Democrats flee the House...

[Ags2000]

Don't know if any of y'all have heard what's going on here in Texas...but it has been making CNN. Just wanted to get y'alls opinions.

Okay here's what is going on. The Democrats are upset because the House committee on redistricting has submitted a new plan for redistricting. The Democrats are upset because they will loose 4 districts. While that may be true (won't know until the elections) they WILL gain at least 2 new seats by new districts down in the valley.

So instead of doing their constitutionally elected job, they decided to become fugitives of the law. They just walked out and sent to Ardmore, Oklahoma and have stated they will not come back until session is over.

Sad day in politics when elected officials are acting like a 2 year old and walks away.

D

May 12, 2003


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DPS Seeks Help From Public in Locating Missing Legislators


The Texas Department of Public Safety is asking the public for assistance in locating 53 Texas legislators who have disappeared. Anyone who has information regarding the current whereabouts of the legislators listed below is asked to call 1-800-525-5555.

Under the Texas Constitution, the majority of members present in session in the House can vote to compel the presence of enough members to make a quorum. Members of the House did so this morning and directed the Sergeant-at-Arms of the House and the DPS to locate the absent members and bring them back to Austin.

DPS troopers and investigators are searching for the absent legislators.

Here are the names of the Texas legislators reported to be absent:

Roberto Alonzo, Dallas
Kevin Bailey, Houston
Lon Burnam, Fort Worth
Gabi Canales, Alice
Jaime Capelo Jr., Corpus Christi
Joaquin Castro, San Antonio
Garnet Coleman, Houston
Robert L. "Robby" Cook III, Eagle Lake
Yvonne Davis, Duncanville
Joseph "Joe" Deshotel, Houston
Dawnna M. Dukes, Austin
Jim Dunnam, Waco
Harold V. Dutton Jr., Houston
Craig Eiland, Galveston
Dan Ellis, Livingston
Juan Escobar, Kingsville
Jessica Farrar, Houston
David Farabee, Wichita Falls
Pete P. Gallego, Alpine
Timoteo "Timo" Garza, Eagle Pass
Ryan A. Guillen, Rio Grande City
Scott Hochberg, Houston
Terri Hodge, Dallas
Mark S. Homer, Paris
Charles L. "Chuck" Hopson, Jacksonville
Jesse W. Jones, Dallas
James E. "Pete" Laney, Hale Center
Ruth Jones McClendon, San Antonio
Jim McReynolds, Lufkin
John Mabry, Waco
Trey Martinez Fischer, San Antonio
Jose Menendez, San Antonio
Joe E. Moreno, Houston
Paul C. Moreno, El Paso
Elliot Naishtat, Austin
Richard J. "Rick" Noriega, Houston
Rene O. Oliveira, Brownsville
Dora F. Olivo, Rosenberg
Aaron Pena, Edinburg
Joseph C. "Joe" Pickett, El Paso
Robert R. Puente, San Antonio
Inocente "Chente" Quintanilla, Tornillo
Richard E. Raymond, Laredo
Allan B. Ritter, Nederland
Eddie Rodriguez, Austin
Patrick M. Rose, Dripping Springs
Jim Solis, Harlingen
Barry B. Telford, Dekalb
Senfronia Thompson, Houston
Carlos I. Uresti, San Antonio
Michael U. "Mike" Villarreal, San Antonio
Miguel D. "Mike" Wise, Weslaco
Steven D. "Steve" Wolens, Dallas

http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/director_staff/public_information/pr051203.htm

[Ags2000]

Here's another article.

D

House rule requires quorum-busters to be arrested
ASSOCIATED PRESS

Monday, May 12, 2003


The Texas House rules allow for the arrest of members who intentionally bust a quorum. Rule 5, section 8 states:

When a call of the House is moved for one of the above purposes and seconded by 15 members (of whom the speaker may be one) and ordered by a majority vote, the main entrance to the hall and all other doors leading out of the hall shall be locked and no member permitted to leave the House without the written permission of the speaker.

The names of members present shall be recorded. All absentees for whom no sufficient excuse is made may, by order of a majority of those present, be sent for and arrested, wherever they may be found, by the sergeant-at-arms or an officer appointed by the sergeant-at-arms for that purpose, and their attendance shall be secured and retained.

The House shall determine on what conditions they shall be discharged. Members who voluntarily appear shall, unless the House otherwise directs, be immediately admitted to the hall of the House and shall report their names to the clerk to be entered in the journal as present.

Until a quorum appears, should the roll call fail to show one present, no business shall be transacted, except to compel the attendance of absent members or to adjourn. It shall not be in order to recess under a call of the House.

http://www.statesman.com/hp/content/coxnet/texas/legislature/0503/0512quorum_rule.html

[Ags2000]

Because of the walkout by the Democrats there are alot of bills that will die. Here is a sampling of the bills that will die if the Democrats continue their walkout.

House Bill 1857
By Mercer, Hochberg, Zedler, Campbell

This bill would allow students and siblings of students who have been a victim of a certain crimes to transfer to another school. This bill would prevent students who are victims of criminal conduct from being re-victimized and threatened by the same student perpetrator and could protect hundreds of Texas schoolchildren.

House Bill 16
By Corte

This bill would provide for expulsion of students who assault public school employees and would protect tens of thousands of Texas teachers.


SENIORS, DISABLED AND DISADVANTAGED

House Joint Resolution 37
By Gutierrez

This bill would increase the homestead exemption for elderly and disabled from $10,000 to $20,000. Disabled people and those that are over 65 often live on limited, fixed incomes and property values and rates might rise disproportionately to their incomes. This bill would provide relief for the tens of thousands of seniors and disabled Texans.

House Bill 3485
By Delisi

This bill would require the use of Medical Transportation Program funds for nursing-home clients to reduce the cost of meeting their transportation needs. Texas Department of Health’s transportation program does not provide medically necessary non-emergency transportation for clients in nursing homes. Costs for ambulance service are considerably higher than those of the Medical Transportation Program.

House Bill 2617
By Mowery, Hamric

This bill would allow cities to use tax abatements to encourage affordable housing for the disadvantaged. Federal tax credits are awarded to developers on a competitive basis for the development of affordable housing. This bill would permit the abatement of local property taxes, in addition to federal tax credits.



HOMELAND SECURITY AND PATRIOTISM

House Bill 2988
By Capelo

This bill would update public health preparedness to properly respond to public health emergencies such as terrorist attacks. This bill would make a number of changes to the way a public health emergency is to be declared and managed in this state, including guidelines for quarantine measures and the disposal of human remains.


House Bill 1279
By Zedler, Howard

Some Home Owners Associations have banned flagpoles and other flag displays from the yards of homes under their jurisdiction. This bill says that homeowners associations cannot keep someone from flying the flag.


BAN ON HUMAN CLONING

House Bill 1175
By King, Bonnen, Jones, Jesse, Luna, R. Cook

This bill would ban human cloning and some types of related research. Currently, no state law exists regulating human cloning. As it stands anyone is free to perform any type of research on human embryos.

http://www.texasgop.org/newsroom/newsDisplay.php?id=2595

These are just a few of the MANY bills that will die, not including the problems with the budget that will get worse of they don't get back here.

[dlemond]

That is just pathetically emabarrassing.

Acting like children who don't get their way is deplorable and reprehensible- be it Democrats or Republicans.
They were elected to serve the public, not to serve themselves.

Seize their assets (until they return).
Then jail them.

[Ags2000]

Just got this email, I x'd out the phone numbers for privacy reasons.

D

May 14, 2003
Contact: James Logan, Executive Editor
(XXX) XXX-XXXX

The Austin Review Files Open Records Request for Documents Generated by Fugitive Texas Legislators in Oklahoma; Asks Band of Legislators to Allow Embedded Reporters from Review and Other Media Outlets


Austin, TX - Today, The Austin Review announces that it has filed an open records request under the Texas Freedom of Information Act with the State Attorney General Greg Abbott for any and all records produced by the fugitive Democrat Texas state legislators while in Oklahoma. A full copy of our request is enclosed below. The Review is also requesting that this brigade of fugitive legislators allow us to place an embedded reporter within their ranks to provide the same objective, independent coverage that the U.S. military permitted in Iraq.

Austin Review Executive Editor James Logan stated, "We believe that under state law all documents created by the fugitive legislators in Oklahoma are public information, including even handwritten notes. These legislators may be able to hide from their colleagues, Texas law enforcement, and the public, but we will not allow them to shirk their responsibility to be open and accountable to a free press and the people of this state. Among other things, these documents may reveal whether special interest groups such as plaintiff's lawyers and labor unions are picking up the tab for this junket."

Logan quipped, "We are also demanding that these fugitive legislators allow the Review and other concerned media outlets to place embedded reporters within their ranks. Our journalists pledge to abide by any reasonable restrictions which they impose on us, including not revealing the location of their weapons of mass desertion."

Logan explained, "While these legislators held a choreographed news conference, that is hardly sufficient to provide the objective, independent reporting that the public demands. It is unconscionable that our military, which is engaged in far more sensitive and dangerous operations in Iraq, permitted far greater access than these legislators who are elected by and accountable to the people."

Logan concluded, "Whatever the merits of the redistricting proposal now on the table, it must not be used an an excuse for public officials to abdicate their duties, including the requirement of transparency in how they conduct their affairs. Although these fugitives claim they are standing on principle and had no alternative but to desert, district lines are both highly political and malleable. As such, there are infinite possibilities for compromise, and any plan is subject to challenge in court. If they haven't already, these AWOL legislators ought to devise their own redistricting plan, which would be covered by our open records request, and present it upon their return. Then we can have a real debate on the merits instead of a puerile game of chicken."

****************************

THE AUSTIN REVIEW
James Logan, Executive Editor
1609 Shoal Creek Blvd, Suite 204
Austin, TX 78701
Phone: (XXX) XXX-XXXX
Cellular Phone: (XXX) XXX-XXXX
Fax: ((XXX) XXX-XXXX
Email: xxxxxx@austinreview.com

May 13, 2003

Director of Communications
Texas House of Representatives
VIA FAX: (XXX) XXX-XXXX

cc: Amanda Crawford
Public Information Coordinator
Office of the Attorney General
VIA FAX: (XXX) XXX-XXXX

To Whom It May Concern:

This is a request under the Texas Open Records Act, chapter 552 of the Government Code (formerly V.T.C.S. article 6252) as well as Article I, Sec. 8 of the Texas Constitution, the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, the common law of the State of Texas and any statute providing for public access to government information.

In light of the extraordinary circumstances surrounding this request, we would ask that your office immediately contact the fugitive legislators, if they can be reached, to advise them against destroying any documents subject to this request. Additionally, we would request that the Texas Department of Public Safety and Texas Rangers be notified of this request so that, upon the arrest of any fugitive legislators, they may confiscate any documents covered in this request that appear to be at risk of destruction.

I request that I be sent copies of the following documents or, if there are a large number, be permitted to inspect the following documents and receive copies of the ones I would like:

All documents produced on or before May 9 by all state legislators who have refused to show up at the Capitol for purposes of establishing a quorum, including but not limited to the following lawmakers who are reportedly in hiding in Oklahoma:

Alonzo
Bailey
Burnam
Canales
Capelo
Castro
Coleman
Cook, R.
Davis, Y.
Deshotel
Dukes
Dunnam
Dutton
Eiland
Ellis
Escobar
Farabee
Farrar
Gallego
Garza
Guillen
Hochberg
Hodge
Homer
Hopson
Jones, J.
Laney
Mabry
Martinez Fischer
McClendon
McReynolds
Menedez
Moreno, J.
Moreno, P.
Naishtat
Noriega
Oliveria
Olivo
Pena
Pickett
Puente
Quintanilla
Raymond
Ritter
Rodriguez
Rose
Solis
Telford
Thompson
Uresti
Villareal
Wise
Wolens

This request includes, but is not limited to, all documents discussing legislative plans and strategy, including, but not limited to, the logistical arrangements for their walkout, redistricting, and planned attacks on political opponents. It also includes, but is not limited to, all records and receipts showing these legislators expenses for the purchase of any and all goods and services, whether legal or illegal, from: hotels, restaurants, bars, recreational facilities, and other commercial establishments, as well as individual purveyors.

It also includes, but is not limited to, telephone and email records reflecting calls and emails transmitted on state cellular telephones and laptop computers, including, but not limited to, such communications with national Democrat Party operatives and leaders. This request also includes, but is not limited to, all records showing any direct, indirect, or in-kind contributions from individuals, groups, and businesses made to defray the costs these legislators have incurred while absent from Austin.

In addition to the above documents generated on or after May 9, this request includes any and all documents generated before May 9 discussing these legislators plans to break quorum through this dereliction of their duties.

If you have any questions about the nature or scope of this request, please contact me. If you determine that all or some portion of the information requested is excepted from required disclosure, I request that you provide me with the portions of the requested information that are public and reasonably separable from that which you believe is excepted.

If any records are in active use or in storage, please certify this fact in writing and set a date and hour within a reasonable time when the on of the information requested is excepted from required public disclosure under a particular exception, I request that you advise me as to which exceptions you believe apply.

If you rely on previous determination, please advise me of the applicable court decision or Attorney General's opinion. If there is no such determination, please advise me of the request for such an opinion, as required under section 552.301 of the Act, and a dated copy of your letter to the Attorney General. I call your attention to section 522.353 of the Act, which provides penalties for a failure to release public records.

I am prepared to pay reasonable costs for copying, within the guidelines set by sections 552.261, 552.262, 552.263, 552.267, 552.268, 552.269.

I appreciate your attention to this request and expect to hear from your office within ten days.

Yours Sincerely,


James Logan
Executive Editor
The Austin Review

[Ags2000]

I also just got this. WARNING: THIS IS A JOKE AND IS NOT TO BE TAKEN LITERALLY!

D

Satire on the Texas Stand-off By Chuck Muth

MUTH'S TRUTHS
"Who Needs Fiction When We Have Democrat Reality?"
by Chuck Muth
May 13, 2003

You'd have to laugh at 'em if they weren't so ridiculous.

Democrats, who are in the minority in the Texas state House, ain't happy with a re-districting plan crafted by the GOP majority. So on Monday they threw a temper-tantrum and did their imitation of former Saddam Hussein regime honchos: They literally ran off and hid rather than show up for their jobs in the Texas legislature.

No, really. And I do mean LITERALLY.

On Sunday night, 59 of the 62 House Democrats packed their bags and sun-tan lotion and fled throughout the country so that state troopers couldn't find them and force them to return to their jobs.

Tips to the Associated Press suggest the spoiled sports lit out in three separate groups, with two hiding out in New Mexico and the other holed up in "a remote location" in Oklahoma.

With that many Democrats on the lam, the Texas Legislature is unable to conduct any business for lack of a quorum, including completion of the redistricting plan.

In a prepared statement from South Dakota, Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle said he was "saddened, saddened" that President Bush had "failed so miserably" in diplomatic efforts to persuade the Republican majority in his home state to do what the pouting Democrat minority wanted.

In Washington, Sen. Robert Byrd (D-West Byrdginia) applauded the hiding legislators' flamboyant showmanship, to which Sen. Ted Kennedy chimed in, "I'll drink to that."

The most stunning development of the day, however, was the dramatic re-appearance of former Iraqi minister of information, Mohammed al-Sahhaf, who took to the floor of the empty Texas legislative chamber to declare that there were no - repeat NO - missing Democrats. "Baghdad Bob" said the empty room was just an illusion perpetrated by the "cowboy imperialist infidel dog in the White House."

Back in Washington, at a hastily convened Pentagon press conference on Tuesday morning, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld sought to quash rumors that a number of the escaped Democrats had crossed the border into Syria and dismissed reports that they were traveling disguised in black mustaches and berets using French-issued passports.

"That's just stupid and any reporter who suggests such nonsense ought to be sent to Singapore for a good caning," said the plain-spoken Rumsfeld.

It's also untrue that photos of the 59 Democrats will soon appear on the sides of milk cartons or that the escapees will be featured on "America's Most Wanted." However, it does appear true that the United Nations has dispatched Hans Blix to the southwestern U.S. to search for the missing legislators.

And in a surprise reversal by two media giants, the New York Times announced it had rehired reporter Jayson Blair to cover the developing story (from a cruise ship in the Bahamas) while CNN announced that Peter Arnett had been rehired and will be embedded with a posse of Texas Rangers who have been dispatched to round up and return the Democrats to Austin.

Meanwhile, ABC's Peter Jennings declared the effort a "quagmire" after seven-and-a-half fruitless minutes of searching.

In Hollywood, hundreds of celebrities led by actress Susan Sarandon and film-maker Michael Moore, took to the streets of Beverly Hills and went on a looting rampage as a show of solidarity with the wayward Democrats. Moore blamed the whole fiasco on the Supreme Court for stealing the 2000 presidential election from Al Gore.

Moore also took the occasion to announce that he had chosen Beavis and Butthead for the leading roles in his upcoming "objective" film of the two Bush presidencies, while wondering why anyone would think his film was going to be a "hatchet job."

And in Las Vegas, former drug czar Bill Bennett set the odds of the Democrats returning to their jobs by the end of the week at 4-to-1, while NewsMax.com announced the release of a new "Deck of Deserters" playing cards featuring the 59 missing Democrats.

God bless America.

# # #

Chuck Muth is president of Citizen Outreach, a non-profit public policy advocacy organization in Washington, D.C.

[Kitt]

Proposed bills can be decieving. In this article Molly Ivans says that the Dallas newspapers and others around the state have been writing reports of disgust with the way the Republican majority in Texas has been ramming greivous legislation. I read a report in my local newspaper which wrote the same story about this that Molly is writing in this article. If the majority party is not going to allow the minorty party to have a say in anything then more power to them doing what it takes to change the landscape.
____________________________________________________
Far too far
Texas Republicans vote in lockstep to ensure an unhelpful government


AUSTIN, Texas -- They just went too far, that's all. This session of the legislature has been as brutal, callous and indifferent to the welfare of the weakest, the most frail, youngest and oldest Texans as it is possible to get. The level of pure meanness is stunning. They have just gone too damn far.
The session was pretty well summed up by Rep. Senfronia Thompson when she illustrated what was going on by taking the House rulebook to the podium with her and dropping it on the floor. There is no rule of procedure, fairness, common sense or decency that has been observed by the Republican majority in the Texas House.

This is not about partisan politics -- although that has certainly reared its ugly head. In case you hadn't noticed, every major newspaper in this state has criticized the plans and performance of the legislature this session, often in harsh language. Those wild-eyed radicals at the Dallas Morning News and Houston Chronicle are just disgusted with the tacky display these people have been putting on.

There is no excuse for this, and blaming it on the deficit will not wash. We all knew going in that some terribly hard choices would have to be made, but what in the name of heaven was the governor thinking when he had handicapped people arrested? These were citizens who came to their capital to protest budget cuts affecting them, and they get arrested. Maybe it was because they were in wheelchairs -- don't even have to be hauled away, they can just be rolled away.

Most of us thought it was pretty funny when Rep. Debbie Riddle popped out with her now-classic statement: "Where did this idea come from that everybody deserves free education, free medical care, free whatever? It comes from Moscow, from Russia. It comes straight out of the pit of hell."

Amusing as that was, the House has been doing its dead-level best to destroy both public education and public health. They've taken 250,000 poor children off the Children's Health Insurance Program, and the schools are in dire straits. As the Austin American-Statesman pointed out in an editorial, these same fine thinkers did manage to find $10 million to appropriate for cow research and $300 million for Gov. Perry to woo companies to Texas.

Of course, there have been some lovely moments we can celebrate, like the day Speaker Tom Craddick decided that the new ethics reform law should be debated in a backroom, closed-door session. Amazingly enough, the proposed ethics law was weakened and watered down behind the closed doors.

I think a special salute for clear thinking should go to the House for its amazing decision to cut the program that pays for medications for mentally ill people who are out of prison on probation or parole. Is this brilliant? Now these people will be wandering around the state without their meds.

The latest flap is over a congressional redistricting map that is so bad it's actually funny. Of course, the thing was passed without public hearings, because as Rep. Joe Crabb explained, "The rest of us would have a very difficult time if we were out in an area -- other than Austin or other English-speaking areas -- to be able to have committee hearings or to be able to converse with people that did not speak English." Sometimes you have to wonder what planet these people are from.

That was the proverbial straw for the Democrats, 53 of whom left the state or went into hiding Sunday to break the quorum, thus bringing legislative business to a halt. They've already been dubbed the Killer D's, after the tradition of the Killer Bees in 1979. Believe me, stopping the legislature from functioning at this point is high public service.

Speaker Craddick called it a "stunt." The R's have been pulling stunts every day of this session, and don't write it off as payback for heavy-handed Democratic rule. Speaker Pete Laney ran a fair House, and everyone knew it -- these people are disgracing themselves and the state.

The way things got to such a sorry pass is that the R's have been running on rote, lockstep voting. No Democratic amendment gets considered on its merits, no matter how sensible it is. Shell bills get introduced, and then whole sections are amended on the floor, in a parody of legislative process. Much time has been spent on gay-bashing and trying to take away abortions rights. I'm starting to think right-wing Republicans all have an unhealthy fixation on sexual behavior.

The choices on how to spend money couldn't possibly make Republican "values" any clearer. We can spend money on corporate welfare, but not on people's welfare. We can't cover health insurance for our teachers, but we must have brush control.

The creepy thing about the far-right Republicans, who are definitely in the majority in the House, is not that they are dismantling government because they won't raise taxes, they're dismantling government because they think it shouldn't help people. They really think health and human services should not be provided. It's an old line among liberals that anti-choice people care more about the unborn than they do about the born, but I'm telling you that it's not just some clever line -- these people are writing it into the state budget.

[Max Whittaker]

Isn't Bush and company acting worse than children? They say that only the countries who supported the war can participate in their party. All the others are not invited. Bush did not attend the Cinco De Mayo celebration this year because Mexico did not support the war. He didn't seem to mind attending last year... or was it the year before.
Do you remember when the US ambassador to the UN stormed out when the US was being criticized? That is worse than Childish!

Some fourth graders recently visited DC to watch politicians debate. When they returned, they were asked how it was by their parents. They said, "They acted worse than second graders!"


The whole government is made up of children!

[Jem]

Originally posted by Ags2000
Sad day in politics when elected officials are acting like a 2 year old and walks away.

They acted like 2 year olds then? How 'bout not taking the France opposition to war maturely and renaming the french fries and french toast freedom fries and freedom toast. That's what I call acting like 2 year olds.

[Jem]

Originally posted by Max Whittaker
Isn't Bush and company acting worse than children? They say that only the countries who supported the war can participate in their party. All the others are not invited. Bush did not attend the Cinco De Mayo celebration this year because Mexico did not support the war. He didn't seem to mind attending last year... or was it the year before.
Do you remember when the US ambassador to the UN stormed out when the US was being criticized? That is worse than Childish!

Some fourth graders recently visited DC to watch politicians debate. When they returned, they were asked how it was by their parents. They said, "They acted worse than second graders!"


The whole government is made up of children!

George Bush is being discriminating of other countries based on their anti-war stances. That's just wrong of him to do that.

[Ags2000]

Well, I don't know who Molly Ivans is, but I can tell you that she does not have all of her facts in that nice little article there. There HAVE been bills as well as amendments considered and passed that were authored by democrats. Anybody who says otherwise is either a liar or just plain ignorant.

The thing is, the Democrats have been doing these things for YEARS here in Texas. This is the first time that the Republicans had control of all of the major offices in the state as well as a majority in the House and Senate. The Democrats have rammed their own bills through back in the days and drawn and redrawn the districts whenever there started to be a large group of Republicans. Turn about is fair play, Republicans are just trying to have representation equal to what is now all over Texas. Yes they might loose a few seats, but they WILL be gaining seats elsewhere.

And as for the paper's writing bad things about what is going on, what's new there. Alot of them have the backing of Democrats, MY paper being one of them. You just have to take it with a grain of salt.

Yes there are some legislation that came about that I don't like, and some cuts that HAD to be made because of the deficeit. That's just how it is right now, everybody has to have cutbacks right now. And as for the Ag bills, so what...Texas is a BIG Ag state. They cut the money back for them as well. Just because they received money doesn't mean anything.

D

[Kitt]

Mollly Ivins is a political writer who has lived and written in Texas for many, many years. She is neither ignorant nor a liar. She has her facts correct in her article. "Turn about is fair play" is one hell of a way to justify your argument. Tom Delay is from Texas but he is now the majority wip in the house of Representatives. This power play for redistricing was set up and pushed by him. Also, if you can believe this insane abuse of a use of power, Delay used the office of Homeland Security to track the Democrats down in Oklahoma. Good lord! Is that the kind of crapola that Homeland Secuity was put in place to do? Let's hope not!

For all who would like to know more about Molly Ivins go to this link or read about her in my next post. She has an impressive history and, more importantly, she has a good sense of humor.
http://www.creators.com/opinion_Shell.cfm?pg=biography.html&columnsname=miv

[Kitt]

About Molly Ivins

Molly Ivins is from Houston, has a B.A. from Smith College, a Master's in journalism from Columbia University and studied for a year at the Institute of Political Science in Paris. She began her career in journalism as the Complaint Department of the Houston Chronicle. She rapidly worked her way up to the position of sewer editor, from whence she wrote a number of gripping articles about street closings. She next went to work for the Minneapolis Tribune, first as a police reporter and later on a beat called Movements for Social Change. She covered militant blacks, angry Indians, radical students, uppity women and a motley assortment of other misfits and troublemakers.

In 1970, Ivins returned to Texas as co-editor of The Texas Observer, a sprightly, muck-raking publication devoted to the coverage of Texas political and social events. Her specialty was covering the Texas Legislature, which doubtlessly accounts for her frequent fits of hysterical laughter in those years. When the Lege was not in session, Ivins roamed the state in search of truth, justice and good lead stories for the magazine.

In 1976, Ivins joined The New York Times as a political reporter, first at City Hall and then at the statehouse in Albany. In 1977, she was named Rocky Mountain Bureau Chief, chiefly because there was no one else in the bureau. For three years, she covered nine mountain states by herself and was often tired.

In February 1982, she returned once more to Texas, which may indicate a masochistic streak, and has had plenty to write about ever since.

Ivin's freelance work has appeared in Esquire, Atlantic, The Nation, Harper's, TV Guide and numerous other publications. She also does occasional commentary for National Public Radio and the McNeil/Lehrer program. She served for three years on the board of the National News Council, is active in Amnesty International's Journalism Network and the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. She writes about press issues for the American Civil Liberties Union and several journalism reviews. She has received a number of journalism awards and in 1976 was named Outstanding Alumna by Columbia University's School of Journalism.

She speaks both French and Spanish, loves to camp, canoe and run rivers and is a semi-famous storyteller and beer-drinker.

She is author of two best-selling books, Molly Ivins Can't Say That, Can She? and Nothin' But Good Times Ahead, both collections of essays on politics and journalism. She has been a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize three times and was the winner of the 1992 Headliners Award for best column in Texas.

However, Ivins counts as her two greatest honors that the Minneapolis police force named its mascot pig after her and that she was once banned from the campus of Texas A&M.

[Fleet]

Originally posted by Jem
They acted like 2 year olds then? How 'bout not taking the France opposition to war maturely and renaming the french fries and french toast freedom fries and freedom toast. That's what I call acting like 2 year olds.
How 'bout French documents found in Baghdad revealing some of what the U.S. was/is doing? How 'bout France not voting with the U.S. because they were buying oil from Iraq? In a way, this war was about oil... not the U.S., but France.
France has proven to no longer be an ally with the U.S.
Yeah, some in the U.S. renamed French Fries, but that's a lot better than revealing France's secrets to her enemy (which is what France did to the U.S.).

[Kitt]

Originally posted by Fleet

How 'bout French documents found in Baghdad revealing some of what the U.S. was/is doing? How 'bout France not voting with the U.S. because they were buying oil from Iraq? In a way, this war was about oil... not the U.S., but France.
France has proven to no longer be an ally with the U.S.
Yeah, some in the U.S. renamed French Fries, but that's a lot better than revealing France's secrets to her enemy (which is what France did to the U.S.). How 'bout maybe that's a bunch of bull?

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/05/16/1052885379696.html

France cries foul over US smear campaign
May 16 2003

France railed today against what it described as a months-long smear campaign, fuelled by unnamed US officials, inaccurately linking Paris to Saddam Hussein in major US media.

"The methods used by those propagating this disinformation have no place in the relationship between friends and allies, who may disagree on important issues but should not engage in denigration and lies," Ambassador Jean-David Levitte said in a letter to US administration officials and politicians.

The diplomat cited a spate of media reports, sourced to anonymous administration officials, alleging cozy - and even illegal - commercial or military ties between Paris and the now defunct Iraqi regime.

"I would like to draw your attention to the troubling - indeed, unacceptable - nature of this disinformation campaign aimed at sullying France's image and misleading the public," said Levitte.

The White House and the Pentagon swiftly rejected any allegation that there was an orchestrated effort to spread disinformation about France, which drew Washington's ire by opposing the war to oust the Iraqi dictator.


A spokesman for US President George W Bush, Scott McClellan, said: "There is, I don't think, any basis in fact to it," before making light of recent tensions.

"The United States and France have been at marriage counselling for the last 200 years. France is an ally; they're still friends. And despite our past differences, we are looking to the future," he said.

"Certainly there's no such campaign out of this building," said Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who has not been shy about criticising France. "I can't speak for the rest of government."

Later, State Department officials said that Secretary of State Colin Powell will travel to Paris for a May 22-23 Group of Eight foreign ministers' meeting, becoming the highest-level US Cabinet member to visit France since the war.

France angered Bush by leading the international effort to block any new UN resolution authorising the invasion, and top US officials recently met at the White House to discuss how to punish Paris for its actions.

In Brussels, French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin said it was time to clear the air between the two longstanding allies.

"Is there a problem? Let's deal with it. Do not let rumour come between us," he said. "We want to work with our friends and American allies in a spirit of responsibility, of truth and of clarity."

Levitte's letter included a two-page list of anonymously sourced news stories he said were false, including a May 6 Washington Times story alleging that France helped top Iraqis elude US capture by giving them passports.

That story drew a fierce denial from the French embassy. But while the State Department said it did not have any information to support the accusation, the White House and the Pentagon did not deny it outright.

White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said the same day that he could not confirm the story, but added: "I think the French will have to explain what they did or did not do."

"France has historically had a very close relationship with Iraq," Rumsfeld said at the time. "My understanding is that it continued right up until the outbreak of the war. What took place thereafter, we'll find out."

US anger over France's opposition to the war has found some less ominous outlets, with politicians replacing "French fries" and "French toast" with "Freedom fries" and "Freedom toast" on their official menus; French wine boycotts; and a resurgence of decades-old jokes about French personal hygiene and military prowess - or supposed lack thereof.

- AFP

[ABlairican Pie]

Originally posted by Jem


They acted like 2 year olds then? How 'bout not taking the France opposition to war maturely and renaming the french fries and french toast freedom fries and freedom toast. That's what I call acting like 2 year olds.


MMMMMMMMM.....French toast....nice and buttery...Mapley syrupy.....hot and flavory...and cinnamonamanomamony.......:liplick:

[ClesStahn]

Originally posted by Ags2000
Sad day in politics when elected officials are acting like a 2 year old and walks away.

Lol, amen! Spoiled Brats.... At least Conservatives act like adults if they lose.

[Ags2000]

Originally posted by Kitt
Also, if you can believe this insane abuse of a use of power, Delay used the office of Homeland Security to track the Democrats down in Oklahoma. Good lord! Is that the kind of crapola that Homeland Secuity was put in place to do? Let's hope not!

Actually that is VERY misleading as well as incorrect. Delay did NOT use the office of Homeland Security to track the Democrats down in Oklahoma and New Mexico. The Texas House rules allow for the arrest of members who intentionally bust a quorum. Rule 5, section 8 states:

When a call of the House is moved for one of the above purposes and seconded by 15 members (of whom the speaker may be one) and ordered by a majority vote, the main entrance to the hall and all other doors leading out of the hall shall be locked and no member permitted to leave the House without the written permission of the speaker.

The names of members present shall be recorded. All absentees for whom no sufficient excuse is made may, by order of a majority of those present, be sent for and arrested, wherever they may be found, by the sergeant-at-arms or an officer appointed by the sergeant-at-arms for that purpose, and their attendance shall be secured and retained.

The House shall determine on what conditions they shall be discharged. Members who voluntarily appear shall, unless the House otherwise directs, be immediately admitted to the hall of the House and shall report their names to the clerk to be entered in the journal as present.

Until a quorum appears, should the roll call fail to show one present, no business shall be transacted, except to compel the attendance of absent members or to adjourn. It shall not be in order to recess under a call of the House.

So the sergeant-at-arms got ahold of the governor who gave permission to use the Texas Rangers as well as the State Troopers to track them down and bring them back.

The reason the office of Homeland Security got involved was because it was believed that a plane carrying Democrats might have crashed.

The call to Homeland Security was placed Monday, after the blip that was one of the planes disappeared from view. It was believed that the plane might have crashed and since that IS the job of the Homeland Security to investigate that, they were called in.

NOT TO LOCATE the democrats, who were already located, but to make sure nothing had happened to the plane.

D

[bandito]

Originally posted by Ags2000


So the sergeant-at-arms got ahold of the governor who gave permission to use the Texas Rangers as well as the State Troopers to track them down and bring them back.

The reason the office of Homeland Security got involved was because it was believed that a plane carrying Democrats might have crashed.

The call to Homeland Security was placed Monday, after the blip that was one of the planes disappeared from view. It was believed that the plane might have crashed and since that IS the job of the Homeland Security to investigate that, they were called in.

NOT TO LOCATE the democrats, who were already located, but to make sure nothing had happened to the plane.

D Thanks for clearing that up Ags!

[Kitt]

Originally posted by Ags2000


The reason the office of Homeland Security got involved was because it was believed that a plane carrying Democrats might have crashed.

The call to Homeland Security was placed Monday, after the blip that was one of the planes disappeared from view. It was believed that the plane might have crashed and since that IS the job of the Homeland Security to investigate that, they were called in.

NOT TO LOCATE the democrats, who were already located, but to make sure nothing had happened to the plane.

D Bull. That is the game that Delay and the Texas House played. They knew damn well that a plane didn't crash. And that's what makes this situation even worse. They lied and manipulated the Homeland Security in order to find the plane and thus the Democrats. Incredibly out of line, and I don't think they're going to get away with it. My statement was not in the least misleading it was completely accurate. What I added just now only tops off what a gross abuse of power Delay and the Texas House are guilty of. The following article by Josh Marshall tells the story.

--Josh Marshall
May 16th, 2003 -- 4:11 AM EDT // link)
"We got a problem, and I hope you can help me out. We had a plane that was supposed to be going from Ardmore, Oklahoma, to Georgetown, Texas. It had state representatives in it, and we cannot find this plane ..."

Those are the words of a Texas state trooper calling a division of the Department of Homeland Security to help locate a missing plane with government officials on board, according to a partial transcript of the conversation released yesterday by the Department of Homeland Security and excerpted here in Friday's Dallas Morning News.

As reports in various Friday morning papers make clear, the Texas Department of Public Safety, tricked the folks at Homeland into thinking that they were looking for a missing aircraft that might either have crashed or fallen victim to a terrorist attack when in fact they were just trying to track down those Democrats who refused to make a quorum call. "From all indications, this request from the Texas DPS was an urgent plea for assistance from a law enforcement agency trying to locate a missing, lost or possibly crashed aircraft," said Dean Boyd, spokesman for the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Now, House Speaker Tom Craddick -- the guy who ordered the troopers to track the Dems down -- made great efforts yesterday to distance himself from the whole fiasco, telling reporters he'd instructed troopers to find the fugitive Dems but had not involved himself in any way in how they did it.

The Dallas Morning News, however, was able to find out who the trooper in question was, identifying him as Lt. Will Crais, a "veteran fugitive-hunter" assigned to the DPS's Special Crimes Division. Now, the interesting detail is that Crais "was working on the hunt for the missing lawmakers, an effort that was run out of a conference room next to Mr. Craddick's office [emphasis added]."

If this was all going in a conference room adjoining Speaker Craddick's office, that makes it a bit less credible that he didn't know anything about what they were doing.

And what about Tom DeLay? The Dallas Morning News article quotes DeLay aids saying that there was "no contact between his office and the Homeland Security Department or the FBI." But a DeLay aide told the Washington Post that the Majority Leader "did pass along to the Justice Department Craddick's inquiry on whether federal law enforcement could assist in the manhunt."

So DeLay had "no contact" with Homeland or FBI but he did "pass along to the Justice Department" a request from his man in Austin, Tom Craddick, asking the Feds to "assist in the manhunt." (Presumably, the reason to involve the Feds would be to bring them back across state lines.) Frankly, I don't think you've got to be too big a DeLay-o-phobe to think that, pretty much by his own admission, DeLay was involved in trying to get federal law enforcement involved in arresting those state Democratic legislators and hauling them back to Austin. In this context, the difference between 'passing along a request' and making a request really doesn't pass the laugh test.

Just draw back for a moment and ask the question: what on earth is a House Majority Leader doing passing on requests from a state House Speaker to the Justice Department, asking for federal officers to arrest members of his own legislature? Add to that the fact that none of the stories match up. Craddick says he made no effort to pull in the Feds. But DeLay says he passed along Craddick's request to pull in the Feds. All of which lends tremendous credence to the notion that Lt. Will Crais, shall we say, acted alone.


-- Josh Marshall

[Max Whittaker]

Originally posted by Fleet

How 'bout French documents found in Baghdad revealing some of what the U.S. was/is doing? How 'bout France not voting with the U.S. because they were buying oil from Iraq? In a way, this war was about oil... not the U.S., but France.
France has proven to no longer be an ally with the U.S.
Yeah, some in the U.S. renamed French Fries, but that's a lot better than revealing France's secrets to her enemy (which is what France did to the U.S.).

So, we re-name French Fries Freedom Fries to prove to the French that we are better at being smug?

[Fleet]

Originally posted by Max Whittaker
So, we re-name French Fries Freedom Fries to prove to the French that we are better at being smug?
No, we should just tell the French that they are no longer one of our allies because they stabbed us in the back. (But they probably already know that anyway.)

[Max Whittaker]

Originally posted by Fleet

No, we should just tell the French that they are no longer one of our allies because they stabbed us in the back. (But they probably already know that anyway.)

We should show them that we are the better country by forgiving their transgressions. All we have to do is watch them a little closer, that's all.

[Fleet]

Originally posted by Max Whittaker
We should show them that we are the better country by forgiving their transgressions. All we have to do is watch them a little closer, that's all.
Yeah, forgive them while they are siding with our enemy. :lol:
As I said, liberal thinking like that only works in a fantasy land (where you can "trust" everybody.) No, we have to watch them A LOT closer. If we "forgive their transgressions" who's to say they would not do it again? This time informing N. Korea or Iran of U.S. activities.

What would the world say if the U.S. did what France did? Would Germany or whatever country forgive the U.S.? Highly unlikely.

BTW, for info about the French atrocities, check the link below.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/4/28/164443.shtml

[Max Whittaker]

Originally posted by Fleet

Yeah, forgive them while they are siding with our enemy. :lol:
As I said, liberal thinking like that only works in a fantasy land (where you can "trust" everybody.) No, we have to watch them A LOT closer. If we "forgive their transgressions" who's to say they would not do it again? This time informing N. Korea or Iran of U.S. activities.

What would the world say if the U.S. did what France did? Would Germany or whatever country forgive the U.S.? Highly unlikely.

BTW, for info about the French atrocities, check the link below.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/4/28/164443.shtml


So lets watch them A LOT closer, then. It is not in our favor to alienate ourselves from one of our oldest allies.

If the US did what France did no one will ever know about it.

[ABlairican Pie]

Originally posted by Fleet

No, we should just tell the French that they are no longer one of our allies because they stabbed us in the back. (But they probably already know that anyway.)

Why don't we just tell the whole stinking world they're no longer our allies for stabbing us in the back?? Except for our lap dog Tony Blair....:rolleyes:

[Fleet]

Originally posted by Captain ABlairica
Why don't we just tell the whole stinking world they're no longer our allies for stabbing us in the back?? Except for our lap dog Tony Blair....:rolleyes:
Currently, France, Germany and Russia have sided with Iraq. On our side, it's not just Tony Blair and England, it's also the 48 other countries which supported the U.S.
Blair, along with Bush, just want their countries to be safe from terrorism (and to remove the tyrant Saddam). Some people seem to have a problem with that- defending their country.

[Fleet]

Originally posted by Max Whittaker
So lets watch them A LOT closer, then. It is not in our favor to alienate ourselves from one of our oldest allies.

If the US did what France did no one will ever know about it.
France has proven to be a false friend. Why should we continue to accept them as allies? They have already proven they will hurt the U.S. (by supplying the enemy with info).
France has not been an a true ally with the U.S. for a long time. They have in the past voted against the U.S. on many different issues. Many times, the only reason was because the U.S. was for something and France voted the other way because, overall, the French gov't is anti-U.S. Has been for many years.
England is a true ally; France is not.

[Kitt]

Originally posted by Fleet

Currently, France, Germany and Russia have sided with Iraq. On our side, it's not just Tony Blair and England, it's also the 48 other countries which supported the U.S.
Blair, along with Bush, just want their countries to be safe from terrorism (and to remove the tyrant Saddam). Some people seem to have a problem with that- defending their country. None of those countries "sided with Iraq".And when you say 'Tony Blair', mind you he is supposed to be representing Britain, not England. But France Germany And Russia weren't alone. Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Canada, India, China and about a hundred other countries also didn't side with the US policy of invading Iraq.

[Fleet]

Originally posted by Kitt
None of those countries "sided with Iraq".And when you say 'Tony Blair', mind you he is supposed to be representing Britain, not England. But France Germany And Russia weren't alone. Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Canada, India, China and about a hundred other countries also didn't side with the US policy of invading Iraq.
Really? I would call selling military weapons to Iraq (which Germany and Russia did) and revealing to Iraq U.S. activities (which France did) siding with Iraq!
Interesting that you point out Syria (they are buddies with Iraq).
There were 49 countries on our side; even if there were none it would not have mattered. The U.S. will do its best to protect its citizens no matter who "approves" of it. If this means taking out a madman dictator, that's what we do and if some countries don't like it, too bad.

[Jem]

Originally posted by Kitt
None of those countries "sided with Iraq".And when you say 'Tony Blair', mind you he is supposed to be representing Britain, not England. But France Germany And Russia weren't alone. Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Canada, India, China and about a hundred other countries also didn't side with the US policy of invading Iraq.

Canada is an important country to take note of with opposition to the war with Iraq. Canada has been close allies with the USA for years. If Jean Chretien opposes going to help the USA with the war in Iraq, that says that the war with Iraq must be unjustified.

[Kitt]

Originally posted by Fleet

Really? I would call selling military weapons to Iraq (which Germany and Russia did) and revealing to Iraq U.S. activities (which France did) siding with Iraq!
Interesting that you point out Syria (they are buddies with Iraq).
There were 49 countries on our side; even if there were none it would not have mattered. The U.S. will do its best to protect its citizens no matter who "approves" of it. If this means taking out a madman dictator, that's what we do and if some countries don't like it, too bad. Oh and we didn't sell any nasty stuff to Iraq? But anyway gee, wait a minute. I thought "liberating" the Iraqi people was your compassionate and caring reason for invading Iraq. But no? That wasn't it? That's all youve talked about for the past month or more, so I thought it was. I didn't know that the reason for your glee was that we are now protected from Iraq? What did Iraq have that we needed to be protected from? They don't seem to have had any mushroom cloud stuff or dangerous goos and all of that other excitatious mumbo jumbo that we were told about day after day for months on end. And now that we've spent billions of dollars and all of our intelligence sources paying attention to Iraq, guess who is on the loose in the world and still and reeking havic? Al Qaida. And I don't know if we have a clue yet how we're going to stop them.

[Kitt]

Originally posted by Fleet

Really? I would call selling military weapons to Iraq (which Germany and Russia did) and revealing to Iraq U.S. activities (which France did) siding with Iraq!
Since the lead up to war was filled with lies, I have no reason not to suspect that what you're regurgitaing about France etc, is not yet another series of lies.

France Claims U.S. Is Engaging in Disinformation Campaign
By BRIAN KNOWLTON
International Herald Tribune

WASHINGTON, May 15 — France took the highly unusual step today of complaining formally that it had been victimized by a campaign of "repeated disinformation," allegedly fed by officials in the Bush administration, that accused the French of providing military and diplomatic aid to Baghdad. The administration denied the existence of any such campaign.

"There is, I don't think, any basis in fact to it," said Scott McClellan, a White House spokesman. He added: "France is an ally; they're still friends."

And Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, whose department and supporters are most often cited as a possible anonymous source of the stories, said he knew of no such campaign. "Certainly, there's no such campaign out of this building," he said.

The French complaint underlined the depth of ill feelings that still divide the two long-time allies weeks after the end of the United States-led war against Iraq, which France opposed.

The French made their complaint in a letter from Ambassador Jean-David Levitte that was sent to the White House, the State Department and the Congress. In addition to the letter, which was first reported by the Washington Post, the Foreign Ministry in Paris took an unusual step of its own, instructing French diplomats to monitor the American news media for signs of orchestrated anti-French disinformation.

"We have decided to count the untrue accusations which have appeared in the U.S. press and which have deeply shocked the French," said a Foreign Ministry spokeswoman, Marie Masdupuy, according to a report by Reuters.

Among other things, the challenged stories assert that France and Germany supplied Iraq with precision switches that could be used in nuclear weapons; that French companies sold Iraq spare parts for warplanes and military helicopters; that France possessed prohibited strains of human smallpox; and that France, most recently, helped Iraqi leaders escape to Europe by providing them with travel papers.

The stories have been rankling French diplomats for months.

They see such reports as not just hurtful to American-French relations, especially since several have been seized on by members of Congress to call for investigations or punishment of the French. Paris also sees the stories as possibly linked to dangerous eruptions of anti-French sentiment. While they suggested no direct link, French officials did cite the example of a man who they said was attacked and severely beaten in a Los Angeles restaurant because he was speaking French.

The challenged reports are "all untrue, and all serious," and "not acceptable," said Nathalie Loiseau, a spokeswoman at the French Embassy in Washington.

Ms. Loiseau did not specifically point to anyone in the administration as the source of the articles, but she said that France could only assume that journalists were being truthful when they cited unnamed sources in the administration.

"We don't know who talked to journalists," she said, "but we would like it to stop, because it's inaccurate and it discredits our country."

The administration, while denying the French allegation, has made no secret of its deep unhappiness with France's adamant opposition during the Iraq debates at the United Nations, and later when it sought to block NATO assistance to Turkey during the Iraq war.

[ABlairican Pie]

I am getting sick of all the Francophobia going on by all the Bush Worshippers. I'm sure France has probably done some unethical things with Iraq, but ever since 9/11, we have acted as if America is a country that could never do wrong. Uhhh, excuse me people, but didn't Bush Sr. get into trouble for supplying weapons and military technology to Saddam so Iraq could fight their war with Iran? How convenient we forget that Saddam and Bush Sr. were buds...

[Max Whittaker]

Originally posted by Captain ABlairica
I am getting sick of all the Francophobia going on by all the Bush Worshippers. I'm sure France has probably done some unethical things with Iraq, but ever since 9/11, we have acted as if America is a country that could never do wrong. Uhhh, excuse me people, but didn't Bush Sr. get into trouble for supplying weapons and military technology to Saddam so Iraq could fight their war with Iran? How convenient we forget that Saddam and Bush Sr. were buds...

We have forgotten a lot. We don't want to acknowledge our own misdeeds. We don't want to be the bad guy. So we point fingers at others to draw attention from ourselves. Typical schoolyard behavior.
Just remember, when you point a finger, you have one finger pointing at your victim, but you have three fingers pointing at yourself.


Why should we continue to accept France as an ally? Because we don't need more enemies!

Just remember Fleet, we reap what we sow.

[bandito]

Originally posted by Captain ABlairica
I am getting sick of all the Francophobia going on by all the Bush Worshippers. I'm sure France has probably done some unethical things with Iraq, but ever since 9/11, we have acted as if America is a country that could never do wrong. Uhhh, excuse me people, but didn't Bush Sr. get into trouble for supplying weapons and military technology to Saddam so Iraq could fight their war with Iran? How convenient we forget that Saddam and Bush Sr. were buds... Um, I don't think anyone cares what you're sick of. This is a board for everyones opinions, and if people want to post negatives about France so be it.

[Fleet]

Originally posted by Captain ABlairica
I am getting sick of all the Francophobia going on by all the Bush Worshippers. I'm sure France has probably done some unethical things with Iraq, but ever since 9/11, we have acted as if America is a country that could never do wrong. Uhhh, excuse me people, but didn't Bush Sr. get into trouble for supplying weapons and military technology to Saddam so Iraq could fight their war with Iran? How convenient we forget that Saddam and Bush Sr. were buds...
At the time, Iran was our enemy. That's why the U.S. helped Iraq. And, the U.S. did not reveal any French secrets to Saddam.
This is much different than France (a supposed ally of the U.S.) giving out info to the enemy of said ally.

[ABlairican Pie]

Originally posted by bandito
Um, I don't think anyone cares what you're sick of. This is a board for everyones opinions, and if people want to post negatives about France so be it.

That's not what I'm talking about. I'm not talking about negative opinions about France on this site. I'm talking about the xenophobic attitudes everone has anywhere about other countries that don't toe the Bush party line.

I encourage people's opinions both pro and con. I need a good laugh sometimes.:lol:

Another thing I'm sick of is being misquoted.:mad:

Btw, do you think they were right to burn Joan of Arc at the stake or should they have let the English have their way with her?

[Fleet]

Originally posted by Max Whittaker
We have forgotten a lot. We don't want to acknowledge our own misdeeds. We don't want to be the bad guy. So we point fingers at others to draw attention from ourselves. Typical schoolyard behavior.
Just remember, when you point a finger, you have one finger pointing at your victim, but you have three fingers pointing at yourself.

Why should we continue to accept France as an ally? Because we don't need more enemies!

Just remember Fleet, we reap what we sow.
News alert- the U.S. are the good guys. We provide more in aid to other countries than any other country on earth. We just want to protect ourselves- like any other country would.

No need to worry about France as an enemy. All we would have to do is send a few military planes over thier country and they would start surrendering!

"We reap what we sow..." I hope Saddam has heard that saying!

[ABlairican Pie]

Originally posted by Fleet

News alert- the U.S. are the good guys. We provide more in aid to other countries than any other country on earth. We just want to protect ourselves- like any other country would.

No need to worry about France as an enemy. All we would have to do is send a few military planes over thier country and they would start surrendering!

"We reap what we sow..." I hope Saddam has heard that saying!

The scary thing is that is what I was just thinking Dubya might do before his term is up: carpet bomb Paris.

[Fleet]

Originally posted by Captain ABlairica
I encourage people's opinions both pro and con. I need a good laugh sometimes.:lol:

Me, too. I'm always entertained by some of the comments on this board. Like "this war is for oil" or "the U.S. wants to take over Iraq, and then more and more middle east countries." :lol:

[ABlairican Pie]

Hey, Kitt, I like your avatar!!!:D

[Fleet]

Originally posted by Captain ABlairica
The scary thing is that is what I was just thinking Dubya might do before his term is up: carpet bomb Paris.
I know you are joking. There would be absolutely no reason to do that.

[Fleet]

Originally posted by Jem
Canada is an important country to take note of with opposition to the war with Iraq. Canada has been close allies with the USA for years. If Jean Chretien opposes going to help the USA with the war in Iraq, that says that the war with Iraq must be unjustified.
Jean Chretien is wrong. Just because he opposed the war does not mean he is right.
Hopefully, Jean and Canada will regain their senses and back up the U.S.

[Max Whittaker]

Originally posted by Fleet

I know you are joking. There would be absolutely no reason to do that.
Haven't you been saying we need to teach France a leason? They are not our ally anymore? So, lets bomb them! That solves that problem!

[Max Whittaker]

Originally posted by Fleet

News alert- the U.S. are the good guys. We provide more in aid to other countries than any other country on earth. We just want to protect ourselves- like any other country would.

No need to worry about France as an enemy. All we would have to do is send a few military planes over thier country and they would start surrendering!

"We reap what we sow..." I hope Saddam has heard that saying!

The American people are basically good people. We are not always the good guys.

You're right, every country has a right to protect itself. That statement has taken on a whole new meaning now. Now, any country can attack it's neighbor if it believes it poses any inkling of a threat to them. What a nice world we're building.


Yeah lets show france who's boss! After we bomb them, they wouldn't dare to even look at us wrong for atleast fifty years!


I'm sure Saddam understands that phrase very well. We're still working on it...

[Fleet]

Originally posted by Kitt
Since the lead up to war was filled with lies, I have no reason not to suspect that what you're regurgitaing about France etc, is not yet another series of lies.


http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/4/28/164443.shtml

[bandito]

Originally posted by Max Whittaker

Haven't you been saying we need to teach France a leason? They are not our ally anymore? So, lets bomb them! That solves that problem! Keeping France from being involved in the rebuilding of Iraq, is a lesson France will learn the hard way.

[Kitt]

Originally posted by Captain ABlairica
Hey, Kitt, I like your avatar!!!:D Yeah, thanks. Me too. It has a nice look and a kind of rhythm about it. :wink2: :music:

[Fleet]

Originally posted by Max Whittaker

The American people are basically good people. We are not always the good guys.

You're right, every country has a right to protect itself. That statement has taken on a whole new meaning now. Now, any country can attack it's neighbor if it believes it poses any inkling of a threat to them. What a nice world we're building.


Yeah lets show france who's boss! After we bomb them, they wouldn't dare to even look at us wrong for atleast fifty years!

The U.S. is as good as can be expected. No country is perfect. Perhaps you should praise what the U.S. has done instead of constantly criticizing her.

The U.S. had a very good reason to attack Iraq (WMD, a murderous dictator, Iraqis being tortured) and you know it.

I think France already knows who's boss! We don't need 'em anyway. We don't need to attack them, they have already damaged themselves.

[Kitt]

Originally posted by Fleet


http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/4/28/164443.shtml Yes, Fleety, I know. I read your 'screaming meany, the sky is falling!' web site. That could well be the pack of lies that the French are referring to in the articles I posted. We'll see some day. In the meantime I'm sure that you will continue to spread the unsubstantiated rumors as obllviously and as vociferously as you can. The Mutilate France Brigade rules the roost for putting out the latest "Talking Points" of your trash 'em and bash 'em party. Trash France and trash 'em good. Keep the American people scared and pissed so they won't notice what's going down in the real world.

[Fleet]

"Unsubstantiated?" Lol. It's been verified. French documents were found in Baghdad. Of course, anything that makes the U.S. (and England) look good, you hate!
Why should the link I provided be any less believable than those riduculous liberal columnists/websites you post all the time?
Americans do know whats going on... France betrayed the U.S.

(Note- notice I did not attach any of the smilies that seem to irritate you so much.)

:)

Oh, darn. I couldn't resist.

[Kitt]

Originally posted by Fleet
"Unsubstantiated?" Lol. It's been verified. French documents were found in Baghdad. Verified by whom?

[Fleet]

Originally posted by Kitt
Verified by whom?
Well, I would post it but would you believe it?

Like I said, anytime the U.S./Britain is proven right, you seem to get angry. Why? Do you dislike the U.S. that much?

[Kitt]

Originally posted by Fleet

Well, I would post it but would you believe it?

Like I said, anytime the U.S./Britain is proven right, you seem to get angry. Why? Do you dislike the U.S. that much? I don't dislike the US at all. I do get sick and tired, though, of you telling me and everyone else what we like or don't like, as if you have your finger on the pulse of America.

Here is something for all of us. See if you have room in your French bashing brain to feel some contempt for the complicity of the US, along with the others who ***** footed around with Hussein for 30 years.

The document trail in Iraq
Amir Taheri (archive)


May 10, 2003 | Print | Send


During the confusion that accompanied the liberation of Baghdad last month, bands of thieves roamed the city on an orgy of plunder.

Some bands attacked the National Museum and made away with numerous objects, including at least 170 regarded as unique. Others looted the villas and palaces of the fleeing Ba'athist dignitaries, much like Ali Baba ransacking the den of the 40 thieves.

The activities of these thieves attracted massive media attention.

Other bands also at work, stealing government and Ba'ath Party documents, have attracted little media attention. Who they were and what they managed to steal remain mysteries. What is certain is that a brisk market in stolen document is already in operation in Baghdad.

Some Iraq experts describe the documents as " weapons of political and diplomatic mass destruction." For they narrate the secret story of over 30 years of Ba'athist rule. In that period, thousands of politicians, diplomats, journalists, do-gooders, peaceniks and officials of an unknown number of countries in the Middle East, Europe and North America were on the payroll of Saddam Hussein's regime.

Some of Saddam's former collaborators who later joined his opponents in exile have revealed that the Ba'athist regime pursued a policy of targeting politicians and opinion-makers in all countries where Iraq had a presence.

" Putting journalists and politicians on the payroll was a well-established policy," says Khalid Kishtaini who worked for the Iraqi Cultural Office in London in the 1980s.

Kishtaini, a prominent writer who later joined the opposition, also reports that the office had instructions to obtain documents from all the recipients of Iraqi largesse, possibly for future blackmailing exercises.
Saad al-Bazzaz, another writer who also worked with Saddam before defecting to the opposition, confirms this.

" The principle was that everyone could be bought, if the price was right," al-Bazzaz says. " You would be surprised to know who was in Saddam's pay."

European, especially French, and Middle Eastern political parties and individual politicians, received cash or anonymous donations through front organisations, including fake charities.

Sometimes, the regime directly invested in creating Arabic language newspapers in Europe, especially London and Paris. At other times it provided subsidies, mainly through the purchase of large numbers of each favoured publication.

A number of documents implicating a British member of parliament, a French former official, a Qatari personality, and several Palestinian and Egyptian press and television journalists have already been leaked and publicised. But these represent only the tip of the iceberg.

According to our information part of the documents have been " acquired" by the Iraqi National Congress (INC) led by Ahmad Chalabi.

At least another batch of Ba'ath Party documents is believed to be in the hands of the British intelligence.

A prominent Jordanian-Iraqi businessman with links to various French political parties is believed to have acquired another batch.

It is important for the US-led coalition to trace these documents and collect them in one place for future use. It must acknowledge the fact that these documents are as much the property of Iraq as are the stolen items from the Baghdad Museum. Thus a ban should be imposed on smuggling any of the documents outside Iraq, possibly for sale or blackmail.

The coalition must also fix the rules under which these documents could be made available to investigative journalists, researchers and historians. Some documents might be needed as evidence in the trial of the fallen regime's leaders. The documents must be made public as quickly as possible. There is no sense in respecting "top secret" time limits set by a fallen despot.

A selective use of the documents could become a weapon in the political power struggle that is already taking shape in Baghdad. Malicious leaks of documents could be used for character assassination against Arab and ethnic Kurdish politicians who had, at one point or another, made deals with Saddam.

The real value of the documents lies elsewhere.

Properly studied they would reveal how a large number of multinational companies, no doubt encouraged by major industrial nations, helped Saddam Hussein create his war machine. For example, who gave him the heavy bombers that in 1983 destroyed Iran's main oil export terminal at Kharg Island? And which European company sold him the chemicals that he used for massacring 5000 Kurdish men, women and children in Halabchah in 1988? Which French company built Saddam's numerous palaces and bunker? And which German company provided the electronic surveillance and communication systems used in them? And what about the British companies that helped Saddam built his " Supergun", known as "The Fist of Allah"?

The documents could answer other questions.

What was the exact role of the Iranian secret service, the SAVAK, in financing and helping the Ba'ath between 1958 and 1968?

Who encouraged Saddam to invade Iran in 1980?

Who provided him with billions of dollars of loans and cash at a time his regime was on the verge of bankruptcy?

And who gave him the wrong signal to invade Kuwait?

The documents would also show how a regime that ought to have been banished from the family of nations was not only tolerated but also positively supported and encouraged by many governments, including almost all the major democracies.

Iraqi leaders who should have been treated as criminals were given red carpet reception in major capitals, including Washington, London, Paris and Moscow. Saddam Hussein became an honoured guest in Jacques Chirac's private home in Correze at exactly the time that the Ba'ath was massacring thousands of political opponents in 1976. Tareq Aziz was always welcome whenever he dropped by for tea with the Pope in the Vatican. Nizar Hamdoun, one of Saddam's diplomatic minions, spent many weekends in Arkansas with Bill Clinton when the latter was Governor.

We also have Arab politicians and intellectuals who, rather than fleeing the Ba'athist regime like pest, helped it acquire a legitimacy that it did not deserve.

It was not surprising that Saddam became a prisoner of his illusions.

Right to his bitter end he must have believed that some of those who had feted and flattered him and, in exchange, been bribed by him, would somehow get him off the hook again.

The documents would show the collective guilt that lies behind Saddam's vicious rule. This does not absolve Saddam and his cohorts. But it would show the world how cynicism disguised as Realpolitik and combined with greed masquerading as business, can help create a monster.

Saddam's fate, if properly documented and narrated, could become a cautionary tale both for would-be tyrants in the Third World and the Western officials, businessmen and politicians who, when dealing with non-Western nations, are prepared to ignore their own laws and the basic rules of ethics.

Saddam must answer for his crime. But those who helped and encouraged him for three decades should also be named and shamed.


Amir Taheri is the Iranian author of 10 books on the Middle East and Islam. He can be reached through www.benadorassociates.com

[Fleet]

If you don't dislike the U.S., as you claim, allow me to ask you this question (again): Can you, for once, say something positive about the U.S. I know it would be painful for you, but give it a try, okay?

We've been through this already- Iraq was our enemy back in the '80s. They took Americans hostage for 444 days and their people were in the streets burning the American flag.
An article from an Iranian author is not exaclty a most reliable source.

The fact remains that French documents were found in Baghdad. Documents that compromised the welfare of the U.S. and her troops.

[Kitt]

Originally posted by Fleet
If you don't dislike the U.S., as you claim, allow me to ask you this question (again): Can you, for once, say something positive about the U.S. I know it would be painful for you, but give it a try, okay?

We've been through this already- Iraq was our enemy back in the '80s. They took Americans hostage for 444 days and their people were in the streets burning the American flag.
An article from an Iranian author is not exaclty a most reliable source.

The fact remains that French documents were found in Baghdad. Documents that compromised the welfare of the U.S. and her troops. The French have disputed the negative media blitz about them. They've requested that a congressional hearing be held to prove that the accusations are lies. So the fact does't, as you said, remain. If they say that the administration has planted false stories then I say let's hear them out. Afterall the administration has a record 10 miles long of planting false stories.

When Clinton was president did you critisize him as you do now? Did you dislike the US then? So get off my back. I'm not going to explain myself to you. disagreeing with the president has absolutely nothing what so ever to do with appreciating the United States. Absolutely nothing!

[Kitt]

http://truthout.org/docs_03/051903F.shtml

1. September 1-15, 2002: In its "Week in Review" section, The New York Times published an article entitled "Psst Can I Get a Bomb Trigger?" alleging that in 1998, France and Germany had supplied Iraq with high-precision switches used in
detonating nuclear weapons.

The Embassy issued a denial, which was published the following week in that section's Letters to the Editor column, noting that a French company had indeed received an order for 120 switches, presented as "spare parts" for medical equipment but that the French authorities had immediately barred this sale and alerted both Germany and the country that had previously sold the equipment that incorporated the switches.

2. On November 5, 2002, the front page of The Washington Post carried a story entitled "Four Nations Thought to Possess Smallpox." According to this article, France, along with Russia, Iraq and North Korea, possesses prohibited human smallpox strains. This "information" was purportedly given to the Washington Post by an "American intelligence source," who mentioned the existence of a
"report" on this subject.

At the Embassy's request, the Post subsequently published a rebuttal from the Embassy Press Office noting that France abides by WHO provisions and by its own national regulations prohibiting the possession of human smallpox strains.

3. On March 7, 2003, Washington Times reporter Bill Gertz asserted that two French companies had sold Iraq spare parts for airplanes and helicopters. The article referred to "a U.S. intelligence source."

On March 8, the two companies named in the story formally denied these allegations, as did the Embassy, which had already given a categorical reply to the question put to it by the reporter. On March 10, the Foreign Ministry deputy spokesperson reiterated the two companies' denial, adding that the French authorities had never authorized the export or re-export of such spare parts and strictly respected the arms embargo and Security Council resolutions. That denial was published, which did not prevent the Washington Times from regularly referring to this case.

4. On March 13, New York Times columnist William Safire began a series of articles entitled "The French Connection" in which he claimed that France had permitted the delivery of sensitive equipment to Iraq. According to him, a French intermediary had facilitated Iraq's acquisition, through Syria, of chemical components for long-range surface-to-surface missiles. Safire asserted in the same article that "he had been told" that the Société Nationale des Poudres et Explosifs had signed a contract in April 2002 to provide Iraq with five tons of dimethyl hydrazine, a chemical that can be used for missile propulsion.

The Foreign Ministry spokesman denied these allegations on March 14, noting that it had neither delivered nor authorized the delivery of such products, either directly or indirectly. In his interview with CNN/CBS, President Chirac expressed himself most clearly on this subject. Although he no longer mentioned the SNPE after that, Safire nevertheless continued his attacks in two successive columns. Moreover, The New York Times never published the Embassy's rebuttal to these charges nor took the trouble to answer the letter the French Ambassador personally sent them on this subject.

5. On April 2 on MSNBC, Joe Scarborough accused France of selling Iraq "planes, missiles, armored vehicles, radar equipment and spare parts for Iraqi fighter planes," and of offering to sell nuclear reactors, without mentioning specific dates.

Needless to say, France fully complies with the UN sanctions against Iraq, including a ban of all weapons sales.

6. On April 21, Newsweek reported the "possible" discovery of Roland 2 missiles by coalition forces in Iraq and implied that they had been manufactured in 2002. A charred Roland 3 missile launcher was also allegedly found.

Once again, the Ministry spokesman had to specify that France had sold no military equipment to Iraq since the summer of 1990 and that it was furthermore impossible for Roland 2s to have been manufactured in 2002, given the fact that they were not manufactured after 1993. This information had in fact been
communicated to the author of the article, who made very limited use of it.

7. On May 6, The Washington Times once again attacked our country, indicating that according to an "anonymous American intelligence source," France had helped wanted Iraqi leaders to escape to Europe by providing them with French passports.

Although the author of that article did call the Embassy and included our denial in his article, he nevertheless referred to this supposed "scandal" three times in the following days. The fact that the Foreign Ministry's spokesman issued a categorical denial did not dissuade the Washington Times.

8. Recently, as reported again by the Washington Times, other "intelligence sources" accused France and Russia of seeking to sign oil contracts with Iraq just before the start of the war. A "military expert" asked by MSNBC about the coalition's failure to discover banned weapons insinuated that "weapons could well have been discovered" and that they "could very well be French or Russian," which would have led the administration not to mention them "out of concern for easing tensions."

[Fleet]

Originally posted by Kitt
The French have disputed the negative media blitz about them. They've requested that a congressional hearing be held to prove that the accusations are lies. So the fact does't, as you said, remain. If they say that the administration has planted false stories then I say let's hear them out. Afterall the administration has a record 10 miles long of planting false stories.

When Clinton was president did you critisize him as you do now? Did you dislike the US then? So get off my back. I'm not going to explain myself to you. disagreeing with the president has absolutely nothing what so ever to do with appreciating the United States. Absolutely nothing!
Oh, the French "disputed" it. Like that really makes a difference. French documents were found in Baghdad. Accept it and let it go.
This current administration has been MUCH more truthful than the last one.

Your hatred for America is showing (even though you desperately try to cover it up). If you can't list just one thing of praise for this country you are either A) not intelligent enough to think of one, or, B) an American-hater, or, C) it would make you physically ill to say anything good about this country- especially when a Republican president is in office.
Yes, I certainly did criticize Clinton when he was pres., even more than I do now. For a while, there was an average of almost one scandal per week.
I liked the U.S. back then... that's why I disliked having an obviously corrupt president. He was bad for the country and set a bad example for children and young adults.
Even Jem could probably think of something good about the U.S. (well, maybe not).

[Kitt]

Originally posted by Fleet

Oh, the French "disputed" it. Like that really makes a difference. French documents were found in Baghdad. Accept it and let it go.
This current administration has been MUCH more truthful than the last one.

Your hatred for America is showing (even though you desperately try to cover it up). If you can't list just one thing of praise for this country you are either A) not intelligent enough to think of one, or, B) an American-hater, or, C) it would make you physically ill to say anything good about this country- especially when a Republican president is in office.
Yes, I certainly did criticize Clinton when he was pres., even more than I do now. For a while, there was an average of almost one scandal per week.
I liked the U.S. back then... that's why I disliked having an obviously corrupt president. He was bad for the country and set a bad example for children and young adults.
Even Jem could probably think of something good about the U.S. (well, maybe not). "Like that really makes a difference." Do you think that Bush is God? What is the deal with you that anything anyone else says in their own defense is of no consequence? The French have as much right to defend themselves as anyone else. I'd say they've done a pretty good job of it in the article I posted. But Your extreme bigotry is stinking up the joint something awful.

As for your smartass, self aggrandizing and disgusting insults towards me, you know nothing about me. You can make an ass of yourself pretending that you do. If that's what makes you feel special and big their isn't much I can do about that.

[ABlairican Pie]

Originally posted by Fleet
If you don't dislike the U.S., as you claim, allow me to ask you this question (again): Can you, for once, say something positive about the U.S. I know it would be painful for you, but give it a try, okay?

We've been through this already- Iraq was our enemy back in the '80s. They took Americans hostage for 444 days and their people were in the streets burning the American flag.
An article from an Iranian author is not exaclty a most reliable source.

The fact remains that French documents were found in Baghdad. Documents that compromised the welfare of the U.S. and her troops.

Uhhh, excuse me, but it was the IRANIANS who held Americans hostage for 444 days.

[Fleet]

Originally posted by Captain ABlairica
Uhhh, excuse me, but it was the IRANIANS who held Americans hostage for 444 days.
Sorry for the error. It must have been getting late!

[Fleet]

Originally posted by Kitt
"Like that really makes a difference." Do you think that Bush is God? What is the deal with you that anything anyone else says in their own defense is of no consequence? The French have as much right to defend themselves as anyone else. I'd say they've done a pretty good job of it in the article I posted. But Your extreme bigotry is stinking up the joint something awful.

As for your smartass, self aggrandizing and disgusting insults towards me, you know nothing about me. You can make an ass of yourself pretending that you do. If that's what makes you feel special and big their isn't much I can do about that.
Why do you believe the French more than the U.S. and/or Britain? "Bigotry?" Nice try. Americans disliked Japan and Germany during WWII, but it was not bigotry. It was because their behavior was detrimental for the U.S. This is similar to France today. They were revealing things to Iraq which certainly did not help us in any way. Leave it to you to to twist my (and hundreds of thousands of Americans) view of France to be "bigoted." Actually, I'm not surprised at all. You cannot accept what France did, so you label anyone who criticizes that country a "bigot."

What insult? I only asked you to say one nice thing about this country. It's a question even a 5-year-old could probably answer within one minute.
See, I can do it, too. I will say one nice thing about a person or other subject I don't have much (or any) respect for....

Clinton- He likes some classic cars. I believe he once had a '67 Mustang. We both seem to be auto enthusiasts (although I am probably much more so).

France- I like the Effiel Tower.

Gore- Now this one is hard. If I knew some of his hobbies this would be easier. I know- he seems to be clean-cut. Nice wardrobe.

Hillary Clinton- Well, she is a woman (although Laura Bush is much more attractive).

[Kitt]

Originally posted by Fleet


What insult? I only asked you to say one nice thing about this country.

Quote by Fleet:

Your hatred for America is showing (even though you desperately try to cover it up). If you can't list just one thing of praise for this country you are either A) not intelligent enough to think of one, or, B) an American-hater, or, C) it would make you physically ill to say anything good about this country- especially when a Republican president is in office.

____________________________________________________
That insult!

Just how incredibly stupid do you think that everyone on this board is? If you think you can say the above batch of filthy insults to someone -- anyone -- and then claim to have not insulted that person, you're a complete fool.

[Fleet]

Originally posted by Kitt
Quote by Fleet:

Your hatred for America is showing (even though you desperately try to cover it up). If you can't list just one thing of praise for this country you are either A) not intelligent enough to think of one, or, B) an American-hater, or, C) it would make you physically ill to say anything good about this country- especially when a Republican president is in office.

____________________________________________________
That insult!

Just how incredibly stupid do you think that everyone on this board is? If you think you can say the above batch of filthy insults to someone -- anyone -- and then claim to have not insulted that person, you're a complete fool.
From past history, I've noticed you are usually the one who starts with the insults.
Besides, the above was a multiple choice question. For choice "A" I did not say you were not intelligent- it was just one of 3 possibilities. For choice "B" all you had to do was say something good about America and you would have proved me wrong. As for "C" only you can answer that one.

[Kitt]

Originally posted by Fleet

From past history, I've noticed you are usually the one who starts with the insults.
Besides, the above was a multiple choice question. For choice "A" I did not say you were not intelligent- it was just one of 3 possibilities. For choice "B" all you had to do was say something good about America and you would have proved me wrong. As for "C" only you can answer that one. That quote from you is a feeble attempt at worming your way out of sounding like the ass that you were for making your cynical challenge to begin with. Then your examples of how one could answer your cynical question about liking or "hating" America tells me and others that I was right not to answer your question as posed. Your examples are of Clinton, France, Gore and Hillary Clinton. You've been clear in the past that you love to hate all of those examples. So your 'saying something nice' comments about them are nothing more than sarcasm. More of the same crude crappy jokes and cynicism that you've always used wnenever you mention those four examples. You can't call me unintelligent or a hater of America and expect the time of day from me. Your arrogance is stunning. Your fat-headedness to think that your insults are somehow funny or exceptble is also stunning.

If I were asked in a sincere manner what I like or love about America I'd answer. I wouldn't answer by making crude underhanded jokes pretending to be nice about what I actually don't like in or about America. I'd answer honestly about things about America that I do like.

America has great music. Country music--Willie Nelson, The Dixie Chicks, Alison Krauss, and Bluegrass music in general. Rock music: From The Beatles to the Rollling Stones, to Bob Dylan, Madonna, Aerosmith, Bruce Sringsteen, Chritine Aguilera and tons more. Also, America has Jazz music, which was invented in America.

Then there's baseball. I'll never understand Soccer like other countries do, but that's another story. But no game in the history of the world can touch baseball. America is where the best baseball players are, and America is where the best baseball is played.

America has produced great authors. Many of them have been blatently honest and critical of America. Which in an ironical way is one of the great things about America. We're allowed to critisize America ( at least until recently) and learn about America from each other. We aren't expected to shut up and take America as it is. We get to keep on keeping on!

America produces great movies. From 'Gone With The Wind' to 'Easy Rider' to the probably one too many Woody Allen spoofs and comedies--has he made any dramas?, lol. Nine out of every ten Jack Nicholson movies ever made were great. Lots and lots of great movies were made in America!

America has an abundance of pretty women. And I suppose the opposite sex would say the same about nice looking fellas. Or, for that matter, any combination of genders one chooses to be attracted to.

The incredible Giant Sequoias and the Giant Coastal Redwoods are in America. :crazy:

[Fleet]

All right!!! You answered my question!

Thank you. :thanks:

You mentioned many good things which had begun (or were perfected) in America. Regarding music, I would add that Rock 'N' Roll started here. Some would have trouble defining who and when it began. Was it Elvis? Was it Bill Haley and the Comets with 1954s "Rock Around The Clock?" Was it Fats Domino and others from the late '40s/early '50s? Even I'm not sure.

Re: Baseball, yes a very popular sport in America. I like soccer, but when watching the professional games (like world cup), it's irritating waiting for a team to score. Usually, the final score is something like 5-3. Meaning it takes a while for one team to score a point.

Re: Authors. Many great ones. A lot of fine works.

Re: Movies. A lot of great ones. From the year 1939 alone, probably 10 or so excellent ones (Gone With The Wind, Wizard Of Oz, Wuthering Heights, Mr. Smith Goes To Washington, Huntchback Of Notre Dame, Goodbye Mr. Chips, Stagecoach, etc.).
Any kind of flim you could possibly want were made throughout the years... Drama, Comdey, Western, Horror, Sci-Fi, Musicals, Fantasy, Children's, Action/Adventure and so on. I read somewhere that the year 1946 was considered the high-point in movie making. (BTW, I doubt that Woody Allen made any dramas.)

Re: American women. Agreed. A very large selection there. :D
Easy to see why so many show up when there is a casting call asking for beautiful women. For one part, sometimes thousands of lovely ladies show up!

Re: The Sequoias and Redwoods. Good point. The largest (Sequoias) and tallest (Redwoods) trees in the world. The oldest (Bristlecone pine) are also located in the U.S.- in California and Nevada- approximately 4,000 years old. Also here are not only many other National Parks, but some of them are huge. Also in the U.S.- highest mountain in N. America (Alaska's Mt. McKinley at 20,320 ft); lowest point in the western hemisphere (California's Death Valley at -282 ft).

I shall ignore your first two paragraphs because a response would not profit either of us. Besides, you answered the question I asked (I really was curious as to your response.)

Anyway, your answer has exceeded my expectations!