Politics: A new beginning

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
I was betting that the rabidly GOP people here would jump all over Gore (or whoever) for (a) posing with a turkey that was just for show, (b) saying that there had been some conversation with a BA pilot and/or (c) giving reporters incorrect information for security purposes.

Not exactly right. The GOP would be jumping on him all right, but only because he claimed to have been in Iraq when in reality he was down in his basement, creating the internet, writing the sequal to Love Story, and making out with Tipper.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by sgtclub
OK, I think I understand it conceptually, but from what the article says, the adminstration did not bring the turkey with them and the military say it is standard issue at all holiday meals. So the turkey is laying there and they say, "hey Mr. President, why don't you pose with the turkey." This should be gone by tomorrow.

Yes, this one qualifies as sniping, not substance. Washington Post must have needed some filler. The substantive criticism is that Bush has been avoiding bringing attention to the troops and to casualties whenever possible, but better late than not-at-all and he seems to now be starting to hear this criticism.

Now, my bet is that this little "centerpiece" was later dissected by the officers, while the troops got their steam-tray prepackaged turkey, but at least it's better than C-rations and that's the military for you.

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
The British Airways thing is just weird. Maybe it wasn't really BA, maybe it was some Iraqi American-haters pretending to be BA to throw off the President's security people.

The most interesting theory that I've heard so far - which is nothing more than a theory, it can't be proved - is that he was warned ahead of time by the Saudis. Now, who knows what the real situation is?

S_A_M

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by bilmore
Maybe someone already covered this, but there is an international tradition of sorts dealing with the repudiation of "odious debt". Money that is loaned to an illegitimate leader of a country and used for his own aggrandizement or outright enrichment, with the knowledge of the lender, does not become a claim upon the people, for whom the loan provided no benefit. It allows people to escape such debt, and also serves to make said lenders a bit more careful about sending money to Idi Amin types.

Yes, indeed. There has been some talk about Iraq possibly repudiating much of its current debt as "odious". (I keep thinking of the number $54 billion. Which is a lot for a medium-sized country.) The big problem there is who'd they be pissing off. Much of the Iraqi debt is to Russia (who needs the money) and France/Germany. These are countries that we'd like to have cooperate with us in the reconstruction, and the debt issues (and the guarantees of repayment they seek -- have been part of the hold-up.

S_A_M

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Not exactly right. The GOP would be jumping on him all right, but only because he claimed to have been in Iraq when in reality he was down in his basement, creating the internet, writing the sequal to Love Story, and making out with Tipper.

It would be more accurate to say that he was in Vietnam when GWB was snorting coke, driving drunk and/or hiding out in the Texas Air National Guard.

S_A_M

[Hank Chinaski]

c
l
u
b

d
o
n
't

l
o
o
k
!
!
!



guys............................................xmas gift for Club:

http://www.conservativebookservice.c...?prod_cd=c6230

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
It would be more accurate to say that he was in Vietnam

on camera safari!

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I'll call bullshit alright, on this. The guy stood up to a good deal of the world, and convinced the US public that we should invade Iraq. You can say he lied, you can say he's dumb, you can say he's far too much a fundamentalist to be left with his finger on the button. It is not, however, credible to say he governs by photo op.

Jesus fucking Christ almighty, I cannot believe that a discussion about some PHOTO OPS had "stood up to the world" blah blah dragged into it. You people are unbelievable.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Not exactly right. The GOP would be jumping on him all right, but only because he claimed to have been in Iraq when in reality he was down in his basement, creating the internet, writing the sequal to Love Story, and making out with Tipper.

Jesus fucking Christ almighty redux.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
It would be more accurate to say that he was in Vietnam when GWB was snorting coke, driving drunk and/or hiding out in the Texas Air National Guard.

S_A_M

I don't know what comes after "redux." "Revolutions"?

[notcasesensitive]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Jesus fucking Christ almighty, I cannot believe that a discussion about some PHOTO OPS had "stood up to the world" blah blah dragged into it. You people are unbelievable.

Strong words coming from a sleeping kitty. I guess that "I'll be nice now" mantra couldn't last forever.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by notcasesensitive
Strong words coming from a sleeping kitty. I guess that "I'll be nice now" mantra couldn't last forever.

The little baby sleepy kitty was (a) woken before it wanted to be, and cranky; or (b) feeling cornered, and screaming. You choose.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
The little baby sleepy kitty was (a) woken before it wanted to be, and cranky; or (b) cornered and screaming. You choose.

let's hope (a), and you were still half asleep. Atticus takes a story that the turkey Bush is holding STANDING NEXT TO ACTUAL SOLDIERS, wasn't really served to those soldiers, and extrapolates that Bush governs by photo op. I cite one example of governing not by photo op. You see me as unbelievable? poor reading comprehension, sloppy grammar and haphazard thought articulation are my calling cards not your's baby.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
let's hope (a), and you were still half asleep. Atticus takes a story that the turkey Bush is holding STANDING NEXT TO ACTUAL SOLDIERS, wasn't really served to those soldiers, and extrapolates that Bush governs by photo op. I cite one example of governing not by photo op. You see me as unbelievable? poor reading comprehension, sloppy grammar and thought articulation are my calling cards not your's baby.

Fuck off. I already told Atticus he was nuts last night.

All of this just proves that Laura Bush is a whore, and Ann Coulter blows Scalia during "oral" (heh, heh, she has quite a sense of humor, that Ann!) arguments (and takes it up the ass from him while he reviews briefs). He's such a hypocrite.

OK, now, see how that was a ridiculous retort?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sgtclub
OK, I think I understand it conceptually, but from what the article says, the adminstration did not bring the turkey with them and the military say it is standard issue at all holiday meals.

And the military designed that big "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED" banner and the White House had nothing to do with it.

This should be gone by tomorrow.

Yes.

The story has no legs and little inherent interest, except as a barometer of the press's willingness to continue to be used to transmit the Bush campaign's, er, Administration's stories. The journalists like to be the ones to tell the stories, so if you don't let them think that they're coming up with it themselves, and distract them with Air Force One gimme caps and wars and stuff, they get surly and start writing stories about the man behind the curtain.