Montgomery Burns

Of course the US never funded the taliban nor did they sell weapons to Iraq at anytime. 1) They gave humanitarian aid to Afghanistan. So has Canada. Interesting attempt by the libertarians at Cato to assume that a $43 million grant was payback for the crackdown on opium. I'm not surprised. Most libertarians think drugs shouldn't be illegal. 2) Yeah, they funded a covert war against the USSR by arming Afghanis--"some" who later joined the Taliban. They had to be secretive because the left tended to be sympathetic to the USSR. I read the Charlie Wilson book (the Texas Democrat behind the aiding of the Afghan resistance). It is disingenuous to say that Wilson and the US armed the Taliban. 3) I have never denied that the US sold arms to Iraq. Numerous times I have posted the SIPRI report where it showed that 1% of Iraq's arms came from the US. Funny that you brought up the US arming Iraq, but forgot to note that 57% of Iraq's arms came from Russia, 13% from France, and 12% from China (Top 3 = 82%, and the 3 countries who blocked the US in the UN's Security Council). I'm sure that was just an oversight on your part. Don't you read any soldier blogs? They weren't being attacked with US weaponry. Every weapon seemed to be made in Russia and France.

This isn't racism, but... Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate in Ohio wants to make homosexual behavior a capital crime punishable by the death penalty Yeesh.

Well, if that's the case then why do you portray it as troops just expressing that they want thier soft beds? You're contradicting yourself Monty. And if you believe you've found a liberal conspiracy at work then you're contradicting yourself again. Which is it: a. troops answered as they did because they want thier soft bed. b. troops answered as they did because they want to agree with the Pentagon plan. c. troops anwered as they did because the poll was skewed by that cheating lib John Zogby. It's common sense, Gerry. If you were a soldier in a foreign country, wouldn't you rather be home with your family, sleeping in your own bed with your wife, seeing your children? And you've got to admit that Zogby was way off in the 2004 US election. He predicted Kerry would win--even though his final poll had Bush winning. Then on election day, his exit polls had Kerry with a big lead (to discourage Republicans from coming out to vote), and then to add to his record, he declared Kerry had won Ohio.

What he said is the objective of the capitalist system is to maximize profits and that social progress is not an objective of the system. This is a definition from Economics 101 and is hardly controversial. This is what he literally said: "Do you see how this economic system is at odds with humanity? At odds with caring and compassion? It's at odds with human rights." Which is utter rot. Just like the rest of his Hate-America rant. It has been proven time and time again that capitalism is more humane, carring, and compassionate compared to socialism. Alas, he will probably not be fired for having 20 minute rants that have nothing to do with geography. Apparently (surprise!) the school board is very liberal. Plus, it is virtually impossible to fire someone who is in an union. I saw Sean Allen's mom on Fox News. She is a Democrat, but after Sean Hannity asked if she was questioning liberalism, she said yes. Perhaps another neo-(new)-conservative will join the ranks. I saw the video (on the internet) of Bennish on NBC's Today Show. Bennish said that the other 30 mins of the 50 minute class "provided the balance" to his anti-America distribe. I don't believe him. I got a chuckle when Matt Lauer said, *cue dark foreboding music* "I understand that they shopped this tape around to conservative news sources." Poor Matt didn't get a chance at it first, so the liberal MSM could put their spin on it.

Is that the best you got Monty? You must be getting awfully tired of using that BDS mantra. Well, put me down as I believe Murtha is right on the money. With the Democrats shoddy record of being "right on the money", I hope you were given good odds.

Black Dog: Ridiculous projection. How does Bush claiming that Saddam was seeking nukes (and we know he was) become "They said there's nuclear weapons", as Murtha said? What do you want? Pics of them having sex with each other? Saddam ran Iraq with an iron fist and he gave sanction (and housing and a govt salary) to one of the terrorists involved in the 1993 World Trade Center attack, and Zarqawi fled to Iraq (after the Taliban fell), and got medical attention at Baghdad's Olympic Hostpital, a hospital run by Uday Hussein. We all know that Saddam's Iraq was a virtual terrorist haven. Secular? Do secular people change the country's flag by adding the words "Allah Akbar"? Saddam and his Al Qaeda friends: But but but..."connections" could mean anything. And it's insignificant.

