Central Scrutinizer Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 I mean, it's true. We've always had a view that the ends justify the means. We just went too far.You are largely right, but that "just" rings mighty hollow. Honestly, a first step towards tearing down the partisan walls would be some sort of censure from Bush's own party -- that he and his administration did indeed go too far. I don't just mean moving away from him like he's radioactive prior to an election. Bobbob, I don't think you can deny that the administration used fear and intimidation in the process of going too far. I think a lot of this blind rage has as much to do with feeling they've been used. Unlike Obama, who used opposition of the war in Iraq to help secure the nomination, those who were in the Senate were enablers, but given the circumstances they couldn't have done anything less than vote yes. It helped lose Clinton the nomination. But what stops the Dems from pushing the issue is that they played a role in it happening. Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Honestly, a first step towards tearing down the partisan walls would be some sort of censure from Bush's own party -- that he and his administration did indeed go too far. I don't just mean moving away from him like he's radioactive prior to an election. And this comes back to the reason nothing ever really changes. Rather than doing the right thing, both parties do the electable thing. And there's nothing to gain from not being partisanned. Both parties are rooting for a kind of constant, orwellian war between the two parties to keep them both in control. Link to post Share on other sites
ShuckOwens Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 I don't remember stating that war is a pleasant endeavor. Posting grizzly visceral photos of dead bodies in a war zone does not "show me light". I come from a family of Marines... one of which never recovered from the mental and physical pounding he received on Okinawa in WWII. I'm proud of my family members who served so that I can have the luxury of debating liberal big-thinkers on the Wilco message board. I'm proud of the job that our volunteer military has done in a mission that is brutal... a mission they believe in. I don't need a lesson from a teenage fan on the Wilco message board. Link to post Share on other sites
Central Scrutinizer Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 And this comes back to the reason nothing ever really changes. Rather than doing the right thing, both parties do the electable thing. And there's nothing to gain from not being partisanned. Both parties are rooting for a kind of constant, orwellian war between the two parties to keep them both in control.Sad but true. But it hasn't always been that way. These guys would go toe to toe across the aisle, then head out for drinks and dinner that evening. They worked together when it made sense, stood their ground when it took care of getting themselves re-elected. Honestly that's one thing that hasn't changed -- the incumbent just doesn't have to screw up badly enough to hold his job. These guys still have the same damned constituents. It's been pointed out well by (jnick? -- dumbo the acrobat avatar) that the special interests are the house, backing both sides. The courageous thing is to recognize that doing the right thing would be an electable thing. Link to post Share on other sites
Party @ the Moontower Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Wow. I googled "Bush lied", and landed on a streaming moive called "Loose Change". Shall I believe it first, and seek proof later? The power and oil schtick is your opinion. Bush lied... this is a statement that requires proof to become fact. Google his approval rating dude. Seriously, your a trip. I live in a military/college town where some of my top clients are B-2 bomber pilots, while many of the rest are professors. Not one of them has ever suggested Bush was right on with Iraq.I also read, and I live next to a state park where I hike and think about the war while B-2's fly over me. You, I think you may have just woken up from a coma.But hey, that's okay. Free speech, isn't that what Bush wants? Your a trip... Link to post Share on other sites
ShuckOwens Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Your search for the truth could start here: and then move on to here: http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2008/08/08/suskind/ Oh, and Knight Ridder did a fantastic job reporting the events leading up to the war, casting much doubt on the admin's justifications. The fact that virtually every justification for the war turned out to be false, should, in and of itself cast a great deal of doubt on the Admin's claims. There's tons and tons of great reporting out there, you just have to dig a little, now, go buy your own damn shovel.Unfortunately, you've referred me to an opinion column, but thanks for the recommendations anyhow. I'll try to watch more Olbermann and Maher as well. Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Unfortunately, you've referred me to an opinion column, but thanks for the recommendations anyhow. I'll try to watch more Olbermann and Maher as well. Shuck, you Link to post Share on other sites
ShuckOwens Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Google his approval rating dude. Seriously, your a trip. I live in a military/college town where some of my top clients are B-2 bomber pilots, while many of the rest are professors. Not one of them has ever suggested Bush was right on with Iraq.I also read, and I live next to a state park where I hike and think about the war while B-2's fly over me. You, I think you may have just woken up from a coma.But hey, that's okay. Free speech, isn't that what Bush wants? Your a trip...I have not suggested that President Bush was 100% perfect with the war. Might I suggest that the chief role for bombers at this point might be in Afghanistan? If you are also opposed to action in Afghanistan, I fear that it may be you who has been in a coma. I totally get your point about the B-2's, though girlfriend. They're actually running a brain scan on you as they pass over. Dick Cheney wants to know your thoughts. Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Jesus, in a way I hope Bush and Cheney were lying. If they were that gullible to go to war on the flimsy evidence they had ... oy. Link to post Share on other sites
Party @ the Moontower Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 I don't remember stating that war is a pleasant endeavor. Posting grizzly visceral photos of dead bodies in a war zone does not "show me light". I come from a family of Marines... one of which never recovered from the mental and physical pounding he received on Okinawa in WWII. I'm proud of my family members who served so that I can have the luxury of debating liberal big-thinkers on the Wilco message board. I'm proud of the job that our volunteer military has done in a mission that is brutal... a mission they believe in. I don't need a lesson from a teenage fan on the Wilco message board. Don't assume that just because one fights in Iraq they believe in it. Again, I live in a military town. What's the suicide rate among the soliders returning from Iraq and Afghanastan. What's the homeless rate for soliders returning from war? Pretty damn high. What does the Bush administration do for returning soldiers?Nothing. Why do you think there are so many groups started by vets to speak out against this war? And, who's the teenage fan on the Wilco message board you are speaking of? Oh, and to not challenge this war or our government is a slap in the face to your family that served us so proudly. Look away long enough and your rights will be history. Link to post Share on other sites
ShuckOwens Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Shuck, you Link to post Share on other sites
Party @ the Moontower Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 I have not suggested that President Bush was 100% perfect with the war. Might I suggest that the chief role for bombers at this point might be in Afghanistan? If you are also opposed to action in Afghanistan, I fear that it may be you who has been in a coma. I totally get your point about the B-2's, though girlfriend. They're actually running a brain scan on you as they pass over. Dick Cheney wants to know your thoughts. My clients are back and forth back and forth back and forth to Iraq, and they tell me shit from the heart and experience. They are taking some of the top pilots here and giving them shit jobs in Iraq cause no one is left. I'm sorry, I'm done with you. Good day. Link to post Share on other sites
ShuckOwens Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Don't assume that just because one fights in Iraq they believe in it. Again, I live in a military town. What's the suicide rate among the soliders returning from Iraq and Afghanastan. What's the homeless rate for soliders returning from war? Pretty damn high. What does the Bush administration do for returning soldiers?Nothing. Why do you think there are so many groups started by vets to speak out against this war? And, who's the teenage fan on the Wilco message board you are speaking of? Oh, and to not challenge this war or our government is a slap in the face to your family that served us so proudly. Look away long enough and your rights will be history. Your (sic) a trip. Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Jesus, in a way I hope Bush and Cheney were lying. If they were that gullible to go to war on the flimsy evidence they had ... oy. Seriously, you almost have to think that, if they didn Link to post Share on other sites
ShuckOwens Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Of course, revisionist history aside, there were many nations and US lawmakers who believed the same intelligence reports. Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Of course, revisionist history aside, there were many nations and US lawmakers who believed the same intelligence reports.I didn't, and I'm just a copy editor. Compare Colin Powell's evidence before the U.N. to Adlai Stevenson's during the Cuban missile crisis and you'll see what I mean. I reckon the "coalition of the willing" and the lawmakers thought it would be a better bet to go along with what most thought would be a pretty easy war than risk being branded a bad ally/person, especially in the post-9/11 environment. Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Do you seriously want me to be all clever, and post the covers of books that bolster the administration's reasons for war? Provide you with links to professional columnists whom I find credible? Does it come as a shock to you that there are other opinions on the topics that Jeff Tweedy pens about? Does it shock you that claims of "lying" typically will be met with a request for proof to back it up? You Link to post Share on other sites
OOO Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 CHARLIE BIT ME.....AND IT REALLY HURT!!!!!! Link to post Share on other sites
fatheadfred Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Our troops have gunned down and bombed hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians, or purposely put innocent bystanders in deadly harm's way? Proof please. BTW, proof does not constitute a lyric from a Green Day song. Looks like someone has been listening to alternative radio instead of following the news for, at least, the last 4 years. Link to post Share on other sites
fatheadfred Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Proof please. Lying about lying = lying.Dude(or ette): We are not going to teach you about the last 5-6 years of history. Go spend some time in your local library and step away from the message board. Did I say that John Edwards is on the ticket? No. All I did was put up a picture when someone was claiming that scumbag politicians were exclusively Republicans.No, but we are talking about the election and John ain't in it, so get on point. Maybe he was just trying to ketchup.If you came up with that, yer good. That really is funny. Link to post Share on other sites
ShuckOwens Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Dude(or ette): We are not going to teach you about the last 5-6 years of history.Please do... I won't skip class, I promise perfezzor. Just as long as "lesson #1" includes your definitive proof that George Bush lied to this country to drag us into a war. Link to post Share on other sites
fatheadfred Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Kucinich is one of the few people on either side that I like.Shit, Bob, after all this conflict we've found something we agree on. Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 I'll say this, it's very difficult to prove he lied. It is always extremely difficult to prove someone's motive. But I don't think there's much doubt that we didn't have very good evidence, at the very least... Link to post Share on other sites
jenbobblehead Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Do we have a separate thread to talk about the Denver Convention, or do we do it here? Link to post Share on other sites
fatheadfred Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Wow. I googled "Bush lied", and landed on a streaming moive called "Loose Change". Shall I believe it first, and seek proof later? The power and oil schtick is your opinion. Bush lied... this is a statement that requires proof to become fact.I'm scrolling down to ketchup (ha) and you continue to show that you've been out of communication with the world for a long time or you are following Dub's reading list...nothing. "...duh, I never read the paper, I got all these smart people around me to advise me, huh huh." Oh, I just remembered the acronym, "WMD". Does this ring a bell? Lie? or 'misguided by intel'? Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts