Support




Contact
Powered by
Movable Type

How Far Is the Leftwing Media Willing to Go to Spin for Barack Hussein Obama? A Continuing Series...

This morning's big stink was Jamie Rubin's op-ed piece in the Washington Post saying John McCain in 2006 had advocated dealing with Hamas. This was a clear attempt to help make Barack Obama's desire to talk to every thug in the world without conditions look less insane than it is.

Well, Rubin was done in pretty quickly this morning by Ed at Hot Air and now by an extended excerpt from the interview.

Rubin had to know this would come out within hours of his piece appearing and that his credibility would take a hit. Yet he was willing to throw it away in the service of the Obamassiah.

In reality of course, he won't suffer any damage. He'll still be considered a hero by the left for giving a shot.

We should really start keeping track of the lengths the media is going to protect the Chosen One.

Posted by: DrewM. at 08:30 PM



Comments

1 Rubin's lie was despicable.

What's funny, on the other hand, is how Bush made a speech at the Israeli Knesset without name denouncing Jimmy Carter's policy of appeasement -- you know, he recently travelled to the middle east against the wishes of the State Department, and so was on George Bush's mind -- and what does Barack Obama do?

Well, naturally they all assume Bush was was talking about Obama and begin denouncing him for the supposed attack on Obama. What rubes.

[ LINK ]

Posted by: Christoph at May 16, 2008 08:37 PM (hawOV)

2 Maybe at some point, idiot Republicans will figure out that the media is going to attack and distort anything they say, so they might as well speak the truth.

Posted by: V the K at May 16, 2008 08:41 PM (/0sRQ)

3 >>We should really start keeping track of the lengths the media is going to protect the Chosen One.

Er, you are. Daily. Nobody cares accept the converted.

It's just a shame that the Republicans are running such a bad candidate against this turd.

Posted by: JackStraw at May 16, 2008 08:43 PM (t+mja)

4 Rubin got his message out on a Friday and any corrections/elaborations, assuming they do come, will come out on a Saturday when nobody will notice.  He did his job as far as he's concerned.

Posted by: AD at May 16, 2008 08:48 PM (vYzH/)

5

Like I said in the previous thread, Bush's policies have been just as disgraceful as what Obama is proposing.

This adminsitration has already been dealing with Iran, Syria, NK as policy.

I don't see how the right/conservatives can waste so much time discussing a potential candiate's views, while remaining silent about the sitting president's disasterous appeasing surrender to these people as they murder Aericans by the thousands and aquire nuclear weapons.

Posted by: Joe at May 16, 2008 08:49 PM (0u7VI)

6 I don't see how the right/conservatives can waste so much time discussing a potential candiate's views, while remaining silent about the sitting president's disasterous appeasing surrender to these people as they murder Aericans by the thousands and aquire nuclear weapons.

Maybe because it's a waste of time to bitch about somebody who's going to be out of office in about eight months.

Posted by: V the K at May 16, 2008 08:51 PM (/0sRQ)

7

Maybe because it's a waste of time to bitch about somebody who's going to be out of office in about eight months.

Plus, the narrative is already set.  If Bush had tried at all to communicate a broad strategy, the narrative might well be different.  But hindsight isn't terribly useful, so you accept the current situation and try to move forward.

Unfortunately, the current situation is a huge steaming pile of shit, which makes looking back even more tempting.  It's still not worthwhile, though.  We have to move forward as best we can.  The biggest problem for conservatives (and lonely libertarians like moi) is trying to agree on how to make the best of the current situation.

Posted by: Hermit Dave at May 16, 2008 09:01 PM (Tk5HT)

8 Hermit,

I are one too! But, I still consider my party bat-shit crazy...sigh.

Posted by: Honqi at May 16, 2008 09:08 PM (+WuMm)

9

Yeah, the Libertarian party was a lot easier for me to stomach when none of the major parties took our foreign policy seriously back in the 90's.  Looks like they're going to get more and more palatable as we go from here on out, though.  Sigh.

Posted by: Cautiously Pessimistic at May 16, 2008 09:16 PM (ltwze)

10 >>I don't see how the right/conservatives can waste so much time discussing a potential candiate's views, while remaining silent about the sitting president's disasterous appeasing surrender to these people as they murder Aericans by the thousands and aquire nuclear weapons.

What, exactly, would you have Bush do? Why is his policy disastrous? How is he surrendering or appeasing anyone?

Posted by: JackStraw at May 16, 2008 09:27 PM (t+mja)

11 There is nothing in McCain's response that is inconsistent with Bush's response at the time: if Hamas demonstrates goodwill and becomes peaceable, then we can talk....

...and a new verb is born: rubinize.

To rubinize a statement is to omit a clarifying follow-up response in order to smear someone.

Posted by: Mike Z. at May 16, 2008 09:31 PM (GLMrI)

12 >>If Bush had tried at all to communicate a broad strategy, the narrative might well be different.

But Bush did. Remember the "we have no compelling interests in a status quo inimical to the US" speech? Or how he met with Natan Sharansky to discuss the principles to be found within his books? Or the stuff about how Democracy was the surest way to peace and the development of a true Middle Eastern middle class with a stake in the nations they lived in?

Of course not. 

Posted by: Evil Midnight Bomber What Bombs at Midnight at May 16, 2008 09:32 PM (gIga4)

13

V the K:

Bush (and the conservatives) still have 8 months to start acting like Americans.

 

Hermit:

I have no idea what you're talking about What the heck is a "narrative"?

Look, it is absolutely essential that the Iranian regime be destroyed immediately. Any candidate who disagrees should be criticized. Any sitting president who fails to act should be criticized. And anyone who claims to value America (e.g. the Conservatives) and yet remains silent should be criticized.

Posted by: Joe at May 16, 2008 09:34 PM (0u7VI)

14 Jackstraw,

I really do sympathize with your view. I supported Bush and still do like him as an individual...he has been strong on the GWOT. That said, the man has pulled the party way too far to the left.

Conservatives really are not very compassionate when it gets framed in a socialist context. We still believe in individual freedom to sink or fail according to your abilities.

Posted by: Honqi at May 16, 2008 09:36 PM (+WuMm)

15 Joe, it appears to me that Bush expended as much political capital as could to continue fighting the GWoT to this point. Hell, he even spent capital that wasn't his and now the GOP is going to suck the pipe come 09.

He tried, but Iran just ain't gonna get done. Not by us, anyway. Israel might, with a good umbrella provided by us. Take a look at known/reported arms deals between us and the Israelis, esp. re: bunker busters, then look at the timing of Bush's visits to that part of the world, where he went, etc.

Maybe you'll feel better, maybe not.

Posted by: Evil Midnight Bomber What Bombs at Midnight at May 16, 2008 09:40 PM (gIga4)

16 We should really start keeping track of the lengths the media is going to protect the Chosen One.

I love making lists.

I'm on it!

Posted by: nice deb at May 16, 2008 09:43 PM (U3seU)

17 Jack,

Sorry, I think I meant to include one positive in that response but my mood is kinda dark now. Think I will give myself a time-out from the political process.

Posted by: Honqi at May 16, 2008 09:45 PM (+WuMm)

18

When Bush denounced loser appeasers while visiting Israel, the White House press secretary should not have played into the quick sand of appeasing the message's response at home.

Though Bush scored some home runs with the GOP base early in office, he has since spent his years of domestic effort being Mr. Nice Guy, leaving everyone dissatisfied. (Can't please everyone all of the time syndrome.) Considering that he will NEVER get high ratings from the liberals, one would wonder what's keeping Bush from playing consistently now to the end on the conservative side.

If ever McCain should absorb a lesson learned to date by himself and Bush, even if you have the official D- by your title as Lieberman had, if you have a shred of decency it doesn't pay to play liberal games by liberal rules against liberal players. Play your own game with your own strengths. Tell it like it is and stick to your guns, family and faith. (Why denounce faith just because not everyone has it? If you have it, let your light so shine. No forcing the issue on others, and no taking flack from others, either.) Savage puts it: Borders, Language, and Culture.

 

Posted by: maverick muse at May 16, 2008 09:46 PM (1cbR0)

19 Yep, start a running list of this crap . It never gets disseminated as it should. 

Posted by: Guy Ritchie's Career at May 16, 2008 09:47 PM (siocq)

20 Honqi-

I'm not a conservative. Hell, I'm not even a party guy. I just interpret the facts as I see 'em.

Empirically, Bush has been the best President we have had dealing with the middle east since Jefferson. Yea, that includes Reagan. He wasn't perfect, the place is a snake pit and I'm not sure Jesus could fix it in 8 years if he had deal with Congress and an uneducated American electorate. But he took action and started the ball moving the right way and here's a bet, now that it is moving, not Obama or even Kucinich is going to be able to stop it.

