?

Log in

fear and loathing on the campaign trail '08 [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Sean

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

(no subject) [Mar. 13th, 2007|09:32 pm]
Sean
Adam Lasko
linkpost comment

Olbermann goes yard, again. [Jan. 31st, 2007|11:15 am]
Sean
Keith Olbermann's Special Comment about the massive own-horn-tooting that went on during SOTU.
linkpost comment

(no subject) [Jan. 31st, 2007|11:12 am]
Sean
I love all my fellow Alabama fans, but Good Lord.

"You notice if Bama lands a good recruit then we are "cheating". When they do, it's just good clean recruiting. Their morons..."

*Sigh*
linkpost comment

(no subject) [Jan. 24th, 2007|02:23 pm]
Sean
THANK GOD.
linkpost comment

(no subject) [Dec. 7th, 2006|12:30 pm]
Sean
The New York Post, the last bastian of respectable journalism SURRENDER MONKEYS!


THE COUNSEL OF COWARDS
PrintEmailStory Bottom

December 7, 2006 -- After nine laborious months, the Iraq Study Group yesterday recom mended that there be peace in the Middle East.

Well, of course.

But how to achieve it?

One word: Surrender.

Surrender in Iraq - and, in due time but inevitably, beyond.

Not in so many words, of course.

The 10-member group, headed by Republican Jim Baker and Democrat Lee Hamilton, wants to pull out U.S. combat troops within 16 months.

It wants Washington to ask those fomenting violence in Iraq - Iran and Syria - to be good fellows and stop it.

And it wants Israel to begin another "dialogue" in pursuit of peace. (Translation: It wants Israel to surrender, too.)

"The situation is grave and deteriorating," the much-hyped report begins, adding: "There is no path that can guarantee success" and "There is no action the American military can take that, by itself, can bring about success in Iraq."

Of course there are no guarantees.

There are never guarantees.

The report decidedly avoids using the word "victory." Rather, it sees only the possibility of somehow improving the odds of "success."

But that's just putting lipstick on this pig of a report.

The fact is, the study group offers 79 recommendations adding up to a cowardly exit from Iraq - and the abandonment of tens of thousands of Iraqis who took America's promises at face value.

Also to be tossed overboard are regional allies who believed America has the will to finish the fight it began.

Does it? That is the question.

President Bush has said quitting the fight "simply has no realism to it at all."

Here's hoping he means it. Because Iraq is a key theater in the broader War on Terror. And anything short of a win there doesn't mean the larger war is lost - but it makes ultimate victory immeasurably harder to achieve.

The group's solution?

Talk to Tehran and Damascus.

But those regimes are already talking: Iran is actively supporting the Shia insurrection in Iraq, and Syria is murdering members of the freely elected Lebanese government.

Which brings us to the study group's focus on a new peace process for Israel and its enemies - which represents utterly breathtaking disregard for decades of failed earlier such efforts.

Israel has made every manner of concession, fruitlessly. To this day, Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran vow only to erase Israel from the map.

But the group wants more diplomacy, because it sees the Arab-Israeli conflict as central to the Middle East puzzle.

Which is nonsense: Israel, in fact, is a vivid symbol of the broader clash between Islamic fundamentalists and jihadis, and Western civilization.

Ending the conflict there can come only with victory in the War on Terror - not the other way around.

Why - absent a strong threat - would Iran, Syria and their puppet dispensers of terror quit, when their efforts to spread their power seem to be succeeding?

Why would they agree to help their enemies - America and Israel?

The answer: They wouldn't.

Baker himself all but admits it: "We didn't get the feeling Iran is champing at the bit to come to the table with us to talk about Iraq," he said. "And in fact we say they very well might not."

No fooling.

Call it anything you like, but this latest prescription for Iraq is nothing more than a plan for surrender. Notwithstanding the disaster that would surely follow.

President Bush should thank the ISG for its work - and promptly toss the report in the trash.

The president has a lot to answer for, but Operation Iraqi Freedom, while badly mismanaged, was a noble - and necessary - undertaking.

The war is not yet lost, nor need it be.

Bush needs courage right now.

The Iraq Study Group counsels cowardice - and, ultimately, a shameful defeat.
linkpost comment

(no subject) [Dec. 7th, 2006|02:38 am]
Sean
i think i'm going to respect [read: not like, but respect] Republican members of this Congress more in the next two years than Dems. Why? Because Pelosi & co. are going to waste time pandering to centrists, sacrificing their ideals in the name of moderation while folks like Arlen Specter (R-PA) make attempts to restore habeas corpus.

We'll see what happens. I suppose it's the best thing that the new majority [controlled, basically, by aforementioned centrist Democrats] can do to moderate until 2008 so that we can get a Democratically controlled executive branch.

. . . but would that be a good thing? Wouldn't the best thing for 2008 America be not Clinton/Obama/Feingold/Bayh, but a McCain/[insert meaningless Veep] with an even more strongly Democratically controlled legislate?

Isn't government better when it's three inches away from gridlock'd?

Let's have a dialogue here. I am expecting comments from Rob, Geoff, Becca J., and Brad. Everyone else will earn a special place in my heart. Sorry to assign you folks homework, but more than half of you cocksucks don't even have finals this week. Anyone else who's listening, please feel free to chime in and invite.
link6 comments|post comment

(no subject) [Dec. 6th, 2006|09:52 pm]
Sean
I'd just like to confirm that 1/3 of our wins this season came against the only two winless teams in division I football.
link1 comment|post comment

(no subject) [Dec. 4th, 2006|10:54 pm]
Sean
I've decided that the next time I hit up some karaoke, I'm going to start off with some Beastie Boys. The only question is, which of the following should I break off?

So Whatcha Want
Hey Ladies
Sure Shot
Root Down
Get It Together
The Move
Body Movin'
Intergalactic
-other-

Any suggestions for non-bboys songs would be appreciated as well. Oh, if you're about to suggest Wham's "Young Guns [Go For It!]", it's totally been done.

link4 comments|post comment

(no subject) [Nov. 20th, 2006|11:22 am]
Sean
MIke Shula's stats:

26-23 in four years
13-19 in SEC Games (2-8 in the last conference games)
4-12 in road games
0-19 when trailing in the 4th Quarter
0-4 v. Auburn
0-4 v. LSU
1-3 v. Tennessee (1 win by 3 points)
1-3 v. Arkansas (including blowing a 3 TD lead in the middle of the 3rd quarter in 2003)
1-11 in rivalry games.
3-10 in November (all 3 wins v. MSU)
6-15 in games decided by one score or less
9 out of 26 victories in the past 4 years have come the state of Mississippi.
14 Offensive Touchdowns v. conference opponents (13 games) since October 15, 2005.

Upsets: Northern Illinios, Hawai'i, Minnesota, Mississippi State

No offensive touchdowns v. Mississippi State in two years.

This season, half of our wins came against three teams with a combined 1 win (Duke, FIU, ULM). This season, we've lost 4 out of the last 5. This season, we squeaked by Vanderbilt, we played Hawai'i close, we lost to Slyvester Croom, and we needed 60 minutes to beat Duke and FIU.

It's time to cut and run from Shula.
linkpost comment

Facebook v. Myspace [Nov. 16th, 2006|01:13 pm]
Sean
I'm a little bummed that hamsterster was left out of this, but it's still funny.

Facebook: Hey.
MySpace: Sup.
Facebook: So…how's it going?
MySpace: It's going great, actually. How are things with you?
Facebook: Not bad. Not bad at all.
MySpace: I mean, you had a pretty good idea to start with.
Facebook: Now what is THAT supposed to mean.
MySpace: You and I both know that you based Facebook on MySpace.
Facebook: WHAT!? That's ridiculous. I don't see your users poking each other!
MySpace: That's because my users aren't GAY.
Facebook: No no, it's not like that, it's like a poke on the shoulder. Or something.
MySpace: Oh, ok….GAY.
Facebook: Well it's not as gay as Tom.
MySpace: You take that back.
Facebook: I will not.
MySpace: You take that back RIGHT. NOW.
Facebook: (singing) Tom is gay, Tom is gay.
MySpace: Yeah well at least he's not looking for 'whatever he can get.'
Facebook: Hey - we added that option as a JOKE.
MySpace: Oh, sure you did. Just like you added Live Feed to 'keep people up to date.'
Facebook: Don't even start with Live Feed. We asked our users what they wanted!
MySpace: Oh yeah, nice open letter, you homo.
Facebook: IT'S IMPORTANT TO KNOW WHAT THE USERS WANT!
MySpace: Lame.
Facebook: You're just jealous because your users are all old and creepy now.
MySpace: If by old and creepy you mean famous musicians, then yes, yes they are.
Facebook: That is NOT what I meant, I meant what I said.
MySpace: Watch it, Facebook. Don't make me call my Top 8.
Facebook: Oh, I'm so scared. Well YOU don't make me call my…my…
MySpace: Your what? Your "Friends We Have In Common"?
Facebook: Shut up, that's a helpful feature! Better than "Who I'd Like To Meet."
MySpace: Yeah, well you FREE IPOD CLICK HERE TO WIN
(pause)
Facebook: What the hell was that?!
MySpace: Oh nothing, don't worry about that, I have a tic and sometimes-
Facebook: That was a pop-up, wasn't it??
MySpace: I HAVE A TIC!!!
Facebook: Hahaha you have pop-ups and you can't control them!
MySpace: I can to! I can stop them whenever I want!
Facebook: Whatever you say, sell-out.
MySpace: Oh I'm sorry, what? I can't hear you over the sound of my money.
[Silence. A door opens]
Friendster: Oh, hey guys!! What's going on??
MySpace/Facebook: Fag.
linkpost comment

navigation
[ viewing | most recent entries ]
[ go | earlier ]