SilverNRed

"We're gonna get someone from Harvard! They'll prove it to you, Elizabeth." Popular Mechanics has issued a response to Rosie. Anyone with two spare minutes and access to Google could find out why the 9/11 myths are crap. Rosie really has to go out of her way to avoid the truth and keep hanging on to these delusions. That's why I can't even take that much pleasure in his stupidity or ignorance anymore. She's seriously mentally ill. She's so bitter and crazy at this point, you wonder how she even gets out of bed in the morning. She hates her career, her country, her co-workers, and probably has a lot of contempt for her viewers (the stay at home mom and unemployed crowd). I can't even imagine what she'll be like in 5 or 10 years. It's just sad at this point.

...................HUH?

In his creepy world, if something terrible happens to his kids, we can all have a good laugh at it because we're conservative and he's liberal. Right? Right?

You're right. People who don't agree with you politically don't deserve compassion or respect. Even when they might be dying. Congratulations on being a scumbag and an idiot, and for being so proud of it that you'd actually tell us.

The Iranian government isn't all that trusted or popular in Iran either. Their economy is in the crapper so I'm not convinced a charade where they take 15 hostages is going to help them all that much. If I'm an Iranian guy, I could really care less about the government feeding and housing 15 Brits to show how badass they are when I can't find a job.

Throw in every lyric that Fergie has ever sang. Lovely lady lumps? Really? I'll submit Green Day's "Wake me up when September ends" where he says "Here comes the rain again, falling from the stars." The lyrics to that song are completely embarassing. Then again, Green Day's lyrics have always been somewhere below the poetry high school students in AP English write so maybe they should have just stuck to songs about masturbating and watching TV.

Hildog! "Somebody snuck a snuke into Hildog's snizz."

My LA Angels are no.7 and the no.1 baseball team. You're damn right they are.

Time for body shots! Body shots everybody! Yeah! Woooooooooo!

So it's like The Matrix? Johnny plugs this giant metal thing into the back of his head every night and it pumps him full of liberal marching orders and vintage punk rock music? I heard Molson signed up for one too but his brain didn't meet the "system requirements"....

Pajama party! Wooooooooooo!

I agree with your premise but I don't think our LBs were that good last year. Fletcher was good, Spike was invisible because of the injury, and Ellison and Crowell were both "pretty good." I don't think we had a great group back there by any means.

My first year in Texas I had a friend whose girlfriend was going to school for social work. And on the day I met her super-liberal, social work friends, my strategy was to steer the conversation to how much I hated conservatives. "You know who would hate it if we hooked up? Donald Rumsfeld. Probably John Ashcroft too. I'm just sayin'.....lose the bra."

Highlight of the thread. Well done. The bottom line is that McGahee is significantly slower now than he was just 3 years ago. So for all his trash talk, he's on the downside of his career already. He'll be working at T.G.I.Fridays the way things are going for him.

I agree.

No. I want what I said I wanted. I want them to offer real solutions. I want them to talk about actual success. All they've done for years is score points by crapping on the effort and the troops. If they have a plan to make sure things are better there in the future, then let's hear it already. The problem is, they don't. For them it always boils down to "Let's leave, Bush lied anyway." I used the word stability. Longer. You broke it, you bought it. Again, it's not about "how much longer" or setting a timeline. It's about doing what's best for the long-term. Leaving the region totally fugged only means we're going to end up right back there. Moreover, our presence does not guarantee their government is not legit. U.S. troops are still present in countries all around the world from previous conflicts, including Germany and Japan. Screwing the troops is telling the world you don't want to win a war but making sure the troops are there 17 more months. And it is unconstititional because Congress can't decide on troop movements. They can decide on how much money. That's it.

HBD to the "mad as hell" Righty.

There is a new plan. It is not Bush's plan. It was formulated by General Petraeus and he's over there implementing it now as the top commander. Petraeus was confirmed by the Senate for the job after explaining his plan in Senate hearings. And the bottom line, as Tom points out, is that whether we leave today, in a month, or in 17 months, if we don't leave before the region is stabilized things will be about ten times worse in the long run. Leaving for the sake of leaving is not a solution.

That's a nice way of putting it except all this bill really does is say "Look, we're only going to try for a little bit longer and we really don't care what happens after that." So all that means is anyone who is against the new government in Iraq will figure out 1. they're fighting people who have no will to win and 2. they only have to hold out a little longer. In other words, it guarantees that everything we're trying to accomplish over there won't happen. I don't see how that's helpful, especially when you're two months into the new plan that everyone was demanding (a plan most likely formulated without a timer in mind). Bin Laden is in such great shape that they haven't even been able to snap a new picture of him in 2-3 years. The guy lives in a cave in Waziristan (if he even lives at all) and has sex with a goat every night. I'm honestly a bit skeptical when I hear people tell me how great things are going for him and his jihad right now. That doesn't match the facts. Al-Sadr, for example, fled to Iran and his Mahdi militia is dissolving. These sects don't benefit from the U.S. army being there to crush them if they get too unruly. And I don't think the violent sects represent the vast majority of the 25 million people who live there. Yes it is. The timer pretty much destroys any chance of success in the conflict and the money it sets aside doesn't balance that out. (And on a side note, it would be nice to just once hear a Democrat talk about finding a way to succeed instead of constantly harping about how terrible everything is going and the terrible things our troops are doing a la Kerry, Murtha, and Durbin. Whatever.) The deadline can just as easily be called the temper tantrum in this because it's unconstitutional. Congress is not in the chain of command. This isn't their call. The Democrats had their chance to get in the chain of command in 2004 and they blew it. The Commander in Chief is Bush and it's going to be that way until January 2009. It will be vetoed. It should be vetoed. And its only lasting effect will be that it openly declared that one of our two political parties has zero interest in success in the conflict.

Everyone wants the troops home but how they leave is the big issue. Announcing your troop movements to the enemy a year and a half in advance is pretty much only going to ensure that things get worse over the next year and a half. And they're doing this about two months (?) into Petreaus's turn in charge there and his implementation of a new plan (which is still in the early stages). Fighting a war with a timer pretty much ensures that you won't achieve your goals because the enemy will just wait you out. And, again, this bill is just a useless gesture based on how Congress has nothing to do with these decisions and how even if they did, Bush is vetoing this thing.

Do you really think the "raghead" card is something only the Republicans play or did you completely forget about the Dubai Ports Deal fiasco? That thing was squashed 100% based on where Dubai is and who lives there.

I don't have a party. I've never joined any party and I plan to keep it that way. I hate the Republicans. It's just that I really, really hate the Democrats. Again, this bill doesn't get the troops home. It's almost definitely not constitutional and Congress isn't in the chain of command. And even if they were, this thing is being vetoed very quickly. The most significant thing this bill will do is send a message to the people we're fighting that "look, we have a new general and we're in the early stages of a new plan with the surge but just hang in there another year and a half and we're leaving. Don't take us seriously." Our troops aren't coming home because of this thing but our enemies just found out that our legislative branch has no interest in succeeding. That this has anything to do with bringing the troops home IS a talking point. The most significant effect this bill will have is the headlines it makes today and those make our efforts in the region look very, very bad.

They aren't "attempting to bring them home" because this has zero chance of working. As DC already pointed out, this is almost certainly unconstitutional because Congress isn't in the chain of command. This is basically a publicity stunt. And for what? To bring the troops back in 17 months? If Pelosi really believes the war is such a disaster, why wait 17 months? More importantly, how does doing this ensure success for what our troops are trying to do over there? Do you think General Petreaus is happy about this? This is pretty much the last thing you'd want Congress to do when you're trying to achieve your goals in a military conflict and the fact that they had to sweeten this thing up to grab the extra votes needed to barely make this thing pass confirms it's a complete abortion.

Congress selling out the troops for some pork spending......AWESOME.