Comments for Semidi

Comment on I Told You So by Again, I Told You So (Plus One Surprise) « Semidi

Again, I Told You So (Plus One Surprise) « Semidi — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 02:56:28 +0000

[...] by semidi As I stated here and here, Joe Lieberman wasn’t going anywhere. And 42 assholes have proven my [...]

Comment on Why Harry Reid Can’t Touch Joe Lieberman by Again, I Told You So (Plus One Surprise) « Semidi

Again, I Told You So (Plus One Surprise) « Semidi — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 02:53:53 +0000

[...] by semidi As I stated here and here, Joe Lieberman wasn’t going anywhere. And 42 assholes proven my [...]

Comment on Why Harry Reid Can’t Touch Joe Lieberman by I Told You So « Semidi

I Told You So « Semidi — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 09:55:21 +0000

[...] by semidi Earlier I noted that Harry Reid can’t touch Joe Lieberman. And guess what? I was right: President-elect Barack Obama has informed party officials that he [...]

Comment on Why Harry Reid Can’t Touch Joe Lieberman by semidi

semidi — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 14:49:39 +0000

Yes, Cliff. However, if Lieberman is going to be punished for cozying up to Republicans, why is it NOT okay for Lieberman to do that but perfectly fine for Obama to do the same? The Dems are being very hypocritical on this one, and Lieberman and the GOP will use it to their own advantage. Reid should have kicked Lieberman to curb years ago, but he chose not to. I doubt he’ll do the right thing now; he CAN’T, without causing a headache for Obama.

Of course, if OBAMA wasn’t so busy trying to recruit Republicans into his Cabinet, this wouldn’t be an issue.

Comment on Why Harry Reid Can’t Touch Joe Lieberman by Cliff

Cliff — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 03:37:18 +0000

There is no reason that Sen. Reid has to give Lieberman anything. President-Elect Obama spoke of bipartisanship in his cabinet. There were plenty of moderate and conservative Republicans who supported Obama (maybe not in such a public way as Sen. Lieberman). Throw this guy out on his ass without a thought. You reap what you sow.

Comment on Three Words by Libby Dole Out On Her Lying Ass! « Semidi

Libby Dole Out On Her Lying Ass! « Semidi — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 02:09:23 +0000

[...] Kay Hagan didn’t help matters. Nor did Dole’s move to name a HIV/AIDS relief bill after the late Jesse Helms, who was positively vile towards HIV/AIDS [...]

Comment on Taliban? WHAT Taliban? by semidi

semidi — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 02:44:02 +0000

Actually Frank, the Taliban was still in existence during the time that Bush lied and said the group had been eradicated. In point of fact, the group dispersed to various regions in November of 2001, which is a far cry from ceasing to exist.

Comment on “We Will Not Be Silenced” by Alice Paul

Alice Paul — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 03:02:06 +0000

We have to get rid of the caucuses. They have disenfranchised the voice of voters long enough and this year was a disgusting bullying, cheating fraud of a display that had nothing to do with democracy. This cannot be allowed to continue. If it does we might as well just go ahead and ask the next richest old white man who he picks for the nominee. *Soros*

Comment on Taliban? WHAT Taliban? by frankg

frankg — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 11:12:26 +0000

Mark, my response was to the headline, “What Taliban?”.
Apologies for any incompleteness on my part. The difference in the two dates was just the first thing I noticed.
I will have to reference Bush’s speech from 2004 to see exactly what he said, but it could be that there were no serious threats in 2004 compared to four years later when this particular attack occurred.
Yes, these attacks have been building for some time. I’ve read lots of warnings about these threats growing since 2006. Two years after Bush’s speech.
We couldn’t pursue them into Pakistan’s lawless regions with large units (understandably), so they have regrouped and rearmed, gathered recruits, allies, etc. for years now.
My main point was that the Coalition forces have restricted their forces to their bases in Afghanistan for so long, the Taliban have gotten bolder and bolder over the years and are operating more and more in that vacuum, with more and more forces. There have been other problems that have allowed this to occur, like NATO rules of engagement, chain of command problems, etc. I don’t why NATO chose this course for such a long time.
Also while the coalition special forces were useful, there is only so much they can do, especially at this point (even some of them were restricted to bases when they were expressly sent to Afghanistan to engage any Taliban resurgance).
In 2004, I doubt much of this was the case.
Again, apologies for any missing of the points.

Comment on Taliban? WHAT Taliban? by semidi

semidi — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 01:29:02 +0000

Frankg, you’re either missing the point or trying to cloud the issue. George W. Bush at BEST misspoke when he said the Taliban were gone — which calls into question his competence — or at worst LIED when he made his claim. And since he lied us into an illegal and unnecessary war in Iraq, he doesn’t have the credibility necessary to defend his statement as misspeaking.

Comment on Taliban? WHAT Taliban? by Mark

Mark — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 00:57:44 +0000

Well CNN picked the headline, not me. My headline: Taliban execute and behead prisoners of war. Under that headline I would place the middle and last paragraphs of the CNN story: Afghan officials on Sunday retrieved six of the victims’ bodies, which were beheaded, according to provincial police chief Matiullah Khan Qaneh. Qaneh said the Taliban militants seized around 50 passengers, releasing 10 of them and taking the rest to the Band Timor area of the district. “According to our information from the area, Taliban killed the remaining 40 passengers,”

Comment on Taliban? WHAT Taliban? by frankg

frankg — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 23:59:45 +0000

A statement from 2004. Things have changed drastically between Afghanistan and Pakistan since then. Taliban and AQ have a safe haven in the latter and cross the border into Afghanistan, and have learned to expand their operations in the face of the low profile/non combat deployment of NATO and its dependance on small operations by special forces to counter the Taliban in a large and rugged area. Large force operations are needed at this point, to secure long term and assure populace that the Taliban won’t be back with their guns and reliquous courts.

Comment on Why AIG Had to Be Saved by semidi

semidi — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 23:33:52 +0000

I think that the irresponsibility of the executives in question doesn’t change the fact that the company needed to be saved. You don’t execute an entire family for the crimes of a few family members.

Comment on Why AIG Had to Be Saved by brandon

brandon — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 06:57:54 +0000

For all of you that think AIG had to be saved, what do you think about the 500,000 dollar week long party the company threw for execs a week after they got our 85billion dollars?

Comment on Nice Company Obama Keeps by semidi

semidi — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 14:41:58 +0000

Let’s not forget the John McCain is a corporate whore, too. As a matter of fact, he had MORE lobbyists working for him than other candidate in the primaries, and STILL has oodles more than Obama (link). CNN ran a story about some of the high-ranking lobbyists McCain has in his campaign (see here).

Obama and McCain are both right-wing, corporate whore scum.

Comment on Nice Company Obama Keeps by John

John — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 13:15:59 +0000

Look at this artical articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/MutualFunds/ALookAtBarackObamaTheInvestor.aspx

Comment on Nice Company Obama Keeps by John

John — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 13:02:36 +0000

I stand corrected. How about hiring the great people from fanny May, who help put this country where it is today. The loosers!How many of these people in Roll Call top richest people list D & R did Fanny May throw money at that they didn’t have? Where was the economic commitee watch dog?I see McCain’s net worth listed, how about Obama net not listed they are telling me that he doesn’t have at least 5 Mil?

Comment on Nice Company Obama Keeps by semidi

semidi — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 03:55:00 +0000

Uhm, actually… Obama isn’t one of the top three wealthiest senators in America, according to Rollcall’s “The 50 Richest Members of Congress.”

Comment on Nice Company Obama Keeps by John

John — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 23:36:57 +0000

How can Obama be the one of the top third wealthiest Senater in the country in less than three years. His top supporter was FANNY MAY and Mr. Franklin Raines. Until Fanny May got rid of Mr. Raines and Fanny May started to go down the tubes. The Senate should check the back ground of their relationship. In fact I heard that Obama hired some of the people that were involved with the down fall of Fanny May as his adisors.I can’t beleive that that you can be so squeaky clean and turn out to be the richest Senator in three years. Look at where the Senitor from NJ is in the teen and how long he was in the senate.

Comment on On the Senate’s Breathtaking Arrogance by texasretiredteacher

texasretiredteacher — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 04:09:03 +0000

This could not be called a rescue plan. It is not a rescue. It is a finger in the dyke.