Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
You might have forgotten, since coverage of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan has been wiped from the U.S. press - more proof of "liberal bias in the media", isn't it?
Let's take a trip down the Memory Hole:
A Scandal Greater Than Watergate
By Eric Margolis, Contributing Foreign Editor
Toronto Sun, 2-1-2004
"We were all wrong," White House chief weapons hunter and longtime war booster David Kay admitted last week. There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, as the U.S. and Britain had long alleged."
"Iraq's nuclear weapons, death rays, vans of death, drones of death, mobile germ labs, poison gas factories, hidden weapons depots, long-range missiles, links to al-Qaida - all were bogus."
"The only thing real is Iraq's oil."
"If Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction (WMD), as it long insisted, we must draw one of two conclusions."
"Either President George Bush, and secretaries Colin Powell and Donald Rumsfeld, lied about the global threat they claimed Iraq posed, and deceived Congress and the American people. Or, they were grossly misinformed by their intelligence experts and must be judged fools of the first order."
"If Bush and his team of chest-thumping, self-proclaimed national security experts were really misinformed about Iraq's weapons and capabilities, then they started a war by mistake - and presided over the two biggest national security fiascos since Pearl Harbor: the 9/11 attacks and the invasion of Iraq."
"It turns out President Saddam Hussein, whom Bush repeatedly branded a "liar," was in fact telling the truth all along when he said all of Iraq's old weapons systems had been destroyed. It was Bush and British PM Tony Blair who weren't telling the truth."
What a record. What a team.
They'll go down in history, that's for sure.
"The American neofascist movement seized control of the U.S. government in a fraudulent election in 2000."
Something like that, I imagine.... or is it a neocommunist movement?
I could never tell the difference, personally.
ChrisWhat I like about you - what I can count on you and people like you to do eventually - is let the mask drop. It allows people to see you for what you truly are, what I have said you are all along. A fascist. -- Ron Pauliac
Wow talk about your classic case of projection. Hey Chris do you think he is too stupid to realize he is doing it or do you think he is just engaging in rank lies and deceit because that is what comes most naturally to him?
I tend to think it is the latter but sometimes I wonder. After outing himself the other day and having had his ass handed to him you would think he would crawl back in his hole but instead he attempts to use the Rovian tactic of projecting onto his enemies his own traits and failings. Yeah... it has to be the latter. It is finally dawning on him that he has zero credibility and he is fighting back the only way he knows how.
You might have forgotten, since coverage of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan has been wiped from the U.S. press ... --CargoCult
Really? Just in the past few days I read about how we handed over Anbar Province (former center of the Iraqi triangle of death) to the Iraqi army, and just today Gen. Petraeus saying he thinks US troops can be out of Baghdad in the next few months.
Or maybe you meant "coverage biased in the direction of bad news only ..."?
from this guy
http://billayers.wordpress.com/2008/03/03/im-sorry-i-think/
Kids. Everyone has to repeat the same mistakes as the previous generation.
You see, Shooter, here is the difference from your list of comments on a blog board that you think is so funny, to what matters for reals out in the big scary real world.
This person is a Republican Representative of the People of Georgia:
Westmoreland calls Obama ‘uppity'
By Mike SoraghanPosted: 09/04/08 03:07 PM [ET]
Georgia Republican Rep. Lynn Westmoreland used the racially-tinged term "uppity" to describe Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama Thursday.
Westmoreland was discussing vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin's speech with reporters outside the House chamber and was asked to compare her with Michelle Obama.
"Just from what little I’ve seen of her and Mr. Obama, Sen. Obama, they're a member of an elitist-class individual that thinks that they're uppity," Westmoreland said.
Asked to clarify that he used the word “uppity,” Westmoreland said, “Uppity, yeah.”
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/westmoreland-calls-obama-uppity-2008-09-04.html
I could not agree more with the latest piece on the Democratic party's missed opportunities and the GOP's pathetic mud-slinging, platform-less tactics. However, there is one piece missing from the Democratic platform that really needs to be addressed if we're going to seal this election: how are we going to pay for all of that which Obama outlined in his speech?
I could not agree more with the direction the Obama-Biden ticket wishes to take-but my question remains, and I'd like to see a thoughtful, intelligent, point-by-point plan for paying for all their campaign promises.
Mayor Bloomberg to the rescue, anyone?
I'm inclined to think that McCain will win, possibly by the thinnest of margins, and Obama will bend over backwards demonstrating magnanimity in defeat.
It's not just that dirty politicking works-- dirty politicking accompanied by opponents who are utterly unwilling to fight back, and discourage others from fighting on their behalf.
If voters' responding to personal attacks is primitive, so is the notion that somebody who won't defend himself is weak and untrustworthy-- except the latter also has a practical aspect.
Isn't it just common sense to have misgivings about someone who won't defend himself, or even defend his positions, when attacked?
When Clark said something as relatively mild (and true) as "Being shot down doesn't qualify McCain to be president," most media reports were that it was an ugly, mean-spirited attack. It didn't seem to go over very well, and Democrats backed away from Clark fast. It makes me wonder if going negative on McCain would really work. Or have Democrats made too much of Clark's hand getting slapped and backed off negative attacks too quickly? Hard to say, but if Clark's statement was a trial balloon to judge which way the winds were blowing, it's possible that Democratic strategists determined that going negative wasn't going to help them.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Salon headlines in your mailbox
