Recent comments posted on my blog and his by Christspeak Rx remind me of that time. He seems mostly uninformed while towing the GOP party line like the subject the Bush administration thinks they deserve. Often, when I'm driving down the street behind someone with a "W: The President" sticker (as it is very likely Christspeak has on his car), I wonder if these 30% of Americans still backing Bush do, in fact, have enough money to benefit from Bush's policies or if it is disinformation or delusion that leads them to believe that this administration cares about them despite their lack of riches.
This is a corporatist administration - it's why the 400 most wealthy Americans each have a billion dollars or more while our own Gulf coast has barely begun the post-Katrina rebuilding process. Christspeak, Bush would sell you personally to the Taliban to use for target practice if it would boost Haliburton stock one point.
As for President Clinton, Keith Olbermann gives commentary about the Fox interview with more insight and eloquence than I can, but I will say that I'm nostalgic for the days when our biggest concern was a president lying about adultery, and not about the false pretexts upon which more than two thousand of our best and brightest were sent to be killed in an unwinnable war.
My self-enforced news hiatus ended when I got together with my husband who is so well-read and well-informed that not only did he get me turned back on to news and politics but presented facts that pulled me a little closer to center, which is where I believe the truth always lies.
Christspeak, I would like to do the same for you. An argument is only worth having if both parties are well-informed and have something beyond political talking points to add to the mix. So I offer these links, straight from my husband:
http://factcheck.org/default.html
non partisan
http://www.mediamatters.org
partisan, but we need someone to break down the lies of the neocon machine
http://edition.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/forces/casualties/
read this and tell me why Bush is a great guy.
http://www.therandirhodesshow.com/live/
Open your mind
http://www.newsprism.com/
read them all and decide
http://english.aljazeera.net/HomePage
If youÂ’re not afraid
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/
TomorrowÂ’s scandals today, they go after both sides of the aisle
25 comments:
Chip has expressly stated that he blogs for the sole purpose of starting arguments and riling people. He has a running bet with Joel Gillespie to see how many Greensboro blogs he could get banned from in a year.
I admire your optimism and patience, but it's a total waste of time, as he is of oxygen. He's not part of the blogging community, he's simply a viral strain. Ignore him.
How do you reconcile these statements:
I'll admit that being totally uninformed didn't keep me from spouting knee-jerk yellow-dog liberalisms to whoever would listen - in fact, not only did I spout, but I fully believed that I was right.
and
Christspeak, Bush would sell you personally to the Taliban to use for target practice if it would boost Haliburton stock one point.
Very interesting post. Thoughtful discussion is what we need to win the day. That's what we need to win in November.
Check out what Jerry Falwell said right here -- http://www.whereistheoutrage.net/wordpress/2006/09/26/jerry-falwells-joke/
Where's the Outrage?
Thanks for the post SB! I'll gladly go toe to toe with you and your hubby. But it is just as wrong to assume I am uninformed as it is to assume I have a W on my car.
I have left a few remarks with you- and I apologize for not following through on them. I've been on the run- but I hope and trust you are happy that I read your blog.
I've perused the links. Why not answer Boyd's question?
You watched the Clinton interview and were offended by Wallace's question and impressed with Clinton's answer. I look at his answer and see it contradicts the 9/11 commission, Stephanopolis' accounts, his CIA and FBI directors's accounts. Who's misinformed?
As for the anonymous post- consider who's insulting whom.
By the way- we now know the NIE report will reveal that the recent leak was used to mislead folks like your husband and you. But if anyone puts any faith in Aljazira (in English) as a reliable source they are certain to be misinformed.
And since we know NOLA was run by liberals for years and the result of that was extreme poverty and corruption...and that we've sent over a billion dollars in relief- which has passed through the same corrupt hands in La, how are you tying NOLA to Bush?
Well then, let's start from the top:
Anonymous, interesting insight if it's true - any way to confirm that?
David, the reconciliation between those two statements comes from the first taking place at a time when I was admittedly and intentionally uninformed while the latter comes after years of paying studious attention to current events including the current administration.
ec - great blog - I look forward to reading more!
And Christspeak... I suspect that I could quote you the parts of the 9/11 Commission Report that confirms Clinton's assertions (and disproves yours)and you would respond by saying, "nuh-uh." And though I am eager and willing to argue with well-informed members of the right, I am unwilling to have the political equivalent of an argument about the tooth fairy. You're welcome to troll my blog all day and night - I accept that part of putting my opinion in the public sphere, but don’t expect me to respond until you put forth a reality-based argument.
...after years of paying studious attention to current events including the current administration.
You mean then, SBJ, that after years of studying politics and current events that you believe that Bush would offer someone to the Taliban for them to execute in order to increase the stock price of Haliburton a minimal amount?
Surely you aren't serious. If so, and this isn't a 'knee-jerk yellow-dog liberalism,' what is?
I think you're confusing colorful wording with a misguided message. What is Bush doing if not sacrificing not one but thousands of military men and women in a war that even high ranking officials, with recent years in Iraq, beleive is completely fruitless? Dying in vain is dying in vain, period.
SBJ- So now I am a troll. Sorry you feel that way.
But they're not dying in vain. They're dying to increase the price of Haliburton. Right?
You seem to be saying all this is a calculated manipulation on behalf of Bush and Cheney to become richer than they already were. How smart would you have to be to design the plan immediately after 9/11, carry it out and conceal it
I'll grant that there has been tons of incompetence displayed in Iraq and Afghanistan, but that's a far cry from willfully constructing the whole thing as a get-even-more-rich-quick-scheme.
It's this silliness that I'm saying is 'knee-jerk yellow-dog liberalism.'
Hey David, checked out your blog. How suprising that someone who worked in a stock brokerage, bank, and now works at an oil and gas company would be a major supporter of an administration beholden to stock brokerages, banks, and most of all oil and gas companies. With two kids you'd think you'd be worried about them growing up in an America that tossed all the things that made America great down the toilet. You're blindly following an administration determined to shred the Constitution in favor of their corporate sponsors and our children are the ones that will pay the price. I've got news for you, if you live in Burlington, you're not rich enough to enjoy the fruits of their wreckless policies. This administration is not Republican nor Conservative, it's bordering on Fascist and it makes me long for the days when true Conservatives were in Washington, at least then their arguments were coherent and their facts closer to truthful. Our leaders, both Democrat and Republican have lost their way and we as Americans deserve better. This November should be the first step toward replacing those who have brought this upon us and those who stood by and let them.
"A year or so ago Chip and I made a bet as to how many sites he could get banned from in the coming year." -- Joel Gillespie
http://christspeak.spaces.live.com/Blog/cns!1pMWwBP8vJQelsZ_-cR8qcfA!1108.entry
Chip's statement about blogging for the purpose of starting arguments was also made over a year ago. Ed Cone has used the quote before and might still have the link, but it's Google-rotted.
Related:
Chip lumps all his fellow bloggers in one insulting nickname:
http://christspeak.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!43CEE321907E10A4!456.entry
"I've seen blogs become defined by an aggressive commenter, and I don't want that to happen with Mr. Sun, because I love it and the audience I've created."
http://mrsun.us/2005/05/mr-suns-prom-tips.html
David: I think it's knee-jerk conservatism to suggest that because I acknowledge that the current administration is profiting from this war, that I think they caused 9/11 - no where in my post or comments did I say anything of that nature because I don't believe it.
I also think it's shameful and shows extreme disrespect for our troops to suggest, even in twisted jest, that dying in the name of war profiteering (which is exactly what's happening) makes their deaths acceptable. That's a disgusting joke.
"We appreciate the sacrifice the troops are making but do not appreciate sacrificing our troops."
- Jon Elliot
Anonymous, thanks for the links!
SBJ, I'm not saying that you said Bush designed 9/11. I'm saying that you're saying his ultimate motive in invading Iraq was to make money. This is correct, no? If so, he had to spring immediately to action after 9/11 designing and plotting his scheme and being so smart and cunning as to have hid all evidence to date.
As for dying in vain, you're the one suggesting that Bush is murdering our troops to make money. Let's just cut to the chase. Is this what you really believe?
And what of the farm, lumberyard and warehouse, Snoop?
Exactly David. What happened to the hardworking simple man we grew up loving? Working the soil with his own two hands, helping to build rather than destroy. Oh the good ol' days. It's not too late, step away from the right and rejoin the fold.
Don't know, Snoop. It was a tobacco farm. The guvment done took that away.
David, that's exactly what I'm saying - and tomorrow I will start a new post with some of the reasons why.
David, sorry the guvment done took away your tobacco farm. Did it make you mad David, did it make you mean mad? Is this when you became a conservative?
Wow, SBJ. I'm stunned that you think Bush would sacrifice our soldiers to make himself richer than he already is. America for you these last six years must be a dreadful place.
"How smart would you have to be to design the plan immediately after 9/11, carry it out and conceal it" -- David
David, as I believe we've discussed before, a plan was in place BEFORE 9/11, admiting in it that it would be easier to implement with the occurance of some modern Perl Harbor. Recall PNAC?
I thought I talked you out of that notion, Roch. Look, I'm sure there were plans for Iraq just as I'm sure there are currently plans for China. However, what's important is what triggers the implementation of those plans.
SBJ is saying that Bush's sole motivation in invading Iraq is to make money. This is so laughable as to not even merit serious consideration.
David, I posted this under War Profiteering but you never replied, so I'll repost it here.
Another excellent post Sarah, right on the money (after all that's what the perpetual wars of the Bush administration are all about). Watch out Iran, you're next. We really don't have a military left in shape to handle Iran, so we'll need to outsource this war to Haliburton as well.
And great comment david, I take it you've defined misguided to share your self discovery. Check out this link for more about the fascism. http://www.oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm
I have to ask david, you're so gung ho for this war, why are you in Burlington? With the difficulties the military is having getting recruits they've increased the age limit to 41. They've even decided that education isn't really a requirement, which kind of sucks because when you're fighting an insurgency you really need smart people on the front lines. They've even lightened up the stance on previous drug usage. Oh well, there's still time to catch the next war.
I think Bush went into Iraq for multiple reasons in addition to profit: mostly access to oil, god told him to, and Saddam tried to kill his daddy. I think he stays in for the sole purpose of profit. Now, whether it's Bush's idea or all the evil henchmen surrounding him that keep him in, I don't know...
Why Bush stays in Iraq and why the US stays in Iraq (no matter what happens in the '06 or '08 elections) is the civil war that will follow and the hundreds of thousands of people who will die if we leave. Most people in this country are not at the level of contempt for Bush that makes this a palatable option at this point. Maybe in a few years things will be different (like Vietnam)and we'll throw up our hands, but at this point it's too gruesome to contemplate.
Post a Comment