Dems/Media own defeat

2

202typical

Long Time Member
Messages
3,123
You know last week or was it earlier this week. Some very good news was coming out about the success the Troop Surge is having in Iraq. Apperently the terrorist are on the run and former Alquida strong hold are no longer. Yep hardly a peep on ABC, CBS or NBC..................typical though and should not shock anyone. However the thing that was really the best news is, that it seems the Iraqi people are getting fed up and cooperating more with us and even Alquida members them selves are fed up with the brutality and the actions of Alquida.

I have a question for all the Lefties on this site. This thing could very well turn around with in the next year or sooner and Bush may very well be proven right. What then will you nay sayers, quiters, losers, cut and runners and peace hippies have to say. Will any of you have the sack to say you were/are wrong?

I seriuosly doubt it as most of you are simply to far gone with with DOOM and GLOOM and yes HATRED for Bush.

Oh and will it ever be bad for the Dems...........So bad it would take years for them to recover.............I can imagine the Utopia................can you?
 
The message that I haven't heard in the Dem. debates is a detailed plan on how they would fight the war on terror. It's almost like they don't think there is a threat to our country. I doubt if there are many people in our country that want to stay in Iraq any longer than we have to, but what would happen if we pulled out now. I want to hear the "PLAN" and "GOALS" on fighting the war on terror.
All I hear now is there isn't any threat, and we should quit fighting the terrorist.
 
The only thing the Dems have is Pointless investigation after pointless investigation, after pointless investigation, after pointless investigation.....................
 
Hey 202, you have to give the Dem's more credit than pointless investigation, after pointless investigation. They did pass the min. wage bill. Not bad for 8 months in control.
 
>Hey 202, you have to give
>the Dem's more credit than
>pointless investigation, after pointless investigation.
> They did pass the
>min. wage bill. Not
>bad for 8 months in
>control.

They also have named a bunch of Post Offices.

The dems have vested too much in us losing to ever say anything positive is happening over there, and yes the media IS part of the democratic party, offically or unofficially it makes no difference. They will do everything they can to put a negative spin on news coming out of Iraq and squash any good news, since that would hurt their agenda. It is a sad day when p we put politics and hatred for Bush above the country and our soldiers. Reid, Pelosi, Murtha, and the rest of the dumbacrats can't afford to have America succeed in Iraq, as it would lead to their lose of power.

PRO
 
yep, just like global warming too, the dems want to see the end of the world. you guys crack me up . . . take a chill-pill, rock back a little in your chair and smell the air around you, life is good, it all doom and gloom. . .
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-27-07 AT 05:16PM (MST)[p]The dems need to be lined up in front a firing squad for treason if you ask me. You know the House Appropriations Committee recently cut 298 million out of the missile defense program and only left 80 million. This for a system that is going to cost 3.5 billion and 75% of the American people, both dems and reps, feel missile defense is important and should be implemented. They did this at a time that everywhere you look more countries are aquiring nukes.

Pakistan recently tested a cruise missile with a range of 435 miles and is now building a massive underground base south of Riyadh. Putin has threatened to target Europe. Iran is fast on track to a possible nuke sometime within the next 2 yrs. Saudia Arabia is now trying to develop nukes. Lets not talk about N. Korea and China, both threats.

Poland, Czech, Britain, Japan, and Germany all want a missile defense system on their soil. Are the dems morons or what?? Don't they see any kind of threat from anywhere? The rest of the world certainly does.

The more I see coming out of this congress, the more I have to believe Dr. Savage, even though I don't want to, is right. Liberalism "IS" a mental disorder!! No doubt about it. Lets put em out of their misery asap. Lock and Load baby!
 
>yep, just like global warming too,
>the dems want to see
>the end of the world.
>you guys crack me up
>. . . take a
>chill-pill, rock back a little
>in your chair and smell
>the air around you, life
>is good, it all doom
>and gloom. . .

Hello! global warming, defeat in Iraq, WHO is gloom and doom here? That would be the left. What are you sniffing up there anyhow?

PRO
 
I hope you're right 202 and the next year will tell. I've been reading this site for three years and haven't read a post by what I would call a lefty or liberal.
Remember their is a middle ground where most of the nation falls called moderates. Go read some of the liberal sites and you will see Dude, Zigga,tfinal, ftw and myself aren't really lefties unless you cosider being a lefty being to the left of the neocons. The lefties bother me as much as the neocons.
 
