Pine Barrens Mafia Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 Shut up Krugman, you sicken me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 Shut up Krugman, you sicken me. 90722[/snapback] I think his point is that the right has become easily sickened by the truth. Everytime something is reported now the Bush campaign has to go to lengths to discredit it, and they are running out of excuses. Now all Cheney has to say is that he doesn't consider a publication "friendly," thus the story is not valid. It appears you are just sorry that the media is not giving this administration a free pass anymore. It got one for a long time. The tide is turning. The WSJ, whose praises you were singing a few days ago, reported one of the stories Krugman cites. Obviously this administration has made mistakes; you cannot be so blind to not admit that they haven't. All the mouthpieces of this administration have clearly drank the Kool-Aid and are buying into the President's rhetoric. And the media is right to take him to task for it. If Bush hasn't made any mistakes, then clearly all of these so-called attacks shouldn't be a problem for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted October 29, 2004 Author Share Posted October 29, 2004 I think his point is that the right has become easily sickened by the truth. Everytime something is reported now the Bush campaign has to go to lengths to discredit it, and they are running out of excuses. Now all Cheney has to say is that he doesn't consider a publication "friendly," thus the story is not valid. It appears you are just sorry that the media is not giving this administration a free pass anymore. It got one for a long time. The tide is turning. The WSJ, whose praises you were singing a few days ago, reported one of the stories Krugman cites. Obviously this administration has made mistakes; you cannot be so blind to not admit that they haven't. All the mouthpieces of this administration have clearly drank the Kool-Aid and are buying into the President's rhetoric. And the media is right to take him to task for it. If Bush hasn't made any mistakes, then clearly all of these so-called attacks shouldn't be a problem for him. 90778[/snapback] Of course they've made mistakes. And for the large part, they've been reported WIDELY in the left wing media. HOWEVER...the left has made a CONCERTED effort to break "stories" that aren't even stories (NG papers, "missing explosives" to name tow) in order to attempt to sway a close election. It's indefensible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 Of course they've made mistakes. And for the large part, they've been reported WIDELY in the left wing media. 90918[/snapback] Well, I would feel a lot more comfortable with the President if he agreed with you there and put the truth before politics on this one. I'm not saying I'd vote for him, but I wouldn't be as worried about the prospect of his re-election. The point is, the administration discounts any reported mistakes with exactly the kind of rhetoric you've displayed here. The problem becomes the "left wing media," not the mistake, which is generally far more life and death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted October 29, 2004 Author Share Posted October 29, 2004 Well, I would feel a lot more comfortable with the President if he agreed with you there and put the truth before politics on this one. I'm not saying I'd vote for him, but I wouldn't be as worried about the prospect of his re-election. The point is, the administration discounts any reported mistakes with exactly the kind of rhetoric you've displayed here. The problem becomes the "left wing media," not the mistake, which is generally far more life and death. 90928[/snapback] You're missing the point, as usual. The point is that mistakes, when made, have been put out there for all to see. The PROBLEM is, things that were not problems or non-existent have also been presented as if they were by attack dogs in the media. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 You're missing the point, as usual. The point is that mistakes, when made, have been put out there for all to see. The PROBLEM is, things that were not problems or non-existent have also been presented as if they were by attack dogs in the media. 90935[/snapback] I think an administration that is not willing to adjust its course to fit the reality of a situation is a far greater problem, but we are both afforded the right to disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted October 29, 2004 Author Share Posted October 29, 2004 I think an administration that is not willing to adjust its course to fit the reality of a situation is a far greater problem, but we are both afforded the right to disagree. 90943[/snapback] If "adjusting the course" means cutting in running in Iraq, then that's no option at all. Unless you're John Kerry, which is EXACTLY why terrorists and Muslim extremists everywhere would dance for joy at a Kerry election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 REASON #1, as given by bin Laden himself as to why he went through with the 9/11 attacks: The U.S., through its lack of response to the terrorist accacks and Somalia massacres that took place in the 90s proved to be a "Paper Tiger" and worth attacking with little risk of retribution. Who was President for the bulk of those attacks???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 If "adjusting the course" means cutting in running in Iraq... 90951[/snapback] How about more troops? How about getting down on our hands and knees to NATO or the UN and saying, "look, we went about this too hastily, and now we really need your help. A lot is at stake for all of us here. A stable Iraq is in everyone's best interests, and we can all share in the benefits..." But that kind of humility is beneath this administration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 REASON #1, as given by bin Laden himself as to why he went through with the 9/11 attacks: The U.S., through its lack of response to the terrorist accacks and Somalia massacres that took place in the 90s proved to be a "Paper Tiger" and worth attacking with little risk of retribution. Who was President for the bulk of those attacks???? 90958[/snapback] Yet if we went after Bin Laden you would have decried it as a diversionary tactic from the blowjob at hand. Do I think Clinton !@#$ed up? I sure do. Did he admit it, after much prodding? Yes. He handcuffed the country with his antics. But again, we're where we are now. The past is not nearly as important as the present and the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted October 29, 2004 Author Share Posted October 29, 2004 How about more troops? How about getting down on our hands and knees to NATO or the UN and saying, "look, we went about this too hastily, and now we really need your help. A lot is at stake for all of us here. A stable Iraq is in everyone's best interests, and we can all share in the benefits..." But that kind of humility is beneath this administration. 90964[/snapback] Why the hell should we be humble? They owe us, not the other way around. We've saved their sorry a$$es for decades, they ought ot help us out of gratitude. And more troops? From where? From John Kerry's mythical 2 new heavy divisions? Where they gonna come from? A DRAFT? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 How about getting down on our hands and knees to NATO or the UN and saying, "look, we went about this too hastily, and now we really need your help. A lot is at stake for all of us here. A stable Iraq is in everyone's best interests, and we can all share in the benefits..." 90964[/snapback] Nice. Thanks for the daily reaffirmation. Begging in front of the UN that depends on us for its continuing existense? For the last time, the much adored international community will fall right in line on November 3rd. They just would rather deal with the guy who will go in front of them on his hands & knees, instead of the one that's exposing the futility of the self dealing diplomatic cocktail society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 Nice. Thanks for the daily reaffirmation. Begging in front of the UN that depends on us for its continuing existense? For the last time, the much adored international community will fall right in line on November 3rd. They just would rather deal with the guy who will go in front of them on his hands & knees, instead of the one that's exposing the futility of the self dealing diplomatic cocktail society. 91034[/snapback] I am speaking of the UN as a forum, not as an organization. Where else can we have the ear of the world? Sneer in derision if you like, but this hasn't even been tried. And in general the UN is good about helping foster fairer elections. They know a thing or two about that. It'd be a good idea to have their help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 I am speaking of the UN as a forum, not as an organization. Where else can we have the ear of the world? Sneer in derision if you like, but this hasn't even been tried. And in general the UN is good about helping foster fairer elections. They know a thing or two about that. It'd be a good idea to have their help. 91043[/snapback] OMFG. The UN is the epitome of graft and corruption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_BiB_ Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 OMFG. The UN is the epitome of graft and corruption. 91126[/snapback] Thank you. You saved me the time. And, once again BTW, who's the one who started this explosives stuff a week before the election? The UN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 OMFG. The UN is the epitome of graft and corruption. 91126[/snapback] Guess I'd better flush that UNICEF money down the toilet instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavin in Va Beach Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 Guess I'd better flush that UNICEF money down the toilet instead. 91506[/snapback] Why not give it to a local children's charity instead, or do you feel more self-rightous giving it to UNICEF? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 Why not give it to a local children's charity instead, or do you feel more self-rightous giving it to UNICEF? 91512[/snapback] I do both. I think UNICEF does a world of good. And I know that even some of the poorest kids here have it a lot better than some of those around the rest of the world. Did anything in my post indicate a sense of self-righteousness? I just believe I have some responsibility to the whole world, it's part of what I believe in, the same way others give to Christian charities -- and I don't go accusing anyone who gives to those of being self-righteous. My point was the UN does some things right, otherwise it would be gone by now. Any completely corrupt or transparent institution falls or is fixed. It's the same with our government. If it did NOTHING good, there'd be obvious revolt. In the meantime, what we have instead is a bunch of complainers who don't take any action, because it isn't bad enough to elicit more than just a complaint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 Guess I'd better flush that UNICEF money down the toilet instead. 91506[/snapback] Interestingly, it was UNICEF's own report that is most damaging to the UN's "credibility." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts