Cynical Nation

At the end of the day, it's of keen interest to me to see whether or not we can get Joe Wilson frog-marched out of Le Paradou in handcuffs. And trust me, when I use that name, I measure my words.

Glad you're back!

On a positive note, perhaps, this will be the last time we have to see, or even hear anything from that less than dynamic duo.

Jeeez, the only cover those two didn't pose for was Orgasm Magazine's...I know because I'm a part-time fotog for Orgasm and I was more than a little miffed when our offer was rebuffed.

The media has been real quite about this and it disgusts me

It will now take an exceptional leap of faith from the left to try to keep their hero afloat.

However, as we both know, Barry, one of them has already claimed that the Bushies got to the authors and made a deal for this revelation to be put forward.

His response was devoid of the whys and wherefores.

Merely that it was his gut feeling.

How truly pathetic.

As usual, no facts, just statements from right wingnut idiots.

Bush is a traitor and a criminal. Oh, and a liar. The Niger story was a lie, and Bush knew it. Rove had Plame outed to ruin her career, because that is how he plays politics ... dirty.

The disgusting Republicans lose Absolute Power in '06, thank God.

yeah, and the Dems will be in the spotlight and be responsible for anything good or bad too

As usal Barely couldn't be more wrong.

Joe Wilson has long ago acknowledged that he "never debunked the Iraq in Niger claim."

Now, even the WaPo, a Liberal bastion concedes;

"The Washington Post acknowledged it this way; "Nevertheless, it now appears that the person most responsible for the end of Ms. Plame's CIA career is Mr. Wilson. Mr. Wilson chose to go public with an explosive charge, claiming -- falsely, as it turned out -- that he had debunked reports of Iraqi uranium-shopping in Niger and that his report had circulated to senior administration officials....He diverted responsibility from himself and his false charges by claiming that President Bush's closest aides had engaged in an illegal conspiracy."

The major statment in that piece is, "Mr. Wilson chose to go public with an explosive charge, claiming -- falsely, as it turned out -- that he had debunked reports of Iraqi uranium-shopping in Niger..."

The crux of the story ISN'T merely that the Bush administration DIDN'T "viciously out" Valerie Plame, as the Wilson's and their MSM cohorts claimed, BUT that Joe Wilson FAILED to debunk the Iraq going to Niger for Yellowcake charge!

Here's what the Financial Times said about that, even when the American MSM was focused solely on some forged docuents;

"However, European intelligence officers have now revealed that three years before the fake documents became public, human and electronic intelligence sources from a number of countries picked up repeated discussion of an illicit trade in uranium from Niger. One of the customers discussed by the traders was Iraq.

"These intelligence officials now say the forged documents appear to have been part of a "scam", and the actual intelligence showing discussion of uranium supply has been ignored."

http://www.belgraviadispatch.com/archives/001447.html

"The FT has now learnt that three European intelligence services were aware of possible illicit trade in uranium from Niger between 1999 and 2001. Human intelligence gathered in Italy and Africa more than three years before the Iraq war had shown Niger officials referring to possible illicit uranium deals with at least five countries, including Iraq.

http://www.belgraviadispatch.com/archives/001447.html

Stop arguing with long established facts...you look foolish doing that.

Wow, as usual, JMK has a bunch of kooky, unverified, out of the mainstream BS by rabid wingnuts to "substantiate" his claims.

Bush lied and knew the whole story was false, because it was false. There are reams of reports verifying this, including many from our ally, England.

JMK is a pathological liar, which is why he fits in with the Bush Brownshirts so well.

Bailey, you're showing your ignorance if you consider the FT (the Financial Times) to be "out of the mainstream...rabid wingnuts."

Ditto the Washington Post, but the FT has even more credibility than the oft sullied Washington Post and NY Times.

The WaPo and the FT were the sources above. It's not my fault if you're unfamiliar with those sources.

Maybe you should get out more.

As JMK knows, I have generally sworn off even responding to people such as Bailey Hawkins.

But when he attacks a friend such as JMK with nothing but vitriol and platitudes with no substance, something has to be said.

Bailey, unlike Blue Wind and others from your side, you offer absolutely nothing in this forum in terms of ideas and discussion.

Your boilerplate BS is long on personal attacks and woefully short of intellectual discourse.

Either start offering substantiation for your crap opinions or shut up.

You are an embarrassment for both yourself and the Democrats, the party I actively belonged to for 28 years.

mal, did you meet JMK at Rush Hour in your local Elks Lodge? LOL! You are friends, now isn't that frightening.

There is no need for intellectual responses to JMK, because JMK is just a useless squawking Limbaugh ditto-clone who lies, twists the truth, distorts, and quotes things out of context.

Your fake indignation and attempt to bolster your credibility by saying you were a Democrat for 28 years proves that you don't even know what is going on, since I am a registered Republican and a true Conservative.

Go bad to sleep, stupid.

Barely, you're a lot of things, including emotionally disturbed, but a "Conservative" isn't one of them.

You support the Estate Tax, oppose across the board tax rate cuts and the domestic security protections ramped up due to the ongoing WoT.

But worst of all, you constantly respond to facts with ill-thought out, emotion-based opinions.

Not that I blame you for that, since the one time you attempted to respond with actual facts, you posted a chart that showed H-1B Visas expanding from under 50,000 in 1993 to nearly one million by 2001. A chart that also showed that it was the Clinton administration that signed off on increasing the caps to 195,000/year (up from 65,000/year) and the current administration that signed off on lowering that cap back down to 65,000/year.

As the late Johnny Carson would say, "Wild, whacky stuff."

As for, " I am a registered Republican," yeah, so's Link Chafee"...and he ain't no "Conservative" either.

All of which kind of makes your calling Mal "stupid," kind of ironic.

My H1B assertion was 100% true and correct in every way. I said that under Bush, 1,000,000 foreigners took American jobs through H1-B.

The chart showed that under Bush, over 1,000,000 foreign workers were taking American jobs.

But, like drug felon Rush Limbaugh, you don't let facts get in the way of your talking points.

See how you repeat your same lie over and over and over, hoping that the mindless rubes start to buy into it, trying to create an Official Truth despite the facts.

You have learned well from your doltish leader.

Oh, and I am a registered Republican. That is simply a fact. I voted for Reagan, that is a fact. I am a *REAL* Conservative, not a Neocon wingnut like you.

If you were truly a conservative, you would be concerned with Bush wiping his ass with the Constitution. Remember all the wailing about justices legislating from the bench instead of following the Constitution? You see, a true conservative was against legislating from the bench, and is also against Bush's criminal and unconstitutional power grab.

You aren't a Conservative, you are merely a Republican shill, like Rush Limbaugh. You don't really give a shit about the Constitution, laws, rules, or even common courtesy when YOUR SIDE (as you see it) is in power.

You are shallow, stupid, and wrong.

The chart you posted showed;

(*) Appx 28% (17,300) of the 65,000 annual quota are set aside for workers from Australia, Chile and Singapore.

(*) There were less than 50,000 in 1992 and that ballooned up to over 900,000 by 2000.

(*) Congress set the quotas and Congress raised those quotas in 1996 (to 135,000/year) and 2000 (to 195,000/year) and a Democratic President (Bill Clinton) signed off on those increased quotas.

(*) When the quotas next came up for review in 2004, they were reduced back down to 65,000/year.

(*) The reason that during the years the quota was 195,000, it was never reached, and the availability of high-tech jobs in the USA plummetted was because of the Tech Bubble bust that began in the Spring of 2000, when the NASDAQ began to implode.

The fact that you let emotion override reason says it all about any opinion you offer.

Bush abusing the Constitution?

How? When? Where???

The Patriot Act was passed overwhelmingly with broad bi-partisan support.

There have yet to be any substantiated abuses of that Act.

There have been no successful court challenges to that bit of legislation.

Ergo, (1) it wasn't "Bush's abuse," as it was supported by the vast majority of both Democrats & Republicans in Congress and (2) it hasn't been ruled unconstitutional by ANY U.S. court.

The NSA surveillance program?

That wasn't Bush's either!

Operation Eschelon, with the NSA monitoring many international calls began in the Clinton administration.

The NSA provided America with a treasure trove of information - some of which led to the capture and prosecution of the traitorous Aldrich Ames and some of which helped many American companies get inside information on their foreign competitors.

The Bush administration merely expanded Eschelon to include monitoring international calls originating within the U.S.

Emotions don't equal facts there Barely.

What you fail to say above is that under Bush a million foreigners were taking American jobs.

My original quote is still completely 100% correct. The rest is you trying to Rove the issue. Under Bush a million H1B foreigners were taking American jobs. True. Fact. Case closed. You lose.

Bush is operating secret spy programs without oversight, which is illegal. Bush also claims that he has the power to operate without oversight, which makes him a traitor. Clinton did not do these things. Clinton operated within the law. Once again, you are trying to Rove the issue. Again, you are wrong. You lose again.

Again, here's ALL anyone needs to know about H-1B Visa;

(*) Appx 28% (17,300) of the 65,000 annual quota are set aside for workers from Australia, Chile and Singapore.

(*) There were less than 50,000 in 1992 and that ballooned up to over 900,000 by 2000.

(*) Congress set the quotas and Congress raised those quotas in 1996 (to 135,000/year) and 2000 (to 195,000/year) and a Democratic President (Bill Clinton) signed off on those increased quotas.

(*) When the quotas next came up for review in 2004, they were reduced back down to 65,000/year.

(*) The reason that during the years the quota was 195,000, it was never reached, and the availability of high-tech jobs in the USA plummetted was because of the Tech Bubble bust that began in the Spring of 2000, when the NASDAQ began to implode.

The "Tech Bubble Bust" took down tons of tech sector jobs over the past five years.

H-1B Visas did NOT.

In fact, H-1B Visas workers are currently being used in the accounting field and salaries for accountants have only gone up and accountants are still in great demand.

That imploded "Tech Bubble" took much of the "demand" for techies out of that sector in its wake.

In this regard, you're a lot like a toddler who pokes itself in the eye and then gets mad at its mother who is only holding and trying to comfort it.

H-1B Visas went from under 50,000 in 1992 to over 900,000 by 2001 under the same guy who twice raised their yearly limit (Clinton). The annual limit was reduced back down to 65,000/year by the current administration the first time those numbers came up for review in 2004.

That the actual facts don't fit your opinion should merely be edifying for you, not contentious as it seems to be.