GOP fundraiser to feature Cheney

[Hampton Follies]

Bad guys? You mean Big DC and GW?

Flipped Out wrote:

<quoted text>
Looky here,the big Lib must have spent a few days reading up on the fluffington blog.Isn't she the lady that ran for governor of California? So close! She almost won!
Just to let you know where I stand. I have no devotion to Bush;I do have a devotion to the President of the United States. Except in the case of Clinton,when he pointed his finger in my face and lied. Kind of like Pete Rose. Otherwise there isn't a President I haven't liked while he was in office.Even Nixon was able to keep me on his side since he had the dignity to resign for the good of the Country.
I don't view Afganistan and Iraq as seperate wars.
To me,we are fighting a "global war against Islamist Facism".They are merely battles.
You state the police know and are fighting the true enemy...that is insane! The police have a hard time knowing who is the bad guy amongst the civilian population.Example: A policeman pulls over a speeder,walks up to the driver side window and asked for ID.The driver shoots him and speeds off.Had the officer known he was dealing with a murderer,he would have handled the situation differently.
Policeman are in danger constantly.Whether it be a high speed chase an assasin or a kid high on drugs that is uncontrollable. We had an officer approach a street corner drug dealer and another person snuck up from behind and shot him in the back of the head. How often has a domestic situation gone awry?
I suggest you re-examine your response and ask yourself this question. If I blame the President for every military death do I also blame the Mayor for every law enforcement death?
Rather than blame America for this war,how about blaming the bad guys for this war!

[Flipped Out]

Hampton Follies wrote:

Bad guys? You mean Big DC and GW?
<quoted text>

You are putting words in my mouth.
That is not what I meant.

It is you that thinks they are the bad guys.
Just say what you mean and stop talking in riddles.

[Flipped Out]

Drew wrote:

<quoted text>
As opposed to you, an air-headed conservative, who pontificates GOP talking points and impugnes someone's personal dignity without even knowing that person from Adam? For the record, I am neither liberal nor conservative; I am a moderate, an Independent voter. My views wax conservative on some issues, more liberal on others.
How do you know that I don't pray for success and the safety of the troops? Truth is, you have no clue. You rely on the safety of your computer screen to fire off your snarky vitriol at anyone who doesn't see the world through your elephant-framed glasses. No, for you it seems to be much easier to mindlessly parrot the squawks from the right-leaning media and do what they do best - get louder and more insulting when presented with evidence you cannot refute.
I do not fear the terrorists, nor do I fear this war. I fear what this "war" is exacting in human and financial costs, and in cost to America's moral authority and global standing. Right now, the costs are excruciatingly high on all fronts. Terrorists, as we saw in Oklahoma City, can strike at any time, at any place. If you are confident in your faith, death is just a passage.
You don't have an alegiance to Bush, but you do the President? So do those who don't agree with Bush. My point, and the points of othes which you fail to "swat out of the park," is the current President and VP have presided over an administration that has done a tremendous amount of harm to American civil liberties in the name of "justice" and "national security;" have created a war with no exit strategy, and toppled a dictator (ruthless though he may have been) with no real plan for a new government to take its place; failed to accurately assess the sentiments of the Iraqi people, or their cultural heritage; sent in a woefully-undermanned force; and have diverted precious resources that could have brought bin Laden to justice years ago.
No, sir, I do not have any respect for THIS President or VP. I still DO respect tremendously the office of President and VP, and I can only hope and pray that - should it either be Obama OR McCain - that they look at what Bush/Cheney did and EARNESTLY endeavor to do a better job.

OK! Moderate. Which ever way the wind blows.
I guess you were for the war before you were against it. LOL!!

So Bush and Cheney have harmed your civil liberties? How so? Are you paranoid or something?
I haven't heard of a single instance where they have overstepped the boundaries and abused the laws. Unless maybe you and your ACLU buddies are concerned for the terroists at Gitmo. Are you worried they might not get their 3 squares a day and be denied their rights as desribed in OUR Constitution.

For your information: The cost of this war is worth every penny if it saves American lives at home. In five years,we have yet to spend what the attacks on 9-11-01 cost our economy. What do you think a similar or even worse attack would do to our economy?

I agree wholeheartedly in the hope Obama/McCain can do a better job.
My biggest beef with the Republican'ts has been their spending over the past 7+ years! I also blame the Democraps for the spending.

President Bush's priorities changed on 9-11-01 and I understand this. However,he allowed too much frivilous spending by Congress,I would have liked more veto of Congress' earmarks.

Hindsight is always right.

[Skrilla]

1.The police are out here to do one thing: To enforce the laws of this here United States of America. You are equating situations with the mission, that's like apples to oranges. 2. The objective in Afghanistan was clear, to bring Bin Laden to justice and to eradicate Al Queda. 3. The war in Iraq was to: Destroy Saddam because he was in with Al Queda, had WMD's and was preparing to use them against us. When no WMDs were found, and no links with Al Queda could be found (In fact Bin Laden hated Saddam for being secular), the mission turned to bringing democracy and order to Iraq. Meanwhile, the Taliban retreats, licks their wounds, and now are coming back full blast. Say what you want, this situation is screwed up and our military is paying the price. A global war is fine when you have global resources. America has to look to it's own now. Looky here bushie, my devotion is to God and country, not one office, not one person. If you want to devote yourself to this trainwreck of a presidency, that's your right. BTW, I don't read the Huffington blog, I read various books and articles, watch the news (even that "fair and balanced" FOX hee hee, snort, snort), listen to discussions from people engaged in intelligent debate,(conservative, liberal, and other) and then I come to my own conclusions. See how that works? there, I knew you could.

Flipped Out wrote:

<quoted text>
Looky here,the big Lib must have spent a few days reading up on the fluffington blog.Isn't she the lady that ran for governor of California? So close! She almost won!
Just to let you know where I stand. I have no devotion to Bush;I do have a devotion to the President of the United States. Except in the case of Clinton,when he pointed his finger in my face and lied. Kind of like Pete Rose. Otherwise there isn't a President I haven't liked while he was in office.Even Nixon was able to keep me on his side since he had the dignity to resign for the good of the Country.
I don't view Afganistan and Iraq as seperate wars.
To me,we are fighting a "global war against Islamist Facism".They are merely battles.
You state the police know and are fighting the true enemy...that is insane! The police have a hard time knowing who is the bad guy amongst the civilian population.Example: A policeman pulls over a speeder,walks up to the driver side window and asked for ID.The driver shoots him and speeds off.Had the officer known he was dealing with a murderer,he would have handled the situation differently.
Policeman are in danger constantly.Whether it be a high speed chase an assasin or a kid high on drugs that is uncontrollable. We had an officer approach a street corner drug dealer and another person snuck up from behind and shot him in the back of the head. How often has a domestic situation gone awry?
I suggest you re-examine your response and ask yourself this question. If I blame the President for every military death do I also blame the Mayor for every law enforcement death?
Rather than blame America for this war,how about blaming the bad guys for this war!

[Skrilla]

Thank you, you've said it much better that I could.

Drew wrote:

<quoted text>
As opposed to you, an air-headed conservative, who pontificates GOP talking points and impugnes someone's personal dignity without even knowing that person from Adam? For the record, I am neither liberal nor conservative; I am a moderate, an Independent voter. My views wax conservative on some issues, more liberal on others.
How do you know that I don't pray for success and the safety of the troops? Truth is, you have no clue. You rely on the safety of your computer screen to fire off your snarky vitriol at anyone who doesn't see the world through your elephant-framed glasses. No, for you it seems to be much easier to mindlessly parrot the squawks from the right-leaning media and do what they do best - get louder and more insulting when presented with evidence you cannot refute.
I do not fear the terrorists, nor do I fear this war. I fear what this "war" is exacting in human and financial costs, and in cost to America's moral authority and global standing. Right now, the costs are excruciatingly high on all fronts. Terrorists, as we saw in Oklahoma City, can strike at any time, at any place. If you are confident in your faith, death is just a passage.
You don't have an alegiance to Bush, but you do the President? So do those who don't agree with Bush. My point, and the points of othes which you fail to "swat out of the park," is the current President and VP have presided over an administration that has done a tremendous amount of harm to American civil liberties in the name of "justice" and "national security;" have created a war with no exit strategy, and toppled a dictator (ruthless though he may have been) with no real plan for a new government to take its place; failed to accurately assess the sentiments of the Iraqi people, or their cultural heritage; sent in a woefully-undermanned force; and have diverted precious resources that could have brought bin Laden to justice years ago.
No, sir, I do not have any respect for THIS President or VP. I still DO respect tremendously the office of President and VP, and I can only hope and pray that - should it either be Obama OR McCain - that they look at what Bush/Cheney did and EARNESTLY endeavor to do a better job.

[Drew]

No...not a follower of the wind. Rather, I tack to the middle of the road. I was never for the war, and have written my Congressmen and Senators to end it ASAP. That doesn't mean that I don't support the troops fighting the war; they are doing what they were ordered to do. I don't believe that war funding bills should devolve into political grandstanding measures.

However, I have a REAL problem with the fearmongering that Bush/Cheney & Co. have used to justify their actions. I also have a problem with them branding as "unpatriotic" anyone who has the stones to stand up to their bullying and question their motives. If their motives are so good and true, why couch them in so much secrecy?

Hmmm...what civil liberties were challenged? Warrantless wiretapping; the desire (wrapped in "Patriot Act" bunting) to secretly examine bank records, library records, and other private records; the sidestepping of Geneva Convention accords for the treatment of POWs thru the abuses seen both at Abu Ghraib and Gitmo. Other outcomes of the secrecy of Bush/Cheney? The outing of a CIA operative; use of torture methods like waterboarding; a lack of honesty with the American people throughout the "war." The simple fact is that, when America refuses to abide by international laws and treaties, she loses any moral standing she might have had. When her leaders stoop to the level of those they despise (the terrorists) to "extract information" from them, they are no better than those in custody.

Actually, the costs of 9/11 (caused by an attack materminded by Osama bin Laden and carried out by 19 Arabterrorists - 15 Saudis, but 0 Iraqis) has been calculated in the billions; the "Iraq War" is fast closing in on $1 trillion in costs for direct combat operations, treatment of wounded veterans, etc., plus the casualties (American, coalition, militants, and Iraqi civilians) have FAR exceeded the 3,000 or so killed that September day. That is FAR above what 9/11 cost us.

For five years, people have criticized Bush/Cheney on their war leadership. For 7 years, the White House and the COngress have been ripped on fiscal mismanagement. There are problems in our economy that could cause a meltdown no matter how many Islamic extremists are rounded up. That's not hindsight; that's a consistent choice on their part to ignore the facts on the ground, and the perspectives of those who might actually know more than they do. Arrogance prevented Bush from seeing the forest for the trees. His whole "Mission Accomplished" photo-op publicity stunt proves that - and now look at the humble pie he is being served because of that arrogance.

[Flipped Out]

I will respond to your rants and complaints based on mis-information tomorrow.
Today is July 4th.I intend to honor this Holiday in a way it is meant to be observed.

In closing,I would just like to say: Happy 4th of July!!

[Drew]

Flipped Out wrote:

I will respond to your rants and complaints based on mis-information tomorrow.
Today is July 4th.I intend to honor this Holiday in a way it is meant to be observed.
In closing,I would just like to say: Happy 4th of July!!

Likewise. I just got back from a family cookout where red, white, and blue was in abundance; patriotic songs were sung; and we ended the (somewhat rainy) day with a fireworks display. Cheers, amigo!

Just don't forget that loving one's country and disapproving of its leaders' actions are NOT mutually exclusive.

Nothing I mentioned is a misinformed "rant and complaint." It's all documented in the 9-11 Commission report and other sources, which came from nonpartisan review committees.

[Drew]

Skrilla wrote:

Thank you, you've said it much better that I could.<quoted text>

No problem. Flipped Out can't stand it when the irrefutable evidence is stacked against his arguments. "Hitting us out of the park"...more like going down swinging, for there's no joy in Flipped Out's Mudville tonight.

[Flipped Out]

Drew wrote:

<quoted text>
No problem. Flipped Out can't stand it when the irrefutable evidence is stacked against his arguments. "Hitting us out of the park"...more like going down swinging, for there's no joy in Flipped Out's Mudville tonight.

I've got Drew's,
You've got all wrong blues.

After baseball,beer and ribs on the bun,
I am sitting rootin' for another Orioles' run.

In a perfect world there would be no need for war.
War is a fact of life.It is what we humans do.A look back in time proves my point.Therefore we must win.If we pull out and retreat it will only embolden our enemies.

Like the Israelis say: If they lay down their weapons there will be peace. If we lay down our weapons we will be destroyed. Bush/Cheney are not trying to scare you.They are telling you like it is.No one wants war. Everyone is afraid of war. Anyone who isn't is just a blood thristy fool.

You state the cost of 9-11 to our economy is in the billions.How many billions? There is a big difference between 5 bil and 900 bil.The cost to the airline industry after being grounded the week after was enormous. The loss in values to the stock market was 3 trillion dollars!! You say we lost 3000 lives. We are still losing(lives) first responders to illness from the attacks. How many children now must go on without a parent? How many spouses lost someone? Can you look them in the eye and say this war isn't necessary? To avenge their losses alone is justification for this war. Our fellow Americans have lost a great deal and deserve nothing less of us.

I ask you to show one instance where one American has had his/her civil rights trampled on by this administration? I can show several instances where the Patriot Act has thwarted terriost about to do harm to Americans.

I have had it explained to me that you liberals dislike Bush/Cheney so much that yall would rather retreat and lose this war than see Bush/Cheney get any credit with a victory.
Liberals are sick in the head.

Indeed: "Liberalism is a Mental Disorder"

[Drew]

Flipped Out wrote:

<quoted text>
...I have had it explained to me that you liberals dislike Bush/Cheney so much that yall would rather retreat and lose this war than see Bush/Cheney get any credit with a victory. Liberals are sick in the head. Indeed: "Liberalism is a Mental Disorder"

Again, you miss the mark with your Ann-Coulter-lite soundbytes and logic.

We haven't avenged ANY 9-11 deaths because we have NOT brought Osama bin Laden to justice. He was NOT in Iraq; he STILL remains on the lam in Afghanistan & Pakistan.

You ask about the children without parents due ot 9-11? The spouses? What about those whose military parents, spouses, relatives, friends went over to Iraq for bogus reasons and never made it back? How about the ones coming back who are crippled, maimed, or otherwise traumatized? For what? To topple a dictator who had NOTHING to do with 9-11?!?

The 9-11 first responders are suffering, but is all being done to address their medical ailments? No. Benefits have been delayed, or diminished, or cut in some instances. Same with veterans' benefits. The fact that PTSD is both spiking in diagnosis, and getting cut in funding for treatment, is a dichotomy that just shouldn't happen.

What about the National Guard troops who've served as many - if not MORE - tours than some active duty troops? What about their regular lives and jobs? The safety of their communities? Part of our in-house disaster reponse effort is compromised because so many National Guard troops and equipment are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan.

You can show several instances? What, do you have some special security clearance? Report after report has offered up proof that the Bush/Cheney method of ruling, and sidestepping the law, and fearmongering has done more harm than good; has weakened America's clout globally; and done real damage to our financial security here at home.

Just because Bush/Cheney, or one of the bloviators on Faux-NEWS, says it's so, doesn't make it so. Bush/CHeney are telling us what they want us to hear, and they're peeved because the majority of the country is no longer just bowing in obeisance to their hawkish rhetoric. After 9-11, Bush and Cheney wrapped their pugnacious aims in red, white, and blue bunting, laced their rhetoric with "it's in our national security interest" and "we don't want another 9-11" fearmongering, and most of the country went along with them. Time and time again, they were proven wrong on the ground in Iraq, yet they couldn't humble themselves to admit that they were wrong (Bush has only begrudgingly begun to do so this year, as it's finally dawned on him that his legacy is going to suck worse than Carter's). That is the height of arrogance, particularly of Cheney's.

To burble forth that "war is a fact of life, it's what we humans do" is irresponsible and shallow, and insufficient as a justification for what we did in Iraq. The fact that all you can do in reponse is to toss out softball insults about "yall liberals" proves that you don't offer anything of more substance than gradeschool sandlot taunts and namecalling.

[Flipped Out]

You ask about the children without parents due ot 9-11? The spouses? What about those whose military parents, spouses, relatives, friends went over to Iraq for bogus reasons and never made it back? How about the ones coming back who are crippled, maimed, or otherwise traumatized? For what? To topple a dictator who had NOTHING to do with 9-11?!?
The 9-11 first responders are suffering, but is all being done to address their medical ailments? No. Benefits have been delayed, or diminished, or cut in some instances. Same with veterans' benefits. The fact that PTSD is both spiking in diagnosis, and getting cut in funding for treatment, is a dichotomy that just shouldn't happen.
What about the National Guard troops who've served as many - if not MORE - tours than some active duty troops? What about their regular lives and jobs? The safety of their communities? Part of our in-house disaster reponse effort is compromised because so many National Guard troops and equipment are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan.
You can show several instances? What, do you have some special security clearance? Report after report has offered up proof that the Bush/Cheney method of ruling, and sidestepping the law, and fearmongering has done more harm than good; has weakened America's clout globally; and done real damage to our financial security here at home.
Just because Bush/Cheney, or one of the bloviators on Faux-NEWS, says it's so, doesn't make it so. Bush/CHeney are telling us what they want us to hear, and they're peeved because the majority of the country is no longer just bowing in obeisance to their hawkish rhetoric. After 9-11, Bush and Cheney wrapped their pugnacious aims in red, white, and blue bunting, laced their rhetoric with "it's in our national security interest" and "we don't want another 9-11" fearmongering, and most of the country went along with them. Time and time again, they were proven wrong on the ground in Iraq, yet they couldn't humble themselves to admit that they were wrong (Bush has only begrudgingly begun to do so this year, as it's finally dawned on him that his legacy is going to suck worse than Carter's). That is the height of arrogance, particularly of Cheney's.

Here we go again with that mean old liberal condescending gobblyygook.
When you can't handle the truth; you attack.
Why don't you answer any of my questions with a straight answer? Instead you go off ranting about things that have little to do with the issues,it just shows that you cannot control your emotions and have a sensible debate.
You follow the Democraps talking points exactly as you are instructed too.
You attack me because apparently I don't care about the wounded soldiers. That is absurd.
First of all,these are all volunteers doing what is asked of them by their Commanders.I guess I should feel sorry for every West Point or VMI graduate because they chose to go to a Military School after 9-11? You will now blame Bush/Cheney if these men/women are sent into a dangerous situation and somehow are harmed.
No,these brave men/women know what faces them and yet they throw aside their selfishness and give of themselves for all of us. Recognize what they do and honor their sacrifice without the need to point blame on Bush/Cheney. Can you not for a moment get politics out of your train of thought?
Why must you liberals play politics with everything? You act as if you are not human.
Like Hurricane Katrina!! You meli-mili liberals could not move fast enough to blame Bush for everything so that he could not get credit for anything. How many lives were actually saved?
You don't know and don't care. Just as long as you can pounce on any inperfections and trumpet them out as if they are intentional or a show of incompetence. The Democraps were in charge down in La. and look what it got them.

[Flipped Out]

Flipped Out wrote:

You ask about the children without parents due ot 9-11? The spouses? What about those whose military parents, spouses, relatives, friends went over to Iraq for bogus reasons and never made it back? How about the ones coming back who are crippled, maimed, or otherwise traumatized? For what? To topple a dictator who had NOTHING to do with 9-11?!?
The 9-11 first responders are suffering, but is all being done to address their medical ailments? No. Benefits have been delayed, or diminished, or cut in some instances. Same with veterans' benefits. The fact that PTSD is both spiking in diagnosis, and getting cut in funding for treatment, is a dichotomy that just shouldn't happen.
What about the National Guard troops who've served as many - if not MORE - tours than some active duty troops? What about their regular lives and jobs? The safety of their communities? Part of our in-house disaster reponse effort is compromised because so many National Guard troops and equipment are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan.
You can show several instances? What, do you have some special security clearance? Report after report has offered up proof that the Bush/Cheney method of ruling, and sidestepping the law, and fearmongering has done more harm than good; has weakened America's clout globally; and done real damage to our financial security here at home.
Just because Bush/Cheney, or one of the bloviators on Faux-NEWS, says it's so, doesn't make it so. Bush/CHeney are telling us what they want us to hear, and they're peeved because the majority of the country is no longer just bowing in obeisance to their hawkish rhetoric. After 9-11, Bush and Cheney wrapped their pugnacious aims in red, white, and blue bunting, laced their rhetoric with "it's in our national security interest" and "we don't want another 9-11" fearmongering, and most of the country went along with them. Time and time again, they were proven wrong on the ground in Iraq, yet they couldn't humble themselves to admit that they were wrong (Bush has only begrudgingly begun to do so this year, as it's finally dawned on him that his legacy is going to suck worse than Carter's). That is the height of arrogance, particularly of Cheney's.
Here we go again with that mean old liberal condescending gobblyygook.
When you can't handle the truth; you attack.
Why don't you answer any of my questions with a straight answer? Instead you go off ranting about things that have little to do with the issues,it just shows that you cannot control your emotions and have a sensible debate.
You follow the Democraps talking points exactly as you are instructed too.
You attack me because apparently I don't care about the wounded soldiers. That is absurd.
First of all,these are all volunteers doing what is asked of them by their Commanders.I guess I should feel sorry for every West Point or VMI graduate because they chose to go to a Military School after 9-11? You will now blame Bush/Cheney if these men/women are sent into a dangerous situation and somehow are harmed.
No,these brave men/women know what faces them and yet they throw aside their selfishness and give of themselves for all of us. Recognize what they do and honor their sacrifice without the need to point blame on Bush/Cheney. Can you not for a moment get politics out of your train of thought?
Why must you liberals play politics with everything? You act as if you are not human.
Like Hurricane Katrina!! You meli-mili liberals could not move fast enough to blame Bush for everything so that he could not get credit for anything. How many lives were actually saved?
You don't know and don't care. Just as long as you can pounce on any inperfections and trumpet them out as if they are intentional or a show of incompetence. The Democraps were in charge down in La. and look what it got them.

This post did not work correctly.

[Drew]

The federal response to Katrina, seen thru the Army Corps of Engineers (levees and flood control) and FEMA (a disaster of a federal disaster response) was woefully inadequate - as were the state and local responses. EVERY government agency got caught flatfooted, there's no refuting that point. The one shining light of professionalism, heroism, and dedication to duty was shown again and again by the U.S. Coast Guard, who literally plucked hundreds of folks off of oil rigs and derricks, rooftops, and swamped bridges. Other military units stepped up, too, and many were saved that would have died otherwise. That said, far too many souls perished because government at ALL levels failed.

I see you didn't answer any of my questions, either. Cuts both ways, smart guy. My support for the victims of 9-11 was clearly stated; it was just an inconveneient truth for you to accept.

The simple fact that the feds eavesdropped on countless American citizens and others - without a duly-authorized warrant attesting to the legitimacy of said action - is cause enough. Do I know of anyone in particular? No, I do not, and I would wager that you don't either.

You, my friend, are the one who constantly attempts to fog the air. Every point I raised is a valid counterpoint to the vitriol you pixelated onscreen.

Of course, I feel bad for the troops and the National Guard forces, who were sent into a sovereign country by a shortsighted, cocksure S.o.b.- and who have time and again perfomed admirably despite inadequate equipment, grusomely long tours of duty, and woefully inadequate treatment facilities back home. The fact that there have only been some 4,000 casualties (and not a lot more) is a testament more to their skill, bravery, and dedication than anything Bush/Cheney came up with. I indeed WILL blame Bush/Cheney for this quagmire we've created in Iraq - just as I'd blame the next CiC for doing a like-mannered, FUBAR'd military action in the future. I indeed honor their service, and the sacrifices of all those who have died or are wounded.

Yes, it is a volunteer force, but that does NOT excuse sending them into a warzone we had no business being in. Do not presume that you can lecture any of us on whether or not they know they roles - or about being patriotic. For you to equate any criticizing of Bush/Cheney with dishonoring the troops is - as is typical with you and those of your stripe - shallow, disingenuous, and narrowminded.

The intorduction of the natural disasters item is DIRECTLY related to the Iraq war because - as report after report has shown - communities' responses to the various natural disasters that have occurred over the past few years HAVE been hampered by the extended tours the NG are pulling in Iraq and Afghanistan. Monies that COULD have gone to repairing and strengthening our infrastructure (bridges, levees, flood management, others) have been spent fighting a 2-pronged war that has NOT accomplished its missions. That's not an emotional response. That is a look at cold, hard facts - something you glibly choose not to do as you spew forth your condescending insults and heated verbosity.

[Flipped Out]

Drew wrote:

The federal response to Katrina, seen thru the Army Corps of Engineers (levees and flood control) and FEMA (a disaster of a federal disaster response) was woefully inadequate - as were the state and local responses. EVERY government agency got caught flatfooted, there's no refuting that point. The one shining light of professionalism, heroism, and dedication to duty was shown again and again by the U.S. Coast Guard, who literally plucked hundreds of folks off of oil rigs and derricks, rooftops, and swamped bridges. Other military units stepped up, too, and many were saved that would have died otherwise. That said, far too many souls perished because government at ALL levels failed.

Local Gov't was caught flatfooted? I beg to differ. There had been studies done 30 years prior, warning of the dangers of a catagory 5 hurricane. The Mayor of N.O.took the warnings seriously and got his family to Baton Rouge 3 days before Katrina hit. Federal monies had been allocated to the city for years to shore up the levees and the money was used for other things.

What terriosts in America have we nabbed? The Fort Dix six. The group in Buffalo. Moussouwi(?).
A group in the Miami area. The group plotting to blow up the Sears Tower. Numerous bogus charitable groups funneling money to terriost. It has helped us nab terriost all over the world.

You give the Coast Guard some credit. Are they not Federal Gov't? Therefore they are under Bush.
So is the National Guard. The reason some were not availiable to help is because they are fighting terrorist...The bad guys!

Since you didn't dispute the economic cost of 9-11 I assume you agree with my figures. Therefore we have not spent more money on this war, defeating the terrorist, as you said earlier.

It looks to me that your hatred for Bush/Cheney will not allow you to see the truth. You look to bend every event and statistic in such a way so you can blame them for any imperfections you can manufacture out of thin air. It is classic Clinton stragedy. Tell a lie often enough and it becomes the truth. That only works on people,like yourself,that will accept anything they hear as long as it is critical to this administration.
I am not saying anyone should ignore them,however one should at least think things out and come to their own conclusion.Plaese don't just repeat what you hear because it might be wrong and you look like a fool. The Clintons were masters at misinformation. If it stuck,great. If it didn't they would excuse it away,apologize if necessary,and move on to the next lie.

It's OK to trust; you must verify.

[Flipped Out]

Drew wrote:

The federal response to Katrina, seen thru the Army Corps of Engineers (levees and flood control) and FEMA (a disaster of a federal disaster response) was woefully inadequate - as were the state and local responses. EVERY government agency got caught flatfooted, there's no refuting that point. The one shining light of professionalism, heroism, and dedication to duty was shown again and again by the U.S. Coast Guard, who literally plucked hundreds of folks off of oil rigs and derricks, rooftops, and swamped bridges. Other military units stepped up, too, and many were saved that would have died otherwise. That said, far too many souls perished because government at ALL levels failed.
I see you didn't answer any of my questions, either. Cuts both ways, smart guy. My support for the victims of 9-11 was clearly stated; it was just an inconveneient truth for you to accept.
The simple fact that the feds eavesdropped on countless American citizens and others - without a duly-authorized warrant attesting to the legitimacy of said action - is cause enough. Do I know of anyone in particular? No, I do not, and I would wager that you don't either.
You, my friend, are the one who constantly attempts to fog the air. Every point I raised is a valid counterpoint to the vitriol you pixelated onscreen.
Of course, I feel bad for the troops and the National Guard forces, who were sent into a sovereign country by a shortsighted, cocksure S.o.b.- and who have time and again perfomed admirably despite inadequate equipment, grusomely long tours of duty, and woefully inadequate treatment facilities back home. The fact that there have only been some 4,000 casualties (and not a lot more) is a testament more to their skill, bravery, and dedication than anything Bush/Cheney came up with. I indeed WILL blame Bush/Cheney for this quagmire we've created in Iraq - just as I'd blame the next CiC for doing a like-mannered, FUBAR'd military action in the future. I indeed honor their service, and the sacrifices of all those who have died or are wounded.
Yes, it is a volunteer force, but that does NOT excuse sending them into a warzone we had no business being in. Do not presume that you can lecture any of us on whether or not they know they roles - or about being patriotic. For you to equate any criticizing of Bush/Cheney with dishonoring the troops is - as is typical with you and those of your stripe - shallow, disingenuous, and narrowminded.
The intorduction of the natural disasters item is DIRECTLY related to the Iraq war because - as report after report has shown - communities' responses to the various natural disasters that have occurred over the past few years HAVE been hampered by the extended tours the NG are pulling in Iraq and Afghanistan. Monies that COULD have gone to repairing and strengthening our infrastructure (bridges, levees, flood management, others) have been spent fighting a 2-pronged war that has NOT accomplished its missions. That's not an emotional response. That is a look at cold, hard facts - something you glibly choose not to do as you spew forth your condescending insults and heated verbosity.

You are mad because the money spent on the war could have been used for infrastructure? Because we haven't accomplished our mission? I am not sure of your angle on this one.

OK,smarty pants. How has the trillions and trillions of dollars spent on the "War on Poverty" succedded? Have the liberals achieved their mission? Would you consider this money wasted that could have been spent on something more meaningful,in your opinion?

[Flipped Out]

Do you liberals ever get tired of getting beaten over the head with the truth?

How many of yall have I knocked out of the park now?

Everyone of them out in "left field" !!

One by one; You're outta here !! LOL LOL LOL

[Drew]

Flipped Out wrote:

<quoted text>
Local Gov't was caught flatfooted? I beg to differ. There had been studies done 30 years prior, warning of the dangers of a catagory 5 hurricane. The Mayor of N.O.took the warnings seriously and got his family to Baton Rouge 3 days before Katrina hit. Federal monies had been allocated to the city for years to shore up the levees and the money was used for other things.
What terriosts in America have we nabbed? The Fort Dix six. The group in Buffalo. Moussouwi(?).
A group in the Miami area. The group plotting to blow up the Sears Tower. Numerous bogus charitable groups funneling money to terriost. It has helped us nab terriost all over the world.
You give the Coast Guard some credit. Are they not Federal Gov't? Therefore they are under Bush.
So is the National Guard. The reason some were not availiable to help is because they are fighting terrorist...The bad guys!
Since you didn't dispute the economic cost of 9-11 I assume you agree with my figures. Therefore we have not spent more money on this war, defeating the terrorist, as you said earlier.
It looks to me that your hatred for Bush/Cheney will not allow you to see the truth. You look to bend every event and statistic in such a way so you can blame them for any imperfections you can manufacture out of thin air. It is classic Clinton stragedy. Tell a lie often enough and it becomes the truth. That only works on people,like yourself,that will accept anything they hear as long as it is critical to this administration.
I am not saying anyone should ignore them,however one should at least think things out and come to their own conclusion.Plaese don't just repeat what you hear because it might be wrong and you look like a fool. The Clintons were masters at misinformation. If it stuck,great. If it didn't they would excuse it away,apologize if necessary,and move on to the next lie.
It's OK to trust; you must verify.

I didn't dispute your numbers because they are not accurate, so no further highlighting of that fact is necessary.

Of course the Coast guard is federal, which is why I identified them as the U.S. Coast Guard. They don't wait for the Presidential "OK" to do their job. All Bush could manage was a cursory flyby in Air Force One on his way home from a political fundraiser in Texas until well after the disaster was passed. Hmmm...I'd rather cast my lot with Coast Guard any day.

Your primary fallacy remains that, if any idea doesn't jive with your narrowminded viewpoints, you curtly dismiss them as "Clinton-like" or "liberal" or - what was that asinine term from yesterday?- "meli-mili."

The ONLY success you can tout for Bush/Cheney is the nabbing of some terrorists, small-time players though they might be. The #1 terrorist remains at large, though, which means that justice for the victims of 9-11 (those dead and those still getting sick) is a long time coming. It's sad that the elgacy of the man who so confidently stood astride the smouldering wreckage of Ground Zero has become a laughingstock.

As much as the Clintons were masters of spinning a lie for political expediency (which cost Hillary in the primaries), Bush/Cheney have excelled at their own Rovian machinations - lying, spinning their particularly narrow viewpoint, using media windbags to hammer opponents, labeling critics as "unpatriotic" (for an example, see Bush's own words - "If you're not with us, you're with the terrorists.") Using other things to distract from the truth, then hanging surrogates out to dry when it blows up in their faces (see Scooter Libby, Michael ("You're doing a heckuva job, Brownie!" Brown, Valerie Plame, Scott McClellan, etc.

No, this administration will have MUCH to answer for - perhaps not in this lifetime, but definitely to the one Judge who is over all.

[Flipped Out]

Drew wrote:

<quoted text>
I didn't dispute your numbers because they are not accurate, so no further highlighting of that fact is necessary.
Of course the Coast guard is federal, which is why I identified them as the U.S. Coast Guard. They don't wait for the Presidential "OK" to do their job. All Bush could manage was a cursory flyby in Air Force One on his way home from a political fundraiser in Texas until well after the disaster was passed. Hmmm...I'd rather cast my lot with Coast Guard any day.
Your primary fallacy remains that, if any idea doesn't jive with your narrowminded viewpoints, you curtly dismiss them as "Clinton-like" or "liberal" or - what was that asinine term from yesterday?- "meli-mili."
The ONLY success you can tout for Bush/Cheney is the nabbing of some terrorists, small-time players though they might be. The #1 terrorist remains at large, though, which means that justice for the victims of 9-11 (those dead and those still getting sick) is a long time coming. It's sad that the elgacy of the man who so confidently stood astride the smouldering wreckage of Ground Zero has become a laughingstock.
As much as the Clintons were masters of spinning a lie for political expediency (which cost Hillary in the primaries), Bush/Cheney have excelled at their own Rovian machinations - lying, spinning their particularly narrow viewpoint, using media windbags to hammer opponents, labeling critics as "unpatriotic" (for an example, see Bush's own words - "If you're not with us, you're with the terrorists.") Using other things to distract from the truth, then hanging surrogates out to dry when it blows up in their faces (see Scooter Libby, Michael ("You're doing a heckuva job, Brownie!" Brown, Valerie Plame, Scott McClellan, etc.
No, this administration will have MUCH to answer for - perhaps not in this lifetime, but definitely to the one Judge who is over all.

Should we abandon our "War on Poverty"?
This liberal concoction of siphoning the peoples' hard earned money through taxes is a failed mission. How many more trillions of my tax dollars will be wasted?

[Drew]

Flipped Out wrote:

<quoted text>
Should we abandon our "War on Poverty"?
This liberal concoction of siphoning the peoples' hard earned money through taxes is a failed mission. How many more trillions of my tax dollars will be wasted?

Why do you persist in bringing up the "War on Poverty," when eliminating poverty has never been on the radar of Bush/Cheney - despite his claims of being a "compassionate conservative"?

Additionally, you personally have not paid "trillions" of dollars in tax money, so don't presume that you can say the phrase "trillions of my tax dollars."

Finally, while flawed, the aims were/are noble. The government should be there to help those less fortunate. Under Clinton, you saw a drastic change in this effort. Under Bush I you also saw some movement on this front. However, under Bush II, not so much.

Any program is bound to have abuses, problems, etc. The fact that BOTH political parties like to make political footballs out of various programs - and the funds that run them - also weakens the programs. NO political party is free from blame, and NO party has done a better job than the other in this area.

So, again, save your smarmy slurs and rants. You have yet to even get to first base, let alone "hit it out of the park."