Tuesday, April 24, 2007

Hartshorne as a student at Yale

Title: A church for a summer colony
Artist: Hartshorne
Date: c1933

Reid: Petraeus is a Liar

Sen. Harry Reid is in over his head and has possibly gone insane. His total detachment from reality is showing more each day. When will we see the complete meltdown?
BASH:He also said that General Petraeus is going to come to the Hill and make it
clear to you that there is progress going on in Iraq, that the so-called
surge is working. Will you believe him when he says that?

REID: No, I don't believe him, because it's not happening.

Who was it that referred to Conservatives by snarking "Hate is not a family value"? Reid's hatred of Bush and his lust for power, I believe, have unhinged him.

UPDATE: Sniper One thinks his problem is mere stupidity.
UPDATE: Thanks to the tube like magnificence of the Internet Bloodthirsty Liberal captures Rudy's thoughts on Dems in general.
Gateway Pundit reports that the San Francisco Treat will not meet with General Petraeus. That's leadership!
MVRWC has the audacity to think a soldier has an opinion worth listening to.
Red State says resignation now!
WMD brings Boehner in his A-Game showing true leadership. Read on-Matt nails Reid and the SFT as well.

Elysium by Brandon of Javajive

Ostroy, Harry Reid Groupie

Andy Ostroy, who believes the media and its writers have become whores for the right wing writes for the media. Now that we know what he is, what's he cost?

Sen. Harry Reid Is Right About Iraq War
Last week Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., caused a ruckus in
Washington by saying that there is no military solution to the Iraq War. That
it's over and it's time to get out.

"I believe myself that the secretary of state, the secretary of defense —
and you have to make your own decision as to what the president knows — that
this war is lost, and that the surge is not accomplishing anything, as indicated
by the extreme violence in Iraq yesterday," Reid said.


Bush and his war-mongering cronies took it upon themselves to invade a
sovereign nation under the guise of (a) retaliating against Sept. 11; (b)
protecting America and Britain from WMD "mushroom clouds;" and then (c) building a stable democracy in the Middle East. As we now all know, there were no WMD in Iraq, there was no connection to bin Laden and al Qaeda and true, sustainable democracy is but a fantasy. Failure, failure, failure. And the insurgents have been empowered and emboldened by this failure, not weakened. And Bush's desperate "troop surge" is not going to make one bit of difference in changing Iraq's military and political landscape.


Stop regurgitating all this BS about progress and success and show it to

Ah, the usual Liberal restating what Reid didn't say to make it more acceptable.

Next in the Liberal litany of usuals;
Supporters of the GWOT are war-mongering cronies of Bush
Iraq was a good sovereign nation, just remember the flying kites and balloons
No WMD, i.e., Bush lied and got Congress to lie with him
No al-Qaeda connection, but anyway just imply Bush said bin-Laden
No sustainable democracy because everybody knows it should have happened by now

Ostroy is right about emboldening the terrorists (he lovingly calls them insurgents), he and Reid and their ilk empower and embolden them everyday and as long as they voice terrorism's daily talking points, the surge may not work.

Andy, stop regurgitating the Liberal BS about failure and regression and you won't be able to continue as a whore for the right wing media. Maybe the BS is your price.

e-mail chuckle

The old priest lay dying in the hospital. For years he had faithfully served the people of the nation's capital. He motioned for his nurse to come near. "Yes, Father?" said the nurse.

"I would really like to see Ted Kennedy and Hillary Clinton before I die" whispered the priest.

"I'll see what I can do, Father" replied the nurse.

The nurse sent the request to the Senate and waited for a response. Soon the word arrived. Kennedy and Clinton would be delighted to visit the priest.

As they went to the hospital, Clinton commented to Kennedy "I don't know why the old priest wants to see us, but it will certainly help our images." Kennedy couldn't help but agree.

When they arrived at the priest's room, the priest took Kennedy's hand in his right hand and Clinton's hand in his left. There was silence and a look of serenity on the old priest's face.

Finally Senator Kennedy spoke. "Father, of all the people you could have chosen, why did you choose us to be with you as you near the end?"

The old priest slowly replied "I have always tried to pattern my life after our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ."

"Amen" said Kennedy.

"Amen" said Clinton.

The old priest continued..."He died between two lying thieves. I would like to do the same."

Chuck Hagel Faces the Truth

This from High Plains Patriot via Gateway Pundit :

Monday, April 23, 2007
Bruning Polling Ahead of Hagel
From Jon Bruning's press
release today, 23 April. Polling funded by Bruning's exploratory committee, completed by experienced, reputable polling firm.

Ballot 1
If Chuck Hagel
decides he does want to pursue a 3rd term in the Senate, and the Republican
primary election for U.S. Senate were held today between Jon Bruning and Chuck Hagel, for whom would you vote?
**Jon Bruning
leads Chuck Hagle 47%
to 38% statewide
**Bruning leads Hagel among
conservatives 57% to 31%Bruning leads Hagel among Republicans in Congressional District 2
(53% to 35%)
**Bruning leads Hagel among
Republicans in Congressional District 3 (52% to 33%). Congressional District 3
represents 42% of the Republican primary vote
Bruning leads Hagel in Douglas
County (Omaha) 54% to 34%
Bruning leads Hagel in the
Lincoln-Hastings-Kearney media market 49% to 34%
Bruning leads Hagel in Lancaster
County (Lincoln) 48% to 41%
Bruning leads Hagel in the entire
Omaha media market 44% to 42%
Hagel leads Bruning in 3 GOP
primary subgroups:
Congressional District 1 by 46% to 37%
Moderates by 46% to 37%
Liberals by 46% to 32%

Ballot 2"
Now suppose you learned that many Republicans here in Nebraska are
dissatisfied with Chuck Hagel because of his unrelenting criticism of
President Bush and for voting with liberal Democrats for a defense bill that
calls for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq and is loaded with pork barrel
spending. They are also upset that Senator Hagel has suggested publicly that impeachment of President Bush is an option, saying "You can impeach him. And before this over, you might see calls for his impeachment." Knowing this, if the Republican primary for U.S. Senate were held today between Jon Bruning and Chuck Hagel for whom would you vote?"
**Support for Jon Bruning increases by 8 points statewide while
support for Chuck Hagel drops by 7 points - a 15 point net shift in
the Attorney General's favor.
**Bruning leads Hagel in
Congressional District 1 by 12 points (48% - 36%) and among moderates by 4
points (45%-41%). Only among liberals does Bruning trail Hagel (39% - 46%).
widens his lead over Hagel in Douglas County (Omaha) 57% to 33%,
Congressional District 2 (56% to 32%), and seniors 65+ (52% to 33%).
**Support for Bruning increases significantly among conservatives
(63% to 23%), voters under 50 years of age (56% to 33%), those over 50 (55% to
30%), those in Lancaster County (Lincoln) 55% to 38%, the
Lincoln-Hastings-Kearney media market (57% to 26%), the Omaha media market (50% to 35%), and Congressional District 3 (59% to 27%).

posted by Brian Bresnahan

Good, I hope they throw his arrogant tail out of office.

Time for Harry Reid to Vamoose

Reid is a reed in the wind, only without the reed's strength, suppleness and usefulness.

The Democratic strategy to use the ongoing violence in Iraq to their
political advantage in the run-up to the 2008 elections requires some skill and
nuance. But it's growing harder to believe Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid --
Nevada's own -- actually possesses those skills.

The Democratic strategy is anything but straightforward.
Sen. Reid and his colleagues know there is much political hay to be made by
criticizing President Bush's planning and conduct of the post-war occupation.
But they also know that while "cut our losses and pull out" plays well in
Democratic caucuses, it failed in the Connecticut general election in 2006, when
Sen. Joseph Lieberman and his anti-surrender stance handily defeated end-the-war candidate Ned Lamont -- even though Sen. Lieberman had to run as an independent to pull it off.

That's the kind of "poll" that really counts.

Thus, the Democrats' careful strategy requires them to appear to oppose Mr.
Bush's ongoing occupation of Iraq (to please their pacifist base), without
taking any concrete, "binding" actions to change the status quo.
Enter Sen. Reid, flopping around in big red shoes like Bozo the

Reid has instead given moral support to the terrorists. His "leadership"
has been to try to cut off our forces' war funding. Now he has told the
Islamofascists that victory is theirs if they can just keep blowing up U.S.
soldiers and Iraqi citizens a little while longer.

In aiding and comforting the enemy in wartime, Reid has betrayed the office
he holds
, shamed the Nevadans he represents and made the Democratic Party he
leads synonymous with surrender. There is one way he can repair the damage he's done to the nation: step down.

…actively undermining our fighting men and women in Iraq. His legislative
efforts to starve our armed forces in the middle of a war are as contemptible as
anything I’ve witnessed in my 25 years in Washington. And yesterday he made a
statement that was so disgraceful and brazen that it could have been uttered by
Tokyo Rose during World War II or Jane Fonda during the Vietnam War. The difference, of course, is that Reid is the highest ranking Democrat in the
United States Senate.

David Broder, the
sagely insightful “dean” of the Washington press corps, attacked Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) today over his claim that the war in Iraq is lost.

Speaking on XM radio, Broder said that Reid should “learn to engage mind before mouth opens,” and suggested that Reid’s Senate allies “have a little caucus and decide how much further they want to carry Harry Reid” and his “bumbling performance.”

Asked if Harry Reid is “an embarrassment,” Broder said, “I think so,” since “every six weeks or so there’s another episode where he has to apologize for the way in which he has bungled the Democratic case.”

Hang up the gloves Harry. Even the ref is laughing at you.

(All emphasis mine)