News-Record.com

What .. there's a war on?

Lee, why not just ask the democratic leaders what happened to their campaign promises of "ending the Iraq war if elected"? They were supposed to have a plan for redeployment on the table by the end of 2006.

While you're at it how about telling Pelosi where still waiting on her "plan" to provide tax relief for the middle class.

While I understand Roger Clemens' possible steroid use took priority over the war and tax relief, we now are at a standstill concerning that issue until we find out if he really did screw Mindy McCready. So there ought to be enough time to squeeze in a little tax relief bill during the break, don't you think?

Neo,

repeat after me:

Can you say presidential veto? Can you say 2/3rds majority to override? Stop laying the blame at the democrats and blame the guilty party. that would be your president, George W Bush. the guy who will go down in history as the worst president this country has ever seen.

Mikey, you really need to take a refresher course in civics...your government school education in this instance is sorely lacking.

"I was surprised to learn that only 3 percent of news coverage this year has been about the war in Iraq."

You can thank high gas prices and Rev. Wright for that.

Neo,

ok, please explain to me how I have it wrong? I thought that the president had the ability to veto legislation and that it took a 2/3rd majority to overrule.

silly me.

It's not my job to provide you with an education, mikey. You need to do the research yourself, so it will stick.

(Hint: don't bother going to WFU for said research)

Mikeg,
Note the disingenuous remarks from our two partisans. Both are quick to declare anything, not of the GOP as "BAD"! Little Dan is so hung up on Rev. Wright that he's probably having the D.T's and other withdrawal symptoms as we speak.
Oh, and their math skills are right there with their reading comprehension. Gotta hand it to both of them though. They've supported Bush when the rest of the country bailed on him. While over 70% of the country sees Bush as a failure on every count, neo and Danny boy lead the cheering section for him.

Big question is "Who will Dan's bogeyman be next?"

He has to have one, manufactured or otherwise. : )

"...Dan is so hung up on Rev. Wright..."

Well I must be in good company with the media. I guess you don't spend much time keeping up with the news. In today's N&R for example the lead story:

"Clinton cuts into Obama lead in N.C."

They didn't bother to interview me, but some voters in the article are not considering Obama because......drum roll.........of Rev. Wright!!

I must be in good company with Leonard Pitts. His column today:

"Wright acts more like buffoon than reverend".

I must be in good company with David Horsey of the Seattle Post Intelligencer. His cartoon is in today's N&R op-ed section and features.........drum roll.......Rev. Wright!!

BTW, there were two Iraq related stories on Page A-8.

I wish I could take credit for the Rev. Wright debacle as you seem to infer, but alas I cannot. Nice try though. heh, heh, heh

Danny,
Your partisan sniping about Reverend Wright seems to be falling on deaf ears...but only you don't get it.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/05/04/opinion/polls/main4069259.shtml

Oh and borrowing one of your "looky, looky! They do it too! Looky!" routines, this just made me chuckle at your infantile screeds.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/135385

You are a funny little fellow.

Mike:

What Neo is [coyly not] saying is that with a 50% + 1 majority, congress has only to not bring forth ANY bill that has Iraq associated with it .. then there were be zero dollars available to “conduct the war.”

What Neo is [with bias not] saying is should that happen, all future failures in the middle east can then be readily blamed on pansy democrats for not supporting America’s troops. He is also not saying that if the Prez’ wanted, he could tap all other federal monies and use that to substitute for the monies not authorized to wage the war … but the Prez’ of course would never do that because it would remove his ability to blame the pansy democrats that did not support America’s troops.

You want some proof? Run through this thread: where Carter takes the blame for not only the economic problems of the 70’s, but also 100% of the problems in today’s Middle East, because he didn’t send America troops in to prop up the Shah of Iran as he was dying .. of course Neo is also not saying is who would have replaced the Shah is unstated (I offered Chalabi as a candidate). Also not mentioned was Reagan’s’ cut-and-run from Lebanon or his Reagan’s’ support of … “now they tell us” .. the brutal dictatorship of Saddam, or that America simply walked away from Afghanistan after the Soviets had bombed them back to the Stone Age (one more cut and run in the name of political expediency ...

… we can go on for quite a while I’m sure .. but it is certainly all Carter’s fault .. I mean the pansy democratic LIEburals in congress .. aided of course by those nasty faggot RINO’s.

Forgot "Run through this thread":

http://blog.news-record.com/opinion/letters/archives/2008/05/remember_carters_windfall_tax.shtml

"Your partisan sniping about Reverend Wright seems to be falling on deaf ears...but only you don't get it."

ONLY me? Ok, this definitely qualifies but I'll be nice and not add this to the stupid quotes collection. As mentioned, I guess I'm in bed with the N&R, Leonard Pitts, and David Horsey, you might call it a vast right wing conspiracy. Perhaps a "cabal" in honor of conundrum. I watched CBS news tonight, there was Rev. Wright on the screen. I guess Katie Couric is part of the cabal as well.

Sorry pal, it isn't just me. But if you enjoy delusion be my guest eh.

Something from our home state:

Poll: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama in tight race for N.C. votes:

A WRAL news poll released Wednesday shows Barack Obama's double-digit lead over Hillary Clinton among Tar heel Democrats is eroding.

Mason-Dixon Polling & Research Inc. surveyed 400 likely Democratic voters Monday and Tuesday. The results show Obama with a 7 point lead over Clinton, with 9 percent undecided. The poll has a margin of error of 5 percentage points.

“Right or wrong, it's the Wright phenomenon for Obama,” said David McLennan, a political science professor at Peace College.

McLennan said Obama's former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, is dragging down the Illinois senator. Wright has made comments such as suggesting that the AIDS virus was invented by the government to destroy "people of color."

“It is a media-driven story. Wright is very controversial. He makes controversial statements. He gets people fired up, but it's not one of the top issues in the polls,” McLennan said.

http://www.wral.com/news/local/politics/story/2818209/

Add Mr. McLennan to the fold as well.

Obama will likely win here but the Wright thing has taken him off track no matter what you believe.

Thanks JDR, although that "logic" of Neo's escapes me. I guess one has to be totally biased to be able to swallow that rationale without puking some of it up. with that kind of rationale, the spread of AIDS cound be attributed to Reagan, or this whole Iraq mess to Bush Sr. for not pulling out sooner. nonsense is nonsense. I guess it all depends on what line of BS one wants to believe.

BTW Demon Deacon, since you cited Newsweak as a source please read this from the same publication, seems Oprah didn't agree with Rev. Wright's message in church and got the hell out of dodge:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/135392

Add Newsweak to MY contrived conspiracy along with Leonard Pitts, N&R, David Horsey, WRAL, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc.

Repeat after me mikey: "No money, no war...no money, no war...no money, no war".

Congress controls the purse strings and your democrats control congress.

They either a) lack the stones to sever funding or b) the 'leaders' in congress have been made privy to intel that warrants continued funding.

Probably a combination of both.

We fell into one of the classic blunders...Never get into a land war in Asia. Only slightly less well known is...oh never mind.

The classic Win-Win strategy for "Patriotic Neocons":

No money, no more war.

No more war, no way to cleaning up their mess.

No cleaning the mess, no chance at success.

No success? Blame the pansy democrats (and RINO's) !!

==

Speaking of "Patriotic Neocons" ... here they are .. plan in hand .. Check the date, read the strategy, see familiar names in the signatures:

http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm

==

BTW, mikey .. are you "For us, or Against Us" - perhaps we should re-check your National Identity Card ..

==

... and let us not forget the mantra of Personal Responsibility:

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1736831-2,00.html

... Sanchez .. certainly another "Has-been" who is cashing in wit a kiss and tell book. WAIT .. that's General Ricardo Sanchez ... we need to "support our troops" .. says so on the back of my SUV ... WAIT .. oh maybe I'm just confused, what with the war and all.

What .. there's a war on?

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hj7bLU_VVjrxBnHiIQbBEZqK4FhAD903QS9G0

"Democrats in Congress, seeking to avoid a vote on funding the Iraq war during the fall campaign season, are considering combining President George W. Bush's two pending requests into a single bill to be voted on this spring"

Wonder why democrats are seeking to avoid a vote on funding the war during the fall campaign season? With Bush being the worst president EVER and the Iraq war being so unpopular, this ought to be great campaign slogan: 'vote for me, and I'll end the war'.
...oh wait, they already used that one. fool me once...

Speaking on combining the Iraq war funding bill with other popular pork spending bills to be voted on this spring, John Murtha said this: "You vote one time and get the money out of the way,"

Get that out "of the way"... so they can concentrate on the real threats to national security like getting to the bottom of where Roger Clemens took his steroid shots... in the arm or in the rump, and finding out if Mindy McCready was offered counseling at one of the government crisis control centers after her encounter with this terrorist of the baseball diamond.

Damm wasteful Democrats .. wait

... Tom Davis, the ranking Republican on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee ... joined Waxman in a letter to the Justice Department requesting a perjury probe into Clemens' sworn depositions ??

And who is this Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., who told FOX News that the seven-time Cy Young Award winner should have never testified before the House Oversight Committee?

What-ever, it's all Jimmy's fault.

"That's the assessment of Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW), which has been crunching the numbers on congressional pork each year since 1991. Its annual "Congressional Pig Book," released this week, reports $13.2 billion in pork-barrel spending for the current fiscal year, down from $29 billion in 2006.

The plunge in the number of lawmakers' pet projects is more marked. Congress approved 2,658 pork projects for this year, down from a record 13,997 in fiscal 2005.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0309/p02s01-uspo.html

Neo responds from my link:

"Pork spending plummeted this year primarily because lawmakers in the previous Congress managed to clear only two of 13 spending bills, after a handful of antipork Republican senators blocked the remaining bills."

... to which I reply ..

"Oh .. you mean it's more complex than R = Good, D = Bad? What a concept!! "

James,
Do you really think you can shut that guy up with facts? He still thinks one vote can override a Presidential veto.

As has been said many times about neo and his little buddy Dan, "They're seldom right, but never unsure".

So the minority now dictates congress' agenda.
I never realized that.

...no doubt this is what the government schools will be pushing while the democrats are investigating the 'Wrigley Field' arm of al-qaeda.

Here's a Jon Stewart interview with Harry Reid. The latter part of the interview deals with why Congress, or at least the Senate, has had trouble pushing their agenda, especially concerning the war.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=167644&title=senator-harry-reid

In case you don't want to watch it, I'll give you a brief summary.

December 06, the Democratic Senator from South Dakota, Tim Johnson, had a major medical issue that essentially put him out of commission until September 07. That gives us 99 Senators. The Dems have a slight majority, when you include Senator Johnson. Including him. there are 49 Democrats and two Independents caucusing with the Democrats, one of which is Joe Lieberman, who virtually votes Democratic on everything but the war--lending a majority of 50/49 during the first 9 months of 2007 to war supporters.

Anyway. Everything ain't always so clear-cut, neo.

And TLC will be happy to have heard Senator Reid say that we're spending $5,000 a second in Iraq.

By the way, that's from last night, May 5's episode.

Everybody vote today?

I sure did and have the pretty blue sticker to show for it.

I was pleasantly surprised that I walked into the precinct and not a single person was in line. I guess a lot of folks early voted after all.

Which may be bad news for Clinton and possibly democrats.

Obama seems to keep losing ground among voters as new revelations appear day to day.

Just wait until McCain's handlers get a hold of him.

At this rate, by the time Obama becomes President, everybody will hate him.

Nothing new there, I suppose.

Earnestine, there was no one at our voting place either. JDR, you sure know about war, how many years did you spend in the military?

So when Tim Johnson has fully recovered we can look forward to the democrats finally fulfilling their promise and bring an end to the Iraq war? I'll be watching.

Everything ain't always so clear cut because the democrats lack the stones to defund the war because they fear repercussions at the polls, so they make appearances on liberal shows like 'The Daily Show' where they are sure to be tossed softball questions and 'muddy the water' with innuendo and doublespeak designed to put the blame for their failures at the feet of others...."one of our boys took ill" and was unable to vote... yeah, right.

Do I have to spell it out for you neo?

Even WITH Tim Johnson there are only 49 Democrats and 49 Republicans. There are TWO Independents, one for the war and one against it.

Lets add 1 to 49 Dems against the war.

1+49=50

Ok.

Let's add 1 to 49 Republicans for the war.

1+49=50

That's 50 for and 50 against. Also known as a tie.

Who casts the tie-breaking vote in the Senate?

The Vice President.

Who is the Vice President?

Dick Cheney.

Would Dick Cheney vote against the war?

No. Unless he or his buddies could make a couple million by doing it.

So. If Dems in the Senate all oppose the war, they still lose. What makes more sense, neo? Giving the Republicans everything they want in a war funding bill, or working it out for the best interests of both parties (and yeah, avoiding being tagged as people who don't support the troops). Why sacrifice yourself if there is nothing to gain?

I don't think you're stupid. But come on.

Sigh...

The house democrats could prevent a war funding bill from ever coming to the floor...no money, no war.

I don't think you're stupid either. But come on. They could have had the US out of Iraq a long time ago and there isn't one damned thing Cheney, Lieberman, or the ailing Senator from SD could have done about it.

Looks like Reid has done a pretty good job of muddying the waters.

"They could have had the US out of Iraq a long time ago and there isn't one damned thing Cheney, Lieberman, or the ailing Senator from SD could have done about it."

first off, that's not correct - if they wanted to they could tap other federal monies to substitute for the monies not authorized to wage the war …

second off, they would never do that because it would remove their ability to blame the pansy democrats for all losses.

"If"...if a frog had wings.

The democrats don't have the balls to cut the war funding, in spite of their pre-election rhetoric. They DO have the ability.

It's kinda pitiful to watch you libs try to provide cover for them by making wild ass guesses at what "the republicans would do".