Rep. Boehner ad: "A Small Price to Pay!"
By John Amato Wednesday Sep 19, 2007 4:59pm
John Boehner's claim that we're paying a "small price" in Iraq is flat out wrong!
John Amato’s virtual online magazine…OK, It’s a blog!
©2008 Crooks And Liars
Login or Register to post comments.
How much has he personally paid so far?
Is a dead son or daughter, mother or father, sister or brother, a small price? Is a loved one living with a brain injury or missing limbs a small price? This man is too removed from reality to know what the hell is going on in the world outside DC.
"This man is removed from reality"...whelp most of DC is removed from reality...Someone needs to explain to these guys what the phrase Blood and Treasure means....Maybe Boehner would like a tour of the FULL Military Cemetary below...
As if Mean Jean would ever do anything decent. She was the bitch who called Murtha out for not being a good marine. Wonder if the president found that to be "disgusting" when she did it, like he finds the moveon ad today?
I don't know what bothers me more. The fact that he said it. Or the fact that there are people defending the miserable waste of skin.
the media needs to stop giving the Thompson's Water Seal wearer airtime. The Boner doesn't care how many troops die so he can live out his daddy fetishist daydreams
the gop war profiteers always think it's a small price to pay when they reap a windfall from the suffering of EVERYONE ELSE.
send compassionateless rep. boehner to live in iraq outside of the greenzone.
Play the whole sentance and I think most of us would agree with the guy...
You greek pussies sure know howto skewer things...
You are the whiniest pussies on the planet....crooks and liars...A great name that says volumes about this blog's pimp.
john @ 7:
and you jonnie boy have not served in the armed forces......wanker
Republicans have certainly paid a small price. Let's hope Republicans pay a nice, big, fat, juicy price soon.
I think I just heard the footsteps of the site monitor coming down aisle 7 ;)
I'm the last one to defend a guy like Boehner, but his "small price" comment was in response to a question about the financial cost of war. It sounds far worse out of context as it is presented here.
John, did you slither up the Internet drain from the Gathering of Eagles website? Go back and practice your synchronized flag routine with the other morons so you will be ready for the next parade.
by the way, out of context
This war has cost this country a very high financial price that the next generations will be still paying for. Billions of dollars is not a small amount of money to me.
The price we are paying in debt to China, loss of liberties, the gigantic redistribution of wealth that has already occured upward (supply side b.s.) is more than you, your children and your grandchildren will be able to crawl and fight out from under in their lifetimes.
The Late Generation, Constitutionally-protected American turned out to be a lazy coward.
Too bad.
soothsayer @ 11:
The financial cost of the Two Front War in Afganistan and Iraq is about $850,000,000,000 dollars so far, with an estemated $1,5000,000,000,000 dollars for another five years. A small price to pay for.........what?
pissed off patricia @ 14:
Absolutely true. But its also a far cry from inferring that 3,700 American lives (so far) is a "small price to pay."
Can anyone here give me an example of how you would properly use the word 'investment' when talking
about troops lives and limbs, as you're suggesting Boehner did here? Maybe you'd use the word 'cost', maybe the word 'sacrifice', but not the word 'investment' when describing lsot soldiers.
Even after he says this: "For anyone to suggest that I am belittling our troops or belittling those who have lost their lives in Iraq is disgusting," Boehner said.
"The question that was asked concerned the dollar figures," Boehner continued. "The money really is a small price to pay when you look at the future security of our country."
He even clarified it for any thick-headed person thinking he meant otherwise. What else do you want, a Senate resolution denouncing his statement?
A chickenhawk says what?
john @ 7:
soothsayer @ 17:
So Boehner thinks $1.2 Trillion is a small price?!
Regardless... The question Boehner was responding to was "The loss in blood, the Americans who are killed every month, how much longer do you think this commitment, this military commitment is going to require?". To assert the answer was to a different question sort of takes it out of context first don't it? -- http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-kerry/boehners-small-price_b_64259.html
Oh right, Jean Schmidt? She'd rather play footsie in a bathroom stall with Boehner than ever vote against the great and fearless Bushmaster.
where is the amendment for this ? and the nugent smears..and the swift boats...and the mCain attacks in 2000...and sheet Coulter, Savage, Insannity, BlecK, and all the other smear merchants..???
Instead the dems roll over like submissive collies and 75-25 the move on amendment with two of the senators they helped get elected voting with the wingers against their right to free speech...
this is insane and I hope KO skewers not only the hypocrites who even let this crap get to the floor ( hello Harry ) but those in the democratic party who are supposed to represent liberal views and voted yes for this crock of an amendment.
