Home > Uncategorized > Colin Powell: The Man Who Should Have Been President

Colin Powell: The Man Who Should Have Been President

I have some homework for everyone, please. Here’s the opening to an article in today’s London Times about Colin Powell and what seems to be happening in Iraq. As the article makes clear, Powell tried his best to persuade President Bush not to invade and even eventually fell on his sword by going to the United Nations and giving that silly speech on WMDs.

The one ray of hope for me in all this remains Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, a breath of fresh air after Rumsfeld. He seems to be intent on building bi-partisan consensus on what to do now with this mess. Gates and Powell are the two we sohuld be listening to, not Cheney and the neo-cons. See what you think.

Ona personal note, I just want to publicly welcome Matt Donovan back to KVEC and Hometown Radio. Matt was our production chief a few years ago and now he’s back to produce the show. He started on Thursday and I think he’s doing a great job. We all know he has big shoes to fill, but I know Matt will be just fine.

Here’s the Times analysis:

“The former American secretary of state Colin Powell has revealed that he spent 2½ hours vainly trying to persuade President George W Bush not to invade Iraq and believes today’s conflict cannot be resolved by US forces.

“I tried to avoid this war,” Powell said at the Aspen Ideas Festival in Colorado. “I took him through the consequences of going into an Arab country and becoming the occupiers.”

Powell has become increasingly outspoken about the level of violence in Iraq, which he believes is in a state of civil war. “The civil war will ultimately be resolved by a test of arms,” he said. “It’s not going to be pretty to watch, but I don’t know any way to avoid it. It is happening now.”

He added: “It is not a civil war that can be put down or solved by the armed forces of the United States.” All the military could do, Powell suggested, was put “a heavier lid on this pot of boiling sectarian stew”.

The signs are that the views of Powell and other critics of the war are finally being heard in the Pentagon, if not yet in the White House. Robert Gates, the defence secretary, is drawing up plans to reduce troop levels in Iraq in anticipation that General David Petraeus, the commander in Iraq, will not be able to deliver an upbeat progress report in September on the American troop surge.

“It should come as no secret to anyone that there are discussions about what is a postsurge strategy,” said Tony Fratto, deputy White House press secretary, last week.

The surge’s lack of demonstrable success is creating fissures in the Republican party as well as putting enormous pressure on the Democratic presidential candidates to favour a rapid pull-out, which Gates fears could leave Iraq in chaos.

New Mexico senator Pete Domenici became the third Republican senator in recent weeks to break ranks openly with Bush on the war. “We cannot continue asking our troops to sacrifice indefinitely while the Iraqi government is not making measurable progress,” he said. “I am calling for a new strategy that will move our troops out of combat operations and on the path home.”

Speculation is growing that Gates will demonstrate his commitment to withdrawing US forces by moving a combat brigade of up to 3,000 troops out of Iraq as early as October and continuing to reduce their numbers month by month from their current strength of 160,000 to presurge levels of around 130,000 by the summer of 2008.

Gates believes American troop withdrawals are essential to building a cross-party consensus for retaining a presence in Iraq after Bush’s term in office expires. As a former director of the CIA who saw out the cold war in the early 1990s, he hopes to win the same bipartisan support for Iraq that President Harry Truman secured against the Soviet Union after the second world war.”

  1. Chuck from Atascader
    July 9, 2007 at 2:49 am

    It was Nixon who coined the political strategy of running to the right and governing from the middle.

    President Bush did it in reverse. He ran as a moderate (sort of) and downplayed his conservative leanings. Then once he won office, he went WAY to the right.

    I think that was his mistake because he stopped listening to anyone who wasn’t a neo-con, anyone who wasn’t in lock step with Cheney.

    I’ve always admired Powell, though I lost respect for him when he chose to keep silent when we needed him and his courage the most. Had Bush not been so surrounded by only one point of view this whole Iraq mess would not have happened.

