Eruptions From The Fever Swamps

I’ve gotten a lot of reactions, pro and con, from my endorsement of Barack Obama, most of which on both sides have been thoughtful and cogent. But as the election draws nearer, I am hearing from more people like Paul J. Henry of Colville, WA:

Wick, you are an idiot. Obama is a slick talking Muslim terrorist.  He has promised to destroy SDI, eliminate our nuclear arsenal and destroy our economy by raising taxes and increase government spending. You should look for another job.

(Paul, haven’t you noticed? There are no other jobs.)

Comments

43 responses to “Eruptions From The Fever Swamps”

  1. Bethany says:

    Hey…at least he called him a Muslim, and not a Muslin.

    I’m glad to see your new correspondents are so well read, though.

  2. Amy S says:

    Other good news, he lives in Washington, far, far away.

  3. Ugh. The last time I checked, our economy was ALREADY destroyed. By a Republican. Just more whinings and babblings of another paranoid Bushie.

  4. Mark says:

    Wick,

    Did you support Carter in 1976? Just curious.

    – Mark

  5. Ed says:

    At least I’ve not called you an idiot.

  6. Tim R. says:

    I agree — Wick, you should look for another job. I might know someone who would be interested in filling your soon-to-be-vacant position, though.

  7. yikesdallas says:

    A poll that CNN reported on a couple of days ago showed that 23% of Texans actually believe Obama is a Muslim. How embarrassing.

  8. Emily Litella says:

    What’s this about that nice Mr. Obama and muslins?

    I don’t care what kind of fabric he likes – as long as it is not polyester!

  9. Davie Dave says:

    A simple “wrong” would have been just fine.

  10. Long Memory says:

    Don’t worry, yikesdallas. An even higher percentage still believes that Saddam had WMDs.

  11. Wow... says:

    so I use a quote from Billy Madison to say that Paul J. Henry’s sentiment is i.d.i.o.t.i.c and I get the heave-ho?

  12. Robb says:

    People like Paul make Republicans look bad. There are reasons one should vote against Obama, but people shut down when you start the conversation with that stupid “Muslim Terrorist” stuff.

  13. Robb says:

    Misleading comment Long Memory. Saddam DID have WMD’s, he just never proved to us he got rid of them. When we finally told him to prove it or we would go make sure he got rid of them, he said go to ****. It is a fact that he had them to begin with.

  14. Huh? says:

    Completely baseless comment, Robb. Since you brought up proof, let’s talk about proof. Where’s the proof that there WERE in fact WMDs? I haven’t seen any, have you?

  15. Robb says:

    Post Desert Storm, weapons inspectors were regularly indexing biological and chemical weapons in Iraq. There was always a fear Iraq would send a SCUD missile filled with some of his Anthrax into Saudi Arabia or Israel, thank goodness he never did. So, the UN inspectors would inventory and track the stockpiles. The orders from the UN were for Iraq to destroy said WMDs and provide proof that they did. Saddam kicked the inspectors out and told us he did not have to prove anything to us. He said he destroyed them, but that we didn’t deserve proof.

    Now, the fact is he either destroyed the biological and chemical weapons, or he moved them to a neighboring country. We found nothing when we liberated the country, but that does not mean we erase several years from the history books. The real issue was the lack of proof that he got rid of them.

  16. Davie Dave says:

    @ wow… and now my comment makes no sense at all.

  17. Wow... says:

    I know, right?

  18. Bethany says:

    Seriously – is there not a way to leave the placemarker there where the person commented, and then just delete the comment itself, replacing it with, “This commented has been removed as objectionable” or something?

    I mean, I can do that on mine.

  19. ChuckE says:

    I agree with Robb. People forget that Saddam used mustard gas against the Iranians and the Kurds. Mustard gas is a WMD!

  20. Marty Cortland says:

    Wick:

    Just curious: do you have the same level of conviction in your endorsement that you had when you made it, or has it lessened (or increased)? I would also be curious if you would phrase your endorsement the same way or would you make different arguments or emphasize different policies? And has Obama done anything to disappoint you since you made your endorsement? (And for the record and to be fair, although I will be voting for McCain for pocketbook reasons, he has done nothing but disappoint me since the date of your endorsement.)

    Your former columnist,
    MC

  21. JS says:

    Huh: It is undisputed that Saddam at one point did have WMDs. He used them on the Kurds and during the Iran-Iraq war. The UN destroyed stockpiles of WMDs after Desert Storm. Many different intelligence agencies around the world believed Saddam had restarted Iraq’s WMD program in the late 1990s/early 2000s. In fact, some reports indicated that Saddam wanted everyone to believe Iraq had WMDs to deter an Iranian attack (http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/01/27/saddam.cbs/index.html).

  22. Long Memory says:

    This is just stunning that y’all bring out the revisions every time the war comes up. I don’t even know where to begin to answer people who won’t admit they were ever wrong. Maybe y’all don’t understand it, but the lies and obfuscations are one reason the Republicans are about to be driven into the wilderness. People died because of y’all; I guess I’d have a hard time admitting that, too.

  23. ang. says:

    What a small window a vast majority of republicans are choosing to look through in placing their vote this election. Pocketbooks? What about helping the middle class–who only make the rich richer, no? Or drawing troops out or Iraq? Or having a VP who has used his passport? Why are people giving Wick a hard time when they are being apparently selfish and close-minded. I understand it’s hard, but come on…I just don’t get it. What has worked with McCain’s group that anyone would possibly want to keep in office? He have the same people Bush had…and if, God forbid, he dies as his father and grandfather did at his age, Palin would be more easily influenced than the greedy and disturbing president we have in office right now. You betcha!

  24. Marty Cortland says:

    Dear ang:

    Our mouths and nostrils are tiny portals through which we breathe, and yet if you shut them off, we die. Without tax revenue, we have no government — and all the points you make, however valid and important, become irrelevant.

    I believe that Obama (for all his admirable qualities) is wrong-headed on his tax policies, with the consequence that the government’s tax receipts will go down, not up, under his administration.

    The pocketbook drives all. (Without Wick’s pocketbook, there would be no Frontburner on which to conduct this debate.)

    Best,
    MC

  25. Daniel says:

    For once, I agree with Marty: Our mouths and nostrils are tiny portals through which we breathe.

    Well said, sir!

  26. Huh? says:

    If memory serves, and please correct me if I’m wrong, yellowcake uranium was one of the primary justifications for the invasion in March 2003.

    By the way, we (myself included) are getting way off topic.

  27. Drew says:

    Uhm, Wick, I think you’ve just found the long lost husband of that crazy McCain woman (also parodied on SNL) who thought Obama was an Arab (her words, not mine).

    Seems there is proof that the gene pool is a bit shallow and in much need of a lifeguard. They’re out there.

  28. Huh? says:

    With regard to the original subject of the post, I have this to say: Do I think Bush is a bad person? No. Do I disagree with his policies and the direction he has taken the country (however well intentioned he thought he was being)? Yes. Do I think John McCain, if elected, will formulate a plan to steer the Earth into the sun? No. Do I think his policies, particularly economic, are misguided? Yes.

    Obama isn’t a terrorist, he’s not going to bomb anyone, and, quite frankly, people who make those kind of baseless, negative comments about either candidate are immature and in a perfect world, shouldn’t be allowed to vote because they have clearly demonstrated a blatant lack of knowledge.

  29. Drew says:

    @Huh?

    Seems Wick’s penpal may have ingested a wee much of that yellowcake thinking they meant birthday cake (?)

  30. Steveâ„¢ says:

    Long Memory:

    I’ll bet you don’t recall any Democrats saying anything bad about Saddam pre-war either.

    “Bush’s War”, indeed.

  31. Long Memory says:

    Steve, I actually do recall that. Everyone who cast a vote for war without bothering to read the NIE — that’s just about everyone in Congress — and everyone who knew the intelligence didn’t add up but who said nothing at the time, and everyone who said “This is bull—-,” but still went before the U.N. to “make the case” for war has blood on their hands. But the Bushies are soaked in it.

  32. Steveâ„¢ says:

    Ok, LM. IMO, anyone who did not support the invasion was pro-despot, we’re even now.

    Given the rhetoric concerning Saddam from Democrats which preceded Bush’s 1st term, and the *majority* view of the NIE, one could argue that failure to act would be dereliction of duty.

    But, what galls me the most (as the father of an IOF veteran), is the prompt, politically-driven reversal of position from the very same democrats who shouted the loudest alarms about Saddam, only to turn “anti-war” when the going got tough. To me, at the time, this was treasonous.

    Don’t get me started, I’ll bring up Jack Murtha, and get banned for bad, bad language.

  33. Mike says:

    Just a reminder for the real revisionists.

  34. Long Memory says:

    Steve, your beef is not with Barack Obama. He was against the war all along.

    Put me down as one of the people who believes John Kerry would have won four years ago if he had had the guts to say, ‘Yes, I voted for the war. I believe the lies.’

    Democrats who voted for that resolution haven’t said that, by and large. Sen. Biden has said he read the report.

    As to the report itself, I don’t know what you mean by “majority” view of the NIE. I am under the impression that the 92-page report most in Congress didn’t bother to read contained all the caveats from within the intelligence community. The revised version that was release to the public presented only what the Bushies considered to be compelling reasons for an invasion.

    To my way of thinking, people in Congress are allowed to change their minds, but they’re not allowed to act as if they never felt any other way.

    Neither should someone be allowed to say ‘He kept us safe’ without having to add ‘except for 9/11.’

    Oh, by the way: Marine Corps veteran here.

  35. Steveâ„¢ says:

    “Yes, I voted for the war. I believe the lies.’

    Including his own?

    “To my way of thinking, people in Congress are allowed to change their minds, but they’re not allowed to act as if they never felt any other way.”

    That, precisely, is my beef with the dem’s.

    (BTW, thank you for your service, semper fi from the son)

  36. Long Memory says:

    @ Robb: I’m sorry I missed this earlier. You said: Misleading comment Long Memory. Saddam DID have WMD’s, he just never proved to us he got rid of them. When we finally told him to prove it or we would go make sure he got rid of them, he said go to ****. It is a fact that he had them to begin with.

    At the time, it was considered poor form to ask someone to prove a negative. Even Saddam Hussein. Yes, everyone THOUGHT he had WMDs, but as many of the works about the war have shown, there were many in intelligence who didn’t think the case had been made. We now know that they were right and we were wrong.

    But the WMDs were nothing if not convenient for Bush and the neocons, who were determined to be rid of Saddam. In fact, here’s what Paul Wolfowitz said: “The truth is that for reasons that have a lot to do with the U.S. government bureaucracy we settled on the one issue that everyone could agree on which was weapons of mass destruction as the core reason.”

  37. Long Memory says:

    And, Steve, it’s precisely my beef with the Republicans. I consider it Kerry’s fault that we couldn’t make it stick in 2004.

  38. Robb says:

    Mike, you’re link is exactly what I spoke to. They did have WMDs and UN weapons inspectors logged them. They DID NOT have them when we liberated their country, but they were required to prove that to the UN and they did not.

  39. Long Memory says:

    So we’re back to it: We sent Americans off to die — excuse me, to liberate “their” country — to prove that they didn’t have WMDs. You people obviously believe two wrongs make a right. Tell that to Steve’s who’s son is in harm’s way. Nevermind that the Iraqis don’t see us as liberators.

    Also, go back see what the UN weapons inspectors did after the first Gulf War. They logged the weapons and destroyed them. The reason they didn’t bother to destroy everything was that the toxic stuff biodegrades after a period of time to the point of unreliability and uselessness. The weapons inspectors told us that, but it wasn’t good enough. So more than 4,000 Americans have died and more than 30,000 have been wounded, and y’all have yet to admit you were wrong or that the war was a fail accompli for the Bushes.

  40. Dubious Brother says:

    Long memory not so good –
    After Sadam invaded Kuwait in a move that could have led to an invasion of Saudi Arabia, etc. if successful, the USA had to go in and stop him. You are right, we should have taken him out then along with his Red
    Brigade but if you will recall, Bush I left that up to the Kurds and the Shiites who ended up getting slaughtered when we would not help after encouraging them in the first place. Is it no wonder that it has been difficult getting the Iraqis to believe that we were there to help? There was a list of 18 or so reasons that we invaded Iraq of which WMD’s was only one.
    Bush II has been blamed for the economic problems that have clearly grown from the seeds planted as far back as Carter and fertilized by Clinton and scandalized by the Pelosi mob.
    The market just had its best week since 1974. Does Bush get the credit for that or is that the result of Pelosi and her American Samoa economic incentives?

  41. Spamboy says:

    Wick, start your own charter airline and ferry around the reporters kicked off Obama’s and McCain’s planes.

  42. IreneAdler says:

    “Our mouths and nostrils are tiny portals through which we breathe.”

    Marty, your tenacious grasp of the obvious never fails to amaze.

  43. Phil Lester says:

    @IreneAdler, you would not be so amazed if you actually bothered to read his whole comment, and the one he was responding to — ang’s right above. Some of the writing on this blog might be more challenging than what you are accustomed to in the National Enquirer, but please try to expend the effort for all of our sakes.