|
Post by CherokeeJack on Mar 27, 2004 20:58:51 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Phantom Engineer on Mar 27, 2004 23:20:27 GMT -5
Testify brother.
|
|
|
Post by Buddhist Kitten on Mar 28, 2004 17:43:27 GMT -5
But I don't want him in office!
|
|
Alleged
Moderator Emeritus
"Is It Wrong To Not Always Be Glad?"
Posts: 572
|
Post by Alleged on Mar 29, 2004 3:02:27 GMT -5
Crawford, Texas only loaned its village idiot to Washington. Time to return him.
|
|
TomServo69
Moderator Emeritus
Gone but not Forgotten
Nothing ever changes........
Posts: 5,467
|
Post by TomServo69 on Mar 29, 2004 3:45:02 GMT -5
You know, I'm so tired of this Weapons of Mass Destruction debacle. Sure, he messed up and said that's what we were looking for, but, in reality, he was just getting to what Clinton ignored. And that was getting back the things we'd loaned Iraq in the 80's when they were helping depose the Ayatollah. They were supposed to give it back. They didn't. We wanted our stuff back. They won't give it. Go to hell, we're taking our stuff. (And deposing another mass-murdering dictator in the process)
I mean, hell, the UN gave him 9 months. Me and a trained monkey could dispose of weapons of mass destruction given 9 months.
Bring the hate,
Servo
|
|
|
Post by BobJohnson on Mar 29, 2004 8:42:56 GMT -5
You know, I'm so tired of this Weapons of Mass Destruction debacle. Sure, he messed up and said that's what we were looking for, but, in reality, he was just getting to what Clinton ignored. And that was getting back the things we'd loaned Iraq in the 80's when they were helping depose the Ayatollah. They were supposed to give it back. They didn't. We wanted our stuff back. They won't give it. Go to hell, we're taking our stuff. (And deposing another mass-murdering dictator in the process) I mean, hell, the UN gave him 9 months. Me and a trained monkey could dispose of weapons of mass destruction given 9 months. Bring the hate, Servo Servo, He had 10 years to dispose of those weapons. And we gave the weapons to him, NOT loaned, read your history. I can understand fair opposition but when people get their facts wrong it makes them look stupid (No offense)
|
|
|
Post by civlyzed on Mar 29, 2004 12:12:19 GMT -5
Thanks for the link! Kerry '04!
|
|
TomServo69
Moderator Emeritus
Gone but not Forgotten
Nothing ever changes........
Posts: 5,467
|
Post by TomServo69 on Mar 29, 2004 13:44:33 GMT -5
Servo, He had 10 years to dispose of those weapons. And we gave the weapons to him, NOT loaned, read your history. I can understand fair opposition but when people get their facts wrong it makes them look stupid (No offense) Here we go again. Bring me something that says we gave them all those planes and large scale war machines. To think that those weren't on loan is just, well, stupid to use your words. And, yes, you finally got my point that he had 10 years, 8 of which were the Clinton Administration, to dispose of them. Now, I'm under the impression that those weapons, as much money as was spent on them, were on loan. I seriously doubt that we would just GIVE them to anyone. They were supposed to come back after their purpose was served. Go ahead. Prove me wrong. Servo
|
|
|
Post by Blurryeye on Mar 29, 2004 14:12:44 GMT -5
I don't recall "getting our stuff back" as one of the reasons Bush and his administration gave for going to war with Iraq, Servo. I frankly do not have any idea where you're getting that from. Please tell me.
Oh, and if you're sick of the WMD debacle, there's plenty more debacles to choose from: AIDS Funding, Affirmative Action, Blackout on the East Coast, Clean Air in Texas, Chemical Weapons, Carbon Dioxide Emissions, Cost of War in Iraq, Congress' Resolution on Iraq War, Drones in Iraq, Environmental Policy, Economic Policy, Energy Plan, Global Warming, Fuel Efficiency Standards, Prescription Drug Coverage, Social Security Surplus, Iraq War and Anti-West Militancy, and so on. 59 others, available for viewing on Cherokee's link.
|
|
TomServo69
Moderator Emeritus
Gone but not Forgotten
Nothing ever changes........
