[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by spacefreak

Soft news my ass, and it has nothing to do with wanting the right to "dominate" the press. A little coverage of a larger, nearby rally would have been sufficient. But yet again, the media leftist bias is so damn apparent, it's blinding.

What's strange is that I remember just a few months ago, people were complaining about how the media were just eating up everything Bush told them.

I think that what we're seeing here is just the left's propaganda machine finally finding something useful it could latch onto and doing a pretty good job with it. I've said it before and I'll say it again: In my eyes, the problem with the media in general is not that it's biased, but that it's so lazy it's incredibly easy to manipulate. If you can convince them that this is where a big, heart-wrenching story is, that's where they'll be, regardless of whether there's anything substantial there at all.

[mojo2]

Unintended consequence is what you or she would call the damage her protest might cause. The court of public opinion (in THIS person's view) says she COULD have known and she SHOULD have known and if her protest were to lead the US to pull out and the Middle East to fall to OBL's forces anything and everything that would happen as a result would have at least a smidgen of Sheehan smeared on it.

Careless disregard. Negligence. Childishness. Ignorance. Hubris. And all of that while those with a longer, wiser POV are trying to advise her otherwise, but nooooooo.

So we can't do anything about her. She'll have to accept the consequences of her actions.

A fitting analogy, just off the top of my head, is that of author/inmate, killer Jack Abbott who became the cause celebre of the literary set, primarily Norman Mailer. Mailer used his celebrity status to help win a release for Abbott because he'd shown the ability to write a book about prison, from prison. Some time after being released Abbott, predictably, killed again.

No one KNEW for sure what was going to happen once Abbott was free but the danger that Abbott posed to society illustrated by his violent and criminal past suggested a greater risk than any but the foolish or the careless or the self possessed would dare risk.

Yet, Mailer had nothing to say afterwards but that "his involvement with Abbott was 'another episode in my life in which I can find nothing to cheer about or nothing to take pride in."

In 1980, Norman Mailer supported convicted killer Jack Abbott's bid for parole, which was successful. He helped Abbott publish a book titled In the Belly of the Beast, a collection of his letters to Mailer about his experiences in prison. However, Abbott committed a murder not long after his release and was returned to prison. Mailer was subjected to some criticism for his role in getting Jack Abbott released.

Wiser heads had tried to advise him otherwise, but noooooooo.

The prick, Mailer, lives knowing that at least a few drops of blood from Abbott's victim is on his own hands.

So, you Sheehan supporters, go ahead. Do what you want.

After the US forces pulled out of Viet Nam it wasn't long before the North Vietnamese defeated the South Vietnamese forces and gained control of the entire country. It turns out all the North Vietnamese wanted was to unite their country.

Well, we KNOW OBL wants more than to unite Iraq. They want the Great Satan America dead. He's said so several times. He's killed thousands of people trying to get bombs and or bullets right to you at your own front door. He's said he wants to bring the US down economically. He's told his followers to attack the oil resources.

As soon as we left Iraq, if the Iraqi government couldn't hold the al Qaeda terrorists back just what do you think would happen?

Hahahaha! Yeah, I know. No one can prove that.

Gee. I wonder what it would feel like to be you? Actively working to make it easier for people who hate you to destroy you and everything you hold dear?

We have three groups of people here.

One group is willing to die to kill you.

Another group is willing to die to protect you.

A third group thinks that by removing the defenders from danger that the danger is removed.

You don't get it. I know. Forget that I disturb your slumber.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

What's strange is that I remember just a few months ago, people were complaining about how the media were just eating up everything Bush told them.

I think that what we're seeing here is just the left's propaganda machine finally finding something useful it could latch onto and doing a pretty good job with it. I've said it before and I'll say it again: In my eyes, the problem with the media in general is not that it's biased, but that it's so lazy it's incredibly easy to manipulate. If you can convince them that this is where a big, heart-wrenching story is, that's where they'll be, regardless of whether there's anything substantial there at all.

Is the media lazy, or are we lazy for not demanding more from them?

I mean, look at Fox... whether you're Right or Left, it is easy to see that they are really shooting for the lowest common denominator.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by mojo2

So, you Sheehan supporters, go ahead. Do what you want.

