Posted by ( James Wilson ) on June 04, 2008 at 9:38 am

Well the Isreali Government said a few years ago if the Ultra Orthdox Jews would work they could add $200 Billion to the Isreali Economy.
That is about the amout of the U.S. Aide given to Isreal every year. Some say $50,000 a day is given to Isreal.
Now why does the USA support these people who refuse to work and just study the Torah while hammering single monthers in the USA who are raising future American Taxpayers.
Why not enforce the employment discrimination laws acorrs the country too. So businesses can have it both ways. Deniing employment because of races then shouting about the taxes to pay for welfare.
I actuall quit a company that would not hire a blackman but hire all the Illegals the could get.
Does anyone really think blackman want to be out there hustling 24/7 to make a living instead of a job then home with their familys?
If we just follow the laws we would all live better and then no political party could divide Americans with illegal activity or religion.
Wake up and reclaim your country!

Posted by ( Robert W ) on June 04, 2008 at 7:38 pm

right on the point jody!!!! i, myself can live my own life without the government having their nose all up in my business.
James,,,that company wasn’t being racist,,they wre hiring a minority.maybe it has to do with a thing called reliable,,,or maybe work ethic. it has nothing to do with race,,there are good and bad ones in all races.at my work we recently hired two"black" men,,,have not worked a full week yet,,i have said to them “need to get going,,get your work done” so many times that i have to had said it in my sleep. this is just two individuals,,not the race as a whole. i have worked with all races across the spectrum,,,it all depends on the individual.

Posted by ( Chris ) on June 10, 2008 at 12:50 pm

Here we go again. The same old tired argument where you folks on the right make the insinuation that if anyone dares to move forward progressively and not adhere to the goose stepping nationalistic dogma preached by conservatives they are somehow aligned with peo-le like Stalin, Castro, etc who were responsible for the deaths of millions. Let’s get one thing straight, Communism is not a form of government it is an economic system. What you are insinuating is that Obama will somehow insitute a socialistic dictatorship. One would think that after McCarthy failed so miserably with his witch hunts in the 50’s you guys would come up with a better scare tactic. Instead you guys make a false argument by comparing Obama to an abstract extreme. At least Bush and his minions tried something new like Mushroom clouds over New York. Thanks to that manipulation of intelligence to meet a policy we now have 4,000 dead American kids in some desert a half a world away. How do you explain to some kids mother that her son died in a war based on lies? Unfortunately I’ve seen men die under the same circumstances. There is no excuse nor justification for this travesty!

The reality is that bringing our troops home is good policy. Osama bin Laden (whom we armed in the 80’s) did not declare a “holy war” on America until we set up shop in Saudia Arabia. The notion that having combat troops in a region where we are not wanted, serving as nothing more than targets, will keep the muslim hordes from invading America is right out of the Dick Cheney manipulated diversionary scare tactics playbook. According to the newest CIA assesments our presence in Iraq has contributed to more anti-American sentiment in the middle east along with fostering growth of more and more terrorists. Our naval presence in the gulf and operation bases in Turkey are plenty to meet threats quickly. How about using our embassies as a first option, restoring our standing in the world, and stop spending over 700 million per day in Iraq as a different way of adressing this issue?

It is bizzare to see there are people who yearn for a continuation of what we have now. I fail to see how giving tax cuts to the wealthiest 1% while spending over 700 million per day is good for our country. It has only led to a de-valuation of the dollar, further de-stabilizaiton in the middle east, and $4.00 a gallon of gas. Your right, we don’t need change. We need more of the same because one day those billions in tax cuts will trickle down to the proles and the arabs in the middle east will welcome us as saviors. Did we not learn anything from Vietnam? If the people don’t want us there success is futile. Newsflash! The Iraqi people see us as occupiers and not liberators anymore. And that makes us safer how?

You know, it wold be nice to have an election in which the issues are debated and arguments are not based on extreme comparisons. Karl Roves style of divisive misdirection where instead of issues we discuss tabloid sensationalism and label opponents with the scariest word of the day has destroyed done nothing to help this nation. It is a sad reality for sure.

BTW, Robert, please see my statement above where I explain that Communism is not a form of government. If one wants to make false arguments based on abstract extremes then one should at least be knowledgable of the information being used to make such an argument.

Posted by ( LuckyParent ) on June 13, 2008 at 7:28 am

Chris,

Why do you continue to argue a moot point?  American soldiers ARE in Iraq, regardless of how we ended up there!  I think a better discussion would be one detailing who is better suited to lead our country during a time of war rather than arguing a point that neither candidate was responsible in creating.

But, your rantings and ravings are typical of what we hear from most liberal democrats - a great amount of criticism with little in the way of solution.  I think it is great that Obama believes his election into the presidency is going to create this wonderful “moment” where all is right in the world.  Only the democrats could produce a candidate who has more arrogancy than Bill Clinton (or George Bush).

When you go to a doctor to have a physical exam, or to a mechanic to have your car worked on, or to a roofer to have the shingles on your house replaced, who do you look for?  Personally, I look for someone with proven experience and a good reputation in his field, not some new-comer with a nice office and a great sales pitch.  I will apply the same standards when I vote for my next president.

I relaize this may be a little simplistic for you, but somebody had to cut through all the liberal BS you sling on these forums and apply a little common sense.  Oh, and by the way, this post was written without regard to race and nary a political view of the major media outlets was used to base this OPINION.

Posted by ( Chris ) on June 13, 2008 at 7:24 pm

Lucky Parent,

Moot Point? Are you kidding me? Why are you trying to rationalize a war where 4,000 kids are dead when the rationale for the war has changed at least SIX TIMES! You obviously have no clue that we are no longer fighting Saddam’s army or Al-Queda for that matter but rather we are caught in the middle of a sectarian civil war for God’s Sake! Furthermore, I find it repulsive for you to attempt to justify a war (based on lies) by saying “what the hell, were here why not find someone who will propogate this to an endless conclusion” Your argument is like a group of contractors who go to the wrong piece of property to build a house and when they find out it’s the wrong piece of property they say “ well, since we’re here we might as well build a house that we weren’t supposed to build in the first place” Makes no sense to me, but I’m a simplistic thinker like that. Here is a better plan, the owner of the contracting company should recognize that the crew shouldn’t be there in the first place so obviously he should bring them home so they can be sent to the right property. What novel idea, right?

You say Obama doesn’t have solutions because you don’t like the ones he proposes, even though they obviously are much different than the disasterous solutions being worked on right now. I tend to think in the practical sir, your argument isn’t simplistic it is simply a logical fallacy. Despite that, I hold a different point of view because I have had the unfortunate experience of serving in a war where we got in over our heads and tens of thousands of Americans got killed and maimed while our leaders didn’t recongnize that we should get out. Maybe that is the difference between me and you. You bring forth the typical rantings and ravings of conservatives which is to attack alternative solutions as non solutions. Some call that misdirection i.e the “hey everyone,look over there!” argument. Unlike you, I realize the elitism of telling our boys in the field that even though we sent you there for a lie you need to suck it up and figure out a way to win a war where “victory” has YET TO BE DEFINED TO THIS DAY!

If you want to vote for someone who thinks it is not important when our troops come home but rather how many of them are getting killed then be my guest. I on the other hand, sure as heck don’t look for a roofer who will take a year to fix my roof, or a mechanic who lets my car sit at is garage for ten days before he gets around to fixing it. Nor do I go to a heart surgeon for back problems), (which is what you are proposing). I look for someone who can recongnize the real problem, address it, and come to a conclusion. Moot point....boy oh boy; how insensitive can you be to the families of the dead kids who died in that desert over there?

robert,

Shew! I got three words for you....context man context.

Posted by ( Chris ) on June 16, 2008 at 10:31 am

Lucky Parent wrote this:"What you need to understand is that these forums are for people to voice their OPINIONS, not to be ridiculed and chastised like small children because they disagree with yours.”
Pay attention now, he wrote that after first writing this :"But, your rantings and ravings are typical of what we hear from most liberal democrats - a great amount of criticism with little in the way of solution.” and (i especiallly like this one) “I relaize this may be a little simplistic for you, but somebody had to cut through all the liberal BS you sling on these forums and apply a little common sense.”

Are there any bounds to your hypocrisy sir or do you just pretend that you didn’t do the same exact thing you accuse me of?

Let’s do this another way. Let’s talk about what disqualifies McCain from being the right person to lead this nation during this time. You have readily agreed that we were lied to which makes this an unecessary war. McCain has yet to recognize this. Instead he has continued on with the campaign of deception. For example, he went to Bagdad and strolled down the street declaring how safe it now was. We find out later that he had two divisons and attack helicopters surrounding him on that day as well as daily sweeps of the area before his vist. We agree that we were lied to for this war. Why then vote for a candidate who proposes to propogate a continuation of this war indefinitely? This is a man who has declared that it isn’t important when our troops come home but how many are getting killed. His policy as of this moment is to continue with the policy set in place by George W. Bush. Remember him, he’s the one who lied to us about this war. Just think, you may be the UNlucky parent of a Iraq causality if he gets his way. McCains 20+ years in Washington and time as a POW or leader of men in combat does not make him maagically more qualified to be President. If that was the case the John Kerry was much more qualified than George Bush. Somehow I get the feeling that Sen. Kerry didn’t get your vote on that basis in 2004 right?

Being qualified to lead this nation out of Iraq means an ability to grasp the situation. Recognize error and correct it. Obama doesn’t have 20 years in Washington or experience in the Navy. What he does have is an understanding that this is an uncessary war which we need to end. He gives us proposals on ending this war where the Iraqi people will take care of themselves. He recognizes that this war and subsequent continuation has devastated our economy and standing in the world. He doesn’t want combat troops in some desert for a 100 years. Unlike you, I don’t want a President who is more qualified of continuing this war, I want a President is is more qualified in getting us out of Iraq. That choice is clear. If you feel that McCain is the best choice because he wants to continue on with this debacle then be my guest. I hope and pray that you or your children do not fall prey to what could be an endless occupation.

Posted by ( dadw5boys ) on June 23, 2008 at 11:42 am

If you look for experience the why look at McCain??

From his own mouth he said I don’t know much about the ecomony, about who our Soldiers are fighting after 7 1/2 years! (or did you miss Liberman hand holding him thru a press conference where he still made mistakes). He said he needs to be educated on so many things it makes you wornder if he has been asleep in his offce all these years or what has he been doing.

If you vote to send a Soldier off the die YOU D+++ WELL BETTER KNOW WHO THE ENEMY IS AND WHY THE SOLDIERS NEED TO RISK THEIR LIVES!!!!!!

Mc Cain’s family values shown ture when he dumped his wife who had raised his kids all alone all those years and suffered a disabling accident while doing it. He repaid her dedication to him and their children by leaving her for a rich bootleggers daughter!!!!!!!

So your supporting an arrgoant, selfcentered and selfserving politican??

Good Luck with that!!!!!!

Posted by ( Chriss ) on June 24, 2008 at 6:51 am

dadw5boys,

Obviously you get it. I hope and pray that our nation makes the right choice this time after 8 years of what John Dean says has been “Worse Than Watergate.” Hopefully we will get a President who will have the wisdom to understand the folly of the Iraqi occupation, that way one or all of you five boys won’t have to trek a half a world away and risk their lives for a policy that has never really been defined. How many days has it been since President Bush delcared “Mission Accomplished?”

Posted by ( rawbleedorange ) on June 26, 2008 at 5:48 pm

chester.....you don’t have to agree with my opinions/facts. but i am not going to be swayed by anyone if it does not make sense to me. i’m sorry but i just don’t get into polls. it usually consists of as few as 1000 people, and based along party lines. peole may claim that it is a scientific process,but that doesn’t convince me that 1000 or so people can speak for the millions of registered voters.but,,,,,,,,since you brought polls into the fray,,,you forgot to mention that YOUR democratic congress has an aproval raing almost in the teens.

Posted by ( Chester ) on June 30, 2008 at 1:02 pm

“There�s no question that the administration, and particularly Vice President Cheney, spoke with too much certainty at times and failed to anticipate or prepare the American people for the enormous undertaking in Iraq.”

Where did you get that quote? Really Robert, if you are going to plagarize try to not make it so obvious. The crap you cut and pasted above did not come from the Washington Post but was merely an interpretation of the report by Fred Hyatt using snippets of the article. Does this look familiar....http://theanchoressonline.com/2008/06/09/wapo-bush-substantiated-by-intelligence/

Anyway, looking past your partisan blinders I find it hard to believe that anyone would conclude that “Generally substantiated by available intelligence.� absolves the President from cherry picking intelligence and presenting to Congress and the American people. I guess the lie about Iraq seeking enriched uranium from Nigeria was generally substantiated? I guess David Kay’s report means nothing. I guess the former press secretary who in fact sat in on high level meetings is lying when he reitterates that the intelligence was fixed around the policy. I guess the Dwoning Street Memo is just another Liberal lie. There is just way too much information to discount the rantings of Fred Hiatt to which you owe your ideas. For example: A June 21, 2002 CIA report, “Iraq and al-Qa’ida: Interpreting a Murky Relationship,” states that, relative to a report that Iraq provided chemical and biological weapons assistance to al Qaeda, “the level and extent of this is assistance is not clear.” The document notes the “many critical gaps” in the knowledge of Iraqi links to al Qaeda because of “limited reporting” and the “questionable reliability of many of our sources.”
The October 2, 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq’s Continuing WMD Programs states: “As with much of the information on the overall [Iraq-al Qaeda] relationship, details on training and support are second-hand or from sources of varying reliability.” It also notes that that the Intelligence Community “cannot determine...how many of the reported plans for CBW [Chemical and Biological Warfare] were actually realized.”
A January 29, 2003 CIA report, “Iraqi Support for Terrorism,” discusses the lack of “evidence of completed training,” and says most of the reports of training “do not make clear whether training” was “actually implemented.” It indicates that some number of the reports appeared to be based on “hearsay,” and that others were “simple declarative accusations of Iraqi-al Qa’ida complicity with no substantiating detail or other information that might help us corroborate them.”
Likelihood of Atta meeting with Iraqi officials:

On December 9, 2001, Vice President Cheney said that the Prague meeting had been “pretty well confirmed,” and on September 8, 2002, he said, “Mohamed Atta, who was the lead hijacker, did apparently travel to Prague on a number of occasions. And on at least one occasion, we have reporting that places him in Prague with a senior Iraqi intelligence official a few months before the attack on the World Trade Center.” When asked if the CIA thought the report of the meeting was credible, he said, “it’s credible.” On January 9, 2004, Cheney further said, “We did have reporting that was public, that came out shortly after the 9/11 attack, provided by the Czech government, suggesting there had been a meeting in Prague between Mohamed Atta, the lead hijacker, and a man named al-Ani, who was an Iraqi intelligence official in Prague, at the embassy there, in April of ‘01, prior to the 9/11 attacks… That was the one that possibly tied the two together to 9/11.”

However, according to the newly declassified documents:

A June 21, 2002 CIA report, “Iraq and al-Qa’ida: Interpreting a Murky Relationship,” states: “Reporting is contradictory on hijacker Mohammed Atta’s alleged trip to Prague and meeting with an Iraqi intelligence officer, and we have not verified his travels.”
A January 29, 2003 CIA report, “Iraqi Support for Terrorism,” states: “some information asserts that Atta met with … al-Ani, but the most reliable reporting to date casts doubt on this possibility.”

I guess that would “generally substantiate” that we were duped into this war and as a reuslt there are 4,000 dead American kids with tens of thousands of others maimed for life. I hope the next President does in fact learn from the grief and misery caused by this war based on LIES.

Posted by ( rawbleedorange ) on June 30, 2008 at 6:30 pm

june 9,2008 pg.a17
wasn’t any plagirization,,i told you where the source was from.
period......

Posted by ( Jody Lee ) on June 30, 2008 at 9:13 pm

Sigh.  Let’s try one more time.  Do you have ANYTHING to add, Chester, about Barak’s “moment” speech?  Any reaction to it?  Any opinion about it?  Anything?

It is my policy to post ALL entries (except those containing obscenities).  It is also my policy to bring folks back to my original point when they stray too far off.

Your other remarks truly only serve to make you look small.  You obviously are very learned and passionate about your views - if you can stick to those and avoid the Bush-bashing and Jody-bashing, I’m sure everyone will continue to enjoy your remarks.

My comments were not directed exclusively to you, as evidenced by my use of the term “you are obviously intelligent people”.  I apologize if I did not make that clearer. 

I am sorry that you do not have your own blog, read by thousands of people each week, or your own radio show, or your own column.  I am also sorry you have never had a book published, broadcast from locations all over the world, or hosted a cable television show.  Not my fault.  The fact that I have chosen (important word) to move on to other challenges after enjoying an accomplishment is a decision that, in retrospect, I am very happy to have made.

I do not usually stoop to replying to personal attacks.  But the intensity of your bitterness took me aback. 

That is the end of our personal comments - yours AND mine. Now, back to Barack’s “moment” - I’d love to know what you think.

Jody

Posted by ( captainkona ) on July 20, 2008 at 5:53 pm

LOL!!!!

Jody Lee doesn’t even know the difference between Communism and Socialism.

High School level politics, Jodi.  “F”

ROTFFLMAO