Patterico's Pontifications

7/20/2008

A Third Version of Maliki’s Remarks

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:37 pm

As I noted in a previous post, Hot Air quoted the English translation of Maliki’s Der Spiegel interview as follows:

SPIEGEL: Would you hazard a prediction as to when most of the US troops will finally leave Iraq?

Maliki: As soon as possible, as far as we’re concerned. US presidential candidate Barack Obama is right when he talks about 16 months. Assuming that positive developments continue, this is about the same time period that corresponds to our wishes.

So, by the way, did The Hill, and lots of other people.

Then, without explanation, Der Spiegel changed the translation to this:

SPIEGEL: Would you hazard a prediction as to when most of the US troops will finally leave Iraq?

Maliki: As soon as possible, as far as we’re concerned. U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes.

That’s the version currently being quoted by the entire U.S. media, and it eliminates the qualification: “Assuming that positive developments continue . . .”

Now, via DRJ comes this from the New York Times:

The following is a direct translation from the Arabic of Mr. Maliki’s comments by The Times: “Obama’s remarks that — if he takes office — in 16 months he would withdraw the forces, we think that this period could increase or decrease a little, but that it could be suitable to end the presence of the forces in Iraq.”

He continued: “Who wants to exit in a quicker way has a better assessment of the situation in Iraq.”

[Said in the voice of the Count from Sesame Street:] Three versions! Ah ha ha ha haaaaa!!

I trust the New York Times implicitly, which is why I see no reason for them to release the actual audio of the tape, to see if anyone disagrees with their translation. We don’t want to double-check things ourselves; we want to be told what the truth is. And yes, I’m entirely serious about that. (Click the links to see just how serious.)

UPDATE: What is the point? A number of people are making a big deal of the fact that the statement from Maliki’s office was issued by CENTCOM, after the U.S. Government contacted Maliki’s office. It is relevant, then, that Der Spiegel’s original translation contained exactly the part that Maliki’s office insists was left out of the final version — namely, an explicit condition that Maliki’s agreement to a rough 16-month timetable “[a]ssum[es] that positive developments continue.” In other words, Maliki’s support for withdrawal depends on conditions on the ground.

192 Responses to “A Third Version of Maliki’s Remarks”

  1. Do I hear FOUR! FOUR versions!

    Ah ha ha ha haaaaa!!

    Paul (2ae585)

  2. If the 3rd version doesn’t bring up Obama’s poll numbers, the 4th version will have Maliki saying that McCain promised to stay in Iraq for 100 years.

    DRJ (92ca6f)

  3. DRJ: Heh.

    Paul (2ae585)

  4. Hot Air is treating the 3rd version in the New York Times’ article as confirmation that Der Spiegel‘s second version was correct, but they don’t look the same to me. I must not be nuanced enough.

    DRJ (92ca6f)

  5. Well, I have no idea why Der Spiegel changed their quote, but I am not surprised that the NYT comes up with a different translation. Arabic is so different from English that any two honest translations could come out quite differently. If the Arabic transcript gets released, we would see any number of translations by whoever chooses to translate it.

    Compounding this is the Der Spiegel quote went from Arabic to German to English, probably losing quite a bit of precision in the process. I’d trust a direct Arabic to English translation to be more accurate than one translated from German.

    The two versions in Der Spiegel might be someone correcting a mistake in the translation from German to English on the website, which wouldn’t warrant Der Spiegel indicating it changed the quote in the story, because in the German version, it may not have. I don’t know if it is standard journalistic practice to issue correction announcements if they clean up translation errors from their native to their international translated editions.

    At any rate, Der Spiegel is standing by its story, presumably the Arabic to German version, and will publish a full English transcript of the interview on Monday for everyone to look at.

    Aplomb (b6fba6)

  6. I say it appears that FFOS, Flip-Flopping Obama Syndrome, is indeed contagious.

    Dana (f3e2a8)

  7. Aplomb,

    If I had to chose one version, I’d go with the NY Times’ translation, too — if only because it went directly from Arabic to English. But given the history on this quote and that Maliki’s spokesman disputed the Der Spiegel reports, I think Patterico’s suggestion (to release the audio) is a good idea.

    DRJ (92ca6f)

  8. I agree DRJ, although it should probably be Der Spiegel who releases it. They probably provided a copy to the NYT to comment on under Fair Use, but I doubt they would be cool with another media source releasing the entirety of their exclusive interview.

    Aplomb (b6fba6)

  9. Would they have to release the whole interview or just the disputed section?

    DRJ (92ca6f)

  10. I have no doubt Maliki was aware that his statement would be difficult to translate. The idea that he would even mentions B.O. speaks volumes all by itself.

    tonynoboloney (001f8c)

  11. Maybe a daring member of the herd tailing Obama around the Middle East (talk about sheeple!) will score an interview with Maliki and will ask him to clarify his comments directly.

    Wait. Is Chris Wallace on this trip?

    Never mind.

    Icy Truth (385a38)

  12. The linked NYT article provides a translation only for the highlighted lines. There doesn’t seem to be a sidebar with an Arabic to English translation of the entire Der Spiegel interview.

    From Hot Air, here is a directly-relevant Der Speigel translation of another part of the interview:

    So far the Americans have had trouble agreeing to a concrete timetable for withdrawal, because they feel it would appear tantamount to an admission of defeat. But that isn’t the case at all. If we come to an agreement, it is not evidence of a defeat, but of a victory, of a severe blow we have inflicted on al-Qaida and the militias.

    How does the NYT translate that? Maliki’s words seem to suggest that a 16-month timetable can be discussed now, because certain essential positive developments have already taken place.

    Here’s a Q and A that it would be nice to have independently verified:

    SPIEGEL: Mr. Prime Minister, the war and its consequences have cost more than 100,000 lives and caused great suffering in your country. Saddam Hussein and his regime are now part of the past. Was all of this worth the price?

    Maliki: The casualties have been and continue to be enormous. But anyone who was familiar with the dictator’s nature and his intentions knows what could have been in store for us instead of this war. Saddam waged wars against Iran and Kuwait, and against Iraqis in the north and south of his own country, wars in which hundreds of thousands died. And he was capable of instigating even more wars. Yes, the casualties are great, but I see our struggle as an enormous effort to avoid other such wars in the future.

    The audiotape ought to contain the answers.

    AMac (29c0bf)

  13. Well, there probably would be no problem with the NYT releasing that section, but it’s not really a “disputed section” to my mind. It’s just the NYT is providing a fresh translation from one of their own Arab language translators. I don’t see any big conspiracy or dishonesty if the NYT position is, “if you want the original, get it from Der Spiegel like we did, it’s their interview after all.”

    There is nothing sinister or mysterious about these various versions, they just reflect there is no one way to translate from a language as different from English as Arabic, especially if you go through a German intermediary step. So far it seems there is one unchanging version in Arabic on tape, and understandably different translations of it. I assume Der Speigel will release the original if they haven’t already, and we will see even more versions of it when it gets translated by different people. I really don’t understand the controversy here.

    Aplomb (b6fba6)

  14. Maliki is obviously helping Obama. He mentioned him by name and wants us out in 16 months. So much for the “Obama is a naive defeatist” meme.

    Will Republicans now claim that the Iraqi people don’t understand the “conditions on the ground”?

    This is a major humiliation for Bush/McCain no matter how anyone tries to spin it.

    The only people who want the troops to stay in Iraq are McCain, Bush and bin Laden.

    Maliki endorsed Obama (b98438)

  15. I wanted to try to find the interview in German, as published in Der Spiegel, but couldn’t find it. Could it be only in English?
    I did find an article about it, but not the full inteview:
    http://tinyurl.com/5f477c

    Any help would be appreciated.

    Zach (afe76a)

  16. Maliki is obviously helping Obama.

    Don’t forget that Kim Jong Il and the leader of Hamas endorsed Obama, too. I mean, since we’re mentioning world leaders that want a Democrat in office…

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  17. Maliki endorsed Obama,

    This interview is being presented as an endorsement of Obama’s plan but the complete interview shows the only reason the US can leave Iraq is because the surge worked. You know … the surge Obama said would never work.

    DRJ (92ca6f)

  18. Then again, maybe when Obama meets with al-Maliki the two of them can get their story straight. The part of that transcript I want to see would go something like this: “What’s the deal with that reverend of yours? He makes Muqtada al-Sadr look like a patriotic moderate!”

    Icy Truth (385a38)

  19. #14 – Maliki endorsed Obama

    Maliki is obviously helping Obama.

    – Maliki, understandably, is focused on what affects his country directly; however, it’s hard to imagine the leader of a country with one of the most restrictive abortion laws in the world actually “endorsing” Obama.

    Icy Truth (385a38)

  20. Spin faster righties! The truth is gaining on you!

    axt113 (0368b3)

  21. Well, what’s the point about those differences? Obama himself says that 16 months is the best-case scenario while the real time-line would depend on the conditions on the ground. So Maliki still supports Obama’s approach.

    Nikolay (f5b13d)

  22. I just bought the paper copy of Der Spiegel and the quote, in German, is exactly the same as in their english translation (the one that´s now on the website). As they will have translated it from German to English, I guess that the first, retracted version of the quote was an inaccurate translation and this is why they changed it. (Remember: Spiegel is a German magazine and they write in German – they only translate some stuff for their English website).

    Jurgen (dc5e23)

  23. According to an editinserted into the English version of the Obama interview dated 07/20/2008, it says:

    (eds: full interview will be available in English on Monday),

    liontooth (0edfdb)

  24. You’re talking about three versions of a translation.

    Surely you’re not prepared to argue there’s something fishy about the Bible because it exists in KJV, NIV, etc.

    And if you were, surely you’re not prepared to argue that the essential meaning of the Bible is fundamentally changed by the differing translations.

    As to your point about the “conditions on the ground,” Obama has never called for an unconditional withdrawal. His most recent slogan is “We’re going to have to be more careful about getting out of this war than we were getting into it.”

    Taking him at his word, how does that support the idea that Obama’s plan for withdrawal is rigid and ignores the “conditions on the ground?”

    Herb (0ec303)

  25. I am puzzled. More then once, B. Obama has said that if he is elected, he will end the Iraqi war and bring the troops home in 2009. If he is correct, that means ending the war in less than 12 months. Where does the 16 month calendar come in? Oh yes, Obama has already visited 57 of the 50 states that make up the union.

    Delcy Voisine (ad860c)

  26. “Maliki endorsed Obama,

    This interview is being presented as an endorsement of Obama’s plan but the complete interview shows the only reason the US can leave Iraq is because the surge worked. You know … the surge Obama said would never work.”

    That’s what I’ve been thinking. This is what Mccain says about getting out:

    “I do not want to keep our troops in Iraq a minute longer than necessary to secure our interests there. Our goal is an Iraq that can stand on its own as a democratic ally and a responsible force for peace in its neighborhood. Our goal is an Iraq that no longer needs American troops. And I believe we can achieve that goal, perhaps sooner than many imagine. But I do not believe that anyone should make promises as a candidate for President that they cannot keep if elected. To promise a withdrawal of our forces from Iraq, regardless of the calamitous consequences to the Iraqi people, our most vital interests, and the future of the Middle East, is the height of irresponsibility. It is a failure of leadership. “

    So, at the end of the day, Mccain felt that the surge would work, and he was correct.

    Obama thought it wouldn’t and he was incorrect.

    They both want to withdraw, if it’s ok to do so.
    Mccain has proven better judgement in the case of when that will be. Obama ran his campaign on “let’s get out asap”, which isn’t what the situation needs. Iraq doesn’t think so, and the generals don’t think so.

    The success of the surge is Bush’s doing. Obama opposed the surge. Which is to say that he agreed with Rumsfeld’s approach, which was that we don’t need that many troops, and he was proven wrong.

    Period, end of story.

    xerock (cf0c5e)

  27. Obama said we should withdraw all troops by the end of 2007
    He then said we should withdrawl all troops my March 2008
    Now he says we should withdraw all troops by Nov 2009.

    Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

    Dennis D (ae900a)

  28. I found the original German here: http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/0,1518,567006-2,00.html

    SPIEGEL: Wann wird der Großteil der US-Truppen den Irak endgültig verlassen?

    Maliki: Was uns angeht, so bald wie möglich. Der US-Präsidentschaftsbewerber Barack Obama spricht von 16 Monaten. Das, finden wir, wäre der richtige Zeitraum für den Abzug, geringe Abweichungen vorbehalten.

    Unless Der Speigel changed the German translation, it looks like it did correct its translation, as “geringe Abweichungen vorbehalten” is “reserving minor changes” as in “16 months, more or less” not “16 months if all continues to go well”. I don’t know where that came from.

    Zach (afe76a)

  29. #24 – Herb

    Taking him [Obama] at his word,

    – Stop right there.

    Icy Truth (36dec9)

  30. #24, I also echo #29 – what, exactly, leads you to believe you can trust Obama’s word? He breaks his word near-daily.

    steve miller (e3ebcc)

  31. “The success of the surge is Bush’s doing. Obama opposed the surge.”

    -Uhh, the complete and utter failure that is the Iraq war is Bush’s doing.

    “what, exactly, leads you to believe you can trust Obama’s word? He breaks his word near-daily.”

    -Coming from someone who obviously trusts the Bush administration’s word.

    Repuglicans should just face reality and stop living in a truthiness-filled fantasy world. This war was a disaster. Bush’s foreign policies were complete failures and McSame wholeheartedly supported all of them.

    Of course, I’ll have to give credit where credit is due. The genius of Karl Rove is that he recognized the massive pool of useful idiots like people commenting above (dare I say “infinite pool” because these retards actually reproduce). Tell these lemmings that down is up and they’ll gladly follow McBush and company off a 1,000-foot cliff. They’ll even believe they can fly before their puny brains get splattered on a boulder.

    There’s really no point in discussing anything with these sheeple. It would make more sense to discuss astrophysics (or evolution) with a monkey. Ridicule is the only way to go.

    master shake (27ee58)

  32. Der Spiegel says it stands by its version of the story but then claims the “full interview will be available in English on Monday”. Why? Are they meaning that something was left out (either before or after) in the original quoted part? As someone already mentioned, all they need to do is release the few minutes of the audio, not the full interview.

    But in the interview:
    SPIEGEL: Germany, after World War II, was also liberated from a tyrant by a US-led coalition. That was 63 years ago, and today there are still American military bases and soldiers in Germany. How do you feel about this model?
    Maliki: … Today, we in Iraq want to establish a timeframe for the withdrawal of international troops — and it should be short.

    Later:
    “But it’s the business of Iraqis to say what they want. And that’s where the people and the government are in general agreement: The tenure of the coalition troops in Iraq should be limited.”

    Maliki was asked about American bases and troops and answered regarding international troops. Later he used the term coalition.

    When Maliki is talking about ‘troops’, it may have different contexts in different sentences, such as US only troops, Private Security (that carry really heavy firepower hired by international firms), coalition troops that aren’t the US, or every foreigner.

    liontooth (0edfdb)

  33. masterbaiter/masturbator you obviously are on the
    wrong blog. check out your fever swamp homes at moron dot org and barrackobama dot come and go back to dangling amongst the putrid dingelberries on dinglbarry’s scrawny arse.

    Must be lovely to take everything out of context. Hussein O’s belittling of the surge and calls to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory are totally whitewashed by your prevaricating ilk. now, bioya and gfy eternally.

    madmax333 (d052b2)

  34. Jeez. Is this how we celebrate the tenth anniversary of “It depends on how you define the word ‘is’”?

    Icy Truth (36dec9)

  35. This war was a disaster.

    And exactly what was the alternative? We were supposed to just wait for naughty Saddam to come around? Oh yeah, give him more time. He only had like 11 years.

    So you think Saddam was simply harmless that the US could have left alone?

    Could Saddam Hussein either thru threats of force, dirty nukes, or long range missles disrupted oil tankers in the Persian Gulf and is the disruption of oil important?

    Obama thinks so:
    “The price of a barrel of oil is now one of the most dangerous weapons in the world,” Obama told an audience in Dayton, Ohio. “Tyrants … use it to prop up their regimes, intimidate the international community and hold us hostage to a market that is subject to their whims.”

    If Iran can cut off the petroleum-rich Strait of Hormuz, one speculator predicted the pump price for a gallon of gasoline would be $12, Obama said.”

    liontooth (0edfdb)

  36. Certainly the German version sounds more like the newer English one, but I’m not sure what that proves. Presumably, the original interview was in Arabic, so maybe their English-speaking staff and their German-language staff each ran their own translations, then someone noticed that the English and German versions didn’t match to each other all that well, and revised one to conform to the other.

    Then again, for all we know, maybe the original German translation read like the original English version, and both versions were edited later?

    Xrlq (b71926)

  37. #31 – master shake

    dare I say “infinite pool” because these retards actually reproduce

    – If there is an upside to all of those abortions, and having only one or two children (if they have any at all), and passing on those values to their children, it is that liberals do reproduce less frequently. But then of course, as in so many other areas, they take the backdoor approach of warping young minds at college. It’s a perfect plan: take an isolated group of newly registered voters, most of them away from home for the first time, and tell them “America is broken but you can fix it; we know how because we’re professors and we’re smart. And in the deal you’ll replace your mommy with the nanny state.” How can they resist?

    There’s really no point in discussing anything with these sheeple … Ridicule is the only way to go.

    – Yes, well, that’s the sort of blinkered, philistine pig ignorance I’ve come to expect from you non-creative garbage. You sit there on your loathsome, spotty behinds squeezing blackheads, not caring a tinker’s cuss for the struggling artist. You excrement! You whining, hypocritical toadies, with your colour TV sets and your Tony Jacklin golf clubs and your bleeding Masonic secret handshakes! You wouldn’t let me join, would you, you blackballing bastards! Well, I wouldn’t become a Freemason now if you went down on your lousy, stinking knees and begged me!

    Icy Truth (36dec9)

  38. excellent contortionism here. i assume the spinal flexiblity comes from having one’s head up one’s ass all the time.

    benjoya (291c4d)

  39. The Maliki statements #’s 1, 2 or 3 are a black eye to the Bush administration. You can keep spinning this to your hearts delight Patterico, but it doesn’t change the fact that Maliki included two significant elements that show his government is now playing the Bush administration for fools. First is 16 months. Now let’s see: Who’s been saying 16 months since he began his presidential campaign began? Oh I know: Barack Obama whom, in case anyone misses the point, Maliki mentions directly with that timeframe:

    Translation 1: US presidential candidate Barack Obama is right when he talks about 16 months.

    Translation 2: U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. Assuming that positive developments continue,

    this is about the same time period that corresponds to our wishes.

    To point out the obvious. Usually people, provided they’re not complete idiots, or insane or manipulative, think a thing that corresponds to their wishes is right.

    Translation 3: Obama’s remarks that — if he takes office — in 16 months he would withdraw the forces, we think that this period could increase or decrease a little, but that it could be suitable to end the presence of the forces in Iraq.”

    He continued: “Who wants to exit in a quicker way has a better assessment of the situation in Iraq.

    Who wants to exit in a quicker way?

    Any way you look at this I’m afraid this is a black eye, not only for the administration, John McCain.

    There’s no salient difference in any of those translations. To dispute that, Assuming that positive developments continue is the salient part of that statement doesn’t matter much.

    Even if you do paraphrase it in administration/McCain-speak as: Maliki’s support for withdrawal depends on conditions on the ground.

    Was there any chance someone would think that Maliki would want the troops out if conditions on the ground haddn’t improved? And what if he did mean that, could it not also be inferred that he felt perhaps, that the Iraqi forces could take care of the situation even if, conditions on the ground hadn’t improved in that 16 month Time Horizon?

    How is a general time horizon any different than a TIMETABLE?

    Could it be that the word timetable in regards to Iraq, has been turned by BushCo as a euphemism for surrender?

