Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Ripsnort on February 16, 2004, 03:55:14 PM
-
http://slate.msn.com/id/2095158/
Slate speaks. Read the Hutchins analysis. I kept nodding in agreement. Here is the bottom line:
"I'm a single-issue person at present, and the single issue in case you are wondering is the tenacious and unapologetic defense of civilized societies against the intensifying menace of clerical barbarism. If in the smallest doubt about this, I would suggest a vote for the re-election of George Bush, precisely because he himself isn't prey to any doubt on the point. There are worse things than simple mindedness—pseudo-intellectuality, for example. Civil unions for homosexuals, or prescription-drug programs, are not even going to be in second or third place if we get this wrong[/i]
About the author:He joined NPR in 1977 as host and producer of NPR's morning news service.
-
"Clerical barbarism" is a strange euphemism. Hitchens is usually more direct. "Islamist terrorism" is more accurate and sounds more like the type of term Hitchens would use. Perhaps there are some other religious fanatics looking for nukes?
-
I've not read your link Rip but your thread tittle made me think of one (certainly stupid ...) question :
Why is there a primary for the democrats and not for the republicans ?
I thought it was a mandatory step in the american election system ... but as usual I was wrong I think :)
-
Originally posted by straffo
I've not read your link Rip but your thread tittle made me think of one (certainly stupid ...) question :
Why is there a primary for the democrats and not for the republicans ?
I thought it was a mandatory step in the american election system ... but as usual I was wrong I think :)
As an incumbent, Bush has no real competition within the Republican Party. Therefore, one would not expect Republicans to turn out in large numbers for the primary. The results are a forgone conclusion.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
As an incumbent, Bush has no real competition within the Republican Party. Therefore, one would not expect Republicans to turn out in large numbers for the primary. The results are a forgone conclusion.
Which is too damn bad. If the repubs ran another decent candidate, he would win. All we Repubs disgusted with Bush and his policies are forced merely to vote against.
h
-
Originally posted by Horn
Which is too damn bad. If the repubs ran another decent candidate, he would win. All we Repubs disgusted with Bush and his policies are forced merely to vote against.
h
LOL! Horn trying to pass himself off as a republican. Want me to start quoting you? ;)
Back to the subject Horn. Comment on the paragraph I highlited if you would.
-
Originally posted by Horn
Which is too damn bad. If the repubs ran another decent candidate, he would win. All we Repubs disgusted with Bush and his policies are forced merely to vote against.
h
As a life long Democrat I am forced to vote for Bush because of the sorry state of affairs of the party, and the 9 morons they gave me to choose from, such a shame.........:rofl
-
rumor is if dean drops out ralph nadar will pick up the fallen standard and lead all the rightious people to a world of safe cars,clean skys, and world peace, .....kum ba ya
-
To phrase the matter in another way, I know many people who are much more intelligent than George Bush (even if they do keep saying so themselves) and whom I have heard, over the past decades, talk with perfect seriousness about the prospect of electing Gary Hart, Michael Dukakis, Bill Bradley, or Tom Harkin as president of the United States. Do such smart people really wish that Michael Dukakis had been president when Saddam invaded Kuwait, or when Mikhail Gorbachev began to signal from Moscow? Of course they don't,
Common sense from slate.....Hell just froze over.:cool:
-
Originally posted by Horn
Which is too damn bad. If the repubs ran another decent candidate, he would win. All we Repubs disgusted with Bush and his policies are forced merely to vote against.
h
All we Repubs ...:confused:
not this one - this country will be better served with 4 more years of Bush than any other choice being presented
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
LOL! Horn trying to pass himself off as a republican. Want me to start quoting you? ;)
Back to the subject Horn. Comment on the paragraph I highlited if you would.
Be my guest. I voted for the man and was wrong.
I liked his concluding statement:
"Make up your own mind, is my own best recommendation, and put "electability" (once a Dean property, for heaven's sake) to one side. An Edwards-Kerry ticket would be made up of serious men, at least, and this is a test that people and politicians have to pass whether they are looking for votes or not."
As I said, were there another Republican option other than Bush, he would win. The Dems have little to work with and it shows--I will however vote for one of them just to get this farce out of office.
h
-
!!!!!KERRY AND FONDA 2004!!!!!!!!!
-
Originally posted by Eagler
All we Repubs ...:confused:
not this one - this country will be better served with 4 more years of Bush than any other choice being presented
If you are going to take it out of context, why not just "all"? The statement was: "All we Repubs disgusted with Bush and his policies...."
If GWB is re-elected, your children will be the ones to pay for your blindness.
h
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
As an incumbent, Bush has no real competition within the Republican Party. Therefore, one would not expect Republicans to turn out in large numbers for the primary. The results are a forgone conclusion.
ok that the conclusion I ended with too.
It's just that like I said in my previous post I assumed it was a mandatory part of you election system (even without other competitors than Bush)
-
Originally posted by Horn
If you are going to take it out of context, why not just "all"? The statement was: "All we Repubs disgusted with Bush and his policies...."
If GWB is re-elected, your children will be the ones to pay for your blindness.
h
as I pay for my parents? as their children will pay for theirs??
and the world continues to spin round & round...
for the next 4 years, GW is the best choice for this country - hands down. Be confident, our enemies both abroad and internal, are hoping for his defeat. whose camp does that place you in??..!
-
Horn
I don't mind, and I'm sure my children would agree once adults, to paying for alittle security for the future.
Money isn't everything. Safety is.
-
(http://www.sacredcowburgers.com/parodies/psycho-analysis.jpg)
Blame Bush
-
Originally posted by Eagler
. Be confident, our enemies both abroad and internal, are hoping for his defeat. whose camp does that place you in??..!
The thinking camp. The camp that does not just parrot what he is told by his gov't. Of course, that puts you in the other camp, but you and Rip have long ago determined to let others do your thinking for you.
h
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Money isn't everything. Safety is.
In that case, we should put you and yours in a isolated jail cell. You will be very safe there. :rolleyes:
h
-
Originally posted by Horn
The thinking camp. The camp that does not just parrot what he is told by his gov't. Of course, that puts you in the other camp, but you and Rip have long ago determined to let others do your thinking for you.
h
how so? I vote the issues. Can you explain why I've voted for democrats in the past since you apparently know me better than me?
Today the issue is the security of the world. Who do you think a barbaric muslim extremist cleric is going to be more fearful of...an democrat contender with no history or GW?
Another one moves off subject (comment on the article HORN!) because they can't argue the point.
-
I should think the Muslim Extremist Cleric will be thanking Bush. He probably won't advertise for help with the cause for several years to come.
-
Originally posted by Dowding
I should think the Muslim Extremist Cleric will be thanking Bush. He probably won't advertise for help with the cause for several years to come.
Yeah, we should have hid in the closet and hoped the bad man went away...:rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by 1K0N
(http://www.sacredcowburgers.com/parodies/psycho-analysis.jpg)
Blame Bush
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :aok
-
No. Which is why I, along with most of the world, supported the action in Afghanistan.
-
Originally posted by Dowding
No. Which is why I, along with most of the world, supported the action in Afghanistan.
Heres the kicker...you would have CONDEMNED the U.S. had we gone in and cleaned up Afghanistan in order to PREVENT 9/11.
Now, we're doing in Iraq what we should have done in Afghanistan.
Hindsite is a wonderful vision, isn't it Dowding?
Refer to Rudes post below for further clarification.
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=108864&referrerid=3203
-
If you knew anything about Al Queda, you'd know that an invasion of Afghanistan prior to Sept. 11th would not have stopped the WTC attacks, any more than the invasion has halted the subsequent bombings (Bali etc).
-
Originally posted by Dowding
If you knew anything about Al Queda, you'd know that an invasion of Afghanistan prior to Sept. 11th would not have stopped Sept. 11th.
Ah, nice quick edit Dowding. ;)
Who gave the okay to go ahead with plans Dowding? Why don't you tell me since you're such an expert on the subject. (I''ll have to laugh, er respond to your post this afternoon)
(And for those at home counting, another poster who cannot argue the point of the original topic)
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Heres the kicker...you would have CONDEMNED the U.S. had we gone in and cleaned up Afghanistan in order to PREVENT 9/11.
Rip,
You yellow press muckraking Anti-liberal-bed-wetter conservative Bush-loving Slate Reading rabble rouser. ;)
Afghanistan had a direct link to 9/11.
Iraq's ONLY link was OIL... OIL... OIL... Bush/Chenny/OIL OIL OIL....BILLIONS of no bid dollars to Haliburton and BAZILLION dollars to OIL companies.
Look at the damn symbol on Bush's "flight" suit.
What is it?
It's the Golly-geen TEXICO logo!
That's no damn Flight suit either... He was never in the Texas ANG - Those are overalls because he pumped gas at Texico through out Vietnam War! :p
OIL OIL OIL!! It's in his blood!
-
Originally posted by Nakhui
Rip, you yellow press muckraking ramble rouser!
Afghanistan had a direct cause/effect link to 9/11.
Iraq did not... Ira
You totally missed the point, but its not like I'm surprised.
-
I couldn't give a rat's bellybutton about the Democrat nomination. But just to pretend I do, here goes; Dean looks like a moron and sounds like retard, Kerry is a popularity-seeking cameleon who seems to have a very shaky history in terms of issues. That Edwards fella looks like he should be on a cable evangelist show. But at least he seems honest (!). Your party politics is mistifying. Kind of a like a football match but without the fun. British politics is sadly the same these days.
But someone else mentioned Islamic Clerics and Bush - perhaps you should spit the dummy out at them?
Bin Laden - who survived the invasion of Afghanistan did he not? And it's not a nation state, it's a cell based terrorist organisation. Do you think Bin Laden personally orchestrates all the attacks? And when he dies, he'll have some lieutenant take the reigns.
-
I started editing before you replied, I'm afraid. :p
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
You totally missed the point, but its not like I'm surprised.
Didn't miss your point... hit the wrong key before I could finish typing my post...
-
I don't know if you guys should be reading Slate, the big words might be confusing.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
how so? I vote the issues. Can you explain why I've voted for democrats in the past since you apparently know me better than me?
Extremely hard for me to believe given your stand on abortion.
h
-
Originally posted by Horn
Extremely hard for me to believe given your stand on abortion.
h
So a single issue determines what party you support? Come on Horn. I thought you were smarter than that. :rolleyes: