Hillary Clinton joins Robert "Sheets" Byrd in move to deauthorize Iraq War
Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton announced a short time ago on the floor of the Senate that she is joining with Democratic Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia to introduce legislation to make October 11, 2007 -- the five year anniversary of the original resolution authorizing the use of force in Iraq -- an "expiration date" for that resolution.
"The American people have called for change, the facts on the ground demand change, the Congress has passed legislation to require change. It is time to sunset the authorization for the war in Iraq. If the president will not bring himself to accept reality, it is time for Congress to bring reality to him," Clinton said in the Senate.
. . .
The Politico calls Clinton's announcement today "her most dramatic statement on the Iraq War since officially entering the 2008 presidential race."
Hillary's hard left turn comes after the April 30 Rasmussen poll of the Democratic primary hopefuls, which has her in a statistical dead heat at 30%, below Obama's 32% (with Edwards trailing at 17% and no one else getting above 3%). Now it's far too early in the 2008 campaign saga to attribute much to the polls, but when we've got politicians running instead of statesmen, polls can cause the candidates to make legislative decisions with ramifications far outlasting the election cycle.
This is my first post for the Elephant Bar, so be kind.
Seems reasonable, the original reasons for the Authorization have been fulfilled. Mission Accoplished, so to speak. Doubt that the Dems will spin it that way, though.
ReplyDeleteWhen one cedes the inititive to their political opponents, why be "surprised" when the take it?
All that is surprising is that it's taken so long for them to formulate this scenario. Senator Warner called for a new Authroization just about a year ago, as I recall. Should have done followed his sage advise, while the GOP maintained the majority.
Then again, Mr Bush was sure that the political status que would not change, in November of '06. He was certainly wrong, about that, also.
You expect more respect above the fold do you?
ReplyDeleteT is a consistent contributor to the EB. She has engaged any and all, sometimes in some gritty jousts. She has tough bark but a lady with something to say and I think I can speak for most and welcome her as an old friend and new host.
T is the May surprise.
ReplyDelete2164th T is the May surprise.
ReplyDeleteWell I've been away to Kansas City learning to write software, and later this month I'm going to the Philippines for a few weeks. After that it will be full bore blogging.
Get some good photos in the Phillipines.
ReplyDeleteWASHINGTON (AP) - House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is considering a proposal that would pay for the Iraq war through at least July but cut off funding after that if the Iraqi government does not meet certain political and security goals, Democratic officials said Thursday.
ReplyDeleteThe bill would be a direct challenge to President Bush, who says he cannot accept any legislation that would tie his hands on the war. This week, Bush vetoed a $124.2 billion bill that would have funded operations in Iraq and Afghanistan while requiring troops to begin coming home on Oct. 1.
The White House and Democratic leaders began negotiations Thursday on a possible compromise on the war spending bill.
In a closed-door leadership meeting, Rep. David Obey, D-Wis., suggested that the House fund the war through July and provide some extra funding to ensure the military does not become strapped for cash. The bill also would identify benchmarks that must be met by the Iraqi government; if the government fails, the bill would prohibit funding the war past the end of July.
October "suprise" tells us what we knew or suspected all along. The Clintons do not brush their teeth in the morning, without checking the polls first.
ReplyDeleteSlightly OT, Muslim men do have a woman problem:
ReplyDeleteSHARM EL-SHEIKH, Egypt (AP) -- Iran's foreign minister walked out of a dinner of diplomats where he was seated directly across from U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, ostensibly because a female violinist entertaining the gathering was dressed too revealingly.
"I don't know which woman he was afraid of, the woman in the red dress or the secretary of state," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said Friday, regarding the actions of Iran's Manouchehr Mottaki on Thursday night.
Well, we must admit to the cultural insensitivity of sending a black woman to speak to Arab men, about matters of import.
ReplyDeleteWhy should we expect them to take US seriously? While appropriate to our code of concuct, sending Ms Rice, herself, to represent US can be percieved as an insult, by them.
Are we "leading by example" or "dooming our cause" by behaving so?
She is Sec of State!
ReplyDeleteExactly.
ReplyDeleteMs Albright before her.
