Video: Nancy Pelosi’s idea of “force protection” Updated
posted at 9:40 am on October 15, 2007 by Bryan
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
In military terms, “force protection” is what it sounds like: Equipping the military so that it can defend itself in the midst of battle. The phrase tends to conjure up debates about armor, tactics and ammunition, but in a war of ideas like the one we’re fighting now force protection is one of those things that starts at home.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi weighed in on the importance of force protection on ABC’s This Week yesterday. Suffice it to say that I do not think she actually knows what the phrase “force protection” means.
Pelosi favors the Armenian genocide resolution, which in the current context may cost us the vital Incirlik air base in Turkey and cut off a vital supply line into Iraq. Pelosi brings up Abu Ghraib on her own, in full knowledge of the fact that what happened there was isolated and doesn’t happen at Gitmo (which has been cited as a model prison), and then says that we should only deal with Iranian meddling in Iraq in Iraq and not make any attempt to cut off the Iranian part of the war at its source.
Summed up: Let’s protect our military by passing resolutions that alienate allies and may cost us their vital logistical support, let’s accuse our troops of systemically engaging in activities like Abu Ghraib, and let’s keep allowing the Iranians to stage attacks against our troops from Iranian soil and with Iranian equipment, with impunity. Let’s protect the troops by making the war on the ground and the war of ideas all but impossible to win.
That’s how Speaker Pelosi wants to protect the troops.
Update: Jed Babbin adds some detail to the possible consequences of passing the Armenia resolution.
According to Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Incirlik Air Base near Adana, Turkey is the transshipment point for about 70% of all air cargo (including 33% of the fuel) going to supply US forces in Iraq. Included are about 95% of the new “MRAP” — mine-resistant, ambush-protected — vehicles designed to save the lives of American troops. Turkey wasn’t always this helpful. In 2003, the Turks refused permission for the 4th Infantry Division to enter Iraq through Turkey.
Turkey’s Erdogan government has indicated that if the House of Representatives takes action on a non-binding resolution being pushed by Speaker Pelosi, Turkey might revoke our ability to use Incirlik as a waypoint for Iraq supplies.
Read the rest. There’s more than a passing possibility that the Armenia resolution ends up a) cutting off our use of Incirlik and b) getting the Turkish military more directly involved in Iraq, in a bad way. Taken together, what Pelosi and the Democrats are threatening to do may cut off our supply lines and bring a new player into the war in a way that might lead to a direct US-Turkey military confrontation, and at a time when conditions across Iraq are vastly improving. The non-binding resolution about a massive crime of the past could have some very real and very disastrous consequences in the here and now.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
B I T C H
Griz on October 15, 2007 at 9:48 AM
anything to win.
frreal on October 15, 2007 at 9:54 AM
Pathetic, and a bit sad.
High Desert Wanderer on October 15, 2007 at 9:55 AM
This clip is a candidate for Monday Stupid.
Leonidas Hoplite on October 15, 2007 at 9:57 AM
I am so reminded of the N. Vietnamese supplying their troops through Laos and Cambodia. The Dems said the same thing at the time. No, no, no… don’t you dare bomb the Ho Chi Min trail.
It is frustrating to me that our gov’t will not allow the military to have a few missles “go lost” into training and supply depots on the Iranian side of the border. We could even apologize after the fact!
Babs on October 15, 2007 at 9:57 AM
She really is isolated and insulated from reality.
bbz123 on October 15, 2007 at 9:59 AM
Just gotta admire her tenacity, lose at ANY cost…
commonsensehoosier on October 15, 2007 at 10:00 AM
This is the Dems idea of protecting America?
Time to take a ride down to my favorite gun store.
right2bright on October 15, 2007 at 10:01 AM
Palomino!
Kid from Brooklyn on October 15, 2007 at 10:02 AM
But she’s raised what, five children? So I wouldn’t dare question her patriotism. Or her intelligence.
Would I?
So, if we just show the world our enlightened values, people will respect us so damned much they’ll stop trying to kill our soldiers. “Well, I was going to set off this IED, but that resolution on Armenia has touched my heart.”
saint kansas on October 15, 2007 at 10:05 AM
I’m truly convinced that Washington has lost what little bit of intelligence it had somewhere…
Add in our Sec of State proposing to make Palestine a state now with the 67 boundaries… giving all that territory to a group who has LOST half its existing territory…
Add in Syria massing on the border of Israel.
