free web counter

Maries Two Cents

Far Right Conservative And Proud Of It!..... Stories That I Think Need Special Attention, And, Of Course, My Two Cents :-)

My Photo
Name:
Location: Del City, Oklahoma, United States




Click for Oklahoma City, Oklahoma Forecast





Homeland Security Advisory

January 04, 2008

Feed Shark Turbo Tagger

Way To Go Fred!!!!!!

Coming in 3rd in Iowa aint bad, aint bad at all!

I'm still with Fred :-)


Git 'er Done









Fred Thompson Post Caucus Address To Supporters



Help Send Fred To New Hampshire To Win Ticket To The Next Dance!!

GO FRED GO!!!!



Labels:

41 Comments:

Anonymous Joanne said...

Coming in 3rd isn't bad? It's where Hillary place, too. So that must mean it isn't bad for her. Right?

PS. Haven't made any decisions on who I'll support yet.

Just saying. If third is good for Thompson, then it's good for Clinton, too.

January 04, 2008 2:27 PM  
Blogger Marie's Two Cents said...

Joanne,

I guess you could look at it that way.

But with all the hype about Hillary being our next President, and her not winning Iowa, I'm sure she is quite upset today.

I look for a barage of Hillary attacks to open up wide and heavy on Obama and Edwards from the Hillary Campaign.

This woman is NOT going to go down without a fight, just like Thompson :-)

January 04, 2008 3:26 PM  
Blogger Amy Proctor said...

I don't know.... the bronze medal is good, but 13% doesn't seem too good.

The good news if you're a Fred fan is that this one caucus really doesn't mean anything. It's completely inconclusive. Until all the primaries, we won't know much.

January 04, 2008 5:23 PM  
Blogger Marie's Two Cents said...

Amy,

Considering I wasnt expecting Fred to come in at all. I'm extatic!

I think Fred has his fire back and will come in not to bad in New Hampshire, but He will win South Carolina because he's a southerner. And they pretty much stick together down there.

But You are right ya never know.

But my money is still on Fred :-)

January 04, 2008 5:44 PM  
Blogger J_G said...

Republicans, Iowa was only the first in a quick series of events, New Hampshire is next. The race is still pretty open for the Republicans, it could go a lot of different ways. If you support someone stay with it and don't let up.


As far the democrats are concerned, Clinton took a big hit in Iowa. She was the inevitable candidate and came in third behind two lightweights. Clinton is in big trouble if she doesn't place at least second in New Hampshire because South Carolina is going to go to Obama.

January 04, 2008 9:50 PM  
Blogger Gayle said...

Good job, Marie, my girl! I'm enthusiastic too.

Here's how I see it (wrong or right, it's the way I see it):

First of all, historically the winner in Iowa more often than not, doesn't become president. So... having said that, the top three, both Republicans and Democrats, are still viable runners in this most important race. The fact that Fred came in third is reason to celebrate, especially since the MSM had it that he was going to bow out if he didn't make a good showing in Iowa, and that wasn't even true to begin with because the story was a plant!

Both Fred and Hillary have as much chance of winning this thing as any one of the top three. The debates are now going to get more important than ever. Unlike most conservatives, I hope Hillary wins, because she is going to be easier to beat than Obama. Most Americans don't like Hillary. Obama has youth and charm and is admired by many of the youth - especially young women - of this country, and he's more capable of picking up independents than Hillary, so he's a much larger threat. As for Edwards.... PFHHHHHT! I don't think he stands a chance.

Bottom line is that both Fred and Hillary still are in the running and we need to back Fred like never before. You're doing a good job of that. Thanks! :)

January 05, 2008 5:52 AM  
Blogger The Federalist said...

Wow! Holy optimism! And the word on the street is that Thompson is going to quit the race in the next week.

I would be more troubled by the fact that Democrat caucus voters outnumbered the Republican ones by 2-1.

The tired rhetoric about being scared is dying quickly. (Which counts Rudy out immediately).

I feel as though the Republicans should be looking at Thompson or McCain: the only two true Republicans.

January 05, 2008 9:04 AM  
Blogger Marie's Two Cents said...

Jenn,

I am trying too.

I will stick with Fred until he drops out if he does.

I dont know what Fred will pull off in New Hampshire, but I am counting more on South Carolina, because he is in home territory.

He's a Country Boy :-)

January 05, 2008 9:24 AM  
Blogger Marie's Two Cents said...

Gayle,

Good job, Marie, my girl! I'm enthusiastic too.

Here's how I see it (wrong or right, it's the way I see it):

First of all, historically the winner in Iowa more often than not, doesn't become president. So... having said that, the top three, both Republicans and Democrats, are still viable runners in this most important race. The fact that Fred came in third is reason to celebrate, especially since the MSM had it that he was going to bow out if he didn't make a good showing in Iowa, and that wasn't even true to begin with because the story was a plant!


Thank you Gayle :-)

Considering Fred came in AT ALL got me all excited lol

I dont know where that story about Fred dropping out came from, but I was sure happy that he quickly responded to it as being wrong!


Both Fred and Hillary have as much chance of winning this thing as any one of the top three. The debates are now going to get more important than ever. Unlike most conservatives, I hope Hillary wins, because she is going to be easier to beat than Obama. Most Americans don't like Hillary. Obama has youth and charm and is admired by many of the youth - especially young women - of this country, and he's more capable of picking up independents than Hillary, so he's a much larger threat. As for Edwards.... PFHHHHHT! I don't think he stands a chance.

Bottom line is that both Fred and Hillary still are in the running and we need to back Fred like never before. You're doing a good job of that. Thanks! :)



I think Obama is getting the women and youth vote because of Oprah, that witch!

You are right Edwards doesnt stand a chance pfft lol

I'm trying like heck to do a good job of getting Fred's message out.

Thank's for the encourgement :-)

January 05, 2008 9:32 AM  
Blogger Marie's Two Cents said...

Federalist,

Wow! Holy optimism! And the word on the street is that Thompson is going to quit the race in the next week.

I would be more troubled by the fact that Democrat caucus voters outnumbered the Republican ones by 2-1.



I am VERY Optomistic :-)

Now see how do we all know for sure how many Democrats came out to caucus vs. Republicans?



The tired rhetoric about being scared is dying quickly. (Which counts Rudy out immediately).

I feel as though the Republicans should be looking at Thompson or McCain: the only two true Republicans.



Well I disagree with the "Fear Factor" being out for the simple reason that those that want to kill us all are still out there.

Even Fred said the Terrorists wont be satisfied until there is a Mushroom Cloud over the United States.

And even if you took out Bin Hidin, they will still be out there because there are so many offshoots of them since 9-11 was a complete success for the terrorists.

Winning in Iraq and Afghanistan is the only option to slap the terrorists back into hiding where they belong.

Like President Bush said: "There will be hell to pay for attacking America", and we have to prove that fact!

McCain is great on the War on Terror. But he sucks at home. He hangs out with the Liberals to much and sides with them about tax cuts and things we need that affect our daily lives.

Thompson is the only one who wraps it all up in one package for me.

January 05, 2008 9:48 AM  
Blogger The Federalist said...

I noticed all of your ads hyping war. I guess I'm just not that thrilled about "shock and awe". I understand that many enjoy America when it wages war. I've always thought that my country was great...guess I don't need it to engage in preemptive war to prove it. I'm just not one of those who believe that war is exciting. Don't get me wrong: war is at times necessary (Afghanistan, when we were looking for Bin Laden) and other times is completely unnecessary (Iraq when looking for WMD that we know don't exist).

You're right: Bush said and I quote, "We will get the folks who did this." I just thought we were going after al-Qaeda, not the whole Middle East.

I have not heard anything on the search for Bin Laden...are you sure we're still looking for him? What recent information/articles do you have Marie? Please post them :-)

Total Democrat Caucus Voters in Iowa = 220,000
Total Republican Caucus Voters in Iowa = 115,000

I don't know how to post links but here is the Forbes.com article with the facts:

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2008/01/03/ap4493407.html

This means 1 of 2 things:

Either there are more Democrats in the country than there are Republicans (which would not be the first time I've heard that information since the party of the honorable Ronald Reagan was hijacked by socio-pathological neocons)

or

The Republicans are so uninspired by their candidates that they are disinterested and, therefore, are already conceding to the fact that there will be a change in the dangerous direction our country is headed.

Regardless it would appear that the country is in some type of shift; one that may indicate the frustration of a "cowboy" foreign policy which says "war first, diplomacy a distant second".

But then again...we are no where near the election. Rove may come back for the ultimate political play of his career: a totally planned crisis/disaster that will have Bush suspend the elections indefinitely and invoke martial law....stay tuned!

January 05, 2008 3:33 PM  
Blogger Marie's Two Cents said...

Federalist,

I noticed all of your ads hyping war. I guess I'm just not that thrilled about "shock and awe". I understand that many enjoy America when it wages war. I've always thought that my country was great...guess I don't need it to engage in preemptive war to prove it. I'm just not one of those who believe that war is exciting. Don't get me wrong: war is at times necessary (Afghanistan, when we were looking for Bin Laden) and other times is completely unnecessary (Iraq when looking for WMD that we know don't exist).



Oh by no means dont get me wrong I am NOT a warmonger.

But when our Soldiers are in a war and in harms way I support them 100%

I have a son in the Army who has already been to Iraq and back and then some. He signed on before 9-11and has proudly protected our Country ever since. He is on Reserve Status Now, he would have went straight back in if it hadnt been for him marrying a German girl and punching out a couple of kids lol.

But he's ready should they call him back up again.

You really cant blame President Bush for pre-emptive strikes. He was led to believe by our own failure of intelligence that Saddam STILL had WMD and was aiming for America. After all that idiot threatened to wipe us off the map how many times? And did use WMD on his own people and invaded his neighbors. And violated 17 UN resolutions and so on etc.. you know the drill.

And you have to admit President Bush was pissed to put it mildly after 9-11. He was so pissed he was gunning for anybody that even looked like they had intentions of hurting us again.

Me and alot of my friends that comment here understand what it is that happened, and what he went through.

I think President Bush and the entire Country learned a very big lesson about how important TRUE, FACTUAL, Intelligence that presents a clear and present danger at the time is, was and always from now on will be.

I cant blame the man.

But we are there now and the Troops believe in what they are doing so I'm backing them 110%

It's really thier call isnt it? Not ours. If they believe they can win and finish this mission they ought to be able to have the opportunity and the weaponry to do it. And Harry Reid and Congress should NOT try to Micromanage thier war.

That truly pisses me off when Harry Reid said "The War Is Lost", and the Troops were saying WTF?

I mean I feel for the Troops, and you can see where they are coming from when they put up that poster that was funny as hell about what John Kerry said a little over a year ago "Hdlp su Jon Kery we aer stuk in Irak". I mean they know what is going on back home and they must not be able to contain themselves at times ya know?

Anyway, if the Troops believe they are winning and we have concrete proof on the ground like we do now, it's just not American not to back our Troops if they want to win let 'em!


You're right: Bush said and I quote, "We will get the folks who did this." I just thought we were going after al-Qaeda, not the whole Middle East.


LMAO! I know it looks like we are after the whole middle east but we arent. lol



I have not heard anything on the search for Bin Laden...are you sure we're still looking for him? What recent information/articles do you have Marie? Please post them :-)

Actually we are still looking for him and my articles are in my archives, I can find them but I dont feel like looking for them now. Maybe you could go to "Search this site" and it will lead you to them. We have never stopped looking for that ass, but Musharraff wouldnt let us into Waziristan to go bomb the hideouts or look for him there, HOWEVER we do have special opps in there and are on a continuing basis looking for that ass.

We have to put up with Musharraff since Bhutto was assassinated, after all he did capture Kalid Sheik Mohammed, the mastermind of the 9-11 attacks. And some other goons we have locked up at GITMO.

Sometimes we have to go with the lesser of two evils for America's saftey or we will have another Jimmy Carter moment with the Shaw Of Iran for instance. That went over real well. Pfft.



Either there are more Democrats in the country than there are Republicans (which would not be the first time I've heard that information since the party of the honorable Ronald Reagan was hijacked by socio-pathological neocons)

or

The Republicans are so uninspired by their candidates that they are disinterested and, therefore, are already conceding to the fact that there will be a change in the dangerous direction our country is headed.



I think maybe the Republicans are still undecided. However I did read a report the other day that more Republicans have signed up to vote than Dems! I dont remember where I read that.


Regardless it would appear that the country is in some type of shift; one that may indicate the frustration of a "cowboy" foreign policy which says "war first, diplomacy a distant second".

But then again...we are no where near the election. Rove may come back for the ultimate political play of his career: a totally planned crisis/disaster that will have Bush suspend the elections indefinitely and invoke martial law....stay tuned!



Haha NO, they wont pull that, they actually havent pulled anything like that, chatter we have been finding out seems to increase every time it's Christmas, Thanksgiving, 4th of July, any election, etc.. It has taken some years but we are beginning to decipher what is to be an iminent threat and what may only likely be a threat and to watch out either way.

If you have noticed some of these alerts come in the middle of the year when there is Nothing even going on.

I take these people seriously now. I dont think they were at all prepared for 9-11, I dont think we were prepared for after 9-11 for years. But I think we are better prepared now.

I think it takes years to weed out all the usual threat stuff and the real iminent threat stuff. But we havent been attacked since 9-11 and that's sure not by accident.

I think they take EVERY threat seriously and dont let us know every damn thing going on unless it is truly iminent and they need the public's help. Which is a good thing. I dont need to be on pins and needles all the time anyway.

It may have taken years but at least the next President whoever it will be will have a much easier time if they pay attention to all the safeguards Bush has put in place since 9-11.

Bush may have gotten extremely pissed off, but ya know? So did I.

And I will back whatever decision the Troops want, not what Congress wants. And until further notice the President is still ours and thier Commander-In-Cheif.

I believe whatever the Troops want, they should get :-) And they want to win, and I want them to win so I back them 110%.

January 05, 2008 7:03 PM  
Blogger The Federalist said...

I back them, too. I don't think anyone wishes for our troops to die. If you believe that, that is just hate and lack of maturity.
I think many people want to know what "win" looks like. Is that when the Iraqi insurgents AND al-Qaeda put down their weapons and raise white flags and say, "You guys win"? You see, "win" is not that easy to figure out. If it's up to McCain we may be there for 100 years.


Well, you call it "failure" of intelligence, I call it "intentionally misleading" intelligence. LOL...we were going into Iraq WAY before 9/11. You don't send 175,000 troops to exercise "diplomacy". You know it's bad when on 9/12/01, Cheney and Rumsfeld are saying, "How can we pin this on Iraq?" This was planned in 2000. 9/11 was a convenient entry.

19 nerdy, geeky terrorists got lucky one day in September 2001. When the USS Cole was hit, we didn't declare war on an uninvolved, sovereign nation. This is a small group of perverted, radical, murderous, religious zealots.

Bush's daddy got Saddam out of Kuwait and then came home. Why didn't he go to Baghdad? Because he listened to experts (attributed to humility and Republicanism). Bush the Decider and Cheney the Terrible listen to no one who second-guesses their agenda.

Bush said he would go into Pakistan with or without the permission of Musharraf...so what's the hold up?

I am counting the days until this regime is nothing but a black mark on the history of this great democracy.

Thank you to you son for his service. "Patriotism is supporting your country all of the time and your government when they deserve it." - Mark Twain

Your hate for liberals seems to be fueled by Hannity and O'Reilly, as I see so many of their talking points in your posts.
Life is so much better without hate. Give it a try.
(I merely have great dislike for Bush and Co. My wife and I continue to pray for him, our leaders and soldiers in harms way)

January 05, 2008 7:43 PM  
Blogger Marie's Two Cents said...

Federalist,

I back them, too. I don't think anyone wishes for our troops to die. If you believe that, that is just hate and lack of maturity.
I think many people want to know what "win" looks like. Is that when the Iraqi insurgents AND al-Qaeda put down their weapons and raise white flags and say, "You guys win"? You see, "win" is not that easy to figure out. If it's up to McCain we may be there for 100 years.




Hey! Now wait a sec. Werent you the one that said McCain and Thompson were the only true conservatives?

Lack of Maturity? I am probably older than you! Well even if I'm not I have common sense which is lacking in most commentors on here that disagree with me. But you are at least mature enough to debate without idiocy involved. (Cough-Compliment)

How many times must "Winning" be explained to you? It isnt that hard to understand!

A Country that can Sustain itself (In other words provide for themselves)

A Country that can Defend itself ( in other words have a Military and a Navy capable of defending themselves once we are gone)

A Country that will no longer be a threat to America or it's neighbors )In other words a Country that wont gas it's own people, invade it's neighbors, etc..)

And be a valuable ally in the War on Terror.

I mean what is so hard to understand about this? Truly! We are still In Kosovo (Where Clinton sent us) and it's been 11 years now!

We have NEVER Liberated a Country without leaving a base or bases there. EVER.

So if you think we are all going to be gone tomorrow, forget that!

There will be NO white flags waved in this war, when things calm down like they are in Iraq, and the people themselves turn in the terrorists and call a halt to the violence and work with American and Coalition Troops that's a win!

That's happening NOW in Iraq and Afghanistan!


Well, you call it "failure" of intelligence, I call it "intentionally misleading" intelligence. LOL...we were going into Iraq WAY before 9/11. You don't send 175,000 troops to exercise "diplomacy". You know it's bad when on 9/12/01, Cheney and Rumsfeld are saying, "How can we pin this on Iraq?" This was planned in 2000. 9/11 was a convenient entry.


Now that is just utter nonsense. We had NO plans of invading Iraq before 9-11, even my son tells me that and he knew war plans before the world did and couldnt talk about them till they were implemented and the world knew.

There was nothing "Misleading" about intelligence, it was just wrong. Period. But C'mon, you know as well as the rest of the world that Saddam had umpteen threats going against the United States as well as the rest of the world.

That statement is just wrong and misleading.



19 nerdy, geeky terrorists got lucky one day in September 2001. When the USS Cole was hit, we didn't declare war on an uninvolved, sovereign nation. This is a small group of perverted, radical, murderous, religious zealots.



Uh... You are forgetting Bin Hidin declared war on us in 1996. He started with the first bombing of the WTC and he kept going until he got it right. But had Bill Clinton been more involved in fighting the war on terror we wouldnt be dealing with this shit today!

Small group? Boy have you underestimated the enemy!

There are offshoots of this branch of lunatics ya know?

NEVER underestimate the enemy! You have no Military experience do you?


Bush's daddy got Saddam out of Kuwait and then came home. Why didn't he go to Baghdad? Because he listened to experts (attributed to humility and Republicanism). Bush the Decider and Cheney the Terrible listen to no one who second-guesses their agenda.



Bush's daddy wasnt attacked at home was he?

And there were several analysts that said we should have taken out Saddam then and there. Maybe if Daddy or Clinton would have listened we wouldnt be in this shape today.



Bush said he would go into Pakistan with or without the permission of Musharraf...so what's the hold up?


NO, Bush said if Mussaraff didnt help out in the war on terror we would bomb his ass back to the stone age!

So far he has captured and handed over to the US Kalid Sheik Mohammad (Matermind of the 9-11 attacks) and other goons held at GITMO.

And he did so at his own peril.

The last thing we need is a Country completely out of control, filled with Al-Qaeda, and armed with Nukes!! Get Real here!


I am counting the days until this regime is nothing but a black mark on the history of this great democracy.

Thank you to you son for his service. "Patriotism is supporting your country all of the time and your government when they deserve it." - Mark Twain



Well this "Regime" has kept yours and my ass safe since 9-11, but you fail to see what all they have had to go through to do it.

Regime my ass!

Bush has protected us as best he could since 9-11 and he hasnt done a bad job at all. He will go down in History by people who will write that arent even born yet that he was one of the greatest Presidents we ever had.

My son is a Veteran, I thank him and all Veterans every day I'm still able to breathe American Air.



Your hate for liberals seems to be fueled by Hannity and O'Reilly, as I see so many of their talking points in your posts.
Life is so much better without hate. Give it a try.
(I merely have great dislike for Bush and Co. My wife and I continue to pray for him, our leaders and soldiers in harms way)


I have NO hate in my soul. I just dont like the Liberal agenda. O'Reilly and Hannity have NOTHING TO DO WITH IT!

They may just happen to agree with me, maybe it looks like I agree with them but they agree with me. Or Vise Versa.

I dont hate Liberals, I just dont like the way they think about home policy and foreign policy and I truly believe they will get us all killed.

But continue to pray for Bush, he does need all the prayers he can get. He is a great leader and will continue to protect us till he is out of office, then we I guess are on our own.

God help us all!

January 05, 2008 8:51 PM  
Blogger The Federalist said...

Neither Bush was attacked by Iraq. Fact.

Wow, it is truly amazing how well Karl Rove has divided the country. You actually believe that your fellow Americans will get you killed. That is truly remarkable!

There is no off-shoot of al-Qaeda because al-Qaeda is a database! That's like saying there is an off-shoot of the internet or of a phone book.

But you're right. When L. Paul Bremer fired the 450,000 Iraqi soldiers who were standing ready to be rehired by the U.S. to quell the violence in Iraq, that did create somewhat of an "offshoot". Especially when we fired them without gathering their personal data or sequestering their weapons. Those are the individuals who created the current civil war in Iraq.

Funny though how you blasted Obama for stating that if he had credible intelligence on Bin Laden in Pakistan he would go after him, with or without permission from Musharraf. Bush says the same thing and everyone is okay with it.

Doesn't make a lot of sense. But I guess it doesn't have to when you have a cowboy hat, a southern accent and sign your name on an American flag.

When the truth comes out Marie, and it will, I promise not to gloat. We don't shoot our wounded.

Hail to The Decider!

January 05, 2008 10:08 PM  
Blogger J_G said...

Sorry Marie, one of the moonbats followed me over here from my blog.

liberals are so used to being the led by pied pipers such as the mainstream press and so called prominent members of congress,and academia (given the misnomer "intelligentsia"). No one else but those enlightened few could possibly think for themselves. Nothing could be further from the truth. Conservatives are by far more independent in their thinking then the wishy-washy liberals of today.

There are far too many incorrect assumptions for me to address from the previous comments but suffice it to say "same old-same old". Those talking points have been discredited for o long not evcen the mainstream press will repeat them anymore.

We are winning the war, the surge has worked. Winning looks like what is going on in Iraq. When we leave Iraq and toss them the keys they will be set up to take care of their own and defend themselves from out side attackers as best as can be expected by any nation especially in the middle east.

The elites look down from their ivory towers upon the unwashed and proclaim failure because George Bush was the president. Anyone that disagrees with them are simply the ignorant masses being led by the unappreciative unenlightened.

January 05, 2008 10:37 PM  
Blogger Marie's Two Cents said...

Federalist,

Oh Sweet Jesus, why must we go over and over this?

Neither Bush was attacked by Iraq. Fact.

Wow, it is truly amazing how well Karl Rove has divided the country. You actually believe that your fellow Americans will get you killed. That is truly remarkable!

There is no off-shoot of al-Qaeda because al-Qaeda is a database! That's like saying there is an off-shoot of the internet or of a phone book.



Really! Take a look at Britain, Spain, Yes Iraq, our own Country, there are offshoots of Al-Qaeda everywhere.

Al-Qaeda for your info means "The Base" In Arabic.

If you dont think they are out to kill us all then you are dense.

If you cant see the lingering danger and think all is well and fine because we havent been attacked since 9-11 you are about as naive as they come.

Karl Rove? I dont listen to anything but DOD and State Dept. intelligence reports. Why you harp on Karl Rove I dont Understand! I have NEVER paid any attention to Karl Rove!

I LOVE my fellow Americans, but some are misguided and sometimes full of shit.

I only think my Liberal American Friends will get us all killed if they go back to thinking defeating Al-Qaeada will be a Police Action instead of a War! It isnt possible since they attacked us first!



But you're right. When L. Paul Bremer fired the 450,000 Iraqi soldiers who were standing ready to be rehired by the U.S. to quell the violence in Iraq, that did create somewhat of an "offshoot". Especially when we fired them without gathering their personal data or sequestering their weapons. Those are the individuals who created the current civil war in Iraq.

I will agree with you there, we should have never fired the old Iraqi Army. But we didnt know that at the time. We do now.



Funny though how you blasted Obama for stating that if he had credible intelligence on Bin Laden in Pakistan he would go after him, with or without permission from Musharraf. Bush says the same thing and everyone is okay with it.


I never blasted Obama for anything YET! But Bush has it handled, he is still the Commander-In-Cheif ya know?



Doesn't make a lot of sense. But I guess it doesn't have to when you have a cowboy hat, a southern accent and sign your name on an American flag.

When the truth comes out Marie, and it will, I promise not to gloat. We don't shoot our wounded.

Hail to The Decider!



What the hell is that suppose to mean?

I know wounded, that still want to go back and finish the job!

Obviosly you and your wifes prayers only go to a selected few.

You cant have it both ways!

Either you support the Troops or ya dont!!

January 05, 2008 10:56 PM  
Blogger Marie's Two Cents said...

Federalist,

I missed some of your post.

I will get to it tomorrow as I cant hold my eyes open any more tonight.

Sweet Dreams :-)

I have to get sleep

Marie
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

January 05, 2008 10:59 PM  
Blogger Marie's Two Cents said...

Jenn,


Dont worry about it, ya know how I handle moonbats ;-)

He seems to at least have a brain unlike some others that post here.

But I cant go into this any longer My eyes are shutting.

I will be up and ready for the Federalist Tomorrow lol

Federalist wait till I have my coffee tomorrow :-)

I actually like ya, even though you are misguided, I can fix that lol

I will see yall tomorrow :-)

January 05, 2008 11:06 PM  
Blogger J_G said...

I know you'll set'em right Marie
;-)

January 06, 2008 1:41 AM  
Blogger The Federalist said...

Marie,

You're right about the lack of time. I don't have time to go back and explain to you the history of al-Qaeda, what it is, how they were not in Iraq until we occupied it, how other terrorist groups with their own agenda are aligning themselves in al-Qaeda to obtain funding, etc.

Do those affiliated with al-Qaeda want to kill people? YES. Their first choice, Americans. No argument there.

I've always wanted to go after them where they were: Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Iraq had nothing to do with this.

But you keep believing what you want and I'll do the same.

January 06, 2008 7:35 AM  
Blogger The Federalist said...

J_G,

You're just so darn cute!

I don't watch Fox News so I'll never be misguided!

"If you tell a big enough lie enough times, people will eventually believe it." - Joseph Goebbels

January 06, 2008 7:37 AM  
Blogger The Federalist said...

J_G,

I just read your funny post in its entirety. LOL...conservatives are more independent? Have you considered going on stage with this act? Too funny...

In 2005, despite Bush saying Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11, 19% of registered Republicans still believed that Saddam was behind 9/11. Holy St. Independent thinkers!

You are the ones who bought into, "you're either with us or you're against us." Based on that ideology, how could you possibly see any truth? You give blank check support for EVERYTHING Bush & Co. do! THAT is treasonous!

What does "intelligentsia" have to do with academia? Not sure where you tie that in...but hey, if you heard it on Rush or Hannity, then of course, it's true.

Ever notice how both Rush and Hannity start out most comments with, "Let me tell you folks what this means..."

LOL...why do you think they say that?

January 06, 2008 8:15 AM  
Blogger Mike's America said...

This "Federalist" is a Paulista in disguise!

Iraq had everything to do with 9/11. Not the attack per se, but everything to do with the global strategy to defeat jihad by drawing the line in the sands of Baghdad and killing every jihadi who stepped over it.

Face it Feddy... that strategy is WORKING!

According to polling in the Muslim workd support for the concept of a violent jihad is FALLING as Muslims witness the rout that Al Queda has been dealt in Iraq.

Now, won't you admit that you are a Ron Paul supporter?

January 06, 2008 11:00 AM  
Blogger The Federalist said...

Ron Paul? LOL...not in this lifetime.

Read my blog. It contains my ideas and perspectives, not cut and paste from articles followed by brief commentary.

January 06, 2008 1:03 PM  
Blogger Marie's Two Cents said...

Jenn,

I was to tired to answer you properly lastnight, but now I see where he came from YOUR PLACE!! lol

You can have at it with him all ya want lol

January 06, 2008 1:14 PM  
Blogger Marie's Two Cents said...

Ah a Ron Paul supporter in disguise!!

Hmmm sneaky!

January 06, 2008 1:15 PM  
Blogger Marie's Two Cents said...

Fed,

Marie,

You're right about the lack of time. I don't have time to go back and explain to you the history of al-Qaeda, what it is, how they were not in Iraq until we occupied it, how other terrorist groups with their own agenda are aligning themselves in al-Qaeda to obtain funding, etc.



I think I understand the history of Al-Qaeda quite well thank you.

THEY ARE EVERYWHERE!!



Iraq had nothing to do with this.


Yeah I used to think that until I woke up to the fact thet Abu Massab Al-Zarqowi went to Iraq for a leg operation he suffered fighting the Americans in Afghanistan.

Iraq, mind you. Now why on earth did he think he should seek treatment in Iraq?

Way before we ever went to Iraq.

Boggles the mind doesnt it?

January 06, 2008 1:21 PM  
Blogger The Federalist said...

Did Cheney tell you that? Was that the same source that said Atta went to Prague to meet with senior Iraqi intelligence officials before 9/11?

Now I see where you're getting your information from! No wonder!

Al-Qaeda are very dispersed, that's for sure Marie. "The base" started out simply as a network of individuals who followed the ideology of a Saudi professor. Now anyone who goes on a suicide bomb mission claims to be al-Qaeda. Even Bin Laden at one point discredited Zarqawi (the eternal "Fredo" of al-Qaeda).

Didn't Fox News, at one point, claim that they had sources who could prove that al-Qaeda were responsible for the California wildfires?

As you once said Marie, "you can't have it both ways." We supposedly went to Iraq for WMD, ("we can't let the smoking gun be a mushroom cloud" - like that was going to happen) then it changed to "Saddam was brutal", and now it's al-Qaeda, who were not even allowed in secular Iraq pre-invasion??? Which is it Marie? I can't keep up! LOL...


If you research any credible information regarding Iraq before the invasion, you will find innumerable sources citing that Saddam and al-Qaeda were about as friendly as Bill O'Reilly and Rosie O'Donnell. What we did for Bin Laden was his dream of an outcome: remove Saddam so he could infiltrate the country and take advantage of those disenfranchised from the U.S. invasion.

January 06, 2008 2:15 PM  
Blogger The Federalist said...

Mike's America,

LOL....hahahahaha...

Quote: "Iraq had everything to do with 9/11 except the attack."

That my friend is the funniest thing I've read in 7 years.

Thank you!

January 06, 2008 2:16 PM  
Blogger Marie's Two Cents said...

Fed,

I know how Al-Qaeda got started, it was Zawahiri "The Egyptian" first he met up with Bin Hidin "The Saudi" and they together formed "The Base".

And that base was fighting the Soviets for years, and the Soviets got thier asses kicked.

But when we came along things changed :-)

I know anyone who does anything to anybody now can claim Al-Qaeda did it.

It's turned into something like the Manson Family only with Jihadist's that wouldnt hesitate to cut off our heads.

Oh now C'mon Zarqowi was recieving orders straight from Bin Hidin himself I saw the Videos you did too. Bin Hidin praised Zarqowi's efforts in Iraq. And yes the freak went to Iraq for Medical Treatment before we ever thought about going there.

Saddam knew everyone that was in his Country, he didnt like Al-Quaeda, but he hated us more.

I still have it on Video where our Military was entering the outskirts of Baghdad and Saddam had a Mural of the Twin Towers being hit by airplanes with some arabic written crap underneath.

You cant tell me he Saddam wasnt proud of what Bin Hiden had done.


Oh that's a good one, Al-Qeada responsible for the California wildfires, ya know, you are a real smartass.

I'm not quite sure what your point is anymore. Are you trying to get me to believe the Liberal spin?

And what on earth does any of this have to do with Fred Thompson?

January 06, 2008 2:44 PM  
Blogger The Federalist said...

Actually Fox News did originally report that as the cause of the wildfires in California. I wasn't trying to be a smartass about that.

What does this have to do with Fred Thomspon? Not sure. You began with "Even Fred said the terrorists won't be satisfied until there is a mushroom cloud over the United States."

And...as you have the cute little ad on your blog, if Fred says that today is Thursday, "By golly it's Thursday!"

I just don't buy into all of it and I made myself heard.

I certainly prefer your choice of Fred over Rudy "On 9/11..." Giuliani, as he is not stepping on those killed in 9/11 for his campaign.

Zarqawi was treated at a Baghdad hospital in May of 2002. Contrary to what O'Reilly wildly spewed, he did not have his leg amputated.

As the CIA reported in 2004, "there is no conclusive evidence that Saddam harbored Zarqawi or gave him aid."
Furthermore, The Senate Intelligence Committee would later assert in a September 8, 2006, report that Saddam's "regime did not have a relationship with, harbor, or turn a blind eye toward Zarqawi." The report also noted that "postwar information from an al-Qaeda detainee revealed that Saddam's regime 'considered Zarqawi an outlaw,' and blamed his network, operating in Kurdish-controlled northern-Iraq, for two bombings in Baghdad." (taken from Christian Science Monitor).

Iraq and al-Qaeda were not working together. Zarqawi might have gone to Iraq for medical treatment but he certainly didn't hold any terrorist town hall meetings to gather support, putting it lightly.

At this point Marie, what we should be discussing is how to get out of Iraq. It's not personal but no one on the right can debate the Iraq situation in the decision to invade. It was unjustified and illegal preemptive war, which is an international crime. The facts are simply overwhelming.

To say that we are going to be there for decades is unrealistic. To say also that this country is near independence and is unified is naive and foolish.

I don't know what we should do. We can't pull out tomorrow but then again, we can't pull out 100 years from now.

Other than the drastic decline in violence, I don't see the situation getting any better. They can't take a crap without us showing them where the bathroom is. How are they going to defend themselves WHEN we eventually leave?

January 06, 2008 3:41 PM  
Blogger J_G said...

What we've just witnessed is the standard talking points of the left. Damned the facts and full hate ahead. We hate Bush We hate America, America is always wrong. Same old same old Marie, just as I said. Doesn't matter how much evidence is presented its always going to be George Bush lied because Karl Rove told him too. Ha-ha the more childish the theory the more they agree with them.

January 06, 2008 10:07 PM  
Blogger Marie's Two Cents said...

Fed,

Someone added the "If Fred say's it's beef" thing to the Thompson picture lol

And I never said a darn thing about Zarqowi getting his leg amputated. It was an operation, by why Iraq?

I dont give a hoot what the FBI nor the CIA said. I know what I believe and that is if Zarqowi was in Iraq there was some reason for it and just out of no-where he is head of Al-Queda in Iraq?

Give me a break, you cant possibly be that dense!

No at this point in time we should NOT be talking about getting OUT of Iraq, we still have Troops in Kosovo that Clinton sent there for Pete's sake.

This war isnt over yet.

And we have never Liberated any Country without leaving a base or bases there.

Handing Al-Queda a new terrorist playground isnt gonna happen.

Besides the Troops want to finish the job there so just let them.

It's thier call not ours!


Oh trust me by the time we do pull back and/or leave the Iraqi Military and Navy will be capable of defending themselves.

Have some faith in our Troops would ya?

January 06, 2008 11:17 PM  
Blogger Marie's Two Cents said...

Jenn,

This is truly getting old.

Having to explain the situation over and over again and again.

I dont know where Fed is headed but we gotta elect a President soon and last time I checked Bush wasnt on the ballot lol

January 06, 2008 11:20 PM  
Blogger The Federalist said...

LOL @ J_G "Damned the facts"...I presented nothing but! The difference is that Marie does not care for facts. She relies on what Stephen Colbert coined as "truthiness". That's her choice, she's entitled to that. It's really my issue that I continue to come on here and try to present facts, truth and data when I know that no one wants to hear them! What insanity!

I don't hate America, don't hate Bush and I don't believe that America is always wrong. (nice job in listing the three main right-wing/O'Reilly talking points, though).

January 07, 2008 4:31 AM  
Blogger Marie's Two Cents said...

Federalist,

I appreciate your efforts in trying to get me to go along with this notion that Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11 and the whole thing.

But this has been rehashed and rehashed ya know what I mean?

I know even our own President wont admit Saddam had anything to do with 9-11, but I dont always agree with the administration and on this issue this is one of those times.

President Bush looked at it like, Ok the middle east has gone into mushroom cloud status against the US, who could be the next threat? And he truly thought Saddam, because he was given all this intelligence not only from us, but Britain, Israel, Germany, etc..

They all looked at the same intelligence and so did Congress.

But I looked at the situation like somehow these nutjobs are all connected together, and after looking into it myself I just disagree with my President on this issue.

I know you are trying to present your version of the facts and that's fine, I know you believe all that.

But I am not going to change my mind.

I still think there are more connections out there to 9-11 than anyone has even said yet.

I know for sure there are more people that want to kill us all dead.

And I know for sure we better elect someone that wont treat terrorism as a Police Action anymore. We tried that with Clinton and it didnt work!

That's my main concern, is Terrorism.

You forget I guess or maybe you never knew but I live in Oklahoma City. I know Terrorism first hand. Even though it was homegrown, it was still terrorism.

I was just barely getting over that attack when 9-11 happened.

All the plans for health care, and social security and education and all wont mean a damn thing if we dont have a Country left.

And those that have declared war on us want to make damn sure we dont have one left.

Once we get the terrorism issue under some form of control, then we can think about all these other plans.

We have to put Terrorism and National Security first.

January 07, 2008 10:24 AM  
Blogger The Federalist said...

Well, it's not MY version of the facts Marie. I didn't write the CIA reports, the SIC reports or make the hundreds of U.S. military experts in the Middle East say that Saddam and al-Qaeda were not working together.

But I respect your opinion and your commitment to your "truthiness". After all, Bush did say so many things with so much conviction that it was hard not to go along with him on nearly everything. He could have said that Canada was responsible for 9/11 and people would have believed him!

As you know better than most people, when you're in a state of fear and terror after a terrorist attack, your intellect shuts down and you operate almost entirely on emotion.

In my opinion, that is a dangerous and vulnerable state of mind. It is, however, very convenient for a government pushing for an unnecessary war.

January 08, 2008 4:44 AM  
Blogger Marie's Two Cents said...

Fed,

I know you didnt write the reports, and you probably believe most of them. But if our intelligence failed us, how on earth could a report written on and about the bad intelligence we recieved possibly be correct?

I mean it just doesnt take a genius to find out what happened that day! Hell we all saw most of it on tv!

I jumped up off the couch when the second plane hit the second tower and looked at my drunk as hell father-in-law and said "Holy shit we are under attack" "This has Bin Laden written all over it"!

Naturally that idiot said "Who is Bin Laden"? I dont know why I bring him up but that's all I can remember.

I dont even remember going to work that day. That's how out of it I was, and still till this day cant remember what I did after that.

And I by no means am trying to say anything bad about our government, it's just that for whatever reason they just dont tell us everything. Maybe it's so we dont draw conclusions, or have a Nation wide panic that might make quite a few people go after every Muslim in America even though they are inocent.

I just happen to believe they cant absolutely tie Saddam to the 9-11 attacks and personally I dont believe he had a personal hand in the attacks themselves, but I do believe he gave comfort to the enemy that did attack us and that makes him just as guilty.

Either way he was a pain in the ass of the middle east, caused nothing but problems, quite probably if he would have had nukes he would have used them on us if he could.

Canada lol, now that's funny.

Yes I do remember running entirely on emotion for a long time after The Murrah bombing. I'm only a few blocks from there. I will never forget that NEVER.

I see your point about an unessecary war, but I honest to God truly believe those were not the President's intentions upon entering the White House, for us to go to war.

But you have to study the man himself. Bush is a good man who got extemely upset after we were attacked and I know first hand what emotions he went through.

First he was scared. For himself, his family and his Country. Being shuffled around from place to place by the Secret Service to protect the chain of command, all hell braking loose not knowing exactly where his family was and were they going to be safe knowing planes were still in the air. How many planes were there and were more headed for New York? Washington perhaps? I can crawl into Bush's mind that day truly.

Knowing your Country is under attack is the scariest emotion I can think of, but imagine it happening and YOU are the President. My God.

Then deep deep sorrow set's in, like you are the commander of the best Military in the world, the leader of the free world your Country just got attacked and you dont have a clue what to do. People yelling commands, orders that have to be signed, all while you are in a state of shock.

And all this going on while they are still shuffling him around and trying to find out if the First Lady and children are secure. The Vice President, the chain of command. The Country at this point grinds to a complete halt. First time in History, and you are thinking "This is my watch what should I do, what should I do"?

Then he felt sick to his stomach. And knew he had the most major of decisions to make. Still in the state of shock and horror and sick.

Then he felt guilty, was there anything I could have done to prevent this horrible attack? So now he's feeling sick, shocked, and guilty all while still being shuffled around, just thinking probably quietlt to himself, or if if anyone was talking to him (Which I'm sure they were) they sounded to him as if they were at a distance.

Then the most dangerous of emotions set in, he got pissed. His head started to clear up as soon as he found out all planes had landed, the Pentagon was hit, one went down in a field in Pennsylvania. He looks outside Air Force One and sees fighter jets on either side of the plane escorting him to safety.

I imagine by that time knowing how stubbron that man is he told his Secret Service Detail, I have to make an appearence back at the White House and assure the people that the worst had indeed happened but they still had thier government under control. The Secret Service probably argued with him. not yet Mr. President, we have to secure this and that and whatever, and he probably said NO NOW!

Feeling hurt, guilty, full of sorrow, and pissed as hell, he returns to the White House and addresses the Nation on tv.

Oh he's getting reports of the damage that had been done, and he's looking at intelligence estimates and briefings but he isnt quite seeing them clearly, but he sees them clearly enough just enough to keep it together a little bit and show the Country they have a strong leader and we are now safe. The worst is over. He suddenly becomes all our father.

He is sorrowful and upset for days, he cant sleep, he cant eat, he almost cant get anything done without help from his entire administration who I might add was also in complete shock.

Then he visit's ground zero and seeing what had happened, he pulls the Country together and says "The people who knocked these buildings down will hear from all of us soon"! By then he has intelligence estimates of who was responsible. And knew what he had to do.

Can you imagine having that weight on your shoulders?

So then intelligence reports start pouring in, there is talk of chatter just before the attacks, they have now connected the dots as to who was to blame for this atrocity, and what they couldnt figure out before the attacks happened.

He want's threat assesements from around the world because for the first time since 12-7-1941 we are at war.

First one that pops up according to Britain, Israel, France, Italy, Spain, Germany, etc... Saddam Hussein!

He seemed the likeliest of all threats because he had been saying for years he was going to take out America any way he could. (This is after Afghanistan)

He wreaked havoc on his neighbors before, he had WMD, (God only knows what really happened to it, unless he used it all and it was the biggest hoax of all time to try to keep his neighbors as well as us from attacking him), was still shooting at our planes in the no-fly zones, and was truly a general pain in the ass. He would have been my likely suspect as well. Especially since Bush had actionable intelligence that Zarqowi was in Iraq for a leg operation! It had to have looked like they were tied together, it absolutely had to have looked that way, that's what I would have thought.

President Bush still reelling from the attacks think's to himself we have to stop these sons of bitches before they hit us again!

Maybe that's where things went a bit haywire. I understand his intentions fully, he wanted to protect his Country and his People from being attacked again and that's the only solution he could come up with.

I can look in President Bush's eyes and see if he would have known Saddam was just talking shit, he would have never sent our Troops into harms way over there.
But looking at Saddam's track record, all the intelligence we know now was out of date completely, from all these different Countries, and so on wouldnt you have thought Saddam would have been the most likely to have attacked us next? I would have thought that! I would have thought Saddam and Al-Qaeda were in on something together.

You know, the enemy of my enemy is my friend?

Some say it was unessisary, I dont. If I were President I would have done the same thing.

Only after we enter Iraq and dont find WMD does he get really really pissed. And want's to know all intelligence if it's good or bad he was going to verify it himself!

That's why we have not invaded another Country, because unless that man has on the ground actual intelligence, he will verify it. I imagine through rings and rings of reports and Special Ops, and he just isnt going to do this again because he cant verify it.

So we are in Iraq, it takes alot longer for us to gain control for several different reasons, 1 being my son and his company had to escort the 4th ID down and around through places he cant tell me about just to get them in Country because Turkey wouldnt let us use thier ground or airspace (At First) and changed thier minds later after the fact.

Then there were several mistakes made after that, then the insurgents/terrorists started pouring in from Iran and Syria and at the same time you have a battle brewing between tribes (Shia and Suni), the Iraqi Army get's dismantled, and all hell just completely brakes loose.

So Bush fires Rumsfeld. I loved Rummy but wanted to win the war more. Do you know how many Generals were fired during WW2 until Roosevelt found ones that could win?

So Gates comes in, Patraeus steps up and says the only way to win this is with a surge in Troop strength. Patraeus should know his specialty was counter-insurgency.

Then we battle Congress for money as well as going through with the Troop Surge, as this is going on something dramatic and amazing is taking place, the Iraqi's have 3 elections and have formed a government. Yet they need security to be able to implement what thier government wants to do.

Bush get's his money for the Troops and The Troop surge and then all the sudden..... the surge starts working. The Iraqi civilians are tired of being attacked and start turning in Al-Qaeda left and right, violence drops 90%, Troop casulties drop 90%, the leader of the Sunni's (Sadr) calls a halt to the violence from his supporters.

And in the middle of all this and after all the Troops had been through Harry Reid, John Kerry, John Murtha, and a bunch of other dolts in the Democrat party have the gall to say "The War Is Lost"! Can you imagine what our Troops must have been thinking at that point?

They are winning and these assholes tell them they arent. Code Pink goes to Code Red, Demonstrations happen, one counter demonstration I went to along with J_G, Jennifer in D.C. was the biggest counter demonstration known to date.

We demanded that our Troops be given the chance to win, and come home with the honor, respect, and dignity they deserve.

It paid off. It may have taken some time, but they have won. The greatest Military in the world has defeated the terrorists.

Life is returning back to normal in Iraq, people are streaming home from wherever they fled to, and The Iraqi Government is hard at work getting thier shit together.

There is still alot more to be done before we leave these people, but we are not going to leave these people without a stable Country because if we dont, Al-Qaeda will once again take over and set up a new playground for them to plot and plan against the US again.

Were mistakes made? Yes. Was it worth it? Ask the Soldiers over there training the Iraqi Army, ask the Soldiers over there watching the little Iraqi kids coming home from school while the Soldiers are building a sewage treatment plant.

Ask the Soldiers that are invited to sit down with Iraqi families for dinner, the shop owners who now have thier businesses open and not being blown up every time they open the doors, etc..

Is it totally safe in Iraq? Not Yet. But I see the future for Iraq and it will flourish. And they will be a valuable ally in the War on Terror and a good friend to the US.

I'm rambling, I've had WAYYYYY to much coffee.

January 08, 2008 9:58 AM  
Blogger The Federalist said...

Marie,

How romantic of a story! That's right out of a John Wayne movie!

Fred...ouch!

January 08, 2008 7:43 PM  
Blogger Marie's Two Cents said...

Smartass!!

January 09, 2008 10:12 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

RepublicanGOP.com The Ring of Republican Websites
Ring Owner: Republicans Site: republicangop.com/ - The Ring of Republican Websites
Free Site Ring from Bravenet Free Site Ring from Bravenet Free Site Ring from Bravenet Free Site Ring from Bravenet Free Site Ring from Bravenet
Free Site Ring form Bravenet

Proud Member Of The Alliance

........In Memory Of President Ronald Wilson Reagan....................................................................In Memory Of President Ronald Wilson Reagan........


Click for Harbor City, California Forecast


Click for Carthage, Tennessee Forecast


Click for Dekalb, Illinois Forecast