For those who really care, at all, about our troops, I highly suggest the following two sites: Is Our Peace Activists Learning? http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/22962

Hit Those Democratic Betrayers on HR 2206 Where They Live http://www.opednews.com/articl…..cratic.htm

Otherwise, just STFU, put on your “I heart Dems” T-shirts and march in lockstep to the polls to reenshrine those miserable curs who have betrayed us ALL time and time again! Don’t kevtch, DO.

I’m not aware of any way that a commenter can search for their previous comments based on their email address. You can Goggle search using your name and Firedoglake, but my guess is that you will get a raft of false leads that way.

I’m also not familiar with AVG. My suggestion would be that you include firedoglake.com as a trusted site within that software and see if it seems to clear up the issue. If not, I’m at a loss for what to tell you.

Hi Cassandra-

Your “profile” is the information you entered when you first submitted a comment, including your screen name and email address. As one of FDL’s site administrators, I can see that information with each of your comments.

I searched comments based on your email address and found 10 comments visible on various threads. I believe your first comment was on March 31st and appears here.

If you are not able to see that comment, or the one I linked earlier today, please let me know what browser and internet security software you use.

Thanks.

Yes, I see them from your links. But for some reason, sometimes I don’t. I think what’s happening is some glitch between the time a new comment first appears in the thread (highlighted), and the next time I refresh. It’s there and then it’s gone. And then I guess it comes back. I use MS Internet Explorer and AVG.

Um….so how do I do a search based on my email address? Is there an easy way for me to locate all my comments?

Thanks RBG!

Love,
Cassandra The Idiot

Democrats: you’re taking it to the limit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWz9X3gVaqg

Please excuse a brief comment from an Aussie in China: All wars will cease when men refuse to fight.

I must concur with your principled and unwavering stand here Oklahoma k.

LnL @ 202

Thanks, PW, for your adult statement.

The Dems do not have the numbers to override a veto or to succeed at impeachment.

No rhetoric, no breath-holding, no ranting, no foot-stamping can change the numbers.

Dems do have the numbers to conduct investigations and oversight in congressional committees. They must compile the record documenting the wrong-doing of this vile administration.

The rest is theater and I wish Dems did it better.

In many cases, it probably isn’t theater. It may well be honestly held, albeit misguided, belief.

I keep going back to a conversation LBJ had with McGeorge Bundy about Vietnam back in 1964. (A transcript can be found here.) Johnson expressed grave doubts about being in Vietnam, but in the end told himself and Bundy that they had to be there because otherwise the Communists would be invading the US — and remember, this was only a few years after Stalin’s death, as the details of his hideous r駩me were coming to light in the West. (And let’s not even get into what Mao did.) Suffice to say that when people in America in 1964 thought of Communism, they didn’t think of nice friendly places like Sweden (which was actually Socialist, not Communist, but you get the point).

If somebody as smart and otherwise well-informed as LBJ could honestly believe something like that, is it any surprise that anyone might think — especially with the media Wurlitzer’s constant repeatings thereof — that Vietnam vets were routinely spat upon, or that ending the Vietnam War led to Reagan’s election?

Or that voting against the supplemental means that troops will be hurt in the field?

Dear PW,

I think you are approaching this, as is the Democratic majority, from the wrong perspective.

So, the Democrats wouldn’t be able to override a promised presidential veto. So what? Let the little snot nosed Shrub veto the very funds he says he desperately needs. Then let the Dems send up progressively more restrictive bills or, better yet, say, “OK, we sent you a bill, you vetoed the bill, you get NO funds. Start the withdrawal! NOW!”

As Glen Greenwald points out ever so cogently, defunding the OCCUPATION does NOT mean that the troops would be left naked, unarmed and unfed in the field. If this IS the case, point pointedly at the ‘War President’ and say in no uncertain terms, “You, sir, are a dolt and a failure. You have failed the nation, the Constitution AND the troops.”

If you say you support the troops, and mean it, the ONLY way to support them is to get them the hell out of this insane occupation AS SOON AS POSSIBLE! The way this is done, pure and simple, is to defund the occupation, one way or another. As is, this occupation is just as much the fault of the Democrats as it has been up to now of the Republicans!

From the cost of war website, it is estimated that $429 Billion has been spent.

Why are we spending $429B to steal oil?

The people paying for stealing the oil and the people receiving the stolen oil are two entirely different groups.

Thanks, PW!

Your “profile” is the information you entered when you first submitted a comment, including your screen name and email address. As one of FDL’s site administrators, I can see that information with each of your comments.

I searched comments based on your email address and found 10 comments visible on various threads. I believe your first comment was on March 31st and appears here.

If you are not able to see that comment, or the one I linked earlier today, please let me know what browser and internet security software you use.

Thanks.