It’s fascinating to see conservatives tossing around quotes from pols they hold in contempt (most conspicuously Clinton) to try and prove…well, I’m not sure what.
But if quotes mean so much, then let’s have a few more, all of which underscore Bush’s commitment to a vision and his world-respected ability to express himself. Please be aware…there are no typos in any of the below. They’re “as is.”
I think our troops ought to be used to fight and win war. But in this case, it was a nation-building exercise. And same with Haiti. I wouldn’t have supported either. (GWB, 2000)
(W)e can’t be all things to all people in the world. I am worried about over-committing our military around the world. I want to be judicious in its use. I don’t think nation-building missions are worthwhile. (GWB, 2000)
But the use of the military needs to be in our vital interest. The mission needs to be clear and the exit strategy obvious. (GWB, 2000)
This country has no designs on Cuba’s soverty; we have no designs on the soverty of Cuba. (GWB, 2002)
The goals for this country are peace in the world. And the goals for this country are a compassionate American for every single citizen. (GWB, 2002)
Parents and educators will not be bystandards in education reform. (GWB, 2003)
These are folks that have hijacked a great religion and then take innocent life. And that’s a huge difference between America. (GWB 2002)
In my attitude, it doesn’t matter how high the hurdle is, we’ll cross it. (GWB 2003)
I promise you I will listen to what has been said here, even though I wasn’t here. (GWB 2002)
• 
The guy wasn’t letting the UN inspectors in – THAT ALONE was enough to jsutify action and the Dems and Libs supported it when it was politically beneficial and NOW change their tune oooirtunistically.
Um, remember Hans Blix? Saddam didn’t kick him out, Bush did.
Add this to Bush’s lies: he has twice claimed that Saddam didn’t let inspectors in, and used that as post hoc justification for the war.
“Saddam was no threat to the U.S.,”
Keep telling yourself that. Forget that he funded terrorism against Israel, forget that he had billions of dollars to spend on funding terrorism against us and now had a very clear reason to do so(another Bush in power).
And I’m still not convinced he didn’t have WMDs at all. All Kay ever said was that they aren’t there NOW.
For all we know Saddam handed them off to Syria in the months we wasted trying to convince the UN to do something, anything.
the Deaths your referring to weren’t caused by Clinton lying…
they were caused by terrorist attacks. Stop trying to twist the facts to meet your requirements of truth. Both sides on here are doing the same thing. Claiming unknowable reasons adding them to knowable facts and coming up with conclusions that they preordained. The US’s morality and standing in the world was not hurt by Clinton lying about his sexual relations, everything points to it being the opposite. But the mishandling of Iraq by Bush has hurt our standing, we now have the rep of an untrustworthy thugish bratty brute… very similar to what Iraq had under Sadam (if not as bad)…
Dude! He’s from Texas, what do you want?
Dude, I’m from Texas. How do you do?
James Tichy: “The other thing we have to do is to take seriously the role in this problem of . . . older men who prey on underage women. . . . There are consequences to decisions and . . . one way or the other, people always wind up being held accountable.”
–Bill Clinton, June 13, 1996, in a speech endorsing a national effort against teen pregnancy [USNews: 9/21/98]
Luigi Novi: Monica Lewinsky wasn’t underage.
Steve O’Rando: I am from Texas as well and I assure you that the sort of garbled speech that drips out of George W. Bush’s mouth is not a, erm, quality that all Southerners possess, so please…no stereotyping. I don’t exactly appreciate you implying that my diction is on the same level of eloquence (or lack thereof) as Dubya’s just because I happen to be from the same state as him.
“When was the last time you saw a concerted effort of protesters and activists working together to end the high number of murders in U.S. cities? Most efforts are half-hearted, underfunded or fragmented, at best. At least I write to newspapers, with some success, I might add, and take them to task for avoiding or burying the issue, which I think is a national disgrace”
Who was protesting to get rid of Saddam? I know people have been protesting the conditions in this country for several years, and i’ve seen far more protests against the war than i’ve seen supporting it.
Ra!
“-America will be a safer place with a regime change in Iraq.-
Saddam was no threat to the U.S., had no WMD’s, & Didn’t have terrorists in the parts of the country he controlled. But overthrowing him & thereby inciting more hatred toward America makes us safer.
How? “Go back to my last link and read it. All of it. This is extensive indepth stuff. Educate yourself.
I pay little attention to Bush’s malaporpisms. It’s relatively minor stuff.
I pay more attention to his substantive policy matters. That he’s done such a clear reversal on matters such as nation building means that, at best, he came into office with a naive and ill informed outlook on international affairs…which was something that was counted as a point against him at the time.
This is a valid argument to be using; it shows a lack of preparedness that underlies his Iraq policies and is apparent (though not noted) in his Afghanistan policy. Bush supporters should not be defensive about this, as it strikes directly to a core competency in what we want in a President.
Or that he’s done such a clear reversal on matters such as nation building means that 9/11 happened.
The anti-nation-building comments were jabs at Clinton, and by extention, Gore. So, now that 9-11 happened, he supports Clinton policy, and in fact wants to go much further in that direction than Clinton would have?
About WMD from a Democrat:
http://www.rhinotimes.com/greensboro/osc2.html
And if you like that he has all of his War Watch columns at http://www.ornery.org/ as well. Although they are posted there about a week or so later then the Rhino.
Or that he’s done such a clear reversal on matters such as nation building means that 9/11 happened.
I.e., he had a naive and unsophisticated grasp of international affairs.
Moreover, his planning for post war Iraq was not particularly well thought out; the long gap in getting power back on line and letting the individuals in the Irqui army get away also betray sloppy planning and execution. And it still shows in the sloppiness of Afhganistan affairs.
What, exactly, could Bush have done differently in order to satisfy you?
Let’s get some facts straight:
Paul O Neil – yes, he alone when trying to sell his book, who clearly has an axe to grind because he was never truly accepted in whatever inner circle he thought he should be in – goes and leaks what could’ve been potentially classified information. Yes, I’d rest my arguments with him – that’s perfect.
AS for the alleged purpose behind PAD’s quotes – I’m still recovering fom the abdominal pain that ensues after cronic laughter.
SO the quotes are to show Bush is a moron . . no they are to show his policy on Nation building and how it contradicts him now . . .no, wait – it’s to show you can take quotes out of context and then you miss the point.
Well I think we’ve shown that most sane people aren’t concerned about overturning the balance of power b/c he’s not studiously memorizing his William F. Buckley Word of the Day calendar.
On to Nation Building – well, for those with a modicum of foriegn policy knwoledge, it’s clear that the world after 9/11 requires change.
Sticking your nose where it doesn’t belong to build a nation is still not their policy.
Sticking our nose somewhere to protect the rest of the body IS our policy – and we are not morally bankruptcy enough to then jsut walk aaway.
For one thing – it wouldn’t be right
and it also would be unintelligent and would create a breeding ground amongst the Iraqi’s that feared we would leave them in chaos.
So that leaves PAD, being the ever “smart Hulk” and putting thsoe qutoes there to show they are out of context.
Well, the qutoes I posted have already been linked to explanations of context and there was truly nothing misleading about those quotes. So if PAD’S point was posting quotes out of context, it is sorely misplaced, since the quotes used did not have some altered meaning out of context.
They only show the political games the people saying them are playing.
And it only exposes the idiocy of the pseudo-intellectual minor celebrity who’s not simply content in contributing to his art, but must let you know that YOU the PRESIDENT and anyone else who isn’t an -ivory tower – what SHOULD be, instead of what IS – LIBERAL – is completely foolish to support this President.
Sorry, PAD and your rabidly blind followers – the fact of the matter is that this President may not be the SMARTEST micromanager this side of Arkansas – but he IS a decent fellow who has been put in a situation where he is in charge of a Nation at a very dangerous time and he seems to be tryin ghis best to do the RIGHT thing and not be overly concerned about POLLS like some other Presidents.
Here’s my favorite GWB quote:
“If we teach a child to read, then he or her will be able to pass a literacy test.”
Yeah, yeah, yeah, it has nothing to do with his declaring a specific point of foreign policy and then doing the opposite. I just think it’s funny!
Paul O Neil – yes, he alone when trying to sell his book, who clearly has an axe to grind because he was never truly accepted in whatever inner circle he thought he should be in – goes and leaks what could’ve been potentially classified information.
Soooooo… since it came from a book and from a guy who was fired, it’s automatically not credible?
This guy sounds like the perfect person to collect intelligence for the Bush Administration.
He’s already taking the fall for Bush’s BS (like so many others will before all is said and done).
UDog, your longwindedness and repetition is a weakness.
OK, responding to a few different people at once here.
Bush isn’t “wasting American lives” and if you liberals could see past your rabid desire to get Bush out of office than perhaps you would see like Joe Lieberman does that America will be a safer place with a regime change in Iraq.
1) Gotta love the “you liberals” bit. What, are we an entirely different species that can be cordoned off and penned in?
2) If the “regime change in Iraq” were the sole consequence of Bush’s Iraq policy, I doubt you’d see nearly as many people objecting.
It’s not. Other consequences include a near-complete lack of American credibility abroad, the fact that Iraq is now a haven for Al-Qaeda when it wasn’t previously, and the loss of life of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians who did nothing more than be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
So being against Gulf War II doesn’t mean one thinks Saddam is just a neat guy. Ever heard of a Pyrrhic victory?
The exit strategy is easy to see : Hussein and his like out of power, and the people in Iraq having a free voice to speak their mind about what they wish instead of spending their time in a rape room, prison cell, or otherwise fearing for their lives.
Sorry: that’s a goal, not an exit strategy. I could say our exit strategy was “all terrorists dead.” It doesn’t say thing one about how we’d go about achieving such a thing — and your statement is only slightly more useful.
(For one thing, your “exit strategy” implies that until and unless Iraq is a free, peaceful democratic nation we cannot ever leave. Based on current trends, that means you’re suggesting a decades-long occupation.)
And I’m still not convinced he didn’t have WMDs at all. All Kay ever said was that they aren’t there NOW.
Of course he used to have WMD’s. We’ve still got the receipts from when we gave them to him. Is this supposed to be news?
Sheesh.
TWL
My work here is done. So I am not longwinded and repetitious – or maybe one just doesn’t like to be bombarded with facts and would rather I just be short sweet and sumgly arrogantly and poorly misinformed like PAD – but anyway – it seems we have made progress.
Instead of just having some stupid, minsinformed obnoxious quip about Bush being a moron or some other infitie witty flippant verbal barb from the almighty PAD – we have people exchanging different points of view on the validity of the Iraq war and exit strategies etc. . .
I can deal with that and it’s a pleausre to read. I don’t agree with TWL an many others – but at least they are not making some points and backing them up. Of course these arguments are more centered around different views on foriegn policy and reveal how little many understand about its complications.
But again – it is still better than blindly and malicously blaming it all on the Bushie.
So while this all started from an infantile blog post from PAD showing how blowhard and arrogant he can be when he goes political it has ended up with some intelligent discussion.
We’ve gone from Grey Hulk to Banner in 70 or so entries. Not bad.
Udog:
Speaking of Cronic Laughter, that’s exactly the response your post generated.
First of all, your indignation at PAD expressing his personal views on his personal web log is so absurd it’s hard to take anything else you write seriously (even if most of that weren’t absurd in and of itself). He’s not out there condemning people like, oh say Dr. Laura, Jerry Fallwell or a certain poster at this log which goes around insulting the owner for posting his personal opinions on a space designed just for that and nothing else, just because he disagrees with them.
As for Bush being a decent man who cares about doing the right thing and not the polls, I still can’t decide wether that’s more ridiculous than your outrage or just about the same. Sure, he’s interested in doing the decent thing, which is why he’s ignoring places like Saudi Arabia. He doesn’t care about the polls, which is why he silences investigations and brings up smoke-screens every time little things like the terrible state the economy is surface. Funny how every time an election is coming up, things like Saddam’s capture happen. Lucky guy, huh?
You support Bush and believe everything he says despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. We get it. I personally can’t wrap my mind around such an attitude, but more power to you. However when you go all hypocrite, blasting on people who do the same (guilt is equal on both camps) or even a lot less, and start insulting people here, that’s when I have a huge problem.
So do us all and, from every indications yourself, a favor: take your high horse and ride off to the Rush Limbaugh message boards or something. That way you won’t have to put up with PAD shoving his opinion down your throat (by making you log onto his site and read his opinions) and we won’t have to put up with your hate-mongering and fanatism.
I jsut get done writing one reponse, and you already gave me more material. I have to get faster.
Udog wrote
I can deal with that and it’s a pleausre to read. I don’t agree with TWL an many others – but at least they are not making some points and backing them up.
And that, is what we call a Freudian slip. I have nothing more to add.
“Bystandards”, Hy-uck! He talks as if I was writing his speechesez. Ee-hee-hee!
Oh – now Bush isn’t doing enough. Now we want him to go into Saudi Arabia?
I’m not against it – but it’s funny how now his critics are blasting him for not doing enough.
And gee – I’m not saying PAD’s views are forced down my throat. Of course I voluntarily read the site – and I also point out when I think he’s being a moron. But YES he has a consitutional right to be a moron.
What is this defense that it is HIS blog board. That’s not the point. He’s putting up his views – if he didn’t want to hear a response on them – WHY IS HE POSTING THEM. It’s an invite to sound off on the topic – I’m sorry that I am not here to feed his almighty ego when I think he’s being an arrogant know it all.
And as for chronic laughter – look around – it is not as if I am the ONLY person with this point of view. There are people back and forth on Iraq and Bush.
WHy is it that when PAD posts his childish Bush barb and I respond with quotes and then he posts ANOTHER bunch of quotes that are irrelevant to the topic that I am a RUSH fan.
Yes, if someone doesn’t agree with your liberal view of the world they MUST be part of the vast right wing conspiracy.
I LOVE it! If only some of you would start consitently making a legitimate point I might become confused about my world views. Luckily you’ve consistently only been ridiculous in your unending support for ANYTHING anti-Bush.
Keep it up!
And yes – I love the response that it is a vast conspiracy and we find Sadaam during election year.
Yes – Bush is a complete idiot on one hand – yet masterminding these conspiracies on the other.
Whatever makes your point, I guess.
Did Bush’s lies (or “intelligence failures,” if you prefer) get American soldiers killed?
Yep, 500+ and counting.
Do a head-count. Or better yet, go here: http://nationalreview.com/novak/novak200402020959.asp
There’s a few numbers to throw around:
as of January 15… the official number of U.S. combat deaths listed by the Defense Department was 343
That’s not 500. I keep in mind that those are official numbers and at this point outdated.
Another 155 had died from non-hostile causes, including 100 in accidents and others from illness
I totalled it. In the following weaks, combined deaths have exceeded 500 easily. The number of _combat_ deaths hasn’t passed 400. Sorry to disapoint you.
Frankly, the conquest of Iraq was fueled by many issues and concerning, including and aside from those relevent to the use of the American Intelligence Estimate and its seemingly abortive role in confirming the existence of WMDs in Iraq.
Regime-change was the American policy in regards to Iraq for three Presidential Administrations, including one I didn’t like and… well, I don’t have a great love for any of their fiscal policies.
As Rumsfeld said today, It took us 10 months to find Saddam Hussein. The reality is that the hole he was found hiding in was large enough to hold enough biological weapons to kill thousands of human beings… (if such weapons exist) But unlike Saddam Hussein, such objects, once buried, can stay buried. In a country the size of California, the chances of inspectors finding something buried in the ground without their being led to it by people knowledgeable about where it was is minimal
He mentioned that forces had passed the farm where Saddam was hidden many times before he was found, as an example. Unfortunately that means they could also have passed over similar holes, or whatnot, with various amounts of destructive weapons, many times without knowing it. That makes being 100% certain about the presence or absence of WMDs nearly impossible.
That scares me. Nearly every possibility is a frightening one, especially since we can’t know that Saddam was being tricked into thinking that he had an arsenal, without genuinely having the omniscience that the President’s critics accuse him of having whenever they accuse him of lying about Saddam’s weapons capacity.
Ultimately, that isn’t even what PAD was talking about. I apologize for getting off-topic. The topic was about the quote thing and I pulled away from that.
CJA
Udog, you persist on attacking PAD’s intelligence. On what grounds do you do this? Just out of curiosity, what level of education do you have? Also, what occupation do you have that makes you more qualified to make political decisions than PAD? There is an interesting poll in an issue of time magazine that is around a month old. This poll shows that more educated people are generally anti Bush. Notice that I said “generally” so if you like Bush you’re not necessarily uneducated. Also notice that I never said that all uneducated people are stupid. After all, I have not graduated from high school… yet.
What fascinates me is how so many folks on the left think that Bush is pretty much a moron…but also claim that they fully expect him to soundly trounce whoever they send against him. If Bush is really that stupid then Kerry or Edwards would have to be on the mental level of, say, a planarian worm to lose. But maybe my Democratic friends know something about the candidates that I don’t.
“Other consequences include a near-complete lack of American credibility abroad, the fact that Iraq is now a haven for Al-Qaeda when it wasn’t previously, and the loss of life of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians”
we are upping our credibility. Why do you think Libya came forward?
If Al-Queda comes to Iraq it is a fly paper scenario.
And if we had not gone to Iraq Saddam would have killed more people then we have in this war.
“we gave them to him.”
Some. France and Russia gave far more then us.
By and By, I love how people like Tim Lynch are demonstrating how they have not looked at links provided. Or they have and are ignoring them because they don’t fit their world view.
All presidents say dumb things and things they wish they could have back. Some of course just flat out lie, but I guess as long as it is done eloquently than who cares.
“We can’t be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans …”
Bill Clinton (USA TODAY, 11 March 1993, page 2A)
“The other thing we have to do is to take seriously the role in this problem of . . . older men who prey on underage women. . . . There are consequences to decisions and . . . one way or the other, people always wind up being held accountable.”
–Bill Clinton, June 13, 1996, in a speech endorsing a national effort against teen pregnancy [USNews: 9/21/98]
“I ask that all Americans demonstrate in their personal and public lives… the high ethical standards that are essential to good character and to the continued success of our Nation.”
–President Bill Clinton, October 17, 1997. “National Character Counts Week.”
MISSION IN SOMALIA:
“The ultimate goal is to make sure that the United Nations can fulfill its
mission there and continue to work with the Somalis toward nation
building.”
June 16, 1993.
“The U.S. military mission is not now nor was it ever one of `nation
building.'”
October 13, 1993.
Hate to point it out, Tichy, but these quotes don’t prove a Clinton lie. The first quote says that the US is involved to ensure that the UN can do nation building, not the US soldiers.
monkeys
400 instead of 500 deaths? Oh, that’s makes it ALL okay.
I look at my being anti-bush real simply. I was told that Saddam had WMDs and paid Al-Queda. Thus, he was a significant threat to our country.
Then we run him over, take his country, and overall do a good deed for the world. But it turns out he had no WMDs and didn’t fund Al-Queda.
I see this as a problem. But I can’t have a discussion about it, because people on the opposite side of my fence tell me that it’s all okay, no matter what failures, lies, or mishandling took place – it’s all okay because Saddam was a bad man.
The truth is the REAL threats to our country, we can’t deal with like we dealt with Saddam.
the President of the United States should be held to a higher standard
Gee, PAD, now you sound like all the vast, right-wing wackos who said the same thing when Clinton lied under oath and gave us multiple definitions of the word “is”.
In my experience, whenever people pull out the term “higher standard” it usually means “my standard”.
Funny how every time an election is coming up, things like Saddam’s capture happen. Lucky guy, huh?
How was Saddam capture in any way close to an election? We have elections every 2 years so by your logic virtually anything that happens could be considered to either be timed to influence the upcoming election or have been deliberately withheld until after the previous one. yeesh.
No doubt when or if Osama is captured/killed/has his DNA positively identified off of a reddish smear found on a cave wall we will be told that Bush, the oafish dullard who can’t chew gum and walk at the same time, fiendishly had it planned all along. Tinfoil hats, anyone?
Just out of curiosity, what level of education do you have?
By that logic, the president–who holds a Harvard MBA– probably leaves most of us very much in the dust.
Sure, he got Cs…but as they used to say back in Albany Medical College–What do you call the person who graduates last in his class?
Doctor.
(They also used to say “when hearing hoofbeats, expect horses not zebras.” which has been advice I have used ever since)
I don’t say he did NOTHING good in his presidency – but he was all flash and fast talking and I think people wanted someone honest.-Udog
Too bad we didn’t get him.
Oh, and you may want to proof read your postings. Kind of tough to take a rant seriously with so many misspellings and grammar issues and such.
monkeys
Calvin
For an indepth understanding of how and why we got to Iraq I direct you here: http://denbeste.nu/essays/strategic_overview.shtml
For some of the more complicated points there are links to more extensive articles.
PAD,
I seriously cannot tell from your writings sometimes. I mean you seem like a smart guy – heck I know you are – I’ve been reading your column and comics since you first started. So, how can a guy who is so smart get caught up in all this political garbage. I used to be just like you, but I leaned toward the right. Don’t you just get tired of it, though? 95% of the politicians are in it for themselves. They are greedy, power hungry folk who say anything to please anyone at the moment. Most of them could give two sh*ts about you and I. In my opinion, both parties should be abolished and a person should run on the strength on their own beliefs. The majority of the people don’t seem to be heard – the far right and the far left are the only viewpoints you hear anymore (it seems). About 10 years ago, George Carlin said something to the extent of – the politicians in DC want to keep us arguing and fighting with each other (about our differences as people) so they can run off the the bank with all the f*cking money.
Thank you for the link and I will look through it, however, MY President was very clear on why I needed to support him in this war and my opinions are based on HIS public statements.
Bill, Bush only got into Yale and Harvard because of his dad, Harvard and Yale are overated due to so many people like him being accepted on account of who he knows, and if you read my whole post you would have noticed that there are exceptions.
“WHy is it that when PAD posts his childish Bush barb and I respond with quotes and then he posts ANOTHER bunch of quotes that are irrelevant to the topic that I am a RUSH fan.”
Did PAD say you were a Rush fan? Maybe i missed it somewhere, but if i did and you are, i’m sorry.
“I totalled it. In the following weaks, combined deaths have exceeded 500 easily. The number of _combat_ deaths hasn’t passed 400. Sorry to disapoint you.”
Yes, but the combined deaths are to be blamed on him too, if those marines weren’t in Iraq, they wouldn’t have gotten killed. A real leader takes the blame for all the deaths he/she causes.
“What fascinates me is how so many folks on the left think that Bush is pretty much a moron…but also claim that they fully expect him to soundly trounce whoever they send against him”
Well you see, many of us think Bush is an idiot, but on that same token, he’s got a whole lot of people around him controlling his puppet ášš…
Ra!
What fascinates me is how so many folks on the left think that Bush is pretty much a moron…but also claim that they fully expect him to soundly trounce whoever they send against him.
Not everyone is saying that. I’m pretty hopeful.
If Bush is really that stupid then Kerry or Edwards would have to be on the mental level of, say, a planarian worm to lose.
That assumes the smartest person always wins. I think there’s an awful lot of evidence over the last 200+ years putting the lie to THAT assertion.
I don’t think Bush is especially bright, but I certainly give him credit for being an extremely canny politician. Political smarts he’s got in spades. I only wish they were in the service of policies I agreed with.
TWL
Mr Sims, you have quite the defeatist attitude, run for political office yourself or something.
I don’t know… dissolution of political parties really wouldn’t be a bad thing.
It would certainly eliminate the part of the ballot where you can just vote “Republican” or “Democrat” and not have to even know the candidates names. That’s scary.
Other consequences include a near-complete lack of American credibility abroad, the fact that Iraq is now a haven for Al-Qaeda when it wasn’t previously, and the loss of life of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians
we are upping our credibility. Why do you think Libya came forward?
Several reasons, actually. Behind-the-scenes British diplomacy is one of them; settling the issues of repatriation with France is another; the fact that Libya’s economy is in the çráppër is a third.
If you think our swaggering around like a mafia goon is the main reason, that’s your prerogative — but if that were the case, wouldn’t Libya have come forward after we directly bombed them back in ’86? Or was Reagan not sufficiently sincere and godlike in his motives?
If Al-Queda comes to Iraq it is a fly paper scenario.
Riiiiiiiight. That’s why we’re the ones getting killed and the portion of the Iraqi population wanting us gone is rapidly growing.
But nice work keeping to your talking points.
And if we had not gone to Iraq Saddam would have killed more people then we have in this war.
Really? He killed 10,000 in less than a year? I’m surprised he had any population left.
By and By, I love how people like Tim Lynch are demonstrating how they have not looked at links provided. Or they have and are ignoring them because they don’t fit their world view.
I’ve looked. Some are interesting. Many are clearly biased.
And as long as we’re feeling the love and picking on specific people … let me just say how much I love the way most of the people arguing the pro-Bush side can’t even be bothered to use their real names. At least I stand by my words — “Brill.”
TWL
I don’t know… dissolution of political parties really wouldn’t be a bad thing.
I’m not disagreeing, I’m just saying Sims seems to be taking the “It’s hopeless, I won’t vote” point of view.
“We have elections every 2 years…”-Bill Mulligan
Um, what country are you living in? I hope that was a typo, or that you were referring to perhaps a small town election or somesuch.
Again, monkeys.
I love the e’level of education’argument used earlier.
ANti-Bush people are generally more educated?
Please.
There are people on both sides with high academic credntials.
First off – I wouldn’t say I am PRO-Bush in the sense that the anti-Bush people are blind zealots.
I just happen to not knock him down unreasonably.
Why? Becuase I don’t have an axe to grind politically and I can see things for what they are.
AS for my level of education? That doesn’t matter. If I am a doctor or a lawyer – what difference would it make. There are idiot doctors and lawyers on both sides.
And I am glad that someone else at least points out that PAD just shows a totally shameful side when he gets caught up in politics.
I’ve seen this alot in writers both comics, hollywood and fiction.
I’ve seen it a lot in comics where they portray the conservative like an idiot or beer swilling pot bellied buffoon (Supreme Power # 6 or 7)
But I don’t mind that – if you fit it in a fictional context.
I just get the willies when I see PAD do it for real. He DOES have the right and I love the back and forth positions – but it saddens me to see he’s not far removed from the other nuts in Hollywood.
You make a good buck and you get a little famous and you start to think you are above everyone else. You don’t put together a reasoned argument, but instead a quick snippet of insults and beat the Anti___ drums. Today the drums happen to be BUSH.
PAD – put as much research in your politics as you do in the Hulk’s 42 different personalities and maybe you’d make a little sesne.
First, the education thing was based on a Time Magazine Poll, and second, I was just inquiring as to what you were basing your apparent authority on politics on; as evidenced by my stating my current lack of education.
Toby,
I assume Bill’s referring to Congressional elections, which do take place every two years — it’s not changing the presidency, but it (theoretically) could change the entire House and a third of the Senate, so it’s certainly a valid point.
TWL
Just as a side comment to the ranting some people are doing who disagree with ol’ PAD here…
It’s amazing how when someone of any kind of notoriety in an entertainment field, like an author, actor, director or a muscician voices a political opinion that someone doesn’t agree with, they then attack that celebrity as being “Uninformed”, “Wrong-headed”, “Biased”, or just plain “Stupid and ignorant”. Such rants are usually followed up with “Why don’t you stick to what you know and shut the hëll up about politics?”
Little lesson kids: Being in an entertainment industry doesn’t automatically make you an idiot, just as being President or being aligned with your particular political party doesn’t always make you “Right”.
And just because someone holds different opinions than you,it doesn’t automatically make them wrong.
You have your beliefs and your convictions, fine. Just don’t act like it’s your duty to somehow correct someone else’s way of thinking. Accept that they have a different way of thinking from you and move on. Throwing around words like “Uninformed” when you clearly are in no position to know WHAT that person’s seen, read or heard that’s different from what you know is the height of arrogance.
My 2 cents. Which will probably gain no interest in certain mental banks.
And here comes the question from the paradigm of post-modernism….
Why can’t we all just get along?
*sniggers*