Talk about a bunch of LOSERS

[Airhead]

LOL Sheeesh, Todd, you, Toad, Dune, Curval, MT, Dowding, Mini D, Hortlund and many others offer well articulated arguments. Let me rephrase- MANY of the posters in here offer up a knee jerk reaction to almost any subject based upon which side of the political spectrum they're on. With most posters here I can look at the subject and know what their opinion is on it and, almost always, I'm right. Ironically enough, the one poster who it's hard to predict their viewpoint on a perticular issue is- is you.  

[AKIron]

Some things are just pretty simple and don't really require much thought or some deep drawn out explanation. This topic happens to fall into that category, imnsho.

[Eagler]

pretty black and white to me

not much falls in the middle when you really look at it - cept the fence sitters

[midnight Target]

Originally posted by Airhead
LOL Sheeesh, Todd, you, Toad, Dune, Curval, MT, Dowding, Mini D, Hortlund and many others offer well articulated arguments. Let me rephrase- MANY of the posters in here offer up a knee jerk reaction to almost any subject based upon which side of the political spectrum they're on. With most posters here I can look at the subject and know what their opinion is on it and, almost always, I'm right. Ironically enough, the one poster who it's hard to predict their viewpoint on a perticular issue is- is you.  

Mini-D surprises me sometimes... I think he's a closet lefty.

[GrimCO]

Originally posted by Airhead
Nah Grim, it's just politics as usual. I'll tell ya, I'm learning something about these bbs tho- no matter what the issue the same right wing posters line up behind the "official" viewpoint of the right and the same left wing posters line up behind the "official" viewpoint of the left. As a result nobody really thinks in here.

Well Airhead, I'll have to concur for the most part. There are a few on here who do surprise me on occasion though. Although my voter's registration card says Republican, I don't really consider myself affiliated with either party. When I vote these days, I just try to vote for whoever seems like less of a moron. A difficult choice at times, I must admit. It's just human nature for people who don't like the particular President in power at the time to try to find any little thing they can to present a negative viewpoint.

[X2Lee]

Originally posted by Dead Man Flying


Since I'm guessing that taxpayers paid for the whole event, both Republicans and Democrats, Republicans should come clean about the costs of what amounts to a de facto campaign stunt.

-- Todd/Leviathn

Aww comon its something every man in the world does not get to do. If you had the chance in life to snag the wire would you take avantage of it??
I would and GW had enuff balls to do it too. They routinely fly sorties off and on those carriers so what if the boss of the US caught a ride?

I bet its one of the things he says later he thought about and said, they can bite me arse im going for it  ;->

[X2Lee]

Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
The flying in part didn't bother me near as much as seeing him wear a uniform. I can't remember the last time a president did that. The military should never forget that the commander in chief is a civilian.

are you some kind of oxmoronic idjit?

[midnight Target]

Originally posted by X2Lee
are you some kind of oxmoronic idjit?

OK, who wants this for a sig line?

[Sandman]

I dunno... it's rather tasty though.

[OIO]

hahahah "dont click this"



DOH!

[10Bears]

And Shameless it is too boy.. and look at him.. George “Maverick” Bush.. ah-ha-ha-ha. He’s even got a red lens flashlight for in case he get shot down behind enemy lines and has to read a map. Too funny..

I’m a tough guy!

Smart cookie Karl Rove thought this 2.1 million taxpayer photo op would be great for Junior’s reelection bid. That is would highlight the President’s foreign policy accomplishments

Interesting choice of words “accomplishments”

Well lets see: We start off telling China “oh we so very sorry” TWICE for our spy plane getting a little too close to the mainland. We tell the two Koreas that the administrations predecessors policy would be placed under review.. (shelved) That policy being to nudge North Korea back into the family of nations by using incentives, i.e. teaching them the best way to farm, helping them develop an industry a little more helpful then say... nuclear arms. By urging them to accept capitalism --hey, it’s working in China it would here too. By signing the damn non-aggression pack... That should be a no brainer, every country on earth knows what happens to them if they launch a nuclear attack. Non-aggression treaty or not.  We disregarded the advice from the previous administration regarding terrorism. The Hart-Rudman report went up for further review (shelved). A month before the attacks we Poo-Pawed reports from no less than five different international intelligence agencies regarding an immediate attack. We cut funding for the anti-terrorism task force.

And that’s just the first year..

You can change around a few words to make them sound nicer so the people would accept them. The nazi like “preemptive strike” or “preemptive war” is a good example. It sounds acceptable unless you sit back for a moment and think about what it means.. The number one war crime of all is aggressive war. It’s also the number one reason the U.N. charter was set up -- to prevent aggressive war. This would explain why some folks want America out of the U.N. “Liberation” Another happy sounding word that is much better than say.. overthrow and occupation. As someone mentioned above, the banner behind the President read “Mission Accomplished” well, if you consider securing the oil ministry and oil fields as mission accomplished, then yes. On the other hand, we were told the 140 men who gave their lives and the 700 wounded was not about stealing a sovereign nation’s natural resources.

[Martlet]

Yes, let's ignore the facts.   Here's a comment my best friend from college, an Navy pilot, made on that very topic on another board:

Comments:

I'm neither a republican or a democrat and I largely share views from both sides.  But moments like this remind me why I WILL NEVER declare myseld a democrat.  Is there any low they will not stoop?  I am a Naval Aviatior that recently returned from my second tour onboard the USS George Washington/ Carrier Air Wing 17 in which we enforced UN sanctions.  I can assure you that I, as well as any other crew member of the GW or Air Wing 17 would have been deeply honored by the presence of our Commander in Chief.  The allegations that Bush used this is a campaign pitching ground are not only ludicrous, but appaling.  What Commander in Chief doesn't welcome his victorious troops home with a speech honoring thir hard work, sacrifice, and dedication?  The allegations that he wasted money to divert the carrier for a day are also false.  There were no more additonal costs for his visit with exception to his meal onboard wich the Officers Mess pays for.  The fuel for the S-3b squadron is part of their yearly budget for training - it would have been used regardless.  The carrier WAS NOT diverted for a day - it had to pull into San Diego to let two squadrons disembark on North Island NAS.  George Bush is the finest Commander in Chief since Reagen.  He has my  vote!


I guess he's a little more in touch with the feelings of todays sailors than most of us.

[Rude]

Originally posted by 10Bears



And Shameless it is too boy.. and look at him.. George “Maverick” Bush.. ah-ha-ha-ha. He’s even got a red lens flashlight for in case he get shot down behind enemy lines and has to read a map. Too funny..

I’m a tough guy!

Smart cookie Karl Rove thought this 2.1 million taxpayer photo op would be great for Junior’s reelection bid. That is would highlight the President’s foreign policy accomplishments

Interesting choice of words “accomplishments”

Well lets see: We start off telling China “oh we so very sorry” TWICE for our spy plane getting a little too close to the mainland. We tell the two Koreas that the administrations predecessors policy would be placed under review.. (shelved) That policy being to nudge North Korea back into the family of nations by using incentives, i.e. teaching them the best way to farm, helping them develop an industry a little more helpful then say... nuclear arms. By urging them to accept capitalism --hey, it’s working in China it would here too. By signing the damn non-aggression pack... That should be a no brainer, every country on earth knows what happens to them if they launch a nuclear attack. Non-aggression treaty or not.  We disregarded the advice from the previous administration regarding terrorism. The Hart-Rudman report went up for further review (shelved). A month before the attacks we Poo-Pawed reports from no less than five different international intelligence agencies regarding an immediate attack. We cut funding for the anti-terrorism task force.

And that’s just the first year..

You can change around a few words to make them sound nicer so the people would accept them. The nazi like “preemptive strike” or “preemptive war” is a good example. It sounds acceptable unless you sit back for a moment and think about what it means.. The number one war crime of all is aggressive war. It’s also the number one reason the U.N. charter was set up -- to prevent aggressive war. This would explain why some folks want America out of the U.N. “Liberation” Another happy sounding word that is much better than say.. overthrow and occupation. As someone mentioned above, the banner behind the President read “Mission Accomplished” well, if you consider securing the oil ministry and oil fields as mission accomplished, then yes. On the other hand, we were told the 140 men who gave their lives and the 700 wounded was not about stealing a sovereign nation’s natural resources.

Try real hard to get over this ok....you're making yourself look foolish again.

[GrimCO]

Originally posted by 10Bears


Well lets see: We start off telling China “oh we so very sorry” TWICE for our spy plane getting a little too close to the mainland. We tell the two Koreas that the administrations predecessors policy would be placed under review.. (shelved) That policy being to nudge North Korea back into the family of nations by using incentives, i.e. teaching them the best way to farm, helping them develop an industry a little more helpful then say... nuclear arms. By urging them to accept capitalism --hey, it’s working in China it would here too. By signing the damn non-aggression pack... That should be a no brainer, every country on earth knows what happens to them if they launch a nuclear attack. Non-aggression treaty or not.  We disregarded the advice from the previous administration regarding terrorism. The Hart-Rudman report went up for further review (shelved). A month before the attacks we Poo-Pawed reports from no less than five different international intelligence agencies regarding an immediate attack. We cut funding for the anti-terrorism task force.

And that’s just the first year..

You can change around a few words to make them sound nicer so the people would accept them. The nazi like “preemptive strike” or “preemptive war” is a good example. It sounds acceptable unless you sit back for a moment and think about what it means.. The number one war crime of all is aggressive war. It’s also the number one reason the U.N. charter was set up -- to prevent aggressive war. This would explain why some folks want America out of the U.N. “Liberation” Another happy sounding word that is much better than say.. overthrow and occupation. As someone mentioned above, the banner behind the President read “Mission Accomplished” well, if you consider securing the oil ministry and oil fields as mission accomplished, then yes. On the other hand, we were told the 140 men who gave their lives and the 700 wounded was not about stealing a sovereign nation’s natural resources. [/B]

I just have one thing to say about this one...

[weaselsan]

Originally posted by eddiek
"You aren't seriously tossing about the "they did it, so it's okay" argument, are you?  

That all depends on what your definition of the word they is....