We love having HBO but we rarely have the ability to sit down and watch a program in its designated slot….

since October of 2004, we have now killed or captured over 7,000 al Qaeda in Iraq terrorists.” So, as I point out here, is Pelosi just a liar or actually this stupid? I suppose those 7,000 are some sort of figments of Bush’s imagination, huh Madame S…

November of 2006 brought America more than one day of turkeys, but the excrement of these turkeys is stinking up the nation.

Check out George Will’s article on Democrat Senator-elect, Jim Webb: “Webb Offends Bush & the English Language.”
…

Here you go. No wonder you couldn’t find it: it was on the internet.

Constantine on November 29, 2006 at 9:38 PM

As I was saying (and to once again quote one of your lefty commenters, honora) “blah, blah, blah”…we can do the same thing, but better, and without being corrupt – San Fran-Nan is sure off to a great start, isn’t she?

Charles Rangel, portly Mussolini of the left, argues for the draft. He bases his argument on his claim that the military is primarily comprised of minorities from poor backgrounds. But the Heritage Foundation has had no trouble uncovering facts that……

Medicated on narcotics
Schizophrenic
Hubristic

Is that the best you got, amateurs. I’ll take the high road.

Sorry, I know its hard to pigeon hole me since I actually think for my self and live in the real world. My post was a little bombastic, must admit but got your attention. It’s our prosecution of the war that’s schitzophrinic. Today, Colin Powell: “It’s a civil war”. Doha! Bush = Denial or needs to buy a clue. I hope the Dems do something with their power, take the high road and don’t self destruct. We shall see. I can dream can’t I.

Cheers to you!!

That’s interesting, given that you all suffer from serious BDS. This last election, the Dems entire campaign was based on Bush-bashing and “we can do it better”. I still haven’t heard what the Dems plans are, and they are about to take office as the majority in both houses (that’s because they don’t know). It’s always easy to criticize.

Rick on November 29, 2006 at 2:43 PM

Thanks Rick. Case in point: it’s not that “some Dems suffer from BDS” No,no,no–it’s “all”. And it’s not that the Dems campaigned somewhat on Bush-bashing, it’s the “entire campaign”.

Blah, blah, blah.

And what would the goal of that be? Because we all own stock in Al Qaeda (NYSE: AQDA) and we’re getting rich? We want to destroy America because… we hate freedom?

This is a pattern I see over and over, particularly with conservatives: you have trouble debating your opponent’s actual position, so you invent a new one for them that’s easier to grasp. If you really believe this crap, you’re an idiot.

Constantine on November 29, 2006 at 1:51

PM

Nobody’s inventing your position – you all have made it very clear for all to see. You always argue against your government – in other words, it’s always our fault (no matter what – unless, of course, one of your own is in office).

And what would the goal of that be? Because we all own stock in Al Qaeda (NYSE: AQDA) and we’re getting rich? We want to destroy America because… we hate freedom?

This is a pattern I see over and over, particularly with conservatives: you have trouble debating your opponent’s actual position, so you invent a new one for them that’s easier to grasp. If you really believe this crap, you’re an idiot.

Constantine on November 29, 2006 at 1:51 PM

Once you crack the code, it’s easy to understand: the point is not whether Pelosi makes an intelligent or a stupid comment. It’s simply not relevant. If Pelosi makes a comment, it is stupid. Prima facie. The mental acrobatics can be pretty amusing.

Oh and then there’s the black and white thing–there is never any middle ground–regardless of what it is, a person, a religion, an idea, a media outlet, it is either entirely wicked and stupid and should be spat upon, or it’s beyond reproach.

Then there is the all purpose thing: mention anything negative about Republicans and you will get a mention of Ted Kennedy and MaryJo–it’s automatic, very Pavlovian. Clinton’s sexual escapades are another all purpose retort.

Well you get the gist. Cheers!!!

E L is right you liberals are cheering for Osama to beat the U.S. & you liberals do want the U.S. to lose the war on terror.

