« Behind Closed Doors? | Home | The Reason Why Clinton Testified Behind Closed Doors »
400 Pro-Bush Bloggers At Blogs For Bush
By Matt Margolis | April 9, 2004
Quite an amazing feat was announced today at Blogs For Bush. Over 400 pro-Bush bloggers are signed up on the Blogroll For Bush.
5 months ago, when Blogs For Bush was launched, probably very few people would have predicted such rapid success. Well, we challenged the stereotype that the blogosphere was liberal. Mazel tov to all the pro-Bush bloggers on the Blogroll For Bush!!!
Topics: Blogs For Bush |
Related Posts:
April 11th, 2004 at 8:47 am
Cold coffee and hot blogs
catching up on my reading can be fun. . . here’s what i found to amuse me in the blogosphere
April 16th, 2004 at 8:00 pm
Viet-What
I’m a simple guy. I only know Vietnam from the point of a historical view. I was in my pre-teens when that thing ended. The only thing I really know about Vietnam was what I was told by two cousins that I idolized and a doll named “Joe“. Since I created all the adventures by “Joe” I can only base what I know from what I was told by my cousins. One was the younger of the two brothers but he went first. He got into some trouble and was told by the judge he could go to an adult jail or head off to Vietnam. It didn’t take a split second for a seventeen year old boy to take off for Asia. Some time during his first tour his brother went into country to pay for the birth of his first child. After the younger got back, mind you he was still a minor and had to get his mom to buy him a bottle, he got drunk and re-upped. Not so bright but ballsy as hell even for a young one. He was ripped and tanned and it didn’t take long for him to catch the eye of a young beauty. Then he married that younger sister of his brothers wife. After a very short honeymoon he headed back to do his second nine months in Vietnam. That was when the tent-offensive took place. His older brother got lost and was assumed captured or killed. After a couple of months he and another soldier carried a wounded comrade out of the jungle. Sadly enough the injured man that was carried out later died in an American hospital. Out of the twenty three men that went missing with him the two were the only survivors. They were both injured and not in such good shape mentally after watching their fellow soldiers die one by one. The other soldier, like him, went to a hospital in Vietnam. The other fellow had been drafted and during his disappearance his nine month hitch had passed. He went home. My cousin spent a few months in the hospital. Then he was sent back into action. A higher rank but back to finish his two year enlistment. There was some weird rule about finishing his time. You see he wasn’t a wealthy officer. Meanwhile, the younger brother finished his nine months and came home. His big brother was still in Vietnam. The younger of the two found his young wife six months pregnant and his big brothers wife living with another guy. He fully realized his brother’s life and stability was in great peril and felt as though his own being meant very little at that stage. He made a deal that if he went back to Asia they would send his brother home. Strangely enough the two brothers never even saw each other during that, close to three year period they were in that war. The younger one got back to America about two weeks before his older brother did. The deal never made it out of the recruiters office. You could say they were both a bit bitter toward our government but the strange thing was they never once thought what they were doing in Vietnam was wrong. I saw a picture that the youngest took of a dead V.C. pinned to a tree by the blade of a bayonet with a cigarette hanging out of his mouth. His whole troop stood beside the North Com., one by one, for Christmas cards. It could be said he was among the worst of the worst in country. When shot at he shot back. That was the rule of war. Never once did he see American soldiers do anything close to what they were accused of by, what he referred to as, mamby pambys at home. Later. Years after that event had ended, and grown cold in many peoples minds, he made a statement that I didn’t understand then. The man said they could kill all the communist in Vietnam but when he got home they couldn’t kill them anymore. Now I get it. The communist in America spent their time protesting and giving testimonies to congress. They were U.S. citizens and fought here for the North Vietnamese government. Not in Vietnam. When I hear the comparisons to what is happening in Iraq as, “Bush’s Vietnam”, I have to wonder what I can call the Americans making these statements. If they were, and I am convinced they were, communist then and we are fighting terrorist now, we can only assume they are no more than that. Those words, if this is, “Bush’s Vietnam”, must be coming from our present day American terrorist.
R. L. West
Ada, Ok.
April 19th, 2004 at 6:42 pm
One way or the other
As of late Kerry has utilized the words in Bob Woodward’s book to bolster his campaign. He has touted the accusation that Saudi Arabia, as a government, has conspired with the President Bush administration to lower gas prices just before the 2004 elections to manipulate the American vote. This accusation is suspicious at best and at the bias view an out right lie. Even if one is gullible, as John Kerry assumes, it simply goes against his previous statements. He has made the statements that he is prefer over George Bush as the President of the United States. If you by this statement than Saudi Arabia would do all they could to raise the gas prices before the elections to help assure their man would get elected. After all the leaders in the Middle East have been pointed out as his staunch supporters. Now which is it? Is Kerry supported by the leaders of the Middle East or are they willing to break the law to defeat him. He can’t have it both ways.
