Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by KirtFalcon

  1. I believe the "anti-waranti-Bush" while we pretend to "support the troops" dimocrats will pay dearly at the ballot box! Who could trust them with our national defense and homeland security? :w00t:
  2. The exit stategy is simple and has been explained by the president on numerous occasions. I will outline it for you liberals once more. It goes as follows: We will bring our service men and women home when the job is done . . . plain and simple! :whistle: Oh I see, you libs you don't like that strategy? You want to cut and run . . . maybe surrender? You could care less about finishing the job? That's your problem . . . it's not really that we don't have an exit strategy, you just don't LIKE the presidents strategy for VICTORY. You wan't us to tuck tail and run BEFORE we finish the job so you can declare everything a failure for political reasons. I get it now! :w00t:
  3. Answer: CENTER 0, Stephen F. Austin 118 :w00t:
  4. Drudgereport.com Thu Dec 08 2005 18:02:44 ET The DRUDGE REPORT has learned from a top GOP operative that the Republican National Committee will provide state parties with a web video prior to release tomorrow afternoon that shows a white flag waving over images of Democrat leaders making anti-war remarks. The ad is in response to the controversial comments Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean and 2004 Democratic Presidential nominee John Kerry made earlier in the week. A Democratic strategist who had the web ad described to her said, “This is way over the top but we have no one to blame but Dean, Kerry and others who continue to pander to the anti-war activists within our party.” The web video advances the Republican contention that the Democrats only have a “retreat and defeat” message on the war in Iraq. The video highlights the effect Democrats can have on the morale of U.S. soldiers. One Republican strategist familiar with the ad said, “The Democrats, especially Howard Dean have a way of trying to turn the tables and say ‘that’s not what I meant’ – its just those ‘evil Republicans’ This video will make them crazy – it reinforces what they really believe with what they actually said – and that is devastating for the Democratic Party.” Developing . . . :w00t:
  5. His execution should be broadcast live all over America! :thumbsup::whistle::thumbsup:
  6. By KATHRYN BIRDWELL, The Daily Sentinel Wednesday, December 07, 2005 What do Chireno Owls, Central Heights Blue Devils and Etoile Gators have in common? They're not Nacogdoches Dragons – and they don't want to be. In response to the Texas Supreme Court's order to change the state's school finance system by June 1, lawmakers have begun to study a number of contentious plans, including the possible consolidation of smaller school districts, to more efficiently and adequately fund Texas schools. What may sound like an avenue for reform in Austin, however, is being described as a dead-end solution by many school administrators in Nacogdoches County. According to Etoile ISD Superintendent Jerry Bobo, consolidation is just another politician's interpretation of what is best for small schools, and a bad one at that. "This will never happen in our lifetime – not in Texas," Bobo said. "The only effect consolidation would have on our rural communities is destroying them." Last week House Public Education Committee Chairman Kent Grusendorf, R-Arlington, asked his committee members to look at consolidation, along with merit pay for teachers, superintendent compensation and school vouchers, as a means of addressing the Supreme Court's findings on how Texas funds public education. According to Grusendorf, who has been skeptical of increasing the amount of money Texas schools receive, the court's recent ruling charges the Legislature to come up with structural changes to the current funding system that will result in a more efficient system of school finance. In its decision, the court ruled that local school boards have lost control over the tax rates they set, setting the stage for lawmakers to meet in yet another special session to try to reduce local property taxes, while compensating by raising other taxes. But the court also said the system will not be able to improve without some type of major change. "Bigger is not always better, but a multitude of small districts is undeniably inefficient," Justice Nathan Hecht wrote in the court's majority opinion. "The justification offered for this situation is that as a matter of public policy, public schools should be locally controlled, although it has never been clear why the legitimate benefits of local control are so entirely inconsistent with efficiency in funding." But some local administrators, like Douglass ISD Superintendent Lowell McCuistion, fail to see the connection between larger school districts and more efficient school funding. Student performance aside, McCuistion said smaller districts are already more efficient than their larger counterparts and have drastically lower administrative overhead. "The present leadership in Austin clearly does not understand much about Texas schools," McCuistion said. "Say we consolidated in Nacogdoches County and sent all our kids to a central campus. Tell me how on earth we would save money by eliminating rural administrators. We would have to turn around and hire several assistant superintendents, with salaries in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. I fail to see the savings there." McCuistion also pointed out the logistical issues of busing children across a vast county like Nacogdoches. With eight rural school districts in Nacogdoches County spread out over 939 square miles, McCuistion said it was "ludicrous" to imagine busing them to a centralized location each day. "Nacogdoches ISD already has bus routes that are two-and-a-half hours long. In Douglass, not one of ours is longer than an hour," McCuistion said. "How early in the morning do the people in Austin want these children getting on the bus?" But more than creating the hassle of long bus routes or fostering the myth of administrative savings, local superintendents say consolidation ultimately cheats students at smaller schools both academically and socially. According to McCuistion, numerous studies indicate that students at smaller schools drop out less, participate in more extracurricular activities and develop more personal relationships with their teachers than students in larger school districts. "When our students are falling down academically, we are more available and able to help them," McCuistion said. "The success of small school districts is apparent by looking at our academic performance as measured by the state. Take a look, and you'll see that a huge percentage, over 80-percent, of Texas' best performing schools are the rural districts." Central Heights ISD Superintendent Pat Adams echoed McCuistion's claim that smaller schools equals smaller classes equals more student success. For several years, Adams said the Central Heights school district has had to turn away students wishing to transfer out of the larger Nacogdoches ISD, due to lack of space. "Most families looking to enroll their children in a smaller district are hoping for more personalized instruction, something our teachers here at Central Heights are able to provide," Adams said. "We can offer children many more opportunities to participate in things like UIL and athletics, and we pride ourselves on our academics, as well." According to Adams, whose sentiments were shared by both Bobo and McCuistion, talking about consolidating small school districts amounts to talking about killing rural communities. And Adams hopes that local representatives will keep the preservation of local identities in mind when traveling to Austin next spring. "State Rep. Roy Blake Jr. needs to listen to our concerns and understand the importance of preserving smaller school districts before he gets to Austin next year," Adams said. "Grusendorf and Tom Craddick, speaker of the Texas House, are way off base in seriously considering consolidation." Just how seriously Austin lawmakers will take the consolidation issue in the coming months remains to be seen, according to Blake, who will represent the interests of Nacogdoches County in the coming school finance debates. Although House members voted down an effort earlier this year to include a study of school consolidation in a major school finance bill, Blake said consolidation will remain on the table. "Although it wasn't a major part of their ruling, the Supreme Court mentioned consolidation and efficiency, so we have to keep it under consideration," Blake said. "But the reality is that we'll be looking at some of the broader challenges of school finance reform next spring, such as adequate school funding and equity issues. Providing property-tax relief will probably also supercede consolidation discussions, as will continued work on accountability measures." Warning that "consolidation for its own sake doesn't accomplish anything," Blake said many more studies would be required before legislators are in a position to empirically evaluate the benefits of consolidating small school districts. "Without these studies, we just have to wait and see what pros and cons emerge," Blake said. "Knowing that many of these schools make up the heart of rural communities, I will not support anything that has a negative effect on my district."
  7. We should honor our service men and women by telling the stories of their heroic efforts and accomplishments as well as the tragedy of their loss. The liberal press is so obsessed with making the effort in Iraq a Bush failure that they are dishonoring their efforts instead of honestly reporting the war effort! That's the truth whether the libs will ever admit it or not! :whistle:
  8. As a retired Air Force veteran, I can tell you without a doubt that probably 85% of the active duty military agree with the swiftboat veterans about Kerry's fitness to be Commander-In-Chief. Like Bill Clinton, they don't trust him with our national security or to do the right things for the right reasons. Everything he does and says is a political calculation that changes like the wind depending his audience and politics. He has no moral compass or core belief system that guides him. :w00t: They think even less of Hillary Clinton! :whistle:
  9. Lieberman is one of the few dimocrats with the intellectual honesty to set politics aside and do and say what's right for America. He's not willing to play politics with national security and the war on terrorism. He is a far cry from Haaard Dean, Hillary, Kennedy and Pelosi who are pure partisan politics 100% of the time. It's a shame he had the unfortunate experience of running with aLGore. :w00t:
