Politics As Usual

[the Spartan]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
How long do flags stay at half-mast for a dead president?

Literally or figuratively? and if the latter, are you confirming the rumour that Hank has oft raised on IM, that you actually have a flagpole to run something up. And down. And up. And down.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by the Spartan
Literally or figuratively? and if the latter, are you confirming the rumour that Hank has oft raised on IM, that you actually have a flagpole to run something up. And down. And up. And down.

Literally, though I am skinny as a flagpole.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Literally, though I am skinny as a flagpole.

I thought the directive was 30 days, so it should be regular today. It is in DC, which usually has it right.

I don't think there's a governing standard. I doubt Reagan would have gotten 30 days if Clinton were president.

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
I don't think the answer to the following question will depend on your political viewpoints. What would you do to punish her, if anything, for Abu Ghraib and, now more directly, for her conversation with the BBC (whether her information is correct or not)?

(a) For Abu Ghraib -- I would ensure that she actually was formally "relieved of command", with an appropriate letter in her file. I'm not at all sure that was ever done. It seems to me that this is the sort of "career-ender" typically administered to senior officers who permit lax disciplinary environments with lousy unit cohesion and poor mission accomplishment.

It also seems that the situation is far too confusing to justify more than that -- even aside from the public embarassment the government would suffer from the evidence that would emerge at a full court-martial. If I were Karpinski, I'd probably accept the GOMOR and retire, but would reject any attempt at more and insist on a full court-martial.

(b) For the conversation with the BBC -- unknown. Did she violate any order against speaking to the media? Did she reveal anything secret? If not -- there is nothing to be done about it. Her statement probably shows appallingly poor judgment, but what else can you do to her, since we're already firing her?

S_A_M

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
To put it in terms you might understand, Dems can't be trusted with power during a period like the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Everyone might think it was okay you were in charge during the Hobbit, but you all were ignoring gathering dark forces as it turned out. See?

This from a staunch supporter of President Boromir.

S_A_M

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by the Spartan
Literally or figuratively? and if the latter, are you confirming the rumour that Hank has oft raised on IM, that you actually have a flagpole to run something up. And down. And up. And down.

As usual, Penske bends the truth here. And as usual, I just had Fringe's back. I said I read for each 25 pounds of overweight a penis disappears 1". so unless Fringe's was really well-hung, I theorized, you wouldn't see anything. How Penske got to what he says I said is beyond me. Maybe he confuses me with Picasso?

[Shape Shifter]

I really don't see what Gephardt brings to the table.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0706041post1.html

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
I really don't see what Gephardt brings to the table.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0706041post1.html

Another reason why the Post just doesn't matter.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by sgtclub
How do you square the fact that Clinton significantly reduced the size of the military (i.e., number of soldiers), while still harping that we need more troops to do the job right?

I think that's called starving the beast. W's doing it right now with the Fed Govt. The fastest theoretical way to way to maximum productivity with minimal expenditures is to decrease resources while increasing productivity demands (yes, I know - "Duh").

These debates are great examples of why lawyers armed with statistics are incredibly annoying. Its like watching mini-versions of Farenheit over and over, but not 1/10 as entertaining. Its as though some people arguing think that their figures are unassailable. You could spin every figure in "9/11" in reverse and come out with a glowing picture of Bush. Its all context and the angle from which you read the numbers. If you muct cite numbers, its probably a good thing to do it in a tongue-in-cheek fashion, recognizing how quickly you'll be fileted with the very same information.

Don't get too sanctimonious - that blog article might seem to be proof in your pretty little mind, but its all clay.

* But if you want to see masterful manipulation of that clay, please check out "9/11". It is revietting and I'm pretty sure it will change a lot of red state votes. Call Moore what you will, but he makes one hell of an engaging film.

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
* But if you want to see masterful manipulation of that clay, please check out "9/11". It is revietting and I'm pretty sure it will change a lot of red state votes. Call Moore what you will, but he makes one hell of an engaging film.

It's a great piece of work and it will be more effective than I would have thought before seeing it. [anecdotal evidence]Mrs. Weed, who is generally uninterested in politics and has a soft spot for Ronnie Regan for personal reasons, wants to see the film again to catch the information she missed due to loudtalkers sitting next to us. [/anecdotal evidence]

ETA: Why anyone would believe a word they read in the New York Post is utterly beyond me. In fact, why anyone buys it is beyond me -- at least the UK equivalent rags have topless pictures in them.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
I thought the directive was 30 days, so it should be regular today. It is in DC, which usually has it right.

I don't think there's a governing standard. I doubt Reagan would have gotten 30 days if Clinton were president.

• The flag shall be flown at half-staff thirty days from the death of the President or a former President; ten days from the death of the Vice President, the Chief Justice or a retired Chief Justice of the United States, or the Speaker of the House of Representatives; from the day of death until interment of an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, a Secretary of an executive or military department, a former Vice President, or the Governor of a State, territory, or possession; and on the day of death and the following day for a Member of Congress.

36 U.S.C. s 10

more

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by ironweed
It's a great piece of work and it will be more effective than I would have thought before seeing it. [anecdotal evidence]Mrs. Weed, who is generally uninterested in politics and has a soft spot for Ronnie Regan for personal reasons, wants to see the film again to catch the information she missed due to loudtalkers sitting next to us. [/anecdotal evidence]

ETA: Why anyone would believe a word they read in the New York Post is utterly beyond me. In fact, why anyone buys it is beyond me -- at least the UK equivalent rags have topless pictures in them.

1 Moore's docu-drama is great.
2 Why would anyone believe the post.
C'mon- you did these 2 togehter as a joke right?

Anyway, i give you Michael moore 9/12/01.

http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/me...ate=2001-09-12

Bush is to blame for 9/11, because of Kyoto, anyway its our fault. this is Mike for real, laid bare. not the mike trying to influence your vote.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by ironweed
It's a great piece of work and it will be more effective than I would have thought before seeing it. [anecdotal evidence]Mrs. Weed, who is generally uninterested in politics and has a soft spot for Ronnie Regan for personal reasons, wants to see the film again to catch the information she missed due to loudtalkers sitting next to us. [/anecdotal evidence]

I expected to see a whining lefty screed polluted with class warfare soundbites. Moore wisely aimed this pic at the red states and made the very compelling point "Look, we send the poor to die routinely, and that's accepted, so at a minimum, shouldn't we at least not lie to them about why they're going?"
If you've no appreciation of the complexities of the situation, that sort of simplistic point sticks with you. If you think in terms of black and white right and wrong - like Bush's "core" allegedly does - there's no rebuttal.

I don't believe Moore any further than I could throw him, but I have to admit being greatly pleased to see one liar get his ass handed to him by another. Bush and his people have played fast and loose with facts, figures, truth, you name it... and they're pretty fucking miffed that this Moore cat has mastered their voice, and their technique, and turned it on them. All Moore has done is present a loose conglomrartion of possibly connected facts which show that Bush and his people might be the most criminally malevolent lot since Nixon. Just like Bush and his people have done to their opponents, and Iraq, since they've been in office.

Of course, what Moore fails to recognize is that we're all indictable for the invasion of Iraq. If we were too stupid to spot the lies, shame on our lack of interest and attention spans. If we went along with Bush, like I did, thinking "Yeh, he's lying, but we'll take the war over there and the Wolfowitz Doctrine will be a smashing success" we were pretty damn arrogant and deserve the egg on our faces. But laying the lion's share of the blame on the audience, where it belongs, probably wouldn't have flown too well with Bob and Harvey.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Bush and his people might be the most criminally malevolent lot since Nixon.

I think the Reagan administration probably exceeded Nixon's in criminality, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt while were still half-masting. He was witty and well dressed. I will miss him.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
I think the Reagan administration probably exceeded Nixon's in criminality, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt while were still half-masting. He was witty and well dressed. I will miss him.

STP, Shifty, STP. The flags are back up, so we're free to state the obvious -- Reagan and his cronies should have been hanged for treason for selling weapons to one of the most committed enemies the US has ever had.