Comments Posted By Turnabout
Displaying 1 To 10 Of 20 Comments


Okay, Rick Moran owes CREW (citizens for responsibility and ethics in washington) an apology. He has been advancing the idea that CREW is a "leftist" organization that sat on emails or documents that would incriminate Foley in the current scandal for political reasons.

CREW has posted today an article that proves that is just false. Here is an excerpt from CREW's post:

"On July 21, 2006 CREW received a set of emails, allegedly from Rep. Foley to a former House page, which it sent to the FBI later that day. The emails, posted at, asked the page, who had recently left the Hill, his age, how school was going and what he wanted for his birthday. Rep. Foley also requested the boy’s photograph.

“As a former prosecutor who handled sex crimes in the District of Columbia, the emails set off alarm bells. Grown men simply do not send emails requesting photographs to teenagers over whom they have had some degree of authority,” Melanie Sloan, executive director of CREW wrote today."

We're waiting for your response Rick.

Comment Posted By Turnabout On 2.10.2006 @ 11:33


Here is a little nuance that you left out of your post:

"Besides the leaders, other lawmakers and Congressional officers who served on the board that oversaw the page program were aware of the e-mail messages, though the Democratic lawmaker who serves on the board, Representative Dale E. Kildee of Michigan, said Saturday that he had never been informed." NYT

I'm sure you can explain how this little fact is meaningless.

Comment Posted By Turnabout On 1.10.2006 @ 10:52


Montysano, welcome to all things stupid.

The "albeit in slow motion" modification was a response to my previous post. Little victories, little victories.

The lack of response to your quest for "conservative values" justification for unfettered executive power is power. Men drunk with power desperately trying to keep power.

Comment Posted By Turnabout On 30.09.2006 @ 15:49

Moran #17

Your the one asking men [and women] to risk their lives for nothing...

Comment Posted By Turnabout On 30.09.2006 @ 14:15

You want immoral? How about the fact the occupying forces that invaded Iraq have failed to provide security for the citizens of Iraq. has 43,500 minimum civilian deaths attributed to military intervention in Iraq. Now that's immoral!

Senator Dick Durbin says that the latest NIE on the war on terrorism estimates "as of 9/11, there were 20,000 members of al Qaeda worldwide. Now there are 50,000." Great a 250% increase in terrorists and 43,500 innocents dead. Talk about your Wrong Track.

Comment Posted By Turnabout On 30.09.2006 @ 13:41

Moran: "Democrats still could lose thanks to a party so intellectually bankrupt and morally ambivalent that they can’t bring themselves to tell the American people the truth about their cut and run strategy in Iraq or that they fully intend to initiate impeachment proceedings against the President of the United States at the earliest possible moment after they achieve power in the House."

To begin, the Democrats do not have a "cut and run strategy in Iraq." "Cut and run" is another Rovian slogan designed to smear Democrats with the charge of cowardice, which you so dutifully repeat in your rightwing flacking. What the majority of Democrats do voice publicly is a realization of no realistic military option to the political victory described by the Bush administration. Faced with that reality, a number of strategic alternatives have been proposed by Democrats. One being, and the most prominent, John Murtha's redeployment over the horizon, where American troops are extracted from the civil war in Iraq but not from the region. Another put forth just last night by Sen. Levens of a gradual draw-down of U.S. troops that would force the Iraqi government to make the political compromises necessary to facilitate a resolution to the turmoil that now exists. A third Democratic strategy forwarded, on the record, by Joe Biden is that of a three way, at least temporary, partitioning of Iraq where the warring factions could go their respective neutral corners as sanctuary from the current violence. Not one of these strategies use the words "Cut and Run." Therefore, Sir, that makes you the lair.

Having said that, let me ask you, what is your plan? "Stay the course?" That is not a strategy. "Adapt and win?" Just more sloganeering. Really I'm serious, given the realities on the ground in Iraq, what is the Republican plan for victory?

As for the 'full intention to impeach the President,' where is your evidence of that? I'm sure somewhere in the blogisphere you could find someone who has recommended that option, but I'm not aware of any serious discussion of impeachment in the Democratic leadership. Furthermore, even if you could substantiate such a claim, has the president committed any impeachable offenses? If not there is nothing to worry about, especially given the high standard set by the Republicans in the Clinton impeachment.

Comment Posted By Turnabout On 30.09.2006 @ 12:56


Hey, pretty nice job of poo-pooing the content of Woodward's new book. I also would like to commend you for not trying to call his integrity in to question, although there was a moment when it looked like you were going to go down that road. I agree with you, the content probably is not that earth shaking, but the title says it all. "State of Denial." Great title and it will be shown ever 5 minutes on cable news for the next four or five days, not mention the nightly network news, the local news and radio talk shows.

We all know this whole business is not about the truth and facts. No, rather it is all about perception and the Republicans have been the masters of manipulating perception for a long time. While there may not be anything new in Woodward's book nothing shapes perception like repetition. Reinforcing the dysfunctional and incompetence of the administration with new nitty-gritty detail coupled the charge that they are hiding the truth from the American public can't be good for Republicans.

Tell me, am I reading you right in your statement, "When the investigations into what’s gone wrong in Iraq begin..." that you are conceding the congress will turn over to the Democrats. Or was that a Freudian slip? It's probably just weakness from the pneumonia.

Comment Posted By Turnabout On 29.09.2006 @ 15:53


From CNNs 360 last night Anderson Cooper speaking with Sen. Richard Durbin of Illinois:

COOPER: The White House is also saying, look, terrorists have hated us for years. If it wasn't in Iraq, it would be somewhere else.

DURBIN: Well, I guess you can make that argument, but the intelligence estimates told us that, as of 9/11, there were 20,000 members of al Qaeda worldwide. Now there are 50,000. The trend line is going in the wrong direction. We have to be tough. I agree. This is a dangerous world, and there are people who want to kill us. But we have to be smart in our policies, and we have to have a strategy that really starts winning this worldwide struggle. So that America is a leader and accepted around the world.

Comment Posted By Turnabout On 27.09.2006 @ 07:28


Answers to questions:

Moran: How do our agencies “count” jihadists in order to come up with the idea that their numbers are increasing as a result of the Iraq War?

A: The author of "The Journey of Jihad" explains that the Iraq war has created a new generation of Jihad that moved it from the fringes of the population to the mainstream.

Moran: Why not Afghanistan as I asked above?

A: Jihad is an Arab political movement and Afghanistan is obviously not Arab.

Moran: Or because of their successes in the last few years?

A: Again, it is Iraq that has been the impetus of the new generation of Jihad. Infidels invading an Arab nation is the motivator.

Comment Posted By Turnabout On 27.09.2006 @ 00:00

Fox News All-star Charles Krauthammer explains the NIE to the faith-based red universe: 'It makes perfect sense that Jihadis are increasing. You see when you attack the bad guys they are going to increase. This all part of the broader war on terror.'

Geese, in the reality based world you expect the bad guys to decrease when you attack them, if the opposite where the case it wouldn't make much sense to attack them. Would it?

That's your world class news organization?

Comment Posted By Turnabout On 26.09.2006 @ 20:58

Powered by WordPress


Next page »

Pages (2) : [1] 2

«« Back To Stats Page