Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Ol' Dubya finally wasn't playing to a hand-selected audience when he spoke to the General Assembly the other day... I heard it on the radio and it sounded like he was speaking alone from inside a water tank.

 

I guess what was the most troublesome were his references to respect for human life- he must have been referring to Christian lives, because his neocon

policies in the Iraq quagmire have killed many thousands of innocents.

 

All for something that didn't exist- WMD's.

 

So now he rationalizes about how Iraq is better off without Saddam. Our interests may be better off, but how can he claim that about Iraq?

 

The audience at the UN knew the full picture- a superpower pounced on a third world country, albeit with a bad leader, on made-up charges. And now the leader of that superpower comes before them and essentially claims we were doing it for the people of Iraq. While killing countless thousands of Iraqi non-combatants.

 

Anyone who thinks Saddam was a threat to us is deluded- the entire world was watching him, and he only controlled 1/3 of his country. We went after the wrong guy. Iran and the Saudis are more to blame for international terrorism, and we didn't go after them. Now that we have needlessly spent our political will and capital in Iraq, our options are severely limited by this quagmire.

 

I wonder what the result would be if Dubya were to speak to an American audience that wasn't screened- just an average cross-section of citizens.

 

Crickets would be a fond memory for him.

  • Replies 55
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
this quagmire.

44419[/snapback]

 

 

it always cracks me up how the left jumps on a phrase and beats it to death as if there wasn't an original thought from any of them.

Posted

Now, if I were there, there would be nothing but standing ovations from the countries I would be bribing...I mean working with...on tough international issues like Iraq.

 

Elect me President. I was in Vietnam.

Posted
Now, if I were there, there would be nothing but standing ovations from the countries I would be bribing...I mean working with...on tough international issues like Iraq.

 

Elect me President. I was in Vietnam.

44431[/snapback]

 

But you don't look nearly as good in a flight suit!

Posted
But you don't look nearly as good in a flight suit!

44433[/snapback]

 

 

I wore a flight suit once!

Did'ja ever notice how big my ass is?

Did'ja ever notice how big my head is?

Did'ja ever notice how Dan Rather sticks

his tounge down my throat when we kiss.

Posted
Ol' Dubya finally wasn't playing to a hand-selected audience when he spoke to the General Assembly the other day... I heard it on the radio and it sounded like he was speaking alone from inside a water tank.

 

  I guess what was the most troublesome were his references to respect for human life- he must have been referring to Christian lives, because his neocon

policies in the Iraq quagmire have killed many thousands of innocents. 

 

  All for something that didn't exist- WMD's. 

 

  So now he rationalizes about how Iraq is better off without Saddam.  Our interests may be better off, but how can he claim that about Iraq? 

 

  The audience at the UN knew the full picture- a superpower pounced on a third world country, albeit with a bad leader, on made-up charges.  And now the leader of that superpower comes before them and essentially claims we were doing it for the people of Iraq.  While killing countless thousands of Iraqi non-combatants.

   

    Anyone who thinks Saddam was a threat to us is deluded- the entire world was watching him, and he only controlled 1/3 of his country.  We went after the wrong guy.  Iran and the Saudis are more to blame for international terrorism, and we didn't go after them.  Now that we have needlessly spent our political will and capital in Iraq, our options are severely limited by this quagmire.

 

    I wonder what the result would be if Dubya were to speak to an American audience that wasn't screened- just an average cross-section of citizens.

 

    Crickets would be a fond memory for him.

44419[/snapback]

 

The UN works by different rules than, say, Congress at the State of the Union Address. In particular, they're far more restrained, don't interrupt every five seconds with applause, and basically just shut up and listen.

 

I don't doubt that Bush was largely unpopular with the General Assembly...but the relative lack of reaction isn't a symptom of that, it's just how the UN is. Don't make it into something it's not.

Posted
The UN works by different rules than, say, Congress at the State of the Union Address.  In particular, they're far more restrained, don't interrupt every five seconds with applause, and basically just shut up and listen.

 

I don't doubt that Bush was largely unpopular with the General Assembly...but the relative lack of reaction isn't a symptom of that, it's just how the UN is.  Don't make it into something it's not.

44440[/snapback]

 

That may be part of the reason for the nonresponse, but Bush's tired rhetoric and political doublespeak truly ring hollow when not backed by a hand-picked audience of salivating Young Republican hacks worshipping his every misstatement.

 

It's like a bad sitcom without the benefit of being pumped up by a laugh track- you get to see how truly lame it is.

Posted
it always cracks me up how the left jumps on a phrase and beats it to death as if there wasn't an original thought from any of them.

44428[/snapback]

 

like "flip-flop" for instance?

Posted
That may be part of the reason for the nonresponse, but Bush's tired rhetoric and political doublespeak truly ring hollow when not backed by a hand-picked audience of salivating Young Republican hacks worshipping his every misstatement.

 

   It's like a bad sitcom without the benefit of being pumped up by a laugh track- you get to see how truly lame it is.

44451[/snapback]

 

There were crickets during Kofi Annan's address as well. Does that mean your analogy holds for that speech or are you just applying a double standard?

Posted
That may be part of the reason for the nonresponse, but Bush's tired rhetoric and political doublespeak truly ring hollow when not backed by a hand-picked audience of salivating Young Republican hacks worshipping his every misstatement.

 

  It's like a bad sitcom without the benefit of being pumped up by a laugh track- you get to see how truly lame it is.

44451[/snapback]

 

Or could the crickets mean that the Bush administration continues to expose the UN's irrelevancy in the world?

 

I hear that the General Assembly is auditioning for next year's Apprentice, as The Donald is eyeing the site for his next real estate project.

Posted
There were crickets during Kofi Annan's address as well. Does that mean your analogy holds for that speech as well or are you applying a double standard?

44475[/snapback]

 

OK- here goes a neocon-style argument about a specific talking point, disregarding the rest of the person's post, and giving them the choice between two points that have nothing to do with their larger opinion:

 

You failed to comment on Bush's disregard for the thousands of innocent Iraqi lives he needlessly terminated, or in his words, "liberated". You did comment on what you claimed was my double standard about speech applause.

 

Surely that means you have a double standard about double standards, leaning heavily towards accepting murder.

Posted
There were crickets during Kofi Annan's address as well. Does that mean your analogy holds for that speech or are you just applying a double standard?

44475[/snapback]

 

Oh, also- I didn't hear Annan's speech, I was commenting in George's. But I'm sure not taking your word for it.

Posted
OK- here goes a neocon-style argument about a specific talking point, disregarding the rest of the person's post, and giving them the choice between two points that have nothing to do with their larger opinion:

 

    You failed to comment on  Bush's disregard for the thousands of innocent Iraqi lives he needlessly terminated, or in his words, "liberated".  You did comment on what you claimed was my double standard about speech applause. 

 

    Surely that means you have a double standard about double standards, leaning heavily towards accepting murder.

44506[/snapback]

 

 

It is people like you who are killing me in this election. You are exactly the reason why I am having a tough time getting my message out.

 

You want to focus on the relative amount of applause, or lack of applause in a body that does not applaud, instead of discussing something that is actually important. You also continue to trot out the same tired rhetoric, and parrot it because you have absolutely no clue what you are talking about.

 

Now, run along. I think the Teletubbies are on, and that seems like more your speed. You do not have to think about anything, just play along with what they say.

Posted
Oh, also- I didn't hear Annan's speech, I was commenting in George's.  But I'm sure not taking your word for it.

44523[/snapback]

 

 

Well, we wouldn't want you to actually be informed, before posting idiotic remarks.

Posted
Ol' Dubya finally wasn't playing to a hand-selected audience when he spoke to the General Assembly the other day... I heard it on the radio and it sounded like he was speaking alone from inside a water tank.

 

  I guess what was the most troublesome were his references to respect for human life- he must have been referring to Christian lives, because his neocon

policies in the Iraq quagmire have killed many thousands of innocents. 

44419[/snapback]

Unlike the ultra-liberal UN policies that have killed 100s of thousands (according to the UNICEF report) of women and children in Iraq over the past decade? Oh, I love the success of "diplomatic" solutions.

 

NEOCONS! HALLIBURTON! FLIGHTSUIT! Nothing more than standard sloganeering for the uninformed.

Posted
OK- here goes a neocon-style argument about a specific talking point, disregarding the rest of the person's post, and giving them the choice between two points that have nothing to do with their larger opinion:

 

    You failed to comment on  Bush's disregard for the thousands of innocent Iraqi lives he needlessly terminated, or in his words, "liberated".  You did comment on what you claimed was my double standard about speech applause. 

 

    Surely that means you have a double standard about double standards, leaning heavily towards accepting murder.

44506[/snapback]

Well...as I said, that's the way the UN listens to speeches. It has precious little to do with the speaker.

Posted
Unlike the ultra-liberal UN policies that have killed 100s of thousands (according to the UNICEF report) of women and children in Iraq over the past decade?  Oh, I love the success of "diplomatic" solutions.

 

NEOCONS!  HALLIBURTON!  FLIGHTSUIT!  Nothing more than standard sloganeering for the uninformed.

44553[/snapback]

Is this the same UN who can't even vote to decide if they want to talk about maybe voting on some sactions in Sudan, where thousands are being raped and killed daily.

 

That's what I thought.

Posted
It is people like you who are killing me in this election. You are exactly the reason why I am having a tough time getting my message out.

Wow. Is this guy for real?

 

Here's some solid advice- why not write a book about your struggle? You could easily get your message out- but you'd better check Amazon- I think "Mein Kampf" is taken.

×
×
  • Create New...