# Where will Bush start a war first? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 17, 2001, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-will-bush-start-a-war-first/50566 "2001-01-17T20:59:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![kgriffey79](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/2bfe46/32.png) [@kgriffey79](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kgriffey79)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2001, 5:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-will-bush-start-a-war-first/50566/141 "2001-09-19T05:12:37Z")
You want me to start my own post for this? I can’t flame someone in their own post ☹ ---
**Author:** ![Gaudere](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e495f1/32.png) [@Gaudere](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gaudere)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2001, 5:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-will-bush-start-a-war-first/50566/142 "2001-09-19T05:17:26Z")
You can’t flame someone here, period. In the Pit only. ---
**Author:** ![minty\_green](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f6c823/32.png) [@minty\_green](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/minty_green)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2001, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-will-bush-start-a-war-first/50566/143 "2001-09-19T05:22:50Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Chas.E \* > I never said he put on a fake texas accent for the Texas election, that never would have worked. I said (perhaps unclearly) that he used the fake Texan accent for the presidential election. Oh yeah, Chas. Way back in 1948, when Dubya was just a wee tiny Shrub playing in the dirt of a dumpy little backyard in Midland, George and Barbara were insisting that he learn to imitate the redneck cretins around him by using such hideous terms as _ya’ll_ and _fixin’ to_. That accent is clearly a fake, trotted out for the sake of the presidential election. :rolleyes: > [@](#): > > But it is more than obvious that Bush jr. has been downplaying his Ivy League heritage even as far back as the Texas Gov election. Yeah, I particularly love the way he would show up for classes at the Harvard Business School with a spit cup. What a freakin’ Yankee! Seriously, **Chas** , are you just trolling here, or are you really this deluded? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2001, 5:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-will-bush-start-a-war-first/50566/144 "2001-09-19T05:24:20Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Chas.E \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by Bricker \* > > **I point out that Bush is not a Chief Legislator; he’s not even a Junior Assistant Legislator. He can neither propose nor vote for legislation.** > > You must have been sleeping in Civics class. The President has three roles, Chief Executive, Commander in Chief, and Chief Legislator. The President can propose legislation, in fact, he is required to submit at least one bill annually: the Federal Budget bill. The Chief Legislator has exactly one vote on every bill. He either signs the bill, or vetos it. > I read hundreds of Bush-related articles a week, I am hunting for the cite for Bush’s pushing the bill. I haven’t found it yet. I’ll hunt more tonight. > \*\* Indeed, I must have. The phrase doesn’t appear in the Constitution, but several on-line civics syallbi use the phrase “Chief Legislator” to refer to the President - apparently because he is Constitutionally empowered to deliver the State of the Union address to a joint session of Congress, and because he may veto legislation. I therefore concede the point, although it was hardly material to the main thrust of my question. I await your further response, to what _was_ the material part of my question. - Rick ---
**Author:** ![curious\_george](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b487fb/32.png) [@curious\_george](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/curious_george)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2001, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-will-bush-start-a-war-first/50566/145 "2001-09-19T20:56:15Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Demise \* > Actually, why don’t you come answer these questions in the Pit. > > \*Originally posted by Bricker \* > I have posted in the Pit regarding curious george tact and decor. To those who attack a poster like me in the pit, I will say that is the lowest form of debate. Those pit topics are nothing but worthless, juvenile, filthy, vulgar name calling. If you have an intelligent idea to debate with me, say it here in a mature, respectable manner. Going to the pit to attack me only weakens your arguments. It is a weak, cowardly act. It is verbal terrorism. Your links to the pit are hijacking my thread. It is like you are hijacking my planes and crashing them into my peaceful towers. > [@](#): > > And **pldennison’s** comments aren’t worth dignifying with a reply. :rolleyes: \*\* I agree. However, he has gone so far overboard, someone has to say something to him. Allow me. [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/member.php?action=signup](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/member.php?action=signup) SDMB Rules “We have one basic rule: Don’t be a jerk. … You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this BB to post any material which is …abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, threatening… Refusal to cooperate with board moderators or to abide by these rules is grounds for revocation of your posting privileges”. PLD, kiddo, your posts here are clearly abusive and hateful towards me. You don’t seem to follow any rules of decorum, and don’t always treat other posters with respect. Apparently, you think the basic rule is “Don’t be a jerk, except pld can decide when a post is not worthy of respect and can teach the poster a lesson”. Do you think you are a moderator? Do you think you are the self-proclaimed leader of this board? Instead, you are the bully of SDMB. Maybe you can bully other people on this board, but you are not going to bully me. I am going to continue posting my ideas here, and do so in a respectful manner, unlike you. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by pldennison \* > When I find a person, I’ll let you know. I feel the same way about you. ---
**Author:** ![gobear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/8dc957/32.png) [@gobear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gobear)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2001, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-will-bush-start-a-war-first/50566/146 "2001-09-19T21:00:52Z")
> [@](#): > > Going to the pit to attack me only weakens your arguments. It is a weak, cowardly act. It is verbal terrorism. Your links to the pit are hijacking my thread. It is like you are hijacking my planes and crashing them into my peaceful towers Wow. That really says it all about ol’ **Curious George** , doesn’t it? Being criticized for telling lies and backpedaling is JUST like the destruction of the WTC. Words fail me. ---
**Author:** ![curious\_george](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b487fb/32.png) [@curious\_george](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/curious_george)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2001, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-will-bush-start-a-war-first/50566/147 "2001-09-19T21:05:43Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by bordelond \* > So we can post anything we want in GD with no backup? Awesome! > \ > Democrats Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and Gary Condit got together and ordered terrorist cells to hijack U.S. planes and destroy the WTC! The two-pronged goal was > to make George W. Bush look bad and to get the press off of Condit’s back. > > Hey – I don’t have to prove that, right? \*\* Nobody has to prove anything in GD. I see no reason why you can’t post a thread like that in GD. There are lots of threads in GD that have little or no factual support. That is the nature of debates, politics, religion, and so on. Here are some titles currently in GD: Carter was Right. What do skeptics gain by trying to get ppl not to believe in religion/psychics/et al? Why is Christianity popular? God was looking out for some, not others? NFL: To play or not to play? When is the right time to resume events? What about the next time? These threads are all probably discussion oriented debates, with little or no facts. Nothing wrong with that. ---
**Author:** ![gobear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/8dc957/32.png) [@gobear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gobear)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2001, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-will-bush-start-a-war-first/50566/148 "2001-09-19T21:19:40Z")
> [@](#): > > Nobody has to prove anything in GD. I see no reason why you can’t post a thread like that in GD. There are lots of threads in GD that have little or no factual support Ah, but the difference is that you are trying to pass off opinion as fact, and that is not allowed. Here are two words you are going to hear a lot: “cite, please?” ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2001, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-will-bush-start-a-war-first/50566/149 "2001-09-19T23:12:41Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by curious george \* > \*\*Nobody has to prove anything in GD. I see no reason why you can’t post a thread like that in GD. There are lots of threads in GD that have little or no factual support. That is the nature of debates, politics, religion, and so on. \*\* As **gobear** very cogently points out, there is a difference between offering a subject for discussion that’s inherently subjective, and offering facts in support of your subjective opinion that are lies. To take one example you raise, it’s perfectly acceptable to say, for instance, “I think the NFL should play this weekend. We need to get back to business as usual.” This is clearly opinion, and defies rigorous proof. But to say, “I think the NFL should forgo play this weekend. After all, they cancelled one week of play when JFK was killed, and this is far more serious,” invites instant disdain – because the NFL did _not_ cancel play after the murder of President Kennedy. I’ll go further. When you seek to persuade others of your view, I would argue that you should hold yourself to an even _higher_ standard than simply plain accuracy. I would argue that the rhetor with integrity will hold himself to a sort of “scientific integrity.” As Feynman pointed out in talking about this standard (paraphrased): [quote] I heard last night that Wesson oil doesn’t soak through food. Well, that’s true. But it fails the test of scientific integrity. At a certain temperature, _no_ oils will soak through food. At other temperatures, _all oils_ - including Wesson - will soak through food. The rhetor with integrity will present all those facts, and argue to the audience that the the conclusions they draw should be the ones he wishes. His opponent will argue otherwise. For you, or your ilk, to come along and dismissively claim that GD is not a forum where anyone has to prove anything, or that tere are lots of threads in GD that have little or no factual support, is to myopically concentrate on one type of assertion that can be made in GD, rather than the totality of GD interaction and conduct. As my high-school debate teacher was fond of saying, a gratuitous assertion may be equally gratuitously denied. If your view of GD is correct, the forum will become an online version of Monty Python’s “The Argument Clinic:” (“No I haven’t!” “Yes you have!” “No I haven’t!” “Yes you have!” “No I haven’t!” “Yes you have!”) But as even the Python character points out, an argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition, not merely the automatic gainsay of whatever your opponent says. And it goes without saying - or it should - that if your “statements” cannot be relied upon as true, the whole process becomes suspect. - Rick ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2001, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-will-bush-start-a-war-first/50566/150 "2001-09-19T23:15:58Z")