"I have a question for all the Lefties on this site. This thing could very well turn around with in the next year or sooner and Bush may very well be proven right. What then will you nay sayers, quiters, losers, cut and runners and peace hippies have to say. Will any of you have the sack to say you were/are wrong?"

202, Absolutley, in fact I'll say thank you Mr. President, sorry I ever doubted you and mean it.

Now, will all you Bush lickers do the same if things continue to degenerate and we end up pulling out of this mess? If history proves Bush wrong, will you admit you were wrong?

RUS
 
>"I have a question for all
>the Lefties on this site.
>This thing could very well
>turn around with in the
>next year or sooner and
>Bush may very well be
>proven right. What then will
>you nay sayers, quiters, losers,
>cut and runners and peace
>hippies have to say. Will
>any of you have the
>sack to say you were/are
>wrong?"
>
>202, Absolutley, in fact I'll say
>thank you Mr. President, sorry
>I ever doubted you and
>mean it.
>
>Now, will all you Bush lickers
>do the same if things
>continue to degenerate and we
>end up pulling out of
>this mess? If history proves
>Bush wrong, will you admit
>you were wrong?
>
>RUS

Bush licker and proud of it, aren't you? Not that there is anything wrong with being a pud licker.

PRO
 
" yep, just like global warming too, the dems want to see the end of the world. you guys crack me up . . . take a chill-pill, rock back a little in your chair and smell the air around you, life is good, it all doom and gloom. . ."

T the siissy Dems don't want the end of the world, they prefer all our tax dollars. They want to tax us for science fiction on man mande global warming, they want to name their oscar winner of Inconvienient Lie and Messiah I might add as "Global Warming Czar" Yes sir and they would love nothing more than to put that fat slob Michael moore in charge of Scocialised medicine. Hillary says she will hit the ground running with Scocialised Healthcare. Oh joy!!

Personnally I can not wait for the Dems to take the Whitehouse cause I am going to dog you sissy leftist every friggin day. You think I suck now T just wait. LMAO you had better hope your sissy Dems don't win. LMAO

But in all seriousness T you are correct, Life is Good. I tell you lefties that all the time. Glad to see you are coming around.

You know another thing, It is a truely sad looking bunch that is running for President of this country. Both sides. There is not a single Dem that is even close to being leadership quality. Not one. Same goes for the Republicans. Just pathetic. What does that say about us?

Where is the Ron Reagans, where is the JFK's, where is the Teddy Roosevelt's of today. I know they are out there. Why wont they run!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I know the answer do you?
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-27-07 AT 02:55PM (MST)[p]202 and PRO are both right. The left is so vested in defeat in Iraq that they know the only way they can gain and maintain power is if we lose in Iraq.

If we lose/pullout of Iraq al queada and the Dems win.

If we succeed in Iraq the US the iraqi's and the world wins.

Make no mistake about it we are winning!
 
Things are turning around in Iraq? that's a mighty big assumtion there 202. with that thinking when the twin towers came down on 9/11 it was no big deal, NYC is a big place and the rest of it was fine and dandy. just what level of carnage and violence constitutes an improvement? not to mention we can't hold this number of troops for long even if it did show a minor improvement( big if ).

Corn made you a good offer, when Petraeus makes his report in September if the news is good and the country says we should keep it up, I'll say I was wrong to doubt the stay the course plan and Bush was right and smarter than I gave him credit. if things haven't improved and we begin to draw down troops and give up on Iraq you have to admit we were wrong to stay as long as we did and Bush is a loser. how confident are you? this is sort of a way to put your money where your mouth is.

By the way, Bush started this war and was commander and chief for 5 years right up until the end, I'd say that makes him and his party the proud owners of defeat, the dems still don't have the votes to over ride his veto ( yet ) so this baby is all his, right into the ground. nice try at passing the ball though, the dems won't try to catch this one buy they may have to pick it up .

You are right about only bums running for president anymore. the good people either don't want to take the pay cut and or face the trashing they know they're going to get.
 
Dude wrote:

"By the way, Bush started this war and was commander and chief for 5 years right up until the end, I'd say that makes him and his party the proud owners of defeat, the dems still don't have the votes to over ride his veto ( yet ) so this baby is all his, right into the ground. nice try at passing the ball though, the dems won't try to catch this one buy they may have to pick it up ."

The dems are doing everything they can to undermine the war, as is the left wing media. This war will not be lost on the ground in Iraq, it will be lost in DC by those, on whichever side, that hold back the military from getting the job done. Right now, I see baffoon wannabe generals trying to run the war w/o any regard for the real Generals. Afterall, I am sure Pelosi and Murtha are better qualified to run this war than the Brass in charge at the present time, right? If we lose, it WILL because of the democrats doing everything they can to undermine our troops and doing everything they can to turn the American populas against doing what MUST be done for our security.

Oh, and Bush didn't start this war by himself, almost EVERY freakin democrat voted to go forward with it(inclulding Hilbill and John Edwards), then wuss out and say it is Bush's war. Freakin sissy mary's.

PRO
 
Are you saying congress would have forced this war on Bush if he hadn't wanted it? do you deny he sold this war harder than a sleazy used car salesman sells a '64 Rambler?

That aside why didn't Bush just go ahead and win this war ? he's had full control of congress and of course he's the CIC so what gives? the dems haven't been in a position to stop him, as we speak they still haven't stopped him from one thing he's wanted. yes that's about to change but give me a break , you're blaming the audience for a bad ball game.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-27-07 AT 07:49PM (MST)[p]Hmmm! seems the neocons are unwilling to commit to apologizes if proven wrong ... how typical!!

RUS
 
Hmmmm! seems the socialists are unwilling to aplogizes if proven to have given aid and comfort to the enemy.....how typical!!

PRO
 
Did your L key break so that anybody that doesn't see things your way is now a socialist instead of a lefty or liberal. Everything I've read from Dude or Rus would make them far from a socialist. Perhaps it would be a good idea to look up what a socialist is and then list a post of either of the above two show any socialistic thoughts.
 
>Did your L key break so
>that anybody that doesn't see
>things your way is now
>a socialist instead of a
>lefty or liberal. Everything
>I've read from Dude or
>Rus would make them far
>from a socialist. Perhaps it
>would be a good idea
>to look up what a
>socialist is and then list
>a post of either of
>the above two show any
>socialistic thoughts.

What's good for the goose ought to be good for the gander amigo! If RUS can call me a neocon, I feel more than justified in returning the slur by calling him a socialist. I know what the 'definition' of a socialist is, I also know what the 'definition' of a neocon is, do you? Now, we can deal with what is implied by those who use the terms; liberal, socialist, neocon, religous right. NONE of them are meant to flatter the accused, so to act like I am doing something others on the left are not, is pompous and hypocritical.

PRO
 
How do you figure saying enough already after 5 years is giving aid to the enemy? most Iraqis weren't even enemies until we bombed and occupied them if you recall. if we're traitors and socialist so are the majority of Americans and the majority of congress, soon a large enough bipartisan majority to over ride Bush's veto.

So what does that make you? a loser.

Whining and sniveling at those who are in step with the country and reality who happen to be hunters that hang out here only makes you look foolish. if you could support any of the claims you make on this issue you wouldn't have to resort to personal crap.

Just the facts, tell us how in the last 5 years the dems have let Bin Laden off the hook and lost the Iraq war. no evil media crap, what political or legal moves have they made that took any control or finances away from Bush? ....we're waiting.
 
> How do you figure saying
>enough already after 5 years
>is giving aid to the
>enemy? most Iraqis weren't even
>enemies until we bombed and
>occupied them if you recall.
>if we're traitors and socialist
>so are the majority of
>Americans and the majority of
>congress, soon a large enough
>bipartisan majority to over ride
>Bush's veto.
>
> So what does that make
>you? a loser.
>
> Whining and sniveling at those
>who are in step with
>the country and reality who
>happen to be hunters that
>hang out here only makes
>you look foolish. if you
>could support any of the
>claims you make on this
>issue you wouldn't have to
>resort to personal crap.
>
> Just the facts, tell us
>how in the last 5
>years the dems have let
>Bin Laden off the hook
>and lost the Iraq war.
>no evil media crap, what
>political or legal moves have
>they made that took any
>control or finances away from
>Bush? ....we're waiting.

You are killing me. You call me a loser, then accuse ME of resorting to personal crap. WTF? Oh the irony!

I don't believe Bin Laden considers himself off the hook, and I sure don't believe we have lost the Iraq war. You are validating my points for me. Thank you.

It is one thing to believe we need to get out of Iraq to "save soldiers lives", it is another to wish/want/enable America to lose in Iraq in order to make Bush look bad/evil. That is pathetic. To say Iraq was not a threat goes against what EVERY major intelligence analisis from EVERY major Country believed before we invaded Iraq. I suppose Bush forced the French intel to say Iraq had WMD, right?

Now come back crying AGAIN how I get personal and how you don't.

PRO
 
More whining, tell us what the dems did to not get Bin Laden and not win the Iraq war, if that's more palatable to you. we don't care if Bush is a dork or a hero that makes no difference. when has Bush's image or popularity with the media or democrats ever swayed him? that's weak if that's all you've got. what power or resorce did they take from Bush making him unable to succeed? com'on now.
 
I will type slower for you this time.

Bush is succeeding for the most part on the war on Terror, and we are winning in Iraq. The only question is, do we have the stomach to finish what WE started? Or are we a bunch of west French wannabes? Putting timetables on a war is idiotic.

The people of Iraq see progress every day. The American soldiers see progress every day. The Generals see progress every day. Just because the main stream media, MoveOn.org, and the left freak bloggers only report the bad, doesn't mean it is all bad. The war against fundamental islam will last long past your/my lifetime. Get used to it. This isn'ta X-box video game. It is a fight to keep our way of life.

NO whining here duuuude, just pointing out your flawed accusations.

PRO
 
I'm not asking for your opinion, saying things are improving in Iraq is an opinion few experts agree with. even if they were the military can't maintain current troop levels and we're going broke.

One last time I'm asking for the reason Bush hasn't won in Iraq and hasn't found Bin Laden, and how it's the dems fault? just the facts not your opinion or spin. your Bushie freinds have pulled what's left of their hair out trying to help you on this and can't help you. this would be a good time to let this die, the longer you side step the dumber you look. the rest of the country already knows the answer and Bush's approval rating reflects it.
 
> I'm not asking for your
>opinion, saying things are
>improving in Iraq is an
>opinion few experts agree with.
>even if they were the
>military can't maintain current troop
>levels and we're going broke.
>
>
> One last time I'm asking
>for the reason Bush hasn't
>won in Iraq and hasn't
>found Bin Laden, and how
>it's the dems fault? just
>the facts not your opinion
>or spin. your Bushie freinds
>have pulled what's left of
>their hair out trying to
>help you on this and
>can't help you. this would
>be a good time to
>let this die, the longer
>you side step the dumber
>you look. the rest of
>the country already knows the
>answer and Bush's approval rating
>reflects it.

I'll answer ONE more time. Just try and pay attention this time.

We ARE winninig in Iraq, just because you say we have lost, does NOT make it so.

Bin Laden is in Pakistan, how do you suggest we get him there? Pakistan isn't just going to let us waltz in there and take him out.

The country is being given nothing but the negative from the media and the left, how do you expect the average American to respond to such?

Bush's approval rating has to do with other issues along with the war. Conservatives are not happy with him on his immigration stand, add that with the constant spin from the left and their mouth-piece, the main stream media, and of course his approval ratings will be low. How high are the approval ratings for the Democrats? They are even lower than Bush's, ,and they oppose the war, so it isn't as cut and dry and you claim.

Again another insult aimed at me, how long before you cry about me name calling and insulting you AGAIN while you do the same, but more often?

PRO
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-28-07 AT 02:42PM (MST)[p]There is flip side to 202's post! Until there is a political
settlement to:

Oil Sharing
Sheria Law
Womens Rights
Sunni Amnesty/Place in Government

Don't expect the violence to stop anytime soon.

Then those who have ignored the voice of the American people, geo-political experts, and a mulititude of Generals will look
like war-mongering mindless partisan fools, who were willing to needlessly sacrifice American blood and money for We the Party instead of We the people.

In either case success or no success in restoring a viable and peaceful Iraq, the words of both sides will remain on MM for all to see.

I expect the September report to state "Although there have been numerous victories in suppressing the violence in certain areas, we will need more time, troops, and money for another 6 months to ensure success in the mission." This announcement will serve as spin for continuing an overall failed strategy of relying solely on a military solution without a greater emphasis on a political solution.

This message will be embraced by George, he needs this war to deflect attention away from the corruption in his administration.
When George is confident that the war has served his political purposes, he will start talking about redeployment, I expect it to be in exactly 9 months from today.

With only a few months remaining in office he will proudly announce how he accomplished the mission and brought American troops back home. Leaving a couple of months of buzz for GOP candidates before the elections.
 
Pro are you paranoid or just trying to devert the conversation? where did I insult you? you're ducking the question with shuck and jive, that bunch of BS wasn't an answer. the dem leadership won WWII in less time than it took Bush to screw up Iraq and lose Bin Laden, times up no more excuses.

Again you just gave us your opinion but no facts to answer why the " dems own defeat". nice try but it's obvious you and your chronies can't fabricate a story you think will fly.

Now you can change the subject.
 
You called my "stupid" and an "idiot", are those meant as compliments?

I didn't know we have time limits on how long we have to win a war. What is the exact maximum time allowed by the almighty dude to win a war with an enemy that hides in amongst the civilians and isn't nowhere near as easy to locate and 'defeat' as the Germans/Japanese?

The ONLY way we can lose in Iraq is by giving up here. The major pushers of giving up and admitting to defeat come from the left. We have NOT lost in Iraq, so I don't have a reason for us losing, because we have NOT lost, even with the left doing everything they can to assure American defeat. How? By undermining our troops, giving the enemy hope, that if they kill enough innocent civilians and American soldiers, we will give up and admit defeat, calling our troops "terrorists"(Murtha,Kerry), calling this a lost war while we have troops there(Harry Reid). That is how the dems are doing everything they can to 'help' America lose. The left has invested way to much toward defeat to allow victory. Politics first, right?

Now tell me I am stupid AGAIN, then say you aren't insulting me by doing so. I can't wait to see what you will insult me with, then deny you did.

PRO
 
My you're sensitive, i'll take it easy on you if you get hurt so easy.

How much time to win a war? until America says so, and we're saying times up. what part of that don't you get? maybe we can't lose as long as we stay but it seems we can't win by staying either. who's going to fight and fund your eternal war? the military can't meet it's recruitment needs so are we going to make tours permanent for those already fighting? who's going to pay for it? a few hundred billion every few months adds up to big money after a while you know. a bipartisan majority of congress will most likely soon over ride Bush's veto and begin what ever method of ending this they see fit. that's the way it works here in America, if you don't like it go live under a dictatorship, I know a few people who won't miss you....sorry that was mean...ok we'll miss you.
 
I'm not sensitive, just pointing out the hypocrisy from you and your fellow libs complaining about me being brash and/or "name calling", all the while you are doing atleast as much of it as I. Did you get it that time? Or did I type to fast for you?

So, now we run wars based on polls, not whether or not the war is vital to America. Brilliant! I can imagine the Civil War ran under this brilliant strategy. Can you name a war waged this way pre-Vietnam? That turned out well didn't it? I wonder how many polls Lincoln had to figure out what moves to make next.

You should not run wars based on popularity, costs, or the 'mood' of the people living for the now with no regard or ability to fathom the future. That is a recipe for disater not victory. When the Commander in Chief makes military moves based on polls instead of advice from Generals, is that really a wise move? Please tell!? Do you really believe that is what our Founding fathers had in mind when they made ONE Commander in Chief instead of giving that authority to Congress which is more likely to be swayed by public opinion?

PRO
 
A democracy runs on public opinion .

When a commander in chief leaves reality and ignores his people and congress then his judgement and competence are in question. do you propose we let a lunitic do anything he pleases with no checks and balances? if Bush is shut down it will be by the people and laws of our nation and nothing else. end of story, and the proper end as well.

Get over it or move to China, they see things your way.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-29-07 AT 01:43AM (MST)[p]>
>You should not run wars based
>on popularity, costs, or the
>'mood' of the people living
>for the now with no
>regard or ability to fathom
>the future.

Oh what...and Dubbya has some magical ability that none of the rest of us has just because he's the freakin' president? Give me a break! He's got his own agenda and his own interests in mind. All of us "living for the now" as you so claim, are not idiots and we've got just as much ability to fathom the future as the man who's running the country does!

That is a
>recipe for disater not victory.

Iraq is a disaster.

>Do
>you really believe that is
>what our Founding fathers had
>in mind when they made
>ONE Commander in Chief instead
>of giving that authority to
>Congress which is more likely
>to be swayed by public
>opinion?
>
Since when is Dubbya even paying attention to the polls? It's not influencing him one bit. The Founding Fathers had a "checks and balances" system in mind. The President of the U.S. serves the people. The people answering all those polls. He SHOULD be swayed by public opinion. It was never intended for the President to become a dictator.
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

E042CC13-E85E-4D28-AC32-0C63AB74D4D2.jpeg
A1BC2BDF-6B65-49CE-9B22-DFF96F669DE7.jpeg
Screenshot_20230903-225245_Gallery.jpg
20210904_104624.jpg
IMG_7183.jpeg
IMG_3100.jpeg
F61590B6-BC38-42A5-ACA9-33DFAC2A4D9B.jpeg
Elk.jpg
IMG_5806[1].JPG
imagejpeg_0.jpeg
95E40933-44DD-44EF-B277-1CC74756022A.jpeg
IMG_7608.png
Back
Top Bottom