Jump to content
TSM Forums


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by CheesalaIsGood

  1. "The media is only as liberal as the conservative white men who own it."





    Plus, they are there to ONLY serve advertisers. Rating folks! It's what its all about. All of it. It's sad when the news is no longer there as a public service, instead competing for ad revenues. Just like everything else, those involved in the news have sold out.

  2. This is more of a demostration that the American Public needs a hobby. If you fire someone for a Kerry sticker or spit on someone for supporting Bush, you need to do something constructive with your time that doesn't involve acting like a jackass.


    In the words of Lewis Black, if you need to be part of a team that badly then join a bowling league.

    How about posting on a messageboard?

  3. Moulton woman says she lost job for sporting Kerry sticker on car


    By Clyde L. Stancil

    DAILY Staff Writer

    [email protected] · 340-2443


    MOULTON — Lynne Gobbell never imagined the cost of a John Kerry-John Edwards bumper sticker could run so high.


    DAILY Photo by Clyde Stancil

    Lynne Gobbell said her boss fired her last week because of the Kerry-Edwards campaign sticker on the back of her car.

    Gobbell of Moulton didn't pay a cent for the sticker that she proudly displays on the rear windshield of her Chevrolet Lumina, but said it cost her job at a local factory after it angered her boss, Phil Geddes.


    Geddes, a Decatur bankruptcy attorney, owns Enviromate, a cellulose insulation company in Moulton.


    Geddes did not return phone calls from THE DAILY about the alleged Thursday firing.


    Gobbell said she consulted a lawyer, but then changed her mind about going to see him. She said she has cried about the incident and must do without income for three weeks while the state unemployment commission decides if she is eligible for compensation.


    Gobbell said she was averaging 50 to 60 hours a week on the plant's bagging machine.


    "The lady there (at the unemployment commission) said that she has never heard of a firing like this before," Gobbell said.


    Gobbell gave this account:


    "We were going back to work from break, and my manager told me that Phil said to remove the sticker off my car or I was fired," she said. "I told him that Phil couldn't tell me who to vote for. He said, 'Go tell him.' "


    She went to Geddes' office, knocked on the door and entered on his orders.


    "Phil and another man who works there were there," she said. "I asked him if he said to remove the sticker and he said, 'Yes, I did.' I told him he couldn't tell me who to vote for. When I told him that, he told me, 'I own this place.' I told him he still couldn't tell me who to vote for."


    Gobbell said Geddes told her to "get out of here."


    "I asked him if I was fired and he told me he was thinking about it," she said. "I said, 'Well, am I fired?' He hollered and said, 'Get out of here and shut the door.' "


    She said her manager was standing in another room and she asked him if that meant for her to go back to work or go home. The manager told her to go back to work, but he came back a few minutes later and said, " 'I reckon you're fired. You could either work for him or John Kerry,' " Gobbell said.


    "I took off my gloves and threw them in the garbage and left," Gobbell said.


    Though she is unemployed and uncertain if she will get her job back, Gobbell said, she doesn't regret her decision to keep the sticker on her windshield.


    "I would like to find another job, but I would take that job back because I need to work," she said. "It upset me and made me mad that he could put a letter in my check expressing his (political) opinion, but I can't put something on my car expressing mine."


    She was referring to a flier that she said Geddes placed in employee envelopes to remind them of the positive impact that President Bush's policies have had on them. An employee at the plant who would not identify himself confirmed the contents of the letter.


    Gobbell provided a copy of the flier. It says:


    "Just so you will know, because of the Bush tax (cut):

    # I was able to buy the new Hammer Mill

    # I was able to finance our receivables

    # I was able to get the new CAT skid steer

    # I was able to get the wire cutter

    # I was able to give you a job"


    It further says:


    "You got the benefit of the Bush tax cut. Everyone did."


    Leave feedback

    on this or




    201 1st Ave. SE

    P.O. Box 2213

    Decatur, Ala. 35609

    (256) 353-4612

    [email protected]






    I'll just save some folks on here the time and say "The bitch deserved it!"

  4. Author's Note | I spent Tuesday evening watching the debate, and then writing about it. When I was done, I went to the website Dick Cheney told Americans to visit in order to get the truth about Kerry's record. Cheney said we should view 'FactCheck.com,' but as a seasoned internet scrambler, I knew immediately he meant 'FactCheck.org'. Not much difference between a .com and a .org, right?


    Wrong. FactCheck.com is a website owned by George Soros. The banner headline across the top of the page reads 'WHY WE MUST NOT RE-ELECT PRESIDENT BUSH.' You can assume what the content to follow has to say, or you can go visit the site yourself. I'd love to see what Soros' hit counts look like on Wednesday morning. This is a fairly solid allegory for Dick Cheney's night at the desk. - wrp




    Cheney's Avalanche of Lies

    By William Rivers Pitt

    t r u t h o u t | Perspective


    Wednesday 06 October 2004


    "The vice president, I'm surprised to hear him talk about records. When he was one of 435 members of the United States House, he was one of 10 to vote against Head Start, one of four to vote against banning plastic weapons that can pass through metal detectors. He voted against the Department of Education. He voted against funding for Meals on Wheels for seniors. He voted against a holiday for Martin Luther King. He voted against a resolution calling for the release of Nelson Mandela in South Africa. It's amazing to hear him criticize either my record or John Kerry's."


    - Senator John Edwards, 10/05/04


    Cheney and Edwards at the National Prayer Breakfast, 02/01/01


    Clearly, Dick Cheney is no George W. Bush.


    On Thursday night in Florida, Bush exposed himself as unprepared, easily ruffled, angry, excitable and muddled. As one wag put it, he came to a 90 minute debate with 10 minutes of material. On Tuesday night in Ohio, Cheney showed the American people who is really running things at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. He was controlled, calm, every inch the CEO in charge.


    Cheney was also every inch the snarling, hunch-shouldered golem that has made him one of the least popular politicians in recent memory. He seldom looked up at moderator Gwen Ifill, or at the cameras facing him, choosing instead to speak into his own chest for the entire night. Cheney appeared, overall, to cut quite the frightening figure, the dark night to Edwards' optimistic day.


    The other problem for Cheney, of course, was the way he lied with nearly every word that passed his curled lips. It was a virtuoso performance of prevarication, obfuscation and outright balderdash. On Thursday night, George W. Bush played the part of a man who couldn't possibly defend his record. On Tuesday night, Cheney acted as though that record did not exist.


    Cheney was behind the eight-ball before he even entered the hall, tasked to defend his administration's rationale for invading and occupying Iraq. Unfortunately for him, journalists record statements made by important people. In 1992, then-Defense Secretary Cheney spoke to the Discovery Institute in Seattle, WA. Recall that the United States was flush from the trouncing of Iraq in the first Gulf War. Cheney was asked why coalition forces didn't roll tanks on Baghdad and depose Saddam Hussein. Cheney's response, given 14 years ago, could well describe the mess we currently find ourselves in.


    "I would guess if we had gone in there," said Cheney in 1992, "I would still have forces in Baghdad today. We'd be running the country. We would not have been able to get everybody out and bring everybody home. And the final point that I think needs to be made is this question of casualties. I don't think you could have done all of that without significant additional U.S. casualties. And while everybody was tremendously impressed with the low cost of the conflict, for the 146 Americans who were killed in action and for their families, it wasn't a cheap war."


    For the record, 1,064 American soldiers have died in this second round of war in Iraq. An additional 138 soldiers from the 'coalition' Bush and Cheney assembled have also died, bringing the total to 1,202. Edwards made the point several times that the United States was bearing "90% of the coalition causalities" in Iraq, and that the American people are bearing "90% of the costs of the effort in Iraq." Cheney tried to say this wasn't true, but the body count numbers don't lie, and never mind the burden being carried by the Iraqi people, more than 20,000 of whom have perished since the invasion began.


    "And the question in my mind," continued Cheney in 1992, "is how many additional American casualties is Saddam worth? And the answer is not that damned many. So, I think we got it right, both when we decided to expel him from Kuwait, but also when the president made the decision that we'd achieved our objectives and we were not going to go get bogged down in the problems of trying to take over and govern Iraq."


    Cheney's answer to this glaring contradiction, of course, is "September 11," i.e. the terrorist attacks changed everything. It doesn't change the facts of a disastrous occupation, or the overwhelming financial burden being placed on American taxpayers because of Bush administration failures, and it certainly doesn't explain 1,064 folded American flags handed to American families who thought their sons, daughters, husbands, wives, mothers and fathers were going to Iraq to destroy weapons of mass destruction and protect the United States.


    Page 01 of the Washington Post for Wednesday 06 October carries an article titled 'Report Discounts Iraq Arms Threat,' which reads in paragraph one: "The government's most definitive account of Iraq's arms programs, to be released today, will show that Saddam Hussein posed a diminishing threat at the time the United States invaded and did not possess, or have concrete plans to develop, nuclear, chemical or biological weapons, U.S. officials said yesterday."


    Yes, the lies were thick before Cheney took his seat at the desk on Tuesday night. They got thicker. Edwards, in a theme repeated throughout the night, stated that Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with the attacks of September 11, and that the Bush administration had erred grievously by diverting attention from Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda and into Iraq. Several times, Edwards accused Cheney of rhetorically combining Iraq and 9/11.


    "I have not," replied Cheney, "suggested there is a connection between Iraq and 9/11."




    "His regime has had high-level contacts with al Qaeda going back a decade and has provided training to al Qaeda terrorists." - Cheney, 12/2/02


    "His regime aids and protects terrorists, including members of al Qaeda. He could decide secretly to provide weapons of mass destruction to terrorists for use against us." - Cheney, 1/30/03


    "I think there's overwhelming evidence that there was a connection between al Qaeda and the Iraqi government." - Cheney, 1/22/04


    "There's been enormous confusion over the Iraq and al-Qaeda connection, Gloria. First of all, on the question of - of whether or not there was any kind of a relationship, there was a relationship. It's been testified to. The evidence is overwhelming. It goes back to the early '90s...There's clearly been a relationship." - Cheney, 6/17/04


    One could argue, perhaps, the definition of "is" on this matter. Cheney did not state specifically in any of the above quotes that Iraq was involved with 9/11. But the repeated claim that Iraq was connected to al Qaeda, a claim that has been shot to pieces dozens of times over, establishes enough of an Iraq-9/11 connection to satisfy a man who appears to believe that a frightened populace is a happy populace.


    George W. Bush doesn't even believe Cheney on this point. An article by Reuters from September 18, 2003, had Bush telling reporters, "We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved in September 11." Bush was forced into this scramble because his Vice President had, again, made this discredited connection between Iraq and 9/11 on 'Meet the Press' the previous Sunday by claiming, "more and more" evidence was being found to justify the connection. It wasn't true then, and it isn't true now.


    Cheney's unruffled, monotone demeanor became demonstrably agitated only a few times on Tuesday, but those times were telling. They came when John Edwards mentioned Halliburton. Edwards accused Halliburton, essentially, of war profiteering, and went so far as to describe how the company, while run by Cheney, was trading with nations now considered to be enemies of America.


    "While he was CEO of Halliburton," said Edwards, "they paid millions of dollars in fines for providing false information on their company, just like Enron and Ken Lay. They did business with Libya and Iran, two sworn enemies of the United States. They're now under investigation for having bribed foreign officials during that period of time. Not only that, they've gotten a $7.5 billion no-bid contract in Iraq, and instead of part of their money being withheld, which is the way it's normally done, because they're under investigation, they've continued to get their money."


    Cheney was allotted 30 seconds to reply to this explosive charge. His response: "The reason they keep mentioning Halliburton is because they're trying to throw up a smokescreen. They know the charges are false."


    Edwards' reply to this in-depth rejoinder: "These are the facts. The facts are the vice president's company that he was CEO of, that did business with sworn enemies of the United States, paid millions of dollars in fines for providing false financial information, it's under investigation for bribing foreign officials. The same company that got a $7.5 billion no-bid contract, the rule is that part of their money is supposed to be withheld when they're under investigation, as they are now, for having overcharged the American taxpayer, but they're getting every dime of their money."


    A few more facts: According to the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Houston Chronicle, the New York Times, the Petroleum Economist and scores of other reporters and media outlets, Halliburton in the time of Dick Cheney dealt with both Iraq, Iran and Libya through a variety of subsidiaries and in defiance of scores of international sanctions. Cheney did not like the sanctions against these countries, and went out of his way to make sure Halliburton could get around them and turn a tidy profit.


    On June 13, 2000, one month before joining the Republican presidential ticket, the Los Angeles Times reported Cheney's claim that, "We're kept out of (Iran) primarily by our own government, which has made a decision that U.S. firms should not be allowed to invest significantly in Iran, and I think that's a mistake." When speaking to the Cato Institute on June 23, 1998, Cheney stated, "Unfortunately, Iran is sitting right in the middle of the (Caspian Sea) area and the United States has declared unilateral economic sanctions against that country. As a result, American firms are prohibited from dealing with Iran and find themselves cut out of the action."


    Cut out of the action?


    It went on like this for 90 minutes, and got quite silly at one point. Cheney tried to paint Edwards as an absentee Senator by claiming he'd not met Edwards until that night. CNN and the other networks, a couple of hours later, began showing video of the two of them sitting together for several hours during the National Prayer Breakfast in February of 2001. It seems a silly thing to lie about, what with all the chaos and dead people we're all dealing with, but the media appeared happy to seize upon it. So it goes.


    Cheney looked for all the world as if the whole thing bored him. One can hardly blame him. When your entire professional and political career is a tapestry of untruths, telling them again for the umpteenth time could indeed be quite dull.


    William Rivers Pitt is a New York Times and international bestseller of two books - 'War on Iraq: What Team Bush Doesn't Want You to Know' and 'The Greatest Sedition is Silence.'






    Still, isn't gonna get me to vote for Kerry/Edwards, but HEY its almost as good as a vote for Bush/Cheney right guys?

  5. You know you really hit the mark when you get them to get all bent out of shape like THAT ^.



    Next is the part where he tells me and INXS and whoever else is supposedly a liberal on this board to go away. See but *I* don't want MikeSC to go away. Cuz while I consider him and his point of view to be predictable, I still find it to be hilarious. I take back any bad thing I said about. You are awesome.

  6. If you want to assume the book will contain ten letters, sure. And dude, you don't need 20 ellipses after making a point.

    So 9 letters out of 140,000 obviously are an accurate judge of the whole. Thank you very much.


    Anyone can make a point. It's not that hard. But putting something behind that point is what really matters. Just because he has a few letters means shit; you need more than a hundred disgruntled GIs to really get noticed. We are talking 140,000 people here (I'm hammering this point down. That's around .07 of a percent of the entire force in Iraq. Frankly, I doubt that they are the true indicator of what's really going over there.


    And it'd be funny if he did get reemed out by a judge for bribery of voters. I'd laugh my ass off at that.

    It means shit to you that anybody would have something bad to say about the war as it is. Sorry but it means something to me, cuz I support ALL the troops regardless of the conditions and opinion. You don't see anybody questioning the validity of the letters that are PRO this war do you? They get their turn too. So chill the fuck out.



    Its even funnier that the Michigan republicans are gonna make a stink over this considering what he was "bribing" them with. It's not like its lobbyist money. Its UNDERWEAR AND NOODLES! Go ahead make a big deal about this. I dare you.

  7. Who said these letters were fake?

    I don't think it's that the letters are fake. It's just that, well, 9 people out of 140,000 doesn't give us an accurate sentiment of the troops over there. Especially ones who want to send letters to Michael Moore.


    I would, though, like to see their authenticity proven. I wouldn't put it past Moore to make up a few of them.

    So it's just an assumption then. Ok, you don't trust Moore. Fine. It doesn't mean its ONLY 9. Thats an assumption too. There ARE alot of people who are against this war, world over. IS it so hard to imagine that some of them might be IN the military? Of course not. We'd solve this by getting some kind of poll, but from the military? Good luck.

  8. Too fucking funny! Sorry C-bacon.






    Wednesday, October 6th, 2004

    Republicans, Out of Ideas, Ask Prosecutors to Arrest Michael Moore




    Dear Friends,


    You may have heard by now that the Michigan Republican Party has called for my arrest. That's right. They literally want me brought up on charges -- and hope that I'm locked up.


    No, I'm not kidding. The Republican Party, yesterday, filed a criminal complaint with the prosecutors in each of the counties where I spoke last week in Michigan.


    My crime? Clean underwear for anyone who will vote in the upcoming election.


    Each night on our 60-city "Slacker Uprising Tour" through the 20 battleground states, I've been registering hundreds (and on some nights, thousands) of voters at my arena and stadium events. I then ask for everyone over 23 who has never voted (or didn't vote in the last election) to stand up. I tell these slackers that I understand and respect why they think politicians are not worth the bother. I tell them that I may have been the original slacker, and that I do not want them to change their slacker ways. Keep sleeping 'til noon! Keep drinking beer! Stay on the sofa and watch as much TV as possible! But, please, just for me, on 11/2, I want you to leave the house and give voting a try -- just this once. The stakes this time are just too high.


    If they promise me that they'll do this, I give the guys a 3-pack of new Fruit of the Loom underwear, and the women get a day's supply of Ramen noodles, the sustenance of slackers everywhere.


    I then close by having them repeat the 2004 Slacker Oath: "Pick nose! Pick BUTT! Pick Kerry."


    It seems to have worked, as each night the volunteer tables are swamped afterwards with hundreds of new and young voters signing up to campaign for regime change for the next four weeks.


    The satire of all this seems to have been lost on the Republicans. Or maybe it hasn't. The state of Michigan (where we spent most of last week) reported that over 100,000 young people recently registered to vote, a record that no one saw coming. The Slacker Tour has turned into a huge steamroller with a momentum all its own.


    So, the Republican Party, to show their gratitude that so many young people will now be involved in our system, has demanded that I be sent to jail for trying to "bribe" students to vote.


    Of course, this would be quite laughable if they weren't so serious about their charges. But they are. I may soon be a wanted man in Michigan -- simply because I convinced a few slackers to change their underwear and eat a healthy meal of artificially flavored noodles.


    I thought I'd seen it all this year -- Disney refusing to distribute the film they paid for, right-wingers harassing theater owners who showed "Fahrenheit 9/11," conservative action groups trying to get the FEC to kick our film ads off the air, the unnecessary restrictive R-rating that forced teenagers to sneak in to see it, and all the stupid, crazy attacks on me and my movie that I've had to listen to as I watched the public ignore them and pack the movie houses anyway, where my film was being shown. And when all that failed, five different Republican groups made five different attack dog tapes (oops, "documentaries"!) against me in a period of about six weeks. But they were all so bad, so boring, so right-wing, no one wanted to watch them and they too went away, a sad waste of good videotape.


    Now, after enduring all this, with no tricks left in their bag, they've just decided, "Let's toss his sorry ass behind bars -- him and his noodles and his gift of clean underwear!"


    My friends, they will not catch me. Though I may be on the run, and I may never be able to return home to my beloved Michigan, I make this solemn vow to you and yours: The slackers of America shall not be denied their noodles, they will proudly wear their clean underwear as free Americans, and they will vote Bush out of office come November 2nd (though they will not show up to the polls until well after noon)!


    Stay strong, stay slacker, and please remember to turn the underwear inside out every three days. As for the noodles, add boiling water, stir.




    Michael Moore

    [email protected]



    P.S. My favorite moment of the VP debate: Cheney saying to the moderator that this was the first he heard that that many black women in America had AIDS. Clueless. Cheney, for an entire 90-minutes, only mentioned Bush's name -- that's his running mate, the "president" -- once. They should have called this the "President (Cheney) -- Vice President (Edwards) Debate."


    P.P.S. Tomorrow's letter, as promised for today, will be about my new book, "Will They Ever Trust Us Again?: Letters from the War Zone." And thanks, everyone, for sending "Fahrenheit 9/11" on its first day to #1 on Amazon. If you find that your store didn't order enough copies, or to report other problems, please e-mail Sony Home video at [email protected].

  9. Rather than start a new thread I'll throw our conservative friends here a bone with this lil ditty.







    Michigan GOP says Moore's vote offers illegal



    By The Associated Press

    Wednesday, October 6, 2004


    LANSING, Mich. -- Republicans say filmmaker Michael Moore should be prosecuted for offering underwear, potato chips and Ramen noodles to college students in exchange for their promise to vote.


    The Michigan Republican Party has asked four county prosecutors to file charges against Moore, charging that his get-out-the-vote stunt amounts to bribery.


    "We want everyone to participate in this year's election, but not because they were bribed or coerced by the likes of Michael Moore," said Greg McNeilly, executive director of the state Republican Party.


    Moore, a Michigan native, is touring the country and imploring "slackers" who usually don't vote to head to the polls this year, saying they could make the difference in the presidential race. Moore has made stops at three Michigan universities as part of a 60-city pre-election tour.



    During each program, habitual nonvoters are invited on stage to pledge to vote. First-time student voters are offered gag prizes such as clean underwear.


    The GOP said Moore also offered students a clean dorm room, a year's supply of Tostitos and a package of Ramen noodles.


    The GOP said it asked the prosecutors to charge Moore, a John Kerry supporter, with violating Michigan's election law, which prohibits a person from contracting with another for something of value in exchange for agreeing to vote.


    Maria Miller, a spokeswoman for the Wayne County prosecutor's office, refused to comment on the matter. Calls to Moore and the other prosecutors weren't immediately returned Tuesday.






    My god he is bribing those potheads with FOOD and underwear! He should have tried beer.




  10. I love how Al Gore being present suddenly makes everything Bush says equal and fair. It was a STUPID thing for him to say... that is in FRONT of camera! It exposes high ranking officials for what they are and insults the poor and working class.



    Cry, BITCH, and moan, all you want Mikey but holding editing choices against Moore makes YOUR arguement SUBJECTIVE OPINION, NOT FACT!!! Its called a persuasive arguement dolt. An effective one at that. If he continues to pimp his books etc. to the masses a conservative like yourself should be applauding him for working and staying off welfare. C'mon sweetheart, it wasn't FOR you. If these letters piss you off, WHO is the one getting all bent out of shape so easily? I figure since your so hardline if these letters were proven to YOU to be real, it would piss you off even more. Now I will click Powerplays link to see yet moe disputes against Moores films, cuz in spite of what you might think I will always listen to what the opposing side has to say.

  11. Yup --- and no glaring factual inaccuracies.


    Of course, you wouldn't bitch about a movie you never saw, would ya?


    Nope, so far no bitching. I saw "Outfoxed" today though. No Mike Moore to be seen. Telling stuff. I'll still watch Fox News tho, it makes me laugh. Shep Smith and his plastic head bring the hilarity.

  12. You wouldn't know after reading the majority of your posts....................

    Yes, because if you aren't voting for Bush, you MUST BE a Kerry supporter. Oh I also happened to think Kerry performed better in his debate, so I guess I am voting for Kerry. I have stated it several times already, please let this be the last.

    And where exactly do you think Kerry's getting his most support, from actual KERRY SUPPORTERS? Hell most would vote for Nader or Badnarik but 'don't think their vote would do any good' or 'it doesn't get Bush out of office'.


    Which is really stupid if you think about it because A)if enough people voted for indy candidate A not only might he get more than 10% of the vote but might seriously threaten and B)you're just setting yourself up to do this all over again in four years anyway when Kerry isn't 'The People's Choice' like all his 'supporters' think he is. But that is what it is nonetheless.

    Naw, its got nothing to do with my thinking that he isn't the right guy for the job. I haven't even given ANY thought to any of this. Quit talking like you know me.

  13. I seem to remember they gave us some kind of gift awhile back. A statue or something?



    Oh sure it WAS a long time ago if you wanna split hairs....

    Hm... I dunno, anyone remember something called the Marshall Plan? I could have sworn it involved rebuilding France or something. Oh well. I guess a statue is obviously so much better than, well, being saved from occupation twice and having your country rebuilt twice.

    Yeah, and I said that because Greatone wanted to know when we if ever have gotten along with the french.




    Read the thread. Pay attention.

  14. I mistakingly thought the REPUBLICANS would support a policy they supported in the 1990s.





    "The question in my mind is how many additional American casualties is Saddam worth?... And the answer is not very damned many. So I think we got it right, both when we decided to expel him from Kuwait, but also when the president made the decision that we'd achieved our objectives and we were not going to go get bogged down in the problems of trying to take over and govern Iraq.... All of a sudden you've got a battle you're fighting in a major built-up city, a lot of civilians are around, significant limitations on our ability to use our most effective technologies and techniques.... Once we had rounded him up and gotten rid of his government, then the question is what do you put in its place? You know, you then have accepted the responsibility for governing Iraq.... Now what kind of government are you going to establish? Is it going to be a Kurdish government, or a Shi'ia government, or a Sunni government, or maybe a government based on the old Baathist Party, or some mixture thereof? You will have, I think by that time, lost the support of the Arab coalition that was so crucial to our operations over there."


    -Dick Cheney, speaking about the Gulf War in 1992

    Jeez, perhaps we should also adopt the Clinton Terrorist policy.


    Oh wait, we saw how that worked out.


    Seriously, your own candidate says Saddam was a threat. Please, if he was a threat, explain to me why we should have left him alone? And, oddly enough, I doubt that Cheney and Bush I thought that Saddam would still be in power 10 years later.

    I am not voting for him either. "MY" candidate. Pfft.