iOS app Android app
Clicking Follow Back will add user to your friends list and may allow access to your Social News timeline..

HuffPost Social News

Your Badges and the Badge Module will be removed from your profile

biglabowskii's Comments

View Comments:   Sort:
1 - 25
Supreme Court Strikes Down Arizona Law But Leaves Public Financing Intact

Supreme Court Strikes Down Arizona Law But Leaves Public Financing Intact

Commented Jun 27, 2011 at 13:08:02 in Politics

“because that is only a right for obama/geitner. If you allowed that it would take away from his power”

wtf2009 on Jun 27, 2011 at 13:12:44

“you're forgetting Bush/Paulson.”
Vivian Schiller, NPR CEO, Resigns

Vivian Schiller, NPR CEO, Resigns

Commented Mar 9, 2011 at 11:24:57 in Media

“As someone who is educated well enough, the answer is in your question. A person who is "educated" is not the same as someone who thinks they are an "intellectual". Many people are educated, it is only those who think that education makes them better than someone else or separates them into their own special "class" that is better than others, that makes them an "intellectual". An intellectual is a term that takes us back to a class society as only "intellectuals" know enough to judge how another person should live their life and they know better than the individual they are deciding for what's best for them. An intellectual is almost a contridiction in terms, as they think they are "educated" but in reality all the education did was add to their ignorance. Marie Attoinette is probably the greatest example of that premise that people are aware. Even though she did not really say, "let them eat cake", it was attributed to her and history has never forgiven her for it. Kind like how Tina Fey said "I can see Russia from my house", but all "intellectuals" keep attributing that statement to Sarah Palin and claiming it as proof of her ignorance when all it really is, is proof of theirs.”

52tucker on Mar 9, 2011 at 11:48:53

“Do intellectuals really attribute Tina Fey's statement to Sarah Palin, or do they attribute Palin's statement about seeing Russia from Alaska to Sarah Palin? The reason that quote is indicative of Palin is because she cited it as a part of her foreign policy expertise.
I don't know a lot of intellectuals who judge people for how they live, think they are better than others, or think their education makes them inherently better than others. That said, why does the right hate intellectuals? That question hasn't been answered by your opinion on intellectuals. so I'm going to have to discount your statement as spurious.”
Glenn Beck Smears Progressives: They Used To Be Called 'Slave Owners' (VIDEO)

Glenn Beck Smears Progressives: They Used To Be Called 'Slave Owners' (VIDEO)

Commented Oct 21, 2009 at 18:54:20 in Politics

“Dude, MLK was a Republican (look it up) so what is your point here”

gettingitright on Oct 21, 2009 at 21:40:38

“If he was, and it matters not, the republican party of the pre- and post-Civil Rights Movement is not the same neo-conservative right-wing party of today.

Back then, it was the southern democrats who opposed civil rights. It was the republicans who were also inclined to be abolitionists.

This is a rogue GOP overtaken by birthers, teabaggers, townhall shouters, gay-bashers, Mexican-bashers, etc. MLK would not affiliate himself with the republicans today.”

tomjones44 on Oct 21, 2009 at 21:14:44

“doesn't mean he wasn't progressive (pay attention)”
Transferring Some Guantanamo Detainees to the U.S. Will Actually Make America Safer

Transferring Some Guantanamo Detainees to the U.S. Will Actually Make America Safer

Commented May 22, 2009 at 12:01:38 in Politics

“Dude, this will never happen. The writing is on the wall. Even the Dems see it. 90-6 against this after all that blowvating in the last election. They have no principles, they will protect themselves. This is the campaign issue the repubs want. They want the Dems to make their day. Any state that gets any one of these people will be turned red in the next election. You'll see. The NIMBY's always win. The left is screwed on this one as the reality is their party is as non principled as the other one. That why I do not belong to either.”
No Tricks Here: Dick Cheney Has Become Nixon 2.0

No Tricks Here: Dick Cheney Has Become Nixon 2.0

Commented May 11, 2009 at 19:59:44 in Politics

“There is a huge difference between the two though, one (Nixon) tried to cover up something that he probably never authorized and the cover up itself became his undoing. In this case, there is no cover up, in fact it is almost the complete opposite. Cheney is trying to say if you are going to let out state secrets then let them all out and let the chips fall where they may as he believes he was right period. He wants to have it all out in the open now that Obama has let just a small part out of the bag. Whether we can "handle the truth" as someone said or not is no longer the issue.

Now you will see the Democrats in charge now scramble to "cover" it up as it is no longer in their interest to show us the truth. They are afraid public opinion would not be with them. It was only expedient to push for this when they were out of power and they used the anger and outrage of the far left to get them what they wanted. Now they have it and the far left is now wondering what hit them as nothing they wanted done about this will happen. There are too many skeletons here for the Democrats and they will keep them in the closet in order to protect their newly achieved power. Since the far left will never vote for "change" the other way they will be safe.”

TXfemmom on May 12, 2009 at 01:20:04

“I think you under estimate Obama. He is going to release this stuff and make the case slowly and carefully in the court of public opinion. He has to take time to get the economy back on some sort of ground, and then they will reveal something which will seal Cheney, Bush's and some others fates, which will include some punishment.”

ramblin jack on May 11, 2009 at 21:39:45

“Think so you are a day late and a dollar short the memos are coming out just after cheney makes a statement he is refuted and Obama will put this small nutcase in his place. If you like cheney I doubt you understand what America is all about.”
huffingtonpost entry

A Disturbing D.C. Whodunit [Update II]

Commented Mar 18, 2009 at 17:19:40 in Politics

“as opposed to the 5 that the democrats have. Are you kidding? At least on Fox they do not say "we" like the others do, Matthew, Shuster, Maddow and the king of all, Ubberstank, do not even pretend anymore. At least Fox does not jsut come out and say "we" with regards to when they are presenting things with regards to the Republicans.”
Afghanistan: US Missile Strike Kills 37 Civilians

Afghanistan: US Missile Strike Kills 37 Civilians

Commented Nov 7, 2008 at 17:28:40 in Politics

“Prediction: The first people to be disillusioned with the "one" Mr Obama will be the ones who were responsible for him beating Hillary. The anti-war crowd. He will not withdraw from Iraq any sooner than President Bush has already said would happen. This will be sometime in 2011 and even then there will be a small presence left behind as a permanent force for emergency needs just as in Europe and Korea. He is already talking about escalatation in Afganastan, which also this crowd will oppose. Your hatred of Mr Bush has blinded you from this, but now you will see as it plays out.”
huffingtonpost entry

Say "No" to Pollsters!: a HuffPost Call to Action

Commented Jan 11, 2008 at 19:16:05 in Politics


I think you have something here. While I lean towards the other side of the spectrum I think this is one subject that left, right and middle all agree for the most part. We are all tired of the poll takers trying to decide elections with their polls that push people to either vote with the herd or not go to the polls as there is no point in voting if their candidate has no percieved chance. I bet if you asked your counterparts on the right wing blogs they would join you in this one. Why don't you try?”

transendentilist on Jan 13, 2008 at 13:42:01

“The Dude was not a republican. The dude abides!”
Iraq Government: Civilian Deaths Rose In '07

Iraq Government: Civilian Deaths Rose In '07

Commented Jan 2, 2008 at 15:18:39 in Politics

“come on at least be truthful about the link you are posting. I follow this site every day and the daily count has fallen continuously since the surge started with a short peak in the months of April/May. Since then it has dropped substantially with Dec being less than 1 a day for the first time since 2003. Even those deaths are not trivial, but it is stupid to ignore the fact that the link you posted says the oppisite of how you are trying to spin it.”
huffingtonpost entry

Turkey Approves Sending Troops Into Iraq

Commented Oct 17, 2007 at 12:43:49 in Home

“If this starts we can call this one Pelosi's war. This is one you cannot blame on Bush.”

bushdoescrack on Oct 17, 2007 at 14:46:12

“If this starts we can call this one Pelosi's war. This is one you cannot blame on Bush

bush is the decider, remember????”

A Meat Beetle on Oct 17, 2007 at 14:21:01

“Guess again, biglabowskii. None of this would be happening--at least not with our troops in the middle-- if Bush's unresolved childhood issues with his dad hadn't prompted him to start a war in the first place (so many dead because of one dysfunctional childhood and two unfit parents!). True, Pelosi and others may have signed on to some degree of shared ownership of this filthy, stupid, unnecesary war, but it was Bush who got us there in the first place. Oh, Bush and anyone stupid/amoral enough to vote for/support/believe/trust him.”

demigod on Oct 17, 2007 at 13:51:34

“Of course we can blame Bush. Saddam would never have allowed the Turkish army to invade Iraq, even to assault the Kurds. This is just one more unintended consequence of Bush's ignorant expedition into a mine field he knew nothing about for a pie in the sky theory based on nothing but neocon dreams. There was STABILITY between Iraq, Iran, Turkey and Syria but that's all gone now. The hounds of war have been released - well maybe it's the Christian end times and Jesus is coming !”

JaneC on Oct 17, 2007 at 13:05:26

“Bullshit, the Bush regime knew this would happen. Turkey has threatened three times in the last four years to do this. Nice try.”

MajorKong on Oct 17, 2007 at 12:57:53

“Except for the fact that it has absolutely nothing to do with the Senate resolution on the Armenian genocide.

It's about Iraq (which we control) harboring the PKK, which indeed Bush has some control over.

Nice try, though.”

StuCop on Oct 17, 2007 at 12:56:01

“no, it's bush's war. turkey is just following our leadership...we've shown that the way to deal with any terrorism is to invade a sovreign nation that may or may not be home to terrorist...also invade preemptively if possible...we've set the example for the world.”

JoeBlough on Oct 17, 2007 at 12:54:57

“No,it would be Turkey's war. Didn't you read the article?”

pfc1369 on Oct 17, 2007 at 12:53:54

“Do you really belive Turkey will invade the Kurdish area of Iraq because of Nancy Pelosi ??!!

Talk about ethnocentric !”

getoffmedz on Oct 17, 2007 at 12:49:43

“biglabowskii - your Comment is the lamest application of "Blame the Democrats" ever written.

Rush on pretty soon, y'all better git.”

serialcoma on Oct 17, 2007 at 12:48:23

“When this one starts we certainly CAN and MUST blame bush.. he's the one who began the rapid destabilization of the region and he is the one that encourages continued destabilization with his never ending demands that the world bow at his feet.

george bush is a threat to humnanity.”

JamesR. on Oct 17, 2007 at 12:47:21

lornejl on Oct 17, 2007 at 12:45:43

“Oh, I can blame Bush, and I do, but Off the Table Nance gets her share of blame too.”
huffingtonpost entry

Outside the Bubble: Iraq's Med Crisis

Commented Aug 21, 2007 at 18:48:10 in Media


Provided you a link as to where I got the figures. Point being is this link was from Progressives providing the info then and they were blaming us for those deaths as well, just like you are blaming us for all of them now.

I think your argument now has more merit, by the way since this was a pre-emptive move by our president. Even though the deaths you are talking about now are not committed by our military, arguments such as yours point to the fact that no matter who is doing the killing, it all points back to that decision. A valid point and argument.

But using that same argument, and the prior history I showed you, you could argue the opposite that the number of deaths have decreased due to this ill planned ill executed war. Not that I would do that, just saying you could.

Either way, impressed that you took the time to respond.


LiberalLibertarian on Aug 22, 2007 at 13:45:37

“Actually, through our routine use of Depleted Uranium (considered a WMD itself in international accords, although no one ever talks about that) and the reliance on air strikes, we have killed MANY Iraqi civilians filed under the lovely euphemism "collateral damage". Plus, because it can be so hard to tell an insurgent from a civilian, the military and press routinely call anyone killed by us as an insurgent, regardless of who they actually might be. As more and more stories come out about the routine and callus treatment soldiers give to the Iraqi population (as happens in all wars), it becomes harder to pretend that we are not directly responsible for the many deaths.

