Weekend Open Thread
The days are winding down for President George Walker Bush. Perhaps this weekend we can take the time to remember his presidency for better or for worse. I know each of us can find at least one positive and one negative thing about his 8 years as our Head of State.
Of course, since this is an open thread, you may talk about whatever you like. :-)
Submitted by stinerman on Fri, 2009-01-16 19:11
Tags:

Comments :
Positive/Negative
Positive:
Americans, who were generally apathetic about politics 8 years ago, are now much more involved than they've been in decades.
Granted, the reason for that is the complete cluster-fuck that his Presidency was... but hey... at least people are engaged again.
Negative:
One could write a book. To me... the BIGGEST blunder was the complete lack of oversight by the SEC, which has basically driven this country to the precipice of another Great Depression.
The "deregulation" fervor of conservatives in charge is the single biggest negative of the past 28 years. The past 8 are just the culmination.
The free market works... but it MUST be regulated. It needs rules, and it needs cops to enforce those rules.
If the economy is a football game... the conservatives in this country want there to be no referees, while the far left want every game to be manipulated so it ends in a tie.
The sweet spot is in between. We need referees that guarantee that there is a level playing field, but not guaranteed outcomes.
The Bush Administration... specifically his SEC chair Cox... put blindfolds on the referees.
...and chaos has ensued.
I survived the Bush Administration
That's a bit of a cop out
On the positive, but I'll take it.
I thought his policy on illegal immigration/border security was very close to what my policy is/would be. I was sorry to see that bill be defeated.
I supported his nomination of John Roberts to the SCOTUS at the time, but Roberts has disappointed me.
Of course, the negative is pretty obvious for me. I've discussed it here time and time again. In my opinion he should be tried for war crimes, and if keeping with tradition, should be executed for it if convicted. However, since I'm against the death penalty in all cases, I would be most happy if he was just sentenced to life in prison.
I never broke the law; I am the law! --
George W. BushJudge DreddI'm listening to...
I don't get this...
..it was the Democrats that time and agian poo-poo'd the republicans, and yes even the Bush administrations, and alan greenspans warnings 6-7 years ago that if we didn't get some stricter regulation on the GSE's that the sh!t was gonna hit the fan. Then in a typical liberal revisionist style they make insane statements like the ones PM makes above!
And as far as Barney Frank goes, what the hell is that moron doing running the senate finance commitee! He is the most muddle headed, politician I have ever seen!
Underlying all arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. ~M. Friedman
I dodn't eat red herring
The topic was about Bush blunders:
Somehow that turned into a diatribe about how the Dems miraculously halted Bush and a previously GOP controlled Congress from implementing the same regulations on GSEs, that are on public companies. No Rep, in the GOP ever heard of a Rider?
Dems were fighting to keep the GSE regulations the same, most of the GOP generally talk about deregulation in all other cases.
In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,
Hey PM, work on that one a little more...then get back to me...
Oh...Brutus...
Ok...anyway...
a) Technically it's not a diatribe.
b) There is no miracle.
c) They weren't the same.
Look...just do this...look into it a little more...
There are facts bro, and then there are Brutus-ism's.
One fact is the GOP, the POTUS, and Alan Greenspan all tried to get regulation on the GSE's tightened.
Hey look...add Johnny Mac to that group.
Another fact is...the GSE's ..liberal-lending-requirement was the bullet to the temple of the economy, and because America is the center of free trade, prosperity, and abundance on the planet, it killed the not only the messenger, but the whole damn carcass.
Point is, you can make all kinds of obscure why's, and invoke miraculous happenstance's....nonetheless....the facts...remain.
...oh...hey you got a little red something there on your chin... ;-)
Underlying all arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. ~M. Friedman
The refs making mistakes is cause to get rid of refs for some
The same thing that makes communism fail when done on a large scale is the same thing that makes deregulation bad. Motivation and opportunity, if people can get away with something and get more, enough people will do it to ruin it for everyone else. If people can get away with doing very little and get more in return, they will do that.
In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,
Battlestar Galactica was good. Very weird.
Maybe that's why I like it. More drama than action now. Odama is almost a crybaby, but I think the characterization of 'em all is great.
Nuclear wiped out terra sucked though. Sure hope we make it through without goin' through that.
I remember the original...LUV'D IT...
...burn one....turn off the lights ....and turn up some Jeff Beck, or Robin Trower....
....and watch Battlestar Galactica...
Oh ya....
And we were all Young Republicans, members of Young America's Foundation too...
The good old days...
Underlying all arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. ~M. Friedman
The history of the original BSG is kind of interesting
it was produced shortly after the oridginal star wars movie and it was an attempt to bring the same level of special effects to the tv screen. They did in fact do a few shots of spectacular quality for a tv show but that used up their whole budget so they had to make use fo those same few shots in every episode. There's a lot more to it of course but I thought it was interesting.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
Spoilers will make Stinerman a crybaby
Frack Earth and n/t
In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,
Yes
I didn't read any of that, luckily.
I have it downloaded and as soon as I fix some Ramen, I'm going to watch it in glorious HD.
I never broke the law; I am the law! --
George W. BushJudge DreddI'm listening to...
“Do As I Say, Not As I Do”: The Motto of Liberals Everywhere.
(RS
Original post.)
Only three years into George W. Bush’s eight-year tenure as President of the United States, BDS-afflicted lefties, led by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., were branding Bush an “environmental criminal” who would “go down in history as America’s worst environmental president
.”
“When the Republican right managed to install George W. Bush as president in 2000 [Auth: Remember, he was Selected Not Elected!], movement leaders once again set about doing what they had attempted to do since the Reagan years: eviscerate the infrastructure of laws and regulations that protect the environment,” Kennedy wrote.
By 2007, the verdict was unquestionably confirmed in the mind of the far-left environmentalist movement: Bush and his policies have become “an outright catastrophe for greenhouse gas emissions and future generations,” wrote liberal website Climate Progress
.
The latter of those was referring to the increase
in U.S. carbon emissions from 5,888 million metric tons in 2006 to 5,984 MMTCO2 in 2007 (a rise of 96 MMTCO2, or 211.6 billion pounds of CO2).
So here’s a question for you: if a rise of 211.6B lbs of CO2 nationwide in a full year makes Bush an “environmental criminal,” then what does an output of 575 million lbs of CO2 in one weekend, because of one person make the individual responsible for that output?
More...
Underlying all arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. ~M. Friedman
Yeesh
So Obama is now personally responsible for the carbon emissions of everyone flying, driving and riding a bus to D.C. this weekend? All the good liberals will be purchasing carbon offsets for these expenditures anyway!
We are the environment. There is no distinction. What we do to the earth we do to ourselves. —David Suzuki
Don't you know, the coal ash dam break in TN is his fault
too. Hey if Fox News can say dubya inherited the 9/11 attacks...well then, why stop there.
All to often with my collegues on the right they say what they prefer to believe rather than what actually exists. I do understand that they say the very same thing about us progressives though too.
It goes without saying
Obama is very likely the Anti-Christ and people will listen to him if he ask them to not emit so much carbon
*I personally know people who believe this line of thinking*
In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,
How is your brother by the way?
I never broke the law; I am the law! --
George W. BushJudge DreddI'm listening to...
Same old, same old
The Earth is still 6,000, and evolution is only believed by "idiots."
Anyone that isn't a Christian, is a "moron."
Catholics and nearly every denomination it seems aren't really Christians, they apparently don't follow the King James Version of the Bible close enough.
In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,
Oh yikes...
n/t
Underlying all arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. ~M. Friedman
No, just the ones going for the inauguration.
He could call the whole thing off and just let everyone watch the televised version. Would that be such a large price to pay to save the planet from imminent doom? Why yes, if you're a liberal. (Apparently)
I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4Oh yeah
And the DC hotel and restaurant owners would be real happy about that wouldn't they? I bet Obama wouldn't take any flack at all for making such a pronouncement.
We are the environment. There is no distinction. What we do to the earth we do to ourselves. —David Suzuki
Are the DC hotel and restaurant owners ...
more important than saving the planet? That comment seems a bit short sighted given your stance on the subject to date. Carbon credits are going to hurt everyone economically speaking, so why the sudden change of heart on curbing carbon? Do you own a DC hotel or restaurant? :)
I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4That struck me exactly the same way...
...you surprised me there SL?
You subordinated the planets future to that of business owners and the popularity of Barry?
Wow?
Underlying all arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. ~M. Friedman
Fer cryin' out loud
Heck, I would have been ecstatic if Obama had called off the festivities for the express purpose of cutting down carbon emissions. It would have been a great example. I have no illusions that it would have been a wise move politically, though. And if Obama is seriously going to make some significant headway against the environmental, economic and political challenges the world is facing, he's going to need as much support as he can get.
Besides, both RW's and GR's initial comments were such classic examples of concern trolling, why shouldn't I respond with some faux concern of my own for the DC business owners. :)
We are the environment. There is no distinction. What we do to the earth we do to ourselves. —David Suzuki
Classic
ridiculousness.
The argument is that if you want things to be cleaner and greener, then you should sell your car immediately and go live in a cave or something.
I'm only half stupid
Ironically ...
That IS pretty much what it means. "ML snark = reality". Does that imply that "ML non-snark = non-reality"? Hmmm. :)
I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4See, that's completely wrong though
You can have a far greater positive impact on the environment by expressing your views to others and convincing them to live "greener" than you would by simply crawling off to live in a cave. It's better to shrink a million carbon footprints by 10% than just one by 100%. Even better, convince a million people to not only live greener, but also express their views and convince others to live greener too.
"And can you, can you imagine fifty people a day, I said fifty people a day walking in singin a bar of Alice's Restaurant and walking out. And friends they may thinks it's a movement."
We are the environment. There is no distinction. What we do to the earth we do to ourselves. —David Suzuki
As Al Gore clearly demonstrates ...
the greenies aren't really willing to change their lifestyles ... they just want everyone else to do it. And moving into caves would clearly be a win from their perspective.
I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4Mr Broad-brush strikes again.
As GoRight clearly demonstrates, the conservatives like to pigeonhole diverse groups of people into convenient derogatory boxes.
We are the environment. There is no distinction. What we do to the earth we do to ourselves. —David Suzuki
He is the icon of the AGW Scientology movement.
Is he not? :)
I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4Al Gore
Has solar panels on his roof, drives a hybrid car, pays extra to his power company to pay for "green" energy, has renovated his home to be incredibly energy efficient, purchases carbon offsets to mitigate his family's carbon footprint, has his office in his home... I could go on. He's a great example of what people with money can do to reduce their carbon footprint without drastic changes to their lifestyle. And he has done more than any other individual I can think of to bring the discussion of global warming into the public consciousness. That's why you can't stand him, isn't it? :P
We are the environment. There is no distinction. What we do to the earth we do to ourselves. —David Suzuki
And even after all that ...
he still consumes 12 to 20 times as much energy as the average American home
(in a home that is only 4 times as large). Geeze, what an energy hog.
Imagine how bad it would be if he DIDN'T take all those measures. This just illustrates why he is such a zealot on the topic, I guess. He probably thinks that the average American is just as much of an energy hog as he is. If we were all using 12 to 20 times as much energy like he is you might actually be able to convince there is a problem.
From my perspective, the average American is already conserving relative to Al Gore, by a factor of at least 12 to 20, and this doesn't even take into account his use of private jets.
In the end, though, you are only proving my point. He is unwilling to alter his lifestyle. He prefers to maintain it and buys carbon credits to offset his usage. The result? Everyone else and especially those in the developing nations are expected to pick up the slack. He's flying around in private jets drinking Lattes while a whole bunch of poor schlubs in Africa somewhere are trying to boil coffee with a solar panel. He just shifts his excesses onto the masses via carbon credits.
So, like I originally said, the greenies (like Al Gore) aren't willing to change their lifestyles but they sure expect the rest of us to do so.
I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4Meh
I'm not going to get into a tit for tat defense of Al Gore's energy usage. Yes, he does use significantly more than the average home, but that home is also an office, and he does have staff and ex-VP-related security issues. So a slightly fairer comparison would be to the average American's home plus workplace. Also, a bunch of these renovations just got completed, and you are linking to two-year old numbers.
Anyway, since you have now amended your initial statement with a parenthetical qualifier, I don't really care anymore. I still don't particularly agree with it, but at least given the parentheses it is no longer so outrageously stupid (like your unqualified statement was) that I feel the need to argue about it. :)
We are the environment. There is no distinction. What we do to the earth we do to ourselves. —David Suzuki
It wasn't a qualification ...
it was identifying an exemplar for the group. :)
Al Gore is the self-identified leader of the group, and as such I assume that he is on the leading edge of what the group members are willing to do in terms of impacting their lifestyles. Is this not the case?
Perhaps we should allow for the fact that he works out of his home (or at least claims to), but on the other side we should also account for the fact that he flies around the world in private jets rather than using commercial airlines. These may not be equivalent, but they certainly offset one another in terms of one's personal carbon footprint. I was just considering those to be a wash for the purposes of this discussion. YMMV.
But I agree, no need to discuss that hyprocrit anymore. I'm beginning to feel a bit nauseous.
I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4Nausea
Well, now you've rekindled my interest in keeping the conversation going! :)
As regards your assumption, I think it would be unusual indeed for the leader of any group to be on the leading edge of what group members are willing to do, particularly as regards to making sacrifices. Maybe that's just my inherent distrust of authority speaking, but most leaders are schmucks. Only truly great leaders might fit your assumption. Ghandi comes to mind, for example. And though I certainly have some degree of admiration for Gore, he ain't no Ghandi!
We are the environment. There is no distinction. What we do to the earth we do to ourselves. —David Suzuki
Well, we do have some common ground then.
SL - Maybe that's just my inherent distrust of authority speaking, but most leaders are schmucks.
At least in the case of Al Gore, I agree.
SL - And though I certainly have some degree of admiration for Gore, he ain't no Ghandi!
And on this I agree unreservedly. :)
I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4If you think that Al Gore is a hypocrite I have no problem it...
...believe it or not. He clearly could do more, and the fact that he does not calls into question his true commitment to his cause. If one is going to present themselves as a leader as Gore has done, they should be expecting such challenges regarding inconsistencies between their personal conduct and their preaching. For example, a televangelist , if caught attending a local brothel, should expect to be questioned about the mismatch between his sermons and his philandering.
In fact, a leader who does not show strong personal commitment to their cause can tend to do as much damage to their cause as a result of their personal conduct. I believe that people such as yourself who are turned off by leaders who talk the talk but don't walk the walk allow their strong feelings about the leaders of a cause to color their views regarding the underlying facts. I see this in your efforts and the efforts of others to seek out evidence that not only is Al Gore a hypocrite, but that he is also 100% wrong about AGW. I see these efforts as aimed towards sticking it in the hypocrite's eye, but I would argue that the pursuit of sticking it to the hypocrite often interferes with the objectivity of the pursuer regarding the facts of the matter.
So what I think you need to ask yourself is this: do you have Gore Derangement Syndrome? And is this causing you to reject certain evidence regarding AGW that you should not be rejecting?
skymutt: accept no substitutes!
No, I don't believe that I suffer from Gore Derangement Syndrome
I do not deny that the planet is in a warming period ... although that may be reversing at this point. I do deny the scientific conclusions regarding the source of that warming. I believe that many (most) of these conclusions are premature and not conclusively supported by the evidence if one takes into account all of the evidence. This may just be my opinion, but I am entitled to it none the less.
I believe that policy decisions which will affect the standard of living world wide should be based on rigorous science based on all available data and supported by sound logical arguments. The current political hysteria which is stirred up by individuals like Al Gore seeks to subvert that goal by claiming a "consensus" as being undeniable "proof" and by actively working to silence any scientific data or criticism which does not support the current prevailing view. I believe that this is dangerous and wrong which is why I actively work against the forces that promote such nonsense.
That's the serious part of my position.
The light hearted part of my position views Al Gore as a sort of political Piñata which is ever so fun to poke. :)
I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4:)
I disagree that my first comment was concern trolling, but the second clearly was! :)
I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4The good that George wrought
I am still mystified by his nomination in 2000; his skill set, seen clearly by the vast majority now, was visible then. He was always an inept and rather mediocre businessman, lacking personal charm and judgment, and was the least qualified scion of a highly ambitious but quite lackluster political family. But his super-slim victory reminded the Democrats of the dangers of splitting their party vote over trifles; those who thought Gore wasn't pure enough gave us George instead. It was also a reminder to the general populace that in key states, anyway, every vote does matter.
His actions in office galvanized the opposition. Thousands (millions?) moved from one-way screaming at the television to the two-way interactions on the internet. Some of those bloggers moved themselves and others to more concrete actions. We don't yet know how that will morph over the upcoming four years, but a more-engaged populace is a good thing, IMHO.
His win in 2004 was pure partisanship. Most by then could see what he was, yet the Republican voters lacked the courage to act. In 2008, this resulted in the loss of control of the federal government to their opposition. I hope this results in the breakup of the current GOP, because the last eight years should have taught them that their current coalition stands for too many conflicting things. I think the time is ripe for orange ;-) Big-government conservatism is an oxymoron.
Much of the world looks differently upon the US now, after these eight years. Perhaps this has encouraged them to develop their own strengths more than they have in the past, having seen that the US is perhaps not as stable as they once assumed. Having an effective world "team" might turn out much better than having the USA always carrying the ball.
I could write more, but this is long enough. I'll be glad to turn the page, and I am hoping that we don't spend too much time looking backwards, and that we are more concerned about tomorrow than yesterday.
Ender- Blockquote?
Ender, is there a blockquote function on the new editor that I'm just missing? If not is it something we can get in the near future? It goes a long ways towards making things more understandable when you have a diary or comment that mixes quoted material with your own thoughts/replies.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
I agree
For the moment, you can put the manual tags on either side of the quote in source mode:
I never broke the law; I am the law! --
George W. BushJudge DreddI'm listening to...
Peter Schiff For Senate
Schiff for Senate!
Underlying all arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. ~M. Friedman
It all sounds like a bad joke.
President Bush was a great subject to make fun of, but that means when growing up, it's been hard for me to take politics so seriously. I am not kidding when I say this, but it's the main idea that I get from Bush's presidency: that politics is a bad joke.
What a punchline!
Welcome to Swords Crossed
Don't blame you a bit for that perception.
It wasn't that long ago...
...they were saying the same thing about Ronald Reagan...
It's hard to find anyone, liberals included that have much bad to say now...but you should of heard 'em howling in the 80's...
Bush will go down as a good president. He didn't bomb the WTC-he prosecuted those who did, he didn't F up the economy-he warned those who did it would happen, so try not to buy into the fad, and see it in greater measure.
...and welcome if I haven't greeted you as of yet... ;-)
Underlying all arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. ~M. Friedman
Welcome aboard
(assuming you are new, if not I apologize for misremembering).
You might want to post an introductory diary so we know a little about you (unless you prefer an aura of mystery).
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
I knew the name was familiar
I'm glad you dipped a toe in. I'm Lodi, btw. Better handle in SL than here. Long story.
Good point, Stella!!
This:
"Politics is a bad joke"
says it in a nutshell, Stella. Thanks. Welcome to Swordscrossed, btw.
Bush showed U.S. is no paper tiger
A surprising opinion piece from a surprising media source.
Bush showed U.S. is no paper tiger
[...]
How will history judge Bush?
Osama bin Laden once told Time magazine that the U.S. withdrawal from Somalia after the murder of 18 U.S. troops on a humanitarian mission made him realize "more than before that the American soldier was a paper tiger and after a few blows ran in defeat." Members of al Qaeda have told intelligence officials that they never thought that Washington would respond to the 9/11 attacks as ferociously as Bush responded. They expected a few bombs to be dropped, no boots on the ground, a swift withdrawal if casualties mounted - the usual short-attention span foreign policy that warped Lebanon, the Persian Gulf War, Somalia, the African embassy bombings and the attack on the destroyer Cole.
Bush showed America's enemies a country that does not retreat in fear, does not bomb with impunity, and most important, does not desert civilians or foreign governments that trust us. If you think that doesn't matter, look at Libya, which disarmed its weapons program. And see how much easier Obama's presidency will be, because Bush kept the faith.
Osama bin Laden may live, most likely quivering in a cave. But no one thinks America is a paper tiger anymore.
I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4Reductio ad bin Ladenum
bin Laden either has a few more screw lose, or he is lying.
If he thought going into someone's house and burning down the place would case that person to back down. The US is not Somalia, this guy is upset that the US was in Saudi Arabia and "somehow" doesn't realize that Americans would be more than a little upset if he killed thousands of Americans in America.
Deciding to play Russian Roulette by going into Iraq wasn't the smartest thing to do.
You left some ambiguity in the statement, what if the trusted friends tell the US to leave?
Playing Russian Roulette with multiple bullets is still more than dumb, even if one wins a lot of money. Christopher Walken is not be praised for finding one way of sending a bunch of money home to his friend.
In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,
On President Bush's Accomplishment
After visiting some Islands in the Pacific, he was so struck by their beauty that he declared them a National Monument.
<blockquote>President George W. Bush on Tuesday will designate three remote Pacific island areas as national monuments to protect them from energy extraction and commercial fishing in what will be the largest marine conservation effort in history. </blockquote>
_____
During the historically awful Presidency of George W Bush, the one action that he took that was to my mind most damaging and most overlooked was cutting taxes during a time of war. He ordered that cost of war be paid for 'later'. The thinking that tax cuts are always good, because deficits don't matter. Besides you can live on the credit from the inflated value of your home.
In '04 the Federal Govt cut the budget of the Solar Research Institute, just miles from where I live, thus forcing them to lay people off, a few days before the President had scheduled a campaign speech touting his research cred. He expected the folks still left there after his budget cuts to stand behind him and smile while he campaigned.
It was a sickening farce, and a cynical political ploy to ask folks that were having their research budget cut to stand happily behind him so he could play politics with the truth.
The wool that Bush is trying to pull over people's eyes, about his legacy, is the same wool he pulled over people's eyes about the War in Iraq, taxes and everything else.
Good-bye double vision, double messaging, and double standards. And good-bye to Karl Rove's K-Street project and the dream of a 100 year Republican majority.
If you hate government, then you don't deserve to run it.
I'm only half stupid
For anyone who follows wikidramas ...
Raul654 (on behalf of all the climate scientologists) has once again tried, and failed, to get a community ban against me at wikipedia on the administrators noticeboard. The archived discussion can be found here
. The whole episode was laughably lame.
I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4You might like this link
It compares the rules-enforcement mechanisms
of dKos and Wiki.
h/t to Crooked Timber
Redstate is upset that some people take war crimes seriously
http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/2009/01/18/what-republics-really-cant-s...
According to Moe there was just no reason for republicans to think that committing flagrant war crimes against brown people would come back to haunt them.
Naturally, given the victim fetish of the right lo these last few decades, it is the dems fault, not that republicans commited the crimes, but that they might be appropriately punished.
Much as I strongly suspect the dems will fail to see their way fit to sending half the bush administration to the Hague, at least the threat is making guys like Moe Lane soil himself. That's a step in the right direction.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
Kill the Messanger and the message.
"Only Nixon could go to China."
Mr. Spock.
I always get the notion that the people that are most upset about things similar to what Pelosi said, will dismiss her claims and attack her, not because they disagree with her. But because they don't want to ever agree with anything that they think some "God hating" liberal might agree with.
A war crime is a war crime, is a war crime. Whether it's don't on another war criminal or one that happens to have a tribal feud with the wrong tribe. War crimes encompasses more than just rounding up a bunch of civilians and killed millions intentionally. Even if all Jews were out to kill all Germans as per the propaganda.
In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,
Moe Lane would eat your lunch intellectually...
Be forewarned....
Your liberal light fare is just an appetizer compared to some of the stuff he takes on.
...IMHO of course...
Underlying all arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. ~M. Friedman
Maybe but I doubt it
I cut my teeth at GNN which was pretty harsh. Moe hides at a site where he has ban power. And he's terrified of the dems, which is especially funny given how utterly incapable the dems tend to be.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
Well now...
...he hides...no...he has a home website...and I want you to tell me who he has banned from RS who did not have a obvious warrant for it?
Go here
and take your best shot.
Underlying all arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. ~M. Friedman
A better suggestion
Invite him to come here. He's perfectly free to come here and defend his point of view without fear of banning for it. I'll even help explain to him the difference between energy and electricity since he needs a refresher on the topic.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
He's not bashing YOU at RS - Thats why...
You are not so lacking in such guilt.
Face him...
LOL...He'd take you apart...
Underlying all arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. ~M. Friedman
I'd be happy to
but what's the point when he'll simply ban me? If he'd really take me apart then there's no reason he has to do it on a site where he has the power to silence me. By all means let him come here and demolish me on my home turf as it were. I'd honestly relish the chance to discuss matters with him in an environment where he couldn't shut down debate by fiat.
Actually that goes for a lot of the RS guys. Sometimes Leon would post here. I wish he would more often, even though he's probably the person there I have the very least amount of agreement with on issues (at least of the big names there).
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
I will be the witness...
Who is Moe banning? LOL!
Come on...?
Underlying all arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. ~M. Friedman
Sarah Palin on Glenn Beck's Fox News show TONIGHT!
Glenn Beck is coming to the Fox News Channel
5PM Eastern. You go girl!
I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4Positives vs. Negatives:
As far as I'm concerned, that's a no-brainer.
Frankly, I didn't see much positive happening during the last 40 years, much less the last 8 years of G. W. Bush. Moreover, I don't see any real positive stuff coming on the horizon, either. Quite frankly, it's never even occurred to many people on the Left, or they're not willing to face the fact that they, too, made some blunders that ultimately helped get such a blatant jerk as G. W. Bush into the White House.
First of all, the attitude on the part of many Leftist-liberals that white workingclass conservatives per se were/are unalloyed bigots and racists who aren't to be talked to, but only repelled. That's proven to be a self-fulfilling prophesy, albeit a disastrous one.
Secondly, the support on the part of many leftists and liberals of such groups as Bill Ayers and the Weather Underground, as well as the Black Panthers helped do much harm to the progressive causes and alienated lots of people who might well have gotten on the bandwagon for more progressive stuff.
Thirdly, I think that the Democratic Party isn't as unified as a lot of people would like to believe that it is, especially because many, if not most workingclass whites voted for McCain and not Obama. The Democratic Party still didn't get the white workingclass vote per se.
WRT Ayers and WUO
I want to pose a question and I want to ask you to think about it honestly. Which organization do you think has killed more innocent civilians, the Weather Underground or the US Air Force? The Air Force, obviously since the WU killed nobody. Now here's the actual question- why then is the WU utterly unacceptable and the USAF is a national institution?
Both groups bombed places in order to maintain their ideology. Is bombing an empty bathroom really worse than dropping napalm on Vietnamese villages? Does calling "murder" "collatoral damage" really excuse it? The US AF went around the world to kill people who posed us no threat. The WUO bombed empty buildings to try and stop that.
McCain claims to be proud of his aviation service. Isn't that easily as contemptible as Ayers time with the WUO? Why not?
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
Is this a question from some 3rd grader?
Why don't YOU think about it HONESTLY.
The WU DID
kill people.
Inept unskillful question Tlaloc.
Underlying all arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. ~M. Friedman
I take that to mean
you have no cogent reply.
BTW, Can you list the people killed by the WUO for me?
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
No, it means it warrants no cogent reply...
...for a death toll, read the link.
Underlying all arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. ~M. Friedman
Looked at the link
and the only deaths I saw listed occured after the WUO was disbanded. I was wondering if I missed some in there.
(Yes, I know "it doesn't deserve a reply" is code for "I have no counter-argument", thank you)
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
You are such a bright person...
...then you ask such a benighted question.
Do you honestly think a terrorist organization, exploding bombs in metropolitan areas in cities throughout the US, has any equivalency to a US military action against a foriegn enemy?
People died? I guess that's a commonality. Beyond that it is a extreme stretch to draw any worthwhile, rational conclusion.
Sorry.
Underlying all arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. ~M. Friedman
Let me put it this way
If I said:
Name the organization made up of americans that used bombs against political enemies...
...wouldn't that equally describe both the USAF and the WUO?
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
No
USAF used bombs against political enemies of the US.
WU used bombs against the US.
Underlying all arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. ~M. Friedman
I guess this means ...
That the USAF should have used bombs against the WUO. :)
I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4Well
The armed wing of the US military has had no qualms about bombing
quasi military infrastructure/personnelcivilians before.The USAF should have dropped some napalm on them.
In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,
LOL
How did oyu ever come across that link?
I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4History Channel had a piece on the creation of napalm
...then I googled "napalm bats" to get a link.
In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,