The words themselves aren’t shocking for they grace the editorial pages everyday in the form of letters written by Carol-Shea Porter supporters. It’s almost as if he has written her speeches. It’s got to be tough to be one of said supporters, look yourself in the mirror in the morning, and realize the degree of self loathing that has brought you to the point where you closely resemble a man who is responsible for the death of thousands of Americans, makes no bones about his hatred for this country, and vows to continue killing us.




And yes, I know her husband was in the US military






But there can only be one logical conclusion in this. Carol Shea-Porter and Osama bin Laden were separated at birth.

Osama Bin Laden reads the news. He's just mimicking what he reads. He's just a PR guy and a pussy. It means nothing. Remember when 9/11 happened? He blamed US presence in Saudi Arabia. How soon we forget. I'm sure he doesn't need to hide in a cave anymore. The President took the heat off him.

By mid-October (2001) CIA case officers and Army, Navy, and Air Force Special Operations units were working together in unusual harmony...
...As recalled by Gary Berntsen, the CIA officer in charge of the covert team working with the Northern Alliance, code named Jawbreaker, the military refused his pleas for 800 Army Rangers to cut off bin Laden's escape. Maj. Gen. Dell Dailey, told Berntsen he was doing an "excellent job", but that putting in ground troops might offend America's allies, "I don't give a damn about offending our allies!" Berntsen yelled, I only care about eliminating Al Qaeda and delivering bin Laden's head in a box!"
Berntsen went to Crumpton, his boss at the CIA. Crumpton called CENTCOM's commander Gen. Tommy Franks. It would take "weeks" to mobilize a force, Franks responded, and the harsh, snowy terrain was too difficult and the odds of getting bin Laden weren't worth it. Frustrated, Crumpton went to the White House and rolled out maps of the Pakistani-Afgan border on a small conference table. The meeting was inconclusive.
...The frustrations are well illustrated by the recollections of Adam Rice, the operations sergeant of a Special Forces A-Team working out of a safe house near Kandahar in 2002.
Rice blames risk aversion in career officers, whose promotions require spotless ("zero defect") records-no mistakes, no bad luck, no "flaps".

-Newsweek 9/3/07

Hogwash
I remember the same crap from the Vietnam era. "Anyone who wants the
Americans out of Vietnam is a pinko commie and wants the Viet Cong to
kill American soldiers." If it makes any difference, look at the public opinion
polls about this war. If you define everyone who is against the war
[and wants to bring the troops back] as terrorist sympathisers,
then that's half of America! Your ranting does nothing but demonize
people. We attacked & destroyed Iraqi society [for some unknown
reason] and Al Queida moved in. Wonder why they've moved into
Iraq? Its like storing your food outside, and wondering
why there are so many bears in your yard.

Leaving Iraq will be a disaster. Staying there will
be a disaster. Keeping an occupying army in a shooting war in a
Muslim country makes us a magnet for every kind of terrorist.
This will be a whole level above some daring act by a rogue group
crashing planes into our buildings. Bush will walk away from this war.
We know that withdrawal of American troops is a job for the next
president. (If that goes badly for a Democratic president, imagine
what you’ll hear Republicans say…).
The surge was somewhat successful. Now a political reconciliation
is needed in Iraq. We know what the word "diplomacy" means to this
White House. It means "weakness". Think the Bush administration
is up for statesmanship? [The American people don’t think so.
Unbelievably low poll numbers for Bush when the word “trust” or
“success” are used]...You are obsessed with Carol Shea Porter,
and never did bother to answer my question about why "In essence
for her to be right more of our troops have to die"
Its easier to talk than to justify talk. I'll bet you're disappointed that
your brand of conservatism is such a damn failure. Even so, your
audience of two, Dave D and I, will continue to read...

What is most sickening is stalling the minor 'draw down' till just before the election. Kissinger advised Nixon the same way in the 70's meanwhile more soldiers died. I'm sure that's some more of Karl Rove's 'genious'.

Yesterday, John McCain told supporters in Iowa that U.S. soldiers are "carrying 40 pounds of body armor in 130-degree temperatures." Run a quick Google News search, and you'll find numerous references to Iraq's sweltering "130-degree" weather. But the highest temperature ever recorded in Asia is 124 degrees—in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. So, how hot does it really get in Iraq?

The temperature never breaks 130 degrees, according to official climate records. A 2007 Air Force Weather Agency report on Iraq's summer weather also marks the record at 124 degrees, with mean highs for July and August at 110 degrees. And Iraq is always dry, so the heat index won't be much higher than the actual temperature.

-Slate

While the Afgan terrain required deep local knowledge and small units, career officers in the U.S. military have long been wary of the Special Operations Forces best suited to the task (of capturing bin Laden). In the view of the regular military such "snake eaters" have tended to be troublesome, resistant to spit-and-polish discipline and rulebooks...
...Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich was on Rumsfeld's Defense Policy Board at the time and a close confidant of the Secretary of Defense. In November 2001, Gingrich told a Newsweek reporter, "There's a feeling we've got to do something that counts-and bombing caves is not something that counts."
...To the civilian bosses at the Pentagon and the eager-to-please top brass, Iraq was a much better target. By invading Iraq, the United States would give the Islamists-and the wider world-an unforgettable lesson in American power.

-Newsweek

Yes, I think the rise in mortgage default is just another lie fabricated by the left to make the President look bad.

Once again I must repeat myself. Over half of this country does not "closely resemble a man who is responsible for the death of thousands of Americans, makes no bones about his hatred for this country, and vows to continue killing us."
We were ALL united on September 11, the President has divided us.

It's not enough to differing political
opinions. Mine apparently makes for self-loathing.
I haven't felt it yet, but will be on the look-out for its symptoms.

It's not enough to differing political
opinions. Mine apparently makes for self-loathing.
I haven't felt it yet, but will be on the look-out for its symptoms.

It's not enough to differing political
opinions. Mine apparently makes for self-loathing.
I haven't felt it yet, but will be on the look-out for its symptoms.

Donald Rumsfeld made our military weaker:

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) said the Defense Department overestimated savings from base closings and underestimated the costs of construction projects called for by the 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) decisions. In two reports released Sept. 13 examining the Pentagon’s military base consolidation effort, GAO, the investigative arm of Congress, also found several challenges in implementing the BRAC decisions, including competing priorities that may:

"force the Army to choose between fully funding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan or paying for BRAC-related construction."

more genious from the adminstration

qpenta - Since you have so willingly put yourself on my couch, here's my analysis. The tip off of your self loathing is the constant reference to an unresolved painful past event - the Vietnam War. Iraq is not Vietnam - they are separated by thousands of miles and 30 odd years. And no matter how you try to reconstruct this painful past event and project it onto all present events, you can't. In the simplest terms, apples are not oranges and never will be. Now, I won't charge you the usual rate that a therapist would, but then again you are probably getting what you paid for it.

Hillary Clinton and the Republicans are one and the same. Holding $1000 a plate dinners with lobbyists and holding corporate stock. Having an anti-union guy heading her campaign. They're all more of the same old same old. The times they are a same-in'. I'm ready for a change. But unfortunately I'm part of Katherine Newman's "missing class". The forgotten population who are carrying the load for everyone else. You're welcome.

I feel self-loathing due to Vietnam?
That's not a good diagnosis.
I was 15 when it ended and don't
recall doing anything to be ashamed of...
You make accusations,
speak in vagueness on a good many things,
and then don't answer very specific
rebuttals or questions. This is clearly more
of a platform for you rather than a forum.
Why bother to have a comments section?
I don't "project Vietnam onto all present events,"
but did make a good point equating your
"anti American terrorist sympathizer" slur
with 1960s "anti American pinko commie" name
calling/demonizing. Gotta admit that, or maybe you don't.

qpenta - I admit to having jumped to a conclusion. It wasn't apparent to me that you were looking for a serious discussion. I misread your response. I apologize for that. Sometimes conclusion jumping is my only and best exercise.

I'm as distressed by Shea-Porter as most on the left are by Bush. Bush and Shea-Porter are easy targets because they are both "out there" with their beliefs. I had a chance to talk with her during the campaign. She is a true believer. When I was done talking with her, I didn't feel as though I had been "glad handed" by a politician, which is the usual case whether a politician is on the right or left. Bush is the same. Love em or hate em he acts on what he believes and he won't back down. This makes them both easy targets.

Shea-Porter has taken the position that we need to get out of Iraq and that the surge isn't working. As I see it in order for this position to be held US casualties have to stay up there, otherwise the war is working and we can win and have a democratic outpost in the Middle East. I don't think Shea-Porter goes to bed at night hoping for casualties, but the logical follow through of her position requires it.

Obviously I don't know you well enough to actually know if you are self loathing. Therefore, I rescind my analysis. I did warn you that it was worth what you paid for it. And I can't afford to give a refund. I do actually believe that for a large segment of the left self loathing is the basis for their beliefs (Dave, I don't put you in that category.) This is based on extensive conversations with and reading writings of those on the left. The hatred for America just oozes through. And no I'm not standing up and singing the Star Spangled Banner. I recognize the flaws that are this country. The left seems to wake up in the morning hating. I can't imagine doing it. When you do it day in and day out, it's got to be tough waking up. They have been at it for so long, that something has to be underlying it. I believe that it is based on self loathing. I also recognize the problem with painting with a brush as broad as that.

I still have no problem with Bush having "gotten us into" Iraq. Hindsight being 20-20 it's obvious that the administration didn't execute the occupation wisely. The surge is working. It's going to be up to the Iraqis to bring a government together, and if you look at the details of WW II you see 2 steps forward and one step back from beginning to end. I'm not sure at what point we pull the plug. We were in Japan for 10 years and we are still in Europe. None of this says that invading Iraq was a mistake. Now I would ask you, do you see the problem as Islamo-fascism or US hegemony or perhaps something else?

I appreciate you and Dave reading what I'm putting out there. I've mentioned to the Herald folks that writing this blog is an awful lot like peeing in a dark suit. It feels good, but nobody notices. They keep telling me that I'm getting hits. This is a new medium for me, so I'll take their word for it. All I can tell you is that I'm having a great time writing. I only wish my parents were still alive to see this. My mother kept insisting that I was taking English as a foreign language.

You are right on. I don't feel any self loathing. Why would I? I'm just tired of getting screwed and insulted when politicians think they are fooling me. I'm watching my retirement security get pissed away in front of me. Any many don't care because they're too young to worry about it yet. But it's coming folks. Unless you're part of the rich few who have been sheltered by tax breaks and exemptions your future is bleak at best. Don't spend your savings to pay your heating or phone bills.

Here's another good example of how good people got screwed by a Republican's policy in the news this morning. A girl in Maine was killed by a drunk driver while sitting on her snowmobile. Family and friends were hurt and outraged when the driver got a year in jail instead of 10. Why? The prisons are full because of Reagan's mandatory drug sentences that took away power from judges to use thier own wisdom and descretion in deciding sentences. (Along with abusive prosectors like Mike Nifong.)

Want more? A man in Maine was falsely accused like the Duke players, was found innocent in court, moved in with his girlfriend who has/had 2 daughters, and the State took the girls away from her for "endangering them". Now the State (the taxpayers) will pay for thier upbringing. Pure genious. I don't have self loathing, it's loathing for things like this.

The President says he 'respectfully disagrees' with Alan Greenspan. The former Chairman of the Federal Reserve who oversaw the longest sustained period of economic growth in American history. Think about that a minute.

He still refuses to raise the taxes necessary to pay off the cost of the occupation of Iraq. He'd rather just continue paying interest only to China.

Pure economic genious. Just what we need is four more years of paying just interest on the war. All in the name of political victory and denial.

For the record, his transcripts say he got a C- in Economics. No surprise there.

When Bush took office, Social Security was solvent out to 2055. Right now it's only solvent out to 2041. How long are you willing to keep working?

You say:>Shea-Porter has taken the position that we need to get out of Iraq
>and that the surge isn't working. As I see it in order for this position
>to be held US casualties have to stay up there, otherwise the war is working

So, to you casualties are the measure of whether the surge is working?
That argument can only be made by an anti-war pacifist. Think about it:
A true conservative believes the surge is successful if it meets its military
objectives. Just because US casualties may be down doesn't mean the war
is working! This doesn't justify the huge cost, commitment, risk
(and casualties) for us to be there. Temporary strategic gains don't
justify it either.

Shea Porter, wants to remove troops (regardless of the surge's sucess)
because she is anti war. That position does not require
US casualties to "stay up there", no matter how often you assert it.

You say>...we can win and have a democratic outpost in the Middle East.

This is so naive, it makes me weep big salty tears on my keyboard.
Its "think-tank" propaganda like the "Iraqi oil will pay for this war" BS.
Do countries which America has waged (overt or covert) war
against become democracies? Name me some examples
since WW2
(and Korea doesn't count considering the stalemate there.)
I could make a big list of the opposite, but you really don't care...
Muslims hate us with a religious fervor. An Iraqi democracy means we have
imposed our will on them. They will never allow this to happen.
Any government there with our support doesn't stand a chance in hell.
Are there movements toward democracy in the Arabic world?
None with any political influence, and yet we can make a "democratic
outpost" by waging war? Pure self-delusion on your part...

You say:>I still have no problem with Bush having "gotten us into" Iraq....
>None of this says that invading Iraq was a mistake.

Here's what I think.
Let's look at Afghanistan. I supported the invasion.
Al Queida killed Americans, and they were based in Afghanistan.
We had the "moral" authority to go in and destroy them. We also
had the support of much of the world on this. Even Arab extremists would
have to admit this was an "eye for an eye".

Now--I want you to give me a similar justification for invading Iraq.
since you say it wasn't a mistake.
I don't believe you can do it. Prove me wrong.
Your justification should take into account the enormous cost
to us in lives, money and political isolation, not to mention a 10 year
commitment (at the very least), and our status as a sitting duck
smack in the middle of ground-zero for World War 4.
Tell us why it wasn't a mistake. This could be one of your feature columns
--instead of another pithy rant about Shea-Porter, or something some
damn fool liberal has said or done.
Maybe then I'll tell you why I think we're there, and it isn't about oil.

Rudy Giuliani presents a unique challenge for the Republican party. He's for gun control. Many Republicans vote Republican because they believe it protects thier right to bear arms. And Repubilcan politicians take a pro-gun stance because the NRA is a big, wealthy, powerful political entity. Candidates need them.
The problem is there are 2 cultures in the United States. Most people in rural areas own guns for hunting. While most people living in cities own them to shoot people. Rudy Giuliani is both Republican AND the mayor of our largest city. If he gets the nomination he'll either have to lie, or his party will be making a major change in policy.

Here's an interview today with Congresswoman Carol Shea-Porter:

http://www.nhpr.org/node/13769#comments

Listen for yourself.
I was particularly struck that the President plans to veto health care for our children even though the plan uses no tax money and is not even run by the government. He basically hates kids apparently. There is no other explanation. Listen for yourself.

qpenta- Is it just anger or is it rage on your part? I understand that underneath Shea-Porter is a pacifist, but she's the one that says the surge hasn't worked. She hasn't said the surge hasn't worked because I'm a pacifist. She has stated her disbelief in Petraeus and the facts. So my assertion no matter how unpleasant for you holds.

The Middle East is a swamp that needs to be drained. The cost if we don't will far exceed the cost of war.

Examples since WWII don't hold, because we have fought them as political wars. in WWII we crushed the enemy. They were able to rise from the ashes. I sure hope you don't have a stroke over this!

Perfectly reasonable questions from me. Perfectly evasive non-answers from you. I'm assuming your justification for this war is: "The Middle East is a swamp that needs to be drained. The cost if we don't will far exceed the cost of war." Wow. That's why we're in Iraq? As for your defense of your statement "we can win and have a democratic outpost in the Middle East..." Not sure if you did defend that one.
"Examples since WWII don't hold, because we have fought them as political wars." Um, what? We've fought all sorts of wars hot, cold and
CIA actions. Where are the resulting democracies? That was the question. Your anger/rage comment is another distraction from a discussion on real political issues I've attempted to engage you in. Maybe that's a mistake on my part, and you just aren't up for it.

In WWII we didn't got it alone. Although I understand France still owes us. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Here is an interesting show I heard part of today. It's an interview with Amy Zegart, a professor of public policy at UCLA. She explains how there were 23 missed opportunities to prevent 9/11. And how the same turf wars between the Pentagon and the CIA still exist and haven't changed to adapt for the post 9/11 world.

http://www.wamu.org/audio/dr/07/09/r2070927-13736.asx

As I undertand it Russia was actually an ally of ours during WWII helping to defeat the Germans. The President hasn't been able to get much allied help in the occupation of Iraq. He's decided to go it alone flying against the wind and taking us with him without any consultation. He's chosen to leave us out of the process.

I hope you take the time to listen to this show. It explains in detail how our intelligence agencies are still antiquated and haven't made the neccessary conversions from cold war operations to gathering intelligence using operatives versed in the lanquage and culture of the middle east. Our security clearance system won't let those people through. So we are "Spying Blind" as the book's title implies.

Is anybody surprised that the President plays Democratic activist in Iraq but makes little or no effort to support the movement in China? Iraq is an oil producer, China is a consumer. Is there any question why we're there?

For anybody who says national security, read about the Chinese military build up.

"Iraq is an oil producer, China is a consumer.
Is there any question why we're there?"

Well I do think oil is a factor, but I also think
there were other reasons for invading Iraq.
We were unable to capture Bin Laden in Afghanistan,
and our president believed action needed to be taken.
Iraq was a chance for Bush to send a message to Islam.
The message was "Don't f^*# with us. We can take
you down at any time." One reason it was Iraq (who we had
totally under our thumb at the time) was for payback
of old scores between Hussein and Bush Sr. Also,
because of our superior firepower, there was no chance
of losing. We had already beat the crap out of them once
before. No way would they mount an effective defense
against us. One problem though, there is no real justification
for going to war with Iraq. Even people who support the war
can't give a justifiable reason, and lots of lies were told during
the big push for war. To the third world, it looks like America
is trying to destroy Islam. This is a very easy concept to sell.
Its a "marketing tool" for terrorists...

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)