We can chose whom we wish to be Sec of State. To represent US to the world. We do. We chose Ms Rice, in part to signify that we in the US are "beyone" stereotypes.
1.2 Billion Mussulfolk see a womens position differently. That is a fact. So by US choosing a woman to carry our message to the Mussulmen, we belittle and insult them, regardless of the womens job title.
It can be viewed as
"Leading by example" or as
"Implicit insult".
From their perspective.
It is exemplified in the Iranian dress-code police. I read it and at first think, it must be an act. They're just playing their part in street theater production. But that is far from the reality of their culture.
ReplyDeleteThese fellows are truly barbarians, of the old school. Slavers and stoners, beheaders.
I have no problem sending Ms Rice, to carry our water, she does well represent Mr Bush and his positions.
But realize the subliminal cultural messages sent when we do.
Desert Rat: Well, we must admit to the cultural insensitivity of sending a black woman to speak to Arab men, about matters of import.
ReplyDeleteTo the Black Congressional Caucus, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, et al., Condi isn't really black because she's a Republican (while Bubba from Arkansas was the first black President, despite signing welfare reform, because he's a Democrat). To the National Organization for Women, Diane Feinstein, Patty Murray, Maria Cant-vote-well, Condi uisn't really a woman, because she's a Republican (while our rapist-in-chief from Arkansas was dubbed an honorary woman by Sally Quinn in March 1999). See how things work?
The New "American Idol"- Muslim Rapper Akon, Simulated Rough Sex on Underage Girls
ReplyDeleteA "La Raza" hero is now high up in the Hillary Campaign.
ReplyDeleteOutreach (to the hispanic KKK)
or such.
Desert Rat: 1.2 Billion Mussulfolk see a womens position differently. That is a fact. So by US choosing a woman to carry our message to the Mussulmen, we belittle and insult them, regardless of the womens job title.
ReplyDeleteNazis saw blacks as inferior, so I figure using that logic Jesse Owens belittled and insulted Hitler in the 1936 Berlin Summer Olympics.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSimulated Rape of 15 year old girl by Muslim Celebrity Scum,
ReplyDeleteCENSORED BY THE NEW MEDIA
(which now has a worse record, thanks to Google inc. than the MSM)
Akon's record company abuses DMCAto stifle criticism on YouTube
This morning, I linked to the YouTube version of our Hot Air show exposing hip-hop misogynist Akon.
The YouTube version is no longer available.
Is Verizon Wireless out of its mind?
ReplyDeleteAs we reported at Hot Air yesterday, Akon is in deep doo-doo in Trinidad over his vulgar sexual molestation of a 15-year-old girl during one of his trademark "performances." The incident is being investigated by police authorities in Trinidad and the country's prime minister has condemned the performer and his posse.
I suggest Verizon Wireless executives watch the video, which was a hot topic on The Laura Ingraham radio show this morning:
This is the message
ReplyDeleteyou will now see:
"This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Universal Music Group."
Deuce and Allen continue duel
ReplyDeleteYou're right, Ms T. Mr Owens victories were insulting to herr Hitler. No doubt about that.
ReplyDeleteTo have had the US even send Mr Owens, was insulting to the NAZIs.
But athletic endeavours are not diplomacy. Mr Owens was not expected to convince the Germans to disarm or quit rabble rousing over the Sudetenland.
I've been following his career because not only is he disgusting, but he's a Muslim who bragged he had three wives on a New York radio station, and then his record company, Universal, made him shut up about it.
ReplyDeleteAlthough Akon isn't just any Muslim, like many Muslims born here, he's an anchor baby Muslim. His father is a Muslim from Senegal--whom he bragged also practiced polygamy--made sure Akon was born here in the States to get him U.S. citizenship. But he was not raised here with American values. Akon--whose full name is Aliaune Damala Bouga Time Puru Nacka Lu Lu Lu Badara Akon Thiam--was raised in Senegal as a Muslim with Muslim "values."
Akon is a convicted felon, who spent five years in prison for armed robbery, distribution of illegal drugs, and auto theft. He was also involved in a drive-by shooting. And not only that he's an ex-con, he's proud of it, with a hit album entitled "Konvicted," a hit single, "Locked Up," and two companies, Konvict Muzik and Kon Live Distribution. Another hit single, "Smack That"--well, you can imagine what it's about: rough, graphic sex.
And not to forget Islam, he also has raps praising his chosen religion as well, amidst the vile other stuff on his CDs.
The biggest outrage about Akon is not that he's openly pushed and accepted by the music industry and Black--and WHITE--America, but that he was recently featured on FOX's top-rated "American Idol," doing a "duet"--if you can call it that--with singer Gwen Stefani.
"1.2 Billion Mussulfolk see a womens position differently. That is a fact. So by US choosing a woman to carry our message to the Mussulmen, we belittle and insult them, regardless of the womens job title."
ReplyDelete...and they can go **** themselves.
Shlussel,
ReplyDelete"I've been following Akon's career because not only is he disgusting, but he's a Muslim who bragged he had three wives "
I thought,
ReplyDeleteBelittling and insulting them
Was OUR JOB.
Fuckin Towelheads.
ReplyDeleteFor the record, Akon also sounds like Alvin the Chipmunk.
ReplyDeleteAt least in "Lonely" - a song so bad I thought it was a parody.
ReplyDeleteEunichs gotta get their Jolley's Somehow!
ReplyDeleteAkon is VERIZON'S Central message for cellphone Rap Promotion.
ReplyDeletePorn is next, as in Europe,
the enlightened ones.
We believe our commentary and criticism of UMG "artist" Akon falls fully under fair use.
ReplyDeleteWe believe UMG, with YouTube's cooperation, is abusing the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) to stifle constitutionally protected speech.
As the Electronic Frontier Foundation has explained in similar battles:
Under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), a mere allegation of copyright infringement on the Internet can result in content removal, silencing a creator before any misuse is proven. This "shoot first, ask questions later" system can silence online artists and critics, creating unfair hurdles to free speech.
"Online sites like YouTube have revolutionized political expression and can give the little guy an audience of millions for a political point of view. An entertainment powerhouse like Viacom must not be allowed to muzzle independent video creators and their free speech," said Eli Pariser, Executive Director of MoveOn.org Civic Action. "Copyright owners need to double-check their claims and think about free speech rights before erasing political content from sites like YouTube and misusing the DMCA."
More info at Chilling Effects .
We are contacting EFF for help in fighting UMG's attempt to erase criticism of rapper Akon on YouTube.
Readers/viewers can still access the video files of our report here.
New developments and audio on the corporate responsibility campaign by Laura Ingraham, Hot Air, and MM.com here.
What is UMG trying to hide? Here's the full script of our show with links:
You may still watch the show above, and you may download an mpg4 version here.
ReplyDeleteThat’s the iPod version, but it will play on any computer that has iTunes installed.
...or whatever my non generic player is.
I faggot.
(it has a cute icon on my taskbar, however.
Pyramid shaped, I believe.)
"generic"
ReplyDelete(as opposed to NON)
ReplyDeleteDR wrote:
ReplyDelete"I have no problem sending Ms Rice, to carry our water, she does well represent Mr Bush and his positions.
But realize the subliminal cultural messages sent when we do."
While Khalilzad wasn't Sec. of State he didn't seem to fare any better with his 'face' time.
dOUg
ReplyDeleteyUr hip To wAt is. hOW coMe
the country's prime minister has CONDOMED the performer and his pUsse.
fUzZ b?
a4qps51xk, NUKE ISLAMISTS NOW!
ReplyDelete(yes, even the children!)
ReplyDelete"Ash"
ReplyDeleteIs a nic that represent those outlines on the pavement, in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
"represents"
ReplyDeleteUs Nazis ain't NOTHIN,
If not PROPER!
W T F ....
ReplyDeleteDoug, you've gone mad with the power of the Internet. A virtual Colonel Kurtz...
ReplyDeleteWho among us is Willard?
I know Habu must be the guy with the grenade launcher with the tiger detail
Ya gotta do,
ReplyDeleteWhat ya gotta due.
Hu
ReplyDeleteHu You Gonna Call?
ReplyDeleteAkon?
ReplyDeleteVerizon Calling!
Doug,
ReplyDeleteWhen should we stock up on water and food?
Desert Rat: But athletic endeavours are not diplomacy. Mr Owens was not expected to convince the Germans to disarm or quit rabble rousing over the Sudetenland.
ReplyDeleteWell, for that sort of thing the Brits had Mr Chamberlain. but Americans like to economize. Sending our chief diplomat Condi with her go-go boots and piano chops is a sort of two-for-one deal.
Imagine it - the Ecto-1 done up China-style - so many blinking neon lights and mandarin characters. We'd blare the Party's Song as we drove, and every Chinese would stand at attention and salute, as per the letter and spirit of the land, when they heard the epic tune of the Middle Kingdom. Ah, you Yanks may have Napalm in the morning, but give me a joy-ride in a Police State's propaganda-mobile any day.
ReplyDeletehmmm
ReplyDeleteHandsome Hu
sounds
a lot
like
Habu
True, ash and Ms T, the Iranians don't give US represntitives much respect, no matter who we send, to talk to them.
ReplyDeleteSo whether the emissary is dressed in Brooks Brothers or go-go boots, matters little.
The result is going to be the same, regardless.
Ash, do you do thinking with the same brain that just deduced that?
ReplyDeleteAsh,
ReplyDeleteToday I've been:
a4qps51xk
PeristalsisLog
I was just gonna be me but I was already taken.
I woke from a deep sleep.
ReplyDeleteWhere are our carriers?
Who wants to know?
ReplyDeletePeristalsis log is really hilarious, honestly.
ReplyDeleteI presume Ash would approve of public funds being used so impoverished males can have their peristalsis logs surgically removed, as per the inviolable sovereignty of a man's intestinal tract. Just gimme some of those old timey values...
ReplyDeleteSarkozy plays the race card - and our establishment cheers
It's about time the frogs woke up to the Mussulmen, raghead, camel jockey, sandtarbaby's
Western Europe is becoming increasingly diverse, especially France and Britain. That process will continue apace.(This next sentence is pure bull shit-Habu) The ability of our societies to embrace all races and cultures will be crucial to their future stability, security and success. (deport them all now while you still can-Habu) The alternative is the "Sarkozy route", which has all too many parallels elsewhere in Europe, not least in the Netherlands:(these are GOOD things when it comes to the treatment of Mussulmen-Habu)repression, ghettoes, gated communities, rampant racism, the exclusion of ethnic minorities from mainstream society, a form of low-level civil war.
ReplyDeleteTypical leftest Guardian trash
Guardian Bullshit
Is it tomorrow we finally get Sarkozy and Merkel on our side? Or is the Frog election the 6th?
Free at last,free at last, thank God Almighty I'm free at last.
ReplyDeleteWhew, wish I could say the same thing.
ReplyDeleteMove along folks there's nothing to see here...yet.
DR,
ReplyDeletecarriers?
well for sure that one AQ guy we've killed now a dozen times in Iraq. I mean that guys got more lives than a mutating ebola virus.
Ash,
ReplyDeleteHandsome Hu (if he cares to) and Habu are forming a new US Continental Tonton Macoute.
Wanna join?
You have to bring your own old tires for necklacing, a machete, some type of old NBA jersey, Detroit if possible and an attitude.
Revisiting the Case for Invasion
ReplyDeleteBy Charles Krauthammer
WASHINGTON -- George Tenet has a very mixed legacy. On the one hand, he presided over the two biggest intelligence failures of this era -- 9/11 and the WMD debacle in Iraq. On the other hand, his CIA did devise and carry out brilliantly an astonishingly bold plan to overthrow the Taliban in Afghanistan. Tenet might have just left it at that, gone home with his Presidential Medal of Freedom and let history judge him.
Instead, he's decided to do some judging of his own. In his just-released book and in hawking it on television, Tenet presents himself as a pathetic victim and scapegoat of an administration that was hell-bent on going to war, slam dunk or not.
Tenet writes as if he assumes no one remembers anything. For example: "There was never a serious debate that I know of within the administration about the imminence of the Iraqi threat."
Does he think no one remembers President Bush explicitly rejecting the imminence argument in his 2003 State of the Union address in front of just about the largest possible world audience? Said the president, "Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent" -- and he was not one of them. That in a post-9/11 world, we cannot wait for tyrants and terrorists to gentlemanly declare their intentions. Indeed, elsewhere in the book Tenet concedes that very point: "It was never a question of a known, imminent threat; it was about an unwillingness to risk surprise."
Tenet also makes what he thinks is the damning and sensational charge that the administration, led by Vice President Cheney, had been focusing on Iraq even before 9/11. In fact, he reports, Cheney asked for a CIA briefing on Iraq for the president even before they had been sworn in.
This is odd? This is news? For the entire decade following the 1990 invasion of Kuwait, Iraq was the single greatest threat in the region and therefore the most important focus of U.S. policy. U.N. resolutions, congressional debates and foreign policy arguments were seized with the Iraq question and its many post-Gulf War complications -- the WMDs, the inspection regimes, the cease-fire violations, the no-fly zones, the progressive weakening of sanctions.
Iraq was such an obsession of the Clinton administration that Clinton ultimately ordered an air and missile attack on its WMD installations that lasted four days. This was less than two years before Bush won the presidency. Is it odd that the administration following Clinton's should share its extreme concern about Iraq and its weapons?
Tenet is not the only one to assume a generalized amnesia about the recent past. One of the major myths (or, more accurately, conspiracy theories) about the Iraq War -- that it was foisted upon an unsuspecting country by a small band of neoconservatives -- also lives blissfully detached from history.
The decision to go to war was made by a war Cabinet consisting of George Bush, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell and Donald Rumsfeld. No one in that room could even remotely be considered a neoconservative. Nor could the most important non-American supporter of the war to this day -- Tony Blair, father of new Labour.
The most powerful case for the war was made at the 2004 Republican convention by John McCain in a speech that was resolutely "realist." On the Democratic side, every presidential candidate running today who was in the Senate when the motion to authorize the use of force came up - Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Joe Biden and Chris Dodd -- voted yes.
Outside of government, the case for war was made not just by the neoconservative Weekly Standard, but -- to select almost randomly - the traditionally conservative National Review, the liberal New Republic and the center-right Economist. Of course, most neoconservatives supported the war, the case for which was also being made by journalists and scholars from every point on the political spectrum -- from the leftist Christopher Hitchens to the liberal Tom Friedman to the centrist Fareed Zakaria to the center-right Michael Kelly to the Tory Andrew Sullivan. And the most influential tome on behalf of war was written not by any conservative, let alone neoconservative, but by Kenneth Pollack, Clinton's top Near East official on the National Security Council. The title: "The Threatening Storm: The Case for Invading Iraq."
Everyone has the right to renounce past views. But not to make up that past. It is beyond brazen to think that one can get away with inventing not ancient history but what everyone saw and read with their own eyes just a few years ago. And yet sometimes brazenness works.
letters@charleskrauthammer.com
More Kafkaesque behavior from the UN
ReplyDeleteEd Lasky
Zimbabwe is about to become head of UN's Commission on Sustainable Development. This goes beyond Orwell; it is Kafkaesque.
Under the dictatorship of Robert Mugabe, all indexes of economic well-being, let alone political freedom, have plummeted. Life expectancy at birth for males has dramatically declined from 60 to 37 since 1990 (for women it is even lower), making it the lowest in the world. The infant mortality rate has climbed from 53 to 81 deaths per 1000 live births in the same period. Five and a half million Zimbabweans currently live with HIV. Inflation has soared; trade unions are repressed; opponents are tortured.
Even the UN notes that the Zimbabwe Economy is Africa's Worst Performer in 2006 (its economy slipped 4.4% last year, while Africa's economies averaged growth of 5.7%).
Urban redevelopment for Zimbabwe consists of destroying vast swaths of housing which are occupied by those groups considered political opponents of the ruling regime. Formerly a huge exporter of farm goods, the country now relies on imports of food for sustenance. Yep...sure sounds like qualifications for the new chair of the UN Commission on Sustainable Development.
If the UN were rational and felt the need for an African nation to head the Commission, it should have chosen Botswana-which for many years has enjoyed a booming economy AND political freedom. But that would presume some positive values at the UN.
Zimbabwe? Jeez when are we leaving the UN ,God help us.
I do not understand why Hillary is in a panic over Obama. Obama in a way is like HowDea and will flame out sooner or later. Obama is not that great of a speaker, I have heard many reports of him stammering and bumbling his way through speeches. Like HowDea he generates excitement and print on fish-wrap but in the end I suspect Dem primary voters will go with Hillary.
ReplyDeleteAs to revoking a congressional declaration of war that is interesting. If that moves picks up any support it will be interesting watching it. I have a feeling it will not get far, I posit this move is not within the limits of congressional power.
Congress has yet to authorize spending and that is more than enough to give the fight to AQ & Iran.
Marcus Aurelius,
ReplyDeleteYou're a good man. But the writing is on the wall.
The Iraqi parliment and the Griswolds are headed to WallyWorld for a two month vacation. So it really doesn't matter what Congress funds, de-declares,says, etc. It's already swirling around the bowl and picking up speed and suction.
We need to pull back to desert redoubts until we can take over the oilfields.
Profiles in Cowardice
ReplyDeleteBy Michael Reagan
FrontPageMagazine.com | May 4, 2007
If ever there was a revealing contrast between courage and wimpishness it is the behavior of the competing political parties in connection with the pre-primary debates now going on.
Most revealing was the way the Democrat presidential hopefuls arranged to hold their debates and the way the 2008 Republican candidates chose where to hold their debates.
As revealed in their willingness to see the United States defeated in Iraq, the Democrats also showed the white flag of surrender when faced with a terrifying debate hosted by the evil Fox News. They ran for cover.
The Democrats refused to participate if Fox is to be in charge of the debate and the coverage of the session, with Fox reporters questioning the candidates and moderating the session. After all, the last thing the Democrats want is a fair and balanced presentation, which is what Fox offers. They demand a rigged game.
According to MSNBC, “The first debate, which was to be co-sponsored by Fox and the Nevada Democratic party, had been set for this August but was canceled. Fox then teamed with the Congressional Black Caucus Political Education and Leadership Institute for a Sept. 23 debate that is still scheduled, even though John Edwards, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton all said they won’t attend.”
That more or less leaves Dennis Kucinich and a couple of other hopeless hopefuls to face the lions in the Fox’s den next September.
As my pal Ann Coulter put it, “The not-visibly-insane Democrats all claim they'll get rough with the terrorists, but they can't even face Brit Hume."
“In case you missed this profile in Democrat machismo, the Democratic presidential candidates are refusing to participate in a debate hosted by Fox News Channel because the hosts are ‘biased.’ But they'll face down Mahmoud Ahmadinejad!”
And over at the Hot Air blog, it was noted that that this is a win-win situation for everyone, [except for both remaining Centrist Democrats]: “the Dems get to show how tough they are against an enemy who’s more their speed and Fox gets to tout itself as the network that frightens the left.”
The idea of facing Fox on live TV scares them silly and the Democrats, as is their usual practice, ran for cover. If they can’t dictate the rules of the game they won’t play. And Fox made it clear that they would make the rules, which is their right.
On the other hand, you have the Republicans who debated Thursday night at my father’s library in a contest run by MSNBC and moderated by none other than Chris Matthews.
Think about it – the Democrats run away from a fair and balanced Fox-sponsored debate while the Republicans have no problem agreeing to a debate moderated by the Bush-hating, anti-GOP Matthews, whose idea of balance is to tilt everything towards the Democrat side, and run by NBC, the most liberal network. The GOP attitude: “Bring ‘em on,” contrasted with the Democrats’ cut-and-run strategy.
In this case, as in the case of the war in Iraq, the Republicans are standing up while the Democrats continue to display that large yellow streak that runs down their spines, even retreating in the face of what they regard as a deadly threat: an unbiased Fox network.
They always insist on having the umpires in their back pockets. If they are fair and unbiased the Democrats won’t play in their ballpark. As Dracula is said to cringe before a crucifix, the Democrats tremble in the face of facts.
The Republicans, however, are not only willing to fight an unpopular war in Iraq against the insurgents, but are also willing to face the hostility of the home-grown insurgency that has captured the Democrat party, the mainstream media, left-wing Chris Matthews, and NBC.
Iraqi Lawmakers Demand Pullout
ReplyDeleteBaby Boomer Love:
ReplyDeleteAcing the First Date Tips
No. 1 Make sure you're ready
No. 2 Remember: Similarities, not opposites, attract
No. 3 Reconsider where you look for dates
No. 4 Don't put all of your cards on the table
No. 5 Don't discuss past relationships or marriages
No. 6 Don't rush judgment
No. 7 Be open to online dating
No. 8 Don't cut the cheese in the car
No. 9 Don't push her stool in
No.10 Don't gift her "Summer's Eve"
John Hull, the American owner of a Costa Rican ranch on which planes were seen arriving and leaving.
ReplyDeleteAnyone care to finish the story?
That is a long story. Don't believe what you read about John Hull on the internet. I could write a book on John Hull, but no one is that interested.
ReplyDeleteJohn's got to be in his upper eighties by now.
ReplyDeleteI hope his is well and doing fine.
ReplyDeleteBAGHDAD, May 2 (UPI) -- As calls in the U.S. Congress grow for a scheduled troop withdrawal from Iraq, similar demands are escalating in Iraq's National Assembly.
ReplyDeleteSome 133 Iraqi lawmakers from different political blocs, calling themselves the "free deputies," signed a document demanding a scheduled withdrawal of the U.S.-led multinational troops from their country, according to the Sadrist bloc in Parliament.
*********************************
What do we have to do to get the rest of them to sign on?
As it is, we'll simply end up leaving in the next administration - and get some goddamned managed health care to go with it.
ReplyDeleteHeh, this is interesting.
ReplyDeleteAccording to latest Rasmussen Poll, a majority of Democrats believe Bush knew about 9-11 beforehand or are unsure if he did.
Overall, 22% of all voters believe the President knew about the attacks in advance. A slightly larger number, 29%, believe the CIA knew about the attacks in advance. White Americans are less likely than others to believe that either the President or the CIA knew about the attacks in advance. Americans are more likely than their elders to believe the President or the CIA knew about the attacks in advance."
The Middle America. Moderate. Reality. Based. Community.
But yeah, better worry about whether people think Saddam was behind 9-11, that's much more problematic.
Isn't all that surprising, considering how many idiots believe the CIA created AIDs.
Twas brillig, and the slithy toves did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
ReplyDeleteall mimsy were the borogroves,
and the mome raths outgrabe.
It's all Jabberwocky, my friends!
I'll tell ya Deuce it get's harder and harder to see some good men I, and I am sure you, have known grow old and eventually pass away. Few of their kind are around to step up, but there I could easily, be wrong. Been out of the loop for so long.
ReplyDeleteStill it is distressing to me to see what today passes as "the right stuff", when in many cases it's just "a bag of fluff".
Trish,
ReplyDeleteI hear the rest of them have to sign on if they want their two months vacation at WalleyWorld.
DR:
ReplyDeleteBack on the "Who is Tzipi Lizni" thread you said:
"Another Israeli Minister that can trace their political and genetic lineage to the Terror bombing of the King David Hotel.
Another form of nepotism?"
Did you ever elaborate on that? If so where? If not please do.
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
ReplyDeleteThe frumious Bandersnatch
Special note:
If you see anything at the mall, airport, trainstation, etc that looks like it might be frumious call HomeLand Security immediately!!
Ah, frumious....I think I shall be more concerned about a Bandersnatch!
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile I will rest by the TumTum tree in the Tulgey wood...
"I hear the rest of them have to sign on if they want their two months vacation at WalleyWorld."
ReplyDeleteThat would've been a plan.
"Overall, 22% of all voters believe the President knew about the attacks in advance. A slightly larger number, 29%, believe the CIA knew about the attacks in advance."
ReplyDeletePeople believe all kinds of goofy things, cutler. Always have and always will. And the Right is not immune to this.
I have low standards, but something like this should be shouted from the rooftops and discredited. It hasn't been, in fact, politicians have been going along with it because they don't want to anger the psycho voting bloc.
ReplyDeleteAt some point you have to have some standards.
Trish, Cutler
ReplyDeletethese are the same people who think Al Gore should rightly be our President...they just cannot let go and move on..
Large-scale American tracking in conspiracy theories isn't time immemorial, it is relatively new and an acquired taste.
ReplyDelete"Large-scale American tracking in conspiracy theories isn't time immemorial, it is relatively new and an acquired taste."
ReplyDeleteOh, no, no, no. Hofstadter wrote a fabulous essay on just this subject, which I will now have to dig up.
The Paranoid Style in American Politics
ReplyDeleteHarpers Magazine, 1964
Applies to Left and Right both.
Tis available on the net (just google it) and I do recommend it.
ReplyDeleteIn conclusion: "We are all sufferers from history, but the paranoid is a double sufferer, since he is afflicted not only by the real world, with the rest of us, but by his fantasies as well."
"We are all sufferers from history, but the paranoid is a double sufferer, since he is afflicted not only by the real world, with the rest of us, but by his fantasies as well."
ReplyDeleteSo are you saying those Cuban hit squads weren't really trying to disrupt Ross Perot's daughter's nuptials?
whit,
ReplyDeleteOn threads since, here and at BC.
Because you are the host, I'll try to explain and expand, again
cutler, I & traitorous doug, were discussing nepotism and elitism in US government.
I mentioned, as is my wont, the Skull & Boners.
When duece posted the thread on Ms Tzipi Lizni, two things stood out, to me. First that Ms Lizni was an Israeli elitist, tracing her lineage back to an Irgun commander of the King David Hotel terrorist attacks.
The only part of that statement that would require explanation is referencing Irgun as terrorists.
Which is a matter of perspective, as to whether they were, or not.
The British Government, our NATO ally and kissin' cussin', in 2006 wrote a letter to the Israeli Government protesting the commemeration of the King David Hotel bombing, as celebration of a terrorist event.
The link to that story is here at the Bar, a thread or two back.
The underbelly of the thought, is that Ms Rice and Mr Bush expect Mr Fatah and Mr Hamas to migrate from terrorists to peacemakers, on a path similar to Mr Begin's and the Lizni family have.
That is the crux of US Policy with regards Israel and Palistine, the two State solution.
Equality for Palistins, on someone elses dime!
Michelle and Laura are the first people to take on and win against a bigger censor and manipulater of "news" than CBS, CNN, NY Times, WaPo, Drudge, and the rest, combined:
ReplyDeleteGoogle/You Tube,
this time at the direction of VERIZON.
Please do whatever you can to support these ladies.
(not you, Allen, we know you hate and detest everything Michelle (and Captain Ed) stands for, and since you disagree, you KNOW she has NO integritry.
right on!)
----
I'll be back in the No-Spin Zone again tonight, guest-hosting for Bill O'Reilly.
Tune in at 8pm Eastern.
Verizon Wireless ends Akon partnership
By Michelle Malkin
Thank you, readers.
Thank you, Laura Ingraham listeners. Thank you, Verizon
Wireless:
Verizon decided this week to end its support and sponsorship of Akon.
Jim Gerace
Vice President, Corporate Communications Verizon Wireless One Verizon Way
Basking Ridge, NJ 07920
Akon's ringtones have been
removed by the Verizon Wireless website.
I just spoke with Gerace by phone, and he told me Verizon Wireless had made
a mistake partnering with Akon.
It's good to see some corporate responsibility here. Will others step up to
the plate?
***
Update: A reader notes that
Verizon is still sponsoring Gwen Stefani's tour--with Akon as the opening
act.
What will they do now?
Update II: Verizon writes that they are no longer sponsoring the Gwen
Stefani tour with Akon as opening act. Jim Gerace:
"We are no longer -- that was the decision we made this week. If the
reader is seeing a poster or something promoting our sponsorship of the
tour, it's only because that material has not yet been destroyed."
***Previous:
Akons record
company abuses DMCA to stifle criticism on YouTubeLook
whos promoting a vulgar misogynist
Rapper
molests girl on stage (graphic warning)
digg
gag,
ReplyDeleteThat's irresponsible.
Have you NO INTEGRITY?
I was thinking of Daniel Patrick Moynihan when I said that, who supposedly traced it back to the beginning of the Cold War and the John Birchers, then the 'unmasking of the CIA' as supposedly being behind every rock during the 1970s.
ReplyDeleteI'll read the article, however.
I still think, however. That if you cannot agree on things as basic as this, you'll be shooting at each other eventually.