In the early 1960's right wingers met on the Connecticut estate of arch conservative William Buckley to form an ultra rightist student organization to counter the antiwar student activism of the day. The resulting group called itself the "Young Americans for Freedom" (YAF).

YAF spearheaded the campaign of Barry Goldwater for President. Goldwater ran as an extreme rightist, advocating a full military onslaught against Vietnam... "victory at any cost" was his slogan.

Goldwater and his YAF hooligans were so extreme that Lyndon B. Johnson took advantage and organized his own campaign for President around the spectre of a possible nuclear war as the result of a Goldwater victory. Johnson won, and went on to escalate the war against Vietnam.

In 1962 Ronald Reagan joined the YAF national board... where he still remains.

YAF started a campaign of red-baiting intimidation it called "STOP RED TRADE." The group targeted IBM, Mack Truck, Firestone, and other companies for trading with the then exisiting Soviet Union.

YAF begins offensive against the "Students for a Democractic Society" (SDS), and MOBE (short for "Mobilization againt the Vietnam War). YAF attacks the two organizations for being "un-American" and "Communist." YAF thugs start fights with student activists against the Vietnam war, and disrupt rallies and teach-in's at every opportunity. "Bomb Hanoi" became a popular slogan with the YAF goons. YAF calls for total U.S. military victory in Vietnam no matter what the cost. The group made Jane Fonda a target of their attacks... calling her a traitor and giving her the nickname "Hanoi Jane."

In the 1970's, when Richard Nixon went to China... YAF completely FREAKS OUT and accuses Nixon of "selling out" the conservative cause. Not even Nixon was right wing enough for the YAF.

In the late 1970's, YAF attacks President Carter for "giving away" the Panama Canal. YAF also condemns the "Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty" as an appeasement to Communism. During the Iran hostage crisis, YAF starts a letter writing campaign designed to pressure Carter to militarily attack Iran.

In 1980, YAF cadre... a bit older (but no wiser), fully support the reactionary Ronald Reagan as 40th President. YAF called for the military defeat and invasion of Nicaragua. They defended Interior Secretary James Watt, Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork, and Lt. Colonel Oliver North fromwhat YAFers called "attacks by the radical left."

YAFers supported the fascist mercenaries attacking Nicaragua, as well as the right wing death squads of El Salvador organized by the ARENA party of that country. What's most ironic is that YAF also supported the rightist Mujahaddin of Afghanistan. Reagan was pumping hundreds of millions of dollars into the war chests of the Mujahaddin so the "Islamic Soldiers" could defeat the Soviets. Just so happens one of the main organizers of the Mujahaddin was none other than OSAMA BIN LADEN.

Today the YAF thugs are mounting a campaign against France for it's stand regarding a war on Iraq. YAF is shrill in it's condemnation of terrorism and links the "Beast of Baghdad" to the 9-11 terrorists. Let's just be sure to REMIND everyone that it was the so-called Young Americans for Freedom who supported the backing, training, and arming of the Mujahaddin and Osama bin Laden back in the 1980's. But then... fascist right wing "birds of a feather" tend to hang out together.

Be on your guard antiwar activists. By holding a rally one day ahead of the March 8th International Women's Day antiwar march... on virtually the very spot were the antiwar activists are to gather, YAF is making it's presence known, and they hope to intimidate you. Watch your backs and protect one another. Keep away from the YAF goons... they are cowardly and known to attack in packs. Don't argue with them... they argue with their fists. Ignore them... they will go back to their sewers.

good summary of history -- and spot-on.

do you have a web link or something that shows they were the ones that organized the bogus demo? just curious

You are weak. And unconvincing. Probaly mossad.

Certainly a cretin. Not working is it?

Blow me.

You are so very upper middle class. Bad boy,no more daddy money and hacky-sack playing for you. And you are a racist as well, but you already know that.

hmm NAZI or ANSWER?

hmm lets see.. both hate jews..

both organize protest marches..

Both seek to overthrow a government to create a new order.

Hey maybe they are fronts for each other!

One however is a small group that doesnt pose any serious threat the other is a big pimple on the ass of civilization.

(what would a world be like with ANSWER ruling it.. pretty close to hell I recon)

It's interesting that the second "nazis raus" posts without even responding to my question. You would think that "he" would try to pull of the fake of the first author. Yet it's so clear that the first author isn't the second person, by tone, content and lack of response to 82475.

Funny stuff. These trolls really do need a life.

As for the YAF, this is interesting:

http://www.bol.ucla.edu/~ya4f/index2.html

That's their Los Angeles chapter homepage, and in 2.5 years, they've only managed to get 1509 hits (and mind you, I'm talking hits, not independent visitors, because if you go there and hit refresh, you'll see that the counter will increment up, which means that far fewer people than 1509 have visited their site). The site is linked from the national organization site. Pathetic. Maybe only 200 people have ever visited the place .......................... Yup. Looks like a huge movement. ;-) Here fascists... come and get us...... c'mon.... cute little boogers.

Love,

82475 (but only for today)

You think we can't see all the posts you're tossing up here at the same time? You make it so bloody obvious that you're impersonating Sheepdog and Diogenes to try to make them look like shit.

It's really cute how organizations like the ADL have political operatives that actually go around saying the most disgusting things about Jews when the ADL is supposed to fight against defamation of Jews. But so it goes.........

The historical record is known and public. ....and you can't hide.

Hey, fuck you you republican jack off.

thanks for making it even more clear that your last two posts were not by the author that started this thread

But it's crude tactics don't work.

The baiting works, but not here.

Desperation is in the air. New tactics

old stupidity.

I'm the one who originally posted the information concerning the creeps of the "Young Americans for Freedom."

Some rotten puke used my indentification to post "I hope Iraq creams us. We deserve it." I DID NOT WRITE THAT. The mummy wanted to undermine and discredit the factual info I revealed to all. Subsequent posting pertaining to this thread that used my name were also NOT made by me.

Someone asked how I knew the YAF organized the jingoist anti-French rally. Watching the local television "news" stations revealed that. KCAL Channel 9 first reported the story... saying that "a group calling itself the Young Americans for Freedom organized a rally that spilled onto the streets of Westwood." Other local tv stations followed with simular reports. Channels 2, 7, and 11 also reported that YAF organized the demo. All tv reports showed the YAF pukes pouring French wine into the gutter.

The name I used to make the original post, "nazis raus"... is German for "nazis out!" The slogan is apt for this message board... which is crawling with right wing cave men and jerks trying to divide and conquer the peace movement. Cafeful antiwar activists, don't fall into their trap!

BEAUJOLAIS not BOMBS!

"It's really cute how organizations like the ADL have political operatives that actually go around saying the most disgusting things about Jews when the ADL is supposed to fight against defamation of Jews. But so it goes......... "

I've only got through half a cup of coffee so far and I've already seen the most ridiculous, paranoid and simple-minded post of the day. Thanks.

"Don't argue with them... they argue with their fists. Ignore them... they will go back to their sewers. "

What if we just beat their fascist asses into a thin red paste? Seems effective to me. Then we could pour them back into the sewers along with all that wine they're wasting.

I see no reason why being anti-war dictates we take every scrap of shit from anyone so insecure in their cause that they feel obligated to impose their bullshit (in this case, violence) on others they imagine to be 'pussy pacifists'.

Lets just put these idiots in their place.

(tip for you would be thugs-for-fascism out there, we are not all a bunch of tree hugging hippies. Some of us would be more than happy to fashion a coffee mug out of your hollowed skull. Govern yourself accordingly next time you decide to impose your ignorance via strongarm tactics.)

But you haven't the intelligence. By the way, you guys misuse and overuse your pet phrase of "facist". But I realize that that's the term you use for anyone progressive who doesn't agree with you middle class trolls.

I mean I would beat them with my fists, but I haven't actually ever gotten into a real fight. You know, except in video games where I totally rule.

You wacky trolls, where o where do you come up with your colorful, creative antics?

I do rule at video games by the way. My soul caliber skills are not to be fucked with.

It's tempting to dig up a link to that one image of that fat dork with his 'support our troops' sign and talk about how much I would hand that dude and his ilk their collective asses, but that seems rather rhetorical. One thing that comes to mind from pondering that though is how the opposition seeks to cloud the issue by argueing matters that aren't on the table. For instance, "Support Our Troops" implies that people against the war are against our army. No where have I seen this demonstrated. I for one totally appreciate our army and the job it does for us. I happen to think they're taking their orders from a treachorous idiot at the moment though, and I don't agree with what they are being commanded to do. Does this make me anti military? Anti american? No, in no way. The pro-war people just suffer a distinct lack of catchy phrases that actually pertain to the issue at hand.

Consider one of the protestors main workhorses here: 'No War'. Pretty much speaks for itself. Even war's strongest supporters, if asked, will admit it is a "neccessary" evil, and a dirty one at that. Not a good thing but it might bring about good results, or so they say. So for someone to say 'No War' clearly states that for whatever reason and to whatever end, they are opposed to that 'neccessary evil'. Either they are personally willing to accept the results of non action, they don't believe such results will ever occur, or they don't feel war would do anything to effectively lessen those results in severity.

Now consider what would be the prowar peoples version of that. It would be a couple letters shorter, or just: "War". Doesn't speak very clearly. Which part of mass death and destruction are you supporting in that statement? The actual action of killing people and destroying things? The smoldering immediate results of warring (nothing like the smell of napalm in the morning)? The long term global social damage inevitable from warring (in the case at least)? Or does the act of killing people just sound inviting in the wake of how many of our people died senselessly in WTC? Or perhaps it implies the person is a big fan of helping people by starving them to the brink of death, and then dropping a cluster bomb on them?

And thus we see idiots waving their indirect intentions around like drunken fools at WWF, unable to clearly express what they really want without looking like a bunch of violent ignorant assholes. Gee.

"Remember 911" -> Like anyone could possibly forget it. And as if to say going to far away lands and destroying them might actually help prevent more global resentment and active hostility against us. Also implies that our government didn't actively bring about 911. Thats one hell of an assumption in light of A) dubya's actions before, during, and after 911, B) Huge piles of evidence, and C) Common sense to the contrary. But we wont get into that here, the concept is covered thoroughly elsewhere.

"Peace from Strength" -> sounds almost exactly like "War is Peace". And despite what you pro-war people might be led to believe, anti-war activists are not marching down a road of roses and tulips. For one, we have to deal with you assholes every step of the way. For another, we have to deal with a frequently corrupt and immoral police state that even when it agrees with us its obligated to hinder us and deny us our constitutional rights for the sake of maintaining the status quo. Also, for many of us this creates wide rifts within our families as well, as many of the older generation remember a government that wasn't designed to consume poor people like logs on a fire (and don't ask me to source that you pricks), and thus see it, in a way rightly, as proper to blindly support your government assuming that they A) know best and B) have your best intentions in mind. Both of which are clearly not in effect any more, if they ever were, but try explaining that to grandpa. Moral of the story: Protesting takes strength too. Hell in this case one could argue that protesting takes MORE strength than going over to iraq, camping out for a couple weeks, and bombing the hell out of them. The toughest work anyone did while we were over there last time was plowing their dead into mass graves. The rest was brought to you by air-raids, smart bombs, tanks that can kill you from half a mile away, satellite imagery, and a wide array of other tools so effecient at what they do that the people who use them are in almost no danger at any time against a force not similarly armed, unless you consider human error, which (I believe) resulted in more US casualties in desert invasion 1 than any iraqi action. I don't have sources availabe on that but I recall as much being widely reported at the time and since.

I could rip apart a few more of these signs but I need to get some work done.

Keep at it trolls, maybe some day, for some reason, your innovative methods and strategys will just magically start working. And until then they'll continue to amuse the hell out of me.

"your innovative methods and strategys"



By this do you mean being correct with facts to back us up?

No by this I'm referring to the petty obvious actions of these trolls that seem to come crawling out of the woodwork every so often. Maybe just one, seems to be several though.

I love how you're so quick to make assumptions to... "being correct with facts to back us up? "... assumes that there is a correct answer and you and anyone you have aligned yourself have it. With facts to back you up no less. Bang up job of backing up that statement by the way. Didn't state what you were correct about, what that "correct truth" was, who "we" is, and those facts you mention are no where to be found. Class act man. Why don't you guys just simplify your verbage and chant 'WAR WAR WAR WAR', it'd save us both a lot of time and energy, and that is really all you're trying to say.

You're the hillbilly who made the blanket statement that we who disagree with you know nothing and are somehow brainwashed by "the man". Your'e the petulent fool who is still desperately grabbing onto some hairbrained idea that 9-11 was designed and executed by Bush although you never show any evidence AND neatly disappear when overwhelming, common knowledge evidence is posted that proves you're wrong. Face it. Your ideas ARE wrong because they are formed in the mind of a lemming. You are unconcerned about facts. Your sole concern is the sound of the mantrs you get such a kick out of hearing yourself spew. You talk alot about "kicking ass". Deep down your just like everyone you claim to hate but without the intellect. You have yet to post any cogent argument supporting any point you claim to believe in. Just more bashing of those clearly more informed than you. You get no points for that. The world looks down on people like you and laughs.

Please, remember your lineage. You are a dumb cracker who copies and pastes your posts from other boards. It's obvious. You betray yourself when you want to"kick ass". Stop being a troll, shut up, and learn.

You're dispatched.

You obviously haven't been reading anything i've written here. And i've written everything i've posted, the only time i've ever copied and pasted anything is select quotes of statements i'm debunking. If you like the way it sounds, and you clearly do, perhaps you should try listening to it instead of questioning my sources, and then my home state, and then my disposition. You're so predictable. Left with no other recourse your ilk eventually descends into criticizing petty spelling and grammatical errors. You're all desperate idiots.

Nor will i debate whether or not dubya did it with you. I'm convinced dubya did it. You demand that in order for my opinion to have any validity with you that i find somewhere, in writing, in a major publication, bush admitting he did it, or else you decide to discount everything I or anyone else of similar mind say as conspiracy theory mumbo jumbo. Thats clearly unrealistic and ignorant. And I refuse to play your anal little games with you. If you need convincing, go google for a minute and you will find such a wealth of information on the subject it would keep you occupied for months. If you're not prepared to listen and/or be open to the idea that bush might be corrupt, this might be entirely about the money and the power, and that this might not have anything to do with terrorism, well then nothing i could say or do will ever convince you otherwise. And why should i even try. You're not worth the effort. You presume to think that i'm here to convince you of something. I could give a rats ass about you. I'm here to network with other like minded individuals, see what things are like on the west coast, and occasionaly when i'm presented with the mind numbing ignorance you, bush admirer and simple simon like to spew i will occasionaly voice my support for the team i have chosen.

The idea that in order to play ball with you thugs that one must play it in a very particular way is the core of the problem with our system today. If we the people decide we disapprove of our leaders actions, we have no venue of expressing this discontent aside from our vote, or our right to bear arms. The first just isn't enough (especially with bullshit like the electoral college in place), and the second is too extreme for most any circumstance (though i question whether today's environment is one of those circumstances more every day).

I'm tired of it. I refuse to play anymore. There is no way to win your infantile little pissing contest, you assholes are well aware of it, and thus you love the game.

Our system badly needs an overhaul, I'm working towards that effect, and you and yours will not slow me down or deter me in the slightest.

By the way, your little 'you are dispatched' comment leaves me utterly convinced that at least you and simple simon are the same person. Quite possibly bush admirer too. Most likely anyone who has ever heralded the unquestionable superiority of your arguements as well. Whoever you are, get a clue, and a spine, and a life.

"You are dispatched"... indeed... arrogant prick. Get your head out of your ass.

Also, I feel obliged to reluctantly point out how terribly simple minded you idiots are, attacking the first 'weakness' i present to you (my home state). You and yours consistently decide that because you can't find any fundamental flaws in what i'm saying, because i don't play your stupid little 'name your sources' game with you, that you will attack me on the basis of my location, thus demonstrating your ignorance far more clearly than anything i could ever say about you. I'd imagine I would school you rather severly at chess because your strategy is lacking.

When did i make any blanket statements about anyone who disagrees with me being brainwashed? I don't think you're brainwashed, I think you're on the take and/or stupid. And not you as in everyone rallying for war. You personally; fresca/simon/bush admirer, whatever you feel like calling yourself today. You're an idiot.

To be fair, I do think a large part of the people who are blindly going along with whats happening today are a bit if not competely brainwashed, but most of them aren't here. They're off watching american idol, debating on some new piece of furniture they just have to have. Thinking about anything but what matters. By the time someone has started researching their opinions of reality on the net, they have generally overcome the worst of the programming.

You creeps on the otherhand, the people that seem to make a profession out of 'dispatching' and 'debunking' people trying to express their opinions, know exactly what you're doing and why you're doing it and i'm convinced its money. And no i don't have any sources available on that. Dick.

Is that the same O'Reilly who one day was defending Rush Limbaugh's right to disinform (speak) and the next shutting off the microphone of the son of a 911 victim because he was asking questions O'Really did not want to be heard?

O'Reilly is just another Faux News Presstitute. He says what he is paid to say.



911 - WHAT REALLY HAPPENED?

Beaujolais Villages Please. (It has a little more fruit and nose.)

"Nor will i debate whether or not dubya did it with you"

Well then, your idiocy is verging on mental illness. And I mean that seriously.

Still wondering what you all (Ohio and Dio et.al. ) have to say about all the video bragging/confessions of Al Queda members. All part of the conspiracy? Seriously. I'm willing to listen to your theory. You always say Bush did it, but you never lay out a clear theory or line of evidence. For what it worth, no matter what I think of your theory, all I will say in response is thank you for your time. So please, tell me. Ohio or Dio.

By the way, either of you like baseball?

Still wondering what you all (Ohio and Dio et.al. ) have to say about all the video bragging/confessions of Al Queda members. All part of the conspiracy? Seriously. I'm willing to listen to your theory. You always say Bush did it, but you never lay out a clear theory or line of evidence. For what it worth, no matter what I think of your theory, all I will say in response is thank you for your time. So please, tell me. Ohio or Dio.

By the way, either of you like baseball?

hey Hi hi.

Is the television telling the truth? A recent court case declared that is was ok for the tv to be able to tell lies an get away with it.

indy media news story.........

On another topic, Fox News (that bastion of "fairness") wins in court:

Appellate Court Rules Media Can Legally Lie.

By Mike Gaddy

Published 02. 28. 03 at 19:31 Sierra Time

On February 14, a Florida Appeals court ruled there is absolutely nothing illegal about lying, concealing or distorting information by a major press organization. The court reversed the 5,000 jury verdict in favor of journalist Jane Akre who charged she was pressured by Fox Television management and lawyers to air what she knew and documented to be false information. The ruling basically declares it is technically not against any law, rule, or regulation to deliberately lie or distort the news on a television broadcast.

On August 18, 2000, a six-person jury was unanimous in its conclusion that Akre was indeed fired for threatening to report the station's pressure to broadcast what jurors decided was "a false, distorted, or slanted" story about the widespread use of growth hormone in dairy cows. The court did not dispute the heart of Akre's claim, that Fox pressured her to broadcast a false story to protect the broadcaster from having to defend the truth in court, as well as suffer the ire of irate advertisers.

Fox argued from the first, and failed on three separate occasions, in front of three different judges, to have the case tossed out on the grounds there is no hard, fast, and written rule against deliberate distortion of the news. The attorneys for Fox, owned by media baron Rupert Murdock, argued the First Amendment gives broadcasters the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on the public airwaves.

In its six-page written decision, the Court of Appeals held that the Federal Communications Commission position against news distortion is only a "policy," not a promulgated law, rule, or regulation.

you should read "manufacturing consent" by noam chomsky.

it tells the story of who owns the media and how it is about making money.

solidarity.

ps

not really a baseball fan but i dig reality fighting matches.

also.

these YAF doods show up at a peace rally,,,,thats what the black bloc is for.

Factions are allowed to exist, but if they become violent, they need to be smashed in the streets.

BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"these YAF doods show up at a peace rally,,,,thats what the black bloc is for.

Factions are allowed to exist, but if they become violent, they need to be smashed in the streets. "

So far it's been the"black block" anarchist fantasy players who have breaking windows and other such nonsense. I suspect that a fight between both groups would be a fairly pathetic sight.

i am fully and willing and capable of defending myself and other innocent protesters at any rally.

You need to research the black bloc and understand what it is bafore making idiotic comments.

If someone takes a swing at me they better be ready for retaliation. thats why we argue with the government, thats why we fight violence to stop further bullshit violence.

Who the hell are you afraid is going to attack you? What the hell are you going on about. You're just a fat guy who has fantasies about having been in the army, in a shitty punk band with a shitty website. No one cares enough about you to fight you. Settle down junior. Stop being such a troll.

"Well then, your idiocy is verging on mental illness. And I mean that seriously."

Ok, so I'm krazee and stoopid. Moving right along.

"By the way, either of you like baseball?"

No. Hockey is kinda cool though.

"...have to say about all the video bragging/confessions of Al Queda members. All part of the conspiracy? "

Yes. Understand that i'm of the believe this same party of conspirators allowed (by not apposing) 3 plane loads of 20 or so fanatics and/or operatives to willfully crash the WTC and the Pentagon. I'd say its a safe bet that they can get someone to say whatever they want behind closed doors. You'd say Ashcroft was our lord savior christ on a stick if he was shoving a cattleprod up your ass.

You almost sound sincere in your request for substantiation of our 'conspiracy theory crap', so here are some interesting links. I will not debate every or even any aspect of what is said on these sites either. You need to be able to make up you own mind on what you believe, and the moment you require someone else to do that for you that person has ceased doing you any sort of favor. I'm too damn busy anyways.

http://www.lebensaspekte.de/groundzero/manifesto.html (This link probably comes closest to addressing what i feel are the major issues at hand, without addressing what is clearly bullshit)

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/02_11_02_lucy.html (this link is subject to much debate. Naturally i don't subscribe to every last thing rupert says. Again you will need to read, think, and make up your own mind. In particular, this vreeland crap is pretty far fetched. Otherwise though, he asks a lot of good questions)

http://makethemaccountable.com

Again, 30 seconds at google would yield similar results and is highly encouraged.

And in response to a statement of yours in a different thread... "tell me where I'm wrong." No. I have better things to do then play these infantile little bullshit games with you all day. A cursory inspection of your posts shows that you damn near never site your sources, but in light a convincing arguement that you don't agree with, are quick to challenge their sources, or in light of convincing sources, the sources of those sources, or in light of convincing sources with convincing sources, you challenge the intent and or mental stability of the people making the accusations. And if that doesn't get a response you start with the petty name calling and unsubstantiated desperate attacks on the character of the people who would "dare" to disagree with you. Again, please... Get your head out of your ass. Go read up on those links, then go read them again, give those braincells a workout, don't ask the people you report to explain it all away for you again, just make up your own mind and take it from there.

Thanks for taking the time to do that. I'm off to Ireland for a few weeks so if you're still around when I get back I'll let you know what I thought of the links. Thanks again.

I would recommend making some printouts or burning the info off to a cd and reviewing them from Ireland. Its a lot easier to be objective and non-biased outside of the reach of our media industry and/or peers.

Certainly not complaining about it, but it does seem either his comments are being removed or there is an error in the forum system (until I have posted this comment, Bush Admirer is listed as the last person to contribute to this and several other threads that he is not the last person to have said something on).

Again, I am not at all complaining about this, just curious. And if he is being censored, could I have access to whatever drivel he posted last? It has been a bleek day, a good laugh would be nice.

Thank you.

Yes, Bush Admirer is being censored. Fear not, you will not be similarly treated. Your views have been approved.

I disagree with BA on just about everyone of his doctrinaire stands. However, I would defend his right to take part in the debate. I find him amusing anyway - because he is so doctrinaire he is easy to counter. He is the perfect Devil's Advocate - he is totally impervious to facts.

I do agree with removing Anal Pastrami as he is merely disgusting and adds nothing to the debate.

Didn't seem like he was doing much other than mudslinging and finger pointing anyways. Naturally i'm not a big fan of censorship but some people just can not figure out when to shut the hell up.

Thank you for the info.

Do you mean that BLOND Telebimbo Ann Coulter?

The one who was fired as a columnist by National Review for insensitivity?

Or do you mean the nice sensitive Ann Coulter who thinks mass murder is OK as long as they are brown-skinned Ay-rabs?

Hey Bush Ass-mirer aren't you going to rate her numerically like you did other women whose pictures you have seen and rated previously on this site? Ann Coulter holds disturbing views of violence and prejudice couched in patriotic blather. Her book "Slander" should be called "Slaughter" the way she mangles and misinforms with the limited amount of thinking contained in it. Just more hyprocrisy from people on the right wing nut side of humanity.

...Ann is not a bimbo (which is good bread) she is a

whore.

I havent read anything else of her stuff but that seems ok to me its basically a critisism of how opposition parties such as the democrats tend to shift their position to one of most acceptible opposition to the point ie here where they sound like a hawk but actually they arent one at all. or sometimes they will even oppose somthign that they would have done themselves.

I fond the sadan didnt kill3000 people osama did argument so funny.. sadam killed FAR more than 3000 and it doesnt matter how you count them even if you dont count the people he effectively killed by cripling his economy and sucking money out of it

the people he effectively killed by not working to lift the sanctions (caused by his war)

the people he killed in his war

the gassing of kurds..

even inspiute of these he probably personally orded mroe than 3000 people executed for not voting for him or somthing like that