Boycott Koppel and his Advertisers!
Sat May 1st, 2004 15:04 MSTTed Koppel’s choice to read the names of the Iraq war dead was clearly a partisan attempt to damage the American will to continue that effort. This is made obvious by Koppel’s focus on Iraq but not Afghanistan. We have dead from both, but he chose to dramatize Iraq.
Ted Koppel pretends to be reporter and honest host.
He is not. His partisanship has been evident for years. But today’s activity was damaging to our war efforts, was dishonest, and deserves a response.
I suggest that people no longer watch Nightline. You are unlikely to get the truth there anyway, and I doubt you want to add to the profit of this dishonest man who things he is smarter than you and me.
I would suggest complaints or boycotts for his advertisers.
He has done his damage to our nation. It is time he understands the consequences.
Some people say they love America, which means the love living here.
Some people show they love America by their actions, and some pay the ultimate price.
Ted Koppel is clearly in the former category.
“I supported the President’s decision to go to war in Iraq, and remain a strong supporter of that decision. But every American has a responsibility to understand fully the terrible costs of war and the extraordinary sacrifices it requires of those brave men and women who volunteer to defend the rest of us; lest we ever forget or grow insensitive to how grave a decision it is for our government to order Americans into combat. It is a solemn responsibility of elected officials to accept responsibility for our decision and its consequences, and, with those who disseminate the news, to ensure that Americans are fully informed of those consequences.”
Sen. John McCain
We Arizonans have long known that John McCain, one of the greatest heroes of the Vietnam war for his selfless sacrific in turning down an offer of early release from the Hanoi Hilton, is nonetheless not very bright (last in his class at Anapolis).
Which, of course, is why he didn’t understand that Koppel’s selective choice to not include those who died in Afghanistan was propaganda.
There is something to be said for keeping the names of the fallen in Afghanistan apart from those lost in Iraq.
I understand that many claim that they are both “battles in the same war”, but belief, no matter how deeply held, is far from universal and certainly not beyond argument.
Calling it “propoganda” to not read the names together begs the question: was this war with Iraq worth it?
We can, and do, disagree about the answer to that question, but the question needs to be asked. The full emotional impact of hearing the names and seeing the faces needs to be part of the equation when we weigh the cost.
Nonsense.
It is part of the same war. The Administraiton created the doctrine and the War on Terror. For ABC to presume that it is not is itself an act of editorializing rather than reporting news. For them to show only the dead from Iraq is to visually isolate a war which is not a separate war.
You and Koppel may believe the wars are separate. If you do, then you are baldly asserting that the president and his administration are lying about it. The burden of proof falls on those who make that assertion, not the president. I haven’t seen any shouldering of that burden.
I call it propaganda because its purpose is to dramatize the cost of one battle in a larger war. Its purpose is to emotionally show Americans the cost of the war, with no context of anything else about the war. Did he read the names of the Iraqi’s killed by Saddam in, say, the month before the war? Did he provide any context?
No, he simply put out a piece intended to make people feel bad about the war, and that is propaganda.
The question of whether the war was worth it is a question that can be validly asked. Koppel did not do that. He presented only the cost of the war, in a dramatic way.
If Koppel wants to ask the question, then let him ask it. Don’t masquerade it as honoring those who almost all would have said “yes.”
I consider it disgusting. He is making a political point on the coffins of the dead, who would mostly disagree with him. He reminds me of John Kerry, except that Koppel hasn’t stooped to treason, just propaganda.
I saw way too much of this during the Vietnam Years. I’ve studied propaganda, in the US and from other countries - mostly the USSR and CUBA. I have long watched the media for bias, because I have been so long aware of it.
Your argument about belief is absurd. It reminds me of deconstructionism.
If the war in Iraq is not part of the war against terror, what is it? Koppel didn’t tell us. He just showed us the cost, with no context.
Couldn’t agree more - why didn’t Kopple read the names of ALL the US dead in the War on Terror, not just Iraq?
John:
The Left is cornered on Afghanistan. There is virtually NO way to discredit the military effort there (unless you live in certain pestilent areas of the Pacific Northwest) without dismissing the losses of September 11th. They grudgingly accept Afghanistan, I think, because they have the issue of Iraq as concealment, and for the usual dramatic and irrelevant reasons. Without Iraq they would focus on Afghanistan all the same. It’s fortuitous that they have two issues, because on the one they can pretend to support it, on the other they can pretend to oppose it.
I say pretend, because I don’t actually believe The Left either supports the mission in Afghanistan, or opposes the war in Iraq for any reasons that would stand scrutiny. Their reaction is just another of their retrograge instincts: wishful thinking, outright cowardice, moral equivocation and vanity rolled into a type of non-resistance to ANY unpleasant fact of life.
It’s not pacifism. It isn’t even appeasement. It’s a more benighted impulse that flourishes in the collective narcissism of the upper middle classes. Their ideas, however vague, are advertised for each other, not to find the truth.
I recall in, maybe 1969, when one of the major networks at the time…I think CBS, concluded each night’s broadcast with a stream of the names and, sometimes, photoes of those killed that week in Vietnam. That was during the period where we were losing nearly 250-300 a week killed.
Since this was near the height of the anti-war protests, it was, I thought, a demonstration of The Left’s success in aiding the resistance in Vietnam. Many of those names should be written on the forehead of the reprehensible Walter Cronkite, who was neither honest nor bright enough to calculate the encouragement his remarks offerred to our enemies. There is no idea so simple that it can’t elude a Leftist, which includes Cronkite.
You continue to emphasize..and I agree with you…that Iraq is one battleground in the War on Terrorism, or The War on Jihad. You properly remarked that if Koppel wanted to question the war, this is the issue to debate. The Left, which includes Koppel, is UNABLE to bring any reason to bear on the war in Iraq, only subversion. They know nothing else.
Mr. Cerny:
The previous post was not necessarily directed at you. But, issue Number One: Because there is not universal agreement that Aghanistan and Iraq are part of the same war means nothing. If the same question is not beyond argument, then what is the argument? I haven’t heard it. All I have heard from your side is that they aren’t, which is a conclusion not an argument.
You pose the question, was the war in Iraq worth it? Worth what? What were the stakes? You don’t say. You suggest that hearing the names and seeing the faces is necessary to weigh the cost? The cost of what? What is being purchased by this blood? Predictably, you don’t say.
Number Two: You probably mean well, but I for one am sick to death of this emptiness at the heart of the opposition, the weightless equivocation and moral vapidity that accompany all your questions. I don’t want our wars waged by Hamlet, or the latest Senior Seminar in Humanities at Wesleyan. Wars are dirty, often inconclusive, heartbreaking and worse. I was in one of them myself long ago. Flowcharts and business plans don’t work in war.
You come to the war table with a certain loftiness and righteousness, with a cool detachment that suggests that those who act have an imperative to satisfy all the uncertainties of those who don’t. Take a position. What is it?
John,
I agree that any reading of the names of the war dead should include those killed in Afghanistan, and I don’t believe ABC’s assertion that the timing of this program had nothing to do with May sweeps.
ABC is owned by Disney, and I am a Disney stockholder. What should I do to show Disney my displeasure?
David,
Beats me. Show up at a stockholder meeting and raise hell? Maybe bring along a bunch of Afghan Vets?
Disney’s been on the bad side for a long time. Someday that will show in their stock price.
Its too bad. At one time it was a fine organization, and I did some consulting for them back in the early ’80s.
Actually, I haven’t watched the elf in years. He comes on after my bedtime.
Just a few questions for G.A. Cerny, since we’re presently in a ‘questioning’ mode regarding the war in Iraq:
I’ve long felt–at least since the 1950’s, anyway–that Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were guilty of espionage and passing nuclear secrets to the Soviets. Most of the academic world once believed them innocent, indeed worked overtime to protect the ‘good’ Rosenberg name. Of late, however–that is, within the past eight or nine years–academicians have very reluctantly begun to privately and quietly concede that the Rosenbergs, indeed, were guilty of directly aiding and abetting Josef Stalin. Similarly, it is now common knowledge among most historians that Alger Hiss and Whittaker Chambers were likewise complicit in helping the considerable international Soviet spy network–though for many years left-thinking professors (and, of course, their Hollywood martinets) vehemently denied this. As I said, G.E., while we’re on the subject, why not question left-leaners as to why it took so long to arrive at a conclusion of guilt amongst all these aforementioned parties?