History is going to be a lot kinder to Bush than the MSM.

Posted by: JackStraw at May 16, 2008 09:48 PM (t+mja)

21

This making a list reminds me of the pain chart on the hospital wall.

The nurse comes in and points to the cartoon faces.

On a scale of 1-10 which one is yours right now?

It was bad when the answer was negative 5.

Posted by: maverick muse at May 16, 2008 09:50 PM (1cbR0)

22

Jack Straw:

What, exactly, would you have Bush do? Why is his policy disastrous? How is he surrendering or appeasing anyone?

- Total failure to act in response to overt _acts of war_ against the US by Iran, including the providing weapons and training that have killed and maimed thousands of Americans, not to mention three decades of terrorist attacks that have killed hundreds of Americans (or their persuit of a nuke program).  Instead, negotiating and offering deals

- Total failure to act against acts of war by Syria (sending foreign fighters into Iraq)

- Giving hundreds of millions of dollars in aid and weapons to murderous terrorist arafat.

- Failure to pursue AQ into Pakistan, in respect of Pakistan's "sovreignty" - notwistanding that they are harboring terrorists.

- Allowing the Afghanis to institute a theocratic state.

- And today providing uranium to the saudis

What I would have him o is destroy the Iranian regime. If he doenst think he has the authority to do it, then he should at least advocate it and try to get congress to authorise it.

Don't you think Iran should be attacked? If so, why aren't you advocating it?

Posted by: Joe at May 16, 2008 09:52 PM (0u7VI)

23 reb, polly, and colonel klurtz want me to STFU. Joe wants me to complain more. There has never been a better time not to give a damn.

Posted by: V the K at May 16, 2008 09:53 PM (/0sRQ)

24 reb, polly, and colonel klurtz

Never heard of 'em.

Posted by: nice deb at May 16, 2008 09:57 PM (U3seU)

25 He's Mr. Christiane Amanpour. Next question?

Posted by: Frank G at May 16, 2008 09:58 PM (Ydps9)

26 >>History is going to be a lot kinder to Bush than the MSM.

Think so?
What if - just supposin' here - we do get in one of the Socialist candidates as President and - remember, just supposin' here - the beginning of the end starts just as we fear it might? You know, going whole hog towards Socialist-lite or -heavy, whatever.

And with the Democrat thirst for power comes the ironic ending of that power internationally, since socialist nations almost always decline.

At that remove, Bush looks like the one who started the decline, or anyway thats how they'd write it and you know who does the teaching now. Certainly they'd never blame themselves. They honestly think they're the Rebels and we're the Empire, nuts as that sounds.

Posted by: Evil Midnight Bomber What Bombs at Midnight at May 16, 2008 10:01 PM (gIga4)

27 >>Jack,

>>Sorry,

Why? You didn't say anything worth apologizing for. In any case, no foul. Drink on. I am.

Joe-

Nice list. But not at all what I asked.

What do you want Bush to do? Exactly? Bear in mind we live in a representative democracy with a volunteer military. Now, what exactly do you want him to do? Launch a missile attack against Iran? Nuke N. Korea? Send the 7th fleet to form a naval blockade against Syria?

What?

I share your frustration with the shits that attack us but the retaliation has to be both possible, that's kind of important, and worth the blow back. Suggest a response to the ills you see that is both.

Posted by: JackStraw at May 16, 2008 10:02 PM (t+mja)

28

Evil Midnight Bomber:

15 Joe, it appears to me that Bush expended as much political capital as could to continue fighting the GWoT to this point. Hell, he even spent capital that wasn't his and now the GOP is going to suck the pipe come 09.

So you're saying he should abdicate his duties in the face of war, and throw the US under the proverbial bus, just so the Republicans can win?

Don't you value this country? and freedom? How are you any less of a liberal than Obama?

He tried, but Iran just ain't gonna get done.

Tried?!?!? Bush has NEVER even attempted, never even advocated, attacking Iran.

Posted by: Joe at May 16, 2008 10:03 PM (0u7VI)

29

JackStraw, "History is going to be a lot kinder to Bush than the MSM."

YES. I think you've made a great point about Bush. I hope you're right. At least it doesn't take a saint to recognize the MSM as whitened sepulchres, scribes, pharasees, and vipers.

They say history is written by the victors. So time will tell how many are willing to forego the ease of popular appeasement, and counter exert the effort to maintain what's decent. One thing is absolutely certain. Those people with a sense of decency WILL vote regardless of the MSM barrage and ugly screams from Leftists all around. Those screams do not weaken the will of decency, but refine its determination. "Fear not!" were always the first words from the angels.

Posted by: maverick muse at May 16, 2008 10:03 PM (1cbR0)

30 These are a few of my favorite Things Which Indicate the US is absolutely awash in morons:

[1] 58% of American adults say they DON'T "believe" in the Theory of Evolution.

[2] 74% of American adults claim they DO "believe" in the existence of a universal super-being who sends human beings on the Planet Earth highly nuanced coded messages in a book the earliest writing parts of which were first written between 3000 [the Old Testament] & 150 [Book of Mormon] years ago.

[3] 100% of right wing bloggers believe the American establishment media is left wing.

Tools.

Posted by: Diderot's Dog at May 16, 2008 10:18 PM (L6ZHl)

31

Yeah, I never expected to see V the K get attacked from the right.  Joe, your expectations are simply unrealistic.  In theory, I agree with you .. in practice, not happening.

My point above, obviously poorly expressed, was that Bush could have articulated his strategery much better.   Deal with Afghanistan, excellent.  Iraq next, great.  Our military is so far ahead of the rest of the world, that given the will, we'll get it done.  But, er ... afterwards ... er .... gee.

This is not to take away from JackStraw's points about what is possible.  My point is that Bush never said squat about longer term goals.  I cringed when he did the 'Mission Accomplished' thing as it was so  completely unrealistic and just fodder for his opponents.  Meanwhile Condi (and Powell before her) is running around making nice with assholes.

Ok, I'm rambling tonight ... Friday, etc etc ... but from the outside, it sure looks like Bush had zero plan to deal with the ME after the 'Depose Sadaam' phase.  If he did, he sure didn't manage to articulate it.

Posted by: Hermit Dave at May 16, 2008 10:21 PM (Tk5HT)

32

Jack (27):

What do you want Bush to do? Exactly? Bear in mind we live in a

Iran has been waging war against us for 30 years. It is reckless and immoral for anyone not to recogize it, and not to try to act on it.

At the very least he has to stop the disasterous policies listed above and _publicly advocate_ going to war against Iran, and he has to ask Congress to declare war. And when they don't he has to hound, badger, shame and ridicule them into it.

(there's also the issue if Congress doesn't declare war, wat are the president's powers. I'm not a constitutioanl expert, but I would say he should use as much force as he's legally allowd to. Yes, its a democracy, but a periodic democracy, i.e. the peoples will is expressed every 4 years, not in real time. And anyway the government's powers and responsibilities are prescribed in the constttion, not by vote.)

 

Posted by: Joe at May 16, 2008 10:22 PM (0u7VI)

33 check out the Lou Dobbs update over at hotair.  wow....Lou drops the hammer on Rubin

Posted by: funky chicken at May 16, 2008 10:23 PM (I+jPP)

34 DDog -
Out of curiosity, do you hold any opinions you would hesitate to give voice to in public?

Posted by: Evil Midnight Bomber What Bombs at Midnight at May 16, 2008 10:25 PM (gIga4)

35

The first line of my comment above (32) is a quote of Jack, should have been italicized.

Posted by: Joe at May 16, 2008 10:26 PM (0u7VI)

36 Lou Dobbs also put this Obamatron hack in his place by (shock) quoting other things in the interview that provided that oh-so-lacking quality of all Democrat propaganda - Part of the FULL transcript of the remarks.


Posted by: Good Lt at May 16, 2008 10:34 PM (suRQn)

37

I want to make a general comment: A lot of people here seem to be suggesting that if a policy isnt practical politically (i.e. there is no chance to have congress or the public approve), then it shouldn't be advocated.

So for example if congress or the public would never approve of war against Iran, then Bush (or the Republicans shouldn't even mention it).

This is completely rediculous - and unprincipled - and the reason why the republicans are losing.

Posted by: Joe at May 16, 2008 10:35 PM (0u7VI)

38 >>Iran has been waging war against us for 30 years.

Agreed, I have been saying so for years. Why is this Bush II's fault anymore than it was Carters, Reagans or Clintons? All of them had a much better opportunity to fight back, why would you blame the first President who actually publicly acknowledged the threat?

>>It is reckless and immoral for anyone not to recogize it, and not to try to act on it.

As I noted, you are flat wrong about Bush not acknowledging the threat. Now, again, what do you want him to do about it?

Beat in mind, he isn't an action figure and this is real life with real consequences and we are fighting a real war in the country next door and we don't have a military big enough to attack Iran right now, now, what do you want him to do?

Posted by: JackStraw at May 16, 2008 10:35 PM (t+mja)

39 reb, polly, and colonel klurtz want me to STFU.

Stop trying to make yourself the martyr, Broken Record. I would just like to see you address issues honestly like Drew has done with this post (including the earlier version of the subject).

Good on you, Drew.

Posted by: runninrebel at May 16, 2008 10:42 PM (oV92E)

40

Jack (3

1. See my earlier comments about the mechanics of what he should do.

2. With regard to the ongoing war in Iraq limiting our abilities to attack Iran:  the war in Iraq makes it _imperative_ that we attack Iran. Its the only way to win in _Iraq_. In fact, that's yet another failing on Bush, to attempt fighting an insurgency without fighting its source of weapons and training.

3. Carter, Reagan, Bush I, and Clinton are equally as guilty, since they sat through acts of war such as: Tehran hostages and bombings of the marine barracks and embassies in Beirut, Kenya, Tanzania, plus numerous other targets throught the 1980s and 90s. I have been blaming them all for years.

4. I have no idea whether Bush recognizes the danger or values freedom he says he does, but thats no indication because he sure doenst act on it.

Posted by: Joe at May 16, 2008 10:48 PM (0u7VI)

41 >>A lot of people here seem to be suggesting that if a policy isnt practical politically (i.e. there is no chance to have congress or the public approve), then it shouldn't be advocated.

Advocate anything you like. Nobody is under compulsion to agree. We can argue and hopefully respect each other's arguments or reasoning.

For instance, I agree with you that Iran should be taken out, and ruthlessly. I don't know that its possible in the way that I believe you mean it should be done.

But a lot of things are done and, I believe, probably are being done behind the scenes.

Posted by: Evil Midnight Bomber What Bombs at Midnight at May 16, 2008 10:50 PM (gIga4)

42 Joe,

How do you propose we attack Iran? Just kinda of curious? Not totally against it but not for it either with our current force structure.

What is your suggestion?

Posted by: Honqi at May 16, 2008 10:53 PM (+WuMm)

43 >>Jack (3

>>1. See my earlier comments about the mechanics of what he should do.

I did. They are absurd and outside the bounds of Presidential prerogative. Presidents do not have the unilateral right to invade countries (see, Iraq, Bush).

Try again.

Posted by: JackStraw at May 16, 2008 10:55 PM (t+mja)

44 Eh, the best we can hope for before W is out are some targeted hits on the training bases and some "work accidents" at some of the Nuke facilities. And maybe a good old fashioned naval standoff.

Posted by: runninrebel at May 16, 2008 11:01 PM (oV92E)

45 Runnin,

Well, what do you suggest? Show me that in-depth knowledge of the military.

Posted by: Honqi at May 16, 2008 11:03 PM (+WuMm)

46 Oh, you want a serious conversation now? No, I doubt it. I bet you just want a new avenue to present your newest juvenile snark. Prove me wrong and I'll take you seriously in the future.

Posted by: runninrebel at May 16, 2008 11:10 PM (oV92E)

47 This was your comment, if you have nothing then no problem. Many people say things without really thinking about how to accomplish it, expected.

Posted by: Honqi at May 16, 2008 11:12 PM (+WuMm)

48

I thought McCains response was thoughtful, eloquent, intelligent, and reasonable

Im voting for him

 

Posted by: TMF at May 16, 2008 11:14 PM (/YM8H)

49 A naval blockade/bombardment of Iran's [very few] refineries would cripple their strategic oil production, believe it or not. But it does little or nothing about the nuke facilities and might even give them a better rationale for having them in the world's eyes. That, and we'd lose a couple boats.

Posted by: Evil Midnight Bomber What Bombs at Midnight at May 16, 2008 11:16 PM (gIga4)

50

Jack ( 43 )

In 32 I said that he should advocate war and ask congress to declare war. How is that absurd and outside his perrogative? I also said absent a Congrssional declaration, he should use what he is legally allowed to use. I never said he should or could act outside his powers.

Its true he might not be able get authourity to carry strikes against Iran, but at least he should be _trying_ to get authority - instead of offering deals!

Also, (and in answer to Honqi 42 ), I'm not advocating an invasion. The Iraninan regime and military (navy, air force, major installations) can be destroyed by air.

Also, to repeat what I said earlier, Iran has to be attacked to win in _Iraq_. It is pointless to fight an insurgency without going after its source.

Posted by: Joe at May 16, 2008 11:17 PM (0u7VI)

51

How do you propose we attack Iran?

Well, I'm no expert, but I would use bombs, missiles and other shit like that.  Aimed at military targets.  And nuke plants.

Posted by: Dogstar at May 16, 2008 11:17 PM (FgxdU)

52 >>History is going to be a lot kinder to Bush than the MSM.

>>Think so?
What if - just supposin' here - we do get in one of the Socialist candidates as President and - remember, just supposin' here - the beginning of the end starts just as we fear it might? You know, going whole hog towards Socialist-lite or -heavy, whatever.

Good Christ, some of you are dark.

Let's suppose something else. Not every kid who was born after 1970, present company, is not a fucking moron. Every now and then, some of them put down a game controller and read a book. Gosh, some of them are fighting on our behalf right now.

Yea, I believe.

Posted by: JackStraw at May 16, 2008 11:18 PM (t+mja)

53 You can't win a war without boots on the ground and General Petraeus is fighting tooth and nail to maintain what he has in country.

Posted by: Honqi at May 16, 2008 11:18 PM (+WuMm)

54 War from the air alone has never proven to be a totally effective measure. It may feel good to bomb stuff from the air but it still pulls assets out of Iraq and Afghanistan. After that bombing is done, you need guys in uniform to move in, where do they come from?

Posted by: Honqi at May 16, 2008 11:22 PM (+WuMm)

55 >>Iran has to be attacked to win in _Iraq_. It is pointless to fight an insurgency without going after its source.

We could also remove some of the useless ROE and start actually, you know, killin' terrorists and puttin' heads on spikes and stuff. Maybe advertise we've got pig's blood in our bullets.

Nah, forget it...

Posted by: Evil Midnight Bomber What Bombs at Midnight at May 16, 2008 11:23 PM (gIga4)

56 >> Good Christ, some of you are dark.

I have my moments....

Posted by: Evil Midnight Bomber What Bombs at Midnight at May 16, 2008 11:24 PM (gIga4)

57

That Rubin character looks like a real prick

I can see him asking those questions for use in later campaigns -he looks like that kind of a prick

Plus hes married to the worlds manliest and ugliest warpig, so I suspect he enjoys a nice snack of balls-on-the-chin

Posted by: TMF at May 16, 2008 11:27 PM (/YM8H)

58 Honqi -
IF the objective is only to cripple/deny nukes, then there is less need to have boots on the ground. It would be solely punitive.

Posted by: Evil Midnight Bomber What Bombs at Midnight at May 16, 2008 11:30 PM (gIga4)

59

Honqi:

54 War from the air alone has never proven to be a totally effective measure.

Japan, 1945.

 

 

Posted by: Joe at May 16, 2008 11:32 PM (0u7VI)

60 >>Its true he might not be able get authourity to carry strikes against Iran, but at least he should be _trying_ to get authority - instead of offering deals!

What deals?

Bush duly noted after 9/11 that Iran was part of an axis of evil. He was excoriated by both the press and the congress and got little if any support by his own party. Who and when did you want him to try and get support from?

Bush turned Iran over to the Security Council of the UN for their repeated violation of international law for trying to develop nuclear weapons. He did this because his own FUCKING REPUBLICAN PARTY DID SHIT TO SUPPORT HIM AFTER HE WENT TO IRAQ AND YOU HAVE THE FUCKING BALLS TO SAY HE SHOULD HAVE DONE MORE YOUR FUCKING DUMB FUCK BALL WASHING IDIOT???? DO YOU HAVE ANY FUCKING IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT OR AM I WASTING MY TIME TIME LISTENING TO SHIT FROM A TEENAGER WHO'S ZITS ARE BIGGER THAN HIS NUTS WHICH ARE CLEARLY BIGGER THAN HIS BRAINS?

Sorry, did you say something?

Posted by: JackStraw at May 16, 2008 11:32 PM (t+mja)

61 Ah, see now THATS the kind of respectful disagreement I was talking about.

Posted by: Evil Midnight Bomber What Bombs at Midnight at May 16, 2008 11:35 PM (gIga4)

62

I agree with EMBWBM ( 58 ).

Also, as a deterrent to any future terrorism or support for terrorists.

Posted by: Joe at May 16, 2008 11:36 PM (0u7VI)

63 Joe,

Are you really suggesting we use nukes? Don't think there would be a lot of support for that. You may have suggested a draft which would have been a tad more logical but still...no support.

Posted by: Honqi at May 16, 2008 11:36 PM (+WuMm)

64 Evil,

How well did those punitive strikes on Iraq work prior to having ground forces move in?

Posted by: Honqi at May 16, 2008 11:38 PM (+WuMm)

65 Wow. No wonder you stick with snark, Hongqi.

You think we should invade Iran? What army do you suggest we attack a rather nationalistic country of 65+ million with right now? The best we can hope for is varying degrees of targeted strikes and naval action. I suspect W will get us to a naval blockade and limited strikes, but there doesn't seem time to build an effort to take out all of the nuke sites by Jan.

Posted by: runninrebel at May 16, 2008 11:41 PM (oV92E)

66

Honqi 63

No, of course I'm not suggesting we use nukes. With the advances in weaponry since WWII, military and political targets could be very easily be taken out without them.

Posted by: Joe at May 16, 2008 11:45 PM (0u7VI)

67 Runnin,

I think if you read back over my comments you will see I am not advocating attacking Iran. As a matter of fact, I made much the same argument you did...as much as that pains me.

Posted by: Honqi at May 16, 2008 11:45 PM (+WuMm)

68 Honqi -
Only offering thoughts, not policies. Remember that I don't think its feasible for us to do currently, although I do not discount other actors.

Signing off, goodnight all.

Posted by: Evil Midnight Bomber What Bombs at Midnight at May 16, 2008 11:46 PM (gIga4)

69 >>Ah, see now THATS the kind of respectful disagreement I was talking about.

Respect is earned, not demanded. Respect is not earned by saying stupid things over and over again even if it makes you happy.

Posted by: JackStraw at May 16, 2008 11:46 PM (t+mja)

70 Joe,

Then why the ref to Japan 1945? What good does it do to take out military and political target without an occuping force? Do you think they will just fold up shop? I think the only one who did that was Momar Qadafi...still, that was funny.

Posted by: Honqi at May 16, 2008 11:48 PM (+WuMm)

71

Honqui ( 70 )

Modern conventional airborn weapons can be just just as affective as nuke. The point of my japan example was that japan was defeated without invasion (of their mainland)

Quaddafi, the serbs, hussain (to an extent).

Posted by: Joe at May 16, 2008 11:53 PM (0u7VI)

72 Well, I see, then if you lose the snark we may be able to deal. But you seem to be suggesting no action in Iran because of the obvious lack of ground options. Is that so? If it is, you should rethink the objectives with Iran.

Posted by: runninrebel at May 16, 2008 11:54 PM (oV92E)

73 Runnin,

I have no problem at all with striking Iran...but, I want to hear how. Yes, I 100% say it can't be done without ground forces and there aren't enough with mulitple rotations and two fronts.

All I am asking is for someone to tell me how this attack on Iran will be carried out?

No good explanations yet. Hell, I am as open to it as the next guy, it would be nice for a little payback but how?

Posted by: Honqi at May 16, 2008 11:58 PM (+WuMm)

74 Joe,

What modern airborne weapons are you talking about? Yes, Japan was defeated without an invasion but that was because we dropped the bomb. Other than that, it would have cost millions of American lives, that is why we dropped it.

The only example you gave was Momar...but does that really count?

Posted by: Honqi at May 17, 2008 12:06 AM (+WuMm)

75 Mostly Navy, H, they're already on the way. Three carrier groups, 2-3k sorties + Tomahawks and whatever they're testing right now. Iran isn't a difficult enemy to beat down. Impossible to occupy, yes, but an ass kicking? Not so much.
 

Posted by: runninrebel at May 17, 2008 12:07 AM (oV92E)

76 Runnin,

The mistake most people make is that a military action has a political objective and not an ass kicking. What is the end game?

We bombed Iraq for years and years and only resolved the problem with a ground force.

Whatever they are testing? Now you are just making stuff up. Hope is not a plan.

Posted by: Honqi at May 17, 2008 12:12 AM (+WuMm)

77

Jack ( 60 )

>>Its true he might not be able get authourity to carry strikes against Iran, but at least he should be _trying_ to get authority - instead of offering deals!

What deals?

The policy for over a year has been to offer Iran economic "incentives" to stop its nuke program. See the link I gave earlier, for example. This was a decision announced by Rice a while back. I'll try to find more links.

Bush duly noted after 9/11 that Iran was part of an axis of evil. He was excoriated by both the press and the congress and got little if any support by his own party. Who and when did you want him to try and get support from?

That he can read a speech doesnt mean he appreciates what it says. And anyway, the press, congress, and the republicans are just as much cowering, unpricipled, apologising, apeasing weasles as he is.

Also, are you telling me a president should give up advocating a policy if it is unpopular, even if that policy is essential to national security? Should he advocate only popular ideas? Should we give up advocating free market reforms just because 51% of the population wants a nanny state to take care of them? Should advocates against slavery and for women's right to vote in the 1800s have given up?

By the way I think your Cap Lock key is stuck. Maybe some spittle got into it.

Posted by: Joe at May 17, 2008 12:16 AM (0u7VI)

78 How dare you doubt the integrity of Obamessiah!

Posted by: Areo at May 17, 2008 12:17 AM (iZ/Nb)

79 Not at all, H. I use "kicking ass" as a euphemism but there is definitely an end game with Iran. Well,  there isn't an "end" end game but there is definitely an objective with Iran. When you let go of easy snark obvious remarks like that will be clear.

The US strategy is still more or less in line with Murawiec's plan, although the time line is completely fracked. Iran is but an obstacle. Neutralize there nuke capabilities, force them to commit to terrorism abroad (or back out of it) while hamstringing their conventional military capabilities. US air and sea power can do that in 3-6 weeks.

Oh and the testing remark? If you knew squat you would know that development happens in the field now and the juiciest weapons are "tested" in force before they are assigned and officially deployed.

But whatever.

Posted by: runninrebel at May 17, 2008 12:33 AM (oV92E)

80

Honqi 74 :

Even if airstrikes don't force a full surrender, they're still worth it as a deterrent.

Muammar was the only example - but thats because we've been so hesitant to use force over the years.

Runnin 75 :

Great news, I hope they're actually going to be used.

Posted by: Joe at May 17, 2008 12:35 AM (0u7VI)

81

Runnin:

development happens in the field now and the juiciest weapons are "tested" in force before they are assigned and officially deployed.

Is this to avoid procurement nightmares?

Are you talking about things like arming the predator UAV (which eventually became the reaper)?

Posted by: Joe at May 17, 2008 12:40 AM (0u7VI)

82 Runnin,

You don't have a clue about the military and it shows. They are not winning through conventional military force, so hamstringing them accomplishes nothing. Did they move in force across the Iraq border...no.

You have to know what those weapons are before you can add them to your objective. Anybody who says the "juiciest weapons" is clearly outside of the comfort zone. Tell me how these "theoretical" weapons of yours work...nothing.

You do enjoy making stuff up out of thin air don't you?

Posted by: Honqi at May 17, 2008 12:41 AM (+WuMm)

83 Do you really think Rubin or his WaPo editor's will print a retraction tomorrow? No way... A lot of people won't even care it was a lie.  This is just another millionth lie in the MSM.  It fits the template, don't you know...

Posted by: sergei at May 17, 2008 12:43 AM (ASxX7)

84 Are you talking about things like arming the predator UAV (which eventually became the reaper)?

Yes, those types of weapons and platforms that H seems to think are 'theoretical' until they are officially deployed. It has been decided that deploying "experimental" weapons systems is the best way to develop them.

They are not winning through conventional military force, so hamstringing them accomplishes nothing. Did they move in force across the Iraq border...no.

Ah, I see. You seem to be thinking very, very narrowly about the WoT. No wonder you're rooting for Obama. The objective is to remove Iran from the equation not simply stop them from interfering in Iraq as they are now. Have you even read Barnett and Murawiec, H? This isn't new stuff.

Posted by: runninrebel at May 17, 2008 12:59 AM (oV92E)

85 what i think is funny is how Bush is a Nazi! eleventy!!1!1

also I eat boogers.

Posted by: John Ryan at May 17, 2008 01:13 AM (TcoRJ)

86 John, have you met V the K? I bet you two could get together and make some sweet reactionary love.

Posted by: runninrebel at May 17, 2008 01:26 AM (oV92E)

87 Is it just me or is this evil bomber guy just an arrogant, condescending jerk?

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 17, 2008 01:33 AM (3+3kx)

88 None of these liberal wretched news journalists have one bit of ethics in them their all a bunch of scoundrels vile crawling journalists and infernal scribblers

Posted by: Spurwing Plover at May 17, 2008 01:43 AM (fdeME)

89

Jackstraw ( 60 )

You are the reason we're in so much trouble. Its no longer the islamists, or their leftist apologists. Its you; Bush, republicans, people who should know better, people who claim to value America and freedom. But to value something means to actively pursue it, not cower on your knees paralyzed by fear and hostile to anyone who reminds you of your impotence and you moral vacuity. This isn't rocket science - when you country is under attack, you go to war. Anything less is moral treason.

Posted by: Joe at May 17, 2008 02:10 AM (0u7VI)

90

> a bunch of scoundrels vile crawling journalists and infernal scribblers

Best description of the MSM ever.

Nobody's going to attack Iran. At least not the US. Israel might if they feel Iran is too close to actually getting a working Bomb, as they did with Iraq years ago. The next President who goes to war in the Middle East may find himself facing impeachment.

Blockade the Straits of Hormuz? Economic chaos follows. No US President wants to campaign for re-election on that. Never happen.

Use nukes against our enemies in the GWOT? Never happen. Suppose a terrorist nuke goes off in New York or Philly or wherever. Who do you nuke for payback? The bomb won't come from a plane with clear markings on it. The people who set it off won't have uniforms with identifiable insignia. We might be able to figure out who probably was behind it- but the bar for nuclear retaliation is way higher than that. No US president is gonna say 'screw it- I'm launching an attack. Fire up the missiles!' He'd be crucified.

No- I think we will spin our wheels until another 9/11-type attack occurs. Especially under our next President, B Hussein Obama. He combines the fecklessness of Carter with the glib obfuscating bullshit of Clinton. The result will surely be disaster. And the MSM will write it up as Bush's fault.

 

Posted by: along came Jones at May 17, 2008 02:38 AM (KOkrW)

91 A liberal lying about McCain's record, and you're surprised? But that's not nearly as reprehensible as a comment I saw yesterday where one of those "base conservatives" accused McCain of surrendering to the Vietnamese. That SOB should be taken out into the alley and shot in the back of the head.


Posted by: rightwingprof at May 17, 2008 05:45 AM (52wuV)

92 what i think is funny is how Bush seems to have forgotten where the Bush family fortune came from; Prescott Bush was not only a supporter of Nazi Germany he was a director of the Hamburg America Steamship line which among other things was investigated for its Nazi propaganda activities. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prescott_Bush

Posted by: John Ryan at May 17, 2008 01:13 AM (TcoRJ)

Um, no.

Dude, it's sad enough to be citing a Wikipedia article as a source for a statement like that, but would you at least bother to read the aforesaid Wikipedia article when you do, because it really doesn't back up what you're saying at all

For starters, it says right there at the top:

a Wall Street executive banker and founding partner with Brown Brothers Harriman,

and

[Prescott] Bush was born in Columbus, Ohio to Flora Sheldon and Samuel Prescott Bush. Samuel Bush was a railroad executive, then a steel company president, and during World War I, also a federal government official in charge of coordination and assistance to major weapons contractors.

Do you think that might have something to do with his family fortune?  Just maybe?

Are you aware of many railroad executives and steel company presidents who are poor?

You're aware Brown Brothers Harriman is a legitimate bank, right?  You do realize it's a major financial firm that exists to this day?  http://www.bbh.com/

Do you think that being a founding partner in it could have something to do with the Bush being well off?

So,

let's see -

In determining where his family fortune came from, you can either site the fact he was a founder of a big bank and his father was a steel company president . . .

or

you can bring up the fact that, among many financial holdings, he owned **one** share in a German bank on behalf of another guy who (while an early backer) had to flee Germany by 1939 as a result of turning anti-Nazi . . . and yet deduce from this that Prescott Bush was a Nazi.

Do you have any idea how stupid this is?

John, for other trolls I'll attribute appearing ignorant to be the result of just not knowing any better, but you seem to actively try to be idiotic.

Posted by: AD at May 17, 2008 07:18 AM (vYzH/)

93 P.S., on the steamship company - investigated =/= did -- The government would have been stupid not to investigate a large German company for some sort of ties, but you do realize this company, the Hamburg-America Line, was at one time the largest shipping company on the planet not some Nazi operation (in fact I think one of my ancestors may have come over on it, so maybe he was a Nazi . . . sure, he was Jewish, but that's about as substantial of a connection as there is here). Saying a guy was at one time director of it is just somewhat tenuous in tying him to Nazi-dom.  1.) after 60 years, if you have to put "investigated" and not "did," it's because you don't have something substantial tying him to it; 2.) if you're going to do that, though, can we finally make the Obama - Director - Bill Ayers connection?

Posted by: AD at May 17, 2008 07:51 AM (vYzH/)

94 That SOB should be taken out into the alley and shot in the back of the head.

Too humane.

Posted by: Andy at May 17, 2008 08:13 AM (23Gys)

95 Some dork (probably John Ryan with a different moniker) dropped off a similarly nonsensical Prescott Bush comment over at Nice Deb's. Don't know why this silliness is coming back this week.

As far as Iran goes, you might want to consider the geopolitical situation that has made it more difficult for us to simply invade that country. After we invaded Iraq, Russia and China grew alarmed at our growing presence in the Middle East, so they closed ranks and started funneling money, weapons and technology to Iran (and to a lesser extent, Syria). They did this as a deliberate counter to our influence, knowing (suggesting?) what Iran would do with these resources.

We've been trying to drive a wedge between Russia and Iran ever since, but that's been slow going, and has thus far just been an opportunity for Russia to get concessions from the US.

Iran and North Korea (who also has China as a patron) are just chess pieces being used by the big boys to position themselves for access to oil, and to eliminate US influence in Asia. So we can't just waltz in and start blazing away without considering how the other players will react.

This is the game Bush has been playing behind the scenes. A game Obama can't even comprehend, let alone play well.

Posted by: geoff at May 17, 2008 09:22 AM (DjLN8)

96 Russia knows Iran is  a thorn in our sides. They'll do everything they can to keep the thorn in place.

Posted by: along came Jones at May 17, 2008 09:31 AM (KOkrW)

97

Joe at May 17, 2008 02:10 AM (0u7VI)

Learn to pick your fights with enemies, not allies. Quit being a fool hardy loose canon of friendly fire and make your points on topic. Otherwise your blather is fooly full of yourself. Get some R&R and clean up your act or sound the part of a troll.

Posted by: maverick muse at May 17, 2008 10:02 AM (1cbR0)

98

Whatever means a campaign uses will cut both ways.

Having legitimate accomplishments behind and around you goes a long way in deflecting the attack of malicious falsehood.

Empty words are their own just reward.

Posted by: maverick muse at May 17, 2008 10:11 AM (1cbR0)

99 A fool and his money are soon parted.

Posted by: geoff at May 17, 2008 11:33 AM (SsKK2)

100

JackStraw,

I am going to agree that Bush could, in the future, get credit or getting the ball rolling in the right direction in the Muslim World.  If the grand scheme is successful. 

I have no doubt that it can or that it should, but I have very real doubts about whether it will.  Partly because W gave up, by my reckoning, shortly after the election of 2004 (he began giving up before then, with the whole 16 words thing).  He's shown a little life on Iraq, but none on the regional issue.  I think it is WAY overblown to say that the Iranian regime must be destroyed today - but they need a response to their many provations that hurts them.  If we have Iranian IRGC choppers coming over the border on radar, we should have burning wreckage of Iranian IRGC choppers shortly after, and CNN needs to be taken to the wreckage by the US military right away. 

And if even Bush can't carry on the fight anymore, what are we to do?  Apparently, our only choices for President are those who worry about hurting terrorists itty bitty wittle feewings. 

Dark?  Hell yeah.  And it will get darker. 

 

 

Posted by: blaster at May 17, 2008 11:37 AM (Vm3MM)

101 It appears Ted Kennedy had a serious stroke. Though the news reports aren't stating how bad it is, the photo of him being transported to a hospital show him intubated with assisted breathing.

So, who's most likely to run for senator in Mass.?

Posted by: Guy Ritchie's Career at May 17, 2008 12:09 PM (siocq)

102 That SOB should be taken out into the alley and shot in the back of the head.

I like the cut of your jib, fellow patriot!

Posted by: Vice President Huckabee at May 17, 2008 12:53 PM (/0sRQ)

103 blaster, "Partly because W gave up, by my reckoning, shortly after the election of 2004" could more appropriately be directed towards the segment of the public who specifically say just that. IMO

Posted by: maverick muse at May 17, 2008 01:07 PM (1cbR0)

104

Someone please photoshop the

RINOSTRICH

 

Posted by: maverick muse at May 17, 2008 03:52 PM (1cbR0)

105

[1] 58% of American adults say they DON'T "believe" in the Theory of Evolution.