I am hardly a Sheehan supporter. Remember just a few posts ago, when I said she was "off her rocker"? However, while I'm not a Sheehan supporter, I'm also not a Sheehan worshipper like you, believing that this flash-in-the-pan mom is capable of bringing down the most successful country in the world. Your fears strike me as really unhealthy McCarthyistic paranoia.

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

I am hardly a Sheehan supporter. Remember just a few posts ago, when I said she was "off her rocker"? However, while I'm not a Sheehan supporter, I'm also not a Sheehan worshipper like you, believing that this flash-in-the-pan mom is capable of bringing down the most successful country in the world. Your fears strike me as really unhealthy McCarthyistic paranoia.

FYI, I REMEMBER how the Viet Nam protests began. You speak with such certainty, from what, experience???

I see the amount of press she gets and I won't feel comfortable until the protest is silenced or else we get a greater sense of assurance than your albeit comforting promise that this will amount to nothing.

Besides, was I addressing your post???

[AKcrab]

Originally Posted by mojo2

I won't feel comfortable until the protest is silenced...

That is completely absurd. I don't wish "silence" on anyone. Is this finally the real you?

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

What's strange is that I remember just a few months ago, people were complaining about how the media were just eating up everything Bush told them.

Conservatives complain about 'liberal bias'. Liberals complain about 'conservative bias'. This has been going on for many years, and frankly I take it as a sign that the media might actually be doing something right. Neither side would be happy unless the media were squarely in their camp, so if both sides are mad then it must not be on anybody's side.

[spacefreak]

Originally Posted by besson3c

I mean, look at Fox... whether you're Right or Left, it is easy to see that they are really shooting for the lowest common denominator.

Yeah, like when they were warning of Katrina a few days ago, and CNN was re-airing the Larry King-Pamela Anderson interview for the umpteenth time.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Millennium

Conservatives complain about 'liberal bias'. Liberals complain about 'conservative bias'. This has been going on for many years, and frankly I take it as a sign that the media might actually be doing something right. Neither side would be happy unless the media were squarely in their camp, so if both sides are mad then it must not be on anybody's side.

If the media was transparent so that people had great difficulty and it required quite an involved intellectual argument to point to a media source being biased, this would be even better. As it stands, sources like Fox could not make it any more clear what side they are on.

[finboy]

Yes, he was killed for lies and for a PNAC [Project for the New American Century] Neo-Con agenda to benefit Israel. My son joined the Army to protect America, not Israel.

From the Sheehan quote above.

So she's a racist, then? Nice.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by finboy

From the Sheehan quote above.

So she's a racist, then? Nice.

She's racist against Israelies because she thinks that at the core of this war is the Israel/Palestine conflict, and that the US is implicitly heavy-handed in supporting Israel?

Racist isn't the term I'd use here.

[Spliffdaddy]

Cindy who?

[Moderator]

I wonder if there has been an outspoken critic of the war who hasn't gotten the GOP beatdown treatment. Everyone is a nut? Isn't that like 95+% of the world?

[Spliffdaddy]

95% of the world can be wrong - and quite often, apparently.

[spacefreak]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

I think that what we're seeing here is just the left's propaganda machine finally finding something useful it could latch onto and doing a pretty good job with it. I've said it before and I'll say it again: In my eyes, the problem with the media in general is not that it's biased, but that it's so lazy it's incredibly easy to manipulate. If you can convince them that this is where a big, heart-wrenching story is, that's where they'll be, regardless of whether there's anything substantial there at all.

Lazy they're definitely not. And there's nothing useful about any of this. Furthermore, on most days, there are more media members present than actual rally supporters. The entire thing is a media created spectacle. That's why we saw no coverage of a larger nearby rally.

Notice the unusually high percentage of people in this photo who are media members.




And then here's the photo that appeared in the press across the nation...

[spacefreak]

She's back... Woohoo!!!

George Bush needs to stop talking, admit the mistakes of his all around failed administration, pull our troops out of occupied New Orleans and Iraq, and excuse his self from power.

[placebo1969]

More quotes:

When I think of how many other poor neighborhoods are being decimated and made so desperate and hopeless by the failed policies of the Bush administration, it makes me so angry.

