Good solid reasons to NEVER EVER vote for a Democrat!

[jeskibuff]

Occasionally a story gets published and you are amazed at who actually published it. Consider the following story about life transitioning in Basra, Iraq: [Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now]

Here are some excerpts from the story:

Basra is beginning to awaken from a four-year dormancy. A recent week-long visit that included several dozen interviews revealed that many of the city's nearly 3 million residents are resuming lives that had been interrupted by an austere interpretation of Islam.
.
.
On this day, Zaki ..walked to an organ and played "Listen to Your Heart" by the 1980s Swedish pop band Roxette. He then swung into a medley of Western and Arab tunes...
Another student joined him, strumming the oud,...When the pair finished, their classmates applauded loudly, itself an act of courage. Even enjoying music was banned in recent years.
.
.
In a traffic circle, Sadr's face has been scratched out on a billboard, the same treatment given to Hussein murals in the weeks after the invasion.
.
.
Restaurants stay open late, no longer forced by insecurity to shut early.
.
.
On a recent night, Salam Hassan, 20, sold Arabic pop music CDs and cellphone ring tones on the sidewalk. A few months ago, Sadrists beat him up and fired a bullet that grazed his knee.

His crime: selling non-Islamic religious songs and ring tones.
.
.
The sounds of drums and dancing now fill the streets every Thursday, when most weddings take place. Cars and buses are decked in flowers and play loud music as revelers head to local hotels for ceremonies.

"It's like a gift from God," exclaimed Abdul Emir Majid
.
.
In al-Andalus Park...Children played on colorful slides and swings. Vendors sold ice cream and toys. It was a remarkable scene given that this park was the reason picnics were banned in Basra.

Any reasonable freedom-loving person should be overjoyed that Iraqis are beginning to experience true freedom after being oppressed by sadists for decades. Although the story does speak of hesitation and fear of powerful forces that are intent on taking those freedoms away, the overall positive message is hard to contain: things are changing for the better in Iraq! People are overcoming the oppression from hard-liner Islamists and they're beginning to taste life like they've never tasted it before! The bad guys are losing their grip on Iraq!

How did this happen? Did we pull our troops out of Iraq to force the Iraqis to "stand up on their own", like the Dumbocrats wanted us to believe was necessary? NOPE. We "stayed the course" and ADDED troops on the ground. It enabled us to deal some pretty bad blows to the terrorists who want to keep Iraqis oppressed. There's plenty of evidence that shows "the surge" put us over the edge and we're about to see steady improvements over there because of it. The MSNBC story alone is some nice evidence, ESPECIALLY considering that it's coming from MSNBC!! This has really got to pain liberals...not only to realize that they were so wrong about pulling the troops out, but GWB was SO RIGHT about keeping them in! Flashback to when they were so wrong about the tax cuts and GWB was so right! Gee, that's gotta hurt!

But more evidence is piling up. Over the last week, I've seen news stories about increased weapons caches being "ratted out" in Iraq ([Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now] for one). There's multiple good things about these stories. First, with those weapons seized, the terrorists have fewer toys to kill with. That's good for Allied forces and good for regular Iraqis! Second, the reporting of these caches to police indicates that Iraqis are trusting their government more and distrusting the insurgents more. They are also fearing the insurgents/terrorists less and realizing the value of ending their killing sprees. This process should continue to snowball...with more weapons off the street, there should be less violence and thus less fear in exposing terrorists and their deadly toys. This is precisely what the terrorists didn't want to happen, which is why they frequently targeted lines of police recruits. The tide is turning and it's not looking good for the terrorists!

Another MSNBC story ([Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now]) tells of teens being pressured into becoming suicide bombers. This is kind of good news, believe it or not. It's good on a couple of levels. It indicates that terrorists are running out of idiots who are willing to sacrifice their lives for "the cause". Now they are resorting to threatening the lives of the families of their new recruits: "either blow yourself up (along with many other innocent people) or we kill your family members". I would think this effort would eventually backfire on them - perhaps a recruit blows himself up while in the presence of his handlers. Foremost, it shows that they're fighting a losing battle when they have to force people to fight for them. It also shows that the terrorist is the true enemy of Iraqis, not their saviors! Despite Democrats asserting that the U.S. troops were invaders and "occupiers", Iraqis are realizing more and more that the U.S. is there to help them in their fight against their true enemy, the terrorists.