  2. Friend of Downtown Bob
    July 9, 2007 at 2:53 am

    Defense Secretary Robert Gates today canceled a visit to Latin America amid mounting criticism of the Bush administration’s policy in Iraq.

    Gates was due to leave tomorrow on a four-day trip to El Salvador, Colombia, Peru and Chile. The trip was rescheduled so he can participate in policy meetings in advance of a report to Congress July 15 on the results of President George W. Bush’s decision to add 30,000 troops to help the Baghdad government meet a series of goals designed to ease sectarian violence.

    The Washington Post, citing unnamed senior officials, reported today that those goals won’t be met; the New York Times, in a 1,700-word editorial, said the U.S. military should begin leaving Iraq as soon as possible; and congressional Republicans, on television news shows, continued to voice dissatisfaction with the course of the war.

    “There’s no conceivable way” the Iraq government can meet the benchmarks, Indiana Senator Richard Lugar, ranking Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, said on “Late Edition” on CNN. “We have no good options in Iraq now; there are no good options,” Republican Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, also a member of the foreign relations panel, said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

  3. Anonymous
    July 9, 2007 at 3:38 am

    220 people killed this weekend in Iraq. 220! Stop the insanity. Bring the tropps home. NOW!

  4. Anonymous
    July 9, 2007 at 4:01 am

    call me what you will…but this nation is not ready for a black president nor a woman.
    Our president is Bush! relax! we had to put up with sex pot bubba…you can sit still now for Bush

  5. Marilyn
    July 9, 2007 at 5:09 am

    Unfortunately, Powell was one of those who were directly or indirectly ousted because of their attempts at discouraging an all-out war in Iraq.

    What some people fail to realize is that the Iraqi insurgency has all the time in the world and it is an all-out war for them. After all, it is their country and their cultural, economic, and political sovereignty they are fighting for.

    All the “surges” Bush and the military are talking about are bogus. They are one more attempt to appease the American public into accepting this imperial war on a nation that has done us no harm.

    There is a rise in the successful and failed attempts of “terrorist” attacks on different targets across the globe. The disturbing thing about their evolution is the fact that there is an increase in the involvement of professional and well-to-do individuals in such attacks. That is the outcome of “global” wars, where the adversaries are no longer standing armies or states. We are creating a new generation of potential “martyrs.” It is an all or nothing act for them because they have nothing left to lose except themselves. We have basically declared war on the people of Iraq, not the government. We have also declared war on any individual or group that dares disagree with our imperial policies, and that includes people here at home. The Patriot Act has not been used to its full potential yet, but it may if we do not wise up as a nation and hold our government and their corporations accountable for the crimes they have committed against humanity. That cuts across partisan lines.

    Time to impeach the crook and all his cronies who are making billions off the blood of young and innocent people.

    Have we caught those behind 9-11 yet or are we still fishing for excuses to justify our indefinite presence in the Middle East?

  6. Thomas W
    July 9, 2007 at 5:13 am

    To revel in the death of 220 people, among whom were new army recruits destined to help stem the tide of violence is inappropriate even for so-called right wing extremists. The anon person who wrote that has not been in combat nor had to face death himself. There were women and children involved in those bombings. Remember, Live by the sword, Die by the sword.
    Shame on you.

  7. Dave Congalton
    July 9, 2007 at 5:58 am

    I have deleted the comment from the idiot who suggests that the 220 people who were killed in Iraq were terrorists.

    I thought these Anonymous comments had gone as low as they could go.

    Guess I was wrong.

    In terms of Anonymous I, your best argument is that we have to put up with Bush because you had to put up with Clinton?????

    Remind me, please, how many people died when Clinton was President versus how many people have died since we invaded Iraq?

    Pretty amazing. Pretty sad.

  8. Newspaper Reader
    July 9, 2007 at 8:50 am

    White House officials fear that the last pillars of political support among Senate Republicans for President Bush’s Iraq strategy are collapsing around them, according to several administration officials and outsiders they are consulting.

    They say that inside the administration, debate is intensifying over whether Mr. Bush should try to prevent more defections by announcing his intention to begin a gradual withdrawal of American troops from the high-casualty neighborhoods of Baghdad and other cities.

    Mr. Bush and his aides once thought they could wait to begin those discussions until after Sept. 15, when the top field commander and the new American ambassador to Baghdad are scheduled to report on the effectiveness of the troop increase that the president announced in January.

    But suddenly, some of Mr. Bush’s aides acknowledge, it appears that forces are combining against him just as the Senate prepares this week to begin what promises to be a contentious debate on the war’s future and financing.

    Four more Republican senators have recently declared that they can no longer support Mr. Bush’s strategy, including senior lawmakers who until now had expressed their doubts only privately. As a result, some aides are now telling Mr. Bush that if he wants to forestall more defections, it would be wiser to announce plans for a far more narrowly defined mission for American troops that would allow for a staged pullback, a strategy that he rejected in December as a prescription for defeat when it was proposed by the bipartisan Iraq Study Group.

    “When you count up the votes that we’ve lost and the votes we’re likely to lose over the next few weeks, it looks pretty grim,” said one senior official, who, like others involved in the discussions, would not speak on the record about internal White House deliberations.

  9. Anonymous
    July 9, 2007 at 12:54 pm

    Dave, your thinking is so clouded by hate!
    The 220 people killed in Iraq were muslims. The nation of islam has declared jihad against the west and israel.
    If you are Muslim then you are a terrorist as you believe that allah has willed you to kill any infidels that won’t convert.
    How soon the liberals forget all the terror attacks! Even a week ago in Great Britain…
    Muslims want you dead Dave! Dead!
    and that is terrorism even if your your weak morals can’t understand it.
    Just because you don’t agree doesn’t make it wrong!
    They want you dead!

  10. Anonymous
    July 9, 2007 at 6:20 pm

    Most of those people killed over the weekend were women and children, just trying to go about the day like you and I.

    I shudder when I see the hate like this. It makes me ashamed to be an American.

  11. wilson
    July 9, 2007 at 6:48 pm

    “I shudder when I see the hate like this. It makes me ashamed to be an American.”

    That’s exactly how I feel when I see a Codepink,ACLU Gay”pride”Global Warming socialist losers preaching their crap.

  12. Rich from Paso
    July 9, 2007 at 10:24 pm

    Okay, for all this talk of a “change of strategy”, here is what needs to happen first:

    1. The US should force a national referendum on three issues. Those issues the Iraqi people would vote on are:
    a) Should the US pull out troops from Iraq? Yes or no. If a majority of Iraqis vote “No”, part b is irrelevent.

    b) If the US troops should remain, what role should they have in Iraqi security? The people would have six options:
    1. Border security only
    2. Internal security operations only
    3. counter-terrorism operations only
    4. 2 and 3
    5. 1 and 3
    6. All of the above (the status quo)

    Which ever option gets the highest vote return, that is the path the US should take and tailor the forces accordingly.

    3. Do you have convidence that the present Iraqi government is operating in the best interests of the Iraqi people to the fullest extent possible? Yes or no. If there is a vote of no confidence, then the US should demand the resignation of al-Maliki and his government, dissolve parliment, and plan to hold national elections for a new parliment in 120 days. The US could cut off all aid to Iraq if they don’t comply. We could have the referendum elections by the end of August, just in time for the report to Congress that GEN Patreus has to give. With an honest effort to gauge the will of the Iraqi people, we can tailor our presence to the needs and wants of the people we came to liberate from Saddam Hussein, or we can leave if that is their desire.

    Again, I have to reiterate that regardless of what kind of Monday-morning quarterbacking people want to do about whether or not we should have invaded Iraqi in the first place, it is a done deal. It would be morally repugnant to me for us to break that country and then leave when it no longer suited us to remain. That is the kind of capricious behavior that will lose America allies in the fight against Jihadist Islam. Our allies have to know that we do not formulate foreign policy or take military action based on polling numbers. When America becomes a country that moves based on mercurial public opinion, rather than a moral compass of doing the hard right thing to do instead of the easy wrong thing to do, then we will truely be lost. I don’t think we are there yet; I hold out hope.

    Anyhow, that is how I would address this call for a “change in strategy” in Iraq. Bush says he is trying to push “democracy in Iraq”, then here is a good opportunity to test that new democracy.

  13. BBW
    July 9, 2007 at 11:23 pm

    Here is a link to the real story in Iraq, where the terrorists are and are fighting supported by Iran.


    Read this you pull-out people and tell me we need to use law enforcement of these “people” who need to be terminated.

  14. Rich from Paso
    July 9, 2007 at 11:48 pm

    Here is the link to website bbw spoke of.

  15. Barry in Los Osos
    July 10, 2007 at 12:53 am

    I can just see Bob and Mariyln and Dave scanning the internet for an Al-Queda version of how it was really the Americans fault

  16. master debator
    July 10, 2007 at 1:23 am

    Dave said”
    I deleted the comment right before I re-posted it”
    Sound familiar?
    Welcome to the Dave Kerry Show!

    Dave also issued a challenge to anyone to debate Santa Maria Bubba…and he complains vociferously that there are no takers
    Bloggers here have issued a challenge to dave to post a topic on the dingy harry and nambla nancy house and senate whos rating are in the teems far below Bush
    Has Dave taken the challenge? NOPE!
    We all see the hypocrisy! Post the topic dave and I will debate Santa Maria Bubba…deal?
    Now let’s see who has the guts!

    ps: I knew the minute we started hating Bush again our hezbolah friend from Lebanon would be back in her typical form.

    pps: If you are embarrassed to be an American leve the country and try it someplace else. Post your apology to the patriots when you come crawling back!

  17. Anonymous
    July 10, 2007 at 3:02 am

    Really Dave…anon has a point. I saw the rating for congress today went down to 14%! Way lower than Bush yet you refuse to talk about.
    Why prey tell?
    What are you afraid of?
    Before the 06 election and right after you gloated.
    It certainly deserves discussing here. no?

  18. Dave Congalton
    July 10, 2007 at 3:51 am

    Master Debater (which is the correct spelling)

    You don’t need my permission to post any comment about either Pelosi or Reid. Comment away — I may even agree with you on some points.

    Hey Rich —

    Isn’t it time you disclose to the rest of the blog what it is you do for a living and let them decide the extent of possible bias on the issue of Iraq?

    The invitation for all of you Anonymous Chickenhawks remains in terms of challenging SM Bill on my show. Of course, you won’t.

  19. Dave Congalton
    July 10, 2007 at 3:54 am

    One other point:

    If you read any newspaper today, liberal (NY Times) or conservative (Washington Times).you’ll see that the clocking is ticking for Bush on Iraq.

    Too many Republicans are deserting the sinking ship. This isn’t about Reid and Pelosi. Bush’s headache is from Lugar and Hagel. It’s from within his own party.

  20. Rich from Paso
    July 10, 2007 at 4:02 am

    Only if you agree to go to Iraq and see the country for yourself.

    I am biased since I was there. My boots were actually on the ground there. I have personal friendships with Iraqis.

    Why this sudden accusation of bias after all this time? What’s a matter, don’t like my call for a referendum? Afraid that the Iraqi people would vote for the status quo?

  21. Anonymous
    July 10, 2007 at 4:12 am

    Low low blow on your personal attack on Rich Dave! shame on you!
    We have asked you for months now to call the lebanon muslim on the carpet with no avail.
    I am really surprised that you made a personal comment to and about a blogger.
    Something is really wrong here…we all know it…
    Apologize dave, publically and never ever do that again.
    Most post anon because of this exact thing.
    Desperation breeds stupidty.

  22. humpty dumpty
    July 10, 2007 at 4:14 am

    hurts don’t it Dave?

  23. Anonymous
    July 10, 2007 at 4:31 am

    I have to say….I wholeheartedly side with Rich when he blogs here….and I know this war has divided us all….but I still believe it is the right thing to do….and even after reading & listening to all you have to say…Dave & all….I believe that what we are trying to accomplish is the right thing…not the easy thing…but the right thing. Maybe I am wrong…but maybe I am right….and in all honesty that is what we all have to say….because it will only be much later with evaluation that we may know for sure. That all being said….I know that I have enjoyed your show many times Dave…but this… in combination with reading your blog with such emphasis always on anti Bush, anti war effort,…..it’s just made me not enjoy “hometown radio” as I first did. Reading your blog has spoiled it for me…the enjoyment I had in the show….it has just gotten too angry…too hate filled. I think it would actually be better for your listening audience if you didn’t have this blog…as once you start reading it…one sees only the hardened side of Dave….and I know you have a lot more to offer than that. We all do.

  24. The New Tone of San Luis Obispo
    July 10, 2007 at 5:05 am

    Marilyn Said:

    “The disturbing thing about their evolution is the fact that there is an increase in the involvement of professional and well-to-do individuals in such attacks. That is the outcome of “global” wars, where the adversaries are no longer standing armies or states. We are creating a new generation of potential “martyrs.” It is an all or nothing act for them because they have nothing left to lose except themselves. We have basically declared war on the people of Iraq, not the government. We have also declared war on any individual or group that dares disagree with our imperial policies, and that includes people here at home.”

    Marilyn: Ever heard of well off Osama Bin Laden and the attacks from the 1980’s on? Exactly how stupid do you think we are with this nonsense propaganda? Have you checked out the recruiters for Al Queda in Rich’s link….invite a family to lunch, and have their son cooked with fruit in his mouth. That is how they are coercing the population to “join” them.

    You may enjoy and agree with this piece of crap congressman Kennedy who wants to call global warming deniers “traitors” for real!

    Robert Kennedy making an ass of himself

  25. The New Tone of San Luis Obispo
    July 10, 2007 at 5:07 am

    I also understand that someone has been typing as the New Tone while I was out of the country. There is only one New Tone and I am it.

  26. Anonymous
    July 10, 2007 at 5:23 am

    Dave…no one should be called a name by you….ie “chickenhawks” or “anonymouses” and no one should be called on the carpet for being anonymous….afterall…..SM Bill is anonymous…as we don’t know who he really is…and “downtown Bill” is anonymous as he is afraid his business will suffer if we know who he really is…so….until those guys tell us who they really are…which frankly I really don’t care to know….don’t fret over the various anonymous postings.

  27. Dave Congalton
    July 10, 2007 at 6:20 am


    Actually, I can call anyone a name — it’s my blog and it’s my perogative.

    And here’s anews flash for you, pal. Santa Maria is not anonymous. He’s a living, breathing, thinking human being who comes on my show a coujple times each month and sits there, taking crap from callers like you.

    You may not like the guy, you may not agree with the guy, but at least he has the courage of his convictions and he is willing to appear in public.

    How about you? Nope, you call yourself Anonymous. you won’t debate Bill, only attack him.

    That makes you a CHICKENHAWK!!!!!

  28. Homer
    July 10, 2007 at 2:45 pm

    ACLU dues
    A Radio
    The Dave Congalton Show
    Santa Maria Bill and his truthiness

  29. The New Tone of San Luis Obispo
    July 10, 2007 at 3:27 pm


    How can you say that since someone has a moniker that they are identified? Do you believe that someone who has a blogger moniker is less legitimate than Santa Maria Bill or Downtown Bob? We can’t know who they are really?

