It's Us and Dem. Other networks use "dem" in contrast with GOP regularly now too.
Fauxtard5000 | 01.10.07 - 4:41 pm | #

How fascists support the troops:
"Note that an increase in embeds doesn’t necessarily require an increase in overall troop strength. We’ve got lots of soldiers sitting on megabases all over Iraq. They should be out and about, some of them embedded, others just moving around, tracking the terrorists, hunting them down. I don’t know how many guys and gals are sitting in air-conditioned quarters and drinking designer coffee, but it’s a substantial number. Enough of that."
http:// article.nationalreview.co...jE0Y2FkNmM0MTE=
irritated | 01.10.07 - 4:55 pm | #

Yes. Let us listen to the democrats. How about starting with the new Speaker?

May 30th, 2004:

Tim Russert: "What would you do? What would you do in Iraq today right now?"

Pelosi: "What I would do is, and what I think our country must do in Iraq is take an assessment of where we are, and there has to be a leveling with the American people and with Congress as to what's really happening there. It's very hard to say what you would do. We need more troops on the ground."

Russert: "Would you send more American troops in order to stabilize the situation?"

Pelosi: "Yes."
Bob | 01.10.07 - 5:15 pm | #

Brownback Comments on Troop Surge
Sen. Brownback's Office, January 10, 2007

U.S. Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) today commented on President Bush’s proposal to increase the number of troops deployed to Iraq.

“I do not believe that sending more troops to Iraq is the answer,” said Brownback. “Iraq requires a political rather than a military solution. In the last two days, I have met with Prime Minister Maliki, with two deputy presidents and the president of the Kurdish region. I came away from these meetings convinced that the United States should not increase its involvement until Sunnis and Shi'a are more willing to cooperate with each other instead of shooting at each other.”

During a two day visit to Iraq, Brownback met with several Iraqi and U.S. officials, including U.S. Generals Raymond Odierno and George Casey, Jr., and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad.

Brownback continued, “The Kurdish leadership does not wish to get in the middle of a sectarian fight between the Sunni and Shi’a, and the United States should not either. Instead of surging troops, we must press the Iraqi government to reach a political solution. We cannot achieve a political solution while a military solution is imposed. The best way to reach a democratic Iraq is to empower the Iraqis to take responsibility for their own nation building.”

-R | 01.10.07 - 5:15 pm | #

Bob, too bad we didn't listen back in '04, the war might have been won already!
irritated | 01.10.07 - 5:20 pm | #

Is this the same b*** who was jerking off when he denied pardons down in TX??

"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush was upset after watching the video of Saddam Hussein's execution, comparing it to how he felt after seeing the photographs of Iraqi prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib, White House officials said Wednesday."

Oh, I get it, they are just lying.
irritated | 01.10.07 - 5:22 pm | #

I know. Nancy is just like John F.

"I was for the increase in troops before I was against it"
Bob | 01.10.07 - 5:35 pm | #

Bob | 01.10.07 - 5:35 pm | #

Smart people evaluate new info and make their decisions...unlike you repugs that keep your head buried firmly in your ass!
kdog | 01.10.07 - 5:40 pm | #

"I was for the increase in troops before I was against it"

Gee, nothing could have changed in Iraq and our knowledge of how the war was being mismanaged by the administration since 2004, could it? I mean, otherwise Bob's comment would be idiotic, wouldn't it?

Oh, wait...yes, things did change, and Bob's comment IS idiotic!

I just love these trolls that don't have the brains to see past the surface of any issue.
Stosh | 01.10.07 - 5:43 pm | #

tks for clearing that up... KDOG

I only thought she was saying it now(Tight faced Pelosi) because Bush is for it now. And that she thinks calling for troop withdrawls would help them win the Presidencey in 08.

I am sure Nancy has studied this really deeply.
myze | 01.10.07 - 5:45 pm | #

"How stupid are these people that write for this site ??"

A whole quantum level less stupid than the people who can only criticize spelling errors, and don't comment on the actual topic of the thread. That is as stupid as it gets.
Stosh | 01.10.07 - 5:46 pm | #

"I am sure Nancy has studied this really deeply."

She's obviously studied it more deeply than you have.
Stosh | 01.10.07 - 5:48 pm | #

Has anyone here besides me read the Iraq Study Group Report? I got it out of the library and I have to say that it is obviously a well researched report. The problem is that it is a completely top down analysis and does not consider at all the reasons that individual Iraqi's have for killing each other. SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE Nancy Pelosi has probably realized that the escalation in violence is being caused by the US policy of giving away guns and shooting lessons to any guy who shows up.

What kind of moron came up with a strategy for ending an escalation of violence by giving away guns and training...

Also, don't post under different names so you can agree with yourself, bootstrapping just doesn't work. If you don't believe me, grab onto your bootstraps and try to pick yourself up, I'll wait.
irritated | 01.10.07 - 6:01 pm | #

It's hard to believe the continuing impoliteness shown to Democrats. There was also the interruption of Sen. Nelson this afternoon in order to see a shot of the Oval Office or some such.
This is the Sampson complex.. pulling down the organization from the inside.
The sooner the implosion, the better!
David E Toronto | 01.10.07 - 6:02 pm | #

Shep isn't as good as some think. Today proved it. He's all about Shep.
brian | 01.10.07 - 6:02 pm | #

What Donna should do is go back and read all those newspuppy threads where all you folks said Shep was a liberal.

I am so confused....
Bob | 01.10.07 - 6:08 pm | #

I used to look at Smith as one of the only tolerable ones on Fox. I probably got that impression during Katrina coverage though, when he seemed to care about ALL the people effected despite the fact that there were "Dems" down there too. But lately that whole good ol' frat boy schtick is getting harder and harder to stomach. The almost constant "aren't I cute?" twinkle in the eye is just kind of silly for a grown man who is supposed to be a professional.
Larry | 01.10.07 - 6:12 pm | #

"all you folks said Shep was a liberal."

All? Really?

"I am so confused...."

Yep.
Stosh | 01.10.07 - 6:19 pm | #

Thank god for Fox "New" they have done more to discredit Neo-Conservatism, George Bush and the right-wing than any "left-wing" media could ever hope to do. They are so brazen in their propaganda, anyone with half a brain figures out at some point how full of shit the entire right wing is. Thank you Fox for making Bush's numbers drop so low!
dan | 01.10.07 - 6:24 pm | #

HAHAHAHAH Dan.....sooooo Very true.

Bill Krisol isnt a war expert??? What an understatement. he isnt an expert on anything that I have seen him write about so far.


And I see the trolls are whining in THIS thread too. Whining about LOSING their credibility. Assuming if they write enmasse that somehow that will cause them to be accepted by the majority who have dismissed them with the vote.
Hoode | 01.10.07 - 6:27 pm | #

dan, the really depressing thought is that there are so many Americans with less than half a brain. Apparently, its about 26%, if you believe the polls.
irritated | 01.10.07 - 6:30 pm | #

dan, the really depressing thought is that there are so many Americans with less than half a brain. Apparently, its about 26%, if you believe the polls.
irritated | 01.10.07 - 6:30 pm |

They too shall move away from the dark side, no one likes to be on a sinking ship for long. In a few more years you will be hard pressed to find anyone who will admit they supported these Neo-nuts.
dan | 01.10.07 - 6:35 pm | #

Just curious, is this a "troop escalation plan" that Bush has or a "troop execution plan"? Cus the way I see it all he is doing is sending more people over there to die for nothing.
dan | 01.10.07 - 6:37 pm | #

I don't think b*** knows himself. The first time he talked about an increase in troops it sounded like he was referring to the total number of people in the military. I thought he was supporting Representative Rangel's draft proposal.
irritated | 01.10.07 - 6:39 pm | #

Some republicans that Fox would rather not think about:

Smith
Specter
Warren
Hagel
Collins
Lugar
Coleman

And more defecting as we speak.
claudo | 01.10.07 - 6:39 pm | #

I forgot Brownback.
claudo | 01.10.07 - 6:40 pm | #

Dan, along with the "brilliant", ahem, "reporting" on POX as a stick to drive away intelligent and critically minded voters from the Greasy Old Pedophile party, you can easily add the shrill voices of the foaming-at-the-mouth pus-for-brains spoon-fed faschist loving American hating trolls who are attracted to this site much like gnats attracted to a large bug zapper. They, and the forums they frequent, also are a force in driving people away from their militia minded hateful and violent little groups.
BedtimeForBonzo | 01.10.07 - 6:40 pm | #

If Shep wants to go army, he better not "tell"!!!!
claudo | 01.10.07 - 6:41 pm | #

I am so confused....
Bob | 01.10.07 - 6:08 pm |
======
Bob, it is obvious that you are confused, you don't have to tell us.

In 2003 and early 2004, a lot of people were saying more troops were needed. Who was adamently against it? Pres. Bush, who said people didn't understand how a modern mobile army works.

So after bashing the idea for three years, Bush does have a selling job to do. Why now, when the insurgency is stronger, polls have shown that we are viewed as occupiers, not liberators, and there are questions about our capacity to rotate in a larger troop force?
And I hope he addresses the tragic question: Why did it take his party getting pounded in an election for Bush to finally make changes? Had we been able to guard borders better and contain the insurgency in 2003, we might have been out of Iraq by now, instead of trying to babysit a civil war.
The Other Dan | Homepage | 01.10.07 - 6:43 pm | #

Studio B with Shepard Smith is a newscast, so it shouldn't be biased like O'liely, which is opinion. Anyway, I heard part of this "surge" will involve sending Kurdish troops to Bagdad. Last summer during the last surge into Bagdad, the Shi'ite troops basically said the American equivalent of fuck this and either left the fighting in Bagdad or didn't show up at all.
williheart | 01.10.07 - 6:43 pm | #

And more defecting as we speak.
claudo | 01.10.07 - 6:39 pm

Did they perchance vote for the war before the went against it?

Tsk! What ever does 'selective outrage' Bob think about that?
DTR | 01.10.07 - 6:45 pm | #

DTR | 01.10.07 - 6:45 pm

He's sticking his fingers in his ears and saying "I don't hear you."
claudo | 01.10.07 - 6:47 pm | #

Oh well, maybe all those Bush supporters (30%) will get raptured!!!!
Otherwise, they'll be "left behind" with democrats and sympathetic republicans!!!!
claudo | 01.10.07 - 6:49 pm | #

Shepard Smith should just have stayed
down in New Orleans permanently. During the initial days AFTER Katrina you could barely get Sheph OUT of the
BARS in the French Quarter... he
drank incessantly EVEN in the EARLY morning hours and tryed/sometimes succeeded to oggle/feel up any MAN that had a half way decent physique....What a little
Candy-Assed Queen.....
william | 01.10.07 - 6:49 pm | #

Claudo, I know it seems like I'm picking on you, but I have to take issue with your 30%, his approval rating reached a record low of 26%. Sorry about this.

Anyway, back to the discussion about giving two enemies guns and then training them how to use them as a means to stop them from killing each other.
irritated | 01.10.07 - 6:52 pm | #

irritated | 01.10.07 - 6:52 pm

No problemo!!!
claudo | 01.10.07 - 6:53 pm | #

George Bush's public approval ratings hit a new low yesterday as Democratic opposition to his planned US troop increase for Iraq rapidly gained momentum. Even before Mr Bush formally announces a fresh Iraq strategy tonight, Democrats in the new Congress discussed a range of options that include withholding funding for what they call an escalation of the war.

A poll in USA Today showed that approval for Mr Bush's handling of the war has dropped to 26%, a record low. About 61% opposed Mr Bush's proposed 20,000 increase in the number of troops.
http://www.buzzle.com/articles/1...les/ 122805.html
irritated | 01.10.07 - 6:55 pm | #

Well, here we are. On the verge of escalating a war that should have been escalated at the BEGINNING.

There is no defined enemy other than terrorist. They have no uniforms, no defined territory, and no common goal other than the extermination of Israel and the United States. That is their mantra, death to the west.

I have doubts if this escalation will now have a positive outcome. The politicians have allowed us to become bogged down and now they are in panic mode. The general public has become less supportive over time. When this whole mess stated I was of the mind set that if you are going to let the military in then they damn well better kick some A#@ and then ask questions later. But that wasn't the case. We had to fight things on the enemy's terms. Now you are seeing the results of a war run by politics. Ya all better wake up and see just what is going on. We have been divided as a nation on purpose. We fight each other right here (for now it is verbal God forbid if it should escalate!) everyday and what is it accomplishing? I can only think of one thing that has been positive...the monies that the hundreds of contractors now in Iraq are making. However, that in itself seems tainted too due to how they have come to make that money.

You shall hear of wars, and rumors of wars........
bonehead | 01.10.07 - 6:56 pm | #

Washington, DC - According to a new USA Today/Gallup Poll, the American people overwhelmingly oppose the President’s plan for an increase in troops in Iraq. Furthermore, while the President’s job approval rating has sunk to a record 26 percent low, "by 2-to-1, Americans say they want congressional Democrats, not Bush, to have more influence over the direction of the nation." Democrats remain committed to working with Republicans for a new direction in Iraq that does not put additional troops in the middle of a civil war and makes it clear to the Iraqi people that they must take responsibility for their country’s future.
http://www.wisdems.org/ht/displa...etails/i/ 994934
irritated | 01.10.07 - 6:56 pm | #

irritated | 01.10.07 - 6:55 pm

How low can you go - not low enough!!!
claudo | 01.10.07 - 6:56 pm | #

A USA Today/Gallup survey taken from Friday through until Sunday showed 61 per cent opposed a troop increase, compared to 36 per cent who supported it. Forty-two per cent said they strongly opposed a temporary troop surge, and 19 per cent moderately opposed the idea, it found.

Approval of Bush's handling of the Iraq situation stood at 26 per cent, a record low, according to the survey, which had an error margin of plus or minus three percentage points.

And almost half said they believed that no matter how many troops might be sent, the United States cannot achieve its goals, the survey showed.

Another poll by CBS television found that just 18 per cent wanted to see more US troops in Iraq, 17 per cent favour current levels, 30 per cent sought a decrease, and 29 per cent called for a complete withdrawal.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/ Wo...8105014331.html
irritated | 01.10.07 - 6:57 pm | #

A USA Today/Gallup Poll taken over the weekend found that 61 percent oppose the idea of a "temporary but significant" increase in troop levels. Approval of the job Bush is doing in Iraq sunk to a new low of 26 percent. It may not help that support seems to be dwindling among families with troops in the military.
http://www.mlive.com/news/grpres...2490.xml& coll=6
irritated | 01.10.07 - 6:57 pm | #

I could do this all day! I just hope that I can do it again when his numbers get lower!
irritated | 01.10.07 - 6:58 pm | #

Those approval numbers should be a little bit higher...they didn't poll Laura and Barney
OkieWhiskey | 01.10.07 - 8:16 pm | #

dan, the really depressing thought is that there are so many Americans with less than half a brain.
--------------------------------------
Agreed, I would also like to add the number of Americans that also appear to have less than half a heart.
Patriot Actor | 01.10.07 - 8:21 pm | #

Even Oliver North came out against the troop escalation.
Russ | Homepage | 01.10.07 - 8:21 pm | #

I'll give the "executioner" three months. Actually, I wouldn't give him three seconds, but I seem to have no choice...the troops are already on the move.

If this sack of low life sheeet doesn't show us some sign of success in 3 months, I'm all for hitting the streets and calling for his skin. It's time to get off our butts and do something beside bitch in cyberspace. It took massive demonstrations to get our troops out of Vietnam. Do you honestly think we can do it by just sitting around and bitching?

I'd like to see the chimp turned loose on the streets of Bagdad with a sign on hs back saying "kick me". Let him run thru the streets and be given the "warm welcome" he so justly deserves.

Then BRING OUR TROOPS HOME!
Hulk | 01.10.07 - 8:31 pm | #

In the end,chimpy will be shown the door by his own party:if they finally come to their senses before he screws the pooch completely.
Genghis Khan | 01.10.07 - 8:32 pm | #

I'd like to see the chimp turned loose on the streets of Bagdad with a sign on hs back saying "kick me". Let him run thru the streets and be given the "warm welcome" he so justly deserves.

Then BRING OUR TROOPS HOME!
Hulk | 01.10.07 - 8:31 pm | #
-------------

Sweets and flowers for the divider in chief!
OkieWhiskey | 01.10.07 - 8:40 pm | #

That countdown clock Fox had on???? maybe they were predicting the furture??? The future of Bush and Cheyne impeached??? We can only hope.
Hoode | 01.11.07 - 4:07 am | #

Russert: "Would you send more American troops in order to stabilize the situation?"
Pelosi: "Yes."
Bob | 01.10.07 - 5:15 pm

sorry, but are you a moron?

Pelosi was asked this question 36 months ago (!!) when the military was asking for more troops to be sent.
Because 36 months ago, extra troops may have made a difference.
But Bush was'nt interested, and now nearly 3 years later, he decides to send more troops, and it's far too late.
Another fuck up by a complete incompetent, and you want to focus on Pelosi?
what a fucking loser (that applies to you, and Bush)
Office Ed | 01.11.07 - 5:23 am | #

ok, we have to be fair. If a hard break comes on any channal they have to cut away,no choice. Second,I always call Democrats Dems, is that a negative term, or just a nickname? I haven't heard it used in a derogatory way. I didn't think he was either.If this is all ya got perhaps it's as fair and balanced as it could be. Not a happy subject, ya know?
I watch all the news channals, switch around. It's the op ed shows I find offencive, but at least they get a dialoge going, so maybe thats a good thing. Now, if we could just jar the midwest awake too, perhaps we could get some positive things accomplished.
I would really like to see solar energy in mass market in my life time. I'm 50, what do ya think?
LPnerd | 01.13.07 - 2:36 am | #