Friday, November 18, 2005

Cheney Fights Back

Wed Nov 16 2005 18:56:46 ET

Excerpts As Prepared For Delivery Tonight by Vice President Cheney

"THE VICE PRESIDENT: "As most of you know, I have spent a lot of years in public service, and first came to work in Washington, D.C. back in the late 1960s. I know what it’s like to operate in a highly charged political environment, in which the players on all sides of an issue feel passionately and speak forcefully.

In such an environment people sometimes lose their cool, and yet in Washington you can ordinarily rely on some basic measure of truthfulness and good faith in the conduct of political debate. But in the last several weeks we have seen a wild departure from that tradition.

And the suggestion that’s been made by some U. S. senators that the President of the United States or any member of this Administration purposely misled the American people on pre-war intelligence is one of the most dishonest and reprehensible charges ever aired in this city...

Some of the most irresponsible comments have, of course, come from politicians who actually voted in favor of authorizing force against Saddam Hussein. These are elected officials who had access to the intelligence, and were free to draw their own conclusions.

They arrived at the same judgment about Iraq’s capabilities and intentions that was made by this Administration and by the previous Administration. There was broad-based, bipartisan agreement that Saddam Hussein was a threat … that he had violated U.N. Security Council Resolutions … and that, in a post-9/11 world, we couldn’t afford to take the word of a dictator who had a history of WMD programs, who had excluded weapons inspectors, who had defied the demands of the international community, who had been designated an official state sponsor of terror, and who had committed mass murder.

Those are facts.

What we’re hearing now is some politicians contradicting their own statements and making a play for political advantage in the middle of a war. The saddest part is that our people in uniform have been subjected to these cynical and pernicious falsehoods day in and day out. American soldiers and Marines are out there every day in dangerous conditions and desert temperatures – conducting raids, training Iraqi forces, countering attacks, seizing weapons, and capturing killers – and back home a few opportunists are suggesting they were sent into battle for a lie.

The President and I cannot prevent certain politicians from losing their memory, or their backbone – but we’re not going to sit by and let them rewrite history.

We’re going to continue throwing their own words back at them. And far more important, we’re going to continue sending a consistent message to the men and women who are fighting the war on terror in Iraq, Afghanistan, and many other fronts.

We can never say enough how much we appreciate them, and how proud they make us. They and their families can be certain: That this cause is right … and the performance of our military has been brave and honorable … and this nation will stand behind our fighting forces with pride and without wavering until the day of victory.
"

When will people get it?

110 Comments:

Blogger OTTMANN said...

Jayson, Good post.

Don't worry, Bush and Cheney are playing the dems for the fools they are. Watch as democrat's overplay their hand by calling for Bush's impeachment from now to next years elections. They will then carry it up to 2008
in vengence for Clintoon. The backfire effect will be massive!

After the elections in Iraq take place next month, democrat's will prove they didn't want Iraq to ever have freedom, and all their vicious lies have only gotten more troops killed. Dems state one thing, and then try to take it back with false accusations when they realize they blew it.

The only reason they want to pull the troops is because they want Iraq to fail, just to say "we told you so." How childish and evil can they get? They likely want Saddam Hussein back in power too!

The liberalz will be extinguished by their own mouths.

Friday, November 18, 2005 1:23:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

disgusting...

Friday, November 18, 2005 2:28:00 PM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

Cheney is a liar. He never engaged in any "public service" -- all he did was set himself up so that he could make a ton of money later in the private sector using his Washington contacts. This man is despicable.

Jayson, who clearly has no idea what he's talking about, said... Just to make a point about whats going on here, dfkz - what your doing is using baised news sources to prove your points and what were using is common knowledge.

Common Knowledge???! I'm using biased news sources??! What the hell is Jayson talking about? Check out the story Ottmann linked to:

Big Lie Democrats

This story is ALL bias and ZERO fact!

Ottmann LIED... Congress is privy to the same info the White House gets.

Nonsense!

Richard Clarke (bush's former National Security Advisor and Chair of the Counter-terrorism Security Group from 1992 to 2003) was on the Daily Show last night, and he said the same thing that the article I posted above says -- The Senate did NOT have the same intelligence that the "president" did!

FACT -- Dissent From White House Claims on Iraq Nuclear Program Consistently Withheld from Congress:

Several Congressional and intelligence officials with access to the 15 assessments [of intel suggesting aluminum tubes showed Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear program] said not one of them informed senior policy makers of the Energy Department's dissent. They described a series of reports, some with ominous titles, that failed to convey either the existence or the substance of the intensifying debate. [NYT, 10/3/04]

FACT -- Sen. Kerrey: Bush "Has Much More Access" to Intel Than Congress:

Former Sen. Bob Kerrey (D-NE), ex-Senate Intelligence Committee vice chairman: The president has much more access to intelligence than members of Congress does. Ask any member of Congress. Ask a Republican member of Congress, do you get the same access to intelligence that the president does? Look at these aluminum tube stories that came out the president delivered to the Congress -- "We believe these would be used for centrifuges" -- didn't deliver to Congress the full range of objections from the Department of Energy experts, nuclear weapons experts, that said it's unlikely they were for centrifuges, more likely that they were for rockets, which was a pre-existing use. The president has much more access to intelligence than any member of Congress. [CNN 10/7/04]

FACT -- Rockefeller: PDBs, CIA Intel Withheld From Senate:

Ranking minority member on the Senate Intelligence Committee Jay Rockefeller (D-WV): People say, "Well, you know, you all had the same intelligence that the White House had". And I'm here to tell you that is nowhere near the truth. We not only don't have, nor probably should we have, the Presidential Daily Brief. We don't have the constant people who are working on intelligence who are very close to him. They don't release their -- an administration which tends not to release -- not just the White House, but the CIA, DOD [Department of Defense], others -- they control information. There's a lot of intelligence that we don't get that they have. [11/04/05]

FACT -- War Supporter Ken Pollack: White House Engaged in "Creative Omission" of Iraq Intel:

In the eyes of Kenneth Pollack, a Clinton-era National Security Council member and strong supporter of regime change in Iraq, the Administration consistently engaged in "creative omission", overstating the imminence of the Iraqi threat, even though it had evidence to the contrary. "The President is responsible for serving the entire nation", Pollack writes. "Only the Administration has access to all the information available to various agencies of the US government -- and withholding or downplaying some of that information for its own purposes is a betrayal of that responsibility". [Christian Science Monitor, 1/14/04]

FACT -- White House Had Exclusive Access to "Unique" Intel Sources:

The claim that the White House and Congress saw the "same intelligence" on Iraq is further undermined by the Bush administration's use of outside intelligence channels. For more than year prior to the war, the administration received intelligence assessments and analysis on Iraq directly from the Department of Defense's Office of Special Plans (OSP), run by then-undersecretary of defense for policy Douglas J. Feith, and the Iraqi National Congress (INC), a group of Iraqi exiles led by Ahmed Chalabi". [MediaMatters, 11/8/05]

Ottmann lied... dkfz has one thing right, I do need more soul searching and prayer. We all do, especially during these days. But he's wrong that I wish him ill. I'm trying to help him...

You are not trying to help me, you are trying to damn me to hell along with you!

Friday, November 18, 2005 3:47:00 PM  
Blogger saint said...

You are not trying to help me, you are trying to damn me to hell along with you!

I think this is a little bit over the top dkfz. Ottman probably feels the same way about you - and that is the problem. Before any progress can be made in this arena the arms must first be laid down. This is one of the first things I learned in pre-marital counselling - your spouse (or let us say your countrymen) are not the enemy. They may have different opinions, but the goal should not be to "win", rather it should be to advance the state of the union as a whole.

If right and left continue to point the finger at each other and say "LIARS! DEVILS! YOU'RE ALL OUT TO GET US!" then of course the debate will never be resolved. You have already assumed that the other side is only in opposition out of evil intent or malice, when in fact there are just as many honest republicans fighting for what they believe is right as there are democrats, and vice versa.

It leads me to believe that, rather than really intending on helping anybody, all these links and facts and heart-felt cries really amount to little more than a political pissing contest.

Its time for politics to grow up.

Friday, November 18, 2005 8:51:00 PM  
Blogger OTTMANN said...

dkfz,

Richard Clark is Paid for by Democrats who bought him off. That is 100% absolute fact. Clark was forced to admit it. His congressional testimony (timed with his book) was the lamest acting job I've ever seen. I was actually embarrassed for him!

We all know the 2004 sore-loserJohn Kerry's words are trash, and have been ever since he lied to Congress about Vietnam. Only the anti-war UN-American fools believe that liar, who incidently gave one of his final speeches in front of people all holding signs with the number 6 on them. It was a sea of sixes. I have the picture that clearly shows 666 with three signs together in at least two places. And you should see the sinister look on Kerry's face. It's as if he knew exactly what was going on right then. I can email the pic for those who want see it. Just let me know.

The Libby thing really has dems screwed. But watch, you won't hear anything more about it in the liberal media as they've already dropped it after their lies were exposed by Woodward's testimony. They'll act as if nothing ever happened. The bias in the media is truly disgusting and they all need to be held accountable for their one-sided bias.

Congress CAN get the same info given to the White House. THAT IS THE FACT OF THE MATTER !!!!!!! Another Constitutional fact is that Congress decides if America goes to war. Not the president! Care to deny that dkfz? I mean why not, you've denied all the other facts I've provided, what's one more, right?

It is the duty of congressmen to review the reasons for going to war BEFORE voting on it, which they said they did, using the same information from the CIA given in 1998 under Bill Clinton.

Dems always want it both ways, but they're only making bigger jackasses out of themselves in the process.

How can democrat's claim Saddam had WMD's during Clinton's time–all the way up to the war, and now claim they were lied to? There is no credibility in that whatsoever. If anything, they lied to the nation '98, and to President Bush!

Which raises two important questions...
Did democrat's know Saddam didn't have WMD's in '98, but said he did anyway to justify Clinton's rash decision to bomb Iraq without any warning? Did Clinton, Gore, Albright, Dasshole, Kennedy, Kerry and the rest of the dems know it then? If so, then they all LIED! Why do I suddenly see this all blowing up in the democrat's faces? Oh, the Lord works in marvelous ways!

Democrats have lost it all now and don't know that to do anymore, so they just keep lying on top of lies. They're all going to condemn themselves, if they haven't already. How distressing for them.

dkfz wouldn't know when someone's trying to help him because he's just to filled up with hate to notice. Such a pity, really.

Friday, November 18, 2005 11:20:00 PM  
Blogger OTTMANN said...

THIS IS AMAZING!!!!
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D.-Nev.), who is leading a spurious Democratic campaign that alleges President Bush misled the country into war, admitted last week that he did not read the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs that Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet prepared in 2002 at the request of Senate Democrats specifically so Congress would have up-to-date intelligence as it debated whether to authorize the Iraq war. Read the rest here... Harry Reid Didn’t Read Prewar Intel Report

This clearly proves Jayson and I right, and dkfz and the liberal whiners TOTALLY wrong! Most Dems didn't even read the report before voting for the war!!!! I hate to say I said so, but I did.

IMPEACH THE DEMOCRAT'S!!!!

Saturday, November 19, 2005 12:50:00 AM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

Saint said... I think this is a little bit over the top dkfz.

Maybe. I know for certain does not want to "help" me. I'm a proud liberal -- and that isn't going to change. It's part of who I am -- and one of the things I like best about me.

Saint Said... Before any progress can be made in this arena the arms must first be laid down. the goal should not be to "win", rather it should be to advance the state of the union as a whole.

I'm all for compromise -- just not with bush. He IS the enemy -- As well as fanatics like Ottmann who support him. You DO NOT compromise with criminals. You don't allow corrupt officials to remain in office.

Ottmann lied... How can democrat's claim Saddam had WMD's during Clinton's time–all the way up to the war, and now claim they were lied to? There is no credibility in that whatsoever. If anything, they lied to the nation '98, and to President Bush!

This is CLEAR PROOF that you are LYING Ottmann! You think we only gathered information about Saddam's WMDs once??! You think it was the SAME intelligence that convinced both Mr. Clinton and bush that Iraq might have WMDs? The intelligence gathering was constant and ongoing! The bush White House uncovered a lot of new evidence that "supported" the WMD theory -- but it was from unreliable sources, and was later proven wrong! That didn't stop bush from using it -- even after it was disproven!

I take back my "maybe" answer to Saint's earlier question. My saying that you are trying to damn me to hell along with you is NOT "over the top". You're trying to take down as many people as you can -- which is why you started your blog, and why you are spreading your lies to other blogs!

Ottmann lied... This clearly proves Jayson and I right, and dkfz and the liberal whiners TOTALLY wrong! Most Dems didn't even read the report before voting for the war!!!! I hate to say I said so, but I did.

It certainly does NOT prove you are right!! Almost everyone in the senate saw this as inevitable -- they were worried that if they voted against bush it would cost them their jobs. The AntiChrist used all these fears against the Democrats, which is why they blindly supported him.

Check out the following observation regarding Congress and the Senate's support of the Iraq War Resolution:

Not since Congress passed the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin resolution -- which increased U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War -- has a president won such broad and flexible authority to carry out an undefined military operation, historians say.

How ironic! The Gulf of Tonkin Incident involved another president who lied! So much for Ottmann's theory that bush could not have lied because it is impossible to keep the lid on a conspiracy!

The war in Iraq is one in a sequence of events that will ultimately bring about the battle of Armageddon. If not for 9/11 there is no way ANY senator would have voted for a preemptive strike against a country that was of minimal danger to us. After 9/11 bush was able to manipulate everyone -- through fear -- into doing exactly what he had wanted from the beginning... It's all quite clear -- and chilling -- if you're not too deluded to see what's really going on.

Saturday, November 19, 2005 5:42:00 AM  
Blogger Cody O'Connor said...

FACT -- Sen. Kerrey: Bush "Has Much More Access" to Intel Than Congress:

Former Sen. Bob Kerrey (D-NE), ex-Senate Intelligence Committee vice chairman: The president has much more access to intelligence than members of Congress does. Ask any member of Congress. Ask a Republican member of Congress, do you get the same access to intelligence that the president does? Look at these aluminum tube stories that came out the president delivered to the Congress -- "We believe these would be used for centrifuges" -- didn't deliver to Congress the full range of objections from the Department of Energy experts, nuclear weapons experts, that said it's unlikely they were for centrifuges, more likely that they were for rockets, which was a pre-existing use. The president has much more access to intelligence than any member of Congress. [CNN 10/7/04]


It's not a FACT until it's proven. You could be right, maybe he does get more intel. But maybe for something this important the congress did get all of this info but decided not to read it all. Maybe Kerry just lied. There are many different possibilities so it can't be a FACT.

Saturday, November 19, 2005 7:15:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

www.prisonplanet.com/articles/november2005/181105eldiablo.htm

not related to DIckie but your so called Christian Leader

Saturday, November 19, 2005 7:42:00 AM  
Blogger Cody O'Connor said...

How could a senator say he's missing information without knowing what the information he's missing is? Kerry can't just wake up and say "I have a feeling Bush knows something I don't,". If Kerry knew what information he wasn't getting then he would be getting the information, it's the only way. The only person who could prove this is the president saying "I get more information than the congress,".

I don't believe your FACT is a TRUE FACT.

Saturday, November 19, 2005 7:52:00 AM  
Blogger Cody O'Connor said...

Richard Clarke (bush's former National Security Advisor and Chair of the Counter-terrorism Security Group from 1992 to 2003) was on the Daily Show last night, and he said the same thing that the article I posted above says -- The Senate did NOT have the same intelligence that the "president" did!

So you believe everything you hear on the Daily Show? Why?

How about a non-biased link quoting someone who is not in the congress or a left-wing radical.

By the looks of things by now it looks like members of the congress had access to this intel but did not look at it.

Lets have less biased links (from both sides) guys. I'm not interested in what a left or right wing extremist says, I'm more interested in the truth.

Saturday, November 19, 2005 8:04:00 AM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

Ottmann lied... The Libby thing really has dems screwed. But watch, you won't hear anything more about it in the liberal media as they've already dropped it after their lies were exposed by Woodward's testimony. They'll act as if nothing ever happened.

WRONG! The investigation is proceeding under a new grand jury (since the old one expired).

I guess I was wrong when I said (above) that bush had new intelligence! According to the article below he was working from the same intelligence that Clinton had -- he was just interpreting it "differently"!

Decoding Mr. Bush's Denials
Published: November 15, 2005
New York Times Editorial

To avoid having to account for his administration's misleading statements before the war with Iraq, President Bush has tried denial, saying he did not skew the intelligence. He's tried to share the blame, claiming that Congress had the same intelligence he had, as well as President Bill Clinton. He's tried to pass the buck and blame the C.I.A. Lately, he's gone on the attack, accusing Democrats in Congress of aiding the terrorists.

Yesterday in Alaska, Mr. Bush trotted out the same tedious deflection on Iraq that he usually attempts when his back is against the wall: he claims that questioning his actions three years ago is a betrayal of the troops in battle today.

It all amounts to one energetic effort at avoidance. But like the W.M.D. reports that started the whole thing, the only problem is that none of it has been true.

Mr. Bush says everyone had the same intelligence he had -- Mr. Clinton and his advisers, foreign governments, and members of Congress -- and that all of them reached the same conclusions. The only part that is true is that Mr. Bush was working off the same intelligence Mr. Clinton had. But that is scary, not reassuring. The reports about Saddam Hussein's weapons were old, some more than 10 years old. Nothing was fresher than about five years, except reports that later proved to be fanciful.

Foreign intelligence services did not have full access to American intelligence. But some had dissenting opinions that were ignored or not shown to top American officials. Congress had nothing close to the president's access to intelligence. The National Intelligence Estimate presented to Congress a few days before the vote on war was sanitized to remove dissent and make conjecture seem like fact.

It's hard to imagine what Mr. Bush means when he says everyone reached the same conclusion. There was indeed a widespread belief that Iraq had chemical and biological weapons. But Mr. Clinton looked at the data and concluded that inspections and pressure were working -- a view we now know was accurate. France, Russia and Germany said war was not justified. Even Britain admitted later that there had been no new evidence about Iraq, just new politics.

The administration had little company in saying that Iraq was actively trying to build a nuclear weapon. The evidence for this claim was a dubious report about an attempt in 1999 to buy uranium from Niger, later shown to be false, and the infamous aluminum tubes story. That was dismissed at the time by analysts with real expertise.

The Bush administration was also alone in making the absurd claim that Iraq was in league with Al Qaeda and somehow connected to the 9/11 terrorist attacks. That was based on two false tales. One was the supposed trip to Prague by Mohamed Atta, a report that was disputed before the war and came from an unreliable drunk. The other was that Iraq trained Qaeda members in the use of chemical and biological weapons. Before the war, the Defense Intelligence Agency concluded that this was a deliberate fabrication by an informer.

Mr. Bush has said in recent days that the first phase of the Senate Intelligence Committee's investigation on Iraq found no evidence of political pressure to change the intelligence. That is true only in the very narrow way the Republicans on the committee insisted on defining pressure: as direct pressure from senior officials to change intelligence. Instead, the Bush administration made what it wanted to hear crystal clear and kept sending reports back to be redone until it got those answers.

Richard Kerr, a former deputy director of central intelligence, said in 2003 that there was "significant pressure on the intelligence community to find evidence that supported a connection" between Iraq and Al Qaeda. The C.I.A. ombudsman told the Senate Intelligence Committee that the administration's "hammering" on Iraq intelligence was harder than he had seen in his 32 years at the agency.

Mr. Bush and other administration officials say they faithfully reported what they had read. But Vice President Dick Cheney presented the Prague meeting as a fact when even the most supportive analysts considered it highly dubious. The administration has still not acknowledged that tales of Iraq coaching Al Qaeda on chemical warfare were considered false, even at the time they were circulated.

Mr. Cheney was not alone. Remember Condoleezza Rice's infamous "mushroom cloud" comment? And Secretary of State Colin Powell in January 2003, when the rich and powerful met in Davos, Switzerland, and he said, "Why is Iraq still trying to procure uranium and the special equipment needed to transform it into material for nuclear weapons?" Mr. Powell ought to have known the report on "special equipment"' - the aluminum tubes - was false. And the uranium story was four years old.

The president and his top advisers may very well have sincerely believed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. But they did not allow the American people, or even Congress, to have the information necessary to make reasoned judgments of their own. It's obvious that the Bush administration misled Americans about Mr. Hussein's weapons and his terrorist connections. We need to know how that happened and why.

Mr. Bush said last Friday that he welcomed debate, even in a time of war, but that "it is deeply irresponsible to rewrite the history of how that war began." We agree, but it is Mr. Bush and his team who are rewriting history.

Saturday, November 19, 2005 8:19:00 AM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

So you believe everything you hear on the Daily Show? Why?

No, I believe Richard Clarke -- he's said the same thing numerous times, and not just on the Daily Show.

Ottmann lied... The Libby thing really has dems screwed. But watch, you won't hear anything more about it in the liberal media as they've already dropped it after their lies were exposed by Woodward's testimony. They'll act as if nothing ever happened.

You are right, you aren't going to be hearing a lot about this -- not because it's being "dropped" -- but because Fitzgerald isn't going to allow any leaks. He's going to try this case in the courtroom -- NOT in the press.

Saturday, November 19, 2005 8:29:00 AM  
Blogger OTTMANN said...

dkfz,
That's twice you used the same quote. And your response wrong both times. You're sucking up the liberal kool aid dude. The fact is (and everyone but libs realize) Fitz made a mistake. A big one in not checking all sources. Democrats were in such a rush for the indictment, Fitz missed important info that has more bearing on the weakness of this partisan witch hunt.

Watch drew, you'll see that I'm right as usual. Even the liberal media knows a dead horse when it's laying on the ground with its feet up.


I'm glad you finally admitted you're a massive liberal, after you've denied it for months with a barrage of lies.

Being proud is one thing, but blinding yourself to reality is just being stupid, and that's nothing to be proud of!

Everytime you say "Ottmann Lied," is just another nail in your heart because only liberals lie like you do, and it's been proven with every word you write here.

Your quoted info from the biased NYT "editorial" (meaning ones opinion), is only desperate insanity.

"It all amounts to one energetic effort at avoidance. But like the W.M.D. reports that started the whole thing, the only problem is that none of it has been true."

So now you're telling us that ALL that info from all the intelligence, including that from the UN, France, Germany, Italy, Australia, Japan, and Russia gathered over a decade, was a lie? That is really crazy dude, and so far removed from reality, it's scary. Saddam Hussein lied all that time. One only has to see the evidence of the Oil for Food scandal to realize that!

The fact is that Saddam killed millions with chemical weapons before the first Gulf war and hundreds of thousands afterward. We are still fighting that same war because we made a mistake in bringing the troops home the first time, and we won't make that same mistake this time no matter how whiney little liberals get.

Funny how when put to the test of bringing the troops home on Friday, democrat's voted to keep the troops in Iraq 403-3. Dems were called out on their bluff (hypocrisy) and they've been EXPOSED... BIGTIME!

Responding to a call yesterday by Democratic Rep. Jack Murtha of Pennsylvania to withdraw troops from Iraq, on Friday evening House Republicans scheduled a vote to settle the issue and put (hypocritical) lawmakers on the record.

The House voted 403-3 to reject a non-binding resolution to immediately withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq, as most democrat's were loudly insisting just this past week.

During the House session late this afternoon, Democrats blew-up in anger when Republican Rep. Jean Schmidt of Ohio quoted Ohio state Rep. Danny Bubp, a Marine Corps Reserve officer.

"He asked me to send Congress a message 'Stay the course,'" she said, "he also asked me to send Congressman Murtha a message, that 'Cowards cut and run. Marines never do.'" The whiney Democrats were forced to put their votes where their mouths were. Will democrat's now finally shut-up and stop playing politics with the lives of our brave men and women in uniform? Will democrat's stop lying about the war and the administration, and accept the facts as they are instead of spinning things for their political advantage against democracy?


This has clearly exposed the demagoguery of democrat's who've been cowing liberals, thus egging on the enemy to kill more of our troops, who liberals hate with a passion. Democrat's have proven again and again they could care-less about the war, our troops, Iraq or America. All they want is power over the people because they feel they know better. But in reality, democrat's know only what's good for themselves and is why they constantly want taxes hiked to the max in order to steal the people's money like kings and dictators.


Be proud drew, not stupid!

Saturday, November 19, 2005 9:51:00 PM  
Blogger OTTMANN said...

The following is from the man dkfz vehemently calls the Antichrist.

Bush: 'May God bless the Christians of China'

During his visit to the Gangwashi Church -- one of five Protestant churches sanctioned by the government -- Bush signed a guest book with the words: "May God bless the Christians of China." With her signature Laura Bush, who's accompanying her husband, added, "with love and respect." (Watch Bush after attending officially recognized church in Beijing -- 1:36)

After services, the U.S. president thanked the church pastor.

"It wasn't all that long ago that people were not allowed to worship openly in this society," Bush said. "My hope is that the government of China will not fear Christians who gather to worship openly. A healthy society is a society that welcomes all faiths."

So let's hear from dkfz how he spins this into "Bush the Antichrist taking over China". LOL! He's so lost!

#

Saturday, November 19, 2005 10:08:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bush: 'May God bless the Christians of China'

What NONSENSE!
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/november2005/181105eldiablo.htm

Bush Sr.& Jr. Seen at Satanic Rituals in Castle
by JESS LAVEY

PHOTO: The Kimball- Cherokee Castle in Sedalia, Colorado, scene of Satanic rituals described by Jess Lavey, the son of Church of Satan founder Anton LaVey, who writes:

When I was 10 years of age, I remember my parents taking me there.

I remember the Kimball Castle well many times and rituals being held there. The memories are like yesterday.

I remember spending the night in one of the bedrooms that was very scary to me, in which I never sleep well when we did go there. It seemed most of the time very dark and with a musky smell about it. The rooms were big.

My father Anton LaVey spent a lot of time there. I never liked going there at all. I remember being forced to watch rituals and I hated that too. For the most part I never could forget the Council of 13. Very wicked looking men.

When I reached the age 12 my father told me I had to go before them because of my rebellion and being opposed to what I was to do. That was the time I met these men.

They warned me of what could happen to me if I did not do as they suggest.

George H.W. Bush Senior was one of these men.

I stood before them and told them I was not going to follow their ways and I was not going to take my dad's place, and that there was nothing they could do to me.

My father was so embarrassed he cowered in his seat. I told them I believe in a higher power and that higher power said in his Word that no harm can come to me. So be it and I turned and left. They never said a word back. I think they were all stewing or struck with shock. I know my dad said this was "out of the mouths of babes".

I also remember Scott Millman. We were all the same age. There where others but I don't remember them as well as I remember Scott Millman. I think it's because we talked to each other a lot.

I do remember a tunnel under the building where Scott and I were taken one night and it was not good. To this day I freak a little talking about it. Some say there is light at the end of the tunnel, well, there was darkness at the end of this one, where Satanists come together and do unspeakable things. The acts are of a nightmare.

The acts done to kids are unspeakable. To think that Bush and his whole family is a part of this kind of thing is hard for some people to believe. But the Lord warns us all about the dark one in sheep's clotheing.

The whole Bush family are Satanists, run down the family lines.

I have met Bush Jr. once when he came to a ritual at the castle once with his father. My thought when I met him is still the same as today. He is a very cold man for Satan. Like a lethal weapon.

ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED
http://www.illuminati-news.com/bushes-human-sacrifices.htm

The Devil's Hand: No, It's NOT 'Hook 'Em Horns'
by CONSPIRACY PLANET

"Devil's hand" (or "cornuti" in Italian) signifies that satan rules. It is a universal hand signal used by politicians, celebrities as well as heavy metal bands, affirming their allegiance to satanic powers and a visual shorthand for "Hail, Satan."

The "devil's hand" is familiar to both Bill Clinton and George Bush as evidenced by the photos with the caption "the satanic torch is passed" on Steamshovel Press (www.steamshovelpress.com)

Both Laura and George Bush used this hand signal during the 2005 coronation (inauguration)of the US President on January 20.

The mainstream media cartel has vainly tried to explain away this bizarre and occult hand signal by implying that this is the "hook 'em horns" sign used by Texas Longhorn football fans.

Not so. The devil's hand has been observed and photographed around the world, used by George Bush, Bill Clinton, Silvio Berlusconi, Elizabeth Taylor, Prince William, Paul McCartney,Metallica, Ozzie, Avril Lavigne, Stephen Dorff, Dave Navarro and many others.

They are not Texas football fans by any stretch of any imagination.

Former New York Governor Mario Cuomo was shown making this gesture on the cover of "Secret Societies and Psychological Warfare" by Michael A. Hoffman II (1992)

(See Adrian Frutiger, "Signs and Symbols, Their Designs and Meanings.")

The devil's hand signifies the horned god of witchcraft Pan and is an occult sign of recognition worldwide.

Like the Masonic sign of distress (the reach for the skies hands straight up pose) or masonic handshakes, the devil's hand has been used for centuries.

George Bush may be the one to make it really popular in the USA.

That's RIGHT! Clinton and Bush!

http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?channelid=126&contentid=1811&page=2

Sunday, November 20, 2005 7:25:00 AM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

Ottmann lied... That's twice you used the same quote. And your response wrong both times. The fact is Fitz made a mistake. A big one in not checking all sources. Democrats were in such a rush for the indictment, Fitz missed important info that has more bearing on the weakness of this partisan witch hunt.

Yes, I used a quote from you twice. I had some more to add. Both responses are correct. The investigation is going to continue. Do you think the charges are going to be dropped? (They're not). Also -- a 2-Year investigation is a "rush"?

Ottmann lied... Will democrats stop lying about the war and the administration

Democrats won't stop telling the truth -- even though Republicans won't ever stop lying!

So now you're telling us that ALL that info from all the intelligence, including that from the UN, France, Germany, Italy, Australia, Japan, and Russia gathered over a decade, was a lie?

No, I'm saying that information was old. Inspections were working and Saddam was destroying his WMDs.

Ottmann lied... This has clearly exposed the demagoguery of democrat's who've been cowing liberals, thus egging on the enemy to kill more of our troops, who liberals hate with a passion. Democrat's have proven again and again they could care-less about the war, our troops, Iraq or America.

All lies Ottmann. The Democrats don't want any more of our soldiers to be killed in a war based on lies. We want to save their lives.

Ottmann lied... All they want is power over the people because they feel they know better. But in reality, democrat's know only what's good for themselves and is why they constantly want taxes hiked to the max in order to steal the people's money like kings and dictators.

Clear proof of who you hate. If it was up to Republicans the government would abolish all governmental programs designed to help the less fortunate. They would abolish Minimum Wage! These people have the audacity to call themselves Christians -- but call Democrats "thieves" because they are trying to help the less fortuante -- like Jesus said we should! Clearly this shows how lost YOU are Ottmann!

Ottmann crazily said... So let's hear from dkfz how he spins this into "Bush the Antichrist taking over China". LOL! He's so lost!

Why would I spin this story? Are you spinning it? I don't get what your point is.

You don't think the AntiChrist is going to use Religion against mankind? George Bush isn't a Christian! It's an ACT to get votes -- and to mock God. Today people are calling themselves Christians even though the have turned their backs on the poor. Today people are calling themselves Christians while at the same time they think it's perfectly acceptable to discriminate against other Americans (homosexuals). I call bush's brand of religion (The religious "right") a perversion of Christianity.

Remember bush briefly called the war on terror a "crusade"? During the original crusades Christians invaded Muslim lands, slaughtered them, stole their possessions, and occupied their territory. The SAME thing is going on right now in Iraq.

Why do you keep addressing drew? I went back and checked -- he hasn't posted to this thread.

Ottmann lied... I'm glad you finally admitted you're a massive liberal, after you've denied it for months with a barrage of lies.

I will assume you're talking to me, even though your comments make no sense -- I've never, and would never, deny being a liberal. I'm PROUD that I'm a liberal.

Sunday, November 20, 2005 8:56:00 AM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

Being proud is one thing, but blinding yourself to reality is just being stupid, and that's nothing to be proud of!

I agree -- so why don't you take off the blinders Ottmann?

Ottmann lied... Everytime you say "Ottmann Lied," is just another nail in your heart because only liberals lie like you do, and it's been proven with every word you write here.

Your lies are so obvious Ottmann -- they are proven with every word YOU write.

Sunday, November 20, 2005 9:04:00 AM  
Blogger Cody O'Connor said...

Funny you should get that bull crap from a site called "conspiracy planet"

You're a moron for believing what some guy says over recent news which is proven unlike conspiracy planet's rubbish conspiracy.

As dkfz would say, You're delusional.

Jayson, I suggest you turn off anonymous comments. The main reason why people post anonymous is because they want to be a$$es and get away with it.

Sunday, November 20, 2005 9:06:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

As if believing what the CIA would report no wonder I find them as completely disgusting vile people who should go straight to hell. You should go and read about Albert Pike whose goal is part of the NWO.
http://www.myspace.com/nwo666

please look at that image of your so called seal but I disgress you are pretty ignorant and delusional...

Sunday, November 20, 2005 9:52:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

you are oblivious that this country and the elite are ran by conspirators. No wonder we see all of these politico right wing/left wing/politically correct/bigoted people manipulating the masses. As if this country would work because you have choice for voting and dividing this country up with this vile choice of words instead of seeing the bigger picture. Such UnAmerican Garbage. I believe more of the little people than such mainstream media covering about the petty Iraq war.

Sunday, November 20, 2005 10:02:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

btw are you implying your petty ebonics on me little man because that does not work with me...I can care less about a damn debate...

Sunday, November 20, 2005 10:03:00 AM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

Ottmann LIED... This has clearly exposed the demagoguery of democrat's who've been cowing liberals, thus egging on the enemy to kill more of our troops, who liberals hate with a passion. Democrat's have proven again and again they could care-less about the war, our troops, Iraq or America.

Middle America asks: "Did we give up our young so cheaply?"
Sunday November 20, 2005

Identical red flags of the 3/25th Marines Regiment hang outside the homes of two families in Ohio. Their sons went off to war last March in the same unit. Seven months later, I followed both sets of parents through the emotional homecoming of Lima Company. Only one son was returning alive.
In Paul Shroeder's home, he showed me a photograph of 11 marines, all Lima Company members. Ten of them are now dead, including his son, Augie. They died last August as the marines swept through the town of Haditha.

Two days earlier, six of their colleagues had been shot dead in an ambush, so a convoy had rumbled back into town to hunt down the killers. At least one vehicle drove safely over a hidden bomb. Then a massive explosion blew apart 14 marines.

"His body came back in a casket, had to be closed, could not see him", Paul says. Then he describes how Augie grew up in New Jersey and Ohio. "He had two homes and the nature of his injuries are such that he will be buried in two places". His voice cracks. "And when Lima Company came home, we received a third part of him in an urn. We don't know where to put that yet".

That is the hideous reality of war, but until recently President George Bush has done the best job he can hiding it from the American public. More than 2,000 troops have been killed since the invasion of Iraq two-and-a-half years ago, but the President hasn't been to a single funeral.

During last year's presidential election, Bush was a regular visitor to Ohio. It was a key state and in the end victory there handed him his second term.

"He came here when he needed votes", Peggy Logue tells us as the family prepares to go to Lima Company's homecoming to be reunited with their son, Mike. "When the marines were killed, there was no sign of him and if he should come now I'd be sickened. Does he think we give up our young so cheaply? He wasn't here for the death and the pain, why should he be here for the glory?"

Not that there was ever much chance of Bush appearing at the homecoming. He doesn't do those either. Nor does this Commander-in-Chief, unlike many of his predecessors, greet the flag-draped coffins of fallen soldiers that traditionally arrive back at Dover air force base. In fact, for the war dead from Iraq he tried to impose a total news blackout, banning the release of pictures taken by the military's own photographers.

It took a lawsuit by an angry professor of journalism to force the release of the pictures. "I think they've pulled off a really big lie by pretending to be supportive of the military", Professor Ralph Begleiter says, as he shows me the photos. A CNN reporter for 20 years, he knows what war looks like. "They've been able to get away with not supporting the military in the most important way, showing respect for those who've made the ultimate sacrifice".

We took off with 17 casualties, but the Pentagon only officially counts nine of them. This is one more way they play down the human cost. Only those injured in battle are included in statistics. The air force man who collapsed with severe pneumonia in Afghanistan, the National Guardsman with blackened fingers and deep burns from faulty electrical kit in Iraq -- they don't count, officially. Soldiers have been crushed and paralysed by falling equipment, suffered long-term injuries in overturned vehicles, but they're not in the figures.

The American public has been told that about 16,000 troops have been wounded in Iraq, but if the Pentagon counted everyone flown out for medical treatment -- which is how the British Ministry of Defence calculates figures -- then the number of American injured would double to more than 30,000.

One of the key factors is that those within the military community itself are now coming out and complaining they have been manipulated by the Bush administration. It started with the families, especially the bereaved ones.

"If you have skin in this game and they have died, parents and spouses are very slow or unwilling to admit the death was for anything other than a noble cause", one Ohio father says. "I knew this was not a noble cause, and my son's life was wasted and his death and all these other deaths should not have been". He stops and emphasises each word: "For no good cause".

A growing number of soldiers-turned-politicians agree. In Ohio Democrat Paul Hackett stood in a congressional by-election last summer. He lost, but cut a huge Republican majority down to a sliver. One reason was that he had just spent seven months as a marines reservist in Iraq. The voters liked that. When he said, "The war is over, bring them home, it's a misuse of the military", no one could call him unpatriotic. Opinion polls now say that 60 per cent of Americans believe the bloodshed is not worth it.

"I'm a Marine mum", Peggy tells us. She's the talker of the family. For much of the interview, her husband, Jerry, sits quietly, choked with tears but nodding at her every answer. "Mothers know when it's time to stop. It's time to stop. It's time to bring them home".

Sunday, November 20, 2005 12:19:00 PM  
Blogger Cody O'Connor said...

you are pretty ignorant and delusional...

You want to tell me why or are you just out of arguments so you have to move to personal attacks.

please look at that image of your so called seal

My so called seal? It's the US coat of arms. But only someone as IGNORANT or DELUSIONAL as you could think otherwise.

little man

ROFLMAO!

Your amazing stupidity and ignorance is actually pretty humorous!

So I'm a little man huh? What are you trying to say? That you are so overweight that you feel good about yourself by calling other people small! Man, you are pathetic!

Sunday, November 20, 2005 2:10:00 PM  
Blogger Cody O'Connor said...

btw are you implying your petty ebonics on me little man because that does not work with me...I can care less about a damn debate...

ebonics

n : a nonstandard form of American English spoken by some Black people in the United States


'fo shizzle my nizzle 'mo anonymonizzle!

Sunday, November 20, 2005 2:27:00 PM  
Blogger OTTMANN said...

dkfz loses again. Prison Planet? Wow, what a joke! Only a total dip-shit loser would bother wasting time reading that garbage. ZERO CREDIBILITY!!!!!!!

Bush isn't hiding the war from the American people at all. The liberal media is showing it all the time, but only the rough parts, not the good progress that IS taking place. Bush knows American's are willing to sacrifice for a noble cause as WE have always done all over the globe to help oppressed people become free. dkfz doesn't get it and never, ever will because he's a selfish loser who'd rather whine about everything than offer any help.

While using a very lame, highly emotional STORY, dkfz denies the reality of the situation, still relying on feeble polls that are proven wrong far more often than not, especially when the questions are asked in a bias manner by liberals.

democrat's voted just last Friday to NOT bring the troops home, with only 3 of the most extreme liberal fools voting for it. All their whining is making the American people sick!

US real American's know what the mission is and that we will win it for the Iraqi people!

After the vote next month, the troops will likely start coming home as the Iraqi government begins to fend for itself. It is a long process, but it has worked much as planned. Unfortunately, democrat's never wanted it to work in the first place because it makes them look really bad, like they do now.

All dkfz proves is that he and the liberal democraps are down to their last-gasps of their dishonest, hate-filled charges against the war, President Bush, and our Military.

So Now the dems are suddenly realizing they've created a real mess for themselves as they start wildly accusing all kinds of different people for leaking the Plame-name crapola. The fools on the left don't know when to let it go. They instead keep running full force into the desert, with their tank on fumes.

Self-destruction is never a pretty picture, and this one is looking especially ugly for dems.

Sunday, November 20, 2005 2:43:00 PM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

Ottmann Lied... dkfz loses again. Prison Planet? Wow, what a joke!

MORE LIES FROM OTTMANN!! "Anonymous" posted a story from "Prison Planet" -- my story was from The Observer. It is very obvious that Ottmann has no idea what the truth is, nor does he even care -- just like his leader!

Ottmann Lied... dkfz doesn't get it and never, ever will because he's a selfish loser who'd rather whine about everything than offer any help.

Ottmann, YOU are the selfish loser who will never get it! You are only interested in helping Corporations and CEOs steal from ordinary Americans! It's what this administration is all about -- bush is bankrupting the US government in order to give wealthy individuals and corporations tax breaks and corporate welfare hand-outs! Ottmann has the audacity to call me selfish while he supports bush's looting of the treasury! YOU DISGUST ME OTTMANN!!

Ottmann Lied... After the vote next month, the troops will likely start coming home as the Iraqi government begins to fend for itself. It is a long process, but it has worked much as planned.

Everything is working out as "planned"... maybe you're right! The Coalition Provisional Authority recently admitted that they "lost track" of $9 BILLION in reconstruction funds as a result of "poor book-keeping". Just part of the "plan"?

Ottmann Lied... Self-destruction is never a pretty picture, and this one is looking especially ugly for dems.

You've made some pretty BOLD predictions Ottmann -- what happens when they don't come true? If anyone, in the future, says "I thought you said it was over for the Democrats, that they were going to self destruct?" Ottmann will DENY ever saying anything of the sort -- because all Ottmann does is LIE.

Sunday, November 20, 2005 4:05:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

wow otty you are no different than any of these far right neocons. It makes a typical conservative look like a liberal...btw I don't vote for a 2 party system, I defend the constitution something that both parties do not even practice. Vile heathens I can assume that you are being PAID to lie...paypal perhaps? I think so

cody nice attempt to change your settings...I am not here for a pittant debate, I am facing what the left right dems and repub never face REALITY. It's rather oblivious that you suppress these thoughts about conspiracy and how the administration would further their agenda. Stop being stubborn like a commie and realize the leader of the lies is no different than any other president.

Sunday, November 20, 2005 6:28:00 PM  
Blogger OTTMANN said...

OK dkfz, prove to us all that you're not this 'anonymous' poster that sounds and spews insanity just like you.

dkfz said: "Everything is working out as "planned"... maybe you're right! The Coalition Provisional Authority recently admitted that they "lost track" of $9 BILLION in reconstruction funds as a result of "poor book-keeping". Just part of the "plan"?"

A better question is... Who lost track of over $100 BILLION in the MONEY FOR SADDAM scandal at the Useless Nations?


Anonymous is obviously another courageous liberal hiding behind the curtain, likely from Hanchett's foolish site of lies against Bush that is so filled with hate, It probably makes Satan blush.

But I would say that the part about the constitution borders on being correct, but at least Republican's attempt to hold to it, whereas democrat's simply desire to shred it in order for them to rule by judicial fiat.


dkfz said: "You've made some pretty BOLD predictions Ottmann -- what happens when they don't come true? If anyone, in the future, says "I thought you said it was over for the Democrats, that they were going to self destruct?" Ottmann will DENY ever saying anything of the sort -- because all Ottmann does is LIE."

Well not to seem arrogant or anything like a liberal, but I have yet to be proven wrong about my assessments based on the facts. LIberals like dkfz can say whatever they want because the facts don't matter to them as they constantly rely on emotional gossip, spins, and false accusations instead of the truth. So President Reagan was right when he said: "Facts are stubborn things. And they'll survive propaganda."

That true statement doesn't even make sense to liberals, just ask one!

But if it ever happens that I'm proven wrong, I'm certainly man enough to admit it, and will. Clintoon taught liberals all about denial, even after being caught lying on to the entire country on national TV with "I did not have sex with that woman." Was he practicing for his Antichrist debut perhaps?

dkfz is not even man enough to accept facts let alone admit he's wrong, which he is on everything because he's so far left, he makes John Kerry look like a conservative.

Sunday, November 20, 2005 9:03:00 PM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

Ottmann Lied... OK dkfz, prove to us all that you're not this anonymous poster that sounds and spews insanity just like you.

I have never posted anonymously. I have only ever posted under the "dkfz" ID.

"Anonymous" New World Order conspiracy theorist said... The "devil's hand" is familiar to both Bill Clinton and George Bush as evidenced by the photos with the caption "the satanic torch is passed" on Steamshovel Press

Seeing as the above quote is critical of Clinton, and seeing as I "worship Clinton as a God", why would I post it -- If it is me who is posting anonymously?

Ottmann proclaimed, without a shred of proof... dkfz is not even man enough to accept facts let alone admit he's wrong...

I'm not wrong about bush being corrupt and dishonest. It's an obvious fact that anyone who isn't deluded can see. I'm not wrong to cast my lot with the Democrats. History has proven our nation does better with a Democrat in office:

Quote from "Big Lies" by Joe Conason
The available data show consistently that Democrats are more capable, productive economic stewards than Republicans. Consider the history of the stock market, where plummeting values since 2001 have caused wider distress than ever -- ironically thanks to the vastly expanded ownership of equities, either directly or indirectly, during the Clinton era.

When Slate magazine analyzed the average returns on the Standard & Poor's 500 in October 2002, its researchers found that Democratic presidencies produced annual returns of 12.3 percent, while Republicans produced 8 percent. Moreover, stock valuations during Democratic control of Congress also beat the Republican record in both the Senate and the House by considerable margins, averaging 10.7 percent for the elephants. The Democrats should perhaps consider adopting the bull as their party animal, while the Republicans deserve to be stuck with the bear.

Not long ago, Northwestern Mutual, the insurance and financial services giant, published a survey of presidential administrations and S&P 500 performance between 1929 and 1999 that showed the Democratic advantage quite starkly. Even when the company's analysts massaged those numbers to remove two of the worst Republican periods -- the Hover administration and Nixon's second term -- the outcome still favored Democrats by 16.9 percent to 14.2. The largest gains occurred under FDR, Truman, Johnson, and Clinton.

The editors of the Stock Trader's Almanac -- an authorative source of Wall Street statistics -- drew very similar conclusions in 2000 when they looked at the prices of Dow Jones stocks, although their analysis was even more favorable to the Democrats, who posted gains of 13.4 percent versus 8.1 percent for Republicans. Jeffrey Hirsch, who edits and publishes the almanac, told Slate that the correlation between presidential party and stock appreciation was among the most significant statistical relationships he has found.

Market historian Hirsch's verdict? "I don't know why people are convinced Republicans are good for the stock market".

Rising stock indexes are not necessarily the best means, however, to measure national economic progress from a liberal perspective. What about gross national product, job creation, unemployment, disposable income, deficit reduction, federal spending, and inflation? By every one of these yardsticks, Democratic Presidents achieved a superior record: on average, their administrations fostered more growth, higher wages, lower deficits, lower government spending, and lower inflation than Republican regimes. If voters understood how poorly the GOP has operated the nation's business -- and the gaping difference between promises and results -- they would file the electoral equivalent of a shareholder lawsuit. (pages 85-87)

Clearly this proves the old adage: "Give and you shall receive". Clearly this true statement doesn't even make sense to conservatives.

Monday, November 21, 2005 12:50:00 AM  
Blogger Kirk said...

Cheney rocked the house! Bush's polls will be climbing now. I expect a 70% approval rating by the end of the month.

Monday, November 21, 2005 1:21:00 AM  
Blogger Cody O'Connor said...

Ottmann, YOU are the selfish loser who will never get it! You are only interested in helping Corporations and CEOs steal from ordinary Americans!

But according to your profile, you are a CEO. Oh it looks like you recently just took that off so I couldn't post something like this. I knew that was a lie.

cody nice attempt to change your settings...I am not here for a pittant debate, I am facing what the left right dems and repub never face REALITY. It's rather oblivious that you suppress these thoughts about conspiracy and how the administration would further their agenda. Stop being stubborn like a commie and realize the leader of the lies is no different than any other president.

This post is loaded with stereotypes. I'm a Conservative, why does that make me bad? Because I have Conservative values, or just because you don't like the ones in office now. Your logic confuses me.

wow otty you are no different than any of these far right neocons. It makes a typical conservative look like a liberal

Just more stereotypes, nothing that has anything to do with REALITY, something you need to wake up to.

...btw I don't vote for a 2 party system, I defend the constitution something that both parties do not even practice.

BS, if you check my profile it'll say that I call myself a constitutional conservative. Just more wrong stereotypes, anonymous.

Vile heathens I can assume that you are being PAID to lie...paypal perhaps? I think so

If anyone should be suspicous of being paid to lie I think it would be Mr. Internet CEO, dkfz. Of course he took the CEO part off recently because he was lying, but still, it makes you wonder...

Monday, November 21, 2005 3:36:00 AM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

Cody attacked... If anyone should be suspicous of being paid to lie I think it would be Mr. Internet CEO, dkfz. Of course he took the CEO part off recently because he was lying, but still, it makes you wonder...

OK, I admit that was a mistake putting that in there -- because it gave people the wrong impression. When you say "CEO" most people think of a huge multi-million dollar corporation. I run a SMALL business out of my home -- so yes, I realized I made a mistake and changed my profile. Go ahead and continue to say I'm lying -- I've admited I made a mistake, and that's the end of it as far as I'm concerned. But you'll probably continue with the Ad hominem attacks, seeing as you're clearly unable to debate any of the actual issues I brought up.

When I referred to CEOs I was talking about people like Kenneth Lay and Jeffrey Skilling of Enron, Bernard J. Ebbers of WorldCom, Joe Bernardino of the Accounting firm Arthur Anderson, Samuel Waksal of ImClone, Dick Cheney (formerly) of Halliburton (but still working hard on their behalf) and others who haven't yet been caught committing fraud -- Like the Big Oil CEOs who recently testified before Congress (but not under oath -- I wonder why?).

Excessive CEO pay takes money out of the pockets of shareholders, including the retirement savings of America's working families. A poorly designed executive compensation package can reward decisions that are not in the long-term interests of a company, its shareholders and employees.

I'm sure you knew EXACTLY the type of CEO I was referring to -- but you didn't care about the point I was making -- the only thing you cared about was the avenue of attack you saw. OK, you did a great job attacking me -- but you didn't address a SINGLE ONE of the arguments I made!

From the Washington Post: The right believes that if corporations thrive, the rest of us will too. Unfortunately, this preference for corporations over individuals has not worked in our favor. Over the past few years, corporate profits have soared, but wages are stagnant. Corporate taxes have fallen, while individual taxes have risen (Although individual federal tax rates were reduced, state and local taxes have gone up.). Corporations are now protected from lawsuits by injured people, and are given more power to regain money and property when people declare bankruptcy. The net result of these right-wing policies is the transfer of wealth from the poor and middle class to the wealthy. (March 29, 2005)

From the Global Policy Forum Website: After the 2002 tax cuts, U.S. corporations will pay close to the lowest rate of taxes as a share of the economy that they have paid in 60 years. Nevertheless, corporations continue to demand more, while the global race to the bottom has established a competition among countries to further reduce taxes as the price of keeping companies from fleeing.

Many U.S. corporations are shifting their headquarters to nominal mail-drop locations in tax haven countries in order to further reduce or avoid paying taxes. Even without moving their headquarters offshore, many companies have found ingenious ways to avoid paying taxes. Enron, for instance, set up over 800 subsidiaries in offshore tax havens to fraudulently hide its debt and reduce its tax payments. The company also deducted billions of dollars of stock option gains and used other techniques to avoid paying taxes entirely in four of the last five years before it filed for bankruptcy. (October 29, 2002)

Why is the Bush administration allowing corporations to avoid paying their fair share through the use of accounting tricks like moving their headquarters offshore?

FYI: If anyone did offer to pay me to TELL THE TRUTH I would take them up on their offer. Unfortunately, I've been wasting MY OWN free time here. Why is it that when SOMEONE ELSE levels a charge of being "paid to post" I'm always suspect?! What about Ottmann? He doesn't even have a public profile -- what's he hiding?

Monday, November 21, 2005 10:53:00 AM  
Blogger Bushcheney08 said...

"Funny you should get that bull crap from a site called "conspiracy planet""

And to that anonymous dude, its funny you should get the bullcrap you have all from prisonplanet.

Monday, November 21, 2005 12:24:00 PM  
Blogger OTTMANN said...

dkfz said: "Ottmann, YOU are the selfish loser who will never get it! You are only interested in helping Corporations and CEOs steal from ordinary Americans! It's what this administration is all about -- bush is bankrupting the US government in order to give wealthy individuals and corporations tax breaks and corporate welfare hand-outs! Ottmann has the audacity to call me selfish while he supports bush's looting of the treasury! YOU DISGUST ME OTTMANN!!"

dkfz, please answer these questions from your emotional accusations....

1. How am I helping Corporations and CEO's steal for ordinary American's? Who are the "ordinary Americans"?

2. Do corporations provide work for people to make an income and provide for their families?

3. Are you against free markets?

4. a. How is Bush looting the treasury? I've explained tax cuts (far too little) to you many times, but you refuse to understand how it works. You say you're a small business man running it out of your house. b. Are you writing off your house expenses and your SUV on your taxes? Why or Why not? c. Do you like government red tape?

5. Why did Clinton let corporate corruption happen during the 1990's, including ENRON, Global Crossings, World com, etc? How did Terry McAulliffe get so stinkning rich off Global Crossings? Bush has nothing to do with any of that, but he did fix it all! McAuliffe should've gone go jail foever.

See how wrong you are about everything? You get it all backwards to reality because you suck up the liberal lies created for fools like you. Here's a clue: REALITY IS THE OPPOSITE OF ALL LIBERALS SAY!

That's why you dkfz come off as being so delusional, you literally just don't get it!

Monday, November 21, 2005 12:34:00 PM  
Blogger OTTMANN said...

dkfz, there's some lessons to read and some questions for you to answer on Jayson's "Wacked Out" post.

Monday, November 21, 2005 12:39:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What about the looting of the federal reserve? why don't you explain about that

dear cody just because you claim to be a constitutional conservative does not constitute you as one. Everything you say is the opposite of the constitution allowing this whole torture nonsense and allowing the CIA to control and manipulate countries. How does the Patriot Act protect us even though it is the opposite of the constitution. Talk radio does not count either they are just a bunch of puppets being told to what they say creating this whole theatrical performance.

Israel has their own problem thanks to the Big Banks and the Royal Families of the Rothchilds. Why should be stick our noses?

Jay Jay...please stop writing this devil propoganda you are spewing. It does not work on me...

Monday, November 21, 2005 12:54:00 PM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

[1] How am I helping Corporations and CEO's steal for ordinary American's? Who are the "ordinary Americans"?
By supporting/voting for bush. The middle class and the working poor -- The people who aren't benefiting the most from bush's tax cuts

[2] Do corporations provide work for people to make an income and provide for their families?
Yes -- and if they're doing a good job they deserve to be fairly compensated -- not overcompensated. It's when they do a bad job, get fired, and then depart their position with overly generous severance package that's REALLY disgusting.

[3] Are you against free markets?
No, but I think we need government regulation to avoid corruption and greed.

[4] a. How is Bush looting the treasury? I've explained tax cuts (far too little) to you many times, but you refuse to understand how it works. You say you're a small business man running it out of your house. b. Are you writing off your house expenses and your SUV on your taxes? Why or Why not? c. Do you like government red tape?
A. By purposefuly driving the US government into bankruptcy -- by borrowing more money than we will ever be able to pay back. I understand perfectly how Republicans think Vodoo Economics should work. History has proven your theories are all wrong. I expained this to you awhile ago on your blog. Go back and re-read what I wrote on the thread for your October 13th Post "Had Al Gore Been President...". B. My finances are none of your business. I don't own an SUV. C. I don't support the flat tax.

[5] Why did Clinton let corporate corruption happen during the 1990's, including ENRON, Global Crossings, World com, etc? How did Terry McAulliffe get so stinkning rich off Global Crossings? Bush has nothing to do with any of that, but he did fix it all! McAuliffe should've gone go jail foever.
It's Clinton fault -- what a surprise! No, of course bush had nothing to do with it -- it only happened under his watch -- just like 9/11. So, he was forced to take action -- exactly how did he "fix" the problem? Who did he "fix" it for?

[6] See how wrong you are about everything?
No, I see how wrong YOU are about everything.

[6] dkfz, there's some lessons to read and some questions for you to answer on Jayson's "Wacked Out" post. "Tax cuts for the rich" is just another falsehood created and used by democrats to divide the people into groups. Liberals fall for it, Conservatives don't!
I read what you wrote. I'm not an idiot, I understand what you're saying COMPLETELY. I just don't agree with it. Wealthy individuals SHOULD PAY MORE. You've never heard the old adage "It takes money to make money"? Wealthy people have an unfair advantage.

Why the Republican Tax Cut is a Scam -- Republican's attitudes may be fairly summarized by his phrase "the government has its ever-present, greedy hands deep in my pockets", completely ignoring the manifold benefits he receives as a citizen of the United States, as well as the fact that for those in the higher earning brackets, taxes have been going down for years. Those citizens not quite so fortunate have, on the contrary, seen regressive taxes, such as payroll taxes and sales taxes rise precipitously. Such taxes literally take food off the table. The moral principle behind the imposition of a progressive income tax is that discretionary income, money that people can do without, ought to be taxed first and that taxation of the income of persons living at subsistance level should be avoided, if at all possible. A flat tax, paid at the same percentage rate by the fabulously wealthy as well as the penurious, evokes the famous dictum of Anatole France:

The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.

This unwillingness to pay one's fair share of one's discretionary income for the common good ignores the fact that we are all interdependent; that we are part of a web of complementary and mutual relationships so complex that no one can say "I did it myself". We are not hermits. We all stand on the shoulders of others. We constantly depend on others. If we are wealthy, it is likely because we were born wealthy; if we are poor, it is likely that we were born poor. If it were otherwise, more poor people would become rich and more wealthy children would eventually descend into pauperism. There are exceptions, of course, but they are few and far in between.

If your family saved up money by neglecting your kids, going without health care and ignoring needed home repairs, would you say you had a budget surplus? Now imagine giving much of your "surplus" to your rich uncle. That's what Congress wants to do. The truth is that the Republican tax cut will not help the average American. It will enrich the already rich and dispense goodies to the biggest and most powerful corporations. It will produce staggering deficits in the coming years and furnish the opportunity for the Republicans to begin all over the litany to reduce spending beneficial to the general public, to further shred what little social safety net is left after the last onslaught, and to complete the third-worldization of the United States that was begun by Ronald Reagan. (by Tom Lowe August 16, 1999)

[7] Next time we'll answer why Republican's want to lower rich democrat's income taxes, if dkfz still doesn't get it.
I already read the answer in your "Had Al Gore Been President..." post -- there is no need for you to repeat yourself. I get it -- you embrace the lie that trickle down ecomomics works.

Monday, November 21, 2005 2:38:00 PM  
Blogger Cody O'Connor said...

Anonymous said...
dear cody just because you claim to be a constitutional conservative does not constitute you as one. Everything you say is the opposite of the constitution allowing this whole torture nonsense and allowing the CIA to control and manipulate countries. How does the Patriot Act protect us even though it is the opposite of the constitution.

I'm not for torture, but you don't have to know that because you are going to use the same stereotypes every time anyways.

talk radio does not count either they are just a bunch of puppets being told to what they say creating this whole theatrical performance.

LOL, do you have like attention deficit disorder or something? What the heck does this have to do with my political idiologies?

Israel has their own problem thanks to the Big Banks and the Royal Families of the Rothchilds. Why should be stick our noses?

So you'd rather sit back and let innocent Jews die every day by terrorists?

Jay Jay...please stop writing this devil propoganda you are spewing. It does not work on me...

You know, I've always had a problem with Liberals, but now I can see that the radical Centrists are just as bad, if not worse! You don't stand for anything, you have no ideas, you just hate this and hate that. You hate the government, you hate the politicians, frankly you just hate America. That's why you say you want reform, the only problem is that you don't stand for anything or have any ideas so you want to reform but you don't know what you want to reform and how you want to reform it.

Hate won't get you anywhere. You need to believe in someone, or something. Otherwise you're just hurting all of us.

Monday, November 21, 2005 3:38:00 PM  
Blogger saint said...

Centralists don't stand for anything?! Bah! I stand for unity, something which, from a Biblical perspective especially, is considered to be the most important thing within the body. These kinds of political arguments are not limited only to countries, they arise within the Church as well, but Christ's message was one of unity with each other. No argument over ideology is worth breaking apart the body.

The same is true of your country. There is no point to any of these arguments as long as their purpose is to divide and be enemies with each other. By taking sides you are, in essence, undermining the very union that you are trying to protect. Your differences of opinion are NOT WORTH BEING DISUNITED FROM YOUR COUNTRYMEN.

Monday, November 21, 2005 3:48:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

right...as if I should choose the better team they are all the same people...I don't care

looks like here the politico juniors are here to use their nasty adhominem attacks...

Talk radio as if you claim that you wanted to be a part of and receive your petty info

If you want to bitch about Israel ask about those fat rich puppets ARIEL SHARON and the YASSIR ARAFAT...and all of those Zionists Wolfowitz, Falwell, Robertson

As if terrorists want to deficate your house please...

Monday, November 21, 2005 7:19:00 PM  
Blogger OTTMANN said...

dkfz,
Thanks for Your answers. Here are my responses....

1. By my supporting Bush, How does that let corporations "steal" from people? Bush has promoted fair business practices and stopped corporate corruption. Clinton promoted business too, but let them steal from the people by artificially inflating their stock prices. Enron and the others were due to Clinton's corruption in the '90s. Remember, Bush fixed all that with heavy fines and jail time for those Corporate liars who knew they could take advantage of the system under the massive liar Bill Clinton.

2. The government should not tell companies how to run their business. I agree that some companies overcompensate their CEO's, etc. But that is an internal matter that needs to be addressed by their stock holders and board of directors. Do you own any stock? Do you get proxy statements? Do you vote on them?
3. Yes, some government regulation is good of course, but too much can be worse for honest companies.
We have massive government regulations. In fact too many already. But the ones put in place by Bush were good to stop the corruption that happened under Clinton's nose. Why do liberals keep trying to blame Bush for of Clinton's screw-ups? Because they're evil!

In order to keep up with all the red tape and regs, companies have to hire lawyers at $100/hr. to keep them from being sued. All that does is drive costs and prices UP, cuts quality, wages and healthcare. You should know that being a business owner. Government more often than not, stifles business with their red tape, thus stopping them from hiring people, the same way raising taxes does, causing unemployment and recession. That's what happened in the late '90's when Clinton's tax hikes fully kicked in.

4. A. In times of war, we've always borrowed money to meet our needs. History has proven our economics work better. After the war is over, things will return to normal and the debt will be reduced accordingly by letting the people keep more of their own money, which generates more tax revenue for the government. I explained that to you before and it's very true. The economy is not static, it moves and grows continuously, that is why prices keep going up.

Your Al Gore response was totally wrong. Reagan's economy proved tax cuts worked, and now so has Bush.

It also proves the opposite of what democrats say. The reality is that the economy is cooking good now because government is not taking from the people disproportionately.

B. True they''re not, and others finances including the wealthy are none of YOUR business either, so why do you complain so? Jealousy perhaps? Resentment? But I bet you write off everything you can while you whine on and on about tax cuts, which is totally hypocritical of you. Libs constantly say the opposite of how they really are. One only has to look Barbara Streisand to see who bad liberals lie. She projects that she cares about the little guy, while she orders caviar from her help staff working in one of her mansions. It's DISGUSTING! Not that she's rich, but that she feigns sympathy for the poor. Most libs are the same way! See below.

5. I've told you, Bush inherited a mess from Clinton. Everyone with a brain who's honest, knows that. Bush was only in office 8 months when 9/11 happened. Clintoon had 8 years to get the bastard and failed to do his job to protect the nation.

All the corporate corruption happend during the late '90's into 2000 under Clinton, not Bush! It was discovered when the Bush administration came in... FACT!

6. Clearly you don't really understand because you said "Wealthy individuals SHOULD PAY MORE" Why should Wealthy people pay more? Give us reasons!
Making wealthy people pay more only takes away the incentives for progress. If I cut your pay with tax hikes, you have to work that much harder to make the same amount as you did before, right? So once you've worked and saved your money, should the government be able to come in and take it away and give it to who they want?

Wealthy people do not have any unfair advantage. They have to play by the same rules as everyone else does to make their money.

dkfz said: "It takes money to make money." That is so wrong It's amazing. How do you explain all the hundreds of thousands of people who've come to America with nothing, and made it big for themselves? Arnold Swartzenegger is a great success story. He used his brain and body to make it big and became a millionaire before he turned 25 after coming to America with nothing but desire and a dream.
How did Steve Jobs or Bill Gates do it? By using their brains! You can't take that away from people just because you're not as smart as they are.

I think you need to move to Britain or France where unemployment is 10%, twice higher than ours here to understand how government rapes the people of their money and incentive to make a living. Socialism simply doesn't work. France and Germany are a disaster. But it seems that's what you want because you obviously don't understand free markets or how real competition drives economies.

"We all stand on the shoulders of others." No we don't, never have either, not in this country. This country is where people make it for themselves because they have the freedom to do so. YOU dkfz are of the communist mindset. Maybe China is for you where you can become a cog in a big machine that treats you like a slave.

dkfz said: "... Republicans to begin all over the litany to reduce spending beneficial to the general public, to further shred what little social safety net is left after the last onslaught, and to complete the third-worldization of the United States that was begun by Ronald Reagan."

That is insane. Social programs are mostly corrupt because they're not managed well by government and are in constant need of repair and more tax money, yet they do very little for most people. If I want to join a group, I'll do it myself. I don't want to be forced by government to be part of some social system. I can do fine on my own, thank you!

Government Welfare is the worst thing you can do to able people. Living off government is lazy, selfish and irresponsible, especially if you're able to work and support yourself.

Government Welfare keeps people down and dependent, which is just what democrats want so they can decide how much people make and who lives and who dies, thus making government their god. Democrats are the worst, most selfishly ugly people on the planet because all they want is power and money, period. Dems/libs don't give a rats-ass about anyone but themselves and their pleasures. Even Bono of U2 realizes liberals are selfish and don't care. That's why he likes Republicans, because we really do care about others. He tried to get help from dems/libs, but they were all talk and no action.

7. Trickle down economics works great as Reagan's and now Bush's economies PROVE beyond doubt! That's why dems are having hissy fits because it also proves that democrat's have been WRONG about it all as they continue trying to bring socialism into government where they can have say over the people. Sure it sounds kinda good, until you realize it's just a smokescreen for bigger and bigger government control to force everyone to be part of some group they didn't want to be a part of in the first place. NO thanks! It is individualism that makes things work for progress. Group mentality only slows things down until it becomes just a bunch of talk with no action or progress.

Monday, November 21, 2005 11:45:00 PM  
Blogger Cody O'Connor said...

If you want to bitch about Israel ask about those fat rich puppets ARIEL SHARON and the YASSIR ARAFAT...and all of those Zionists Wolfowitz, Falwell, Robertson

Well I would talk to Yassir Arafat, but he died of AIDS due to homosexual activity. Sorry to break the news to you.

Tuesday, November 22, 2005 3:31:00 AM  
Blogger Cody O'Connor said...

I don't care

That is why I don't want Centrists in the government. You don't know, you don't care, or you won't do anything because it might be a little partisan.

I wrote this at my blog earlier.

Why the Anti-Decision Centrists are Hurting America

For a long time I have been against what the Liberals are doing, but just recently I've been more concerned with what the Centrists are doing, and not doing.

But there are two different kinds of Centrists, one that I don't have a problem with. Most Centrists call themselves Centrists because they agree with the Liberals on some thing and the Conservatives on others. People like John McCain. But then there are the Anti-Decision Centrists (and the Reform Party).

These Anti-Decision (Reform Party) Centrists will hate the left no matter what, they will hate the right no matter what. They will hate any politician no matter what. They will hate any administration, any government, government program, government agency. They hate everything about the country that a politician has talked about. If a politician talked about Microsoft, they would hate Microsoft. If a politician talked about French fries, they would hate French fries.

Why? There is no valid reason for all of the hate, other than the fact that partisanship may be involved.

So what's so bad about partisanship? Do you know what America would be like without partisanship? Can you think of anything? Probably not and there is a reason for that. If nobody believed in anything, we wouldn't be America. We would be an extension of Engand where what the king said goes and there would be no opposition to him because there would be no other opinions or beliefs.

How do they get away with all of this hate you might ask? Simple, they say they will reform everything.

But there is a problem with that concept. They will try with all of their might to deal with issues that no one has taken a side on because they refuse to be partisan.

So they aren't really left with much to reform are they.

They can't touch the economy because that would be partisan. They can't touch any social issues because that would be partisan. And the list goes on and on.

They will only reform things that will make both the left and right happy, so what are they left with?

Federal deficit (both sides agree here)
National debt (both sides agree here too)
Term limits (Not worth the time to take sides on)
Campaign finance reform (less money spent on campaigns, no complaints here)

Now believe me when I say it, that is all they want to work on. Of course those are good things to reform, but you can't ignore other issues. Economics, social, security, foreign policy, and just about every other issue you can think about. The only things they will make decisions on is spend less and change term limits. Hello guys, if you want to be part of the government you are going to have to tackle a lot more than that.

That is why we can't let these people get into the government. We can't give power to people who won't do anything with it, it's like giving a CD player to a deaf person. Pointless. But unlike the deaf person with a CD player, these people have the responsibility to help the people and they won't do it. There's something wrong with that!

So whether you're a Liberal, Democrat, Conservative, Republican, Libertarian, Greenist, Constitutionist, or just an Independent, please don't support the Reform Party. Reform sounds great, so does money. You could ask for Reform and get 4 issues fixed. And you could ask for money and get a quarter. Both ways you are dissapointed.

Say no to the Reform Party.

Tuesday, November 22, 2005 3:35:00 AM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

The economy does far better with a Democrat in the White House, as my prior post concerning stock market performance pointed out. Trickle down economics has been proven to be hogwash. We're dealing with PROVEN FACTS here Ottmann! The nonsense you're spouting -- I've heard it many times before. In your posts you write as if you are showing me the light -- and that after reading your words of wisdom I will have no choice but to see the error of my ways and immediately convert to Republicanism! Sorry Ottmann, this is one liberal Democrat who is wise to your lies.

Mr. Clinton was a moderate who did not raise taxes high enough. Jealousy doesn't have anything to do with it -- Part of the Democratic key to success involves a progressive income tax. Mr. Clinton increased the number of tax brackets -- leading to greater prosperity. bush cut the number of tax brackets -- and lowered taxes for those at the top -- increasing our debt to a point from which we most likely cannot recover.

Even when things start falling apart -- and it's obvious to everyone else that you've been USED -- you'll STILL be blaming Mr. Clinton! I will have no compassion for you, since you've doomed us all.

(Ottmann quotes a portion from one of my prior posts) dkfz said... The truth is that the Republican tax cut will not help the average American. It will enrich the already rich and dispense goodies to the biggest and most powerful corporations. It will produce staggering deficits in the coming years and furnish the opportunity for the Republicans to begin all over the litany to reduce spending beneficial to the general public, to further shred what little social safety net is left after the last onslaught, and to complete the third-worldization of the United States that was begun by Ronald Reagan.

Ottmann's reply to my post... That is insane.

It isn't "insane", it is EXACTLY what is happening!

Enrich the already rich. (check)

Dispense goodies to the biggest and most powerful corporations (check)

Produce staggering deficits in the coming years (check)

Furnish the opportunity for the Republicans to begin all over the litany to reduce spending beneficial to the general public (check)

Complete the third-worldization of the United States that was begun by Ronald Reagan (check)

Brainwash "worshipers" like Ottmann (check)

Tuesday, November 22, 2005 9:07:00 AM  
Blogger saint said...

I think the real idea behind at least my own version of non-partisanism is not that one can only touch issues that are non-partisan, but that partisanship should not be a factor in the decision making process.

Obviously I am being idealist here, to imagine that people might actually want to make the RIGHT decision from a Biblical perspective or even from a moral perspective, but both sides have good points and good focuses, however both sides also miss out on fundamental truths behind their ideals.

Republicans are very focused on managing peoples' morality. They gather together to protest homosexuals and same-sex marriage, or abortion, because they believe that the Bible calls these things wrong. And rightly so - the Bible DOES make a case for taking action against unrighteousness of this kind.

The problem with Republicans is that, in their quest for morality management, they have left out the most important aspect of Biblical Christianity - love. They condemn and they rally against and they preach at, but they don't follow-through.

The same people who protest abortion as one of the most deadly sins ever are the same people who go home to their pregnant teenage daughters and shame them, make them feel like dirt for being pregnant and ultimately drive them right back to abortion, or worse. If we are going to take a stand against abortion, then it is also necessary to take a stand FOR single mothers and pregnant teens. Not to condone their actions, but to SUPPORT them in the situations they are now in.

If we are to take a stand against the Biblically decried moral issue of homosexuality or same-sex marriage, then we need to be taking a stand on equally important Biblically decried issues, such as poverty, social justice and the care of the environment. These are equally spiritual in scope (if not more-so)to same-sex marriage or abortion.

On the other side of the coin are the Republicans, who profess to be more interested in helping the needy and spreading the wealth around. They seem to represent love and tolerance by embracing freedom of choice, freedom of religion, freedom of lifestyle. They are all about acceptance and tolerance. And these are important things. Christ himself modeled these ideas - he demonstrated UNCONDITIONAL acceptance and love. He never turned anyone away, nor would he. It doesn't matter if a person be gay, alcoholic, drug-addicted, pro-choice, pro-marijuana, a deadly killer, a white, a black, jew or gentile, arab or hispanic or scandinavian. Or anything. He is unconditional.

However, freedom, acceptance and love without responsibility, is worthless. In their quest to accept everyone and everything, Liberals and democrats have ignored and covered up the power of sin and the need for redemption. They have gone too far in their support and tolerance and made everything "OK" so long as it feels good to you. They have forgotten that sin is very real, and that sinners (aka everyone) do need to change their habits and practices in order to live a right life. They have created a society in which a person really doesn't need to get a job or contribute to society, because the government is always there to provide a hand-out. This is irresponsible at best, and is not the right way to do things.

You see, neither side is right. They both have a piece of the puzzle, but the only way to bringing wholeness to the church, or the state, or the country, or the family is to have a balanced perspective, to draw upon the strengths of both sides to make something infinately better.

Partisanship assumes that one can have only one way or the other, and that is the real lie. Imagine what would happen if we could have responsibility, righteousness and morality simultaneously along with love, acceptance and support.

That is what I stand for.

Tuesday, November 22, 2005 9:22:00 AM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

This describes exactly how the Republican mind works...

Republican Hypocrisy 101: Always Play the Victim - Often and Loudly
by Doug Basham, Las Vegas Talk Radio Host

(excerpts)

I then thought about the millions of brainwashed, brain-dead, Bush boot lickers who continue on their merry quest for a seemingly utopian, fascist state (where blissful, willful ignorance reigns supreme) and continue to support the wanton murder of innocent human beings in Iraq (and anywhere else the Bush administration lies them into thinking they have go to kill people). And yet, over the holidays, I would hear these same people -- these same self-professed "Christians" -- call conservative talk radio, completely unaware of what colossal hypocrites and fools there were exposing themselves to be.

On the one hand, they seemed completely oblivious to the fact of how they have willfully eliminated the "Thou Shalt Not Kill" Commandment from their subverted, perverted and immensely watered down republican version of Christianity (not to mention being their brother's keeper or loving their enemy). They seemed equally unconscious to how they're completely ignoring the atrocities and war crimes against humanity that they are sanctioning and allowing to be committed in their name. Instead, remarkably -- the only thing these perverters and subverters of true Christianity seemed to be concerned about this holiday season with regards to Christianity was chastising department store clerks for saying "Happy Holidays", instead of "Merry Christmas".

Talk about misguided priorities! But we always have to remember -- this is all just part of the conservative republican ideology. Live in delusion, denial and ignorance -- and the most important element, of course, remains -- whine, moan, bitch and complain, and accuse the other side of that which they are most guilty of themselves. Author Paul Waldman calls it "Orwellian Misdirection".

And how does that work? Here's where the lessons of fascist propagandization come in handy. They whine and accuse so often (because they've been so thoroughly brainwashed into believing they actually have a legitimate complaint), and they whine and accuse so loudly -- that even those who know they're full of crap eventually give up trying to combat their lies out of sheer frustration and disgust But when that happens -- by and large -- the abuser then gets to play the victim instead.

Classic example? The media. Rather than admitting to being the biggest abusers, subverters and perverters of the media which they now own -- they just keep whining about, and accusing the media of being the "liberal media", which in the real world is absolutely ludicrous. But done often enough and loudly enough -- and promulgated by the very media they now own -- even rational thinkers begin to consider the irrational as a possibility. Ultimately, the very people who abuse the media the most get to play the victim of the media instead -- victims of the republican owned, republican managed and republican controlled liberal media.

Would sure love to be a fly on the wall when it's time for these religious hypocrites to give an accounting of themselves before their Creator. Tell Him how 9-11 changed everything –- including His Commandments. Tell Him how you demonized and deemed every one of His human creations who dared disagree with your false Bush prophet a "terrorist". Tell him why you disagreed with Christ's message of peace. And tell me how you're going to respond when He asks, "Where was your faith?" Just a hunch, but somehow, I just don't think playing the victim will absolve you of your earthly republican crimes before the Almighty.

Bottom line? These people should be committed immediately -- not only because they're a danger to themselves -- but also before they can do any more harm to what was once considered to be the most intelligent, progressive nation in the world.

Tuesday, November 22, 2005 9:44:00 AM  
Blogger OTTMANN said...

LOL! It's the whiney liberals who are always playing the victim! EVERYONE KNOWS IT TOO! They can't handle the war and are too cowardly to admit they're wrong, so now they're spinning everything they can to cover for their lies... libs are simply disgusting... and dead!

Speaking of being victims, it looks likeLiberal terror hero, Zarqawi may be dead. Boo-hoo libs!

Democrats are hoping it's all a rumor, a real rumor this time. The failure of terrorists' in Iraq is another crushing blow to the democrats who wanted this war to turn out much worse than Vietnam–the war liberals lost for America.


An excellent article by Mark Steyn today. He hits the nail good! Here are some excerpts....

"Though it's much admired in the salons of the West, armchair insurgents such as Michael Moore seem to have no desire to walk the walk. Mr Moore compared the Zarqawi crowd to the "Minutemen" of America's revolution, pledged to take to the field of battle at a minute's notice. Alas, the concept of self-destructing Minutemen depends on the often misplaced optimism of the London bus stop: there'll be another one along in a minute."

"Happily for Mr Zarqawi, no matter how desperate the head-hackers get, the Western defeatists can always top them. A Democrat Congressman, Jack Murtha, has called for immediate US withdrawal from Iraq. He's a Vietnam veteran, so naturally the media are insisting that his views warrant special deference, military experience in a war America lost being the only military experience the Democrats and the press value these days. Hence, the demand for the President to come up with an "exit strategy".

In war, there are usually only two exit strategies: victory or defeat. The latter's easier. Just say, whoa, we're the world's pre-eminent power but we can't handle an unprecedently low level of casualties, so if you don't mind we'd just as soon get off at the next stop.

Demonstrating the will to lose as clearly as America did in Vietnam wasn't such a smart move, but since the media can't seem to get beyond this ancient jungle war it may be worth underlining the principal difference: Osama is not Ho Chi Minh, and al-Qa'eda are not the Viet Cong. If you exit, they'll follow. And Americans will die - in foreign embassies, barracks, warships, as they did through the Nineties, and eventually on the streets of US cities, too. – Mark Steyn


dkfz now quoting talk radio? LOL!

Clearly the libs are working on their cover stories about their weak showing in protesting the war. The fact is that as terrorism dies, so does liberalism!

YOU LIBS ARE DEADER THAN DOORNAILS... THANK GOD!

Tuesday, November 22, 2005 12:11:00 PM  
Blogger OTTMANN said...

dkfz said: "The economy does far better with a Democrat in the White House, as my prior post concerning stock market performance pointed out."

LOL! It's clear that the last two democrats were bad news for the economy. The first, Carter had a terrible economy with massive inflation and super high gas prices. Interest rates were in the mid-teens!

Clinton's economy was false. The bubba bubble was a fun ride for awhile until his tax hikes kicked in and popped it along with the dot com crap. Enron and all that, plus the recession are Clintoon's legacy as the last two years of his admin. were NEGATIVE GROWTH!... FACT!!!!!!!

Democrats don't have a clue about the economy. They do however know how to steal them when they're good by saying they're bad... another FACTOID!

dkfz is toast. Liberals are death to the democrats!

Tuesday, November 22, 2005 12:29:00 PM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

Republicans whine and accuse so often (because they've been so thoroughly brainwashed into believing they actually have a legitimate complaint), and they whine and accuse so loudly -- that even those who know they're full of crap eventually give up trying to combat their lies out of sheer frustration and disgust.

Ottmann Lied... Clinton's economy was false. The bubba bubble was a fun ride for awhile until his tax hikes kicked in and popped it along with the dot com crap. Enron and all that, plus the recession are Clintoon's legacy as the last two years of his admin. were NEGATIVE GROWTH!... FACT!!!!!!!

Ottmann -- you're full of crap.

The Clinton Presidency: Historic Economic Growth
In 1993, President Clinton and Vice President Gore launched their economic strategy: (1) establishing fiscal discipline, eliminating the budget deficit, keeping interest rates low, and spurring private-sector investment; (2) investing in people through education, training, science, and research; and (3) opening foreign markets so American workers can compete abroad. After eight years, the results of President Clinton’s economic leadership are clear. Record budget deficits have become record surpluses, 22 million new jobs have been created, unemployment and core inflation are at their lowest levels in more than 30 years, and America is in the midst of the longest economic expansion in our history.

"My colleagues and I have been very appreciative of your [President Clinton's] support of the Fed over the years, and your commitment to fiscal discipline has been instrumental in achieving what in a few weeks will be the longest economic expansion in the nation’s history".

-- Alan Greenspan, Federal Reserve Board Chairman, January 4, 2000, with President Clinton at Chairman Greenspan's re-nomination announcement.

How to Create a Phony Power Crisis: The BUSH-ENRON Connection
Federal Election Commission records show that Enron Chairman Kenneth Lay donated more than $350,000 directly to Bush campaigns since 1997. Lay also gave another $100,000 to Republican candidates and fundraising committees. In addition, Enron Corporation, including employees, also donated $1.5 million in soft money to Bush and Republican committees. More recently, Lay and his wife donated $10,000 to the "Florida Recount Fund", and another $100,000 to the "Presidential Inaugural Fund".

As one of his fundraising "Pioneers", Lay helped raise more than $100,000 for Bush's campaign for president. In consideration of these numbers, is it too much to ask for a phony and contrived power "crisis" as a payback?

Connect the Enron Dots to Bush
Enron is Whitewater in spades. This isn't just some rinky-dink land investment like the one dredged up by right-wing enemies to haunt the Clinton White House--but rather it has the makings of the greatest presidential scandal since the Teapot Dome.

The Bush administration has a long and intimate relationship with Enron, whose much-discredited chairman, Kenneth L. Lay, was a primary financial backer of George W. Bush's rise to the presidency.

It was Enron that provided the model for the administration's trickle-down attempt to revive an economy that's been in steep decline during Bush's tenure. That model gives the fat-cat corporate hotshots everything they want in return for bankrolling political campaigns. What did Enron get in return for its contributions? It got its way on deregulation, for one thing. Remember when the administration refused to assist California and other states during the energy crisis, and consumers paid the steep price?

So greedy was Enron that it locked its own workers into a pension plan based on inflated company stock values and suspect hidden partnerships, while the top leadership led by Lay made out like bandits. Bush should be called as a witness in the congressional hearings scheduled to unravel this mess. One thing that should come up in the hearings is then-Gov. Bush's October 1997 telephone call on behalf of Lay to then-Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge to help Enron crack into the tightly regulated Pennsylvania electricity market.

"I called George W. to kind of tell him what was going on", Lay told the New York Times about the 1997 phone call, "and I said that it would be very helpful to Enron, which is obviously a large company in the state of Texas, if he could just call the governor [of Pennsylvania] and tell him [Enron] is a serious company, this is a professional company, a good company".

The Enron-Cheney-Taliban Connection?
The coverups are still very much a mystery. What were the documents that were fed into the shredder -- even after the corporation declared bankruptcy? What is the White House fighting to keep secret, even going to the length of redefining executive privilege and inviting the first Congressional lawsuit ever filed against a president? Were the consequences of releasing these documents more damaging than the consequences of destroying them?

Could the Big Secret be that the highest levels of the Bush Administration knew during the summer of 2001 that the largest bankruptcy in history was imminent? Or was it that Enron and the White House were working closely with the Taliban -- up to weeks before the Sept. 11 attack? Was a deal in Afghanistan part of a desperate last-ditch "end run" to bail out Enron? Here's a tip for Congressional investigators and federal prosecutors: Start by looking at the India deal. Closely.

Republican Corruption Scandals coming to a Boil

DeLay Ex-Aide to Plead Guilty in Lobby Case
Michael Scanlon, a former top official for Representative Tom DeLay and onetime partner of the lobbyist Jack Abramoff, has agreed to plead guilty in a deal with federal prosecutors, according to his lawyer. The deal reveals a broadening corruption investigation involving top members of Congress.

Criminal papers filed in federal court outlined a conspiracy that not only named Mr. Scanlon but also mentioned a congressman, identified only as Representative No. 1, as part of the exchange of favors from clients funneled to lobbyists and officials.

This was the first time that a member of Congress, identified by lawyers in the case as Representative Bob Ney, Republican of Ohio, has been implicated in criminal papers as part of the inquiry, which has sprawled from Indian casinos to the lucrative lobbying firms of Mr. Abramoff and Mr. Scanlon and then reached to the Republican leadership.

DeLay/Abramoff partner Michael Scanlon, in a private memo: "The wackos get their information through the Christian right, Christian radio, mail, the internet and telephone trees. Simply put, we want to bring out the wackos to vote against something and make sure the rest of the public lets the whole thing slip past them".

Mr. DeLay has been indicted in Texas on unrelated charges involving fund-raising practices for state Republicans. His ties to Mr. Abramoff, along with costly overseas trips, have been under investigation for more than a year. The indictment forced Mr. DeLay to step aside as House majority leader this fall.

Tom Delay, Bill Frist, Jack Abramoff, Michael Scanlon, David Safavian, I. Lewis Libby, etc, etc...

Hopefully the voters will kick these lying Republican scumbags out of Washington starting in 2006. Are the Republicans toast? I'm praying for indictments and convictions for everyone named above.

Tuesday, November 22, 2005 2:23:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well I would talk to Yassir Arafat, but he died of AIDS due to homosexual activity. Sorry to break the news to you.

Wow that's a real fucked up statement to say using that whole AIDS bullshit...but you are in cognitive dissodance about that whole AIDS virus is another "biological warfare" that initially started in Africa...even if you try to do something about this you would probably end up dead as a another "accident." Hell they won't tell you about the Jon Brown case, vince foster, gary webb or hunter thompson.

Tuesday, November 22, 2005 3:21:00 PM  
Blogger Cody O'Connor said...

Wow that's a real (swear) up statement to say using that whole AIDS (swear)...but you are in cognitive dissodance about that whole AIDS virus is another "biological warfare" that initially started in Africa...even if you try to do something about this you would probably end up dead as a another "accident." Hell they won't tell you about the Jon Brown case, vince foster, gary webb or hunter thompson.

Dude, you are wacked! I usually try to be nice to people, but you are jut messed up in the head. You don't believe the truth but you believe that Bush is a satanist.

But by now I can safely say that you are a pot-head, there can be no other way.

All of a sudden to you, when a guy gets AIDS from homosexual activity, it's biological warfare.

Your thoughts are so wrong, stupid, off topic, and scattered I can no longer have an intellegent discussion with you.

Goodbye.

(Cut down on the dope please)

Tuesday, November 22, 2005 3:33:00 PM  
Blogger OTTMANN said...

dkfz quotes from the libs revised history... "The Clinton Presidency: Historic Economic Growth" above. It's about as true as Clinton wagging his finger to the nation.

CLINTON LIED!!!!!! TO EVERYONE!!!!! ON NATIONAL TV!!!!!!! HE NEVER APOLOGIZED EITHER!!!!!!! BECAUSE HE'S AN ARROGANT S.O.B.!!!!!! HE SHOULD BE HANGED FOR HIS CORRUPTION AND FAILURES!!!!!!!

Clinton simply got lucky to inherit a much improving economy coming out of a small and PREDICTED recession. It was still the Reagan/Bush economy that created the good parts of the 80s - mid 90's boom, which historians and economist credited to President Reagan, NOT Clinton.

Clinton simply rode the Reagan Train which was designed to last a minimum of ten years, topping out in year 14. When Clinton came in, he lied about the economy being the worst in 50 years. It was nowhere near even bad.

The recession was very small at the time. Democrats knew it, but decided their best chance to win was to bash Bush Sr. about the economy. Unfortunately for the nation, Car Salesman Clinton's lies worked. The public was fooled by a the biggest liar in history who lied to the entire nation about not having sex on national TV.

Clinton then KILLED the economy when all his massive tax hikes fully kicked in. Those tax hikes stifled businesses which lead to job cuts, unemployment and recession.

Most American's then realized Clinton was a disaster for the nation and Voted for Bush over Gore, who should've won in a walk. But since Clinton had been exposed for the liar he was, most people also knew Gore was a dumb dipshit who's father was a neo nazi. Gore nearly killed himself in a panic, running all over the country campainging at taxpayer expense, albeit to no avail when he got so far behind in the polls.

After the election, instead of being a man and conceding, Gore tried to steal it from Bush by using unconstitutional methods. He finally was found to have subverted Florida's state law and the U.S. Constitution in a 7-2 decision buy the USSC, after not winning a single recount. Dimpled chads? Bugg-eyed guy etc... what a disaster for the nation Gore put us through. Gore is still pissed he lost because he's a whiney twit who grew up in hotels, and always will be!

Gore wasted a full month dragging it out. A month that had Bush had for transition, he more than likely would've prevented the terrorists attacks on 9/11 as the report about Al Qeada would've been done a month sooner!

Gore blew it because he's stupid, selfish and arrogant, as are ALL liberals! They all need to be crushed if America is to surive. And they will be!

THOSE ARE THE TRUE FACTS of the entire matter!


Republicans are certainly not the ones living in delusion, quite the contrary. It is liberals who are deluded by their siilly emotions, who fail to understand the facts or see reality for what it is.

Liberals are the Utopian wannabes, always have been and will be. They sit around smoking dope all day long like their parents from the 60's did.

As I've said before, liberals have everything backwards to reality, and that is why they continue losing on everything! Facts are liberal killers!


Enron's Secret Admirers
Enron Had Friends Before Bush/Cheney
TIME Magazine is running a story called "Enron's Democrat Pals" that may upset Democrat plans to use corporate scandal as a platform from which to launch their 'It's the Economy, Stupid II" campaign for the upcoming mid-term elections. TIME, usually sympathetic to the Democrats, yanked the planks, one by one, saying, "Documents obtained by TIME show the energy giant enjoyed much closer ties with Clinton Administration regulators than was generally known.
Long before Cheney's task force met with Enron officials and included their ideas in Bush's energy plan, Clinton's energy team was doing much the same thing. Drafting a 1995 plan to help facilitate cash flow and credit for energy producers, it asked for Enron's input—and listened. The staff was directed to "rework the proposal to take into account the specific comments and suggestions you made," Clinton Deputy Energy Secretary Bill White wrote an Enron official.


Clinton Personally Nixed Plans to Get Bin Laden

Time magazine's "bombshell" report this weekend Clinton himself personally deep-sixed plans for taking out Osama bin Laden long before they reached the Bush team.

As recently as February, in a speech to a Long Island, N.Y., business group, the ex-president described two separate bin Laden attack plans drawn up during the last two years of his administration by his national security and military teams - and explained why he decided not to pursue either one.

The first plan involved a "boots-on-the-ground" assault by U.S. Special Forces on Khandahar of the kind Time says then-National Security Advisor Sandy Berger wanted.

"I actually trained people to do this. We trained people," Clinton told the Long Island Association's Feb. 15 luncheon.

"But in order to do it we would have had to take them in on attack helicopters 900 miles from the nearest boat, maybe illegally violating the airspace of people if they wouldn't give us approval," he explained.

By Clinton's own account, in other words, it was he, and not the Bush administration, that put the kibosh on Berger's "boots-on-the-ground" plan. And he did so for reasons that don't sound particularly well founded in hindsight - fear of "illegally" violating the airspace of Afghanistan's neighbors.

Time also claims that in 2000, the ex-president had dispatched submarines to the northern Arabian Sea. There they waited, ready to attack bin Laden if his coordinates could be determined.

In fact, as Clinton revealed in the same speech six months ago, military planners had indeed determined bin Laden's whereabouts with enough certainty to develop a plan to take him out with a cruise missile attack.

But once again, the ex-president acknowledged, he pulled the plug on the operation - this time because he was afraid innocent Afghans would die in the same attack.

"The only place bin Laden ever went that we knew was occasionally he went to Khandahar, where he always spent the night in a compound that had 200 women and children," Clinton told the business group. (LIE)

"So I could have, on any given night, ordered an attack that I knew would kill 200 women and children, that had less than a 50 percent chance of getting him," he explained, struggling to justify his failure to act.

But it's equally clear, by the ex-president's own words, that the plans with the best chance to succeed in decapitating al-Qaeda before 9-11 were personally rejected by Clinton himself.

Tuesday, November 22, 2005 9:04:00 PM  
Blogger Gayle said...

This is a good post and has obviously brought out the wackos.
You go, Ottman! :)

Ted Kennedy's moonbat response to Cheney's speech is over at Let Our Voices Be Heard. DFKZ, you are politely requested to stay out of there! After reading the bs above I don't want to hear from you.

Wednesday, November 23, 2005 9:00:00 AM  
Blogger Gayle said...

To add to the above: Saint said dfkz was "a little over the top."
A little ? More like to the moon over the top!

Wednesday, November 23, 2005 9:02:00 AM  
Blogger saint said...

On the other hand, Ottman's posts come across like the fanatical rantings of a first-year poli-sci dropout turned conspiracy-theorist, lost in the throes of a perpetual drunken haze.

Not to say that he is exactly that, necessarily, but that is what his comments make him look like.

Wednesday, November 23, 2005 11:11:00 AM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

A clueless gayle said... This is a good post and has obviously brought out the wackos. You go, Ottman! :)

Ottmann is the most extreme wacko I see posting here! According to Ottmann Mr. Clinton was involved in the spread of AIDS, let Osama go on purpose, and had nothing to do with the 8 years of economic prosperity we enjoyed while he was president! Totally crazy accusations which are all 180 degrees from the truth! Ottmann also said that Democrats are greedy and selfish -- which anyone with half a brain KNOWS is completely contrary to everything the Democratic Party stands for!

The deluded moonbat gayle said... Ted Kennedy's moonbat response to Cheney's speech is over at Let Our Voices Be Heard. DFKZ, you are politely requested to stay out of there! After reading the bs above I don't want to hear from you.

From gayle's moonbat blog: Executive priviledge established at the beginning of our nation prevents Congress from viewing the private conversations and briefings of the Executive Branch.

I agree 100% with everything Mr. Kennedy said. The whole reason for bush's super secrecy is that he KNOWS that a lot of what he's doing is illegal, immoral or just plain wrong. American citizens wouldn't stand for it if they knew exactly what that liar was up to.

More lies from Ottmann posted on gayle's moonbat blog: See my current post(s) on Jayson's site. dkfz is a real loon and relies on made-up info from wacko sites like Prision Planet and Conspiracy Planet. I wonder if Teddy does too.

I thought we had this cleared up -- I've never posted here anonymously! Cripes, how much of a moron are you?! This anonymous poster says that ALL presidents are in on the illuminati/masonic conspiracy -- meanwhile I'm defending Mr. Clinton (one of our greatest presidents). Your accusations make absolutely no sense -- even coming from a crazy lunatic like you!

Another raving lunatic post from gayle's moonbat blog: And yet people continue to believe these ghastly lies. That just goes to show that the Democrats really ARE modeling themselves after Hitler. You know, "Tell a lie often enough and it becomes the truth". and all that.

This guy is describing the Republican mantra perfectly! Replace "Democrats" with "Republicans" and he would be 100 percent correct! You know, "Catapult the Propaganda", and all that.

Wednesday, November 23, 2005 12:37:00 PM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

Ottmann lied... CLINTON LIED!!!!!! TO EVERYONE!!!!! ON NATIONAL TV!!!!!!! HE NEVER APOLOGIZED EITHER!!!!!!! BECAUSE HE'S AN ARROGANT S.O.B.!!!!!! HE SHOULD BE HANGED FOR HIS CORRUPTION AND FAILURES!!!!!!!

bush is the liar!!!!!! A corrupt immoral liar!!!!!! He is the one who should be hanged -- for Treason!!!!!!

A CRAZY Ottmann Lied... Gore wasted a full month dragging it out. A month that had Bush had for transition, he more than likely would've prevented the terrorists attacks on 9/11 as the report about Al Qeada would've been done a month sooner!

PURE DELUSION! The report was already finished! Cheney threw it out!

Ottmann lied... It was still the Reagan/Bush economy that created the good parts of the 80s - mid 90's boom, which historians and economist credited to President Reagan, NOT Clinton. Clinton simply rode the Reagan Train which was designed to last a minimum of ten years, topping out in year 14.

The recession was CAUSED by Reagan/Bush I's crazy deficit spending! Clinton turned things around through sound ecomonic policies -- and we enjoyed 8 years of economic prosperity! Then bush II was "elected" and immediately he brings back the disastrous Vodoo Economics -- which is why we are currently headed towards bankruptcy and recession! Right now we are being kept afloat on a TON of foreign debt -- but that won't, and CAN'T last! If a Democrat is elected as our next president (unlikely since the "fix" is already in) he'll be blamed for bush's bungling of the economy!

Those are the True Facts Ottmann!

From the Los Angeles Times: Bush's Way: Discipline, Dollars and Deceit

It was less than a month ago that President Bush and his Republican allies were celebrating a string of legislative triumphs, once again demonstrating Bush's near-infallible ability to get his way. This seems so strange because a virtual consensus has developed that the administration has been utterly incompetent in its planning and execution of the war in Iraq.

So, what gives? How can an administration be so masterful in the way it campaigns and shepherds its legislative agenda, yet so blundering in its conduct of a war? The answer is that Bush's political successes all have three main elements in common, none of which translates well into fighting a war.

The first is massive partisan discipline. Bush's ability to persuade fellow Republicans to swallow their misgivings and back his agenda is uncanny. Fiscal conservatives may balk at huge spending hikes like his 2003 Medicare bill, and deficit hawks may blanch at repeated tax cuts in the face of deficits. But when the vote is on the line, they always capitulate.

In 2003, Ohio Sen. George Voinovich, a traditional fiscal conservative, asserted that rising red ink would "undermine our economy instead of stimulating it", and then proceeded to support a $350-billion tax cut. And even that concession was soon nullified. Republicans bragged about how easy it was to cook the books to comply with Voinovich's limit -- "Numbers don't mean anything", scoffed Tom DeLay -- and yet Voinovich remained on board anyway. In 2001, one GOP representative, Robin Hayes of North Carolina, actually cried after the leadership forced him to vote for a trade bill he disdained.

ELEMENT NO. 2 is massive giveaways to well-organized lobbies. Bush's string of midsummer triumphs -- the energy bill, the transportation bill, CAFTA -- were larded with special provisions for sundry lobbyists. The same holds for Bush's tax cuts, Medicare bill, farm subsidies and various other elements of his agenda. It's easy to get things done if you're willing to empty the federal Treasury and enrich everyone who can afford a K Street lobbyist.

The third element is -- how should I put it? -- lying. The corollary to No. 2 is that a platform of massive tax and spending giveaways to the rich and powerful does not have wide public appeal. Therefore, Bush and his allies have had to systematically misrepresent basic facts about their policies.