    As for debating Santa Maria Bill on air, I would love to. I would not have a debate with Santa Maria Bill however because you could not be an impartial moderator, Bill would not allow you to speak without getting too excited, and the ridiculous points Bill would want to debate are all known fabrications. How can you blame me for that, even the leading democratic contenders will not even appear at a debate with each other on the Fox News Channel event. Obama and Mrs. Clinton will never appear for honest debate on the Sean Hannity Program, because they feel they will not be treated fairly by Mr. Hannity.

    Tell you what, if Bill really has guts, get him on the Sean Hannity Program with you clear channel cronies and see how he does in the big leagues! Since he is just so right, lets all sit back and laugh as he shreds Sean! That would be interesting!

  30. Al Neill
    July 10, 2007 at 4:07 pm

    Dave —

    I doubt that being snarky helps your cause much with your readers. In the past you’ve complained about the level of debate on your blog, go back and read your comments, and you’ll find yourself fighting it out for the lowest common denominator.

    Back in the sixties, my buddies and I were drafted and shipped off to Vietnam. It was not our idea, but we did what our elected government asked us to do. Some of us lived, and some of us died for what was probably a good cause. During that time, the Dems and those on the left who ran the gamut from being slightly demented to wildly deranged succeeded in changing American policy and got us to abandon the people of South Vietnam. The domino theory that the Dems and their fellow travelers ridiculed then came into play, and millions of South Vietnamese died, and about one quarter of the Cambodian population met the same fate (see the movie “The Killing Fields.”). Laos faired better.

    Fast forward to today. We are engaged in a war in Iraq. Should we have gone there? Probably not, but the reality is that we are there. Unlike the sixties, our Soldiers and Marines are all volunteers, and they have taken the fighting to the enemy after the enemy first brought the fight to our shores on that fateful day in September.

    You can quibble about the national origin of the lunatics in the planes, but this is not about nations; this is about a cult that wants to kill all non-moslems (and apparently some of their own as well).

    You and your CodePink, GALA, and Mothers Against Diablo Canyon types may prefer that the war be brought to our shores where we can discuss things with these misunderstood young men, but before you try that for real, why don’t you head up to ASH for a friendly chat with some of the inmates. If you are successful in converting them into folks you’d like to have for neighbors, then I’ll listen to your plans for the cesspool of the Middle East. Until then, sadly, you are as naive as your burned out friends from the “peace” movement of the sixties.

    Personally, I’d prefer that two of my grandsons were not over in that God-Forsaken part of the world, but if that’s what it takes to eliminate the sub-humans who infest its population, then so be it.

    And just to throw some additional red meat to your howling hyena friends, I hope the Israelis are successful in fending off the Palestinian cultists. I continue to be amazed at the success the Jews have made in forming a nation from nothing and the failure of the Palestinians to accomplish a thing other than additional bloodshed.

    Back to the title of your blog — absolutely; Colin Powell should have been President. I would vote for him in a heartbeat if his wife allowed him to run.


    Al Neill

  31. Anonymous
    July 11, 2007 at 1:28 am

    So true!

    2008 Democratic National Convention Agenda

    7:00 pm Opening flag burning

    7:15 pm Pledge of Allegiance to the U.N.

    7:20 pm Ted Kennedy proposes a toast

    7:25 pm Nonreligious prayer and worship with Jesse Jackson
    and Al Sharpton

    7:45 pm Ceremonial tree hugging

    7:55 pm Ted Kennedy proposes a toast

    8:00 pm How I Invented the Internet – Al Gore

    8:15 pm Gay Wedding Planning – Barney Frank presiding

    8:35 pm Ted Kennedy proposes a toast

    8:40 pm Our Troops are War Criminals – John Kerry

    9.00 pm Memorial service for Saddam and his sons – Cindy
    Sheehan and Susan Sarandon>

    10:00 pm “Answering Machine Etiquette” – Alec Baldwin

    11:00 pm Ted Kennedy proposes a toast

    11:05 pm Collection for the Osama Bin Laden kidney transplant
    fund – Barbra Sreisand

    11:15 pm Free the Freedom Fighters from Guantanamo Bay ­ Sean

    11:30 pm Oval Office Affairs – William Jefferson Clinton

    11:45 pm Ted Kennedy proposes a toast

    11:50 pm How George Bush Brought Down the World Trade
    Towers – Howard Dean

    12:15 am “Truth in Broadcasting Award” – Presented to Dan
    Rather by Michael Moore

    12:25 am Ted Kennedy proposes a toast

    12:30 am Satellite address by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

    12:45 am Nomination of Hillary Rodham Clinton by Nancy Pelosi

    1:00 am Ted Kennedy proposes a toast

    1:05 am Coronation of Hillary Rodham Clinton

    1:30 am Ted Kennedy proposes a toast

    1:35 am Bill Clinton asks Ted Kennedy to drive Hillary home

  32. go figure
    July 11, 2007 at 1:34 am

    Santa Maria Bubba is a scam and a shill!
    He won’t debate he will just pontificate and Dave will sit back and let him like he always does…
    There is a thread here, and if you don’t see it I will make it crystal clear.
    SM Dave & The Bill Congalton show are one and the same.
    Why debate the bobsy twins when there is such real work to get done…

    I didn’t check today…did Congresional poll numbers drop below 14%…if not it will soon.
    Dave & Bill’s wonderful congress…the do nothing congress!
    what a freeking laff!

  33. Anonymous
    July 11, 2007 at 4:10 am

    Jafar Kiani was stoned to death in Aghchekand village, 200 kilometers (124 miles) west of the capital, Teheran, on Thursday, Ali Reza Jamshidi told reporters. It was the first time in years that Iran has confirmed such an execution.

    “This verdict was carried out Thursday,” Jamshidi told reporters.

    Death sentences are carried out in Iran after they are upheld by the Supreme Court. Under Iran’s Islamic law, adultery is punishable by stoning.

    Jamshidi didn’t elaborate on how the stoning was carried out, but under Islamic rulings, a male convict is usually buried up to his waist while a female criminal is buried up to her neck with her hands also buried.

    Those carrying out the verdict start throwing stones and rocks at the convict until he or she dies.

    International human rights groups have long condemned stoning in Iran as a “cruel and barbaric” punishment.

    Earlier Tuesday, before Iran confirmed the stoning, UN human rights chief Louise Arbour condemned the execution, her spokesman said.

    “The execution has apparently gone ahead despite Iran’s moratorium on execution by stoning, a moratorium that had been in effect since 2002,” said Jose Diaz of UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

  34. Anonymous
    July 11, 2007 at 4:13 am

    From one Anonymous to the latest Anonymous…THANK YOU for the BEST laugh I’ve had in a looooooooong time reading this blog!!

  35. Anonymous
    July 11, 2007 at 4:15 am

    OOPS….regarding the laughter….my congratulations were to the 6:28 Anonymous posting!!!

  36. Barry in Los Osos
    July 11, 2007 at 4:37 am

    What does Bob call them, “Muslim Boogiepersons”

  37. save america
    July 11, 2007 at 5:08 am

    Dave blogs

    “Actually, I can call anyone a name — it’s my blog and it’s my perogative.”

    Dave and his ilk state clearly how they roll

  38. Hoosier21
    July 13, 2007 at 3:43 pm

    There is no such word as perogative!

    Back to the original post, I voted for Bush in 2000 because he was a conservative. I did not vote for him in 04 because I thought he was going to far left. Perceptions are a funny thing. He spent money making Clinton look like a penny pincher. Do we judge a politician by a sample of his policies or by the opinions of his opponents and/or supportors? It is known that the more a President is hated/disliked, the more the perception he is further to the right or to the left then their policies actually are, depending on which party is in office.

  39. Downtown Bob
    July 14, 2007 at 4:55 am

    pre·rog·a·tive [pri-rog-uh-tiv, puh-rog-]
    1. an exclusive right, privilege, etc., exercised by virtue of rank, office, or the like: the prerogatives of a senator.
    2. a right, privilege, etc., limited to a specific person or to persons of a particular category: It was the teacher’s prerogative to stop the discussion.
    3. a power, immunity, or the like restricted to a sovereign government or its representative: The royal prerogative exempts the king from taxation.
    4. Obsolete. precedence.
    5. having or exercising a prerogative.
    6. pertaining to, characteristic of, or existing by virtue of a prerogative.
    [Origin: 1350–1400; ME < L praerogātīvus (adj.) voting first, praerogātīva (n. use of fem. of adj.) tribe or century with right to vote first. See pre-, interrogative] Perhaps a misspell? Kind of like: “… because I thought he was going toO far left.

    Hoosier, it is not a perception that President Bush is too far right; it is by definition of what too far right looks like. If you go too far either left or right, you will have left behind Democracy. Too far left, socialism or worse, communism; too far right fascisim or worse totalitarianism. By continuing to blend government, big business and a compliant press, you do start to lean towards fascism. The main difference between the United States of 2007 and Italy of the 1930s is our Constitution. Read up on Benito Mussolini and his government and tell me that there are no similarities between what he did and what President Bush has been attempting to do. Please note that I do not believe that our country is fascist at the present time, nor do I believe that President Bush knowingly is attempting to become a fascist leader; I believe that he is pliant enough to manipulated by those of the extreme right to lead our country up to the precipice of fascism however.

  40. wilson
    July 14, 2007 at 4:48 pm

    Bob blogs

    “By continuing to blend government, big business and a compliant press, you do start to lean towards fascism.”

    compliant press?

  41. copy n paste judge
    July 15, 2007 at 1:54 am

    Nice copy & Paste Bob! You are da best! The radical socialisistic left has a great puppet in you!

  42. Downtown Bob
    July 15, 2007 at 5:57 am

    Wilson: Yes, the press is compliant, as in:
    com·pli·ant [kuhm-plahy-uhnt]
    1. complying; obeying, obliging, or yielding, esp. in a submissive way: a man with a compliant nature.
    2. manufactured or produced in accordance with a specified body of rules (usu. used in combination): Energy Star-compliant computers.
    [Origin: 1635–45;

    The press has been de-fanged by the consolidated ownership of the major five media conglomerations, whose agenda is one of serving the corporate world to further whatever serves them best. NBC is owned by General Electric which also owns many different defense contracting firms. Their main profit divisions are those that make weapons of war, so having a press that will not investigate or report on war crimes, profiteering or anything that could reduce their income. That is just one example, there are many; but, to some, if not most, I will be labeled as “paranoid”, or as a “conspiracy theorist”, and that is okay.

    copy ‘n paste judge: I have one reason for the cut ‘n paste; if I embed a link to make my point, I have no control over whether or not someone like you will actually look at the link or not, so by doing a cut ‘n paste, I can make a certain point that you will either read here or not. If you have a certain point that you would like to make and a cut ‘n paste would help you illustrate your point better, please do so. I won’t criticize you or anyone else for doing so. Take care.

  43. Anonymous
    July 15, 2007 at 2:36 pm

    Downtrodden bob…either way…nobody listens to what you have to say! It’s all on Moveon’org!
    Wise up pallyroo!

  44. Hoosier21
    July 19, 2007 at 6:37 pm

    Perhaps a misspell? Kind of like: “… because I thought he was going too far left.
    No, more kind of like: “…Too far left, socialism or worse, communism; too far right fascisim

    In any case, I was not writing about the extremes, only my opinion of the Presidents policies. More money for social programs, education, and amnesty for illegal’s are liberal points, not conservative. You see him as an extreme conservative and I see him as a moderate. Perception.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: