I never have gotten all this 'victory' stuff. I thought 'victory' was when they pulled down the statue. It wasn't 'mission accomplished' but it was victory of the war. The words that people use and latch on to confound me. The 'peace' is what our brave men and women have been fighting for. They already won the war.Comment Posted By Pd On 17.07.2008 @ 17:01
"clearly a political ploy by the Democrats to place the onus of defeat on Bush and the Republicans."
I can completely understand one growing cynical especially after spending many years following politics. But in this case I do think the Democrats are doing what they were elected and put into the majority by the American people to do and that is to try to alter the course of things in Iraq.
How many times to we need to hear "just another 6 months" before we get it? These guys are just playing for time and Bush doesn't want to be
the President who oversees the Iraqi pullout.
Iraq is in a civil war. The Iraqi's have to do the heavy lifting themselves and its sad to say but I think they're going to have to end up fighting it out. The Dems putting parameters on this occupation no more "aids the enemy" than the idea we're going to keep the troops in Iraq until we have peace and stability. Following the same kind of reasoning what would stop the insurgents, the violent types from simply being good until the Americans leave Iraq?Comment Posted By pd On 28.03.2007 @ 10:09
So Democrats are letting their hate of President Bush cloud their judgement? Hmmm. I suppose its possible. I guess when we spent a good part of the last decade watching the GOP foam at the mouth over President Clinton its only natural to assume the same thing is happening here. And perhaps it is. Or perhaps what we're seeing is simply the way a Democracy works. The Democrats aren't of one mind, nor can one say is Congress. Nor should they be.
Enough with this "Al Qaeda will now win if we pull the troops out" stuff. One could easily point out the various government reports that claim our activities in Iraq are emboldening terrorists to counter that idea. Besides if the problems in Iraq were simply limited to dealing with Bin Laden's henchmen, life would be sweet. Most of the problem is that Iraq is in a civil war. The answers are going to be political and diplomatic in nature and not purely military. Its past time we stop casting stones and to start treating each other's ideas with some respect and dignity.
And maybe just maybe the benchmarks are not meant to embarrass a President at historically low poll numbers, but rather to actually put some pressure on the Iraqi's to start taking care of things themselves.Comment Posted By pd On 23.03.2007 @ 09:51
" The Dems put Valerie Plame under oath, where she lied to Congress a half-dozen times about her covert status and who sent her husband to Niger. "
I guess the fact that the current Director of the CIA, confirmed Plame's status as covert should in no way be taken to mean that yea she was actually covert or anything.Comment Posted By pd On 19.03.2007 @ 10:05
Let me get this straight: when a Democrat perjures himself and obstructs justice we must uphold the law, yet when another high ranking (but Republican) official does the same we should look the other way?
I know different situation, blah blah. Obviously I don't agree with that notion.
As someone you'd label from the left, I happen to not have a problem with Gingrich persuing Impeachment over perjury and obstruction. Let's also not forget that Clinton did almost get booted and he did lose his law license and had to pay fines for the mess he got himself into. He was punished and rightly so. Nobody is above the law. Now the way the GOP played politics with the sexual angle of Clinton's mess, well to be honest that's the way they play the game in DC. Sure it makes Newt look a bit hypocritcal, and let's face it the sex angle didn't do anything to alter Clinton's approval ratings, if anything people rallied around the President. So basically my ramble is trying to get to the point that Newt's affairs are irrelevant, at least in my "leftist" opinion.Comment Posted By PD On 9.03.2007 @ 10:07
"... because the agent wasnâ€™t clandestine as the Prosecutor Fitzgerald made clear."
Maybe I missed something but when was this made clear?
Last I read was this:
"Feb. 13, 2006 issue - Newly released court papers could put holes in the defense of Dick Cheney's former chief of staff, I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby, in the Valerie Plame leak case. Lawyers for Libby, and White House allies, have repeatedly questioned whether Plame, the wife of White House critic Joe Wilson, really had covert status when she was outed to the media in July 2003. But special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald found that Plame had indeed done "covert work overseas" on counterproliferation matters in the past five years, and the CIA "was making specific efforts to conceal" her identity, according to newly released portions of a judge's opinion. (A CIA spokesman at the time is quoted as saying Plame was "unlikely" to take further trips overseas, though.) Fitzgerald concluded he could not charge Libby for violating a 1982 law banning the outing of a covert CIA agent; apparently he lacked proof Libby was aware of her covert status when he talked about her three times with New York Times reporter Judith Miller. Fitzgerald did consider charging Libby with violating the so-called Espionage Act, which prohibits the disclosure of "national defense information," the papers show; he ended up indicting Libby for lying about when and from whom he learned about Plame."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11179719/site/newsweek/Comment Posted By pd On 6.03.2007 @ 13:55
This sounds like the poll which was front page news in today's NY Post- a poll conducted by PUBLIC OPINION STRATEGIES. Their website:
They are a Republican polling firm. The thing about polls is that one needs to see a bunch of them to get any idea of what the trends are. One poll tells us nothing. And of course, the only polls that matter are on election day.Comment Posted By PD On 21.02.2007 @ 15:12
Hey -- I'm all for teaching 'Intelligent Design' in CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY classes along with all the other 'Creation MYTHS'.
One question to all the pea-brained fundatmentalist-extremist-religion fascists: Who decides which version of 'Intelligent Design' gets taught?
I for one don't think you can be hard enough on these small-minded, anti-intellect, anti-scientific inquiry, non-thinking extremists.
And I wish they would go start their own theocratic nation among all the other theocratic dictatorships -- elsewhere, far far away since they have no concept of not only scientific inquiry and critical analytical thinking, they have no concept of a democratic republic.
Stupid is as stupid does to quote one of their favorite icons.Comment Posted By PD On 3.08.2005 @ 11:02
Pages (1) :