ROSEN: One nation, one anthem
By Mike Rosen, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)
Published July 11, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.
The last time I checked, Rene Marie was still at large. That should clear up any mistaken notions that the local jazz singer's hijacking of the national anthem at Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper's State of the City address last week was a free speech issue. The First Amendment protected her from any risk of criminal prosecution.
As an individual with free will she certainly had the choice and opportunity to do what she did. But she's not protected from public rebuke for an inappropriate, unethical and deceitful act. She could have exercised her right to free speech by singing whatever she wanted on a soapbox in the park. Marie's defenders who believe that the ends justify the means (when the ends fit their personal agenda), are unconcerned about what most others regard as her disrespectful and dishonorable behavior.
She was a guest at a public ceremony where she had agreed to sing The Star-Spangled Banner. She abused this privilege, this honor, by substituting the words from another song.
Lift Ev'ry Voice and Sing was first performed in 1900 - 35 years after the Civil War, on the anniversary of Abraham Lincoln's birth - as an inspirational celebration of black liberation. The words were written by James Weldon Johnson. It has its own music, composed by John Rosamond Johnson. It sounds nothing like The Star-Spangled Banner, nor does it relate to Francis Scott Key's heroic account of the American flag and the garrison at Fort McHenry surviving the 25-hour British bombardment in 1814. There may certainly be appropriate occasions for the singing of Lift Ev'ry Voice and Sing, but the State of the City address wasn't one of them.
Lift Ev'ry Voice and Sing is not the black national anthem for the simple reason that there is no black nation on the North American continent. African-Americans are Americans, not Liberians. Blacks, Hispanics, gays, feminists, environmentalists - or Republicans or Democrats, for that matter - can have theme songs if they wish but they can't stake claim to a national anthem. Our nation has only one - The Star-Spangled Banner, officially designated as such by an act of Congress in 1931.
Marie acknowledged that her deceit was premeditated, explaining that she pulled "the switcheroonie," as she put it, because she didn't think they'd allow her to do this otherwise. Unhappy with her treatment as a black woman in this country, she declares that she will no longer sing the national anthem. That's her prerogative, in which case she should have turned down the invitation, not sabotaged it. "I knew my rendition of the national anthem was not the typical rendition, but I didn't tell anybody . . . because I don't think it is necessary for artists to ask permission to express themselves." Wow, what a mouthful!
This wasn't a "rendition" of the national anthem; it was nothing like the national anthem. And spare me the self-indulgent, pretentious justification of "artistic expression." That's for her nightclub act, not an official public ceremony. This isn't like Frank Sinatra applying his own distinct phrasing to a popular song. You never heard Martin Luther King Jr. leading his followers in a rendition of We Shall Overcome sung to the tune of Dixie. "Artists" aren't a privileged category of citizen; of course she was ethically bound to ask for permission.
How ironic that Marie would make this statement of racial injustice and frustration during the presentation of Denver's State of the City address. Denver is a stronghold of liberal Democrats. It's Boulder with minorities. The last two mayors before Hickenlooper were, respectively, black and Hispanic. The city couldn't be more sensitive to racial, ethnic, gender and lifestyle concerns. What's she protesting?
Marie defiantly proclaims, "When you're an artist, taking risk is what it's all about." What risk? She's not running for governor. So now she's a hero in the oppressed-minorities and white-liberal-guilt communities. Her next nightclub gig will probably be a sellout.
Mike Rosen's radio show airs weekdays from 9 a.m. to noon on 850 KOA. He can be reached by e-mail at mikerosen@850koa.com.
Post your comment
Registration is required. Click here to create your free user account, or login below.
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
Featured
-
Legislature Blog
Read live updates from the opening of the 2009 legislative session.
-
Rocky multimedia
The news comes alive in our videos and slide shows. Catch up on what's happening today.
-
Who's next?
Complete coverage of the Broncos' search for a new coach.
-
Rocky year in photos
View an audio slide show of staff selections from 2008.
-
Winter Escapes
Your insider’s guide to the copious joys of the coolest season.
-
Sam Adams' Open Mic
Open Mic: Two-man advantage with Avs
-
Shanahan's career
See photos from Mike Shanahan's career as Broncos coach.
-
12 days of Drew
Look back at the year that has been with Drew Litton.
-
A dream fulfilled
A Rocky Mountain News and MediaStorm production
July 11, 2008
12:23 a.m.
Suggest removal
p_myers661 writes:
Whatever boost she gave herself will be temporary. Too many will remember her contempt for courtesy and honesty. In five years she might stumble along as a singing artist. There will be many who won't take a chance on her unreliability. That's just business. I'd advise her to save her coin. A bad business reputation is more detrimental than a bad performance. She will end up the loser in the end.
Free speech might be her excuse. It doesn't hold water. If she was really interested in her "expression," she would have asked for permission. That she did not do so says it all.
July 11, 2008
2:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
paperboy_80110 writes:
I hate when Rosen is right, but alas, he's nailed it.
Politics aside, this girl is really confused:
"but I didn't tell anybody . . . because I don't think it is necessary for artists to ask permission to express themselves."
Absolutely true! Unfortunately the venue, as well as the songs, are political.
What Rosen gets right is that the girl was rude, egocentric and politically off-key in a traditional liberal milieu. There was nothing insidious whatsoever in her dubious choice to switch songs; the girl suffers from the large heart small brain syndrome that afflicts the young, passionate and ignorant.
Trust me, folks, if this girl set off any meaningful liberal ripples in Rosen's political pond, he'd be leading the charge to shave her head and banish her from the city.
This is getting to be the biggest non-story of the year.
July 11, 2008
5:21 a.m.
Suggest removal
roger44 writes:
Just think if she had gone down to Africa and sang that song for the inauguration of the leader that has killed more of his people than he's helped. Be dirt nap time.
July 11, 2008
7:24 a.m.
Suggest removal
JYP3500 writes:
I’m confused. There is a black man running for president, highlighting the fact of opportunities for all in this great country. Then there is Rene Marie, who is not happy with how she’s been treated as a black woman, and continues to play the victim/race card. And plays it out with an ignorant stunt at the State of the City event. It sounds to me like her attitude & character are keeping her “oppressed”, not discrimination.
July 11, 2008
7:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
Eli writes:
Froward,
From the link you just posted:
"According to the liberal blog ThinkProgress, Rove's lawyer's confirmed that Rove was out of the country on a trip scheduled long before the subpoena was sent."
Therefore, according to your own source of information, your statement that Rove refused a subpoena and THEN fled the country is a flat out lie. According to your source of information, Rove left the country BEFORE the subpoena.
That said, if you want to start a thread about this topic, write a letter to the editor about it and I'm sure the comments section following your letter will offer input from all kinds of different people. Otherwise, stay on topic. The topic of this thread is the stunt pulled by Rene Marie at the State of the City address.
If you don't like that topic, go post on a thread about a topic that you DO like.
July 11, 2008
7:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
markcpa writes:
Mike Rosen is right. She didn't do what she was asked to do. Pure and simple. I wouldn't want to buy anything from her website now. She might pull the old switcheroonie and send you something other than what you ordered.
July 11, 2008
8:04 a.m.
Suggest removal
HolierThanThou writes:
Dead Horse National Anthem
Oh, say can you see?
That old horse is now croaked,
What so stubbornly refused
To get up and do some work,
Whose broad flanks and blank stare,
Through these perils had joked,
O'er the ramparts we heard,
Yet another political jerk?
The bombs bursting abroad,
Gave proof of those soaked
in whiskey were at the bar.
O, say, does that
Horse not from death revive
To lay down more manure
On the home of the inane?
________________________________________
This was written to honor conservative sots like Mike Rosen who, being wrong about everything else, have finally found a dead horse to whip.
At least that old mare won't bite them back.
But I'd keep an eye on that filly.
July 11, 2008
8:30 a.m.
Suggest removal
zivo24 writes:
You just knew as soon as that whole thing happened that Mike Rosen was falling down and wetting his panties to get to a computer and write another snarky column.
God forbid he ever devote his column to any substantial or important issues.
July 11, 2008
8:31 a.m.
Suggest removal
HolierThanThou writes:
Froward69 posted an interesting link.
I won't argue the coincidental nature Karl Rove's trip to the Bangkok underage sex toy market or where ever it was that he vanished. Suffice to say that his legal team failed to give the Congressional committee advance notice of his disappearance. Instead they've been arguing that his role in firing federal prosecutors for political reasons is protected by executive privilege, not that the hearing was inconvenient to the Rovian schedule.
Remember now, that these were Republican federal prosecutors who were fired. That pissed them off. They were fired because they refused to pursue cases against Republicans' political opponents. Like most prosecutors, they don't like loosing in court bringing cases that have neither merit nor evidence to support them.
Karl Rove, like most conservatives, has a complete sense of entitlement once appointed to any position of power. He truly doesn't believe that the people's elected representatives in Congress have any standing to question his corrupt and immoral conduct. After all, they only represent the American people. Karl Rove believes that we're nothing more than a bunch of fools, easily tricked into believing whatever nonsense and spin he pukes out.
The delay is no problem. Let him stay out of the country, whoring around whatever foreign brothel can provide him with little children to abuse. When we get a new president, he won't get the same get-out-of-jail-free card that Scooter got.
July 11, 2008
8:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
taoistblockhead writes:
Another side-show column from the neocon carnival barker Mike Rosen. Keep your eye on what's really going on and don't be deceived by the distractions presented in these ongoing columns of class warfare cloaked as patriotism.
The last time I checked, Mike Rosen was still shilling for American Exceptionalism - not that Americans aren't Exceptional it's just that Americans needn't be Exceptional at the expense of the rest of the world. Rosen will use any excuse to bash liberals and present himself as the defender of the one true faith.
The foundational "reality" of all of Rosen's columns is the message of elite control and unbridled corporatism at all costs; elite control wrapped in the faux flag of nationalism and disaster capitalism at the expense of the natural world and those in the underbelly of the beast. The goal of power is power and the goal of disaster capitalism is profit - everything else is just a side-show and distraction.
The Republican hero Reagan began the internal destruction of America; George Bush is doing his best to complete it. Once the Constitution is gutted and the economy wrecked, the two wings of the one Corporate Party can dissolve the Republic into the North American Union aka the new China of the West.
When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross - a working definition of right-wing Judeo-Christian fundamentalists and the freaks associated with the Project for a New American Century. Reagan, Bush, Cheney, et al - A hypocritical legacy of the destruction of the United States of America.
Mike Rosen - Corporate Shill for American Exceptionalism.
July 11, 2008
8:49 a.m.
Suggest removal
Eli writes:
That may be, Froward. Aside from the link you posted, I haven't checked out the story so I don't know a whole lot about it. The point was simply this: stay on topic.
All of the lefties here seem to have a hard time with that. If Rove did something screwed up, write a letter to the editor about it or comment on it in another thread that is about that topic.
Whining about Rosen writing a column about a topic you don't like is roughly the equivalent of walking into a Pizza Hut and yelling at them because they won't sell you a cheeseburger. For those that don't like the subject matter of this particular column, the solution is very simple: Move on to another thread that IS about the topic that you want to discuss.
July 11, 2008
8:50 a.m.
Suggest removal
jbristow123 writes:
more crap from blackhead...
July 11, 2008
8:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
ksells writes:
Hey Mike,
Looking through the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, I must have missed the requirement that the "official" National Anthem is the "official" song and any other, especially by "black" people is against the law. Me, I don't really care. I think the song can't be sung by 99 percent of the people of the US. Lord knows, after having a season ticket to the Rockies, I cringe every time I hear someone trying to hit the high notes. But I guess it's only natural that people who believe in right wing freedom of speech state that there is only one correct way to talk (or sing).
July 11, 2008
8:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
Mike_In_Hartsel writes:
Froward69, HolierThanThou - both of you can't wait to change the subject to your rant. Who cares?
taoistblockhead - yes you are
zivo24 - you're just a Mike Rosen hater. Big deal.
July 11, 2008
9:02 a.m.
Suggest removal
FlyfishDude52 writes:
I wonder how the folks back in Virginny, her home state, would react to this kind of duplicity. I would bet dollars to doughnuts that she would not have had the chutzpah to even contemplate that act.
July 11, 2008
9:04 a.m.
Suggest removal
Eli writes:
"I must have missed the requirement that the "official" National Anthem is the "official" song and any other, especially by "black" people is against the law"
-Ksells
"The last time I checked, Rene Marie was still at large. That should clear up any mistaken notions that the local jazz singer's hijacking of the national anthem at Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper's State of the City address last week was a free speech issue. The First Amendment protected her from any risk of criminal prosecution."
-Rosen
Ksells,
If you can't be bothered to read the very first paragraph of the column you are commenting on, then there isn't much point in commenting at all is there?
The opening of the column makes it very clear that no law was broken. You just repeated what Rosen said in different words, thinking that you were being critical of the column.
Literacy is a wonderful thing. You should try it sometime.
July 11, 2008
9:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
FlyfishDude52 writes:
ksells - The Star-Spangled Banner is, indeed the official national anthem of the United States of America. As an American perhaps you should know that. I do. It was adopted by Congress in, I believe the early 1930's as our anthem.
It so happens I appreciate Mike Rosen's commentaries. Keep it up Mike!
July 11, 2008
9:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
Eli writes:
Froward,
RMN, Fox News, Front Page Mag, Daily Kos, WSJ, Washington Post, etc. all tend to lean right.
NY Times, MSNBC, Think Progress, Daily Kos, Center for American Progress, etc. all lean left. What's your point? Is it the NY Times is "the liberal Bie-atch"? Or maybe it's Think Progress, the source of the article you posted?
The best way to get a balanced perspective would probably be to read stories from all of the above, and some sources that are in between.
Staying on topic on a particular thread does not mean that people are purposely staying ignorant. It means that they are staying on topic on that particular thread, nothing more.
If I were to jump on a thread where the subject matter was critical of some comments made by a conservative and I started posting comments about Bill Clinton getting his license to practice law revoked, what would you say? Would you take the liberty to inform me that my comments were 100% completely irrelevant to the topic at hand?
If conservatives wanted to purposely remain ignorant of current events, then I would not have even bothered to look at your link would I?
July 11, 2008
9:34 a.m.
Suggest removal
Eli writes:
Wow. I just realized I inluded Daily Kos in my list of sources leaning right.
I'm sure everyone realized that was an error...quite a huge one at that...
July 11, 2008
10 a.m.
Suggest removal
ML writes:
Dang, I really hate to admit it, but I agree with Mike on this one. Grumble...
July 11, 2008
10:41 a.m.
Suggest removal
Ted_in_Vegas writes:
Froward69: Congress unlawfully supoenas Karl Rove, Rove refuses to comply with the illegal supoena and somehow Rove is the one who is wrong?
July 11, 2008
11:01 a.m.
Suggest removal
P_Denver writes:
taoistblockhead,
The last two syllables describe you perfectly.
July 11, 2008
11:29 a.m.
Suggest removal
Nick_in_Virginia writes:
I'm not really sure how Phil Gramm managed to get into this thread, but since he did I do have to defend him a bit. As he says, we are NOT in a recession. A recession by definition is "two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth." We have yet to have even ONE quarter of negative GDP growth. Therefore, we are not in a recession.
A recession is NOT defined as high gas prices; a slumping stock market; record-high foreclosures, etc. True, that means things are tough right now for many people, but as long as we are at "full employment" (which, again, has a specific definition according to economists: 6% or less unemployment) then things can't really be all that bad, can they?
Sure, we are in a disturbing trend, but the people in charge of the economy (Bernanke and the Federal Reserve Board) are at least taking steps that they think will alleviate the problem (let's hope they are right). The biggest part of the economic problems come from high energy sources, and Congress is most responsible for those. The Democrats uncharateristically insist on "outsourcing" our energy needs, thus putting us in peril caused by greedy OPEC ministers and foreign speculators.
As for Rene Marie, what she did was low-class. If she was hired for a fee to sing the Anthem, the city of Denver should withold payment. And of course, they should never either hire her or invite her to perform at any official function again.
But gee, if they don't pay her, that's one more unemployed "artist", driving up the unemployment rate. Maybe Gramm was wrong after all!!!
July 11, 2008
12:26 p.m.
Suggest removal
arby writes:
Mike
I don't like having to agree with you. But you are spot on this time.
A freethinker
July 11, 2008
12:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
wow mike...thanks for rehashing a non issue once again.
i still can't believe they allow this guy to publish this kind of drivel.
how about some relevancy next time.
we might as well talk about rove because the anthem story is child's play.
to that end rove knew well before he was subpoenaed that he would be if he didn't show up for the court date.
being out of the country is no excuse.
why anyone would still defend this guy's actions is beyond me...but i guess you can never look for logic in the eyes of yet another example of partisan hackery.
July 11, 2008
12:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
Eli writes:
Um...jay...
There are a lot of people out there who don't like sports. Do they comment under the sports section of the RMN about how the writers shouldn't be allowed to publish their drivel? No.
If you don't like the points made, offer a counter-point.
If you simply don't like the subject matter, move on to the next story.
July 11, 2008
1:08 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
no, i think i'll continue talking about rove if that's alright with you.
do you believe he shouldn't have to testify about the politicization of the justice dept?
July 11, 2008
1:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
Eli writes:
"i think i'll continue talking about rove if that's alright with you."
Are you asking my permission?
July 11, 2008
1:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
not at all...just didn't want to be pestered by you for bringing up politically inconvenient subjects...again...
so are you going to answer that pesky inconvenient question?
July 11, 2008
1:54 p.m.
Suggest removal
Eli writes:
"not at all"
Damn...that would have been fun.
July 11, 2008
2:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
DenverDan writes:
Rove left with Haggard to Vegas.
July 11, 2008
2:17 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
yiota...you need to increase the education and decrease the ridiculous rhetoric.
policy
policy
policy
if you can't vote according to which set of policy stances will be better for the country...please don't vote and let the big decisions be made by the adults.
July 11, 2008
2:17 p.m.
Suggest removal
Eli writes:
Yiota,
Let's not forget that jay holds disabled veterans who did not vote for George W. Bush (such as myself) responsible for the Iraq war. He's WAY beyond liberal. The child is an extremist of the worst sort.
July 11, 2008
2:26 p.m.
Suggest removal
DenverDan writes:
Eli
Who is responsible for this war? What are you calling victory? Dont like how you disrespect the word liberal.
OBAMA 08
July 11, 2008
2:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
stuckiniowa writes:
Jay apparently is omniscient as he knows unequivocable which policy stances are better for the country. In fact -- since he is all knowing -- and will make the country better - I am changing my vote to Jay -- oh wait -- I dont remember seeing his name on the ballot back in January. Must be that nobody listened to him and thus we are all idiots.
July 11, 2008
2:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
Eli writes:
DenverDan,
I was not disrespecting liberals. There are many respectable liberals to be found on this website, and to count jay amongst them would be disrespectful. I am doing the opposite.
I do not want to drive the entire thread off in the direction of Iraq- if you look at my earlier posts I've been making an effort to keep it on topic. If you are interested on my position regarding Iraq, you can find it here:
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news...
July 11, 2008
2:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
DenverDan writes:
YIOTA
Where do you get your info, fat boy rush? I am part of the working poor class, used to be middle class. Unemployment is at a all time high, gas is at a all time high, 1500 days plus after mission acomplished. all you do is talk crap about DEMS. This happened on Jr. watch. Do any people on the right take blame for this? No it must be Obamas fault.
July 11, 2008
2:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
"Let's not forget that jay holds disabled veterans who did not vote for George W. Bush (such as myself) responsible for the Iraq war."
why do you always have to lie to try to make a point, eli?
remember what kind of trouble that gets you in? don't pout about the smackdown your received for trying to shift ANY blame for this fiasco on to the shoulders of our troops in iraq (or their leadership). move on...or the beatings will continue. we know your position on iraq...it is predictably willfully ignorant about the fact that our troops weren't given the resources necessary to win by conservative politicians...once again cementing your status as a far right political hack of the finest degree.
"Your view points are 180 degrees out from the main stream public."
not so much, yiota. in fact...the majority of americans agree with the stances the dems have on the major issues before the country...so the reality is quite the opposite...as folks like you and eli are in the vast minority in this country. do you believe that the majority of americans are "fanatics"?
stuckinfarrightfield, you said, "Jay apparently is omniscient as he knows unequivocable which policy stances are better for the country"
it's just data.
as mccain represents a third bush term, and obama most closely represents a third clinton term, we can look at the track records of those administrations and determine which set of policy stances were better for the country.
surely you're not saying that facts have a well known liberal bias are you?
http://www.dems.gov/index.asp?Type=B_...{D68CD0B2-1442-4804-9F6B-AF67DE7FF585}&DE={FDD09C4F-E958-4E13-A92B-179C2FAC6FEA}&Design=PrintView
tough to run away from the data....not that you guys won't try...
July 11, 2008
2:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
Eli writes:
"why do you always have to lie to try to make a point, eli?"
This is what you said, jay:
"our troops could do their jobs in iraq to perfection and it still wouldn't matter because of the decisions made by the folks YOU voted for...so if anyone can share the blame for this quagmire, i guess it would be you"
Knowing that I did not vote for Bush, you have not offered a retraction of this statement. Therefore, you blame the war on disabled veterans who did not vote for Bush- and apparently all the vets who did vote for him, too. Until a retraction and apology is offered, I will continue to expose your extremism and your hatred for the veterans of our nation.
Now can we get back to the topic at hand?
July 11, 2008
3:04 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
"Jay only 9% of the people think the democratic controlled senate is doing a good job."
you need to take a civics class, yiota.
this has nothing to do with the FACT that the majority of americans share the dems' views on the major issues before the country today.
surely you're not just going to stick your head in the sand and refuse to acknowledge that politically inconvenient fact are you?
are you and eli related?
sorry eli, yo'ure quite right...you're only partly to blame now because of your ongoing support of keeping soldiers in harm's way without the resources necessary for success.
quite right indeed.
July 11, 2008
3:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
Eli writes:
"sorry eli, yo'ure quite right"
Thanks jay, glad you can admit that you blame veterans who did not vote for Bush as well as those who did. Glad you can admit to the contempt you hold for the country's vets.
July 11, 2008
3:11 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
"Glad you can admit to the contempt you hold for the country's vets."
this is a lie.
i hold contempt for those who voted for bush.
does this mean i also hold contempt for black people since some of them voted for bush?
you're reaching eli....not a surprise, considering the weakness of your position on iraq...
July 11, 2008
3:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
Eli writes:
"your ongoing support of keeping soldiers in harm's way without the resources necessary for success"
More made up "facts" from the extremist left. I have never said any such thing- ever. You expose yourself more every day, jay.
DenverDan,
See what I was talking about? You should be thanking me for pointing out that your average liberal is a respectable individual who is not even close to being as extreme or hate-filled as jay. Most liberals respect the veterans of our nation's wars and do not blame them for wars that they just happened to fight in. Most liberals have the decency and intellectual integrity to not randomly make things up that have never been said. Extremists like jay have no decency or integrity, and I do not count liberals amongst the likes of him.
July 11, 2008
3:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
DenverDan writes:
YOTA
Why do more citizens vote against gay marriages, vote for removing affirmative action and other deivsive issues that you and your liberal pals think are great ideas.
I dont remember voting on gay marriages. I thought Bush was not going to have gay marriages. That was a big issue last time. Tell me what he has done for that. Nothing! He had eight years to do it, what happened? He told all the bible thumbers no on gay marriages and abortions. NOTHING....
July 11, 2008
3:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
"More made up "facts" from the extremist left. I have never said any such thing- ever. You expose yourself more every day, jay."
so you don't support the iraq war, eli?
news to me.
sounds like someone is cornered again....
July 11, 2008
3:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
arby writes:
How did Rove get in here?
Stay on topic! We are bashing a singer! Jeeze!
July 11, 2008
3:25 p.m.
Suggest removal
DenverDan writes:
ELI
Thank You. God bless America. I hope the next pres can bring us together as a nation. Sadly we are divided.
July 11, 2008
3:27 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
"Are you denying the latest report that the MAJORITY of America thinks our democratically controlled Senate is doing a poor job"
not at all...congress's ratings are in the toilet...but that has nothing to do with the FACT (again...) that the majority of americans agree with dems' stances on the issues.
what about that confuses you, yiota? again...i think you need to take a civics class if you don't understand this concept.
"If you have other data to prove that most of America believes in your left leaning, social agenda, then please provide the data."
my pleasure...i have had to tutor folks with similar willful ignorance issues...
speaking of...eli...didn't you and i have to go through this dance at one point?
http://blogs.rockymountainnews.com/ro...
July 11, 2008
3:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
HoosierGuy writes:
"Another side-show column from the neocon carnival barker Mike Rosen. Keep your eye on what's really going on and don't be deceived by the distractions presented in these ongoing columns of class warfare cloaked as patriotism."
"I cannot help but to acknowledge. if a (Democratic)president should get a blow job, we would know where every drop of ejaculate landed. republicans actually breaking the law and insulting EVERYONE'S intelligence. is no news to the rocky."
Tao, Looks like Mr. 69 is very good at distracting us from the issue being discussed, I am sure you are proud.
July 11, 2008
3:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
yiota, please read the link.
i gave scientific national polling that consistently proves that the majority of americans side with the dems in regards to the major issues before the country today.
refusing to acknowledge that politically inconvenient fact isn't a valid debate tactic.
so what's it going to be...are you going to concede the point and maintain some semblance of credilibity or are you going to go the eli route and just stick with the willful ignorance?
July 11, 2008
3:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
Brain writes:
The singer took an opportunity to get her 15 minutes; self-centered, rude action. I hope she doesn't get rewarded for this. She was supposed to there for the address not for her own self-centered reasons, pathetic!
July 11, 2008
3:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
Brain writes:
BTW, Rosen has been a Republican from birth.
July 11, 2008
4:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
"Please spend some time to research and if you find some data that shows that the majority of Americans agree with left leaning liberal stances, then please post that data.."
refusing to read the data i posted isn't a viable debate tactic, yiota.
it's all there...you just have to read the link i posted.
i don't know why you're having such trouble with this...
July 11, 2008
4:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
jaymoveonorg writes:
DenverDan,
Did we not just vote on changing the Colorado constitution that marriage is between a man and a woman. That is a slam against gay marriage. Did we not vote against recognizing gay unions. Another slam.
Jay,
What are you going to do when Obama doesn't pull the troops out of Iraq? He is already keeping a back door open for himself on this issue. Typical politician. I thought he was supposed to be different?
July 11, 2008
4:35 p.m.
Suggest removal
jaymoveonorg writes:
froward69,
Speaking of investigations. Why isn't congress investigating Christopher Dodd and the kickbacks he received from Countrywide Mortgage? Oh I forgot he is head of the committee who actually would call for the investigation.
July 11, 2008
9:14 p.m.
Suggest removal
The_Punnisher writes:
" What part of data do you not understand? "
I could never understand his left elbow......
July 13, 2008
9:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
Patron_Drinker writes:
LOL @ Punnisher... I couldn't understand his claim to be a "fully-functional android"....
Jay, just remember, "scientific" polls still only get the opinion of the people they ask. I *know* I could conduct a scientific poll which would conclude that no American agrees with the Democratic Party platform. Polls, like politicians, can't be trusted to tell the whole story.
July 14, 2008
10:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
"What are you going to do when Obama doesn't pull the troops out of Iraq?"
this was never part of his plan, mwanecek. none of the major candidates had complete withdrawal in their game book. i'm not sure why you believe this.
we'll be in iraq for decades. decades...because of mistakes made by conservative politicians.
yiota...you're killing me smalls. please see the THREAD under the article in which i posted all the scientific polling data the last time someone like yourself refused to acknowledge the politically inconvenient fact that the majority of americans support the dems' stances on policy issues.
tequiladrunk...if you don't know why scientific polling very accurately measures the wishes of the american people, you need to take a college level stats class.
July 14, 2008
11:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
Ted_in_Vegas writes:
Better question for you Jay: what are you going to do when we pull the majority of our troops out of Iraq, having succeeded in stablizing the country? Will you finally be able to admit that your were horribly wrong and that your spinelessness - and that of Pelosi, Reid, et al. - added to the difficulty we faced in suceeding?
As far as your claims that most Americans agree with the demonrat plan: Really? I look at the polls too and I see a lot of vagueness. I see a lot of Americans really upset about the course of the country, but not so much evidence as to what direction the masses want to go. I, for one - as you well know - am very disgusted at the immoral, liberal direction this country is facing and know there are millions just like me.
Even so, the majority is not always right? Remember, a long time ago in this very country, the majority thought black slavery was a good thing. That belief didn't make it so. If Quakers and hard-core, right-wing Christians of the day didn't buck the trend and work for the end of slavery, even though they were the minority, we might still have slavery. Would that be right? Even though the majority thought it was a good thing?
July 14, 2008
11:44 a.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
"what are you going to do when we pull the majority of our troops out of Iraq, having succeeded in stablizing the country?"
one more time, ted.
we're no closer to "stabilizing the country" than we were the LAST time we tried a failed "surge".
keep those rose colored glasses on buddy.
"I look at the polls too and I see a lot of vagueness."
what about these polls sounds "vague" to you?
NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll conducted by the polling organizations of Peter Hart (D) and Neil Newhouse (R). June 6-9, 2008. N=1,000 registered voters nationwide.
"When it comes to energy and gas prices, who do you believe should take the lead in addressing this issue: Congress or President Bush?" Half sample (Form B)
Congress 59%
Bush 21%
Both 16%
Unsure 4%
ABC News/Washington Post Poll. June 12-15, 2008. N=1,125 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3. Fieldwork by TNS.
"Which of these do you think is more important: providing health care coverage for all Americans, even if it means raising taxes, OR, holding down taxes, even if it means some Americans do not have health care coverage?"
Coverage For All 66%
Holding Down Taxes 31%
Unsure 3%
Thinking ahead to the next presidential election, do you think a Democratic or a Republican president would do a better job handling the economy?"
Democratic 55%
Republican 34%
Depends 2%
No Difference/Unsure 10%
"Regardless of how you usually vote, do you think the Republican Party or the Democratic Party is more likely to make the right decisions about the war in Iraq?" N=1,065 adults, MoE ± 3
Republican 34%
Democratic 51%
Both/Neither/Unsure 15%
CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll. June 26-29, 2008. N=1,026 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.
"Do you favor or oppose the U.S. war in Iraq?"
Favor 30%
Oppose 68%
Unsure 2%
"If you had to choose, would you rather see the next president keep the same number of troops in Iraq that are currently stationed there, or would you rather see the next president remove most U.S. troops in Iraq within a few months of taking office?"
Keep Same Number 33%
Remove Most 64%
Unsure 3%
July 14, 2008
12:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cwillyrun1 writes:
Good article Mike. You know it is when the liberals are unwadding their bunched up panties.
DenverDan, unemployment is NOT at an all time high, try again. Gas prices are at all time highs, but so is the average salary of Americans in general. Must be something called inflation, you think? So, are you okay with this woman singing some irrelevant song in place of the National Anthem at a government event?
In my opinion, it may be her right to freedom of speech, but it also reflects poorly on Hickenlooper and his people...... that they're so out of touch with the people they're hiring for specific services. If this woman was paid to sing the National Anthem, she was in breach of contract and should be sued as such.
July 15, 2008
12:14 p.m.
Suggest removal
Ted_in_Vegas writes:
Jay, jay, jay. Please quit relying on popularity to prove you're right. Majorities have been known to be wrong before; it is a poor argument based on your inability to prove your case.
First, our surge has failed? WOW! You have some capability to ignore the obvious!
Now, to the polls; assuming these poll numbers are accurate, for the interest of debate, I'll answer each in turn:
59% of Americans think Congress SHOULD lead the way in dealing with energy and gas prices. OK, I agree. Too bad the bumbling idiots in charge - Pelosi and Reid - aren't using rational thought in dealing with energy and gas prices.
66% think it is more important to providing health care coverage for all Americans, even if it means raising taxes. Just goes to show you how few Americans have a decent education! I blame the dumbed-down public schools. We can not increase taxes enough to pay for health care for everyone. You see, the more we make available, the more the demand for socialized medicine increases; its called supply and demand - an increase in supply creates an increase in demand. Eventually we'll hit the Point of DMR - if we haven't already - where an increase resources actually bring and cause fewer returns. Total coverage is impossible, just ask the English, Germans, Italians, Norwegians, Candians, etc.
55% of Americans think a demonrat president will do a better job of handling the economy. See the above answer as evidently most Americans don't understand our political-economic system; president's don't handle the economy - only an uneducated person would think so. I blame the public schools.
54% of Americans think Demonrats will make the right decisions about the war in Iraq?. (as of June 15th anyway) I wonder if that has changed now that we see the surge worked and we're already planning a pullback? At any rate, AGAIN!, just because a majority think it best doesn't make it best. Pulling out early would cause defeat and, as a military man, I prefer victory!
68% of Americans oppose war in Iraq. OK, and? Again, it doesn't make it right. I bet if you could poll 1760 American Colonists, 68% would've thought the British Crown should continue ruling the continent and that slavery was OK; didn't make it so, did it? Ruling by popular opinion is the tactic of fools and wimps.
64% of Americans want to remove most troops within a few months of taking office. OK, so. I'd like to remove all of our troops tomorrow - if we could do so victoriously. My point is; the question - like most poll questions - don't address under what circumstances we'd pull our troops. Of course, we're already pulling out since the surge worked...
Your polls don't convince me to choose failure as a policy. I'm still left wondering why you like to fail!
July 15, 2008
3:43 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
"Please quit relying on popularity to prove you're right."
ted, i've simply said and supported as fact that the majority of americans support dems' stances on the major issues before the country.
i'm right about that because the scientific polling on the matter says so.
i'm not saying the dems have all the right answers on the major issues before the country....just that the majority of americans believe they do vs. the republicans.
no surprise there considering The Track Record.
you can choose not to acknowledge that or you can come to terms with it and move on.
July 15, 2008
7:03 p.m.
Suggest removal
Ted_in_Vegas writes:
Wow, this article cites a poll that says McCain is the, slightly, preferred candidate to handle the Iraq situation.
I think, as usual, your claims are not as strong as you wish them to be.
July 16, 2008
9:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cwillyrun1 writes:
ted, polls have said that the majority of Americans feel McCain would handle the war in Iraq better than Obama. Obama has said he wants to pull our troops out because we should be chasing the Taliban and Al Qaeda. Well, Mr. wannabe President Obama...... Al Qaeda IS in Iraq. Obama says if he had intelligence that bin Laden was in Pakistan, he'd invade their country to go after bin Laden. Pakistan has said they won't allow U.S. troops inside their borders.... so it's an invasion. Let's see, get out of Iraq and invade Pakistan with their nuclear weapons, based off the intelligence that is widely criticized for the reasons we went to war in Iraq. Brilliant!
jay, Americans are against being taxed even more than now, and Democrats want to expand on taxes. How is it Americans are behind the Democrats on that stance? I won't even mention that most Americans don't want illegal immigration and amnesty for those criminals but Democrats would welcome them with open arms.
Obama is in over his head, and as time has gone by, we've seen more and more to back that up.
July 16, 2008
11:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
"Al Qaeda IS in Iraq"
we've gone over this a hundred times, cwilly.
al qaeda only represents 5% of the folks we fight in iraq...according to our own pentagon.
iraq has allowed al qaeda to restrengthen to 9/10 levels.
iraq is hindering our ability to effectively fight in afghanistan...with the folks who actually pose a threat to the US and who actually had something to do with 9/11.
"Americans are against being taxed even more than now, and Democrats want to expand on taxes"
once more...we've gone over this a hundred times.
if you are against higher taxes...don't vote republican:
http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
" I won't even mention that most Americans don't want illegal immigration and amnesty for those criminals but Democrats would welcome them with open arms."
yet another myth.
the vast majority of americans support the enforcement of our labor and border laws...AND...support a guest worker program (not citizenship amnesty by the way) that contains a path to citizenship for those who qualify and complete the required steps.
"Obama is in over his head, and as time has gone by, we've seen more and more to back that up"
you have? like what? has he had countless "senior moments" during which he routinely makes ignorant statements about geopolitics?
are his policy stances a continuation of the failed policies we've seen over the last 8 years?
why exactly do you believe that obama is "in over his head"?
July 16, 2008
11:48 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cwillyrun1 writes:
jay, what is a FACT is that Al Qaeda is in Iraq, and Obama naively believes it's easy to pull troops out. Since the U.S. has been fighting in both Afghanistan and Iraq, Americans haven't faced another terrorist attack on American soil. Maybe you have no problem dumping this problem off, but if it means we pull out and Iraq goes under control of terrorist organizations, I don't want the deaths of our soldiers to be in vain. The soldiers don't want that either.
jay, when Obama talks about raising taxes to companies that are ultimately passed onto the consumer, what do you think is going to happen? You can talk about it a hundred times, but you're still not getting the reality of the situation. We pay for it, not the magic dust fairy! Didn't Ritter say he wouldn't raise taxes as Governor, and that he wouldn't cave in to special interests? He lied...... he's tried to raise taxes with the property tax freeze that the courts said was an increase, and he's caved into the unions, a special interest group. This is the Democratic mantra, and denying the truth isn't getting you anywhere, jay.
About illegals, the majority of Americans want a secure border, with walls, right? Why is it the politicians continue to ignore the will of the people on this? The required steps that most Americans want is for illegals to get in line with everyone else applying for citizenship. Illegal immigration proponents would like us to believe those people should jump to the front of the line, even though technically, they're criminals for breaking American laws. Do you know what Mexico does with people crossing into their country illegally? They prosecute them as felons.
jay, Obama is in over his head when he talks about something without knowing any facts or opinions that matter. The troop withdrawal from Iraq, and as McCain has said, it's interesting for Obama to say it's not working over there without talking to Generals on the ground, and by ignoring the fact that the troop surge is producing positive results. He also wants to get the federal government involved in retirement accounts and the feds have already screwed up social security, so why? He wants to invade Pakistan and possibly start a nasty war that'll make Iraq look like a couple of kids rolling on the ground, based off of intelligence if binLaden's in Pakistan. Are you comfortable with that.... with Obama wanting to invade Pakistan based off of intelligence, the same intelligence group that's been criticized for the Iraq war? I see you avoided answering that one the first time, jay. Those are only a few minor reasons I see he's in over his head.
Obama's policy stances are similar to those of Jimmy Carter.... tax the people, and let's talk nicely to our enemies. Neither of those did Carter any good, and he's gone down as the worst President of the 20th century. Americans don't want another Jimmy Carter, ever.
You make it all too easy jay........ thanks!
July 16, 2008
12:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
"what is a FACT is that Al Qaeda is in Iraq"
i've never said anything different, cwilly.
it is also a fact that only 5% of the people we are fighting in iraq are al qaeda.
please confirm that you understand that.
"it means we pull out and Iraq goes under control of terrorist organizations, I don't want the deaths of our soldiers to be in vain. The soldiers don't want that either."
this is a false dilemma. you've given what's called a false choice. we can redeploy most of our combat troops out of iraq in order to fight the folks who actually pose a threat to us and who actually had something to do with 9/11 and still ensure that iraq as a country doesn't "go under control of terrorist organizations".
understand why this invalidates your point?
"when Obama talks about raising taxes to companies that are ultimately passed onto the consumer, what do you think is going to happen?"
no clue what you're talking about. is this in reference to ending the republican corporate welfare program for oil companies?
no clue what point you're trying to make with illegal immigration. one more time:
the vast majority of americans support the enforcement of our labor and border laws...AND...support a guest worker program (not citizenship amnesty by the way) that contains a path to citizenship for those who qualify and complete the required steps.
again...please confirm that you understand this.
"Obama is in over his head when he talks about something without knowing any facts or opinions that matter."
okay...give some examples...again...i'd like to know why you think obama is "over his head". links, not conspiracy theories about "invading pakistan", cwilly.
this kind of vague ranting might play on gunny bob blog, but we require a little more substantiation here.
finally...we've debunked the obama carter myth so many times it's getting old...here you say, "Obama's policy stances are similar to those of Jimmy Carter.... tax the people, and let's talk nicely to our enemies."
really cwilly? that's what the association has been reduced to? more tinfoil hat theories about "taxes" and "talk nicely to our enemies"?
come on man, you're too smart for that.
July 16, 2008
12:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cwillyrun1 writes:
jay, even you admit that Al Qaeda is in Iraq, yet you want to pull out. Good for you....... I'm sure you'd run from any fight, no matter how worthy it is.
jay, you've said the one thing that does make sense. You have no clue! Try thinking about this.... a windfall tax on oil profits means that tax is passed onto the consumer, so in the end, it's not a windfall tax on the oil companies, it's a tax on consumers. That wasn't so hard was it, unless you still have problems with comprehension, and in that case, I can't help you. I have no problem stopping with providing subsidies to oil companies, but a tax that we pay for, no thank you. Did you know Intel made a 25% increase in profits over last year? Considering how many people buy and use computers, you'd probably believe Intel should have a windfall tax on their profits too, right?
jay, about illegal immigrants.... despite your twisting it however you see fit, Americans don't want illegal immigrants to come here unlawfully, Americans want them to jump to the back of the line behind people who are applying through the legal process, and Americans don't want amnesty. Too many liberals feel the opposite. Sorry, but that's the truth to it. Now, since I put it simple enough for a fifth grader to understand, do you get it? Do you understand, jay??
Jay, try informing yourself on occasion. CNN has had stories that last few days about how Obama says if he's President, he'd pull out of Iraq and chase after the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and in Pakistan, if intelligence showed that he was there. Since Pakistan has said over and over that they won't allow U.S. soldiers in Pakistan, and since Obama has said he'd go into Pakistan, it's nothing more than an invasion. That's not what anyone else but you would call a conspiracy. Sorry to burst your bubble!
There's no theories, I base my opinions off of statements Obama's made, and knowing exactly what Jimmy Carter did for this country. It doesn't matter though, you believe what you will. Even some kids will run out in traffic after they're told over and over not to.
July 16, 2008
1 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
"jay, even you admit that Al Qaeda is in Iraq, yet you want to pull out"
i never said they weren't in iraq right now, cwilly.
i want to pull out most of our combat forces so we can fight in areas with 95% al qaeda...not 5%
please address this point...as i can't imagine it's going over your head...rather you're just refusing to acknowledge it.
"You have no clue!"
about the point YOU are trying to make, cwilly.
sounds like we're both on the same page in regards to ending corporate welfare. i know that obama has talked about making additional oil company taxes a part of his permanent platform, but hasn't done so.
have you heard differently?
"Americans don't want illegal immigrants to come here unlawfully"
i never said they did.
"Americans don't want amnesty."
no one is talking about amnesty. please address this point so i know that you understand this.
"Too many liberals feel the opposite"
actually no. the "liberals" side with the vast majority of americans on this issue. the minority and the majority just differ on what to do with the illegal immigrants already here.
"Jay, try informing yourself on occasion."
kind of a pathetic statement considering your track record here today.
"CNN has had stories that last few days about how Obama says if he's President, he'd pull out of Iraq and chase after the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and in Pakistan, if intelligence showed that he was there"
obama has repeatedly said that he'll act on actionable intelligence that takes our forces into areas on the pakistan border.
that does not mean we are going to "invade pakistan".
again...please give me some sign that you understand that.
"I base my opinions off of statements Obama's made, and knowing exactly what Jimmy Carter did for this country."
no, you're not. you're parroting this debunked myth because you heard it on Rush Limbaugh Fantasy Hour or something like it...as he's been saying it for months.
we've debunked it.
again...please address this so we can confirm that you understand why obama's policies most closely represent a third clinton term...just as mcsame most closely represents a third bush term.
do we need to look at the numbers again?
so....to recap...the points you need to address and confirm an understand in is the al qaeda percentage in iraq, the fact that a gwp doesn't represent citizenship amnesty and is supported by the vast majority of americans, that specops missions into border areas of pakistan doesn't equate to proof of your tinfoil hat conspiracy theories about the united states armed forces "invading pakistan"...and last but not least that you understand that the obama-carter myth has been debunked....so that we don't have to hear it from every rushian footsoldier that comes down the pike.
okay...go.
July 16, 2008
2:14 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cwillyrun1 writes:
jay, I would rather fight them in both areas, and Al Qaeda isn't the only terrorist organization in Iraq. Believing they are is just naive.
Sorry if I've hurt your feelings, you're not dumb, you just have a different view and not one I agree with. My view of illegals is they should enter the country by the way the law is. And like many others, I believe they should get in line behind the people who are already applying for citizenship. I think it's going to cause trouble to go into Pakistan as Obama's mentioned. He didn't say the border areas only, he specifically said "go into Pakistan" to find bin Laden, which in all honesty I have no problem with, but Pakistan isn't an enemy and going into their country without their permission, and based off of intelligence only, leaves us with another Iraq, yet worse considering they have a nuclear arsenal. Aggghh, you bring up Rush again. Why do you listen to him so much? You shouldn't believe everything he says. I know enough about what Jimmy Carter was as President, and some of Obama's plans are similar to what Carter had. Carter and diplomacy didn't get the hostages released, and Obama and diplomacy won't get Iran to stop with producing nuclear weapons. Has asking them to stop produced anything so far? Now, while you feel you debunk myths, you is not "we". I'm not the only person with these views. Clinton's policies and those that Obama espouse are not as similar as what Obama likes and what Jimmy Carter had while in office. That makes Jimmy and Barrack more like each other than what you give credit for, and I'd rather go with a third term of George Bush than a second term of Jimmy Carter! Thankfully, America had Ronald Reagan to bring the country out of that stinking pit! As I said, we don't agree, but I'm not changing my view based off of the facts that's known by everyone. jay, continue to feel free to be Al Sharpton's disciple........ HAHAHA.
July 16, 2008
2:27 p.m.
Suggest removal
Eli writes:
"Carter and diplomacy didn't get the hostages released"
Cwillyrun,
I've agreed with most of what you've said here, but I don't think you're very familiar with the details of what happened in Iran and the deals that were made in negotiating for the release of the hostages.
The Carter administration negotiated through the Algerian government for the release and made a series of concessions to the Iranians after the failed rescue attempt at Desert One.
May I suggest "Guests of the Ayatollah" by Mark Bowden? If you have an interest in what happened in Tehran, I think you'll find this book to be a great source. It's extremely well researched and is utterly lacking in political bias, save some author's comments at the end condemning the actions of the Iranians.
July 16, 2008
2:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
"Al Qaeda isn't the only terrorist organization in Iraq. Believing they are is just naive"
never said they were. the problem isn't that we're fighting them in both places...it's the way we're doing it. our bloated footprint in iraq (where we are facing 5% al qaeda) is hindering our ability to fight in places where we're fighting near all al qaeda.
see the problem?
" I think it's going to cause trouble to go into Pakistan as Obama's mentioned."
could be...how much trouble is being caused by NOT going in?
"some of Obama's plans are similar to what Carter had."
you betcha...and some of his policies are similar to what nixon had.
still doesn't change the fact that mccain most closely represents a third bush term and obama most closely represents a third clinton term.
" Clinton's policies and those that Obama espouse are not as similar as what Obama likes and what Jimmy Carter had while in office."
completely false. you're reaching now.
again....you can't make the case that obama more closely represents a carter second term than a clinton third.
ain't gonna happen. if you don't want me bringing up rush...stop spouting the same far right wing myths that he is.
"we don't agree, but I'm not changing my view based off of the facts that's known by everyone"
you are actively ignoring facts that are inconvenient to your political loyalties.
there in lies the problem, willy.
July 16, 2008
3:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cwillyrun1 writes:
True Eli, and thanks for the advice on the book. I'll definitely look into it.
July 16, 2008
3:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cwillyrun1 writes:
Well jay, since I'm independant and fall in line more closely to Libertarian than Democrat or Republican, your generalization has failed.
If you'd like to explain how Obama and Clinton are so alike, feel free. I don't see it, and you can't make the case (using your words). If you have no problem with the U.S. going into Pakistan based off of intelligence, yet have a problem with the U.S. going into Iraq based off of intelligence, it's hypocritical. Add to that the fact they have nukes. If there was undeniable proof, not intelligence but actual proof, bin Laden's in Pakistan, and we knew exactly where he was at, it could be worth the risk. But off of intelligence that you've criticized for getting America into Iraq? Funny... if it's a Democrat it's okay, but whatever.
July 16, 2008
3:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
what generalization is that, willy?
" I don't see it,"
sure you do...unless you're a moron...and i don't think that's the case. it's just politically inconvenient for you to admit it.
" If you have no problem with the U.S. going into Pakistan based off of intelligence, yet have a problem with the U.S. going into Iraq based off of intelligence"
actionable, real time intelligence...not trumped up speculation that we know is not credible.
HUGE difference.
nice try.
so are we done?
July 16, 2008
8:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
Ted_in_Vegas writes:
Jay, you were done before you started.
Most of Iraq is pacified and back in the hands of the Iraqi government. Just about the only group still fighting is AQ. Even Al-Sadr stood down after getting his butt kicked, royally, by Iraqi forces.
You, once again, are shown to have no clue about what you write.
July 17, 2008
10:23 a.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
ted, we still haven't provided enough stability for self governance...and are now having to go back to pre-surge troop levels because we don't have enough soldiers to sustain it.
the surge failed.
now...spouting myths about aq representing more than 5% of the enemy we face in iraq isn't going to change that fact.
al-sadr stood down because he was promised a piece of the pie, not because he was getting his "butt kicked". his army is still larger than the iraq regular.
where do you propose we get the troops necessary for victory?
if we aren't prepared to do that...can we still ask that our troops remain in harm's way without the resources necessary to win and come home?
July 17, 2008
11:28 a.m.
Suggest removal
Ted_in_Vegas writes:
IDIOT, we have the troops necessary for victory; furthermore, considering that we're now looking to pull back more troops, to a smaller force than pre-surge, we may even have more troops than are necessary.
ARE YOU NOT PAYING ATTENTION? The surge worked, why else would Obama and McCain be now calling for a similar surge in Afghanistan?
Closing your eyes from reality and wishing it away doesn't actually change anything you know.
Oh, and yes, Al Sadr was promised a piece of the pie; but that was while his troops were being decimated. Its the old "Carrot and Stick" approach, which is the key to the Surge. What was Al Sadr promised? Either join into an actual working government or get your butt kicked more. It was the same promise made to other indiginous militant groups; all of which have joined the government. AQ, according to the Investor's Business Daily, is now the ONLY group fighting the government and their numbers are down to less than a 10th of pre-surge levels.
We are succeeding where you wish we were failing. Too bad for you! Great for our troops! Give them, and God, the credit!
July 17, 2008
11:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
"we have the troops necessary for victory;"
boom.
we finally come back to the real issue.
willful ignorance in the form of refusing to acknowledge politically inconvenient facts.
ted, if the surge worked, why did it fail to accomplish its stated goal?
how does it fail...and "work" in your eyes?
no offense, but i think i'll listen to the pentagon before i'll give any credence to any of your tinfoil hat theories about iraq.
July 17, 2008
1:14 p.m.
Suggest removal
Ted_in_Vegas writes:
It failed? What planet are you on?
Is violence down? Yes.
Is the Iraqi government in control? Yes.
Is Iraq stabilized? Yes.
You have yet to cite any REAL facts, only your own misconceptions and failed perceptions.
July 18, 2008
10:51 a.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
"It failed? What planet are you on?"
it failed to accomplish its stated goal of providing enough stability for self governance, ted.
that is a fact.
stop running from it.