hitler also ate carrots, does that make it a dumb idea?
the same people who cry for 'individual rights' will vote to limit who can marry who... hypcrites are the right wing!
i'm an ex smoker, so i know the addiction can be ended... and i resent second hand smoke from the person in the car in front of me, and the people smoking walking down the street... if you want to smoke, do it in your own house with the windows closed, other than that, you are infringing on my right to breathe clean air... take some personal reponsibility and quit the stupid habit, or be forced to have your habit restriced to only affecting you... i say legislate the hell out of all addicts habits that infringe on my freedomsComment Posted By jay On 17.11.2006 @ 00:33
i think the reason the dems were concerned about rigged elections were because most rational people knew the electorate was leaning heavily against the republicans... also, given the history of the last two presidential elections, especially the one where Gore won the majority of the votes, it is also understandable some may not trust the republicans to win fairly... lets face it, the recent republican mindset has been nastier and more unethical than any previous administration and ruling party... and that's pretty nasty! So, the reason there is no mention of rigged elections is because everyone knows they were fair, but people don't have the same trust when republicans win because their reputation succeeds them.
Finally, the only ones who have lost faith in anything are the right wing extremists, who in their manipulation and corruption and especially in their hypocracy, have swung the tide of mainstream america against them... finally the lie of the right is doing itself in, one scandal at a time...
I hope the crimes committed by the Bush administration are exposed and the democrats don't wimp out due to pity for the pathetic man behind the curtain... but i wont be surprised if the 'liberals' (ie. mainstream america who voted against Bush) show compassion and let the poor man slip away into obscurity as the worst president ever...
Somehow i doubt the right will ever get as far as it did in the last 6 years, the damage will take decades to repair, and the issues must be addressed, else immediate negative repercussions will result...
It's funny you end your comment speaking of American Democracy... as if it's expression and recent flexing of it's muscle was upsetting to you... I have never been prouder to be an American, and for the first time in years feel hope once again for truth and the power of the people...Comment Posted By jay On 10.11.2006 @ 01:48
Rumsfeld was responsible not only for managing the war in Iraq, but also for transformation of the military from a Cold War oriented outfit to something more nimble. The argument for the latter role is with long term interests in mind. That needs to be assessed as well in thinking about his term as SecDef--whether that transformation was necessary, how important Rumsfeld was to it, and how successful he was.
As for Iraq, it's nice to think that if we just had the right people in place, that everything would be better. Given the smaller military we had to work with after the Clinton years (why we haven't ramped that up outside of the recruiting difficulties in the 2004-5 seems a good question) and shell of a civil society in Iraq and its ethnic tensions, it was going to be hard whoever was SecDef. The Kurdish North has internal reasons for its stability and not simply the brilliant U.S. policy that enabled it.
Announcing the imminent retirement of Rumsfeld would have helped the GOP perceptually. However, I am skeptical about how much his replacement would have changed things on the ground in Iraq. I also think neither the flaws of the GOP Congress nor the inability of Bush to persuade anybody but his supporters to support the war would be offset politically just by getting rid of Rummie.Comment Posted By Jay On 8.11.2006 @ 16:59
Olmert's Folly = Nasrallah's TriumphComment Posted By Jay On 11.08.2006 @ 19:09
I concur with what Lisa said above. I've been looking for some rational thought on this issue and it looks like I found it here. I can't bring myself to NOT vote. Maybe this burst of anger was just something that needed to happen and now we can all take a deep breath and think more clearly.Comment Posted By Jay On 18.05.2006 @ 08:34
Arkin has it wrong. He may even be part of an Administration attempt to get the Iranians believe their could be war, as probably was the purpose of the leaks to Hersh.
The reasons Iranians do not believe that a war is imminent is not because Rumsfeld is not saying there is war planning. The reason is that Iranians have looked at the alternative war scenarios and concluded they are unfavorable to the Americans. Broadly there are three scenarios:
1) Airstrikes. Won't end Iran's nuclear program. May delay it by a few years. But those who rule Iran are willing to wait a few years. After all it is a country with a history over three thousand years, what does ten more years matter?
2) Ground troops. In three years of war with 5 million Iraqi Sunnis the Americans have suffered 2,300 casualties. Iran has 70 million Shias. Also Iran now has a blueprint for fighting Americans from their observations of the Iraq war. To "pacify" a population an Army needs brutal methods (ask Saddam how he was able to keep the peace). As long as the American army is constrained in their methods by public opinion at home, they will not be able to use such methods and will keep suffering casualties at the rate they are suffering in Iraq (scaled up due to Iran's larger population).
3) Nuclear strikes. This may be able to delay or permanently stop Iran's nuclear program without immediate significant American casualties. However this can remove the inhibition against using nuclear weapons by all countries, something which has lasted over 50 years. A world in which it becomes acceptable to use nuclear weapons is a world that will die.Comment Posted By Jay On 16.04.2006 @ 14:07
utter nonsense? I didn't see that at all. I didn't see him rushing to bomb anyone. What I read was that we should have a plan for military action in the case diplomacy fails. Yes, we have time for diplomacy to work, but lets also keep in mind the sanity of Iran's leader. No one wants to rush this thing, but it would be stupid not to have a plan. Thats all I think he was saying. I don't have much faith in the U.N., Russia, or China, much less Iran. We need a strong statement if diplomacy is going to work, and it will take the U.N. willing to back up its claims. This may be years down the road, after many, many times of Iran failing the demands of the U.N. and the U.N. doing nothing about it...just like Iraq...but I see it coming.Comment Posted By Jay On 13.04.2006 @ 13:07
I just did a search and it looks like the last time they cached your page was on the 20th. But if you remember the title you had, it may come up. Do a google search. You will see choices like this
Right Wing Nut House
Contact Me about About RightWing NutHouse Â· Site Stats Amazon Honor System ... MY VAST RIGHT WING CONSPIRACY Â· mypetjawa Â· NaderNow Â· New Blog Showcase ...
rightwingnuthouse.com/ - 101k - Cached - Similar pages - Remove result
See where it says Cached? Click that...sometimes it helps retrieve things if they happened to cache it before it got deleted. Hope it works, good luck, JayComment Posted By Jay On 23.03.2006 @ 14:16
Can you see if google cached it?Comment Posted By Jay On 23.03.2006 @ 14:09
I think it is odd that right after the doctor said Henderson's nervous was shut down, that he was able to wake up and escape. It makes me wonder if the doctor was not really injecting him with "truth serum." I wonder if he was faking the whole time.Comment Posted By Jay On 15.03.2006 @ 08:57