Posts: 5,467
|
Post by TomServo69 on Mar 29, 2004 14:18:36 GMT -5
I don't recall "getting our stuff back" as one of the reasons Bush and his administration gave for going to war with Iraq, Servo. I frankly do not have any idea where you're getting that from. Please tell me. Oh, and if you're sick of the WMD debacle, there's plenty more debacles to choose from: AIDS Funding, Affirmative Action, Blackout on the East Coast, Clean Air in Texas, Chemical Weapons, Carbon Dioxide Emissions, Cost of War in Iraq, Congress' Resolution on Iraq War, Drones in Iraq, Environmental Policy, Economic Policy, Energy Plan, Global Warming, Fuel Efficiency Standards, Prescription Drug Coverage, Social Security Surplus, Iraq War and Anti-West Militancy, and so on. 59 others, available for viewing on Cherokee's link. Let me put it this way, this war was supposed to be a continuation of the first Gulf War, that's what the first Gulf War was about. That and the oppression of the Kuwaiti people. And, let's see, how the hell did George Bush cause global warming, the blackout on the East Coast, and, just to have a third, what the hell chemical weapons are we referring to? How's about some explanation of these grievances rather than just empty references? Explain each of these problems and how George W. Bush, singlehandedly mind you, caused them. Do you people ever look to Congress for the answer to some of your grievances? They do have just a small amount of pull in it. Damn! Bring the hate some more! Servo
|
|
|
Post by Blurryeye on Mar 29, 2004 14:40:58 GMT -5
Actually, I was suggesting that you read on the website the categories that I labeled. I never stated that Bush caused global warming. I'm wondering if you actually read through any of the categories in the link Cherokee Jack provided. If not, then I'll tell you that it shows a claim or assertion that Bush or his administration made, and how the reality of the situation is quite different, how the claims do not hold up to scrutiny, or how Bush failed to act on campaign promises he made. In other words "Failures and Falsehoods of the Bush Administration".
From http://www.newdemocracyproject.org: Global Warming Assertion: According to President Bush, there is an “incomplete state of scientific knowledge of the causes of, and solutions to, global climate change.” Truth: In 2001, reports from the National Academy of Sciences and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [glow=red,2,300]unequivocally state that global warming is occurring and that man-made pollution is responsible.[/glow] Even Philip Watts, the chairman of Royal Dutch Shell, conceded the existence of the problem: “Amid all this uncertainty, we have seen and heard enough in Shell to say we stand with those who believe there is a problem and that it is related to the burning of fossil fuels.” (Pages 16, 148)
Blackout on the East Coast: Assertion: In the days after the devastating East Coast blackout of August 2003, President Bush and his advisors blamed it on Democratic opposition to his Energy Plan. Truth: In fact, when Congressional Democrats proposed spending $350 million to modernize the grid in 2001, [glow=red,2,300]the proposal was summarily rejected by the White House and Republican leaders,[/glow] who would only agree to improve the electrical grid if it was combined with tax giveaways and new drilling. (Page 20)
Chemical Weapons: Assertion: In June 2003, Bush referred to two trucks in Iraq that might have been mobile bioweapons labs. “For those who say we haven’t found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they’re wrong. We found them.” Truth: But the two mobile labs and a dozen 55 gallon drums of chemicals to which the president was referring “showed no positive hits at all” for chemical weapons. (Page 256)
Here's one that stood out to me, since I am a scientist: Failure: The administration has removed respected scientists from scientific advisory committees and often replaced them with industry representatives, including chemical company favorite Lois Swirksy Gold, who denies many of the links between pollutants and cancer, and Dennis Paustenbach, who actually testified for Pacific Gas & Electric in the real-life Erin Brockovich court case. In fact, the Bush administration sees nothing wrong with conducting an ideological litmus test for each of its potential appointees. For example, William Miller, a nominee to the Nation Advisory Council on Drug Abuse, was contact by someone in Secretary Thompson’s office after he’d been asked to consider the appointment. The caller asked a range of questions, including “Are you sympathetic to faith-based initiatives?” He was also asked whether he was supportive of abortion rights and whether he’d voted for President Bush. When he confessed that he had not voted for President Bush, he was asked to explain himself and did not receive a callback. [glow=red,2,300]Sixty influential scientists, including 20 Nobel Laureates, issued a statement February 18, 2004, decrying the president’s manipulation of science for political gain.[/glow] "Other administrations have, on occasion, engaged in such practices, but not so systematically nor on so wide a front," the statement from the scientists said, adding that they believed the administration had "misrepresented scientific knowledge and misled the public about the implications of its policies." (Statement of scientists, “Restoring Scientific Integrity in Policymaking,” February 18, 2004, Union of Concerned Scientists. See also James Glanz, “Scientists Accuse White House of Distorting Facts,” New York Times, February 18, 2004)
And a nice instance of hypocrisy: Miners' Safety: Failure: Shortly after the nine miners were rescued from a flooded underground mine in Pennsylvania, President Bush made a trip to the state and said, “It was their determination to stick together and to comfort each other that really defines the kind of a new spirit that’s prevalent in our country, that when one of us suffer, all of us suffers.” [glow=red,2,300]Shortly before making that speech, Bush proposed cutting funding for the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) by $7 million (6 percent). [/glow] Meanwhile, coal-mining deaths increased by 41 percent from 1998 to 2001. (Page 182)
There are 60 of these things on the website, only one of which covers WMD.
You say that the recent Iraq war was a continuation of the first Gulf War. Maybe that's how you see it, but that has never been asserted by Bush, Cheney, John Ashcroft, or Colin Powell. They never made any mention of the oppression of Kuwaiti people, either. I guess you and the Bush administration share different views on the purpose and cause of this war.
|
|
TomServo69
Moderator Emeritus
Gone but not Forgotten
Nothing ever changes........
Posts: 5,467
|
Post by TomServo69 on Mar 29, 2004 14:47:31 GMT -5
Sure, sure. You know, I'm sure someone can do the same type thing with every other president in history. Most of those, after reading, were just assumptions and assertions by those who support the opposition. Throw in some manipulation of words, and, voila!
Muckraking! It goes on all the time.
Servo
|
|
|
Post by Blurryeye on Mar 29, 2004 15:04:13 GMT -5
Sure, sure. You know, I'm sure someone can do the same type thing with every other president in history. Most of those, after reading, were just assumptions and assertions by those who support the opposition. Throw in some manipulation of words, and, voila! Muckraking! It goes on all the time. Servo Which of those, specifically, did you find to be "just assumptions and assertions by those who support the opposition", and how? Which words were "manipulated"? How's about some explanation of your grievances rather than just empty references? Please come up with specific rebuttals to Bush's denial of the global warming problem, the Republicans' rejection of the grid modernization proposal before the blackout, the administration's testing of a scientific advisory candidate's ideological stance before hiring, and Bush's cutting of funding for the Mine Safety and Health Administration just before making the speech to the rescued miners. None of those things were "made up" by the "opposition". There's a difference between "muck-raking" and pointing out failures upon scrutiny.
|
|
TomServo69
Moderator Emeritus
Gone but not Forgotten
Nothing ever changes........
Posts: 5,467
|
Post by TomServo69 on Mar 29, 2004 15:20:41 GMT -5
OK, let's see, the whole affirmative action being referred to as a quota. Well, that's what it is, some just don't like to admit it. Political correctness took that over. The whole purpose of affimative action is in the same vein as racism, just for the "good side". The air policy in Texas. Sounds to me like someone didn't have the balls to call it a failure while he was there. And, it's not the people there that don't like him. I was just there a few months ago. They loved him and loved his policies.
That's just a couple I found. Some of them seem on the money. But others are just opinions.
Servo
|
|
|
Post by Blurryeye on Mar 29, 2004 15:22:03 GMT -5
Well, he's gone, so at this point I feel I am triumphant in this little debate. Long live me!
EDIT: Sorry, I spoke too soon. Forgive my premature celebration! More coming soon.
|
|