- Six teenagers drown in the Red River in Louisiana. Three each from two families. None knew how to swim.
- Place your bets: Can the Texas Rangers possibly blow an eight game lead down the stretch? I'm a little nervous about that.
- And the "auction" of the Rangers that occurs today is incredibly confusing.
- Obama is sticking to his end of August timeline to get out of Iraq. There were 144,000 troops there when he took office. Soon there will be next to nothing. That's a huge campaign promise that was kept.
- Now get us out of Afghanistan. (I know I say that every week, but I think it more often than that.)
- I was in a Fort Worth post office yesterday. When did every postal worker get so friendly? I mean eerily friendly.
- Sarah Palin was on Fox News Sunday last weekend and uttered the phrase "In Alaska, we know only dead fish go with the flow." Host Chris Wallace acted like he had never heard that line before (even though she famously used it in her governor resignation speech.) How do I know that and he doesn't?
- I got to be checked out by a Walmart gal who acted exactly likely the Asian character "Jodi" who had a minor dope smoking girlfriend role in Knocked Up.
- Falling 500 feet to death with your wife while hiking in Colorado is not a way I want to go. Horrible.
- I woke up late this morning. I'm beginning not to trust my alarm which isn't a good feeling.
- Isn't Deal or No Deal a show that could take place in about five minutes instead of thirty?
- I've heard it's "Shark Week" but it would take me a bit to find that channel.
- I bought TCU/Baylor tickets yesterday.
- I don't know who Sophie Turner is, but she went to the beach. Hey, now.
- Breaking: At least three dead in Connecticut workplace shooting this morning. I fear the workplace shooting. Edit: Body count is up to 9 by noon.
- I think I fixed my computer virus by tinkering in the Registry. Always a dangerous proposition.
.jpg)
45 comments:
Barry Boy,
Obama is ending the "combat" mission of Iraq and will still be leaving 50k (20+%) troops there for years. It will take years to bring all out equipment home and billions of dollars. Heck, last week you posted about the $33 billion that was approved just recently to fund the war.
This is just another way to say that we are doing something about the war and bringing troops home when we are looking at another Korea type situation.
Now, let's just not forget about all the troops that will now be forgotten by the administration that are staying in Iraq.
We're finally getting out of the country we should never have invaded (Iraq), now we're stuck in the one with the original problem (Afghanistan). This is a no-win proposition and I hope Gen. Petraus will figure a way to get out of.
"Obama is trumpeting that he has "kept his promise" on the Iraq withdrawal timetable, likely in the hopes that anti-war critics won't point out that if he had kept his original campaign promise, all American troops would now have left Iraq." - Huffington Post
Plus, 50,000 American troops (not quite "next to nothing") will remain. According to Obama's plan, all American troops will be withdrawn from Iraq by the end of 2011 -- the same deadline that George W. Bush set in 2008.
* None of the adults knew how to swim so there was no one to rescue the teenagers. WHAT level of cretin does a parent have to be to take their non-swimming children to a lake/river/ocean when none of the adults accompanying the children are NON-SWIMMERS? Just more proof that not all people should be permitted to breed.
* Obama is not honoring a campaign promise. Obama is merely not screwing up the time line set by US President GEORGE BUSH and Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki when they agreed to the U.S.-Iraq Status of Forces Agreement. Typical of Obama, he takes the credit for the work done by Bush just as easily and surely as he blames Bush for the screw-ups caused by Obama and his posse. Obama is such a weasel I find myself more disgusted by the people who buy his load of crap than I do Obama spreading crap.
"That's a huge campaign promise that was kept" Really. Are you serious? How soon you liberal weenies forget that he promised he would get the troops home by the summer he was elected. Remember that? Of course not, you're too busy trying to figure out how to program your DVR for The View!!
910 - Everyone wishes they knew in 2003 what we know now. 20/20 hindsight is easy. In 2003, everyone, including Democrats and the UN (the "consensus" if you will,) knew that Iraq had WMD, that they aided terrorists, and that America was their prime target.
Given that information, what decision should a President make? Go through through the UN? They tried it. Diplomacy? Tried it. Warnings? Tried it. So, given the information at hand in 2003, what should the President do?
BG,
The Rangers' auction is tomorrow (Wednesday). Ever thought of buying the new Mrs. a ball club for a late wedding present?
DF Tom Hicks
Today's Pic... Great!! Woke me up..
typo/continuity repair kit...
"when **** ALL of the adults accompanying the children are NON-SWIMMERS?"
Just A FEW FACTS for Loony Leftist Liberals about WHO got the US into the second Iraq War in 2003.
Perhaps, Bush should not have listened to the dire warnings about Iraq that were issued, since 1998, by ALL the top Democrats but you and the other Loony Leftist Liberals would be hissing and spitting had Bush not done something and, as declared by the Democrat leadership, Hussein made a first strike using WMDs.
In an attempt to keep from, in the future, proving your ignorance regarding the war in Iraq, you would well served to WATCH the VIDEO and make special note of the dates the Democrats are decrying Iraq and Saddam Hussein is a threat to the World and U.S.
1998 - Medeleine Albright, Sec. of State - Clinton Admin. claimed that Iraq's use of weapons of mass destruction against the U.S. is the greatest security threat and a threat against which the U.S. must stand firm.
1998 - Bill Clinton, while POTUS, claimed the U.S. could not continue with an ambiguous third route will Iraq continued to develop WMDs.
1998 - Howard Dean, DNC Chairman and Former Governor (D-VT) had no problem declaring that Iran and Iraq were "International Outlaws" about which something must be done.
1998 - Sandy Berger, National Security Adviser, Clinton Admin declared that Hussein would rebuild his arsenal of WMDs and that Hussein would use WMDs.
Keep in mind those statements were made PRIOR to 9/11.
No one forced/coerced, then Rep. (D-CA), Nancy Pelosi, in 2002, to declare on "Meet The Press" that "Saddam Hussein certainly has chemical and biological weapons, there's no question about that."
2002 - Jay Rockefeller freely made the statement on the Senate Floor: "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will have them within the next 5 years." He further warns that; "We have always underestimated the progress Saddam Hussein has been able to make in the development of weapon of mass destruction."
There is more and I do mean MUCH more. Watch the video before you shoot off your mouth. Stop eating the BS being fed by the likes of MSNBC, CNN and the Daily Kos and there is a chance you will LEARN a few FACTS.
Incidentally, claiming the Democrats were dumb enough to be duped by Bush and his Clueless Crew is not a very good defense and makes the argument that the Democrats are DUMBER than "W".
Wordkyle: Actually the UN was not at a consensus for waging war on Iraq. One of the big problems President Bush faced during the build up for Iraq was not getting authorization from the UN security council and choosing to go at it alone.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/diplomacyend_03-17-03.html
When looking at these two wars it must never be forgotten that Afghanistan was started to catch Osama Bin Lauden and Iraq was started on gerrymandered intelligence and bold faced lies to the American People
shark week is on the discovery channel
May all of Obama's wonderful campaign promises be announced from Gitmo.
Hobbes - the consensus I referred to was the belief that Iraq had WMD. (But I'm sure you knew that.) As for "going it alone," that misstatement has been dealt with before in this forum. Several dozen nations were part of the multinational force (hence the name.)
As for your last line, I'll simply ask you to support your statements with data, if you can. We wouldn't want anyone to mistake them for mindless canards fueled by ignorance.
You liberals. Gay rights, homeless rights, minority rights, women's rights, animal rights, and on and on. But the rights of hundreds of thousands of people being murdered and tortured by a dictator and whoa, stay away. Not our fight, get out. Since when is it wrong to help the defenseless and persecuted.
Much better pic today!!
Dear Mzchief...... you hit the nail on the head (as usual)however, I do disagree with you on one point.....the pork tamales at MAS are much better than the chicken :)
“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, the missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.”
Sen. Hillary Clinton, Oct. 10, 2002
For those who do not know, biological and chemical weapons ARE weapons of mass distruction.
On a more important note...the link on that Sophie girl was outstanding. Thanks
The "eerily friendly" postal worker situation is probably just the calm before the disgruntled storm. The organization is bleeding money like a butchered hog, and it won't be too long before the overworked masses "go postal" as the saying goes
I'm just sayin'
I don't understand the Rangers' auction, either. Seems like it should be limited to the players in the original sale bid. Now it's open to anybody with a few hundred million lying around. And what happens if the creditors don't like the result of the auction...do they file suits and restraining orders again? And then we repeat the whole process?
Your comment about Deal or No Deal could apply to almost any of the non-scripted "reality" programs, where they try to increase the drama with lights and music, and lingering camera shots of people acting as if they're on a soap opera
Idiocracy I tells ya!
Bosnia was ok to send troops to because Bill Clinton was President. And the criticism of making war that was radiating from most of the TV news stations has went away since the Kenyan was elected to office.
10:58 -
It's not wrong to hlep the defenseless and persecuted, but it is wrong to lie about why we are going into a war..... and to help the defenseless and persecuted was not even mentioned at the time.
If we fought on behalf of the defenseless and persecuted world-wide, how many wars would we be fighting right now? Too many to count. We don't have the resources to do that everywhere, as honorable as that might seem.
Wordkyle: I still don't understand how you believe that a consensus was reached when a vote in the UN was never held. I would speculate that a consensus against imperialism would have emerged if a vote actually was taken.
As for my Iraq and Afghanistan comments I understand your disagreement with my personal commentary, but I don't believe in the case of the Iraq war that I'm speaking in hyperbole.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/06/world/middleeast/06intel.html?hp
You guys go ahead and talk amongst yourself. Maybe you can agree on a name to call those who have a opinion different from yours. It makes your argument so much stronger!!!!!!
But don't carry on too long, it leads to self-righteousness as in the Mzchief kind.
Thumbs up to you, Hobbes.
1:00 - It only took, a douchebag like you, two sentences to stoop to the name calling that you accused other people of doing. I saw facts and links and didn't see anything self-righteous in MZ's comments.
MZ is right, you haters are eat-up with jealousy. Keep talking your sh*t 'cause you're just making MZ look better.
Can the Rangers blow it?
Is the Pope catholic?
Hobbes - The link you provided was from the New York Times (certainly no friend of Bush) about a partisan report designed to malign Bush during the 2008 Presidential election -- yet the word "lie" is not used once. The article, casting Bush in the worst possible light, merely accuses him of "overstating the dangers" when Democrats said as much or more based on the same information Bush had. Wrong? Maybe. Did anybody lie? No.
As for the UN and WMD, in 2002 UN inspectors could not account for anthrax stockpiles which they knew existed as recently as 1998. The UN Security Council, including some Arab states, unanimously (15-0) approved resolution 1441 which specifically mentioned Iraq's "proliferation" of WMD. So did the UN think Iraq had WMD? Apparently so.
Always glad to see a polarizing issue commented on so thoroughly by all the usual suspects, however, having been to Iraq in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom, I'm with those who wonder, why'd we go?
Many cried out about the perceivede threat to the USA from WMD, no question there. Real smart people Americans depended on were wrong, that sucks, and many American families have been profoundly impacted by that.
I don't think you can apply the filter of hindsight to the decision to go to war. Many state-sponsored terrorist nations still persist in the world, if we were looking to make a regime change in an unfriendly to America part of the world, then success in Iraq is a first step, but when do we go after other bad guys with actual WMDs and open hostility to America?
Wordkyle: Look in the middle of the article where it mentions that the first report came out three years before and states faulty intelligence in the decision to go to war. Sorry I couldn't find it. I probably like yourself can't spend all day in debate. Also if you remember editorials were placed within the New York Times at the buildup sighting the intelligence concerning yellow cake uranium and calling for action. And really, calling the New York Times partisan is beneath you. I'm sure your intelligent enough to recognize liberal media articles, but the New York times isn't Salon, Huffingtonpost, or Fox News.
In the end its not about Democrats or Republicans though, it's about imperialism in the name of farce. There were no WMD's and that is where the lie is. The Iraq war has less legs to stand on then the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution.
Hey Barry,
I found the Mayan Civilization that was supposedly extinct, they are on the strip in Vegas handing out business cards for naked women.
Hobbes - Of all the things you've said, implying that the New York Times is not partisan is the funniest. There's lots and lots and LOTS of evidence I could cite, but I'll stick with one item for now. Since 1960, the New York Times has endorsed the Democrat candidate in every single presidential election. That's 100% support for Democrats over five decades, in case you're counting. Not partisan?
RTMT = 9.75
Drowning, in the Red River? Why didn't they just stand up?
Sophie Turner. Lovely pic...except, uh, is there a little something extra down there?
Just wonderin'...
Congratulations to Gabe Keese the new assistant principal at Carson Elementary.
Welcome back to Decatur
Do you guys who keep saying that EVERYONE said there were WMD's in Iraq ever stop to think that they were saying it BECAUSE BUSH SAID THERE WERE? If they were getting briefings (think about the word - brief is in there) that were slanted, incorrect, or outright lies, of course they would then say something had to be done. They BELIEVED the president and thought he would not lie about something so serious. My gosh, even the evil Hillary Clinton was supporting the Bush administration. Do you think every senator or congressperson has their own CIA or NSA with which they can independently verify what the president says or what Colin Powell said? Criminy, the UN inspectors said he didn't have any, but we just didn't want to believe them because the UN is evil, too. Well, they were right, Bush was wrong, and the Democrats and media were spineless for not challenging him on it. What do you want to bet that if Obama made similar claims the Republicans would fall in line the way the Democrats did and support him? I think we all know what would happen, don't we? By the way, since Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9-11, what exactly was the precipitating factor that made us go into Iraq and not one of the multitude of other nations that actually DO have WMD's? Why then, why there? If Bush had focused on Afghanistan and bin Laden instead of messing with Iraq, we would most likely be rid of him and out of Afghanistan by now. For some of you to still blindly accept Iraq as a necessary thing leads me to believe you are as dumb as the proverbial box of rocks.....
8:44, From Wikpedia: "The Halabja poison gas attack (Kurdish: Kîmyabarana Helebce) was a genocide massacre that took place on March 16, 1988, during the closing days of the Iran–Iraq War, when chemical weapons were used by the Iranian and Iraqi government forces in the Kurdish town of Halabja in Iraqi Kurdistan.
The attack quickly killed thousands of people (around 5,000 dead) and injured around 11,000, most of them civilians.[1][2] The incident, which has been officially defined as an act of genocide against the Kurdish people in Iraq,[3] is the largest chemical weapons attack directed against a civilian-populated area in history" Go to Wikpedia for their sources numbered in the above text. And take a look at the dead laying in the streets. Poisoness gas is a weapon of mass destruction.
844 - Okay, I want to be clear on this...You're claiming that the Democrats in Congress said all those things that I linked to earlier, because they got their information from George Bush? I guess that reflects the wonderful cooperative relationship that Bush had with Congressional Democrats, to the point where they accepted his word on everything, and voted according to his wishes.
First of all, I won't bother addressing how Bush made the Democrats say those things in 1998, before he took office. That's just too much evil genius power. I'm also not sure how Bush forced Al Gore to claim in 2002 that Iraq had WMD.
(In reality, Democrats got their intelligence from the same sources that Bush did, not from Bush himself.)
I would say that it was a good try, 844, but nah...it really wasn't that good.
War is outdated, we have more civilized ways to get what we want. Anyone who resorts to violence shows a lack of mental growth and intelligence.
1047 - You're absolutely right. When the less intelligent who resort to violence beat the crap out of the more intelligent, the more intelligent are displaying their civility and mental growth.
To anonymous 10:58...
It is a violation of international law for any nation to attempt to remove from power a head of government or government for merely torturing or persecuting its citizens. The US led coalition was well within the parameters set forth by international law to invade Iraq and topple Hussein and his government because it was determined by unanimous passage in 2002 of United Nations Security Council Resolution 144I that Iraq proved a grave threat to the World and especially so to the Mid-East region.
********************************
To Hobbes @ 3:48...
Seemingly, the New York Times had a better source than did the United Nations Security Council and US Senators, from both sides of the aisle, in 2001-2002. What a shame NYT kept their source to themselves.
From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D-FL), Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-CT), Rep. Harold Ford (D-TN), & Rep. Tom Lantos (D-CA), among others.
“This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of an illicit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies.”
Just in case you were unaware, at the time Sen. Graham wrote the letter to Bush, Graham was the Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.
Source
If you bother to read the source, make note of ALL the DATES and statements made by leading Democrats who supported the US invasion of Iraq.
If "W" lied or was wrong about WMD, he was joined by most, if not all, prominent Democrats at the time. Keep in mind, it was the DEMOCRATS who started, in 1998, beating the drum of Something must be done to stop Iraq and Hussein. and they continued beating the drum until the moment the invasion got a bit dicey and proved to be more than a stroll through the park. That sounds about right for the "cut-and-run" mentality and selective memory that is endemic to Looney Leftist Liberals.
wordkyle...
Congratulations on another valiant attempt at presenting FACTS to those who have been sooooo brainwashed, by the Loony Leftist Liberals, they have, seemingly, been rendered incapable of comprehending FACTS.
Thank you for doing all the heavy lifting. I am still on vacay. I will be in Ogunquit, Maine, for a few more weeks (perhaps, a few extra weeks in Deleware if I can find a cute cottage to rent in Rehoboth or Dewey Beach). Keep up the good work.
Just stay there. Do us all a favor, you pompous windbag.
To anonymous 9:47...
Soooooo, your reaction to someone supplying FACTS is to call them a "pompous windbag."
You keep proving, with your comments, that jealousy is a MENTAL disease.
You REALLY need to get over me being me and get on with you becoming someone you can like/respect.
mzchief - Thanks for the kind words. Have fun and come back with a good tan. (Do people tan in New England?) Let us know how the crab puffs and crab cakes are.
Mzchief and Wordkyle.. thank you BOTH for providing all the facts and references that support your comments.
Post a Comment