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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jttmab who wrote (199931)	8/28/2006 5:40:18 PM
From: Ichy Smith	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

It's really quite amazing. If the press mentions to Bush that there were no WMD in Iraq Bush says: What difference does it make? And the conserveratives around here will generally follow that line on "not enough troops for the invasion" or de-baathification, or whatever. Mistakes don't matter, we're here now. No point in going over the past. It isn't amazing at all. Most of the time, it isn't possible to calmly discuss the present situation because the whacko element screams that it is all Georges fault and on and on. Take Bin laden. Yes the whole scenario was in the end a bad thing, but it was a brilliant idea at the time. Things go wrong, ideas go bad, and that is part of life. Clinton had 8 years to catch Bin laden and didn't, does that make him a bad president? no, but George hasn't caught him either, and that doesn't make him a bad president either. But when you try to discuss things, you get hysterical nutbars, calling people traitors and not addressing the ideas if/when you present them, so the discussion soon degenerates. You will note that any reference to clintons misadventure gets a reaction, but my suggestion that perhaps they are timing things to coincide with Presidential elections got no response. Why not? because the little minds have an agenda, to pillory the president of the United States. There is no other debate they are willing or able to have. Except perhaps the abandonment of Israel to the tender mercies of the Muslims around them.

To: jttmab who wrote (199931)	8/28/2006 5:52:43 PM
From: geode00	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Yep. Note that Ichy is unhappy that people spend more time focusing on the most powerful man in the world instead of focusing on AQ's timing. Bush has, at various times admitted that he doesn't even think about OBL and the media hasn't taken him to task for that. Bush has stated that there is no connection between Iraq and 911 and the media barely utters a word. Bush gets away with practically everything with this media in place. As I've said before, Bush could run screaming, naked down PA ave and the media and Republicans would just ignore the whole thing. The 'media' --- and Clinton can certainly be lambasted for signing the telecom bill --- has ownership and regulatory issues before Republicans all the time so it shuts itself up and doesn't do its job. The media is a disgrace. =========== Why aren't rightwingers anxious to go over the past? Democrats are happy to go over Clinton's past achievements even when it includes the mess and stupidity over Monika. Hmmm. You'd think rightwingers would be proud of Iraq, proud of Afghanistan, proud of Katrina recovery, proud of the national debt, proud of the budget, proud of Medicare, proud of what they did on SS and bankruptcy (ok, now they ARE proud of that LOL), proud of how well George W. Bush represents the best they have. Hmmm. Curious.