If Hillary Clinton’s goal was to get some ink in saying that the Senate was like a plantation, then it was a really smart thing to say. If, on the other hand, she was trying to draw a remotely accurate metaphor, I don’t think that was the way to go.
Her representatives have tried to justify it by saying that the Senate is being run by the Bossman and opposing views are stifled. Yeah, okay, but that also describes any number of corporations. No one is in the Congress or Senate against their will, no one is being beaten, and no one is being hunted down if they leave. There’s just way too much baggage attached to the concept of plantations to try and pare it down to, “Our attempts to present our views are being stifled.” I mean, she could just as easily address the UJA and say the Senate is like a concentration camp, and it would be just as questionable.
If she’d wanted to be clever, she could have said, “I’m not saying the Senate is like, say, a plantation. Not at all. I mean, yes, Democrats are being given no more respect by Republicans than the Bossman gave his workers, and we have about as much input into the way things are being done. And it can be certainly stated that the Senate is giving little to no attention to the needs of its black constituents. But it’s definitely NOT like a plantation…yet.” That makes it slightly harded for critics to come back and say, “So you’re saying the Senate is like a plantation?!” to which she replies, “Uh, no, I said it isn’t like one. Are you reading impaired?”
Now the Mayor of New Orleans, on the other hand…what the hëll is up with THAT guy? I mean, geez, if the mayor of a mostly white city that had been wiped out by a tornado said it was punishment from God because they’d let blacks in, and this was a message that it should be exclusively a white city, the guy would be hung out to dry. So what’s this “New Orleans needs to be chocolate again.” Okay, yeah, he’s been under some stress, but holy crap. I have to think there’s plenty of black constituents who have–if nothing else–made plenty of money off white tourists who are saying, “Shut the hëll up!”
PAD
• 
I like chocolate.
At this point, I don’t think Pat has much direct influence over the general public, however, there are a number of people who do have such direct influence that listen to Pat and think, “yeah, that’s true.”
Lest you forget, Jerry Falwell, who has plenty of influence in the public arena (and in the GOP in particular) was sitting next to Pat and agreeing with him when he said that feminists and homosexuals made 9/11 happen.
As for the situation in Pakistan, it will be a while before we have confirmation that anyone connected to Al Qaeda was killed. If I were a cynical man (heh), I’d wonder if it were a coincidence that, just as the media was flooded with stories about the Abramoff scandal and the warrantless domestic spying scandal, we get this report crowing that we’ve killed the number 2 man of Al Qaeda*. No wait, it turns out he wasn’t there, but we’re sure someone connected to Al Qaeda was there, give us a few more days to sift through the rubble.
After all, wasn’t Clinton’s motive for every single military action he took to divert the country’s attention from zippergate?
That is, if I were a cynical man.
*Side note: Does anyone have an org chart for Al Qaeda, because it seems to me that we’ve killed 8 or 9 “Number 2 men” in Al Qaeda since 9/11? Is it really bin Laden on top and then 10 guys directly beneath him?
Actually Den, it’s the other way around. Falwell was the one saying all the stuff about 9/11, Pat just sat their grinning and bobbing his head in agreement.
Bill wrote:
With two of the biggest supporters of the Iraq War??? I’m sorry, I can see supporting either of the two or both but not for that reason.
My point for mentioning those two is that McCain knows the horror of war. Hilary is a smart mom.
Perhaps the two of them can put there heads together and come up with better ideas.
Okay, Thom, I had it backwards. Falwell made the initial comment, but Pat did a lot more then just “grinning and bobbing his head in agreement.”
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/87/story_8770_1.html
JERRY FALWELL: And, I know that I’ll hear from them for this. But, throwing God out successfully with the help of the federal court system, throwing God out of the public square, out of the schools. The abortionists have got to bear some burden for this because God will not be mocked. And when we destroy 40 million little innocent babies, we make God mad. I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way–all of them who have tried to secularize America–I point the finger in their face and say “you helped this happen.”
PAT ROBERTSON: Well, I totally concur, and the problem is we have adopted that agenda at the highest levels of our government. And so we’re responsible as a free society for what the top people do. And, the top people, of course, is the court system.
He made it very clear that they were on the same page that day.
“Is it really bin Laden on top and then 10 guys directly beneath him?”
No. That’s the plot line for Brokeback Mountain 2.
I’m not sure if I would vote for a Clinton/McCain ticket. Maybe a McCain/Clinton ticket.
It’s pure fantasy anyway, as neither would jump parties to create such a ticket. Of course, if McCain did run as a democrat, we’d have to endure another year of the Rovian slander machine attacking his military service (see: Kerry, Murtha). We probably will during the GOP primary anyway, since I don’t see Rove working for McCain’s campaign given their history.
I’ve only been a democrat for a year now, but I still think all the talk about Hillary having a virtual lock on the nomination is also pure fantasy. She is too divisive to win in the general election. You can cite all the polls you want showing her ahead today, but a poll taken this early is meaningless.
Den, that’s what made Robertson’s retraction such a stunning and laughable lie. I believe he tried to claim he was just so caught off guard by Falwell’s statements, he did not know what to say…so he agreed.
It is completely ridiculous for any human being to claim that he has direct communication with God…except for the crazy homeless guy who hangs around outside the Charles Center Metro Station in downtown Baltimore.
No. That’s the plot line for Brokeback Mountain 2.
Image: Me shooting soda out of my nose laughing
after reading this line.
Seriously, though, anyone know how many “number 2 men” are in Al Qaida?
Maybe it’s just like when Israel got bored a couple years ago and killed the leader of Hamas, then waited a few weeks for them to get a new leader, then killed him right away. At the rate we’re going we may soon have killed off a large enough portion of Not America that we’ll be just safe as houses.
“Is it really bin Laden on top and then 10 guys directly beneath him?”
No. That’s the plot line for Brokeback Mountain 2.
*chuckle* That’s a pretty good one. 🙂
Regarding bin Laden, the problem I have, beyond the fact that we have more civilian casualties than enemy casualties, is that according to this Administration, bin Laden “is no longer important”.
Oh, he’s important enough that we’ll try and take out half a dozen #5’s, and a few #3’s. But the most wanted man in the world? Nah, not worth the effort, apparently.
Craig wrote: “With our latest little unmanned drone bombing to try and get al-Zawahiri (and doing nothing more than killing civilians in the process), this time in Pakistan, we (our wonderfully stupid government) may be running the risk of encouraging the people to revolt against the Pakistani government.”
What other options are there? Leave Al Qaeda alone whenever they are given safe haven in remote regions by sympathetic fringe groups around the world?
If left alone to grow, raise funds and reorganize, how long do you think it would be before a directed WMD strike would occur against a western nation — including the U.S.?
Frankly, anytime one’s solution to a serious security issue is to do nothing — at least nothing substantial — for fear of angering some faction somewhere, I doubt the person has a sincere desire to keep me and my fellow citizens secure. Historically, such decision-making paralysis invariably ends up a disaster for the passive state. Face it — no matter what the U.S. does in any given situation, it will be criticized to some degree by someone. So why not take a shot at al-Zawahiri? Are we going to make him and his followers do something they wouldn’t have done anyway, if they were given free reign to do so? Keep in mind that in the days leading up to 9/11, we weren’t in Al Qaeda’s face every day. We were pretty much ignoring them and their Taliban pals. The result? Three thousand dead, a nation traumatized, and a robust economy suddenly paralyzed.
No, to do nothing, in my opinion, is far worse than lobbing a few Hellfire missiles at guys like al-Zawahiri and taking some international heat for it. And until someone comes up with a better idea, I don’t think we have any other recourse with the stakes as high as they are.
Well, the concern isn’t so much what al-Zawahiri will do, it’s what the people of Pakistan will do. We know that he will plot attacks against American interests. The concerns is that Mushareef (sp) is, at least on paper, our ally in the war on terrorism (or is it the global struggle against extremism? I forget what the official name is this week) and that Pakistan is a nuclear power with a longstanding border dispute with India, another nuclear nation. Should our actions provoke a civil war or even a coup attempt in Pakistan, the results could be ugly to say the least.
This is the reason that, even though we’re sure he’s still hiding somewhere in the mountains of Pakistan, we’ve been hesitant to go after him with guns blazing the way we did when he was in Afghanistan.
At least, we were hesitant until Bush needed to show that his intelligence operation was actually accomplishing something.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/17/politics/17spy.html
“In the anxious months after the Sept. 11 attacks, the National Security Agency began sending a steady stream of telephone numbers, e-mail addresses and names to the F.B.I. in search of terrorists. The stream soon became a flood, requiring hundreds of agents to check out thousands of tips a month.
“But virtually all of them, current and former officials say, led to dead ends or innocent Americans.”
Oops.
*Side note: Does anyone have an org chart for Al Qaeda, because it seems to me that we’ve killed 8 or 9 “Number 2 men” in Al Qaeda since 9/11? Is it really bin Laden on top and then 10 guys directly beneath him?
Well, if you kill the number 2 guy in an organization doesn’t someone else become the new number 2? If someone sho the vice president they should not be too surprised to discover, a few days later, that there is another one.
As for whether or not it’s cynical to see this as a distraction from Abramhov etc, one must ask just when would it NOT be considered a possible distraction? If it’s within 6 months of an election it’s said to be designed to influence the vote. If it’s within 3 months of a natural disaster it’s said to be designed to distract attention from that. Etc etc.
Of course, if Democrats actually think that the military guys who are making the claim are lying under the direction of Bush, they should investigate it. And if that is actually the case I expect that the “dead” men will shortly be seen smiling in an Al Qaeda video. So we will see shortly.
It’s also kind of interesting that right after this strike that some find of questionable value we get a tape supposedly from Bin Laden himself, offering a truce. Interesting.
Well, if you kill the number 2 guy in an organization doesn’t someone else become the new number 2? If someone sho the vice president they should not be too surprised to discover, a few days later, that there is another one.
And yet the number 1 guy is someone that Bush isn’t “all that concerned about” anymore.
It just seems odd that every time we capture or kill an Al Qaeda operative, he’s always the number 2 guy. It makes me wonder if they have any spear carriers in the organization at all.
As for whether or not it’s cynical to see this as a distraction from Abramhov etc, one must ask just when would it NOT be considered a possible distraction? If it’s within 6 months of an election it’s said to be designed to influence the vote. If it’s within 3 months of a natural disaster it’s said to be designed to distract attention from that. Etc etc.
Good point. Of course, that never stopped Clinton’s detractors, either.
In Bush’s case, though, we’ve already seen him use soldiers reading scripted statements and try to pass it off as a “spontaneous” dialogue, so it would not surprise me if the reports of killing several Al Qaeda operatives were somewhat exaggerated, just as the previous report that we got Al-Zawihiri was.
My point is that the timing does seem suspicious. For several months, we’ve heard virtually nothing from the Afghani-Pakistan board, but just as Bush needs a justification for his intelligence policy, we get this attack. Too bad the intelligence about Al-Zawihiri turned out to be a day late and dollar short.
It’s also kind of interesting that right after this strike that some find of questionable value we get a tape supposedly from Bin Laden himself, offering a truce. Interesting.
The tape also says that they’re preparing another attack and heightened security in the US is not the reason why they haven’t had another one on US soil since 9/11. So, I guess having grandmothers take their shoes off at the airport and spying in US citizens hasn’t been working.
What other options are there?
You’re joking, right?
Here’s a bloody intelligent thought: GET BIN LADEN.
Oh, but as I said, Bush is no longer concerned about him.
Yet he remains concerned about all the other supposedly threatening Al Qaeda guys. Go figure.
Maybe if we weren’t in Iraq, we would’ve been able to get bin Laden.
It certainly wasn’t about preventing another 9/11, or our focus would’ve been on bin Laden from the start, and it wouldn’t have left bin Laden until he was dead or captured.
The most wanted man on the planet, or a dictator who wasn’t a threat. Now, try and tell me what Bush’s priorities *really* were.
And now Bush could be on the verge of creating a civil war in yet *another* country, supposedly one of our allies.
Yeah, that’s looking great for his legacy.
Ok, let’s define influence. Name me one issue that Pat has changed in recent history. Dobson? Probably. Falwell, perhaps. Pat Robertson? Not anything that was not already championed by someone more mainstream in Christian circles.
I know there are a few who listen to Robertson, but to say he has any real influence is a joke. But if you want to waste your time worrying about him, go right ahead.
I’m sure that Robertson is on the White House speed dialer and I seem to recall reading an article that reported that the administration call Robertson for “advice” whenever a judgeship is going to be filled.
So, no, I don’t think worrying about him is a waste of time.
This is totally unrelated, but I just had to share this:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060118/ap_on_he_me/fat_kids_lawsuit
Poor Spongebob, the right thinks he’s making kids gay and now the left thinks he’s making kids fat. He just can’t catch a break.
Craig wrote: “Here’s a bloody intelligent thought: GET BIN LADEN.”
C’mon! That’s like saying “Find Jimmy Hoffa!”
Don’t you think every CIA spook from here to Zanzibar has had “get bin Laden” tatooed to his/her forehead since 9/11? Bin Laden knows the minute he shows his face, someone will put a missile through it. It’s not like he’s prancing about the countryside saying “Here I am — come get me!” Even when, under Clinton, we still had the element of surprise, we missed him with a missile strike. Easier said than done.
“It’s not like he’s prancing about the countryside saying “Here I am — come get me!”
True. That’s Bush’s job.
PAD
C’mon! That’s like saying “Find Jimmy Hoffa!”
Last I heard he was buried in the Meadowlands.
al-Zarqawi has been reported dead a couple of times
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/zarqawi_woodenleg.html
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/zarqawi_woodenleg.html
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/focus/story/0,6903,887439,00.html
Don’t you think every CIA spook from here to Zanzibar has had “get bin Laden” tatooed to his/her forehead since 9/11?
Given how many were pulled off the hunt for bin Laden to fabricate, I mean interpret, the “slam dunk” evidence about Saddam’s WMD program, I would say no.
Easier said than done.
Easier to dismiss out of hand than take seriously as well, apparently.
But then, that’s why we have over 100,000 troops in Iraq, and something like 20,000 in Afghanistan, with, according to one article I just found, major reductions in Afghanistan on the way.
Yeah, we really tried our hardest, didn’t we?
Keep in mind that Bin Laden’s probably dead. Several sources here:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=bin+laden+dead
Keep in mind that Bin Laden’s probably dead. Several sources here:
Wow. Well, if several political blogs and opinion pieces that come up on a Google search say he’s dead, then it must be true.
I notice most of the links that came up on the first Google page were 3-4 years old or referenced rumors that were that old. And yet tapes of his voice keep popping up. Oh yeah, they’re all faked, even the ones that the CIA had verified were real.
Gimme a freakin’ break. If there was credible that bin Laden has been dead since 2002, don’t you think Bush would be screaming it from the roof of the White House instead of shrugging off questions about him by saying he’s “not all that concerned.”
Let’s try googling “bin Laden not dead”
Ah, hear, apparently the head of the CIA at least thinks he’s alive:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/12/08/schuster.column/
“They don’t want us to find them and they’re going to great lengths to make sure we don’t find them. And I assure you we’re applying a lot of efforts to find out where they are. And I don’t want to get into the depth and the details, but we know a good deal more about bin Laden and Zarqawi and Zawahiri than we are able to say publicly,” Goss said.
Now, I realized that unlike Tenet, Goss hasn’t been awarded the Medal of Freedom for his “slam dunk” intelligence work, but I suspect that he’s more plugged into the reality of all the evidence then you or I are, Mike.
several political blogs and opinion pieces
BBC, CNN CBS, UK Mirror, National Review, Time Magazine. That’s just the first page.
don’t you think Bush would be screaming it from the roof of the White House
No, because Bin Laden is bush’s Emmanual Goldstein. As long as he can keep using this bogeyman, bush can justify doing whatever he wants.
Goss … but I suspect that he’s more plugged into the reality of all the evidence
Given that bush only appoints people who agree with &/or say what he wants, I wouldn’t give him too much credibility.
even the ones that the CIA had verified were real
The same CIA that verified bush’s WMD claims, the connection between 9/11 & Saddam, the connection between Saddam & Al-Queda. They’re not doing too good these days.
Let’s try googling “bin Laden not dead”
Just did. About a third of the page overlaps the previous search.
BBC, CNN CBS, UK Mirror, National Review, Time Magazine. That’s just the first page.
You do understand that all of those run opinion pieces? In fact, the National Review is all opinion.
We have a tape this week indicating that he is still alive. Until I see real proof that he’s dead, I am going to continue to assume that he is still sucking oxygen. And by proof, I mean physical evidence, not “according to Iranians I trust” as the guy from the National Review said.
A body would be nice.
The same CIA that verified bush’s WMD claims, the connection between 9/11 & Saddam, the connection between Saddam & Al-Queda. They’re not doing too good these days.
Actually, other then Tenet, a lot of CIA agents expressed doubt about the WMD’s, and Saddam’s connection to 9/11 and Al-Quaeda. They were just ignored by Ðìçk and Ðûmbášš.
Gee, looks like the CIA has already verified that it is OBL’s voice on the tape:
http://news.yahoo.com/fc/world/osama_bin_laden_and_al_qaida
Again, if people are going to claim he’s dead, the burden of proof is on them.
I know Bush and his apologists would very much like to say that OBL has died quietly so that they can focus on the Project for a New American Century, but I want to see the body. Or at least the dental records.
If Bin Laden were dead, and Bush knew it, yet continued to play the “get Bin Laden” game, he’d be too at risk for the embarrasment of being wrong. For that reason alone, I think he’s still alive, or at least there’s no evidence that he’s dead. Plus, Bin Laden is worth more to his own movement dead than he is alive.
The US’ best option is to quietly capture him, then keep him locked up somewhere for the next 20 years.
What “get bin laden” game? Bush has spent the past four years trying to equate Iraq and 9/11 in our minds. He doesn’t give a rat’s ášš whether OBL is dead or alive. He’s already as admitted as much. He would be very happy to have news that OBL has died quietly so that he can forget all about him.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060119/ts_nm/religion_catholic_evolution_dc
Uh-oh, God has been voted out of Rome! The Pope better prepare himself for the hurricanes and blood clots coming his way.
A commentary on NPR’s “All Things Considered” by Emory University professor Robert Franklin put Clinton’s and Nagin’s comments into the context of call and response rhetoric used in the Black church. This link will take you to the NPR website, and you should be able to listen to the commentary.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5162860
Rick
It’s not the Pope who has to worry…it’s the feminists, the atheists, the pagans and the gay people.
We have a tape this week indicating that he is still alive.
We have a tape purportedly with bin Laden’s voice, a voice the CIA now has “verified” to be bin Laden’s.
But then, we’re back to the fact it was “verified” that Saddam had WMD and so forth.
Besides, some of the stuff in this tape isn’t very bin Laden-like. A truce? Umm, okay…
But, just like “the good people of Dover”, the RCC has turned their back on God by saying that intelligent design isn’t science. The pope had better worry. God is still planning on smiting Dover. Pat said so.
Love this one from Comedy Central:
http://www.comedycentral.com/sitewide/media_player/play.jhtml?itemId=36400
It makes me wonder if they have any spear carriers in the organization at all.
One of the articles I read about the incident said that 2 or 3 bodyguards were killed as well. They didn’t get mentioned by name because who cares? Al Qaeda get killed all the time in Afghanistan, many of them probably the “spear carriers” you mention but it’s not deemed newsworthy.
The tape also says that they’re preparing another attack and heightened security in the US is not the reason why they haven’t had another one on US soil since 9/11. So, I guess having grandmothers take their shoes off at the airport and spying in US citizens hasn’t been working.
Well, two points– one, why should we take Bin Laden at his word? If he says that heightened security isn’t working I, for one, am inclined to keep it at least as heightened. Second, from reading a few far left blogs, the talking points that THEY are issuing is that this is obviously a fake, engineered by Bush to encourage people to pass the extension of the Patriot Act. I know, I don’t quite get the logic either but there it is.
re Jimmy Hoffa– “Our top story tonight: dedication ceremonies for the new Teamsters Union Headquarters building took place today in Detroit, where Union President Fitzsimmons was reported to have said that former President Jimmy Hoffa would always be a cornerstone in the organization.” (Chevy Chase)
Given how many were pulled off the hunt for bin Laden to fabricate, I mean interpret, the “slam dunk” evidence about Saddam’s WMD program, I would say no.
Ok. How many were pulled off? I mean, how many spooks do you need to fabricate evidence? Or was I not meant to take this seriously?
You gotta love the paranoia though–Some say that Bush KNOWS that Bin Laden is dead but keeps it quiet because he wants to keep us all scared. Others say that he knows he is alive but he is trying to downplay this…which would kind of contradict the keeping us scared part. Some say the tape proves Bush’s incompetence in chasing Bin Laden while others think Bush MADE the tape. Theresa Heinz Kerry thought that Bush might have already captured Bin Laden and was waiting until the right moment to make the announcement (must be a hëll of a poker player, since he’s still sitting on the big news).
Unless someone can come up with a unified field theory to tie it all together…One thing I can say with certainty–when and if Bin Laden turns up dead some of the same loud voices complaining now will claim that his death has not really made much of a difference. And actually, they’ll be right. Zarqawi would be a far more important kill but the justifiable desire for vengeance on our part would probably make a Bin Laden death more popular.
Others say that he knows he is alive but he is trying to downplay this…which would kind of contradict the keeping us scared part. Some say the tape proves Bush’s incompetence in chasing Bin Laden while others think Bush MADE the tape.
I’m looking at this as a combination: we could pretty much guess that bin Laden was alive, but since this Administration stated that bin Laden no longer mattered, well, another tape does prove Bush’s incompetence in the half-ášš attempt that was made to get him.
“True. That’s Bush’s job.”
Actually, it’s supposed to be the job of both the National Squirrel Agency and the Clueless Idiots Associated. With a degree in Arabic, I had the “pleasure” of working with both of them. The Liberal, I mean, Progressive, gubmint employees were too busy building their little empires to actually have a desire to protect this country.
The Liberal, I mean, Progressive, gubmint employees were too busy building their little empires to actually have a desire to protect this country.
Well, it’s about time somebody on the Right admitted that Bush is more liberal than conservative.
Second, from reading a few far left blogs, the talking points that THEY are issuing is that this is obviously a fake, engineered by Bush to encourage people to pass the extension of the Patriot Act. I know, I don’t quite get the logic either but there it is.
I give the far left blogs about as much credibility as I do the far right ones, so that means nothing to me. Tell you what. The CIA has weighed in as the tape being authentic. So has every major news media organization, including Fox News, so if someone can produce at least one credible source that the tape is fake, I’ll concede that it’s at least possible that bin Laden is dead.
You gotta love the paranoia though–Some say that Bush KNOWS that Bin Laden is dead but keeps it quiet because he wants to keep us all scared. Others say that he knows he is alive but he is trying to downplay this…which would kind of contradict the keeping us scared part.
Actually, that just proves that the left isn’t the monolithic block the right makes it out to be and vice versa.
One of the articles I read about the incident said that 2 or 3 bodyguards were killed as well. They didn’t get mentioned by name because who cares? Al Qaeda get killed all the time in Afghanistan, many of them probably the “spear carriers” you mention but it’s not deemed newsworthy.
Maybe, but that still doesn’t explain why we never seem to kill or capture any number 3 or 4 guys. It’s always number 2. Why is that?
Probably because after numbers 1 & 2 it gets a bit harder to place them. Take the USA for example. The president and VP make an easy #1 and #2 but then it gets tougher. What number would a Condi Rice or Donald Rumsfeld be?
At any rate, wouldn’t the very subject of our discussion, the guys taken out this time, be pretty much a #3 or #4? Bin Laden is #1, the guy they tried to kill was #2. Abu Khabab al-Masri had something like a 5 million dollar bounty on his head so he was no small potato.
What number would a Condi Rice or Donald Rumsfeld be?
So, you’re comparing the officials of a constitutional republic with a terrorist organization?
OOOOOKay.
At any rate, wouldn’t the very subject of our discussion, the guys taken out this time, be pretty much a #3 or #4?
Possibly. But of course, they weren’t the primary target that we were going for. At best, they’re consolation prizes.
So, you’re comparing the officials of a constitutional republic with a terrorist organization?
Considering the depths this Administration has gone to to allow themselves to be easily compared to a terrorist organization, it’s not much of a stretch at all.
I’m just surprised that one of this administration’s strongest defenders would make that comparison.
Besides, some of the stuff in this tape isn’t very bin Laden-like. A truce? Umm, okay…
Not really. He offered a truce to Europeans in his 2004 tape as well.
Of course, I’m sure that one was faked, too, even though it was certified by the European intelligence agencies as well as the CIA.
I don’t know which is weaker-evading the point or calling me one of the administration’s strongest defenders! I guess if you aren’t blindly rabid you’re automatically a supporter. Oh well. If I’m one of the adminstrations biggest supporters, God help them.
At any rate, back to the, ahem, point. You asked why we never get the #4 or #5 guy. I pointed out that maybe we did but it is hard to say who the number 4 or 5 guy is and, as an example of this difficulty, pointed out that in our own government it would be difficult to prioritize people (one could just go down the list of who would become president in what order but I don’t think that would be very useful–if one wanted to strike at the USA there are a lot of people who would be higher on the list than the secretary of transportation even if they aren’t in the officail line of succession).
Anyway, that was my point. Thought it was obvious but OOOOOKay.
I don’t know which is weaker-evading the point or calling me one of the administration’s strongest defenders!
Oh, please. I have yet to see you not defend the position of the Bush administration here when it comes to the war or foreign policy.
As for prioritizing people by the line of succession, that is a perfectly logical way to do it, because it goes: president, vice president, speaker, president pro tempore, and then through the cabinet officials, making the Sec. of Transportation far below #4 or #5. So, I don’t see how hard it is to do.
But, you made the analogy between our government and Al Qaeda, so don’t get upset when someone questions that.
Or, to quote you: “Waa waa waa.”
Hey, whatever. It’s not like I’m claiming I lost all my respect for you. Heh.
But at least you’ve amended your overstatement to just the war and foreign policy. Lurching ever so slowly toward reality but a step nonetheless.