President Bush's Despicable Attack on Barack Obama
I've been writing this week about the Republican leadership's insulting and destructive attempt to use outright lies to try to smear Barack Obama's steadfast commitment to Israel.
Well now President Bush joins the chorus of Republican attacks, pushing the Bush/McCain "argument" of smears and misleading attacks:
In a particularly sharp blast from halfway around the world, President Bush suggested Thursday that Sen. Barack Obama and other Democrats are in favor of "appeasement" of terrorists in the same way U.S. leaders appeased Nazis in the run-up to World War II.Where to even start?"Some seem to believe we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along," said Bush, in what White House aides privately acknowledged was a reference to calls by Obama and other Democrats for the U.S. president to sit down for talks with leaders like Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
"We have heard this foolish delusion before," Bush said in remarks to the Israeli Knesset. "As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American Senator declared: 'Lord, if only I could have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided.' We have an obligation to call this what it is - the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history."
First, it's absolutely shameless that an American President would use a speech in front of a foreign government to launch such a petty political attack. President Bush has abused the dignity of the office in ways that make especially ironic his long ago pledge to "restore dignity and integrity to the Oval office."
Perhaps worse -- he's not even right on the facts, and he knows it. Like Representatives Boehner and Cantor, President Bush just makes up policies to attack. Barack Obama opposes negotiating with terrorists. And always has. This is just another example of the disingenuous habit of this administration to create "some people" whom they can argue against, strawman arguments that they can use in their disgusting political attacks.
No -- Barack Obama believes our government should engage the full range of diplomatic tools with other states in the region - from Syria to Iran to Pakistan - to further our foreign policy interests and fight against terrorism.
Here's Barack Obama's response pointing this out:
It is sad that President Bush would use a speech to the Knesset on the 60th anniversary of Israel's independence to launch a false political attack. It is time to turn the page on eight years of policies that have strengthened Iran and failed to secure America or our ally Israel. Instead of tough talk and no action, we need to do what Kennedy, Nixon and Reagan did and use all elements of American power - including tough, principled, and direct diplomacy - to pressure countries like Iran and Syria. George Bush knows that I have never supported engagement with terrorists, and the President's extraordinary politicization of foreign policy and the politics of fear do nothing to secure the American people or our stalwart ally Israel.And if the Administration has a problem with people who want to engage with countries he has avoided, he should come home and start demanding resignations from his Cabinet. Just yesterday, his Secretary of Defense told the Washington Post,
We need to figure out a way to develop some leverage . . . and then sit down and talk with [Iran]," Gates said. "If there is going to be a discussion, then they need something, too. We can't go to a discussion and be completely the demander, with them not feeling that they need anything from us.I also find it enormously disrespectful of Israel for President Bush to use the occasion of the 60th anniversary of the founding of the nation of Israel to launch such a divisive and mendacious attack, even using a disgusting and misleading reference to the Nazis in front of the Israeli government.
Throwing in the "Nazi appeaser" rhetoric is an old Republican trick, too. I remember saying way back in 2006 in a speech at Faneuil Hall that, "It is deeply immoral to compare a majority of Americans who oppose a failing policy and seek a winning one to appeasers of Fascism and Naziism." I was then responding to Rumsfeld; he's gone but his legacy endures.
I also said in that speech that the Bush/McCain policy in the Middle East has threatened the security of Israel. "The Middle East is more unstable than it has been in decades. Our stalwart ally Israel is surrounded by emboldened enemies who talk of wiping it off the face of the earth. Hezbollah flags fly from rooftops in Shiia slums of Sadr City and Iran is rebuilding Southern Lebanon."
Has the situation improved since then? No - just take a look at last week's headlines out of Lebanon.
The fact is - and I've said this many times before, and I'll keep saying this - the Republican policies in the Middle East have made America and our ally Israel less safe, not more. As I said in a statement I sent out earlier.
The bottom line is that George Bush's policies have made America less safe. The Middle East is more unstable than it's been in decades. Al Qaeda is reconstituted, Israel is more threatened, Hamas controls Gaza, Hezbollah threatens to take over Lebanon, Iran is stronger and Iraq is in chaos. America needs - and Israel deserves - presidential leadership that actually makes us safer and stronger.But Bush continues with the overheated rhetoric, and the McCain policies continue many of the same mistakes.
The Bush/McCain Republican Party is heading straight into the gutter with this campaign, and, while I can't say I'm surprised, it's always shocking to see how low they will go.
bush has shamed us all! McShame!
May 15, 2008 2:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for your patience and sorry for the inconvenience!
Best regards, Mary CEO of youtube downloader free
December 21, 2010 9:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is a smart blog. I mean it. You have so much knowledge about this issue, and so much passion. You also know how to make people rally behind it, obviously from the responses. Youve got a design here thats not too flashy, but makes a statement as big as what youre saying. Great job,children health indeed.
January 21, 2011 8:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well said, Senator Kerry. Please join your colleagues in making sure that you don't allow this to drop out of the news after one news cycle.
May 15, 2008 2:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Indeed. Also, query if we will hear from the junior senator from New York on this. Or, for that matter, from the 42nd President of the United States. Their silence, thus far, is deafening.
May 15, 2008 5:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well John Kerry, I'd much rather hear Barack Obama declare his steadfast commitment to the United States of America and NOT participate in the RITUAL asskissing of Israel which is nothing more than a veiled commitment to maintaining our control of the Middle East ( by maintaining Israel as a garrison State) at the expense of Israel's future in the region.
May 18, 2008 12:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Dear Mr. Preznit:
Two words about Nazi enabler comparisons:
Prescott Bush
May 15, 2008 2:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
touché!
May 15, 2008 3:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
not only an enabler,
not just an "appeaser,"
but allegedly or apparently,
a traitor.
bbc radio 4:
Mike Thomson investigates why so little is known about this biggest ever peacetime threat to American democracy.
scott horton of Harper's on the above;
May 15, 2008 9:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
amen
May 16, 2008 12:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Secretary Gates said that we have no leverage on Iran, and that they have all kinds of leverage on us.
In other words -- he's implying that the US is at Iran's mercy.
May 15, 2008 2:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you, Senator Kerry.
May 15, 2008 2:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is a huge distinction between Iran, a sovereign nation, and a terrorist group like Hamas or Al Queda. Obama has said he wouldn't negotiate with terrorists. Direct negotiation with Iran, given pre-conditions have been met, can promote progress with regard to our intrests in protecting Israel and discouraging nuclear development.
Iran hasn't invaded another country in 300 years and has made no direct threat to do so. It's hardly a comparison to Hitler. This is pure fear mongering conjuring up the image of the most despised regime of history for the purpose of political smear.
May 15, 2008 2:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe GWB was talking about Jimmy Carter kissing Hamas' colective butts. He never said anything about Obama. Obama's the one who decided the President was talking about him. Like a wise woman once said "it's the hit dog that barks the loudest." (Please HusseinTenaX, no accusations of racism for comparing Obama to a dog...that's not the point here.)
May 15, 2008 3:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
SFCWallace,
JERUSALEM (CNN) – [...] The president did not name Obama or any other Democrat, but White House aides privately acknowledged the remarks were aimed at the presidential candidate and others in his party.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/05/15/bush-suggests-obama-wants-appeasement-of-terrorists/
May 15, 2008 5:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why not include the entire statement in context?
The president did not name Obama or any other Democrat, but White House aides privately acknowledged the remarks were aimed at the presidential candidate and others in his party. Former President Jimmy Carter has called for talks with Hamas.
It's not an attack on Obama, it's an attack on the "appeasment party."
May 16, 2008 11:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Show us an example of any alleged appeasement.
May 16, 2008 9:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Can Bush just stay over there? I think he's more popular there anyway...
May 15, 2008 2:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
I bet the Israelis would not like that. He'd be a huge target!!!
May 15, 2008 3:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
You wish thought could produce that remark. And your avatar is uglier than mine, too.
Let Bush stay in Iraq, instead of our troops. He could have that big old Green Zone all to himself.
May 15, 2008 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nazi appeaser?
Um:
http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/05/15/grandson-of-nazi-enabler-decries-talking-to-nazis/
May 15, 2008 3:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are you having a change of heart? Good link!
May 15, 2008 3:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
I watched part of the speech the Iranian leader gave at Columbia University last year. The behavior of those present was extremely indicative of the respective willingness of the two sides to communicate.
I think it might be better for Obama to respond to Bush's attacks against him instead of having the person who lost the supposedly unlose-able 2004 race.
The responsibility of the Democratic Party in the results of its various defeats is considerable. Care must be taken to pick a "winner".
May 15, 2008 3:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Vaughn B,
Note the second blockquote in Kerry's post. I think it might be better for you to read a whole post before commenting.
May 15, 2008 3:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or, more accurately, read the whole post before just taking a cheap shot at the poster. Regardless of how the 2004 election shaped up, Senator Kerry still knows his stuff and his response deserves attention. Thanks for dropping by, Senator.
May 15, 2008 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
A very sad day. Politics is one thing, but this is so depraved and disgusting.
May 15, 2008 3:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Senator Kerry,
The Senator who made the statement that he wished he could have talked with Adolph Hitler was a Republican from Idaho, William Borah. He was an isolationist, which Obama is not. To have the grandson of someone who DID appease the Nazis in Germany say something like this would be laughable, if not for the response of the audience. If you listen to the audience where Bush was giving the speech, nothing less than the Israeli parliament, they agree with him.
What will Israel do when Obama takes office? What will Saudi Arabia do? These are serious questions that we need to consider. And we need to talk about them.
Thank you for your response, and thank you for your support of the next President of the United States. Barack Obama.
May 15, 2008 3:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
When oh when is this going to end. Just when you think he can't say anything more moronic and/or ignorant he opens his mouth and stupid rolls out. At least in this respect he has exceeded expectation. Mission Accomplished. Waiting for that bonehead to leave office is going to be the longest seven months of my entire life
May 15, 2008 3:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland, Prescott Bush Sr. was heavily invested in Hitler's military industry. The Polish death camp named Auschwitz was built near coal deposits so that slave labor could be used in one of Prescott Bush's holdings, the Silesian American Corporation. And even after the US declared war on Germany in December of 1941, Prescott Bush continued violating the Trading With the Enemy Act until the government finally shut him down late in 1942. But not before making him rich and establishing the Bush family fortune, which would enable future generations of this family of Nazi collaborators to enter politics, and eventually to occupy and defile the highest office in the land.
May 15, 2008 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is worth noting that the quote is from Senator William Borah, Republican of Idaho, who is best known not as an appeaser, but as an isolationist. He was a firm opponent of the League of Nations, and of any US involvment in European affairs.
Borah would certainly not have described himself as in favor of appeasement -- he, in fact, would have strongly advised that the US should not be involved at all, let alone appeasing anybody.
It is also worth noting that although an isolationist, Borah apparantly had some positive feelings about Hitler -- he also said: admiration for Hitler. "There are so many great sides to him," Borah said of Hitler in 1938. and "Gad, what a chance Hitler has! If he only moderates his religious and racial intolerance, he would take his place beside Charlemagne. He has taken Europe without firing a shot." [Cite to http://www.kevincmurphy.com/williamborah4.html]
So the President likens Obama to a Hitler supporter while speaking to the Israeli Knesset!
AH
May 15, 2008 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Funny how quickly Republicans gloss over the fact that the Senator, who so wanted to talk with Hitle, was William Borah, Republican of Idaho. By the way, Bush stole the line from a Charles Krauthammer column from 2006.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/10/AR2006081001334.html
May 15, 2008 3:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dear Senator Kerry,
Thank you so much for writing this. I really wanted to vote for you back in 2004 (I turned 18 last year), and I'm so glad to see you working to prevent the same shambles of treatment that happened to you back then.
May 15, 2008 3:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sure seems like the GOP has launched the smear machine a little early this time around. Don't they usually wait until the fall for this crap? Methinks it's a sign that they realize they're losers on pretty much all issues. Each time W opens his mouth, 10,000 people switch to Democrat.
May 15, 2008 3:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry not to respond with the kind of hatred you were hoping for, "Sergeant" Wallace, but I'm afraid you have followed the extreme-right's SOP of playing fast and loose with the facts.
Let's see whether you are able to reply with any kind of support for your outrageous charges, whether you are simply incapable of doing the kind of research that would require, or whether you are simply uninterested in fact or truth.
Can't wait to hear from you!
May 15, 2008 3:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Imagine that. No response from another right-wing bar-stool soldier.
I'm guessing that the closest "Sergeant" Wallace ever got to a uniform was at the VFW?
May 15, 2008 10:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
More of nothing from the Commander in Chief of third barstool from the left.
Every real soldier who actually earned three chevrons and two rockers is snickering at you, "Sergeant" Wallace.
May 16, 2008 7:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you, Senator Kerry. The attacks will be vicious, and they will be directed at swaying the votes of the most gullible Americans. What Bush fails to acknowledge is something that everyone already knows: Iran is quickly becoming an ally of Iraq. If anyone in this administration believes that we will NOT be talking with one of Iraq's allies, I'd say they are seriously and dangerously naive.
May 15, 2008 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, as seen from comments above, if one good thing comes out of this, it is that the Democrats may use this to unify the party behind Obama.
May 15, 2008 4:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Senator Kerry,
I think you need to have a talk with Senator Reid about Holy Joe.
I'm just sayin, he's not much of a democrat anymore and it seems silly to me that he should get to keep his committee chair and his seniority while undermining the democratic party and the party's nominee.
May 15, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
One more point:
The President seems to think that diplomacy between sovereigns is about winning an argument -- that the point of negotiation is convincing somebody that you are right, and they are wrong.
He made a similar remark earlier this week, when asked about dialogue with Syria, saying that there is nothing to talk about, since Syria knows the U.S. position.
It is this view of the nature and value of diplomacy which best characterizes the President (and I fear, Senator McCain). From it flows a host of logical, but terribly damaging, conclusions: that talking to an adversary is a sign of weakness; that recognizing complexity is equivalent to losing ones moral compass; that there is good and evil in the world, and the best that can come of anything but open war is a temporary truce.
May 15, 2008 4:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Very few people outside the US think Bush has any credibility. He's embarrassing himself and our nation, but I doubt it's gonna hurt Obama much.
May 15, 2008 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Senator Kerry -
Thank you for highlighting this and addressing it so forcefully. Senator Obama's response struck exactly the right tone.
Hopefully, there is discussion of a coordinated effort amongst others in the party to blanket the airwaves with the same message. It seems that something as egregious as this needs to be stomped on until the purveyors look utterly foolish. I know of the hullabaloo at The Atlantic - where Boehner was nearly called a liar but it seems that televised responses are required here.
Bush further confirms his bubble of delusion by believing that drawing attention to his own disastrous foreign policy helps McCain. Perhaps we can transform this into a gift - a way to show the parallels between the two - and let this be the true, substantive opening salvo of the GE campaign.
Just when I thought this Administration could not disgust me more, they find a way.
May 15, 2008 4:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm watching John Kerry on CNN, he's addressing Bush's speech. I wish I could sense anger in Kerry's voice. Bush needs to be taken to task, not by polite analysis, he needs to be attacked, excoriated, by name for what he is.
I think the Dems in the House and Senate should take to the floor tomorrow and attack Bush for his comparing those who oppose him as appeasers
and liken them to the Nazi invasion of Poland.
When cretins like Bush compare political opposites to the Nazis he's taking away from the suffering the Jews experienced under that regime.
I'm sorry I didn't hear any Knesset member boo Bush when he made this reference.
May 15, 2008 4:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Anything Bush says is a gift to the democrats.
May 15, 2008 4:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
"To have the grandson of someone who DID appease the Nazis in Germany say something like this would be laughable,"
No it was despicable...
Bush broke every rule this time, even the few he still considers valuable.
Smart Jews won't fall for any of this crap.
Too many American Jews have gone over to "the dark side" to Bush's realm, for reasons that have nothing to do with their religion or their bloodlines or the nation of Israel.
They use Minijabs stupid islamic evangelisms as an excuse to blame a whole, ancient and diverse culture for what it's most desperate members say and do.
Do we Americans like being judged around the world by the stupid words Bush spits out? Do you consider Bush a symbol of YOUR ideology?
Then why do so many people lay the whole guilt at the feet of "Iran" as if they all agree completely with their little wannabe despot?
Even in Iran there are millions of people who just want to forge a future of peace for their children and grandchildren.
If we can't negotioate with them, how can they change from within?
May 15, 2008 4:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
JEP07,
For sure, even 1 in 4 is too many. But American Jews still trend toward Obama in numbers larger than the overall electorate. Republicans are even crowing about how Obama "only" wins Jews polled 2-1....
WASHINGTON - A new Gallup survey found that 61% of Jewish voters prefer Obama to McCain, who got 32% of the Jewish support.
That number is far greater than the rate found for the general population, who only preferred Obama to McCain 45-43, according to the poll. Obama also still trails Clinton in Jewish support, according to the survey, with Clinton winning against Obama in the Jewish community 50%-43%.
Though the results showed Obama is favored by the Jewish community, the Republican Jewish Coalition pounced on them to attack Obama.
"In 2004, John Kerry received 75% of the Jewish vote and George W. Bush received 25%. The recent polling numbers demonstrate Obama's weakness among Jewish voters. This data comes on the heels of the exit poll data from the Democratic primary in Pennsylvania. Hillary Clinton beat Obama among Jewish voters 62%-38%," said RJC Executive Director Matt Brooks.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1209627043154&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
May 15, 2008 6:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Senator...
Of course Bush is reprehensible. If we didn't know it already we knew that from the 2004 campaign where they, with scurrilous lies, tried to turn a war hero and a true American patriot into a scoundrel. I just wish you, and/or people on your behalf, had responded as forcefully back then as you did just now on Senator Obama's behalf and we might be talking about a 2nd term for President Kerry. I apologize for taking that jab at you but I am still bitterly disappointed that you lost in '04 and we had to endure an second Bush adminstration, which was equally disasterous as his first.
But while you got no support in matters like these back in '04 I am happy that the D's aren't gonna sit back and let them do it again to Senator Obama this go round. This is just the latest example in the VERY long list where Bush puts partisan politics before the best interests of our country which I consider to be treasonous. I hope the D's push back on this issue is fierce and sustained, don't let this fade away. What Bush did was shameful and inexusable just as he is...
May 15, 2008 5:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you, Sen. Kerry.
I not only voted for you in 2004, I worked for you.
George W. Bush is easily the single most contemptible human refuse pile ever to hold the office of President. That the remarks he delivered were uttered by the grandson of a man who colluded with Adolf Hitler, and profited by the Nazi regime even into 1942, when the US was actively at war with Nazi Germany, is almost beyond imagination.
I do look forward to President Obama, on lowering his hand after taking the oath of office in January, pointing at Bush and Cheney and ordering their arrest, followed shortly by their transport to The Hague for war crimes trials.
I wonder if Spandau still stands. Ironic justice and all that...
May 15, 2008 5:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
George Bush is an outrage and embarassment. But I think everyone needs to take a deep breath. Democrats lose elections when they sound shrill in the face of these kind of ridiculous assaults. I think Senator Kerry is not the person to be leading any charge against anyone in this election.
Take it for what it is worth from this Clinton supporter. I think that Senator Obama needs to do what he does best; he needs to respond forcefully but like a leader, like a president. He needs to demonstrate through dignified ridicule that George Bush is a fool and a dangerous one at that, and he needs to combine that with a solemn but direct explanation about how his way is the right way, both in terms of what is really tough and what really works. On the other hand, watching John Kerry and a bunch of angry senators screaming at the president might play well in the ranks of those who are enjoying Keith Olbermann these days, but my sense is that such outrage won't play very well at all in Peoria.
I mean really. How many people think John Kerry is helping Senator Obama get elected by throwing a hissy fit 4 years too late? Seriously. What makes us lefties feel warm and fuzzy inside doesn't always feel the same way to the rest of the country that votes.
Of course, finally, let us not forget--this year it definitely is the economy stupid. Once again, take it for what it is worth from this supporter of Hillary Clinton. Senator Obama will lose the election this year if he decides to spend too much time debating morons like George Bush and John McCain on foreign policy. That doesn't mean that they are right on the merits, obviously. But we're talking about winning the election this year, and the Senator will win it only if the focus stays on the economy. Respectfully, the electorate is larger than the viewership at MSNBC.
May 15, 2008 5:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
bslev,
You will please note that Peoria is in Illinois, where Barack Obama has built a fairly substantial political career by the way.
And, correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't the knock on Senator Kerry since 04 been that he never pushed back hard enough and early enough against the Swift Boat jerks?
May 15, 2008 6:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not only is Peoria in Illinois it's in the middle of America and the war is NOT popular in the middle west. Chris Matthews may be correct when he says Hillary lost the nomination with her Iraq vote. I don't think Obama is going to lose many votes out here speaking out strongly against the reckless warmongering that got us into Iraq.
May 15, 2008 6:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
The war is not popular anywhere, not just in the midwest.
May 16, 2008 8:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
I am not making a politcial statement about the war, please. And I am not suggesting that people in Peoria don't oppose the war. I am saying that we should be careful about how we express our opposition, and all I am saying is that Senator Obama needs to be careful that he is not Kerryized. He needs to show people that he will be president.
Now, compare how Kerry should have responded to how Clinton may have lost the election due to her position on Iraq is just a non-sequitur. All I am saying is that what you and what a bluebell might want to hear is not, in my own opionion, the way to win this election. Thank you for not insulting me while disagreeing with me. And thank you for understanding, unlike other knee-jerk posters, than I'm not sticking up for war in Iraq; I'm just trying to win a fucking election for once.
May 16, 2008 7:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Bar Kafka:
LOL. Just read my reply to you from this morning and that's not quite how I wanted to express myself. To clarify. . .
First, I don't think that Senator Obama can win this election by repeating what was successful for him in the Democratic primaries and caucuses. Thus, while Senator Clinton's position on Iraq may very well have doomed her from the start in the Democratic nominations fight, that doesn't mean that Senator McCain will be doomed in the General Election because of his position on Iraq, and it doesn't mean that Senator Obama will win because of his position in Ocotober of 2002. I think this is a raw political reality, and that's why I don't think we rush out the cannons every time George Bush sticks his foot in his mouth. I disagree with those who think that many people in America would be at all moved with what the allegedly don't already know about Prescott Bush's relationship with Nazi Germany.
Second, the fact that Kerry should have been tougher in 2004 does not mean that Senator Obama should be fighting the battles that Senator Kerry should have fought in 2004. I actually thought that Senator Obama must have read what I wrote last night (if I do say so myself :)), because the news reports I heard indicate that Senator Obama responded the way a presidential candidate should, and that is that he was dismissive of George Bush, polite but dismissive, and said that Bush was playing poltics. Nice work I think.
Third, I believe that Senator Obama can, if he chooses to, promote a progressive and visionary foreign policy (one that is centered first and foremost on getting our troops out of Iraq) and, at the same time, convey what I submit needs to be conveyed with lasar-like precision in a general election, and that is that he will do whatever it takes to defend the security of the American people.
Fourth, and perhaps most importantly, while Senator Obama needs to stress that he is the person we want to be our commander in chief, I still think it's fundamentally important that the thrust of his campaign be on domestic matters, including his emphasis on a new brand of politics, but not without substantial focus on specific bread and butter issues like health care and gasoline.
Hopefully I make more sense.
May 16, 2008 10:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, you make plenty of sense. I am mainly responding to what appears to me something of an inconsistency in the perception of how much fight a candidate should bring to a campaign. Not necessarily your inconsistency, but an inconsistency in our overall discourse, that is.
That, and the "Will it play in Peoria?" thing. That was just an irony I couldn't resist.
May 16, 2008 3:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Kerry doesn't scream.
If anything, the opposite is true. If he had screamed at a couple of points in 04 he might have won. Instead he was throughout not only admirably constrained by moral standards but ,unfortunately inhibited by his prep school manners. A sure fire vote loser since they are detested by those working class white voters being discussed this week.
Altho my working class white catholic relatives, see Kerry unobtrusively attending 6am mass whatever favorable reaction you might thinkg that would engender is completely offset by resentment of his patrician demeanor. A few screams might make all the difference.
May 15, 2008 10:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Flavius,
Thanks. I hear you. If you get a chance read what I wrote to bar kafka (my second reply to him :)), and I hope that clarifies where I'm coming from.
May 16, 2008 10:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Have done.
Too bad Kerry's demeanor puts people off. I've bumped into him myself carrying groceries out of the A&P looking like the people who detest him. I suppose because they fear he looks down on them.
But I know them. They're perfectly nice people with some (not all) good values.
The wind surfing photo taps into another story.
A media that mails in the story instead of covering it.It was described as an upper class pursuit, which it may be many places. If you go to the point from which Kerry left you'll have to park down the road because it's crammed with the pick ups driven by the local plumbers, carpenters and landscape workers. The upper class wouldn't be caught dead there. They're off at
Richard Mellon Scaife's where before entering they have to wipe their feet on a door mat with a photo of Hillary over the words
Nice.
May 16, 2008 11:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you Senator Kerry. I know it must feel great to not have to hold back against comments so silly and dispicable. I personallly hope JR keeps this up. I would like to say that I was alive when we had a president who hit the teens in the approval polls.
May 15, 2008 5:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great Post, Senator Kerry. Please keep up your efforts at this critical time.
Here are some other issues that I think ought ought to be raised:
Was Richard Nixon an appeaser when he debated Kruschev? or when he advocated recognition of "Red" China?
Was Henry Kissenger an appeaser when he advocated detente with the Soviets and Chinese? or when he negotiated an end to the Viet Nam war with Le Duc Tho?
Throughout the cold war we had discussions with the Soviets. Moreover, there were constant "cultural exchanges" throughout much of that period. Wouldn't we be better of re-opening diplomatic relations with Iran, and Cuba, and establishing cultural exchanges? This does not mean that we accept the policies of the government -- only that we recognize that governments do not necessarily represent the people.
Does the Bush administration represent the American people?
May 15, 2008 6:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Makes you wonder if bush would consider Jesus an appeaser. After all, he ate with sinners. Talked to them too. Even when dying he was busy to talking to one.
May 15, 2008 10:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Senator I write from your Blue State, with a message for you to forward to the BO campaign.
Many believe that the "American Senator" was Wm. Borah, but the Knesset was supposed to think of Sen. Obama. Borah is well known to historians of antisemitism for another quote.
"I'm like *Hitler* when it comes to the *Jews*" (Leonard Dinnerstein, /Antisemitism in America,/ 1994, p. 119.)
So Bush was calling BO an appeaser and an anti-Semite, to a mainly Jewish audience.
We're not finished. Borah's quote may be spurious, the only source for it is hearsay, according to an online conversation between historians.
I have sourced this information and sent it to a member of the NE Coordinating Committee for BO, but if you could pass the word along, I, and the historical record, would be much obliged.
May 15, 2008 6:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, Senator Kerry. My WWII veteran father was impressed with your campaign in Iowa, particularly how you understood the plight of the Iowa National Guard and its substantial losses in Iraq.
May 15, 2008 6:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
If John McCain thinks that it's wrong to speak with our enemies (or, in this case, potential enemies) then he must be committed to war. Apparently, he believes that the only way to prevent war is to wage war.
There's a powerful lesson in our own history we should look to. If the 'negotiators' hadn't had the more persuasive voice in John F. Kennedy's cabinet, the Cuban Missile Crisis could have erupted into war. Parts of the southeastern United States and island nations in the Caribbean might still be in a state of devastation as a result of it.
May 15, 2008 7:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
@John Kerry
"The Middle East is more unstable than it has been in decades. Our stalwart ally Israel is surrounded by emboldened enemies who talk of wiping it off the face of the earth"
Nonsense. The Middle East has been unstable since the time of Moses and the emboldened enemies have been talking that way since the state was founded. There have been ups and downs, momentary respites, nothing more.
"I also said in that speech that the Bush/McCain policy in the Middle East has threatened the security of Israel."
Now this is the tricky part. How would you know that? Israel has been under mortal threat since its founding.
Either you mean that blacks and white progressives, who form the core of Obama support at home, are friendlier to Israel than evangelicals and conservatives, which is questionable to say the least.
Or, if not, that Obama would act contrary to their wishes. Please.
Or that evangelicals and Christians and the Israeli government itself, do not know how to properly defend Israel, that they are acting contrary to their own stated goals, and that Obama and his supporters know better and can do better.
May 15, 2008 7:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
May 16, 2008 12:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
@littleblackpropaganda
Virtually no one posting to this board likes the Administration's policy towards Israel. You say
Obama has said he would talk to more of the Middle Eastern combattants than Bush. But mere talk means nothing. What material changes would you hope Obama would make in our policy towards Israel?
May 16, 2008 1:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
I was taking issue with this:
which I believe is historically inaccurate, especially when you consider the concurrent 6000 plus years of civilization in places other than the "Middle East." This region has had long periods of relative stability.
May 16, 2008 5:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
You mean like their war against Hezbollah in Lebanon two years ago? The Israeli air force bombing civilian areas in Lebanon? Is that what you consider wisdom in self-defense?
May 16, 2008 5:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Correction:
"Or that evangelicals and Christians and the Israeli government itself, do not know how to properly defend Israel, that they are acting contrary to their own stated goals, . . . "
You mean like their war against Hezbollah in Lebanon two years ago? The Israeli air force bombing civilian areas in Lebanon? Is that what you consider wisdom in self-defense?
May 16, 2008 5:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hitler in 1938 had the most modern army in the world with the most modern strategists like Guderian and Rommel, later he had the first missiles and the first jet aircraft used in war. George Dubya's little bloodbath in Iraq is not World War II.
Someone should tell George Dubya that he isn't Churchill or Lincoln, he just "a tinpot Genghis Khan from Crawford" -(Dick Cavett-link
May 15, 2008 7:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
General Custer more like.
May 15, 2008 8:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
he'll never learn. save your breath.
May 15, 2008 10:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Where are the California voices of Sen Feinstein and Boxer (both Jewish)? House Reps. Howard Berman and Henry Wax (both endorsed Obama recently and Jewish)?
Moving forward, vetting out from the short list of Democratic running mates, the best possible V.P. outcome may be Gov Kathleen Sebelius, of Kansas - her being the most aligned with Obama's message, winnable demographics for the fall, and they're compatible (friends). If so, McCain may have on his short list, Carly Fiorina, to counter. Here are the developments into this summer: the McCain and Obama campaigns will conduct "elevated" policy discussions in those town hall meeting TBD, while their respective surrogates and 527s RIP into each other's candidate's character, credibility, judgment, and past associations.
May 15, 2008 8:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you Senator.
It was heartening to read that Sen Clinton has also joined in denunciations of both Bush and McCain.
They're not going to get away with it - not this time.
May 15, 2008 9:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
From "Head of State"
http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/05/change-that-you-deserve.html
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
The Change That You Deserve
From the Chicago Tribune:
Black Screen.
Fade into:
Scene of a thin grey haired man standing in a green field. Behind him we can see the sun is rising.
"I got the change I deserved with GOP."
Cut to a small child, in a sun dress, who looks up at him and smiles.
"I was tired, listless. I had lost interest in my usual activities--creating false attacks, acting as if I had been unfairly attacked about issues created out of whole cloth, drawing specious historical parallels, fawning over ideologically bankrupt manufactured father figures. Sure, I sent emails claiming that Obama was a Muslim, but somehow...it had lost the spark, the enjoyment of everyday life."
Cut to a child who rides by on a bicycle, and throws a newspaper on the front porch.
"That's when I found GOP."
Cut to man rowing in a scull across a still river. He turns to the camera, smiles.
"In clinical studies, GOP has been found to increase aggressiveness in the absence of actual provocation in 8 out of 10 users. In most users, the desire to gleefully attack returns in 1 week. Full enthusiasm for invented ideas in two. "
Cut to image of porch swing.
"With GOP, my attention to minor distractions fully returned, until I was again building them into major accusations of flawed character. Once again, my intense focus on pins, buttons, sentences fragments and remote relationships as absolute indications of personal virtue and ability was at its peak. For an entire weekend, I could one again choose the right moment to accuse a candidate of treason without cause--when I was ready, when the time felt right".
Cut to a series of blurred images: long, stringy haired teens in torn jeans and ironic 80's t-shirts lounging by the Washington Monument; picture of John Kerry in a Swift Boat during Vietnam;
Eiffel Tower. Arugula on plate. During these images, rapid voiceover in female voice:
"GOP may cause monosyllabism, inability to consider two differing concepts at the same time, memory loss or inaccurate recall of recently and repeatedly presented intelligence information, focus on size of automobiles or koro, sequential nicknaming, knowing mischaracterization, hooting. If you have a desire to read the collected works of Ann Coulter that lasts longer than four hours, this may be a sign of a dangerous condition and you should contact your physician immediately."
Cut back to man standing in field. American flag waving in the distance behind him, below a risen sun. A woman walks up beside him, puts her arm around him, and smiles.
Man:
"So get the change that you deserve. Talk to your Doctor about GOP. Soon, you'll be walking by the homeless on the street again and saying "Let them get a job!"
Or better yet--let them get GOP."
Woman smiles.
Fade.
Cite:
Head of State
http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/05/change-that-you-deserve.html
May 15, 2008 11:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sen. Kerry,
You guys need to go on the offensive on this issue by setting the record straight about the 1990s. For years now, the GOP has been telling the American people that the 90s was a foreign policy disaster that led directly to 911.
But the truth is, and Fareed Zakaria had a great post on this the other day, the number of conflicts in the world went drastically down, the number of terror attacks in the world -- including on Americans -- was much lower, 3 nuclear powers were disarmed through negotiated agreements -- South Africa, Ukraine and N. Korea -- and loose nukes in Russia were put under wraps through an agreement between us and the Russians.
Furthermore, the Clinton administration -- as we now know -- ended the last of the WMD programs of Saddam with his strike on that country in 1998.
And let's remember that after the 1993 bombing of the Trade Center there was not another foreign terrorist attack on US soil during Clinton's term. Same as Bush, but without pissing off the whole world and occupying two countries.
So the entire GOP argument against the 1990s foreign policy -- and therefore against the Dem foreign policy philosophy -- is that it failed to stop terrorism, and get Bin Laden. Therefore, 911 is the Dems fault.
But of course, they've failed to do either as well, but with a lot more negative blowback.
This picture, this narrative of the truth about the 90s in comparison to the present is what we need to hammer on over and over and over again in this campaign.
Their indictment of the 90s is absolutely key to their argument for the kind of macho, tough guy foreign policy approach they want to take.
As Obama says, we fight by repeatedly and forcefully telling the truth, which we must do persistently because they will try to spin the reality into something else.
May 15, 2008 11:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
It sounds like Bush thinks Reagan blew it by talking with the Soviet Union and that we should be breaking off diplomatic relations with China.
By the way, the Guardian's article about Prescott Bush, W's Nazi appeasing grandfather, is at http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/sep/25/usa.secondworldwar
May 16, 2008 12:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
I just wish you'd really punish these lies, instead of being so careful about it. When someone uses the word Nazi, and you come back with overheated rhetoric, it just doesn't pack the same punch. While I appreciate "outright lies," "deeply immoral," and "gutter," I might also take issue with "enormously disrespectful."
You just got Nazied. And when someone Nazis you, the time for enormously disrespectful has passed. "Enormously disrespectful" left the station 7 years ago.
May 16, 2008 12:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm sorry - calling W's grandfather, Prescott Bush, a Nazi appeaser is a bit misleading. Prescott Bush helped Hitler rise to power.
Democrats, especially those advised Senator Obama, should realize Bush and McCain are using a strategy from Newt Gingrich. Blast your opponents for your own faults, and do it before he attacks you.
President Bush has a lot of accomplishments, and it's hard to choose the most significant one. Was it ignoring Richard Clarke and the other experts about the dangers of bin Laden, thereby paving the way for 9/11? Was it going to war in Iraq, dramatically helping bin Laden's recruiting efforts, killing tens of thousands Iraqis and turning many more into refugees? Is it the deaths of over 4,000 U.S. soldiers? It is getting rid of career Federal employees, allowing disasters like the Hurricane Katrina debacle, so the R's could give donors and volunteers jobs they weren't qualified for?
Bush has done a great job of running a kleptocracy, stealing from America and the world to help his cronies. Not a Christian attitude, nor a patriotic one at that. As long as the D's are soft on Bush and McCain, the R's will go as low as they can keep their kleptocratic government in power.
May 16, 2008 12:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think of Bush as the Manchurian President. Although Democratic advisors might think that too much, but if you look at the damage he's done to America, it's a very accurate description.
What I don't want is John McCain in the sequel.
May 16, 2008 12:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
We should never have appeased Bush in his march to war by allowing passage of the AUMF or ceding the airwaves to Rumsfeld's PR blitz.
Bush wants to confuse and conflate 'negotiation' with 'appeasement' ? Fine, let's talk about the real appeasement that's done stunk up the joint: that of our Congress, that of our Fourth Estate, that of a whole bunch of us too scared to call bullshit as Bush readied to roll.
May 16, 2008 1:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well said! Appeasement = Congress. Appeasement = the press. Senator, call for impeachment!
May 16, 2008 1:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
You know littleblackpropaganda, I completely agree with you.
So does this mean Clinton would be a good running mate with Obama after all? I was aghast at the thought until today, but I don't think she'd take any crap from these sleazy R's.
May 16, 2008 1:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
I can't tell if you're being facetious, but I agree that the Democratic party should learn to "play dirty," "fight back,"-- name your cliche.
May 16, 2008 1:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
How about fighting as if you were serious about it. How about actually believing in your own rhetoric. How about fighting as if you really wanted to make a real change. If the Democrats did that, then....
May 16, 2008 10:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
We all applaud your forcefull condemnation of dear leaders cheap, twisted, and repugnant babel today in Israel. Our socalled president is a pathological liar and a traitor to, and betrayer of America, and the many excellent commentaries pointing out the hypocricy of the idiot posing as president even mentioning the word nazi in light of the many festering examples of appeasements, support, and enabling of nazi's and fascism by what Indira Singh, acurately terms' "The Bush Crime Family Cabals", is both appalling and telling.
That said can you please use your voice to shine some light on the fascists Continuity of Government presidential directives conjured by dearleader, - and the unmitigated fascist underpinnings and ends of the socalled "Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act", drafted by Jane Hartmen, a fellow democrat, - and would you, could you pretty please - place IMPEACHMENT back on the table?
May 16, 2008 2:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
@littleblackpropaganda
We know that in the time of Herod and Jesus the land was filled with Jews...but by 1870 the Jews were almost all gone and the land was filled with Arabs. How did that happen? Do you think the Jews all decided to vacation in Florida?
May 16, 2008 2:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
The key word here would be the word "recent." Usually "recent" and "Herod" are not terms we associate with one another. At least, not since the time of Herod.
May 16, 2008 5:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
heh!
May 16, 2008 8:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
@littleblackpropaganda
In other words, no other nations have recently been founded on land occupied by others (surely you can't mean 'no other nations have been recently founded on land occupied by others in Palestine') and in times other than recent (previous times) Palestine enjoyed long periods of stability - the implication being that the recent instability is due to the circumstances under which Israel was founded.
That doesn't sound like a ringing endorsement for the state of Israel, its policies, or those of its supporters.
I repeat, what substantive changes would you like to see Obama make in our policies towards Israel should he become President?
May 16, 2008 10:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
@littleblackpropaganda
Iran, the Palestinians, the other Arab States, and the United States all have different visions of a future Middle East. These visions are NOT mutually compatible or achievable.
There are only two reasons for diplomatic talks
1) to make the visions clear
2) to find compromises which give at least something to everyone.
If a party doesn't wish to talk it's because it doesn't think additional clarity is useful or compromise possible.
Without the possibility of compromise additional talk is useless. Scrape away the posturing, phony outrage, etc. and the positions of McClain and Obama are clear. So I repeat - in different words - what compromises do you think Obama should aim for and how should he approach Israel about them?
May 16, 2008 10:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
@littleblackpropaganda
Putting it even more directly, a very large number of core Obama supporters are in agreement with you about the circumstances and morality of the founding of the State of Israel.
They want the United States to pressure Israel to withdraw entirely behind its 1967 borders. They do not care about the effect of such a move on Israeli society or security. In their view they are only asking for simple justice.
No politician can be oblivious to the views of his core supporters.
May 16, 2008 11:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Coming on the heels of the third straight Republican Congressional special election drubbing, I think this is just the beginning of a desperate last grasp for power. Bush and his cronies know that the Congressional elections this fall are likely to be a landslide. If the Democrats win the White House it's likely that every little secret that they've tried to hide is going to finally see the light of day.
Senator, you should understand that we expect you and your colleagues to do your duty when the time comes. The people who have committed crimes in the current administration must be punished to the full extent of the law. If they aren't the next time they come to power it will be worse.
May 16, 2008 3:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
Senator Kerry,
Thank you for your honesty, and your continual work for all of us. We notice!
I have a major concern that no one has commented on, and has not been brought up in the press. While everyone is quick to point out the differences in candidates, and McCain exacerbates the issue by calling Obama "Chamberlain", the public discourse is stuck on defense of Obama. Yes, this is important, but there is a greater principle at stake if this is the rhetoric that the President is using.
The greater corollation to be made in these historical references is not that they are paranoid about Obama being an appeaser, but that they are paranoid about anyone opposing them being an appeaser. They are looking for appeasers because they are walking into a situation that is 100% reminicent, to them, of WWII. They are walking us into WWIII.
Whether they actually believe this rhetoric or not is a moot point. The larger point is why would they think of this language in the first place. They think they are in an equivalent circumstance. They are hell-bent on starting WWIII, and anyone who stands between them and their path to armegeddon is an appeaser.
Please start having this discussion with your fellow legislators. If you do not believe this is possible, or even probable, then you are not paying attention as closely as you need to.
May 16, 2008 4:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
"It's not a timetable; it's victory. It's victory, which I have always predicted. I didn't know when we were going to win World War II; I just knew we were going to win," McCain said. http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080515/D90MB7CG0.html He was nine years old... do people even vet what this guy says?
May 16, 2008 5:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
you should mention PRESCOT BUSH more in your remarks
georgie and the repuglitards wanna talk about APPEASERS
they were ALL repuglicans
and one of themm was george bush's GRANDFATHER
you should be out talking about how the bush family should know an appeaser when they see one
May 16, 2008 6:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
It is too bad that Kerry puts people off becaues I am sure that it has nothing to do with who he really is.
May 16, 2008 11:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
RAPID CITY, S.D. – After a day spent doggedly campaigning and talking only of her agricultural agenda, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton held an impromptu news conference on a windy airport tarmac today to criticize President Bush and Senator John McCain.
“President Bush’s comparison of any Democrat to Nazi appeasers is offensive and outrageous,” Mrs. Clinton said. “Especially in the light of his failures in foreign policy. This is the kind of statement that has no place in any presidential address.”
From The Caucus, NYT Political Blog, May 15, http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/15/clinton-criticizes-bush-mccain/
May 16, 2008 11:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Tank Hussein Ard Shut the hell up or say something.
May 16, 2008 2:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
OMG - you're back. that's scary to everyone who's been at the Cafe for years. I notice you got scarce after the November 2006 election. Feel free to stay scarce.
May 16, 2008 5:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is directed to SFC Wallace.
May 16, 2008 5:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think I'd be talking about Hitler, if my grandfather did business with the Nazis, and if my own administration was so dictatorially oriented.
Bush had better look to his own back door, before he takes potshots at people who have a much better understanding of democracy than he.
May 18, 2008 6:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
In the wake of Bush’s ravings, quoted above, there has been a flood of coverage, from authors ranging from New York Times columnist Frank Rich, to investigative journalist Robert Parry, to the blogosphere, referencing the Bush family’s infamous history of financing the Nazis. We can say with confidence, that what is correct in this coverage derives from the 1991 book, George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography, by Webster G. Tarpley and Anton Chaitkin. Unauthorized Biography, which circulated in 50,000 copies in the early 1990s, in an edition published by EIR NS, and continues to be a hot item today.
Here are excerpts from The Unauthorized Biography,
Chapter II(complete): “The Hitler Project”:
http://www.tarpley.net/bush2.htm
Good Luck!
June 30, 2008 3:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the nice blog. It was very useful for me. Keep sharing such ideas in the future as well. This was actually what I was looking for, and I am glad to came here! Thanks for sharing the such information with us.
Live Support
February 4, 2011 1:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
I absolutely adore your site! You aggressive me as able-bodied as all the others actuality and your broiled PS is absolutely nice. Thank you for afflatus and accumulate up the acceptable work thanks!
sex
March 26, 2011 3:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Marvelous, this content is very much helpful and appreciating . . . . information is efficient and targeting towards complete solution to the problem.
hulu Australia
April 4, 2011 6:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
This information is very useful! Thanks!
Best regards, Katya, CEO of hyper v manager download, windows storage server 2003 iscsi target
April 8, 2011 8:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
Its very awesome article,all the content is so beneficial and valuable for us.presentation of article is very good,so I will bookmark it for sharing it with my friends.Thanks for sharing nice and pretty post.
promotional coasters
April 9, 2011 8:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is a very intriguing post, I was looking for this knowledge. Just so you know I found your web site when I was searching for blogs like mine, so please check out my site sometime and leave me a comment to let me know what you think.
du lich nuoc ngoai
April 16, 2011 2:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is the first time I am visiting this post.I have gathered much of it.Really a interesting firm things.
Free Online Music
April 18, 2011 4:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
I absolutely adore your site! You aggressive me as able-bodied as all the others actuality and your broiled PS is absolutely nice. Thank you for afflatus and accumulate up the acceptable work thanks!
elitegroupz
April 19, 2011 3:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
I found your website perfect for my needs. It contains wonderful and helpful posts. I have read most of them and got a lot from them. To me, you are doing the great work.
cheat point blank
April 21, 2011 6:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
There are some very great sources here and thank you for being so kind to post them here.
truck bak
April 21, 2011 9:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
I enjoy your weblog and will sign up to your feed so I will not miss anything. Fantastic content.
sains
April 24, 2011 5:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
Exciting post... These tips are very useful especially to those who want to avail in this topic.
boost your immune system
April 24, 2011 7:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
Exciting post... These tips are very useful especially to those who want to avail in this topic.
المرفقات
April 25, 2011 5:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
I enjoy your weblog and will sign up to your feed so I will not miss anything. Fantastic content.
hockey
April 25, 2011 7:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
Great post! I'm just starting out in community management/marketing media and trying to learn how to do it well - resources like this article are incredibly helpful. As our company is based in the US, it's all a bit new to us.
anything about internet
April 25, 2011 9:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
The clarity in your post is simply spectacular and i can assume you are an expert on this field. Well with your permission allow me to grab your rss feed to keep up to date with incoming post.
بازسازی
April 26, 2011 2:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is a very intriguing post, I was looking for this knowledge. Just so you know I found your web site when I was searching for blogs like mine, so please check out my site sometime and leave me a comment to let me know what you think.
news online
April 26, 2011 5:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
This was exactly what i was searching for. Have been fighting for a while to do this, thanks for have posted.
Manga Online
April 27, 2011 2:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
car shipping, auto transport, car transport, car transportation, vehicle shipping, car shipping.
April 28, 2011 7:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Would you please provide way more information on this issue?? By the way your blog is amazing. Best regards..
المنتدى المتكامل
April 29, 2011 3:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Very useful tips, I like it. Thanks for sharing such a wonderful trivia.
cho ao
April 30, 2011 5:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
Would you please provide way more information on this issue?? By the way your blog is amazing. Best regards..
bayi
April 30, 2011 7:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
I found your website perfect for my needs. It contains wonderful and helpful posts. I have read most of them and got a lot from them. To me, you are doing the great work.
loan
May 4, 2011 6:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Si vous etes interesses par le dossier, ou desirez en savoir plus, contactez-moi par mail, et je vous mettrai en contact.
Best regards,Jane, CEO of high availability architecture
May 4, 2011 7:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
This was exactly what i was searching for. Have been fighting for a while to do this, thanks for have posted.
bilimkurdu
May 4, 2011 9:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
Really like your blog content the way you put up the things…I’ve read the topic with great interest and definitely will stick your blog routinely for other great posts.
business
May 7, 2011 5:15 AM | Reply | Permalink