US casualties since the Obamination....

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

Funny that the same libtard lamestream media that had a running death toll in Eye-Rack every f$cking day doesn't report this:

http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/obamavsbush

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/60-us-military-deaths-afghanistan-have-occurred-obama-was-inaugurated-2009

http://www.infowars.com/us-troop-deaths-in-afghan-war-under-obama-now-twice-that-under-bush/

http://icasualties.org/oef/

[Ghost]

Right, Obama started the war, I forgot.

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

Right, Obama started the war, I forgot.
Doesn't matter who started what, it matters how he's escalated it to kill more of our troops and how this fact has been ignored by the libtard media.

[Ghost]

Doesn't matter who started what, it matters how he's escalated it to kill more of our troops and how this fact has been ignored by the libtard media.


Wait. "It doesn't matter who started it"?

You realize, I hope, that had it not been started then there would have been -0- US Iraq War v2.0 causalities, right?

Or, did you think that

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/images/1030-02.jpg

Meant that the insurgents would somehow just...quit?

I mean, sure if there's a guy in a suit in front of a sign saying it's Over then it must be Over, right?

Guess all the insurgents who flooded into Iraq during the war would just leave since they saw this on tv.


((maybe the didn't get the memo--or maybe they didn't see this since they had no electricity))

[Clovis]

Less then a year to go until the nightmare of Obama is over.

[mastap07]

i sure hope so...

[Ghost]

Less then a year to go until the nightmare of Obama is over.

The world ends in 2012, you really believe that?

Though, I suppose it might...especially with a Republican in office. :p

[Clovis]

LOL, no. I'm referring to less then a year to go until Obama is out of office.

I wish it wasn't going to be Romney but I like him a hell of a lot better then Obama.


The world ends in 2012, you really believe that?

Though, I suppose it might...especially with a Republican in office. :p

[Nick_Ninja]

I'll tune in next November after the election and listen to all the screaming when the GOP candidate doesn't make it to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Remember --- in NO way is it a slam dunk that The O-man will be ousted. :roll:

[Ezzzzy1]

LOL, no. I'm referring to less then a year to go until Obama is out of office.

I wish it wasn't going to be Romney but I like him a hell of a lot better then Obama.

:lol: Obama and his Billion will DESTROY Romney. Hell, Romney will destroy Romney.

WE.ARE.FUCKED.

[Clovis]

There was an article the other day where a Romney supporter said that the rest of the GOP needs to drop the other candidates in the primary and get behind Romney, because in the end he's going to get the nomination anyways and they're wasting money fighting each other that should be spent fighting Obama/Soros 2012.


:lol: Obama and his Billion will DESTROY Romney. Hell, Romney will destroy Romney.

WE.ARE.FUCKED.

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

The world ends in 2012, you really believe that?

Though, I suppose it might...especially with a Republican in office. :p
It will end in 2012......if the Obamination is still in office. :)

The basic war in Afghanistan has been going on long before "W" got involved. What I find telling is the DRASTIC increase in casuaties.......and the fact that the libtard press has stopped the "death counter" since "O" took office, and refuses to report the news that he's killing more of our troops over there now than "W" did, in a shorter period of time. But, he's their chosen one, so the bias goes on....

Oh, and how are things in eye-Rack since we left? ;)

[DFab]

LOL, no. I'm referring to less then a year to go until Obama is out of office.

I wish it wasn't going to be Romney but I like him a hell of a lot better then Obama.

LOL. Do you know how many people were saying the same thing about Bush in '04?

No way that a prez as bad as Bush will get reelected. Right? Right? I mean Kerry sucks, but Bush lied us into the war in Iraq, and exploded the deficit, and etc. etc.

Obama sucks, Romney sucks, and we're screwed. I think I'll vote for Gary Johnson or whoever run as the libertarian candidate.

[Clovis]

I don't think that Bush was a bad president. I voted for him in 2000 and 2004.

When 9/11 happened I specifically remember thinking "Thank God Bush is the President and not Gore."

Gore would have probably surrendered right then and there.


LOL. Do you know how many people were saying the same thing about Bush in '04?

No way that a prez as bad as Bush will get reelected. Right? Right? I mean Kerry sucks, but Bush lied us into the war in Iraq, and exploded the deficit, and etc. etc.

Obama sucks, Romney sucks, and we're screwed. I think I'll vote for Gary Johnson or whoever run as the libertarian candidate.

[Ghost]

Oh, and how are things in eye-Rack since we left? ;)

So, you wanted us to stay?

[McVaaahhh]

Can we freeze all these political threads and then resurrect them after the next guy takes office.

It's fun to have the same arguments every 4 years. :rolleyes:

[RajunCajun]

It will end in 2012......if the Obamination is still in office. :)

The basic war in Afghanistan has been going on long before "W" got involved. What I find telling is the DRASTIC increase in casuaties.......and the fact that the libtard press has stopped the "death counter" since "O" took office, and refuses to report the news that he's killing more of our troops over there now than "W" did, in a shorter period of time. But, he's their chosen one, so the bias goes on....

Oh, and how are things in eye-Rack since we left? ;)

I love the way you bring up a valid point that is fact, not hearsay, and just goes to show the liberal bias in the media. And the first thing to come out of people's (libs) mouths is excuses about how it was someone else’s fault or other issues that really don’t have squat to do with the articles you posted.

[mathman1000]

Great......a mormon President. Anyone who would vote for a Mormon as president NEEDS to read their history; or atleast watch the South Park episode; preferrably read John Krakauer's Under The Banner of Heaven. Wanna talk about opening your fucking eyes people......DAMN!

[RajunCajun]

Great......a mormon President. Anyone who would vote for a Mormon as president NEEDS to read their history; or atleast watch the South Park episode; preferrably read John Krakauer's Under The Banner of Heaven. Wanna talk about opening your fucking eyes people......DAMN!

:yes:

[Ghost]

I love the way you bring up a valid point that is fact, not hearsay, and just goes to show the liberal bias in the media. And the first thing to come out of people's (libs) mouths is excuses about how it was someone else’s fault or other issues that really don’t have squat to do with the articles you posted.

It's neither hearsay nor invalid to point out that the war was started under Bush, not Obama.

If you're all so Lilly-livered that you can't understand Wars involved death, then why did you support Bush in the first place?

Did you think we'd invade and everyone would just surrender and cease any/all hostilities?

It is Bush's fault, he started it--that's a fact, period.

The ongoing deaths were a result of the war Bush began, and unlike a light switch, you cannot simply turn it off.

If there's any fault/guilt then it still rests on the shoulders of the man who lied to get us into that war, not the one who inherited it.


But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make; when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in a battle, shall join together at the latter day, and cry all, ‘We died at such a place;’ some swearing, some crying for a surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left. I am afeard there are few die well that die in a battle; for how can they charitably dispose of any thing when blood is their argument? Now, if these men do not die well, it will be a black matter for the king that led them to it, whom to disobey were against all proportion of subjection.

[RajunCajun]

It's neither hearsay nor invalid to point out that the war was started under Bush, not Obama.

If you're all so Lilly-livered that you can't understand Wars involved death, then why did you support Bush in the first place?

Did you think we'd invade and everyone would just surrender and cease any/all hostilities?

It is Bush's fault, he started it--that's a fact, period.

The ongoing deaths were a result of the war Bush began, and unlike a light switch, you cannot simply turn it off.

If there's any fault/guilt then it still rests on the shoulders of the man who lied to get us into that war, not the one who inherited it.

So, the president that was in office when the war started has what to do with the # of soldiers lost under Obama?? And it has what to do with the fact that obama hasn't kept his word about his handling of this war? Again, the article (at least the first one anyway) stated the number of deaths under each president and also stated the multiple claims obama made about removing troops from the area and ending the war,, that he not only did not adhere to but did the opposite on nearly all accounts. Those are simple facts that you can't argue with and really has NOTHING to do with who would bomb what country or invade whomever. Dance around it as long as you want, but Monkey's point wasn't who's fault it is, but the media's unfair twist and bashing on one but not the other. Plain and simple......

[Clovis]

The Mormans have done some good things, after all that's how the Harwards (my father's side) came to America from England in the 1800s.

A few years ago my mom was doing genealogy and traced the Harwards back to 1500s England. The Harwards were were pretty well off as a family when some Mormon missionaries came to town. I guess made a pretty convincing argument, because my great-great-great-grandfather and his brother, along with their wives and children converted and left England for Utah.

They were disowned by their family and along the way his brother died on the trek. So he did what any good man would do and married his brother's wife too. Yeah, polygamy... thanks for that little nugget ancestry.com!

I don't know when they left the church but today our family isn't Mormon.


Great......a mormon President. Anyone who would vote for a Mormon as president NEEDS to read their history; or atleast watch the South Park episode; preferrably read John Krakauer's Under The Banner of Heaven. Wanna talk about opening your fucking eyes people......DAMN!

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

It's neither hearsay nor invalid to point out that the war was started under Bush, not Obama.

If you're all so Lilly-livered that you can't understand Wars involved death, then why did you support Bush in the first place?

Did you think we'd invade and everyone would just surrender and cease any/all hostilities?

It is Bush's fault, he started it--that's a fact, period.

The ongoing deaths were a result of the war Bush began, and unlike a light switch, you cannot simply turn it off.

If there's any fault/guilt then it still rests on the shoulders of the man who lied to get us into that war, not the one who inherited it.
We were involved long before "W":
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-12024253

1986 - US begins supplying mujahideen with Stinger missiles, enabling them to shoot down Soviet helicopter gunships. Babrak Karmal replaced by Najibullah as head of Soviet-backed regime.

1998 - US launches missile strikes at suspected bases of militant Osama bin Laden, accused of bombing US embassies in Africa.

1998 - US launches missile strikes at suspected bases of militant Osama bin Laden, accused of bombing US embassies in Africa.


"W" took office: January 20, 2001 - January 20, 2009.

And, as I said, my points were "O"'s major escalation of forces there and their drastically increased mortality rate while the libtard media remained silent. Hypocrasy????

Game. Set. Match....... :)

3 guesses as to who was in office before him....... ;)

[Clovis]

Umm, the U.S. didn't start the war, Al-Qaeda did.

Bush did not lie, they acted on the best intelligence they had at the time.



It's neither hearsay nor invalid to point out that the war was started under Bush, not Obama.

If you're all so Lilly-livered that you can't understand Wars involved death, then why did you support Bush in the first place?

Did you think we'd invade and everyone would just surrender and cease any/all hostilities?

It is Bush's fault, he started it--that's a fact, period.

The ongoing deaths were a result of the war Bush began, and unlike a light switch, you cannot simply turn it off.

If there's any fault/guilt then it still rests on the shoulders of the man who lied to get us into that war, not the one who inherited it.

[rforsythe]

Wars do not end on political rhetoric. They are started by it. Once the killing starts, the war will end when it's god damn good and ready to, not when some wannabe prez gets up and says he'll do something he has no full knowledge of.

I do wonder though... Obama escalated the effort and we lost more soldiers in that time. But what if it hadn't been escalated? Would we have still lost just as many but over many more years? It's all speculation on that question, but I think we would have.

Not that it matters. We ended the war, killed a couple dictators (and enabled another, if you count the Libya thing), and have our folks home just in time for the next war when Iran and NK decide to become bedfellows with China and Russia in WW3.

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

Umm, the U.S. didn't start the war, Al-Qaeda did.

Bush did not lie, they acted on the best intelligence they had at the time.

Exactly! And, as mentioned plenty of times, it was already proved Hussein HAD WMD's when the libtards cried over him gassing the Kurds. Hypocrasy???

[Ghost]

Umm, the U.S. didn't start the war, Al-Qaeda did.

Bush did not lie, they acted on the best intelligence they had at the time.

Al-Qaeda is NOT Iraq. Wrong war.

Saddam was killing any/all insurgents he could round up--including Al Qaeda.

Fabricating "intelligence" is not lying, how?

[Clovis]

Eventual war with Iran is becoming more and more likely every day. But the possibility of war with Iran has a time limit. Bombing Iran is only an option until they have the bomb. After that shit gets real.


Wars do not end on political rhetoric. They are started by it. Once the killing starts, the war will end when it's god damn good and ready to, not when some wannabe prez gets up and says he'll do something he has no full knowledge of.

I do wonder though... Obama escalated the effort and we lost more soldiers in that time. But what if it hadn't been escalated? Would we have still lost just as many but over many more years? It's all speculation on that question, but I think we would have.

Not that it matters. We ended the war, killed a couple dictators (and enabled another, if you count the Libya thing), and have our folks home just in time for the next war when Iran and NK decide to become bedfellows with China and Russia in WW3.

[Clovis]

I thought we were talking about the war in Afganistan? The article refered in the very first post is entiteld "U.S. Deaths in Afghanistan: Obama vs Bush".



Al-Qaeda is NOT Iraq. Wrong war.

Saddam was killing any/all insurgents he could round up--including Al Qaeda.

Fabricating "intelligence" is not lying, how?

[rforsythe]

Eventual war with Iran is becoming more and more likely every day. But the possibility of war with Iran has a time limit. Bombing Iran is only an option until they have the bomb. After that shit gets real.

Bombing Iran is not an option as long as China (and possibly Russia) would respond as their allies. The possibility of war has no time limit, only their currently limited capabilities (which are growing every day).

NK has allies, but not like Iran. NK doesn't oil up a bunch of countries, so I think if shit went down with them their list would be a lot smaller.

[Ghost]

I thought we were talking about the war in Afganistan? The article refered in the very first post is entiteld "U.S. Deaths in Afghanistan: Obama vs Bush".

Yeah, but I thought CM's point was the war deaths in "Eye-Rack" and that we were discussing that, not the death toll in Afghanistan directly.

[Clovis]

Oh sorry, I missed that.

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

Fabricating "intelligence" is not lying, how?

I have yet to see how it was "fabricated". I double-dog dare you to prove that claim. :) The prez has access to info none of us ever will. Even ObaMao does. We can only speculate. I spent enough time dealing with the military to understand this. Those that never have, will always speculate erroneously.

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

Yeah, but I thought CM's point was the war deaths in "Eye-Rack" and that we were discussing that, not the death toll in Afghanistan directly.
Nope, my point was the deaths in Afghanistan, how they have dramatically escalated since ObaMao took office, and how the libtard media refuses to report it considering the daily "death-count" they had for "W". Bias? Hypocrasy? Yup.

[Zanatos]

Whatever happened to the Republican philosophy of "Fight the terrorists in Afghanistan or else they will come to America"?

I remember when Conservatives endlessly chanted that slogan before the 2008 election.

[Sarge]

So, the president that was in office when the war started has what to do with the # of soldiers lost under Obama??......


Uhm, it has everything to do with it. When "war" is declared, etc, it literally boils down to a document at some point that crosses the President's desk, and with his single signature (after a vote, blah blah blah, etc) the "war" begins. Imagine what would have happened if Obama pulled everyone out day 1, even if he had the power? What would happen if it did it tomorrow? Chaos in the region and bitter, bitter hatred directed towards America. Obama inherited this war, and the biggest thing he did so far was to pull Patreaus back from the Pentagon and put him in charge, and Patreaus attempted the same strategp
y in Afghanistan that worked so well in Iraq.

Blaming Obama for a single one of those Soldier's deaths is an insult and a disgrace. It's basically akin to blaming Obama for the hangover while everybody enjoyed Bush's party so much. This was Bush's war, and Obama did the smart thing by taking full responsibility for it and doing what has to be done in order to finish it honorably. My Brigade is sending 600 Soldiers to Afghanistan as part of a bunch of SVAT teams designed to enable the Afghan government and security forces to take their country back. Bush fucked this up, Obama is doing the dirty work and cleaning up the mess, and I say this from the point of view of somebody who has been there, more than once, and who has witnessed first hand the effect of Patreaus and his surge strategy.

To all you haters, there is a timeline, and a LOT is being done, but it's dirty, hard work that nobody else wants to do, but Obama is doing that dirty work, the only thing he can do responsibly. I say this knowing all you "haters gonna hate" but if you hate it so much, why don't you pick up a rifle and fight along side those who fight for your freedom, regardless of whether or not you agree with them at the time. People talk about charity work and doing something about the problems with America. This is what I do.

[stubbicatt]

Exactly! And, as mentioned plenty of times, it was already proved Hussein HAD WMD's when the libtards cried over him gassing the Kurds. Hypocrasy???

Yep and good ole' Amu Sam sold him the gas he used, which is why we knew he had those shells... We know because US sold it to him.

Oh.

And those involved all turned a tidy profit that year.

[Zanatos]

Sarge, I couldn't agree more.

I respect Conservatives and Republicans, and I like a lot of their ideas and philosophy. I understand their criticism of Obama, but I don't understand the pure hatred and hostility aimed at him.

I deployed to Khamis Mushait Saudi Arabia in 1991 right after the Khobar Towers bombing during the first gulf war. I did a one year remote in Ankara, Turkey in 1995, a deployment at Al Udeid Air Base, Qatar in 2004 and Balad Air Base, Iraq in 2005. I retired from the Air Force in 2006.

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

Yep and good ole' Amu Sam sold him the gas he used, which is why we knew he had those shells... We know because US sold it to him.

Oh.

And those involved all turned a tidy profit that year.
We've sold weapons to everyone at one time or another. I'm not sure we sold him gas though, we follow the Geneva convention which strictly bans such things. Blaming the US is like blaming the gun dealer for selling bullets. I'm not saying it was the smartest thing to do, but he did it, not us. I just love how the libs claim he never had WMD's, yet just a few years before were crying when he used them.

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

Uhm, it has everything to do with it. When "war" is declared, etc, it literally boils down to a document at some point that crosses the President's desk, and with his single signature (after a vote, blah blah blah, etc) the "war" begins. Imagine what would have happened if Obama pulled everyone out day 1, even if he had the power? What would happen if it did it tomorrow? Chaos in the region and bitter, bitter hatred directed towards America. Obama inherited this war, and the biggest thing he did so far was to pull Patreaus back from the Pentagon and put him in charge, and Patreaus attempted the same strategp
y in Afghanistan that worked so well in Iraq.

Blaming Obama for a single one of those Soldier's deaths is an insult and a disgrace. It's basically akin to blaming Obama for the hangover while everybody enjoyed Bush's party so much. This was Bush's war, and Obama did the smart thing by taking full responsibility for it and doing what has to be done in order to finish it honorably. My Brigade is sending 600 Soldiers to Afghanistan as part of a bunch of SVAT teams designed to enable the Afghan government and security forces to take their country back. Bush fucked this up, Obama is doing the dirty work and cleaning up the mess, and I say this from the point of view of somebody who has been there, more than once, and who has witnessed first hand the effect of Patreaus and his surge strategy.

To all you haters, there is a timeline, and a LOT is being done, but it's dirty, hard work that nobody else wants to do, but Obama is doing that dirty work, the only thing he can do responsibly. I say this knowing all you "haters gonna hate" but if you hate it so much, why don't you pick up a rifle and fight along side those who fight for your freedom, regardless of whether or not you agree with them at the time. People talk about charity work and doing something about the problems with America. This is what I do.
I actually agree with being there, and why we went in in the first place. BUT, I understand that in ANY military action, even practice here at home, there are going to be casualties. My issues are that all the libtard press were constantly screaming about the death toll and always ran the "death counter" during the news outlining how many men Bush had "killed", yet when ObaMao dramatically escalates the effort in 'Stan and a lot more people have died as a result, the libtard press has been strangely silent. Hypocritical.

I have nothing but respect and gratitude for the war fighters, but nothing but loathing for the Idiot in Chief.

[RajunCajun]

Uhm, it has everything to do with it. When "war" is declared, etc, it literally boils down to a document at some point that crosses the President's desk, and with his single signature (after a vote, blah blah blah, etc) the "war" begins. Imagine what would have happened if Obama pulled everyone out day 1, even if he had the power? What would happen if it did it tomorrow? Chaos in the region and bitter, bitter hatred directed towards America. Obama inherited this war, and the biggest thing he did so far was to pull Patreaus back from the Pentagon and put him in charge, and Patreaus attempted the same strategp
y in Afghanistan that worked so well in Iraq.

Blaming Obama for a single one of those Soldier's deaths is an insult and a disgrace. It's basically akin to blaming Obama for the hangover while everybody enjoyed Bush's party so much. This was Bush's war, and Obama did the smart thing by taking full responsibility for it and doing what has to be done in order to finish it honorably. My Brigade is sending 600 Soldiers to Afghanistan as part of a bunch of SVAT teams designed to enable the Afghan government and security forces to take their country back. Bush fucked this up, Obama is doing the dirty work and cleaning up the mess, and I say this from the point of view of somebody who has been there, more than once, and who has witnessed first hand the effect of Patreaus and his surge strategy.

To all you haters, there is a timeline, and a LOT is being done, but it's dirty, hard work that nobody else wants to do, but Obama is doing that dirty work, the only thing he can do responsibly. I say this knowing all you "haters gonna hate" but if you hate it so much, why don't you pick up a rifle and fight along side those who fight for your freedom, regardless of whether or not you agree with them at the time. People talk about charity work and doing something about the problems with America. This is what I do.

Sarge, I don't claim to know a whole lot about what is going on out there, compared to someone like you that has lived and seen it first hand, as down and dirty as it gets. I agree with you, though. Every comment that I made was specifically referring to the hypocritical nature of the media. I still can’t understand how almost every single comment is directed at who is to blame, like that was the point of the article. From what I read, IT WASN’T. I don’t think it really blamed anyone and I haven’t intentionally made that point once.


I actually agree with being there, and why we went in in the first place. BUT, I understand that in ANY military action, even practice here at home, there are going to be casualties. My issues are that all the libtard press were constantly screaming about the death toll and always ran the "death counter" during the news outlining how many men Bush had "killed", yet when ObaMao dramatically escalates the effort in 'Stan and a lot more people have died as a result, the libtard press has been strangely silent. Hypocritical.

I have nothing but respect and gratitude for the war fighters, but nothing but loathing for the Idiot in Chief.

HYPOCRITICAL MEDIA

Right? Wasn't this the main point of this post?? Or am I the only one that got that impression?

[dirkterrell]

The important point here is the fact that the concept of an unbiased media is critically flawed. The only way to get a good understanding of a topic is to look at how it is reported by various parties, understand their intrinsic biases, and draw an intelligent conclusion. Unfortunately most people don't bother or don't want to hear ideas and opinions from people who aren't on their political "team". I have certainly noticed the lack of the running death ticker on the national news. It would be interesting to see a study of how many times it has been mentioned on the various evening network news programs over the years.

The news organizations have been perverted into instruments of the politicians and when we get into these bitching-at-each-other sessions, they have to just be smiling inside, knowing that the voting public has fallen for their bullshit yet again, be it war deaths, health care, deficit spending, the Occupy movement, whatever. Divide and conquer. While we're here tossing around terms like libtards and republicons like a bunch of five year olds, they're pilfering everything we've worked for right from under our noses.

[#1Townie]

hey we lost the point of the thread. thread is the lack of news going on with some scary things happening. first point he made was how everytime you turned on the news bush was doing this and that. then all you heard was how many of our troops are dieing. i remember this same debate but defending bush on this forum. barn?? remember?? now we dont hear jack shit about how things are going over there. also anyone remember the patroit act???? yeah that had this whole country screaming and crying aboud people listening to your phone calls???? REMEMBER!!!!!???? well guess what your beloved obama just did..... ready for it???? we basically dont have a right to due process anymore. stop bitching about bush obama clinton and whatever idoit we have all put into power. fact is we are facing very fucking dark days and the only thing anyone is talking about is how did tebow play last weekend. its time to wake the fuck up morons. doesnt matter what party we vote for anymore they all do the same shit. bush took away our phone calls. obama made it so we can be arressted for having seven days worth of food. not just that but go straight to jail. no judge no jury.. you dont even get to see a court room. this system is so fucking broken the only way to fix it is to clean house. if you think a revolution is a thing of the past you better think again. if we dont learn from the past we are doomed to repeat it right? here we are.....

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

The important point here is the fact that the concept of an unbiased media is critically flawed. The only way to get a good understanding of a topic is to look at how it is reported by various parties, understand their intrinsic biases, and draw an intelligent conclusion. Unfortunately most people don't bother or don't want to hear ideas and opinions from people who aren't on their political "team". I have certainly noticed the lack of the running death ticker on the national news. It would be interesting to see a study of how many times it has been mentioned on the various evening network news programs over the years.

The news organizations have been perverted into instruments of the politicians and when we get into these bitching-at-each-other sessions, they have to just be smiling inside, knowing that the voting public has fallen for their bullshit yet again, be it war deaths, health care, deficit spending, the Occupy movement, whatever. Divide and conquer. While we're here tossing around terms like libtards and republicons like a bunch of five year olds, they're pilfering everything we've worked for right from under our noses.
Agreed 1000%, and was the point I was trying to make. I knew you and a few other would get it. I haven't seen the "death counter" in a while. Hell, I can't remember it since ObaMao took office.

But, hey, us debating this is good in and of itself. I still think you should run for prez bro! I'll volunteer as your bodyguard for free! You da MAN! :)