basso, I've addressed that before in the same thread. I encourage everyone to go read it. And with that it's back to ignore with you. Let me know if you're in Providence and want to get a drink and talk Rockets. I'm gonna do my best to make this the last thing I say to you in this forum.
Sishir Chang: The harping that I was citing was the harping that goes on here not the professional harping that goes on. The other issue is that all this is taking place in a time of war. Honestly, if Al Gore had won the presidency in 2000, I can't see myself taking setbacks in the war effort and using them to make political hay. I expect more national unity, but the harping here and there started even before the war with Bush's dreaded 7-minute lapse as he read a book to those school children. There's adversity and there's meanness. The country was founded on dissent... and now it is well-founded. Our dissent was with those who would colonize us. Isn't it time to let up a little? Can't it be a little more civil at least? By unbalanced i meant "overloaded." The haranguing about Bush is constant. Those politicians have no moment for self-reflection and no opportunity for confession for it will be pounced upon and cut into sound bites and run by us 24/7. Politics is blood sport and it serves no one well. I don't consider anyone here un-American. I don't think anyone demanded that Batman post in any other fashion. It was clearly suggested that doing so would raise his credibility. Whether or not I agree with him, it is obvious that Batman is quite brilliant but that alone does not make him right. Busted. I'm the Titan of Testosterone.
Here's a story about our troops in Iraq. The pro-war guys will probably say that it is unpatriotic and pro-terrorist to write the story and certainy to repost it since they care so much about the troops. However.. *********** Five U.S. soldiers killed in northern Iraq on Sunday, military says By Associated Press, 5/23/2005 05:06 ADVERTISEMENT BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) Five U.S. soldiers were killed in northern Iraq on Sunday, the U.S. military said. Officials on Monday said three Task Force Freedom soldiers were killed in Mosul, 225 miles northwest of Baghdad. Details were not released. A fourth Task Force Liberty soldier died of wounds sustained in 10 a.m. car bomb attack against his combat patrol just north of Tikrit, 80 miles north of Baghdad, the military said in a statement. A fifth soldier was fatally injured in a vehicle accident at 2:30 p.m. near Kirkuk, 180 miles north of Baghdad, officials said. The cause of the accident was under investigation. The names of the five soldiers were being withheld pending next-of-kin notification. As of Monday, May 22, 2005, at least 1,634 members of the U.S. military have died since the beginning of the Iraq war in March 2003, according to an Associated Press count. link
The other issue is that all this is taking place in a time of war. Honestly, if Al Gore had won the presidency in 2000, I can't see myself taking setbacks in the war effort and using them to make political hay. Isn't it time to let up a little? Can't it be a little more civil at least? Giddyupp So nice sounding. . So moderate and balanced. They all were so fair to Clinton when they tried to impeach him for a blow job-- knowing that it was for show and wouldn't even happen. When Clinton fired missiles at Al Qaeda, he was only doing it to "Wag the Dog" and deflect attention from his blow job. Oh, I know they equate the blow job with Nixon's behavior, so it was payback time. Of course Bush' lies about wmd are not even in the same league. They only want nice guy stuff when their guy is in power.
the problem here is indicative of that in the larger body politic. you, like much of your party, including such prominent voices as MoveOn, Howard Dean, and Al Gore, see your vituperative personal attacks as nothing more than righteous indignation, while I'm "extremeist" or "outside-the-mainstream." rather than try and see past the rhetoric, you launch vicious personal attacks of your own, while simultanously demanding a full apology, or you'll go nuclear. frankly, i expected more from you. don't worry, you won't be ignored, just no longer taken seriously.
It would increase apparently. I call strawman. I have a can of homemade elephant repellant here at my desk. It must be working because I don't see any elephants. Implying that the Iraq war or our continued presence in Afganistan is preventing terrorism is incredibly naive. IMHO, I think that we are increasing our enemies, as opposed to solving any of the real problems at the heart of this animosity. But then again, I'm not sure that there is anything America could do currently to reverse that anger.
President Clinton had troops in the field settling the Serb/Croat/Albanian mess, and it didn't stop anyone from criticizing him, going after him on any number of fronts. Nobody complained and said, "we have troops in the field. we can't go after a president." Nor should they. During war the leader of our nation should still be held accountable. Nobody gets a free pass because we are at war. That is especially true when the leader is the one who started the war, and did so when it wasn't necessary, or a last resort. People will always need protection from the govt. There will always be a need for dissent on some issues. Few issues are more important than starting a war because the leader wants not needs to, but wants to. When a president comes in to office telling people that Christ is his role model, and then starts wars among other actions contrary to his stated belief, he should be decried as loudly as possible.
I prefer we fight them in Afghanistan and not Iraq. Why did allow terrorism to be exported to Iraq in the first place? It wasn't there before and now it is, and somehow that is a good thing?
rhadamanthus: Who does not expect terrorist attacks to go up when there is a global attack on the terrorists? It is a war and the terrorists are going to fight the only way they know how. They forgot to buy planes, uniforms, K-rations etc. And you call me naivie?
1. President Clinton was not dealing with this enemy in the aftermath of 9/11-- THE WORST ATTACK ON US SOIL IN AMERICAN HISTORY. President Clinton's worst hit was the USS Cole. You are conveniently overlooking a huge disparity of proportion. 2. Wasn't the timing of President Clinton's military movements just precisely timed-- like on the very day that bad news about him was hitting the news cycle? That's the way that I remember it. I think you are cutting him some huge slack and allowing him to hide behind the troops unnecessarily. 3. The president is held accountable; it is called an election. 4. President Bush is not the first Christian to engage in war.
The articles of impeachment never mentioned a blow job. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it something about LYING BEFORE A GRAND JURY... My main concern about nice guy stuff is UNITY IN THE FACE OF OUR ENEMY. Geez, some people have no sense of history...
Glad to see everyone but Rocketmantex is ignoring glynch. "We" should be careful in our broad generalizations about the 'pro-war' crowd. I, for instance, don't have any problem criticizing Bush or others doing so. I am and have always been 'for' the intervention in Iraq, but am not a Bush supporter.
1. After that attack, many here who now criticize Bush including myself applaude his overall handling of the invasion in Afghanistan. It was when he switched focus that my problem, and I'm sure many others problems with him began. 2. You are still using the WAG the DOG timing? I used to believe that too. Then I read about how close Clinton was to nailing Bin Laden, and about how Clinton's missle attacks helped to wipe out what few WMD's Saddam had left. That report came courtesy of Bush appointee David Kaye. I used to believe that it was a diversionary tactic as well, then I saw the facts, and it changed my mind. I'm not cutting him any slack and allowing him to hide behind the troops. I think he should have been attacked for his lies. People should have been outraged by Clinton's falsehoods. I was. But I just don't want to hear any bull about not criticizing nation's leader while the troops are in the field. Because we did have troops in the field under Clinton, and he was not only criticized he was impeached. I know that wasn't after 9/11, but I don't think our troops morale and welfare all of a sudden became more important because we were attacked on 9/11. Those troops still had families, a hard job, and were serving their country. They were no less valuable than the troops after 9/11. 3. I wasn't talking only about the president being held accountable. He doesn't hold anyone else accountable. Gonzales wrote a memo justifying torture, and the president promoted the man. That is disgusting. Wolfowitz blew every single prediction he made about Iraq and the economy of a post Saddam Iraq, and Bush appoints him head of the world bank. Those folks should be held accountable, and Bush has failed to do so time and time again. 4.Bush may not be the first Christian to engage in war, but he is the first to declare to the public that Christ is his role model. Then he followed that up not just by going to war, but by STARTING a war that wasn't necessary to start. Haven't you seen the news? Iraq wasn't a threat. They didn't have WMD's. Bush was fixing the intel to whatever it needed to be so that he could start the war. There is a huge difference between going to war because we were attacked, and starting a war with a country not involved in an attack, and fixing the intel to make it appear like it was necessary. Going to war may not be turning the other cheek, but it can be self-defense. Starting a war regardless of need, however, is directly opposed to the teachings of Jesus and the bible. The thing is that Bush won't even admit that he's wrong, or made a mistake. He isn't contrite in the slightest, and has none of the humility about this that is spoken of in the bible. I'm not trying to judge him as a Christian. That isn't my job. What I oppose is his proclaiming Christ as a role model publically and behaving unprententently contrary to Christ's teachings in public. He is a poor representation of my religion, and I can't stand that he puts himself up as a representation of someone who supposedly follows Christ, and then his actions bring such shame.
Probably no invasion for oil, but could be an intervention (I start to like this word after seeing it repeatedly used by hayes) for environment pollution as a result of oil drilling.
you're a poopyhead. no, you're a poopyhead. your mother's a poopyhead. don't talk about my mother. poopyhead. repeat chorus -an excerpt from the saga of basso and batman
