|
CE 7
Oct 6, 2004 11:17:28 GMT -5
Post by Galactus on Oct 6, 2004 11:17:28 GMT -5
I drive a van, will it be safe? Damn that Ari Fleisher. Seriously though when Bush stares into a camera with absolutly no idea how to finish the sentence he's begun, I feel like to he's speaking to directly to heart of America. I get a little teary eyed.
|
|
|
CE 7
Oct 6, 2004 11:19:40 GMT -5
Post by Proud on Oct 6, 2004 11:19:40 GMT -5
the American people consider the VP debate a tie or a narrow Edwards victory because of non-debate factors. if Dick Cheney didn't have... certain personally traits, he'd be crushing Edwards in the polls. but he has them, and Richard Nixon looks trustworthy compared to him.
now that we know the VP debate was meaningless and ultimately ineffective for either side, onward to JFK and W's 2nd debate.
|
|
|
CE 7
Oct 6, 2004 11:20:51 GMT -5
Post by chrisfan on Oct 6, 2004 11:20:51 GMT -5
I hear that Karen Hughes is in charge of vans, so you should be safe until at least after the election. She's busy right now. Although,if you live anywhere near a campaign stop, she would have some time to run out and tinker while Bush is speaking. Car drivers are screwed though. Ari's daughter should be teething anytime now, and as soon as that starts, he'll probably hit the road just to escape the crying.
|
|
|
CE 7
Oct 6, 2004 12:01:18 GMT -5
Post by pissin2 on Oct 6, 2004 12:01:18 GMT -5
The only reason you believe Kerry is because he will tell you whatever you want to hear. Sort of true. They both do that. But he at least makes more sense and knows what he's talking about.
|
|
|
CE 7
Oct 6, 2004 12:08:38 GMT -5
Post by pissin2 on Oct 6, 2004 12:08:38 GMT -5
I drive a van, will it be safe? Damn that Ari Fleisher. Seriously though when Bush stares into a camera with absolutly no idea how to finish the sentence he's begun, I feel like to he's speaking to directly to heart of America. I get a little teary eyed. Sometimes I look at him talk and could swear there is a mic going to his ear with someone else telling him what to say. Sometimes that mic just goes out. I mean that has to be it right? He can't seriously be forgetting the question, or what he was talking about, or the name of the terrorists he's going after.
|
|
|
CE 7
Oct 6, 2004 12:25:02 GMT -5
Post by pissin2 on Oct 6, 2004 12:25:02 GMT -5
Looking back at posts I see most of you agree Bush got his ass handed to him in the debate. That's good. Fuck you guys post a lot on here.
|
|
|
CE 7
Oct 6, 2004 12:32:36 GMT -5
Post by shin on Oct 6, 2004 12:32:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
CE 7
Oct 6, 2004 12:59:50 GMT -5
Post by Thorngrub on Oct 6, 2004 12:59:50 GMT -5
|
|
|
CE 7
Oct 6, 2004 13:05:33 GMT -5
Post by RocDoc on Oct 6, 2004 13:05:33 GMT -5
From: Kyle Waldman Sent: Friday February 27 2004 2.35am Subject: None
As we can all obviously see, Iraq was not and is not an imminent threat to the United States or the rest of the world. My time in Iraq has taught me a little about the Iraqi people and the state of this war-torn, poverty-stricken country.
The illiteracy rate in this country is phenomenal. There were some farmers who didn't even know there was an Operation Iraqi Freedom. This was when I realised that this war was initiated by the few who would profit from it and not for its people. We, as the coalition forces, did not liberate these people; we drove them even deeper into poverty. I don't foresee any economic relief coming soon to these people by the way Bush has already diverted its oil revenues to make sure there will be enough oil for our SUVs.
We are here trying to keep peace when all we have been trained for is to destroy. How are 200,000 soldiers supposed to take control of this country? Why didn't we have an effective plan to rebuild Iraq's infrastructure? Why aren't the American people more aware of these atrocities?
My fiancee and I have seriously looked into moving to Canada as political refugees.
Kyle is proof that guys who(and I'll be just a bit unkind here, sorry) just sorta fall off of the turnip truck then are taken ½-way around the world are going to have nice simple explanations for everything they see. Honestly, they can't help it. There's going to be a lack of some perception and of objectivity...they WILL of course see thing that'll blow their minds to the point that the processing will be impaired.....and if they've been told that a nation like Iraq should realistically be completely rebuilt and back on its feet in, say 6 months...they're going to believe it. While unaware that similarly undertaken structural and economic miracles ELSEwhere (ie the Balkans for one) have gone 10 years already and are FAR from this 'effective plan' which he seems to think should already be taking root.
I mean a person who can say he'd just learned THIS by being there...I mean this:
The illiteracy rate in this country is phenomenal. There were some farmers who didn't even know there was an Operation Iraqi Freedom.
No inkling of what goes on in a place like this in this part of the world? Tsk.
This honestly sounds like something a Kerry shill should have written.
|
|
|
CE 7
Oct 6, 2004 13:49:19 GMT -5
Post by Mary on Oct 6, 2004 13:49:19 GMT -5
BTW, Mary, no one bit but I was curious to hear where you were heading with your question on democracy in the Middle East. Woops, sorry, doc drum - the vp debate got me distracted! I think you were kind of on to me when you wrote this: As for Iraq, not that the neo-cons ever intended to stand aside and let events take their own course..Mostly, I was just wondering about the depth of commitment to "democracy". We are frequently told this is not some neocolonial adventure precisesly because we are paving the way for genuine democracy in the middle east. However I wanted to test what the limits of this democracy really are - because democracy is obviously in no way synonymous with friendliness to the west or to america. I wanted to see how much of the talk about democracy was really "you can have a democracy as long as you vote for our guys" - to put it crudely. I don't think it's really that crude or black-and-white, but I do think the goal of democracy stands in a certain tension with some of our other goals, and we've all too often conflated democratization with the achievement of these other goals. If it's ultimately the case that we are unwilling to accept certain outcomes, no matter how democratically they come to pass, then we have to at least admit that there is a certain neocolonialism at work here. Maybe it's justifiable, but to deny it entirely in the name of this pure ideal of democracy seems highly disingenuous to me. I also can't help but think back to some of rocdoc's posts, in which he has scoffed at the idea that America should try to make itself amenable to the "Arab street" - which he has repeatedly depicted as toothless, illiterate, ignorant, and fanatical. Very well, but when you have such a deep level fo contempt for the "Arab street" then why are you trying to democratize the Middle East? The whole point of democracy is to empower the Arab street - why should you want to empower these people whom you find irredeemably backwards and dangerous? At least John Stuart Mill was being honest when he said liberty did not apply to barbarians - I don't think it's consisten to offer this noble rhetoric of democracy on the one hand and this contemptuous depiction of the Arab street on the other. M
|
|
|
CE 7
Oct 6, 2004 14:00:16 GMT -5
Post by pissin2 on Oct 6, 2004 14:00:16 GMT -5
So Roc, you'll believe things your president tells before someone who is actually over there in Iraq? Interesting.
|
|
|
CE 7
Oct 6, 2004 14:19:05 GMT -5
Post by Galactus on Oct 6, 2004 14:19:05 GMT -5
Bush is now saying he didn't do well in the first debate becuase he was "overprepared"...holy shit. "Overprepared"? I can't believe anyone would buy that. It's just like this fucker, if he has to admit a mistake it's that he's done something TOO WELL.
|
|
|
CE 7
Oct 6, 2004 14:23:18 GMT -5
Post by pissin2 on Oct 6, 2004 14:23:18 GMT -5
Man he keeps digging himself deeper and deeper.
|
|
|
CE 7
Oct 6, 2004 14:57:32 GMT -5
Post by RocDoc on Oct 6, 2004 14:57:32 GMT -5
I also can't help but think back to some of rocdoc's posts, in which he has scoffed at the idea that America should try to make itself amenable to the "Arab street" - which he has repeatedly depicted as toothless, illiterate, ignorant, and fanatical.
The 'street' in Jenin, Fallujah and Peshawar, yeah...where the worst of the wackos are...
I'm scoffing at the LENGTHS to which some will insist we MUST go, lengths of expending VAST energies to people to whom we have nearly zero in the way of a common pipeline which THEY won't reflexively scoff at....due to their isolation, lack of formal education AND a plenitude of hateful 'education' via their shithead self-interested mullahs...
So...then after the 99th time of being told to 'fuck off Amerikan', we'll then see that there's no 'winning over' of big chunks of those people....or will it take the 999th...or the 9999th?
~
Pissin, will ya look at the fact that 'Kyle' was amazed at the illiteracy and uninformedness of the common Iraqi...to YOU, this is really being on top of things, y'say?
Like being informed even MINIMALLY, before the fact...BEFORE actually going into this foreign culture?
And now with near-zero background, he's just drinking in this absolute GIVEN of complexity and you think he's processing it in a perfectly akurat manner regarding these larger contexts(rebuilding, illiteracy, oil revenues which he feels convinced the average Iraqi should have in his POCKET right now)he obviously is dumbfounded by?
|
|
|
CE 7
Oct 6, 2004 15:15:31 GMT -5
Post by melon1 on Oct 6, 2004 15:15:31 GMT -5
Spoke with a Democrat today. He said he was supporting Kerry because the Democrats were for him. He said that if he got rich one day he would vote Republican. I tried to combat the whole "Republicans are only for the rich" rhetoric to no avail because he simply didn't buy it. He pretty much summed up his political position when I asked him if he was basically looking out for #1 and that that trumped everything else and he said,"Yes", rather proudly. I've explained the procedure of partial-birth abortion to him in the past and that Kerry voted against the PBA ban in the Senate. He said that that was "barbaric" and that he wouldn't vote for someone who voted that way. He has since changed his position because he honestly believes the Republicans would starve him if given the chance. To him that matters more than some baby he doesn't know and he has adimitted it with pride. Some people you just can't reach. You havta pray for 'em.
|
|