So anyway...there's plenty of evidence to show that the tide is turning in Iraq. Sure, there will be more violence, like the 51 killed in the Hurriyah market today ([Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now]). The scum terrorists will continue to have their victories, but with fewer people fearing them and more Iraqis enjoying their new freedoms, the terrorists will eventually get ratted out and they'll have to scrounge more for their deadly toys.

A free Iraq is what GWB envisioned all along, and his dream looks like it will come true. Not only is this best for the people of Iraq but it deals the deadliest blow to terrorists who would force their hard-line Islamic rules on Iraqis. When they succeed with that, they get to force their belief system on the entire population with schooling (madrasses, etc.) and fear. They can blame all their problems on The West and foment a hatred that justifies killing anyone who doesn't believe like they do. A free Iraq not only WON'T be a terrorist incubator, it will be a force in the region that will pursue and annihilate terrorists, and that's a good thing for America!

So who was ready to pull our troops out of Iraq? Just about every Democrat, except maybe Zell Miller and Joe Lieberman. Don't forget a couple of idiot Republicans like Chuck Hagel and Ron Paul. These people had no vision for the future. They saw surrender and capitulation as the only option. What fools! They had no idea that victory does not come without a price, but worse than that, they had no concept of what the consequences of failure were!

If you vote for a Democrat, you are voting for a fool. I mentioned 2 exceptions, but that's about all there are. Can you name any more who didn't fall for the "pull the troops out" business? In the coming months there should be more and more stories about the improvements in Iraq. Oh look! Here's yet ANOTHER one, reported by Tom Aspell: [Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now] All this will be nice ammunition for the McCain campaign. I'm looking forward to a lot of these successes thrown in Obama's face if just to hear the stories he'll invent to justify his flawed position. It should be entertaining to watch his backpedaling!

[slevdogg]

You reek of neo-conservatism. So we didn't invade Iraq to "fight the terrorists" as Bush and his cronies said, but to give them freedom? Should we invade every country whose citizens we do not consider to be free? Who should be next? Cuba? Iran? Russia? Almost all 47 countries in Africa? China? Should we just occupy every sovereign nation on the face of the planet? Should we take over the oceans? Heck, why not wrest Antarctica from international control and just take it for ourselves.

Iraq has been a colossal failure. We were lied into Iraq under the march to war beat following 9/11, while completely ignoring those who actually attacked us. Bush and Co. had decided long before 9/11 that he wanted to invade Iraq, and he used 9/11 to sell the country on it. The point of the so-called "surge" was to allow for political reconciliation. We're not seeing any real political reconciliation. Remember the 18 surge benchmarks? Wonder why the White House never talks about those anymore? Because by their own pre-defined metrics of success in Iraq they have failed. So now they are creating their own definitions of success as they go. They're constantly moving the goal posts of success, as well as the reason we are there. They're now being reduced to saying that we're there because oil will skyrocket if we leave.

I could literally write a bleeping book in response to your post, but I don't have the time. I'll leave it at this for now.

And keep it civil. I think that you're personal beliefs and those of the Republican party are whacked, but I won't reduce myself to namecalling as you have. Dumbocrats? Calling someone a fool for voting for a Democrat? Grow up and respect differences in opinions. That's freedom, no war required.

[jeskibuff]

Originally Posted by slevdogg

You reek of neo-conservatism.

While you probably intended that remark to be an insult, I'll regard it a compliment. Considering the opposite pole which is "mentally-challenged liberal", I'll take being labeled a neo-con ANY DAY! One side has common sense...the other side has far-fetched theories of how steel has never melted, GWB imploded the WTC, etc. and has a host of well known idiots who believe in those theories: John Kerry, Jimmy Carter, Rosie O'Donnell, Mikey Mooron, Dan Rather, Barack Obama, Cindy Sheehan...that list of idiots goes on and on! One side gets their theories proven over time, the other continually suffers embarrassment when their ideas prove to be the stupid mindless meanderings that they are! You see, this is why Bush doesn't really care about the "low approval ratings" that the media just loves to measure him by. The passage of time will prove him right. Success is the true measure and we're beginning to see that happen in Iraq, much to the chagrin of liberals who are perpetually wrong.

