Senator Boxer Hitting Below the Belt
Go figure a Democrat would do something like this and little media attention is given to this event.
In a Senate hearing Secretary of State Condolezza Rice was defending and stating the administrations new plan in Iraq. Barbra Boxer (D) from California, went and attacked Secretary of State Rice. She said that since Secretary Rice did not have any children, and that no one close to her was fighting in Iraq she could not make appropriate decisions.
Senator Boxer should just apoligeze. One thing that I find outrageous is the media coverage; there is none. I heard about this on The O'Reilly Factor and Hannity and Colmes. If a Republican did this it would be all over the news.
In a Senate hearing Secretary of State Condolezza Rice was defending and stating the administrations new plan in Iraq. Barbra Boxer (D) from California, went and attacked Secretary of State Rice. She said that since Secretary Rice did not have any children, and that no one close to her was fighting in Iraq she could not make appropriate decisions.
Senator Boxer should just apoligeze. One thing that I find outrageous is the media coverage; there is none. I heard about this on The O'Reilly Factor and Hannity and Colmes. If a Republican did this it would be all over the news.
posted by BigShot | Saturday, January 13, 2007
32 Comments:
You’re kidding right? Part of the problem is you need to look at a real source of unbiased news instead of faux news, the propaganda arm of the bush White House. Or at least look at more than one news source, and f you had you would have found your post is wrong right off the bat. Here’s a link to the story in the Washington Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/12/AR2007011202414.html.
I agree 100 percent with what Sen. Boxer said, and the real offensive thing is Rice never answered the question the Senator asked: who pays the price?
Not once did the Senator say what you claim, but she did make a very valid point. That why I support Rep. Charlie Rangel’s move to bring the draft back. Not one of the people who are pushing this useless bloodbath has any real personal stake in it, and that’s the great point the Senator made. If any of the idiotic politicians who support this stupid and misguided Iraq folly had any relatives fighting in it they would think twice about sending them off to die so easily.
It’s pretty easy to send faceless people off to die, but a little harder when it’s your son or daughter. Do not apologize for speaking the truth, Sen. Boxer.
How can increasing troop strength by a mere 15 percent change what we have not been able to do in three years? Maybe the Administration should start listening to the American voters, the military and the generals when they say they don’t want this war.
If you really think its just “liberals who oppose the war” you truly better look at another news source besides faux. Just off the top of my head republicans like Sen. Chuck Hagel, Rep. Chris Shays and the late President Gerald Ford opposed this war and sending in more troops.
I do watch other news sources, before I watched Hannity and Colmes and The O'Reilley Factor, I was watching MSNBC. Not one word of coverage on the above article.
I think Boxer should say sorry because I think that it was an attack on Sec. Rice's personal life. But then you liberals will just blow it off and not say anything.
Try reading more. You will get better news, for one, and maybe you will understand what I am saying when your reading comprehension improves. What do you call an article from the Washington Post? That’s not the mainstream media you smear as the so-called “liberal media?” Personally I don’t think it should have gotten any coverage at all, but it in no way insulted Rice. You conservatives are grasping at straws after losing control of the House and Senate.
Why should anyone apologize for the truth? Rice should be apologizing to the American people for her role in this mess, but we know no one in this Administration takes responsibility for anything. You’re up in arms about this perceived insult, yet you have no problem with young Americans coming home in a box everyday and what upsets you is someone is asking her some tough questions for a change. Sad. Just sad.
Communications_Guru is a big part of the reason for the "mess" in Iraq. You see, the terrorists know that there are a large number of gutless, spineless, little anti-war pussies in the United States like "Communications_Guru"...most of whom are in the Democrat party or the news media. They know that if they kill American soldiers, make life rough on the Iraqi civilians, and spread their poison over the internet and Al-Jazeera...that the "Communications_Gurus" of the US will turn out in force to advocate cutting and running. Then...Presto...here is "Communications_Guru" telling a bunch of outright lies and distorting the discussion about this to make it seem like cutting and running is the reasonable alternative in the face of Islamic barbarism.
A few points:
1. The American soldiers are not being "sent to die" in Iraq. That is how a little anti-war pussy like Communications_Guru would phrase it but that is a wrongful characterization. These soldiers are being sent to defend their country by engaging its enemies on foreign soil not American soil. They are also liberating over 20,000,000 people and giving the world its first glimmer, however turbulent, of democracy in the Arab world. The fact that some die in the process is very sad but more of a testament to their bravery and commitment.
2. To say that nearly everybody, including the generals in the military, is against this war is conveniently putting words in lots and lots and lots and lots of peoples' mouths...something that an anti-war pussy like "Communications_Guru" would do. I've read books, points of view, interview excerpts, talked to personally, and listened to a number of military people. There are many of them that believe this war needed to be fought and took part in doing so. One that immediately comes to mind is General Mattis of the US Marines who was not long ago quoted saying that he loved killing the enemy and that shooting them was "...a hell of a hoot." I didn't get a whif of "Communications_Guru's" rhetoric saying the generals were against the war from General Mattis. You see, General Mattis, and those like him are MEN...not little anti-war pussies like "Communications_Guru."
3. This whole business of saying that people who aren't serving in the military really shouldn't advocate or support the war because in doing so we are sending faceless soldiers off to die is nothing but a cheap means of stopping pro-war comments from spreading so that little anti-war pussies like "Communications_Guru" won't have to work as hard to spread their poison.
REMEMBER: One of the main reasons we still have fighting and killing in Iraq is because all the little anti-war pussies in this country, like "Communications_Guru" continually give the terrorists hope. The terrorists read the seemingly well-reasoned comments from little anti-war pussies like "Communications_Guru" and think "hey...America is losing its nerve...lets continue killing its soldiers because they are about to cut and run and then we will control Iraq."
In short...we are losing soldiers in Iraq in part because of comments like those posted here by little anti-war pussy "Communications_Guru."
Now...I can almost guarantee you that little anti-war pussy Communications_Guru is going to stick his bottom lip out and pout that I resorted to name-calling to make my point. You may have noticed that I referred to Kevin Shopshire, a.k.a. "Communications_Guru", as a "little anti-war pussy". Well, if Kevin is going to resort to name-calling when referring to himself by calling himself "Communications_Guru" then why can't I resort to what I believe is a more accurate form of name calling by referring to him as "Little Anti-War Pussy?"
:-D
Matthew Cragg
Very mature. Spout a bunch of lies and threats. You have some serious problems. Fine. I’m in the book. If you want to try and kick my “gutless, spineless, little anti-war pussies” ass I challenge you to try.
Again, I'm challengeing you to back up your lies and disgusting name-calling.
Which one of my so-called "lies" do you want me to back? Name one and I will.
That's not good enough C_G. You accuse me of being a liar. What did I say that was a "lie?"
I find it amusing that dems resort to the "send your own kids over there" line when they run out of things to say about Iraq. My husband was in Iraq 2 years ago. While he was gone a liberal started debating me using the usual tactics. He actually said I didn't have any credibility either because I hadn't been over there. Apparently, I am suppose to leave my 3 children and join my husband on the front lines before I can credibly support the war. Amazing. Liberals want us to lose this war. Shame on them. The can wrap up the truth with any ribbon they want, but it doesn't change their lack of patriotism. The only problem with this war is that it is being fought in front of a politically correct media that spoon feeds the American people slanted information.
You see everybody...this is a "tactic" that these anti-war types use to silence us. They spew their crap all over the media and the internet then when we respond they call what we said "lies" and pout that we engaged in name-calling.
I am offering my opinions on the war in Iraq and the disastrous effect all of this second-guessing and self-criticism done by these anti-war types has caused. It is disastrous because it gives the terrorists hope that if they continue killing American soldiers and blowing stuff up in Iraq that we will lose our nerve and pull the troops out. The terrorists also know that all this anti-war crap has made the American people at least a little less likely to broaden the war on terror by going into sponsor nations like Syria and Iran.
If we have made any "mistakes" in Iraq as a nation it has been by paying too much attention to these anti-war types, their friends all over the news media, sad excuses for generals like those "embedded" in the TV studios, and those that make posts on the internet. We have allowed their second-guessing and weak arguments to shape the discussion.
That's right armywife1...this is a tactic that these people use.
"You can't comment on the 9/11 commission because you didn't lose a loved one in the WTC."
"You can't comment on the war in Iraq because you didn't fight there."
BS!!!
Those soldiers are over their fighting for our rights including freedom of speech and no anti-war Democrat is going to take that from us.
They try to get us to just shut up because they are afraid of what we have to say. They don't want the American public to hear something other than their steady stream of criticism for America, its power, its past, its military, and the righteous struggle in which we are currently engaged.
www.suburbanvoice.com
Are you serious?
Here are the lies you told, I’m a big part of the reason for the "mess" in Iraq, I’m a pussy, the majority of the people who are against the “war” are Democrats and the media, I told a lie, soldiers are being sent to defend their country and to liberate, that the majority of the generals on the ground do not support the conduct of the war.
I find it unbelievable that any sane solider, Marine or sailor would enjoy killing another human being and think it’s fun, especially an officer. It’s good thing that the idiot you quote is no longer in command and was reprimanded.
It’s also a lie that we are losing soldiers in Iraq because we want to hold our government accountable for its incompetence.
It’s sad that you can’t make your ridiculous arguments against the truth and well-reasoned facts I have posted here and elsewhere, so you stoop to name-calling.
I can understand that you are frustrated because everyday more facts come out that the people who were against the trumped up invasion in 2003 were right all along, and more and more people everyday realize Iraq was a huge mistake that serves no purpose in our national defense.
But you crossed the line here. I resent begin called gutless, spineless, a pussy and I’m a liar. I resent it because none of it is true. I think you’re the pussy. I was in the first Gulf War. Where were you? If you love the war so much enlist.
My phone number and address are in the phone book, and I’m challenging you to either apologize for the offensive name-calling or say them to my face. If you don’t say them to my face, it just proves you are the coward I think you are.
Can I make that any more clear? I’ve said it like three times now. I’m challenging you to back up your name calling by saying it to my face or apologize. It’s that simple.
There you go again...
"You didn't serve so you can't support the war."
BS!!!
I'm free to share my opinions even though I didn't serve.
It's not a lie to say that people like you are a big part of the mess in Iraq. You represent "dissent" within America and people like you have a vote in the American democratic process. The terrorists know that if they can galvanize the support of enough of you that pressure can be brought to bear on the government to pull out and usher in a disastrous American defeat.
Your comment on General Mattis is very telling. I'm a "General Mattis" kind of guy because he enjoys killing the enemy. The fact that he was repremanded is also part of the problem. We are trying to fight a war against barbarians yet we hold our generals to some stupid politically correct standard. You, on the other hand, are a "General Wesley Clark" kind of guy. You think that America can be made safe by all this endless hand-wringing about why we went to war, about every little mistake made in the war...and...by ignoring any good brought by the war and conveniently ignoring the war when considering the fact that we haven't been hit here in the US since 9/11.
I WILL ALWAYS CHALLENGE PEOPLE LIKE YOU WHO DIMINISH THE SACRIFICE OF OUR MEN AND WOMEN IN IRAQ BY SAYING THEY HAD NO PART IN KEEPING THIS COUNTRY SAFE!!!
I'm not going to apologize to you either for calling you what I did because that is what you are. I'm also not going to waste my time calling you either. My number is in the book too and if you want to get a hold of me go ahead.
For more on my views regarding all this go here:
http://suburbanvoice.com/2007/01/14/the-seminal-difference.aspx#Comment
I’m not asking you to call me. I’m challenging you, challenging you – do you know what that means – to look me in the eye and call me those offensive names or apologize. If you don’t you’re the coward I think you are. BTW, you’re not in the phone book, I looked.
It’s kind of ironic that Bigshot here posted this to begin with because he thinks Sen. Boxer somehow insulted Rice by implying she had no problem sending more troops to Iraq because she, like most warmongers like you, have no personal stake in this mess, and he thinks she should apologize.
And yet no one has a problem that Cragg here personally attacks me with these disgusting names. No one is asking him to apologize. Believe me, I have been attacked personally plenty by wingnuts like you in the past over on dan wolhiarn's blog and others, but this crossed the line even for hatemongers like you.
And what was my crime? I disagreed with you. Hey Cragg, if you ever want to have a real debate instead of name-calling come and visit my blog. I doubt that will happen either because the facts are not on your side, and that’s why you stoop to this name-calling. In the meantime, apologize for the name-calling or make them to my face so you can face the consequences. Or are you the coward and pussy you claim I am.
Crossed what line? Yours? So what. Screw your lines.
If you want me to tell you this face-to-face then you send me the location where we can meet. I can be reached at editor@suburbanvoice.com. Don't give me your home address either so that when I get there you can call the cops on me.
Okay; this was really unexpected, all these comments. I like the debate that happend; but I dont like the name calling. I want this blog to be a place where everyone can share their views, and then there can be a good clean debate. I dont like how Mr. Cragg used, what I think, offensive language. I ask that to please stop and settle your differences.
Mr. Guru,
I am not calling for Mr. Cragg to apologize because, (although I kind of did above), I post things as if it were a news forum.
Mrs. Army Wife,
I agree with you 110%. Liberals are the "cowards". All they say is things to attempt to make Conservatives shut up; but when we try to do the same we get accused of name calling and other things. Some times we may call people names, but we never try to demorilize our troops.
Bigshot
What a coward. I knew you would pussy out, cregg. A lot of tough talk as usual from conservatives, but when it comes down to action you get nothing. Bigshot has the nerve to call liberals cowards? I suggest you take a look at your friend cregg. Of course you will not ask him to apologize. That’s the very definition of hypocrisy.
Hey...Shopshire...I told you to send a location where we could meet. You sent nothing. Now lets have it.
Matthew Cragg
Mr. Guru,
I may be a hipocrate on apology; but I am not a coward when it comes to defending my beliefs!!! I did call on Mr. Cragg to apologize, not word for word, but I did call him to apologize. Before name calling, please get your facts straight!! Mr. Cragg might not have been on in a while to comment; he most likely did not chicken out. Also please abide to my new rule that I posted. Thanks.
See Mr. Guru,
Told you Mr. Cragg did not chicken out!!
If I misunderstood where you called on him to apologize I will retract my statement and apologize myself, but how could I have possibly got that out of what you said,
“I am not calling for Mr. Cragg to apologize because, (although I kind of did above), I post things as if it were a news forum.”
I don’t get where how that is asking him to apologize “not word for word” or otherwise. However, it is nice of you to admit your stance was hypocritical on the apology, but I never said you were a coward. However, I have no way of knowing you are “not a coward when it comes to defending my beliefs.” Does that mean you plan on enlisting? If so good luck. The military did a lot of good for me.
As for Cragg’s cowardice, it’s pretty obvious. I e-mailed him where he can meet me, even though he knows where I live, but I don’t know where he does. He even lied and told me he was in the phone book.
I'll be there Kevin.
Mr. Guru,
I would enlist but unfortunatly I am to old.
Mr. Guru, and Mr. Cragg,
From what it appears is that you two are going to meet. I urge you not to get into a fight. You are both intelligent men, and most likely have a lot of your life ahead of you. I hope that this meeting will be a good clean debate on your opinions.
There will be no fight if simply apologizes for the uncalled for and offensive names. If he doesn’t he will deal with the consequences.
Forgive me for questing your honesty, Bigshot, but I have been operating under the impression you were a teenager, and how would that make you too old to enlist when the age of enlistment has been raised to 43?
Back in June I got hammered by some guy calling himself Daniel Christianson in the comments section who said I was picking on you because you were so young. In the post from June 27, this guy told me “Aren't you a little old to be hanging out on a teenager’s blog bugging him? Do you only feel confident arguing against fourteen year olds.” In that exchange you never corrected him, and all you said was “Thank you daniel christianson for pointing out that I misspelled politics.”
You also told me repeatedly you were involved with the Teenage republicans, and you also told me you had a great-uncle who served in Vietnam. Considering the war ended just 30 years ago, I find it hard to believe you are over the age limit of 43. I’ll find out if cragg is too old to enlist tomorrow.
No actually I am not too old. I recently said I was but I didn't know that they had increased the maximum age limit. My mistake. I'm 37. 250 pounds. I run 16 miles per week. I lift weights regularly.
Do you want me to show you where the Recruiting office is? It’s not far from the library.
Mr. Guru,
No problem in wondering about my, but I assure you that I am 43+. I looked at what Daniel said; and I am suprised that I did not correct him. About the TeenAgeRepublicanS, my nephew wants me to post about their news; and obviously I will post about their events. Also sometimes my nephew does comment using my name, since he is in the LCTARs, so some of the post's on here are his. The Great Uncle that was refrenced is my Dad's brother.
I hoped that cleared everything up.
Big talk Kevins. Easy to do over the net. If you're going to fight him, shut the hell up and fight him.
This is high school BS.
Big talk Kevins. Easy to do over the net. If you're going to fight him, shut the hell up and fight him. If you're not going to fight him, shut the hell up and don't.
This is high school BS
Well...Kevin and I met face-to-face. It started out pretty hostile with a lot of finger pointing, a lot of posturing, a lot of tough talking, and a little bit of arm-grabbing/shoving. Somehow through all of that the level of tension and hostility dropped a bit and we started talking. We ended up walking back to our cars together, talked a little longer, shook hands then left.
I really dislike a lot of what the guy says and even how he says it. I suspect he would say the same thing about me. But actually meeting somebody makes you see them a little differently and aside from the differences of opinion he seemed like somebody I could get along with.
Looking back on it, he showed up and I showed up and I guess that says more about who we are than all the crap that we hurl at each other in these online discussions.
Matthew Cragg
www.suburbanvoice.com
Post a Comment
<< Home