A Liberal Marines Progressive Perspective

Marines are defenders of the republic and the Constitution. That is our oath, that is our purpose, that is our calling. Many are Democrats. This is the journal of one such Marine. This leatherneck's progressive perspective is as follows...

My Photo
Location: Southwest, United States

U.S. Marine,0300 MOS,eight years in,honorably discharged,college-educated. To all the damned trolls, you better believe there are liberal Marines. Read "War Is A Racket" by 2-time Medal of Honor recipient Maj.Gen.S.D.Butler, plus Lewis B. Puller, Jr.'s "Fortunate Son" and maybe then you'll understand. Semper Fi!

Play M.L.1775 Theme Song

Tuesday, May 17, 2005

The Day of Reckoning: Villaraigosa and the Progressive Movement's March to Victory Posted by Hello
Good morning to all. Got a late start this morning, so I'm going to post and get out of here. Well, today is the day...the run-off in Los Angeles that will determine the next mayor of that great city (the second largest city in the country). The race is between the incumbent, James K. Hahn, versus Antonio Villaraigosa (http://www.antonio2005.com/), the Progressive favorite. After trouncing the field on 8 March 2005, Mr. Villaraigosa (in an upset of significant proportions, http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2005/03/09/state/n044705S54.DTL) brilliantly gained the majority vote and never looked back. With Mr. Villaraigosa ahead in the polls, the race is looking like it is his to win or lose (http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0511/p01s01-uspo.html). Yes, we have finally arrived at the "battle royale" between these two, municipal behemoths to determine the course and direction of America's second largest city. This is Mr. Villaraigosa's second attempt at securing the L.A. "top job"(http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4554873.stm) and it is certainly looking more and more like the second time is going to be the charm, at least in Mr. Villaraigosa's case. As an historical footnote, if and when Mr. Villaraigosa wins tonight, he will be the first Hispanic mayor of Los Angeles in 133 years, since Cristobal Aguilar (http://www.latinola.com/story.php?story=2092) held the job way back in 1872 (http://www.nbc4.tv/politics/4497397/detail.html); and if you ask me, it's about time and long over-due. Yes, yes I know the 2005 L.A. mayoral race is Democrat against Democrat (which is pretty refreshing, to be honest about it) with the contenders for the office being (again) Democrats Antonio Villaraigosa and James K. Hahn. However, Antonio Villaraigosa is the only candidate (in my opinion) that is not only talking about building bridges but has already demonstrated, in real life and in real terms, the hands-on experience of building bridges between multiple communities...and as far as this devildog is concerned, that's what it is all about. All the pretense and horses**t can go out the window...it's simply all about working people pulling together, cutting through the wedge issues and forming alliances that will allow them to lead better lives. That's what Villaraigosa is talking about and (more importantly) that's what he's been talking about his entire political career, based on what I've read on the man (http://www.canyon-news.com/artman/publish/article_2557.php ). I'm really pulling for him and hoping that he will win today, and win decisively (no "photo finishes", although we'll take victory any way we can get it) which will mean winning by a landslide (or close to a landslide; either way, such a victory will certainly mean a mandate). Today's results will be found at the following link, http://cityclerk.lacity.org/clk/election/Results.htm. In closing, I want to say good luck Mr. Villaraigosa, your victory will resonate and resound far outside of the city limits of Los Angeles and the surrounding Los Angeles area; in fact, a victory will positively impact millions of good people hungry for real inspiration and real leadership in this time where both are (due, in large part, to the "leaderless-ship" exhibited by the current office-holders in the White House) noticeably and regrettably absent from the American political landscape. Semper Fidelis.


Blogger idiotx said...

it's nice to see you avoiding the slanderous report by Newsweek that has so far gotten 15 killed, put the US work in Afghanistan (thats the campaign you liberals supposedly support) in jepordy, and since been retracted. The fact you pay it no mention, makes it clear to me you support the propaganda that gives the Bush admin a black eye, all the while it does even more harm to your brothers in arms. Typical liberal stance, but shameful for a soldier. Newsweeks effectively dealt a blow to US forces that the Taliban only dreams of. While the bad actors in that area cheer and riot, liberals like yourself remain silent. Your in depth analysis of stories shows you have the means and insight to look into things, but I guess you only like things that support the opposition. opposition to US victory that is. The rioters in Afghanistan thank you. Al Jazeera thanks you. Terrorists all over the world thank you.

11:22 AM  
Blogger DBK said...

Idiotx--you definitely are.

Only a true idiot would place the blame for those riots on the Newsweek article when there is no evidence that it had anything to do with those riots. Meanwhile there is some general (wish I had my cites but I don't have the time right now) who says the riots had nothing to do with Newsweek.

Such a lotof bullshit you mindless neo-cons throw around. How about taking responsibility for the deaths of 1600 American men and women in Iraq for a pack of lies. Got ONE WMD?

Nope. Not one.

How about 15,000 American men and women wounded and injured, many of them permanently. Got ONE WMD?

Nope. Not one.

What blows my mind about you neo-con assholes is what a completely weak and sissified crowd of assholes you really are. The US lost two buildings and 3000 people in 2001, a terrible tragedy, but not even close to what a few hours in Dresden did sixty years ago. As a result, you and your ilk have THROWN AWAY THE CONSTITUTION AND MURDERED TENS OF THOUSANDS AND ALLOWED HALLIBURTON AND OTHERS TO ACCOMPLISH MASSIVE THEFT AND BANKRUPT THE COUNTRY.

Bunch of useless, brainless, pussies is what you are. Yeah, blame fucking Newsweek. That'll cover your useless, pussified, shit-for-brains asses.

8:14 AM  
Blogger DBK said...

Oh, idiotx, not to call you a brain dead dumbfuck or anything (because I'll let others make that judgement about you for themselves, and I wouldn't want to "slander" you by describing you accurately), but here's the cite I was talking about, in the Voice of America. VOA, in case you are unfamiliar with it, is funded by the US government and is a sort of official news organ of the US government. In the article, General Myers of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is quoted saying that General Eichenberry, the US commander in Afghanistan, says that the riots in Afghanistan weren't about the Newsweek article.

Let me know when you need help pulling your head out of your butt again, idiotx. I'm always happy to help the mentally deficient obtain actual facts to refute their asinine assertions.

9:33 AM  
Blogger idiotx said...

There is no end to what a clueless douche you are.All the dirty names yo call, as you quote drivel and garbage to back your spineless claims of no link. The Joiint Chiefs head Gem Meyers says what I would say. the bad actors dont need newsweek to kill and slaughter, they do that anyway. What newsweek did, as does most of the major leftist tomes, dailys, and weeklys is give the bad actors and there propaganda mouthpiece Al Jazerra is plenty of gas to pour on the fire. That same fire that gets soldiers killed. Not to mention the average smoes that happen to be walking down the street when the newsweek inspired riot takes off. Like I keep saying to pussies like you, in 3 years if god for bid hillary takes over, it will be a riot watching a smarmy folks like you get behind the war. Cuz it wont be over. It started long before BushI or Clinton I, and wont be over anytime soon. So watching you get on top of the bandwagon cuz its got a donkey in the druvers seat says it all. You were a quiet churchmouse when Clinton sent cruise missles on a world tour. An to use a leftist term to describe Bill Clintons illegal non-un sanctioned war in Bosnia that one time global police hawks turned leftwing pussies like you who used to chide all the non-supporters of that action. Once again, using the VOA, or Michael Morre, or CBS, is not credible seeing them crash and burn under any scrutiny. As with you they generally respond with name calling. So if a left leaning pussy calls me a brain dead dumbfuck, that must mean I made a good point. So Ill keep being dumb you keep being scared and in 3 years we can switch roles. By the way neo-con is a nice way for you to be a jew hater. Funny neo-cons all happen to be conservative jews. I guess its ok to hate them as long as they are conservatives. Kinda like uncle-toms if they are black. Typical leftwing drivel. And as usual when a leftwing pussy gets tired of wiping his dirty ass with the constitution he wants to drape it around himself and declare his allegiance to it. Its almost over. 3 more years and you can start telling us why its now ok to bomb the middle east when Hill is doing it.

1:04 PM  
Blogger DBK said...

Nitwit, General Eichenberry said that the Newsweek story had "nothing to do with" the riots.

Again, sorry if the facts get in the way of your ignorant rants, but facts have a way of doing that. You can call the words of General Eichenberry "drivel" if you like. I think he's in a better position to say what the facts are than you, you brave 101st Fighting Keyboarder, you.

And like a clueless ass, you continue to blame soldier deaths on the people reporting what is going onrather than President Horse Fluffer and his co-conspirators, who started a war to help them steal. That's so stupid I hardly know where to begin. And you support that war because you are a big fat pussy who got so scared by the tragedy of 9/11 that you couldn't think straight about it.

Or maybe you never could think straight. That does seem like a reasonable assumption given the "quality" of your rhetoric.

And yeah, I called you a pussy. What are you doing here, supporting the war, and not in Iraq, working in it?

Interesting how I presented facts and sources to refute you, but you get all het up about what I said, spout a lot of mindless invective, and don't provide one single fact in support of your arguments.

There's a reason for that. The facts don't support you.

Anyway, VOA, the Star Tribune, and a bunch of other news organizations reported General Eichenberry's words. Oh, and I like how you lump VOA with Michael Moore and CBS. Do you know who publishes VOA?

The US government, you dumbfuck. I haven't heard the VOA conflated with Michael Moore and CBS before, but then only an idiot would do that. Hey, that's you, isn't it?

And we get the mindless Hillary Clinton rant too, of course, and Bill Clinton on top of it. I'm surprised you didn't dump on General Wes Clark too, but maybe now that I mentioned him, you'll do that too.

As for the "Jew hater" crack, that stupid meme about neo-con=anti-semitism was floated and refuted long ago. Guess what, monkey-boy? I'm a Jew! And never been ashamed of it and never had any hatred towards myself or other Jews. But keep being an idiot, idiotx. You do it well.

Now, if you can ever provide a single factual remark or anything worthy of discussion I would love to see it. So far you just spout the same, tired, and kind of moronic finger-pointing at, of all people, the Clintons. That is sad, actually.

If you want to talk about Bill Clinton, we can some time. We can talk about the Clinton administration warning the Horse Fluffer administration about terrorism and being ignored. We can then transition to a memo stating "Bin Laden Determined to Attack in the US", which was viewed as not nearly as important as missile defense.

See, I deal in facts, Zippy. Try doing it yourself. You might not seem nearly as stupid next time.

Geez, that was too easy.

1:31 PM  
Blogger idiotx said...

your a joke and the fact your a jew is beside the point. the fact you denegrate jews a bit more conservative than you by demonizing them with the moniker neo-con, means maybe your a self hating jew. i wouldnt know. like i said i agree with the generals, the perpetrators of the riots and bombings don't need newsweek for inspiration. they do it freely on their own. what i added was newsweek was merely a convenient tub of gas for al jazeera to throw in the fire. "the fire" being the conflict people like you dont support. so when newsweek empowers the enemy, and wonks like you start gushing, it just deserves to be called out. the Clinton warning is funny, you cry that george bush didnt start putting the boot to the arabs throat pre-911 because of a clinton admin warning, yet when an attack happens and the boot is being put down you don't support that. i doubt seriously if shortly after bush became president he enacted the patriot act, started profiling and detaining arabs, specifically if he detained 19 arabs who were mostly legal and at worst overstayed visas, bombed afghanistan, you thoughtful leftists would be supporting that either. as a matter of fact you would be foaming with ACLU the poor muhammed atta was inocent and being persecuted by nazi bush. putting in jail for nothing. terrorism? prove it the ACLU would say while you foamed and marched. calling bush hitler for bombing the benevolant taliban. i feel you will eventually support the war. when it benefits you to support it you will. And not just if it benefits you as an american but as a democrat (with a little "D")party member. if the war doesnt return power and credibility to your failed party, blind and ignorant you remai even with all your so-called facts. a true credit to the circles you run with. a true credit.

2:14 PM  
Blogger DBK said...

I'll make this simple and short. I have never referred to Jews as "neo-cons". You are, therefore, demonstrably wrong. And stupid, but that's beside the point.

I refer to Bush, Cheney, Rice, et al. as "neo-cons", none of whom are Jews. You are, therefore, demonstrably wrong. And still stupid, but we knew that already.

The tactic of yelling "anti-semite" to smear me just because you've already made a fool of yourself and have no other recourse is a failure. And you are stupid, but that's not the point.

On a second front, your attempt to run from your own words is likewise a failure. Your words remain, unaltered, in the text above. I'll remind you of them.

"it's nice to see you avoiding the slanderous report by Newsweek that has so far gotten 15 killed, put the US work in Afghanistan (thats the campaign you liberals supposedly support) in jepordy, and since been retracted."

Now you claim "what i added was newsweek was merely a convenient tub of gas for al jazeera to throw in the fire."

You didn't "add" that. That was your opening statement. You stated, in no uncertain terms, that Newsweek was responsible for the riots in Afghanistan and for jeopardizing "the US work in Afghanistan." By the way, smart guy, are you aware that the US troop level in Afghanistan is around 18,000 and there are about 8,900 troops from other NATO countries? The current estimate is that about 80% of the country is no longer under any coalition control. Kabul is the only part of the coutnry that is actually under coalition control. The rest is controlled by warlords and Taliban.

The reason things are bad in Afghanistan is that the neo-cons pulled the troops from Afghanistan to fight the unnecessary and disastrous war in Iraq.

Anyone with half a brain understands that.

Which means you probably don't understand it.

You really are pretty dumb. I said that Clinton warned Bush's incoming team that terrorists were a big threat and should be a priority. You, with your amazingly poor reading comprehension, take that as "put the boot to the arabs throat". Now, you aren't very bright, so I'll make everythign as simple as possible for you. I have never supported the misnamed "Patriot Act". I kind of like America. I'm find of the Constitution. I also think Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson were smarter than any and all of the Bush administration, and that either of them is still smarter than Bush at this very moment. So I kind of prefer to keep the Constitution intact rather than tear it to shreds with the disastrous and useless "Patriot Act". But I'll tell you what, you have free rein to name one instance in which this act you seem to like so much has led to the arrest and conviction of a single terrorist.

Guess what, dumbass? Clinton's administration stopped two terrorist attacks without the Patriot Act. President Horse Fluffer? It was on HIS watch that 9/11 happened. It was on HIS watch that the anthrx mailings happened, too, but you never hear anything about that, do you. And the people behind 9/11? Bin Laden is still free. The people who mailed the anthrax letters? Never been caught. When the WTC was bombed on Clinton's watch in '95, they caught the people responsible.

The Horse Fluffer's administration is a complete failure. So they, like you, try to blame Newsweek for their failures. There's nobody to blame but themselves, though. Don't know whty you are so anxious to excuse them.

Well, I have a guess as to why. I chalk it up to stupidity.

So, why, by the way, if you're so suppotive of the Iraq fiasco, are you still ehre? Why aren't you there, brave chickenhawk? Why haven't you enlisted?

7:44 PM  
Blogger idiotx said...

you are such the talker. with all your name calling and red faced rants i bet you sound really smart to your friends. your probably the one they all call for a learned opinion. ill let your blood pressure decrease, and give your wife or boyfriend a respite from the beatings. what a savage. somewhere in the middle of your semi-lucid screed you made the remark that "anyone with half a brain would know the facts as you report them" speaking of troop movements from Afghan. to Iraq. I disagree vehemently with your conclusion but agree wholeheartedly that fools like you with half a brain and an axe to grind would support your analysis of troop levels being the expert you obviously are. If troop levels are so low then maybe you and your "Pro US military" leftist drooler friend ought to be out there helping recruitment. to get those numbers up in the afghan campaign you know? thats the war you guys support? and you know as well as me the term neo con was used primarily to describe the people in the admin, and in the think tanks (like richard perle(jew) bill krystal(jew)) that had "different" ideas about foreign policy than the clintonistas and a decidedly PRO israeli stance. the fact that skeeves like you want to start calling everyone on the other side neo con is just plain cute. i see you with your red face, spittle flying from your lips, as you repeat the headline from the new york time, while at the same repeating noam chomsky to prove to the world you are as smart as you tell yourself. you and chomsky have more in comman than i bet you care to believe. for all the crying about how important dissent is, and differing opinions are, you leftists sure like to scream and cry, call names and threaten and demean anyone you cannot bowl over with your half truths, and analysis bandied about as cold fact. like i keep saying 3 years and you can start supporting the war. then (for you,god willing,its a dem who wins!!)you can let party politics get out of the way of you supporting your country. be a proud hater frog dong. make us proud.

PS: your most rediculous statement was in the middle of you helping bill write his legacy as it pertains to TERRORISM. you stated "When the WTC was bombed on Clinton's watch in '95, they caught the people responsible." really? that old ass man? yeah im sure that old bastard sat in front of a bunch youg bastards and told them to do it. sure. and they caught the old man. typical. arrest an old man and decry "we won!". thats the sameold man terrorist that the proud leftist lawyer was convicted for trying to help him relay messages. remember that? you leftists. so happy a terrorist is arrested then squall and kick and scream to get him released. i guess if we had killed bin laden day 1 in afghanistan we could have done a frog dong and grabbed our pom poms and screamed like a twelve year old girl. WE WON!!! its your (your: meaning leftist politicians/policy makers) sadly inept view of the world that will continue to force people to vote for anyone but a leftist in any election that matters. funny how the congress went right when clinton took over, and went more right when bush took over and you leftists came out of the closet finally. and scared even more folks right. right figuratively and politically. keep being you donger. Disasterous and useless patriot act:if you catch a guy before he commits an act of terror is he a terrorist? all i know is alot of arab muslim "visa dodgers" were scooped up and havent seen the light of day since thanks to the patriot act. so i need not one conviction. i just like the lack of terrorist acts. thats good for my family right now. if something changes, unlike you i am flexible.

9:24 PM  
Blogger DBK said...

As usual, you have no facts and just invective on your side. By the way, Bin Laden isn't so young anymore either, but he's still free.

Look, you don't know what you're talking about. That much is clear from your sad little arguments.

Again, your words are that "all you know is". Actually, "scooping up" illegal immigrants doesn't mean very much at all. There has been not one single conviction from the unconstitutional "Partiot" Act.

Yeah. All you know. In other words, you don't have a fact, you don't have any information, and you try, badly, to mock me for knowing some facts. That's just sad.

7:30 PM  
Blogger idiotx said...

Again douche, repeating of the nightly news, repeating the nation, the new republic, washington post, new york times, cnbc,msnbc, fine unbiased leaders like ted kennedy, nancy pelosi, and calling it all undeniable fact is unremakably typical of learned types like yourself. i bet you got yourself a kollege de gree. i know, i guarantee, as much as you claim and i bet at the end of the day a tad more. because what i claim "to know" comes from the same type of source you get yours from. that type being second hand from tv,book,lecture, or collum. again douche, the mere fact you take some secondhand info and bandy it about as fact STILL does not make it fact. reading some op ed and then coming on to the net and repeating it as a firsthand account no matter how much it makes your head swell, STILL does not make it a fact. unless you are a policy maker or, something close to it you are absolutely no further along than i am. actually a step or two behind. i research your angles in earnest, you merely spew. denegrate, denounce, and threaten is all a liberal can do. your aguments are specious and routinely overwhelmingly defeated at the ballot box. although i call them specious i should say that they sound real real good when you spew them. good enough to make a vegan, peta loving, aclu supporting, hermaphrodite say amen, and tell you how smart you are. enjoy.

8:40 PM  
Blogger superlong said...

Cool site on big pussy lip Check out my Penis Enlargement

3:49 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home