Harry: "President? The man who's voted to abandon 25 million Iraqis to death squads and terrorists, but wants to invade Pakistan...?"
Better them than our troops. Anyway, he's not the only man, since most Americans support withdrawal.
And Musharaff doesn't want to let Pakistan have the vote, so at least invasion there would be legit. Though I'd imagine Obama would be more likely to issue sanctions.
"How could anyone who believes in humanity even consider voting for such a heartless individual?"
Yes, why can't he ignore genocide in Darfur like Bush?
"Obama's the future? If you're an Iraqi your future will be looking pretty bleak. And short. And painful."
Um, they already have a short future, due to the cancer from our depleted uranium. That, and them being refugees who aren't wanted anywhere...
Also, if we cared about the Iraqis, why are we helping Turkey commit another genocide against the Kurds? (You know, the people Saddam killed with our weapons?)
Oh, and apparently racist, too. I'd like to hear the justification for how an American soldier's life is more valuable than an Iraqi civilian's. I could justify such a notion if you were yourself a soldier, or if you had a spouse or some other close family member in the military, but I feel fairly comfortable in saying that none of these are the case. So that means that you're just a brainwashed, sheepish, thumbsucking tool.
PS: I'm a liberal who would never vote for any Republican candidate. But DZ's political views are nauseating.
Nothing's more selfish than adding the vets to the 25% who already make up the homeless in this country.
"Oh, and apparently racist, too. I'd like to hear the justification for how an American soldier's life is more valuable than an Iraqi civilian's."
I got no problems saving Arabs, especially since I've bitched against Guantanamo plenty of times. But you can't save anyone who's engaged in a turf war. That's just common sense.
"I could justify such a notion if you were yourself a soldier,"
I've met plenty, and they don't like those hellholes anymore than me.
"So that means that you're just a brainwashed, sheepish, thumbsucking tool."
Yes, people who don't want to continue a failed war are tools. You're rationale is extraordinary, jeff.
"PS: I'm a liberal who would never vote for any Republican candidate."
"Not voting were Democratic presidential candidates Joe Biden of Delaware, Hillary Clinton of New York, Chris Dodd of Connecticut and Barack Obama of Illinois. All four had said they opposed Mukasey's nomination."
Man I hope he wins. The thought of a Hillary Clinton presidency is almost as depressing as another term with Bush in office.
Is there a more transparent, calculating, full of shit politician on the ticket than Hillary Clinton? Hasn't America had enough of the Bush/Clinton/Bush legacy, do we really need another Clinton?
democrats and republicans are slightly different sides of the same coin. at some point, shock that "democrats" have the same agenda as "republicans" should render the reasonable person skeptical of them both and interested in different ways to organize communities. otherwise you're just a rube, except better-informed.
Posted by redundantworker at November 9, 2007 9:55 AM
Kids, by skipping on out that Mukaey's confirmation vote -- which they opposed and spoke out against tortue -- Obama and Clinton just pushed Edwards closer to the presidency. Huge tactical error. Don't think Edwards is not going to drill them on this in coming debates -- and they'll flounder.
Obama has a bad record of skipping votes. He ain't the one. I'd have him for VP though.
The Mukasey vote is just another distraction and red herring and an opportunity for Congress members to feign outrage. If the Congress truly cared about torture they would have passed a bill banning waterboarding a long time ago, instead of continuing to ask self righteous questions about it.
'The Mukasey vote is just another distraction and red herring and an opportunity for Congress members to feign outrage.'
Disagree, it's a taunt at Bush that the non-Zombie nominee can't give public acknowledgement that his future boss is a war-criminal. It's cheap, but then, this is Congress we're talking about. Obama's vote (as well as the other non-voters) and the debate which follow wd def be a meaningless distraction. I'm glad he's confirmed, maybe he can fix some of what BushCo has broken. This is not a "leadership" issue. Not impeaching/holding hearings on these scumbags in January 07 was a leadership issue.
Voted on a red herring, irrelevant nominee for a lame duck administration who is likely going to be voted in anyway? This is for a guy who said before questioning that if Congress would pass a law banning waterboarding, he would support it?
If he weren't campaigning for the Democratic nomination for President, you might have a point.
Everything they capitulate becomes a leadership issue. I'm sorry, but making a nice speech about the future is fine, actually taking a stand in the present is more revealing.
And what's up with this "distraction" meme? Distraction from what? Fund raising? Meeting lobbyists? Appearing on SNL?
I'd say his stance, and public vote, on the war in Iraq is more revealing than this nomination. If Congress were to vote on a bill banning waterboarding, and Obama missed the vote, that would be revealing.
I'd like to know why a nominee for a lame duck administration is such a huge issue? Waterboarding seems to be the only real hangup. Congress could actually pass a bill banning waterboarding if they really wanted to, instead they just keep talking about how "outraged" they are.
If they were truly outraged, they would take action on the issue.
Yes, thy should take action. These folk are also are the people's representatives with a job to do. They get salaries by taxpayers to cast votes. If they opposed Mukasey, then follow through. Obama is getting called "The Evader" because of his no-show pattern. Is that what he wants?
You've got no argument with me in the Kucinich department. In a perfect world he could be elected president, I just don't think it's realistically possible.
'And what's up with this "distraction" meme? Distraction from what? Fund raising? Meeting lobbyists? Appearing on SNL?'
So you want Tim Russert or whatever Rt Wing Handpuppet conducts the next debate to ask 36 questions abt the confirmation of a guy everyone with a pulse knows may be the only competant and least corrupt official ever nominated by Bush? Personally, I'd rank this a little higher than whether Obama places his hand over his heart during the National Anthem, but not much.
SpinDozer, it's their JOB to vote. That's what they were sent to do. If they don't have a problem with Mukasey, let 'em stand by their vote. I'm tired of this hiding out and triangulating. Most Americans are and this just writs large for their future plans.
I agree that they should have all turned up for the vote, and that Obama has a history of missing key votes.
But the Mukasey waterboarding issue isn't that simple. By acknowledging that waterboarding was tantamount to torture and/or violated the Geneva Convention, he would be severely compromising our own agents in the CIA and other organizations who have presumably been engaging in waterboarding.
I abhor waterboarding and all forms of torture (even things that are in the "grey area") but I'm realistic enough to know that an AG nominee is not going to testify that his would-be boss' policies make him a war criminal.
Yes, it is their job to vote, but not-voting is fairly standard in the campaign season, and this is hardly an important vote and the idiotic obsessing over this vote as part of the debate/campaign is a distraction from rather more important issues like healthcare, energy policy, etc., etc.
If missing a vote or two would've given Kerry another state, I wouldn't complain about that, even tho I'm not a huge Kerry fan, it would've spared the country from four years of Bush stupidity, No Roberts/Alito, etc.
christian: "Kids, by skipping on out that Mukaey's confirmation vote -- which they opposed and spoke out against tortue -- Obama and Clinton just pushed Edwards closer to the presidency. Huge tactical error. Don't think Edwards is not going to drill them on this in coming debates -- and they'll flounder."
I'd rather Obama not vote than vote for something he "regrets"(or in Hillary's case, doesn't regret, but criticizes anyway)later. Moving on, the ones who really screwed us over were Feinstein and Shumer.
"Then Obama should have voted and made his voice known. That's being a leader."
True. But he probably knew he wasn't going to win, so there's no point. Whether it's right or wrong doesn't make a difference, because it's not Feinstein who's running for President.
"I'm sorry, but making a nice speech about the future is fine, actually taking a stand in the present is more revealing."
I agree. It's just that Congress is hampered by Republicans and Republicrats alike, and the only way to shift the balance in our favor is for another massive fuck-up-which will probably be in Iran.
Monument: "You've got no argument with me in the Kucinich department. In a perfect world he could be elected president, I just don't think it's realistically possible."
If he can get Bush impeached, then you never know...
BNick: "By acknowledging that waterboarding was tantamount to torture and/or violated the Geneva Convention, he would be severely compromising our own agents in the CIA and other organizations who have presumably been engaging in waterboarding."
Yeah, like I really care about an organization of people who like to start civil wars...
comment #1
Caustic712
says ...
Great clip, Jeff. Thanks for posting.
And now, with the Republican response, Senator Filthy Harold...
Posted by Caustic712
at November 8, 2007 7:04 PM
comment #2
Chinaski
says ...
That is a great clip, gave me chills a few times.
This man *is* the future. Don't fuck this up, America.
Posted by Chinaski
at November 8, 2007 8:15 PM
comment #3
Tim
says ...
How f'ing cool would it be to wake up in an America where this guy was President? Here's hoping.
Posted by Tim
at November 8, 2007 8:36 PM
comment #4
Dirty Harry
says ...
President? The man who's voted to abandon 25 million Iraqis to death squads and terrorists, but wants to invade Pakistan...?
How could anyone who believes in humanity even consider voting for such a heartless individual?
Obama's the future? If you're an Iraqi your future will be looking pretty bleak. And short. And painful.
Posted by Dirty Harry
at November 8, 2007 9:24 PM
comment #5
D.Z.
says ...
Harry: "President? The man who's voted to abandon 25 million Iraqis to death squads and terrorists, but wants to invade Pakistan...?"
Better them than our troops. Anyway, he's not the only man, since most Americans support withdrawal.
And Musharaff doesn't want to let Pakistan have the vote, so at least invasion there would be legit. Though I'd imagine Obama would be more likely to issue sanctions.
"How could anyone who believes in humanity even consider voting for such a heartless individual?"
Yes, why can't he ignore genocide in Darfur like Bush?
"Obama's the future? If you're an Iraqi your future will be looking pretty bleak. And short. And painful."
Um, they already have a short future, due to the cancer from our depleted uranium. That, and them being refugees who aren't wanted anywhere...
Posted by D.Z.
at November 8, 2007 10:27 PM
comment #6
D.Z.
says ...
Also, if we cared about the Iraqis, why are we helping Turkey commit another genocide against the Kurds? (You know, the people Saddam killed with our weapons?)
Posted by D.Z.
at November 9, 2007 12:29 AM
comment #7
jeffmcm
says ...
"Better them than our troops."
You're a profoundly selfish asshole.
Posted by jeffmcm
at November 9, 2007 1:18 AM
comment #8
jeffmcm
says ...
Oh, and apparently racist, too. I'd like to hear the justification for how an American soldier's life is more valuable than an Iraqi civilian's. I could justify such a notion if you were yourself a soldier, or if you had a spouse or some other close family member in the military, but I feel fairly comfortable in saying that none of these are the case. So that means that you're just a brainwashed, sheepish, thumbsucking tool.
PS: I'm a liberal who would never vote for any Republican candidate. But DZ's political views are nauseating.
Posted by jeffmcm
at November 9, 2007 1:28 AM
comment #9
Dave
says ...
It's amazing how much Danny learns about the "real" world from manga.
Posted by Dave
at November 9, 2007 6:04 AM
comment #10
BNick
says ...
I'm a Republican, and we don't have anybody like this guy.
I hope he wins the primary. If he gets to the general, we'll see what he's really made of, and I'll make up my mind about voting for him then.
Although if we get Rudy or Mitt, Barack's already got my vote.
Posted by BNick
at November 9, 2007 6:21 AM
comment #11
Dirty Harry
says ...
"Oh, and apparently racist, too. I'd like to hear the justification for how an American soldier's life is more valuable than an Iraqi civilian's."
Could not agree more.
Posted by Dirty Harry
at November 9, 2007 6:22 AM
comment #12
D.Z.
says ...
jeff: "You're a profoundly selfish asshole."
Nothing's more selfish than adding the vets to the 25% who already make up the homeless in this country.
"Oh, and apparently racist, too. I'd like to hear the justification for how an American soldier's life is more valuable than an Iraqi civilian's."
I got no problems saving Arabs, especially since I've bitched against Guantanamo plenty of times. But you can't save anyone who's engaged in a turf war. That's just common sense.
"I could justify such a notion if you were yourself a soldier,"
I've met plenty, and they don't like those hellholes anymore than me.
"So that means that you're just a brainwashed, sheepish, thumbsucking tool."
Yes, people who don't want to continue a failed war are tools. You're rationale is extraordinary, jeff.
"PS: I'm a liberal who would never vote for any Republican candidate."
You don't need to, when you have Hillary.
Posted by D.Z.
at November 9, 2007 7:41 AM
comment #13
christian
says ...
"Not voting were Democratic presidential candidates Joe Biden of Delaware, Hillary Clinton of New York, Chris Dodd of Connecticut and Barack Obama of Illinois. All four had said they opposed Mukasey's nomination."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/11/09/clinton-dodd-biden-oba_n_71903.html
To quote Steve McQueen: Bullshit.
Posted by christian
at November 9, 2007 8:15 AM
comment #14
Monument
says ...
Man I hope he wins. The thought of a Hillary Clinton presidency is almost as depressing as another term with Bush in office.
Is there a more transparent, calculating, full of shit politician on the ticket than Hillary Clinton? Hasn't America had enough of the Bush/Clinton/Bush legacy, do we really need another Clinton?
Posted by Monument
at November 9, 2007 9:36 AM
comment #15
redundantworker
says ...
@ Christian:
democrats and republicans are slightly different sides of the same coin. at some point, shock that "democrats" have the same agenda as "republicans" should render the reasonable person skeptical of them both and interested in different ways to organize communities. otherwise you're just a rube, except better-informed.
Posted by redundantworker
at November 9, 2007 9:55 AM
comment #16
christian
says ...
Kids, by skipping on out that Mukaey's confirmation vote -- which they opposed and spoke out against tortue -- Obama and Clinton just pushed Edwards closer to the presidency. Huge tactical error. Don't think Edwards is not going to drill them on this in coming debates -- and they'll flounder.
Obama has a bad record of skipping votes. He ain't the one. I'd have him for VP though.
Posted by christian
at November 9, 2007 10:06 AM
comment #17
Monument
says ...
The Mukasey vote is just another distraction and red herring and an opportunity for Congress members to feign outrage. If the Congress truly cared about torture they would have passed a bill banning waterboarding a long time ago, instead of continuing to ask self righteous questions about it.
Posted by Monument
at November 9, 2007 10:19 AM
comment #18
christian
says ...
Then Obama should have voted and made his voice known. That's being a leader.
Posted by christian
at November 9, 2007 10:27 AM
comment #19
SpinDozer
says ...
'The Mukasey vote is just another distraction and red herring and an opportunity for Congress members to feign outrage.'
Disagree, it's a taunt at Bush that the non-Zombie nominee can't give public acknowledgement that his future boss is a war-criminal. It's cheap, but then, this is Congress we're talking about. Obama's vote (as well as the other non-voters) and the debate which follow wd def be a meaningless distraction. I'm glad he's confirmed, maybe he can fix some of what BushCo has broken. This is not a "leadership" issue. Not impeaching/holding hearings on these scumbags in January 07 was a leadership issue.
Posted by SpinDozer
at November 9, 2007 10:36 AM
comment #20
Monument
says ...
Voted on a red herring, irrelevant nominee for a lame duck administration who is likely going to be voted in anyway? This is for a guy who said before questioning that if Congress would pass a law banning waterboarding, he would support it?
If he weren't campaigning for the Democratic nomination for President, you might have a point.
Posted by Monument
at November 9, 2007 10:39 AM
comment #21
christian
says ...
Everything they capitulate becomes a leadership issue. I'm sorry, but making a nice speech about the future is fine, actually taking a stand in the present is more revealing.
And what's up with this "distraction" meme? Distraction from what? Fund raising? Meeting lobbyists? Appearing on SNL?
Posted by christian
at November 9, 2007 10:42 AM
comment #22
Monument
says ...
I'd say his stance, and public vote, on the war in Iraq is more revealing than this nomination. If Congress were to vote on a bill banning waterboarding, and Obama missed the vote, that would be revealing.
The Mukasey vote is a non-issue.
Posted by Monument
at November 9, 2007 10:47 AM
comment #23
christian
says ...
"The Mukasey vote is a non-issue."
To you, but there are plenty people to which it is. You saying "non-issue" doesn't make it so, Captain. 40 people voted against him.
Posted by christian
at November 9, 2007 10:55 AM
comment #24
Monument
says ...
I'd like to know why a nominee for a lame duck administration is such a huge issue? Waterboarding seems to be the only real hangup. Congress could actually pass a bill banning waterboarding if they really wanted to, instead they just keep talking about how "outraged" they are.
If they were truly outraged, they would take action on the issue.
Posted by Monument
at November 9, 2007 11:06 AM
comment #25
christian
says ...
Yes, thy should take action. These folk are also are the people's representatives with a job to do. They get salaries by taxpayers to cast votes. If they opposed Mukasey, then follow through. Obama is getting called "The Evader" because of his no-show pattern. Is that what he wants?
Posted by christian
at November 9, 2007 11:17 AM
comment #26
christian
says ...
And just watch how "crazy" Kucinich dismantles Tucker Carlson. None of the other candidates could do this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bELc-kjLR_E
Posted by christian
at November 9, 2007 11:31 AM
comment #27
Monument
says ...
You've got no argument with me in the Kucinich department. In a perfect world he could be elected president, I just don't think it's realistically possible.
Posted by Monument
at November 9, 2007 11:43 AM
comment #28
SpinDozer
says ...
'And what's up with this "distraction" meme? Distraction from what? Fund raising? Meeting lobbyists? Appearing on SNL?'
So you want Tim Russert or whatever Rt Wing Handpuppet conducts the next debate to ask 36 questions abt the confirmation of a guy everyone with a pulse knows may be the only competant and least corrupt official ever nominated by Bush? Personally, I'd rank this a little higher than whether Obama places his hand over his heart during the National Anthem, but not much.
Posted by SpinDozer
at November 9, 2007 11:54 AM
comment #29
christian
says ...
SpinDozer, it's their JOB to vote. That's what they were sent to do. If they don't have a problem with Mukasey, let 'em stand by their vote. I'm tired of this hiding out and triangulating. Most Americans are and this just writs large for their future plans.
Posted by christian
at November 9, 2007 12:21 PM
comment #30
BNick
says ...
I agree that they should have all turned up for the vote, and that Obama has a history of missing key votes.
But the Mukasey waterboarding issue isn't that simple. By acknowledging that waterboarding was tantamount to torture and/or violated the Geneva Convention, he would be severely compromising our own agents in the CIA and other organizations who have presumably been engaging in waterboarding.
I abhor waterboarding and all forms of torture (even things that are in the "grey area") but I'm realistic enough to know that an AG nominee is not going to testify that his would-be boss' policies make him a war criminal.
Posted by BNick
at November 9, 2007 12:48 PM
comment #31
SpinDozer
says ...
Yes, it is their job to vote, but not-voting is fairly standard in the campaign season, and this is hardly an important vote and the idiotic obsessing over this vote as part of the debate/campaign is a distraction from rather more important issues like healthcare, energy policy, etc., etc.
If missing a vote or two would've given Kerry another state, I wouldn't complain about that, even tho I'm not a huge Kerry fan, it would've spared the country from four years of Bush stupidity, No Roberts/Alito, etc.
Posted by SpinDozer
at November 9, 2007 2:25 PM
comment #32
D.Z.
says ...
christian: "Kids, by skipping on out that Mukaey's confirmation vote -- which they opposed and spoke out against tortue -- Obama and Clinton just pushed Edwards closer to the presidency. Huge tactical error. Don't think Edwards is not going to drill them on this in coming debates -- and they'll flounder."
I'd rather Obama not vote than vote for something he "regrets"(or in Hillary's case, doesn't regret, but criticizes anyway)later. Moving on, the ones who really screwed us over were Feinstein and Shumer.
"Then Obama should have voted and made his voice known. That's being a leader."
True. But he probably knew he wasn't going to win, so there's no point. Whether it's right or wrong doesn't make a difference, because it's not Feinstein who's running for President.
"I'm sorry, but making a nice speech about the future is fine, actually taking a stand in the present is more revealing."
I agree. It's just that Congress is hampered by Republicans and Republicrats alike, and the only way to shift the balance in our favor is for another massive fuck-up-which will probably be in Iran.
Monument: "You've got no argument with me in the Kucinich department. In a perfect world he could be elected president, I just don't think it's realistically possible."
If he can get Bush impeached, then you never know...
BNick: "By acknowledging that waterboarding was tantamount to torture and/or violated the Geneva Convention, he would be severely compromising our own agents in the CIA and other organizations who have presumably been engaging in waterboarding."
Yeah, like I really care about an organization of people who like to start civil wars...
Posted by D.Z.
at November 9, 2007 4:23 PM