Er… should be a close quote after the Wesson oil paragraph - the rest of the words are mine, not Feynman’s. - Rick ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2001, 12:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-will-bush-start-a-war-first/50566/151 "2001-09-20T12:31:37Z")
And fine words they were, **Bricker**. Anyone else think that post should be linked to in the forum description? ---
**Author:** ![Mauvaise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mauvaise/32/11084_2.png) [@Mauvaise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mauvaise)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2001, 5:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-will-bush-start-a-war-first/50566/152 "2001-09-21T05:04:50Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by curious george \* > > These threads are all **probably** discussion oriented debates, with little or no facts. Nothing wrong with that. Probably?! You mean you’ve given examples (in current GD threads) and haven’t even checked them out to see if they support your claim? Even _I_ know that you need to back up your facts (not opinions which aren’t facts) with proof in GD. And I’ve never posted (or even read) GD before a thread I posted to in MPSIMS was moved here. ---
**Author:** ![Freedom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Freedom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freedom)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2001, 11:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-will-bush-start-a-war-first/50566/153 "2001-09-21T11:07:32Z")
> [@](#): > > And how, pray, should we solve the murder of thousands of innocent Americans peacefully: “We surrender?” I thought it was the job of the French to surrender. > [@](#): > > Nobody has to prove anything in GD. I see no reason why you can’t post a thread like that in GD. Am I the only one having Brian Bunnyhurt flashbacks? **Stoid** From one partisan to another, even before this thread I had noticed that you have toned down the comments in the last week. Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2001, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-will-bush-start-a-war-first/50566/154 "2001-09-21T14:47:53Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by John Corrado \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by curious george \* > > I believe GQ is the only forum on this board where factual evidence is needed for discussion. I can’t prove anything about this topic, of course. I don’t need to prove anything. What do you think this is, a court of law? > > Ironically, in stating such, curious george _did_ prove something- namely, that he need not be taken seriously in GD again. \*\* John, I must take issue, you are implying that he was being taken seriously before this statement. ---
**Author:** ![Demise](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/34f0e0/32.png) [@Demise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Demise)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2001, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-will-bush-start-a-war-first/50566/155 "2001-09-21T15:32:40Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by curious george \* > \*\*It is verbal terrorism. Your links to the pit are hijacking my thread. It is like you are hijacking my planes and crashing them into my peaceful towers. \*\* Your posts are totally absurd. It’s like you are smoking crack while writing them. But thanks for the laugh, you’re almost as good a comedian as **WB**. ---
**Author:** ![emarkp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3be4f8/32.png) [@emarkp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emarkp)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2001, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-will-bush-start-a-war-first/50566/156 "2001-09-21T16:14:54Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Chas.E \* > More wiretapping without warrants. The Government wants to ban domestic use of cryptography without secret “back doors” for government spooks. I could go on and on. You could go on, but if it’s as inaccurate as this, I hope you don’t. Guess how long various members of Congress have been trying to put “key escrow” methods into encryption? The answer is: **years**. Here’s just [one example](http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/lawprof-letter.htm) of public outcry against if from (get this) four full years ago, right in the middle of Clinton’s second term. Here’s [another one](http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Key_escrow/Clipper/) from 1994. So please don’t tell us that this is an invention of GWB. As for the wiretaps, the primary focus **I’ve** seen is **not** wiretaps without a warrant, but rather the ability to get (say) a warrant for both a person’s land line, cell phone, and office phone instead of requiring three separate warrants. ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2001, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-will-bush-start-a-war-first/50566/157 "2001-09-21T18:19:45Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Freedom \* > \*\ ***Stoid** > > From one partisan to another, even before this thread I had noticed that you have toned down the comments in the last week. > > Thanks. \*\* You’re welcome. Just don’t expect me to hold out forever! 😃 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-will-bush-start-a-war-first/50566.md?page=7)