More hapless Libs speaking out of their ass

[ELVIS]

"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."


"The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over"


"Think of the press as a great keyboard on which the government can play."


"Whoever can conquer the street will one day conquer the state, for every form of power politics and any dictatorship-run state has its roots in the street."


"Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place"


"If the day should ever come when we [the Nazis] must go, if some day we are compelled to leave the scene of history, we will slam the door so hard that the universe will shake and mankind will stand back in stupefaction.."

Joseph Goebbels

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Ernie123
Bob Woodward's book "Bush at War" details George Tenet's "Slam Dunk" quote. It is a fact spewed by the left's journalistic Moses... The man that brought down that big, bad facist Richard Nixon!!!!

Finally, Every liberal Democratic Senator that is now turning and RUNNING like hell from what they said BEFORE the war can kiss my ass. Is that the type of leadership you want? People who HAWK out at the drop of a hat and then turn around say they were mislead...

The only misleading being done in Washington is by the Democrats and that IDIOT Howard Dean. It's the old game of misinformation. If you state it as truth long enough, it will eventually be perceived that way. Josef Goebbels of the Nazi regime in WWII was the KING of it.. The Democratic party has co-opted it, although they keep stepping on their own dicks.. Oh, in Hillary's case, her tits... God that woman is homely.

OMG, could this be anymore delusional, nihilist horseshit? No? Congratulations!

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by ELVIS


"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."


"The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over"


"Think of the press as a great keyboard on which the government can play."


"Whoever can conquer the street will one day conquer the state, for every form of power politics and any dictatorship-run state has its roots in the street."


"Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place"


"If the day should ever come when we [the Nazis] must go, if some day we are compelled to leave the scene of history, we will slam the door so hard that the universe will shake and mankind will stand back in stupefaction.."

Joseph Goebbels

Goebbels or Dick CHENEY?

[Nickdfresh]

What about RICHARD CLARKE's book?

[Cathedral]

I really don't understand why all the fuss, guys...both sides are losers and you all look silly trying to take the moral high ground from one another.
United we stand, divided we fall....have a nice trip...when you pick yourselves up just reach for the top because that's where you'll find me.

I mean really, does it make much sense to chop people apart over dirty laundry when your own washer is just as full of filth?

Honestly, around here hypocracy comes wearing many different faces yet, they're all the same clown wearing makeup.

[Nickdfresh]

BTW, "we're in the last throes of the insurgency." (VP Dick CHENEY)

[ELVIS]

Originally posted by Cathedral

Honestly, around here hypocracy comes wearing many different faces yet, they're all the same clown wearing makeup.

That's not true...

What's up your ass ??


Occasionally our bitch and shout fests are productive...


Hang in there 'ol buddy...

[Cathedral]

LOL, whats up my ass?
The government and these piss fests where people tend to forget the shortcomings of their own chosen party in the name of partisanship.

I believe that Jesus would be saying, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone"

Now i'm a Conservative, but i won't ignore the fact that the current Administration has it's own shortcomings.
If it were truly what it has claimed to be and did what it promised 5 years ago the heat on the abortion debate would be getting hotter, not cooling off.
Immigration would have been dealt with on 9-12-01 and not just now being addressed in it's current political fodder.

Iraq would have been better planned and instead of the argument still being bantered about as it is, our troops would have had all the support they needed to be actually wrapping up all military operations by now.

I just cannot defend either side with what some of you are usuing to do just that.
I'm sorry to be unproductive here, but it smells of hypocracy to me and i'm trying not to take part in it.

You can't be honest with anyone if you cannot be honest with yourself.
This is the very reason we tend not to learn from our mistakes and are doomed to repeat them.

Bush gets all spiritual on camera, but then as soon as the cameras are turned off, or so he thinks, his true nature comes out and that is also hypocritical in my opinion.
It plays against the true Christian, which i am trying to be, and in doing that one has to be prepared to call out his/her own when he/she doesn't agree.

Elvis, I have become more critical of Bush because of what so many people calling themselves obedient Christians seem to ignore about the man's character.
That said, i will defend anyone, including Bush if there is no proof of the accusations made beyond the shadow of a doubt.

It's called being fair, you got no problem with that, do you?

