IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New The Democrats\ufffd Dilemma
Another great [link|http://www.nationalreview.com/may/may062703.asp|article on NRO]. The author believes the Democrats need to restore thier credibility on national security to have any chance in presidental elections:
So now, Democrats have a choice: (1) Restore their party's credibility on matters of war and peace, or (2) bet that another scandal will get voters angry enough to again throw the Republican rascals out of the White House.

Such seasoned Democratic strategists as Donna Brazile, Al Gore's 2000 campaign manager, are making a strong case in favor of the first option...Democrats such as presidential hopeful Howard Dean, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, and Sen. Carl Levin and favor option (2); they're looking to the Carter election as a model. But not content to pray for a new Republican scandal, they're hoping to manufacture one by transforming the mystery over what's become of Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction into a scandal.

...

Democrat scandalmongers are not pondering such questions. Instead, they are peddling a scenario so fantastic that not even Saddam's mouthpiece, Baghdad Bob, would have dared trot it out: That there were no WMDs and Bush knew it \ufffd but that he pretended otherwise as part of a vast (right-wing?) conspiracy that would have included Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell, Tony Blair \ufffd and, of course, Bill Clinton, who bombed what he said were suspected WMD sites in 1998, after the U.N. inspectors were forced to go home. And don't forget to include the U.N. Security Council, every member of which signed Resolution 1441 which did not ask whether Saddam had WMDs but rather gave his regime "a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations."

The Democrats have a dilemma. Donna Brazile, Tim Bergreen, and other sober-minded Democrats have a way out, a way that will make it harder for Republicans to win elections but easier for Americans to become more secure in an era of great peril. By contrast, Howard Dean and his friends are digging a hole that it could take Democrats a generation to get out of.
New "restore their credibility"?
WTF is that supposed to mean? That the two parties should continue their drift together as this country heads towards implementing Bush's, "All war, all the time" agenda?

Why should people who disagree with the warmongers have to buy into their agenda?

Sheesh,
Ben
"good ideas and bad code build communities, the other three combinations do not"
- [link|http://archives.real-time.com/pipermail/cocoon-devel/2000-October/003023.html|Stefano Mazzocchi]
New Well, if one already agrees with the agenda
then everyone has to buy into it before one can describe them as legitimate.
--\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton                            jake at consultron.ca *\n* [link|http://consultron.ca|http://consultron.ca]                   [link|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] *\n* Kingston Ontario Canada               [link|news://news.consultron.ca|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
New As I understand our system:
To disagree with the President is unAmerican.
To persist, elaborate is treasonous.

One must thus, pretend agreement on all pieces of doggerel associated with hot-button ergo meaningless words. (Mom, Security, Peace-through-War etc.)

Then massacre the incumbent for excessive $-love, [oil]-love and loose *morals. Dumbth cannot be an issue, it's an obv attack on the electorate.
(Remember that ego-thing re reviewing one's own software design?)

* clearly, being AWOL from military service is not loose-enough morals.



Hey! it's what got us where we are today..
No, it does not make any sense.

If anyone knows an antidote - NOW is the time.
(Nobel? A shrine built just For You? A new Bugatti?)
(800 rack-mount Beowulf?)
(A year off in Colorado with Lovins Institute?)
(Sex - with the intelligent Concerned Starlet(s) of Your Choice)
(or Stars.. if that's the way it is.)
New Re: "restore their credibility"?
Why should people who disagree with the warmongers have to buy into their agenda?

They don't have too. They just aren't going to get elected when national security is an important issue to voters these days.

Regards,
John
New And to quote Clinton...
The Republicans won't get elected when voters are saying, It's the economy, stupid.

Personally I care a lot more about the ongoing destruction of our way of life to the profit of a few than I do about Bush's desire to redirect legitimate public outrage into the fulfilment of the hawks geopolitical domination fantasies.

Eventually I think that the public will agree with me. I actually think a lot more than that - you may wish to read [link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=107614|http://z.iwethey.org...?contentid=107614] for perspective.

Regards,
Ben
"good ideas and bad code build communities, the other three combinations do not"
- [link|http://archives.real-time.com/pipermail/cocoon-devel/2000-October/003023.html|Stefano Mazzocchi]
New see?
--\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton                            jake at consultron.ca *\n* [link|http://consultron.ca|http://consultron.ca]                   [link|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] *\n* Kingston Ontario Canada               [link|news://news.consultron.ca|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
New The New Republic, bullwark of balanced investigative...
...journalism......NOT!
The problem is that this line of attack is based on a patent falsehood. There can be no doubt that Saddam had WMDs. He used chemical weapons to slaughter thousands of Kurdish civilians, and against Iranian combatants as well. He attempted to build nuclear weapons but the Israelis bombed his nuclear facilities 21 years ago this month, and U.S. forces seized his rebuilt facilities after the Gulf War ten years later \ufffd and found that he was closer to building a bomb than U.S. intelligence analysts had estimated. CNN is right now reporting "Nuke Program Parts Unearthed in Baghdad." Saddam admitted producing biological weapons (e.g. 8,500 liters of anthrax) and U.S. forces have found what appear to be mobile biological-weapons laboratories.


The problem is that they imply since Bufu had WMDs 11 years ago, that he must currently have WMDs. A not too unreasonable stretch, except...They ain't none now! Or we'd hear about it, fersher! The "Nuke Program Parts Unearthed" and the so-called mobile bio-weapons labs are just noise; both have been sufficiently debunked so as to make NRO using them as counterexamples (or, worse, justification) just flat laughable.

That's OK johnu, just keep supplying your bullshit wrapped in straw...I got my hip-waders on!
jb4
"We continue to live in a world where all our know-how is locked into binary files in an unknown format. If our documents are our corporate memory, Microsoft still has us all condemned to Alzheimer's."
Simon Phipps, SUN Microsystems
     The Democrats\ufffd Dilemma - (johnu) - (7)
         "restore their credibility"? - (ben_tilly) - (5)
             Well, if one already agrees with the agenda - (jake123)
             As I understand our system: - (Ashton)
             Re: "restore their credibility"? - (johnu) - (2)
                 And to quote Clinton... - (ben_tilly)
                 see? -NT - (jake123)
         The New Republic, bullwark of balanced investigative... - (jb4)

?
74 ms