Republicans & Conservatives Archives

Your inability to see that these kinds of things happen on both sides really strains your credibility, Eric. Random violence committed by wackos can hardly be considered the policy or fault of either side.

Please show me a single example of the Democratic party encouraging voter fraud - particularly the claim that we “pay people in crack” (interesting that that one wasn’t linked like most of the other claims). Here’s a news flash for you - if you’re going to blame the fringe elements of the Left on the mainstream Dems, we’ll start blaming the fringe Right on you Republicans.

Kerry’s campaign has 10,000 lawyers ready - and so does Bush. It’s a prudent move by both sides, given the potential for disaster this year.

I’ve read about the Democratic election manual in Colorado, and despite the RNC’s attempts to implant false memories of events, it doesn’t say to falsely claim voter intimidation. It says to pre-emptively take measures to avoid it happening. What’s the problem with that? Why should we wait until it does happen to make an effort to stop it? You guys are pre-emptively striking against voter registration fraud, aren’t you?

I’m with you ceejayoz.

How outragious, Eric, that you would mention the daily reports of physical violence and fraud perpetrated by Democrats which fill the media from coast to caost but not give equal time to the black-helicopter conspiracy theories and other assorted tin-foil crackpot alien-abduction stories of the Daily Kos!

Nice try Martin,
but if you check the Kos page, you’ll find links to local news stories of vote fraud, voter registration fraud, and voter intimidation in at least 20 of the 50 states. You can’t blow all of them off, esp. when people like the Oregon Secretary of State are involved in the Oregon & Nevada Voter reg. sherdding cases. All of these are coming from local news channels and are easy to follow up because there are lawsuits and state intervention already underway..

This will be very ugly in the coming weeks I’m sure. Both sides are to blame, and it’s time to stop arguing about which side is worse. It needs to be fixed. period.

Yeah, me too, Ceejayoz.

I heartily urge everyone reading this, Red, Blue and Purple - be responsible, and don’t pick “short term political gain over the stability of our very democracy.” Don’t be demogogued by anyone (Eric included).

And, if there’s a Democratic gathering that involves being whips and frenzies, let me know, it sounds kinda interesting.

I suspect that the election night plans of the Kerry campaign may have more insidious things in store for our republic.

Where I live in Georgia, the average life expectancy of a Kerry yardsign is about 5 or 6 days. Kerry bumper stickers are ripped off cars daily in parking lots, and that isn’t the half of it. Kerry Sucks is permenantly keyed into my friends car door. Do propose that these thefts are being orchestrated by the Bush campaign outpost nearby? What other insidious plans do you think Ken Mehlman has in store for me on election day Eric?

Bashing Eric and his views is exactly what he is talking about.
There is plenty of hate over in the Dem column against Republicans if you care to go read it. In the so called ‘Independent’ column too.
It seems no matter what a Republican says it turns into a bash Bush and Republicans are nothing but Right Wing nuts who don’t know what they are talking about thread.
Go ahead and hate if that makes you feel any better.
It sure doesn’t make me feel better to hate someone for the way they think.
Taking either party and claiming everyone in it is either far left or far right has got to be one of the stupidest things I see in these posts.
How does anybody ever expect to solve anything if all they can do is scream about how right they are and how stupid someone else is who doesn’t totally agree with them?
This may be an election year but that does NOT make either party totally right or totally wrong.

Picking the right leaders for our country will always be more important than whether they are Democrat or Republican or the man from mars for that matter!!

I suppose, Martin, that the Washington Times is now considered a loopy leftie newspaper?

Meanwhile, authorities in Oregon and Nevada are trying to determine whether a Republican-affiliated group destroyed voter registration forms filed by Democratic voters in both states. A Phoenix political-consulting firm, Sproul & Associates, headed by Nathan Sproul, former head of the Arizona Republican Party, is the focus of the inquiry.

The firm received nearly $500,000 from the Republican National Committee for a voter registration drive known as Voters Outreach of America. The company has denied any wrongdoing.

Your outright refusal to admit any sort of wrongdoing on your own side seems rather delusional. I don’t hold this idiot against the Bush Campaign, but for some reason you hold the loonies of our party against the Kerry Campaign.

Eric, Jack and Tototh

Lots of bashing for Blues and lots of excuses for Reds.

In 2000 I beleived Bush and mistakenly voted for him.

Lots of awful things have happend on his watch - war, economy and lots of americans much worse off and no “compassion”.

How in the name of humanity, decency, morality or spirtutalty do you justify or excuse the torture of children?????

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6163.htm

http://www.sadlyno.com/archives/000732.html

Yet Bush signed the authorization for these atrocities:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7122.htm

Can any of you honestly justify these actions???

This to me is about as low as you can get so I guess I’ll be voting the same way as these Bush relatives

www.bushrelativesforkerry.com

Bashing Eric and his views is exactly what he is talking about.

We’re not bashing his views, we’re bashing his inaccurate - hell, slanderous - portrayals of us liberals.

Eric, let the record show that you were the first one here to ask WatchBloggers to think of the differences between Republicans and Democrats as a “War”. You were the first to try to fan the flames by portraying these condemnable incidents of partisan hotheadedness as skirmishes in what you fear (or hope, I can’t tell) will become a even more heated conflict.

Other WatchBloggers posting above have shown that this sort of violence and foolishness transcends party lines, and even the oregonlive.com article you link to describes incidents on both sides. Sometimes the incidents are just plain old pranks. And yet you describe it as a Democrat-only problem. Your choice to paint these terrible incidents as a deliberate Democratic strategy is either:
(a) a blatant attempt on your part to incite Republicans to fight back with the same aggressiveness, or
(b) an attempt to get Democrats to feel disenchanted with their own party, or
(c) an attempt to further provoke Democratic anger.

I feel confident that you will fail in any case, that neither your fellow Republicans nor my fellow Democrats will fall for your attempts at incitement.

Let the record also show that on that same day that Eric Simonson declared War, Al Gore has asked Democrats, and I assume all Americans as well, to keep the political debate civil:

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. (AP) - Former Vice President Al Gore on Sunday told blacks embittered by his narrow loss in the 2000 presidential election that “it doesn’t have to be this way” and urged them to turn anger into energy at the polls.

“Don’t turn it into angry acts or angry words,” Gore said at one stop during a tour of mostly black churches.

I, too, condemn all of these violent incidents, but I would never stoop so low as to use them, as you have, to further fan the partisan flames and to encourage people think of the political differences in this country as a “War”. Shame on you.

-Cf

> Kerry Sucks is permenantly keyed into
> my friends car door.

“OSAMA VOTES KERRY” is spraypainted in a hundred different places in my neighborhood in crude foot-high scrawl (often using the same color paint as the paint used by the construction workers working nearby). Local citizens and city workers have painted over them repeatedly, only to have the Kerry-haters return to repaint their message. One of them has been repainted at least 5 times.

I walk by these signs every day, and despite how much it upsets me that people think this way about John Kerry and, worse, that they see fit to vandalize my neighborhood (they can’t live here), I never once blamed Rove, Mehlman, Gillespie, or the GOP for it. In fact, the idea that the GOP might be behind such vandalism never even occurred to me until this very minute, and I still wholly reject it.

-Cf

One more data point, to balance against Eric’s horde of angry Democrats, I give you some extracts from this poster on a recent Blue Team thread (http://www.watchblog.com/democrats/archives/001688.html):

This is America. We have earned the right to do and say whatever we like. We deserve the right to destroy countries that stand in in the way of peace and that includes the civilians. Quit pussyfooting around. The next time you see a Kerry supporter, punch him right in his ignorant face. Putting that man in charge would be like committing suicide.

These terrorists are a real threat. […unrelated conspiracy ravings deleted…] They are too powerful and they need to be killed, every last man woman and child. Yes the children too. They grow up to become Muslim Terrorists too, just like these pussies who vote Kerry. They ain’t worth a shit and if you step in them just hose them off your shoe.

Even if Kerry should win, we shouldn’t accept him. Our people won’t follow a loser like that. I am so glad that I have finally found people who think like me. Thank God for Bush and Thank God for you Republicans. Maybe in the next election cycle we won’t even worry about these lying Democratic Voters. God I hate them. I wish we could bomb the democrats. That’s who needs bombing even more than the terrorists.

Posted by: BushFan at October 17, 2004 10:16 PM

Lucky Kerry, or lucky Bush, after this is all over. Glad it’s not me that’ll be trying to put the country back together.

This is true, sadly.

I have heard of many Democrats bullying old ladies at early voting polls.

Today as I was walking near a pro-Bush rally, I saw two surly liberal youths pushing around a young girl who was wearing a Bush/Cheney shirt. It was disgusting.

I don’t know what is happening to our country. Democrats are engaging in all kinds of voter fraud. Last week I received several calls asking me to support Kerry. The person calling said that if I didn’t vote for Kerry, my son would be drafted and there was a good chance terrorists would rape me.

9/11 Never Forget.

Let’s All Support President Kerry. Hail to the Chief!

I don’t want to write this headline, but I am prepared to support President Kerry and will devote a November 3 posting to praising him if he wins. This I promise even if – as is very possible – Kerry takes the Electoral College and Bush wins a popular majority. I am on record now and I expect the same support for a newly elected President Bush if goes his way. Is that hypocritical? Hypocrisy is an underrated virtue. It is the tribute vice pays to virtue. A hypocrite implicitly acknowledges the superiority of the other side. I don’t have a problem with that from others and they shouldn’t have a problem with me. In America, we judge people by what they do, not what we believe they think.

When I came to this blog, I was a lukewarm Bush supporter, but as I read and especially as I wrote I became more and more convinced that Bush was by far the best choice. George Bush will keep us safer in a dangerous world. I began to work actively for his reelection and will take the next week off to volunteer full time. (One of my big jobs is to replace people’s Bush signs after the Kerry folks have destroyed them) I have come to see Democrats as opponents, but they are not my enemies. No American taking part in a peaceful democratic process can be my enemy. There is an important distinction between an opponent and an enemy.

America has real enemies. There are people in the world who will kill you just because you are American. They don’t care whether you vote for Kerry, Bush or anybody else, and their minds won’t change in January no matter who wins. The most important issue on inauguration day for President Kerry or President Bush will be keeping these bad guys on the run. He will need the support of all Americans. So after the election – at least until the next one – let’s not be Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Greens or Naderites. Let’s just be Americans and put the vitriol on the shelf at least for a little while.

Eric, on a more personal note:

… runaway hatred for George W. Bush.

I have to say, the humor page on this site is absolutely excellent. Thanks!

- William

9/11 Never Forget, Approximately 1000 Registered Democrats Spin in Their Graves, If They Even Have Graves, Every Time a Republican Uses Their Untimely Deaths to Try and Get Votes.

William, you can put your mind at ease. I have no doubt that a great many of those dead democrats will stop spinning in their graves, rise up and vote for Kerry soon enough.

Martin is right.

I have it on good authority that Kerry can raise the dead with his devil-worshipping voodoo. And that he gains more power with each abortion performed in America.

While I am not out-and-out SAYING that Kerry EATS those babies, I will let each educated reader come to their own inevitable conclusion.

9/11 Never Forget: Because a vote for Kerry is a desecration of all the victims.

No matter who ends up winning on November 2, we’re in terrible spot now unless somebody wins by a huge margin. Personally, I’d rather see Kerry win by a large margin than watch this country tear itself to pieces with months of litigation and the probable violence that would erupt.

If Bush wins by a nose, I anticipate serious civil unrest. It will be a miracle if nobody’s killed. If Kerry wins by a nose, there will be a huge cloud hanging over him because of the massive voter fraud going on. Unlike Bush in 2000, he’ll have to deal with a hostile Congress, a hostile military, and the deep bitterness of close to half of the population—all during a time of war. I don’t see that as being in anyone’s interest.

Yes, Republicans as well as Democrats are involved in tearing up signs, spraying graffiti, etc. That’s petty stuff, and not unusual during any elections. I’ve heard NO stories, however, of Republicans actually forming mobs and attacking, vandalizing or robbing opposition offices—which Democrats are doing now on an almost daily basis to the accompaniment of nothing but denials and excuses from the rest of the left and their media allies. I personally would never wear or display a Bush sign in my neighborhood for fear of being assaulted.

It’s increasingly clear in parts of this country, that if you’re a Republican who wants to excercise your First Amendment rights, you’d better be willing to excercise your Second Amendment rights as well.

I have it on good authority that Kerry can raise the dead with his devil-worshipping voodoo. And that he gains more power with each abortion performed in America.

This thread is getting way too weird for me.

William, I like your sense of humor—some good satire in your left column posts. “Bushfan” is either one of those internet whackos who floats into a scene mysteriously and then just as mysteriously disappears. Or (more likely from where I sit) the inspired creation of the individual in whose thread he appeared, and with whom “he” shares certain give-away stylistic quirks. I thought so at the time, but now the reposting of his rant convinces me.

In other words, a B+ for effort and an A for verve.

While it’s true that there are Republican idiots out there who do stupid things too, Bush headquarters are being attacked in a way that has never been seen before. I can’t ever remember up to a dozen acts of such hate and rage in the lead up to an election.

And my main point is that democrats are actually planning to engineer a Florida 2000 style debacle this election. I don’t even want to imagine to what lengths they will go. It will be utter chaos and bitterness.

Maybe I dashed this off too quickly to really put a less partisan spin on it. But from what I have been observing— from my viewpoint democrats are playing with fire.

ceejayoz,

I beg your pardon- a link to the crack story reference is now present.

I’ve read about the Democratic election manual in Colorado, and despite the RNC’s attempts to implant false memories of events, it doesn’t say to falsely claim voter intimidation. It says to pre-emptively take measures to avoid it happening. What’s the problem with that?

I beg to differ. Did you even read what it said, or are you just going by the democratic spin?

“If no signs of intimidation techniques have emerged yet, launch a pre-emptive strike,” rule No. 2 says.

Then, the manual says the operatives should issue a press release “reviewing Republican tactics used in your area or state.” They should also quote “party/minority/civil rights leadership as denouncing tactics that discourage people from voting.”

Indeed, a press release from the Colorado Democrats on Wednesday looked straight out of the playbook.

After Secretary of State Donetta Davidson and Gov. Bill Owens, both Republicans, said anyone caught defrauding the voter registration process would be prosecuted, the Democrats shot out a statement decrying Davidson’s and Owens’ remarks as “voter intimidation.”

I can understand the attempt to play this off as no big deal but it clearly instructs activists to lie. To commit false witness. To slander republicans of election fraud and rascists. This does nothing but create an atmosphere of chaos and distrust. Is this your idea of democracy?

Why should we wait until it does happen to make an effort to stop it?

Uh, yes. You are accusing people of crimes they have not committed as an election strategy. If someone breaks the law— Republican or Democrat I expect them to be prosecuted. But to just start throwing charges around is below contempt.

Chris,

Eric, let the record show that you were the first one here to ask WatchBloggers to think of the differences between Republicans and Democrats as a “War”.

Nice try, Chris. The idea, the seed for this post came from other posts on watchblog, such as David’sreference to the 1860’s (i.e. the civil war). As well as the completely incindiary charges that Republicans are ‘suppressing the vote’. This started months ago out of the blue with Kerry announcing one day that he heard ‘plans’ that Republicans were going to try dirty tricks. I think that that announcement was part of their own plan to lay the groundwork for suing everywhere they think they can effect the election.

Can anyone tell me how Republicans are really suppressing the vote?

What do you think will happen on election day if democrats go through with what they are planning? It’s unprecedented.

Partisanship aside, I do not believe the Florida recount was not a planned strategy by either side. But once Gore started the recounts and they began counting hanging chads and dimples and discarded ballots it was a blight upon democracy.

But this time I see evidence that Kerry is actually planning recounts and lawsuits as their election strategy. I am saying that this will not be good for our democracy and if Bush wins after all that I shudder to think what kind of violence, or at minimum, hatred and venom we might see. Not that I want to see a real fighting war. I am bemoaning the total lack of common sense here.

Throughout Bush’s entire term the hatred and slander from the left has been continuous. Republicans can handle being out of power, after all Democrats controlled congress with an iron grip for thirty years. It just seems as though the current powerlessness of the democratic party has brought out the worst.

There are clearly radical fringes on both ideological extremes. Neither side has totally angelic. In the past, the right has had its Timothy McVeighs and the left has had its Ted Kaczynskis.

But until now, those people—and more importantly, people who show signs of BEHAVING like them—have been roundly condemned by cooler heads on their own political side. There are clear signs now, however, of leftist-inspired violence being brushed over and ignored by people on the left and the media.

Does anyone doubt what kind of media-storm we’d be witnessing now if Republicans were firing into and sacking Democratic offices? Dan Rather would be going nuts (even more nuts). So why aren’t Republicans acting like Democrats now in the middle of a heated and contentious political scene?

And I beg your pardon, apocryphal and unproven conjectures about “voter suppression” on partisan farleft-wing extremist sites like the Daily KOS or the New York Times don’t count.

Part of it is possibly a greater confidence in winning the election (I think the right may be deluding themselves on this score). But even if Bush loses, I see no incipient signs of violence on the scale that Democrats are currently perpetrating.

Here’s my theory: the mainstream of Republicans are just less invested in winning elections on a personal and psychological level. Who sits in the White House is just not as relevant to their own feelings of personal self-esteem. I can’t prove this—it’s just a feeling I have. So why is this?

Could it be that more Republicans are religious and believe that there is a higher and more significant plane than the political? I don’t know. I’m not religious. But there’s a pretty obvious difference that bears accounting for.

Ceejayoz said:
“It says to pre-emptively take measures to avoid it happening. What’s the problem with that? Why should we wait until it does happen to make an effort to stop it?”

It’s okay with VOTING but not WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION?

Something is wrong here !!!!

wow….

lots of extreme pundit douchebagery happenin here….

glad to see you can all be completely irrational and follow your leader blindly…..whoever he may be….

after reading this particular blog-commentary….sigh….filling with rage…..

and for the record:

voter suppression has been a part of our democracy since, well…VOTING. it’s wrong, no matter who is doing it….

both sides do it….so don’t play high and mighty……christ you people……

Eric,
Your diatribe on these events is worthy of Goebbels.
Lets assume that of the six publicised events that have taken place this year against the Republican headquarters around this country were perpetrated by, lets be fair and say 10 people each. Is that a large enough conspiracy for you?
How about 100 each?
Gee, that would mean that .0000024% of the population took part in the conspiracy.
And of course these 600 ruthless souls answer directly to Kerry.
You need a hobby pal.

> I can understand the attempt to play this off
> as no big deal but it clearly instructs
> activists to lie. To commit false witness.
> To slander republicans of election fraud and
> rascists.

Eric, first of all, please notice that the manual says to pre-emptively condemn the tactics of voter suppression, not the Republican Party (I wonder why you automatically assume that the two are connected?). Al Gore today did exactly that: he condemned tactics that could be used by either party, and even went further and specifically asked Democrats to play fair and to stay civil. Sounds to me like leading Democrats are taking the moral high ground here, specifically asking Democrats to play fair. I haven’t heard a peep of that nature from your leadership.

Secondly, you are a hypocrite: You condemn the Democrats for what you assume to be encouraging people to falsely accuse Republicans, and yet here you are making unsubstantiated accusations before the fact about what you allege Democrats are up to. And yet nothing you linked to can be traced to Democratic deliberate skulduggery. Nothing. The vandalism could just be that: vandalism. Petty crime with no political motivation. In fact, much of the anti-GOP crimes being alleged by you and others have yet to even be proven to be real (for example, the Ohio registrations that were returned to sender in the mail - they still don’t know why, and are investigating).

More to the point, you have no personal proof of anything that you allege. Nothing. Yet here you are, raising the alarm! This is pretty much what you and some of the other Bush supporters have been doing quite a bit on WatchBlog in the past couple of days: condemning voter fraud, with implicit and sometimes explicit suggestions that the Democrats are doing it or are going to do it, citing news articles you’ve read rather than citing actual personal experience. You are making a pre-emptive strike, in exactly the manner you condemn the Democratic manual for encouraging! Thus you are a hypocrite. Can’t you see it?

And the crack story? Please. Don’t tell me that you are trying to fool WatchBloggers into thinking that the guy was paid in crack by the Democratic Party. According to the full story, the guy was paid in crack by a woman who was in turn paid in dollars by a guy working at the local office of the NAACP. Democratic conspiracy to steal votes? I don’t see it. Khow what it sounds like to me? It sounds a couple of knuckleheads taking advantage of the system for personal gain. It sure doesn’t sound like people trying to help John Kerry.

Also, can you tell the difference between intentional voter fraud and someone pulling a stupid prank? Apparently not (from your ‘crack’ link):

Ohio, where election officials are reviewing the voter registration of Jive Turkey Sr., who was among 1,284 suspicious applications that Cuyahoga County, Ohio, election officials will turn over to prosecutors to investigate for potential fraud.

Tell me, Eric. What on earth do you suspect the sinister plan was behind the person who registered as “Jive Turkey”? How in the world could this registration possibly help John Kerry? It makes far, far more sense to conclude that the person who registered as “Jive Turkey” was a non-partisan nincompoop - or a Bush supporter. There is just no logical scenario, besides having an IQ of 50, that would drive a Kerry supporter to submit such an registration. I ask you to please use your head, and to assume that we will too.

You talk as if all of these voter registration crimes have been proven to have been perpetrated by Democrats. Which is in many cases simply illogical, and in all cases is 100% speculation, designed to pre-emptively raise concerns about the election.

Pot, meet kettle.

-Cf

Rocky, crunch numbers with such deceptive logic and nobody need be held responsible for anything anywhere at any time.

How many people actually set the Reichstag fire? How many people actually lynched Blacks in the Old South? If you willfully ignore the political environments that such permitted despicable acts, then any hate crimes, including those being currently encouraged and countenanced by the extreme left which has now moved into the mainstream of Democratic politics, can be blindly ignored.

As soon as I hear about Republicans shooting live ammunition in the direction of Democrats, gathering into mobs reminicent of brownshirts and breaking into and vandalizing Democratic offices while physically intimidating those inside, I will condemn these actions vociferously and not fall into the trap of making unconscionable exuses for reasons of blind partisanship.

Alas, I no longer expect such a sense of decency or citizenship from the other side of the political divide.

no…your side just puts up flyers telling black people to show up for the vote on November 6th!

and they better make sure their child support is paid up….and their rent…and if they have any outstanding parking tickets they may want to pay them…..and there will be reublican “lawyers” sitting in black cars outside of polling places….and….

grumble……

Martin,
The political environment is so hostile that six isolated incidents can be construed to be right out of the DNC playbook?
Give me a break.

When are the people from both “sides” going to realize that until we as a nation, get our collective heads out of our butts, this country will continue it’s slide toward oblivion?
There are no sides here!
There is only opinion.

Rocky,
I could of not said it better myself. Starting November 3, 2004 “We the People” must start doing a better job running “OUR FREAKING COUNTRY!”

Eric & the rest of the HARDCORE REDS,
Do any of you really want to debate me over how stupid Bush and Cheney has laid waste to the future of Our Country’s Future. Yes, 9/11 did change America. As of this date NOT ONE PERSON HAS BEEN TOLD THEY HAVE SCREWED UP. What has changed in America is now the TRUE REPUBLICANS do not want to stand up Our Government to the same Standards as they have held the Democrats to for the last 40 years.

Cf & the rest of you HARDCORE BLUES,
What has your Party done for Our Country for the last 40 years? How many times have they said that they were supporting REGULAR HOURLY WAGE EARNERS only to sale out to “BIG BUSINESS/BIG GOVERNMENT?” And Yes, I’ll Debate You on That Fact.

Political idealogy aside, you are all freaking nuts if you do not believe that TRUTH IN OUR GOVERNMENT DOES NOT MATTER! As someone who remembers very well “The Nixon Years” of Our Government, I will tell you young folks now that you do not want to live through them.

No, the Dems and Reps Political Games Men have played this chess game wrong. Although I have to praise Senator Edwards for trying to keep to the High Road during this race, I think all the Candidates to include the Third Parties have done a DISERVICE TO OUR COUNTRY by not be willing to Stand up to “The Monster” we call “Our Society.”

No, come January 21,2005 OUR COUNTRY will have a New E/Slected President who will face a freaking mess with no plan nor idea of how to fix it. So unless We All Want to Admit That Our Government and Society must Grow Up, we might as well give up to the Terrorist Now.

Henry said: Political idealogy aside, you are all freaking nuts if you do not believe that TRUTH IN OUR GOVERNMENT DOES NOT MATTER!

Henry, dispense with the personal attacks if you wish to continue to participate at WatchBlog. Calling people nuts for thinking differently than you is not permitted here.

I should point out that the vitriol coming from Rush Limbugh and Ann Coulter makes anything we do look civilized. Nice of you to ignore Talk Radio in your diatribe.

Aldous.

Mr/Mrs. WatchBlog Manager et al,
If I offended anyone by using the sentence Political idealogy aside, you are all freaking nuts if you do not believe that TRUTH IN OUR GOVERNMENT DOES NOT MATTER I apologize. However, what I was trying to get across was the idea that every time our society has closed a blind eye toward our government officials behavior, we have lived to regret it.

Look back at what any political leader has been saying at the time and what reality was at the time. Although I believe in putting our best foot forward as a society, when both feet our in our mouth it is hard to stand up in the world and say “We are the Best.”

It is not your critique of the issues or messages that is the problem. Just do it without critiquing the characters, intelligence, or other attributes of our visitors and writers here at WatchBlog. —WatchBlog Manager

> How many people actually set the Reichstag fire?

Martin, I hereby invoke Godwin’s Law and implore you to, for God’s sake, please be reasonable.

> If you willfully ignore the political
> environments that such permitted despicable
> acts, then any hate crimes, including those
> being currently encouraged and countenanced
> by the extreme left which has now moved into
> the mainstream of Democratic politics, can
> be blindly ignored.

You are the one “willfully ignoring the political environment” in the United States today. Where has the mainstream of Democratic politics behaved at all similarly to the Nazi thugs who paraded the streets of Germany to the flaq-waving cheers of their countrymen? Indeed, where have mainstream Democrats espoused violence, intimidation, or crime? In fact Al Gore, in a speech reminiscent of his gracious concession speech in 2000 [I can’t wait to hear Bush’s concession this year!] did the exact opposite just yesterday, encouraging Democrats to work hard and to be civil.

Your hamfisted Nazi analogy is inapplicable, inappropriate, and inflammatory. Give us a break.

-Cf

Rob,

Nov. 6th?

Let’s see, if it’s a flyer from their side, it is intentionally misleading voters to keep them from voting.
If it is a flyer from my side, it is a typo.
What’s the problem?

If my side gets caught doing something, the other side has done something too, and probably worse, even if it wasn’t.
What’s the problem?

My side wants dead people to be able to vote because they may not have voted when they were alive. The other side wants living people to vote but on the wrong day.
What’s the problem?

Both sides make excuses for what they do and the other side is cheaters and liars.
What’s the problem?

It’s the American Way.
What’s the problem?

Let’s face it: It’s a mistake to point to fringe elements of any group and say those people are representative. That goes for either side. But I submit this: Supporters of Bush ignore his erosion of all of our civil rights because they believe he’ll repress only those his supporters don’t like. It doesn’t work that way, folks. The fist tightens around all of us, not just the gays and Muslims.

Alejo,
‘Supporters of Bush ignore his erosion of all of our civil rights because they believe he’ll repress only those his supporters don’t like.’

What are you saying?

Do you know why any person or group supports one candidate or the other? Really?
I suggest you look at both sides.

As soon as I hear about Republicans shooting live ammunition in the direction of Democrats, gathering into mobs reminicent of brownshirts and breaking into and vandalizing Democratic offices while physically intimidating those inside, I will condemn these actions vociferously and not fall into the trap of making unconscionable exuses for reasons of blind partisanship.

Martin, by that point it’s too late.

Alejo,
The reason that the fringe is recognized as as representitive is because they say they are.
It would be laughable to think that Coulter or Hannity or Limbaugh, or other neo-con bullies were actually representitive of the right.
No one could be that closed minded.

bugcrazy:

I overgeneralized. I should have said, “Some supporters of Bush.” I’m sure there are some Bush supporters who are frightened by Bush’s ability to hold people indefinitely without charging them with crimes or allowing them access to legal counsel. There are probably Bush supporters who feel the Patriot Act is unconstitutional as it stands and feel it needs to be repealed or amended.

I just haven’t heard from any. Let me ask you, so I can have some idea what the other side really thinks: How do you feel about the lessening of your civil rights under the Bush administration?

Rocky,
“No one could be that closed minded?” Bunker and Meatball made a living at it. Just like in the 60’s and 70’s we are going through an awaking of the individual and their spirit to use their freewill to promote themselve. The problem is people have not realized that politics is still just a game.

“DON’T HATE THE PLAYER; HATE THE GAME!”

I will brace for the waves of indignation, but I have to say something we all know.

Voting is as much a responsibility as a right, maybe more. Every citizen is entitled to his/her choice. But there is also the duty to be reasonably informed and responsible expressing your opinion. It is not a game, where you herd together a bunch of people, who don’t even know what they are doing and get them to mark a piece of paper. Near where I used to live (Milwaukee) Democrats organized groups to go to homeless shelters and mental institutions to get voters. Most of these people have the right to vote, but some of them probably shouldn’t. This sometimes goes for me too. I don’t keep up with all the issues and candidates on the ballot. When I don’t know anything about a set of offices or candidates, I don’t vote for either. No vote is better than an ignorant vote.

A good thing about the U.S. is that voting is voluntary. It is the right of every American NOT to vote. Maybe some of those people not voting are making a good decision. They don’t know enough about the issues and they are deferring to their better-informed colleagues. And maybe, if they are just too lazy to vote, it is better for everyone. Large turnout is not a sign of success. It depends on why or how. Unusually high voter turnout tends to be associated with fear and loathing among the electorate, or dishonesty. In Franklin County – Columbus, Ohio there are currently more registered voters than there are citizens eligible to vote. This can’t be good.

Remember why we vote. It is not to feel good about ourselves. It is to elect the people who will lead our country. If we lose sight of that, we will lose our liberty. People have used the Nazi analogy maybe too much. But there is a fitting one here. The Nazis (like all totalitarians) spoke a lot about the rights of the masses and they could mobilize them. They had no trouble assembling huge crowds of wildly enthusiastic supporters and they talked about how the masses had been excluded from the democratic process. The Nazis produced impressive voter turnouts. They went through all the motions of a free country, and the opinion polls would have backed them up. You can have all these things and still not have a democracy.

Henry I hate to disagree. The state of politics in this country is no longer a game. The very life of this country is at stake when the messengers are louder than the message.
If you actually listen to what these “messengers” bring to the table you will see that they, to a man (sorry ladies), don’t allow any discussion. Any one with an oposing view is interupted or shouted down before they might poke holes in the neo-con message.
These charlatans belive that they are right and therefore there can be no discussion.

Alejo,

Since the FBI has not smashed in my door and held me for no reason without a lawyer.
Law enforcement is not a perfect science.
Giving them the tools to do their jobs is a problem?
I don’t know why people think innocent people were never arrested and held before the Patriot Act.
How do I feel?
How do you feel when someone is arrested and then released, and goes back and rejoins a terrorist group and holds hostages?
Either because a lawyer got them out on technicalities or they did not have enough evidence to hold them.
I suppose it’s Bush’s fault. He didn’t do enough to hold that person.
It works both ways.
I don’t want any innocent people held.
I FEEL that I would rather have law enforcement err on the side of public safety even if it is my butt behind bars.
In your eyes that probably makes me cruel and inhuman.
Did Kerry not support the Patriot Act? Now he says it needs to be changed? I know. It’s because he understands. He always knows what should be done after the fact. He knows just what to say to get people stirred up and find one more reason to hate Bush.
Law Enforcement has not been given the right to go around busting in doors and arresting anyone they feel like.
They are not only in the business of arresting people for already having done something, they are also working to prevent terrorist attacks from happening in the first place.

And asking for a person’s ID at a voting booth is somehow infringing on their rights too. Right?

I fear many liberals will resort to violence and fraud as a result of being whipped up into a frenzy by their irresponsible party leaders and their own runaway hatred for George W. Bush.

[…] What will democrats not do in an effort to regain their power?

[…] Bush headquarters are being attacked in a way that has never been seen before. I can’t ever remember up to a dozen acts of such hate and rage in the lead up to an election.

And my main point is that democrats are actually planning to engineer a Florida 2000 style debacle this election. I don’t even want to imagine to what lengths they will go. It will be utter chaos and bitterness.

[…] What do you think will happen on election day if democrats go through with what they are planning? It’s unprecedented.

My hair is on fire and my hands are waving. The world is going to end. The evil Democrats are planning on ruining our democracy. The world is going to end. (Maybe.)

Rocky,
That’s funny because their are people who think the Liberals are much louder and do more to shut down the other side.

bugcrazy,
I don’t think that any sane individual would dispute that someone voting should show some id.
I think it is about the draconian way that anyone with an opposing view is singled out for speaking his/her mind.
With all the flag waving after Sept.11, the shouts of treason, of traitor, the political climate is not one of freedom.
Don’t tell me that if I have nothing to hide, I have nothing to fear. That is, on it’s face, a statement of tyrany.

Jake & Rocky,
Life is a game of choices so how can not the politics of life be nothing but a game. Yes, Jake any person can get a group of people to follow their idea. And yes Rocky this election does matter more than what anyone really wants to discuss. However, you are both right about the need for the American Citizens wake up to reality.

Right now our economy and individual wealth is being stole right in front of us and nobody knows it. Within the next four years our country will either have to allow inflation to take control our economy or regulate our businesses so that they have limited growth which will bring the market down. Accompany inflation growth with higher interest rates and we get a government that goes deeper in debt.

No this election is between those who believe in living in fear or standing up and being an American who is still independent. Yes, the neo-conservatives think that they are right, yet I still do not see any of them willing to debate the TRUTH and REALITY of their ideas. It seems like Bush, they want us to tell them what is right and than try to yell louder than we can. I know better than that.

Aside from the prognostications of doom, this thread has at least produced two great comments.

Hypocrisy is an underrated virtue. It is the tribute vice pays to virtue. A hypocrite implicitly acknowledges the superiority of the other side.

That’s great, Jack.

Don’t tell me that if I have nothing to hide, I have nothing to fear. That is, on it’s face, a statement of tyrany.

Also great, Rocky.

bugcrazy:

Since the FBI has not smashed in my door and held me for no reason without a lawyer.

Your first sentence kind of backs up what I said to begin with, but let’s go on.

Giving them the tools to do their jobs is a problem? I don’t know why people think innocent people were never arrested and held before the Patriot Act.

This is an oversimplification. We all want to protect our citizens and stop terrorism. Giving our own government too much power over its citizenry (which should be anathema to a conservative), however, is not acceptable. And to say that since the system was never perfect is an excuse to make it more imperfect is not even an argument.

How do you feel when someone is arrested and then released, and goes back and rejoins a terrorist group and holds hostages? Either because a lawyer got them out on technicalities or they did not have enough evidence to hold them. I suppose it’s Bush’s fault. He didn’t do enough to hold that person. It works both ways.

As you said, the system isn’t perfect. But if we don’t have a “system” at all — people held with no way to get themselves free and the government not accountable to its people — that’s much scarier to me than a few desperate people committing desperate acts.

I don’t want any innocent people held. I FEEL that I would rather have law enforcement err on the side of public safety even if it is my butt behind bars.

Are you contradicting yourself or saying you don’t want innocents jailed but are willing to sacrifice your freedom for the safetly of the country?

In your eyes that probably makes me cruel and inhuman.

No. I may disagree with you but I feel certain you have strongly-held reasons for your beliefs.

Did Kerry not support the Patriot Act? Now he says it needs to be changed? I know. It’s because he understands. He always knows what should be done after the fact. He knows just what to say to get people stirred up and find one more reason to hate Bush.

In the heat of the moment many people voted for the bill, even though it was printed in the middle of the night and no one had read it. Kerry voted for it, as did most of the house and senate. He doesn’t want to repeal the whole bill, but revise it so it’s still effective as a law-enforcement tool but not so broad when it comes to human rights.

They are not only in the business of arresting people for already having done something, they are also working to prevent terrorist attacks from happening in the first place.

True. But we need to limit our government’s authority over us — again, a conservative ideal — while protecting ourselves. There is a balance that must be maintained.

And asking for a person’s ID at a voting booth is somehow infringing on their rights too. Right?

Now you’re ascribing the same sort of narrow-mindedness to me that you accused me of doing to you. Let’s not do that, okay?

Comment deleted for referencing others as idiots. The policy here is critique the message, not the messenger. If you want your comment heard on this site, abide by the policy. —WatchBlog Manager

Alejo,

Just so you know. I was arrested once by a cop that was supposed to be helping me.
The guy he was helping me from never got in trouble.
I spent the night in jail, I was given a phone that did not work.
I had a moron for a lawyer who was just trying to get me the minimum sentence.
My FATHER got me off. He and my lawyer went into the judges chambers and when they came out I was free to go and all charges were erased from my record.
The policeman was suspended for 6 months without pay.
We could have sued the Town for a lot of money but we didn’t.
This was 20+ years ago.
Does that help you to understand where I am coming from?

bugcrazy:

Actually I’m more confused now. That sounds like a horrible experience and I know how I would feel if it happened to me. If it were me, I would be even more in favor of limiting the government’s ability to hold people without a stated reason.

But it wasn’t me. How did the experience cause you to feel the Patriot Act is a good thing?

Alejo
“How do you feel about the lessening of your civil rights under the Bush administration?”
- Just as mad as when clinton took them away and when he murdered all those innocent people.

Jack
“Voting is as much a responsibility as a right, maybe more.”
Give me a break. Its always someone elses responsiblity to do it for us. Why should we be forced to think for ourselves? Thats not fair.

Everyone needs to wake up. Bush? kerry? It doesn’t matter. Our rights will continue to slip away while we are still fighting over the dumb stuff. Just like clinton and Bush 2’s first term, the next administration will keep on the same path. When kerry wins, the left will continue defending his every mistake, even if they are the same ones Bush has made so far. The right will then be criticizing kerry for everything they defended Bush on. Its a tired circle that has put us in the position we are in now.
I, for one, embrace the idea of another civil war. Maybe then we can get rid of all the corruption and anti-American ideas ruling this country.

Alejo,
Because the system worked for me in the end. That is what we all want.
We don’t want innocent people dying on death row.
We don’t want people held who are innocent.

Sometimes information the police get is wrong. People who shouldn’t be arrested are arrested.
We cannot scrap law enforcement because they make some mistakes.

I am not bitter about what happened to me.
The cop was a screw-up. Maybe not his whole career, just that night.

I don’t believe that the FBI is going to go around arresting people for the heck of it. It not only makes them look bad, it can jeapordize investigations they are conducting. Ones that are going to get the real bad guys.

We could have sued, wrote a book, been on the news. We didn’t. The ‘bad cop’ was dealt with. He was close to retirement and was gone shortly afterwards anyway. We could have destroyed his life. We didn’t. He made a bad call.
If he had been younger it probably would have turned out differently.
When I look back on it, the money would have been nice.
Chances are if it ever happens to me again I would sue, write a book, go on the news, and ruin the cops life.
It would be within my rights to do that.

kctim—

Who did Clinton murder?

“You say you want a revolution, well, you know — we’d all love to see the plan.” Yes, the current two-party system is badly flawed. Kerry and Bush are both politicians and therefore dishonest. But until the minds of the people are changed you couldn’t even get a civil war started if you wanted to. Americans are too complacent. Anyway, I think the solution is more in the grass-roots, viable-third-party direction.

bugcrazy —

Sometimes information the police get is wrong. People who shouldn’t be arrested are arrested. We cannot scrap law enforcement because they make some mistakes.

I agree. But how is that an argument for retaining the Patriot Act as it stands? We need law enforcement, and we need more of it. We need more cops. I never came anywhere close to advocating the dissolution of the law enforcement system.

I don’t believe that the FBI is going to go around arresting people for the heck of it. It not only makes them look bad, it can jeapordize investigations they are conducting. Ones that are going to get the real bad guys.

It can only make them look bad if someone hears about it. The detainees in Guantanamo have been there for three years and it’s taken that long to even begin to get them representation. I have no doubt that yours was a lousy experience, but might you think differently if you’d been held for three years, in isolation?

Christopher, my Reichstag reference was directed to Rocky who had just finished comparing Eric to Goebells. In general, I agree that invoking Hitler and Nazi Germany is usually off-base, but I thought I’d just join a conversation already in progress started by one on your side.

Alejo
I embrace the idea of another civil war because that is where we are heading.
Only one side is ever right anymore and the time for letting the Constitution direct us has come and gone.
It is no longer about what is good for the nation, but instead about what “our” party thinks is good for the nation. Even when it ignores the basic principles of the Constitution.

There no longer exists room for compromise and there no longer is respect for what made us great.
With these two ways of thought controlling our nation today, there is no doubt it will lead to conflict. And I’m starting to believe the only way to fix it is by starting over again.

If Bush can be held responsible for Abu G. then clinton can be held responsible for Waco and Ruby Ridge. Both are slime, but they should still have the same standard applied to them.

WatchBlog Manager,

So what your saying is that its ok to incite violence or swear.
but its not ok to call some one who incites violence as an idiot: stupid or foolish person. WOuld you have removed my blog for the words foolish or stupid.

codco: The point is to rephrase your opinion to attack the message, which can be just as effective. To wit:

Calls to civil war and incitements of violence are idiotic and foolish. Engaging in this kind of rhetoric is stupid.

Martin,

William, I like your sense of humor—some good satire in your left column posts. “Bushfan” is either one of those internet whackos who floats into a scene mysteriously and then just as mysteriously disappears. Or (more likely from where I sit) the inspired creation of the individual in whose thread he appeared, and with whom “he” shares certain give-away stylistic quirks. I thought so at the time, but now the reposting of his rant convinces me.

In other words, a B+ for effort and an A for verve.

I’m flattered, but Bushfan is not my creation.

Martin, I did not compare Eric to Goebbels.
My inference was only to the propaganda that is being spread.
To repeat blatently false statements that accuse vast numbers of people for the actions of a few is propaganda at best.

kctim —

You may be right. I hope you’re wrong. If you truly believe this, would you do me a favor? If you don’t think it will make a difference, would you refrain from voting for Bush?

Waco and Ruby Ridge equals Abu Ghraib. I’m going to have to think on that one.

Alejo,

How many of those people in Guantanamo do you think are as innocent as the day they were born?
They were picked up in a war fighting against our troops and those of other countries that joined us.
Maybe they should all be set free and dropped off in John Kerry’s neighborhood in Mass. ha ha?
Some of those people should go back to countries that don’t want them either.
When someone is released. Returns home to their country for trial and that country sets them free only to return to criminal ways, who is responsible then? The U.S.?
If someone is released to their home country, taken into custody, not given a lawyer, and tortured for information, who’s fault is that? The U.S.?
The detainees are being evaluated as to whether they should be released or not. Just like in our courts, some mistakes will be made. Some will be tried. Some released.
Hopefully there is no one left there who does not belong there.
Due to the language barrier I imagine it is a lot tougher to determine which are innocent. I imagine finding interpreters and lawyers that can be trusted is difficult also.
Since I can only base my opinions on what I have heard, I would never claim I am right.
I am not there and have never been there. I don’t know what is really going on and I would say that the majority of us don’t.
You know as well as I do when something goes wrong we hear about it 100 times more than anything that goes right.

Eric wrote:

“Can anyone tell me how Republicans are really suppressing the vote?”

Same way they did last time. And what we are witnessing in this election on both sides is what happens when people no longer trust in the premise that America is a Democratic Republic.
Read this article and then tell me that We The People (left, right and center) aren’t reaping now what was sown in Florida in 2000:

http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=217&row=2

Greg Palast is an American-born investigative reporter who left these shores to work in England, and he is very highly respected there. He has openly stated that he supports neither Bush or Kerry, so he cannot be accused of base partisanship. His book “The Best Democracy Money Can Buy” was a NY Times bestseller for over a year, and is a must read for anyone who wonders what really happened in the 2000 election.

Chris,

Eric, first of all, please notice that the manual says to pre-emptively condemn the tactics of voter suppression, not the Republican Party (I wonder why you automatically assume that the two are connected?).

Maybe because the manual explicitly says to issue press releases against Republicans? Are you expecting they will be charging the Green Party?

“If no signs of intimidation techniques have emerged yet, launch a pre-emptive strike,” rule No. 2 says.

Then, the manual says the operatives should issue a press release “reviewing Republican tactics used in your area or state.” They should also quote “party/minority/civil rights leadership as denouncing tactics that discourage people from voting.”

Why does Al Gore feel the need to have to ‘get out the message’ not to turn their anger into acts of violence? Al is admitting that the democratic electorate is filled with irrational anger that may turn into violence.

The question is, can you see how the election year effort to stoke the fires of anger by these same democratic leaders might have something to do with the irrational hatred?

Secondly, you are a hypocrite: You condemn the Democrats for what you assume to be encouraging people to falsely accuse Republicans,

You mean for exposing democrats about their obviously concerted plan to preemptively charge Republicans with voter fraud and suppression? Yeah I shouldn’t be pointing that out should I?

And for the record, the one day record for smashing Bush headquarters and assaulting workers there was organized by the AFL-CIO. A virtual arm of the Democratic party.

More importantly, the evidence of the plans I am talking about by the democratic party in particular are the statements and documents of democratic operatives. The election manual is exhibit A. Exhibit B are the numerous statements made charging that Republicans have suppressed votes without any evidence. Especially in Florida. How could Republicans disenfranchise Black democrats in counties fully controlled by democrats? That would be quite a feat. Exhibit C is the openly revealed plan to utilize 10,000 lawyers on election day to ensure ‘it never happens again.’ Meaning voter intimidation, suppression, and disenfranchisement. Something that never happened.

To sum up my argument: Democrats invent a traumatic democratic voter ‘holocaust’, charge Bush and Republicans with perpetrating it, register thousands of false voters, then create an army of lawyers to attack polling places all across the US and file lawsuits based on their invented charges of voter disenfranchisement. Pointing to the invented history of past disenfranchisement as proof of current election crime they will dispute the election in every county and state they believe they can change the vote to win.

Some counties now have more voter registration than they have eligible voters. The integrity of our democracy is at stake when we cannot ensure the integrity of our elections.

After nine months of intense voter-registration efforts focused on Franklin County, the number of people signed up to cast ballots in the Nov. 2 election has surpassed U.S. Census estimates of those eligible.

There are about 815,000 Franklin County residents older than 18, according to the most recent census estimates, for 2003. As of yesterday, Franklin County Board of Elections officials counted more than 817,000 registered voters, and forms are still coming in at the rate of 8,000 per day as Monday’s registration deadline approaches. columbusdispatch.com

Rocky,

The state of politics in this country is no longer a game. The very life of this country is at stake when the messengers are louder than the message.

That’s what concerns me about democrats these last four years. One might get the idea that when the ‘very life of this country is at stake’ that the ends justify the means. That there is no limit to what might be done to ‘save this country’ from the neo-cons.

If you actually listen to what these “messengers” bring to the table you will see that they, to a man (sorry ladies), don’t allow any discussion. Any one with an oposing view is interupted or shouted down before they might poke holes in the neo-con message. These charlatans belive that they are right and therefore there can be no discussion.

The one thing I don’t see is any evidence of anyone not speaking their minds, here or in the country at large.

Henry,

I’m not sure what you mean in this sentence:

Within the next four years our country will either have to allow inflation to take control our economy or regulate our businesses so that they have limited growth which will bring the market down.

bugcrazy,
To allow someone to languish in a cage for three years in a foreign country no matter how guilty is immoral.
I wouldn’t suggest setting them free, but something should be done to expidite the process.
If our soldiers were being held this way, we would be screaming about it.
Humans don’t treat humans that way.

bugcrazy:

I can’t tell whether you’re intentionally missing my point or whether you realize what you’re saying when you say things like

How many of those people in Guantanamo do you think are as innocent as the day they were born?

I have no idea whatsoever of their guilt or innocence, nor do you. We don’t even know who they are. The point is that they are being denied rights as POW’s under the Geneva Convention. If the government is really intent on figuring out who did what, why are they stalling and blocking the legal process?

When someone is released. Returns home to their country for trial and that country sets them free only to return to criminal ways, who is responsible then? The U.S.?

Again, you’re putting words in my mouth. Did I suggest setting anyone free? I’m simply talking about due process.

The detainees are being evaluated as to whether they should be released or not. Just like in our courts, some mistakes will be made. Some will be tried. Some released.

THREE YEARS.

Since I can only base my opinions on what I have heard, I would never claim I am right. I am not there and have never been there. I don’t know what is really going on and I would say that the majority of us don’t. You know as well as I do when something goes wrong we hear about it 100 times more than anything that goes right.

I’m sorry, but this seems like a cop-out to me. I don’t expect anything more from you than your opinion, but you need to back it up with logic. We don’t know as much about what’s going on as we should because our own government blocks us from finding out. Why? To protect national security or to prevent us from doing anything to correct an out-of-control situation?

Eric,
Obviously you don’t listen to talk radio, or watch Fox News. Not one of the “hosts” on these formats allows any disenting view. Combs doesn’t count, Hannity keeps him on a pretty tight leash.
I also listen to NPR and Air America. The programing on these formats at least seem to be more civil and unless their speaking in some secret code I don’t hear any talk of violence or mayhem there.
To suggest that the DNC is financing some huge, underground cabal to overthrow the election process is laughable.
The virulence against the “left” started much longer ago than the last four years.

bugcrazy wrote:
> And asking for a person’s ID at a voting booth is
> somehow infringing on their rights too. Right?

In most of the country it is infringing on their rights, because in most of the country it’s illegal (in certain states, it’s only required if you are a first-time registrant). You can fight to change the system if you like, but you probably shouldn’t defend people who just make up laws on the spot.

Rocky wrote:
> I don’t think that any sane individual would dispute
> that someone voting should show some id.

Rocky, you mean well but you’re actually not correct. See above.

> Christopher, my Reichstag reference was directed to
> Rocky who had just finished comparing Eric to Goebells.

Oops, sorry Martin! Rocky, I hereby refer you to Godwin’s Law as well.

Eric wrote:
> Why does Al Gore feel the need to have to
> ‘get out the message’ not to turn their anger
> into acts of violence?

Oh, how clever of you! You know, you are such a master of “gotcha” politics and word twistery that I totally knew that you’d say that.

First of all, it’s fairly Alice-in-Wonderland of you to accuse someone of being guilty because they condemn a crime (I used the term “Alice-in-Wonderland” to avoid triggering Godwin’s Law on myself - oops!).

Your insight also reflects a steep bunker mentality - I assume it’s the same mentality that prevents the the Bush Administration from condemning torture: If you so much as recognize the potential existence of a problem, then people will attack you!

Maybe Gore just wanted to do the right thing and make sure everything was gracious and fair. Maybe he wanted the legacy of the 2004 election to be one where the Democratic Party, and indeed America itself, is remembered as gracious and fair. Ever think of that?

> You mean for exposing democrats about their
> obviously concerted plan to preemptively
> charge Republicans with voter fraud and
> suppression? Yeah I shouldn’t be pointing
> that out should I?

I never said that. I only said you shouldn’t condemn Democrats for something you are doing identically. It’s your choice which of your two contradictory positions you will drop in order to not be hypocritical anymore.

> Some counties now have more voter registration
> than they have eligible voters.

While this is clearly evidence of registration problems (could be anything from voter registration fraud, to pranks, to terrible record-keeping), it is not evidence of Democrats trying to change the election. Which brings another thing up: You never answered the question about how in the world the registrations of “Jive Turkey” or “Mary Poppins” would work as part of a Democratic plot to help John Kerry.

Until you answer that simple question, your allegations shall remain largely absurd and illogical.

-Cf

This election cycle is comming to a close, we have all debated the issues, and that is a good thing.

Wasn’t this site created to debate the issues ?

I am of no real importance on this site, but even as a hick I understand that issues are all we can really debate, Isn’t that why you came here?
I’m as partisan as anyone here, but I want to here other points of view.
Do you hate the other side, or just the fact that your side is loseing ?
If your views aren’t being embrased by the majority, don’t attack the other side, listen to the views of others, and vote based on issues, not hate for the opposing side of that issue.

If on Nov.2nd things dont turn out the way you would like them to, don’t blame the other side, listen to why they vote the way they did.

Thats my opinion and I’m sticking to it.

Chris,
As I stated before my reference to Goebbels had nothing to do with Nazism and everything to do with propaganda, as I belive that the aforementioned Goebbels was one of historys foremost authority on the subject of propaganda, whether he was a Nazi or not is inconsequential to my post.

Rocky, please, I know you are trying to make a point, but to say

Obviously you don’t listen to talk radio, or watch Fox News. Not one of the “hosts” on these formats allows any disenting view.

is just not accurate at all. The fact that Greta Van Susteren has Susan Estritch on her show all the time spouting her tripe is example enough, without taking into account the other shows that routinely bring on both left and right opinions.

I watch MSNBC, CNN and FOX, all 3 of them do this format that I mostly despise where two of the most partisan hacks that they can find come on to ‘debate’ a subject, all it turns into is ‘who can get their talking points in more often’ without any actual sane discussion of the topic at hand getting in the way.

But you can’t just say that they never let a leftie on, it’s not accurate or realistic.

Rhinehold wrote:

I watch MSNBC, CNN and FOX, all 3 of them do this format that I mostly despise where two of the most partisan hacks that they can find come on to ‘debate’ a subject, all it turns into is ‘who can get their talking points in more often’ without any actual sane discussion of the topic at hand getting in the way.

How right you are. I can’t even watch any of those shows because they’re all about who’s louder. It’s insulting and annoying.

Rhinehold,
I agree that the above invite “lefties” on their programs, but rarely are they allowed to make their point without a lot of harrassment and name calling.
I wouldn’t call that discussion.

eric,

it’s official. your credibility is now zilch with this post.

there are many many more credible republican posters (on other sites) who at least are able to maintain some semblance of credible discourse when talking about the differences between republicans and democrats. i’ll now visit them when looking for an intelligent republican viewpoint.

you’ve reduced yourself to hysterical talking points and rehashed drudge headlines that have no historical context and oinly the slightest basis in reality. they are hyped purely for the ability to scare.

it’s going to be a really difficult next 8 years for you. i hope you can come to some peace.

“it’s going to be a really difficult next 8 years for you”

Dont worry about it Eric. If the country can handle 8 years of clinton and his mess, 8 more years under French-style rule will be a piece of cake. At least we’re prepared this time.

remind me exactly, kctim what was the “mess” that Clinton made?

What about Reagan?

Hi Cali_
Wow, I guess I’ll start with his assaults on the 2nd and 4th amendments. The murders at Waco and Ruby Ridge. Forcing American soldiers to serve and allowing them to die for UN special interests, lying and disgracing the office.
But the most important one to me would have to be the total dismanteling of our military.
I’m sure there are some more, but these matter most to me.

We have elections so we don’t have civil wars.

Maybe so John, but if both sides keep the “our way is the only right way” mentality, then more and more violence will occurr and more of the non-political people will start taking sides.
A nation divided even more so than now.

John, but if another president is appointed by the courts or the House of Representatives (becoming a real possibility now) instead of by the people’s choice, we will have inched closer to civil war based on the fact that the consitution is being used against the people, instead of for them.

kctim,

thanks for the response and for the details. i’m glad, at the very least, you didn’t mention the usual stand by “b/c he got a bj”.. i respect your answers. although most presidents lie, and more than a few on both sides have “disgraced” the office, especially recently.

I disagree with your comments about the “UN special interests” since to my knowledge we didn’t lose any soliders at Kosovo. I could be wrong.

The dismantling of the military was at a time when the entire country thought that the cold war was over and that a new era was beginning, but i can understand your frustration with some of the decisions made at that time, especially as it seems you’re career military (?). but it seems at least as relative an argument as saying that defense spending is up to record levels because of the “war on terror”. even cheney voted for dismantling some of the out dated weapons systems and lowering troop levels. you need to adjust to suit the needs of the present day, and so that you are prepared for unforseen events. i would assume that the
even the military goes through periods when they ramp up and ramp down, based on the times. i don’t think we’re meant to be a military industrial complex 100% of the time.

thanks for clarifying your views.

Beagle, your opinion expressed above is wise - and I say this despite the fact that we sit in differing political philosophy camps. It is voices and reason such as yours and 10’s of thousands of others like yours that visit this site every month, that make WB unique and worthwhile.

You may call yourself a hick, but, your civility and rational opinions are as sophisticated and valuable as anyone else’s here.

Cali_ don’t forget that it was Clinton (and Clarke’s) treatment of terrorism as a criminal activity for 8 years (along with Carter, Reagan and Bush I before him) that got us into the mess we are in now. Clinton was proud that he put in jail all but 1 of the WTC93 bombers (the remaining 1 headed to Iraq where he was given a house and a government salary), yet he failed to get the people who planned and funded the attack, so that they could just try again in 2001. You’ll excuse me if I find that a failure instead of a positive thing.

rhinehold,

i think it’s quite fair to say that no president before 9/11 treated terrorism as the severe threat that it was. we have all paid for that lack of focus and attention.

therefore, i think it’s even more of an issue that since 9/11 George W Bush has severely misled this country on the war on terror.

the inability to capture or kill osama, the inability to secure weapons, the inability to cut funding, the purposeful deceit of trying to connect iraq and al-qaeda, the entire war in iraq, all of these things are in some ways more horrible than all of the presidents prior. those presidents had no mandate. george w. bush has the mandate, the support and the backing of the people to fight the war against terror and so far he has failed.

Rhinehold, that was a failure in capturing the masterminds. But, what you imply should have been done is directly analogous to the Hoover Administration nuking NY. City in order to take out the Mafia.

Those previous Presidents were not in custody of the facts that al_Queda was an extensive network, nor were they aware that Afghanistan had become the home base of the leadership save for perhaps Clinton. But, even if Clinton was aware that Afghanistan was home base to the planners of the 1993 WTC bombing, that fact alone would not have justified invading Afghanistan in an all out war designed at nation building. For one, the Congress, including Republicans would never have sanctioned such disproportionate action, let alone the international community.

The 9/11 attacks or the knowledge of their imminence, would have been required to justify an all out invasion. Clinton did attempt surgical strikes against al-Queda, and such action along with international policing was all that would be realistically supported prior to 9/11.

David,
Not to mention that OBL was our buddy during the eighties while fighting the Russians in Afganistan.

Wow, out comes the rhetoric and apologists. Sorry, but Clinton failed, he put us in the position we found ourselves in 2001. Blaming Bush for the 8 months he was in office over Clinton for 8 years, makes no sense.

Yes, something should have been done with Afghanistan, other than lobbing in cruise missles, same with Iraq. Clinton preferred to protect his political ass instead of the people of the US. Everything else is hyperbole and does not change that fact.

Eric Simonson,
Bush’s economic policies over the last four years has created an artifical economy. Did you know that in the Trucking Industry Our Government has been paying part of the fuel bill for truck drivers? By footing the bill for the $.60-.70/gal. increase in fuel and taxes, they have kept the cost from reaching the local store; however, this pratice can not go on much longer or it will start hurting the economy much more than it helps.

Refer back to 1974-80 economy to see how the market and people dealt with a steady increase in prices after the sudden increase of fuel that went from $.32/gal. to $.69/gal. When I came back from Germany in late 1980 I was shocked to see that everything had doubled in price. Fuel was $1.29.9/gal, Food and necessites cost twice what they did in 78 when I left, and the good paying manufacturing jobs where replaced by low paying service jobs.

Look at how much the value of the dollar has fallen over the last two years (30%). Heres a good article that explains how the dollar is fairing on the market Additionally, American Street shows a chart on the dollar: http://www.reachm.com/amstreet/archives/2004/10/21/we-support-a-strong-dollar/. Unless you are making more than 30% more income than you are losing money. Considering our IRA’s and other retirement programs on the market is averaging 4-5% and even the top 20% of the market has on average seen less than a 25% increase in pay, are we really making money (i.e. national debt going up)as a nation? Hence, the only way we can get out of the mess that we are in is to begin slowly increase everything in are market so that we can make more money. What type of jobs should we create depends on your vision for the future of Our Civilization and American Society. JFK was absolutely correct when he challanged Our Country to build a better world for our children which Kerry and Edwards buys into. The problem with Bush and Company’s economic plan is to allow the top 20% to get the increase first and than hand it out to the masses. While people who have “Old Money” in this country has a right to complain, most new millionaries and billionaries (last 20 years) are complaining of the “Dirty Little Secert” of the Wealthy People who help build this great nation of ours.

If “We the people” are serious about wanting to build a “Better Life” and stop the maddness of keeping up with the Jone’s family than it is our Socialitoral Responsiblilty to lead our government in that direction. I don’t know about you, but I would like to begin keeping up with “The Jetson Family” in my life time. I think that along with building a clean environment is the best thing we Baby Boomers can leave Our Future. The “Me-ism” that became popular in the 80’s needs to be replaced with “We-ism” for Our Nation to work.

And while I think both the Blues and Reds Elites are just as guilty for allowing it to happen. It is time for the “American Citizen” to wake up to the fact that Our Country either Grow Up or face becoming like Europe and other accient cities.

> Sorry, but Clinton failed, he put us in
> the position we found ourselves in 2001.

Rhinehold, you condemn Clinton for doing nothing, but can you name a single person besides Clinton and his team who advocated attacking Al Qaeda before 9/11? Can you give any evidence whatsoever that President Bush or any of his team, or any Republicans whatsoever ever expressed any opinion that Al Qaeda was a threat to America?

No you cannot. The reality is that Bush’s team, and the Republicans in general, always thought that Clinton was too focused on Al Qaeda, that he was foolish to focus on fringe groups instead of on state-sponsored terrorism.

In fact, after taking office, the Bush Administration proceeded to ignore or even undo what little progress Clinton had made towards raising the political will to fight the growing terrorist threat. Instead, the Bush team focused on missle defense (I say “instead” because they literally kept saying that we have far more to fear from a terrorist with an ICBM than we have to fear from a bunch of ragtag radicals). Read the GOP platform from 2000 and you’ll see what I mean.

You can’t criticise Clinton for inadequate attention to terrorism unless you can show evidence that there were wiser voices than his calling for him to attack terrorists with the intensity you think he should have. There were few such voices, and those voices were most definitely not from anyone currently working for President Bush.

-Cf

CF,

1) You mistake me for a republican who voted for Bush in 2000. You are wrong.

2) You again attempt to evade and apologize. Can you one time admit that Clinton failed because of the way he treated the problem?

The US failed, we failed. Clinton was our president. He led the policies. He failed. Why is it so hard to say it?

This is why I really really really hate the 2 party system. All anyone ever does is deflect from ‘their guy’ by attacking ‘the other guy’. Give me a break.

> You mistake me for a republican who voted
> for Bush in 2000. You are wrong.

You are wrong. I never said anything of the sort. Please re-read my words and re-evaluate your post.

> Can you one time admit that Clinton failed
> because of the way he treated the problem?

Oh, please. Of course he failed. I’ve said it before. It’s obvious. Even Clinton has admitted it!

-Cf

Rhinehold,
While Clinton did not fully engage our military into the War with Al Qaeda, he did give the orders to the CIA to do what ever is necessary to caputure or eliminate the problem. Now we know from the 9/11 Commission about the “Hunting Party” why didn’t Mr. Temet give the order to fire? It was Mr. Tenet’s own words that nailed President Bush when we found out about the two memos. Although I do not place blame of the hijacking of the four planes squarely on anyone sholders, I do hold My Government responsible for its reaction to our defense.

I personally have pretty much stopped watching the news. I prefer to get my news by reading papers on the web. I think Jon Stewart pretty much hit the nail on the head.

I am not worried particularly over stories about fights among crazed thugs. They occur nearly ever other football, basketball or baseball game as I see it.

What really worries me is the stories out of Iraq, Haliburton gets a pass, Oops 350 tons of plastique missing, We’re paying $3,000,000 to terrorists for old wornout weapons which are worth less than a million, They’re 20 some prisoners “missing”, The CIA authorized torture and killing of prisoners, Rumsfeld and Bush orchestrated the subversion of the Geneva Accords. Doesn’t this bother anbybody else? Is this America we’re talking about? Why isn’t this page one 20 point letters?

Are these partisan bickering noises so loud that we don’t hear these stories, or do we simply not wish to believe them? Is this America?

Does anyone here support this stuff?

Greg,
What really gets me is how many people want to turn a blind eye to the problems we face. Although I think the media is trying to just keep the election interesting, I do strongly believe Kerry will at least win the electoral college.

Greg, perhaps the problem is that more than half of your litany of complaints is false.

I respectfully submit that if you’re going to admit you don’t watch any news except what you can glean from a left-wing cable comedy show, then your analysis isn’t all it could be.

Holding Bush responsible for missing explosives in Iraq, like the Rather memo story, has collapsed in less than one day. Not only has it collapsed, it’s once again shown that like CBS, the NYT is willing to get in bed with Kerry and tell lies right before the election.

Those explosives were gone before an American soldier even set foot in Iraq. So where are they?
With the WMD that also disappeared? Given to terrorists? Saddam was no threat? Right.

Martin,
Considering the 380 tons of high explosive was gaurded by the weapon inspectors before the attack begun, the role of the president does come into play if he assumes the role as Commander & Cheif. That site should of been held under survilence of a stationary sattellite and destoried within the first few minutes of the war.

Failure to plan for the capture or destruction of the site is an absolute responsiblity of the Commander & Cheif or do you believe we need to leave that up to the locals to decide?

Henry, weapons inspectors were “guarding” Iraqi weapons depots? Dare I ask what you mean by that?

And what for the love of god is a stationary satellite?

Dear Lord, partisanship and Bush hatred is now demanding that Bush, as Commander in Chief, should suspend the laws of physics. Yes, it’s come to that. A stationary satellite! LOL!!!

Martin - duh! Stationary orbit ring a bell. It moves in orbit perpendicular to a stationary point on the earth. Basic physics, you know. I think the last laugh is Henry’s…

Martin,
A stationary satellite is a man made object which orbits our planet at approx. 280,000 miles from earth. Our government owns some called “Spy Satellites” which they can use for numerous reasons. Putting one over the site and having 24/7/365 security should of been done when Bush41 was in office as well as on the gound systems and troops. In fact if you web search the UN record you can find the source of the orders. They were in place until Bush called for their removal in 2003.

Christopher, good response to Rhinehold, but wasted effort. Rhinehold has already indicated his mind is made up on this issue and isn’t about to be confused by any facts or history. Similar folks can be found on both sides of the spectrum as can be evidenced on Washington Journal’s call in segments on C-span.

Reminds of the validity of all that herd behavior psychological researchers studied back in the 1980 with cows and sheep. Worthwhile research with great results. Only problem was, the cows and sheep wouldn’t read it, and if they did, they wouldn’t identify with it. But you can bet your boots Rove and Carville studied the results and use them to great effectiveness.

It is why America can’t keep a single long term solution in place long enough to solve any long term problem. Every 4 to 8 years the leader changes direction and the herds follow oblivous to their previous direction and the certitude of it. It is no wonder Buddha is depicted so often laughing.

I don’t think so, David, but a valiant and worthy attempt nonetheless to justify our night of pure Bush-bashing science fiction here on Watchblog (finally we have some fun in the midst of this contentious election season).

“Orbits” are stationary by definition—hence the term you probably googled—“stationary orbit.”

The earth, for example, has a “stationary” or “synchronous” orbit around the sun. To alter a stationary orbit, the orbiting entity must either be propelled by its own force (which is how a space shuttle moves while it’s in orbit—with thrusters) or succumb gradually to the gravitational pull of a nearby body (which is why satellites eventually come crashing to earth and why the earth’s rotation around the sun alters minutely from year to year).

But none of this has anything whatsoever to do with what Henry was suggesting—parking a satellite over a weapons stash to monitor it around the clock.

So “Beam me up, Scotty. These people want a god with powers over nature and not a mere president after all!”

David,
Good point about Buddha. Just think what America would be like if we challanged our government.

Martin,
Here is a web site of Military Spy Satellites [http://fas.org/spp/military/program/imint/ ] I quickly found on the web.

Martin, you ain’t an aerospace engineer, that’s for sure. Ever wonder what the heck all those satellite dishes on the rooftops were pointing at?

You should read a little more NASA Stuff, or Arthur C. Clarke.

-Cf

Martin, continuing the humor, the term geosynchronous orbit is what Henry was referring to and in typical fashion you chose to obfuscate the issue with little mind games over words.

And no, didn’t need to google a thing. Comes from my 1958 8th grade science class, when the hope and future was all about space dreaming.

But, Henry’s point stands, that until they left, weapons inspectors kept an eye on the seals of that bunker according to the evening news on CNN and MSNBC. They also report the weapons were largely intact just 3 months before the invasion. Many respected individuals from inside the administration, the military, ex-military, have agreed the Bush plan for invading Iraq was myopic and failed to plan at all for anything beyond wiping out Iraq’s armed forces.

Big story in a number of the big publications as well. Whether one chooses to ignore this story or not, what is being reported is not going unnoticed by the electorate, and I see a long list of notable and highly respected Republicans coming out in a steady stream opposing Bush’s reelection, if not outrightly supporting Kerry’s candidacy. I can provide you a link with the list and their comments if you like.

Not looking good for the Pres. who has been losing momentum steadily against Kerry. That is not to say there will be a landslide, or even that it is guaranteed one or the other will win. We in fact, could see the House of Representatives decide who is the President which will cause Gingrich no end of grief for all of the undoing Bush will do to the Republican party with another 4 years in office.

I won’t deny the gleeful smirk that came to my face when I read this. Remember Eric’s link, above, about Democrats registering “people who don’t exist”?

Well, turns out in today’s news that those Ohio Republicans have been submitting thousands of “erroneous” voter registration challenges. They got caught and had to withdraw thousands of those challenges.

COLUMBUS, Ohio - State Republicans withdrew thousands of more than 35,000 challenges to new voter registrations because of errors in their filings apparently caused by a computer glitch.

Republicans filed the challenges Friday in 65 of Ohio’s 88 counties, saying mail sent to the newly registered voters was returned as undeliverable.

Using Eric’s Wonderlandian jurisprudence and his bunker mentality, I should probably condemn this as deliberate Republican skulduggery!

But you know what? It is probably just an “error”. An error caused by overzealous and negligent Republican operatives who care far more about partisan victory than about honesty, accuracy, or the integrity of our elections… but an error nonetheless.

-Cf

Interesting comments, David, considering I’m one of the few people on here who is actually still looking for answers to questions, trying to discover as much as I can about the issues and admittedly unsure who I am going to vote for…

You’d think that some of the Reds and Blues would want to actually court me instead of bashing me for their perceived views of my views. I’ve been called both conservative and liberal, depending on who is arguing with me, because that’s the nature of politics these days I’m afraid.

I actually thought you would agree with me on that…

I am very open to changing my mind if presented with evidence and persuading arguments. I’ve seen little of that though to make me move to the Kerry camp, I very rarely will embrace anyone because I don’t want to vote for someone else and beyond that Kerry holds little interest to most true independants who aren’t anti-bush or anti-iraq-war.

For the record, I will not be voting for Kerry for a loooong litany of reasons. I am unwilling to vote for Bush or Badnarik, but will end up choosing between the two I’m afraid. I have long standing issues with the Green party’s progressive politics, being a libertarian, so Nadar and Cobb are out…

If only the libertarian party wasn’t so stupidly isolationist when it comes to this one issue I disagree with them on, it would be easier. A little common sense goes a long way. Learning from history isn’t a bad idea either…

Basically, there is no one out there really trying to court my vote. :/

Stop, please. You guys are murdering me with laughter. I’m not complaining, really—no hard feelings. This is welcome relief.

You’re actually linking to sites that refer to geosynchronous satellites and earthbound dish receivers? Do you even have the foggiest idea what any of that means?

What it means (if you’ll actually read the links you provide) is that an earthbound dish fixes on the known trajectory of a satellite spinning around the earth to gather information. But what, pray tell, relevance does that have to what we’re talking about?

It definitley doesn’t mean that a satellite can hover, against all the laws of physics, over a weapons depot and monitor it around the clock!

I’m glad that we have this in the open. Kerry supporters base their positions on fantasy and science fiction. Bush supporters, alas, have to contend with the limits of physical reality.

Martin,
The capability of most “Spy Satellites” are still considered “Classifed” even today. While we know for a fact that our GPS Satellites can cover every square inch of the planet and their position in realation to earth and space stay the same, you still find it hard to believe that one satellite can stay in orbit with a nuke reactor providing power.

“We in fact, could see the House of Representatives decide who is the President which will cause Gingrich no end of grief…”

So now we add time-warps to the delightful world of science fiction which we all now so gleefully inhabit? Gingrich? Where is he, anyway?

Martin, Even Newt is running away from Bush this year. Doesn’t that tell you anything.

Martin, my jaw is on the floor at your almost Bush-like denial of plain facts, placed right before your very eyes. The more proof that is presented to you, the more vigorously you defend your position. It’s amazing.

Geostationary satellites orbit the Earth in a special way: Their orbit takes exactly 24 hours, like other geosynchronous satellites, and they move in the same direction that the earth spins. But unlike other geosynchronous satellites, geostationary satellites move in a circle, directly above the equator. The earth moves .1 degree, the satellite moves .1 degree. Such satellites, in effect, “hover”.

> What it means (if you’ll actually read the
> links you provide) is that an earthbound dish
> fixes on the known trajectory of a satellite
> spinning around the earth to gather information. …
> It definitley doesn’t mean that a satellite
> can hover, against all the laws of physics

Hm, maybe I should listen to Martin and actually read the link I provided:

If one could see a satellite in geostationary orbit, it would appear to hover in the same celestial position.

Sounds like hovering to me, what with the fact that it uses the word “hover” and all.

By the way, I am not defending the idea that spy satellites are generally geosynchronous. From what I understand, geosynchronous satellites have to fly pretty far away from the planet’s surface. You’re probably right that not too many spy satellites, at least not the photographic ones, are geostationary.

But you are wildly incorrect in your mocking accusations that “hovering” is impossible. Even satellites geostationary satellites above or below the equator only wiggle back and forth in the sky a little bit, which counts as “hovering” to me, too. They stay in a pretty much fixed point in the sky - they certainly don’t go over the horizon, not ever.

> Bush supporters, alas, have to contend with
> the limits of physical reality.

LOL! Faith based astrophysics?

-Cf

Martin,
I guess Scotty needs to beem you up. Here is a good web site the explores some of the technology. Space Daily is one among many that will show you what is being done. Also here is a good article on Geo-Orbit; US To Boost Reconnaissance With Powerful New Birds

Tell me what you think of our ability now?

Rhinehold, I provided you with information which you refused to accept. The information is factually and historically correct. I said: “For one, the Congress, including Republicans would never have sanctioned such disproportionate action, let alone the international community.”

Perhaps you wern’t following politics too closely 4 to 5 years ago, but, Bush bashed Clinton for nation building, and the Republican Congress was hypercritical of most of Clinton’s military actions overseas.

Given that factual and historical background, it appears illogical to me for a person to posit that any other President would have invaded Afghanistan or Iraq prior to 9/11 given the limited and unconnected intelligence Bush now uses as a defense for his inability to respond before 9/11.

As I said, Congress would not have supported such a risky adventure prior to 9/11 for all the reasons now touted as negative consequences of having done so. Today those negative consequences of invading Afghanistan and Iraq are defensible in light of 9/11 by about half of the American electorate. Prior to 9/11 such action would or position would have threatened election by most Congress persons who supported preemptory invasion.

Martin, he is doing the conservative think tank circuit and forums. I see him about once a month on C-Span. He also gave testimony before the 9/11 Commission as I recall. Still very active in Washington, though now, like Pat Buchannan, pretty critical of what is happening to his party under Bush’s leadership.

Given that factual and historical background, it appears illogical to me for a person to posit that any other President would have invaded Afghanistan or Iraq prior to 9/11 given the limited and unconnected intelligence Bush now uses as a defense for his inability to respond before 9/11.

I read through the 9/11 Commission Report, and it was interesting that Clinton had the military on alert for an invasion of Afghanistan as soon as Tenet proved bin Laden’s responsibility for the USS Cole bombing.

Tenet never came up with anything until after Bush was elected, and then Bush decided the whole affair was a “Clinton thing” and ignored it.

Martin:

A geostationary orbit (abbreviated GSO) is a circular orbit in the Earth’s equatorial plane, any point on which revolves about the Earth in the same direction and with the same period as the Earth’s rotation. It is a special case of the geosynchronous orbit, and the one which is of most interest to artificial satellite operators.

An orbit synchronized with the sidereal rotation of the Earth (1 sidereal day equals 23 h, 56, min, 4 s) with an inclination and eccentricity of zero. A satellite in this kind of orbit always appears in the same spot in the sky (i.e., somewhere on the celestial equator ).

A list of satellites in geostationary orbit.

What it means (if you’ll actually read the links you provide) is that an earthbound dish fixes on the known trajectory of a satellite spinning around the earth to gather information. But what, pray tell, relevance does that have to what we’re talking about?

You’re right that it fixes on the known trajectory - not moving! The satellite orbits at the same speed that the earth rotates, so the position of the satellite relative to the surface of the earth is stationary.

The relevance is that you ridiculed an opponent’s statement based on your lack of understanding of the situation. I doubt you’ll admit it, though; it’s not your style.

It definitley doesn’t mean that a satellite can hover, against all the laws of physics, over a weapons depot and monitor it around the clock!

Yes, in fact, it does, and it’s against no laws of physics. A satellite can be placed so that it maintains a fixed position dirrectly above a certain spot on the globe, like a weapons depot. Whether such a positioning would be high enough priority to do it is a big question, but it is very much in the realm of possibility thanks to physics.

Kerry supporters base their positions on fantasy and science fiction. Bush supporters, alas, have to contend with the limits of physical reality.

Sorry. Kerry supporters rely on actual science and get evidence to back themselves up. You followed Bush’s lead to make a decision based on instinct, then ignored all evidence and fact to the contrary.

Thanks for all the info on satellites. I now feel much smarter.

The one thing I question in this whole post is this said by Henry:

‘Putting one over the site and having 24/7/365 security should of been done when Bush41 was in office as well as on the gound systems and troops.’

Was this option not available to Clinton?

Clinton was waiting for Tenet and Bush 43 didn’t listen to Clinton?
Sounds like all of it was Bush 41 & 43’s fault and Clinton did everything he could have done.

Clinton gave orders to take out UBL? From what I gather the people who had this order still had to okay it with the White House before following through. Losing valuable time and letting UBL get away.
Nice try covering for Clinton and saying he admits to mistakes. Hindsight? He was out of office before mistakes were admitted and people expect Bush to say he made some.
Give me a break.
He did not make a mistake taking out Saddam Hussein.
Why does everyone want to selectively forget that this whole insurgency problem is because Bush went into Iraq to change the WHOLE MIDDLE EAST?

Cali
I was a typical male when the ML scandal first came to be, I thought “hey, slick willie gettin some on the side, whats the big deal?” But it still was a disgrace on the office, to everyone. Today, only half of the country feels the office is full of lies and has been disgraced.
Bosnia/Kosovo was not the only UN mandated operation. US troops under UN control is one of the reasons I threw away an 11 year military career.
I also am aware of who was involved in dismantleing the military, but it happened on clintons watch. He heavily supported it also. Knowing that, if deployed, we would not be properly equiped or trained, is another reason I left the military.

I do not support the wars we fought in Iraq or Bosnia/Kosovo, but I believe the only seperation of views on it are due to who is president at the time.
This closedminded, party at all costs thinking has terribly divided us and I fear the only answer will be a civil war.

it’s laughable that the “blame clinton” troupe of posters here look for nuance in every single bush response and yet find none in the actions of clinton. look, no president makes perfect decisions, but you can judge a president by how he protects the american people..

clinton knew bin laden was a threat:

“On August 7, 1998, National Security Advisor Berger woke President Clinton with a phone call at 5:35 A.M. to tell him of the almost simultaneous bombings of the U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Suspicion quickly focused on Bin Ladin. Unusually good intelligence, chiefly from the yearlong monitoring of al Qaeda’s cell in Nairobi, soon firmly fixed responsibility on him and his associates. Debate about what to do settled very soon on one option:Tomahawk cruise missiles. Months earlier, after cancellation of the covert capture operation, Clarke had prodded the Pentagon to explore possibilities for military action. On June 2, General Hugh Shelton, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, had directed General Zinni at Central Command to develop a plan, which he had submitted during the first week of July. Zinni’s planners surely considered the two previous times the United States had used force to respond to terrorism, the 1986 strike on Libya and the 1993 strike against Iraq. They proposed firing Tomahawks against eight terrorist camps in Afghanistan, including Bin Ladin’s compound at Tarnak Farms.38 After the embassy attacks, the Pentagon offered this plan to the White House.” ~ 9/11 commission

bush had even more information, but took no action to protect the american people:

“For the President Only

Bin Laden Determined To Strike in US

Clandestine, foreign government, and media reports indicate (Osama) Bin Laden since 1997 has wanted to conduct terrorist attacks in the US. Bin Laden implied in US television interviews in 1997 and 1998 that his followers would follow the example of World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef and “bring the fighting to America”.

After US missile strikes on his base in Afghanistan in 1998, Bin Laden told followers he wanted to retaliate in Washington, according to a …(edited)… service. An Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ) operative told a … (edited) … service at the same time that Bin Laden was planning to exploit the operative’s access to the US to mount a terrorist strike.” http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3617289.stm

you can debate motives, but you can’t debate the facts. sorry.

Martin,
I would assume that you have never heard of satellite television. How would you account for the fact that a stationary dish attached to your house remains in contact with a satellite?
If you don’t like the laws of physics in this universe you should find another one that suits you.

kctim,

thanks for your response. i can completely understand your frustration and while i don’t necessarily agree with them, i respect them. thanks for making it a civil discourse.

David,

I’m a little confused by your argument that Congress and the american people would not have allowed Clinton to perform a ‘preemptive strike’ on Afghanistan when they had no problem with the same kind of military action in other places around the world during Clinton’s presidency.

Your opinion is just your opinion, not fact. Based on the fact that Clinton did use the military for other uses without much fuss would tend to cause most people two second guess that opinion.

As for Iraq, there were calls from many Democratic senators to do something about Iraq in the late 90s, and the fact that many republicans felt that something more should have been done in 1991, it would not have been hard, if the attempt were made, to resolve the issue militarily then. Clinton’s official policy was one of regeime change in Iraq.

OK Sherman, set the way back machine for the present.

Guy’s it doesn’t matter a hill of beans what Clinton did. Blame him, not blame him, it doesn’t matter.

Clinton isn’t the reason we’re in Iraq.

Maybe not Rocky, but his presidency played a great part in what this topic is about.
Blame him for everything or defend him at all costs were and are the only two ways of thought nowadays.
This very “un-civil” discourse will only continue to grow until something major happens.

I’m a little confused by your argument that Congress and the american people would not have allowed Clinton to perform a ‘preemptive strike’ on Afghanistan when they had no problem with the same kind of military action in other places around the world during Clinton’s presidency.

Yeah, the 9/11 Commission Report really slams Gingrich’s Republican Congress for yelling “Wag the dog!” every time Clinton tried to do something about Saddam or bin Laden. Orrin Hatch even referred to Clinton’s obsession with terrorism a “phony issue” distracting America from te real danger - hanky panky in the White House.

When Clinton destroyed the bin Laden-owned chemical factory in Sudan because the CIA found traces of WMD precursors on the site, Republicans just sneered and called it an aspirin factory. And, oh yeah, they yelled “Wag the dog!”

When you think of what could have been accomplished if the Republican Congress hadn’t been so myopically focused on tearing down the President of the United States… Grrr. Whatever.

kctim, if “something major happens,” let me know. I want to be there.

Why is it, in recent times that only Republican Presidents have invaded soverign nations to remove the heads of state (usually former friends of the CIA), and the Democratic Presidents work within the auspices of the UN on humanitarian missions?

Eric, WatchBlog’s MVB for two weeks running, has sparked another marathon thread. I’ve really enjoyed reading some of the posts (David, you should contribute to these debates more often).

I studied Physics at college so I particularly liked the debate between Martin and the Mad Scientists. LOL.

In a race this close the revelation about the looting of the unsecured explosives is, err, dynamite, and enough to scramble most people’s critical faculties.

With that in mind I expect the debates around here to deteriorate further and become increasingly bizzare until the electoral boil is lanced, and ‘sanity’ returns.

As for Eric’s article, I think it is really weak. Sorry. I wish I came in here and had nice things to say more often, but I can’t, because a lot of these posts are so absurdly partisan. This one being a prime example.

NEWSFLASH: Both sides are dishonest. Both sides are probably manipulating the mechanics of the electoral system. Therefore, I think it is totally ridiculous for Eric to attempt to claim the moral high ground on this.

Why is it, in recent times that only Republican Presidents have invaded soverign nations to remove the heads of state (usually former friends of the CIA), and the Democratic Presidents work within the auspices of the UN on humanitarian missions?

Umm, Milosovich was removed as a ‘head of state’ by Clinton and NATO, Russia’s veto on the security council prevented it from being a UN action.

What I find odd is that people are trying to point it as one way or the other on the failures of the US to deal appropriately with the terrorist threat, everyone is culpable in this issue. As I said before, Carter, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, all before Bush took office, had a hand in putting us in the position we were in 8 months into Bush II’s presidency. Does this mean I’m ‘apologizing’ for Bush II? No, it just means I’m appropriately laying the blame on all that were involved, not just the presidents either.

As for AP’s assurances that the republicans would never had allowed Clinton to take action, he assumes that the republicans would have voted in lock step, which rarely happens and I doubt would have happened then if Clinton had tried it. Or, quite possibly they might have. But we won’t know because Clinton couldn’t find a political edge in his favor so didn’t try. That was my biggest frustration with Clinton and one I share with Kerry, that they need to have majority support to do what they may think is right. A ‘global test’ if you were. I don’t think we have that problem with Bush II. Of course, some see that as a negative, others a positive. That’s why we are in a close election.

But the attitude of ‘I’m right and you evil for disagreeing with me’ that I see a lot (not necessarily here, but then again) is frustrating and sad that we become so religious in our hatred or fear in terms of politics that, if I can bring this thread back around to it’s beginnings, you see the type of behavior displayed in raiding, looting and destroying opponent’s headquarters as if it were some gang war!

Hey I don’t totally disagree, however, I don’t think that we can take the actions of a few and paint the whole Democratic party as co-conspiritors.
As for Clinton, it seems to me he spent an inordinent amount of time defending himself against the half-vast right wing conspiericy (I wish I could spell).

We need to spend more time fixing the problem insted of the blame.

Martin, I presume from your response that you don’t read, because you obviously didn’t read and interpret my post within the normal understanding of a literate adult.

You stated that half of my list was false. Prove it. Because I believe your post to simply be a radical rant of lies.

Perhaps, if you took the time to read, your responses would have some merit.

Alejo & Rocky,

Bet your glad I made it back.

If you are expecting me to say that the prisoners should be given the same rights as American citizens, I say NO WAY.
Find out what country they are from and give them the rights they would have where they come from.

Best I can do.

bugcrazy,
I don’t expect them to enjoy the rights of an American, unless they are American citizens.
However, I don’t expect them to be treated as sub-humans.

Outside, in cages, in Cuba, is immoral.

Rocky,
Maybe the most recent pictures I saw, and info I heard, were not the same as what you saw.
I saw a prison. Cells with 3 walls, one side with bars, a sink, toilet.
They have their prayers. They have their meals. I think I heard meals that they prefer.
As far as I know they have people that visit to find out who they are, whether they are considered a threat, how they are being treated.
I’ve not heard of anyone being in any type of sweat box or total isolation for 3 years.
But, like I said. I have not been there.

I also do not think that our government would keep anyone who they know is not going to be dangerous if released.

What are they supposed to do with the ones who can’t even be returned to their country because their country doesn’t want them?

I can say that it has almost been forgotten. I know I don’t hear or read anything about it lately.

Bugs,
you don’t mind if I call you that do you?
Things may have changed from my most recent info.
Still, that last vision was heart wrenching. I am annoyed that our government decided to side step the Geneva Convention by calling them “enemy combatants”. I suppose it’s legal but why?
Yes some are starting to be processed out. What took so long? I don’t think any one can answer that question.
My biggest problem with the government as it sits is, that not one person took the long view.
Not one person saw the big picture.
The biggest problem with Bush is he that he seems incredibly myopic and can’t be bothered with the facts. I see the same problem with his supporters. Most of them belive what they belive and nothing, and I mean nothing will sway them from their beliefs. Facts be damned.
We as a nation have to start looking at the big picture. We are only 1 country of, what, 190. We are supposed to be the good guys.

I don’t know if Gore or Kerry could have dealt with the problems of the last few years any better. But they couldn’t possibly have done any worse.

he assumes that the republicans would have voted in lock step

You’re right Rhinehold, they didn’t. Clinton was able to put a couple anti-terrorism measures and a funding boost for intelligence through the Republican Congress. They all got really watered down, but you take what you can get with a hostile Congress.

That was my biggest frustration with Clinton and one I share with Kerry, that they need to have majority support to do what they may think is right.

HELLO! Checks and balances. I guess that’s easy to forget, since the ruling party has controlled all three branches of government for the last four years.

Rhinehold said: I’m a little confused by your argument that Congress and the american people would not have allowed Clinton to perform a ‘preemptive strike’ on Afghanistan when they had no problem with the same kind of military action in other places around the world during Clinton’s presidency.

What would have been the justification prior to 9/11 for the maiming and death of Americans and the billions of dollars for the preemptive strike, Rhinehold, that would have convinced Congress and the American people that it was necessary?

Based on the intel available prior to 9/11, which we know now to have been very incomplete, what factual justification could have been provided that would have been convincing prior to 9/11?

bugcrazy said I also do not think that our government would keep anyone who they know is not going to be dangerous if released.

Right, that’s why they held all those people at Abu Ghraib until the scandal, then they released them by the hundreds per day.

And since I brought it up: The Road to Abu Ghraib by Phillip Carter.

Mr. Briggs
I just re-read Carters contribution to the “Blame Everything on Bush” library and have a simple question concerning Abu Ghraib.
Now, due to the actions of these “rogue” soldiers (who are being punished as we speak) we must hold Bush and the entire military and the chain of command responsible. It’s all Bush’s fault.

OK, I got it. But here is where my question is.
So, do I now, due to the actions of “rogue” soldiers (who are not being punished and keep terrorizing and beheading, even as we speak) hold Islam and the entire religious following it has, responsible?

[…] the extraterritorial chain of prisons and detainment centers, stretching from Guantanamo Bay to Afghanistan, set up by the Bush administration to hold suspected terrorists. More than 300 instances of abuse in those facilities, from November 2001 to as recently as March 2004 […]

Sounds like more than a few rogue soldiers.

The devastating scandal of Abu Ghraib wasn’t a failure of implementation, as Rice and other administration defenders have admitted. It was a direct—and predictable—consequence of a policy, hatched at the highest levels of the administration, by senior White House officials and lawyers, in the weeks and months after 9/11. […]

In any war, civilian leaders set strategic aims, and it falls to commanders and planners at successively lower levels of command to refine that guidance into executable orders which can be handed down to subordinates. That process works whether the policy in question is a good one or a bad one. President Bush didn’t order the April 2003 “thunder run” into Baghdad; he ordered Tommy Franks to win the war and the Third Infantry Division’s leaders figured out how to make it happen. Likewise, no order was given to shove light sticks into the rectums of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib. Nevertheless, the road to the abuses began with flawed administration policies that exalted expediency and necessity over the rule of law, eviscerated the military’s institutional constraints on the treatment of prisoners, commenced combat with insufficient planning, preparation and troop strength, and thereby set the conditions for the abuses that would later take place. (my emphasis)

At first, I was willing to believe that it was “a few bad apples” as Bush had said. But as more information came out, the torture memos, more reported abuse, the “disappeared” prisoners, outsourced torture, et cetera, it began to look like there was some culpability in the Bush administration. I just wonder when, if ever, Bush and his staff will accept any accountability. As I have summed up elsewhere on this board, Bush et al seem to believe that good leadership can say with a straight face, “I didn’t fail; everyone around me did.” I don’t.

kctim,
I do not blame Bush so much for letting the pirson abuse happen, but I do hold Rumfled and him directly responsible for not taken charge of the situation. Bush had 2 weeks given to him by 60 Minutes on exposing the pictures. Bush should of had the balls to step up and tell the American People what happened instead of the News Nedia. That was Stike One!

Guys, guys, easy now.
I just wanted an answer. Now I know. Thank you.
Islamic leaders know all about their problems also but yet don’t really do anything meaningful either. Thats fine, really. Bush is responsible for everything bad, ok, I will hold him accountable. Now I know that all of the followers and leaders of Islam should also be held accountable.
After all, Islam didn’t fail, its followers did!

kctim, there is a little thing in the US military called the chain of command, which ends, at the top, with the president. You can try to equate Islamic leaders to Bush in their culpability for the actions of those terrorists completely unaffiliated with them but I won’t engage in that argument because it’s irrelevant to the issue.

Also, no need to assuage anyone’s passions, I used the strong tag to point out the most pertinent passage.

More on Military Detention:

Amnesty Condemns U.S. for War on Terror Torture

Goodbye Geneva Part XVIII

Abu Ghraib Guards Kept a Log Of Prison Conditions, Practices

To Fight Another Day

U.S. Action Bars Right of Some Captured in Iraq

Federal Government Turns Over Thousands of Torture Documents to ACLU

Records Released in Response to Torture FOIA Request

The CIA’s Disappeared

Some links may require free registration.

By Eric’s logic, this is important news: Apparently the Republican Party is asking its members to stab Kerry supporters, even to stab their own loved ones, just for supporting Kerry.

-Cf

Ok, it’s time for some serious talking about our society folks!

When a guy wants to kill his girl for voting her mind the game is up.

Good catch Cf.

JB
Sorry bout that, I must of forgot about the chain of command while serving 10 years in the military.
Your also right about the Bush/Islam points. I keep forgetting that if any fair comparison showing the hypocrisy of something, doesn’t make Bush look bad, its just “irrelevant to the issue.”
Thanks for clearing that up.

It is not a fair comparison and shows hypocrisy in nothing but your own pretense to logic. If you’re trying to equate Islam with terrorists then you are demonstrating a fundamental bigotry that is impossible to argue with.

First, I don’t like to argue. I respect your views and that is why I bring this up.
I really don’t see how it is fair to place the blame directly on the shoulders of one person in charge but yet dismiss it for another.
Solely blaming Bush for these actions is as insane as blaming kerry for the actions of the AFL vandalism group.
Both actions are distorted lies meant to garner more votes. I think its wrong.

Let me reiterate (i.e. copy & paste):

At first, I was willing to believe that it was “a few bad apples” as Bush had said. But as more information came out, the torture memos, more reported abuse, the “disappeared” prisoners, outsourced torture, et cetera, it began to look like there was some culpability in the Bush administration. I just wonder when, if ever, Bush and his staff will accept any accountability.(more emphasis added)