Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (79245)	10/20/2004 3:37:14 PM
From: mph	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793964

Maybe you could then explain why you feel so "disconcerted"? Bush has admitted that tactical mistakes have been made. Just because you think that invading Iraq was a mistake doesn't require Bush to share your views. What you were articlulating was a personal discomfort for what you considered to be a Bush failing. Since it was your personal view, and a subjective reaction you offered, my comment was entirely appropriate. Again, if you're so disconcerted by a person who, in your words, eschews admitting mistakes, how can you support Kerry?

To: Lane3 who wrote (79245)	10/20/2004 3:57:05 PM
From: SBHX	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793964

I find it amusing when folks bring up Kerry whenever Bush is criticized. That is because Bush is not running against perfection, Bush is running against Kerry, and we all have topics critical to us, so the question is always focused around how Kerry and Bush would react when faced with the same challenges. The reason you don't like it is because you do want Bush to run against perfection and have Kerry slip in under the radar, warts and all. It doesn't work that way. It is important to note that in the 2nd debate, when the question came to Bush about top 3 mistakes he made, someone in the focus group thought that when Kerry's turn came, it was supposed to be Kerry's turn to talk about the mistakes that Kerry made, that would have been another opportunity for him to endear himself by joking about the 87B or a diplomatic juggling to soften his anti-war vietnam days (and then he can attack Bush - it would be unthinkable not to), but we all know what happened next. In foreign policy, I think history has been very clear on the consequences when a leader responds to aggression with appeasement. If you think that the current casualty count is an unjustifiably high number, you have not learnt from history what happens if you don't confront your enemy head on --- Neville Chamberlain was an extremely popular figure in the 1930's --- a true multilateralist, a gentleman politician who would consult with world leaders before making a move. Chamberlain became a figure that is most often cited to be the textbook case of what not to do at times of great conflict. You really should read about this great historical figure first if you truly want to seek some common ground. I hear Kerry speak, I read Kerry's words, but I see only Neville Chamberlain.

To: Lane3 who wrote (79245)	10/20/2004 4:40:29 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793964

>>I find it amusing when folks bring up Kerry whenever Bush is criticized. It's amusing because you don't think voting for Kerry is voting for Kerry. I guess "the meaning of 'is'" really is a concept Democrats find difficult to grasp.

To: Lane3 who wrote (79245)	10/21/2004 1:39:18 AM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793964

I must have a faulty memory. Perhaps you can help me. Who "insisted" Abu Graib be discussed in comparison with the enemy's brutality? I believe that such a comparison was reasonable when some folks, including the MSM compared what the horrible criminal activity of a few US soldiers to Saddam's atrocities. But then, they weren't "insisting" it be discussed that way. They had it forced upon the debate by liberal zealots out to score political points, rather than deal with the seriousness of the problem objectively & maturely. Anyway, I await your reply. I'd really like to know the truth. "That reminds me of the discussion about Abu Graib and the way some folks were insisting it be discussed in comparison with the enemy's brutality"