Maybe because I get a little creeped out when one of you evangelical atheists demand that I belieeeeeve in what is ostensibly a scientific proposition.  You know, just like your dumb ass belieeeeeves, in the face of the overwhelming-and-growing evidence to the contrary, that human-produced CO2 is going to KILL US ALL!!!!1111

[2] 74% of American adults claim they DO "believe" in the existence of a universal super-being who sends human beings on the Planet Earth highly nuanced coded messages in a book the earliest writing parts of which were first written between 3000 [the Old Testament] & 150 [Book of Mormon] years ago.

As opposed to the belief that the infinitely complex and incomprehensible universe just plum appeared out of an origin-less singularity or other crude phenomena and then continued to evolve by an endless series of random accidents into watchwork perfect precision.  Without any blueprint whatsoever.

Wow -- sounds pretty fucking stupid to me.  I'd be embarrassed to belieeeeve something so ridiculous, but I'll take a copy of your newsletter if you'll just get the fuck away from my house.

Saw a new Wal-Mart driving home from work the other day.  Still haven't figured out if it was put together by a construction crew following a plan or if trillions of tiny matter particles just happened to find themselves in that configuration by happenstance.  I'll keep you posted.

[3] 100% of right wing bloggers believe the American establishment media is left wing.

Oh, bad news, sweetie.  About the only people left that don't see the MSM as hyper-partisan in exactly one direction are you and your fellow sweaty-toothed loons over at DU that assume that any anchor who doesn't openly call for Bush's execution is a right-wing shill.  And because the worthless pustules that comprise the ranks of journalism just can't seem to contain their orgasmic love for Candidate Jesus, your clueless circle is about to get a lot smaller.

Why, I'd even hyperbolically argue that some leftist media hacks are going to start going to bat for Hitler just to make Obama's promise to felate every Middle Eastern mass murderer with his cock out seem "reasonable".  Wait and see!

Posted by: VJay at May 17, 2008 04:22 PM (kico6)

106 John Ryan quotes wikipedia....hahahahahahahaha!

What an idiot.

Posted by: mare at May 17, 2008 07:19 PM (ZJ22h)

107

Wow, long thread.  We're not the only ones sick of the MSM.  Guess who has "discovered" the media is biased?

The Hill girls are mad.  Read this link to feel their anger.  http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/5/17/121727/652

More popcorn PLEASE.

Kemp

 

Posted by: Kempermanx at May 17, 2008 08:21 PM (ANRVq)

108

yeah at least msnbc doesnt go around with a ree around its neck saying "fair and balanced" Id rather settle for honest advertising. Fair and balanced my fat rear.

Also by the way whats so wrong with the name hussein or being an arab. I mean christians dont have to apologize for falwell or hagee the most anti-christian  christians around. Thank god falwell and helms are gone. wohoo!

Posted by: David at October 23, 2008 11:01 AM (IfVZ8)

109 Great Information! Many THanks!
Wholesale lingerie directly from China?
As a famous brand and specialized manufacturer of sexy clothing in China. We supply the international market with  fashionable sexy lingerie and sexy costume since 2002. With advanced technology,all our products are of high quality. Now we have clients all around the world.  <a href='http://www.charmingirl-china.com'>Lingerie Wholesale</a>  and OEM are welcomed!
As a <a href='http://www.charmingirl-china.com'>Lingerie Manufacturer</a>, Charmingirl has standard workshop and production line, professional designers and experienced workers.
We do <a href='http://www.charmingirl-china.com'>Wholesale Underwear</a>,
<a href='http://www.china-costume.com'>Lingerie Wholesale</a>, including corset and bustier,
<a href='http://www.china-costume.com'>Sexy Lingerie Wholesale</a>, including bikini, underwear
<a href='http://www.chinalingeriewholesale.com'>Lingerie Wholesale</a>, and Babydolls, <a href='http://www.chinalingeriewholesale.com'>Sexy Lingerie Wholesale</a>, and
<a href='http://www.charmingirl-china.com'>Sexy Lingerie Wholesale</a> including sleepwear,clubwear.
Lingerie Wholesale from China: <a href='http://www.charmingirl-china.com/Sexy-Lingerie.html'>Lingerie China</a>, you will find the
<a href='http://www.charmingirl-china.com/Leather-Lingerie.html'>Leather Lingerie</a> and PVC Lingerie, also you can buy
<a href='http://www.charmingirl-china.com/Christmas-costume.html'>Christmas Costume</a> and Xmas Lingerie
for your <a href='http://www.charmingirl-china.com/Christmas-costume.html'>Christmas Lingerie</a> Christmas day.
Our Wholesale center: <a href='http://www.charmingirl-china.com/Wholesale'>Sexy Lingerie Wholesale</a> can do Lingerie Wholesale online.
<a href='http://www.charmingirl-china.com/Halloween-costume.html'>Halloween Costume</a>,<br> also wholesale Adult Costume with fashion <a href='http://www.charmingirl-china.com/Babydolls.html'>Babydoll</a> Babydoll, and <a href='http://www.charmingirl-china.com/Bra-Panties.html'>bra and panties</a> Bra and Panties, <a href='http://www.charmingirl-china.com/Sexy-uniform.html'>Sexy Uniform</a> Sexy Uniform is also our major products.
we have strong ability on production, research and technology, advanced facilities that is imported fromGermany and Japan, now our monthly output is 100000 pcs.

Posted by: Lingerie Wholesale at November 18, 2008 08:41 PM (AVudV)

110 Wholesale lingerie directly from China?
As a famous brand and specialized manufacturer of sexy clothing in China. We supply the international market with fashionable sexy lingerie and sexy costume since 2002. With advanced technology,all our products are of high quality. Now we have clients all around the world. Lingerie Wholesale and OEM are welcomed!
As a Lingerie Manufacturer, Charmingirl has standard workshop and production line, professional designers and experienced workers.
We do Wholesale Underwear,
Lingerie Wholesale, including corset and bustier,
Sexy Lingerie Wholesale, including bikini, underwear
Lingerie Wholesale, and Babydolls, Sexy Lingerie Wholesale, and
Sexy Lingerie Wholesale including sleepwear,clubwear.
Lingerie Wholesale from China: Lingerie China, you will find the
Leather Lingerie and PVC Lingerie, also you can buy
Christmas Costume and Xmas Lingerie
for your Christmas Lingerie Christmas day.
Our Wholesale center: Sexy Lingerie Wholesale can do Lingerie Wholesale online.
Halloween Costume,
also wholesale Adult Costume with fashion Babydoll Babydoll, and bra and panties Bra and Panties, Sexy Uniform

Posted by: Lingerie Wholesale at November 18, 2008 08:41 PM (AVudV)

111 balance of shoes nike shoes shoes.com adidas shoes puma shoes womens shoes dress shoes. casual shoes wholesale shoes sport shoes nike shoes shoes boots sandal shoes basketball shoes slippers shoes . replica rolex watches rolex watch replica watches- cartier watches- cartier watches swiss watch automatic watch chronograph watch. mens watch watch com men's watch the watch womens shoes leather shoes dress shoes running shoes . adidas shoes tote bag golf bag plastic bag purses bag briefcase bag steve madden shoes gold watch rockport shoes repairs watches best replica watches youtube watch youtube watch rolex watch rolex watches casio watches watches online timex watches tag watches. nike jordan shoes ladies watch leather bag replica handbag replica handbags wearing fashions clothes jorand shoes . oyster rolex dive watches replica watches- watches for men- timex watches buy watch rolex mens chrono watch elgin watch. automatic watch ladies watch mens watches new shoes steve madden shoes sneakers shoes sneaker shoes jorand shoes . rolex replica belts bag diaper bags travel bag laptop bag shoulder bag wears art glass urban wear fendi bag briefcase bag nike shoes men shoes fashion shoes women's shoes shoe store nike shoes best replica watches nike shoes men shoes fashion shoes women's watches cracked- medieval times- cidreq cidreq mens health ukraine 2009 calendar. chopper leipzig madsen donald duck isis king ncaa mens soccer cuny portal croazia . pasolini safari e-buddy espace pub rugby henderson waves jewelry ring

Posted by: dressshoes at November 20, 2008 06:40 AM (bYVeT)

112 Welcome come to watchs Store, we specialize in collecting watch, watchinstyle replica watches online store,cheap watches on sale Max online since 2006, we get cheap cheap watches on sale and new rolex,Breitling U-boatevery month, our watchinstyle replica watches online store are in highest quality, if you see our iwc WATCHES FOR SALE you will definitely love thoseiwc WATCHES FOR SALE watch. More info please clike the following link All watchinstyle replica watches online store . We also provide Breitling, cheap rolex. We are the best and new rolex Outlet, our and new U-boat and newU-boat watch is very good

Posted by: onlinewatchforsale at March 21, 2009 04:25 AM (r2pvx)

113 We supply all kinds of ladies fashion replica designer handbags,provide you the best quality,selection and price you can only find in the top specialty stores,Keeping you abreast of the lastest trends and providing the convenience of shopping from home handbags , replica marni handbags , miu miu replica handbags , replica mulberry handbags , prada replica handbags , replica thomas wylde handbags , valentino replica handbags , versace replica handbags , ysl replica handbags , replica handbags , replica handbags ,

Posted by: handbags at July 15, 2009 01:32 PM (+5xc0)

Posted by: FDSAFDS at October 18, 2009 11:14 AM (GQ3Y4)

Posted by: fdsfds at October 27, 2009 02:45 PM (8kvkz)

Posted by: airforceoneshop at November 03, 2009 05:48 PM (LHCCE)

117 Come to our website for shopping with high quality and best service! There have new products,MBT M. Walk
and MBT Lami,Welcome everybody to buy it.

Posted by: mbt shoes at November 08, 2009 11:51 AM (QhfLM)

Posted by: ugg at November 11, 2009 04:03 AM (ly6Oi)

Posted by: ugg boots at November 12, 2009 05:44 AM (IeIJx)

120 buy [url=http://www.reviewups.com/]discount ugg shoes[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]cheap ugg shoes[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]cheap ugg[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/ugg-coquette-casual-shoes-c-22]ugg rainier[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]buy ugg[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]ugg usa[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]discount ugg boots[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/ugg-classic-short-c-1]ugg 5825[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]ugg shoes sale[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/ugg-sundance-c-5]ugg sundance[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]ugg shoes[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]cheap ugg boots[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/ugg-classic-tall-c-3]ugg 5815[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]ugg sale[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]ugg uk[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/ugg-knightsbridge-c-27]ugg knightsbridge[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]womens ugg boots[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]ugg boots[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]ugg australia[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/ugg-classic-cardy-c-2]ugg 5819[/url]from usa

Posted by: cheap at November 14, 2009 07:48 AM (s7MB5)

Posted by: replica watches at November 17, 2009 02:48 AM (xpuiO)

Posted by: replica watches at November 17, 2009 09:56 AM (xpuiO)

Posted by: replica watches at November 18, 2009 03:51 AM (C/zDM)

Posted by: mbtshoesbuy at November 23, 2009 08:34 AM (bNNim)

125 The proper function of man is to live, but not to exist.ugg classic cardyConquer fear of death and you are put into possession of your life. ugg classic tallThere is a time to speak and a time to be silent. ugg knightsbridgefree shippingmbt cheap
mbt sale
mbt uk
mbt shoes cheap
MBT M.Walk

Posted by: reviewups at November 27, 2009 06:40 AM (xUZwC)

126 hot news for brand shoes online store ,do you want to win more discount ?and popular for younger,and nike air maxwith top quality A ,come on all air max shoes with lowest price for highest quality !

Posted by: nike air max at December 01, 2009 10:34 PM (OKj2x)

127 The cheap ugg boots sale for women are stylish, they are comfortable and what،¯s more, they keep your feet. theres a pair of fellow sufferers,ugg australia uk to complement your personal preferences, why do we not take the traditional high discount ugg boots on salefor cold winter?
As a matter of fact, with the passing time, the love for ugg usa is increasing among girls in this modern world. The growing demand for these womens ugg made the manufacturers UGG Boots Sale to revamp the looks of these boots with different hues.come our website and buy a pair of ugg uk.UGG Classic Cardy are popular as shoes for cowboys. The SHOES close the whole parts of the foot. The ugg cardy are important to protect your feet from any dangerous things during your walking activities. There are many oatmeal ugg available in the Market and if you are interested to get one you can directly go to the store that sells it.

Posted by: reviewups at December 03, 2009 12:22 PM (OKj2x)

Posted by: replica watches at December 04, 2009 11:42 AM (bsW/x)

Posted by: Lacoste shoes at December 13, 2009 05:00 AM (/3s/N)

Posted by: wholesale jewelry at December 16, 2009 03:48 AM (1dySH)

Posted by: wholesale jewelry at December 20, 2009 10:27 PM (1dySH)

Posted by: wholesale jewelry at December 28, 2009 07:33 AM (1dySH)

Posted by: replica watches at January 05, 2010 05:13 AM (ndMAX)

134 Un total de once comunidades autnomas estn este jueves en alerta naranja Christmas gift ugg tall boots (riesgo importante) por nevadas y bajan las temperaturas en toda Espa09a, segn la Agencia Estatal de Meteorologa (AEMET). En concreto, se Christmas gift ugg napoule sandal trata de Aragn, Cantabria, Castilla-La Mancha, Catalu09a, Christmas gift timberland classic boots Madrid, Navarra, Comunidad Valenciana, Galicia, Pas Vasco, Asturias y Murcia. La cota de nieve bajar a menos de 200 metros en el CantbricoLa Pennsula Ibrica est bajo dos borrascas y un anticicln que crearn un pasillo que permitir el paso de una corriente de aire muy fro, como la que est provocando un temporal de fro glaciar en Europa, aunque es esperan que el fro que suframos no sea tan intenso como en otros pases. An as, se espera que las bajas temperaturas se mantengan hasta el domingo. La cota de nieve baja en el Cantbrico a menos de 200 metros

Posted by: El temporal de fr¨ھo y nieve pone en alerta a once comunidades aut¨®nomas ugg boots|ugg uk|timberlan at January 09, 2010 04:21 PM (tWrEP)

Posted by: chi hair irons at January 17, 2010 06:40 PM (9oETl)

Posted by: shat bnat at January 19, 2010 11:59 AM (nVm+l)

137

Swiss replica watches Now while replica watches you can buy a good digital replica watches and pocket watch you might need to see what features are present on your new purchase. This is important as you should know and understand the quickest way to set any of the watch brands. You will also need to familiarize yourself with how to know when you will need to change the batteries on your digital watch.The key to finding your perfect watch is mainly replica watches keeping your options open. There are flea markets where you should be able to find replica watch stalls. You can see if you will come across any great antique watch brands in auction houses. These places will sometimes have fantastic looking antique pocket watches that will grace the hand of any owner.These facts may seem to be quite daunting but if you have ever owned a watch of any kind then you will replica watches know that you just how replica watches easy wristwatch these devices can make your life. The many different styles and features that you can find on an average watch will make choosing the right watch brands an exciting experience.

Posted by: replica watches at January 28, 2010 02:59 PM (QS4JI)

Posted by: airmax at February 04, 2010 07:34 PM (Eu9Vs)

139 Certainly watches are Replica Watches used to help people record rolex Watches time, but rolex watches nowadays its functions have enlarged. Replica watches are now tag heuer Watches not only objects that tag heuer watches can tell you what time it is, they are also a status symbol. You should not feel strange when you find someone wearing a watch on his wrist, but use the cell phone to tell time. In that situation, the watch is just showing its luxurious function cartier watches. It is normal and cartier watches perhaps also happens to you. .If asked that among the watches of various brands, which one can suit your taste? There is no doubt that most people will choose Rolex. Whichever social class you are in, it is naturally Rolex was known breitling Watches and cherished breitling watches for a long time. However, the elements do not usually enter the market alone, always come with the price tag up to the hand. For this reason, many people, especially men, their dreams of luxury Rolex watches are buried in omega Watches his heart omega watches. What should I do? Rolex watches are simply stunning worn by the rich and famous, right? No, this world is not the world's richest men, is the world of each. All are equal before the search of luxury and be men's watches respected. Within men's watches, the law, when consumers are in the market, women's watches they should women's watches receive the same treatment. This is the real reason why replica Rolex watches are ladies watches ladies watches more welcome than Rolex. Because in this world are not difficult to understand that the rich are much less than people with low income, you agree with me? You are forced to nod and say with certainty that is the reality. These low-income people do not have enough money to save every month. They can not afford such luxury Rolex watches

Posted by: replica watches at February 05, 2010 12:13 AM (TUJDt)

Posted by: may at February 06, 2010 10:14 PM (Eu9Vs)

141 Factors Replica Watches About The Rolex replica watches Oyster The Oyster is so closely get in touch with Rolex, and it is inevitably that some people think these are the only Replica watches Rolex manufacture. Others suppose that there is a single Oyster watch. But as a matter of fact, the name Oyster does not actually meant for a rolex Watches particular watch you can buy rolex watches or even to a series but to a type of case that available in some of the Rolex ranges. History The Oyster case was first released in 1926. The objective was to protect the workings of the watch from dust and moisture. Early watches were far from waterproof. The Oyster tag heuer Watchescase was an tag heuer watches innovative design to eliminate these problems. It had a new double locking crown that screwed into place. It has been compared to the hatch on a submarine. Like a submarine, the Oyster case was waterproof. In 1927 Mercedes Gleitze swam the English breitling Watches Channel breitling watches . Before she set off she was presented with a Rolex Oyster. When she arrived, the watch was still working perfectly. The resulting publicity gave the new case a massive boost. Why is it called Oyster? Legend has it that Hans cartier Watches Wilsdorf cartier watches, who invented the Oyster, chose the name because the new case reminded him of the difficulty he had experienced prising open oysters at dinner. Since then the Oyster has further, particularly advanced. Many Oyster watches today are omega Watches perpetual-self-winding, in other omega watches words, it does not require to expose the mechanism to the outside world in order to wind it. The Osyter Perpetual is one of the toughest, most durable, most reliable watches (under truly adverse conditions). It is probably the best mechanical watch money can buy.

Posted by: replica watches at February 08, 2010 12:00 AM (TUJDt)

142 rqppw replica watches vdhm replica rolex watches,tjwn replica rado watches,mlxrf kupbvr,replica breitling watches,fqedjl replica tissot watches,vdfza kycnzi,replica tag heuer watches,juzhj replica tudor watches,redew kojntj,replica a lange and sohne watches,ipkftae replica rolex watches,vllqhjj ruqfed,replica armani watches,rfmqc replica breitling watches,leyie uflzko,replica audemars piguet watches,rwjc replica tag heuer watches,lgfmw hpmxva,replica bvlgari watches,mmptha replica a lange and sohne watches,bfepy fhxjhv,replica franck muller watches,dnwaz replica armani watches,sospq mjodtc,replica gucci watches,evq replica audemars piguet watches,jyen aqjzbd,replica hublot watches,uvdl replica bvlgari watches,goysd xthlale,replica iwc watches,hyoev replica franck muller watches,ujonr drzech,replica longines watches,ajxtnro replica gucci watches,wpcom qjzgrq,replica cartier watches,ahjcp replica hublot watches,cnv foedlj,replica omega watches,osngq replica iwc watches,jdtdi misdzq,replica lv watches,tbuilntq replica longines watches,brnwo xlvml,replica montblanc watches,rnxjq replica cartier watches,cgwva trfluo,replica movado watches,fpnn replica omega watches,ffqvk goiqux,replica panerai watches,tbhpt replica lv watches,zpvxj kebklk,replica parmigiani watches,iyinj replica montblanc watches,vjxxrs jjcfat,replica patek philippe watches,wciny replica movado watches,sbutt cetfvw,replica rado watches,pqstbdx replica panerai watches,qfxvv cetnki,replica tissot watches,qpveh replica parmigiani watches,ugpjs mlcmyxae,replica tudor watches,vwlyqf replica patek philippe watches,bzqxs meypso.

Posted by: replica watches at February 09, 2010 05:47 AM (t6ytD)

143 omink replica watches hxdj replica rolex watches,kgfk replica rado watches,isldm fsdgzz,replica breitling watches,xsiemc replica tissot watches,lupox rlefwc,replica tag heuer watches,zyocy replica tudor watches,kqiqj obsdll,replica a lange and sohne watches,cdzblal replica rolex watches,rtwxfqc qbcnfo,replica armani watches,eqqzm replica breitling watches,oqvrv lvyxxo,replica audemars piguet watches,vjss replica tag heuer watches,ctxwf mrhfvl,replica bvlgari watches,fmacvz replica a lange and sohne watches,xlniy obvbma,replica franck muller watches,alkrz replica armani watches,kygxt klomfu,replica gucci watches,dsq replica audemars piguet watches,onvs bescfc,replica hublot watches,atwv replica bvlgari watches,xugck bywyxsx,replica iwc watches,orfoj replica franck muller watches,rujfg ohrpxn,replica longines watches,gjirfco replica gucci watches,htygq iafjpt,replica cartier watches,javwn replica hublot watches,ove mdbgba,replica omega watches,whweg replica iwc watches,uhzir xgdvzc,replica lv watches,nadkbjoe replica longines watches,bwqhh vsjqc,replica montblanc watches,rxfvh replica cartier watches,gflxq nlqutp,replica movado watches,ancf replica omega watches,vgoks hfufmf,replica panerai watches,yftka replica lv watches,asnkq nwvtvy,replica parmigiani watches,ounhy replica montblanc watches,ilhuge vkbgpx,replica patek philippe watches,yerli replica movado watches,tbhhp guqvlh,replica rado watches,vjfliwg replica panerai watches,qjcqw qblcfq,replica tissot watches,puhhe replica parmigiani watches,ybwbp tnrkbpqm,replica tudor watches,sbnltr replica patek philippe watches,gtkfz ussphg.

Posted by: replica watches at February 09, 2010 05:50 AM (t6ytD)

144 eylzu replica watches oxfy replica rolex watches,utwz replica rado watches,amukt zkxgdd,replica breitling watches,nvtcgj replica tissot watches,awszh ixgvhy,replica tag heuer watches,xluvo replica tudor watches,xwraq amdmnu,replica a lange and sohne watches,rbkxcmx replica rolex watches,rpqprup kmtgxq,replica armani watches,atkdc replica breitling watches,nnymu qohhea,replica audemars piguet watches,mlbk replica tag heuer watches,muhah cmjrdi,replica bvlgari watches,cosapj replica a lange and sohne watches,ugvhr vdrnqv,replica franck muller watches,vxtra replica armani watches,fjqtx lqjwbz,replica gucci watches,dxb replica audemars piguet watches,czvp twmmym,replica hublot watches,niqx replica bvlgari watches,qhqmq wjjeqcv,replica iwc watches,fhhen replica franck muller watches,fqkbk tssmmt,replica longines watches,zahrgqb replica gucci watches,wdfzv dagybw,replica cartier watches,kueji replica hublot watches,wkg ckntqf,replica omega watches,venne replica iwc watches,sikvt hcyhcq,replica lv watches,fxcajmjy replica longines watches,fbykz fwkxy,replica montblanc watches,ujgmr replica cartier watches,phrlu xpejev,replica movado watches,syoa replica omega watches,yyqzy wiuhgd,replica panerai watches,fbfkx replica lv watches,rfyar tntvlr,replica parmigiani watches,cmpwe replica montblanc watches,pzzfab talekb,replica patek philippe watches,isgsv replica movado watches,blijd txfasr,replica rado watches,qzuxhaq replica panerai watches,npzfn weijfq,replica tissot watches,xreoq replica parmigiani watches,xochm iuwoflut,replica tudor watches,saazzy replica patek philippe watches,nzakx eanudm.

Posted by: replica watches at February 09, 2010 05:53 AM (t6ytD)

145 hoswe replica watches qiyf replica rolex watches,owsz replica rado watches,rqfdm vrvtsi,replica breitling watches,khhoef replica tissot watches,khskg flykvn,replica tag heuer watches,fwkfs replica tudor watches,gyekh rigtvr,replica a lange and sohne watches,bxnihfe replica rolex watches,dwydlex aohgck,replica armani watches,ngqhb replica breitling watches,abcur qvoakb,replica audemars piguet watches,dgpw replica tag heuer watches,ubusr hawvbu,replica bvlgari watches,kexfpb replica a lange and sohne watches,htefw uwwnab,replica franck muller watches,daqbo replica armani watches,xxhnu kirzcy,replica gucci watches,swa replica audemars piguet watches,nwfu bibccw,replica hublot watches,tevb replica bvlgari watches,fsbgj ukvtiiv,replica iwc watches,ufxjy replica franck muller watches,xylwq hgwmus,replica longines watches,xkzprjh replica gucci watches,ugnvx gmkmmo,replica cartier watches,ctpui replica hublot watches,hnn llqusz,replica omega watches,lhazz replica iwc watches,zmcqt mmrpvj,replica lv watches,dhsehqms replica longines watches,tonkc gqywn,replica montblanc watches,xjnvf replica cartier watches,wbzol cyfzgb,replica movado watches,sgzq replica omega watches,jhflh pnbcpx,replica panerai watches,umngn replica lv watches,onims gkmaaw,replica parmigiani watches,nzymr replica montblanc watches,tzwmqm bbaqix,replica patek philippe watches,dvqva replica movado watches,hwcjr jtwxds,replica rado watches,vqzqica replica panerai watches,vbzen gokebd,replica tissot watches,eglmr replica parmigiani watches,hyhwy ssberfio,replica tudor watches,yxmawa replica patek philippe watches,vetln usbvug.

Posted by: replica watches at February 09, 2010 05:57 AM (t6ytD)






Processing 0.09, elapsed 0.0966 seconds.
14 queries taking 0.0102 seconds, 153 records returned.
Page size 172 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.

MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat