Can anyone please explain to me why Harry Reid is a big pink weenie-boy?
What is this bizarre trend of Democrats in the House to morph into leg humping bush supporters? When my dog does that I smack him with a rolled up newspaper. Oh that I could be closer to Washington DC. All of those newstands! Where are my brothers and sisters in heart and mind? YO, D.C.!, grab the next Washington Post or WSJ, roll it up, and go visit our elected officials. PLEASE. A few hollow, resounding brisk taps about the nose and forehead may do the trick. It's at least worth a try, isn't it? Nothing else seems to be working.
Our calls, letters and emails don't seem to be getting the point across. Our thousands of protests and marches are getting about as much attention in DC as they are in the corporate media. Precisely ZIP.
We have entered the age of government breaking off from the people and then promptly ignoring them, while feeding off of them. It's not working for me. How are you doing with it?
Mr. Reid, since you so aptly aped Mr. Bush's nonsensical diatribe that "we must prevail in Iraq. The mission must succeed. Too much is at stake.", then would you be so kind as to explain why you believe this? To just pronounce it to be your opinion is in no way the equivalent of having a reason for taking this position. I am not interested in your opinion sir, I am interested in your reasons.
WHY do you believe this to be true?
While we're having this chat, could you also let us all know what exactly the "mission" is? You would be surprised to find out how very few people have a clue what the mission is. I don't personally know a single soul who can answer that question.
Also, what is it that is at stake? If it all boils down to "face" then you're wasting everyone's time. America no longer has face to save thanks to our fearless leader and king, president chimply. We've spent hundreds of billions of future dollars to dig ourselves deeply into the pickle of all time. Now we sit there, surrounded by angry arabs who want us to leave please. They are so polite. At least they were for the first couple of years but their patience has all but run out. They don't want us there. We don't want us there. But you and mr chimply keep spouting your little diatribe about needing to complete the mission successfully. Again, the parameters of which are clear only to you.
Could it be that you are keeping something from us? Could it be that there is something going on here that has nothing whatsoever to do with what we've been told are the reasons for our invasion of Iraq? As little as you may like it sir, you need to cough it up. We darn well deserve to know what you folks are really up to.
As I see it, there is no conceivable reason for us to be in the middle east. Zero. Zip. Most of the middle least would agree with that. Most of the planet agrees with that. Only you and the bush administration stand alone pounding your little pink fists on your expensive mahogany podiums, claiming we're un-American troop hating flag burners because we don't want to stay in Iraq like you do.
Exsqueeze me Mr. Reid, but who's the real twit around here? The whole planet? Or the handful of no-war-experience-politicians who want to be at war, and now want to increase the size of the military, and send tens of thousands more troops abroad? Is it everybody else or is it you guys? It's you guys. That's what the odds say. Only a politician could try to spin something like, "sending thirty thousand more troops to Iraq will bring them all home". No Harry. It won't. It will send more troops abroad. If you can't even get that much straight, we are really in a load of trouble.
The president's Homeland Security forces are driving us up the wall. THOSE people haven't even gotten step one of their jobs down pat. They can't tell the difference between terrorists and citizens. Their whole strategy is to convict the whole planet as terror suspects and when it turns out they finally torture someone long enough to figure out they're just regular people, then they let them go. This may work for them, but it does not work for anyone else. REAL security people do their jobs without anyone even noticing them. That allows the rest of us to go on living our lives normally. So the strategy of ruining everything for everyone is just a crappy strategy, it's one I don't respect and frankly, I don't think the bushy folks are qualified for this job.
Which leads me to believe that bush's Iraq strategy is likely to be just as obtuse, backwards, and repressive. I think you should know sir, that WAR is not a democratic experience. So, unless you can explain to everyone a)WHAT the darn mission is, b) WHY it's so important to succeed, c) WHAT you're defining success to be, and d) WHY you think it's required - not justified but absolutely required to send 30,000 more Americans to Iraq, then understand this: you're not making a damn bit of sense. I don't respect that. I can't even take you seriously. You're acting like a pod person.
What is this bizarre trend of Democrats in the House to morph into leg humping bush supporters? When my dog does that I smack him with a rolled up newspaper. Oh that I could be closer to Washington DC. All of those newstands! Where are my brothers and sisters in heart and mind? YO, D.C.!, grab the next Washington Post or WSJ, roll it up, and go visit our elected officials. PLEASE. A few hollow, resounding brisk taps about the nose and forehead may do the trick. It's at least worth a try, isn't it? Nothing else seems to be working.
Our calls, letters and emails don't seem to be getting the point across. Our thousands of protests and marches are getting about as much attention in DC as they are in the corporate media. Precisely ZIP.
We have entered the age of government breaking off from the people and then promptly ignoring them, while feeding off of them. It's not working for me. How are you doing with it?
Mr. Reid, since you so aptly aped Mr. Bush's nonsensical diatribe that "we must prevail in Iraq. The mission must succeed. Too much is at stake.", then would you be so kind as to explain why you believe this? To just pronounce it to be your opinion is in no way the equivalent of having a reason for taking this position. I am not interested in your opinion sir, I am interested in your reasons.
WHY do you believe this to be true?
While we're having this chat, could you also let us all know what exactly the "mission" is? You would be surprised to find out how very few people have a clue what the mission is. I don't personally know a single soul who can answer that question.
Also, what is it that is at stake? If it all boils down to "face" then you're wasting everyone's time. America no longer has face to save thanks to our fearless leader and king, president chimply. We've spent hundreds of billions of future dollars to dig ourselves deeply into the pickle of all time. Now we sit there, surrounded by angry arabs who want us to leave please. They are so polite. At least they were for the first couple of years but their patience has all but run out. They don't want us there. We don't want us there. But you and mr chimply keep spouting your little diatribe about needing to complete the mission successfully. Again, the parameters of which are clear only to you.
Could it be that you are keeping something from us? Could it be that there is something going on here that has nothing whatsoever to do with what we've been told are the reasons for our invasion of Iraq? As little as you may like it sir, you need to cough it up. We darn well deserve to know what you folks are really up to.
As I see it, there is no conceivable reason for us to be in the middle east. Zero. Zip. Most of the middle least would agree with that. Most of the planet agrees with that. Only you and the bush administration stand alone pounding your little pink fists on your expensive mahogany podiums, claiming we're un-American troop hating flag burners because we don't want to stay in Iraq like you do.
Exsqueeze me Mr. Reid, but who's the real twit around here? The whole planet? Or the handful of no-war-experience-politicians who want to be at war, and now want to increase the size of the military, and send tens of thousands more troops abroad? Is it everybody else or is it you guys? It's you guys. That's what the odds say. Only a politician could try to spin something like, "sending thirty thousand more troops to Iraq will bring them all home". No Harry. It won't. It will send more troops abroad. If you can't even get that much straight, we are really in a load of trouble.
The president's Homeland Security forces are driving us up the wall. THOSE people haven't even gotten step one of their jobs down pat. They can't tell the difference between terrorists and citizens. Their whole strategy is to convict the whole planet as terror suspects and when it turns out they finally torture someone long enough to figure out they're just regular people, then they let them go. This may work for them, but it does not work for anyone else. REAL security people do their jobs without anyone even noticing them. That allows the rest of us to go on living our lives normally. So the strategy of ruining everything for everyone is just a crappy strategy, it's one I don't respect and frankly, I don't think the bushy folks are qualified for this job.
Which leads me to believe that bush's Iraq strategy is likely to be just as obtuse, backwards, and repressive. I think you should know sir, that WAR is not a democratic experience. So, unless you can explain to everyone a)WHAT the darn mission is, b) WHY it's so important to succeed, c) WHAT you're defining success to be, and d) WHY you think it's required - not justified but absolutely required to send 30,000 more Americans to Iraq, then understand this: you're not making a damn bit of sense. I don't respect that. I can't even take you seriously. You're acting like a pod person.
Posts
"Un-American troop hating flag burners"
ReplyDeleteThat's un-American, gay-marrying, Terri-Schiavo-killing fetus-eating flag burners!
Somebody get me a rolled up newspaper!