joe
You know, my heart and soul are with Bernie Sanders. I think the man is the best thing to come along in American politics since Eleanor Roosevelt. Defying all expectations, he's bringing into his campaign appearances the multitude of the disaffected, disenfranchised segment of the electorate - an number that comprises most Americans, I imagine. I saw a posting on Facebook this morning that quoted someone named John Fugelsang:
"They tell me that Bernie Sanders can't win because Americans will never vote for a socialist Jew. I tell them that America celebrates one every December 25."
Yeah, Bernie's quest for the White House may not be the impossible dream a lot of so-called "people-in-the-know" proclaim it to be. I can remember the condescension from some people - even liberals - when Barack Obama threw his hat into the ring in February 2007. At the time I wrote on this very site:
"We live in desperate and extraordinary times and the American people, if only out of sheer desperation, might very well turn towards an extraordinary candidate. That very fact is enough to put the good senator over the top. We can only hope. Talk about audacity!"
Less than two years after I wrote that piece, Barack Obama was being sworn in as the forty-fourth president of the Unites States. No one should be foolish enough to dismiss the candidacy of Bernie Sanders outright. Still, politics being as unpredictable as it is, progressives need to have a back-up plan. My suggestion is a guy named "Joe".
For all the bitching and wailing I do regarding the president, I'll be the first to concede that he has been a pretty good at his job. In fact, some are arguing that, when one takes into consideration what he came to Washington to do, he's been one of the most successful presidents in modern history. If you're paying attention, it's hard to ague with that point. I like Barack Obama - I really do. But I LOVE Joe Biden. What's not to love? The Jolly disposition masking the serious inner man reminds me so much of FDR that I find it impossible not to love the guy. And while he may ebb and flow at times with respect to policy, Joe Biden is a true "progressive" in the best and most literal sense of that word.
It's hard to begrudge a person who is able carry on after multiple personal tragedies as Joe Biden has. Losing his beloved son, Beau, this year was not the first time that this perpetually cheerful man has had to confront devastating personal tragedy. On December 18, 1972, one month after being elected to the senate, and one month before being sworn in, Biden's first wife, Neilia, and his infant daughter, Naomi, were killed in a traffic accident while shopping for a Christmas tree. His two sons, Beau and Hunter survived but were both seriously injured.
Joe Biden had paid some dues. If he is concealing any inner-torment you wouldn't know it; the son-of-a-bitch is still smiling.
The Democrats have a history of taking fine champagne and turning it into donkey piss. Handing the nomination to Hillary Clinton would be foolish. They ought to be really careful about what they wish for. She is not the foregone conclusion she seemed to be only a year ago - and she is becoming more unwinnable with each passing day. Don't go there, folks.
Would Biden be the ideal candidate? Hardly. There will be an issue made of his age no doubt. If Joe decides to go for it next year he'll be the oldest candidate elected in history; Older, even, than Reagan was when re-elected in 1984. The opposition will also point out the fact that he does at times tend to shoot from the hip. I view that as the man's insatiable honesty. It's something to admire in my view. I'm not going to insult your intelligence by implying that a guy who's been part of the Washington establishment for over forty years is "one of us", but Joe comes fairly close to the mark. This may be the ultimate in naiveté on my part; a part of me is somewhat embarrassed by it. But I like Joe Biden. I trust him. So sue me.
Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
SUGGESTED VIEWING:
Here's Joe Biden being interviewed last week by Stephen Colbert on CBS's The Late Show. It is as emotionally revealing (without being maudlin) as anything I've ever seen from as American politician:
http://www.vox.com/2015/9/11/9309931/colbert-biden-late-show#
Like I said: What's not to love?
 |
| Beau and Joe |
It's hard to begrudge a person who is able carry on after multiple personal tragedies as Joe Biden has. Losing his beloved son, Beau, this year was not the first time that this perpetually cheerful man has had to confront devastating personal tragedy. On December 18, 1972, one month after being elected to the senate, and one month before being sworn in, Biden's first wife, Neilia, and his infant daughter, Naomi, were killed in a traffic accident while shopping for a Christmas tree. His two sons, Beau and Hunter survived but were both seriously injured.
Joe Biden had paid some dues. If he is concealing any inner-torment you wouldn't know it; the son-of-a-bitch is still smiling.The Democrats have a history of taking fine champagne and turning it into donkey piss. Handing the nomination to Hillary Clinton would be foolish. They ought to be really careful about what they wish for. She is not the foregone conclusion she seemed to be only a year ago - and she is becoming more unwinnable with each passing day. Don't go there, folks.
Would Biden be the ideal candidate? Hardly. There will be an issue made of his age no doubt. If Joe decides to go for it next year he'll be the oldest candidate elected in history; Older, even, than Reagan was when re-elected in 1984. The opposition will also point out the fact that he does at times tend to shoot from the hip. I view that as the man's insatiable honesty. It's something to admire in my view. I'm not going to insult your intelligence by implying that a guy who's been part of the Washington establishment for over forty years is "one of us", but Joe comes fairly close to the mark. This may be the ultimate in naiveté on my part; a part of me is somewhat embarrassed by it. But I like Joe Biden. I trust him. So sue me.
Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
SUGGESTED VIEWING:
Here's Joe Biden being interviewed last week by Stephen Colbert on CBS's The Late Show. It is as emotionally revealing (without being maudlin) as anything I've ever seen from as American politician:
http://www.vox.com/2015/9/11/9309931/colbert-biden-late-show#
Like I said: What's not to love?
posted by Tom Degan @ 2:07 PM
52 comments
52 Comments:
pla·gia·rism
ˈplājəˌrizəm/
noun
noun: plagiarism; plural noun: plagiarisms
the practice of taking someone else's work or ideas and passing them off as one's own.
"the son-of-a-bitch is still smiling."
Yeah, just look at Joe's teeth. You can't buy that dental work with ObamaCare, that Joe and his cronies exempted themselves from.
With ObamaCare, your deductible for that premium dental work would be unaffordable.
Yeah Joe, keep smiling and keep showing us AmeriKans that their tax dollars ended up in your mouth!
Are you kidding me? How much was the taxpayer on the hook for Dick Cheneys heart transplant? And he shot the guy in a hunting accident just to get the guys heart. That was not right at all!
"And he shot the guy in a hunting accident just to get the guys heart."
And once again we hear from the 9-11 was an inside job crowd.
Laughable.
Chucky, you are a riot and you don't even know it.
Yup JH,
I'm Laughing at you.
Tom Degan: "But I like Joe Biden. I trust him. So sue me."
You'll be hearing from my lawyer in the morning.
Chuck Morre: "Yup JH, I'm Laughing at you."
Don't forget, Chucky -- like the town drunk, we're all laughing at you!...
JG
How's the "9-11 was an inside job" cult coming along, any new converts?
I was in Florida. And my chief of staff, Andy Card -- actually I was in a classroom talking about a reading program that works. And I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower -- the TV was obviously on, and I use to fly myself, and I said, "There's one terrible pilot." And I said, "It must have been a horrible accident."
But I was whisked off there -- I didn't have much time to think about it, and I was sitting in the classroom, and Andy Card, my chief who was sitting over here walked in and said, "A second plane has hit the tower. America's under attack."
CNN December 4, 2001
"I was sitting there, and my Chief of Staff -- well, first of all, when we walked into the classroom, I had seen this plane fly into the first building. There was a TV set on..."
January 5, 2002
James Hansen (a.k.a. Jefferson's Guardian)
When Bush/Cheney conspired with the Muslims on the 9/11 attack, how many people do you think they wanted dead?
Has anyone ever told you that you need medication to try to cure your extremely f*cked up beliefs?
How come we have not heard from Saul Alinsky's favorite radical son lately? Has he accidentally locked himself in a solitary confinement cell at the prison?
Unfortunately for you no amount of medication can cure stupid.
Sore loser stole my name at 6.44
WE WANT DEBATES!!
I'm supporting Hillary, I have her whole career and would LOVE to see her win the presidency. I also love Joe Biden and I would not mind him jumping in the race. All I want at this point is our nominee to be strong enough to beat the hideous GOPers! The most heinous group of clowns to run for POTUS in my lifetime!
GO DEMS!!!!
Wait a minute. Why can't anyone explain this?
"I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower -- the TV was obviously on, and I use to fly myself, and I said, "There's one terrible pilot." And I said, "It must have been a horrible accident." CNN December 4, 2001
Since when was the first tower hit on live TV? It wasn't.
So was Bush truthful and saw what no other American saw live on TV? Was he confused? Or was he just telling lies again?
"Leadership". And Americans trusted this man to take us to war based on more lies.
Vote GOP, and put America out of its misery.
United States has 57 States
can any explain this?
57 stops.
Now about Bush repeating he saw the first plane hit the tower?
Crickets.
Are Righties so stupid to believe that Obama thought there were 57 states?
Of course, if they are stupid enough to believe he's a Marxist Muslim.
And they do. And the are.
So Bush twice claimed to have watched the first tower get hit by a plane.
Lie? Truth? Confused? It must be one of those.
Could they be ashamed of him? No, they have no shame.
Not a peep from our Republicans here, yet they delight in mocking anyone with questions. How authoritarian... and cowardly.
Gee Davy I guess if Obama can make a mistake with 57 'Stops" because of the pressure of the campaign GWB couldn't possibly misspeak twice under the pressure of the USA under attack?
You sure work awful hard to blame Bush and defend Obama,
get a life.
BTW, do you believe what Jesus said about himself?
The question was raised and I gave a plausible explanation. "United States has 57 States
can any explain this?"
This is "defending Obama" how?
How plausible is repeating the same statement months after the incident that everybody remembers when and where they heard about it?
As we all know, IOKIYAR. Amirite?
This confirms my point.
Are Righties so stupid to believe that Obama thought there were 57 states?
Of course, if they are stupid enough to believe he's a Marxist Muslim.
And they do. And the are.
We know Chuckie doesn't read well, as he defends Bush being "under pressure" repeating statements3 to 4 months AFTER 9-11.
So I guess all Bush/Cheney lies were just "misspeak under pressure". Doesn't matter when.
"Nukular" aluminum tubes in the State of the Union speech? Misspeak under pressure, obviously. It's hard work giving war-mongering speeches. Lots of pressure there.
"Saddam's ties to al-Qaeda"? Misspeak under pressure, obviously. It's a lot of pressure to justify a war of aggression for crony profit and political capital.
Obama saying "57"? Why, this is proof he's a Kenyan Marxist Muslim not knowing how many states there are, of course.
Does that sum it up accurately?
Wow Davy
Still running from my question I see.
"As we all know", you really are a light weight.
Another one bites the dust, Scott Walker can now go back to doing what he loves, lowering the standard of living for the citizens of Wisconsin.
Lowering the standard of living, what a crock.
Who pays the wages of govt union employees?
Why the taxpayers do.
When the govt union employees get a wage increase, where does the money come from??
From the taxpayers.
What method is used to secure the funds for the wage increase?
Why its tax increases.
Does the standard of living go up or down when you have less money to spend?
It goes down.
Do you have less or more money when taxes go up?
You have less.
So increasing taxes to increase the wages of unionized govt employees does what to the standard of living of those who pay the taxes?
It lowers it.
JH, got your tickets to the DNC debates?
Chuckie, like a good Republican robot, is using union bashing to distract from how James correctly characterized Walker.
Walker's Republican takeover of Wisconsin shows their "trickle down" failure compared to how Democrats run Minnesota:
===
"Minnesota economy beats Wisconsin: 7 charts, 1 table"
http://blogs.mprnews.org/newscut/2015/01/minnesota-economy-beats-wisconsin-7-charts-1-table/
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/wisconsin-and-minnesota-one-sided-political-competition
"Wisconsin and Minnesota: A One-Sided Political Competition"
03/05/15
Wisconsin and Minnesota the two neighboring states have similar sizes, similar populations, similar demographics, and even similar climates. But they don’t necessarily have similar politics.
In the 2010 elections, the Badger State elected Scott Walker (R) governor and gave control of the legislature to Republicans, while the Gopher State made Mark Dayton (D) governor and, in 2012, elected a Democratic legislature*. The former got to work targeting collective bargaining and approving tax cuts, while the latter raised taxes on the wealthy and boosted in-state investments.
Nearly five years later, one of these two states is doing quite well.
Since 2011, Minnesota has been doing quite well for itself. The state has created more than 170,000 jobs, unemployment rate stands at 3.6% – the fifth-lowest in the country, and far below the nationwide rate of 5.7% – and the state government boasts a budget surplus of $1 billion. Forbes considers Minnesota one of the top 10 in the country for business.
Minnesota’s gains come on the heels of tax increases on Minnesota’s top 2% and higher corporate taxes, both of which state Republicans said would crush Minnesota’s economy. As for their neighbors to the east:
By a number of measures, Wisconsin hasn’t fared as well as Minnesota. As the Milwaukee Sentinel Journal reports, Wisconsin’s job growth has been among the worst in the region, and income growth is one of the worst in the country. It has a higher unemployment rate than Minnesota. And the budget is in bad shape.
Back in January, the editorial board of LaCrosse Tribune wrote, “The governors of Wisconsin and Minnesota each presented their versions of new year’s resolutions in various media interviews last week….Which approach is better? As we enter the new year, Minnesota is clearly winning by a long shot.”
===
Chuckie can go back to focusing his rage and blame for unions now. But WE know it's a distraction from GOP failure.
Nice regurgitation of the Obama narrative, Dave. Unfortunately, like most of what Obama and the pro-union Democrats spout, it doesn't always jibe with reality.
Here is an excerpt from Noah Williams, a professor of economics at the University of Wisconsin, regarding the truth of the matter.
"Minnesota had a lower unemployment rate and higher income than Wisconsin at the start of 2011. But since then, the unemployment rate has fallen more in Wisconsin and per capita output growth in Wisconsin has outpaced Minnesota each year. Since 2012 real per capita disposable personal income—a broad measure of average after-tax income—has fallen in Minnesota. In Wisconsin, due to reductions in state taxes, real after-tax incomes have increased twice as fast as the nation as a whole.
The labor market in Wisconsin tightened substantially under Gov. Walker, with the unemployment rate falling from 8.1% in December 2010 to 4.6% in May 2015. In addition, labor force participation has been roughly stable over the past few years around 68%."
http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2015/07/20/under-scott-walker-wisconsin-has-prospered-keep-that-in-mind-for-2016/
Oh, TP.
Surely you can do better than accuse my multiple sources as "Regurgitation of the Obama narrative", as you post the words of Mr. Williams who "has been serving as an informal adviser to Gov. Walker’s presidential campaign".
Did you read that part?
It's called projection, my friend.
TP,
So you're saying "Reality" is what Republicans say it is.
Speaking of Walker, did you know he took $250 million of taxpayer money from public universities to GIVE to billionaire cronies for their new sports arena?
More of that Republican "trickle up" wealth.
But let's attack unions instead. Play the blame game, kick the working class, as the servants of mammon take, and take, and take.
Yes, I did see that he is an informal advisor to Walker. He is putting out the other side of the argument. You put out Wasserman-Schultz's and Obama's erroneous talking points and call it "the truth". Who is actually projecting, buddy?
So now the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia is owned by Wasserman-Schultz and Obama?
That was the primary source, NOT a partisan hack like yours.
So, yes, it is very much projection. Come back to the real world. We won't bite.
Well Davy, if higher taxes are the solution for more economic growth (along with increased govt spending, IE: the liberal's solution to everything) then how much of EVERY citizen's income should be given to the government? Even the poorest should pay more in taxes if according to the liberal formula of economics, as they will only have a better standard of living with higher tax rates. Correct?
And Davy you in defending James, (if you can call what you said a defense) avoid the basic premise of my post, and that is increasing the wages of Govt employees only lowers the living standards of those who have to pay for the wage increase. So how was James claim that Walker was lowering the standard of living accurate?
From what I have read here leads me to believe you are a govt employee on the State of MI. If I'm wrong correct me.
As such I would say you have a very Partisan view on Govt Unions. A very partisan view being the same thing you accuse TP of having. Isn't it time for you to stop being so partisan and so self centered and take into consideration the impact of your wage increases has on the people who pay your wages, or the wages of govt employees? Who is it worshiping at the throne of money? Now who has money as their manna?
Why it's you dear Davy, it's you.
P.S.
One very important thing you seem to forget Davy, and that's Governor Walker has been elected twice as Governor. Maybe the voters of WI are telling you what non-govt union employees think about THEIR standard of living.
“Walker was lowering the standard of living”
Federal Reserve stats presented as evidence, but ignored. Partisan hack taken to be truth.
“increasing the wages of Govt employees only lowers the living standards of those who have to pay for the wage increase”
No supporting evidence provided.
Better attack unions again. Fascists also hate unions. They need scapegoats. So do communist dictators and Republicans. Go figure. What else do they have in common. Opposition to democracy and voter rights.
Davy,
So James was wrong, Walker has not lowered the standard of living in WI?
"union bashing to distract from how James correctly characterized Walker." Davy
"Scott Walker can now go back to doing what he loves, lowering the standard of living for the citizens of Wisconsin." James
Whats with you and the FED? I only responded to James comment? Now you are comparing Republicans to Communists? I thought you said they were Fascists, off your meds again?
But here is the best part Davy, you still cant prove that paying more in taxes of your to pay for wage increases of govt union members makes the standard of living go UP for the tax payers. A little common sense tells anyone that more income means a better standard of living. Isn't that what wealth redistribution is all about?
BTW aren't you a little partisan when you support govt union workers wage increases?
Others pay the wages by their taxes of unionized Govt workers, would it surprise anyone that WI elected Walker twice to be their Governor? Walker attacked Unions by doing what?
Now you've drifted to voter rights? Man, you better stay off the booze, you're all over the place.
Do you find it interesting that Clinton is against the best union job creating, non govt program out there, the Keystone Pipeline? Does it surprise you that the USPS hasn't made a profit in 9 years, that it has lost over $51 billion since 2007?
Do you think the wages being paid might have something to do with that? Or is it the Koch Brothers fault?
Among other ill-informed remarks, Chuckie wonders, Walker attacked Unions by doing what?
This is a perfect example of what a low information voter Chuckie really is.
Chuckie's befuddled, or just annoyed, to see he and his party share their hatred for unions with fascists and communist dictators. Republicans, fascists, and communist dictators also oppose democracy and would deny altogether, or if unable, make voting more difficult.
Jeb Bush purged enough eligible voters in Florida for his brother to steal the 2000 election, denying the majority of Americans their choice for president.
44% of Republicans also BELIEVE Obama is a Muslim. That's a LOT of fellow low information voters with Chuckie. It's not hard to see why. They are driven by hate. They hate Muslims, Democrats, liberals, unions, journalists and minorities.
Obama is two of those.
What are the chances these dolts are racists as well?
I don't care much for Democrats these days, but they are the only viable option to keep the most neo-fascist, neo-liberal, and neo-feudal far Right extremists out of power.
All they offer is tax cuts for the rich, war, de-regulation of Wall Street, cutting food stamps, denying women's reproductive rights, privatizing Social Security, dismantling public education, and handing over as much taxpayer money as they can get away with to their cronies, like Walker did to the billionaire sports team owners.
This is what the Party of Greed and their low information dolts want to do to our country.
This is Chuckie's agenda. This is the Republican agenda.
Just the facts.
Now Scott Walker can go back to Wisconsin and get indicted. I make the odds of his finishing out his term at no better than 2-1
Good grief you are off your RX aren't you Davy.
Your most recent post sure shows a lot of support for Joe Biden.
You're like an out of control windmill, swinging in the wind at anything.
What did Walker do to attack Unions?
And
Do you believe what Jesus said about himself, or only that bit about render unto Cesare what is Cesare's?
Focus man focus,
help is on the way,
NOV 2016 is less than 14 months away!
Yep, Walker could be indicted. Democrats though can commit high crimes and misdemeanors and then go on $250k per pop speaking tours.
Hillary for Prison, 2016!
"An out of control windmill"? LOL!
Never been called that before. Too many facts for him to process through his narrow indoctrinated mind.
"What did Walker do to attack Unions?"
More proof low information voters hate to look up information that is not fed to them by FOX, Breitbart, Limbaugh, etc.
Yes, Chuckie is excitedly anticipating the day the "Muslim in Chief" vacates the office for the next Democrat.
TP,
Starting a war based on lies for crony profit and political gain, and leaving a financial collapse with a deep recession are also just as rewarding.
Implementing torture and getting away with it also sends a tingle up someone's leg.
TP,
Your assertions debunk nothing. You never did explain those "nukular" aluminum tubes in the Decider's State of the Union speech. You never showed any evidence of a cooperative relationship between Saddam and al-Qaeda. Why not?
Belief does not make it so.
Cutting taxes for the rich, advocating the privatization of Social Security, and starting a war intended to reward big oil cronies is not progressive. Honest.
Some rhetorical questions arise.
Do you believe no innocent lives were taken by our "war on terror" and war of choice in Iraq? Do you believe these populations were not terrorized by "shock and awe" and the ongoing civil war we abetted?
Do you believe everyone incarcerated in the war on terror is a terrorist? Were they all convicted by evidence and fair trial?
Unfortunately "Christian cruelty" is not an oxymoron.
Gish Gallop should be the new name of every republican (or "conservative" or however they want to label themselves):
Gish Gallop
Named for the debate tactic created by creationist shill Duane Gish, a Gish Gallop involves spewing so much bullshit in such a short span on that your opponent can’t address let alone counter all of it. To make matters worse a Gish Gallop will often have one or more 'talking points' that has a tiny core of truth to it, making the person rebutting it spend even more time debunking it in order to explain that, yes, it's not totally false but the Galloper is distorting/misusing/misstating the actual situation. A true Gish Gallop generally has two traits.
1) The factual and logical content of the Gish Gallop is pure bullshit and anybody knowledgeable and informed on the subject would recognize it as such almost instantly. That is, the Gish Gallop is designed to appeal to and deceive precisely those sorts of people who are most in need of honest factual education.
2) The points are all ones that the Galloper either knows, or damn well should know, are totally bullshit. With the slimier users of the Gish Gallop, like Gish himself, its a near certainty that the points are chosen not just because the Galloper knows that they're bullshit, but because the Galloper is deliberately trying to shovel as much bullshit into as small a space as possible in order to overwhelm his opponent with sheer volume and bamboozle any audience members with a facade of scholarly acumen and factual knowledge.
Dave, you are correct that I did not address the aluminum tubes. In light of the yellow cake uranium Saddam had and was trying to acquire more of, I thought that was sufficient to show his desire to continue his nuclear program. Evidently you think he had some altruistic motive for that uranium instead, I assume.
And I did give specifics of al Qaida and Saddam's cooperative stance towards each other. Your beliefs otherwise do not make them so.
As for Bush's tax cuts, those went to everyone paying taxes, including me. (And no, I am not rich.) The bottom 50% of people in the country don't pay any effective income tax, so they really cant get a tax cut now, can they?
Social Security is unsustainable in its current form. Bush was at least suggesting a way to try and give a bigger return on the money that is involuntarily confiscated from my paycheck each month "for my own good" by our "caring" government.
As for the war started to enrich his oil buddies, you really must be drinking that Kool Aid. If that were the case, we would have insisted that they repay us by giving America or American companies access to that oil. If Bush was helping his oil buddies out, he did a piss poor job of it.
Yes, innocent lives were lost in the war. Any war will tragically have innocents that are killed. I guess you would have preferred Saddam to continue unabated with his WMD programs, terrorizing his own citizens, and cozying up with other terrorist elements.
Not everyone that was incarcerated in the war was a terrorist, but neither were most of them that were imprisoned innocent bystanders either.
As for your asinine "Christian cruelty" phrase, perhaps you should look to which of the great three monotheistic faiths have done more since its inception to care for the poor, advance civilizations, and advance science and medicine. It sure as hell is not Islam as practiced by these extremists. The world would be a far darker place without Christianity. In fact it would probably look like Afghanistan under Taliban/al Qaida rule.
Regarding Anonymous and Gish Gallop, I agree completely with one slight edit. Instead of his use of Republican/conservative, he should have used Democrat/progressive. This makes the accuracy of the following paragraphs much higher.
A Gish Gallop involves spewing so much bullshit in such a short span on that your opponent can’t address let alone counter all of it.
Finally a term that describes Davy's method of debate. See his posts above for proof.
TP,
Neither Christian nor Muslim extremists have contributed any good to the world. They represent fear, hate and ignorance.
Are you unaware of any advances in science and math by Muslims? Whatever. You have your beliefs.
You didn't address the tubes because it was a lie, and you can't shroud it with misinformation. Yes, it was one of numerous lies to instill fear of mushroom clouds to support his war of aggression. They lied so much that most Americans bought into Saddam and al-Qaeda partnering in 9-11. They did not. Saddam knew al-Qaeda was a threat to all secular regimes. This stuff isn't a secret. I swear.
By the way, are you aware of how Iraqi Christians were treated before, as opposed to after, your war? Yeah, better blame Obama for that too.
You needn't repeat your untrue assertions held as beliefs. But I understand that's easier than acknowledging documented evidence that contradicts your beliefs.
I don't suppose you are familiar with Cheney's secret energy task force.
Documents turned over in the summer of 2003 by the Commerce Department as a result of the Sierra Club’s and Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, concerning the activities of the Cheney Energy Task Force, contain a map of Iraqi oilfields, pipelines, refineries and terminals, as well as two charts detailing Iraqi oil and gas projects, and “Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts.
http://www.projectcensored.org/8-secrets-of-cheneys-energy-task-force-come-to-light/
"Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts" would be Bush and Cheney's cronies plotting to seize their share of plunder. Iraqis partially put an end to that scheme.
I guess you would have preferred Saddam to continue unabated with his WMD programs, terrorizing his own citizens, and cozying up with other terrorist elements.
"Unabated", huh? That's not what the inspectors said, but you do have your beliefs.
I guess you would prefer decades of civil war in Iraq, the rise of ISIS, and a new ally for Iran. That's what we got. But you believe it's all Obama's fault for following Iraq's AND Bush's status of forces agreement to withdraw our military.
Of all of Saddam's "desires", war with the US was not one of them. That was strictly the desire of Bush and Cheney and their neocon war-mongers.
They want war with Iran now. Too bad international cooperation and diplomacy shut them down AND will greatly reduce Iran's nuclear program.
But like sheep, the Republicans still follow en mass and in lock-step behind THEIR president Netanyahu, a far Right Israeli hot head and war criminal.
But you don't have to believe this either.
Chuckie finds it easier to dismiss my points than to rationally debate them.
Because he cannot. They are facts. He can't disprove one of them.
Poor little low information Republican that he is.
TP,
This is a link to a non Christian man beating a women in public over her attire.
Coming to a street corner in Dearborn MI soon.
I get a hoot of the progressive liberals like Davy who make statements like 'Christian cruelty" while ignoring the lack of aid to the refuges fleeing the middle east war by the Islamic State, from Muslim countries.
It is the Christian's in the non-Muslim countries who are sending aid, not the Muslim Brotherhood.
It is the Lutheran Church (Missouri Synod)who is sending aid t0 the refuges, not the Black Lives Matter organization. Or for that mater, nothing from the sainted labor unions Davy swoons over, or any progressive organization.
Yet Davy makes statements like "Christian cruelty". For a man who claims to know so much about Christianity, I wounder if he can tell me if he believes what Christ said about himself?
So wrong, so often.
while ignoring the lack of aid to the refuges fleeing the middle east war by the Islamic State, from Muslim countries.
Chuckie is passing his uninformed low information BS again.
These are the top 7 countries giving aid. No Muslim countries here?
US, UK, Kuwait, Germany, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and Canada.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3222250/How-Britain-given-aid-refugees-Germany-Netherlands-France-Italy-Hungary-Austria-Poland-COMBINED.html
Saudi Arabia’s offer to build 200 mosques in Germany for the thousands of Syrian refugees that had made their way to the country has been branded “cynical” by German politicians.
The offer was made in response to the large numbers of refugees fleeing the crisis in the Middle East, with Saudi Arabia reportedly suggesting to build one mosque for every 100 asylum seekers crossing into Germany.
As Amnesty International recently pointed out, the "six Gulf countries — Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman and Bahrain — have offered zero resettlement places to Syrian refugees." This claim was echoed by Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch.
The region has the capacity to quickly build housing for the refugees. The giant construction companies that have built the gleaming towers of Dubai, Abu Dhabi, and Riyadh should be contracted to create shelters for the influx. Saudi Arabia has plenty of expertise at managing large numbers of arrivals: It receives an annual surge of millions of Hajj pilgrims to Mecca. There’s no reason all this knowhow can’t be put to humanitarian use.
Oh, Joe, has been my man for so long. I want him to be our next President in the worse way. No, I want him to be our next President in the best way! The speculation of who might be his vice presidential running-mate fills me with excitement, not the usual dread...Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, or, heck, even a defected and turned-around-left Ben Carson.
Love your writing, you know. Want to share this one at fb....
Post a Comment
<< Home