D Cheney

West Mifflin, PA

#57082 Apr 4, 2014
In October 2002, after several days of full-dress debate in the House and Senate, the US Congress fell into line behind almost-elected president George W. Bush, giving him a mandate to launch a massive military assault against the already battered nation of Iraq. The discourse in Congress was marked by its usual cowardice. Even many of the senators and representatives who voted against the president's resolution did so on the narrowest procedural grounds, taking pains to tell how they too detested Saddam Hussein, how they agreed with the president on many points, how something needed to be done about Iraq but not just yet, not quite in this way. So it is with Congress: so much political discourse in so narrow a political space. Few of the members dared to question the unexamined assumptions about US virtue, and the imperial right of US leaders to decide which nations shall live and which shall die. Few, if any, pointed to the continual bloody stream of war crimes committed by a succession of arrogant US administrations in blatant violation of human rights and international law.
Pretexts for War
Bush and other members of his administration gave varied and unpersuasive reasons to justify the “war”—actually a one-sided massacre—against Iraq. They claimed it was necessary to insure the safety and security of the Middle East and of the United States itself, for Iraq was developing weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear missiles. But as of 1998, UN inspection teams determined that Iraq had no such nuclear capability and actually had been in compliance with yearly disarmament inspections. And, as of February 2003, UN inspection teams found little to support Bush’s case for aggression, despite Colin Powell's slide-show shenanigans before the United Nations.
As for the fact that Iraq once had factories that produced chemical and bacteriological weapons, whose fault was that? It was the United States that supplied such things to Saddam. This is one of several key facts about past US-Iraq relations that the corporate media have consistently suppressed. In any case, according to UN inspection reports, Iraq’s C&B warfare capability has been dismantled. Still the Bushites keep talking about Iraq’s dangerous “potential.” As reported by the Associated Press (2 November 2002), Undersecretary of State John Bolton claimed that “Iraq would be able to develop a nuclear weapon within a year if it gets the right technology.” If it gets the right technology? The truistic nature of this assertion has gone unnoticed. Djibouti, Qatar, and New Jersey would be able to develop nuclear weapons if they got “the right technology.”
Through September and October of 2002, the White House made it clear that Iraq would be attacked if it had weapons of mass destruction. Then in November 2002, Bush announced he would attack if Saddam denied that he had weapons of mass destruction. So if the Iraqis admit having such weapons, they will be bombed; and if they deny having them, they still will be bombed—whether they have them or not.

Read more here:
http://www.michaelparenti.org/IRAQGeorge2.htm

“Comfort the afflicted”

Since: May 13

Afflict the comfortable

#57084 Apr 4, 2014
Love you wrote:
Love my hubby even tho he makes me mad sometimes :)
Dumb c_nt.
Just wondering

Glenside, PA

#57085 Apr 4, 2014
What's next
Love you

Philadelphia, PA

#57086 Apr 4, 2014
bacon hater wrote:
<quoted text>
Dumb c_nt.
Retarded d__chebag d_ck.
Mandela Funeral Selfie OK

Scranton, PA

#57087 Apr 4, 2014
White House objects to Samsung Ortiz and Obama selfie
April 4, 2014

The White House has objected to the tweeting of a selfie snapped by a member of a leading baseball team which included President Obama in the photograph.

The White House said the President's image should not be used for commercial gain.

David Ortiz denied that he was paid by Samsung to take the picture, as Alpa Patel reports.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-26880...
Lipstick on a Pig

Scranton, PA

#57088 Apr 4, 2014
Noonan: A Catastrophe Like No Other
April 3, 2014
The president tries to put a good face on ObamaCare.

...Support it or not, you cannot look at ObamaCare and call it anything but a huge, historic mess. It is also utterly unique in the annals of American lawmaking and government administration.

Its biggest proponent in Congress, the Democratic speaker of the House, literally said—blithely, mindlessly, but in a way forthcomingly—that we have to pass the bill to find out what's in it....

Her comments alarmed congressional Republicans but inspired Democrats, who for the next three years would carry on like blithering idiots making believe they'd read the bill and understood its implications. They were later taken aback by complaints from their constituents.

The White House, on the other hand, seems to have understood what the bill would do, and lied in a way so specific it showed they knew exactly what to spin and how.

"If you like your health-care plan, you can keep your health-care plan, period." "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor, period." That of course was the president, misrepresenting the facts of his signature legislative effort. That was historic, too.

If you liked your doctor, your plan, your network, your coverage, your deductible you could not keep it....

What the bill declared it would do—insure tens of millions of uninsured Americans—it has not done. There are still tens of millions uninsured Americans. On the other hand, it has terrorized millions who did have insurance and lost it, or who still have insurance and may lose it.
...
There are very, very few Democrats who would do ObamaCare over again. Some would do something different, but they wouldn't do this. The cost of the blunder has been too high in terms of policy and politics.

They, and the president, are trying to put a good face on it.

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1000142...
Unsettled Science

Scranton, PA

#57089 Apr 4, 2014
Climate scientists refuse to debate global warming ‘skeptics’ in the media
03/24/2014

Climate scientists and environmentalists are venting their frustrations debating those who are skeptical of man-made global warming — and some have even gone so far as to refuse debating skeptics.

Dan Weiss, the director of climate strategy at the liberal Center for American Progress, refused to appear on Fox Business to debate climate skeptic Marc Morano last week. Morano runs the blog Climate Depot, where he reports on environment and climate news.

Weiss was set to debate Morano on the show “The Independents” but “refused to debate directly with Morano, and chided [the show] for airing his views,” according to the Fox Business show.

“In what is part of a growing trend, yet another global warming activist ducked a TV debate,” Morano told the Daily Caller News Foundation.“Weiss and other activists claim the debate is so settled that granting a skeptic ‘equal time’ does some type of disservice to ‘science.’ Climate activists want to impose everything from carbon taxes, UN treaties, cap-and-trade, EPA regulations, light bulb restrictions, automobile regulations, even our bedtimes — yet they will not debate the basis for these actions.”

http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/24/climate-sci...

“Comfort the afflicted”

Since: May 13

Afflict the comfortable

#57090 Apr 4, 2014
Unsettled Science wrote:
Climate scientists refuse to debate global warming ‘skeptics’ in the media
03/24/2014
Climate scientists and environmentalists are venting their frustrations debating those who are skeptical of man-made global warming — and some have even gone so far as to refuse debating skeptics.
Dan Weiss, the director of climate strategy at the liberal Center for American Progress, refused to appear on Fox Business to debate climate skeptic Marc Morano last week. Morano runs the blog Climate Depot, where he reports on environment and climate news.
Weiss was set to debate Morano on the show “The Independents” but “refused to debate directly with Morano, and chided [the show] for airing his views,” according to the Fox Business show.
“In what is part of a growing trend, yet another global warming activist ducked a TV debate,” Morano told the Daily Caller News Foundation.“Weiss and other activists claim the debate is so settled that granting a skeptic ‘equal time’ does some type of disservice to ‘science.’ Climate activists want to impose everything from carbon taxes, UN treaties, cap-and-trade, EPA regulations, light bulb restrictions, automobile regulations, even our bedtimes — yet they will not debate the basis for these actions.”
http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/24/climate-sci...
Make you a deal. You tell us what happens to the 27 billion metric tons of CO2 we pump in the atmosphere, and we'll debate. Unfortunately, not one idiot science denier can say. To debate against someone whose position is "Derr... I dunno" is quite the waste of time. The notion that we can deforest millions of acres of forest and pump 300 times more greenhouse gases in the atmosphere than is naturally produced and none of it have any detrimental effect is simply laughable. So please, tell us what happens. I'm all ears.
O_zone

Washington, DC

#57093 Apr 4, 2014
Basically one of the O's in the O2's living in an outer valance band of the CO2 molecule finds it more accomodating to join an random Oxygen molecule that then becomes O3 or something known as ozone. This ozone is being produced by those metric tons of soot that the No Brain blunt heads think isn't doing any harm to the wonderful weather we have been experiencing these days.
So. This ozone stuff likes to accumulate in the upper atmosphere of the Earth...you know the place we humans call home...the green house gases are up there baby. Even though we have had a cold winter this has been one of the warmest winters on average around the globe. Those super twisters will be coming to a neighborhood near you real soon ...its like a coming attraction at the theater.
Anyway, just about any reliable scientist who isn't on the energy company dole will attest to climate problems due to man made polutants. So, maybe 90 some percent...these independent scientists don't need to see it with their own eyes...they just know this is based on things like statistical data, physics, chemistry. You know the stuff that the blunt headed oddballs (Tea Party) despise and ridicule.
rainman

West Mifflin, PA

#57094 Apr 4, 2014
I guess the teabaggers don't believe in acid rain either,
but all scientists do, and it is real !
it's for real and has nothing to do with the earth's cycle as far as cold/hot years over millions of years.

Two elements, sulfur and nitrogen, are primarily responsible for the harmful effects of acid rain.