R. L. West
Ada, Ok.
April 20th, 2004 at 12:39 am
Take the Troops
The new socialist Spanish prime minister has remained true to his word and has announced that he will remove all his troops from Iraq. Now Honduras declares they will remove all their soldiers as soon as possible. We have been told that militarily their removal will not make any real difference. That’s probably true. After all it only makes up a small percentage of the fighting force. But publicity wise. That’s a different story. It don’t look good. I think President Bush should turn this one on it’s ear. Make some kind of an offer that will allow these troops to become American Soldiers. Let them stay in Iraq. We should probably make certain that they stay really really safe. I know it can be a delicate process to basically ask soldiers to commit treason against their home country but we should do it anyway. Heck! Let’s get the offer to include the French and other conniver’s. Even a hand full from each country that take us up on our offer will make a media bonanza for the U. S. A..
Robert West
Ada, Ok.
April 20th, 2004 at 12:46 am
I say any country who bows out of Iraq also bows out of getting any aid $$ from the U.S.
April 21st, 2004 at 8:15 pm
Commission Prevent or Just Dupe
The 9/11 commission has become it’s own entity. The question at the heart seems to be should Jamie Gorelick step aside or not. To tell you the truth, It no longer matters! She is just one of the symptoms of the bigger problem. The commission itself has taken on a bias that makes it moot in it’s final conclusions. Whether or not it will make a difference in the upcoming election answers itself. No one is going to hear the final findings as anything that will change their minds. If someone looks at this decision as what they will base their vote on, there is something wrong with that person. It has became obvious by the questioning that what has taken place in the public forum reveals that the commission is no longer looking at the causes and treatment for the terrorist attacks of 9/11. This is just a bias and extremely partisan witch hunt that points fingers. The only action that makes sense now is a total disbanding of the commission. At any rate, the commission will show that we need the Patriot act. It will be renewed, at least in some form. The failures to result in any other constructive facts is really a shame. I think this commission could have gave objective findings that may have even improved things. Now, no one can utilize or even pay any attention to the final report. So much for that thought!
Robert West
Ada, Ok.
April 23rd, 2004 at 5:36 pm
Hind Sight
Criticism as to whether or not we should or shouldn’t have went to war in Iraq, right or wrong, is an on going debate. Most of the criticism centers around the actions that have taken place since the major war activities have ceased. We have faced overwhelmingly more human casualties post war in both lives lost and human injuries. Any way you look at this it is a heavy horrible loss. That is not disputed nor is it debated among political parties. At this point the critics of the peace say repeatedly that we have done too little to protect our soldiers and the people of Iraq. I can make no statement as to whether that is a correct or extremely partisan view of the situation that currently exists in that country so far away. I can, however, eliminate the second guessing. A year ago things looked much different to the American people. A pole by Gallup found that over 60 % of Americans felt that the war would take more than a year. Fox News / Opinion Dynamics polled an discovered that a whopping 80% of those polled thought we would spend over six months fighting house to house within Baghdad. The national pole by the AP / Ipsos felt as though Americans would face many defeats in battle with Iraq’s Republican Guard. That would certainly lead one to believe that until after the armed conflict began we expected to be fighting a war. Under anticipated unfolding events we would undoubtedly not have been in control of security of either our soldiers or the people of Iraq. Under anticipated actions many more deaths on both sides were expected even by those who now cry foul.
R. L. West
April 29th, 2004 at 7:11 pm
No Way Out
The call’s for an exit strategy from Iraq is a deafening roar that emanates, primarily, from a view of political bias. I hate to be the one to inform them but, there is no exit strategy because we might never leave Iraq militarily. Many people will try to argue but history will repeat itself. Most Americans can’t grasp the idea of permanent intervention but such activities are not unusual. The largest military base, outside of the U. S. is in Germany. There is even more than one. We still have troops in Japan. Is there a pattern starting to develop for you. If not let’s take the, arguably, most successful war we have been in since WWII. Korea! My father left flesh in Asia over that one. We beat back the Communist North and established a D. M. Z. that still exists today. There are an approximate 30,000 troops still there to assure that the border separating the North from the South remains. South Korea is a vivacious successful society that imports a massive amount of raw resources and exports some of the finest finished products this planet has ever known. They live independently and are so far away from where they once were the land itself is not even recognizable. They have an independent streak that even has a large anti-American constituency. Surrounded by communist nations that are poor and held back in the past South Korea flourishes. I’m not saying that we will need to have 30,000 troops in Iraq in 50 years but we might! One thing is certain. There can not be an exodus.
R. L. West
April 30th, 2004 at 12:14 pm
Who’s the expert
The man who wishes to lead our military in a time of war desires to second guess naval commanders. John Kerry uttered the words “Mission is not completed. It must be devastating for the thousands of navel enlistees that the man that is running for president of the United States can tell them they failed. In May of 2003 the leaders of our navy and president Bush watched the return of our brave sailors to America declaring that they had accomplished the duties they had been ordered by their leaders to complete in Iraq. Now, a year latter, they are told they failed in the duties they were charged with. Kerry and other opponents of George Bush are utilizing their life threatening undertakings as some kind of a campaign catchphrase. The sailors charged to protect and defend our freedom are no more than pawns to these whoremongers. Some how the extensive experience of Ted Kennedy and Robert Bird exceed the comprehension of the commanders in our Navy. They wished that these dedicated navel armed forces were somehow still in Iraq. That way their retrospective proficiency could be exercised to it’s entirety. According to these fair-minded proponents, the logic behind the declaration of “Mission Accomplished” must be part of a “Right Wing Conspiracy”. How else can president Bush’s opponents justify their repugnant statements.
R. L. West
October 25th, 2004 at 7:26 pm
Bush’s Awful Mess
I’ve served in Iraq, and that’s why I can’t vote for this president again
By Andrew Borene
I’m a Minnesota guy, born and raised. I’m from Edina, I went to the Blake School in Minneapolis, I was the captain of the Macalester football team. After I graduated from Mac in ’98, I spent a couple of years working for Norwest and Wells Fargo as an investment banker. I started law school at the University of Minnesota in the year 2000, and after about two months dropped out and enlisted in the Marine Corps. I was going to become a JAG attorney. But after I got bit by the bug to learn a little bit more about the Marine Corps, I decided I wanted to be a ground officer and go around the world with guns rather than deliver legal briefs in a courtroom.
Not long after September 11, I ended up as an intelligence officer with the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force. I was an intelligence collection officer, one of several, with the 1st Marine Division, which is the infantry unit of the expeditionary force. Personally, most of my work in intelligence was done during the build-up to the invasion of Iraq, here in the United States. I deployed to the Middle East in February of 2003. I was in Kuwait, I crossed over to Iraq the night the invasion began. Made it as far north as the north side of Baghdad, drove into Baghdad the day that Saddam’s statue fell down. I basically was there for the events of the invasion and the fall of the regime.
Just after President Bush declared Mission Accomplished and the end of major combat operations, I was sent home because it looked like things were going to settle down, and my wife was pregnant and had some pregnancy issues. That was pretty much the end of my combat phase of the war, but the war was not over for me at that time. When I came back, I was still serving as an intelligence officer. My job was to support the troops in Iraq by putting together a lot of reporting from agencies and assets, and helping in an intelligence capacity through the computer and by communicating with the troops on the ground. It was also my job to call families when there were casualties–not deaths but injuries. That is a story that hasn’t really been reported. You don’t see those numbers. But there are now over 10,000 young Americans whose lives are forever changed by the injuries they sustained there.
When I left Iraq, fully two-thirds of the Iraqi people supported our occupation of Iraq and wanted us there. Also at that time, the 1st Marine Division, the unit I’d been part of, did occupation duty in southern Iraq for four months, in what are now lawless areas where al-Sadr is. But during that four months, no Marines were killed in action. That’s an important thing to note: what happened in Iraq to cause the Iraqi people to suddenly swing to–the last poll I saw said over 80 percent of the Iraqi people want the occupation forces gone tomorrow. And they see the coalition as actually creating more chaos and more insecurity in their country. For me personally, I fully supported President Bush, I fully supported the invasion of Iraq. I still support the liberation of the Iraqi people, but I came around to support John Kerry when I realized that this administration has erred time and time again. Even in the pursuit of their own end of a free Iraq, they’re incompetently carrying out the plan.
I started to get doubts as I drove south from Baghdad into southern Iraq where we were going to do occupation duty. The Army forces were coming north at the time. At the time we drove into Baghdad, people were literally hugging and kissing the Marines. We had Marines wearing soft-covers instead of helmets. It was a very permissive environment at the time. I’m not going to say it was safe, but I will say that the Iraqi people genuinely appreciated us. The joy that we felt doing that, I’ve got to think it’s only akin to what the WWII vets marching into Paris felt on the day that they liberated France.
But as we were driving south, there was a Shi’ite pilgrimage going on at the same time. It hadn’t happened in over 20 years because of Saddam, but they actually got to exercise their religious freedom. As our Marines were driving south past these Shi’ite people waving and smiling, the Army was driving north, as I said. I expected to see construction equipment, or water, or supplies. Instead what I saw were combat troops–tanks moving up the highway. They had dismounted infantry along the side pushing Iraqi people off to the edge of the highway. It was at that time I started to have some doubts about how the occupation was going to go if we… There was a window of opportunity where the Iraqi people genuinely wanted assistance, and we could have exploited that opportunity and used it to the advantage of the Iraqi people and of the U.S. forces in Iraq.
Unfortunately, the reconstruction funds were never spent. If you just look at the record, I think it was $18 billion appropriated by Congress for reconstruction, of which this administration only spent 5 percent. They spent more than seven times that much money on non-bid contracts to Halliburton. And this is the kind of stuff that got me upset. I think the final screw for me was… there’s a Marine general named Anthony Zinni. He wrote a book called Battle Ready
with Tom Clancy, who obviously has a following in conservative circles. I read that book, and then General Zinni came and gave a lecture to the Marine officers at Camp Pendleton where I was stationed in which he made a rather scathing indictment of the incompetence with which the White House was essentially interfering with commanders on the ground.
The thing that General Zinni was talking about was that the White House had appointed spokesmen. I don’t know if you recall the press conferences in Baghdad, but there was a guy named Dan Senor standing over [military officials’] shoulder at every press conference. They spent more time on the information campaign, on deceiving the American people about what was happening in Iraq, than they did on actually trying to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people. That’s a problem. General Zinni is one of the generals who spoke out and said, hey, you need more troops for the occupation. And you need better plans for the stability operations after the invasion.
Because everybody knew the invasion was going to go very well, even with the limited number of troops. However, any of the generals who dissented–like Shinseki, who got basically relieved. If you look what happened yesterday, where it looks like even Bremer on the day he got there said he wanted more troops on the ground, and that what we had was not sufficient to stop the looting. The bottom line is that, even though the argument about weapons of mass destruction and terrorist proliferation was fabricated, the underlying argument, the principle that a free Iraq would be better for the war on the terror, still holds true. But you can’t even get that done.
And frankly, myself, I have the opportunity to speak out because I’m kind of an odd case. I got back from Iraq completely in one piece and healthy, and was selected to play rugby for the All-Marine Corps rugby team. And I blew out my knee and had reconstructive surgery, and got a medical discharge from the Marine Corps on August 15.
On August 16 I walked into Kerry headquarters and asked them how I could help out, because I’ve followed the issues very closely, and Senator Kerry laid out a plan long ago to double the size of the special forces, to increase funding for intelligence personnel and operations, and that’s the kind of thing we need to do. It’s just common sense. Where do terrorists live? How do they get trained? They get trained in little camps. Or they’re a couple of guys in an apartment building. Prior to 9/11, many of them were in Hamburg before the attack happened.
How do you get them? You use special forces, you use intelligence operations, you find a couple of them and drop some black helicopters and guys in black pajamas, and you whack them. And that’s the kind of operation we need to launch. This sideshow in Iraq where we send 150,000 teenagers without enough equipment to manage the occupation, and without the kind of international support we needed for that battle on the Iraqi front, it really detracted from our ability globally to stop the spread of terror.
Another issue I had is, in the last 12 months, $3-4 billion worth of heroin has been exported from Afghanistan. So that $3-4 billion, that’s illicit drugs, that’s illicit money. And who does that money go back to? It goes back to the former Taliban warlords, it goes back to the people who generated the very first terrorist strike on America anyway.
And that $3-4 billion worth of heroin, how does it get exported? It gets exported through clandestine shipping networks, the same kind of clandestine shipping networks that one would need to smuggle weapons of mass destruction. So the bottom line for me is, America is less safe because of the way this administration has prosecuted the war on terror. Senator Kerry and Senator Edwards have laid out real structural plans. They want to add two active duty divisions to the armed forces. They want to double special forces. And they want to rely on the 9/11 Commission, which is something the administration opposed in the first place, to look into those failings and ask how we can make America better.
I guess I used to be what they call “Republican in name only.” Kind of a Ramstad Republican, you know–socially liberal and fiscally conservative. Unfortunately the issues in this election are just too big for that.
Also see…
August 24th, 2005 at 10:17 pm
migraine-headache-medication
400 Pro-Bush Bloggers …