Add in Turkey massing on the Iraq border to invade Kurdish Iraq.
Add in Kuwait trying to buy into the Stock Exchange…
Add in Bushy giving away our Sovereignity (to both Mexico, and the International Court… run by the same UN who makes Syria part of the Anti Nuke Proliferation group, and Iran part of the Human Rights group)…
Is it just me? or does it seem like NO ONE has a clue in Washington.
Romeo13 on October 15, 2007 at 10:06 AM
An organization is rightfully usually known by its leaders. Pelosi, Reid, Clinton … yep, the left is not only morally bankrupt, they are emotionally, spiritually and intellectually bankrupt as well.
Succinct…
deepdiver on October 15, 2007 at 10:08 AM
Liberals are stuck in the past. They cannot deal with the present because the past points out the flaws in their philosophy. They must constantly go back and try to refight the past so they can fool us today and justify their nonsensical beliefs.
By the way, when we are attacked in the future we will only deal with the enemy here and not take the fight to them?
peacenprosperity on October 15, 2007 at 10:10 AM
its about goddamn timed if you ask me. how else would you like to solve that problem? every day we have to make up for arafat’s walking away from the greatest deal ever handed to an arab ruler. if you come up with a better way, be sure to let condi know.
ernesto on October 15, 2007 at 10:11 AM
That woman is absolutely pathetic.
rplat on October 15, 2007 at 10:12 AM
Thanks Brian for the summ up. . .
Listening to her is akin to watching “The View”
I have no interest . . . . She’s just sickening .
Texyank on October 15, 2007 at 10:14 AM
HA!! I’d imagine it’s something akin to Angelina Jolie or George Clooney thinking their ever so enlightened movies will open “dialogue” between the warring factions to understand each other. Talk about pointless. But whatevs. It’s not like Nancy Pelosi has to help, oh, I don’t know, run a country or something.
I was watching a set of documentaries on the SS on the History Channel last night. Perhaps those documentaries should be shown to the government and all who wonder about people who are so dogmatically rigid and how one deals with that. Although I doubt they will see the parallels between the SS and the terrorists. Probably more like the SS and the US military is the parallel they’ll see. Which is sad.
mjk on October 15, 2007 at 10:16 AM
‘Palestine’ is and always has been a lost cause. That’s what happens when one side demands constant and increasing appeasement (sound familiar?) without once meeting ANY benchmarks or honoring any resolutions themselves.
techno_barbarian on October 15, 2007 at 10:18 AM
I’m almost tempted to possibly contemplate… you know… questioning her patriotism. Then I have to entertain the alternative hypothesis that she is just critically stupid. It’s a tough one, to be sure
Wineaholic on October 15, 2007 at 10:19 AM
Pelosi and the dems are desperately still trying to lose this war. The Armenian resolution is a stunningly deviant tactic.
Sure would be great if the dems were actually on America’s side. Yeah, I know. Wishful thinking.
techno_barbarian on October 15, 2007 at 10:23 AM
It’s not just you. We live in dangerous times and it’s the enemies within that are gonna be our downfall. Unfortunately, the country is so divided that we can’t seem to throw the bums out.
The Pelosi plan of criticizing the troops is already getting them killed. Shameless. Dare I say criminal?
Ordinary1 on October 15, 2007 at 10:23 AM
How about the SS and Media Matters and the Daily Kos?
peacenprosperity on October 15, 2007 at 10:23 AM
Ever been to the area? I have.
People don’t realize just how SMALL of an area we are talking about. If Israel has the 67 boundaries Palestinians, who still want to destroy Israel and have not changed, will be able to loft missles and artillery throught the entire state of Israel. Its a militarily indefensable position.
You do know that Fatah has still not gone back on its destroy Israel ambitions? And that they can’t even control the West Bank? And you want to give them territory Israel has spent both treasure and blood to make better?
THERE is now, nor has there ever been, a Palestinian State or People…. READ YOUR F’n HISTORY.
This would be the creation of somthing that has NEVER existed, at the expense of somthing which INDEED DID HISTORICLY EXIST!
My solution? Give the Palestinian territories back to JORDAN, where they came from, and make Jordan pacify them.
Tell the Palestinians… that they are not FIT to rule over themselves, as they have prooven they are not…
Romeo13 on October 15, 2007 at 10:28 AM
So, we should not deal with naming the IRG a terrorist group, but we should put our war effort at risk by denouncing an ally for genocidal acts that happened 90 years ago by a government that doesn’t even exist and the people who did it are all dead?
What’s next? Do we put forward a resolution denouncing Afghanistan because it was run by the Taliban? How about we condemn Canada for stealing the northern territories from the Inuits? Why don’t were demand restitution from Australia in behalf of the Aborigines?
Why? Because none of those resolutions will damage Bush’s ability to win the war in Iraq. This is a continuation of the slow bleed policy because they don’t have the balls to just cut the funding. So, the liberals will put our troops in more danger because they want to have the presidency in 08. The sick part is that there are people out there who would have an orgasm if they were to succeed.
Liberalism is a psychological disorder.
csdeven on October 15, 2007 at 10:30 AM
I am totally convinced, someone should drag this rabid dog out into the street, and put her out of her misery.
franksalterego on October 15, 2007 at 10:31 AM
Man, she is a freakin’ NUT.
She is not worthy to shine a soldiers boots, much less, make decisions about how or where said soldier is deployed.
TheSitRep on October 15, 2007 at 10:32 AM
None of that.
Bryan on October 15, 2007 at 10:35 AM
Woootttt… woooooottttt nutroot alert!!!
Now you sound like a Jihadist. Did you just come over from Kos?
Romeo13 on October 15, 2007 at 10:36 AM
I can’t help it…This is disgusting.
franksalterego on October 15, 2007 at 10:49 AM
Yes it is, but so is advocating assassinating an elected US official, no matter how much of an idiot she is.
Bryan on October 15, 2007 at 10:50 AM
Bryan,
As usual you’re spot on about Pelosi’s cluelessness when it comes to security matters. But I’m surprised you’re against the Armenian Genocide resolution. I understand the expediency issue you raised, but I can’t agree. First, this is a war of ideas, and we can’t win without acknowledging the length and breadth of the enemy ideology. Islamism played its part in the Armenian genocide. I’ll admit this should have been passed a long time ago, but there’s no time like the present.
Secondly, with an elected Islamist government in the AKP (their election win received congratulations from HAMAS, and the Euro-crats,)I’m a little curious just how long they’ll be on our side. In a war against the ideology of extremism, how much of an ally can they be, if they can’t even acknowledge their own past bad actions. I can appreciate the argument that if they are teetering towards Islamism, than we don’t want to poke them in the eye (the Musharraf Problem as it were) but if we sacrifice fundamental values like historical truth on the altar of expediency, than we’ll have already lost. (My two cents)
Dkshideler on October 15, 2007 at 10:53 AM
It’s amusing to think about what would happen if Pelosi was required to defend her own family and property using the same rules she wants to impose on the rest of us.
She’d have to accuse the SF City Council of genocide and the local cops of torture and sex crimes (in SF!!). Then she’d have to get laws passed to make it difficult or illegal to for the police to stop street gangs…especially those populated by foreigners.
Wonder how many days she’d last without a major loss.
landlines on October 15, 2007 at 10:55 AM
Sphincter of the House.
fogw on October 15, 2007 at 10:55 AM
I’m almost convinced of this.
Conservatism in general seems to acknowledge abstract concepts larger than the self: God, country, tradition, etc.
Liberalism seems more and more to be a projection of individual neuroses onto society at large; e.g., if we were more respected, the world wouldn’t hate us; the only reason people join the military is because they have no other choice economically; we’re to blame for bringing 9/11 on ourselves, etc.
And thus the projection bias: don’t call us unpatriotic, Rush Limbaugh is unpatriotic and doesn’t support the troops.
saint kansas on October 15, 2007 at 10:57 AM
“Idiot” is too kind of a word.
Alienating our allies, in a time of conflict, is as treacherous as it gets.
If a Donk were in the office of the presidency, would she be pulling this shit?
franksalterego on October 15, 2007 at 10:58 AM
It’s a matter of priorities. Should Congress concern itself with passing a resolution acknowledging a genocide of 90 years ago or should it concern itself with preventing genocide that could happen if we leave Iran alone or leave Iraq too soon? It’s also a matter of alliances. Right now, we need Incirlik more than we need to pass the Armenia resolution.
Bryan on October 15, 2007 at 10:59 AM
Nope, she wouldn’t.
Bryan on October 15, 2007 at 10:59 AM
She can’t even defend her own house against Code Pink!
saint kansas on October 15, 2007 at 10:59 AM
The question becomes why is the US Congress the arbitrator of Historical Truth? There were no Americans involved… this happened in a foreign land… why is this the subject of debate in the Congress when the Appropriation bills they are SUPPOSED to already have done… are not done?
Theres nothing the in Constitution that says they should be doing this… and in fact this is messing with Foreign Policy, somthing that is left to the Executive Branch. This has nothing to do with Appropriations, or Interstate Commerce, or Oversite… just where is it written this is Congress’s Job?
Romeo13 on October 15, 2007 at 11:01 AM
Force protection according to the most powerful woman in the USA, who is also a Liberal Democrat:
A) New Maxi-Pad design for heavy flow days
B) New special tactics team to protect trans gendered teachers in urban schools
C) Code name for foreign funded campaign contributions to key Democratic candidates that wish to destroy the USA.
Survey sez’ (Bing) “A”
Hening on October 15, 2007 at 11:07 AM
Clueless and anti-military at heart. Big surprise. She is from San Francisco. Look at what her people are doing there.
katieanne on October 15, 2007 at 11:12 AM
So, it wasn’t time to do it because of the Soviets, Gulf War I, overflights and Gulf War II… conspicuously missing from this train of thought are both Kosovo and Somalia. Hmm. Curious.
MikeZero on October 15, 2007 at 11:12 AM
Is this SNL ?
Wade on October 15, 2007 at 11:17 AM
This woman is the most dangerous politician in history for our troops. She won’t condemn the Iranian military who is actively killing our troops in Iraq. But she will stir up tensions on another front (making it more difficult for our troops in the theater) by bringing up a internationally politically sensitive issue that happened 80 years ago.
She is very dangerous for America. She is very dangerous for our troops. It is a shame that she has so much power. She is as treasonous as any enemy of the USA.
ThackerAgency on October 15, 2007 at 11:17 AM
I wonder if Asad gave her the idea about the Armenian genocide when she went to visit her ‘friend’ in Syria.
ThackerAgency on October 15, 2007 at 11:18 AM
She has no idea what she is doing.
Zorro on October 15, 2007 at 11:28 AM
wow – she sounds like Miss South Carolina! And Stephenapolous kept a straight face – just like the pageant MC did!! LMAO!
iam7545 on October 15, 2007 at 11:33 AM
She’s one of those people, when you listen to her, you feel like you’re losing brain cells. God knows what some of the old Democrat dinosaurs in the House say about her over a cigar.
Zach on October 15, 2007 at 11:34 AM
She knows EXACTLY what she’s doing, unfortunately. If you can’t cut off the troops from home, find some way to cut off the troops abroad, all the while claiming “you support the troops”. What better way to do it than piss the Turks off and have THEM shut down 90% of airlift into theater and 75% of ground transport (give or take).
What she HASN’T thought about is second order of effects. Primarily, how Turkey will react towards Israel, our other major ally in the region. Piss an Islamic government (secular or otherwise) and you know who will also be blamed…
rotorhead on October 15, 2007 at 11:35 AM
To her credit, Jane Harman wrote an op-ed saying why this resolution is a bad idea, and to its credit, the LA Times even printed it.
Dudley Smith on October 15, 2007 at 11:49 AM
The thought of her having a say in military matters makes me shudder with dread. The fight against terrorism will not be won by rhetoric. Liberals like her seem to think you can talk your way out of conflict EVERY time. This is a fight that HAS to be fought and she seems to be doing everything in her power to make that fight more difficult for us.
Yakko77 on October 15, 2007 at 11:49 AM
This reminds me of a little kid, who, out of ignorant curiousity, pokes a stick into a hornet’s nest.
And, these are the people, who endlessly, until they’re blue in the face, lecture about “diplomacy”
Thanks to all the republicans, who stayed home in the last election, thinking it couldn’t get worse.
Bah
franksalterego on October 15, 2007 at 11:54 AM
Palomino!
Palomino!
mram on October 15, 2007 at 11:55 AM
Speeding this up too. Doing everything she can to “support our troops”, and “protect” them.
Entelechy on October 15, 2007 at 12:19 PM
I propose that every video of this twit be photoshopped to place her Syrian scarf back on her botoxed head. It will help the liberals to understand her better.
Jaibones on October 15, 2007 at 12:25 PM
Hmmm, if the Turks, as it appears will happen, attack northern Iraq, what are the odds that it will trigger more countries to become involved with direct operations? And then how many countries have to get involved before NATO nations have no choice to send troops? And then how long after that before the war expands even further and massive Islamic uprising start worldwide?
My real question and concern is, is there any likelihood that this little dem stunt gave the Turks justification to open the military front that triggers the floodgates of WWIV (or III if you don’t accept that the cold war was a world war fought by proxy)?
deepdiver on October 15, 2007 at 12:45 PM
she can’t let the chance at passing another non-binding resolution go. Its the only thing she’s been able to accomplish. No matter that it puts our troops at risk, she can add another useless thing to her list of (non)accomplishments.
ctmom on October 15, 2007 at 1:03 PM
Still glowing from her Folsom St Faire I see.. IDIOT.
Viper1 on October 15, 2007 at 1:19 PM
This chickenhead probably thinks “force protection” has something to do with condoms.
Travis Bickle on October 15, 2007 at 1:20 PM
Lets not go there.
csdeven on October 15, 2007 at 1:26 PM
The biggest allies our enemies have are the senate and house dems…led by pelosi and hairy reed…followed by sherotten brown of Ohio who has no mind of his own and dishonors the people of Ohio
areseaoh on October 15, 2007 at 1:28 PM
WTF… That’s a GRADE SCHOOL ANSWER: “…Force Protection is a top priority…”
No EFFEN SHIITE!! It Dang well better be! (Come on, is it ok to curse at this beeotch??) Clueless. This is also a woman that NEVER GOES TO THE BRIEFINGS!
And what’s going on with Snuffaluffagus’s HAIR? It’s more 90’s now than ever! He and Silky hanging out together?
Mazztek on October 15, 2007 at 1:32 PM
Deal with Iranian forces in Iraq in Iraq? There hasn’t been a significant dem leader that knows the smallest thing about war since Truman. This is horribly sad and terrible discouraging.
Plus her dead eyes frighten me.
hulbstar on October 15, 2007 at 1:35 PM
Not tough at all–she’s both unpatriotic and critcially stupid. Typical liberal–hasn’t got Clue One about anything even remotely connected to the military, but considers herself an expert. Although in this case I think she was also determined to work her talking points into her answer, whether or not they were in any way relevant to the question. Gotta stay on message, and the message is ‘Lose the war at all costs!’
ReubenJCogburn on October 15, 2007 at 1:36 PM
oh great i just lost 30 IQ points listening to that
bwitch.Mojack420 on October 15, 2007 at 1:36 PM
I can’t believe what a moron this woman is… it’s truly astonishing.
D2Boston on October 15, 2007 at 2:05 PM
San Francisco values.
Dear Navy: Please move Fleet Week to San Diego, where it belongs, and will be appreciated.
Hawkins1701 on October 15, 2007 at 2:07 PM
They don’t have a clue and can’t even phone a friend.
Ill bet it will be Bush’sssss fault!
Nail on the Head!!!
1st place comment,
blueRED ribbonBrash, but…..
Very thoughtful point to ponder
It would be amusing, if it were not a matter of actual lives being lost.
From this first sentence on, you had it right
Sorry I have to disagree, She is sly like a selfish, uncaring, evil fox.
Brilliant!
This is why I like HA so much, all of you are intelligent deep thinkers that bring every angle to my attention.
Like an evil doll or shark.
Nice wrap up
Of course this is all just MHO.
abinitioadinfinitum on October 15, 2007 at 2:18 PM
Not only is Jane Harman prettier, she is smarter too.
ctmom on October 15, 2007 at 2:23 PM
It’s an end-around. They are trying to lose this war, one way or another. Their past attempts have failed, it looks like it is succeeding and they have to stop it.
Sue on October 15, 2007 at 2:23 PM
Said it better than I did. But that is exactly what they are doing.
Sue on October 15, 2007 at 2:24 PM
OK people lets get this straight, this is not an act of stupidity on Nancy Pelosi’ part. this is a deliberate attempt to cut off funding and lose the war in Iraq in a manner that cannot be directly connected to her or the democrats. They have discovered a way to lose while blaming the loss on Turkey instead of having the blame rest on themselves where it rightly belongs.
There is simply no two ways about it, this is an act of treason camouflaged to look like an act of humanitarianism.
doriangrey on October 15, 2007 at 3:11 PM
What a ass. She keeps saying not the right time. Well the right time was 80 years ago when her parents were procreating idiots.
Wade on October 15, 2007 at 3:16 PM
The Fellow Travellers have returned with a vengeance.
Add this attempt to drive a wedge between the US and a NATO partner to the cutting back of funds to the Airborne Laser and the Ballistic Missile Defense programs. Do not forget that the Dems snubbed Columbia’s President when he was in town and will/have deny Columbia most favoured nation trade status.
Has anyone found any earmarks for organizations supporting our enemies?
davod on October 15, 2007 at 3:30 PM
She will go to Syria but not Iraq
She will promote a resolution about Turkey that can harm our efforts
She won’t promote a resolution condemning Iran for their funding and supply efforts but only wants to deal with their impact inside the borders of Iraq
Yeah I got all that
CommentGuy on October 15, 2007 at 4:02 PM
From an Intelligence blog I follow
CommentGuy on October 15, 2007 at 4:05 PM
This is all part of the “global test” we heard so much about in 2004.
danking70 on October 15, 2007 at 4:13 PM
Are the Democrats smart enough to use the Armenia resolution as a stealth method to the end the war in Iraq?
slp on October 15, 2007 at 6:06 PM
Congressional Dems working to yank the rug from under our troops while proclaiming they’re doing it to help them. I grow tired of these games from them. I view these actions as a betrayal to our troops that is literally like a knife in the back and I’ve developed a unhealthy hatred of them because of it.
Yakko77 on October 15, 2007 at 6:19 PM
Read the latest Dr Sowell article about this travisty. Sabotage in Wartime
Wade on October 15, 2007 at 7:19 PM
All those Republican-registered voters who did not vote last November should be proud………
There are always Pelosis around, and when she drops dead San Franciso will elect someone just as bad. But it took the non-votes of Those Who Could Have Voted last year to put this pathetic freak into power
Janos Hunyadi on October 15, 2007 at 7:44 PM
What a woman….Those five children and grandchildren must have sucked all fragments of grey matter remaining in that well done head of hers. Knowing the outcome of a useless symbolic gesture to be potentially distuptive to our efforts and dangerous to our troops in harms way and proceeding is at best a cheap political trick, at worst it is treason. Someone needs to stop this kind of stupidity….Democrats really do not care about our troops.
jimwesty on October 15, 2007 at 9:12 PM
Get this woman 25/7 coverage. A TV camera and a mike everywhere she goes. Record her thoughts and dreams. And play them back. Over and Over and Over.
Unquiet on October 15, 2007 at 9:46 PM
Aghh! How about we get her a Mike with a microphone.
Unquiet on October 15, 2007 at 9:50 PM
So let me get this straight, Pelosi.
It’s not for Congress to determine that a foreign country’s armed forces are directly acting against our troops in a terroristic manner BUT it is Congress’ role to go declaring Genocides from generations ago against countries that no longer exist?
I cant stand this woman. Ugh.
Coup please!
VinceP1974 on October 15, 2007 at 11:00 PM
Lotta hate here; Franksalterego went way over the line. That’s unacceptable.
– — –
Perhaps the way to frame the next question to an advocate of this resolution is “How many soldiers will die due to the effects of this resolution at this time? At what number is it not worth it?”
Chap on October 15, 2007 at 11:56 PM
Turkey is already teetering on the edge of a less and less secular society, Congress should be one of the last entities to give Islamists there more of an excuse to take the country that much closer to fundamentalist radical Islam.
Speakup on October 16, 2007 at 2:28 AM
Let’s see, Pelosi goes to Syria just before the Syrians got frisky with Israel again and now she’s about to scuttle our nations relationship with a very important ally in the Middle East.
Never lose sight of the fact that our own left loves our enemies much more than our own nation and never assume the things they do are innocent stupid mistakes.
Buzzy on October 16, 2007 at 4:27 AM
And the Republican voters who continue to vote for these moron incumbants should be even prouder. We need to purge the party and start over… this time with REAL conservatives… preferably people who are NOT career
panderers, errr, I mean politicians.BadBrad on October 16, 2007 at 6:44 AM
There are some in the law enforcement, military, and intel who have a clue…they just have no say or power to control these particular problems. Have faith, at least, that they are out there doing their job.
My beef is mainly with Congress: How can those who pass the laws then b*tch about their implementation??? Well, DUH! Maybe you dumbbutts up there shoulda read what you put together first, then you’d realize it was a huge load of horse crap!
Like shark eyes…very creepy.
Miss_Anthrope on October 17, 2007 at 11:48 AM
Comment pages: