A VIDEO THAT WILL FOOL MILLIONS OF PEOPLE!

[got tonkaed]

In Iraq, because America helped, we screwed it up yes, now we have to stay and fix it.

Am I right in thinking that, here, "America helped" is a euphemism for "launched an illegal, unprovoked invasion"?!?!

one could certainly make the claim.

[vtmarik]

In Iraq, because America helped, we screwed it up yes, now we have to stay and fix it.

Am I right in thinking that, here, "America helped" is a euphemism for "launched an illegal, unprovoked invasion"?!?!

Why are you clouding his patriotic mind with something as evil and unamerican as facts?

[brianm]

actually having read the book Imperial Hubris before i had left for the summer, i have the feeling that really there are many occasions when neither side left/right and you can even throw in the middle if you want, have any clue what exactly homeland security and fighting a war against terrorism is supposed to mean. Now this is a knock because of course the terrorism issue is a very grave one but its importnat to understand that there are all kinds of possibilities for error given the parameters we have put on the conflict.

So to claim that one side has the answers, especially the right...when it seems that it was the right who bundled things up early on when things did matter, seems to be a bit much. Im not going to claim that the left has a better answer, but the right hasnt exactly produced the encyclopedia on how to fight terror.

Would you support a candidate that denied that the holocaust occured? To take it a step further, would you support a party that didn't censure a prominent leader of that party for denial that millions of people were slaughtered, or that made remarks such as 'there were many people who were at Auschwitz that were later released and thrived'?

On June 19th, John Kerry stated that there was no mass slaughter when America pulled out of Vietnam and that the people who were sent to 'reeducation camps' have found a way to thrive, and that the 'boat people' was not a major problem.

Conservative estimates (as in lowest estimate, not politically conservative) are that well over 2,000,000 people died in the re-education camps, another 800,000 died fleeing by sea, and well over 3,000,000 died in the killing fields of Laos and Cambodia (roughly 30% of the total population...). Teachers and anyone who wore glasses (the thought being if they needed glasses, then they probably could read, thus were educated) were summarily executed by armed bands of Khmere Rouge thugs (at least the Chinese had mock trials before they killed their intellectuals).

Either he's in denial, or very highly misinformed. While the withdrawal of American troops was not directly responsible for the deaths, the lack of providing support as detailed in the Paris Peace Accords certainly was directly responsible for these deaths. You can't just 'declare victory and go home' after you accept the responsibility of going to war, otherwise other people will pay for your adventurism and irresponsibility, and pay with their very lives.

Shame on John Kerry.

Another thought...

I'm having a difficult time deciding who I will vote for in 08. I like Obama, but I doubt he'll get the nomination, and in light of his statements regarding the War on Terror and the war in Iraq, I am not sure he would be the best choice for commander in chief (on the other hand, for domestic issues, taxes, the economy, and foreign issues regarding our allies, I think he very well may be the best overall candidate).

On the other hand, I think McCain would be the most qualified to be Commander in Chief, and would bring the war in Iraq to an honorable conclusion (much like Nixon salvaged the disaster in Vietnam that was handed to him by LBJ). Nixon had his flaws, but he did achieve victory in Vietnam, and if Congress had held up our obligations under the Paris Peace Accords, South Vietnam would be a prosperous democracy today just as South Korea is.

The loss in Vietnam didn't occur when we withdrew, but when we failed to live up to our obligations (in effect, the country wanted to forget about Vietnam rather than do the right thing and support an ally). I feel that we havn't learned the lesson of Vietnam, and if the time comes in the next couple of years to pull our troops out, Congress will use the absence of combat troops to support to quietly forget that we made promises and that we STARTED that war and are obligated now to help Iraq achieve stability. McCain I do not feel will let Congress quietly 'forget' about Iraq (and being an honest man, won't give them an exuse the way Nixon did with Watergate).

However, regardless of how well qualified to lead the military in these dark times, I don't think McCain will get the nomination, it will be either Rudy Juliani or Fred Thompson, and while I belive both are willing to fight the war out in Iraq to an honorable conclusion and will strive for stability in the middle east, I don't think they have the background for it (any more than Bush, who has proven willing to confront and fight the terrorists where they live, had the proper background for the job. Being willing to do the job and being the bast man for the job are two different things).

So that is my view of the 08 elections, the Democrats are going to nominate Hillary who will lose to whoever the GOP nominates (because she has the highest 'under no circumstances will vote for' rating, and when you are that polarizing you simply can't win the close swing states) and their best candidate is probably not even going to be the vice presidential candidate (Hillary, the ultimate queen bee, will pick a relatively obscure candidate for VP, of that I am reasonably certain). The GOP meanwhile will continue to forget that their party base is conservative or moderately conservative, and will nominate Rudy in spite of the fact that he's not the best candidate, or will nominate Thompson who may be too conservative and will put off many moderate voters. If they nominate Rudy, he will pick a relatively conservative VP candidate (much like Bush 41 picked Dan Quaile, because he was percieved as being moderate he needed a conservative for VP to garner the votes) and if Thompson wins he'll probably pick a moderate (much like Regan picked Bush 41) as his VP. EIther way, the most qualified Commander in Chief won't be part of the picture, he'll have to continue his campaign to actually win in Iraq (what a concept!!) from the Senate floor.

I also predict that another year of San Fran style politics and non-binding resolutions will jepordize house majority (but probably not senate majority, the house is by far seen as the most screwed up side of Congress). When people are not satisfied, incumbents get voted out and this Congress has the absolute lowest opinion polls of any Congress, even lower than Bush's approval numbers (which are also quite low, so it's quite the achievment for them to sink even lower than that). It is a sad statement about our political climate when two out of three of the branches of government have record low approval ratings...

Sorry I wandered off topic, but I was feeling analytical this morning...

[DaGip]

Very good video that any red-blooded Sheeple would like.CLICK HERE TO WATCH

Did you hear him say "Holy Army"? That's scary if that's what our military is now starting to think of themselves! My brother is in the Marines, I know he doesn't think he is part of a "Holy Army"...I don't think the "Holy Army" is here yet, but when it comes, the Marines wouldn't stand a chance!

[Backglass]

Very good video that any red-blooded Sheeple would like.CLICK HERE TO WATCH

Did you hear him say "Holy Army"? That's scary if that's what our military is now starting to think of themselves! My brother is in the Marines, I know he doesn't think he is part of a "Holy Army"...I don't think the "Holy Army" is here yet, but when it comes, the Marines wouldn't stand a chance!

Waiter! More Kool-Aid for my friend!

[jay_a2j]

Very good video that any red-blooded Sheeple would like.CLICK HERE TO WATCH

Did you hear him say "Holy Army"? That's scary if that's what our military is now starting to think of themselves! My brother is in the Marines, I know he doesn't think he is part of a "Holy Army"...I don't think the "Holy Army" is here yet, but when it comes, the Marines wouldn't stand a chance!

Waiter! More Kool-Aid for my friend!

waiter: I'm sorry sir, you seem to have drunk it all.

[heavycola]

In Iraq, because America helped, we screwed it up yes, now we have to stay and fix it.

Am I right in thinking that, here, "America helped" is a euphemism for "launched an illegal, unprovoked invasion"?!?!

Why are you clouding his patriotic mind with something as evil and unamerican as facts?

Because Stopper is a communist. Off to the camps with you.

[Backglass]

Very good video that any red-blooded Sheeple would like.CLICK HERE TO WATCH

Did you hear him say "Holy Army"? That's scary if that's what our military is now starting to think of themselves! My brother is in the Marines, I know he doesn't think he is part of a "Holy Army"...I don't think the "Holy Army" is here yet, but when it comes, the Marines wouldn't stand a chance!

Waiter! More Kool-Aid for my friend!

waiter: I'm sorry sir, you seem to have drunk it all.

Rip up that drivers license yet?