M. (hristine Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 Oh shut up. Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 Oh shut up. Yeah, you Link to post Share on other sites
myboyblue Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 You should write a book. Link to post Share on other sites
M. (hristine Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 Yeah, you Link to post Share on other sites
embiggen Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 You should write a book. Oh shut up. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Cousin Tupelo Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 that article gives me the creeps. need to learn more about it. hope i don't have more of the creeps after doing that.The flipside of this is that there are several faith-based missions and disaster aid organizations that are strong enough domestically and internationally, and effective enough that they put the Red Cross to shame. From my experiences with disaster relief, these organizations are often on the ground giving basic aid before the Red Cross sends anyone. In fact most Red Cross and community disaster agencies pull from these organizations for board members, advice and consul in developing and executing their plans. They do not come in thumping bibles. I have never seen them turn away qualified help regardless of faith or lack therof (unlike, say, an administration ousting an effective commissioner or secretary because they're from the *other* political party). Isn't this the same as privatizing? And to use the previous extremist "torture argument" you don't thing *everyone discriminates* but in more politically correct ways. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Cousin Tupelo Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 All these years I have been intensely curious of what took Powell from this... "The former American secretary of state Colin Powell has revealed that he spent 2 Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 Make shit up much? You have given your opinion about the subject as if it is what I said. First of all, I wasn't talking to you, second of all I wasn't talking to you, third of all I wasn't talking to you. Want to know why? Because there is no talking to you. Real discourse is impossible because you are full of hyberbole, irony and sarcasm. All this is, is conversation. We're not changing history here on VC. Your conversation is just not that interesting to me. Well, you posted a reply on a public message board, which, automatically opens it up to comments from anyone who reads it. Second, you replied with Link to post Share on other sites
EL the Famous Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 I have no problem with that, especially considering the source. fair enough. since we're all a big fan of posting quotes and articles... ...the word Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 Oh, please do Link to post Share on other sites
MattZ Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 For what it's worth, if we can get past the sillyness above, I do think Powell gets cut too much slack. If that guy didn't think we should go to war he should have resigned. End of story. The fact that he tried to convince the President and failed is great, but then he went ahead and convinced the UN. And he had to know that he was being used as a pawn at the UN since he was perceived as the level-headed member of the Bush administration. If this was such a bad idea he should have said something then. I don't want to hear about how smart he was then for knowing this was a bad idea. That and a token get you a ride on NYC mass transit. Link to post Share on other sites
fatheadfred Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 For what it's worth, if we can get past the sillyness above, I do think Powell gets cut too much slack. If that guy didn't think we should go to war he should have resigned. End of story. The fact that he tried to convince the President and failed is great, but then he went ahead and convinced the UN. And he had to know that he was being used as a pawn at the UN since he was perceived as the level-headed member of the Bush administration. If this was such a bad idea he should have said something then. I don't want to hear about how smart he was then for knowing this was a bad idea. That and a token get you a ride on NYC mass transit. Totally agree. I was waiting for a talking head to say this and finally Buchanan said something to the effect that he allowed himself to get duped. Prior to that they were all flapping their wings over who he would side with. Like it matters. I thought he was put out to pasture already. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Cousin Tupelo Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 fair enough. since we're all a big fan of posting quotes and articles......i'm not debating how this current administration has shown utter disregard for our consitution and set in motion a lot of events i'd rather not have associated to my country. The sheer fact you can actually make the comparison w/out fear of government-sanctioned execution shows how far the two scenarios are from each other. And if you was politically active in 2002 and proposed opposing the war, mistaking propaganda for patriotism, you were vilified. Not blacklisted. Imagine if you were an American of Middle Eastern decent? How many innocent people are there in Guantanamo, who are there without formal charges? this country is in the throws of some dark times, i won't debate that... it's irresponsible and extremely counterproductive to making anything better. this is back from 2004, but the moveon.org ad debacle kind of encapsulates the type of careless and unproductive dialogue tied to this comparison i'm talking about: These are two ads that didn't make that, as the story notes, weren't finalists. You boast Moveon.org but the story was from the Washington Times and notes the Republicans posted the ads on their pages to pump them up for political gain among conservatives. Its a debacle because some republicans dragged it out and made an issue about it for their benefit. Two words: Swift boat. What sort of civil approach was that? Look your basic banter comes down to the fact that some people's moral outrage -- which you agree with -- is too much, according to you. After surviving the past 8 years with grave doubts about the next year alone, what the hell are you doing to make things better? You come in and make blunt attacks, try to stir up trouble then you're off to another thread to gossip about how you really got the posters and how wrong they are. Heaven forbid someone should invade your inner circle and oppose you there. What the fuck are you doing politically? When I responded about that you had no coment, you just back up and come up with another supposed civil response that is only to bait for another attack. Threat after thread, throughout this board are countless examples of you and a few other gutless assholes who impose your childishness on others. What are you doing about these dark times? Oh, yeah, you're hiding behind an anonymous name, posting assinine comments on a public board that you've set yourself up as judge and jury of what can be said and what can't. What indignancies are allowable, attacking terms when it suits you, dispeling it when it doesn't. Do these comments get under your skin because you're just as guilty of such socialpathic behavior. You you don't have something civil to say craw back into your hole and shut the fuck up. Link to post Share on other sites
viatroy Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 The comparison w/Hitler has to do with the political manouevers that brought about his dictatorship, not his Aryan supremacy agenda. I agree that fascism can be used to describe any number of political actors/movements whose authoritarian agenda one disagrees with. The underlying point is about subversion of the Constitution, the neocon philosophy of the 'noble lie' wherein the ends justify the secretive means. I guess my greatest concern is the complacency that allows it all to happen, that belief in the greatness of this country means it can't happen here. This stuff happens on the fringes (to dissenting journalists, academics activists) and gradually encompasses more and more people. There is some downright scary information about FEMA camps all over the US, built, staffed and stocked to handle millions of detainees. the sheer fact you can actually make the comparison w/out fear of government-sanctioned execution shows how far the two scenarios are from each other. As far as that goes let me say that I am and have always been a vehemently anti-gun person. Lately, however, it occurs to me that the Founders knew whatof they spoke when recognizing the needs for armed state militias to stand against tyrannical federal power. Of course our state militias have now been subverted by the feds. As a vocal dissident, I am indeed fearful of our government. Link to post Share on other sites
explodo Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 What are you doing about these dark times? Oh, yeah, you're hiding behind an anonymous name, posting assinine comments on a public board that you've set yourself up as judge and jury of what can be said and what can't. What indignancies are allowable, attacking terms when it suits you, dispeling it when it doesn't. So wait, Cousin Tupelo is your real name!? And your posts are helping to get out the vote!? A miracle! Link to post Share on other sites
MattZ Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 Totally agree. I was waiting for a talking head to say this and finally Buchanan said something to the effect that he allowed himself to get duped. Prior to that they were all flapping their wings over who he would side with. Like it matters. I thought he was put out to pasture already. Word. And one other thing -- Powell convinced ME!I was on the fence about this war, and I was on the fence about this Administration. But I thought I could trust Powell. And I watched him at the UN. While his satelite images didn't really sway me, his conviction did. I cannot and I will not forgive him for that. And f*ck that if he is going to stand up now and say he knew it all along. Link to post Share on other sites
EL the Famous Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 And if you was politically active in 2002 and proposed opposing the war, mistaking propaganda for patriotism, you were vilified. Not blacklisted. Imagine if you were an American of Middle Eastern decent? How many innocent people are there in Guantanamo, who are there without formal charges? These are two ads that didn't make that, as the story notes, weren't finalists. You boast Moveon.org but the story was from the Washington Times and notes the Republicans posted the ads on their pages to pump them up for political gain among conservatives. Its a debacle because some republicans dragged it out and made an issue about it for their benefit. Two words: Swift boat. What sort of civil approach was that? Look your basic banter comes down to the fact that some people's moral outrage -- which you agree with -- is too much, according to you. After surviving the past 8 years with grave doubts about the next year alone, what the hell are you doing to make things better? You come in and make blunt attacks, try to stir up trouble then you're off to another thread to gossip about how you really got the posters and how wrong they are. Heaven forbid someone should invade your inner circle and oppose you there. What the fuck are you doing politically? When I responded about that you had no coment, you just back up and come up with another supposed civil response that is only to bait for another attack. Threat after thread, throughout this board are countless examples of you and a few other gutless assholes who impose your childishness on others. What are you doing about these dark times? Oh, yeah, you're hiding behind an anonymous name, posting assinine comments on a public board that you've set yourself up as judge and jury of what can be said and what can't. What indignancies are allowable, attacking terms when it suits you, dispeling it when it doesn't. Do these comments get under your skin because you're just as guilty of such socialpathic behavior. You you don't have something civil to say craw back into your hole and shut the fuck up. Dear Mr. Cous N. Tupelo, 'Carry on with your childishness. I'm done with this thread.' Lovingly,El Sociopath Link to post Share on other sites
Edie Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 Remember -- he was a military guy duty-bound to follow the word of his commander-in-chief. This overriding principle eventually was his undoing on this matter. He must have been extremely conflicted. Link to post Share on other sites
EL the Famous Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 The comparison w/Hitler has to do with the political manouevers that brought about his dictatorship, not his Aryan supremacy agenda. i get where you are coming from, but for a lot of folks it's hard to seperate the two. when you throw his name out, it's the supremacy agenda that will immediately spring to mind for most and then shut them down to the overall message you are trying to esconse, a message i agree w/ for the most part. i can't disagree at all that complacency is extremely dangerous and that this current administration has benefited from it. however, militancy/militias, equally scare the fuck out of me. i'm not telling you that you or anyone else doesn't have the right to make the comparison. (literally) go nuts. it's more so that i see it helping to push people away from the left and even middle...whatever. i'm not judge, nor jury and everybody can do whatever they want. Link to post Share on other sites
fatheadfred Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 Word. And one other thing -- Powell convinced ME!I was on the fence about this war, and I was on the fence about this Administration. But I thought I could trust Powell. And I watched him at the UN. While his satelite images didn't really sway me, his conviction did. I cannot and I will not forgive him for that. And f*ck that if he is going to stand up now and say he knew it all along. I still recall Bush declaring 'war' on Iraq. While I was not as up to speed on politics at that time, I sensed this was illogical. It just didn't seem right. But who was I? I am sure other citizens and politicians thought the same thing but we were manipulated. I agree Powell was manipulated, but come on, at some point someone has to have the balls or clam to say, NO, I will not reinforce this idea. Do these people not have a soul? So, yes, this is why I could give a shit less about any higher up (Powell et al.) who went along with offensive against Iraq. Now Afghanistan or any other area where the actual attackers' peeps were yes, I was cool with that. I am aware that the carte blanche Congress handed the pres was just that and they couldn't go back on it, but they could oppose funding, speak out, etc...you know, things politicans can do. Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 Damn - this mother is coming to a head today. Link to post Share on other sites
MattZ Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 Remember -- he was a military guy duty-bound to follow the word of his commander-in-chief. This overriding principle eventually was his undoing on this matter. He must have been extremely conflicted. He wasn't a military guy duty bound. He was secretary of state. Powell gave credibility to the case for war that no other person in the Administration could. Yes, he was incredibly conflicted, but the guy was secretary of state! If he didn't like the heat, what was he doin' in the kitchen. (Look, I don't mean to pile on Powell here. I think there is plenty of blame to go around. I just think he deserves his fair share. And I am biased because as I said above, he convinced me. So I feel betrayed by him. Especially if he's going to say that he argued against this war. Not to me he didn't.) Link to post Share on other sites
fatheadfred Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 i get where you are coming from, but for a lot of folks it's hard to seperate the two. when you throw his name out, it's the supremacy agenda that will immediately spring to mind for most and then shut them down to the overall message you are trying to esconse, a message i agree w/ for the most part. i can't disagree at all that complacency is extremely dangerous and that this current administration has benefited from it. however, militancy/militias, equally scare the fuck out of me. i'm not telling you that you or anyone else doesn't have the right to make the comparison. (literally) go nuts. it's more so that i see it helping to push people away from the left and even middle...whatever. i'm not judge, nor jury and everybody can do whatever they want. I get what you're saying but for some the anger is so great that one liners are all we/they can muster. Personally I am still struggling with not being pissed at people who are either oblivious or are still Bushies. I tell myself they need some education so I calmly explain my perception of the situation. Prior to a few months ago I would've resorted to "you're a fascist Hitler fuckface'. We realize that doesn't work. Damn - this mother is coming to a head today. Hell yeah, it's a day before we declare our independence. We are ready for a revolution! Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 Hell yeah, it's a day before we declare our independence. We are ready for a revolution! Link to post Share on other sites
Edie Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 He wasn't a military guy duty bound. He was secretary of state. His mind-set was certainly military, not civilian. This had to have some bearing on him, especially where war was concerned. At any rate, I don't believe he belongs in the neocon hall of shame with Perl, Wolfowitz, Cheney etc. Not to mention Rumsfeld. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts