Re: Kerry - still a loser

On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 05:16:11 GMT, Ernie B.
<ebaresch_REMOVE_@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sat, 02 Sep 2006 19:22:12 GMT Dave K wrote:

Well, you're the one who seems to have heartburn over the divided country. I
was just curious if you were working to heal the division in any way.

Are you saying it does not bother you how divided this country is?
I'll not complain of heartburn, but it certainly is cause for concern.

Of course it bothers me. I would like to see everyone agree on a goal and
work together to achieve it. That ain't gonna happen while so much Bush-
bashing is going on though.

It's not about Bush bashing. It is more about the Bush regime
ignoring anything that does not fit into their plan. It is one of the
most exclusive governments I've experienced in my lifetime.

WHen Bush, and company, starts to listen to the will of the people,
well, they might stop bashing him.

<snip>

You may vote your pocketbook or the straight party ticket but I don't. So,
please don't include me among the people you seem to be thinking of.

Then don't include me among the people you are thinking of. Fair is
fair, no?

Yep. I don't use the all-inclusive term "people" very often though. I tend
to say "some people" or "many people" instead. When you post something like
"More than that, people are only going to whatever party they seem to think
^^^^^^
will take the least from them, rather than what party will do the most for the
country." it jumps out at me, especially if I disagree.

Try to separate yourself from the personal then. "The People," is a
collective term, after all.

Yep the candidate I voted for, for lack of a better choice, was elected. I
think I deserve a big THANK YOU! myself. ;-þ

See how it works? Actually I know that you know how it works. The
only thing different between us at this time, and this is
oversimplification, is that your guy won, and my guy lost. Were the
tables turned, it would be the same thing only different.<g>

The same thing only different; Tables turned, winners and losers
switched, One side defending, and the other accusing.

I remember the rancor from conservatives about Clinton. No matter
what he did good, there was nothing he did that was good. Now that
the shoe is on the other foot, there is some deer-in-the-headlights
sort of responses to the critics. I just know it is disingenuous most
of the time, but there are enough that it truly surprises me.

Well, maybe. I think that the country would be crying a lot more if Kerry had
won the election but that's opinion and speculation.

Exactly!

<snip>

Didn't you get the memo? The Islamofacists started a war, the most recent
attack on US soil was 9/11/01. You spend what it takes, do what it takes to
win, or at least to avoid defeat.

Yes, I know, the Iraq war was something we could not possibly
avoid. That old tale is so dried up and blown away that it is amazing
it is still being trottted out now and then.

If this was truly a war on islamofascists, I'd offer that we'd be
bombing in one helluva lot more countries than Iraq. Remember the
nations of origin of the hijackers? Saudi Arabia was in there. Egypt,
the UAE, and Lebanon was in there. Not one was Iraqi.

Yeah, right. Tim McVeigh and Dennis Rader were/are American Caucasian males.
Does that mean that all A.C.m.s should be punished? Jonathan and Reginald
Carr are American black males and sons of the same mother. Should all
American black brothers be punished? It makes as much sense as what you
posted above, imo.

Apparently, I did not make it clear enough. Iraq is not where all
things islamoascist come from. It was just the opportunistic place
that the conflict came to.

<snip>

No, this is not a war on Islamofacism. It is a war of opportuinism;
to establish a front in the Middle East, and it is not going well.

I think that invading Iraq accomplishes three things: 1.) removes a threat to
the US and to the region, 2.) gives the Iraqi people a _chance_ to control
their own destiny and 3.) provides the US and England a presence in the
region, just as troops in Germany provide a presence in Eastern Europe. 1.)
has been accomplished, 2.) and 3.) are in progress and time will tell how it
goes.

I'll disagree with one and two, and accept 3 as the most likely
motive. Iraq seemed to be an easy target, in a comparative way, and
in a way that the people in charge think; power and might.

To defend point 1, I'd have to accept that there was some sort of
linkage to terrorists. I do not see that linkage.

For point 2, I'd have to believe that Rumsfeld and company really
knew what they were getting into. Iraq was pretty much beaten down by
recent conflicts. Their people were more secular in political beliefs
than most of the rest of the middle East. I can see they thought it
an easy defeat with modern firepower, and they were right on that one.
What they did not reckon with was the resolve of the islamists, and
the vacuum they would produce to suck the islamists out into the open,
and engage them in the conflict. In addition, the martyr flow over
the borders into Iraq to save those people from the infidels is a
force I believe they did not reckon with.

3, I'd agree with. It looks like it is running into a we bit of
trouble though. I'd offer that the most we accomplished was to remove
the biggest enemy that Iran had, and I think we are beginning to see
what that has accomplished.

I remember a lot of conservative mantra about unintended
consequences. Well, here they are.


The real war on Islamofacism lies in world cooperation for peace.
There are one heckuva a lot of Christian, or at least secular, nations
that would work toward reducing the threat, but the current
administration makes it impossible to do, for a number of reasons. One
important reason is that they do not wish to work with George Bush.
He just does not play well with others; remember, "You are with us or
against us!"

I don't disagree and making the administration "play nice" is something
worthwhile to work toward.

I am glad to see that.


Oh, c'mon! If you're going to post things like that at least cite something
I've posted to back it up.

I'm too lazy. Yes, it's true. I post for recrreation, not work.
Trying to go back throught the mountains of posts to find the things I
remember is just too much work. Remember the pigeon-holing thing
every time you mention the name of any group though... If you never
pigieon hole anyone, then I'd guess you might be elected a saint
someday. I know better.

Okay. You could try "Seems to me that you said ..." though. If I said it my
memory would be jogged and I might come up with a mea culpa. <g>

Not necessary. It is human nature to generalize. If you don't do
it ever, I'm gonna nominate you for sainthood.


You're the one who's complaining. What is, is, but what happens in the future
can be influenced by people who are willing to work at it.

Of the things I do, voting is perhaps the most influential thing. I
have not mssed an election save one local election, in the last 20+
years. All else is dicey as to its level of influence.

Yes, I was complaining. I was not trying to tell anyone how it
ought to be fixed. I think there is some merit is trying to identify
the problem first. That's part of the problem with the current
administration; they don't know what the problem is, they just know
they gotta do sumpthin'.

So how's that working for ya?

Not very well. As an engineer I tend to try to define the problem, which
hasn't been done here except to say that generally the administration sucks,
and then propose a tentative solution. I'm still waiting for a proposed
solution that doesn't involve "cut and run" or "stay the course, no matter
what". Hope springs eternal though.

A proposed solution may come if anyone is really capable of putting
their ideology aside, and determining what the problems are. Actually,
I think we will probably just flounder around screwing up one thing or
another over time. I am not sure the things we are looking for
answers for are definable, in scientific terms, nor are they things
that we can see into clearly.

<snip>


We really do see what we want to see, colored by our bias. We all
want to believe we have this super objective thinking process going
on, but the reality is we are all looking at things through some sort
of filters set up by our experiences.

And everyone has a different set of experiences. Also, older people have more
experience to draw on. An "olde farte" can look back and say "Oh yeah, that's
like ..." where it would be completely new to a younger person. You can call
that bias if you wish to but I wouldn't.

Well sure it's a bias. The same event experienced by wo people will
have different opinions on the outcome in most cases. I'd offer the
word of eyewitnesses to events. Whether the bias is a physical point
of view, or amental one does not really matter that much.


Yeah, there's a mess although I don't believe it's as big a mess as some
people make it out to be.

These's a filter thing, isn't it.

Well, I remember most of WWII and how bad things looked for us during '42
through '44.

I really can see how that might fit. I remember vietnam, and the
resemblances to me are striking. I was born after WWII, and I was too
young to remember much of Korea.


Duh! Well geez! Thanks for your permission! I'm glad you OK'd my
ability to vote MY conscience.

You're welcome. Now, wipe the foam off of your chin. <g>

LOL, (Emulating Al Pacino in "Scent of a woman,") You don't KNOW,
what foam is.<g>

Yeah. <g>

The quote went like, Lt. Col. Frank Slade: "Out of order, I show you
out of order. You don't know what out of order is,.."

Great movie.


I write letters to the editor about local matters; letters, emails and phone
calls to my local, state and national representatives. IOW I make my wishes
known where I think it will do some good. Oh, and I also rattle cages on
usenet. <g>

Interesting. Thanks for sharing. Those were all of the things that
really don't mean much though. What really counts is cold hard cash.
Pardon my cynicism.

Well, if it changes one vote... I agree that there are too many whores
running around in government. I hope to wave bye-bye to some of them after
November.

We'll see. History does not hold much hope for the future, but
times are changing. We'll see.


No, I just think that you are wrong.

Ass I think you to be wrong...

Was that intentional? ;-)

Damn, I hate when that happens.<g>

FWIW, I am flattered that you think it could be used as propoganda
for the left. It is interesting that you consider WSJ articles
prooganda.

I've found that when most people post a long copy/paste screed and include a
lot of links they are, at least, beating the drum for their POV, propaganda or
not. As Joe Friday used to say "Just the facts, sir".

It really was shortened version.

I have never found the round tuit, if truth be known.<g> I only
pursue the things I am interested in. Occasionally, it will be
opposing views, but honestly, opposing views are so very... Well
opposing, don't you think?<g>

What?! You look for stuff that you agree with? Well, I never... <g>

Thank you for your appreciation. You have aligned yourself with the
Republican party though. You even advocated unwavering support for
they guy. Please spare me the disclaimers. ;)

I don't know what it will take to convince you. I haven't "aligned" myself
with any party although, lacking a good kick-ass Libertarian party, at the
moment I find the Republicans more palatable than the Democrats.

You voted for Bush. I cannot, for the life of me, see why anyone
considered him, "better," than anyone else. The only thing that could
have pushed me toward Bush was party. Beyond that, it is a complete
mystery to me.
--

Cheers! :)
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT: Not one incumbent Democrat lost...
    ... If there is evidence that the Bush administration altered intelligence ... to justify the invasion of Iraq, then that goes far beyond party ... Aren't you going to include them as WMD also? ...
    (rec.music.beatles)
  • Disabled Iraq Vet Candidate Blasts Bush
    ... Disabled Iraq Vet Candidate Blasts Bush ... accomplished' and 'stay the course,'" former Army Capt. Tammy Duckworth ... talk and gave the Democratic Party a chance to showcase one of its ...
    (soc.culture.iraq)
  • Re: "The Party of Defeats Top Five Lies About Iraq"
    ... The Party of Defeat's Top Five Lies About Iraq ... Bush, Rumsfeld and co misjudged the after effects of what they thought ... politico idiot tout the fact that it's a positive that we haven't been hit ...
    (rec.aviation.military)
  • Re: "The Party of Defeats Top Five Lies About Iraq"
    ... The Party of Defeat's Top Five Lies About Iraq ... Bush, Rumsfeld and co misjudged the after effects of what they thought ... politico idiot tout the fact that it's a positive that we haven't been hit ...
    (rec.aviation.military)
  • Re: "The Party of Defeats Top Five Lies About Iraq"
    ... The Party of Defeat's Top Five Lies About Iraq ... Bush, Rumsfeld and co misjudged the after effects of what they thought ... politico idiot tout the fact that it's a positive that we haven't been hit ...
    (rec.aviation.military)