PDA

View Full Version : Bush won Gore lost get over it



chas1022
01-18-2006, 10:49 PM
It just seems like everything that goes wrong is Bush's fault. The Liberals in this country can't wait for a problem, so they can blame the man for everything. Gore was a joke during the Clinton term.For him to talk about a President breaking the law is a joke.People want to be safe,so the President is doing whant ever it takes to do that.Wire taps on terrorist illegal. Give me a break.Thank God you people wasn't around during WW2,or we would be speaking Japanese, or German

DickLeonard
01-19-2006, 05:29 AM
Chas1022. George please no alias used on this Board.####

Chopstick
01-19-2006, 06:11 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote DickLeonard:</font><hr> Chas1022. George please no alias used on this Board.#### <hr /></blockquote>

Well, you're up early today. Mornin' ####. /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

moblsv
01-19-2006, 07:47 AM
Bush won, America lost.

Get out the truth, expose the lies and vote smarter next time so we can get started on repairing the damage.

Deeman3
01-19-2006, 09:24 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote moblsv:</font><hr> Bush won, America lost.

Get out the truth, expose the lies and vote smarter next time so we can get started on repairing the damage. <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> That's what you guys said the last time. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif </font color>

Drop1
01-19-2006, 12:12 PM
Now good old Bush wants Google to turn over all the porn that goes through Google. Ho Ho yuck yuck. And I thought he was taking naps. Will you all now join me in singing "America the Beautiful" Hey its easy to forget a fool,the hard part is getting rid of one.

heater451
01-19-2006, 05:01 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote chas1022:</font><hr> . . .People want to be safe,so the President is doing whant ever it takes to do that.Wire taps on terrorist illegal. Give me a break. . . .<hr /></blockquote>It's wiretaps on anyone, which can be a violation of the Fourth Amendment. However, there are already channels available, for which to have wiretaps approved, the Administration just wan't to take what they want, without due process. IMO, they've already done it, and just want to cover their asses, in case they get found out. . . .<blockquote><font class="small">Quote chas1022:</font><hr>. . .Thank God you people wasn't around during WW2. . . .<hr /></blockquote>The major involvement of the U.S. in WWII was in retaliation to the Pearl Harbor attack---foreign destruction of domestic targets. Iraq was a decision **supposedly** made due to bad intel, on the weak authority of enforcing U.N. resolutions, and was buoyed by the diverted post-911 "fight response" used to attack Afganistan. It was a sleight-of-hand trick, where they pulled Osama Bin-Laden out, and put in Saddam Hussein.
.<blockquote><font class="small">Quote chas1022:</font><hr>. . .we would be speaking Japanese, or German <hr /></blockquote>No, instead we get Spanish /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif---or American-English, with bad grammar and/or spelling. (I know, I know, correct grammar and spelling are open in forums. . . .)

Oh, and sadly enough, Gore, like many former President-elect hopefuls, never seemed to have an electable personality, until after he quit running.



=================

pooltchr
01-19-2006, 07:25 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote heater451:</font><hr> ]The major involvement of the U.S. in WWII was in retaliation to the Pearl Harbor attack---foreign destruction of domestic targets. <hr /></blockquote>

And the war on terror started when New Your, Washington, and Pennsylvania were attacked. You don't seem to get it. They are still out there and still want to attack. Did you hear the tapes from OBL that were released today??? Think they have given up???
Oh yes, and for those who would say we have given up on OBL, have you noticed that while he is holed up in a cave somewhere with the billy-goats, his top level comrads are continually being captured or killed? I know that doesn't fall into the "Bush gave up on OBL" rally cry, but it's a fact. Even with everything going on in Iraq, OBL and his friends are still a target. Do you think we can only fight one bad guy at a time? As I recall, we managed to take on Germany and Japan at the same time 60 years ago.

This is a different kind of war with a different kind of enemy. It will take different tactics in order to defeat them.I think there are some out there who secretly hope we don't win, so they can point the finger at Bush and say "I told you so!!!"
After 9-11, everyone jumped on the administration for not having intelligence on these guys, or not sharing it internally. Now that they are getting the intelligence, that's no good either! Can't do it that way...gotta find another way!
To listen to some people, you would think that GW was the terrorist, and OBL is just the leader of an opressed group of freedom fighters. When they attack us again, what is the liberal spin going to be? I'm sure it will be GW's fault, but nobody is going to remember how hard they tried to tie his hands to prevent him from doing his job.

