Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
Webb Rips Graham: “Don’t put political words into the soldier’s mouth.”
thinkprogress.org — “The traditional operational policy has been if you ’re gone for a year, you get two years back. We’re now in a situation where the soldiers and the Marines are having less than a 1 to 1 ratio.” Webb said. Turning to Graham, he added, “And somebody needs to speak up for them rather than defending what this President has been doing.”
4Crimson- 598 diggs
- digg it
- DRINKxREDxBULL, on 10/11/2007, -48/+5Oh No!! This is from a POLITICAL SITE!! We need the Bury the LGF Brigade over here quick!!
Oh wait, its a liberal site, never mind.- NikhilPK, on 10/11/2007, -3/+25Dude, shut the ***** up.
- EricCiccone, on 10/11/2007, -6/+27Unlike LGF thinkprogress doesn't spew out propaganda against Muslims and inaccurate information
- Zarchon, on 10/11/2007, -8/+3That's because they love Muslims and hate Christians. Oh, and on the inaccurate part, guess that's if they are saying what you want to hear or not.
- Plinkotic, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2***** Christians. Oh, so persecuted. Climb the ***** back into the dark ages and leave the rest of us alone, there's ***** TO DO.
- Zarchon, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Sorry Pinkotic, I am not a Christian. I am an athiest but I hate seeing bigots like yourself pick on Christians for no good reason.
- mightydavefish, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1No good reason?
How about christian history?
How can you "defend" them if you are totally clueless as to why people criticize them?
- mightydavefish, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1No good reason?
- Zarchon, on 10/11/2007, -8/+3That's because they love Muslims and hate Christians. Oh, and on the inaccurate part, guess that's if they are saying what you want to hear or not.
- pintomp3, on 10/11/2007, -4/+22aww, is the islamophobe crying because his favorite hate site isn't popular enough?
- Kmack928, on 10/11/2007, -7/+12WAHH THE INTERNET IS FULL OF LIBERALS, WAHHH
god ***** dammit, you little conservative wimps don't do anything but piss and moan. make a valid ***** point, and stop crying about the points other people are making. serioiusly what the ***** do you want us to do? change our beliefs? only if you can convince us, not just because the balance is shifting. - DRINKxREDxBULL, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1I never said anything about the internet being full of liberals.
I'm just sick of the double standard. If it come from a conservative site, then "it must be buried because it is full of bias." But stuff from sites that are obviously liberal that ok (and it is ok).
I have nothing against liberal stuff being on the front page. I just get sick of the bury brigade trying to censor anything slightly conservative that occasionally makes the front page.
Oh, BTW, LGF gets about 90% of its stuff from the mainstream press. So grow up. You can scream 'racist hate site' all day, but it wont make true.- mightydavefish, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Ah yes, LGF cherry picks any news item that could be interpreted as negative toward islam while avoiding like the plague any objective piece or anything POSITIVE about muslims.
I'm sure the KKK doesn't clip news stories about black people doing good things, too.
You scumbags can pretend you do this for some reason other than racism, but you are unable to prove it.
- mightydavefish, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Ah yes, LGF cherry picks any news item that could be interpreted as negative toward islam while avoiding like the plague any objective piece or anything POSITIVE about muslims.
- Kmack928, on 10/11/2007, -7/+12WAHH THE INTERNET IS FULL OF LIBERALS, WAHHH
- ubuntuedgy, on 10/11/2007, -6/+20I am fairly conservative and I think this site has a pretty good mix of everyone, even right-wing ***** like yourself who immediately claim someone is "liberal" if they disagree with you.
I don't think this site is "liberal" at all. It is pretty balanced. MOST people on this site are fairly open with regard to their political views. If anything, I would say the site is "moderate" with, again, extremists like yourself swimming around going ape-***** every once in awhile.- Zarchon, on 10/11/2007, -4/+5See, when you say "right-wing *****" you really lose all credibility that you are conservative, fairly or not.
- skippay, on 10/11/2007, -4/+4No, he didn't. He put it in terms that would be understood by the, well, right-wing *****. It's a matter of knowing your audience, really.
- Plinkotic, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3Dude, conservatives and right-wing ***** are two different creatures. Some people have conservative or republican polical leanings, but also ethics and common sense. We call these people 'Conservatives', or 'The Betrayed'. They voted for one thing and got a spendfree ***** instead. Right-Wing ***** are an easier creature to identify; they blindly follow the current lying group of ***** telling us(ALL OF US) they are above all laws. We're conservatives, wishing Barry Goldwater would come back to smite you, the Right-Wing *****.
/yeah, I live up north, make something of it you slunt
//politics here suck ass
- dmh11686, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5I'm not sure what you've been reading but Thinkprogress is not moderate at all. They have consistent attacks against republicans and anything right of center. But what shoud I expect from someone who uses right-wing *****.
- Plinkotic, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8Thinkprogress is indeed liberally biased. They say so. It's far from moderate, and no where NEAR fair. Unfortunately, they're kinda accurate. If only they'd be fair and aim at Dems too.
- Zarchon, on 10/11/2007, -4/+5See, when you say "right-wing *****" you really lose all credibility that you are conservative, fairly or not.
- afastingartist, on 10/11/2007, -6/+12webb is an awful public speaker, but an awesome arguer.
- StMac, on 10/11/2007, -0/+14Best line: "My family has been doing this since the Revolutionary War!"
- ClosedCaption, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Best rebuttal by Graham: "Uh...So has mine, so there"
Graham brags about going to Iraq to and bringing home some "fabulous" rugs. *smh*
- ClosedCaption, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Best rebuttal by Graham: "Uh...So has mine, so there"
- craiggroshek, on 10/11/2007, -7/+13Bring our troops hope, NOW. End this war, and all other wars. We don't need any more soldiers dying for lies. They should be home, defending our borders.
- HPCELarry, on 10/11/2007, -11/+4All wars? So your saying Afghanistan was wrong? That was a defense of our borders. We went there to destroy those who killed 3,000 of our citizens on 9/11.
- Wartyboskfapped, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10Afghanistan war failed. The Taliban are resurgent, the country is run by warlords & is lawless everywhere except 100 km zone around Kabul, bin Laden is apparently still alive.. so what was the point of it, again? What makes it right? That the attackers had visited there? Bin Laden was also supported & given refuge by Pakistan, why don't we attack them? The people who attacked the US on 9/11 are a) all dead, and b) were Saudi Arabians. Why don't we make war on Saudi Arabia? Feel free to think about these things for a bit, if you dare.
- Zarchon, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2So you are advocating going to war with Pakistan AND Saudi Arabia? And you call the right warmongerers.
- Plinkotic, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1...hehehe. Please don't stop.
- Zarchon, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2So you are advocating going to war with Pakistan AND Saudi Arabia? And you call the right warmongerers.
- Wartyboskfapped, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10Afghanistan war failed. The Taliban are resurgent, the country is run by warlords & is lawless everywhere except 100 km zone around Kabul, bin Laden is apparently still alive.. so what was the point of it, again? What makes it right? That the attackers had visited there? Bin Laden was also supported & given refuge by Pakistan, why don't we attack them? The people who attacked the US on 9/11 are a) all dead, and b) were Saudi Arabians. Why don't we make war on Saudi Arabia? Feel free to think about these things for a bit, if you dare.
- tehpwnrate, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3By all other wars, I assume you didn't mean Afghanistan. If you don't see the value in Operation Enduring Freedom, you shouldn't be talking about wars and when to end them.
- steamedlice, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Newsflash: The White House has just announced that Operation Enduring Freedom will now be called "Operation Unending". That is all.
- HPCELarry, on 10/11/2007, -11/+4All wars? So your saying Afghanistan was wrong? That was a defense of our borders. We went there to destroy those who killed 3,000 of our citizens on 9/11.
- Calann, on 10/11/2007, -4/+18Jim Webb should replace Harry Reid as senate majority leader.
- Patriot44, on 10/11/2007, -13/+2Jim Webb is JUST another "stinkin" Liberal left-winger, who'd LUV to see this country "sold down-the-drain," and our Constitution done away with. My family comes from a long line of the Military since the Civil War days, and I DO NOT wanna see the same "machinery" in DC do to our American military what they DID to the forces during the Viet nam era. May God Bless our Troops and bring them Home in Victory!!! That's what they tell me when I go over there to Kurdistan periodically.
- tehbishop, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4Hey Civil War family guy, the "machinery" in DC already did what happened in Vietnam which was to put them into a place we had no business being in and then making it a political battle to bring our troops home when they ought not have been there in the first place. It's the same as it was, just the party that screwed our troops changed.
- milliebubba, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Uh. You don't see the shredding of our Constitution under this administration, Patriot44? Why? And today the Guardian/Observer in Britain is reporting that Afghanistan is at the point of "catastrophic failure" with the very real possibility of causing the same rolling failure into Pakistan. They blame the JOINT Operation Enduring Freedom mission and the NATO mission conflict and have caused the disaster approaching.
- Patriot44, on 10/11/2007, -13/+2Jim Webb is JUST another "stinkin" Liberal left-winger, who'd LUV to see this country "sold down-the-drain," and our Constitution done away with. My family comes from a long line of the Military since the Civil War days, and I DO NOT wanna see the same "machinery" in DC do to our American military what they DID to the forces during the Viet nam era. May God Bless our Troops and bring them Home in Victory!!! That's what they tell me when I go over there to Kurdistan periodically.
- madskillzdotcom, on 10/11/2007, -3/+18Classic: You go to Iraq and see a dog and pony show ... ROTFLMBO ...
- pintomp3, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9you mean you don't wear a bullet-proof jacket and have an escort of soldiers when you go to the market? i thought that was normal in all liberated democracies.
- dmh11686, on 10/11/2007, -7/+4Going to Iraq to see and talk to the troops is better then not going at all. Webb acted like a prick.
- ichbinladen, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2How does that ***** taste that you can't stop eating?
- Kmack928, on 10/11/2007, -8/+26I hope everyone had a chance to see this.
It was a stark contrast between Webb, who is forward thining, and genuinely concerned with the troops welfare, and Graham, who was just spewing mindless rhetoric we've been hearing for YEARS. I was absolutely disgusted not only with the content of Grahams argument (which was time and again ripped apart by Webb) but also by the way he acted. He made the same point three times in a row, said God bless the troops several times (what the hell place does that have in this discussion?), and tried interrupting Webb on multiple occasions. It just came across as Graham spewing the same old *****, pandering to idiots still holding such ignorant beliefs. While Webb actually seemed to be addressing real problems, and issues that should not have anything to do with politics.
"Don't put political words into the soldier's mouth" is a fantastic point. ***** you Graham, you don't know ***** about what one single troop honestly thinks. Webb is a true soldier, displaying loyalty to the soldiers years after his service.
Politicians like Graham make me feel physically ill.- Zarchon, on 10/11/2007, -6/+3I've seen some soilders post here about what they have experienced first hand in Iraq and they were treated pretty badly here becsause their view didn't agree with the ":Digg view".
- Kmack928, on 10/11/2007, -3/+10also,
Webb > Graham - bluechips23, on 10/11/2007, -5/+17Graham is a dick.
- Kmack928, on 10/11/2007, -3/+5understatement of the year : )
when i watched MTP today, I was hoping that this would hit Digg, because my God does this paint an accurate picture not only of Graham, but the idealogues dumb enough to still share his view.
- Kmack928, on 10/11/2007, -3/+5understatement of the year : )
- Jamihabs, on 10/11/2007, -16/+3I didn't see anyone get ripped here. Both men articulated their point of view quit well. I happen to agree with Graham, but I also respect Webb. He is one of only a few Democrats who can speak to an issue without resorting to just calling Bush names and throwing out unsubstantiated charges against him
- Kmack928, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7seriously? just listening to him talk made me scared for the safety of our troops. did he offer any reason why he voted against the measure to allow our troops to be home for as long as they are in Iraq before a redeployment? no. he doesnt give a ***** about anything but his career and making his idealogical identicals happy. Webb is everything that is right with democrats, and graham is everything that is wrong with republicans. that you would agree with him, after watching this, is beyond my comprehension. its a ***** pity you can vote, your post seems so smart : /
- Jamihabs, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4I’m probably not going to change your mind on this and you will probably not change mine, but I don’t believe Graham is just trying to protect his job. He supported the immigration bill despite many on the right criticizing him for it and he supports staying in Iraq despite the majority of the people apposing it. He must be motivated by something ells.
I think the troops are capable of taking care of themselves and want nothing more than for all of us to get behind the mission they are trying to accomplish. I think that if we leave before the Iraq government can sustain itself, it will fall into chaos and we will probably need to go back under far worse conditions. I think Graham believes this too.- tehbishop, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1I think the troops actually getting shot at and blown up want to be home and out of that *****, alive and well, not heroically remembered. At least, that's what all those I talk to say.
- Zarchon, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3Tehbishop, so you talk to blown up soilders? Ignore that. My daughter served a tour in Iraq. She told me that she, and all the people she talks to, want you and the rest of the left to shut the hell up and let them win the war. The actions on the left is making it harder to do their jobs. Her words mean more to me than yours or anyone her on Digg. If she says you should STFU then I am on that side of the argument. I am conservative, always have been. My daughter was not political, hated it when I talked politics. After her deployment in Iraq, reading the news out of America, she is now staunchly conservative. For THAT I thank the left.
- justmy2cents, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Ummmm... Webb's son has been serving in Iraq, so I would tend to give him JUST as much credibility as I would give your daughter, considering I don't know either. So I guess it's not really a terrifically uniform view amongst our men and women serving, and that the criticism can go both ways...
- Jamihabs, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4I’m probably not going to change your mind on this and you will probably not change mine, but I don’t believe Graham is just trying to protect his job. He supported the immigration bill despite many on the right criticizing him for it and he supports staying in Iraq despite the majority of the people apposing it. He must be motivated by something ells.
- Kmack928, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7seriously? just listening to him talk made me scared for the safety of our troops. did he offer any reason why he voted against the measure to allow our troops to be home for as long as they are in Iraq before a redeployment? no. he doesnt give a ***** about anything but his career and making his idealogical identicals happy. Webb is everything that is right with democrats, and graham is everything that is wrong with republicans. that you would agree with him, after watching this, is beyond my comprehension. its a ***** pity you can vote, your post seems so smart : /
- harksaw, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8The funny thing is South Carolina is going to kick Graham out of office for not being right wing enough.
- Kmack928, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4funny?
or sad?
- Kmack928, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4funny?
- otakushark, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9I was glad to see both my Senators were in support of this measure. I encourage everyone to see where their elected officials stood on this and give them a heads-up about your anger if you disagreed with their stance and that you'll remember that when they're up for re-election.
- AwakeningAZ, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2It's times like this I'm very thankful I live in Illinois.
- STKD, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7Inaccurate description. NOBODY is defending what this President is doing these days.
- Gutterpunk, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1I have one word for you : Freepers
- Plinkotic, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Gotta agree Gutterpunk. Freepers is the sad last wall to.. well, watch crumble. Meh.
- Gutterpunk, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1I have one word for you : Freepers
- Jamihabs, on 10/11/2007, -8/+3"History won't judge us for when we left. It will judge us for what we left behind"
- pintomp3, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11nice talking point, but it will judge us for starting this ***** in the first place.
- Jamihabs, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2We can't un-start this. We can win this and leave behind a stable government in Iraq that is not a safe-haven for terrorists.
- tehbishop, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Well that would be putting it back to where it was in the first place -- a non safe-haven for terrorists. We were going after those WMDs remember? Going to war for those and taking out the military is what made the place safe for terrorists. No, this one should be another pull-out ala Vietnam and let whatever woes happen fall right in the lap of the Neocons that started it. Let them clean that up, not our troops with their lives.
- obliviousfool, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Look up Paul Bremer's "100 orders." Read some of the articles about them. You are right, we can't un-start this war. We can un-start those orders. We can fix the economic raping of Iraq. To continue the occupation with those orders still in place is insane! Force can't fix what's wrong with Iraq. The reason there is no stable government there is that we keep saddling the Iraqis with these unjust, unjustified, and illegal regulations. Why are we punishing the Iraqi people for Saddam's crimes?
- Jamihabs, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2We can't un-start this. We can win this and leave behind a stable government in Iraq that is not a safe-haven for terrorists.
- Kmack928, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4can you tell me what we left behind in Vietnam? no. because no one ***** cares.
can you tell me what we left behind in korea? no. because no one ***** cares.
how about iraq the first time? whats history say about that? NOTHING
history?!?! we arent gonna keep killing our boys for no reason so "HISTORY" may hold us in higher regard. this is petty ***** *****. Webb doesnt want that, and neither does anyone who supports the troops.
NO ONE WILL CARE WHAT WE LEAVE BEHIND IN IRAQ.
more mindless rhetoric, dont you feel stupid quoting trash?
this is honestly 5th grade level *****, which is about on par with your IQ eh?- Pilot85, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3I agree with you in a respect, but, uh, i think the Iraqis will care what we leave behind. Though, more to the point, I think they will care more about what we started.
- JigoroKano, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2We left behind a free and democratic South Korea that is thriving now. I don't think the Korean War supports your argument given how North Korea turned out.
- mille716, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Did you not see how even Maliki wants us out now as with the majority of the Iraqi people? I know this will sound defeatist to some, but anything we were going to accomplish in Iraq we've had our chance at. Also, have you not realized yet that every prediction that neo-cons had about Iraq has been wrong (WMDs, voting bring peace, insurgents in their last throes...)? Why do people still think neo-cons still have any credibility left when talking about Iraq?
- ClosedCaption, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1how the ***** would Graham know about what the people of the future will think? If he had that ability he wouldnt've supported this war in the first place. Repubs wont even address the people that exist today because a majority dont like it....Soooo, put it on the shoulders of unborn people of the Future. Yeah!
- pintomp3, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11nice talking point, but it will judge us for starting this ***** in the first place.
- Sublime059, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4Graham is a ***** weasel and he obviously doesn't give a rat's ass about our troops since he doesn't want them coming back.. ever. Disgusting Trash.
- devan95, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1The only soldiers democrats care about are dead ones that they can use to promote their cut and run agenda of appeasement and surrender. Don't hear them demanding troops be brought back from Bosnia do ya. Fraking hypocrits are only interested in political power, not the security of our nation. Wonder if Webb had to check his gun at the door?
- fishpicker, on 10/11/2007, -5/+6Lindsey Graham is the ONLY elected reservist to serve in Iraq. God bless Colonel Graham.
- tehbishop, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3Firstly, everyone knows that field grade officers really aren't in touch with the rank & file. I'm sure he was not on the front lines nor going out on patrols too. hah.
That's called "serving" vs SERVING if you ask me. - justmy2cents, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1gotta agree with you tehbishop. you wouldn't catch an O in an E club. No way. As a female who grew up around bases, I can vouch for that. O and E do not mingle, except in giving orders and carrying them out.
- justmy2cents, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Furthermore, 8 days doing your reserve quota is hardly serving in the capacity that most of our guys and gals over there are serving in.
- tehbishop, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3Firstly, everyone knows that field grade officers really aren't in touch with the rank & file. I'm sure he was not on the front lines nor going out on patrols too. hah.
- Goldbricker, on 10/11/2007, -2/+8Thank you Jim Webb for bringing respectability back to politics in the Commonwealth of Virginia
- noamsml, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8It's funny how Webb tries to make his point and Grahm launches into a series of political cliches in order to stop him.
- Plato, on 10/11/2007, -9/+4ohhh the Irony of this libernazi hate site touting a headline that says " Don't put (political) words in soldier mouths"... isn't that what this hate site is all about? Lies and deception... no more, no less. Liberals, be ashamed of yourselves for associating with such drivel.
Marked as SPAM - ChristianMagic, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2He's covered wars you know
- FrameShift, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2Does anyone really care what happens after we leave? Let them kill each other, not US servicemen. If any of them attack us again, not to say Saddam ever did, nuke the *****.
- afastingartist, on 10/11/2007, -3/+11Hmm, lets compare the service of Lindsey Graham and James Webb. Lindsey Graham served as a JAG for several years as a starting point for his civilian career. His continued service in the military IS a dog and pony show. FFS, GWB promoted him to Col in 2004. It is nothing but a political ploy for the Rep Party and Sen Graham's re-election campaigns. James Webb served in Vietnam, then went to law school as a means to correct the injustice towards veterans that he saw after returning to the states.
Also, Naval Academy >> ROTC- rickrwh, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Don't forget Webb was also the Secretary of the Navy.
- justmy2cents, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Secretary of the Navy under Reagan, no less. And as a Republican. Webb's got a ton of bona fides regarding war, from combat to strategy to politics.
- 3cho, on 10/11/2007, -1/+12I went to check out Webb's wikipedia page. Turns out he's a Navy Cross Recipient, here's what the citation reads:
The Navy Cross is presented to James H. Webb, Jr., First Lieutenant, U.S. Marine Corps, for extraordinary heroism while serving as a Platoon Commander with Company D, First Battalion, Fifth Marines, First Marine Division (Reinforced), Fleet Marine Force, in connection with combat operations against the enemy in the Republic of Vietnam. On 10 July 1969, while participating in a company-sized search and destroy operation deep in hostile territory, First Lieutenant Webb's platoon discovered a well-camouflaged bunker complex that appeared to be unoccupied. Deploying his men into defensive positions, First Lieutenant Webb was advancing to the first bunker when three enemy soldiers armed with hand grenades jumped out. Reacting instantly, he grabbed the closest man and, brandishing his .45 caliber pistol at the others, apprehended all three of the soldiers. Accompanied by one of his men, he then approached the second bunker and called for the enemy to surrender. When the hostile soldiers failed to answer him and threw a grenade that detonated dangerously close to him, First Lieutenant Webb detonated a claymore mine in the bunker aperture, accounting for two enemy casualties and disclosing the entrance to a tunnel. Despite the smoke and debris from the explosion and the possibility of enemy soldiers hiding in the tunnel, he then conducted a thorough search that yielded several items of equipment and numerous documents containing valuable intelligence data. Continuing the assault, he approached a third bunker and was preparing to fire into it when the enemy threw another grenade. Observing the grenade land dangerously close to his companion, First Lieutenant Webb simultaneously fired his weapon at the enemy, pushed the Marine away from the grenade, and shielded him from the explosion with his own body. Although sustaining painful fragmentation wounds from the explosion, he managed to throw a grenade into the aperture and completely destroy the remaining bunker. By his courage, aggressive leadership, and selfless devotion to duty, First Lieutenant Webb upheld the highest traditions of the Marine Corps and of the United States Naval Service.
That sounds like something out of a freakin' Rambo movie. Just awesome.- IckyChris, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Damn. No wonder Cheney sought so many deferments. He would still be scraping the ***** out of his pants.
- Mongo61, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4There was a White House reception for incoming lawmakers in November. It was there that some OTHER ***** showed the same insensitivity when Webb said he wanted his son to come home. Check it out:
http://thehill.com/under-the-dome/son-also-rises-in-testy-webb-bush-exchange-2006-11-29.html - JackBurden, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3So Jim Webb, the one who is the senator and the highly decorated marine combat veteran, wouldn't let Lindsey Graham, the one who is the senator and the lawyer desk jockey, talk over him and push him around?
This is a surprise why?
Of course the man won't let the boy push him around. How could it be otherwise?
And come on. Lindsey? That name speaks for itself.- ichbinladen, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Lindsey Graham looks like a deformed baby.
- hittnrun, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0hey jim....How's your boy?
- fauxXenophanes, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1... or Cindy Sheehans
- hittnrun, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0...Or Saddam's
- devan95, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1The only soldiers democrats care about are dead ones that they can use to promote their cut and run agenda of appeasement and surrender. Don't hear them demanding troops be brought back from Bosnia do ya. Fraking hypocrits are only interested in political power, not the security of our nation. Wonder if Webb had to check his gun at the door?
- hittnrun, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0They are gonna really love the soldiers they will be spitting on as they come home.
- milliebubba, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Re-think that, devan95. NONE of these bozos in Washington care about our troops. Go over to Veterans for Common Sense and just read some of the articles, particularly those that deal with the refusal to treat veterans AFTER their service. These men and women are disposable. And all the money that goes to support the wars is much more likely to go to a defense contractor to develop still another weapons system that is propping up still another defense company which has contributed to still another Congress critter. And please don't regurgitate republican talking points about "appeasement" and "surrender". We do not have a comparable government to negotiate with, so the "appeasement" argument is moot. Not to mention that historians of WWII have compared BUSH with Chamberlain (google around). You're going to have to explain to me how keeping our troops in Iraq as targets enhances the security of Iraq or the US. Many people have pleaded for years to pull our troops back...maybe even to Northern Iraq and to ships in the gulf...so that the Iraqis can pound this out and have a viable country. The sad truth is that WE ARE COLONIAL OCCUPIERS, whether the Iraqis like it or not. And they DON't like it. Their parliament has voted to ask us to leave. We have violated many international laws in meddling with their constitution and attempting to force privatization of national assets and the typical free-trade globalization nonsense on this country. We need to get out of Iraq and re-focus on Afghanistan...where, yesterday, the British Guardian/Observers report that NATO is about to suffer a "catastrophic failure"...with the very good possibility of causing the Pakistani government to fall, placing those nukes in the hands of Islamic extremists. Mr. Bush opened up a Pandora's box in the ME, and it's doubtful that even HOPE is left.
- buddhajer, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Remember, they let Osama bomb us and he is still free. These people don't respect the rule of law. They cover up. They lie. They obstruct justice. They leak the names of CIA agents. They interfere with the NIE. They have lost the war in Iraq. They are losing Afghanistan. Al Qaeda is now stronger than ever. And they commute the sentences of their convicted cronies to silence them. Cheney had 7 deferrments, Bush went AWOL in the National Guard and Rove never served. They gave the taxpayer's money to Halliburton and the defense industry. They are responsible for the deaths of thousands of american troops. They have caused PTSD in over 40,000 men and women, which forever changes their lives and the lives of their families. They spy on us without the proper authority. They imprison without regard to the constitution. They torture. Hmm. Am I missing something? Oh yeah, they obstruct scientific facts for their ideological positions. And Bush does signing statements on practically every law he signs, thereby exempting him from the law!!! There is soooo much I am missing. When are we going to impeach?
- hittnrun, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0How do you know he is still alive? Care to share your intel? And, lets just say he IS still alive. Your idea of "FREE" is alot different than mine.
Go smoke some dope & steal some music for a while. You'va already covered the "bad-mouthing your country" aspect of being a keyboard liberal.
- hittnrun, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0How do you know he is still alive? Care to share your intel? And, lets just say he IS still alive. Your idea of "FREE" is alot different than mine.
- harrijs, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Webb, "Don't put political words into the soldier's mouth."
Graham, "Why? Did you have something else in mind that you want to put in their mouth?"
I find it interesting that Webb mumbles the whole time Graham is making his points, but when Graham tries to do the same Webb lashes out at him. Why won't these politicians call each other out on this kind of *****? As much as I can't stand him, they need to take a cue from Michael Moore during his interview with Wolf Blitzer. - davenp35, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I'm a soldier who did two year-long tours in Iraq (OIF I and III) and I agree more w. Graham on this than Webb. Webb may be a veteran but he sold out his country and his fellow soldiers just like Murtha and Kerry. It amazes me that for the first time in the history of ANY nation patriotism means supporting our enemies, and keeping our soldiers from winning. Also supporting the troops now means not letting them fight our enemies. Newsflash: soldiers don't want that kind of "support". You voted for Bush and the Congress. They BOTH sent us to war. Now it's the job of the American people to support the troops through VICTORY and only victory. That's how it works. Saying you support the troops but not the war is the stupidist line I have ever heard and it's NOT possible to actually do.
- hittnrun, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1oH Sh!t.
That should shut these mealy mouthed whiner libs down... BJT IT WON'T. They are right, you are wrong. They know everything.
Thank you for your service to this country. - justmy2cents, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1They already won. Did you not listen to the president's speech on May 1, 2003? Surely you would not show him that lack of disregard? We won already. A long time ago.
From me as well: thank you for your service to our country in our names.
- hittnrun, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1oH Sh!t.
- BohicaTwentyTwo, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2"This is one thing I really take objection to — may I speak? — is politicians who try to put their political views into the mouths of soldiers," Webb said over his opponent's interruptions. He placed his hand briefly on Graham's back, then jerked his thumb in the Republican's direction.
"Have you been to Iraq?" Graham demanded.
"I've covered two wars as a correspondent," Webb said. "I have been to Afghanistan as a journalist."
Graham: "Have you been to Iraq and talked to the soldiers?"
Webb: "You know, you've never been to Iraq, Lindsey."
The Republican pointed out he's been there seven times.
Who PWNED who here?- justmy2cents, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Depends. If you're talking about who's made more physical trips to Iraq, Lindsey won. If you're talking about who's seen war more, Webb won.
- zolaar, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=liberal
lib·er·al
–adjective
1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
2. (often initial capital letter) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
3. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism.
4. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.
5. favoring or permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.
6. of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.
7. free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant: a liberal attitude toward foreigners.
8. open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.
9. characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts: a liberal donor.
10. given freely or abundantly; generous: a liberal donation.
11. not strict or rigorous; free; not literal: a liberal interpretation of a rule.
12. of, pertaining to, or based on the liberal arts.
13. of, pertaining to, or befitting a freeman.
–noun
14. a person of liberal principles or views, esp. in politics or religion.
15. (often initial capital letter) a member of a liberal party in politics, esp. of the Liberal party in Great Britain.
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by