Drudge Retort: Red Meat for Yellow Dogs

President Barack Obama mourned 14 Americans killed Monday in helicopter crashes in Afghanistan and told a military audience he will not be hurried as he evaluates whether to alter U.S. strategy in the war. "I will never rush the solemn decision of sending you into harm's way. I won't risk your lives unless it is absolutely necessary," Obama said during a visit to Naval Air Station Jacksonville

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Subscriptions

Author Info

corky

MORE STORIES

Special Features

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.


Cheney dithered there for 7 years, Bush for 6 months on the surge, while Obama is converting the military to Muslim Socialism one 19 year old private at a time.

Cheney didn't dither for 7 years, he was analyzing the amazingly complex nuances of the situation.

The money quote:

"Obama did not tip his hand on how he might decide. White House press secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters that a decision was still expected in the coming weeks."

This was also said a month ago. ROFLMAO!!!

"Obama Will Not Rush Afghanistan Decision"

What is it with you lefties and your Limbaugh obsession?

"White House press secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters that a decision was still expected in the coming weeks."

This was also said a month ago. ROFLMAO!!!

Posted by KBM

One month = 4 week's'. Two months = 8 week's'. etc...

The importance of the Afghan election cannot be overestimated. He needs to know what kind of a government he is committing Americans to defend. If he is committing Americans to defend a corrupt dictatorship then I doubt many Americans want him to send more troops. If he is defending a legitimate democracy with, even a small chance of success, then most Americans would probably support the effort. It isn't his fault that the question is still in the process of being answered. Just today, Karzei said he would not replace significant officials in the election operation, that hardly brings confidence that he intends to allow real legitimate elections. Karzei is depending on the American right wing to pressure Obama into pouring more troops into Afghanistan and securing his power base without any movement on his part to offer honest elections.
It really is time for the partisan hatred of Obama to cease and for honest evaluations of who and what we are fighting over there for are really about. I doubt even the worst Obama haters would really want to sacrifice more Americans to preserve the power of a corrupt administration like Karzei's. Or would you???

Danni, I accept that you will likely consider me blindly hating President Obama for saying this:

I have always liked President Obama's commitment to winning Afghanistan: "The world cannot afford the price that will come due if Afghanistan slides back into chaos or al Qaeda operates unchecked.".

I've always supported his Afghanistan war view and I will continue to believe that this CiC will take the appropriate course of action there. If he doesn't send the troops requested, I will be disappointed but when you don't like your bosses decision it means you just have to try harder to make his decision a success.

The idea that we are waiting for election results, I believe, is an excuse to say that President Obama believed the quote above, but...

If the election was found to be fair, would you then support sending additional troops?

Translation: Oh crap - I don't know the first thing about being CIC....But, maybe I can organize that community.

#4 | POSTED BY LETUSPREY

As much as I hate the fact you breath our air...FF!

"it really is time for the partisan hatred of Obama to cease"--- Danni, I agree-- I found that the best way to lead is by example. How about setting an example for the rest of the board and move away the partisan hatred you have for past presidents that you have expressed in your past posts. A great idea.

Slow indecisive decision making is the hallmark of President Obama. That and taking plenty of time off to play golf.

Hopefully he plays golf better than he plays President.

"I will never rush the solemn decision of sending you into harm's way."

I keep hearing Obama say this and it just seems like a stupid thing to say. American Soldiers are in harms way right now. I know this may come as a shock to some of you but, we have been at war for a few years now. Americans are getting killed over there. While we wait to see outcomes of elections in Afghanistan to determine our war strategy?

What the hell happened to this Country?
If our Country was in this state when we fought WWII we would have lost. I always thought that the politicians put the military in charge once we had gone to war. But apparently the politicians have a hand in everything nowadays...and they specialize in things they know jack and shit about.

Voting Present won't work here.

The importance of the Afghan election cannot be overestimated.

I don't want my friends, family, neighbors, countryman, soldiers defending some election overseas. We have no business. So we can pipe oil through the Afghans. Well oil in Iraq. Have our Zions defend.

IT IS ALL CHESS. This is so easy.

I tire of the the margins. I think protectionism. Isolationist. Let's take care of US, (U.S.).

THE PROBLEM IS THE DOLLAR.

Money should be built on hard assets. My hard assets are worth more than any Federal Reserve Note.

DOWN WITH THE EMPIRE!

This is our Revolution.

I always thought that the politicians put the military in charge once we had gone to war.

Better get that okayed by Cheney. He ran everything.

If you read the article, you'd see Obama is getting advice from his military leaders. Then he has to decide and take the credit/blame.

Nobody ever chanted "hey hey westmoreland, how many kids did you kill today" for a reason.

I could care less about cheney or westmoreland, my problem is Obama is just stalling the whole "decide and take the credit/blame"...While American soldiers get killed.

I think I am gonna have to agree with WURSTER on this.

"DOWN WITH THE EMPIRE!

This is our Revolution."

"If the election was found to be fair, would you then support sending additional troops?"

Andy, I suspect you are actually trying to be non-partisan in this debate. If the election run off can now happen without corruption and a true leader of Afghanistan can be selected with the support of the Afghan people then, yes, I would support sending the entire 44000 troops that Gen. McChrystal has recommended. If the Afghan people would truely support an anti-Taliban campaign with an increasing Afghan ARmy participation then, yes, I would support our increasing our presence there.
If however, we encounter just a corrupt election, to reeelect a corrupt regime then no, it's then time to come home as quickly as possible and with as few casualties as possible.

To commit or not to commit many thousand more to the subjugation of unconquerable land...hmm...interesting that "gradual withdrawal" or "GTFO" aren't even feasible options...hubris ueber alles...the USA, starting in 2009 under Warlord Obama, will be the empire which successfully conquers Afghanistan...!

LOL!

Can anyone even outline what it is we're doing in Afghanistan, other than "saving face"?

Obama is waiting until after the NOV09 elections, then he will push an increase of troops to the tune of 80,000 soldiers.

He is being deliberate, but not because the military situation, but the political one. He won't be the first, nor the last president to do this.

New strategy: GET OUT NOW.

"
To commit or not to commit many thousand more to the subjugation of unconquerable land...hmm...interesting that "gradual withdrawal" or "GTFO" aren't even feasible options...hubris ueber alles...the USA, starting in 2009 under Warlord Obama, will be the empire which successfully conquers Afghanistan...!"

Meanwhile, the biggest criticisms of Obama are that he is taking too long to commit 40,000 additional troops to Afghanistan and (oh the horror) could be questioning the whole mission.
But don't let reality disturb your fantasy.
WArlord Obama.....how ridiculous.
In the end, do you sir, have no shame???

"New strategy: GET OUT NOW."

AT least an honest opinion, and perhaps an intelligent strategy.

So he holds his sixth meeting on what to do in Afghanistan since Sept 27.

Makes you wonder what he wanted to do last spring when he sent 20,000 troops in.

This is what happens when you elect someone that has never ran anything in his life.

Sad thing is, this time it's costing lives.

There is nothing to win in either war in which we are currently engaged. Neither of them is worth a tank of gas, let alone American lives. The only smart thing to do is GTFO.

This is what happens when you elect someone that has never ran anything in his life.


Sad thing is, this time it's costing lives.

#24 | Posted by Mato at 2009-10-26 10:58 PM | Reply | Flag:

You mean like Bush---who was a complete failure at everything he touched---the guy who started these wars? You think lives are just being lost NOW?

You mean like Bush---who was a complete failure at everything he touched---the guy who started these wars? You think lives are just being lost NOW?

No, but here's the deal, bOoB. Bush is no longer president. It's this whole other guy now and he should be acting. But he's not.

Get it?

The question is, who's in charge? Whatever the out come it must be a level of power that will decide the issue. It is their way. Undeniable and with their future at stake will not see any other outcome but for there's. There state of power relies on it.

Only A (True) revolt by the masses are they derailed.

2010 will decide. When the power of the people take back what is there rights, liberty, and freedom will the powerful fall.

We must send a message to Washington. Give us back our freedom or , well we will just vote you out?

Anyone got the guts? Or, does your brother own you?

Good night for freedom, for now.

He doesn't mind letting our boys and girls die, especially if it gets in the way of his passing his health care reform b.s. and his cap and tax economic ruin plan.

"A bit of dithering might have been in order before we went into Iraq in pursuit of non-existent weapons of mass destruction," {...} "For a representative of the Bush administration to accuse someone of taking too much time is missing the point. We have much more to fear in this town from hasty than from slow government action."
~George Will

It's not dithering. It's intentionally postponing a decision until after the November 3 election. Obama has already worked himself into a corner where whatever he chooses will offend his liberal base.

He has taken the despicable decision to postpone his "decision" so that it will not negatively affect Democrats in the election. The latest BS about Pentagon war games is the latest in a series of lies and misdirections, and meanwhile, our overwhelmed forces in Afghanistan are dying. But what are a few more bodies when Obama has a political agenda to shove through?

"It's not dithering. It's intentionally postponing a decision until after the November 3 election."

Are you actually pretending Hamlet won't make a decision for another year?!?

Obama is too smart for this ruse. Go ahead and cry about it pubbies.

priority 1-campaign to get relected in 2012 2-fund raising events for dems. 3-demonize all aspects of capitalism 4-play golf 5- cap and tax and somewhere in the next 20 is Afghanistan

Why should Obama rush the decision on Afganistan. He can wait three more years and blame any defeat there on Bush and Cheney.


So he holds his sixth meeting on what to do in Afghanistan since Sept 27.


Makes you wonder what he wanted to do last spring when he sent 20,000 troops in.


This is what happens when you elect someone that has never ran anything in his life.


Sad thing is, this time it's costing lives.

#24 | Posted by Mato


Excellent post -

and who can be surprised.

The libs have never cared about the lives of our kids in the military -

So they voted for this unfit CiC, the lives of our soldiers be damned.


-this unfit CiC,

GW is back in office?

Who knew?

Obama does not know what to do when confronted with a tough issue like this as it is a tough issue. When he was a senator he just voted "present" when votes were being taken on tough issues. He can not do this now and he is in way over his head!

I JUST READ the answer to this.

AP article over the weekend had as headline.

"kerry becomes obama's all around advisor"

NOW we know why obama sucks

There is nothing to win in either war in which we are currently engaged. Neither of them is worth a tank of gas, let alone American lives. The only smart thing to do is GTFO.

#25 | Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2009-10-26 11:08 PM

Holy shit, I agree with you on something. Must be a shift in the earth's magnetic field or something.

When Obama gets the 3AM call, he rolls over away from the telephone.

UNLESS its the nobel people.,.
or someone wanting to play in an ALL MALE basketball game..

He is certainly rushing his socialist agenda... Why not rush the Afghan. decision?

I find it laughable that people gripe because Obama is trying to make a thoughtful decision with regards to Afghanistan. You folks on the right just do not have any room to criticise anything Obama hdoes or does not do. Your piece of shit Dubya rushed into everything and You see where it got the United States. You folks need to STFU for a while. Your criticisim isn'ty waranted. Thank You very much

Larry

Instead of strong words, here he needs to actually make a decision (a trying situation for the bamster). Meanwhile our men and women [who are already in harms way!] in Afghanistan are hung out to dry.

You folks need to STFU for a while. Your criticisim isn'ty waranted. Thank You very much


Larry


and men and women are in harms way and getting killed while the fuck in the oval office plays golf and dances the salsa and runs all over the country at fundraisers...FOUR TIMES AS MANY AS BUSH...and campaign stops in new jersey and virginnia...

ALSO......

with john kerry advising him,...DEFEAT is on the horizon.

www.foxnews.com

Americans die while the narcissist Obama decides.

yes OUT

there is no one I know or here from the right that doesnt think he shouldnt think about it and research it but it HAS Been researched and NOW we find out the bush administration did an intensive study that obama asked them NOT to announce apparently just so RHOM could get on meet the press and lie about it.

I know what he's waitig on...elections and NOT the one in afghanistan but the ones in new jersey and VA...
and in the meantime...men and women are at risk and dead

aflakabibble...the only one in the country that knows the inside scoop on Obama, but never had a clue what Bush was thinking. In fact he voted for the clown twice.

Obama is doing the right thing. If he is going to commit more troops it better be all or nothing, but the question is, is it worth it just for a drug that is killing his brothers on the streets of America day and night? Ther eis no other reason to be in Afghanistan today. The terrorist are training in Pakistan and Somalia now and the Taliban who were financed, armed and trained by the CIA are the civilians in Afghanistan. Obama must decide whether to kill all these civilians or let them get on with the business of eradicating opium production like they almost did in 1999 and running their own country. The results of the elections there are extremely important because if the wrong people get elected America will be at war with the entire country and that is a scenery that will take all the troops in Iraq just to bleed them out for the next ten years.

Personally I think the smartest move is to pack up and go home while the gettin' is good, from both countries and let the Arabs kill off each other if all they want to do is fight all the time.


You folks need to STFU for a while. Your criticisim isn'ty waranted. Thank You very much
Larry
----------------------

What's the matter Larry?


Don't you remember:

"Dissent is the highest form of patriotism"


I know I certainly give BHO the exact same amount of respect as the left gave to President Bush....not one iota less!
.

But will he Afghan the Rush Decision?

Hey I am all for dissent and I am all for creepier people than Me to speak out. Hell I got lambasted quite severely supporting Fred Phelps right to His sick hate filled speech. I just get so sick and tired of the faux outrage that comes from the Right Wingers against Obama. They lost and they are shitting themselves and the smell stinks. I would NEVER force anyone to shut up and be quiet.

Larry

I would NEVER force anyone to shut up and be quiet.

Larry

#53 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2009-10-27 02:07 PM | Reply
--------------------

Just a suggestion Larry.....


Take a peek at the latest poll numbers, the independents and moderates are fleeing Obama in droves.


What is comming from the Right is the least of your worries.

.

Obama is a worthless hunk of donkey shit! If it aint on the prompter he his fuckin clueless

Your criticisim isn'ty waranted. Thank You very much


Larry

#44 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2009-10-27 11:22 AM | Reply | Flag: Dumbfuck

From the article, "I won't risk your lives unless it is absolutely necessary," Obama said during a visit to Naval Air Station Jacksonville."

What does that mean? What message does that send the troops already there? Does this imply the lives over there now - the ones Obama's military folks are saying need reinforcement- are expendable?

I think I read where another US military leader resigned, essentially saying he didn't know what we were doing over there.

Voting "present" is not an option.

Obama's trying to get healthcare passed. He needs Afghanistan to go away but it won't. At least he has time for a little golf.

If the election was found to be fair, would you then support sending additional troops?

#7 | Posted by andyuhenet at 2009-10-26 08:15 PM | Reply |

Lets not say IF. Because there is quite a bit there to suggest it wasn't.

51, 54


Respect is earned and lilaWol/hallichainy didn't earn any by allowing us to be attacked then invading/occupying a country that didn't attack us, then outing our own cia ops when their lies were debunked, allowing torture/rendition/no habeus corpus and attempting to politicize the justice dept....., no response for 5 days to a national natural disaster....on and on...

To pretend Obama has fkd up like that is hilarious.

And as the king of polls, you know better than anyone else which "poll" counts, don't you?

Nov 8, 2008 ring a bell?

I could care less about cheney or westmoreland, my problem is Obama is just stalling the whole "decide and take the credit/blame"...While American soldiers get killed.

#17 | POSTED BY PROFIT AT 2009-10-26 09:17 PM

Sure buddy,

And you believe blindly sending more into a no win senario, homegrown insurgency won't get MORE kia/wia?

You think not sending more is what is getting those there now kia/wia?

Newsflash for ya genius.

No conventional foreign occupier has ever defeated a homegrown guerilla insurgency, especially not in Afghanistan.

If you are so sure it's intelligent to send more firemen into a burning building that has already kia/wia many, why don't YOU go join up and put your ass over there as a sitting duck target.,


K?

I really wish righties would back off on their Afghanistan criticisms.

He took his time and made presumably a thoroughly-deliberated decision. Let's see how it plays out before blasting him. What the right is doing is no different than Harry Reid proclaiming the Iraq war is lost just after the surge was implemented.

It was bullshit then and its bullshit now.


During the Bush years, the right accused the left of hoping for failure in these wars for political gain. Now, they are doing the exact same thing.

There is a difference here jeff j, which you continue to IGNORE.

obama didn't create these disasters, he inherited them

no one called for bush to fail, we pointed out the failures....

if you cannot or will not acknowledge the difference, and cannot grasp the importance of acknowledging and understanding the mistakes of the past, then your statement is little more than not wanting to be blamed for these problems your votes caused...


that's my opinion.....

Something more for those like PROFIT who claim our troops are being endangered because Obama is not sending MORE.....


AP IMPACT: Troops already outnumber Taliban 12-1
By SLOBODAN LEKIC (AP) 1 hour ago
BRUSSELS There are already more than 100,000 international troops in Afghanistan working with 200,000 Afghan security forces and police. It adds up to a 12-1 numerical advantage over Taliban rebels, but it hasn't led to anything close to victory.

www.google.com


(note to self: do not post this truth/link on any other thread)

no one called for bush to fail, we pointed out the failures....

Harry Reid said we lost the war in Iraq just as the surge was being implemented. That is pretty blatant.


As for Obama - yes, he did inherit his share of messes, which he points out almost daily. However, he was elected to move us forward, not gripe about the past.

He's been in office for 9 months now. He announced an Afghan strategy in March and has already begun to implement that strategy. This is his war now.

No conventional foreign occupier has ever defeated a homegrown guerilla insurgency, especially not in Afghanistan.


so you want us out asap?

jeff j


Here, look at the FACTS:

icasualties.org


Third graph down, casualties by month and year.

Note that from Feb 07 thru Aug 07, casualties doubled and some months were higher than any other month/year of the occupation.

Surge began in Feb 07.

On Aug 29, 2007 a truce was reached with al sadr.
(Read DIPLOMACY)


From that point on, US casualties were halved and then continued to drop.

Now, think how if anyone would have listened to Kerry during the 2004 debates, when he said diplomacy is needed to win a political battle, how many vets would still be alive and/or not maimed.

Eb

I want us out as soon as is expedient and that will require the least loss of life and best chance for Afghanis to control their own destiny.

I'm not in a position to see all the info the potus is, and I won't second guess him.

I'm an anti war, war vet, with the emphasis on protecting our vets and allies vets.

get it yet?

Americans die while the narcissist Obama decides.

WTF did they expect when they volunteered to join the hunting party in the first place? I pity them for getting suckered into it but that's what happens in a war zone. I guess nobody ever told them that the only ones watching out for their ass was the volunteer kid next to them in the trench. Like I said already, Obama and this country would be best off pulling out all together.

To follow up on my post #57...

Some points for consideration/discussion.

1. Many on the DR left think it wise to hold off on troops. OK, what criteria will be used to determine whether we have a cooperative government? 100% compliance with our wishes? 90%? And what if a government is in place, we send more troops, and then they double cross us? Do we pull out without hesitation?

2. I think Obama's in a pickle. Last thing he wants to do is to piss off the left by dumping more troops over there, particularly when healthcare is still up in the air. Didn't he call Afghanistan a critical war or words to that effect?

If it's so vital... and his military folks are asking for more troops... why doesn't he fish or cut bait? Either this thing gets funded to win it or get out... but to let things sit in neutral while waiting for some theoretical degree of gov't support is passing the buck, plain and simple.

Who can understand a President who made campaign promises to bring our troops home quickly if elected, and does not, but adds thousands more troops to the war he and his supporters blame on Bush???
And first thing after election vows to quickly close down Gitmo terrorist prison camp and begins bringing the most dangerous terrorists to roost on American soil, Wake up folks...

#48--- "Americans die while the narcissist Obama decides"----- not going to get into this debate but the interesting thing about someone with NPD is that they have a very difficult time making controversial decisions-- Obama appears to on the surface have some of the traits and maybe NPD but who knows. That makes some of Oorah's observations all the more interesting-- his point 2.

Who can understand a President who made campaign promises to bring our troops home quickly if elected, and does not, but adds thousands more troops to the war he and his supporters blame on Bush???
And first thing after election vows to quickly close down Gitmo terrorist prison camp and begins bringing the most dangerous terrorists to roost on American soil, Wake up folks...

#70 | Posted by Dr_Feelgood at 2009-10-27 09:56 PM | Reply | Flag:


He always said that Afghanistan would be the War he would fight. Stop your revisionist bullshit.

As for "bringing the most dangerous terrorists to roost on American soil"....so what? Who cares? It's not like they're going to have jobs being a Mall Santa.

Are you really that big of a pussy that you'd be scared if a 'terrorist' was being held in a prison near you?


I don't think Obama instills fear in any of the world leaders. Let's face it; he's not the most masculine guy to ever hold the office. Somewhat metrosexual.

Firemen will not rush putting out the fire in downtown metropolis, they ahve to think about it a while.

The proper analogy is the firemen who were on the scene when the blaze started let the house burn nearly to the ground. Fire inspectors are now on the scene examining how this was allowed to happen, and rebuilding efforts are being planned with safety in mind.

It is now known that the Bush administration left the Obama administration with a detailed plan for Afghanistan.

But, No Hurry... The boy-child "playing at president" has other things to do, such as, golf, travel, have lavish parties with Kobe beef in the white House rather than making the life and death decision for our troops.

Instead, he's left our troops hanging out in the wind -- literally hanging out in the outlands in sparce numbers. Plus, he's left the Afghan people hanging out in the wind, because if Obama decides not to reinforce troops in adequate numbers (the 40,000 asked for; the 60,000 the Generals first asked for and he told them to get it under 50,000), the people who voted in this election, the people who have leaned towards the UN operation, will be "exterminated".

Obama's Generals asked for extra troops in August. It is nearly November. The reinforcements could be on their way if he had made a firm committment to WINNING. WHAT A CONCEPT!!!! This so-called Commander In Chief is proving himself to be an empty suit.

Americans die while the narcissist Obama decides.

#48 | POSTED BY OUTBACKER AT 2009-10-27 11:43 AM |


Americans die while the narcissist OUTBACKER posts on the internet.


Again, do you really believe the number of US troops there decides whether they will be kia/wia? Uh, if so consider this. The MORE US troops there, the MORE are likely to become kia/wia.

All I can say to you is Join up mf! Too old? Send YOUR kid.


Why would Obama have to send more troops?
There are now 100k coalition/nato/us troops and 200k Afghan troops which translates to a 12 to 1 advantage. Will more troops make a difference? How so? A guerilla war isn't about who has the most troops. An insurgency isn''t defeated militarily. The population must be won over. Do you think having MORE foreign occupiers wins the hearts and minds? Can you understand that in Vietnam, the usa won all the military battles, but lost the war?

If, after listening to ALL his advisors, the CIC decides to send more than the 34,000 troops he already sent since April, then he will do so believing it will help us train Afghanis and hasten our ability to remove US troops. Gen. McChrystal is ONE advisor, not all of them. And how about the presidential election "runoff"? Does it make sense to wait and see the outcome? Let's recall that McCain said plainly he would leave US troops there for 100 years. Is that crazyass or what?

For that several decades the USA has spent $400 billion a year on defense programs. Did that stop the 911 attacks? Why not?

Not everything is won or defeated militarily. Vigilance would have stopped the 911 attacks.


Let's allow Obama to get advised from all his "experts", not just the one shooting his mouth off in the press, letting our enemies know what he's thinking by doing so, and jumping the chain of command.


I'm feel confidant he'll make a decision based on what's right for our troops and America and Afghanistan, not what's best for giant, global oil/war corporate profiteers, unlike the last regime.

It is now known that the Bush administration left the Obama administration with a detailed plan for Afghanistan.

#76 | POSTED BY KISSNTELL AT 2009-10-28 05:58 AM


REALLY? Then, pray tell us WHY we are still there? WHY the last regime had about 10k US troops there and allowed the taleban to resurge there, was unable to capture OBL, and instead invaded/occupied a country that didn't attack the USA with 150k troops?


I call bullshit.


I am sure that he is actively seeking the advise of someone that knows more about the problem than he does. Realising that does not narrow the list much, one can imagine right now in Dallas, TX:

*Ring* *Ring*

"Hello, you have reached the office of George W. Bush, I am not in right now, please leave a message and I will return your call"

"Yo, George. Dis Brack. Caw me win you git dis. I wants to rap wich you 'bout Afghanistan. What I do? What I do? I is at duh crib. You gots duh number."

#79 | Posted by A_Citizen

Do you consider yourself
(A) a racist
(B) a racialist
(C) an ignoramous
(D) A and B
(E) A and C
(F) B and C
(G)A, B, and C

(G) Doc Sarvis

Congratulations, Larry! You win this morning's prize!

Personally I think the smartest move is to pack up and go home while the gettin' is good, from both countries and let the Arabs kill off each other if all they want to do is fight all the time.

#50 | Posted by RingMaster at 2009


over the weekend 12 americans died

yesterday 8 more died I believe is the number

obama continues to fundraise and play golf and dance the salsa with a good looking hispanic bitch,

close your eyes and imagine this were george bush.
the left here and around the country would require sedatives to calm themselves down over the outrage.


watch and see......he will decide nothing until after the two american elections for governor

REALLY? Then, pray tell us WHY we are still there? WHY the last regime had about 10k US troops there and allowed the taleban to resurge there, was unable to capture OBL, and instead invaded/occupied a country that didn't attack the USA with 150k troops?


I call bullshit.

#78 | Posted by woke at 2009

and I call you bigoted and biased and uninformed as to your bullshit call concerning the plan and investigation of the previous administration

The decision he would have made for Iraq was to NOT do the surge....which was wrong. He said he had a new strategy for Afghanistan in MARCH ( the new plan brought to him by Bush's team ) but he never implemented it.

Now he sits on it still and eventhough his generals have told him the best way forward he still hasn't decided....he has played golf and basketball..taken 6 vacations...campaigned incessantly for this person and that.....but no time to actually make a decision.

In the campaign it was brought up how many times he voted "Present"....well he is still doing that. But as President..just showing up is not enough.

amen fo amen

#84

You have as much right to post your opinion as do I son.

Yet, it was bush who ignored Afghanistan to invade/occupy a country that did not attack the USA.

Some great plan, eh?


Again, do you REALLY believe sending more troops will keep casualties from occurring?

Think about this.

The more troops, the more targets, the more casualties.


Take it from someone who has actually experienced an ESCALATION of half a million US troops, won all the battles, yet lost the war and nearly 60k troops kia, 250k wia.

Is that the "victory" you have in mind?

Try thinking instead of spewing regurgitated bullshit from right wing multimillionaire chickenhawks who never bothered to serve anyone but themselves.

foshaffer

Apparently you are under the false impression that the "surge" turned things around in iraqnam.

Yet, from Feb 07 thru Aug 07, US casualties doubled each month over previous years.

Until diplomacy was used to negotiate a truce with al sadr on Aug 29, 07, then from Sept 07 on, casualties dropped off to the point that security of the country could be turned over to iraqis.

But don't let FACTS get in your way of placing partisan politics over our country, potus and troops.

more troops the more targets
are you SERIOUS????


how about the more troops, the more security for all..

noones is trying to say that there will be no deaths...thats just silly posturing on your part and you know it.

and this all sounds so friggin familiar
that surge in iraq you know

"THIS WAR IS LOST"

harry reid

Will he make a decision before his 1st and only term ends? I guess it's tougher than knocking on doors in Schaumburg, Community Organ'izin.

AND you made my point when you THOUGHT you were getting to "FRO"

what the hell do you think was one reason they had the security to do the other stuff.

and ALso notice the violence that has occured recently...not unexpected because of a weak and ineffective president who is 'dithering'.
sorry..just wanted to make sure I got that word in somewhere

as i said
wis
watch for more movement or even some action AFTER the elections in VA and NJ.....
he doesnt DARE risk the scorn of the radical left and george soros before that

sure AFK et al....
/

Just show us ONE time in history where a conventional foreign occupying army defeated a homegrown guerilla insurgency regardless of how many conventional foreign occupiers were deployed....


Huh< what's that? NEVER, eh?

Yet you want to send MORE to die and be maimed, eh?

Send YOURSELVES AND YOUR CHILDREN......k?

Who cares what we want, Woke? What are you going to do when the guy in the big seat does it? Deflect to Bush, no doubt.

92

Or maybe after the clusterfk of the election in Afghanistan is figured out eh?

Oh, wait, that would probably make to much sense to someone who places politics over what's best for our country, as you are claiming Obama is doing. I can see why you say that, considering the fkups you supported did exactly that, placing a failed pnac ideology over our constitution and rules of law....at nearly every step of their tenure.

If Obama decides to send more troops, it will be to insure that the troops already there are protected.

Now, compare and contrast that with the last regime who thought invasions/occupations/
nationbuilding could be done on the "cheap" and sent our troops into countries with too little armor and no plan AFTER the invasion.

As I have been saying:

1. Obama didn't invade/occupy these countries, he inherited it.

2. I support him taking the time to decide what's right, rather than blindly sending more (he's already sent 34K since April).

3. Second guessing Obama's every move before he does them and denigrating him is not the same as pointing out the FAILURES of the last admin AFTER they occurred.

4. Recall how 90% of our country rallied behind bush/cheney after 911, even tho they allowed it to occur on their watch. Not until they invaded/occupied a country that didn't attack the USA and turned their back on Afghanistan (using 10k US troops there), did lefty/libs begin complaining of their incompetence and failures.

Too bad you cannot see the difference is your own pathetic poltical partisanship in calling for obama to FAIL.

#76 | Posted by Kissntell

So, follow a failed plan that allowed the Taliban to control 80%+ of the country? Sure. Good move.

You don't remember the 'plan' they had for Iraq? Out in weeks, greeted as liberators, flowers and chocolates everywhere?

This so-called Commander In Chief is proving himself to be an empty suit.

#76 | Posted by Kissntell at 2009-10-28 05:58 AM | Reply | Flag: Spoken by an empty Dittohead

Rethugs would be an amusing bunch of loonies if they weren't so dangerous.

They are the type that WOULD send more firemen into a burning tower before they even knew if it was about to collapse.

"They are the type that WOULD send more firemen into a burning tower before they even knew if it was about to collapse."


As opposed to the fucking lazy dems like you, who would stand there and wait for someone to tell you the tower is on fire.

"So, follow a failed plan that allowed the Taliban to control 80%+ of the country? Sure. Good move."


Glad you pay attention to the POTUS... Didn't he support and outline his strategies back in March this year???? Or is he, like you, still on the Bush clock???

As opposed to the fucking lazy dems like you, who would stand there and wait for someone to tell you the tower is on fire.

#100 | Posted by crispee_oc at 2009-10-28 01:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

We can all see the "tower" is on fire. What we cannot tell is when it will collapse. People are going to die no matter what we do. Now the question is how many are going to die.

WE didn't start the fire!

We didn't start the fire
It was always burning
Since the world's been turning
We didn't start the fire
No we didn't light it
But we tried to fight it

Rethugs would be an amusing bunch of loonies if they weren't so dangerous.
They are the type that WOULD send more firemen into a burning tower before they even knew if it was about to collapse.
#99 | POSTED BY DONNERBOY AT 2009-10-28 01:15 PM


And how few ever served anyone but themselves.

And even after the building is collapsing they would call for more to be sent into it.....if there was a profit to be made from it, eh?

#101

I can see why crispee liked the last regime, that began right away attempting to implement the pnac ideology from the early 90's...never once stopping long enough to see what might be changed or tweaked since their ideology was established, and attempting to continually fix the "intell" around that ideology.


What makes little sense to me is how they can justify denigrating the current potus who inherited those disasters, before any such failure has occurred. Seems to me, after the complete and utter failure of their economic and foreign policy disasters, they'd at least just stfu for awhile and see if another way might work better...(law enforcement and diplomacy in foreign policy and some regulation and tax dollars going back to working Americans economically...

But no....


GOP-party over country


#101


I can see why crispee liked the last regime, that began right away attempting to implement the pnac ideology from the early 90's...never once stopping long enough to see what might be changed or tweaked since their ideology was established, and attempting to continually fix the "intell" around that ideology.


Christ Almighty!! WTF does the 90's have anything to do with Obama's dereliction of duty as the CiC? Is your brain simply unable to grasp the realities of today? Or this fucking thread for that matter? You piss and moan like some spoiled little girl because nobody takes you seriously, and here you are once again retorting some crap?

Got anything at all that can debunk any of the facts i provide crispee?

If not, your namecalling and insults make YOU look like the one who has a little problem.

As i said, you are complaining that Obama isn't following what you claim was his set war stratergery for Afghanistan in March of this year.

Has anything changed there since then? A fraudulent election? An increase in violence? Afghani police and military saying an increase in US troops will increase the insurgency and violence and decrease Afghani support for occupiers.

My point, which you attempt to deflect is that, unlike lilaWol ignoring all the threats and warnings about OBL and following a set game plan that was written in the 90's, Obama is hopefully listening to many different source of intell/info and thoughtfully deciding the best course of action.

Something that rigid ideologues cannot be bothered with, since they fix their actions around ideology and policies rather than FACTS and real time events.

But, please, continue to show your abject ignorance.

Isn't it interesting how, when a dem wins potus, the repugs believe that our potus and over half of our citizens are the enemy.

When they won congress for the first time in 40 years, they spent the entire time demonizing a potus that went along with and signed every piece of legislation they sent up, eventually impeaching him for something that was no one else's business..

Wonder what our enemies thought about that?


When they held potus, scotus and congress, what did they do?

keep us safe?

fix illegal immigration?

insure our ports and borders were secure?

actually stay focused on those who attacked us and bring them to justice?

insure our constitution and rules of law and treaties were adhered to....?

insure we stayed out of further debt and our economy stayed strong?

NOPE, eh?

"Got anything at all that can debunk any of the facts i provide crispee?"


Facts about what? The 90's? Bush? Who FUCKING CARES!!!!! They have NOTHING to do with Obama and his responsibility. If you have any relevant facts about Obama's strategy unveiled in March this year, post something. Otherwise STFU. Nobody cares about Bush and Rush and every other staple you use.

PrezBo is proving to be what all normal rational thinking folks knew prior to the election, a completely inexperienced empty suit who's best skill in life seems to be reading pre-written speeches from a teleprompter.


Might as well face up to the facts, Barry simply doesn't have the guts or desire to do what it takes to win.

That being the case I say bring the troops home Now.
.

what all normal rational thinking folks knew prior to the election,
.

#109 | POSTED BY 2008ATL AT 2009-10-28 02:11 PM

Apparently, 2008ATL believes "normal rational folks"=FAILED neocon ideologues who profited mightily and sank our economy and foreign policy


Tell us how much you made on your war/oil profits per US troop death buddy?

Apparently enough that you want them back home now, eh?

Be careful what you ask for, there may be a few more who turn out like me.....and they will know who sent them with too little armor and who benefitted from it....

vvaw.org
ivaw.org

Right, crispee,

lilaWol/hallichainy's fk ups have NOTHING to do whatsoever with what Obama just inherited.....

Tell us, how does that jibe with the rw talking point/bullshit that Clinton's regime caused 911?


Whoops, eh?


Those who fail to learn from the mistakes of history are doomed to repeat them.....and crispee, 2008, et al want these mistakes repeated, eh?

Question is, WHY?

#111...

Just can't help yourself can you Woke. Here is the post again pretty much proving how fucking worthless your posts are....

Facts about what? The 90's? Bush? Who FUCKING CARES!!!!! They have NOTHING to do with Obama and his responsibility. If you have any relevant facts about Obama's strategy unveiled in March this year, post something. Otherwise STFU. Nobody cares about Bush and Rush and every other staple you use.

#108 | Posted by crispee_oc at 2009-10-28 02:10 PM |

And here is the philosophy that shows how your idiotic post is so worthless and partisan......


Those who fail to learn from the mistakes of history are doomed to repeat them.....and crispee, 2008, et al want these mistakes repeated, eh?
Question is, WHY?

#111 | POSTED BY WOKE AT 2009-10-28 02:21 PM


Your neocon policies FAILED, stfu and get out of the way of someone trying to fix them with some new ideas....

Unless of course YOU have some new ideas.....


Please, tell us all about them......


(crickets chirping)

Your neocon policies FAILED, stfu and get out of the way of someone trying to fix them with some new ideas....


Unless of course YOU have some new ideas.....


Please, tell us all about them......


You fucking twisted moron... How many times does one have to post the same thing before you get it through your thick skull? You ignorance is beyond compare. I have been asking you about OBAMA'S OWN STRATEGY from MARCH 2009? You fucking stupid shit. Have you made any sensible post since that was asked? Of course not, instead you psew the same irrelevant, worthless crap over and over. Answer the fucking question you senile old fuck....

When a dem is potus:

"You can support the troops but not the president."
--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is."
--Governor George W. Bush (R-TX)


When a repug is potus:


"This happened in Vietnam," said Tom DeLay at the time, excoriating John Kerry for circulating a letter calling for Donald Rumsfeld's resignation. "It happened in other wars, where the troops wondered if people are really behind them."

"When our soldiers hear politicians in Washington question the mission they are risking their lives to accomplish," the president recently told a gathering of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, "it hurts their morale." George W. Bush


Any questions about WHO the people who put politics before country are?

#115...

Answer the question Woke. Or did you already forget what was asked?

Unless of course YOU have some new ideas.....

Please, tell us all about them......

You fucking twisted moron... your thick skull? You ignoranceYou fucking stupid shit. you senile old fuck....

#114 | POSTED BY CRISPEE_OC AT 2009-10-28 02:37 PM


No new ideas, just namecalling and insults, eh?

As I said....crickets chirping

Again, do you REALLY believe sending more troops will keep casualties from occurring?

#87 | Posted by woke at 2009-10-28 11:26 AM


PrezBo in March: The roughly 4,000 new troops mainly will be trainers to help expand the Afghan army. The training troops are in addition to the 17,000 troops Obama ordered in February, in what he told CBS's "60 Minutes" last week was the most difficult decision of his young presidency.


Obama's message was not only directed to the American people, however; he also had a message for listeners in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The president repeatedly went out of his way to make the case that a stepped-up American presence in these countries would ultimately be in their own interest.


OPPS!!!!


EH?
.

cripsy

When the Afghanistan election debacle is settled, and all quarters have weighed in on what the best stratergery is, I'm sure you'll be the first to know about Obama's decisions....and the first to denigrate them.....BEFORE ever knowing anything whatsoever about what the outcome of them will be.....

Just as, conversely, even AFTER seeing the complete clusterfk lilaWol/hallichainy created in iraqnam and afghanistan, you will still cling to those failed policies, eh?


GOP=politics over country

As I said....crickets chirping

#117 | Posted by woke

As opposed to your posts...a toilet flushing.

Answer the fucking question you senile old fuck....

#114 | Posted by crispee_oc at 2009-10-28 02:37 PM
-----------------

As I'm sure you already know that braindead lying idiot has no answer, hell he never has any answers. Just the same old tired bulllshit day after day.


Next the lunatic will start posting songs from the 60's another tried and proven woke 'tactic'.

.

As opposed to your posts...a toilet flushing.

I should have known that stench I smelled was Woke, thought it was my dog farting. Although what this fucking idiot posts doesn't smell any different.

Fucking moron can't even read a simple sentence. Three times no less. I ask about March, this fucking idiot brings up the 90's. I ask about March, the fucking idiot brings up Bush. I ask about March, this fucking idiot brings up the recent election.

2008

I believe the very fact that both left and right are denouncing Obama's current path of thoughtful deliberation on what to do, shows that, unlike the last regime, he is not considering politics, but what is right for Afghanistan, the USA and our troops.

Nothing you post will convince me otherwise, mostly because you are a war profiteer who bragged about how much you were raking in despite our troops being kia and maimed and called 2500 US troop deaths in iraqnam "CHUMP CHANGE"

Want me to post that for ya, or do you remember?

"As I'm sure you already know that braindead lying idiot has no answer, hell he never has any answers. Just the same old tired bulllshit day after day."

Yeah pretty much. Should have taken your advice a while ago and just ignore the fucking moron and hope he goes away. Much like the other sites he has been laughed out of.

note to cripsy

It's almost NOVEMBER, not March genius.....wtf does a deployment of 21k troops in March and an additional 13k support troops in Sept have to do with waiting to see what happens with the election runoff and right course of action in regard to deploying more?

NOTHING, except you think your little rw talking point of the day is viable.

By now, you should realize that your multimillionaire, rw, chickenhawk, armchair quarterbacks don't know wtf they are talking about and are grasping at straws to deflect the last decade of failures which CREATED these clusterfks....

But please, continue to spew your idiocy and inanity.

It helps delineate those who seek answers vs those who seek political retribution and redemption.....


Now, again, WHAT are YOUR solutions to get us out of iraqnam and afghanistan?

Oh, yeah.....your "boy" mccain said we should stay for 100 years......eh?


note to cripsy


It's almost NOVEMBER, not March genius...

Way to prove once again your senility. The question was about the STRATEGYS ENDORSED BY OBAMA IN MARCH OF 2009????? Caps in case your eyes are as pathetic as your brain...

"Now, again, WHAT are YOUR solutions to get us out of iraqnam and afghanistan?"

For you to take your daily bath with a electric radio dangling over the side....

It's not MARCH cripsy...it's NOVEMBER, things have changed and so does the stratergery, dependant upon those changes....

unless you are a braindead ideologue, chained to a failed political ideology like neoconservatism....

like yourself...eh?

"It's not MARCH cripsy...it's NOVEMBER, things have changed and so does the stratergery, dependant upon those changes...."


Which are what? What has changed? What are the changes? Other than his fucking generals telling him to get off the pot and make a decision?

Yeah pretty much. Should have taken your advice a while ago and just ignore the fucking moron and hope he goes away. Much like the other sites he has been laughed out of.

#124 | Posted by crispee_oc at 2009-10-28 02:53 PM
--------------------

Even the run of the mill liberal loons can't stand him. If I had a dollar for every time I've seen him get his ass handed to him I'd have more money than Bill Gates.

And the Really sad part is much of the lying bullshit I've seen him post here is actually tame compared to the downright insane commentary he's put up in the past.

EH wokey?
.

I prefer reading Buffalo_Bob's posts over this nutjobs.

#88 Posted by Woke

www.heritage.org

Woke: Not that you will actually read this and think through your bias...but Lieutenant General Raymond T. Odierno the Commanding General of U.S. III Corps disagrees with your assessment.

And as probably you were a conscientious objector / peace demonstrator during Vietnam - or a draft dodger that wasn't that good at dodging ..

("if you can dodge a wrench you can dodge a ball")
(which - by the way - was first escalated by JFK and massively screwed up by Johnson...two of your beloved Dems)

it will not penetrate your deep seated hate of everything good about America.

132

My "hate" as you call it is not about America. I revere and have fought to protect the constitution and laws of the United States.

I do have a disgust and disapproval of the neoconservatives and the military/industrial establishment and their fixed ideology of endless WAR for profit, which has had a death grip on our govt's policies for 4 decades.

You have me confused with someone else if you think i'm a lockstep dem or political partisan, my friend. I'm partisan to AMERICA, and the US CONSTITUTION and BILL OF RIGHTS. I like IKE and the old Republican party before neocons took it over.

If you think posting a far right site (heritage foundation), which is a well known neocon think tank is a viable response to the failures of the neocon policies, then you are the person who needs to be checking your indoctrination.

I'm still waiting for someone like crispy or 2008 or yourself to tell me anything NEW that will solve the problems of an endless occupation.....but, so far, all I've gotten are insults, lies and namecalling from them, and more neocon propaganda from you....

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.
Dwight D. Eisenhower, From a speech before the American Society of Newspaper Editors, April 16, 1953

We merely want to live in peace with all the world, to trade with them, to commune with them, to learn from their culture as they may learn from ours, so that the products of our toil may be used for our schools and our roads and our churches and not for guns and planes and tanks and ships of war.
Dwight D. Eisenhower (1890 - 1969)

I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity.
Dwight D. Eisenhower

"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes that you can do these things. Among them are a few Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or businessman from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid."
President Dwight D. Eisenhower



One other little thingy Foshaffer,


As far as this general or that general says this or that, none of them are the CIC. In our form of govt the buck stops with the civilian leadership of our country, who in turn controls the military, not the other way round.

And that is why over 20 generals "retired" when their advice wasn't followed during the last regime.

At least they had the decency to WAIT until they retired to discuss their differences, eh?

You fucking twisted moron... your thick skull? You ignoranceYou fucking stupid shit. you senile old fuck....
#114 | POSTED BY CRISPEE_OC AT 2009-10-28 02:37 PM

a toilet flushing.
stench I smelled was Woke,
my dog farting.
this fucking idiot
Fucking moron
this fucking idiot
, the fucking idiot
this fucking idiot

#122 | POSTED BY CRISPEE_OC AT 2009-10-28 02:51 PM

braindead lying idiot
same old tired bulllshit day after day."
the fucking moron
#124 | POSTED BY CRISPEE_OC AT 2009-10-28 02:53 PM

your senility.
pathetic as your brain...
#126 | POSTED BY CRISPEE_OC AT 2009-10-28 02:59 PM

take your daily bath with a electric radio dangling over the side....
#127 | POSTED BY CRISPEE_OC AT 2009-10-28 03:01 PM


You really ought to review the moderation policy on this site.

While i have never flagged anyone's post, and i won't begin now, however I'm guessing it's YOU that most posters would prefer to ignore due to your lack of substance and content, and zero ability to back up anything you say with a linked reference to credible information.

Have a nice night.

130

Gosh 2008, when you gonna come on over to the newshounds forum and join our little group you claim i was banned from?

Or when you gonna be able to post anything again on their mains and not see it immediately disappear, since your status is DOS, (delete on sight), due to your continual posting of trollshit, inanity, diversion, and lack of privacy consideration.

What?

You gonna post my name and address here on DR like you did NH?

I would rather try to persuade a man to go along, because once I have persuaded him, he will stick. If I scare him, he will stay just as long as he is scared, and then he is gone.


If men can develop weapons that are so terrifying as to make the thought of global war include almost a sentence for suicide, you would think that man's intelligence and his comprehension... would include also his ability to find a peaceful solution.

If you want total security, go to prison. There you're fed, clothed, given medical care and so on. The only thing lacking... is freedom.


In most communities it is illegal to cry "fire" in a crowded assembly. Should it not be considered serious international misconduct to manufacture a general war scare in an effort to achieve local political aims?


In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

May we never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion.

No one should ever sit in this office over 70 years old, and that I know.

Only Americans can hurt America.


We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security.

When people speak to you about a preventive war, you tell them to go and fight it. After my experience, I have come to hate war.


Dwight David Eisenhower

While i have never flagged anyone's post, and i won't begin now, however I'm guessing it's YOU that most posters would prefer to ignore due to your lack of substance and content, and zero ability to back up anything you say with a linked reference to credible information.


Have a nice night.


#135 | Posted by woke at 2009-10-28 05:20 PM


Ahh. Did I hurt your little feelings? By all means flag away. As a matter of fact, just flag everything. Then nobody would have to suffer through anymore of your inane posts. Seeing as you don't have the balls to answer a simple question. Eh? Think? Eh? Think? LMAO? Eh? Think? LOL? Eh? LOL? RW? Eh?

No, you don't hurt my feelings at all. I have no feelings for you. I'm merely pointing out that you are a juvenile poster.

And no, I have never flagged and won't flag you.

I prefer to calmly point out how your posts are diversionary attacks with no substance or validity.

You may continue your vulgarity as you deem appropriate, but leave "my balls" out of it unless you just cannot help yourself.


"No, you don't hurt my feelings at all."

#139 | Posted by woke at 2009-10-28 06:23 PM
-----------------

You're such a fucking liar

You live to be a permanent 'Victim'

EH?
.

"I prefer to calmly point out how your posts are diversionary attacks with no substance or validity."


Then calmly answer the the questions posed to you earlier. Without any Bush, Rush, 1990, Eisenhower, RW.... BS. You opened your yap and said things in Afghanistan have changed, at least that was your cop out answer to the Obama stategy from March 2009. What has changed? Or was that just more diversionary substance?

stategy...

strategy...

it's strategery.....according to your hero, lilaWol....

LOL


Comeon back to newshounds 2008.....maybe if you make nice, they'll let you post....??


Or, I can just post your inanities on the forum's "troll sockpuppet" thread or the "neocon wingnut quote" thread.......along with all the other ones....

LOL


Are you sockpuppeting crispee, "ranger bob"???

Inquiring minds want to know?

Or is he just a "roommate"?


"Are you sockpuppeting crispee, "ranger bob"???"

The only puppet around this site is you Woke.

BTW...Is that another calmly written post as a diversionary attack with no substance or validity? You fucking whining hypocrite? Eh? lol? Eh? RW? Eh? LOL?

Thought you went to bed a couple of hours ago, or did you forget, again?

#108 | POSTED BY CRISPEE_OC AT 2009-10-28 02:10 PM
#109 | POSTED BY 2008ATL AT 2009-10-28 02:11 PM

#121 | POSTED BY 2008ATL AT 2009-10-28 02:50 PM
#122 | POSTED BY CRISPEE_OC AT 2009-10-28 02:51 PM

#140 | POSTED BY 2008ATL AT 2009-10-28 06:30 PM
#141 | POSTED BY CRISPEE_OC AT 2009-10-28 06:32 PM


2008 and his sockpuppets, come and go together.

It's fairly transparent to anyone paying attention.

#145...

It's fairly transparent you are whining like some little bitch. OHhhh, they are all picking on me.... Why doesn't anyone pay attention to me. boo hoo. My soup is too hot. Eh? Think? Eh? LOL? Trolly? Eh? RW? Rush? Bush? Eh?

www.csmonitor.com

Something on topic more to your liking?

Like why McChrystal might be wrong according to intell?

Hmmmmm....WOKE apparently has quite a stash of good drugs...!!!


#79 | Posted by A_Citizen


Do you consider yourself
(A) a racist
(B) a racialist
(C) an ignoramous
(D) A and B
(E) A and C
(F) B and C
(G)A, B, and C

#80 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis


Sorry I didn't get back to you, I was busily working so I could afford to pay for Larry's health insurance. In answer to your question, you have presented a multiple choice that does not offer the correct answer. Speech is not a racial trait. just like mating before marriage and running away, committing violent crime, and choosing to live on the government dole is not a racial trait. If it were, any country that has the same race would have the same occurrence. England and France do not seem to have the same statistics in the area we do. When I watch television reporters on BBC that are black, I hear proper English with an English accent. I don't hear ghetto garbage. Interestingly enough, they all also appear to be able to speak without a teleprompter.

Sorry to disappoint you. Clowning your boy is no more racist than calling Bush a "chimp" (or any iteration thereof) is racist. But do try again.

"Speech is not a racial trait."

Playing with racialist stereotypes -- please, don't try and claim that's not what you were doing -- is not racial; it's racist. If the suit fits, wear it. Yours is a bit tight and out of date, but it seems your style.


Hmmmmm....WOKE apparently has quite a stash of good drugs...!!!

#148 | Posted by drsoul

Now if only the old goat could remember where he "stashed" them.


Doc,

by your definition, everyone is a racist. I suppose that explains why you are in academia - you are wrong entirely too often to have any credibility in the private sector.

Post a comment
Comments are closed for this entry.
Drudge Retort

Home | News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | Copyright 2009 World Readable