Well, they've reportedly started a draft over there. [Correction:  are seeking to start.]   I'm sure *THAT* will provide an army of folks willing to shoot their cousins on order.  The numbers of troops needed keep going up.  That's progress, right?

.

McBush wants us there a hundred years.   It's starting to look that way.

The Japenese figured it out years ago.  They saved billions with the U.S. handling their National Defense.

Once again our government has American troops dying for Mohammad.

I would rather hoave our volunteer troops die because of mohammad, rather than innocent civilians.  I don't mind the troops being there for a hundered years.  Just like most people don't have a big problem with the troops in Bosnia/Kosovo being there  "til Christmas" as Blister Bill said....

Again, an untruth.  McCain nerver, never said he wanted us there for 100 years.  Why is that constantly repeated when the actual transcripts of that statement have been posted here several times?

Nancy, the pinhead pseudo-intellectuals constantly whine about  "Reverend Wrong" being taken out of context (to the extreme of misquoting the man he was misquoting according to the man originally misquoted  himself re  "chickens come home to roost") but they have no problem whatsoever taking McCain totally out of context.

They have nothing. I don't even argue with them anymore....................

Here's the context:  McBush has no problem with American troops being stationed in a "peacetime" Iraq for 100 years.   In fact, he volunteered the century.  

 And he has no problem with 100 years of bloodshed to get us to the point where they can stay in a "peacetime" Iraq for 100 years.

Of course, Mister 894 flip-flopped on the issue at least once already.

Again misquoting

He specifically indicated no bloodshed

Its amazing how you constantly twist what he said/meant

You are perhaps the most biased bigot on here............................ (ageist, partisan Democrat to be specific)

Sorry for the shouting, but:

HOW DO YOU GET TO THE NO-BLOODSHED PART?  WE LOST ANOTHER 44 THIS PAST MONTH, AND THERE WILL BE A SIMILAR NUMBER GONE IN MAY, AND JUNE, AND JULY.... 

Mister 894 does not say, because he does not have a clue.  In order to get us to his Promised Land of 100 years' occupation of a foreign country, he will have us wander in the bloody desert for 40 years.

There's a big difference between saying he had no problem with us staying there for 100 years if that's what it took, and saying he WANTED to stay there and shed blood for 100 years.

He also said he had no problem with us staying there for 100 years as long as our people were out of harms way.

I paraphrased of course...but no place did he EVER say he WANTED us there for 100 years at war as you and others have implied.

We've been in other countries as a peace keeping force for many, many years under numerous presidents and yet no one wants to address that.

I don't ask that anyone agree with McCain, me,  or any other Republican..all I ask for is that you keep it accurate.  THAT's what bugs me..not the opposing opinions.

"Why not a hundred?" McBush offered.  He *SUGGESTED* it.  And then raised it to "ten thousand," which is stupid even for *HIM*.

.

As I've pointed out many times before, *FIRST* you need a Democrat in office to win the war, *THEN* you can do the "peacekeeper" but.  The awful part of that McBush said is not the "hundred years" part, but the "he-hasn't-got-a-clue-how-to-get-there" part.    It's like he's planning how to spend his millions in  lottery winnings.  Nice daydream, but first you've got to win.

Got the quote wrong, it's "Maybe a hundred."  He specifically said it would be "fine" with him.

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

These are all interesting comments....but how about some suggested captions that we can print next week?? Please!