Sulfur is found as a trace element in coal and oil. When these are burned in power plants and industrial boilers, the sulfur combines with oxygen to form sulfur dioxide (SO2). Because SO2 does not react with most chemicals found in the atmosphere, it can travel long distances. Eventually, if it comes in contact with ozone or hydrogen peroxide, it can be converted to sulfur trioxide. Sulfur trioxide can dissolve in water, forming a dilute solution of sulfuric acid.
O_zone

Baltimore, MD

#57095 Apr 5, 2014
rainman wrote:
I guess the teabaggers don't believe in acid rain either,
but all scientists do, and it is real !
it's for real and has noething to do with the earth's cycle as far as cold/hot years over millions of years.
Two elements, sulfur and nitrogen, are primarily responsible for the harmful effects of acid rain.
Sulfur is found as a trace element in coal and oil. When these are burned in power plants and industrial boilers, the sulfur combines with oxygen to form sulfur dioxide (SO2). Because SO2 does not react with most chemicals found in the atmosphere, it can travel long distances. Eventually, if it comes in contact with ozone or hydrogen peroxide, it can be converted to sulfur trioxide. Sulfur trioxide can dissolve in water, forming a dilute solution of sulfuric acid.
No, they don't. They think its raining soda water. Thier blunted skulls are impervious to facts but they love fiction.....one of the great mysteries of our time.
LaughingAtYou

Chicago, IL

#57096 Apr 5, 2014
Love you wrote:
Love my hubby even tho he makes me mad sometimes :)
bacon hater wrote:
<quoted text>
Dumb c_nt.
A stranger's kind comment sets you off?

All that pent-up, irrational anger can't be healthy for you. You're wound too tight.

Professional therapy can sometimes help bitter, maladjusted women like you, sweetheart.

“Comfort the afflicted”

Since: May 13

Afflict the comfortable

#57097 Apr 5, 2014
LaughingAtYou wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
A stranger's kind comment sets you off?
All that pent-up, irrational anger can't be healthy for you. You're wound too tight.
Professional therapy can sometimes help bitter, maladjusted women like you, sweetheart.
Poor dumb tea baggers will never understand comedy, music or have style. It's so funny.

George Bush is an admitted international war criminal. There. Go run back to your bunker now.
Understandably Ineloquent

Wilkes Barre, PA

#57099 Apr 5, 2014
Hillary struggles to list accomplishments during tenure as Secretary of State
April 4, 201

On April 3, 2014, Hillary Clinton spoke at the Women of the World Summit in New York City and was asked what she was most proud of during her tenure as Secretary of State.

Clinton could not provide any concrete examples of the accomplishments she holds in high regard.

“When you look at your time as Secretary of State, what are you most proud of? And what do you feel was unfinished, and maybe have another crack at one day?” the moderator asks.

“Well, I really see — that was good — that’s why he wins prizes. Look, I really see my role as Secretary, in fact leadership in general in a democracy, as a relay race. When you run the best race you can run, you hand off the baton. Some of what hasn’t been finished may go on to be finished, so when President Obama asked me to be Secretary of State I agreed,” Clinton responded.

She continued,“We had the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, we had two wars. We had continuing threats from all kinds of corners around the world that we had to deal with. So it was a perilous time frankly. What he said to me was,‘Look, I have to be dealing with the economic crisis, I want you to go out and represent us around the world.’ And it was a good division of labor because we needed to make it clear to the rest of the world, that we were going to get our house in order. We were going to stimulate, and grow, and get back to positive growth and work with our friends and partners.”

http://capitolcityproject.com/hillary-struggl...
Fascist Climate Activists

Wilkes Barre, PA

#57100 Apr 5, 2014
Climate Activists Uncaged
April 3, 2014 12:00 AM
Gawker’s Adam Weinstein suggests arresting those on the “wrong side” of the climate-change debate.

Finally, someone has come up with a way to settle the debate over climate change: Put the people on the wrong side of the argument in cages.

A writer for the website Gawker recently penned a self-described “rant” on the pressing need to arrest, charge, and imprison people who “deny” global warming....

Fact-checking scientists are spared. So is “the man on the street who thinks Rush Limbaugh is right.... You all know that man. That man is an idiot. He is too stupid to do anything other than choke the earth’s atmosphere a little more with his Mr. Pibb burps and his F-150’s gassy exhaust.”

Weinstein says that this “is an argument that’s just being discussed seriously in some circles.”

He credits Rochester Institute of Technology philosophy professor Lawrence Torcello for getting the ball rolling.

Last month, Torcello argued that America should follow Italy’s lead. In 2009, six seismologists were convicted of poorly communicating the risks of a major earthquake. When one struck, the scientists were sentenced to six years in jail for downplaying the risks.

Torcello and Weinstein want a similar approach for climate change.
...
The real problem is that political activists and many leading institutions, particularly in the news media and academia, are determined to demonize any kind of skepticism — about the extent of the threat or the efficacy of proposed solutions — as illegitimate idiocy.

That attitude is unscientific and undemocratic enough. But it sure beats calling for your opponents to be thrown in the gulag for disagreeing with you.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/374887/...

“Comfort the afflicted”

Since: May 13

Afflict the comfortable

#57101 Apr 5, 2014
Understandably Ineloquent wrote:
Hillary struggles to list accomplishments during tenure as Secretary of State
April 4, 201
On April 3, 2014, Hillary Clinton spoke at the Women of the World Summit in New York City and was asked what she was most proud of during her tenure as Secretary of State.
Clinton could not provide any concrete examples of the accomplishments she holds in high regard.
“When you look at your time as Secretary of State, what are you most proud of? And what do you feel was unfinished, and maybe have another crack at one day?” the moderator asks.
“Well, I really see — that was good — that’s why he wins prizes. Look, I really see my role as Secretary, in fact leadership in general in a democracy, as a relay race. When you run the best race you can run, you hand off the baton. Some of what hasn’t been finished may go on to be finished, so when President Obama asked me to be Secretary of State I agreed,” Clinton responded.
She continued,“We had the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, we had two wars. We had continuing threats from all kinds of corners around the world that we had to deal with. So it was a perilous time frankly. What he said to me was,‘Look, I have to be dealing with the economic crisis, I want you to go out and represent us around the world.’ And it was a good division of labor because we needed to make it clear to the rest of the world, that we were going to get our house in order. We were going to stimulate, and grow, and get back to positive growth and work with our friends and partners.”
http://capitolcityproject.com/hillary-struggl...
Just a tip. When your news sources have ads offering ready-made bunkers, bulk ammo, Army surplus, gold investments and videos on how to fight the imaginary people trying to take your guns, it isn't a news source.
LaughingAtYou

Chicago, IL

#57102 Apr 5, 2014
bacon hater wrote:
<quoted text>
Just a tip. When your news sources have ads offering ready-made bunkers, bulk ammo, Army surplus, gold investments and videos on how to fight the imaginary people trying to take your guns, it isn't a news source.
Yes, it's embarassing that Hillary couldn't cite a single accomplishment during her State Department tenure. She wobbled and face-planted on that cupcake question didn't she.

Pro tip, sweetheart: when you resort to lying about the advertisers on an article's web page you've obviously fully surrendered to the truth of the article.

LMAO!
B Clinton

West Mifflin, PA

#57103 Apr 5, 2014
Hillary Clinton's Accomplishments Speak for Themselves
Rather than talking about her husband's past, we should be discussing her future.
As our secretary of state, Clinton visited 112 countries, helping to repair a badly damaged U.S. reputation that Bush and his war crime family destroyed. She advocated an expanded role in global economic issues for the State Department and cited the need for an increased U.S. diplomatic presence, especially in Iraq, where the Defense Department had conducted diplomatic missions. Clinton unveiled the Global Hunger and Food Security program, prevailed over Vice President Biden to send an additional 21,000 troops to Afghanistan, saved the signing of a Turkish-Armenian accord, and assisted the president with major decisions as to the U.S. position with regard to the revolution in Egypt and the decision to use military force in Libya.
Hillary doesn't need the merits of her husband; nor does she need to be attacked for standing by her man after his affair. That is her private and personal decision. And the fact that we are still focused more on Bill than Hil speaks volumes to why the United States still has not had a female president.
But I tell you America, that time is coming ... brace yourselves.
Howard

Philadelphia, PA

#57104 Apr 5, 2014
Ugghh
B Clinton

West Mifflin, PA

#57105 Apr 5, 2014
5 Top Highlights in Hillary Clinton’s Secretary of State Tenure :

Hillary Clinton is widely admired for her intelligence, drive, and success as secretary of state. Her four years in office have been marked by a series of noteworthy accomplishments and near lack of serious missteps. Replacing her is a daunting task even for someone with Senator Kerry’s impressive foreign policy credentials. Below are 5 highlights from Clinton’s tenure:

Read more here:

http://www.policymic.com/articles/21829/5-top...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Loretto Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
grace mcguire (Feb '13) Nov '14 Gary Pelphrey 4
Apartment Hunting Sep '14 Jima 1
Nellie Lou Esworthy Aug '14 MARIANNE DUBOIS-Z... 1
Woman accused of having sex with boy Aug '14 no sex 1
celebrities phone numbers (Mar '08) Apr '14 CJ Robertson 16
brother in prison in loretto (Feb '10) Oct '13 Concerned 17
Pennsylvania: accused Franciscan friar commits ... (Feb '13) Feb '13 Fictional Shamed... 1
Loretto Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Loretto People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 5:14 pm PST

NBC Sports 5:14PM
Boston College's Ryan Day joins Philadelphia Eagles staff
NBC Sports 5:15 PM
Eagles hire Chip Kelly protege as quarterbacks coach
Bleacher Report 6:12 PM
5 Mistakes Steelers Can't Repeat in Offseason
Bleacher Report 9:03 PM
Should Eagles Target Upgrades at WR?
Bleacher Report 9:30 PM
5 Changes Eagles Must Make This Offseason