Feb 27, 2009

"Music and Meander" at the Capitol is a bust

LANSING -- It might have been called "Music and Meander" or "Mega Bust," but the so-called "Chicago Tea Party" protest by right-wingers on the Capitol steps at noon Friday certainly did little to change anyone's mind.

The protest was based on the over-the-top, unprofessional rant a few weeks ago by CNBC's Rick Santelli on the trading floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange to protest President Obama's economic stimulus package, and it did little but illustrate right-wingers are in the minority. The majority of Americans in both parties think a spending stimulus is needed to try and reverse the crisis caused by the Bush Administration policies.

I wasted my lunch hour to hear what they had to say, and all I saw was a maximum – a generous estimation - of no more than 150 people milling about, carrying handmade signs, passing out propaganda and listening to patriotic music. I saw a few of the usual suspects, like Leon Drolet, but not much was going on.

The protest was supposed to last until 1 p.m., but I left after listening to Bruce Springsteen's song "Born in the USA." Just like Ronald Reagan in 1984, these people have no clue what the song is all about. It's like their complete misuse and lack of understanding of what the Boston Tea Parry was for and about.

The song was about the tribulations soldiers experienced in the Vietnam War, and it also protests the hardships Vietnam veterans faced upon their return from the war.

I saw the normal signs with the rightwing talking point about the alleged "socialist Democrats," but even funnier were the ones complaining about the budget deficit. Where were these people when Bush took a budget surplus and turned it into a record budget deficit with tax cuts for the richest 1 percent and spent it on an unnecessary invasion of Iraq. Just think what we could do to rebuild and stimulate our economy with the billions of dollars spent on rebuilding on Iraq and the millions that disappeared because of the lack of oversight and no-bid contracts.

They could have went to the end of the Capitol sidewalk and asked the handful of people protesting the Iraq invasion what they thought. To their credit, they have been there every Friday rain or shine in the two years I have worked in Lansing.

Because my office overlooks the Capitol, I looked out the window at about 12:50, and the "protest" was basically over. If there were any speeches they had to be between 12:30 and 12:50 p.m.

To be fair, it's nice to be with like minded people who think the way you do. I know that's one reason I like political conventions and rallies after so many years of being neutral. The good news is more people agree with the President, and the people on the Capitol steps are a small minority.


ka_Dargo_Hussein said...

They have nothing else except lame bullshit about socialism.

Funny how they have never complained about socialism before.

If the government helps the people, then it's socialism and it's BAD. If the government helps big business, which they have done from the inception, it's ok. From tax cuts to allowing them to write our stinking laws (Big Pharma is a recent example).

Pathetic, clueless dolts voting against their own interests.

Communications guru said...

You are 100 percent correct.

Not Anonymous said...

I certainly hope that you're not one of those chosen to count ballots. You say you're being generous by saying 60 people attended. Yet, the Lansing State Journal reports 200-250. CNN called it several hundred. Fox News called it hundreds (which would mean a minimum of 200). Even MSNBC, the liberal bastion which has "Oh God" Chris Matthews, he of "tingle running up my leg" fame said it was in the hundreds.

I don't think that Socialist Democrats have a leg to stand on when it comes to the deficits that Congress ran up during the Bush years that he didn't veto now, since Obama has a quadrupling of the deficit as far as the eye can see. Not to mention the tax increases. He's made the recession which we are now in even worse.

ka_Dargo_Hussein said...

No matter the number, they turned out due to the ravings of an imbecile. Santelli calls folks having trouble with their mortgage losers. I suppose these folks are losers also.

What suggestions do you have to turn our economy around, nonny mouse?

Deficits? The deficits the Republican Congress ran up? The same Republican Congress that served as a rubber stamp for your hero Bush? What a fucking fool you are.

Tax increases? 95% of the country got a tax break and you cry tax increases?

How divorced from reality are you, nonny mouse?

Oh wait, I forgot, you're not divorced from reality, you're just a partisan little cunt who would do anything to advance the goals of your party over the good of the country.

Communications guru said...

There is no way possible there were more than 60 people there, let alone 200. I was there, and there was no way possible there even close to that. There was absolutely nothing going on in the half hour I was there, so I had nothing to do but watch people. I have no idea how anyone could have reached that ridiculous number, not even of you continued to count the people who walked from near the steps to the street and back. As for CNN and MSNBC, I’m going to venture to guess they were not in Lansing, and are using that incorrect figure from the AP report. The bottom line is those misguided people are a small minority, and they will protest anything Democratic. From what I saw, it was a bunch of right-wingers pushing there own hopeless cause, like Ron Paul, Leon Drolet and Fair Tax people. Those are probably the same people who are clinging to the debunked myth that Obama was not born in the U.S.

Once again, there is no such thing as “Socialist Democrats” in this country. Here is the thing about deficits; Bush took a budget surplus and created a record deficit with tax cuts for the rich and an unnecessary war in Iraq, rebuilding it and no-bid contracts to his cronies. The president is trying to stimulate an economy where no one is spending anything.

ka_Dargo_Hussein said...

Much like their peckers, Republicans lie about the size of their peckers.

ka_Dargo_Hussein said...

...and their crowds.

Jason Gillman said...

You lack the wit necessary to hide your hatred for freedom for the citizens of the US.

Its ok.. Swear, curse and bemoan those nasty republicans while your communist in chief tears down the economy to perpetuate crisis in his Chavez like power wish. The numbers are what they are, and you merely reveal even more firmly your willingness to lie to forward your Liberal-Fascist philosophy.

ka_Dargo_Hussein said...

Poor Jason.

He cries about the "communist in chief", yet failed to speak when the "fascist in chief" invaded a sovereign nation, pissed on our Constitution, and redistributed trillions of our riches to the wealthy.

Sounds like your typical Lush/Vannity republican douchebag to me.

Jason, wake the fuck up and smell the goddamn coffee, you wingnut piece of shit.

Have a good evening.

Not Anonymous said...

First, you should learn the difference between "their", "there" and "they're". An occasional mistake is one thing, but over and over again, makes for confusing reading.

Second, I don't care what you saw. You've proven yourself with no credibility.

Third, your guesses mean nothing. MSNBC had cameras there as did Fox, unless they used local news cameas or a pool camera.

Fourth, yes, they were pushing their cause. You characterize it as "hopeless" but that has no meaning.

Fifth, there is nothing "democratic" about what's happening in the Congress or the White House. Socialistic, yes, democratic, no.

Sixth, With some fancy cooking of the books, yes, there was a surplus in the budget when Bush took over. The interesting thing is that after the Republicans took over the House and Senate in 1995, Clinton is on record as saying several time that the budget couldn't be balanced, then he said maybe in 9 years, maybe in 7 years, maybe in four years. The Republican Congress balanced the budget and created the surplus. Clinton was dragged kicking and screaming to the balanced budget, as he was to welfare reform. Clinton gets the credit only because he had his butt planted in the White House at that time. On the other hand, Clinton also left a recession for Bush.

Clinton also left a dilapidated intelligence and a policy of treating terrorists like jaywalkers rather than as enemies of this country. The result was less than 7 months after Bush took office, we were attacked by terrorists. Bush didn't do as Clinton did. Instead, he began bombing the terrorists in less than 30 days following the attack (Oct. 7, 2001). He also put out the Bush Doctrine which said if you harbor terrorists, you are a terrorist. If you fund terrorists, you are a terrorist.

Faulty intelligence is what said that Hussein had WMD's. Not just our intelligence, but that of Germany, Italy, UK, and France. Now, I'd have gladly ignored France if they were the only ones showing that intelligence, but you can't ignore the others mentioned and still others that haven't been mentioned.

Following the Bush Doctrine, Iraq was guilty of terrorism because they harbored terrorists and they funded terrorists as proven by Hussein paying families of those terrorists $25,000 per.

Hussein did nothing to sway public opinion that he didn't have WMD's, in fact, he pushed everyone to believe he did. In addition, Hussein attempted to have former President George H. W. Bush assassinated. Then President Clinton did nothing.

Bush is guilty of several things. Not vetoing increased size budgets; the medical prescription bill, the amnesty program that failed, thank God. The Dubai Ports deal, that failed. But there is no reason for him to be ashamed of tax cuts. Those tax cuts moved this economy forward and created the biggest boom in the economy since the 80's.

He warned that if the housing mess wasn't fixed, it would create a serious economic problem. It was ignored by Democrats.

We know that the expansion of credit to those that couldn't qualify for loans aided in the collapse of the credit markets. I showed you the story from 1999 where the NYTimes (definitely not a right wing publication) warned that this could happen.

Bush is also guilty of abandoning the free market system by starting the TARP program. He also made a mistake in not pushing for his tax cuts to be made permanent. In addition, his tax cuts were not just for the wealthy of this country, they were across the board. You whine about corporations getting tax breaks and tax cuts, but what you don't seem to realize is that corporations don't pay taxes. They pass those taxes on to the consumer. So when you raise taxes on corporations, you're giving the tax increase to the American people. Corporations write the checks for those taxes, but they collect it from consumers from the price of goods.

You've lost the argument about the largest deficits in history under Bush. That loss came in the past two weeks as Obama has quadrupled the deficit, increased taxes and will increase them again when he lets the Bush tax cuts expire.

Obama has identified himself as a terrorist under the Bush Doctrine as he has given a terrorist organization $900 billion.

There is now a terrorist that is advocating for terrorists to enter this country through Mexico with a suitcase of a biological agent that could kill upwards of 330,000 people in one fell swoop, saying that now that Bush is gone and McCain lost the election, they now have their opportunity to attack the United States and attack repeatedly.

Obama wants to leave us defenseless against these terrorists by taking our guns rather than defending or even permitting the American people to defend themselves, their families and their property unless we bring a knife to a bomb fight.

This won't last. In two years, the Republicans will make great gains in the House and the Senate and hopefully they'll take back both Houses and again, hopefully, they won't squander it again by trying to be liked by the liberal media and passing all of the spending that they did during the Bush years.

We're in a recession. The market has tried to make a comeback and only been stymied by the huge spending bills and it will delay us from coming out of the recession. The earliest predictions are for the end of the year. Others say not until the second half of 2010. But then we'll pop right back into another recession when the Bush tax cuts expire on December 31, 2010.

You say there is no such thing as a Socialist Democrat. Facts show differently. It was all Democrats that passed the spending bill in the House. It was all Democrats and three Republicans that passed it in the Senate.

The TARP plan last September was defeated by Republicans. It passed on the second time around.

Democrats were afraid to have the vote if they didn't get a certain number of Republicans on board, and they didn't the first time around.

We're not just saying no to Obama's Socialist agenda, we're saying Hell no. It's not to just say no because it's Obama, it's because Socialism has never worked. It's always failed and we don't want to be a part of dragging this country down into the failure category.

You can twist words all you like, but the fact remains that Obama's spending in the first 30 days has made George Bush look like a Fiscal savings hawk.

I have no doubt that you'll disagree, but the facts are out there. Tax cuts work. Spending increases fail. Need proof on a small scale? Michigan. The tax increase didn't make things better. It didn't stop the deficit in this state. It created a new one. If it didn't, then why is pimply Jenny using some of the spending bill money to balance the budget? It should have been balanced without that input from the feds.

This spending is being put on the backs of our children, grand children and great grandchildren. We don't have the money. They are printing it. We're in danger of deflation and if they continue to print money, the dollar will weaken.

I remember the liberals laughing at Bush for going to Saudi Arabia and begging for them to reduce the price of oil by pumping more. Now we have Hillary over in China begging them to buy more of our debt. I wonder why that's not being reported by the mainstream press and why she's not being laughed at by the liberals.

Yes, Socialist Democrats do exist. There are very Democrats left. Maybe 7. Now there are Socialist Democrats and the head terrorists living the White House.

Communications guru said...

I did more than wave a flag for freedom and the citizens of the U.S. I spent 20 years in the military defending the ideals I love. What gives you the right to tell me I hate freedom simply because I disagree with your warped view of the legally elected President and Legislative leaders?

“Communist-in-chief?” Give me a break. After the smears of the campaign I guess that disgusting smear does not come as a surprise. But here is the bottom line: I was at your misguided protest, and you did not have more than 65 people there, let alone 300 people. That makes you a liar.

“Liberal-Fascist philosophy?” I suggest you look up the word Fascist.

Communications guru said...

First; Wow; talk about nit-picking, but seeing the length of this rant that should be expected. Why don’t you put those rants on your blog? But I deserved it; I used their and there wrong. I said “it was a bunch of right-wingers pushing there own hopeless cause” instead of “it was a bunch of right-wingers pushing their own hopeless cause.” I guess when you can’t dispute the content you go after a typo.

Second; Well of course you don’t care what I saw because you simply cannot be bothered with the truth or facts. I have plenty of credibility because the few mistakes I have made I correct them.

Third; We certainly can’t be talking abut the thing in Lansing. WLNS was there, but I saw no other cameras. But based on the photos I saw posted on the rightwing blogs, my estimate is right on.

Fourth, yes.

Fifth; “there is nothing "democratic" about what's happening in the Congress or the White House?” Are you serious? The majority the people elected are doing what they said they would do when elected, and that is fixing the mess Bush and the Republican policies created. Socialistic, in your mind; democratic, yes. Once again, there is no such thing as “Socialist Democrats” in this country.

Sixth, Bush took a budget surplus and turned into a record deficit with tax cuts for the wealthy and an unnecessary war. The worst terrorist attack on American soil occurred on Bush’s watch, and his response was to invade a country that had nothing to do with that attack based on flimsily evidence and ignoring evidence that did not prove the case they were making for war. You can rewrite history all you want, but no one but you and the misguided 60 or so people who showed up at the Capitol on Friday are buying it.

The cause of the housing mess was greed, and if you want to debate it, do it on the right thread. But you already lost there, - did I use that correctly? - so why are you pushing the same debunked argument?

You are seriously trying to use the same old smear that President Obama is a terrorist? Go ahead; that lie worked so well in the campaign.

ka_Dargo_Hussein said...

dumbfuck wrote...
Clinton also left a dilapidated intelligence and a policy of treating terrorists like jaywalkers rather than as enemies of this country. The result was less than 7 months after Bush took office, we were attacked by terrorists. Bush didn't do as Clinton did. Instead, he began bombing the terrorists in less than 30 days following the attack (Oct. 7, 2001). He also put out the Bush Doctrine which said if you harbor terrorists, you are a terrorist. If you fund terrorists, you are a terrorist.

ka_Dargo responds...
Are you serious? Clinton practically wrote it in crayon for the former dumbass-in-chief, not to mention the fact that he blithely ignored daily briefings with a childish "OK, you've covered your ass".

The guys that bombed the trade center back in '93 were caught. Bush got bored chasing bin Laden and saw some shiny oil in Iraq.

Dude, you are too fucking stupid to live. Your parents should have put you down before you were allowed to breed.

Not Anonymous said...

1. I don't have a blog. I only go to a couple of blogs and answer things said on those. The content was disputed. You inability to deal with someone else having a different opinion or getting facts, is only a reflection on your character and your lack of information.

2. You don't have truth or facts, so there isn't much sense in getting into a you did too/I did not argument.

3. I don't know who WLNS is. I'm assuming it's a Lansing televison station. I saw the crowd on CNN and on MSNBC. I heard that they had it on Fox too, but I don't have Fox, so I can't say for certain. all of them claimed more than 200. I'll take their word over someone with a partisan agenda.

5. I don't remember them talking about increasing taxes other than letting the Bush tax cuts expire which will be a huge tax increase.

6. You finally got something right. The worst terrorist attack on American soil did occur on Bush's watch. Less than seven months into it. Less than 30 days later he took the fight to them by bombing Afghanistan on Oct. 7. The Iraq war was no unnecessary as much as you'd like it to be. Unfortunately, another prediction has come true that we were warned about. Obama is going to cut and run from Iraq. He's doing it without declaring victory. He complained about the surge, said it was doomed to failure and was proven wrong, yet is still willing to cut and run.

Again, the tax cuts were across the board. You can't seem to bring yourself to say that. You prefer to run with your class warfare argument that the media and socialist Democrats continue to spew. Facts are facts.

I can agree that part of the housing mess was greed. Unfortunately, the greedy players in this (Barney Frank and Christopher Dodd) are two of those players and they now are setting the supposed recovery in motion. I believe that this is also known as CYA.

You can't debunk anything on here. They are opinions of yours and opinions of mine. Unless one of us changes, nothign has been debunked and nobody has been beaten. I know you like to think so, but the day a Socialist Democrat beats me is nowhere in sight regardless of how many times they try to say that they have. I don't come here expecting to beat you. You're just another out of touch with reality Socialist Democrat that follows like sheep whatever he's told by the looney left.

Communications guru said...

1. Say you. For most people, I would give the benefit of the doubt, but somebody as dishonest as you who used deceit to post as someone else I do not believe any thing you say. If I didn’t have the ability “to deal with someone else having a different opinion” you would not be posting here.

2. What you really mean is you can’t debunk anything I write.

3. Again, you must not be talking about the Lansing farce. I was there; there were no more than 60 people there.

4. What happened to four?

5. I never said anything about taxes.

6. Wait, you’re trying to blame the recession on President Obama, and he has only been in office for 30 days. Yet, Bush refused to take responsibility for the worst terrorist attack in history after being in office for nine months with plenty of warning. We never should have invaded Iraq, and Obama is following through with what he promised to do during the campaign; withdraw from Iraq. “Cut and run?” That’s a pure BS talking point. “He's doing it without declaring victory?” No one can even define victory. He could always declare victory like Bush did in 2003 when it was not true.

This time the middle class got tax cuts, and once again, there are no such thing as “socialist Democrats in this country.

The greed was on the part of Wall Street.

Sorry, but I back up my “opinions” with facts and links. I guess you don’t like your baseless opinions debunked.

Not Anonymous said...

1. Another threat of censorship? Your threats mean nothing to me. I expect to be censored from here. You can't handle people that disagree.

2. You're really going to tell me what I mean when you can't keep coherent thoughts?

3. As I said before, I really hope that you're not attempting to count ballots. I'll believe the news before I believe any count you try to give.

4. Not much sense in arguing when you agree with me.

5. Uh huh.

6. Bush wasn't in office for nine months. After an election that lasted over a month, he had to start working on getting a cabinet and staff together. He was inaugurated on January 20. Now, once again, let's do the math slowly so you can try to keep up. February was one month. March, two months. April, three months. May, four months. June five months. July 6 months. August 7 months. Got it? That's August 20 was seven months. 11 days later was the end of August and then 11 days after that planes started crashing.

I've heard the conspiracy theory of the August 6 meeting. Yes, there were attacks talked about, but nobody knew it was going to be airplanes, or which airplanes, or that there would be more than one airplane, or what they were going to do with the airplanes.

Even Usama bin Laden said they'd been planning the attack for five years. He also said that the American people wouldn't last in a war. He was half right. The Socialist Democrats couldn't stand it for long.

As for Iraq, the majority of Congress voted for the war.

Finally, no. Try reading again. I didn't say Obama was to blame for the recession. However, he will be to blame for it being prolonged. Investors don't like his tax and spend policies. The market has dropped 2,000 points since the inauguration and 4,000 points since the election.

Taxes are being increased. Yes, he set up a $13.00 tax decrease. But then you'll have to pay taxes on that $13.00 next year, so the $13.00 will actually be less. At the end of the year, those tax breaks decrease down to $8.00 per week.

Then there's the carbon tax being implemented which will drive up the cost of gasoline, heating fuel, electricity. He's increasing the capital gains tax from 15% to 20% this year and then the end of next year they increase again to 28%. Income tax will increase as well at the end of next year (there's goes that $13.00 which will be $8.00 next year and then an increase the following year).

The top 1% of wage earners pay 40% of the taxes in this country. The top 2% pay 60% of the taxes in this country. The top 5% pay over 70% of the taxes.

I wonder what Obama has done about the warnings he's gotten about an impending attack? Joe Biden warned us that one would happen within six months. There is an Arab that is calling for someone to come across from Mexico with a biological bomb to drop on some major cities. He said that now that Bush is out of office it will be easier to attack us and that they should attack often without let up.

Then there is the letter to Obama from CArlos the Jackal looking for some long locked up terrorist.

Obama just gave $900 billion to Hamas, a terrorist group.

I believe you mentioned something about people that didn't believe that he was born in this country. There are three military men that came out in the past week that are part of a class action lawsuit saying that they cannot follow the orders of Obama because it would be unconstitutional for them to do so from a man that may not have been born in this country.

Now, I was surprised by that. I thought it had been settled. Of course, it could be settled easily enough. All Obama has to do is make available his vaulted birth certificate, but instead he's blocked Hawaii and all hospitals from releasing the information. I find it interesting to say the least that he wants to take over the health care system, make everyone's private records accessible on computer which will mean that it has a much easier road to becoming public, yet he wants his own information regarding his eligibility for office under seal and not allow anyone to see it. I wonder what he has to hide.

As for your "facts", your observations are not facts. I'll trust video tape and the count by the Lansing state journal and several media outlets, most of which are liberal, over some guy that says he wandered around during the Tea Party. I noticed you didn't make any comment about the other 40 cities where this took place. I've just looked up at your comments and you have provided no facts. Only your own biased opinion.

I still have not seen you disprove the NYTimes story that I posted. You just whined about it. I did see where you claimed to be former military. I don't believe it, but I don't care either way. We have the finest military in the world for now. I'm sure that Obama will tear that down too with his 40% reduction in defense.

It must be tough to swallow all that you're force fed by the Socialist Democrats. But then again, you're willing to swallow it all, so maybe it's not so tough for you to believe the constant lies put out by this administration.

Obama has never run a business and it's showing. Several nominees that can't pay the taxes that their party forces on the people. It's not surprising since the Socialist Democrats always say do as I say and not as I do. I wonder Daschle is behind bars yet.

Not Anonymous said...

Here's the story. You can get this off of the al jezeerah website.

A professor from Kuwait, the country liberated from Saddam Hussein's attack squads by the United States in the first Gulf War, has called Islamic terrorists "the most honorable people in the world" and has outlined on Arab television a potential terror attack that would involve smuggling anthrax from Mexico into the U.S. and killing 330,000 people in 60 minutes.
The plan was described by Abdallah Al-Nafisi in a speech that aired on Al-Jazeera television Feb. 2, according to MEMRI, the Middle East Media Research Institute, an independent nonprofit that provides translations and analysis of media reports.
Al-Nafisi, whose school affiliation was not identified, says: "Four pounds of anthrax – in a suitcase this big – carried by a fighter through tunnels from Mexico into the U.S., are guaranteed to kill 330,000 Americans within a single hour, if it is properly spread in population centers there."

He calls the plan "horrifying," but says, "9/11 will be small change in comparison. Am I right?"
The plan is simple to carry out, he emphasized.
"There is no need for airplanes, conspiracies, timings and so on. One person, with the courage to carry four pounds of anthrax, will go to the White House lawn, and will spread this 'confetti' all over them, and then will do these cries of joy. It will turn into a real 'celebration,'" Al-Nafisi said.
He said Americans already are afraid that WMDs will "fall into the hands of 'terrorist' organizations like al-Qaida and others."
The video has been posted online and is available on the MEMRI organization website.
"There is good reason for the Americans' fears, because al-Qaida used to have in the Herat region. ... It had laboratories in north Afghanistan. They have scientists, chemists, and nuclear physicists. They are nothing like they are portrayed by these mercenary journalists – backward Bedouins living in caves. No, no. By no means. This kind of talk can fool only na├»ve people. People who follow such things know that al-Qaida has laboratories, just like Hezbollah," he said.
He cited Hezbollah "laboratories" in Lebanon where the terrorist group makes weapons to use and sell.
After viewing the Al-Nafisi video, Jamie Glazov, author of the new book "United in Hate" explained that "militant Islam needs to kill in order to survive. It can breathe only if it kills."

He noted with President Bush now gone from office, potential threats from the likes of Al-Nafisi are closer to becoming reality.
"In the face of this morbid threat we have the liberal-Left trivializing the danger that confronts us and, worse still, going out of its way to frustrate our society's ability to defend itself," Glazov said. "We have Obama now, who has closed all of our CIA interrogation centers abroad, plans on closing Guantanamo, has appointed people who are intent on frustrating every ability we have to gather information on impending strikes, and the list goes terrifyingly on."
MEMRI said Al-Nafisi also ventured into other areas of comment.
He called terrorists "the most honorable people in the world, the best people in the world," the report said.
He spoke of 300,000 "white militia members" in the U.S. who are "calling to attack the federal government in Washington, and to banish the Arabs, the Jews and the negroes (sic) from the U.S."
Explained Al-Nafisi, "These are racist people. They are called 'rednecks.' The Ku Klux Klan. They are racists."
He suggested that element in the U.S. is considering bombing "nuclear plants."
"May Allah grant them success. … They have plans to bomb the nuclear plant at Lake Michigan. This plant is very important. It supplies electricity to all of North Africa (sic)," Al-Nafisi said.
He also dismissed any idea of discussions between Jews and Arabs.
"Allah states in the Quran that the hostility between us and [the Jews] is eternal. So whoever talks about dialogue – cut off his tongue! What dialogue are they talking about?! There is no room for dialogue. Allah said that our hostility towards the Jews is eternal, and then along comes someone and talks about brotherhood and so on ... This contradicts the Quran. Anyone who contradicts the Quran is an infidel," he said.
As part of his effort to further Arab interests, he also advocated threats against journalists.
"There are voices expressing doubts about the leaders of the resistance. We must confront these [journalists], and prevent them from continuing this, even if it means calling them over the phone, and saying to them: 'Do not repeat these despicable things in your columns or your articles, or else we will take the following measures against you.' We must resort to pressure with these people," he said.

Communications guru said...

1. No. I would never censor you because you do more for my side. How do you reach these ridiculous conclusions if yours?

2. What you really mean is you can’t debunk anything I write.

3. I was there. Were you?

4. ?

5. It was more than seven months, so I guess we were both wrong.. But here’s a fact you can’t deny: It occurred on his watch, like an unnecessary war and the worst recession since the Great Depression.

Conspiracy theory of Aug. 6? The Bush Administration failed. Here is an excerpt from the President’s PDB:
The following is the text of an item from the Presidential Daily Brief received by President George W. Bush on August 6, 2001. Redacted material is indicated by brackets.

Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US
Clandestine, foreign government, and media reports indicate Bin Ladin since 1997 has wanted to conduct terrorist attacks in the US. Bin Ladin implied in US television interviews in 1997 and 1998 that his followers would follow the example of World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef and "bring the fighting to America." Al-Qa'ida members--including some who are US citizens--have resided in or traveled to the US for years, and the group apparently maintains a support structure that could aid attacks. We have not been able to corroborate some of the more sensational threat reporting, such as that from a [--] service in 1998 saying that Bin Ladin wanted to hijack a US aircraft to gain the release of "Blind Shaykh" 'Umar 'Abd al-Rahman and other US-held extremists.
Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.”

I’m sure you’re going to claim that because the text said, “We have not been able to corroborate some of the more sensational threat reporting,” but Bush used the debunked “Yellow cake” claim to invade Iraq.

“He also said that the American people wouldn't last in a war?” Well, we are still in Afghanistan, and that is the country that harbored and aided the terrorists who attacked the US: not Iraq. Second, there is no such thing as “socialist Democrats” in this country. What’s even more ironic is that it will never be the Republicans who pushed this war or their family who will ever fight in these wars they are so hot for, but working class Democrats like me.

You are right, the majority of Congress voted for the war, but they learned a valuable lesson: never trust Bush.

Of course Wall Street doesn’t like the President’s plan. There is oversight, and they will not be able to bilk the American people as easily as before.

I have no problem with the pollution tax. The effects of burning fossil fuels and global Warming and climate change are issues that should have been addressed years ago. I already paid more than $4 for a gallon of gas under Bush, and although it hurt, I survived.

The top 5 percent also make the most money, so they pay the most taxes. That’s jut logic. The fat is they pay a smaller percentage of their income in taxes. Warren Buffett, the third-richest man in the world, says the US tax system allows him to pay a lower rate than his secretary and his cleaner, according to the NYT.

I sure did say there are idiots out there that claim the president was not born in this country, and how times has it been debunked? I’m a military man, and I say he is the President, and that’s why he has such support in the military. These three guys should be court-martialed for disobeying a lawful order. The simple fact is any one can file a lawsuit for the price of a filing fee, but they will continue to go nowhere.

He has made his birth certificate available. How many times does he, and I, have to debunk this bullshit?

Once again, I was there, you were not. Give a link to the video you claim proves there were 250 people there. Most of the media is conservative by the way, but they do their best to be unbiased.

I didn’t see a link to any NYT article. You haven’t proved your claim that my estimate of the crowd at the Lansing farce was wrong, which is what this thread is actually about.

Wow, I’m wounded that some anonymous coward is disparaging my military service. I’m so used to the rightwing claims of how they support the troops but nothing else; just a slogan.

I think the president should take a serious look at downsizing the military. The last guy who cut the military was George HW Bush.

Once again, there is no such thing as “socialist Democrats” in this country, and that’s just a GOP talking point. I am a proud liberal Democrat, and no one thinks for me. As a former reporter in Livingston County, I had the rare opportunity to see Republicans up close and personal.

I wonder why Bush, Cheney and Rove are not behind bars.

Not Anonymous said...

Very good. Thank you for proving my point. Here's your copy of the August 6 pdf again:

Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US
Clandestine, foreign government, and media reports indicate Bin Ladin since 1997 has wanted to conduct terrorist attacks in the US. Bin Ladin implied in US television interviews in 1997 and 1998 that his followers would follow the example of World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef and "bring the fighting to America." Al-Qa'ida members--including some who are US citizens--have resided in or traveled to the US for years, and the group apparently maintains a support structure that could aid attacks. We have not been able to corroborate some of the more sensational threat reporting, such as that from a [--] service in 1998 saying that Bin Ladin wanted to hijack a US aircraft to gain the release of "Blind Shaykh" 'Umar 'Abd al-Rahman and other US-held extremists.
Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.”

Now, read back over it again and show me where there is evidence that they say which airports, which planes, which day or days it would happen, and that it was going to crash it (them) into buildings and which buildings. There is still a question of whether the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania was headed for the White House or the Capitol building.

Yes, the event happened on Bush's watch much to Clinton's chagrin. He said afterward that he wished it had happened while he was President so he could look as good as Bush did in the days following the attack.

It is beyond silly to blame Bush for the attacks. You might as well start saying that it was an inside job by the Bush White House and join the rest of the crazies.

2. I wish I could read minds as well as you. I never pretend to know what another means when they say something. I'm not that arrogant.

3. Thank you for asking. It's the first time that you have asked if I actually witnessed something after making your accusations. Yes, I was there. I was disappointed in the crowd, but I didn't count them. I relied on the count from the news, which always undershoots Republican numbers and overshoots Socialist Democrat numbers.

As for the Yellow Cake, Joe Wilson lied. Enough said about that.

If there was oversight, why did they lose $78 billion in TARP 1? Oversight is a joke. It's more of a coverup.

Why should someone that has more have to pay more? That's class envy and class warfare. Everyone has the opportunity for growth in this country. You're guaranteed Life (unless you're not born yet), Liberty (but freedom is disappearing more and more), and the pursuit of happiness. It doesn't guarantee happiness, it guarantees that you can pursue it.

People should not be punished for being successful. You did however, make the argument for the fair tax. Those that have more, and spend more, pay more under the fair tax. So thank you for proving that the fair tax is fairer for all.

As for the comment that Republicans don't have people fighting, the military votes Republican in far greater numbers than they do Democrats.

Let's see, Barack Obama didn't serve. George Bush did serve. Bill Clinton dodged the draft and didn't serve. George H. W. Bush was a hero in the service. Ronald Reagan was legally blind, but still served and achieved the rank of Captain. Jimmy Carter served. So of the last six Presidents, we have three Republicans that served, and one Democrat. I know nothing of Obama's thoughts of serving, but we do know that Clinton went out of his way to not serve.

Hawaii is different than most states on their birth certificates. There is a vaulted birth certificate which is the official one. That one Obama will not allow released. I wonder why.

I have never been a big one on this birth certificate. I assumed that the DNC had vetted Obama before making him their nominee and never put much stock in this. However, I've since learned that the DNC didn't vet him.

There were changes in the law regarding the citizenship eligibility. If you follow those changes, there is sufficient questions created.

In each of the lawsuits that have been refused to be heard, it's not due to issue, but instead the rulings are based on "standing". They are saying that some of these people don't have standing.

If this is a problem for Obama, I do hope that they court martial these guys. That will force the vaulted certificate into the court room. Obama will have to release it or they can't find the servicemen guilty. So I agree, court-martial them.

The link to the NYTimes article was provided. You only need to read your own blog and find it. It's there.

As for the reports on the news programs you can look them up. Foxnews.com, cnn.com, msnbc.com, abc.com. Take your pick. Or you can look in the Lansing State Journal from the day after the Tea Party. Their website is a tough one. It's www.lsj.com.

There is a simple reason for Bush, Cheney and Rove not being in jail. They have been charged with nothing.

In the case of Bush and Cheney, I would never agree to any President being jailed or even put on trial. The Vice President might be different. I thought that Spiro Agnew should have been jailed. I think he was nailed for tax evasion, but I don't remember.

I would never have agreed to Bill Clinton being jailed for perjury nor obstruction of justice which he paid steep fines for and the loss of his law license. But never a public trial or jail. President Ford did the right thing by pardoning Richard Nixon.

A President does what he thinks is best to protect this country. George Bush is the greatest one that we've had in our lifetimes when it comes to that perameter. Am I concerned that telephone calls were monitored that came into this country or went out of this country? No. There are people that want to kill us. This is not a conventional war. These terrorists want to kill Americans. Not uniformed Americans. They want to kill all Americans. So I'm okay with any President monitoring phone calls to and from foreign countries. Now, if they are listening to me speak on the phone to my family members that live in the next town, that's wrong.

It is not a good thing to have any President thrown in jail. We have the impeachment process to remove them office. ONce out, the new President, regardless of who he is, regardless of which party it is, should pardon the former President of everything leading up to his last day in office. After that, if he steals a candy bar from a convenience store, the county jail is good for him.

The VP, I haven't thought alot about. In Bidens case, it might help Obama if he jailed Biden just to keep his mouth shut. He's in danger of surpassing Al Gore and Dan Quayle for stupid things said as VP, and it's only been a month!

I don't know about who downsized the military the most. Normally, I'd take your word for it that Bush the first reduced the military, but because it's you saying it, I'll have to look it up. I do know that Clinton reduced the military and more importantly reduced the on the ground intelligence and went more with technology intelligence and it hurt us badly.

As for your personal story. Stick to it. I don't care about your personal story and from the things you say, and the way you write, I don't believe you were in the military and I don't believe that you were ever a reporter. You may have been, but I don't believe it. If you were a reporter, it doesn't say much for the journalism industry.

I don't think I've heard anyone else call the Democrats Socialist Democrats. It's something that I've named them on my own due to the out of control spending, the exhorbitant taxes and the lack of candor and the poor experience that is showing more and more in this administration.

Joe the Plumber had it right. More right than we ever suspected about Obama being a socialist. Probably more than Joe thought because when Obama said "spread the wealth" all Joe said was "that sounds like socialism to me."

Your talking points that you constantly bring out are the same things we hear in the liberal media nearly word for word. So yes, you are following in lockstep with the Socialist Democrat talking points.

There is a distinct difference here. Republicans believe that people know better how to run their own lives. Democrats believe that only government can make people successful by providing for them.

Under the Republican philosophy, people go out and work to make themselves successful. Under the Democrat philosophy, they take what others earn and provide to those that refuse to go out and try to better themselves. So Socialist Democrats is a more accurate description of the extreme left. There are very few Conservative Democrats left. Maybe 7. The rest are Socialist Democrats and soon to be just plain old Socialists.

Communications guru said...

Put this trash on your own blog. How many times do I have to waste my time and debunk it, or is that your plan?

How about: “Bin Ladin wanted to hijack a US aircraft” or “FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.”

I don’t expect you or Bush to accept responsibility, but he failed.

“Clinton said he wished it had happened while he was President?” That is pure BS.

I don’t understand this: It happened on your watch, but it’s not your fault, and you still refuse to take responsibility for it. He thinks he made no mistakes in his Presidency. I don’t believe that, or the ridiculous conspiracy theory.

2. What you really mean is you can’t debunk anything I write.

3. Great, you were there. I saw nothing else to do but count people. I stand by my estimate. I’m still waiting for the links to the video that proves your 250 estimate. Once again, there are no “Socialist Democrats” in this country, and that is a GOP talking point.

Joe Wilson lied? How is that possible when he was right and Bush was wrong?

No one is saying someone that has more has to pay more, but they have to pay their fair share. So you don’t believe Warren Buffett? Do you want the link again?

Sorry, the military does not vote Republican in far greater numbers than they do for Democrats. That is simply a myth.

Bush got out of Vietnam by getting a plush, coveted spot in the National Guard because of his father, and he never completed it In those days - and until 2003 - the guard rarely deployed to a combat zone. Bill Clinton did not believe in the Vietnam War, like many draft age males at the time, and refused to serve. He certainly could have been prosecuted, but he stood up to take the consequences.

The fact is biggest cheerleaders for the invasion of Iraq went out of their way to get out of serving. Rush Limpdick, anal cyst; George Will, student deferment; Pat Buchanan, bad knee; Newt Gingrich, ?; Mitch McConnell, did not serve; Trent Lott, avoided the draft; John Boehner, did not serve; Rudy Giuliani, did not serve; Dick Cheney, several deferments; John Ashcroft , did not serve; Karl Rove, avoided the draft. I could go on.

The birth certificate is a non-issue.

Sorry, I looked at all 20 comments, and I simply do not see a link to a NYT article. I read the report on the LSJ. I don’t agree. You are the one claming all this video was shot, so you provide it to prove your false claim. I was there, so I don’t have to look at any video. Your reluctance to produce the links simply means you can’t.

They should be charged with war crimes, but Rove is in contempt of Congress.

Bill Clinton paid a penalty after the expensive witch-hunt. Ford was wrong, and he paid the price for that fishy deal in the 1976 election.

Bush should be tried as a war criminal because he is. We prosecuted the Japanese as war criminals after WWII for the same things Bush allowed and authorized. The fact is he will never be held responsible.

George HW Bush reduced the military the most, but I don’t necessarily believe that’s a bad thing.

As for my “personal story” I will stick to it because its true, and I don’t care if some anonymous coward believes it or not.

Off all the ridiculous things you have said this is the most outrageous: you haven’t “heard anyone else call the Democrats Socialist Democrats?” Unbelievable. I thought you said were at the Lansing farce on Friday?

Who cares what this Wurzelbacher guy says? First, he’s not even a plumber. Once again, there is no such thing as “Socialist Democrats” in this country, and I wish I was getting talking points. I wouldn’t waste so much time debating with a closed mind.

Yes, there is a distinct difference here. Republicans are the bankrupt party of Wall Street, and the Democrats are the party of Main Street.

Not Anonymous said...

Once again. I don't have a blog.

Again, you didn't show that he wanted planes hijacked and flown into buildings. Of course he wanted to attack us. He has for many years. I don't blame Bush for the attack and never will. He didn't fly one plane, he didn't crash one plane. The terrorists did.

Yes, Clinton and his people complained that we were attacked on Bush's watch, not on his. As I've said repeatedly, you can't handle the truth and the facts. So you ignore them.

Look up the facts on Joe Wilson. You won't admit it, but you'll see it.

What you really mean is "I'm too stupid to gather the facts and information and consider them when they go against my beliefs, so I'll claim I've debunked everything that I disagree with when in fact I just hope this guy will go away."

The ones that aren't paying their fair share are the ones that don't pay but still get a "refund" of something that they've never paid. I believe we call that welfare. Taking money from others to give to those that don't contribute. Another term is "Socialism". Well, how about that. You're advocating socialism while denying that you're a Socialist Democrat.

You're going to use yourself as a source for how the military votes? That's priceless.

Legal deferments. Some for health, some for education. I'll be no Socialist Democrats did that. Yet you advocate a guy that breaks the law and dodges the draft. Sounds pretty self serving to me.

The only NYTimes article that I posted was the one on the Clinton administration forcing mortgage lenders to open up more for those that couldn't afford to pay back. I don't think that I saw anything about attendance in the NYTimes on the Tea Party's across the country.

I thought you said you didn't hear any of the goings on in Lansing. Just people milling about. I guess you weren't really there. I have been calling Democrats "Socialist Democrats" for about two weeks. Since the spending bill came out that wasn't read. But if others are calling Obama a terrorist or a socialist, then I can't disagree with them because he is what he is. A terrorist in the White House that is a Socialist.

As for Joe the Plumber, I don't care if he's a plumber or not. HIs words spoken were the truth and they are being revealed as more and more truthful as each day goes on. It's predictable of you to discount someone because of their station in life rather than their words, but then complain about someone because they earn too much money.

Communications guru said...

Once again, with your record of deceit I don’t believe anything you say. Put this garbage on your blog.

It doesn’t take a genius to put the two together. I know that disqualifies Bush, but Rice is relatively intelligent. The attack occurred on Bush’s watch, not Clinton’s watch. Who is disputing that? You claimed Clinton said “that he wished it (9/11) had happened while he was President so he could look as good as Bush did in the days following the attack.” I do not believe that for one second, and if it’s a fact then prove it.

Joe Wilson was right on the Yellow Cake. The 16 words in Bush’s State of the Union speech that Iraq was trying to buy yellow cake were not true. Are you denying that?

No, what I mean is when I make a claim I back it up, but when you make one you apparently expect me to back it up. It doesn’t work like that.

I have no problem with a safety net, and if you want to call it welfare that’s fine. I just believe that those of us that are fortunate should look out for those in need. But the fact is we are not talking about welfare or refunds for those who supposedly do not pay taxes - which is not true - it’s about tax cuts going to the middle class instead of the upper 1 percent for a change. Once again; do you not agree with Warren Buffett, the third-richest man in the world? Here is the link again:

Once again, there is no such thing as a “Socialist Democrat: in this country and that’s simply a GOP talking point. I am a liberal Democrat.

No, I’m using the Open Secrets as my source for “how the military votes.”

Once again, there is no such thing as a “Socialist Democrat: in this country and that’s simply a GOP talking point. I have a lot more respect for a person who stands up for what they believe in over a guy who lets his daddy get him out of something because of his power and influence. Then that same person who took advantage of that power sends other people less fortunate to die in an unnecessary war.

I’m still waiting for the NYT link. You made the unbelievable claim that, “I don't think I've heard anyone else call the Democrats Socialist Democrats.” That has to be the biggest lie you have ever told, and if you went to the Lansing farce on Friday like you claim then you would have seen it written on numerous signs.

“A terrorist in the White House that is a Socialist?” You can‘t possibly be that stupid, can you?

Wurzelbacher’s opinion is just one more, uninformed opinion based on nothing but emotions, blind ideology and ignorance, and it’s based on nothing. They guy isn’t even what he says he is.

Not Anonymous said...

Warren Buffets income is $100,000 per year. He paid 17% taxes. Your hero is taking advantage of investment options that keep his taxes low.

The attack was on Bush's watch (as I said over and over again) but it's not Bush's fault. It's the terrorists that are to blame. To say it's Bush's fault is to say that it's Clinton's fault for the 1993 WTC attack, and Waco was his fault, the Khobar Towers was his fault, as was the attack on the USS Cole.

The terrorists committed the atrocities. Clinton did nothing to stop them so they kept happening. 8 times during his Presidency we were attacked. The terrorists attacked us just once under Bush. Why? Because he immediately took them to task. No attacks since. But, get your gas masks out. Another attack is coming. The terrorists are emboldened by Obama's election. I noticed you made no comment about the story from Al Jazeerah that I posted. It's coming.

People that have worked hard are not fortunate. They worked hard to earn what they have. The others just haven't worked that hard and are happy wallowing in poverty.

You really should check the records on Bush. Nobody got him out of service. The Guard operates on a point system. You must collect a certain number of points. He did. He did it early. He also requested to be sent to Vietnam.

It's unbelievable that you want to reargue George Bush and his service. Bush is no longer President. He's retired. You lost twice. Get over it. That eight years has passed.

The present is that there is no confidence in the Obama economic plan. The Dow is down another near 300 points today. People are hoarding their money because they know this guy is destroying the country.

God help us when we're attacked again. If we survive the attack, we then have to deal with the fallout in the economy. Obama is on a path to destroy this country and he's being helped along by the sheeple in the Socialist Democrat party.

ka_Dargo_Hussein said...

The line about Bush being our greatest President was priceless. You are truly a mewling, partisan, Bush butt-boy.

Communications guru said...

Mr. Warren Buffet is not my hero, but I certainly respect him. I have no idea where you got that figure. He said he “was taxed at 17.7 per cent on the $46 million he made last year.” He also said “without trying to avoid paying higher taxes.” There you go again making stuff up.

It’s both Bush’s responsibility, and when you consider he ignored a warning, its also his fault. He still refuses to acknowledge any responsibility. It was Clinton’s responsibility, but at least he brought these responsible to justice. Waco was Vernon Howell’s fault.

Are you honestly trying to claim there were no terrorist attacks after 9/11? What do you call U.S. civilians killed in Iraq? The worst attack on U.S. soil occurred on Bush’s watch. You are correct, I certainty did not comment on the story in Al Jazeerah, and I see no reason to. First you’re pulling for Obama to fail and the country to fall into a depression, and now you’re pulling for an attack on the U.S. I do not believe it will happen, and by the remote chance it did, it will be on a very small scale. The fact is Bush’s polices crated more terrorists than were killed.

Are you kidding? Do have any idea how hard it was to get into the National Guard in the ‘60s and early ‘70s” Bush requested to go to Vietnams? Are you serious? You’re following the GOP strategy of “if you’re going to tell a lie, tell a big one.”

Once again, there is no such thing as “socialist Democrats” in this country; it’s simply a GOP talking point. Bush has retired, but we are going to live with the mess he caused and left President Obama for some time.

There will be no attack, sorry. Keep hoping, and if there were, we would survive. This country survived eight years of one of the worst presidents in history, it can survive anything.

Not Anonymous said...

The top tax rate is 36% and Buffet only paid 17.7% in taxes? Gee, I wonder how that happened. It's easy to find out Buffet's income. There's this thing called google. If you type in Warren Buffet's income, you'll be amazed at all of the websites that come up with his information.

Civilians attacked and killed in Iraq during a war is called a war casualty. It's not a terrorist attack. I know you like to play word games, but you can't find one terrorist attack on our soil since September 11, 2001. You can find attempts, but they were thwarted by the Bush Administration.

How hard it was to get into the guard? Let's see, I came of age in the early 70's and had the choice of enlisting in any service, or waiting to be drafted. The one that many of my friends chose were the guard thinking they wouldn't go to Vietnam, yet still not be drafted.

It's amazing how little you know. You keep asking me things that I've said and asking if I'm serious. Do you hide your head in the sand all of the time? I'll bet you think that Dan Rather wasn't aware that documents were forged.

I guess the best thing to do is to again, point you to google and look things up and try to learn something. But I fear that you'll take the easy way out and say it's my fault you're stupid because I didn't provide you with a link.

I hope you're right that there won't be an attack, but Americans already know that Obama won't have the balls to immediately send troops to wipe out the enemy that attacks us and so do the terrorists.

You're wrong. I'm pulling for Obama's tax increases and spending shows to fail. I'm praying he has four years of boring political posturing but accomplishes nothing that will hurt this country. Thus far, the answer to my prayers is "no". He's already spent more money than we've spent since the beginning of this country until he took over as President.

I am also not hoping for this country to fall into a depression. I seriously doubt it will. In fact, I'll even make a prediction. If Obama comes out and says "we're going to table health care for a year or two until we get this economy on solid footing" then this economy will start a good size turn around. Not a great one, but a good one.

If he continues to overreach, this economy will be hard pressed to have any significant recovery in the next two years. Some recovery yes, but significant, no.

I would be surprised if the economy grows more than 2% this year and I'd even be surprised if it grows that much unless he actually does something to put a stop to the outrageous spending, the oppressive taxes and the talk of more spending as far as the eye can see.

You don't stimulate an economy by taxing and spending. You stimulate an economy by allowing the American people to do what they do best. Work. The sad thing is that many employers won't hire as long as they see more taxes coming towards them and more spending coming from government. For a very good example, look at Michigan. We are the slum of the United States right now and it's due to uncontrolled spending and higher taxes.

I know you don't agree, but I have never seen you get anything correct. You just play the blame game and rewrite history at every opportunity.

Communications guru said...

Like Warren Buffet said, he was taxed at 17.7 per cent on the $46 million he made last year without trying to avoid paying higher taxes, and his secretary paid a higher percentage. That's why we need to get rid of the tax cuts for the richest 1 percent like Mr. Buffet and give a middle class tax break like President Obama is doing.

Civilians kidnapped and beheaded is a terrorist attack in my opinion. It's funny, we have the worst attack on U.S. soil in the history of this country on Bush's watch, and because we don't have another one he did a good job? That's ridiculous. It should be another 200 years or so before another attack like that should occur.
Yes, it was hard to get into the National Guard during the Vietnam War. "Since only a handful of National Guard and Reserve units were sent to Vietnam, enlistment in the Guard or the Reserves became a favored means of draft avoidance," (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscription_in_the_United_States.
Do you have anything to back up your claim about your alleged personal story?
When you make outrageous claims, you never, ever back them up with any facts, and with your record of dishonesty and deceit, unless it's in black and white from a reliable source, I'm not buying it.
No, I guess the best thing for you to do is provide a link to back up your claim. If you continue to refuse, I take it as you can't provide one.
Yes, unlike you I hope there will not be an attack, and I don't believe there will be another one, especially on the scale of losing 3,000 people; I'll guarantee that one. But you keep on hoping for an attack and keep your fingers crossed. What President Obama will do is send troops to attack the people who attacked us, not fit evidence to make a case for invading a country that had nothing to do with the attack.
You know what? We tried it your way and look where it got us. It would be insane to do the same things that got us into this mess to try and fix it.

Not Anonymous said...

My personal story? The only information I gave was that I came of age during the early 70's and that I had a choice of enlisting, or waiting for the draft. You want more? Keep wanting. I don't put personal identifying information on the internet. There are too many perverts and others up to no good on the internet. You're always phishing for personal information. You're not getting it. The harder you try, the more I wonder about your intentions. Since I have children and grandchildren, I'd never give information out to the likes of you.

If you doubt that people had a choice between enlisting or waiting to see how their number came up in the lottery, then you should look it up. I'm not doing your work for you.

You cannot be trusted.

Communications guru said...

No, I don't want more, and I don't give a crap who you are. You made the false claim that it was easy to get into the National Guard during the Vietnam War and the draft. I asked you to prove it, and I also gave you proof to back up my claim. I'm still waiting for you to provide it proof of your false claim.

I'm not asking you do my work for me; I'm asking you to back up your wild claims. I cannot be trusted? I'm not hiding like you are, and I have never used deceit like you to post as someone else.

You cannot be trusted.

Hershblogger said...

OK, here you go.

You started by saying there were 60 people at most, now you're up to 70.

Actually, you are quite wrong. The Freep pointed out there were between 200 and 250. The Capitol Commission put it at 300.

An actual count shows a bare minimum of 193. As documented here: Michigan Tea Party turnout

Your insistence on the lower number is pathetic, but hey, it's your credibility.

Not Anonymous said...


I followed your link and expanded the picture. Excellent. I saw that you mentioned CG in there but hope you didn't go to that trouble of numbering each person in view just because of him. His credibility was shot long ago, but you did throw the dirt on the grave.

I've added your blog to my list of blogs that I follow. Hope you don't mind.

Good job!

Communications guru said...

It is my credibility, Mr. Hershberger, and that’s why I am standing by my estimate. I was there, and I’m not going to change what I saw with my own two eyes just to conform to what you claim were there. The fact is I left my office in the Farnum Building at around 12:10 p.m. and I saw at a max of 70 people milling around. I stayed until approximately 12:30. I find it hard to believe as many people you claim were there just disappeared in 10 minutes. I have no idea where or how those numbers were reached, but that was not how many were there when I arrived. I have never heard of the “Capitol Commission.”

You can also tell Mr. Drolet that he is either lying or mistaken because I never went in the Capitol on Friday, nor did I go to the House Office Building because I do not work there.

Hershblogger said...

Um, the question here would be, "What's your explanation of the picture?" That's the point about your credibility, and the point you are not addressing.

The picture was taken at 12:23PM, Eastern Standard.

What you saw with your own two eyes could at best be described as an estimate. I made an estimate too. I was wrong. I admitted it based on the evidence. Mine was off by a factor of 2, yours is demonstrated to be off by a factor of 4. Standing by it is not about facts, then, it is simply an assertion of your preference. Which would be fine, except you keep contending it is fact.

It's OK you find it hard to believe, but so what? How do explain the actual count in my picture, which is at least 3 times your first guess and almost 3 times your revised guess? What is your refutation of the Freep reporter, whose estimate is 4 times your guess and agrees with the fact that my picture doesn't include everyone?

Mr. Drolet's most important point was defending your claim that you were there.

Communications guru said...

I would say you were very liberal with your counting. It appears you counted people coming and going from the Capitol, and it even looks like you counted some of the war protestors. Certainly a far cry from 300. Your photo is also an estimate. I never said my count wasn’t an estimate. But I’ll concede the point, and I’ll give you credit for 150. Make sure you do the same thing you did for me to other bloggers like Wendy Day so they can change their claims.

Mr. Drolet was wrong, and he is simply lying. But we saw that in his failed recall scam. I didn’t know my being there was in dispute.

Hershblogger said...

Repeated insistence on a number, going out of your way to post it on other blogs as a taunt at least twice, and using it as some sort of triumphal denigration of the people you couldn't even count straight: Well, that moves it beyond well beyond "estimate." You insisted you were certain. Over and over.

In any case, I'm really not interested in what credit you'll give me. The turnout question is settled, and I don't care if you ever admit you were wrong. I just think it useful for people to be aware that you've been promoting your prejudice as if it meant something.

The photo is not an estimate. I was quite careful not to be liberal in my counting, including leaving several probables as question marks. I even noted 2 possible war protesters and eliminated them from my posted count.

That's 2 that I already noted. I suppose you get to subtract 43 more and pretend there are no people outside the photo because of your convincing crowd estimation capabilities.

Finally, of course your presence was in question given an estimate that was off by 400%.

Communications guru said...

It was exactly twice, and it did it to set the record straight. Both you and Day inflated the numbers. When I see a rightwing lie, I will call you out on it. I know what I saw, but I am willing to make a correction when shown I was wrong; and did so.

I admitted I got the estimate wrong and fixed it. When are you going to do the same?

Hershblogger said...

Well, I said at least because I can't follow you around everywhere.

You set the record straight by dividing the attendance by 4?

You still insist on a rightwing lie as the cause of your error?

I did not inflate the numbers as I have proven.

You call more than doubling your "fact" correcting the record, but it still leaves you a hundred people short of reality.

I already did admit my estimate of 120 was wrong.

ka_Dargo_Hussein said...

Who gives a shit? It was a bullshit stunt to fool dumbfucks into equating the failing economy with Obama's policies instead of leaving them at the feet of the Dumbfuck in Chief...dubya.

Give the Republi-bots an out for their irresponsibility and they will take it every time.

Communications guru said...

The two extremist rightwing blogs I posted on have not corrected their inflated numbers. When are you going to ask them to change their inflated numbers? I made an estimation; not an error.

Communications guru said...

You’re right, Dargo. He wants to hassle me about an estimation of the numbers - only with me not the rightwing tools - but ignores the ridiculous and inappropriate notion of a tea party when the majority of Americans support the plan, ignores who got us into this mess and they were silent when Bush turned a surplus into a deficit with an unnecessary war.