If a gun is found in the house, or there is an adult male in the house, they are automatically deemed an insurgent or AL Qaeda. WE are directly responsible for many of the deaths over there, and are indirectly but no less culpable for the rest. 10 years from now when we are no longer in the middle of war hysteria and have better access to war records, I suspect that it will be found that we have directly killed upwards of a million in Iraq. Of course the public health crisis we precipitated will kill hundreds of thousonds more no matter when we leave. It is a travesty beyond measure.

There are lots of articles about this, here is one... Is the US using cluster bombs?”

Nolafugee on Aug 21, 2007 at 21:46:00

“"You could argue the opposite" that the deaths this Iraq war have decreased when compared to the crusades as well.
Check my link in my comment to you above. It was an absolute synchronicity that I landed on the very same Progressive News site, as I had yet to follow Your link, and was really just trying to add to what Harry said about owning those deaths & misery. I was looking for links to Donald Rumsfeld's direct facilitation of Saddham"s poison gas attacks and googled: Donald Rumsfeld Poison Gas Sales Iraq. You should bookmark that site. I sure as hell did.
You will find that it seems the only time our own country's death tax in Iraq idled was when Saddham bought from the Soviets.”
huffingtonpost entry

Outside the Bubble: Iraq's Med Crisis

Commented Aug 21, 2007 at 17:26:24 in Media

“So Harry are you saying it was better before the war?

50000 children and 1500000 people a year dieing was better?

Not saying it is going so great now but it would be nice if progressives like yourself would make up your minds.

I would say the coverage for things like this is about the same now as it was then, but that is just my opinion, which is meaningless to all but myself. Just as yours should be as meaningless to all but yourself.

It will be interesting to see what people such as yourself are focusing on 8 years from now that will make you forget you said such things as this when you look back just as progressives seems to forget what they were screaming about with Iraq prior to the War.

This is not to say the the war was right, but I guess you would rather have the 150k deaths/year run rate to continue as it was going then. That was sooo much better amd the UN was doing sooo much about it.

Time and memories are fleeting I guess.

Right or wrong the one thing we can say for sure for the future that is fixed, is that Saddam will no longer be able to kill his people at this rate. They may kill each other it seems, but it won't be him.
HARRY RESPONDS: I can't vouch for your Saddam-era figures, but what I can say is that we didn't own those deaths. We own these.”

Steve on Aug 22, 2007 at 09:29:29

“HARRY RESPONDS: "I can't vouch for your Saddam-era figures, but what I can say is that we didn't own those deaths. We own these."

We "own" a lot of the sanctions-era deaths as well. In an attempt to "punish" Saddam Hussein, who actually probably felt the effects of the sanctions not at all, our boycott and blockade of Iraq in the years following Iraq War I, sources indicate that between a half million and a million died unnecessarily.

While it's probably true that the late Baathist regime exaggerated some of the figures for propaganda purposes, a great number of them by any objective measure weigh heavily, or at least ought to, on our own consciences.”

Novista on Aug 22, 2007 at 03:06:15

“Yeah well, I recall Madeline Albright asked about the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children due to U.S. sanctions.

She said it was "worth it".

Other sources I've found suggest the evil tyrant's rule offed 300,000 people. Apparently a great number of Kurds -- with the chemical weapons supplied by the U.S.

Remember, he was for being our friend before he was not our friend any more.

Anyway, before I would trust your alleged figures or mine, or any opinion from outside Iraq, I would accept the words of Dr Maryam, children's doctor with a clinic outside Baghdad:

"Saddam was brutal in his response to rebellion. He did not particularly care which sect you were a member of what he was interested in was whether you were loyal to him or not.

"As to Saddam bad though he was your country is far worse.

"All dictators are brutal. But if you did not threaten him and stayed out of politics life was safe for you.

"The problem in Irak is the presence of the invaders. It is not possible to even begin to reconstruct until that problem is solved. The violence is because the American invader is there. Not despite it. If as you claim, you want to help, then you tackle the root problem. Which is that your troops are in our country. Until then the violence will escalate. The attacks are to make the country ungovernable and they are working."

That was an excerpt from a liveblog a few weeks ago.

I have another Iraqi comment somewhere, maybe it was riverbend, something along the lines of:

"Under Saddam, there was no conflict between Shia and Sunni. We lived side by side. No one even asked, it would have been impolite."

And I can categorically say, if you have not lived in the Middle East, as I have, you have NO clue. And maybe I only have half a one. But surely our glorious leaders are in a minus column.”

indypete on Aug 22, 2007 at 01:40:02

“Sure, Saddam was an asshole but as far as I can gather, cheney-bush have a much higher body count than he did.”

neoconjob on Aug 21, 2007 at 22:35:56

“HARRY RESPONDS: I can't vouch for your Saddam-era figures, but what I can say is that we didn't own those deaths. We own these.


is this what they meant about the "Ownership Society"?”

Nolafugee on Aug 21, 2007 at 21:17:08

“Whoa! Were You also born with a Silver Foot in your mouth? Even I feel embarrassed by the size of your, era'ahem...shoe. Harry's right, except that we also own the deaths of those Iranians and Kurds that Saddham gassed.
I mean...that was then. This is now, And will we have even more hell to pay the Reaper tomorrow?”

SmootyBooty on Aug 21, 2007 at 19:06:33

“The winner and champion-stupidest post of the week!”

Scurvybro on Aug 21, 2007 at 18:50:07

“Hey Dumbass --

Did you even read the story you provided in the link? The whole point of it was that these deaths were the cause of sanctions that deprived the population of medicine and other supplies, not Saddam. No one tries to claim that Saddam was a nice guy or wasn't responsible for massacres. I don't know why this is so hard for you to believe, but by all objective accounts, the country is in much worse shape now than before the war.

Or does an hour's worth of electricity and running water a day represent improvement to you? Oh yeah: They also got to enjoy their nifty purple fingers a while back. That makes it all worthwhile.”
huffingtonpost entry

Blank Check Democrats & The Danger of Becoming A Blank Check Movement

Commented May 10, 2007 at 14:10:25 in Home

“What, you do not like being useful idiots? Did you think these fools care about anyone but themselves? You thought only Republicans were that way? What do you think the term politician means? Its right up there with lawyer (of which most of them are by the way).”
huffingtonpost entry

Team Hillary Shoots Back At Geffen, But the Facts Get Caught in the Crossfire

Commented Feb 21, 2007 at 18:52:40 in Politics

“To those who follow this blog. Please get behind a real candidate who has the credentials and the experience for the job. You have one in the race but he is all but ignored at this point as far as I can see.

Bill Richardson is the right man for the job and he would get a lot of cross over votes like mine if you would give him the chance. Especially given the choices from the right that we are being given. Pretty much all crap if you ask me.

Please do not allow the "Hillary" machine into the ring by lining up behind her in the end as she might be able to win just like the lemmings lined up behind Kerry last time.

Obama is just too much of an unknown and is already just saying what the crowd wants to hear just to get votes.

I am a right center voter to be honest, but vote for the best candidate I think is available. You have a great candidate that no one is looking at currently and that is Richardson. He has the credentials and can win over the middle ground voters.

Do us all a favor and give us real choice vs trying for the lesser of two evils as usual.”
huffingtonpost entry

On Snowe-Landrieu Bipartisan Initiative: Kiss My Democratic Ass

Commented Dec 22, 2006 at 13:12:56 in Politics

“Dear Troll, EVERY Senator caucusing with the Dems has the EXACT SAME POWER to make the 'jump ship' threat. Therefore, using your "logic," they are all in a tie for the most powerful representative in the Senate.
By: timm0 on December 22, 2006 at 12:13pm

Hey Dumbass! since you started with the name calling. First learn how to blog and respond on the same chain the original was posted.

Second only one Senator that was re-elected was abandoned by his own party and probably had to make some commitments to the parties that actually funded him. Some probably for their own reasons and some most assuredly from the Republican side.

Get a little more education on how things work in congress before you decide to make a fool of yourself next time. Go ahead and mudsling back as what ever your reply it will not be worth my time again. You will see how it plays out how much power this guy will wield.

Learn some history.”
huffingtonpost entry

Lieberman's Irrelevance in the New Year

Commented Dec 22, 2006 at 11:30:30 in Entertainment

“Irrelavent! Are you nuts! He is now arguably the most powerful representative in the Senate. For the next two years Democrats better treat him with honor and not continue to treat him like crap like most of them did in the election. Especially on this site. Go ahead and try your method if you want to lose the hard fought majority that Dems just earned. You may not like him, but you better respect him and work with him as what ever he says goes for the next two years at least.

Luckily the Dem leaders have already shown they will not listen to people like you and I bet they will pretty much do anything he wants. They are all marching to his drum and they know it.”
huffingtonpost entry

Lieberman's Irrelevance in the New Year

Commented Dec 22, 2006 at 11:27:58 in Entertainment

“Irrelavent! Are you nuts! He is now arguably the most powerful representative in the Senate. For the next two years Democrats better treat him with honor and not continue to treat him like crap like most of them did in the election. Especially on this site. Go ahead and try your method if you want to lose the hard fought majority that Dems just earned. You may not like him, but you better respect him and work with him as what ever he says goes for the next two years at least.

Luckily the Dem leaders have already shown they will not listen to people like you and I bet they will pretty much do anything he wants. They are all marching to his drum and they know it.”
huffingtonpost entry

One Hard Question to Ask Any Republican

Commented Oct 3, 2006 at 14:33:40 in Politics


Your question is easily answered since many of us are not either Republicans or Democrats. Both pretty much suck at the moment. Republicans are the lesser of two evils for a lot of us and until the Democrats have a real platform it will remain that way. Since Democrats refuse to do anything but back an anti anything Republican agenda and call it a platform I do not forsee much hope for them.

As to the rest of your blog post, have you lost your mind or did you only read the version of history presented in the politically correct textbooks of today?

In WWII we detained tens of thousands Germans, Italians, other Axis nations representatives along hundreds of thousands of Japanese without any warrants or rights of habeas corpus, etc. A majority were even American citizens, but hundreds if not thousands were not. They were kept in internment camps for the duration of the war with no rights, no legal representation, no anything.

Not saying that it should be done again, but at least read a little before you post such foolish misrepresentations of the past and try to relate it to the future. If you want to measure what was done in WWII by Roosevelt administration to what Bush admin is doing today, Bush's admin looks like civil rights activists in comparison to that WWII admin.

Please grow up soon and read a little before you try standing on your soap box next time and looking so foolish.”
huffingtonpost entry

The Ultimate Democratic Exit Strategy Revealed

Commented Aug 29, 2006 at 14:19:29 in Entertainment

“Sorry to rain on your parade, but Kerry already ran on this strategy in 2004. If he would ever have presented a real strategy then he might have won. When asked throughout the campaign all he would confirm was that his was better than Bush's and he would tell us what it was after teh election.

Please do not waste the American people's time again by trying to do this again. If Democrats could unite on a plan then do it. If it is reasonable enough then people will vote for them. If they try something similar to the anything but Bush plan of Kerry in the last election then they will lose again. Please offer a real alternative rather than just pointing out the other sides faults.

Jeez, don't you people ever learn. Keep running with your head down against that brick wall and hoping this time it gives. Stupid is as stupid does I guess.

I predict right now that with a bold plan Democrats will sweep into office as a majority in both houses, without one you all will be screaming about those ridiculous conspiracy theories again and crying "how could we lose again!" and being lableled as nut jobs.”
huffingtonpost entry

Democratic Senators on Lamont: The Last Tally

Commented Aug 18, 2006 at 12:54:23 in Politics

“go joe go! Serves these hypocrites right. FYI Republicans are hypocrites too. This is a free and INDEPENDENT country and we need more independent candidates now. Perhaps Joe will inspire others so we can overcome the left and right crazies who have taken over the two parties.”
huffingtonpost entry

Senator Lieberman: Why Would You Let A Republican 527 Attack Group Work For You?

Commented Aug 16, 2006 at 18:43:23 in Politics

“once again total hypocrisy by you people. You started the 527 fight and republicans were late to the game. Not that they deserve defending. Ever hear of moveon. I am sure most of you belong”
huffingtonpost entry

Senator Lieberman: Why Would You Let A Republican 527 Attack Group Work For You?

Commented Aug 16, 2006 at 18:19:20 in Politics

“Because its a big screw you back to all of you who screwed him. You are all such hypocrites it is ridiculous. You may not agree with him, but at least he has more integrity than most people in office today. He was good enough to be your VP candidate 6 years ago, but now since he agrees with GW on one thing you all screw him. Good for you Joe. Go for it and lets have an independent voice in congress not tied to either of these fringe groups. I only wish we could get a majority of neither of these two parties since both are controlled by extremists groups. People here on this blog do not believe that there is a middle ground, but if there were more Joe's then they would see when they all got elected.

Go Joe Go!”
huffingtonpost entry

The Dichotomy of Two Wars

Commented Aug 14, 2006 at 19:24:58 in Home


Back at ya on this one. What was agreed too was to replace the Israeli forces with an International/Lebanese one of 15000 that is suppose to keep Hezbollah from firing rockets into Israel. Cross your fingers that one works.

How is this different from the Iraqi army standing up so we can come home? It seems like a similar plan to what the US is already doing in Iraq. The difference lies in the fact that you are willing to hand the keys to them now versus when they say they are ready. If you want this to happen now it seems you must first convince the Iraqi government that they are ready rather than just citing stupid polls that say the people want it.

Why don't you make the case to the Iraqi government to take the keys now versus later like they keep saying. If they did that then Bush would have no leg to stand on and we would have to leave as he has stated publically we would leave if their elected government requests it. This would also give him a face saving mechanism of doing what a supposedly sovereign government told him to do. Since you are a congressman, you have the power to make such a request of the Iraqi government. Why are you not doing that?

I suspect it is because you do not want Bush to have a diplomatic out or the ability to save face for this country in anyway since your only aim seems to be political rather than for the good of this country.

If it meant us out of there sooner rather than later and even if it meant Bush was able to save face I would think you should not care if you truly want to do what best for this country.

go for it.”
huffingtonpost entry

Bush Lies, Again

Commented Aug 31, 2006 at 16:49:24 in Politics


This line of reasoning get old and your "lies" as that is what they are, under your definition of lying, are as bad as his.

It is irrefutable that we would not be in Iraq if not for what happened on 9/11. Therefore they are connected whether you or anyone else agrees with it or not.

The policy Bush stated and set forth after 9/11 was pretty clear that he would go ater both terrorists and the states that sponsor them. 9/11 is what triggered the policy and Iraq is/was a state that sponsored terror. Even you cannot dispute that. Not defending that we should have gone in there, but to say they are not related is a "lie" as well since Iraq war would not have happened without the 9/11 happening.

You are free to disagree with the policy, but you back up your argument with "lies" of your own.

Almost all suicide bombers in Iraq have been against the Iraqi people and not the US occupational force . I can only think of few that occurred against US solders as most our US casualties have been from IED's.

The definition of terrorism is to intentionally target innocents and particularly civilians which is what these people are doing. You can attribute them to the US occupation if you want, but it is not US solders blowing themselves up and blowing up people with them so if they are not terrorists then they are sure not freedom fighters either. Explain to me how blowing up Iraqi's helps get Iraqi's on their side again?”
huffingtonpost entry

Joe Lieberman Betrays the Democratic Party

Commented Jul 5, 2006 at 15:09:57 in Home

“your caption should read "Democratic Party betray's Joe Lieberman". This is a man who according to all your claims should be Vice President right now. The fact that he has a spine while most Democrats do not will bode well for him if he goes independent.”
1 - 25