  10. David Horowitz Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2005 This is a war. You can be unhappy about it and sit it out. That's OK. That's what a democracy is about. You're right to dissent. You can criticize the war and vote for another government that will leave the field of battle. That's OK too. That's also what a democracy about. But while an elected government and the young men and women it sends into battle are engaged with a ruthless enemy in the field, you can't work to cripple their efforts or do the work of the enemy side and expect the rest of us not to regard you as a saboteur and a Judas and an enemy within. These thoughts are provoked by the lead story in Saturday's Los Angeles Times and then by a missing lead in the paper the next day. On Saturday the lead story headline in the Times was "Bomb Kills 10 Marines at Fallouja." What kind of a lead story is this? We're in a war. What's the big news that ten soldiers have died? And by one roadside bomb? It could happen any day – even on the last day of a war before a peace. There is no story. This is hardly news. It's like running a headline that today 110 people were killed in car accidents. Actually, that's a fact (or a ballpark fact – if 55,000 Americans die every year from car wrecks). But no one writes headlines about it because it's not news. It's life as we know it. As long as there are millions of cars on the roads and they're driven by people like us, there are going to be accidents and deaths. So, too, with war. The only reason the Times ran the commonplace death of a few soldiers in war as its lead story is that the Times' editors want America to cut and run from the battle for Iraqi freedom and let the Zarqawi terrorists take over the country. So they are conducting their own psychological warfare campaign against the war. Just what the enemy would do if it had the means. I don't care if you call this treason or not. What it undeniably is is a pscyhological warfare campaign which the terrorists would conduct themselves if they had the means to do it. Terror is about inflicting enough pain on free societies so that they will surrender without a fight. If America's pain threshold is lowered enough, the terrorists will win in Iraq by default. And then they will come after Americans here at home with Iraq's oil billions behind them and the chemical and biological and eventually nuclear weapons they are desperately seeking in hand. Is this what the Times wants? Or perhaps the Times editors are so delusional, they think the way John Kerry does – that we are responsible for creating the terrorists. That they wouldn't exist if we weren't in their face. But of course we weren't in their face on 9/11 – thanks to Bill Clinton and Al Gore. And that was the problem. On Sunday the Los Angeles Times lead story was again about Iraq: "Private Security Guards in Iraq Operate With Little Supervision." This was not a big story either, but it was also a negative one and so it was the Times' editors choice for a lead. It would sap Americans' will to fight. It would increase their weariness with the problems of the war. But there was another Iraq story on Sunday that the Times' editors pushed to page 3. The headline for this story was "Senior Leader of Al Qaeda Is Killed in Blast." Actually it was the number 3 leader of Al-Qaeda after bin Laden and Zawahiri. This was big news – or should have been big news for people who think that the war in Iraq is a distraction from the war on terror. And of course it was big news for them, which is why they attempted to bury it on page 3 instead of leading with it on page 1. Because in addition to opposing an American war for freedom, the Times' editors are dishonest journalists and relentlessly subordinate reporting of the facts to arranging their reports to serve their political agendas. No sooner had the Times story about the killing of Al-Qaeda's number 3 covered the details of the event, moreover, than its writers sought to diminish the significance of that event: "[unamed] experts cautioned that the killing was likely to have a limited effect because Al Qaeda is less a hierarchchical organization and more a movement that can carry out missions without directions from top leaders." Oh, like 9/11. What this malicious subterfuge conceals is the fact that while the Los Angeles Times and the Democratic leadership were busily sabotaging the American war on terror, the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld team was destroying Al-Qaeda as we knew it. Yes, today Al-Qaeda may be a decentralized collection of local terrorist cells, as the Times claims. But that is because America has taken the offensive, killed Al-Qaeda's leaders and driven them into hiding, destroyed much of its infrastructure and reduced its capabilities so dramatically that the United States has been safe from terrorist attack for more than four years. Thank you, George Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and the thousands of men and women in arms who have had to fight a war against a ruthless enemy with half the country either on the sidelines or actively stabbing them in the back.
  11. Newsmax.com Saturday, Dec. 3, 2005 10:45 a.m. EST The American media is up in arms over reports that the Pentagon hired a public relations firm to write positive news stories about the Iraq war and get them printed in the Iraqi press. But Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch, spokesman for U.S. forces in Baghdad, isn't letting journalists get away with their phony display of outrage. After the New York Times front-paged the "fake news" story Thursday under the headline: "U.S. Is Said to Pay to Plant Articles in Iraq Papers," Gen. Lynch defended the practice. "We don't lie. We don't need to lie," he told reporters in Baghdad. "We do empower our operational commanders with the ability to inform the Iraqi public, but everything we do is based on fact, not based on fiction." Sounds to us like Gen. Lynch was taking a none too subtle jab at the mainstream media's penchant for reporting - not just planted stories - but its own faked news reports. Perhaps the next time he's questioned about "planting" stories, he'll get even more specific, by reminding the military's accusers of their own sorry history. Beginning with: • The New York Times - and the false reports the Old Gray Lady printed about PFC Jessica Lynch - courtesy of Jayson Blair. • The Washington Post - which won a Pulitzer Prize for its series on Little Jimmy, the 8-year-old heroin addict - which the paper had to give back once star Post reporter Janet Cooke admitted she'd faked the whole story. • CBS - Perhaps at the next press briefing, Gen. Lynch could inquire as to whether the Tiffany network has yet discovered just who it was who forged President Bush's National Guard records - before Dan Rather committed professional suicide by putting them in the air. • NBC - Gen. Lynch might offer the Peacock network a hearty round of congratualtions for their relatively good conduct over the last decade. It's been more than 10 years since NBC aired video of an exploding GM truck gas tank - which was faked by their reporters. In fact, the list of fake news stories reported by the mainstream press is so long it would make even Baghdad Bob blush. It's good to know that some in the military - like Gen. Lynch - aren't about to let the press' hypocrisy go unnoted.
  12. Without a doubt, we are winning the war against the terrorists, but it will never be completely over. The liberals politicians along with the liberally biased media are bound and determined to try and present everything as doom and gloom and a failure as long as the republicans control the White House and congress. It's actually tougher to fight the media war with all of the one sided coverage, disinformation and outright lies coming from the liberal media than fighting the terrorists! :w00t:
  13. My prayers are with you and your family as well. His service and sacrifice to his country is greatly appreciated.
  14. Maybe we can pay them to provide fair and balanced coverage over here. Lord knows we could use some coverage of our successes instead of only our failures that our own liberal media isn't providing because of their "it's a total failurebring the troops home" mantra! :w00t:
  15. Yea . . . you're probably right, too many direct quotes from Hillary . . . the liberal slant! :whistle:
  16. I've been expecting this one, it took her long enough to speak out although she is still trying to take both sides of the issue . . . just like a Clinton! - KF :w00t: Newsmax.com Tuesday, Nov. 29, 2005 7:55 p.m. EST For the first time since she voted to authorize the Iraq war three years ago, 2008 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is now saying that vote was a mistake - in an apparent move to pacify growing dissatisfaction with her position among the Democratic Party's left-wing base. "If Congress had been asked [to authorize the war], based on what we know now, we never would have agreed," Clinton said, in an email sent to her supporters on Tuesday. While saying she took full responsibility for her error, Clinton repeatedly insisted that she had been misled by "false" intelligence on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction presented by the Bush administration. Citing "assurances they gave that they would first seek to resolve the issue of weapons of mass destruction peacefully through United Nations sponsored inspections," Clinton lamented: "Their assurances turned out to be empty ones." In fact, "the Administration refused repeated requests from the U.N. inspectors to finish their work," she complained. The former first lady charged that "the Bush Administration short-circuited the U.N. inspectors - the last line of defense against the possibility that our intelligence was false." By describing the White House's WMD evidence as not merely wrong, but false, Mrs. Clinton stopped just short of saying she was lied to. At times, however, the top Democrat tried to have it both ways - trumpeting her criticism of the war while insisting she backed the troops. "I have continually raised doubts about the President's claims, lack of planning and execution of the war," Clinton said, before adding - "while standing firmly in support of our troops." She also insisted that by constantly criticizing of the Commander-in-Chief in a time of war, she wasn't emboldening America's enemies, explaining: "Criticism of this Administration's policies should not in any way be confused with softness against terrorists, inadequate support for democracy or lack of patriotism." Right! :w00t: :whistle::whome::w00t:
  17. I wonder how many wacko activist liberals have actually been duped into donating to them. They even take PayPal! :w00t::dancingbanana::banging: Man . . . I should have thought of this first! :w00t:
  18. I don't have the foggiest idea about your question HankTheCowDog, but since no one has been able to answer your "toughie" for several days, I'll throw this one out there! What current East Texas high school football team played an East Texas college in football and what was the score? Hints: :w00t: The year was 1923 The college is now a Div I- AA university The high school is not a class 5A or 4A school
  19. Photos by Associated Press, Reuters show 'Peace Mom' Sheehan waiting for buyers Posted: November 27, 2005 3:13 p.m. Eastern © 2005 WorldNetDaily.com While book-signings for political figures like Bill and Hillary Clinton, Ann Coulter or Sean Hannity often feature long lines and people waiting for hours, the scene at Cindy Sheehan's book-signing yesterday near President Bush's Crawford, Texas, ranch was a much more lonely affair. Photographers focus on Cindy Sheehan in empty tent waiting to sign copies of her new book (Associated Press) Photographs published by wire services including the Associated Press and Reuters depict a lonely "Peace Mom" in a virtually empty tent awaiting those seeking her autograph on her new book, "Not One More Mother's Child." The Washington Post reported the scene this way: "Sheehan found herself addressing a crowd of only about 100 on Saturday afternoon. The large tent where supporters had erected a stage hung with the banner 'Speak Truth to Power' was only partially full. Earlier, Sheehan signed copies of her new book for an even smaller crowd." Sheehan's son, Casey, was killed in the Iraq war, and Cindy has been on an anti-war and anti-Bush campaign since the summer months when she began a vigil in Crawford gaining worldwide media attention. Cindy Sheehan waiting to sign copies of her new book yesterday in Crawford, Texas (Reuters) "What if Cindy had a book signing and no one came?" asks one poster in an online messageboard. "Well we know what happened. No one cares about her but the press. Cindy is finished." "Frankly I'm amazed the DNC/AP allowed these photos to see the light of day," writes another. "Usually their photogs do their (unlevel) best to angle their cameras and crop their pictures to make Mother Sheehan always appear to be at the center of a worshipful swarm. I'm afraid someone is going to be in hot water for letting us glimpse the truth."
  20. Saw this posted on The Old Coach: Abilene High 2,478 Abilene Cooper 1,989 Abilene Wylie 916 Aledo 1297.5 Alto 182 Alvarado 1000+ Amarillo Caprock 1774 Amarillo High 2018 Amarillo Palo Duro 1952 Amarillo Tascosa 2274 Andrews 902 Angleton 1880 Anna 383 Anson 203 Athens 947 Argyle 472 Aubrey 347 Azle 1861 Baird 118 Ballinger 314.5 Bangs 349.5 Barbers Hill 963 Bartlett 142 Bay City 1258 Big Lake 241 Big Sandy 198 Birdville Birdville HS 1872.5 Birdville Haltom HS 2609.5 Birdville Richland HS 2103 Blooming Grove 293 Blue Ridge 198 Boling 280 Bovina 139 Brady 400 Brazos 277 Brazosport 1117 Bridgeport 669 Brookshire-Royal 426.5 Brownsboro 845 Brownwood 977.5 Buffalo 232 Burkburnett 947.5 Burnet 998 Callisburg 340 Calhoun 1123 Canadian 216 Carroll Southlake Carroll 2408 Carrollton Creekview 2256.5 Carrollton Newman Smith 2117 Carrollton R.L. Turner 2044.5 Carrollton Ranchview 722 Castleberry 831 Cedar Hill 2449 Celina 429 Central Heights 215 Channelview 2000+ Chico 225 Clifton 369 Clint 480 Clint Horizon 1325 Coleman 303 Colmesneil 181.5 Colorado City 302 Columbia 833.5 Copperas Cove 1,959.5 Corsicana 1,519.5 Covington 104 Crawford 195 Crocket 468 Cross Plains 110 Cross Roads 169.5 Crowley 1625 Crowley North Crowley 2169 Dallas Pinkston 1000 Daingerfield 407 Danbury 247 Dawson 138 Decatur 871.5 DeLeon 187 Deweyville 205 Denton Guyer 1134 Denton High 1538 Denton Ryan 1863 Dripping Springs 1119.5 Dublin 353 Duncanville 3759.5 Eagle Mt. Saginaw Boswell 1805.5 Eagle Mt. Saginaw 1767 Early 388.5 East Bernard 260 Eastland 341 Edna 419 El Campo 1070 Eldorado 186 Elgin 960 Ennis 1,504.05 Eustace 475 Fairfield 514 Fort Worth Diamond Hills 910 Fort Worth Trimble Tech 1708 Forney 1290 Foster 1749 Frankston 235 Fredricksburg 971.5 Frisco Frisco HS 1679 Frisco Centrennial 1659 Frisco Wakeland 865 Frisco Liberty 801 Frost 102 Ganado 200 Garrison 202 George West 375 Geronimo Navarro 396 Glen Rose 514 Godley 385 Goldthwaite 158 Goliad 434 Gorman 103 Granbury 1995 Grapeland 171 Gunter 304 Hallettsville 379 Hardin 369 Harper 192.5 Haskell 207 Hawkins 199.5 Hawley 230 H.E.B. L.D. Bell 2709 H.E.B. Trinity 2079 Hebron 2168 Hewitt Midway 1,931.5 Hitchcock 368 Hubbard 163 Huffman 991 Hull Daisetta 183 Ingram - Tom Moore 450 Irving Nimitz 2078 Irving MacArthur 2362 Irving Irving 2448 Italy 197 Jarrell 198 Jefferson 389.5 Jesuit Dallas Jesuit Prep 2096 Jim Ned 331 Joaquin 185 Johnson City 190 Junction 214 Keller Keller HS 2789 Keller Central 2370 Keller Fossil Ridge 1921.5 Kemp 483 Kerens 198 LaGrange 581 Lake Dallas 1070 Lake Travis 1640 Lake Worth 669 Lamar Consolidated 1805 Lampasas 1032.5 Lancaster 1,671 LaPoynor 142 Leakey 70 Lewisville Lewisville HS 3462 Lewisville Marcus 2778 Lewisville The Colony 1976 Lewisville Hebron 2166 Lewisville Flower Mound 2763 Liberty Hill 599 Lindale 990 Little Elm 1010 Livingston 1230 Lorenzo 97 Lovejoy 604 Lumberton 1018 Lytle 440 Mabank 899 Malakoff 362 Manor 992 Mansfield Mansfield HS 2613 Mansfield Summitt 2554 Mansfield Timberview 2072 Marble Falls 1050 Marlin 378 Mart 206 Mason 198 McCamey 170 McGregor 325 Medina Valley 908.5 Merkel 409 Mesquite Mesquite HS 2487.5 Mesquite North Mesquite 2440 Mesquite Horn 2055 Mesquite Poteet 1684.5 Mesquite West Mesquite 1661 Midlothian 1,893 Milano 157 Mildred 208 Mt. Vernon 463 Muleshoe 378 Needville 794 New Boston 416 New Braunfels 1890 New Braunfels Canyon 1601 O'Donnell 122 Ozona 240 Palacios 476 Palestine 908 Pampa 1052 Paris High 979 Plano High 5122 Plano East 5652 Plano West 4156.5 Pleasonton 944.5 Poth 240 Pottsboro 407 Prosper 504 Quinlan Ford 828 Ralls 170 Reagan County 241 Red Oak 1,664 Richardson Richardson HS 2186.5 Richardson Lake Highlands 2547 Richardson Pearce 1980 Richardson Berkner 2915 Rice 350 Rockwall Rockwall HS 2468 Rockwall Heath 1708 Rosenberg Terry 1749 Salado 404 Sadler / Southmayde 296 San Antonio Reagan 3400+ San Saba 242 Seminole 625 Seven Lakes 1640 Sonora 300 Springtown 1028 Stephenville 1065.5 Sterling City 99 Stamford 197 Sundown 160 Sweeny 652 Tarkington 588 Tatum 394 Taylor 881 Tenaha 96 . . . 196 ? :w00t: Terry 1749 Texas High 1,720 Timpson 202 Trinidad 77 Thorndale 185 Tolar 187 Tulia 334 Valley Mills 181.5 Van Alstyne 417 Waskom 229 Waxahachie 1,965 Weatherford 2172 West Hardin 176 Wharton 688 Wheeler 103 Whitewright 276 Wichita Falls Hirshi 892 Wills Point 808 Winters 193 Woodville 377 Wortham 127 Wylie 2246.5 Last Four UIL Enrollment Numbers: 2004-06: Class 5A: 1,925 and above Class 4A: 900 to 1,924 Class 3A: 389 to 899 Class 2A: 190 to 389 Class A: 189 and below Six-man: 99.9 and below 2002-04: Class 5A: 1,910 and above Class 4A: 900 to 1,909 Class 3A: 345 to 899 Class 2A: 180 to 344 Class A: 179 and below Six-man: 94.5 and below The 2000-2002: Class 5A: 1,865 and above. Class 4A: 845 to 1,864. Class 3A: 345 to 844. Class 2A: 170 to 344. Class 1A: 169 and below. The 1998-2000: Class 5A: 1,780 and above. Class 4A: 780 to 1,779. Class 3A: 345 to 779. Class 2A: 160 to 344. Class 1A: 159 and below.
  21. My guess is that he is looking for publicity . . . I smell a "book deal" down the road! :w00t:
  22. That's why most of the liberals want us to pull out . . . failure in Iraq is the ONLY way they can declare victory. They could care less about democracy and freedom for the Iraqi people or the sacrifices Americans have made to make it happen . . . liberals want President Bush to fail so badly they would sell their souls to the devil to make him look like a failure! It's pathetic! :w00t::whistle::w00t:
  23. By Clifford D. May Scripps Howard News Service November 24, 2005 Memo to Murtha Before I say anything else, Congressman Murtha, let me thank you -- for your long public service in Washington and, before that, in Vietnam. And let me commend you, too, for sparking an honest debate. Until now, what has passed for debate on Iraq has been mostly slander – for example, calling President Bush a liar and questioning his patriotism. Yes, questioning his patriotism: because anyone who would lie to get America into a war for reasons unrelated to national security would not be a patriot. He'd be a traitor. I ask you, sir: Has such a vicious charge ever before been leveled at an American president in a time of war – or even a time of peace? But you have not taken this low road. Instead, you have said you believe the war in Iraq “cannot be won” and that “it's time to bring the troops home.” This is a discussion worth having. You also say that “80 per cent of Iraqis want us out.” I'm not sure where you got that figure but it's probably low. I'd guess that close to 100 percent of Iraqis – as well as 100% of Americans – would love to see U.S. troops heading home for the holidays. But some of us think it matters whether we leave Iraq after we've defeated our enemies – or whether we leave Iraq after having surrendered to our enemies. When you suggest that planning for the war in Iraq was flawed, I think you have a point. American leaders, in the Pentagon and elsewhere, crafted an effective strategy for toppling Saddam Hussein. Once that mission was accomplished, however, they had only a vague idea about how to transform Iraq into a free, independent and self-reliant nation within a short period of time. Maybe that's because no one had ever attempted such a feat before. Clearly, we should not fail again to plan adequately. So I would ask you about your plans for the aftermath of the defeat you say we must now accept. For example, it's obvious that if the U.S. military can't stand up to al-Qaeda in Iraq, the fledgling post-liberation Iraqi military won't have a prayer. That means we must plan for the possibility that al-Qaeda will come to power in part or all of Iraq. What, if anything would you propose to do in response to that? Even if al-Qaeda only manages to shore up its positions in the Sunni areas of western Iraq, we must expect it will use that base to continue attacking Jordan and other countries in the region. Maybe we'd send advisors to help the Jordanian king? But help him do what exactly? Decide when the fight has become hopeless? Also possible: The “Party of Return,” Baathists loyal to Saddam Hussein, could take over (maybe in some kind of de-facto coalition with al-Qaeda). They might even release Saddam from the jail where he has been awaiting trial (odd, isn't it, how trials, like wars, aren't as speedy as they used to be?) and restore him to power. What would we do in that case – ask the U.N. to re-start sanctions and the Oil-for-Food program? The Shia of Iraq would turn to Iran's mullahs for protection against both al-Qaeda and the Baathists. To whom else could they turn? If what followed was an Iranian anschluss – annexation – of southern Iraq, will you have a plan to deal with that contingency? Iraqis who “collaborated” with us would undoubtedly face execution – perhaps tens of thousands of would be killed for revenge or just to send a message. I guess Congress could offer a resolution condemning such behavior. Thousands, perhaps millions of Iraqis would no doubt flee the country. Should the U.S. accept them as refugees? Or turn them away? In many other countries where al-Qaeda has been applying pressure -- Bangladesh, Indonesia and Thailand to name just a few – three things would now be clear: (1) It is dangerous to be allied with the U.S.; (2) it is futile to resist al-Qaeda; and (3) bin Laden and Saddam were correct in predicting that if you bloody Americans, they will always turn tail and run. As evidence they'd cite not only Iraq but Mogadishu and Beirut and, of course, Vietnam, where you served honorably. In truth, after that defeat – while millions of Southeast Asians suffered and died – Americans got on with their lives and we even went on to win the Cold War. Is that the idea, Congressman? To cross our fingers and hope that our defeat in Iraq will follow the Vietnam pattern? Because if so, I have to say candidly, sir, that isn't much of a plan. Clifford D. May, a former New York Times foreign correspondent, is the president of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies a policy institute focusing on terrorism.
  • Create New...