Intermarkets' Privacy Policy
Support


Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!


Contact
Ace:
aceofspadeshq at gee mail.com
Buck:
buck.throckmorton at protonmail.com
CBD:
cbd at cutjibnewsletter.com
joe mannix:
mannix2024 at proton.me
MisHum:
petmorons at gee mail.com
J.J. Sefton:
sefton at cutjibnewsletter.com


Recent Entries
Absent Friends
Captain Whitebread 2026
Jon Ekdahl 2026
Jay Guevara 2025
Jim Sunk New Dawn 2025
Jewells45 2025
Bandersnatch 2024
GnuBreed 2024
Captain Hate 2023
moon_over_vermont 2023
westminsterdogshow 2023
Ann Wilson(Empire1) 2022
Dave In Texas 2022
Jesse in D.C. 2022
OregonMuse 2022
redc1c4 2021
Tami 2021
Chavez the Hugo 2020
Ibguy 2020
Rickl 2019
Joffen 2014
AoSHQ Writers Group
A site for members of the Horde to post their stories seeking beta readers, editing help, brainstorming, and story ideas. Also to share links to potential publishing outlets, writing help sites, and videos posting tips to get published. Contact OrangeEnt for info:
maildrop62 at proton dot me
Cutting The Cord And Email Security
Moron Meet-Ups

Texas MoMe 2026: 10/16/2026-10/17/2026 Corsicana,TX
Contact Ben Had for info





















« Refuting Objections To Coercive Interrogations | Main | Woe Canada »
November 29, 2005

Liberals Pledge: We'll "Connect The Dots" The Moment After An Attack Occurs

Good piece from Lorie Byrd about Democrats who say, with some degree of pride, that they never acted to remove Saddam Hussein despite believing him to be a threat.

As Lorie says, it's a simple question. All intelligence is, by its nature, vague, fragmentary, and open to multiple interpretations. After 9/11, should our instinct be to act upon worrisome but incomplete information, or to refrain from acting?

Before 9/11, the nation did the former. And the Democratic Party wants to continue that policy. Because, you know, that worked so beautifully for us during the 80's, 90's, and early 00's.


The Democratic Party

Our national security policy is taking the old "wait and see" attitude. After all, what's the worse that could happen?



posted by Ace at 05:14 PM
Comments



A responsible leader can not wait and see anymore...
Before the invention of the airplane...
you could wait, cuz it took weeks to get troops to the next country...
Before the creation of the atomic bomb...
you could wait, cuz it took lots of airplanes to destory a city...

Now, a whole city could be gone in a flash...

Since the entire world was convinced that Saddam was a threat with his WMD...
responsible leaders acted.

Posted by: Marvin on November 29, 2005 05:38 PM

But...but...but...the sanctions were working. We just needed more time for the inspectors. There were no WMD. BUSH LIED!! Mother Sheehan is GOD!!

Posted by: rls on November 29, 2005 06:10 PM

You mean GODDESS.

Hater!

Posted by: Andrea Harris on November 29, 2005 07:29 PM

Yeah, if there's an attack, they'll connect the dots. They'll form a non-partisan commission to connect the dots between the attack and a republican tax cut or something like that.

Posted by: SJKevin on November 29, 2005 07:30 PM

The only time they want action to be taken to stop an attack beforehand is after its happened..... the only action they want done to stop the attack (after its happened) just happens to be exactly what is needed (and no more) .

Posted by: Wallcloud on November 29, 2005 11:29 PM

The scumbag Dems and Moveon .org have commited their latest fraud in ad that they claim "they support the Troops" . Bull shit the lying traitors photoshopped a picture of british soldiers to look like US soldiers . Then added us style fatigues to a british soldier wearting shorts. See for yourself. When are we going to slit the troat of the lying liberal media?? And the treasonous Dimocraps. They don't run this country they just want to destroy it . Screw them!!

http://gopandcollege.blogspot.com/2005/11/eyes-of-hawk.html

Posted by: L.A. ex-dem on November 30, 2005 08:34 AM

This is nothing but a straw man argument. Weak. Guess this article was just an excuse for you conservative jerkoffs to have another 'agree-a-thon' about whatever nonsense it is that you so desperately need to hear each other confirm/conform. What a bunch of wankers. This site and this article is nothing but a wankoff for extremists. LOL at pathetic losers that buy into such tripe. You have no bearing on the real world. : )

Posted by: ErrinF on November 30, 2005 06:11 PM

This is nothing but a straw man argument. Weak. Guess this article was just an excuse for you conservative jerkoffs to have another 'agree-a-thon' about whatever nonsense it is that you so desperately need to hear each other confirm/conform. What a bunch of wankers. This site and this article is nothing but a wankoff for extremists. LOL at pathetic losers that buy into such tripe. You have no bearing on the real world. : )

This deserves a proper response.

Fuck you.

Posted by: Edward R. Murrow on November 30, 2005 06:14 PM
LOL at pathetic losers that buy into such tripe.

Wow. Can we analyze this unique stlye of writing? I have never seen "LOL" used in such a manner. ErrinF has done something that most writers only dream about -- put their voices inside the reader's head. I actually heard ErrinF laughing out loud. It sounded like Mwahahaha Mwaaaaahahahaha
Mwaaaaaaahhahahhahahaha Ha!

Hey Errinf, did you watch President Bush's speech on television today? It was great, huh?

Posted by: Bart on November 30, 2005 06:29 PM

ErrinF's vulgarity above is an absolute perfect illustration of liberal intellect and progressive debating skills.

One side reasons; the other side sounds like young ErrinF.

His post should not anger you - it should make you smile. It is the ultimate proof that poor ErrinF is losing .... and knows it.

As long as liberals are spewing their infantile hate .... I know something is right in the world. When they get quiet or start sounding rational -- that's when I'll worry.

Thanks, ErrinF -- for reminding us all of the obvious truth. Please post again soon, okay?

Posted by: Professor Blather on November 30, 2005 06:52 PM

You have no bearing on the real world.

Well, aside from leading the free world, packing Congress with our guys, directing a free market economy to great new heights, and winning, winning, winning every. single. time.

Yeah, other than that we're a bunch of losers.

We just come here to bolster our low self esteem. Which we got from all the winning.

Posted by: lauraw on November 30, 2005 08:18 PM

That was beautiful.

We'll take the old tried and tested "wait and see approach."

Yeah, that's the ticket.

These guys are a trip, aren't they.

Posted by: Dan on November 30, 2005 10:24 PM

Laura W.

Liked that brief post too.

Hey, all you libs, we're getting real tired of winning so often, so why don't you libs do something about it. I mean it gets awful tiresome having to win that much.

Nixon won over 40 states, Reagan won first 44, then followed that up by taking 49. GHWB too, got over 40 states.

And as for GW, well he is the first guy to get a genuine majority of the vote since your guy Carter eeked one out way back in '76, when he had the advantages of Watergate, the Nixon pardon and the dreadful aftermath of 'Nam and the ongoing Culture wars.

That's why the Dems need to hightail it to the Courts. That's the only place they can be sure they will find a receptive ear.

Posted by: Dan on November 30, 2005 10:29 PM

I'll concede that ErrinF's post didn't contain much reasoning. But this post just accentuates what hypocrisy can be found on this board:
"As long as liberals are spewing their infantile hate .... I know something is right in the world."

Might I point out this post from a little earlier?
"When are we going to slit the troat of the lying liberal media?? And the treasonous Dimocraps."

I think ErrinF's post kind of pales in comparison, don't you? It's rare that I see someone post a liberal viewpoint here without being met by resoponses ranging from threats of violence to plain old hateful invective.

And lauraw, is "we won, we won," all you really have to offer? Yes, you guys are in control. Losing the popular vote in 2000, then winning by one of the smallest margins in history in 2004 hardly means the whole world has become Republican, especially when you consider that the only thing that kept the Republicans from a net loss of seats in the last election was Tom DeLay's gerrymandering. I'm not one to predict victory with still a year to go until the elections, so let's just say enjoy it while it lasts. The pendulum swings both ways.

Posted by: Chris on December 1, 2005 12:22 AM

Chris, you have nothing to offer this forum except rebuke for the commenters. All your comments are half scolding and half warning of bad things to come to the evil Republicans.

When Lauraw is serious, she can debate you into the ground. But since Lauraw has something you lack, a sense of humor and a personality, she doesn't need to waste her time with people like ErrinF who got exactly the response that was warranted.

Chris, I tried to explain this to the asshole once and I'll try it again with you, when commenters make sincere comments, agreeing or disagreeing, they will responded to in kind at AoS.

Conversely, if a commenter is a rude prick or a nasty troll, they shall be treated as such.

BTW, and I mean this sincerely, it is rather foolish trying to belittle the wins from the last two elections. If the shoe was on the other foot, you'd think the same thing -- a win is a win.

Posted by: Bart on December 1, 2005 12:43 AM

I think ErrinF's post kind of pales in comparison, don't you? It's rare that I see someone post a liberal viewpoint here without being met by resoponses ranging from threats of violence to plain old hateful invective.

Well, excuse us. When you all start making actual points instead of repeating the same tired soundbites over and over again, maybe we'll start to take your "arguments" seriously.

Until then, mockery and invective are what a lot of liberals have given for the last five years, and it's what they're going to get from us in return.

Posted by: Edward R. Murrow on December 1, 2005 08:44 AM

Why don't you people just admit it? You're idea of an intelligent post is one that agrees with everything you say. It's amazing that not one liberal poster rises to your lofty standards. There's points being made on both sides. If there are certain arguments that I make regarding the Plame outing, or the war in Iraq, or other issues, do you really expect them to be totally unique from the points any other poster has ever made? Dismissing them as "talking points" is just a weak way to avoid having to answer them. I'm sure many of my posts can be argued against, but I notice that most of the responses to my posts contain no refutations of my arguments, but plenty of ad hominem attacks. I post at a few right wing blogs because I like the debate and I like to hear what people who think differently than me have to say, and I can say that this is the biggest circle jerk I've ever seen. You guys spend so much time patting yourselves on the back and telling each othe how clever you are that you can't see that your arguments aren't particularly original, either. Your idea of originality is thinking of different ways to tell me that I'm a baby, for Christ's sake. That's what passes for lauraw's "humor."

It's inevitable that every thread will have one of you guys saying "But Bush lied!" or "Rove did it" or some other pithy comment that's supposed to pass as satire. Do you realize how many dozens of times I've seen similar posts in the relatively short time I've been coming here? And how many times I've seen references to how brilliant the regulars are?

A telling point was when personal information about Tubino was posted. I'm not trying to dredge up an old issue. Rather, what I found interesting was that Ace referred to Tubino as a troll. Fine, you don't like his points and don't think he argues honestly. But he does post links he's researched, and returns to threads to counter arguments. It appears the only thing that qualifies him as a troll is that he's from the other side of the aisle. Do ytou even know what a troll is? Perhaps he should have his throat slit.

Posted by: on December 1, 2005 10:42 PM

A telling point was when personal information about Tubino was posted.

Perhaps you mean a "telling moment."
No personal information about the troll was posted, only a link to a website on the WWW, a city, and an occupation. I'm sure you'll argue that that is personal.

Ace referred to Tubino as a troll.

Ace is accurate with his designation.

[Tubino] does post links he's researched,

That's what makes him a troll. He spams the site with links to other liberal sites and blogs. It doesn't help his argument like you say, it makes him look like an ass.

Do ytou even know what a troll is?
Yes, a troll is someone like Tubino. We've covered that already.

Perhaps he should have his throat slit.

Well, he is a dispicable person. His gross enthusiasm to demoralize the war effort at every turn that American soldiers are dying for is reprehensible. But I'll leave the throat slitting of unarmed, peace-niks, the Islamofascists.

Your entire post is a clear indication of your jealously and of someone with a lot of spare time on his hands. Yes, it's true that we are by and large a happy who like each other. Unoriginal? Nah, you know that's not true or you wouldn't be so upset that you've been rejected.

Take a long hard look in the mirror some time and ask yourself if this site sucks so much, why waste your time with us dim bulbs?

Chances are you either Tubino or Chris.
You know the deal. You can't stomp into a site with the opposite ideology, run your mouth, drop links, try to piss on corn flakes and then feign indignation with complaints of lousy treatment.

I can't imagine me going to the DU or Atrios and telling everyone there how wrong they are, and how stupid they are, and then complain that I wasn't liked or treated well.


Posted by: on December 1, 2005 11:13 PM

I appoint Mr. Fitzgerald to investigate the Toobeano leak case.

Posted by: George W Boosh on December 1, 2005 11:23 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?








Now Available!
The Deplorable Gourmet
A Horde-sourced Cookbook
[All profits go to charity]
Top Headlines
Funniest thing I've read about the Virginia mess. Back when they were hustling the referendum through the assembly both Senators, Warner and Kaine, advised them to go slow and play by the rules. Louise Lucas said she respected them but didn't need advice from the "cuck chair" in the corner. The gerrymandering was overturned and Louise is heading for the big house. Edward G. Robinson voice "where's your cuck now?"
Posted by: Smell the Glove

I posted his post on twitter and it's gotten 25K views so far. Thanks, Smell the Glove
Chris
@chriswithans

aaahahaa.jpg


"Ahhhhh ahh I put my career on the line for Louise Lucas and Jay Jones thinking they'd vault me into presidential contention and we ended up costing Democrats 20 House seats and unleashing a Reverse Dobbs ahhhhh ahhh"
Forgotten 80s Mystery Click That Sums Up the Democrat Communist Party Today
Something is wrong as I hold you near
Somebody else holds your heart, yeah
You turn to me with your icy tears
And then it's raining, feels like it's raining
"It's f**king f**ked."
-- reportedly a genuine comment offered by a "senior Labour source"
Correction: I wrote that Labour is losing 88% (now 87%) of the seats it is "defending." I think that's wrong. The right way to say it is the seats they are contesting -- that is, they don't necessarily already hold these seats, but they have put up a candidate to run for the seat. It's still very bad but not as bad as losing 87% of the seats they already held.
Basil the Great
@BasilTheGreat

🚨ED MILIBAND [a Minister in Starmer's government] SAYS KEIR STARMER WILL RESIGN AS PRIME MINISTER

He has reportedly reassured Labour MP's that Starmer will be resigning following the disastrous results tonight

It's over
"The end of the two party system in the UK" as first the Fake Conservatives and now Labour chooses political suicide rather than simply STOPPING THE INVASION
Incidentally, the only reason this didn't already happen in the US is because of the Very Bad Orange Man (who is right on 85% of all policy calls and extremely, existentially right on 15% of them)
No political party that is NOT also a doomsday religious cult would EVER choose a cataclysmic loss -- and possible extinction as a party -- to support a toxically unpopular favoritism of NON-CITIZEN ILLEGAL MIGRANTS over actual citizen voters.

Only a cult does this.
Now they've lost 84%.
Annunziata Rees-Mogg
@zatzi
If this continues Labour loses 2,148 seats tonight.

That is much worse than the worst case predictions I’ve seen.

Cataclysmic

Update: They've now lost 88% of the seats they're defending. As I mentioned earlier, I think I heard that London will not bail them out, as many of those Labour seats will probably flip to "Muslim Independent" or Green. Detroit's 5am vote will not save them.
Yup, Labour is losing 80% of its seats...
The British Patriot
@TheBritLad

🚨 BREAKING: Labour have lost 80% of all seats contested as of 2:25 AM.<
br> If this continues, Keir Starmer will be out of office next week.

Reform has surged and projected to pick up between 1700-2100 seats.


Wow, up to 1700-2100 seats. It's not incredible that this is happening. It's incredible that the Davos crowd is so absolutely determined to privilege Muslim "migrants" over the actual native population who elects them, no matter how loudly the natives scream that they want to be prioritized, that they will gladly self-extinguish as a party rather than simply representing the interests of their own voters. Astonishing.
Remember, when they call other people "cultists" -- they are the ones so imprisoned in their social reinforcement and discipline bubbles that they will choose political death rather than dare upset the Karen Enforcement Officers of their cult.
Update: Now they've lost 83% of the seats they were defending.
(((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges

Reform are basically wiping Labour out in the North. It's not a defeat. It's not even a rout. Labour are simply ceasing to exist.


Nick Lowles
@lowles_nick

Tonight’s results are calamitous for Labour. Not just for Keir Starmer's leadership, but for the very future of the party
STARMERGEDDON: In early returns, Reform gains 135 seats, Labour loses 90, the Fake Conservatives lose 36 (and I didn't even know they could fall any further), the Lib Dems lose 4, and the Greens gain 6. Note that the only other party gaining seats is the Greens and they're only gaining a handful of seats.
Update: Reform now up 145, Labour down 98.
Labour projected to lose Wales -- where they've ruled for 27 years.
Fulton County Georgia just discovered 400 boxes of ballots for Labour
Update: REF +156, LAB -107, CON -45
Brutal: In four out of five council seats where Labour is defending, they've lost. 80%.
I'm sure it's not this simple, but Reform is straight taking Labour's and the "Conservatives'" seats. They've lost almost exactly what Reform gained. If understand this right (and warning, I probably don't), all of London's council seats are up for election, and Labour might lose hugely there, as their old voters abandon them for Reform, Muslim Indenpendents, and the Greens.
REF +190, LAB -134, CON -56.
Updates on the Labour collapse in council elections -- which wags are calling #Starmergeddon -- from Beege Welborne. There are about 5000 seats up for grabs, Labour is expected to lose 1,800, Reform will probably gain 1,580, up from... zero. So this would be more than that.
People claim that while Labour has adopted the Sharia Agenda to appeal to the million Muslims it allowed to migrate to the country, those voters are ditching Labour to vote for the Muslim Independent Party or the Greens. Delicious. This shadenfreude is going straight to my thighs.
Oh, and if Starmer loses about as badly as expected, Labour will toss him out of a window Braveheart style and replace him. He will announce he is resigning to spend more time with his Gay Ukrainian Male Prostitutes.
Media bias and senationalism are as old as, well, the media:
spidermanthreatormenace.jpg

That was written by Denny O'Neill and illustrated by, get this, Frank Miller. Editor to the Stars Jim Shooter was in charge at the time.
I always thought the gag was original to the comic book, but in fact the "Threat or Menace" headline was a satirical joke about media bias and sensationalism for a long while. The Harvard Lampoon used it in a parody of Life magazine: "Flying Saucers: Threat or Menace?"
CJN podcast 1400 copy.jpg
Podcast: Starting a new season, CBD and Sefton discuss their personal journeys to conservative principles, is Nick Shirley the beginning of a trend?, Iran trying to reignite the war, the Left attacks itself, even on "Best Guitarist" lists, and more!
Recent Comments
Dash my lace wigs!: "58 May the peace of THE LORD be with you all Post ..."

Mr Aspirin Factory: "Good Morning ..."

Ben Had: "May the peace of THE LORD be with you all ..."

San Franpsycho: "The UFO files release has proved conclusively that ..."

dantesed: "Who walks around on runways while planes are takin ..."

Dash my lace wigs!: "the mutilated creature before me was an object of ..."

Bulg: "51 Wow, that’s awful. Stay off of runways ..."

Brother Tim, still standing: "Mornin' Horde. Won't go into my situation. Perha ..."

Skip: "As plans are now, going out with my sister tonight ..."

one hour sober: "A statement from Frontier Airlines last night: ..."

Ace-Endorsed Author A.H. Lloyd: "Also: The Soviets used UFOs to convince Americans ..."

Ace-Endorsed Author A.H. Lloyd: "The UFO files release has proved conclusively that ..."

Bloggers in Arms
Some Humorous Asides
Archives