That claim is SO old. Anyone playing that old record
Posted By: again is really clutching at straws. on 2008-10-22
In Reply to: I'm more worried about Obama hob-knobbing with - terrorists...........nm
.
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
Hey, thanks for playing!
I think most of us progress throughout lives from one avocation to another. MT was not the very first thing I ever worked at, and probably won't be the last. (Especially if this VR thing finally finds me.) But everything I've done, everything I've read and everything I've experienced has helped me develop.
With all those cards he is playing.........sm
it is easy to see why he is not playing with a full deck of cards.
Just playing by liberal rules
It doesn't matter if something is supposed to be funny or not. In the liberal world every statement is taken literally. According to GT even thinking something stereotypical or racial should be grounds for dismissal from your job or worse yet a trip to the gallows, but in the next breath she posts a blatantly stereotypical article about our nations regions.
Oh did I take what GT said out of context? Did other people take what GT said out of context? Gee, gosh, sorry...but cccording to the LIBERAL rules nothing is ever taken out of context. If you utter the words like *black* or *abortion* in the same sentence. Then you're a racist...case closed.
Don't blame us for enforcing your rules. We didn't make them, but you have to play by them too, or we'll call you out...
Have a nice night....
McCain is playing the "woman"
She has no experience at all... I can't wait to see Biden chews her up and spits her out; hope she takes her Midol.
I cannot believe that bracelets is the issue here at all.
Everyone is crying about the economy and Barack Obama says he's worried about us the middle class (which we are as MTs), and a bracelet is all you people have to worry about??? Hello??????????????
And I'm not sitting playing the woe is me, pity
@
The playing field has never been more level!
Thanks to affirmative action, white heterosexual males cannot get jobs especially when competing with a person classified as a minority. Mintorities get college scholarships and acceptance into good schools so universities can meet their quota. It's ridiculous! There is a black man in the White House --- I think affirmative action has done its job!
It's time for everyone, no matter their race, be treated equally. The best PERSON for the job should get the job. The best student with the best transcipts should get the admission letter and scholarship. There shouldn't be quotas to fill. NOBODY should get preferential treatment anymore!
Just leveling the playing field...(sm)
I thought it was about time for a left wing post to balance out those gazillion posts from the right. You think its garbage because its from the left -- about the same thing that I think about posts from the right.
As far as Rush goes, it doesn't much matter if you aren't ga-ga over Rush because obviously those republicans that actually have a say in govt are very much ga-ga over him. You did catch Michael Steeles' apology? Priceless.
Playing dumb is not your strong suit. nm
nmnmnm
So playing the gender card to get votes
nm
On a level playing field that would be correct...
this is not a level playing field. I don't see her encouraging Obama to do town hall meetings with McCain...and after 18 months running for the #1 seat, he just this past month sat down with someone who was not in the tank for his candidacy. You really don't see how lopsided this is? Obama being inteviewed by the lambs and the left wanting to feed her to the wolves.
School vouchers would even the playing field.
Obviously, you've never had a child in the public school system in a large city.
Vouchers would serve to level the playing field for those of us whose children's schools have gone down the tube thanks to the influx of "at risk youth" (probably the most overused term in existence).
When a public school gets a FAILING grade on their 'no child left behind' (another bogus waste of taxpayer money) progress scores, those kids are allowed to transfer to another school.
Then guess what happens. The school all those inner-city kids are bussed to gets a FAILING grade the next year. So, it's a big fat wad of BS that 'at risk' youths are 'at risk' because they don't have ACCESS to a decent education. From my personal experience, and those of hundreds of thousands of other moms around the country, they simply drag the good school down to their level.
My daughter used to go to an A-rated public high school. Then the 'ghetto school' (the name the STUDENTS called it, so don't rip on me about it) failed for its fourth year and all these 'students' were shoved into the A-school. I guess someone thought they weren't getting their fair shake, and all that was needed was to put them in the 'good' school.
I'm sure you know what happened. That first year, there were countless disruptions for weapons on campus, drug activity skyrocketed, the campus became a 'lock-down' school where all kids' backpacks were searched, teen pregnancies went through the roof (on purpose, which makes me sick) and the students' grades plummeted. The A-school subsequently received Fs each consecutive year.
The kids who ruined their own school didn't give half a drip about learning anything. They slacked off in the back of the class, mouthed off to the teachers, and made it impossible for anyone to learn anything, as the teachers became wardens rather than instructors to deal with the disrespectful little delinquents.
My daughter is now home-schooled. Yet I still have to pay income tax and county 'school tax' for the little monsters who invaded it and ran it into the ground.
And it has nothing to do with color, before you get all high and mighty on me. My daughter's school was a pretty even mix of Black, Caucasian, and Hispanic before AND after the forced bussing. It's about the 'culture' of the kids that came in. To them, hip-hop culture is the only way to live. Gangstas and ho's - that's the ultimate career goal in their minds.
So let's not pretend that vouchers are undesirable. That's a fat, steaming pile of B.S.
Throwing money year after year after year at kids that simply aren't interested in learning is what really drags down the system.
School vouchers would even the playing field.
Obviously, you've never had a child in the public school system in a large city.
Vouchers would serve to level the playing field for those of us whose children's schools have gone down the tube thanks to the influx of "at risk youth" (probably the most overused term in existence).
When a public school gets a FAILING grade on their 'no child left behind' (another bogus waste of taxpayer money) progress scores, those kids are allowed to transfer to another school.
Then guess what happens. The school all those inner-city kids are bussed to gets a FAILING grade the next year. So, it's a big fat wad of BS that 'at risk' youths are 'at risk' because they don't have ACCESS to a decent education. From my personal experience, and those of hundreds of thousands of other moms around the country, they simply drag the good school down to their level.
My daughter used to go to an A-rated public high school. Then the 'ghetto school' (the name the STUDENTS called it, so don't rip on me about it) failed for its fourth year and all these 'students' were shoved into the A-school. I guess someone thought they weren't getting their fair shake, and all that was needed was to put them in the 'good' school.
I'm sure you know what happened. That first year, there were countless disruptions for weapons on campus, drug activity skyrocketed, the campus became a 'lock-down' school where all kids' backpacks were searched, teen pregnancies went through the roof (on purpose, which makes me sick) and the students' grades plummeted. The A-school subsequently received Fs each consecutive year.
The kids who ruined their own school didn't give half a drip about learning anything. They slacked off in the back of the class, mouthed off to the teachers, and made it impossible for anyone to learn anything, as the teachers became wardens rather than instructors to deal with the disrespectful little delinquents.
My daughter is now home-schooled. Yet I still have to pay income tax and county 'school tax' for the little monsters who invaded it and ran it into the ground.
And it has nothing to do with color, before you get all high and mighty on me. My daughter's school was a pretty even mix of Black, Caucasian, and Hispanic before AND after the forced bussing. It's about the 'culture' of the kids that came in. To them, hip-hop culture is the only way to live. Gangstas and ho's - that's the ultimate career goal in their minds.
So let's not pretend that vouchers are undesirable. That's a fat, steaming pile of B.S.
Throwing money year after year after year at kids that simply aren't interested in learning is what really drags down the system.
NO! You mean Obama is playing a shell game?
It's just too simple and too obvious. All the obots here won't be able to compute that information. It'll have to come up a bit 'em in the butt!
Stop playing the blame game!
There are millions of people who were not "sucked" into buying more house than they could afford. Unfortunately, many people got greedy and bit off more than they could chew. It is very easy to blame someone else for your bad judgment, but the bottom line is that you have to take responsibility for your own actions. Smoke that!
I am SO TIRED of minorities playing victim!
So the black firemen totally SUCKED on the test. Maybe they didn't study as hard. Or they weren't as smart to begin with. Or they got loaded the night before the big test. Who cares why the stunk on the test. The fact was they STUNK! I'm sure a lot of WHITE firemen sucked at it, too.
But, instead of people saying, gee, those guys sucked on the test, they decided to pretend like there was something wrong with THE TEST instead of the guys who sucked at it. For no other reason than a bunch of hard-working WHITE GUYS did better than the majority of other people.
Yet another example of how this country bends over backwards to help minorities. They don't want EQUAL rights - they want RIGHT-OF-WAY - as in - clear the decks, let the 'special cases' go to the front of the line.
It's pure and utter BS. Typical of the lunatics on the left to defend such racism, while still maintaining their oh-so-precious "victim" status.
I'm not playing your sick demented mind games gt
You want me dead...admit it...you do. You are one sick, sad puppy.
Go put on your party clothes and get to your local people died, so leftists can celebrate parties. You admitted it was party time. Go now...shooo...
Playing both sides of the field in case she gets in power...sm
Big business 101.
Now you're playing Sarah Palin games--
I'm perfectly on point. My reasoning is that there is no reason to fear 1 man, because it takes a lot more than 1 man to make a change. Members of either party don't always back their party's bills. In fact, a lot of them don't, as the case was Monday.
The hard part for you here is that what I am saying is true and you don't want to admit that, ergo you would be admitting that there should be no fear.
Smart move on their part; looks like they are playing games with all of us.
xx
trust me...you're playing right into the media's hands.....sm
thinking exactly what they want you to think about her.
Doesn't surprise me a bit.
Notice how the dems are the ones always playing the race card...
and then blaming it on the pubs....typical.
Another one from the Conservative board. Is it playing nice to call someone an insufferable
I believe the whole thread containing this post should be deleted, since they are all along the same lines and contain personal attacks against people who don't agree with them. Fair is fair, right?
****
You insufferable elitist snob. sm
[Post a Reply] [View Follow Ups] [Politics] --> [Conservatives]
Posted By: MT2 on 2005-06-28,
In Reply to: Do you ever say anything intelligent? - MTME
I am sure they have had to widen the doorways in your house to get your head through it. Get over yourself.
Iran playing rope-a-dope with Obama...when will he learn?
So today we get these "conciliatory" advances from Ahmadinejad regarding their nuke program. Only someone living in fairyland will fail to recognize this old ploy from Iran for exactly what it is. Like Iran's invested $billions in their nukes and they're just going to throw it all away.
If Ahmadinejad can show that Washington is "negotiating" with him, he will shore up the position of his highly unpopular party for the elections in June. He can say "Look - for years we've taken it to America, and now they're coming our way."
It will also undercut the democratic opposition in Iran if Washington has any truck with this deceitful regime, which has never been any more trustworthy than the most psychopathic liar that you've ever known in your life. It will only give them more time to continue to work on their nukes, and will also undercut Israel.
Rope-a-dope is one thing, BO, but even Mohammad Ali's punch-stupid opponents weren't this easy. Your kumbaya fantasies are incredibly naive, and frighteningly dangerous.
Israel, looks like you'll have to do the job again.
It's kinda fun to watch you playing mental bumper cars
NM
Just for the record
I felt the same way about the war before he was killed. It is wrong, its based on lies, and its immoral. So okay to lie about reasons for going to war, not okay to lie about sex, okay to let the perps of 09/11 go free, not okay to try the perps of the first World Trade bombing and let em rot in jail after a trial as that is not tough enuf on terror, okay to spy without warrants on Americans..okay to sit and eat cake and play guitar while New Orleans drowns, Then tell Brownie heckuva job while people die in the Superdome...I mean whats it gonna take?
And yes, I did rather explode at the Xmas isnt treating me nice comment..that hit a nerve bigtime for me.
And also for the record, I would be just as upset were Bush a dem or green or libertarian..this administration has done more damage to this country than I thought was possible. This isnt about political parties,this is about America and our constitution, our ideals and everything this country is built on.
For the record, neither am I....
Just an American married to an Iranian refugee who fled political persecution under the current regime. If I misunderstood your post, I apologize.
This post is not "news" but rather a brief yet accurate description of the complex nature of Iranian politics. No sources you can try to attack. Sorry about that.
Not quite sure what you mean when you say you "know" politics every which way and that you "kick butt at it."
It comes as no surprise that you would not be interested in any viable information on this subject, since you seem to be perfectly comfortable in characterizing US-Iranian diplomatic initiatives as dealing with madmen who hate America for its freedoms (gag me). Sounds like sound byte mentality to me...again nothing new under heaven, coming from an Ann Coulter wannabe who thinks that former POW patriots are automatically qualified to be president.
By the way, throwing around a bit of sarcasm about radical Islam and infidels does not exactly qualify as a total butt kick. So I'm like you...not interested in futher pursuit of this nonsense.
Thank you so much...I will...and for the record....
I don't care what you think, nor do I care if anybody cares what I think. The babies need a voice. And why that irritates all of you so much....hmmmm.
For the record -
While I am a supporter of Obama, I want to emphasize that I am not a coldhearted murderer, that I do not advocate watching babies die, that I do not go out and actively support abortions of any kind (early or late).
I also do not feel that Obama is sitting there right now saying to himself, I wonder how many babies I can let die today. I think that the relationship he has with God is worked out between him and God and if he has worked this issue out in his own mind and feels comfortable with his decision, then that is his personal decision. I do not think that he is the be all and end all in the decision making process for the rest of us. I think that he has just decided that it should be an individual choice for a woman to decide what to do with her own body...
I do not want to see abortions once again be illegal in the United States. How many young, naive, and stupid girls (children mostly) died when they chose to have an illegal abortion rather than go to their families and admit that they had made mistakes and ask for help? How many women died or were permanently mutilated and could never have children again because after they were raped and became pregnant, they could not face having that child, and they chose to have an illegal abortion?
I don't believe in abortion, I didn't choose to have an abortion when I got pregnant at 15, but I do believe that every woman should have the right to choose what she does with her own body - if she does not want to carry a child, then she should not be forced to by the government.
Now, I think we can go on and on about this forever, and we will never agree, or we can remember that abortion will not be outlawed by any president that is elected, and go on to argue the issues that will be on the front burner for the next couple of years and decide who will serve us best there.
For the record........... sm
I do have filtered internet access at home for my kids, and I have taught them that looking at pictures of naked women/men is unacceptable, but what happens when my 12-year-old son goes to the public library to check out a book and happens to walk behind someone who is accessing p*rn on the free access library computer? How do I protect my child against that? And what happens if that person happens to be a pervert who exposes himself to my child? Am I supposed to lead my child around the library with a blindfold on his eyes? Whose rights are being trampled on there?
Behavioral problems? No, friend. It is natural curiosity of a 12-year-old to learn about the opposite sex, what they look like unclothed and that is nothing new. Naturally, they won't cop a look at mom getting out of the shower because that would be wrong on so many levels for a young boy, but they will look at anonymous women on the internet, given the chance. We need to take that chance away from them until they are more grounded in their moral beliefs and can control such urges themselves. If the government allows free access to objectionable material at school (where I can't hold his hand all day) or in the public library (where he should be able to check out a book without fear of glimpsing something objectionable) then I really have to wonder at the moral base of our government. As someone pointed out, they work for me, not the other way around.
I think he's going for the record for...(sm)
number of lies in one speech
For the record
1. I'm not a Republican, but a conservative who votes for the candidate of either party I think will do the job properly. This often is a Republican, but not always.
2. I did not realize board space was rationed, or that any of us was taking more than our share. Please explain these guidelines.
3. When you see a post under a moniker that usually upsets you, feel free to skip reading it. That way you will not be offended. And if you don't read it, you will not respond to it and maybe the thread will die out.
4. When something is broadcast that I feel will raise my blood pressure, I use one of those little on/off/channel thingies to eliminate the threat. I don't holler that it has no business on the airwaves. Try to think of this board in the same way.
5. However, if you wish to debate an issue, bring it on. That's my understanding of what this forum is for.
Not at all. Just trying to set the record straight. sm
 As to what the board monitor REALLY said, since the left sometimes has comprehension problems and all.
Record speaks for itself.
Been there, done that, and agree with OP - Cons have been grossly hypocritical about demanding dissenters leave their board, then sneaking over here to post nasty comments.
He's trying to break a record you know.
Cutting his vacation short due to the Katrina disaster could have affected his record! Must be nice to have over a year of vacation time in only 7 years, and a war-time president at that. I'm not surprised though. I almost don't want to talk smack about him anymore because it is just too easy. It helps to vent though, I suppose.
Voting Record
Since everyone is at least a bit familiar with John McCain’s record when it comes to strolling through a market in Baghdad with hundreds of his closest guards, or how he wants to stay in Iraq for 100 years (except when he flip flops on that).
But not that many really, truly know just how horrific his voting record is when it comes to the troops. And it is pretty consistent – whether it is for armor and equipment, for veteran’s health care, for adequate troop rest or anything that actually, you know, supports our troops.
This is chock full of links to the roll call votes, and the roll call votes have links to the actual underlying bills and amendments. I present this so that there is support and things that can be rattled off when saying that McCain is not a friend of the military. Feel free to use it as you want, but this can be tied into the "Double Talk Express". But here is a very quick statement - John McCain skipped close to a dozen votes on Iraq, and on at least another 10 occasions, he voted against arming and equipping the troops, providing adequate rest for the troops between deployments and for health care or other benefits for veterans.
In mid 2007, Senator Reid noted that McCain missed 10 of the past 14 votes on Iraq. However, here is a summary of a dozen votes (two that he missed and ten that he voted against) with respect to Iraq, funding for veterans or for troops, including equipment and armor. I have also included other snippets related to the time period when the vote occurred.
September 2007: McCain voted against the Webb amendment calling for adequate troop rest between deployments. At the time, nearly 65% of people polled in a CNN poll indicted that "things are going either moderately badly or very badly in Iraq.
July 2007: McCain voted against a plan to drawdown troop levels in Iraq. At the time, an ABC poll found that 63% thought the invasion was not worth it, and a CBS News poll found that 72% of respondents wanted troops out within 2 years.
March 2007: McCain was too busy to vote on a bill that would require the start of a drawdown in troop levels within 120 days with a goal of withdrawing nearly all combat troops within one year. Around this time, an NBC News poll found that 55% of respondents indicated that the US goal of achieving victory in Iraq is not possible. This number has not moved significantly since then.
February 2007: For such a strong supporter of the escalation, McCain didn’t even bother to show up and vote against a resolution condemning it. However, at the time a CNN poll found that only 16% of respondents wanted to send more troops to Iraq (that number has since declined to around 10%), while 60% said that some or all should be withdrawn. This number has since gone up to around 70%.
June 2006: McCain voted against a resolution that Bush start withdrawing troops but with no timeline to do so.
May 2006: McCain voted against an amendment that would provide $20 million to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for health care facilities.
April 2006: McCain was one of only 13 Senators to vote against $430,000,000 for the Department of Veteran Affairs for Medical Services for outpatient care and treatment for veterans.
March 2006: McCain voted against increasing Veterans medical services funding by $1.5 billion in FY 2007 to be paid for by closing corporate tax loopholes.
March 2004: McCain once again voted for abusive tax loopholes over veterans when he voted against creating a reserve fund to allow for an increase in Veterans' medical care by $1.8 billion by eliminating abusive tax loopholes. Jeez, McCain really loves those tax loopholes for corporations, since he voted for them over our veterans' needs.
October 2003: McCain voted to table an amendment by Senator Dodd that called for an additional $322,000,000 for safety equipment for United States forces in Iraq and to reduce the amount provided for reconstruction in Iraq by $322,000,000.
April 2003: McCain urged other Senate members to table a vote (which never passed) to provide more than $1 billion for National Guard and Reserve equipment in Iraq related to a shortage of helmets, tents, bullet-proof inserts, and tactical vests.
August 2001: McCain voted against increasing the amount available for medical care for veterans by $650,000,000. To his credit, he also voted against the 2001 Bush tax cuts, which he now supports making permanent, despite the dire financial condition this country is in, and despite the fact that he indicated in 2001 that these tax cuts unfairly benefited the very wealthy at the expense of the middle class.
So there it is. John McCain is yet another republican former military veteran who likes to talk a big game when it comes to having the support of the military. Yet, time and time again, he has gone out of his way to vote against the needs of those who are serving in our military. If he can’t even see his way to actually doing what the troops want, or what the veterans need, and he doesn’t have the support of veterans, then how can he be a credible commander in chief?
Maybe cuz it's the same old "broken record"?
Yup, it's that same old broken record.
X
just for the record, that wasn't me!
LOL
and for the record, I think it is always wrong (sm)
I do believe abortion is murder no matter what stage of development. But I can't see how ANYONE could even argue a case that partial birth abortions are right. We are not talking about medical emergencies here but are talking about elective abortions. And even in the case of an emergency, if the mother was someone who wanted her baby, everything would be done to try to keep the baby alive. Partial birth abortion is a horrible heinous crime that should not be acceptable to any intelligent, feeling human being.
Just for the record....I am not a far right person.
Secondly....what in the world does your post have anything to do with mine. I want to know why we aren't doing something and you give me this huge lecture about how Bush is evil and to blame for every single thing, etc. Truthfully, I am tired of you and your far-left rantings. I'm tired of people refusing to see that this crisis has been coming on for a long time. You people refuse to see that Clinton had any hand in this issue either even though he was the one who forced banks to give everyone loans whether they could pay for them or not. I'm tired of the right vs left BS. They are all guilty in my opinion, some more than others. I personally wanna puke every time I see Pelosi, Dodd, Frank, Reid, etc.
I know things are bad....trust me....I know. You don't have to preach to me about tent cities, etc. Also, Bush is gone and I know Obama got a mess when he stepped into the White House, but he is the commander in chief now and blaming Bush for everything doesn't change the fact that I don't agree with what Obama is doing now. We are spending money where we shouldn't and we should definitely be looking into more energy resources as that will create jobs as well as stop sending money out of the country for as much foreign oil.
Yawn same broken record
that keeps sticking on the same note.
Just for the record, I have never called anyone a racist.nm
x
Setting the record straight.
It is not spinning someone else's thoughts to ask them a question about those thoughts. I asked you how you felt about Mrs. King. Spinning is saying something like, you HATE Mrs. King. Courteously, I did not do that. You did however do that to me by assuming I hate Bush. By the way, what posts were those in which you expressed your admiration for Mrs. King? You referred to them but I don't see them here. Maybe you were singing her praises on the Con board? Might be why I missed them, as I don't go there.
Talk radio all abuzz about the impropriety? LOL!! We know what type that is. The story hardly got a slight clip on any of the network news stations - that right there ought to tell you that they were very squeamish about how bad it made Bush look. Had it been anything like a true classless act by Democrats, Rove would have made sure it was network news 24/7 for two weeks.
And what is this about implying that I said Repubs were to blame for ruining Wellstone's funeral? I said no such thing. What Repubs did (in their perpetual terror of ordinary people banding together to express sentiments that uplift the soul and give them hope) was to try to spin the whole thing as a bash fest against themselves and the deceased - much as your favorite radio host is doing now with Mrs. King's memorial events. THAT was the connection and deliberately trying to misunderstand it is lame.
Don't really give a hoot if you admire people of both parties - I think I was pretty clear that I rather admire GBI myself. Anybody taking in the whole scene and using good judgment is going to find traits they admire across the board. Which Dem did you say you really admire? I missed that. Let me guess - Zell Miller? Hahah!
And for the record, I don't hate Bush. I just believe he's an enabler who has no respect either for the working people of this nation or for our founding priciples and therefore has no business being in the White House.
They all sound like a broken record.sm
I think they all learned this from Hannity on Fox. They call everyone asking questions conspiratory theorists, or if they cannot shoot the message they focus the blame on Clinton. The one thing they never do is answer THE QUESTIONS. Here is a link to an article on Hannity's histrionics on 911.
http://www.newshounds.us/2005/10/23/hannitys_hackneyed_histrionics_over_911.php
For the record, Teddy/Taiga....
the rest of the post said when it wasn't in response to what had been thrown at me first. Methinks you are very guilty of what you always accuse me of....cutting and pasting out of context. Teddy is taking over again.
Bremer's bio, just to set the record straight....
Born in Hartford, Connecticut, Bremer was educated at New Canaan Country School and Phillips Academy. He graduated from Yale University in 1963, and went on to earn an MBA from Harvard University in 1966. He later continued his education at the Institut d'Etudes Politiques DE Paris, where he earned a Certificate of Political Studies (CEP).
That same year he joined the Foreign Service, which sent him first to Kabul, Afghanistan as a general officer. He was assigned to Blantyre, Malawi, as economic and commercial officer from 1968 to 1971.
During the 1970s, Bremer held various domestic posts with the State Department, including posts as an assistant to Henry Kissinger from 1972–76.[2] He was Deputy Chief of Mission in Oslo from 1976–79, returning to the US to take a post of Deputy Executive Secretary of the Department of State, where he remained from 1979–81. In 1981 he was promoted to Executive Secretary and Special Assistant to Alexander Haig.
Ronald Reagan appointed Bremer as Ambassador to the Netherlands in 1983 and Ambassador-at-Large for Counterterrorism in 1986.[3] Bremer retired from the Foreign Service in 1989 and became managing director at Kissinger and Associates, a worldwide consulting firm founded by Henry Kissinger. A Career Member of the Senior Foreign Service, Class of Career Minister, Bremer received the State Department Superior Honor Award, two Presidential Meritorious Service Awards, and the Distinguished Honor Award from the Secretary of State. Before rejoining government in 2003, he was Chairman and CEO of Marsh Crisis Consulting, a risk and insurance services firm which is a subsidiary of Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc., a trustee on the Economic Club of New York,[4] and a board member of Air Products and Chemicals, Inc., Akzo Nobel NV, the Harvard Business School Club of New York[5] and The Netherlands-America Foundation. He served on the International Advisory Boards of Komatsu Corporation and Chugai Pharmaceuticals.
Bremer was appointed Chairman of the National Commission on Terrorism by House Speaker Dennis Hastert in 1999. He also served on the National Academy of Science Commission examining the role of Science and Technology in countering terrorism. Bremer and his wife were the founders of the Lincoln/Douglass Scholarship Foundation, a Washington-based not for profit organization that provides high school scholarships to inner city youths.
In late 2001, along with former Attorney General Edwin Meese, Bremer co-chaired the Heritage Foundation's Homeland Security Task Force, which created a blueprint for the White House's Department of Homeland Security. For two decades Bremer has been a regular at Congressional hearings and is recognized as an expert on terrorism and internal security. Some of Bremer's published work includes "Warfare & Defence Military Science Alliance Response to Nuclear Weapons Proliferation", "The Alliance Response to Nuclear Weapons Proliferation: Deterrence, Defense, and Cooperative Options", and "Countering the Changing Threat of International Terrorism: Report from the National Commission on Terrorism", a New York Times article "What I Really Said About Iraq", and his first book, "My Year In Iraq: The Struggle to Build a Future of Hope".
Bremer is awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom, December 14, 2004Bremer was awarded on December 14, 2004 the Presidential Medal of Freedom,[6] America's highest civil award for "especially meritorious contributions to the security or national interests of the United States, to world peace, or to cultural or other significant public or private endeavors." "He was also presented with the Department of Defense award for Distinguished Public Service and the Nixon Library[7] honored him with the "Victory of Freedom Award" for "demonstrating leadership and working towards peace and freedom."[8]
He does have extensive experience. So that part of the movie is an untruth. This is the point that Bremer makes about dissolution of the Iraqi Army...
On May 23, 2003 Bremer issued Order Number 2,[28] in effect dissolving the entire former Iraqi army and putting 400,000 former Iraqi soldiers out of work.[29]
The move was widely criticized for creating a large pool of armed & disgruntled youths for the insurgency to draw recruits from. Former soldiers took to the streets in mass protests to demand back pay. Many of them threatened violence if their demands were not met.[30][31]
Bremer called this argument of disbanding the Iraqi army a cat-like issue with nine lives. In his Fox news interview on July 31, 2006 he repeated again what he said before "...And no matter how many times I answer with the facts, it still comes back. But let's look at the facts. Let's take a minute. There was no Iraqi army to disband. The Iraqi army basically self-demobilized, as the Pentagon said. There wasn't a single unit standing anywhere in the country. So the question was should we recall the army. Now, let's think about what the army...".[32]
It was widely asserted within the White House and the CPA that the order to disband the Iraqi Army had little to no practical effect since it had "self-demobilized" in the face of the oncoming invasion force. This however was revealed to be false insofar as the CIA had conducted psychological operations against the Iraqi's which included dropping leaflets over the Army's positions prior to the invasion. The leaflets ordered the Iraqi Army to abandon their positions, return to their homes, and await further instructions. In the defense of those involved in the decision making process, it was apparently unknown to them at the time that the CIA had done this.[citation needed]
Regardless of what messages the CIA may or may not have tried on the old Iraqi army, the truth is by the time "Baghdad fell on April 9, 2003" the previous Army had demobilized, or as Bremer puts it "had simply dissolved...." The issue of disbanding the old Iraqi Army found itself, once again, the center of media attention with two articles explaining why Bremer did not make the decision on his own.
The first press release by the New York Times included a letter written by Bremer to President George W. Bush dated May 20, 2003 describing to the President the progress made so far since Bremer's arrival in Baghdad, including one sentence that reads "I will parallel this step with an even more robust measure dissolving Saddam's military and intelligence structures to emphasize that we mean business." Readers of the New York Times article will assume Bremer interpreted the President's response to the progress report as a "go".
The second press release dated September 6, 2007 was submitted by Bremer as an Op Ed piece for the New York Times. Titled "How I Didn't Dismantle Iraq's Army", Bremer discusses why the decision was not made on his own, and how the decision was reviewed by "top civilian and military members of the American government"; which included General John Abizaid who briefed officials in Washington "'there are no organized Iraqi military units left'".
Bremer’s article goes into further about how the Coalition Provisional Authority did consider two alternatives - to recall the old army or to rebuild a new army with "both vetted members of the old army and new recruits." According to Bremer, General Abizaid liked the second alternative.
Bremer also details the situation he and the major decision makers faced; especially when the large Shiite majority in the new Army could have had problems with the thought of having a former Sunni officer issuing orders.
Furthermore, Bremer reveals again how he received a memo from Donald Rumsfeld on May 8, 2003 that said "the coaltion 'will actively oppose Saddam hussein's old enforcers - the Baath Party, Fedayeen Saddam, etc...'we will make clear that the coalition will eliminate the remnants of Saddam's regime'". According to Bremer, the memo was also sent to both the national security adviser and the secretary of state at the time.[33]
There are two sides to every story. In all the people listed for the movie who were asked to contribute but did not wish to, I did not see Bremer among them. I wonder why.
Again, I agree mistakes were made. I also believe that this documentary had an agenda, that it was very narrow and targeted one particular part of the Iraq situation, and as usual...there is a lot of the story left untold.
I am looking into the other principles who had input into the documentary...and what I am finding is not at all surprising.
I think we can stop beating the dead horse, tho...annother issue we will never agree on, that being you take it on face value and I don't. :-)
Have a good day!
This is like listening to a broken record! (nm)
It just keeps skipping back and repeating the same thing over and over and over. Do have these comments set up in a word Expander to save time and keystrokes?
Well just for the record, my vote has nothing to do with race. sm
In fact I started out pro-Obama. And I am still not terribly fond of Palin. I would hate to think in this day and age race would have anything to do with who wins this election. I am sure it will influence a certain number of votes in each direction, because there are racists of every race, but I do not believe it strongly influence who wins.
BC fanatics, the broken record.
x
Your boy Jim Cramer's track record
http://www.cxoadvisory.com/gurus/Cramer/
In short, as of 01/18/2009, Jim Cramer has been correct about his market predictions about 46% of the time, a little below average. You'd have been better off with a no-load index fund than Cramer's picks.
Read about his "stock of the year" NYSE Euronext debacle in 2007.
http://www.stocktagger.com/2007/07/jim-cramer-track-record-on-nyse.html
In short, Euronext lost 20% of its value since his "growth stock of the year" recommendation, despite flogging it repeatedly on his show and even bringing the CEO on his show and grilling him on why his stock was going down the tubes.
If Jim Cramer has an opinion on anything, the smart money choice is to do the opposite. This includes his opinion on the stimulus.
I don't claim to no everything about him.
I have never claimed that. Did I vote for him....no. Have I given him a chance? What chance is there to give him? Look at what he has done in this short time. I don't want to wait another term in office before I see the huge mistakes that are happening now. And please correct me if I am wrong but I do recall many of you putting Bush down for every little thing that he ever did. I didn't vote for Bush either and I do believe he made some huge mistakes as well. You people have no problem cutting people down and not giving them a chance unless we are talking about Obama and then all of a sudden we are all horrible for opposing government spending MORE of our money. That makes us instantly prejudice.
You ridicule Bush for the war in Iraq and Obama said he would pull our troops out ASAP. We are still there and Obama has pushed back the time line to pull them out. Now we are in Afgan fighting the Taliban....which are the same terrorist freaks we ran out of Iraq. Gitmo is still open with no plan of where to put these terrorists. The usual rules in bankrupcty were changed in Chrysler's dealings so that the unions came out top dog....which is not supposed to happen like that. Obama has spent more money than Bush ever did and he wants to spend more. He promised no taxes of any kind to 95% of Americans and yet he wants to institute cap and trade which will tax everyone. The jobs that he claims will be created with the spendulous package are not sustainable jobs. Only 1 out of 10 green jobs are sustainable long term. He is capping what CEOs can make. He has done nothing but apologize for the US wherever he goes and yet he fails to comment on all the good things that we have done for other countries or how much we gave relief to people after natural disasters. A man who gives abortion rights but takes away the rights of doctors and hospitals to deny performing a procedure they don't believe in when those patients could easily go elsewhere for that particular procedure. Our government is getting bigger and taking over too much. What right does our government have to cap pay for anyone? What right does our goverment have to okay bonuses for AIG and then turn around and demand the bonuses be taken away. I don't agree that they should get bonuses but congress approved it in the first place. Did you sleep through all of this? They are talking about taxing health care benefits to help pay for universal health care when Obama ridiculed McCain during the campaign stating how ridiculous it is for McCain to want to tax someone's benefits.....hello?
ARE YOU LISTENING? How much more time should I give him because I can say that he sucks?
|
