When I suggested that you make your point using declarative sentences, I meant sentences ending in periods, not question marks. As it is, you’re being a putz: put up or shut up, eh?
Daniel
I just tossed them in, to prevent someone saying “yeah what about blahblahblah”. But, in putting party above country, I’d call them sell-outs (trying to be nice). I still have no idea why on earth McCain continues to take their shit. Remember that old video where McCain told Bush how “mean” it was to sabotage him? He had been the target of “Rovian wrath”. How it hurt (awwww). Damn it McCain, you should have knocked him flat on his ass, on national TV. I’d have bought the DVD. But nooooo.
Pfft. He might still get his gold watch.
Or, really, it’s because that’d be “bad for the party”…whether or not the party is good for the country is irrelevant, of course.
In all honest, I’m sure McCain is holding out for one of them juicy cabinet jobs. Yeah, John-boy, that’ll make it all worthwhile.
-Joe
Sure it is, when LHoD claims that there’s a big moral dimension to voting these days. Now some people may have considered the swiftvet claims, vs Bush’s misleadership in the Iraq war and the abu Ghraib disgrace, and concluded that Kerry held the weaker moral position, but I’ll bet others heard the swiftvet claims, and simply decided to stay away from the polls.
There’s no moral dimension to throwing up your hands and taking a pass on democracy. Lofty prose notwithstanding, and we’ve all heaed some great excuses, the only thing a nonvoter actually accomplishes is the passive ceding of power to whichever side happens to win.
John McCain ‘did nothing’ because he strongly supports the war. He’s perfectly willing to take on Bush over all kinds of issues (for example, torture. And McCain is right). But on the war, McCain is solidly with Bush, and always has been. Go check out his speech at the last Republican convention. It was as hawkish as you’re ever going to hear. Never quit, never surrender, fight to the end. That was his message.
'Course, McCain is a problem for some of you, because he doesn’t fit the ‘chickenhawk’ label. It’ll be fun to see how McCain gets spun if he winds up being elected president and carries on ‘Bush’s war’.
I disagree with him, but he has “street cred” with me.
Absolutely, and I’ve praised him for that.
But he doesn’t just talk the talk, he’s been there and walked the walk. He also shows a hell of a lot more concern for the well-being of the military that has to fight. He watches to see where the money goes and raises holy hell when it gets “diverted” by political cronies.
Wow, Sam, it must be tough to be as smart as you. I mean, knowing everything about everything all the time?
O! The burden!
McCain is solidly with Bush and always was? And you believe that because of a single speech. Ahnold spoke for Bush, too. Are they peas in a pod?
Let me give you a little info for that big old brain of yours - McCain existed before Dubya got his stiffy for invading Iraq…and so did Dubya. Not everything in the world revolves around that.
Of course, cowering in your own country while others do your fighting for you (because you’re such a believer!) makes you so neat. Kind of like a chickenhawk-once-removed.
-Joe
Too much caffiene today, Merijeek?
Nah, not that late. I’m an old man and need to get what sleep I can between crochety blowups.
-Joe
Says a guy who’s very willing to have the non-Canadians spend any number of lives in support of his lying idol’s war, but not his own. Tell us that after you’ve come down and enlisted - you *are * eligible, you know. Or, at least take a moment to consider what you’re posting before you post it - it would do you a world of good.
McCain is a problem, not because he’s a chickenhawk, but because he’s a pol, playing his own game and concerned with his own image at least as much as with his own principles. He’s been quite successful working both sides of the fence here - he can tell the (dwindling number) of war supporters that he was always in favor of removing Saddam etc., while simultaneously showing the growing majority his stand on torture. Either way he looks both realistic and principled. But, of course, someone with a black-and-white mind like yours may have a problem comprehending that.
*Note to Mods… These are just snippets. I will not intentionally violate coyrights, but I need some quotes to make a point. *
Sam, for this discussion, I’m not interested in McCain. I really dont care. I’m interested in the others, the Chickenhawks, who are behind the white flag ads, and the “you’re with us against us” crapola. They are the ones making the noise and questioning the courage of the rest of the people. They haven’t earned the right to do that. They never had it, and if they did, they threw that away years ago. Maybe some people need to be reminded on a dialy basis, just what sort of people these are. So here are just a FEW of them again. Let’s start with Chicken George himself.
Bush - You know when a guy walks away from a National Guard obligation during wartime and gets away with it, he must come from “a good family.” Not that his daddy had anything to do with his getting a Guard slot in the first place - oh, no …
Used family to join Texas National Guard , a draft-dodging tactic favored by “sons of the powerful” (Colin Powell/Memoirs). GWB went AWOL when National Guard introduced drug testing, remained AWOL for 17 months- SEVENTEEN MONTHS – in 1972-3. He was not disciplined for this in any way. In 2000, angry Alabama veterans offered a $3,500 reward to anyone who could prove that Bush had served in the state. There were no takers.
Cheney - Says he had "other priorities." You bet he had other priorities. Imagine how early in life you must begin scheming to get away with what this guy has. He was too busy thinking about Halliburton to go fight Charlie. Started with student deferment; when rules tightened, married to get family deferment. When rules changed to exempt only married men with children, Cheney went to work, fathering a child born exactly nine months and two days after the rule-change. “* had other priorities in the 1960s than military service.”
Wolfowitz - Yet another Bush administration man in the Pentagon who has no idea what it’s like to wear a uniform. He got a BA at Cornell in 1965. Maybe if we’d had a guy as bright as he thinks he is in Vietnam, it would have turned out differently. Also, avoided military service during the height of the Vietnam War, due to elusive medical problems which vanished once that unhealthy draft ceased.
DeLay - “I would have joined up but those minorities took all the places”
Limbaugh - alleged medical problem which RL has identified as either “anal cysts” or "an ingrown hair follicle on my bottom " Also eligible for exemption under Vietnam-era draft law on sexual orientation. “…and, upon taking a physical, was discovered to have a physical – uh, by virtue of what the military says, I didn’t even know it existed – a physical deferment and then the lottery system came along, when they chose your lot by birthdate, and mine was high. And I did not want to go”.
Ashcroft - To avoid serving in Vietnam, Ashcroft sought and received a military deferment because, he claimed, he was involved in work of national importance: teaching business education at a small college in his native Missouri.
Rove - Lott says he (Rove) was so focused on his studies and student political matters, such as getting soda machines in the dorms, that he didn’t think much about either protesting the war or volunteering for it.
Kemp - sought medical deferment (while playing in the NFL). “Knee problem,” although continued in NFL for 8 years.
Buchanan - Sought deferment (for bad knee).
Robertson - His US Senator father got him out of Korea as soon as the shooting began.
Then, on top of all the other stuff, the yellow cake, the Downing memo, the real CIA report, ALL the other crap there is … http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/_/id/8798997?rnd=1134488766190&has-player=false
The fabrication might have ended there, the tale of another political refugee trying to scheme his way to a better life. But just because the story wasn’t true didn’t mean it couldn’t be put to good use. Al-Haideri, in fact, was the product of a clandestine operation – part espionage, part PR campaign – that had been set up and funded by the CIA and the Pentagon for the express purpose of selling the world a war. … By law, the Bush administration is expressly prohibited from disseminating government propaganda at home. But in an age of global communications, there is nothing to stop it from planting a phony pro-war story overseas – knowing with certainty that it will reach American citizens almost instantly. … In modern warfare, he believes, the outcome depends largely on the public’s perception of the war – whether it is winnable, whether it is worth the cost. … The key element of Rendon’s INC operation was a worldwide media blitz designed to turn Hussein, a once dangerous but now contained regional leader, into the greatest threat to world peace. … Never before in history had such an extensive secret network been established to shape the entire world’s perception of a war. "It was not just bad intelligence – it was an orchestrated effort," … Indeed, Rendon is already thinking ahead. Last year, he attended a conference on information operations in London, where he offered an assessment on the Pentagon’s efforts to manipulate the media.
There are the security leaks BY the administartion - WIlson and Plame were not the only ones.
Then there is the way these chickenhawks treat those who did fight.
Earlier this year, Republican leaders in Congress blocked $2 billion in emergency funding for veterans’ health care from the $82 billion supplemental funding bill. They felt that the money would be better spent in Iraq and Afghanistan, where we’re producing more and more injured soldiers for whom we cannot afford adequate medical care.
Then the Bush administration requested a mere 2.7 percent increase in Veterans Affairs (VA) spending, even though the VA’s under-secretary testified last year that the VA health care system needs a 13 to 14 percent increase annually to maintain their current level of services. Thousands of veterans of the first Gulf War are suffering the effects of exposure to depleted uranium, or have died from that exposure, yet the U.S. government denies the effects and continues to ship depleted uranium munitions for use in Afghanistan and Iraq. Some wounded U.S. soldiers have returned home from the current war in Iraq only to learn that they are being referred to credit agencies who want the soldiers to pay for equipment they lost when they were injured; or for charges for military housing.
The Veterans Affairs Department is currently reviewing approximately one-third of the cases of veterans who are receiving disability benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). After conducting an internal study, the VA believes that they were too lenient in deciding which soldiers were eligible for PTSD benefits. Last year, the VA spent $4.3 billion on PTSD disability payments, and the VA hopes to reduce these payments by revoking PTSD benefits for many veterans. This will be the final insult to soldiers who were asked to fight a war in Iraq on false premises.
Back to the White Flag again. Senator Miller said
Now we are told that those expressions of concern about the misdirection of the Iraqi campaign demonstrated that the national Democratic Party declared its surrender on the war on terror.'' Democrats were accused of giving aid and comfort to the enemy,’’ according to another Republican Member who never served in combat. Let every American understand the meaning of these words: It does not matter who you are, if you have worn the uniform of your country, if you have risked your life in combat; to those who use these words on the floor of the House, it does not matter. Challenge the policies of the Bush administration and House Republicans in Iraq, and you are ``giving aid comfort to the enemy.’’ You are surrendering to terrorism. In other words, you are a traitor. That is what these Republican Members would suggest about Members of Congress. Well, according to the latest poll, 60 percent of the American public think the situation in Iraq is out of control. Have we become a Nation of traitors in the eyes of the Republican leaders of this institution?
Mr. Speaker, this disgraceful, demeaning, and insulting rhetoric has no place in the Congress, it has no place in America, and it should be denounced by every Member of this House, regardless of party and regardless of one’s position on Iraq. The day we lose our ability to voice our heartfelt views without having our patriotism demeaned is a dangerous day for democracy. Some may argue that these are just the voices of an extreme, though powerful few. Some say it is just partisan politics. That is not the case. We have been here before.
He goes on to talk about various other, as he says “vicious attacks”.
Robert Byrd says
That so many have sacrificed during this war in Iraq is reason enough to ask questions about our government’s policy in that faraway country. Our troops continue to shed their blood, and our nation continues to devote enormous sums of our national wealth, to continue that war. Whether one supported or opposed the war at its outset: no American must ever surrender the right to question the government. Since our country was sent to war on March 19, 2003, two thousand and seventy-three Americans have been killed. Nearly 16,000 troops have been wounded. Our military is straining under the repeated deployment of our troops, including the members of the National Guard. More than $214 billion has been spent in Iraq. Urban combat takes place each and every day in Baghdad. Veterans hospitals in our own country are threatened by budget shortfalls. And yet, Americans are still left to wonder, when will our brave troops be coming home? … Wednesday evening, the Vice President of the United States even claimed that criticism of the Administration’s war in Iraq was “dishonest and reprehensible.” The Vice President’s comments come on the heels of comments from President Bush, who said, “What bothers me is when people are irresponsibly using their positions and playing politics. That’s exactly what is taking place in America.”
The President and the Vice President need to reread the Constitution. Asking questions, seeking honesty and truth, and pressing for accountability is exactly what the Framers had in mind. Questioning policies and practices, especially ones that have cost this nation more than 2,000 of her bravest sons and daughters, is a responsibility of every American. It is also a central role of Congress.
… But instead of working with the Congress, instead of clearing the air, the White House falls back to the irksome practice of attack, attack, attack, obscure, obscure, obscure. The American people are tired of these reprehensible tactics. Circling the wagons will not serve this Administration well. What the people demand are the facts. They want their elected leaders to level with them. And, when it comes to the war in Iraq, this Administration seems willing to do anything it can to avoid the truth – a truth that I believe will reveal that the Bush Administration manipulated the facts in order to lead this nation on the road to war.
Finally, after all the fine talk about the traitors undermining the morale and safety of the troops, how do they show their own respect? Instead of sending their bodies home with traditional military displays of courtesy, they are treated as cheap-ass cargo.
Meanwhile remember when Rumsfeld said “… the army we have and not the army we wish for”? The company that makes the armor, has said that it was never contacted for more armor, and could have provided all that was needed. Soldiers and their families are forced to bu the armor out of their own pocket. BUT there is plenty of money to give away to cronies, for projects that are unnecessary and unwanted.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20051204/news_1n4adcs.html
Wilkes’ story shows how gifts, favors and campaign contributions can be used to gain lucrative business from the government.
Over the past 20 years, Wilkes has devoted much of his career to developing political contacts in Washington. He and his associates have spent at least $600,000 on political contributions and $1.1 million on lobbying beyond the gifts mentioned in the Cunningham plea agreement, as they cultivated such politicians as House Majority Leader Tom DeLay and Appropriations Committee Chairman Jerry Lewis. And since 1996, he has received at least $95 million in government contracts for the small family of firms based in his $11 million headquarters in Poway, including ADCS Inc. and Group W. … “An earmark is usually devoted to a particular company or particular project that is tied to a particular congressman,” said Michael Surrusco, director of ethics campaigns at Common Cause, a government watchdog group.
Earmarks are typically added to budget bills after they have been passed by the Senate and the House and the differing versions are being resolved in a conference committee. Because those meeting occur outside public view, the earmarks can be a way of avoiding scrutiny or accountability.
The earmarks were included in the budget even though the Pentagon never asked for funds for automated document conversion. In 1994, the General Accounting Office, now known as the Government Accountability Office, which monitors federal spending, found that the military did not need automated systems because it already had its own systems to digitize documents.
That did not dissuade Audre’s supporters in Congress.
So corruption and graft are more important than the soldiers, and more important than any mere war. One of the most vocal “attack dogs” was deliberately diverting money to his buddies, who then paid hi very well - Cunningham
The Bush-Cheney campaign used Cunningham as a designated hit man in 2004. He went on national TV to attack Democrat John Kerry – “We do not need a ‘Jane Fonda’ as commander in chief” – and as someone who “would depreciate our military and our intelligence services in a time of war.”
This was no aberration. In 1992, Cunningham branded Democratic nominee Bill Clinton a “traitor” for his anti-Vietnam War activities and said of all Vietnam War protesters, “I would have no hesitation about lining them up and shooting them.”
… Duke Cunningham tearfully confessed that he had “demanded, sought and received at least $2.4 million in illicit payments” to steer from his influential positions on the House committees for defense appropriations and intelligence Pentagon contracts to the defense contractors whose bribes he had solicited. … For the betrayal of his office and his oath, and his serial criminal acts, Cunningham faces up to 10 years in prison. … It is his confession that he steered defense contracts because of the bribe money he took and not because the work of his criminal collaborator “was in the best interest of the country” – the country the California Republican professed to love, the country he sought to protect from John Kerry. Cunningham’s motive was not obtaining the best intelligence gathering or analysis, the specialty of one of his co-conspirator contractors, to protect and defend American troops at risk. No, it was to make a buck even if his corrupt accomplice corporation failed to protect those troops Cunningham insisted were his “passion.”
Too bad the treason laws are so tightly written. If I had MY way, for deliberately stealing money that could have gone to the soldiers in the war he so staunchly supported, I think the son of a bitch should be branded a traitor. He talked about wanting to shoot people? SOme of us would like to shoot him now.
Karen Kwiatkowski has some good things to think about. She’s the one who told us all about the neocon “Iraq desk” in the Pentagon, and how it was “inventing” justifications for war.
No one in America wanted a brash and dangerous foreign policy pursued for the narrow and counterproductive interests. No one dreamed that in a modern information age, a war could be conducted for reasons never to be honestly shared with those same Americans who would send their beloveds to fight and die. The price for speaking out against any government program is often to be vilified, attacked, slandered, smeared and discredited. Neoconservative circular logic says those who disagree with their prescriptions must be crazy, because to be sane is to know – to feel – that neoconservative political desires are innately beneficent, noble and wise. Every critic of the lies leading to war has received similar, almost identical, treatment by neoconservatives, through whispering campaigns, quiet threats, false statements and newsy articles and opinion pieces built around a smear.
So Sam, come one down and enlist. The Neo’s and chickenhawks can use a guy like you. Just don’t expect them to give you any support, equipment, decent pay, benefits, health care, or even a decent funeral. If your equipment and supplies are lost or damaged, expect calls from collection agencies. Just don’t expect any straight expanations, you will never get any.
This stuff is about on the same level as Bill Clinton murdering Vince Foster and then faking the suicide.
What garbage. Yes, Bush was in the National Guard. He was NOT AWOL for 17 months, and I’d like to see you prove this claim.
I bet it will be a shock to Lynn to learn that Dick married her to get a deferment. And that’s some potent Cheney sperm and compliant ova… able to jump on command only two days after the rule change, eh?
Cite, for both the specific medical problems and that they vanished?
This is the worst sort of sly innuendo.
Cite?
John Kerry was also eligible for exemption under Vietnam-era draft law on sexual orientation. EVERY SINGLE PERSON WAS ELIGBLE FOR EXEMPTION under the Vietnam-era draft law on sexual orientation. Was Limbaugh EXEMPT under that draft law?
So he didn’t lie. He didn’t cheat. He didn’t deceive anyone about his intentions. He claimed a legal exemption.
Right?
So Rove didn’t volunteer. Is that the substance of this complaint?
Do you want to stake your reputation for intellectual honesty on this board on these arguments?
The difference being that people could sell videos accusing Clinton of murdering Vince Foster without anyone making a fuss, but anyone accusing Bush if shirking his military service gets shouted down by the Powerline/Little Green Footballs/mouth-foaming Bush apologists.
If only, for the country’s sake, if only.
Tell Cecil about it. Only because a Congressman’s son was never formally charged with it. Yes, I know, to you nothing is real unless there’s a charge, but the rest of us live in the real world.
I bet it will be a shock to think that many young women might have been interested in keeping their boyfriends from getting killed, and might have been willing to help?
As you, an alleged grown man, must know, the period of fertility is a little longer than a single moment, and the error margin around the standard nine months is similarly large. Only for one being deliberately obtuse would there be much of a coincidence.
You got him there, chum. Wolfowitz instead used student deferments, like so many other men his age. But be kind; it’s so hard to keep all the chickenhawks’ excuses straight.
(Re DeLay) Cite. I thought you lawyers didn’t ask questions if you didn’t already know the answers?
But not many of those eligible to use that ruse, possibly committing perjury while doing so, followed through. Limbaugh is therefore either gay or a liar, huh?
Ah, your old reliable “if it’s legal, it’s moral” approach, once again. Do you ever stop to think there might be more to life than that?
Are you really that dense? The substance is that virtually all of those responsible for sending >2000 American troops and, by their own estimate, 30,000 Iraqis to die would not risk their own lives for a similar cause. The substance is that they do not know the value of human life, or, if they do, think others lives are worth less than their own. And you’re defending them.
Be very, very careful about that, in your position, friend. Be very, very sure you understand what is being said before you rush to find a way to denounce it. Don’t you suspect that you yourself just might have a reputation already for placing party before either country or morality, and that this post of yours doesn’t help dispel it?
Interesting.
Suppose an anti-war person said something like:
Since this “paraphrase” is a simple falsehood, would it be worthy of condemnation, or does the person get a walk on this?
Or is it ethical to lie about your opponents’s positions, if they are pro-war?
http://www.truthandduty.com/documents.htm
has some of the applicable documents, with a history. Note to mods again - this is a snippet… The text, the history given, and the documents linked in pdf form at the site all mesh. They also are available at
http://awolbush.com
and http://www.glcq.com/bush_at_arpc1.htm
All with phtocopied xeroxed goodness.
If Bush served so well and so honorably, where the fuck are the documents to prove it? The military is usually very good at keeping records (unless maybe some big shit doesn’t want them found???). There are plenty that say Bush was a screw up and a no show.
From “The Nation”
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20041011/baker
Hmmmm. Nerves and fear. Fear from the War President? From the guy who told the terrorists to bring it on? Mercy me.
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/040920/20guard.htm
So there. Bush was getting daddy or someone to pull strings for him - first, to get into the Guard and therby avoid the draft, and then he tried to get strings pulled to transfer, and finally he had “help” in avoiding AWOL charges. I know many people (including Cecil and myself) have posted this info before. I am not going to post it again in the immediate future. In the future, you (Shodan or Bricker or whoever) can provied some cites of your own. Prove Bush did finish his commitment. Now. Are there any cites proving Bush did more than drink heavily, fail to fly properly, get grounded, and then disappear?
There are still groups offering BIG rewards for anyone who can produce reliable (as in not forged) proof that Bush completed the commitment he had signed up for. Big money. To date, none of it has been collected.
I will get to Rush Limbaugh in a moment.
Not so at all.
One of my first jobs as a government contractor was in support of a project called RCAS - the Reserve Component Automation System. RCAS was designed to bring computer automation support to the record-keeping and mobilization requirements of the Army Reserve and Army National Guard. In support of this contract, I spent considerable time with our test sites: the 99th Army Reserve Command in Pennsylvania and the Iowa State Area Readiness Command, as well as driving around Iowa and Pennsylvania to subordinate units of the Iowa ARNG and 88th ARCOM respectively.
Recordkeeping by reserve units ran the gamut from excellent to non-existent. As part of my company’s propsal for wokr on RCAS, we highlighted the cases of several ARNG and AR soldiers that were unable to get promotions, travel expense reimbursement, or even timely pay for active duty or training weekends due to their records being lost, misfiled, or simply never completed.
(In fairness to Iowa, I will say that we had to look long and hard before finding some good examples of this; mostly, Iowa’s Guard was squared away. But not all. And in Pennsylvania, at the 99th ARCOM… we didn’t have to look hard at all; these problems were rampant.)
So I can tell you from personal experience that the LACK of records in a reserve or guard unit means absolutely nothing. It may mean, as you seem eager to conclude, that the indivdual in question was AWOL. Or it may mean that no one took the time to keep the records straight.
I agree that Bush likely had strings pulled to get him into the Guard. There’s no proof of that, but I agree it’s the fairest inference, given the reality of the times.
I don’t agree that there’s proof of his being AWOL, nor do I agree that’s the fairest inference. I’ve seen too much reserve component record-keeping to believe otherwise.
[Hijack]Small world. I use to work for the defense contractor that wrote RCAS.[/hijack]
However, Bricker, nobody remembers seeing him either.
[QUOTE=bup]
[Hijack]Small world. I use to work for the defense contractor that wrote RCAS.[/hijack]
Really!!
I was the project lead for a support contract for the PMO RCAS. I was with the PMO from source selection, just after Star Carey took over as PM, through competition through award and initial fielding.
Were you in Vienna?
And that, too, is hardly meaningful. I don’t imagine Lt. Bush was a gung-ho guy or particularly memorable. The question is – do the same people remember every other single pilot that was there for drill? Or is it that they simply don’t recall everyone that showed for drill?
Aside: Rush suggested that Vince Foster was “murdered in an apartment owned by Hillary Clinton.” Let’s get the lying accusations and the sources rigtht there.
http://www.webguild.com/sentinel/draft_dodgers.htm
http://boards.historychannel.com/thread.jspa?threadID=300010753&tstart=0&start=-1
http://www.exile.ru/2003-April-06/feature_story.html
http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/10/09/092738.xml
http://www.infoshop.org/octo/matrix/index.php/Limbaugh,_Rush
http://patriotboy.blogspot.com/2005_10_30_patriotboy_archive.html
