This site is dedicated to everything that can be disagreed about. There are appropriate swear words and graphic descriptions so PLEASE, keep your children off this site. In fact, don't let your kids look at anything with a screen.

Saturday, November 19, 2005

So Much News, So Little Time

I got a reply from Senator Ken Salazar (D-CO) on an inquiry I made regarding Able Danger, the DoD task force that identified the 9-11 hijackers months before the attack. This post will have to wait till tomorrow however.

The post today concerns the vote in the House last night regarding the removal of troops from Iraq. It came on the heels of a demand by Democrat Rep. John Murtha for just such an action. The vote rejecting the demand, went down hard by a vote of 403-3. Even Murtha voted against it. I'll bet he didn't sleep well last night.

Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi called the proposal, which was introduced by Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA), "a disgrace", a "deception", that the "Republican majority has stooped to a new low", and that the proposal was "a political stunt and should it be rejected by this House". Ms. Pelosi then voted with the majority. I'm sure that her vote will enrage her constituents. I'll bet she didn't sleep well last night.

FYI, the only Representatives who vote for the measure (and probably the only Dems to sleep well last night) were Cynthia McKinney, Jose Serano and Robert Wexler.

I think it is hilarious. I want the GOP to pull more stunts like this on all government programs. For instance, how about a proposal to raise the minimum wage to $25 per hour?

It could work both ways too. The Dems could propose using the Commerce Clause to criminalize alcohol and tobacco, as is the case with marijuana. It could make politics even more fun.


Anonymous marshall said...

Some difficult questions to ponder that you probably won't answer.

Who introduced the resolution that was voted on last Friday?
And how did this person vote on there own resolution?
Why would someone introduce a resolution and then vote against it?
Why are Republicans playing games with our troops?
Is war just one big running joke to you?


11:22 AM

Blogger The Plumber said...

Unlike intelllectually dishonest liberals, I love to answer questions. I'll number them for ease of reading.

1&2)Both answered in my post.

3)To show that Democrats are intellectually dishonest and don't have a nutsack.

4)War is considered a game by liberals who look to score political points by falling poll numbers.

5)The "running joke" is the Democrats who don't have balls to say (or vote on) what they really believe. Admit it Marshall, you hate this country, you hate individualism, you hate free will, you hate success, you salivate over every death because it represents another lost poll number for Bush.

My cousin is over there disarming IED's. He and the men in his unit view the U.S. press and Democrats as cowards (that is the nice way to put it).

9:15 AM

Blogger The Plumber said...


The men that I am in correspondence with who are actually in the Middle East arena believe that the words of Durbin, Sharpton, Shehan, Dean, and all of the rest of the moonbats actually prolongs the conflict.

Bin Laden thinks that the U.S. is a paper tiger because of what we did in Viet Nam, Beirut, and Somalia. He believes that we won't finish the job because the U.S. public can't handle death.

He's wrong though, we can handle death.

The problem however, for U.S. troops, is that a significant minority (and nearly all of the MSM) view U.S. casulties and deaths as a good thing for advancing a political agenda.

There is another significant minority who view terrorist deaths and U.S. success as the good thing.

Then there are the moderates whose opinions change depending on the polls. For now, the polls are in your favor.

But mark my words, there may come a day when the war in Iraq may be viewed as a turning point for the entire Middle East. Success and prosperity in Iraq may ultimately be the harbinger for equal rights and political inclusion for the entire region.

That day may come very soon, altough the MSM won't report it. Why? Because it would be an example of U.S. success in the hands of Republicans. 1

12:51 PM

Blogger Black Bear said...


This might be a dumb question, but what are IED's and MSM?

9:06 PM

Blogger The Plumber said...

Improvised Explosive Device (IED) are often wired to radios or cell phones.

MainStream Media (MSM) often have no wiring at all. In fact, there is nothing that actually connects the MSM to the real world.

8:48 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here is my example of your logic regarding Iraq.

It would be like if your kid came home from school and was failing History. You question your kid on why he was failing history, maybe give him some suggestions how he could do better. The kid then decides he doesn’t want to hear what you have to say and turns around and accuses you of hating history. Well you don’t hate history, what I do hate is my kid failing at history.

I don’t base my opinion on polls and I don’t think Murtha does either. The happy thoughts theory of military strategy didn’t work in Vietnam and it isn’t going to work here. I can tell you what my friends are saying that are coming back from Iraq, they say we don’t have enough troops and we don’t seem to have a defined strategy, they are fighting the same battles over and over again. They push out the insurgence but don’t have enough troops to secure the area so they move to fight in another area and the ground they just fought over is regained by insurgence.

We must force the Iraqs to take control over their own country, there is no more than we can do. It is time to leave and start fighting the real war on terror. That is what Bin Laden is truly scared of.


3:02 PM

Blogger The Plumber said...

No kid of mine would ever fail history, it wouldn't get to that point.

You apparently know nothing about history. Maybe you could enlighten me as to your theory about why we turned yellow and ran from Viet Nam. Who lost Viet Nam Marshall, our military, or the yellow cowards in D.C.? What happened to the SVN after we left? Were they better off with the Khmer Rouge in power?

What I've been told is that over 80 percent of Iraq is not only stable, but in better condition than under the former regiem. That is, more schools, more roads, more electricity, more clean water, better medical care, etc. How do you know that there is nothing more that we can do?

Do you think that Qadafi would have given up his quest for wmd's if we weren't in Iraq? Do you think that Syria would have pulled out of Lebanon if we weren't in Iraq? Do you think that Egyptians would have had the opportunity to vote for a new president if we weren't in Iraq? Would the Saudi's be voting in local elections for the first time in history if we weren't in Iraq?

Maybe you think it is all just a coincidence that these events all occurred in the last two years, after we went into Iraq. I think that is wishful thinking.

Admit it Marshall, you know less about the situation on the ground that even I do. You are unwilling to admit that a democratic Iraq may be viewed as a turning point for the entire Middle East. Success and prosperity in Iraq may ultimately be the harbinger for equal rights and political inclusion for the entire region.

You hate Bush and Republicans, and any victory by them. I'll bet you get sick at the idea of portraits of G.W. Bush hanging up in Iraqi schools just like the portraits of his dad in Kuwati schools (or Reagan's in schools in the former Soviet Union).

History in the Middle East will be written by those liberated by the U.S. military. If you and your ilk are lucky, the words of the gonadally-challenged won't be included in those text books.

12:44 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Let me ask you how long we were in Vietnam? I don't get the feeling you have any clue how long we were in Vietnam and your ignorance shows. Student of history indeed. Maybe after we spend more than a decade in Iraq you will finally get the hint but I doubt it. In the meantime I am sure you will be yelling communist sympothizer/America hater/freedom hater or whatever else helps you go to sleep at night. One day you will wake up and realize that all the happy thoughts in the world will not change what is happening on the ground that neither of us has a clue about. I am at least willing to listen to others while you are busy yelling psuedo mccarthyism rhetoric in anyones face that dares to question how this war is going. What makes me sick is thinking we could be Iraq in another decade while you have your head stuck in the sand.

4:09 PM

Blogger The Plumber said...


We provided military equiptment and economic aid to the Associated States of Indochina and France as early as 1950. President Eisenhower pledged further support to Ngo Dinh Diem in 1954 and sent advisor's into Viet Nam in the late 50's. We were there till 1973.

I'll sleep just fine regardless of how much you hate liberty.

BTW, our country's first spy mission happened shortly after we ratified the Constitution in 1789. Guess where...Israel.

Shortly after that, several of our merchant ships were captured by Algerian pirates, the sailors were taken hostage and ransom demands were made. President Jefferson said (to paraphrase), "Fuck you! We don't deal with terrorists. You will let our citizens go, or I'll send in the Marines!" The Algerian's let our citizens go immediately.

We've been dicking around with these pricks in the Middle East and other Muslim countries since the beginning of our own country. I don't have any happy thoughts or illusions. We will be there for a very, very long time. Indeed, we may be there as long as the United States remains a country.

I have an idea jackass, answer my questions. You won't though, because like all leftists, you are not intellectually honest.

6:14 PM


Post a Comment

<< Home