PDA

View Full Version : Kerry Insults Troops or Misspeaks?



Pages : [1] 2 3

MattW
10-31-2006, 11:58 PM
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15499174/


a comment the Democrat made to California students that those unable to navigate the country’s education system “get stuck in Iraq.”

After outrage from McCain and the White House, the spin is that Kerry was telling a joke and missed 2 words that would have said: if you don't get an education, you get the nation stuck in Iraq.

Seeing how much ammo GWB has given by his missteps, I don't believe that Kerry's people would admit to it, much less that his intention was to outright call the president a moron.

Without the spin, he sounds like the rich elitist that he is, and very much distanced from the average American.

dclary
11-01-2006, 12:02 AM
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15499174/



After outrage from McCain and the White House, the spin is that Kerry was telling a joke and missed 2 words that would have said: if you don't get an education, you get the nation stuck in Iraq.

Seeing how much ammo GWB has given by his missteps, I don't believe that Kerry's people would admit to it, much less that his intention was to outright call the president a moron.

Without the spin, he sounds like the rich elitist that he is, and very much distanced from the average American.


As spoken, it is a HUGE insult to the men and women of our volunteer army. ESPECIALLY given that the vast majority of non-lifers are there FOR college money. For no other reason than this, I would be glad Bush is our president and not Kerry.

As far as the spin version? Kerry should go back and check the transcripts. Bush's C- GPA at Yale was higher than Kerry's...

blacbird
11-01-2006, 12:20 AM
It was a dumb thing for him to say, regardless of how he meant it. I very much doubt that he meant to insult troops in Iraq, but you have to take responsibility for what comes out of your mouth. It's the same problem that plagued George Allen earlier this summer, and a number of other highly-placed officials I could name. What is it about these guys that makes them so blissfully unaware of the meaning of the verbiage they utter?

caw.

dclary
11-01-2006, 12:23 AM
Because, democrat or republican, they're all dumbasses, who honestly think they can win just by showing up.

TheGaffer
11-01-2006, 12:24 AM
My guess is the spin version is probably what was meant to be said, but you of course never know with him, because he's a fool. So at best, he's an a**, and at worst, it's a pretty lousy, damned stupid thing to say, and gives the GOP even more to aim at him when his run comes around in 2008 (assuming he even finishes higher than 6th in any of the primaries, anyway). What a moron.


For no other reason than this, I would be glad Bush is our president and not Kerry.

Of course, there are the 200 or so reasons why I would have rather had Kerry as president, but...

dclary
11-01-2006, 12:32 AM
My guess is the spin version is probably what was meant to be said, but you of course never know with him, because he's a fool. So at best, he's an a**, and at worst, it's a pretty lousy, damned stupid thing to say, and gives the GOP even more to aim at him when his run comes around in 2008 (assuming he even finishes higher than 6th in any of the primaries, anyway). What a moron.



Of course, there are the 200 or so reasons why I would have rather had Kerry as president, but...

Given that we would still be in Iraq and at war, I would rather have a president who respects our boys, or at least gives them great lip service, than a man with a lifelong history of pissing on the military and its members.

TheGaffer
11-01-2006, 12:35 AM
Given that we would still be in Iraq and at war, I would rather have a president who respects our boys, or at least gives them great lip service, than a man with a lifelong history of pissing on the military and its members.
His cavalier use of our boys suggests a lack of respect to me. Paying them lip service sounds about right. It's hardly a noble stance.

Sheryl Nantus
11-01-2006, 12:40 AM
my husband joined the Air Force right out of high school, served in Desert Storm and other operations and went to university on the GI Bill to get his engineering degree.

guess he's one of those idiots Kerry's referring to.

you Americans never fail to surprise me...

:D

TheGaffer
11-01-2006, 12:49 AM
Sheryl, we get it. Americans are idiots. Nothing that happens on this board would ever happen in Canada. Etc. etc. etc. etc. How many good movies has your country come up with in the last 30 years? Three?

dclary
11-01-2006, 12:50 AM
my husband joined the Air Force right out of high school, served in Desert Storm and other operations and went to university on the GI Bill to get his engineering degree.

guess he's one of those idiots Kerry's referring to.

you Americans never fail to surprise me...

:D

Canada has an air force? How many blimps and biplanes is that?

eldragon
11-01-2006, 01:12 AM
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15499174/



After outrage from McCain and the White House, the spin is that Kerry was telling a joke and missed 2 words that would have said: if you don't get an education, you get the nation stuck in Iraq.

Seeing how much ammo GWB has given by his missteps, I don't believe that Kerry's people would admit to it, much less that his intention was to outright call the president a moron.

Without the spin, he sounds like the rich elitist that he is, and very much distanced from the average American.

I understand what I think Kerry meant.

Perhaps he is referring to the fact that some people get to go to college - if they can afford it and if they have the grades to get in. And if you can't afford to further your education, you might join the service, either for the college benefits or the damned paycheck ..............just to survive.

And then, you'll be stuck in Iraq.


I know exactly what that means, and he's right. It means that formal education is for the rich kids, and the military AKA Iraq war is for the poor ones.

TheGaffer
11-01-2006, 01:21 AM
Either way, the lesson remains that John Kerry shouldn't try jokes. Shouldn't attempt them at all, as his speech in 2004 and appearance on the Daily Show shows.

Oddly, though, his response to Tony Snow is pretty damned good, and makes me wonder where the hell this all was in 2004. Thanks Kerry. Good response, now, please -- dont' run in 2008, ok?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNvUg3F58BE

blacbird
11-01-2006, 01:31 AM
John Kerry is not going to be the Democrat nominee in 2008. Never was. If he does make a run, he'll probably not even make it to the Iowa caucuses.

caw.

TheGaffer
11-01-2006, 01:33 AM
You're right about that. He'd be lucky to finish 4th in New Hampshire.

Sheryl Nantus
11-01-2006, 01:38 AM
Sheryl, we get it. Americans are idiots. Nothing that happens on this board would ever happen in Canada. Etc. etc. etc. etc. How many good movies has your country come up with in the last 30 years? Three?

one word.

Porky's.

:D

well, that and we gave you William Shatner.

;)

eldragon
11-01-2006, 01:39 AM
Either way, the lesson remains that John Kerry shouldn't try jokes. Shouldn't attempt them at all, as his speech in 2004 and appearance on the Daily Show shows.

Oddly, though, his response to Tony Snow is pretty damned good, and makes me wonder where the hell this all was in 2004. Thanks Kerry. Good response, now, please -- dont' run in 2008, ok?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNvUg3F58BE

I agree, presidential elections should be a one shot deal.

eldragon
11-01-2006, 01:40 AM
one word.

Porky's.

:D

well, that and we gave you William Shatner.

;)

And Jim Carrey and Michael J Fox are Canadians. Two of the best we have.

blacbird
11-01-2006, 01:42 AM
one word.

Porky's.

:D

well, that and we gave you William Shatner.

;)

And Michael J. Fox.

And Neil Young, Peter Jennings, Jim Carrey, Mike Meyers, Dan Aykroyd, Eugene Levy, Celine Dionne, and about a thousand professional wrestlers.

caw

billythrilly7th
11-01-2006, 01:43 AM
and gives the GOP even more to aim at him when his run comes around in 2008

Yeah, and I'd bet this will bring more conservatives out to the polls next Tuesday as well.

Thank you.

TheGaffer
11-01-2006, 01:45 AM
Yeah, and I'd bet this will bring more conservatives out to the polls next Tuesday as well.

Don't start that again, Thrills. ;)

Bartholomew
11-01-2006, 01:48 AM
ESPECIALLY given that the vast majority of non-lifers are there FOR college money. .

HAHAHAHAHAHAH.

<Cough>

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.

billythrilly7th
11-01-2006, 01:53 AM
I understand what I think Kerry meant.

Perhaps he is referring to the fact that some people get to go to college - if they can afford it and if they have the grades to get in. And if you can't afford to further your education, you might join the service, either for the college benefits or the damned paycheck ..............just to survive.

And then, you'll be stuck in Iraq.

I know exactly what that means, and he's right. It means that formal education is for the rich kids, and the military AKA Iraq war is for the poor ones.

I know that's what he meant.

Then the country must be doing really well.

We have around 17-20 million "rich kids" enrolled in college.

While only around a million "poor kids" in the military.

That's a great ratio in my opinion.

17-20 million rich kids really speaks well for the American economy. I didn't realize how many rich people we had.

And they're going to school to become even richer!!!

Awesome.

billythrilly7th
11-01-2006, 01:53 AM
Don't start that again, Thrills. ;)

:D

robeiae
11-01-2006, 02:01 AM
"Why don't the troops like me?... Pull!"

*aaaaaaaaaaahhh! Bam!*

dclary
11-01-2006, 02:43 AM
HAHAHAHAHAHAH.

<Cough>

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.

Why is this funny? Army statistics state that 90% of the people who join the Army do it, in at least some part, for the college tuition reimbursements.

blacbird
11-01-2006, 03:36 AM
Why is this funny? Army statistics state that 90% of the people who join the Army do it, in at least some part, for the college tuition reimbursements.

Without implying disagreement with your statement, Army statistics also indicate that they can't keep track of 95% of the weapons they've given to Iraqi forces over the past three years. But they promise to do better in the future.

caw.

whistlelock
11-01-2006, 03:36 AM
That's one of the reasons I joined the Army. College cash. Came in handy too. Several of my friends in college were ex-service too. So, I don't know why it's funny either.

And Kerry seriously misspoke on that one.

billythrilly7th
11-01-2006, 03:42 AM
But they promise to do better in the future.


That's all you can ask.
:)

dclary
11-01-2006, 03:42 AM
Without implying disagreement with your statement, Army statistics also indicate that they can't keep track of 95% of the weapons they've given to Iraqi forces over the past three years. But they promise to do better in the future.

caw.

It's kinda hard to count the bullets after they're discharged.

caw.

robeiae
11-01-2006, 03:51 AM
It's kinda hard to count the bullets after they're discharged.You hear that on Jerry Springer every day.

billythrilly7th
11-01-2006, 05:07 AM
Kerry's statement may have just cost the Democrats the entire election one week from today.

What a hump.

This guy needs to retire A.S.A.P.

He's killing you guys on the left.

Tearing your heart out for the second time in two years.

http://liveshot.cc/images/John%20Kerry%20Wind%20Surfing.jpg

blacbird
11-01-2006, 05:29 AM
It's kinda hard to count the bullets after they're discharged.

caw.

It ain't bullets they've flubbed up on keeping record of. It's rifles, machine-guns, pistols, by something like 200,000 of them.

caw.

blacbird
11-01-2006, 05:41 AM
Kerry's statement may have just cost the Democrats the entire election one week from today.


Yep. Fer sher. That there Democrat Senator said a really dumb and insulting thing, I'm gonna run right out and vote for the other guys, the ones that gave us Mark Foley.

caw.

BottomlessCup
11-01-2006, 05:49 AM
I don't think he missed two words. I think he didn't guard his words carefully enough.

What a douche.

And not just for this. I'm a lefty and I've always hated Kerry.

He's full of ****.

I think both sides should clean house. Trim the whole American government down to about twelve people. There's only a half dozen or so on each side who aren't dirtbags anyway.

billythrilly7th
11-01-2006, 06:01 AM
I think both sides should clean house. Trim the whole American government down to about twelve people. There's only a half dozen or so on each side who aren't dirtbags anyway.

Yes, just like on Krypton.

A ruling council or something.

Thank you.

whistlelock
11-01-2006, 06:08 AM
Hm. A Phantom Zone to stick people in. That has...possibilities.

billythrilly7th
11-01-2006, 06:17 AM
Hm. A Phantom Zone to stick people in. That has...possibilities.

Labor camps in Alaska.

'Nuff said.

TheGaffer
11-01-2006, 06:25 AM
Yep. Fer sher. That there Democrat Senator said a really dumb and insulting thing, I'm gonna run right out and vote for the other guys, the ones that gave us Mark Foley, the Iraq war, lackluster supplies for the army, massive deficits, a resurgent Taliban in Afghanistan, and no accountability in Congress.

(Fixed that quote above, blacbird.)

Plus, his post-bonehead-remark response was pretty darned on the mark, actually, savaging the GOP for screwing up everything while they turn on the "think of the children!" rhetoric at this comment (a comment that is, at best, admittedly asinine.) But hell, I say screw it now. We've had years of elected GOPers foaming at the mouth and barely ever getting called on their bull, making it acceptable for half the country to refer to the other half as terrorist-lovers, so I could give a damn about polite Republican society pulling a Claude Rains about now. Let 'em get punched in the mouth for once.

Billy, if you're right, I'll wonder if the country is worth saving. That people will vote to continue to rubber-stamp the policies of an barking lunatic after six years of watching things go to pot because waaah, John Kerry said dumb thing waaaah, seems like a lot. Honestly, I just don't see the American people making that kind of leap. (If Kerry was running for Prez now? Then yes, I'd be with you, because it would hurt him specifically.)

billythrilly7th
11-01-2006, 07:46 AM
I don't think it will have much, if any, effect.

But you never know.

Honestly, if the democrats don't take at least the house next week, what will happen at the DNC?

Mass suicides?

I'm actually nervous that some people will truly flip out and start shooting from clock towers or something.

But, I think you'll be fine.

And you'll get to have a democratic congress for the next two years. Two possibly miserable years. I just don't know what's going to happen and I don't think our leaders have that much to do with it. So, that's why I still can't figure out what I really want to happen next Tues. My goal is to wipe out the democratic party forever and I think this loss could help make that happen if the next two years are destined to be crappy.

For example, if you win, I can't wait to see the poll on like 4/1/07...Regardless of how things are actually going....

Congressional approval ratings..... 27%...LOL...Most likely not even deserved, but the American people really are funny.

"I just hate everybody. Let's switch back and forth."

And then in 2008.

Bye bye Miss Democratic Guy.....

Forever.

I love it when a plan comes together.
:)

zarch
11-01-2006, 07:52 AM
Politicians can crack jokes about each other all they want. Soldiers are off-limits.

SC Harrison
11-01-2006, 07:56 AM
I'm actually nervous that some people will truly flip out and start shooting from clock towers or something.



Don't give Dean any ideas. He reminds me of the father of this girl I went out with once. Currrazy.

billythrilly7th
11-01-2006, 07:58 AM
lol...the man is a lunatic...

http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/R/4/dean_bong_gun.jpg

zarch
11-01-2006, 08:00 AM
http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/R/4/dean_bong_gun.jpg

Okay, now that's just freaking hilarious.

BottomlessCup
11-01-2006, 08:03 AM
I love it when a plan comes together.
:)

This is why Republicans win elections.

Democrats would never have the balls to start a disastrous war of aggression - sending thousands of people to death and disability - all as part of a Rube-Goldbergesque plan to lose a midterm election so that their rival party is the one with which the populace is dissatisfied when the next presidential election comes along.

Well played, Ken Mehlman. Well played.

TheGaffer
11-01-2006, 08:09 AM
And you'll get to have a democratic congress for the next two years.

I'm not asking for much. Just enough so that when a historically stupid idea comes down the pike from 1600 Penn. Ave., the House can say, "Um, no." That, in and of itself, will be fine for a while.

billythrilly7th
11-01-2006, 08:11 AM
This is why Republicans win elections.

Democrats would never have the balls to start a disastrous war of aggression - sending thousands of people to death and disability - all as part of a Rube-Goldbergesque plan to lose a midterm election so that their rival party is the one with which the populace is dissatisfied when the next presidential election comes along.

Well played, Ken Mehlman. Well played.

;)

I just hope you realize that if you put me in power for one generation, I will wipe out poverty, terrorism, war, starvation and all human suffering and usher in the true age of Aquarious.

It's true.

You'll see.

Sadly I'll only have eight years to do it and a liberal media and the obstructionist remnants of the democratic party might make it difficult.

But if you give me ultimate power for 20 years, I'd bring us heaven on earth.

Thank you.

billythrilly7th
11-01-2006, 08:13 AM
I'm not asking for much. Just enough so that when a historically stupid idea comes down the pike from 1600 Penn. Ave., the House can say, "Um, no." That, in and of itself, will be fine for a while.

Oh, we're at a complete standstill for two years, but luckily most of the important things are in place as far as I'm concerned.

As long as Bush has to sign anything the democratic congress offers up, which he won't, I'm not too worried.

And he'll keep fighting the War on Terror with gusto with the tools the Republican congress has given him.

So, I'm cool with a stalemate for two years.

And then we shall see.

And then we shall see.


:D

BottomlessCup
11-01-2006, 08:21 AM
I just hope you realize that if you put me in power for one generation, I will wipe out poverty, terrorism, war, starvation and all human suffering and usher in the true age of Aquarious.

Apocalypse doesn't count.

billythrilly7th
11-01-2006, 08:23 AM
When I accomplish all I say I will acoomplish WITHOUT an apocalypse, I expect rep points to rain down upon me, like Niagra Falls.

Kentuk
11-01-2006, 08:27 AM
Kerry is right Iraq duty right now is crap. Kind of like going to Vietnam in 1970. It sure isn't the kind of place you want to end up because you couldn't get into college.
To make thinks clear I don't think it was the army that screwed up in Iraq. This army was much better prepared to face insurrection then it was in Nam. I think the fact that Afganistan has diverted so much of the Special Forces effort has made an impact. I don't believe this situation is the army's fault.

The missing weapons didn't happen because the army couldn't be bothered. The serial number check routine is drilled into junior leaders. Therefore I conclude the turn over was the work of intelligence types. Rule number one in their book is 1. CYA. and deniability is number two.

dclary
11-01-2006, 08:38 AM
When I accomplish all I say I will acoomplish WITHOUT an apocalypse, I expect rep points to rain down upon me, like Niagra Falls.

Done.

billythrilly7th
11-01-2006, 08:42 AM
Done.

You're getting rep points too.

We're in this together.
:)


Good night AW!!!!!!!

Happy Halloween!!!!!!!

Lyra Jean
11-01-2006, 08:51 AM
one word.

Porky's.

:D

well, that and we gave you William Shatner.

;)

But he said he was from Iowa in Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home.

blacbird
11-01-2006, 08:59 AM
I'm not asking for much. Just enough so that when a historically stupid idea comes down the pike from 1600 Penn. Ave., the House can say, "Um, no." That, in and of itself, will be fine for a while.

Which is one of the best arguments for division of parties in the branches of government I can think of. In the 60's, we had a Dem Pres and a slam-dunk Dem Congress, and we got Vietnam (which all the Repubs agreed with anyway). In the 00's we've had a Repub Pres and enough of a Repub Congress (combined with Dem wimpiness), and we got Iraq. With Reagan and a Dem Congress, with Clinton and a Repub Congress what did we get? Mainly, peace and prosperity, grumble however you want about individual policy specifics.

Dems will get the House next Tuesday, and the Senate will be on a razor's edge, methinks quite likely with Cheney winding up with deciding vote. In any case, GWB's wings will be clipped considerable for his final two years in office.

caw

blacbird
11-01-2006, 09:05 AM
I agree, presidential elections should be a one shot deal.

I can't decide on this one. It's the way they do it in Mexico. Hardly a good role model. Every one of their guys takes his single mandated Presidential term as a license to loot the country for all he can get. At the same time, you don't want to keep leaders in power for real long times (examples: Castro, Mugabe, Saddam Hussein, Kim Jong-Il, Mobutu). In the end, I guess the two-term limitation works out about as well as can be hoped for.

caw

TheGaffer
11-01-2006, 03:47 PM
I think eldragon was suggesting if you run and lose, you're done -- no more running again. But I don't agree. I'd love to see Al Gore run again. I don't have any interest in John Kerry running again.


With Reagan and a Dem Congress, with Clinton and a Repub Congress what did we get? Mainly, peace and prosperity, grumble however you want about individual policy specifics

Bingo. Plus, you also ended up with people who were willing to compromise, which was the whole idea of the division of powers. "Uh, Ronnie? That tax bill you passed in 1982 was a disaster. We have to rework." "Um, ok." "Uh, Bill? The health care thing is a non-starter. Let's try something else." "Um, ok."

billythrilly7th
11-01-2006, 04:14 PM
With Reagan and a Dem Congress, with Clinton and a Repub Congress what did we get? Mainly, peace and prosperity

Luck.

Harding had a dem congress and all we got was the soybean famine and the Arabian horse war.

Hayes had a Republican congress and before he was shot all we got was the light brigade and the Canadian encroachment.

I prefer the same party white house and congress, regardless of who.

What kind of shmendrick actually votes opposite when in the voting both.

"I have no core principles. I think Evan Bayh is good looking so I'm going to vote for him, and for Prez, Giuliani because he's America's mayor. I know. I'm a moron."

Nice.

:eye roll:

Thank you.

aghast
11-01-2006, 06:06 PM
Kerry is so 2004 and of course hes an elitist but no different than mr gwb and neither of these two guys know a thing about being homeless or having to struggle to feed their families or joining the army because thats your only option so they should both just shut the f up already

aghast
11-01-2006, 06:09 PM
I prefer the same party white house and congress, regardless of who.


i dont, without check and balance you have absolute power especially if you have a liberal or conservative court respectively and absolute power leads to outright corruption and thats what we are seeing right now and it cant be a good thing, our forefathers designed this three branch system to avoid absolute power but thats what the republicans want, you can practically see them drooling and it has nothign to do with helping and working for the people

TheGaffer
11-01-2006, 07:14 PM
Harding had a dem congress and all we got was the soybean famine and the Arabian horse war.

You're forgetting the Teapot Dome scandal, too. Good times.

I'll just say it this way -- I prefer checks and balances. The gov't started investigating Pearl Harbor 11 days after it happened. Dem Congress, Dem White House. Harry Truman did a massive investigation into war profiteering despite having a Dem President in office.

If there were 200 GOPers running today saying "it's time to impose some checks & balances on the President," I'd consider voting for them, too. But there aren't. Just a rubber stamp. Stay the course. How dare you question him you terrorist/commie/acid-head/homosexual blah blah.

So no, it's not entirely luck.


"I have no core principles. I think Evan Bayh is good looking so I'm going to vote for him, and for Prez, Giuliani because he's America's mayor. I know. I'm a moron."

You may be more right with that assessment than you think, dude.

eldragon
11-01-2006, 07:23 PM
I know that's what he meant.

Then the country must be doing really well.

We have around 17-20 million "rich kids" enrolled in college.

While only around a million "poor kids" in the military.

That's a great ratio in my opinion.

17-20 million rich kids really speaks well for the American economy. I didn't realize how many rich people we had.

And they're going to school to become even richer!!!

Awesome.

Well, that's not exactly all the kids in the country, now is it?

Some people are in college, and some are in the military. Still others work at McDonalds, and others are in jail. Then there are some who still live with their parents and watch Jerry Springer all day long, while still others .............get the picture?

eldragon
11-01-2006, 07:27 PM
I can't decide on this one. It's the way they do it in Mexico. Hardly a good role model. Every one of their guys takes his single mandated Presidential term as a license to loot the country for all he can get. At the same time, you don't want to keep leaders in power for real long times (examples: Castro, Mugabe, Saddam Hussein, Kim Jong-Il, Mobutu). In the end, I guess the two-term limitation works out about as well as can be hoped for.

caw

I meant for running - it should be a one-time deal.

Who ran twice and then won?

Nixon? Anyone else?

eldragon
11-01-2006, 07:29 PM
I think eldragon was suggesting if you run and lose, you're done -- no more running again. But I don't agree. I'd love to see Al Gore run again. I don't have any interest in John Kerry running again.



Gore is too good to be president. The United States doesn't deserve him. He's up there with Dukakis - too nice and too smart to be president.

We need dumb scum to be up there. Kind of like what we have now - except not that dumb.

whistlelock
11-01-2006, 07:46 PM
Who ran twice and then won?

Nixon? Anyone else?hm. Grover Clevland. lessee, John Adams. Jefferson. John Quincy Adams, William H. Harrison.

And that's about it.

greglondon
11-01-2006, 07:49 PM
Barney Fife is our president.
And he's put his bullet in his gun and shot Aunt Bee dead.
Floyd is the secretary of defense, and has fired all teh
generals because they wouldn't let him cut their hair.
Goober's got a machine gun.
And Otis is in charge of torturing people.
And with the death of Habeus, I'll be surprised if the
whole damn country isn't locked up in jail by Jan 2009.

Bellyache all you want about Kerry, but I would have
chosen him in 2004 as president, than to have four
more years of the Mayberry Machievelli's.

And Kerry was right about one thing:
Only a moron would ignore all his generals,
all his intelligence people, and his own father
who studied invading Iraq in the first Gulf War
and found it to be stupid, and do it anyway.

eldragon
11-01-2006, 07:54 PM
hm. Grover Clevland. lessee, John Adams. Jefferson. John Quincy Adams, William H. Harrison.

And that's about it.


What can I say? I wasn't paying attention in school. Maybe I should run for president.

dclary
11-01-2006, 08:54 PM
Gore is too good to be president. The United States doesn't deserve him. He's up there with Dukakis - too nice and too smart to be president.

We need dumb scum to be up there. Kind of like what we have now - except not that dumb.

So you agree, then. No Kerry.

eldragon
11-01-2006, 09:23 PM
I agree. No Kerry.

We need a good president next time. As good as Clinton.

Clinton went in and cleaned up the Reagan/Bush mess, and now we need someone like Clinton (or- Hillary) to do it again.



Bush to Clinton - Bush to Clinton.

It's time!

blacbird
11-01-2006, 10:14 PM
Hayes had a Republican congress and before he was shot all we got was the light brigade and the Canadian encroachment.


Ummm . . . Thrillsy . . . Hayes wasn't shot. If you're thinking of Garfield, he was in office all of three months in 1880, so nothing much happened while he was Pres. And the Charge of the Light Brigade (if that's what you're referring to) took place in 1854 in the Crimea, when the British, through one of the most glaringly blatant pieces of military idiocy on record, ran the Brigade in an infantry charge up into a box canyon with the enemy on the surrounding ridges firing cannon down at them; it had nothing to do with the U.S., and, oh, the President at that time was Franklin Pierce.

I'll admit to not having a clue about what you're referring to as "Canadian encroachment".

Carry on.

caw.

Haggis
11-01-2006, 10:19 PM
I'll admit to not having a clue about what you're referring to as "Canadian encroachment".

Carry on.

caw.

1942. Toronto beats Detroit 4 - 3 to take the Stanley Cup.

blacbird
11-01-2006, 10:38 PM
1942. Toronto beats Detroit 4 - 3 to take the Stanley Cup.

Coulda been 1992-1993, too, when the Blue Jays won consecutive baseball World Series. But, near as I recall, Hayes wasn't President during these times, either. Does Thrillsy need some new meds?

caw.

dclary
11-01-2006, 10:39 PM
He means Stephen Hayes, the white ninja.

blacbird
11-01-2006, 10:46 PM
He means Stephen Hayes, the white ninja.

He got shot? By Canadians?

caw

aadams73
11-01-2006, 11:15 PM
We need dumb scum to be up there. Kind of like what we have now - except not that dumb.

We need a visionary who will work hard and do good things for this country, unlike the oil-a$$-licking dunce currently in office.

eldragon
11-01-2006, 11:25 PM
We need a visionary who will work hard and do good things for this country, unlike the oil-a$$-licking dunce currently in office.

I meant it tongue-n-cheek, as in "nobody will ever elect a good person to be president."


A good person has no shot. He won't fight back (Willie Horton) when the bashing starts - because he will assume that the voters will see the truth. But, they won't - and instead, will vote for the person who tells the biggest lie with the biggest microphone.


That's one reason why Kerry didn't win. Here in Mississippi, we had welfare recipient neighbors voting for Bush, because "Kerry is a babykiller."

aadams73
11-01-2006, 11:27 PM
I meant it tongue-n-cheek, as in "nobody will ever elect a good person to be president."


I know :)



A good person has no shot. He won't fight back (Willie Horton) when the bashing starts - because he will assume that the voters will see the truth. But, they won't - and instead, will vote for the person who tells the biggest lie with the biggest microphone.

That's one reason why Kerry didn't win. Here in Mississippi, we had welfare recipient neighbors voting for Bush, because "Kerry is a babykiller."

That's just sad, isn't it? It's hard to believe that other people are that stupid, but apparently they are.

dclary
11-01-2006, 11:47 PM
He got shot? By Canadians?

caw

Canadian Mounted Ronin, tracking sasquatch for their magical beer elixir, spotted him and hunted him down in the Northwest Territory.

dclary
11-01-2006, 11:48 PM
We need a visionary who will work hard and do good things for this country, unlike the oil-a$$-licking dunce currently in office.

I bet you didn't say anything when Big Peanut had their hands firmly around Carter's c*ck.

Sheryl Nantus
11-02-2006, 12:02 AM
Canadian Mounted Ronin, tracking sasquatch for their magical beer elixir, spotted him and hunted him down in the Northwest Territory.

hush.

you're giving away state secrets!

:D

eldragon
11-02-2006, 12:06 AM
I bet you didn't say anything when Big Peanut had their hands firmly around Carter's c*ck.


I'm offended by the term "big peanut."

aghast
11-02-2006, 12:36 AM
I meant it tongue-n-cheek, as in "nobody will ever elect a good person to be president."

a good person who cares about people and not special interest groups but doesnt like blowjobs - thats the key - the more sexless the better - gone are the days of jfk

billythrilly7th
11-02-2006, 01:05 AM
It's official. Kerry may have destroyed everything.

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=2619383&page=1


For weeks, Republicans on the campaign trail have been looking for something — anything — to talk about other than the record of the Republican Congress and the way the Bush administration has conducted the war in Iraq.

Monday, they got their wish. While stumping for local Democrats in California, Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., addressed students at Pasadena City College and made a comment about education and the war in Iraq that lent itself to much controversy.

It was a rhetorical gift for the embattled Republican Party, which is eager to run against Kerry again. The White House, in an unusual move, notified the media ahead of time that the president would address Kerry's comment in remarks at today's campaign rally in Georgia.

What's unclear is if Kerry's comments will help rally Republican voters or help their party portray Democrats as against the troops to score victories next Tuesday. A Democratic congressman told ABC News Tuesday, "I guess Kerry wasn't content blowing 2004, now he wants to blow 2006, too."

I hear ya, democratic congressman. I hear ya.

aghast
11-02-2006, 01:25 AM
those who are going to vote republican will vote that way anyway with or without kerry and those undecided are unlikely to make up their minds because of kerry, so wishful thinking thrill and gwb - then again what would karl rove be doing if he doesnt have anything to spin for the republicans, volunteeer for church?

TheGaffer
11-02-2006, 01:27 AM
As I said, Billy, if the greater populace is willing to vote GOP on the basis of a dumb comment by JK, well, they deserve this do-nothing, failure-addicted government we've got. If people are that fragile to have gotten in a bunch over those sensibilities being offended, there's nothing more I can do. I've done enough. Thank you.

eldragon
11-02-2006, 01:55 AM
a good person who cares about people and not special interest groups but doesnt like blowjobs - thats the key - the more sexless the better - gone are the days of jfk

JFK was sexless?

eldragon
11-02-2006, 02:02 AM
This is silly. He made a joke, and apologized for it. It's a good joke. I get it. Who doesn't get it?

He's right.


And, BTW ............who cares? He's not the democratic party anymore than .............gosh, let's just pick some republican who has been caught with his hand in the cookie jar lately, and yes - you can take that anyway you want to.............


There's nothing anyone can do to me to make me vote republican. I'm sure republicans feel the same way.

Kerry is getting press this week, like Arnold got it a few weeks ago for making an ethnic slur...............and who cares?

We had over 100 America casualties in Iraq for the month of October - and Kerry's comment will sway voters against democrats who might actually get us out of the war?

Sheryl Nantus
11-02-2006, 02:03 AM
JFK was sexless?

ooh... I don't think so...

;)

Gary
11-02-2006, 02:03 AM
[quote=eldragon]Gore is too good to be president. The United States doesn't deserve him. He's up there with Dukakis - too nice and too smart to be president.quote]

I spewed my coffee on that one!

Sheryl Nantus
11-02-2006, 02:05 AM
We had over 100 America casualties in Iraq for the month of October - and Kerry's comment will sway voters against democrats who might actually get us out of the war?

I've always wondered what the Democratic plan was for that - does anyone have any references I can look over?

aside from "hey, get on the plane!" *is* there a Democratic plan for withdrawing from Iraq? Has it been publicized at all?

I'm very serious.

I don't get out enough.

eldragon
11-02-2006, 02:07 AM
"Stay the course."


"1000 points of light."

billythrilly7th
11-02-2006, 02:07 AM
Agast and Gaffer,
It's not about someone "Switching their vote" because of this comment.

Elections are won or lost on turnout.

It's about more Republicans coming out to vote based on some controversial issue.

And it's not wishful thinking, agahst. I want the dems to win on Tuesday for reasons stated in this thread or some other thread. I can't keep track.

I'm just as appalled as you are that John Kerry might be destroying my 2008 Republican Tornado that wipes out the democratic party once and for all, by helping the Republicans keep Congress next Tuesday.

If that happens and the next two years go miserably OR EVEN WELL, all could be lost.

People eventually want a change. Now or later.

I want that desire to be quenched next Tuesday, so when 2008 rolls around, their common sense will kick back in.

Having the dems take control of congress for two measly years while I still have my boy controlling things for the most part from 1600 is a small price to pay in the long term goal of a red country from sea to shining sea for a millenia.

The only part of me that wants the dems to lose next Tuesday is the part of me that just wants to laugh at facial reactions like Janine Garafolo's after Kerry lost. It was priceless.

But my long term strategic goals have to take precedence over my desire to snicker and say "I can't believe you guys still can't win an election."

Thank you.

Jongfan
11-02-2006, 02:10 AM
If you look at the history of Presidents and Presidential Candidates, you would find it humorous. I will not get into my opinion, one should never discuss politics.

On that note, go back to the debates.. John Kerry should never be allowed to speak in public again.

He should stick to Katsup with his very personable (said with much sarcasm) wife. Everytime he opened his mouth, he contradicted himself. He would make a statement and in the very next breathe, flip flop the issue. Personally, give me the oral sex loving guy.. the ecomomy was great and he got families talking again : " Mommy what is oral sex".. Thanks Bubba

billythrilly7th
11-02-2006, 02:17 AM
BREAKING NEWS.....

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=2621654&page=1


Kerry Apologizes as "Stuck in Iraq" Firestorm Rages.

Under pressure to make a clear-cut apology to the military, this afternoon Sen. John Kerry issued a statement that Democratic candidates around the country must hope that will end the firestorm the Massachusetts Democrat set off.

"I sincerely regret that my words were misinterpreted to wrongly imply anything negative about those in uniform, and I personally apologize to any service member, family member, or American who was offended," Kerry's statement said.

robeiae
11-02-2006, 02:19 AM
"I sincerely regret that my words were misinterpreted..."
:ROFL:
What a putz.

eldragon
11-02-2006, 02:20 AM
Rob, all scripted apologies are putzy.

I wish someone would just say "GEEZ! Can't you people take a joke!"

billythrilly7th
11-02-2006, 02:23 AM
I wish someone would just say "GEEZ! Can't you people take a joke!"

Oh, you mean like democrats do after a Republican says something "offensive?"

:eye roll:



Anyway....I'm such a softy. I actually feel bad for Kerry now. Decent man. But a hump. I feel bad he's let his party down again. I feel bad for HIM. Because I have a heart.

:heart emoticon:

robeiae
11-02-2006, 02:23 AM
How bout a scripted apology for the poorly-scripted apology, then?

Come on, there have got to be better writers out there that Kerry could call on for his script...

Jongfan
11-02-2006, 02:26 AM
How bout a scripted apology for the poorly-scripted apology, then?

Come on, there have got to be better writers out their that Kerry could call on for his script...


Jack Nicholson could do it, it would be something like this

" Ladies and gentlemen I F'kd up, move on"

Robert Toy
11-02-2006, 02:27 AM
How bout a scripted apology for the poorly-scripted apology, then?

Come on, there have got to be better writers out their that Kerry could call on for his script...
Don't blame the writer, it's the AH reading it! :D

billythrilly7th
11-02-2006, 02:31 AM
Is this the biggest election gaffe in the history of American politics?

It has to be up there with the Dukakis tank ride and the Kerry oompa loompa bunny ears spacesuit costume.

But those were wardrobe issues.

This might be the biggest misspeak of all time this close to an election.

Robert Toy
11-02-2006, 02:38 AM
The big secret is that it wasn't really Kerry - it was Rove in drag.

eldragon
11-02-2006, 02:39 AM
Is this the biggest election gaffe in the history of American politics?

It has to be up there with the Dukakis tank ride and the Kerry oompa loompa bunny ears spacesuit costume.

But those were wardrobe issues.

This might be the biggest misspeak of all time this close to an election.

?????

You wish. It means nothing to me.

Nothing. At. All.

I agree with him.

Yes, he's a hump.

But a hump is better than what we have for a president now.

Robert Toy
11-02-2006, 02:40 AM
Two humps and you have a camel

billythrilly7th
11-02-2006, 02:45 AM
The big secret is that it wasn't really Kerry - it was Rove in drag.

My code breaking skills aren't what they used to be but look what I found in Kerry's statement....


"if you make the most of it, if you study hard and you do your homework, and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."

An...
i,e,d,o,b,l,d ...

DIEBOLD.

'Nuff said.

billythrilly7th
11-02-2006, 02:48 AM
?????

You wish. It means nothing to me.

Nothing. At. All.


?????

It has nothing to do with YOU.

Are YOU the center of the political world?

This was a gaffe of gargantuan proportions this close to an election.

I just wonder where it falls on the scale of gaffes.

That's what I'm talking about.

Not what an random individual thinks about the statement.

This gaffe is a raging firestorm.

It's raging.

eldragon
11-02-2006, 02:50 AM
"if you make the most of it, if you study hard and you do your homework, and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."

I broke the code. It means, "W, you suck."

billythrilly7th
11-02-2006, 02:51 AM
"Personal insults are the last recourse of an exhausted mind."
Pat Buchanan

billythrilly7th
11-02-2006, 02:53 AM
It's raging I tell ya!

eldragon
11-02-2006, 02:54 AM
"Personal insults are the last recourse of an exhausted mind."

CODE: thanx.

billythrilly7th
11-02-2006, 02:55 AM
You're welcome.

Good day.




Raging.

robeiae
11-02-2006, 03:11 AM
"Personal insults are the last recourse of an exhausted mind."
Pat BuchananQuoting Pat Buchanan is the last refuge for the congenitally under-equipped.

billythrilly7th
11-02-2006, 03:32 AM
Quoting Pat Buchanan is the last refuge for the congenitally under-equipped.

"Personal insults are the last recourse of an exhausted mind."
PB

blacbird
11-02-2006, 03:32 AM
Two humps and you have a camel

In the Middle East, it only takes one.

caw.

eldragon
11-02-2006, 03:34 AM
"Stay the Course."

"A thousand points of light."

billythrilly7th
11-02-2006, 04:07 AM
Clinton went in and cleaned up the Reagan/Bush mess

That's a gem.

Yeah, a real Hooverian and Carterian debacle was that Reagan/Bush "mess."

Anywho....

This is funny....

From Drudge...

http://www.drudgereport.com/irak.jpg

billythrilly7th
11-02-2006, 05:51 AM
Poor Kerry.

The democrats are tearing him apart as bad as repubs and everyone is saying that his Presidential aspirations are over forever.

Good for the country, but I still feel bad for the man.

One gaffe, game over.

blacbird
11-02-2006, 06:15 AM
He didn't know it, but his Presidential possibilities were minimal at best anyway, even before this debacle.

Other Dems rightly denounced what he said in much the same tones people did here, and I'll give Repubs some credit at this point, for pretty much accepting Kerry's apology, and not overplaying their hand (which would be easy to do). Too close to polling day.

caw.

billythrilly7th
11-02-2006, 06:19 AM
He didn't know it, but his Presidential possibilities were minimal at best anyway, even before this debacle.


True, but it's still sad to see a man's hopes and dreams dashed even if they were a longshot anyway.

Three days ago, he went to bed dreaming of 1600.

Now, the number he'll dream of is 57.

For the rest of his life.

Like I said, I think Kerry is a decent man. I disagree with 91% of his politics, but he seems like a good person.

Sad to see one mistake ruin someone's dreams.

TheGaffer
11-02-2006, 06:24 AM
Elections are won or lost on turnout.

It's about more Republicans coming out to vote based on some controversial issue.
True. And if JK were running for President now, I'd be with you that he'd basically single-handedly screwed the pooch.


This might be the biggest misspeak of all time this close to an election.
Um, no. He's not running, remember? It was a dumb comment. He apologized, even though I preferred his "go f*** yourself" response initially - had he done it all at once, it would have sounded better - apologize, then get after Bush.

Now, will Bush apologize for, like, screwing up everything? Anybody gonna apologize for that? Admit to any mistakes? Or is the boy king still infallible? Is anyone gonna talk about it? Or is the media gonna continue ramming a story of a dumb joke/dumb statement down everyone's throat, while Maliki has told our soldiers to get out of Sadr City on orders from Muqtada even though we're searching for one of our missing boys? Anyone? Bueller? Or should we find another dumb statement to manufacture some outrage over?

billythrilly7th
11-02-2006, 06:27 AM
Classic "dems can dish it out, but can't take it."

http://www.jokeawhenever.com/archive/media/pictures/democratic%20seal.jpg

Well done, Gaffer.

Well done.
:)

TheGaffer
11-02-2006, 06:31 AM
Classic "dems can dish it out, but can't take it."
Dish what out? Can't take what? This comment makes no sense.

A dumb comment by Kerry, and the entire GOP gets its knickers in a twist with the manufactured outrage. "Waaah, waaah, apologize, waaah. Never mind all we've done to mess up everything, you're a meany-bad guy, meh, sensitive ears, waah." Well, kish mein tuches.

Besides, who cares when you've got GOP leader John Boehner to blame the fiasco on the soldiers anyway?


BOEHNER: Wolf, I understand that, but let's not blame what's happening in Iraq on Rumsfeld.
BLITZER: But he's in charge of the military.

BOEHNER: But the fact is, the generals on the ground are in charge, and he works closely with them and the president.

billythrilly7th
11-02-2006, 06:33 AM
Dish what out? Can't take what? This comment makes no sense.

Dish out criticism and insults, but can't take criticism and insults.

Duh.

You can bash Bush, Cheney, Foley, Hastert etc with the most vicious of attacks...but...

Kerry gets attacked for a dumb statement and you're....

http://www.jokeawhenever.com/archive/media/pictures/democratic%20seal.jpg

billythrilly7th
11-02-2006, 06:36 AM
Don't worry, Gaffer.

I understand how you feel.

You're on the five yard line and about to punch the ball in to win the championship game, but your team fumbled.

It's very frustrating to have this firestorm raging. I get it.

But don't worry, John Kerry, like Jerome Bettis will come out okay in the end.

The team will still win, but damn why did they have to make it harder on themselves.

Hang in there.

TheGaffer
11-02-2006, 06:38 AM
Send me a copy of Robert's Rules of Order, so I don't violate whatever standards of conversation you've set up, so I can do better next time, ok?

robeiae
11-02-2006, 06:39 AM
His apology was a crock. I don't care if Republicans ease up on him, or not. It doesn't change my opinion of him. Course, this single bone-headed comment didn't really contribute to that opinion, though it did serve to verify it.

But I'm with Gaffer on this Billy, insofar as Kerry's mouth isn't going to have any effect on the upcoming elections.

And I still expect the Dems to win most of the competitive races. If they don't, then something is very wrong with the party's leadership.

TheGaffer
11-02-2006, 06:42 AM
Course, this single bone-headed comment didn't really contribute to that opinion, though it did serve to verify it.

For those of us on the left side, we're of a similar mind. "Thanks for playing, John. Now, after you finish in 5th in the Iowa caucuses in 2008, go away. It's been fun, but you've outlived your usefulness."

billythrilly7th
11-02-2006, 06:50 AM
But I'm with Gaffer on this Billy, insofar as Kerry's mouth isn't going to have any effect on the upcoming elections.


Uh...I've repeatedly or at least once or twice in this thread said the same thing.

Please re-read entire thread.

Thank you.

robeiae
11-02-2006, 06:58 AM
Uh...I've repeatedly or at least once or twice in this thread said the same thing.

Please re-read entire thread.

Thank you.Okay...

I don't think it will have much, if any, effect.

It's official. Kerry may have destroyed everything.

This might be the biggest misspeak of all time this close to an election.
I apologize...wait, no I don't. :tongue

dclary
11-02-2006, 06:59 AM
Dish what out?

LASAGNA!

billythrilly7th
11-02-2006, 07:00 AM
Don't worry, Gaffer.

I understand how you feel.

You're on the five yard line and about to punch the ball in to win the championship game, but your team fumbled.

It's very frustrating to have this firestorm raging. I get it.

But don't worry, John Kerry, like Jerome Bettis will come out okay in the end.

The team will still win, but damn why did they have to make it harder on themselves.

Hang in there.

You forgot Exhibit D, Rob.

I rest my case.

Thank you.
:)

robeiae
11-02-2006, 07:02 AM
Well then, I agree with Gaffer's position and half of yours. But that doesn't sound right.

billythrilly7th
11-02-2006, 07:05 AM
This John Kerry debacle is a raging firestorm I tell ya!!

:ROFL:

TheGaffer
11-02-2006, 07:37 AM
BOULDER, COLO. -- The Senate campaign of William J. "Cha-Cha" Thrillster VII came to an abrupt end today, 10 years before the election, when Mr. Thrillster admitted that he had, until now, not realized that Col. Nathan R. Jessup was not, in fact, a real human being.
"I couldn't handle the truth," Mr. Thrill was quoted as saying.

blacbird
11-02-2006, 08:32 AM
Just for info, I listened to interviews with two national political pollsters/strategists for the major parties yesterday, speaking together, and these thoroughly Machiavellian guys were in full agreement that the Kerry blunder would have little if any effect on the election Tuesday. Consensus was that it was a far too risky thing for anyone to try to jump on as an issue, for fear of backlash. Both pointed out that Republicans still have that very recent specter of Mark Foley still hanging around, and in comparison to that, Kerry's doltish comment seems kind of pale. Better get past it and hope for the best, in the opinion of both.

I think that uses up my supply of wisdom tonight. I'll go recharge now.

caw.

karo.ambrose
11-02-2006, 08:35 AM
And Kerry loses another election he's not even in.:Headbang:

Kerry, you're the lamest person ever. You lost to Bush. How bad can you be? Seriously, you're ruining the democrats and you should never talk ever again. You botched a joke... because your life is a joke.

I swear, if this alone gives the republicans leverage to win in the midterms, I will officially have someone on my hit list higher than W.

P.S. Big Brother, I actually don't have a... erm... hit list. I kid! I kid! I joke! I joke!

aghast
11-02-2006, 09:14 AM
goodness so cheney said his water torture comment was a joke and everyone laughs and no one called him lame, and now kerry said something stupid and everyone thinks the world is coming to an end - we give the guy way too much power - the republicans are looking for something and they found it so they can deflect their problems and the dems are walking on eggshells - great leaders we have - kerry is lame and hes not going to change the election one way or another - sleep easy folks... still cant beleive that made headline news

billythrilly7th
11-02-2006, 11:09 AM
This just in...

Kerry's remarks no longer a raging firestorm.

They are now a swirling tornado according to many news outlets.

http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=local&id=4717274

What that means, I don't know.

I report. You decide.

Thank you.

BottomlessCup
11-02-2006, 11:29 AM
It's a week before the election and the media isn't talking about whether or not the soldiers are dying in vain; they're talking about whether or not John Kerry implied that the soldiers are ignorant.

If I were a soldier, I think I'd be a lot more offended about getting my legs blown off for no good reason, than because some prick insulted my intelligence at a fundraiser.

billythrilly7th
11-02-2006, 11:51 AM
If I were a soldier, I think I'd be a lot more offended about getting my legs blown off for no good reason, than because some prick insulted my intelligence at a fundraiser.

I'm sure they're concerned about both....but they have a sense of humor.

That they do.

http://www.drudgereport.com/irak.jpg

God bless ya, boys! For everything.

Haggis
11-02-2006, 04:06 PM
I'm sure they're concerned about both....but they have a sense of humor.

That they do.

http://www.drudgereport.com/irak.jpg

God bless ya, boys! For everything.

:roll:

TheGaffer
11-02-2006, 06:25 PM
As annoying as this whole situation is, that thing the soldiers came up with was pretty funny, I'll admit.

Of course, the GOP is starting to overplay its hand with this, demanding that Dem candidates in tight races who denounced his comments return funds given to them by Kerry (um, he's not a convicted felon, guys, or even a porn producer).

Story is starting to fade now. Thursday morning papers are using it...other than that it seems to be dying out. As of 9:17 a.m. in NY, CNN is running with the "missing soldier" story and a big picture identifying him; the Kerry thing is first headline in a group of headlines. MSNBC has a "clouds of scandal" headline at the top with a pic of Tom Delay. FoxNews is leading with it on its web site, of course, but that's Fox. Yahoo News has a story on policemen being killed in Iraq and it's "most emailed" story is "Prince bringing purple reign to Vegas," followed by "Mean squirrel attacks Pa. letter carrier."

Meanwhile, Thrilly has still not commented on the derailment of his Senate campaign for the Col. Nathan Jessup fiasco.

robeiae
11-02-2006, 06:35 PM
How come no "of course" for MSNBC? And CBS has "Did Ann Coulter vote illegally?" right at the top of the page...

TheGaffer
11-02-2006, 06:38 PM
How come no "of course" for MSNBC?
They're not as blatantly partisan as Fox is.

eldragon
11-02-2006, 06:44 PM
"Prince bringing purple reign to Vegas," followed

It's a sad, sad day in musicial history when Prince sells out and gets in the back pocket of a Las Vegas casino/resort (Rio.)

What's next? Sineaod O'Connor on a Nike commericial?

dclary
11-02-2006, 09:02 PM
So... When Kerry said that an all-volunteer army would be an army of the poor, black, and brown in 1972 was that a botched joke about Johnson's administration?

karo.ambrose
11-02-2006, 09:26 PM
Kerry is going to fail miserably in '08. He made me cringe during the debates when he brought up that Cheney's daughter was a lesbian. He just needs to shut up. He's that clueless guy that ruins every joke and has no idea. Honestly, he looked like just as big a turd sandwich as Bush during the debates (which, my friends, is no simple feat).

My bets on Obama! Hillary scares me too much and McCain (who I originally rooted for) is getting more bipolar by the day.

TheGaffer
11-02-2006, 10:34 PM
So... When Kerry said that an all-volunteer army would be an army of the poor, black, and brown in 1972 was that a botched joke about Johnson's administration?

Ummm, who cares?

Seriously, what about the stuff we were discussing a couple months back -- the infiltration of the army by white supremacists and the Crips? Isn't that where we're headed? That's the stuff that's more disturbing -- wasn't there some other article not long ago about, and darn it I can't remember, the Army being more lenient in its psychological profile in terms of who gets admitted to the infantry? (Lemme know if you know what I speak of, Clary.)

billythrilly7th
11-02-2006, 11:59 PM
I'm amused at how Gaffer, holding on for dear life to his hopes of winning on Tuesday, is obsessively waking up and checking all news sites to monitor the situation.

:ROFL:

I can just see a bleary eyed Gaffer skipping his morning pee and with blood shot eyes, clicking every newssite...

"Okay, whew...it looks like it's dying down a bit...whew whew...etc..."

:roll:

billythrilly7th
11-03-2006, 12:09 AM
Gaffer!!

The Arizona Ledger just ran a new John Kerry story about 4 minutes ago.

It just came across the wire!

Put that in the "Oh Boy, It's Still Going" category.

I'll keep you updated as best I can!!

TheGaffer
11-03-2006, 12:42 AM
Ok, Billy. Shut up, ya pr***. ;)

billythrilly7th
11-03-2006, 12:51 AM
:D

dclary
11-03-2006, 01:19 AM
Ummm, who cares?

Seriously, what about the stuff we were discussing a couple months back -- the infiltration of the army by white supremacists and the Crips? Isn't that where we're headed? That's the stuff that's more disturbing -- wasn't there some other article not long ago about, and darn it I can't remember, the Army being more lenient in its psychological profile in terms of who gets admitted to the infantry? (Lemme know if you know what I speak of, Clary.)

I know exactly what you speak of. There is a sliding scale of who the military will or will not allow enlist. These controls are very tight during peace time, specifically to keep costs and controversies down (how many $50,000 GI Bills do you give away to felons before someone starts complaining?). However, during war time, especially extended periods where heavy enlistment is required, these quality controls are loosened, under the (correct, imo) belief that a volunteer army, even volunteers of less-than stellar morals, is better than an army of inductees.

When I was ejected from the Navy (for lying about my prior enlistment status), I fought the ejection, and requested a hearing with the admiralty board or some such -- essentially it came down to an administrative review by the base CO. Their final decision was relayed to me as this: "We are currently downsizing from Desert Storm, and any reason we can find to disallow an enlistment we have to take seriously. If you had enlisted 6 months ago (as Desert Storm was raging) we'd have kept you without question."

Sheryl Nantus
11-03-2006, 01:22 AM
It's a sad, sad day in musicial history when Prince sells out and gets in the back pocket of a Las Vegas casino/resort (Rio.)

What's next? Sineaod O'Connor on a Nike commericial?

I'm sure John Lennon and Paul McCartney were thinking about Nike when they wrote Revolution, really...

*sighs*

I lost it when I heard Bob Dylan songs selling trucks. Really, have they no shame!

blacbird
11-03-2006, 02:07 AM
I lost it when I heard Bob Dylan songs selling trucks. Really, have they no shame!

Neil Young still "don't sing for no Coke."

If he ever does, I'm converting to Islam.

caw.

billythrilly7th
11-03-2006, 02:14 AM
I'm very excited to buy the new Cat Stevens/Yusef Islam album coming out shortly.

Thank you.

TheGaffer
11-03-2006, 02:22 AM
Coming back to your earlier point, Clary -- from a CS Monitor article earlier this year:


From time to time, the Army has had to recruit more soldiers from the "lowest acceptable" category based on test scores, education levels, personal background, and other indicators of ability.

The phrase "from time to time," is too vague for my taste. But still. Anyway, here's the piece, if you're interested.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0824/p02s02-usmi.html

miles111
11-03-2006, 02:57 AM
Decided to remove the post. It added nothing to the thread.

Point taken, blacbird.

'Honorable men?' Please....

billythrilly7th
11-03-2006, 03:05 AM
then why aren't the bush sisters over there?

The secret service won't let them.

Security logistical nightmare.

Also, watch "Air Force One."

'Nuff said.

dclary
11-03-2006, 03:24 AM
Let's see, Kerry gets slammed for hinting that rich kids are much less likely than poor kids to ever have to serve in the military—especially in a time of war. And rw dumbasses say Kerry has no respect for the troops, though he volunteered and SERVED in Viet Nam. Unlike the prez and VP.

Then you have president dipshit going around the country saying how noble, and urgent and necessary the Iraq war is, and how he LOVES all the brave servicemen who are being shot at every day. And how he thanks them and how fine it is for them to act as targets over there.

Meanwhile Barb and Jenns bush who were born in November of 1981 and are plenty old enough to serve, never seem to go near an Army recruitment center. Just makes one wonder: if the Iraq war is such a just and noble cause, and if it is every young person's duty to serve, then why aren't the bush sisters over there? They could certainly handle a rifle as well as that dick, Cheney.

I'd like to reply to in a specific manner. I want you (and the rest of AW) to understand that I am replying in this manner to make a point, and for no ulterior, sinister, or inappropriate reason. Ok? Here goes.



What does this f*ckwad poster have against the Bush sisters? Why not make Slut Carter or B*tch Clinton serve?



You make a decent point, Miles. It's completely lost by your total lack of decorum and respect by referring to honorable men with stupid vulgarity.

You don't have to like or respect the man, but you really ought to respect the office enough to debate the issue civilly.

blacbird
11-03-2006, 03:31 AM
You make a decent point, Miles. It's completely lost by your total lack of decorum and respect by referring to honorable men with stupid vulgarity.

I gotta echo this. Try the decaf, Miles.

caw.

robeiae
11-03-2006, 03:34 AM
Let's see, Kerry gets slammed for hinting that rich kids are much less likely than poor kids to ever have to serve in the military—especially in a time of war.Actually he was hinting--no,actually saying--that kids who don't study serve in the military. He's getting slammed for that, and rightly so.

And rw dumbasses say Kerry has no respect for the troops, though he volunteered and SERVED in Viet Nam.So what if he served. That doensn't mean he necassarily has respect for the troops. And his words indicate that he clearly does not. Even most lw morons realize that.

Kentuk
11-03-2006, 05:55 AM
Actually he was hinting--no,actually saying--that kids who don't study serve in the military. He's getting slammed for that, and rightly so.
So what if he served. That doensn't mean he necassarily has respect for the troops. And his words indicate that he clearly does not. Even most lw morons realize that.
I think the Dems are too quick to back peddle. The war is obviously going to hell. The recruiters must be having a hard time. The whole country has its heads stuck in the ground insisting in vain we have to stay the course. This whole issue is going to crack wide two months too late.
This war is going to have an ugly ending.
Terry

blacbird
11-03-2006, 08:26 AM
Actually he was hinting--no,actually saying--that kids who don't study serve in the military.

Not, Robbie, and I think you deep down really know that. He was making a really dumb attempt at a scurrilous joke on Dubya. It was dumb, dumb, dumb, he should have known it was dumb, he didn't, and didn't catch the unintended implications, and that's bad enough. Kind of like Trent Lott's accolade about Strom Thurmond's segregationist 1948 Presidential run. Stupid, stupid, stupid, enough justifiably to get Lott out of the Majority Leader post in the Senate, and enough justifiably to scuttle any feeble Presidential run ambitions Kerry might have been gestating.

By the way, with Frist retiring from the Senate, there's rumor about that Lott might try to regain the Repub Senate leadership. Do something about that, will you? Get a sensible one, Lindsey Graham, Charles Grassley, Chuck Hagel, somebody who's porch doesn't need Presidential approval to get rebuilt.

caw.

robeiae
11-03-2006, 08:27 AM
I think the Dems are too quick to back peddle. The war is obviously going to hell. The recruiters must be having a hard time. The whole country has its heads stuck in the ground insisting in vain we have to stay the course. This whole issue is going to crack wide two months too late.
This war is going to have an ugly ending.
TerryAll of which, whether correct or not, has zero to do with what John Kerry said and the criticism he is receiving for saying it. Or do you think he was right to say what he said?

robeiae
11-03-2006, 08:30 AM
Not, Robbie, and I think you deep down really know that. He was making a really dumb attempt at a scurrilous joke on Dubya.Sorry, no I don't. I think Kerry's remarks reflect exactly how he feels. He's an elitist snob who thinks he's better then everyone else, end of story.

blacbird
11-03-2006, 08:34 AM
Agree with the elitist snob judgment, but his comment wasn't aimed at troops. Any more than Lott's famed gaffe was aimed at black Americans. Both stupid and unacceptable at any level. That doesn't get either one of them off the hook in any way.

caw.

Kentuk
11-03-2006, 08:38 AM
All of which, whether correct or not, has zero to do with what John Kerry said and the criticism he is receiving for saying it. Or do you think he was right to say what he said?

No, he thinks he flubbed a joke. I think it is wrong for people to jump all over it in the name of defending the honor of our troops. I've become disallusioned over time and distrust the motives of flag wavers.

Terry

BottomlessCup
11-03-2006, 09:01 AM
It doesn't really work as a joke about Bush, though, does it?

Bush has a degree from an Ivy League school. He certainly "did well" with regard to the educational system. You can argue about Bush's intelligence, but he's undeniably educated.

I think Kerry said what he believes.

blacbird
11-03-2006, 09:23 AM
It doesn't really work as a joke about Bush, though, does it?

Bush has a degree from an Ivy League school. He certainly "did well" with regard to the educational system. You can argue about Bush's intelligence, but he's undeniably educated.

A. No, it doesn't work as a joke about Bush, which is why it's idiotic.

B. Bush also has a credential as a military veteran, evidently earned through attending frat parties rather than National Guard training. I think I can argue both about his intelligence and his educational credentials, starting with: He got into his Ivy League school through the good ol' Ivy League Affirmative Action Program: His pappy was an alum. All that was needed.

caw.

billythrilly7th
11-03-2006, 09:26 AM
B. Bush also has a credential as a military veteran, evidently earned through attending frat parties

I don't think you appreciate how much you can learn about defending a country at a frat party.

Keg Diving is very similar to paratrooping.

Crowd control and disbursment.

Hand to hand combat.

Drugging and extracting information or persuading behavior.

And pledging is like basic training.

Many many more....

dclary
11-03-2006, 11:17 AM
A. No, it doesn't work as a joke about Bush, which is why it's idiotic.

B. Bush also has a credential as a military veteran, evidently earned through attending frat parties rather than National Guard training. I think I can argue both about his intelligence and his educational credentials, starting with: He got into his Ivy League school through the good ol' Ivy League Affirmative Action Program: His pappy was an alum. All that was needed.

caw.

Alums must get all the breaks: Bush had a higher GPA than Kerry.

TheGaffer
11-03-2006, 04:21 PM
Alums must get all the breaks: Bush had a higher GPA than Kerry.
in his freshman year only.

SC Harrison
11-03-2006, 04:53 PM
It doesn't really work as a joke about Bush, though, does it?



Try these:

"And I suspect that what you'll see, Toby, is there will be a momentum, momentum will be gathered. Houses will begat jobs, jobs will begat houses." --George W. Bush, talking to reporters along the hurricane-ravaged Gulf Coast, Gulfport, Miss., Aug. 28, 2006

"I've reminded the prime minister-the American people, Mr. Prime Minister, over the past months that it was not always a given that the United States and America would have a close relationship." George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., June 29, 2006

"No question that the enemy has tried to spread sectarian violence. They use violence as a tool to do that." --George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., March 22, 2006

"See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda." --George W. Bush, Greece, N.Y., May 24, 2005

"We expect the states to show us whether or not we're achieving simple objectives -- like literacy, literacy in math, the ability to read and write." --George W. Bush, on federal education requirements, Washington, D.C., April 28, 2005

"We look forward to analyzing and working with legislation that will make -- it would hope -- put a free press's mind at ease that you're not being denied information you shouldn't see." --George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., April 14, 2005

"I speak plainly sometimes, but you've got to be mindful of the consequences of the words. So put that down. I don't know if you'd call that a confession, a regret, something." --George W. Bush, speaking to reporters, Washington, D.C., Jan. 14, 2005




Come to America! We guarantee we're no worse than where you're from, we've got great roads, we have the fattest children in the world, and you don't need to be a rocket scientist to become President!

Yay!

robeiae
11-03-2006, 05:24 PM
No, he thinks he flubbed a joke. I think it is wrong for people to jump all over it in the name of defending the honor of our troops. I've become disallusioned over time and distrust the motives of flag wavers.I'm not defending anyone's honour--it's not my responsibility to do so for anyone but myself. And I'm not waving any flags. All I'm doing is calling Kerry exactly what I perceive him to be.

You don't agree? Fine. But trying to reframe this single issue to protect your own ideology is a waste of time, imo. Kerry's comment says nothing about the Democratic Party or liberals in general. It's not about policy, it's about Kerry.

robeiae
11-03-2006, 05:31 PM
Agree with the elitist snob judgment, but his comment wasn't aimed at troops.True, to the extent that his comment was aimed at anyone who doesn't have enough education to meet Kerry's standards; being a "troop" was just one of the possible options for these poor bastards.

So that element of his "joke" that was aimed at Bush was really just the idea that Iraq was a mess. To claim that Kerry was trying to say Bush was the uneducated one stuck in Iraq is the height of absurdity. Really, I can't believe people are actually willing to accept this explanation. But then again...

C.bronco
11-03-2006, 05:43 PM
I don't know, but somehow I think an elected official who manages to put his foot in his mouth even with a written speech could somehow be more hazardous in foreign relations than someone who, let's say, barfs on a Japanese ambassador.

TheGaffer
11-03-2006, 05:44 PM
Kerry's comment says nothing about the Democratic Party or liberals in general. It's not about policy, it's about Kerry.

This is true. But I think we all agree on this. And we all want him to go away now, and shut up.


To claim that Kerry was trying to say Bush was the uneducated one stuck in Iraq is the height of absurdity.

Actually, I'd call the fact that we are stuck in Iraq now as a result of this unintelligent man the height of absurdity.

Sheryl Nantus
11-03-2006, 06:04 PM
Come to America! We guarantee we're no worse than where you're from, we've got great roads, we have the fattest children in the world, and you don't need to be a rocket scientist to become President!

Yay!

but he does have a Master's in Business Administration...

?

robeiae
11-03-2006, 06:13 PM
Actually, I'd call the fact that we are stuck in Iraq now as a result of this unintelligent man the height of absurdity.
:ROFL:
I walked into that one.

But it doesn't let Kerry of the hook, and I know you aren't saying that it does.

TheGaffer
11-03-2006, 06:19 PM
When you get a fat pitch, you gotta swing. (No Carlos Beltran jokes, Billy.)

SC Harrison
11-03-2006, 06:36 PM
but he does have a Master's in Business Administration...

?

Yeah, from Yale. Pffft. I hope he at least got a decent mop-n-bucket out of the deal. ;)

Which reminds me of something Homer once said:

"Lisa, I'm getting really tired of all this Vasser-bashing!"

dclary
11-03-2006, 08:04 PM
in his freshman year only.

Kerry's cumulative average over 4 years was 76. Bush's was 77. Both improved during their 4 years, but Kerry had such a bad start his higher senior-year grades did nothing but help close the gap.



No, he thinks he flubbed a joke. I think it is wrong for people to jump all over it in the name of defending the honor of our troops.

The problem, as I see it, blaccy, is that even *if* Kerry intended this as a joke against Bush, our troops were the punchline. He meant to say "If you end up as an enlisted man because of no education, you could have a dumbass send you to iraq." -- But that just implies "go to school, or else" on the part of the students, and slams Bush.

That's not what he said. He *piled on* the insults on the people going into the military, not the ones running it. I mean, he is at a community college. He is speaking to college students about their education. Take the quote IN context (Kerry desperately wishes you won't) and read it verbatim: "Education, if you make the most of it, if you study hard and you do your homework, and you make an effort to be smart, uh, you, you can do well. If you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq."

That is no slam on Bush. That says, quite specifically "The boys dying in Iraq did not make the most of their education. They did not study hard. They did not do their homework. They made no effort to be smart."

I mean, I got banned from AW for a *joke* that was less botched than this. You guys on the left are still going to defend him on it?

TheGaffer
11-03-2006, 09:10 PM
I mean, I got banned from AW for a *joke* that was less botched than this. You guys on the left are still going to defend him on it?

We can ban him from AW if you like.

greglondon
11-03-2006, 09:29 PM
The problem, as I see it, blaccy, is that even *if* Kerry intended this as a joke against Bush, our troops were the punchline. He meant to say "If you end up as an enlisted man because of no education, you could have a dumbass send you to iraq." -- But that just implies "go to school, or else" on the part of the students, and slams Bush.

That argument only works if you paraphrase Kerry. If you look at exactly what Kerry was recorded as saying, you can see where he was going with it:



You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq.


Going to college isn't even mentioned. He's specifically setting up to point out that the president is a moron.

President Barney Fife wanted to invade Iraq when he first got into office, long before 9-11. When 9-11 happened, he jumped on it. He put his bullet in his gun and he was just itching to use it. He didn't study what it would really take to invade and occupy Iraq, he didn't do his homework and ignored the international inspectors and his own intelligence people who said there were no WMD's, and he definitately didn't make an effort to be smart when it came to planning the actual invasion and occupation. We went in with insufficient manpower, lack of weapons and armor, lack of a plan for occupation, of a plan for when to leave. Rumsfeld fired several generals before we first invaded Iraq because they kept saying it would take a couple hundred thousand troops to occupy the country, and Rummy didn't want that number to scare the public away from supporting an invasion. Instead, the administration kept insisting it would be 6 weeks to 6 months before we would turn it over to the Iraqis and have our own troops back home.

President Fife and the Mayberry Machiavellis are clearly the intended target of Kerry's joke. The only folks who say otherwise are the people still saying how great the emporer's new clothes look.

dclary
11-03-2006, 09:34 PM
That argument only works if you paraphrase Kerry. If you look at exactly what Kerry was recorded as saying, you can see where he was going with it:



Going to college isn't even mentioned. He's specifically setting up to point out that the president is a moron.

President Barney Fife wanted to invade Iraq when he first got into office, long before 9-11. When 9-11 happened, he jumped on it. He put his bullet in his gun and he was just itching to use it. He didn't study what it would really take to invade and occupy Iraq, he didn't do his homework and ignored the international inspectors and his own intelligence people who said there were no WMD's, and he definitately didn't make an effort to be smart when it came to planning the actual invasion and occupation. We went in with insufficient manpower, lack of weapons and armor, lack of a plan for occupation, of a plan for when to leave. Rumsfeld fired several generals before we first invaded Iraq because they kept saying it would take a couple hundred thousand troops to occupy the country, and Rummy didn't want that number to scare the public away from supporting an invasion. Instead, the administration kept insisting it would be 6 weeks to 6 months before we would turn it over to the Iraqis and have our own troops back home.

President Fife and the Mayberry Machiavellis are clearly the intended target of Kerry's joke. The only folks who say otherwise are the people still saying how great the emporer's new clothes look.


Wow. It took you a whole sh*tload of paraphrase to spin that joke Kerry's way.

greglondon
11-03-2006, 09:38 PM
That says, quite specifically "The boys dying in Iraq did not make the most of their education. They did not study hard. They did not do their homework. They made no effort to be smart."

Right, because what would any politician remotely considering running for president do but insult the entire United States Military in an effort to get some votes from a community college.

This is paper logic. It only makes sense from an emotional level as long as the words are pulling heartstrings and no one looks at what they would actually imply. And what this implies, when you unravel it, is absurd.

greglondon
11-03-2006, 09:44 PM
. It took you a whole sh*tload of paraphrase to spin that joke Kerry's way.

And you've been taking his words only at face value, right? Because what presidential hopeful wouldn't kiss up to a community college at the expense of insulting the entire US military. I mean it makes perfect sense that he would do this.

Here's a little news flash for you. Anytime someone objects to a moronic war or a stupid invasion or an imbecilic bombing, the people who support it love to turn questioning the military orders into questioning the military itself. Kerry has no reason to insult the military people, the guys in the trenches. He has nothing to gain and he has no personal view that says military service is a dishonorable thing. To imply that he does is unbelievably naive.

greglondon
11-03-2006, 09:46 PM
cue the swiftboat veterans for spin...

greglondon
11-03-2006, 09:49 PM
Yoda supports the war in Iraq? That's too funny.
Jedi don't crave adventure.

eldragon
11-03-2006, 09:58 PM
:sleepy:

This thread is better than Excedrin PM.

MacAllister
11-03-2006, 10:01 PM
Ahh, Greg! Excellent. :) I figured you'd find your way up here. We have a handful of resident hard-core neo-cons and libertarians.

This should be fun.

greglondon
11-03-2006, 10:09 PM
Since Yoda can't be bothered to read too much, I'll shorten it a bit. This is exactly what Kerry said in his speech:


You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq.

And this is clearly aiming for Bush:

Bush didn't study what it would really take to invade and occupy Iraq, he didn't do his homework and ignored the international inspectors and his own intelligence people who said there were no WMD's, and he definitately didn't make an effort to be smart when it came to planning the actual invasion and occupation (lack of armor, not enough troops, no exit strategy, 6 months and we should be out, right?).

I hope that's a shorter paraphrase.

Notably lacking is any reference to the word "college". There is nothing in these words that say "if you're smart, you'll go to college. If you're dumb, you'll have to join the military".

It's clear Kerry's intended target was Bush. And it's also clear that Kerry botched it. He should have apologized for botching it, rather than running around and trying to explain it away. But to actually sit there in your swamp in Degobah and say he really did mean to call the entire US military a bunch of morons is really, really silly.

blacbird
11-03-2006, 10:31 PM
"Originally Posted by The Bird
No, he thinks he flubbed a joke. I think it is wrong for people to jump all over it in the name of defending the honor of our troops."

I didn't say this, declarey, Kentuk did. I think I've made it pretty explicit that I have no intention of defending Kerry's idiotic remark, regardless of our difference of opinion as to what he really meant. It was spherically stupid, stupid anyway you look at it. It would have been stupid and lame even if he'd managed to utter it without flarking it up.

caw

dclary
11-03-2006, 10:59 PM
And you've been taking his words only at face value, right? What I wish is that we had the transcript of the whole speech, to be sure both sides can get the full context. But yeah, I take everything on face level. I don't really do subtext.


Because what presidential hopeful wouldn't kiss up to a community college at the expense of insulting the entire US military.John Kerry. Duh. He has a long, proud tradition of doing this. Can you name any other presidential hopefuls with a memorial to them in Ho Chi Minh City?


Kerry... has no personal view that says military service is a dishonorable thing. To imply that he does is unbelievably naive.>.<

I don't have to. John Kerry will himself:

There are all kinds of atrocities, and I would have to say that, yes, yes, I committed the same kind of atrocities as thousands of other soldiers have committed

I believe that the men who designed these, the men who designed the free fire zone, the men who ordered us, the men who signed off the air raid strike areas, I think these men, by the letter of the law, the same letter of the law that tried Lieutenant Calley, are war criminals.

We will not take solace from the creation of monuments or the naming of parks after a select few of the thousands of dead Americans and Vietnamese. We will not uphold traditions which decorously memorialize that which was base and grim.

dclary
11-03-2006, 11:03 PM
Bush didn't study what it would really take to invade and occupy Iraq, he didn't do his homework and ignored the international inspectors and his own intelligence people who said there were no WMD's, and he definitately didn't make an effort to be smart when it came to planning the actual invasion and occupation (lack of armor, not enough troops, no exit strategy, 6 months and we should be out, right?).

I will say this. You're a magnificent extrapolator. How this is CLEARLY a joke against Bush is beyond me.

For instance: this is a joke clearly aimed at Bush.

"You ought get a good education, work hard, and study. Otherwise you'll end up like president Bush."

This is a joke not clearly aimed at Bush.

"You oughta get a good education, work hard, and study. Otherwise you'll end up in Iraq."


It boggles my mind that you hate Bush so bad you're willing to defend this so hard.

billythrilly7th
11-03-2006, 11:31 PM
It boggles my mind that you hate Bush so bad you're willing to defend this so hard.

The hatred coming from so many on the left has reached the point of absolute absurdity. I've moved from mind boggled to enjoyment at the complete unhingedness of so many people.

There's nowhere else you can go with it, David. The mind can't comprehend the size of the universe and at some point, you just have to laugh and say "wow." The same with the level of hatred for Bush, a man who at worst, maybe overreached in his effort to make sure he never had to witness 3000 Americans dead in the street.

Essentially, he's hated for removing Saddam Hussein and his psychopath sons.

Bush didn't order an invasion to remove Nelson Mandela or the invasion of Norway.

After 9/11, he made a decision to remove one of the most brutal pieces of human garbage in earth history. You can have sincere debate whether that was the right decision at the time until the cows come home. You can debate how long we should try and make it work there as well. You can debate what level of tools the people trying to protect us should have etc...

But it's just so amusing that the so called "defenders of the down trodden" far left would HATE....HATE...HATE someone for removing such a brutal man.

It's amusing that a man could be so hated for just trying to prevent the worst thing that ever happened to our country from ever happening again, even if his methodolgy is wrong and maybe oversteps.

It boggles the mind.

Hey, David, I guess you were right in the first place.
:)

dclary
11-03-2006, 11:43 PM
Plus, I like playing Boggle.

billythrilly7th
11-03-2006, 11:45 PM
It's no Connect Four, but it's a helluva game.

English Dave
11-03-2006, 11:56 PM
But it's just so amusing that the so called "defenders of the down trodden" far left would HATE....HATE...HATE someone for removing such a brutal man.

It's amusing that a man could be so hated for just trying to prevent the worst thing that ever happened to our country from ever happening again, even if his methodolgy is wrong and maybe oversteps.



I don't hate Bush. I think he's a manipulated jerkoff. But I don't hate him. Because then I'd have to hate Tony Blair as being a manipulated jerkoff's fluffer.

Oh come on. Iraq was an illconcieved sideshow. We've had that argument ad nauseum.

greglondon
11-03-2006, 11:58 PM
>>Kerry... has no personal view that says military service is a dishonorable >>thing. To imply that he does is unbelievably naive.

>I don't have to. John Kerry will himself:
>
>There are all kinds of atrocities, and I would have to say
>that, yes, yes, I committed the same kind of atrocities as
>thousands of other soldiers have committed

So much for "I take everything on face level. I don't really do subtext."

I said Kerry doesn't have a view that military service is dishonorable. That's the face value of what I said. You took into subtext and turned it into criticizing the military attacking civilians. But hey, didn't I just say, people love to take criticism of a dumb war and turn it into criticism of all military personel?

So, you know, if I say "Bush is a moron" and that Bush's war in Iraq is a quagmire and boondoggle and the most f-ed up thing our government has done in a long time, folks like you turn around and say "BooHoo! Don't insult our troops!"

I'm not insulting the troops, by calling Bush's war a suck hole that is going to kill more Americans than 9-11 did, or kill more civilian Iraqis than Americans were killed in WW2. I'm not insulting the troops by saying Bush's military combatant designation and indefinite imprisonment of detainees is a violation of the Geneva Convention. And I'm not insulting the troops when I demand that torture allegations at Abu Graib be fully investigated and punished to the greatest extent possible.

It's a nice game to change the subject of someon's sentence, but when I criticize Bush, I criticize Bush. If I criticize some group of american military personel who have committed torture, I am not condemning the entire military service. If I criticize some american military personell who rape and kill an Iraqi girl and then murder her family to bury all witnesses, I am not condemning the entire military.

And you're no Yoda for suggesting one has anything to do with the other.

Kerry's criticism of Vietnam was not criticism of Americans serving their country, it was criticism of a massively bad military campaign. A boondoggle with no exit strategy. A quagmire where the number of Vietnamese civilians killed exceeded the number of american troops killed in WW2. Why were we in Vietnam? What noble cause? The "domino theory" of communism then was the phantom "weapons of mass destruction" snipe hunt of today. Did it justify millions of Vietnamese civilians dead? Why are we in Iraq? Bush Senior considered it back in Gulf War 1 and saw it to be a Phyric victory at best, the demise of the american military at worst. And now we're overextended in a country that has no WMD's and hasn't been working on nukes for years, meanwhile Shrub has allowed North Korea to go nuclear and Iran is getting close, and our military is spread so thin we can't deal with real threats. We can't deal with a hurricane that gave us weeks of prior notification that wiped out New Orleans, how do you think we'd deal with a suitcase nuke with zero notification? And do I criticize the entire US military, the entire US government, the entire US people, if I criticize this administration?


It boggles my mind that you hate Bush so bad you're willing to defend this so hard.

It boggles my mind that you consider any criticism of some part of a group to be criticism of the entire group.

Welcome to the US. Freedom of speech for all. As long as you agree with the administration in power.

billythrilly7th
11-03-2006, 11:58 PM
I'm not saying everyone on the left hates him,EDave.

Some people have both sincere objections and deserved criticism for the man.

Others are in serious need of cognitive behavioral therapy and most importantly....

www.angercoach.com

Thank you.

billythrilly7th
11-04-2006, 12:01 AM
Greg, you must have been part of the Clinton linguistic defense team.

Excellent work with Bubba.

Tell me, did you feed him the "is is" line?

greglondon
11-04-2006, 12:11 AM
Essentially, he's hated for removing Saddam Hussein and his psychopath sons.

What are you, Tokyo Rose or something? Do you write propaganda pieces in your spare time?

No, Bush isnt' hated for removing Saddam Hussein. He's hated for killing a two hundred year legal tradition called Habeus Corpus that somehow we managed to keep in place despite all teh wars and tragedies this country suffered in the two centuries of its history. He's hated by people who think that the Geneva Convention keeps us from descending into barbarism, by people who believe tortore is unacceptable military strategy.

He's hated for ignoring his entire intelligence community that said there are no WMD's in Iraq and saying Saddam has WMD's anyway. He's hated for silencing the generals who said we would need several hundred thousand troops to occupy Iraq and it would take several years before we could hand over teh country to a new Iraqi government, and told us it would take 100k troops and we'd be out in 6 weeks or 6 months at most. He's hated for ignoring all the wisdom and intelligence that his father put into investigating invading Iraq back in Gulf 1, that it would be a quagmire occupation with no exit strategy, and he invaded anyway. He's hated for continuing to push for more and more power to be handed to his administration when it has been repeatedly demonstrated that he couldn't lead his way out of an escalator. He's hated for spending so much time after 9-11 on showmanship security, rather than real security, to the point that when Katrina hit with a week's notice, we were left with our pants down for a week before there was any real response.

But no, I'm not so moronic as to suggest I hate him for bringing down Saddam.

Care to post another strawman?

billythrilly7th
11-04-2006, 12:13 AM
What are you, Tokyo Rose or something? Do you write propaganda pieces in your spare time?


"Personal insults are the last recourse of an exhausted mind."

I don't engage with tired people.
:)

greglondon
11-04-2006, 12:15 AM
Greg, you must have been part of the Clinton linguistic defense team.

Thank you, Tokyo Rose. Because, you know, getting a bl-wj-b is impeachable, but being so incompetant that you mislead the country into two botched wars, get thousands of americans killed, hundreds of thousands of foreign civilians killed, approve torture as a tactic, put an end to habeus corpus, and spend a week after Katrina pointing fingers rather than doing something, well, that's just the line of work.

billythrilly7th
11-04-2006, 12:18 AM
No, Bush isnt' hated for removing Saddam Hussein. He's hated for killing a two hundred year legal tradition called Habeus Corpus that somehow we managed to keep in place despite all teh wars and tragedies this country suffered in the two centuries of its history. He's hated by people who think that the Geneva Convention keeps us from descending into barbarism, by people who believe tortore is unacceptable military strategy.

He's hated for ignoring his entire intelligence community that said there are no WMD's in Iraq and saying Saddam has WMD's anyway. He's hated for silencing the generals who said we would need several hundred thousand troops to occupy Iraq and it would take several years before we could hand over teh country to a new Iraqi government, and told us it would take 100k troops and we'd be out in 6 weeks or 6 months at most. He's hated for ignoring all the wisdom and intelligence that his father put into investigating invading Iraq back in Gulf 1, that it would be a quagmire occupation with no exit strategy, and he invaded anyway. He's hated for continuing to push for more and more power to be handed to his administration when it has been repeatedly demonstrated that he couldn't lead his way out of an escalator. He's hated for spending so much time after 9-11 on showmanship security, rather than real security, to the point that when Katrina hit with a week's notice, we were left with our pants down for a week before there was any real response.

You must have missed this part...


You can debate what level of tools the people trying to protect us should have etc...

It's amusing that a man could be so hated for just trying to prevent the worst thing that ever happened to our country from ever happening again, even if his methodolgy is wrong and maybe oversteps.


But that's okay.

You're very angry. No more Habeaus Corpus.The constitution has been destroyed. The Geneva convention is laying in a ball in the corner of the Oval office.

I truly understand why you'd be angry and hateful.

I forgot about all that stuff.

My mistake.

greglondon
11-04-2006, 12:19 AM
"Personal insults are the last recourse of an exhausted mind."

I don't engage with tired people.

Aw, I'm sorry. Did I bother you?

if you can't stand the heat, don't hide behind strawman attacks*. They're very flammable.

*And because you seem a little slow on the uptake, the strawman in question is your nonsense argument that "people hate Bush because he got rid of Saddam". Uh, right. That's exactly why I hate Bush. Sure.

billythrilly7th
11-04-2006, 12:19 AM
Thank you, Tokyo Rose.

Okay...if this is your M.O. of debate, I bid you farewell.

billythrilly7th
11-04-2006, 12:21 AM
*And because you seem a little slow on the uptake,

Good day, sir.

dclary
11-04-2006, 12:24 AM
So, you know, if I say "Bush is a moron" and that Bush's war in Iraq is a quagmire and boondoggle and the most f-ed up thing our government has done in a long time, folks like you turn around and say "BooHoo! Don't insult our troops!"

Folks like me? Didn't study hard? Didn't get an education? I don't fit well in buttonholes.


It's a nice game to change the subject of someon's sentence, but when I criticize Bush, I criticize Bush. Yes, and it's too bad you're not John Kerry, isn't it? If he was criticizing Bush, maybe he should have mentioned Bush?


If I criticize some group of american military personel who have committed torture, I am not condemning the entire military service. Kerry's point in his testimony to congress wasn't that it was some group of soldiers, but that it was endemic throughout the entire military.


Why were we in Vietnam? What noble cause? The "domino theory" of communism then was the phantom "weapons of mass destruction" snipe hunt of today. Was it? We won Viet Nam: no new nations turned to communism in southeast Asia after we made our stand there.


And do I criticize the entire US military, the entire US government, the entire US people, if I criticize this administration?No, of course not. I think you show a real naivete in your worldview, but that's no crime.


Welcome to the US. Freedom of speech for all. As long as you agree with the administration in power.No one said Kerry couldn't say what he said. Just that he was a dumbass for saying it.

greglondon
11-04-2006, 12:26 AM
It's amusing that a man could be so hated for just trying to prevent the worst thing that ever happened to our country from ever happening again, even if his methodolgy is wrong and maybe oversteps.

Yeah, sorry. Missed that. If I had noticed, I would have pointed out the complete and utter fantasy that 9-11 was the worst thing that ever happened to this country. We've had world wars that were far worse.

And if Bush's methodology was wrong and he overstepped his boundaries as a president, why shouldn't we complain? Do you think any other president would have tried to NOT prevent a 9-11 from happening again? You think a Democratic president would have sent Bin Laden a telegram saying "Yeah, give me more of that"?

How are we to judge a president but by his effectiveness? His methodology? His overstepping? Do we give Bush a "pass" simply because he had good intentions? This only makes sense if you think any other president would have had bad intentions. Otherwise, one can assume that no president would ahve wanted to see 9-11 repeated, and then they would be judged solely on the effectiveness of their actions, their methodology.

But I guess if Bush had good intentions, then whether or not he did a single thing right is ok by you.

TheGaffer
11-04-2006, 12:27 AM
Greg pretty much put it how I would have, Billy. You forget Bush had 90% approval ratings after 9/11, and they slowly eroded. They eroded for a reason (several reasons, actually).

I don't see how you can see so many former moderates move to the left and some slightly-right-of-center people (like the Kansas ex-Gop now becoming Democrats, Andrew Sullivan, Chris Hitchens) without understanding that it's not just a knee-jerk kind of hatred but founded upon a number of decisions that have been made that combine the following:

A) breathtaking arrogance and belief in their own power above everyone else ("We create our own reality.")
B) failure to listen, trust or work with anyone who doesn't meet the standard of loyalty or agreement they deem necessary (Paul O'Neill, Colin Powell, Richard Clarke)
C) poor organization and poor planning (Iraq, Iraq, Iraq)
D) willfull lack of oversight for decisions made and an unwavering disdain for those who demand oversight (see: 9/11 Commission, needed to have arms twisted to be formed)
E) blithe disregard of the institutions that this country built over 200 years, or a twisting of those to serve those in power only (see: signing statements, destroying the military, seeking to undermine intelligence agencies)
F) pathological need to shirk responsibility or otherwise explain away bad decisions as someone else's fault and lastly (Katrina)
G) appealing to our basest instincts in dividing the country by tarring anyone who doesn't agree as traitors, treasonists, "appeasers," or even terrorists, which started in 2002 when Bush, Rove et. al. decided to start jawboning about Iraq and claiming Democrats didn't care about national security because of arguments over certain issues.

Add those things together, and that's why you have people where they are now; why his ratings remain mired around 35%, and why you have such a heavy, rabid dissatisfaction with this man. And I think that'll manifest itself on Tuesday. While a Presidential candidate needs to offer a positive vision on the country to get elected most of the time, midterm elections are the "throw the bums out" moments (see: 1994, 1982 and 1974). When you treat people, and the nation, as cavalierly as they do, you have to always have 80% approval ratings. When you don't, no matter how compliant the media is, well, it turns, and it turns ugly.

I hope that's concise enough. But the frustration and anger comes from somewhere, Billy. And it didn't come as a result of invading Afghanistan. It came after that. I know you think I'm a moderate or at least, "not a fringe loony left" type, but it's more that I'm pragmatic, and can see that even though Ronald Reagan, for instance, did a few things that really were massive screw-ups, he also did a few good things, worked hard, trusted other people and compromised. He was a human being, in other words. As was Bill Clinton.

Basically Billy, it comes to this: I don't want my government to suck. I don't think you do either. Whether it's a conservative approach (less gov't) or liberal one (more), the "not sucking factor" remains most important. Right now our government sucks, and sucks hard, and he's to blame, and a lot of people are angry about it.

greglondon
11-04-2006, 12:29 AM
We won Viet Nam

Really?

Then we're well on our way to "winning" in Iraq.

dclary
11-04-2006, 12:32 AM
Really?

Then we're well on our way to "winning" in Iraq.

That's gotta terrify you.

English Dave
11-04-2006, 12:35 AM
Thank you, Tokyo Rose. Because, you know, getting a bl-wj-b is impeachable, .

Just as an aside, forgive me. But if impeachable is bad, is peachable good?

billythrilly7th
11-04-2006, 12:37 AM
Thank god you showed up, Gaffer. At least we can talk.


But the frustration and anger comes from somewhere, Billy.

I understand.

But everything that you hate about Bush comes from the man trying to do the right thing that he believes in his heart to protect American lives.

And there's a difference between hating his methods and hating the man.

That's the point I think you are missing.

I have no problem with anger and frustration over policy disagreement and incompetence.

I have problem with visceral, personal hatred for the President, who is just doing the best he can do.

If he's as dumb as you all think he is, you should feel sorry for the man for getting in over his head. You're supposed to be the defender of unequipped, not their bashers.

greglondon
11-04-2006, 12:42 AM
>>>We won Viet Nam

>>Really? Then we're well on our way to "winning" in Iraq.

>That's gotta terrify you.

Yeah, Iraq fracturing into uncontrollable civil war for a couple years is about as bad a scenario as I can imagine. But we'll "win" because we will have stopped evil dictators from acquiring WMDs, right?

Oh wait, no, we pooched that one already, didn't we? North Korea has already gone Nuclear under Shrub's watch. Well, Bush at least had good intentions, didn't he? Can't judge him by his results. Oh, and Iran is borderline nuclear, but Bush really, really intended that not to happen too. So if Iran gets the bomb, well, who can criticize his administration, right?

Yeah, we just keep on "winning", don't we?

I love the neo-cons who look at the war critics and say, well, "we got us into this mess, now how do you plan to get us out of it?"

Like I should be blamed for not having an exit strategy. Lovely.

No, yoda, I would love to see Iraq stabilize, maintain unity, keep a democracy, not devolve into civil war, and not turn into Afghanistan after the Soviets pulled out in the 80's. But I didn't want this war, you did. So don't get all snooty on me because you have no idea how to get us out of this mess.

eldragon
11-04-2006, 12:44 AM
But everything that you hate about Bush comes from the man trying to do the right thing that he believes in his heart to protect American lives.

Are we talking about the same guy here? The President I see doesn't seem to care about anything but gaining more power and padding his friends pockets with money. He's like a king on a throne - pointing his fingers at people and telling them to go die for him, no matter how ill-thought out the plan is. He's so out of touch with the common man, I really don't think he knows they're there.

greglondon
11-04-2006, 12:45 AM
But everything that you hate about Bush comes from the man trying to do the right thing that he believes in his heart to protect American lives.

I keep hearing someone humming the Star Spangled Banner.
Don't you, Otter?


http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0077975/quotes

billythrilly7th
11-04-2006, 12:46 AM
Gaffer,
No one here ever said you can't criticize the administration and engage in sincere policy debate.

Just wanted to let you know.

xoxo
Billy

billythrilly7th
11-04-2006, 12:49 AM
The President I see doesn't seem to care about anything but gaining more power and padding his friends pockets with money.

And he also planned 9/11.

Yes, he talks to his friends at Halliburton everyday.

"You made another 10 million today!? Awesome. Oh, don't worry about the Iraq war. You're my pal and I'm glad you're cleaning up. It's all come together!!"

That's the kind of statement that makes people on the left look bad when some of them actually try and get into sincere policy debate.

But oh well.

That's a YP, not an MP.
:)

TheGaffer
11-04-2006, 12:49 AM
But everything that you hate about Bush comes from the man trying to do the right thing that he believes in his heart to protect American lives.
Invading Iraq? Ok, I can accept that. The lack of oversight? The lack of any sense that maybe we've gotta alter our course here? No, that part of the pig-headedness I really don't understand and don't attribute to the above.


I have problem with visceral, personal hatred for the President, who is just doing the best he can do.

If he's as dumb as you all think he is, you should feel sorry for the man for getting in over his head. You're supposed to be the defender of unequipped, not their bashers.

He is in over his head. He's not up to the job. But he has this responsibility and he's not living up to it, and combines that ineptitude with this assurance that he's always right, you're always wrong if you disagree, and go to hell. And that's where the pity ends for me. I have pity on those who can't help themselves, not those who won't, and with such an awesome responsibility that affects so many people, I can't give him that kind of pass.

TheGaffer
11-04-2006, 12:50 AM
That's the kind of statement that makes people on the left look bad when some of them actually try and get into sincere policy debate.

Sure. The right has those crosses to bear, too. "You don't want to win the war on terror." "You're appeasing Saddam." "You just hate America." "You want to give the terrorists more rights." Goes both ways.

dclary
11-04-2006, 12:51 AM
No, yoda, I would love to see Iraq stabilize, maintain unity, keep a democracy, not devolve into civil war, and not turn into Afghanistan after the Soviets pulled out in the 80's. But I didn't want this war, you did. So don't get all snooty on me because you have no idea how to get us out of this mess.

Are you capable of debating without belittling? I don't call you Alf. Yet you have to make up names for each of the people you're addressing here. Why? To dehumanize them? To make you feel smug and superior?

Let's talk issues like men, not 4th-graders.

greglondon
11-04-2006, 12:53 AM
No one ever said you can't criticize the administration and engage in sincere policy debate.

But if Bush really, really, really, meant for good things to happen, can we criticize him just on his results? I mean, I'm sure if a Democrat had been elected president, like Gore or Kerry, they probably would have wanted more 9-11 attacks, rather than try to prevent them. Right? They'd probably have offered al queda transport to New York and a supply of weapons and explosives. Bush at least intended good things to happen. Is it really his fault if everything he did actually sucked?

billythrilly7th
11-04-2006, 12:53 AM
And that's where the pity ends for me. I have pity on those who can't help themselves, not those who won't, and with such an awesome responsibility that affects so many people, I can't give him that kind of pass.

I was semi-kidding with that statement. Or sarcastic.

Something like that.

holla!!

Thank you.

But I could never hate a President on a personal level for policy decisions.

But maybe I was raised properly.

:)

Thank you!

Holla!!

Good day.

eldragon
11-04-2006, 12:55 AM
And he also planned 9/11.

Yes, he talks to his friends at Halliburton everyday.

"You made another 10 million today!? Awesome. Oh, don't worry about the Iraq war. You're my pal and I'm glad you're cleaning up. It's all come together!!"

That's the kind of statement that makes people on the left look bad when some of them actually try and get into sincere policy debate.

But oh well.

That's a YP, not an MP.
:)

I never said any of that stuff. So I have no idea what you're talking about.

I never believed he had anything to do with 911.

Halluburton? Yes. Contracts for his friends.

And then there's the gas prices all of us regular guys have been paying for the past 2 years, with complete innaction on his part to do anything about it.

Ah, but gas is $1.98 today, 4 days before the election. What a coincidence.
Let's see what it costs afterwards.

greglondon
11-04-2006, 12:57 AM
Let's talk issues like men, not 4th-graders.

Gee, Wally, I'm sorry. When you said


That's gotta terrify you.

I thought you were being sarcastic and childish because I said "Then we're well on our way to "winning" in Iraq."

Like I didn't want to win in Iraq or something.
Like I watch TV and cheer every time I hear about more American's killed.

I must have misunderstood.
What exactly did you mean, then, that winning must terrify me?

greglondon
11-04-2006, 12:58 AM
I never said any of that stuff. So I have no idea what you're talking about.

It's OK. eldragon, BillyThrilly gets to make stuff up as he goes along. He's chief Strawman arguer here. It's just how this thing works.

billythrilly7th
11-04-2006, 12:59 AM
I never said any of that stuff. So I have no idea what you're talking about.

I never believed he had anything to do with 911.

Halluburton? Yes. Contracts for his friends.


Who said you did?

I didn't say YOU said he had anything to do with 911.

I offered that up as a ridiculous add on to your IMO ridiculous statement. It was an editorial choice.


Thank you.

dclary
11-04-2006, 01:01 AM
What exactly did you mean, then, that winning must terrify me?

A lot of people are afraid of being wrong. As drastically wrong as you are on this topic, that fear's gotta be somewhere along extreme phobia levels for you.

greglondon
11-04-2006, 01:01 AM
I offered that up as a ridiculous add on to your statement.

Speaking of ridiculous: They hate us for our freedom.

billythrilly7th
11-04-2006, 01:06 AM
A lot of people are afraid of being wrong. As drastically wrong as you are on this topic, that fear's gotta be somewhere along extreme phobia levels for you.

Of course.

It goes back to my oldest messageboard theme...

"The ego-centric desire to be correct over the good and welfare of the nation and world as a whole."

Many fall into that category.

Many do not.

Bravo for example. Good kid. Gaffer wavers back and forth. I think in his heart he wants to believe he'd love for Iraq to stabilize and for democracy to flourish in the middle east and for Bush to be recognized years from now as a visionary and one of the great Presidents, but I don't know, Gaffer.

Too close to call on you.
:)

TheGaffer
11-04-2006, 01:08 AM
Bravo for example. Good kid. Gaffer wavers back and forth. I think in his heart he wants to believe he'd love for Iraq to stabilize and for democracy to flourish in the middle east and for Bush to be recognized years from now as a visionary and one of the great Presidents, but I don't know, Gaffer.

Too close to call on you.

Three factors in this.

1. Will it involve unlimited amounts of fried chicken for me.

2. Can I have more chicken.

3. I'm hungry.

;)

greglondon
11-04-2006, 01:11 AM
What exactly did you mean, then, that winning must terrify me?



A lot of people are afraid of being wrong. As drastically wrong as you are on this topic, that fear's gotta be somewhere along extreme phobia levels for you.

That wasn't the question, green one. Try again. Why did you say I must be afraid of winning the war in Iraq?

And no pop-psych analysis over the internet, unless you're pulling some sort of yoda/jedi mind trick. Just answer the quetion like an adult, since that's how you want to discuss this:

Why would I be afraid of winning the war in Iraq?

Is it because I like seeing american troops getting killed every day on TV?

greglondon
11-04-2006, 01:13 AM
Bush to be recognized years from now as a visionary and one of the great Presidents,

:roll:

TheGaffer
11-04-2006, 01:13 AM
To answer Billy more seriously...

...if you'd talked to me in 2003, that would have described my position pretty well. "I hope he succeeds. I don't know why we're doing this. But if it comes out ok, good. I fear it won't. I have doubts. I think it's a very bad move. I hope I'm wrong."

In November of 2006, I can't give you that answer anymore. I think the die has been cast. I think the President doesn't recognize, or doesn't want to recognize that. So the "do you want success" question is more or less moot now. I want us to rebuild relationships we've battered in the last few years, to focus more on other priorities in our national defense, a new direction for everything. In 2003 I could have said, "Yes, if this all happens, I'll give with the inevitable loser judges and bad social policies." In 2006, it's just not an option anymore -- his power needs to be curtailed as best it can be.

That's where I stand.

English Dave
11-04-2006, 01:15 AM
Is this an Alf and Yoda deathmatch? I got popcorn!

eldragon
11-04-2006, 01:15 AM
If we do win in Iraq, what do we win?

Dead people do not come back. The money is gone. Respect from the rest of the world is history.

All this to get Saddam out of power?

How could this war end with a winner?

greglondon
11-04-2006, 01:20 AM
If we do win in Iraq, what do we win?

Well, that's easy. All you have to do is look at the exit strategy and it'll define....

Oh.

I think I see the problem.

greglondon
11-04-2006, 01:28 AM
Is this an Alf and Yoda deathmatch? I got popcorn!

Here, have some of mine.

:popcorn:

greglondon
11-04-2006, 01:35 AM
"The ego-centric desire to be correct over the good and welfare of the nation and world as a whole."

Yeah, that's good human psychology for ya:
People who disagree with me are ego-centric,
because they can't admit I'm right and they're wrong.

But then we can't judge someone like Bush based
on how his actions bring us closer or further away from
"the good and welfare of the nation and world as a whole"
because Bush had good intentions.

This is almost like moral gerrymandering.

SC Harrison
11-04-2006, 01:37 AM
The hatred coming from so many on the left has reached the point of absolute absurdity. I've moved from mind boggled to enjoyment at the complete unhingedness of so many people.

It's amusing that a man could be so hated for just trying to prevent the worst thing that ever happened to our country from ever happening again, even if his methodolgy is wrong and maybe oversteps.



I can tell you one of the reasons I feel a great deal of disgust for him. Up until very recently, he has treated almost every person who has asked him any kind of probing question as if they were less than human. The tone of his voice and his carriage made each sentence seem like he had to force himself from adding, "...you dumbass!"

In many of his speeches, his tone when explaining his actions reminds me of a parent or teacher, fast nearing the end of their patience, going over the subject one more time for their poor idiot students.

He has, in my opinion, been extremely disrespectful to the American public as a whole, while his f**cked up policies have cost us hundreds of billions, thousands of lives, erosions to the Constitution, and reduced our country to a short-sighted bully in the eyes of the rest of the world.

English Dave
11-04-2006, 01:38 AM
Well, that's easy. All you have to do is look at the exit strategy and it'll define....

Oh.

I think I see the problem.

Greg, you have to come in low with with a one two combination. Not appear to attack the ref.

greglondon
11-04-2006, 01:43 AM
Greg, you have to come in low with with a one two combination. Not appear to attack the ref.

I was attacking the administrations complete lack of exit strategy.

If it isn't clear, I wasn't commenting against eldragon in any way.

Apologies to eldragon if that's how it landed.

billythrilly7th
11-04-2006, 01:57 AM
Three factors in this.

1. Will it involve unlimited amounts of fried chicken for me.

2. Can I have more chicken.

3. I'm hungry.

;)

Yes it will!!

Popeyes if that's okay?

I LOVVVVVVVVVEEEEEE Popeye's.

eldragon
11-04-2006, 01:57 AM
Apologies to eldragon if that's how it landed.

I understood it.

greglondon
11-04-2006, 02:01 AM
cost us hundreds of billions, thousands of lives, erosions to the Constitution, and reduced our country to a short-sighted bully in the eyes of the rest of the world.

Hey, at least he had good intentions. If someone else had been president, who knows what evil they would have wished upon our country.

(end sarcasm)

billythrilly7th
11-04-2006, 02:04 AM
To answer Billy more seriously...

...if you'd talked to me in 2003, that would have described my position pretty well. "I hope he succeeds. I don't know why we're doing this. But if it comes out ok, good. I fear it won't. I have doubts. I think it's a very bad move. I hope I'm wrong."

In November of 2006, I can't give you that answer anymore. I think the die has been cast. I think the President doesn't recognize, or doesn't want to recognize that. So the "do you want success" question is more or less moot now. I want us to rebuild relationships we've battered in the last few years, to focus more on other priorities in our national defense, a new direction for everything. In 2003 I could have said, "Yes, if this all happens, I'll give with the inevitable loser judges and bad social policies." In 2006, it's just not an option anymore -- his power needs to be curtailed as best it can be.

That's where I stand.

Fair enough.

At least we can all agree that John Kerry is a hump who according to the newly released hot off the wire CBS/NY TIMES "post Iraq remark" poll probably just cost the Democrats both houses of Congress.

English Dave
11-04-2006, 02:08 AM
Fair enough.

At least we can all agree that John Kerry is a hump who according to the newly released hot off the wire CBS/NY TIMES "post Iraq remark" poll probably just cost the Democrats both houses of Congress.

Yes we all agree on that Billy.




Or do we?