And what would the goal of that be? Because we all own stock in Al Qaeda (NYSE: AQDA) and we’re getting rich? We want to destroy America because… we hate freedom?

This is a pattern I see over and over, particularly with conservatives: you have trouble debating your opponent’s actual position, so you invent a new one for them that’s easier to grasp. If you really believe this crap, you’re an idiot.

If you want to fight the Islamo-fascists support Bush, if you want to fight Bush support Pelosi and the dems..it really is that simple……

ritethinker on November 29, 2006 at 1:26 PM

What’s that word, umm, oh yeah: eureka.

There will be more of this in the future. This is what we have to look forward to. http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/28/pelosi-defends-al-qaeda-chastises-bush/…

If you want to fight the Islamo-fascists support Bush, if you want to fight Bush support Pelosi and the dems..it really is that simple……

honora,

That’s not the argument here. Pelosi’s stated the following:

House Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) told reporters on Wednesday that she feels it is “sad” that President Bush continues to blame Iraqi insurgent violence on al Qaeda.
“My thoughts on the president’s representations are well-known,” Pelosi said. “The 9/11 Commission dismissed that notion a long time ago and I feel sad that the president is resorting to it again.”
She is going back to what the 9/11 Commission found regarding AQ’s presence in Iraq – in other words, there was no presence, and reading the rest of her comments, there is none today. I don’t see how you could read that any other way.

Rick on November 29, 2006 at 12:29 PM

Well I don’t agree there is none and if Pelosi is saying that, she is making a mistake. I also think that Bush is making a mistake by blaming the whole mess on Al Q. Again, not what the generals are saying.

That’s not the argument here. Pelosi’s stated the following:

House Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) told reporters on Wednesday that she feels it is “sad” that President Bush continues to blame Iraqi insurgent violence on al Qaeda.
“My thoughts on the president’s representations are well-known,” Pelosi said. “The 9/11 Commission dismissed that notion a long time ago and I feel sad that the president is resorting to it again.”

She is going back to what the 9/11 Commission found regarding AQ’s presence in Iraq – in other words, there was no presence, and reading the rest of her comments, there is none today. I don’t see how you could read that any other way.

Please don’t tell me you actually believe there is no such thing as Al-Qaeda in Iraq? That it was all made up by Bush and the Republicans? Do you think that all the correspondence we have intercepted or found in raids between AQ and AQ in Iraq discussing the strategy for Iraq was all fabricated by Bush?

Rick on November 29, 2006 at 12:07 PM

I am sure (well, actually none of us is sure, are we?)that Al Q is in Iraq. As are Iranian/Syrian trained fighters. Proportionally, at least according to Abizaid’s (sp?) latest testimony, they are less significant than the Iraqi Shiite/Sunni groups. (I would think while their numbers–Al Q–may be modest, their influence is considerable).

I do think that the notion that if only we could root out and kill the Al Q guys, all would be rosy, is foolish.

Please don’t tell me you actually believe there is no such thing as Al-Qaeda in Iraq? That it was all made up by Bush and the Republicans? Do you think that all the correspondence we have intercepted or found in raids between AQ and AQ in Iraq discussing the strategy for Iraq was all fabricated by Bush?

Constantine, the Democrats DIDN’T win this past election. the Republicans lost, because they didn’t remain loyal to their conservative base. had they remain loyal to the conservative base, then the Republicans would still be in power & not trying to “cut & run” like you liberals want to. btw – E L is right you liberals are cheering for Osama to beat the U.S. & you liberals do want the U.S. to lose the war on terror.

Starblazer on November 29, 2006 at 12:35 AM

Yeah I often try that excuse when my football team loses–the other team didn’t win, we blew it. Oddly enough it still shows up in the W column for the other team……

The American voters will wake up someday and take a look at the woman they went to bed with and (hopefully) realize what a mistake they made.

BigOrangeAxe on November 29, 2006 at 10:04 AM

Perhaps. My money says Bush drops to 25% approval before all is said and done.