This guy gets it. Sees through the phony Obama

• Why this black man can't vote for Obama - Elle
  • Maybe Senator Obama believes in following the - Stardust
  • This guy gets it. Sees through the phony Obama - WAKE UP AMERICANS!. nm
    • I say WAKE UP AMERICA too - gourdpainter
      • oh get over bush would ya? - his foot
      • That's getting kind of tired. - Zville MT
        • you're right - they
        • I guess I ranted enough above. LOL - gourdpainter
          • let me tell you this - i don't care
            • Oh....you can bet your ars they are - Chele
          • I would beg to differ with - old Clinton...sm

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

And you're the one who has issues..severe anger management issues.  You've been up and down this board throwing hissy fits, one right after another, being rude, crude, angry and obnoxious to anyone who dares to disagree with you, and you even had the audacity to suggest to someone (who has put up with your crap and tried to discuss issues with you) that they have anger issues.  YOU are the one with an obvious anger problem.  You act like a 3-year-old who is throwing a tantrum because she can't get her way.  You're the one who is phony.  You must have a pitiful personal life, and it must really suck to be YOU because you are obviously miserable.

Friday, November 25, 2005 - 12:00 AM

Permission to reprint or copy this article or photo, other than personal use, must be obtained from The Seattle Times. Call 206-464-3113 or e-mail resale@seattletimes.com with your request.

Rep. Norm Dicks voted in 2002 to back the war.

JIMI LOTT / THE SEATTLE TIMES, 2003

U.S. Rep. Norm Dicks, center, with military officers at ceremonies marking the opening of new facilities at Naval Station Bremerton in 2003.

By Alicia Mundy
Seattle Times Washington bureau

WASHINGTON — It was after 11 p.m. on Friday when Rep. Norm Dicks finally left the Capitol, fresh from the heated House debate on the Iraq war. He was demoralized and angry.

Sometime during the rancorous, seven-hour floor fight over whether to immediately withdraw U.S. troops, one Texas Republican compared those who question America's military strategy in Iraq to the hippies and peaceniks who protested the Vietnam War and did terrible things to troop morale.

The House was in a frenzy over comments by Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., who had called for the troops to leave Iraq in six months. In response, the White House initially likened Murtha, a 37-year veteran of the Marines and an officer in Vietnam, to lefty moviemaker Michael Moore.

Then a new Republican representative from Ohio, Jean Schmidt, relayed a message to the House that she said she had received from a Marine colonel in her district: Cowards cut and run; Marines never do.

During much of the debate, Dicks, a Democrat from Bremerton, huddled in the Democrats' cloakroom with Murtha, a longtime friend. Both men are known for their strong support of the military over the years. Now, they felt, that record was being questioned.

There was a lot of anger back there, Dicks said in an interview this week. It was powerful. I can't remember anything quite as traumatic as this in my history here.

Near midnight, he drove to his D.C. home, poured a drink and wondered how defense hawks like he and Murtha had gotten lumped in with peaceniks by their colleagues and the administration.

And he thought about all that had happened over the past couple of years to change his mind about the war in Iraq.

Voted to back Bush

In October 2002, Dicks voted loudly and proudly to back President Bush in a future deployment of U.S. troops to Iraq — one of two Washington state Democratic House members to do so. Adam Smith, whose district includes Fort Lewis, was the other.

Dicks thought Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and wouldn't hesitate to use them against the United States.

After visiting Iraq early in the war, Norm told me the Iraqis were going to be throwing petals at American troops, Murtha said in an interview this week.

Dicks now says it was all a mistake — his vote, the invasion, and the way the United States is waging the war.

While he disagrees with Murtha's conclusion that U.S. troops should be withdrawn within six months, Dicks said, He may well be right if this insurgency goes much further.

The insurgency has gotten worse and worse, he said. That's where Murtha's rationale is pretty strong — we're talking a lot of casualties with no success in sight. The American people obviously know that this war is a mistake.

Dicks, a member of the House Intelligence Committee, says he's particularly angry about the intelligence that supported going to war.

Without the threat of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), he said, he would absolutely not have voted for the war.

The Bush administration has accused some members of Congress of rewriting history by claiming the president misled Americans about the reasons for going to war. Congress, the administration says, saw the same intelligence and agreed Iraq was a threat.

But Dicks says the intelligence was doctored. And he says the White House didn't plan for and deploy enough troops for the growing insurgency.

A lot of us relied on [former CIA director] George Tenet. We had many meetings with the White House and CIA, and they did not tell us there was a dispute between the CIA, Commerce or the Pentagon on the WMDs, he said.

He and Murtha tended to give the military, the CIA and the White House the benefit of the doubt, Dicks says. But he now says he and his colleagues should have pressed much harder for answers.

Norm ... has agonized

All of us have gone through a difficult period, but Norm really has agonized, Murtha said this week.

Murtha and Dicks were appointed to the House Defense Appropriations subcommittee in 1979, three years after Dicks first was elected to Congress. They rarely have disagreed, especially in their support of the military.

In October 2002, Dicks made an impassioned speech during the House debate over whether to authorize the president to send troops to Iraq without waiting for the United Nations to act.

Based on the briefings I have had, and based on the information provided by our intelligence agencies to members of Congress, I now believe there is credible evidence that Saddam Hussein has developed sophisticated chemical and biological weapons, and that he may be close to developing a nuclear weapon, Dicks said at the time.

By spring 2003, U.N. weapons inspectors said they hadn't found hard evidence of WMDs in Iraq. But Dicks remained convinced of Iraq's threat.

We're going to find things [Saddam] had not disclosed, he said shortly before the war began in March 2003. There is no doubt about that. Period. Underlined.

By June of that year, with no chemical, biological or nuclear weapons found, Dicks remained steadfast in his support for the war but called for a congressional inquiry into the intelligence agencies' work on Iraq. I think the American people deserve to know what happened and why it happened, he said at the time.

That same month, Dicks was upset when a good friend, Gen. Eric Shinseki, the Army chief of staff, was forced into retirement after telling Congress that the secretary of defense was not sending enough troops to win the peace.

Growing doubts

On July 6, 2003, Dicks awoke to read the now-famous New York Times opinion piece by former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who had been sent on a CIA mission to investigate a report that Iraq had tried to buy nuclear materials in Africa.

Wilson wrote that he had found no evidence of such Iraqi intentions and criticized Bush for making the claim in his State of the Union address two months before the invasion.

That Joe Wilson article was very troubling, Dicks said.

Dicks grew somber about Iraq. Rep. Jim McDermott, who represents Seattle and had opposed the war from the start, talked with him about it.

Norm is a lot like Jack Murtha. These are guys with a somewhat different philosophy than me, McDermott said recently. This an extremely difficult time for them because they have to reassess what they were led to believe about prewar intelligence.

The White House maintains it did nothing to mischaracterize what it knew about Iraq and its weapons.

Dicks' private concerns became more public two months ago. At a breakfast fundraiser on Capitol Hill, Dicks surprised the guests with a tough talk against the war.

The White House last Friday called Dicks to gauge his support. House GOP leaders were pushing for a vote on a resolution they hoped would put Democrats on the spot by forcing them to either endorse an immediate troop withdrawal or stay the course in Iraq.

Dicks said he told the White House that their attack on Murtha was the most outrageous comment I've ever heard.

The resolution, denounced by Democrats, ultimately was defeated 403-3.

Dicks says the Pentagon should begin a phased withdrawal and leave some troops to help maintain order and train a new Iraq army. We've got to be very concerned that Iraq comes out of this whole, he said.

But he added, We can't take forever.

Some people say it takes eight to nine years to control an insurgency, Dicks said.

I don't think the American people will give eight to nine years, and I sure as heck won't.

Alicia Mundy: 202-662-7457 or amundy@seattletimes.com

Copyright © 2005 The Seattle Times Company

Nevada tanning salon gets 9/11 loan: audit

By Jim WolfThu Dec 29, 3:10 PM ET

A Texas golf course, a Nevada tanning salon and an Illinois candy shop were among small businesses that may have improperly received U.S. subsidized loans intended for firms hurt by the September 11 attacks, an internal government watchdog has found.

The Small Business Administration's inspector general said in a report made public on Wednesday that in 85 percent of the sample of loans it reviewed, a company's eligibility to receive the money through the program could not be verified.

A leading Senate Republican called for further investigation, but the Small Business Administration said the program was properly implemented.

The one-year, $4.5 billion Supplemental Terrorist Activity Relief, or STAR, program offered loan guarantees to small businesses adversely affected by the September 11 attacks.

However, the Small Business Administration had failed to properly oversee lenders to make sure that only eligible borrowers obtained STAR loans, the watchdog's report found.

Money may have gone to businesses that were not adversely impacted by the terrorist attacks of September 11th or their aftermath, wrote Robert Seabrooks, assistant inspector general for auditing.

Congress authorized the program in January 2002, and set aside $75 million to cover potential defaults. The program was operated through the Small Business Administration's main loan-guarantee program and the loans were made by participating banks. In all, 8,201 loans were approved totaling $3.7 billion, but only 7,058 were actually paid out.

Of 42 STAR-loan recipients interviewed by the inspector general's office, just two said they were aware they had obtained a such a loan. In cases where eligibility could not be established, 25 of 34 borrowers interviewed stated they were not adversely affected by the attacks, the report said.

GOLF COURSE

The report's examples included the Texas golf course, whose owner was cited by a lender as saying people were more interested in staying home and watching the attack on television than playing golf. However, the course was owned by someone else when the attacks took place and the justification for the $480,000 in loan guarantees did not apply to the new owner, the report said.

The tanning salon's lender blamed the September 11 attacks for hurting the Las Vegas casino industry which employed many of the salon's customers.

However, the inspector general found the salon's business had grown by 52 percent in 2001 and 32 percent in 2002 and said there was no evidence the owner could not borrow outside of the program. The SBA guaranteed $437,000 in loans to the salon, which were used to expand.

The Illinois candy shop received $21,250 in guarantees but could not back up its claim that the attacks had delayed the shop's opening, the report said.

Senate Small Business Committee Chairwoman Olympia Snowe, a Maine Republican, said her panel would look into the program.

If abuses are discovered, many questions must be answered by the parties involved, beginning with how and why was this allowed to happen, she said in a statement.

SBA said it has told lenders it will not honor guarantees on defaulted loans that fail to document the September 11 link.

SBA implemented the STAR program as Congress intended, Administrator Hector Barreto said in a statement.

The inspector general said it appeared qualified borrowers were not shut out of STAR loans.

(Additional reporting by Diane Bartz)

Obama has shown great judgment in the people who surround him.  He picked a great VP choice, and his wife is impeccable as a helpmate and is a fantastic role model for the American children.   

I believe Obama has an awesome political future.  He sure is a bright light, and he would be someone I would seriously consider voting for.

Someone I like even better is Rep. Harold Ford from Tennessee.  Every time I hear this man speak, I like him more and more and more.

I think there are lots of good candidates out there who don't fit the profiles you outlined, which I also believe to be true, and I think we're well overdue in considering those candidates because, in my opinion, what we've been offered in the last several elections -- on BOTH sides -- has been pretty pitiful.  The "box" isn't working, and it's time to look outside of it.

If we get Obama or any of the other candidates we will get more of the same. War and taxes. Empire building. If you like that kind of stuff, vote for any of the candidates EXCEPT.......... RON PAUL. The only candidate for peace, limited government and minding our own business.

Haven't seen any posts here for awhile.  Very excited about the outcome of tonight's election.  I am so glad to see that people are not buying the "gimmicks" Hillary proposed.  Gas tax holiday?...give me a break!  Someone needed to ask her, "So what happens when the holiday is over", you charge back up the gas price! 

The big joke is that Bill Clinton raised the gas tax in his first year in office.  It was included in a package of tax increases that amounted to the biggest tax increase in history.  It was raised by 4.3 cents.  Not only did he raise the gas tax, but he wanted to raise it even higher.

So you should all get this straight...Hillary is "claiming" she would give drivers 3 whole months (wow - imagine that) 18 cent a gallon cut after her husband forced drivers to pay an extra 5 cents for 15 years.

Unfortunately there were some people who bought into her pandering (which by the way is another word for lying), but thank goodness enough people with an education and most important most of the with common sense could see right through her lies.

Way to go North Carolina - I'm so pleased.  And Indiana too.  It was a close race thank goodness.

Now she needs to step down.  Why?  Because its the right thing to do.  Do the numbers.  There is no way she can win and anyone who believes so needs to wake up.  What we need is for her to support Barack Obama (that is if she's telling the truth about the most important thing is nominating a democrat for president).  Somehow though I do not believe she has the best interest of the party or the american people in mind.  Her goal is to serve herself.  She needs to graciously bow out and put all her efforts into getting a democrat in the office.

P.S. - Note to the "ditto heads".  Maybe we should rename Limbaugh followers "dumbo heads".  Not only did your little plan fail Mr. Limbo, but it failed badly.  In a poll taken (and yes I know polls can be misleading), but not only did the republicans change parties to vote for a democrat but the majority of them voted for Obama.  Then on top of that over 75% of republicans that voted as democrats said that Obama could be McCain (or as I am hearing him being referred to as McBush), but only around 25% said they believed Hillary could win.  So not only does Hillary need to do the math, so does Mr. Limbo.

He's just a talking head, somebody's puppet, aint nothing without his teleprompter and written speeches...gimme a break!

help these people so they can continue to sit on their butts and do something while the rest of us bust our humps.  No thank you! 

With RNC behind us now, dems are faced with the daunting challenge of making the 2008 election a referendum on issues, not a personality contest.  Here are 2 links that got thrown under the bash bus. 

http://www.alternet.org/election08/97198/top_ten_most_disturbing_facts_and_impressions_of_sarah_palin/

http://www.alternet.org/election08/97350/8_more_shocking_revelations_about_sarah_palin/?page=3

Though the title of these articles may lead one to conclude it is more about Palin bashing, there is a gold mine of pertinent information to be found there.  Embedded within the articles are more links that are overwhelming on first inspection, but well worth the time it takes to review them.  Laid out there between the lines is a structured blueprint for facing the upcoming 60 days with effective campaign strategy. 

There is another post that also got buried in the mud which will be brought back up to the top momentarily on issues.  If it get buries again, it will be brought back up to the top again.  The bashes it may inspire will be ignored.  The issues will continue to get the focus. 

There is another battleground in this election aside from the issues push.  It is the one fought on the field of values and vision; specifically, the Obama vision versus the McCain/Palin vision of what kind of America they/we see in our futures and what sort of change each candidate promises to deliver.  The link below is an article that addresses this subject.  It is a self-effacing piece I believe dems should take to heart when considering how to frame their upcoming campaign tactics.  Here's that link.  

http://www.alternet.org/election08/97193/the_palin_choice%3A_the_reality_of_voters%27_minds/

The introduction to this post expresses a basic premise from which I will be operating.  I will not be diminishing the power of Obama's message by indulging in petty squabbles, dead-end distractions, one-upmanship and a race to get the last word.  There is important work here, people, and we best rolls up our sleeves and get started.