home

Sunday Open Thread

By Jeralyn, Section Blog Related
Posted on Sun Nov 06, 2005 at 11:17:42 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

I haven't written about:

Does anyone have something to say about these or other topics? Go right ahead.

< The Jailed in Africa Are Left to Rot | Aniston on the State of the World >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Sunday Open Thread | 43 comments (43 topical)
    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#1)
    by legion on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:15 PM EST
    I thnk the NYT expose and Sen Rockerfeller's statements are linked. More an more people, even on the GOP side, are beginning to realize that the Bush admin has lied, repeatedly, callously, and demonstrably, throughout the entire so-called 'war on terror'. These people simply don't care about America or Americans; they are only interested in maintaining their own personal power, and they will use up anyone, left or right, to get there.

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:15 PM EST
    Why no mention of the assertions by retired Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely that Joe Wilson discussed his wife's occupation with the CIA in conversations with the General in the green room at FOX News in early 2002, roughly a year before her supposed "outing"?

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:19 PM EST
    I thought the discussion with Talkleft Catherine Crier and the other guy on something with Blitzer was excellent I think Blitzer was shocked to find a noninvective or nonspin segment could be interesting

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:19 PM EST
    Here's yet another Democratic Dirty Trick: Arnold Schwarzenegger appeared on a televised forum on Thursday. The audience was supposed to be "balanced" and representative of California. But, almost all the questioners were virulently opposed to him, arguing with Arnold and tossing puffballs questions to the Dems. Bear in mind: KNBC told its viewers this was a "balanced" audience. And, it turns out that three of the questioners were Democratic Party operatives. And, the viewers weren't told that. Details here. The Dems are so scared of losing their death grip on California they're forced to resort to things like this.

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:19 PM EST
    Arnold's "Party" has collected more than $50 million in corporate donations, after he ran on the promise not to take them. Boohoo that his 'party' got crashed. The guy wasn't elected legally -- HE KNOWS IT -- WE KNOW IT -- and his political career is OVER, whether or not Diebold steals another election for him on Tuesday. "Death grip." That's HILARIOUS, BM.

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:19 PM EST
    "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998 "This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others "Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities" -- From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002 "Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998 "(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998 "Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002 "The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, October 2002 "There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we." -- Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002 "What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002 "The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998 "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002 "I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003 "Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998 "Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002 "The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002 "I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002 "Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 2002 "We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Bob Graham, December 2002 "Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to deprive his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction." -- Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002 "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002 "There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." -- Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002 "I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002 "The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation." -- John Kerry, October 9, 2002 "(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. ...And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War." -- John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003 "We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002 "Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States." -- Joe Lieberman, August, 2002 "Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002 "As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998 "Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production." -- Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998 "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources -- something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002 "Saddam’s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq’s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002 "Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration’s policy towards Iraq, I don’t think there can be any question about Saddam’s conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts." -- Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#7)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:45 PM EST
    BMB complains: Here's yet another Democratic Dirty Trick: Arnold Schwarzenegger appeared on a televised forum on Thursday. The audience was supposed to be "balanced" and representative of California. But, almost all the questioners were virulently opposed to him... To be fair to BMB - he did provide a link to back up his complaint. The article he linked to states:
    Arnold Schwarzenegger TV questioners included three Democratic activists. ...the questioning was biased strongly against him... ...three of those who questioned him were Democratic Party activists. ...from a crowd of about 75 voters screened by the station.
    Let's all try to treat Arnold with a little respect, huh? Next time he makes an appearance, to make sure there is a "balanced" audience, can we get 37.5 (that's half of 75, BMB) democrats there? Poor widdle terminator...

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:46 PM EST
    Texas is voting on a referendum on Tuesday to incorporate a ban on same-sex marriages into its constitution. Since its Governor explicitly said that he supports the referendum because he's a pro-family Christian, we should all be asking why Texans aren't also voting on Tuesday to ban divorce and re-marriage, since both are at least as prohibited by Christianity as same-sex marriages are, and divorce in particular has a truly devastating effect on children.

