Khamenei: Democratic victory is Iran’s victory; Update: Iraq AQ: We’ll blow up the White House

posted at 10:43 am on November 10, 2006 by Allahpundit

As InstaGlenn might say: well, yeah.

Iran’s most powerful leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, on Friday called U.S. President George W. Bush’s defeat in the congressional elections an “obvious victory” for the Iranian nation.

“This issue (the elections) is not a purely domestic issue for America, but it is the defeat of Bush’s hawkish policies in the world,” Khamenei said in remarks reported by Iran’s student news agency ISNA on Friday.

“Since Washington’s hostile and hawkish policies have always been against the Iranian nation, this defeat is actually an obvious victory for the Iranian nation.”

It’s a return to “realism.” Reality-based realism. Starring, um, George McGovern.

Syria sounds pretty jazzed about it, too.

Meanwhile, in Iraq, the local unterfuhrer has a message for “the lame duck.”

Update: Speaking of which.

Update: Dirka dirka Mohammed jihad.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Grebrook, you are indeed a genius; I’m pretty sure you’re way above 140. The rest of us can only aspire…

Entelechy on November 10, 2006 at 3:14 PM

Just curious, way above 140 what? feet above sea level, perhaps?

I, too will try to aspire with you.

Emmett J. on November 10, 2006 at 3:21 PM

The idea that I should honestly give the slightest rat’s ass what the Iranians think about the outcome of this election is pretty amusing.

Continue to amuse yourself, and our enemies will continue to support you.

JackM on November 10, 2006 at 3:24 PM

The idea that I should honestly give the slightest rat’s ass what the Iranians think about the outcome of this election is pretty amusing.

The idea that you shouldn’t be listening to the people in hot pursuit of the Islamo-nuke is pretty stupid, Grebrook. But then, we already knew that about you.

It’s like saying, “REPUBLICANS ARE ALL TRAITORS” because the Nazis were undoubtedly hoping for FDR to be ousted during WWII.

That may be the most idiotic, historically ignorant thing I’ll read all month.

Pablo on November 10, 2006 at 3:27 PM

Jaibones is right, Iran, Syria, etc are just lovin’ this election news. The party of dhimmitude has won, therefore the islamic radicals who wanna replace the Constitution with the koran are one step closer to their objective. It’s like us taking Iwo Jima in WW2, it got us one step closer to Japan. Same thing, ‘cept one is symbolic, one is actual combat.

Tony737 on November 10, 2006 at 3:28 PM

So should I get measured for my burka?

bookwurm322 on November 10, 2006 at 11:20 AM

No. But may I suggest a Smith & Wesson or Ruger?

AZ_Redneck on November 10, 2006 at 3:30 PM

Pablo, mi amigo, you’re trying to talk sense into somebody who thinks we’re safer by giving the terrorists what they want.

“Appeasement only makes the aggressor more aggressive.” – Winston Chirchill.

Lib: “If we just be nice, they’ll leave us alone. It’s the hawkish policies of Bush and Rice that cause terrorism!”

Terrorist: “Yesssssss, tell them to vote for the dhimmis, just like they did in Andalusia.”

Two words: Useful. Idiots.

Tony737 on November 10, 2006 at 3:36 PM

The idea that I should honestly give the slightest rat’s ass what the Iranians think about the outcome of this election is pretty amusing. It’s like saying, “REPUBLICANS ARE ALL TRAITORS” because the Nazis were undoubtedly hoping for FDR to be ousted during WWII.

You’re amused by the notion that our enemies might have a preference in our strategy? I’ve always thought that this bit of left-wing propaganda was quite effective and thought-provoking. If Osama really does want us in Iraq, if we really are helping him by being there, then that’s a rather compelling argument for rethinking our strategy, is it not?

And yet when it cuts against your side, you find the argument preposterous. Duly noted.

As for who the Nazis preferred, please do enlighten me about the Republican anti-war juggernaut that threatened to derail America’s success in WWII. It’s news to me, particularly in light of the fact that Wendell Willkie based his campaign in 1940 in part on FDR’s lack of military preparedness.

Honestly, grow up. You lost, get the hell over it. I’m pretty sure the Ku Klux Klan and skinheads all around this country are rejoicing at the conservative defeat of affirmative action in Michigan. Does that make you racists?

No, but if the Klan were a serious political force that equation might change. Think back to when David Duke ran for governor of Louisiana. He was, nominally, a Republican; he was probably closer to my position on fiscal issues than Edwards was. Should I have voted for him, then, had I had the chance? Of course not. Because whatever benefit I would have gained fiscally would have been outweighed by emboldening pieces of shit who share his Nazi ideology.

See where I’m going with this?

It’s not that the Democrats are Islamists. It’s not that they want Iran to win or to have the bomb. It’s simply that, when push comes to shove, they’re willing to vote for measures that would embolden the Muslim version of David Duke. Congratulations.

And stop calling me a moron.

Allahpundit on November 10, 2006 at 3:53 PM

Apparently I gave AllahPundit too much credit. Turns out, he’s a complete moron.

The idea that I should honestly give the slightest rat’s ass what the Iranians think about the outcome of this election is pretty amusing. It’s like saying, “REPUBLICANS ARE ALL TRAITORS” because the Nazis were undoubtedly hoping for FDR to be ousted during WWII.

Honestly, grow up. You lost, get the hell over it. I’m pretty sure the Ku Klux Klan and skinheads all around this country are rejoicing at the conservative defeat of affirmative action in Michigan. Does that make you racists?

No. But this thread shows you’re fairly stupid.

Grebrook on November 10, 2006 at 2:26 PM

You might want to have a neurologist check that struck nerve, Grebrook.

ReubenJCogburn on November 10, 2006 at 3:56 PM

It’s not that the Democrats are Islamists.

Well, they’re not, except for one new little Democrat congressman named Keith Ellison in MN.
His victory speech on Tuesday night turned into an Allahu-Akbarfest.
Dare we call this the camel’s nose in the tent?

Jen the Neocon on November 10, 2006 at 4:01 PM

Many of the Dems who won were fairly conservative, or at least they ran on conservative platforms. But the first thought that terrorists have of Democrats is that they are weaklings and have weak moral characters. The Iranians hated Carter as much as Reagan; they returned the Americans on the first day of Reagan’s presidency because they hated but feared and respected him. The Iranians hated Carter but had contempt and not respect for him.

On the first day, huh? That is impressive. I’m guessing it was that Bonzo Blows Up the Mosque film. Please. Reagan was a very good president, very good on defense, but get serious, read your history. Carter negotiated the return via the Algerians. Not actually letting the hostages go til RR took over was a final Fuck You to Carter.

honora on November 10, 2006 at 4:02 PM

Can’t wait for the “Muslim Girls Gone Wild” ads to this the airwaves!!

thirteen28 on November 10, 2006 at 2:53 PM

Now that’s using your head!!!!

honora on November 10, 2006 at 4:03 PM

Can’t wait for the “Muslim Girls Gone Wild” ads to this the airwaves!!

thirteen28 on November 10, 2006 at 2:53 PM

Now that’s using your head!!!!

honora on November 10, 2006 at 4:03 PM

I’m sure we’ll see them lifting their veils and (gasp!) showing their faces!!

thirteen28 on November 10, 2006 at 4:11 PM

Honora, I appreciate your attempt at humor, but I hafta ask, what will YOU do to avoid joining the burqa brigades? You didn’t give me a viable answer. Do you or do you not think we should fight terrorism? Is it a police matter or a military matter? If not by fighting them over there as you oppose, then how do we defend ourselves from religious wackos who wanna kill us and destroy our liberal way of life? (That’s CLASSIC liberalism, not your modern day socialist liberalism). And please don’t try to be funny and say that you ARE fighting religious wackos like Pat Robertson by voting Dem. (You guys are so predictable)

Also, the leader of A.Q. in Iraq just stated that he was pleased with our election results. Don’t tell me that doesn’t make you think. Our enemies WANT the dhimmis to win, that gets them one step closer to enslaving us, ALL of us. (Hence the term “dhimmicrat”).

Tony737 on November 10, 2006 at 3:09 PM

It’s both a military and a police action (WOT). Iraq is now a military action/police action, it needs to be a political/diplomatic action as well.

I will say this one more time: the Iraqis today are involved fighting each other–this is not just my POV, it is what our military is telling us. They are indeed religious wackos, but right now they are offing each other. So we do what? Pick a side? Kill Sunnis on Mon/Wed/Fri and Shiites on Tues/Thurs/Sun? Or just keep taking casualties and training the Iraqi police and army–aka project Sisyphus?

honora on November 10, 2006 at 4:11 PM

DUBAI – Al-Qaeda’s Iraq branch has threatened to “blow up the White House” in the course of establishing an Islamic caliphate which has started with the proclamation of an Islamic state in Iraq, in an audio message by its chief posted Friday on the Internet.

Bring it… we got more Nukes than we need, perhaps we should drop some on you.

E L Frederick on November 10, 2006 at 4:27 PM

Honora, YES! It IS both! Very good Grasshopper! But it’s MORE a military matter overseas and LESS a police matter here at home. Let’s KEEP it that way, shall we?

What we’re afraid of is that it will BECOME MORE of a police matter here at home. And what comes after that if it progresses? It becomes a MILITARY matter HERE at home.

If we don’t defeat them over there they’ll bring it here. They themselves have already said so. And lest we forget, they ALREADY brought it here.

So, it starts out with police detectives investigating possible terror cells in Chicago, then it becomes the SWAT team shooting it out with jihadis in New York (American Urban Combat becomes a new phrase that will be coined by the news media) THEN it turns into Soldiers and Marines going door to door, with running gun battles in our streets, airplanes being shot down by shoulder launched missiles, high rise apartment buildings being brought down in Miami, school buses being blown up in Seattle, Air Force Combat Contollers calling in airstrikes, B-2’s dropping JDAMs on “safe houses” in Buffalo, Navy SEALs liberating jihadi occupied offshore oil rigs and Green Berets conducting snatch n’ grab operations in Detroit, “collateral damage” all over the country, etc etc…

On second thought, let’s just keep the war OVER THERE!

Tony737 on November 10, 2006 at 4:37 PM

So, it starts out with police detectives investigating possible terror cells in Chicago, then it becomes the SWAT team shooting it out with jihadis in New York (American Urban Combat becomes a new phrase that will be coined by the news media) THEN it turns into Soldiers and Marines going door to door, with running gun battles in our streets, airplanes being shot down by shoulder launched missiles, high rise apartment buildings being brought down in Miami, school buses being blown up in Seattle, Air Force Combat Contollers calling in airstrikes, B-2’s dropping JDAMs on “safe houses” in Buffalo, Navy SEALs liberating jihadi occupied offshore oil rigs and Green Berets conducting snatch n’ grab operations in Detroit, “collateral damage” all over the country, etc etc…

On second thought, let’s just keep the war OVER THERE!

Tony737 on November 10, 2006 at 4:37 PM

Is it that you won’t or can’t address my questions?

I will say this one more time: the Iraqis today are involved fighting each other–this is not just my POV, it is what our military is telling us. They are indeed religious wackos, but right now they are offing each other. So we do what? Pick a side? Kill Sunnis on Mon/Wed/Fri and Shiites on Tues/Thurs/Sun? Or just keep taking casualties and training the Iraqi police and army–aka project Sisyphus?

Am I not being clear?

honora on November 10, 2006 at 4:40 PM

And stop calling me a moron.

Allahpundit on November 10, 2006 at 3:53 PM

Well not to split hairs, but he/she actually called you a complete moron….

(I’m such an agitator… :^) And you’re not even a partial moron!!

You’re welcome.

honora on November 10, 2006 at 4:46 PM

Honestly, grow up. You lost, get the hell over it. I’m pretty sure the Ku Klux Klan and skinheads all around this country are rejoicing at the conservative defeat of affirmative action in Michigan. Does that make you racists?

Prolly not any less than having a former Klu Klux Klan member in congress as a member of your party for over 30 years.

E L Frederick on November 10, 2006 at 4:52 PM

Just curious, way above 140 what? feet above sea level, perhaps?…

Emmett J. on November 10, 2006 at 3:21 PM

Emmett, no; I meant mental age.

Entelechy on November 10, 2006 at 5:01 PM

Am I not being clear?

honora on November 10, 2006 at 4:40 PM

Sorry, not our problem anymore… ask Howard Dean & Nancy Pelosi.

(sarcasm) We should just leave and let the country tear itself apart on CNN, because Iraqi deaths don’t matter. Why should I care if Habibi or Akmed die, they aren’t American, and they don’t vote. Why should I care if Iran and Syria just carve up Iraq and the oil reserves, it’s not my side of the planet. They aren’t posing a threat to us. (/sarcasm)

E L Frederick on November 10, 2006 at 5:01 PM

No. But may I suggest a Smith & Wesson or Ruger?

AZ_Redneck on November 10, 2006 at 3:30 PM

I suggest Para-Ord… Light Double Action is the way to go in my opinion.

E L Frederick on November 10, 2006 at 5:06 PM

Sorry, I thought that was a rhetorical question. Yes, we keep fighting them over there, when the new Iraqi Army is ready (it … will … take … some … time) then our Troops will prepare for the next mission. I know you hate that and so do I, but it’s gotta be done.

Do I WANT casualties? Don’t insult my intelligence. And why is it always about how many of OUR guys get hurt? Yes it’s tragic, yes it’s terrible, but they’re fighting terrorists there so WE, you and I, civilians, cops, firemen and EMTs don’t hafta fight ’em here. And how come we never hear about how many bad guys our Troops have killed? That WAS a rhetorical question, you already know the answer, because the media doesn’t WANT us to know that our guys are kickin’ ass over there.

I’m still waitin’ to hear your side’s ‘plan’. How do we get out of Iraq? Maybe YOU can tell us how we should handle this war. And when I say ‘this war’ I mean the whole thing, not just the Battle of Iraq.

Tony737 on November 10, 2006 at 5:12 PM

Well not to split hairs, but he/she actually called you a complete moron….

(I’m such an agitator… :^) And you’re not even a partial moron!!

You’re welcome.

honora on November 10, 2006 at 4:46 PM

Isn’t that a bit like Olbermann telling you that you don’t make his “World’s Worst” list? How is that supposed to be comforting?

E L Frederick on November 10, 2006 at 5:40 PM

So if they wait until February we could have President Pelosi? Smart move! I am certain the democrats will be cheering in the streets.

Impeach Bush!

DannoJyd on November 10, 2006 at 6:10 PM

DannoJyd, repectfully, buggar off.

I grow increasing annoyed with your mindless counter-productive rhetoric. You have the right to feel and speak as you wish. However I for one do not appreciate your words and request that you move along in your quest for someone who gives a shit.

E L Frederick on November 10, 2006 at 6:16 PM

E L Frederick, if that is what you substitute for respect then you need to do a bit of self examination.

As I stated, should the anti-American terrorists succeed in hitting the White House as they did the Pentagon then we could truely face having Speaker Pelosi become President Pelosi.

All I keep hearing is how we need to reach across the isle, so since Bush has decided to cater to the democrats on opening the borders further than they are now I will join the democrats in their effort to Impeach Bush. IMHO, Cheney could make a real difference in the next 2 years, but Bush will not.

DannoJyd on November 10, 2006 at 7:21 PM

E L Frederick, if that is what you substitute for respect then you need to do a bit of self examination.

That is what I substitute for respect. Believe me, that was far more charitable than I feel you deserve.

E L Frederick on November 10, 2006 at 7:41 PM

The MOMENT our leadership even appeared to falter (Rummy gone) the enemy changed from attacking the middle east, to focusing on Wash DC.
They KNOW this is much more do-able with DemDhimmis now in ‘control’ of both houses.
Hell, the Islamafascists? they just might even get invited.

shooter on November 10, 2006 at 7:55 PM

E L Frederick, I’ve earned more than you could give as I worked to keep America safer by spending the last 4 weeks, and previously [2004] spent about the same amount of time in getting Republicans elected as well as making sure that only properly registered voters were allowed to cast their vote. Can you say the same?

My son was in the Army, and returned home after his knee got messed up during a training exercise. That gives me a certain amount of moral authority.

It is most apparent that you do not see the irony of Bush pandering to the party leading the charge for his impeachment. It is my opinion that he needs to learn a lesson.

I am a GOP conservative volunteer who supports Impeaching Bush! Like it or not, my view is most relevant. :oP

DannoJyd on November 10, 2006 at 8:12 PM

I worked just as hard as you, Danno, and I know I gave more money to GOP campaigns.
ELF’s right–bugger off!

Jen the Neocon on November 10, 2006 at 8:46 PM

Terrorists have been stealing daily talking points from the DNC for their videos for years, Palestinian terrorist groups (Hamas, Al Aqsa, etc.) openly endorsed the Democrats before the election, and now Iran and other terrorists are celebrating the Dem victory? I for one am just shocked!

RightWinged on November 10, 2006 at 8:51 PM

Jen, you shock me! Such sentiments coming from a lady… :oP

RightWinged, like you I appreciate the irony of how the elections have gone the way that the terrorist groups had hoped for worked towards. A majority of Americans, for whatever stupid reason, just voted in the party of terrorist enablers, and if those terrorists did succeed in hitting the White House we could end up with President Pelousy.

Keep your head down, buddy. This War won’t be over for a very loong time.

DannoJyd on November 10, 2006 at 9:12 PM

E L Frederick, I’ve earned more than you could give as I worked to keep America safer by spending the last 4 weeks, and previously [2004] spent about the same amount of time in getting Republicans elected as well as making sure that only properly registered voters were allowed to cast their vote. Can you say the same?

Sorry, in 2004 I was a bit too busy to worry about the polls, but I did absentee ballot from Afghanistan. I was a bit busy with keeping the computer systems running for US Army.

My son was in the Army, and returned home after his knee got messed up during a training exercise. That gives me a certain amount of moral authority.

Well, I was there in Iraq and in Afghanistan…

Is that a full house to your pair of 7s? Not that I really feel like playing a moral equivalence game with you.

Please go and play elsewhere…

E L Frederick on November 10, 2006 at 9:18 PM

E L Frederick, did I insult you? NO! Did I treat your comments as irrelevant? NO!

Like it or not, impeachment will happen since the majority of Americans voted to allow that, and I will continue to support their attempt as long as Bush ignores the huge defence gap at our borders which allows the terrorists to come and go as they please. The POTUS needs to learn that he cannot shirk his duty as our commander-in-chief. Maybe facing Impeachment with very low polling numbers will wake him up to that fact. Maybe not.

Americans understand that all points of view have merit even when not popular. Didn’t you just fight for that right guaranteed under the Constitution? :oP

DannoJyd on November 10, 2006 at 9:57 PM

Impeachment isn’t some toy you just throw around. There has to be grounds for it. You can make up “Dereliction of Duty” grounds all day long, but that doesn’t mean they will hold up.

The President has done a lousy job at the border. However, so has the Congress. It’s not all Bush’s fault. Your ranting and raving about impeachment ruins any credibility you may of had at one point.

If your going to go and use that wide paintbrush to slap around “Dereliction of Duty” for anyone who doesn’t do exactly what you want, you’ll be left standing alone.

I am all for a more aggressive approach in Iraq. I am all for real, serious, militarized, boarder security. However, impeaching Bush will not get you what you want.

How is your ranting and raving helping the cause? How is what you are doing going to be productive? You are doing far more harm than good. Your not being part of the solution, your being part of the problem.

If you have actual helpful suggestions, lets hear them. However ranting about how Bush has betrayed us and we should impeach doesn’t help anyone.

E L Frederick on November 10, 2006 at 10:15 PM

E L Frederick, thank you for a fine insiteful post.

I happen to agree with ALL that you just posted, yet that does not adress the issues facing America today. We have the terrorists proposing hitting the White House, and we must take that threat seriously. We must face the real possibility that we could end up with President Pelousy [freaks me out!] should they succeed while Bush, and Cheney were inside. Due to our POTUS playing games with border security we must increase the odds of another successful attack. What can we do?

America got the House Heroes [they fell on their swords] to try to close the borders even though they went against Bush by doing so. Now Bush, the man I worked to get elected in 04, and have stood by throughout the 06 elections, has decided to ignore his loyal base. What can we do?

IMHO, the White House is currently deaf on the border issue. Do you think they would hear Impeach Bush when it comes from Republicans? Until he decides to act as our commander-in-cheif I’ll be pushing that message. Heck, when the libs do decide to try to impeach him that just might get us back in power in 08. Nothing else that I can see would do so, and I refuse to sit back while Hitlary worms her self back in to America’s House. The only way that I can see him gaining in the polls is if he works to close the borders. The issue is that popular across the political spectrum.

Question my timing as that is relevant. ;o)

DannoJyd on November 10, 2006 at 10:43 PM

suggest Para-Ord… Light Double Action is the way to go in my opinion.

Very nice choice.

Thought there was more mileage with name recognition in the other two.

AZ_Redneck on November 10, 2006 at 11:54 PM

If you are so freaked out with the potential of President Pelosi, why persue impeachment on grounds of betrayal or dereliction of duty?

Maybe you could trump up the charges with smirking or cowboying and gain some mileage.

Americans understand that all points of view have merit even when not popular.

You can freely exercise your First Amendment right, however, all points do not have merit.

AZ_Redneck on November 11, 2006 at 12:07 AM

Sorry, not our problem anymore… ask Howard Dean & Nancy Pelosi.

(sarcasm) We should just leave and let the country tear itself apart on CNN, because Iraqi deaths don’t matter. Why should I care if Habibi or Akmed die, they aren’t American, and they don’t vote. Why should I care if Iran and Syria just carve up Iraq and the oil reserves, it’s not my side of the planet. They aren’t posing a threat to us. (/sarcasm)

E L Frederick on November 10, 2006 at 5:01 PM

First, I was talking to Tony. Second, I don’t recall being told we were invading Iraq to save Habibi and Akmed. This movable feast of rationale is getting old.

honora on November 11, 2006 at 8:32 AM

I’m still waitin’ to hear your side’s ‘plan’. How do we get out of Iraq? Maybe YOU can tell us how we should handle this war. And when I say ‘this war’ I mean the whole thing, not just the Battle of Iraq.

Tony737 on November 10, 2006 at 5:12 PM

I am leaving in a half hour to catch a plane, remember to ask me this Wed when I get back; only if you can promise not to use whatever I say as relief to you own POV. Deal?

honora on November 11, 2006 at 8:34 AM

I am puzzled. Why do “loyal” liberal citizens always side with our enemies? Do they feel the violence of radical Islam is not really directed at them?

I first noticed this syndrome when my late brother went off on his first of six “trips” to Viet Nam. A small vocal minority of smelly hippies thought it was cool to be antiestablishment and side with the communist and to protest our troops.

Back then the under current of the Cold War was more like a rip tide. The agents of darkness were very active here in the States. They found allies in groups like the Students for a Democratic Society and the like. Many members of those groups decided to test the waters and were swept away in the current. They were well funded, well spoken and the forces of darkness were successful, they had found the surrogates they needed, that fifth column to help fight America. Communism vs. America; in Viet Nam, darkness prevailed.

Now we face another determined enemy. The smelly hippies of the past who were touched by the dark side are now law professors and politicians and political advisors. Are they still doing what they did before? Is being perceived as “cool” and “antiestablishment” more desirable than being viewed as loyal???

Zorro on November 11, 2006 at 9:59 AM

Can they blow The White House some time when Bushie is in Crawford and Nancy Pelosi is haunting it—measuring for Hillary’s drapes?

seejanemom on November 11, 2006 at 10:02 AM

Off topic, KP is on Cavuto and sounding like a “blue dog” democrat…

Zorro on November 11, 2006 at 10:40 AM

I’m still waitin’ to hear your side’s ‘plan’. How do we get out of Iraq?

They’re gonna cut and run, you know, I know it, and the terrorists are giddy about it.

JackM on November 11, 2006 at 12:06 PM

If you are so freaked out with the potential of President Pelosi, why c?
AZ_Redneck on November 11, 2006 at 12:07 AM

I have decided to persue Impeachment because Americans just voted for that. They might not have realized that, but such are the facts. Personally, I hope that everyone who stayed home, or voted for the BDS crowd chokes on their actions.

I chose to persue impeachment on grounds of betrayal AND dereliction of duty because that is relevant, and can be argued as fact. The BDS crowd make their issues out of thin air. Should Bush stop shirking his sworn duty to America during this time of War I will happily change my mind and tone, but not before he does the job he was elected to do.

DannoJyd on November 11, 2006 at 1:55 PM

Can they blow The White House some time when Bushie is in Crawford and Nancy Pelosi is haunting it—measuring for Hillary’s drapes?

seejanemom on November 11, 2006 at 10:02 AM

I love the way you think, but let’s face facts. Who do the terrorists want to kill? Certainly not Pelousy. Her party assists the terrorists every chance that they can.

IMHO, Cheney should never be close to the White House when Bush is there, but I don’t know that we are being that diligent. [my current curse] Great shades of Speaker Pelousy!

DannoJyd on November 11, 2006 at 2:01 PM

Yeah, in other words

“Ummm, I really don’t know how to answer thqt question, I have no clue, the Democrats have no clue, so therefore I will not answer.”

BIZZZZT! Sorry, wrong answer, but thanks for playin’.

Tony737 on November 11, 2006 at 4:26 PM

I don’t see what advantage there is to us in Grebrook’s being among us. People in the West have lost the habit of exclusion, and one sees evidence of that right here.

Kralizec on November 11, 2006 at 6:12 PM

I chose to persue impeachment on grounds of betrayal AND dereliction of duty because that is relevant, and can be argued as fact.

Then you need to cite the offense, chapter and verse. Not –because I think so. Are we not a country of laws? Oddly, betrayal is not listed in the USC.

Should Bush stop shirking his sworn duty to America during this time of War I will happily change my mind and tone, but not before he does the job he was elected to do.

Then you forgive the puppet because he performed what you wanted? If he executed the violations that you speak of, should he not be prosecuted? Again, are we not a countyr of laws, or, are all violations absolved because DannoJyd approves?

You need to cite the offenses. Make your case, I will listen.

AZ_Redneck on November 11, 2006 at 9:21 PM

Smile Dems, Our Enemies Love You

Opinionnation on November 11, 2006 at 9:54 PM

You need to cite the offenses. Make your case, I will listen.

AZ_Redneck on November 11, 2006 at 9:21 PM

Thank you as that is very kind of you to offer, but instead of trying to swim upstream I’ll just allow the issues which makes Bush impeachable to me to play out. As they occur you can be certain that I’ll point them out, and I believe that by doing it in this manner we will find less to disagree on.

I’ll leave you with this tidbit from Rush

These folks [democrats] have no interest in oversight. Oversight is the technique. Oversight is the umbrella. Oversight is the mask and the camouflage that will mislabel. These are going to be full-fledged investigations, and it doesn’t matter how bipartisan the president promises to be, because we had a caller that said they hate me — and they do, but they hate Bush. They hate Bush. They hate Bush, and they are going to do whatever they can to pay him back and dispatch him back to Crawford as disrespected as they can. They got payback on their mind for Clinton, and they have this in mind for everybody they think stands in their way.

I agree with Rush, but I prefer to take it a step further by pointing out that the American Voters voted for this. You see, I want them to remember what they got for their effort. ;o)

DannoJyd on November 11, 2006 at 10:50 PM

DJ, certain “issues” might make Bush impeachable to you, but you’ll never, ever, EVER convince me.
You are mentally imbalanced, saying you’ll work to impeach Bush and then quoting Rush about how awful it is that Bush’es enemies will be out to get him…
Don’t look now, DJ, but that would YOU.

Jen the Neocon on November 11, 2006 at 11:24 PM

Hey that guy resembles Jerry Garcia in an Ayatollah costume.

StuLongIsland on November 12, 2006 at 12:51 AM

I am convinced that Grebrook is typical of the Democratic Party’s hard core left wing. I am also convinced that he doesn’t have a clue. He’s beyond pigheadedness into delusional — or perhaps outright treasonous. So is Constantine.

Honora, bless her heart, is “half clueless,” in that she is in denial about how our enemies are relying upon the Democratic Party to give them what they cannot obtain on the battlefield — victory. The same victory that the Democrats gave to the Communist Vietnamese in December 1974 when they cut off all military assistance, including spare parts and ammunition, to South Vietnam.

If the leadership of the Democratic Party follows through on their threats of massive investigations and subpoenas (ref. Henry Waxman’s comments this week and Conyers’ promise of an impeachment investigation), and also appeases their cut-and-run base, they will help deliver a massive terrorist strike against the United States and the rest of us will hold them directly and personally accountable.

georgej on November 12, 2006 at 6:53 AM

Jen the Neocon, you sound depressed. You need to wake up to the fact that America has spoken, they voted in the I Hate Bush Party, and Impeachment is now a realistic possibility.

Republicans lost. We should accept that decision rendered by America, and follow the lead of our POTUS by also compromising with the liberals. If you don’t like that then blame it on those who voted for Impeachment at the polls, not on a GOP volunteer. Your ire is misplaced. :oP

DannoJyd on November 12, 2006 at 3:21 PM