Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

Caught him on Larry King one night last week.

Posted By: francie on 2007-10-21
In Reply to: I am looking forward to reading - reveille

He's a very funny and intelligent man....


Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

Who watched Larry King last night?

They were talking about the idea of implementing a stimulus package for (in particular) the auto industry.  Well, turns out that they have already been trying to pass a stimulus package and I'll give you one guess as to who's blocking that.  In the meantime if the auto industry goes down that's another 2-3 million jobs.  Nice going Bush!


I saw part pf Larry King Monday night.
He was trashing Palin and laughing at Stephanie Miller's really nasty jokes. The media have intruded into where they should have never gone. They have laughed and acted better than women from small town, kind of like Obama calling us bitter and clinging to our guns and God.She has been given the Bork and Clarence Thomas treatment. It is a very sad day for all women. They did this to Hillary, just not to the extreme in such a short time. The media really really want Obama to win.
JM was scheduled for Larry King the
other night but he got upset because they were asking questions about SP.....
By any chance, you catch Larry King?
To begin with, I was a pregnant teen and most definitively will be voting for Obama. The other unwed mother poster is voting for Obama too in case you hadn't noticed. Bully, fear and threat tactics are not effective.

His candidacy is alive and well and has nothing to do with this issue and how it is going to play out. Tonight, Larry King's panel were talking this subject up one side and down the other. Every single issue that was raised today in these posts on this board were touched upon....every single one. SP is in the political arena now. Unfortunately, she has put her daughter there too. The issues surrounding this will be politicized. You can't stop this train.
Bush tells Larry King that Ken Lay was a *good guy*

Video at:  http://thinkprogress.org/2006/07/07/bush-lay/


Transcript:



KING: The death of Ken Lay.


G. BUSH: Yes, yes.


KING: I know he was your friend. How do you feel? Were you shocked?


G. BUSH: I was. I was very surprised. You know, just — my hope is that his heart was right with the Lord, and I feel real sorry for his wife. She’s had a rough go, and she’s now here on earth to bear the burdens of losing her husband, a man she loved.


KING: Was that whole thing, the whole Enron story shocking to you?


G. BUSH: Yes, yes.


KING: Because, I mean, you knew him pretty well from Texas, right?


G. BUSH: Pretty well, pretty well. I knew him. I got to know him. This — people don’t believe this, but he actually supported Ann Richards in the ‘94 campaign.


KING: She told me that.


G. BUSH: She did?


KING: She liked him a lot.


G. BUSH: Yes, he’s a good guy. And so what I did — then did was we had a business council, and I kept him on as the chairman of the business council. And, you know, got to know him and got to see him in action.


One of the things I respected him for was he was such a contributor to Houston’s civil society. He was a generous person. I’m disappointed that there was this — he betrayed the trust of shareholders, but…


KING: Did you know him well, Mrs. Bush?


L. BUSH: I knew him. Not really well, but I did know him.


KING: Did you know his wife?


L. BUSH: And I know Linda and I’m sorry for her.


KING: Did you contact her?


L. BUSH: I haven’t.


G. BUSH: I haven’t yet. I’m going to write her a letter at some point in time.


 

I caught this last night. Wow,
Obama would be wise to find a place somewhere for Mr. Pickins as an energy advisor -- he's got it all figured out!!
I thougth you signed off for the night with a good night to all
Welcome back. Yeah, I saw the same flip off he gave Hillary - nice gesture and respect to a woman who fought hard to get where she is at. Such disrespect.

BTW - I don't know anyone who uses their middle finger to scratch their face.
Larry Craig/W phone transcript
http://www.whitehouse.org/news/2007/09/larry-craig.asp
Don't forget Larry "Don't Squeeze the Charmin" Craig...

...whose appeal was denied just today.


Sen. Craig loses appeal in airport sex sting case



MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — Idaho Sen. Larry Craig has lost his latest attempt to withdraw his guilty plea in a Minneapolis airport men's room sex sting.


A three-judge panel of the Minnesota Court of Appeals on Tuesday rejected the Republican's bid to toss out his disorderly conduct conviction.


Craig was arrested in June 2007 in a Minneapolis airport bathroom stall by an undercover officer who said the senator solicited sex.


He pleaded guilty to the misdemeanor and paid a fine, but changed his mind after word of his arrest became public. Craig insisted he was innocent, but the case effectively ended his political career.


Craig's attorney argued before the appeals court this September that there was insufficient evidence for any judge to find him guilty. Prosecutors said his guilty plea should stand.


http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iM7VsmCI91xXDASkhgtGf3_zk__gD94V9JQ00


Yet she conveniently overlooks Obama's gay affair with Larry Sinclair.
xx
I think Larry Craig has the weird butt..he even has a wide stance! nm
x
Yes, last night was party night.
I was actually very disappointed in the Obama party. I thought we were going to discuss issues and where Obama stood on the issues, but the lady from the Democratic Headquarters that came to give that information only passed out papers that were printed directly off of his website - already read that. The other thing I was disappointed in was that it seemed everyone there was a Hillary supporter and talked endlessly about her rather than Obama (no, I didn't get snarky and remind them that she was not running=). Unfortunately, I don't really feel like I learned more than what I did off of his website. It was nice to chat with my friends and meet some new people, but other political-wise, it was a waste of time. That's not to say that all Obama parties would be that way and I do encourage anyone who gets invited to one, whether you're Republican or Democrat, to attend - the person in charge of that one might be more knowledgable than the one from the party I was at. Thanks again to all who sent me websites to check out beforehand!!!
I caught that too.. Don't know if he
intended for it to come across the way I took it, but it felt like a dig to whites. Disappointing.
I caught that
I just can't stand to watch Keith talk about anything because he always misses the point.  That was my point, which you missed, just like Keith.
She wasn't *caught* in anything.
Stop lying.  You lose all credibility when you do that.
Biden Caught In A Lie

Biden caught in a lie





This really couldn’t have come at a worse time for Joe Biden. Speaking on Fox and Friends, Sen. Biden, the Democrat VP nominee denied reports from ABC news that if elected, he planned on pursuing criminal charges against the Bush Administration.



“That’s not true. I don’t know where that report’s coming from,” Biden told Fox & Friends.


Here you go Joe. See if this jogs your memory just a bit.



Poor old Joe. I expect the “Dump Biden” movement to pick up steam in the next few days.


h/t FreeRepublic


yeah, i caught that too.
x
Hmmm....why are you so caught up in what's on
--
I caught the nasty racist

little dig there.  I got that you were saying that Obama is ahead but his being black will doom him.  I didn't miss your sneaky way of signalling your fellow Rothschilds.


 


Corrupt Obama caught in the act.

How's this for abuse of power? 


While in the Illinois State Senate, Barack Obama sure seems to have played footloose and fancy free with the taxpayer's money, to the benefit of his own circle of family and friends. 


A $25,000 grant to his first cousin.


$100,000 for a garden for one of his campaign workers   


$100,000 for Father Pflager to badmouth Hillary Clinton from his pulpit.


$75,000 to FORUM, a group who helped Obama pay off the debt from his failed 2000 Senate race.


Yeah, THIS is the guy I'm going to trust with 'changing' the way government does business. 


http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=6BA619B2-88A2-4245-8617-AA0A07F47068


Obama caught red handed.....

He finally said the words "SPREAD THE WEALTH" when asked by a plumber about raising his taxes.  THe plumber told him he could not afford to have his taxes raised because that would keep him from being able to expand his business, EMPLOY more folks, etc.  Obama told him yes he would but ONLY to help "spread the wealth" and make it fairer for others.  That man couldn't care less about small businesses.  If that isn't about the most ignorant/self-absorbed/SOCIALIST thing I have ever heard.  Anyone who still thinks he's a good deal needs a reality check. 


Even the Wall Street Journal says his policies are going to put businesses OUT OF BUSINESS because they cannot afford these ridiculous policy mandates.  This man is looking out for only one people and definitely NOT the country.   Now, he is going back and asking his "advisors" to REDO ANOTHER ECONOMIC POLICY so the one everyone is jumping on as WONDERFUL NEWS...be advised, it is changing again!!!


He is now wanting MORE money to give to MORE people so we can keep MORE PEOPLE on the welfare roll.  KEEP IT UP BUDDY.....SOCIALISM, SOCIALISM, SOCIALISM!!


 


I caught this deceit during the last debate
When Obama was asked if he would sign the ban against partial-birth abortion he responded he would if there was a clause allowing it in cases where the mother's health was at risk. Those of us who lived through the ྂs will recall this jargon effectively legalized second-into-third-trimester abortions under any circumstances--A physician had only to sign a form stating the woman's mental health was in jeopardy. I remember the actual coercion involved as it happened to someone very close to me, and--hate to admit it--I worked in an abortion clinic for a short time. Planned Parenthood and other "pro-choice" organizations are in reality pro-killing mills that are allocated federal and state funding according to the number of abortions they perform. It's to their obvious benefit that they "counsel" women towards the termination of their pregnancies.

Obama is slick and tried to slide that one through unnoticed. Beware.
I think I hit a nerve because you get caught in errors often
...if you want to succeed in this business
I didn't really have an intention. That post just caught my eye. nm

McCain caught in bold faced lie
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHPi4hycZdI
Musta caught the virus from "why-in-the-
.Pesky. Hard to get rid of.
I caught a clip of Bill O'Reilly
chewing Barney Frank a new butt during an interview.  He basically told him to claim the blame instead of trying to push it on others and called him a coward.  I was just sitting on the couch with my mouth open in shock.  I'm glad someone told the stupid SOB though.  Needless to say, Barney Frank didn't get to say much.  Also, if Barney Frank got all that money from these banks, why can't he afford to get some dentures on the top?  I can't stand to hear him talk.  PUT SOME TEETH IN!  SHEESH.
Caught parts of it today on MSNBC sm
Heard that she would not do the script they had planned for her. What snipits I saw were not that complimentary of her at all. Oh well, just curious, don't think she likes to be "caught up" in anything, ignoring interviews, etc. Couric made her look bad and Couric is for Obama, I believe. Just keeping eyes and ears open, not much time left to decide. Not looking good for her as of now.
Oh brother - it amazes me how many are caught up in a fantasy
.
You caught me, so that would make you Dickwad Cheney.
xx
Caught an ad-Barney Frank is going to be on O'Reilley
tonight or Thursday night? I think BF is a glutton for punishment. I hope, but doubt, BF will answer some questions instead of blowing smoke again.
Maybe we should have a king instead.

I especially enjoyed the real refreshing lie I caught him in the other day...did you catch it?
...no, guess not...no one in the media called him on it either.


Here, let me give you a hint. Obama said that all of the conservative and liberal economists agreed that his economy recovery plan was good (or would work, or something like that).


The lie being that "all the conservative economists" part.

That was one, big, fat, honking lie.....no one even blinked and took his word for it.


My DH says there's at least a half dozen conservative economists out there that don't agree with Obama...and yet....if Obama says they do....everyone believes him.


He lies and you don't even know it, he's so smooth about it.....



But some of us know he does...lie that is......he's getting real good at talking both sides of the issues, so that if something does or doesn't come to pass, he can say I told you so....or whatever needs to be said to save his you know whatsis.

I think he's learned a lot from the Clintons lately, don't you?
You caught me, I just "lurk" here waiting to pounce on you. Now who's paranoid?
I post when the discussion moves me or when I read something completely hilarious, like you who's who in Gay America list.
One stubborn King.
Looks like we're stuck in Iraq, folks. But wait a minute, you mean there is no connection between between Iraq and 9/11? And I thought the insurgency was in its final throes a year ago? Oh right, it's the *suiciders*. A God-fearing Christian war king wouldn't lie, right? Uh, kind of, uh, I guess, uh, duh, I would surmise, uh, uh.

Bush Tells Press U.S. Won't Leave Iraq While He Is President -- And Says He Won't Campaign in Connecticut

By E&P Staff

Published: August 21, 2006 11:55 AM ET

NEW YORK At a press conference this morning in Washington, D.C., President Bush declared, We’re not leaving [Iraq] so long as I’m the president. That would be a huge mistake.” Bush leaves office in January 2009.

He also said, in response to a question about backing the Republican candidate for Senate in Connecticut --against Democrat Ned Lamont and Independent Joe Lieberman -- that he is going to stay out of Connecticut.

Reminded that a reporter that this was his native state (he was born there), Bush replied, to laughter, Shhh.

He explained further, And by the way, we're -- I'm staying out of Connecticut because the -- the -- you know, that's what the party suggested, the Republican Party of Connecticut, and plus there's a better place to spend our money, time and resources.

Bush also tied Iraq to 9/11, and then backed off, when asked about the effects of the U.S. invasion as witnessed today.

You know, I've heard this theory about, you know, everything was just fine until we arrived and, you know, kind of -- the 'stir up the hornet's nest' theory, Bush said. It just doesn't hold water as far as I'm concerned. The terrorists attacked us and killed 3,000 of our citizens before we started the freedom agenda in the Middle East.

Asked by a reporter what Iraq had to do with 9/11, Bush replied, Nothing, except for it's part of -- and nobody's ever suggested in this administration that Saddam Hussein ordered the attack. Iraq was a -- Iraq -- the lesson of September the 11th is take threats before they fully materialize, Ken.

Also on Iraq, Bush explained, The strategy is to help the Iraqi people achieve the objectives and dreams which is a democratic society. That’s the strategy. The tactics — now — either you say yes it’s important we stay there and get it done or we leave. We’re not leaving so long as I’m the president. That would be a huge mistake. It would send an unbelievably, you know terrible, signal to reformers across the region. It would say we’ve abandoned our desire to change the conditions that create terror.

Bush also said at the news conference -- held at the temporary press quarters while the old White House briefing room is being rebuilt -- that if the government in Iraq fails, it could turn the country into a safe haven for terrorists and extremists and give them revenues from oil sales.

He said he agrees with a top military commander that if the U.S. were to do so, the terrorists will follow us here. Bush added those who want an immediate pullout from Iraq are absolutely wrong. He says it takes time to defeat the extremists, but that the U.S. is going to stand with the government of Iraq, and with reformers across the region.

Despite all the grim news, Bush often acted in a very jocular manner. He also had a rare exchange with reporter Helen Thomas on the Lebanon conflict.

Asked by another reporter if he was frustrated by lack of progress in Iraq he replied: Frustrated? Sometimes I'm frustrated, rarely surprised. Sometimes I'm happy. You know, this is -- this is a -- it's -- but war's not a time of joy. These aren't joyous times. These are challenging times. And they're difficult times. And they're straining the -- the psyche of our country. I understand that.

You know, nobody likes to see innocent people die. Nobody wants to turn on their TV on a daily basis and see the havoc wrought by terrorists.

A partial transcript follows. To watch a full video of the President's press conference, click here

***

Q: Thank you, Mr. President. More than 3,500 Iraqis were killed last month -- the highest civilian monthly toll since the war began. Are you disappointed with the lack of progress by Iraq's unity government in bringing together the sectarian and ethnic groups?

BUSH: No, I -- I am aware that extremists and terrorists are doing everything they can to prevent Iraq's democracy from growing stronger. That's what I'm aware of. And therefore we have a plan to help them -- them, the Iraqis -- achieve their objectives.

Part of the plan is political; that is, to help the Maliki government work on reconciliation and to work on rehabilitating the community.

The other part is, of course, security. And I have given our commanders all the flexibility they needed to adjust tactics to be able to help the Iraqi government defeat those who want to thwart the ambitions of the people. And that includes, you know, a very robust security plan for Baghdad. We -- you may or not know, Terry -- have moved troops from Mosul Stryker Brigade into Baghdad, all aiming to help the Iraqi government succeed.

You know, the -- I hear a lot of talk about civil war. I'm -- I'm concerned about that, of course. And I've talked to a lot of people about it. And what I've found from my talks are that the Iraqis want a unified country, and that the Iraqi leadership is determined to thwart the efforts of the extremists and the radicals and al Qaeda, and that the security forces remain united behind the government. And one thing that's clear, the Iraqi people are showing incredible courage.

The United States of America must understand it's in our interests that we help this democracy succeed. As a matter of fact, it's in our interests that we help reformers across the Middle East achieve their objectives. This is the fundamental challenge of the 21st century.

You know, it's an interesting debate we're having in America about how we ought to handle Iraq. There's a lot of people -- good, decent people -- saying withdrawal now. They're absolutely wrong. It would be a huge mistake for this country. If you think problems are tough now, imagine what it would be like if the United States leaves before this government has a chance to defend herself, govern herself and listen to the -- and answer to the will of the people....

Helen?

Q: (Chuckles.)

BUSH: What's so funny about me saying Helen? (Laughter.)

Q: Israel --

BUSH: It's the anticipation of your question, I guess.

Q: Israel broke its word twice on the truce. And you mentioned Hezbollah rockets, but it's Israeli bombs that destroyed Lebanon. Why do you always give them a pass? And what's your view on view on breaking of your oath for a truce?

BUSH: Hm. Yeah. Thank you.

I -- I'd like to remind people about how this started, how this whole -- how the damage to innocent life, which -- which -- which bothers me, began; what caused this.

Q: Why drop bombs on -- (off mike)?

BUSH: Wait, let me finish. Let -- let -- may I -- let me -- may I -- please, let me finish the question. It was a great question to begin with. The follow-up was a little difficult, but anyway....I know you're waiting for my answer, aren't you, with bated breath.

(Laughs.) There you go.

It's -- this never would have occurred had a terrorist organization, a state within a state, not launched attacks on a sovereign nation. From the beginning, Helen, I said that Israel, one, has a right to defend herself, but Israel ought to be cautious about how she defends herself. Israel is a democratically elected government. They make decisions on their own sovereignty. It's their decision making that is what leads to the attacks they chose. And -- but the world must understand that now is the time to come together to address the root cause of the problem, and the problem is you had a state within a state. You had people launch attacks on a sovereign nation without the consent of the government in the country in which they are lodged.

And that's why it's very important for all of us, those of us who are involved in this process, to get an international force into Lebanon to help the Lebanese government achieve some objectives. One is their ability to exert control over the entire country. Secondly is to make sure that the Hezbollah forces don't rearm, don't get armed from Syria, or Iran through Syria, to be able to continue to wreak havoc in the region.

Let's see. We'll finish the first line here. Everybody can be patient.

Q: Thank you.

BUSH: It's kind of like dancing together, isn't it? (Laughter.)

Q: Yeah, kind of.

BUSH: If I ask for any comments from the peanut gallery, I'll call on you. (Laughter.)

Q: Mr. --

BUSH: Yeah. By the way, seersucker is coming back. I hope everybody gets it. (Laughter.) Never mind.

Q: It's the summertime east Texas county commissioner look. (Laughter.)

BUSH: (Laughs.) Yes. Yes, Martha. Sorry.

Q: That's quite all right. Mr. President, I'd like to go back to Iraq. You have continually cited the elections, the new government as progress in Iraq, and yet the violence has gotten worse in certain areas. You have to go to Baghdad again. Is it not time for a new strategy? And if not, why not?

BUSH: You know, Martha, you've covered the Pentagon; you know that the Pentagon is constantly adjusting tactics because they have the flexibility from the White House to do so.

Q: I'm talking about the strategy.

BUSH: Well, the strategy is to help the Iraqi people achieve their objectives and their dreams, which is a democratic society. That's the strategy.

The tactics -- now, either you say, yes, it's important that we stay there and get it done, or we leave. We're not leaving so long as I'm the president. That would be a huge mistake. It would send an unbelievably, you know, terrible signal to reformers across the region. It would say we've abandoned our desire to change the conditions that create terror. It would give the terrorists a safe haven from which to launch attacks. It would embolden Iran. It would embolden extremists. No, we're not leaving. ...

Now, if you say, are you going to change your strategic objective, it means you're leaving before the mission is complete, and we're not going to leave before the mission is complete. I -- I agree with General Abizaid: We leave before the mission is done, the terrorists will follow us here.

And so we have changed tactics. Our commanders have got the flexibility necessary to change tactics on the ground, starting with plan Baghdad, and that's when we move troops from Mosul into Baghdad and replace them with a Stryker Brigade so we're not -- we increase troops during this time of instability.

Q: Sir, that's not really the question. The strategy is --

BUSH: Sounded like the question to me.

Q: You -- you keep -- you keep saying that you don't want to leave, but is your strategy to win working, even if you don't want to leave? You've gone into Baghdad before. These things have happened before.

BUSH: If I didn't think it would work, I would change the -- our commanders would recommend changing the strategy.

They believe it'll work. It takes time to defeat these people. The Maliki government's been in power for, you know, less than six months. And, yeah, the people spoke. I've cited that as a part of -- of -- the reason I've cited it is because it's what the Iraqi people want. And the fundamental question facing this government is whether or not we will stand with reformers across the region. It's really -- it's really the task. And we're going to stand with this government.

And, you know, obviously I wish the violence would go down, but not as much as the Iraqi citizens would wish the violence would go down. But incredibly enough, they showed great courage, and they want our help. And any sign that says we're going to leave before the job is done simply emboldens terrorists and creates a certain amount of doubt for people so they won't take the risk necessary to help a civil society evolve in the country.

And this is the campaign -- I'm sure they're watching the campaign carefully. There are a lot of good, decent people saying, get out now. Vote for me. I will do everything I can to, I guess, cut off money is what they're trying to do to get our troops out. It's a big mistake. It were to be wrong, in my judgment, for us to leave before the mission is complete in Iraq....

Q: Good morning, Mr. President. When you talked today about the violence in Baghdad, first you mentioned extremists, radicals and then al Qaeda. It seems that al Qaeda and foreign fighters are much less of a problem there and that it really is Iraqis versus Iraqis. And when we heard about your meeting the other day with experts and so forth, some of the reporting out of that said you were frustrated, you were surprised, and your spokesman said, Nope, you're determined.

But frustration seems like a very real emotion. Why wouldn't you be frustrated, sir, by what's happening?

BUSH: I'm not -- I do remember the meeting; I don't remember being surprised. I'm not sure what they meant by that.

Q: About the lack of gratitude among the Iraqi people.

BUSH: Oh. No, I think -- yeah -- first of all, to the first part of your question, you know, if you look back at the words of Zarqawi before he was brought to justice, he made it clear that the intent of their tactics in Iraq was to create civil strife. In other words, if you -- look at what he said. He said let's kill Shi'a to get Shi'a to seek revenge and therefore to create this kind of hopefully cycle of violence. Secondly, I think it's pretty clear that the -- at least the evidence indicates that the bombing of the shrine was an al Qaeda plot, all intending to create sectarian violence.

Now, al Qaeda is still very active in Iraq. As a matter of fact, some of the more -- I would guess, I would surmise that some of the more spectacular bombings are done by al Qaeda suiciders. No question there's sectarian violence as well. And the challenge is to provide a security plan such that a political process can go forward. And you know, I know -- I'm sure you all are tired of hearing me say 12 million Iraqis voted, but it's an indication about the desire for people to live in a free society. That's what that means, see. And the only way to defeat this ideology in the long term is to defeat it through another ideology, a competing ideology, one that -- where government, you know, responds to the will of the people. And that's really the fundamental question we face here in the beginning of this 21st century is whether or not we believe as a nation and others believe it is possible to defeat this ideology.

Now, I recognize some say that these folks are not ideologically -- but I strongly disagree. I think not only do they have an ideology, they have tactics necessary to spread their ideology. And it would be a huge mistake for the United States to leave the region, to concede territory to the terrorists, to not confront them.

And -- and the best way to confront them is to help those who want to leave in free society. Look, eventually Iraq will succeed because the Iraqis will see to it that they succeed. And our job is to help them succeed. That's our job. Our job is to help their forces be better equipped, to help their police be able to deal with these extremists, and to help their government succeed.

Q: But are you frustrated, sir?

BUSH: Frustrated? Sometimes I'm frustrated, rarely surprised. Sometimes I'm happy. You know, this is -- this is a -- it's -- but war's not a time of joy. These aren't joyous times. These are challenging times. And they're difficult times. And they're straining the -- the psyche of our country. I understand that. You know, nobody likes to see innocent people die. Nobody wants to turn on their TV on a daily basis and see the havoc wrought by terrorists. And our question is, do we have the -- the capacity and the desire to spread peace by confronting these terrorists and supporting those who want to live in liberty? That's -- that's -- that's the question.

And my answer to that question is, we must. We owe it to future generations to do so....

Q: Thank you, Mr. President. You mentioned the campaign earlier Do you agree with those in your party, including the vice president, who said or implied Democratic voters emboldened al Qaeda types by choosing Ned Lamont over Joe Lieberman, and the message that how Americans vote will send messages to terrorists abroad.

BUSH: What all of us in this administration have been saying is that leaving Iraq before the mission is complete will send the wrong message to the enemy and will create a more dangerous world. That's what we're saying. And it's an honest debate and it's an important debate for Americans to listen to and to be engaged in.

In our judgment, the consequences for defeat in Iraq are unacceptable. I fully understand that some didn't think we ought to go in there in the first place. But defeat -- if you think it's bad now, imagine what Iraq would look like if the United States leaves before this government can defend itself and sustain itself, A -- you know, chaos in Iraq would be very unsettling in the region.

Leaving before the job would be done would send a message that America really is no longer engaged or cares about the form of governments in the Middle East. Leaving before the job would done would be -- send a signal to our troops that the sacrifices they made were not worth it. Leaving before the job was done would be a disaster. And that's what we're saying. I will never question the patriotism of somebody who disagrees with me. This has nothing to do with patriotism; it has everything to do with understanding the world in which we live.

It's like the other day I was critical of those who heralded the federal judge's opinion about the terrorist surveillance program. I thought it was a terrible opinion, and that's why we're appealing it. And I have no -- you know, look, I understand how democracy works. Quite a little bit of criticism in it, which is fine. That's fine. It's part of the process. But I have every right, as do my administration, to make it clear what the consequences would be of policy, and if we think somebody is wrong or doesn't see the world the way it is, we will continue to point that out to people. And therefore, those who heralded the decision not to give law enforcement the tools necessary to protect the American people simply don't see the world the way we do. They say it maybe kind of isolated incidents. These aren't isolated instances; they're tied together. There is a global war going on.

And you know, somebody said, well, this is law enforcement. No, this isn't law enforcement in my judgment. Law enforcement means kind of a simple, you know, singular response to the problem. This is a global war on terror. We're facing, you know, extremists that believe something and they want to achieve objectives. And therefore, the United States must use all our assets, and we must work with others to defeat this enemy.

That's -- that's the call. And we -- in the short run, we got to stop them from attacking us. That's why I give the Tony Blair government great credit and their intelligence officers, and our own government credit for working with the Brits to stop this attack.

But you know something? It's an amazing town, and -- you know, where they say on the one hand, you can't have the tools necessary -- we herald the fact that you won't have the tools necessary to defend the people, and sure enough, a(n) attack would occur and say, how come you don't have the tools necessary to defend the people? That's the way -- that's the way we think around this town. And so, you know, we'll -- Jim, we'll continue to speak out in a respectful way, never challenging somebody's love for America when you criticize their -- their strategies or their -- their point of view.

And, you know, for those who say that, well, all they're trying to say is we're not patriotic simply don't listen to our words very carefully, do they? What -- what matters is that in this campaign that we clarify the different points of view, and there are a lot of people in the Democrat party who believe that the best of course of action is to leave Iraq before the job is done, period, and they're wrong. And the American people have got to understand the consequence of leaving Iraq before the job is done. We're not going to leave Iraq before the job is done, and we'll complete the mission in Iraq. I can't tell you exactly when it's going to be done. But I do know that it's important for us to support the Iraqi people, who have shown incredible courage in their desire to live in a free society. And if we ever give up the desire to help people who live in freedom, we will have lost our soul as a nation as far as I'm concerned.

Q: And would you campaign against Senator Joe Lieberman, whose Republican candidate may support you, but he supports you, too, on Iraq?

BUSH: I'm going to say out of Connecticut. (Laughter.)

Q: It's your native state, Mr. President! You were born there!

BUSH: Shhh! (Laughter.)

Q: How can you stay --

BUSH: (Chuckles.) I may be the only person -- the only presidential candidate who never carried the state in which he was born.

Do you think that's right, Herman? Of course, you would have researched that and dropped it out for everybody to see, particularly since I dissed that just ridiculous-looking outfit. (Laughter.)

Q: Your mother raised you better than that, Mr. President....

BUSH: And by the way, we're -- I'm staying out of Connecticut because the -- the -- you know, that's what the party suggested, the Republican Party of Connecticut, and plus there's a better place to spend our money, time and resources.

Q: Mr. President, polls continue to show sagging support for the war in Iraq. I'm curious as to how you see this developing. Is it your belief that long-term results will vindicate your strategy, and people will change their mind about it? Or is the kind of thing you're doing because you think it's right and you don't care if you ever gain public support for it?

BUSH: Thank you. Yeah, look -- look, I mean, presidents care about whether people support their policies. I don't -- (inaudible) -- think that I don't care. Of course I care. But I understand why people are discouraged about Iraq. I can understand that. There is -- we live in, you know, a world in which people hope things happen quickly. And this is a situation where things don't happen quickly because there's, you know, a very tough group of people using tactics, mainly the killing of innocent people, to achieve their objective, and they're skillful about how they do this and they also know the impact of what it means on the conscienceness of those of us who live in the free world. They know that. And so I care. I really do. I wish -- you know, and so therefore I must spend a lot of time trying to explain as best I can, you know, why it's important for us to succeed in Iraq. And --

Q: A quick follow-up. A lot of the consequences you mention for pulling out seem like maybe they never would have been there if we hadn't gone in. How do you square all of that?

BUSH: I square it because imagine a world in which you had a Saddam Hussein who had the capacity to make a weapon of mass destruction, who was paying suiciders to kill innocent life, who would -- who had relations with Zarqawi. Imagine what the world would be like with him in power. The idea is to try to help change the Middle East.

Now, look, I -- part of the reason we went into Iraq was -- the main reason we went into Iraq at the time was we thought he had weapons of mass destruction. It turns out he didn't, but he had the capacity to make weapons of mass destruction.

But I also talked about the human suffering in Iraq, and I also talked the need to advance a freedom agenda. And so my question -- my answer to your question is, is that imagine a world in which Saddam Hussein was there, stirring up even more trouble in a part of a world that had so much resentment and so much hatred that people came and killed 3,000 of our citizens.

You know, I've heard this theory about, you know, everything was just fine until we arrived and, you know, kind of -- the stir up the hornet's nest theory. It just doesn't hold water as far as I'm concerned. The terrorists attacked us and killed 3,000 of our citizens before we started the freedom agenda in the Middle East. They were --

Q: What did Iraq have to do with that?

BUSH: What did Iraq have to do with what?

Q: The attack on the World Trade Center.

BUSH: Nothing, except for it's part of -- and nobody's ever suggested in this administration that Saddam Hussein ordered the attack. Iraq was a -- Iraq -- the lesson of September the 11th is take threats before they fully materialize, Ken.

Nobody's ever suggested that the attacks of September the 11th were ordered by Iraq. I have suggested, however, that resentment and the lack of hope create the breeding grounds for terrorists who are willing to use suiciders to kill to achieve an objective. I have made that case. And one way to defeat that -- you know, defeat resentment, is with hope. And the best way to do hope is through a form of government.

Now, I said going into Iraq we got to take these threats seriously before they fully materialized. I saw a threat. I fully believe it was the right decision to remove Saddam Hussein, and I fully believe the world was better off without him. Now, the question is, how do we succeed in Iraq? And you don't succeed by leaving before the mission is complete, like some in this political process are suggesting.


E&P Staff (letters@editorandpublisher.com)

SAVE | EMAIL | PRINT | MOST POPULAR | RSS | REPRINTS
SUBSCRIBE TO EDITOR & PUBLISHER »

Related Articles
Former CIA Officer Defends 'Wash Post' Op-Ed in Online Chat
Jan 10, 2006 – Editor and Publisher
Gallup: 55% Now Call Iraq War a 'Mistake'
Feb 22, 2006 – Editor and Publisher
'Military Times' Poll Finds Fading Support for President, War
Jan 2, 2006 – Editor and Publisher
'Stars and Stripes' to Launch Weekly U.S. Edition: A Military 'Parade'?
Aug 29, 2005 – Editor and Publisher
Small Oregon Paper Leads Reporting On Missing Local Soldier
Jun 19, 2006 – Editor and Publisher
hroes? Why have I been so badly misinformed?
GWB is the king of big government
US Government has grown 27% under Bush - really O can't be much worse than that!
King of Pork!

And the King is...... Robert Byrd - D-WVA


60 earmarks for a total of 122 million..... 


LOL! He was the BUMBLING King!
.
King Obama? sm
I got this in email today and checked out the links.  It certainly looks legit. 

House Considers Repealing 22nd Amendment


Earlier this year, Rep. Jose Serrano, D-N.Y. introduced H. J. Res. 5, a bill that would repeal the Constitution’s 22nd Amendment which prohibits a president from being elected to more than two terms in office, thus potentially paving the way to make Barack Obama president for life.   Not surprisingly, the corporate media  currently caught up in Obama-mania has not covered this story.

 

“Will George W. Bush end up being the last true U.S. President?” asked Sher Zieve, writing for the Canadian Free Press on January 14. “As I warned you on multiple times prior to the 2008 General Election, ‘once Obama is elected, we won’t be able to get rid of him.’  Tragically, this warning is now being realized.  Not only has Obama established his election-fraud organization  ACORN nationwide, his adherents have now begun the process to repeal the U.S. Constitution’s 22nd Amendment.” 

See the proof on any of these websites.
 



 

Or go to Google and do your own search by typing in H. J. Res. 5.

 

More:


Fox News Caught Repeatedly Cropping, Manipulating Video

Hey, kids! Do you ever get tired of Fox News' crops? I don't mean the food
they might be literally growing, in Glenn Beck's Doom Room, in preparation for
Imminent Socialist Panic. I'm talking about the way they manipulate video to
make it look like people are just straight up saying the opposite thing they
actually said. Well, it's been bothering the media critics at Media Matters For
America for some time, and they have, for a long time, been cataloging "examples
of Fox News hosts and correspondents cropping comments by progressives and
Democratic political figures in a manner that misrepresents them." A new mash-up
video offers some side-by-side examples of what they're talking about.






Some constructive criticism? I think the third example -- Obama's "empathy"
criteria for Supreme Court justice -- isn't the best example of a Fox cropping.
While it's certainly true that Major Garrett's statement, "That aggravates those
who feel that justices should follow the Constitution and legislative intent,"
seems to neatly ignore the fact that Obama's next statement was "I will seek
someone who is dedicated to the rule of law, who honors our Constitutional
traditions, who respects the integrity of the judicial process, and the
appropriate limits of the judicial role," the fact is, just about every news
organization honed in on the "empathy" part of the statement. It became the
sound bite from that press exchange.


In a more lengthy report, however, Media Matters has other candidates that
are fitting examples of these games with videotape, well worth reviewing. Key
examples include Sean Hannity's intentional omission of Obama's admonishment of
Europeans' "casual...insidious" anti-Americanism to make it look like Obama was
apologizing for the United States, and Wendell Goler's splice-happy report that
made it look like Obama was in favor of "European-style health care," when he
was actually specifically opposing it. Also close to my heart is Fox's
misleading insertion of an out-of-context Joe Biden clip into a report, for
which the network eventually had to apologize. At the time, I opined:


It's very sad, and weird, because Fox News would have made their point just
fine if they hadn't included the misleading part of this clip. All they've
really done is demonstrate that they do not have enough faith in their own
editorial premises to avoid bolstering them with falsehoods. But more to the
point, whoever is responsible for putting this video together needs to accept a
new prevailing reality, that stupid little lies like this will be debunked and
exposed very quickly, so they may as well just cut out this nonsense
entirely.


Yet they persist!


Why did the 9/11 commission give King
Yet again, you continue to miss the point. He acted ILLEGALLY. For all your blabbing about *intelligence* you have no idea what you're talking about. Perhaps it's okay with you that your civil rights are violated all in the name of *protecting the country*. Why is it so hard to get the required permission from judges?
The madness of King George

Here's another example of King George's *work*


Bush Quietly Says No Need Follow Patriot Act Oversight Measure


White House Says Signing Statement Is Normal and Constitutional


Analysis
By GEORGE SANCHEZ



March 24, 2006 — - When President Bush renewed the revised USA Patriot Act on March 9, Congress added oversight measures intended to keep the federal government from abusing the special terrorism-related powers to search homes and secretly seize documents.


The additional provisions require law enforcement officials to safeguard all Americans' civil liberties and mandate that the Justice Department keep closer track of how often and in what situations the FBI could use the new powers, and that the administration regularly provide the information to Congress.


However, it was not known at the time that the White House added an addendum stating that the president didn't need to adhere to requirements that he inform members of Congress about how the FBI was using the Patriot Act's expanded police powers.



After the bill-signing ceremony, the White House discreetly issued a ''signing statement, an official document in which a president lays out his interpretation of a new law. In the statement, Bush said he did not consider himself bound to tell Congress how the Patriot Act's powers were being used and that, despite the law's requirements, he could withhold the information if he decided that disclosure would ''impair foreign relations, national security, the deliberative process of the executive, or the performance of the executive's constitutional duties.



Presidential Power in Question



In doing so, it appears the president once again cited his constitutional authority to bypass the law under certain circumstances.


For example, after The New York Times reported last year that Bush had authorized the military to conduct electronic surveillance of Americans' international phone calls and e-mails without obtaining warrants, as required by law, the president said his wartime powers gave him the right to ignore the warrant law.



When Congress passed a law forbidding the torture of any detainee in U.S. custody, Bush signed off on it but issued a signing statement declaring that he could bypass the law if he believed using harsh interrogation techniques was necessary to protect national security.


Bush's actions have provoked increased grumbling in Congress from both parties. Lawmakers have pointed out that the Constitution gave the legislative branch the power to write the laws and the executive branch the duty to ''faithfully execute them.


On Thursday Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, took issue with Bush's assertion that he could ignore the new provisions of the Patriot Act. He said it represented ''nothing short of a radical effort to manipulate the constitutional separation of powers and evade accountability and responsibility for following the law.


''The president's signing statements are not the law, and Congress should not allow them to be the last word, Leahy said. ''The president's constitutional duty is to faithfully execute the laws as written by Congress, not cherry-pick the laws he decides he wants to follow. Leahy voted against renewing the Patriot Act this year after sponsoring the bill back in 2001.


The White House dismissed Leahy's concerns, saying Bush's signing statement was simply ''very standard language that is ''used consistently with provisions like these where legislation is requiring reports from the executive branch or where disclosure of information is going to be required.



''The signing statement makes clear that the president will faithfully execute the law in a manner that is consistent with the Constitution, said White House spokeswoman Dana Perino. ''The president has welcomed at least seven inspector general reports on the Patriot Act since it was first passed, and there has not been one verified abuse of civil liberties using the Patriot Act.


The Patriot Act's renewal was viewed as a rare victory for the Republican-controlled Congress and the White House. The House of Representatives approved the measure by a vote of 280-138 after the Senate passed the controversial bill 89-10.





Rush...the new pub king....ROFL (sm)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/28/phil-gingrey-gop-congress_n_161964.html


 


Unprovoked Israel on Palestinian settler violence caught on tape
http://sabbah.blip.tv/#1586762
Settler Violence in Hebron

http://sabbah.blip.tv/#1550798
Israeli Settler Shooting Palestinians in Hebron

http://sabbah.blip.tv/#999702
Jewish Settlers Attack Elderly Shepherd and His Wife

http://sabbah.blip.tv/#916017
More Settler Violence in Hebron

http://sabbah.blip.tv/#1653918
CNN Rick Sanchez report on who really broke the cease fire, 01/07/2009

LOL! Why aren't you upset with King George?

Oh, I forgot.  It's the neocon MO to bash the messenger and defend the actor. 


http://www.avn.com/index.php?Primary_Navigation=Articles&Action=View_Article&Content_ID=227238 Mary Carey to Dine with President Bush By: Chip Baker Posted: 1:15 pm PDT 5-18-2005 LOS ANGELES - Porn star and former gubernatorial candidate Mary Carey will be joining her boss, Kick Ass Pictures president Mark Kulkis, in attending a dinner with President Bush in Washington, D.C. on June 14.


Coretta King Rejected War (period).








 

We must remember it was Coretta's funeral, so sentiments were made in HER honor, NOT SUGAR COATED FOR THE BUSHES.

 

 
 
















Published on Friday, February 3, 2006 by the Madison Capital Times

Coretta King Rejected War

Editorial
 

President Bush may have tried to claim a little bit of the legacy of Coretta Scott King with a warm and generous reference to her at the opening of his State of the Union address this week, but it should be remembered that King was a foe of this president and a frequent critic of his abuses of power.

On the eve of the invasion of Iraq in 2003, King celebrated the anniversary of the birth of her late husband, the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., by recalling that the slain civil rights leader had been outspoken in his opposition to unnecessary and unwise wars.

We commemorate Martin Luther King Jr. as a great champion of peace who warned us that war was a poor chisel for carving out a peaceful tomorrow. We must pursue peaceful ends through peaceful means. Martin said, 'True peace is not just the absence of tension, it is the presence of justice,' Coretta King told a crowd that had gathered at Atlanta's Ebenezer Baptist Church. She continued, May his challenge and his example guide and inspire us to seek peaceful alternatives to a war with Iraq and military conflict in the Middle East.

Coretta King continued to speak out against the Bush administration's policy of pre-emptive war-making, and she always make it clear that she disagreed passionately with this president.

Coretta Scott King ponders a reporter's question in front of a painting of her late husband, civil-rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr., in this Jan. 14, 2003 file photo from Atlanta.

When Bush showed up to lay a wreath at the Rev. King's grave in January 2004, Coretta King was polite but pointed in her remarks. Before greeting Bush, she said at another event at Ebenezer Baptist that she sided with those who opposed the war rather than supported it, and she lamented the fact that those people are not in charge of making the policies of their nations. If they were, she added, I think we would have more peace and more justice.

There will be many celebrations of Coretta Scott King's brave and inspiring life, as well as her rich legacy of activism.

But none will be so appropriate as those that recall her absolute opposition to this president's illegal and immoral war-making.

© 2006 The Capital Times


Revelations, King James Version

The anniversary of Martin Luther King's...
"I have a dream" speech. And it was not condescending. He was being honest. It is a historic day. On this day in 1963 is when King delivered that speech, and today the first African American man will accept the nomination of a major party for President of the United States. It is historical and McCain was taking the high road.
Yah remember the Rodney King riots? (sm)

The original OJ not-guilty verdict because the jury was too afraid of another Rodney King-like riot were he actually convicted?


I just hope Biden is qualified to be president.  I honestly don't see Obama actually becoming president or maybe that's just wishful thinking, take it however you want.


Martin Luther King was a republican, Mrs. M
nm