From Jim Gilliam's blog archives
"the most clear-cut, winning political issue for Democrats in a generation"

September 20, 2006 7:50 PM

That's what Chris Bowers, an influential netroots Dem strategist, thinks of war profiteering after seeing Iraq for Sale.

"If we take even one house of Congress, we need to immediately set up a second Truman commission to investigate and prosecute war profiteering. If this issue stays in the headlines for an extended period of time, it will negatively brand Republicans for decades."

More from the archive in War Profiteering.

"the most clear-cut, winning political issue for Democrats in a generation" (09.20.2006)

Next Entry: Foley had internet sex with two underage boys on the floor of the House (10.03.2006)
Previous Entry: Robert's taking it to the war profiteers (09.20.2006)

Read the 19 comments.

cpurick:

"If this issue stays in the headlines for an extended period of time, it will negatively brand Republicans for decades"

So I guess Dems have pretty much given up hope of beating the GOP, and are now depending on the GOP to defeat themselves? Nice strategy. Says wonders about the platform.

Thu Sep 21 2006 11:40 AM


Right Wing Robby:

"I hate Bush" isnt a platform.

Thu Sep 21 2006 12:54 PM


Dave E.:

Such penetrating insight.

Thu Sep 21 2006 4:56 PM


Right Wing Robby:

And yet somehow your entire political party cant figure that out. I guess they arent as smart as you then huh.

Sat Sep 23 2006 1:10 PM


Dave E.:

It's called sarcasm. Don't ever make the mistake of me actually attributing insight with you.

Sat Sep 23 2006 1:17 PM


Mike of the Great White North:

War profiteering is a great thing to run on... but what i really think the issue that should remain in the headlines the longest that would get the most pull for Democrats would be security. And they should have Clinton run the playbook. He makes a key observation (click on my name) about Karl Rove. Is Karl Rove a bad man? who knows... but it's his 'job' to make republicans win, by hook or by crook.

So i think Dems need someone like Clinton, whos blody articulate and smart enough to counter media bullshit like this wonderfull interview he gave to a FAUX news stooge. (click on my name) I mean i almost feel sorry for that Wallace guy. Any normal individual with more than 2 brain cells to rub together can see Clinton just murdered his talking points with fact and reason.

If Dems made a clear effort to get Clinton and Gore back to the at least being their media spokespeople and countered the garbage coming out of the rightwing MSM, especially on 'security' issues... the ONLY area Bush consistantly leads in because of the lies and fear mongering.

I mean comon... i think the most telling thing Clinton said was that this administration considers Afghanistan only 1/7th as important as Iraq, when it was Osama who perpetrated 9-11.

Mon Sep 25 2006 1:42 PM


Right Wing Robby:

Clintons interview is blowing up in his face and his assertions about Clarke on contradicted in Clarkes own book! LOL

Here comes Nov! Ready?

Mike, you're clueless.

Tue Sep 26 2006 3:07 PM


Mike of the Great White North:

Rob... you're such a silly little toadstool. But you are right about one thing. Sure can't wait until november. I can smell the fear oozing from you. Keep up the brave facade... and remember to have a clean pair of underwear to change into after the votes are tallied!

Tue Sep 26 2006 3:14 PM


Dave E.:

I'm actually interested in seeing some links on that assertion. Sounds more like wingnut damage control.

Tue Sep 26 2006 5:25 PM


NJGuardsman:

My God, What has become of Democrat Icons?
First Dean now Clinton!?

The former President of the most powerful nation in the world ranting like he’s on an infomercial “READ CLARK’S BOOK, READ CLARK’S BOOK” after EIGHT years in office and the only defense he can muster is a book authored by a former underling of his – he cant even pull highlights of his presidency from his own memory (must be all the cigars he smoked)!

Now according to Clinton the CIA was telling him (Clinton) who to and who not to kill? I think maybe Hillary was President then, no thats not the case because then the Clinton Presidency would have had balls.

F.Y.I. - Dick Clark WAS the Head of Counter Terrorism on 9/11!

OK - on pg 234 of Rich Clarks book he (Clinton) talked about his (Clarks) “demotion” he asked for it, also he wasn’t fired by his own words (after 9/11) on page 239, he was kept in the administration LONGER then he wanted.

Can anyone educate me as to Clinton’s book “My Life” ???? close to 1000 pages of text and how many of those pages talk about terrorism? Can anyone tell me?

You want to see how important terrorism was to Clinton? He pulled soldiers out of Somalia and Al-Qaeda took over, USS Cole no retaliation, bombing of embassies in Africa nothing done about it, AND THE KICKER: 1993 the first WTC ATTACK Bill Clinton was in JERSEY and couldn’t/didn’t cross the river to see what happened, 1000 people needing medical attention, 6 people dead and he was probably too busy getting a hummer in the limo to care.

HE HAD AT LEAST FOUR (4) OPPORTUNITIES (not counting Yemen handing OBL over to him) IN EIGHT YEARS AND HE SAYS BUSH DIDN’T DO ANYTHING IN EIGHT MONTHS??????

Oh but he cares about a TV movie, WHY? Because he’s worried about his “legacy” he was a do nothing president and the reason why he’s a do nothing president because his actions as president should speak for him AND THEY DO but not the way he wants.
You all say “leave Clinton alone”, say “he’s not president anymore” I agree but he just will not leave things alone, he needs the spot light on him.

Wed Sep 27 2006 7:12 AM


Dave E.:

I would encourage you to watch the entire pt.1 of the interview that Fox made public NJ. Clearly, your post indicates you've only seen a hatchet edit job. Watch the whole thing (link below) and try posting again with your honest reaction. Indulge me.

At a minimum, this is just to counter the terribly ill-informed hyperbole from your post. Anyone that lurks can watch the vid and see you're clearly ranting and your post is completely baseless.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EAnuqicla4I

Thu Sep 28 2006 2:26 AM


Dave E.:

Found pt.2.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErrdLvWjm8o

You've got nothing to stand on NJ. Nothing. Your outlandish words speak for themselves. All you've seen were the 30 seconds of combative rhetoric. Not the FOURTEEN MINUTES of factual rebuttal to Wallace's ridiculously biased question.

Two words are the reason why the GOP is scared out of their mind: subpoena power. God forbid the tiniest sliver of transparency be cast upon this corrupt behemoth. Because, if so, the scope of GOP malfeasance that has suffocated this country while wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross will finally have that word "accountability" catch up with it.

Thu Sep 28 2006 2:37 AM


Right Wing Robby:

That fact that Clinton is a liar isnt a subjective point of view, its a proven fact. They dont take away your right to practice law because Chris Wallace gave you a tough interview.
You can ignore this simple truth, but it doesnt make you correct.

DaveE. Hows that race in CT going? I think you responded to me saying; "No surprise that you're failing to understand what just happened."

Yet here we are, 40 days out and your massive movement called Lamont is getting his tail kicked.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060928/D8KDQTLG0.html

Prepare your crow.

Thu Sep 28 2006 3:16 PM


Dave E.:

2 quick things:

"They dont take away your right to practice law because Chris Wallace gave you a tough interview."

Could this sentence possibly conatain two more mutually exclusive clauses? Borders on gibberish. One has nothing to do with the other. Try addressing just one of the factual assertions made during the 14 minutes of that 'interview'. Being intellectually lazy is no way to go through life.

The CT polls: Zogby has it down to within 2 points - the very margin of error. It's nice to see that you're getting so much excitement from the CT race, but as I've stated before, the value has already been garnered from CT - anything else is gravy. And any reasonable person would see the disparate polling and bite his idiot tongue.

But there's the rub: a reasonable person.

How bout that Intel report that completely discredits everything Dear Leader has been feeding you since go? Are you gonna simply dismiss the intelligence community as liars and partisans now too? At what point does the weight of this overwhelmning objective evidence begin penetrating that thick wingnut skull of yours?

Thu Sep 28 2006 3:51 PM


Right Wing Robby:

Dave E.

Please show me were YOU addressed a factual assertion? You didnt. Try contradicting one of NJ's factual assertions. You cant. Linking to the interview of a known and proven liar isnt proof of anything. You havent addressed a SINGLE thing, but you seem to have no trouble accusing others. Go ahead and prove what NJ writes is wrong. Ill make sure check back.

You have said nothing in your comment minus the usual personal attack.

Had some leaks recently Dave. Dont you care about national security? "Shame on you!"
Being wrong time after time and ignoring it is no way to go through life Dave. Talking down to people with empty words is even worse.

Thu Sep 28 2006 5:26 PM


Mike of the Great White North:

"Try contradicting one of NJ's factual assertions."
It's kind of tough to do when he doesn't make any?

"Had some leaks recently Dave. Don’t you care about national security? "Shame on you!""
Oh, that’s right. You mean the administrations outing of a CIA op to the media? No? What about Bush giving interviews about how they're going after terrorist finances. Whoops its ok when he does it, but when the media reports on it, that’s bad. Whoever leaked the latest info on the NIE is a patriot; because it goes to show yet again, the pattern of deception the admin weaves. The leaker wants this madness to stop like every other sane individual. Wingnuts need not apply.

"Being wrong time after time..."
Is something you seem proud of in dear leader.

"Talking down to people with empty words is even worse."
No, staying quiet, uncritical thinking, and undying loyalty to the King, all traits you posses in spades, would be worse.

Thu Sep 28 2006 6:40 PM


Mike of the Great White North:

http://www.reason.com/0610/co.cy.crying.shtml

Meant to add this url to my last post.

Article pointing out some of what i have to consider some of the most retarded behaviour of wingnuttery.

Thu Sep 28 2006 6:56 PM


Mike of the Great White North:

Wow, its gotten quiet as of late. I can only theorize...

1. Wingnuts choked on their turkey dinners.
2. Wingnuts are praying with their pastors for an October surprise.
3. Wingnuts are in bombshelters with the news of the NK nuke test.
4. Wingnuts are packing their bags to help celebrate the 75 milllion dollar 'Victory party' for Iraq and Afghanistan
5. Wingnuts need days to formulate counter arguments that still utterly fail.
6. Wingnuts have gone to other more uber-right posting boards to preach to the choir.

How do i know about the last part? I tried posting on a message board www.freerepublic.com, a veritable who's who of todays closet fascists. Not only did i not violate any of the terms of posting, i went above and beyond to call of duty to remain eloquent, polite and articulate in a debate regarding Stephen Harpers re-election chances when standing with Israel over Lebanon when Canadian civilians were killed by an Israeli airstrike. My message was deleted. I had to re-register a new name and new email address to respond to my deletion... only to be deleted again.

Wingnuts can only argue the simplest nuances amongst themselves and feel grandiose. Thats how they cacoon themselves in their own reality. They flee from here where there is no moderator censurship because they can't stand on the weight of their arguments. They go to post on other boards that are 'private' or can kick, ban, silence any member that isn't towing the party line. It's ego stroking at its most grotesque.

I can see it now. Maybe in a month or two that little yappy dog RWR will rear his arse in here and blitherly yelp something about gay-this, bad democrat-that,terror-loving-lib-this or baby-killer-clinton-that, without ever tackling the rebuttles of yesterday.

At least NJ does try to respond, in between his tours of Iraq where he is no doubt helping to build the hospitals and schools that the media isn't reporting enough of. I don't expect NJ to always find the time to rebut when he's off securing Iraq to make it safe for Iraqis, minus the 650,000 dead in a new survey. And woe is he to find the time to rebut when he's at his keyboard banging away an email to the Dept. of Defence, chastising them about how they embolden the enemy when they reported to the International Red Cross that 70-90% of all detainees held by the US were innocent of any wrongdoing.

Just a certain pattern i noticed.

Wed Oct 11 2006 4:07 PM


Mike of the Great White North:

With the signing of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, the great experiment that was the United States of America is over.

http://www.antiwar.com/orig/ketcham.php?articleid=9877

Wed Oct 18 2006 1:19 PM


Jim Gilliam
Jim Gilliam

Email:







Add to My Yahoo!

Last week's soundtrack:

jgilliam's Last.fm Weekly Artists Chart