    These are the risks of screwing with language and public perception and the truth. And unless everyone is on board it usually comes back to bite one on the buttocks. The Iraqi’s apparently have given notice that they will not be political manservant’s. BushCo has made it’s own bed. And now the ring wing pundits, here and elsewhere will have to perform these lingual acrobatics that say: The Bush administration is not embarrassed and this is all part of the master plan.

    Plus there’s more that throws dirt in the eye of these translative machinations, but I’ll save that for my next comment.

    Peter (e70d1c)

  40. take an isolated group of newly registered voters, most of them away from home for the first time, and tell them “America is broken but you can fix it; we know how because we’re professors and we’re smart. And in the deal you’ll replace your mommy with the nanny state.” How can they resist?

    your desperation warms my pinko heart.

    benjoya (291c4d)

  41. And there’s this too and if it’s accurate, I’m sure more anonymous sources will come forth, if not now, due once again to administration pressure, then surely once they’re gone:

    “Let’s squeeze them,” al-Maliki told his advisers, who related the conversation to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.

    The squeeze came July 7, when al-Maliki announced in Abu Dhabi that Iraq wanted the base deal to include some kind of timetable for withdrawing U.S. troops. The prime minister also proposed a short-term interim memorandum of agreement rather than the more formal status of forces agreement the two sides had been negotiating.

    Please keep the insults down to minimum, please. I’m sure Patterico wants to encourage a lively and respectful debate free of bitterness and name calling, so do it not for me, but for him. I’m reasonable sure he would agree.

    Peter (e70d1c)

  42. How is a general time horizon any different than a TIMETABLE?

    If you have to ask this question, you are not likely the type of person who would understand the response. Nuance, and all.

    JD (75f5c3)

  43. let’s see:

    maliki has adopted obama’s iraq plan

    mcWar has adopted obama’s afghanistan plan

    bush has adopted obama’s iran plan.

    i believe this is called leadership.

    benjoya (975ea2)

  44. bush also adopted elements of obama’s “controversial” statements wrt pakistan.

    mcThuseleh better move the debate to dometic issues where he’s stronger (like the mcCain/Kennedy immigration bill. which mcCain no longer supports — how’d his name get on that bill anyway? tricksy kennnedddyssss)

    benjoya (291c4d)

  45. When most foreign troops should leave Iraq:

    Maliki: “As soon as possible, as far as we’re concerned.”

    McCain: “I do not want to keep our troops in Iraq a minute longer than necessary to secure our interests there.”

    Maliki is endorsing whose proposals, again?

    Close but no cigar, Obamamaniacs.

    Trouble (0b9dec)

  46. your desperation warms my pinko heart.

    – There’s no desperation in telling the truth, only in denying it.

    Icy Truth (36dec9)

  47. Icy Truth, #37…
    The phrase you’re looking for here is: The Roe Effect, coined IIRC by James Taranto of OpinionJournalOnline.

    Another Drew (8018ee)


  48. There’s really no point in discussing anything with these sheeple. It would make more sense to discuss astrophysics (or evolution) with a monkey. Ridicule is the only way to go.

    Although I agree with most of your comment I disagree with this. It’s important to engage in debate no matter how loathsome the opinion of the opposing party might be. Ridicule without facts and without a sense of humor says more about the person doing it than the object of said ridicule.

    Peter (e70d1c)

  49. #39 benjoya

    excellent contortionism here. i assume the spinal flexiblity comes from having one’s head up one’s ass all the time.

    Good description of Barack Obama, and his sycophants and ignorant supporters. Interesting, though. No complaints lately with the dedicated BIAS going on from the ‘Tiger Beat’ network coverage? And wouldn’t you like to vote for a dictator first (you know, from voting booth). Or is it cool to have him just appoint himself as he has, with total disregard to the foundation of our rights and responsibilities. Never mind. You called yourself a pinko which is sufficient. We can leave it that.

    I couldn’t help but notice you smudged BO’s ever-changing ‘strategies’ on the war as well as the fact that he stuck with one that finally seemed to work. Of course, it’s not his originally – - nothing ever is. You know Obama has a short politial resume, beefed up by a long history of appropriating others’ work as is own. He steals. He lies. He flips. His arrogance attracts voters like you. A real shame.

    And ironically, to think you’re only voting in November against a man who isn’t even running. Liberal bitterness is almost as boring as it is destructive.

    Vermont Neighbor (31ccb6)

  50. Peter, you have a point. I think Maliki was trying to maneuver the Bush administration and does not understand that Democrats, like you, have absolutely no interest in the survival of Iraq as a free country and in Maliki’s agenda for Iraq. He may have made a fatal mistake. It was his naivete’ in believing that all Americans are of good will toward his country. He may know better now but it may be too late. The Democrats, like you, will take any cover availabe to cut and run and he just gave it to you.

    Mike K (f89cb3)

  51. no matter how loathsome the opinion of the opposing party might be.

    Republicans think Democrats are naive.
    Democrats think Republicans are evil.

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  52. The Bush administration has opposed timetables for troop withdrawals. But al-Maliki and President Bush last week agreed to a “general time horizon for meeting aspirational goals” on troop cuts.

    Time Table = “Time Horizon” doesn’t it?

    Seriously, does our president think that we are 10 years old?

    Oiram (983921)

  53. Misguided, not “Evil”.

    Oiram (983921)

  54. Another Drew,

    Exactly, which is why the left works vigorously to counteract this effect by using the university system, proselytizing the lib cause to a group of impressionable newly-”independent” youngsters, most of whom are about to vote in a presidential election for the first time.

    Icy Truth (36dec9)

  55. In your case he might pick a lower number.

    Icy Truth (36dec9)

  56. Mike K:

    He may have made a fatal mistake.

    You’re right, because I’m sure now that he’s no longer willing to be the political puppet and water boy for the failed Iraqi adventure of GWB, I imagine some of his Blackwater security (also known as the private mercenary army of the White house) will probably be asked (wink, wink) to take an accidentally on purpose coordinated cigarette break soon in order to put the fear of a God (GWB not Allah) back into him.

    Also if I remember correctly it was GEORGE W. BUSH who bombed them back to the stone age.

    It was his naivete’ in believing that all Americans are of good will toward his country.

    Yeah, well considering who he (and the rest of the Iraqi’s) have had to deal with since 2003, maybe he’d just rather take his chances. 16 months sounds pretty good to him so who are you to argue.

    Peter (e70d1c)

  57. by using the university system

    Yeah, education sure is bitch right? People begin to see through liars and think for themselves. I know that’s a bitter pill for the Right to swallow. I hear they even teach about crazy shit like evolution in those heathen god forsaken places.

    Peter (e70d1c)

  58. Interesting way to run a country ICY TRUTH. Are you happy with this form of leadership?

    Oiram (983921)

  59. Misguided, not “Evil”.

    One does not throw insults as a matter of course at those whom one believes to be merely “misguided”.

    Before you protest, “I don’t do that!”, I can only remind you of the famous argument: “Exceptio probat regulam in casibus non exceptis”.

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  60. Great, throw Latin at me, I bow down to your cut and pasting ability.

    You assume I think the right are all Evil. I don’t (sorry I said it). As a matter of fact I have many right wing friends who know that I regard their opinions with respect. I don’t regard them as evil. One reason your misguided.

    Oiram (983921)

  61. #58 – Peter

    I hear they even teach about crazy shit like evolution in those heathen god forsaken places.

    – I believe in evolution, despite all of the contrary evidence within this blog.

    Icy Truth (36dec9)

  62. – I believe in evolution, despite all of the contrary evidence within this blog.

    I couldn’t agree with you more.

    Peter (e70d1c)

  63. You assume I think the right are all Evil.

    Not at all. There are exceptions, but the fact that they have to be individually identified merely proves the rule.

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  64. Although I agree with most of your comment I disagree with this. It’s important to engage in debate no matter how loathsome the opinion of the opposing party might be. Ridicule without facts and without a sense of humor says more about the person doing it than the object of said ridicule.

    Allow me to disagree, Peter. To paraphrase Mark Twain: It is impossible to reason someone out of something they were never reasoned into. This is true for most extreme Repuglican moonbats. In this case the best (and really only) thing to do is to ridicule these useful idiots to expose them as what they are. Attempting to debate morons is pointless as it just encourages them and validates their ridiculous arguments as being worthy of a response. What sustains complete idiots like Sean Hannity is that people actually try to engage them in political debate, thus legitimizing them. Besides, ridicule is often very effective strategy: the KKK was brought down (much to the chagrin of right wingnuts everywhere) in large part because they were ridiculed to the point that nobody took them seriously anymore. Being rightly labeled idiots and mocked completely destroyed their legitimacy.

    You excrement! You whining, hypocritical toadies, with your colour TV sets and your Tony Jacklin golf clubs and your bleeding Masonic secret handshakes! You wouldn’t let me join, would you, you blackballing bastards! Well, I wouldn’t become a Freemason now if you went down on your lousy, stinking knees and begged me!

    Case in point: how am I expected to NOT ridicule the moonbat auteur of the diatribe above? Or was this an attempt at sarcasm?

    master shake (7dfbed)

  65. Most of you are assuming that the German version is accurate. The most important part of the article is this: “It is relevant, then, that Der Spiegel’s original translation contained exactly the part that Maliki’s office insists was left out of the final version

    You’d think Maliki would be the final authority on what he, himself said. He seems to be insisting that Spiegel’s original version is correct.

    Its very possible that Spiegel simply left out part of Maliki’s quote in the final version. To assume this doens’t happen in modern journalism is a little naive.

    ChrisGreen (a8d1a3)

  66. Peter;
    You’re right, because I’m sure now that he’s no longer willing to be the political puppet and water boy for the failed Iraqi adventure of GWB,

    Thank you for confirming my impression that you do not care a whit whether Iraq survives as a free country or falls to the Islamic terrorists. Someday, you may care but it will be too late.

    Mike K (6d4fc3)

  67. Case in point: how am I expected to NOT ridicule the moonbat auteur of the diatribe above?

    Oh, I don’t know, how about by recognizing where the quote comes from?

    Talk about no sense of humor…

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  68. I just LOVE how the media is making it an issue about the corrupt people in the administration rather than having the balls to accept responsibility for potentially misleading people through their various interpretations

    dumdum (573163)

  69. #65 – master shake

    Case in point: how am I expected to NOT ridicule the moonbat auteur of the diatribe above? Or was this an attempt at sarcasm?

    – It depends. Do you know from whence that quote originated? and therefore understand that my use of it was a case of pure sarcasm?

    Icy Truth (36dec9)

  70. Note the comment by master shake at #65.

    It’s disappointing but not surprising that someone who thinks the KKK (who were typically Democrats, not ‘right-wing’ Republicans) was brought down “in large part because they were ridiculed to the point that nobody took them seriously anymore” might also believe Al Qaeda and other terrorists could be defeated through legal enforcement and reason.

    DRJ (92ca6f)

  71. Drumwaster,

    That’s scary. I started to write my comment, took a break to eat a sandwich, and by the time I posted my remarks you had it covered. Thanks!

    Now we can give him a hard time for “the KKK was brought down (much to the chagrin of right wingnuts everywhere)” by pointing out which party contains a man who has been a Senator for the past 50 years.

    Icy Truth (36dec9)

  72. Sure, the KKK were typically Democrats right up until JFK and RFK turned the south against them. Much of the right wing had to take up the KKK torch.

    As far as your comment on Al Qaeda and Terrorists being defeated through legal enforcement and reason…….what is the alternative???
    Going after a country that had nothing to do with 9/11?? Don’t be ridiculous.

    Oiram (983921)

  73. I nominate Oiram to be our chief negotiator with al-Qaeda. Will anyone ‘second’ this nomination?

    Icy Truth (36dec9)

  74. LOL

    Negotiate?? Nah. Capture or kill the criminals that they are? Yeah, that works. It’s the way a society should work.

    Oiram (983921)

  75. History, for these folks, begins about 1965. A caller to Dennis Prager’s radio program this morning was giving him a hard time about Iraq. Vince Bugliosi, who has written two excellent books, Helter Skelter and The Sea Will Tell, both about crime, has also written a weird thing about prosecuting Bush for murder over Iraq. That caller asked Dennis if he would have Bugliosi on the show to discuss the book. Dennis said he had been thinking about it and then tried to engage the caller in his argument about Bush and war crimes. He asked the caller if he agreed that Harry Truman should also be prosecuted for Korea.

    It was embarrassing for the caller because he obviously didn’t know anything about Korea. He stammered and finally said he “wasn’t up to speed” or some such evasion. No historical basis because he doesn’t know history. The ignorance of these people is simply staggering.

    Some woman called Hugh Hewitt one day a couple of months ago and said she voted for “the man” and didn’t care about party. He kept asking her what her criteria were and she was vague every time. Finally, he asked her who the present vice president of the US is. She didn’t know.

    Another Obama voter.

    Mike K (f89cb3)

  76. Icy Truth, nice Monty Python quote.

    But the first casualty of partisanship is a sense of humor, I fear.

    Eric Blair (c8876d)

  77. Not really, history began for us when we walked out of out caves, but was at a very high point after the Republican created depression was solved in part by Franklin D. Rosevelt.

    Hugh Hewit needs to evaluate why the bulk of his listeners voted for a man who proclaimed “Mission Accomplished” prematurely.

    Oiram (983921)

  78. As far as your comment on Al Qaeda and Terrorists being defeated through legal enforcement and reason…….what is the alternative???

    If you kill enough of them, they stop fighting. — W.T. Sherman, General

    The best way to quiet a country is a good thrashing, followed by great kindness afterwards. Even the wildest chaps are thus tamed. — General Sir Charles James Napier GCB, Commander-in-Chief in India (1782 – 1853)

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  79. To all those who are saying McCain’s judgment is better because he supported the “surge” and the surge worked — how did it work if violence is only down to 2005 levels? And, if you recall, the surge was meant to produce not just a reduction in violence, but also political reconciliation. But that hasn’t happened. And violence went down only because it gave cover to ethnic cleansing; the cleansing is almost complete, so sectarian violence is down. And now that the “surge” is over (although more troops remain in Iraq than there were before the surge started), shouldn’t we wait and see whether the reduction in violence persists, and whether any political reconciliation can be achieved (national petroleum law at the very least) prior to the next provincial elections before we say that the surge worked? If it all falls apart, which everyone seems to think is a real possibility, both on the left and right, then the temporary (and relatively minor) reduction in violence, the only positive tangible result of the surge, won’t look like much of a success, will it? Given everything that has happened over the last five years, I would be very careful before positively asserting that the surge has worked and things are getting better in Iraq.

    Reginald Perrin (cd93b0)

  80. Sherman’s Key word was “Country”.

    Oiram (983921)

  81. a man who proclaimed “Mission Accomplished” prematurely.

    Which mission are you talking about? The overthrow of Saddam’s Ba’athist government? That Mission was accomplished, in less time than it took Janet Reno to take a compound in Waco.

    Or was it the overly long deployment that was just concluding by the aircraft carrier that NCA chose to land his aircraft on? (And let’s see Obama try an aircraft carrier landing.) That mission also was accomplished.

    But you want to put your own spin onto those words, using your own definitions, then blame Bush for failing to meet those goalpost-shifted missions you are suddenly demanding (such as the complete removal of all troops from the political and military vaccum we had just created).

    Just FYI, it was that same General Clark that bombed civilians in Kosovo that declared Iraq was a “quagmire” less than 48 hours after our forces crossed the border northbound.

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  82. Sorry, General Sir Charles James Napier GCB key word was “Country”.

    Oiram (983921)

  83. Oiram #73:

    Sure, the KKK were typically Democrats right up until JFK and RFK turned the south against them. Much of the right wing had to take up the KKK torch.

    JFK was too afraid of alienating powerful Southern Democrats to pick up the mantle of civil rights legislation. And it was JFK and RFK who agreed to let the FBI wiretap Martin Luther King in connection with its investigation of King’s suspected Communist ties.

    DRJ (92ca6f)

  84. And, if you recall, the surge was meant to produce not just a reduction in violence, but also political reconciliation.

    And, if you’ll recall, not less than 15 of the 18 criteria put into place by our Congress have been satisfactorily completed, and even Maliki says that the last three have shown substantial progress.

    But you are like Maxwell’s Demon, only seeing the negative.

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  85. General Sir Charles James Napier GCB key word was “Country”.

    And it has worked out really well in Germany, Japan and Afghanistan, hasn’t it? Once you achieve the higher thought processes of expanding the concept to “culture” or “mindset”, the truth remains.

    Keep in mind that we didn’t start this little fracas.

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  86. If things had gone great in Iraq and 2/3 or more of our country were in Bush’s court. They would be issuing coins with the words Mission Accomplished behind him. You all know that.
    Don’t muddy the water with trying to explain off what “Mission Accomplished” actually meant please.

    Oiram (983921)

  87. Reginald Perrin #80 and Oiram #87,

    Here’s what Iraq Prime Minister Maliki said in response to whether the Iraq War and the surge were worth it for Iraqis:

    “SPIEGEL: Mr. Prime Minister, the war and its consequences have cost more than 100,000 lives and caused great suffering in your country. Saddam Hussein and his regime are now part of the past. Was all of this worth the price?

    Maliki: The casualties have been and continue to be enormous. But anyone who was familiar with the dictator’s nature and his intentions knows what could have been in store for us instead of this war. Saddam waged wars against Iran and Kuwait, and against Iraqis in the north and south of his own country, wars in which hundreds of thousands died. And he was capable of instigating even more wars. Yes, the casualties are great, but I see our struggle as an enormous effort to avoid other such wars in the future.

    DRJ (92ca6f)

  88. We didn’t start the little fracas in Iraq??????
    Are you kidding me?

    Oiram (983921)

  89. Don’t muddy the water with trying to explain off what “Mission Accomplished” actually meant please.

    I wouldn’t have to if you weren’t implying lies by bringing it up.

    We didn’t start the little fracas in Iraq??????
    Are you kidding me?

    I wasn’t talking about Iraq, specifically, but since you bring it up, you need to learn a little history. Short answer: No, I’m not kidding you. Iraq actually started this war.

    Long version requires more thought than you have shown so far. So let’s start with a simple beginning: tell us the difference between a Conditional Cease-Fire and a Peace Treaty.

    Take your time.

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  90. DRJ, all I am saying is that there are a bunch of folks who are out there arguing that McCain’s judgment is so much better because the surge worked, and he supported the surge. In fact, the surge only worked a little, and even that success is contingent and uncertain. So everyone should hold off the chest-thumping, self-justifying, “I was right!” rhetoric until we see what actually happens. The only certain things in Iraq right now are that violence remains too high and that progress is fragile and reversible.
    As to Drumwaster, there was much dissent about whether those goals have been attained and the “15 of 18″ is just more administration propaganda. Furthermore, the most important goals — political reconciliation, national gas law and provision for distribution of gas revenues, and federal structure of the new Iraqi state — were not even addressed satisfactorily, and still have not been. Until they are, the conditions for renewed sectarian violence and/or regional civil war remain, and remain close to the surface. And we certainly did start the “little fracas”, as you so charmingly put it, in Iraq.
    I would think that experience has taught you that, with respect to Iraq, it is more realistic to be Maxwell’s Demon than Pollyanna. But you’re right, we will be welcomed as liberators, the war will pay for itself, the Iraqis are more secular than religious and won’t engage in sectarian violence, a guerrila movement won’t form and oil production will be back to pre-war levels quickly. In fact so many rosy predictions have come true, I can see why you’d want to discount my pessimism.

    Reginald Perrin (cd93b0)

  91. Yeah, I will take my time.

    Nah, you tell me your version of history Mr. Drum.

    Preach to your choir here my friend, it’s all you got.

    Oiram (983921)

  92. By the way you never answered my question Drum. Hypotheticaly speaking if the war in Iraq had gone favorably. How many times would we see that banner “Mission Accomplished” waving proudly behind Bush?
    The banner would be required right next to our American Flag.