The people in LA who were displaced have nice, if modest homes that are perfectly fine. I wonder why the government made them leave at great expense and uproot families who have been living in their communities for generations.

When our fellow citizens are told to "shoot to kill" other fellow citizens because they want to stay alive, that is military and governmental fascism gone out of control.

If George Bush truly listened to God and read the words of the Christ, Iraq and the devastation in New Orleans would have never happened.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by spacefreak

I don't know many men who could take yammering like this from their girlfriends or wives.

Exactly. Those women need to shut up, learn their place, and get their husbands/boyfriends a beer.

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by spacefreak

She's back... Woohoo!!!

See, there's just no pleasing these irrational raggers!

It seems whenever he performs PROACTIVELY against a possible disastrous threat to the United States he's ragged on.

I still need to be convinced he did anything wrong with Katrina. His taking responsibility or blame yesterday was a noble and manly thing to do and it's the mark of a true leader. History will note this.

If he did do something wrong I'm SURE he didn't intentionally drag his feet in responding to Katrina, but you have to ask yourself wtf the man can do to please some of these ignorant ingrates?

He's ahead of the people and they just need to get smarter and catch up.

He's a better President than we know.

Maybe better than SOME people deserve.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by mojo2

I still need to be convinced he did anything wrong with Katrina. His taking responsibility or blame yesterday was a noble and manly thing to do and it's the mark of a true leader. History will note this.

This is from the person who said Bush wasn't to blame?

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by mojo2

See, there's just no pleasing these irrational raggers!(...)
I still need to be convinced he did anything wrong with Katrina. His taking responsibility or blame yesterday was a noble and manly thing to do and it's the mark of a true leader. History will note this.

Well I am glad he did that for history and no other reasons.

History is ... somewhat "vital" I guess.

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by goMac

This is from the person who said Bush wasn't to blame?

I note he took the blame even IF he may not have been deserving of it.

True leadership.

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by Pendergast

Well I am glad he did that for history and no other reasons.

History is ... somewhat "vital" I guess.

Since it looks as though you bright fellows (HA!) won't give him the credit he's due during his lifetime, maybe he'll get "pie in the sky" when he dies.

http://www.fortunecity.com/tinpan/parton/2/pie.html

Meanwhile he keeps serving your interests with not so much as a second thought from you 'all.' You will owe your way of life and your very existence to his foresight and dedication to this country.

And. you. won't. even. realize. it.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by mojo2

I note he took the blame even IF he may not have been deserving of it.

True leadership.

Being President sounds easy. Apparently you take month long vacations and then take blame for things. I mean, Bush doesn't do much else...

History will remember you for your contributions, and vilify you for your mistakes.

[loki74]

If George Bush truly listened to God and read the words of the Christ, Iraq and the devastation in New Orleans would have never happened.

Hahahaha... OOoookAY lady, do you have any clue how much credibility you lose when you claim to have the power to know, as if told to you directly from God Himself, that Bush doesn't really read the Bible, and that if he did, Hurricane Katrina never would have happened? So its like yeah, YOU somehow are God's favorite and He has decided to make you privy to his decision to *punish* America because of Bush??

...what a freaking psycho.

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by goMac

Being President sounds easy. Apparently you take month long vacations and then take blame for things. I mean, Bush doesn't do much else...

History will remember you for your contributions, and vilify you for your mistakes.

Tell ya what my friend, once you get the theory down pat here on MacNN, THEN we can think about your candidacy.

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by mojo2

Since it looks as though you bright fellows (HA!) won't give him the credit he's due during his lifetime, maybe he'll get "pie in the sky" when he dies.

http://www.fortunecity.com/tinpan/parton/2/pie.html

Meanwhile he keeps serving your interests with not so much as a second thought from you 'all.' You will owe your way of life and your very existence to his foresight and dedication to this country.

And. you. won't. even. realize. it.

I realize a lot more people died following his actions after 9/11. That it made me freer remains to be proved.

But obviously, you love the guy. Which is "good", but don't love him too much, cause that would be "evil".

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

The people in LA who were displaced have nice, if modest homes that are perfectly fine. I wonder why the government made them leave at great expense and uproot families who have been living in their communities for generations.

Way to hitch a wagon there leftists. Whooosh.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by mojo2

Since it looks as though you bright fellows (HA!) won't give him the credit he's due during his lifetime, maybe he'll get "pie in the sky" when he dies.

http://www.fortunecity.com/tinpan/parton/2/pie.html

Meanwhile he keeps serving your interests with not so much as a second thought from you 'all.' You will owe your way of life and your very existence to his foresight and dedication to this country.

And. you. won't. even. realize. it.

If MY way of life is dependent on never-ending dependence on fossil fuels like oil then he will get NO thanks from me. I am more than ready for our way of life to change.

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

If MY way of life is dependent on never-ending dependence on fossil fuels like oil then he will get NO thanks from me. I am more than ready for our way of life to change.

I appreciate the irony of your using my quote to Simey in your sig.

I appreciate the irony of my quote.

I appreciate the irony of our making this particular exchange.

Do you appreciate the irony of your ACTUALLY continuing to USE your COMPUTER in spite of everything you say and apparently believe?

Do you appreciate how hypocritical that appears?

Can you prove to ANYONE here that you ARE NOT a hypocrite?

Or, will you be forced to recognize reality?

For background, why not google the United Staes v. Holmes.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by mojo2

I appreciate the irony of your using my quote to Simey in your sig.

I appreciate the irony of my quote.

I appreciate the irony of our making this particular exchange.

Do you appreciate the irony of your ACTUALLY continuing to USE your COMPUTER in spite of everything you say and apparently believe?

Do you appreciate how hypocritical that appears?

Can you prove to ANYONE here that you ARE NOT a hypocrite?

Or, will you be forced to recognize reality?

For background, why not google the United Staes v. Holmes.

YES mojo2, you ARE right. I AM a hypocrite.

I am not a sack-cloth wearing luddite who lives off the grid in a passive solar, straw-bale house. I do NOT grow my own food, nor raise ruminants to use their dung as fuel. NOR do I shun any and all modern conveniences like a computer. You were right. I was wrong. Please accept my apologies for being so hypocritical; it won't happen again.


Nice to see everything is so extreme with you. So, unless I am all those things above I cannot want to see our country become less dependent on fossil fuels. Please?!?


So, let me ask YOU, is there any way you think a person can live a modern lifestyle while wanting his country to become less dependent on fossil fuels? Or is it that we just keep doing what we're doing, we keep slaking our thirst for petroleum until it runs out and then we let the next generation, or maybe even the one after that--if the supplies last that long--figure out a solution to change our dependence on fossil fuel?

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

YES mojo2, you ARE right. I AM a hypocrite.

I am not a sack-cloth wearing luddite who lives off the grid in a passive solar, straw-bale house. I do NOT grow my own food, nor raise ruminants to use their dung as fuel. NOR do I shun any and all modern conveniences like a computer. You were right. I was wrong. Please accept my apologies for being so hypocritical; it won't happen again.


Nice to see everything is so extreme with you. So, unless I am all those things above I cannot want to see our country become less dependent on fossil fuels. Please?!?


So, let me ask YOU, is there any way you think a person can live a modern lifestyle while wanting his country to become less dependent on fossil fuels? Or is it that we just keep doing what we're doing, we keep slaking our thirst for petroleum until it runs out and then we let the next generation, or maybe even the one after that--if the supplies last that long--figure out a solution to change our dependence on fossil fuel?

At least you, unlike many here, are man enough to admit when he hasn't thought an issue through.

But, in my mind the issue isn't whether you, correctly, want the country to become less dependent on fossil fuels. It's about recognizing that for us to get to THAT point is TRILLIONS of dollars and multiple decades away. If you criticize George W. Bush for giving you the ability to have oil TODAY, you are missing the point.

If MY way of life is dependent on never-ending dependence on fossil fuels like oil then he will get NO thanks from me. I am more than ready for our way of life to change.

We have a need for oil. Today. Tomorrow. For the foreseeable future. Why? Because ALL of our transportation and manufacturing and agriculture and medicine and utilities and every day conveniences and ALL our jobs and our economy is dependent on OIL.

If we are to think of making a change over to alternative energy sources I ask you to answer me three simple questions.

1) WHAT alternative energy source is on the table, RIGHT NOW, that will replace oil not only in our cars, but in pesticides, plastics and fabrics, in powering our factories and supplying electricity, creating medicines and etc.?

2) HOW LONG will it take to switch 200,000,000+ vehicles to this new alternative energy? How long to retrofit ALL of our manufacturing needs? How long to convert the furnaces and generators and pumping plants of big business, large and small, from one end of this country to the other, in every industry to this ONE new alternative energy source (or even a handful of them all put together) that doesn't yet exist beyond an experiment?

3) HOW MUCH MONEY will it cost to go from where we are TODAY to that day in the future when that NEW MIRACULOUS ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCE THAT DOESN'T YET EXIST will be serving all our energy needs currently served by oil?

OK. Now, tell me what we do to keep this nation and it's economy which is dependent on oil to stay afloat going without oil until that day in the future when the new alternative energy source(s) is/are assuming the heavy lifting of keeping America alive, if not strong and vibrant?

The US, the civilized developed world is dependent on OIL.

You may not like it. I may not like it.

But THAT is the reality.

If you don't recognize the efforts GWB has taken to buy us TIME to even get to your brave new alternative energy world, then your admissions above are worthless.

We ARE dependent on fossil fuels. You can drop out of your current lifestyle and eschew anything and everything that comes from oil and live like the Amish. But the fact is that until or unless you do, you DO owe President Bush a thank you for doing a dirty job, making a tough decision, but one that HAD to be made.

If he hadn't and the terrorists had been able to disrupt the oils coming from the Middle East, THEN you'd have some reason to be angry at him.

He gets no thanks from us for doing this important thing that benefits every one of us!

But he should get thanks.

Every. Single. Day.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by mojo2

At least you, unlike many here, are man enough to admit when he hasn't thought an issue through.

Mojo2, save your breath. I was mocking you with intense, and apparently believable, sarcasm.

When President Bush--or any President for that matter--starts spending AS MUCH effort and our money on research into developing new fuel sources as he does on maintaining access to our our current supply of fossil fuels, THEN he will get a big, appreciative "Thank You" from me.

But,
where are the grand pronouncements about efforts to produce newer, safer forms of nuclear power?
where are the grand pronouncements about efforts to produce new solar and wind power technologies?
where are the grand pronouncements about efforts to change the way we use energy such that there will be requirements for new construction to be more energy efficient, cars will get higher gas mileage, communities will get more money for mass transit and less for ex/sub/urban sprawl?

I see a lot of effort from the Bush Administration to ensure we are maintaining access to our fossil fuel supplies. I see VERY LITTLE effort to even begin to change away from that.

(And none of what was written above is mockery. That is all genuine sentiment on my part.)

[mojo2]

Sorry about being unable to discern your believable sacrcasm for the believable ignorance that still exists in this country.

But alas, I, too, lament his failure to exercise greater leadership in the area of the NEXT STEP.

But, you have to admit he's ALREADY waaaaaay ahead of the American people in recognizing the oil thing and acting to protect it. Now, WHY, exactly he doesn't come right out and announce it is subject to at LEAST three different interpretations.

1) Doesn't want to start a world wide panic and a 'run' on oil. That's in NO ONE'S interest. But it COULD happen. An economic depression and/or World War would result.

2) The debate over whether we are justified in taking lives to guarantee our own survival likely wouldn't help us as we fight al Qaeda right now. It would draw in all kinds of voices and points of view and opinions and bring up questions of precedents and other stuff...ugh. A can of worms.

3) If we announce we are securing supplies of a natural resource and using it to gain a better position for any future power plays (defensive or offensive), what other nations might get the same idea but with OTHER vital natural resources instead of oil? Athens just started a thread about China and water. That's pretty insightful thinking, if you ask me!

There may be other reasons GWB doesn't come clean to the American people and the world. Oh, and to reiterate, telling the Americann people is tantamount to telling the world and the enemy. So there are things he HAS to keep secret, even from us.

Back to the point.

A few weeks ago I exchanged posts with OreoCookie re: alternative energy efforts and the like.

I admitted less than a great deal of enthusiasm for the INTERIM energy developments like hydrogen, which everyone agrees is not THE ANSWER but very well COULD buy us more time on the way to THE ANSWER.

Then I said something about not being interested in the interim developments and technologies.

Well, ironically, GWB MAY see himself as the set-up man, the interim or middle relief pitcher on a baseball team. He knows the business and technology sector isn't ready for such a drastic change, so he's just keeping us in the game. Making sure we DON'T LOSE. He's started things that will continue to serve the American people for some time, like FDR did. Homeland Security. The WoT. The effort to protect our oil supplies. Getting increased cooperation from the rest of the world now that they better understand the dynamics of our actions since 9/11.

He's put the leaders of the world on notice that terrorism is a scourge that THEY, TOO will HAVE to combat, whether they approve of our actions or not.

He's shown them, in a moment of worldwide instability, that we DID act in our own interests, but it was in THIER interests as well. And that we ARE NOT the wild-eyed, loose cannon they feared. But now, with a healthy respect for what lengths we are willing to go to, given the right set of circumstances, to bring stability and assure that the balance of power in the world is NOT going to be dictated by a Saddam or an OBL without a fight, progress can resume.

GWB doesn't expect he's going to get the win, but he'll get credit for a save.

The "closing pitcher" who is still years away from the White House will introduce the BIG initiatives and build upon what GWB has created. Then, as more and more people come to appreciate his administration in retrospect, the elder stateman GWB will be able to enjoy his growing popularity and appreciation in his life after the Presidency. He'll also have set the stage for another Republican Presidency.

BTW, I searched for the thread.
http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.p...61#post2676261

[Captain Obvious]

ha ha ha... quitting whatever she claims she was doing was the only way she was going to get her name in the press again. Being whiny and staging circus like scenes only works for people like Lindsay Lohan it was not a platform for activism as Cindy learned.

Like all members of her generation they give up or sell out in the end.

[Rumor]

Hooray for raising the dead.

[smacintush]

WTF is it with all the Zombie threads lately?

THey died for a REASON. Let them rest.

[Captain Obvious]

Well: The Denver Post - Demoralized Sheehan hangs up war activism

So why start a new thread on an old topic when its easier to just bump the subject back up

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Captain Obvious 

Well: The Denver Post - Demoralized Sheehan hangs up war activism

So why start a new thread on an old topic when its easier to just bump the subject back up

Homie I'm wit'cha, resurrect these bad boys!

Cindy ran into a bit of a problem maintaining support among her own. Once she became critical of the new (D) House and Senate, they turned on her. Along with her ideal to drop the "STOP WAR" mantra, she's also decided to relinquish her identity as a Democrat. She's disgusted with them and they're now disgusted with her. I applaud the Democrats for finally seeing what a whacko they'd placed on the national scene.

I applaud Cindy for now tending to the life she's all, but entirely ignored in favor of a little notariety.

[tie]

Some of you guys are real jerks. Give her some slack, her son died.

She is certainly a lot more sensible than spacefreak (the OP of this thread). I don't know that spacefreak had any excuses for making up his lies about Iraqi WMD.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by tie 

Some of you guys are real jerks. Give her some slack, her son died.

She didn't want any slack. That's the point. I understand you're trying to see the humanity in offering her an olive branch, but railing against the military establishment and slandering those among whom her son proudly served is whacko. I'm sorry. All the while traveling the country on the shoulders of those who wanted nothing more than to use her voice of tragedy for their sad partisan tripe. When she expressed disagreement with them, they threw her under the bus. They were all she had. She gave them her husband, her life, and her living children and they left her with no one else. Now she's going to try to patch it up and I applaud her. The ones that abandoned her are the real jerks in this scenario my friend.

She is certainly a lot more sensible than spacefreak (the OP of this thread). I don't know that spacefreak had any excuses for making up his lies about Iraqi WMD.

Which lies, the ones given him by Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, John Edwards, Robert Byrd, Henry Waxman, Tom Daschle, Nancy Pelosi, Ted Kennedy...

Granted, I've decided not to go picking through the rubble of this tired thread to find out what you're talking about exactly, but I know how you hate to hear that there are a lot more "liars" than you've been willing to admit. There's a reason why the "Bush lied" mantra has all, but been buried six feet under. It's a lie.

[Atomic Rooster]

die