Well, it's not as if we all haven't come to adore his cute little, unending flip flops on any number of issues. However, this latest one may be the most bold yet, considering that he went AWOL during Vietnam, and had a cushy job in the air guard in order to avoid combat anyway, so he's probably the last person on earth, besides Cheney and the rest of the republican draft dodging, warmongering chickenhawks, who should be saying ANYTHING about Vietnam.
Anyway, he couldn't resist, I guess. I wonder if he'll be comparing his upcoming debacle in Iran with his debacle in Iraq?
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 71
"
Sorry honey buns, but he failed his flight physical and then went AWOL. He did not complete his term of commitment. And, btw, he also only got in there ahead of 1200 other more qualified candidates (he only passed the entrance exam by one point, far below 1200 others) because Poppy muscled him in there with his political clout, so that junior wouldn't have to go into combat. They left that messy combat stuff to real heroes, like Jack Murtha and John Kerry.
Not much! If Clinton got more respect it was because he was on the block for recieving felatio for creative use of cigars. Bush has disregarded the Bills of Rights and is responsible for an unnecessary war whose native death toll has surpassed that of Darfur, whose crisis he, himself labeled a genocide etc etc etc. Clinton faced impeachment. Bush did not. You equate the scandalous with the abominable and it wreaks of hypocrisy.
Yeah, that's it. The ones who're standing up and shouting about the criminal actions of a criminal white house are the ones who're bringing this country down. It's not the apologists and bush worshippers who are. There's no need for rule of law when a republiCON is in the white house, right? That only matters when pussycrats are in charge. Fricking hypocrites.
"Even Clinton got more respect than this. "
Right. I honestly don't think any of your fellow bush worshippers would agree with this ridiculous statement. I remember quite well how you rabid wing nuts "respected" Clinton. You're a pathetic joke. How anybody could, in this day, be a bush worshipper or apologist is simply beyond reason. Whatever tiny shred of credibility you may have thought you once had is now gone.
After training, Bush kept flying, racking up hundreds of hours in F-102 jets. As he did, he accumulated points toward his National Guard service requirements. At the time, guardsmen were required to accumulate a minimum of 50 points to meet their yearly obligation. According to records released earlier this year, Bush earned 253 points in his first year, May 1968 to May 1969 (since he joined in May 1968, his service thereafter was measured on a May-to-May basis). Bush earned 340 points in 1969-1970. He earned 137 points in 1970-1971. And he earned 112 points in 1971-1972.
The numbers indicate that in his first four years, Bush not only showed up, he showed up a lot. That brings the story to May 1972. Bush asked for permission to go to Alabama to work on a Senate campaign. His superior officers said OK. Requests like that weren't unusual, says retired Col. William Campenni, who flew with Bush in 1970 and 1971. "In 1972, there was an enormous glut of pilots," Campenni says. "The Vietnam War was winding down, and the Air Force was putting pilots in desk jobs. In '72 or '73, if you were a pilot, active or Guard and you had an obligation and wanted to get out, no problem. In fact, you were helping them solve their problem." So Bush stopped flying. From May 1972 to May 1973, he earned just 56 points — not much, but enough to meet his requirement. Then, in 1973, as Bush made plans to leave the Guard and go to Harvard Business School, he again started showing up frequently.
In June and July of 1973, he accumulated 56 points, enough to meet the minimum requirement for the 1973-1974 year. Then, at his request, he was given permission to go. Bush received an honorable discharge after serving five years, four months and five days of his original six-year commitment. By that time, however, he had accumulated enough points in each year to cover six years of service. During his service, Bush received high marks as a pilot. 1970 evaluation said Bush "clearly stands out as a top notch fighter interceptor pilot" and was "a natural leader whom his contemporaries look to for leadership." 1971 evaluation called Bush "an exceptionally fine young officer and pilot" who "continually flies intercept missions with the unit to increase his proficiency even further." And a 1972 evaluation called Bush "an exceptional fighter interceptor pilot and officer."
http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/Document_1_-_Al_Lloyd_Memo.pdf
http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/Document_2_-_USAF_Reserve_Personnel_Record_Card.pdf
http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/Document_3_-_ARF_1st_Statement_of_Points_Earned_1972-1973.pdf
http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/Document_4_-_DocuARF_2nd_Statement_of_Points_Earned_1973.pdf
http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/Document_5_-_Payroll_Records.pdf
And why are Clark and Lyndon always so hateful? Why always with the name calling and put downs? YOU are the ones who seem pathetic, imo.
By comparing Iraq to Vietnam, he has once again shot himself in the foot. Just like Iraq, we never should have been in Vietnam, and we fucked that country over royally by being there. We had massive forces in Vietnam, but we could never win that war because China was behind North Vietnam. Talk about a huge mistake! Anyone want to go to war with China? Even back then...I thought not!
How any idiot can support the idiots who now control our government and our military is beyond my comprehension. First, they fake intelligence about Iraq, and then convince all the other idiots in Washington to believe their crap, and then they invade a country that our present vice president stated back in 1994 was not to be invaded because it would turn into chaos. Guess what, it did!
Don't one of you folks try to call me a lefty! I'm so far right of left, that you won't believe it! First, we need to eliminate the Federal Reserve, and get back on a gold standard. We need to massively downsize the Federal Government that has grown into a huge corrupt mechanism never intended by our forefathers. Both the Federal Reserve and the non-gold standard are both unConstitutional in a huge way!
Our forefathers intended for states to control most of our laws, and economies, not our Federal Government. Federal income tax is also unConstitutional since there are no laws that allow tax on people's labor. That is against our Constitution!
Face it folks, Bush is a complete idiot. His controllers on the other hand are on par with the likes of Hitler and other tyrannical leaders. Why the nasty comparison? Well, how many innocent Iraqis have died since we illegally invaded Iraq for no plausable reason? The alleged 9/11 folks were almost 100% from Saudi Arabia, and sure did not train in Iraq! You Bush supporters have no leg to stand on, but I'm half on your side, because the democrats are the same lying bastards as the republicans are. They all pander to big business, and the FED, and are for the most part corrupt. When is the last time any of them did anything for Americans?
Why is our Mexican border wide open under any president? Why don't we arrest and deport all illegal immigrants? Why do we free trade with slave labor countries? Why do we enter into unwinnable and massively expensive foreign conflicts, and borrow massive amounts of money to fund these conflicts? I don't think the average American would vote for any of the above in an open election. None of the above provides any National Security to our citizens. Why bicker over party crap. Bush is an idiot. My 16 year old son is smarter than he is by a long shot! His presidency is by far the worse job done in the last 50 years. Sure, Clinton was not the best either. The fact is, one of our best hopes could have been JFK, but he was assassinated by a lone gunman who although being mentally unstable was able to hit his mark in a moving car at three hundred yards with three shots in a matter of four seconds using a bolt action rifle and no scope. And you people really believe we live in a democracy?
Personally, I would prefer a president who came from the lower class, and had no military background! Why do all you idiots continue to kiss the asses of elite ultrawealthy who actually control our country?
If you don't think I'm from the right, then here are my core beliefs:
Eliminate most of our Federal Government entirely, and eliminate Federal taxes.
Cut Federal spending massively, and allow states to controll their own schools, transportation, etc...
Close our borbers and shut down all immigration until every single American is employed.
No Federally funded health coverage, but eliminate private insurance of any kind all together by buying out all shareholders, and making insurance non-profit. That would cut premiums massively.
Tax all Churches on their income, unless they prove all proceeds are spent on helping the poor.
Eliminate the CIA, FBI, NSA, etc, and create one central agency with transparency to all state governments.
Eliminate free trade with slave labor countries or charge massive tariffs, and send the proceeds to Americans who consume these goods.
Eliminate all corporate lobbying, and add term limits to congress.
Eliminate all corporate campaign contributions, and fund all elections through taxpayer's contributions with equal amounts given to all candidates who run.
Jeesh, that sounds like so far left eh? Not actually, look at our Constitution! That is exactly the vission of our forefathers. They did not want fake money (no gold standard), and did not want bankers in our government, and did not want states to lose control over their own affairs. 1913 is a year that will live in imfamy! The year our Federal Government turned over control to private enterprise controlled by the ultrawealthy. Don't bother to watch the news, they own all of those stations now.
Vickey, Wake up! Who was the first President to smoke pot? ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................Obviously you know nothing of our past Presidents!....George Washington grew, and even bred different strains of pot, and smoked it regularly. Back then it was used as a pain killer, and he had massive dental problems.
By comparing Iraq to Vietnam, he has once again shot himself in the foot. Just like Iraq, we never should have been in Vietnam, and we fucked that country over royally by being there. We had massive forces in Vietnam, but we could never win that war because China was behind North Vietnam. Talk about a huge mistake! Anyone want to go to war with China? Even back then...I thought not!
How any idiot can support the idiots who now control our government and our military is beyond my comprehension. First, they fake intelligence about Iraq, and then convince all the other idiots in Washington to believe their crap, and then they invade a country that our present vice president stated back in 1994 was not to be invaded because it would turn into chaos. Guess what, it did!
Don't one of you folks try to call me a lefty! I'm so far right of left, that you won't believe it! First, we need to eliminate the Federal Reserve, and get back on a gold standard. We need to massively downsize the Federal Government that has grown into a huge corrupt mechanism never intended by our forefathers. Both the Federal Reserve and the non-gold standard are both unConstitutional in a huge way!
Our forefathers intended for states to control most of our laws, and economies, not our Federal Government. Federal income tax is also unConstitutional since there are no laws that allow tax on people's labor. That is against our Constitution!
Face it folks, Bush is a complete idiot. His controllers on the other hand are on par with the likes of Hitler and other tyrannical leaders. Why the nasty comparison? Well, how many innocent Iraqis have died since we illegally invaded Iraq for no plausable reason? The alleged 9/11 folks were almost 100% from Saudi Arabia, and sure did not train in Iraq! You Bush supporters have no leg to stand on, but I'm half on your side, because the democrats are the same lying bastards as the republicans are. They all pander to big business, and the FED, and are for the most part corrupt. When is the last time any of them did anything for Americans?
Why is our Mexican border wide open under any president? Why don't we arrest and deport all illegal immigrants? Why do we free trade with slave labor countries? Why do we enter into unwinnable and massively expensive foreign conflicts, and borrow massive amounts of money to fund these conflicts? I don't think the average American would vote for any of the above in an open election. None of the above provides any National Security to our citizens. Why bicker over party crap. Bush is an idiot. My 16 year old son is smarter than he is by a long shot! His presidency is by far the worse job done in the last 50 years. Sure, Clinton was not the best either. The fact is, one of our best hopes could have been JFK, but he was assassinated by a lone gunman who although being mentally unstable was able to hit his mark in a moving car at three hundred yards with three shots in a matter of four seconds using a bolt action rifle and no scope. And you people really believe we live in a democracy?
Personally, I would prefer a president who came from the lower class, and had no military background! Why do all you idiots continue to kiss the asses of elite ultrawealthy who actually control our country?
If you don't think I'm from the right, then here are my core beliefs:
Eliminate most of our Federal Government entirely, and eliminate Federal taxes.
Cut Federal spending massively, and allow states to controll their own schools, transportation, etc...
Close our borbers and shut down all immigration until every single American is employed.
No Federally funded health coverage, but eliminate private insurance of any kind all together by buying out all shareholders, and making insurance non-profit. That would cut premiums massively.
Tax all Churches on their income, unless they prove all proceeds are spent on helping the poor.
Eliminate the CIA, FBI, NSA, etc, and create one central agency with transparency to all state governments.
Eliminate free trade with slave labor countries or charge massive tariffs, and send the proceeds to Americans who consume these goods.
Eliminate all corporate lobbying, and add term limits to congress.
Eliminate all corporate campaign contributions, and fund all elections through taxpayer's contributions with equal amounts given to all candidates who run.
Jeesh, that sounds like so far left eh? Not actually, look at our Constitution! That is exactly the vission of our forefathers. They did not want fake money (no gold standard), and did not want bankers in our government, and did not want states to lose control over their own affairs. 1913 is a year that will live in imfamy! The year our Federal Government turned over control to private enterprise controlled by the ultrawealthy. Don't bother to watch the news, they own all of those stations now.
Vickey, Wake up! Who was the first President to smoke pot? ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................Obviously you know nothing of our past Presidents!....George Washington grew, and even bred different strains of pot, and smoked it regularly. Back then it was used as a pain killer, and he had massive dental problems.
By comparing Iraq to Vietnam, he has once again shot himself in the foot. Just like Iraq, we never should have been in Vietnam, and we fucked that country over royally by being there. We had massive forces in Vietnam, but we could never win that war because China was behind North Vietnam. Talk about a huge mistake! Anyone want to go to war with China? Even back then...I thought not!
How any idiot can support the idiots who now control our government and our military is beyond my comprehension. First, they fake intelligence about Iraq, and then convince all the other idiots in Washington to believe their crap, and then they invade a country that our present vice president stated back in 1994 was not to be invaded because it would turn into chaos. Guess what, it did!
Don't one of you folks try to call me a lefty! I'm so far right of left, that you won't believe it! First, we need to eliminate the Federal Reserve, and get back on a gold standard. We need to massively downsize the Federal Government that has grown into a huge corrupt mechanism never intended by our forefathers. Both the Federal Reserve and the non-gold standard are both unConstitutional in a huge way!
Our forefathers intended for states to control most of our laws, and economies, not our Federal Government. Federal income tax is also unConstitutional since there are no laws that allow tax on people's labor. That is against our Constitution!
Face it folks, Bush is a complete idiot. His controllers on the other hand are on par with the likes of Hitler and other tyrannical leaders. Why the nasty comparison? Well, how many innocent Iraqis have died since we illegally invaded Iraq for no plausable reason? The alleged 9/11 folks were almost 100% from Saudi Arabia, and sure did not train in Iraq! You Bush supporters have no leg to stand on, but I'm half on your side, because the democrats are the same lying bastards as the republicans are. They all pander to big business, and the FED, and are for the most part corrupt. When is the last time any of them did anything for Americans?
Why is our Mexican border wide open under any president? Why don't we arrest and deport all illegal immigrants? Why do we free trade with slave labor countries? Why do we enter into unwinnable and massively expensive foreign conflicts, and borrow massive amounts of money to fund these conflicts? I don't think the average American would vote for any of the above in an open election. None of the above provides any National Security to our citizens. Why bicker over party crap. Bush is an idiot. My 16 year old son is smarter than he is by a long shot! His presidency is by far the worse job done in the last 50 years. Sure, Clinton was not the best either. The fact is, one of our best hopes could have been JFK, but he was assassinated by a lone gunman who although being mentally unstable was able to hit his mark in a moving car at three hundred yards with three shots in a matter of four seconds using a bolt action rifle and no scope. And you people really believe we live in a democracy?
Personally, I would prefer a president who came from the lower class, and had no military background! Why do all you idiots continue to kiss the asses of elite ultrawealthy who actually control our country?
If you don't think I'm from the right, then here are my core beliefs:
Eliminate most of our Federal Government entirely, and eliminate Federal taxes.
Cut Federal spending massively, and allow states to controll their own schools, transportation, etc...
Close our borbers and shut down all immigration until every single American is employed.
No Federally funded health coverage, but eliminate private insurance of any kind all together by buying out all shareholders, and making insurance non-profit. That would cut premiums massively.
Tax all Churches on their income, unless they prove all proceeds are spent on helping the poor.
Eliminate the CIA, FBI, NSA, etc, and create one central agency with transparency to all state governments.
Eliminate free trade with slave labor countries or charge massive tariffs, and send the proceeds to Americans who consume these goods.
Eliminate all corporate lobbying, and add term limits to congress.
Eliminate all corporate campaign contributions, and fund all elections through taxpayer's contributions with equal amounts given to all candidates who run.
Jeesh, that sounds like so far left eh? Not actually, look at our Constitution! That is exactly the vission of our forefathers. They did not want fake money (no gold standard), and did not want bankers in our government, and did not want states to lose control over their own affairs. 1913 is a year that will live in imfamy! The year our Federal Government turned over control to private enterprise controlled by the ultrawealthy. Don't bother to watch the news, they own all of those stations now.
Vickey, Wake up! Who was the first President to smoke pot? ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................Obviously you know nothing of our past Presidents!....George Washington grew, and even bred different strains of pot, and smoked it regularly. Back then it was used as a pain killer, and he had massive dental problems.
Please, do not attempt to make this worthless, cowardly little piece of human feces into some sort of military hero. He got into the TANG because his daddy had connections and could keep him out of combat. He drank and snorted his way through part of his term of commitment, failed to take his required physical, and went AWOL. End of story. He's a loser. Always has been, always will be. If his last name were "Smith," he'd be having a difficult time holding down a job as a shit sucker.
"NOT two years of weekends.... Two years. "
This was what he signed up for, genius. He's not a hero for doing it. It's called "doing the job you signed up for." Pretty much everybody in America that has a job does the same thing every single day.
"Bush asked for permission to go to Alabama to work on a Senate campaign. His superior officers said OK"
That's because he no longer had wings, because he'd failed his physical, and his superiors saw no need for him to be cluttering up the local bars in Texas any longer. Too bad he never showed up for duty in Alabama, though. Not a single person has ever reported seeing him report for duty there. Not his superiors, not anyone he would've worked with, nobody. Aside from that, his name does not appear on a single duty roster in Alabama. He wasn't there. He was AWOL.
"So Bush stopped flying."
He stopped flying because the TANG forced him to, because he'd failed a required physical.
Read and learn:
http://www.glcq.com/bush_at_arpc1.htm
http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2004/02/13/bush_update/index.html
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040927/baker
http://www.awolbush.com/
Heckuva hero you've got there, kiddies.
" Joe T---The awsome thing about AMERICA is you don't have to like the facts,...you can even dispute them,..but unless you have documents showing other wise then it's your opionion,,..your right."
Get a grip, for crying out loud. Your boyfriend was suspended from flying because he refused to take a required physical, and then he went AWOL. Deal with it.
During the 2004 campaign, when news of Bush's AWOL status became public, the white house attempted desperately to make it go away, but try as they might, they just couldn't produce the documentation to refute what was being said. To this day, there has not been a single shred of documentation to prove that your little cheerleader boyfriend did not go AWOL. The story stands. Oh, btw, there is still a $10,000 reward being offered to anyone who can prove that he showed up for duty in Alabama. Knock yourself out.
" I am not a Bush lover or worshiper, but I do try to give the man his due."
For what? For being born on third base and thinking he hit a home run? For his decades of alcohol and drug addictions? For having a daddy who could shove him ahead of 1200 other far more qualified pilot candidates, so that he could land a cushy, safe job in the TANG instead of fighting for his country, and then for going AWOL instead of finishing his term of commitment? For his constant failures? For his cuddly relationship with the bin Laden family? For his shocking arrogance and abuse of power? For his insider trading? For using TX taxpayer funds to build a baseball stadium while he was part owner, and then pocketing $12 million when he sold out? For ignoring threats and allowing 9/11 to happen under his watch? For lying the nation into an illegal, unnecessary war in Iraq? For prancing around the country at fund raisers while an entire major US city died? For letting a gay male prostitute into the white house over 100 times? For stealing two national elections? For destroying the rule of law by politicizing the entire DOJ? For refusing to allow scientists to report their work? For being, without any question or hint of doubt, THE worst president in the history of this nation? For shoveling another $3 trillion in debt onto the shoulders of our children and grandchildren? For shipping millions of good paying jobs overseas? For ignoring a health care crisis that will destroy this nation's economy? For trying to destroy Social Security with an idiotic privatization plan? For not catching the anthrax killer? For not catching Osama? For making al Qaeda far stronger and more dangerous than they ever were? For leaving our borders, ports, railways, power grids, refineries, etc. wide open, 6 years AFTER 9/11? For his illegal domestic spying program? For his habitual lying?
Just what is it that you could possibly give this permanent loser, this scab of a disease, this cancerous tumor on the face of America credit for? That he hasn't killed YOU with his stunning incompetence and lies yet?
"And why are Clark and Lyndon always so hateful?
Because we're angry that you and your cheerleader boyfriend in the white house are destroying this country. We want our nation back. We want a strong America that's respected and admired, not one that's despised. We want a nation that's not poisoned with trillions of dollars in republiCON debt. We want an America with a future again. We want our rule of law back. We want accountability. We want a media that tells the truth. We want our moral authority restored. We want our basic civil liberties and rights restored. We want a leader who takes action to protection us when necessary, not one that sits on his ass while the nation is under attack, and then launches an illegal war against a nation that had nothing to do with it.
Yeah, you're Goddamned right we're angry. We're mad as hell, and we're not going to take it any more.
" At least Bush was in the service, what branch did Clinton serve in?"
Man, that's weak. Holy crapola. You people really have nothing at all, do you?
Let's see...Bush is a hero, because, while he went AWOL and deserted his unit and his nation, Clinton went to college instead. Where were the rest of your cowardly republiCON freaks while John Kerry, Max Cleland, and Jack Murtha were being heroes? Where were Limbaugh, Nugent, Cheney, Wolfowicz, Pearle, O'Reily, Bolton, and the rest of the warmongering chickenhawks?
You defenders of the indefensible need to study the founding fathers and peek at the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Read the works of Franklin, Jefferson, and Adams then ask yourselves "how do these sentiments compare with the actions of Bush and the neo-cons?" Understand this: to support these people and their role in government is to be ANTI-AMERICAN, worse than enemies that would assault our shore with tanks and battalions, worse than psychotics that would fly airplanes into our Capitol and the Twin Towers. Even those lunatics would not pretend to be loyal citizens of our Constitutional Republican Democracy.
Of course, it is the people who report what the losers have done who are bringing the country down - not the losers who do what they do. This makes perfect senses to someone, I'm sure.
They just can't let him alone. It says more about them than it does about Mr. Bush.
You people are really starting to look pathetic. You've chosen to remain one of the few misinformed, foolish people who refuse to stop clinging to the pant leg of the nation's worst failure of a president, and you're now reduced, in shouldering defense for failure, to whining like a small child who's lost a game and cannot accept defeat.
Chronic liars and thuggish criminals who abuse their power and violate constitutional and federal laws do not deserve the respect of anyone. When will you people finally realize that? This entire administration should be locked away for the rest of their filthy, corrupt, lying lives, and serve as examples as to what happens when evil, dangerous men and women gain control of the government and manipulate others through fear and war mongering, while violating the very premise of constitutional law that they swore to uphold.
This is still a nation of laws, regardless of how you and your corrupt white house feel about that. The president cannot lie a nation into an unnecessary war. He cannot violate international law at will. He cannot define what the term "torture" means. He cannot illegally spy on US citizens. He cannot send his minions to lie under oath to congress. He cannot write signing statements to bills that are in direct contradiction to the content of the bills. He cannot ignore the presidential records act. He cannot conduct business under a veil of secrecy.
This isn't the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany. This is the USA, regardless of what you and your corrupt white house think. We have an open government that abides by the rule of law, and when they sway from that, we hold those individuals accountable.
"Keep up the whining and get used to the rebuttal."
Sam C., Aug 24, 2007, 1:41am EDT
Right back at cha, Sam, old boy! Even Clark's title sounds like whining.
"Booshie flippity flops. Again."
I thought it was hilarious. Hatred and anger? She's using humor to give you the smack-down, and rightly so.
Lera..........nice.
"Bret what part of "unConstitutional" is confusing? What part of right to privacy, search and seizure is not manifestly clear since the founding? What part of posse comitatus? Is whining about "unrelenting antagonists" working toward the undoing of Bush Admin power grabs? Isn't is important that those who seek truth and may read these pieces are made aware of the incredible trail of deceit and by Bush and CO? These works serve the dual purpose of enlightening voters and venting the just outrage of the brutal rape of our nation. The lack of universal disgust says volumnes and the great need to volumnes more. Keep up the whining and get used to the rebuttal."
Unconstitutional? I guess you can always try to press charges if you think that's the case.
Posse Comitatus? I'm ex-military, Sam. I probably understand this one better than you do, since I lived under it for years. You think Mr. Bush is somehow abusing the Posse Comitatus Act? I can't wait to hear how...........
You guys on the Left really will say ANYTHING, won't you?
"Brutal rape of our nation"? Now you're out there in Leftyville. Ask 100 people on the street if you think that quote is appropriate, and I bet the only people nodding their heads in approval are also the nutjobs that are picketing outside the local courthouse.
Sam, we Conservatives just don't like hearing griping when it isn't warranted. When you have something worth pressing charges, feel free to chime in. Until then, you've got nothing.
There, there, now sweetie buns. I know what it was, and it wasn't a "smack-down." Don't get yourself all hot and wet. I was playing with her, fool.
"Unconstitutional? I guess you can always try to press charges if you think that's the case."
That's what impeachment is for.
" You think Mr. Bush is somehow abusing the Posse Comitatus Act?"
He's ended it. Hello, Mr. Wizard. Yank your head out of your ass and start paying attention.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Posse_Comitatus_Act
"Ask 100 people on the street if you think that quote is appropriate, and I bet the only people nodding their heads in approval are also the nutjobs that are picketing outside the local courthouse."
Actually, roughly 1/2 the population believes that Bush needs to be impeached, and over 1/2 believe the same should apply to Cheney. Currently, anywhere from 26-29% of the population is dumb enough to still carry water for this failed president. You're one of them. Who's the extremist nutjob?
"we Conservatives just don't like hearing griping when it isn't warranted. "
First, you're far from conservative. You're a neocon, and worse yet, a bush worshipper and apologist, which, quite frankly, is inexcusable at this point, and should really be a criminal offense, considering the tremendous, lasting damage that he's done to this nation.
Secondly, if you don't feel that flagrant violations of constitutional, federal, and international laws warrant "griping," you have no right calling yourself an American.
"There, there, now sweetie buns. I know what it was, and it wasn't a "smack-down." Don't get yourself all hot and wet. I was playing with her, fool."
You got what you deserved, and it was humorous too. If you were playing, you were playing with knives………and you got cut.
"Bret : "Unconstitutional? I guess you can always try to press charges if you think that's the case."
CK : That's what impeachment is for."
It will never happen, and I think that is starting to dawn on you and your Leftist friends. Bummer.
"Bret : "You think Mr. Bush is somehow abusing the Posse Comitatus Act?"
CK : He's ended it. Hello, Mr. Wizard. Yank your head out of your ass and start paying attention.
Clark, when has Mr. Bush suspended Posse Comitatus? Name specific instances. You can't, can you? Didn't think so………….
Why state things that haven't happened? I suppose fantasy is better than reality for you, isn't it, Clark?
CK : Actually, roughly 1/2 the population believes that Bush needs to be impeached, and over 1/2 believe the same should apply to Cheney. Currently, anywhere from 26-29% of the population is dumb enough to still carry water for this failed president. You're one of them. Who's the extremist nutjob?
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/39_favor_impeaching_bush
Half the population believes Mr. Bush SHOULDN'T be impeached, Clark. I think you got your numbers confused…….again. Why do you constantly quote insane things that are so easily challenged. Note that I went to Rasmussen, and not to the DailyKos for my numbers. You should try it some time. Its all about credible sourcing, Clark.
Once again, Rasmussen has Mr. Bush at 38% today.......go check it out. No, not on Truthout.org.......
"First, you're far from conservative. You're a neocon, and worse yet, a bush worshipper and apologist, which, quite frankly, is inexcusable at this point, and should really be a criminal offense, considering the tremendous, lasting damage that he's done to this nation.
Secondly, if you don't feel that flagrant violations of constitutional, federal, and international laws warrant "griping," you have no right calling yourself an American."
Clark, you already know I'm a Conservative. And like I've stated many, many times for those of you Lefties who don't know the difference : neocons believe that deficit spending is OK. True Conservatives hate deficit spending. Coincidence - I hate deficit spending....lol. Case closed.
Secondly, I hear accusations of Constitutional violations, but I have heard of no indictments of Mr. Bush, so far. Personally, I think you Lefties and your Congressional minions are too stupid to have found any charges worth pursuing. Keep accusing though, I am sure it helps you feel better about your imaginary little world…..lol. Ask John Conyers if he thinks impeachment is possible :
http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977065583
Again, a neutral source – the Associated Press. Learn, Clark, learn.
I so seldom get to read the vocal defense of the indefensible, that it is almost worth it to read the "Sombody-else-think-for-me sheeppeople" quote articles and sales pitches and still think of it as real facts, and not the "big 7 year lie..."
If you're not shocked and appalled, and scared of the future--you have not been paying attention to reality lately.
Impeach him, please!
No one can because no laws were broken. Liberal Democrats have been looking for at least the 9 months we've had control of both Houses. Still nothing, and it looks to remain that way until Mr. Bush's term is up.
'If you can't prove I did it in court yet, I didn't'.
Lovely ethics you've got there. Right up till Mr. Lay and Mr. Skilling got convicted, they had done nothing wrong at Enron, and the Arthur Anderson folks were keeping good books? It was loosing in court that was their crime? Thousands lost their life savings and many more thousands significant investment dollars through no fault of anyone, till a jury ruled people guilty of fraud and corruption? What in the hell are you thinking?;
FIRST comes the crime, THEN comes the hammer of justice. Not the other way round. Crimes are still crimes whether the perps get away with them or not, El Rationalito.
I was hoping you'd come on here.
Did you happen to catch the History Channel's debunking of 9/11 myths last Monday? I thought of you immediately when I watched the show.
No, I didn't. I have little interest in watching someone debunk myths. One pretty much knows how such a story ends, by definition.
(Pssst, Bret, not everything that is showm on TV is reality. Even if the 'History Channel' decides to show it. They themselves are just people like you and I, subject to error, not Gods or anthing.)
Sorry to tell you but that documentary ended your little cult. The Emperor has no clothes, John.
No expert can prove that there was no stand-down order. The proponderance of evidence points to there being a stand-down order.
No "expert" can prove that the towers weren't brought down by exposives. The steel was hauled off the scene and "recycled" almost immediately (a suspicious development in and of itself; you'd think they would AT LEAST want at look at the steel from building 7, wouldn't they?). All we have to work from is vieo evidence, an average adult's working knowledge of basic laws of physics, and common sense; and they all point to controlled demolition.
Anyways... about that Posse Comitatus Act; the federal government is currently using Department of Defense surveillance satellites to spy on Americans. That's a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act as well as the Fourth Amendment, not to mention basic principles of American liberty and common decency.
I have to say that you are the most un-Conservative sounding Conservative I've ever run into. ALL of the Conservatives I know think 9/11 Conspiracy Theories are a joke.........you don't. Suspicious.
Steve, where did you hear that DoD surveillance satellites were being used to spy on Americans? I hope this is some reputable source you're talking about........
If what you say is true, this would be a HUGE news story. And since I haven't heard anything like it on the news, I hope you're not going to tell me you read it on the DailyKos......lol.
Sources, please.
Do you consider the "CBS Evening News" to be a reliable source?
CBSNews.com -- American Spy Satliites to Snoop on U.S.
p.s. -- If you think of the term "conservative" to mean you place your loyalties with Republicans, even if they are spending us into bankruptcy, waging unconstitutional wars of naked aggression that are destroying our military and our good name, doing all they can to usurp Executive power while ignoring the Constitution, thinking of the world in "left/right" paradigms where everyone who disagrees with you politically is a Commie; then yeah, I guess I am a pretty unconservative guy.
However, if you think of the word "conservative" as what it used to mean; believing in strict adherence to the U.S. Constitution, meaning limited government size, scope, and power, state's rights, and individual liberty as being granted by the Creator and not the state and therefore "inalienable," then I'm probably one of the most conservative people around.
I consider CBS news to be Left of Center, but somewhat believable. The story seems to have been picked up by others in the media, so it looks reasonable. However, I would counter your story with one I just read from UPI :
http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_News/2007/08/23/
dems_plan_to_monitor_spy_satellite_program/5435/
I don't think Democrats in Congress would allow Posse Comitatus to be circumvented.........it looks like they're out ahead of this story.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conservative does not mean that you identify with either party. It means you take a look at all the possible options and choose the one most aligned with being Conservative. For instance, the Immigration policy pushed forward by Mr. Bush recently was highly Liberal.......and surprising. So naturally, I was against it.
The Federal Deficit is scandalous, so naturally, I want it brought back into line. Balanced budgets are the rule in most states, and I think the same should be true for the Federal government. If this were the norm, then Big Government would quickly be whittled down to Little Government.
Being Conservative doesn't mean you're for or against war. It means that you analyze where a war might get you down the road, if you supported it. I support this one because it removed a dictator who has caused our country great pain for a long, long time. In Afghanistan, I supported the war there because it removed a brutal dictatorship that would have been worse than Saddam, had we let it stand.
I'm a pretty 'traditional values' kinda guy, Steve. Aren't most Conservatives?
Do tell. How have you all come to ignore the fact that the laws of physics simply did not apply, if one accepts the official fairy tale version of events? When was the last time you saw a steel-framed, high rise building collapse due to "pancaking" yet leave absolutely not one shred of evidence that such a thing had happened, while at the same time leaving massive evidence that an explosives-caused implosion had take place? Just curious.
Since you and your "conservative" buds are utterly convinced that false flag events never happen, and that the official fairy tale version is the only possible version to even consider, you must have some evidence to provide with regard to pancaked buildings, right? I really would like to see what you've got that has so completely convinced you that those buildings pancaked.
"I don't think Democrats in Congress would allow Posse Comitatus to be circumvented.........it looks like they're out ahead of this story."
It's already been done.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/10/18/211033/23
"Bret : "ALL of the Conservatives I know think 9/11 Conspiracy Theories are a joke"
Clark Kent : Do tell. How have you all come to ignore the fact that the laws of physics simply did not apply, if one accepts the official fairy tale version of events? When was the last time you saw a steel-framed, high rise building collapse due to "pancaking" yet leave absolutely not one shred of evidence that such a thing had happened, while at the same time leaving massive evidence that an explosives-caused implosion had take place? Just curious.
First, what motivation would a non-partisan 9/11 committee have to falsify their findings in front of the whole world, Clark? That would make no sense at all. I mean, Thomas Kean, Lee Hamilton, Bob Kerrey…………come on, those guys are solid………and lifelong Democrats. They have NOTHING to gain from making up stuff. Once again, I'll always believe them before I believe you or any other nutty Conspiracy Theorist, Clark.
"Since you and your "conservative" buds are utterly convinced that false flag events never happen, and that the official fairy tale version is the only possible version to even consider, you must have some evidence to provide with regard to pancaked buildings, right? I really would like to see what you've got that has so completely convinced you that those buildings pancaked."
Clark, its not that false flag events never occur, its just that the overwhelming preponderance of evidence suggests that it didn't happen on 9/11. Too many people would have had to be involved for this "operation" to have been successful (and quiet)………and to date, no one has ever come forward and said "Hey, I'm a CIA operative and I helped plan it"…..lol.
The technical questions you have about 9/11 and the pancaking of buildings was fully and completely put to rest on the History Channel debunking of August 20th. At that point, the pancaking occurred to your irrational cult of belief. Clark, face it – its over. You CT people have no credibility remaining.
""I don't think Democrats in Congress would allow Posse Comitatus to be circumvented.........it looks like they're out ahead of this story."
It's already been done.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/10/18/211033/23"
Come on Clark, haven't you learned anything about reputable sourcing? You quote the DailyKos as a source for ANYTHING? How do you expect to be taken seriously? It's a rag, with a negative reputation………..the Dan Rather of Leftist political blogs….lol.
Let's not be so naive, shall we? Why don't you do a bit of research into who the top dogs on that committee were, and then we'll talk.
"Clark, its not that false flag events never occur, its just that the overwhelming preponderance of evidence suggests that it didn't happen on 9/11."
Really? By whose standards? I've yet to see any such "overwhelming evidence." What I've actually seen are a lot of lies.
"
The technical questions you have about 9/11 and the pancaking of buildings was fully and completely put to rest on the History Channel debunking of August 20th."
Oh, please shower me with your brilliance then. Tell me how those buildings "pancaked" without leaving a shred of evidence that they'd done so. And, explain to me why they looked precisely like buildings that had been demolished with explosives. Can't wait for this one.
You wanna know something? Just because YOU are willing to accept utter nonsense doesn't mean that the utter nonsense is factual. Your opinion is not necessarily proven fact, believe it or not. I anxiously await being disproven by your "expert, scientific analysis," but believe me, I'm not the least bit dazzled by your worthless, ignorant opinion.
"Too many people would have had to be involved for this "operation" to have been successful (and quiet)………and to date, no one has ever come forward and said "Hey, I'm a CIA operative and I helped plan it"…..lol."
This is probably the lamest, stupidest "proof" that you nut bags bandy about. False flag events take decades to uncover, as a rule. Why should 9/11 be any different? Again, this is NOT "proof" that 9/11 was not another of those covert operations. It is, once again, your worthless, ignorant opinion, and nothing more.
"Come on Clark, haven't you learned anything about reputable sourcing"
Refute anything in that article, and you'll have me. Otherwise, enjoy the enlightenment. This isn't difficult to find. I just happen to think that the kos has a pretty good take on it. Read it from any site you wish. The song remains the same.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/09/26/bush.military/
Why is it, btw, that every time you knuckle draggers disagree with something, you attack the messenger? You can NEVER address the actual message, can you? What does that say to you?
"It's a rag, with a negative reputatio"
You're a fool. It's the #1 blog on the internets. You're completely welcome to offer your documentation to back your absurd claim. Let's see you discredit them, big guy. Knock yourself out.
Bret : "First, what motivation would a non-partisan 9/11 committee have to falsify their findings in front of the whole world, Clark?"
Clark Kent : Let's not be so naive, shall we? Why don't you do a bit of research into who the top dogs on that committee were, and then we'll talk.
Tom Kean was the Chairman of the 9/11 Commission, Clark. That's the ULTIMATE top dog, isn't it? Speaking of naivete, do you really consider Kean, Hamilton, Ben-Veniste, and Kerrey to be liars? If yes, why would these men do such a thing? What possible motivation would they have to lie? Are you Lefties really willing to eat your own, just to push a hateful, but unsubstantiated agenda?
Bret : "Clark, its not that false flag events never occur, its just that the overwhelming preponderance of evidence suggests that it didn't happen on 9/11."
Clark Kent : Really? By whose standards? I've yet to see any such "overwhelming evidence." What I've actually seen are a lot of lies.
Its all in the 9/11 Commission's report, if you care to read it. I'm guessing you haven't. All the items not covered in the report are covered in the History Channel's debunking documentary of August 20th…………good stuff. But I'm sure you CT folks will view it the same way as a werewolf views a silver bullet…..lol.
Bret : "The technical questions you have about 9/11 and the pancaking of buildings was fully and completely put to rest on the History Channel debunking of August 20th."
Clark Kent : Oh, please shower me with your brilliance then. Tell me how those buildings "pancaked" without leaving a shred of evidence that they'd done so. And, explain to me why they looked precisely like buildings that had been demolished with explosives. Can't wait for this one.
You wanna know something? Just because YOU are willing to accept utter nonsense doesn't mean that the utter nonsense is factual. Your opinion is not necessarily proven fact, believe it or not. I anxiously await being disproven by your "expert, scientific analysis," but believe me, I'm not the least bit dazzled by your worthless, ignorant opinion.
Clark, continue praying to a false god if you like, but I think most of your fellow CT followers have seen the error of their ways.
I often wondered what the former believers of the Jim Jones People's Temple Cult felt like the day after 900+ of them committed suicide in Guyana in 1979. Now I get to see a similar aftermath - minus the cyanide-laced Kool-Aid and the gruesome body cleanup, on Gather.com.
Bret : "Too many people would have had to be involved for this "operation" to have been successful (and quiet)………and to date, no one has ever come forward and said "Hey, I'm a CIA operative and I helped plan it"…..lol."
Clark Kent : This is probably the lamest, stupidest "proof" that you nut bags bandy about. False flag events take decades to uncover, as a rule. Why should 9/11 be any different? Again, this is NOT "proof" that 9/11 was not another of those covert operations. It is, once again, your worthless, ignorant opinion, and nothing more.
Clark, let me draw you a little picture : let's say that someone gets information about a President, about something they think he did wrong in the past. Since it seems reasonable, most folks believe it. However, the source dreamed it all up in his head, without any credible facts to back him up, and no corroboration. The guy reporting it discovers that his source is bogus, but continues to push the information as completely credible because of the prevailing wisdom of the time of "hey, we all know it's true, right?". Later, this hoax is uncovered, and all the perpetrators exposed.......some even lose their jobs over it. So now, a few years later, we're in the bookstore and we want to learn all about this event. Do we go to the Fiction shelf to find it, or do we go to the Factual History shelf?
The DailyKos is a funny, kooky little site. I love how nutty and 'way out' it can be. However, it is cartoon-like, at times. It should be used as an entertainment site, not a site for factual history.
Besides, Clark, the DailyKos article you quoted was just someone's opinion………and a bad opinion at that, plus it's from last year. How relevant is that?
Bret : "Come on Clark, haven't you learned anything about reputable sourcing"
Clark Kent : Refute anything in that article, and you'll have me. Otherwise, enjoy the enlightenment. This isn't difficult to find. I just happen to think that the kos has a pretty good take on it. Read it from any site you wish. The song remains the same.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/09/26/bush.military/
Why is it, btw, that every time you knuckle draggers disagree with something, you attack the messenger? You can NEVER address the actual message, can you? What does that say to you?
Knuckle-draggers, Clark? To whom are you referring? Is this a backhanded way of saying that you're the enlightened and we Conservatives aren't? I have to laugh if that's what you're amateurishly attempting.
First, Posse Comitatus has never been circumvented. The only time I've ever heard of anything remotely like what you're talking about, was when Eisenhower forced the Governor of Arkansas to use his troops to enforce de-segregation in the 50's. The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 will allow one state to use another state's National Guard (it wasn't called the National Guard in 1878, but that's what it is nowdays) for military purposes, but only if the two states in question sign a treaty amongst themselves formalizing this exchange in writing. Needless to say, it's never happened in the history of the United States.
Also, Clark, your story is from 2005. This entire situation has been fully vetted by a Democratic majority and has been found to have no merit whatsoever. So I've refuted it………….now, do I have you? LOL. I'm not holding my breath.
Bret : "It's a rag, with a negative reputation"
Clark Kent : You're a fool. It's the #1 blog on the internets. You're completely welcome to offer your documentation to back your absurd claim. Let's see you discredit them, big guy. Knock yourself out.
Clark, The DailyKos is #15 on the Net, not even close to the top sites. It has a very negative reputation – especially as the news source you seem to use it for. It is full of unsubstantiated opinions. I suppose you get all your real news from Jon Stewart, don't you? LMAO!
http://www.netscape.com/viewstory/2007/05/02/
top-25-most-influential-blogs-ranked-by-traffic/
?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebusinessmba.com%2F
articles%2Fmost-popular-blogs.html&frame=true
So Clark, I offered documentation to show you that The DailyKos is NOT the top-rated blog on the internet. It isn't.
They've already discredited themselves, Clark, and I'm happy to see them continue to do so. They just make you Lefties look more cartoon-like every day.
Readers, please excuse the length of my response, but the only way to counter these Left Wing nutjobs is to categorically refute EVERYTHING they try to pass off as legitimate. We can all see it isn't. Most of it is pure speculation, or their jaded opinions...........so forgive me for the length.
Bret
The Republican presidential front-runner also says he learned "the lesson of Vietnam." "Our nation should be slow to engage troops. But when we do so, we must do so with ferocity. We must not go into a conflict unless we go in committed to win. We can never again ask the military to fight a political war," Bush wrote. [AP, 11/15/99, reporting on Bush's biography A Charge To Keep]"
If Bush put all this out to the public he must believe it. WHY ARE WE IN IRAQ?
WHY ARE POLITICIANS IN CHARGE?
Read and learn:
http://911research.wtc7.net/post911/commission/index.html
"Its all in the 9/11 Commission's report, if you care to read it."
We've already established that the report is a joke. There is no proof of anything in that sham, except that the government lied to us once again. Btw, I'm sure you're keenly aware that the only reason Bush and Cheney ever agreed to testify (but not under oath, and not seperately, of course) was because they traded their bogus testimony for editing rights. Nobody saw the report until after the white house had decided what it would say. My, how "independent" and "bi-partisan," right?
You should really try to educate yourself about this stuff before you start spouting off. You carry about as if you've spent the past 6 years studying it, rather than me, yet you don't know anything about the most rudimentary aspects of it. So, you're the expert who knows nothing. No wonder you believe the official fairy tale nonsense.
"Clark, continue praying to a false god if you like, but I think most of your fellow CT followers have seen the error of their ways.
I often wondered what the former believers of the Jim Jones People's Temple Cult felt like the day after 900+ of them committed suicide in Guyana in 1979. Now I get to see a similar aftermath - minus the cyanide-laced Kool-Aid and the gruesome body cleanup, on Gather.com."
This isn't proof either. Shall we just go ahead and lay down the statement that you've really got nothing to offer? Can we finally just admit that, do you think, or are you going to continue pretending you have all the answers, and then provide nothing to back yourself up?
"The DailyKos is a funny, kooky little site. I love how nutty and 'way out' it can be. However, it is cartoon-like, at times. It should be used as an entertainment site, not a site for factual history.
Besides, Clark, the DailyKos article you quoted was just someone's opinion………and a bad opinion at that, plus it's from last year. How relevant is that?"
Refute it then. Refute the CNN article, and the kos article. Stop saying that you know everything, and then failing miserably to prove it. You simply spewing shit does not make the shit you spew factual, believe it or not. If CNN or Kos is lying about what's happened with posse comitatus, lay it out. Let's see your source. Otherwise, shut the hell up. I'm getting pretty sick of this infantile shit. Either put up or shut up.
"First, Posse Comitatus has never been circumvented."
Again, you spewing random shit is not "refutation." You provide nothing but your own opinion and heresay. If you've got the goods, produce them. Otherwise, you've got nothing but an opinion.
Meanwhile, here's what documented facts look like, just in case you aren't familiar with them:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Commissions_Act_of_2006
http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/ENGAMR511542006
http://www.netctr.com/milcommact.html
You see? Some people have opinions that are based on FACTS. Other people just have opinions based upon their own opinions and nothing else.
"Also, Clark, your story is from 2005. This entire situation has been fully vetted by a Democratic majority and has been found to have no merit whatsoever."
"HUGE! Bush Guts Posse Comitatus, Grabs National Guard! [ACTION UPDATE]
by Major Danby
Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 06:10:33 PM PDT"
Looks like 2006 to me. The law that opened the door for the gutting was the military commissions act of 2006, which is the same law that ended habeus corpus. Read sometime.
"Clark, The DailyKos is #15 on the Net, not even close to the top sites. "
You simp. I'm talking about political blogs. It looks like Arianna has passed him up, however.
http://www.mydd.com/story/2005/2/27/16243/2951
"It has a very negative reputation – especially as the news source you seem to use it for. It is full of unsubstantiated opinions. "
First, I want to see your proof that this is not a credible source. Everything that I've ever read there is heavily documented and linked, typically to MSM news sources.
Secondly, I don't go there for my news. I just happen to like his take on things, and the way that he provides so many links, so you can conduct some research on your own. Of course, you wouldn't know anything about that.
"I suppose you get all your real news from Jon Stewart, don't you? LMAO!"
Funny you should say that since a recent poll found that viewers of his program are the most news-savy people in the country. Fox viewers, btw, rank last.
"They've already discredited themselves, Clark, and I'm happy to see them continue to do so. "
You're a blithering idiot.
"but the only way to counter these Left Wing nutjobs is to categorically refute EVERYTHING they try to pass off as legitimate."
You haven't refuted a goddamned thing, you fool! Your opinion is not refutation of jack shit. You've offered nothing but pure speculation and jaded opinion, and a shameful does of your own stunning ignorance.
PNAC
"WHY ARE POLITICIANS IN CHARGE? "
The constitution made it so. Besides, the decision to war is a political decision.
Wow, apparently only Slade Gorton and Tim Roemer are "untainted"…..lol. So why would these two guys put their name on something you view as unbelievable as the 9/11 Commission Report?
Clark Kent : "This isn't proof either. Shall we just go ahead and lay down the statement that you've really got nothing to offer? Can we finally just admit that, do you think, or are you going to continue pretending you have all the answers, and then provide nothing to back yourself up?"
I had my doubts, but now you've squashed them to death………there is absolutely no way a True Believer will ever be brought back to earth. There is no way to cure you, Clark……..you've got the disease, and you've got it bad…lol. Category 5, for sure.
Bret : "First, Posse Comitatus has never been circumvented."
Clark Kent : Again, you spewing random shit is not "refutation." You provide nothing but your own opinion and heresay. If you've got the goods, produce them. Otherwise, you've got nothing but an opinion."
I will commend you this time – you tried hard to use somewhat reputable sourcing. So good job – but try to keep leaning towards the Center. You'll at least sound more reputable that way. However, your sources didn't even discuss the alleged circumvention of the Posse Comitatus Act. Not once that I saw.
The Wiki definition about the suspension of Habeus Corpus was interesting, however. I want you to know that I have no problem with the suspension of Habeus Corpus for those caught on the battlefield against the U.S. in a time of war. They aren't citizens of this country, so they shouldn't have the rights of a citizen. In that respect, I see no conflict with the Constitution, and neither do many Constitutional scholars (Lt. Col. Jeffrey Addicott – former JAG lawyer, John Yoo – Cal-Berkeley law professor, Glenn Sulmasy – US Coast Guard Academy law professor, Douglas W. Kmiec – Pepperdine University law professor, etc., etc., etc.,).
"First, I want to see your proof that this is not a credible source. Everything that I've ever read there is heavily documented and linked, typically to MSM news sources.
Secondly, I don't go there for my news. I just happen to like his take on things, and the way that he provides so many links, so you can conduct some research on your own. Of course, you wouldn't know anything about that."
Clark, come on. Even you can't be this simple-minded. The DailyKos is fun to read, but it's 99% opinions. That's like saying something, then quoting yourself as your own source………its stupidity at its stupidest. You can do better than this.
Bret : "They've already discredited themselves, Clark, and I'm happy to see them continue to do so. "
Clark Kent : You're a blithering idiot."
Don't get me wrong, Clark. I don't want The DailyKos or any other Left Wing rag to ever go away. They paint a ridiculous picture of you Lefties, and I want it to go on forever……lol. I go there for pure entertainment – almost as good as reading about The Bat Boy in the rags at the supermarket checkout. It's that funny.
Bret : "but the only way to counter these Left Wing nutjobs is to categorically refute EVERYTHING they try to pass off as legitimate."
Clark Kent : You haven't refuted a goddamned thing, you fool! Your opinion is not refutation of jack shit. You've offered nothing but pure speculation and jaded opinion, and a shameful does of your own stunning ignorance."
I know these smackdowns have got to hurt a sensitive Liberal like yourself. But you seem to like it – so I'll keep on administering them…..lol.
The CFR has long ago subverted both political parties into collectivist ideology; so the fact that half of the 9/11 Commission lackey whitewashers were Democrats means ZILCH.
I'm not sure there's anyone alive that could pass your test to be on the 9/11 Commission. When announced, I thought most were a little Left-leaning. I was absolutely sure the Left would love this group...........and apparently they were well received by many in the Lunatic Fringe at the time. However, once the report was issued and no "grassy knoll" conspiracies were uncovered, the Nutty Left went on the rampage.
Personally, I think its hilarious when Lefties don't have things go their way. Like spoiled little children, they throw a tantrum. Then the real fun begins.
A) Lack the ability to source documented information to back your opinions
B) Are far more inclined to believe mythical fantasies than logical lines of reason, based upon documented evidence.
"I know these smackdowns have got to hurt a sensitive Liberal like yourself. But you seem to like it – so I'll keep on administering them"
You're a pathetic joke. The only thing you've managed to smack down is your already heavily-disheveled credibility. You've proven to all that you cannot respond with substantive documentation. You've got nothing but opinion, and it's not even educated opinion at that. You're an ignorant fool.
Remember, I'm the guy that pushed you to clean up YOUR sourcing problems! You used to use the DailyKos as a source. At least now you're somewhat rehabilitated.
I don't have sourcing problems. The Daily Kos is as solid a source as I've ever seen in the form of a blog site. He links EVERYTHING that he says, and you can spend literally hours reading through all of the pertinent information that he provides to back his opinions.
I'm still waiting for you to refute something that he's posted that I've referred to, btw. I know that you SAID that it wasn't a credible source for information, but I've yet to see you actually PROVE that, as is often the case when you spew things that you cannot back.
You may choose to agree or disagree his opinions, but he doesn't make those opinions without backing them with rather robust documentation. I'd love to see what YOU consider credible sourcing. Given your penchant for believing things that simply are not true, and your great difficulty in providing documentation to back your opinions, I'm going to make a wild guess that your sources are not nearly as credible as kos.
You don't have sourcing problems the way Jason Blair didn't have sourcing problems.....LOL!
I shouldn't laugh, you're actually doing better lately.
Clark, The DailyKos is a blog. It's people writing in and voicing their opinions. Do you understand that someone could write in, voice his opinion, then come to Gather and actually quote themselves as a source? Using your logic, this is do-able.
Quoting The Kos is a lot different than quoting NPR, or the Guardian, or MSNBC. They just report the news. Their news is exactly that - news. That's why they're true sources for us when we want to make our point on Gather. Understand now?
I'm the one that said that to YOU. I also pointed out to you that Mark does a fantastic job of linking every published article of pertinence to his stories. Then, I asked you to show me an instance in which the core essence of his stories were not proven to be entirely factual. You may disagree with his OPINION, if you wish, but you do NOT have your own set of facts.
"Do you understand that someone could write in, voice his opinion, then come to Gather and actually quote themselves as a source? Using your logic, this is do-able. "
That's precisely what you do nearly 100% of the time you post here. You state your opinion, based upon nothing but your opinion, which is probably based upon nothing but your favorite political pundit's opinion, which may or may not be based in fact.
The bottom line difference between you and dailykos, however, is that Mark backs everything he says with published articles from traditional news sources. You do not. You provide nothing but your own opinions, devoid of any actual facts to back them up.
:"The Kos is a lot different than quoting NPR, or the Guardian, or MSNBC."
We've already covered this. I pointed this out to you more than once already. However, I've yet to see you refute the basis for any of his articles, more than likely because he references sources such as NPR, The Guardian, or MSNBC when he posts his opinions.
Btw, I thought NPR, The Guardian, and MSNBC were nothing but left wing propaganda sources? Every time I post something from one of those sources, I see one of you pathetic, factually challenged wing nuts toss it aside as useless, because of their so-called "liberal bias." Which is it? Are they liberal propaganda mouth pieces, or legitimate news sources?
Bret : ""Clark, The DailyKos is a blog."
CK : I'm the one that said that to YOU. I also pointed out to you that Mark does a fantastic job of linking every published article of pertinence to his stories. Then, I asked you to show me an instance in which the core essence of his stories were not proven to be entirely factual. You may disagree with his OPINION, if you wish, but you do NOT have your own set of facts."
Clark, for your next trick, are you going to point to my nose and tell me its called a 'nose'? This is too obvious for us to get into. The Kos is an opinion blog – not a news source to be quoted. Sometimes Markos quotes another blog to back his already jaded opinion. If you want to make a case built on solid facts and researched news stories, that doesn't seem like good sourcing, does it Clark?
"Do you understand that someone could write in, voice his opinion, then come to Gather and actually quote themselves as a source? Using your logic, this is do-able. "
That's precisely what you do nearly 100% of the time you post here. You state your opinion, based upon nothing but your opinion, which is probably based upon nothing but your favorite political pundit's opinion, which may or may not be based in fact.
Clark, what opinion web site do I go to, to do this?
Either you're lying to yourself (which I'm convinced you do daily) or you're trying to lie to me – which I won't tolerate.
When I want to make a point, I write my opinion in a Gather.com response bubble, then link you to the NEWS article that substantiates my opinion. Remember, this is a public site, and everyone can see for themselves how I respond.
"Btw, I thought NPR, The Guardian, and MSNBC were nothing but left wing propaganda sources? Every time I post something from one of those sources, I see one of you pathetic, factually challenged wing nuts toss it aside as useless, because of their so-called "liberal bias." Which is it? Are they liberal propaganda mouth pieces, or legitimate news sources?"
I have always held the opinion (mainly from reading and listening to them) that NPR, The Guardian, and MSNBC were Left-leaning………..and they are. However, they do research their news, to make sure it's at least marginally near the truth. But they do look at most news from at least a socialist point of view. The research is the important thing, though. The DailyKos and TruthOut.org are opinion blogs, not to be used as reference material. Just funny, kooky sites – nothing more.
You're a clueless idiot. Go to ANY of his postings, and count the number of published references that he includes on a given article. Then, go to those links and read the material provided. Are you really this stupid?
"Clark, what opinion web site do I go to, to do this?"
Personally, my best guess is that the opinion site that you derive your worthless, unfounded opinions from is your ass.
"When I want to make a point, I write my opinion in a Gather.com response bubble, then link you to the NEWS article that substantiates my opinion.
This is complete bullshit. I can't even believe you're saying this. I can't even count how many times I've asked you to back up one of your nonsensical opinions, and you either completely ignore the request, or you begin to spin and change the subject, and provide links to support your NEW opinion, such as the case when you stated that the Taliban was "weak." You're a fool.
"The DailyKos and TruthOut.org are opinion blogs, not to be used as reference material."
But, they're A-Ok when they use NPR, The Guardian, and MSNBC as sources, right? Because, both do, when the story calls for it. So, in other words, what you're saying here is that DailyKos and Truthout are unreliable sources of nothing but political hackery, and NPR, Guardian, and MSNBC are credible sources, but not when DailyKos and Truthout use them as sources, right? Got it. That makes a whole lot of sense now. Thanks for clearing that up.
Freak.
See, the whole problem here is that you've been caught once again with your soiled pants down around your ankles, and rather than be a man and admit that you were mistaken, you've chosen to begin yet another one of your endless, meandering, whimsical, ridiculous journeys of mind-numbing spin, diversion, and truth deflection.
I've caught you in this tactic before, so I'm frankly a bit surprised that you still use it around me. I guess you don't want anyone mistaking you for someone who's terribly bright.
What's really sad about this is that you seem, at times, like a reasonably articulate fellow, and you might even be marginally intelligent. But, when you go off into these mad spins in order to avoid having to admit an error, you look like nothing short of a dumbass. If you could just somehow find a way to grow the gonads to admit an error when you're called on it, you wouldn't be continually making such a fool of yourself now, would you? Food for thought.
Bret : ""Clark, what opinion web site do I go to, to do this?"
Clark Kent : Personally, my best guess is that the opinion site that you derive your worthless, unfounded opinions from is your ass."
So if this is so obvious, and I do it so often, name just ONE site or source. Just one. You can't, can you? Didn't think so……….
Bret : ""When I want to make a point, I write my opinion in a Gather.com response bubble, then link you to the NEWS article that substantiates my opinion.
Clark Kent : This is complete bullshit. I can't even believe you're saying this. I can't even count how many times I've asked you to back up one of your nonsensical opinions, and you either completely ignore the request, or you begin to spin and change the subject, and provide links to support your NEW opinion, such as the case when you stated that the Taliban was "weak." You're a fool."
I know you don't like it when I back up my opinion with a well-researched news story that agrees with my opinion, but that's just how I operate. You don't, and that's what sets us apart. The Taliban commentary and my news stories refuting your claim, were just more proof that this is how I operate on Gather. Too bad if you don't like it because I'll continue operating in an ethical manner whether you do or not.
Bret : ""The DailyKos and TruthOut.org are opinion blogs, not to be used as reference material."
Clark Kent : But, they're A-Ok when they use NPR, The Guardian, and MSNBC as sources, right? Because, both do, when the story calls for it. So, in other words, what you're saying here is that DailyKos and Truthout are unreliable sources of nothing but political hackery, and NPR, Guardian, and MSNBC are credible sources, but not when DailyKos and Truthout use them as sources, right? Got it. That makes a whole lot of sense now. Thanks for clearing that up."
But, but, but…………Jesus, Clark, get ahold of yourself man.
I don't know how I can explain this any better way unless I draw you a crayon picture : The Kos and TruthOut.org are opinion blogs. NOT NEWS SOURCES.
News sources are like what you see on your TV at night, Clark. You know, those stations with reporters and camera crews and stuff like that. Those people work for a living and their stories are fact-checked. Opinion blogs are not. Get it now?
I can only guess that you were just too enraged by my opinion to think straight. But isn't that exactly what you Lefties always do when you can't get total agreement?
Late again. Brett performs his pratfalls, mutters gibberish, makes his ugly faces, and the laughter is already died down by the time I get to my seat.
Bush is repudiated by two thirds of the nation; his lies and his incompetence exposed to the whole world, and fools like Bret claim that he is abused worse than Clinton, the person who demonstrated how government can work effectively.
Kent, I hope you are properly ashamed of yourself for "bringing this country down".
What rational meaning can be derived from a statement of such petulant idiocy?
I truly believe you are correct! This probably explains why they breathe through their mouths and drag their knuckles on the ground when they walk!