Liberal Forum

Look who's back from exile. But the funny thing is he hasn't learned a single thing in all this time away from the forum.

Sad, more than funny. And the pig calls another poster partisan - contards are inevitably veritable FOUNTAINS of irony.

There are more vacancies on the federal courts now than when Obama took office nearly four years ago. And he is the first president in generations to fail to put a nominee on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, the second most influential court in the land and traditionally a training ground for Supreme Court justices.http://www.washingto...8036_story.htmlThere are four vacancies on the D.C. Circuit court. The nomination of Sri Srinivasan, Obamas deputy solicitor general, has not yet gotten a vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee. In his first term, Obama did not get a single nominee onto the court. Overall, eighteen of Obamas judicial nominees are currently awaiting confirmation.http://www.washingto...gan-nomination/In 2005, the phrase 'up or down vote' was heard most often from Republicans in the United States, who occupied 55 seats in the United States Senate, and thus lacked the 60 votes required to overcome a filibuster maneuver by the Democratic Senators.If the Republicans were able to bring any particular matter to an 'up or down vote', they would be able to approve that measure if voting as a bloc.To this end, many Republican-affiliated websites and political action committees had urged voters to demand of their Senators and Representatives an 'up or down vote' on various issues.

The big lies of the Iraq war were not the faulty intelligence about weapons of mass destruction or the fabricated link between Saddam and 9/11. More serious were the infantile fantasies promoted by the Bush Administration and their supporters that the war would be a "cake walk." They argued that it would require less than 100,000 troops, take less than six days to win, cost at most one to two billion dollars (before Iraqi oil revenues kicked in to pick up the rest of the tab), and it would all be over in six months. It was a delusional apocalyptic vision -- projecting that out of the destruction of the old, a new order would rise. We were told that the dictator would fall and we would be greeted as liberators "with flowers in the street." Democracy would take hold and Iraq would become the "beacon of freedom for the Middle East." For good measure, they even predicted that regime change in Iraq would help solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict ("the road to Jerusalem must pass through Baghdad"). Guided more by ideology than reality, the Bush Administration's veterans of the Project for a New American Century believed that a show of decisive force in Iraq would make us stronger, securing America's global hegemony for the next century. The tragic irony of this failed war, of course, is that it left our country less respected, compromised our values and our standing across the world, over-stretched our military resources, emboldened our enemies, created openings for other nations to exert their influence and, in the end, left America more vulnerable. James Zogby

The British report was true, moonbat.And it was the French who insisted that the aluminum tubes were meant for centrifuges. There was a heated debate about that, with US intelligence officials on both sides.How typically dishonest of you that you'd claim that Bush lied.From post #2903:New evidence: CIA and MI6 were told before invasion that Iraq had no active WMDFresh evidence is revealed today about how MI6 and the CIA were told through secret channels by Saddam Husseins foreign minister and his head of intelligence that Iraq had no active weapons of mass destruction.Tony Blair told parliament before the war that intelligence showed Iraqs nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons programme was active, growing and up and running.A special BBC Panorama programme tonight will reveal how British and US intelligence agencies were informed by top sources months before the invasion that Iraq had no active WMD programme, and that the information was not passed to subsequent inquiries.It describes how Naji Sabri, Saddams foreign minister, told the CIAs station chief in Paris at the time, Bill Murray, through an intermediary that Iraq had virtually nothing in terms of WMD.Sabri said in a statement that the Panorama story was totally fabricated.However, Panorama confirms that three months before the war an MI6 officer met Iraqs head of intelligence, Tahir Habbush al-Tikriti, who also said that Saddam had no active WMD. The meeting in the Jordanian capital, Amman, took place days before the British government published its now widely discredited Iraqi weapons dossier in September 2002.Lord Butler, the former cabinet secretary who led an inquiry into the use of intelligence in the runup to the invasion of Iraq, tells the programme that he was not told about Sabris comments, and that he should have been.Butler says of the use of intelligence: There were ways in which people were misled or misled themselves at all stages.When it was suggested to him that the body that probably felt most misled of all was the British public, Butler replied: Yes, I think theyre, theyre, they got every reason think that.The programme shows how the then chief of MI6, Sir Richard Dearlove, responded to information from Iraqi sources later acknowledged to be unreliable.One unidentified MI6 officer has told the Chilcot inquiry that at one stage information was being torn off the teleprinter and rushed across to Number 10″.Another said it was wishful thinking (that) promised the crock of gold at the end of the rainbow.The programme says that MI6 stood by claims that Iraq was buying uranium from Niger, though these were dismissed by other intelligence agencies, including the French.It also shows how claims by Iraqis were treated seriously by elements in MI6 and the CIA even after they were exposed as fabricated including claims, notably about alleged mobile biological warfare containers, made by Rafid Ahmed Alwan al-Janabi, a German source codenamed Curveball. He admitted to the Guardian in 2011 that all the information he gave to the west was fabricated.Panorama says it asked for an interview with Blair but he said he was too busy.

Go ahead, tell your usual blatant lies. Because you're a deceitful partisan hack. How typically dishonest of you Ya think you would have at least learned some new catch phrases while you had all this time away from the forum...but nooooooooooooooo. Same old nonsense.

Ya think you would have at least learned some new catch phrases while you had all this time away from the forum...but nooooooooooooooo.Same old nonsense.I'm pretty sure it's some sort of Tourette's.I despise you....dishonest partisan hack, Missy Poo, shrieking hysteric and deceitful Clinton toady, coward, fawning, groveling toady and partisan liar, shrieking hysteric Missy Poo, dishonest, Hard Left, fawning toady Missy Poo, deceitful propaganda artist, dishonest coward, Hard Left shrieker, hysteric Missy Poo, complete and utter hack, deceitful partisan toady, Left wing twit, Hard Left hysteric and Clinton toady Missy Poo, comically stupid, freaking loon, liar, deceitful hack, wackjob, shrieking hysterical loon, foolish fringe left wackjob, resident hysteric Missy Poo, fawning brainless toady, fawning, groveling Clinton toady, despicable, deceitful, fawning toady, fawning, groveling toady, deceitful partisan hack, fawning partisan toady, dishonest Hard Leftist, deceitful Hard Left hack, shrieking hysteric, lying twit, deceitful partisan toady, despicable partisan hack and a liar, paranoid wackjob Left Winger, propagandist, deceitful troll, deceitful propaganda artist, dishonest partisan, freaking liar, fawning Obama toady, lying troll, heap of trash, brainless twit, one-sided Propaganda from a Hard Left wackjob, Left wing wack job, dumb as a post, I don't like you. I don't like your ideas, foolish fringe left wackjob, Silly twit, deceitful partisan hack, freaking cement head, needs a brain transplant, very, very low character, Take a freaking valium, you twit, Get stuffed, you silly twit. Stupid, ignorant twit.Shameless harlot! stupid, dissembling troll.I don't like your wackjob Hard Left philosophy. I don't like your ugly lies.I don't like you.

The British report was true, moonbat. And it was the French who insisted that the aluminum tubes were meant for centrifuges. There was a heated debate about that, with US intelligence officials on both sides. How typically dishonest of you that you'd claim that Bush lied. From post #2903: New evidence: CIA and MI6 were told before invasion that Iraq had no active WMD.... It describes how Naji Sabri, Saddams foreign minister, told the CIAs station chief in Paris at the time, Bill Murray, through an intermediary that Iraq had virtually nothing in terms of WMD. How typical. When almost every informed person in the US government, including both Clintons and his cabinet, and every US intelligence agencies accepted the premise that Hussein had WMD's as did every major foreign intelligence agency, including those of countries that opposed the war, you believe Saddam Hussein's foreign minister and on that basis call Bush a liar? Words to not suffice. That's why I use the term "moonbat" for you and your ilk.

How typical. When almost every informed person in the US government, including both Clintons and his cabinet, and every US intelligence agencies accepted the premise that Hussein had WMD's as did every major foreign intelligence agency, including those of countries that opposed the war, you believe Saddam Hussein's foreign minister and on that basis call Bush a liar? Words to not suffice. That's why I use the term "moonbat" for you and your ilk. So, trick enough people and the lie becomes real? Tha rather reminds one of - dare I say it? - Hitler.

So, trick enough people and the lie becomes real?Tha rather reminds one of - dare I say it? - Hitler.Ha, ha, ha, more psychotic babbling from the resident lunatic.Here, read the words again. Almost everyone pertinent in government HONESTLY believed that Saddam Hussein had WMD's.Honestly believed,duuuh.When almost every informed person in the US government, including both Clintons and his cabinet, and every US intelligence agencies accepted the premise that Hussein had WMD's as did every major foreign intelligence agency, including those of countries that opposed the war, you believe Saddam Hussein's foreign minister and on that basis call Bush a liar?

I honestly believe you're an idiot and an apologist for crimes against humanity, Glory Hole.

Ha, ha, ha, more psychotic babbling from the resident lunatic. Here, read the words again. Almost everyone pertinent in government HONESTLY believed that Saddam Hussein had WMD's. Honestly believed,duuuh. Some of them honestly hyped the intelligence to back it up, too.

I honestly believe you're an idiot and an apologist for crimes against humanity, Glory Hole.Having a problem with clear English again, psycho?Almost every informed person in the US government, including both Clintons and his cabinet, and every US intelligence agencies accepted the premise that Hussein had WMD's as did every major foreign intelligence agency, including those of countries that opposed the war

Running away? Try again. Pretty sure if I had to gamble a million dollars on any argument (government spending, monetary policy, environmental regulations, etc.), I'd go with FAIR. And chances are, I'd come out a lot richer. Since you obviously did not read the article, FAIR cited comprehensive studies (that accounted for variations like race, socioeconomic status, etc.) from the WSJ, Economic Policy Institute, and the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, none of which showed any improvements from vouchers. Correct. They would cut spending as much as possible, so children could have a 3rd rate education. The last thing I would want is to see the education system turn into a profitable market. Microsoft has been hit with lawsuits over its oligopolistic control across the world, in http://lmgtfy.com/?q...opoly lawsuits'>quite a few continents already.I'd take the words of a SEC spokesperson or a foreign regulatory agency over those of a blowhard like yourself any day.

Here, I'll help with the epidemic of "RWFM"3/4ths of Senate GOP Doesn't Believe in Science -- When Did Republicans Go Completely Off the Deep End?The Tea Party and its allies had made it unacceptable to the GOP base to be anywhere except pandering to the anti-science crowd.March 22, 2011 | Photo Credit: AXEL SCHMIDT/AFP LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?Join our mailing list:Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Environment headlines via email. TAKE ACTIONPetitions by Change.org|Get Widget|Start a Petition � Youve got to go back to the Scopes Monkey Trial of 1925 for a precedent to the anti-science mania that is currently sweeping the GOP. Then, the issue was teaching Darwins work on evolution in the schools. Today, the issue is global warming. Then, as now, large numbers of politicians tapped into the stratum of popular culture that simply rejects science as the basis for public or personal decisions. The chief prosecutor of high school teacher John Scopes, William Jennings Bryan, gloated that literal interpretation of the Bible trumped scientific knowledge. This resonated with large masses of ordinary folks, the ones H. L. Mencken and the liberal press were calling yokels and morons.Turns out the yokels and morons won, at least for a generation. Scopes was found guilty of violating the Tennessee law that prohibited teaching evolution, and his conviction (though later overturned on a technicality) galvanized the anti-evolution movement for years. Politicians came pouring in. Scores of resolutions were introduced in state legislatures and school boards all over the country, setting back the teaching of evolution for decades until logic and reason and the scientific method gradually reasserted themselves in the culture.Today, Republicans are falling over themselves in a rush to ridicule the science that shows our use of fossil fuels is producing greenhouse gases that are warming the planet to disastrous levels. These findings were confirmed even by the Bush administration before it left office, as well as by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and every other significant scientific academy around the world, not to mention the unpaid global work of hundreds of volunteer scientists for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.But anti-scientists are undaunted by facts. More than half of the incoming Republican caucus denies the validity of climate change science. Some 74 percent of Republicans in the U.S. Senate now take that stance, as do 53 percent of GOP in the House. Heres a sampler of what some of their leading illuminati have to say about it:I personally believe that the solar flares are more responsible for climatic cycles than anything that human beings do. Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, WisconsinNobody really knows the cause. The earth cools, the earth warms It could be caused by carbon dioxide or methane. Maybe we should kill the cows to stop the methane, or stop breathing to stop the CO2 Thousands of people die every year of cold, so if we had global warming it would save lives We ought to look out for people. The earth can take care of itself. Rep. Duncan Hunter, CaliforniaThere was a report a couple of weeks ago that in fact you look at this last year, it was the warmest year in the last decade, I think was the numbers that came out. I dont I accept that. I do not say that it is man-made. Rep. Fred Upton, MichiganThe greatest hoax ever perpetuated on the American people. Sen. James Inhofe, OklahomaRep. John Shimkus of Illinois says we need not worry about the planet being destroyed because, citing chapter 8, verse 22 of the Book of Genesis, God promised Noah it wouldnt happen again after the great flood.Sen. John McCain co-authored a good global warming bill when running for president in 2008. But he did a 180-degree turnabout when running for re-election to Arizonas Senate seat two years later, suddenly saying, Theres great questions about it that need to be resolved.What happened?The Tea Party and its allies had made it unacceptable to the GOP base to be anywhere except pandering to the anti-science crowd.None of this would have surprised historian Richard Hofstadter, who won a Pulitzer in 1964 for his book Anti-Intellectualism in American Life. Starting with the colonies, Hofstadter shows how the vast underlying stratum of anti-elite, anti-reason, anti-science Americans has frequently erupted into political and cultural action. These are folks who never heard of the Enlightenment of the 18th century, and do not experience a lot of reason, logic or the empirical method in their daily lives. They live by common sense, personal relationships and superstition. They have always been with us, and there are a lot of them.Their outburst into todays anti-science global warming mania would just be the latest chapter in Hofstadters book.You might think that the revolution of Internet-blogging-networking technology would work to spread sound scientific knowledge more broadly, but you would be wrong. The new technology spreads a cacophony of voices in which the pre-Enlightenment folks are not only equal but more numerous and dominant than the voices of reason.Journalist Charles Pierce not long ago wrote an essay on Idiot America, followed by a book of that name, in which he argued that the rise of Idiot America today represents for profit mainly, but also, and more cynically, for political advantage and in the pursuit of power the breakdown of a consensus that the pursuit of knowledge is a good. It also represents the ascendancy of the notion that the people whom we should trust the least are the people who best know what theyre talking about. In the new media age, everybody is a historian, or a preacher, or a scientist, or a sage. And if everyone is an expert, then nobody is, and the worst thing you can be in a society where everybody is an expert is, well, an actual expert.Moreover, the new technology is not working alone. You have the likes of oil interests such as Koch Industries and Exxon Mobil funding a phalanx of anti-science spokesmen, think tanks and lobbyists. They put their money into sowing doubt about the scientific consensus, as many of these same people did on tobacco, ozone and acid rain, playing on the fact that the way science works is to set up repeated challenges of the evidence by peers but ignoring that scientific consensuses do indeed exist otherwise, we would not have made the progress we did on tobacco, ozone and acid rain.Sheltered by the technological cacophony and the big money available, politicians feel unashamed to stand in front of the National Academy of Sciences and virtually every climate scientist in the world and utter irrational things like God promised Noah , or solar flares, or nobody really knows, not man-made or hoax.[The deniers] goal is to create the perception that fundamental aspects of climate science are controversial, write several scientists connected to the National Academy. They are not.All their claims, all the studies cited and all the evidence they have presented has been thoroughly reviewed by climate scientists. There is no scientific basis for contesting the academys finding.We are in Tennessee again, 1925, in the grip of the anti-scientists and their politicians. We will lose a generation in dealing with greenhouse gases. Yet the science says we have only a few years.

Here, I'll help with the epidemic of "RWFM"They actually embrace ignorance.

Republican Presidential Candidate Herman Cain: "I Would Not" Appoint A Muslim In My Administration.ThinkProgress filed this report from the Conservative Principles Conference in Des Moines, IA.As the Republican presidential nomination process begins, one GOP candidate is making a name for himself as the Islamophobia candidate: Herman Cain.Earlier this week, Cain gave an interview to Christianity Today in which he declared that, based upon the little knowledge that I have of the Muslim religion, you know, they have an objective to convert all infidels or kill them.ThinkProgress caught up with the former CEO of Godfathers Pizza today at the Conservative Principles Conference in Des Moines, Iowa, to discuss his comments further. We asked him, in light of his statements on Islam, would he be comfortable appointing any Muslims in his administration. Rather than skirting the question or hedging his answer, as most presidential aspirants are wont to do, Cain was definitive: No, I would not."KEYES: You came under a bit of controversy this week for some of the comments made about Muslims in general. Would you be comfortable appointing a Muslim, either in your cabinet or as a federal judge?CAIN: No, I would not. And heres why. There is this creeping attempt, there is this attempt to gradually ease Sharia law and the Muslim faith into our government. It does not belong in our government. This is what happened in Europe. And little by little, to try and be politically correct, they made this little change, they made this little change. And now theyve got a social problem that they dont know what to do with hardly.The question that was asked that raised some questions and, as my grandfather said, I does not care, I feel the way I feel. I was asked, what is the role of Islam in America? I thought it was an odd question. I said the role of Islam in America is for those that believe in Islam to practice it and leave us alone. Just like Christianity. We have a First Amendment. And I get upset when the Muslims in this country, some of them, try to force their Sharia law onto the rest of us.Watch the video here.The only attempts I've seen to ease a faith into our government have been from people who call themselves Christians.Herman Cain won the straw poll at the Conservative Principles Conference in Iowa.

Ohio House Passes Nations Most Restrictive Voter ID Law That Would Curb Rights Of Almost 900,000 Ohioans In 22 states across the country, Republican lawmakers are ginning up the specter of voter fraud to pass highly restrictive photo identification laws that would severely restrict the voting rights of millions. But yesterday, the Republicans in the Ohio House secured passage of what could become the nations most restrictive voter identification law. In just eight days, House Republicans hustled through HB 159, a bill that would require voters to show one of five forms of ID to vote in person: an Ohio drivers license, state ID, military ID, U.S. passport, or a new, free photo ID that State Bureau of Motor Vehicles would dispense to indigent citizens who qualify. Currently, voters must show a photo ID or present a utility bill, bank statement, paycheck or government document with a current name and address. Unlike other states photo ID laws, HB 159 would not even allow students to use IDs issued by state colleges. The bill sponsor, state Rep. Bob Mecklenborg [R] said the bill is necessary to combat voter fraud and the perception of fraud. But after failing to produce any actual evidence of such voter fraud, Meklenborg defended his theory with the inexorable proof that I believe it happens and its impossible to prove a negative:While Republicans produced no evidence of voter fraud from impersonation, Mecklenborg and other GOP leaders say they believe it is going on unreported. I believe it happens, but its proving a negative, Mecklenborg told reporters after the vote. Its impossible to prove a negative. How do you prove that fraud doesnt exist there?However, Cuyahoga County Board of Elections head Jane Platten, a Democrat, said she has never seen a case of voter impersonation in the seven years she has been with the local elections board.Despite his belief, representatives from the Board of Elections, the League of Women Voters, and the former Secretary of State office have never even heard of one instance of voter impersonation in Ohio. As the Brennan Center for Justice notes, a statewide survey found four instances of ineligible persons voting or attempting to vote in 2002 and 2004 out of 9,078,728 votes case a rate of 0.00004%. However, bills like HB 159 stands to severely restrict or exclude millions (at least 12%) of Americas voting population, most notably seniors, the disabled, low-income voters, students, and people of color. As Ohio Democrats noted, an estimated 890,000 voting age Ohioans do not currently have a government-issued photo ID, including significant numbers of blacks and people older than 65. Whats more, the GOP bill would actually cost the state up to $20 million to implement.The Toledo Blade called the bill a ruse thats true intent seems to be to make it harder for some Ohioans to vote and is correctly called the 21st-century equivalent of a poll tax. If [the bill] were supported by any evidence of election-day fraud, then I could understand the legitimacy of our conversation, said Rep. Dennis Murray (D-OH). But the complete absence of evidence means the legislation is gasoline on the fire of elitist prejudice. The bill now heads to the GOP-led Ohio Senate. Update Yesterday, the Texas House passed a similarly restrictive voter ID bill to "curb voter fraud." Noting that there has been "just one case of convicted voter impersonation" since 2002, House Democrats argued that the bill is "about disenfranchising groups of people who do not historically vote for the Republican Party" -- such as "minorities and the elderly." Though Democrats managed to kill voter ID legislation the past two sessions, the bill passed 101-48. Both chambers "were tasked by Gov. Rick Perry with making voter ID legislation a priority." LinkSo the bill's sponsor, state Rep. Bob Mecklenborg can't cite a single case of voter fraud, but he 'believes' it happens. And on that belief alone he's willing to disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of voters including seniors, the disabled, low-income voters, students, and people of color, and spend $20 million to do so, while Ohio has an $8 billion deficit.

Avenger_of_Justice, on 28 March 2011 - 11:02 PM, said: Here, I'll help with the epidemic of "RWFM"They actually embrace ignorance.How's that roaring Obama Economy going with its 11.5% real unemployment rate?Your entire side is hopelessly ignorant of Economics and business.

Weekly Standard Publishes Hagiography To Koch Brothers, Doesnt Disclose Financial Ties To Kochs The Weekly Standards Matt Continetti, a writer who gained fame defending Sarah Palin from public scrutiny, has a new article blasting critics of Koch Industries and its billionaire owners, David and Charles Koch. Continetti traveled to Kochs headquarters in Wichita, gained unprecedented access to the brothers, as well as their top executives, and came away with nothing but praise for the company and its peerless role in financing right-wing front groups. In over 8,000 words of hagiography, Continetti did not find space to disclose that his fellow opinion editor at the Weekly Standard, Michael Goldfarb, is currently employed by Koch Industries to help improve the companys political image. Or that the Weekly Standards reporters routinely attend Kochs secret political strategy and fundraising meetings. Or that Continetti had received a fellowship funded by the Phillips Foundation, a nonprofit heavily reliant on Koch funds. Or that the Weekly Standard is owned by billionaire Phil Anschutz, a friend of the Koch brothers and an attendee of Koch donor events.Read moreI guess when you have over 80 billion dollars you can buy all the good publicity you want.