Democrats hard at work blowing the 08 election Part II

I find that a very funny comment from you seeing as how you are from Britain, and you ended up in Iraq with Bush as well.....:lol:
We had 2 million in the streets protesting against it and a huge media campaign against it.

That's one example of their liberality. You might not see them as liberal, because you're a liberal European - but by American standards, the "mainstream media" is definitely leftist.
The world is not judged by American standards, it's judged by world standards. By world standards the media as a whole is very right-wing. You talk as if European views don't matter because there not American. It also looks like you describe everything which isn't Fox as Liberal. You probably like to ignore all the localised conservative media, for example.
 
Oh my god! Soldiers are dieing in combat? This is horrible.

You know those soldiers are people, dont you? And that those that theyre killing are people too, right? So what exactly are you talking about, besides nonsense?
 
Come on bozo. The rhetoric is just too much. You blatently mislead in several areas. The USA, to include both Dems and Republicans have had a policy of regime change for Iraq for the last 15 years or more. This wasnt the republicans 'ramming' this down anyones throats, congress voted and a friggin ton of republicans and democrats alike votes "YES LETS DO THIS". The entire country, all sides, were pretty much all on board with it.

We were already over there once, unless we do it right this time, we will be over there again within a decade. May as well do it right this time, regardless of how painful it is.

Well, didn't Gore vote against the war? (He seemed to have grown testicles after he lost the election). I know that is not "the Democrats", but it isn't difficult to see that this mess would not have happened under Gore.
 
comradedavo said:
The media is big buisness who support the Republicans because Republcicans give them tax cutsa

Yeah,, its all a big conspriacy....the republicans have bought off all the media with their tax cuts!

Excuse me....but saying something like that is just beyond looney. I mean really, it just smacks of 'Loose Change' type of thinking....
 
Well, didn't Gore vote against the war? (He seemed to have grown testicles after he lost the election).

Errr, Gore wasnt in office when the vote was taken, therefore he didnt get a vote. He was off in the ant-artic finding himself.....and trying to find a way to make more money....

I know that is not "the Democrats", but it isn't difficult to see that this mess would not have happened under Gore.

Considering the fact that Gores own comments from the Clinton administration would disagree with you, and that the Clinton administration had a policy of regime change in Iraq I dont think you can gurantee that in any way, shape or form. We very well could have found Iraq to be Gores as Bosnia was Clintons.
 
A bit OT: has anyone heard the new NIN album?

Capital G

I pushed a button and elected him to office and a
he pushed a button and it dropped a bomb
you pushed a button and could watch it on the television
those mother******* didn't last too long ha ha
I'm sick of hearing bout the haves and the have nots
have some personal accountability
the biggest problem with the way that we've been doing things is
the more we let you have the less that I'll be keeping for me

well I used to stand for something
now I'm on my hands and knees
traded in my god for this one
he sings his name with a capital G

don't give a **** about the temperature in Guatemala
don't really see what all the fuss is about
ain't gonna worry bout no future generations and a
I'm sure somebody's gonna figure it out
don't try to tell me how some power can corrupt a person
you haven't had enough to know what it's like
you're only angry cause you wish you were in my position
now nod your head because you know that I'm right - all right!

well I used to stand for something
but forgot what that could be
there's a lot of me inside you
maybe you're afraid to see

well I used to stand for something
now I'm on my hands and knees
traded in my god for this one
he signs his name with a capital G
 
Yeah,, its all a big conspriacy....the republicans have bought off all the media with their tax cuts!

Excuse me....but saying something like that is just beyond looney. I mean really, it just smacks of 'Loose Change' type of thinking....
I ddin't say it was a conspiracy at all. Plus I actually removed that quote when I edited my post.

And what I was reffering to is that big media people act in self intrest. Whats loony about saying rich Americans act ins elf intrest? I thought self intrest was what American style capitalism was all about.
 
A bit OT: has anyone heard the new NIN album?

Capital G

I pushed a button and elected him to office and a
he pushed a button and it dropped a bomb
you pushed a button and could watch it on the television
those mother******* didn't last too long ha ha
I'm sick of hearing bout the haves and the have nots
have some personal accountability
the biggest problem with the way that we've been doing things is
the more we let you have the less that I'll be keeping for me

well I used to stand for something
now I'm on my hands and knees
traded in my god for this one
he sings his name with a capital G

don't give a **** about the temperature in Guatemala
don't really see what all the fuss is about
ain't gonna worry bout no future generations and a
I'm sure somebody's gonna figure it out
don't try to tell me how some power can corrupt a person
you haven't had enough to know what it's like
you're only angry cause you wish you were in my position
now nod your head because you know that I'm right - all right!

well I used to stand for something
but forgot what that could be
there's a lot of me inside you
maybe you're afraid to see

well I used to stand for something
now I'm on my hands and knees
traded in my god for this one
he signs his name with a capital G
Yup, been in my CD player alot since day of release:goodjob:
 
Considering the fact that Gores own comments from the Clinton administration would disagree with you, and that the Clinton administration had a policy of regime change in Iraq I dont think you can gurantee that in any way, shape or form. We very well could have found Iraq to be Gores as Bosnia was Clintons.

Easy there, a "policy of regime change" doesn't mean "war at the first excuse".

You are right, obviously, that he didn't vote on it; however, I do remember him opposing it at the time, which suggest to me he wouldn't have made the same mistake (yes, it was a huge bloody mistake).
 
We very well could have found Iraq to be Gores as Bosnia was Clintons.
As zero casualty war with Republicans saying things such as this:

"You can support the troops but not the president."
--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)
"Well, I just think it's a bad idea. What's going to happen is they're going to be over there for 10, 15, maybe 20 years."
--Joe Scarborough (R-FL)
"Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?"
--Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99
"[The] President . . . is once again releasing American military might on a foreign country with an ill-defined objective and no exit strategy. He has yet to tell the Congress how much this operation will cost. And he has not informed our nation's armed forces about how long they will be away from home. These strikes do not make for a sound foreign policy."
--Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA)
"American foreign policy is now one huge big mystery. Simply put, the administration is trying to lead the world with a feel-good foreign policy."
--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)
"If we are going to commit American troops, we must be certain they have a clear mission, an achievable goal and an exit strategy."
--Karen Hughes, speaking on behalf of George W Bush
"I had doubts about the bombing campaign from the beginning . . I didn't think we had done enough in the diplomatic area."
--Senator Trent Lott (R-MS)
"I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our over-extended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today"
--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)
"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is."
--Governor George W. Bush (R-TX)
 
Easy there, a "policy of regime change" doesn't mean "war at the first excuse".

You are right, obviously, that he didn't vote on it; however, I do remember him opposing it at the time, which suggest to me he wouldn't have made the same mistake (yes, it was a huge bloody mistake).

Errr. After 14 years of Iraq breaking UN resolution, firing on our jets, I hardly think ANYONE could claim this was a 'war at the first excuse' with a straight face and actually mean it.:rolleyes:

I dont recall him saying anything on it one way or the other at the time of the congressional vote. He may have voted no, as a mere handfull of democrats did, or he may have voted with the majority of democrats and voted for the war.

But I would say its probably likely Gore would oppose anything Bush would endorse just as a matter of policy since he lost the election to the man.

Bottom line, I dont think I can agree with any allegation that we wouldnt be in Iraq if Gore had been elected. Perhaps Gore would have handled it like Carter handled Iran back in the 70s and really screwed things up. Who knows? Neither you nor I have a crystal ball that would indicate it either way.
 
As zero casualty war with Republicans saying things such as this:

"You can support the troops but not the president."

/snip

For Gods sake dont make me start quoting all the crap the Dems said about Iraq to counter your point. Thats just a game neither of us is going to win as the politicos give us more than enough ammo to fling at each other.
 
9/11 was the excuse in my opinion.

And are you implying GWB didn't screw up Iraq?

And Bosnia is a country that had less than a 10th the population of Iraq, and way less than a 10th the territory; 60,000 troops were sent in. Wouldn't that suggest a force size for Iraq of at least 600,000 troops to keep security? Well, maybe Dems just know how to handle wars better than Republicans.
 
1st, if they weren't as liberal in the past, then how did they become more liberal in the face of free market forces?

Second, there have always been multiple outlets for news in every broadcasting medium, so free market forces should have always been at work to prevent a liberal imbalance.

Third, Fox still trails some of your so-called liberal brioadcasters by many multiples despite the fact that cable is virtually universal these days, so if they are the only conservative on the block, they should be THE LEADER by many multiples instead of trailing 3 other networks by many multiples.

Fourth, if the free market pretty much always works, then it was working when the media somehow became liberal.
The free market is hardly the only social force there is. :rolleyes:

The world is not judged by American standards, it's judged by world standards. By world standards the media as a whole is very right-wing. You talk as if European views don't matter because there not American. It also looks like you describe everything which isn't Fox as Liberal. You probably like to ignore all the localised conservative media, for example.
I'm an American talking about the American media. I'm going to use American standards. I'm sorry if you have to remember that our definitions aren't always the same as yours. I hope that isn't an undue burden upon your brain.
 
9/11 was the excuse in my opinion.

And are you implying GWB didn't screw up Iraq?

Actually, I am going to say no, GWB didnt screw it up....if anyone can claim that lable it would most likely be Rumsfeld. As a soldier, I have stated from the beginning that I never agreed with the troop levels over there, nor how much of the after-major-combat-ops stuff decided. I dont think Rummy listened enough to his top commanders and made a decision early to try and win this one on the cheap. A bad mistake.

Now, is it a mistake we can overcome? Is it a mistake that we SHOULD overcome? The answer to both I think is yes. But thats not good for the dems any way you slice it. Thus their call for withdraw and saying that the war is lost.

And Bosnia is a country that had less than a 10th the population of Iraq, and way less than a 10th the territory; 60,000 troops were sent in. Wouldn't that suggest a force size for Iraq of at least 600,000 troops to keep security? Well, maybe Dems just know how to handle wars better than Republicans.

Or maybe they had someone a little less egotistical than Rummy running the show. But again, there is nothing to be gained from complaining about it. It is what it is. Merely pointing at the turd on the floor does nothing to clean it up. Now either we fix it, or embrace defeat and pull out.
 
To be fair, I can be witness to the fact that I do remember (unlike Gonzo, some of us can remember things) that you were critical of troop levels for as long as I have seen you posting.

Rumsfeld was largely responsible for the plan, but George W. Bush could have vetoed it and listened to other people (Shinseki for one) instead. The president is responsible for the final decisions regarding war, and a good president would have known who to listen to. What if Kennedy had taken General Le May's advice about launching an air strike against Cuba? There are responsibilities that come with being "The Decider".
 
The Bushbash is still continuing! :D

Actually, I am going to say no, GWB didnt screw it up....if anyone can claim that lable it would most likely be Rumsfeld.
George Bush is THE Commander in Chief, is he not?

Thus their call for withdraw and saying that the war is lost.
The War has been lost since the rise of the insurgency.

Now either we fix it, or embrace defeat and pull out.
Nothing wrong with defeat and pulling out. Saves us on military bills and eliminating the war wearyness in this country. (You do know that this War is unpopular. Dont you?)
 
George Bush is THE Commander in Chief, is he not?

Yes, he is and he has admitted that mistakes have been made.

The War has been lost since the rise of the insurgency.

Sigh. Again, apparently another person who thinks we cannot win wars unless there is no opposition what-so-ever. You dont lose a war simply because there are insurgents, CG.

Nothing wrong with defeat and pulling out.

Errr, yeah...there is. As you are so fond of using the Vietnam war as an example, what happened there after we pulled out? Honest answer please.

Saves us on military bills and eliminating the war wearyness in this country. (You do know that this War is unpopular. Dont you?)

All wars are unpopular as no one likes war.
 
Something like 90% of new journalists voted for Kerry in 2004.

And we all know that, as the saying goes, he who is the piper calls the tune.

Oh, wait...
 
Back
Top Bottom