Politics: Where we struggle to kneel in the muck.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
And I will reiterate for the 7th time - by "this" standard, Bush passed the test.

You're down to 'Hussein was a bad man.' No WMD. No ties to Al Qaeda. No threat to his neighbors. But Bush won't really acknowledge any of this. You can't pass this test if you can't acknowledge the truth.

I will say that I have been pleasantly surprised by the number of Republicans who have been willing to say in the heat of an election year that they cannot vote for Bush again because he's fucking things up so much.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
They can debate it with the folks who've died recently.

The death/maiming toll in Iraq under the coalition is still less than under SH. However, now US soldiers are in the death toll. That is not a good thing, but I believe that there would be more attacks on US soil if it weren't for our invasion of Iraq.

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
The test of these policies is not just the body count. It's also whether we can bring stability to the region.

Agreed. My money is on liberty. The human soul craves it. I think liberty and democracy and a viable middle class will win out in the end. I just hope I am alive to see it.

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Israel's not going to be doing much to protect the oil we rely on.

The average Joe driving around in his SUV will be willing to send US soldiers to die to defend our access to oil rather than give up their gas guzzlers. That is morally unconsciencable (sp?). But we can rely on Israel to do things the US public won't support, like bombing Iraq's nuclear facilities. I don't think you can get the US public to support an attack on Iran's nuclear plants. Israel will do it, though. Long live Israel.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
You're down to 'Hussein was a bad man.' No WMD. No ties to Al Qaeda. No threat to his neighbors. But Bush won't really acknowledge any of this. You can't pass this test if you can't acknowledge the truth.

I will say that I have been pleasantly surprised by the number of Republicans who have been willing to say in the heat of an election year that they cannot vote for Bush again because he's fucking things up so much.

Ty, when they say that, what they really mean is "we now have some pretty cool airbases to hit Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Turkey (if they start acting too Slami) without the need to ask for pesky flyover rights." I don't know why they don't come right out and say it. And I don't see how this makes much difference if we can't properly maintain the equipment we have over there.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I will say that I have been pleasantly surprised by the number of Republicans who have been willing to say in the heat of an election year that they cannot vote for Bush again because he's fucking things up so much.

Therein lies the main reason I am a Rep. Reps stand on principle and will abandon a candidate if they feel he or she isn't acting on principle or is not the right person for the job. Principle means more than partisanship to most Reps that I know. I am proud to stand with them.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Not Me
Therein lies the main reason I am a Rep. Reps stand on principle and will abandon a candidate if they feel he or she isn't acting on principle or is not the right person for the job. Principle means more than partisanship to most Reps that I know. I am proud to stand with them.

FWIW, Kerry is getting a smaller percentage of the votes of Democrats than Bush is getting from Republicans, at least according to the last numbers I saw.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
I don't know why they don't come right out and say it.

I'd like to see that religious abortion/terrorist breeding ground known as Saudi Arabia blown right of the face of the fucking earth.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Not Me
The death/maiming toll in Iraq under the coalition is still less than under SH. However, now US soldiers are in the death toll. That is not a good thing, but I believe that there would be more attacks on US soil if it weren't for our invasion of Iraq.

Except for 2001, the record isn't so bad.

Agreed. My money is on liberty. The human soul craves it. I think liberty and democracy and a viable middle class will win out in the end. I just hope I am alive to see it.

I hope to see it too, but this is simply wishful thinking. Events do not indicate that Iraq will be a thriving democracy with a robust middle class any time soon. I don't know how old you are, but I'm inclined to go with the over. Perhaps Less can help us with the line.

The average Joe driving around in his SUV will be willing to send US soldiers to die to defend our access to oil rather than give up their gas guzzlers. That is morally unconsciencable (sp?).

Then why are the Rs giving them tax breaks to own them?

But we can rely on Israel to do things the US public won't support, like bombing Iraq's nuclear facilities. I don't think you can get the US public to support an attack on Iran's nuclear plants. Israel will do it, though. Long live Israel.

I'll admit that I kind of like Israel doing ballsy stuff like this. Better them than us. Perhaps "O'Kerrystein" can get them to do something about Iran?

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
FWIW, Kerry is getting a smaller percentage of the votes of Democrats than Bush is getting from Republicans, at least according to the last numbers I saw.

Sure, if by Kerrey voter you mean those who aren't journalists and who aren't politically active in a campaign.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by Not Me
I'd like to see that religious abortion/terrorist breeding ground known as Saudi Arabia blown right of the face of the fucking earth.

While not intimately familiar with the tenets of Wahhabiism, I actually don't think that they're so big on abortion. FWIW.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Then why are the Rs giving them tax breaks to own them?

This is wrong and should be stopped immediately.

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
I'll admit that I kind of like Israel doing ballsy stuff like this. Better them than us. Perhaps "O'Kerrystein" can get them to do something about Iran?

If only. American Jews by and large are Dems and, although they support Israel in general, will self-flagellate when Israel does ballsy stuff. Time for more American Jews to become Reps.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Gattigap
While not intimately familiar with the tenets of Wahhabiism, I actually don't think that they're so big on abortion. FWIW.

SA is an abortion in a metaphorical sense, a pox on this Earth if you will.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Not Me
Therein lies the main reason I am a Rep. Reps stand on principle and will abandon a candidate if they feel he or she isn't acting on principle or is not the right person for the job. Principle means more than partisanship to most Reps that I know. I am proud to stand with them.

I'm no lexicol . . . lexicogra . . . word guy (Atticus?), but I'm pretty sure "Executive" (the branch of gov't that the president heads up, for club) is derived from the same word as "execution." Whatever W's professes while being annointed with Ashcroft's oil, we don't just elect a bundle of prinicples. We also need to be concerned about the ability to execute the policies derived from these prinicples. This administration has proven its inability to make its decisions produce desired results. Even if you agree with his prinicples, couldn't the execution have been better?

And couldn't you have found someone more principled than W?

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
I'm no lexicol . . . lexicogra . . . word guy (Atticus?),

You don't need AG for this one; you need a patent attorney. Word is lexicographer and every patentee is entitled to be his own lexicographer. Without said concept, us patent attorneys wouldn't be able to make a living.

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
but I'm pretty sure "Executive" (the branch of gov't that the president heads up, for club) is derived from the same word as "execution." Whatever W's professes while being annointed with Ashcroft's oil, we don't just elect a bundle of prinicples. We also need to be concerned about the ability to execute the policies derived from these prinicples. This administration has proven its inability to make its decisions produce desired results. Even if you agree with his prinicples, couldn't the execution have been better?

are you sleep walking again?

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
And couldn't you have found someone more principled than W?

Well, as far as sticking to his principles, few are better than W. However, my choice was McCain. I lost.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Not Me
are you sleep walking again?

Possibly. Are those implants?

Well, as far as sticking to his principles, few are better than W. However, my choice was McCain. I lost.

W said his favorite political philosopher is Jesus Christ. Please explain how the actions of this administration (both in governing and in campaigning) have been consistent with the teachings of Christ. "Being crucified for our sins and being president are both a lot of hard work" is not an acceptable answer.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Possibly. Are those implants?

No, that was my ass, but it's all good.

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
W said his favorite political philosopher is Jesus Christ. Please explain how the actions of this administration (both in governing and in campaigning) have been consistent with the teachings of Christ. "Being crucified for our sins and being president are both a lot of hard work" is not an acceptable answer.

I like you better when you are drunk.

Oh, and in case you were wondering what I think, I think Jesus was a wimp.