The Western Standard is a tabloid trying to exploit a controversy. The cartoons were available on the web - there is no reason to further aggravate the situation by printing the cartoons.The violent reaction of the Muslims unacceptable and unjustifiable but that is how they reacted and we cannot pretend it did not happen. One does not deal with a rabid dog by poking it with a stick. A tabloid is full of sensational material. That doesn't describe the Western Standard. Why do you want to appease the Muslims in this istuation? The caricatures were relatively harmless, yet you are willing to forsake freedom of the press over some trivial cartoons. Wake up! Look at Islam's teachings. It's just like the appeasing of Hitler. Europe is a powderkeg and is going to explode soon. The MSM has no problems publishing pics of Piss Christ and a dung-covered Mary but when it comes to relatively harmless cartoons, they won't show them to the public because they don't want to offend Islam. They are cowards. Why don't they come right out and admit it? They fear for their lives if they publish those cartoons. The cartoonists are in hiding in Denmark. The MSM is quiet when it comes to showing support for all the imprisoned journalists in the ME--just like Hollywood is silent when it comes to the death of filmmaker Theo Van Gogh.

People are tuning out liberal Hollywood. I guess Clooney is right; Hollywood is out of touch. Oscars drop 10% from dismal 2005 ratings: Also, from Drudge Report:

You clearly don't understand the oil argument. It's not about buying oil. It's about controlling the access to it. If you said you suspected that was one of many factors in the Bush administration's decision, I might agree with you. It is not in the USA's interest--especially after 9-11--to have an oil-rich psychopath that has the potential to hurt the US economy--and commit terror, get WMD, and get nukes. Indeed, we see from the translation of those tapes that Saddam was actively trying to get a nuke program going as recently as 2000. A guy that used chemical weapons during war, and even on his own citizens; a man who attacked 4 countries (Iran, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Israel); a man that was costing the US hundreds of billions of dollars by having US troops in the ME to "contain" Saddam for 12 years; a man who ignored the ceasefire he signed in 1991; for the UN lovers, he ignored 16 Chapter VII (binding) UN Resolutions; a man who repeatedly shot at US (and UK) aircraft over the two No Fly Zones; a man who paid people to commit acts of terror; a man that harbored numerous sorts of terrorists in Iraq, and a man who tried to assassinate a US president. Yeah, a sworn enemy--a madman who controls such a valuable resource to the US could potentially cripple or severely hurt the US economy. Geopolitics. All countries engage in it. Come on. Don't do this to yourself Burnsy. Saddam and even Osama were held in high regards with the US administration during the 80s. The US even gave Saddam the chemicals to gas his own citizens. The US funded and armed the Taleban feat. OBL, to help get the Soviets out of Afghanistan. Hypocracy abound here. Deal with the despots when it is convenient. Don't do this to yourself. Most of what you said is untrue.

Separately, more than 300 tribal chiefs, politicians, clerics, security officials and other community leaders met last week in Hawijah, about 35 miles southwest of Kirkuk, and "declared war" on al-Qaeda in Iraq Dude, where's my civil war?

You clearly don't understand the oil argument. It's not about buying oil. It's about controlling the access to it. If you said you suspected that was one of many factors in the Bush administration's decision, I might agree with you. It is not in the USA's interest--especially after 9-11--to have an oil-rich psychopath that has the potential to hurt the US economy--and commit terror, get WMD, and get nukes. Indeed, we see from the translation of those tapes that Saddam was actively trying to get a nuke program going as recently as 2000. A guy that used chemical weapons during war, and even on his own citizens; a man who attacked 4 countries (Iran, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Israel); a man that was costing the US hundreds of billions of dollars by having US troops in the ME to "contain" Saddam for 12 years; a man who ignored the ceasefire he signed in 1991; for the UN lovers, he ignored 16 Chapter VII (binding) UN Resolutions; a man who repeatedly shot at US (and UK) aircraft over the two No Fly Zones; a man who paid people to commit acts of terror; a man that harbored numerous sorts of terrorists in Iraq, and a man who tried to assassinate a US president. Yeah, a sworn enemy--a madman who controls such a valuable resource to the US could potentially cripple or severely hurt the US economy. Geopolitics. All countries engage in it.

Black Dog: Old saw? He was in the military so he is a moron. If he at least looked European or French, but he is clearly of subpar intelligence when it comes to comparison to America's greatest war hero and super-duper genius John Fitzgerald Kerry! Can I call you blind? Let's take another look at Peters' column: "I've been trying all week. The other day, I drove another 30 miles or so on the streets and alleys of Baghdad". All day - and it was a long day - we drove through Shia and Sunni neighborhoods. 30 miles is 18 kilometres? What are you smoking? 30 miles through alleys and streets, including: In place of the civil war that elements in our media declared, I saw full streets, open shops, traffic jams, donkey carts, Muslim holiday flags - and children everywhere, waving as our Humvees passed. Even the clouds of dust we stirred up didn't deter them. And the presence of children in the streets is the best possible indicator of a low threat level. . . And we didn't just drive past them. First Lt. Clenn Frost, the platoon leader, took every opportunity to dismount and mingle with the people. Women brought their children out of their compound gates to say hello. A local sheik spontaneously invited us into his garden for colas and sesame biscuits. Do you know some of the journalists who have won a Pulitzer Prize? Like the Nobel Peace Prize, it has lost credibility in the eyes of the public. Here it comes So intolerant. We are not even allowed to have one channel. It goes to show how closeminded the left is. No TV news channel offers the diversity of opinion that you get on the FNC. There is a reason why it gets better ratings than the combined CNN, CNN Headline News, MSNBC, and CNBC ratings. I find it amusing how the Fox News Channel spooks leftwingers. It was banned for 5 years in Canada and most of the leftwing "media watch" websites devote 90% of their energy to Fox News. There's even a website (newshounds.us) that has people sitting around all day and nit-picking every single little thing they can find "wrong" about Fox News. Just today (Tues) there are extended entries at: 1) 09:38 PM 2) 08:21 PM 3) 05:53 PM 4) 05:36 PM 5) 04:59 PM 6) 02:02 PM 7) 10:50 AM 8) 10:03 AM 9) 01:15 AM 10)12:26 AM And the day isn't over yet! Monday's last entry was posted at 11:45 PM. Get a life, ffs! Nowhere on a major channel can you get such a diverse amount of views like on the FNC. It's not my fault so many Democrats end up looking like idiots on the FNC. It's a right-leaning channel, don't expect to have Dan Rather there licking your arses while lobbing up softball questions. Sharpen your debating skills and quit trying to spin everything! O'Reilly has been calling out Howard Dean for months to appear on the No Spin Zone; Dean has refused. He's the head of the DNC, fer cripe sake. There are terrorists in Iraq? Noooooo. Dude, where's the civil war?

Gerryhatrick: WTF? Conservatives are much happier because they are ignorant? Good point. That could explain why liberals are unhappy. They do seem to be a doom-and-gloom lot. Iraq is a quagmire, the civil war, the earth is warming and we're all going to die, can't buy that big auto and have some fun; I might hurt the enviroment, the productive are making too much and don't want to share it with me, I'm going to stay on unemployment, or welfare, until someone comes along and offers me a $25/hr job--when no one does, I get depressed...much have constant relelentless class warfare. Or is it guilt - for the tens of millions of innocent babies they have murdered - that makes them so unhappy? Then why are liberals so unhappy? They look to their Dear Leader to hold their hands and guide them through life so they don't have to make any decisions themselves. Everything is taken care of for them so they don't have to make any decisions. They simply rely on Nanny to look after them.

Things can get heated on a political forum but people shouldn't take it too seriously. I agree that insulting other members should not happen, but the majority of us have done it and I hope no one takes it too personal. I try not to. We aren't supposed to call Paul Martin "Dithers" so I try to follow that rule. Instead of Shrillary, or The Hildebeest (I've even seen Hitlery a couple of times *ugh*), I refer to her as Hillary Clinton. Can't stand her but she is a former first lady and at least deserves the repect of her capitalized proper name. However I admit to spelling France's leader thusly--ChIraq. But we should be able to mock politicians. Come on. How can you not mock the wild-eyed DNC head Howard Dean? The guy has terminal foot-in-the-mouth disease and he and his merry band of seething progressives are a barrel of laughs. I hope this place doesn't turn into a tattle-tale-to-the-moderator type of forum. I don't like over-regulated forums. I think Greg does a helluva job. When the crazies from Rense.com etal come on here spewing nazis, fascists, zionists, etc, they don't seem to last here very long. I suspect that Greg has given them the boot. And if one of the "regulars" steps out of line, Greg politely asks them to stop it--not that this happened to me. But I think we shouldn't take it too seriously, take a deep breath, and relax. Go visit Canuck E Stan's political jokes thread--its still on the 1st or 2nd page. Great stuff in there to make you laugh. Perhaps I'll start one myself to get everyone to relax. P.S. Thanks for the info about Greg's first child on the way. Good to hear that.

Why are Republicans happier than Democrats? Why are conservatives much happier than liberals? Election results do not explain this happiness gap. Republicans have been happier every year since 1972--the year Pew started doing this survey. It can't be dismissed as just another poll, because they've gotten the same result 34 years in a row. I see that married people are especially happier. I suspect that they tend to vote more conservatively. People who attend church regularly are also much happier than non-churchgoers, and we know that religious people also tend to vote more conservatively. Are there more reasons? Your thoughts?

Gerryhatrick: Don't get your shorts in a bunch. What is despicable are the people who constantly call Phelps a Republican when he is in fact a registered Democrat. Would it be more despicable if I mentioned that former Grand Kleagle of the KKK--Robert Byrd--lovingly called "the conscience of the Senate" by the Democrats, and as recently as 2001 used the term "white n*ggers (twice) on the air? Or doesn't that count because he uttered the phrase on the Faux News Channel? Phelps was a delegate for Al Gore's 1988 Democrat Presidential bid, and Fred Phelp, Jr and his wife were given tickets and were guests at Clinton's January 1993 inauguration. Want to see some pics of Phelps and Gore together? A bigot like you (look at my signature) has nerve lecturing someone on messageboard decorum. I have never heard that but you have gall lecturing on killers. Leftist monsters like Stalin, Chairman Mao, Hitler, Pol Pot, Hussein, etc, killed hundreds of millions of innocents during the 20th Century. The left's hands are drenched with the blood of innocents.

The Center for Peace and Global Studies is definitely an anti-war organization and - surprise! - they are a blame America outfit. John Zogby has been a speaker at events sponsored by the Center. John Zogby is an admitted Democrat. Take into account the fact that the Pentagon's existing plan calls for troop reduction of almost half in the next 6 months and about 70% by the end of the year. It's reasonable to assume, since the responses are consistent with the existing troop reduction plan, that the respondents were taking this plan into account when answering the question. But Gerryhatrick is shocked that the troops would rather be out of Iraq and home with their families! Next thing you know he will be telling us that the troops are bitching! We've never heard of that before.

Drew Bedson: No. He starts talking about globalization after his anti-American tirade. He even says that they will eventually do a unit on it and then he lays the groundwork for his definition: Essentially, globalization is about the world shrinking, not literally but metaphorically. I suggest people listen to the tape. I report, you decide. He lied about what Bush said in the SOTU addy and then lied again when he said this: It has been proven time and time again that capitalism is more humane, caring, and compassionate versus socialism and communism. Good grief. Why is this guy even "teaching" idiocy like this in a sophomore geography class?

Black Dog: How convenient of you to ignore this: Bullshit. I watched Bush's SOTU addy and he said no such thing. I have even posted the transcript on this thread. Then Bennish says: And if you don't like me using the word liberal, how about leftist? He is the epitome of a leftist--he hates America. He is spouting leftwing talking points that you see and hear every day. Btw, look at his picture. Can't you easily imagine Bennish protesting with all those leftist radicals and their death to America and Israel signs?

I know I asked ppl not to drag the US into this, but since it is my thread I am allowed to do so. You won't believe this: You just know that 3 letter word is coming up next... It’s important in the US constitutional system that the final decision as to what information during wartime should be classified or not...should be made by newspaper editors rather than elected representatives of the people? Wow. No wonder these arrogant elitists are losing reader and viewership.

I am constantly amazed at how many "righties" get their news from Fox. Here's another Ann Coulter quote for you: "If conservatives complained about CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, PBS, the New York Times, the Washington Post, Time, Newsweek, Vanity Fair, NPR, etc. etc. half as much as liberals scream about Fox News, even I would say conservatives were getting to be a bore on the subject." Zing!

Excerpt from yesterday's Mark Steyn column: Stupid Iraqis. They're letting down CNN, BBC, and the NY Times. When will they ever learn not to sass their masters?

New Zeal: No stockpiles of WMD, but some WMD was found. Besides, that was not the reason for the Iraqi invasion as the Joint Authorization to Use Force clearly stated. Only 2 of the 23 clauses even mentioned WMD. Btw, how did you like the translation of those tapes found in Iraq? When has the Bush administration ever given a timetable? Bush has stated - numerous times - that there is no timetable. It's costing too much to free Iraqi children! And what social services have been cut? You make it sound like cutting wasteful social services is a bad thing. The obligatory Bush=Hitler reference. I don't recall Bush calling for the citizenry to be disarmed, unlike former PM Martin. Hitler disarmed the German populace. Martin=Hitler? First there is not enough troops, then are too many. Will you guys make up your mind? No wonder you admired John Kerry. And I can see pigs flying outside my window... Because the founding fathers did not pledge their lives, fortunes, and honor so that America's fate would depend on the whims of other countries like France, China, and Russia? Because Saddam had ignored the ceasefire he had signed back in 1991? Because America wasted hundreds of billions of dollars having 100,000 troops "contain" Iraq for 12 years? Only in the liberal la-la land part of the Senate...

Is Jack Murtha nuts? From the same appearence on CBS's Face the Nation: Yeah, he's nuts. Another Democrat goes off the deep end--a victim of Bush Derangement Syndrome (BDS).

Ralph Peters reports from Iraq: Ah ha! Former intelligence officer = military man. Obviously a poor oppressed minority who was brainwashed/forced into the military by a past neocon. Oops. I just noticed his pic above his column--he's caucasian. Okay, so he's not a minority; instead he is a dumb jock. To be fair Ralph, I understand that the NY Times is still devoting most of their resources looking for evidence that Bush missed a medical exam 30+ years ago in TANG. *Puts hands over ears and slaps Fahreheit 9-11 in the DVD* "La la la. I can't hear you." They want Iraq to fail? You mean reporters like this one? (From the Daily Telegraph's Toby Harnden) The other day, while taking a break by the Al-Hamra Hotel pool, fringed with the usual cast of tattooed defence contractors, I was accosted by an American magazine journalist of serious accomplishment and impeccable liberal credentials. She had been disturbed by my argument that Iraqis were better off than they had been under Saddam and I was now — there was no choice about this — going to have to justify my bizarre and dangerous views. I’ll spare you most of the details because you know the script — no WMD, no ‘imminent threat’ (though the point was to deal with Saddam before such a threat could emerge), a diversion from the hunt for bin Laden, enraging the Arab world. Etcetera. But then she came to the point. Not only had she ‘known’ the Iraq war would fail but she considered it essential that it did so because this would ensure that the ‘evil’ George W. Bush would no longer be running her country. Her editors back on the East Coast were giggling, she said, over what a disaster Iraq had turned out to be. ‘Lots of us talk about how awful it would be if this worked out.’ I understand the bars in the hotels the MSM stay in--do a good business. Glug glug. For 3 years many on the left have been predicting a civil war. They were confident those brown-skinned Iraqis weren't ready for freedom and the savages needed to live under the boot of a massmurdering totalitarian dicktator. Once again the left was wrong--just like they were wrong about Reagan and the USSR. Perhaps it is time for them to put their soft bigotry aside and play a different tune in the jukebox.