Dems’ mockingly talk often and at great length of Nixon’s ‘culpability’ in the Watergate break-in, an incident in which ‘thieves’ reportedly bugged Democratic Party telephone conversation. Since we’re talking political culpability here, G.E., shouldn’t we be asking why Teddy Kennedy never openly confessed to active responsibility in the death of Mary Jo Kopechnie? (I realize we’re talking about the modern-day Iraq war here, but since it’s all about politics anyway (Ted Koppel, et al.), why not go the full distance and ask: If Bill Clinton’s affairs with, and alleged assaults’ of any number of women weren’t worthy of impeachment (he lied before a grand jury, you know), why then did Joe Biden (and Teddy Kennedy, for God’s sake!) take such avid interest in destroying or attempting to destroy Wilbur Mills, Bob Packwood, and Clarence Thomas?
Frankly, G.E., the above simply are rhetorical questions as far as I’m concerned, but I just thought I’d ask them anyway, simply because–for one, as a former Democrat–I think my onetime party has fallen into the hands of a bunch of fg political criminals the likes’ of which Stalin himself might’ve smiled upon.
And, while we’re basically on the subject of political brinksmanship, I’d still love to know just how Lt. Kerry managed to garner the Silver Star, the Bronze Star, and three Purple Hearts’ in less than 120 days. I don’t mean to be a stick-in-the-mud on this issue, but I have a great deal of trouble believing the word of any man who runs so close with the Kennedys, the most successful bootlegging family in American history.
–Help me out here, G.E., will you my friend?
I didn’t watch the proKerry commercial out of disgust, but if somebody recorded it, how about a list of advertisers to complain to?
An apology, Mr. Cerny: In my hastily-scribed earlier post, I boo-booed your initials and listed you as “G.E.”, and not “G.A.” My apologies for the mistake, sir.
I watch, read, and listen to virtually every talk-show pundit, scribe, journalist, or commentator I can get my hands on, but–sadly–not Ted Koppel (I use the word ’sadly,’ here, simply because, like the rest of you, I’d like to boycott the man, but can’t).
Frankly, I gave Koppel up for lost way back in 1983, when a Soviet Mig-Foxbat downed that KAL jumbo-jet over Sakhalin Island. What were there, like some 283 human beings aboard that doomed airliner? As I recall, to cover their misdeed, the Soviets issued a communique stating that the aircraft was under the employ of the CIA, and therefore a ’spy plane.’ Whether or not it truly was such, Ted Koppel, as I recall, wasted absolutely no time in voicing virtually the same charge as the Soviets.
Thanks, Ted–thanks for jumping before thinking. I wonder how Ted would’ve felt had the airliner belonged to EL Al?
John,
You and your cronies seem to agree that opposition is treason. You seem to think the idea that asserting the Afghan and Iraq theaters of war are different wars might mean that the Bush administration is lying is a surprising and unstated conclusion. What a monumental confession of ignorance. If you have not heard the argument it is a testimony to your close-mindedness, not to the weakness of arguments on the part of those who oppose the administration. Yes, they are separate theaters of war. Yes, Bush is a liar. All serious opponents of the Iraq war hold that the entire problem is that people like Bush and Wolfowitz and yourself ignorantly imagine they are related theaters of war. They are not.
Richard Clarke is a registered Republican. He says Bush and yourself are wrongheaded and irrational. Calling him names does not make his fundamental critique of Bush “policy” go away. Iraq undermined the war on terrorism, by diverting resources from Afghanistan where the bad guys were when we knew where they were. Is rationality subversion? Intelligent strategy, treason? Do you really expect people to take you seriously when you claim not to have heard this argument? Why would this confession of ignorance be a point of pride?
Can you even conceive the possibility that der Fuehrer might make a mistake? Should we think of you as a traitor on the day you conclude that Bush has miscalculated something? You’d better be careful what you wish for.
Mr. Franklin:
In re your post: SENTENCE ONE: Cronies? Who said anything about treason? SENTENCE TWO: Assertions can’t mean anything until they’re proven. This is incomprehensible. SENTENCE THREE: Learn how to write without florid adjectives. SENTENCE FOUR: We have heard the argument Restating it does not make it true? SENTENCE FIVE AND SIX: Unproven anywhere but in your own mind. SENTENCE EIGHT: Saying it again does not make it true. SENTENCES NINE: Oh? SENTENCES TEN AND ELEVEN: So what? SENTENCE ELEVEN: I know. Only YOUR name-calling works this way. SENTENCE TWELVE: Unproven. SENTENCES THIRTEEN AND FOURTEEN: I would say no, but I haven’t seen any rationality OR intelligence in your post yet. SENTENCE FIFTEEN AND SIXTEEN: These are incomprehensible. SENTENCE SEVENTEEN: You’re a name-calling little twit, aren’t you? LAST TWO: I suggest you read Elements of Style by Strunk and White. You might learn how to write comprehensibly.
