Story Comments
Posted by: GWHayduke 7 months, 3 weeks ago
This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.
-
88%
GWHayduke7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The purification of the Republican party continues with support from the bottom of the American barrel.
Reply
The American Taliban's leader, El Rushbo garners the support of the previous vice president and chief hawk.
Cheney is becoming more of a fringe nutcase each time he opens his totalitarian mouth.-
18%
b-happy7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
How is Powell a Patriot when he lied to us about WMD's and got us into the War in Iraq? I'm just curious about that because the only thing I see that he has done for you Libs. is back Obama. So if he lied to us and got us into a war he is Baaadddddd(sheep tone). But if he now backs Obama he is Gooooodddddd.....????
Reply
What if Bush comes out and backs Obama? You going to support him too? What about all the black Democrat's who called Powell an Oreo because he acts like too much of a white person and he was a Republican? All that goes away because now he backs Obama?
Naive to say the least.-
91%
GWHayduke7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Powell was a tool of the W Administration, manipulated like the 'intelligence' he was given to present to the UN.
Reply
The speech to which you refer:
In one dramatic accusation in his speech, Powell showed slides alleging that Saddam had bioweapons labs mounted on trucks that would be almost impossible to find.
"In fact, Secretary Powell was not told that one of the sources he was given as a source of this information had indeed been flagged by the Defense Intelligence Agency as a liar, a fabricator," says David Kay, who served as the CIA's chief weapons inspector in Iraq after the fall of Saddam. That source, an Iraqi defector who had never been debriefed by the CIA, was known within the intelligence community as "Curveball."
I support leadership that promotes the defense of our country - not the manipulation of data to present some kind of nefarious plan to invade a soverign country for economic and or personal reasons.
Powell resigned in shame for being associated with the decider and his war of choice.-
93%
Candida7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Powell allowed himself to be used and manipulated. He is not stupid. He should have asked questions, and he could have prevented the war.
Reply
Still, when it comes down to a choice between Powell and Limbaugh, Mr. Cheney has chosen the way I had expected him to do, and I agree that he is drifting more and more to the fringe every time he opens his mouth.
-
-
89%
mesodude7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Powell is a hero because, like Scott McClellen, he's at least made an attempt to acknowledge his disgraceful mistakes and his unbelievably poor judgment in supporting the most criminal administration in history--that of George W Bush (omg, I feel chunks rise every time I even *type* that filthy rodent's name). Cons consider self-criticism and the ability to simply say things like "We were wrong" and "I'm sorry" to be fatal character flaws. To cons, admitting that you're wrong sometimes or that you don't know all ( or, in the case of most cons here, ANY of) the answers is considered to be a fate worse than death.
Reply
You hate Powell because he's showing America that there are normal Republicans who aren't sore losers and don't believe they're right all the time. You're turning on Powell now because Rush told you to and because, unlike cons, Powell doesn't arrogantly believe that the GOP's agenda should be adopted for America -- when they lose an election by millions and millions of votes and when that agenda represents only what 20% of America wants. Cons are absolutely out of control drunk on bitterness and sour grapes and you need to get a GRIP before you destroy yourselves entirely. I hate to say this but WAKE UP. Screw what Rush says. STOP talking. START listening and learn to think for yourself before it's too late. No one likes to see anyone go off the deep end and tumble head-first into the dark abyss of insanity and chaos or whatever--even when cons are involved (which, frankly, is almost always the case). Anyway, good luck. The point is, no one likes to see so much ugliness and tragedy. Great...Now you made me think of Katherine Harris all over again. Great ;-( -
85%
NoWayMan7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You're right, I don't fogive Powell for what he did.
Reply
powell sold this country down the river when he got in front of the enitre world and sold us Bush's fake war. and thanks for admitting that.
but I'll still take him over rush or cheney any day. cause those two are both just a worthless waste of space.-
93%
sinophil497 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Powell did question the rationality of invading Iraq. He was one of the doves within the Bush WH. He famously told Bush that if he invaded Iraq, he would then "own it." That is, Bush would then be responsible for the breakage. Like a customer venturing into a china shop, you break it, you own it.
Reply
Powell did question the veracity of the WMD evidence. He talked to George Tenet about it and Tenet won him over by saying it was a "slam dunk."
Although Powell was the Secretary of State, he did not run the CIA nor the Pentagon intelligence (larger than the CIA). So he depended on what they gathered, interpreted, and sent to him.
I am not sure if Powell has to be forgiven for anything. He was duped as much as the rest of the country.
Should he have pushed his doubts and questioning further? Perhaps. But would he have gotten a different answer? Doubt that.-
7%
ettucatk7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Powell depended on what the various Intelligence agencies gave him, but President Bush was supposed to see beyond that? Can't have it both ways. Obama, along with the overwhelmingly burdensome number of government workers sucking up taxpayer dollars, has hired what he likes to call "Czars" to help him. Do you suppose he will depend on their ability to give him solid info, or should Obama use his Messianic powers to determine the real facts. If the latter, than why would he need to burden us with "Czars?"
Reply-
100%
sinophil497 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
ettucatk - One important fact you overlooked or ignored. The CIA and the Pentagon intelligence systems WERE under the control of Bush and Cheney.
Reply
Bush had already made the decision to invade and he and Cheney put pressure on the CIA and Pentagon analysts to interpret all data to their satisfaction. Some evidence was simply made up - like the alleged meeting between Iraqi and al Qaeda officials in Prague (never happened).
What Bush did was order the intelligence to find evidence that the WMD's were present, rather than find out WHETHER WMD'S WERE PRESENT OR NOT.
Bush set the tone and obviously his lackeys rushed around trying to satisfy the boss. Bush made it impossible for the intelligence network to make unbiased, dispassionate, clear-eyed assessments and conclusions. VOILA! The evidence presented to Bush conformed to his pre-existing decisions and biases.
Bush created the misinformation with which he duped the entire country.
So try as you may to wriggle and contort the truth, Bush was a failure as a leader. Bush was a failure in making honest, well-grounded, balanced decisions about the immoral and illegal invasion of Iraq.
-
-
100%
NoWayMan7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I wasn't duped. not even close. and I know many many many many people who weren't duped as well. so I have a very hard time believing Powell was simply duped.
Reply
Powell had been to iraq, fought in iraq, and knew that enemy very well. he knew the inspectors weren't given sufficient time and he knew iraq was the wrong move (militarily at least) and that it took our collective eye off of the real war on terror.
and when it came to WMD, Powell knew there were none.
in fact, he even said it.
in a statement Powell made on Feb. 24, 2001, while meeting at Cairo's Ittihadiya Palace with Egyptian Foreign Minister Amr Moussa, he said that Saddam Hussein "has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors."
so Powell knew what was up.
but the biggest problem I have with powell at the UN selling Bush's war is that everyone, even Powell, knew he was the ONLY PERSON who could close the deal for Bush, the only person connected to Bush who all of us would give the benefit of the doubt. and he did it. he even went so far as to hold up a vial of white powder saying it was anthrax, which was simply playing the fear card.
maybe he thought he was just being a good soldier. but a good soldier should know when he's given a bad order. at that point, the good soldier is supposed to refuse that order. powell didn't do that.
mind you, all this doesn't make me think he's a bad person at the end of the day or that he's unAmerican in any way. I just think he showed how weak he actually is when it comes to politics, and that he should have stayed in his miltary realm, where questioning orders isn't part of the program like it is in civilian life.
and again, I'll still take him over rush and cheney any day, cause those guys are just walking talking dooshbags.
-
-
-
-
-
87%
UnusualSuspect7 months, 3 weeks ago
-
-
-
94%
Candida7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Endoscopy: "We shall see what happens if the recession is ended shortly or not. If not then it will be the failed policies of the liberals."
Reply
How come not the Republicans' who have created the conditions for it and triggered the recession? Not to mention the handing out the money to the banks which was also concocted in 2008.-
0%
ettucatk7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Candida: TARP might have been concocted in 2008, but President Bush used only approx 1/2 the money. The rest was given to Obama to use at his discretion (the entire issue was a result of the Dems refusal to rein in Fannie, Freddie, AIG, and others). Now Obama has increased the bailout money far beyond what was originally agreed upon. Are you saying Obama is just one of the sheep, blindly following because he has no brain of his own?
Reply-
100%
wtagg7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Yeah, the Dems failed to reign in the unregulated nature of the market created in part by Gramm-Leach-Bliley, especially prior to 2007. Please try to sell us on that.
Reply
Bush signed off on $700 billion. That is his and congress' responsibility. You are free to blame Obama as a signer of any bill after the third week in January.
I'll certainly say that Obama followed. Ironically, if Obama is stupid for following, it places stupidity on the leaders that led them. That isn't an at-a-boy for either, is it?
-
-
-
87%
mesodude7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"We shall see what happens if the recession is ended shortly or not. If not then it will be the failed policies of the liberals. LOL Then what will happen in the mid term elections?"
Reply
--But no one with a functioning brain (iow, that rules out most cons) expects the recession will end "shortly." No one is predicting that and most people know that Obama's strategy right now is to slow the economy's free fall. Cons are talking about "recovery" before the patient has even gone under anaesthesia. I don't know if you're just not too bright or if you're deliberately trying to whip up unrealistic expectations by repeating misinformation but either way, it's sad. -
100%
sinophil497 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
endo - If a construction company builds a faulty dam and the dam starts cracking. The original contractor gets fired and a new company is rushed into place to repair the dam. The new company can not stop the collapse in time and the dam bursts. Who should get the blame - the second company that failed to fix the dam in time or the original company that built the faulty dam in the first place?
Reply-
100%
sinophil497 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
endo - Oh, and you are assuming right now at the very start that Obama will fail (are you a dittohead?). What happens if he succeeds in turning the economy around and the credit market gets revived, the banks become healthy again? Are you willing to state openly and unequivocally RIGHT NOW that you will give him the proper credit and adulation that you have unreservedly granted to Bush in spite of his massive failures?
Reply
-
-
-
-
94%
cowboygrandpa7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA
Reply
"'Not as right as others would like'
Powell, who was secretary of state under President George W. Bush and held the nation's top military post under President George H.W. Bush, endorsed Democrat Barack Obama for president last year. Nonetheless, since the election he has described himself as a Republican and a right-of-center conservative, though "not as right as others would like."
Cheney, citing Powell's backing of Obama over Republican nominee John McCain, said, "I assumed that that is some indication of his loyalty and his interests."
Cheney's remarks on CBS' "Face the Nation" were the latest step in his slow-motion estrangement from Powell since the two worked closely together to manage the Persian Gulf war in 1991 — Powell as the Army general who was chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Cheney as defense secretary for the elder Bush.
Under the younger Bush, Powell initially backed action against Iraq's Saddam Hussein and delivered a famous U.N. speech laying out the U.S. case. But Powell and Cheney increasingly parted ways over the Bush administration's policies on the war and terrorism, with Cheney usually prevailing. Powell left the administration after Bush's first term."
There is no room for anyone except extreme right wing racists in the party now, Cheney has been an idiot coward for years. So of course he would back another racist idiot coward.
Gush Limberger,Cheney,GW Bush all cowards,who let someone else fight the wars so they can turn a profit.
Colin Powell, a man who has fought for his country and espouses patriotism over party politics.
Who is the real Republican ? Powell !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Who are the real losers everyone who allows the Gush bags to set policy.
Take Cheney and try him for war crimes against humanity, hang the bastard if he is found guilty. Just like they did the German leaders of WWII.-
14%
Endoscopy7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Typical liberal rant. Had to stopop to calling names as well as saying that conservative principles are "extreme right wing racists". Anybody can call names. How about attacking the issues instead of doing the liberal attack the person rants. Or is that all you can do. Do you even know what a conservative position is. Liberals ranted one during the Bush years but have fallen silent about it now. The Deficit. Under Bush it was horrid but now that Obama makes Bush look like a miser the liberal hypocrites are silent on that issue.
Reply
HYPOCRITE!!!!!!!-
100%
mesodude7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Typical liberal rant. Had to stopop to calling names as well as saying that conservative principles are "extreme right wing racists".
Reply
--But there is much demonstrable evidence that this is true, Endo.
"Do you even know what a conservative position is. Liberals ranted one during the Bush years but have fallen silent about it now."
--No. Like most Americans we thought our tax dollars shouldn't be going towards a war of Bush and Cheney's making and what cons fail to acknowledge is that Bush spent wildly, his spending largely helped the rich, and now we're digging our way out of the damage and destruction caused by his poor leadership and incompetence. And you people need to stop crying about Obama spending money. Pretending you don't know that most respected economists think spending is the way to get us out of our hellhole (which, again, was caused by Bush) only makes cons look dumber than usual.-
23%
beavith17 months, 3 weeks ago
-
100%
quackpot7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Bush running a deficit in times of plenty WAS bad.
Reply
Obama running a deficit in times of financial calamity (due largely to Bush's hyper economy) may or may not be bad - we have yet to see.
As in most things in the world, an action may be good or bad depending on the context. -
100%
flyonthewallzz7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
beavith: How do you get that 5x money figure?
Reply
You are wrong if you think I think the current spending is "Good".
I do think much is mandated, some was snuck in the back door, and some was necessary.
The Bush budget request FY2009 called for $3.1 trillion and the Obama request was for $3.9 in projected outlays. I admit that the numbers are bad but not 5x bad. It is worth noting that the financial crisis hit after the Bush budget was submitted and that the Obama budget has been whittled down a bit.
I have been paying attention:
The average yearly variance between the deficit and the dept....
Bush...$352 billion
Clinton....$28 billion
The average growth in the dept under the Obama administration has been 1.54x that of Bush's last year. and it has declined by an average $1/2 a billion a day (from when I checked on 4/20/2009
and then again on 5/6/2009).
The average daily growth of the dept is now 3.36x the growth of the entire Bush administration.
We are in a historically deep recession now, and Bush did have at least one boom year. Government dept does accelerate during recessions.
There are a couple of things that give my a touch of optimism:
1. Obama has been putting money back into the trust funds ($21 billion so far)
2. If the average growth in dept holds steady, it will end at less than 1/2 the amount projected in the Obama budget.-
33%
nostalgia7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Fly
Reply
Add in the stimulus bill, the huge increases in the omnibus spending bill etc
Have you read this?
US red ink rising even higher, to $1.8T
US red ink to top $1.8 trillion, 4 times record; govt borrows 46 cents for every dollar spent
The government will have to borrow nearly 50 cents for every dollar it spends this year, exploding the record federal deficit past $1.8 trillion under new White House estimates.
Budget office figures released Monday would add $89 billion to the 2009 red ink -- increasing it to more than four times last year's all-time high as the government hands out billions more than expected for people who have lost jobs and takes in less tax revenue from people and companies making less money.-
100%
flyonthewallzz7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well Nostalgia:
Reply
I have spent a bit of time comparing the Obama/Bush budgets FY2009 and even though I am a moonbat Liberal I try to be honest about numbers.
In defense of the Obama budget proposal it was a lot more honest than the one bush put out. I believe that the variance in deficit to growth of dept are a lot closer. Bush's last year had a more than $1 trillion variance. He increased the dept by $1.4 trillion in his last year. have read from some pretty good sources that the tax cuts where financed by deficit spending.
They are quite different than the tax cuts offered in 1964,1981,1986.
If Obama keeps growing the dept at the rate he is going he will hit $2 trillion in his first year. His budget projected a growth of $4.2 trillion.-
-
100%
flyonthewallzz7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You could be correct..
Reply
But I do remember seing numbers for both the TARP and WOT that appeared in the Obama request that where not in the the older budget.
It could well be that I either missed them or that congress washed them out when they sent it up for vote.
I am too lazy to look it up right now. -
100%
flyonthewallzz7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2010/assets...
Reply
Hi Nostalgia:
I just came back from making some deliveries, and that thing you said about supplemental spending was “bugging” me; so I had to check. I do not expect you to open the big .pdf… but if you do.. on page 10 of 36: Table S-3: shows:
Defense (050) including cost of overseas
contingency operations: FY2008 $612 B and FY2009 $726 B.
I think that extra $100 B is the supplemental stuff.
And then for the: TARP it shows $260 B FY2009 and $0 FY2008
-
-
-
100%
flyonthewallzz7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Sidebar:
Reply
The Stimulus package would show up in Outlays. It could be hidden in Budget Authority.
The omnibus spending bill was unfinished business left over from the previous administrations budget requests. I do not have data to add the spending bills up that passed before and after the regime change. As far as I can figure it represents $410 billion which is a part of the $3.1 Trillion Bush Budget that was left unfinished.-
-
100%
flyonthewallzz7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Like I said:
Reply
I have yet to be able to define it.
That is why I have been sticking to growth in the dept as the primary metric.
I have yet to find a good source, to compare budget requests to the amount enacted, and then when the budget was actually passed.-
50%
nostalgia7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Fly
Reply
Keep in mind that when a president is leaving office and a new one sworn in, it is in the middle of a fiscal year
Thus, the budget for fiscal year 2009 is a budget that can be attributed to both and becomes very difficult to untangle
This 2009 year spending is going to be very difficult to make any sense out of
The Bush portion then the Obama portion with the omnibus spending, bailout money and any suppplementals-
100%
flyonthewallzz7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It sure can be a mess to untangle.
Reply
So many times, they have to pass stop gap measures just to keep the government functioning.
Some times the spending is higher in those years and sometimes lower. I do think the legislation is sloppier that way.
I am a Democrat for the dumbest reason, I just can not imagine being anything else.
I hold no malice towards Republicans and even less for fiercely independent folks like yourself.-
50%
nostalgia7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"fiercely independent folks like yourself"
Reply
LOL Fly
You are going to get in big trouble for that statement with many on the far left on this website!
I grew up in a family of Democrats but by today's standards they would be labeled "Blue Dogs" - they didn't like Roosevelt and they didn't like Carter
I don't think any of them would feel comfortable in either political party today - grandparents and parents that is
-
-
100%
flyonthewallzz7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2009/sheets...
Reply
I really should be working: but I thought I would try one more time to find a budget request amounts and approval time line.
I got excited for a minute: when I found out that the White house is now putting out spreadsheets.
Unfortunately they seem to be reports on the same tired old Bush budget, and they are organized politically. But the are easy to look at.
This one does point out some of the stuff that was “bugging” me.
Military Personnel::: At the top of the page it shows the $8.3 billion cut for 2009.
155 International financial programs::: This money usually goes directly to DOD, and for the most part does not show up as revenue. It struck me that DOD was running their own private treasury here.
372 Postal Service:::The number progression here is interesting.
901 Interest on Treasury debt securities (gross):: They summed the numbers from the “Shadow” accounts here. Most of the pie charts I have seen in the past failed to do that.
The main reason I posted all this stuff is in the hope you would take the chance to compare 2008 to 2009, I believe some of the changes where irrational, and I do not think Bush would have hit his $3.1 trillion target.-
100%
flyonthewallzz7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Unfortunately for folks that think the way I do.
Reply
I suspect that many of the contracts that represent the $75 billion dollar increase for DOD have already been approved and signed.
There are things we are buying that the even the military leaders don't really want.
I was reading about Powell and Cheney bumping heads over artillery fired tactical nukes.
I can think of a number of reasons (other than my Moonbat ones) why a warrior, who has experianced the battlefield, would rather not have them rattling around out there.
I imagine they are being built as I type these words.
-
-
-
-
-
-
91%
mesodude7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Again, nostalgia, crying now won't make cons credible after what you did in November '04. Sorry to wake you from your fantasy that you can support wild Republican spending or look the other way when we waste money in Iraq and then turn around and have a tantrum and panic attacks when the spending is being done by a Democrat. No way. ;-(
Reply-
-
100%
mesodude7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Sorry Mesodud
Reply
I'm the one who votes third party now and wants a more viable third party to challenge the corrupt Democrats and Republicans"
--And we don't care that you're calling yourself "independent" now that you're ashamed of what you've done in the past as a Republican. This doesn't absolve you of anything. You're still here every day attacking Obama in ways we never saw you attack Bush. That's what's important--not what you say to make yourself sound reasonable and thoughtful as a voter. Your words about 3rd party or whatever are hollow.-
0%
nostalgia7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well Mesodud
Reply
You are stuck in your partisan cubbyhole as usual
Cognitive dissonance is very uncomfortable but at least try to break out of your fog!
There are several things I don't like about politicians - far left loons and politicians who claim to be conservative but have never done a single thing in their careers that are even remotely conservative. Bush falls into the later category and Obama the first along with you
If I didn't vote for Bush as governor why would I vote for him as president?
But stay in your fog Mesodud - otherwise you might post something reasonable and insightful
-
-
-
-
75%
mesodude7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Don't speak for me, lostalgia because you can barely get out a coherent sentence about your damned self. Now, I believe there are people who are Independents. I just don't think YOU qualify as an independent thinking individual. No way in HELL do you qualify. ;-(
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
92%
mesodude7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I didn't swing from anything. We have nothing to show for Bush's wild spending spree except death and destruction. Bush spent AGAINST the better judgment of most respected economists (unprecedented war time tax cuts for the ultra wealthy--yeah, that was a great investment) and Obama is listening to what most (but not all) economists are saying. The point is, it's pure idiocy to suggest that a spending freeze is going to do anything except make the recession last longer. Cons refuse to acknowledge that.
Reply
-
-
-
100%
cowboygrandpa7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Endo:
Reply
I keep hearing this buzz. Damn mosquitoes like you are irritating.
I'm no Hypocrite Gush lover. My standards are from the Bible. Where are yours from?
You lay with dogs you get fleas, seems to me the Republican party has been laying with dogs since the Nixon administration.
As far as calling names. Hahahahhaaaaaaaa
I wonder we get that from? Could it be the right wing hate factory radio heads, who call us names daily then weep like litle sissy girls when they get a small taste of their own medicine.
Endo you are incredibly obtuse. Trying to communicate with you is like trying to speak to a person on Jupiter. There is just no way to reach you with the current means available. You are out of touch, morally, spiritually, and as a human being you display an alarming lack of compassion for any but the morally corrupt of which you seem to think offer the best chance of gaining the wealth you love.
Let me know if you ever find a heart in that cavernous body, or are you like the tin man. A watch in there to record the time and hear the ticking of life slowly pushing you to an eternity of the hate you espouse. -
-
-
-
-
-
17%
ettucatk7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Colin Powell is no more a patriot or a Republican than Arlen Spector is a Democrat or a Republican. Colin Powell went with whatever was most expedient for his personal benefit, just as Spector did. I believe those who voted for Obama found the bottom. They swished around in the muck of Chicago politicians, and found Obama. Even those of you on the Left have to smirk when Powell professes to be politically right of center, and supports Obama.
Reply-
-
100%
GWHayduke7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Colon Powell dedicated his life to the service and protection of this country.
Reply
He made mistakes.
His political affiliation is of no real concern, only that he loves his country more than his party and its ideology.
Marginalizing or diminishing his contribution to our country because of his abandonment of his radicalized party is utterly absurd. -
100%
cowboygrandpa7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
ettucatk:
Reply
You seem to speak as a fool, when you demean the service of Colin Powell.
" Powell was a captain during the Vietnam War, serving as a South Vietnamese Army adviser from 1962 to 1963. While on patrol in a Viet Cong-held area, he was wounded by stepping on a punji stake.[12] He returned to Vietnam as a major in 1968, serving in the Americal Division (23rd Infantry Division), then as assistant chief of staff of operations for the Americal Division."
Were you ever there ??
Did you ever do any of the things Powell did ?? -
-
100%
sinophil497 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
ettucatk - I could only shake my head when I read your post insulting Powell. You are only exposing yourself as a totally uninformed, rabidly partisan fanatic. You are opening yourself up to a lot of scorn and derision on these electronic boards.
Reply
Powell is one of the most illustrious soldiers in the history of our armed services. He is an astute thinker. He has served in various capacities in the administrations of 4 separate Republican presidents - Nixon, Reagan, GWH Bush, and GW Bush. This all was on top of an acclaimed military record.
If your beliefs about Powell were true, then all 4 Republican presidents and their staffs must have been idiots to be duped by Powell for decades.
-
-
loading ...
Eagle_Eye
engineer
sinophil49
quicksilver0602
cushi
Charlson
tchef
alakazam
Radiofreeeuropa
doppich
Beau7890
fsev41
juvel
Goppy
Will1313
quackpot
mesodude
Jaydee40
bruhaha
CRYMTYPHON
DenCuddy
cowboygrandpa
bluetexasvalley
Progressive
Sageparadox
WikiMap
automan909
Codi6934
gwhiddon
Post Reply
You are not signed in to Propeller.com. Please sign in to post a reply.