Nancy Pelosi originally had indicated she was going to name her long-time friend, corrupt democrat federal judge, Alcee Hastings. It is nothing short of astounding that she would even consider Hastings for this position considering that Ms. Pelosi has …

The backlash against the Democratic Party, should this calamity happen, will be unstoppable.

georgej on December 11, 2006 at 4:41 PM

Sorta sounds like you are half wishing this “calamity” will happen….

I find your phrase “blame America first” interesting. Read your post–you seem to a real master of assigning blame yourself.

It’s interesting to me that more than half this post is about the possibility that there are dirty nukes out there, yet all the liberals want to talk about are two Republican reps who aren’t leading House Intel.

They don’t want to talk about Reyes, who will lead House Intel and who was a subject of this post.

They don’t want to talk about dirty nukes, which was a subject of this post.

The unwillingness to face reality IS the main problem with America’s liberals.

If there are dirty nukes, and if they are brought to America and used against us here, and if it happens while the Democrats are in power (i.e., the next 2 years), then the “blame America first” liberal Democrats running the Party had better have bus tickets to Canada because as former Senator Phil Gramm once said: “We’ll be hunting Democrats with dogs.”

Remember, as Vasko Kohlmayer noted in his article in the World Defense Review that it is the DEMOCRATS who have been subverting our defenses against Al Qaeda:

-They have tried to prevent us from listening on terrorists’ phone calls;
-They have sought to stop us from properly interrogating captured terrorists;
-They have tried to stop us from monitoring terrorists’ financial transactions;
-They have revealed the existence of secret national security programs;
-They have opposed vital components of the Patriot Act;
-They have sought to confer unmerited legal rights on terrorists;
-They have opposed profiling to identify the terrorists in our midst;
-They have impugned and demeaned our military;
-They have insinuated that the president is a war criminal;
-They have forced the resignation of a committed defense secretary;
-They have repeatedly tried to de-legitimize our war effort;
-They want to quit the battlefield in the midst of war.

In this age of blogging and the Internet, the media gatekeepers will NOT be able to spin away the fact that the Democratic Party leadership — whom our enemies now hold in high esteem and to whom they extend their ‘brotherly greetings’ and congratulations for their 11/7 victory — ARE AND WILL BE held accountable.

The backlash against the Democratic Party, should this calamity happen, will be unstoppable.

Congratulations!! I believe you have just taken circular reasoning into another dimension!! Bravo!!

Thank you Honora. Coming from you that’s a real condiment.

Not that it’s constructive, but it seems to be the way these days unfortunately.

Anyway, back to the topic.

Reyes is a lightweight member of the Permanent Intellegence Committee. He is known as the “go to” guy for immigration issues, and is a retired Border Patrol agent, having served over 26 years.

He’s only been in the House for 10 years and in the last Congress, sponsored 19 bills, none of which were intelligence related. (Although he does claim National Security in an education bill)

This is not a “my guy, your guy” debate, Honora. They are all “our” guys. In this particular instance, Reyes would appear to be uninformed and unqualified. That’s the point.

It is rather obvious liberal Democrats are clueless or they wouldn’t have such clueless views on foriegn policy. If they weren’t so clueless they wouldn’t be liberals

Congratulations!! I believe you have just taken circular reasoning into another dimension!! Bravo!!

;^)

…

Honora, just stick to the topics. I’m not bullying you, but I will ban you if you keep hijacking threads.

One more time and you’ll experience something else, called “banning.”

Bryan on December 11, 2006 at 1:30 PM

I will not be bullied. Do what you have to do.

I was referring to the reporter in the interview being agenda driven, and the small section that Honora quoted. Not you. He basically says certain Republicans are stupid, but by not quoting or referencing any examples, we must take his word. I was not agreeing with Honora, just trying to twist her meaning, like she does so often, only with obviously less skill.

Sorry for not being more skillfully sarcastic, and for not addressing this misunderstanding sooner. Please don’t ban me.

As for “cherry picking,” I quoted the core of the story as it related to Reyes because he’s the incoming House Intel chair and what he thinks about the war is very relevant. I linked to the whole article so that you could read the whole thing for yourself and see that, yes indeed, Reyes is clueless. It’s called “blogging.” So you come back with the stuff that didn’t relate to Reyes, who was one of the subjects of this post because he’s the incoming House Intel chair. You attempted to steer the discussion away from Reyes and toward some GOPers who aren’t leading House Intel anytime soon. That’s called “hijacking.” One more time and you’ll experience something else, called “banning.”

Just a friendly note, before you jump into that water-hole…

But I’m “agenda driven” for not spoon feeding them links to speeches they won’t read and in five years have shown that they’ll never have the capacity to understand.

No you’re agenda driven because you cherry pick the article for the parts that support your agenda. And you’re childish for making statements like “they’ll never have the capacity to understand”. Exercise some restraint.

But I’m “agenda driven” for not spoon feeding them links to speeches they won’t read and in five years have shown that they’ll never have the capacity to understand.

I’m pretty sure that when it happens, it will be Mr. Bush’s fault. Until then it will be Congress’ oversight…or will it? Maybe, based on this thread, it shouldn’t.

honora, there’s more than a ‘bus strike’ going on on in Iran.

Entelechy on December 11, 2006 at 1:14 PM

My point is that Santorum keeps flapping his gums about Iran and what not to do, but when asked point blank what to do, he seems at a loss.

They don’t want to talk about Reyes, who will lead House Intel and who was a subject of this post.

They don’t want to talk about dirty nukes, which was a subject of this post.

But I’m “agenda driven” for not spoon feeding them links to speeches they won’t read and in five years have shown that they’ll never have the capacity to understand.

As I said, it’s interesting.

When Ceausescu was heckled in Romania, he and his ‘lovely’ wife were executed in less than a week later. Just saying…possibilities always abound and things can change rapidly, sometimes even for the better, depending on one’s view.

(The answer, it turns out, is…)

…I *LOVED* this clip.

Hadn’t seen it before, you see, and it’s so bloody catchy…it cries out for a guy in a stripy linen suit, a handlebar mustache, a straw boater, and a banjo. It would take vaudeville by storm.