Bush insisted that the majority of his tax cut would go to the lowest-earning taxpayers, which is untrue by any definition. He and his administration have repeatedly low-balled the cost of their initiatives. One Bush flunky threatened to fire a government actuary who wanted to release the true cost of the Medicare bill. Thus many Republicans voted "yes" on the strict assurance the bill would not cost a penny more than $400 billion, while the administration knew the real price tag would be about double that.

Alas, none of these tools work as well in Baghdad as they do in Washington. Promising to build a bridge in Muqtada Sadr's district or funnel cash to his campaign is unlikely to mollify the Shiite strongman. Iraqi democracy, in its primitive state, has yet to develop the equivalent of K Street.

When it comes to crafting policies that are good, rather than policies that merely seem good to an inattentive public, the Bush administration turns out to be awful. You can insist that 125,000 troops are enough to reconstruct Iraq, just as you can insist that $400 billion is enough to pay for the Medicare bill. The difference is, the effects of higher federal debt can be obscured for a long time. But when Iraqi reconstruction has essentially halted, some two-thirds of the population lacks employment and terrorists and other armed thugs are roaming freely throughout Iraqi cities, lies can get you only so far. (August 26 2005)

Wednesday, November 23, 2005 1:35:00 PM  
Blogger OTTMANN said...

dkfz is truly insane. HE has literally every part of history wrong and backwards. The facts are what I said, period! No amount of revision can change the facts that democrats suck and republicans are good as proven by economies going back to Carter, who was a total disaster.

Don't even bother reading his stupid biased links, they're all lies from jerks like Move On and other leftist losers who can't deal with reality.

Dems put up a peanut farmer to run the country and he messed it up really, really bad! Thank God for president Reagan who came in and fixed it all, just like Bush has after Clintoon, who was another disaster for the nation. Republican's always fix what democraps screw up! FACT!

dkfz said: "Mr. Clinton was a moderate who did not raise taxes high enough."

MY ASS !!!!! His taxes were so high, it literally killed business in this country and brought on RECESSION!!!!! FACT!!!!!!!!!! NOT LIES as dkfz tries to say. Clinton screwed up bigtime and the nation was left in recession when Bush came into office.

As far as the deficit goes, it's no biggie compared to past ones during wartime.

The way to handle deficits is to grow your way out of them by CUTTING wasteful spending for the lazy bastards like dkfz and his liberal ilk who live off others with government welfare because they're lazy, lazy, lazy morons. YOU DO TO dkfz! Don't lie! You're a pathetically weak person who takes and takes and takes from everyone else while contributing NOTHING but complaints! Whine on loser in denial!

The liberal crap dkfz is trying to sell isn't cutting it with the American people who voted overwhelmingly to reelect pres Bush due to his economic policies and his handling of the war. As I've said numerous time, dkfz doesn't get it and never ever will because he's a fool of epic proportions who only cares about himself.

Hey, dkfz, If you "feel" Clinton didn't raise taxes high enough, then why don't send in all of your money to the damn government, you lying hypocrite?


dkfz said: "Complete the third-worldization of the United States that was begun by Ronald Reagan"

B.S.! Look at France and Germany now. They're screwed because they've adopted socialism to the max and it doesn't work! France's unemployment is more than twice ours now! FACT! Liberals have no clue about running the government.

If you don't like here dkfz, move to France like I said. That's where you belong, with the weak, selfish losers!

dkfz lies again: "Bush insisted that the majority of his tax cut would go to the lowest-earning taxpayers, which is untrue by any definition."

Bush never said that. The tax cuts were across the board! Do you know what that means dkfz? It means taxes were cut on a percentage basis! SO YOU LIED, AGAIN YOU FOOL!

From the Los Angeles Times: ANTOHER DISCREDITED LIBERAL SOURCE JUST LIKE THE NEW YORK TIMES AND CNN. CNN PUTTING AN X OVER CHENEY'S FACE WAS DISGUSTING! BUT IT SHOWS HOW DESPERATE AND WRONG LIBERALS ARE!

Gore wasted a full month dragging it out. A month that had Bush had for transition, he more than likely would've prevented the terrorists attacks on 9/11 as the report about Al Qeada would've been done a month sooner!


Clinton and Gore were the worst for this nation and it's being proven everyday. dkfz is a lost cause and will never be able to deal with reality. He lives in the past and wants to go back to the "Great Society" where government can hold his hand because he can't take of himself! What a loser dkfz really is! The door is wide open dk, use it!

Wednesday, November 23, 2005 2:52:00 PM  
Blogger OTTMANN said...

dkfz,
Do you deny that Gore wasted a full month in his protesting the election in 2000? Of course you do because it proves that Gore's selfishness caused a late start for the Bush administration. That month was critical to the transistion process and Gore messed it up bad because he couldn't stand losing, so he tried in desperation to steal the election anyway he could.

Had Bush had that month, it is more than likely 9/11 would have been prevented because the report on OBL and Al Qaeda would've been ready a month sooner and action would've been taken because Bush knew that Clinton didn't do a damn thing about it for 8 years prior and that OBL had delared war on America twice in the 90's. Clinton basically ignored it so the next president could deal with it. Clinton was a lazy bastard who spent most of time partying at the W.H. and chasing little girls his daughters age.

Wednesday, November 23, 2005 3:05:00 PM  
Blogger OTTMANN said...

"The Clinton Presidency: FALSE Economic Growth"

CLINTON'S ECONOMY = TAX HIKES, DOT COM TECH BUBBLE, POP!, ENRON, MASSIVE UNEMPLOYMENT, RECESSION.

Clintoon's economy is no match for what Bush has done since 9/11, and during two wars. The economy is much stronger now because it is REAL, whereas Clinton's economy was a bubble that popped all over him and left the country in RECESSION!

FACTS are liberal killer!

dkfz can live in his Clinton wet dream while the rest of us deal with reality.

Wednesday, November 23, 2005 3:45:00 PM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

Ottmann Said: The facts are what I said, period!

I knew it! You live in a fantasy world where the "True Facts" are whatever you decide they are!

Ottmann lied... Don't even bother reading his stupid biased links, they're all lies from jerks like Move On and other leftist losers who can't deal with reality.

I have NEVER linked to "Prison Planet". I have NEVER linked to "Moveon.org". Ottmann is following the Republican playbook to a Tee. First Smear, then Hammer your lies home by repeating them OVER AND OVER.

Ottmann lied... Thank God for president Reagan who came in and fixed it all, just like Bush has after Clintoon, who was another disaster for the nation. Republican's always fix what democraps screw up! FACT!

Reagan messed up our country BIG TIME by jacking up the National debt, which wasn't that big before he started practicing his disasterous Vodoo Economics. Clinton did a good job of turning things around, and was even got us to a point where we could begin to pay down the National Debt. Now all Mr. Clinton's acomplishments have been wiped out by another Vodoo Economics nitwit! If another Democrat becomes president he probably won't be able to clean up the HUGE mess that this jerk has made! George bush will leave this country in economic ruin -- for which the Republicans will blame Clinton, or the next Democratic President!

Ottmann lied... As far as the deficit goes, it's no biggie compared to past ones during wartime.

BULLSH|T! bush has borrowed more money then every other president before him COMBINED!! You call this "no big deal"? I call it suicide! But bush doesn't care! His only goal is to give away as much as the government's money as possible -- in the form of pork and corporate welfare -- while cutting taxes for the wealthiest Americans!

Bush's Class-War Budget: First, the facts: bush's budget really does take food from the mouths of babes. One of the proposed spending cuts would make it harder for working families with children to receive food stamps, terminating aid for about 300,000 people. Another would deny child care assistance to about 300,000 children, again in low-income working families.

And the budget really does shower largesse on millionaires even as it punishes the needy. For example, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities informs us that even as the administration demands spending cuts, it will proceed with the phaseout of two little-known tax provisions -- originally put in place under the first President George Bush -- that limit deductions and exemptions for high-income households. More than half of the benefits from this backdoor tax cut would go to people with incomes of more than a million dollars; 97 percent would go to people with incomes exceeding $200,000. (From the New York Times: February 12, 2005)

Ottmann lied... The liberal crap dkfz is trying to sell isn't cutting it with the American people who voted overwhelmingly to reelect pres Bush due to his economic policies and his handling of the war.

More Ottmann LIES. The American public did NOT vote "overwhelmingly" for bush!

From Wikipedia: Although Bush received a majority of the popular vote: 50.73% to Kerry's 48.27%, it was -- percentage-wise -- the closest popular margin ever for a sitting President; Bush received 2.5% more than Kerry; the closest previous margin won by a sitting President was 3.2% for Woodrow Wilson in 1916. In terms of absolute number of popular votes, his victory margin (approximately 3 million votes) was the smallest of any sitting President since Harry S. Truman in 1948. (2004 election)

(Note: The above quote totally ignores the VERY REAL possibility that the election was STOLEN)

Ottmann lied... Gore wasted a full month dragging it out. A month that had Bush had for transition, he more than likely would've prevented the terrorists attacks on 9/11 as the report about Al Qeada would've been done a month sooner!

Mr. Gore wasted time in his attempt to stop bush from STEALING the presidency?! I don't think he fought hard enough!

None Dare Call It Treason by Vincent Bugliosi: In the December 12 ruling by the US Supreme Court handing the election to George Bush, the Court committed the unpardonable sin of being a knowing surrogate for the Republican Party instead of being an impartial arbiter of the law. If you doubt this, try to imagine Al Gore's and George Bush's roles being reversed and ask yourself if you can conceive of Justice Antonin Scalia and his four conservative brethren issuing an emergency order on December 9 stopping the counting of ballots (at a time when Gore's lead had shrunk to 154 votes) on the grounds that if it continued, Gore could suffer "irreparable harm", and then subsequently, on December 12, bequeathing the election to Gore on equal protection grounds. (January 18, 2001)

HELLO MORON! bush and Cheney IGNORED the Clinton Administration's warnings and threw out the Rudman-Hart Report! 9/11 occured because bush screwed up by not taking terrorism seriously!

Against All Enemies: Inside America's War on Terror by Richard Clarke, Amazon.com Editorial Reivew: Clarke, a veteran Washington insider who had advised presidents Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Clinton, and George W. Bush, dissects each man's approach to terrorism but levels the harshest criticism at the latter Bush and his advisors who, Clarke asserts, failed to take terrorism and Al-Qaeda seriously. Clarke details how, in light of mounting intelligence of the danger Al-Qaeda presented, his urgent requests to move terrorism up the list of priorities in the early days of the administration were met with apathy and procrastination and how, after the attacks took place, Bush and key figures such as Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, and Dick Cheney turned their attention almost immediately to Iraq, a nation not involved in the attacks. (Publish Date: March 2004)

Ottmann lied... Clintoon's economy is no match for what Bush has done since 9/11, and during two wars. The economy is much stronger now because it is REAL, whereas Clinton's economy was a bubble that popped all over him and left the country in RECESSION!

bush's economy is being kept afloat on a mountain of foreign debt and a real estate bubble! It won't be pretty when it bursts.

Wednesday, November 23, 2005 7:58:00 PM  
Blogger OTTMANN said...

dkfz,
Clinton never warned Bush about anything. Clinton was pissed Gore failed to steal the election, which meant Clinton would be found out for the liar he is. The un-American liberals working in the White House TRASHED IT before Bush came in on Clinton's orders! Another fact the libs can't stand to face. CLINTON SHOULD BE HANGED AND HE EVEN KNOWS IT, HENCE HIS HEART ATTACK, to which I'd bet he promised anything to live, likely to Satan.

You can screw the national debt because it is nothing compared to how high taxes and high inflation wreak havoc on the economy. The disaster of the Carter administration taught economists' a good lesson on what doesn't work, while the Reagan economy taught what does work. With this next round of a successful economy by Bush, it will put liberal arguments to rest.
For everyone besides dkfz, (hint: time to invest if you haven't already)

The debt is manageable through the federal reserve on debt consolidation paid for by extended bonds over decades. That is how it works! Learn something for once instead of reading garbage from liberal Bush-hating idiots.

This is another lesson you need to learn dkfz, but one in which you won't because you refuse to accept the realities of honest facts given to you.

Your claim of "vodoo economics" is baseless. Just another lame catch phrase for fools like you to suck up. Oh, and have you sent in all your money for the lack of taxes yet? Why not hypocrite?

Clinton turned nothing around. He simply inherited an improving economy. He was lucky because the liberals made him out to be much more than he was, just like they do with celebrities. It's all a big show for liberals who feel they know better than everyone else.

Bush's economy is working fine. Just fine. The liberals have lied to the max about it, but it won't work.

As for deficit you call b.s., you miss the reality again and lie about how much he "borrowed." Congress is the body that appropriates money for the war. The pork you speak of comes from liberal senators who want to bring the bacon home for their constituents, including wasteful programs to keep liberals happy.


The American public did indeed give Bush more votes than any other president in America's history! THAT IS A FACT BEYOND DISPUTE!!!!!!! Kerry lost, period!
Dems lost more seats in congress too and more govenorships... FACTS, baby, FACTS! Accept it and free yourself! Did republican's steal all those votes too? LOL! You're pathetic dkfz, really! You probably "feel" that dems are in the majority because of your made-up liberal polls against Bush and the war. Too funny!

Here is your lie you got from Wikipedia that YOU edited to deceive!: "Although Bush received a majority of the popular vote: 50.73% to Kerry's 48.27%, it was -- percentage-wise -- the closest popular margin ever for a sitting President "

That's a lie. The closest margin was between Bush and Gore in 2000. Caught YOU dkfz revising history again to fit your deceptions.Bush had 51% and Kerry only had 47%. REALITY HURTS DON'T IT?

There is absolutely no evidence at all that Bush stole either election. Democrats are the ones who steal them with votes from dead people, illegal immigrants, convicts and homeless people. WE ALL KNOW THAT! Democrats know they'll lose every election because they're against the people, and more and more people have woken up to that fact. Dems have to cheat because they're evil.


dkfz says: "bush's economy is being kept afloat on a mountain of foreign debt and a real estate bubble! It won't be pretty when it bursts."

Dems have been hoping for a real estate bubble for the past 3 years. It ain't happ'n. The market is however relaxing now as interest rates rise to slow it down, so it's not a bubble. Too bad for the doom and gloom liberals!

It's funny how libs can see an imaginary real estate bubble (that didn't happen), with Bush in office, but fail to see the actual–-HISTORIC FACT bubble Clinton created! Wow talk about living in denial, dkfz likely can't grasp that a war is going on with the economy still able to grow (last reported at 3.8%),
without raising taxes. It blows away the entire democrat game of deception!

Liberals like to make everything into a huge crisis when it isn't. Any foreign debt will surely be paid when Iraq is stable enough to pay US back. That is why we are able to take it on. Countries forgive debt all the time. In fact, America has forgiven way more debt from other countries than any other nation on earth.

dkfz... try thinking for yourself sometime instead of getting all your emotional crap from liberal no-minds!

Until you start dealing in real terms and start seeing the big picture, you'll stay stuck on stupid following Moore and Franken, just where the democrat's want to keep you.

Wednesday, November 23, 2005 9:45:00 PM  
Blogger OTTMANN said...

Remember how liberals panicked about oil prices just a couple of weeks ago? I just paid $2.22/gal. while liberals are still lying that gas prices are at all time highs. Libs are liars, period! See the links for proof....

Stage is set for big market comeback


Stocks Extend Rally on Oil Price Drop, Consumer Confidence

Never listen to whiney liberals like dkfz. He's literally lost!

Wednesday, November 23, 2005 10:13:00 PM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

Ottmann lied... Clinton never warned Bush about anything.

There you go rewriting history again Ottmann! Not to mention the fact that we have been over this before. Still Ottmann persists because he knows that if he repeats his lies often enough someone will believe him! Pathetic!

From the New York Times: Senior Clinton administration officials called to testify next week before the independent commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks say they are prepared to detail how they repeatedly warned their Bush administration counterparts in late 2000 that Al Qaeda posed the worst security threat facing the nation -- and how the new administration was slow to act.

They said the warnings were delivered in urgent post-election intelligence briefings in December 2000 and January 2001 for Condoleezza Rice, who became Mr. Bush's national security adviser; Stephen Hadley, now Ms. Rice's deputy; and Philip D. Zelikow, a member of the Bush transition team, among others. One official scheduled to testify, Richard A. Clarke, who was President Bill Clinton's counterterrorism coordinator, said in an interview that the warning about the Qaeda threat could not have been made more bluntly to the incoming Bush officials in intelligence briefings that he led.

"Until 9/11, counterterrorism was a very secondary issue at the Bush White House", said a senior Clinton official, speaking on condition of anonymity. "Remember those first months? The White House was focused on tax cuts, not terrorism. We saw the budgets for counterterrorism programs being cut". (March 20, 2004)

Ottmann lied... Clinton was pissed Gore failed to steal the election, which meant Clinton would be found out for the liar he is. The un-American liberals working in the White House TRASHED IT before Bush came in on Clinton's orders!

bush was able to steal the election due to the Supreme Court being made up mostly of Republicans! FACT! The White House was NOT trashed. This is just ANOTHER Republican lie!

From the Kansas City Star: No truth in White House vandal scandal, GSA reports. The General Services Administration has found that the White House vandalism flap earlier this year was a flop. The agency concluded that departing members of the Clinton administration had not trashed the place during the presidential transition, as unidentified aides to President Bush and other critics had insisted.

"The condition of the real property was consistent with what we would expect to encounter when tenants vacate office space after an extended occupancy", according to a GSA statement. No wholesale slashing of cords to computers, copiers and telephones, no evidence of lewd graffiti or pornographic images.

Mark Lindsay, who oversaw the transition as Clinton's assistant for management and administration, said he was pleased that the record has been set straight. "Because of President Clinton, this was one of the smoothest transitions in the history of the presidency", he said. "This was nothing more than just lies". (May 17, 2001)

Ottmann lied... Never listen to whiney liberals like dkfz. He's literally lost!

Actually, yes, I have lost a lot of money investing in the stock market. I purchased several hundered shares of stock in a company I used to work for. They WERE doing so well that they had dedicate more employees just to do the hiring. Then I was laid off. Then they did a REVERSE stock split of 5 for 1! They were in danger of being delisted for awhile (per share price below $1). Often, when I check the share prices of my other stocks I notice that the 1 year Target Estimate has gone down. I was going to sell some stock and buy a new car -- but that's currently on hold because I don't want to take such a HUGE loss.

Ottmann lied... I just paid $2.22/gal. while liberals are still lying that gas prices are at all time highs.

Wow, oil prices fluctuate! Who'd of guessed that happens!

Ottmann lied... That's a lie. The closest margin was between Bush and Gore in 2000. Caught YOU dkfz revising history again to fit your deceptions. Bush had 51% and Kerry only had 47%. REALITY HURTS DON'T IT?

Republicans are the ones who are constantly revising history! You, Ottmann, do it almost with every sentence you write! As for the information I posted -- it was a simple cut and paste -- I altered NOTHING! If you disagree why don't you head over to Wikipedia and make some revisions -- although someone else will probably remove your lies pretty quickly.

It figures that you would have a problem with information from Wikipedia -- where they have a Strict NEUTRAL policy -- the only information that is acceptable to you is that which is biased in your favor! FACT!

From MSM Money: Housing Mania will end in Tears. Today's tales of rampant real-estate speculation sound just like what we heard at the peak of the tech bubble. And we all know what happened when that bubble burst.

Of course, what's powering this psychology is the fact that real estate has appreciated mightily. (As one speculator is quoted: "It seems that real estate always goes up.") According to the story, the national median home price has increased by 33% since 2000. I'm sure that virtually everyone reading this has firsthand knowledge of even bigger gains.

Also according to the story, 8.5% of mortgages taken out last year nationally were taken out by people who did not plan to live in these houses. That's up from 5.8% in 2000. Knowing how rough these data are, my guess is it's probably even higher. And it's contrary to what our esteemed bubble-blowing Fed chairman says about real estate not lending itself to a bubble because it's not fungible and people have to live somewhere.

So, at least 8.5% of the market is buying simply because prices are going up -- the very definition of a bubble mentality. In addition, the fact that prices are going up and people are chasing them distorts the very market that underlies the speculative boom -- another classic symptom of a mania.

However, as is the case with all bubbles, this will pop of exhaustion (if it hasn't already). According to data passed along to me by a friend in London, the number of new single-family homes for sale in the United States is now greater than at any time since recordkeeping began in 1963. In addition, the ratio of homes-for-sale to houses-sold has crept back to levels not seen since mid-2000.

And, when the housing bubble does pop, folks will find out about the downside of leverage. The fact that our financial system is so larded up with bank assets (in the form of loans collateralized by real estate) means that the implosion will impact the economy. Then, as soon as lenders start taking hits on real estate, they will tighten up lending standards, exacerbating the problem.

I think it's safe to say that this mania in real estate cannot get too much crazier. Yet, it's not possible to say how much longer it will last. What is 100% knowable: Given all the speculation financed by borrowed money, this will end in tears, and the ramifications will be far-reaching.

In case you're wondering what it might look like, there is a group of islands where there isn't enough real estate for everyone -- and where real-estate prices have declined for 10 years now. It's also home to the world's second-largest economy. It's called Japan.

Thursday, November 24, 2005 8:06:00 AM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

A confused Ottmann lied... That's a lie. The closest margin was between Bush and Gore in 2000. Caught YOU dkfz revising history again to fit your deceptions. Bush had 51% and Kerry only had 47%. REALITY HURTS DON'T IT?

OK, I see where you got confused... Notice that the Wikipedia excerpt I posted says:

it was -- percentage-wise -- the closest popular margin ever for a sitting President... In terms of absolute number of popular votes, his victory margin (approximately 3 million votes) was the smallest of any sitting President since Harry S. Truman in 1948.

Did Ottmann just make an honest mistake? Maybe. I think he should read a little more closely the next time he accuses someone of lying -- or he will end up making himself look foolish -- AGAIN!

BTW this information STILL proves that Ottmann's claim of an "overwhelming" victory for bush in the 2004 election was a LIE!!! Does the truth hurt Ottmann?

Thursday, November 24, 2005 8:31:00 AM  
Blogger saint said...

dkfz: You're wrong!
Ottman: No you're wrong!
dkfz: You're deluded!
Ottman: You're an asshole!
dkfz: Bush is the antichrist!
Ottman: Clintoon was a liar!
dkfz: Only Satanists support the war in Iraq!
Ottman: The war in Iraq never happened!
dkfz: Republicans = Nazis!
Ottman: Democrats = Commies!
dkfz: We have a fictional president!
Ottman: The moon landing never happened either!

---------------------------------

Both of you need to go get a life. Do you honestly think that ANYTHING is being proven here?

Thursday, November 24, 2005 9:02:00 AM  
Blogger OTTMANN said...

Saint,
You're very observant. This could go on and on to no end. dkfz is clearly someone who is dismissive of all facts while pushing conspiracy laden spins from the loonies on the left.

The one thing that is being proven is that liberals on par with dkfz, take no fact as truth.

The facts I've posted are not for dkfz, they're for others who want to read the truth.


For instance, this is a good article on the FALSEHOOD about there being no connection between Saddam and Al Qeada.

No hype needed: Saddam, al-Qaida linked
One of the most frequent charges is that President Bush hyped a non-existent link between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida — and that as a result, we diverted our efforts from finishing off the real terrorists to start a new and costly war to replace a secular dictator.


This charge is false for several reasons — and illogical for even more. Almost every responsible U.S. government body had long warned about Saddam's links to al-Qaida terrorists. In 1998, for example, when the Clinton Justice Department indicted bin Laden, the writ read: "In addition, al-Qaida reached an understanding with the Government of Iraq that al-Qaida would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al-Qaida would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq."


Then in October 2002, George Tenet, the Clinton-appointed CIA director, warned the Senate in similar terms: "We have solid reporting of senior-level contacts between Iraq and al-Qaida going back a decade." Seventy-seven senators apparently agreed — including a majority of Democrats — and cited just that connection a few days later as a cause to go to war against Saddam: " ... Whereas members of al-Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq."

Friday, November 25, 2005 2:06:00 PM  
Blogger Gayle said...

Dfkz said: "A clueless gayle said... This is a good post and has obviously brought out the wackos. You go, Ottman! :)

Ottmann is the most extreme wacko I see posting here! According to Ottmann Mr. Clinton was involved in the spread of AIDS, let Osama go on purpose, and had nothing to do with the 8 years of economic prosperity we enjoyed while he was president! Totally crazy accusations which are all 180 degrees from the truth! Ottmann also said that Democrats are greedy and selfish -- which anyone with half a brain KNOWS is completely contrary to everything the Democratic Party stands for!"

Whatever, Dfkz. I think you are a paid shill and that's why I've banned you from my bloggs. I don't see any sense in arguing with you and will never again waste my time doing so.

By the way, I hope you had a great Thanksgiving. I also hope everyone else here had a great Thanksgiving. I did! :)

Friday, November 25, 2005 2:20:00 PM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

Ottmann lied... Saint, You're very observant. This could go on and on to no end. dkfz is clearly someone who is dismissive of all facts while pushing conspiracy laden spins from the loonies on the left.

You agree with Saint that this arguing is a waste of time, but then continue to argue?! I know what your purpose is... you want all the "true believers" to know exactly what lies they are supposed to believe. Congratulations Ottmann, you're doing a great job spreading Republican lies!

Ottmann said... One of the most frequent charges is that President Bush hyped a non-existent link between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida — and that as a result, we diverted our efforts from finishing off the real terrorists to start a new and costly war to replace a secular dictator.

Yes, that is what happened. Instead of fighting terrorism bush used 9/11 as an excuse to lie us into a war in Iraq because he wanted to erase the "mistakes" his father made!

A clueless gayle said... I think you are a paid shill and that's why I've banned you from my bloggs.

I'd gladly accept money for "disrupting" (as you call it). The problem with your argument is that when someone pays for something they usually expect to get something of value in return!

What would be the point?? Your blog is just a bunch of brainwashed morons agreeing with each other and patting each other on the back! If ANYONE is being paid I think it's Ottmann.

Friday, November 25, 2005 3:58:00 PM  
Blogger OTTMANN said...

Gayle knows exactly what she's talking about, and she knows who the real loon on here is... dkfz.

LOL, dkfz is now rehashing his crap because he has nothing else. Dems have lost again. All you hear from libs now is rehashed lies bashing Bush to make themselves feel better while the decent people living in reality ignore them. Only 3 dems voted to bring the troops home, including Murtha, who is basically being written off by democrats.

Bush is simply doing his job as president, and he's winning. Al Qaeda is history. It's doubtful we will ever hear from Osama bin Laden again because mostly likely he's dead.

Zarqawi's death is only matter of time. The War on Terror is being won, especially as the vote in Iraq takes place in only a few weeks, which is all bad news for democrat's. The economy is set to boom again as shoppers went wild at the stores. Gas prices are way down, while the stock market is way up, and 2006 is looking very good for the economy by all accounts. And all to liberals dismay.

The whiney saps on the left are out in the cold. Just as dkfz's "mother" Cindy Sheenhan is being ignored in her attempted return before a camera.... LOL!

Dems are done! Cya dkfz, have a nice pathetic life, loser.

Friday, November 25, 2005 9:10:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Diogenes in America: Looking for an honest liberal, Part 2: Inherent faith of Liberalism

Faith has become such a dirty word. Whenever you hear it uttered in the political realm, it’s said with disdain for those pitiful evangelicals who need a crutch to survive. Heaven forbid we believe in something greater than our government. But take even a cursory look at liberalism, and you will uncover a system of beliefs that puts blind faith ahead of contrary evidence, proven history and logic.

Whether it’s easy to swallow or not, current liberal philosophies are rooted in the theories of Marx, Hegel and Lenin. All three of these gentlemen have a heavily romanticized and ridiculously idealized view of the lower class. Sure, you can try and throw in a John Meynard Keynes, an FDR or even a Huey Long, but these men were all shaped by the writings of the former. But at its core, liberalism as it exists in America today believes that human nature as it pertains to the impoverish is pure, innocent and eager to succeed. In contrast, they believe the soul of the wealthy is inherently corrupt.

So, what’s my evidence of this? Well, since the passing of the 16th amendment, the government has been consistently eroding the income levels of all its citizens. But after the advent and implementation of the New Deal under FDR, the tax burden that Americans feel has swelled, bulged and exploded. The primary impetus for this growth? Liberalism in America that promotes the government as the solution to all our problems. And what are an over-abundance of these tax-generated dollars being used for? Social programs to help the poor. But, at the heart of these government programs for the poor is one the more basic principles of Marxism: The redistribution of wealth. And, while some of the social programs that were born under the New Deal and flourished in the Great Society are not cut from this Red cloth, a wealth of them are.

The liberals of this country choose to believe in giving our money to people who are dependent on it and will almost automatically mismanage it. No, this does not pertain to the working poor and it does not pertain to that small fraction of the poor who are working to get out of poverty. There will always be exceptions to the rule, and in this case, there are certainly individuals who are trying to succeed. There always have been in America and there always will be individuals who rise from poverty to succeed. This common story is indivisibly woven into the fabric of America. However, these arguments are directed at the plethora of people living on a handout. And, if you don’t believe them to be true, just look at Louisiana for your proof. That state has been run by socialist and democratic philosophies since the 1920s. And what has that produced? Abject poverty and a huge segment of society that’s incapable of taking care of itself. That is the truth of socialism and liberalism.

But, while their faith in the purity of the proletariat is impressive, their faith in the government is staggering. All, I repeat, ALL governments who have become socialist at their core have been overrun with corruption. The people who gain the power are the only ones who control all financial resources. How funny. In a system of government that’s designed to spread wealth to all, it limits wealth to an elite few. It effectively eliminates the middle class and creates a caste of the perpetually poor. So, as it’s trying to help the poor, it’s actually making more of them.

The greater example of socialism in our country today is the disgustingly disproportionate progressive income tax system. During the early 1980s and before our first round of tax reform, many Americans were paying over 50% in income tax. But, that doesn’t include all the countless other taxes these people were paying then and we’re paying now: sales tax, state taxes, gas taxes, food taxes, sin taxes, capital gains taxes, etc, etc, etc. In truth, some people were paying more like 75% in taxes. And, the economic effects of this liberal philosophy were so clearly evident. After the Carter administration, the American economy was in absolute shambles. Unemployment, inflation and gas prices were at an all time high. Why? The people with money were prevented from investing in the economy and were forced to give it to the government instead. This tax system and the fallacies reasoning that produced it are counter-logical, meaning they punish the producers and reward those who do more.

Today, our highest income bracket is truthfully around 40%, a rate that has increased steadily since that time. It’s often been said that the wealthiest 20% in the country bear almost 70% of the tax burden. Think about that. Think about all that money that could be reinvested in industry, used to start companies and create more jobs. Then, look at the alternative: a government that parasitically wastes money takes some, skims a little of the top, pays several bloated salaries and distributes a fraction of it back to the poor. Instead of believing in the power of Capitalism, which consistently has proven itself, liberals choose to follow the path that gives the government more and gives the poor less. The economic impact of an unruly tax burden is not only obvious, it’s crippling.

And sadly, Americans are blind to the real tax burden we face. When we tax industry, who do you think actually pays those costs? It’s definitely not CEO’s and boards of directors of these mega-corporations. No. It’s you and me. They roll the taxes into the price of goods and services, passing them along to consumers. So, when you buy that hammer from Home Depot, you’re paying for the taxes on steel, the taxes on the lumber company who purchased the wood, the property taxes for the land to grow the timber, the environmental taxes levied on the steel mill and the lumber mill, the gas taxes on the trucks, the sales tax on the sale of the hammer to Home Depot and the sales tax when you buy the hammer. And if you don’t think that adds up, you’re not paying attention. Bloated, ridiculous taxes like that don’t just negatively affect the wealthiest 10%, they affect all Americans, even the poor.

Liberalism at its core is blind. It resorts to a system of beliefs that have always resulted in the failure of an economy, the corruption of the government and the relegation of most to poverty. It bankrupted the Soviet Union economically, it drove East Germany into the arms of capitalism and it directed the French into bloody coup after bloody coup after bloody coup. The product of socialism and wealth redistribution is not a better life for all, it is a darker life for most. But this poses a distinct question: why do liberals support pushing our country down a road that has been repeatedly tried and has always lead to failure, poverty, mass loss of life and absolute loss of freedom?

So, the next time you consider liberalism as a viable solution for our social, economic and governmental woes, just think about what it comes from and where it leads. If there’s a liberal out there that can openly discuss these issues and not resort to changing the subject, creating ridiculous absolutes or name-calling, please bring your honest debate to the table. I’d love to hear it. Here

Friday, November 25, 2005 10:38:00 PM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

Excerpts from: Bringing Down a Tyrant

Today, the United States is being subverted and destroyed internally by a criminal, imperialistic ruling cabal controlling the Bush junta. Plutocratic cabals have previously tried to destroy this nation by achieving dominance in political and economic power. Such attempts in the past have resulted in abject failure and in the case we will examine, led to the destruction of the political party that tried to create a dictatorship.

The modern-day "conservative" ideology began with Federalists Alexander Hamilton and John Adams, who claimed that America could achieve stability only if ruled by an aristocracy. America, they said, must allow this governing elite greater power and privilege over what Adams called "the rabble".

John Jay, later to become the first chief justice of the Supreme Court, was elected president of the clandestine Constitutional Convention. His sentiment was a forecast of what the Constitution would establish: "The people who own the country ought to govern it".

To understand how to defeat this present Bush II imperialist junta, we must gain insight from this earlier era of our nation's history. The puppet Bush regime's criminal acts establishing plutocratic rule are all connected, late-arriving events in the evil cabal's overall plan and follow the pattern created by Alexander Hamilton and John Adams.

When Adams was elected President in 1796, the Federalists (philosophically identical to modern-day Republicans) controlled both houses of Congress, the judiciary -- including the Supreme Court -- along with the presidency. (Sound familiar?)

The Federalists were opposed by Vice President Thomas Jefferson's and James Madison's Democratic-Republican Party (now called the Democratic Party). A majority of the American people were waking up to the fact that the Federalists had created a flawed Constitution which established the rule of the wealthy over the poor. It was becoming clear to Jefferson and Madison that the Federalists had established not a representative democracy but an out-and-out plutocracy, with all the power held by one faction.

The Federalists, led by Hamilton, seized control of all branches of power in the federal government: the Presidency, the Congress, and the Judiciary.

The Federalists used the threat of attack by hostile forces as the excuse to enact laws which:

* Branded their political opponents as traitors.
* Made it a crime for American citizens to "print, utter, or publish ...any false, scandalous, and malicious writing" about the Government (The Alien and Sedition Acts).
* Imprisoned their most outspoken verbal critics.
* Allowed aliens to be imprisoned or deported at the whim of the president.
* Had the intent of keeping the Federalists in power indefinitely, perpetuating its control of the government.

The Federalists almost declared war on France through their own bellicosity, not through any real threat to American security. The Federalists only handed over power to the constitutionally-elected President, Thomas Jefferson, after the Federalist-controlled House of Representatives had prolonged the process through 36 ballots, leading Jefferson to wonder, understandably, if the Federalists were going to retain control of the government illegally.

So our challenge is to make sure "the people are well-informed" so they can set things right. But the Democratic-Republican party would not have defeated the Federalist-Adams tyranny if they had not fielded a strong, viable presidential candidate in 1800 and made sure the election was fair. Today, we must rid the nation of the criminal cabal's stranglehold on the nation and reinstitute the tradition of Jefferson, Franklin Roosevelt, and John Kennedy, turning the tyrants out.

In 1799, the Federalist party had gained an increased majority in both houses of Congress and had tightened its grip on the American mind through warmongering, fomenting super-patriotism, and silencing its enemies by enforcing the unconstitutional Sedition Act. But within one short year, the totalitarian Federalist regime was swept out of office and a new era of freedom began. We must make certain the same thing happens again in America. We must bring down the tyrants again!

By Norman D. Livergood

Excerpts from: Brainwashing America

New propaganda slogans are being overtly and subliminally implanted by Bush and his gang through their speeches and actions:

* Dissent is treason.
* Constitutional liberties are less important than security.
* The "war on terrorism" excuses any attack on civil liberties.
* The Bush administration has the right and the duty to bring about "regime change" in any nation it chooses.
* The economy is basically sound.
* Only a few bad apples are found in the corporate barrel, which requires no new oversight laws.
* If Bush and Cheney say they're not guilty of corporate crimes, then believe it and shut up.
* It's okay to lie about weapons of mass destruction as a pretext of starting a pre-emptive war against Iraq.
* The election in 2004 was completely fair and legal.
* Karl Rove can out a CIA agent and not have to face any legal repercussions.
* Using the Republican Party strangle-hold on the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government to institute a dictatorship is okay.

By Norman D. Livergood

Lessons to be learned:

* The Republicans are on the way out (provided the 2008 election isn't fixed, or bush doesn't seize power and institute martial law following another terrorist attack).
* Ottmann has been completely and thoroughly brainwashed.

Saturday, November 26, 2005 9:19:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

New propaganda slogans are being overtly and subliminally implanted by Democrat's and their gang of liberals through their speeches and actions:

* Dissent is patriotic.
* Constitutional liberties are more important than security.
* The "war on terrorism" excuses any attack by terrorists.
* The Clinton administration has the right and the duty to bring about "appeasement policy" in any nation it chooses.
* The economy is terrible.
* Only a few bad apples are found in the corporate barrel, which requires democrats to ignore them.
* If Clinton and Gore say they're not guilty of corporate crimes, then believe it and shut up.
* It's okay to lie first about weapons of mass destruction as a pretext of starting a pre-emptive war against Iraq.
* The election in 2004 was completely unfair and illegal because the exit polls were correct.
* Karl Rove can out a CIA agent and not have to face any legal repercussions because Plame was not covert at the time and everyone in Washington knew it.
* Using the Republican Party majority on the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government to kill social-liberalism is okay.


Lessons to be learned:

* The Democrats are way out (provided the 2008 election isn't fixed, or Clinton, Kerry, Dean doesn't seize power and institute martial law following a liberal muckracking of a conservative candidate using their liberal media).
* dkfz has been completely and thoroughly screwed.

Monday, November 28, 2005 1:03:00 PM  
Blogger Bushcheney08 said...

right on anonymous

Monday, November 28, 2005 1:50:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

dj;kfausrthgkbjdnou;awerhnvgkjfgbvhaoe;iguhsf; NWO NWO NWO djskfhsdkjghjkghskjg ORDO AB CHAO kjldsfgaoiurghfkjghuirgkjsdhfgkjsdh NEW WORLD ORDER dsjkfhksdjhjkvhsauvn ZIONISM

Monday, November 28, 2005 2:39:00 PM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

Ottmann made a number of mistakes in his "opposite" post above:

There is no "Clinton Administration" to to institute an "appeasement policy". Mr. Clinton served TWO terms and wasn't able to run again -- although he most likely would have been elected for a third term if he had been able to run.

Why would a Democrat say Mrs. Plame wasn't covert? I thought these were supposed to be DEMOCRATIC propaganda slogans. Whoops! Guess you screwed up on that one Ottmann!

Same problem with the last Democratic "propaganda slogan". Why would Democrats say killing "social-liberalism" is OK?

Ottmann -- If you're going to make a joke out of someone's post you should at least GET IT RIGHT!

Lessons to be learned

* "People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both" (Benjamin Franklin)
* The Presidency was awarded to bush in 2000 because Republicans on the Supreme Court stopped the recount that would have shown Al Gore to be the winner.
* Diebold "delivered" the Presidency for bush in 2004.
* Neither a former President, a former presidential canidate, nor the Chairman of the DNC can declare Martial Law.
* The "Liberal Media" Myth is another lie concocted by Republicans.
* Ottmann is a brainwashed moron.

Monday, November 28, 2005 3:38:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Karl Rove can out a CIA agent and not have to face any legal repercussions."
"Why would a Democrat say Mrs. Plame wasn't covert? I thought these were supposed to be DEMOCRATIC propaganda slogans."


Democrats convicting Republicans before charges, indictments or trial = Dictatorship!

Is she Mrs. Plame or Ms. Wilson? CIA u/c status expired.


The media is 95% liberal, 5% conservative.

Numbers Never Added Up for Gore
"You don't have to get snippy about it," Vice President Al Gore reportedly snapped to Texas Gov. George W. Bush on election night 2000. Bush's margin of victory had dwindled, and Gore decided to retract his concession at 3:30 a.m. Minutes later, William Daley, Gore's campaign manager, broke the news to the rain-soaked supporters of Gore and his running mate, Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-Conn). "The TV networks called this race for Governor Bush. It now appears that their call was premature," he said. "This race is simply too close to call, and until the recount is concluded and the results in Florida become official, our campaign continues."

The results do, though, rebuke some of the conspiracy theories of late 2000, including the assertion that the only votes that mattered were those of the nine justices of the U.S. Supreme Court. In fact, the results suggest that, more than ever, Americans should be thankful that the high court stepped in with a ruling that in effect put an end to the election circus in Florida.

So the U.S. Supreme Court did what landslide majorities of Americans had told pollsters they wanted it to do: resolve the case. The high court ruled that such bizarre vicissitudes as counting dimpled chads as votes in one county but not in another violated the constitutional notion of equal protection of voters' rights.

But even when the results in Florida became official, the recounting didn't stop. It went on for more than a year, with the last media recount trickling in Nov. 12 — 340 days after voters went to the polls. It was a year few Americans will forget. Now that the ballots have been counted and recounted, in some cases half-a-dozen times, can America expect some closure to the great Florida fiasco?

According to Michael Barone, closure to Florida and Bush's legitimacy had nothing to do with the media recounts. "By the time the last recount came out, it was irrelevant."

Some Hollywood types even threatened to move to France if the Florida recount were decided in Bush's favor. For 36 days after the election, the country — indeed the entire world — was assigned to the role of spectator in the great recount spectacle.
At the end of that first official recount, Bush's lead had held, with a margin of victory of less than 400 votes. After the overseas absentee ballots were tabulated, even though the Gore camp managed to disqualify some 1,420, Bush's lead increased to 930 votes.

But Democrats were claiming that confusing ballots, including the infamous butterfly ballot of Palm Beach County, had spoiled many votes. The Gore camp argued that the canvassing boards should be able to determine the voter's intention on so-called "undervotes," ballots where the voting machines didn't register a preference. Court-mandated recounts were soon under way in Democratic counties such as Miami-Dade, Palm Beach, Broward and Volusia, enclaves where Gore hoped to find more votes.

But only three of the four counties met the new certification deadline. In Palm Beach County, the canvassing board declared that it wouldn't be able to get its figures in by the deadline. On Sunday, Nov. 26, 2000, Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris certified Bush as the winner of Florida's 25 electoral votes. This time the winning margin in Florida was 537 votes. Despite several recount attempts that number would hold and, on Dec. 12, 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court effectively ended all pending recounts. The next day, Gore finally conceded for good.

In April, the liberal papers Miami Herald and USA Today completed the first comprehensive study of undervotes. They concluded that Bush would have widened his 537-vote victory to a 1,665-vote margin if the recount mandated by the Florida Supreme Court had continued. Bush would have won even using standards that Gore favored, namely counting faintly dimpled undervotes.

It wasn't until Nov. 12, more than a year after Election Day, that NORC announced that Bush still would have won. Having spent more than $900,000 on its study, NORC aimed to "provide a historical record for one of the most remarkable presidential elections in U.S. history."

The New York Times conceded that "George W. Bush would have won even if the United States Supreme Court had allowed the statewide manual recount of the votes that the Florida Supreme Court had ordered to go forward." According to NORC, Gore would only have won had he focused on the "overvotes," those ballots where two marks were made for president. But the Gore team never asked for a statewide recount of overvotes. The study determined that a count of all undervotes in the state would have left Bush ahead of Gore by 430 votes. As the Wall Street Journal editorial page noted, "the outcome proves the point we and others were making all along, which is that you can't change election rules after the votes have been cast." As for the DNC's McAuliffe, he remained silent when the study of the final recount was released. The DNC declined to issue a press release.

Some partisans will never let go. For the majority of Americans, though, the results of the new research should help put the election debate over Florida even further in the rearview mirror.

Gore lost, get over it.

Monday, November 28, 2005 9:00:00 PM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

Ottmann/Anonymous said... Democrats convicting Republicans before charges, indictments or trial = Dictatorship!

uh, hello moron! -- nobody's been convicted... YET. There are numerous trials coming up!

Remember George W. Bush is the guy who said, "If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator". (CNN Transcripts Transition of Power: President-Elect Bush Meets With Congressional Leaders on Capitol Hill - Aired December 18, 2000 - 12:00 p.m. ET)

Ottmann/Anonymous said... Is she Mrs. Plame or Ms. Wilson? CIA u/c status expired.

What OFFICIAL source does this come from EXACTLY?? I think you should get in touch with Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald immediately! Obviously nobody told him that Mrs. Plame's covert status had expired, thus "outing" her was not a crime. As to what last name Mrs. Plame prefers to be refered to by -- why don't you give her a call as well? Do you have something against a woman using her maiden name?

Ottmann/Anonymous said... The media is 95% liberal, 5% conservative.

That is a TIRED Republican lie!

Ottmann/Anonymous said... According to Michael Barone, closure to Florida and Bush's legitimacy had nothing to do with the media recounts. "By the time the last recount came out, it was irrelevant". Gore lost, get over it.

No, I am not going to "get over it". I will continue to believe that the election was most likely stolen -- because the facts and coverup support it.

Also, you still screwed up your "opposite" post by mixing in lies Republicans would tell with your "Democratic propaganda slogans".

Tuesday, November 29, 2005 11:01:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

From a democrat? Our Troops Must Stay

Suddenly the democrat's are calling for our troops to STAY in Iraq. Why would they do that? Because president Bush will soon make an announcement democrat's have claimed they've wanted, but in reality have feared... that troops will begin leaving Iraq after the December elections.

This leaves democrats in a mess with nothing to even whine about anymore. Democrat's have offered nothing substantial to move the country forward in the last five years after losing all three branches of government.

The scramble to come up with a viable alternative to the GOP congress will keep democrat's busy through next year, but they have little hope of making any inroads.

Do democrat's have any ideas at all besides raising taxes? Their attempt to copy the GOP with tax cuts will surely backfire, making them look that much weaker and hypocritical.

As the troops come home and Iraq becomes a solid democratic government, democrats here at home will be left holding the bag filled with their anti-war rantings.

With no war to whine about, democrats will once again lose the 2006 mid-term elections as president Bush's approval numbers increase dramatically.

A poll by the liberal Democracy Corps confirmed that, despite a collapse in support for Bush and Congressional Republicans and tangible Democratic advantages on key issues, Democrats still do not have enough public trust to secure a net gain of 15 seats for a House takeover.

With the troops coming home and Iraq's rebuilding taking shape, democrats will have even less public trust, having again been proven wrong about the war. The public will be reminded of the democrat's false comparison to Vietnam, especially by Illinois Senator Dick Durbin, who's rant was reprehensible and totally irresponsible from a representative of the Untited States.

"Voters are deeply discontented on Iraq, the economy, gas prices and health care, with corruption and [GOP] failure to address problems," Democratic strategists James Carville and Stan Greenberg wrote in a widely distributed memo Nov. 14.

Well, Carville can dream can't he?

And yet, in a generic Congressional ballot test, Democrats lead Republicans 48 percent to 40 percent, "not good enough to win control," the strategists said.


Democrats now are viewed favorably by 39 percent of voters and unfavorably by 39 percent, Democracy Corps reported - well short of the favorable situation that prevailed in 1993 before the GOP took control of Congress in 1994. Then, favorable attitudes toward the GOP were 13 percent ahead of unfavorables.

Looks like Republican's will control the government for the next few decades at least. Praise the Lord!

Tuesday, November 29, 2005 1:01:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

More bad news for the left...

Consumer Confidence Soars As Gas Prices Fall
Tuesday, Nov. 29, 2005


NEW YORK -- Consumer confidence soared in November as declining gasoline prices contributed to a stronger-than-expected reading that could bode well for the holiday shopping season.



The Conference Board said Tuesday that its Consumer Confidence Index rose to 98.9 this month from 85.2 in October. Analysts had expected a reading of 90. The better-than-expected results reversed a two-month decline.



"A decline of more than 40 cents in gasoline prices this month and the improving job outlook have combined to help restore consumers' confidence," Lynn Franco, director of The Conference Board Consumer Research Center, said in a statement.



"While the index remains below its pre-Katrina levels, the shock of the hurricanes and subsequent leap in gas prices has begun wearing off just in time for the holiday season," Franco said.



One component of the report, which examines consumers' views of the current economic situation, rose to 114.0 from 107.8. The expectations index, which measures consumers' outlook over the next six months, surged to 88.8 from 70.1 last month.



Economists closely track consumer confidence because consumer spending accounts for two-thirds of U.S. economic activity.



The Conference Board index is derived from responses received through Nov. 16 to a survey mailed to 5,000 households in a consumer research panel. The figure released Tuesday include responses from at least 2,500 households.



Consumers' assessment of present-day conditions improved in November. Those claiming business conditions are "good" increased to 25.5 percent from 23.3 percent. Those claiming conditions are "bad" decreased to 17.3 percent from 18.4 percent. Labor market conditions also appear to be improving. Consumers saying jobs are "hard to get" decreased to 23.2 percent from 25.3 percent, while those claiming jobs are "plentiful" was virtually unchanged at 20.8 percent.



Consumers' outlook for the next six months is considerably more upbeat. Those expecting business conditions to worsen decreased to 11.7 percent from 18.5 percent. Those expecting business conditions to improve rose to 18.8 percent from 14.1 percent.



The outlook for the labor market is also more optimistic. Those expecting more jobs to become available in the coming months increased to 14.2 percent from 12.3 percent, while those expecting fewer jobs fell to 17.7 percent from 24.0 percent in October. The proportion of consumers anticipating their incomes to increase in the months ahead improved to 20.9 percent from 17.4 percent last month.


And now this....

Sales of New Homes Up 13 Percent in Oct.

Tuesday, November 29, 2005 1:15:00 PM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

Ottmann/Anonymous said... Looks like Republican's will control the government for the next few decades at least. Praise the Lord!

I think you mean Satan.

House prices: After the fall. From The Economist: By the time American prices begin to fall, probably sometime next year, they will not be Mr Greenspan's headache. He will have retired and someone else will be in his job. If weaker house prices push the economy towards recession, the awkward truth is that America's policymakers will have much less room to manoeuvre than they did after the stockmarket bubble burst. Short-term interest rates of only 3% leave less scope for cuts. In 2000, America had a budget surplus. Today it has a large deficit, ruling out big tax cuts.

The whole world economy is at risk. The IMF has warned that, just as the upswing in house prices has been a global phenomenon, so any downturn is likely to be synchronised, and thus the effects of it will be shared widely. The housing boom was fun while it lasted, but the biggest increase in wealth in history was largely an illusion. (June 16, 2005)

Housing bubble's burst could cost 1 million jobs and cause a recession, experts say. From The North County Times: If housing prices decline sharply, the effects could be broad. Lehman estimates one-third of the past year's U.S. economic growth was a consequence of the housing boom. Housing construction is equal to 5 percent of the national economy.

A downturn in housing could mean more than 1.3 million lost jobs, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. predicts, bumping up the national unemployment rate by 1 percent and the unemployment rate in house-mad California by 2 percent. Those numbers don't include likely job cuts in housing-dependent businesses, such as banking, furniture and building materials.

The Center for Economic and Policy Research predicts worse, saying a bubble burst would mean the loss of 5 million to 6.3 million jobs.

The housing run-up has financed consumer spending, creating more than $5 trillion in bubble wealth, the center estimates. Consumers have used "cash-out" mortgages to pay for everything from new kitchens to college tuition.

A final nightmare scenario: A federal bailout of the mortgage market is likely if housing crashes, the center predicts. So, if corporate pension funds continue to falter and this dire prediction does come true, the Feds could conceivably be holding your mortgage and your pension. (November 12, 2005)

Is the world's oil running out fast? From BBC News: How long will the oil keep flowing? If you think oil prices are high at $40 a barrel then wait till they are four times that much. How will you pay to run your car? How will you get the children to school? How will you heat your house? How much will transported food go up in price?

How will we pay for plastics, metals, rubber, cheap flights, Simpson's DVDs, 3G phones and everlasting economic growth?

The basic answer is, we won't. This is the message from the Association for the Study of Peak Oil (ASPO). The group of oil executives, geologists, investment bankers, academics and others has been warning the world of high oil prices, and the ensuing fallout, for some years now. It includes a diverse range of oil industry insiders.

People like Ali Bakhtiari, head of strategic planning at Iran's National Oil Company (NOIC), Dr Colin Campbell, a former executive vice president of Total-Fina, and Matthew Simmons, an energy investment banker and adviser to the controversial Bush-Cheney energy plan.

They are united by one idea, that global oil production is about to peak, which in turn will signal the permanent end of cheap oil. And they warn that this is the foundation of the current rise in oil prices.

"Oil is far too cheap at the moment," says Mr Simmons. "The figure I'd use is around $182 a barrel. We need to price oil realistically to control its demand. That is because global production is peaking". (June 7, 2004)

Tuesday, November 29, 2005 2:47:00 PM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

Hubbert peak theory From Wikipedia: Severe economic turbulence will be precipitated by the realization of Wall Street bankers that "peak oil" (and natural gas) is a real phenomenon and either upon us or behind us. Significant indications of economic volatility have manifested themselves in the largest increase in inflation rates in 15 years (Sept. 2005), which were due mostly to higher energy costs. Since natural gas is the single largest feedstock (raw material) used to produce fertilizers, food costs are set to be dramatically higher next year (2006). This situation is exacerbated by exploding transportation costs as well. It should only be a (short) matter of time before this is fully recognized by investors.

The economic implications, however, do not end with higher food costs, or even greater levels of inflation. The situation is made even more dire by a number of confounding factors, which include: (1) US federal deficits of nearly $8 trillion (2) The impending retirement of the baby-boomer generation (3) Dependence of the largest employers in the US on cheap, abundant, and immediately available forms of energy (i.e. General Motors, Ford, the airline industry, "big-box" stores, etc.--essentially, the backbone of the entire American economy) (4) Burgeoning middle-class debt through credit cards and inflated housing prices (5) Concentration of food production in the hands of several oligopolic agri-businesses (lack of local production capabilities).

The Real Reasons for the War With Iraq -- A Macroeconomic and Geostrategic Analysis of the Unspoken Truth: Although completely unreported by the U.S. media and government, the answer to the Iraq enigma is simple yet shocking -- it is in large part an oil currency war. One of the core reasons for this upcoming war is this administration's goal of preventing further Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) momentum towards the euro as an oil transaction currency standard. However, in order to pre-empt OPEC, they need to gain geo-strategic control of Iraq along with its 2nd largest proven oil reserves. The second coalescing factor that is driving the Iraq war is the quiet acknowledgement by respected oil geologists and possibly this administration is the impending phenomenon known as Global "Peak Oil." This is projected to occur around 2010, with Iraq and Saudi Arabia being the final two nations to reach peak oil production. The issue of Peak Oil has been added to the scope of this essay, along with the macroeconomics of "petrodollar recycling" and the unpublicized but genuine challenge to U.S. dollar hegemony from the euro as an alternative oil transaction currency.

From the Roman Empire to today, the propaganda tactics for war as discussed by Hermann Goering remain effective. It is deplorable that even in the US or UK, people can always be "brought to the bidding of the leaders". It is New Years Day, almost nine months since the invasion of Iraq. The American people are slowly realizing how much they were misled about this war.

Tuesday, November 29, 2005 3:15:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"uh, hello moron! -- nobody's been convicted... YET. There are numerous trials coming up!"

According to liberals, the entire Republican party has been found guilty without a trial. Liberals have already convicted Tom DeLay, VP Cheney, Scooter Libby, and the president, having insisted on their guilt about everything going wrong for them in the world. All one has to do is read their blogs and liberal commentary in the media, and right here by the shill dkfz.


"If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator".

uh, hello moron! Again, liberals miss the meaning entirely! Democrat's have no idea when someone is using an OBVIOUS (to all but libs) metaphor. Bush was referring to the job of being president in a democracy is much tougher than that of a dictator like Saddam. Notice he didn't say he wanted to be a dictator, as liberals READ into it. Also note that as president, he has removed two dictators FROM power using our military power granted by the Constitution of the United States Congress. Another document liberals can't stand, as it requires accountability and protection of individual freedom.

Reagan replaced communism with democracy in Russia and liberals whined, bitched and moaned about it. Many still do. Bush is Replacing the dictators with democracy, as will happen Dec. 15th. Liberals are whining about it just like they did about Russia, proving liberals can't stand living in freedom because they just don't have a clue about running their pathetic lives on their own, thus hoping instead for a nanny state to hold their hand.


"Obviously nobody told him that Mrs. Plame's covert status had expired, thus "outing" her was not a crime. As to what last name Mrs. Plame prefers to be refered to by -- why don't you give her a call as well? Do you have something against a woman using her maiden name?"

Was Plame married to her father thus making her Mrs.? Mrs. Plame is Valery's mother.

Ms. is the correct abbreviation for Plame's maiden name.

And they say Bush can't talk? Geesh!



Emotionally stunted liberals rely on unproven theories based on gloom and doom stories created to keep the losers believing in their wasted lives while the rest of society continues progressing without them.

Ottmann was correct about dkfz, who is a primo example of what such a loser who can't get out of the past, and won't see reality for what it is, sounds like.

As it just happened in Canada, the liberal party in the U.S. is also basically toast. While debating and trashing the war that is nearly won, liberals unwittingly continue dragging down the democrats to their ultimate demise.

Liberal/Socialism having outlived its usefulness from past decades, has certainly lost favor thoughout most of the world today, being proven grossly ineffective in modern society.


The liberals only hope is that the European Union will continue on its current path to rule the nations of the world through globalism based on the newly revived 1995 Barcelona agreement, and that America succumbs to their wishes.

This very important (end time) agreement was initiated by Javier Solana the EU's high representative for the Common Foreign & Security Policy (CFSP), who said during his recent speech: "So I am pleased that the EU will launch a so-called governance facility. This will not be a cosmetic initiative, but one that, over seven years, will offer several hundred million euros to those countries that are making the greatest efforts concerning governance reform. They can then spend the extra money on the priorities they have set themselves. This is what I call a true partnership for political reform."

Partners reaffirm their commitment to achieve a just, comprehensive and lasting settlement consistent with the Road Map and principles of the Madrid Conference including land for peace and based on relevant UNSC resolutions, including 242, 338 and 1397 and take note of recent regional developments and initiatives, including the Beirut Arab Peace Initiative.

Partners also call for the reinvigoration of efforts to promote progress in the Middle East Peace Process on all tracks, Palestinian, Syrian and Lebanese.

The Barcelona Process provides an important contribution to promoting progress in the Middle East Peace Process and to furthering mutual understanding, even if it is not the forum in which a settlement will be reached. They call for the rapid and full implementation of the Road Map and encourage the parties to continue on the path of direct dialogue and negotiation in the fulfilment of the vision of two states, a safe and secure Israel and a viable, sovereign, contiguous, democratic Palestine, living side by side in peace and security. Final status issues have to be agreed by the parties.

They recognize that major changes have occurred in the European Union and internationally since the Barcelona Declaration was signed in 1995.

The EU has launched the European Neighbourhood Policy to reinforce and complement the Barcelona Process. The EU has also developed the European Security and Defence Policy on which a dialogue has been initiated with Mediterranean partners. They also recall Turkey’s special situation as a candidate country and a member of the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership.


Notice that it is not Bush who's making this happen. Javier Solana is!

A seven-year agreement. (Dan. 9:27)

They're now saying "Peace and Safety!" Which means sudden destruction is near. (2 Thessalonians 5:1-3)

Tuesday, November 29, 2005 8:30:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Lookie here...

Can a Third Party Save Us From a Neocon Doom?

Robert Schumacher | November 30 2005

Unchecked “neconservative” power in the United States over the past six years has brought us to bloody international warfare, attempted to establish a technological and executive police state, and helped rush out of America any industry that can be moved to foreign places whose pitiful social conditions generate big profits for a privileged few of our citizens. We have seen the GOP under neocon rule change its flags from the standard of the “old republic” to that of a new empire, the power thrust of an elite corporate globalism. Neocons seem to be at odds with the traditions of the republican party, whose constituency is largely middle class traditionalists of every faith and variety. At the head of the GOP today are wealthy corporate-backed globalists, whose policies primarily revolve around growing rich on the economies of the world. These are a very small minority of the GOP, yet they command most of of the power. Far outnumbering these wealthy interests is middle America, who still hold it a virtue to place “America First” and deal with the rest of the world accordingly.

I, like many others who called themselves republican during the Regan years, became disillusioned with the GOP once we sensed the change of guard under H. W. Bush. We weren't alone – nearly 1/3 of the country at one time backed Ross Perot's Reform ticket during the 1992 presidential election. That's a lot of republicans who were ready to bolt back then, and I trust these same folks are waiting for another opportunity to do so. Obviously, the energy needed to form a third party has not yet emerged from the inertia of the past, but the conditions of the past few years could propel this change into being.

Like many other GOP expatriates, I flirted with libertarianism, but failed to find true representation in it. What was left for us? The bicameral system of liberal vs. conservative is a discredited sham, and should be understood by all citizens to be so. It is a “red vs. blue” machine, a treadmill for the masses to move; a system operated by powerful groups that grow stronger and stronger behinds the scenes of the charade. The message so far to the people by our corporate media as been, as poor Dorothy came to hear in the palace of the Great Oz: “Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!” Wake up middle class America, we cannot afford to ignore these things anymore!

Neoconservatism in practice is rooted in the notion that our national policies should be whatever is advantageous for large corporations and the generation of wealth, and applies our might and influence in the world for such gain. Has any republican asked themselves why this administration demands that we do business with China? No one is foolish enough to think China a friend of the American people. Does anyone really think it wise to supply and enrich an antagonistic, tyrannical slave-state who has nuclear weapons pointed in our direction? I cannot understand how the average GOP voter overcomes this astonishing hypocrisy within their own leadership. If you look behind economic policies of this neocon administration, you can see the shadows of such groups as the CFR and the Trilateral commission, who advocated a “new world order” long before Bush Sr. publicly spoke of such a thing. It is the suspicious international aims of these kinds of groups that helped drain the industrial lifeblood of America. In fact, the loss has already happened: Industrial jobs have collapsed from 20% of the economy in 1980 to only about 14% today. In 1960, industrial work was around 40% of the entire economy! This uncontrolled bleeding was hurried along by the squeezing of those whose mantra was “interdependence of nations”, “collective understanding,” and “free trade” - which in practice is for the monopoly of a few to overstep the oversight and power of freely elected national governments. Those are the true fathers of the neoconservative movement, men who loved a fantasy of global economic empire for a few corrupt, unapproachable dynasties more than the liberty of their own people.

Americans, globalists are not your friends. Internationalism is not the policy of those friendly to the liberty and industry of this nation, nor was it ever. These aims serve the few, at the great expense of the many, and have shown themselves willing to lie, steal, and kill to achieve their aims. These men have shown all through the 20th century and now into the 21st that they will not stop until our nation is under the power of international concerns, and our middle class brought down penniless into serfdom, as our ancestors in Europe were. So much for our renegade ancestors throwing off the murderous tyranny of those who would rule our destinies on this continent – their modern day equivalents seek a whole new level of power over us, and desire to remove our blood-won birthright from us all. True conservatism is the opposite of neoconservatism; just as true patriotism is the opposite of the “patriot act and all of the nightmarish specters of a totalitarian police state contained in it.

No conservative American ever desired a world government, economic or otherwise. It is something that has always caused conservatives to recoil, because they know inwardly that it is bad for this country. I, like all middle Americans prefer to keep our factories and jobs in America, but neocon leadership has greased the skids for sending them to India, China, or whomever else can offer a slave-wage advantage. How is it possible that middle America, the core of the GOP, continue to support those who allow (openly and without any shame whatsoever!) the shutdown of whole industries; firing tens, even hundreds of thousands of Americans – only to help these very same companies open up new factories overseas, and then sell those shoddy products back to the same families they robbed the jobs from in the first place? Not to mention the self-destructive immigration policies of the neocons – does anyone really buy the line that these people are taking jobs that Americans aren't willing to take? Those jobs should first go to Americans, and our national boarder was drawn for that very reason long ago! This is our land, and this is our bounty. At the rate we are losing our industries to the greed of these globalist traitors, it won't be long before Americans are again clamoring for any work like our grandfathers did in the 1930's. It is time to realize that the neoconservative movement is bad for republicans, bad for the economy, and will have dire consequences for America as a whole.

Certainly it is obvious to even those who believe Fox News Corp is a “fair and balanced” view of the world that a nation who loses industry after industry to third world countries is headed for trouble. It should infuriate the true core of the GOP that it is their own leadership that has paved the way for this to occur! Yet why is it that these same patriotic, nationalistic people continue to ignore the behavior of their new leadership?

Naturally, globalism and its policies are incompatible with conservative nationalism, which is the traditional platform of the GOP. Nationalism directs us to protect our industries, keep Americans employed in American factories, guard our boarders and lessen our involvement in other nations, and to check the tendency of wealthy groups and individuals to overstep the bounds of national governments and form powerful unions of their own advantage. Those who vote the GOP ticket need to understand the difference that has arisen between their leadership, and themselves. They are, if anything, adversaries of what their own people have always stood for.

Realizing this, it becomes easy to see a fault line developing in the GOP, one threatening to rupture at any time. Conservatives everywhere are beginning to understand how closely the Bush administration has brought us to a police state, in a time when there is no real danger the land and liberty of the United States. Buildings can be rebuilt, even capitals if need be; governments can be selected again and the business of the government will continue. No terrorist, no matter how violent and ingenious would ever be able to “take America down.” But once our liberty is foolishly traded away for a false security, it will never come back.

No true republican can ever say they were delighted in discovering the nation was likely deceived into going to war. This has led to a rapid decline of the approval of G. W. Bush and company (37% as of Nov. '05, and still heading due south), forcing the GOP to confront the citizens' just indignation at necon chicanery and its bloody legacy.

There are clearly two distinct entities within the GOP today, that of the neocons, and that of the conservative nationalists. These two entities cannot logically exist in the same party for long – it's like a mixture of oil and water and will separate on its own once the bottle stops shaking. So what is constantly shaking the bottle into confusion? Entities such as Fox News Corp, Rush Limbaugh, and other mass media outlets are how this is done. In frightening lockstep with one another, the major media players of the western world have all seemingly agreed to support the neocons, no matter how false or bloody their polices become. It is difficult to find anyone willing to challenge the policies of this administration in the mainstream media. Events and news all seem to be following the same script handed down from on high, all of it promoting the dastardly policies of men and women who desire to change the order of the world. Their “new order” would remove the power of destiny from the people of all free nations, and lock it away into hidden, unelectable, and unaccountable power combinations of industry and finance. These people have been trying to fool all of the people all of the time, and of course, this cannot be done for long.

Neoconservatism is a parasite that latched onto the Republican party, grew inwardly, and came to lodge itself at its head. Neocons attempted to force the GOP power base into doing its bidding, so long as the GOP voters are willing to accept their manipulations. How often do you hear the neocons in the Bush administration say: We had a clear mandate from the people to invade Iraq. . .or pass the patriot act. . .or whatever demonic villainy has gone on in the filthy god-forsaken pits of torture and abuse that “enemy combatants” have disappeared into for YEARS. It is inevitable that this ruse fall apart, and with it may come a major fracture in the republican party. It is an earthquake that may change the face of the American political landscape forever, and allow us to sweep away these years of neocon corruption and terror that has stained our name across the whole world.

How much more blood are the American people willing to shed to enforce the policies of their “new world order?” How many more jobs will we sacrifice to the new economic feudalism of the elite few? I hope the time has come for a choice, a real choice, and for the voice of the true America to be heard once again.

Wednesday, November 30, 2005 12:46:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hamiltonian W.

The president’s speech today at the Naval Academy is as fine an example of republican rhetoric as I have heard since the presidency of Ronald Reagan.


In Number 71 of The Federalist, Alexander Hamilton wrote about the relationship between presidential rhetoric and public opinion in a republic.
There are some who would be inclined to regard the servile pliancy of the Executive to a prevailing current, either in the community or in the legislature, as its best recommendation. But such men entertain very crude notions, as well of the purposes for which government was instituted, as of the true means by which the public happiness may be promoted. The republican principle demands that the deliberate sense of the community should govern the conduct of those to whom they intrust the management of their affairs; but it does not require an unqualified complaisance to every sudden breeze of passion, or to every transient impulse which the people may receive from the arts of men, who flatter their prejudices to betray their interests. It is a just observation, that the people commonly INTEND the PUBLIC GOOD. This often applies to their very errors. But their good sense would despise the adulator who should pretend that they always REASON RIGHT about the MEANS of promoting it. They know from experience that they sometimes err; and the wonder is that they so seldom err as they do, beset, as they continually are, by the wiles of parasites and sycophants, by the snares of the ambitious, the avaricious, the desperate, by the artifices of men who possess their confidence more than they deserve it, and of those who seek to possess rather than to deserve it. When occasions present themselves, in which the interests of the people are at variance with their inclinations, it is the duty of the persons whom they have appointed to be the guardians of those interests, to withstand the temporary delusion, in order to give them time and opportunity for more cool and sedate reflection. Instances might be cited in which a conduct of this kind has saved the people from very fatal consequences of their own mistakes, and has procured lasting monuments of their gratitude to the men who had courage and magnanimity enough to serve them at the peril of their displeasure.



This is a critically important observation. One of the most important functions of the president in our form of republican government, writes Hamilton, is to shape public opinion, not put his finger in the air to determine what direction the wind is blowing.


I don’t know if President Bush has ever read The Federalist Papers, but the steps he is to taking to explain the policy and strategy of the United States in Iraq means that he has at long last recognized Hamilton’s principle. His speech today at the Naval Academy is as fine an example of republican rhetoric as I have heard since the presidency of Ronald Reagan.


We often forget that opinion polls have no constitutional standing. Nonetheless, when properly done, they can tell us a great deal about what the citizenry are thinking. And it is clear that in the absence of any attempt by the president to defend his policies, the vacuum has been filled by “by the wiles of parasites and sycophants, by the snares of the ambitious, the avaricious, the desperate, by the artifices of men who possess [the people’s] confidence more than they deserve it, and of those who seek to possess rather than to deserve it.” Under such circumstances, it should not be surprising that public support for the war has gone down.


Another name for such operators is “demagogue.” Our demagogues have pandered to the fears and weaknesses of the American rather than to their virtues and strengths. In his Naval Academy speech, President Bush did just the opposite, exercising his “duty [as one whom the people have] appointed to be the guardians of [their] … interests, to withstand the temporary delusion, in order to give them time and opportunity for more cool and sedate reflection.”


Today’s speech is the opening salvo in a campaign of public diplomacy to reinvigorate the war effort and restore public support for our enterprise in Iraq. It coincides with the release of the president’s Iraq strategy document, which is important in and of itself. The fact is that the United States has always had a strategy for Iraq, but any strategy worthy of the name must be adaptable.


What critics mean when they say there is no strategy is that they don’t like what the president is doing, although none have offered any alternative but withdrawal. By publishing the outline of his strategy, the president makes it impossible for his critics to take the easy way out. now they will have to put up or shut up…if only.


As far as the speech goes, I think he did a fine job today. Now he needs to keep up the fire.


— Mackubin Thomas Owens is an associate dean of academics and a professor of national-security affairs at the Naval War College in Newport, R.I. He is writing a history of U.S. civil-military relations..











 

 

http://www.nationalreview.com/owens/owens200511301403.asp

 
 
 

Wednesday, November 30, 2005 8:50:00 PM  
Blogger saint said...

WOW! Thanks for the completely partisan and biased articles you all have been posting! Those are very informative, and I would never have imagined such information being shared on this blog, especially by Ottman or dkfz! And now, with this anonymous poster getting in on the act, I feel I have all the information I'll ever need on overly-onesided politics! Thanks!

*/sarcasm off*

Thursday, December 01, 2005 9:51:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nancy Pelosi: Anal Airhead

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California said yesterday she now agrees with Rep. John P. Murtha's call to begin withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq immediately, adding that a majority of House Democrats also agree. "I'm endorsing what Mr. Murtha is saying, which is that the status quo is not working and that we need to have a plan that makes us safer, our military stronger, and makes Iraq more stable," she said. "I believe that a majority of our caucus clearly supports Mr. Murtha," she added. When Murtha' proposed immediate withdrawal from Iraq was put to a vote last week, it was defeated 403-3 


NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR VICTORY IN IRAQ (pdf)


Democrats must be embarrassed by Pelosi. Could her timing be any worse? This shows how far out of the mainstream democrats truly are, despite their made-up polls suggesting otherwise. Pelosi is a disgrace not only to democrat's, but to women everywhere. How many democrat's wish she'd shut-up? Well, we know by their vote in the House that it must be overwhelming. Of course she's playing to her shrinking anti-American liberal base, but even they must be getting tired of defending her stupid remarks.

Those in the middle are confused on which direction to take. They don't really know who is winning or losing, but of course their indecisiveness doesn't matter to them until the end when it becomes clear enough to make their decision, thus making them right in any case, win or lose... after the fact.

Thursday, December 01, 2005 8:52:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This describes dkfz and his ilk of liberal swine...


Liars Lying about Lies

Vice President Dick Cheney gave a speech on Nov. 21 at the American Enterprise Institute defending the administration's Iraq policy. This was part of a long overdue counterattack against the tactics of the president's political critics and their allies in the liberal media. Cheney made a particular point of setting the record straight about his criticism of some of the critics.

He said, "Several days ago, I commented briefly on some recent statements that have been made by some members of Congress about Iraq. Within hours of my speech, a report went out on the wires under the headline, quote, Cheney Says War Critics Dishonest, Reprehensible, end quote." The vice president went to on to explain and emphasize that, "I do not believe it is wrong to criticize the war on terror or any aspect thereof. Disagreement, argument and debate are the essence of democracy, and none of us should want it any other way. . . . What is not legitimate and what I will again say is dishonest and reprehensible is the suggestion by some U.S. senators that the president of the United States or any member of his administration purposely misled the American people on prewar intelligence. . . . The flaws in the intelligence are plain enough in hindsight. But any suggestion that prewar information was distorted, hyped or fabricated by the leader of the nation is utterly false. Sen. John McCain put it best: 'It is a lie to say that the president lied to the American people.' "


The unanimous conclusion of 15 separate intelligence agencies in their National Intelligence Estimate, submitted to the president in October 2002, was that Saddam Hussein's WMD constituted a real and present danger. Subsequent bipartisan investigations by the Senate Intelligence Committee in 2004 and the Silberman-Robb Commission in 2005 reported that the president neither distorted intelligence reports nor did he pressure intelligence agencies to reach tendentious conclusions.


In the afternoon following Cheney's Nov. 21 speech, here's how it was reported by Jack Cafferty on CNN's The Situation Room: ". . . if you dare question the use of prewar intelligence, according to that speech this morning, you are dishonest and reprehensible." (how do dems claim Bush lied about the intelligence, and then defend it when none of them bothered to read it?)


Outrageous! This is liberal media bias on stilts. Cafferty blatantly duplicated the very same distortion of an earlier Cheney speech that the vice president had specifically made a point of correcting. Cheney's distinction between what he believed was legitimate and illegitimate criticism couldn't have been clearer. Cafferty is either dense or shameless. (both)


So, what's new? Bush-haters have a repertoire of shifty theatrical tactics. One is to feign outrage at make-believe attacks on their "patriotism." When the administration defends itself and challenges the claims of certain critics, the critics will falsely claim that their patriotism has been impugned. By this device, critics hope to discredit and discourage criticism of their criticism. No one in the White House questioned Rep. John Murtha's patriotism, just his judgment.


Another canard is the misuse of the "L-word." "Bush lied" has become a mantra and an outright obsession with Bush-haters, repeated endlessly in the titles of a spate of books by the likes of Al Franken (Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them), Joe Conason, Robert Scheer and other lefties. I believe this to be a backlash rooted in their resentment and anger over the downfall of the Clinton presidency. So they labor to turn the tables and take out their visceral revenge on Bush by branding him a "liar."


In Clinton's case, however, he was caught in blatant lies while under oath in a deposition, for which he suffered official discipline in a court of law. While his sexual exploits may have been of far less import than the current debate over the nation's foreign policy, the inescapable point is that it's flatly intolerable for the president of the United States - the attorney general's boss - to lie under oath about anything.

Clinton lied to a grand jury and the nation. Bush was misinformed by intelligence from all over the world. Being wrong about misinformation after the fact, is NOT a lie.

After 9/11, the president was being prudent in his judgement in fulfilling his duties to protect the nation as required by his oath of office.

Unfortunately, liberals will never understand the difference due to their blind-hatred of everything they disagree with.

Friday, December 02, 2005 9:55:00 PM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

Franken's Truth is No Joke by John Nichols (excerpts) Published on Friday, December 2, 2005 by the Madison Capital Times (Wisconsin)
Some might chuckle at Franken's line: "Bush is lucky that he had a Republican Congress, or he almost certainly would have been impeached and imprisoned". But does anyone seriously question, after all the revelations regarding the doctoring of intelligence and the deliberate deception of Congress and the American people by the president and his cronies, that an independent Congress would now be reviewing impeachment resolutions?

With The Truth, Franken indicts both the Bush administration and its congressional allies -- the section on former Majority Leader Tom DeLay is deliciously detailed. Franken's targets this time include both people -- Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rove, DeLay -- and something new: ideas. In particular, the idea that the 2004 election meant that Franken's beloved America had moved to the right. Al Franken ain't buyin' it.

The fishy figures of this administration do, indeed, get fried. Franken's book succeeds not with jokes -- although the author's humorous barbs remain the most effective skewers of the likes of Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld - but with the tool that Thomas Paine and the pamphleteers of previous ages employed: facts.

The Truth is no screed penned in anger at a disreputable ruler and his acolytes. It is a bill of particulars, which spells out high crimes and misdemeanors for which Bush, Cheney and their crew will, ultimately, be remembered. Indeed, if someone were to ask me for a quick review of what has gone wrong with America since Jan. 20, 2001, I would not hesitate to recommend that they start with this book. There are few others that have the broad sweep combined with the consistent reliance on official statements and credible critiques that this book offers.

Additionally, The Truth captures the emotions of the moment, particularly in the sections that deal with the frustrations of the 2004 presidential contest, its delusional Democrats, its dysfunctional debates and its disappointing conclusion. Bush, or more precisely Karl Rove, prevailed not on merit, Franken argues, but by employing the "Three Horsemen of the Republican Apocalypse: Fear, Smears, and Queers". That's a good line, to be sure. But it is backed up by chapters of information and analysis that batter Bush with the effectiveness of a particularly well-written legal brief -- or a closing statement to the jury from Clarence Darrow.

Perhaps it does Franken no good to suggest that he has written -- with the able research assistance of Madison native Ben Wikler -- an important and useful book. In these days, the greater rewards tend to go to the most glib commentators, to the loudest ranters and to the cruelest character assassins. But Franken has offered us something more than another scream from the left.

This is a book that matters, not as great literature -- although it is quite well written and smoother in flow than Franken's previous texts -- but as a dose of reality for a nation that has grown ill from imbibing the global fantasies of the neocons, the free-trade fallacies of the neolibs and the "fighting-for-freedom" fakery of the Patriot Act-pushing, torture-promoting neofascists who pass themselves off as the champions of liberty. At one point in the book, there is a joking reference to the notion that Franken penned this tome with an intent to "purify the blood of the body politic". Yet the often poignant letter to his grandchildren that closes the book, under the title "The Resurrection of Hope", suggests that Franken's purpose is just such a purification.

Surely, Thomas Paine -- who anticipated both the Bush administration's secrecy and Franken's challenge to it when he observed, "It is error only, and not the truth, that shrinks from inquiry" -- would encourage his pamphleteering heir to embrace no less a mission.
--------------------

John Nichols is the associate editor of The Capital Times. His latest books include The Rise and Rise of Richard B. Cheney (The New Press) and, with Robert W. McChesney, Tragedy and Farce: How the American Media Sell Wars, Spin Elections, and Destroy Democracy (The New Press).

Sunday, December 04, 2005 10:36:00 AM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

Is George Bush the worst president ever? By Richard Reeves. Friday December 2, 2005.
I have talked with three significant historians in the past few months who would not say it in public, but who are saying privately that Bush will be remembered as the worst of the presidents.

There are some numbers. The History News Network at George Mason University has just polled historians informally on the Bush record. Four hundred and fifteen, about a third of those contacted, answered -- making the project as unofficial as it was interesting. These were the results: 338 said they believed Bush was failing, while 77 said he was succeeding. Fifty said they thought he was the worst president ever. Worse than Buchanan. This is what those historians said -- and it should be noted that some of the criticism about deficit spending and misuse of the military came from self-identified conservatives -- about the Bush record:


* He has taken the country into an unwinnable war and alienated friend and foe alike in the process.
* He is bankrupting the country with a combination of aggressive military spending and reduced taxation of the rich.
* He has deliberately and dangerously attacked separation of church and state.
* He has repeatedly "misled", to use a kind word, the American people on affairs domestic and foreign.
* He has proved to be incompetent in affairs domestic (New Orleans) and foreign (Iraq and the battle against al-Qaida).
* He has sacrificed American employment (including the toleration of pension and benefit elimination) to increase overall productivity.
* He is ignorantly hostile to science and technological progress.
* He has tolerated or ignored one of the republic's oldest problems, corporate cheating in supplying the military in wartime.

Quite an indictment. It is, of course, too early to evaluate a president. That, historically, takes decades, and views change over times as results and impact become more obvious. Besides, many of the historians note that however bad Bush seems, they have indeed since worse men around the White House. Some say Buchanan. Many say Vice President Dick Cheney.

Sunday, December 04, 2005 7:10:00 PM  
Blogger Bushcheney08 said...

This is kind of off topic, but have you ever noticed that most teachers are liberal? actually, almost all teachers are liberal. except. . . history teachers! imagine that! All history teachers Ive had are republican!

Monday, December 05, 2005 9:30:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Funny how dkfz goes by a lunatic in Al Franken, who is so far to the left, he makes Marx look conservative.

Here are more facts that liberals will deny as no fact to them is actually a fact, rather just something else to whine about and spin with lies.


Confidence in Terror War Jumps
In a survey completed on Dec. 1, 2005, 48 percent were confident of a U.S. victory - and only 28 percent said the terrorists were likely to win.

Predictably, Republicans were most optimistic, with 74 percent saying they expect the terrorists to be defeated - up ten percent from a month ago. Only 28 percent of Democrats now predict victory for the U.S.

The pessimistic democrats have offered nothing but criticism of the war and the economy while the majority of the American public moves on without the whiners sitting their liberal crap.

Dems/libs actually feel our military is doing nothing in Iraq and that the few terrorists' left have the upper hand. Amazing! In 10 days, the libs will be crushed by reality, but they will still refuse to believe the Iraqi people actually want freedom. Libs will say the lines of people can't be real and votes were rigged. Libs want Saddam back in power as they feel he was ripped off by our government and Bush.

dkfz worships Al Franken and Mike Moore, who are only in it for themselves to take money from the suckers who follow them. All the have are silly accusations, and nobody with any brains listens to those wacko fools.


I feel sorry for the kids in school today wasting their parents hard earned money on nutty liberal professors spreading anti-American propaganda from their marxist playbooks.

BC'08 is correct, the liberal teachers and "professors" are also following along the DNC scripts of hatred while ignoring the facts on the ground. Oh and how they absolutely HATE history! Because it proves how utterly wrong they are about literally everything. They all need to move to a communist country where they can be fed "healthy" food, and told what to do by the dictators they blindly follow. But wait, Hillary is in the wings... LOL!


The media attacks on Bush are truly disgusting as they follow the scripts of hate pushed by Howie (Mean) Dean and Ted (Drunk as a skunk) Kennedy, and John (Kennedy puppet) Kerry.




Gaining Ground: Clear Progress in Iraq
By Peter Brookes

The "Cut and Run Crowd" (liberals) are proving to be the worst kind of pessimists on Iraq - refusing to see the significant evidence that things are starting to go our way militarily.


No, no one should be turning cartwheels just yet over security and stability in Iraq - there is still a lot to be done. But several favorable developments should make even the "Doom-n-Gloomers" take note.


The U.S. military is having significant success securing the Syrian border - previously a sieve for Iraqi and foreign insurgents/terrorists seeping into Iraq. Result: It's tougher for Syria-based Sunni insurgents to orchestrate or support attacks in Iraq. Suicide bombings are down 30 percent since the October referendum.


International pressure on the Syrian regime - including the possibility of punitive U.N. economic sanctions over the killing of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri - may also be "encouraging" Damascus to decrease its support for the Iraqi insurgency.


Abu Musab al Zarqawi's cast of al Qaeda killers seems to be in increasing disarray. Recent intelligence reports suggest near-mutiny in al Qaeda's ranks - most likely thanks to U.S. forces capturing/killing operatives in large numbers, cash crunches and an influx of "green" recruits.


The American military's new "Clear, Hold and Build" strategy is plainly putting the squeeze on al Qaeda. It improves upon the "Whack a Mole" (i.e., random search-and-destroy) strategy by establishing a permanent Iraqi security presence that makes it harder for the insurgents to return once they've been evicted.


Watch as the realization hits, the nattering nabobs of negativism will actually try to take credit for progress in Iraq by saying they told us so.... LOL!

And that is how evil and backwards the left is!

Monday, December 05, 2005 1:16:00 PM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

Conservatives will NEVER get it!

(Excerpts from: Arguing about the War: The Top Ten Reasons for Staying in (Leaving) Iraq. by Michael Schwartz. Monday, December 5, 2005)

The premise that the only way to change the attitudes of those who are fighting the U.S. involves "whipping their ass" because "these people only understand force" -- is a premise held by many Republicans. However, attitudes are never changed in this way. Every serious scholar who studies terrorism agrees on this essential point: Terrorism arises from the misery that many people are forced to live in or in close proximity to. It is misguided and criminal, but it nevertheless derives from complaints people have about their daily lives, about the humiliations they experience in the larger social and political worlds they inhabit, and about the apparent impossibility of changing these circumstances.

The best way to transform such attitudes, built as they are on hopelessness, would be to take a fraction (a fraction!!) of the money we are now spending on the war in Iraq and on our military and invest it in the lives of others. One example: a panel of expert development economists just delivered a report to the UN saying that for $50 billion annually we could bring the income of the poorest people in the world up to a level that would largely eradicate the famines and mass starvation currently spreading from one continent to another. That project, if enacted, would do more to reduce terrorism than all the "anti-terrorist" activities of our government, including the entire official defense budget (about $400 billion a year), the $200 billion for the war in Iraq, and the $80 or so billion for the Department of Homeland Security. Put another way, if the U.S. withdrew from Iraq, it could fund an entire program to alleviate global suffering with but a modest portion of the money it saved, and start to reduce terrorism instead of increasing it.

But Republicans will never understand this simple premise because they are backward and evil!

Tuesday, December 06, 2005 8:10:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chilling Leftist Insanity

Liberals are clearly the worlds suckers, whom scam artists everywhere pander to for creating panic out of nothing with fear.

Liberals ask what planet President Bush lives on if he won't spend billions on the unproven theory of global warming and endorse the Kyoto protocol that even the EU hasn't give dime one to, thus proving their empty rhetoric meaningless.

As to what planet Mr Bush is on, he's not on Pluto but on planet Goofy, a strange lost world where it's perfectly normal for 'apparently' sane people to walk around protesting about global warming in sub-zero temperatures. Or, as the Canadian Press reported: "Montreal - tens of thousands of people ignored frigid temperatures Saturday to lead a worldwide day of protest against global warming."

Unfortunately, no one had supplied an updated weather forecast to the fellow who writes the protesters' chants. So, to the accompaniment of the obligatory pseudo-ethnic drummers, the shivering eco-warriors sang: "It's hot in here! There's too much carbon in the atmosphere!" Is this the first sign of the "New Ice Age" the media warned us about last week?"

But the point is, as Steven Guilbeault of Greenpeace puts it: "Global warming can mean colder, it can mean drier, it can mean wetter, that's what we're dealing with." Got that? If it's hot, that's a sign of global warming, and, if it's cold, that's a sign of global warming.



I remember back in the 70's when so-called scientists' were drumming up "Global Freezing". Then when they found there wasn't enough panic for it, they turned the tables and made it into "Global Warming," which turned the trick to con the eco- warriors who suddenly forgot about the first failed attempt to deceive them.

Global Warming is a fantasy created from nothing to keep the green liberals worried and busy with another program for their obsessive compulsions. It has been used to bring down the American economy by the left.

But even Bill Clinton wasn't dumb enough sign onto Kyoto, no matter who hard his vice president whined.

It is something they cannot see, smell, taste or prove, so it's a perfect gold mine for those who push it onto the unsuspecting worry worts who they know will insist on getting the government to pay plenty for promised, but never seen actions.

dkfz is one of those worriers who want to do something about nothing as long as someone else pays for it and democrats are put in control of it. Getting others to believe in hysterical, unprovable theories is the goal of scheisters, not actual scientists. But many suckers on the left also like the play the victim to escape responsibility for making decisions while blaming all others for their perceived problems.

Tuesday, December 06, 2005 9:19:00 PM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

From Rolling Stone: The Debate Is Over: No serious scientist doubts that humans are warming up the planet.

From USA Today: The debate's over: Globe is warming


From The Environmental Magazine: Reality Check: The Global Warming Debate Is Over.

From The Environmental News Network: The Global Warming debate is over – the Earth is warming because of human activities.

Friday, December 09, 2005 7:32:00 PM  
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

Anonymous/Ottmann said... I remember back in the 70's when so-called scientists' were drumming up "Global Freezing". Then when they found there wasn't enough panic for it, they turned the tables and made it into "Global Warming," which turned the trick to con the eco- warriors who suddenly forgot about the first failed attempt to deceive them.

I don't understand how someone who obviously knows NOTHING about the subject can be so sure of themselves. It must be Republican arrogance. Read and learn:

Warming could bring colder UK winters. By Penny Palmer, BBC Horizon.

Britain could be heading for a "big freeze" if global warming switches off an important ocean current in the Atlantic, some scientists say.

We could be heading for much colder winters. Britain is kept relatively mild in the winter by the warm air blanket brought to us from the tropics by a branch of the Gulf Stream.

But if global warming continues to melt major ice sheets, that supply of warm air could come to an abrupt end, according to a number of experts.

The Gulf Stream relies on a sensitive "conveyer belt" action, which could be "switched off" - quite suddenly - if it becomes diluted by fresh water from the melting ice-sheets, they claim.

Dr Terry Joyce, an oceanographer from Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, US, believes there is a 50% chance of a sudden climate change happening in the next 100 years. "It will be quick", he says. "Suddenly one decade we're warm, and the next decade we're in the coldest winter we've experienced in the last 100 years".

It is the Gulf Stream that allows us to live the way we do. But now scientists have found evidence that the current that carries the protective Gulf Stream is slowing down - and may even stop.

Dr Bill Turrell, from the Marine Laboratory, Aberdeen, has measured a drop in the salinity, the first warning sign that the current might collapse.

Dr Bill Turrell is measuring salinity in the North Atlantic
"These changes are fundamental. They are substantial. They are going to impact our climate and the climate our children have to live in", he tells Horizon.

The US space agency (Nasa) has measured big increases in the speed of some of Greenland's largest glaciers, and melt water on the Greenland ice sheet in 2001 was twice that recorded 10 years ago.

Scientists also predict that with an increase in global temperatures will come an increase in rain at northern latitudes. Huge Siberian rivers are discharging more water into the North Atlantic than ever before, and are predicted to increase their discharge by up to 50% in the next 100 years.

These factors combined could lead to a large amount of fresh water making its way into the North Atlantic.

Climate switch

This particular geographical region of the North Atlantic is vital because it is the point at which the Gulf Stream current sinks and overturns to join the Atlantic Conveyer, a vast rotating belt that takes cold water back to the tropics on the floor of the ocean.

Sinking - the process vital for powering the conveyer - relies on a change in the density of water. As sea-ice forms at high northern latitudes, it leads to an increase in the salinity of the cold, dense salty water underneath, which sinks down into the depths.

The one thing that can stop the sinking is fresh water.

Fresh water effectively dilutes the salty seawater to the point at which it cannot sink - and the conveyer shuts down. With no conveyer, there is no Gulf Stream, and our benign winters come to an end.

Most ocean scientists believe the conveyer has a crucial freshwater threshold level, at which it will shut off - like a light bulb.

Dr Joyce says: "The likelihood of having an abrupt change is increasing - global warming is moving us closer and closer to the brink. (Thursday, November 13, 2003)

Anonymous/Ottmann said... But even Bill Clinton wasn't dumb enough sign onto Kyoto, no matter who hard his vice president whined.

ABC News: Clinton Says Bush Is "Flat Wrong" on Kyoto. Former President Clinton told a global audience of diplomats, environmentalists and others Friday that the Bush administration is "flat wrong" in claiming that reducing greenhouse gas emissions to fight global warming would damage the U.S. economy.

With a "serious disciplined effort" to develop energy-saving technology, he said, "we could meet and surpass the Kyoto targets in a way that would strengthen and not weaken our economies."

Clinton, a champion of the Kyoto Protocol, the existing emissions-controls agreement opposed by the Bush administration, spoke in the final hours of a two-week U.N. climate conference at which Washington has come under heavy criticism for its stand. (December 9, 2005)

I'm not sure why Anonymous/Ottmann has changed the topic to global warming. Did he want to prove one of my earlier points? Earlier I posted the following regarding bush:

He is ignorantly hostile to science and technological progress.

Anonymous/Ottmann's post clearly proves that this is true!

This discrediting of real science is all part of the Republican's pro big business agenda.

The Republican War on Science. by Chris Mooney.

In the not too distant past, mainstream scientific input was an important respected resource, called on frequently to give independent advice to a president and his administration. We had an Office of Technical Assessment, which was widely respected and relied on by Congress and the US government for regulatory advice. Gingrich's contract with America did away with it, to the amazement of modern governments around the world.

It was replaced with the Data Control Act, which changed a congressional hearing into a courtroom, where a scientist representing scientific consensus could represent only one side. The other side could be represented by several "hired gun" scientists hired by the industry wanting to avoid regulation.

Several other laws were enacted that raised the bar for a legitimate scientific conclusion to be used as evidence, and allowed special interest groups to obstruct implementation of regulations. The Bush administration decided to finish the job. They gutted real scientific input by replacement throughout the government with appointees advocating the new "sound science", preferred by hand-picked scientists who underwent questioning and passed the litmus test of the Republican agenda.

Mainstream science was confidently referred to as "junk science", and along with "sound science", two new buzzwords found wide usage.

Audio Clip: Chris Mooney on NPR. Talk of the Nation, November 11, 2005 (35 minutes).

Saturday, December 10, 2005 11:15:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

dkfz: "Anonymous/Ottmann said... But even Bill Clinton wasn't dumb enough sign onto Kyoto, no matter who hard his vice president whined."

Clinton never signed Kyoto because it would literally kill the American economy as it is designed to do. And that is basically the only reason for it. The peons don't give a crap about it, they want to bring America down, that's all. Clinton wants to help them!


Now that the EU has just finalized their European Security and Defence Policy Will Clinton or possibly Solana be the Antichrist and make his moves for peace?

Israel is set to attack Iran by March 6th, 2006. Report: Israel prepares to strike Iran

Should Israel be forced to attack, it could evoke Russia and/or Syria to respond against Israel, which would set-up an Armegeddon scenario.

Whoever the AC will be, the stage is being set now!


The idiots on the left will believe whatever the liar of liars says, to the world's ultimate doom!



FYI, There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq in January. In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in the month of January. That's just one American city, about as deadly as the entire war torn country of Iraq.

When some claim that President Bush shouldn't have started this war, remember...

a: FDR led us into World War II and denied he knew of Japans plans to attack before. History shows he knew of their plans and let it happen as an excuse to go after Germany.

b: Germany never attacked us; Japan did. From 1941 - 1945, 45,000 lives were lost... an average of 12,500 per year.

c: Truman finished that war and started one in Korea. North Korea never attacked us. From 1950 - 1953, 55,000 lives were lost; an average of 18,334 lives per year.

d: President John F. Kennedy (D) started the Vietnam conflict in 1962. Vietnam never attacked us.

e: President Johnson (D) turned Vietnam into a quagmire. From 1965 - 1975, 58,000 lives were lost; an average of 5,800 per year.

f: President Clinton (D) went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent. Bosnia never attacked us. Clinton was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three times by Sudan and did nothing. Osama has attacked us on multiple occasions including 9/11.

g: In the years since terrorists attacked us, President Bush has liberated two countries, crushed the Taliban, crippled al-Qaida, put nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran, and North Korea without firing a shot, and captured a terrorist who slaughtered 800,000 of his own people.

The Democrats are complaining about how long the war is taking, but it took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51 day disaster of murder hypocrite democrat's said nothing about afterwards.

We've been looking for evidence for chemical and nuclear weapons in Iraq for less time than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose Law Firm billing records after she killed Vince Foster.

It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the Marines to destroy the Medina Republican Guard than it took Ted Kennedy to call the police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick. Kennedy should be hanged for his crimes of treason, alongside Kerry, Dean, Durbin and Pelosi for theirs.

It's not just being against the war, it is betraying our country, giving aide and comfort to the enemy against U.S. policy, and they need to be punished for it with the appropriate penalty.

Sunday, December 11, 2005 2:59:00 PM  
Blogger Gayle said...

I posted the above on my blog. Glad to see it here too! The points, each and every one of them, are valid. Thanks, Anonymous!

Sunday, December 11, 2005 5:35:00 PM  
Blogger Gayle said...

Notice how the liberals yell "Cheney is a liar! Bush is a liar! Everybody, id called a liar. Now there's a great political arguement for you!

Sunday, December 11, 2005 5:39:00 PM  
Blogger Gayle said...

FOR OTTMAN:
This has nothing to do with this post but Ottman needs to know the url for his blog is still not working. www.threefourthsright.blogspot.com
I can't get to it.
If anyone else can, please let him know.

Sunday, December 11, 2005 6:18:00 PM  
Blogger Bushcheney08 said...

gayle: click on the link on my sidebar, I just tried it and that works. if it doesnt for you, then its your internet connection or something.

Monday, December 12, 2005 9:29:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The day after the EU passed a resolution on Global Warming to fight pollution, a huge oil explosion at an oil refining facility cast a huge plume of smoke rising hundreds of feet into the air and spreading to the south-east and south-west of the site. The smoke cloud has now gone to all the way over to France.

In total, 20 petrol tanks were involved, each said to hold three million gallons of fuel. Over 2000 people have been evacuated from the blast area.

The massive explosion at Buncefield oil depot was described as "a Vision Of Doomsday" by the Daily Telegraph.

"Hell on Earth" is how the Daily Express viewed the raging inferno and choking cloud of black smoke.

The Daily Mail recalls the "apocalyptic scenes" after the biggest blast of its kind in peacetime Europe.

And the Sun - under the headline Black Sunday - uses an image of the "150-mile wide" smoke cloud on its front page, saying it was visible from space.


Now read Joel chapter 3.


The environmental miscreants are blowing just as much smoke whining about Global Warming!

Monday, December 12, 2005 2:49:00 PM  
Blogger Cody O'Connor said...

Hey Jayson...

TAG, you're it!

Friday, December 16, 2005 9:21:00 AM  
Blogger Gayle said...

Cody, when are you going to post again?

Ottman, you've done some very good writing here, and so has Saint. :)

Wednesday, January 04, 2006 9:40:00 AM  
Blogger Cody O'Connor said...

I've posted twice in two days. I think it would be a better idea to ask Jayson when his next post would be.

Saturday, January 14, 2006 12:22:00 PM  
Blogger The Conservative UAW Guy said...

Cool site!
I hope you come back and post again.

Saturday, January 21, 2006 7:51:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Woah, dude, you live right next to me! Do I know you? I live in Edmonds WA which is pretty close to
Mukilteo.

BTW, sweet post.

Friday, February 17, 2006 10:18:00 AM  
Blogger Bushcheney08 said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

Sunday, February 26, 2006 11:14:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Who knows where to download XRumer 5.0 Palladium?
Help, please. All recommend this program to effectively advertise on the Internet, this is the best program!

Friday, November 20, 2009 11:46:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home