Originally Posted by slevdogg

So we didn't invade Iraq to "fight the terrorists" as Bush and his cronies said, but to give them freedom?

No silly, we invaded Iraq to ensure that terrorists didn't get easy access to weapons that could be used against us in 9/11-style attacks. 9/11 (should have) taught us that there are some very evil people who are intent on killing us and we need to do all in our power to prevent that from happening. Obviously, some of us (that would be YOU, DUH, WhiteQueen, etc.) never quite learned that very simple lesson.

Originally Posted by slevdogg

Should we invade every country whose citizens we do not consider to be free.

Again, you're totally missing the point. We invaded Iraq for our own national security. The freedom thing is just a fringe benefit of removing the dictator from power.

Originally Posted by slevdogg

Who should be next? Cuba? Iran? Russia?

Iran is playing the same dangerous game that Saddam played. It should be obvious to people who enjoy freedom that there is great danger whenever Islamic radicals can get their hands on weapons that can kill en masse. Eliminating the potential for that to happen is paramount if you desire to keep your freedom. Cuba, Russia and all the rest on your list don't come close to the threat that looms with Ahmadinejad.

Yeah, I can predict your response: "you're a warmonger, jeskibuff". Au contraire, slobdoggie - there can only be a guarantee of peace and freedom if those who threaten that peace are stopped in their tracks. You don't wait for the trigger to be pulled if someone's pointing a gun at your head - you recognize and anticipate the threat and prevent it from ever getting to that point. You liberals would wait until the last moment of your lives, stupidly thinking that you can reason with madmen. We conservatives are way smarter than that!

Originally Posted by slevdogg

Almost all 47 countries in Africa? China? Should we just occupy every sovereign nation on the face of the planet? Should we take over the oceans? ****, why not wrest Antarctica from international support and just take it for ourselves.

Oh silly slobdoggie, now you're starting to babble uncontrollably. Is that foam at your mouth?

Originally Posted by slevdogg

Iraq has been a colossal failure.

Yes...Saddam and Islamic radicals made a mess out of that country. But if you read the news reports I mentioned, you'd realize what a tremendous transformation is taking place there right now and what that means to our national security! You obviously have no clue what a defeat is being handed to Al-Qaeda and Islamic radicals by this renaissance.

Originally Posted by slevdogg

We were lied into Iraq under the march to war beat following 9/11

Oh really? No liberal has yet to prove these "lies" were really lies. Yes, there was misinformation from several sources, but that doesn't constitute lies. The lies that CAN be proven are all the lame attacks that liberals have made on GWB. Mikey Mooron films are laced with lies and distortions. Dan Rather took a most embarrassing blow to his career and credibility because of the fabricated "evidence" he wanted so badly to believe. Beyond that, almost every liberal has been caught telling whoppers. John Kerry's campaign imploded because he couldn't open his mouth without telling a lie. We all remember Slick Willie waving his finger at the camera. Hillary dodging snipers? Obama's uncle liberating Auschwitz? AlGore practicing what he preaches? If I were a liberal, I'd be hiding under a rock, totally embarrassed by the hypocrites and liars that comprise the people I identify with. Yet you liberals seem to be proud of all the liars on your side of the aisle!

Originally Posted by slevdogg

...while completely ignoring those who actually attacked us.

And just who are we ignoring? All of the 19 who carried out the attack on 9/11 are dead, so I'll have to agree with you there but I don't see any problem ignoring THEM, do you? We have mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed and several other high-level Al-Qaeda operatives in custody, although your liberal buddies are putting forth their best efforts to set them free. Only in your imagination are we not looking for OBL, but then again you all have such vivid imaginations. I remember the theory that "they've already caught OBL, but they're waiting just prior to the election to march him out". Once again, you were wrong!

Originally Posted by slevdogg

Bush and Co. had decided long before 9/11 that he wanted to invade Iraq

Of course you ignore the fact that the prior administration also considered Iraq a deadly threat that warranted action. How conveniently you love to narrow the focus in order to achieve your desired goals!

Originally Posted by slevdogg

...he used 9/11 to sell the country on it.

Sorry, but you obviously don't get the whole picture. If you did, you'd understand the importance of shutting down a source of WMD to terrorists. But this has been explained to you for many years now and you still don't get it so I doubt that you ever will!

Originally Posted by slevdogg

The point of the so-called "surge" was to allow for political reconciliation.

Only in the puny minds of liberals. Liberals wanted to label the conflict a "civil war" that we shouldn't involve ourselves in. Liberals were blind to the fact that terrorists were fueling the conflicts between Shia, Sunni and Kurd. The more bloodshed that they could cause, the more Americans would call for a withdrawal. That's the only way they could win against our superior military. But the surge reduced that bloodshed, beat back the terrorists and allowed the good Iraqis the opportunity to gain the upper hand. With the violence ebbing and the realization that the true enemy of Iraqis were the terrorists, NOT the U.S. soldiers, progress is underway! If Dimocrats had their way, the terrorists would now be in total control of an oil-rich nation and we'd be in for a bloodbath of mammoth proportions. Thank God we have a president like GWB who didn't knuckle under to polls just because he thought his legacy depended on being "liked". Thank God we didn't have an egomaniac like Slick Willie at the helm who would have done the absolutely wrong thing just so that his popularity numbers wouldn't take a hit! We shouldn't want an insecure president who feels the need to be popular; we should want one that takes the RIGHT action, and GWB has done JUST THAT!

Originally Posted by slevdogg

We're not seeing any real political reconciliation. Remember the 18 surge benchmarks? Wonder why the White House never talks about those anymore? Because by their own pre-defined metrics of success in Iraq they have failed. So now they are creating their own definitions of success as they go.

Success in Iraq is happening RIGHT NOW, and you'd see plenty of the evidence of it if you weren't so reluctant to embrace reality. Things don't always go according to plans, especially in a war where an enemy has their own plans for success. Transforming a country that was under brutal dictatorship for 30 years into a thriving democracy is not an overnight success, yet liberals demand instant results! Our own nation has had over 230 years since it began and although it's the best country in the world, it is far from perfect. The political reconciliation will happen over time, but contrary to what you want to believe, the terrorists are the ones fanning the flames of violence.

Originally Posted by slevdogg

They're constantly moving the goal posts of success, as well as the reason we are there. They're now being reduced to saying that we're there because oil will skyrocket if we leave.

What we are witnessing today is momentum that will result in EVERY goal being met, PLUS! There are still ways to halt that momentum, the greatest being an idiot like Obama getting voted into the Oval Office!

Originally Posted by slevdogg

I could literally write a bleeping book in response to your post, but I don't have the time. I'll leave it at this for now.

Oh, what you've said has all been said before, but maybe your book would still sell because liberals just love to believe that the more people who think the way they do means that their theories have merit. Scott McClellan hasn't said anything that liberals haven't said before, but they'll be buying his book in great numbers because they believe the greater the volume of sales, the more "truth" there is in the book. What fools!

For now, why don't you collaborate with FunDUHmental? He's at a loss for words in this thread: [Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now], most notably on post #11. He has that classic deer-in-the-headlights look about him that happens when liberals can't seem to respond to simple questions. He made a lame attempt to answer point #11, but failed miserably. Maybe you both can put your heads together and come up with some good responses, but I doubt it. Hey, gang up on me if you want...put hundreds of liberal "thinkers" to the task! That's part of the fun of being a conservative....putting liberals up against a wall and watching as they struggle with all their self-proclaimed intelligence to answer what should be simple questions. I know, it's a little cruel, kind of like pulling the wings off a fly, but you really deserve the torture! It wouldn't be near as fun if you didn't strut around and proclaim your genius, like "DUH" in all his pompous glory!