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:46 PM EST
    I also thought the segment on Blitzer today was very good. Too bad it wasn't longer, as the three of you could have delved a little bit deeper into your (educated guess) tea leaf reading. It's always sort of surprising to have not one, but three people with knowledge of a subject actually give authoritative answers and not have to deal with reactionary spin. I think you caught little Wolfie off guard!

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#10)
    by alapip on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:46 PM EST
    At the time of the vote to give Bush the war authorization, I speculated to my daughter that the Senators of both parties would be considering the following: - Bush needed the authorization in order to put the needed pressure on Saddam to cooperate with the inspection proceedures. - If Saddam decided we were bluffing, did not cooperate and we had to start the war, it would be thoroughly thought out and well planned. - As in The First Gulf War, we would have many powerful allies. - Even though Bush did not have the experience or necessarily the brainpower for the job, the more worldly people in his administration would keep him reigned in. - Dispite the Republican's predeliction for dirty tricks and lying to further their political ends, most of them, like most Democrats would honestly put aside personal goals when the well-being of their Nation was involved. - Due to fact that very few people could be trusted to keep secret any major lies or conspiracy for very long, we could generally trust that the fear of being eventually exposed kept our leaders honest. HA! OK, so that all sounds pretty naive after the fact. I would argue, However, that most people, even jaded Senators, did not expect Bush and his Bushies to operate in governing in the same manipulative way as they had in campaigning. Now, of course, we know better. As to the lack of effective planning for the war: - There was the oncoming Summer season that was continuously mentioned, in that we did not want to be in the midst of the most intense period of the war during the hottest most oppressive time of the year in a country that got as hot as hell and stayed that way for weeks on end - not to mention sand storms. Hence, the "rush to war" in the month of March. - There seemed to demonstrably be a general arrogant mindset within this administration that it could not make a bad decision, plan poorly or take ill advised action. - Lately, there has been more recognition of the phenomenon of "groupthink". I think that was probably in effect here, considering the years of poor, but mostly inflamatory so called intelligence that many agencies in the free world had been amassing. Also, this administration, for some idiotic reason, puts out the message that to disagree or question the ruling premise decided upon, is to commit something like sacrelige. "If you're not with us, you're agin' us"! This would explain the pervasive refusal to consider information that did not support that ruling premise. another HA! The foregoing theses, if they happen to be correct, do not excuse the Senators who trusted Bush and his people to be honest with themselves and therefore us. Our Senators need to apologize for, what is in this case a fatal for many Americans and many more Iraqis, lack of cynicism in trusting without verifying those with a propensity for prevarication. Yes, I was obviously wrong too, but nobody died due to *my* stupidity. Also, and more importantly, the Bush administration must, in my opinion, be held accountable. If there was indeed willful suppression of intelligence contrary to that which served their purpose, would not that be an impeachable offense if that suppression was committed with the approval of Bush or Cheney? At the very least, it should be established, as definitively as it can be, who are they that are most at fault for the incompetent spectacle we have become in the eyes of the world.

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#11)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:46 PM EST
    Nice job ob CNN today JM! some wingnut said:
    Why no mention of the assertions by retired Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely that Joe Wilson discussed his wife's occupation with the CIA in conversations with the General in the green room at FOX News in early 2002, roughly a year before her supposed "outing"?
    uhhh, because he lies and does propaganda for a living!?
    Hume says only that Fox military analyst Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely, who represents several information-technology companies, is valuable as a commentator on psychological operations.

    Shortly after the Vietnam War, Vallely pioneered a concept he called MindWar, a strategy that uses "electronic media--television and radio" in the "deliberate, aggressive convincing of all participants in a war that we will win that war." With the televised version of Operation Iraqi Freedom, we may be watching his theory at work--and at a tidy profit, too.
    This is the same Paul Vallely who said OBL is hiding in Tehran and if we invade iran we'll be greeted with hearts and flowers, the same vallely that endorsed Grand Ayatollah Sayyid Ali al-Sistani in iraq, the same guy who suddenly remembered the conversation with Wilson when he outed his wife in the green room at fox!? jeebus, please come up with better lies or liars.

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:46 PM EST
    Jeralyn, you looked fab today on CNN! I also enjoyed the segment. At first, I was annoyed at Wolfie for the most part only asking each of you, "So, what are your thoughts on that?" But, after thinking about it, for once, Wolfie actually allowed the guests to do most of the talking.

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:46 PM EST
    I can't believe I'm responding to PinLA, but: The party wasn't "crashed". This was a televised forum where 75 were invited to come and ask questions. The company that selected those 75 people was hired to select a "balanced" group "representative" of California. Instead, TV viewers got to see an ambush by the far-left. Thankfully, Arnold came out of it fine, despite their best efforts to pull yet another dirty trick. And, regarding Arnold's funding, do you know how much the unions have spent on their lying, smearing TV ads? Over 100 million dollars. In fact, the CTA is spending themselves into a deep hole. As for the other idiot, read the comment and the post: - almost all of the questioners were strongly biased against Arnold - the affiliations of those three operatives were not given to the viewers I'm sure you can find reading comprehension lessons at your local community college.

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#14)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:46 PM EST
    edgey - Nice strawman, but it doesn't work. What do you think the odds of getting three demo operatives out of 75 people picked in a random drawing? Very, very high. sailor - And this may be the man who did any number of things. But lying doesn't appear to be one of them. Now. Since you have called him a liar, how about some real proof instad of babbling about his position on the war. Can't, can you? alapip - Almost directly above your comment we have a host of quotations/statements made by a variety of Demos. The facts were, and are, everyone believed the intelligence. That includes a host of other countries. If you are concerned about the intelligence, I offer you the Silberman-Robb Report on what has gone wrong with our intelligence gathering capabilities. It has been endorsed by both parties. As for WMD's, well, we have the established fact that Saddam offerred a $2 million dollar bribe to a weapons inspector. Hmmm, let me see. I don't have anything to hide... So I'll try to bribe an inspector... And then we have the 11/98 indictment by the Clinton JD that said:
    The 1998 indictment said: "Al Qaeda also forged alliances with the National Islamic Front in the Sudan and with the government of Iran and its associated terrorist group Hezbollah for the purpose of working together against their perceived common enemies in the West, particularly the United States. In addition, al Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the government of Iraq."
    Now, if you want to talk about Niger, we must first remember what Bush said. He quoted the British, who had said that Saddam had attempted to purchase yellowcake. That's all. ATTEMPTED. Now. What, after an investigation, did the British say in the Butler Report?
    British intelligence on the claim that Iraq had sought uranium from Niger was "credible". There was not conclusive evidence Iraq actually purchased the material, nor did the government make that claim.
    So what's the big deal with Joe Wilson? Why did he write an op-ed that made a big deal in claiming that Saddam had not purchased yellowcake? Heck. No one had claimed he had. What was his motive?
    Later that day, two CIA DO officers debriefed the former ambassador who had returned from Niger the previous day.....Based on information provided verbally by the former ambassador, the DO case officer wrote a draft intelligence report... (Former PM) Mayaki said that if there had been any such contract during his tenure, he would have been aware of it. Mayaki said, however, that in June 1999,(xxxx) businessman, approached him and insisted that Mayaki meet with an Iraqi delegation to discuss "expanding commercial relations" between Niger and Iraq. The intelligence report said that Mayaki interpreted "expanding commercial relations" to mean that the delegation wanted to discuss uranium yellowcake sales. The intelligence report also said that "although the meeting took place, Mayaki let the matter drop due to the UN sanctions on Iraq."
    Sailor is all incensed over Gen Valley, and calls him a liar. Can you tell me why Wilson never mentions the above? It proves what the Brits said, and it validates Bush's comments in his SOTU. Why did Wilson leave it out? Yes, we do need some investigations. Let's start with the CIA who had miserable intelligence, follow with the CIA officer who signed of on using Wilson, follow with putting Wilson under oath... Thanks for reading. I just knew you, being oh so reasonable, would want to consider the above.

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:46 PM EST
    There's a great post about the Paris riots here: http://okrasoup.typepad.com/black_looks/2005/11/_members_of_par.html Nice work on CNN!

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#16)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:46 PM EST
    alapip - Almost directly above your comment we have a host of quotations/statements made by a variety of Demos. The facts were, and are, everyone believed the intelligence. Some change their views and admit their mistakes, with time, reflection, and new knowledge... and grow. Some are incapable of learning from their mistakes... and are destroyed by them.

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#17)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:46 PM EST
    bush has already said that he shouldn't have said that during the state of the union, the cia had removed the words from a previous speech, colin powell refused to say them. blair's gov't now admits they relied on forgeries, the italian gov't says they knew they were forgeries and the italian PM says he tried to talk bush out of war. Are we done with this lie yet!? jim, I used vallely's own words, maybe he's delusional, maybe he's a liar, since he is an avowed propagandist who has proposed using all forms of media to advance his views I don't consider him a trustworthy source.

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#18)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:46 PM EST
    edgey - No, they are not "changing their views." They are claiming that Bush lied. There is a huge difference. You know that. I know that. And everyone who reads their comments then and listens to them now, knows. Can you say: Hypocrites? sailor - You are the one calling people liars when we have direct proof that they are not. Shame on you. As for Bush saying he shouldn't have said it, so what? It was either accurate or it was not. I, the CIA and the Brits say it was. Care to refute them? As for Valley, he made a direct statement that has nothing to do with "his own words" re other topics. He said Wilson outed her. That's direct. Prove him wrong, sailor. You can't.

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#19)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:46 PM EST
    They are claiming that Bush lied. Yes, they are... and they are admitting that even they were fooled for a time by Bush's lies. You of all people should know that even Bush probably does not believe his own lies, nor do you, I think.

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#20)
    by cpinva on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:46 PM EST
    anyone who still would vote to give bush the authority to attack iraq, knowing what we know now, is a total moron, and should be immediately recalled by their constituents. toady, must have been a mental stretch, to do all that copying/pasting. what's the matter, no original thought of your own? while the clinton administration was convinced that saddam was still in the wmd biz, it didn't feel the need to start a poorly planned and executed war over it, sanctions were working. unlike bush, clinton is secure enough in his manhood, that he doesn't have to send young people off to die in a foreign country to prove it. i guess we'll be expecting this vallely guy to be getting a subpoena from fitzgerald, so he can repeat his allegations, under oath. i'll not be holding my breath. of course, he can make all the claims he cares to. since, by his own admission, it was only he and wilson in the green room, he can prove none of it. what i find truly amazing is that the fbi is apparently so inept, people all over washington d.c. supposedly knew ms. plame was employed by the cia, yet the fbi has thus far been unable to locate any of them. i knew they were the gang that couldn't shoot straight, but that's ridiculous, even for them.

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:46 PM EST
    Trolling Toad leaves this particular hoary piece of rightwing crafted propaganda, with selective quoting leaving out the actual statement being made at the time. I hope it is deleted as the piece of misleading trolling it is. Notice that the dates in the list are intentionally scrambled, to disguise the first raft of comments as occuring around Desert Fox in 1998, and the second raft as occuring during the call for votes on the ADMINISTRATION-SUPPLIED Resolution, and the third raft during the vote on that Resolution. Over and over again this selection of quotes outright LIES about the intent expressed by the quoted speaker, taking the preamble to a rebuttal, with its standard concession to the opponent, as if those rhetorical devices are the statements of the rebutter. In the case of the Kerry quote, for instance, he went on to say: "As I have said frequently and repeat here today, the United States should never go to war because it wants to, the United States should go to war because we have to. And we don't have to until we have exhausted the remedies available, built legitimacy and earned the consent of the American people, absent, of course, an imminent threat requiring urgent action." Bush didn't exhaust the remedies. He did EXACTLY what Kerry was saying he shouldn't. But the troll doesn't want people to know what Kerry actually said. It's a trick, another damn trick, from the biggest liars the US has ever seen. "Thou shalt not...put a stumbling block before the blind." -- Jesus Taking advantage of such lies as those of Trolling Toad is not Christian. It is more of the warmaking of the demons that it serves.

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#22)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:46 PM EST
    Posted by BigMediaBlog: "The party wasn't "crashed"." The party was funded by $67 million in donations he has collected, after he ran on not collecting such funds. He has directly violated his own words, his own promises. He has also cycled that funding back, taking large amounts of money from Univision, and then paying it back for advertizing. That's pretty suspiciously like DeLay's money laundering. "Instead, TV viewers got to see an ambush by the far-left." What a joke, the 'far-left.' What did they do that you consider so far left? Criticize the liar who is wasting $50 million to hold a vanity election without a papertrail? Boohoo. "And, regarding Arnold's funding, do you know how much the unions have spent ..." They never said they wouldn't -- HE DID. Arnold campaigned on two other major lies. A deficit which only existed because the Legislature hadn't yet voted a budget, and the Car Tax, which was blamed on Davis even though the law was a policy of Arnold's campaign chair, Pete Wilson. And then, bloated with power after stealing the election with lies and vote-fraud, he verbally alienated the very groups that uphold ANY governor's political approval: firefighters, police, teachers, and nurses. And then the corruption started. He blocked implementation of an ordered increase in the hospital patient safety net, which would require his backers to pay for more nurses, rather than stretching them so thin the patients suffer. He has taken $2 million from big healthcare providers like Blue Cross. Did they get what they paid for? Sounds like they did. Pay to play, aka GRAFT.

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:46 PM EST
    He also has taken $9 million from real estate developers. Now he wants to redistrict. WHAT DEVELOPMENTS must have redistricting to go forward? Do you doubt that these "three retired judges" will find somehow that Malibu needs a new representative in EXACTLY the beach areas that those developers have dripping greedy fangs over? Pay for play. Schwarzenegger has EASILY out-collected Gray Davis in such large-scale donations. He's a tool. Stealing the special election on Tuesday with vote-fraud will not make him any less the corrupt liar he has PROVEN himself to be.

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#24)
    by cpinva on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:46 PM EST
    actually paul, quotes are, by definition, always out of context. that's kind of the nature of the beast. the real issue is, does the quote contain the essence of the total? in toady's case, no, they don't. thus, we play the "i didn't lie, i just didn't tell you everything" game. or, as it's known in the catholic church, the sin of ommision. what i find amusing is that californians actually believed arnold was the answer to their prayers. puhleeze! he got elected because of a ficticious persona, a movie character. had his name been arnold smith, cpa, he'd never have been elected. the difference is that arnold smith, cpa probably would have been more competent at the real job. hey, like the man said, "we get the government we deserve."

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#25)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:46 PM EST
    PIL - Nice rant. But what does that have to do with the fact that three Demo ringers were picked by the media? Repeat after me. Absolutely nothing. Re the Demo quotes. I note that each quote is dated and identified. That is hardly misleading. Your problem is that you don't want the general public exposed to what the Demos were saying then, as opposed to what they are saying now. I also note you call for TL to delete it. That is a typical Leftie device. Free speech for those who agree with you. edgey – Is that the best you can do? The Demos don’t want an investigation or they would be yelling to put Mr. and Mrs. Wilson under oath, and they would be yelling about the inaccuracies of Wilson’s comments. What you have are some supposed leaders proving that they are just plain old partisan politicians. cpinva - Clinton's strategy was the use of the criminal justice system with selective attacks based on intelligence. The intelligence was so good that he blew up an aspirin factory. Perhaps that should have been Bush's clue that the world's intelligence agencies weren’t as good as they advertised. ;-) Clinton's CJ approach was so good that he turned down two chances to have bin Ladin handed to him. With the resulting attacks.. the LAX bomber…..captured at the border by good border agents and a lot of luck...USS Cole... and absolutely no slow down in attack planning.. as demonstrated by 9/11. If you haven't read the Silberman-Robb report, do so. It spells out what the problems are. Congress needs to fix those rather than playing politics. It is the second time around for the Demos on that issue. They flunked the first time with the Church Committee in the 70's. As for Wilson vs Valley, I’ll take Valley based on Wilson’s remarks to David Corn for Corn’s Wilson’s remarks were too much “nudge-nudge wink-wink.,” and then we have the Vanity Fair cover. The whole thing reminds me of “Tom Swift Wilson and His Amazing Electric CIA Wife Machine.” And yes. I’d love to put Mrs. Wilson, Mr. Wilson, various CIA types and Gen. Valley under oath. BTW - Arnold got elected because the previous Governor had done such a lousy job.

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#26)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:48 PM EST
    Sounds like Charley may have been on this bus, or one of the other local trolls. E&P

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#27)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:48 PM EST
    Gray Davis did not do a bad job as governor -in fact in most areas a better job than the Exaggerator Davis made serious political mistakes including his campaign against Richard Riordon causing him to lose the Republican primary. Schwarzengger is nothing but a captured interest of moderate Republicans in California -and he has done a crappy job and now he is going to get his ass kicked by the girlymen. Up until this week all of his campaign appearances have been private what Beatty has done is expose the governor's hiding out and also exposing the weakness of the local press in covering Schwarzengger's cowardice The Exaggerator's approval ratings are lower then Bush. Davis' approval ratings never sank this low I think most Californian's have buyers remorse

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#28)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:48 PM EST
    He was hired by Ken Lay. The deal was that Enron's $8bil debt to the people of CA could be renegotiated by the gov. 5 cents on the dollar. He met Kennyboy a year before the election and cooked up the plot. Creative accounting meets the terminator.

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#29)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:48 PM EST
    Squeaky writes:
    Sounds like Charley may have been on this bus, or one of the other local trolls. E&P
    Pretty disgusting, isn't it Squeaky? And these kind of people are Bush's base? Talk about pandering to the lowest common denominator. Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe. --Albert Einstein

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#30)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:48 PM EST
    You are the one calling people liars when we have direct proof that they are not. Shame on you.
    Wow, vallely lies for a living, advocates lying for a living and lied. And you have direct proof he has never lied about anything!? And I'm trying figure out where that 'nudg, nudge' quote came from because it never appeared in the article you linked to. And the S-R Report the intel community had screwed the pooch, and also stated their mandate precluded them from examining how the intelligence was twisted by bushco. dems and other senators made their votes on bad intel fixed by the WH and good intel blocked by the WH. The From the S_R Report:
    First, we were not asked to determine whether Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. That was the mandate of the Iraq Survey Group; our mission is to investigate the reasons why the Intelligence Community's pre-war assessments were so different from what the Iraq Survey Group found after the war. Second, we were not authorized to investigate how policymakers used the intelligence assessments they received from the Intelligence Community.
    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#31)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:48 PM EST
    Sailor - So, they had their guidelines. You think that is bad? No, you don't, but you will use it as an attack comment. I say again. Valley said what he said. You have shown no proof that he lied. Wilson, on the other hand, omitted Mayaki's comments re the Iraq demand for a meeting. Plus, instead of addressing the question: Did Saddam ATTEMPT to purchase, he reported that Saddam had not. That, of course wasn't the question, but he used it to attack Bush. Shameful. Given that Wilson knew about Mayak's statement, and the ommission, I question his motive.

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#32)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:48 PM EST
    cpinva: "what i find amusing is that californians actually believed arnold was the answer to their prayers. puhleeze! he got elected because of a ficticious persona," The recall/election of 2003 was not legal. We CAUGHT Diebold: • Installing and immediately removing UNTESTED, UNCERTIFIED, ILLEGAL, CONTRACT-VOIDING software, throughout the entire state. That in itself invalidates a legal election (or recall). We also caught their employees changing the totals in computer tabulators, without any documentation of their actions. NO ONE other than Diebold (and their cronies, including Schwarzenegger) knows if the former governor was legally recalled. NO ONE other than Diebold (and cronies) knows who was elected. • The 2003 vote count was non-verifiable, and therefore moot under California and federal law. The SecState, Shelley, approved this stolen election in the face of massive coercion -- how these felons get ANYTHING they now (illegally) have, whether in Washinton or Sacramento. The former SecState traded the certification of this stolen election (to his shame), in exchange for a law that specified that California will have its papertrail restored on 01 Jan 06. • Schwarzenegger therefore scheduled a 'special' (as in illegal) election for his REFERENDUMS, tomorrow. That violates the agreement with Shelley THAT THERE WOULD BE NO FURTHER MAJOR ELECTIONS IN CALIFORNIA BEFORE 01 JAN 06. Schwarzenegger is ramming through one more illegal election for his pet, BRIBED, projects, for his lobbies, in violation of the agreement made in 2003. He's despicable, but with the restoration of auditable elections in January, he is toast in 2006. So now we can watch his referenda 'suddenly' achieve a few percentage points win, just low enough not to trigger a recount -- IF THERE WAS ANYTHING TO RECOUNT.

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#33)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:48 PM EST
    Posted by Jim: "Nice rant. But what does that have to do with the fact that three Demo ringers were picked by the media?" EVERYTHING. Californians, and Americans btw, are entitled to engage in EVERY LEGAL ACT they choose (and a range of illegal nonviolent acts, civil disobedience), in order to help remove or help weaken an ILLEGAL GOVERNMENT. Given the endless string of lies, crimes, coercions, threats, corruptions, deregulations, and acts of treason that ILLEGAL GOVERNMENT has wrought on us in the last five years, there is one word covering ALL of our actions in facing down these bastards: FREEDOM. You are an objective supportor of tyranny and terrorism, Jim. Turn in your passport and go find somewhere else to live.

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#34)
    by peacrevol on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:48 PM EST
    quick joke Rumsfeld breifed prez Bush yesterday that 3 Brazilian troops were killed. Bush was visibly distraught and put his head in his hands. All of the whitehouse aides were surprised at his emotion. Suddenly the prez lifted his head and sadly inquired "How many is a brazillian?"

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#35)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:48 PM EST
    Paul in La La... The guy wasn't elected legally .. OK Paul.. we all get it already! According to you... No Republican can ever get elected legally... right? If it wasn't for diebold... every single position would be filled by a Dem...

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#36)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:48 PM EST
    trolling toad.... Nice one.... Of course you know most people here would argue (IE - explain away) all these FACTS as you posted them. (As Paul in La LA land tried to do with 'one' of his hero Kerry's remarks) I guess the truth hurts ....? It's tuff to see the big cheeses of your party scrambling now to cover up what they said... Much easier to point the finger at the other guy and call him a liar....which they have ALL done infinatum. LOL Speaking of cheese, most of these liberal Dems would argue that the moon was indeed made of cheese if a Repub said it wasn't. Common sense on here....? I think not?

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#37)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:48 PM EST
    trolling toad.... Nice one.... Of course you know most people here would argue (IE - explain away) all these FACTS as you posted them. (As Paul in La LA land tried to do with 'one' of his hero Kerry's remarks) I guess the truth hurts ....? It's tuff to see the big cheeses of your party scrambling now to cover up what they said... Much easier to point the finger at the other guy and call him a liar....which they have ALL done infinatum. LOL Speaking of cheese, most of these liberal Dems would argue that the moon was indeed made of cheese if a Repub said it wasn't. Common sense on here....? I think not?

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#38)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:48 PM EST
    Posted by BB: "OK Paul.. we all get it already! According to you... No Republican can ever get elected legally... right?" Obviously, you are a troll. Or maybe you're just illiterate. Try reading the ACTUAL FACTS I posted before you try your patented no-fact trolling effort, BB. You're pathetic. "Of course you know most people here would argue (IE - explain away) all these FACTS as you posted them. (As Paul in La LA land tried to do with 'one' of his hero Kerry's remarks) I guess the truth hurts ....?" No, that's an old bit of lie you people tried to float quite a while ago, back again. The quotes are out of context, as I showed with the example. That's a method of lying, and as for your final troll question, the answer is: YES. You think not.

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#39)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:49 PM EST
    Posted by cpinva: "actually paul, quotes are, by definition, always out of context." What a specious fallacy. To manipulate quotations to obviate and contradict the intended meaning is a misrepresentation, aka slander. "The returning good sense of our country threatens abortion to their hopes." --Thomas Jefferson

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#40)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:49 PM EST
    Paul in LA LA.. Try reading the ACTUAL FACTS I posted. LOL..you never have posted any Facts! It's all your opinion...or drivel from left wing propoganda sites. The 'FACT' is, whether you choose to believe it or not, that ALL those people quoted by trolling toad said what they said! There is nothing to take "out of contex" and nobody is lying (a term you love to throw around that has lost all meaning coming from you) You (and the rest of the libs) need to get a grip on reality dude!

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#41)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:49 PM EST
    Take a guess, BB -- does the sun go around the earth? Apparently you think it does. Why does the sun hate us? • California hasn't had a papertrail for election auditing since 1999. This is what is called A FACT. Today's 'special' election will NOT have a papertrail, and so CANNOT be audited. IT WILL BE ILLEGAL. FACTS can be very interesting. Because we found our sudden lack of a papertrail, along with 29 other states, UNACCEPTABLE, we are due to get our papertrail back in January. According to BB, this fact isn't true. His rebuttal? "The sun goes around the earth -- any idiot can see that!"

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#42)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:50 PM EST
    Paul in La La.. Today's 'special' election will NOT have a papertrail, and so CANNOT be audited. IT WILL BE ILLEGAL. So there is a 'LAW' saying every election has to have a paper trail....? ....or is this another personal Paulie rant? Please show me that LAW!...if you can? BTW...I'd take you alot more seriously if you'd cool the personal attacks. Try and act your age for a change. (of course I'm assuming you're an adult?) Also...your cute (out of left field) analogies (about the sun) make no sense what-so-ever. I'm not the one that believes everything they hear that is anti-establishment... so that sun comment would apply to you much more than me. You're the lemming here.

    Re: Sunday Open Thread (none / 0) (#43)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:50 PM EST
    Posted by BB: "So there is a 'LAW' saying every election has to have a paper trail....?" The obvious right to recount elections is not necessarily a law in YOUR state, but in mine, yeah, we have an statutory right to a MANUAL RECOUNT of votes, according to a law passed in the 1960s. You cannot do a manual recount of secret software vote-fraud machines. BB, I would take you at all seriously if you and your troll pals would bother to rebut instead of ridicule without facts, as you have done in this thread several times, including the above. "Try reading the ACTUAL FACTS I posted. LOL..you never have posted any Facts! It's all your opinion...or drivel from left wing propoganda sites." Now you know that IN FACT I DO HAVE THE RIGHT TO A PAPERTRAIL, and that's why California is getting it back, in January. That is also why we are having an illegal election today -- because it can be stolen; because it cannot be audited. Try to raise your IQ above 50. It's not so hard.

    Sunday Open Thread | 43 comments (43 topical)