Andy, don't get me started...
goatsage @ 23:
I can not believe ...harry even allowed this POS amendment to come to a vote...then get trampled....
The dems don't have an ounce of brains to share with the world.
So the wingers wanna talk about hate ? There are probably 1000's of vile quotes directed at democratic politicians in the last 7 years and if I recall didn't the wingers attack one of the generals who called for more troops ? Where's the amendments ?
The coverage this is getting is "worse" than the swift boating.
Andy @ 24:
I have to believe Move-On's funding is skyrocketing right now. Most folks I know have sent contributions since this BS began.
goatsage @ 25:
Then I'd take out another full page Ad filled with quotes of hate from the right towards liberals and anyone in the military ( dissenting soldiers have been smeared ) and then ask where's the amendment...given the fact a large portion of the Dems have hung them out to dry, be interesting to see what they do next.
So what if it's out of context? I watched the segment and it seemed to me he was speaking of lives and money. The repugs use out-of-context quotes on us all the time. I'll say it now...the high road just make us easier targets. Until we learn to fight back just as hard and just as dirty, we'll lose the argument. Use their tactics against them. Sometimes speaking the truth just isn't enough. Sometimes it needs a little help being heard.
Andy @ 26:
I have complete faith in Move-On's next move...
When I saw that and the way his comment was cut off you could tell it was kinda of a hatchet job without even looking at the full quote. Come on people aren't stupid. The Republicans are wrong enough without distorting thing. We can give plenty of actual quotes that are stupid enough and probably dumber than Boener's obvious cut off in mid sentence quote here.
There is no taking "a small price to pay" out of context. It speaks volumes all by itself.
He's not talking about the price of admission to a circus or the fair for a bus ride. He's talking about LIVES.
And if you can get around the hideous evil of the initial statement then you get into the hypocrisy. Every sperm is sacred with the repugnocons. To the point where they're talking about putting women in jail for daring to assume they've got rights over their own bodies. But it's ok to take as many young lives as you can and throw them into a meat grinder and smile because the OIL is still flowing. Or just totally destroy them and then discharge them as "unfit" for duty when they need help. Or leave them drooling vegetables with no means of support.
It's all ok as long as the neocruds get their oil and their money and the junkie frat-boy failure gets his "legacy"
BLITZER: How much longer will U.S. taxpayers have to shell out $2 billion a week or $3 billion a week as some now are suggesting the cost is going to endure? The loss in blood, the Americans who are killed every month, how much longer do you think this commitment, this military commitment is going to require?
BOEHNER: I think General Petraeus outlined it pretty clearly. We’re making success. We need to firm up those successes. We need to continue our effort here because, Wolf, long term, the investment that we’re making today will be a small price if we’re able to stop al Qaeda here, if we’re able to stabilize the Middle East, it’s not only going to be a small price for the near future, but think about the future for our kids and their kids.
The full question and answer. Actually there were 2 questions. Boehner only made one answer. He's obfuscated first. Claiming cut-off or out-of-context is a no excuse for using weasel words when people are dying.
I think what he meant was "a small price"compared to the price our children and grand children will pay,and compared to what congressmen and senators pay--nothing.
"Full" clip here (that is, what I quoted) -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lUS4NQu9uo&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Etalki...
(Took heck of a long time to load BTW).
[Deleted. Whining. Too much pinot, drinker? Sitemonitor]
To paraphrase PoP: I think I just heard the footsteps of the site monitor coming down aisle 34 ;)
check out this video of boners small price
http://youtube.com/watch?v=tMACzBomDK4
John, wrong doesn't even begin to describe what Boehner's description of the loss of life in Iraq is. This guy should be run out of Washington for what he said, clearly he doesn't support our soldiers and thinks their lives to be insignificant. That's not wrong, that's vial! that is more offensive the 61 exposed boobies on a single Super Bowl, it's worse then voting for it before voting against it, it's even worse then bring home a dead fetus to meet his brothers and sisters.(we'll, maybe not, but you get the point) Boehner has no business having any say in the future of our soldiers, he should not be in office.
Alas, that ad will fall on deaf ears (and blind eyes) in Jean Schmidt's neck o' th' woods (Cincinnati).
Clean up on aisle 34.
Good ad.
He says his name like it is pronounced Bayner, when any body can clearly see his name is pronounced Boner. Maybe, he cannot so that is why he says it is Bayner. Well enough junior high nonsense. The truth is these fools who have never fought in a war, have no immediate connection(no sons or daughters in war) are going to dictate war policy to the rest of us. Granted I have never been in a war but I am a veteran, married a Vietnam vet, and my father was a career man in the Navy during both Korean War and Vietnam. I feel particularly anti-war because of my history. I always have been anti-war and will remain one. I find it to be such a terrible atrocity that old people force on the young war. We would not have wars if the old people had to fight them. You never see an elderly suicide terrorist. Just stupid young people get coerced into this waste of youth, waste of strong bodies, waste of future.
He's my district.
He's a boob.
Hey. Retards get to vote.
Why is it nescessary to take what this douche says totally out of context and blow it up into a media campaign? I think Boner is a mouth breathing dumbass, but it is OBVIOUS to anyone who actually heard the interview that it has been edited for the sake of making Boner say something he didn't actually say. Blitzer asked him if he felt that the expense of so much money in this war, along with American blood was justifiable. My God, please stop these desperate, lying smears. This is just swiftboating from the our side of the fence and it's a lie.
pinotdrnkr @ 34:
As a viet nam vet, let me tell you that it's a good thing I don't know where you live.
Hmmm, wonder if I could Fedex someone to Baghdad????
Actually, I am a 6'3", 245 Texan and if you want to know where I live, I will be more than happy to tell you. You're very mistaken to think everyone who thinks Bush is a chimpanzee and that this war is a disgrace will cower to your threats. You went to Viet Nam? I salute you. If you come to my house, you'll go to the VA, old man.
OneTrickPony @ 42:
Gave the full context back @31. My God, please stop these desperate whines about out of context, not in context, and complaining about lies. Only thing OBVIOUS is the attempt duck accountability by claiming "swiftboating"
Thing Fish @ 44:
My point is WhoTF CARES what this drooling Right Wing dolt said?? The entire premise behind this expense of money and political capital is lame. Instead of taking Bush and his echo chorus to task with salient, real arguments, the best we can do is chop some Blitzer interview and try to play off a wingnut as an uncaring warmonger? Please, someone, tell me what is new about that even if this bonehead had actually meant that all the American lives lost fighting in this ridiculous war are a small sacrifice?? I am not carrying this idiot's water, but would some intellect and strategic thought please stand up on the Left? Please??
Thing Fish @ 31:
The entire premise behind this attack is lame. It smacks of "didn't inhale," "invented the internet," "you get sent to Iraq." It's stupid and a waste of time. It's off-message and is attacking a person who is not widely known or admired for saying something in an impromptu interview that, even if genuine, takes a logical disconnect to explain. Stop knee-jerking and trying to argue a court case. It's a cheap argument and has no shelf life. Anyone with any sense at all knows what he meant and to spend money airing this ad is a wasteful lie. If you want truth in politics be that truth you seek.
I shall give pinotdrnkr @ 34 the benefit of the doubt and say that I suspect he is responding to john @ 7, and is possibly not very good at quoting.
Guess who's not paying the price?
Shouldn't there be a congressional meeting about this...like the Betrayus mess?
A small price to pay for WHAT? Chaos? Disasters? Destabilization? Weapons contracts? (actually, yes!!) (don't assume that what seems stupid is accidental)
It should be restated from time-to-time, lest it be forgotten:
I'm quite sure that most people here know some of the real reasons Washington chose to invade Iraq, in contrast to the stated reasons. I won't reiterate except to say Gulf of Tonkin fictitious incident and Domino (conspiracy?) Theory redux, and a disdain for having to purchase "tin, tungsten, and rubber" at fair market prices or go elsewhere, plus a "foothold" in a region which can serve as a jumping off point for future threats and future imperialist wars.
For that matter, don't debate me on that, just check with Brzezinski (Grand Chessboard) and with PNAC and all those related interlocking tax-free foundation-funded 'think tanks' (see Scaife). "Imperial mobilization" is precisely what they were promoting, long before Sept 11. They said NEEDED us -- ordinary Americans -- to suffer a bloodbath, before they could roll out their policies.
In a serious moment, Jon Stewart slammed Hardball, not for issues, but for dishonest arguments. Much of US political debate has fallen over into the gutter, drunk and stoned on ego.
For a source with more gravitas than Jon Stewart, check YouTube for some postwar govt-sponsored videos from 1946 and 1947. One is called "Don't be a sucker", the other "Despotism". Once-popular Wisdom calls to us down through the decades.
Login or Register to post comments.