If it happened today.
Sad but true.

http://tinyurl.com/clpcf

"George Fillioa" wrote in message
news:H4Hlf.8280$H84.7700@trnddc04...
If it happened today.
Sad but true.

http://tinyurl.com/clpcf


Indeed.

George Fillioa wrote:
If it happened today.
Sad but true.

http://tinyurl.com/clpcf


What's sad, but obviously true, is that certain factions always insist
on turning national calamities into opportunities for political
mudslinging.

Have you no shame or decency at all?

Seems like my wish, that we remember the victims and the many
high-priced lessons
learned from war, is lost on you entirely.

I wonder where the equivalent liberal crap is, blaming Pearl Harbor on
George Bush?
My bet is that it would be harder to find than the negative and
divisive propaganda demonstrably being churned out for this occasion by
the militant and reactionary right.

wrote in message
oups.com...

George Fillioa wrote:
If it happened today.
Sad but true.

http://tinyurl.com/clpcf


What's sad, but obviously true, is that certain factions always insist
on turning national calamities into opportunities for political
mudslinging.

Have you no shame or decency at all?


Chuck, the left, you included, have taken the War on Terror into
opportunities for political mudslinging for months now.

Where is your shame and decency?

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

George Fillioa wrote:
If it happened today.
Sad but true.

http://tinyurl.com/clpcf


What's sad, but obviously true, is that certain factions always insist
on turning national calamities into opportunities for political
mudslinging.

Have you no shame or decency at all?


Chuck, the left, you included, have taken the War on Terror into
opportunities for political mudslinging for months now.

Where is your shame and decency?


Well at least you do not disagree that using Pearl Harbor as a vehicle
to attack the Democratic party is shameless and indecent, and the best
defense you can mount for your philosohpical ally is "you or somebody
else did worse, first, or whatnot." Frankly, that's a more reasonable
response than I thought I might see.

wrote in message
oups.com...

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

George Fillioa wrote:
If it happened today.
Sad but true.

http://tinyurl.com/clpcf


What's sad, but obviously true, is that certain factions always insist
on turning national calamities into opportunities for political
mudslinging.

Have you no shame or decency at all?


Chuck, the left, you included, have taken the War on Terror into
opportunities for political mudslinging for months now.

Where is your shame and decency?


Well at least you do not disagree that using Pearl Harbor as a vehicle
to attack the Democratic party is shameless and indecent, and the best
defense you can mount for your philosohpical ally is "you or somebody
else did worse, first, or whatnot." Frankly, that's a more reasonable
response than I thought I might see.


You make it way too easy Chuck. ;-)

Well at least you do not disagree that using the War on Terror as a vehicle
to attack the Republican party is shameless and indecent, and the best
defense you can mount for your philosophical ally is "you or somebody
else did worse, first, or whatnot." Frankly, that's a more reasonable
response than I thought I might see.

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

George Fillioa wrote:
If it happened today.
Sad but true.

http://tinyurl.com/clpcf


What's sad, but obviously true, is that certain factions always insist
on turning national calamities into opportunities for political
mudslinging.

Have you no shame or decency at all?


Chuck, the left, you included, have taken the War on Terror into
opportunities for political mudslinging for months now.

Where is your shame and decency?


Well at least you do not disagree that using Pearl Harbor as a vehicle
to attack the Democratic party is shameless and indecent, and the best
defense you can mount for your philosohpical ally is "you or somebody
else did worse, first, or whatnot." Frankly, that's a more reasonable
response than I thought I might see.


You make it way too easy Chuck. ;-)

Well at least you do not disagree that using the War on Terror as a vehicle
to attack the Republican party is shameless and indecent, and the best
defense you can mount for your philosophical ally is "you or somebody
else did worse, first, or whatnot." Frankly, that's a more reasonable
response than I thought I might see.

Imitation is the most sincere form of flattery, thanks.

I'm pretty confused abaout your reference to a "war on terror". Surely
you couldn't possibly mean the invasion of Iraq? If that's a war on
terror, we're losing big time- there are a lot more terrorists in Iraq
now than when Saddam was running the show- (he was a lot more effective
at catching them than we seem to be, and he was enough of a ******* to
keep them in check. Our problem? We can't be as big a ******* as Saddam
used to be
in order to keep some remote resemblance of order there and still
promote our "noble motives" or claim to be helping the Iraqi people).
We are hoping for a victory where somebody shows up, surrenders, and
signs a peace treaty. How quaint. There is no "somebody" in charge over
there who can call off all the religious fanatics from the various
sides. If you are waiting for terrorism to stop in order to declare a
"victory", good luck with that. We're inciting more terrorism than
we're stopping.

You won't find many liberals shedding tears for guys like that
high-ranking Al Qaida member who was taken out by a CIA drone last
week. That's what the "war on terror" is about, IMO.

Chuck,
Are you using a national calamity into an opportunity for political
mudslinging?


wrote in message
ups.com...

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

George Fillioa wrote:
If it happened today.
Sad but true.

http://tinyurl.com/clpcf


What's sad, but obviously true, is that certain factions always
insist
on turning national calamities into opportunities for political
mudslinging.

Have you no shame or decency at all?


Chuck, the left, you included, have taken the War on Terror into
opportunities for political mudslinging for months now.

Where is your shame and decency?


Well at least you do not disagree that using Pearl Harbor as a vehicle
to attack the Democratic party is shameless and indecent, and the best
defense you can mount for your philosohpical ally is "you or somebody
else did worse, first, or whatnot." Frankly, that's a more reasonable
response than I thought I might see.


You make it way too easy Chuck. ;-)

Well at least you do not disagree that using the War on Terror as a
vehicle
to attack the Republican party is shameless and indecent, and the best
defense you can mount for your philosophical ally is "you or somebody
else did worse, first, or whatnot." Frankly, that's a more reasonable
response than I thought I might see.

Imitation is the most sincere form of flattery, thanks.

I'm pretty confused abaout your reference to a "war on terror". Surely
you couldn't possibly mean the invasion of Iraq? If that's a war on
terror, we're losing big time- there are a lot more terrorists in Iraq
now than when Saddam was running the show- (he was a lot more effective
at catching them than we seem to be, and he was enough of a ******* to
keep them in check. Our problem? We can't be as big a ******* as Saddam
used to be
in order to keep some remote resemblance of order there and still
promote our "noble motives" or claim to be helping the Iraqi people).
We are hoping for a victory where somebody shows up, surrenders, and
signs a peace treaty. How quaint. There is no "somebody" in charge over
there who can call off all the religious fanatics from the various
sides. If you are waiting for terrorism to stop in order to declare a
"victory", good luck with that. We're inciting more terrorism than
we're stopping.

You won't find many liberals shedding tears for guys like that
high-ranking Al Qaida member who was taken out by a CIA drone last
week. That's what the "war on terror" is about, IMO.

wrote in message
ups.com...

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

George Fillioa wrote:
If it happened today.
Sad but true.

http://tinyurl.com/clpcf


What's sad, but obviously true, is that certain factions always
insist
on turning national calamities into opportunities for political
mudslinging.

Have you no shame or decency at all?


Chuck, the left, you included, have taken the War on Terror into
opportunities for political mudslinging for months now.

Where is your shame and decency?


Well at least you do not disagree that using Pearl Harbor as a vehicle
to attack the Democratic party is shameless and indecent, and the best
defense you can mount for your philosohpical ally is "you or somebody
else did worse, first, or whatnot." Frankly, that's a more reasonable
response than I thought I might see.


You make it way too easy Chuck. ;-)

Well at least you do not disagree that using the War on Terror as a
vehicle
to attack the Republican party is shameless and indecent, and the best
defense you can mount for your philosophical ally is "you or somebody
else did worse, first, or whatnot." Frankly, that's a more reasonable
response than I thought I might see.

Imitation is the most sincere form of flattery, thanks.


It just worked so well.



I'm pretty confused abaout your reference to a "war on terror". Surely
you couldn't possibly mean the invasion of Iraq? If that's a war on
terror, we're losing big time-........snip

yadayadyada............

sigh

wrote in message
oups.com...

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

George Fillioa wrote:
If it happened today.
Sad but true.

http://tinyurl.com/clpcf


What's sad, but obviously true, is that certain factions always insist
on turning national calamities into opportunities for political
mudslinging.

Have you no shame or decency at all?


Chuck, the left, you included, have taken the War on Terror into
opportunities for political mudslinging for months now.

Where is your shame and decency?


Well at least you do not disagree that using Pearl Harbor as a vehicle
to attack the Democratic party is shameless and indecent, and the best
defense you can mount for your philosohpical ally is "you or somebody
else did worse, first, or whatnot." Frankly, that's a more reasonable
response than I thought I might see.


http://michellemalkin.com/archives/004021.htm

http://twobabesandabrain.typepad.com...ere_it_is.html

" Saying the "idea that we're going to win the war in Iraq is an idea which
is just plain wrong," Democratic National Chairman Howard Dean predicted
today ..."

" A Democratic congressional leader on defense called for an immediate
withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, as he rejected on Thursday Bush
administration attacks on war critics and raised bipartisan pressure for a
new policy.

"The U.S. cannot accomplish anything further in Iraq militarily. It is time
to bring them home," said Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania, the senior
Democrat on the House of Representatives subcommittee that oversees defense
spending and one of his party's top voices on military issues. "

Oh my.