Vox

Couple problems. First off, you get all your info from the same blog. Not healthy.

Of course, it could be accurate, but when they start on the "friends in the media"... lets be honest- the meida is not left wing. They aren't centrist. They are so far to the right that the American left is most other countries conservative party.

As for the pick of Palin... never, EVER underestaminate the American public. They will surprise you with a new low EVERY single time.

Ah yes, the surge. Of course, some say it succeed because the Sunni's a Shittes have finished the ethnic cleansing, but lets ignore that. Or the fact it is supposed to be temporary. Or the fact we should have used that many soldiers in the first place.

First off, you troll all the posts on the same blog. Not healthy.

The media is not left wing???? Baahahahahahahahahahaha!

Yes, we shouldn't underestimate the American public as they will surprise us with a new low every time. Hey, aren't you an American?

The violence and killing has gone way, way down and is more peaceful than it was before the surge. But let's ignore that. Yes, we should have used that many soldiers in the first place. Just like we should have killed or captured Osama Bin Laden when we had the chance and knew he was a threat and blowing up American targets on Clinton's watch. But everything is 20/20 in hindsight isn't it? Especially from armchair generals.

Your concern about my sanity is touching, but misplaced. And you completely ignore my point.

As for the media being "left wing"... you say that because... what? You do realize that the US is so far to the right that any deviation from extreme right would look "liberal"?

Are you familiar with the term "Ad Hominum"? Or have you not taken a logic class. It isn't complicated- just read up on logic and you'll be avoiding the fallacies in no time.

Yes, because the Pentagon is armchair generals... wait they aren't. And they DID want more troops.

As for killing Bin Laden... remember the 90s? You seem not to. Remember the Republicans complaining about the cost and waste in lives of the war in Serbia? And wait... they were the majority in Congress! Sure, the president could have started an illegal war... but he would have been booted out of office, like he almost was for cheating on his wife.

You also seem to miss two important parts of what I said- the violence has dropped because all the people who are targets are mostly dead (NOT a good sign). And for 20/20 hindsight... no, this was something people saw ahead of time... like George W Bush Senior.

You seem to not realize who incredibly juvenille your responces are- "well, you did it too!" is a retort suitable for the nursery yards, not an actual argument.

I'm sorry, all I heard from that response was, "blah, blah, blah... You dirty rat! blah, blah, blah."

I found a new, and clever, source - and went post happy. Hardly the only place I get my news, just where I was that night.

"You do realize that the US is so far to the right that any deviation from extreme right would look "liberal"?"
From your lips to God's ears - LOL

You may want to look up ad hominum before you accuse others of using that tactic. Perhaps a mirror would be in order. We try to keep the discussion out of the gutter here, but occasionally readers get a bit passionate. You seem to fit that description, as well.

I think you missed the point of the article in the first place. It did have a line about Obama's "media sympathizers", but the point of the article is about his inability to accept that the GOP in general, and McCain in particular, might get things right on purpose. Hence the "Oops"

Not really. Every single other first world nation (and a good portion of the third and second world) use socialized health care. It has lower costs and in some places superior services. It hasn't been instituted in the US because it is "leftist".

And then there is gay rights... which speaks for itself.

Taxes, government services, etc- we are to the right of alot of the world.

So the Republicans do things that are non-stupid? That isn't a surprise- after all, a stopped clock is right twice a day.

As for "right on purpose", it is obvious adding more troops will reduce violence- that is why the military wanted to have more men in the first place.

Of course, the "surge" is supposed to be temporary (hence the name), but it hasn't.

So the Republicans intelligence in this case is listening to advice given 5 years ago... and then claiming it as a victory. The word's "intellectually dishonest" come to mind- if they had used the troop levels asked for origionally, we wouldn't have this problem.