Nasty Letters To Crooked Politicians: Response to "real lefty" from discussion below Maureen Dowd's column:

Friday, October 07, 2005

Response to "real lefty" from discussion below Maureen Dowd's column:

Well, you started saying that "he can always take the Clinton approach to women: rape them."

You ended by citing nothing but your own unconfirmed blather. You start out not agreeing, and you end up quite disagreeable.

Is that the way you carry out your dialogue? Quote a sub quote from anonymous from a document issued by NOW in 2/99 which also ended up saying 'nothing was known' (at that time) about the 2-bit Brodderick charges, long since disproved and found unworthy of action? Cling to that if you will, but most people on the right who believe that mirror those on the left who believe Bush initiated the Sept 11 attacks and snorted cocaine in Houston.

While it may be true, it can't yet be verified.

Unsubstantiated character assassinations don't make for good discussion. Neither does unsubstantiated posts such as the one you have offered. They amount to little more than gossip. But you guys love to get into other people's beds while killing their kids in a foreign war of oil profit, don't you.

I suggest you provide URLs to support your numbers of how many people Saddam killed every year before complaining that I was exaggerating (You wrote: It was estimated that Saddam killed—pornagraphically, and without discrimination--20,000 Iraqis a year.)

Oh Really? That's just silly. Right up there with Saddam's troops spearing babies when they invaded Kuwait.

Prove it.

And using the deaths created by the phony WMD hunt is not a zero-sum game, as the wingers would have us believe. Since we went there to find WMD, why haven't we left empty-handed? When will we as a nation, instead of simply a political argument, decide that the reason we went to war was phony and bring the troops home?

Finally, when will Bush institute a draft to refill the ranks of the military and get off of his idiotic tax cuts that are working for the top 1 or 2% of the income categories and savaging working people?

I've enjoyed this dialogue. It is interesting to find out what a 'real lefty' thinks. More importantly, it is clear that 'real righties,' such as yourself, really let the government do most of their thinking.

8 Comments:

At 12:06 PM, A. J. Franklin said…

For clarity, I am preserving the remarks of all in the following post:

t 12:13 AM, Real lefty said…

Well, he can always take the Clinton approach to women: rape them.

#

At 1:10 PM, A. J. Franklin said…

real lefty, who did President Clinton rape? If you are going to post on this or any blog, don't spout nonsense, please.

The charges of rape were as manufactured as was the entire impeachment process. We need to get rid of the son of a bitch we have in there now, who has sent our family and friends to die in Iraq, and cares nothing about killing over 50,000 Iraqis--by conservative estimates.

AJ

#

At 4:51 PM, Real lefty said…

A.J.,
There were a string of very credible rape and harrasment charges against Bill Clinton. These go back decades, even involving campus police reports at Oxford. I would never bring up something that was not backed up by pages and pages of credible sources.
Unlike you, I'm afraid. The 50, 00 estimate is outlandish. I refer to Fred Kaplan on slate.com. Kaplan is staunchly anti-wat, but recognizes the need for accuracy. It's all there for you to read. And you'll do better to blame American deaths on the Jihadists and Baathists who have targeted them.

#

At 5:10 PM, Anonymous said…

http://www.now.org/press/02-99/02-25-99.html

That's from NOW. I'd think twice before calling them manufacturers. Do not fear the truth A.J..

#

At 6:23 PM, A. J. Franklin said…

Did you read the article at your link, anonymous? I totally agree with what NOW said early on, but later, after February of 1999, Ms. Broddrick backed off of her claims, and then glommed on to them again.

I sure don't want to rehash all of that. But the charges against Bill Clinton remind me of the cocaine charges against Bush: thrown out there without firm evidence for conspiracy freaks to accept or reject.

I overstated the number of dead civilian Iraqis. the site http://www.iraqbodycount.net/ says there is probably less than 30,000.

I can't imagine a figure that low, but I will play by my own rules and use real figures from a good organization.

No matter which figures you like to see, the fact remains that these are deaths that were the result of Bush's lies and the hunt for WMD...which has transformed the land of Babylon into a living hell. There is blood on your hands if you are any part of American society. We own this government. It doesn't dictate to us...we dictate to IT. But a tyrant will use any excuse to take his country to war. Doesn't that scare you?

You should not give any government lackey, especially W, the right to use our military for his manufactured lies. When will the bastard stop moving the goal post?

It is a disaster by any scorecard, and the son of a bitch doesn't intend on pulling out. His "speech" today claimed that we might be there for a long time--calling his insanity the 'war on terror.'

You don't really believe there is such a thing, do you?

Would we have lost 2,000 more Americans to the "terrorists" as we have young Army,, Marine, and NG'men?

Today, America is the terrorist and Bush runs free in the street. Ass backwards--he needs to go to trial and hang--along with his entire cabal.

And not for a blow job. For international terrorism and, what the Nuremburg Tribunal called "Crimes against the Peace."

I live for the day they haul the bastard out of his heavily fortified compound and lock his ass up. On the prisoner dock right next to other killers such as Slobodan Milosevic. I worked for CNN during the 90's. I saw nearly every article on these issues.

I never saw anyone as flagrant and grisly as George W. Bush & Co. He is truly out of his mind--what there is left of it. And dangerous. The fact that there are so many people on the right--certainly not everyone--who fail to take note of it remains very troubling to me.

Thanks to both of you for your comments. Dialogue is important. We are all Americans, after all.

#

At 7:45 PM, Real lefty said…

To suggest that the burden of proof rests on the plaintiff’s willingness to keep up her charges at all costs is not only ajudicial, but considering the mysoginistic smear campaigns of Bill Clinton, ahistorical. That you demand a self-respecting woman to put herself through the Clinton/Blumenthal locker room in order to make good on her charges stands in direct opposition to the NOW viewpoint.
And I promise you that using real figures from respectable sources is not one of your rules, but the agreed upon rules of responsible analysis. That said, let’s take the briefest look at those figures. It was estimated that Saddam killed—pornagraphically, and without discrimination--20,000 Iraqis a year. The coalition has been in Iraq for two-and-a-half years. In that time less than 30,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed. In the same time Saddam would have killed 50,000. This means that by going to war in Iraq we have saved 20,000 civilian lives right off the bat. If you figure in the tens of thousands of infant vaccinations and food supllies, the gain in life is considerbly larger. This is to say nothing of years to come. One must always look to the facts.
Now, as to the charge of lies. What evidence do you have? The international intelligence community—those opposed and in favor of regime change in Iraq—all believed that Saddam had WMD. I invite you, I welcome you, to demonstrate otherwise. And I’d like to direct you to several undisputable facts in addition: 1. Parts of a nuclear centrifuge were uncovered in the garden of an Iraqi nuclear scientist after having been buried there on regime orders. Needless to say, this was not reported to the UN as was required. 2. The Duelfer report states that Baghdad was virtually ringed with duel-use chemical facilities, also not reported to the UN as required. There was also an extensive concealment program for such labs. 3. Saddam was, in fact, trying to purchase yellow cake in the Sudan. 4. Sadam was trying to buy proscribed missiles from Kim Jong Il. 5. UNMOVIC still says that they cannot rule out that some weapons of mass destruction were shipped to Syria on the eve of and during the invasion. And even if none of this were true—which it is, and backed up by ectensive documentation—that you would want a President who takes Saddam at his word on such matters is masochistic.
The rest of your hysterical rant, peppered with it’s “bastards” and “son of a bitch”s requires no input from me. It speaks eloquently for itself. But I am issuing you a challenge on the tangible points above. Find evidence to the contrary.
At 1:54 PM, Anonymous said…

http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/pdf/iraq_mass_graves.pdf

Happy reading. And I promise you I will deliver much more evidence than this once the weekend gives me time. When you take a break from the NY Times op-ed pep-rally, go consult Human Rights Watch and the United Nations for their figures. You'll find me wholly vindicated.

And, as expected, you've failed to even muster a pretense of proving me wrong on my facts.
At 5:38 PM, Anonymous said…

http://wais.stanford.edu/Iraq/iraq_deathsundersaddamhussein42503.html

Can you divide 600,000 by 24?

And you claim to be some sort of political commentator?

I can keep this stuff coming all weeked.
At 5:56 PM, A. J. Franklin said…

Lefty,

The USAID page was an excellent page cite. But even that deals with estimates. I haven't had a chance to look at the new one because like you, this blog is not my full time job.

No one said Saddam was not a SOB. But don't expect the government to give you a fair representation of the number of dead from Saddam's repression. They are too busy hiding their own murders and filling their own mass graves in soccer fields, funeral pyres around Fallujah and other cities "WE" have decimated, while creating a new breeding ground for Islamic 'freedom fighters' when Iraq was safe from that threat before we attacked it.

Is the world safer? Have we made it safe? Is terrorism on the run? Have we found OBL dead or alive? Can he run but not hide? How many $BILLION$ of taxpayer dollars a month should we allow this entire creepy regime to throw at Iraq?

It is a total loss. And it may hurt the ego of many on the right to admit their confidence in Bush was misplaced. But it is undeniable.

We have been lied to. We are being lied to day-in-day-out. The dumbocrats are not much better...I don't know what will become of the whole thing but I know we never had a reason to go there, and now chimpo can't face reality.

I hope reasonable people like yourself can. There may not be a good way to finish this discussion, but let the conversation move along. At least Americans can talk to each other about their government's transgressions. For now.

And yes, I am a political analyst. Maybe you are too. I don't know because I have a name and a blog page and you have only a nick name and have come in with an opinion.

But I enjoy the argument, and maybe you can prove that Bush didn't lie. I'm sure that will be easy for you ;-)

AJ
At 6:08 PM, Anonymous said…

AJ,
You still dodge my challenge, while I confront yours. Show me proof of your claims.
Human Rights Watch is not the US Gov, and that's their estimate.
The argument was not about whether or not Saddam is an SOB, it's about how many more would be dead under his rule. You can say chimp and dumbocrats and make the charge of lies your mantra, but until you deal in facts, you're writhing in a vacuum. The truth is an absolute defense.
At 2:33 PM, Anonymous said…

AJ,

I don't know how you can be so civil to right wingnuts.

They forget that IRAQ had nothing to do with Sept 11. They forget that we as a country made big bucks off of Saddam when we helped him GAS the Kurds. They forget that we gave him an OK to go into Kuwait, then told lies that his troops were bayonetting babies in incubators.

They forget that this economy runs off of the blood, sweat and tears of the working class which they hate and won't give the tax cuts that they greedily accept themselves. A war without consequences for anyone in upper income categories for the first time in history--

But the nightmare is just beginning. The social upheaval in America is just beginning. There will be hell to pay. And chimpo is bringing this all on to his heavily fortified self and anyone who thinks the way he thinks.

I'm glad I won't be around to see the results of the things that are happening now. None of us will. But if you come back and look at America in 50 years, it will not resemble the 60's 70's or 80's.

You will see the changes that will steal our democracy from this country taking shape and a police state that has replaced it. And this son of a bitch of a bastard is doing it. Let's hope something comes along that changes the dynamic. Dramatically. No one is more hated all over the world in civilized countries among intelligent life than Bush and his cronies.

He has turned the USA into a garrison state, always wanting to throw a threat out there to scare people into submission. His approval ratings are hovering around 37%...only the Xtian right and Israelis are on his side at this point.

There are people in America who want change, and that number hovers at about 67% right now.

Sign me...Old man who can see
At 4:10 PM, Anonymous said…

Ah, the misdirected argument. Did I mention 9/11? Did I mention tax cuts?
I have not forgotten about America’s complicity and endorsement of Saddam’s genocides, nor do I wish to ignore it. To the contrary—doesn’t our own ignoble history double, triple, quadruple our debt to the Iraqis and Kurds who we’ve murderously betrayed in the past? You would have us sweep it under the rug and let them suffer, well I call that sadistic and cowardly. I say we right our wrongs, which we are attempting to do. And that is why the Kurds are our biggest allies and why there are more Iraqis signed up to fight alongside us than there are Iraqi thugs bent on killing their countrymen.

I too am glad that a cynical isolationist such as yourself will not be around to see the Arab Spring of 2005 bare its fruit. You and your fellow travellers, the Pat Buchanans, Michael Moores, and David Dukes will be a sorry little footnote to history. Like the Americans who packed into Madison Square Garden in the 1930s to protest us fighting in WWII. The world has passed you by, old man.
And AJ is civil to me because, presumably, he believes in discussion and debate. Unlike you. I continue to be amused by the fact that those who are so intent on calling Bush a fascist are the ones who have least tolerance for dissent.
At 10:15 AM, Anonymous said…

So? I backed up my claims. You haven't. Therefore I can only assume you acknowledge the truth of what I write and understand that coalition forces have, in fact, SAVED lives in Iraq.

Nasty Letters To Crooked Politicians

Friday, October 07, 2005

Response to "real lefty" from discussion below Maureen Dowd's column:

8 Comments:

About Me

Previous Posts