He should be tried for treason.

I hope this disgusting act by a United States Senate Majority Leader is finally the straw that break's the camel's back and compells Joe Lieberman to declare he is now a Republican.

The first order of business for the new Republican Leadership should be a resolution to expell Reid from the Senate and, if at all possible, the United States.

Here's my offer:

Gonzalez resigns. Reid resigns.
Deal?

Yeah well him, Durbin, Murtha, Pelosi and who knows how many others ought to? I mean seriously, how many times do the Democrat leaders have to show disdain and even hatred for the constitution, their own country, and the voters before they are hurled from power?

You know, if Reid had just called for Iraq to be made into a "Gun Free Zone.....

Posted by Christopher_Taylor
April 20, 2007 2:51 PM |

Exactly.
There is nothing new here, just another talking head.
His resignation should be called for loud and clear. Over and over until the Gonzales flack dies and then until the Democrats no longer get away with this kind of treasonous behavior.

I'll contact mine too...wait a minute, mine are Kerry and Kennedy. -SIGH-

Posted by mojoe
April 20, 2007 2:52 PM |

I have Schumer and Shrillary. Although I wouldn't trade them for yours.

Can someone create a letter and web page where we can sign a petition and contact our Senators? Reid really does need to resign for this scandal.

Posted by FairMindedLefty
April 20, 2007 4:02 PM

Everybody wants and end to the war. Just not the surrender that you seem to favor.

Treason! lol... You guys need to get your heads outta Ann Coulter's ass and into a Civics class, STAT.

This was in the news when President Bush spoke about Reid:

Reid, D-Nev., fired back at Bush, saying "no one wants us to succeed in Iraq more than Democrats."

All I can say is Bwhahahahahahahaha. Exactly HOW do you succeed in a war when you pull all of your troops out of the fight? Do they even listen to themselves any more?

I'll contact mine too...wait a minute, mine are Kerry and Kennedy. -SIGH-

Posted by mojoe
April 20, 2007 2:52 PM

Mine are Feingold and Kohl, but I contacted them anyway. His comments are disgraceful and he needs to go.

Last defense of the conservative, when everything else is going bad at least we can insult people.

Posted by idpanicman
April 20, 2007 4:39 PM

You did notice what he was responding to there, right?

Last defense of the conservative, when everything else is going bad at least we can insult people.
Posted by idpanicman
April 20, 2007 4:39 PM

Typical liberal defense mechanism. Ignore every other point of an argument and respond only to any insult, real or imagined. I see this joker using this exact tactic on other threads today. When you have no real counter-argument, cry foul at every given opportunity.

...Senator Reid has an obligation to stand up and fight for what the American people want: and end to the war.

Posted by FairMindedLefty
April 20, 2007 4:02 PM |

In case you haven't noticed, a few hours later he changed his mind and said the war is not lost.

It's tough for Harry, I suppose, to be true to his convictions when he can't seem to make his mind up about what they are.

You know, I'm not normally one to say "I told you so", but I'll still take the credit for pointing out this one. ;)
Posted by Good_Ol_Boy
April 20, 2007 4:57 PM

D'oh!

Reid, D-Nev., fired back at Bush, saying "no one wants us to succeed in Iraq more than Democrats."

All I can say is Bwhahahahahahahaha. Exactly HOW do you succeed in a war when you pull all of your troops out of the fight? Do they even listen to themselves any more?

What makes you think he means America by the word "us?"

GOB - as much sense as anything that comes out of your president's mouth - for example

"The solution to Iraq -- an Iraq that can govern itself, sustain itself and defend itself -- is more than a military mission. Precisely the reason why I sent more troops into Baghdad." --George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., April 3, 2007

Posted by Tomcat53
April 20, 2007 5:16 PM

Yeah, yeah, yeah, he's terrible at articulating his point. We all know that. But at least his statement can be easily explained. When he said "is more than a military mission" he obviously (for anyone who doesn't suffer from BDS, that is) that the principles and ideology behind the mission in Iraq (freedom and democracy for the people of that nation) are much more than just a military matter.

How do you explain yours?

Oh, and btw, unless you are an expatriot (which I fully encourage if you're not) then he is your President too. ;P

Thank you Miranda for the web site. I've emailed me Senators telling them how much i agree with Reid. Also thanked Reid...

Posted by Tomcat53
April 20, 2007 6:00 PM

They don't care what you have to say any more than we do.

I've emailed me Senators telling them how much i agree with Reid. Also thanked Reid...

Posted by Tomcat53 April 20, 2007 6:00 PM

Glad to see that we can no longer question your patriotism, TomPussy. You can join Rastus in the traitorous prick club.

If ding-dong Harry beleives the war is lost,he has the power to end it.
If he doesn't end it by cutting off funds immediately,then every soldier should be able to sue him for putting undo risk on their lives.

I can see not calling for his resignation, but I cannot see how anyone in good conscience could possibly applaud these statements. It takes a special kind of hateful, anti-liberty person to do such a thing, even Reid is backtracking from it because he realizes how awful it was.

(Harry Reid examines the situation in Iraq)

Iraqi Army defeated: check
Saddam deposed, tried, and hung: check
New democratically elected government in place: check
No enemy force in the region capable of dislodging US troops and holding territory: check

Car bomb in Baghdad: OH MY GOD WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!!!! WE LOSE!!!!! NOOOOOOOO!!!!1111!!!!1!!!!

I'm just wondering in hindsight if the surge should have been done quietly without us telegraphing that we are sending in more troops?

If Reid thinks we have lost, then he should have surrender terms ready, as far as I am concerned.
I have not seen them, somebody should push for them. You cannot "lose" without some sort of terms of surrender. Unless you are willing to say we are pulling out and absolutely DO NOT CARE what happens after that, to them or us, and we give you free reign to do what you will with the country once we are out, he should then say that.
Then he should be held responsible. Even if he didn't get us there, we are there, and that country is in the position it is partly because of us. What happens now is part of his responsibility, and also was before.

Left_Turn,

Kissinger has no knowledge but defeat. He's about as useful to listen to as listening to George Seifert about winning while he was coaching the Carolina Panthers.

General Odom hasn't been in the field for over 20 years. How the hell would he know?

And McPeak? The AF guy in my CGSC group refuses to even say his name - the opinion of him is so low in the Air Force.

How come most of the soldiers who come back say that the story is being misrepresented in our press? How come Congress demanded a new strategy, then declared that strategy a failure befvore General Petraeus even arrived on the ground?

Here's the lesson from the left - when the going gets tough, we'll quit!

I sent a useless message to my Senators, Dumbass Durban and Messiah Obama.

No, the surge should not have been done quietly. The biggest change is something out of the control of the military - the united front of the American people.

The center of gravity on this fight is not AQ, baathist insurgents, or any particular person - it is the Iraqi populace. Were they to see an America not abandoning them, in fact stepping up efforts, they would be less inclined to view the insurgents as winners. Therefore, they would be more inclined to side with what they see as the "winning team."

Surprise, like not telegraphing reinforcements and/or a change in tactics, is great for a conventional fight. But this is not a conventional fight. We needed to announce our intentions for the maximum impact on the Iraqi people. It's a shame our leadership doesn't see its part as being just as critical.

Yep, everything's fine in Iraq

Why don't you and your strawman argument go somewhere you're wanted?

""Far more relevant, consequential and disturbing is the behavior of the Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, who by word and action is actively undermining our fighting men and women in Iraq."

Oh please. Indeed, let's not debate the war, let's not talk strategy, let's not have an open debate obout policy in Iraq lest we hurt the feelings of one of our troops.

If even one of our troops is so "undermined" by having heard that someone, anyone, in the states thinks this war is lost, not worth fighting or a charade then they aren't fit to be soldiers. However, it does make them fit enough to squat in a crib and suck their thumb like the baby they are.

Why don't you embrace a little reality, Cav?

I suggest you embrace a little reality, Rastus. Let's examine some choice quotes from your so-called "source":

Walls are controversial. The Israeli government insists its wall is effective in reducing suicide bombers but Palestinians, many of whose lives it has seriously disrupted,

Oh no! Palestinians are having their lives disrupted! Never mind the Israelis whose lives are being "disrupted" by suicide bombers blowing up pizzerias and school buses.

Not exactly thinly veiled bias, eh Rastus?

Let's read further:

Since the US-led invasion, "ethnic cleansing" has resulted in population shifts that have left Baghdad increasingly divided on sectarian grounds, separated by the Tigris which runs through the centre of the city.

"Ethnic cleansing"? I think that's a tad melodramatic, don't you think? Where were the Guardian's complaints about the real ethnic cleansing practiced by Saddam's regime?

No, no bias in that article at all.

Let's look at a few more Guardian articles.

"Q&A: US Gun Laws"
www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2059250,00.html

The article quotes the Brady Campaign twice, citing their claims as undisputed facts, and describes the NRA as a "powerful lobby group that jealously protects gun ownership". The article also contains a blatant lie stating that the Columbine shooters bought their guns at a gun show when they actually bought them through an illegal straw purchase.

Let's look at another article, "Made in America: pride that keeps gun law in place"
www.guardian.co.uk/usguns/Story/0,,2062329,00.html
(I think quoting the title alone is proof enough of the blatant bias contained therein.)

And lets recall that this is the same Guardian that hired a terrorist apologist op-ed writer and described him as "sassy".

Thank you Miranda for the web site. I've emailed me Senators telling them how much i agree with Reid. Also thanked Reid...


Posted by Tomcat53
April 20, 2007 6:00 PM

It's not often that traitors self-identify...

It's not often that traitors self-identify...

Oh, I don't know... some of them seem to do so every time they open their traitorous mouths...

So under what circumstances would the Democrats claim victory?

Folks like rastus seem to think all is lost simply b/c the enemy can inflict casualties. Thank God they weren't in charge at Pusan, or there would be a united, and communist, Korea.

And Jefferson, you aren't going to "hurt my feelings" through dissent. But you don't seem to understand the practical effects of Reid's words:

1. The folks who are helping us - translators, new police, tribal leaders, etc - see us leaving and wonder why they should help us at all.

2. Insurgents use Reid's words to recruit. Folks usually don't join a losing cause, but they can point to Reid's words and say, "See, even the Americans think we're winning." That gets them more recruits.

3. Our own soldiers stop signing up or reinlisting. They say, "Why should I join when my own leadership won't give me the time we need to win?"

Those who think it's "just dissent" are exceptionally short-sighted.

Do we STILL have to allow that they are "Patriots" - anyway?

I mean, at what point does it get too ridiculous to keep up the FARCE for the sake of the PC version of Miss Manners???

Treason! lol... You guys need to get your heads outta Ann Coulter's ass and into a Civics class, STAT.

Posted by rastus
April 20, 2007 4:13 PM |

You get your arse out of Stalin's a$$, and wash your brains out, figure out what nation you are an actual citizen of, and THEN, think about opening your mouth.

Of course, an insurgent just might say to himself - why should i join, they're leaving anyway...

On the other hand, it's hard to understand the Liberal view that if the enemy ever, ever makes a move of any kind, it's an automatic loss for the US. A bomb goes off? We've lost, get out! Someone gets shot? We've lost, get out! Someone gets a hangnail? We've lost, get out, run away!!

Well they have that great international organization for peace and to prevent tyranny and despotism as a model: the first attack on a UN base in Iraq? They bailed to Cyprus.

If only they'd apply this logic to the enemy. If us taking causalties or anything at all ever going bad means we're losing, imagine how they should portray al`Qaeda and the Iraqi deathsquads: they lose every single engagement, all their leaders are killed, they have lost tens of thousands of members, and their entire infrastructure and funding network was scattered and mangled after 9/11.

If we're doing badly by the leftist standards, how is the enemy doing? If we ought to leave because we're losing based on the events in Iraq, what's happening to the enemy?

This is exactly the kind of attitude that got us in the situation in Iraq to begine with.

Posted by idpanicman April 21, 2007 3:44 PM

Were you born a self-righteous asshole, or did you take private lessons?

The situation that got us into this war was Iraq's support of worldwide terrorism and their continued refusal to disarm after ordered to do so by the UN.

But you know this already, don't you? You just like to ascribe malice and evil to America while absolving our mortal enemies.

You do not deserve the freedoms of this country, bequethed to you by better men.

You disgust me.

This is exactly the kind of attitude that got us in the situation in Iraq to begine with.

Yes, it is: the attitude that we have to fight evil, not run from danger, and do what is right, no matter what the price. That's what got us involved in the entire war on terror.

What's sad is how much you oppose the very concept of it all.

Let's see, speaking of Stalin...didn't he build some kind of wall to divide Berlin? Now Bush is building a wall. So Bush is following Stalin's example.


I do agree with this criticism. A wall around an Iraqi neighborhood does seem to signify some kind of defeat for a free and open Iraq.
I won't blame the Americans, as they seem to be stuck in the middle of a larger war between Sunnis and Shiias, but this turn of events does not bode well for the Iraqi gov't.
Even one we want to create to represent all Iraqis.
A wall in Bahgdad? It is as ominous as a wall in Berlin.

"You know, I have been looking at all the threads here today, and idpanicman is, without a doubt, crthns. I'm not normally one who goes out of his way to catch the sock puppets (except that loser Shergald), but the peevish style is just too close. And I thought we were finally rid of the little toad.
Posted by sabiticus
April 20, 2007 4:53 PM"

I am a guy who does go out of his way to catch sock puppets and I am starting to think this as well. Consider the following:

-IPM apeared the same day that crthns told us he was leaving and in the exact same thread.
-There are similarities in posting style, grammer, and internal content as well as the frequency and times in which the two post.
- When IPM first apreared, he acted as if he were quite familiar with various regulars here on the site, meaning that he lurked for a considerable time before posting or he was a sock puppet.
-Although when he first started posting, IPM tried to remain civil and utilize a different and less confrontational style than crthns did, he has been slipping of late. His posts this weekend for example have gone back to being short nasty, insults directed at individuals.
-Finally, and most damning, about a week ago there were two crthns posts that apeared out on no-were in a thread. They were closely spaced and oddly enough were written in the non-confrontational style that IPM was using at that point. Since then, there have been no post under the crthns account. I suspect that he slipped up and accidently logged in under his old account and made a couple of posts before realising his mistake and resuming his posting under the IPm name.

Now, is this 100%?
Of course not. I don't have access to IP signatures to confirm it one way or another. However the signs do indeed seem to point toward IPM being a sock puppet of crthns.

Why do you guys persist on doing this? Do you have no respect for the rules of the site or yourself?
Since one of the 'mods here once stated that thet do not have access to IP addresses, I would ask Hawkins to check the two IP addresses and cinfirm if the two acounts are originating from the same address.

"Trench Raider"

I think he deserves praise and have written his office and the WH to express that sentiment.

I think you can reach Reid c/o al Jazeera these days. I'd give you their address, but from your statements of support for Reid's treason, I'd guess you already have it.

I agree with nutcase - stating the obvious doesn't take courage.

Reid hasn't stated the obvious - he has stated the popular. There's a big difference.

Those who say we've "lost" - please provide metrics on this. Or are you saying that the enemy's mere ability to inflict casualties means we're losing. Thank God you weren't around at Cold Harbor.

You also believe that America should be a third rate, socialist nation.

And you make shit up, jasmac. Do you see dead people too?

What would you like me to back up with facts?

Don't worry about CardsFan. He simply cannot back up what he says with facts or metrics, so he spouts off emotionally b/c it's easier than reasoning through things. Of course, it's also easier to shit your pants than find a toilet too...

Posted by RtWingNtCase
April 22, 2007 5:38 PM

Oh, I am hardly worried. CardsFan is one of the more lame trolls we get here.

Ah, the false bravado, jasmac. Seems like you worry enough to respond and you worry enough to make shit up.............'06

And is the '06 the year of your birth, your IQ, or the size of your package...in millimeters.

Posted by jasamc
April 22, 2007 5:50 PM |


I wonder what CardsFan would think about about Dizzy and Daffy Dean. They were definitely a couple of good ole boys from Arkansas, who weren't liberal.

CardsFan equipment maybe abot about 9 femtometers, .0000000000009, long.

"So, again, I ask - how are we "losing?" -RtWingNtCase


You'll never get a straight answer to that question, RWNC. The best you can hope for (because the trolls will most likely ignore you) will be their standard "we're losing the battle for hearts and minds" rejoinder. And they won't even defend that if you press them on it.

None of the current liberals have the first clue about geo-political events, or military matters. So let me educate you, please... direct from a military intelligence office (S2) who has already BEEN in the Iraqi theater of operations.

WE NEVER INTENDED TO LEAVE IRAQ! 62 years after V-E Day we still have a whole armor corps based in Germany. Almost 61 years after WWII ended we are in Japan. 109 years after the end of the Spanish American War we still have a base in CUBA, Guantanamo Bay (Gittmo)! We've been in Saudi Arabia since Aug. 2nd, 1990, and Kuwait since February 1991! I can go on and on...

We now have permanent American bases in Iraq. Why is it the default position of the ignorant liberals and a few so-called "moderates" that we NEED to leave Iraq? The Democratic Presidential hopefuls are falling all over themselves over who will surrender (sorry, “strategic redeployment”) first.

Iraq is THE central front in the war on terror, and you want to concede it to the enemy, even though the troops WANT to be there. It’s an all volunteer military, and nearly everyone had a choice to reenlist or join since AFTER the invasion. Now I know why only 9-11% of the current US Military votes democrat. I met only 2 liberals when I was in the service. I thought it was a BRILLIANT military strategy, to invade Iraq after Afghanistan.... Look at a map for God's sake. Creating a democracy in the HEART of the Middle East - the land of Mesopotamia, the Garden of Eden - creates a land void of Wahhabbism and state controlled media that preaches violence and propaganda against the infidel. It's going to take a full generation, 20 years or more to start to fully work, but it no doubt will. In the short term it will deny the enemy a safe haven backed with state funds from oil proceeds. And immediately, it GUARANTEED that Sadaam would never again attempt to produce or acquire WMDs.

In less than a month, one Special Forces A-Team backed up by the Northern Alliance, ANGLICO (Air-Ground Liason) and CAS (Close Air Support) defeated the Taliban and drove Al Qaeda underground. We probably haven't killed Bin Laden yet, but we've kept him from building a movement, and isolated him without the ability to communicate. HERE's the brilliant part... We knew the terrorists will follow us wherever we go. We knew they would regroup and flock to us as partisans. Afghanistan is the most inhospitable place on the planet to defend territory. It goes from 110 to below freezing in 24 hours, with arid deserts and elevations regularly above 16,000 ft., has millions of places to hide, and gives the advantage to smaller, more mobile forces (ie. small groups of poorly organized jihadists.) It was time to open a 2nd front.

HERE's the problem. Bush CANNOT go on TV and say, "We want to lure our enemies into a land in which we can slow-bleed the enemy on favorable terrain. We want to change the face of the Middle East, and create democracies in the 3 main sponsors of terror, that happen to border Iraq: Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia." WE WOULD LOSE ALL SUPPORT in the Arab world if he said that! It's a delicate balance, but Bush chose to bite his tongue, and take a massive poll hit to save national security. THAT is a leader.

We are capturing and killing the enemy every single day in Iraq - MANY MORE then they kill of us. Some estimates as great as 14 times more. We have more men, we have better equipment, the best training, and we have the will of the Iraqi people behind us. BUT THE TERRORISTS HAVE A FORMIDABLE WEAPON TOO: LIBERALS here in America. Islamic Extremists know the liberal media is on their side. They know Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and Hillary is rooting for them. Bush is more compassionate than conservative, so he likes to say he does not question the patriotism of democrats. WELL I DO QUESTION THEIR PATRIOTISM! Isn't it blatantly obvious that the democrats stand to lose politically if we WIN? Every single speech, sign, and vote democrats have made were designed to win back power, and they didn’t care if those policies HURT the troops and cause us LOSE a war. Isn't it obvious that they have been trying to do exactly that since 2004? They don't even try to hide it anymore. So it shouldn't surprise you that EVERY single "TROOP WITHDRAWAL DEADLINE" that dems have proposed is scheduled for BEFORE THE NEXT ELECTION! (14 in all.) Why? Because they do not want to deal with the issue. They know they are considered “soft” and “weak” on national defense, so they want to run for cover, then stick their heads in the sand like an Ostrich and pretend there is no war on terror. That is their strategy to win back the white house, and they do not care about the consequences. A win in Iraq, or an attack on Iran would destroy all that... They have already demonstrated the propensity to do what it takes to prevent both those things – even though they voted for the original resolution. If anyone disagrees, please email me with ONE thing that a liberal has done to help WIN the war on terror. Remember, it wasn't until Nixon was elected that the Vietnam anti-war movement grew. While Kennedy and LBJ were in office, there was very little public outcry over the war, even though casualty rates were higher in many of those years. Interesting….

Wake up people. You have been given propaganda for years by the liberal media; You have been fed US Casualties on a regular basis, but not enemy casualties. That's like only getting one team's score at a football game you didn't even see, and having the audacity to comment on the coach's strategy. You were given “pipeline” excuses as the real reason we invaded Afghanistan, and Halliburton reasons for Iraq. The pipeline was canceled in the 90’s, and Cheney doesn't own a single stock in Halliburton. He sold all his stock before accepting the VP nomination. When I point that out to liberals, they say, “Well…… But his buddies still do!” How many of you would start a war and kill thousands of people so your “buddies” can make more money? Think people. How many of you knew that last year Cheney made almost 9 million dollars, but gave 7 million of it away to charity? I'll bet you didn't know that. You didn’t know that because the liberal media has stopped reporting news, and is now more about reporting an agenda. Bush is horrible at communicating; therefore he has no bully pulpit. Even if he was a “Reagan,” only Fox and talk radio would report the speech anyway, thereby preaching to the choir. No one else would even know what as said. This is an uphill battle, but our entire way of life is at stake, and many of you are too blind to see it, or unwilling to acknowledge it.

What Democrat Senate leader Harry Reid did was treasonous. Did anyone watch Al-Jazeera today? Talk about giving aid and comfort to our enemies... From Cairo to Kandahar, Islamic Extremists are celebrating in the streets, and terror cell leaders are using it as proof that Bin Laden was right… America will cut and run after only 3.000 casualties. Ask you grandfathers how many Americans died on D-Day. Ask a police officer how many murders there are in Philly, DC, or Chicago each year. How about some historical, logical prospective? End of rant. Do what you want. I say Reid (D) must resign, or should be arrested for Treason. He is the current Baghdad Bob, Tokyo Rose, and Neville Chamberlain all in one embodiment. Don't worry if you think someone may be offended by a political email- forward this email to them. It's about time we spoke up and put an end to this nonsense. Enough is enough. Either way, OUR way of life WILL be affected by what we do... more than you may know.

Definition of Treason:
1. Violation of allegiance toward one's country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one's country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies.
2. A betrayal of trust or confidence.
"The War is Lost," said U.S. Senate Democrat Leader
("Reid: U.S. Can't Win Iraq Military Fight," AP, 4/19/07)
Those are the words from the Senate's Democrat Leader yesterday -- the war is lost. How do you think our troops in the Middle East feel today after hearing that? How emboldened are the Islamic radicals who wake up every day trying to kill Americans?
"We are going to pick up Senate seats as a result of this war," said U.S. Senate Democrat Leader

Don’t take it from me, read it from the 2nd most liberal show on the network: CNN
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITI...d.iraq.ap/index.html

Now see the difference with a Fox News story:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,267324,00.html

Joe Brignoli
joeybrignoli@aol.com

Joe,

Well said, sir, well said.

Whatever. Defeat is defeat is defeat. Is car bombs inside the green zone. Is the highest casualty rate of the year. Is still having no clue..........after four years.

Posted by CardsFan
April 22, 2007 9:42 PM |

Listen, imbecile: the Iraqis don't consdier themselves defeated; they've fielded a combat worthy army larger than the standing army of Britain or France.

YOU better hope for the safe of YOUR sorry ass that Al Quaida or Iran don't win in Iraq, because it will be precisely THAT pimply, blubbery, pale and hairy ass that will be the line NEXT. What about that don't you understand?

YOUR economy ruined, YOUR security imperiled. I suspect once the first car bomb goes off next to your favorite Starbucks, YOU'LL be screaming bloody murder and demanding that we nuke Baghdad.

What do these moonbats think war is, a game of checkers? Once it's over you pack up your pieces and go home to watch Oprah?

Jeesh. And to think the word "reality" should cross that empty space between their unwashed ears...

Posted by joeybrignoli
April 22, 2007 9:22 PM

Good post. Liberals act the way they do to regain power. The idots that vote for them are just that....idots.

joeybrignoli,

You're never going to convince people like CardsFan - aka crthns. He is convinced that the enemy's ability to simply inflict casualties is a sign they're winning. Thank goodness he wasn't around at Pusan, or Gettysburg, or Bladensburg, or Little Big Horn, etc.

He has yet to bring up a single fact or metric besides, "Everyone KNOWS it's a defeat." He thinks that by saying it enough, it will be true. Well, everyone KNOWS I won the lottery...don't they?

now that's funny *squawk*
now that's funny *squawk*
now that's funny *squawk*
now that's funny *squawk*
now that's funny *squawk*
now that's funny *squawk*
now that's funny *squawk*
now that's funny *squawk*

Self parody is even funnier than when someone else does it.

I am signing all posts with my real name and real email address - even though I may lose business clients as a result. I am sick of hiding, and I suggest the rest of you disgruntled conservatives do the same.

I always have.

They have mental asylums in Nova Scotia?

Hmmm.

Now that is intereesting, CT.
How do you have access to the IP signature of our favorite returning troll? One of our 'mods (probably Maledicta) has gone on the record saying that the 'mod staff do NOT have access to IP addresses of members here.

Given my interest in exposing trolls and sock puppet accounts, I am VERY curious about this as you might imagine.

"Trench Raider"

Reid said thousands more U.S. troops died in Vietnam as a result. Now, he said, Bush "is the only person who fails to face this war's reality - and that failure is devastating not just for Iraq's future, but for ours."

Posted by CardsFan
April 23, 2007 4:38 PM

Just goes to show that someone as stupid as you can make it to Congress!

How do you have access to the IP signature of our favorite returning troll?

She used to visit my blog, so I'm going on memory. Might have been Prince Edward Island too, but I am pretty sure it was Nova Scotia. She left when she didn't get fed by other commenters... hint, hint.

She left when she didn't get fed by other commenters... hint, hint.

The problem is that most people can't resist offering some kind of response, particularly an insulting one. IMO, they do it so the troll can't claim they've won the argument because no one responded to them. That's why I invented the "Nobody cares what you think" post. It's insulting, condescending, and it offers nothing the troll can effectively respond to. Eventually the realize you aren't the least bit interested in debating with them and they stop trying.

The only difficult part is being creative enough to think of a thousand different variations on the phrase "Nobody cares what you think".

RtWingNtCase,

I understand where you are coming from... But I have to respectfully disagree. Has pointing out how stupid they are worked until now? I really think we have reached a pinnacle in this country, where McCarthyism has its place to distinguish friend from foe. In WWII, could you have ever imagined a member of the Legislative Branch make statements like Harry Reid did? The modern day version of the communist party is here among us, but in numbers that would have made Khrushchev salivate. We need to fight fire with fire. And I don't mean calling them stupid all the time. I mean putting them on the defensive, and making them PROVE they are Americans, and not Al Qaeda.

I am new to this room, but not to the concepts I was referring to. Harry Reid's comments made me start using my own name, and sending political emails to everyone, instead of my "R" list. I spent the last year righting a book on the process, and have converted over a hundred moderates. Before joining the service, I sold stocks, cars, investments, gym memberships, and then martial arts memberships. I have found that selling is selling- whether it is an idea, or an 07 Nissan Maxima. Imagine if each die-hard conservative were to sponsor and convert one open-minded liberal or so called moderate... We would win every election in a landslide.

The reason why the left is winning the propaganda war is because we have remained too friendly. We are too rich, and we are not upset enough to protest in front of Harry Reid's daughter's house. I think we should start.

If there was a PRO-WAR protest, in your town, right now, how many of you would show up? Last week I would have stayed home to watch 24. Now, I would be the guy with the bull-horn. I'm fed up with the Treason, and fear for the future of our kids.

Joe Brignoli
joeybrignoli@aol.com

W Fights WWII


It’s May 1944 and the catastrophe of world war still plagues the people of Planet Earth. But not to worry, the advanced civilization of ‘Future America’ has just taken control from the Roosevelt administration and its compliant warmongering congress! Scientists, sixty-three years in the future, had found a way warp the space-time continuum and lend our ‘more evolved’ leadership to the backward, arrogant, over-confident nation that we once were.
The replacement president from the future, George W. Bush, showed the 1944 world his courage by flying to Great Britain to meet with Winston Churchill. Before he left he assured the American people by live radio address that he would consult with congress on every change in tactics and would establish something he called a ‘solid exit strategy’ from Europe “long before any invasion of Normandy”. The Whitehouse Press Secretary later said that the President ‘misspoke’ and strongly denied that the U.S. has any invasion plans for mainland Europe whatsoever. “We do not, at this time, have any plans to invade Europe. But we’re keeping our options open. We don’t want to take D-Day off the table.” Vice President Cheney said.
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi just back from her famous ‘black shirt’ meeting with Italian strongman Benito Mussolini said she has nothing to apologize for. “How can you ever expect peace to come to Europe if you won’t talk to potential friends?” Pelosi said. “I regret giving the fascist salute to President Mussolini but thought at the time that it would be a polite gesture. I never would do anything to undermine the morale of our fighting men and women.”
The Speaker and Rep. John Murtha both urged President Bush to redeploy U.S. troops from the European theater of operations to the Pacific where the ‘real war’ is taking place. “Germany and Italy never attacked the United States! The Imperial Forces of Japan have been and continue to be the real threat to America. The British have made virtually no effort to invade France on their own. Why do they expect the Russians and Americans to support them when they aren’t willing to help themselves?” She, Senator Kennedy and a growing number of others called for General Eisenhower to return from England for the next two weeks a give congress a detailed account of the Allied ‘exit strategy’ from Europe!
Speaker Pelosi addressed the persistent rumor that Eisenhower and the Allies are planning an invasion across the English Channel. “Those Europeans have been fighting each other for centuries and we’re supposed to give up our boys and young women on the bloody beaches of Normandy next month! I saw Saving Private Ryan” Pelosi said cryptically. “Thousands of Americans will die unless something is done to stop Bush and Eisenhower and their Republican plot to invade Normandy on June 6!”
When asked if she thought Hitler still posed a threat to the world, Pelosi downplayed the German leader’s importance but predicted that he would be “dead in one year anyway”. She went on to say, “I’m not denying that Adolph Hitler is a bad man but he is Europe’s problem. Much more important is the threat that we Americans pose to the world! We need to defeat Japan soon a by using strictly conventional means!” She would not explain what she meant by ‘strictly conventional means’.
Senator Mitch McConnell said that Representative Pelosi was suffering from delusions. “She thinks that firestorms over Dresden are more humane somehow than Hiroshima and Nagasaki!” When he was asked by times reporter Helen Thomas what the hell he was talking about, McConnell told her, “I don’t dare explain to the likes of you Helen. But if you live to be a thousand years old you will never understand what the hell anybody who makes any sense is talking about. You Democrat you!”
“Republican scum!” Countered Thomas.
Epilogue
The next month when June 6th rolled around General Eisenhower was in Washington testifying before congress. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid expressed his fear that America can never win in a fair fight with the awesome Nazis without what he termed “unacceptable losses”.
“We need to keep our troops safe! How can you have an effective fighting force if they are being shot? We can’t risk American lives fighting for someone else’s freedom! That’s why I’m recommending unconditional surrender to the Axis powers!” Reid said. The President finally came to his senses and flew to Berlin to personally surrender to der Fuhrer. Everyone now agrees that America’s last president was a real ‘action guy’.
The Russians were defeated on the eastern front by the Germans who along with the Japanese and the Italians invaded North America and found evidence of a rudimentary Atomic Bomb program in New Mexico. The world was made safe for the Grand Alliance between our beloved Chrysanthemum Empire and The Third Reich. Banzai und Heil Meinen Damen und Herren!

willnotsubmit,

That was the best parity I've ever read. What worries me is that it's becoming all too true. The isolationist left seem to be suffering from the delusion that our way of life is indestructible.

If only more WWII Vets used the internet... I am sure they would be appalled at the sheer volume of anti-Americanism, and pure ignorance.

What does the last line of German mean?

Joey