Originally Posted by slevdogg

And keep it civil. I think that you're personal beliefs and those of the Republican party are whacked, but I won't reduce myself to namecalling as you have. Dumbocrats? Calling someone a fool for voting for a Democrat? Grow up and respect differences in opinions. That's freedom, no war required.

You can only EARN respect, you can't demand it. How do you earn it? You talk with reason, you argue with solid logic. You do not fabricate and distort. You answer questions that are presented to you. You concede when you've lost an argument. Liberals cannot do these things. DUH certainly can't and judging from your perspective, neither can you. If you want respect, do these things and you'll GET IT!

[FUNdamental]

While you probably intended that remark to be an insult, I'll regard it a compliment. Considering the opposite pole which is "mentally-challenged liberal", I'll take being labeled a neo-con ANY DAY! One side has common sense...the other side has far-fetched theories of how steel has never melted, GWB imploded the WTC, etc. and has a host of well known idiots who believe in those theories: John Kerry, Jimmy Carter, Rosie O'Donnell, Mikey Mooron, Dan Rather, Barack Obama, Cindy Sheehan...that list of idiots goes on and on! One side gets their theories proven over time, the other continually suffers embarrassment when their ideas prove to be the stupid mindless meanderings that they are! You see, this is why Bush doesn't really care about the "low approval ratings" that the media just loves to measure him by. The passage of time will prove him right. Success is the true measure and we're beginning to see that happen in Iraq, much to the chagrin of liberals who are perpetually wrong.

The biggest blunder was invading Iraq after the President was told repeatedly his allegations of WMD, 15 minute strike capability, missile silos, mobile labs, etc. were wrong.



Quote:
Originally Posted by slevdogg
So we didn't invade Iraq to "fight the terrorists" as Bush and his cronies said, but to give them freedom?

No silly, we invaded Iraq to ensure that terrorists didn't get easy access to weapons that could be used against us in 9/11-style attacks. 9/11 (should have) taught us that there are some very evil people who are intent on killing us and we need to do all in our power to prevent that from happening. Obviously, some of us (that would be YOU, DUH, WhiteQueen, etc.) never quite learned that very simple lesson.

There were no WMDs, and Saddam was not interested in cozying up with fundamental extremists.



Quote:
Originally Posted by slevdogg
Should we invade every country whose citizens we do not consider to be free.

Again, you're totally missing the point. We invaded Iraq for our own national security. The freedom thing is just a fringe benefit of removing the dictator from power.

So we are more secure with 180,000 troops and equipment in Iraq, and not at home?



Quote:
Originally Posted by slevdogg
Who should be next? Cuba? Iran? Russia?

Iran is playing the same dangerous game that Saddam played. It should be obvious to people who enjoy freedom that there is great danger whenever Islamic radicals can get their hands on weapons that can kill en masse. Eliminating the potential for that to happen is paramount if you desire to keep your freedom. Cuba, Russia and all the rest on your list don't come close to the threat that looms with Ahmadinejad.

Yeah, I can predict your response: "you're a warmonger, jeskibuff". Au contraire, slobdoggie - there can only be a guarantee of peace and freedom if those who threaten that peace are stopped in their tracks. You don't wait for the trigger to be pulled if someone's pointing a gun at your head - you recognize and anticipate the threat and prevent it from ever getting to that point. You liberals would wait until the last moment of your lives, stupidly thinking that you can reason with madmen. We conservatives are way smarter than that!


Saddam avoided Islamic radicals. The threat was not there, he had no ability to strike. Many countries told us that, and for that the Republicans in the Senate coined the terms "Freedom Fries" and "Freedom Toast." The threat was somewhere else.


Quote:
Originally Posted by slevdogg
Almost all 47 countries in Africa? China? Should we just occupy every sovereign nation on the face of the planet? Should we take over the oceans? ****, why not wrest Antarctica from international support and just take it for ourselves.

Oh silly slobdoggie, now you're starting to babble uncontrollably. Is that foam at your mouth?
against TOS


Quote:
Originally Posted by slevdogg
Iraq has been a colossal failure.