Steve

Gayle in MD
01-20-2006, 11:15 AM
Tap Tap Tap! GWB, and ObL, two religious men, claiming to follow the wishes of their personal God's. Both using fear to hold the world at bay, both killing thousands, and both promising to kill thousands more.

Occupying Iraq, has done nothing but drain our resources, and injure and kill our troops, and kill thousands of innocents. WE ARE NO SAFER NOW THAN WE WERE BEFORE!

People forget that GWB left out all the intel which suggested that SH had no WMD's, and was not connected to 911, or to bL.

Simple facts, he said he didn't have them, turns out he didn't have them. Bush occupied a country which had never attacked us. War, should always be a last resort. Many countries have dictators who oppress, and kill their people. Are we going to start wars with all of them? Many countries have WMD's, are we going to occupy all of them? Einstein told us long ago, unless mankind learns to settle the problems of the world without wars, the world will not survive. Bush is the man who took his office with an agenda for war.

Bush was president on 911, Bush was responsible to sift through intelligence to determine it's accuracy, Bush made a huge mistake, then turned around and said, well, he was a bad man anyway, so just keep sending your sons and daughter to die and be slughtered.

Bush is the man who refused to accept intelligence which did not support his wishes to go to war in Iraq. Bush is the man whose father had been targeted by SH, and who obviously determined to use what happened to us on 911, to settle a family score.

Bush is the man whose administration had been warned that occupying Iraq would only increase our enemies, enhearten binLaden's supporters, and throw Iraq into civil war. Bush is the man who created a scenario that insures that for every al Qaeda that we capture or kill, thousands more will be waiting in line to take their place.

Bush is the man who didn't bother to turn on the TV to stay abreast of this countries greatest natural disaster. Bush is the man who sat like a deer in the headlights for seven minutes while this country was under attack. Bush is the man who uses fear to threaten us so that he can spy on us with no accountability to us, or our system of checks and balances.

Bush is the man who stood before the Congress and the Senate and told a story which left out the dissenting opinions which did not support his personal desire to go into Iraq, and occupy a country that had never attacked us, and did not have WMD's. Bush is the man who wants to claim that he has prevented further attacks in this country, but ignore the fact that he has greatly expanded the number of people who hate us and want to kill us. Bush was warned that if he went into Iraq, the country would fall into civil war, and that his wishes and expectations were unrealistic. Bush is the commander in Chief who went into Iraq and failed to prevent kaos after the Occupation.

Bush is the man who appointed Michael Brown as head of FEMA, and Chernoff to HLS, and lumped the agencies together, both of which are now considered by the experts to be impotent, and rendered even more incompetent as a result.

Bush is the man who was president when his appointee, Condoleeza Rice, failed to take seriously a warning from intelligence that said, "bin Laden determined to attack inside US." Bush is the man who refused to give the inspectors the time they requested to finish their investigations. Bush is the man whose chosen Vice President told us over a year ago that the insurgency was in it's last throes, while the Generals on the ground said that the insurgency was greatly expanding.

Bush is the man who wants to claim that his concerns are for our safety, while he pays no attention when Americans are starving, drowning, and begging for food. Bush was the man who hugged BROWNIE, and told hin he was doing a fine job after seeing people on rooftops, begging for rescue.

Bush is the man who flew around in an Enron Jet during his campaign, and deemed one of the biggest crooks to ever darken the steps of the Senate Office Building as innocent, and a good man, Tom Delay.

Bush is the man whose own advisors are afraid to tell anything which goes against his opinion.

Bush is the man who wants to forgive all those who broke the law to get into this country. Bush is the man whose Vice President worked for Halliburton, the company which is stealing our tax dollars by the billions.

Bush is the man who tried to turn our Social Security system into a windfall for his cronies on Wallstreet.

Bush is the man who wants to take power he doesn't have, and use fear to justify it, while at the same time, he gets an F from the investigative body which was formed to learn how to make us safe from future attacks.

Bush is the man who said "Mission Accomplished" over 2,224 dead American bodies ago, and trillions of dollars ago. Bush is the man who has run up the biggest deficit in the history of this country.

Bush is the man whose administration is working to avoid reporting their connections to Jack Abramoff, and his many invitations to the White House.

Bush is the man who pays gay male prostitutes to pose as reporters during press conferences and ask him questions which will glorify his performance.

Bush is the man who holds hands with Saudi Arabian Princes, the country from which most of our attackers on 911 originated. Bush is the man whose closest friends and advisors are being investigated for illegal activities, and whose party is being touted as the most corrupt group of so called public servants to ever occupy Capital Hill.

Bush is the man who was warned, "You break it, you own it" in advance of starting a war which has been deemed militarily unwinnable.

Let's all try and remember all the things that George Bush has accomplished.

Gayle in Md.

Gayle in MD
01-20-2006, 11:28 AM
Who do you want us to blame for everything that IS wrong, Bill Clinton? We're in a mess, and George Bush put us into it. Go splash some cold water on your face, and read the newspapers. George Bush is the worst president in history. When the truth comes out about these wire taps, No one will be able to deny that fact. When a president breaks the law, it IS a big deal, and is reported in both the liberal press, and the right wing press. Where have you been? Republicans and Democrats alike have reported great concern about this President's attempt to go around the laws which protect the privacy rights of Americans, guaranteed us by our Constitution. The President took an oath to protect our Constitution, and our laws.

Gayle in Md.

Gayle in MD
01-20-2006, 11:53 AM
Iraq, did not, attack us. People from Saudi Arabia, attacked us,... you know, the country whose Prince, George Bush holds hands with. Terrorists, AKA religious fanatics, attacked us. They are doing it for their God, and intend to attack us further.

When they attack us again, we will be wondering why George Bush didn't do the things the Senate Investigation Committee told him to do to protect our country from attack. That is what we will be saying. I'm sure some will wish that we had focussed on bin Laden, instead of going off half cocked against a country which was of no immediate threat, wasting money, lives, and time.

Bush had the intelligence, when we were last attacked, it said, "bin Laden determined to attack inside the United States." He was President at that time, not Al Gore, not Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and he sat in a chair for seven minutes before he got up off his ass to take any action. When he finally did take action, he dropped the ball when he had bin Laden right in his reach, and took action against the wrong country, and the wrong man.

He is not above the law, regardless of what war is being fought, or how it is being fought. He must, abide by the law, or approach the Congress and the Senate to alter the law. He did not do that. He told a very few in power, and then promptly tied their hands, and those who reported his illegal activities, are being called traitors. No one is above the law. Not even King George. After his Mushroom cloud facade regarding Saddam, why should we suppose his judgement regarding spying on Americans would be on target, or that he is being honest about whom he spies upon, and for what reason? One can only cry wolf so many times, before the townspeople begin to question one's ability to identify the wolf.

Gayle in Md.

DickLeonard
01-20-2006, 01:57 PM
Chas1022 Bush was not elected he was appointed by the Supreme Court. They ignored the one man one vote instead of a recount they appointed Bush.

I was around durinng WW11 and we threw Japanese Americans into Camps. Bush on the other hand packed up all of BinLaudins relatives and flew them to Saudi Arabia. Air raid Wardens patrolling the streets at nights. We haven't done one thing to prevent people from entering our country illegally.

We entered WW11 because of the Liberals in this country. The tough republicans were Isolationists.

To the muslims in the world we are the terriorists. We attacked a Soverignn Country. Bombing and killing thousands of Innocent people looking for a Lie.

Every Iraqi soldier killed defending his country was killed by US terriorists. Bush is as Guilty as Saddam Hussein when it comes to massacuring innocent people.####

Sid_Vicious
01-20-2006, 06:33 PM
Gayle...I totally agree with everything you said, yet I feel that I have a pitifull response many Americans will have when we get attacked her again. You'll see two lame responses, one being fear and sheepish alignment with Bush for his so-called assertive war against terrorism. Second you will find that there will be moderates from L-R who will shift to believing the US being in Iraq is now more necessary. It is total sh!t that this mind game of the administration since the towers fell, in reality, is and will still work. Like I said once before in exageration, "Bush could be caught on camera slipping a knife into a grandmother, and as long as it's not a rightie's grandmother, that SOB will still skate." Our country has been bought and sold down the river. This breaking of the constitutional laws, rushing us into a wrong war, all of the personal lives lost or destroyed by Bush...that monkey has all the power cuz he who holds the gold, makes the golden rules. If that wasn't true, Bush would have already been knee deep in an impeachment process. Bill C. unloaded in privacy in an adulterous activity and the country shutdown just to get him. Our country has given their rights away to idiots, and sad to say, about nothing will get it back. It is a sad and pathetic expression this country gives to the rest of the world.

I'm just being upfront, not giving up. Let's hope some action over these wire taps really gets it's due legal attention, and that I am simply over reacting, totally wrong. I'd really enjoy being totally wrong this time...sid

Gayle in MD
01-20-2006, 06:51 PM
Martin, regardless of whether we are attacked or not, the right will not be able to justify this administration when all the investigations are complete, nor will they be able to change the mood of vast numbers of people in this country who do not agree with this war. Aids in Delay's office were getting inside information, then e-mailing their contributors to sell or buy stocks! Martha Stewart went to jail for supposedly doing that same thing. Believe me when I tell you, the Republican party will take a big hit from these corruption scandels. They are trying to make it a partisan scandel, but it just won't work. Democrats were not involved in taking bribes. Those who got any money, got it from the Indian Tribes, not Abramoff, and Abramoff has also been wined and dined in the White House, along with Tom Delay, of course.

Rove, has already begun to formulate the next election campaign around the usual fear tactacs of the Bush administration, claiming the Democrats are living in a pre- 9/11 world. They (Republicans) are all looking a bit dazed and confused these days, "Oh, you mean we have to follow the rules, Gee, when did that occur?"

When they begin to match up the earmarks, with the pay offs, Republicans will be fighting for the last tickets on a slow boat to China!]

Gayle in Md.

Sid_Vicious
01-20-2006, 07:10 PM
"Believe me when I tell you, the Republican party will take a big hit from these corruption scandels."

All I am saying is that just like 9-11, another hit of any kind inside our borders, may simply divert attention away from the reps legal issues. Will it rectify, no. Will GW be hurt in his stature, not! Until the avenue of prosecution right to the top is unblockaded due to the power of the legislative branches...I'm afraid we are stuck with the chimp's idiotic ways. This ain't purty...sid

Gayle in MD
01-20-2006, 07:46 PM
What gets me is the way they put out their BS about what they are doing, and what the results are. For example, the whole, "Fight them over there, so we won't have to fight them over here" arguement was a joke. The whole story about the so called terrorist caught in NY. The guy was a nutcase, who had plans to bring the bridge down, cable by cable with a blow tourch. or wire clippers, or some such faluty plan. If Bush is so worried about us being attacked again, and is only spying on people who are in contact with the terrorists, to protect us, then why doesn't he just arrest the people in this country who are in touch with them, and interrogate them, instead of spying on all of us. If he is so worried, then why doesn't he give a damn about our borders? Why isn't there a universal terrorist list circulated among law enforcement, and transportation?

He uses 9/11 for his illegal illogical activity now, but how will he justify his methods to fight terrorism after we are attacked again. When it happens, and his appointees screw up the response, it will only highlight and expose the incompetance of his administration, and their failures to do what should have been done long ago, then what will he do? He has set himself up as our protector, how is it going to look when attention is drawn to his inability to put into motion safegaurds for this country?

After two more years of his deficits, his connections to crooks, his documented lies, such as, "And when we talk about wire taps, we're talking about wire taps that require us to go to court," blah blah blah...the man never tells the truth, never.

I have confidence that eventually Americans will see through this kind of smoke screen, and realize that Bush has made absolutely NO strides whatsoever in making us safer, has actually exascerbated the problems of terrorism, and has done nothing but chip away at the principles of which Americans have traditionally been proud. You can't lie and steal and torture and twist the truth and get away with it forever, even if you are King. In the meantime, we had better all stock up on food and water, and hazmat suits, because we sure as hell don't have any Federal Emergency Management Agency to come to our aid, that's for sure.

I find it curious that everytime Bush is faced with bad press, bin Laden suddenly emerges with more threats. Last time, a week before the election? Hmmmmmmmm???? /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Gayle in Md.

heater451
01-21-2006, 11:44 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote heater451:</font><hr> ]The major involvement of the U.S. in WWII was in retaliation to the Pearl Harbor attack---foreign destruction of domestic targets. <hr /></blockquote>

And the war on terror started when New Your, Washington, and Pennsylvania were attacked. You don't seem to get it. They are still out there and still want to attack. Did you hear the tapes from OBL that were released today??? Think they have given up???
Oh yes, and for those who would say we have given up on OBL, have you noticed that while he is holed up in a cave somewhere with the billy-goats, his top level comrads are continually being captured or killed? I know that doesn't fall into the "Bush gave up on OBL" rally cry, but it's a fact. Even with everything going on in Iraq, OBL and his friends are still a target. Do you think we can only fight one bad guy at a time? As I recall, we managed to take on Germany and Japan at the same time 60 years ago.

This is a different kind of war with a different kind of enemy. It will take different tactics in order to defeat them.I think there are some out there who secretly hope we don't win, so they can point the finger at Bush and say "I told you so!!!"
After 9-11, everyone jumped on the administration for not having intelligence on these guys, or not sharing it internally. Now that they are getting the intelligence, that's no good either! Can't do it that way...gotta find another way!
To listen to some people, you would think that GW was the terrorist, and OBL is just the leader of an opressed group of freedom fighters. When they attack us again, what is the liberal spin going to be? I'm sure it will be GW's fault, but nobody is going to remember how hard they tried to tie his hands to prevent him from doing his job.

Steve <hr /></blockquote>Yes, you are correct, that the U.S. was attacked, but as Gayle has already mentioned, and I came close to in the last post, was that they had nothing to do with Iraq.

Again, as Gayle mentioned, the 9/11 perpetrators were Saudis, and not Iraqis. The odd thing to me is, that Bush is friendly with the Saudis, and yet Osama Bin Laden is from there as well--although his family supposedly disowned him.

Also, a question with no easy answer, is whether any country at all can be held responsible for a "terrorist" act. Pearl Harbor was an attach carried out by a nation, that was actively engaged in an open, declared war. Unfortunately, terrorism, as you point out, is a different kind of animal, and it isn't that easy to define a target.

The attack on Iraq/Saddam Hussein, and the continued occupation are very much similar to the "Police Action" of Korea, and the "Vietnam Conflict", IMO. The "War on Terrorism" is a catch-phrase, the same as the "War on Drugs". If we were truly at war, Congress would have been fully on board, and I'm sure that those of us who don't look favorable upon the Iraq Incident, would be as ready to kick some ass as those who think our current actions in Iraq are a good thing for the U.S. (not to be confused with the good of the people in Iraq, Kuwait, or anyone else damaged by the Hussein regime).

BTW, I usually stay out of the heavy political argument threads, because it's too hard to retain a balanced view, without being drawn into one camp of thought or another--or to even be viewed that way. I also don't really like to waste my time typing anything that won't change anyone's mind--the same as I would not be able to changed someones preference for 9-ball over 8-ball, or vice-versa. And, when topics are emotionally charged, I don't think it's worth suffering the stones and arrows.



=========================

jtlabs
01-22-2006, 02:35 PM
Where have you been, that type of stuff happens to every president:) Granted Bush probably doesn't deserve half the stuff that is thrown at him, but one can certainly respectfully disagree with him. He is definitely not the brightest crayon in the box. I enjoyed Bush Sr much better.

At any rate, I will be glad when Bush Jr. is behind us.

eg8r
01-23-2006, 10:59 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, you are correct, that the U.S. was attacked, but as Gayle has already mentioned, and I came close to in the last post, was that they had nothing to do with Iraq. <hr /></blockquote> What's up heater? When people bring up WWII in these discussions I feel they make a relevant comparison. We entered WWII because of the attack by Japan. We went and took care of Japan and also took care of Germany (who had not YET attacked us). Fast forward to where we are now. We entered the War on Terror (a name we attributed to our actions against terrorists around the world) because of an attack on our soil. We first went and took care of Taliban and Afghanistan (now just like in WWII when we took care of Germany who oh-by-the-way never attacked) we have moved forward and took care of Saddam.

Any chance you are playing in the IPT qualifer in Atlanta?

eg8r

eg8r
01-23-2006, 11:01 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Iraq, did not, attack us. <hr /></blockquote> Nether did Germany or Milosevic (not part of WWII but another attack on a country/leader who never attacked us).

eg8r

wolfdancer
01-23-2006, 11:20 AM
[ QUOTE ]
When people bring up WWII in these discussions I feel they make a relevant comparison. <hr /></blockquote>

you mean like comparing apples and agent orange?
Japan had attacked us, Germany was already at war in Europe, and had pacts with Japan....it was a no-brainer to declare war on Germany.
The war against Iraq was declared by a no-brainer.

heater451
01-23-2006, 08:16 PM
Hey, Ed--

I can see where it might look like a parallel (maybe, further than it should), but I just don't think that the Afganistan/Iraq connection is as clear as the WWII alliance of Germany and Japan. Especially on the tenuous thread of "terrorism". Following that logic, we could (and may already be) going after any country with "ties to terrorism". Unfortunately, that would include us, the U.S. of A.

[For those that don't know it, we trained the Afgans (Afganis?), so that they could resist the Russians, who were our cold-war enemies at the time. IMO, it was an "enemy of my enemy is my friend" sort of set up. The downside was that it empowered them to fight us as well.]

As for the IPT qualifier, I highly doubt it. There's supposed to be a local tourney, with the prize being the entry fee ($2K) into the qualifier. I might play in the local, but I'm not that good at 9-ball (at least, I don't have the experience to see all the early, defensive opportunites--assuming that my shotmaking is working well enough, of course.) I might see about getting into a 9-ball league, instead of just the Sunday weekly tourneys, and try to rack up some experience. (Pardon the pun)


================================

Deeman3
01-24-2006, 06:56 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
When people bring up WWII in these discussions I feel they make a relevant comparison. <hr /></blockquote>

you mean like comparing apples and agent orange?
Japan had attacked us, Germany was already at war in Europe, and had pacts with Japan....it was a no-brainer to declare war on Germany. <font color="blue"> Actually, it was not a "no brainer" as many Amercicans were sympathetic to Germany, even the republicans were isolationist in terms of going to war with Germany. Pacifists said we were getting into a war we had no business in, defending a country, England, that itself had resisted fighting Germany. </font color>
<hr /></blockquote>

Chopstick
01-24-2006, 07:59 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
When people bring up WWII in these discussions I feel they make a relevant comparison. <hr /></blockquote>

you mean like comparing apples and agent orange?
Japan had attacked us, Germany was already at war in Europe, and had pacts with Japan....it was a no-brainer to declare war on Germany. <font color="blue"> Actually, it was not a "no brainer" as many Amercicans were sympathetic to Germany, even the republicans were isolationist in terms of going to war with Germany. Pacifists said we were getting into a war we had no business in, defending a country, England, that itself had resisted fighting Germany. </font color>
<hr /></blockquote> <hr /></blockquote>

They also said FDR lied about the reason for getting into the war, caused America to be attacked, wasted millions that could have been used for social programs on the Manhattan project based on "intelligence" that Germany was nearing completion of "the Bomb", blah, blah,blah.

<font color="blue">These guys aren't walking in fresh snow. They have been beating the same drum for sixty years. </font color>

Gayle in MD
01-24-2006, 08:12 AM
It's amazing, isn't it, how the right will muddy up the waters just to try to cover up for Bush's decision to do something we have never done before. They try to compare this war, to other wars, when the truth is that we have never occupied another country and launched a war because our King was too impatient to wait for the inspectors to finish their work. But, in the faux news tradition, they continue to avoid looking at the real truth of any devastating situation created by their King. There is no reasonable comparison to this war in our history, none. plain and simple.

So, they just coin new words, it's the Republican Way, you know, Illegal Wire Taps, aka, Domestic Spying, is now known as Terrorist Surviellance, and outsourcing torture is called, rendition, and Democratic fury when the President breaks the law, is called partisan politics, a raging growing insurgency, is an insurgency that is in its last throes, gay male prostitutes, are called journalists, and neglecting the old the ill and the poor, is called Faith Based Initiatives. An educational system that is in the can, is called No Child Left Behind.
Selling the country out to foreign interests is called free trade, and open borders, unchecked shipping containers, unchecked presidential powers, and non communicative first responders, all called the Patriot Act. Taking bribes from corrupt Corporations through their lobbyists, is called earmarking, and doing the business of the people. Going to The Congress For Approval of Illegal Wire Taps, is really just calling a few to the side, and then telling them they can't say anything about it to anyone. Wistle Blowers, who don't want to prectice illegal activities, are called traitors, and war heros are called cowards. You just have to get with it Jack, it's kind of like ebonics, Rebonics,... ya know,...but if you're not Republican, you just can't follow it!

Gayle in Md.

wolfdancer
01-24-2006, 09:29 AM
[ QUOTE ]
hey also said FDR lied about the reason for getting into the war, caused America to be attacked, wasted millions that could have been used for social programs on the Manhattan project based on "intelligence" that Germany was nearing completion of "the Bomb", blah, blah,blah.

These guys aren't walking in fresh snow. They have been beating the same drum for sixty years.
<hr /></blockquote>
Do you actually believe that? there was a strong isolationist movement here, among the notables ..Henry Ford, Charles Lindbergh.....
Since the public did not know about the Manhatten project, they could hardly have objected to it, in favor of some social programs, and who but a few scientists were aware of
any Atom bomb program, anywhere.
It was only after the war, that the theorists, believed Pearl Harbor was allowed to be attacked....because FDR needed something to get a war bill approved by Congress.
I think you may have rewritten history a bit, and doubt it's the same guys, so to speak.. that have been "beating the same drum"
I can't believe ole Henry and Charles were Democrats, liberals, and I'd guess they would have been strong right wing supporters....
One aspect of this war is that there has been this tenuous balance of power in the region, esp between Iraq/Iran...and now that we have changed the playing field, Iran is emboldened to become a Nuclear power. Will this become a greater threat, then Saddam?
I was reading a 2003 message board....some interesting thoughts... web page (http://pub238.ezboard.com/fnigeriadiscussionsfrm2.showMessage?topicID=241.to pic) but all on the side of...against the war

Gayle in MD
01-24-2006, 09:56 AM
Dear Deeman,
I guess you're going to tell me that before King George made his illogical, incorrect, and down right stupid decision to start a war in Iraq, that we were all sympathizing with the Iraqis, walking around over here in the good ol' USA, saying, "We've just got to do something about Saddam, and what he is doing to his people." HA HA HA, we didn't give a damn about SH, or Iraq, only the King had a score to settle with SH, for his Dad. Inspectors were saying they didn't think there were WMD's, remember, they just wanted another couple of months, the whole world was in sympathy with the United States, until Bush threw it all away by thumbing his nose, with the support of the neocon right, BTW, thumbing his nose at the rest of the world, and going on his Mushroom Cloud Rampage.

The number of countries, and people that hate us, is uncomparable to anything in our history. Now, bush is seeing that there is no way out of this mess, and NOW, he's going to try to go with his hat in his hand and try to BS other countries into packing up their guns, and troops and armies and pitching in, LMAO, I don't think so. You people who want to compare what Bush has done in the middle east, Iraq, to war efforts in the past, are definately practicing Rebonics....

Love,
Gayle...

Chopstick
01-24-2006, 02:46 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
hey also said FDR lied about the reason for getting into the war, caused America to be attacked, wasted millions that could have been used for social programs on the Manhattan project based on "intelligence" that Germany was nearing completion of "the Bomb", blah, blah,blah.

These guys aren't walking in fresh snow. They have been beating the same drum for sixty years.
<hr /></blockquote>
Do you actually believe that? there was a strong isolationist movement here, among the notables ..Henry Ford, Charles Lindbergh.....<font color="blue">I don'tbelieve that FDR did anything wrong. I do believe that some people said he lied. </font color>
Since the public did not know about the Manhatten project, they could hardly have objected to it, in favor of some social programs, and who but a few scientists were aware of
any Atom bomb program, anywhere.
It was only after the war, that the theorists, believed Pearl Harbor was allowed to be attacked....because FDR needed something to get a war bill approved by Congress.
I think you may have rewritten history a bit,<font color="blue">It would appear that way since I did not include the timeline in the original context. </font color> and doubt it's the same guys, so to speak.. that have been "beating the same drum"
I can't believe ole Henry and Charles were Democrats, liberals, and I'd guess they would have been strong right wing supporters....<font color="blue">By saying the same guys I meant those who sought political gain by making those accusations. I beleive it was the Republicans that were doing it back then. </font color>

One aspect of this war is that there has been this tenuous balance of power in the region, esp between Iraq/Iran...and now that we have changed the playing field, Iran is emboldened to become a Nuclear power. Will this become a greater threat, then Saddam? <font color="blue">We are on the same page here. Colin Powell knew it too. He was opposed to military action in Iraq then he suddenly changed his mind. I wonder what they did to get to him? I'll check out the web page.</font color>

I was reading a 2003 message board....some interesting thoughts... web page (http://pub238.ezboard.com/fnigeriadiscussionsfrm2.showMessage?topicID=241.to pic) but all on the side of...against the war <hr /></blockquote>

Deeman3
01-24-2006, 02:59 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> Dear Deeman,
I guess you're going to tell me that before King George made his illogical, incorrect, and down right stupid decision to start a war in Iraq, that we were all sympathizing with the Iraqis, walking around over here in the good ol' USA, saying, "We've just got to do something about Saddam, and what he is doing to his people." HA HA HA, we didn't give a damn about SH, or Iraq, only the King had a score to settle with SH, for his Dad. <font color="blue"> Gayle, Where in your dislusional reading did you come up with that from me? You always snap at people mis-quoting you. I feel this is not a fair or even logical evaluation of what I said. </font color> Inspectors were saying they didn't think there were WMD's, remember, they just wanted another couple of months, <font color="blue"> Inpectors were being blocked out of sites, not allowed to do open searches and just wanted to hold onto their UN positions for as long as possible. If they had made 200 more resolutions, Saddam would not have budged, he already knew the quality and character of the dogs he was letting sniff him.</font color> the whole world was in sympathy with the United States, until Bush threw it all away by thumbing his nose, with the support of the neocon right, BTW, thumbing his nose at the rest of the world, and going on his Mushroom Cloud Rampage. <font color="blue"> The rest of the world always has short term support for the U.S. followed by critical analysis, followed by crawfishing (ask Chopstick what this is). </font color>

The number of countries, and people that hate us, is uncomparable to anything in our history. <font color="blue"> This is rediculous. We have had waves of hate in the past and they like this will do, went away. Canada is now seeing the light as is even France (see them getting ready to exile 25 ~30 K non-residents (read Islamic leaches). </font color> Now, bush is seeing that there is no way out of this mess, and NOW, he's going to try to go with his hat in his hand and try to BS other countries into packing up their guns, and troops and armies and pitching in, LMAO, I don't think so. You people who want to compare what Bush has done in the middle east, Iraq, to war efforts in the past, are definately practicing Rebonics.... <font color="blue">War is war, Gayle. It's never pretty and never for a good enough reason for pacifists. I do think what GWB has done is going to be good for Iraq, good for the West in the long term. I do believe he could have prosecuted the war much more agressively but, hey, he's the guy we elected and he should be able to do it his way. There is plenty of time for capitulation, whining and begging the Europeans for their forgiveness and approval so we will be "popular" again when the Democrats take the election in 2008. Then we can all feel safer as the Islamic terrorists will feel good about us. As you know, they are reasonable people, right? All they want is to give peace a chance. You guys can even negoiate with Osama Bin Laden if he is still around.</font color>

Love,
Gayle... <hr /></blockquote>

more love back at you,

Deeman

pooltchr
01-24-2006, 05:40 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> , we didn't give a damn about SH, or Iraq, .......The number of countries, and people that hate us, is uncomparable to anything in our history. <hr /></blockquote>

So Gayle...which is it? How can you not give a damn about the situation in Iraq, yet be so concerned about what the world thinks about us? What would the rest of the world think about us if we didn't give a damn about any of them?
Just wondering...
Steve

Gayle in MD
01-25-2006, 01:51 AM
You made the statement that many Americans were sympathetic with Germany, didn't you? Wasn't that a comparison between two totally different wars? I don't think Iraq was much of an issue after 9/11, to most Americans, until Bush juryrigged the intelligence, and put out all the lies about a connection between Sh and bL. Most of the Democrats, were interested in going after bin Laden, not SH, especially after they realized how the King had deceived them.

According to international studies, America has never been the recipient of the vast international hatred which is so prevalent today.

The rest of what you have posted here isn't worth answering. Bush is a genius, and you righties are so right to support him. Iraqis are going to just decide to love one another, and stop killing one another, and become fast friends, and Bush will be a hero for starting another war which is militarily unwinnable, lol.

Historians will ultimately articulate the vast incompetance of this administration, and the faulty judgement it has displayed. Iraq will continue to wage civil war, and I hope that the Democrats, such as John Murtha, will be able to put enough pressure on Bush to force him to see the error of his thinking, and faulty decisions, so that our troops can come home, instead of staying in Iraq where they will continue to be targets in a civil war. Civil war is, after all, exactly what Bush was told he would launch if he went into Iraq, and civil war is exactly what is going on there now.

Einstein was a pacifist, but he was such a dummy.


Gayle in Md.

Gayle in MD
01-25-2006, 01:59 AM
Hi Chopstick, you question about Powell is interesting. I have wondered the same thing many times. Suffice to say, Powell now considers his change of heart, and the decision to support Bush by helping him to con the world with justifications for Bush's War to be a black mark on his career. He has stated this several times in interviews. I'm sure he will have much more to say about it after Bush is out of office.

Gayle in Md.

Gayle in MD
01-25-2006, 01:27 PM
That isn't what I said, I was discussing pre-war Iraq sentiments in this country. Most of us were much more concerned about bin Laden, North Korea, China, al Qaeda, the Talibon, not Saddam, not Iraq, which most Middle East Experts said would be a bad situation to stir up, hence Colin Powells warning, "You break it, You own it." Bush, didn't listen to the experts, the same way he doesn't listen now to knowledgable experts such as John Murtha.

As for helping people, we should be helping the poor people in Delphur, in Africa. We are wasting our people, time, and resources fighting a war which even the Generals on the ground are saying is militarily unwinnable. If there was ever a war which resembles this one, it is Vietnam, another Civil War, in a country where we had no business sticking our noses.

Gayle in Md.

DickLeonard
01-28-2006, 02:10 PM
I watched Chris Matthews on Hardball on MSNBC and he said he was in Africa and everyone was wearing Osama T shirts. I wonder what that means?####