kapkomet

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 26, 2007 -> 12:52 PM) WWII? Run away and hide? Iraq is going to bomb us? A little over the top, no? If you are so convinced there are "alternatives", then I'd like to hear one. I mentioned one earlier - Kurdistan. But I really see no others, and even that one has major risks. What would you suggest? Are you saying we should just stick it out as-is, despite the fact that there is no sign of it getting better? Supposedly, where they have reshuffled the deck, it is getting better. More later from me on my ideas, hopefully. Don't have time right now. QUOTE(Texsox @ Mar 26, 2007 -> 12:56 PM) Kap, not all the terrorists are in Iraq. While we are stretched this thin, we can not respond with full "Shock and Awe" anywhere else in the world. Perhaps terrorists would be even less likely to bomb us if they knew the entire US military had nothing to do but retaliate. As it is now, we can barely keep up with the demands in Iraq. Both in terms of soldiers and money. This is more about psychology then anything, Tex. We can win any war we want, both psychologically and "shock and awe" (pure war power, if you will.) The truth is, America can't handle the reality of what "war" means. It's probably the video game mentality, which is really, really unfortunate.

I think it's "hypocritical", but honestly, necessary... the Goracle is a dignitary of this country, and you certainly can't armour plate a damn Prius.

No, you play hardball with the government, and you let them know that the people who are harming other innocent people will get blown into their next life. It kills me that you all are so ready to run out of there to let the power vaccuum to begin. "ohhhhh there's just NOTHING we can do but get out". It sickens me that you all give up so easy. Maybe we should have said the same thing in World War II. There's alternatives, there's ALWAYS alternatives, except to those who want to say "America has lost." OK, whatever. Let's just bury our heads up our collective asses, run away, and let the people who want to do us harm bomb the s*** out of us in our own towns. It will happen.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Mar 25, 2007 -> 03:28 PM) The War is over. We have lost. Any other thought is delusion. "Well, we could win if we'd just wait." And it's people like you, sir, who are the problem. (and I don't mean that personally... but it's absolutely the truth). Any war is "winnable", if the screwball politicians weren't involved. Furthermore, it doesn't have to he by a lot of deaths, either.

Come on, NSS. I mean really, if you're anyone in the Mideast, they now realize that all they have to do is wait us out and we'll let them take control. That is EXACTLY what message this sends to everyone in the world: if things get tough, the US will run away. Congress knows what's going on... but they do have to grandstand for the cameras. I'm glad everyone who voted for these morons are really happy with what's going on. I think DICK (ahem) is callous, but he's right at the heart of it all. I think what really pisses me off about this is how HAPPY Nancy, et. al. was about "pulling off the vote". Oh, f***ing joyous times.

Our dog is crate trained and does really well with it. That seems like the best course of action.

allrighty then... I was trying to figure out where the hell that came from.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Mar 25, 2007 -> 12:21 AM) He traded Sirotka for Wells and people still deal with him "His other arm is OK." No he didn't, IIRC.

QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ Mar 23, 2007 -> 10:16 PM) savage... WTF are you talking about?

Yea, Nancy had to buy her votes - so she and her Democratic collegues added a bunch of pork spending so people would vote for it. Nice and "ethical", Nancy! You go! Change Congress forever! wOOt! Hypocritical. Very hypocritical.

Rush's stance, at least the two minutes in the last three months I have heard of him (I think that's about all I can take of him in a quarter), is just as radical as the Goracle's stance is, on the opposite side.

Goracle! (Forgive me. I'm punchy tired and still have a long ass ways to go in putting my dissertation together.)

Wow, so no one in the Democratic Party could possibly ;) ;) say anything bad about Obama?

I don't disagree with you all about "acting" - the question is, how, without totally effecting the economy? By the way, I like the one congressman's quote in response to the Goracle's testimony, basically saying if we take the Goracle's recommendations literally, we would have to all stop living, driving, and die right now to make the Goracle's recommendations pass to fruition.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Mar 23, 2007 -> 03:47 PM) Please cite the situation, because to my knowledge, the Clinton administration never fought a subpoena to testify before congress. In fact 31 aides testified nearly 50 total times during the Clinton administration by subpoena to Congress. How many aides have the Bush administration sent to testify before Congress by subpoena? According to the Congressional Research Service, not a single request for Congressional testimony was turned down during the Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush 41 or Clinton administrations. http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/RL31351.pdf Because it never HAD to get that far. Congress, back in the "old days" (hehe) accepted the fact that they could have hearings that aren't "under oath" (aka in front of the cameras grandstanding about how everything's WRONG in the Bush administration). Come on Rex, the Dems have been slobbering for a chance to get Karl Rove for 6+ years now. They see a crack, they're capitalizing on it for the camera spectacle that's sure to follow.

Well I'll be damned. Turns out I was right, after all. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070323/sc_nm/carbon_china_dc China to surpass US Carbon Emmissions in 2007. SAY IT AIN'T SO!

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Mar 23, 2007 -> 02:18 PM) Now please remove the GOP colored glasses Kap, because I honestly can't tell if its you or Sean Hannity speaking. The truth is, this is a shady situation, the AG office has even admitted as such. However, there is the issue of whether or not the AG has lied to Congress about matters of government business. I realize that for some people, this doesn't raise itself to the level of a President getting a hummer - but its worthy of some investigation. If there was really nothing here, why is the White House fighting the subpoena? Why is the only offer to Congress in terms of any kind of investigation is an off the record closed door interview? This is a personnel review. Exactly what about this is covert or classified? Exactly why isn't transparency appropriate in this situation? If I recall, there was a very similiar situation with the Clinton Administration, and Clinton offered the same "Deal" Bush is offering, and the Republicans took it because they wanted to know the truth without all the grandstanding. Of course, THIS is different. It always is.

Congrats!

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Mar 22, 2007 -> 11:04 PM) Impeachment in the current climate is not what the Dems would want. Impeachment in a climate similar to 1974 is what the Dems would want. Remember, successful impeachment proceedings will only take place when the movement to oust the President comes from the grassroots. The movement to get rid of Nixon didn't start in Congress. Now THAT's insightful!!!! Remember, these Democratic f***tards are trying to do exactly what you're suggesting by screaming SCANDALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL!!!! every 30 seconds on Capital Hill - they are trying like hell to create a "grassroots" movement. They want it really, really, really bad, and it's clouding their judgement bigtime. Of course, some of us knew this was the climate we were going to get, not the "we want to work on behalf of the American people" bulls*** we were promised before the election. Now that they have the "power" back, they just can't help themselves taking a run at everything they can at the BushCo administration.

Then bring on impeachment. Seriously. That's what they have wanted since November 10, 2000.

According to the CONSTITUTION, he's right. Some case law may be different, but if it's challenged, I think the White House would win this argument. The legislative branch is under no authority to oversee the executive branch. (That one word is important).

GORACLE! I'm sorry, I couldn't resist. It's strange to say, but the Goracle could actually be an alternative to Mrs. Bill Clinton that the Dems would want to give another shot to beat the evvvvvvvvvviiiiiillllllllll, election STEALING Republicans.

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Mar 22, 2007 -> 06:09 PM) Although he says he is still running I wouldn't be surprised if he bowed out in the near future. I just hope it all turns out OK for her in the end. I agree. /faints

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Mar 22, 2007 -> 05:30 PM) Wow. Steve must have been close to getting canned there, because his leaving the midwest is pretty contra to the family guy I knew when he was at Manchester. Good luck to the guy. Wow is right.

She beat it once, so let's hope she can beat it again. I noticed they said it was no longer "curable"... so the best they can hope for is remission? Prayers go out to her and her family during this.