Yes...Saddam and Islamic radicals made a mess out of that country. But if you read the news reports I mentioned, you'd realize what a tremendous transformation is taking place there right now and what that means to our national security! You obviously have no clue what a defeat is being handed to Al-Qaeda and Islamic radicals by this renaissance.

Saddam was not involved with "Islamic radicals."

Quote:
Originally Posted by slevdogg
We were lied into Iraq under the march to war beat following 9/11

Oh really? No liberal has yet to prove these "lies" were really lies. Yes, there was misinformation from several sources, but that doesn't constitute lies. The lies that CAN be proven are all the lame attacks that liberals have made on GWB. Mikey Mooron films are laced with lies and distortions. Dan Rather took a most embarrassing blow to his career and credibility because of the fabricated "evidence" he wanted so badly to believe. Beyond that, almost every liberal has been caught telling whoppers. John Kerry's campaign imploded because he couldn't open his mouth without telling a lie. We all remember Slick Willie waving his finger at the camera. Hillary dodging snipers? Obama's uncle liberating Auschwitz? AlGore practicing what he preaches? If I were a liberal, I'd be hiding under a rock, totally embarrassed by the hypocrites and liars that comprise the people I identify with. Yet you liberals seem to be proud of all the liars on your side of the aisle!

A Senate panel has concluded the information given to the White House was not the information the President, Vice president, an SoS articulated to the public. General Powell said his testimony before the UN was "deliberately misleading."



Quote:
Originally Posted by slevdogg
...while completely ignoring those who actually attacked us.

And just who are we ignoring? All of the 19 who carried out the attack on 9/11 are dead, so I'll have to agree with you there but I don't see any problem ignoring THEM, do you? We have mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed and several other high-level Al-Qaeda operatives in custody, although your liberal buddies are putting forth their best efforts to set them free. Only in your imagination are we not looking for OBL, but then again you all have such vivid imaginations. I remember the theory that "they've already caught OBL, but they're waiting just prior to the election to march him out". Once again, you were wrong!

"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02

Quote:
Originally Posted by slevdogg
Bush and Co. had decided long before 9/11 that he wanted to invade Iraq

Of course you ignore the fact that the prior administration also considered Iraq a deadly threat that warranted action. How conveniently you love to narrow the focus in order to achieve your desired goals!

The previous administration kept Iraq in check.



Quote:
Originally Posted by slevdogg
...he used 9/11 to sell the country on it.

Sorry, but you obviously don't get the whole picture. If you did, you'd understand the importance of shutting down a source of WMD to terrorists. But this has been explained to you for many years now and you still don't get it so I doubt that you ever will!

No WMD's, and no ties to 9-11.




Quote:
Originally Posted by slevdogg
The point of the so-called "surge" was to allow for political reconciliation.

Only in the puny minds of liberals. Liberals wanted to label the conflict a "civil war" that we shouldn't involve ourselves in. Liberals were blind to the fact that terrorists were fueling the conflicts between Shia, Sunni and Kurd. The more bloodshed that they could cause, the more Americans would call for a withdrawal. That's the only way they could win against our superior military. But the surge reduced that bloodshed, beat back the terrorists and allowed the good Iraqis the opportunity to gain the upper hand. With the violence ebbing and the realization that the true enemy of Iraqis were the terrorists, NOT the U.S. soldiers, progress is underway! If Dimocrats had their way, the terrorists would now be in total control of an oil-rich nation and we'd be in for a bloodbath of mammoth proportions. Thank God we have a president like GWB who didn't knuckle under to polls just because he thought his legacy depended on being "liked". Thank God we didn't have an egomaniac like Slick Willie at the helm who would have done the absolutely wrong thing just so that his popularity numbers wouldn't take a hit! We shouldn't want an insecure president who feels the need to be popular; we should want one that takes the RIGHT action, and GWB has done JUST THAT!

Speculation and spin.

Quote:
Originally Posted by slevdogg
We're not seeing any real political reconciliation. Remember the 18 surge benchmarks? Wonder why the White House never talks about those anymore? Because by their own pre-defined metrics of success in Iraq they have failed. So now they are creating their own definitions of success as they go.

Success in Iraq is happening RIGHT NOW, and you'd see plenty of the evidence of it if you weren't so reluctant to embrace reality. Things don't always go according to plans, especially in a war where an enemy has their own plans for success. Transforming a country that was under brutal dictatorship for 30 years into a thriving democracy is not an overnight success, yet liberals demand instant results! Our own nation has had over 230 years since it began and although it's the best country in the world, it is far from perfect. The political reconciliation will happen over time, but contrary to what you want to believe, the terrorists are the ones fanning the flames of violence.

And how much is it costing us?



Quote:
Originally Posted by slevdogg
They're constantly moving the goal posts of success, as well as the reason we are there. They're now being reduced to saying that we're there because oil will skyrocket if we leave.

What we are witnessing today is momentum that will result in EVERY goal being met, PLUS! There are still ways to halt that momentum, the greatest being an idiot like Obama getting voted into the Oval Office!

Law Review.




Quote:
Originally Posted by slevdogg
I could literally write a bleeping book in response to your post, but I don't have the time. I'll leave it at this for now.

Oh, what you've said has all been said before, but maybe your book would still sell because liberals just love to believe that the more people who think the way they do means that their theories have merit. Scott McClellan hasn't said anything that liberals haven't said before, but they'll be buying his book in great numbers because they believe the greater the volume of sales, the more "truth" there is in the book. What fools!

For now, why don't you collaborate with FunDUHmental? He's at a loss for words in this thread: most notably on post #11. He has that classic deer-in-the-headlights look about him that happens when liberals can't seem to respond to simple questions. He made a lame attempt to answer point #11, but failed miserably. Maybe you both can put your heads together and come up with some good responses, but I doubt it. Hey, gang up on me if you want...put hundreds of liberal "thinkers" to the task! That's part of the fun of being a conservative....putting liberals up against a wall and watching as they struggle with all their self-proclaimed intelligence to answer what should be simple questions. I know, it's a little cruel, kind of like pulling the wings off a fly, but you really deserve the torture! It wouldn't be near as fun if you didn't strut around and proclaim your genius, like "DUH" in all his pompous glory!

The question was a hypothetical; anyone can design hypotheticals to make a failed point- Fox News does it all the time. The White House made egregious claims not supported by the facts given, and then went after the box.

Quote:
Originally Posted by slevdogg
And keep it civil. I think that you're personal beliefs and those of the Republican party are whacked, but I won't reduce myself to namecalling as you have. Dumbocrats? Calling someone a fool for voting for a Democrat? Grow up and respect differences in opinions. That's freedom, no war required.

You can only EARN respect, you can't demand it. How do you earn it? You talk with reason, you argue with solid logic. You do not fabricate and distort. You answer questions that are presented to you. You concede when you've lost an argument. Liberals cannot do these things. DUH certainly can't and judging from your perspective, neither can you. If you want respect, do these things and you'll GET IT.

Fabricate and distort? Isn't that what the White House did to get us into this mess?

[FUNdamental]

Originally Posted by jeskibuff

A free Iraq is what GWB envisioned all along, and his dream looks like it will come true. Not only is this best for the people of Iraq but it deals the deadliest blow to terrorists who would force their hard-line Islamic rules on Iraqis. When they succeed with that, they get to force their belief system on the entire population with schooling (madrasses, etc.) and fear. They can blame all their problems on The West and foment a hatred that justifies killing anyone who doesn't believe like they do. A free Iraq not only WON'T be a terrorist incubator, it will be a force in the region that will pursue and annihilate terrorists, and that's a good thing for America!

As reported by 60 Minutes, Christians, once allowed to worship freely and build churches in Iraq, have been purged, kidnapped, and killed, since our invasion. George Bush, a self proclaimed Christian, has never mentioned the plight of Iraqi Christians since the invasion.

[Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now]

[jeskibuff]

I WAS WRONG!

Yes, I admit it!

What was I thinking??

Here I thought that DUH had finally got the knack of the quote function. I thought he finally understood how it worked.

But alas, perhaps we only witnessed an instance of the [Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now]. Enough typing and DUH is bound to get the quote function to work every now and then.



Now, let's get to DUH's latest brain fart...

What's THIS??? According to DUH...

Originally Posted by DUH

General Powell said his testimony before the UN was "deliberately misleading."

STOP THE PRESSES!!!

Wow! I must've been doing some Rip Van Winkle imitation when this happened! I hadn't heard such a thing...on TV, the radio, the internet....HOW DID I MISS THIS??

Well, an attempt to find where Powell confessed to being "deliberately misleading" doesn't really turn up anything of worth, does it??

Did Colin Powell ever say the words that DUH says he did? Perhaps he did in the fantasies of millions of liberals, but certainly not in the real world.

Here's what Colin actually said: On Meet The Press: [Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now]

When I made that presentation in February 2003, it was based on the best information that the Central Intelligence Agency made available to me. We studied it carefully; we looked at the sourcing in the case of the mobile trucks and trains. There was multiple sourcing for that. Unfortunately, that multiple sourcing over time has turned out to be not accurate. And so I'm deeply disappointed. But I'm also comfortable that at the time that I made the presentation, it reflected the collective judgment, the sound judgment of the intelligence community. But it turned out that the sourcing was inaccurate and wrong and in some cases, deliberately misleading. And for that, I am disappointed and I regret it.

Do your own research. The information is at your fingertips. If you put an honest effort into it, you should conclude that DUH's reality is nothing more than wishful thinking. DUH is simply WRONG! WAY WRONG! Colin Powell said that the information provided BY THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY was in some cases deliberately misleading. He did not say that HE was deliberately misleading. In an interview with ABC TV he said ""I'm the one who presented it on behalf of the United States to the world, and (it) will always be a part of my record. It was painful. It's painful now,"

Are we somewhere in the Twilight Zone?

Someone wants us to trick us into believing that black is white and white is black; that truth is fiction and fiction is truth.

It MIGHT seem like we're in some parallel dimension but we're just witnessing liberals up to their old tricks once again.

This is an example of "projection", the process of projecting one's own faults onto another person. In this case, DUH appears to be trying to lie and mislead you into believing that Colin Powell is lying and misleading. The amazing thing here is how blatant and transparent DUH's attempt is!

Years have passed since Colin said what he said. There should have been an overabundant period of time in which the words could be analyzed and digested, especially by someone who proclaims to be so brilliant on political topics!

Does DUH just not understand the words he reads? If so, he's not alone...you can find hundreds of websites where liberals interpret Powell's words pretty much the same way that DUH did. It's almost like they ignore the "inconvenient" words and assemble the sentences the way they THINK they were said. Apparently, this is how liberals read Colin's "Meet The Press" statement:

When I made that presentation...it was...inaccurate and wrong and...deliberately misleading

Yeah, he certainly said those words, but not in that context.

So, does DUH and millions of liberals like him suffer from some kind of mental problem where they misinterpret everything they read? That's a good possibility, I suppose. I've certainly seen way too many cases where liberals appear to have lousy reading comprehension. But if this were the case, all that would be necessary would be to point out the error of their ways. If they were honest, they'd say "oh yes...I certainly misinterpreted that!". But you'll never hear such a confession out of DUH or the millions of liberals just like him. I seriously doubt he'll ever apologize for distorting Colin's words!

So if liberals won't admit they're wrong, WHY WON'T THEY?? The most likely scenario is that they KNOW they're wrong, but they can't admit it because their whole philosophy is founded on lies. The only way to keep their house of cards from falling is to continue to lie. They desperately need to keep that house standing because their personal agendas depend on it! It's pretty sad that there are people like this whose primary goal is to lie and distort so their selfish needs are preserved. The fortunate thing is they're so easy to spot and their tactics are predictable. The bad thing is that so many people accept what they say at face value.

Well, that's expounding on just ONE of DUH's moronic statements. It's a huge burden to combat the mindless babbling of liberals, but someone's got to do it!