Dems already dismissing Iraq report

[Destino]

It'd just amazing that some of you don't have the stones to admit that you want this war to fail, because it would be good for your leftist leaders. Is there a time at night, when your being totally honest with yourself, that you admit that your pulling for your country to loss a war so that it advances your political beliefs? Any other time in American history this would be labeled sadition at the very least or even treason.

Have a nice day.

Nobody wants the US to fail. In fact, if you have the stones to be honest for second, it was the DEMOCRATS that wanted more troops on the ground. This of course was before the complete failure to provide security and the rise of civil fighting... you know when we had a chance to do this right? Generals have come out and said that they wanted more troops and were ignored.

The democrats wanted to win the war and fought for the very unpopular rise in troop level when it would have made all the difference. Your side took the US into a war on the cheap instead... now you want to call people traitors for wanting to get us out of the mess made by republicans.

Have a great day.

[helptheSKINS]

I believe in human bias, not massive collective conspiracy theories like "the liberal media". It's easy to point out instances of bias, it's another thing entirely to claim the media as a whole is in the pocket of a specific political party.

QUOTE]

it's only the Moony Times (aka the Washington Times) that mention Patraeus because they are trying to make what the dems actually said look like something else.

Back Peddling from the comment above. I think what you meant to say is only Fox news and the rare "conservative" papers are bias. The NYT, LAT, NBC, CBS, Boston Globe, and on and on are very fair. 80% or more of the mainstream journalists are liberals that are 100% balanced. Except when they are being "human".

[redskins59]

I believe in human bias, not massive collective conspiracy theories like "the liberal media". It's easy to point out instances of bias, it's another thing entirely to claim the media as a whole is in the pocket of a specific political party.

QUOTE]

Back Peddling from the comment above. I think what you meant to say is only Fox news and the rare "conservative" papers are bias. The NYT, LAT, NBC, CBS, Boston Globe, and on and on are very fair. 80% or more of the mainstream journalists are liberals that are 100% balanced. Except when they are being "human".

You forgot to count all those radio talk shows.

[Ellis]

Politicians suck.

Their political future is more important than ANYTHING else.

That's why I voted for Urlich and not O'Malley.

[JMS]

Peddling from the comment above. I think what you meant to say is only Fox news and the rare "conservative" papers are bias. The NYT, LAT, NBC, CBS, Boston Globe, and on and on are very fair. 80% or more of the mainstream journalists are liberals that are 100% balanced. Except when they are being "human".

If Bill Clinton decide he was going to write a Generals report to congress for him on such an important and anticipated report you would be screaming to high heavens.

How do you justify that Bush is writting the report out of the Whitehouse knowing this report was always supposed to be General Patraeses report for congress?

I think you are bending over backwards to defend Bush when no defense is possible. The Chairman of the joint chiefs have collectively and individually reported to Bush. the Secretary of Defense hase publically disagreed with Bush. 5 or six of the last 7 four star chairman, ( all but Tommy Franks ) have disagreed with Iraqi war strategy. Including the current one Peter Pace. The independent GAO came out yesterday saying the surge has failed to meet it's goals .. 3 out of 18!!... Hell even the consensus of the inteligence community disagrees with Bush and says Iraq is continuing to spin more out of control...

But with your blinders you can dismiss all that as a democratic conspiracy?

[twa]

How do you justify that Bush is writting the report out of the Whitehouse knowing this report was always supposed to be General Patraeses report for congress?

?

Simple question...Was the Whitehouse supposed to write the report?

And is Petraeus going to testify in person to Congress?

The answers to those questions SHOULD eliminate the partisan bs being spread.

Not that it will happen

Added The answers

The legislation authorizing the administration report and General Petraeus' testimony is HR 2206.

Both specifically state who is to provide what reports. There is no "Petraeus Report," per se, because the legislation does not authorize one. The President is to prepare and deliver the report, after consulting with the Commander of MNF-Iraq and Ambassador Crocker.

A separate section of the legislation requires that both the Commander and Ambassador be made available for congressional testimony, in both closed and open sessions.

[Destino]

Back Peddling from the comment above. I think what you meant to say is only Fox news and the rare "conservative" papers are bias. The NYT, LAT, NBC, CBS, Boston Globe, and on and on are very fair. 80% or more of the mainstream journalists are liberals that are 100% balanced. Except when they are being "human".

I disagree that NBC and CBS are entirely bias. That's crap. The moony times are insanely bias on average, just like the LA Times. I never said there was no bias, again human bias.

What I disagree with is that there is such thing as "the liberal media" which is framed to be all for the democrats... sorry to break it to you but logically "most people" are either of average or below average intelligence. If the entire media, save for a few fair and balanced sources, were entirely in the pocket of the democrats... the democrats would own damn near every election with ease. The nation with a high population that can't name the vice President wouldn't easily ignore such a massive media weapon.

Have the democrats dominated in such a fashion? No. In fact the word "liberal" has been turned into a dirty word. Amazing how such a publicity coup was accomplished with almost the entire media against them... it's a miracle!

[Destino]

How do you justify that Bush is writting the report out of the Whitehouse knowing this report was always supposed to be General Patraeses report for congress?

good luck getting an answer to that.

[GibbsFactor]

Simple question...Was the Whitehouse supposed to write the report?

And is Petraeus going to testify in person to Congress?

The answers to those questions SHOULD eliminate the partisan bs being spread.

Not that it will happen

Added The answers

The legislation authorizing the administration report and General Petraeus' testimony is HR 2206.

Both specifically state who is to provide what reports. There is no "Petraeus Report," per se, because the legislation does not authorize one. The President is to prepare and deliver the report, after consulting with the Commander of MNF-Iraq and Ambassador Crocker.

A separate section of the legislation requires that both the Commander and Ambassador be made available for congressional testimony, in both closed and open sessions.

Typical. pass legislation then ***** about it.

[twa]

good luck getting an answer to that.

Added The answers

The legislation authorizing the administration report and General Petraeus' testimony is HR 2206.

Both specifically state who is to provide what reports. There is no "Petraeus Report," per se, because the legislation does not authorize one. The President is to prepare and deliver the report, after consulting with the Commander of MNF-Iraq and Ambassador Crocker.

A separate section of the legislation requires that both the Commander and Ambassador be made available for congressional testimony, in both closed and open sessions.

[IHOPSkins]

I think the country is effed up because one of our parties likes to have homosexual sex in public bathrooms.

But the Republicans are trying to stop that....

Notice the Strongest Critics of these unsavory acts

I guess its OK with the Barney Frank Party

[81artmonk]

Is it any wonder?? They were saying the surge was a failure before it even began.

[Destino]

Is it any wonder?? They were saying the surge was a failure before it even began.

They wanted to increase troops levels when it mattered... you know back when your guys were ignoring generals and screwing us over?

[skinfan133]

Yep.... if the report were to depict utter failure and a lost cost in Iraq... the Dems would be grinning from ear to ear, patting each other on the backs, and cheering in the back halls of the Congressional offices. What an effed up country we live in..... when.... one of our political parties actually hopes for our defeat militarily in order to solidify and possibly gain power in Congress. :doh:

that right there scares me to death. i wouldnt care which party it is, NO elected official should want the US to be defeated in any endeavor.

it seems to me that the 110th congress is just extremely immature, like that anoying kid who was always a loud mouth in grade school. I just outlined the constitution for my AP Govt class and looking at how congress is suposed to act and how congress DOES act (under both parties, but especially the democrats) its almost laughable, if it wasnt firieghtening and sad. I pray for my country, Her death is nigh, we ignore our constitution and elect peices of **** to office.

[helptheSKINS]

that right there scares me to death. i wouldnt care which party it is, NO elected official should want the US to be defeated in any endeavor.

it seems to me that the 110th congress is just extremely immature, like that anoying kid who was always a loud mouth in grade school. I just outlined the constitution for my AP Govt class and looking at how congress is suposed to act and how congress DOES act (under both parties, but especially the democrats) its almost laughable, if it wasnt firieghtening and sad. I pray for my country, Her death is nigh, we ignore our constitution and elect peices of **** to office.

Both parties of congress are sad. What I don't get is libs on here think they know all about every subject. They think that anyone conservative is in love with Bush and watches Fox News 12 hours a day.

JMS accussed me earlier of "bending over backwards to defend Bush". Where in this thread or in any other thread have I "defended Bush"? How did you come to that conclusion other then because the liberal goggles were on? I don't mean that as an insult either. The point is that most of us on this site have been lumped together into left or right. I lean right but that doesn't mean everything said and done by the republican party/Bush is OK with me. It just happens that I agree more with them then I do with the democratic party.

[chomerics]

Yep.... if the report were to depict utter failure and a lost cost in Iraq... the Dems would be grinning from ear to ear, patting each other on the backs, and cheering in the back halls of the Congressional offices. What an effed up country we live in..... when.... one of our political parties actually hopes for our defeat militarily in order to solidify and possibly gain power in Congress. :doh:

Cough *Bosnia* Cough. . .

A bigger problem is the projection you are letting seep out of the closet. . . I thought your shrink had worked on all your defense mechanisms skin? You seem to need to work on your projection skills a little bit more

[chomerics]

I don't pretend to know whether the Democrats are secretly rooting for defeat in Iraq...and when I say Democrats, I mean the scumbucket politicians. I don't think anyone in general public who's in their right mind is rooting for defeat in Iraq.

But it wouldn't surprise me if the douchebag Democrat senators and congressmen are rolling their eyes and hoping for failure if it means their party takes the election in 2008.

Thats the way it is in this country now, win for your party at any and all costs. Sick and pathetic.

Spiff, the funny thing is that you have two sides arguing about an issue. One side has not changed their position in over 4 years, the other side has done everything to make their position seem less credible.

I agree you need teamwork, but if one side is not able to work as a team what is the solution? Let them get away with running the country into the ground? heck, you are guilty of it as well, look at how you worded your statement i quoted. . . I don't know if they want us to fail, but I wouldn't be surprised.

Do you not see how simple minded, biased and opinionated that statement is? Do you think I want us to fail in Iraq? How about larry? I want us to succeede, but seeing as we are not trying to do anything different, and we are not making any progress, I think it is time to get the hell out. That is not rooting for failure, that is examining the issues based on facts, and understanding what the right course of action is.

Wanting to lessen the damage is not rooting for failure, but the right has made you think that bringing the troops home and admitting a mistake is treasonous and rooting against our soldiers. . . they neglect to see that the way we look at it.

Placing our soldiers in the middle of a civil war we caused, and have no solution for is rooting against our soldiers. They don't care how many die, and how many families are ruined by this war, just to save face. they lied to get us into this war, lied throughout the war, and are continuing to lie in order to cover their ass. . .And that, my friend, is where the real treasonous actions are hidden.

[Midnight Judges]

that right there scares me to death. i wouldnt care which party it is, NO elected official should want the US to be defeated in any endeavor.

it seems to me that the 110th congress is just extremely immature, like that anoying kid who was always a loud mouth in grade school. I just outlined the constitution for my AP Govt class and looking at how congress is suposed to act and how congress DOES act (under both parties, but especially the democrats) its almost laughable, if it wasnt firieghtening and sad. I pray for my country, Her death is nigh, we ignore our constitution and elect peices of **** to office.

Tell me, where in the constitution does it detail "how congress supposed to act?" :laugh: Are they not allowed to dissent? Do you think the founding fathers agreed on everything as well?