partially destroyed. Because of this, these munitions posed no proliferation threat. Remember, we were told he had an active chemical weapons program of which no evidence can be found to support this. It should however surprise no one that the Senator would leap to such conclusions. This is exactly the mentality that got us into the Iraq war in the first place. Senator Santorum and the Bush Administration claimed that Iraq had WMD and used any scrap of intelligence to try to justify the case for war. It appears that Senator Santorum has not yet learned the lessons of the Iraq war - that fixing the intelligence around the policy is a dangerous path to follow.

morphie - some around here have been peddling the same old, tired, debunked crap for so long, they refuse to believe it isn't true.

The US Air Force operated out of an AWACS airbase in Riyadh from 1980 until 2003.