And, of course, we know, as does any thinking American, he's always been wrong. So why does the GOP follow along like lemmings, with only a few exceptions?

Expect more rats to jump ship as the '08 election nears.



The slow demise of the national Republican Party just took a turn for the worse. Hard to believe that the GOP’s prospects could actually become more bleak after two years of unrelenting bad news, but it has.

Republican senators are now turning their rhetorical guns away from Democrats and toward one another. A few conservative Republican senators, whose votes usually cheer me up during bleak political times, are actually accusing Virginia’s senior senator, John Warner, of providing comfort to terrorists.

The White House even got involved in the name calling when Tony Snow suggested Warner’s actions could embolden the likes of Osama Bin Laden.

The message from the Bush administration seems to be this: “Thanks for carrying our water on this miserable war for four years. Now we’re going accuse you of helping terrorists.”

How pathetic.

Didn’t Dick Cheney just cite Ronald Reagan’s 11th Commandment about Republicans not attacking one another?

My how things have changed in a few days.

It’s one more reason I have grown increasingly distraught over the GOP’s direction in recent months. The president is prepared to take his administration and his party over the cliff to prove that he right about Iraq—even if most of his generals and the majority of Americans disagree.

The question now is how long will Republicans stand by this war that has cost over 3,000 lives? Is it worth the $1 trillion dollars that will be added to our national debt? Is it worth undercutting our ability to strike at Iran and North Korea? I would say “yes” to all three questions if there were the slightest chance victory was around the corner. But it is not. If you don’t believe me, ask any general to tell you about the Bush surge. They will roll their eyes.

Even if you agree with me that this war was worth fighting as long as we believed Saddam Hussein had WMD’s aimed at America, at some point you have to face the facts: the Bush administration was wrong about those weapons, wrong about the nuclear program, wrong about their refusal to quell rioting early, wrong about Bremer’s gutting of the Iraqi army and police force, wrong about refusing to kill or capture al Sadr in 2003, wrong to tell the generals not speak of the coming insurgency, wrong to stubbornly refuse to give generals the troops they needed to win this war, wrong to make the “Mission Accomplished” declaration, wrong for the VP to claim that the insurgency was in its death throes and wrong to push a surge plan that the president’s top generals opposed.

The list could continue for pages but I will be generous to the White House and leave it at that.

At some point, GOP senators and congressmen need to understand that this war is no longer a battle between Republican war heroes and Democratic 60s hippie freaks. The lines have now been blurred by Bush’s bungling war strategy. Now we find ourselves in a fight between war heroes and war heroes. Former secretaries of Navy and former Vietnam POWs. Conservative Republicans and protectors of the president.

That may not be so bad for George W. Bush in the short run, but it is a disaster for Republicans in 2008 and beyond.

Conservatives had better wake up before all the gains made by Ronald Reagan and the 1994 Revolution are lost. The clock is ticking.

Catch 'Scarborough Country' each weeknight at 9 p.m. ET

msnbc

Actually odanny,

I don't think that Republicans are dissing each other. I think that they are following the lead from their leaders.

Since about July, 2006, there has been a major paradigm shift in political events.

1. Cheney met with Netanyahu at the AEI in mid-June, 2006 to discuss the upcoming war with Lebanon. I don't know exactly what was said, but it is certain that they agreed with Israel's push into Lebanon in July.

2. Israel used one of the flimsiest excuses to invade Lebanon, "Hezbollah kidnapped two Israel soldiers." This is a tactic used by Hezbollah frequently over the past twenty years. It's called prisoner exchange. We'll give you back your soldiers for the freedom of certain key players.

3. Israel launches major attacks against Lebanon in July.

4. In August, Israel suddenly retreats so fast that the media can't even catch up. They also drop an inordinate amount of cluster bombs on civilian targets, knowing full well that these bombs leave bomblets that can kill innocent people for years afterwards.

5. All of a sudden, Republican scandals that have been known for decades come to light. There are major scandals across the Republican political spectrum. This is done to ensure a change in the Congress.

6. Congress belongs to the opposite party, even though many of those elected are Blue Dog Democrats. Everyone thinks there's a difference in Congress. Does Congress press for impeachment?? NO! Does Congress press for a stoppage of the war? NO! Does Congress stop funding for this illegal war?? NO! It's same-old, same-old.

The powers that be have provided the great bait-n-switch maneuver. Americans have the same government they've always had.

btw, extraordinary rendition was started under a Democrat, Clinton. It was simply continued by a Republican, Bush. Same policy, different president. Democrat, Republican it's the same claptrap.

Toeg regugitated:

The procedure was developed by Central Intelligence Agency officials in the mid-1990s who were trying to track down and dismantle militant Islamic organizations in the Middle East, particularly Al Qaeda. At the time, the agency was reluctant to grant suspected terrorists due process under American law, as it could potentially jeopardize its intelligence sources and methods. The solution the agency came up with, with the approval of the Clinton administration and a presidential directive (PDD 39), was to send suspects to Egypt, where they were turned over to the Egyptian mukhabarat, which has a reputation for brutality. This arrangement suited the Egyptians, as they had been trying to crack down on Islamic extremists in that country and a number of the senior members of Al Qaeda were Egyptian. The arrangement suited the US because torture is banned under both US and international law.

The argument for rendition made by defenders of the practice is that culturally-informed and native-language interrogations are more successful in gaining information from suspects. For instance, interrogators of one terrorist suspect prayed to Mecca five times per day in the presence of the suspect until he became willing to talk. Nevertheless, there have been many reports of the use of torture by these governments on suspects rendered to them.

After the 9/11 attacks the program appears to have been expanded and some believe it now encompasses individuals for whom there are but vague suspicions. Critics charge that the program has "spun out of control", and has been used against large numbers of individuals. In a lengthy investigative report published by The New Yorker in February 2005, journalist Jane Mayer cited Scott Horton, an expert on international law who helped prepare a report on renditions issued by N.Y.U. Law School and the New York City Bar Association, as estimating that 150 people have been rendered since 2001.

Business daily Handelsblatt reported November 24, 2005, that the CIA still uses an American military base in Germany to transport terrorism suspects without informing the German government. The Berliner Zeitung reported the following day there was documentation of 85 takeoffs and landings by planes with a "high probability" of being operated by the CIA, at Ramstein, the Rhine-Main Airbase and others. The newspaper cited experts and "plane-spotters" who observed the planes as responsible for the tally.[33]

In 2002, the Council of Europe's Human rights commissioner Alvaro Gil-Robles witnessed 'a smaller version of Guantanamo', he told France's Le Monde newspaper.[34][35] Gil-Robles told the daily he had inspected the centre, located within the US military's Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo, in 2002, to investigate reports of extrajudicial arrests by NATO-led peacekeepers.[36]

"The United States is holding at least 26 persons as “ghost detainees” at undisclosed locations outside of the United States," Human Rights Watch said on December 1, 2005, as it released a list naming some of the detainees. The detainees are being held indefinitely and incommunicado, without legal rights or access to counsel.[37][38]

The biggest difference between renditions under Clinton and renditions under Bush is that the detainees under Clinton were interrogated for information, not confesions, and still were able to go before a court of law. This is not the case with Bush.

Nope difference at all, just like Toeg sputtered.

It is amazing how one person can take a little information and mold it to what he already thinks he believes.

Generally, in most of TOEGs ranting, there are nuggets of truth. Seeds upon which he builds his simplistic delusions! Enough so that he can pull one out as his evidence, his proof when the need comes up. But what he also refuses to recognise, is that an educated and aware audience is well aware of the fact that he's molded these truths like an artist molds clay.

Also,
Most reciently we have seen him ratchet up his "poor me" rant into full on Victim-Martyr.
"After all the money I have donated, all you guys do is pick on me" Classic Victim-Martyr syndrome.
One might swear he was an old Jewish Mother.
He himself has used the word "pathetic" and I think it certainly applies here.


Toeg,
If I were a Republican Operative looking for recruits to send to play on Liberal forums and blogs, I'd send you.
Your mission, to drag down the Democrats and minimize any Democratic successes by consistantly and constantly creating the image for all to see, and there for frame the discussion in which the Democrats, those The People rightfully elected last november, are after all, the same as the Republicans. So come November 08, ya might as well vote Republican, and we'll kick terrorist butt! I mean, if we're gonna do it, might as well have the party in charge that knows how, right?

I'm not saying that you are a right wing operative. But damn, if you were? You got the perfect line for it!


Edit to add....

Same as the Republicans. The same as the Republicans. This creates a frame in which the Republicans are the party to which all are measured by. Republican is the TOP of the heap. When you reach up, you reach up to Republicans.

They're all the same as the Republicans. No one else even gets a mention.
Democrats are the same as the Republicans. Still, Republicans remain king of the hill.
Republicans and Democrats are all the same. Much more equal, but still Repugs receive a better image.

Toeg has been a master Right Wing Framer, even if he hasn't intended too.
From now on when you read Toegs rants, forget the message, as if you already haven't.
Instead, focus on the frame of the statement, and see what he is really saying.

ding ding ding! We have a winnah!!!!!!!!!!!! Right on, Sky.

I've been thinking that all along. They've been pushing that "the two parties are the same" bullshit ever since they got spanked in the election. I see the paid propagandists doing it all the time.

..You...you...you mean people pay money for spreading propoganda???? So where do I sign up? I can do that job. Toeg....need a job, yo?


You know that in the past I have said the very same thing which over time I have refined to...both parties DO share some common traits, actions, bloviations, and idiocy. There are some platform differences, certainly glaring enough to be called remarkable. Toeg makes some points and while some here think Democrates are correct in their approach, deep down most would agree (if not in secret) our political system sucks right now. The rightiousness often seen on smug Senatorial and Congressional faces (Yes, Bush as well) over what they stand for is about 10% genuine. His point as far as politics isnt far off base. There are no guys in white hats....just different shades of gray. Who is wearing the lighter shade of gray. Well, that gets down to personal opinion for sure. I dont see anyone in the audience who would say the Repub are.....nope, not even me. But, Ill be damned if Ill 100% buy the bullshit thrown by the Dems either. A generic statement that they are all the same isnt true. However...it is still America and even Toeg gets to vote and express an opinion. And Toeg...you get that right BECAUSE it is America...not because you paid $50. If it was because of the money.....we WOULD all be Republicans yea?

If you watch TV at all, you see it 15 - 20 times an hour.





The system is working. How well the system works depends entirely upon how many of us are involved with it.
The more people plug into the system and become directly involved with the political system on all levels, the better it works.

Actually, yes. There are paid propagandists that work on popular forums. I've never thought of our forum as being big enough to be worthy. But we've had our share.

So When OAC becomes big time...yunt someone to spread the gospel according to Saint POAC?

There was a time that I called someone out on it in another forum. He didn't deny it, and he mistook us for a much larger organization than we are. His response: "Well what do you pay people per post?". I responded that you don't have to pay people to tell the truth.

It's funny, too, how the other side of the same coin looks...let somebody bad-mouth POAC on a wingn, er, rightwing site and you never know what kind of a crowd it'll draw.

The worst I've ever gotten is being called a "leftwing propaganda outlet". To which I always respond, "Can you show me where I've published anything that was untrue or misleading?". I've never had any takers. =-) But in all honesty, we are a left wing propaganda site. It's just that the negative connotation that people associate with propaganda is false. Propganda isn't misleading by nature. Propaganda is just an effort to influence popular opinion. Like a safe sex poster or an anti-child abuse campaign.

I thought you were gonna say the worst thing you got was Abell9. Or virtual crabs.

This has and sometimes does happen.
It's why some of us were so nervous over the sudden influx of military types. (which has since settled down)

I love having ABell around. The crabs? Not so much. But I can live with 'em.

Sky said:


Actually, I welcome it, as long as it's not a crazy flood like the freepers and the PWICS like to do. It gives us the opportunity disprove their lies and misinformation and makes us look good. As for the military types. They are the most welcome of all. They're starting to come around and see that we were right all along about the war and that we really do appreciate their service. The burden is on us to express our feelings regarding the war without belittling their service. So words must be chosen carefully.

Funny thing about visiting wingnuts: Remember the guy who posted this graphic:

and then went on about how those things were bad and a tyranny of the majority and that everything should be privatized? If you'll recall, I ripped his argument to shreds and basically humiliated him. Well, it turns out that he was a somewhat high profile blogger who posted a link to that thread on his blog before he got his ass handed to him. He posted it like he was hot shit and then if you read his user comments they were all like "wow, you really lost that argument". heh heh

Side note about the freepers and the PWICS: Yesterday I deleted over 400 user accounts that had never posted. I wonder if some of them were part of a PWIC-ish sleeper cell waiting to rain barrage of wingnut superiority on the stupid libtards.

>>perk<< Sleeper Cell?

So I have been promoted from Troll to nice Troll to a Crotch Cricket. Least I skipped over VD. Pus Pocket. At this rate I could be admitted to the human race within a couple of years, yea!

Sky said


Yea, damned right wing knuckle dragging assholes. Can't stand THOSE wing nuts.

They aren't all bad. But you have to look for the ones that claim they're gonna lead us to a mass suicide on George W's front lawn.

The right side of the aisle doesn't have exclusive rights to knuckle-dragging. Or assholes. Too bad.

DOOOOOAAAHHHHHHHHH!



Nope....but Im guessing the right is better at it, had more practice, and has pursued PhD levels of subject matter expertise in Knuckle Draggery. Why hell...I are one.

You know what I've found? The left seems to try to corner the market on humorlessness. They are always the first to be offended. Right wingers are masters of the false outrage: ie: OMG NANCY PELOSI DISSED POOR CONDI FOR NOT HAVING KIDSSSZZZ!!!1!!!1

Lefties really seem to be the real deal. Take a look at the feedback to right and left wing talk radio, and you'll see what I mean. If I have to hear one more Air America host have to apologize for offending some hyper-sensitive listener, I'm gonna pull my hair out.

Yeah, but IMO, you're one of the odd knuckle draggers in that you actually ask to be educated.
And when someone offers up information, you actually listen BEFORE making a judgement.
And even after that opinion has been formed, you aren't forever locked into that position.

As has been said many times, I don't always agree with you Abell, but the reason I like you is that this fact, is OK by you.
I'm not required to agree with you before we can discuss anything. And in MY book, that's more valuable than the color of your political shirt. You choose your team with the understanding that the other team might not be all that bad.

If more people of all political persuasions had your attitude and desire for honest truth, we might not be in the political situation we're in today.


That said, to honor open mindedness on all sides of the issues, I award this here BLUE ribbon to Abell9.

Ahhhh shucks..... Aint had a blue ribbon since I stole one off an art picture and put it on mine when I was a kid in elementary school. Course, I did get expelled for it...well, not THAT......exactly. When the little brat who actually won it challenged me on it I kinda hit him...with a Roy Rogers lunch box....in the face.....three times.....then kicked him. Dad had to pay for the surgery to put his nose back on his face or some such nonsense.....and for the glass eye.....and speech therapy....and court cost....Dad wasnt very happy about that Blue Ribbon....go figure.

My own Blue Ribbon...fuck me crosseyed....awesome.

Ummm.........I take it you have never watched The Daily Show, The Colbert Report, or even 'Oddball' on "Countdown with K.O.".

Actually (since this thread went way off topic anyway) the left HAS the market on humor, usually satirical, whilst the right whines, screams, pisses and moans over their feigned outrage that the Rove led team use to whip into a hysteria their drooling and unquestioning supporters.

Just refer back to the first post, where Tony Snow likes to equate those critical of this "surge" with providing aid and comfort to al Quaeda.

And expect Jon Stewart to parody it.

This is going to be off-topic, but I can't stop myself.

Crab-related sound file.

What is this Daily Show that you speak of?

That's a good point. A very good point. I'm not saying that there aren't humorous liberals and liberal humor. And there's certainly no such thing as conservative humor except for laughing at the unfortunate, minority jokes, and Larry the cable guy. I guess what I was trying to say is that just as much as we have humor, we also have the humorless hyper-sensitive people.

I am a former supporter of the Republican party, but I am so completely repulsed by most Republicans that I have no problem with them going over the cliff with Bush. For those moderate Republicans who are turning against Bush, I am supportive of them. But for those Republicans who support the President and the right-wing, you people are traitors to America. You don't deserve to be in any office.

A lot of Democrats do not please me, but I would much rather see them control Congress than this current GOP "sleaze pack".

Im sensing some anger ther AFW.......

We should all be not just angry, but outraged by all the shit that has gone on. Our layed-back attitude has let these neo-cons and ultra-conservatives hijack our government and our foreign policy, with Iraq being one inevitable result of that. No one should be surprised that Iraq is the clusterfuck it is today. It's just a matter time before we leave there, and no way will be a "Democracy", whatever the fuck that is supposed to mean anymore. These people have hurt America worse than the terrorists could have ever hoped to do with their 9-11 attacks. Somewhere, deep inside a cave, Osama is laughing his ass off at the sheer irony of that. Bush didn't just bite that lure. He swallowed it whole.

I'm a Democrat, and there are some Democrats I don't care for. Generally they are DLC, or Money Democrats, or Neo-Liberals.
Even so, given the ugly choice, one of those DLC Democrats or ANY of todays Republicans, it's still an easy decision to make.

I understand how you feel but I disagree. There are some Republicans I like and trust much more than some Democrats. For example, if you gave me a choice between many Republicans and Hillary Clinton, I would choose the Republican. Hillary is a "bottom feeder", who will do anything, say anything, to get to be President. You could sooner trust your local shady used car dealer than her. Her decision to run will hurt her party greatly in 2008, I think you will see.

Yep, pretty much the way I see it, too.

Howya like that AFW....we agree. Never thought you'd see THAT day didja?

Sorry Abell. I go off on my little emotional tirades when I get pissed about something I see, which is frequently these days. You're ok in my books. You see much more of the way things are than many of your conservative bretheren, even if you are not quite willing to cross over into the liberal camp. Watch your morally-bankrupt Commander in Chief. He will convince you more than anything I or anyone else here could say. I think he's already convinced you deep inside, but you are not quite willing to admit it.

In other words, Hillary is willing to run her party over a cliff as well? Sameness abounds. I wonder if she'd pull a Lieberman if she didn't get the nomination.

Can you name any Republicans you'd prefer? For my part I'd vote for Ron Paul over anybody else in either party. I think if he won the primary, you'd see a real change in the GOP.

Hillary has no loyalty to progressives or to the country. She will do whatever is best for Hillary, you can be assured of that. I hope enough people see through her that she does not get the nomination despite the frantic MSM effort to influence the sheeple.

I would prefer Chuck Hagel, for one, if he decided to run. I would prefer many Republicans over her. In fact, she would probably be toward the very bottom of my list. Not all Republicans are bad, despite what Sky thinks. Some are seeing the error of their ways and we should respect that.

Hillary does NOT represent the vast majority of the Democratic Party!
For Chrisake DO NOT BE fooled or coddled by your corporate MSM!!!


BIG money news = BIG money politics = BIG MONEY, PERIOD

Hagel's a good choice, AFW. Thanks for the point-out.


Right now Hillary does represent the 83% of NY voters who re-elected her 3 months ago. That's not mathematically possible without a majority of Dems.

I predicted back around 1990 that soon the Internet would provide a forum for free discussion which would allow people to bypass big-money politics and elect grassroots candidates. I'm still waiting. Howard Dean came the closest so far.

I'm sorry if I'm coming across as negative. At this point, anything can happen (well, anything except a legitimate third party getting its foot in the door).

Speaking of big money, did anybody see the anti-war ("against the escalation") ad during the Superbowl? It was near the end. That has to be some kind of milestone -- most expensive political ad ever?

As soon as you leave the state of New York, those numbers drop way off.
New York is not the center of the world, even if they might think they are.

Historically, the last time the national Dem nominee was different than the NY Dem nominee was 1980, when NY chose Ted Kennedy.

Nice primary maps here!

Dick Morris was on TV the other day proclaiming that Hillary Clinton was a socialist. Talk about getting your talking points from 1993!

I commend him if he can say something to hurt her chances for getting the Democratic nomination, despite the MSM and DLC efforts to serve her up cold to the uninformed and easily-influenced sheeple. I am absolutely convinced that she could not win the election but she could get the Democratic nomination, which would pretty much be a disaster for the Democrats and make Republicans everywhere giddy that they played the Democratic Party so well. Why do you think so many Republicans have been talking up Hillary? Hillary took the bait. Let's hope Democrats don't.

It's not enough simply to hurt her chances of being elected!
We need facts and reality! We do not need a left wing version of Faux Knews.

Here's a recent Hillary quote somebody sent me from today's "Nuze" on boortz.com:

"The Democrats know what needs to be done. Again, we're working trying to try push this agenda forward. The other day the oil companies reported the highest profits in the history of the world. I want to take those profits and I want to put them into a strategic energy fund that will begin to fund alternative, smart energy; alternatives and technology that will begin to actually move us toward the direction of independence."

Seize the profits for the benefit of the state, because they're bigger than she thinks they should be? That's beyond socialism; it's damn near communism.

I've said before that I fully support a huge fossil fuel tax, but don't base it on the success of the businesses involved. Base it on the amount of fuel consumed.

Im not sure why the surprize, Spud. You know, to some that will appeal in a large way. It's not a small "Some" either. Im not one of them by the way.