Too Close For Comfort --- Still

I was listening to that.. (0.00 / 0)

there should be a link to the audio here in this entry..

he's such a dope.

this was probably the WORST I've heard him sound in a LONG time.

.Adding Another Dimension of Vituperation Toxicity to Blogging since 1999!.

---

by: nolopro @ Tue Jan 30, 2007 at 00:10:36 AM UTC

I think they're taunting us. (0.00 / 0)

What are you gonna do about it, you crazy-liberal-float-builders . . .

They're both such an embarassment.

I believe that time wounds all heels. -John Lennon

---

by: Mom @ Tue Jan 30, 2007 at 00:38:13 AM UTC

A lame duck and a chicken hawk walked into a bar... (0.00 / 0)

....ok, so I don't know how to end the joke, except that I didn't vote for either of them. To the clever MLN'ers, feel free to make us laugh.

It is unprecedented when most historians feel that a sitting president will go down in history as one of the worst (if not the worst) president in American history.

A recent informal, unscientific survey of historians conducted at [R. McElvaine's] suggestion by George Mason University's History News Network found that eight in ten historians responding rate the current presidency an overall failure

I wonder how history will judge this president's favorite senator.

The arc of history is long, but it bends toward justice. --Martin Luther King, Jr.

---

by: connecticutyankee @ Tue Jan 30, 2007 at 01:37:00 AM UTC

wait... (4.00 / 1)

weren't there some generals that said Bush needed more troops, before Bush invaded and that Bush was going to need even more troops to occupy Iraq,

And Bush said he didn't... So he replaced all the generals who said "more" with generals who said "less" and now Bush has replaced the generals who said "less" with generals who say "more."

More or less...

---

by: notcho @ Tue Jan 30, 2007 at 01:40:00 AM UTC

Shinseki (0.00 / 0)

Not just a General but Chief of Staff for the entire U.S. Army.

---

by: Scarce @ Tue Jan 30, 2007 at 01:55:57 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Our dilemma (0.00 / 0)

This is why I both agree with Ned's comment in his speech that we have an obligation to help Iraq after all that has been done to destroy the country, and I have hesitations.

It's just that anything Bush touches turns to shit. I almost think the Iraqis would be better off if the US doesn't do the helping, but some other body takes the US's money and helps them.  "thanks, but you've *helped* enough."

These people are way way too ideologically "out there" and the technical skills of many people who crafted the debacle we're in ,on the civilian side (Bremer's crew), would make Michael Brown look like a rocket scientist.

"Learn new skills; make new friends; build your resume while you see the world and try your hand at nation building.  Be part of a Big Experiment.  Aftewards, party.  Pack shot glasses and hot pants.  No foreign language skills or pertinent professional experience required.  Must have voted for George Bush and be a member of FIC or equivalent.  For more info -- well, just give us a call and tell us who you know -- we don't really need to see your resume."

Classified ad for CPA job, from what I have read.

---

by: greenpeas @ Tue Jan 30, 2007 at 12:26:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

We can help the Iraqis without permanently stationing our troops there (0.00 / 0)

When nearly 80% of the Iraqis say they want us to leave and about 70% think it's OK to kill American troops, maybe we should listen to them and leave.

Ned is right that redeployment is the best solution to this catastrophe right now. 

---

by: Larkspur @ Tue Jan 30, 2007 at 15:55:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]