You know, Ben. People like you haven’t a clue as to what this is all about. A few hundred years ago you would have been burning witches. The reason WE have to continue this fight is because YOU offer no alternative except a puerile emotionalism, which is certain to lose. Try to learn something new today.
“You and your cronies….”
“…the Bush administration is lying….”
“…[your] argument…is a testament to your close-mindedness….”
“Yes, Bush is a liar….”
“…people like Bush and Wolfowitz and yourself ignorantly imagine….”
“…Bush and yourself are wrongheaded and irrational….”
“Why would [your] confession of ignorance be a point of pride?”
“Can you even conceive the possibility that ‘der Fuehrer’ might make a mistake?”
–First, I’d like to thank Mr. Ben Franklin for bringing such profound intellect, obvious philosophical ‘gravitas,’ and ‘objectivity’ to this board.
–Second, I’d like to ask “Ben,” in response to his insightful tirade: Suppose you delineate those Muslims who want us dead, and those who don’t. When you can effectively and rationally do so, let us know.
–Third, suppose you explain the ‘difference’ between ‘missing WMD’ and Saddam’s poison-gassing of no less than 15,000 innocent Kurds.
Frankly, Ben, I’d say it’s up to you to prove your point, and not us to prove ours. I’d also say that Muslims rather blatantly revealed their feelings for us on 9-ll, whether you have yet accepted that truth, or not.
John,
This is a pretty sad excuse for a rebuttal. I responded to your specific claim in a previous post that you hadn’t heard these arguments. Now you say you have and aren’t impressed. You can’t be bother to say them out loud. Make up your mind. Talking about adjectives doesn’t rebut Clarke. You don’t need me to restate Clarke’s argument. Do you have a rebuttal or not? Your failure to respond suggests no.
Robert,
The real reason I am posting on this website is because I have a genuine curiosity why people like yourselves believe in such misguided and factually mistaken positions. I was raised in a Republican family in the midwest and I supported Nixon and Reagan until I was about twenty years old. By that time I learned enough history and economics to realize that their policies were irrational and incoherent even if you are a neo-liberal. Your failure to distinguish al Quaeda from the millions of people who believe in Islam only feeds the argument that your position has nothing to fall back on but racist and anti-religious ignorance. My curiousity is satisfied. You have answered my question. Thanks. I won’t darken your electronic door again.
Ben:
The first rebuttal to your post came from me, not John. John Moore would have been more patient with you, and he will probably answer you at some point.
You’re an annoying person. Your approach to these issues is the “do you still beat your wife” approach. Your first sentence to Robert is to express your genuine curiosity, not in our positions, but in why people like us hold these “misguided and factually mistaken positions”. In other words, you aren’t curious about the issues, you’re taking an anthropologist’s interest in the primitive tribe next door. Your vanity is so petrified that you have risen above mere discussion.
I’m pleased that education has lifted you above the desolation of Midwest Republicanism and all its ugliness. Where you are now, however, is in the dense and congealed conceits typical of the modern liberal, which to you is progress. You don’t believe things when you see them, you believe them first and then see them everywhere, true or not. The same can be said of a cargo cult.
Your praise for your first post is evidence enough that you don’t even know what you said, or didn’t say. By the way, until you understand what an “argument” is, stop confusing it with a conclusion, an opinion or a statement. As highly educated as you are against the incoherence and irrationality of Republicanism, you should be alert to these faults.
Wisdom and Knowledge begin with self-perception, insight and self-awareness, all of which you clearly lack. Until you have them, your political views are meaningless.
Ben:
One further comment.
Post Number One from Ben:
“Richard Clarke is a registered Republican. He says Bush and yourself are wrongheaded and irrational.”
Post Number Two from Ben: (about Clarke)
“Talking about adjectives doesn’t rebut Clarke. You don’t need me to restate Clarke’s argument. Do you have a rebuttal or not? Your failure to responds suggests no.”
Now. Where to begin? By the way, “yourself” is the reflexive and not to be substituted for “you”.
Someone as well-educated as “yourself” should know that, unless you are talking in the lingo of stupid people like me.
WHAT about Clarke’s “argument” that Bush and John Moore are wrongheaded and irrational should be rebutted? Okay. Bush and John Moore are NOT wrongheaded and irrational. Are you happy now? Clarke made a remark which you wrongly quoted, and I have rebutted it, and you may quote me in the future as the source of the rebuttal.
And what does Clarke’s party affiliation have to do with his COMMENT (not argument)? This just goes on an on.
Friends
Ben Franklin appears to be the same pseudo-intellectual who came in with the mud on my boots from a discussion I joined here (btw, that article and it’s comment section will give you a hint at why the press is so screwed up. The blog and article are published by an NYU Journalism Prof - who is interesting and not nearly as screwed up as BF seems to be, but still just doesn’t get it).
It will also show you (towards the end) that Ben Franklin (assuming this is the same one, and his argumentation style matches perfecly) is not a serious debater.
Not surprisingly, his email address comes from a rather undistinguished university.
He uses the tactics of the DU types who used to infest our big thread before we formed our separate Veterans Against Kerry web site. Specifically, he claims to be trying to learn something but every question includes attacks on the Republican administration. We’ve seen that trick before. You may also find him attacking the Clinton administration in an apparent attempt to be fair, but since Bush is up for re-election and Clinton never will be, it’s a pretty transparent ploy.
Also, be aware that he has poor reading comprehension (hence his irrational response to the use of the word treason) and vocabulary (ask him what “privatization” means and then go look at how he used it on the other thread).
I wouldn’t bother to argue with him. It gets him excited and he may leave excess DNA in his underwear.
And to Ben, as Bart Simpson would write: “I will not waste chalk.”
Dear John:
Sometimes the imagery is too much. Franklin DNA in any repository at all is horrifying, but we need to remember that he’ll be leaving some in a voting booth next Fall. I don’t think it will be on the Bush lever, either. (The flaw at the heart of universal suffrage).
It is never fun dealing with the genus represented by Franklin, but how do we ignore them? They stumble in, club in hand, looking for nuts and berries and we try to clothe and feed them the best we can.
You have an immense job as webmaster here dealing with Homo Lefticus. Shouldn’t we try occasionally to reach past their hate centers and probe around for the capacity to reason?
His Email address is from an undistinguished university? Amazing. The faculty there has been so successful with him!
Keep up the racist, anti-religious, simpleminded, wrongheaded, misguided, factually-mistaken and irrational work, John.
Your Neo-Con incoherent, name-calling, registered-Republican, lying, Fuerher-loving crony,
Rhod Leslie
Honestly gents, I, for one, would like to seize the opportunity to issue a heartfelt apology to Ben, to extend the proverbial olive branch, if you will:
I realize, Ben, that my attitude just now toward Islam is poor at best, and that my political positions, as you so eloquently adjudged, are ‘misguided’ and ‘factually mistaken.’ I realize, too, that what I said about Muslims was unfair, sir–no, not just unfair, but grossly unfair. The words of heathen! I suppose that, for a moment, I forgot myself, and abysmally failed in an attempt to draw a clear and meaningful distinction between those Muslims who torched the lives of nearly 3,000 innocent human beings on 9-11, and those who gleefully, publicly, and hideously strung the charred carrion of four innocent Americans from the cross-members of an Iraqi bridge.
I hope you’ll forgive me for losing my grip on patience, for rabidly discarding my ability to reason, Ben. It seems that in the minutes leading to my earlier post, I had spent valuable downtime consuming platefuls’ of tangy bratwurst and fine Pilsner, all while giddily enjoying the latest DVD-release of Leni Riefenstahl’s timeless comedy, “Triumph of the Will.” (What a sense of humor, that girl!)
As a Midwest-born Republican-rightwingnut, I do admit that at times, particularly after indulging in Riefenstahl’s work, I’m frequently guilty of goosestepping about the house, and ordering my wife and kids to accompany me in another truly scintillating stanza of “Horst Wessel Lied.”
–I do hope you might overlook my myriad political shortcomings, Ben, as well as my omnipresent sense of patriotism. Frankly, the thought that your shadow might never again darken our elecronic doorstep is sobering, to say the least.
Robert: (If that’s your real name….)
I knew it. Even the name “Robert” has a phony, suspicious Anglo-Saxon or Gallic Crusader ring to it. Putting us off the scent won’t work. Maybe you dropped an “o” on the back to hide out here, huh? We’ll find you “Robert”; your praise for Leni notwithstanding and make sure you’re on the level. I’m keeping an eye on this Franklin guy too because I think he’s bogus. He took the name because the original BF LIVED IN FRANCE!!! Wait a minute. The French were collabro’s. I’m confused…
From the Arkansas Democrat Gazette, May 3, 2004:
“John Kerry, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, took a spill from his bicycle while riding with Secret Service agents through Concord, Mass., but was not injured, a campaign official said.”
–This leaves me wondering, penitence-paying Teuton that I am…could there be a potential fourth Purple Heart in this incident for Kerry? Might we expect a press release from Teddy Kennedy, anytime soon? And might the next Purple Heart arrive in newly minted medal-form, or, rather, the easy-throwing ribbon-type citation?
Watched 30 seconds of Jane Fonda’s “Klute,” last night, on Turner “Classic” Movies. I’m surprised John Kerry wasn’t offered a part in this ‘71 film ‘classic’. Maybe he was doing weekend-drill during filming? Perhaps Kerry took timeout last night to watch the film with Ted Turner, on Ted’s 500,000-acre Montana fiefdom? (Only a hop-skip-and-a-jump from Robert Redford’s 300,000-acre Sundance fiefdom, and virtually next door to Turner’s 350,000-acre ‘retreat’ in Colorado, and Tom Brokaw’s ‘modest’ Montana redoubt). Did I fail to mention Michael Eisner’s holding in Montana? Is there a book one might read in order to get real rich real quick without becoming a Democrat?
–Rhod, John–be forewarned: This may well be the last time today I shall darken your electronic doorstep….
I would look around for a nearby pond or river. There may be a female trapped in her bicycle underwater.
“Rolf” and John:
I haven’t laughed this hard since Ben’s first post. Praise the Lord for guys like you. Absolutely priceless. Thank you, thank you, thank you for the good times…
“…darken your electronic doorstep….a female trapped in her bicycle underwater…” Oh my God, this is too funny for this late at night.
One comment about party affiliation. I have voted in all the primaries in my county as a Democrat for the last 26 years though I am not a Democrat. But my county is controlled by a Democrat machine, and that way I get to vote against the most crooked or for the least crooked of the bunch, because there has been no need to vote in the Republican primary since they are always unopposed. I never voted for a Democrat in a regular election but some of us enjoy actually having the controlling outcome in the primaries every time there is a close election. So I guess that I probably get labelled by those that don’t know me and only see that I voted in the primary as a Democrat. Those who know me and my political activiy know better, as the practice is common among Republicans in the Democrat controlled county. And I did have the joy of one of my former students running for office and being elected as a state representative as a Republican, and he continues to get elected, just about the only Republican in yers to make office here. A real shame. So I guess it would be interesting what might be thought of my voting record if I ran for office (I would love to but my health doesn’t permit it).
TN Bob
The first vote I ever cast was in the Democratic Primary for McGovern. I registered as a Democrat just so I could do that.
When the party workers came by to inspire me afterwords, I tried to convince them to vote for Nixon. It was great fun.
Of course, I voted for Nixon.
I was living in the People’s Republic of Santa Monica (with Jane Fonda down the street a ways), just before the communists took it over and slapped on rent controls.
And congrats on your student. You should be proud.
John:
Did you call in the services of an exorcist after registering Democrat and voting McGovern? If not these little demons might still be swirling around in there and pop out of your chest someday. Remember Ripley? Get help.
BTW. I think a sociopath IS a psychopath. Not all psychopaths are sociopaths, but the other way around, yes. I think it has to do with how the pathology is expressed. I mean, your everyday Democrat ward healer would be a psychopath. If he’s just stealing from the local poor box then he is just lying and stealing in the neighborhood. If he becomes a Leftist, though, he’s a sociopath because then he’s lying to, and stealing from, everybody.
the sinclair group are a disgracethey’ve never seen a body bag or a flag drapped coffin–
the puppetmasters–rove,cheney, wolfowitz and perle pulling bush’s strings are killing our children for oil and $$$$
bush is an unintellectual moron.
leonard green
ww 2 enlistee
chmn, quality care, inc, [ret]
Leonard:
Are you English? Your use of the plural “are” for the collective “group” is interesting.
Anyway, I’m glad you made if through WWII as an enlistee. I was in a war once too, so I can comment on your post. These days, at least according to John Kerry, unless you felt the sting of battle, you better keep your mouth shut about other veterans.
I don’t know what an “unintellectual moron” is, but it seems to be a double negative. I think if you’re going to make the case that Rove, Cheney, Wolfowitz and Perle are pulling Bush’s strings, and killing our children for oil, you have an obligation to explain how this is happening. Are the neo-cons conspiring against our interests in the Middle East? What about all this? Believe me, judging by your grammar, your usage, your punctuation I wonder a little about you too…”chamn, quality care, inc.”
It’s really offensive when people with your “views” show up here and roll out the regulation arguments that Bush is a moron under the Svengali-like influence of a war-mongering cabal, and then have virtually nothing more to say about it. Your war and professional credentials don’t impress me at all. That’s apparently all you’ve got.
events since my post only justify the fact that we are in serious trouble , driven there by this bible thumping administration’s cabal—if there is a draft , my grandchildren have been advised to leave the country —-
i rest my case–
your responses have been pitiful—-
The inimitable Leonard Green has arrived and rested his case. What case? Leonard, perhaps you’ve forgotten or never knew that to make a “case”, one must follow certain rules. Rule one would be have a series of letters and dashes strung together in such a way as to state a fact or make an argument.
I’m please that your grandchildren will leave the country in response to your rambling idiocy, because if they’ve inherited your intelligence, we’re better off without them.
“bible thumping administration”. Leonard is at it again, a pithy comment from Leonard Green on the existence of religion in America and its expression by the President.
Leonard, you’re a dense shithead. Go away with your hatred, prejudice and ignorance. Stew somewhere else. If my “responses” have been pitiful, give us something to argue about and stop making a fool of yourself.
And Leonard:
Is this the way you conducted yourself as “chmn, quality care, inc”? Did you have any customers?
Leonard:
I could write your life story from just two of your posts. Life-long Democrat. Conceited about your war service and professional career. Accustomed to having your own way. Always hated Republicans. Accustomed to spitting venom about everything you dislike and accustomed to having people listen to you.
Will accept any crack-brained idea as long as it lines up with your hatred for Republicans. So arrogant about your opinions you don’t think they need to be ordered in any way, even with punctuation. So hateful you will enlist your own family in your hatred, and turn your back on your country out of impotent outrage.
It is not your “opinions” that piss me off. It is YOU. You haven’t a shred of an idea about what is going on in the world. Your nastiness runs so deep that there wouldn’t be any room for a fact, no empty corner of your mind where a little knowledge might creep in. No room for anything but cliches and prejudices. Go away.
interesting article
it is amusing to see all the attacks upon one when proclaiming that bush is not intelligent , IQ= 91 , carter 176,nixon 155.
in their minds they extrapolate and imagine situations which are not true , just as this administration has substituted slogans for reality i.e. ‘alfred e newman’ in a panty waist flight suit while proclaiming ‘it’s all over, we won’ ,and the ‘patriot’ act which takes away civil liberties but uses the word ‘patriot’ against citizens when they disagree.-
[-years in jail with no lawyer or family visit].
having been a lifelong republican before ‘bush’ stole the election , which posters will now surely attack , doesn’t mean that when ‘arrows of evil’ come into power one has to go along with their program. cheney’s 5 deferments and bush’s ‘make believe service’ are there for all to see. [and everyone DOES see].
bush’s policy has killed 900 and wounded 5000 of our children in a war that didn’t have to be fought. caskets are flown in under the cover of darkness and wounded are hidden away in hospitals where no photos are allowed.
as an enlistee ww2 vet , and the father of a viet nam vet i have the right to question WHY WE ARE NOT HONORING OUR RETURNING DEAD AND WOUNDED.
of course one way to become a ‘war time’ president is to start a war , which these neocons have done.
dogma is what is wrong with these politicos- there is no way one can change their minds with facts –
—-we have to vote them out.
texas hold em
texas hold em texas hold em hold em hold em
texas hold em
texas hold em texas hold em hold em hold em
virtual strip poker
In your free time, check the pages about virtual strip poker where can i play texas holdem for free
free texas holdem
Please check: texas holdem poker texas hold em poker free texas holdem.
Texas hold em
You are invited to check the sites in the field of Texas hold em Empire poker
auto loan
In your free time, visit the pages about auto loan cash loan college loan
free texas hold em
Please check: free texas hold em free texas holdem.
free poker online
Please check: empire poker free poker online.
party poker
In your free time, check out the sites in the field of texas hold em party poker texas hold em