PDA

View Full Version : Who is telling the truth?


the Talking Can
06-19-2006, 07:22 AM
credit to think progress (http://thinkprogress.org/2006/06/18/snow-taliban-predicatable/)

in 2004 Bush said this (his comments are archived on whitehouse.gov (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/09/20040927-4.html) )

And as a result of the United States military, Taliban no longer is in existence. And the people of Afghanistan are now free. (Applause.) In other words when you say something as President you better make it clear so everybody understands what you're saying, and you better mean what you say. And I meant what I said. (Applause.)


yesterday, Tony Snow said this (from cnn transcripts (http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/18/le.01.html) )

BLITZER: Let’s move on and talk about some other issues. I know your time is limited. Afghanistan. Is the Taliban making a serious comeback right now?

SNOW: I think what the Taliban is doing — and it’s predictable — is that they are trying to test in the south, where the U.S. forces are handing over to NATO…But A, it’s predictable, and B, in the encounters, as you know, the Taliban fighters have overwhelmingly been losing. Now, I think it is predictable…you can expect there to be pushback by the Taliban.



Now, I'm just a simple country lawyer, and I know this isn't as important as Bush making fun of a blind man, but some questions bug me:

Was Bush lying? Or did he really not know that the Taliban had never been completely destroyed?

Does Bush still believe the Taliban are "no longer in existence" even though Tony Snow thinks their existence is a matter of fact?

Does the fact that the Taliban (which at one point "no longer existed") now exist and exist in increasingly large and dangerous numbers, as report after report has documented for a long time...does this fact mean that Bush's plan was a success? Is it proof of how smart and honest he is?

Does it prove that taking resources away from Afghanistan to invade Iraq was brilliant idea on Bush's part?

Is this all part of Bush's master plan? Did he expect the Taliban "that no longer exist" to return and wage war in Afghanistan?

Will the press ever ask Bush how the Taliban went from "non-existence" to existence? Will he answer? Will he answer honestly?

Does anyone, ever, hold Bush accountable for what he says?

Does anyone, ever, hold Bush accountable for what he does?

Baby Lee
06-19-2006, 08:59 AM
I think he was referring to the Taliban as the ruling politcal party. Kind of like the Allies ridding Germany of Nazism.

Mr. Kotter
06-19-2006, 10:53 AM
I think he was referring to the Taliban as the ruling politcal party. Kind of like the Allies ridding Germany of Nazism.Now, now BL.....that's not polite to totally disarm a perfectly good rant, without giving the thread a chance to devolve into irrational ad hominem Bush hatred.

%(/

patteeu
06-19-2006, 11:32 AM
Wow, this is a major GOTCHA! LOL

go bowe
06-19-2006, 11:32 AM
devolve?

good gawd, are you trying to sound like baby lee light?

Mr. Kotter
06-19-2006, 11:39 AM
devolve?

good gawd, are you trying to sound like baby lee light?

Exactly. You know me....just trying to fit in with the "cool" kids. Yup, yup. :p

Baby Lee
06-19-2006, 11:42 AM
devolve?

good gawd, are you trying to sound like baby lee light?
Are you busting on my glorious vocabulence?
Two syllables is all it takes? ;)

the Talking Can
06-19-2006, 11:51 AM
"And as a result of the United States military, Taliban no longer is in existence."

not finding the ambiguity in this statement....and the questions remain regardless, what does the Taliban resurgence mean in regards to Bush's plan?

Will he tell us? Will anyone ask him?

but thanks for following the script all...I almost posted your replies in advance, but was too lazy...

Mr. Kotter
06-19-2006, 11:54 AM
"And as a result of the United States military, Taliban [government/ruling faction] no longer is in existence."...

Hope that helps, Can....

go bowe
06-19-2006, 12:09 PM
Are you busting on my glorious vocabulence?
Two syllables is all it takes? ;)two syllables of laudable, if not glorious, vocabulence...

if sufficiently outside of common usage by ordinary vocabulences, it qualifies...

go bowe
06-19-2006, 12:14 PM
"And as a result of the United States military, Taliban no longer is in existence."

not finding the ambiguity in this statement....and the questions remain regardless, what does the Taliban resurgence mean in regards to Bush's plan?

Will he tell us? Will anyone ask him?

but thanks for following the script all...I almost posted your replies in advance, but was too lazy...it seems to me that this is more of a typical bush misstatement than a lie...

perhaps even optimistic exaggeration, but not an outright lie...

mistaken, giving the benefit of the doubt, but not an intentional lie...

and no, noone is gonna ask him about it, and if they do, they'll just get a new version of what he said...

like anyone involved in the plame leak would be fired, and then it was anybody guilty of a crime would be fired, and then it was...

i see a pattern, together with the mistakes/misstatements about wmd and iraq...

go bowe
06-19-2006, 12:16 PM
Hope that helps, Can....while a reasonable case could be made for your interpretation, it is an interpretation...

what the guy said was that the taliban no longer existed, that was incorrect...

Baby Lee
06-19-2006, 12:20 PM
while a reasonable case could be made for your interpretation, it is an interpretation...

what the guy said was that the taliban no longer existed, that was incorrect...
Do you think any rational person heard those words and thought "Thank God, there is no longer a single individual on the face of the earth who would aspire to return the Taliban to power."
Do you think TC thought that? Ever?
We still have people who think the Confederacy is going to rise again fer chrissakes.

the Talking Can
06-19-2006, 12:32 PM
wait, I found the ambiguity in his remarks...right after declaring the Taliban no longer "exist," he hedges by saying:

"In other words when you say something as President you better make it clear so everybody understands what you're saying, and you better mean what you say. And I meant what I said."


you guys are right, I am wrong....Bush did not mean what he said....

man, you guys are smart, I can't pull one over on you!

John_Locke
06-19-2006, 12:37 PM
Exactly. You know me....just trying to fit in with the "cool" kids. Yup, yup. :p


you mean the ones on the short bus?


good gawd man you are out there

patteeu
06-19-2006, 12:41 PM
Do you think any rational person heard those words and thought "Thank God, there is no longer a single individual on the face of the earth who would aspire to return the Taliban to power."
Do you think TC thought that? Ever?
We still have people who think the Confederacy is going to rise again fer chrissakes.

I was sure that he meant that Mullah Omar had evaporated into thin air. ROFL

go bowe
06-19-2006, 01:00 PM
Do you think any rational person heard those words and thought "Thank God, there is no longer a single individual on the face of the earth who would aspire to return the Taliban to power."
Do you think TC thought that? Ever?
We still have people who think the Confederacy is going to rise again fer chrissakes.rational doesn't necessarily equal intelligent or moderately well educated...

you are using an extreme example of what was not said...

i think that some rational people could conclude that the taliban, as a organized force, had been totally defeated (no longer exists is pretty categorical)...

go bowe
06-19-2006, 01:04 PM
* * *
We still have people who think the Confederacy is going to rise again fer chrissakes.my brother in law in rural georgia still clings to the hope...

of course, at his age he's barely clinging to life...

go bowe
06-19-2006, 01:05 PM
I was sure that he meant that Mullah Omar had evaporated into thin air. ROFLwhy are you laughing?

mulla supremo did evaporate into thin air...





the air in the mountains is very thin...

Nightwish
06-19-2006, 01:07 PM
it seems to me that this is more of a typical bush misstatement than a lie...

perhaps even optimistic exaggeration, but not an outright lie...

mistaken, giving the benefit of the doubt, but not an intentional lie...

and no, noone is gonna ask him about it, and if they do, they'll just get a new version of what he said...

like anyone involved in the plame leak would be fired, and then it was anybody guilty of a crime would be fired, and then it was...

i see a pattern, together with the mistakes/misstatements about wmd and iraq...I concur. It was a misstatement, though possibly a calculated one, perhaps more of an intended hyperbole. As we all know, propaganda is nearly as important a facet of war as the bombs and bullets whizzing about. It would have been much more accurate to say "the Taliban no longer controls" Afghanistan, but that would lack the impact, finality and air of victory that was achieved by saying they no longer exist. I think by "no longer exist," he was using that as hyperbole, meaning that they had become a non-entity, a non-issue, having no more further significance than a gnat. It was a calculated insult of the enemy. Which means, of course, that it probably wasn't Bush who came up with the idea to say it.

the Talking Can
06-19-2006, 01:22 PM
it seems to me that this is more of a typical bush misstatement than a lie...

perhaps even optimistic exaggeration, but not an outright lie...

mistaken, giving the benefit of the doubt, but not an intentional lie...

and no, noone is gonna ask him about it, and if they do, they'll just get a new version of what he said...

like anyone involved in the plame leak would be fired, and then it was anybody guilty of a crime would be fired, and then it was...

i see a pattern, together with the mistakes/misstatements about wmd and iraq...

if I could give you a cyber gold star I would....

meanwhile the real questions remain: what does this tell us about his plan? about his ability to plan? about his competance? about his judgement?

the Taliban haven't gone anywhere...what's his Plan now? hope everyone sticks their head in the sands like Kotter?

accountability lurks....

Baby Lee
06-19-2006, 01:27 PM
if I could give you a cyber gold star I would....

meanwhile the real questions remain: what does this tell us about his plan? about his ability to plan? about his competance? about his judgement?

the Taliban haven't gone anywhere...what's his Plan now? hope everyone sticks their head in the sands like Kotter?

accountability lurks....
Is TC channeling Tommykat, or rexjake? :p

Edit: or is he bearing witness to his title?

jspchief
06-19-2006, 01:30 PM
Threads like this are pretty much why DC topics need their own forum.

Mr. Kotter
06-19-2006, 01:39 PM
Threads like this are pretty much why DC topics need their own forum.Yup.
it seems to me that this is more of a typical bush misstatement than a lie...

perhaps even optimistic exaggeration, but not an outright lie...

mistaken, giving the benefit of the doubt, but not an intentional lie...

and no, noone is gonna ask him about it, and if they do, they'll just get a new version of what he said...

like anyone involved in the plame leak would be fired, and then it was anybody guilty of a crime would be fired, and then it was...

i see a pattern, together with the mistakes/misstatements about wmd and iraq...
You'll get no disagreement from me on that, John. It's called politics.

Some only seem interested when the "other" side is doing it though--which makes such partisan hacks.....disingenuous hypocrites. Both sides engage in the same kinda bullshit....so, in order to be credible, either you condemn it when both sides do it, or accept it as just an unfortunate part of the way the game is played. I've chosen the latter.....

pak1983
06-19-2006, 04:14 PM
Yup.

You'll get no disagreement from me on that, John. It's called politics.

Some only seem interested when the "other" side is doing it though--which makes such partisan hacks.....disingenuous hypocrites. Both sides engage in the same kinda bullshit....so, in order to be credible, either you condemn it when both sides do it, or accept it as just an unfortunate part of the way the game is played. I've chosen the latter.....

Kotter loves to be lied to. He cant distinguish face from fiction. heck he still thinks his brother is his father, oops did i say that outloud?

Something funny Chris Matthews was saying the other day, Compared the war in Iraq / Bush Administration to the Royals. Said it doesnt matter if you win a few games, your still losers!

the Talking Can
06-19-2006, 04:52 PM
Yup.

You'll get no disagreement from me on that, John. It's called politics.

Some only seem interested when the "other" side is doing it though--which makes such partisan hacks.....disingenuous hypocrites. Both sides engage in the same kinda bullshit....so, in order to be credible, either you condemn it when both sides do it, or accept it as just an unfortunate part of the way the game is played. I've chosen the latter.....

you're so predictable...."both sides do it" is the lamest excuse, and the only thing you ever say - in order to avoid holding people accountable and having to accept responsibility for the politicians and policies that YOU support....

tell me which democrat is currently President and Commander in Chief?

which Dem President launched an invasion of Afghanistan only to abandon it for an invasion of Iraq?

which Democratic President has told a 1001 untrue things about the state of affairs in both countries?

you're a chickenshit know-nothing...you pathologically want to be "in the middle" of every issue to avoid getting called on your ignorance...

you're only interested in seeming to be above politics when the reality is you don't have a clue...

the point of this thread was to expose just how insanely resistant people are to holding the President and Commander in Chief accountable for anything...word or deed...

no one has even attempted to answer the most basic of questions asked in this thread....and as you've proved, no one will....

stick to accusing people of being peophiles...or stalking people off line, or whevetever wierd things it is you do to be "kotter" on this board...

the Talking Can
06-19-2006, 04:54 PM
Threads like this are pretty much why DC topics need their own forum.

actually, we created the DC to get away from you...same with the World Cup thread...

the Talking Can
06-19-2006, 04:56 PM
Is TC channeling Tommykat, or rexjake? :p

Edit: or is he bearing witness to his title?

if you're referring to my spelling...I'm ****ing guilty..

jettio
06-19-2006, 06:34 PM
The way things are going you would have to expect that the Taliban might end up like a lot of those institutions that you might have heard of once before, next thing you know they will be on K-State's non-conference schedule.

Logical
06-19-2006, 07:23 PM
This would not be a big deal at all if not for the consistent pattern it follows. The problem is not an occasional mistatement, it is the constant barrage of them.

jspchief
06-19-2006, 07:30 PM
actually, we created the DC to get away from you...same with the World Cup thread...World Cup thread? I'm not sure I follow. Maybe you're confusing me with some soccer hater?

Nightwish
06-19-2006, 08:44 PM
This would not be a big deal at all if not for the consistent pattern it follows. The problem is not an occasional mistatement, it is the constant barrage of them.
"Mission Accomplished!"

Mr. Kotter
06-19-2006, 09:53 PM
Fine, Can….I can’t believe I’m gonna do this, but here goes. You want a rant, I’ll give you a rant…

I’ll answer every one of your silly assed questions and accusations, if for no other reason than someone needs to give you a lesson or two in WTF politics in the real world is all about, because it’s pretty damned obvious you don’t have a fuggin’ clue about anything outside of the partisan and ideological brainwashing that you religiously submit yourself to…so, try to pay attention. you're so predictable...."both sides do it" is the lamest excuse, and the only thing you ever say - in order to avoid holding people accountable and having to accept responsibility for the politicians and policies that YOU support.... ...You say the “both sides do it” argument is lame. You are entitled to your opinion, but the fact of the matter is it is undeniably true—and you know it. It’s always been a part of politics. Always. Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover polished the art of modern politics. FDR, Truman, and Eisenhower engaged in it more selectively, but each had their moments. JFK and LBJ were unabashed fans, Nixon set the standard, and Reagan surely pushed the envelope. Has W? Sure. When you have facts and evidence to support a real impeachment effort, not a contrived and politically motivated masquerade…..we’ll listen. Is it a coincidence that the ONLY two men, to have in any major way attempted to return politics to a more noble form (since WWII) were Carter and G.H.W. Bush? One-term Presidents.

I’d love to hold all politicians accountable for their bullshit…..the half-truths, the deceptions, and the parsing of language. But apparently you woke the fugg up yesterday from a 60 year sleep, “Rip Van Talking Can,” because in the real world Americans don’t want honesty from politicians. In case you hadn’t noticed, honest politicians rarely win elections—on either side of the isle. We don’t want honesty, because we are too fuggin’ spoiled and hypocritical to handle the truth. It’s been that way, especially, for the last 65-70 years…. and, truthfully, it’s always been that way.

Want an eye-opener? Go back and study the ethics of the elections of 1800, 1824, or 1828….. I have. Talk about personal attacks, half-truths, outright lies, and character assassination? Wow. Some of the stuff that went on then, would make some of the Clinton/Bush stuff seem tame in retrospect. History didn’t begin in 2000, so attempting to impose a “new standard” on the second oldest profession in the history of mankind is wishful thinking. The art of modern politics has been centuries in the making….there have been modern gains (scrutiny of the modern media,) but even those are a mixed blessing (ask Nixon or Clinton.)

I didn’t make the rules, I’m just smart enough to recognize them. It’s just the way it is. So it’s best to learn to fuggin’ live with it, and to work around it. It’s best to simply recognize politics for what it is….whoring by another name…..and save the real fuggin’ outrages for the truly illegal stuff….the stuff we can actually “prosecute” politically—actual violations of law, with real evidence…..that can bring real charges, not the politically motivated grand standing and politics of personal destruction both sides are now obsessed with. tell me which democrat is currently President and Commander in Chief? ...There is none. However, only a myopic view of history forgets that the current occupant of the White House is following the lead, the tradition, and the precedents set by those who preceded him. Has W pushed the envelope? Yup. If and when he breaks the law, and there is evidence to impeach/prosecute him…..I suspect we will. Thing is, there has been a full-court press to do just that for the better part of six years, yet your side keeps coming up long on accusations, but short on substance and facts. which Dem President launched an invasion of Afghanistan only to abandon it for an invasion of Iraq? ...Abandoned Afghanistan? That will be news to those still on the ground there…. Foreign policy decisions are always applauded and lauded by some; criticized by others. Always. So you disagree with Bush’s foreign policy? Fair enough. He’s President; you aren’t. And neither are the guys you supported. Get over it. Or try to do something about it, and win the next election. We’ll see if you guys can really do any better. which Democratic President has told a 1001 untrue things about the state of affairs in both countries? ...

Define “untrue.” And make sure you are willing to apply the same definition to all Presidents, past and future. Otherwise, you are being a hypocrite. you're a chickenshit know-nothing...you pathologically want to be "in the middle" of every issue to avoid getting called on your ignorance... ...You are so way off-based on this one, it’s hilarious. Your own ignorance is the only way to account for your perception of me as ignorant. That, and perhaps…..my penchant for making this place, usually, a light-hearted and amusing release for my full knowledge and cynicism , of the jaded art that politics has become.

As for my place in the middle, I’m a pragmatist. A pragmatic. American democracy, in a diverse and a pluralistic society demands consensus and moderation, not ideology and extremism. Too bad for my own party, that Republicans seem to understand that much better than many Democrats. Although, I do agree the Republicans may be becoming complacent and arrogant. There may be hope, yet….unless your faction of the party continues it’s stranglehold on common sense. you're only interested in seeming to be above politics when the reality is you don't have a clue... ...Don’t have a clue? How about, don’t have the time or desire to engage in pointless “debates” that are not gonna change anybodies mind? How about, I prefer the entertainment and amusement value of provoking the truly clueless, and watchin’ them make fools of themselves....? the point of this thread was to expose just how insanely resistant people are to holding the President and Commander in Chief accountable for anything...word or deed... ...Accountability is a subjective thing. As are “lies” and “untruths” as you say. Illegal acts, and iron-clad evidence of such, are all that really matters. Everything else is just political shills trying to promote their own ideology….. Call me, when impeachment is inevitable. In two weeks, perhaps? no one has even attempted to answer the most basic of questions asked in this thread....and as you've proved, no one will.... ...No one will…..because it’s a waste of time, engaging in an ideological circle jerk that is going no where. No where.

“Politicians Lied!” I’ll alert the fuggin’ evening news. stick to accusing people of being peophiles...or stalking people off line, or whevetever wierd things it is you do to be "kotter" on this board...I have never done anything close to either of the specific charges you cite, unless you think “googling” a loud mouth counts as stalking….and making a vague claim, that it would not surprise me that some who occupy the political fringe on one issue, might on also on another……counts as “accusing" people of being a pedophile.

If you honestly believe that’s what occurred, you are even more delusional than I thought; and more paranoid than I ever imagined.

I voted for Bill Clinton in 1992, and for Al Gore in the 2000 election. I was not a fan of the overzealous effort to bring Clinton down. But face it, the dumb phuk brought it on himself. If W ever is impeached, my reaction will be much the same. The vengeance sought by Bush haters for what was done by Clinton haters, is a much bigger problem than many of the things folks like you are constantly whining about...IMHO.

I guess I shouldn’t be surprised though…..Watergate brought us Iran-Contra, and Iran-Contra brought us Clinton’s scandals, and Clinton’s scandals have brought us the Bush bashing moonbats of moveon.org. Each side seeking revenge for “persecutions” of the past, in an ever increasing irrational political demagoguery that has done nothing to solve the problem….and instead has increased the problem.

In a political landscape where both sides are bent on vengeance and the politics of personal destruction, as Clinton said, is it any wonder most Americans tune politics out? And message boards have to create ghettos, to keep the trash away from those who have become sickened by it? Too bad. But it’s where we are….

WilliamTheIrish
06-19-2006, 10:09 PM
The way things are going you would have to expect that the Taliban might end up like a lot of those institutions that you might have heard of once before, next thing you know they will be on K-State's non-conference schedule.

Oh you dirty......

And you can bet we'll do what the President couldn't:

Beat them down!!!

Mr. Kotter
06-19-2006, 10:54 PM
Damn. All that for a Talking Can. May I please have that 25 minutes of my life back? :banghead:

jettio
06-19-2006, 11:21 PM
Oh you dirty......

And you can bet we'll do what the President couldn't:

Beat them down!!!

Wow, I checked out the K-State website and they have scheduled a home and away with Miami U., the one from Florida. Looks like they are putting at least one name school on the schedule in some upcoming years, so I might have to take that back.

irishjayhawk
06-19-2006, 11:36 PM
“Politicians Lied!” I’ll alert the fuggin’ evening news.

It's sad that lying is commonly accepted by the public, if it comes from politicians, regardless of party.

Mr. Kotter
06-19-2006, 11:43 PM
It's sad that lying is commonly accepted by the public, if it comes from politicians, regardless of party.

Define a "lie".....

It is sad, but tell me it isn't reality.

Show me a politician who doesn't/hasn't lie(d), and I'll show you a unicorn.

banyon
06-20-2006, 12:02 AM
American democracy, in a diverse and a pluralistic society demands consensus and moderation, not ideology and extremism. Too bad for my own party, that Republicans seem to understand that much better than many Democrats.

“Politicians Lied!” I’ll alert the fuggin’ evening news. I have never done anything close to either of the specific charges you cite, unless you think “googling” a loud mouth counts as stalking….and making a vague claim, that it would not surprise me that some who occupy the political fringe on one issue, might on also on another……counts as “accusing" people of being a pedophile.


Republicans want consensus and moderation? Maybe we should alert the evening news. It'll certainly be news to Tom Delay.

“For all its faults, it is partisanship — based on core principles — that clarifies our debates, that prevents one party from straying too far from the mainstream and that constantly refreshes our politics with new ideas and new leaders,”

I'm not going to blast your entire rant. You passion is admirable. But this point of yours is just divorced from the reality of the situation.

patteeu
06-20-2006, 06:35 AM
I'm not going to blast your entire rant. You passion is admirable. But this point of yours is just divorced from the reality of the situation.

You really think so? I think he's right about that. I guess maybe it depends on what you mean by partisanship. If you are thinking of the gotcha game, then I can see why you'd disagree, but if you are thinking of a stark divide between agendas, I agree with Kotter.

the Talking Can
06-20-2006, 06:45 AM
testing

the Talking Can
06-20-2006, 06:50 AM
ok, for some reason I can't post a reply to Kotter...maybe even vBulletin is tired of his holier-than-politics routine...

so here it is, out of order:

sorry, but this the same non-response you always give....just longer and with more B.S.

You use "history" as an excuse, a cop out.

Your whole "I'm above it all" schtick is an excuse. It's what lots of people who support Bush say when they want to escape responsibility for his policies (the details, the facts, not the talking points)...and their support of his policies.

Your ten cent grasp of history, and five cent knowledge of current events, can't do anything but blather about the same self-serving non-issue of anything-except-what-is-actually-happening.

....Kotter's a real democrat, Kotter's too pure and just floats over the top of politics, Kotter's dipped in the ambrosia of History and can't judge Republican...err, I mean contemporary events....Kotter's not a pedophile unlike everyone else in this thread wink wink nudge...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

I still haven't found anyone who holds the President to any standard of accountability for what HE says and what HE does.


Director = accountable

President of the United States = not so much

Broccoli = accountable

Commander in Chief = eh....

Corn Nuts = mmmmm..so accountable

The Decider = no

this thread has achieved meta- status, as expected....anything but the real thing....

Mr. Kotter
06-20-2006, 07:56 AM
Republicans want consensus and moderation? Maybe we should alert the evening news. It'll certainly be news to Tom Delay.

I'm not going to blast your entire rant. You passion is admirable. But this point of yours is just divorced from the reality of the situation.

I can't stand Delay. Never have. He's was part of the problem, certainly. I've said so here before, but of course that doesn't serve the purpose of my critics.

If you don't understand the distinction between partisanship, and the vitriolic and irrational demagoguery of political opponents in support of a 'rule at all costs' mentality.....from both sides of the isle....I doubt I can help you.

banyon
06-20-2006, 08:42 AM
You really think so? I think he's right about that. I guess maybe it depends on what you mean by partisanship. If you are thinking of the gotcha game, then I can see why you'd disagree, but if you are thinking of a stark divide between agendas, I agree with Kotter.

whoops. I think I boldfaced the wrong part of his post.

Too bad for my own party, that Republicans seem to understand that much better than many Democrats

If you read the rest of his rant it actually cuts against this point too. It's just simply untrue. Big $ corporate politicians and so-called "mods" (ironically like Kotter wishes we had) have controlled the WH and Congress now for quite some time. The southern-led, pro-free trade/market DLC has chosen every Dem candidate since Dukakis, while the "Mods" on the Repub side that just want their tax cuts and corporate bailouts and offer droppings to the religious right have been in control on that side. To assert that somehow the Dems are "more partisan" is absurd. Here's a Repub from last night:

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/G6nR7mgjfmE"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/G6nR7mgjfmE" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

banyon
06-20-2006, 08:56 AM
If you don't understand the distinction between partisanship, and the vitriolic and irrational demagoguery of political opponents in support of a 'rule at all costs' mentality.....from both sides of the isle....I doubt I can help you.

[go bo]You can't? Shucks, I was hoping ya could help me with my Rhuematic fever too. :sulk:[/go bo]

stevieray
06-20-2006, 08:58 AM
ok, for some reason I can't post a reply to Kotter...maybe even vBulletin is tired of his holier-than-politics routine...

so here it is, out of order:

sorry, but this the same non-response you always give....just longer and with more B.S.

You use "history" as an excuse, a cop out.

Your whole "I'm above it all" schtick is an excuse. It's what lots of people who support Bush say when they want to escape responsibility for his policies (the details, the facts, not the talking points)...and their support of his policies.

Your ten cent grasp of history, and five cent knowledge of current events, can't do anything but blather about the same self-serving non-issue of anything-except-what-is-actually-happening.

....Kotter's a real democrat, Kotter's too pure and just floats over the top of politics, Kotter's dipped in the ambrosia of History and can't judge Republican...err, I mean contemporary events....Kotter's not a pedophile unlike everyone else in this thread wink wink nudge...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

I still haven't found anyone who holds the President to any standard of accountability for what HE says and what HE does.


Director = accountable

President of the United States = not so much

Broccoli = accountable

Commander in Chief = eh....

Corn Nuts = mmmmm..so accountable

The Decider = no

this thread has achieved meta- status, as expected....anything but the real thing....

just admit you got owned, it's better for the board... :)

irishjayhawk
06-20-2006, 10:50 AM
Define a "lie".....

It is sad, but tell me it isn't reality.

Show me a politician who doesn't/hasn't lie(d), and I'll show you a unicorn.

I'm not saying they don't lie. I'm saying it's extremely sad that we accept that they lie. If they lie, we shouldn't vote them back in until it stops becoming a problem.

And by lies, I mean, public fiascos and saying one thing and doing another, etc.

Radar Chief
06-20-2006, 10:53 AM
I'm not saying they don't lie. I'm saying it's extremely sad that we accept that they lie. If they lie, we shouldn't vote them back in until it stops becoming a problem.

And by lies, I mean, public fiascos and saying one thing and doing another, etc.

And if we had that option available to us, you’d have a point.

go bowe
06-20-2006, 11:50 AM
[go bo]You can't? Shucks, I was hoping ya could help me with my Rhuematic fever too. :sulk:[/go bo]you need some work on your go bo impersonation...

first of all, i don't use caps...

second, i don't ever say shucks, i say shit or damn...

third, except for questions, i always end each line with an ellipsis...

fourth, i'm occasionally funny...

but you are right that i tend to pick on my good buddy kotter...

but he needs the direction...

go bowe
06-20-2006, 11:52 AM
And if we had that option available to us, you’d have a point.like that might ever happen...

i think it's the nature of politics that duplicity is a requirement for success...

BucEyedPea
06-20-2006, 01:10 PM
like that might ever happen...

i think it's the nature of politics that duplicity is a requirement for success...


Nah, it's just that most of them are lawyers! ROFL :p

Radar Chief
06-20-2006, 01:15 PM
Nah, it's just that most of them are lawyers! ROFL :p

Q: What’s the difference between a lawyer and a Raggedy Ann doll with rocks in’er mouth?
A: The Raggedy Ann doll with rocks in’er mouth is a cotton rock sucker. ;)

go bowe
06-20-2006, 01:16 PM
well, that's true i think, although i haven't the statistics for the senate and house for awhile...

but president bush is not a lawyer...

isn't that comforting?

banyon
06-20-2006, 01:21 PM
you need some work on your go bo impersonation...

first of all, i don't use caps...

second, i don't ever say shucks, i say shit or damn...

third, except for questions, i always end each line with an ellipsis...

fourth, i'm occasionally funny...

but you are right that i tend to pick on my good buddy kotter...

but he needs the direction...

Ill try to work on it, damn it...

It's my first attempt...

It's not as easy as impersonating GoChiefs... :)

go bowe
06-20-2006, 01:57 PM
Q: What’s the difference between a lawyer and a Raggedy Ann doll with rocks in’er mouth?
A: The Raggedy Ann doll with rocks in’er mouth is a cotton rock sucker. ;)that's a good one...

i should probably put some rocks in my mouth...

BucEyedPea
06-20-2006, 03:17 PM
that's a good one...

i should probably put some rocks in my mouth...


I kinda thought you already had!


Sir go bo, just messin' with ya' on the lawyer comments. It's all in fun. Never was intended in a 'Hamas Jenkns' way.

I actually have respect for lawyers. I think they are more intelligent as a group than a lotta of other folks. They at least know words have definitions and bother to look them up more than most. On the other hand, I think, as a very general statement, there are some ethics problem in that profession. That does not mean all attorneys are unethical by a long shot. In fact, lawyers, are kind like men: you can't live with 'em but you can't live w/o 'em. JMO though! ;)

mlyonsd
06-20-2006, 03:27 PM
I actually have respect for lawyers. I think they are more intelligent as a group than a lotta of other folks.

Scratch one more off my "Credible" list and add another to my "Butt kissing" one.

BucEyedPea
06-20-2006, 03:31 PM
Scratch one more off my "Credible" list and add another to my "Butt kissing" one.

I'm not kissing anybody's butt, let alone go bo's.
I was jokin' around, even if there was some truth in such jokes.
Based on some comments by go bo earlier I wanted to clarify.

You can't deny they are intelligent...can you?

I had a great attorney in Massachusetts...very wise, very ethical.
I had ran into two unethical one's in Florida. All were smart though.
I have two that are relatives:nastiest two you'd ever wanna meet. Never knew when to stop arguing or in what social venue.

Baby Lee
06-20-2006, 03:32 PM
Scratch one more off my "Credible" list and add another to my "Butt kissing" one.
C'mon mlyon, with go bo's butt, there's always room for one more. ;)

mlyonsd
06-20-2006, 03:55 PM
I'm not kissing anybody's butt, let alone go bo's.
I was jokin' around, even if there was some truth in such jokes.
Based on some comments by go bo earlier I wanted to clarify.

You can't deny they are intelligent...can you?

I had a great attorney in Massachusetts...very wise, very ethical.
I had ran into two unethical one's in Florida. All were smart though.
I have two that are relatives:nastiest two you'd ever wanna meet. Never knew when to stop arguing or in what social venue.

I should have added j/k at the bottom. I've met go bo and he seems to be a big lovable teddy bear. If you're into that sort of thing.

Sorry if I came across as being all serious.

mlyonsd
06-20-2006, 03:57 PM
C'mon mlyon, with go bo's butt, there's always room for one more. ;)

I'm sure he'll make you pay for that. :)

BucEyedPea
06-20-2006, 04:13 PM
I should have added j/k at the bottom.
Sorry if I came across as being all serious.

It's all cool. I know you guys tease each other. It's hard to always detect humor in text formats with no tone of voice.

I've met go bo and he seems to be a big lovable teddy bear. If you're into that sort of thing.

No, but seems you are. :p Next time you two meet, give him a hug and kiss ( on the cheek of course) for me.

mlyonsd
06-20-2006, 04:21 PM
It's all cool. I know you guys tease each other. It's hard to always detect humor in text formats with no tone of voice.



No, but seems you are. :p Next time you two meet, give him a hug and kiss ( on the cheek of course) for me.

Err, last I saw him he had this huge ZZ Top scraggly beard. I'd be way to afraid of what I'd find in it to give him a kiss. I'll respectfully shake his hand and give him your best though.

BucEyedPea
06-20-2006, 04:24 PM
OMG! :shake: I get the picture. :p

Logical
06-20-2006, 04:27 PM
just admit you got owned, it's better for the board... :)

I personally do not think either of them got owned. I think they both have legitimate points.

TC is correct no one is truly holding Bush accountable.

Kotter is correct that historically this is nothing new, but it does not make it right.

Hydrae
06-20-2006, 08:43 PM
I’d love to hold all politicians accountable for their bullshit…..the half-truths, the deceptions, and the parsing of language. But apparently you woke the fugg up yesterday from a 60 year sleep, “Rip Van Talking Can,” because in the real world Americans don’t want honesty from politicians. In case you hadn’t noticed, honest politicians rarely win elections—on either side of the isle. We don’t want honesty, because we are too fuggin’ spoiled and hypocritical to handle the truth. It’s been that way, especially, for the last 65-70 years…. and, truthfully, it’s always been that way.

Perhaps that is why so few vote, no one worth bothering to vote for? So we get stuck with the ones from the bottom of the barrel?

Just because it has been like that for most of the last century doesn't mean we have to lie down and take it. I have dreams of a competent leader in the White House. Maybe I will see that within my lifetime if we are all extremely lucky!

stevieray
06-20-2006, 11:29 PM
I personally do not think either of them got owned. I think they both have legitimate points.

TC is correct no one is truly holding Bush accountable.

Kotter is correct that historically this is nothing new, but it does not make it right.

It's a joke Jim, TC said that recently, hence the smiley.

cherrypicking my post again?

Rausch
06-20-2006, 11:36 PM
I have dreams of a competent leader in the White House. Maybe I will see that within my lifetime if we are all extremely lucky!

Watch your health closely the next 8 years...

Logical
06-20-2006, 11:41 PM
It's a joke Jim, TC said that recently, hence the smiley.

cherrypicking my post again?Actually I was using your post to point out that they both had good points and that neither was absolutely correct. Your post just made it easy.

the Talking Can
06-21-2006, 06:21 AM
just admit you got owned, it's better for the board... :)

hey, that's my line...actually, I'd like to hear someone say that to Bush after tells one of those whopper lies he loves so much...

the Talking Can
06-21-2006, 06:44 AM
I personally do not think either of them got owned. I think they both have legitimate points.

TC is correct no one is truly holding Bush accountable.

Kotter is correct that historically this is nothing new, but it does not make it right.

holding him accountable is just the start...if you hold him accountable, as you should, then his past words and deeds have to modify your understanding of his honesty and competence....this is what adults do: they allow facts to dictate the terms of reality

but the American citizen has simply given up...they treat Bush like a child by constantly telling us that "he didn't really mean it" or "he didn't know" or "he's not responsible" (this is patteeus shtick)....of course, this ends up making the citizens like children as well...

so, Bush, who has said so many things that were fatally untrue or outright lies, is still treated as if he had any credibility....though there is nothing, in fact, to establish his credibility...

the result of this is that no one will ask him to explain the events in Afghanistan, for example...no one will look at Afghanistan and ask the simple, obvious, questions of what it means in relation to Bush's words...in relation to Bush's prior claims and plans....NO ONE will do this

and we're left with 3 distinct and common responses:

1. simply refuse to discuss anything but the price of tea in China, or your own "distaste" for politics - this is the Kotter response

2. simply claim that Bush never really means what he says and therefore isn't responsible and well, what's bad about breaking the law anyways - this is the patteeu response

3. simply claim that Bush is always right, always honest, and is literally the voice of God protecting us from FRENCH fries and crazy liberal ideas like civil rights - this is the marc bulger response


these 3 types of response are all we've read on this board for years...all we've heard in the media....all I hear when I talk to Kansans....no one will treat Bush like the President and Commander in Chief, and no one will do what adults do and hold him accountable

the Talking Can
06-25-2006, 07:19 PM
How is it that we've captured neither Osama bin Laden nor Mullah Omar?

Are they "non-existant" too in Bush's brain?


U.S. Back at Full War Footing in Afghanistan

June 20, 2006 11:07 AM

Brian Ross Reports:

Taliban_typepadThe United States military is quietly carrying out the largest military offensive in Afghanistan since U.S. troops invaded the country in 2001.

"The Taliban has made a comeback, and we have the next 90 days to crush them," said a senior U.S. military official.

The offensive, "Operation Mountain Thrust," involves almost 11,000 U.S. troops and is focused on four southern Afghanistan provinces.

The Taliban has re-emerged as the Afghan government "has created vacuums of power" says the official. Proceeds from the growing opium trade in the region has helped the Taliban obtain new weapons and pay local officials.

The Taliban leader, Mullah Omar, remains at large despite a $10 million reward offered by the United States. U.S. military officials believe he has established a safe haven in Pakistan, where U.S. soldiers cannot operate.

we don't exist...snicker (http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/06/us_back_at_full.html)

Logical
06-25-2006, 08:31 PM
...

these 3 types of response are all we've read on this board for years...all we've heard in the media....all I hear when I talk to Kansans....no one will treat Bush like the President and Commander in Chief, and no one will do what adults do and hold him accountable

Unfortunately a low of around 29% approval rating is about the only accountability you will get when the Republicans hold all the branches of power. That is the public saying we don't approve, unfortunately it does not change anything.