Say Anything Blog

Because that is all they can do.  Attack without any facts.  They are shameless.  They are on their last ropes and they know it.  This is a last ditch effort to maintain control of the Supreme Court.  The last time democrats tried this was Bork and before that was FDR’s attempt to “pack” the court, proposing to increase it from 9 to 15 judges to get his way.
Pitiful.
The Truth:  Lindsay Graham is our U. S. Senator.  He was in the same Air National Guard Unit I spent 36+ years in.

I have only been reading the transcripts, don’t watch"TV news” anymore, and have missed the whole tele-drama. Read a couple of pieces in BBC and have come to the conclusion that most of the world is mildly puzzeled by this whole process, much less most Americans. The personal attack tactics have become such an SOP that it is, for me, no longer relevent. Look at the man’s work product. That is the only standard that should interest any of us.

Juan Cole:

I don’t like Kennedy. At all. I think Schumer is a grandstanding fool and a pompous ass. I think Patrick Leahy is as partisan as they get, and not to be trusted. But only the most patently dishonest person on the planet would claim that Mrs. Alito left after a Democratic attack. She left after REPUBLICAN Sen. Lindsey Graham was basically praising Alito, defending him and reciting some of the things that have been said about Alito.

But it was not a withering attack from Democrats which unsettled Mrs. Alito. Not at all.

I am so sick and tired of everyone just lying about every-damned-thing.

Rob:

There are hundreds of opinions in the public record written by Judge Alito. He has heard thousands of cases. Why aren’t the Democrats pouring over that information instead of resort to these personal attacks?

I’m also wondering if anybody else noticed the irony in the Democrats latching onto a few select statements from Alito then running with them, instead of considering them in context with the much larger body of writings by Alito that suggest the contrary picture.

Tortured theories of literary criticism aside---this does seem to be a pervasive habit on the “modern liberal” front:  None of them know how to read in context.

I’m done with amok for now. G’day.

Pathetic is right! How pathetic is Alito that he has to hide behind his wife’s skirt, using an obviously staged outburst to garner sympathy.

As for Alito’s record---I’m pretty disgusted with his membership in the Princeton He-Man Woman Haters Club. But I’m far MORE disgusted at his long record of pro-imperial president, pro-corporate, anti-poor, anti-individual rights decisions. And the lying to Congress doesn’t sit too well either.

And I hate the fact that he was chosen specifically to overturn Roe---you know it, I know it, anyone with half a brain knows it---but he’s been trained to maintain a disengenious “I have no opinion” facade.

Pathetic indeed!

Boo-fuckin’-hoo.  If you can’t take the heat, get out of the subway turnstile.

I’m pretty sure that Ryan is quoting John Cole and not Juan Cole.  I’m also pretty sure that Rob fell for a bit of political theater.

So, ryan, you think she was upset because somebody said something nice about her husband? Your powers of deduction are just stunning. Oh, by the way, qouting Juan Cole is the best way to have people laugh at you.

I think we can say that John Cole can be somewhat passinate.  I don’t know why you think that Democrats should make things easy for Alito.  Stakes are big and membership in a group such as CAP should be questioned.  CAP published a woman’s name in their little political sheet for using contraceptives while Alito was a member.  What kind of behavior is that?

Everybody has something in their past that will look bad to one group or another.  In a critical position like Supreme Court justice an airing out of these subjects is probably a good idea.  It might be Alito’s single flaw - and one that many might think a feature not a bug.  Do you think that if the tables were turned and a liberal judge was the current nominee that Hatch et al wouldn’t be asking questions about his/her previous associations?  You may be guilty of a bit of over-excitablity yourself, Rob.

I don’t think it should determine Alito’s suitabilty for the court but I wish his wife were a bit stronger emotionally.  It must be hard to stay as sober as a judge when the person you share your life with is prone to public meltdowns.  Of course, Graham helped prep Alito for these hearings so I’m sure Graham knew what he was doing when he was spinning the Dem case against him.  It was, afterall, Graham put the Mrs. to her hankies.

You’re really going to tell me that you wish Alito’s wife wouldn’t cry after she’s forced to sit by, silent, as her husband is made out to be a racist/sexist snob?

Give me a break.  The attacks on Alito by Democrats have been unconscionable.  Disgusting, in fact.  If they want to determine whether or not he’d be a good judge then let them focus on his record as a judge.  And if they truly want to find out about his relationship with CAP let them go after it without first concluding that he is, in fact, a racist.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

I might be willing to believe that this was a “bit of political theater” if Ted Kennedy hadn’t been trying to make Alito out as a Klan member for the last couple of days.

Democrats are stepping over the line, and their questioning of Alito has been pathetic.  I suspect that the lefty’s here know it (as do the Democrats in Congress) because all we’re getting in respose is invective and bluster.

And John Cole is an overly-excitable twit.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

I thought Lindsey Graham was a Republican.  My bad.  It is his spin that seems to so outrage you.  Course, I have no right to complain.  I’ve long regreted the Dems inability to go hard after Repubs so if they engender such a reaction from you they are at least trying.  I still can’t help but feel that a more appropriate reaction from you would be smug self-satisfaction.  Alito, afterall, will be confirmed, Roe will be overturned, and corporate rights over civil rights will be strengthened.

Maybe she was laughing so hard she cried listening to Ted (I NEVER hire minorities, female aides are for fucking) Kennedy call anyone a racist or sexist. Listen to a lying alcoholic killer moralize about anything is a joke.

LowLife:

I’ve long regreted the Dems inability to go hard after Repubs so if they engender such a reaction from you they are at least trying.

Your response is exactly what is wrong with the modern Democratic party.  You guys are much more interested in provoking a response ("leaving a mark") than you are in getting anything accomplished.

You present no vision, no dreams.  You are left defending a marginal judicial decision that, if overturned, you have neither the legislative or the electorate support to reverse. This is your idea of populist governance?  GMAB.  Without the aid of politicized activist judges out, you would have no power, and we all realize this is what you really fear.

So instead of going after Alito on issues of substance, you people resolve yourselves to be as ugly, troll-like and bullish as possible.  No doubt you think this accomplishes something---which it does, it turns the stomachs of people who watch your Senator’s perform, and further erodes support from centrist voters.

Boy, it’s getting piled high and deep around here.  If that had been the wife of a liberal, all we’d be hearing about is how she’s a nutjob.

The hypocrisy of the right just gets more and more unbelievable:

1. “Judicial appointments deserve an up-or-down vote.” Except for Harriet Miers.

2. “The right to an abortion isn’t explicitly written into the Constitution.” But it’s ok if the president orders warrantless wiretaps, because he’s defending the nation.

3. “Get rid of activist judges.” Except for those who will overturn RvW or order a feeding tube to be stuck back in to a vegetable.

4. “We want to have a debate about Iraq.” But if you bring up oil or cherry-picked intelligence, you’re helping the enemy.

5. “We welcome dissent.” As long as Congress is a rubber-stamp for our policies.

The real tragedy about this hearing and the focus on abortion is that it’s one of the least-impactful issues on the lives of the citizens of the US.

Dudes, I know people who work 12 hours a day, 6 or 7 days a week at shitty McJobs and are still below the povery line.

Makes me wonder what life choices they’ve made that they can’t get a better job.  Maybe they need to move to a new area or re-prioritize where they’re spending their money, because I know a few people working at Wal-Mart and McDonald’s who are getting along just fine.

As for the people of Iraq—-what do they have to cry about? 100,000 civilian deaths from foreign occupation with no end in sight. An Iran-friendly theocracy forming. A quagmire of death that will last for years, perhaps decades.

Don, only a goofball like yourself would buy into that 100,000 civilian deaths number. The reality is closer to the 30,000 - 35,000 range...most of those caused by insurgents.  But even if it was 100,000, we’ve still saved some lives over and above what Saddam would have killed had he still been in power.

As for Ms. Alito and her fake crocodile tears—-Fuck her.

Ah, that famed sensitive liberalism.  Stupid wives caring about their husbands.  Who needs ‘em?

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Lindsey Grahm is a Republican, but his comments weren’t what made Alito’s wife cry.  His “are you a bigot” question was a clear jab at the Dem. line of questioning.  You’re taking it out of context to spin the issue.

If clinging to that spin makes you feel better about the Dems having nother outside of “you’re a racist!” to question Alito with then go with it, I guess.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

If that had been the wife of a liberal, all we’d be hearing about is how she’s a nutjob.

But she wasn’t.  Let’s try to stay away from flights of fancy, ok?

1. “Judicial appointments deserve an up-or-down vote.” Except for Harriet Miers.

What a bunch of baloney.  Nobody opposed giving Miers an up or down vote.  I don’t know of one Republican who suggested filibustering her.  There were a lot of Republicans expressing concern about her qualifications and based on that Bush withdrew her.  Not the same thing at all.

2. “The right to an abortion isn’t explicitly written into the Constitution.” But it’s ok if the president orders warrantless wiretaps, because he’s defending the nation.

That’s because the President’s Article II war powers are expressly written into the Constitution.  Unless you were expecting the framers to list every sort of tactic acceptable for use by the President?

3. “Get rid of activist judges.” Except for those who will overturn RvW or order a feeding tube to be stuck back in to a vegetable.

I agree with you on the Schiavo thing, but I don’t see where overturning Roe v. Wade would make one an activist judge.  It was a bad ruling.  Period.  Overturning bad rulings is not activism, unless you think the overturning of Dred Scott was activism…

4. “We want to have a debate about Iraq.” But if you bring up oil or cherry-picked intelligence, you’re helping the enemy.

Reasonable people can debate the war in Iraq.  Unfortunately, many of the people doing the debating aren’t reasonable.  Telling the country that we’re losing in Iraq helps the enemy.  Endlessly calling for troop withdrawal, even as we approach the cusp of victory, helps the enemy.  Whether you want to admit these things or not just doesn’t matter.

5. “We welcome dissent.” As long as Congress is a rubber-stamp for our policies.

Huh?  Congress has certainly not been a rubber stamp for the policies of the Bush administration.  If anything, the Bush administration has been a rubber stamp for Congress.  Seriously, how many bills has Bush vetoed?

The real tragedy about this hearing and the focus on abortion is that it’s one of the least-impactful issues on the lives of the citizens of the US.

Agreed.  Why are Democrats spending so much time focused on it?

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Dudes, I know people who work 12 hours a day, 6 or 7 days a week at shitty McJobs and are still below the povery line. You know what they cry about? Having to choose between paying the rent or their kid’s doctor bills. Not having the opportunities to lift themselves out of poverty. Listening to gang shoot-outs right outside their window.

As for the people of Iraq----what do they have to cry about? 100,000 civilian deaths from foreign occupation with no end in sight. An Iran-friendly theocracy forming. A quagmire of death that will last for years, perhaps decades.

As for Ms. Alito and her fake crocodile tears----Fuck her.

Fuck her and the horse she rode in on. Fuck her, the horse, and every delusional neo-con who thinks her fake tears are a reason to give this anti-choice, anti-individual rights, pro-corporate polluter, pro-imperial presidency judge to the high court.

Makes me wonder what life choices they’ve made that they can’t get a better job. Maybe they need to move to a new area or re-prioritize where they’re spending their money…

That’s right----always blame the victim. If they’re poor it must be because they are bad and it’s a judgement from God, right?

Most of the working poor cannot “move to a new area,” Rob, because they’re, y’know, poor.

And many of them “re-prioritize where they’re spending their money” as well---by choosing between food or rent.

Don, only a goofball like yourself would buy into that 100,000 civilian deaths number. The reality is closer to the 30,000 - 35,000 range…most of those caused by insurgents

30,000 - 35,000 by direct gunfire/bombing, dude. The rest are from hospitals destroyed, wells demolished, disease, hunger, etc etc. Read this for more info on the John Hopkins research study.

Of course, we both know you’ll stick to whatever the right-wing media tells you, so why bother?

Forgive me if I find John Hopkins Medical School and the most pretigious medical journal in Europe just a wee bit more credible than some random blogger in North Dakota.

Ah, that famed sensitive liberalism. Stupid wives caring about their husbands. Who needs ‘em?

They reap what they sow, Rob. After demonstrating your lack of compassion for the working poor, you’ve got no right to lecture me about senstivity.

I hasten to add I greatly prefer option 2) to 1), certainly in the long-term - I was merely pointing out that alternative options might have existed.

Mark,

I guess I didn’t get as in-depth as I should have as I was responding to Don (who has proven on more than one occassion his inability to debate in a rational, or even sane, manner) and we’ve been over the subject so many times before I didn’t think anyone (outside of a few on the political fringes) was even still buying that Lancet study any more.

I’ll just leave it with this: In a war where the enemy routinely targets citizens and hides themselves among the general citezenry 30,000 - 35,000 civilian deaths isn’t quite as bad as it sounds.  Tragic still, yes, but when compared to the level of good we’ve done in Iraq I’m willing to live with it.

I know you disagree with me about going to war in Iraq, but I think you’re dead wrong.  Not that it matters now.  We’re there, and it is in our best interest to finish the job we’re there to do before we leave.

Don:

That’s right—-always blame the victim. If they’re poor it must be because they are bad and it’s a judgement from God, right?

No, what I’m saying is that most people work at jobs like McDonald’s because a) they’re really young and just getting started, b) only need to work part time or c) are working the only job they can get after a string of bad life choices.

There are very few blameless people in this world, Don.

30,000 - 35,000 by direct gunfire/bombing, dude. The rest are from hospitals destroyed, wells demolished, disease, hunger, etc etc. Read this for more info on the John Hopkins research study.

Of course, we both know you’ll stick to whatever the right-wing media tells you, so why bother?

That Lancet study has been so throughly gone over here before that I’m not even going to boether.  Suffice it to say that the only people still buying it are people like you and Cindy Sheehan.  In other words: the political fringe.  The 30,000 - 35,000 number is the one most agree on, and I think it makes sense.  It is a hard number to quantify, but 100,000 is so off the charts compared to every other study as to be laughable.

They reap what they sow, Rob. After demonstrating your lack of compassion for the working poor, you’ve got no right to lecture me about senstivity.

What exactly did Judge Alito “sow” in order to be called a racist and drug through the mud as he has been?  Other than being generally conservative in his politics?

And I have plenty of compassion for the “working poor,” its just that I’m not a communist like you are.  I believe in people working for what they get, and I’m not about to feel sorry for people who put themselves in bad situations through their own choices.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

"But even if it was 100,000, we’ve still saved some lives over and above what Saddam would have killed had he still been in power.”

A) Semantically speaking, I think that should read ‘we’ve been responsible, directly or indirectly, for less deaths than would have been the case if Saddam were still in power’.
If Saddam killed two hundred people yesterday, and I kill one hundred people today, that does not mean I have saved one hundred people. I’ve just killed less people.

B) From your mathematics, I take it that you assume Saddam would have killed around about 30,000 people a year. Is that estimate based on his rule as a whole, or just the last couple of years? If we’re going into the realm of hypothesis, it’s probably better to use more recent data.

Finally, I don’t think there was a straight choice between

1) Saddam at 30,000 deaths a year
and
2) the current situation at something less than that.

I’m sure it would have been perfectly possible to pursue a course of containment whereby, albeit Saddam remained in power, there were a negligible amount of deaths per annum (I use negligible only in the context of the size of the figures we’re discussing here). Going to war was therefore a moral choice between 2) (many thousands of deaths per year and 3) containment - which certainly worked for the Kurdish north during the 1990s.

Why should Saddam, at his worst, be the yardstick by which we judge the number of deaths?

Mark points out exactly what I’m talking about---but much smarter and less snarky than I do. Bravo, Mark.

As for Ms. Alito and her fake crocodile tears—-Fuck her.

Hate to say it, but this was probably the smartest thing said in this whole thread.  The Dems are definately guilty of saying some pretty unneccessary and terrible things.  But why do we care about Mrs. Alito?  There are so many people with much more serious problems and I don’t see them crying about it.  Judge Alito willingly allowed himself to be subjected to this kind of scrutiny, so I refuse to be sympathetic toward his wife.  If her biggest problem is having her husband called a few names by people no one take seriously, than I’m fuckin’ jealous of her.

That Lancet study has been so throughly gone over here before that I’m not even going to boether.

By “gone over” you mean “denied by the Bush regime and their stenographers in the corporate media.” As far as I’m concerned, they have enen less credibility than you do.

No, what I’m saying is that most people work at jobs like McDonald’s because a) they’re really young and just getting started, b) only need to work part time or c) are working the only job they can get after a string of bad life choices.

You’re wrong---but as long as you insist on burying your head in the sand, there’s nothing more that I can do.

I’ll just leave it with this: In a war where the enemy routinely targets citizens and hides themselves among the general citezenry 30,000 - 35,000 civilian deaths isn’t quite as bad as it sounds. Tragic still, yes, but when compared to the level of good we’ve done in Iraq I’m willing to live with it.

If the enemy “routinely targets citizens,” then---in the words of the great Walt Kelly: “We have met the enemy and he am us.”

I’m sooooo relieved to hear that you’re “willing to live with it” up there in the frozen North. Now please go to Iraq, find a man who has lost his home, his livelihood and his entire family to US bombs, and tell him how you’re “willing to live with it.”

There are thousands dying in Darfur, so I refuse to be bummed out by my buddy getting laid off from his job. Fuck him. I’ve got better things to worry about.

You know that’s not what I meant.  Getting laid off is a real problem.  Having your spouse called a few disgusting names by a bunch of nutjobs is not.  I’d be sympathetic toward your friend, but I just cannot justify feeling sympathetic toward Mrs. Alito.  So what if some woman was upset by a few hurtful remarks that weren’t even directed at her?

If I stub my toe today, will you coddle me if I cry?

Don: As much as you may want to blame America first for everything, you’re way off base.  Our troops aren’t not the ones targeting civilians.  100,000 civilian deaths is way off the map, it isn’t even remotely accurate.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

There are thousands dying in Darfur, so I refuse to be bummed out by my buddy getting laid off from his job.  Fuck him.  I’ve got better things to worry about.

Great line of reasoning, Andrew.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

I’m not criticizing Mrs. Alito’s reaction (though I think it’s a bit much).  What I’m criticizing is the fact that everyone is making a big deal over her getting so upset.  Who cares if she had a few tears?  Its not like she has a huge problem or anything.  So why bother feeling sympathetic?

Let’s not make a mountain out of a mole hill.  There are plenty of more serious things to criticize the Dems about, besides making someone’s wife cry.  Afterall, Kennedy did get away with killing a woman.  And the rest of the Dems on that committee are nutjobs.

If you were my wife who I loved very much, yes I would.

For those of us who are familiar with internet debate, where terms like “racist” and “fascist” are thrown around routinely and indiscriminately, what has been done to Alito may not seem like a big deal.  To a woman already under a lot of stress and media scrutiny, watching your husband have his career and personal life drug through the mud, to have such terrible things implied about it, it is no wonder she shed a few tears.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not equating this with losing a job or anything (though that is the example I used above, perhaps it wasn’t the best), but it is hard, and I do question why some participating in these proceedings need be so hateful.  Especially when it is so unwarranted.

I’m not saying that the Democrats who have been participating in this are guilty of a crime or anything, I’m just saying that they’re guilty of being jerks and are worthy of being criticized for that.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

If you were my wife who I loved very much, yes I would.

Gosh, you sure do know how to make a fella blush.

Astute claims like made here, right before you decided to tuck your tail and run? Hard to back up lies, isn’t it Don?

I was responding to Don (who has proven on more than one occassion his inability to debate in a rational, or even sane, manner)…

I have this annoying habit of making a astute claim and backing it up with credible evidence. What a putz I am!

Why can’t I be like bob or 2 or lik---pulling paranoid fantasies outta my ass?

Our troops aren’t not the ones targeting civilians.

You’re wrong, as usual---but as long as you consider the Rev. Sun Yung Moon a reliable news source, I have no illusions of educating you.

100,000 civilian deaths is way off the map, it isn’t even remotely accurate.

Again, who has more credibility---John Hopkins Medical School, or you? I’m gonna go with John Hopkins.

BTW---the high number includes ALL deaths as a result of the war; famine because of bombed out farms, disease because hospitals were blown up, etc. 30,000 - 40,000 deaths directly due to getting their face shot off is probably accurate.

Like the president, you don’t seem to grok the concept that actions have consequences.

I’m not criticizing Mrs. Alito’s reaction (though I think it’s a bit much). What I’m criticizing is the fact that everyone is making a big deal over her getting so upset.

Well, the point behind the “big deal” over her getting upset is the line of questioning Demcorats have chosen to pursue.  I think it is wildly inappropriate and not at all productive as to the real purposes of the hearing.  Mrs. Alito crying is a symptom of the problem, and I see no problems in pointing that out.

Gosh, you sure do know how to make a fella blush.

Thank you.  I’m quite charming when I try to be.  My point, though, is that its hard to watch a loved one get grilled like Alito has been.  If I were watching my wife take shots like Alito have I probably would have had to been restrained.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

I have this annoying habit of making a astute claim and backing it up with credible evidence. What a putz I am!

You usually don’t make any claims, you just insult people.  But when you do try to make a point you usually back it up with some far-left, tinfoil hat rantings.

Honestly, I think you’ve done more work here on SA making my positions look good than supporting your own.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

What, now all of the sudden you don’t know how to click a link, Don? Your comment in that other thread was a lie and I proved it but for some reason you can’t seem to find that other thread now. Typical lying liberal.

Astute claims like made here, right before you decided to tuck your tail and run? Hard to back up lies, isn’t it Don?

What the hell are you talking about? care to try that again in English?

donnie, I have allready explained to you that the whole"gay man standing in the middle of the room screaming until everyone agrees with it” just don’t work. As for the"sources" you link, they are worse than a waste of time, they are riddled with virusi. I would suggest you get a clue, though that would be worse than a waste of time in it’s self, goodbye.

Your comment in that other thread was a lie and I proved it…

Your definition of “proof” is to scream like a sissy. It’s not mine, so bugger off.

As for the”sources” you link, they are worse than a waste of time…

They are only a waste of time for someone like you, an illiterate hick with a closed mind and a melon the size of Texas.

Don Myers:

As for the people of Iraq—-what do they have to cry about? 100,000 civilian deaths from foreign occupation with no end in sight.

That 100,000 civilian deaths is based on flawed methodologies, as was summarised here. I have found few positive responses by anybody other than those self-served by these highly inflated numbers.  Marc Garlasco of HRW had this to say of the Lancet report:

“The methods that they used are certainly prone to inflation due to overcounting,” said Marc E. Garlasco, senior military analyst for Human Rights Watch, which investigated the number of civilian deaths that occurred during the invasion. “These numbers seem to be inflated.”

Given a choice between estimates based on good methodology such as the iraqbodycount number of 28,000-31,000 and junk science like the Lancet report, any reasonable person would pick with the method free of major methodological flaws.  But not Don.  Don, why do you hate truth so much? [tm]

Secondly the 25,000 to 30,000 number is over 2+ years, may of which were intentionally caused by suicide bombers and other insurgent activity financed and directed by former Ba’athists.  Between 1996 and 2003, Saddam was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of deaths through his diversion of the oil-for-food money to the construction of his nearly 100 new palace resorts.  All I can say is these former Ba’athists must miss their old day job, if they like this kind of moonlighting so much.

In regard to Mark’s comment, you have to be pretty careful about constructing a false moral equivalence, especially when it is an artifice based on comparing the actions of formerly in-power Ba’athists thugs and now out-of-power Ba’athist thugs.

Rob,
Thanks for taking care of the light work, carrying the water on this string.  People who work for a living are not “victims”, but most are honest people, trying to make a living, and moving up in life honestly.  Take a look at my blog today for some facts and figures.

The Truth:  I saw one of the tombs in Kuwait, the results of Sadam’s invasion and rape of that country.  After a few years, when the final count of dead and tortured bodies has been counted, we will have more facts to discuss.  In the meantime, he was responsible for 1 + 1.1 million=2.1 million deaths during his war with his neighbor, Iran.

We are not occupying Iraq.  We were invited to assist in the transition from a brutal dictatorship for the last 35 years or so to a democracy.  I saw with my own eyes on three local TV stations in Iraq, when on 28June04 the interim leader of Iraq asked the United States of America to stay there to help them.  That request has been renewed twice since.  We will hear from the newly elected representatives of the permanent government on their wishes in the next weeks.  Liberals love to twist words like the truth (Pravda) and re-education camps (torture jails).

[...] […] Here’s some video of Sam Alito’s wife getting up and walking out of the hearings while Sen. Lindsey Grahm apologizes for the actions and statements of his colleagues. […] Pingback by Say Anything - North Dakota’s Most Popular Political Blog » Democrats Make Alito’s Wife Cry — January 11, 2006 @ 9:53 pm [...]