The U.S. didn't lose.
Posted By: Lydia on 2006-09-30
In Reply to: In my opinion, everyone lost... - Lurker
We weren't allowed to win.
Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old. To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Dang! 208 to 228 didn't lose by much (sm)
Both Suzy Orman and Jim Cramer were on the Today show and they thought it was a good deal which, I might add, surprised me.
I wonder what will happen now.
There goes my 401K!
I do agree. It was a lose/lose situation for him either way.
Very sad.
I am not willing to lose what
I've earned through my hard work to give to some lazy bum who would rather mooch than work for a living. I'm not willing to lose my freedom. To me....it seems like government wants to take control over more things and when will it end.
I do not support our president because I do not believe his goals and agenda will help anyone who really needs the help. It will continue to enable moochers to keep on mooching. It will hurt charities by taxing the rich.....who, BTW, are the biggest donators to charities. It will hurt businesses by taxing them more and in turn they will cut back and lay off workers, not hire more employees. Cap and trade will hurt everyone as gas prices will sore, utility costs will sky rocket, and the price for all goods and services will go up. That doesn't help people who have to decide which is more imporant....gas to get to work or food to put on the table.
To stand by and let these things happen because we support our country and just have to see how things come together......to me that is just ignorant. That is how we ended up in this situation in the first place. We supported our country and put our trust in government (dems and pubs alike) and we ended up getting it stuck to us.
How many did you lose on Sept 11?
Probably none. I did. I still can hardly believe that they country I live in, have ALWAYS felt safe in and never, EVER thought anything like that would happen in...did. Don't you get it? It did. I for one do not ever, EVER want it to happen again. I'd give every dime I have and every dime I'll ever make to have those back that I lost.
Yes, investors have a lot to lose....
and investors are not just "the rich." Many companies' 401Ks for their employees are in the stock market. People should be VERY careful about what they think they want...the effects could be disastrous for an already weak economy.
here are a few if my candidates lose -
1. Get up Wed. AM, after election, turn on TV. See my faves didn't win. My reaction: 'Oh, cr@p!'
2. my actions: Eat cereal and drink coffee.
3. Where to go from thERE?
BACK TO BED!
4. What will I flee? My low-paying MT job, which most likely will never get any better.
Don't lose sleep over it
Win or lose, we'll be rebuilding the Republican party. That means purging the RINOs, too. That's more than can be said for the Dems.
I believe they lose a portion of their
social security. I agree that it is unfortunate and absurd that senior citizens are treated as they are. As far as her obit, that was the family. Could be they did not agree with the situation or had a problem with him. At least he was mentioned although it must have hurt him deeply. Long-time same sex partners are usually not mentioned at all.
they did not lose one person
They lost an entire generation and their children too probably. Can you say 529 no more?
novelty VP choices always lose
Geraldine Ferraro. Gore and Lieberman, etc.
I agree with you. He/she should lose license. nm
.
Lose the "denial" accusation will ya.
x
Thinking that the democrats would lose is exactly, well....
Thanks for proving my point for me.
win or lose......it's not our place to intervene
we continually give Israel the very tools they use to give to terrorists groups who when the terrorists groups no longer do Israel's bidding, then Israel wants to turn on them. They may have good reason down the road but Israel needs to stop playing the terrorists like pieces on a chess board if they don't want them turning around decades down the road and turning on them.....
Let's lose the "teabagger" thing, okay?
X
IRS to Church: Support Iraq War or Lose Your
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-allsaints7nov07,0,592419,full.story?coll=la-home-headlines
Antiwar Sermon Brings IRS Warning
All Saints Episcopal Church in Pasadena risks losing its tax-exempt status because of a former rector's remarks in 2004.
By Patricia Ward Biederman and Jason Felch Times Staff Writers
November 7, 2005
The Internal Revenue Service has warned one of Southern California's largest and most liberal churches that it is at risk of losing its tax-exempt status because of an antiwar sermon two days before the 2004 presidential election.
Rector J. Edwin Bacon of All Saints Episcopal Church in Pasadena told many congregants during morning services Sunday that a guest sermon by the church's former rector, the Rev. George F. Regas, on Oct. 31, 2004, had prompted a letter from the IRS.
In his sermon, Regas, who from the pulpit opposed both the Vietnam War and 1991's Gulf War, imagined Jesus participating in a political debate with then-candidates George W. Bush and John Kerry. Regas said that good people of profound faith could vote for either man, and did not tell parishioners whom to support.
But he criticized the war in Iraq, saying that Jesus would have told Bush, Mr. President, your doctrine of preemptive war is a failed doctrine. Forcibly changing the regime of an enemy that posed no imminent threat has led to disaster.
On June 9, the church received a letter from the IRS stating that a reasonable belief exists that you may not be tax-exempt as a church … The federal tax code prohibits tax-exempt organizations, including churches, from intervening in political campaigns and elections.
The letter went on to say that our concerns are based on a Nov. 1, 2004, newspaper article in the Los Angeles Times and a sermon presented at the All Saints Church discussed in the article.
The IRS cited The Times story's description of the sermon as a searing indictment of the Bush administration's policies in Iraq and noted that the sermon described tax cuts as inimical to the values of Jesus.
As Bacon spoke, 1984 Nobel Peace Prize winner Archbishop Desmond Tutu, a co-celebrant of Sunday's Requiem Eucharist, looked on.
We are so careful at our church never to endorse a candidate, Bacon said in a later interview.
One of the strongest sermons I've ever given was against President Clinton's fraying of the social safety net.
Telephone calls to IRS officials in Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles were not returned.
On a day when churches throughout California took stands on both sides of Proposition 73, which would bar abortions for minors unless parents are notified, some at All Saints feared the politically active church had been singled out.
I think obviously we were a bit shocked and dismayed, said Bob Long, senior warden for the church's oversight board. We felt somewhat targeted.
Bacon said the church had retained the services of a Washington law firm with expertise in tax-exempt organizations.
And he told the congregation: It's important for everyone to understand that the IRS concerns are not supported by the facts.
After the initial inquiry, the church provided the IRS with a copy of all literature given out before the election and copies of its policies, Bacon said.
But the IRS recently informed the church that it was not satisfied by those materials, and would proceed with a formal examination. Soon after that, church officials decided to inform the congregation about the dispute.
In an October letter to the IRS, Marcus Owens, the church's tax attorney and a former head of the IRS tax-exempt section, said, It seems ludicrous to suggest that a pastor cannot preach about the value of promoting peace simply because the nation happens to be at war during an election season.
Owens said that an IRS audit team had recently offered the church a settlement during a face-to-face meeting.
They said if there was a confession of wrongdoing, they would not proceed to the exam stage. They would be willing not to revoke tax-exempt status if the church admitted intervening in an election.
The church declined the offer.
Long said Bacon is fond of saying it's a sin not to vote, but has never told anyone how to vote. We don't do that. We preach to people how to vote their values, the biblical principles.
Regas, who was rector of All Saints from 1967 to 1995, said in an interview that he was surprised by the IRS action and then I became suspicious, suspicious that they were going after a progressive church person.
Regas helped the current church leadership collect information for the IRS on his sermon and the church's policies on involvement in political campaigns.
Some congregants were upset that a sermon citing Jesus Christ's championing of peace and the poor was the occasion for an IRS probe.
I'm appalled, said 70-year-old Anne Thompson of Altadena, a professional singer who also makes vestments for the church.
In a government that leans so heavily on religious values, that they would pull a stunt like this, it makes me heartsick.
Joe Mirando, an engineer from Burbank, questioned whether the 3,500-member church would be under scrutiny if it were not known for its activism and its liberal stands on social issues.
The question is, is it politically motivated? he said. That's the underlying feeling of everyone here. I don't have enough information to make a decision, but there's a suspicion.
Bacon revealed the IRS investigation at both morning services. Until his announcement, the mood of the congregation had been solemn because the services remembered, by name, those associated with the church who had died since last All Saints Day.
Regas' 2004 sermon imagined how Jesus would admonish Bush and Kerry if he debated them. Regas never urged parishioners to vote for one candidate over the other, but he did say that he believes Jesus would oppose the war in Iraq, and that Jesus would be saddened by Bush's positions on the use and testing of nuclear weapons.
In the sermon, Regas said, President Bush has led us into war with Iraq as a response to terrorism. Yet I believe Jesus would say to Bush and Kerry: 'War is itself the most extreme form of terrorism. President Bush, you have not made dramatically clear what have been the human consequences of the war in Iraq.'
Later, he had Jesus confront both Kerry and Bush: I will tell you what I think of your war: The sin at the heart of this war against Iraq is your belief that an American life is of more value than an Iraqi life. That an American child is more precious than an Iraqi baby. God loathes war.
If Jesus debated Bush and Kerry, Regas said, he would say to them, Why is so little mentioned about the poor?''
In his own voice, Regas said: ''The religious right has drowned out everyone else. Now the faith of Jesus has come to be known as pro-rich, pro-war and pro-American…. I'm not pro-abortion, but pro-choice. There is something vicious and violent about coercing a woman to carry to term an unwanted child.
When you go into the voting booth, Regas told the congregation, take with you all that you know about Jesus, the peacemaker. Take all that Jesus means to you. Then vote your deepest values.
Owens, the tax attorney, said he was surprised that the IRS is pursuing the case despite explicit statements by Regas that he was not trying to influence the congregation's vote.
I doubt it's politically motivated, Owens said. I think it is more a case of senior management at IRS not paying attention to what the rules are.
According to Owens, six years ago the IRS used to send about 20 such letters to churches a year. That number has increased sharply because of the agency's recent delegation of audit authority to agents on the front lines, he said.
He knew of two other churches, both critical of government policies, that had received similar letters, Owens said.
It's unclear how often the IRS raises questions about the tax-exempt status of churches.
While such action is rare, the IRS has at least once revoked the charitable designation of a church.
Shortly before the 1992 presidential election, a church in Binghamton, N.Y., ran advertisements against Bill Clinton's candidacy, and the tax agency ruled that the congregation could not retain its tax-exempt status because it had intervened in an election.
Bacon said he thought the IRS would eventually drop its case against All Saints.
It is a social action church, but not a politically partisan church, he said.
Just learned how Hillary is going to get Barack to lose
Hillary's supporters like General Wesley Clark and others are starting to come out now in full force making statements that are not favorable towards Barack. Even though Clark's statements are true (just cos you are shot down in an aircraft doesn't mean your qualified to be President) but it doesn't help in getting your party elected to the white house. I knew she was going to do it so that McCain would win and because he's so weak he'll only be in four years then she and Bill will run again in 4 years. I just didn't know how she was planning it until I watched the news this a.m. She is such a skum bag in my opinion. The worry of having to listen to her again in 4 years is enough to put me through the roof again.
The Mind is a terrible thing to lose
thus spats out another great repub VP choice, Dan Potatoe Quayle.
Bottom line: Either way, WE lose. At least, if the bill
doesn't pass until it strips the wall street & banking criminals of their ill-gotten gains, then EVERYONE will have to pay. But as the bill is currently written, WE have to pay. We're screwed, either say. Once this dies down a bit, I'm pulling every cent out of the stock market forever. I don't want my hard-earned savings, what little there is, going to making shysters rich.
GAME OVER!
It's hard to have your precious McCain lose
McCain did himself in by choosing Palin. It is exhibit A of his bad judgement.
Michigan will lose big time if no bailout
Here in Michigan 7 out of 10 jobs are related to the auto industry. I don't know if the bailout is the right thing to do or not, but if the auto industry fails, Michigan will be in big trouble. We already have the highest unemployment rates in the country and I believe the highest foreclosure rate. I do believe most of the high executives need to go, their salaries and "benefits" are unbelievable with the bonuses, stock options, etc.
they lose a lot of their income and also their Medicare if they marry - nm
x
Hey, don't lose heart....look what he has done in 3 short weeks with...
the power you folks gave him. He has a LONG time left to do his O magic. When we are all lining up for the checks (well, that is if you lose your job and don't have to pay taxes as those are the folks who are going to get the biggest handout), just remember who put the great benefactor in Washington there and gave him carte blanche. Uh...that would be you. :)
There are a lot of angry folks in the US with nothing left to lose.
.
If you lose your ability to work, you're gonna need it
Obama could win popular but still lose election - see message
It is possible. It has happened before. I think now especially in these final two days, when people are hearing Obama saying in a radio interview that he will bankrupt coal companies and skyrocket electricity bills, a lot of people are really wondering. Especially the states where coal is their major industry. They are starting to realize that a vote for the O means they'll be out of work. Along with the birth certificate issue not being resolved, and other the other numerous questions about the O people are really wondering about him.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081103/ap_on_el_pr/split_decision_4
You probably lose more bets than GOP lost offices in this last election.
The red radical finge is a dying breed, destined for extinction.
Wow, such sour grapes!!! I know it's hard to lose but try to be classy nm
nm
"She" made it easy for "you" to lose control of yourself? sm
and end up writing that trash you wrote?
Only you are responsible for how low you sink. Anyone can see that.
hang on a minute? WE'LL get paid less or lose jobs.
nm
Heads dems win, tails pubs lose. I'm just sayin'........
x
Army order soldiers to get rid of better body armor or lose death benefits
Army Orders Soldiers to Shed Dragon Skin or Lose SGLI Death Benefits
By Nathaniel R. Helms
Two deploying soldiers and a concerned mother reported Friday afternoon that the U.S. Army appears to be singling out soldiers who have purchased Pinnacle's Dragon Skin Body Armor for special treatment. The soldiers, who are currently staging for combat operations from a secret location, reported that their commander told them if they were wearing Pinnacle Dragon Skin and were killed their beneficiaries might not receive the death benefits from their $400,000 SGLI life insurance policies. The soldiers were ordered to leave their privately purchased body armor at home or face the possibility of both losing their life insurance benefit and facing disciplinary action.
The soldiers asked for anonymity because they are concerned they will face retaliation for going public with the Army's apparently new directive. At the sources' requests DefenseWatch has also agreed not to reveal the unit at which the incident occured for operational security reasons.
On Saturday morning a soldier affected by the order reported to DefenseWatch that the directive specified that all commercially available body armor was prohibited. The soldier said the order came down Friday morning from Headquarters, United States Special Operations Command (HQ, USSOCOM), located at MacDill Air Force Base, Florida. It arrived unexpectedly while his unit was preparing to deploy on combat operations. The soldier said the order was deeply disturbiing to many of the men who had used their own money to purchase Dragon Skin because it will affect both their mobility and ballistic protection.
We have to be able to move. It (Dragon Skin) is heavy, but it is made so we have mobility and the best ballistic protection out there. This is crazy. And they are threatening us with our benefits if we don't comply. he said.
The soldier reiterated Friday's reports that any soldier who refused to comply with the order and was subsequently killed in action could be denied the $400,000 death benefit provided by their SGLI life insurance policy as well as face disciplinary action.
As of this report Saturday morning the Army has not yet responded to a DefenseWatch inquiry.
Recently Dragon Skin became an item of contention between proponents of the Interceptor OTV body armor generally issued to all service members deploying in combat theaters and its growing legion of critics. Critics of the Interceptor OTV system say it is ineffective and inferior to Dragon Skin, as well as several other commercially available body armor systems on the market. Last week DefenseWatch released a secret Marine Corps report that determined that 80% of the 401 Marines killed in Iraq between April 2004 and June 2005 might have been saved if the Interceptor OTV body armor they were wearing was more effective. The Army has declined to comment on the report because doing so could aid the enemy, an Army spokesman has repeatedly said.
A U.S. Army spokesman was not available for comment at the time DW's original report (Friday - 1700 CST) was published. DefenseWatch continues to seek a response from the Army and will post one as soon as it becomes available. Yesterday the DoD released a news story through the Armed Forces News Service that quoted Maj. Gen. Steven Speaks, the Army's director of force development, who countered critical media reports by denying that the U.S. military is behind the curve in providing appropriate force protection gear for troops deployed to Iraq and elsewhere in the global war against terrorism. The New York Tiimes and Washington Post led the bandwagon of mainstream media that capitalized on DefenseWatch's release of the Marine Corps study. Both newspapers released the forensic information the Army and Marines are unwilling to discuss.
Those headlines entirely miss the point, Speaks said.
The effort to improve body armor has been a programmatic effort in the case of the Army that has gone on with great intensity for the last five months, he noted.
Speaks' assessment contradicts earlier Army, Marine and DoD statements that indicated as late as last week that the Army was certain there was nothing wrong with Interceptor OTV body armor and that it was and remains the best body armor in the world.
One of the soldiers who lost his coveted Dragon Skin is a veteran operator. He reported that his commander expressed deep regret upon issuing his orders directing him to leave his Dragon Skin body armor behind. The commander reportedly told his subordinates that he had no choice because the orders came from very high up and had to be enforced, the soldier said. Another soldier's story was corroborated by his mother, who helped defray the $6,000 cost of buying the Dragon Skin, she said.
The mother of the soldier, who hails from the Providence, Rhode Island area, said she helped pay for the Dragon Skin as a Christmas present because her son told her it was so much better than the Interceptor OTV they expected to be issued when arriving in country for a combat tour.
He didn't want to use that other stuff, she said. He told me that if anything happened to him I am supposed to raise hell.
At the time the orders were issued the two soldiers had already loaded their Dragon Skin body armor onto the pallets being used to air freight their gear into the operational theater, the soldiers said. They subsequently removed it pursuant to their orders.
Currently nine U.S. generals stationed in Afghanistan are reportedly wearing Pinnacle Dragon Skin body armor, according to company spokesman Paul Chopra. Chopra, a retired Army chief warrant officer and 20+-year pilot in the famed 160th Nightstalkers Special Operations Aviation Regiment (Airborne), said his company was merely told the generals wanted to evaluate the body armor in a combat environment. Chopra said he did not know the names of the general officers wearing the Dragon Skin.
Pinnacle claims more than 3,000 soldiers and civilians stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan are wearing Dragon Skin body armor, Chopra said. Several months ago DefenseWatch began receiving anecdotal reports from individual soldiers that they were being forced to remove all non-issue gear while in theater, including Dragon Skin body armor, boots, and various kinds of non-issue ancillary equipment.
Last year the DoD, under severe pressure from Congress, authorized a one-time $1,000 reimbursement to soldiers who had purchased civilian equipment to supplement either inadequate or unavailable equipment they needed for combat operations. At the time there was no restriction on what the soldiers could buy as long as it was specifically intended to offer personal protection or further their mission capabilities while in theater.
I lose count everytime I try to count the conservative posts on this page alone.nm
x
I didn't miss any part and didn't say...
anything either way. I just posted a link.
This is the reason we are in Iraq and it's the same reason I didn't vote for him in 2000: Didn't
his own personal reasons.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/20050620/why_george_went_to_war.php
The Downing Street memos have brought into focus an essential question: on what basis did President George W. Bush decide to invade Iraq? The memos are a government-level confirmation of what has been long believed by so many: that the administration was hell-bent on invading Iraq and was simply looking for justification, valid or not.
Despite such mounting evidence, Bush resolutely maintains total denial. In fact, when a British reporter asked the president recently about the Downing Street documents, Bush painted himself as a reluctant warrior. "Both of us didn't want to use our military," he said, answering for himself and British Prime Minister Blair. "Nobody wants to commit military into combat. It's the last option."
Yet there's evidence that Bush not only deliberately relied on false intelligence to justify an attack, but that he would have willingly used any excuse at all to invade Iraq. And that he was obsessed with the notion well before 9/11—indeed, even before he became president in early 2001.
In interviews I conducted last fall, a well-known journalist, biographer and Bush family friend who worked for a time with Bush on a ghostwritten memoir said that an Iraq war was always on Bush's brain.
"He was thinking about invading Iraq in 1999," said author and Houston Chronicle journalist Mickey Herskowitz. "It was on his mind. He said, 'One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief.' And he said, 'My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it.' He went on, 'If I have a chance to invade…, if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it. I'm going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I'm going to have a successful presidency.'"
Bush apparently accepted a view that Herskowitz, with his long experience of writing books with top Republicans, says was a common sentiment: that no president could be considered truly successful without one military "win" under his belt. Leading Republicans had long been enthralled by the effect of the minuscule Falklands War on British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's popularity, and ridiculed Democrats such as Jimmy Carter who were reluctant to use American force. Indeed, both Reagan and Bush's father successfully prosecuted limited invasions (Grenada, Panama and the Gulf War) without miring the United States in endless conflicts.
Herskowitz's revelations illuminate Bush's personal motivation for invading Iraq and, more importantly, his general inclination to use war to advance his domestic political ends. Furthermore, they establish that this thinking predated 9/11, predated his election to the presidency and predated his appointment of leading neoconservatives who had their own, separate, more complex geopolitical rationale for supporting an invasion.
Conversations With Bush The Candidate
Herskowitz—a longtime Houston newspaper columnist—has ghostwritten or co-authored autobiographies of a broad spectrum of famous people, including Reagan adviser Michael Deaver, Mickey Mantle, Dan Rather and Nixon cabinet secretary John B. Connally. Bush's 1999 comments to Herskowitz were made over the course of as many as 20 sessions together. Eventually, campaign staffers—expressing concern about things Bush had told the author that were included in the manuscript—pulled the project, and Bush campaign officials came to Herskowitz's house and took his original tapes and notes. Bush communications director Karen Hughes then assumed responsibility for the project, which was published in highly sanitized form as A Charge to Keep.
The revelations about Bush's attitude toward Iraq emerged during two taped sessions I held with Herskowitz. These conversations covered a variety of matters, including the journalist's continued closeness with the Bush family and fondness for Bush Senior—who clearly trusted Herskowitz enough to arrange for him to pen a subsequent authorized biography of Bush's grandfather, written and published in 2003.
I conducted those interviews last fall and published an article based on them during the final heated days of the 2004 campaign. Herskowitz's taped insights were verified to the satisfaction of editors at the Houston Chronicle, yet the story failed to gain broad mainstream coverage, primarily because news organization executives expressed concern about introducing such potent news so close to the election. Editors told me they worried about a huge backlash from the White House and charges of an "October Surprise."
Debating The Timeline For War
But today, as public doubts over the Iraq invasion grow, and with the Downing Street papers adding substance to those doubts, the Herskowitz interviews assume singular importance by providing profound insight into what motivated Bush—personally—in the days and weeks following 9/11. Those interviews introduce us to a George W. Bush, who, until 9/11, had no means for becoming "a great president"—because he had no easy path to war. Once handed the national tragedy of 9/11, Bush realized that the Afghanistan campaign and the covert war against terrorist organizations would not satisfy his ambitions for greatness. Thus, Bush shifted focus from Al Qaeda, perpetrator of the attacks on New York and Washington. Instead, he concentrated on ensuring his place in American history by going after a globally reviled and easily targeted state run by a ruthless dictator.
The Herskowitz interviews add an important dimension to our understanding of this presidency, especially in combination with further evidence that Bush's focus on Iraq was motivated by something other than credible intelligence. In their published accounts of the period between 9/11 and the March 2003 invasion, former White House Counterterrorism Coordinator Richard Clarke and journalist Bob Woodward both describe a president single-mindedly obsessed with Iraq. The first anecdote takes place the day after the World Trade Center collapsed, in the Situation Room of the White House. The witness is Richard Clarke, and the situation is captured in his book, Against All Enemies.
On September 12th, I left the Video Conferencing Center and there, wandering alone around the Situation Room, was the President. He looked like he wanted something to do. He grabbed a few of us and closed the door to the conference room. "Look," he told us, "I know you have a lot to do and all…but I want you, as soon as you can, to go back over everything, everything. See if Saddam did this. See if he's linked in any way…"
I was once again taken aback, incredulous, and it showed. "But, Mr. President, Al Qaeda did this."
"I know, I know, but…see if Saddam was involved. Just look. I want to know any shred…" …
"Look into Iraq, Saddam," the President said testily and left us. Lisa Gordon-Hagerty stared after him with her mouth hanging open.
Similarly, Bob Woodward, in a CBS News 60 Minutes interview about his book, Bush At War, captures a moment, on November 21, 2001, where the president expresses an acute sense of urgency that it is time to secretly plan the war with Iraq. Again, we know there was nothing in the way of credible intelligence to precipitate the president's actions.
Woodward: "President Bush, after a National Security Council meeting, takes Don Rumsfeld aside, collars him physically and takes him into a little cubbyhole room and closes the door and says, 'What have you got in terms of plans for Iraq? What is the status of the war plan? I want you to get on it. I want you to keep it secret.'"
Wallace (voiceover): Woodward says immediately after that, Rumsfeld told Gen. Tommy Franks to develop a war plan to invade Iraq and remove Saddam—and that Rumsfeld gave Franks a blank check.
Woodward: "Rumsfeld and Franks work out a deal essentially where Franks can spend any money he needs. And so he starts building runways and pipelines and doing all the necessary preparations in Kuwait specifically to make war possible."
Bush wanted a war so that he could build the political capital necessary to achieve his domestic agenda and become, in his mind, "a great president." Blair and the members of his cabinet, unaware of the Herskowitz conversations, placed Bush's decision to mount an invasion in or about July of 2002. But for Bush, the question that summer was not whether, it was only how and when. The most important question, why, was left for later.
Eventually, there would be a succession of answers to that question: weapons of mass destruction, links to Al Qaeda, the promotion of democracy, the domino theory of the Middle East. But none of them have been as convincing as the reason George W. Bush gave way back in the summer of 1999.
I didn't know that.
Thanks, Democrat. I wasn't aware of that point at all, and to me, that makes a huge difference. I will visit the site and check it out. Thanks again.
I though you said you didn't
Sorry, but I didn't see anywhere
in AR's post that she was against it. Instead, she acted as if the topic has no place on this board and shouldn't be discussed... like some kind of dirty little secret.
The *attack the messenger* technique has been used constantly in the last 5 years by the current administration (and his followers) when someone gets too close to the truth. Don't believe me? Ask Valerie Plame.
I didn't say that.nm
It is me, but I didn't get it...sm
I think there is a problem wiht the email on forumatrix because I tried to send an email to the poster ????? who posted on the conservative board today and got an error message as well.
Nevermind it though. Have a good day! I have to get ready for my mini vacation later this week, so I will be working mucho hours til Wednesday.
I didn't know it was q/yours/q.
I just made a fast post. I don't know what the rest of the stuff is you are talking about. ForuMatrix is a worldwide board. Some of us don't even live in the United States. People here might want to realise that when making responses. It is of no consequence to me one way or the other. Just asking a question.
I didn't think so.
Same old. Same old.
No way. He didn't say that, did he??? nm
.
I didn't think of it this way.
I really didn't think of that, but you are right. My brother-in-law made over $20K in a few months. My sister has paid off just about everything, including the mortgage.
But, that is a heck of a risk to take for a little cash.
Didn't know about that one.
nm
You'd be #$%*@ing if they didn't do anything -
But, it IS the RNC, so they are damned either way with socialists oops I mean democRATS like yourself.
Please tell me he didn't say that
I received a call from an friend who was so upset and said Obama called Palin a pig in lipstick. I responded, surely no, you must be mistaken. Obama is running for office of the President of the United States. Why would he ruin his chances of winning by calling this lady a pig. That doesn't sound like rational behavior for a presidential candidate. However, to my surprise I opened several different news sources (both liberal and conservative) and sure enough he did. I'm thinking why, why in the world would you fall down that path of being so low that you would call Palin a pig saying "you can put lipstick on a pig and it will still be a pig". If he was trying to make a joke in reference to her joke about the difference between a soccer mom and a pit bull is lipstick, this joke could not have come at a worse time for him. How in the world is he going to explain that one.
Shame shame Barack Obama. This has to be one of the lowest comments anyone can make about another candidate. - Not funny! Why would you go and ruin any chance you had that people may have thought you had a little bit of "class" to you.
I haven't watched MSNBC but am curious as to how they are going to respond. How can they support someone when this is his opinion of other people.
Talk about low class. One more reason I will not be voting democrat this election.
I didn't know this either, but....sm
I was a little disappointed in McCain yesterday, blaming Bush for the current crisis, just like Obama.
What he needs to do, is link Obama and Biden to this, as they both took bribes from the lobbyists, from these corporations, that went under.
Where's the outrage against the dems and the democratic congress, that knew these things were going on, and refused to step in and stop these from happening?
Once again, it's blame George Bush, and McCain has to remember he's running against Obama, not George Bush.
I don't think he didn't know where
Spain was. I think he is just old, tired from the campaign and wasn't thinking very clearly at that moment. But that is not any more comforting than not knowing where Spain is. Geography he can learn; energy, youth and vitality he cannot get back. My mom is a pretty spry 75YO, but would I want her as President at that age, no way.
I didn't go after anything she said . . .
I posed a question, which is worse?. You read far more into it than was intended. Lady R. brought up Obama's bitterly clingly to guns and religion insult and added an additional insult of referring to those people as rednecks. Thus, my question, which is worse? She was just as clueless that it was offensive.
And as far as going after what my opponent says, I am not running for anything, I have no opponent. I voted for McCain in the primary of 2000 and was very disappointed when he wasn't the nominee then. I am an independent that has actually voted both parties.
You didn't see this on NBC, etc.
Subject: Bet Ya didn't hear about this on NBC
Family with Down Syndrome Child Meets John McCain and Sarah Palin
September 9, 2008
((( BEGIN PHONE TRANSCRIPT WITH RUSH LIMBAUGH )))
RUSH: Kurt in Pittsburgh, hello, sir. Nice to have you on the EIB Network, and how about the Steelers defense? CALLER: How about those Steelers, huh? RUSH: How about that? CALLER: Hey, listen, Rush, longtime listener, first-time caller, one of those Bible, family, gun clingers from western Pennsylvania. RUSH: Thank you. CALLER: And I wanted to share a story with you. A week ago last Saturday we went to the Palin-McCain rally in Washington, Pennsylvania, was the day after he announced her, and we have a five-year-old daughter with Down syndrome, and we made a sign that said: "We Love Kids with Down Syndrome." So when they pulled in their bus, the sign did catch their eye (McCain and Palin and the rest of their family) it caught their eye, we could tell, they gave us a thumbs-up from the bus, so we were all excited just by that --
RUSH: Wait, wait, wait. Who gave you the thumbs up, McCain and Palin? CALLER: McCain, Palin, Cindy McCain, we could see them from the bus. We were in a position where we had eye contact with them -- RUSH: Oh, cool! CALLER: My wife was holding our daughter. RUSH: Very, very, very cool. CALLER: It was really cool, Rush. I was like, "Wow, that's awesome," because I love Governor Palin and so I thought that's really neat. So then we moved around as the bus was getting ready to pull out, we kind of positioned ourselves so we could just wave them on and a Secret Service agent came up to us and said, "Hey, can you come with us?" I was like, "Do we have a choice?" RUSH: (laughing) You shouldn't have worried. It's not the Clinton administration. CALLER: Right. So we accompanied them up the hill, we went right to the bus, where it was, and Governor Palin, Senator McCain, Cindy, Todd Palin, they're all standing there. We're in this inner circle with just us and them, and the Secret Service agent, and they came right up to us and thanked us for coming out, said they loved our sign, and Governor Palin immediately said, "May I hold your daughter?" and our daughter Chloe, who's five, went right to her, and I have some pictures I'd love to send you maybe when I'm done here, but Governor Palin was hugging Chloe, and then her little daughter brought their baby Trig who has Down syndrome from the bus, he was napping, and Chloe went right over and kissed him on the cheek, and my son Nolan who's nine, he thanked her.
RUSH: This is amazing. CALLER: I will send you all the stuff, Senator McCain was talking to my son, and we thanked him for his service, and he asked my son if he wanted to see the bus, and we were hanging out and it was very surreal. I felt like we could have had a pizza and a beer with them, they were so warm. RUSH: You know what? I want to put you on hold. I want Snerdley to give you our super-secret, known-only-to-three-people here, e-mail address. CALLER: I will send you everything, Rush. RUSH: And then could you send us these pictures? Would you mind if we put them on the website? CALLER: I would be honored, and my main thing is they are warm, kind, genuine people, and they represent the best of this country. RUSH: That's right. And when you send these pictures, make sure you identify them. I mean, we'll know Palin and McCain, of course. Identify yourselves. CALLER: I will, I will identify everybody in the picture, Rush, and God bless you for being a beacon of hope and truth in this country. RUSH: Oh, no, no. It's nothing, it's nothing. You're doing the Lord's work. CALLER: Well, we're very blessed and I want people to know what a blessing it is to have a child with Down syndrome. These kids, they're angels. RUSH: That's the thing. There's always good to be found in everything that happens. It may be a while before it reveals itself.
CALLER: Absolutely. RUSH: Right, and when she hugged my daughter I said, here's the difference, this candidate embraces life and all its limitless possibilities. RUSH: All right. CALLER: That's what she is. RUSH: Terrific, okay, I gotta run here, but I'm going to put you on hold. CALLER: Thank you, Rush. RUSH: Thank you, Kurt. I really appreciate it. ((( END TRANSCRIPT )))
|
|
|