News & Politics - Repubs/Conservatives: Warning! May Contain Traces of Conservatives And/Or Other Nuts - Page 3

mh67511 · 07-14-2004, 03:47 PM

Bush's daughters have joined his campaign.

All I got to say is

. Those girls are HOT!

Marissa · 07-17-2004, 08:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dawnie

* Textbooks that don't mention Saddam are in the schools for the first time in 30 years.

I'm not going to argue with anything else you said (I'm a very liberal Democrat, just reading this board for the first time, so I thought I'd read both sides), but I don't understand why it's good for textbooks not to mention Saddam, when he was clearly a huge part of their country for a long time, and (at least part of) the reason that there is now a war there. So, I'd think that textbooks that don't mention Saddam would be like Germany refusing to mention Hitler in its textbooks. Am I completely out of line here?

(Again, I hope its not stepping on any toes to be posting here!)

Navmetchick · 07-18-2004, 12:09 AM

I don't think it's that they don't mention him, I think it's that they're not giving him credit for everything from the sun rising every day to "winning" the first Gulf War. That man had a serious cult of personality going on, and it's going to take a while to assuage the effects of it.

Semmer · 07-19-2004, 05:34 PM

Somehow when I saw the Spiderman 2 movie all I could think was politics. At first I thought that it was made by conservatives because the movie showed how biased media is and how they like to switch up facts to support one side. But then when the villian came into play I thought of liberals because they portrayed the bad person as someone who is not evil, but just had to do his crimes because his environment made him that way. It wasn't really his fault.

~Ashleigh~ · 07-23-2004, 09:56 PM

I've been lurking on this board for awhile now so I thought I would pop in and say hi. I grew up in a Republican household so I caught on quick.

Quote:

Is it just me or is anybody else tired of listening to what the news has to say lately. I'm so sick of turning it on and having to hear negative comments made about the President, the War in Iraq, etc. I mean yes everyone is intitled to their opinion, but having to hear the same opinion over and over again is getting old.

That's why I watch FOX News. As they say, their fair and balanced but maybe occasionally leaning towards the right. I especially love watching Bill O'Reilly.

mh67511 · 07-26-2004, 08:51 PM

Donde estan todos las Republicanos/Conservativos?

Did anybody catch any of the DNC? I saw a little of it...at least they are laying off the Bush bashing and deciding to focus on WHAT THEIR IDEAS ARE (gasp! what an idea!). 4 months until the election AND NOW Kerry decides to start telling us what he is really about! Up until now his campaign seems to have been, "I'm better than Bush because..." or "Bush sucks because..."

I will give them props though...their set up at the Fleet Center kicked some major butt! Very nice stage.

mh67511 · 07-26-2004, 08:55 PM

By the way Ashleigh, it's WHITE SOX ALL THE WAY BABY!

Navmetchick · 07-28-2004, 01:36 AM

No, I gotta say I agree with Ashleigh. My guys can do it, and they WILL do it.

The DNC is already over? Huh. Shows how much I'm paying attention to stuff.

aldebaran · 07-28-2004, 10:51 AM

Link to the Kerry Iraq documentary mentioned in article

TALE OF A TAPE

Excerpt:

Quote:

Wednesday morning, the GOP fired one of the biggest guns in its counter-spin arsenal: a twelve-minute video of John Kerry's statements on Iraq and how to handle Saddam Hussein, contrasting his pro-war views of 1998 and 2003 with his antiwar views of 1991 and 2004.

While the charge that John Kerry is a flip-flopper is nothing new, rarely has the case been made so comprehensively, in such detail, relying almost entirely on the Democratic senator's own words.

There are quite a few Kerry quotes that have disappeared down the memory hole that are worth recollecting. Like his statement on Dec. 11, 2001, on The O'Reilly Factor (does it seem shocking now that Kerry once appeared on O'Reilly's show?): "I think we ought to put the heat on Saddam Hussein. I've said that for a number of years, Bill. I criticized the Clinton administration for backing off of the inspections when Ambassador Butler was giving us strong evidence that we needed to continue. I think we need to put the pressure on no matter what the evidence is about September 11."

Got that? Tougher stance than Clinton. Evidence about 9/11 is irrelevant.

Kerry on Larry King Live, several days later: "I think we clearly have to keep the pressure on terrorism globally. This doesn't end with Afghanistan by any imagination. And I think the president has made that clear. I think we have made that clear. Terrorism is a global menace. It's a scourge. And it is absolutely vital that we continue, for instance, Saddam Hussein."

Afghanistan's not enough. Continue the fight. Take Saddam Hussein.

Then this exchange with Chris Matthews on Feb. 5, 2002: Matthews asked, "Do you think that the problem we have with Iraq is real and it can be reduced to a diplomatic problem? Can we get this guy to accept inspections of those weapons of mass destruction potentially and get past a possible war with him?"

"Outside chance, Chris," Kerry responded. "Could it be done? The answer is yes. But he would view himself only as buying time and playing a game, in my judgment. Do we have to go through that process? The answer is yes. We're precisely doing that. And I think that's what Colin Powell did today."

There was no complaining then about a "rush to war." No warnings that Saddam Hussein's WMD programs might not be as advanced as the administration feared. No skepticism about the intelligence, no blood-for-oil, no conspiracy theories about Chalabi and Halliburton and neocons.

Finally, his speech to the Democratic Leadership Council's national convention on July 29, 2002: "I agree completely with this administration's goal of a regime change in Iraq."

What makes the video more than a collection of Kerry's rhetorical hits is its documentation of how outside events were influencing the Democratic senator's political positions. Specifically, as 2003 wore on, Howard Dean rocketed to the top of the Democratic-primary polls and garnered laudatory press coverage. And Kerry obviously, blatantly, started borrowing Dean's anti-war rhetoric.

By August 2003, Kerry was declaring on Meet the Press, "The fact is, in the resolution that we passed, we did not empower the president to do regime change."

By October, the struggling Kerry was insisting that the war he had said he "agreed completely with" was unnecessary. "But the president and his advisors did not do almost anything correctly in the walk-up to the war. They rushed to war. They were intent on going to war. They did not give legitimacy to the inspections. We could have still been doing inspections even today, George."

Remember, the previous February, Kerry had dismissed diplomatic negotiations for more inspections as Saddam's "buying time and playing a game."

Judging by the 100-percent certainty with which Kerry made both sets of comments, he doesn't seem to even acknowledge that they contradict each other. Both appear to accurately express his views at the moment he speaks them.

The point is that there isn't truth or untruth to Kerry's views. There is simply what is needed and what is not needed, and the True North of Kerry's rhetorical and policy compass is whatever he needs politically at that time.

George Clooney's character in Three Kings, a film about the first Gulf War, explains to three soldiers under his command that "the most important thing in life is necessity... As in people do what is most necessary to them at any given moment."

What does Kerry stand for? Whatever is most necessary to him at that particular moment.

One could say that's not unique to Kerry, and may be a common trait among politicians. But what would this mean in a president? Periodically, Sen. Edward Kennedy or some other Democrat will make the stupendously illogical charge that George W. Bush made the call to go to war in Iraq in order to boost his poll numbers. But the political boost from a war, the rally-around-the-flag effect, is notoriously short lived. Winston Churchill won World War II and got tossed out on his tush by British voters almost the moment the war ended.

Follow link for the rest of the story

ETA: more interesting stuff at ScaryJohnKerry. There's even some "interesting" (and I use the term loosely) stuff on Michael Moore. Boy, he is a LOSER!!

~Ashleigh~ · 07-28-2004, 10:53 PM

I can't stand Michael Moore. He bugs the hell outta me. He should get shipped to France and join in on the American flag burning. Argh!

Quote:

it's WHITE SOX ALL THE WAY BABY!

No no no. Cubs all the way. Hey how was that sweep a few weeks ago? hehe Shouldn't be talking though because ever since then we haven't been to good.

coconutlime · 07-29-2004, 07:09 AM

White Sox fans: what, did you miss the last 3 games when we, the Twins, royally kicked your butts?

mh67511 · 07-29-2004, 09:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by coconutlime
White Sox fans: what, did you miss the last 3 games when we, the Twins, royally kicked your butts?

Ok, fine, I'll give you that simply because I grew up in Minn. and love the Twins. But I'm still hopeing for the White Sox to go all the way...it's not THAT much of a long shot

.

Selina · 07-29-2004, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ~Ashleigh~
I can't stand Michael Moore. He bugs the hell outta me. He should get shipped to France and join in on the American flag burning. Argh!

haha I feel the same way. Did anyone happen to catch the O'Reilly interview with Michael Moore? I was reading the transcript from it earlier and I realized that he(Moore) is one of those people who doesn't like to admit it when they are wrong. I love Bill.

I've been trying to avoid watching any news channel with the DNC on it like a plague.

~Ashleigh~ · 07-29-2004, 11:56 AM

Yeah I saw the interview. You're right, Moore won't admit he's wrong even if it's dancing right in front of him wearing Dobby's tea cozy (Harry Potter reference hehe). And he kept on calling the soldiers in Iraq children. That's what irked me the most. I wanna see him go up to some troops and call them children and see how they react.

WalkingOnSunshine · 07-29-2004, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Selina
haha I feel the same way. Did anyone happen to catch the O'Reilly interview with Michael Moore? I was reading the transcript from it earlier and I realized that he(Moore) is one of those people who doesn't like to admit it when they are wrong. I love Bill.

I've been trying to avoid watching any news channel with the DNC on it like a plague.

Hey all! Since I am new I have a lot of catching up to do in this thread! And I am looking forward to it!

Just wanted to drop in and comment on the O'Reilly interview real fast.

I saw it and loved it! Ahhh I love Bill too Selina!

And Ashleigh, that is a great point you make there about the troops and children. I hadn't even thought about that. You are right though - he should go up to one of our service people and ask them that. Grrr!

The thing that just amazes me about Moore's "position" on the military is how he makes it seem like it is a draft. In his debate with O'Reilly he kept saying "would you send our troops to die"? Well first of all, no one wants the troops to die or get in harm's way at all. But, it is a volunteer service and those that Choose to sign up know that one day they might have to enter battle. Not a pleasent though to enterain by any means but it comes with the choice you made to defend your country. As well, the troops aren't sent somewhere to die - they are sent somewhere to fight. There is a difference.

Grrr! One more thing. on O'Reilly's show last night he said that they received 25,000 e-mails about the debate he had with Moore! Wow! Ok I will be back later to hopefully be able to get up to date!