or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Just What the Founders Feared: An Imperial President Goes to War
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Just What the Founders Feared: An Imperial President Goes to War

post #1 of 71
Thread Starter 
President Bush believes he is the King in my opinion.
Congress needs to stop being sheep and force him to fall in line with what the Constitution says.
The founding fathers must be rolling over in there graves, after what he has been doing.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/23/op...gewanted=print
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive. Thomas Jefferson
Reply
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive. Thomas Jefferson
Reply
post #2 of 71
Let's be truthful, ronaldo- very few in our government respect the Founder's intent. At all.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #3 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Let's be truthful, ronaldo- very few in our government respect the Founder's intent. At all.

Let's be even more truthful. Bush can say whatever he wants about about what he expects Congress should do. Congress can end the war right now if it wants to. All they have to do is cut off funds. The editorial's author complains of Bush thinking he is a king, and yet...what he should be complaining about is the Chickenshit, Lying Democratic Party, which refuses to end the war as they said they would.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #4 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Let's be even more truthful. Bush can say whatever he wants about about what he expects Congress should do. Congress can end the war right now if it wants to. All they have to do is cut off funds. The editorial's author complains of Bush thinking he is a king, and yet...what he should be complaining about is the Chickenshit, Lying Democratic Party, which refuses to end the war as they said they would.

Oh, hey dude.

So what did you do, mix it up with a mod? At any rate, welcome back.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #5 of 71
The whole stinking corps of politicians needs to be removed from power. When political calculations stand in the way of doing the right thing for the country, politicians no longer serve the citizens, and instead serve the political process. It is time for the political party system to be dissolved, (in)direct election of the president and vice president to be re-initiated etc etc. The political parties are the problem. We have created entities that through governance serve themselves and only themselves. It was a mistake back when Washington decried the formation of parties, it is a mistake now.
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #6 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Let's be even more truthful. Bush can say whatever he wants about about what he expects Congress should do. Congress can end the war right now if it wants to. All they have to do is cut off funds. The editorial's author complains of Bush thinking he is a king, and yet...what he should be complaining about is the Chickenshit, Lying Democratic Party, which refuses to end the war as they said they would.

I totally agree with you, almost...I Tapped That??

Quote:
The New York Times lead says Congress accidentally gave President George Bush the power to conduct warrantless searches and seizures when it passed a wiretapping bill earlier this month. Democrats are embarrassed they voted without understanding language that would allow—among other things—some physical searches, and the collection of business records, without a court order.

The only way they 'accidentally' gave those powers is if they didn't fucking read the bill they passed. Any bets a ton of them voted just because their buddies in congress did, or because they were lobbied to, or because they saw the title and thought it sounded good...or...all of the above?

With the war, it is a whole other story. Yes, they could stop the funding, but that would honestly put the soldiers at even more risk (you can't fund a withdraw either). The blame falls into this administration's lap. They have made this unjust war an occupation set in stone. They've (and I'd add AIPAC for their unstoppable lobbying process on the Republican and Democratic side) made sure no one can shut it down.
post #7 of 71
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Let's be truthful, ronaldo- very few in our government respect the Founder's intent. At all.

Very true.
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive. Thomas Jefferson
Reply
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive. Thomas Jefferson
Reply
post #8 of 71
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Let's be even more truthful. Bush can say whatever he wants about about what he expects Congress should do. Congress can end the war right now if it wants to. All they have to do is cut off funds. The editorial's author complains of Bush thinking he is a king, and yet...what he should be complaining about is the Chickenshit, Lying Democratic Party, which refuses to end the war as they said they would.

I agree totally. The political system is fucked up.
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive. Thomas Jefferson
Reply
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive. Thomas Jefferson
Reply
post #9 of 71
We are at a point where the Constitution itself is a barrier to be overcome by the power elite, not the principles by which they govern.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #10 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

I totally agree with you, almost...I Tapped That??

The only way they 'accidentally' gave those powers is if they didn't fucking read the bill they passed. Any bets a ton of them voted just because their buddies in congress did, or because they were lobbied to, or because they saw the title and thought it sounded good...or...all of the above?

Not to be rude but they absolutely read the "fucking" bill and they absolutely knew what they were voting for.

I mean seriously, how many excuses can the Dems come up with for why things are they way they are and not be responsible for their votes? From 9/11 scaremongering, to Bush lied, to here is the money, a surge and no timeline, to we don't read our own fine print... at some point they have to be responsible for what goes on as well. I mean for goodness sake they are the governing party in both houses.

Quote:
With the war, it is a whole other story. Yes, they could stop the funding, but that would honestly put the soldiers at even more risk (you can't fund a withdraw either). The blame falls into this administration's lap. They have made this unjust war an occupation set in stone. They've (and I'd add AIPAC for their unstoppable lobbying process on the Republican and Democratic side) made sure no one can shut it down.

Nonsense. They pass the bill. They tie the strings to it and refuse to pass any additional monies. If they passed the "Bringing the Troops Home" bill with the amount necessary to bring them back here and did not budge on any additional funds to continue the war, the money would have to be spent as they allocated.

Stop making excuses for why Republicans are jerks, and Democrats are accidental jerks when they do, say and act the exact same way but have better "intentions." It is a line of bull.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #11 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post


Stop making excuses for why Republicans are jerks, and Democrats are accidental jerks when they do, say and act the exact same way but have better "intentions." It is a line of bull.

Nick

Pelosi's Capitulation



US and Israel in $30bn arms deal



post #12 of 71
You lost me there @_@ Artman. Your narrow focus on Israel shows your real feeling.
post #13 of 71
The Dems didn't do this by accident. They're just expecting to be able to abuse the same powers when they get in the White House.

What, you thought they *didn't* want these powers *too*? Silly rabbits...

If the Dems were any different, they'd repeal the powers they inherit. They won't.
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #14 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kickaha View Post

If the Dems were any different, they'd repeal the powers they inherit. They won't.

Especially if Clinton is elected. The march to the imperial presidency would go completely unchecked.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #15 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Let's be truthful, ronaldo- very few in our government respect the Founder's intent. At all.

And very few of our citizens, as well.
post #16 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

We are at a point where the Constitution itself is a barrier to be overcome by the power elite, not the principles by which they govern.

Hear! Hear! Well said.
post #17 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Let's be even more truthful. Bush can say whatever he wants about about what he expects Congress should do. Congress can end the war right now if it wants to. All they have to do is cut off funds. The editorial's author complains of Bush thinking he is a king, and yet...what he should be complaining about is the Chickenshit, Lying Democratic Party, which refuses to end the war as they said they would.

Amen.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #18 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by mydo View Post

You lost me there @_@ Artman. Your narrow focus on Israel shows your real feeling.

Narrowed down to one specific group, yes. I only added the book because a friend had just finished reading it and we were discussing it. Boy, would you love to hear what he thinks we should do...

You want a broader scope than that? Of course. In the broader sense let's take a look at something...grossly oversimplified, but nonetheless absolutely true. A graph showing that Democrats and Republicans are virtually the same thing...right wing authoritarian fascists.



Quote:
In response to many requests, not only from Americans, The Political Compass has charted the most prominent names in the 2007 US Primaries. They have been evaluated through scrutiny of public statements, manifestos, interviews and, crucially, voting records. Our apologies for those not included.

It is important to recognise that The Political Compass is a continuum rather than consisting of hard and fast quadrants. For example, Ron Paul on the social scale is actually closer to Dennis Kucinich than to many figures within his own party. But on the economic scale, they are, of course, far apart.

When examining the chart it is important to note that although most of the candidates seem quite different, in substance they occupy a relatively restricted area within the universal political spectrum. Democracies with a system of proportional representation give expression to a wider range of political views. While Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel are depicted on the extreme left in an American context, they would simply be mainstream social democrats within the wider political landscape of Europe. Similarly, Hillary Clinton is popularly perceived as a leftist in the United States while in any other western democracy her record is that of a moderate conservative.

It's the company you keep.

Source
post #19 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Let's be even more truthful. Bush can say whatever he wants about about what he expects Congress should do. Congress can end the war right now if it wants to. All they have to do is cut off funds. The editorial's author complains of Bush thinking he is a king, and yet...what he should be complaining about is the Chickenshit, Lying Democratic Party, which refuses to end the war as they said they would.

Well it involves a little more consequence than just cutting off the funds.

Besides I must point out they're not as bad as the lying, chickenshit, republicans who started and have been the main supporters of this conflict all along.

Yes the american public would like more progress from the democratic congress on this issue but they still trust them more than they do the republicans ( as recent polls will bear out ).

And yes before you start any democrat who voted for this war should have been able to see Bush and CO. for what they are. A snake in the grass. But as I've said you want to believe when your president says " Let's go to war! ". Any thinking person saw it for what it is. I simply find it incredible that he blindsided so many. Trying to turn this conflict into " It's the democrat's fault " isn't going to solve anything. They didn't start this.

So if they're " lying and chickenshit " does that mean that you're in favor of them cutting off funds and ending the war? Because it may come to that.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #20 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Well it involves a little more consequence than just cutting off the funds.

Besides I must point out they're not as bad as the lying, chickenshit, republicans who started and have been the main supporters of this conflict all along.

Let me ask you this jimmac, which is worse, someone who is wrong who doesn't realize it and thus keeps acting in a wrong manner, or someone who is wrong who does realize it and keeps acting in a wrong manner.

The Iraq vote was far from party line. It passed the Senate 77-23 and the House 296-133.

But for Democrats to say this is wrong, to get elected either saying they will end the war, that their vote was wrong and they desire to make amends for it, and then do nothing is not acceptable. You can't ask to be empowered and then claim helplessness, forgetfulness, carelessness, etc. You can't declare a desire to make amends and then keep doing the same wrong action.

Quote:
And yes before you start any democrat who voted for this war should have been able to see Bush and CO. for what they are. A snake in the grass. But as I've said you want to believe when your president says " Let's go to war! ". Any thinking person saw it for what it is. I simply find it incredible that he blindsided so many. Trying to turn this conflict into " It's the democrat's fault " isn't going to solve anything. They didn't start this.

How can one be blindsided when there is skepticism from the beginning? You have to start assigning responsibility for actions to the people who undertake them. The Democrats thought Bush was elected illegitimately so they.... gave him everything he wanted?!? Oh wait.. they know he cheated and so when he lied about Iraq they....gave him everything he wanted?!?! Oh well now they are the party in power and so they are going to put a timeline on the war and instead they... gave him everything he wanted?!?!

Finally... we gave him everything he wanted, something we decried as spying on Americans without warrants because...well we can't read our own writing.

Either it is right and they want to talk out of both sides of their mouth while voting for it, or it is wrong and they are bad people.

Man I get tired of this nonsense. The bad actions are excused EVERY time and the buck and blame are always passed on. When are the Democrats finally bad people for voting FOR the Patriot Act, the Iraq War, warrantless surveillance on Americans, etc.

Really stop telling me the Republicans are some evil boogie men because they undertake bad actions with bad intentions while the Democrats are good and noble because they undertake bad actions with good intentions.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #21 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Let me ask you this jimmac, which is worse, someone who is wrong who doesn't realize it and thus keeps acting in a wrong manner, or someone who is wrong who does realize it and keeps acting in a wrong manner.

The Iraq vote was far from party line. It passed the Senate 77-23 and the House 296-133.

But for Democrats to say this is wrong, to get elected either saying they will end the war, that their vote was wrong and they desire to make amends for it, and then do nothing is not acceptable. You can't ask to be empowered and then claim helplessness, forgetfulness, carelessness, etc. You can't declare a desire to make amends and then keep doing the same wrong action.



How can one be blindsided when there is skepticism from the beginning? You have to start assigning responsibility for actions to the people who undertake them. The Democrats thought Bush was elected illegitimately so they.... gave him everything he wanted?!? Oh wait.. they know he cheated and so when he lied about Iraq they....gave him everything he wanted?!?! Oh well now they are the party in power and so they are going to put a timeline on the war and instead they... gave him everything he wanted?!?!

Finally... we gave him everything he wanted, something we decried as spying on Americans without warrants because...well we can't read our own writing.

Either it is right and they want to talk out of both sides of their mouth while voting for it, or it is wrong and they are bad people.

Man I get tired of this nonsense. The bad actions are excused EVERY time and the buck and blame are always passed on. When are the Democrats finally bad people for voting FOR the Patriot Act, the Iraq War, warrantless surveillance on Americans, etc.

Really stop telling me the Republicans are some evil boogie men because they undertake bad actions with bad intentions while the Democrats are good and noble because they undertake bad actions with good intentions.

Nick

Trumpy,

If you're trying to say that Bush didn't know what he was doing that won't fly!

He knew how weak the evidence was.

Yes the democrats should take more action. However they didn't start this, they aren't the ones not letting go, and they aren't the ones who've been deceptive about this whole situation from the start.

I've never said they were noble. Ever.

I'm sure they have their own selfish and political reasons for holding back at this time.

But trying to make this " Quagmire " all about them is not only lame it's stupid!

I've always said what I thought. They are the lesser of evils and the only semirational thing we've got going right now. There is no way an independent will get elected this time around. Maybe sometime in the future when they're better organized but not right now! So I must vote for the democrat. Because I don't want another Bush clone to carry on the torch and their agenda.

I'm registered independant. Get it!

Ps. So does this mean you're in favor of them cutting off the funds and pulling out of Iraq?
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #22 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Trumpy,

If you're trying to say that Bush didn't know what he was doing that won't fly!

He didn't say that. Not at all.

Quote:

He knew how weak the evidence was.

False and unprovable assertion. You think you know. He by all accounts felt otherwise.
Quote:

Yes the democrats should take more action. However they didn't start this, they aren't the ones not letting go, and they aren't the ones who've been deceptive about this whole situation from the start.

Irrelevant. The Democrats are the ones controlling both houses and the ones who claim to want to end the war. Yet, they don't. So tell me...who's worse....the politician you disagree with and does what he wants to do....or the one who agrees with you but doesn't follow through? Hmmm?

Quote:
I've never said they were noble. Ever.

Not, but you've questioned Bush's motivation. Are you saying that they are political whores too?

Quote:

I'm sur they have their own selfish and political reasons for holding back at this time.

Then why defend them?

Quote:
But trying to make this " Quagmire " all about them is not only lame it's stupid!

Well, they've made it about them as opposed to being about winning. They've done so by relentlessly bashing the President and military whilst voting to continue the war. And coming soon to a Tv screen near you, they will be attacking the report by Petraeus because it contains good news. Just watch.

Quote:

I've always said what I thought.

Unfortunately.

Quote:
They are the lesser of evils and the only semirational thing we've got going right now.

Now they're not. They are at least as bad. In fact, they're worse.

There is no way an independent will get elected this time around. Maybe sometime in the future when they're better organized but not right now[/quote]

True.

[quote]
! So I must vote for the democrat. Because I don't want another Bush clone to carry on the torch and their agenda.[/quite]

So you'll vote for Hillary over say, a Guiliani or Thompson or even McCain? Hillary is going to be the nominee. She's way worse than a Bush clone. Way.

Quote:
I'm registered independant. Get it!

Whatever. You can be a registered communist for all I care. You're still totally polarized.

Quote:
Ps. So does this mean you're in favor of them cutting off the funds and pulling out of Iraq?

PS: Stop putting words in his mouth. It's cheap. You know he doesn't believe that.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #23 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Trumpy,

If you're trying to say that Bush didn't know what he was doing that won't fly!

He knew how weak the evidence was.

Here is what you refuse to understand, claiming to be dealing with a known variable makes every justification about the Democrats even worse.

Understand that it makes you look a hundred times worse when you claim to have bought a lie from a known cheat, liar, wannabe dictator, etc.

Ignorance is bliss, but you claim they knew these things about Bush, that EVERYBODY knows these things about him and yet they still give him and do what he wants.

How terrible is that?!?

Quote:
Yes the democrats should take more action. However they didn't start this, they aren't the ones not letting go, and they aren't the ones who've been deceptive about this whole situation from the start.

They are letting go. They passed the revised FISA, the revised Patriot Act, they gave Bush additional war funding. There is not a single thing that has changed with regard to his actions since the Democratic Congress has come into session. Claiming they can't do everything has some truth, claiming they can't do anything? Nonsense.

Also they have been deceptive about it from the start. Statements from the period before the war reflect their belief, from briefings and readings they had available to them just as Bush did, that Iraq was on the same course it had been understood to be on since the first Gulf War. In fact most non-war votes were due to the fear of high death counts due to guerrilla fights on the streets of Baghdad and fears of massive deaths due to chemical agents being deployed.

If the search function worked here, I'd drag out the posts from people here who said the same thing. Democrats authorized this war. If they claim they bought a lie from a known cheat and liar, which is what they claim Bush is known to be, that just makes it worse that they went along. IT NEVER MAKES IT BETTER.

Quote:
I've never said they were noble. Ever.

I'm sur they have their own selfish and political reasons for holding back at this time.

But trying to make this " Quagmire " all about them is not only lame it's stupid!

You make it about who has the power to respond. The Democrats asked for control of the government to make these changes, and have now not made them. It isn't just all about htem, but to exempt them defies reality.

Quote:
I've always said what I thought. They are the lesser of evils and the only semirational thing we've got going right now. There is no way an independent will get elected this time around. Maybe sometime in the future when they're better organized but not right now! So I must vote for the democrat. Because I don't want another Bush clone to carry on the torch and their agenda.

I'm registered independant. Get it!

Can you prove that the Democratic nominee won't be a Bush clone? We hear all these claims that the Democrats are so different. Clinton started "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and Hillary has not claimed she would do anything different. Both Obama and Clinton have made statements that they would undertake preemptive war actions in countries related to terrorism with or without the consent of those countries. All they have claimed is to be more focused and selective with their choices.

At best most have claimed they would move the troops out of Iraq, but not out of the region. They haven't really said they would bring them home.

No major candidate has pledged to enforce our borders, empty out bases abroad and end America as empire. No one.

Tomato...Tomahto.

Quote:
Ps. So does this mean you're in favor of them cutting off the funds and pulling out of Iraq?

I'm in favor of them following through on actions instead of passing the buck. When people earn power they need to exercise it. If people disagree with that action, then they need to put forth the effort to elect replacements.

Basically, use it or lose it.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #24 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Here is what you refuse to understand, claiming to be dealing with a known variable makes every justification about the Democrats even worse.

Understand that it makes you look a hundred times worse when you claim to have bought a lie from a known cheat, liar, wannabe dictator, etc.

Ignorance is bliss, but you claim they knew these things about Bush, that EVERYBODY knows these things about him and yet they still give him and do what he wants.

How terrible is that?!?



They are letting go. They passed the revised FISA, the revised Patriot Act, they gave Bush additional war funding. There is not a single thing that has changed with regard to his actions since the Democratic Congress has come into session. Claiming they can't do everything has some truth, claiming they can't do anything? Nonsense.

Also they have been deceptive about it from the start. Statements from the period before the war reflect their belief, from briefings and readings they had available to them just as Bush did, that Iraq was on the same course it had been understood to be on since the first Gulf War. In fact most non-war votes were due to the fear of high death counts due to guerrilla fights on the streets of Baghdad and fears of massive deaths due to chemical agents being deployed.

If the search function worked here, I'd drag out the posts from people here who said the same thing. Democrats authorized this war. If they claim they bought a lie from a known cheat and liar, which is what they claim Bush is known to be, that just makes it worse that they went along. IT NEVER MAKES IT BETTER.



You make it about who has the power to respond. The Democrats asked for control of the government to make these changes, and have now not made them. It isn't just all about htem, but to exempt them defies reality.



Can you prove that the Democratic nominee won't be a Bush clone? We hear all these claims that the Democrats are so different. Clinton started "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and Hillary has not claimed she would do anything different. Both Obama and Clinton have made statements that they would undertake preemptive war actions in countries related to terrorism with or without the consent of those countries. All they have claimed is to be more focused and selective with their choices.

At best most have claimed they would move the troops out of Iraq, but not out of the region. They haven't really said they would bring them home.

No major candidate has pledged to enforce our borders, empty out bases abroad and end America as empire. No one.

Tomato...Tomahto.



I'm in favor of them following through on actions instead of passing the buck. When people earn power they need to exercise it. If people disagree with that action, then they need to put forth the effort to elect replacements.

Basically, use it or lose it.

" Nick

"Can you prove that the Democratic nominee won't be a Bush clone? "

No Democrat has even come close to ever doing the type of things that Bush has done. Whereas on the republican side you can site several examples : Nixon ( Watergate ) Reagan ( the Contra affair ) etc. I'm sorry but they've always had this sort of " For your own good " type of attitude. While saying they're not for big government.

" Both Obama and Clinton have made statements that they would undertake preemptive war actions in countries related to terrorism with or without the consent of those countries. "

Once again Iraq isn't about 911!


" I'm in favor of them following through on actions instead of passing the buck. "

So you're in favor of them cutting off funds and stopping this war?

If not it kind of takes the wind out of your argument.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #25 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

He didn't say that. Not at all.



False and unprovable assertion. You think you know. He by all accounts felt otherwise.

Irrelevant. The Democrats are the ones controlling both houses and the ones who claim to want to end the war. Yet, they don't. So tell me...who's worse....the politician you disagree with and does what he wants to do....or the one who agrees with you but doesn't follow through? Hmmm?



Not, but you've questioned Bush's motivation. Are you saying that they are political whores too?



Then why defend them?



Well, they've made it about them as opposed to being about winning. They've done so by relentlessly bashing the President and military whilst voting to continue the war. And coming soon to a Tv screen near you, they will be attacking the report by Petraeus because it contains good news. Just watch.



Unfortunately.



Now they're not. They are at least as bad. In fact, they're worse.

There is no way an independent will get elected this time around. Maybe sometime in the future when they're better organized but not right now



Quote:
! So I must vote for the democrat. Because I don't want another Bush clone to carry on the torch and their agenda.[/quite]

So you'll vote for Hillary over say, a Guiliani or Thompson or even McCain? Hillary is going to be the nominee. She's way worse than a Bush clone. Way.



Whatever. You can be a registered communist for all I care. You're still totally polarized.



PS: Stop putting words in his mouth. It's cheap. You know he doesn't believe that.

SDW! Buddy!

Are you making some noise up there?

Well I think my reply to Trumpy goes for both of you!
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #26 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

"Can you prove that the Democratic nominee won't be a Bush clone? "

No Democrat has even come close to ever doing the type of things that Bush has done. Whereas on the republican side you can site several examples : Nixon ( Watergate ) Reagan ( the Contra affair ) etc. I'm sorry but they've always had this sort of " For your own good " type of attitude. While saying they're not for big government.

" Both Obama and Clinton have made statements that they would undertake preemptive war actions in countries related to terrorism with or without the consent of those countries. "

Once again Iraq isn't about 911!


" I'm in favor of them following through on actions instead of passing the buck. "

So you're in favor of them cutting off funds and stopping this war?

If not it kind of takes the wind out of your argument.

So you're essentially saying that Hillary would be a better president than Bush becuase she's a Democrat and Republicans have historically done worse things.

What a horrible, weak argument.

What they're trying to say is that the POTUS is powerless without Congress (which is held by the Dems), which means that the Dems are entirely able to stop the war in Iraq, warrentless wiretapping, ect. But, they don't. They continue to give President Bush what he wants, then whine about what a terrible person he is.

I remember there was something on the Colbert Report about a guy who voted to appropriate funds for the Iraq war, then give a speech denouncing it. Is he *better* than everyone else too because he's a Dem? No, I think he's worse because he knows what he's voting on is wrong, but continues to shovel money.

...I'm just rambling now but you get the point.
"Humankind -- despite its artistic pretensions, its sophistication, and its many accomplishments -- owes its existence to a six-inch layer of topsoil and the fact that it rains."
Reply
"Humankind -- despite its artistic pretensions, its sophistication, and its many accomplishments -- owes its existence to a six-inch layer of topsoil and the fact that it rains."
Reply
post #27 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by theapplegenius View Post

So you're essentially saying that Hillary would be a better president than Bush becuase she's a Democrat and Republicans have historically done worse things.

What a horrible, weak argument.

What they're trying to say is that the POTUS is powerless without Congress (which is held by the Dems), which means that the Dems are entirely able to stop the war in Iraq, warrentless wiretapping, ect. But, they don't. They continue to give President Bush what he wants, then whine about what a terrible person he is.

I remember there was something on the Colbert Report about a guy who voted to appropriate funds for the Iraq war, then give a speech denouncing it. Is he *better* than everyone else too because he's a Dem? No, I think he's worse because he knows what he's voting on is wrong, but continues to shovel money.

...I'm just rambling now but you get the point.

No I don't think so.

Fact : What you've already sited that historically republicans when they've been in power for a while tend to go the direction I've outlined before.

Fact : The current republicans have supported Bush's policies to the hilt. So what would you expect they would do when they get into office?

Fact : I really don't mind Hillary as much a smost of you. I really liked her husbands way of governing and feel that she would mirror this.

Fact : I'm damn sure she wouldn't be another Bush clone and we've had entirely enough of that for quite some time to come.

Just because they are giving Bush what he wants now doesn't mean they are in agreement with those policies. Also it doesn't mean that they are one in the same with the party that instituted those policies.

So we're also back to the idea that if you agree with the president's policies ( Which you've not stated your position ) then what the hell are you trying to say ( or spin )?


Hey it's an easy idea to wrap your mind around! The recent polls show that the american public mirrors my attitude. They don't approve of how congress has handled things so far but they still trust them more than they do the republicans.

Personally I think you guys are the ones with the weak argument.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #28 of 71
Clinton: Iraq Tactics "Working. We're Just Years Too Late"...

...and she will increase US Military by 80,000. I'm so glad we're going to have a choice next election.

Hlllary is self-destructing. She's running her campaign in precisely the way to make sure she doesn't get nominated. The way to become the Democratic president is not to attempt to be more hard-nosed and warlike than the Republicans.
post #29 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

No Democrat has even come close to ever doing the type of things that Bush has done. Whereas on the republican side you can site several examples : Nixon ( Watergate ) Reagan ( the Contra affair ) etc. I'm sorry but they've always had this sort of " For your own good " type of attitude. While saying they're not for big government.

Once again Iraq isn't about 911!

So you're in favor of them cutting off funds and stopping this war?

If not it kind of takes the wind out of your argument.

First, Jimmac, do us all a favor and use the quote function please.

Now you claim that NO Democrat has ever done what Bush has done or what Republicans hav done historically. That is complete nonsense. Democrats were responsible for Jim Crow laws, for the Civil War, and for Dixiecrats advocating segregation.

Additionally Democrats are the only presidents who have signed sedition acts which made it illegal to criticize the government and for internment camps which tossed out every possible Constitutional guarantee for Japanese-American citizens.

You find me anything worse than that history.

You say Iraq isn't about 911, but fail to grasp that preemptive war isn't about waiting for a 9/11. I mean seriously you couldn't miss the point more if you tried. Preemptive war is about being willing to attack someone BEFORE they attack us and for no other reason than they do not root out and end elements considered dangerous to us. The doctrine of preemptive war is what created Iraq and neither Hillary nor Obama have refuted it. In fact in various hawkish statements they have vowed to continue it, but simply apply it more carefully than Bush.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #30 of 71
Wow, a person who actually wants to go back to the Clinton days. A democrat no less. Stunning, considering this single man screwed the party for almost a decade. I wish we could elect Bill Jeff again... sure does make selling Conservatism easier.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #31 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac;1130679Just because they are giving Bush what he wants [I

now[/I] doesn't mean they are in agreement with those policies. Also it doesn't mean that they are one in the same with the party that instituted those policies.

So we're also back to the idea that if you agree with the president's policies ( Which you've not stated your position ) then what the hell are you trying to say ( or spin )?


Hey it's an easy idea to wrap your mind around! The recent polls show that the american public mirrors my attitude. They don't approve of how congress has handled things so far but they still trust them more than they do the republicans.

Personally I think you guys are the ones with the weak argument.

So...that means that the American public is stupid and the democratic congress is chickenshit and ball-less.

Yeah, that who I want representing the country.
"Humankind -- despite its artistic pretensions, its sophistication, and its many accomplishments -- owes its existence to a six-inch layer of topsoil and the fact that it rains."
Reply
"Humankind -- despite its artistic pretensions, its sophistication, and its many accomplishments -- owes its existence to a six-inch layer of topsoil and the fact that it rains."
Reply
post #32 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

So you'll vote for Hillary over say, a Guiliani or Thompson or even McCain? Hillary is going to be the nominee. She's way worse than a Bush clone. Way.

If we make Thompson our nominee we're complete morons. McCain...meh...8 years later I don't think he has the chops. Guiliani? Mmmm...best of the three but meh. No one in the pack excites me. Clinton would at least have humor value and frankly she couldn't do a WORSE job than Bush has.

Vinea
post #33 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Wow, a person who actually wants to go back to the Clinton days. A democrat no less. Stunning, considering this single man screwed the party for almost a decade. I wish we could elect Bill Jeff again... sure does make selling Conservatism easier.

Check our polls lately? There are folks that look fondly back on the Days of Bill. Bush is going to go down in history like "that idiot Carter" but without the humanitarian and Nobel stuff at the end.

I suspect that Bush is going to get doubly blessed as the US economy slides into a deep hole before he leaves office.
post #34 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

First, Jimmac, do us all a favor and use the quote function please.

Now you claim that NO Democrat has ever done what Bush has done or what Republicans hav done historically. That is complete nonsense. Democrats were responsible for Jim Crow laws, for the Civil War, and for Dixiecrats advocating segregation.

Additionally Democrats are the only presidents who have signed sedition acts which made it illegal to criticize the government and for internment camps which tossed out every possible Constitutional guarantee for Japanese-American citizens.

You find me anything worse than that history.

You say Iraq isn't about 911, but fail to grasp that preemptive war isn't about waiting for a 9/11. I mean seriously you couldn't miss the point more if you tried. Preemptive war is about being willing to attack someone BEFORE they attack us and for no other reason than they do not root out and end elements considered dangerous to us. The doctrine of preemptive war is what created Iraq and neither Hillary nor Obama have refuted it. In fact in various hawkish statements they have vowed to continue it, but simply apply it more carefully than Bush.

Nick

So Iraq was about to attack us? Gosh I must of missed that one!

Just how were they going to do that? Given that on a good day their missiles would only go about 700 miles. Also I seem to remember that they found no WMD.

As for the rest I think you're reading a lot into statements by Ms. Clinton and Obama.

But I understand. When you get desperate and things just aren't sliding your way you tend to grasp at straws.

But really we all know you aren't in favor of the democrats pulling us out of Iraq. So the reasoning behind your arguments really is weak. One might even say transparent.

By the way what did you have against the civil war?

Also it was a democrat who ordered then Gov. George Wallace to let a couple of black kids attend school when he stood in the way. I watched it on tv. It was something even for the young kid that I was.

Sorry but no democrat has shown the kind of disregard for the legacy left by our forefathers in the way Bush has. Not even close!
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #35 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

Check our polls lately? There are folks that look fondly back on the Days of Bill. Bush is going to go down in history like "that idiot Carter" but without the humanitarian and Nobel stuff at the end.

I suspect that Bush is going to get doubly blessed as the US economy slides into a deep hole before he leaves office.


God! I'm glad I can't read Jubelum's comments any more for the most part. Only when people quote him. And that's enough!
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #36 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by theapplegenius View Post

So...that means that the American public is stupid and the democratic congress is chickenshit and ball-less.

Yeah, that who I want representing the country.


Well I think I've been clear. But you go ahead and misintepret all you want!
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #37 of 71
Oh god!

I just read this one :

Bush invokes 'tragedy of Vietnam' against Iraq pullout

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/...ech/index.html

Apparently it's not right to compare Iraq to Vietnam when just talking about the conflict but it's ok when you're talking about the pullout!

That's rich!
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #38 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

So Iraq was about to attack us? Gosh I must of missed that one!

This is what we've been saying since day one. It's a clear debunking of the idea that this particular pre-emptive war was called for, or even legal.

But...

Deaf ears. Deaf, lying ears.
post #39 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

This is what we've been saying since day one. It's a clear debunking of the idea that this particular pre-emptive war was called for, or even legal.

But...

Deaf ears. Deaf, lying ears.


I know.

You just have to talk to them long enough to wipe away the smoke screen and find out what they're really geting at. Same old song and dance. Different day. Never mind all of that was debunked long ago.

This is among the many reasons I don't want a republican in the Whitehouse next time.

We need to send a strong message that what we've had isn't even romotely acceptable for a president. I really don't pictuire the democrats solving everything. I mean they're politicians also. But they're a alot better than what we've had. If we did elect a republican this time it would be like saying " We like what we've had shoved in our faces for 8 years. Give me more! ".
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #40 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

So Iraq was about to attack us? Gosh I must of missed that one!

Apparently so did Senators Kerry, Clinton, Edwards.....

You make it sound so obvious that the CONSENSUS was wrong here. Twenty-nine DEMOCRATIC Senators voted for and twenty-one voted against.

This was not just the beliefs or actions of one man or one party.

Quote:
Just how were they going to do that? Given that on a good day their missiles would only go about 700 miles. Also I seem to remember that they found no WMD.

Perhaps you need a primer on pre-emption. You really seem to fail to grasp the meaning of it and thus cannot understand why there has been no advocated change from the Bush position by Clinton or Obama.

You keep bringing up the fact that they didn't or couldn't attack us yet failing to realize that pre-emption means you take action to occur the possibility can't even arise.

Here is a helpful analogue Jimmac. How many long range missles or WMD's do you think Osama Bin Laden will have when a President Obama invades Pakistan to capture and kill him?

Quote:
s for the rest I think you're reading a lot into statements by Ms. Clinton and Obama.

Oh it is the comprehension thing again because you prefer to dismiss instead of address.

CNN

Quote:
"If we have actionable intelligence on al Qaeda operatives, including [Osama] bin Laden, and President Musharraf cannot act, then we should," Obama said. "That's just common sense."

Quote:
"Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts," Biden said. "It's already the policy of the United States -- has been for four years -- that there's actionable intelligence, we would go into Pakistan."

The war Bush started was based off actionable intelligence, the same intelligence that the Democrats read and voted to authorize action with, and then undertook action. As Biden notes, it is the exact same policy as Bush. It is still pre-emptive war.

The rest of your post is just dismissive, and personal attacks with smilies attached. It falls beneath the threshold of deserving attention. Enjoy the last word because people clearly can understand that a continuation of pre-emptive war is the Bush doctrine, even if you are claiming you will run the doctrine better, it is the same doctrine.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Just What the Founders Feared: An Imperial President Goes to War