Say what you want about FEMA's better performance here, the staged press conferences with fake reporters was-- fraudulent. It was such a stinking deceptive maneuver that even the White House has condemned it. Maybe because it was boneheaded even by administration standards.

this long to think of this.  I can see it now, Cheney, and the gang peppering the President with questions at his next news conference.

Most recently they did at the end of a news conference where a "schill" reporter (Jeff Gannon Duckard) was allowed(given)the LAST question for G-dubya and gave Bush the opportunity to attack moveon.org for their now famous “General Petraeus or betray us” newspaper ad.

It's humorously hypocritical that the White House should now chide FEMA for the same tactic.

there, speculation is the same as a factual statement so they must have concluded they could say what reporters would say and it would be the same thing....

I think you need to see providers more often.  Thy cup overfloweth with bile, even for THIS board.

your stupid little "proggy agenda" will survive despite the seeming emtional instablity amonsgst it's ranks...

i'm just here lettin' my Id get it's freak on...

you and the bush haters have set the tone already, i'm just passing thru...

-- Modified on 10/26/2007 9:31:10 PM

General fund. It's an agency within the Department of Homeland Security.

As blatant as our government's lies and acts of legerdemain have been in recent years, along with all media swiftly being gobbled up by tools like Rupert Murdock spinning and twisting the truth to an ever increasingly dumbed down populace; it will soon become a "terrorist act" to question the shilled shit spooned out by ANY of the 'approved' news sources.

Dude, I am so tired of the smug responses that I don't have the energy anymore. Don't pass the buck.  It isn't about who started what...it is about how pointless any discourse has become when most things approaching sincerity are taken out with a well placed snide one liner.  I found myself drawn into that enough that I am trying to take a backseat with it.

Since YOU still evidently have unlimited energy to go back and forth still with opposite minded people without even breaking a sweat, why don't you try corralling your id sometime and put your intellect (which you obviously have, in spite of it's dubious use) to use and think hard to find stuff we can have more civil discussions about here than just instigating with one liners like the Bill O'Reilly clone that you have become on here?

I'm sure it's quite amusing to you, but is that the best you can do?

I'm not trying to excuse the flag waving, god fearing righties, but to claim that they have a monopoly on one line, snide remarks, is laughable.

You Bush haters are much more likely to resort to those type of tactics, then when you're called on it, you say something like "it was only parody", "can't you take a joke?" or some such nonsense.

I don't like it coming from either side, it just proves my point,  "All partisans are idiots" Democrat or Republican, you all sound like morons when you start with the one liners. Do you really think that "Bush Lied" sounds any more intellgent than "all libs are traitors"?

Now of course when anybody says that "Bush sounds like an idiot" or "Hillary's a communist" I really have a hard time disagreeing with either statement. lol

have questions about his policies strikes me as pretty partisan.

Assuming opposition because a person wants answers is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

-- Modified on 10/27/2007 11:56:35 AM

Not people who disagree with his policies. I'm talkng about people who are so full of hate that they can't even mention his name without calling Dubya or shrub or some other kind type of insult. Those are "Bush haters" and it is almost impossible to have a rational discussion with anyone that full of hate. It blinds them to anything else.

Don't get me wrong, it exists on both sides, the "ditto heads" are just as incapable of independent thought. they let Rush do all their thinkng for them.

Even though they are on opposite sides of the politacal spectrum, "ditto heads" and "Bush haters" are very much the same. Anybody who lets someone else do their thinking for them, is an idiot.

what most Bush supporters mean.

The distinction is what one takes as a fact, versus an opinion.  

If, for example, you can't counter a statement with a confirmable fact, you've probably defaulted to fact.  

Let me cite one example that frosts my ass pretty seriously, and that is the running battle of Republican vs. Democrat "support the troops/heros/my dick is harder than yours".

When I don't have decisive factual knowledge of a situation, and still have to make up my mind, I usually walk away from the fellow I think is incredible because of the way they answer questions.

the other thing is, whenever you disagree, they launch into this Hannitty FAUX news, Rush, ABu Ghrab, yadi yadi yadi mantra.

i gave up along time ago trying to have a civil conversation about polotics with someone who is NOT within range of a left hook.

-- Modified on 10/27/2007 12:33:33 PM

This is exactly what I'm talking about. You take one line out of my post and come to the conclusion that because I used the term "Bush hater" I must be a Bush supporter. Did you even read the rest of my post?

You obviously missed the part where I said that I wouldn't disagree with either the sentiment "Bush sounds like an idiot" or "Hillary's a communist"  What part of that statement sounds like a "Bush supporter"?

I said, "most Bush supporters".

And "you" is commonly used impersonally or collectively, and that is my meaning here.

Look carefully at MY post.   I think you're making a lot of assumptions.

OK, so looking back a couple posts is more reasonable.   This is a "if the shoe fits, wear it" statement, and should be interpreted as such.



-- Modified on 10/27/2007 1:10:16 PM

you should be able to take notice of the fact that Iraq has been a massive and ongoing GOP fuckup from the beginning.

At least, taking their own measures as a guideline.  If you want to regard it as an oil control operation, then of course it's a pretty serious and ongoing fuckup, as well as a massive deception of the American people.

Realistically, what could you expect from a guy who trips over his own brain?

Like I said, you just can't resist can you?

"Realistically, what could you expect from a guy who trips over his own brain?"

Just when I think there is some kind of hope around here. I think I'll go back to the other boards and talk about pussy. At least its a subject where people don't have to resort to name calling on every fucking post.

is leading and prolonging a massive and ongoing fuckup in Iraq; (3) continues to bait others about their military records while refusing to answer about his own, (4) etc - how much more do you want?

Hey, if you want to deny it, just let us know.   Defaults are taken as admissions, for good reason.

BTW, pouting that people don't agree with you doesn't help, either.   Zin might be able to get you a cheap ticket to Canada, I dunno.

-- Modified on 10/27/2007 2:11:02 PM

Or do we just have a delicate ego problem?

Can you listen to Bush for 10 minutes and think he knows WTF he's talking about?  I mean, apart from not knowing that Greeks are not Grecians or Greasers or something?

Do you think Iraq is going as planned?  Do you think it's going as represented?  Exactly what do you think is going on in Iraq?

Do you think there is a more important issue facing the USA than Iraq today?

I was trying for some unknown reason to find some kind of common ground with you, but you just insist on being such a fucking asshole. You are not always wrong, but you are almost always an asshole. I'll wait until I am really, really fucking bored and then maybe we'll try this again.

In the meantime Go fuck yourself and you and BSD can go argue to your heart's content. He seems to be the only one that can stomach you for any length of time.

OTOH, your response makes it sound like he's a real close butt buddy of yours.

I can only assume that you're just fine with Iraq, etc., and that anybody not liking that situation is a Bush-hater.  And a fucking asshole too, now.   Apparantely because you want to avoid discussion of, well, things like Iraq.

But of course, you don't support Bush.  

Well, sorry to hurt your feelings, and embarrass you with facts here, but it seems it's up to you to say precisely what you think should be going on here - apart from avoiding discussion of Iraq.

I would like to know how you are going to discuss Iraq and still avoid the phrase, "massive and on-going fuckup", or it's equivalent.

Do you think there is any more important and immediate issue in American politics than Iraq?

What do you think should be done?

Do you think that calling me a fucking asshole and running off is enough of a smokescreen or answer?

which of course is impossible. You'd know that you were the only on this thread talking about Iraq, but If you have to talk about Iraq on every fucking thread, here goes.

Yes, Iraq is presently a fuck up, but we need to be there, not just today, but for probably as long as we were in Germany.

Yes It's about the fucking oil, yes we should of had international support. No, it shouldn't just be our kids dying, but yes it is that fucking important. If we don't do it some one else(China or Iran) will. If the flow of oil to the west is cut off, we will look back at the Carter years as the good old days. $200 oil will kill our economy and then we will have to take the oil fields by force, Can you say WWIII, that's what we would be looking at.

That is my postion on Iraq. If you want to talk further about Iraq, either start a new thread or continue the one that is already talking about it. The one where i basically said the same thing you just made me say all over again. Is staying on topic too much to ask?

You have to admit Webb is not able to speak with any resemblance to intelligience..

is that the most convincing thing you can do?

OK, I'm not stopping you.

Hijacking this thread is MY job!

Hey JackO, you're already having a discussion about Iraq on another thread. How many threads do you want to hijack? Do you have so many alises that even you don't even rember who you are?

without spitting?

-- Modified on 10/27/2007 9:19:50 PM

You hijacked the thread before Einstein, and I'm gonna file a grievance with the union.

investigation to know that the administration knew from the beginning that we were going in for the long haul, and yet made no plans for that, so that it wasn't so much truly surprised as simply totally unprepared.

Is that the sort of recklessness that a president should be impeached for?

Let's assume that these investigations turn up enough  evidence to prove your POV, that the administration said, "look, we have to control the resource, no matter what else", and so invaded a country without provocation or authorization, and indeed by misrepresenting the matter to its own people, and thereby killed god knows how many people.

Now how do you think that would have gone over at Nuremberg?

Just asking.

It seems fair game to at least remind you what people share your side of the aisle and what they say. Maybe you can disown Bush, Rush, Fox and Hannity and still keep conservatism. But if a tree that produces rotten fruit it's probably because it's infested to core.