Ted Haggard

Originally Posted by Downthestretch55

Pgardn,
You stated above that Rumsfeld has gotten the job done. I'd like clarification on that statement, as last I heard, the engagement in Iraq is far from completed.

DTS

DTS.

We won the war militarily. We wiped the Iraqi military out. Did you miss that? We invaded and removed Iraq as a country we thought was a nuclear and biological threat to us directly.

Now as far as stabilizing the country after wiping out the regime that held so many factions from killing each other with brutal authority, well, that has clearly not gone well.

Our first objective was met with success. We removed what we thought was a threat. (No WMD's but we did not know that. We had people scouring all sites detected as biological and nuclear threats) Clearly should have spent some time thinking about stabilizing the country. After we got rid of the regime and finding no WMD's, then we had an entirely different objective that was not well thought out at all.
Then it was, ok then... well we did get rid of a brutal dictator (excuse for not finding WMD's)... uhhh, lets get this country fixed, uhhhh...

What is incorrect about my analysis and opinion.

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by pgardn

DTS.

We won the war militarily. We wiped the Iraqi military out. Did you miss that? We invaded and removed Iraq as a country we thought was a nuclear and biological threat to us directly.

Now as far as stabilizing the country after wiping out the regime that held so many factions from killing each other with brutal authority, well, that has clearly not gone well.

Our first objective was met with success. We removed what we thought was a threat. (No WMD's but we did not know that. We had people scouring all sites detected as biological and nuclear threats) Clearly should have spent some time thinking about stabilizing the country. After we got rid of the regime and finding no WMD's, then we had an entirely different objective that was not well thought out at all.
Then it was, ok then... well we did get rid of a brutal dictator (excuse for not finding WMD's)... uhhh, lets get this country fixed, uhhhh...

What is incorrect about my analysis and opinion.

Pgardn,
Considering that there were UN inspectors looking for wmd's prior to the invasion, perhaps it would have been more prudent to allow them to continue.
I agree that this country needs to "get fixed".
DTS

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I'm not claiming he meant to say "rarely". I'm saying that he should have said "rarely". I think he was wrong to use the word "never".

Well, of course he was wrong to use the word "never" because it's not true! But it's what he said. He said something that wasn't true, that is an absolute fallacy about women's health, on air.

It was also on his show that Mark Foley was listed as a Democrat (and then he didn't correct the mistake; he just removed "Democrat" from the little blurb when they reran the show again), he claims he's won awards he hasn't won, for that matter, he claims a blue-collar background that he doesn't have, and selectively edits quotes by people to spin what they've said-- this link includes a section from Franken's show (which, I have to admit, I watched maybe once. Bad liberal!). Regardless of what you think of Franken, it shows a speech made by Sen. Biden, and then shows how O'Reilly cut it together on his show. It's an interesting look (and if anyone has a clear example from a liberal-based show of the host tinkering with speeches like this, please send it to me!). Scroll down; it's number 7:

http://throwawayyourtv.com/2006/09/b...roversies.html

Rupert, if you love Bill O'Reilly, of course you should keep watching him, but don't let him persuade you that what he's doing is news-- it's not; it's political-themed entertainment. And hey, in his defense, I thought the lawsuit he pushed Fox to file against Franken, claiming Fox owned the phrase "Fair and Balanced" made for hilarious news for a few weeks. (Franken claims O'Reilly wanted to sue becaue he was mad about the picture Franken used of him on the cover of the book, which he swears he had intended to get airbrushed until O'Reilly threatened Franken's editor, who is a rather tiny woman. It's actually a pretty funny account in the book, of O'Reilly cornering her and shrieking, 'This is what I look like! This is what I look like!" as he points at his face.)

And watching the clip reminds me of why I never got hooked on Franken's radio show-- he's really boring on radio.

Originally Posted by Downthestretch55

Pgardn,
Considering that there were UN inspectors looking for wmd's prior to the invasion, perhaps it would have been more prudent to allow them to continue.
I agree that this country needs to "get fixed".
DTS

There was this continuing problem of the inspectors not being allowed to do their job. Continually harassed and not let into sites... You have got to remember this. The inspectors knew very little because they were not allowed to do their job. Read the UN reports... You certainly did not forget this? If they would have been allowed into sites none of this might have taken place. If Saddam had cooperated, we would not be in this mess. You have got to see this.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

Well, of course he was wrong to use the word "never" because it's not true! But it's what he said. He said something that wasn't true, that is an absolute fallacy about women's health, on air.

It was also on his show that Mark Foley was listed as a Democrat (and then he didn't correct the mistake; he just removed "Democrat" from the little blurb when they reran the show again), he claims he's won awards he hasn't won, for that matter, he claims a blue-collar background that he doesn't have, and selectively edits quotes by people to spin what they've said-- this link includes a section from Franken's show (which, I have to admit, I watched maybe once. Bad liberal!). Regardless of what you think of Franken, it shows a speech made by Sen. Biden, and then shows how O'Reilly cut it together on his show. It's an interesting look (and if anyone has a clear example from a liberal-based show of the host tinkering with speeches like this, please send it to me!). Scroll down; it's number 7:

http://throwawayyourtv.com/2006/09/b...roversies.html

Rupert, if you love Bill O'Reilly, of course you should keep watching him, but don't let him persuade you that what he's doing is news-- it's not; it's political-themed entertainment. And hey, in his defense, I thought the lawsuit he pushed Fox to file against Franken, claiming Fox owned the phrase "Fair and Balanced" made for hilarious news for a few weeks. (Franken claims O'Reilly wanted to sue becaue he was mad about the picture Franken used of him on the cover of the book, which he swears he had intended to get airbrushed until O'Reilly threatened Franken's editor, who is a rather tiny woman. It's actually a pretty funny account in the book, of O'Reilly cornering her and shrieking, 'This is what I look like! This is what I look like!" as he points at his face.)

And watching the clip reminds me of why I never got hooked on Franken's radio show-- he's really boring on radio.

I don't think his show is a news show. It is basically a show where he gives his opinion on whichever current events are of interest to him and then he has guests on to debate him about it. For example, he'll bring up a trial that just ended where some child molester was only sentenced to 6 months in jail, and he'll talk about how outrageous the sentence was. Then he'll have some liberal guest on that will explain why the senetnce was fair and they will debate about it. That's basically what the show is. I probaby watch it once a month. I don't love O'Reilly by any means. I think he's alright. I certainly agree with his positions a lot more often than I disagree with them.

By the way, his show must be pretty good. He gets great guests. He gets congresmmen and Senators from both parties. When the Clinton/Chris Wallace controversy was going on, O'Reilly had James Carville and Paul Begala on the show.

With all of these things whether we are talking about the Drudgereport or the O'Reilly Factor, you really need to check them out for yourself. It's obvious from your description that you know very little about either one. Just because some liberal source told you that these were bad, it doesn't make it true. You really need to decide for yourself rather than basing your opinion on someone else's one-sided argument that bashes the Drudgereport or The O'Reilly Factor.

O'Reilly is an entertainer with a quick mouth. If you really want to listen to some more thoughtful people I would stick with George Will. Heck George Stephanap (greekname) once big demo has actually become much more fair and probing sense becoming more of a mediator. I also like Jim Lehrer. These guys are much more thoughtful and are not in the business to entertain. They give information. Charlie Rose has an agenda but his guests are absolutely incredible (the ones that are not his friends in Hollywood.) He gets some of the most thoughtful liberal and conservative minds, again not terribly exciting people, but very wise. His recent interview with Jim Baker was absolutely fantastic.

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by pgardn

There was this continuing problem of the inspectors not being allowed to do their job. Continually harassed and not let into sites... You have got to remember this. The inspectors knew very little because they were not allowed to do their job. Read the UN reports... You certainly did not forget this? If they would have been allowed into sites none of this might have taken place. If Saddam had cooperated, we would not be in this mess. You have got to see this.

Pgardn,
Dubbya gave Saddam an ulimitum...Leave within 48 hours. Remember?
Saddam was already in a box.
The invasion could have waited. There already were sanctions.
The real shame is that so many "bought" into this nonsense.
Like...if you disagreed with Dubbya's policy, you were "unpatriotic".
The words were, "You're either with us or against us."
Look at where that got us.
What ever happened to "free speech"?
Maybe it all got lost on the diversions like "intelligent design", "flag burning",
"gay marriage" and "stem cells".
In my humble view, we need not continue to waste more lives on the insanity that our "beloved" president has created.
Yes, there is a mess. "Stay the course" won't work anymore.
If Dubbya is indeed responsible for the direction that he's taken this country, and other countries also, it is time for answers to be found in the World Court in Hague, wherein he desrves to have a fair hearing on the charges of being the war criminal, that he is.
I can't wait for the trial.
DTS

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by pgardn

DTS.

We won the war militarily. We wiped the Iraqi military out. Did you miss that? We invaded and removed Iraq as a country we thought was a nuclear and biological threat to us directly.

Now as far as stabilizing the country after wiping out the regime that held so many factions from killing each other with brutal authority, well, that has clearly not gone well.

Our first objective was met with success. We removed what we thought was a threat. (No WMD's but we did not know that. We had people scouring all sites detected as biological and nuclear threats) Clearly should have spent some time thinking about stabilizing the country. After we got rid of the regime and finding no WMD's, then we had an entirely different objective that was not well thought out at all.
Then it was, ok then... well we did get rid of a brutal dictator (excuse for not finding WMD's)... uhhh, lets get this country fixed, uhhhh...

What is incorrect about my analysis and opinion.

Good analysis. I agree with everything you said.

[Danzig]

--he desrves to have a fair hearing on the charges of being the war criminal, that he is...

welllll. if he's already been found guilty there dts, why not just sentence him?? how can the trial be fair if the verdict is a foregone conclusion??

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Good analysis. I agree with everything you said.

For sure!
I have a slightly used bridge that I'd like to sell to you.
It connects Manhatten and Brooklyn.
I can give you a "good deal".
If you're not interested in this one, I have an "option" on one that's in San Francisco, it connects to Oakland.
Let me know if you want to put money down on either of them.
I'll give you a very good deal.
If you can afford the buying the "war on terror", wherein we create even more terrorists, to the tune monthy costs, for sure this will be a "money maker" for you.
Let me know if you're interested. This "deal" won't wait.
Do you also want to buy a slightly failed "war"?

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

--he desrves to have a fair hearing on the charges of being the war criminal, that he is...

welllll. if he's already been found guilty there dts, why not just sentence him?? how can the trial be fair if the verdict is a foregone conclusion??

I can't wait to see the trial. I'm waiting for that and a Beatles' reunion. I'm not sure which is more likely of happening between a Beatles' reunion and a trial for Bush.

In case anyone doesn't know, a Beatles' reunion is impossible since Lennon and Harrison are no longer alive.

[timmgirvan]

DTS: Hyperbole Hyperbole, you have found your Master! It's nice of you to sit on your perch and spin about the Great Villain Bush, as you haven't walked a mile in his shoes. Yes, it's unfortunate that Bush doesn't run the Administration with a poll(or pole) as his sorry-butt predesessor did,huh? You choose the facts you believe and articulate...surely you are aware that car burnings in France average 112 a day, and that England is in turmoil with Muslims stating "if you call us criminals, we will become criminals" The Popes' statements added fuel to the fire, and that Muslims have set 2015 as date to have full control of Germany. The Gathering Storm is real, and every part that we can neutralize is necessary. We have countries that their 'express purpose' in life is to destroy the US and Israel,and anyone else who dares stand in their way. You're dreaming if you think Bush and Rumsfeld would stand trial in ANY court! I would advocate complete end to funding any and all countries who would support that scheme. BTW..if you're a patriot as you say..then it behooves you to get with those people who monitor everything and GIVE them your solution to Iraq...or is it really aout the money?

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I can't wait to see the trial. I'm waiting for that and a Beatles' reunion. I'm not sure which is more likely of happening between a Beatles' reunion and a trial for Bush.

In case anyone doesn't know, a Beatles' reunion is impossible since Lennon and Harrison are no longer alive.

I wsa in the car for a couple hours yesterday morning and had "Breakfast with the Beatles" on the radio. They played all of the Ed Sullivan show appearances. It was great. Besides the music, Ed Sullivan was also great, "Let me tell you, they're fine, fine youngsters."

Welll, we dusted the Iraqi army pretty good.
We rooted out Sadaam pretty easily
But,
We chose to dismantle the Iraqi army which probably was a bad idea, since a lot of those guys now get their paychecks from the bad guys,
And,
While "freedom reigns" in Iraq, it really has done so only if you are not part of the Sunni group.
Just today,
The Ba'ath party has been reinstated in the Iraqi legislature.

On second thought, maybe Rumsfield is the only thing actually going right. The political decisions, on the other hand, have not gone well, purple fingers notwithstanding.

(I must work "root out" into my conversational vocabulary.)

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by SentToStud

I wsa in the car for a couple hours yesterday morning and had "Breakfast with the Beatles" on the radio. They played all of the Ed Sullivan show appearances. It was great. Besides the music, Ed Sullivan was also great, "Let me tell you, they're fine, fine youngsters."

Welll, we dusted the Iraqi army pretty good.
We rooted out Sadaam pretty easily
But,
We chose to dismantle the Iraqi army which probably was a bad idea, since a lot of those guys now get their paychecks from the bad guys,
And,
While "freedom reigns" in Iraq, it really has done so only if you are not part of the Sunni group.
Just today,
The Ba'ath party has been reinstated in the Iraqi legislature.

On second thought, maybe Rumsfield is the only thing actually going right. The political decisions, on the other hand, have not gone well, purple fingers notwithstanding.

(I must work "root out" into my conversational vocabulary.)

er...just be careful what people you say 'root out' to...and whether it is indeed out or not. hate to see you up on charges....

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

er...just be careful what people you say 'root out' to...and whether it is indeed out or not. hate to see you up on charges....

i'll be careful. lol. i will surely never use the expression with you.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by SentToStud

i'll be careful. lol. i will surely never use the expression with you.

oh, really?? darn....

Originally Posted by Downthestretch55

Pgardn,
Dubbya gave Saddam an ulimitum...Leave within 48 hours. Remember?
Saddam was already in a box.
The invasion could have waited. There already were sanctions.
The real shame is that so many "bought" into this nonsense.
Like...if you disagreed with Dubbya's policy, you were "unpatriotic".
The words were, "You're either with us or against us."
Look at where that got us.
What ever happened to "free speech"?
Maybe it all got lost on the diversions like "intelligent design", "flag burning",
"gay marriage" and "stem cells".
In my humble view, we need not continue to waste more lives on the insanity that our "beloved" president has created.
Yes, there is a mess. "Stay the course" won't work anymore.
If Dubbya is indeed responsible for the direction that he's taken this country, and other countries also, it is time for answers to be found in the World Court in Hague, wherein he desrves to have a fair hearing on the charges of being the war criminal, that he is.
I can't wait for the trial.
DTS

Ultimatum... what? How many times did we go around and around with them about inspections all thru the late 1990's. Its so easy to forget. Ultimatum after how many warnings? For God's sake those inspectors got thrown out of the country time after time. Did you completely forget this. Go back and read about the UN inspections in Iraq and what the inspectors had to deal with. I am more than willing to be accurate. You have got to hold to this also. If you say we should have given it more time even though Iraq constantly balked and lied etc.. chunked the inspectors out, that we STILL could have worked something in the long run, ok. But to completely forget how much trouble the UN had inspecting anything in Iraq is disingenious history, and thats being kind. I have no agenda here. I want accuracy. I want people to go back and put themselves in that moment and ask what was going on AT THAT TIME. You cant just take the easy way out and forget it all.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

"With regard to your question about Bush, I do not think that his job approval has been hurt by media coverage. I think the media has been fair with him overall. I think the only thing that has really hurt him is the war. And the war would not have hurt him at all if it would have gone well. Americans are results oriented. If we would have won the war, everyone would be happy. "-Ritchie



There was no way to "win" this war.These people have never known Democracy,yet this fool thought they would be easily indoctrinated into it.There is 1 Islamic Democracy in the whole Middle East.They don't want it.They want law and order enforced by powerful leaders,and most want an Islamic Theocracy. That's where this fool blew it.He keeps repeating that everybody yearns for freedom.They don't.I'd really like to know who advised GEEDUBBYA about the Islamic World,because his understanding of it would fit in a thimble.Democracy will never work there.He can keep us there forever,but it will still not work there.Americans are upset because the guy has no clue how to get out of there.So,there is very little progress there,but hundreds of Americans will simply keep getting killed. A pathetic situation in the opinion of 2/3rds of the people in this country.Dumb cowboy got us in there,but he sure can't get us out.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

"With regard to your question about Bush, I do not think that his job approval has been hurt by media coverage. I think the media has been fair with him overall. I think the only thing that has really hurt him is the war. And the war would not have hurt him at all if it would have gone well. Americans are results oriented. If we would have won the war, everyone would be happy. "-Ritchie



There was no way to "win" this war.These people have never known Democracy,yet this fool thought they would be easily indoctrinated into it.There is 1 Islamic Democracy in the whole Middle East.They don't want it.They want law and order enforced by powerful leaders,and most want an Islamic Theocracy. That's where this fool blew it.He keeps repeating that everybody yearns for freedom.They don't.I'd really like to know who advised GEEDUBBYA about the Islamic World,because his understanding of it would fit in a thimble.Democracy will never work there.He can keep us there forever,but it will still not work there.Americans are upset because the guy has no clue how to get out of there.So,there is very little progress there,but hundreds of Americans will simply keep getting killed. A pathetic situation in the opinion of 2/3rds of the people in this country.Dumb cowboy got us in there,but he sure can't get us out.

I don't know about that. I think the vast majority of people in Iraq want democracy. The problem is that if you have 10% of the population that don't want it and they are well armed and want to fight, you have a serious problem. It's not as if the vast majority of people in Iraq are fighting right now. You've got a small percentage of the population fighting. I think there are around 25 million people in Iraq. If you have even 4% of the population(which would be 1 million people) running around shooting everyone, then you have a big problem.

Ultimately you may be right that the people will not tolerate democracy but that's not necessarily because most people don't want it. It's because a violent minority will not tolerate it.

Either way, it was a major miscalculation on the part of the Bush Administartion. They should have known that a violent minority that was willing to fight a guerilla war could wreak havoc.

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Ultimatum... what? How many times did we go around and around with them about inspections all thru the late 1990's. Its so easy to forget. Ultimatum after how many warnings? For God's sake those inspectors got thrown out of the country time after time. Did you completely forget this. Go back and read about the UN inspections in Iraq and what the inspectors had to deal with. I am more than willing to be accurate. You have got to hold to this also. If you say we should have given it more time even though Iraq constantly balked and lied etc.. chunked the inspectors out, that we STILL could have worked something in the long run, ok. But to completely forget how much trouble the UN had inspecting anything in Iraq is disingenious history, and thats being kind. I have no agenda here. I want accuracy. I want people to go back and put themselves in that moment and ask what was going on AT THAT TIME. You cant just take the easy way out and forget it all.

Pgardn,
You might find this article interesting.http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/1022-04.htm
DTS