Some crusty bitter bitch, with hair like she lit it on fire vs an airhead..lets see how that crusty bitch would have been against Hannity or someone else who argues for a living...

The funds used for the ceremony were private; thus, how they were used is a moot point in regards to federal money spent in Iraq. Going by the idea that "they're spending too much on themselves, give more to others!" does not work here, as the funds are privately appropriated and were not meant to be spent on either the Tsunami relief (which has been given to in mass wads by other private organizations and the government) or the troops. If the donaters and sources of the money wished the funds to go to a ceremony, then they will go to the ceremony.

Its funny to read these posts and how most of you just do not put any thought into what it is that you are saying.
First thing I have to ask:
How do Nazis and an inauguration event come together? Why does everything in our society need to be rationilized by the fucking nazi party?

Another thing -- yes, this was private money, but that should alarm each and every one of us. That means that we have a president in office who is obviously on the take! Sure, we cannot tell people not to give, but if was as ethically sound as he is supposed to be, such a godfearing man, wouldn't he say that it is too much for PUBIC SERVICE?

One last thing-- who gives a shit about Social Security that is going to run out in 25 years? We have HUGE problems that need fixing NOW. Why arent we thinking about that?

Two sides to the issue? Yeah, their side and they will prop up a weak shill for the left who [imagine this] get their ass kicked in the debate.

No, FoxNews is a one-sided right-wing propaganda that Ruppert Murdoch is using to promote his flawed ideology.

Check out how balanced fox news is here: http://mediamatters.org/items/200501220001

Ask Rupert Murdoch why FoxNews doesn't air overseas in England. Instead he offers 'SkyNews'. England also has strict laws about what is considered fair news reporting practice.

-MMM

That bitch looked like a member of Charles Manson's family...

yeah especially since if it wasn't for us you would be speaking german ..... hmm yes I suppose you should love us

I can't wait for the day when it is revealed to pro-bush supporters who are pro fox news (all of them, I am sure), the consequences of propagating socially phukked up and inhumane government and media. Further, and this is where I will lose some sympathy, when that day comes, I hope the whole lot of them off themselves out of self-loathing. It'd be hard to prove the world wouldn't be a better place without them.

Yep, that's what I saw too...

Oh, wait asecond--I mean "What the fuck are you talking about?"

Next time, do us a favor and go with you impulse not to bother fucko

Quite so, because arguing that money should be put into a huge party rather than protecting soldiers is a very strong point.

/sarcasm

Who got their arse kicked?

The right wing loves their myopic view. Hence, they watch FoxNews.

As I recall 82% of Manhattan Island, aka Ground Zero for 9/11 voted for Kerry.

kinda sad when the overwhelming majority of those hit hardest says that Mad King George couldn't get the job done.

Look at me! I'm a liberal commie! I think giving poor people relief is sensible! Watch me critically evaluate ideas using reason and historical precedence!

LOL they have to cry a bit still the intimidation didn't work on republicans so now the democrats are showing their true color YELLOW

Yeah that difference in the polls is Really a landslide. >_>

Half the country voted against Your man. And he's only doing a great job on your TV station. The rest of the world sees differently. Hmm.. I wonder why?

News and editorials should be separate. Biased news undermines liberal democracy.

Possibly so, But I would like to have a president that Actually uses proper grammar, or anything close to english.

Moderative isin't even a word my friend..

I still support Kerry because I know a man who shows loyalty to his people, his party, and his country. (The blatant lies about him show the desperate nature of the ones who dislike him)

I watch CSPAN, and I think moderate is a whole lot better than what our presidency has shown us. Our current administration has all of the trait tags of a fascist nation. (Not to sound too left.. but I'm right. ;] Correct?)

As an independent, I think I can justifiably avoid party lines.

Forget about FDR. How can Bush justify his massive spending and not protect our kids?

I don't need a magnet on my car to tell others that I support our troops. I come right out and say it.

But similarly, I also don't have to take it laying down when some boob TV network owned by a right-wing idjit tells us that we're only patriotic if we agree with them politically.

Yeah, and I say this as a solder:
Bush lied about the reason we invaded Iraq, plain and simple, and no soldier should have to die because of a lie. On top of that the Bush administration has not taken any steps to eliminate our need for fossil fuels. And regardless of where the money for these parties is coming from, the President should not have been partying during a time of war. Oh, and let's get over the whole "what about Clinton" bull sh*t. This isn't about Kerry or Clinton anymore. Bush is in charge and we as citizens owe it to our democracy to hold him accountable for his actions.

Ok. I'm sure you win major credit for having served in a conflict etc etc. But had you driven to Mosul, you'd know that they weren't under Saddam since the Kurdish revolt in 91. And had you gone to Sunni areas you would have seen people pissed off at you for having forced them from power. However, even taking what you say at face value, I sincerely doubt that you speak for all soldiers in the theatre, especially those getting blown to bits on stop loss extensions. True, whoever signed up for reserve or nat guard should have read the fine print and not just thought about the extra money, but that doesn't mean jack when you consider that that armor issues on HMMMVs is down to bad planning and PORK on all military funding bills. HMMMVs could have been produced with better armor if GM knew anything about building efficient vehicles, which it doesn't. Upgrading the tranny and going to 6.2L will not offset the fact that it was never a well designed vehicle for the job at hand, and you forgot to mention they're something like 3000% over annual usage in terms of mileage, and 18 mos behind on maintenance and refit. And BTW, this whole thing affects anyone of military age because guess what, we're not too far away now from a draft, which means that your logic - which is personal and narrow at best - will no longer apply.

Well everyone gave a bunch of solutions to the whole over partying thing. Namely, not so much partying, more spending on useful things. But I wouldn't expect you to pick on that with out me holding your hand. I don't even know what you said about the ACLU exactly.

Fuckin' Genious

suck it

So the American deaths don't bother you?

You know what? The rest of the world is going to hate us no matter what we do.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/050119/cx_ariail_umedia/20051901&e=2

Fuck the rest of the world. I used to care, but they aren't going to change their minds about us. Let them starve.

You sound like Rodney King. And his appeal to "just get along" has done as much for race relations as Armstrong Williams.

Want a solution? Stop the Christian Fundamentalists from engaging the Islamic Fundamentalists in a proxy war using misinformed, misguided, Bible-bashing rednecks, downtrodden Hispanics and inner city blacks as cannon fodder. I have no pity for the gung-ho, raised-on-violence racist soldiers who comprise the other 50% of the armed forces.
My solution is Bush v. Bin Laden in primetime smackdown, one on one. Then in round two, one-eyed Mullah Omar takes on Dick Cheney. Finally, Sharon wrestles the corpse of Arafat (a tougher match than you think). That should have enough for people on both sides of the divide. I'll bring the fried chicken.

I too think that the country should join together in a common cause: minding our own damn business. Since the days of Theodore Roosevelt we have been the policing power of not only the western hemisphere but the majority of the globe. Even after the establishment of blanket organizations like the U.N. we still feel the obligation to "help" any nation or cause we feel is in need. From what I recall, it wasn't citizens of Iraq who were persuading us to liberate them from Saddam, it was George W. Bush. We are such a successful country partly because of the convictions our founding fathers had to bring about their own independence.

With so many of our own citizens in need of better employment, healthcare, and security, I can't understand why we don't fix our domestic problems before the problems of others. I cetaintly don't expect or want other countries to do it for us.

Seen Fight Club? Remember when he's explaining the cost/benefit analysis of doing a recall to the woman on the plane? Think the government doesn't do the same thing when weighing extra armor vs lives of soldiers (public response)?

Clearly, judging by current decisions, we can conclude where the government currently views the issue.

-MMM

i don't know. i think it was their only moment to talk to a big audience. i guess fox would have never let anybody speak so clearly about some anti-bush-thought on TV.
why haven't you seen any "actions" like these from republicans? well seems like the media already allowed them to say averything they wanted.

and btw, everybody should have the right whatever profession her/she holds.. if she writes normally for the yellow-press.. fine, let her do that, but also give her the right to express her thoughts..

(speaking as a german who lives in spain)

For a "truth monger" you sure are deceptive.

To start, you and everyone else griping about Kerry, should look up "Ad Hominem Tu Quoque". Kerry has nothing to do with the argument Judy is giving. Kerry could personally set ablaze every humvee or protective gear those soldiers had and it still would have absolutely nothing to do with Bush spending lavishly on his parties rather than in other, more appropriate, venues.

Secondly, I think you ought to look up Kerry's voting record yourself, since it's well known that Kerry supported the $87 billion bill when the source of the funding was rolling back the tax cuts rather than borrowing during a deficit (Bush's form of the bill). Kerry cast a protest vote on the new bill which had absolutely no danger of failing*. You might be able to make an argument that even as a protest vote it was untasteful, or even unethical to vote no on armor no matter the source of funding, but don't try and imply that Kerry doesn't want our troops adequately armored. I don't think you could make that case using accurate facts.

However, the case can easily be made that body armor, etc for military men has NOT been a priority for Mr. Bush or his cabinet. Just look at Cheney's record on the matter, for example**.

*http://www.factcheck.org/article155.html
**http://www.independentsforkerry.org/info/index.php?category_id=1272

The chick stated she was PRO-Kerry?

Hmm... lemme go look again....

Nope, sorry... not there!

I think she is stating (as I will) she is ANTI-scumbag!

It really does amaze me that Bush got back in, considering his faux pas implementing the English language in the course of his duties. But then again, this country is getting more redneckish and divided by the day anyway. With 37 guys getting killed over there just today, this isssue is going to escalate and some say he might be impeached before long.

Check out truth_monger's user records. He/She just registered just to comment in this post. How strange.

This is my first time posting on Milk and Cookies, although I've read many of the political comments/messages from this link and, especially, the Jon Stewart on CrossFire link. So, I'm probably going to get flamed for this, but, here's my opinion on this:

Regardless of whether Bush used his own pocket money, or the Republicans did, or they used our tax money, the issue is that it shouldn't have been used at all. It doesn't matter whether in the past Clinton used a few dozen million, or Nixon did. The issue is that millions of dollars were used during a time where we should be hoping all, and I mean -all-, our troops should be getting the correct equipment and funding for what they do best. They shouldn't be concentrating on celebrating a victory when only 50% of the eligible voters in America do happen to vote. (It's true. In fact, the only country we beat in % of eligible voters is Switzerland, I think... Or was it Sweden? Either way, in the words of my Political Science professor, they still make better chocolates then us. Australia has 94% voters who vote, though they tax the hell out of people who don't vote... Anyways.) They should be concentrating on what really matters.

And, yeah. -Waits for all the flame to come to him.-

Well, there was more talk about this at the beginning, but.....

As a DC resident, and someone who knows the son of the Chief of police, (not trying to sound snotty here, just saying I know what he thinks, and he may not even think the same thing as the chief) let me verify.

SECURITY WAS PUBLIC MONEY.

Bush is the first president-- ever-- to stick the entire security force on our police.

Welcome back Truth_Monger. Did you forget your password?

The inauguration (not the dozen balls) itself was paid for with YOUR tax dollars. And the Super Bowl is paid for by advertisers. Your point?

It must suck to be constantly wrong. Bush won the election by the smallest margin EVER for an incumbent yet he claims to have some kind of mandate.

Actually, I, myself, am not going to watch the Superbowl. I didn't last year, either. I'm not a fan of football, 'nd I'm actually probably going to wake up after getting off my night audit shift when the game is over. Even then, I wouldn't watch the Superbowl.

Consider this, though: The SuperBowl and the Ads are all in the industry of entertainment and sports. These football players are paid to play, and regardless of any circumstances, unless they involve death or chances of injury to our players, would it be canceled. The Ads are ran through by investors and companies that are all in the business to do what they do best: advertise their product. It just so happens that the Superbowl has a history of being one of the most televised sporting events where more people watch TV then any other event. So, therefore, if they want to stay in business, they'll make commercials for the Superbowl and spend money advertising what they are getting paid to do.

Bush, however, is not paid to run the Superbowl or make Ads for his product. Why? Because he has no product. He has a service to us as the President of the United States. He is getting paid several hundred thousand dollars a year to run the Executive branch of the government and to ensure that any decision that we should have to make, he makes for the majority of the people and to appease everybody. Not to celebrate with over 40 million dollars. He's not getting paid to spend money for his inauguration. He's getting paid to get ur soldiers out of Iraq. He's getting paid to deal with problems we can't handle in our everyday lives.

That's all just my opinion, anyways.