Congressman Murtha Calls for Immediate Withdrawal

[kapkomet]

It amazes me the tone when people are challenged around here. The patronization is amazing. It's kind of like our president.

[Texsox]

It amazes me the tone when people are challenged around here.  The patronization is amazing. It's kind of like our president.

 

LOL, you are still amazed? That's wonderful to be so childishly amazed.

I kid because I care™

 

I just thought it was funny that SS didn't post a link to Bush's statements. That seemed more important than pointing out that no one else did.

 

But nice call, here's a pretzle, chew carefully.

[kapkomet]

The irony is that there are about 50 posts here and in other threads condeming the "viscinoussness" of the White House on Rep. Murtha. When the tone changes, and something good is said, *crickets*.

 

It definitely says that with the notable exception of Rex Kickass talking about Isreali progress, how quick to point out all the faults of the current administration is, but when something is done to try to bridge the "hostility", it's not recognized.

 

So go chew on your pretzel.

[southsider2k5]

LOL, you are still amazed? That's wonderful to be so childishly amazed.

I kid because I care™

 

I just thought it was funny that SS didn't post a link to Bush's statements. That seemed more important than pointing out that no one else did.

 

But nice call, here's a pretzle, chew carefully.

 

There isn't much point to posting anything that isn't anti-Bush on here anymore.

 

Notice no green.

[Texsox]

The irony is that there are about 50 posts here and in other threads condeming the "viscinoussness" of the White House on Rep. Murtha.  When the tone changes, and something good is said, *crickets*. 

 

It definitely says that with the notable exception of Rex Kickass talking about Isreali progress, how quick to point out all the faults of the current administration is, but when something is done to try to bridge the "hostility", it's not recognized.

 

So go chew on your pretzel.  

 

 

There isn't much point to posting anything that isn't anti-Bush on here anymore. 

 

Notice no green.

 

I honestly was gone all weekend from any news sources, but is it better for the debate to post what Bush is saying, or to post what other posters are not saying? It appears that Bush Backers are now resorting to attacking the other posters and not defending Bush. That is sadder to me than Bush Bashers not posting his latest remarks.

[southsider2k5]

I honestly was gone all weekend from any news sources, but is it better for the debate to post what Bush is saying, or to post what other posters are not saying? It appears that Bush Backers are now resorting to attacking the other posters and not defending Bush. That is sadder to me than Bush Bashers not posting his latest remarks.

 

In my case it just means I see there is no point in talking about it with some people on here. I used to think Juggernaut was insane when he pointed to bias in the way that some people handled subjects and posters... Now I wonder.

[Texsox]

In my case it just means I see there is no point in talking about it with some people on here.  I used to think Juggernaut was insane when he pointed to bias in the way that some people handled subjects and posters... Now I wonder.

 

I just think it is better to post the current statements and comment on that. It seemed to be a slow weekend and I'm guessing no one had a chance to post Bush's current quotes.

 

It would be like one of the Liberals around here posting that no one posted that the GOP controlled House voted themselves a pay raise while cutting food stamps.

[kapkomet]

I just think it is better to post the current statements and comment on that. It seemed to be a slow weekend and I'm guessing no one had a chance to post Bush's current quotes.

 

It would be like one of the Liberals around here posting that no one posted that the GOP controlled House voted themselves a pay raise while cutting food stamps.

I sure as hell do.

 

But I can see both sides of an issue usually.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

I honestly was gone all weekend from any news sources, but is it better for the debate to post what Bush is saying, or to post what other posters are not saying? It appears that Bush Backers are now resorting to attacking the other posters and not defending Bush. That is sadder to me than Bush Bashers not posting his latest remarks.

 

 

HUH?

 

:rolly

 

 

Im the king of the Bush Backers and who have I attacked recently over comments about Bush?

Edited November 21, 2005 by NUKE_CLEVELAND

[Rex Kickass]

Well, if you see both sides of the issue - see what the President really said.

 

He praised Murtha while saying that his criticism is invalid because he didn't provide an alternate strategy. Except that Murtha actually did provide an alternate strategy.

 

I've been thinking about this a lot lately. About whether I am personally too hard on the GOP and not hard enough on my own party.

 

The more I think about it, I'm probably treating my own a touch too softly. I'm a contrarian by nature and sometimes I'm letting my own hunger for change color my view of what's right. So I give up my own view of what is and what should be for the sake of an argument or a candidate. It's something I'm trying to stop doing.

 

It's why I don't like Biden. It's why I'm unhappy with Kerry 2.0. It's why I love folks like Governor Schweitzer. It's why I get pissed off when we'll cut food stamps programs to make it look like we're trimming the fat, while we spend billions of dollars in graft elsewhere in our budget.

 

I'm pissed off because our society generally does what's easy instead of what's right.

 

I'm not a causehead and I'm more of a practicalist than you might think. But I also think that honesty, fairness, social justice ought to be more than ideals in our society.

 

I don't know so much that my party believes in these values either. But I feel like on my side of the fence that voice is allowed to be addressed. With the GOP, there's tons of recent evidence showing that it isn't even a consideration.

[Texsox]

HUH?

 

:rolly 

Im the king of the Bush Backers and who have I attacked recently over comments about Bush?

 

Instead of SS posting what Bush said over the weekend, he posted that no one had posted what Bus said over the weekend. Attacking the lack of posts, would be a better phrase now that I think about it.

[FlaSoxxJim]

If many of the dissenters would post about Bush's most recent words on Murtha, it would be in a way that gave it the proper perspective. The broadside attacks by the White House beginning on Thursday night with McClellan "baffled" by the way Murtha turned "Michael Moore" didn't play well to the American public. After Rep. Schmidt stepped in it on the Floor Friday, there was a calculated reassessment as to how to speak to the Murtha issue.

 

We are seeing that in the most recent GWB statements.

[FlaSoxxJim]

And The Note said it better than me this morning, calling Bush's remarks yesterday "fascinatingly conciliatory."

 

It will be interesting to see the language Cheney uses in his "Iraq and the War on Terror" speech this morning (He's speaking now at American Enterprise Institute).

 

Edit to add: Another Note snippet:

 

. . . one Senate Republican aide, who watched the House debate with "dismay," saying, "If the House Republicans want to make Jack Murtha the face of the Democratic Party, then Republicans will really be trounced next year."

 

Maybe all that explains the presidential dial-back. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm[/quote]

Edited November 21, 2005 by FlaSoxxJim

[EvilMonkey]

I'm sure the two of us can agree that what she did was f***ing moronic.

 

Yes. Open mouth, insert foot.

[Texsox]

Yes.  Open mouth, insert foot.

 

But what pisses me off, is the sharks jumping on her. The outrage was way out of scale for what she said. Each side looks for a small misstep and jumps with all feet. A simple statement, she's a moron would have been enough.

[EvilMonkey]

But what pisses me off, is the sharks jumping on her. The outrage was way out of scale for what she said. Each side looks for a small misstep and jumps with all feet. A simple statement, she's a moron would have been enough.

 

Tex, I think both Rex and I traded a statement a while back that sums up alot of what we see today. manufactured outrage. It seems like each side is just waiting for something to get pissed off about, and when it happens, they go balls out trying to 'get' the other side. As to who started it first, kinda like the chicken and the egg argument. It would be great if there WAS some civility in politics.

[Texsox]

Tex, I think both Rex and I traded a statement a while back that sums up alot of what we see today.  manufactured outrage.  It seems like each side is just waiting for something to get pissed off about, and when it happens, they go balls out trying to 'get' the other side.  As to who started it first, kinda like the chicken and the egg argument.  It would be great if there WAS some civility in politics.

 

I always respected the Senators that seemed to rise above the politics. Congress was never all that civil, but has dropped to an all-time low.

 

I've decided the first step is to quit defending any crap from the politicians I voted for. Somehow we got backwards and defend "our side" no matter what. We should be more embarrased and upset when it's "our guys".

[kapkomet]

But what pisses me off, is the sharks jumping on her. The outrage was way out of scale for what she said. Each side looks for a small misstep and jumps with all feet. A simple statement, she's a moron would have been enough.

You know what's funny is that you see people that are defending the policies jumping all over the "esteemed" Rep. in question... in other words, we can definitely criticize someone even when it's a position we agree with for having gone too far. I don't see that from the other side on this board. I just see more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more (you get the idea now) s*** piled on top of the pile.

 

You know I got to thinking - the timeline of all this stinks to high heaven.

 

Last weekend (two weekends ago)-- you have Bush and Cheney finally pushing back on the "liar" charges, then you have on Tuesday of last week, Bill Clinton overseas criticising the war, calling George Bush a liar, the whole 9 yards, then Thursday, the whole Rep. Murtha deal, then Friday the "vote" :rolly, then last night Hillary coming out and "defending the troops" - now come the f*** on. YOU KNOW she knew that Bill Clinton was going to say what he did, and she's so quick to jump on the side of "moderation"... can anyone say SMOKESCREEN?

 

It's amazing how both sides are hamming this up so bad. In fact, it's disgusting. It's all for jockeying for power is all this is. "But the troops"... BLECH... no one (the politicians) gives a rat's ass about those people, really. But it sure sounds good on a political slogan.

[Texsox]

There's an awful lot of crap on both sides, I agree. What I always find surprising is the groups that generally don't want to deploy troops, and want them back the fastest, are painted as unpatriotic and not "supporting the troops". Those that seem to find body counts acceptable if the Commander in Chief says it must be, are patriotic and support the troops.

 

I also found it insanely ironic that during the last election the Dems had a war hero and the GOP did not. All the rhetoric from prior elections went out the window as they met secretly one night and exchanged campaign scripts. All the same crap was said, but this time it came from opposite sides.

 

They are all in the same industry and best practices tend to creep into every company in the same industry. When voters start to demand better from their own party, we will begin to take back our government. As long as voters will defend any crap as long as it comes from "their team" we'll have crappy government.

[kapkomet]

There's an awful lot of crap on both sides, I agree. What I always find surprising is the groups that generally don't want to deploy troops, and want them back the fastest, are painted as unpatriotic and not "supporting the troops". Those that seem to find body counts acceptable if the Commander in Chief says it must be, are patriotic and support the troops.

 

I also found it insanely ironic that during the last election the Dems had a war hero and the GOP did not. All the rhetoric from prior elections went out the window as they met secretly one night and exchanged campaign scripts. All the same crap was said, but this time it came from opposite sides.

 

They are all in the same industry and best practices tend to creep into every company in the same industry. When voters start to demand better from their own party, we will begin to take back our government. As long as voters will defend any crap as long as it comes from "their team" we'll have crappy government.

I don't want to draw this out, but John Kerry was only in the position he was in because he was a "war hero"... he had NO ideas. That's why he lost.

[Texsox]

I don't want to draw this out, but John Kerry was only in the position he was in because he was a "war hero"... he had NO ideas.  That's why he lost.

 

Not meaning to draw it out, but if you recall, Clinton's Vietnam era activities were deemed not important by Dems, and everything by the GOP. Then years later it was the GOP discounting and the Dems extolling the virtues. Tons of irony here. No consistency at all. Both sides should have been ashamed, but instead they just carry on with business as usual.

[kapkomet]

Not meaning to draw it out, but if you recall, Clinton's Vietnam era activities were deemed not important by Dems, and everything by the GOP. Then years later it was the GOP discounting and the Dems extolling the virtues. Tons of irony here. No consistency at all. Both sides should have been ashamed, but instead they just carry on with business as usual.

The difference between then and 2004 is that we didn't have 250,000 troops around the world involved in a war. I think that's a big difference.

[Rex Kickass]

I don't want to draw this out, but John Kerry was only in the position he was in because he was a "war hero"... he had NO ideas.  That's why he lost.

 

Actually, he did have ideas. He put them in a book that he released when he announced his candidacy. They're good ideas. They're good plans and they make sense. He didn't really share them though beyond that book. And the world was more concerned with the Swift Boat vets and flip-flop sandals than actually looking at issues last year.

 

I would just love an election where people don't just wrap themselves up in a flag or a war and actually talk about the damn things that matter.

 

But that just doesn't seem to fit in the "missing teen in aruba, could someone poop in your food, was that tv switcher error on CNN deliberate, next on FOX/MSNBC?CNN/local newscast" atmosphere that we live in.

[sec159row2]

You are not off.  And the White House immediately had Scotty Mac on the job attacking Murtha and calling him unpatriotic and the saame tired old bit.

 

Attack the war vets when they oppose is something the administration has a lot of experience at.

 

Murtha is as hawkish as a Dem can be, and he's really very conservative.  But certainly he expected he would be attacked.  He won't let them Swiftboat him and get away with it.

 

 

murtha asked clinton to pull out of somalia... which clinton did... and bin laden later pointed to this as "emboldening" his fighters... some hawk

[Balta1701]

murtha asked clinton to pull out of somalia... which clinton did...  and bin laden later pointed to this as "emboldening" his fighters...  some hawk

Are you saying that there were no Republicans who demanded Clinton pull out of Somalia?