    Sad, what politicians will do to win an election (2004)

    Oiram (983921)

  93. Nah, you tell me your version of history Mr. Drum.

    It isn’t “my” version. I will only use verifiable facts, and let you draw your own conclusion.

    But you won’t believe me if I just tell you. You will need to dig out those facts for yourself, otherwise you just won’t believe them.

    I’ll ask again: what is the difference between a Conditional Cease-Fire and a Peace Treaty?

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  94. It’s a spin trap Drum. Not going to answer it with facts. Keep reading history the way you want to.
    I would start gearing up for the 2012 election my friend.
    Looks bad for McCain when his buddy Bush seems to be taking orders from Obama.
    “Time Horizons” – President Bush

    give me a break

    Oiram (983921)

  95. The twatwaffles are out in force today.

    JD (5f0e11)

  96. Not going to answer it with facts.

    It’s all I’m asking you to find, but if you think the truth cannot be found by looking at the facts, then nothing anyone says will help you out of your self-imposed box.

    C’mon Oiram, let’s be serious here. What is the difference between a Conditional Cease-Fire and a Peace Treaty?

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  97. “Not going to answer it with facts.”

    This is now in the lead for funniest brain – dead comment over the past month, and that includes the infamous “I only have to read a book’s title to know what’s in it” idiocy from Levi.

    Dmac (416471)

  98. O.k., I’ll bite:
    Let’s see, Conditional cease fire means a suspension of fighting as long as both parties agree to conditions.

    Peace Treaty is basically suspension of fighting without conditions.

    Now blab your version of the definition and then relate it to Repubs revisionist history of Iraq.

    Oiram (983921)

  99. Facts are not required for Teh Narrative.

    JD (5f0e11)

  100. ” the Republican created depression was solved in part by Franklin D. Rosevelt.” [sic]

    Maybe you should read “The Forgotten Man” and then come back for a discussion. Once again, history is tough because you have to read to get it. It’s so much easier to get your knowledge form MTV.

    And you provide further reenforcement for my theory that Democrats will skip out of Iraq and then wonder why the roof fell in ten years from now. I would give a longer reading list for you but I know you won’t read anything thicker than a Rolling Stone issue.

    Mike K (f89cb3)

  101. oiram doesn’t know the definition of a peace treaty so why would anyone think he/she/it knows what happened in Iraq/Kuwait in 1991 ? That’s so long ago !

    Mike K (6d4fc3)

  102. Now blab your version of the definition and then relate it to Repubs revisionist history of Iraq.

    No, no, I’m quite willing to accept your definitions.

    Now, I need you to do a little more digging, find UN Security Council Resolution 687, and tell me which of those definitions best describes that resolution.

    I’ll even make it easy for you. Link

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  103. Hint: Look at Section 33.

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  104. Great, thanks. Where were the weapons?
    And was it worth it?
    4000 American Lives
    hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives
    1 million displaced Iraqis (10,000 of which we’ve taken in)
    Have we topped the trillion mark in dollars yet? (I lost track at 600 billion) in our cost. Oh wait, Iraq oil revenues will pay for that, when?

    Oiram (983921)

  105. You’re throwing up nonsense.

    Pay attention.

    The question was “which of those definitions you gave best described the United Nations Security Resolution # 687?” I even provided you a link.

    The truth can be uncomfortable, but all you have to do is admit that the facts got the better of you and I will let you scamper away…

    If you choose to stick with it all the way through, you will come to unpleasant truths that have nothing to do with your current ideology (or mine), but you’ll feel the same sense of accomplishment that you currently get by asserting those falsehoods you’ve been regurgitating so far, without the icky feeling of not knowing the truth for yourself…

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  106. The facts did not get the better of me. The internet has served you well Drum. I fear for this country. I fear that 20 years from now we will have to keep two sets of books to recall our history. It has already begun.
    Believe it or not, I still believe you have the best of intentions for yourself, me and our Nation.
    I think deep down you feel that way about my beliefs.
    I hope whoever gets elected in November that they serve this country well.

    Over and Out
    Peace

    Oiram (983921)

  107. The facts did not get the better of me. The internet has served you well Drum

    Eh ?

    Change the subject works well, doesn’t it ?

    These are the kids who think they deserve A’s for turning in homework even if they get the problems wrong.

    Mike K (6d4fc3)

  108. Brave Sir Robin ran away,
    bravely ran away, away.

    When Hist’ry reared its ugly head,
    he bravely turned his tail and fled…

    Why don’t liberals ever want to learn the facts? Is their mindset so fragile?

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  109. Over and Out

    Yet another thing that liberals always get wrong.

    Like “Beam me up, Scotty” or “Play it again, Sam”…

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  110. “I fear for this country. I fear that 20 years from now we will have to keep two sets of books to recall our history.”

    After reading your inane posts over the past day, I fear for this country as well – and it’s clear that you’re already keeping two sets of history books in your head.

    Dmac (416471)

  111. I’m not as liberal as you think Drum.
    And believe it or not I do want to learn the facts.
    Problem is, I know where your coming from. This is all a game to you.
    History is all a big search to you. Your terms, your ideas.
    “Why don’t liberals ever want to learn the facts? Is their mindset so fragile?”

    I pose this question to you:
    Why do conservatives have so much faith in their value system?
    Do you really think we can make it without some government intervention?
    Again I know where your coming from, too much government bugs the crap out of me too. But I just don’t trust big business to create a middle class.
    Yeah, I’m changing the subject……… you all have, I’ve seen it up and down on the comments here.
    Live Long

    Oiram (983921)

  112. Man you guys really hate don’t you?
    Let go of it. You’ll have a chance in 2012 to get the white house back. (LOL)

    Oiram (983921)

  113. History is all a big search to you.

    History is composed of facts. Your arguments about me “rewriting history” is NOT made of facts.

    I simply want you to acknowledge what the facts are.

    Do you want to learn something you obviously never knew before? Or would you rather throw around disproven talking points?

    Do you really think we can make it without some government intervention?

    YES. The less the government is involved in my day-to-day life, the happier we will both be.

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  114. Maliki: As soon as possible, as far as we’re concerned. US presidential candidate Barack Obama is right when he talks about 16 months. Assuming that positive developments continue, this is about the same time period that corresponds to our wishes.
    Another embarassment on John McCains position. Reality seems to be against the republicans again. Now Maliki has dealt a major blow on the Iraq saga. However you choose to spin this, it doesnt look good for McCain.

    love2008 (0c8c2c)

  115. And believe it or not I do want to learn the facts.

    Prove it.

    Answer the question.

    You came up with definitions for both Conditional Cease-Fire and Peace Treaty. YOU did, not me, so you cannot accuse me of putting words in your mouth.

    Now, I am asking you to look at the very definitions you provided and tell us which definition would cover UNSCR 687.

    You really want to learn the facts? Then try and keep up. I promise to take only baby steps on our journey for The Truth.

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  116. First this:

    “Not going to answer it with facts.”

    Then this:

    “And believe it or not I do want to learn the facts.”

    WTH?

    Dmac (416471)

  117. I’m trying to be fair…

    But we start looking at the actual facts and he’s acting as though he were made of Kleenex and I’d asked him to jog through a bonfire.

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  118. It’s disappointing but not surprising that someone who thinks the KKK (who were typically Democrats, not ‘right-wing’ Republicans) was brought down “in large part because they were ridiculed to the point that nobody took them seriously anymore” might also believe Al Qaeda and other terrorists could be defeated through legal enforcement and reason.

    -Obviously you missed the simple point… disappointing, but not surprising. Of course, today, Repuglicans comprise the vast majority of right wingnuts. It’s not the party of Lincoln anymore, in case you haven’t noticed, so I will continue with my ridicule.

    It depends. Do you know from whence that quote originated? and therefore understand that my use of it was a case of pure sarcasm?

    -Only arugula-eating elitists quote defunct British comedy troops [note the sarcasm]. The amazing thing is that even insane, surreal, satire is virtually indistinguishable from regular Repuglican talking points. Colbert could be a Fox anchor without even changing the script.

    master shake (27ee58)

  119. Heh. Indeed. We’re winning! Read the whole thing. Obama’s pivoting on Iraq. Dude, where’s my recession? Mickey Kaus says Obama will lose! Heh. Indeed. We’re winning! Read the whole thing. Obama’s pivoting on Iraq. Dude, where’s my recession? Mickey Kaus says Obama will lose! Heh. Indeed. We’re winning! Read the whole thing. Obama’s pivoting on Iraq. Dude, where’s my recession? Mickey Kaus says Obama will lose! Heh. Indeed. We’re winning! Read the whole thing. Obama’s pivoting on Iraq. Dude, where’s my recession? Mickey Kaus says Obama will lose! Heh. Indeed. We’re winning! Read the whole thing. Obama’s pivoting on Iraq. Dude, where’s my recession? Mickey Kaus says Obama will lose! Heh. Indeed. We’re winning! Read the whole thing. Obama’s pivoting on Iraq. Dude, where’s my recession? Mickey Kaus says Obama will lose! Heh. Indeed. We’re winning! Read the whole thing. Obama’s pivoting on Iraq. Dude, where’s my recession? Mickey Kaus says Obama will lose! Heh. Indeed. We’re winning! Read the whole thing. Obama’s pivoting on Iraq. Dude, where’s my recession? Mickey Kaus says Obama will lose! Heh. Indeed. We’re winning! Read the whole thing. Obama’s pivoting on Iraq. Dude, where’s my recession? Mickey Kaus says Obama will lose! Heh. Indeed. We’re winning! Read the whole thing. Obama’s pivoting on Iraq. Dude, where’s my recession? Mickey Kaus says Obama will lose! Heh. Indeed. We’re winning! Read the whole thing. Obama’s pivoting on Iraq. Dude, where’s my recession? Mickey Kaus says Obama will lose! Heh. Indeed. We’re winning! Read the whole thing. Obama’s pivoting on Iraq. Dude, where’s my recession? Mickey Kaus says Obama will lose! Heh. Indeed. We’re winning! Read the whole thing. Obama’s pivoting on Iraq. Dude, where’s my recession? Mickey Kaus says Obama will lose! Heh. Indeed. We’re winning! Read the whole thing. Obama’s pivoting on Iraq. Dude, where’s my recession? Mickey Kaus says Obama will lose! Heh. Indeed. We’re winning! Read the whole thing. Obama’s pivoting on Iraq. Dude, where’s my recession? Mickey Kaus says Obama will lose! Heh. Indeed. We’re winning! Read the whole thing. Obama’s pivoting on Iraq. Dude, where’s my recession? Mickey Kaus says Obama will lose! Heh. Indeed. We’re winning! Read the whole thing. Obama’s pivoting on Iraq. Dude, where’s my recession? Mickey Kaus says Obama will lose! Heh. Indeed. We’re winning! Read the whole thing. Obama’s pivoting on Iraq. Dude, where’s my recession? Mickey Kaus says Obama will lose! Heh. Indeed. We’re winning! Read the whole thing. Obama’s pivoting on Iraq. Dude, where’s my recession? Mickey Kaus says Obama will lose! Heh. Indeed. We’re winning! Read the whole thing. Obama’s pivoting on Iraq. Dude, where’s my recession? Mickey Kaus says Obama will lose!

    Malfunctioning Glenn Reynolds Robot (f68688)

  120. master shake #120,

    Here’s a portion of your comment #65:

    Allow me to disagree, Peter. To paraphrase Mark Twain: It is impossible to reason someone out of something they were never reasoned into. This is true for most extreme Repuglican moonbats. In this case the best (and really only) thing to do is to ridicule these useful idiots to expose them as what they are. Attempting to debate morons is pointless as it just encourages them and validates their ridiculous arguments as being worthy of a response. What sustains complete idiots like Sean Hannity is that people actually try to engage them in political debate, thus legitimizing them. Besides, ridicule is often very effective strategy: the KKK was brought down (much to the chagrin of right wingnuts everywhere) in large part because they were ridiculed to the point that nobody took them seriously anymore. Being rightly labeled idiots and mocked completely destroyed their legitimacy.

    In one paragraph, you call everyone who disagrees with you an “extreme Repuglican moonbat,” an “idiot,” and “moron” who makes “ridiculous arguments” that should be “mocked” and ridiculed. As a result, it’s clear you do not plan to debate anyone here and your only goal is to ridicule. That makes you an admitted internet troll.

    DRJ (92ca6f)

  121. master shake…
    I guess Levi bought a new computer?

    Another Drew (8018ee)

  122. Master Shake isn’t entirely wrong. As I said up thread, I do think it’s important to be able to debate people you don’t agree with and do it with some semblance of civility and/or at least a sense of humor, but that doesn’t mean you need to engage in trying to reason with bitter abusive insecure cock heads who just want to put you down or with those who’ve completely un-tethered themselves from reality.

    Peter (e70d1c)

  123. Maybe you can take up answering my question.

    I mean, since you claim to be serious about debating…

    I was in the middle of proving that Iraq started the war. Do I need to start over or will you pick up where Oiram ran away?

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  124. Where are these folks coming from, I wonder? Do they just have a strange attraction for intellectual abuse of their faulty notions, or is it something else?

    Dmac (416471)

  125. bitter abusive insecure cock heads who just want to put you down or with those who’ve completely un-tethered themselves from reality.

    Since we’re talking definitions here, this one is “anyone who disgrees with me.”

    Sorry, Peter, you get an F.

    Mike K (2cf494)

  126. Since we’re talking definitions here, this one is “anyone who disgrees with me.”

    Nope. Pay attention dammit. As is readily apparent, I’m more than willing to debate people who disagree with me. Go sit in the corner, dunce and open your eyes next time.

    Peter (e70d1c)

  127. I was in the middle of proving that Iraq started the war. Do I need to start over or will you pick up where Oiram ran away?

    Not necessarily, but go ahead make your point I looked over Resolution 687 including section 33. Interesting…

    Peter (e70d1c)

  128. You like abusing and name calling anyone that dares to disagree with you or air a different view point to yours yet you take offence and yell when someone returns the favour. Is that fair game? If you dont want to be insulted, dont insult people. I think it’s sick and stupid and moronic for anyone to come to the internet and abuse total strangers. That’s not what the internet is about. It’s where you build relationships, exchange ideas and learn something new. And even when you feel you have a superior view point or knowledge, there is a way to present it without trying to make others look like their opinions dont count. Respect is the name of the game. If you want it, show it.

    love2008 (1b037c)

  129. In one paragraph, you call everyone who disagrees with you an “extreme Repuglican moonbat,” an “idiot,” and “moron” who makes “ridiculous arguments” that should be “mocked” and ridiculed.

    -Come on, Repuglican moonbats deserve to be mocked. Don’t take it personally though, extreme left wing commies deserve almost as much scorn. This board just happens to be populated with a whole lot of moonbats of the right wing persuasion.

    There’s a point at which debate becomes futile. Can you seriously debate say, evolution, with someone ignorant enough take the Adam and Eve myth literally? Or someone who insists Obama’s a political panderer yet brainlessly supports McFlipflop? The roughly 26 percent that still believe Bushie’s doing a “heck-of-a-job” or that the Iraq war was a resounding success aren’t worth the effort. These people are obviously impervious to logic, so why bother?

    As a result, it’s clear you do not plan to debate anyone here and your only goal is to ridicule.

    -What great reasoning skills you have! What gave it away?

    master shake (27ee58)

  130. I looked over Resolution 687 including section 33. Interesting…

    Good. Now answer this question: which of the two definitions above describe UNSCR 687 more accurately – a Conditional Cease-Fire or a Peace Treaty?

    This point is important…

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  131. You like abusing and name calling anyone that dares to disagree with you or air a different view point to yours yet you take offence and yell when someone returns the favour. Is that fair game? If you dont want to be insulted, dont insult people. I think it’s sick and stupid and moronic for anyone to come to the internet and abuse total strangers.

    -Okay, since you didn’t address your comment, I’ll assume it was meant for me. So, I’ll be happy to field it. What “you think” is not my concern. The internet is also a place where insecure retards go to vent their prejudices and conspiracy theories. It is my opinion that these people deserve to be ridiculed.

    That’s not what the internet is about. It’s where you build relationships, exchange ideas and learn something new.

    -Who died and made you the arbiter of internet etiquette and morality? Have you actually surfed the crap that’s out there?

    And even when you feel you have a superior view point or knowledge, there is a way to present it without trying to make others look like their opinions dont count.

    -You don’t get it, do you? Moonbat “opinions” don’t count precisely because they’re set in stone. The last thing you want to do is legitimize their views by engaging in a futile debate with people who lack the intellectual skills to think them through. Dogma isn’t debatable: I don’t debate Nazis, I don’t debate Islamists, and I don’t debate moonbats.

    master shake (27ee58)

  132. Seems like quite a troll infestation. I recommend a pyrethrin based product.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  133. a Conditional Cease-Fire or a Peace Treaty?

    The wording in section 33 of Resolution 687 is: Declares that, upon official notification by Iraq to the Secretary-General and to the Security Council of its acceptance of the provisions above, a formal cease-fire is effective between Iraq and Kuwait and the Member States cooperating with Kuwait in accordance with resolution 678 (1990);

    Peter (e70d1c)

  134. You missed that first dependent phrase: “upon official notification by Iraq to the Secretary-General and to the Security Council of its acceptance of the provisions above

    So we have Iraq accepting conditions in order to implement a formal cease fire. (Admittedly, Iraq’s only alternative was the immediate continuation of armed hostilities, but still, it accepted those conditions in order to put a stop to the slaughter of his troops.)

    Is this accurate? Would you agree with that point?

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  135. master shake -

    Only arugula-eating elitists quote defunct British comedy troops [note the sarcasm].

    – 1) It’s only been 25 years since their last film, and they have an official website (pythonline); that sounds like ‘still active’ to me. 2) Timeless comedy outlives its creators (see: Stooges).

    extreme left wing commies deserve almost as much scorn

    – “Almost”, comrade?

    The internet is also a place where insecure retards go to vent their prejudices and conspiracy theories. It is my opinion that these people deserve to be ridiculed.

    – Well then; turn off the computer, put the .44 in its shoulder holster, square up on the mirror . . . and get to it, Travis!

    The last thing you want to do is legitimize their views by engaging in a futile debate with people who lack the intellectual skills to think them through.

    – Of course in order to legitimize the views of someone else, you yourself must be legit.

    Icy Truth (28d384)

  136. #106 – Oiram

    hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives

    – 93,880 . . . 10% killed by coalition forces; 90% killed by insurgents, suicide bombers, and militias.

    Icy Truth (28d384)

  137. love2008 -

    Now Maliki has dealt a major blow on the Iraq saga. However you choose to spin this, it doesnt look good for McCain.

    – Harry Reid said we need to leave Iraq because we’ve already lost; Obama said it doesn’t matter if we win because Iraq isn’t where the real war is; McCain said we can leave after we win; al-Maliki said we can leave soon because we’re winning.

    Whose position most closely resembles that of Maliki? Where did Maliki say “Hey, you guys gotta leave; the real war is in Afghanistan”?

    Icy Truth (28d384)

  138. #110 – Drumwaster

    Thanks for keeping on him while I ran errands for the wife.

    Icy Truth (28d384)

  139. #133
    Actually I wasnt refering to you. I was refering to people on this blog (some of them) who want to impose their opinion on others and get all worked up when their point is challenged. They resort to insults and name calling and once they are insulted by anyone, they cry foul. I actually see you as their nemesis. What comes around, they say, goes around. So keep up the good work. Just be sure you dont offend people like DRJ, Patterico, Scotty, Pablo, Vermont N., and some very nice others. :)

    love2008 (0c8c2c)

  140. – 1) It’s only been 25 years since their last film, and they have an official website (pythonline); that sounds like ’still active’ to me. 2) Timeless comedy outlives its creators (see: Stooges).

    James Brown also has an official web site, and he’s definitely “defunct”. ELITIST!

    – Well then; turn off the computer, put the .44 in its shoulder holster, square up on the mirror . . . and get to it, Travis!

    Jeez, another 1970′s reference. I’m surprised you can use the internets from your time warp.

    Whose position most closely resembles that of Maliki?

    Keep digging that hole, you’re bound to hit oil at some point. How many times, and in how many languages, must Maliki say “I SUPPORT OBAMA’S PLAN” before it penetrates your thick skulls and atrophied brains?

    Give it up. Trying to spin this as support for McSenile, despite something called reality, just makes you look more retarded… if that’s at all possible.

    – 93,880 . . . 10% killed by coalition forces; 90% killed by insurgents, suicide bombers, and militias.

    93,962 civilian deaths reported in the press. You win, the Iraq war was a great success!

    master shake (27ee58)

  141. Actually I wasnt refering to you. I was refering to people on this blog (some of them) who want to impose their opinion on others and get all worked up when their point is challenged. They resort to insults and name calling and once they are insulted by anyone, they cry foul.

    Sorry, I assumed you were referring to me since I do ridicule and insult the Repuglican moonbats. It’s a habit.

    master shake (27ee58)

  142. You win, the Iraq war was a great success!

    More than 300,000 bodies found in mass graves filled by Saddam and Sons, all because you didn’t want him removed from power, and you were no doubt claiming “the sanctions were working”.

    Glad to see that you have your priorities straight.

    In the meantime, the number of dead terrorists has passed 20,00020,000.

    Putting an end to Saddam’s support for international terrorism.
    Putting an end to his oppression of his own people.
    Putting an end to his desperate search for deliverable WMD systems.
    Disrupting the Iran-to-Syria-to-Lebanon chain of Iranian support for Hezbollah and exposing it for the whole world to see.

    And if we had not worried so much about protecting the civilians that Saddam and the terrorists don’t care about, we could have ended this conflict within 24 hours, instead of several years. Instead of targeting just the restaurant where Saddam was eating, we could have leveled the entire city, and been entirely justified in doing so, according to the rules of warfare and the same tactics used by the preceding administration.

    So. yeah, it is a success.

    Too bad you thought you were being sarcastic.

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  143. since I do ridicule and insult the Repuglican moonbats.

    Too bad that’s all you have. It’s more fun from my side, actually proving Demoncraps and asshats wrong by using the facts that they do not know. (Basic things like “the sun rises in the east” and “they found WMD in Iraq”.)

    If all you have is insults and bumper sticker slogans, you’ll want to back away slowly.

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  144. It is hilarious that you try to use “moonbat” for Republicans, Master whatever. “Moonbat” is an intentional corruption of Monbiot, as in George Monbiot, a left wing nut.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  145. You’ll just confuse them with facts, SPQR. Most of them are allergic…

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  146. How many times, and in how many languages, must Maliki say “I SUPPORT OBAMA’S PLAN” before it penetrates your thick skulls and atrophied brains?

    Once. Let me know when it happens.

    Pablo (99243e)

  147. #148
    So tell me Pablo, do you think Maliki does not support Obama’s position? What do you think?

    love2008 (0c8c2c)

  148. I think he is supporting the same position that he has been holding for quite a while – that our troops will eventually leave, based on conditions on the ground, not some arbitrary date on a calendar.

    But that would require actually taking him at his word, instead of “interpreting” what he said.

    Pepsi brings your ancestors back from the dead, after all.

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  149. I think Maliki wants what pretty much all Iraqis want; a drawdown of American troops as the Iraqi forces stand up. I think he wants that to happen according to facts on the ground, and I don’t think he has any desire to set it to a particular date. (mostly because he’s never said he wanted that.) Unless, of course, he wants to be able to keep all the stuff we’d have to leave behind in order to get out in 16 months. (You know that last was snark, right?)

    Pablo (99243e)

  150. Go sit in the corner, dunce and open your eyes next time.

    More inspired debating points from the left.

    Is this the way you address your high school teachers ? At moments, you almost sound teachable but then the old juvenile impulse returns.

    Mike K (2cf494)

  151. Is this the way you address your high school teachers ? At moments, you almost sound teachable but then the old juvenile impulse returns.

    A response to your patronizing, dismissive and and plainly inaccurate comment.

    Peter (e70d1c)

  152. Too bad that’s all you have. It’s more fun from my side, actually proving Demoncraps and asshats wrong by using the facts that they do not know.

    -Wingnut “facts” from Rovish alternate realities don’t count. Keep trying.

    I think he is supporting the same position that he has been holding for quite a while – that our troops will eventually leave, based on conditions on the ground, not some arbitrary date on a calendar.

    Keep “thinking”, maybe some day you’ll actually come up with an original thought. What part of “16 months” and “by 2010″ was “mistranslated”? Or maybe he was just referring to the Muslim calendar. In that case, we’ll be there for another 500+ years, which is much more in line with McStay’s plan.

    It is hilarious that you try to use “moonbat” for Republicans, Master whatever. “Moonbat” is an intentional corruption of Monbiot, as in George Monbiot, a left wing nut.

    It is hilarious that you’d keep embarrassing yourself by writing nonsense. The term moonbat (howling moonbat, barking moonbat) can be generically applied any idiot, such as yourself, who bases their belief, not on evidence, logic, or reason, but simply on things that they want to believe and completely ignoring facts. In short, “moonbats” are guided solely by dogmatic “truthiness”. According to Perry de Havilland: “It is really quite an ‘ecumenical’ term of abuse for dogmatists of any ilk — left, right or libertarian.”

    I think Maliki wants what pretty much all Iraqis want; a drawdown of American troops as the Iraqi forces stand up. I think he wants that to happen according to facts on the ground, and I don’t think he has any desire to set it to a particular date. (mostly because he’s never said he wanted that.)

    Uhh, What part of “16 months” and “by 2010″ was did you not understand?

    master shake (68b47c)

  153. master shake, so you’ve proven that you have not been around for the rise of the blogosphere. No surprise. Those of us old enough to buy our own beer remember Bill of INDC Journal establishing the term with his “field guide” to moonbats. And we remember the initial ridicule of George Monbiot’s anti-american drivel with the term by people like Bill and Tim Blair and others. Even Wikipedia acknowledges it.

    But people like you don’t have memories that extend a whole four or five years back.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  154. Peter, for a moment I thought you might be worth debating. Instead you go back the cliche’ lefty response with abuse and obscenity. You have abandoned any attempt to discuss issues and regressed to the playground scold. You’re not a bully because you haven’t got the stones. Just a whiney kid. Too bad. I thought for a moment you could debate.

    Mike K (2cf494)

  155. Mike K., during which five second pause for breath did you see any attempt to discuss issues from Peter?

    SPQR (26be8b)

  156. No surprise. Those of us old enough to buy our own beer remember Bill of INDC Journal establishing the term with his “field guide” to moonbats.

    -Did you learn to use the Google from McCain? My Google credits the popularization of the term to Perry de Havilland in 2002:

    “Moonbat is a political epithet popularized in 2002 by Perry de Havilland of Samizdata.net, a libertarian weblog. Contrary to some speculation, de Havilland has stated it was not originally a play on the last name of George Monbiot. The term was originally rendered as ‘Barking Moonbat,’ suggesting that certain issues seem to trigger a reflexive response from some people much like wolves howl at the moon (i.e. the term evokes the traditional association between the moon and insanity).

    Keep howling, moonbat…

    master shake (27ee58)

  157. Uhh, What part of “16 months” and “by 2010″ was did you not understand?

    For me it was the “16 months and by March 2008″ that was really confusing.

    Pablo (99243e)

  158. Give it up. Trying to spin this as support for McSenile, despite something called reality, just makes you look more retarded… if that’s at all possible.

    – You are going to be soooo fun to talk to on the day after the election.

    Icy Truth (d645e2)

  159. You are going to be soooo fun to talk to on the day after the election.

    -Which one? The real one or the election in your head?

    master shake (27ee58)

  160. master bate will go away in a few days. That type comes and goes. It is a typical drive-by twatwaffle, that appears to have stayed a bit longer than normal. Or, maybe Levi is getting around its banning.

    JD (75f5c3)

  161. You are going to be soooo fun to talk to on the day after the election.

    Are you kidding? When Obama loses, “master baiter” will never been seen again. He will change his screen name, pretend he has no idea what you are talking about when he lets slip something “that other guy” said, and continue trash talking anyone who doesn’t have a ‘D’ after their names…

    I’ve got an over/under of 36 hours after the polls close. Who wants some o’ that action?

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  162. Are you kidding? When Obama loses, “master baiter” will never been seen again.

    “Master baiter”… Get it? He put “baiter” after “master” to create a homophone for “masturbater”: As in someone who masturbates. But wait, “master baiter” can also be interpreted as a “master at baiting”. Specifically, at baiting idiots into writing dumbass shit like “Master baiter” while thinking they’re clever. Now that’s freakin’ hilarious.

    I’ve got an over/under of 36 hours after the polls close. Who wants some o’ that action?

    Are they taking bets at the Klavern again? It’ll be hard for you to find fellow “members” to bet against McSame. That should put Obama at ~10,000:1, so yeah, I want in. Just remember, when I win, I’m liquidating everything you own, including your guns, your flowbees, your limited-edition NASCAR collector plates, and your confederate flags.

    master shake (27ee58)

  163. Are they taking bets at the Klavern again?

    Better check with Bobby Byrd for that place. (Interesting how Demoncraps use the KKK as an insult against those on the right side of the issues, while completely ignoring the fact that Democrats started it, financed it, protected it, and even recruited for it. The KKK was the action arm of the Democratic Party.

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  164. Better check with Bobby Byrd for that place. (Interesting how Demoncraps use the KKK as an insult against those on the right side of the issues, while completely ignoring the fact that Democrats started it, financed it, protected it, and even recruited for it. The KKK was the action arm of the Democratic Party.

    Don’t be so defensive. There’s no reason for the Klan anymore: their traditional views are well represented by the GOP. Say hi to the guys at the Klavern for me. Tell them I’ll be taking their money.

    master shake (27ee58)

  165. Say hi to the guys at the Klavern for me.

    I don’t hang around with Democrats, I thought you understood?

    English not your first language, I see…

    There’s no reason for the Klan anymore

    Not since Republicans forced the Civil Rights Act down Johnson’s throat, but you guys keep on blaming others for your own actions.

    The rest of the world knows the truth.

    Because you think I am making it up, I will provide what you cannot. The facts. Some more facts.

    You should try it sometime. People wouldn’t be slapping you around quite as much, but that is because you won’t be repeating the same old lies.

    Unless you resort to another tactic of Democrats – distorting the facts and outright lying about what was said. (Oiram keeps trying that one.)

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  166. The democrats are the racing lyars.

    ww2 (983921)

  167. Not since Republicans forced the Civil Rights Act down Johnson’s throat, but you guys keep on blaming others for your own actions.

    “My” actions? Please tell me more about “my” actions. Besides, who said anything about blaming? Your defensiveness is clouding your judgment.

    Because you think I am making it up, I will provide what you cannot. The facts. Some more facts.

    Come on. Do you really believe I’ll waste my time clicking on your moonbat links, much less read the content?

    People wouldn’t be slapping you around quite as much, but that is because you won’t be repeating the same old lies.

    My bad. Let me state the “facts” as you would perceive them: The Iraq war was an overwhelming success; the economy has never been in better shape; gas is affordable; we’re in a mental recession; Barack Obama is a Muslim whitey-hater; Democrats want to establish a Caliphate in America; and God voted for Bush.

    master shake (27ee58)

  168. Do you really believe I’ll waste my time clicking on your moonbat links, much less read the content?

    Of course not. Who needs facts, when you are so comfortable with lies?

    Let me state the “facts” as you would perceive them: The Iraq war was an overwhelming success; the economy has never been in better shape; gas is affordable; we’re in a mental recession; Barack Obama is a Muslim whitey-hater; Democrats want to establish a Caliphate in America; and God voted for Bush.

    More lies. You just can’t help yourself, can you?

    Of course not, you’re a liberal.

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  169. Wow, I just researched Drumwaster’s “FACTS” for us.
    Drum’s Rebut on #167
    He is using a personal web site by a guy named Wayne Perryman. Wayne Perryman is an African American Republican who actually tried to sue the Democratic Party in 2005 for jim crow laws and slavery dating back to the civil war.
    Thank God he lacked standing to bring the case to the US Supreme Court.

    This is where Good old Drum’s “Facts” in this case are coming from. Hearsay at best.

    Hey Drum, your fast on the keyboard but a little slow in the head.

    Just because it’s on the internet doesn’t make it a “Fact”.

    Have a nice Day :)

    Oiram (983921)

  170. More lies. You just can’t help yourself, can you?</i?

    Lemme get this straight [Master Shake rubs his eyes in disbelief]:

    Are you saying the Iraq war is not a resounding success, that the economy isn’t in good shape, that Obama is not Muslim, that the Democrats aren’t surrendering the country to the turrists and that God didn’t vote for Bush?

    master shake (27ee58)

  171. Hey Drum, your getting a little slow on the keys there. CNTRL C is copy untruths and CNTRL P is paste untruths.

    Oiram (983921)

  172. He is using a personal web site by a guy named Wayne Perryman. Wayne Perryman is an African American Republican who actually tried to sue the Democratic Party in 2005 for jim crow laws and slavery dating back to the civil war.

    I figured it was from a moonbat web site, which is why I didn’t bother clicking on the link. Wingnut sheeple are incredibly credulous. They can ALWAYS find a web site supporting their insane beliefs, no matter how dumb they are. They then jump up and down like monkeys and proclaim to be vindicated by the “facts”.

    master shake (27ee58)

  173. Just because it’s on the internet doesn’t make it a “Fact”.

    No, but every single one of the events he mentions can be – and have been – verified elsewhere.

    He even provides his sources.

    But would you expect the truth of those events to be published on the Democrat’s home page? If they told the truth about their history, they wouldn’t even be able to keep the cemetery vote, much less the Black population.

    Feel free to actually prove one of those events incorrect in the least degree.

    Take your time.

    Until you do, I will believe the historical data.

    BTW, what party did Bull Connor belong to? George Wallace? Governor Orval Faubus (who opposed the desegregation of Little Rock schools)?

    What was the voting breakdown – by party – of all of the civil rights legislation passed?

    What were the party affiliations of the Senators who attempted to filibuster the Civil Rights Act – Al Gore, Sr., Robert Byrd and Clinton’s personal hero, J. William Fulbright (who opposed the Supreme Court’s desegregation ruling, Brown v Board of Education)?

    Hell, even Martin Luther King was a Republican

    So show us all those facts that YOU have…

    *crickets*

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  174. “Feel free to actually prove one of those events incorrect in the least degree”

    Serious?

    Blah blah blah blah blah blah.

    Keep Drinking The Kool Aid and please only pontificate here. You might actually convince a few “TWITS” in the real world.

    Oiram (983921)

  175. Hey Drum, your getting a little slow on the keys there. CNTRL C is copy untruths and CNTRL P is paste untruths.

    Give the moonbat a break. He probably just learned to use the Google for “fact” finding. Maybe he’s busy teaching McSame how to get on the internets all by himself too.

    master shake (27ee58)

  176. Still waiting for you two to provide a single fact.

    Not holding my breath, of course, just … waiting.

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  177. Yeah, I change my mind Drum. Really, stay at this site and preach to your choir.

    Your good at molding untruths to look like truths. You could even run a country. Hey do you work for Dubya by any chance?

    Oiram (983921)

  178. No need to provide a fact Drum. You good at finding it’s alternative on someone else’s web site.

    Oiram (983921)

  179. And providing a Republican’s web site at that……. rich truly rich.

    Oiram (983921)

  180. Hey Drum those lightning fast keyboard fingers would be better used fighting off evil dooers in a nice game of pac man or asteroids.

    Oiram (983921)

  181. Your good at molding untruths to look like truths.

    Prove them wrong, and you prove me wrong. Wouldn’t you like to brag about how you proved that I was wrong?

    Take your best shot.

    No need to provide a fact Drum.

    Well, you’ve certainly got THAT down pat. Maybe you should try looking for any facts – any at all – that support your claims. Just one, and the rest will come more easily…

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  182. All I needed was to see you pull Wayne Perryman out of your you know what Drum.
    Drum, you said “Prove them wrong, and you prove me wrong. Wouldn’t you like to brag about how you proved that I was wrong?

    Take your best shot.”
    I told you and I’ll tell you again:
    You good at finding it’s alternative on someone else’s web site.
    Seriously, I’m not as fast as you nor as bright. But I do know when a person is bluffing with a pair of 10′s against a full house. (Poker Reference)

    Oiram (983921)

  183. Drum said to Oiram:
    Prove them wrong, and you prove me wrong. Wouldn’t you like to brag about how you proved that I was wrong?

    Take your best shot.

    I tell you Drum, like I said before, why should I when I know your good at finding a facts alternative untruth on the web?

    Oiram (983921)

  184. How was this thing diverted into a pissing contest over which party was historically more racist? Oh, I know, Drum got defensive when I made the point that the “KKK was brought down to the chagrin of right wingnuts everywhere”. I made no mention of the political affiliations of said wingnuts but he somehow jumped to the conclusion that I was referring to Repuglicans*. I wonder why? Maybe he made the connection on his own.

    *Today, the vast majority of right wingnuts are GOPs. I’d also be willing to bet that no members of Drum’s local Klavern will not be voting Democrat.

    master shake (27ee58)

  185. I made no mention of the political affiliations of said wingnuts

    Allow me to quote… you: “the KKK was brought down to the chagrin of right wingnuts everywhere”.

    Now, I’ll bet you weren’t thinking “correct carburetor clamp” when you typed those five letters, were you?

    Truly, I wonder how I could have ever come to the conclusion that those who belonged to the KKK were all on the right side of political debates here in the US…

    I’d also be willing to bet that no members of Drum’s local Klavern will not be voting Democrat.

    Funny thing is, you’re probably right. I wouldn’t doubt that particular double-negative one iota.

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  186. why should I when I know your good at finding a facts alternative untruth on the web?

    Because, in the process of researching and finding out all of those little bits of data were in fact utterly correct, you might actually come to mistrust other talking points you keep using, and start researching them on your own.

    Hell, you might even advance high enough up the ladder to become a Republican, and – even better – an involved American citizen. That was worth the effort, even if those particular seeds were sown on the rock. (Parable alert.)

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  187. Odd that master self-abuser does not know that the KKK were essentially the terrorist wing of the Democratic party.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  188. Odd that master self-abuser does not know that the KKK were essentially the terrorist wing of the Democratic party.

    I tried, Pa, but they was too stupid for me…

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  189. It was a pretty large pile of stupid for you to have to move all by yourself …

    SPQR (26be8b)

  190. Now, I’ll bet you weren’t thinking “correct carburetor clamp” when you typed those five letters, were you?

    Nope I was actually thinking of right wing nutjobs.

    Funny thing is, you’re probably right. I wouldn’t doubt that particular double-negative one iota.

    Shit. My bad. Sorry about the poor grammar. I meant to say: NO members of your Klavern (or local Aryan brotherhood chapter) will be voting Democrat.

    Odd that master self-abuser does not know that the KKK were essentially the terrorist wing of the Democratic party.

    Wow, “master self-abuser”. How do you come up with this great material? It’s amazing: The minute I think you can’t come up with a more clever attempt at an insult… WHAM! Pure genius. Anyway, where was I? Oh yeah… The operative word in your quote is “were”. Last time I checked, we weren’t in 1915 anymore (although McCain and supporters are still stuck in the 1950s). Things they have-a changed since the good ol’ days, bubba. You know, we have aeroplanes, the teevee, and all sorts of other wonderful modern contraptions nowadays. Shit, even grandpa McSame sometimes looks at the internets machine when the tubes aren’t all clogged up. Things change and situations evolve… oops… scratch that… I’m sure you don’t believe in “evolution”.

    master shake (27ee58)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.5490 secs.