Busted on the Tuesday OPEN thread
Shot by Dan at Black Dog Salvage in Roanoke
“I have busted more hippies’ noses than all the narcs in the free world.”
Ted Nugent
February 19, 2013 - 10:00 AM
- Contact us |
- Customer care |
- Subscribe |
- Advertise |
- Submit news |
- Sign in
Check It Out
Looking for something to do this holiday weekend? See our picks for some fun local events.
February 19, 2013 - 10:00 AM
Join the conversation [ADD A COMMENT]
View our commenting policy and standards | Commenting FAQ | Report a problem
71 COMMENTS
Error submitting comment
Name is required
A valid email is required (test@test.com)
Comment is required
Add a comment
Your email address will not be published.
All fields are required to comment.
Friday, May 24, 2013
THE ROANOKE TIMES
I’ve never been a big fan of Newt Gingrich, but he does tell it like it is. That’s likely why he didn’t get the nomination in 2012.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2013/02/17/gingrich-obama-immigration-bill-will-never-pass-house-due-hostility-t#
The truth will set you free. Not sure some on this blog believe that, but the link below is a start at getting at a truth most of us have known for some time.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/02/hubris-rachel-maddow-documentary-iraq-war-david-corn
Agreed Ron #2 @ 10:20am! The best thing about history is that it usually manages to get the story right, despite the revisionists and those who seek to “create the narrative”.
Hubris: Selling t he Iraq War was highly praised by Cold n P last night on this blog. Here’s a snippet from the link Ron provided:
One chilling moment in the film comes in an interview with retired General Anthony Zinni, a former commander in chief of US Central Command. In August 2002, the Bush-Cheney administration opened its propaganda campaign for war with a Cheney speech at the annual Veterans of Foreign Wars convention. The veep made a stark declaration: “There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us.” No doubt, he proclaimed, Saddam was arming himself with WMD in preparation for attacking the United States.
Zinni was sitting on the stage during the speech, and in the documentary he recalls his reaction:
“It was a shock. It was a total shock. I couldn’t believe the vice president was saying this, you know? In doing work with the CIA on Iraq WMD, through all the briefings I heard at Langley, I never saw one piece of credible evidence that there was an ongoing program. And that’s when I began to believe they’re getting serious about this. They wanna go into Iraq.”
Not sure if the two statues in the photo are supposed to be representative of women,but the link below makes an interesting suggestion to the College of Cardinals for who the next Pope should be.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-best-choice-for-pope-a-nun/2013/02/15/83c8be2e-76c6-11e2-95e4-6148e45d7adb_story.html?wp_login_redirect=0
Both links are interesting Ron. Thinking why McCain objects to Hagel, it really all goes back to Iraq. Hagel saw it was all BS and let it be known and McCain holds that against him.
Every new piece of evidence that comes out simply further nails down the fact that Bush and his cronies lied to the whole nation to get us into a war that will continue to damage us all for years to come.
Dan, the book I won here, written by the CIA op John Kiriakou, who was recently sentenced to prison (unrelated…?), made it clear that the “channels” in the CIA were NOT attuned to Iraq and WMD and a case for war, it came as a shock to them when “told” to make the case.
http://www.amazon.com/Reluctant-Spy-Secret-Life-Terror/dp/1616086289
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/18/israeli-sniper-photo-child-crosshairs-instagram_n_2711977.html
How unfortunate this “soldier” posted this picture to instagram under his own name.
“Thinking why McCain objects to Hagel, it really all goes back to Iraq. Hagel saw it was all BS and let it be known and McCain holds that against him.”
scott whitaker,
You think so? McCain was saying Hagel would make a great Secretary of State as late as 2005, after the war started.
oh no voter fraud for bammy huh, here is one that admits it:
Richardson told a local television station this month that she voted twice for Obama last November. She cast an absentee ballot and then voted at the polls as well.
“Yes, I voted twice,” Richardson told WCPO-TV. “I, after registering thousands of people, certainly wanted my vote to count, so I voted. I voted at the polls.”
Authorities also are investigating if she voted in the names of four other people, too, for a total of six votes in the 2012 presidential election.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/02/19/ohio-poll-worker-obama-supporter-investigated-for-potentially-voting-six-times/#ixzz2LMWVPHEp
“, it came as a shock to them when “told” to make the case.”
hahaha kind of like your global warming huh sandi….
pammala,
if your point is that voter fraud is any kindsof a significant problem AT ALL, you still haven’t made it.
A Republican in Pennsylvania has already explained for us why these voter ID laws are so important.
“Voter ID . . is gonna allow Gov. Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania.”
That’s the entire motivation. It didn’t work, of course. Which is now why Repbulicans in PA seem hell bent on divvying up their electoral votes.
(I don’t have an object to that, btw, so long as it is done proportionately to a state’s popular vote, and so long as all states like Mississippi, Texas, Utah and Idaho do it, too).
Bill Clinton also said there were WOMD in Iraq.
Guess he was in the same boat as Bush?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0f5u_0ytUs
Clinton was ready to act on Iraq as well. From the 3 minute mark of the speech.
Here is HIS direct Quote: “In the next century the community of nations may see more and more of the kind of threat that Iraq poses NOW- a rogue state WITH weapons of mass destruction.”
Why do you libs seem to conveniently forget that Clinton also believed there were WOMD in Iraq?
Maybe that wasn’t “fast” for you Dan as the speech occurred less than 7 years before the invasion of Iraq……
Maybe Tebow will speak out against Jeffress?
“On Sunday, April 28, Tim Tebow will be speaking at a Dallas Baptist megachurch headed by evangelical reverend Robert Jeffress, who has spoken out in the past against Muslims, Jews, Mormons and homosexuals.” (He also thinks Catholics are cult members.)
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1534600-tim-tebow-to-speak-at-controversial-church?hpt=hp_c3
Hey Dan, why don’t you, Queenie and the rest of the faithful take a break from your Obama-lovefest and give Brian Terry’s family a call? I’m sure they’ll be thrilled to hear your opinions. Unfortunately Ambassador Stevens won’t be available for comment. On WMDs, exactly where do you think Syria’s chemical weapons came from, since there are no chemical weapon manufacturing facilities in that country? Have a great day!
Bob H,
I’m not sure what your argument is here. Is it:
1. Dick Cheney took his cues from Bill Clinton?
2. Bill Clinton went to war with Iraq based on trumped-up garbage?
3. Bill Clinton never lied?
A fat chance you’ll have trying to sell that soap to any of your pals. You know who the evildoers are with the Iraq war? Hint: it wasn’t Bill Clinton.
But you hate be slapped in the face with facts that you’d prefer were buried, eh?
I don’t know why anyone still pays any attention to what John McCain says. He’s become just a Grouchy Old Politician who belongs to the Grumpy Obstructionist Party. They oppose anything Obama proposes, even if they thought of it first. And Lindsey Graham is just running scared of the Tea Party.
Safe to say, the right wing grasp of information, facts and civility, remains stunning.
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/07/syria-iraq-wmd-meme/
hi Bob H,
Dan’s not interested in considering opposing views. Clinton believed saddam had wmds. Prior to the invasion, the former president never said, “saddam does not have wmds.” And, we know he is not a bashful guy, don’t we?
As far as dan’s ” slapping facts” are concerned, if they had any beef around them, you and I can be assured that the libs would’ve found a way to bring Bush and Cheney up on charges by now. I bet ol’ dan dreams about them being perp-walked every night, and day-dreams about it as well.
the link below contains a very comprehensive list of substantive comments uttered by prominent lib-democrat politicians during the lead-up to the Iraq War. The comments uttered by our current Secretary of State john kerry…. and well as ….his predessor ….and her husband, are quite illuminating.
…and, Hey Ron and Dan, …rachel maddow? Are you guys serious?
http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/wmdquotes.asp
The point is Dan that the intelligence that we had, at the time, said there were WOMD in Iraq. Most of the world believed it. You know, that same intelligence we had that told us that our people in Benghazi were not in danger…..
Bush acted on the same intelligence that Clinton had- that there were WOMD in Iraq. Things had changed a little in between that time though (Google 9-11).
Yet you libs blame Bush. Oops, I forget, Bush is to blame for Benghazi too.
Was the Iraq war worth it?
Sandi Saunders | February 19, 2013 at 12:56 pm Safe to say, the right wing grasp of information, facts and civility, remains stunning.
Substitute “false” for “safe”. You’re welcome for the fix Sandi. Your attitude toward or about those who are conservative is false and intolerant. Your posts and multitude of links to liberal progressive websites lack creditbility.
Still need to get used to the Beta look here. Just popping in to say I’m still alive and occasionally prowling here. Should have a space of time to start whining regularly soon.
@4 Dan, the Bush Regime owes Obama quite a debt for “Look forward, not back” when he took office in 2008.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0K27oIJlAlA
I am convinced the Bush White house committed fraud on the American people in the run-up to the War in Iraq to say it in the nicest terms possible.
Clinton didn’t pointlessly invade Iraq. Big difference, and far from the “same boat”.
Frank,
I know you often finds facts to be inconvenient, but do you accept this one?: “The U.S. didn’t invade Iraq during Bill Clinton’s presidency.” That is not more liberal spin, Frank. It’s a fact just like 2 + 2 = 4. Do you fault Clinton for that, based on the statement of his that you quoted? Do you realize that government leaders issue statements like that from time to time for ulterior reasons?
Whatever Bill Clinton thought of Iraq and WMDs, he never ordered his administration to take those thoughts and gin up a pretext for an Iraqi invasion. As a result of that, he refrained from war. Not only did that save thousands of American lives and tens of thousands of limbs, but Clinton also avoided borrowing $3 trillion to finance the war he never waged. Y’all talk a lot about the necessary debt this country on in the last 5 years to avoid a financial meltdown as if that was a crime. You never talk about the trillions of dollars and thousands of lives Bush wasted chasing imaginary WMDs that he had good reason to believe never existed.
Bush’s act with Iraq — those were real crimes. They didn’t base their justifications on the best intelligence available. Instead, they based it on the worst, most half-assed “intelligence” they could desperately cobble together to fool Congress into supporting the war. The sources of that intelligence were known liars to everyone in western intelligence agencies.
I do fault those in Congress, both Dems and Republicans, for being fooled. But that’s a far lesser offense than the lies that fueled the fooling.
The vague statement from Clinton notwithstanding, it’s a fact the Bush administration created a pretext for an unjustifiable invasion. The point was driven home just yesterday, by retired Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, Colin Powell’s chief of staff at the State Department:
“I didn’t know it at the time, and I fault myself for that,” he said. “I’ll go to my grave with that mass failing on my part. But yes, in retrospect, having done all the research and work that my students have done, plus myself, I’m damn sure that the Bush administration cooked the books.”
Yeah Leon, the intolerance, propaganda links, and insults are all ‘my bad’.
“The point is Dan that the intelligence that we had, at the time, said there were WOMD in Iraq. Most of the world believed it.”
That’s not the point, BobH. The point is that Clinton never believed his thoughts amounted to justification for an invasion. And the Bush Administration’s “intelligence” was the WORST available. They did a good job cobbling together a lot of bad information from known liars to cook up a case. And then they sold it to Congress and some other countries. They fooled them. It was dishonest as hell.
If I used those techniques to write columns, I’d be kicked out of the paper in a heartbeat.
@27 I think we as a nation are having a “You can’t handle the truth” Moment.
New site not Mac friendly. Piss-poor planning from the RT. Buh bye…
bill perdue,
we might not know the answer to your question for quite some time.
BILL PERDUE: “Was the Iraq war worth it?”
FRANK: “we might not know the answer to your question for quite some time.”
I predict the question will never be answered to Frank’s satisfaction in his lifetime (and I hope you have a long one, Frank).
But no, it was not worth it.
The truth is pretty obvious, and the answer is no.
I haven’t had any more problems with the new site on my Mac than others have had on a PC. At least not that I know of.
Did you see the wreck Jamey Singleton was in this morning? OMG, it looked like an awful head on collision.
I just read about it, Sandi…it sounds terrible. Hope he’s ok.
Just saw a picture of his car, Sandi…doesn’t look good.
dan,
Your points at #27 and #29 are silly.
Your little missive above doesn’t detract from the clear message which bill clinton, hillary clinton, john kerry, carl levin, algore, madeline albright, sandy berger, tom daschle, bob graham, jay rockefeller, ted kennedy, henry waxman, and nancy pelosi…just to name a few….consistently sent to the American people about Iraq having wmds. by jiminey, when you read all those public remarks those libs made, it is easy to see that the most powerful libs in congress were urging Bush to go to war, and finish the job clinton had started but failed…and it’s also easy to believe that those same libs would have castigated Bush had he not gone into Iraq.
Btw, i think clinton went to war in Bosnia because he hoped it would distract folks from learning about the fun he was having “not having sex” with that young intern, Monica.
And, I think ol’ bill c. executed the Desert Fox operation in IRAQ (did you forget that one, dan?) as a measure which he hoped would take folks minds off of the fun he was having “not having sex” with said intern, monica.
Not concerning WMDs, but as this is the OPEN thread:
With Dan’s approval, and in line with my earlier proposal for Lent, I’m shortening my user name to ‘Contra’. Most of you guys already do anyway.
Not sure how much I’ll be posting though, until things are more mobile-friendly.
Dan, Hagel always harbored reservations about the war though he did vote for it
in ’02. By ’07 he had become an outspoken critic of the war which McCain avidly supported, though he did W bungled the handling of it.
http://thinkprogress.org/security/2013/01/31/1521781/hagel-mccain-iraq/?mobile=nc
Hi Miriam! And when’s the next Gonzo lunch?
Hey, everyone — thanks for the feedback.
Mari just sent me an email, and she’s reading you comments, and she’s working on the problems you’ve experienced. Just wanted to let you know.
Cool, Contra!
Frank@2:36
Btw, i think clinton went to war in Bosnia because he hoped it would distract folks from learning about the fun he was having “not having sex” with that young intern, Monica.
And, I think ol’ bill c. executed the Desert Fox operation in IRAQ (did you forget that one, dan?) as a measure which he hoped would take folks minds off of the fun he was having “not having sex” with said intern, monica
Once again Frank attempts to link all of U.S. history and foreign policy since 1996 to Bill Clinton and an oval office BJ.His obsession with Clinton’s sex
life and oral sex is actually getting pretty creepy.. He may think it’s cute or witty but it’s just ridiculous and boring and adds nothing to real policy discussions.
Cold n P | February 19, 2013 at 1:24 pm
@4 Dan, the Bush Regime owes Obama quite a debt for “Look forward, not back” when he took office in 2008.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0K27oIJlAlA
I am convinced the Bush White house committed fraud on the American people in the run-up to the War in Iraq to say it in the nicest terms possible.
I believe you are correct. I think the Obama people made a conscious decision that to go back and prosecute the Bush officials would be just too divisive and would waste a lot of time and energy that could be spent on trying to move forward and get us out of the mess Bush left us in. In trhat respect it was much like Gerald Ford’s pardon of Nixon and some of his associates after the Watergate fiasco. And I think he was right.
WayneGoodman….creepy like his obsession with his Ambassador Stevens rape fantasy. A good chunk of HayFranks inner life revolves around the genitals of strangers. And it got creepy a while ago.
Plus you’d have to prosecute all the Democrats who claimed that Saddam had WMD’s, starting with Queen Hillary. They voted to allow the war.
I would have guessed that ole Nugent wouldn’t bust up his hands on somebody when he could just be a real tough guy and pistol whip them. sarcasm font off
This being the open thread, I’m using it to test if I can post from the ol’ Droid.
Bob H,
Dan regularly does not comprehend an “argument” that cuts against his libprog talking points.
It is of no importance that “Presidents” Clinton and Bush saw the same information (that most other governments saw) and came to the same conclusions… it does not matter that Powell presented the information (I wonder if Dan thinks Powell believed what he was presenting; or was in cahoots, or just stupid).
You have to keep sight on the overriding theme “tell the ignorant masses the same thing over and over and it will become a truth”; and when that lie runs its course find another.
You gotta give it to the obama folks, they have figured out that using the “its all Bush’s fault” meme no longer works so well; pivot (and broaden) to “its all the R’s fault”.
Perfect example: obama’s sequestration (obama and lew’s idea)… “congress” passed their proposal.
Suddenly, it is now the worst thing for the country and btw… it’s congress’s fault for passing it….
Obama will say “the newest crisis is not “my” fault” over and over again, his media darlings (although I see some crack in the wall here) will agree, and the ignorant masses will drink the kool-aid as usual.
I am sure you understand by now that many of the libprogs here are not “thinkers” they are just following the “talking points” from the liberal “talking points”.
BobH and mikeO
It’s not an argument that Bill Clinton rightly believed there was insufficient cause to invade Iraq. It’s a fact.
BUSTED! The Tea Party discovers political correctness!
It’s not a fact, dan. show me where he said what you said he believed. Then, I’ll show you the other side of the story.
Go for it, please.
Where did the first 50 comments go??
Odd how Mike O and BobH and Frank et al can so easily see and claim Obama will “tell the ignorant masses the same thing over and over and it will become a truth”; and when that lie runs its course find another” but they deny that the Bush administration did that very thing. That some Dems, or even most Dems managed to agree with Bush/Cheney does not make them correct.
Dan,
first, FYI, I am not able to get entire comments from threads. On this particular thread I am getting only your response and not historical posts as before.
Specific to your response I would suggest Clinton did not have to deal with 9-11, and you completely ignored (as usual) the thrust of the conversation.
I was particularly interested in finding your response, to my query, regarding your mistreatment by your employer regarding insurance but could only bring up 9 of 59 comments.
“Specific to your response I would suggest Clinton did not have to deal with 9-11, and you completely ignored (as usual) the thrust of the conversation.”
–mikeO
9/11 had nothing to do with Iraq, mikeO. It was masterminded by Al Qaeda terrorists based in Afghanistan and carried about by a number from many places in the Middle East other than Iraq.
Some idiots in the Bush administration initially brainstormed blaming Iraq but then cooler heads prevailed and they decided to spend a couple of years cobbling together a justification of for the Iraq invasion from bad intelligence passed to them by liars. These are facts, too.
Ron (and others) once a thread passes 50 comments, the first 50 disappear. It’s one of a number of issues that are being worked out as the new beta version of roanoke.com takes shape.
Sandi,
Apparently you know more about the intelligence of our country than anyone in the Clinton or bush administration or the obama administration.
Have you put forth your name for an administration position?
They really need some intelligent folk.
15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudis. The others were from Egypt, Lebanon & the UAE.
Dan,
OK, your “history” makes complete sense (snark), the leadership in Iraq “loved the USof A” they never had WOMD, never used them and never would (their neighbors might disagree, Clinton disagreed but so what…).
So lets use your scenario, it was Afghanistan.
Why is obama still giving “billions” to those who wish to kill us; and propping up a government that hates us? Please don’t use the “it’s bush’s fault” meme.
mikeO, your question makes no sense. Just for starters, Israel does not want to kill us and it doesn’t hate us.
Live arrows!
Sounds las if Bob H has consumed a bit too much koolaid himself! Facts are becoming very distorted to him. Memory loss is out of control!
“It is of no importance that “Presidents” Clinton and Bush saw the same information (that most other governments saw) and came to the same conclusions”
Except that didn’t happen. Next.
Just learned that Chip Woodrum passed away this p
m. Roanoke loses a good man.
Wayne,
Chip Woodrum was one of the smartest people I ever had the privilege of knowing; he was a great father and statesman. The world is a lesser place tonight.
Yes, RIP Chip Sporting. One of the best indeed.
I’m very sad to hear about Chip Woodrum’s passing. He was a good man and an honest and effective legislator, who also posted here occasionally. We need more like him in Richmond, Roanoke, and everywhere.
From Michael Sluss’story on Chip Woodrum posted at 11:30 on Roanoke . com:
Woodrum’s acerbic wit and partisan loyalty made him a big target for Republicans when they seized control of the House in 2000. He lost his seat on the budget-writing Appropriations Committee in 2000, was put into the same district as Cranwell in 2001 and later was removed as chairman of the Freedom of Information advisory panel.
Woodrum shrugged off the apparent snubs with a signature one-liner, saying, “They can tell me where to sit, but they can’t tell me where I stand.”
The loss of Chip Woodrum, Dick Cranwell, and Vic Thomas, left Roanoke and SWVA virtually without influence or an effective voice in the General Assembly and has led to this region being treated as a stepchild by Va. governments since that time.
Morgan Griffith’s negativity and strong antipathy to anything having to do with Roanoke City allowed us to be basically ignored in Richmond.
We will miss Chip greatly just as we have missed the leadership of those other two giants in the General Assembly.
.
…..Advertisement…..