Comments on: Democrats Denounce Bush's Iraq Plan

Senate Majority Whip Says President "Ignoring" Advice, Urges "Surge Of Diplomacy"

Add a Comment See all 176 Comments
by bluestardad January 11, 2007 11:46 AM EST
Senator Lieberman from Connecticut was even mentioned by President Bush. What an honor. Thank you Connecticut for putting someone like Joe Lieberman in Office. You can look to your election with pride. Why don%u2019t the entire state of Connecticut volunteer to go to Iraq and fight. In fact all the states who%u2019s senators and representatives who support the war should have to send their children to the war effort.
Reply to this comment
by January 11, 2007 11:39 AM EST
hillaryin08 wrote:

"I just cant stand whiny liberals that lurk in the shadows and think this dance has not been done by their own party before and about to do it again. I have no love or hate for Bush."

I can see that you're doing a little whining of your own, so what does that make you?

Admit it - you love GW Bush - that's why you need to defend him so much.

Republicans - lying and being dishonest is about all they are capable of.
Reply to this comment
by January 11, 2007 11:35 AM EST
thgdriver wrote:

"I guess you forgot that it was Slick Willie Clinton that stripped our troops of the armor when he cut defense spending.

If he kept his pants on long enough we would not be in this mess in the first place."

You can blame it all you want on that idiot Clinton, but the fact still remains that this mess is GW Bush's fault.

Clinton may not have been able to keep it in his pants, but GW Bush has done to this country what Clinton did to Monica Lewinsky.

Clinton was an a*s, but GW Bush is ten times worse and a coward as well. He is a prime example of a hypocrite, along with his corrupt buddy Cheney.

They are asking the troops to do what those two coward SOB's refused to do when they were supposed to perform their military service.

And yes, Clinton was a coward too.
Reply to this comment
by antoniof123 January 11, 2007 11:27 AM EST
I have said this before until America as a majority and it must be a real majority steps and and says enough is enough it will continue. The polls guide our congress and with just a little over the majority this is not enough. You have to have a clear majority or nothing will change. The increase will take place. I did not agree with this war we should have stayed in Afghanistan and done the job right but we did not and you can not go back. I know that the Republicans would love to go back but they can not and now have to live with their choices.
Reply to this comment
by bluestardad January 11, 2007 10:55 AM EST
Bush is just trying to buy time untill he can slip out the back door and go to Crawford Texas to play with his little Dicktater!
Reply to this comment
by bluestardad January 11, 2007 10:54 AM EST
Denounce the Plan is not enough. Stop the sending of the Troops. Revoke the Authorization to go to war in Iraq and Cut off Funding now!
Reply to this comment
by luvny-2009 January 11, 2007 10:21 AM EST
He said that "to step back now would force a collapse of the Iraqi government, tear that country apart and result in mass killings on an unimaginable scale."

Um hello that's what is going to happen anyway, Dumbya's new plan is just a bandaid, it will help for as long as we are there. He's just finding a way to make it look like it was not his fault. He will then blame Iraq!
Reply to this comment
by hillaryin08 January 11, 2007 9:49 AM EST
Interesting point DRinUK. You forgot our Liberal saviour Bill Clinton. Actually, those guys would be a liability out here.

So hows the weather over there? Just wanted to tell you your boys in Afghanistan are doing an outstanding job here. Worked with them in the big Sand Box also. Good dudes.......
Reply to this comment
by drinuk January 11, 2007 9:42 AM EST
I feel that impeachment is a forlorn dream, what should happen is that Bush, Blair, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Rove and the rest of their crew should be shipped to Iraq and forced to patrol each day around the worst areas. No extra security, no favours and nothing more than the lads have on offer. There they can have real infuence. Gordon Brown, the new UK saviour should be included too, be a good way to get rid of him too.
Reply to this comment
by hillaryin08 January 11, 2007 9:39 AM EST
Hey DRinUK, good to see your call sign up here again. Drink a pint for me brother. It will be another 5 months before I get some.

No, just got back from another patrol. You know, the whole freedom and democracy thing. I just cant stand whiny liberals that lurk in the shadows and think this dance has not been done by their own party before and about to do it again. I have no love or hate for Bush.
Reply to this comment
by drinuk January 11, 2007 9:33 AM EST
Hillary, you back again ! Thought you'd had enough yesterday but I suppose you've got to do Jnr's bidding again, just how "Thick" are you.
Reply to this comment
by hillaryin08 January 11, 2007 9:27 AM EST
Democrats Denounce Bush's Iraq Plan? Gee now there is news................................. I'm sure the enemy denounces the plan too.

RandalDS, you are the bigest coward on this blog. You would never pick up a rifle and stand for anything regardless of the situation anyways.
Reply to this comment
by dallison7 January 11, 2007 7:15 AM EST
You are correct, educates, there seems to be no alternative to impeachment if we are to save America. I kept hoping Bush would listen to reason, especially when the elder statesmen in the study group spoke, no such luck. This traitor must answer for his treason. Surely there can be no higher crime committed by a commander-in-chief than to lie to the people and the congress for the purpose of taking our young people into an unjust war.
Reply to this comment
by educates January 11, 2007 6:28 AM EST
Name calling is very unproductive. Please use facts to support your arguments not ***. People actually read these blogs and we don't care about you
r personal peeves with one another. The gravity of the situation demands impeachment. We are on the wrong course. No more dead soldiers. No more Bush/Saudi, Halliburton, Bechtel. No more troops.
Go Kennedy. Go Pelosi.
Reply to this comment
by destardi2 January 11, 2007 6:03 AM EST
Fascism is blocking public access from viewing who visits a Citizen owned building, aka The White House. In all of our country's history, why now SPARE ME THE "national security" ***.

And to the idiot talking about liberals "scaring all the kids," man what the heck are you talking about? The only people trying scare anyone are the neo-conservatives, with all the terrorist talk.

Talk about "walking in a man's shoes" Why the heck do you think everyone is against America, and not Iceland, or Italy? BECAUSE OF POLICIES that YOU as an American do not SEE in effect.

Attacking a country that had nothing to do with 9/11, BUT GIVING CONTROL OVER to a GOVERNMENT OWNED UNITED ARAB EMIRATES COMPANY TO POLICE OUR PORTS...THAT makes sense?

You "new" republican rabid bush supporters are either dumb as a rock, or blind as a bat.
Reply to this comment
by kstrisha January 11, 2007 5:29 AM EST
Quote:

Article 110 appears to deal with the inequities that may result from this arrangement: "The central government administers oil and gas extracted from current wells, along with governments of the producing regions and provinces, on the condition that revenues are distributed in a way that suits population distribution around the country."

But take a closer look at the beginning of that sentence: The article applies to oil and gas extracted from "current wells"%u2014not from wells to be tapped in the future. There is also something odd about the assurance that revenues from current wells will be "distributed in a way that suits population distribution." It would be useful to know if "suits" is a poor translation or a deliberate ambiguity.

http://www.slate.com/id/2124893/
Reply to this comment
by randalds January 11, 2007 5:05 AM EST
Opps....2000
Reply to this comment
by randalds January 11, 2007 5:04 AM EST
Revolution? Let's try voting. Thats a novel process used to select people we want in power.
Posted by Drsweener at 02:01 AM : Jan 11, 2007

Didn't work in 2001. The man with the most votes lost. Didn't work in 2004 either when many people were stopped from voting through manipulation of the polls and polling places.
Reply to this comment
by drsweener January 11, 2007 5:01 AM EST
Revolution? Let's try voting. Thats a novel process used to select people we want in power.
Reply to this comment
by randalds January 11, 2007 4:50 AM EST
Opps, missed the corporate profit one. That'd be Haliburton, Bechtel and every major oil company. All of whom have made huge profits in this war started by their puppet Bush.
Reply to this comment
See all 176 Comments

Exclusive Webshow

International recording artist Shakira on love, career and more. Watch Now

  • MOST POPULAR
Latest News
News in Pictures
Scroll Left Scroll Right
Connect with CBS News

Stay connected with the CBS News using your favorite social networks and online news applications: