Pervert, you're a dishonest debater.

Pervert, do you really see yourself as kicking liberal ass here? Yes, we get that the Kerry thing was meant to be a intelligent riposte by the Republicans. In your words, we “get the joke”. But not only has Kerry been proved to be blameless, the thread has served to highlight the gross incompetence of Bush. The joke’s on him now.

And while we’re at it, a little about your style of debate. Please do not snip bits of my argument then redo the exact things I was attacking you for in the snipped sections. For example, I pointed out that it is half an hour in question, not seven minutes. You conveniently snipped that bit, and went on talking about seven minutes. You challenged me to find one thing that Bush could do in the command centre that he couldn’t do, and I found three. You snipped them and carried on blithely. I accused you of using straw men when wondering what we would have done if Bush had jumped into action straight away. You snipped that and responded with another straw man:

Similarly, many people have responded to challenges like this:

…and have posted lists of appropriate questions that would have been asked by a competent leader, or even your average concerned schmoe. You ignore arguments you don’t like and repost the same crap again and again. This is dishonest debating.

No, not at all. I am not offering erudite arguments in defence of a beleagerd president. I am simply responding to the rediculousness of the argument that President Bush should have done something, anything, anywhere, anytime, during those first minutes after he learned of the 9-11 attacks.

Um, then, no, you still don’t get the joke. I do not like to speak for Mr. Moto. And if he thought the argument that Kerry did nothing in the first minutes after the 9-11 attacks was a serious attack on Kerry, then I’m wrong. But my take on it was that he was simply illustrating the absurdity of the attack on Bush that has been made again, and again, and agian, and agian , and agian , and agian , and agian , and agian , and agian , and agian , and agian , and agian , and agian , and agian , and agian , and agian until we are all yellow in the face.

You postulated that it could have been longer than 7 minutes. But if I recall (possibly from another thread) there was not much longer than that before he did go into the other room briefly. I could be wrong, I’m willing to be on any particular point. 7 minutes or 30 makes very little difference in the fact that this whole argument is petty tuesday morning quarterbacking.

I don’t remember you using that phrase. Can you point me to the post?

No, they continue to post possible questions that could have been asked without providing a single shred of evidence that any of those questions would have done any good. Moreover, they continue to ignore the possibility that a barrage of such questions could indeed have interfered with the very information gathering you all seem to accuse Bush of avoiding.

Look, I’m certainly willing to say that Bush could have done better in those 7 minutes. He could have done better in those first 30 minutes. Hell, I’ll even say that he could have done better in the first entire day of 9-11. I remember the speech he gave. I found it not nearly as inspiring as the one President Clinton gave after the Oaklahoma bombing. My only point is that whatever happened in those 7, 30, or 200 minutes after President Bush first learned of the attacks on 9-11 do not amount to anything worthy of the sort of visceral response that liberals give to it.

So, let me turn this pitting back on you. Do you think you are whipping conservative but when you make the argument that President Bush did not do enough during the first 30 minutes of the 9-11 attacks?
BTW, thank you very much for this thread. I have never been pitted before. I am in your debt.

Dude, if you’re gonna go cut ‘n’ paste-happy, couldn’t you at least have picked the one time you spelled “again” correctly?

Otherwise, what Lambchop said. You continue to ask questions of people who have already given you answers, several times. That’s really annoying to (and somewhat disrespectful of) your fellow debaters.

We do, after a fashion, have an admission.

The notion that Bush should have done anything at all after being told the country he is President of was under attack is “ridiculous.” Can we even imagine setting a lower standard than this? Jeez. If he’d left the photo-op and taken a power nap, I take it you’d defend that? I mean, it’s not like he was needed or could’ve done anything. For fuck’s sake, pervert, people are not saying that Bush should’ve hopped on Air Force One, intercepted one of the planes and pulled a Harrison Ford and said “Give me back my plane.” KAPOW! They’re asking why he didn’t display even the mildest amount of curiosity or desire to do fucking try to do something after being told “America is under attack.” This is apparently too much to ask.

That’s far and away the toughest slam I’ve ever heard on Bush. In short, the ‘Bush haters’ are expecting that he do something, and you’re perfectly satisfied with no response at all to an enormous crisis. You make it sound like the man has an IQ of 50 and you’re happy if he doesn’t drool on himself too much.

So you say you’re not just trying to kick liberal ass, or arguing in defence of Bush. But in your own words:

(emphasis mine)

No shit. I GET IT, but you’re wrong. Here are a few points. Please answer true or false:

  • Kerry had neither the responsibility, nor the power to do anything in terms of an emergency response. T/F
  • Thus what he was doing on the morning of 9/11 was irrelevant. T/F
  • On the other hand, Bush certainly had the responsibility to control the situation to the best of his abilities. T/F
  • At the time Bush heard of the attacks, a reasonable person would have thought it was possible he had the power to affect the situation. T/F
    (Note - whether, in hindsight, he actually did or didn’t is irrelevant)

I submit that all the answers to these statements are “True” and that therefore, it was his job to do something or at least find out what could be done. Further, Kerry is blameless and the comparison of the two ridiculous.

Well, as the second plane hit the WTC, there were two more planes in the air. At least one hadn’t been hijacked there. Half an hour later, the third plane had hit the Pentagon and the fourth had been hijacked. In that half-hour, a hell of a lot of important stuff happened. Could anyone have prevented it? Probably not. But it was Bush’s responsibility to try. This is his job.

Post #102, halfway down - “keep beating that straw man”.

No, they continue to post possible questions that could have been asked without providing a single shred of evidence that any of those questions would have done any good. Moreover, they continue to ignore the possibility that a barrage of such questions could indeed have interfered with the very information gathering you all seem to accuse Bush of avoiding.

The petty and stupid attack on Kerry got me into that thread, and caused my visceral response in this case. I don’t believe I’ve commented on the matter of the wasted time in the classroom before - I try to stay away from the Moore threads as much as possible.

However, the more I look at it, the more incompetent it makes Bush look. It’s painful watching him just sit there vacantly while people were about to die, so in that sense it’s visceral, yes. Of course it looks worse in hindsight, and of course I’m not asking that Bush flew like Superman to save the remaining planes. But time was extremely tight, and there was an attack going on. It was his responsibility to be in control, to have the facts at his fingertips, to be in contact with other senior figures, and to make tough decisions if necessary. He chose to read a stupid book and chat to the kids. At such an important time, that is fucking outrageous.

I believe the fact that Bush did shit-all for half an hour and seemed incapable of taking any action without his advisors whips President Bush’s butt, yes. Not Republicans in general, just Bush in particular.

My pleasure, I believe it’s the first time I’ve pitted someone.

Note - the paragraph beginning “No, they continue to post possible questions…” are pervert’s words, not mine. Sorry, my crappy coding.

Some folks think that a Commander and Chief should perk up and take interest upon learning that his nation is under attack.

Others think that a Commander and Chief should read “My Pet Goat” at such a time.

I think that any Commander and Chief who believes that he should read “My Pet Goat” upon learing that his nation is being attacked is so devoid of the intellectual and judgment skills required by a Commander and Chief that it would be best if he were to continue to read “My Pet Goat” indefinitely and abdicate from political life forthwith.

Dump the dodo, folks.

You don’t get it. Kerry should have done something. He is a leading Senator; he should have done something.

The country was under attack! He is a veteran, decorated for bravery! WHY DIDN"T HE DO SOMETHING! WHY DID HE JUST SIT THERE! PEOPLE WERE DYING, AND HE DID NOTHING!



John Kerry NOW…SHODAN…we…must…think this THROUGH! We…we…must…nevah…let our…emotions…into…this…fight! Only EVIL…will…give…us…decisive…action! I…remember…when I…was…on…in…Vietnam…on…a…boat…I’M REPORTING FOR DUTY!!! Huh? Oh yeah. So…anyway…I’m…on…this…BOAT…and…I Saved this man (say this in dramatic tones Senator Nevervotes)…and…we…ooooooh, ketchup!

Is this what the wing nuts are reduced to?

And why pick on Kerry, instead of your usual tactic of blaming Clinton’s blow job?

FWIW, I have no idea what Kerry was actually doing on the day. If he was like most people in the world who weren’t on the scene, he was trying to find out what was happening.

Bush did absolutely nothing. It was fucking bizarre. As is your attempt to accuse Kerry. Kerry wasn’t the President. Kerry wasn’t candidate for the Presidency. Kerry wasn’t Commander in Chief. Kerry wasn’t reading about goats.

You stupid fucker.

Jeez. You wing nuts should lay off the drugs.

Reduced to what? Debating what Kerry says? No room for that in your Bush hating world, huh?

And why is it only the left wingers bringing up Clinton’s blowjobs lately?

Just slowing it down like Kerry does so you can catch it all. :wink:

Intentional obtuseness!

The cornerstone of any Republican breakfast.

Ahhhhhh… Shodan and duffer, leaping in yet again with their brilliant ripostes to the lumbering lib’ruls. Damn, you guys are as hilarious as Mallard Fillmore. And about as content-free.

What did Kerry do? He, like most of us, tried to learn more about what was going on.

What did Bush do? He avoided learning what was going on.

Who should lead the most powerful nation on the earth? Someone who does his best to keep up with major events, so that if the time comes to make a decision, he will be able to make an informed decision.

Dump the dodo.

No he didn’t. Kerry, by his own admission, sat around for forty minutes not being able to think.

Check the linked thread, and the Larry King interview.

If anything, I was poking a little fun at this admission, especially in this season when Bush caught so much flack for a similar percieved lapse. I had no idea this would balloon into such a rage fest.

Not so much a rage fest as a typical wing nut “stupid fest”.

Too bad Nero didn’t have “My Pet Goat.”

Here is what followed after the paragraph you quoted:

Meanwhile, Bush read “My Pet goat.”

Mr. Moto, you should be much more careful when you cite statements. Don’t snip out the sections that directly contradict your position. Try to be honest.