Quoting:

  This man has the mental agility of an average 12-year-old.
End Quote

Haha :) :D ;D I was discussing the same, exact thing with the kids... It makes sense. He was an alcoholic and refuses to answer questions about his shady past with cocaine. I'm not an expert, but I think cocaine and booze abuse in the past amounts to a destroyed brain...

Quoting:
*There is a poison plant in Northeastern Iraq
End Quote

Sounds like a parody to "Honey Pie" by the Beatles:
There is a poison plant, in North East Iraq
"Now we've hit the jackpot, c'mon let's attack"
Once the tanks have started rolling, there's no turning back

;-)

Phil

Quoting:
*There is a poison plant in Northeastern Iraq
End Quote

But just remember, one man's poison is another country's baby food  :D

Quoting:
<Devil's Advocate mode on>
But surely he's really really brainy, after all:
1) He was a fighter pilot, and they have to be brainy
2) He went to Yale
3) He won, and Al Gore didn't. ergo, he must be smarter (though I've never quite worked out the logic of that one)
<Devil's Advocate mode off>
...I ain't quite managed to convince myself...

Phil

End Quote

1. He was a "fighter pilot" stationed in Texas during the Vietnam War, right? Bill Maher refers to this group of spoiled brats as the "Champagne Brigade."

2. He had, like, a 2.3 GPA as a Business major! That is just ludicrous of anybody to have...

3. He won on a really weird premise :P

Quoting:3. He won on a really weird premise :P
End Quote

Yeap.

Florida...

Brother Bush...

Recounts...

Too much of a coincidence, if you ask me.

I will always believe Bush stole the election.

Sorry, 80'sRocked.  :-/

Quoting:
  ...Seriously, though, this Presidential News Conference was an exceptionally poor showing for Georgie.
  This is the most bizarre presidential behavior I have ever witnessed,

End Quote

Are the Hollyweird Liberals on drugs....may have been a more apt title....what of Clinton "The so-called Greatest President Ever?"  pardoning known criminals as well as lying to the American people repeatedly....to say nothing of his refusal to step down after being impeached....he was, is and always will be an embarrasment to this country....IMHO ::) Oh and BTW...IF the 2000 election was stolen...why didn't Gore want ALL the votes re-counted...including the overseas ones (Which his party wanted thrown out??)

Quoting:
I will always believe Bush stole the election.
Sorry, 80'sRocked.  :-/
End Quote

hey, don't apologize on my behalf.  Over the last few years its obvious some are determined to believe that and thats just the way it is.  

However, as you know, or may not know, USA Today, The New York Times, and Miami Herald's independant recounts of the Florida votes in question concluded that Bush did win, albeit by a small margin, but a true victory indeed.  

As you know, or again, may not know, our election is based on the "Electoral College".  Many people seemed to selectively forget that fact after 2000.  

This is an old and tired argument.  Every time I hear someone say Bush stole the election, I'm not sure whether to dismiss it as stubborn delusion, or just plain ignorance.  ::)



I copy-and-pasted the opening paragraph from the April 3, 2001 edition of USA Today below:

------------------------------------------------------------
Newspapers' recount shows Bush prevailed

By Dennis Cauchon, USA TODAY


George W. Bush would have won a hand count of Florida's disputed ballots if the standard advocated by Al Gore had been used, the first full study of the ballots reveals. Bush would have won by 1,665 votes — more than triple his official 537-vote margin — if every dimple, hanging chad and mark on the ballots had been counted as votes, a USA TODAY/Miami Herald/Knight Ridder study shows. The study is the first comprehensive review of the 61,195 "undervote" ballots that were at the center of Florida's disputed presidential election.
------------------------------------------------------------

Quoting:

Are the Hollyweird Liberals on drugs....may have been a more apt title....what of Clinton "The so-called Greatest President Ever?"  pardoning known criminals as well as lying to the American people repeatedly....to say nothing of his refusal to step down after being impeached....he was, is and always will be an embarrasment to this country....IMHO ::)
End Quote

  Greatest President?  Sez who?!  Yeah, I voted for him twice and I got exactly what I asked for.  I've also learned to be careful what I ask for...

   Funny thing is, R&R, I get this standard from Bush supporters, who point out that Clinton screwed the people too, and wouldn't you rather have the offender be honest about it? Don't worry, it's as stupid from them as it sounds here, but at least other tyrants are openly tyrannical. It's a lot harder to pretend nobility if you're a recognized dictator than if you get to pretend you're an elected president.

  After eight years of coke-fueled, orgiastic greed, followed by four years of stuttering idiocy and finger-pointing, I got eight years of Clinton, who was everything I expected him to be.  I knew damn well we were getting a sideshow, and I can't figure out why anyone who didn't recognize the obvious would have voted for the man. Yet the Republicans stonewalled, the Democrats buckled, and Clinton played ball. The people got what they wanted and suddenly the "Me" generation returned. We have a hangover that we're curing with warfare and idiocy.

  Gore? Who cares? I still think he would have been preferable to Bush, but only by the merit of not being Bush. I mean, the people pared themselves to a choice between Tweedlefritz and Tweeldefartz. And we still manage to come out of the dumbest election in ages embroiled in voter fraud and what should be the end of the electoral college.
     
   Jeez, could I go any farther off-topic..?! :P

 

 

 

Quoting:


This is an old and tired argument.  Every time I hear someone say Bush stole the election, I'm not sure whether to dismiss it as stubborn delusion, or just plain ignorance.  ::)
End Quote

I know this is not a statement directed towards me since I am aware of the Electoral College, but as soon as it was reported that the Palm Beach ballot was wrongly counted, that's when I smelled a rat. And, yes, it sucked that the overseas ballot was not counted either, so I'm not a Gore advocate on this one either. The whole Florida vote reeked of dirty politics. We have not touched the tip of the iceberg on the subject. We haven't even brought it up in general terms...

Yes. It is an old, tired argument, but you certainly put off an air of authority on every thing that is Bush, US politics, and their history in general, for which you have grossly misjudged yourself to be. "Delusion"? "Ignorance"? Please. You can make the same point without having to use those words, but if you must be right in order to feel right, then I'll be the first to gladly be classified as "delusional" and "ignorant." Dios mio, es imposible hablar con algunos.

Quoting:


Step 1 is admission, Step 2 is overcoming, Step 3 is moving on...  

Congratualtions.  You passed step 1.  Now if only the other "Bush stole the election" people will follow suit. ::)





End Quote

Oh, hell yes! I rather be "ignorant" by your language-shift terms, not by the true definition of it; maybe I should explain things in full detail since what I say tends to be too dry and too quick for some to the point where they must quote me out of context in order to prove their... point. If by "delusional" you mean that I won't believe everything I read and I'm told, then, yes, I can be considered "delusional." I mean, I don't think I have to be a friggin' Sophist to be able to tell who's putting one on the public, so my doubts on the system makes me "delusional." Fine. Step 1: Complete.

Now if only you could stop butchering the language, I could possibly understand your pedantic sense of humour ::) "Congratualtions"? Wtf is that?! I assume you're not actually congratulating me (weak jab). It's funny even when I catch myself lambasting someone else and misusing appropriate words and terms. I think it will take more than one step on this one, but, rest assured, it can be done with a good dictionary. May I suggest the Oxford dictionary? It makes pseudo-wannabe-poser-intellectual-poppycock statements like yours read semi-convincing.

Okay. You win, but you do know that winning an argument over this medium is tantamount to winning an election in the United States. Ba-dah bing! Ba-dah boom! Heeeey!

Quoting:
Now if only you could stop butchering the language, I could possibly understand your pedantic sense of humour ::) "Congratualtions"? Wtf is that?! I assume you're not actually congratulating me (weak jab)...I think it will take more than one step on this one, but, rest assured, it can be done with a good dictionary. May I suggest the Oxford dictionary? It makes pseudo-wannabe-poser-intellectual-poppycock statements like yours read semi-convincing.End Quote

ok, you got me, when caught up in all the excitement, I guess I forgot that perfect spelling and perfect grammar usage is paramount when posting on internet message boards.



wow. ::)

Quoting:
This is an old and tired argument.  Every time I hear someone say Bush stole the election, I'm not sure whether to dismiss it as stubborn delusion, or just plain ignorance.  ::)End Quote

It's not ignorance.

I guess I'll classify myself, by your terms, under stubborn delusion. Though, in this case, I think Tarzan Boy made a better argument against your statement than I'd ever care to.

Quoting:
It's not ignorance.

I guess I'll classify myself, by your terms, under stubborn delusion. Though, in this case, I think Tarzan Boy made a better argument against your statement than I'd ever care to.
End Quote

This can be argued until the end of time...

While I agree with 80sRocked that the election was won fair and square, I agree with Hairspray that you can't win an argument just through sheer smugness and sarcasm.  Gotta back up your words, man.

I have a funny proposition.  Remember how back in the 19th Century, Harrison beat Cleveland in the electoral votes?  Cleveland stormed back to win the next election.  If Gore had any balls he'd try the same instead of whining.  Too bad his political career is in the toilet now.

Quoting:
It's not ignorance.

I guess I'll classify myself, by your terms, under stubborn delusion.
End Quote

Thats fine.  If you, and many others choose to beleive it, despite the fact it has been concluded to be false by several inquires, then by all means...

I've come to the conclusion that with some people, even if  they themselves could recount the entire truckload of Florida ballots personally by hand, realizing much like "USA Today"/"New York Times" did that Bush did win, they would still choose not beleive it.

Oh well, whatever gets you through the day.  8)

Quoting:
I agree with Hairspray that you can't win an argument just through sheer smugness and sarcasm.  Gotta back up your words, man.
End Quote

yea I'll admit my response to TB was full of sarcasm.  But then again, how is one supposed to respond to someone whose major portion of their rebuttel is nothing more than a grammar lesson?  

My original post in this thread was not smug or sarcastic.  If someone feels it was, well sooooory.  

I just took the liberty of removing my first response to TB, hopefully that will suffice.  ::) 

Man always being called upon to apologize etc everytime I post is really getting old and really takes the fun out of coming here, unfortunately:(

Quoting:

Man always being called upon to apologize etc everytime I post is really getting old and really takes the fun out of coming here, unfortunately...End Quote

What takes the fun out of coming here is when people don't respect each other's opinions.

All opinions do not have to be liked.

Everyone's entitled to their opinion.

The problem arises when people are belittled and insulted through opinions.

To All Whom This May Concern:

Just think your statements over a little more carefully before posting.

That's all folks.  8)

Quoting:
On a lighter note....

If GWB ain't on drugs, I could recommend one!
How about Sodium Pentathol?  :D
End Quote

Naah, I reckon they've used up their stocks of that in camp XRay ;-)

Cascara, perhaps?

Phil

Quoting:
I think he's tired and fed up with all of this silly bulls hi t with Saddam and Osama.  

It must be taxing to remain "friendly" with countries who are waning in their support of the US.  
End Quote

You've no idea how taxing it is being in a "friendly"  country and seeing GWB become the biggest threat to world peace (at the moment, and possibly ever)

Phil

Quoting:
... or the USA inflicting any unprovoked, terroristic violence upon any country.  

End Quote

Starting from mid-20th century:

Guatemala. 1954. The overthrow of the govt. an ousting of their elected leader, Jacobo Arbenz.

The Bay Of Pigs.

The VietNam War.

The Cambodian Secret Bombings and US support to Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge in their skirmishes against the Viet Cong.

The violent overthrow and assassination of Salvador Allende in Chile (1973).

CIA support to Muslim extremists in the Middle East (Afghanistan) in the 80s.

CIA support to death squadrons in Latin America (1980s)

Grenada (198?)

Colombia (1980s-present)

Nicaragua (1980s)

Support to Iraq (1980s)

The bombings in Yugoslavia (1990s)

Military aid to Israel to the tune of $2 billion, which is then used in their war against Palestinians.

Unprovoked? Yes. Violent? You bet. Terroristic? It brought lots of terror to those unseen by Americans. I think the US has a pretty good track record in being able to cause lots of harm where it thinks it is helping bring peace and security. I think the rest of the world has plenty of reason to fear GWB.

Quoting:
That great epic and introspective "South Park" episode asked the same question.

"Mr.President, are you high, or just really really stupid?"

"I assure you, I am not high."
End Quote

Holy crap! I missed this one :) :D ;D

Quoting:
I am truly thankful that we have a leader who is not afraid to stand up and defend our country.
End Quote

Defend?  From what?  Iraq was not, is not and will never be a threat to the USA.  What you have is a leader who wants to have a war for reasons that he's not prepared to say to his own people... please wake up and smell the line of bull you're being fed.

Quoting:
Thank goodness Tony Blair is level headed to know that it's good to be playing with the nice kids on the street instead of the bullies or crybabies.  
End Quote

ISTM he's siding with the bullies at the moment.

Phil

Quoting:


Starting from mid-20th century:

Guatemala. 1954. The overthrow of the govt. an ousting of their elected leader, Jacobo Arbenz.

The Bay Of Pigs.

The VietNam War.

The Cambodian Secret Bombings and US support to Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge in their skirmishes against the Viet Cong.

The violent overthrow and assassination of Salvador Allende in Chile (1973).

CIA support to Muslim extremists in the Middle East (Afghanistan) in the 80s.

CIA support to death squadrons in Latin America (1980s)

Grenada (198?)

Colombia (1980s-present)

Nicaragua (1980s)

Support to Iraq (1980s)

The bombings in Yugoslavia (1990s)

Military aid to Israel to the tune of $2 billion, which is then used in their war against Palestinians.

Unprovoked? Yes. Violent? You bet. Terroristic? It brought lots of terror to those unseen by Americans. I think the US has a pretty good track record in being able to cause lots of harm where it thinks it is helping bring peace and security. I think the rest of the world has plenty of reason to fear GWB.


Holy crap! I missed this one :) :D ;D
End Quote

I KNEW I could count on TB for this!  TB I started to PM you for this.  You presented us this same list and it was discussed in great length over a year ago.  

Here's what John McCain said in 1999:
"If we were a nation like any other in the world, and only "realpolitik," in other words, how it affects the United States, was the decision, we could make that decision in a matter of minutes. But we are a nation that is dedicated to Democratic values, to freedom and democracy throughout the world, and where those values are threatened, we also have to intervene where we can, and can beneficially. That's where it makes it very difficult. The United States sits astride the world as the most powerful nation since the Roman Empire, and we have, with that, great responsibilities and great blessings, and when we see a place like, for example, Rwanda, where hundreds of thousands of people are innocently slaughtered, we ought to try and stop it. But we ought to be able to stop it. When we see a situation like Kosovo, where the ethnic cleansing begins which would offend all of our values, as a Judeo-Christian nation, and not to mention offend our interest, when it could destabilize the region, and we have to do whatever is necessary. My biggest problem with the president was, one, he stumbled into it, but two, once we were in it, he wasn't prepared to do whatever's necessary. That's one of the lessons of the Vietnam War."

As TB's list points out, the USA has stepped up to the plate and come to the aid of it's allies more than once.

But to call GWB a threat - I don't buy it.  He's just not rolling over to the threats of those fighting over a dusty rock or fumbling with making a decision that ultimately affects the world.  He's thinking it through.  That's a leader.  If he wasn't don't you agree that this "war" would have started full force over 2 years ago?  

Quoting:
I think he's tired and fed up with all of this silly bulls hi t with Saddam and Osama.  

It must be taxing to remain "friendly" with countries who are waning in their support of the US.  

I don't blame him for being a bit muddled right now.  He looks like he's aged 10 years in the last several months.

Dub-ya has my full support.

I am truly thankful that we have a leader who is not afraid to stand up and defend our country.

End Quote

CS, while I agree with you 100%, I must warn you that some people here will label you (and I) as "brown coats" for having the guts to actually say we the support the President.  

Anyway, Kudos.  Good posts. ;)

Quoting:

Defend?  From what?  Iraq was not, is not and will never be a threat to the USA.  What you have is a leader who wants to have a war for reasons that he's not prepared to say to his own people... please wake up and smell the line of bull you're being fed.

ISTM he's siding with the bullies at the moment.

Phil
End Quote

I totally agree with you, Phil. I am really scare of what is going on in this world. And I DON'T think that Saddam is the cause. What I think is the scariest thing is the fact that people don't see what Dubya is doing. Going to war is just one of the things he is doing to bring down this country. His domestic programs have really put this county into the toilet and he is talking about more tax cuts for his rich buddies. He claims that this is going to jump start the economy. Well, if it didn't jump start it a year and a half ago with his other tax cut, why does he think it is going to work this time? The fact that he is turning his back on the U.N. and all of our allies, is really going get this country in deep doodoo. Some things that COULD happen because of his arrogance might be that the U.S. gets kicked out of the U.N., the U.N. and more than half the world may decide that the U.S. IS a threat to world peace and bring the troops in. Wouldn't that be ironic? Yes, all the playground kids gang up to bring the bully down. I think the guy must be drugs because he doesn't have a clue. Hopefully, we will all be here in 2 years to vote the guy out!



Cat

Quoting:

He's thinking it through.  That's a leader.  If he wasn't don't you agree that this "war" would have started full force over 2 years ago?  
End Quote

CS, excellent point.

I am fairly certain that if the administration had wanted to seriously go to war last year, they would have done it.  HOWEVER, they are taking the diplomatic approach tim ena time again by going through the UN with all these pointless resolutions.  

Its funny when I hear people call Bush the threat, while he is the one that has gone through the UN, he has explicity let Saddam know excatly what needs to be done to avoid war.  

And yet some, (I won't name any names) continue to insist Bush is a threat?  

Quoting:




I totally agree with you, Phil. I am really scare of what is going on in this world. And I DON'T think that Saddam is the cause. What I think is the scariest thing is the fact that people don't see what Dubya is doing. Going to war is just one of the things he is doing to bring down this country. His domestic programs have really put this county into the toilet and he is talking about more tax cuts for his rich buddies. He claims that this is going to jump start the economy. Well, if it didn't jump start it a year and a half ago with his other tax cut, why does he think it is going to work this time? The fact that he is turning his back on the U.N. and all of our allies, is really going get this country in deep doodoo. Some things that COULD happen because of his arrogance might be that the U.S. gets kicked out of the U.N., the U.N. and more than half the world may decide that the U.S. IS a threat to world peace and bring the troops in. Wouldn't that be ironic? Yes, all the playground kids gang up to bring the bully down. I think the guy must be drugs because he doesn't have a clue. Hopefully, we will all be here in 2 years to vote the guy out!



Cat



End Quote

Curious - which domestic programs are you referring to?

Quoting:
he is talking about more tax cuts for his rich buddies. End Quote

sorry, but I'm not one his "rich buddies" and I got a tax cut.  That line didn't work for Daschle and Gore, and its certainly not working for you. ;)

Quoting:The fact that he is turning his back on the U.N. and all of our allies, is really going get this country in deep doodoo.End Quote

Wrong, again.

Resolutions after resolutions from the UN, and each time Saddam chews them up and spits them out.  I beleive we are on Resolution #18 now?

Quoting:

I KNEW I could count on TB for this!  TB I started to PM you for this.  You presented us this same list and it was discussed in great length over a year ago.  

End Quote

Yeah, that's actually a post I searched and searched in the archives and I think it was a topic that was deleted by the hacker, so I just played it by memory. I usually tell others I don't like to repeat myself, but since it's been a while and we have more members now than back then I thought I would state it again verbatim... same tired argument for you, but perhaps new to others :P

You were the first person to PM me, btw :)

Quoting:


Yeah, that's actually a post I searched and searched in the archives and I think it was a topic that was deleted by the hacker, so I just played it by memory. I usually tell others I don't like to repeat myself, but since it's been a while and we have more members now than back then I thought I would state it again verbatim... same tired argument for you, but perhaps new to others :P

You were the first person to PM me, btw :)
End Quote

I was just telling Rice that (about the old thread).  

I also told Rice of my respect for your opinion - REALLY!  Just ask him!

How sweet!  I was your 1st PM - see I'm a nice person.  It was a nice PM wasn't it? ;)

Quoting:

I was just telling Rice that (about the old thread).  

I also told Rice of my respect for your opinion - REALLY!  Just ask him!

How sweet!  I was your 1st PM - see I'm a nice person.  It was a nice PM wasn't it? ;)
End Quote

You're very nice, cs ;)

And TB, you have my respect.  You're one of the most well-read people I've ever encountered.

Quoting:


You're very nice, cs ;)

And TB, you have my respect.  You're one of the most well-read people I've ever encountered.
End Quote

Rice is such a freakin' brown-noser. :-*

Quoting:
 
....

CS, while I agree with you 100%, I must warn you that some people here will label you (and I) as "brown coats" for having the guts to actually say we the support the President.  

....

And yet some, (I won't name any names) continue to insist Bush is a threat?  
End Quote

Insinuating isn't a good way to display one's thoughts.

Here, let me try to do the same thing you're doing: And then some people wonder why I would resort to only discussing boring grammar with them... See how easy that was to state? Would it be a fair presumption of mine to think that it was just as easy for you to post such remarks? Now let's stop the silliness and go back to the topic on hand.

Bush is not on drugs. He is stupid and brain damaged from past drug use. There.

Quoting:
Insinuating isn't a good way to display one's thoughts. End Quote

...the pot calling the kettle black.   ::)

Quoting:Here, let me try to do the same thing you're doing: And then some people wonder why I would resort to only discussing boring grammar with them... See how easy that was to state? Would it be a fair presumption of mine to think that it was just as easy for you to post such remarks? Now let's stop the silliness and go back to the topic on hand.
End Quote

...well, I was having a good time here so far today.

Thanks for ruining  it...again. :(

Do us both a favor.  Don't respond to me, and I won't respond to you.  Agreed?  Good.

Quoting:


...the pot calling the kettle black.   ::)




...well, I was having a good time here so far today.

Thanks for ruining  it...again. :(

Do us both a favor.  Don't respond to me, and I won't respond to you.  Agreed?  Good.
End Quote

Jayzus H. Kuhrist, if you have a problem with me personally, PM me and don't pollute the topic more than you already have.

But if you keep insulting my intelligence in public, I will respond to you. No. Not agreed. Don't even refer to me in jest.

Quoting:
Davester authored this topic.  ;)

Back on topic, again -

The President's not on drugs, IMO. I just don't agree with his politcs is all.

And thankfully, I won't be cricified for my opinion.  :)


End Quote

I won't cricify you if you don't cricify me.  :)

I agree with you that the President is NOT on drugs.

Quoting:
 He is also trying to stack the Federal Courts with ultra- conservative justices...
End Quote

In other words, he's trying to tip the balance back from the Clinton years, when the Federal Courts were stacked with ultra liberal justices.  :D

Quoting:


In other words, he's trying to tip the balance back from the Clinton years, when the Federal Courts were stacked with ultra liberal justices.  :D
End Quote

Actually, if you remember, the Republicans conrolled the Senate, and Orrin Hatch was Chair of the Judiciary Committee, and he held up almost all of Clinton's appointees.  And by the way, why is everybody down on Clinton?  After all, all he did was get a B.J.  I'd rather have a relaxed and satisfied guy with his finger on the button than some up tight prude.  Eisenhower had a misteress, and lots of others - Harding (?) I think Scr**d his in the ovil office.  So what's new?  Maybe only two or three did'nt.

Quoting:

 And by the way, why is everybody down on Clinton?  After all, all he did was get a B.J.  I'd rather have a relaxed and satisfied guy with his finger on the button than some up tight prude.  
End Quote

You are a mystery to me Don Carlos-In one post you are concerned about womens rights, and in this one, it is ok for a president to use one and toss her away just so long as he is satisfied and relaxed?  ???

Quoting:
And by the way, why is everybody down on Clinton?  After all, all he did was get a B.J. End Quote

does the word "Perjury" ring a bell?

Quoting:Eisenhower had a misteress, and lots of others - Harding (?) I think Scr**d his in the ovil office.  So what's new?  Maybe only two or three did'nt.
End Quote

I'm reminded back to when I was a little kid and my mother gave me the "if everyone else jumped off a cliff..." speech.

Just because others did it doesn't make it acceptable.  According to your logic we should just expect our Presidents to be adultering scumbags.

Quoting:
Just because others did it doesn't make it acceptable.  According to your logic we should just expect our Presidents to be adultering scumbags.
End Quote

No!
But then, do you expect your presidents to be angels?
One of the (few) good things I've heard said about GWB is that he seems human.  He doesn't know the president of Pakistan and doesn't pretend he does, that makes him the same as most Americans (no offence intended)
This 'cult of personality' is not productive, I would prefer a leader who was 'real'.
So Bill Clinton got a BJ, be honest, how many men would turn that down because it wasn't PC?  So what if he lied about it? I wouldn't even lower myself to answering 'personal' questions like that in court!

I don't care if Tony Blair screws his secretary, chokes on pretzels or doesn't know the name of the leader of country XYZ.  What I think is important is his ability to do the job he's employed to do!

Quoting:



Actually, if you remember, the Republicans conrolled the Senate, and Orrin Hatch was Chair of the Judiciary Committee, and he held up almost all of Clinton's appointees.End Quote

And Clinton somehow still managed to appoint and have nearly 400 judges confirmed. I don't think any of them were conservative.

Quoting:And by the way, why is everybody down on Clinton?  After all, all he did was get a B.J.  I'd rather have a relaxed and satisfied guy with his finger on the button than some up tight prude.  Eisenhower had a misteress, and lots of others - Harding (?) I think Scr**d his in the ovil office.  So what's new?  Maybe only two or three did'nt.
End Quote

As Steve_H said of Trent Lott, Clinton was in a position of leadership... the Presidency is a bit more lofty than Senate Majority leader... therefore it is reasonable to expect him to be held to slightly higher standards than everyone else.

Quoting:
So Bill Clinton got a BJ, ...So what if he lied about it? I wouldn't even lower myself to answering 'personal' questions like that in court!
End Quote

well, I guess thats your choice.  However, if it were you or I that lied in court, we would be in prison for perjury.  

I don't give a crap about him getting a BJ, thats not the issue.  After all, who knows what else he did that we'll never hear about, its the flat out lying in court and getting away with it that bothers the hell out of me.  

Quoting:


You are a mystery to me Don Carlos-In one post you are concerned about womens rights, and in this one, it is ok for a president to use one and toss her away just so long as he is satisfied and relaxed?  ???End Quote

Well Shaz,  I'm surprised that yoiu'r confused.  Let me try to explain.  Did Bill solicite their encounters?  I guess we don't really know.  Did he make promises to her to gain her favors?  Probably not (admittedly, we don't klnow).  But: she offered him sex - right?  So...  Did he force her?  That has never been alleged.  If he had, I'd say "string the Ba***rd's hind parts to the bard door and blow him away".  But that's not what happened.  She wanted to be where she was, and she wanted to do what she was doing.  So it was just an adultorous B.J.  Why should that have constituted a Constitutional crisis?  Because the Republicans who dominated the Congress wanted (and want) to get back at the Dems for NIXON.  I'm not defending Bill's infedelity, or his treatment of Monica, I'm just saying that for guys, especially old guys like me (and Bill) when a woman offers to do you, its not easy to resist - it happens so rarely, exept with our partners, and in Bill's case, who knows how often Hilloriy offers it up?
What I'm saying is that sex is part of life, and that I think women should have the same opportunity to solicicit it  as men, and should demand to enjoy it as much as men, its stupid to evaluate our Presidents on the basis of what we know about their sexuality.

Quoting:
So it was just an adultorous B.J.  Why should that have constituted a Constitutional crisis?  
End Quote

again, let me point out that Its not the BJ that pissed people off about the whole Clinton-Lewinski issue, its that fact that he lied staright faced in court, and got off scott-free.

PERJURY is a FEDERAL OFFENSE.  He should be in prison right now.  Any common person, who he was supposed to be representing, would be in prison if they did that.

Quoting:

Wrong, again.

Resolutions after resolutions from the UN, and each time Saddam chews them up and spits them out.  I beleive we are on Resolution #18 now?


End Quote

  So Saddam is in violation of UN resolutions... Why do these resolutions exist? Because we're politicking for the oil, at best. The resolutions don't exist because of border violations, else India and Pakistan would be bombed senseless by now. The resolutions don't exist because of Saddam's atrocities; hell, the U.S. sponsored some of them.

  Now, if we choose to take the bully to court, for instance, and he says, "But my folks don't feed me," now we've got an issue.

  What is the equivalent, though, for Americans? "But they won't give us the oil for free"?

  I just wonder why Americans don't understand that if we stop dicking the world around in a quest for petroleum and profit, there will be less terrorists aiming at us.

  To spiral out a little bit on an editorial bender--money is clearly the most importnt thing to Americans. Our love for lucre has pushed us to many an undignified act. And now it has helped fuel the unnecessary fires of fundamentalist anger because while we're happy to point out Saddam's history of atrocities, the American penchant for unmitigated greed and cruelty is apparently a part of history we shouldn't explore--it is somehow irrelevant, if I understand the counterarguments right.

  So now we arrive at the present, and all of that history comes down to the fact that apparently we "must" take this guy out. We the People of the United States helped build this mess, and the only way out of it is a gun; yet to note our contribution to the mess when there's not about to be shooting is useless--people don't understand why it's important. That seven-second attention span is helpful if you're a warmonger.

  I mean, we can't even spend the petty funds allocated for an internal toppling of Saddam. While it's still warfare, it would be a better situation than an invasion. A nation's right to determine its fate is important. We have been more eager to write the fate of others than willing to invest in their opportunity to seize fate by the bollocks.

  While it's a bit offensive to raise here, there's a part in Eco's Foucault's Pendulum about the difference between an idiot and a moron, which I don't recall in its entirety at present, but essentially draws the distinction of doing the right thing for the wrong reasons and doing the wrong thing for the right reasons. In addition, someone somewhere included a quaint observation about 16/64 must equal 1/4 because you can take away the sixes.

  Of course, on my stance, I can never guarantee anyone I'm right; to wit, while I believe pacifism will lead humanity to greater progress, such a belief implies a knowledge of the purpose of life in relation to progress. So while it may be that wars are the only way to get things done, I must insist that the reasons are correct. It's a high toll to pay for foolishness or simple error. War can be proven appropriate to me, but while the view up here is stunning, what happens if the tower is made of toothpicks and rubber bands? You're showing me the view, but I have doubts about the structure. And I'm not prepared to take the flying leap just for the scenery.

Quoting:


In other words, he's trying to tip the balance back from the Clinton years, when the Federal Courts were stacked with ultra liberal justices.  :D
End Quote

Actually, if you read the record, Sen Orrin Hatch, Chair of the Senae Judiciary Committe, blocked the overwhelment number of Clinton nomonees to the Federal Court, which is why there are some many vacANCIES TODAY. And if you can show us more than assertions I would appreciatre it. Same thing with  the filibuster, maybe Mr Bush and company will get the idea that they LOST the popular vote and DON"T have a mondate for their radical right agenda

Quoting:
...maybe Mr Bush and company will get the idea that they LOST the popular vote and DON"T have a mondate for their radical right agenda
End Quote

...however, it begs the question, why did the American people vote to give the Senate majority back to the Republicans last November?  Perhaps they had a change of mind over the last 2 years.

Quoting:


sorry, but I'm not one his "rich buddies" and I got a tax cut.  That line didn't work for Daschle and Gore, and its certainly not working for you. ;)



End Quote

I got one, too and I am no where near one of his rich buddies.

Quoting:
I got one, too and I am no where near one of his rich buddies.
End Quote

True.  Bottom line:  if you paid taxes last year, you got a tax cut.

Naturally, the more you made, the more taxes you paid, therefore your tax cut was bigger.  I can't believe some people still can't (or refuse) to understand the concept.  (eh hem, I'm talking to you Daschle, Sharpton, and Gore!)

Quoting:
Who are all "rich," and thus get huge tax cuts, btw ;)
End Quote

exactly.

And I sincerely doubt they refused to accept the cuts.

Quoting:
"Pregnant dogging"? That's the worst edit I ever say. Ok, how about "complaining".
End Quote

Sorry dude, that's the auto-edit.  ;D

Quoting:


Actually, if you read the record, Sen Orrin Hatch, Chair of the Senae Judiciary Committe, blocked the overwhelment number of Clinton nomonees to the Federal Court, which is why there are some many vacANCIES TODAY. And if you can show us more than assertions I would appreciatre it. Same thing with  the filibuster, maybe Mr Bush and company will get the idea that they LOST the popular vote and DON"T have a mondate for their radical right agenda
End Quote

Bill Clinton had 374 nominated judges confirmed by Congress. This is a number second only to Ronald Reagan's 378. Reagan had a Republican controlled Congress for six of his eight years... so did Clinton. Clinton had 71% of his nominees approved when facing a Republican Congress, while Reagan and Bush Sr. had 80% of their nominees confirmed when facing a Democratic Congress. Pretty comparable numbers.

As for current vacancies, when Clinton left office there were 78 Judicial vacancies. That was with a Republican Congress. When George Bush Sr. left office, with a Democratic Congress, there were 115 open benches.

And you can play the "they lost the election" card all you want to. The fact is there was a recount done by USA Today and others which proved that, even using Al Gore's recount standards, Bush still won.

Quoting:And you can play the "they lost the election" card all you want to. The fact is there was a recount done by USA Today and others which proved that, even using Al Gore's recount standards, Bush still won.


End Quote

hey I've tried to get this through to them, but some refuse to listen and acknowledge the facts. :-/

Quoting:
Ouch you guys.

80's I agree with your comments about people who claim Bush "stole" the election.  Delusional people! ;)

Sidebar:  No, I'm not really calling Hairspray or anyone else delusional.  You know what I mean.  Besides, they did re-count the votes...

End Quote

  I highly recommend Michael Moore's Stup
id White Men.  An excellent read plus it'll enlighten your socks off! ;)

Quoting:


  I highly recommend Michael Moore's Stup
id White Men.  An excellent read plus it'll enlighten your socks off! ;)


End Quote

Just got the book but I am in the middle of reading Blinded by the Right by David Brock. Another interesting and enlightening book.



Cat

Quoting:



Just got the book but I am in the middle of reading Blinded by the Right by David Brock. Another interesting and enlightening book.

 

Cat
End Quote

  Hey, right-on, Cat!  I'm going to check it out. :D

Quoting:

Curious - which domestic programs are you referring to?

End Quote

Any response from anyone?

Quoting:

Any response from anyone?
End Quote

If you read Don Carlos' response on page 4, that basically sums it up-but he did leave out one-"No Child Left Behind." This program is doing so well that many schools have to close their doors about a month and a half prior to the end of the school year. The policy should really read, "No Child Left Untested." Standardized tests do NOT work. They put kids in the same box and you can't do that with kids. I am a certified teacher and have worked with a lot of kids with learning disabilities. There was one 5th grader I had as a student. He had a learning disability and had trouble with writing. But, that kid could build the most amazing things out of legos. A standarized test would not properly assess him because he did not learn in the "normal" way. I am really surprised that Bush would concider a program like this since Laura is a teacher and she should understand that not all kids learn the same way.



Cat

Quoting:



If you read Don Carlos' response on page 4, that basically sums it up-but he did leave out one-"No Child Left Behind." This program is doing so well that many schools have to close their doors about a month and a half prior to the end of the school year. The policy should really read, "No Child Left Untested." Standardized tests do NOT work. They put kids in the same box and you can't do that with kids. I am a certified teacher and have worked with a lot of kids with learning disabilities. There was one 5th grader I had as a student. He had a learning disability and had trouble with writing. But, that kid could build the most amazing things out of legos. A standarized test would not properly assess him because he did not learn in the "normal" way. I am really surprised that Bush would concider a program like this since Laura is a teacher and she should understand that not all kids learn the same way.



Cat
End Quote

Thanks Cat, but I'm still not entirely clear on the domestic programs you were referring to.  Sorry, but I am having a lot of trouble trying to follow Don Carlos' in the first place!  He jumps aroung a lot.

I'm frustrated with the school system myself.  There is an AMPLE number money, programs and services for children who aren't successful (at least here in KY).  The children being left behind here are the ones who are very successful.  As parents we are told to "keep working with at home.  
Hell, if we keep that up we'll have no need for the school.  I could go into greater detail on this but I digress.  PM me if you want to talk about school further :)

Quoting:

Thanks Cat, but I'm still not entirely clear on the domestic programs you were referring to.  Sorry, but I am having a lot of trouble trying to follow Don Carlos' in the first place!  He jumps aroung a lot.

End Quote

Sorry I confuse you CS, I'll try to be clearer in the future.

Quoting:



Sorry I confuse you CS, I'll try to be clearer in the future.
End Quote

I'm easily confused, so don't take it personally. ;)
When these threads get so long and I haven't been around in a day or two, it's hard for me to get up to speed.  

I just wasn't really thinking about the things you mentioned as the domestic programs Cat was referring to.  I thought she meant welfare, social security, etc.

cs