One problem is that there was a program on the other day where it was claimed that Bush is in the bible code. when people start doing that i almost break out in a sweat because of how general these claims are.
Damn near anyone in power could fit in the framework they presented and it scared me for everyone.

In politics it is always about the lesser of two evils, I hate that and want representation that is not evil at all...we don't have that and never really will again.

Like President Lincoln once said, "Stand with anybody that stands RIGHT. Stand with him while he is right and PART with him when he goes wrong."

This idea that Bush was the "chosen one" by God is dangerous because if you know anything about God you know that when he calls someone to something it doesn't make everything they do sanctified, just what he called them to do. the rest is where free will comes in and if people grant you a pass based on faith one time, they'll do it again then they have made what could be a grave mistake, just like those Bush has made in the name of his faith.

For the record, I don't think Iraq was a mistake. it was our duty as a super power to free the oppressed and it doesn't end in Iraq.
but things should be approached differently than they were there.
Diplomacy should be completely extinguished, and then tried one more time before any bombs or troops are sent in.
Then, we should go in with such a force that getting bogged down in a battle with insurgency won't take the toll on our forces that Iraq has taken.
Victory will be achieved, but it could have been more efficient fi the peace had been planned for.
I knew there would be an insurgency, you had to know the same thing, so when our government said it wasn't anticipated, i have to call that a lie, and it doesn't stop there.

[FORD]

Why would you defend the Chimp when you have acknowledged yourself that he is a liar and a hypocrite who pretends to be a Christian?

[Cathedral]

I don't, i was using that as an example that if i don't see evidence or proof of someone's guilt i won't judge them as guilty. that is what i meant by "even G.W. Bush".

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by FORD
Why would you defend the Chimp when you have acknowledged yourself that he is a liar and a hypocrite who pretends to be a Christian?

Tell me about it

It's a common thread [no pun ] running throughout the NeoCon community in here of late.

Warpig says Bush is a liar, and has a Chimp avater, yet runs to his defense, as well as that of this administration all the time.

Cath claims to be a neutral, hate 'em all centrist, but when pushed always ends up defending the Chickenhawks, and tries to cast the Dems as "having no plan"

Too bad they never seem to hold the current administration to the same blow job ethic levels they hold for others....

[Cathedral]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
Tell me about it

It's a common thread [no pun ] running throughout the NeoCon community in here of late.

Warpig says Bush is a liar, and has a Chimp avater, yet runs to his defense, as well as that of this administration all the time.

Cath claims to be a neutral, hate 'em all centrist, but when pushed always ends up defending the Chickenhawks, and tries to cast the Dems as "having no plan"

Too bad they never seem to hold the current administration to the same blow job ethic levels they hold for others....

Well, the Dems don't have a plan, and if they do, i'd like to see it.
But i'm confused, how am i defending the chickenhawks?

Splain, please...

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Ernie123
Bob Woodward's book "Bush at War" details George Tenet's "Slam Dunk" quote. It is a fact spewed by the left's journalistic Moses... The man that brought down that big, bad facist Richard Nixon!!!!

Woodward didn't really bring down NIXON, his deputy-FBI director did. In fact, many would argue that the Wash. Posts' coverage was no better than anyone elses', only Woodward got lucky and was approached by DEEP THROAT, precisely because he was young and easy to manipulate. And it was in fact many Republicans that turned against Tricky Dick for the good of the nation, and NIXON really wasn't that right-wing, in fact his policies were quite moderate in comparison to Da' CHiMP....

Secondly, you're assuming WOODWARD is leftist, there are many that see him as an Administration lap dog if fact, far too close to objectively report, much like "Ms. Run Amok," the TIME journalist jailed over the Plame leak.

I'd really like to hear TENET's take on it. But we won't, because nobody (in gov't) will talk to him now due to his threats to reveal a lot about the BUSH Admin. is he was soley held accountable for 9-11/WMDs, and he's mum about it.

Finally, Every liberal Democratic Senator that is now turning and RUNNING like hell from what they said BEFORE the war can kiss my ass. Is that the type of leadership you want? People who HAWK out at the drop of a hat and then turn around say they were mislead...

Oh, but they were fed cherry-picked, selective intelligence devoid of any of the CIA's skepticism.

I guess you prefer the leadership of a lame duck Chimp and his gang of incompetent, corrupt cronies, but whatever...

The only misleading being done in Washington is by the Democrats...

You are completely delusional if you truly believe this. Have fun in nihilist land.

and that IDIOT Howard Dean. It's the old game of misinformation. If you state it as truth long enough, it will eventually be perceived that way. Josef Goebbels of the Nazi regime in WWII was the KING of it.. The Democratic party has co-opted it, although they keep stepping on their own dicks.. Oh, in Hillary's case, her tits... God that woman is homely.

Oh fucking spare me? Using NAZI analogies now to describe the party that led the fight against them? Sounds like the "truth" about WMDs. Uh dude, you need to check the douches you voted for apparently. Let's see:

• Like the Nazi GERMANS:
  
  Used false pretenses to start a war *Check*
  
  Manipulated and politicized intelligence (to the point of self-destructiveness) *Check*
  
  Used irrational fear to maintain power and increase gov't control *Check*
  
  Used torture *Check*
  
  Enjoyed invading people and putting tanks in the desert, but hated the messy guerilla/intelligence wars that followed *Check*
  
  Incompetent war planners that were initially very successful, but fucked up and made critical miscalculations based on what they wanted to believe (vis-a-vis The Eastern Front) *Check*
  
  Punished their domestic political enemies *Check*
  
  Et cetera...

[LoungeMachine]

DLC | New Dem Dispatch | September 30, 2005
Idea of the Week: What To Do Now In Iraq

While the Bush Administration has committed a long series of mistakes in the aftermath of the removal of Saddam Hussein, America must remain committed to success in Iraq. A failed state in Iraq would destabilize the entire region, hand our jihadist enemies a major victory and result in a devastating blow to our national security credibility and interests. But the right course now is neither to give the terrorists a victory by withdrawing, nor to continue Bush's failed policies. We urge progressives to place maximum pressure on the administration to reverse its mistakes and pursue a new strategy linked to clear benchmarks for success in Iraq and in the broader war on terror.

Here are three ways the U.S. can do exactly that:

First, we should formally disclaim any interest in permanent U.S. military bases in Iraq; clearly shift the primary responsibility of defending the country to the Iraqi military (with embedded Coalition troops), and adopt a joint military strategy based on proven principles of counterinsurgency. The last point means abandoning Vietnam-style "search and destroy" missions against the insurgency, and instead focusing on progressively securing territory where reconstruction can proceed and normal civic life can resume.

Second, we should launch a new political strategy aimed relentlessly at winning Sunni support for the new government, and at isolating jihadists. We still have considerable leverage among Shi'a and Kurdish leaders; we should use it to push for confidence -- building measures like the integration of communal militias into the Iraqi army and police forces; a blanket amnesty for former Baathists not implicated in atrocities; and for intensified talks with Sunnis on supplemental protocols to the proposed constitution that would ensure a viable central government and minority rights.

Third, we should muster all our diplomatic resources to create a more supportive international environment for the new Iraqi government. It should not be that hard to establish a UN-authorized international contact group to coordinate political support and economic assistance.

We should cash our sizable chits with Saudi Arabia and Egypt to work directly with Iraqi Sunni Arabs, using economic incentives where possible, to undermine support for insurgency and encourage political engagement. These Arab states should also push Syria (in conjunction with potential U.N. sanctions) to finally close off travel routes into Iraq for jihadists.

We should formally push for indictment of chief terrorist Zarquawi for crimes against humanity in Iraq, drawing worldwide attention to the vicious anti-Shi'a ethnic cleansing campaign that characterizes the insurgency. All these steps are politically feasible, but there's no evidence the administration is taking them.

In calling for this new strategy, we acknowledge that we are asking brave Americans to sacrifice still more for a crucial goal under the direction of an administration that has failed so often to pursue that goal competently or honestly. We share the anger of most progressives towards Bush's blunders, even as we urge them not to let that anger obscure the very real national stake we all have in taking every step possible to leave Iraq in a condition where it will not become a failed state and a terrorist base for global operations.

As usual, Tony Blair best articulated those stakes, for our people and his, just this week:

"This is a global struggle. Today it is at its fiercest in Iraq. It has allied itself there with every reactionary element in the Middle East. Strip away their fake claims of grievance and see them for what they are: terrorists who use 21st century technology to fight a pre-medieval religious war that is utterly alien to the future of humankind."

That's a reality that all of us, whether or not we supported the original invasion of Iraq, need to keep in mind, holding our leaders most accountable not for their blunders, but for their willingness to recognize them and change course now.

[LoungeMachine]

Tuesday, November 29, 2005
It’s time for an Iraq timetable

By Joseph R. Biden Jr. Tuesday, November 29, 2005 12:43 PM CST






Special to The Washington Post

WASHINGTON — The question most Americans want answered about Iraq is this: When will our troops come home?

We already know the likely answer. In 2006, they will begin to leave in large numbers. By the end of the year, we will have redeployed about 50,000. In 2007, a significant number of the remaining 100,000 will follow. A small force will stay behind — in Iraq or across the border — to strike at any concentration of terrorists.

That is because we cannot sustain 150,000 Americans in Iraq without extending deployment times, sending soldiers on fourth and fifth tours, or mobilizing the National Guard. Even if we could, our large military presence — while still the only guarantor against a total breakdown — is increasingly counterproductive. A liberation has become an occupation.

There is another critical question: As our soldiers redeploy, will our security interests in Iraq remain intact or will we have traded a dictator for chaos?

There is a broad consensus on what must be done to preserve our interests. Recently, 79 Democratic and Republican senators told President Bush we need a detailed, public plan for Iraq, with specific goals and a timetable for achieving each one.

Over the next six months, we must forge a sustainable political compromise between Iraqi factions, strengthen the Iraqi government and bolster reconstruction efforts, and accelerate the training of Iraqi forces.

First, we need to build political consensus, starting with the constitution. Sunnis must accept that they no longer rule Iraq. But unless Shiites and Kurds give them a stake in the new deal, they will continue to resist. We must help produce a constitution that will unite Iraq, not divide it.

Iraq's neighbors and the international community have a huge stake in the country's future. The president should initiate a regional strategy — as he did in Afghanistan — to leverage the influence of neighboring countries. And he should establish a Contact Group of the world's major powers — as we did in the Balkans — to become the Iraqi government's primary international interlocutor.

Second, we must build Iraq's governing capacity and overhaul the reconstruction program. Iraq's ministries are barely functional. Sewage in the streets, unsafe drinking water and a lack of electricity are all too common. With 40 percent unemployment in Iraq, insurgents do not lack for fresh recruits.

We need a civilian commitment equal to our military effort. Just as military personnel are required to go to Iraq, the president should identify more skilled foreign service officers to help.

This should not be their burden alone. Britain proposed that individual countries adopt ministries. It's a good idea that we should pursue. We must redirect reconstruction contracts away from multinationals and to Iraqis.

Countries that have pledged aid must deliver it. So far, only $3 billion of the $13.5 billion in non-American aid has made it to Iraq. And the president should convene a conference of our Gulf allies. They have reaped huge windfall oil profits — it's time they gave back.

The third goal is to transfer authority to Iraqi security forces. In September, Gen. George W. Casey Jr. acknowledged that only one Iraqi battalion — fewer than 1,000 troops — can fight without U.S. help. An additional 40 can lead counterinsurgency operations with our support.

The president must set a schedule for getting Iraqi forces trained to the point that they can act on their own or take the lead with U.S. help. We should take up other countries on their offers to do more training, especially of officers. We should focus on getting the security ministries up to speed. Even well-trained troops need to be equipped, sustained and directed.

We also need an effective counterinsurgency strategy. The administration finally understands the need not only to clear territory but also to hold and build on it. We have never had enough U.S. troops to do that. Now there is no choice but to gamble on the Iraqis. We can help by changing the mix of our forces to include more embedded trainers, civil affairs units and Special Forces.

Iraqis of all sects want to live in a stable country. Iraq's neighbors don't want a civil war next door. The major powers don't want a terrorist haven in the heart of the Middle East. The American people want us to succeed.

If the administration shows it has a blueprint for protecting our fundamental security interests in Iraq, Americans will support it

Biden is a senator from Delaware and ranking Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee.