Gotta tell ya': HERE’S A ‘MOVEON’ AD WE’D REALLY LIKE TO SEE

Common sense from a politician? Noooo! Condemn MoveOn and all the DFH! Much more important than habeas corpus and rotation times for the military!

I just hope MoveOn's membership total has gone up since all this controversy. That's the only hope.

Anyone know if that's the case? Last I heard they had just over 3,000,000 members.

Consider joining their efforts if you haven't already http://www.MoveOn.org

you can read it here until the link is fixed: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gov-bill-richardson/ads-dont-kill-people-w...

OT, but deserves the attention...

Why does Bush HATE our children? Both parties support this bill, but Bush can't stand the idea of children having health care coverage.

Bush: Kids' health care will get vetoed
By JENNIFER LOVEN, Associated Press Writer
2 hours, 11 minutes ago

President Bush again called Democrats "irresponsible" on Saturday for pushing an expansion he opposes to a children's health insurance program.

"Democrats in Congress have decided to pass a bill they know will be vetoed," Bush said of the measure that draws significant bipartisan support, repeating in his weekly radio address an accusation he made earlier in the week. "Members of Congress are risking health coverage for poor children purely to make a political point."

In the Democrat's response, also broadcast Saturday, Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell turned the tables on the president, saying that if Bush doesn't sign the bill, 15 states will have no funding left for the program by the end of the month.

At issue is the Children's Health Insurance Program, a state-federal program that subsidizes health coverage for low-income people, mostly children, in families that earn too much to qualify for Medicaid, but not enough to afford private coverage. It expires Sept. 30.

Don Davis @ 1:

Gotta tell ya': HERE’S A ‘MOVEON’ AD WE’D REALLY LIKE TO SEE

Thanks Don ... Good site, gave me my days chuckle and a lot of food for thought.

well.....atleast he said something right.

The United States, not Iran, invaded Iraq in 2003. I find it insulting for the United States to “blame Iran” for what America has done to kill, rape, and pillage both the people and land of Iraq. It was the United States who boasted of “shock and awe,” and that it would be a “cakewalk.” The United States led by the Neocons and former Reaganites have had Iran in their sights for years now. America is still angry that Iran booted them out in 1979, all while forgetting Iran hated America not for freedom’s sake, but for the overthrow of the Democratically-elected regime of Mohammad Mossadegh in 1953 after he announced the nationalization of the oil supply. Other nations have long memories of the covert actions done by the United States government. The United States is using blackmail and coercion with the backdrop of threats emanating from the use of America’s own nuclear weapons. This is criminal as defined by the Nuremberg Trials. Lieberman and others in threateninh Iran with the use of force are doing what Hitler did.

Its the United States government which is directly responsible 100% for everything bad in Iraq to this point and not “Iran.” Iran and Iraq do share the fact they both are dominated by Shia’s. Unless the USA wants to kill every last Shi’ite, this will likely remain the case for years to come.

The leaders of America are INSANE as were the heads of state in Nazi Germany. This is true of Lieberman, Graham, Kyl, McCain, and ohers.

When all else fails as in the Iraq War, the leaders of America who have no morals or brains to match, look for others to blame. This is typical of any batterer and torturer and America fits this syndrome of being unable to look itself in the mirror and see the direct damage its caused other lands and peoples.

Again, America with much help from the CIA overthrew the Democratically-elected regime of Mohammad Mossadegh in 1953, after he announced the nationalization of the oil supply. The Iranians never forgot this factoid of the 1953 covert coup d'etat. America is still angry that Khomeini with justified reasons, booted the USA out in 1979.

America may win many battles against these nations in the Middle East, but until the USA is extracted from these nations, the war will not be over. But its the United States historically which started what it now terms "terrorism" in the Middle East. If the United States ended its covert operations away from the purview of the American public who are largely unaware of what its government does to people across the globe there would be no need to talk about "terrorism." When will the United States be the real strong power it claims to be and be honest for once about its past digressions?

Yes, an advertisement of the 1953 covert coup d'etat in Iran by the United States of the Democratically-elected regime of Mohammad Mossadegh would be one good one to run! It would show the hypocrisy of the political elite in the United States.

Bangkok-Bob @ 13:

Don Davis @ 1:

Gotta tell ya': HERE’S A ‘MOVEON’ AD WE’D REALLY LIKE TO SEE

Thanks Don ... Good site, gave me my days chuckle and a lot of food for thought.

Great thanks, Bob.

Orangutan. @ 5:

I just hope MoveOn's membership total has gone up since all this controversy. That's the only hope.

Anyone know if that's the case? Last I heard they had just over 3,000,000 members.

I had never donated to MoveOn until this ad "controversy". Faux reich wing attention deflecting rage will motivate a lot of people to do what they perhaps should have done along time ago. Keep it up wingnuts!

Ruthless People @ 22:

Don Davis @ 1:

Gotta tell ya': HERE’S A ‘MOVEON’ AD WE’D REALLY LIKE TO SEE

Good one. Chimp needs too more hands though. One for his whiskey bottle and the other for his cocaine straw.

Opps...I mean "two" more hands.

NO Bill Richardson.

What I find most amusing about the whole condemnation of the MoveOn ad thing is that while they were doing that, the Canadian dollar wandered past the US dollar for the first time in 30 years.

And what's even more amusing is that NOBODY NOTICED.

After everything is said and done in this election, a few insightful folks
may soon recognize the Iraq War as the most serious thing threatening the future of the USA. I hope your readers have read New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson's op/ed piece from the Washington Post on how and why we must get out of Iraq, from 14 days ago.If not, here it is, in full, after a few introductory remarks by me:

There is a much larger scale confrontation with Bush from the candidates
regarding the Iraq War and the problems it is continuing to cause, after six years of Halliburton and Brown and Root and Blackwater corporate
kleptocracy. Only one candidate, it is abundantly clear to me, is really
slamming the truth and providing the logistics and rationale for ending this disastrous war: Bill Richardson. This article was printed in the Washington Post 14 days ago, and please take the time to read it:

_______________________

Why We Should Exit Iraq Now

By Bill Richardson
Saturday, September 8, 2007; A15

Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards have suggested that there is little difference among us on Iraq. This is not true: I am the only leading Democratic candidate committed to getting all our troops out and doing so quickly.

In the most recent debate, I asked the other candidates how many troops they would leave in Iraq and for what purposes. I got no answers. The American people need answers. If we elect a president who thinks that troops should stay in Iraq for years, they will stay for years — a tragic mistake.

Clinton, Obama and Edwards reflect the inside-the-Beltway thinking that a complete withdrawal of all American forces somehow wouldbe “irresponsible.” On the contrary, the facts suggest that a rapid, complete withdrawal — not a drawn-out, Vietnam-like process —would be the most responsible and effective course of action.

Those who think we need to keep troops in Iraq misunderstand the Middle East. I have met and negotiated successfully with many regional leaders,including Saddam Hussein. I am convinced that only a complete withdrawal can sufficiently shift the politics of Iraq and its neighbors to break the deadlock that has been killing so many people for so long.

Our troops have done everything they were asked to do with courage &
professionalism, but they cannot win someone else’s civil war. So long as
American troops are in Iraq, reconciliation among Iraqi factions is
postponed. Leaving forces there enables the Iraqis to delay taking the steps to end the violence. And it prevents us from using diplomacy to bring in other nations to help stabilize and rebuild the country.

The presence of American forces in Iraq weakens us in the war against al-
Qaeda. It endows the anti-American propaganda of those who portray us as occupiers plundering Iraq’s oil and repressing Muslims. The day we leave, this myth collapses, and the Iraqis will drive foreign jihadists out of
their country. Our departure would also enable us to focus on defeating the terrorists who attacked us on Sept. 11, those headquartered along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border — not in Iraq.

Logistically, it would be possible to withdraw in six to eight months. We
moved as many as 240,000 troops into and out of Iraq through Kuwait in as little as a three-month period during major troop rotations. After the
Persian Gulf War, we redeployed nearly a half-million troops in a few
months. We could redeploy even faster if we negotiated with the Turks to open a route out through Turkey.

As our withdrawal begins, we will gain diplomatic leverage. Iraqis will
start seeing us as brokers, not occupiers. Iraq’s neighbors will face the
reality that if they don’t help with stabilization, they will face the
consequences of Iraq’s collapse — including even greater refugee flows over their borders and possible war.

The United States can facilitate Iraqi reconciliation and regional
cooperation by holding a conference similar to that which brought peace to Bosnia. We will need regional security negotiations among all of Iraq’s
neighbors and discussions of donations from wealthy nations — including oil- rich Muslim countries — to help rebuild Iraq. None of this can happen until we remove the biggest obstacle todiplomacy: the presence of U.S. forces in Iraq.

My plan is realistic because:

It is less risky. Leaving forces behind leaves them vulnerable. Would we
need another surge to protect them?

It gets our troops out of the quagmire and strengthens us for our real
challenges. It is foolish to think that 20,000 to 75,000 troops could bring
peace to Iraq when 160,000 have not. We need to get our troops out of the crossfire in Iraq so that we can defeat the terrorists who attacked us on Sept. 11.

By hastening the peace process, the likelihood of prolonged bloodshed is
reduced. President Richard Nixon withdrew U.S. forces slowly from Vietnam — with disastrous consequences. Over the seven years it took to get our troops out, 21,000 more Americans and perhaps a million Vietnamese, most of them civilians, died. All this death and destruction accomplished nothing — the communists took over as soon as we left.

My position has been clear since I entered this race: Remove all the troops and launch energetic diplomatic efforts in Iraq and internationally to bring stability. If Congress fails to end this war, I will remove all troops
without delay, and without hesitation, beginning on my first day in office.

Let’s stop pretending that all Democratic plans are similar. The American
people deserve precise answers from anyone who would be commander in chief. How many troops would you leave in Iraq? For how long? To do what, exactly? And the media should be asking these questions of the candidates, rather than allowing them to continue saying, “We are against the war . . . but please don’t read the small print.”

The writer is governor of New Mexico and a candidate for the Democratic
presidential nomination.

To everyone who "donates" to MoveOn...

You guys are putzes... Moveon is Georgie Soros' baby. Anyone here have a clue as to who Georgie is?

Anyone?

http://deathby1000papercuts.blogspot.com/2007/09/bill-richardson-at-huff...

Ginn @ 31:

To everyone who "donates" to MoveOn...

You guys are putzes... Moveon is Georgie Soros' baby. Anyone here have a clue as to who Georgie is?

Anyone?

http://deathby1000papercuts.blogspot.com/2007/09/bill-richardson-at-huffpo-when-war-ads.html

Um, not at all. See, we here in the reality-based community prefer facts to unsubstantiated innuendo and smears. I've been a member of MoveOn since 1996. Not Soros-funded. MEMBER-funded.

Nice try, troll.

MoveOn used to have a bulletin board so that members and interested liberals could suggest directions for the organization to take. It was clogged with venom spewed by Freepers. Most regulars, including myself gave it up as civil discourse became impossible.

As for Soros - thank you, sir. You are proof that wealth need not corrupt.